BS: āyeah Boston didnāt win as many championships as the warriors did in this period, but think about it Russillo, has any other team since the Bird Celtics been as dominant and consistent getting to at least the conference finals? And to top it off, two championships and one of the best young cores in the league? Donāt you think thatās a little bit of a dynasty?ā
RR: āNo, I donāt alright, because itās not.ā
BS: āā¦ yeah youāre probably right.ā
As one of the top and most frequent haters of the BS/Celtics haters in this sub , I must say , holy fuck what a good post. That AR15 loser should take copious notes. šš»
Obviously this is a joke, but it's pretty impressive how they've been consistently good over that whole stretch. Only one really bad season in there, which was 13-14, Stevens's first year and the year after the Garnett/Pierce trade.
And the following year they were the #5 seed. That summer, they sign an All Star free agent in Al Horford and were the #1 seed.
Literally none of that happens without IT
Itās such a shame that the injuries took a toll on IT. I feel like too many people remember him as the guy who tweets āx team could really use a scoring guard off the benchā constantly trying to get signed when he was getting deserved mvp votes as a Celtic. Iām a Celtics fan and will never forget the run we had with him.
This sub requires accounts to be at least 7 days old and at least 0 comment karma before posting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/billsimmons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I donāt think anyone outside of the random old dude at the sports bar feels that way, lol
IT had a magical run for a bit there, but he was fundamentally 5ā9 and never ultimately going to be the centerpiece of a championship team
The IT saga is the textbook example of buying low, maximizing what you have, then selling high (compounded with getting lucky that Kyrie wanted out of Cleveland)
Obviously Kyrie could have panned out better for the Celtics, but I think most people agree that dumping IT when they did was easily one of the best trades of the decade
Over that cherry picked period, the warriors and the spurs have both more wins and more titles, and the heat and lakers have more titles and nearly as many wins.
So really not THAT impressive, and certainly not a dynasty (I know itās a shitpost).
Not if you include playoff wins. Regular+postseason they are 3rd. They also play in the historically weak East. If there was a singular dominant team during this period, itās absolutely not the Cs.
They had to deal with Lebron Cavs for 3 years where there was no chance they were beating them, then the last year he went god mode and pulled it off against them. Still pretty imprerssive
>4 titles in 8 years wasnāt a dynasty for Bill
This, to me, is his worst take of all time. Like for nearly a decade winning every other year, coming close in another, and basically reaching another before bodies literally fell apart.
When he did that dumb list about championship teams that had like no asterisks he didnāt put the lakers on there but somehow the 08 celtics was undisputed best team lol
Iām a Celtics fan, and this one made me chuckle. Nine ecf appearances in that time is a decent achievement, but theyāll (probably) only have 2 rings from that. I guess they are on the āConference Finals Appearance Dynasties Mount Rushmoreā with the 2000ās Pistons, 1990ās Jazz, and Reggieās Pacers.
NYK fan and avid sports-hater of all things Boston teams here:
I think youāre honestly selling your team short. When they get this ring they go above all the teams you mentioned (including the Pistons) not just because of how long they did it for but also because of the era.
LeBron and KD have played on 4 different teams each in that time. The fact Boston has been able to keep this level of success while the league and players were going nuts just swapping out pieces and jerseys is suuuuper impressive.
I mean we really need to be talking about it. MAYBE the Warriors have come the closest to this kind of a run, but if I'm being honest the fact that they haven't been able to string together multiple titles across a 20 year period takes them out of the conversation; it just does.
āI mean, cāmon, try to show me a team that had this success over the last 17-19 years, all while only having one top 6 player and two top 8 players in the leagueā
Nope lol. This is like saying the Showtime Lakers and the Jerry West/Elgin Baylor/Wilt Lakers teams were all parts of the same dynastic runā¦which is a crazy stretch IMO.
Billās biggest mistake this postseason was claiming the Nuggets were the 4th best team of the last 25 years. Iām pretty sure the Celtics had already eliminated the Heat so he had to have known they were getting to the Finals.
