With an Emphasis on Crap

The Boston Celtics 20-2 start has gone a long way toward quieting early doubters, but it has not quelled the skepticism entirely.

Let's take a moment to recall the path blazed by the skeptics thus far:

1. Celtics acquire Ray Allen. Skeptics Response: Ray Allen? He's a 32-year-old shooting guard coming off double-ankle surgery. What in the world is Danny Ainge trying to do in adding this past-his-prime player to the pool of young talent in Boston?

2. Celtics acquire KG. Skeptics Response: Nice addition. But it takes more than three guys to win a championship. Come to think of it, it will take the Boston Celtics more than those three guys just to win their division. Oh, and by the way, what have those three guys ever won by themselves? There won't be enough balls in Beantown to keep them all happy.

3. Celtics acquire Eddie House and Scot Pollard. Skeptics Response: That's it? You acquire Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett to make a run at a championship and all you are surrounding them with is Rajon Rondo, Kendrick Perkins, Eddie House, and Scot Pollard? The drop-off in talent between roster spots 1-3 and 4-12 is the biggest in NBA history.

4. Celtics acquire James Posey. Skeptics Response: Ok, the Celtics at least have a shot making it to the ECFs. But Rajon Rondo still can't shoot it in the ocean, and asking a second year point guard to lead a team of veterans is not realistic. Who's gonna back-up Rondo, Eddie House? He's not a point guard.

5. Celtics start the season 8-0. Skeptics response: Ok, I had them penned in for 45 or 46 wins (Tim Cowlishaw). I can see I'm gonna be way off on that one. Still, it's only 8 games, and they still have a lot to prove.

6. Celtics move to 20-2. Skeptics response: The Celtics haven't played anyone, and, even if they manage to sweep the Pistons, Bulls, and Magic over the next three games, that doesn't prove anything to me either. Dan Patrick, who, when Reggie Miller told him that the East would be a crapshoot this year, replied, "yes, with an emphasis on crap." Patrick was right. The East stinks, and beating Eastern Conference teams proves nothing. Let's see how Boston does against Dallas, Phoenix, Houston, and San Antonio.

This final point is particularly irksome to me, and should be to any Celtics fan from the 1980s. Every year the Celtics beat themselves up during the regular season playing against tough foes like the Sixers, the Pistons, the Bucks, and the Knicks. Even the Hawks were pretty good. The West? Give me a break. The Los Angeles Lakers got nervous if anyone else in the Pacific Division was above .500.

The year the Celtics went 67-15, I was astonished to find out the other day that the Lakers entered their January 22, 1986 game against the Celtics with a better record than Boston. The Lakers were not a great team that year. So how did they win so many games to start the season? A schedule laden with Western Conference opponents.

I don't seem to recall seeing any asterisks in the record books next to the Lakers championships because they played a weak schedule in getting to the Finals.

Nor will you see won next to the Boston Celtics this year if they win Banner #17, crappy Eastern Conference or not.