10 Things Celtics Should Do in 2013-2014

[PhoSita]

8. Feature Jeff Green as the top offensive option and hope he produces with reasonable efficiency.  This will result in a lot of losses but that's okay.

Ugh, I really hope I don't have to watch happen in the next few years.

I have very little confidence in Jeff Green's ability to be a top scoring option. I would be inclined to dump J.Green too if entering a rebuilding mode. I would rather have the cap space back than have his contract on the books.

That's the entire idea.  I would want to "feature" Jeff Green with the hopes that he averages 18-20 points a night and then some team will think he can be a centerpiece for them and give us something of value for him. 

[Monkhouse]

I still believe that KG and Pierce can be intregal parts to winning a championship and being a successfull team, but it HAS to come as more of a limited role. The question is, can that limited role be on this team? If it can, that means one or both need to be coming off the bench to anchor that core.

But to make that happen, we need to fill out the starting core with impact players. Do we have the money to do that in the offseason? Not really. Unless there is some way to unload Terry (Biggest offseason dissapointment) or somehow mess around with Pierce's money to have some of it come off the books. I still dont believe you can restructure contracts in the NBA, unless I missed something.

The one obvious offseason aquisition would be Josh Smith. Its no secret the guy wants to be here, he's best buddies with Rondo, and while I'm not a huge fan of the current Smith product, II think the kid has legit NBA talent that just hasnt been fully realized yet. If somehow we can get that done, it makes a pretty big impact on our roster, allowing us to shift pieces.

Rondo/Barbosa/Williams
Lee/signing/Pierce/Barbosa
Green/Pierce
Smith/KG/Green
Signing/KG/Randolph

Obviously this hinges on Terry being gone, and the roster filling out a bit, but I think that could be a possible lineup next year. With either KG starting at center and playing limited minutes there or coming off the bench and playing both minutes at the backup 4 and 5.

Should be an interesting offseason, personally, I think KG definitely comes back because his injuries are something that could be cured during offseason rest, and the guy loves playing basketball and loves playing for Doc and with Rondo.

TP for saying Josh Smith. I honestly still don't understand why people hate Josh Smith. Josh Smith is one of my favorite players to watch, his explosiveness, and his defensive intensity is just too much not to notice.

Unfortunately, unless we can salary dump Terry, get rid of Lee/Bass, with the addition of Paul Pierce taking a pay cut, or KG retiring.

The ability to afford Josh Smith would be impossible. Like I stated numerous times before, Josh Smith WOULD take a pay cut especially if it meant coming to the Celtics. Who else talks highly about a team who's swept, and has been their playoff rivals? He says he loves Boston, and loves the fans  . Not to mention him and Rondo are best friends, and you could tell from a recent interview that the injury to Rondo has definitely affected him.

I still think if Bass can produce well in the playoffs, teams might be interested in maybe slotting him somewhere else. He definitely isn't a center though.

With Josh Smith at PF, and Jeff Green at SF, we have a pretty strong defensive/slashing duo.

35.9 MPG .457% FG .326% 3-PT FG .500% FT 8.7 RPG 4.3 APG 1.2 SPG 2.0 BPG 17.9PPG

I don't know about you, but that's definitely allstar numbers... Besides the terrible 3 point shots, if Josh Smith just drove, or try to get shots in the paint as opposed to taking terrible shots. Something Doc would certainly refuse to accept, and would bench him if he kept doing it.

And if we could somehow grab Perkins for a cheaper price too. I know he'd be willing to come back for a less paycut, if we gave him a nice and long contract. OKC fans are booing him, and he hasn't been performing too well in the regular season. Plus I've heard so many rumors of him being amnestied.

I honestly don't see Lee, or Terry coming back after how terrible they have performed this year.

