Author Topic: #17 or Durant?  (Read 27904 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #45 on: February 05, 2010, 04:34:07 PM »

Offline ManUp

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8511
  • Tommy Points: 285
  • Rondo doesn't believe in easy buckets...
Would've been a fun team to watch develop, but you gotta take the guaranteed chip.

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #46 on: February 05, 2010, 04:38:13 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 53023
  • Tommy Points: 2572
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #47 on: February 05, 2010, 04:49:11 PM »

Offline Birdbrain

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2939
  • Tommy Points: 235
  • 36 charges and counting..
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?


AJ isn't as good as we was when the C's traded him.  He's a walking major injury waiting to happen.
Little Fockers 1.5/10
Gulliver's Travels 1/10
Grown Ups -20/10
Tron Legacy 6.5/10

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #48 on: February 05, 2010, 04:54:18 PM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6500
  • Tommy Points: 385
I still go with what we have.  It's hard to say.  Durant is [dang] good, but how good is he going to be?  Will he just end up being a perennial All Star like say Dominique Wilkens that never gets his team even to the Conference Finals? 

I mean even if he's, say, Karl Malone good, if LeBron ends up being the Jordan of the next decade, it will all be for naught. 

Too many unknowns at this point to say that Durant is the right way to go. 

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #49 on: February 05, 2010, 04:56:01 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 53023
  • Tommy Points: 2572
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?


AJ isn't as good as we was when the C's traded him.  He's a walking major injury waiting to happen.
I disagree -- Al Jefferson was averaging close to 20 and 10 for half a season before the Celtics traded him. He was already playing at a near-All-Star level.

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #50 on: February 05, 2010, 05:07:04 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32807
  • Tommy Points: 1733
  • What a Pub Should Be
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?


AJ isn't as good as we was when the C's traded him.  He's a walking major injury waiting to happen.
I disagree -- Al Jefferson was averaging close to 20 and 10 for half a season before the Celtics traded him. He was already playing at a near-All-Star level.


An interesting "what if" here.

Imagine that Shira Springer's intial report on the KG trade was accurate and that Jefferson wasn't part of the deal. 

(Using some creative license here)


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #51 on: February 05, 2010, 05:09:57 PM »

Offline Birdbrain

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2939
  • Tommy Points: 235
  • 36 charges and counting..
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?


AJ isn't as good as we was when the C's traded him.  He's a walking major injury waiting to happen.
I disagree -- Al Jefferson was averaging close to 20 and 10 for half a season before the Celtics traded him. He was already playing at a near-All-Star level.


Agreed that was my point.  He's no better in fact worse than when we traded him.
Little Fockers 1.5/10
Gulliver's Travels 1/10
Grown Ups -20/10
Tron Legacy 6.5/10

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #52 on: February 05, 2010, 05:14:33 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
Its especially an interesting scenario since reportedly we could have gotten KG for just the #2 pick and expirings.

If we talk KG into coming and we have him and Big Al, but no Ray yet, what happens?

  We got KG without trading that pick. Rondo/Durant/PP/KG/Perk.

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #53 on: February 05, 2010, 05:14:37 PM »

Offline Roy Hobbs

  • In The Rafters
  • The Natural
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33333
  • Tommy Points: 6430
  • Doc could learn a thing or two from Norman Dale
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?

I'd say the Nets are right there, or close.   I don't predict good things for them in the immediate future, though.

Last year's Portland squad probably was, too.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Portland CrotoNats:  2009 CB Draft Champions

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #54 on: February 05, 2010, 05:18:49 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 53023
  • Tommy Points: 2572
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?


AJ isn't as good as we was when the C's traded him.  He's a walking major injury waiting to happen.
I disagree -- Al Jefferson was averaging close to 20 and 10 for half a season before the Celtics traded him. He was already playing at a near-All-Star level.


