Love was best sidekick in 18' East - 2-star veteran champs vs 0-star rookie teams

[3ba11]

Middleton wasn't even an all-star in 2018 and hadn't been an all-star yet.

The super-teams from 15-17' provided the 18' Cavs with a 2-star team of veteran champs versus 0-star rookie teams.

If this was anyone else other than Lebron, the 3-time defending conference champs would've been considered too much for the East and easy favorites over a bunch of no-experience teams with inferior sidekicks

Btw, Love wasn't needed in those Eastern Playoffs except against top 5 SRS opponents like the Raptors and Warriors, where he averaged 20/10 each time.. So Lebron never beat top 5 SRS opponents with bed-wetting teammates (no carry-jobs in 2 decades of playing).

[SouBeachTalents]

I already debunked this lie, plenty of people in 2018 would've taken Middleton, Lowry, Horford, Beal or Simmons over Love. There's nothing he did or achieved in 2018 that remotely separated him from that group of players.

And you have to love the irony that 2018 Love is by far the best sidekick in the East in 2018, but the guy making All-NBA every season in Pippen was a bum. What a joke :lol

[Akeem34TheDream]

My criteria is that if Tatum Brown duo is enough to make ECF then that conference is weak. It was the case in 2018 and 2020.

[3ba11]

I already debunked this lie, plenty of people in 2018 would've taken Middleton, Lowry, Horford, Beal or Simmons over Love. There's nothing he did or achieved in 2018 that remotely separated him from that group of players.

And you have to love the irony that 2018 Love is by far the best sidekick in the East in 2018, but the guy making All-NBA every season in Pippen was a bum. What a joke :lol


Love was a 26/13 All-NBA caliber

None of those guys were anywhere near Love's stature at that time..

We're talking 2018 and you're talking 2022

[SouBeachTalents]

Love was a 26/13 All-NBA caliber

None of those guys were anywhere near Love's stature at that time..

We're talking 2018 and you're talking 2022
Yeah, we're talking 2018, not 2014 :lol What he did 4 years earlier on a perennial lottery team is irrelevant.

[3ba11]

Yeah, we're talking 2018, not 2014 :lol What he did 4 years earlier on a perennial lottery team is irrelevant.


SouBeach, you're just a liar for Lebron:



* Simmons was a rookie and not an all-star (also the worst fit ever with Lebron.. worse than Westbrook)

* Middleton hadn't made an all-star team yet and didn't make it in 18'

* Beal was the 1st option on the 18' Wizards

* Horford and Lowry - gtfo - neither are legitimate scoring options


Everyone knows that Lebron reduced Bosh, Love, Jamison and Kuzma - he reduces any forward that can't out-produce him and make him the lower producer like AD did (make lebron the "pippen")

[3ba11]

My criteria is that if Tatum Brown duo is enough to make ECF then that conference is weak. It was the case in 2018 and 2020.


Exactly - if Kyrie was healthy, he would've led a sub-par cast of rookies to the Finals just like all the guys that did it previously - Iverson, Kidd, Dwight or 07' Lebron

Kyrie would've joined this group, just like Butler and Kawhi did (if Lebron led Lowry to the Finals or won the title, everyone would say it's the goat carry-job).

[ShawkFactory]

Lebron in 2018:

32.2 PER, .269 WS/48, 12.4 BPM, 3.4 VORP (of course this is a cumulative stat; 3.4 is the single highest playoff number in the history of the stat)

[3ba11]

Lebron in 2018:

32.2 PER, .269 WS/48, 12.4 BPM, 3.4 VORP (of course this is a cumulative stat; 3.4 is the single highest playoff number in the history of the stat)


if Kyrie was healthy, he would've led a sub-par cast of rookies to the Finals just like all the guys that did it previously - Iverson, Kidd, Dwight or 07' Lebron

So it's just a shit conference that is routinely won by 1-star teams, which means that Lebron's 2-star team of veteran champs was massive overkill - they should've swept every series

[1987_Lakers]

if Kyrie was healthy, he would've led a sub-par cast of rookies to the Finals just like all the guys that did it previously - Iverson, Kidd, Dwight or 07' Lebron


No he wouldn't. Celtics were better without Kyrie.

[3ba11]

No he wouldn't. Celtics were better without Kyrie.


Just like the 2015 Cavs right?... They were better without Kyrie too and cratered in 2016 when he returned.

Ultimately, the historical precedent of Kyrie elevating the Cavs to champion over the so-called goat team is the best evidence available (or possible) that he is a difference-maker.

