Celtics looked lost 20 games in

[dtgold88]

I think you undervalue Baynes... can't just pick up anyone off the street to replicate his defense and toughness.

But for the sake of argument, let's say your analysis above is correct.

In the context of what was actually being discussed in this thread, the fact that Baynes "has value to the C's because they have nothing else like him" is precisely the point. He was doing a fair job defending Embiid in the game in question. Then Baynes got hurt. Then Embiid proceeded to dominate the game.

You're talking beyond the original context to broader points.

All excellent points and no disagreement. But as has been pointed out, all teams have injuries and many to better and more important players than Baynes (and Smart).

 

[Gman]

But as has been pointed out, all teams have injuries and many to better and more important players than Baynes (and Smart).

Again, ^this^ has nothing to do with the specifics of the conversation.

 

[dtgold88]

Again, ^this^ has nothing to do with the specifics of the conversation.

Kind of does...my comment originated from you saying Philly LIKELY loses a game had Smart and Baynes been on at the end.

First, you don't know this. Second, many teams have overcome losing better players for entire games. Not just end of games.

THAT was the point for me.

 

[Gman]

Kind of does...my comment originated from you saying Philly LIKELY loses a game had Smart and Baynes been on at the end.

First, you don't know this. Second, many teams have overcome losing better players for entire games. Not just end of games.

THAT was the point for me.

I watched the game. Boston was having their way with Philly while Baynes was in there... they went on to lose in the final moments after Baynes missed > half of the game, and the main reason was that Embiid (the guy Baynes was defending) went off.

It's not crazy to suggest that the C's likely would have won if Baynes was healthy.

 

[dtgold88]

I watched the game. Boston was having their way with Philly while Baynes was in there... they went on to lose in the final moments after Baynes missed > half of the game, and the main reason was that Embiid (the guy Baynes was defending) went off.

It's not crazy to suggest that the C's likely would have won if Baynes was healthy.

Ok...but also not crazy to say many teams miss far better players for entire games and still win the game. All I'm saying.

 

[Gman]

Ok...but also not crazy to say many teams miss far better players for entire games and still win the game. All I'm saying.

Right. You're making a mushy, broader point that has little to do with the actual specifics of the conversation you entered into.

 

[dtgold88]

Right. You're making a mushy, broader point that has little to do with the actual specifics of the conversation you entered into.

I'm making a point you don't want to hear as it just makes your point an excuse.

Looking at the box score it's kind of looking like Philly was having their way with everyone in the game, especially Embiid.

Baynes didn't even start so how much faith did Ainge have in him? Guy played 12 minutes, 4 less than his season avg. smart played 19, looking like maybe 6 less than his avg.

If you think it was the defense they missed, the guys who likely replaced them (Morris and Brown) were slightly better per 100 possessions for the game and both played better overall. Smart had more fouls than points so maybe he fouls out if he plays more?

 

[The Q]

I don’t know how anyone can feel confident with this Boston team.

It’s going to need to make some serious tweaks this summer

 

[Gman]

Baynes didn't even start so how much faith did Ainge have in him? Guy played 12 minutes...

Baynes got injured in the first half. He played 12 minutes in the first half. He was on pace to play around 30 minutes overall.

Obviously, a good defensive big is more important and likely to get more tread in a game against the best center in the league.

The Celtics were winning by double digits at halftime.

 

[dtgold88]

Baynes got injured in the first half. He played 12 minutes in the first half, before he got injured. He was on pace to play around 30 minutes.

Obviously, a good defensive big is more important and likely to get more tread in a game against the best center in the league.

The Celtics were winning by double digits at halftime.

Is my point enhanced if I add a facepalm? It's worthy here. The guy's high for the season to that point was just over 23 minutes/game. Philly scored 30 in the first quarter, 58 for the half. About what they were on pace for in the game. It's one half of one game. They beat Philly in two games where he was inactive.

 

[Gman]

Is my point enhanced if I add a facepalm? It's worthy here. The guy's high for the season to that point was just over 23 minutes/game. Philly scored 30 in the first quarter, 58 for the half. About what they were on pace for in the game. It's one half of one game. They beat Philly in two games where he was inactive.

