dlpin

I used to think this as well. But, I think the playoffs reseeds after each round. So if Boston or Chicago was seeded lower and won their series they would go on to play Miami. Same goes for us if we were seeded lower.

No, it doesn't. Last year the 4th seed celtics played the 8th seed sixers in the 2nd round, while the 2nd seed heat played the 3rd seed pacers.

Tough as nails, but dumb as a rock. It's the regular season, what the hell was he thinking?

Up until this morning he thought he just had a pulled hamstring.

They sign for the max money then bitch about adding talent...talent cost money. Or better yet don' take the deal, become a FA and pick your team. Go to a contender for less money.

Isn't that what Lebron did? Yes, it sucks when superstars hold teams hostage like Dwight is doing. But if anything that happens less often in the NBA. People just pay more attention to it because a superstar in the NBA has a much bigger impact than in other sports. But the list of pro-bowl level players holding out or demanding deals is much larger in the NFL. TO, Moss, Ochocinco, Carson Palmer, Haynesworth, Percy Harvin, Lance Briggs, etc. The difference is that you don't go from a lottery team to contender by acquiring just one superstar like in the nba.

http://www.cbssports...layoffs-in-2013 It's like a disease spreading throughout the league... First LeBron & Bosh, then Dwight, and now Kevin Love... The way things are going, there will be five superteams and the rest of the league will be ants. It's a sad, sad future for the NBA if this trends persists... The NBA legends should be ashamed of what the youths are doing to this league.

Which NBA legends would those be? Abdul Jabbar and Wilt, who both demanded trades to the lakers? Jordan, who got his first coach fired and demanded a series of 1 year, 30 million dollar deals so he could bolt if the team wasn't to his liking? Barkley, who also demanded a trade? Bird and Magic, both who at different times broke the then record for highest salaries? And that is not to mention a big difference that did not exist back then: max contracts. Nowadays there are caps on how much a player can get paid. But back then there wasn't. I am not defending any of this. But it is simply not new, and not that different from other sports. The difference is how big an impact it has.

Who considers these to be the best in NBA history?In history, you have the following drafts, which are all better than 1999, at least:1960 (Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Lenny Wilkens, Tom Sanders, plus 2 other players who made all star games)1965 (10 players drafted that year made at least one all star game)1970 (12 all stars, including Nate Archibald, Dave Cowens, Pete Maravich)1979 (Magic Johnson, Bill Laimbeer, Sidney Moncrief, plus 5 other all stars)Post lottery:1985 (Ewing, Karl Malone, Joe Dumars, Terry Porter, and 6 other all stars)1987 (David Robinson, Scottie Pippen, Reggie Miller, Horace Grant, Kevin Johnson, Reggie Lewis, Marc Jackson)And finally, the best draft class of all time:1984: Jordan, Olajuwon, Barkley, John Stockton

This is actually a pretty good deal. Hibbert got 4 years/58 mill. Asik 3 years, 25 mill. KG is better than both, and he would likely just retire if the celtics decide to rebuild at any point, making him come off the books.As for Howard, once he picked up his option the celtics would never be able to sign him outright anyways. Boston had cap space this year. In order to roll over that cap space to next year, they would need to renounce everyone (bass, green, kg, allen, stiemsma) and sign a bunch of 1 year deals to reach the minimum team salary. All for a chance at maybe signing Howard. Totally not worth it for a team that was one free throw away from the nba finals.

...and the Buss families deep-pocketed checkbook... It's easier to be GM in sports when you have an owner that is willing to shell out the clams.I have been saying this about the NBA for years. Unless you are the Lakers, Heat, Spurs, Bulls, or Celtics, you are not going to ever win a championship in this league. Why should the Lakers and Celtics be relentivent every single year and not have to go through the growing pains of building a contender? The NBA is so top heavy that the bottom half of the league, teams like the Bucks, Cavs, Clippers, and Kings, will always be bottom teir teams.