Agreed that was my point.  He's no better in fact worse than when we traded him.
Ah sorry, I misread. I think Al is playing at a comparable level as he was when with the Celtics. He's made some slight improvements but comparable.

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #55 on: February 05, 2010, 05:34:01 PM »

Offline xmuscularghandix

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7620
  • Tommy Points: 280
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?

I'd say the Nets are right there, or close.   I don't predict good things for them in the immediate future, though.

Last year's Portland squad probably was, too.

I agree with Portland, and i think they'll be a good team for a long time.

But something about Devin Harris rubs me the wrong way... i think he's gonna be a setback.

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #56 on: February 05, 2010, 05:37:05 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32807
  • Tommy Points: 1733
  • What a Pub Should Be
That 2007 Celtics team was loaded with young talent + trade assets.

It's very difficult to see that squad not becoming one of the top teams in the NBA in the near future.

Seriously???
Young talent = Al Jefferson + Rajon Rondo + Tony Allen + Kendrick Perkins + Delonte West + Ryan Gomes + Gerald Green + Sebastian Telfair

Trade Assets = 2007 high lottery pick + Theo Ratliff's big expiring contract

Established talent = Paul Pierce, an All-NBA level player

The Celtics had an incredibly bright future with that level of talent + flexibility to make moves.
Look at the league today -- How many developing teams can match that mix of acquired talent + trade assets?

I'd say the Nets are right there, or close.   I don't predict good things for them in the immediate future, though.

Last year's Portland squad probably was, too.

I agree with Portland, and i think they'll be a good team for a long time.

But something about Devin Harris rubs me the wrong way... i think he's gonna be a setback.

I think part of it will depend if they get Wall or not.  If they do, you have to guess they're going to try and move Harris.  His contract is reasonable enough and he's young enough that you should be able to get a solid return. 

If they don't get Wall and they're still able to entice a max guy or two, then you can gamble with Harris.

Now, if you don't get Wall and don't get a max guy FA, then you're pretty much screwed.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #57 on: February 05, 2010, 05:40:40 PM »

Offline Brickowski

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4207
  • Tommy Points: 423
I don't think the Nets have a snowball's chance in hell of attracting LeBron or any other good young free agents.  They might snag someone like Boozer who only cares about the money, but where will that get them?  Brook Lopez is a decent young center, but Harris is grossly overrated.  Delonte West (among many others) is a better player. If they get the first overall pick and luck into John Wall, that might make a difference, but then Harris becomes an overpaid albatross.

A more interesting question, really, is where the Celtics go from here.  Let's put aside the question of whether or not they trade Ray or go deep into the playoffs this year.  The fact remains that they will have an aging group of core players and will be drafting in the late 20's.

We all know the mistakes that were made after 1988.  How can the Celtics avoid repeating that unfortunate history?


Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #58 on: February 05, 2010, 06:08:58 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25610
  • Tommy Points: 2723
When I saw the thread title, my first thought was -- no brainer -- take #17.  After reading most of the posts I am even more convinced. 

Lakers, Celtics, Heat, Spurs, Pistons, Bulls, Rockets make up the winners of the last 19 champioships (I could go further to the same end).  Name the team led by a young core?  The only team you could make an argument that won with a young player as its best player would be Miami in 2006 -- but that's arguable since they happened to also have the most dominant center of the era.
Look at the years it's taken for Orlando, Cleveland, Atlanta to develop.  And those are the teams have gotten somewhere. Now look at the teams who've had young talent and who've had false starts and look pretty mediocre now --  Charlotte,OK, Bulls, Wiz, Portland....   It's REALLY hard to throw a team together around a good 19 year old and expect a championship.

I think it would be interesting and we'd be hopeful, but 5 years from now there's a good chance we'd still be waiting. 

I like #17 just the way it happened.
 


Re: #17 or Durant?
« Reply #59 on: February 05, 2010, 06:10:40 PM »

Offline dark_lord

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8808
  • Tommy Points: 1126
#17....no ifs, ands, or buts about it!