So your unfounded opinion that the Celtics were better without him flies in the face of the historical record and is obviously false - the Celtics were the league juggernaut when Kyrie first arrived and a top contender when he got hurt - without him, they were a desperate, scrappy team and not favored..

[GrayGoat]

Tatum and brown will be better than Kyrie so it’s not surprising

[1987_Lakers]

So your unfounded opinion that the Celtics were better without him flies in the face of the historical record and is obviously false - the Celtics were the league juggernaut when Kyrie first arrived and a top contender when he got hurt - without him, they were a desperate, scrappy team and not favored..

Unfounded opinion?

Celtics with Kyrie (78-49, including 2nd round exit)
Celtics without Kyrie (26-11 and a ECF birth)

[Akeem34TheDream]

Unfounded opinion?

Celtics with Kyrie (78-49, including 2nd round exit)
Celtics without Kyrie (26-11 and a ECF birth)

That is because Raptors, Sixers and Bucks weren't that good in 2018. Next year all 3 were real contenders.

[3ba11]

Unfounded opinion?

Celtics with Kyrie (78-49, including 2nd round exit)
Celtics without Kyrie (26-11 and a ECF birth)


Everyone knows that Gordon Hayward cratered Tatum/Brown across the board in 2019 (PER, BPM, WS/48, VORP), which ruined what Kyrie had going.

Kyrie puts the Celtics over the top in 2018 if healthy (confirmed by the historical precedent in 2016), and Hayward ruined 2019.

[SouBeachTalents]

Everyone knows that Gordon Hayward cratered Tatum/Brown across the board in 2019 (PER, BPM, WS/48, VORP), which ruined what Kyrie had going.

Kyrie makes the Finals in 2018 if healthy, and Hayward ruined 2019.
Nah, I'd say Kyrie ruined 2019 with his atrocious showing against the Bucks. Gordon Hayward does NOT bear responsibility for that abomination of a series by Kyrie :lol

[zeerghit]

10+ years talking about Lebron.. same s*i day after day

[3ba11]

Nah, I'd say Kyrie ruined 2019 with his atrocious showing against the Bucks. Gordon Hayward does NOT bear responsibility for that abomination of a series by Kyrie :lol

Gordon turned the Celtics into a weak team by cratering Tatum/Brown, so they were a whimpering underdog instead of juggernaut favorite and couldn't compete with the Bucks

Furthermore, Lebron has at least 3 or 4 series that were as bad or worse than Kyrie's 2019 series (and bad losses as the favorite), yet no one said that Lebron killed the team - you guys just unfairly pick on Kyrie and inflate Lebron.. it's clear as day

[SouBeachTalents]

Gordon turned the Celtics into a weak team by cratering Tatum/Brown, so they were a whimpering underdog instead of juggernaut favorite and couldn't compete with the Bucks

Furthermore, Lebron has at least 3 or 4 series that were as bad or worse than Kyrie's 2019 series (and bad losses as the favorite), yet no one said that Lebron killed the team - you guys just unfairly pick on Kyrie and inflate Lebron.. it's clear as day
Do you legitimately believe that you don't do the opposite :lol

[1987_Lakers]

Everyone knows that Gordon Hayward cratered Tatum/Brown across the board in 2019 (PER, BPM, WS/48, VORP), which ruined what Kyrie had going.

Kyrie puts the Celtics over the top in 2018 if healthy (confirmed by the historical precedent in 2016), and Hayward ruined 2019.

Kyrie in the playoffs vs Bucks in 2019, 20 ppg on 45 TS%.

:yaohappy:

It was pretty noticeable to everyone at the time that the Celtics performed better whenever Kyrie was out of the lineup, but of course you wouldn't know since you haven't watched a game in 20 years.

[3ba11]

Kyrie in the playoffs vs Bucks in 2019, 20 ppg on 45 TS%.

:yaohappy:






Lebron played worse than that in the 07' Finals, 08' ECSF 11' Finals, and 10' ECSF (21 on 34% to lose the last 3 games)

So Lebron is a cancer like Kyrie, except 4 times over






It was pretty noticeable to everyone at the time that the Celtics performed better whenever Kyrie was out of the lineup, but of course you wouldn't know since you haven't watched a game in 20 years.


Real fans that don't listen to the fake news media know that Hayward ruined the 19' Celtics and this is confirmed by the stats.