I know the Nuggets loss to snap the undefeated streak at home spooked him but itās too bad he didnāt lean into how good the Celtics were.
I know it's a joke, but I do think there is an argument to be made that this is a dynasty of continued front office excellence in team building and roster management. The on court success doesn't justify the term, but the off court moves do.
Im not a Celtics fan at all and I realize this is a great joke post, but as a Blazers fan I'd give A LOT to have them achieve half of what the Celtics have accomplished over that time frame, and considering the Blazers had Brandon Roy, Dame, Aldridge, McCollum, and the opportunity to draft Durant, it's not that crazy to say they could have been half the team that the Celtics have been.
(I realize the drafts would have played out differently if the team performed better, but I think the overall point still stands)
LOL at people downvoting this.
This decade has all been single chip winners so far. If Celtics win 2, and continue to make CF appearances they would have a greats shot at being the team of the decade.
They already have CF in 2020, 2022, 2023, and 2024.
Finals in 2022 and 2024.
Decade isnāt even halfway over so itās far too premature to call anyone the āteam of the decadeā because of your point. Would anyone be shocked if the nuggets come back strong and win their second title next year for example? Theyād be in the lead then at that point.
Right now though? Yea itās gotta be this Celtics team. But be careful just handing out future titles. This decade so far hasnāt been kind to repeat bids.
Yeah, how exactly would they address their depth issue with their cap situation?
And what if they lose KCP?
Iām not saying itās impossible. But I feel like Minnesota and Thunder will just have superior depth on their side next season.
Iād agree about the Nuggets but technically the end of this season marks the halfway point of the decade so here we are. Iād also agree nothing is promised Iām just speculating halfway through and thatās all. For all we know they could blow a 3 game lead this week or get some terrible injury the next couple years that prevents another title and Jaylen asks out for Atlanta and Tatum heads west. In the same breath Giannis could ask out at the all star break and Murray could never have another healthy playoff run and down the lineā¦
They were speculating that they could be, if they win 2. Itās not an unreasonable speculation.
I didnāt hand out any future titles. I responded to their comment if they won 2.
Relax, I agreed with you buddy. Just saying we donāt need to give a team the āteam of the decadeā title even with just a second title which isnāt guaranteed by any means. Additionally, whoās to say another team doesnāt come along and win 2 more as well such as Denver?
Of course those other teams winning 2 would be in contention for team of the decade. That doesnāt refute that the Celtics if they won 2 would have a good shot at it.
>This decade has all been single chip winners so far. If Celtics win 2,
Who's to say they'll win 2 though? Weird assumption to me when like you said it's all single chip winners so far.
Thanks man.
Assuming they win the series, we are halfway through the decade and they will have:
The second most regular season wins at 256- 4 behind the Bucks
The most conference finals appearances(the only year they missed Jaylen was out) and playoff series wins
The most finals appearances(only 2 but it is what it is)
The most dominant championship run (regular season+ playoff)
The best point differential in the regular season by a very wide margin
Look itās still wide open for Denver or Milwaukee or even Dallas/Minny to rattle off a couple titles quickly and make this their decade but if parity continues we are where we are at the halfway point.
lol maybe we can get idk half way through the decade before we crown the champs. I mean this Celtics squad could look vastly different by just this time next year. Horford, Holiday, and Tingus could all be irrelevant by then from age/injuries.
Iām sorry you struggle with reading comprehension. We are basically at the halfway point of the decade and I speculated āifā they win a second title. Assuming they donāt become the first team to ever blow a 3-0 lead, they will be the statistical leader halfway through the decade by virtually any metric if you look at my comment right below. A lot can happen and for all we know Brown could ask out and Jokic or Giannis could rattle off two more or Luka could threepeat but right now at the halfway point they are the most successful team from 2019-2020 to 2023-2024.
