Are we the same as the early 2000's ?

[Celtics4ever]

I think we have a crap ton of more talent than the early 2000s teams and it is not even close.

[Sophomore]

I agree with the OP that the current roster is short of being a contender unless everything breaks just right.

That said, I do see more talent and upside.

* Brown and Tatum are a couple years younger - room to grow.
* Comparing JB to Walker sells JB too short. Walker was a less efficient shooter than Smart and used a ton of possessions. Brown’s scoring ability is already very good, and his ceiling, if he reaches it, is much higher. He has played big in big games and we need his fire and focus.
* Rob Williams, if he stays healthy, is our center and Al is the backup. Compare that to Tony Battie, Mark Blount, and Vitaly Potapenko. I mean…
*Smart is underrated as our starting point guard and Schroeder, while not in our future plans, is a pretty solid backup. Compare to: Tony Delk, Bimbo Coles, and JR Bremer.
* We have a front office that isn’t going to do things like trade decent role players for Vin Baker, or send Joe Johnson out for Rogers and Delk. Instead, we’re in solid position to be players for a third star next year and we took a bunch of low-risk possible upside plays for this year.
* There are at least four players under contract - Richardson, Nesmith, Pritchard, and Langford (in that order) who might establish value as rotation players this year.

Net, I don’t think we contend this year unless every single thing breaks our way, which I’m not expecting. But this team is better positioned to improve.

[Vermont Green]

It is a lot easier to compare Tatum to Pierce than it is to compare Brown to Walker.

Tatum is a better pure shooter than Pierce and has more length, Pierce definitely stronger.  Pierce has more Jimmy Butler in him in a good way.  Tatum needs more of that.  Getting a few more foul shots a game is an important aspect but Pierce and Butler get more FTs because they go inside more.  They go inside more because they are stronger.  Kobe Bryant got tons of FTs also but in different ways.  I think Tatum will figure out how to get to the line more, in his own way.

Now as far as Walker vs. Brown, Walker was a stat stuffer that had plenty of flaws.  But for pure talent early in his career (as compared to early in Brown's career), they are similar.  Fringe all stars mostly (meaning when things fall right, they are an all star, but not every year).

I feel that Tatum and Brown as a core have a higher ceiling than Pierce and Walker as a core.  Pierce was a clear #1 or #1A and Tatum is as well.  Walker was never going to be a #2 or #3 type star on a title contending team.  He just wasn't quite that good or at least was not willing to play the game he would have needed to in order to be that.  I think Brown can.

The best season for Pierce-Walker was 49 wins.  Tatum and Brown have 48 wins in a 72 game season, 49 and 55 win seasons (with Kyrie) and more overall playoff success to this point.  They have been better and should continue to be better.

[Alleyoopster]

I agree with a couple previous posters in that I don't understand all these individual player comparisons between this team and the early 2000 Celtics teams.

The real comparison should be between this year's team's talent to the current overall League's talent - then the 2000's team talent versus that League's talent.

The League talent of today is far superior - especially in the outside shooting department.

In this regard the OP makes a fair comparison. From looking at the roster improvements of multiple teams this offseason, e.g., the Knicks, Nets, Chicago and Miami. They all made big name acquisitions. In comparison the Celtics are way behind when it comes to consistent outside shooting.

Yes, we've improved defensively, but if we are depending on Schroder, Smart, Pritchard, Richardson and Nesmith for secondary shooting support we are in trouble. Other teams are simply better in the quality of their outside shooters. This was the same problem in the early 2000's too.

Our primary advantage over other teams is perimeter defense. Underneath we will, at times, get killed on the boards and inside scoring.

My feeling is this team is comparable to the early 2000 team years' when compared to the rest of the League.

[Celtics4ever]

My feeling is this team is comparable to the early 2000 team years' when compared to the rest of the League.

This is called changing the goals where I am from.   It is a pretty weak argument.

[Moranis]

My feeling is this team is comparable to the early 2000 team years' when compared to the rest of the League.

This is called changing the goals where I am from.   It is a pretty weak argument.

Not really it seems like the premise of the thread is more along the lines of is Boston going to be good, but not great in a similar vein to the early 2000's clubs.  That is probably not that far off where Boston has a fun solid team, but isn't one that is going to seriously compete for championships.  This team is better than the early 2000's ones, but neither team is going on a championship run.

