If the Celts are going to make a blockbuster...

[slamtheking]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

you've definitely gone down the rabbit hole in response to my initial post.  my point was that you continually harp on this topic over and over and over and over and over again.

in today's game it's not critical to have an all-star big man to win the title.  GSW didn't have one.  The Cheatles barely had one in Bosh who played more like a SF.  Toronto didn't have one - I like Ibaka but he's not an all-star level last year and big V isn't a "tier one" big man.

let the obsession go.  consider this, C's have a core 5 of wings and points that it'd be difficult if not impossible for any other team in the league to match up with.  Try another consideration: the "tier one" bigs right now in the league would be Embiid, KAT, Jokic and AD at this point IMHO.  (while Giannis is a very tall guy, I don't consider him a 'big' because he plays much more like a SF).  Do any of the teams they're on really scare you where you don't think the C's as currently constructed could beat them (assuming everyone's healthy)?  personally, I strongly believe the C's would be all those teams in a series.

[Somebody]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

Being old doesn't mean you're bad, KG was a strong contender for DPOY in 2011 and wasn't much worse in 2012. And Horford is a star big man if you take your eyes off the box score for once to watch the games lol, or maybe even just look at a different family of stats (impact metrics!).

It absolutely befuddles me that you consider Parish to be a "tier 1" big man but not an old KG (who imo was miles better than prime Parish, especially for more talented teams) or late prime Horford.

Horford can't even average 8 rebounds per game with the Celtics.

Maybe if the Celts got Horford when he was 28 years old.
But Horford was on the decline when the Celts got him.

Celts paid Horford 28m per year and he can't even average 8 rebounds per game.

Here's the thing, I don't think the Celts will trade Smart or Hayward.
I'm only saying that if and only if the Celts will make a trade for a big man, it will be Smart who will get traded.

As I said, take your eyes off the All-Powerful box score slash line of points, rebounds and assists and you'll see how ludicrous your statements are. Btw Cowens had an MVP calibre peak lol, most bigs, including your "tier 1" Robert Lee Parish would never come close to touching that sort of peak.

And I just don't see Smart getting traded. As teams get better, players like Smart get exponentially more valuable due to their unique skillsets.

[Fierce1]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

How is Drummond a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter?

Drummond is a 2-time All-Star, an All-NBA 3rd teamer in 2016, and led the league in rebounding in 2016, 2018, and 2019.

Right now Drummond is once again leading the NBA in rebounds with 17.0 rebounds per game.

There's just no way Drummond is just a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter.

He's a marginal upgrade for what we need out of our centres at the moment. We need a centre who can protect the rim while being able to defend in space and have decent passing to keep our offence humming if his offence isn't top tier to make us build the offence around him. Drummond is a solid rim protector and isn't horrible defending in space, but Theis has been defending in a whole stratosphere above him so far this season. As for passing, Drummond isn't too shabby but he's not really much (if any) better than Theis.

Did you see the game against the Nets in Brooklyn?

Brad had to pull Theis out of the game because Jarrett Allen and DeAndre Jordan were abusing Theis.

It wasn't Theis' fault, Theis was just too small for both Jordan and Allen.

What you're not seeing is Drummond is big, like a smaller version of Shaq.

Guys like Embiid, Jordan, and Allen will not be able to do what they are doing to Theis.

Theis is excellent when the opposing team doesn't have a quality big man.

But when it's guys like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner, Theis will struggle.

We have to accept the fact that Theis is only 6-8.

[Somebody]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

you've definitely gone down the rabbit hole in response to my initial post.  my point was that you continually harp on this topic over and over and over and over and over again.

in today's game it's not critical to have an all-star big man to win the title.  GSW didn't have one.  The Cheatles barely had one in Bosh who played more like a SF.  Toronto didn't have one - I like Ibaka but he's not an all-star level last year and big V isn't a "tier one" big man.

let the obsession go.  consider this, C's have a core 5 of wings and points that it'd be difficult if not impossible for any other team in the league to match up with.  Try another consideration: the "tier one" bigs right now in the league would be Embiid, KAT, Jokic and AD at this point IMHO.  (while Giannis is a very tall guy, I don't consider him a 'big' because he plays much more like a SF).  Do any of the teams they're on really scare you where you don't think the C's as currently constructed could beat them (assuming everyone's healthy)?  personally, I strongly believe the C's would be all those teams in a series.

