Why are we expecting Kemba to be a microwave?

[footey]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

[gouki88]

I see a lot of posts (not related to trades) saying that the team would be best served using Kemba as a 6th man/microwave scorer. Even I sometimes end up saying it too, I think, because it just seems like the “right thing” to say.

But... why? Why do we believe this?

After all, with some reduced athleticism and Kemba drawing fouls less (and getting blocked at the rim more), shouldn’t we instead be advocating for Walker to change up his game instead of trotting him out there with an offensively inept lineup and hope he conjurers up some of that old Charlotte magic?  That’s what the greats do. They adapt and change their games and still find ways to be effective.

I think what I’d really like for Kemba to do more of is... slow his game down, move the ball more and quicker out of PnR action, take more set shots, and (as crazy as it sounds), punish defenses more with mid range J’s.

Every now and then, he still might explode for one of those vintage Kemba games but I don’t know how fair it is to make that the expectation rather than exception.

This.

Brad's offensive strategy of "live by the 3, die by the 3" has frustrated me for years.   I've always firmly believed a made 2-pointer is worth more than a missed 3-pointer.  if we're not hitting 3's, take 2 steps in for a more makable 2.

There's one guy I've seen that work for: Kenny Anderson. Outside of that, it seems most guys are better off taking a decent 3 than a decent long 2.

KG, for some reason.  He never developed an extra 2 feet of range, which could have put him into the Kevin Durant class offensively.

This reminds me of Brandon Bass on the old 2K games. Elite assassin from the mid-range but was impossible to hit 3s with. Infuriated me almost as much as Bass did in real life

[LilRip]

I see a lot of posts (not related to trades) saying that the team would be best served using Kemba as a 6th man/microwave scorer. Even I sometimes end up saying it too, I think, because it just seems like the “right thing” to say.

But... why? Why do we believe this?

After all, with some reduced athleticism and Kemba drawing fouls less (and getting blocked at the rim more), shouldn’t we instead be advocating for Walker to change up his game instead of trotting him out there with an offensively inept lineup and hope he conjurers up some of that old Charlotte magic?  That’s what the greats do. They adapt and change their games and still find ways to be effective.

I think what I’d really like for Kemba to do more of is... slow his game down, move the ball more and quicker out of PnR action, take more set shots, and (as crazy as it sounds), punish defenses more with mid range J’s.

Every now and then, he still might explode for one of those vintage Kemba games but I don’t know how fair it is to make that the expectation rather than exception.

This.

Brad's offensive strategy of "live by the 3, die by the 3" has frustrated me for years.   I've always firmly believed a made 2-pointer is worth more than a missed 3-pointer.  if we're not hitting 3's, take 2 steps in for a more makable 2.

Not to get all analytical, but evidence shows that the vast majority of players are really, really crappy at making mid to long range two pointers.  Kemba, for instance, is a career sub-41% shooter from both 10-16 feet and 16-23 feet (although he has been better the past three years).  That translates to roughly the same efficiency as a 27% three-point shooter.

I didn’t realize Kemba was that bad from mid range. I wonder why that’s his go-to Kardiac Kemba game-ender move if he shoots it so poorly

[ozgod]

This is anecdotal, but if anything I feel like Kemba is more of a rhythm player. He needs to get into a rhythm but when he does he can reel off points quickly. He's not a Kyle Korver type who can come off the bench cold and hit big shots right away (as least that's not the impression I get).

[Kiorrik]

I see a lot of posts (not related to trades) saying that the team would be best served using Kemba as a 6th man/microwave scorer. Even I sometimes end up saying it too, I think, because it just seems like the “right thing” to say.

But... why? Why do we believe this?

After all, with some reduced athleticism and Kemba drawing fouls less (and getting blocked at the rim more), shouldn’t we instead be advocating for Walker to change up his game instead of trotting him out there with an offensively inept lineup and hope he conjurers up some of that old Charlotte magic?  That’s what the greats do. They adapt and change their games and still find ways to be effective.

I think what I’d really like for Kemba to do more of is... slow his game down, move the ball more and quicker out of PnR action, take more set shots, and (as crazy as it sounds), punish defenses more with mid range J’s.