Otherwise, the Celtics were a juggernaut favorite with Kyrie in 2018 and a much weaker team without (a weak underdog)

[Ne 1]

Kyrie is a weapon yes, franchisee player who’s a difference maker? No. He doesn’t turn around franchises. He ain’t a guy you build around. He’s a weapon you add to AN ALREADY GOOD TEAM. He’s the guy who puts a good team over the top, but he doesn’t turn a bad team good. He’s not a difference maker on his own. The Cavs needed Kyrie. They don’t win 2016 finals without him. But he’s not the difference maker, he’s the cherry on top, Lebron is the whole sundae. If you took Lebron off those Cavs teams, they wouldn’t even make the playoffs.

Take Lebron off they go from a contender to a sub .500 team.

[Ne 1]

Exactly - if Kyrie was healthy, he would've led a sub-par cast of rookies to the Finals just like all the guys that did it previously - Iverson, Kidd, Dwight or 07' Lebron

Kyrie would've joined this group, just like Butler and Kawhi did (if Lebron led Lowry to the Finals or won the title, everyone would say it's the goat carry-job).

Subpar cast of rookies?? The Celtics had a 26-11 record without Kyrie. They even have a winning record in the playoffs without him 11-8 despite the exits! You comparer Kyrie’s situation to Iverson and Lebron’s respective situations in 2001/2007? etc. Like I said, Kyrie is a great addition to an already good team. He isn’t someone who’s doing much on a average or below average team.

[3ba11]

Subpar cast of rookies?? The Celtics had a 26-11 record without Kyrie. They even have a winning record in the playoffs without him 11-8 despite the exits! You comparer Kyrie’s situation to Iverson and Lebron’s respective situations in 2001/2007? etc. Like I said, Kyrie is a great addition to an already good team. He isn’t someone who’s doing much on a average or below average team.


That's how weak the East was - the Celtics nearly won without Kyrie

It confirms that if Lebron's super-teams didn't exist, the East would've been won by trashy 1-star teams every year like Iverson, Kidd, and Dwight did before the super-teams, and like Butler or Kawhi after the super-teams (and Kyrie in 18' if healthy)

Btw, imagine if Lebron made Finals or won title with Lowry as sidekick - it would be considered the biggest carry-job in history

[Ne 1]

That's how weak the East was - the Celtics nearly won without Kyrie

It confirms that if Lebron's super-teams didn't exist, the East would've been won by trashy 1-star teams every year like Iverson, Kidd, and Dwight did before the super-teams, and like Butler or Kawhi after the super-teams (and Kyrie in 18' if healthy)

Btw, imagine if Lebron made Finals or won title with Lowry as sidekick - it would be considered the biggest carry-job in history

The 2018 Celtics had a 22-8 record over West teams. So please explain to me how they were “trashy” or “subpar”.

Stop making excuses. That Celtics team was legit. They had 5 lottery picks and a deep bench. Like I said, Kyrie ain’t a difference maker. Never was and never will be a franchise cornerstone. He is a weapon added to already good teams to put them over the edge.

[3ba11]

The 2018 Celtics had a 22-8 record over West teams. So please explain to me how they were “trashy” or “subpar”.





Most of that was with Kyrie (17-7) and no sample size otherwise

They were just a defensive team without Kyrie and therefore not viable..

Most importantly, Kyrie's elite jumpshooting skill and on-ball/off-ball diversity meant that the Celtics didn't have to play "Kyrie-ball" - Coach Stevens could implement a good brand of basketball that didn't change when Kyrie was out.

This is similar to other players that allow the coach to implement a good brand like Duncan, Curry, MJ, Kawhi (Raptors were decent in regular season without him), and Bird, among others (Kyrie).. These players that allow the coach to run a good brand have the highest team ceilings/Finals records.






Kyrie ain’t a difference maker. Never was and never will be a franchise cornerstone.





Except he was the difference between getting demolished in the last 3 games of the 15' Finals and solved (the Cavs would've lost every game after that), to destroying the goat regular season team for the last 3 games.

Kyrie was a rich man's Mo Williams, whose spacing effect and prime Klay offense turned a shitty, 45-win loser into the 66-win league favorite.

[Ne 1]

Most of that was with Kyrie (17-7) and no sample size otherwise

They were just a defensive team without Kyrie and therefore not viable..

Most importantly, Kyrie's elite jumpshooting skill and on-ball/off-ball diversity meant that the Celtics didn't have to play "Kyrie-ball" - Coach Stevens could implement a good brand of basketball that didn't change when Kyrie was out.