Put AB back on SG, where he can do what he does best. Cut. One of the best defenders for his size, and at cutting the lane at the perfect time to catch the ball and go for the easy bucket. Let Terrence Williams get the playing time, and let him be a back up pointguard. I firmly believe he can help the team out enormously, and at a very cheap cost. Not to mention even though lottery picks have been busts before, you can tell T-Will is driven and motivated. Him being in the Celtics will be a good experience for his career.

Doc might want to keep Crawford, as he still has a long way to go.

[PhoSita]

My question is, why do you have to get rid of Garnett and Pierce, then? How are you going to spend the money you save? You want to bid on some modestly priced young free agents so that you can keep cap flexibility and have some upside... but keeping Garnett and Pierce around next year will give you the same cap flexibility in 2014.

If we decide to blow it up next season, there is a chance that Pierce and Garnett will have trade value. No sense in pushing them out the door to expedite the blow-up.

Keeping Pierce and Garnett doesn't give the team nearly as much flexibility for a couple of reasons. 

First, holding onto Pierce and Garnett means that the teams' short term priority is still to win as many games as possible.  This means that Pierce and Garnett are getting minutes that younger players would otherwise get, and it means the Celtics aren't focusing on getting a good draft pick.  Even old and hobbled, Garnett and Pierce is pretty much a guarantee of making the playoffs in this incredibly weak Eastern Conference.  But what's the best we can hope for next season?  Win 45 games and don't get swept in the first round?  That's not exciting for me.  At all.

Second, I really don't think Pierce and Garnett will have much trade value moving forward.  If there was ever a time to trade Pierce and / or Garnett, it would have been this season.  It didn't happen this season, so I don't think we'll ever see it happen.


To all of those saying "why do you want to be terrible for the next 10 years?  why start completely over?" I want to be clear.  I don't think that flat out tanking for rebuild is always the best thing to do.  But for certain drafts, when there's a lot of talent at the top (e.g. 2003, 2007), it's worth it. 

Also, I'm not saying I want to see the team get rid of everybody for the sake of it.  Rather, what I'm advocating here is that the team looks to maximize the trade value of the assets they have on the roster right now and then look to get the most they can for them.  The reason I feel that way is that I don't think the team currently has on the roster any sure-fire long term building blocks.  Rondo is a very nice player, but I just don't see him as a guy you build around.  Bradley, Sullinger, and Green are role players who we should be willing to trade if the right opportunity comes along. 

In the NBA when it comes to rebuilding I think you have to see every player on your team as a trade asset until you finally acquire a player who is or can become that superstar, top-10 player night in and night out.  Then your goal becomes to build the team around that player.

The Celtics shouldn't outright tank for the next however many years and become the Kings.  That's not what I'm saying.  But tanking strategically, at the right times and for the right reasons, is not bad management.  There's also a difference between trying to completely bottom out and simply focusing on acquiring assets and developing them rather than trying to win as many games as possible.  The Celtics are at a stage right now, in my opinion, where asset acquisition should be their focus, and that's going to require at least one or two seasons of being really bad.

[WeMadeIt17]

I think Danny is going to dangle some guys out their this off season like Lee AB and carwford and some picks. As he should we have a log jam at SG now. Everything hinges on what KG does as usual though. I do have a feeling KG retires after this season. If that is the case Paul might as well. So there really is no telling what happens till KG makes a move. I will say Danny has his work cut out for him though if KG decides to stay.

That means he still has his no trade clause. Pierce would want to stay. Rondo is still hurt and would be your best trade asset to move in order to get talent around Pierce and KG for the 3rd last run lol and a bunch or role players that didn't do anything this season.

[BballTim]

My question is, why do you have to get rid of Garnett and Pierce, then? How are you going to spend the money you save? You want to bid on some modestly priced young free agents so that you can keep cap flexibility and have some upside... but keeping Garnett and Pierce around next year will give you the same cap flexibility in 2014.

If we decide to blow it up next season, there is a chance that Pierce and Garnett will have trade value. No sense in pushing them out the door to expedite the blow-up.

