Is Bob Ryan Right?

[WedmanIsMyHero]

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2011/05/13/for_celtics_and_big_three_championship_window_almost_shut/

It's time to liquidate and start over. Mediocrity in the NBA is miserable.

[BballTim]

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2011/05/13/for_celtics_and_big_three_championship_window_almost_shut/

It's time to liquidate and start over. Mediocrity in the NBA is miserable.

  If mediocrity is miserable, what does that make putrid teams?

[WedmanIsMyHero]

Sources of optimism. You build in the NBA by getting really great players in the draft OR through trades/free agency. Even if you believe in Ainge, blowing it up would help give him the resources to try and create another championship team.

The slide to mediocrity, like with the old Big 3, is way worse than ripping the band-aid off and starting over. I think that would make banner 18 more likely.

And really, at the end of the day, any season that doesn't end in a championship is a failure, so whatever makes the next title more likely is better than the alternative.

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2011/05/13/for_celtics_and_big_three_championship_window_almost_shut/

It's time to liquidate and start over. Mediocrity in the NBA is miserable.

  If mediocrity is miserable, what does that make putrid teams?

[the_Bird]

The team's going to get pretty [dang] ****ty of its own accord in a couple of seasons, anyway.  Why rush it along?  Let's have another couple seasons of relevance while we can. 

There's always elements of luck at work.  If that Wade/Rondo tussle ended with Wade's arm getting dislocated instead, we could well still be playing.  Keep yourself in a position where if something "lucky" happens, you can take advantage.

To me, the real danger is what the Pistons did - giving terrible contracts to mediocre players.  That's not Danny's M.O., he's shown more willingness to let a guy walk (Posey) or trade them for (at least perceived) value than to overspend.  Hell, Joe Dumars would already have Jeff Green locked up on a five-year, $50M extension by now!

Let the team stay intact.  Add complementary pieces when you can, on favorable contracts.  Start trying to acquire trade assets - buy some draft picks, sign some younger guys using the exemptions.

You can get back to the pinnacle either by being absolutely horrid and getting a top-3 pick, or by churning, acquiring assets, developing the younger players you do have, and getting trade assets to make deals like those for KG and Ray.  I'd rather do the latter.  

[GreenEnvy]

Didn't read the article, but the there is a dig difference than favorites to win the title and mediocre. The C's will be a good team next year, regardless if they make any big moves.

The Hornets, Clippers, and Sixers are mediocre. The Spurs, Lakers, and Magic aren't.

[WedmanIsMyHero]

Mediocre = not a solid chance to win a championship.

Are you saying you'd rather have 5 years of the end of the old Big 3 when we could skip straight to the post-Big 3 period and move on and start to rebuild.

I totally agree with you about rebuilding through trades, assets, etc. But you need $$ to do that, and the Celtics don't have that unless they get rid of the Big 3.

Didn't read the article, but the there is a dig difference than favorites to win the title and mediocre. The C's will be a good team next year, regardless if they make any big moves.

The Hornets, Clippers, and Sixers are mediocre. The Spurs, Lakers, and Magic aren't.

[the_Bird]

I totally agree with you about rebuilding through trades, assets, etc. But you need $$ to do that, and the Celtics don't have that unless they get rid of the Big 3.

Not necessarily.  We had a pretty sizeable payroll when we made the KG and Ray trades.  Having room under the cap, of course, makes doing trades a lot easier, but large, expiring contracts can be used as well if you have the other "sweeteners" (draft picks and young, developing prospects).  We could make a trade for Chris Paul or Dwight Howard with our current payroll, if we had enough "sweeteners" for them.

I'd also say that with a couple of tweaks and some good luck on the health front (Rondo being 100% and JO being able to give us 25 minutes a night), we ought to be right back among the 5-6 best teams in the league next season.  That should put us right in the mix, if we get a couple of breaks.  If we luck out and can sign someone like Dalembert with the MLE (not that I think that's likely), we're in really good shape. 

[Roy H.]

By this logic, though, 25 or 26 teams per season should just tank for the lottery. 

We're close to a championship.  Maybe we're not the #1 contender, but crazy things can happen.  I mean, did anybody expect Dallas and OKC / Memphis to be the last three teams standing in the West?  What if the Mavericks had decided to "blow it up" and trade Dirk, because their window was closed?

Here's the thing about rebuilding:  it usually doesn't work.  When we tried it the first time, our ceiling was the second round of the playoffs, with no real hope to go any farther.  That's where we are now, except we had to endure years of misery and scores of losses to get there.  It took us 20 years to get back to having a real contender.

Look at the Bulls as another example:  their first attempt at failure was an utter failure.  15 years later, they're finally having some success.

So, in the case of the Celtics and Bulls, "rebuilding" took over a decade, and in each case required a near perfect storm (the Bulls winning the lottery, the Celtics being able to acquire two aging stars).  For the vast majority of teams, they never even get that lucky.

Since, objectively, it's pretty unlikely that our rebuilding effort ever yields a team that is as good as the one we have now, I just don't see what the hurry is to lose 55+ games again.

[the_Bird]

I think about Miami's recent drafts. 

Two fairly recent seasons they had a top-5 pick.

One time they walked away with Dwyane Wade, the other time they walked away with Michael Beasley.