[tenn_smoothie]

Yeah, posters are going to push back at the OP but I think this post is completely fair.  And while it’s possible that we have a better supporting cast, Rob is really the only guy that had the opportunity to be nothing more than a JAG.  For all the love that Marcus gets he’s a below average staring PG.  Everyone else is just a guy too.

The supporting cast just not jump out in any other way.  No stars.

The comparison between the two stars also fair.  I think brown ends up better than Antoine (he’s there now) but relatively speaking we’ll see.  Jaylen somewhere between 20-25 and that was Antoine peak too.  Tatum might end up better than PP but he hasn’t reached his height just yet.  And has been said, PP was fantastic at getting to the line.  Tatum needs to get there, and improve playmaking to surpass him.

One thing we can say about the early 2000s C’s is that they can’t be any better than they were. If Toine and Pierce early 2000s are about equal to the Jays right now - the Jays may surpass them in 2021-22. And that isn’t a pipe dream - they are 23 and 24 and both are on an upward trajectory.

Sure.  But, will they become good enough to ever do anything more than what PP and AW did (eastern conference finals) and if not, how will we get players to help them if they can’t do it themselves?

The comparison is completely fair.

Thank You Droop. My question exactly.

The point of my post was about a concern that our current group will end up spinning their wheels like the 2000's team did.
If young Tatum and young Pierce are close in talent, their respective teams can be compared accurately. The supporting casts are very important. I'm hoping the current team has more overall talent and more potential. Other than Kyrie Irving, this team and this era of stability and mostly winning has been great. But winning records and ECF finals losses only go so far. The Bucks give me hope that putting together a title team these days doesn't require the more common stomach-turning strategies we've seen with Lebron in Miami, Lebron in LA, Durant in Oakland and our friend Kyrie in Brooklyn. Reminds me of a guy I used to play pickup with in the summers who would talk up all the best players to get them, along with himself, on the same team. I would love to see our current core eventually win a few titles the old-fashioned way.

[Celtics2021]

Yeah, posters are going to push back at the OP but I think this post is completely fair.  And while it’s possible that we have a better supporting cast, Rob is really the only guy that had the opportunity to be nothing more than a JAG.  For all the love that Marcus gets he’s a below average staring PG.  Everyone else is just a guy too.

The supporting cast just not jump out in any other way.  No stars.

The comparison between the two stars also fair.  I think brown ends up better than Antoine (he’s there now) but relatively speaking we’ll see.  Jaylen somewhere between 20-25 and that was Antoine peak too.  Tatum might end up better than PP but he hasn’t reached his height just yet.  And has been said, PP was fantastic at getting to the line.  Tatum needs to get there, and improve playmaking to surpass him.

One thing we can say about the early 2000s C’s is that they can’t be any better than they were. If Toine and Pierce early 2000s are about equal to the Jays right now - the Jays may surpass them in 2021-22. And that isn’t a pipe dream - they are 23 and 24 and both are on an upward trajectory.

Sure.  But, will they become good enough to ever do anything more than what PP and AW did (eastern conference finals) and if not, how will we get players to help them if they can’t do it themselves?

The comparison is completely fair.

Thank You Droop. My question exactly.

The point of my post was about a concern that our current group will end up spinning their wheels like the 2000's team did.
If young Tatum and young Pierce are close in talent, their respective teams can be compared accurately. The supporting casts are very important. I'm hoping the current team has more overall talent and more potential. Other than Kyrie Irving, this team and this era of stability and mostly winning has been great. But winning records and ECF finals losses only go so far. The Bucks give me hope that putting together a title team these days doesn't require the more common stomach-turning strategies we've seen with Lebron in Miami, Lebron in LA, Durant in Oakland and our friend Kyrie in Brooklyn. Reminds me of a guy I used to play pickup with in the summers who would talk up all the best players to get them, along with himself, on the same team. I would love to see our current core eventually win a few titles the old-fashioned way.

The Pierce-Walker Celtics made their first playoff appearance when the duo were 25 and 24, in their fourth season together, and made a surprising conference final run that season.  The next season they got to the second round, and then Ainge traded Walker.  They went to two playoffs, and won three series, in 5 seasons together.  Walker came back briefly after having been traded, and they had a first round exit.

Tatum and Brown are entering their 5th season together, and are 25 and 23 this season.  They’ve already been to two conference finals together, four playoffs, and won 5 total series.  Again, at this stage of their careers, Pierce and Walker had never been to the playoffs nor won a series.

