Loaded 2014 Draft = Blow It Up

[nickagneta]

Not to mention what it meant to Wyc to see this brand restored and what KG and Paul did to change the culture here. Tanking would be like p---ing all over everything those two stand for. The Celtics are last in the casual fan base hierarchy right now in this city. We tank and Wyc stands to lose his shirt several years in a row on this investment.

This current team was built on tanking. Have you forgotten the Allen Ray era? 18 losses in a row? Pierce's "stress fracture"?

I remember that last month. It was hilarious. Big Al and Pierce are "injured" for 2-3 weeks while we clinched the #2 worst record and then, magically, they were healthy that very next night. LOL.

And that was a Doc coached and Danny run club with Wyc as owner.

[Galeto]

In the post-MJ era, There's been only two teams with their original Top 5 picks to win titles, the Spurs and Wade's Heat.  Both sides are correct.  You usually need franchise superstars to win titles, and you can get those guys by either drafting them high, getting lucky with picks 6-15, or by using assets to trade for them, like the Cs and Lakers did with KG and Gasol. 

With this Celtics team, blowing it up is very unattractive to me.  What are the odds of getting the #1 pick in the 2014 draft to get Wiggins? If KG, PP and Doc all move on, a Rondo led team will win at least 30 games, giving the Cs a 3% or worst chance at the top pick.  A full tank job and the worst record is a 1 in 4 chance.

Theoretically, if the Cs tank and get Wiggins, how long will it take for a Wiggins, Rondo, Green, Sullinger core take to contend?  Probably at least a half decade.  To me, retooling is a better option.   

You think if both KG and Pierce are gone and replaced with whoever about 8 million in cap room can buy, the 16th pick in the draft and whoever they can get in a trade for Terry, Lee and Bass, that the Celtics going to win At LEAST 30 games on the will of Rondo?  I don't see it.  They're are going to be horrible defensively and unless Pierce and Garnett were the ones holding this club back offensively, I can't see them jumping out of the 20s in offensive efficiency either.  I'm not putting a bottom on a team that could be ranked in the 20s in both offensive and defensive efficiency.

In a projected loaded draft, it's also not only about the no.1 pick.  That's the luxury of it, that it's not all about one pick.  It's not all for naught if the Celtics "only" get the fifth pick in the draft, possibly.

[nickagneta]

In the post-MJ era, There's been only two teams with their original Top 5 picks to win titles, the Spurs and Wade's Heat.  Both sides are correct.  You usually need franchise superstars to win titles, and you can get those guys by either drafting them high, getting lucky with picks 6-15, or by using assets to trade for them, like the Cs and Lakers did with KG and Gasol. 

With this Celtics team, blowing it up is very unattractive to me.  What are the odds of getting the #1 pick in the 2014 draft to get Wiggins? If KG, PP and Doc all move on, a Rondo led team will win at least 30 games, giving the Cs a 3% or worst chance at the top pick.  A full tank job and the worst record is a 1 in 4 chance.

Theoretically, if the Cs tank and get Wiggins, how long will it take for a Wiggins, Rondo, Green, Sullinger core take to contend?  Probably at least a half decade.  To me, retooling is a better option.   

You think if both KG and Pierce are gone and replaced with whoever about 8 million in cap room can buy, the 16th pick in the draft and whoever they can get in a trade for Terry, Lee and Bass, that the Celtics going to win At LEAST 30 games on the will of Rondo?  I don't see it.  They're are going to be horrible defensively and unless Pierce and Garnett were the ones holding this club back offensively, I can't see them jumping out of the 20s in offensive efficiency either.  I'm not putting a bottom on a team that could be ranked in the 20s in both offensive and defensive efficiency.

In a projected loaded draft, it's also not only about the no.1 pick.  That's the luxury of it, that it's not all about one pick.  It's not all for naught if the Celtics "only" get the fifth pick in the draft, possibly.

Thing is, after about the 4th or 5th pick next year, the next pick through about the 20th will all be about the same talent level and you probably have an equal chance to get a great player.

So why tank? The C's had the worst record in 1996 and a 33% chance at the #1 pick as they owned someone else's pick that was also in the lottery. They ended up with picks 3 and 6. In 2007 they had the second best chance at the #1 pick and ended up getting the 5th pick.

Tanking guarantees nothing in the top 3. The percentages are much, much higher that a team with the worst record ends up with pick #4 than a top 3 pick.

[LarBrd33]

It's clear you'll have a BETTER chance at drafting a BETTER player if you draft EARLIER.

But it's also clear that you can draft a GREAT player at a LATER stage, too.

What's all the fuss? If someone's trying to make the point that it's better to draft 15th than 1st, then it's hopeless.

