Skip Bayless said “Shannon you picked them, and they self destructed”.

1st round: They swept KD and Kyrie. A team that the Bucks and other teams wanted to avoid playing in the 1st round. Smart even said they wanted to face them and did not want to duck/dodge no one and said they would eventually have to see them in the playoffs so they may as well just get them outta the way.

2nd round: No Middlleton for the Bucks but everyone else was there. Went to 7 games, and they won a Game 6 at Milwaukee who were still the reigning defending champs. Holiday did make big defensive plays in Game 5, but they blew them out in Games 6 & 7.

​

3rd round: They couldn’t stop Butler when he had those big games, but managed to find a way to win. The Heat could have also made the Finals that year, they were also knocking on the door.

​

Finals: Now the first 4 games, we could tell that no team had the advantage. They came back from being down or something if I remember. Then JT just shrank I guess. How do they do all of that in the previous rounds, and just not show up vs the Warriors? Was it just based on experience, or maybe fatigue?

  • Alear55@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    Theyre a good team but have well defined weaknesses and warriors managed to exploit that in their series.

    Also warriors couldve closed them out in 5 if boston doesnt go scorching hot on that 4q in the first game, i dont think it was that close but thats just me

    • FlyingMocko@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      11 months ago

      and Boston could’ve won if Jordan Poole wasn’t scorching hot in that one game

      This “could have been different if something happened differently” is such a dumb fucking trope in sports lmao

    • Alex_O7@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      11 months ago

      On the last statement I could argue that the Celtics could have been up 3-1 with a commanding lead if Steph didn’t went up and put one of the greatest finals performances ever… for sure the best 3pt performance in the Finals ever.

    • ScootHenderson_@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      11 months ago

      An argument could be made that the Celtics were a better roster but the gap between Curry and Tatum was so big it didn’t matter

      Curry had one of his best series of his career while Tatum had one of his worst

    • Himmy_Buckets22@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      11 months ago

      ESPN gave Celtics an 83% chance to win. most analytics had Celtics better rated

      that was lowkey one of the more impressive titles in history

    • Top-Crab4048@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      11 months ago

      Literally just turnovers. Without the insane turnovers they likely would have overcome every other factor working against them. The combination of incredible perimeter D by GPJr and Wiggins causing turnovers abs a shitload of unforced turnovers put the Celtics in the grave they dug for himself. Didn’t Tatum and Brown alone have 100 turnovers in that series?

  • Wavepops@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    They played a team that shut them down defensively and also had enough offense carried by Steph to push them over the top. Warriors top to bottom were a little worse talent wise, but they were more consistent. Wiggins gave Tatum a lot problems defensively and the Celtics were stretched into multiple wars before getting to the finals. It’s hard win a title going to war with the bucks and heat like that. You run out of gas

  • DrHydrate@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    The answer is Steph and Draymond. Steph is one of the best offensive players ever, and Draymond is a good PnR partner and one of the best defensive players ever.

  • CoachDT@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    Steph carried on offense but that was a defensive clinic. The Jays got clamped so hard.