2007-2008 NBA Season

[Bodhi]

u KNOW what u get when u combine 3 losers *Garnett,Pierce,Allen*?

3 bigger losers.

Seriously Boston are a fuckin joke.

KG has no more excuses.

true ...they are no 66 win team...they took advantage of an easy schedule...out west they probably would have won about 55 or so...they would have been in the middle of the pack with the rest of the west teams....ill tell you this...the 90's Bulls would have bitchslapped the Hawks so bad the first three games they would have forfeited game 4....thats when number 1 seeds and 60 plus win teams were for real....

[faldor]

u KNOW what u get when u combine 3 losers *Garnett,Pierce,Allen*?

3 bigger losers.

Seriously Boston are a fuckin joke.

KG has no more excuses.

true ...they are no 66 win team...they took advantage of an easy schedule...out west they probably would have won about 55 or so...they would have been in the middle of the pack with the rest of the west teams....ill tell you this...the 90's Bulls would have bitchslapped the Hawks so bad the first three games they would have forfeited game 4....thats when number 1 seeds and 60 plus win teams were for real....

Wow, those are some harsh words!  I get it though.  Boston deserves it at this stage of the game.  And yes, I agree the vintage Bulls would've wiped the floor with this Hawks team.  Let's not forget though, this Celtics team went 25-5 against the West this year which is a better winning % than they had against the East.  To say they'd be a middle of the pack team in the West is a bold statement and one you'd have no basis or figures to back up except for the fact they've gone to a game 7 against an 8 seed.  What have you done for me lately I guess?  Now you can definitely bring up their lack of playoff experience, that's a valid argument.  But to insinuate that they're just another run of the mill team in the West is laughable.

[D]

KG is a good regular season guy but chokes in the playoffs time and time again. Only once has he made it past the first round.


Boston's record is a mirage against the west cause u have to factor in injuries, did those teams in the west play a back to back, hard game before etc etc.

I am an admitted KG hater cause I think he is extremely overrated and Boston should've kept Al Jefferson who has a very long career left and he is gonna be a superstar.


KG supporters have called me names and have made excuses for years.

This one guy even told me that if U put KG on SA instead of Tim Duncan that SA would still have 4 rings.

So I am just relishing in knowing I was right all a long about him.

[faldor]

Well fortunately Boston's season isn't over quite yet, so KG still has a chance to prove himself.  I agree Al Jefferson will be a good player for years to come, but you have to make that deal.  I think you may be the only person outside of a few in Minnesota who thought that was a bad trade for Boston.  If that deal wasn't made, the C's MAY have battled the Hawks for the 8th spot in the East, instead they won 66 games.  I know, I know, KG is great in the regular season, chokes in the post-season.  Fact is, you have to at least get to the playoffs first, and without him I don't think they'd be there.

[faldor]

KG is a good regular season guy but chokes in the playoffs time and time again. Only once has he made it past the first round.


Boston's record is a mirage against the west cause u have to factor in injuries, did those teams in the west play a back to back, hard game before etc etc.

I am an admitted KG hater cause I think he is extremely overrated and Boston should've kept Al Jefferson who has a very long career left and he is gonna be a superstar.


KG supporters have called me names and have made excuses for years.

This one guy even told me that if U put KG on SA instead of Tim Duncan that SA would still have 4 rings.

So I am just relishing in knowing I was right all a long about him.

As for their record against the West being a mirage.  Obviously there are some factors you need to take into account there.  But there are injuries and back to backs in the East as well.  The same factors apply.  All I know is the C's beat the Mavs, Spurs, and Rockets to sweep the Texas triangle, 3 games in 4 nights.  That's not done by accident.  And again, before you say it, I'll say it for you.  That WAS the regular season.

[Layne Staley's Sunglasses]

ill tell you this...the 90's Bulls would have bitchslapped the Hawks so bad the first three games they would have forfeited game 4....thats when number 1 seeds and 60 plus win teams were for real....

Those Bulls teams would have bitchslapped any team from any era.

Looks like the Lakers will be playing the Jazz.  That will be a much harder series, especially since Utah is so great at home.

[D]

They swept the Texas Triangle but once again it was a mirage

Houston were without Yao Ming
SA were in their dog day not playin hard mode
Dallas just got Kidd and were all fucked up.



Boston still win at least 55 games with Jefferson,Ryan Gomes and CO instead of KG.

[Thorned Rose]

They swept the Texas Triangle but once again it was a mirage

Houston were without Yao Ming
SA were in their dog day not playin hard mode
Dallas just got Kidd and were all fucked up.



