Is there a downside to running it back?

[Roy H.]

I am thrilled with our off-season, and I agree with the strategy so far.  Having everyone locked up next season -- and most guys beyond next season -- is excellent.

But, it there a counterargument?  Does lack of change in the locker room lead to complacency?  Sometimes adding outside players brings a jolt of excitement.

The best example I can think of is the off-season after the Red Sox title in 2018.  The Sox lost a couple of minor free agents and didn't add anybody, focusing on resigning their own free agents.  They went from 108 wins to 84 wins, and missed the playoffs.

They're very different sports, obviously.  But is there a risk in basketball that "if you're not improving, you're going backward"?

[BitterJim]

I am thrilled with our off-season, and I agree with the strategy so far.  Having everyone locked up next season -- and most guys beyond next season -- is excellent.

But, it there a counterargument?  Does lack of change in the locker room lead to complacency?  Sometimes adding outside players brings a jolt of excitement.

The best example I can think of is the off-season after the Red Sox title in 2018.  The Sox lost a couple of minor free agents and didn't add anybody, focusing on resigning their own free agents.  They went from 108 wins to 84 wins, and missed the playoffs.

They're very different sports, obviously.  But is there a risk in basketball that "if you're not improving, you're going backward"?

I don't think the 2018 Red Sox are a good comp. That team caught lightning in a bottle, they weren't favorites to win the world series before the season started. The Celtics, though, are the most talented team in the league. A similar dropoff would be very unexpected.

That said, there's definitely danger of getting complacent; I see a lot of talk about Jayson and Jaylen being able to play freer because they got the monkey off their back, but what if they just play less motivated instead? What if the energy guys off the bench feel like they already proved themselves and don't need to keep going at 110% now? I don't see any of that happening, but it's entirely possible. The only players on this year's team with something to prove are the rookies, end of bench guys, and I guess Porzingis. But only Porzingis will have any significant role on the team

[Kernewek]

The main downside, similar to what we saw happen to Denver this year, is that now that you've won - teams are going to start building their rosters to beat you and you are effectively locked to your roster with no way to make it better if it's proven that you can be beaten.

[Celtics2021]

I think there is a potential of a downside, and I think the Celtics are aware of that.  In his postseason presser, Brad talked a bit about that.  Firstly he said that this team earned the right to try to repeat as a group, which makes sense.  It seemed like a good TEAM, all year long, and so letting someone go or making a trade for the sake of getting ahead of a complacency that hasn?t been demonstrated isn?t the plan.  But he also said if a change needs to be made, he would do so during trade season.  So they get the first half of the year to prove it.

But he also talked about the team being more willing to experiment during the season to help create some different energy.  I don?t know exactly what that means, and I am not sure they exactly know what that means; that is probably part of their summer planning.  So the record might look complacent, or there might be some rotations that make us scratch our heads, and that could be part of trying to keep the energy up for a repeat run.

It?s tricky.  The Celtics were obviously the best team in the league last year, and were the best since at least the last team to repeat, so logically you want to keep as much of it together as is reasonable.  But the last team to repeat, the Warriors, dropped from 67 wins to 58 wins between titles 1 and 2, and did not come away with the top seed in the West, so there may be some bloodletting in these forums next year if the Celtics take a similar path.

[jambr380]

My only worry is that we typically overachieve in even years and underachieve in odd years. Last year wasn't necessarily overachieving since we had the best team, but we did win it all. There's no logical reason (the even/odd thing isn't logical of course) we shouldn't run it back. Even though we had a relatively easy path, we still basically ran through the playoffs without our 3rd best player.

No reason we shouldn't try to do it again, as most of our players (except Al and maybe Jrue) are firmly entering or in the middle of their primes. If for some reason it doesn't go well, we should be able to make trades since our players are all signed to fair, long term contracts.

Either way, it's just difficult to repeat as champions in the NBA, so I'm not going to freak out if it doesn't happen. But hopefully we don't get too complacent and finish like 5th in the East. We should still pretty easily finish 1st, even if it's not by 14 games.