GSW had Draymond lol, but yeah good points. I'd argue that Gasol was sneaky good for the Raptors though, he was playing like a fringe All-Star for them during that title run. Btw is Giannis not a big? If guys like KG are considered bigs imo Giannis is in the same category.

[Fierce1]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

Being old doesn't mean you're bad, KG was a strong contender for DPOY in 2011 and wasn't much worse in 2012. And Horford is a star big man if you take your eyes off the box score for once to watch the games lol, or maybe even just look at a different family of stats (impact metrics!).

It absolutely befuddles me that you consider Parish to be a "tier 1" big man but not an old KG (who imo was miles better than prime Parish, especially for more talented teams) or late prime Horford.

Horford can't even average 8 rebounds per game with the Celtics.

Maybe if the Celts got Horford when he was 28 years old.
But Horford was on the decline when the Celts got him.

Celts paid Horford 28m per year and he can't even average 8 rebounds per game.

Here's the thing, I don't think the Celts will trade Smart or Hayward.
I'm only saying that if and only if the Celts will make a trade for a big man, it will be Smart who will get traded.

As I said, take your eyes off the All-Powerful box score slash line of points, rebounds and assists and you'll see how ludicrous your statements are. Btw Cowens had an MVP calibre peak lol, most bigs, including your "tier 1" Robert Lee Parish would never come close to touching that sort of peak.

And I just don't see Smart getting traded. As teams get better, players like Smart get exponentially more valuable due to their unique skillsets.

It's not ludicrous because Horford never led the Celts to the Finals even when the Celts reached the east finals twice with Horford.

The results back up my claim of Horford not being elite.

Just look at the Sixers now with Horford.

If you don't want to trade Smart then how about Drummond for Hayward and a draft pick?

Will that change your mind about the Celts having a big man problem?

[Somebody]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

How is Drummond a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter?

Drummond is a 2-time All-Star, an All-NBA 3rd teamer in 2016, and led the league in rebounding in 2016, 2018, and 2019.

Right now Drummond is once again leading the NBA in rebounds with 17.0 rebounds per game.

There's just no way Drummond is just a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter.

He's a marginal upgrade for what we need out of our centres at the moment. We need a centre who can protect the rim while being able to defend in space and have decent passing to keep our offence humming if his offence isn't top tier to make us build the offence around him. Drummond is a solid rim protector and isn't horrible defending in space, but Theis has been defending in a whole stratosphere above him so far this season. As for passing, Drummond isn't too shabby but he's not really much (if any) better than Theis.

Did you see the game against the Nets in Brooklyn?

Brad had to pull Theis out of the game because Jarrett Allen and DeAndre Jordan were abusing Theis.

It wasn't Theis' fault, Theis was just too small for both Jordan and Allen.

What you're not seeing is Drummond is big, like a smaller version of Shaq.

Guys like Embiid, Jordan, and Allen will not be able to do what they are doing to Theis.

Theis is excellent when the opposing team doesn't have a quality big man.

But when it's guys like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner, Theis will struggle.

We have to accept the fact that Theis is only 6-8.

I only saw our perimeter guys stink it up that cost us the game. Sure Theis isn't a good matchup for those high energy bigs, but let's not act like the teams that have those sort of bigs can beat us in a game of 5 on 5 basketball in a 7 game series. Also we have Kanter for the leviathans of the league, and the good teams with those sorts of big men (eg. Philly) can't really punish him enough to make him unplayable.

[Somebody]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

Being old doesn't mean you're bad, KG was a strong contender for DPOY in 2011 and wasn't much worse in 2012. And Horford is a star big man if you take your eyes off the box score for once to watch the games lol, or maybe even just look at a different family of stats (impact metrics!).

It absolutely befuddles me that you consider Parish to be a "tier 1" big man but not an old KG (who imo was miles better than prime Parish, especially for more talented teams) or late prime Horford.