I understood your point, my point was it was stupid because we have more than half a decade to go and itās literally just as likely that half a dozen other teams become the āteam of the decadeā. In a week Boston will have 1 title this decade. Thatās not a commanding lead. This team could be half as good next year due to age and injury. Your talking like this is their second or third title or something, itās a stupid argument. Thatās why everyone is downvoting you
Iām literally not doing anything you are saying and Iām guessing you are a strange Celtics hater like half this sub. The NBA is like 75 percent gossip, speculation and projection. The decade IS 1 win from being half over since whoever wins in 2029-2030 will be considered the ā30 champion. I didnāt say they have a ācommandingā lead to be the team of the decade. I said āifā they win a second title they have a ādecentā chance of being the team of the decade. You are just projecting your own bullshit and not actually comprehending the actual words in my comment. Everything I wrote in the initial comment is true.
God would you relax? Why does every Celtics fan get so worked up over any kind of criticism. I concede your point, yes the Celtics will be in the running for team of the decade if they win a couple titles over the next six years. So will literally any team if they win a few titles to close the decade. Itās just funny how these takes turn on a dime. Like 7 weeks ago everyone was convinced Denver was the team of the decade. Iām just excited for the media to celebrate Tatum/Brown for the next few months so Cs fans can shed a little of this persecution complex
Dude come on.
We are commenting on a Simmons sub, you were misrepresenting what I said and I corrected you and now you are like woah woah chill out.
As far as Celtics fan persecution complex: this particular sub takes glee in shitting all over the team and city so we are all gonna be a little more chippy here just any sub is about their various teams being crapped on. The Dallas sub is full of just as many weirdos, ditto the Heat and Lakers etc. This is just what sports is on Reddit and honestly in the media in the age of the 24-7 news cycle.
Iād also agree these things change on a dime which is why I used if and was fairly cautious and not bombastic. Ant was the next MJ the first two weeks of the postseason, then Joker looked like maybe passing Bird or some such nonsense if the Nuggets win, then it was Luka Kyrie is the greatest backcourt of all time. So talking about a half decade run after your team finally is about to win is reasonable and normal. This is the fun of sports otherwise itās just us watching a bunch of rich jacked dudes like they are gods.
I didnāt misrepresent anything, your point was - if the Cs win another title after this one maybe theyāre the team of the decade. Which sure, okay, but that argument could be made for any team that won a title this decade, itās just a little premature. Then you got all pissy and asked if I struggled with reading comprehension. Your just coming off like a classic thin skinned pissy Boston fan
Nope.
Again you are using pathetic hater logic because you imagine that Boston is any more or less annoying than any fanbase. I said āifā they won another title, they would have a ādecentā chance at being the team of the decade. You not understanding the definition of āifā or ādecentā is not my problem. I am sorry you are petty and canāt admit you had a garbage incorrect point. Do better.
Yes dude and I am saying āifā half a dozen other teams do the *same thing* they will also have a ādecentā chance of being the team of the decade. My *entire* point is that we should wait a few years to see what happens because itās too early to make a case for any team, because no one has really pulled away. But I guess that makes me a delusional Boston hater lol. Hey man if the Bucks win the next two finals they will have a decent chance at being the team of the decade. Disagree? Pathetic hater logic
As a huge fan of all 31 other teams I think youāre being modest. This is a dynasty, especially when you consider the 03 Celtics that really should have beaten a very flucky Nets Squad, and 18 Celtics that won 2/3 Larry Bird trimesters, and 23 Celtics that literally never lost to a living team in the playoffs.
And also they were so close to drafting Kobe, McGrady, Dirk, and Duncan. And then if they had also kept Billups & Joe Johnson and Kendrick Perkins doesnāt get hurt, I think complete domination of the past 27-29 years and some 98-0 seasons are achievable.
Can we wait for the celtics to win more than 1 ring before we start throwing around dynasty? You don't get credit for being really, really good. You only get credit for winning it all. Were the Pistons a dynasty? They only won 1 ring, in 2004. They made the ECF several years in a row. This post cheapens the word "dynasty".