Every now and then, he still might explode for one of those vintage Kemba games but I don’t know how fair it is to make that the expectation rather than exception.

This.

Brad's offensive strategy of "live by the 3, die by the 3" has frustrated me for years.   I've always firmly believed a made 2-pointer is worth more than a missed 3-pointer.  if we're not hitting 3's, take 2 steps in for a more makable 2.

There's one guy I've seen that work for: Kenny Anderson. Outside of that, it seems most guys are better off taking a decent 3 than a decent long 2.

KG, for some reason.  He never developed an extra 2 feet of range, which could have put him into the Kevin Durant class offensively.

Dude it was insane how often he hit that "heel on the line" two-pointer :]

Loved it.

[Somebody]

I see a lot of posts (not related to trades) saying that the team would be best served using Kemba as a 6th man/microwave scorer. Even I sometimes end up saying it too, I think, because it just seems like the “right thing” to say.

But... why? Why do we believe this?

After all, with some reduced athleticism and Kemba drawing fouls less (and getting blocked at the rim more), shouldn’t we instead be advocating for Walker to change up his game instead of trotting him out there with an offensively inept lineup and hope he conjurers up some of that old Charlotte magic?  That’s what the greats do. They adapt and change their games and still find ways to be effective.

I think what I’d really like for Kemba to do more of is... slow his game down, move the ball more and quicker out of PnR action, take more set shots, and (as crazy as it sounds), punish defenses more with mid range J’s.

Every now and then, he still might explode for one of those vintage Kemba games but I don’t know how fair it is to make that the expectation rather than exception.

This.

Brad's offensive strategy of "live by the 3, die by the 3" has frustrated me for years.   I've always firmly believed a made 2-pointer is worth more than a missed 3-pointer.  if we're not hitting 3's, take 2 steps in for a more makable 2.

There's one guy I've seen that work for: Kenny Anderson. Outside of that, it seems most guys are better off taking a decent 3 than a decent long 2.

KG, for some reason.  He never developed an extra 2 feet of range, which could have put him into the Kevin Durant class offensively.

Dude it was insane how often he hit that "heel on the line" two-pointer :]

Loved it.

Weren't there reports about how he could hit the three well in practice and our front office/coaching staff were begging him to take threes in games, but he refused to do so because he felt that he couldn't hit 50% of them?

Anyways KG briefly flirted with three point shooting in the early 2000s: from '00 to '03, he attempted 334 threes and made 31.7% of them. Obviously the percentage is pretty meh, but considering that he never really practiced shooting threes back then (Saunders was a huge proponent of the midrange shot and thus was very much against the idea of shooting threes) as well as his obvious touch and ability to hit some really deep midrange shots at a high clip, the chances of him being able to stretch his shot out to the three point line in the modern game as a reasonably good three point shooter on high volume are significantly higher than him being a 7 foot DeMar DeRozan.

[td450]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

While I agree with almost everything you wrote here, I do think you need at least one player who is a level or two better at passing and more importantly, decision making, than anyone we have. That is a starting five of OK passers, but no one you want to run the offense through in an NBA final.

[gift]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

While I agree with almost everything you wrote here, I do think you need at least one player who is a level or two better at passing and more importantly, decision making, than anyone we have. That is a starting five of OK passers, but no one you want to run the offense through in an NBA final.

I don't even know if it's the passing ability, but more of a "floor general" type. Guys like Lebron, Doncic, Lowry, CP3, Rondo. Floor generals come in all different types, but it's an important role to have on your team. The Celtics don't currently have a floor general. Smart is probably the closest, but he tends to ignore 2/3 of the court at any given time even when he's acting as a passer.

Obviously, my hope would be that Tatum can become that, but it's not his natural role (and there is a downside to having your best player be your floor general; it tends to raise your floor but lower your ceiling as a team).

[td450]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

While I agree with almost everything you wrote here, I do think you need at least one player who is a level or two better at passing and more importantly, decision making, than anyone we have. That is a starting five of OK passers, but no one you want to run the offense through in an NBA final.

