|
 |
|
 |
|
Re: Ladies and gentelmen..
|
|
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:02:28 -0700 (PDT), kenzaburo <...@gmail.com
On Apr 17, 6:35 pm, "Skeptic" <...@yahoo.com
We'll have to agree to disagree. Yes, it's a game changer, but there
are game changers almost every year. The year Duncan was out -
asterisk? The Suns losing Amare because of suspension versus San
Antonio - asterisk? I could go on, but suffice to say the whole notion
of applying an asterisk to a championship is a cop out in my opinion.
I think we'll certainly agree, however, that it's unfortunate we won't
be able to see this Celtics team play at full-strength against the
Lakers (with Bynum, answering that ongoing question) in the Finals.
I'm not saying Boston won't make it there (although I don't think they
will), but even if they do, they'll be without Garnett and it won't be
the same (obviously).
|
| |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 00:02:31 GMT, "Skeptic" <...@yahoo.com
"kenzaburo" <...@y9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 17, 6:35 pm, "Skeptic" <...@yahoo.com
We'll have to agree to disagree. Yes, it's a game changer, but there
are game changers almost every year. The year Duncan was out -
asterisk? The Suns losing Amare because of suspension versus San
Antonio - asterisk? I could go on, but suffice to say the whole notion
of applying an asterisk to a championship is a cop out in my opinion.
I think we'll certainly agree, however, that it's unfortunate we won't
be able to see this Celtics team play at full-strength against the
Lakers (with Bynum, answering that ongoing question) in the Finals.
I'm not saying Boston won't make it there (although I don't think they
will), but even if they do, they'll be without Garnett and it won't be
the same (obviously).
*************************************************
Fair enough. You could make a case for Duncan but I don't think it's a
truly comparable situation. Amare? Uh, no. That wasn't a top picked team
to win it all that lost their chance b/c of him. As for the C's chances...
based on the game 1 loss, we might be lucky to get out of round 1 here.
Losing KG is huge blow not only b/c he's so talented ... but the team must
also now know that their hopes of repeating have been erased and they
probably feel like there isn't much to play for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 14:52:27 -0400, "dano" <...@yahoo.com
"kenzaburo" <...@y9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 17, 6:35 pm, "Skeptic" <...@yahoo.comwouldn't
We'll have to agree to disagree. Yes, it's a game changer, but there
are game changers almost every year. The year Duncan was out -
asterisk? The Suns losing Amare because of suspension versus San
Antonio - asterisk? I could go on, but suffice to say the whole notion
of applying an asterisk to a championship is a cop out in my opinion.
I think we'll certainly agree, however, that it's unfortunate we won't
be able to see this Celtics team play at full-strength against the
Lakers (with Bynum, answering that ongoing question) in the Finals.
I'm not saying Boston won't make it there (although I don't think they
will), but even if they do, they'll be without Garnett and it won't be
the same (obviously).
=======================================================
Question....if we are all so certain KG has absolutely NO chance to
return...why was he kept on the roster?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 13:25:45 -0700 (PDT), kenzaburo <...@gmail.com
On Apr 18, 2:52 pm, "dano" <...@yahoo.com
Doc gives him a 1% chance of coming back at some point, so if there's
*any* chance, why wouldn't you? Besides, what would be the advantage
of taking him off the roster?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
In article <...@newsfe21.iaddano <...@yahoo.com
Because we're pessimists. Doc hasn't actually said he won't play in any
round; I believe he just said not round 1 and probably not round 2.
After some thought, if the Celtics manage to make it to the ECF -- not
likely, but you never know -- I wouldn't be surprised to see Garnett
out there toughing it out.
--
Bryant Durrell // durr...@innocence.com // durr...@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 00:03:19 GMT, "Skeptic" <...@yahoo.com
"dano" <...@newsfe21.iad...
I'm not really even sure exactly what the nature of the injury is. Anyone
with details?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|