Excellent article on the Celtics +Ainge's impending Dilemmas ( Long-Must read)

[steve]

No topline talent out there wants to come to Boston...the only player that I have knowledge of that WANTS to play with Rondo is Josh Smith, which I stated in an earlier post.

Unless we get a diamond in the draft, the climate in Boston is that no one wants to play here, which is where I have a disconnect with as far as today's superstars.

Sadly this is true. Back when Danny acquired KG everyone said there would be a stampede of top free agents wanting to play here. It never happened.

In fact, when was the last time the Celtics were able to sign an impact free agent? It's been a while.

When you spend your money on 3 stars you can't really get any impact free agents.  Nobody thought the c's would get impact free agents because it was impossible due to the salary cap.  Who did we miss out on during the last few years?  Reality is NO player is going to take a paycut to play for anyone... look at Miami, nobody took less to go there. 

The problem is Rondo isn't in that boy's club of nba stars.  As far as we know he has 1 friend in the NBA.

[European NBA fan]

Great read, but as several has stated a bit long
 
I don't agree that there are only two categories of teams (contenders and teams that try to be contenders). That is an oversimplification of 30 different point-of-views.

And I don't agree that you need a top ten player. Unless you look at potential in stead of perception. If a guy under the right circumstances can be top ten player, then that's enough, if you can provide those circumstances.

Before the 2007-2008 season, Garnett was not considered a top 10 player anymore (he and Pierce and were probably considered top 15 and Ray top 40). That was, however, not true, and KG ended up playing like an MVP or at least a top 3 (and Pierce like a top 10) player.

[lepoooo]

Great read, but as several has stated a bit long
 
I don't agree that there are only two categories of teams (contenders and teams that try to be contenders). That is an oversimplification of 30 different point-of-views.

And I don't agree that you need a top ten player. Unless you look at potential in stead of perception. If a guy under the right circumstances can be top ten player, then that's enough, if you can provide those circumstances.

Before the 2007-2008 season, Garnett was not considered a top 10 player anymore (he and Pierce and were probably considered top 15 and Ray top 40). That was, however, not true, and KG ended up playing like an MVP or at least a top 3 (and Pierce like a top 10) player.

KG no top 10 player in 2006-2007? Really?!

[European NBA fan]

Great read, but as several has stated a bit long
 
I don't agree that there are only two categories of teams (contenders and teams that try to be contenders). That is an oversimplification of 30 different point-of-views.

And I don't agree that you need a top ten player. Unless you look at potential in stead of perception. If a guy under the right circumstances can be top ten player, then that's enough, if you can provide those circumstances.

Before the 2007-2008 season, Garnett was not considered a top 10 player anymore (he and Pierce and were probably considered top 15 and Ray top 40). That was, however, not true, and KG ended up playing like an MVP or at least a top 3 (and Pierce like a top 10) player.

KG no top 10 player in 2006-2007? Really?!

Well not by all, at least. I tried to google some lists, and on one he was no. 8, but on others no. 12 or 13. And he was certainly not considered a top 3 player.

[lepoooo]

My 2 cents:

- On Josh Smith: I in the "avoid him at all cost" side. Maybe he is friend with DH but who cares? DH is not coming here and the thought of Rondo + Smith on the floor is scaring because the team would lack floor spacing badly.

- On FA not willing to sign in Boston: big FA wants to sign in team able to offer them money, a very good supporting cast, a good coach and a good ownership. Once the cap is cleared and Ainge strats to accumulate young and upcoming players through the draft and free agency, the team will end up filling all those conditions. DH won't sign in Boston next summer because the team will lack the strong supporting cast he is looking for. Rome didn't build itself in one day, you can't expect a team at the end of a cycle to rebuild on the fly and compete right away. It's gonna take time and you should all get used to it.

- On "blow it up vs stay the course": what does "stay the course" mean at this point anyway? Low lotery pick imho. If you can grab some assets without hurting the cap long-term and helping to get a higher pick, why would you not do it? If you are sentimental that's fine, but Danny will probably not be.

A more general note to all of the fans proposing crazy trade ideas/deals (KG for Stoud for example, or Pierce for Smith): the team is gonna SUCK for several seasons. Again, you should get used to it. The best idea now is not to hurt the rebuilding project by trying to retool on the fly and go for it one more time with the vets and some young blood, because this ball club is not gonna win a championship by just doing that. It will take a full rebuild work top to bottom and you don't want bad contrats/multiple years deals spent on "average stars/players".