You earned the facepalm, dtg. Anywho: your streak of never admitting fault and arguing sh!t to death is intact... so you got that going for you, I guess.

 

[dtgold88]

You earned the facepalm, dtg. Anywho: your streak of never admitting fault and arguing sh!t to death is intact... so you got that going for you, too.

Are you not doing the same, despite overwhelming evidence to what you have said? But yeah, when all else fails come back with the "arguing shit to death" while also arguing. At least you didn't play the "but you never played the game" card which is often used by those whose logic is shown to be a little off base.

Keep in mind I never said losing them didn't hurt. My main point was other teams have lost far better players for far longer and still won. This is fact. You tried to counter this. Philly Right on pace to score what they did with him in the game as they ended up scoring in the game. He did miss 2 games entirely against Philly and the Cs still won. And then we have Smart who had more fouls than points in his time on the court. Almost as many fouls as points, rebounds, assists combined.

But, yeah, I am guilty of going too far when at this point you have no intention of admitting your logic might be a little off base.

 

[Gman]

I don’t know how anyone can feel confident with this Boston team.

It’s going to need to make some serious tweaks this summer

It all comes down the playoffs, Q.

They go out in round 1 or 2... it'd be an unmitigated disaster.

They make it to the Finals... all is more or less forgiven.

A repeat of losing in the ECF's would be somewhere inbetween... but treading water is never good, so it'd be more negative than positive.

 

[Gman]

Are you not doing the same, despite overwhelming evidence to what you have said? But yeah, when all else fails come back with the "arguing shit to death" while also arguing. At least you didn't play the "but you never played the game" card which is often used by those whose logic is shown to be a little off base.

You earned your rep, @dtgold88. And your rep got nothing to do with me.

 

[dtgold88]

It all comes down the playoffs, Q.

They go out in round 1 or 2... it'd be an unmitigated disaster.

They make it to the Finals... all is more or less forgiven.

A repeat of losing in the ECF's would be somewhere inbetween... but treading water is never good, so it'd be more negative than positive.

I share the same views with you here. Sure one would think with the Great Brad Stevens and a more healthy Kyrie a drop from the 2 to 4 seed would not be expected. But I've seen talented teams sleepwalk through the regular season and turn things on when the bright lights come on.

I wouldn't call anything a disaster, though, until you see how the offseason plays out even with an early playoff loss.

 

[dtgold88]

You earned your rep, @dtgold88. And your rep got nothing to do with me.

Nope...has to do with the many who do what you are doing....keep arguing and say I am arguing with you. That always comes, oddly, after I have presented logic, facts and reason to refute what has been said.

And, of course, in this case I presented facts that could not be refuted so out comes the deflection. All you had left to play without admitting you were off base and it's clear that's not happening here.

 

[Gman]

Nope...has to do with the many who do what you are doing....keep arguing and say I am arguing with you. That always comes, oddly, after I have presented logic, facts and reason to refute what has been said.

And, of course, in this case I presented facts that could not be refuted so out comes the deflection. All you had left to play without admitting you were off base and it's clear that's not happening here.

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree at this point. Your speal above can be the last word on the matter... I'll stand on what I've said previously.

 

[dtgold88]

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree at this point. Your speal above can be the last word on the matter... I'll stand on what I've said previously.

all good. This will be it for me.. at this point you really have no choice. "In too deep" so to speak. too late to say, "you're right. We did have success against Philly with no Baynes for the entire game this season. And Smart was almost hurting more than helping, with his replacement - Brown - playing better."

 

[Gman]

all good. This will be it for me.. at this point you really have no choice. "In too deep" so to speak. too late to say, "you're right. We did have success against Philly with no Baynes for the entire game this season. And Smart was almost hurting more than helping, with his replacement - Brown - playing better."

Can't help yourself, eh? Ok... you've declared victory again... I'm gonna stand on what I've said previously again.

Agree to disagree.

 

[dtgold88]

Can't help yourself, eh? Ok... you've declared victory again... I'm gonna stand on what I've said previously again.

Agree to disagree.

so wanted to let it go. If only there was an "oh the irony" specific facepalm I could use.