Perk said time to move on from Smart

[Moranis]

There is nothing false about that.  Talent is what wins and it always has.  The Warriors first title run their 3 best players were 26, 24, and 24.  They had another starter that was 22.  They of course had some veterans, none of which had title experience, but every team has veterans.  The Thunder basically made the Finals with the entire roster on rookie contracts (just about anyway).  Lebron made his first finals appearance at 22. 

You skip over the fact that the Thunder made the Finals when they were young ... and got smoked.

LeBron made the Finals at age 22 ... and got swept.

Talent is a necessary ingredient for winning, but it's also very hard to win playoff series when your team is very inexperienced!  The teams that win the title are almost invariably stocked with veteran players, whether it's the main guys or the players around them.

The Warriors, as you concede, may have had a young core, but they also had key veteran role players.  Iguodala, Livingston, Bogut, David Lee, Barbosa, Mo Speights ... these guys had been in the league for a long time and collectively seen a lot of playoff games.

Then of course you have their coach who won titles with multiple teams as a player.

That's what we're saying here ... the Celtics need more talent on the roster, yes.  But also, particularly because their leading scorers are so young, they need an experienced, veteran, disciplined supporting cast.

The Thunder did lose to the Heat in a rather non-competitive series.  Of course the Heat had the 2 best players in the series so were quite simply more talented.  But to get to the Finals the Thunder swept the defending champion Mavs, then beat the 2-time champion Kobe/Pau Lakers in 5, before finished it off by beating the at the 4-time champion Spurs in 6.  This idea that they lost to the Heat because they were inexperienced and young just isn't borne in reality.  Now obviously players get better as they age, but if a team has more talent, they by and large will win playoff series and it makes no difference at all the age of the roster.  Talent wins.  It always has and it always will.

And sure Lebron got swept at 22 in the Finals, of course that team was probably the worst team to ever make the Finals.  And the team that swept them was a multi-time champion with 3 HOFers in their prime including the best PF in league history.  In other words, the team with more talent won.  Of course those Cavs had to beat the former champion Pistons and a veteran laden Wizards and Nets teams along the way (those Nets were largely a similar team to the one that made consecutive finals a couple of seasons earlier).  The Cavs didn't get swept by the Spurs because Lebron was too young, they got swept by the Spurs because the Spurs were just a better more talented team.  And it should be noted that neither the Cavs nor Thunder made it back to the Finals with those groups despite all of the key players getting older and more experienced.  That seems odd if experience is so important.

[Moranis]

There is nothing false about that.  Talent is what wins and it always has.  The Warriors first title run their 3 best players were 26, 24, and 24.  They had another starter that was 22.  They of course had some veterans, none of which had title experience, but every team has veterans.  The Thunder basically made the Finals with the entire roster on rookie contracts (just about anyway).  Lebron made his first finals appearance at 22. 

You skip over the fact that the Thunder made the Finals when they were young ... and got smoked.

LeBron made the Finals at age 22 ... and got swept.

Talent is a necessary ingredient for winning, but it's also very hard to win playoff series when your team is very inexperienced!  The teams that win the title are almost invariably stocked with veteran players, whether it's the main guys or the players around them.

The Warriors, as you concede, may have had a young core, but they also had key veteran role players.  Iguodala, Livingston, Bogut, David Lee, Barbosa, Mo Speights ... these guys had been in the league for a long time and collectively seen a lot of playoff games.

Then of course you have their coach who won titles with multiple teams as a player.

That's what we're saying here ... the Celtics need more talent on the roster, yes.  But also, particularly because their leading scorers are so young, they need an experienced, veteran, disciplined supporting cast.

But the Celtics don't have a top 5 player and never will because Brown and Tatum never will be....blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

You know who no one thought was going to be a top 5 player in the league until he launched himself into that stratosphere in his 6th year?.....Steph Curry. You know who after 4 years had a better resume than Steph did after 4 years in the league, Tatum and Brown.

Funny that

I certainly believe Tatum can be a top 5 player.  But he isn't now.  Not even top 10, so who know if he ever gets to where he would legitimately need to be.  I'm certainly fine taking the chance and betting on him, which is where Ainge has absolutely 100% failed the last several years.  He just hasn't built this team around, or to maximize, Tatum like he should have been doing.