Are we tanking this year?

[saltlover]

The thing is, it's possible to believe that we're a bad team and not believe that we're tanking.

Have you taken analytic philosophy classes?

I've read some Bertrand Russell in my day. The problem with almost every 'tanking' thread is that no one bothers to define their terms at the outset, so it inevitably denigrates into noise and shouting.

IMO, tanking refers to voiding the team of previously existing talent in an effort to achieve multiple years of high draft picks. The Sixers are a perfect example of that, since they traded away absolutely everyone with any semblance of basketball talent (save Thad Young) after the Bynum experiment didn't work out.

The Celtics aren't doing that, exactly, (and, I would argue, didn't do that when they traded KG and Pierce) but they're certainly not making managerial decisions to optimize the team's ability to win games in the 2014 season, either.

If you think the team is tanking because they're not going out and putting together the absolutely best roster possible, I wouldn't argue with that -- I just don't particularly see that as 'tanking'

It could also be encouraging your power forward with a good post game to shoot three 3-pointers per game despite hitting them 27% of the time because you want him to develop that skill for when the games actually matter.  I don't think that's the same quality of tanking as the Sixers, because I doubt the Celtics would have been disappointed if he made more of them last year.  But at the same time, it was an in-game decision that was likely to lead to fewer wins last year.

[greece66]

The thing is, it's possible to believe that we're a bad team and not believe that we're tanking.

Have you taken analytic philosophy classes?

I've read some Bertrand Russell in my day.

I knew it!

[greece66]

OK, now I feel really excited like I am back to Oxford reading G.E. Moore articles against Kantian philosophy.
I do not think the definition of the term is so much of a problem - precisely because 'tanking' is a derogatory, humorous term that if defined precisely loses all of its charm.
But, here is the point. If this team is not going to make the playoffs, it makes more sense to finish as low as possible than to make wins.  Sure, I would not go as far as saying that it makes sense to purposefully lose every game (hey, even Philly had 19 wins last year; and we all understand that losing game after game would demolish the morale of our young talents). But, I think we all know the recipe: trading our only legit 3p shooter, ten-day contracts testing Blue Vader, resting our best players towards the end of the season, asking AB to take 11 3's against Philly (and yes, out-tank Hinkie in his own game). IMHO Ainge has already given signs he is willing to move to the same direction under the right circumstances.
It is an intelligent strategy, and it does not mean our players are out on the court to lose games. So, if the honour of the team is the issue here, I would not worry about that.
Anyway, back to Bertie fighting the German idealistic establishment

[Celtics4ever]

encouraging your power forward with a good post game to shoot three 3-pointers per game despite hitting them 27% of the time because you want him to develop that skill for when the games actually matter.

I will be interested to see if he can do it when games matter and not in the preseason.   I think he will shoot better than last year but I would be amazed if he maintains 50%.

We just waived Bynum and kept Pressey, so we waived the better player is it all about money or are we tanking?

I doubt many here have read about existentialism.  Maybe a hit on it in a sociology class or the like.  I always prefered Kierkegaard, himself.

[greece66]

encouraging your power forward with a good post game to shoot three 3-pointers per game despite hitting them 27% of the time because you want him to develop that skill for when the games actually matter.

I will be interested to see if he can do it when games matter and not in the preseason.   I think he will shoot better than last year but I would be amazed if he maintains 50%.

We just waived Bynum and kept Pressey, so we waived the better player is it all about money or are we tanking?

IMHO What they really did was waive Bynum instead of Anthony. And the reason was clearly money (and a tiny hope that someone might want to pick up Bynum's contract). Waiving Pressey was never under consideration IMHO.

[Celtics4ever]

I think we may have wanted Powell.   If it is any indicator, it shows we are going young and I could see us trade Bass at some point.  The real thing is we may not have seen the bottom yet.

[greece66]

I think we may have wanted Powell.   If it is any indicator, it shows we are going young and I could see us trade Bass at some point.  The real thing is we may not have seen the bottom yet.

Sure enough, they wanted Powell in the roster. This is why they went through this great labyrinth of mini-maneuvers to trade for a player they planned to waive 

When things look bad, do not worry, they will get better.
When things look good, do not worry, they will get worse.