I don't even know if it's the passing ability, but more of a "floor general" type. Guys like Lebron, Doncic, Lowry, CP3, Rondo. Floor generals come in all different types, but it's an important role to have on your team. The Celtics don't currently have a floor general. Smart is probably the closest, but he tends to ignore 2/3 of the court at any given time even when he's acting as a passer.

Obviously, my hope would be that Tatum can become that, but it's not his natural role (and there is a downside to having your best player be your floor general; it tends to raise your floor but lower your ceiling as a team).

Agreed, although LeBron is clearly has been the best player and the floor general, and he's spectacularly successful. I wouldn't bet against Doncic, or Jokic if they get enough help.

Tatum (and Brown) will improve, but they are never going to be elite passers. We need one more guy who you can run the offense through, and as you said, be a floor general. Someone who can make adjustments, and can make great end of game decisions.

They don't need to be a superstar, just a heady player. I thought Ainge really blew it when we didn't overpay to get Halliburton last year. Wagner might be a similar guy in this draft.

[gift]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

While I agree with almost everything you wrote here, I do think you need at least one player who is a level or two better at passing and more importantly, decision making, than anyone we have. That is a starting five of OK passers, but no one you want to run the offense through in an NBA final.

I don't even know if it's the passing ability, but more of a "floor general" type. Guys like Lebron, Doncic, Lowry, CP3, Rondo. Floor generals come in all different types, but it's an important role to have on your team. The Celtics don't currently have a floor general. Smart is probably the closest, but he tends to ignore 2/3 of the court at any given time even when he's acting as a passer.

Obviously, my hope would be that Tatum can become that, but it's not his natural role (and there is a downside to having your best player be your floor general; it tends to raise your floor but lower your ceiling as a team).

Agreed, although LeBron is clearly has been the best player and the floor general, and he's spectacularly successful. I wouldn't bet against Doncic, or Jokic if they get enough help.

Tatum (and Brown) will improve, but they are never going to be elite passers. We need one more guy who you can run the offense through, and as you said, be a floor general. Someone who can make adjustments, and can make great end of game decisions.

They don't need to be a superstar, just a heady player. I thought Ainge really blew it when we didn't overpay to get Halliburton last year. Wagner might be a similar guy in this draft.

You can definitely win it all if your best player and floor general is an all-time great player. But to be honest, I've felt at times that guys like Lebron and Doncic have held their teams back (as odd as that sounds). Not that their overall impact wasn't incredibly positive, but that they had a lower ceiling (and higher floor) with them managing the game. I particularly look at Lebron's second stint with Cleveland. I felt they could have competed better with Golden State if Lebron didn't dictate as much of their offense. They needed an explosion of offense in order to compete with the Warriors and Lebron was happy (or at least resigned) to conservatively manage the game.

[LilRip]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

While I agree with almost everything you wrote here, I do think you need at least one player who is a level or two better at passing and more importantly, decision making, than anyone we have. That is a starting five of OK passers, but no one you want to run the offense through in an NBA final.

I don't even know if it's the passing ability, but more of a "floor general" type. Guys like Lebron, Doncic, Lowry, CP3, Rondo. Floor generals come in all different types, but it's an important role to have on your team. The Celtics don't currently have a floor general. Smart is probably the closest, but he tends to ignore 2/3 of the court at any given time even when he's acting as a passer.

Obviously, my hope would be that Tatum can become that, but it's not his natural role (and there is a downside to having your best player be your floor general; it tends to raise your floor but lower your ceiling as a team).

Agreed, although LeBron is clearly has been the best player and the floor general, and he's spectacularly successful. I wouldn't bet against Doncic, or Jokic if they get enough help.

Tatum (and Brown) will improve, but they are never going to be elite passers. We need one more guy who you can run the offense through, and as you said, be a floor general. Someone who can make adjustments, and can make great end of game decisions.

They don't need to be a superstar, just a heady player. I thought Ainge really blew it when we didn't overpay to get Halliburton last year. Wagner might be a similar guy in this draft.