Boston still win at least 55 games with Jefferson,Ryan Gomes and CO instead of KG.

Now I know they should of beat the hawks by now, but they are a very quality team... sure there in the east, but you still play around 30 non-conference games...

Boston did this superstar team so they could make a run obviously and well they aren't doing what they need to. Garnett isn't overrated, he's just a good player... the thing is this...

you have allen whos been in the league 12 years now, Garnett has been in 13 years and Pierce I think 10 or so. They are all at the end of their career, and getting these 3 together was a good move, it might now pay off.

Boston isn't a joke it's just a thing about matchups... Atlanta shouldn't be in this series no, but they are and they are because of the myth, the matchups and the legend that boston has.

I always thought this team has been cursed since Bird retired man. They went from so great to so terrible for years and years.

Boston will prevail though, no way Atlanta walks in the Garden and beats them in a game 7

[faldor]

They swept the Texas Triangle but once again it was a mirage

Houston were without Yao Ming
SA were in their dog day not playin hard mode
Dallas just got Kidd and were all fucked up.



Boston still win at least 55 games with Jefferson,Ryan Gomes and CO instead of KG.

Whoa, hold on!  Houston had won 23 games straight or whatever it was without Yao.  The C's snapped that streak by crushing the Rockets.  Nice try though.  Weren't they the first team in a LONG time to sweep the Texas triangle?  Again, you can't discount what they accomplished, although you're trying real hard.  And they don't come close to winning 55 games with Al Jefferson, Ryan Gomes, and Gerald Green.  You're telling me they add basically just Ray Allen to last years 24 win team and they all of a sudden win 31 more games?  No, not happening.  Not even close.

[faldor]

Now I know they should of beat the hawks by now, but they are a very quality team... sure there in the east, but you still play around 30 non-conference games...

Boston did this superstar team so they could make a run obviously and well they aren't doing what they need to. Garnett isn't overrated, he's just a good player... the thing is this...

you have allen whos been in the league 12 years now, Garnett has been in 13 years and Pierce I think 10 or so. They are all at the end of their career, and getting these 3 together was a good move, it might now pay off.

Boston isn't a joke it's just a thing about matchups... Atlanta shouldn't be in this series no, but they are and they are because of the myth, the matchups and the legend that boston has.

I always thought this team has been cursed since Bird retired man. They went from so great to so terrible for years and years.

Boston will prevail though, no way Atlanta walks in the Garden and beats them in a game 7

There was a lot of that curse talk for awhile regarding the C's.  Back in 1986 they drafted Len Bias with the 3rd overall pick and he OD'd on cocaine that night.  He was supposed to help prolong the careers of Bird and McHale by giving them much needed rest.  (Really that whole 86 draft was cursed if you look at it as a whole).  Then in the early nineties, the emerging star Reggie Lewis collapsed and died playing a pickup game.  Then Rick Pitino came aboard and started handing out ridiculous contracts to guys who didn't deserve them.  Travis Knight's forever thankful for that.  Pierce got stabbed in the late nineties too, though fortunately that didn't effect him on the court.  There's been some bad years for the most storied franchise in the NBA.  A loss in game 7 to the lowly Hawks would continue that trend.  But hopefully they will prevail.  I can't see them losing at home, but I also can't believe they're at this point either, so who knows.  The Hawks are a very athletic team (Marvin Williams, Josh Smith) with a great scorer and go to guy (Joe Johnson) that pose some matchup problems for the C's.  But that's no excuse.  They should've easily won this series in 5 games.  We'll see if they can get their act together on the road in Cleveland IF they advance.  They seem to have things in check at home, hopefully that continues today.  Getting out to a large lead early would be nice, you don't want to get the Hawks thinking they've got a chance.

[D]

Sure, Paul Pierce missed how many games last season? A TON which led to their record being really bad. Rondo has improved tremendously and Ray Allen would've helped Pierce.

Look what Al Jefferson did this season. I think he put up better numbers than KG.


KG's defense makes them more of a title contender but they still wouldve been really good.


Sweeping the Texas Triangle was an accomplishment. Houston won 11 without Yao but they really didnt beat anyone, the good teams they beat were due to back to backs. They beat the Lakers I think but Pau gasol was hurt so their streak was great but they got a great stretch of playing bad teams.

Boston are a very good team. Im not sayin they suck but people have overrated them tremendously.

[Layne Staley's Sunglasses]

Boston finally won that series, in a convincing fashion.

I love how New Orleans is playing right now.

And the Lakers are up at the half as I post this.

Kobe= M-V-P!

