Would you give the franchise to the players?

[PhoSita]

This is something I've been thinking about as I look at the success the Nets have had in transitioning from "the team that traded all their picks to the Celtics" to "the team with two MVP candidates and a weirdo who is really good at dribbling that other players really respect for some reason." 

I have my doubts about the Nets winning it all as long as their defense is such a joke, but I think it's fair to assume they have a much better shot at it in the short term than the Celtics do.  That's a somewhat staggering turnaround from just a few years ago.

Among other things, one of the biggest things the Nets did, as far as I can tell, is basically hand over the keys to the franchise to Kyrie and KD.  I assume that it was a condition of Kyrie and KD choosing to sign there. 

I also assume that this is what Kyrie has wanted ever since he asked out of Cleveland, and that the Celtics' unwillingness to concede to that is at least part of why Kyrie left.

In a big way this all flows from LeBron, and of course the defending champion is the other major example of a team that has resurrected itself from a laughing stock to the toast of the league by basically letting the players and their agent(s) run the show.


Here's my question:

If giving up meaningful control of the franchise in a similar manner to the Nets and Lakers is what it would take for the Celtics to become one of the super elite teams and have a better shot at a title than 04 Pistons style one-off, are you on board with that? 

Push Danny out, fire Brad and hire a former-player coach who "manages personalities," defer to the main stars on the team when deciding who to sign, give big money contracts to the supporting guys that the stars like most / who are represented by the same agency, etc?

Would you do so understanding that inevitably in a handful of seasons when the franchise has exhausted its resources and clogged its cap, the star guys will go to a different team with fresh resources to burn, accepting that as the cost of doing business, as the Cavs did multiple times to appease LeBron?

[Moranis]

I don't think all of those things would necessarily need to happen for the player to have a lot more control.  I just think Boston hasn't had a player with that sort of cache since KG (and KG did sort of run things when he was here) and before that it was Bird (and that was just a different era).  Had Durant chosen Boston in 2016, I think he would have been given a lot more power than anyone else has had because Durant was (and still is) one of the handful of perennial MVP candidates that it takes to put together a multi-year legit contender.  Irving wasn't good enough (and is very eccentric) so he was never going to be handed that sort of power or influence. 

[PhoSita]

  Irving wasn't good enough (and is very eccentric) so he was never going to be handed that sort of power or influence.

True, but for whatever reason it seems like Kyrie was the locus that convinced Durant and then Harden to make their way to Brooklyn.  But kowtowing to a player like that seems like a bit of a Faustian bargain that is not a no-brainer decision from my perspective. 

I think it is worth asking whether this is even really an option for a team in a media market like Boston compared to a team in a place like LA or NY.

[freshinthehouse]

I don't think all of those things would necessarily need to happen for the player to have a lot more control.  I just think Boston hasn't had a player with that sort of cache since KG (and KG did sort of run things when he was here) and before that it was Bird (and that was just a different era).  Had Durant chosen Boston in 2016, I think he would have been given a lot more power than anyone else has had because Durant was (and still is) one of the handful of perennial MVP candidates that it takes to put together a multi-year legit contender.  Irving wasn't good enough (and is very eccentric) so he was never going to be handed that sort of power or influence.
[/quote

Think of how much different this franchise's fortunes would be if KG had decided to sign here.  All reports seem to indicate he pretty close to doing it as well.

[Moranis]

  Irving wasn't good enough (and is very eccentric) so he was never going to be handed that sort of power or influence.

True, but for whatever reason it seems like Kyrie was the locus that convinced Durant and then Harden to make their way to Brooklyn.  But kowtowing to a player like that seems like a bit of a Faustian bargain that is not a no-brainer decision from my perspective. 

I think it is worth asking whether this is even really an option for a team in a media market like Boston compared to a team in a place like LA or NY.

Of course.  Cleveland gave Lebron a fair amount of power and influence (at least the 2nd time).  It really has nothing to do with the market, it has to do with the player.  When you have a player that is good enough, you give that player more perks, more influence, more power, etc. than you otherwise would.  I mean Milwaukee gave up all of their draft capital for Jrue Holiday, because it meant keeping Giannis in town.  The Clippers basically sold their soul for Leonard.  If you have a guy worth it, you treat them differently. 

[PhoSita]

I think the role of player agents / player-run agencies in this is a dimension that was not there when KG was on the Celtics.

That's a big part of this question.  Sure, KG was the Big Ticket when he was in green and the team consulted him regarding any major moves.

At the same time, when the team made moves, the guy getting credit or flack was Danny Ainge.  The team had a coach who got a lot of attention / credit as well in Doc Rivers.  Doc and Danny were both there before KG showed up.  To some extent, I think the Celtics were lucky that KG didn't seem to have a disposition where he had a problem with the coach and the GM being a part of the narrative.  I think the current model of "centering your star" does not allow for that dynamic.

KG didn't have an agent / agency that was deeply involved in the management of the team, either.  There wasn't anything going on like the relationship the Lakers have with Klutch, or what the Nets have with CAA.