 

[greece66]

- And yes the draft works- this is how the Bulls got Jordan, OKC Durant, Milwaukee J. Parker. (And we got a certain Larry Bird- maybe you' ve heard of him).

Did you just put Jabari in a sentence with Jordan Durant and Bird?

Add Giannis and you have my Dream Team.

[saltlover]

encouraging your power forward with a good post game to shoot three 3-pointers per game despite hitting them 27% of the time because you want him to develop that skill for when the games actually matter.

I will be interested to see if he can do it when games matter and not in the preseason.   I think he will shoot better than last year but I would be amazed if he maintains 50%.

We just waived Bynum and kept Pressey, so we waived the better player is it all about money or are we tanking?

I doubt many here have read about existentialism.  Maybe a hit on it in a sociology class or the like.  I always prefered Kierkegaard, himself.

I'm a huge Kierkegaard fan.  It's funny, back in my days of majoring in philosophy I hated existentialism, but now that I'm in my 30s it makes so much more sense.

Also, waiving Bynum vs. Pressey. vs. Powell vs. Fav was not really about dollars (mostly).  Since all the contracts are guaranteed, it is likely the Celtics will pay the same dollar amount in salaries regardless (unless you believe one of those players would have been claimed on waivers, which is possible but not guaranteed for any).

What it does do is keep salaries in Pressey, Powell, and Fav which are non-guaranteed next season.  If you believe, like I do, that the Celtics are unlikely to acquire a major talent via cap room next summer, then these contracts have value.  Combined they are $3.9 million in outgoing contracts that don't count as incoming contracts.  Combined with Wallace's finally expiring contract, we should be able to take back something approaching a max contract ($19 million) while sending out $10.1 million and draft picks.

And no, I don't consider this tanking.  Bynum was essentially our 4th-string PG, behind Rondo, Smart, and Turner.  If you're using future contract status to help decide the 15th man on your roster, whatever.  It's not uncommon for competitive teams to start the year with only 14 players, so that 15th guy doesn't usually matter.

[greece66]

encouraging your power forward with a good post game to shoot three 3-pointers per game despite hitting them 27% of the time because you want him to develop that skill for when the games actually matter.

I will be interested to see if he can do it when games matter and not in the preseason.   I think he will shoot better than last year but I would be amazed if he maintains 50%.

We just waived Bynum and kept Pressey, so we waived the better player is it all about money or are we tanking?

I doubt many here have read about existentialism.  Maybe a hit on it in a sociology class or the like.  I always prefered Kierkegaard, himself.

I'm a huge Kierkegaard fan. It's funny, back in my days of majoring in philosophy I hated existentialism, but now that I'm in my 30s it makes so much more sense.

Also, waiving Bynum vs. Pressey. vs. Powell vs. Fav was not really about dollars (mostly).  Since all the contracts are guaranteed, it is likely the Celtics will pay the same dollar amount in salaries regardless (unless you believe one of those players would have been claimed on waivers, which is possible but not guaranteed for any).

What it does do is keep salaries in Pressey, Powell, and Fav which are non-guaranteed next season.  If you believe, like I do, that the Celtics are unlikely to acquire a major talent via cap room next summer, then these contracts have value.  Combined they are $3.9 million in outgoing contracts that don't count as incoming contracts.  Combined with Wallace's finally expiring contract, we should be able to take back something approaching a max contract ($19 million) while sending out $10.1 million and draft picks.

And no, I don't consider this tanking.  Bynum was essentially our 4th-string PG, behind Rondo, Smart, and Turner.  If you're using future contract status to help decide the 15th man on your roster, whatever.  It's not uncommon for competitive teams to start the year with only 14 players, so that 15th guy doesn't usually matter.

I love Fear and Trembling. Garff's biography was also a great read.

[greece66]

encouraging your power forward with a good post game to shoot three 3-pointers per game despite hitting them 27% of the time because you want him to develop that skill for when the games actually matter.

I will be interested to see if he can do it when games matter and not in the preseason.   I think he will shoot better than last year but I would be amazed if he maintains 50%.

We just waived Bynum and kept Pressey, so we waived the better player is it all about money or are we tanking?

I doubt many here have read about existentialism.  Maybe a hit on it in a sociology class or the like.  I always prefered Kierkegaard, himself.

I'm a huge Kierkegaard fan.  It's funny, back in my days of majoring in philosophy I hated existentialism, but now that I'm in my 30s it makes so much more sense.

