This is a question for honest Celtics fans.

[Celtics4ever]

If Shaq had panned out we'd be calling him a genius though.  He didn't and we fell apart in the playoffs.  One thing about Ainge, I like, he isn't afraid of making a bold move.

[Celtkicks.com]

I personally like my scoring to come from any position other than point guard.  I realize we need to build for the future, but I'd ratherkeep rondo and focus on getting a big man.  I think we need to fill this season with role players and get what we can out of the big 3.  Let the contacts expire and rebuild in 2012.

[Celtics18]

Yes, that would be soft logic and is not what my reasoning was. My (unstated) reasoning is because only a short list of a few superstars are capable of winning a title in the NBA. KG was among those few 4 years ago. I knew Big Al would never be. Chris Paul is among those few right now. Rondo will never be.

That seems to be the opinion of a lot of people around here.  I'd be curious to know exactly who is on that short list, however.  I wonder if Dirk Nowitzki was really on that list for anybody until his team actually won an NBA championship. 

I'll give you my list for this season:
Lebron, Kobe, Wade, CP3, Howard, Durant, Dirk, Rose.  Duncan, KG, and Nash I think have fallen off that list for the first time in their career (or maybe a season or 2 ago).  Melo is probably the first player left off the list and a case could be argued for him.

Not to say that no other teams can win... but they won't be carried by one player, it will have to be a complete team effort (e.g. celtics) with several players putting on dominant performances.  But more often in the history of the NBA, titles are won by superstars carrying teams and not be balanced team efforts.

It's tough to answer that question honestly about Dirk since hindsight is so clear in my mind.  If I hadn't put him on it, I would clearly have been wrong.  And I could be wrong about this list too... but I feel safe saying there's a > 95% chance I'm right.

  That's pretty much how it works, you win a title and get onto the list.

Yes, if you do carry a team to a title, you should be on the list that is essentially defined by players who have done so.  But I don't think it's the only way to get on it as only 3 players on my list have won titles.  The NBA is in a position transitioning from the Kobe/Duncan era (9 combined titles in the last 13 years) to a new era of younger superstars who haven't yet won, but are sure to win many of the next 10. 

The balanced team game is highly under-rated.  Unfortunately, the league and it's fan and the common wisdom is stuck in Jordan's NBA of the '90s.  The truth is that these days balanced teams do win the NBA title.  You don't even have to go as far back as the 2008 Celtics.  Last year's championship admittedly got a great run out of their superstar last year leading up to the finals, but when the finals came and he hit a slump (which stars inevitably do), it took a team effort to win that series.  Heck, look at the '10 Lakers team that beat us (or don't if it's too painful.)  Kobe struggled mightily in that series and again it took a team effort to win the title.  The Spurs are another example of this.  Yes, Tim Duncan has been a superstar in this league, but I contend the reason that team won multiple titles is by playing a strong, defensive oriented team game. 

Teams win titles, not individuals.

[PosImpos]

Yes, that would be soft logic and is not what my reasoning was. My (unstated) reasoning is because only a short list of a few superstars are capable of winning a title in the NBA. KG was among those few 4 years ago. I knew Big Al would never be. Chris Paul is among those few right now. Rondo will never be.

That seems to be the opinion of a lot of people around here.  I'd be curious to know exactly who is on that short list, however.  I wonder if Dirk Nowitzki was really on that list for anybody until his team actually won an NBA championship.  

I'll give you my list for this season:
Lebron, Kobe, Wade, CP3, Howard, Durant, Dirk, Rose.  Duncan, KG, and Nash I think have fallen off that list for the first time in their career (or maybe a season or 2 ago).  Melo is probably the first player left off the list and a case could be argued for him.

Not to say that no other teams can win... but they won't be carried by one player, it will have to be a complete team effort (e.g. celtics) with several players putting on dominant performances.  But more often in the history of the NBA, titles are won by superstars carrying teams and not be balanced team efforts.

It's tough to answer that question honestly about Dirk since hindsight is so clear in my mind.  If I hadn't put him on it, I would clearly have been wrong.  And I could be wrong about this list too... but I feel safe saying there's a > 95% chance I'm right.

 That's pretty much how it works, you win a title and get onto the list.

Yes, if you do carry a team to a title, you should be on the list that is essentially defined by players who have done so.  But I don't think it's the only way to get on it as only 3 players on my list have won titles.  The NBA is in a position transitioning from the Kobe/Duncan era (9 combined titles in the last 13 years) to a new era of younger superstars who haven't yet won, but are sure to win many of the next 10.  