[lepoooo]

Great read, but as several has stated a bit long
 
I don't agree that there are only two categories of teams (contenders and teams that try to be contenders). That is an oversimplification of 30 different point-of-views.

And I don't agree that you need a top ten player. Unless you look at potential in stead of perception. If a guy under the right circumstances can be top ten player, then that's enough, if you can provide those circumstances.

Before the 2007-2008 season, Garnett was not considered a top 10 player anymore (he and Pierce and were probably considered top 15 and Ray top 40). That was, however, not true, and KG ended up playing like an MVP or at least a top 3 (and Pierce like a top 10) player.

KG no top 10 player in 2006-2007? Really?!

Well not by all, at least. I tried to google some lists, and on one he was no. 8, but on others no. 12 or 13. And he was certainly not considered a top 3 player.

What lists?

KG has been the most dominant defensive force in the last 15 years. I don't think that you need to know anything more than that to rank him top 10. IMO 20/10 PF with the best defense in the game is top 10, period.

Btw, I also disagree with your comment on the stars. Yes you need a "top 10" player to win it all. The 2004 Pistons are an exception. "Top 10 doesn't actually means much. You have to look at top 10 as meaning "one of the very best players in the game", the kind that can take over a game on a consistent basis. The whole "ranking thing" (who's #1? #2) is really an American trait (from my European perspective at least).

When you look at the championship teams from the 60's Celtics to the Mavs 2011, they almost all had a star player. Whatever the "circumstances" (as you said), a star player is gonna bring it. You can't settle for guys like Josh Smith, OJ Mayo, Rudy Gay, Stoudemire. You need a player who is able to bring his game no matter what happens and no matter who you're playing.

I really share the writer post on that regard.

[GreenFaith1819]

I just think that as Boston fans we have to be open-minded as to some of the players out there. The "top" stars are avoiding Boston like the plague.

For me, I just don't find any player on the "avoid" list...sometimes all it takes is a change of scenery.

As much as been said about JS, he has a 94 defensive rtg....he may have room for improvement in certain areas, but he does have that (94).

He was 2nd team all defense in 09-10.

By contrast, Dwight has a 92 Drtg.

[GreenFaith1819]

I'm going to rattle off a list of players that I bet wouldn't mind coming to Boston. I'm not going to include salary issues or anything like that...players who I think would come here and not use the "Warm Climate" excuse:

These players may not be top 25 or 30 talent:

1. Al Jefferson. He started his career here.

2. Josh Smith - ties to Rondo.

3. ??

That is just sad...we may have to hire Dan Akroyd to get a top talent here:

[Q_FBE]

We got absolutely screwed in the off season. We lost out in the Chris Paul sweepstakes. We lost out inn David West. We failed to resign Delonte West. We had to take back Marquis Daniels and Sasha Pavlicic, both are completely worthless. Garnett was not prepared to play this season and is preparing to retire. Paul Pierce is injured. Jermaine O'Neal is worthless. Chris Wilcox has done nothing. Brandon Bass is playing like Brandon Hunter, great for 10 games and then he fades out.

Danny hit a once in a generation mega grand slam when he Transformed a 24 and 58 team that lost the Durant lottery into NBA champions and kept them relevant for four seasons. This it is painfully obvious that this team is clearly incapable of playing winning basketball and are on a very bad track. I don't see a lot of available trades for the each of the four players. The only recourse is to allow KG to retire, renounce JO, and have a salary slot open for a top 10 FA interested in playing for the Celtics.

Trading Paul Pierce is not the answer. He is still the face of our franchise.

I expect little cooperation from the rest of the league in the trade front so the best we can do appears to be a team on the Atlanta Hawks or Denver Nuggets Caliber that can get to the second round some years while we watch the Heat, the Clippers, Knicks, Lakers, Thunder, Blazers, Bulls, and Grizz fly over our heads.

Depressing. The players we have must start winning games soon.

[SHAQATTACK]

Be interesting to see if DA can do it again , make the Celtics a contender  or was assembling the BIG THREE just a pure accident of fate. With us slowly...  Sinking back to nothing for another 10-20 years

[GreenFaith1819]

Be interesting to see if DA can do it again , make the Celtics a contender  or was assembling the BIG THREE just a pure accident of fate. With us slowly...  Sinking back to nothing for another 10-20 years

I don't think it'll be that long (10-20 years)...

[SHAQATTACK]

Be interesting to see if DA can do it again , make the Celtics a contender  or was assembling the BIG THREE just a pure accident of fate. With us slowly...  Sinking back to nothing for another 10-20 years

I don't think it'll be that long (10-20 years)...