Keeping Pierce and Garnett doesn't give the team nearly as much flexibility for a couple of reasons. 

First, holding onto Pierce and Garnett means that the teams' short term priority is still to win as many games as possible.  This means that Pierce and Garnett are getting minutes that younger players would otherwise get, and it means the Celtics aren't focusing on getting a good draft pick. 

Second, I really don't think Pierce and Garnett will have much trade value moving forward.  If there was ever a time to trade Pierce and / or Garnett, it would have been this season.  It didn't happen this season, so I don't think we'll ever see it happen.


To all of those saying "why do you want to be terrible for the next 10 years?  why start completely over?" I want to be clear.  I don't think that flat out tanking for rebuild is always the best thing to do.  But for certain drafts, when there's a lot of talent at the top (e.g. 2003, 2007), it's worth it. 

Also, I'm not saying I want to see the team get rid of everybody for the sake of it.  Rather, what I'm advocating here is that the team looks to maximize the trade value of the assets they have on the roster right now and then look to get the most they can for them.  The reason I feel that way is that I don't think the team currently has on the roster any sure-fire long term building blocks.  Rondo is a very nice player, but I just don't see him as a guy you build around.  Bradley, Sullinger, and Green are role players who we should be willing to trade if the right opportunity comes along. 

In the NBA when it comes to rebuilding I think you have to see every player on your team as a trade asset until you finally acquire a player who is or can become that superstar, top-10 player night in and night out.  Then your goal becomes to build the team around that player.

The Celtics shouldn't outright tank for the next however many years and become the Kings.  That's not what I'm saying.  But tanking strategically, at the right times and for the right reasons, is not bad management.  There's also a difference between trying to completely bottom out and simply focusing on acquiring assets and developing them rather than trying to win as many games as possible.  The Celtics are at a stage right now, in my opinion, where asset acquisition should be there focus, and that's going to require at least one or two seasons of being really bad.

  The thing is that if you don't get that superstar in that 2014 draft you can't suddenly un-tank, unless you do something like convince Rondo not to come back until the latter stages of the 13-14 season instead of when he's ready.

[PhoSita]

My question is, why do you have to get rid of Garnett and Pierce, then? How are you going to spend the money you save? You want to bid on some modestly priced young free agents so that you can keep cap flexibility and have some upside... but keeping Garnett and Pierce around next year will give you the same cap flexibility in 2014.

If we decide to blow it up next season, there is a chance that Pierce and Garnett will have trade value. No sense in pushing them out the door to expedite the blow-up.

Keeping Pierce and Garnett doesn't give the team nearly as much flexibility for a couple of reasons. 

First, holding onto Pierce and Garnett means that the teams' short term priority is still to win as many games as possible.  This means that Pierce and Garnett are getting minutes that younger players would otherwise get, and it means the Celtics aren't focusing on getting a good draft pick. 

Second, I really don't think Pierce and Garnett will have much trade value moving forward.  If there was ever a time to trade Pierce and / or Garnett, it would have been this season.  It didn't happen this season, so I don't think we'll ever see it happen.


To all of those saying "why do you want to be terrible for the next 10 years?  why start completely over?" I want to be clear.  I don't think that flat out tanking for rebuild is always the best thing to do.  But for certain drafts, when there's a lot of talent at the top (e.g. 2003, 2007), it's worth it. 

Also, I'm not saying I want to see the team get rid of everybody for the sake of it.  Rather, what I'm advocating here is that the team looks to maximize the trade value of the assets they have on the roster right now and then look to get the most they can for them.  The reason I feel that way is that I don't think the team currently has on the roster any sure-fire long term building blocks.  Rondo is a very nice player, but I just don't see him as a guy you build around.  Bradley, Sullinger, and Green are role players who we should be willing to trade if the right opportunity comes along. 

In the NBA when it comes to rebuilding I think you have to see every player on your team as a trade asset until you finally acquire a player who is or can become that superstar, top-10 player night in and night out.  Then your goal becomes to build the team around that player.

