Paul Pierce & Ray Allen reunite
- Thread starter ALonelyDad
- Start date
SadimirPutin
Superstar
You know the funniest part.........
Ray dont give a fukk whether this hatchet is buried or not....He certainly dont care if Rondo is breathing or not...
Ray dont give a fukk whether this hatchet is buried or not....He certainly dont care if Rondo is breathing or not...
Last edited:
At age 40 none the less
Wasn't like he was 28
I don't even understand why there would be a 10yr celebration of the 08 title squad? They only won one. You didn't have 10yr anniversary with the 04 Pistons, any of the Lakers or Spurs squads etc. And Celtics are the weakest of the bunch.
Ray strikes me as the kind of guy that honestly doesnt give a fukk if he never speaks with KG or Rondo again
He works for the Celtics
Born2BKing
Veteran
I just home Kendrick Perkins don't snuff Jesus Shuttlesworth. 
stepbackj34spud
Top 75 All-Time
Pierce was always the bigger man than Ray Allen though. I watched damn near every game of the big 3 era.. Ray was always the most selfish and jeleous of Pierce and Garnett.
Mantis Toboggan M.D.
I’m here for the scraps
the Celtics last title team was probably the best team of the decade, and top 3 with the 2000 or 2001 lakers at worst. The only team to post a better record and win the title that decade was the 2000 lakers.
So you'd have them beating a Shaq led lakers? And the teams that beat those Shaq led lakers? Why's that? I wouldn't think to put those Celtics above any of those Spurs teams either. So why do you say this?
Mantis Toboggan M.D.
I’m here for the scraps
Do you not remember how top heavy the lakers were after the 2000 finals? Their third scorer was averaging between 9-11 points. The 2003 spurs had the same problem. Basically Chris Webber and Dirk getting hurt in the 2003 playoffs opened the door for that spurs team, and the 2005 team wasn't built to score much either. That Celtics team went 9-10 deep and won by an average of 10 points per game while out scoring their opponents by 11.3 points per 100 possessions. They had 3 all stars near their prime, with KG winning defensive player of the year and only being 3 years removed from being the MVP. The teams that beat Shaq's lakers that decade were the spurs and I already went over the 2003 playoffs, and the 2003-04 lakers were a mess for many reasons. Boston would've easily handled business against a team with no shooting and no bench.
I guess this is where we can agree to disagree. Yes I do remember those teams being top heavy.........with 3 of the top 12 Greatest players of all time. Even if you single cover Shaq and Kobe (which to be fair you admitted they'd lose to) and let them go off too play tight D on the others........it's not like every other player is going to have 0 points. Same with the spurs. I wasn't really taking account the end of the decade Lakers, b/c they went 2-1 barely w them C's. I just don't think those Celtics beat the Spurs, Lakers or Pistons. I see where you're coming from though.
So championships (peak achievements) should only be honored if there are multiple titles won?