You can definitely win it all if your best player and floor general is an all-time great player. But to be honest, I've felt at times that guys like Lebron and Doncic have held their teams back (as odd as that sounds). Not that their overall impact wasn't incredibly positive, but that they had a lower ceiling (and higher floor) with them managing the game. I particularly look at Lebron's second stint with Cleveland. I felt they could have competed better with Golden State if Lebron didn't dictate as much of their offense. They needed an explosion of offense in order to compete with the Warriors and Lebron was happy (or at least resigned) to conservatively manage the game.

I think you’re both right and the lesson here is that you can win it all as long as you have an all-time great as your best player. Tatum’s shaping up to be one.

However, Tatum is more in the mold of a KD/Dirk/Kobe rather than a Lebron/Luka. I think this is important for the C’s to keep in mind when it comes to roster construction and creating offensive systems. I think Tatum will thrive in a role where he’s finishing plays rather than getting the team going.

How do you build around a super scorer? I’ll take a crack at it. I think the team needs:
- strong defensive big to do the dirty work inside (Chandler/Bynum or Gasol/Draymond)
- steady PG vet with decent outside shooting to ensure team gets into its sets and doesn’t panic (Kidd/Fisher/Steph lol)
- versatile, Swiss-knife wing (Marion/Ariza/Iguodala or Klay)
- dynamic 6th man who can give opposing benches problems (JET or Barea/Odom/Livingston)

[SHAQATTACK]

If other team GMs read this blog …they would not give us anything for old Worn out Walker .

What a mess.

[td450]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

While I agree with almost everything you wrote here, I do think you need at least one player who is a level or two better at passing and more importantly, decision making, than anyone we have. That is a starting five of OK passers, but no one you want to run the offense through in an NBA final.

I don't even know if it's the passing ability, but more of a "floor general" type. Guys like Lebron, Doncic, Lowry, CP3, Rondo. Floor generals come in all different types, but it's an important role to have on your team. The Celtics don't currently have a floor general. Smart is probably the closest, but he tends to ignore 2/3 of the court at any given time even when he's acting as a passer.

Obviously, my hope would be that Tatum can become that, but it's not his natural role (and there is a downside to having your best player be your floor general; it tends to raise your floor but lower your ceiling as a team).

Agreed, although LeBron is clearly has been the best player and the floor general, and he's spectacularly successful. I wouldn't bet against Doncic, or Jokic if they get enough help.

Tatum (and Brown) will improve, but they are never going to be elite passers. We need one more guy who you can run the offense through, and as you said, be a floor general. Someone who can make adjustments, and can make great end of game decisions.

They don't need to be a superstar, just a heady player. I thought Ainge really blew it when we didn't overpay to get Halliburton last year. Wagner might be a similar guy in this draft.

You can definitely win it all if your best player and floor general is an all-time great player. But to be honest, I've felt at times that guys like Lebron and Doncic have held their teams back (as odd as that sounds). Not that their overall impact wasn't incredibly positive, but that they had a lower ceiling (and higher floor) with them managing the game. I particularly look at Lebron's second stint with Cleveland. I felt they could have competed better with Golden State if Lebron didn't dictate as much of their offense. They needed an explosion of offense in order to compete with the Warriors and Lebron was happy (or at least resigned) to conservatively manage the game.

I think you’re both right and the lesson here is that you can win it all as long as you have an all-time great as your best player. Tatum’s shaping up to be one.

However, Tatum is more in the mold of a KD/Dirk/Kobe rather than a Lebron/Luka. I think this is important for the C’s to keep in mind when it comes to roster construction and creating offensive systems. I think Tatum will thrive in a role where he’s finishing plays rather than getting the team going.

How do you build around a super scorer? I’ll take a crack at it. I think the team needs:
- strong defensive big to do the dirty work inside (Chandler/Bynum or Gasol/Draymond)
- steady PG vet with decent outside shooting to ensure team gets into its sets and doesn’t panic (Kidd/Fisher/Steph lol)
- versatile, Swiss-knife wing (Marion/Ariza/Iguodala or Klay)
- dynamic 6th man who can give opposing benches problems (JET or Barea/Odom/Livingston)

So we have some of that.