Tatum and Brown are already better than those early 2000 Celtics teams.  That team had a very enjoyable, but not remotely repeatable, deep playoff run.  Tatum and Brown have already had two, which means it is repeatable for them.  Accordingly, they are different. Will they get beyond the conference finals?  Who knows — there’s a lot of luck involved in such situations.

[Celtics4ever]

I too think Brown and Tatum are better than AW and PP at that point in their careers.   I think the surrounding cast is also better.

[ManchesterCelticsFan]

I think Tatum and Brown, with a lot of continued hard work, each have a chance at developing into top 5 players when they reach their primes. They both have a chance at become better than a prime Paul Pierce.

[Big333223]

Reading through this thread, I wanted to jump in an defend 'Toine because he was incredibly talented and incredibly versatile and I don't want folks to forget that... but then...

I pulled up his numbers and it's amazing how inefficient he was. Multiple seasons with sub-.400 shooting. Not just because of all his 3's, either. For a guy of his size he should've been a better finisher.The whole time he was in Boston he only once had an eFG% higher than .460.  It was definitely an era where FG%'s were lower but, man... not good.

That said, I think he was an underrated defender and incredibly versatile. He never got the mental side of it locked down, though.

[gouki88]

Reading through this thread, I wanted to jump in an defend 'Toine because he was incredibly talented and incredibly versatile and I don't want folks to forget that... but then...

I pulled up his numbers and it's amazing how inefficient he was. Multiple seasons with sub-.400 shooting. Not just because of all his 3's, either. For a guy of his size he should've been a better finisher.The whole time he was in Boston he only once had an eFG% higher than .460.  It was definitely an era where FG%'s were lower but, man... not good.

That said, I think he was an underrated defender and incredibly versatile. He never got the mental side of it locked down, though.

Had all the talent to be a routine All-NBA player, just never applied it properly. There is no excuse for a 6'8 230lb forward to ever have seasons shooting 43% from inside the arc.

[Celtics2021]

Reading through this thread, I wanted to jump in an defend 'Toine because he was incredibly talented and incredibly versatile and I don't want folks to forget that... but then...

I pulled up his numbers and it's amazing how inefficient he was. Multiple seasons with sub-.400 shooting. Not just because of all his 3's, either. For a guy of his size he should've been a better finisher.The whole time he was in Boston he only once had an eFG% higher than .460.  It was definitely an era where FG%'s were lower but, man... not good.

That said, I think he was an underrated defender and incredibly versatile. He never got the mental side of it locked down, though.

Had all the talent to be a routine All-NBA player, just never applied it properly. There is no excuse for a 6'8 230lb forward to ever have seasons shooting 43% from inside the arc.

I’m not trying to compare their abilities or style of play, but ‘Toine reminds me of Ben Simmons, in that they had a lot of success early on, but never really improved as a player.  That didn’t serve Walker well, as he left the league quickly once his athleticism began to fade, since he hadn’t spent time improving his game.  We’ll see what happens to Simmons, but their lack of improvement from age 20 is rather striking.

[gouki88]

Reading through this thread, I wanted to jump in an defend 'Toine because he was incredibly talented and incredibly versatile and I don't want folks to forget that... but then...

I pulled up his numbers and it's amazing how inefficient he was. Multiple seasons with sub-.400 shooting. Not just because of all his 3's, either. For a guy of his size he should've been a better finisher.The whole time he was in Boston he only once had an eFG% higher than .460.  It was definitely an era where FG%'s were lower but, man... not good.

That said, I think he was an underrated defender and incredibly versatile. He never got the mental side of it locked down, though.

Had all the talent to be a routine All-NBA player, just never applied it properly. There is no excuse for a 6'8 230lb forward to ever have seasons shooting 43% from inside the arc.

I’m not trying to compare their abilities or style of play, but ‘Toine reminds me of Ben Simmons, in that they had a lot of success early on, but never really improved as a player.  That didn’t serve Walker well, as he left the league quickly once his athleticism began to fade, since he hadn’t spent time improving his game.  We’ll see what happens to Simmons, but their lack of improvement from age 20 is rather striking.

Quite an interesting comparison. I definitely see what you're getting at with the comparison. The key difference between the two being shimmy-ability

[nickagneta]

The thing that bothered my most about Toine's game, other than never seeing a shot he didn't like, was that he was such a naturally gifted rebounder and, if he played a more orthodox PF rather than his awful version of the stretch power forward, he might have averaged 11-12 rebounds a game. He had a "feel" for the ball coming off that rim, but sadly he pulled himself farther and farther from the basket limiting his rebounding opportunities.