This is wrong. The NBA is "top heavy" because a top star has a much bigger impact on basketball than in any other sport. The celtics were mostly irrelevant from 1993 to 2007. The heat were irrelevant before Shaq got there (and now Lebron). The Bulls were irrelevant before Jordan, and then irrelevant for a decade until they got lucky with Rose. And if you told anyone in 1997 that the Spurs and the Mavs would win 5 out of 15 titles they'd laugh at you.So yes, the league is top heavy. But that doesn't mean that other teams don't have a shot. Hell, who would have ever thought that a team in Oklahoma City would be the current odds on favorite to win the title?

Just to reinforce the view of Al Jefferson, here's the list of players who had averaged at least 21 points and 11 rebounds at 23 or younger since the NBA ABA merger and before Al Jefferson did it:Moses MaloneHakeem OlajuwonCharles BarkleyShaqTim DuncanKGin over 30 years those were the players who put up the numbers Al Jefferson did at the age he was traded. Unfortunately, injuries on one hand, and terrible Minnesota management on the other helped derail his career a bit.

You say that like PP is a batman. PP is just another Robin. Anybody can look good playing next to 2 hall of famers... maybe 3? With a Hall of fame coach.Joe gets downgraded alot but lets face it... Joe has to carry more weight than PP. If you want an example of what PP can be... Look at him back when he didn't have KG, Allen, and Rondo. Even back to his Antoine Walker days.. he was not what you say he is. Joe is playing with an Antoine Walker like player and we are akin to that Boston team.

In his "Antoine Walker" days, Paul Pierce led the celtics to a conference finals, including what was until recently the biggest 4th quarter come back in playoff history.

I agree with this. I like how people are whitewashing the very real criticisms of all the Big 3 in Boston because once they actually played together they managed to win one, just one, ring. Ray Allen didn't get it done in Seattle or Milwaukee, Pierce was on bad team after bad team in Boston after they traded Walker and KG's team were notorious in never being able to win in the playoffs. But now somehow Pierce is some kind of alpha dog playoff stud? lol ok there.

Ray Allen was one Glenn Robinson missed shot away from making it to the 2001 finals, playing in a team that started Erving Johnson and Scott WIlliams in the front court. In a series against Philly where he scored over 30 3 times.KG took the 04 Lakers to 6 games in a badly officiated conference finals, despite losing its second best player, Sam Cassel, to injury in the first minute of game 2. They lost the series by losing 2 close games in LA, with a line up that was KG, Sprewell, Trenton Hassel, Derrick Martin, and Michael Olowakandi.I think evaluating a player's career by the team success is terrible. Give me a team with John Stockton, Elgin Baylor, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone and Patrick Ewing any day. I'd take it without thinking over a team with Derek Fisher, Chauncey Billups, Rick Fox, Antoine Walker and ALonzo Mourning, who were all important players in championship teams.And in any case, neither of these 3 players had played with anyone as good as Horford or Josh either, so I don't know why the comparison. Each of the 3 achieved more than Joe with lesser talent surrounding them before boston. You may hate them all you like, and it is entirely understandable.

I am not going to weigh in on the particular game because I would obviously be biased.But here is an interesting bit of information: if you are a gambler, one of the best, if not the best single bit of information you can have in order to win a bet are the tendencies of the officiating crew. Spend any time in a gambling forum or talk to anyone in the professional gambling community and you will see that. And that, by itself, shows the problem.

I recall KG having an early termination option for the 08-09 season and so does Sham:http://www.shamsport...play.jsp?id=231Its a little green colored to say KG had 2 seasons left on his deal. KG also got his extension right after, as Mace correctly points out the "extend and trade" really came from the KG deal and then the Melo:http://www.eskimo.co...ender/contractsYeah, I agree with Mace here. Really the Heat and Celtics did about the same thing. Its not unprecedented, but when was the last time this stuff happened? The Malone Lakers? The Barkley Rockets? The...drawing a really long blank here.

