Why We Should Be More Optimistic about the Celtics

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Did you realize that last year, the Celtics started tied for the 4th youngest roster in the NBA (Wolves, Jazz, Bucks, and Sixers) 24.9 years old.

Did you realize that if we kept all our rookies and free agents, our roster would average 24.3 years old? But that's not going to happen, because Bass, Datome, Jerebko, and Wallace could all be gone through free agency and trade by the time the season starts, leaving Isaiah Thomas and Evan Turner as the oldest players on our roster at 26.

Did you know that, according to Kevin Pelton's article, NBA players peak differently, but generally around 27-28?

http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=896

I think the thing that bothers me about most fans on this forum is their lack of appreciation for our young talent. We may not have any superstars, but Sully, Olynyk, Smart, Young, Thomas, Hunter, and Rozier will all trend upwards for at least the next few years. I could see scenarios where any one of those players becomes a fringe all-star (I know, I know ... here come the Olynyk bashers).

We aren't doomed to mediocrity. I want a star free agent, but even if we don't get one, we have one of the youngest rosters in the league with a lot of interesting prospects who made the playoffs last year as a young team. If players continue to trend up, as I think they will, and our team chemistry continues to be good, we could really be interesting over the next few years.

[gpap]

Did you realize that last year, the Celtics started tied for the 4th youngest roster in the NBA (Wolves, Jazz, Bucks, and Sixers) 24.9 years old.

Did you realize that if we kept all our rookies and free agents, our roster would average 24.3 years old? But that's not going to happen, because Bass, Datome, Jerebko, and Wallace could all be gone through free agency and trade by the time the season starts, leaving Isaiah Thomas and Evan Turner as the oldest players on our roster at 26.

Did you know that, according to Kevin Pelton's article, NBA players peak differently, but generally around 27-28?

http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=896

I think the thing that bothers me about most fans on this forum is their lack of appreciation for our young talent. We may not have any superstars, but Sully, Olynyk, Smart, Young, Thomas, Hunter, and Rozier will all trend upwards for at least the next few years. I could see scenarios where any one of those players becomes a fringe all-star (I know, I know ... here come the Olynyk bashers).

We aren't doomed to mediocrity. I want a star free agent, but even if we don't get one, we have one of the youngest rosters in the league with a lot of interesting prospects who made the playoffs last year as a young team. If players continue to trend up, as I think they will, and our team chemistry continues to be good, we could really be interesting over the next few years.

If you find losing to be interesting, then sure.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Did you realize that last year, the Celtics started tied for the 4th youngest roster in the NBA (Wolves, Jazz, Bucks, and Sixers) 24.9 years old.

Did you realize that if we kept all our rookies and free agents, our roster would average 24.3 years old? But that's not going to happen, because Bass, Datome, Jerebko, and Wallace could all be gone through free agency and trade by the time the season starts, leaving Isaiah Thomas and Evan Turner as the oldest players on our roster at 26.

Did you know that, according to Kevin Pelton's article, NBA players peak differently, but generally around 27-28?

http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=896

I think the thing that bothers me about most fans on this forum is their lack of appreciation for our young talent. We may not have any superstars, but Sully, Olynyk, Smart, Young, Thomas, Hunter, and Rozier will all trend upwards for at least the next few years. I could see scenarios where any one of those players becomes a fringe all-star (I know, I know ... here come the Olynyk bashers).

We aren't doomed to mediocrity. I want a star free agent, but even if we don't get one, we have one of the youngest rosters in the league with a lot of interesting prospects who made the playoffs last year as a young team. If players continue to trend up, as I think they will, and our team chemistry continues to be good, we could really be interesting over the next few years.

If you find losing to be interesting, then sure.

We had one of the best records in the East after the all-star break last year, with one of the youngest teams in the NBA. It's interesting because we are winning, because we are young, and because our young players are trending upwards.

[GC003332]

Small incremental improvements amongst hard working players with the upside of 'fringe all star level' is not a sexy sell to the masses.

[PhoSita]

The only optimism I can muster is something along the lines of the following:

"Well, the team last year wasn't very good, but they were fairly entertaining, and likable.  With this coach, I think it should be possible for the team to continue being entertaining, likable, and more competitive than expected."

That's the best spin I can put on hanging out in 35-45 win territory hoping for a lucky break.

[Rosco917]

IMO our rebuild really began in total, when we traded Rondo and Green, and replaced them with two players that could really defend. When we started giving Smart and Crowder minutes, we began stealing games, on  will and defense.

Then IT was traded for, we really had a "spark plug" off the bench to push the pace and score. I feel, we had fun with this team.

The Celtics and the fans, need to decide what type of team they're going to build. Are we going to take a little time and continue building a youngish team that is tough and defensive minded, with solid two way players, and win that way?

Or are we going to blow it up again, and go for the fences, with desperate, crazy wild moves.

When I think of teams that went for the fences in a hurry, I think of the Brooklyn Nets.