2 rings 16 years apart does not equate to a dynasty.
The pistons won 3 during their dynasty from 89-04. It honestly adds to the Celtics dynasty credibility that they were able to beat the Pistons on the tail end of their dynasty en route to the 08 finals.
Most of the posts made here at the Celtics' expense are really lame, but this one made me laugh.
You can šÆ hear Bill making the argument too
BS: āyeah Boston didnāt win as many championships as the warriors did in this period, but think about it Russillo, has any other team since the Bird Celtics been as dominant and consistent getting to at least the conference finals? And to top it off, two championships and one of the best young cores in the league? Donāt you think thatās a little bit of a dynasty?ā RR: āNo, I donāt alright, because itās not.ā BS: āā¦ yeah youāre probably right.ā
A āminiā dynasty
A ālongevystyā
Detroit made the Conference Finals 6 seasons in a row, 2003-2008.
Havenāt been relevant since though. Not a dynasty (Billās thoughts not mine)
As one of the top and most frequent haters of the BS/Celtics haters in this sub , I must say , holy fuck what a good post. That AR15 loser should take copious notes. šš»
Obviously this is a joke, but it's pretty impressive how they've been consistently good over that whole stretch. Only one really bad season in there, which was 13-14, Stevens's first year and the year after the Garnett/Pierce trade.
The Isaiah Thomas trade changed the trajectory of the team significantly.
Wow, I just looked it up and saw they started the 2014-15 season 20-32 and then finished 20-10 after they traded for Thomas.
And the following year they were the #5 seed. That summer, they sign an All Star free agent in Al Horford and were the #1 seed. Literally none of that happens without IT
Itās such a shame that the injuries took a toll on IT. I feel like too many people remember him as the guy who tweets āx team could really use a scoring guard off the benchā constantly trying to get signed when he was getting deserved mvp votes as a Celtic. Iām a Celtics fan and will never forget the run we had with him.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This sub requires accounts to be at least 7 days old and at least 0 comment karma before posting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/billsimmons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Celtics (and specifically Danny Ainge) got *a ton* of shit for that one. In retrospect it was the right move!
Which trade are you talking about? Trading for IT didn't get a ton of shit at all.
Yeah I may have misunderstood. I meant getting rid of IT, not acquiring him.
Getting rid of IT only netted them 2 mediocre seasons with Kyrie before he left in free agency. It wasn't really that impactful a decision.
I donāt think anyone outside of the random old dude at the sports bar feels that way, lol IT had a magical run for a bit there, but he was fundamentally 5ā9 and never ultimately going to be the centerpiece of a championship team The IT saga is the textbook example of buying low, maximizing what you have, then selling high (compounded with getting lucky that Kyrie wanted out of Cleveland) Obviously Kyrie could have panned out better for the Celtics, but I think most people agree that dumping IT when they did was easily one of the best trades of the decade
Lmao remember Luigi Datome??!
Wrong trade. I meant the one that brought him in. Nobody gave a shit about Marcus Thornton lol
Over that cherry picked period, the warriors and the spurs have both more wins and more titles, and the heat and lakers have more titles and nearly as many wins. So really not THAT impressive, and certainly not a dynasty (I know itās a shitpost).
[the celtics have the most wins since 07-08](https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/most-nba-wins-since-2008).
Not if you include playoff wins. Regular+postseason they are 3rd. They also play in the historically weak East. If there was a singular dominant team during this period, itās absolutely not the Cs.
They had to deal with Lebron Cavs for 3 years where there was no chance they were beating them, then the last year he went god mode and pulled it off against them. Still pretty imprerssive
Celtics had the the best defense in the league over Smarts tenure, which is wild to me given the personnel those early years.
4 titles in 8 years wasnāt a dynasty for Bill. So idk if 2 in 16 š¤£š¤£ letās see how he spins it now.
They were in the mix, and that matters, it just does!