He had one full season at the very, very least. And it is not like he requested a trade to boston. He accepted one after the celtics acquired Ray Allen, just like he would have accepted to phoenix, lakers, bulls... And trades of past-his-prime former MVPs for cap space, prospects and picks are as old as the nba itself. Shaq to the heat, if you want to know the last time before KG. And it is in no way the same thing as two 25 year old all stars (one of them an MVP candidate) deciding to sign for less with a playoff team with a in his prime former champion in it. I mean, you may not like it, but I don't see how anyone can say it is the same thing. Under contract 30+ year olds being trade to one of several teams they find acceptable, with those teams getting cap space, prospects and top 5 lottery picks in return is objectively different from 2 twenty five year olds taking less money to play with a 3rd all star.And that is not to mention, again, that KG did NOT want to be traded originally. At all. And only decided on it after the Wolves started shopping him around and the Wolves owner started dogging him in the press:http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/story/2012-03-30/kevin-love-minnesota-timberwolves/53903356/1"The deeply loyal Garnett didn't want to leave when the Timberwolves traded him. But when the deal was made, things turned sour.Timberwolves executives were unhappy with Garnett's demeanor behind the scenes and Garnett seethed over a perceived lack of loyalty from the organization, particularly when owner Glen Taylor alleged that KG "tanked it" at the end of the 2006-07 season by sitting on the bench with injuries."

Who said anything about being plucky under-dogs? I am saying that what happened with the celtics is pretty much your run of the mill superstar trade. Not some major stuff where stars decide to collude to ring chase. Also, KG had 2 years left on his deal when he signed the extension with the celtics. Him agreeing to extend it was certainly nice, but it wasn't in any way a deterrent to any trades. Finally, the reason Ray was important was because the celtics were a bottom of the barrel team. Not a playoff team.

So we should downplay the fact that KG had the power to determine where he got traded to thanks to the threat of his opt out? The fact he wanted no parts of Boston until Ray was acquired in a separate deal and only then would he agree to an extend and trade?We can act like they were put together thanks to some run of the mill trades but KG in particular used his impending free agency as incentive to pick and choose how cushy the situation he landed in was rather than being available to the top bidder. I personally am not crowning neither him nor Carmelo as though they are some sort of saints over guys who were actual free agents. It stinks all around and all the same.

What are you talking about? KG had no opt out clause in his contract. And he had 2 years left on his deal. And he didn't even originally want to be traded. He only asked to be traded after it became public that the wolves were shopping him around. And he didn't force a trade because the wolves were bad: the wolves wanted to trade him because it made no sense to them to keep paying an aging superstar 20+ million a year to miss the playoffs.And then the celtics tried to acquire him 2 times before the actual trade. The first attempted deal had the celtics giving up not only all that they eventually did, but also Rondo instead of Sebastian Telfair and the number 5 pick in that year's draft. Minnesota said no because other teams were still the frontrunners to land him. Then the second time around, KG said he wouldn't resign with the celtics as they were then (one of the 3 worst teams in the NBA). It was only when Phoenix refused to include Amare in a deal, when the Lakers wanted Minnesota to take on Lamar Odom's bad contract, and when Chicago refused to break up the "baby bulls" that the celtics became the front runners. And even then KG wouldn't go. So the celtics made a deal that everyone at the time thought was a bad deal: Wallu Szerbiak's expiring deal, Delonte West, and the number 5 pick in the draft for Ray Allen, who was a shooting guard in his 30s just coming off surgery in both ankles and was still owed 60 million dollars. Don't need to believe me, just go back and read what all the experts thought of the trade.Only then the celtics were able to land KG. And it took a lottery pick (which Minnesota messes up by picking Johnny Flynn), Al Jefferson (who put up 23 points, 11 rounds and 1.5 blocks in his first year in Minnesota and everyone agreed should have been an all star that year), and the largest expiring deal at the nba at the time. It was a better package than any other superstar deal every got in the league.And still, no one thought the celtics would win the title. Just read the previews back then.Here's that season's GM predictions:http://www.nba.com/preview2007/gmsurvey_predictions.htmlHere's ESPN:http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2007/news/story?page=Experts-NBAChampsYou are entitled to your opinion, but the facts are the facts. KG was far from enthusiastic about joining the celtics.