The Celtics shouldn't outright tank for the next however many years and become the Kings.  That's not what I'm saying.  But tanking strategically, at the right times and for the right reasons, is not bad management.  There's also a difference between trying to completely bottom out and simply focusing on acquiring assets and developing them rather than trying to win as many games as possible.  The Celtics are at a stage right now, in my opinion, where asset acquisition should be there focus, and that's going to require at least one or two seasons of being really bad.

  The thing is that if you don't get that superstar in that 2014 draft you can't suddenly un-tank, unless you do something like convince Rondo not to come back until the latter stages of the 13-14 season instead of when he's ready.

I'm not really sure what you're saying here.


Look, even if the Celtics follow my plan, I think it's a very long shot that they'd even win the lottery.  There are a number of teams out there that were downright awful this year that will be downright awful again.  But picking in the top 10 would be far more valuable next season than another first round exit.

My philosophy is that unless you can field a 50+ win team that has a chance to go deep in the playoffs, or you have a substantial amount of young talent on your team already that just needs to develop and learn how to win, then picking in the top 10 or so is a much better outcome for your season than trying to make the playoffs.  You never know when picking 9th or 10th could give you a cornerstone player.  The Celtics learned that with Paul Pierce, and more recently we've seen that with the Pacers (George) and the Pistons (Drummond).  It's a lot harder to find stars in the 11-15 range, though.

Almost all of the best teams this league has seen have been built around franchise stars that were acquired high in the draft or by trading a high pick or player who was taken with a high pick.  There are very few exceptions.  The Celtics are included on that list (traded the #5 in 2007).  You have to be bad at least for a year or two in order to get ahead in this league.  It's unfortunate, but that's the way things are.

[CelticsFan9]

I'm afraid you're right about KG.  if he retires, I'm really gonna miss him.

However, I tend to disagree about the tanking (especially if KG decides to stay).  If he does, I'd do my best to retool the team (getting Terry, Lee, Bass, Green off the books at all costs) and see what happens.  If its not working out, trade guys in February.

If KG does leave, keep the guys we have, pick up a big guy in the offseason (hopefully a rim protector) and see what happens.

[PhoSita]

I'm afraid you're right about KG.  if he retires, I'm really gonna miss him.

However, I tend to disagree about the tanking (especially if KG decides to stay).  If he does, I'd do my best to retool the team (getting Terry, Lee, Bass, Green off the books at all costs) and see what happens.  If its not working out, trade guys in February.

If KG does leave, keep the guys we have, pick up a big guy in the offseason (hopefully a rim protector) and see what happens.

Honestly, I think if KG leaves this team is a goner anyhow.  There's just no way to replace what he does for this team on the defensive end.  I think not having him healthy and on the floor on a consistent basis is a bigger blow to this team than not having Rondo, as important as Rondo is.  The question is whether or not the team will fully commit to rebuilding, as they should, or if they'll foolishly try to have it both ways.  That's what they did this season and for a numbers of reasons -- some which nobody could have foreseen -- it was a disaster.

With all respect to the people who talk about retooling the team by getting somebody like Josh Smith, I just don't see it.  I don't see Rondo-Green-Smith as a competitive core.  At best that gets you where the Hawks were the last few seasons -- a perennial 5th or 6th seed with an outside shot at winning a single series.

[wdleehi]

1)  Hope KG does not retire
2)  Keep Pierce
3)  Get Rondo healthy
4)  Get Sully healthy and figure out a long term plan to keep him healthy
5)  Try, try, try to move some of the mid level contracts of Terry, Bass and Lee
6)  See if Greens better play has added any real trade value to him and try to get a very good big man. 
7)  No long term contracts added past the final year of KG and Pierce.
  Be open to the opportunity to add a true number 1 type scorer who can play off a Rondo led attack.

[PhoSita]

. . .

