Lebron James is one hell of a business man.    He's been in the league since what, '03 - '04?    I am willing to bet that when he first put on his uniform (with the numbers 23 shining on the back) he had the same admiration for Michael Jordan that he does now.   Now mentions this idea - out of the blue?  Come on....

What a brilliant marketing scheme!  The 'previous #23 becomes a 'must have' collector's item and is safely put away.  LJ across all over the world will buy the new uniform.

This idea (supposedly by Lebron himself) has very little to do with his feelings of respect for MJ.    Im sure the king respects your airness to death, but it only goes so far.

Before Lebron makes his decision on whether or not to change his number,  he should first decide which team he wants to dedicate himself to.   Possible changes of cities...uniforms...his mind seems to be everywhere these days.

By now, you've probably seen the video of Artest flipping Ariza's shoe into the crowd.  Funny stuff.  Funnier from the point of view of this C's fan is that the Lakers got the worst of the Ariza-Artest exchange.

Don't believe me? Look at their numbers on B-ball-reference.com. Ariza has a PER two points better than Artest, with a line of 18 pts, 5 rebs, 4 assists, 2 steals. Ron's got similar rebs and assists, but he's scoring only 12 and making only .5 steals pg. The steal number's no surprise - Ariza is quicker and taller than Artest, and I expect he's a better all-around defender. (Yes, Artest is still a good defender, but he *used* to be elite. Not anymore.)

What's more, Ariza is only 24, six years younger than Ron-Ron.  The move is going to look bad this year, and even worse over the next few as Ariza hits his prime and Artest continues to slide down the far side of the hill.

Atlanta is a very good team.  They can shoot, defend and they are very good on the offensive boards.  They play a fast and crazy enough pace to make up for a pretty small center tandem that could or should be abused on defense.  And they have the stud that can create his own shot.  They block shots, they beat teams to lose balls, they seem both young and hungry and poised and smart which like it or not, Bibby helps greatly with.  I think ESPN's power rankings are right - they should be thought of as an elite team in the east.  they will have to be dealt with and we should not misunderestimate them ;).  Just watched a fantastic game between them and Portland, and wow, I wish we had Fernandez. 

The season is 11 games old, the Celtics have won 8 and lost 3 and I'm really not sure what this team is all about. Are they a defensive team? Are they an offensive team? Are they a rebounding team? Are they an old team? Are they a running team or a half court team? Are they a long distance shooting team? Are they a hardened bunch or are they soft? Who and what are they because so far this young season the Boston Celtics have kind of been all over the place. This Celtics bunch seems to be missing...an identity.

 

I'm pretty sure what this team wants to hang their hat on is the fact that they are a defensive juggernaut and will win Banner #18 with defense. I can't say that I can argue with that too much. It should be their identity and with the league's best defensive efficiency rating of 94.7, the league's best point differential of +10.2 and holding their opponent's to the second lowest amount of points per game, 88.3, they should be considered among the best or the best defensive team in the league.

 

But are they?

 

Over the last 5 games, almost half the total games they have played, the Celtics are giving up the following:

95.2 points per game

48.5% FG%

41.8% 3PT FG%

52.8 eFG%

40 rebounds(as compared to their own 37)

 

These are defensive numbers that would put Boston squarely in the bottom half of the league in defensive statistics, if not for their hot defensive start to the season. A defensive start that might be able to be explained away by letting everyone know exactly where the offenses of those teams they played in the first 6 games rank in offensive efficiency, points per game and eFG% in the league:

 

                                Off Eff            PPG         eFG%

Cleveland                    11th            18th            7th

Charlotte                     30th            30th          30th

Chicago                      28th            28th          28th

New Orleans               18th            19th          15th

Philadelphia                  7th            20th          11th

Minnesota                   27th            27th          27th

 

Not exactly the 1980's Lakers, huh? As a matter of fact 4 of the Celtics 8 wins have come against the 4 worst offensive teams in the league as New Jersey is the 29th worse team in all three of these categories and they played them just a few games ago.

 

So are we, the fans of the Boston Celtics being fooled into some sense of a false reality here? Is the Celtics defense as good as their overall yearly stats are or are they a result of playing some of the worse offensive teams in the league? Is the defensive effort and team that we have seen over the last five games more than likely the team we are going to see the rest of this year? Have the Celtics transitioned from a hard nosed defensive oriented, offensively efficient and diverse group to an old, somewhat soft, outside shooting, mediocre defensive team in just a couple of weeks time?

 

The Celtics have always, in their best years, had an identity of being tough, efficient, and one of the best defensively. That has been their identity since the days of Red, Cous and Russell. It is what the 2007-08 Championship team was all about. It is an identity that this team has lost over the course of the past 10-14 days and one they need to regain.

 

It's time to play that tough, smothering man to man and team defense. It's time to be pushing those big guys out of the paint on the defensive end. It's time to start sticking a behind on your man and rebounding the ball and to stop giving up rebounds. It's time to produce the effort we have all seen before. And it's time to start doing it every single night, game in and game out for the rest of the season. The Celtics, as a team are missing their identity and it's time to get it back.