I am not trying to "defend" the celtics and I have no illusions that this will change what people feel about them.But it is a pet peeve of mine this idea that the celtics created the "collect a team of superstars" thing.As long as there has been an NBA, there were superstar teams. Wilt demanding a trade to the lakers to play alongside Jerry West and Elgin Baylor? Jerry Lucas demanding a trade to the Knicks to join Walt Frazier and Willis Reed? And ring chasers are as old as the league itself too. Gary Payton to the heat, anyone?The heat did it differently than others in that it likely involved collusion by the players. But what the celtics did was nothing new.

You're right. I misunderstood the definition. Either way, just because you play with a subpar player doesn't mean rebounds are going to start dropping into your hands.

No, but it has a big influence. Michael Beasley went from having a DRB% of 19.8 and 18.8 in Miami playing alongside Jermaine Oneal, to having 14.1 and 17.2 playing with Kevin Love.

Dreb% is an individual stat and takes that in to account. It's still not close.

No, it does not control for who a player is playing alongside. Rebounding rate numbers control for the availability of rebounds overall, but it does not adjust for who is playing next to someone who is a great rebounder. It was created to control for stuff like players in the old days averaging 20 rebounds a game because they played in a faster pace, missed more shots, and so on. Or players in bad teams that just let the opposition shoot, instead of slowing down the tempo and forcing turnovers. So rebounding rate is essentially the share of total rebounds a player could have gotten.

Since people are resorting to the Defensive Win Share argument, Boozer was 5th by that metric so he was actually greatly under appreciated by voters.As far as DWS argument goes.......it's a cumulative stat that is affected by amount of minutes a player plays. Josh led all players in the top ten of DWS in minutes played excluding numbers 8 (Marc Gasol) and 9 (Kevin Durant who led the entire league in minutes played) so him being at the top isn't exactly the most solid of arguments.But don't mind me, I'm just a hater.

With regards to WS being cumulative, you can adjust it per minute, or, as it is more common, per 48 minutes. In which case Josh Smith is at about 0.10 DWS per 48 and KG is at 0.11 DWS per 48. In fact, I think KG led the league in DWS per 48 among players with at least 20 min per game. Whether or not that is an indication of how good a player is defensively is up for debate, but the fact that WS is cumulative is something that is easy to fix.

Celtics fanatic much? Calm down, I love Doc and the Big 4 minus Pierce, too. I know Bradley's a terrific defender but there simply wasn't enough minutes logged for him to be considered.

How is me saying that Bradley is the best on ball defender on the celtics based on being a celtics fanatic? He plays better defense than Rondo easily, and that has nothing to do with whether I am a celtics fan or not. As for minutes, he played more minutes per game this season than Tony Allen did when he got a 2nd team choice last season, and in total he only played 160 fewer minutes than Tony Allen this season.

Love when this list comes out moreso than All-NBA. Thoughts...I'm a fan of Iman. Should get more than 13 first place votes next year, but to have that as a rookie and nobody really dispute it is outstanding.I like Paul George, although he has hit a wall trying to guard Wade and LeBron. Probably the biggest threat to Joe's All-Star Scrub Streak.Westbrook is an underrated defender. Isn't afraid to body people.Only 8 votes for Josh?5 votes for Thabo and Tim seems low for guys who've been on teams multiple times. Thabo and Tony Allen is basically the same defender, I guess Allen is a little longer.2 votes for Joe? We've been a defensive team primarily for years, and Joe is the most consistent. I felt he should've been on at least 2 Second Teams by now with a lot of "sexy," non-deserving selections in the past, but his total lack of charisma fails him yet again with the media and voters.Avery Bradley and Carlos Boozer get votes, none for Kendrick Perkins who routinely manhandles seven footers?Derrick Rose? Eeh.Overall I have little problem with the teams but no Perkins or Duncan doesn't smell right. Kobe is a staple, Ibaka is a beast, the two PGs can hive you hell, one with his arms, the other with his body. As wonderful an all-around player LeBron is obviously, i think his best assets are now his man defense and durability. I think Luol gets too much credit for playing injured and such, but when you factor in leading the league in minutes while almost exclusively checking the other team's main threat, I don't have too much a problem.