My overall point here is this... almost all nba champions have 1 guy who is designated as the "best player".  Magic, Bird, Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, KG, Pau, Dirk, LeBron, etc ...  almost always those guys are one of the top 5 players in the league at the time of them winning a title.  And almost always, those guys are drafted within the first 5 picks of the draft.

If you want to be a serious contender, it starts with landing a franchise superstar.  It's almost unthinkable that you'll land that guy with the 16th pick of a draft.  History just doesn't show it happening.   Yes, you might get a solid 2nd or 3rd guy... shoot, there have been all-stars drafted in the 2nd round.  But never the best player on a future champion.  It doesn't happen.

This is why it would be so shocking if Paul George and the Indiana Pacers win the title this year.

How this relates to this thread:  2014 is a loaded draft with a prospect who is considered the greatest prospect since LeBron James... and that's definitely saying something since Kevin Durant was considered as "can't miss" as "can't miss" gets...  but they aren't saying this is the best prospect since Durant.  They are saying it's the best prospect since LeBron.

you might as well take a shot at a deep playoff run and tank if it fails. You can always tank, you can't always be a (fringe) contender.

#1 - We just took a shot at a deep playoff run and it failed... time to tank

#2 - We aren't (fringe) contenders.  We're a borderline playoff team who could potentially miss the playoffs next season standing pat. 

Makes more sense to blow it up and try to land a franchise player.  We have drastically different opinions of this team.  This squad isn't capable of winning a championship... we're just prolonging the inevitable blow-up... might as well do it when the 2014 draft is looming.

[LarBrd33]

In the post-MJ era, There's been only two teams with their original Top 5 picks to win titles, the Spurs and Wade's Heat.  Both sides are correct.  You usually need franchise superstars to win titles, and you can get those guys by either drafting them high, getting lucky with picks 6-15, or by using assets to trade for them, like the Cs and Lakers did with KG and Gasol. 

With this Celtics team, blowing it up is very unattractive to me.  What are the odds of getting the #1 pick in the 2014 draft to get Wiggins? If KG, PP and Doc all move on, a Rondo led team will win at least 30 games, giving the Cs a 3% or worst chance at the top pick.  A full tank job and the worst record is a 1 in 4 chance.

Theoretically, if the Cs tank and get Wiggins, how long will it take for a Wiggins, Rondo, Green, Sullinger core take to contend?  Probably at least a half decade.  To me, retooling is a better option.   

You think if both KG and Pierce are gone and replaced with whoever about 8 million in cap room can buy, the 16th pick in the draft and whoever they can get in a trade for Terry, Lee and Bass, that the Celtics going to win At LEAST 30 games on the will of Rondo?  I don't see it.  They're are going to be horrible defensively and unless Pierce and Garnett were the ones holding this club back offensively, I can't see them jumping out of the 20s in offensive efficiency either.  I'm not putting a bottom on a team that could be ranked in the 20s in both offensive and defensive efficiency.

In a projected loaded draft, it's also not only about the no.1 pick.  That's the luxury of it, that it's not all about one pick.  It's not all for naught if the Celtics "only" get the fifth pick in the draft, possibly.

Thing is, after about the 4th or 5th pick next year, the next pick through about the 20th will all be about the same talent level and you probably have an equal chance to get a great player.

So why tank? The C's had the worst record in 1996 and a 33% chance at the #1 pick as they owned someone else's pick that was also in the lottery. They ended up with picks 3 and 6. In 2007 they had the second best chance at the #1 pick and ended up getting the 5th pick.

Tanking guarantees nothing in the top 3. The percentages are much, much higher that a team with the worst record ends up with pick #4 than a top 3 pick.

If you had the worst record in the league your worst case scenario is pick #4.  Correct. 

Question... if you were assured that the 2014 draft was equal to the 2003 draft... would you change your opinion on tanking?  Because that's the premise of this thread.

#1 - LeBron
#2 - Darko
#3 - Melo
#4 - Bosh
#5 - Wade

... I do it... especially when the alternative is another 5-10 years of mediocrity.

The last time we tanked, we won a championship the next year.  Fact.

[BballTim]

It's clear you'll have a BETTER chance at drafting a BETTER player if you draft EARLIER.

But it's also clear that you can draft a GREAT player at a LATER stage, too.

What's all the fuss? If someone's trying to make the point that it's better to draft 15th than 1st, then it's hopeless.

My overall point here is this... almost all nba champions have 1 guy who is designated as the "best player".  Magic, Bird, Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, KG, Pau, Dirk, LeBron, etc ...  almost always those guys are one of the top 5 players in the league at the time of them winning a title.  And almost always, those guys are drafted within the first 5 picks of the draft.

If you want to be a serious contender, it starts with landing a franchise superstar.  It's almost unthinkable that you'll land that guy with the 16th pick of a draft.  History just doesn't show it happening.   Yes, you might get a solid 2nd or 3rd guy... shoot, there have been all-stars drafted in the 2nd round.  But never the best player on a future champion.  It doesn't happen.