Also, waiving Bynum vs. Pressey. vs. Powell vs. Fav was not really about dollars (mostly).  Since all the contracts are guaranteed, it is likely the Celtics will pay the same dollar amount in salaries regardless (unless you believe one of those players would have been claimed on waivers, which is possible but not guaranteed for any).

What it does do is keep salaries in Pressey, Powell, and Fav which are non-guaranteed next season.  If you believe, like I do, that the Celtics are unlikely to acquire a major talent via cap room next summer, then these contracts have value.  Combined they are $3.9 million in outgoing contracts that don't count as incoming contracts.  Combined with Wallace's finally expiring contract, we should be able to take back something approaching a max contract ($19 million) while sending out $10.1 million and draft picks.

And no, I don't consider this tanking.  Bynum was essentially our 4th-string PG, behind Rondo, Smart, and Turner.  If you're using future contract status to help decide the 15th man on your roster, whatever.  It's not uncommon for competitive teams to start the year with only 14 players, so that 15th guy doesn't usually matter.

Agreed. What IMO was about dollars was trading Anthony for Bynum (who they never had the intention of keeping). And sure, keeping Bynum would not have made any difference to our win-loss record.

[D.o.s.]

encouraging your power forward with a good post game to shoot three 3-pointers per game despite hitting them 27% of the time because you want him to develop that skill for when the games actually matter.

I will be interested to see if he can do it when games matter and not in the preseason.   I think he will shoot better than last year but I would be amazed if he maintains 50%.

We just waived Bynum and kept Pressey, so we waived the better player is it all about money or are we tanking?

I doubt many here have read about existentialism.  Maybe a hit on it in a sociology class or the like.  I always prefered Kierkegaard, himself.

Just gonna cast my vote for Sartre and go back to reading the thread.

encouraging your power forward with a good post game to shoot three 3-pointers per game despite hitting them 27% of the time because you want him to develop that skill for when the games actually matter.

I will be interested to see if he can do it when games matter and not in the preseason.   I think he will shoot better than last year but I would be amazed if he maintains 50%.

We just waived Bynum and kept Pressey, so we waived the better player is it all about money or are we tanking?

IMHO What they really did was waive Bynum instead of Anthony. And the reason was clearly money (and a tiny hope that someone might want to pick up Bynum's contract). Waiving Pressey was never under consideration IMHO.

I agree with this conclusion.

[MBunge]

But, here is the point. If this team is not going to make the playoffs, it makes more sense to finish as low as possible than to make wins. 

However, what does "as possible" mean?  No one really argues with trading away high priced-vets or not adding big salaries if you get into a season and realize you're going to suck.  Some did argue when Ainge came into a mid-level team and blew it up because he didn't think it was ever going to get any better, but at least he didn't just strip mine the Celtics and get nothing in return.

What Philly is doing, engaging in a multi-year plan to have as little talent as possible on the roster and refusing to do anything to improve other than suck their way into high draft picks, is not something that really anyone has tried before.

Mike

[D.o.s.]

But, here is the point. If this team is not going to make the playoffs, it makes more sense to finish as low as possible than to make wins. 

However, what does "as possible" mean?  No one really argues with trading away high priced-vets or not adding big salaries if you get into a season and realize you're going to suck.  Some did argue when Ainge came into a mid-level team and blew it up because he didn't think it was ever going to get any better, but at least he didn't just strip mine the Celtics and get nothing in return.

What Philly is doing, engaging in a multi-year plan to have as little talent as possible on the roster and refusing to do anything to improve other than suck their way into high draft picks, is not something that really anyone has tried before.

Mike

[Donoghus]

Sure, in a vacuum, it does makes more sense to finish as low as possible if you're not going to make the playoffs. 

However, that doesn't appear to be the direction this organization is going to go.  Rather than try the Philly route,  Boston seems to be focused on developing young talent, asset collection, and getting themselves roster flexibility.   Build things back up through trades, drafting, and utilizing cap space.   If done right, they don't need to bottom out.  If done wrong, they're lingering in Lotto Land and/or low playoff seeding.    They're still in the strip mining/asset acquisition/develop youth phase of this rebuild.  We haven't seen them go for broke or try to cash in yet.   

It's just another way to try & approach a rebuild.