This is similar to other players that allow the coach to implement a good brand like Duncan, Curry, MJ, Kawhi (Raptors were decent in regular season without him), and Bird, among others (Kyrie).. These players that allow the coach to run a good brand have the highest team ceilings/Finals records.






Except he was the difference between getting demolished in the last 3 games of the 15' Finals and solved (the Cavs would've lost every game after that), to destroying the goat regular season team for the last 3 games.

Kyrie was a rich man's Mo Williams, whose spacing effect and prime Klay offense turned a shitty, 45-win loser into the 66-win league favorite.

Bruh just stop it! This seals it. The Celtics literally had a better record WITHOUT Kyrie (37-19) thanthey had WITH him! (83-53) LMAO! No excuses about the sample size either. You described the Celtics without Kyrie as “subpar”. Just admit you were wrong about that. You compared his situation in Boston to Iverson in 2001 and LeBron in 2007! Boston literally had 7 players averaging double digit points, that’s not a good team?

[3ba11]

Bruh just stop it! This seals it. The Celtics literally had a better record WITHOUT Kyrie (37-19) thanthey had WITH him! (83-53) LMAO! No excuses about the sample size either. You described the Celtics without Kyrie as “subpar”. Just admit you were wrong about that. You compared his situation in Boston to Iverson in 2001 and LeBron in 2007! Boston literally had 7 players averaging double digit points, that’s not a good team?


2019 is when Hayward came back, which cratered Tatum/Brown and ruined what Kyrie had going.

Everyone knew the Celtics weren't the same juggernaut in 2019 that they were in 18' with just Kyrie

Again, the historical precedent of 2016 confirms what would've happened in 18' and 21' with a healthy Kyrie




Bruh just stop it!


Kyrie's elite jumpshooting skill and on-ball/off-ball diversity meant that the Celtics didn't have to play "Kyrie-ball" - Coach Stevens could implement a good brand of basketball that didn't change when Kyrie was out.

This is similar to other players that allow the coach to implement a good brand like Duncan, Curry, MJ, Kawhi (Raptors were decent in regular season without him), and Bird, among others (Kyrie).. These players that allow the coach to run a good brand have the highest team ceilings/Finals records.

[NBAGOAT]

no lowry was very good in 2018. Stature doesnt matter he has a huge impact on winning. Now he's technically the best player on the raptors but since you base sidekicks on scoring, he's the "sidekick". More pertinent to show how hard Lebron was carrying is asking how many East teams had better 3rd options than Jeff Green :lol. Boston has 3 options better than him as does Toronto and Philly's whole starting lineup is better than him

[Ne 1]

2019 is when Hayward came back, which cratered Tatum/Brown and ruined what Kyrie had going.

Everyone knew the Celtics weren't the same juggernaut in 2019 that they were in 18' with just Kyrie

Again, the historical precedent of 2016 confirms what would've happened in 18' and 21' with a healthy Kyrie






Kyrie's elite jumpshooting skill and on-ball/off-ball diversity meant that the Celtics didn't have to play "Kyrie-ball" - Coach Stevens could implement a good brand of basketball that didn't change when Kyrie was out.

This is similar to other players that allow the coach to implement a good brand like Duncan, Curry, MJ, Kawhi (Raptors were decent in regular season without him), and Bird, among others (Kyrie).. These players that allow the coach to run a good brand have the highest team ceilings/Finals records.
Stop going around the fact you called the Celtics a “subpar” rookie squad without Kyrie. They were clearly a good team, even without Kyrie. End of story. You were wrong. So many excuses sheesh! lol

[3ba11]

Stop going around the fact you called the Celtics a “subpar” rookie squad without Kyrie. They were clearly a good team, even without Kyrie. End of story. You were wrong. So many excuses sheesh! lol


the historical precedent of 2016 confirms what would've happened in 18' and 21' with a healthy Kyrie

Kyrie would've carried a rookie Celtics team to the Finals, which would've been above expectation (they were expected to make ECF in preseason with Kyrie), and Kyrie would've led the 21' Nets to the title (they were demolishing the great Giannis before Kyrie got hurt)

[SouBeachTalents]

the historical precedent of 2016 confirms what would've happened in 18' and 21' with a healthy Kyrie

Kyrie would've carried a rookie Celtics team to the Finals, which would've been above expectation (they were expected to make ECF in preseason with Kyrie), and Kyrie would've led the 21' Nets to the title (they were demolishing the great Giannis before Kyrie got hurt)
Would've "carried" a Celtics team to the Finals that came literally one win away from making the Finals without him playing a single minute in the playoffs.