How the hell does Avery Bradley end up next to Carlos Boozer in your list of bad votes? Anyone who has watched the celtics this season knows he is the team's best on ball defender. There is a reason Bradley got the starting job over Ray Allen, and it is not his shooting.

Bradley is a blessed to be next to Rondo. It really helps his game a lot. He's a combo guard with great athleticism and super long arms. But he plays off of Rondo well and it is really what makes his development a lot faster than expected. Honestly, if he was a Hawk, he would be a rich man's Mario West, not even a starter over Ray Allen who potential is bright.Teague can't run an offense, have a quality PnR where he's not slashing to the basket, or make smart decisions. It's kind of hard to do with Lawson does when he's superior to Teague in those areas. That's like asking Zaza to be more like Nene.We use the PnR a lot especially with the PG when Al there.

Bradley won the starting job over Allen and had some of his best games when Rondo was out injured or suspended for 13 games. He is also by far the youngest player on either the celtics or the hawks, and is still younger than 3 players who are expected to go in the lottery in the next draft.

To be a bit more precise, the 3 second count is reset when:" (1) a player is in the act of shooting, (2) there is a loss of team control, (3) the defender is actively guarding an opponent, (4) the defender completely clears the 16-foot lane or (5) it is imminent the defender will become legal."So a player can actually stay in the lane for the entire possession, even if they are mostly not guarding anyone, as long as they get within arms length and guarding an opponent every 2.9 seconds. Not to mention that if they are guarding a player with the ball, there is no count even if he is far from that player (no arm length requirement).

Just to correct something, but section 105 is not behind the hawks' bench. The benches are in front of sections 114-116.

I know more games=more money, but I really wish they hadn't compressed the season so much, because it now shows with the injuries. In the end, the team that will win it all this year won't be the team that is the best team, but the team that is the healthiest. Bulls have just lost Noah as well. This is terrible.

being cleared for contact just means that the injury has healed to the point where contact alone won't set back the recovery. Doctors make no comment on whether the strength or range of motion is enough to be competitive in the nba because, well, they are doctors, not trainers or basketball coaches. I say this not because of Horford specifically, but I have friends who are former professional athletes, and the stuff they go through even when they are technically "healthy" is the kind of stuff that would have most of us lying on the couch the whole day.

LOL no no no no no no noThe Mavs were still much more respected than the Hawks are. They have a Superstar in Dirk on their team. The Hawks have......Oh yea nobody

Whatever additional respect the Mavs got, it was because they had achieved more. Still, despite being a #3 seed with a former MVP, they were the team most "experts" picked to be a 1st round upset last year, people relentlessly referred to their 1st round losses, no one picked them against the lakers and when they scrubbed the floor with the lakers the emphasis was all on lakers' chemistry issues, how could the lakers lose like that, etc. And absolutely no one picked them against the heat, even when they were up in the series.And believe it or not, back in 08, when it was the celtics' first run with the big 3, people didn't respect them either. A lot was made of the fact that each of the big 3 had only gone beyond the 1st round once. In the GM survey before the season, the celtics weren't even top 4 in terms of who they thought would win it all. 9 out of 10 espn "experts" picked the lakers in the finals. No one on nba.com picked the celtics to win the championship.It is not about the city. It is not about the team. It is that the media is reactionary. They take a long time to adjust their perceptions. It took people a long time to realize that the detroit pistons were old and done, and as late as 09 people were picking them to be the surprise of the playoffs, because those "veterans" knew how to turn it on.Which means that the media will pick the celtics, spurs and lakers to be good for a long time after they stopped contending, and whoever is next will have to prove them wrong.

It's not the hawks. The media doesn't respect anyone until they win. Remember how dallas was treated until last year?