Re: Celtics=Playoff's???????

["j.hironaka" <j.hironaka@unesco.org>]

At 22:09 09/08/01 -0400, Celtic4Hire@AOL.com wrote:
><< I see a lot in there way.  6 teams are easily better
>  than the Celtics.  Thoughts are Miami, New York,
>  Toronto, Milwaukee, Orlando, and Philadelphia.  Unless
>  the injury bug hits on of these teams hard come
>  playoff time they will be filling the 1-6 spots in the
>  east.  The next group of teams in the east are
>  Charlotte, Atlanta, Indiana, and maybe even Detroit
>  sneaking in there. >
>
>I disagree on the Knicks and the Heat without Mourning. The Knicks are going
>on past reputation only. The Celts were equal to the Heat when playing them
>heads up. I also think that Detroit doesn't have any prime timers that can
>win the game in crunch time. I agree with the rest.
>
>I see it Philly, Toronto, Orlando, Milwaukee and Charlotte on top with Miami,
>Knicks, Indiana moving down and Atlanta and the Celts moving up and fighting
>it out for the last 3 spots. I think the last 3 spots will be filled with
>Miami, Indiana and the Celts....
>
>DJessen33

Personally, I'd be equally shocked if a team with Michael Jordan on it 
failed to make the playoffs as I would be if the team had Magic or Bird a 
year past their primes. I don't think a ballclub with MJ could possibly 
play below .500 ball.

Otherwise, I agree that the first five teams cited by DJessen have the 
greatest talent when healthy. Next up both Miami and the Knicks arguably 
have the most reliable coaching in the conference, and that's been a big 
factor in predicting where they'll finish.

As playoff hopefuls, Indiana and Atlanta (Lon Kruger) probably have the 
worst coaching, although that could change quickly with a firing.

There's little question in my mind that Larry Bird would have had the 
Pacers in the Finals last year after Donnie Walsh upgraded Smits with 
Jermaine O'Neil. Bird's retirement may have cost Jalen, Reggie and Co. 15 
regular season wins last year. I just think Bird couldn't stomach losing 
again to the Gaykers.

I see the Hawks getting some attention, but to me Atlanta is hard to take 
seriously as a basketball franchise regardless what stars are on their 
roster, much like the Wiz in years past or the Nets in the present tense.

Arguably it was the Nets, not Atlanta, who added the most feared new player 
of any team this summer, yet I'm not expecting any more out of NJ than 
Atlanta. Boston needs to focus to beat these teams, but we won't be 
underdogs by any stretch. Kenny is the type of player that often makes a 
difference in games like that.

The season itself rests on the assumption that Boston can compete in games 
against the top five teams that D Jessen cited (Philly, Toronto, Orlando, 
Milwaukee and Charlotte . If they do, they should be a playoff team.

None of these five teams seem overwhelmingly more talented than the Celtics 
anymore, with the possible exception of Doc River's up-and-down team.

All the top Eastern teams can crush us on the boards if the players set 
their minds to it, but what else is new? The Celtics did do a pretty good 
job on the boards at Shaw, where the competition was a notch higher than 
the Rocky Mountain league. In fact, Boston had three of the seven leading 
rebounders in the ten-team league...our two rookie wing shooters plus our 
center.

Joe

-------