I don't see the point. He isn't going to bump Boston up a tier this year and won't be around long enough to make a difference. The money and roster spot is better used elsewhere.
What other roster needs do you see besides ball handler point guard? PF, I guess? Isn’t this spot filled with small ball options of Tatum/Grant Williams and Horford swinging between C/PF?
Boston needs a PG, but Dragic makes no sense. Boston would still be a mid-tier playoff team and not a real contender with him, but now have used a bunch of money and a roster spot up to not get more than nominally better this year and not increase the title chances down the line at all and may in fact hurt them, by not taking a flyer somewhere else and potentially paying the tax.
Dragic is the kind of player that at this time could put a contender over the top or a very near contender into contending status. Like he would make perfect sense for the Clippers, Mavericks, Suns, etc. teams like that. He doesn't make sense for the Celtics who still are a couple of seasons away from the J's reaching their apex.
Your reply is very telling about your view of our chances to contend. I tend to disagree and think we are closer than many believe.
There is no reason to be telling, I've pretty consistently said I don't think Boston is a contender because Tatum and Brown aren't yet good enough. I do believe they could be, but they are still a couple of seasons away from their prime. Now maybe Tatum takes a massive leap and instead of being in the 15-20 range, gets up into the discussion as a top 5 player. If he does that, then sure Boston can contend as early as next season, I just think he is going to fall more in line with how players have historically developed, since thus far he has pretty much done that. He should have one more decent bump, which I'm hopeful gets him in the 10 range and then he should just slowly inch up after that. Brown probably doesn't have any more leaps in him, but also should still get better. I think he could be in the 20 range next year. But a top 10ish player and a top 20ish player generally isn't going to be a contender when the next best player is the 40's at best (which is the absolute best case for Smart or Horford).
I think Stevens recognizes this as well as he has finally said and is doing what the Celtics should have been doing for years i.e. building the team to get the most out of Tatum and Brown. That has been Ainge's biggest failure since he basically drafted Tatum and saw what he could be almost immediately. Boston should have been doing everything in its power to set Tatum up to succeed because Boston goes as Tatum goes and has since his 1st game as a rookie. Tatum is the one player that has driven Boston's success (or lack there of). Boston needs Tatum and it is about time the management of the team actually realizes that, understands it, and takes actual measures to unlock Tatum's full potential.
How is Atlanta in the ECF? The right bench moves can have Boston as good as the Hawks next year.
Played a terrible team, then luck and meltdowns, kudos to Atlanta for taking advantage of it.
Disagree. Atlanta is built well. They lost Bogdanovic, a big loss for them. Trae is not a top-10 player. They have a balanced roster with the right toughness and yes, some luck too. But when Stevens says he’s putting the right team around the Jays I don’t think he means age - I think he means, next season, a roster that is balanced with players that maximize their strengths and cover their weaknesses. Old or young. I don’t love Dragic but in a vacuum yeah he helps this team a lot, IMO. No more waiting. These guys can compete at the highest level. Put them in a position to win. Heck Tatum might be 2nd team all NBA next season. Maybe Brown is 3rd, or at least all star again. Strike while the iron is hot.
I'm not debating anything, only explaining the main factors of how a team like Atlanta is in the ECF where they don't belong. Knicks are terrible and Philly had a meltdown and become a dysfunctional mess at the right time for Atlanta to take advantage of it, they got lucky.
They have a nice team there overall, but no way is that an ECF team. Celtics have a better team as it is, just suffered a lot of injuries... so trying to be the next Atlanta is a bit of nonsense honestly. Being "as good as the Hawks next year" would be a huge disappointment and a setback for us.
Yeah, not all teams that make the Conference Finals are contenders. And some teams that lose in the 1st round are contenders. Injuries and luck can always change the outcome of a season.
I do think the Hawks are a very good team though, but they shouldn't have beaten the Sixers and aren't good enough to be considered a real contender yet. I mean how do the Sixers blow such massive leads (including at home) when they have the best player on the floor. That just shouldn't happen. The Hawks could certainly be a 2nd round playoff team going forward though with a shot at reaching true contender status if their young players reach their potential. Young is only going to get better and they have seemingly put the right players around him. They've got a lot of young highly drafted players as well in Young, Hunter, Reddish, Okongwu plus some other young guys like Huerter and Collins (in consecutive drafts they took those two at 19) and vets in their prime in Capela, Bogdanovic, and Gallinari (the latter is on the tail end of course). If all those top 10 picks continue to develop (and they keep Collins and Huerter), the Hawks could become a real and legit contender built around the amazing offense of Young.