This is why it would be so shocking if Paul George and the Indiana Pacers win the title this year.

How this relates to this thread:  2014 is a loaded draft with a prospect who is considered the greatest prospect since LeBron James... and that's definitely saying something since Kevin Durant was considered as "can't miss" as "can't miss" gets...  but they aren't saying this is the best prospect since Durant.  They are saying it's the best prospect since LeBron.

you might as well take a shot at a deep playoff run and tank if it fails. You can always tank, you can't always be a (fringe) contender.

#1 - We just took a shot at a deep playoff run and it failed... time to tank

#2 - We aren't (fringe) contenders.  We're a borderline playoff team who could potentially miss the playoffs next season standing pat. 

Makes more sense to blow it up and try to land a franchise player.  We have drastically different opinions of this team.  This squad isn't capable of winning a championship... we're just prolonging the inevitable blow-up... might as well do it when the 2014 draft is looming.

  #1, our best player was injured. You know, the one you claimed we wouldn't miss at all in the playoffs? The one we just saw some terrible offense against a bad defensive team without?

  #2, the team that lost to the Knicks was significantly better than the cast Rondo carried to the ecf last summer, in fact they're probably still better if you removed Green from the roster. Don't get so excited about the same type of in-season slow stretch we've seen like 4 years in a row.

  There's little chance we'd end up at the top of the lottery next year and little chance the draft will end up being what you expect it to. We can tank whenever we want, no need to rush it.

[bfrombleacher]

It's clear you'll have a BETTER chance at drafting a BETTER player if you draft EARLIER.

But it's also clear that you can draft a GREAT player at a LATER stage, too.

What's all the fuss? If someone's trying to make the point that it's better to draft 15th than 1st, then it's hopeless.

My overall point here is this... almost all nba champions have 1 guy who is designated as the "best player".  Magic, Bird, Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, KG, Pau, Dirk, LeBron, etc ...  almost always those guys are one of the top 5 players in the league at the time of them winning a title.  And almost always, those guys are drafted within the first 5 picks of the draft.

If you want to be a serious contender, it starts with landing a franchise superstar.  It's almost unthinkable that you'll land that guy with the 16th pick of a draft.  History just doesn't show it happening.   Yes, you might get a solid 2nd or 3rd guy... shoot, there have been all-stars drafted in the 2nd round.  But never the best player on a future champion.  It doesn't happen.

This is why it would be so shocking if Paul George and the Indiana Pacers win the title this year.

How this relates to this thread:  2014 is a loaded draft with a prospect who is considered the greatest prospect since LeBron James... and that's definitely saying something since Kevin Durant was considered as "can't miss" as "can't miss" gets...  but they aren't saying this is the best prospect since Durant.  They are saying it's the best prospect since LeBron.

you might as well take a shot at a deep playoff run and tank if it fails. You can always tank, you can't always be a (fringe) contender.

#1 - We just took a shot at a deep playoff run and it failed... time to tank

#2 - We aren't (fringe) contenders.  We're a borderline playoff team who could potentially miss the playoffs next season standing pat. 

Makes more sense to blow it up and try to land a franchise player.  We have drastically different opinions of this team.  This squad isn't capable of winning a championship... we're just prolonging the inevitable blow-up... might as well do it when the 2014 draft is looming.

  #1, our best player was injured. You know, the one you claimed we wouldn't miss at all in the playoffs? The one we just saw some terrible offense against a bad defensive team without?

  #2, the team that lost to the Knicks was significantly better than the cast Rondo carried to the ecf last summer, in fact they're probably still better if you removed Green from the roster. Don't get so excited about the same type of in-season slow stretch we've seen like 4 years in a row.

  There's little chance we'd end up at the top of the lottery next year and little chance the draft will end up being what you expect it to. We can tank whenever we want, no need to rush it.

His point is the 2014 draft is historically good, which is why he's saying this is the year to tank.

But then if we do this I think we go all in or nothing. We lose Rondo. We shed Sully. Collect draft picks.

My fear is we end up like one of those one superstar teams that get nowhere. We then become a superstar farm for L.A. or some other big market team and are perpetually the Bobcats.

Not that I'm in love with the whole idea of tanking anyway.

Fortunately I do not have to deal with the stresses of making this decision.

[BballTim]

Question... if you were assured that the 2014 draft was equal to the 2003 draft... would you change your opinion on tanking?  Because that's the premise of this thread.

#1 - LeBron
#2 - Darko
#3 - Melo
#4 - Bosh
#5 - Wade

... I do it... especially when the alternative is another 5-10 years of mediocrity.

The last time we tanked, we won a championship the next year.  Fact.

