I’d give them a B+. They have brought the Celtics back from the brink when the tear down started. Home grown guys that have been through a ton and had massive expectations heaped on them early. Been through three coaches, two GMs. Had guys like Kyrie, Hayward and Kemba not really be the additions everyone was hoping for.

They have won everything you can ask for but the title. Win that and it’s an A. They are still young with a lot of runway left.

B+

Need titles to be an A.

Short of titles, this is about as good as it gets. Sustaned winning. Opportunity to win a title most years. Several long playoff runs. Short of a title, this is as good as it gets.

I am trying to think through the argument that you can be an A grade without winning titles.

What examples in NBA History would you call an A grade era while falling short of winning titles?

So here are some of the examples I am thinking about:

(1) 90s Jazz

I love the Stockton and Karl Malone era. I have been watching a load of the old Jazz games that are on youtube over the last few months. They are still great to watch today. I'd give them an A despite not winning a title. Beautiful basketball.

(2) early 00s Kings

I find this one a bit challenging. Their era was brief due to Webber's injury. I don't know that I would give it an A if Webber had of stayed healthy and they still failed to win a title. That team was so good that failing to win a title would have been hard to take.

They did play the most beautiful basketball of that 90s/00s extreme defense era. Still, I would've felt short-changed if they had not of won a title. Only the Webber injury & short era stops me from feeling that way.

This is similar to how I would feel about Tatum / Jaylen. If it ended now, I would be okay. But if they keep going and never win, I would be irritated by it and not give them an A.

(3) 90s Pacers

I love watching Reggie Miller play. Rik Smits was fun too. The Davis boys. Mark Jackson. I also give them a benefit of "well, they were not quite good enough to win a title so I don't mind that they came up short". Their franchise player in Reggie wasn't as good as other franchise players. They had no real 2nd star. They were more like the loveable overachieving team that played pretty basketball.

I do not see Tatum / Jaylen era as comparable because they are good enough to win title(s). I wouldn't give them the same nod.

(4) 80s Bucks

I love the early 80s Bucks with Bob Lanier and Marques Johnson the most. They were awesome to watch. Mickey Johnson and Junior Bridgeman. Bill Winters. Sidney Moncrief.

They failed to win a title but they lost to great teams. The 80s Celtics and 76ers were monsters. I do not hold it against them. It is not that they choked. It is that they were excellent and so were their contemporaries.

I like the mid to late 80s Bucks as well with Terry Cummings. I love him. Jack Sikma and Paul Pressey. But I prefer the early 80s because of Lanier & Marques Johnson. They were my two favourite Bucks players from the 80s with Terry Cummings 3rd. Sikma was getting a bit older by the time he was in Milwaukee. I prefer his Seattle run.

I do not feel this is true for Tatum / Jaylen. The Miami Heat team they lost to twice in three years were not a great side. The Bucks team that Kyrie's team lost to were not a great side. The Warriors team they lost to in the Finals were not a great side.

Easy A.

I am trying to think through the argument that you can be an A grade without winning titles.

What examples in NBA History would you call an A grade era while falling short of winning titles?

I'll roll on with a few other examples

(5) 90's Knicks

A controversial one. Some folks cannot stand their style of play but I enjoyed it. There ere a lot of Knicks games on youtube. I still watch them today. They are an antidote to today's 3s and PnR heavy offenses.

The Knicks and failing to win a title is an interesting one. They made the Finals twice in 1994 and 1999. They had great matchups & rivalries with the Bulls, the Pacers and the Heat. It is the rivalries that I remember the most about this Knicks era. That I cherish the most.

I don't have the same feeling of rivalries in today's game. The Celtics met the Heat 3 times but they were better than Miami all 3 times and lost 2 of them. Well 4 this year as well. But even that one in the middle they won went 7 games and never should have done. It was an unsatisfying rivalry.

