“The Celtics have at best a mid tier coach, a fringe top 10 best player, a non all nba all star, and some really good role players, and somehow turned out what was at ABSOLUTE worst like the 6th best season ever, I need to understand how people think this occurred”
11 comments
Is this rhetorical?
Does he actually believe this or is he challenging it?
This sounds like pretty heavy sarcasm.
Even Lowe acknowledged some of the talking points around Tatum specifically have gotten really weird.
But we are somehow a super team
Look no further than the anti-Boston bias at the national level. It’s really that simple IMO.
This is obviously sarcasm. The guy is pointing out the fact that even with all these “bad” players and coaches we still were one of the best teams ever so…that must mean the coaches and players are actually really good
If I wasn’t certain of the anti Celtic bias before, I certainly am now after winning this title. There’s always something: Tatum doesn’t score enough- Celtics didn’t win by big enough margin over the pacers, they depend too much on the 3 ball- I really hope we win it all it again just to hear what they come up with next
The victim complex gets a bit old
This guy loves Tatum and the Cs please use your reading comprehension people
Sounds like bait.
People so badly want to compare us to that 04 Pistons team
I think the thing people have a difficult time ranking the Celtics with is they cakewalked through an easy conference both in the regular season and the playoffs. They dominated because the competition was easy in their eyes. While they had a historically great season, I think it’s possible it was inflated a little from the field just not pushing them that much. Which is also in part because of how good they were.
The numbers are the numbers, and if we’re being objective about it, they had one of the best seasons of all time. I don’t put too much stock in individual awards because media will always punish players unfairly (lol Curry and Durant weren’t top 5 or 1st team All-NBA in 2017)
If you use the relative net rating to league average (to account for pace and league trends), they still posted a top 5 offense of all time. I have to double check to see the exact placement.
But if you have a top 5 offense of all time (and highest rating in history), win 64 games when the coasting at the end easily could have had you at 66 or 67, and you win the finals losing just 3 games in the playoffs, it’s a historic season.
11 comments
Is this rhetorical?
Does he actually believe this or is he challenging it?
This sounds like pretty heavy sarcasm.
Even Lowe acknowledged some of the talking points around Tatum specifically have gotten really weird.
But we are somehow a super team
Look no further than the anti-Boston bias at the national level. It’s really that simple IMO.
This is obviously sarcasm. The guy is pointing out the fact that even with all these “bad” players and coaches we still were one of the best teams ever so…that must mean the coaches and players are actually really good
If I wasn’t certain of the anti Celtic bias before, I certainly am now after winning this title. There’s always something: Tatum doesn’t score enough- Celtics didn’t win by big enough margin over the pacers, they depend too much on the 3 ball- I really hope we win it all it again just to hear what they come up with next
The victim complex gets a bit old
This guy loves Tatum and the Cs please use your reading comprehension people
Sounds like bait.
People so badly want to compare us to that 04 Pistons team
I think the thing people have a difficult time ranking the Celtics with is they cakewalked through an easy conference both in the regular season and the playoffs. They dominated because the competition was easy in their eyes. While they had a historically great season, I think it’s possible it was inflated a little from the field just not pushing them that much. Which is also in part because of how good they were.
The numbers are the numbers, and if we’re being objective about it, they had one of the best seasons of all time. I don’t put too much stock in individual awards because media will always punish players unfairly (lol Curry and Durant weren’t top 5 or 1st team All-NBA in 2017)
If you use the relative net rating to league average (to account for pace and league trends), they still posted a top 5 offense of all time. I have to double check to see the exact placement.
But if you have a top 5 offense of all time (and highest rating in history), win 64 games when the coasting at the end easily could have had you at 66 or 67, and you win the finals losing just 3 games in the playoffs, it’s a historic season.