Horford can't even average 8 rebounds per game with the Celtics.

Maybe if the Celts got Horford when he was 28 years old.
But Horford was on the decline when the Celts got him.

Celts paid Horford 28m per year and he can't even average 8 rebounds per game.

Here's the thing, I don't think the Celts will trade Smart or Hayward.
I'm only saying that if and only if the Celts will make a trade for a big man, it will be Smart who will get traded.

As I said, take your eyes off the All-Powerful box score slash line of points, rebounds and assists and you'll see how ludicrous your statements are. Btw Cowens had an MVP calibre peak lol, most bigs, including your "tier 1" Robert Lee Parish would never come close to touching that sort of peak.

And I just don't see Smart getting traded. As teams get better, players like Smart get exponentially more valuable due to their unique skillsets.

It's not ludicrous because Horford never led the Celts to the Finals even when the Celts reached the east finals twice with Horford.

The results back up my claim of Horford not being elite.

Just look at the Sixers now with Horford.

If you don't want to trade Smart then how about Drummond for Hayward and a draft pick?

Will that change your mind about the Celts having a big man problem?

Oh boy now we're moving the goalposts to narrative-driven arguments written in the All-Accurate tales of old. The results don't back your claim up because Horford played on teams nowhere as talented as the ones Parish played in, and non-box statistics that literally capture the value of a player by how he affects results depict Horford as an All-Star big man who fits your criteria of a "tier 1 big man" to a T.

And no way, Hayward is the ceiling raising piece for us.

The only way that'll change my mind about the Celtics upgrading the big man position is that KAT is available and Danny packs Tatum's bags for him to ship him to Minnesota.

[Fierce1]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

you've definitely gone down the rabbit hole in response to my initial post.  my point was that you continually harp on this topic over and over and over and over and over again.

in today's game it's not critical to have an all-star big man to win the title.  GSW didn't have one.  The Cheatles barely had one in Bosh who played more like a SF.  Toronto didn't have one - I like Ibaka but he's not an all-star level last year and big V isn't a "tier one" big man.

let the obsession go.  consider this, C's have a core 5 of wings and points that it'd be difficult if not impossible for any other team in the league to match up with.  Try another consideration: the "tier one" bigs right now in the league would be Embiid, KAT, Jokic and AD at this point IMHO.  (while Giannis is a very tall guy, I don't consider him a 'big' because he plays much more like a SF).  Do any of the teams they're on really scare you where you don't think the C's as currently constructed could beat them (assuming everyone's healthy)?  personally, I strongly believe the C's would be all those teams in a series.

You know what changed after 2018?

After GSW won back to back titles in 2018, the NBA implemented the new freedom of movement rule the following season.

Draymond Green couldn't manhandle, push, and shove the big men anymore because it will be a foul, according to the new freedom of movement rule.

Look at the resurgence of bigs last season, when the freedom of movement rule was implemented.

The bigs are relevant again because of the freedom of movement rule.

Before 2018-19, if you push the big man outside the paint, it wasn't a foul.
After the freedom of movement rule, it's now a foul.

Even Embiid's scoring went up from 22.9 ppg in 2018 to 27.5 ppg in 2019.

[mrceltics2013]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

How is Drummond a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter?

Drummond is a 2-time All-Star, an All-NBA 3rd teamer in 2016, and led the league in rebounding in 2016, 2018, and 2019.

Right now Drummond is once again leading the NBA in rebounds with 17.0 rebounds per game.

There's just no way Drummond is just a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter.

He's a marginal upgrade for what we need out of our centres at the moment. We need a centre who can protect the rim while being able to defend in space and have decent passing to keep our offence humming if his offence isn't top tier to make us build the offence around him. Drummond is a solid rim protector and isn't horrible defending in space, but Theis has been defending in a whole stratosphere above him so far this season. As for passing, Drummond isn't too shabby but he's not really much (if any) better than Theis.

Did you see the game against the Nets in Brooklyn?

Brad had to pull Theis out of the game because Jarrett Allen and DeAndre Jordan were abusing Theis.