I think about the 90s Miami Heat and those matchups with the Knicks. They won the first one in 1997 largely due to suspensions. They likely would have lost otherwise. They played 2-3 more times and lost each one of them. That Heat era was unsatisfactory. Despite having Alonzo Mourning, Tim Hardaway and Jamal Mashburn. Despite having a perennial contender. They kept coming up short and losing in rivalries to the Knicks. That 1998 one in particular where Ewing was injured and they still lost. I don't know if I could give them an A. I would be more of a B. They had only one long postseason run in 1997.

Tatum / Jaylen reminds me a bit of Alonzo's Heat with the playoff disappointments. Although, the Tatum / Jaylen era has had more long postseason runs including a trip to the Finals. So not exactly the same.

(6) late 80s early 90s Blazers

Fun team but I don't love them. They had lots of failures under pressure. Unclutch moments. They had a great three year run from 1990, 1991 and 1992. Lost two Finals against DET and CHI and lost to Magic's Lakers in 1991. They were more talented than Magic's Lakers. That one hurt. They didn't give a great showing of themselves in the Finals in 1990 or 1992.

They remind me of the Jaylen / Tatum era. At least of the past with all the unclutch moments. Making things much harder than they needed to be at times. Also coming up short in the biggest games when it mattered the most.

Unlike Tatum / Jaylen, they only had a brief run. A three year stretch after adding Buck Williams. Maybe a fourth year in 1993. Then it was over. They got old quick. The longevity of Tatum / Jaylen gives them a much better chance at going further than Drexler's Blazers did.

(7) Barkley's Suns

Lot of 90s teams. MJ's victims.

The 1993 team was awesome. The 1994 and 1995 were a lot of fun too. I loved Danny Manning on that 1995 team. Kevin Johnson. Dan Majerle. Some of the most fun basketball in the league during the 90s.

They came up short in 1993 to MJ's Bulls. No shame there. They lost in 1994 and 1995 to Olajuwon's Rockets. It was only a brief era because injuries were catching up to them. To Majerle. To Barkley. The changes they made did not quite work. It was over fast.

The losses to Olajuwon were painful. I think both were 7 game series losses. They had the chance to knock them out. They only managed 2nd round appearances those years. So not a long run. A medium length playoff run. It felt "small" after the dream year of 1993 and the belief that they would win after Jordan left the league.

Still, they only ever lost to Title Winning sides in those 3 years. Top quality teams. Not like the Jays losing to Miami or Milwaukee. Then again, those Rockets teams were cinderalla type title winning teams. Not behemoths. They were beatable and Barkley couldn't get it done. I don't know how highly to rate that.

Overall though, I'd still give them an A. The era was a blast. It was short. If it had of been longer, if they'd been younger & healthier, and still failed to win. I would be harsher. The short era benefits them in my memory. I don't hold it against them as much that they came up short.

Edit: Thinking about more about the losses to Houston. Olajuwon's Rockets remind me some of Steph's Warriors that the Jays lost to. Then again, maybe I am being unfair. While not super-talented by comparisons to other title winners, Olajuwon's Rockets took some major scalps along the way. The 1994 team beat Barkley Suns in the 2nd round, Stockton and Malone in the WCF, and Ewing's Knicks in the Finals. The 1995 team beat Stockton and Malone in the WCR1, Barkley's Suns in the 2nd round, Rodman & D-Rob in the WCF & Penny and Shaq in the Finals. 8 playoff opponents. Only one won less than 50 games. The 1994 Blazers with 47 wins, their first round opponent. The other 7 all won 50+ games. 6 of them 55+ wins. Two 60+ wins. I don't think Steph's 2022 Warriors could have beaten those teams. 

They're doing as well as could be expected given their ages, but giving them an "incomplete" sort of goes against the spirit of the question. But if Jaylen and Jaylen retired today, they'd get a solid B+ for everything they've done so far. The only way to improve it to an A would be to win a ring, and the only way to get an A+ would be to win multiple.

Around a C+ to B.

Eastern Conference Finals appearances are great, but I am looking for NBA championships (note: plural) with both Jays and especially this core. We blew it in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022 and 2023. I expect nothing less of a championship this June.

Outside of 2023, how did we "blow it" in other years, do you think?

Last season was the first one in which I saw this team as not only a contender, but a favorite.  2022 was an excellent season in which we overachieved.