[ozgod]

I am thrilled with our off-season, and I agree with the strategy so far.  Having everyone locked up next season -- and most guys beyond next season -- is excellent.

But, it there a counterargument?  Does lack of change in the locker room lead to complacency?  Sometimes adding outside players brings a jolt of excitement.

The best example I can think of is the off-season after the Red Sox title in 2018.  The Sox lost a couple of minor free agents and didn't add anybody, focusing on resigning their own free agents.  They went from 108 wins to 84 wins, and missed the playoffs.

They're very different sports, obviously.  But is there a risk in basketball that "if you're not improving, you're going backward"?

To me the risk is less about running it back, and more with "we've climbed Everest, we've reached the pinnacle, there's nothing more to achieve"...or "think of the effort, the sacrifices, we made to climb Everest, and now we're back at the bottom and looking up at that 29,032 feet of mountain and have to do it all over again". In our personal and professional lives I'm sure we've all strived to achieve things that were very hard to do, and when we finally did them, there's that feeling of satisfaction but maybe also a feeling of "thank goodness I'll never have to do that again".

It's quelling that feeling that to me will be Joe's biggest challenge for the team this season. For fans its easy because we're fans, we don't sacrifice anything, we just sit and cheer them on. To @Celtics2021's point, we fans can't figure out why they can't just put in the same, no even greater, effort than they already did, to try and beat teams that all got better. They're the ones that have to dig deep all over again. Not us sitting on our couches having a beer watching them. Not everyone is cut out for that, which is why it's so hard to repeat as a team or even an individual player in a sport...you have to really have that drive to prove you're the best, over and over again. Jordan had it, LeBum had it, Kobe, Steph...other players might think, "well I won one, my place in history is assured, if I don't win another one it's ok." That's Joe's No1 job is to guard against that.

Obviously being over the second apron our ability to do anything other than run it back is limited...we could have traded someone like-for-like salary wise, or taken in a couple of guys that added up to a single non-aggregated salary piece, that's really the extent of what we could have done. So we were pretty much locked into the same team for the most part. Thankfully we're locked into a good team that has jelled well and won the championship, as opposed to the Suns who are in the same salary cap and second apron situation as us but have a dysfunctional team and limited way to change it. It's making sure our guys maintain that drive and motivation through a long season to climb Everest all over again.

[Goldstar88]

The main downside, similar to what we saw happen to Denver this year, is that now that you've won - teams are going to start building their rosters to beat you and you are effectively locked to your roster with no way to make it better if it's proven that you can be beaten.

Denver didn?t run it back, though. They lost players in free agency after winning their championship.

[SHAQATTACK]

Not sure how much improvement is even possible without depleting depth .  Our nice bench players give us an advantage over many good teams and let us rest starting five core a lot against many teams.

I think bringing back guys like Hauser and Tillman may pay extra dividends. The confidence level and court time should show up immediately.

Bringing back the same team is less stress for the coach , Celtics families, players to have familiar faces greet you . 

I believe there are no more Irving type distractions in the locker room at the moment. Most of the guys are team players and quiet stars .  This bothers the media ?.they like controversy and fighting ?.it sells clicks

So, don?t throw a monkey wrench in a smooth running engine . Don?t bring in a Lakers diva to screw up the team.

[cman88]

complacency is all that is threatening this team. and injuries imo. stats wise this team is one of the best in NBA history. so it makes sense to run it back. this is the best chance at a repeat since those warriors teams who dominated.

one thing to keep in mind IMO is we never really saw the team at full strength with KP in the playoffs. we lucked out this year, but I think if you are facing say healthy knicks/sixers/bucks you need him healthy.

[jpotter33]

Agree about the risk of complacency.

One thing working in our favor, though, is a more competitive regular season in the East. If Philly and New York stay healthy, they can easily challenge us for the top seed in the East, and even Milwaukee could if they start gelling a little more.

That should help with some of the complacency that we saw start creeping in at the end of the season.

[bdm860]

Sure there's a potential downside of complacency, but there's also several potential upsides, a big one is that there's still doubters (easy playoff run due to injuries to other teams) and a lot of viable opponents they've yet to face.