It wasn't Theis' fault, Theis was just too small for both Jordan and Allen.

What you're not seeing is Drummond is big, like a smaller version of Shaq.

Guys like Embiid, Jordan, and Allen will not be able to do what they are doing to Theis.

Theis is excellent when the opposing team doesn't have a quality big man.

But when it's guys like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner, Theis will struggle.

We have to accept the fact that Theis is only 6-8.

I only saw our perimeter guys stink it up that cost us the game. Sure Theis isn't a good matchup for those high energy bigs, but let's not act like the teams that have those sort of bigs can beat us in a game of 5 on 5 basketball in a 7 game series. Also we have Kanter for the leviathans of the league, and the good teams with those sorts of big men (eg. Philly) can't really punish him enough to make him unplayable.

If your argument is that the Celtics don’t need a Center upgrade then you are really crazy. Jarrett Allen absolutely destroyed us!!!! Jokic also made us look like little kids. Yes the small ball has worked FOR NOW but there is absolutely no way we can win in the playoffs not getting boards and getting beat up down low lol.

[Fierce1]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

Being old doesn't mean you're bad, KG was a strong contender for DPOY in 2011 and wasn't much worse in 2012. And Horford is a star big man if you take your eyes off the box score for once to watch the games lol, or maybe even just look at a different family of stats (impact metrics!).

It absolutely befuddles me that you consider Parish to be a "tier 1" big man but not an old KG (who imo was miles better than prime Parish, especially for more talented teams) or late prime Horford.

Horford can't even average 8 rebounds per game with the Celtics.

Maybe if the Celts got Horford when he was 28 years old.
But Horford was on the decline when the Celts got him.

Celts paid Horford 28m per year and he can't even average 8 rebounds per game.

Here's the thing, I don't think the Celts will trade Smart or Hayward.
I'm only saying that if and only if the Celts will make a trade for a big man, it will be Smart who will get traded.

As I said, take your eyes off the All-Powerful box score slash line of points, rebounds and assists and you'll see how ludicrous your statements are. Btw Cowens had an MVP calibre peak lol, most bigs, including your "tier 1" Robert Lee Parish would never come close to touching that sort of peak.

And I just don't see Smart getting traded. As teams get better, players like Smart get exponentially more valuable due to their unique skillsets.

It's not ludicrous because Horford never led the Celts to the Finals even when the Celts reached the east finals twice with Horford.

The results back up my claim of Horford not being elite.

Just look at the Sixers now with Horford.

If you don't want to trade Smart then how about Drummond for Hayward and a draft pick?

Will that change your mind about the Celts having a big man problem?

Oh boy now we're moving the goalposts to narrative-driven arguments written in the All-Accurate tales of old. The results don't back your claim up because Horford played on teams nowhere as talented as the ones Parish played in, and non-box statistics that literally capture the value of a player by how he affects results depict Horford as an All-Star big man who fits your criteria of a "tier 1 big man" to a T.

And no way, Hayward is the ceiling raising piece for us.

The only way that'll change my mind about the Celtics upgrading the big man position is that KAT is available and Danny packs Tatum's bags for him to ship him to Minnesota.

Then there's no point in going on with this debate because it's KAT or bust for you.

I'll tell you this, it's ludicrous to believe the Wolves will prefer Tatum and Wiggins over KAT and Wiggins.

KAT to the Celts is just not realistic.

Another scenario I think that can happen is Ainge will go for a smaller move like Poirier and a draft pick for Poeltl.

That way the Celts will be able to keep Smart and Hayward.

[Somebody]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

How is Drummond a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter?

Drummond is a 2-time All-Star, an All-NBA 3rd teamer in 2016, and led the league in rebounding in 2016, 2018, and 2019.

Right now Drummond is once again leading the NBA in rebounds with 17.0 rebounds per game.

There's just no way Drummond is just a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter.

He's a marginal upgrade for what we need out of our centres at the moment. We need a centre who can protect the rim while being able to defend in space and have decent passing to keep our offence humming if his offence isn't top tier to make us build the offence around him. Drummond is a solid rim protector and isn't horrible defending in space, but Theis has been defending in a whole stratosphere above him so far this season. As for passing, Drummond isn't too shabby but he's not really much (if any) better than Theis.