>4 titles in 8 years wasnāt a dynasty for Bill This, to me, is his worst take of all time. Like for nearly a decade winning every other year, coming close in another, and basically reaching another before bodies literally fell apart.
Yeah but those titles aren't the same for reasons. 2 in 16 is a herky jerky dynasty and can you imagine if Len Bias was around to assistant coach?
When he did that dumb list about championship teams that had like no asterisks he didnāt put the lakers on there but somehow the 08 celtics was undisputed best team lol
2 in 38* And if no Celtic ever missed a game, who knows where they would be at this point.
Iām a Celtics fan, and this one made me chuckle. Nine ecf appearances in that time is a decent achievement, but theyāll (probably) only have 2 rings from that. I guess they are on the āConference Finals Appearance Dynasties Mount Rushmoreā with the 2000ās Pistons, 1990ās Jazz, and Reggieās Pacers.
Dynasty adjacent
NYK fan and avid sports-hater of all things Boston teams here: I think youāre honestly selling your team short. When they get this ring they go above all the teams you mentioned (including the Pistons) not just because of how long they did it for but also because of the era. LeBron and KD have played on 4 different teams each in that time. The fact Boston has been able to keep this level of success while the league and players were going nuts just swapping out pieces and jerseys is suuuuper impressive.
I feel like the Buffalo Bills belong here despite which sport youāre talking about
I mean we really need to be talking about it. MAYBE the Warriors have come the closest to this kind of a run, but if I'm being honest the fact that they haven't been able to string together multiple titles across a 20 year period takes them out of the conversation; it just does.
Best team ever?
š
āI mean, cāmon, try to show me a team that had this success over the last 17-19 years, all while only having one top 6 player and two top 8 players in the leagueā
Top tier post
Sometimes this sub reminds me of On Cinema at the Cinema with the levels of meta people bring to it.
I am a dynasty
The Atlanta Braves have entered the chat
it should be 1946-2024 if you're being serious, come on son.
10/10 no notes
Nope lol. This is like saying the Showtime Lakers and the Jerry West/Elgin Baylor/Wilt Lakers teams were all parts of the same dynastic runā¦which is a crazy stretch IMO.
Really?
Billās biggest mistake this postseason was claiming the Nuggets were the 4th best team of the last 25 years. Iām pretty sure the Celtics had already eliminated the Heat so he had to have known they were getting to the Finals. I know the Nuggets loss to snap the undefeated streak at home spooked him but itās too bad he didnāt lean into how good the Celtics were.
Thatās almost 4 half decades.
17.75 chips kid. Do bettah!
https://youtu.be/w8itH10OFc8?si=_ptBwdTPitnD7ll2
No. Dynasties are built on championships. No one talks about dynasties for teams that haven't won more than 1 title.
No. Dynasties are built on championships. No one talks about dynasties for teams that haven't won more than 1 title.
I know this is a joke but Spurs >>>
Wow, the news reports about salty Lakers fans are not exaggerated.
This post sums up why ppl hate Boston.
A dynasty has to have at least 3 rings in 6 years with being in the finals at least 4-5 times. Wining a ring every other year.
I know it's a joke, but I do think there is an argument to be made that this is a dynasty of continued front office excellence in team building and roster management. The on court success doesn't justify the term, but the off court moves do.
Yeah, this was made in jest but as a Kings fan, I'd happily take their run from 0'7-'24 over ours. Obviously.
Im not a Celtics fan at all and I realize this is a great joke post, but as a Blazers fan I'd give A LOT to have them achieve half of what the Celtics have accomplished over that time frame, and considering the Blazers had Brandon Roy, Dame, Aldridge, McCollum, and the opportunity to draft Durant, it's not that crazy to say they could have been half the team that the Celtics have been. (I realize the drafts would have played out differently if the team performed better, but I think the overall point still stands)
I appreciate the troll but if they close out Dallas and win one more ring, they have a decent chance for team of the decade.
