What if you knew the Celts won't win a title?

[PhoSita]

@Pho

If I knew we won't title in the next 5 years, my priority would be win one in 6 years.

Can you elaborate on what that means?  How do the Celts aim to compete for a title in 2021-2022?

[PhoSita]

Nope the premise of this thread is unrealistic and you can't think like that if you are building a team seriously.  All you can do is build the best you can.  If you try to blow it up every year you end up like the Sixers.  Which is a stupid way to team-build.  Lottery candy may make for exciting mock drafts but the end product is not a team that has a chance to win.

You want a successful franchise model -- emulate the Spurs instead.  This "blow it all up" because they "might not" win in 5 years is preposterous.  You just can't "know" that.

It sounds to me, then, that your answer would be "build the best team you can."  Perhaps you should have read the original post more carefully to understand the question being asked.

[PhoSita]

I'm going "other."

Danny is clearly not pursuing a binary "now/later" approach.

What he's pursuing, and has from day one of the rebuild, is the "consistent winning culture" approach. This has been, in my mind, a remarkable success.

The first step was hiring Stevens, who has built a reputation as someone who will be here for a long time, who doesn't alienate his players, and who is a great Xs and Os guy. He's one of the top young coaches in the league and seemingly has the kind of close relationship with Danny that leads to a long-term association.

Second, he has made Boston a place where players *want to play*. Top free agents give us a look. We need no more proof than Horford, who was the #2 guy last year. We are in play for the free agents that the San Antonios and Goldent States of the world sign.

Third, he has developed a reputation as one of the smartest GMs out there, someone who can go out can get players - whether in draft, trade or free agency - to build a team from the ground up and take it to a championship.

Fourth, he and Stevens have shown he can put in place a system that maximizes player success. Jae Crowder. Isaiah Thomas. Avery Bradley. Evan Turner. Kelly Olynyk. The list of guys who have absolutely maximized their play and value to other teams is long.

Fifth, he and Stevens have begun developing a "Celtics identity" that can stick in people's minds, attract the right kind of players and lead to long-run success. It's actually not too far, that identity, from the one we had in the big three era, or that the Spurs have had: toughness, sacrifices for the team, and a slant toward defense over offense.

I think a lot of the complaints about how we are "spinning our wheels" or "not developing the young guys," or "no fireworks," just completely miss the point about how much progress we have made on all of the fronts above, and how other strategies would devalue those things.

When players around the league look at the Celtics now, going back to the Big Three era and up to now, they see something consistent in how the GM, coaches and team do things. Right? How many other teams can say that? Can the Sixers? The Lakers? OKC? Chicago? NYK? Anyone, in fact, other than the top 4-5 teams in the league?

That stability and cultural approach are the hardest things to build, and the most valuable for long-term success. The Patriots have it. The Spurs have it. Miami didn't, which is why they blew up. Philly doesn't. The Knicks and Lakers, for all of their advantages, don't have it.

Now, coming back to the question: even if the Celtics do not win soon, by continually succeeding on the court, steadily going deep into the playoffs, developing players to their fullest, and doing it all while judiciously stockpiling young talent, the Celts will end up ahead.

That might mean keeping the BKN picks and simultaneously trying to field one of the top 6 teams in the league. We aren't too far from that already.

If we do that and don't win a title for 5 years, we could have a greater chance at winning multiple titles in the decade after that than we would with an all-in "win now" or "blow it up" strategy, both of which could sacrifice on any of these other dimensions.

Excellent response.  Thank you.

I would argue that part of Danny's "binary" approach is hedging his bets.  He's leaving the door open for a KG-type trade, but not going all-in because it very well might not happen.

I agree with you about building culture.  It's important and doesn't get enough attention.  They are laying the foundation for future seasons even if they aren't contending for a title or heavily developing young players.

Still, I think if Danny could "know" that a title wasn't in the cards in the near future, he would probably shift the focus of the roster.  Not all-out tanking, but probably not what they're doing now, either.

[number_n9ne]

I'm going "other."

Danny is clearly not pursuing a binary "now/later" approach.

What he's pursuing, and has from day one of the rebuild, is the "consistent winning culture" approach. This has been, in my mind, a remarkable success.

I also chose other. I agree so much with Boris' winning culture sentiment.

If I knew we weren't winning a championship in the next 5 years it would definitely impact my decisions on how to run the team.