[faldor]

Sure, Paul Pierce missed how many games last season? A TON which led to their record being really bad. Rondo has improved tremendously and Ray Allen would've helped Pierce.

Look what Al Jefferson did this season. I think he put up better numbers than KG.


KG's defense makes them more of a title contender but they still wouldve been really good.


Sweeping the Texas Triangle was an accomplishment. Houston won 11 without Yao but they really didnt beat anyone, the good teams they beat were due to back to backs. They beat the Lakers I think but Pau gasol was hurt so their streak was great but they got a great stretch of playing bad teams.

Boston are a very good team. Im not sayin they suck but people have overrated them tremendously.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there.  I think it's much the opposite.  People have been trying to demean their success all season long.  If anything I'd say people vastly underrated them.  It took until about the end of February for people to annoint them the best team in the East over the Pistons, and all season long people said they couldn't compete out West, despite their exemplary record against them.  Both of which it seems you're not ready to admit.  And I'm sure you're not alone there, you've probably got a lot more company after they went the distance in the first round.

And yes Pierce was hurt and missed A LOT of games last year which definitely hurt their overall record.  I think they were actually around .500 in games he played.  But who's to say he wouldn't have gotten hurt this season if he had the same team back plus Ray Allen.  Ray got hurt and missed some games this year, as did KG.  Injuries happen, you can bring up all the what if's you want, but that's not gonna change anything.  Al Jefferson is a very good player, solid on the offensive end.  Pretty non-exitant on the defensive end though and the C's were a horrible defensive team for the last decade or so.  It's not by accident that they became the best defensive team statistically with the addition of KG namely.  Posey was also a good addition on the defensive side, and they wouldn't have signed him if they didn't trade away 7 guys to get KG, they wouldn't have had the roster space, plus he probably wouldn't have wanted to sign with an Eastern team who would've struggled to make the playoffs.  I understand you hate KG, but trust me, he made a HUGE difference with this team.  Al Jefferson is no Kevin Garnett.  That trade was about as lopsided as it gets.  Why do you think Celtic fans believe Kevin McHale secretly still works for the C's?

[pilferk]

true ...they are no 66 win team...they took advantage of an easy schedule...out west they probably would have won about 55 or so...they would have been in the middle of the pack with the rest of the west teams....ill tell you this...the 90's Bulls would have bitchslapped the Hawks so bad the first three games they would have forfeited game 4....thats when number 1 seeds and 60 plus win teams were for real....

See...this is the BS "media brainwashing" I'm talking about with the C's.

You can say they wouldn't have done well in the WC....but you're not looking at the fact they actually did REALL well against WC teams.  Really well.

The Hawks are a young, fast, talented team.  Did I think they'd manage more than one win? No.....and the Celts seemed content to phone in the 4th quarters in Atlanta, so they must not have taken them too seriously, either.

But I'd be hardpressed to say "the sky is falling" after one 7 game series, in which they alternated blowing the HELL out of the Hawks, and losing close games on the road (in two of which, they blew late leads).

Before we start bagging on the C's, lets see what happens against the Cavs, eh?

[faldor]

true ...they are no 66 win team...they took advantage of an easy schedule...out west they probably would have won about 55 or so...they would have been in the middle of the pack with the rest of the west teams....ill tell you this...the 90's Bulls would have bitchslapped the Hawks so bad the first three games they would have forfeited game 4....thats when number 1 seeds and 60 plus win teams were for real....

See...this is the BS "media brainwashing" I'm talking about with the C's.

You can say they wouldn't have done well in the WC....but you're not looking at the fact they actually did REALL well against WC teams.  Really well.

The Hawks are a young, fast, talented team.  Did I think they'd manage more than one win? No.....and the Celts seemed content to phone in the 4th quarters in Atlanta, so they must not have taken them too seriously, either.

But I'd be hardpressed to say "the sky is falling" after one 7 game series, in which they alternated blowing the HELL out of the Hawks, and losing close games on the road (in two of which, they blew late leads).

Before we start bagging on the C's, lets see what happens against the Cavs, eh?

People were slow to give the Celtics any respect all season long and were just waiting for their chance to pounce on them again.  Apparently this 7 game series against the Hawks was the time.  Now it's back to, "they'd be just another middle of the road team in the West."  Or, "they may have done well in the regular season, but they can't win in the playoffs."  Or, "all their wins agains the Western teams came when those teams had injured stars or were playing on the back end of back to backs."  We've heard it all season, why should it stop now?  We will indeed see what happens against Lebron.  Hopefully the C's learned a lot by being pressed to the brinks by Atlanta.  It still makes no sense to me how they annihilated that team at home, and couldn't pull one out down there in a less than stellar sports town.

