SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Boston Celtics 2016-17 Season Discussion
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 1, 2017 13:14:19 GMT -5
Cmon guys this team still has a lot to offer us as fans. UMass and I disagree with this but I still look at this as a rebuilding team and they are going to be a 2 or 3 seed. Plus, they have cap room and a top 4 pick coming in a good draft. I agree they should focus on making sure Brown gets his minutes even with Bradley back because his long term development may be the most important thing to this team the rest of the way. I mentioned Thomas as a sixth man before not because he can't be a starter. I said that was his best role for a top team. Like a better Lou Williams. Would he start for Golden State, Cleveland, Clippers, Spurs, Raptors, Rockets or even the Wizzards? I get that's not a perfect way of looking at things. His skill set as a volume ball dominant scorer and weak defensive player sets him up perfectly for a 6th man role. The team can accomplish that by adding another "all-star" via free agency or trade, getting some luck and drafting a guy like Fultz (and him fulfilling his hype) and Brown developing. Lots of unknowns there just saying what's probably ideal. The great Celtics teams have a long history of awesome 6th men and that's what Thomas would be. If Brown's development is most important thing for Celtics for rest of season, than it's not great time to be a Celtic fan. That tells me your all about the future and don't care about winning this year. If you feel that way, then gut team. Then you can play all the young guys and get more high lottery picks. I really don't understand why we signed Horford, I guess it was a play to get KD and it almost worked. Danny needs to pick a path. Either we are trying to compete or building for the future. You can't do both, because your not winning as much as you could and your not playing all the young guys and getting more high picks. I'm OK with either path, just pick one.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 1, 2017 13:20:10 GMT -5
But the Celtics are in the unique situation where they don't have to pick one path. They have a team that's talented enough to make some noise this year, while also developing their young talent in a winning environment. The flip side is being Philly, where your young talent isn't expecting to win and you're not much closer to being good than you were 5 years ago.
I'm warming up to the idea of bringing back Sullinger for the stretch run. He fills a need and already knows Stevens' system, and he's someone who Brad could selectively play based on matchups (whereas Bogut is a guy you'd need to play major minutes every night). It still bugs me they didn't give up a 2nd rounder for Bogut, but in the grand scheme of things, he's not the type of player who will get you over the top.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 1, 2017 13:22:41 GMT -5
Saying they have to pick one the way you are suggesting is akin to saying the Red Sox should trade all their prospects (ok ok leave the jokes out) because it makes their team better now. And if they won't then they should gut the team and rebuild completely.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 1, 2017 13:29:14 GMT -5
Saying they have to pick one the way you are suggesting is akin to saying the Red Sox should trade all their prospects (ok ok leave the jokes out) because it makes their team better now. And if they won't then they should gut the team and rebuild completely. That's how you end up with Drew Pomeranz in exchange for Espinoza... (and still getting swept in the ALDS)
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 1, 2017 13:29:40 GMT -5
But the Celtics are in the unique situation where they don't have to pick one path. They have a team that's talented enough to make some noise this year, while also developing their young talent in a winning environment. The flip side is being Philly, where your young talent isn't expecting to win and you're not much closer to being good than you were 5 years ago. I'm warming up to the idea of bringing back Sullinger for the stretch run. He fills a need and already knows Stevens' system, and he's someone who Brad could selectively play based on matchups (whereas Bogut is a guy you'd need to play major minutes every night). It still bugs me they didn't give up a 2nd rounder for Bogut, but in the grand scheme of things, he's not the type of player who will get you over the top. So let me get this right, developing players in a winning environment is better than more chances at elite talent? The Thunder had no problem with that, the 76ers are winning games now because they got some high end talent. By the time Smart, Brown and future picks develop and reach prime our current players will be well past there prime years.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 1, 2017 13:34:24 GMT -5
But the Celtics are in the unique situation where they don't have to pick one path. They have a team that's talented enough to make some noise this year, while also developing their young talent in a winning environment. The flip side is being Philly, where your young talent isn't expecting to win and you're not much closer to being good than you were 5 years ago. I'm warming up to the idea of bringing back Sullinger for the stretch run. He fills a need and already knows Stevens' system, and he's someone who Brad could selectively play based on matchups (whereas Bogut is a guy you'd need to play major minutes every night). It still bugs me they didn't give up a 2nd rounder for Bogut, but in the grand scheme of things, he's not the type of player who will get you over the top. So let me get this right, developing players in a winning environment is better than more chances at elite talent? The Thunder had no problem with that, the 76ers are winning games now because they got some high end talent. By the time Smart, Brown and future picks develop and reach prime our current players will be well past there prime years. Aren't you the one that said this is a business so any playoff games is better than none? Plus, it's not like this is a now or never proposition to make some trades. And if you're just upset about not adding a Terrence Jones type I'm not even sure what we are debating.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 1, 2017 13:38:33 GMT -5
Saying they have to pick one the way you are suggesting is akin to saying the Red Sox should trade all their prospects (ok ok leave the jokes out) because it makes their team better now. And if they won't then they should gut the team and rebuild completely. That makes no sense at all!!! Basketball and Baseball are so different when it comes to developing talent. In Baseball you just leave them in Minors till they are ready. In Basketball you need to play them to develop them, huge difference. Developing young players in Basketball most likely hurts your team. It's why win now teams like Cleveland and Clippers have almost no young players, they won't help them win now. I also never said anything about trading all our young players. It's the fact we won't make even minor moves to improve current team. If it's all about the future, then we are wasting prime years of Thomas, Bradley, Crowder and Horford. Can you imagine what you could get for them?? Nevermind having another high pick in draft. If it's all about future, you need to look at those options. It makes zero sense giving Thomas anything near max, if we aren't in win now mode!
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 1, 2017 13:47:48 GMT -5
You keep acting like "going for it" is simple. There are maybe 10 players in the league who could legitimately give the Celtics a chance against the Cavs or Warriors, and at most, 2 of them are (barely) available.
Ainge is banking on being very good for at least the next 5 seasons, and hoping that either 1) they hit home runs on these draft picks, or 2) the asking price on those available players comes way down, so you don't have to gut your lineup in the process of getting him.
There's a sizeable chance that approach doesn't work, but there's also a large chance "going for it" doesn't work ... and then you have to start the rebuild all over. There are countless examples of this approach setting teams back for years (hello Nets), so I'm okay with Ainge's approach.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 1, 2017 13:53:20 GMT -5
So let me get this right, developing players in a winning environment is better than more chances at elite talent? The Thunder had no problem with that, the 76ers are winning games now because they got some high end talent. By the time Smart, Brown and future picks develop and reach prime our current players will be well past there prime years. Aren't you the one that said this is a business so any playoff games is better than none? Plus, it's not like this is a now or never proposition to make some trades. And if you're just upset about not adding a Terrence Jones type I'm not even sure what we are debating. Debating the value of trading a first round pick and a player like Rozier versus the money to be made from extra Playoffs games makes sense. It's totally different when debating getting more young stars to build around versus the money from making the playoffs. If your an owner, do you give up 20 million to create the next Thunder team? Do you give up that money to get a superstar? I don't think Danny makes a blockbuster trade. Not after watching Cousins go for pennies on the dollar and showing very little interest. Also David Alridge says Danny is in love with these picks. It sure seems he's thinking long-term.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 1, 2017 14:11:54 GMT -5
You keep acting like "going for it" is simple. There are maybe 10 players in the league who could legitimately give the Celtics a chance against the Cavs or Warriors, and at most, 2 of them are (barely) available. Ainge is banking on being very good for at least the next 5 seasons, and hoping that either 1) they hit home runs on these draft picks, or 2) the asking price on those available players comes way down, so you don't have to gut your lineup in the process of getting him. There's a sizeable chance that approach doesn't work, but there's also a large chance "going for it" doesn't work ... and then you have to start the rebuild all over. There are countless examples of this approach setting teams back for years (hello Nets), so I'm okay with Ainge's approach. Cousins was just traded and he would have made you an instant contender. I'm not saying we need to go all in. Just that if you don't care about winning right now, this team makes little sense. The simple fact Danny wouldn't even give up a few second round picks to try and win this year says everything. He wouldn't trade for Bogut, but goes after him strong when he's a free agent??? We all knew he wouldn't pick us over Cavs. Not only did we not get better, Cleveland got better. We couldn't handle the Cavs with only Thompson, now add Bogut. I would be fine with current path if Danny would try to help current team win, but in his mind 2nd round picks and zellers contract are too much to give up. I think that says it all. Even if you hit a home run on a draft pick, by the time he's good enough to make a difference, our current core will be old. You would need a grand slam for that path to work. An instant impact rookie, that's a true super star. I don't think we're getting a LeBron or KD in this draft.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 1, 2017 14:23:55 GMT -5
I'm not interested in rehashing the Cousins debate. We're both on the same page in that we would've traded for him in a heartbeat, but there are two things that make this situation weird:
1. Sacramento valued Hield higher than almost anyone - probably more than Jaylen and maybe even more than the Nets pick (which sums up why they always suck). 2. The entire league passed on this guy, not just Ainge. Again, I would've taken a gamble on him, but you can't ignore that that's a red flag.
And despite all this knashing of teeth, the Celtics are still in position to make a big deal in the offseason, and/or sign a max player in free agency. And if that doesn't happen? They'll come back next year with a better Jaylen, both Euro players, and potentially a top 2 pick.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 1, 2017 14:54:15 GMT -5
Your so wrong about Cousins, your just going off the very first report that made it seem only two teams had interest. That's just not true, a lot of teams had interest. The Pistons offered Drummond for him. Pelton said a lot of teams made low ball offers that were a lot better than the Pelicans offer. So the notion that Danny not trading for him is OK because the whole league didn't want him holds no water. It's just not true. Nevermind the better offer the Kings turned down two days before trading Cousins.
From what we know, Pelicans valued Hield over Ingram, but they also wanted Ingram from Lakers. So while they valued Hield over Brown, I find it impossible to believe they valued Hield so much over Brown that the difference in picks wouldn't have made up for it.
We will never know what Danny could have got Cousins for, because he hardly tried. With all our assets we could have put together so many different offers it's not even funny. That's the part that upsets me so much. It's the not even really trying part, for a player that is a perfect fit for team in his prime. The one player available that makes you instant title contenders. Butler and PG don't do that, you still need more bigs after getting them.
We will never know if Brown, Rozier, Yabu and 5 late first rounders would have been enough. You will never know if Rozier, Yabu, and 2017 pick gets it done. You can't know that if you never really tried to get him.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 1, 2017 15:03:09 GMT -5
But take the fact that Sandive LOVES Hield and that most teams, when trading a star, would want immediate return it's certainly not hard to imagine him demanding Brown and '17 BRK (the pick offsets the difference between his perceived #2 in Hield and a guy who was the consensus #6 or 7 in Brown).
IF you would do that trade, okay then.
But between connecting those dots and reports that Boston was being asked for BRK, it's hard o imagine that Brown, Rozier, Yabu and late 1sts would've done it.