Would've "led" the Nets to the title despite not even being considered one of the two best players on the team and not in the same stratosphere as KD.

Lie after lie, it's seriously pathological :lol And I'm sure there are even more lies to come in his response.

[3ba11]

Would've "carried" a Celtics team to the Finals that came literally one win away from making the Finals without him playing a single minute in the playoffs.

Would've "led" the Nets to the title despite not even being considered one of the two best players on the team and not in the same stratosphere as KD.

Lie after lie, it's seriously pathological :lol And I'm sure there are even more lies to come in his response.


Let me tell you something... Harden ain't shit - he's another westbrook - a super-ball-dominant loser - aka impossible to win with - you guys just don't know the game.. lebron would be just like him if he didn't team-hop to form super-teams (although Lebron is better than Harden fwiw)

So there's no way a career loser like Harden (whose ball-dominant ass wouldn't have won SHIT with lebron) is anywhere near a winner like Kyrie.

The historical record tells the story - Harden is a loser and Kyrie is a winner

And yes, the Celtics were shit without Kyrie because that's all it took to win the East - a shit team - that's the whole point - ask Iverson, Kidd, Dwight, Lebron, Butler, Kawhi, and yes... ask 18' Kyrie

[Ne 1]

the historical precedent of 2016 confirms what would've happened in 18' and 21' with a healthy Kyrie

Kyrie would've carried a rookie Celtics team to the Finals, which would've been above expectation (they were expected to make ECF in preseason with Kyrie), and Kyrie would've led the 21' Nets to the title (they were demolishing the great Giannis before Kyrie got hurt)

Weather or not the ‘18 Celtics would of made the Finals with a healthy Kyrie is irrelevant to me. We don’t know. That’s just a bunch of speculation, “shoulda coulda woulda”, so don’t say “history precedent CONFIRMS what would of happened in 2018”. Sports doesn’t work like that, especially considering the Celtics actually played better WITHOUT Kyrie. So don’t ever say “confirmed” in sports. Nothing is ever confirmed.

[Ne 1]

Let me tell you something... Harden ain't shit - he's another westbrook - a super-ball-dominant loser - aka impossible to win with - you guys just don't know the game.. lebron would be just like him if he didn't team-hop to form super-teams (although Lebron is better than Harden fwiw)

So there's no way a career loser like Harden (whose ball-dominant ass wouldn't have won SHIT with lebron) is anywhere near a winner like Kyrie.

The historical record tells the story - Harden is a loser and Kyrie is a winner

And yes, the Celtics were shit without Kyrie because that's all it took to win the East - a shit team - that's the whole point - ask Iverson, Kidd, Dwight, Lebron, Butler, Kawhi, and yes... ask 18' Kyrie

My issue is the point when you say that the Celtics were a “shit” AND “subpar” team WITHOUT KYRIE and won’t admit you were wrong about it. The Celtics had a WINNING record without him in both the regular AND post season. Just because they lost in 7 in the ECFs without Kyrie doesn’t make them a “shit team without him”. They were a GOOD team without him. Weather or not Kyrie elevated them is irrelevant to that point. You said they were a rookie, shit subpar team. But they clearly weren’t, so admit that.

[Axe]

The lakers during 2004-05 wallowed in mediocrity when they got rid of phil jackson and shaquille. Maybe you could explain this happening, op.

[Ne 1]

3ball- You keep ignoring the facts and sticking to the narrative and logic you made in your head. The facts are that the Kyrie era Celtics team played better WITHOUT Kyrie. Every single fact points to that. They had a winning records both in 2018 and 2019 without him. Including the playoffs.

The 4 seasons Brad Stevens coached the Celtics, they made the ECFs every single time besides the year that Kyrie played the entire season! As soon as he left to Brooklyn? The Celtics made the ECF again! Coincidence? I think not. Just because you add a superstar to a team doesn’t automatically mean they will win more with them.

Kyrie played in the playoffs in the 2018-2019 season, and they did WORSE with him, then they did without him. They didn’t even make the ECF that year.

