Celtics Fallout: Twice Trivial, Twice Important
First, the two trivia bits, both regarding the announcers:
1) When Blake stuck yet ANOTHER jumper in the 4th, all I could think was: Do it, Steve. Do it 'til you're satisfied.
2) After LaMardridge's post-game on-court Haarlow talk, the Mikes were commenting on how (overly?) tactful he was in his comments, especially towards Cagey, and Rice alluded to LMA not wanting to rile the Celtics up for a future game, saying something along the lines of, "We won't see them again this season, but of course, we will next season." Well, pardon me, but WE MIGHT SEE THEM AGAIN THIS SEASON. Might wanna amend that to "we probably won't see them again this season." Come on, Rice - one of these teams is expected to be in the finals, and the other team is YOUR TEAM. At least don't go ruling it out so casually. Could happen.THIS season.
--------------
Now on to the more serious stuff:
1) There's a lot of talk here about this win being bigger than the Houston and Phoenix wins. Of greater note is the way this Roy-less win is the perfect complement to those Roy-driven wins. He can carry this team to big wins on his own, AND this team can get big wins without him. This game was the Yin to the Rockets-Suns Yang.
And I'm sure both Roy and the guys on the floor last night feel that; they had to be looking at him with a regard of, "That's what YOU did for US. Now we've returned the favor." And Roy had that satisfied, admiring look of a man repaid in full, carried as he himself has done the carrying.
2) Our season introduction to 6 good teams (L[xxx]rs, Suns, Jazz, Hornets, Celtics, Denver) was a road loss. (Also, one not-so-good team, Golden State.) Now, four of those teams have then made their season Rose Garden debut just to see us return the favor. And this is purely about getting them back when they get to OUR place, rather than winning the second game against a team that beat us the first time (as shown by the follow-up road losses to Phoenix and Utah). I noticed this for the Hornets game going into the Suns game, and I was thinking, yeah, cool, do it again, get the home win against the team whose building you lost in, but I didn't wanna jinx it, so I didn't say nuthin'. And then we took care of that bit of business, then the Denver pair, and now this.
So there's that: We avenge our road losses when those teams come into our house. Golden State is the next shot at this, and you gotta think the boys in red and black will be up for that bit of revenge. And on top of that, consider how a team that engages in this sort of home-payback-for-road-losses is gonna function in the playoffs!
Better, broader point? At this point in the season, here's how the 29 other, lesser NBA teams break down:
- 9 teams we haven't seen yet (mostly BAD TEAMS - Cavs are great, Hawks are good, Nets are an inconsistent enigma,Sixers have the talent to be good, and then it's OKC/Grizz/ChaCha/Pacers/Bucks)
- 5 teams we've got a split going against, 4 of which are what i just mentioned: Teams that had our number in their house, and then we got one back at home. (The other team is Orlando, where the road team won both games.) We're done with two of these teams (Celts and Magic) for the season, and won't see again, finals notwithstanding.
- 7 teams we've beaten and haven't beaten us, but we'll see again - we might sweep, we might split, but we won't get swept.
- 3 teams we're done with for the season, and we swept them. Miami, Toronto, and Sacramento, take a bow. We're done witchoo now.
- 5 teams that have beaten us and we haven't beaten, but we'll see again - we have the chance to avoid being swept, but so far, we're winless against them. That's road losses to Utah, the L[xxx]rs, and Pyrite State, and single home losses to the Mavs and Clips.
- ZERO teams that have completed the season sweep of the Blazers. The Celtics were the first team to get a shot at that last night. DENIED!
So there ya go: Of the 20 teams we've faced, 10 of them are winless against us, and the other 10 are evenly split (5 and 5) between teams we've beaten but have also beaten us, and teams we're pulling an ofer against, but still have the opportunity to change (like we've done against the 4 teams we opened with losses to, and avenged those losses). Can we keep it up? 4 avenged, 5 needing vengeance. L[xxx]rs, Jazz, Mavs, Clips, and Warriors.
