Better to be swept in Round 1 and pick #15... or have 9th best draft odds?

[cltc5]

I was a tanker then got on board with playoffs.  I think it's painfully obvious we need help via star power and bigs.  Drafts and free agents is the way to go moving forward.

[jpotter33]

The thing is this post probably wouldn't even have materialized if we had won last night, or at least most of the answers would have been pro-playoffs instead of pro-lottery. It's amazing how fickle a lot of people's opinion on this question is.

But I agree this is a loaded question. It's assuming a negative on one hand while assuming a positive on the other when in reality it's not really safe to make either assumption. Not really fair.

[slamtheking]

Loaded question designed to get as many pro-lottery responses as possible.

reality is there's no guarantee C's get swept although losing the series is pretty likely.  no guarantee that when the C's finish the season, they end up worse than everyone else with a similar record currently. 

better question to ask to get a better line on how people lean on this is issue is:
would you prefer a likely first round loss in the playoffs (sweep or not) and the #15 pick or just missing the playoffs and getting the #11 or 12 pick (C's end up 9th or 10th in East)?

I think in that more realistic scenario, a number of people selecting the #9 pick would slide over to the playoffs option.
while this team will end the season with a losing record and will provide a proverbial black eye for the league to have a losing record in the postseason, since the end of the trades, this team has had a winning record.  I still consider it a team of bench players with no bonafide starters but they're definitely winning and playing competive ball

Can't say I completely disagree with many of your points. That said, pick #11 or #12 and no playoff experience is better for our future than #15 and playoff experience because of the drop off in talent. Now, that drop off comes after #12, but it could change dependent on players not declaring. So if say 3 players don't declare, then the drop off is after pick #9, so I'd rather make the playoffs since I would then be of the mindset that the talent level is more or less the same in either spot.

solid point.  TP

[LarBrd33]

Why are we setting up a scenerio where we assume a sweep?  I mean, in that case, why don't we also assume that whoever we draft at 9 will be a bust?

Obviously because we want people to select the conclusion that we agree with.  Push-polling has come to Celticsblog.

Because I'm a pessimist and I'm assuming a sweep. I legitimately wanted to know if people felt like a dud playoff appearance outweighed losing a lotto pick.

But does you opinion really change if I modified the scenario to "let's say we are certain the Celtics will win two games in the series"?   2012 philly upset the top seed and almost knocked off Boston. It had no impact on their ability to contend the next year.

My example is also intentionally exaggerated.  Chances are it wouldn't be 15 vs 9.  But the difference between making the playoffs as the 8th seed and missing it as the 9th seed will be at least 3 picks, because the western conference has 3 non-playoff teams better than the 8th seed.  So at the very least you're talking about 15 (Boston right now) vs 12th best lotto odds  (pacers right now).  And that's interesting when you consider those two have identical records and the Pacers are clearly a far better team moving forward (Paul George). 

So does the opinion change much if I said...

scenario 1:  two miracle playoff wins and the 15th pick
Scenario 2:  barely miss the playoffs and get the 12th best draft odds

?

[droopdog7]

Why are we setting up a scenerio where we assume a sweep?  I mean, in that case, why don't we also assume that whoever we draft at 9 will be a bust?

Obviously because we want people to select the conclusion that we agree with.  Push-polling has come to Celticsblog.

Because I'm a pessimist and I'm assuming a sweep. I legitimately wanted to know if people felt like a dud playoff appearance outweighed losing a lotto pick.

But does you opinion really change if I modified the scenario to "let's say we are certain the Celtics will win two games in the series"?   2012 philly upset the top seed and almost knocked off Boston. It had no impact on their ability to contend the next year.

Because a big part of the reason people watch sports is because they don't know the outcome ahead of time.  I venture that many folks want playoffs because they want to "experience" the series.  Your scenario takes that away.

And if you were such a pessimist, wouldn't you assume we don't win the lottery and that our pick is a bust?

[LarBrd33]

Why are we setting up a scenerio where we assume a sweep?  I mean, in that case, why don't we also assume that whoever we draft at 9 will be a bust?

Obviously because we want people to select the conclusion that we agree with.  Push-polling has come to Celticsblog.

Because I'm a pessimist and I'm assuming a sweep. I legitimately wanted to know if people felt like a dud playoff appearance outweighed losing a lotto pick.

But does you opinion really change if I modified the scenario to "let's say we are certain the Celtics will win two games in the series"?   2012 philly upset the top seed and almost knocked off Boston. It had no impact on their ability to contend the next year.

