magius wrote:I'm putting my money on detroit. I don't remember the last time in any sport when a team went from last place to winning a championship within the space of a season. It just doesn't happen, you have to earn it together over a longer duration. It's only fair. That's why mass revamps, regardless of how big the name, don't often work (see lakers [malone, payton], rockets [pip, barkley]... both arguably even better teams on paper). Maybe next year or the year after.
Andrew wrote:magius wrote:I'm putting my money on detroit. I don't remember the last time in any sport when a team went from last place to winning a championship within the space of a season. It just doesn't happen, you have to earn it together over a longer duration. It's only fair. That's why mass revamps, regardless of how big the name, don't often work (see lakers [malone, payton], rockets [pip, barkley]... both arguably even better teams on paper). Maybe next year or the year after.
It certainly would be defying history but then again most last place teams don't become 66 win teams the following season either. The Celtics haven't been your average turnaround team, after all. I don't their struggles on the road have much to do with being a revamped team because they were the best road team in the regular season and had they not had those struggles in the first two rounds, the 1-1 start wouldn't be any more cause for alarm than usual.
That said, the 1-1 start bodes very well for Detroit. I'll stop short of calling Game 3 a must-win game for the Celtics since simply getting the split in Game 4 might be enough to get back on track heading back to Boston assuming they can either win Game 5 and then get another one in Detroit to close it out in six, or re-establish their home dominance in Games 5 and 7 to escape another seven game series. If they drop Game 3 though then they could very easily slide to 3-1 by the time they head home and I don't like their chances of winning three straight including one on the road.
magius wrote:This is true. That said, the Celtics first two rounds haven't been exactly awe inspiring. Personally, I put more merit on how "the big three" played in those two rounds than the regular season, considering all of them have always been stellar when it doesn't matter. The playoffs is a whole different beast, and most championship teams earn it the hard way.
but I thought Cassell would prove to be a more valuable player off the bench in the Celtics' postseason run.
I think people are underestimating the Celtic's chances of winning in Detroit.
el badman wrote:I think people are underestimating the Celtic's chances of winning in Detroit.
I would have thought that too before the playoffs, but I don't think anyone was expecting them to lose so many games in Atlanta and Cleveland.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests