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.
2019 Celtics Offseason Thread
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 14, 2019 20:53:49 GMT -5
It was a different league from 1946-1949. The NBA was formed with it's title in 1950. These are facts, not anyone's way of thinking. No narrative Umass. Pedro you get the Championships your counting go back to 1947 right? Like one of the Lakers titles you talk about was pre 1950. You wanna talk facts but yet your using the wrong numbers. You can't say the Lakers have 16 titles since 1950, that is incorrect, they have 15, yet no one would claim that because it's 1947 that counts. Like look at the page I posted. Everyone says the Lakers have 16 and for good reason. I think I'll trust wiki over what you think are facts. It litterally explains what is the definition of a modern Championship is. It should be 15 Championships for the Lakers then. The first one was in a league that doesn't exist anymore. If you want to include those years then the Yankees are the only team in pro sports better than the Celtics. We are counting leagues that don't exist, which is awesome. Wonderful. Let's celebrate Basketball Association of America titles. Okay fine. Goes to show you were wrong about the Lakers and Spurs though. The Celtics are the best team in NBA history. Still, if the Celtics had won, they would have put themselves over 24 winning percentage, even by "wiki standards." What a wasted opportunity not to get Leonard. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 14, 2019 22:14:34 GMT -5
Pedro you get the Championships your counting go back to 1947 right? Like one of the Lakers titles you talk about was pre 1950. You wanna talk facts but yet your using the wrong numbers. You can't say the Lakers have 16 titles since 1950, that is incorrect, they have 15, yet no one would claim that because it's 1947 that counts. Like look at the page I posted. Everyone says the Lakers have 16 and for good reason. I think I'll trust wiki over what you think are facts. It litterally explains what is the definition of a modern Championship is. The Los Angeles Lakers have 11 championships . The first 5 were in Minny, they should be counted differently. I hate when people from LA claim those as their titles... like STFU you weren’t a fan of the Minneapolis Lakers. Are we going to pretend that the Cleveland Browns have only been around since 1999 and that if they win a SB it’s not their 5th NFL Title? Like it or hate it, when the Lakers win another Championship everyone will say it's there 17 and tie the Celtics unless we win one first. The record starts in 1947, not 1950. No one says they have 15 titles like Pedro. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 14, 2019 22:22:34 GMT -5
Pedro you get the Championships your counting go back to 1947 right? Like one of the Lakers titles you talk about was pre 1950. You wanna talk facts but yet your using the wrong numbers. You can't say the Lakers have 16 titles since 1950, that is incorrect, they have 15, yet no one would claim that because it's 1947 that counts. Like look at the page I posted. Everyone says the Lakers have 16 and for good reason. I think I'll trust wiki over what you think are facts. It litterally explains what is the definition of a modern Championship is. It should be 15 Championships for the Lakers then. The first one was in a league that doesn't exist anymore. If you want to include those years then the Yankees are the only team in pro sports better than the Celtics. We are counting leagues that don't exist, which is awesome. Wonderful. Let's celebrate Basketball Association of America titles. Okay fine. Goes to show you were wrong about the Lakers and Spurs though. The Celtics are the best team in NBA history. Still, if the Celtics had won, they would have put themselves over 24 winning percentage, even by "wiki standards." What a wasted opportunity not to get Leonard. Pedro they just renamed the league, look at the list same teams. Like show me a source that says 15 for the Lakers. How was I wrong about the Lakers and Spurs? They have the two highest wining percentages in NBA history, that is a fact. Like look it up. You gotta stop acting like Leonard just equal Championship, given our teams issues, that isn't close to certain. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 14, 2019 22:40:19 GMT -5
It should be 15 Championships for the Lakers then. The first one was in a league that doesn't exist anymore. If you want to include those years then the Yankees are the only team in pro sports better than the Celtics. We are counting leagues that don't exist, which is awesome. Wonderful. Let's celebrate Basketball Association of America titles. Okay fine. Goes to show you were wrong about the Lakers and Spurs though. The Celtics are the best team in NBA history. Still, if the Celtics had won, they would have put themselves over 24 winning percentage, even by "wiki standards." What a wasted opportunity not to get Leonard. Pedro they just renamed the league, look at the list same teams. Like show me a source that says 15 for the Lakers. How was I wrong about the Lakers and Spurs? They have the two highest wining percentages in NBA history, that is a fact. Like look it up. You gotta stop acting like Leonard just equal Championship, given our teams issues, that isn't close to certain. I already listed the winning percentage of all 3 teams. Leonard has now carried 2 teams to a title. I would have liked our chances a lot more with him. I think it's a given, now looking at the track record. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 15, 2019 5:32:16 GMT -5
Like I clearly said before Celtics #1 in Championships and Spurs in winning percentage for games, with Celtics third.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 15, 2019 5:33:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 15, 2019 5:49:35 GMT -5
I would do Horford and two first rounders for Capela. That's what the article indicates too. Horford's best days are behind him. He's not a bad backup plan for Davis. You'd have a solid group, but winning would still be a couple years away. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 15, 2019 5:50:09 GMT -5
Like I clearly said before Celtics #1 in Championships and Spurs in winning percentage for games, with Celtics third. Could really care less about regular season awards. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 15, 2019 5:52:18 GMT -5
Excited to see what happens the next 3 weeks.
