Is it good if the Celtics have 45-49 wins, get knocked out in second round?

[LooseCannon]

My contention is that the Celtics underperformed in the first half of the season and that balances out with overachieving after the break so that 40 wins was a reasonable expectation.  The Celtics have a lot of young players who are likely to be better next season.  They've added Amir Johnson, who seems to be a bit of a test case for the value of advanced metrics, which tend to paint Johnson as an excellent player.  There's a legitimate chance that he blooms late like Paul Millsap.

I'd peg the Celtics as a likely 40-45 win team, which is probably good enough for the playoffs.  But they could be better.

This question is aimed primarily at the posters who wished Boston had missed the playoffs, complain about the so-called "treadmill of mediocrity", and think that the team should enter tank mode.  How would you view the direction of the team if this off-season's changes led to enough incremental improvement to make it to the second round of the playoffs, then losing in 4 or 5 games to, let's say, the Cavs again?

[dreamgreen]

That would be a great year for them IMO and I as a fan could be happy with that as long as I thought they could get better.

But I think you are 10 games higher than they will finish with the current roster.

Does the 10th pick in the draft work for you?

[vjcsmoke]

I feel 40-45 wins is not only doable, but it is likely with the current roster and coaching.  Yeah it kinda sucks fielding a mediocre team, but at least we will see some entertaining games and wins this upcoming season.

[hwangjini_1]

i really have no idea what this next season will bring in terms of w/l, none. but IF your scenario played out, then yes, i would be happy and consider it good. it would mean that CBS and ainge are moving the team in the correct direction sooner than expected.

they just blew up the team two seasons ago. if they can make the second round, then that is progress.

but as always, the real key, the defining question is where do they go from there? can ainge get this team beyond the second round and into the finals?

[SCeltic34]

Yes, good.  This team isn't bad enough to tank properly.

If you want to attract free agents, you need to be winning games.  The problem is that we don't have any star players, or proven young talent that would attract a high-level free agent.  So what I'm hoping for is that, hopefully by next year that Young or Smart (in year 3) start to show signs of becoming a franchise player (I don't think this year is particularly realistic).  Certainly not banking on it, but hoping.

I'm not too worried about the "treadmill of mediocrity" yet.  We still have assets and our team is young.  And you can rest assured that Danny isn't just going to sit in his office with this thumb up his butt.

I also think that this team will be a lot of fun to watch and easy to root for.  Winning games with this team will be fun.

[Chris22]

Screw the tank. Keep getting better.

[sawick48]

what good is it to keep getting better if we don't even have a core to build around yet?  all we have are random parts, many of which probably won't be here when their contracts run out.

regardless, i think 45-49 is a pretty high estimation for this squad.  look at the teams in the east that already had more talent than the C's (atl, cle, chi, was, mil, was) plus the ones that are arguably on the same plane as us talent wise (nyk, ind, tor).  the only teams in our conference that i'd say we are absolutely better than from a roster/talent standpoint are the magic and 6ers (with only Denver, LAL, sacto, and phx qualifying for that category in the west).

and lest we forget, we had a ton go right for us last season to get to that 38 win mark.  catching teams at the right time with injuries and rest (the late season games against Cleveland come to mind, catching brooklyn with DWill and Brook sidelined as well as the Knicks with their injuries) as well as our team being relatively healthy for the last couple months (save for Sully's foot).  Obviously Brad is an advantage and he's going to get all he can out of whatever squad he's at the helm of.  but 45-49 wins?  even in this weak conference i think that's a stretch. gun to my head, as constructed right now, i'd say we're a 37-42 win squad.

[Scintan]

Is it good if the Celtics have 45-49 wins, get knocked out in second round?

No

[danglertx]

If it means our young guys are improving and we keep building, absolutely.  That is the kind of team a star might look at signing with. 

[LooseCannon]

Is it good if the Celtics have 45-49 wins, get knocked out in second round?

No

Obvious follow-up question.  Why?

[Scintan]

Is it good if the Celtics have 45-49 wins, get knocked out in second round?

No

Obvious follow-up question.  Why?

Because it would hurt draft position and, until this team has its next 'elite' player, winning battles in mediocreville makes it harder to reach the ultimate goal.