Did you see the game against the Nets in Brooklyn?

Brad had to pull Theis out of the game because Jarrett Allen and DeAndre Jordan were abusing Theis.

It wasn't Theis' fault, Theis was just too small for both Jordan and Allen.

What you're not seeing is Drummond is big, like a smaller version of Shaq.

Guys like Embiid, Jordan, and Allen will not be able to do what they are doing to Theis.

Theis is excellent when the opposing team doesn't have a quality big man.

But when it's guys like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner, Theis will struggle.

We have to accept the fact that Theis is only 6-8.

I only saw our perimeter guys stink it up that cost us the game. Sure Theis isn't a good matchup for those high energy bigs, but let's not act like the teams that have those sort of bigs can beat us in a game of 5 on 5 basketball in a 7 game series. Also we have Kanter for the leviathans of the league, and the good teams with those sorts of big men (eg. Philly) can't really punish him enough to make him unplayable.

If your argument is that the Celtics don’t need a Center upgrade then you are really crazy. Jarrett Allen absolutely destroyed us!!!! Jokic also made us look like little kids. Yes the small ball has worked FOR NOW but there is absolutely no way we can win in the playoffs not getting boards and getting beat up down low lol.

I didn't say that we don't need a centre upgrade, I was arguing that very little upgrades would make sense for us. And we haven't been playing very small so far, we've been playing a true big in most of our lineups quite a lot.

[Somebody]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

Being old doesn't mean you're bad, KG was a strong contender for DPOY in 2011 and wasn't much worse in 2012. And Horford is a star big man if you take your eyes off the box score for once to watch the games lol, or maybe even just look at a different family of stats (impact metrics!).

It absolutely befuddles me that you consider Parish to be a "tier 1" big man but not an old KG (who imo was miles better than prime Parish, especially for more talented teams) or late prime Horford.

Horford can't even average 8 rebounds per game with the Celtics.

Maybe if the Celts got Horford when he was 28 years old.
But Horford was on the decline when the Celts got him.

Celts paid Horford 28m per year and he can't even average 8 rebounds per game.

Here's the thing, I don't think the Celts will trade Smart or Hayward.
I'm only saying that if and only if the Celts will make a trade for a big man, it will be Smart who will get traded.

As I said, take your eyes off the All-Powerful box score slash line of points, rebounds and assists and you'll see how ludicrous your statements are. Btw Cowens had an MVP calibre peak lol, most bigs, including your "tier 1" Robert Lee Parish would never come close to touching that sort of peak.

And I just don't see Smart getting traded. As teams get better, players like Smart get exponentially more valuable due to their unique skillsets.

It's not ludicrous because Horford never led the Celts to the Finals even when the Celts reached the east finals twice with Horford.

The results back up my claim of Horford not being elite.

Just look at the Sixers now with Horford.

If you don't want to trade Smart then how about Drummond for Hayward and a draft pick?

Will that change your mind about the Celts having a big man problem?

Oh boy now we're moving the goalposts to narrative-driven arguments written in the All-Accurate tales of old. The results don't back your claim up because Horford played on teams nowhere as talented as the ones Parish played in, and non-box statistics that literally capture the value of a player by how he affects results depict Horford as an All-Star big man who fits your criteria of a "tier 1 big man" to a T.

And no way, Hayward is the ceiling raising piece for us.

The only way that'll change my mind about the Celtics upgrading the big man position is that KAT is available and Danny packs Tatum's bags for him to ship him to Minnesota.

Then there's no point in going on with this debate because it's KAT or bust for you.

I'll tell you this, it's ludicrous to believe the Wolves will prefer Tatum and Wiggins over KAT and Wiggins.

KAT to the Celts is just not realistic.

Another scenario I think that can happen is Ainge will go for a smaller move like Poirier and a draft pick for Poeltl.

That way the Celts will be able to keep Smart and Hayward.