Lord I hope not, but ya know, I never thought it would be 2008 before we showed up with team capable of winning it all.

[GreenFaith1819]

The funny thing is that there are so many different issues playing out right now..

I just saw that Dwayne Wade is 30..I didn't know he was that old...I know he is still a great player, but HIS window of opportunity is just a few years...plus he seems to be getting banged up a lot here recently.

NY is having HUGE issues right now...not sure if Baron Davis will fix them or not.

For the article itself, I was a bit interested as to why the author included the Lakers as a solid contender...they have perhaps the best frontcourt, and perhaps the best overall player in the NBA, but they have not beaten the best teams out there this season, and they've only one once on the road so far.

LA's bench is weaker this year, too.

I have serious concerns that Kobe can keep up his pace.

As great a center as DH is, he STILL has problems with Perk...Perk limited him this year in their only game with OKC.

DRose is banged up...Boston isn't the only team with issues.

[European NBA fan]

Great read, but as several has stated a bit long
 
I don't agree that there are only two categories of teams (contenders and teams that try to be contenders). That is an oversimplification of 30 different point-of-views.

And I don't agree that you need a top ten player. Unless you look at potential in stead of perception. If a guy under the right circumstances can be top ten player, then that's enough, if you can provide those circumstances.

Before the 2007-2008 season, Garnett was not considered a top 10 player anymore (he and Pierce and were probably considered top 15 and Ray top 40). That was, however, not true, and KG ended up playing like an MVP or at least a top 3 (and Pierce like a top 10) player.

KG no top 10 player in 2006-2007? Really?!

Well not by all, at least. I tried to google some lists, and on one he was no. 8, but on others no. 12 or 13. And he was certainly not considered a top 3 player.

What lists?

KG has been the most dominant defensive force in the last 15 years. I don't think that you need to know anything more than that to rank him top 10. IMO 20/10 PF with the best defense in the game is top 10, period.

Btw, I also disagree with your comment on the stars. Yes you need a "top 10" player to win it all. The 2004 Pistons are an exception. "Top 10 doesn't actually means much. You have to look at top 10 as meaning "one of the very best players in the game", the kind that can take over a game on a consistent basis. The whole "ranking thing" (who's #1? #2) is really an American trait (from my European perspective at least).

When you look at the championship teams from the 60's Celtics to the Mavs 2011, they almost all had a star player. Whatever the "circumstances" (as you said), a star player is gonna bring it. You can't settle for guys like Josh Smith, OJ Mayo, Rudy Gay, Stoudemire. You need a player who is able to bring his game no matter what happens and no matter who you're playing.

I really share the writer post on that regard.

I'll admit, that it's a fair point to say that Garnett was considered a top 10 player by many in 2007. I read a few lists on blogs and jumped to conclusions. But my point is, really, that the change of circumstances made him an MVP candidate again.
You can look at the Bulls last year. Rose went from underdog to MVP, and the Bulls from also-rans to true contenders. And it was not only Rose taking a huge leap forward, it was also a new coach with a better system (again, circumstances).

What you are saying is not what the writer says, so I don't understand how you can agree:

There are two and only two states for an NBA franchise: you are either a legitimate contender or you are attempting to become a legitimate contender. The difference is night and day. The main criteria for assuming contender status is having a top-10 player on your roster, and ideally a top-5 player. Unless you have a top-10 player you are almost certainly not a legitimate contender. The teams that are the most serious contenders tend to be teams with two top-10 players, or one top-five player and two or three players who are in the top-30.

My point is that you can't list a group of ten players and say: You need one of these to be a contender. You have to look at potential in stead of perception. Who could under the right circumstances be our star player?

It opens up the field a lot, because you can include underrated players from playoff-teams, that are not quite there yet, young players who are in the wrong environment, and older players that have unused potential (like Z-Bo).

My personal favorites: Paul Millsap (is moving into star player territory this season), Javale McGee (who seems lost in a losing organization, but seems to have a lot of potential), Elton Brand (would be great to see him in his best shape again), Danilo Gallinari (though he is not as underrated as he used to be), Al Harrington (best 6th man so far this year and with a much improved attitude), Nicolas Batum (should have been made a starter this year), Tony Parker (if he should need a change of scenery after Timmy). Others: Gortat, Bargnani, Dejuan Blair.

[SHAQATTACK]

I'm betting the next PP , is going to be drafted form the college ranks , somebody we haven't a clue about.

We need some serious good college scouting , and ALOT of LUCK!!!!