What to do with win streaks?


What to do with win streaks?

With last night's blow out over the New Jersey Devils, the Bruins remain entrenched as Boston's undisputed best team. Even though the B's season isn't even halfway complete, if you ask anyone in the city: Who has the best chance to win a title in 2012? The Bruins are the only logical answer.

But right now, of Boston's three active teams, the Bruins actually sport the least impressive win streak. Sure, they've won eight of their last nine, and 22 of their last 26 games, but thanks to their New Year's Eve loss in Dallas, the Bruins current winning streak is at one.

Meanwhile, the Patriots are still riding hot on eight straight games, and after last night's beat down of the Nets, the Celtics, after starting the season with three straight losses, have now won four straight.

But unlike the Bruins, of whom Boston knows what we have and are confident in what they can do, the Pats and C's remain a mystery. Despite a combined 12 straight wins, neither has shown enough to sell us on any serious long term success (aka: a ring). Then again, they haven't had the chance.

It's a tough little predicament that fans find themselves in. On one hand, teams can't control their schedule. They can only beat who they're allowed to play. So while wins over the Jets (the best of the bunch), Chiefs, Colts, Eagles, Broncos, Redskins, Dolphins, Bills, Pistons, Wizards, Wizards and the D-League Nets, aren't entirely impressive, it's not the Pats' and Celtics' fault. They've literally done as well as they possibly can. When it comes down to it, what more could we really expect them to give? Yet, it's still not enough.

Unlike the Bruins, who over the course of this amazing stretch have consistently embarrassed quality teams like Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Florida, Los Angeles, Ottawa and (this year at least) Toronto, with the Pats and C's we still have to wonder: What happens when they face legitimate competition? This while holding on to lasting images of ugly losses to the Steelers and Giants, the Knicks and Heat.

It's not that we don't think they can beat the good teams, we're just not sure that they can, and that's a problem. It's unbelievably strange, when you consider the Pats haven't lost since two weeks before Thanksgiving and the Celtics now sport the second-longest winning streak in the entire NBA.

But thankfully (or maybe not), this indecision won't last much longer. Starting Friday, the Celtics host the Pacers, who are 4-2 and maybe even a little better than their already impressive record suggests. After that, they have four days off before hosting the defending champion Mavericks on Wednesday, and Derrick Rose and the Bulls on Friday. The very next night they're in Indiana for a very tough back-to-back against the Pacers before returning home that Monday to host Kevin Durant, Kendrick Perkins and the Thunder probably the best team in the West. By the end of that stretch, for better or worse, we'll know what we have in the 2012 Celtics.

And by that time, we'll also know a thing or two more about the Pats. Not that anyone can or will be content with only one win in these playoffs, but winning one game (at least to start) will go a long way in increasing our expectations, and easing some of our fears. Whether they beat the Bengals or Broncos, or more than likely, the Steelers, the Pats will have shown us something and have that four-year-old monkey off their backs.

If not, hey, we always have the Bruins.

That's all I'll have today on Standing Room Only, but tomorrow's another day, with a big AFC Playoff preview and NFL playoff picks. So stay tuned, and until then, have a merry Thursday.

Rich can be reached at rlevine@comcastsportsnet.com. Follow Rich on Twitter at http:twitter.comrich_levine

Curran: The main concern with new NFL replay rules is. . .

Curran: The main concern with new NFL replay rules is. . .

Tom E. Curran sounds off on the NFL and the proposed changes coming from the NFL owners meetings in Phoenix.

Curran: Not a big stretch for Tom Brady to play past age of 43

Curran: Not a big stretch for Tom Brady to play past age of 43

Tom E. Curran joins Early Edition to discuss Robert Kraft saying Tom Brady plans to play 6-7 more years, and explain why it is not outlandish.