2007-12-10 14:03:34 · 16 answers · asked by willy_f_wonka 1 in Sports ➔ Basketball
Hell no. Garnett gives them energy, intensity, determination. You think they can get that from just Ray Allen? They sure as hell didn't get it with just Paul Pierce. Allen and Pierce are good players and probably future hall of famers, but without Garnett that team falls apart from the inside out. Spurs can win without Tim because they are that good and because they know how to win without him. I haven't seen the Celtics win several games in a row without garnett on their roster. If i had to bet, i wouldn't even take a chance on Boston if Garnett was out.
2007-12-10 15:15:13 · answer #1 · answered by Jaqq 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Popovich has a stron team ethic built into the Spurs which is what makes the team consistent. I am constantly hearing from people that the Spurs are boring. And I will be the first to admit, they are not all flash that many of the one and two player teams in the NBA are. They send 5 people out on the court, and on any given night you never know who it is that might beat you.
I went to a game last year, and the Spurs seemed stalled, Tim hit his usual 20 pts, but Parker was no very strong and Manu was not hitting well at all. Findley comes on and hits 6 3 pt shots and drops a few more 2s and wins the game. The next game it will be "Big Shot Rob" Horry pulling one out. Unlike most teams, with the Spurs, you have to guard the whole team the whole game. The Celtics, just don't have that depth, they have some great players, but you pull Garnett (who is the best bet for MVP this year) out and the shooters will be covered the rest of the game.
Look at Cleveland in the Finals last year, James is one of the top 5 players in the NBA, but he could not pull an NBA final by himself.
You can't compare most teams to the Spurs, they are a deep, well managed, and fundamentally strong team, that given the time, will consistently beat everyone else.
2007-12-11 03:28:06 · answer #2 · answered by US_DR_JD 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't say they can't but K.G. is the biggest factor on that team!! I can say this much the Spurs are indeed on another level until I see them play the Celtics, with or with Tim Duncan!
They've been together for so long! There a team that can score 87-100 points and win. There not an all out attack team like the Suns!!! They play defense
2007-12-10 22:29:50 · answer #3 · answered by Amo la pallacanestro 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No way! Without Garnett they are the same as they were last year with Pierce and Ricky Davis (although i gotta admit Ray allen is an improvement). They need a solid big man to still win games and last time I checked, KG is still pretty good
2007-12-10 23:17:18 · answer #4 · answered by bigdadi2k3 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, I don't think the Celts could do it without Garnett. Only because that team is new to each other and and new to knowing their strengths and weaknesses. The Spurs have a core set of players that have been playing together for a while and know each other inside and out.
2007-12-10 22:21:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
HELL NO, you must be insane to believe that the Celtics can win without Garnett, besides the Celtics arent Sh*t, they start with a fluke winning streak and everybody already wants to crown them NBA champs when they have done nothing special as of now, until I see them beat Spurs, Mavs, and Suns, I don't see the Celtics as a threat to the west.
2007-12-10 22:51:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
if the celtics have to play without garnett, they will also have play without defense. garnett is the only one holding up the D on that team. He is also the only one bringing in any kind of spirit. you take out Garnett and the whole house of cards crumbles.
2007-12-11 03:35:31 · answer #7 · answered by m33p0 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes they can. Ray Allen, Paul pierce, and the rest of the celtics can still pull off a .500%+ record without Garnett.
Sure they won't be crazy .700-.800%+ good, but they won't be horrible.
The reasons on why it will be harder is because Garnett can do great put backs with the amount of rebounds he gets. If the Celtics miss and theirs no one to put the ball back, well thats one possession wasted.
2007-12-10 22:18:45 · answer #8 · answered by z. 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I doubt it. I consider Jason Kidd, Vince Carter and Richard Jefferson better than just Paul Pierce and Ray Allen, and yet even those three are struggling to win this season. I don't think a Pierce/Allen team would be much better than last years Sonics with Allen and Rashard Lewis.
2007-12-10 22:19:37 · answer #9 · answered by juan_two_three 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yeah how bout the spurs.
i think the celtics can win, but not so easily. they have the scorers. they have the passers. but they lose a monster on defense. they might let teams in the game, but will ultimately win it, just like the spurs.
2007-12-10 22:16:01 · answer #10 · answered by Einstein 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