If the 2014 was considered a weak draft, would that change what you want to do?

[LooseCannon]

This year's draft class is perceived as weak.  Next year's is not.  But what if next year's draft was considered to be equal in strength to this year's draft and the next two drafts after that were predicted to be above-average?

Would you start throwing next year's first-round pick into every trade proposal?  Would you want to run it back for one more year, then tank?  Would you advocate a two-year controlled demolition of the team, going from a mediocre team that misses the playoffs next season to a bottom-feeder in 2014-2015?

[Onslaught]

It wouldn't change my mind because I doubt that tanking will get us a great pick anyway.

[CelticConcourse]

I think it would definitely matter, given that first rounders would be much cheaper and we probably wouldn't tank.

[Moranis]

Nope.

[slamtheking]

considering what I want to do is win the championship every year, I'd have to say the quality of any draft doesn't change that.

How I go about doing that, maybe.  I'd probably be more inclined to run it back than blow it up.  I'm already inclined to run it back but if next year was a weak draft there'd be little to gain from putting together a weak team this year

[Celtics4ever]

draft = blind luck.

It can make you or break you but it's not reliable at all.   Look at how many #1's the Clippers had and how long it took them to get a good team and most of that was result of a trade for Chris Paul.

I think the sooner we start the rebuild the better and better to use what assets we have now than start with none.   I hate to see PP go as much as the next guy but I don't know if  I can bear another 12-15 years of sucking like we did w/o Bird.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

It wouldn't change my mind because I doubt that tanking will get us a great pick anyway.

YES!!! Thank you.

Tanking is so much of an off shoot that it would do us more harm than good. I've been reading a lot about "tank for Wiggins" that they are forgetting one important thing they need to do to tank. You're basically telling your team, who are competitors (and Rondo, whew) to lose, to suck so we can have A SHOT (not a sure thing) to land a future Superstar. Youre going to tell the team to "play your worst" so we can be competitive next year, basically telling them that they are not good enough to compete for wins.

Imagine the morale that team is going to have by this year or next year or worse, if the tank and still not get the first overall pick.

[chambers]

Depends on the free agents available at the time.
There no star free agents this off season, there are a few next year, but in 2015 there are some very nice free agents.

Because there are no free agents itakes it an easier decision to tank. I mean unless we got Cousins here who can we really trade for that could put us into the contender category?
If we spend a season boosting Rondo, Green,Avery and Sullys trade value, whilst putting ourselves in with a shot to land wiggins or parker, we are going to end up with lota of options come 2015.
To me, weve got 2 seasons build a core of 3 young players through our organisation, who we can ghen surround with talent through free agency.
At the moment that core is Rondo, Green and Sullinger. its nice, but its not getting us to a championship level. If we could swap Sully or Green for Cousins or Greg Monroe then we'd
 have a better shot. The key is to get CHEAP yet talented guys through the draft, so you can spend money on 2 max players and a strong role player.
Imagine Parker or Wiggins with Rondo and another max big man or shooting guard?
The cap is just so small now that you must develop talent through the draft.