We all know what Eddie House does well--he spreads the floor and shoots lights out when uncovered. But are those 2 things (which are really one thing with two components) worth the compromises we make with the rest of the lineup in order to put him on the floor? Just think, this is what playing Eddie House makes us give up:

1. Using Rondo as the bridge to the 2nd unit: The no-brainer move designed to keep Ray/Paul from being overplayed, while also keeping our best playmaker on the floor with the 2nd unit that has no point guard--unfortunately, we can't do it because House's presence on the court leaves us too short in the backcourt.
2. Any semblance of play-making on the 2nd unit: This leads to contested jump shots and makes us perimeter-oriented to the detriment of overall team offensive balance. Of course, House's jack-at-all-cost offensive game itself makes us over-reliant on three pointers, above and beyond what his presence at point does to the offense. Not only do we have an over-abundance of 3 point shooters, we have a bad point guard doing bad point guard things which leads to contested 3s as the clock winds down. It's a feedback loop of perimeter dependence.
3. Solution to House-at-point takes our best backup 2/3 and moves him to the point: Of course, Daniels is MUCH better at point than House, and Daniels does a good job at point relative to House, but in essence we're weakening our 2/3 position in order to find a way to get House on the court, while at the same time increasing the minutes of Ray/Paul. So, yes, we can substitute around House's deficiencies at point, but it makes Daniels/Ray/Paul de facto facilitators to the detriment of what they do best. Sure, they can play point from time to time, but we've made it the rule all so we can get House on the court.

So, that's what we give up to get House on the floor.  Are his floor space-ability and occasional eruptions from deep (when left unguarded) worth the compromises we must make in other areas?

I say NO. I say, we have enough 3 point shooters that we don't need him to space the floor. I say that defense and point guard competence are much more important to the second team than what House brings. We're crippling ourselves in 3 areas all just so we can 'space the floor.' It's retarded.

Solution: I wouldn't bench House outright, but instead curtail his minutes to specific situations. The way we have it now, he's easy to defend. Limit his minutes a bit, and maybe the other team doesn't game plan for him as much and then perhaps we can spring him on other teams unawares. The reason he's had 5 bad games in a row is simple--he's been given defensive attention. And when the other team scouts him and defends him, he'll be stopped almost every time. That's why he never performs well in the post-season.

In order to use Rondo as bridge to 2nd unit, either Hudson, TA, Scal, or Walker have to step up and fill in at 2/3. So, while limiting House's minutes, I'd give extra to that foursome. Also, when Rondo needs a break in the mid-2nd quarter, I'd use Hudson for a 3-4 minute stretch, right about the same time the starters come back in. 

The thing with Hudson v. House is simple--Lester Hudson can hit the three, and also defend his position, dribble against pressure, create his own shot, and get to the rim. He could probably even defend some twos, depending on the situation. His youth would give us a nice jolt of energy, something this team could use right now.  Best of all, his presence would remove all the inconveniences of playing Eddie House. Of all the possible moves to get this team on track, Hudson to backup point makes the most sense, if only for a few games. 

Eric Snow a analyst for NBA.tv said,the Boston Celtics has picked back up where they left off before KG went down with injury.Yes,as a fan i got caught up into the media hype and all the people on the blogs saying we are sure to win 70 plus games.I never felt we are going to win 70 plus games,but 68 would work for me. Over this past week,when i witness the team go through a slump or setback,it woke me up.Was i expecting them to go 20-1 before they started to lose back to back games?or was i living in the past of what they acheived 2 seasons ago?The way i see it now,when the time comes to make the playoffs,i want the the team to be 100%healthy first and foremost,and running on all cylinders.Winning enough games to get homecourt advantage would be nice to ,but its not the end of the world if they don't get it.After winning 65games last season,going to the playoffs without one of your key players,made the season seem meaningless in the end.I hope we are playing consistent basketball,and beating up on all the teams we need to beat in April and May of 2010 but i will not expect things to go as perfect through the regular season as it did in 2008. Hopefully i have gotten over being a spoiled fan and just a supportive one who enjoys the team when they win or lose.

 

Did the Boston Celtics set unrealistic expectations for themselves this season?  Did some of us set the bar too high ourselves predicting a 70+ win season? This year's Green team wants to be 'the best defensive team in NBA history.'   When they made this goal for themselves, were they talking about the whole season or just the 'important games.' Boston has given up 100+ points in back to back nights. The Pacers, an offensively challenged team, shot better than 60% in the second half again the green Saturday night.   Indiana got EVERY shot they wanted.  This has been a recent trend for Boston. Allowing Atlanta to score at will was frustrating enough, but the poor defense then continued in Indiana.  Let's go back to the New Jersey game. The Nets has 8 players in uniform! Moreover, the Nets were winless, but still managed to hang on until the very end. Minnesota also gave us fits. Al Jefferson had his way in the paint.  With the exception of the Cleveland game, the Celtics have had problems stopping almost everyone.   I am not buying the back to back nights or the 8 games in twelve nights excuses.  This is an experienced veteran club who should come to play every night.   Elite teams take care of business and do not allow themselves to be pushed around by the bottom feeders of the league. After a quick exit from the playoffs last season, the Celtics had an extended off season.   How is will this team last 82 games if they are tugging at their shorts after eleven?  What will happen on these west coast trips? The 'Big Three' look like the 'Old and Tired Three.'   Here's a side note, the Garden fans have not exactly help matters.   As much as the jumbo tran begs to crowd to make noise, most of the fans sit back on their hands.