Small side note: For all 14 teams we haven't beaten (5 we've seen and lost to, 9 we haven't seen), we'll not just see them again; we'll see them multiple times. So it'll be a long time before a team gets another chance to sweep the season series against Portland, like Boston could've done last night. The first two teams to get a chance at it (if they beat us TWICE) are Charlotte (last game against us on January 28) and Golden State (last game against us on February 12) - not likely. Realistically, the first team to get a crack at sweeping us is Dallas, who we visit February 4 and come back to Portland on March 11. It'll be TWO AND A HALF MONTHS before anyone gets a realistic chance at sweeping us; meanwhile, we've already swept 3, are 1 home win away from sweeping 4 eastern teams (the upcoming Pistons game, plus the VERY beatable Knicks, Bulls and Wizards - all ready for the Miami/Toronto treatment) before March 11, and have our final two games apiece against the very sweepable Charlotte and Minnesota: That's a realistic shot at having swept 9 teams before anyone even has the OPPORTUNITY to sweep US.
I guess this calls for a POLL . . .
0 recs |
14 comments
Comments
Dedicated to Mrs. CatMan2 following a tiff
Darlin’, you’re so lookable
That I am gettin’ leapable
And though you know I’m hookable
Off your feet, you’re just unsweepable
by CatMan2 on Dec 31, 2008 11:51 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
ha HA!
Reminds me of The Magnetic Fields song that coins the term “unboyfriendable”.
In fact, that li’l verse of yours is quite Stephen Merritt-esque overall.
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." - Ernest Hemingway
by QualityPie on Dec 31, 2008 11:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Am I the only person who gets a gay vibe from one man telling another man to do something until he is satisfied?
Imagine Wheels covered in baby oil, looking over his shoulder, looking deep into Roy’s eyes, and saying that.
"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'
by tominhawaii on Dec 31, 2008 12:13 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
There's a Bill Hicks bit that comes to mind.
The one about Rush Limbaugh.
Woof.
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." - Ernest Hemingway
by QualityPie on Dec 31, 2008 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Man, that is seriously messed up.
Blazer's Edge Ambassador to The Dream Shake Blog
LMA is LaMonster!!!!! THE TWIN TOWERS RULE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
38:49 Mins 9-22 FGs 2-2 FTs 4 Off 7 Rebs 2 Ast 2 Stl 2 Blks 20 POINTS! LMA! vs Boston WOW!
by LaMarvelous on Dec 31, 2008 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
tominhawaii, i'm not crazy about it myself
ignacio
by ignacio on Dec 31, 2008 5:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude, that's a disturbing visual . . .
after Wheels’s surgery !
But, you also made me think of the before !
Uhhhhhhhggggg !
May a large cocunut sideswipe your repellant
protection !
It's GO time !
by walkoff41 on Dec 31, 2008 7:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, QP!
I wonder if I jinxed you fanpost by immediately going semi-OT? You put a lot of work into this, and I enjoyed it even though I didn’t comment specifically on topic. I didn’t vote, either, but that is because I really don’t know how to answer your poll.
I mean, what if I vote “Yes”? Isn’t that sufficient arrogance to cause the fates to smite me (and the blameless Blazers, besides)? But, conversely, I couldn’t bring myself to vote “No”, thus expressing a lack of confidence in our guys.
Still, I see that over 60 people actually have voted. After I post this, I’ll check to see how the numbers are running.
by CatMan2 on Dec 31, 2008 5:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It would be arrogant, yes.
The question is specifically “Are the Blazers ‘Unsweeepable’?”, rather than “MIGHT the Blazers be ‘Unsweepable’?”
Phrased for certainty rather than possibility.
The Blazers’ Unsweepability is possible, but not certain.
And yet, I answered “YES” to the POLL.
The jinx is entirely on the Haole. Baby oil?!?
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." - Ernest Hemingway
by QualityPie on Dec 31, 2008 10:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm generally optimistic
but… The Cavs have a good chance of sweeping us.
Chris Dudley for three!
by wilbjammin on Dec 31, 2008 10:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
A good candidate.
Boston and Orlando won’t do it, and we always play the L[xxx]rs tough in Portland
(plus, 3 chances for a sweep-avoiding win instead of the 2 chances against East teams).
That does kinda put the Cavs as the best team who can sweep us in just two tries
(as opposed to three or four games for western teams).
Our second game against them is March 19; after the Mavs chance on March 11, the sweep opportunities are on
March 13 (Nets), 15 (Hawks), 18 (Pacers), and then the Cavs.
Good candidate.
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." - Ernest Hemingway
by QualityPie on Dec 31, 2008 11:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, 4 (not 3) chances to Beat L.A.
My bad.
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." - Ernest Hemingway
by QualityPie on Dec 31, 2008 11:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
VERY enjoyable read
December 18, 2008.
"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212
by maid tu rek on Jan 1, 2009 7:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 




