[NKY fan]

I would be ok with such circus for 3-4 years and then the stars leave. We have proven that we can clean up that type of mess quickly.
On the other hand a lot of celtics fans dream of a championship comprised of 15 drafted and or homegrown talents - beating all odds against them like in the sports movies ...because it feels right to them. ...
I put the odds of either of the 2 happening at 5% each.
I think if that were to happen (we see both materialize) the debates on here will be even more divided. Heck we have been halfway through on both options since 2015

[PhoSita]

I would be ok with such circus for 3-4 years and then the stars leave. We have proven that we can clean up that type of mess quickly.
On the other hand a lot of celtics fans dream of a championship comprised of 15 drafted and or homegrown talents - beating all odds against them like in the sports movies ...because it feels right to them. ...
I put the odds of either of the 2 happening at 5% each.
I think if that were to happen (we see both materialize) the debates on here will be even more divided. Heck we have been halfway through on both options since 2015

I guess part of why I'm asking this question is that although the Nets are set up to be really good for a while, they are also a very unlikeable team.  Of course, winning a lot of games tends to gloss over a team having the personality of a bag of sweaty gym clothes.  But it seems to me that a lot of things we take pride in about the Celts franchise would need to go out the window if you wanted the team to pay obeisance to one or more superstars in the manner I've mentioned in this thread.

I also have a feeling that in the coming years we're going to see the league shift more and more toward this type of model as "the way these things are done" for teams that are serious about being really good.

[jambr380]

I think any NBA team would 'deal' with having the biggest superstars sign with them or demanding they be traded there. BKN was average before Kyrie and KD teamed up there; then they traded picks for Harden. The Lakers opened up space for Lebron and then the only place AD would agree to be traded to was LA.

The way Ainge has had to build a team compared to the Nets or Lakers isn't really close and I doubt we'll ever have the opportunity to add multiple 1st ballot Hall of Famers all at once.

[Roy H.]

Which MVP level players are we getting, and do they have their own agency that will funnel players to us?

[liam]

I think any NBA team would 'deal' with having the biggest superstars sign with them or demanding they be traded there. BKN was average before Kyrie and KD teamed up there; then they traded picks for Harden. The Lakers opened up space for Lebron and then the only place AD would agree to be traded to was LA.

The way Ainge has had to build a team compared to the Nets or Lakers isn't really close and I doubt we'll ever have the opportunity to add multiple 1st ballot Hall of Famers all at once.

In a couple of years players will be knocking down the door to play with Brown and Tatum.

[Vermont Green]

What is happening is management and key players are partnering to achieve success.  It is not about giving the franchise to the player but rather just working together as a team.  For example, once you have a key player like Kevin Durant, he can make a big difference in recruiting other players.  A player with an appropriately sized ego should not have an issue with working with management and vice verse.  That is when you get the best results.  If the player is given or tries to exert too much influence, then at a point it becomes a negative.

I don't think for example that LeBron made the trade for Davis nor do I think there was much disagreement that he would be a good player to get.  I also have my doubts that LeBron goes in and demands that management get or get rid of specific players.  I would expect though that there is some conversation on which FAs to target and then LeBron "helps" as he is allowed to talk to players.  The GM might say hey LeBron, do you think player x wants to be a Laker or LeBron might pass along if he hears a player wants to be a Laker.  Even at that relatively modest level, the joint effort can make a big difference.

Players like LeBron and Durant understand the balance I believe.  Other players may try to take it too far or a highly egotistical GM may not think he needs to involve any of the players at all.  Danny was a player.  I suspect he engages with any of the players that want to be engaged and would put a player to work recruiting for the team where it could help.  But I don't think he would trade for Beal just because Tatum told him to.

[PhoSita]

Which MVP level players are we getting, and do they have their own agency that will funnel players to us?

Hard to predict which MVP caliber player might be the next to meet this description.  But I assume this trend is going to continue, and that teams like the Celtics will need to choose between holding to their long standing structures of team organization and offering a superstar virtual control of the franchise.

[PhoSita]

I think any NBA team would 'deal' with having the biggest superstars sign with them or demanding they be traded there. BKN was average before Kyrie and KD teamed up there; then they traded picks for Harden. The Lakers opened up space for Lebron and then the only place AD would agree to be traded to was LA.

The way Ainge has had to build a team compared to the Nets or Lakers isn't really close and I doubt we'll ever have the opportunity to add multiple 1st ballot Hall of Famers all at once.

In a couple of years players will be knocking down the door to play with Brown and Tatum.

In a couple years Brown will be one season and change from free agency.  Tatum will have just a couple years left on his deal. 

Could easily be Brown or Tatum who is angling to leave to go to a franchise willing to open things up to 2-3 guys who have talked behind the scenes about playing together and say "it's your team, mold it in your image."

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

I think any NBA team would 'deal' with having the biggest superstars sign with them or demanding they be traded there. BKN was average before Kyrie and KD teamed up there; then they traded picks for Harden. The Lakers opened up space for Lebron and then the only place AD would agree to be traded to was LA.

The way Ainge has had to build a team compared to the Nets or Lakers isn't really close and I doubt we'll ever have the opportunity to add multiple 1st ballot Hall of Famers all at once.

In a couple of years players will be knocking down the door to play with Brown and Tatum.

In a couple years Brown will be one season and change from free agency.  Tatum will have just a couple years left on his deal. 

Could easily be Brown or Tatum who is angling to leave to go to a franchise willing to open things up to 2-3 guys who have talked behind the scenes about playing together and say "it's your team, mold it in your image."

I think Tatum ends up a Laker so he can be like his hero Kobe.