Because a big part of the reason people watch sports is because they don't know the outcome ahead of time.  I venture that many folks want playoffs because they want to "experience" the series.  Your scenario takes that away.

And if you were such a pessimist, wouldn't you assume we don't win the lottery and that our pick is a bust?

Well I'd say there's a 100% chance we don't win a championship this year.  For this collection of role players to win a title would be the most unfathomably unprescedented miracle in the history of sports.  The odds of us even knocking off Atlanta is too ridiculous to even consider.

So we basically DO know that this trip to the playoffs is pointless.  Is it worth having a draft pick at minimum 3 spots worse than the 9th seed in the east ?

Fwiw, Im on board with the playoff push.  I admit it's probably slightly worse for our long term future. I don't care.  I just want to root for the team to win.

[wdleehi]

Why are we setting up a scenerio where we assume a sweep?  I mean, in that case, why don't we also assume that whoever we draft at 9 will be a bust?

Obviously because we want people to select the conclusion that we agree with.  Push-polling has come to Celticsblog.

Because I'm a pessimist and I'm assuming a sweep. I legitimately wanted to know if people felt like a dud playoff appearance outweighed losing a lotto pick.

But does you opinion really change if I modified the scenario to "let's say we are certain the Celtics will win two games in the series"?   2012 philly upset the top seed and almost knocked off Boston. It had no impact on their ability to contend the next year.

Because a big part of the reason people watch sports is because they don't know the outcome ahead of time.  I venture that many folks want playoffs because they want to "experience" the series.  Your scenario takes that away.

And if you were such a pessimist, wouldn't you assume we don't win the lottery and that our pick is a bust?

This "don't know what is going to happen" works great in the one and done style of playoffs.



In series, sub 500 teams do not do well.



Playoff experience at this point in overrated.  The key experience right now for the young players is that the Celtics are teaching the play the "right way".  We don't see them allowed to pick up the bad habits you see from the teams that always seem to be junk. 



I want Ainge to have the best asset going into the offseason to allow him the most flexible point to rebuild.

[D.o.s.]

^Nicely put.

[Lucky17]

Isn't stealing two wins from a "clearly better" playoff opponent a great advertisement (or, put differently, an asset) to recruit free agents to come to Boston next offseason?

Edit: conversely, doesn't it also generate buzz about current rostered players who may be seen as trade targets by other teams?

Exposure on the national level will have rewards too. The difference between the #9 and the #15 picks is not insignificant, I concede. Personally, I don't think a bottom-ten finish is still realistic. Looking at the remaining schedule, I think Boston manages to play around .500 the rest of the way.

[Diggles]

You play to win and develop players.   IF you don't play the best players that show up and work hard then you send the wrong message.   If your best players don't work hard in practice you bench them.  YOU PLAY TO WIN!   If you lose trying your best then I'm okay with that.   

So if that means making the playoffs and getting swept then I'm all for it.   You focus on the positives(experience) and learn from the failures.   

Surround my self with winners and hard workers and my future will be bright.  Just like the Celtics.  Put on the Jersey and work your ass off to win.  Its contagious.   

[D.o.s.]

The 2015 Denver Nuggets are a good example of the end result of a team that repeatedly made it to the playoffs with a scrappy, overachieving team.

The talent disparity between the Nuggets of years past and the 2015 Celtics should also be noted in this equation.

[Quetzalcoatl]

The 2015 Denver Nuggets are a good example of the end result of a team that repeatedly made it to the playoffs with a scrappy, overachieving team.

The talent disparity between the Nuggets of years past and the 2015 Celtics should also be noted in this equation.

TP. Don't forget that they had a good coach, too!  George Karl was legit back then.  It never got them out of the first round

[Donoghus]

I'll be a glutton for punishment & take the opportunity to watch postseason basketball involving the Celtics.  (They're not getting swept, though)

[JHTruth]

I think I'd rather have the pick. This team needs talent bigtime..

[wdleehi]

Isn't stealing two wins from a "clearly better" playoff opponent a great advertisement (or, put differently, an asset) to recruit free agents to come to Boston next offseason?

Edit: conversely, doesn't it also generate buzz about current rostered players who may be seen as trade targets by other teams?

Exposure on the national level will have rewards too. The difference between the #9 and the #15 picks is not insignificant, I concede. Personally, I don't think a bottom-ten finish is still realistic. Looking at the remaining schedule, I think Boston manages to play around .500 the rest of the way.

Unless some young Celtics have coming out parties during the playoffs, I don't think it will move the needle for FA coming to Boston.


But the difference in trade value of those two picks could make a difference in a big trade to add talent.