6)  See if Greens better play has added any real trade value to him and try to get a very good big man. 
. . .
  Be open to the opportunity to add a true number 1 type scorer who can play off a Rondo led attack.

- What "very good big man" do you expect to get for Green?  I'd also like to play up his trade value and then sell high on him (which I think only happens if we feature him as the top offensive option, as was the case somewhat by default at times this spring).  I guess I'm a little skeptical the return we'd get for him would be that good, though.  Maybe you could convince a team like the Jazz to give you Enes Kanter or Favors.  That's the sort of deal I'd be okay with.

- What "number 1 scorer" are you expecting to be available for the Celtics to add via free agency or trade?  I'm just not sure how that happens unless the team actually trades Rondo or acquires some more valuable trade assets through the draft.

[CelticsFan9]

I'm afraid you're right about KG.  if he retires, I'm really gonna miss him.

However, I tend to disagree about the tanking (especially if KG decides to stay).  If he does, I'd do my best to retool the team (getting Terry, Lee, Bass, Green off the books at all costs) and see what happens.  If its not working out, trade guys in February.

If KG does leave, keep the guys we have, pick up a big guy in the offseason (hopefully a rim protector) and see what happens.

Honestly, I think if KG leaves this team is a goner anyhow.  There's just no way to replace what he does for this team on the defensive end.  I think not having him healthy and on the floor on a consistent basis is a bigger blow to this team than not having Rondo, as important as Rondo is.  The question is whether or not the team will fully commit to rebuilding, as they should, or if they'll foolishly try to have it both ways.  That's what they did this season and for a numbers of reasons -- some which nobody could have foreseen -- it was a disaster.

With all respect to the people who talk about retooling the team by getting somebody like Josh Smith, I just don't see it.  I don't see Rondo-Green-Smith as a competitive core.  At best that gets you where the Hawks were the last few seasons -- a perennial 5th or 6th seed with an outside shot at winning a single series.

Just to clarify: when I say retool, I don't mean getting a guy like Josh Smith (impact player).

If we are building around Rondo (that's what it looks like), you can't have guys who need the ball.  You need specialists.  Shooters, defenders, rebounders.  Those are the guys you put with Rondo (along with a perimeter scorer (Pierce) and apoccasional post option/pick'n'popper (Garnett)).

There's bound to be guys like that that we can move the other guys for, as well as FAs.

[gpap]

To the OP - Nice topic.

I agree with other fans that I think KG and Pierce can still contribute BUT ONLY as bench players/role players, NOT starters.

They just don't have the ability to play at a high pace for 35 minutes a night anymore.
It's just age, it's natural and catches up to all of us.

The problem with this is that KG is being paid way too much to be a bench player and ditto for Pierce.

SO MAYBE this summer Ainge and Doc can talk to KG/Pierce over Chinese food and say "look guys, we love ya and the fans love ya but you can't play at starter levels anymore. Any chance we can restructure your contracts so we can free up money to sign better, younger players?"

I know Pierce has a player option for 15 mil so they could talk him out of exercising it for a cheaper price. Can they restructure KG's deal per NBA salary cap rules?

Anywho, then with the freed up money try to either sign or trade for a couple decent players/bigs. Three guys who come to mind are Cousins, Varajeo and Gortat.

I am thinking between Rondo, Jeff Green, Sullinger and possibly Bradley we should be able to pry at least one in a trade.

Then in free agency, pick up a couple players to plug in the holes from a trade for a big and away we go.

I would suggest we continue trying to contend. Tanking next year will only result in more frustration as there are other teams in far worse shape then us, plus tanking will only kill fan interest in the product.

I am not saying this will land us a championship, but I think if we put together a more dominant starting five with Pierce/KG coming off the bench, we could do more damage then you think.

[wdleehi]

. . .

6)  See if Greens better play has added any real trade value to him and try to get a very good big man. 
. . .
  Be open to the opportunity to add a true number 1 type scorer who can play off a Rondo led attack.