Lose 55 games to take THAT chance?

[Q_FBE]

Well, I think we are screwed for next season..... Tell you what, lets lock em out and make everybody free agents going into the 2012-2013 season, contract 6 NBA teams, and we start over with the worst remaining team of the 24 getting the 1st pick (Lebron James par value 10 million a season, 2nd pick Dwayne Wade - par value 9.9 million a season, 3rd pick Derrick Rose par value 9.8 million a season........ 288. Glen Davis par value 300,000 season). No more guarenteed contracts and put a hard cap of 40 million per team (Each team must spend a minumum of 32 million).

This country is effectively bankrupt and cannot afford David Stern's inflated hype machine. Maybe we should expand to China, India, or where ever there is money to fund this rediculous league.  

[WedmanIsMyHero]

Maybe the issue is management. The Lakers have managed, with a few short declines, to compete consistently for championships from 1980-today. The Celtics haven't. That's because the Lakers management is better.

Maybe, then, we should be talking about who the best execs in the NBA are and how to get them to the Celtics.

Since if you think rebuilding doesn't work, that means you don't have confidence in management. When the Lakers do it, it works.

By this logic, though, 25 or 26 teams per season should just tank for the lottery. 

We're close to a championship.  Maybe we're not the #1 contender, but crazy things can happen.  I mean, did anybody expect Dallas and OKC / Memphis to be the last three teams standing in the West?  What if the Mavericks had decided to "blow it up" and trade Dirk, because their window was closed?

Here's the thing about rebuilding:  it usually doesn't work.  When we tried it the first time, our ceiling was the second round of the playoffs, with no real hope to go any farther.  That's where we are now, except we had to endure years of misery and scores of losses to get there.  It took us 20 years to get back to having a real contender.

Look at the Bulls as another example:  their first attempt at failure was an utter failure.  15 years later, they're finally having some success.

So, in the case of the Celtics and Bulls, "rebuilding" took over a decade, and in each case required a near perfect storm (the Bulls winning the lottery, the Celtics being able to acquire two aging stars).  For the vast majority of teams, they never even get that lucky.

Since, objectively, it's pretty unlikely that our rebuilding effort ever yields a team that is as good as the one we have now, I just don't see what the hurry is to lose 55+ games again.

[zerophase]

It's almost impossible to rebuild using the draft unless you get a 1st or 2nd overall pick-- or luck out and get a superstar like DWade at 5 in a strong draft. If we try to rebuild, it will be at least 10 years before we have another contender.

[the_Bird]

It's almost impossible to rebuild using the draft unless you get a 1st or 2nd overall pick-- or luck out and get a superstar like DWade at 5 in a strong draft. If we try to rebuild, it will be at least 10 years before we have another contender.

Yeah, I mean, think about the year *we* tanked; would have had our choice of Jeff Green or Yi Jianlian.

[zerophase]

Maybe the issue is management. The Lakers have managed, with a few short declines, to compete consistently for championships from 1980-today. The Celtics haven't. That's because the Lakers management is better.

Maybe, then, we should be talking about who the best execs in the NBA are and how to get them to the Celtics.

Since if you think rebuilding doesn't work, that means you don't have confidence in management. When the Lakers do it, it works.

By this logic, though, 25 or 26 teams per season should just tank for the lottery. 

We're close to a championship.  Maybe we're not the #1 contender, but crazy things can happen.  I mean, did anybody expect Dallas and OKC / Memphis to be the last three teams standing in the West?  What if the Mavericks had decided to "blow it up" and trade Dirk, because their window was closed?

Here's the thing about rebuilding:  it usually doesn't work.  When we tried it the first time, our ceiling was the second round of the playoffs, with no real hope to go any farther.  That's where we are now, except we had to endure years of misery and scores of losses to get there.  It took us 20 years to get back to having a real contender.

Look at the Bulls as another example:  their first attempt at failure was an utter failure.  15 years later, they're finally having some success.

So, in the case of the Celtics and Bulls, "rebuilding" took over a decade, and in each case required a near perfect storm (the Bulls winning the lottery, the Celtics being able to acquire two aging stars).  For the vast majority of teams, they never even get that lucky.

Since, objectively, it's pretty unlikely that our rebuilding effort ever yields a team that is as good as the one we have now, I just don't see what the hurry is to lose 55+ games again.

The Lakers just got lucky with Kobe... it's much easier to rebuild when you have a superstar on your team. Like Orlando-- it seems that they've rebuilt every season but yet still contend.

[Q_FBE]

I think about Miami's recent drafts. 

Two fairly recent seasons they had a top-5 pick.

One time they walked away with Dwyane Wade, the other time they walked away with Michael Beasley.

Lose 55 games to take THAT chance?

Micheal Beasley could hit the game winner at Staples Center against the Lakers in Game 82 to put Minnesota (KG as player-coach   ) in the playoffs as an 8 seed over the Fakers next season for all you know. The point is that there is a lot of young talent coming into the league so we are seeing the league change as the class of 2007 takes full effect.

It is entirely possible that we trade out the core next year and get back Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, a bunch of draft picks and keep Paul Pierce, Jeff Green, Delonte West, and Nenad Krstic, make the 8 seed and give My Hammy a 7 game treatment in round one next year.