Robert Williams could fill one of the big slots.
Jaylen Brown is awesome as a high end swiss army knife type like Klay Thompson
Can Kemba be a dynamic 6th man? OR maybe that could be Nesmith or possibly Fournier? I think it could

We have a gaping hole at power forward.
We have another hole at point.
These are not original ideas.

One of those two players should be a facilitator and a good decision maker under pressure

Again, they don't have to be stars. They have to fit. Defense. Passing. Shooting or some form of alternative offensive input that is complementary with Tatum and Brown

[LilRip]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

While I agree with almost everything you wrote here, I do think you need at least one player who is a level or two better at passing and more importantly, decision making, than anyone we have. That is a starting five of OK passers, but no one you want to run the offense through in an NBA final.

I don't even know if it's the passing ability, but more of a "floor general" type. Guys like Lebron, Doncic, Lowry, CP3, Rondo. Floor generals come in all different types, but it's an important role to have on your team. The Celtics don't currently have a floor general. Smart is probably the closest, but he tends to ignore 2/3 of the court at any given time even when he's acting as a passer.

Obviously, my hope would be that Tatum can become that, but it's not his natural role (and there is a downside to having your best player be your floor general; it tends to raise your floor but lower your ceiling as a team).

Agreed, although LeBron is clearly has been the best player and the floor general, and he's spectacularly successful. I wouldn't bet against Doncic, or Jokic if they get enough help.

Tatum (and Brown) will improve, but they are never going to be elite passers. We need one more guy who you can run the offense through, and as you said, be a floor general. Someone who can make adjustments, and can make great end of game decisions.

They don't need to be a superstar, just a heady player. I thought Ainge really blew it when we didn't overpay to get Halliburton last year. Wagner might be a similar guy in this draft.

You can definitely win it all if your best player and floor general is an all-time great player. But to be honest, I've felt at times that guys like Lebron and Doncic have held their teams back (as odd as that sounds). Not that their overall impact wasn't incredibly positive, but that they had a lower ceiling (and higher floor) with them managing the game. I particularly look at Lebron's second stint with Cleveland. I felt they could have competed better with Golden State if Lebron didn't dictate as much of their offense. They needed an explosion of offense in order to compete with the Warriors and Lebron was happy (or at least resigned) to conservatively manage the game.

I think you’re both right and the lesson here is that you can win it all as long as you have an all-time great as your best player. Tatum’s shaping up to be one.

However, Tatum is more in the mold of a KD/Dirk/Kobe rather than a Lebron/Luka. I think this is important for the C’s to keep in mind when it comes to roster construction and creating offensive systems. I think Tatum will thrive in a role where he’s finishing plays rather than getting the team going.

How do you build around a super scorer? I’ll take a crack at it. I think the team needs:
- strong defensive big to do the dirty work inside (Chandler/Bynum or Gasol/Draymond)
- steady PG vet with decent outside shooting to ensure team gets into its sets and doesn’t panic (Kidd/Fisher/Steph lol)
- versatile, Swiss-knife wing (Marion/Ariza/Iguodala or Klay)
- dynamic 6th man who can give opposing benches problems (JET or Barea/Odom/Livingston)

So we have some of that.

Robert Williams could fill one of the big slots.
Jaylen Brown is awesome as a high end swiss army knife type like Klay Thompson
Can Kemba be a dynamic 6th man? OR maybe that could be Nesmith or possibly Fournier? I think it could

We have a gaping hole at power forward.
We have another hole at point.
These are not original ideas.

One of those two players should be a facilitator and a good decision maker under pressure

Again, they don't have to be stars. They have to fit. Defense. Passing. Shooting or some form of alternative offensive input that is complementary with Tatum and Brown

Yep, I do think we have some of these in spades.

- TL and TT are pretty good defensive bigs who will do the dirty work
- Brown and Smart are Swiss Army knives. I think the biggest hurdle here is accepting that role rather than the talent level

Unlike you though, I don’t think we have a gaping hole at the 4. I think Tatum or Brown could be the 4, especially with how today is played. However, we do need TT or TL to be available at all times.

The biggest hole though is the vet PG. I don’t think we’ve had someone who can control the team on offense since Rondo. Maybe this can be Kemba if he radically changes his game.