Never mind the 8-3 record, the team has played awful on both sides of the court thus far.   Defensively, the second chance opportunities that the C's have given up have cost them big.  Rebounding on both ends needs to improve.  Offensively, many feel that Kevin Garnett and Rasheed Wallace have been shooting too much from the outside.  If your bigs are missing from long range,  second chance opportunities will suffer.  As for shot selection, why must the tallest players in a green and white uniform play the farthest away from the basket?  The purpose is to make the defense spread out more and open up the paint.  But if Rasheed is launching and not connecting this adds more work for Kendrick Perkins and Sheldon Williams.  Did Doc Rivers promise Rasheed a season long green light from behind the arc.  Even Antoine Walker shown more self discipline.

Boston could easily be below .500 right now.  Why am I so worried about wins and losses so soon?  Getting home court advantage is a must if the Celtics are going to win banner #18.   Bottom line, Doc will not be able to rest his starters down the stretch if Boston has to play catch up to the Lakers.I do not fear Cleveland or Orlando, but I do fear L.A.  The only thing keeping me away from the Tobin bridge is the Lakers getting blown out at home by the Denver Nuggets.  Still, the Lakers look like the more dominant team.

Boston had a lot to say during the preseason.  They insist that they are hungry and want to get back what the Lakers stole from them.  So far their bark has been worse than their bite.  The swag and killer instinct has disappeared.

 

I am puzzled why Doc continues to play the big 3 at the end of games during crunch time in games in which they  are struggling, which has happened at times over the past few years and especially during recent games.

Is their a clause in his contract that states he must play the big 3 at the end of games and in crunch time even if they are struggling ?

Take for instance last nights game:

Shelden Williams was playing great and was providing the team with a spark  with his solid physical play, hustle and energy.

He was on a role especially in the 3rd quarter when he rejected his opponent and then hustled down the court for a nice slam dunk.

Moments later though Doc pulled  Williams from the game in place of Garnett and it was like a balloon of energy was deflated because the game started to do down hill then and the C's evidently lost the game.

Another example:

In the 4th period Ray Allen just went ice cold and  was bricking his outside shots badly, but Doc continued to keep him in the game and went to him time after time even though Allen was struggling badly with his shot.

You could see Ray just did not have it in the 4th so why did Doc continue to keep him on the floor?

Doc could of shook things up and put Daniels in the game who could of got us drives too the hoop and  better shot options or even could of went with Hudson who is a good scorer to give us more of a offensive punch.

Another example is Pierce, he was also struggling in the 4th with his bad knee, not being able to defend his opponent and  was a non factor offensively.

Why did  Doc not bench him for say Daniels, Scalabrine or even Walker who could all provided some offensive punch and solid defense?

I just do not get why Doc continues to play the big 3 in crunch time when they are struggling, when we have bench players that are capable of coming in for them and giving us a spark and a lift when we need it the most.

When the big 3 are on the floor and things start going down hill  in crunch like in last nights game its puzzling why Doc continue to just stand pat with them and not go to the bench.

He has no problem pulling bench players out of the game for starters when they struggle so should do the same if the starters struggle.

After all what was the purpose of building a bench this summer if we do not use it when the big 3 are struggling, like they were last night?.

I think Doc for the good of the team has to stop fearing he will hurt the feelings or show disrespect to the big 3 and bench them in crunch time when they are struggling or if other bench players are playing better than them.

Any one else agree with me?

Is it just me or has anyone else noticed during recent home game losses  the crowd is sitting on thier hands, very quietly?

Why is the crowd not showing more energy and trying to juice up the C's?

I understand that a home team should give their fans something to cheer for , but I also believe that if the home team is not giving thier fans something to cheer for and are playing in a funk, that it is then up to the crowd to attempt to pump up the team and get them going.

After all what is the home court advantage in the NBA if your home teams crowd is not motivated and do not get into games?

Our Boston fans when loud and cheering on our beloved Celtics are the best fans and 6th man in the NBA and it concerns me that they are so quiet lately .

Any one else see what I am seeing and does it concern you? 

The Celtics have now allowed the opposition to shoot .450 or better from the field in 4 of the last 5 games, and as a result is a very pedestrian 3-2 in those.

Whatever happened to the team that took pride in its defense?!

Throw in the fact that we were also outrebounded in 4 of the last 5 contests (despite being a very good reboudning team over the last two seasons -- with and without Garnett), and it seems like Doc has his work cut out for him. Either that, or it's time for the players to step it up.