This Season:
First of all the Nets pick become untouchable, it becomes key in all future plans and there would be no blockbuster moves made. I would be looking to trade Olynyk, Young and a second to Philly for Noel.

2017 Offseason:
I would be looking to draft Malik Monk this summer to slot at the 2 between Smart and Brown (for the future). I'd then look to trade the 2018 Nets pick, Minny second, and what else to move up to the teens and select Harry Giles, if that's not possible (or he plays himself back into the top 5) I'd use the Minny second on another draft and stash candidate and trade the rest of the seconds for future picks.

I would prioritize locking up Noel for the longterm and extending Bradley. I would rather commit to these assets rather than fill up cap space chasing another big name free agent who is going to take away playing time from the younger pieces. I would let go of Johnson, Jerebko, Green, and Zeller to free up playing time for younger guys. I'd bring over Yabusele and Zizic and bring up Nader.

The team now looks like:

Thomas/Smart/Rozier/Jackson
Bradley/Monk
Crowder/Brown/Nader
Horford/Giles/Yabusele
Noel/Zizic/Mickey

2017-18 Season:
Brad now has no choice but to play and develop the young guys. Win, win, win as much as possible. The bench will struggle but that's ok, they are developing under some savvy vets.

2018 Offseason:
This is hard, but I let Thomas walk. He said it himself, better back up the Brink's truck. I think someone will and that the divorce will end amicably, sort of like with Turner. He got paid, we wished him well, no hard feelings. I'd put a priority on signing Smart longterm and officially handing over the keys to the franchise to him. No take backs this time!

After spending our 2018 Nets pick to acquire Giles, I'd use our own pick (if we still had it) to draft the BPA.

The team now looks like:

Smart/Rozier/Jackson
Bradley/Monk/(BPA?)
Crowder/Brown/Nader
Horford/Giles/Yabusele
Noel/Zizic/Mickey

2018-19 Season and beyond:
Repeat the 17-18 plan but with Smart now leading the team. Win, win, win and make the goal squeaking into the playoffs for more experience. At some point Monk, Brown, and Giles should be inserted into the starting lineup and our vets should move gracefully to a bench role. Hopefully one (or more) of Smart, Brown, Monk, Giles, Noel, Yabu, Zizic or Rozier makes the leap and we contend for a championship in the 2020s. I'd hope we can keep Bradley, Crowder, Horford as they age as a vet presence in the future.

[max215]

I love the question. This was tough for me, since I tend to put building toward a championship ahead of enjoying a decent on-court product. Ultimately, I settled on "Other." I'd do exactly what we're doing. I'd hang on to the Nets and Grizz picks, trying to build for the future, while enjoying the present. Knowing that we wouldn't win within 5 years, I would probably shy away from all-in moves like trades for Boogie, Butler, George, etc. That would likely be the only change I'd make in regard to what we're actually doing, so I guess I'd just let it all play out pretty naturally.

[Celtics4ever]

NEWSFLASH   They are not winning the title this year.   Ainge is trying to get us to another 2008 year.   Right now he has to be patient as we still have some young guys who have a few good years ahead of them.  If opportunity knocks we have to be ready.  We are generally in a lot of games and win more than we lose.   

[mr. dee]

I'd ride a perennial 50-team win with ECF trip every season even if we don't win championships.

[CelticSooner]

I am not tied to this current core of players at all. There is no Paul Pierce here.

Whether this current core stay here or not, I do not care. 

I am open to trading Isaiah or Horford for top young talent / top draft picks and rebuilding the core around fresh blood. I do not see this team bottoming out though. More like a step back (a few steps even) than starting over from scratch. If you could get a top 5 pick for Isaiah in a trade, still have the Brooklyn top 5 pick, Jaylen, Smart, Rozier and the 2018 Nets pick ... that is a good group to build a new look Celtics team around with an eye towards winning a title.

I am also open to trading that Nets pick (and/or Jaylen) for a proven star and building more for the here and now. Whichever opportunity presents itself as the best path forward to challenging for an NBA title.

This is where I stand. Being middle of the road is most of boring thing in sports. A decision will have to be made pretty soon. Reboot and go young to me seems the more logical choice. GM's these days are less willing to make that big trade unless you give up the farm. The big question I have is CBS still around if that choice is made?