When Golden State was dominating, they seemingly beat Houston and Cleveland every year.  They faced and took down all the superstars and potential threats: AD, Lillard, Harden, Durant/Westbrook, LeBron (everyone except a healthy Spurs with Kawhi). They beat every MVP, MVP candidate, and All-NBA 1st teamer (except Kawhi), while also having their own MVP and later added another MVP candidate on the team.  Easy to see how they could get complacent.

But the Celtics don't have an MVP, won't have the best player on the court, the Sixers and Bucks have retooled since the Celtics last beat them, the Celtics have never faced the Nuggets, Wolves, OKC, or new look Knicks in a 7 game series.  They haven't beaten a healthy Jokic/Murray Nuggets in 3 years (0-2 last year, and Murray missing 3 of 4 games in '22 and '23).

And repeating is hard, 6 years without a repeat champion.

Hopefully this all keeps them motivated next year.

(edit - see jpotter posted a similar thought as I was typing mine up)

[DefenseWinsChamps]

We were so far ahead of every other team this past year, that running it back makes the most sense.

However, it gives another year for teams to adjust their rosters, hone in their gameplans, and capitalize on our weaknesses.

It's the right move, but that doesn't mean that other teams won't do better against us this year.

[Kernewek]

The main downside, similar to what we saw happen to Denver this year, is that now that you've won - teams are going to start building their rosters to beat you and you are effectively locked to your roster with no way to make it better if it's proven that you can be beaten.

Denver didn?t run it back, though. They lost players in free agency after winning their championship.

The season they won, Denver's top 5 players in MPG were Jokic, KCP, Jamal Murray, Aaron Gordon, and Michael Porter Jr.

Last season, Denver's top 5 players in MPG were Jokic, KCP, Jamal Murray, Aaron Gordon, and Michael Porter Jr.

It's true Bruce Brown left, but it's also true that they happened to win more regular season games and significantly improved their D whilst playing largely the same style of championship-winning basketball that won them a ring the season before.

For all intents and purposes, I'd say they ran it back.

[BringToughnessBack]

I am thrilled with our off-season, and I agree with the strategy so far.  Having everyone locked up next season -- and most guys beyond next season -- is excellent.

But, it there a counterargument?  Does lack of change in the locker room lead to complacency?  Sometimes adding outside players brings a jolt of excitement.

The best example I can think of is the off-season after the Red Sox title in 2018.  The Sox lost a couple of minor free agents and didn't add anybody, focusing on resigning their own free agents.  They went from 108 wins to 84 wins, and missed the playoffs.

They're very different sports, obviously.  But is there a risk in basketball that "if you're not improving, you're going backward"?

Another year of Tatum and Brown improving plus the newer parts gelling even better tells me they will be improving as a team. I think it is awesome and I expect even better next year as the level of talent we face in the playoffs will push us to a whole other higher level.

[Celtics2021]

The main downside, similar to what we saw happen to Denver this year, is that now that you've won - teams are going to start building their rosters to beat you and you are effectively locked to your roster with no way to make it better if it's proven that you can be beaten.

Denver didn?t run it back, though. They lost players in free agency after winning their championship.

The season they won, Denver's top 5 players in MPG were Jokic, KCP, Jamal Murray, Aaron Gordon, and Michael Porter Jr.

Last season, Denver's top 5 players in MPG were Jokic, KCP, Jamal Murray, Aaron Gordon, and Michael Porter Jr.

It's true Bruce Brown left, but it's also true that they happened to win more regular season games and significantly improved their D whilst playing largely the same style of championship-winning basketball that won them a ring the season before.

For all intents and purposes, I'd say they ran it back.

Sure, but in total minutes Bruce Brown was third.  In the playoffs he was sixth, but closer to 5th in minutes than he was 7th (the also-departed Jeff Green), playing about 80% as many minutes as number 5 MPJ.  The sixth man in total playoff minutes this year was Christian Braun, who played fewer than half the minutes of number 5 KCP.  Bruce Brown was a significant loss from their title rotation that they were unable to replace internally.