The balanced team game is highly under-rated.  Unfortunately, the league and it's fan and the common wisdom is stuck in Jordan's NBA of the '90s.  The truth is that these days balanced teams do win the NBA title.  You don't even have to go as far back as the 2008 Celtics.  Last year's championship admittedly got a great run out of their superstar last year leading up to the finals, but when the finals came and he hit a slump (which stars inevitably do), it took a team effort to win that series.  Heck, look at the '10 Lakers team that beat us (or don't if it's too painful.)  Kobe struggled mightily in that series and again it took a team effort to win the title.  The Spurs are another example of this.  Yes, Tim Duncan has been a superstar in this league, but I contend the reason that team won multiple titles is by playing a strong, defensive oriented team game.  

Teams win titles, not individuals.

this is true, but very rare is the team that wins a title without at least one player who is capable of dominating a series, even if they also struggle at times during the championship run, as dirk did this summer.  

really the only team i can think of is the 04 pistons.  even the '08 celtics had pierce, who was playing as well as anybody in the playoffs that spring.  you could make an argument that the pistons at least had a player that was transcendent, a superstar on defense -- 4 time DPOY ben wallace, who should one day make the hall of fame basically for his defense alone.

[Celtics18]

Yes, that would be soft logic and is not what my reasoning was. My (unstated) reasoning is because only a short list of a few superstars are capable of winning a title in the NBA. KG was among those few 4 years ago. I knew Big Al would never be. Chris Paul is among those few right now. Rondo will never be.

That seems to be the opinion of a lot of people around here.  I'd be curious to know exactly who is on that short list, however.  I wonder if Dirk Nowitzki was really on that list for anybody until his team actually won an NBA championship.  

I'll give you my list for this season:
Lebron, Kobe, Wade, CP3, Howard, Durant, Dirk, Rose.  Duncan, KG, and Nash I think have fallen off that list for the first time in their career (or maybe a season or 2 ago).  Melo is probably the first player left off the list and a case could be argued for him.

Not to say that no other teams can win... but they won't be carried by one player, it will have to be a complete team effort (e.g. celtics) with several players putting on dominant performances.  But more often in the history of the NBA, titles are won by superstars carrying teams and not be balanced team efforts.

It's tough to answer that question honestly about Dirk since hindsight is so clear in my mind.  If I hadn't put him on it, I would clearly have been wrong.  And I could be wrong about this list too... but I feel safe saying there's a > 95% chance I'm right.

 That's pretty much how it works, you win a title and get onto the list.

Yes, if you do carry a team to a title, you should be on the list that is essentially defined by players who have done so.  But I don't think it's the only way to get on it as only 3 players on my list have won titles.  The NBA is in a position transitioning from the Kobe/Duncan era (9 combined titles in the last 13 years) to a new era of younger superstars who haven't yet won, but are sure to win many of the next 10.  

The balanced team game is highly under-rated.  Unfortunately, the league and it's fan and the common wisdom is stuck in Jordan's NBA of the '90s.  The truth is that these days balanced teams do win the NBA title.  You don't even have to go as far back as the 2008 Celtics.  Last year's championship admittedly got a great run out of their superstar last year leading up to the finals, but when the finals came and he hit a slump (which stars inevitably do), it took a team effort to win that series.  Heck, look at the '10 Lakers team that beat us (or don't if it's too painful.)  Kobe struggled mightily in that series and again it took a team effort to win the title.  The Spurs are another example of this.  Yes, Tim Duncan has been a superstar in this league, but I contend the reason that team won multiple titles is by playing a strong, defensive oriented team game.  

Teams win titles, not individuals.

this is true, but very rare is the team that wins a title without at least one player who is capable of dominating a series, even if they also struggle at times during the championship run, as dirk did this summer.  

really the only team i can think of is the 04 pistons.  even the '08 celtics had pierce, who was playing as well as anybody in the playoffs that spring.  you could make an argument that the pistons at least had a player that was transcendent, a superstar on defense -- 4 time DPOY ben wallace, who should one day make the hall of fame basically for his defense alone.

I'll give you that, but I would say that we have at least 3 guys on our team who are capable of taking over a series, like, for example, Rondo did in the 2010 Eastern Conference semis against Lebron's favored Cavaliers, or like he did in '09 against Derrick Rose's Bulls.  

[BASS_THUMPER]

If Shaq had panned out we'd be calling him a genius though.  He didn't and we fell apart in the playoffs.  One thing about Ainge, I like, he isn't afraid of making a bold move.

tp!

in the beginning people was lovin danny for bringin shaq

shaq was givin a solid 5 to 8mins a qt

when shaq went down...people turned they back on  danny  with a quickness

but a healthy shaq woulda got us pass Miami so i guess u gotta channel ya disappointment on sumone..

[action781]

Yes, that would be soft logic and is not what my reasoning was. My (unstated) reasoning is because only a short list of a few superstars are capable of winning a title in the NBA. KG was among those few 4 years ago. I knew Big Al would never be. Chris Paul is among those few right now. Rondo will never be.