[Thorned Rose]

I must say, I'm very happy that the Cavs lost last night.

I'm not a big Boston fan or anything, but I hate the Cavs, and I like Boston better.

This is my take on James...

He's a really good player, top 5 in the league, BUT I've never hear/seen more hype on a player ever...

I have to say this guy is "Overrated". I know it sounds nuts for the youngest to 10,000 points or whatever it was.

James, if he was that great, and awesome, wouldn't he stole game 1 in Boston to the "bad" Celtics who barely beat the Hawks?

Yeah he should of, but he didn't... so James is a really good player that's overrated.

Think, have you ever had so much hype around one guy? His performance last year against Detroit was remarkable, but we've seen Jordan do that...

Mark my words, LeBron James will NEVER win a title with the Cavs, and he will only get 1 title his entire career... if he ends up with another team.

He'll be traded somewhere around 2013 or 2014, and end up on a great team... and snag a title probably.

Michael Jordan was great...

who wins 3 titles, takes 2 seasons off, and then wins 3 more? I mean come on...

LeBron James is overhyped...

Until he wins back to back titles I'll have to keep this opinion.

Sure James got to a finals faster then Jordan... but when it's all said and done, Jordan will still be on top.

[pilferk]

Mark my words, LeBron James will NEVER win a title with the Cavs, and he will only get 1 title his entire career... if he ends up with another team.

He'll be traded somewhere around 2013 or 2014, and end up on a great team... and snag a title probably.

James won't sign another contract with the Cavs.  He'll be playing for the Nets by the time (or shortly after) they get their new digs.

Michael Jordan was great...

who wins 3 titles, takes 2 seasons off, and then wins 3 more? I mean come on...

LeBron James is overhyped...

Until he wins back to back titles I'll have to keep this opinion.

Sure James got to a finals faster then Jordan... but when it's all said and done, Jordan will still be on top.

I'm  a Celts fan.....

Even I will conceed that James is a great player.  I'm not sure comparing EVERY great player to Jordan is fair.....he's the best ever, and the only person with a shot at really eclipsing him is Bryant (who may give Jordan a run to overtake that top spot as "best ever").  But you can be GREAT and not be Jordan.  Magic was great.  Bird was Great.  McHale was Great.  Isiah was great. Stockton, Malone, Shaq, Barkley....the list of greats goes on and on.  James will, IMHO, be mentioned with those guys by the end of his career.  I don't think he'll be the best ever....I agree with you there.  But I think he'll be up there in the pantheon.

What I DO find amusing is that KG has been bagged on for being EXACTLY the type of player you describe above, while James has been hailed as the 2nd coming.  Last night, it was KG who put his team on his back and dragged them over the finish line and James who folded.  Granted, it was a bad night for Lebron, but still......

[Thorned Rose]

Like I stated not too long ago, LeBron James is a overrated player.

If he's so great he would of taken 1 of 2 in Boston, and not go 8/41 from the field...

that's like 19 %, which Michael Jordan never did...

I'm calling a sweep...

[pilferk]

Like I stated not too long ago, LeBron James is a overrated player.

If he's so great he would of taken 1 of 2 in Boston, and not go 8/41 from the field...

that's like 19 %, which Michael Jordan never did...

I'm calling a sweep...

Again:

James = great player.  He is. I mean, look at his numbers.   And he lost 2 to Detroit last year and carried the team on his back (practically) to the NBA finals.

Boston is also a VERY good defensive team, so lets not leave that piece out, either.  Especially at home (where they've avg giving up about 75 pts a game, so far).

James <> Jordan.  But nobody (with the possible exception of Bryant) does.

If you want to say James is overrated because he's compared, all the time, to being "the next Jordan"...I agree.  100% agree.  He's not.

If you want to say he's overrated in that he's not a great player....I think statistically speaking, you're going to have a tough case to make.

Let me ask you a question:  Was Charles Barkley overrated in your opinion?

[Thorned Rose]

James' stats are great, I agree, and yes he's overrated because of all the second comings and the next Jordan hype....

I'm tired of it...

Jordan would never choke this bad... (8/41)

He's a really good player, I just hate how all these second generation fans (12-18) years old... eat up the King James bit...


Charles Barkley? I wouldn't say he was overrated... he did get a lot more attention for his techs, and problems and attitude then his skill... As a player he was underrated in my opinion. As a character, he always got more attention for the attitude he had...