[Chris22]

what good is it to keep getting better if we don't even have a core to build around yet?  all we have are random parts, many of which probably won't be here when their contracts run out.

regardless, i think 45-49 is a pretty high estimation for this squad.  look at the teams in the east that already had more talent than the C's (atl, cle, chi, was, mil, was) plus the ones that are arguably on the same plane as us talent wise (nyk, ind, tor).  the only teams in our conference that i'd say we are absolutely better than from a roster/talent standpoint are the magic and 6ers (with only Denver, LAL, sacto, and phx qualifying for that category in the west).

and lest we forget, we had a ton go right for us last season to get to that 38 win mark.  catching teams at the right time with injuries and rest (the late season games against Cleveland come to mind, catching brooklyn with DWill and Brook sidelined as well as the Knicks with their injuries) as well as our team being relatively healthy for the last couple months (save for Sully's foot).  Obviously Brad is an advantage and he's going to get all he can out of whatever squad he's at the helm of.  but 45-49 wins?  even in this weak conference i think that's a stretch. gun to my head, as constructed right now, i'd say we're a 37-42 win squad.

Celtic fans don't appreciate their own team.
We have some very good young players, and we are much better than last year.
Getting rid of Rondo and Bass and acquiring IT was huge.

[hodgy03038]

what good is it to keep getting better if we don't even have a core to build around yet?  all we have are random parts, many of which probably won't be here when their contracts run out.

regardless, i think 45-49 is a pretty high estimation for this squad.  look at the teams in the east that already had more talent than the C's (atl, cle, chi, was, mil, was) plus the ones that are arguably on the same plane as us talent wise (nyk, ind, tor).  the only teams in our conference that i'd say we are absolutely better than from a roster/talent standpoint are the magic and 6ers (with only Denver, LAL, sacto, and phx qualifying for that category in the west).

and lest we forget, we had a ton go right for us last season to get to that 38 win mark.  catching teams at the right time with injuries and rest (the late season games against Cleveland come to mind, catching brooklyn with DWill and Brook sidelined as well as the Knicks with their injuries) as well as our team being relatively healthy for the last couple months (save for Sully's foot).  Obviously Brad is an advantage and he's going to get all he can out of whatever squad he's at the helm of.  but 45-49 wins?  even in this weak conference i think that's a stretch. gun to my head, as constructed right now, i'd say we're a 37-42 win squad.

Celtic fans don't appreciate their own team.
We have some very good young players, and we are much better than last year.
Getting rid of Rondo and Bass and acquiring IT was huge.

Did we get rid of Bass?

[Chris22]

Is it good if the Celtics have 45-49 wins, get knocked out in second round?

No

Obvious follow-up question.  Why?

Because it would hurt draft position and, until this team has its next 'elite' player, winning battles in mediocreville makes it harder to reach the ultimate goal.

Not necessarily.
If we win the division and beat Brooklyn every time, we might get a really good draft pick.

[Chris22]

what good is it to keep getting better if we don't even have a core to build around yet?  all we have are random parts, many of which probably won't be here when their contracts run out.

regardless, i think 45-49 is a pretty high estimation for this squad.  look at the teams in the east that already had more talent than the C's (atl, cle, chi, was, mil, was) plus the ones that are arguably on the same plane as us talent wise (nyk, ind, tor).  the only teams in our conference that i'd say we are absolutely better than from a roster/talent standpoint are the magic and 6ers (with only Denver, LAL, sacto, and phx qualifying for that category in the west).

and lest we forget, we had a ton go right for us last season to get to that 38 win mark.  catching teams at the right time with injuries and rest (the late season games against Cleveland come to mind, catching brooklyn with DWill and Brook sidelined as well as the Knicks with their injuries) as well as our team being relatively healthy for the last couple months (save for Sully's foot).  Obviously Brad is an advantage and he's going to get all he can out of whatever squad he's at the helm of.  but 45-49 wins?  even in this weak conference i think that's a stretch. gun to my head, as constructed right now, i'd say we're a 37-42 win squad.

Celtic fans don't appreciate their own team.
We have some very good young players, and we are much better than last year.
Getting rid of Rondo and Bass and acquiring IT was huge.

Did we get rid of Bass?

Danny ain't knocking on his door.