- What "very good big man" do you expect to get for Green?  I'd also like to play up his trade value and then sell high on him (which I think only happens if we feature him as the top offensive option, as was the case somewhat by default at times this spring).  I guess I'm a little skeptical the return we'd get for him would be that good, though.  Maybe you could convince a team like the Jazz to give you Enes Kanter or Favors.  That's the sort of deal I'd be okay with.

- What "number 1 scorer" are you expecting to be available for the Celtics to add via free agency or trade?  I'm just not sure how that happens unless the team actually trades Rondo or acquires some more valuable trade assets through the draft.

If I knew, I would name them.  All I said was explore.  I will never say have to trade him. 


I think making Green the center of the offense will hurt his worth, not help it.  He just isn't that type of player.

[edwardjkasche]

I agree with all 10 of your points.

It's obviously sad, and many fans on this site will attack your opinions, but the truth is that this team's last championship push occurred last season when they lost an epic battle in the ECF.  In hindsight, it was probably time for KG to retire then.  He would have, in essence, gone out on top as a warrior.

I admire Ainge, KG, Pierce, and others for running it back this year.  I don't fault Ainge for any of his off-season moves.  Our team would be entirely different right now if Rondo, Sully, and Barbosa hadn't gone down with injuries.  But, that is unfortunately how this season played out.  And, with another year passing, I think it's time to move on.

It is time to rebuild, and everyone knows that Ainge isn't going to be complacent with building a team that peaks with the 7th seed in the next five years.  Ainge is going to set about doing what he did when he took over the GM role in the 2000s.  He's going to stockpile talent and draft picks and build his way toward trading for a true game-changer (ala KG) or a top-3 draft pick.  This may take a few years, but Ainge isn't going to settle with middle-of-the-pack for the next decade.  He knows what it takes to win championships in the NBA.  It takes Bird, Magic, Jordan, Kobe, Duncan, LeBron... it takes true game-changers.  And, you don't often get game-changers with the #15 pick in the draft or by trading guys like Bass and Lee.  Ainge knows it's go-bold or go-home time.  I think he's going to work the same way he did in the 2000s.

Though it's sad to say it's over, this team has pushed back Father Time and the NBA tide for years.  A three-year window became six years.  We posed the biggest hurdle for almost every eventual champion during the past five seasons.  Teams had to earn victories against us in the playoffs (or have refs deliver them!).  And, our team hasn't been at full strength since 2008!

We fans can be nothing but proud of a team that won the 2008 title, played a fantastic first two rounds in 2009 (w/o starting power forward), almost won the 2010 title (w/o starting center), played tough in 2011 (w/o starting point guard), and waged an epic battle in 2012 (w/o starting shooting guard).  The truth is that injuries, more so than inconsistency, have hurt the Celtics over the past five seasons.  The team was on its way to a repeat before KG went down in 2009.  Imagine how the Heat would be doing this year if LeBron had gone down with a knee injury in January.  I don't think they'd be favorites to win the title.

And, though some fans like to say, "The only thing that matters is championships," don't you think in a decade we'll all look back with fond memories and pride in this team?  When we look back at the 1980s, do we focus on the lost Finals and lost Conference Finals, or do we remember the three championships and the grit that the team had?  I think we'll look back on the Pierce-KG era with equal pride.

[Fred Roberts]

Lil Swag Rondo and KG are too 'built for this' to allow KG to retire. They're talking about doing 1 more run together as we speak (I bet). Neither of those dudes will back down easily.
They're Celtics, not quitters. KG isn't gonna hang it up if we get bounced in the first round. He's gonna try to come back with the squad at full strength (plus tweaking) next year and give it another shot. Danny really has a lot of work to do but that's a side story. KG needs serious help in the post and lacks that enforcer that Darko was supposed to be. We have a gaping hole there. Can't wait until Friday's game so I can watch Doc sit T-Will, Lee and Shav some more.