The next 3 weeks is going to determine the next 5 years for this franchise. That's how long this is going to take too. 3 weeks and the NBA's off-season is over. It's so nice and it'll be fun to review and speculate and whatnot before and after.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 15, 2019 6:20:29 GMT -5
As draft day is getting very close, nothing has changed. Like normally the Mocks start to merge, certain players get pegged to a certain team and that just has yet to happen.
At 14 I'm still torn on Washington, Clarke or Herro. Right now I'd probably take Herro.
Upside guys Bol, Little, Porter Jr. and Langford. Given most mocks, those are likely the highest upside guys. Yet Herro feels like a much safer bet, even if he lacks that All-Star upside.
At 20 and 22 who's left of that group? After going safe at 14, I gamble here on upside unless a guy falls. The risk on guys like Bol and Porter Jr is worth the upside at this point. Yet Washington,Clarke or NAW being there could change my mind easily.
At 22 of course the players mentioned above yet two players I love in Okeke and Dort are in play. I really want to pencil in Okeke, especially if you can't get a Washington. He's like the perfect modern day big. Like Okeke and Dort just scream Celtic type players. They might not be the highest upside guys, but they have a good floors and rather high ceilings.
While it's something you rarely see in the NBA I would try and Patriot this draft if you could. So many players ranked so close together if someone wants to move up I'd be game. Teams like the Hawks and Sixers have those pairs of high second round picks. Could be a good way to reduce player costs as the price of first rounders has sky rocketed in recent years. The 14th pick will now make almost as much as Brown the third pick did a few years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 15, 2019 6:29:21 GMT -5
I would do Horford and two first rounders for Capela. That's what the article indicates too. Horford's best days are behind him. He's not a bad backup plan for Davis. You'd have a solid group, but winning would still be a couple years away. That article says Capela and Gordon though, like how does that make sense for the Rockets? I'd make this my #1 plan, yet still think it's built around Smart, maybe Baynes, Williams maybe and a couple of picks. Like that improves the Rockets depth, it doesn't destroy it. They can't trade two starters for one and some draft picks. Like only way I see Horford is if he opts out and does a sign and trade. Yet at that point he could just bolt for any team. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 15, 2019 6:43:22 GMT -5
I would do Horford and two first rounders for Capela. That's what the article indicates too. Horford's best days are behind him. He's not a bad backup plan for Davis. You'd have a solid group, but winning would still be a couple years away. That article says Capela and Gordon though, like how does that make sense for the Rockets? I'd make this my #1 plan, yet still think it's built around Smart, maybe Baynes, Williams maybe and a couple of picks. Like that improves the Rockets depth, it doesn't destroy it. They can't trade two starters for one and some draft picks. Like only way I see Horford is if he opts out and does a sign and trade. Yet at that point he could just bolt for any team. Maybe they'd bank on upside with Gordon, while getting a few first rounders to round out the rest of the deal? I'm all for moving on from the risk of Gordon Hayward coming back to his old self. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 15, 2019 6:59:52 GMT -5
The Los Angeles Lakers have 11 championships . The first 5 were in Minny, they should be counted differently. I hate when people from LA claim those as their titles... like STFU you weren’t a fan of the Minneapolis Lakers. Are we going to pretend that the Cleveland Browns have only been around since 1999 and that if they win a SB it’s not their 5th NFL Title? Like it or hate it, when the Lakers win another Championship everyone will say it's there 17 and tie the Celtics unless we win one first. The record starts in 1947, not 1950. No one says they have 15 titles like Pedro. I agree they have 16 based on what you’re taking about but LA fans have 11 plain and simple. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 15, 2019 7:04:55 GMT -5
That article says Capela and Gordon though, like how does that make sense for the Rockets? I'd make this my #1 plan, yet still think it's built around Smart, maybe Baynes, Williams maybe and a couple of picks. Like that improves the Rockets depth, it doesn't destroy it. They can't trade two starters for one and some draft picks. Like only way I see Horford is if he opts out and does a sign and trade. Yet at that point he could just bolt for any team. Maybe they'd bank on upside with Gordon, while getting a few first rounders to round out the rest of the deal? I'm all for moving on from the risk of Gordon Hayward coming back to his old self. No, it’s ERIC Gordon coming to the Celtics. Horford makes too much money to trade for Capela straight up. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 15, 2019 7:06:35 GMT -5