Then so be it, I'm fine rolling with this current group until a deal that makes sense arises. And the Poeltl the Turtle deal is the type I'm open to, if we're getting a decent upgrade (in terms of the outgoing pieces) for a reasonable price we should jump on such deals. My dream is that Toronto trades Gasol to the Cavs for TT and we snap Gasol up off waivers though

[Fierce1]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

How is Drummond a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter?

Drummond is a 2-time All-Star, an All-NBA 3rd teamer in 2016, and led the league in rebounding in 2016, 2018, and 2019.

Right now Drummond is once again leading the NBA in rebounds with 17.0 rebounds per game.

There's just no way Drummond is just a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter.

He's a marginal upgrade for what we need out of our centres at the moment. We need a centre who can protect the rim while being able to defend in space and have decent passing to keep our offence humming if his offence isn't top tier to make us build the offence around him. Drummond is a solid rim protector and isn't horrible defending in space, but Theis has been defending in a whole stratosphere above him so far this season. As for passing, Drummond isn't too shabby but he's not really much (if any) better than Theis.

Did you see the game against the Nets in Brooklyn?

Brad had to pull Theis out of the game because Jarrett Allen and DeAndre Jordan were abusing Theis.

It wasn't Theis' fault, Theis was just too small for both Jordan and Allen.

What you're not seeing is Drummond is big, like a smaller version of Shaq.

Guys like Embiid, Jordan, and Allen will not be able to do what they are doing to Theis.

Theis is excellent when the opposing team doesn't have a quality big man.

But when it's guys like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner, Theis will struggle.

We have to accept the fact that Theis is only 6-8.

I only saw our perimeter guys stink it up that cost us the game. Sure Theis isn't a good matchup for those high energy bigs, but let's not act like the teams that have those sort of bigs can beat us in a game of 5 on 5 basketball in a 7 game series. Also we have Kanter for the leviathans of the league, and the good teams with those sorts of big men (eg. Philly) can't really punish him enough to make him unplayable.

If your argument is that the Celtics don’t need a Center upgrade then you are really crazy. Jarrett Allen absolutely destroyed us!!!! Jokic also made us look like little kids. Yes the small ball has worked FOR NOW but there is absolutely no way we can win in the playoffs not getting boards and getting beat up down low lol.

I didn't say that we don't need a centre upgrade, I was arguing that very little upgrades would make sense for us. And we haven't been playing very small so far, we've been playing a true big in most of our lineups quite a lot.

Reason for that is Brown and Hayward have only played together in 4 games, 5 games if you count when Hayward got hurt against the Spurs.

What happens when everybody is healthy?

I'm sure CBS will have no choice but to use Smart as the Center in the last 5 minutes of the game.

[Somebody]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

How is Drummond a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter?

Drummond is a 2-time All-Star, an All-NBA 3rd teamer in 2016, and led the league in rebounding in 2016, 2018, and 2019.

Right now Drummond is once again leading the NBA in rebounds with 17.0 rebounds per game.

There's just no way Drummond is just a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter.

He's a marginal upgrade for what we need out of our centres at the moment. We need a centre who can protect the rim while being able to defend in space and have decent passing to keep our offence humming if his offence isn't top tier to make us build the offence around him. Drummond is a solid rim protector and isn't horrible defending in space, but Theis has been defending in a whole stratosphere above him so far this season. As for passing, Drummond isn't too shabby but he's not really much (if any) better than Theis.

Did you see the game against the Nets in Brooklyn?

Brad had to pull Theis out of the game because Jarrett Allen and DeAndre Jordan were abusing Theis.

It wasn't Theis' fault, Theis was just too small for both Jordan and Allen.

What you're not seeing is Drummond is big, like a smaller version of Shaq.

Guys like Embiid, Jordan, and Allen will not be able to do what they are doing to Theis.

Theis is excellent when the opposing team doesn't have a quality big man.

But when it's guys like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner, Theis will struggle.

We have to accept the fact that Theis is only 6-8.

I only saw our perimeter guys stink it up that cost us the game. Sure Theis isn't a good matchup for those high energy bigs, but let's not act like the teams that have those sort of bigs can beat us in a game of 5 on 5 basketball in a 7 game series. Also we have Kanter for the leviathans of the league, and the good teams with those sorts of big men (eg. Philly) can't really punish him enough to make him unplayable.