That seems to be the opinion of a lot of people around here.  I'd be curious to know exactly who is on that short list, however.  I wonder if Dirk Nowitzki was really on that list for anybody until his team actually won an NBA championship.  

I'll give you my list for this season:
Lebron, Kobe, Wade, CP3, Howard, Durant, Dirk, Rose.  Duncan, KG, and Nash I think have fallen off that list for the first time in their career (or maybe a season or 2 ago).  Melo is probably the first player left off the list and a case could be argued for him.

Not to say that no other teams can win... but they won't be carried by one player, it will have to be a complete team effort (e.g. celtics) with several players putting on dominant performances.  But more often in the history of the NBA, titles are won by superstars carrying teams and not be balanced team efforts.

It's tough to answer that question honestly about Dirk since hindsight is so clear in my mind.  If I hadn't put him on it, I would clearly have been wrong.  And I could be wrong about this list too... but I feel safe saying there's a > 95% chance I'm right.

 That's pretty much how it works, you win a title and get onto the list.

Yes, if you do carry a team to a title, you should be on the list that is essentially defined by players who have done so.  But I don't think it's the only way to get on it as only 3 players on my list have won titles.  The NBA is in a position transitioning from the Kobe/Duncan era (9 combined titles in the last 13 years) to a new era of younger superstars who haven't yet won, but are sure to win many of the next 10.  

The balanced team game is highly under-rated.  Unfortunately, the league and it's fan and the common wisdom is stuck in Jordan's NBA of the '90s.  The truth is that these days balanced teams do win the NBA title.  You don't even have to go as far back as the 2008 Celtics.  Last year's championship admittedly got a great run out of their superstar last year leading up to the finals, but when the finals came and he hit a slump (which stars inevitably do), it took a team effort to win that series.  Heck, look at the '10 Lakers team that beat us (or don't if it's too painful.)  Kobe struggled mightily in that series and again it took a team effort to win the title.  The Spurs are another example of this.  Yes, Tim Duncan has been a superstar in this league, but I contend the reason that team won multiple titles is by playing a strong, defensive oriented team game.  

Teams win titles, not individuals.

this is true, but very rare is the team that wins a title without at least one player who is capable of dominating a series, even if they also struggle at times during the championship run, as dirk did this summer.  

really the only team i can think of is the 04 pistons.  even the '08 celtics had pierce, who was playing as well as anybody in the playoffs that spring.  you could make an argument that the pistons at least had a player that was transcendent, a superstar on defense -- 4 time DPOY ben wallace, who should one day make the hall of fame basically for his defense alone.

I'll give you that, but I would say that we have at least 3 guys on our team who are capable of taking over a series, like, for example, Rondo did in the 2010 Eastern Conference semis against Lebron's favored Cavaliers, or like he did in '09 against Derrick Rose's Bulls.  

I wouldn't call Ben a transcendent player, but every team except '04 Pistons that has won at title since '92 'has had a transcendent player on it.  I actually consider KG the transcendent player of '08, not Pierce.

You say teams win titles, not individuals.  Yes, that's true.  But it's also true that all these teams happen to have at least 1 transcendent player on them.

[Celtics18]

I would say that Paul Pierce, Rajon Rondo, Kevin Garnett, and Ray Allen are all "transcendent" players. 

So, I say to those who claim you can't win without a transcendent player, luckily we have four of them.

[Celtics4ever]

I'd say there were transcendent.  Nowadays they are some days and some days they are simply good players.  It's hard to beat old age and these guys are getting up there.  I wish I was wrong on this one but my gut tells me I am not.

[celtics2]

Danny blew up the team during the season, failed gamble, now history..

[GreenEnvy]

Yes i wanted it.

While i realized Al Jefferson was something special (and young), in my mind i viewed KG as a Kareem Abdul-Jabbar type talent... a player that comes along once every 20-25 years.

Exactly.

I was so stoked when the trade happened. Pierce is my favorite player, so although we wouldn't get to see Rondo/Al/Perk hit their primes together, I knew we were about to witness something special with The Big Three.

[celticinorlando]

lets face it...the Cs are a middle of the Eastern conf. team now. They have little or no hope of landing anyone that can make an impact this season...the roster will be filled with guys off the trash heap...when names like leon powe and marquis daniels are being mentioned as guys they might bring in to play important minutes..things look bleak this season. Seems like the have no $ to bring in guys of value. Really..look at the list...all they are going after are guys injured in the past or just bodies...this doesn't help when we have a center who will be injured at some point this season

they need to do something going forward...resigning green would be good...s and t baby..would be another good move...and if you have to move rondo, allen, KG...do it. it is time to look to the future. I like Johnson and think he can be a good player for boston IF they actually give him the minutes to play

[Assassin70]

Hey I just want the season to start.  If we win or lose I will still be here.