Our perception of commensurate value is meaningless when it comes to trades. Especially when owners, who may or may not have a clue about who is good and who isn't, get involved.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 1, 2017 15:15:29 GMT -5
Lol, I'm done arguing Cousins - what's done is done, and you're not even reading what I'm saying before going off on your tangent.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 1, 2017 15:32:08 GMT -5
But take the fact that Sandive LOVES Hield and that most teams, when trading a star, would want immediate return it's certainly not hard to imagine him demanding Brown and '17 BRK (the pick offsets the difference between his perceived #2 in Hield and a guy who was the consensus #6 or 7 in Brown). IF you would do that trade, okay then. But between connecting those dots and reports that Boston was being asked for BRK, it's hard o imagine that Brown, Rozier, Yabu and late 1sts would've done it. Our perception of commensurate value is meaningless when it comes to trades. Especially when owners, who may or may not have a clue about who is good and who isn't, get involved. What reports say the Kings wanted this year's Nets pick in trade? I just haven't seen that, would like to read that article. If they did really want the Nets pick this year, who says you needed to also include Brown? Maybe the 2017 pick and Rozier has more value. Or you could have added Yabu or another late first. In reality the Nets pick alone has more value than Hield and Pelicans pick. Even if you value Hield as a tier 2 player, the chance to get a tier one player has a lot more value. No team in league would trade a top 4 pick in this draft for Hield and #9 pick. Maybe the Kings, but we don't know that because Danny hardly tried. If the cost was Brown and Nets 2017 pick, which is most likely the most you would have had to give up. Yes I make that trade. That gives you a legit title contender and you still have a bunch of young players and picks. Including the Nets 2018 pick. Best of both worlds right there. A contending team, that also has a ton of future assets.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 1, 2017 15:35:38 GMT -5
Let's table the Cousins talk. Most of us here wish they traded next to nothing to get him.
I am happy they still have Brown tho...
|
|
|
Post by robertpruitt25 on Mar 1, 2017 16:51:58 GMT -5
I never post on this board but read daily. I never hear from people that seem to share my feelings on the team at the time. Of course I would love to win another championship, but I am enjoying the position of the team at the moment. We have a great team with the talent in house, but one of the things I love as a sports fan is dreaming of the future and with the next two Nets picks we can dream big.
Being this is such a strong draft I would love to grab a top four draft pick and then trade some of the logjam in the backcourt and draft picks to move back near the lottery to get another flier.
Trading for another Big Three would be fine but not nearly as exciting as growing a championship team through the draft. I am a gambler so I like the risk.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Mar 1, 2017 18:03:04 GMT -5
I never post on this board but read daily. I never hear from people that seem to share my feelings on the team at the time. Of course I would love to win another championship, but I am enjoying the position of the team at the moment. We have a great team with the talent in house, but one of the things I love as a sports fan is dreaming of the future and with the next two Nets picks we can dream big. Being this is such a strong draft I would love to grab a top four draft pick and then trade some of the logjam in the backcourt and draft picks to move back near the lottery to get another flier. Trading for another Big Three would be fine but not nearly as exciting as growing a championship team through the draft. I am a gambler so I like the risk. I was like you for the past 10+ years, would come hear and read peoples opinions without getting involved. I think you will find most here would agree with enjoying the drafting/building process. Although most here are more pragmatic than gamblers, just my opinion.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 1, 2017 20:24:51 GMT -5
I've been critical of Isaiah lately, but it feels like the refs have been going outta their way not to give him calls.
Meanwhile, Horford (who I'm a big fan of) continues to be a complete detriment.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 1, 2017 20:26:43 GMT -5
If Marcus develops his post game and uses it that would be a very very good thing
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 1, 2017 20:37:03 GMT -5
Stevens tossing out Jerebko-Zeller against the Cavs and hoping for the best. I'm pretty underwhelmed by his rotations this season.
This one might be over by halftime.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 1, 2017 21:37:50 GMT -5
Kyrie is a bad man
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 1, 2017 21:42:29 GMT -5
Great Jerebko is coming back in
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 1, 2017 21:47:05 GMT -5
Marcus got away with a dive there... it was a much better disguised one than normal but he has to cut that shit out
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 1, 2017 21:54:12 GMT -5
It's time for the Celtics to make a public statement about the officiating against them. The call in Chicago (which the NBA defended), Dwight allowed to wrap Isaiah around the neck with no flagrant, then the embarrassment in the 3rd quarter here.
Enough is enough.
|
|
|