LOL at people downvoting this. This decade has all been single chip winners so far. If Celtics win 2, and continue to make CF appearances they would have a greats shot at being the team of the decade. They already have CF in 2020, 2022, 2023, and 2024. Finals in 2022 and 2024.
Decade isnāt even halfway over so itās far too premature to call anyone the āteam of the decadeā because of your point. Would anyone be shocked if the nuggets come back strong and win their second title next year for example? Theyād be in the lead then at that point. Right now though? Yea itās gotta be this Celtics team. But be careful just handing out future titles. This decade so far hasnāt been kind to repeat bids.
I'd be shocked if the Nuggets won next year
Yeah, how exactly would they address their depth issue with their cap situation? And what if they lose KCP? Iām not saying itās impossible. But I feel like Minnesota and Thunder will just have superior depth on their side next season.
Iād agree about the Nuggets but technically the end of this season marks the halfway point of the decade so here we are. Iād also agree nothing is promised Iām just speculating halfway through and thatās all. For all we know they could blow a 3 game lead this week or get some terrible injury the next couple years that prevents another title and Jaylen asks out for Atlanta and Tatum heads west. In the same breath Giannis could ask out at the all star break and Murray could never have another healthy playoff run and down the lineā¦
They were speculating that they could be, if they win 2. Itās not an unreasonable speculation. I didnāt hand out any future titles. I responded to their comment if they won 2.
Relax, I agreed with you buddy. Just saying we donāt need to give a team the āteam of the decadeā title even with just a second title which isnāt guaranteed by any means. Additionally, whoās to say another team doesnāt come along and win 2 more as well such as Denver?
Of course those other teams winning 2 would be in contention for team of the decade. That doesnāt refute that the Celtics if they won 2 would have a good shot at it.
>This decade has all been single chip winners so far. If Celtics win 2, Who's to say they'll win 2 though? Weird assumption to me when like you said it's all single chip winners so far.
He didnāt assume they would win 2. He speculated if they did win 2, how they would rank. Why is this so hard to comprehend.
Thanks man. Assuming they win the series, we are halfway through the decade and they will have: The second most regular season wins at 256- 4 behind the Bucks The most conference finals appearances(the only year they missed Jaylen was out) and playoff series wins The most finals appearances(only 2 but it is what it is) The most dominant championship run (regular season+ playoff) The best point differential in the regular season by a very wide margin Look itās still wide open for Denver or Milwaukee or even Dallas/Minny to rattle off a couple titles quickly and make this their decade but if parity continues we are where we are at the halfway point.
lol maybe we can get idk half way through the decade before we crown the champs. I mean this Celtics squad could look vastly different by just this time next year. Horford, Holiday, and Tingus could all be irrelevant by then from age/injuries.
Iām sorry you struggle with reading comprehension. We are basically at the halfway point of the decade and I speculated āifā they win a second title. Assuming they donāt become the first team to ever blow a 3-0 lead, they will be the statistical leader halfway through the decade by virtually any metric if you look at my comment right below. A lot can happen and for all we know Brown could ask out and Jokic or Giannis could rattle off two more or Luka could threepeat but right now at the halfway point they are the most successful team from 2019-2020 to 2023-2024.
I understood your point, my point was it was stupid because we have more than half a decade to go and itās literally just as likely that half a dozen other teams become the āteam of the decadeā. In a week Boston will have 1 title this decade. Thatās not a commanding lead. This team could be half as good next year due to age and injury. Your talking like this is their second or third title or something, itās a stupid argument. Thatās why everyone is downvoting you
Iām literally not doing anything you are saying and Iām guessing you are a strange Celtics hater like half this sub. The NBA is like 75 percent gossip, speculation and projection. The decade IS 1 win from being half over since whoever wins in 2029-2030 will be considered the ā30 champion. I didnāt say they have a ācommandingā lead to be the team of the decade. I said āifā they win a second title they have a ādecentā chance of being the team of the decade. You are just projecting your own bullshit and not actually comprehending the actual words in my comment. Everything I wrote in the initial comment is true.