Same goes for 6th man too actually. I don’t think we have one yet. Kemba strikes me as someone who gets better on offense the more it goes through him. He doesn’t come in and just light it up. He needs to get into that rhythm. I think JB fills the 6th man role better than Kemba, imo. JB gets hot instantly.

[Somebody]

Move Smart to point guard, and let Romeo start at the 2.  That is  a defensive oriented starting 5 (the two J's and Rob) that changes the mindset and philosophy of the team.

How does an NBA team compete in the modern age by having three poor-to-terrible floor spacers?

Defense wins championships.

Not anymore.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Swap Nesmith (your binkie) for Romeo, then.  And/or trade Smart and re-sign Fournier.  Now you have more than enough shooting in starting 5: Nesmith, Fournier, JB, JT and Rob (who has a better FG% than anyone else on the team, FYI--it's not all about the 3's).

Fournier as the PG?

If you have enough play-makers/passers on the court (Tatum, Brown, Rob and Fournier all have playmaking abilities (i.e., capable of penetrating into the paint and making a play), and Rob is an excellent passer), you don't need a point guard. As long as one of the guys can defend the other team's point guard. Who is  the point guard on the Nets when they don't have Harden out there (and still excel)? Kyrie?  No. Who is the PG on the Bucks?  Is Kemba really a point guard?   Not saying I wouldn't want an elite point guard, just that it is not a requirement so long as the other guys can make plays for each other without.

While I agree with almost everything you wrote here, I do think you need at least one player who is a level or two better at passing and more importantly, decision making, than anyone we have. That is a starting five of OK passers, but no one you want to run the offense through in an NBA final.

I don't even know if it's the passing ability, but more of a "floor general" type. Guys like Lebron, Doncic, Lowry, CP3, Rondo. Floor generals come in all different types, but it's an important role to have on your team. The Celtics don't currently have a floor general. Smart is probably the closest, but he tends to ignore 2/3 of the court at any given time even when he's acting as a passer.

Obviously, my hope would be that Tatum can become that, but it's not his natural role (and there is a downside to having your best player be your floor general; it tends to raise your floor but lower your ceiling as a team).

Agreed, although LeBron is clearly has been the best player and the floor general, and he's spectacularly successful. I wouldn't bet against Doncic, or Jokic if they get enough help.

Tatum (and Brown) will improve, but they are never going to be elite passers. We need one more guy who you can run the offense through, and as you said, be a floor general. Someone who can make adjustments, and can make great end of game decisions.

They don't need to be a superstar, just a heady player. I thought Ainge really blew it when we didn't overpay to get Halliburton last year. Wagner might be a similar guy in this draft.

You can definitely win it all if your best player and floor general is an all-time great player. But to be honest, I've felt at times that guys like Lebron and Doncic have held their teams back (as odd as that sounds). Not that their overall impact wasn't incredibly positive, but that they had a lower ceiling (and higher floor) with them managing the game. I particularly look at Lebron's second stint with Cleveland. I felt they could have competed better with Golden State if Lebron didn't dictate as much of their offense. They needed an explosion of offense in order to compete with the Warriors and Lebron was happy (or at least resigned) to conservatively manage the game.

I think you’re both right and the lesson here is that you can win it all as long as you have an all-time great as your best player. Tatum’s shaping up to be one.

However, Tatum is more in the mold of a KD/Dirk/Kobe rather than a Lebron/Luka. I think this is important for the C’s to keep in mind when it comes to roster construction and creating offensive systems. I think Tatum will thrive in a role where he’s finishing plays rather than getting the team going.

How do you build around a super scorer? I’ll take a crack at it. I think the team needs:
- strong defensive big to do the dirty work inside (Chandler/Bynum or Gasol/Draymond)
- steady PG vet with decent outside shooting to ensure team gets into its sets and doesn’t panic (Kidd/Fisher/Steph lol)
- versatile, Swiss-knife wing (Marion/Ariza/Iguodala or Klay)
- dynamic 6th man who can give opposing benches problems (JET or Barea/Odom/Livingston)

The Warriors used Durant to build around Steph, not the other way round