As draft day is getting very close, nothing has changed. Like normally the Mocks start to merge, certain players get pegged to a certain team and that just has yet to happen. At 14 I'm still torn on Washington, Clarke or Herro. Right now I'd probably take Herro. Upside guys Bol, Little, Porter Jr. and Langford. Given most mocks, those are likely the highest upside guys. Yet Herro feels like a much safer bet, even if he lacks that All-Star upside. At 20 and 22 who's left of that group? After going safe at 14, I gamble here on upside unless a guy falls. The risk on guys like Bol and Porter Jr is worth the upside at this point. Yet Washington,Clarke or NAW being there could change my mind easily. At 22 of course the players mentioned above yet two players I love in Okeke and Dort are in play. I really want to pencil in Okeke, especially if you can't get a Washington. He's like the perfect modern day big. Like Okeke and Dort just scream Celtic type players. They might not be the highest upside guys, but they have a good floors and rather high ceilings. While it's something you rarely see in the NBA I would try and Patriot this draft if you could. So many players ranked so close together if someone wants to move up I'd be game. Teams like the Hawks and Sixers have those pairs of high second round picks. Could be a good way to reduce player costs as the price of first rounders has sky rocketed in recent years. The 14th pick will now make almost as much as Brown the third pick did a few years ago. Okeke makes a ton of sense if you keep all 3 picks as you just basically red shirt him for a year and get him healthy. I don’t think they should care about 3 rookies on the 15 man roster especially when one can be replaced due to injury, |
|
|
|
Post by xanderbogaerts2 on Jun 15, 2019 10:22:04 GMT -5
If we were to run back the team without Kyrie I believe they'll be just as good, if not better. Kyrie's iso game fits with pure shooters and we have a bunch of scorers. Morris was probably the best go-to "shooter" on the team for Kyrie. Brown and Tatum are both scorers and Tatum could take off and Even Brown who i'm not as high on showed me growth and control with the ball a lot in the second half+ playoffs. If they can continue and not be stunted by a ball dominate point guard in Irving i think they could be a top 4-5 team at worst and if everything breaks right top 2(assuming Butler and Kawhi leave and KD stays in GS). Anyone know the CBA rules on S/Ting players? I hear now we couldn't s/t Kyrie to Brooklyn for 5 years only for what Brooklyn can offer- so unless they were over the cap there's really no incentive to deal with Boston? Lot of moving parts but I would love D'Angelo Russell. Russell, Brown, Tatum, Hayward, Horford or Russell, Brown, Hayward, Horford, Davis?
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 15, 2019 10:59:25 GMT -5
If we were to run back the team without Kyrie I believe they'll be just as good, if not better. Kyrie's iso game fits with pure shooters and we have a bunch of scorers. Morris was probably the best go-to "shooter" on the team for Kyrie. Brown and Tatum are both scorers and Tatum could take off and Even Brown who i'm not as high on showed me growth and control with the ball a lot in the second half+ playoffs. If they can continue and not be stunted by a ball dominate point guard in Irving i think they could be a top 4-5 team at worst and if everything breaks right top 2(assuming Butler and Kawhi leave and KD stays in GS). Anyone know the CBA rules on S/Ting players? I hear now we couldn't s/t Kyrie to Brooklyn for 5 years only for what Brooklyn can offer- so unless they were over the cap there's really no incentive to deal with Boston? Lot of moving parts but I would love D'Angelo Russell. Russell, Brown, Tatum, Hayward, Horford or Russell, Brown, Hayward, Horford, Davis? The sign and trade is so complicated, it’s best to ignore it as it very rarely happens now. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 15, 2019 17:20:58 GMT -5
You can sign and trade Irving to Nets and get a trade exception. Like Irving wants to do us a favor, we ship them some small asset or take back a contract they don't want. You can't include Russell though, we'd only be able to take back 50% of his contract and we don't have cap space.
If a player is a BYC player, which is 20 or 25% above what he made last year you can only take back 50% of the contract, Russell is easily going to be a BYC guy in a sign and trade. It's why you can do a sign and trade with Horford, maybe Morris if he doesn't get a big raise, yet the max for Irving goes over the threshold.
Now I'm not positive, but you might be able to do two trades. Like Irving for the exception, then use the exception to trade for Russell. I'm just not sure that works, but it should in theory.
Yet do the Nets really want to help us out? Like it would be a lot easier if Irving was going to a Western Conference team.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 15, 2019 17:23:20 GMT -5
Kyrie isn't doing the Celtics any favors people. Forget the sign and trade. He's either signing or bolting. We are about to either really hate him or glad he's back.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Jun 15, 2019 17:48:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 15, 2019 17:55:10 GMT -5
LeBron is going to leave that place a wasteland like he did in Cleveland |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 15, 2019 18:37:16 GMT -5
Wasn't the the best off before Ingram, Kuzma, Ball, Hart, Zubca, 3 first round picks, plus filler for Davis and Hill?
So the Pelicans don't get Kuzma, Zubca, and salary relief now, yet they know the pick is high this year. Umm should have made the deal at the deadline. No Kuzma is a decent size loss.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 15, 2019 19:10:08 GMT -5
Wow, plan B in the first day of the off-season. Wow again. |
|
|
|
Post by swingingbunt on Jun 15, 2019 19:19:39 GMT -5
In a game of stars, we now have a bunch of pretty good role players. Hope everyone likes the second round of the playoffs because that's basically the ceiling of this team for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 15, 2019 19:41:47 GMT -5
The Celtics believe in Jason Tatum, but it's going to take A WHILE. Hence on the waiting part.
|
|
|