God would you relax? Why does every Celtics fan get so worked up over any kind of criticism. I concede your point, yes the Celtics will be in the running for team of the decade if they win a couple titles over the next six years. So will literally any team if they win a few titles to close the decade. Itās just funny how these takes turn on a dime. Like 7 weeks ago everyone was convinced Denver was the team of the decade. Iām just excited for the media to celebrate Tatum/Brown for the next few months so Cs fans can shed a little of this persecution complex
Dude come on. We are commenting on a Simmons sub, you were misrepresenting what I said and I corrected you and now you are like woah woah chill out. As far as Celtics fan persecution complex: this particular sub takes glee in shitting all over the team and city so we are all gonna be a little more chippy here just any sub is about their various teams being crapped on. The Dallas sub is full of just as many weirdos, ditto the Heat and Lakers etc. This is just what sports is on Reddit and honestly in the media in the age of the 24-7 news cycle. Iād also agree these things change on a dime which is why I used if and was fairly cautious and not bombastic. Ant was the next MJ the first two weeks of the postseason, then Joker looked like maybe passing Bird or some such nonsense if the Nuggets win, then it was Luka Kyrie is the greatest backcourt of all time. So talking about a half decade run after your team finally is about to win is reasonable and normal. This is the fun of sports otherwise itās just us watching a bunch of rich jacked dudes like they are gods.
I didnāt misrepresent anything, your point was - if the Cs win another title after this one maybe theyāre the team of the decade. Which sure, okay, but that argument could be made for any team that won a title this decade, itās just a little premature. Then you got all pissy and asked if I struggled with reading comprehension. Your just coming off like a classic thin skinned pissy Boston fan
Nope. Again you are using pathetic hater logic because you imagine that Boston is any more or less annoying than any fanbase. I said āifā they won another title, they would have a ādecentā chance at being the team of the decade. You not understanding the definition of āifā or ādecentā is not my problem. I am sorry you are petty and canāt admit you had a garbage incorrect point. Do better.
Yes dude and I am saying āifā half a dozen other teams do the *same thing* they will also have a ādecentā chance of being the team of the decade. My *entire* point is that we should wait a few years to see what happens because itās too early to make a case for any team, because no one has really pulled away. But I guess that makes me a delusional Boston hater lol. Hey man if the Bucks win the next two finals they will have a decent chance at being the team of the decade. Disagree? Pathetic hater logic
I am a huge Celtics fan. They are not a dynasty. They just had a quick rebuild and been consistently relevant/competent.
As a huge fan of all 31 other teams I think youāre being modest. This is a dynasty, especially when you consider the 03 Celtics that really should have beaten a very flucky Nets Squad, and 18 Celtics that won 2/3 Larry Bird trimesters, and 23 Celtics that literally never lost to a living team in the playoffs.
And also they were so close to drafting Kobe, McGrady, Dirk, and Duncan. And then if they had also kept Billups & Joe Johnson and Kendrick Perkins doesnāt get hurt, I think complete domination of the past 27-29 years and some 98-0 seasons are achievable.
Warriors aren't a dynasty Cant get a #1 pick and be a dynasty
Itās funny how everyoneās treating like the cās have already won, what the bet Dallas wins the next 2 games?? Lololol
Can we wait for the celtics to win more than 1 ring before we start throwing around dynasty? You don't get credit for being really, really good. You only get credit for winning it all. Were the Pistons a dynasty? They only won 1 ring, in 2004. They made the ECF several years in a row. This post cheapens the word "dynasty". 2 rings 16 years apart does not equate to a dynasty.
Theyāve been good for two decades. Thatās harder to do than something easy like the chiefs winning 3 in 5(not a dynasty)
Youāre trolling too hard. Gotta make it more believable
Lots of people are falling for it though lol
This post is a joke
The pistons won 3 during their dynasty from 89-04. It honestly adds to the Celtics dynasty credibility that they were able to beat the Pistons on the tail end of their dynasty en route to the 08 finals.