If your argument is that the Celtics don’t need a Center upgrade then you are really crazy. Jarrett Allen absolutely destroyed us!!!! Jokic also made us look like little kids. Yes the small ball has worked FOR NOW but there is absolutely no way we can win in the playoffs not getting boards and getting beat up down low lol.

I didn't say that we don't need a centre upgrade, I was arguing that very little upgrades would make sense for us. And we haven't been playing very small so far, we've been playing a true big in most of our lineups quite a lot.

Reason for that is Brown and Hayward have only played together in 4 games, 5 games if you count when Hayward got hurt against the Spurs.

What happens when everybody is healthy?

I'm sure CBS will have no choice but to use Smart as the Center in the last 5 minutes of the game.

It's actually a pretty good option to have, Smart can really frustrate certain types of bigs. Having more options never hurts, trading a good option in general for one that's only better in very specific circumstances and is mostly worse is (eg. Smart/Hayward for Drummond).

[Fierce1]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

Being old doesn't mean you're bad, KG was a strong contender for DPOY in 2011 and wasn't much worse in 2012. And Horford is a star big man if you take your eyes off the box score for once to watch the games lol, or maybe even just look at a different family of stats (impact metrics!).

It absolutely befuddles me that you consider Parish to be a "tier 1" big man but not an old KG (who imo was miles better than prime Parish, especially for more talented teams) or late prime Horford.

Horford can't even average 8 rebounds per game with the Celtics.

Maybe if the Celts got Horford when he was 28 years old.
But Horford was on the decline when the Celts got him.

Celts paid Horford 28m per year and he can't even average 8 rebounds per game.

Here's the thing, I don't think the Celts will trade Smart or Hayward.
I'm only saying that if and only if the Celts will make a trade for a big man, it will be Smart who will get traded.

As I said, take your eyes off the All-Powerful box score slash line of points, rebounds and assists and you'll see how ludicrous your statements are. Btw Cowens had an MVP calibre peak lol, most bigs, including your "tier 1" Robert Lee Parish would never come close to touching that sort of peak.

And I just don't see Smart getting traded. As teams get better, players like Smart get exponentially more valuable due to their unique skillsets.

It's not ludicrous because Horford never led the Celts to the Finals even when the Celts reached the east finals twice with Horford.

The results back up my claim of Horford not being elite.

Just look at the Sixers now with Horford.

If you don't want to trade Smart then how about Drummond for Hayward and a draft pick?

Will that change your mind about the Celts having a big man problem?

Oh boy now we're moving the goalposts to narrative-driven arguments written in the All-Accurate tales of old. The results don't back your claim up because Horford played on teams nowhere as talented as the ones Parish played in, and non-box statistics that literally capture the value of a player by how he affects results depict Horford as an All-Star big man who fits your criteria of a "tier 1 big man" to a T.

And no way, Hayward is the ceiling raising piece for us.

The only way that'll change my mind about the Celtics upgrading the big man position is that KAT is available and Danny packs Tatum's bags for him to ship him to Minnesota.

Then there's no point in going on with this debate because it's KAT or bust for you.

I'll tell you this, it's ludicrous to believe the Wolves will prefer Tatum and Wiggins over KAT and Wiggins.

KAT to the Celts is just not realistic.

Another scenario I think that can happen is Ainge will go for a smaller move like Poirier and a draft pick for Poeltl.

That way the Celts will be able to keep Smart and Hayward.

Then so be it, I'm fine rolling with this current group until a deal that makes sense arises. And the Poeltl the Turtle deal is the type I'm open to, if we're getting a decent upgrade (in terms of the outgoing pieces) for a reasonable price we should jump on such deals. My dream is that Toronto trades Gasol to the Cavs for TT and we snap Gasol up off waivers though

That's possible, but that would mean the trade deadline is over if it's buyout season.

If the Celts don't make any moves on or before the trade deadline and gamble on a scenario like that, Ainge would be making a huge mistake as the Celts are really in the hunt this season.