[3ba11]

My issue is the point when you say that the Celtics were a “shit” AND “subpar” team WITHOUT KYRIE and won’t admit you were wrong about it. The Celtics had a WINNING record without him in both the regular AND post season. Just because they lost in 7 in the ECFs without Kyrie doesn’t make them a “shit team without him”. They were a GOOD team without him. Weather or not Kyrie elevated them is irrelevant to that point. You said they were a rookie, shit subpar team. But they clearly weren’t, so admit that.


All we have to do is look at how Tatum/Brown's Celtics have ended up without Kyrie

They suck

But when Kyrie first got there in 2018 (before Hayward ruined it in 19'), the Celtics were a league juggernaut, which put them in position to make ECF (and obviously a healthy Kyrie puts them over the top like the 16' Cavs or 21' Nets.. Nets were demolishing the great Giannis before his injury)

[ShawkFactory]

All we have to do is look at how Tatum/Brown's Celtics have ended up without Kyrie

They suck

But when Kyrie first got there in 2018 (before Hayward ruined it in 19'), the Celtics were a league juggernaut, which put them in position to make ECF (and obviously a healthy Kyrie puts them over the top like the 16' Cavs or 21' Nets.. Nets were demolishing the great Giannis before his injury)

I think it's funny that you've gone the entire last week or so mentioning the "rookie" Celtics but ignoring the 5x all star that was also on the team.

[TheCorporation]

Jerry Stackhouse
30ppg

/thread

[SaintzFury13]

All we have to do is look at how Tatum/Brown's Celtics have ended up without Kyrie

They suck

Chicago Bulls first year after losing Jordan: 55 wins.

I guess Jordan wasn't all that great then if that's the point you're trying to make.


But when Kyrie first got there in 2018 (before Hayward ruined it in 19'), the Celtics were a league juggernaut, which put them in position to make ECF (and obviously a healthy Kyrie puts them over the top like the 16' Cavs or 21' Nets.. Nets were demolishing the great Giannis before his injury)

The Celtics struggled mightily against the Cavaliers that season even with Kyrie playing. The last time the two teams played with Irving still there, the Cavaliers blew them out considerably.

The Celtics played significantly better across the board without Kyrie. Stats, w/l record and common sense support this.

It's nice to see that nothing has ever changed with you. You still spend your free time talking about LeBron and it's hilarious.

[3ba11]

Chicago Bulls first year after losing Jordan: 55 wins.

I guess Jordan wasn't all that great then if that's the point you're trying to make.







And that's the beauty of it

The Celtics have been a disappointment for years now without Kyrie, whereas the 94' Bulls had a flukey run fueled by surprise factor/no pressure honeymoon period, but then were lottery in 95' before MJ returned - they were on pace for 43 wins and 8 seed, so there's strong likelihood they choke and miss 8 seed.

Regardless, Pippen destroyed a 3-peat dynasty to borderline lottery in less than 18 months, while Kyrie grew the Cavs each year so Lebron viewed them attractive, and then won title by dominating the best comp ever (the only unanimous MVP ever)

[SouBeachTalents]

And that's the beauty of it

The Celtics have been a disappointment for years now without Kyrie, whereas the 94' Bulls had a flukey run fueled by surprise factor/no pressure honeymoon period, but then were lottery in 95' before MJ returned - they were on pace for 43 wins and 8 seed, so there's strong likelihood they choke and miss 8 seed.

Regardless, Pippen destroyed a 3-peat dynasty to borderline lottery in less than 18 months, while Kyrie grew the Cavs each year so Lebron viewed them attractive, and then won title by dominating the best comp ever (the only unanimous MVP ever)
They were a MASSIVE disappointment with Kyrie in 2019 :oldlol: They were the clear favorites to win the conference before the season, your favorite metric, and instead got annihilated in the 2nd round with Kyrie playing like absolute shit.

Again, this was the only season from 2017-20 that the Celtics didn't make the conference finals. This is legitimately one of the dumbest arguments you've repeatedly tried to make.

[3ba11]

They were a MASSIVE disappointment with Kyrie in 2019 :oldlol: They were the clear favorites to win the conference before the season, your favorite metric, and instead got annihilated in the 2nd round with Kyrie playing like absolute shit.

Again, this was the only season from 2017-20 that the Celtics didn't make the conference finals. This is legitimately one of the dumbest arguments you've repeatedly tried to make.


Everyone knows that Hayward's return cratered Tatum/Brown across the board in 2019 (PER, BPM, WS/48, VORP), which ruined what Kyrie had going..

Regardless, Lebron had shittier runs like the 08' Playoffs with his 45-win loser before Mo's spacing arrived in 09' to provide prime Klay offense