  Even if you look only at the top 5 from the 2003 draft you have one sure-fire franchise player, one great player who's only contended for a title when another superstar has been on the team, one guy who will never be the best player on a contender (Bosh), a bust, and Melo, who falls somewhere in between Bosh and Wade and needed to face a depleted Celts team to get out of the 1st round for the 2nd time in 10 trips to the playoffs. In other words, with one of the best (at the top) drafts ever you have a 1 in 5 chance of getting a real franchise player and a 1 in 5 shot at getting a "1A" franchise player (meaning you need a "1B" or better).

[More Banners]

Question... if you were assured that the 2014 draft was equal to the 2003 draft... would you change your opinion on tanking?  Because that's the premise of this thread.

#1 - LeBron
#2 - Darko
#3 - Melo
#4 - Bosh
#5 - Wade

... I do it... especially when the alternative is another 5-10 years of mediocrity.

The last time we tanked, we won a championship the next year.  Fact.

  Even if you look only at the top 5 from the 2003 draft you have one sure-fire franchise player, one great player who's only contended for a title when another superstar has been on the team, one guy who will never be the best player on a contender (Bosh), a bust, and Melo, who falls somewhere in between Bosh and Wade and needed to face a depleted Celts team to get out of the 1st round for the 2nd time in 10 trips to the playoffs. In other words, with one of the best (at the top) drafts ever you have a 1 in 5 chance of getting a real franchise player and a 1 in 5 shot at getting a "1A" franchise player (meaning you need a "1B" or better).

Lebrons, as much as I can't stand him, only come around every 10-20 years.  He's better than most HOF inductees even.  Let's not count him as a "normal" #1 pick.  Most drafts don't have Lebrons.

Looking at his level of team achievement, though...  Many players made the Finals carrying their teams, i.e. Iverson and Dwight.

And not many superstars win it alone.  Jordan didn't win by himself (though he doesn't believe that).  Neither did anyone else.

So I don't knock players like Wade, who was a champion in his 2nd year, or Bosh, who carried a terrible Toronto team for years, or Melo, who dominated Olympic and international play and is a true world champion.

It takes more than one star to win these days.  I'll take any of those guys (except Lebron, who I can't stand).

[boscel33]

I'm referring to missing the playoffs and winning the lottery. I don't think a team built around Rondo & Green makes the playoffs next year.

Winning the lottery is easier said then done. Even if we were the absolute worst team in the nba, there are still no guarantees.

Been there, done that, didn't get the top pick.  The way to rebuild I'd to stockpile some young talent and then deal it for a vet, like Danny did to get Allen and KG.   I think the key this year is Al Jefferson and trying to do a sign and trade for him.  I'd build it around a package of Bradley and Sullinger .

[BballTim]

Question... if you were assured that the 2014 draft was equal to the 2003 draft... would you change your opinion on tanking?  Because that's the premise of this thread.

#1 - LeBron
#2 - Darko
#3 - Melo
#4 - Bosh
#5 - Wade

... I do it... especially when the alternative is another 5-10 years of mediocrity.

The last time we tanked, we won a championship the next year.  Fact.

  Even if you look only at the top 5 from the 2003 draft you have one sure-fire franchise player, one great player who's only contended for a title when another superstar has been on the team, one guy who will never be the best player on a contender (Bosh), a bust, and Melo, who falls somewhere in between Bosh and Wade and needed to face a depleted Celts team to get out of the 1st round for the 2nd time in 10 trips to the playoffs. In other words, with one of the best (at the top) drafts ever you have a 1 in 5 chance of getting a real franchise player and a 1 in 5 shot at getting a "1A" franchise player (meaning you need a "1B" or better).

Lebrons, as much as I can't stand him, only come around every 10-20 years.  He's better than most HOF inductees even.  Let's not count him as a "normal" #1 pick.  Most drafts don't have Lebrons.

Looking at his level of team achievement, though...  Many players made the Finals carrying their teams, i.e. Iverson and Dwight.

And not many superstars win it alone.  Jordan didn't win by himself (though he doesn't believe that).  Neither did anyone else.

So I don't knock players like Wade, who was a champion in his 2nd year, or Bosh, who carried a terrible Toronto team for years, or Melo, who dominated Olympic and international play and is a true world champion.

It takes more than one star to win these days.  I'll take any of those guys (except Lebron, who I can't stand).

  Nobody said anything about LeBron being a normal #1 pick.

[Moranis]

In the post-MJ era, There's been only two teams with their original Top 5 picks to win titles, the Spurs and Wade's Heat.  Both sides are correct.  You usually need franchise superstars to win titles, and you can get those guys by either drafting them high, getting lucky with picks 6-15, or by using assets to trade for them, like the Cs and Lakers did with KG and Gasol. 

With this Celtics team, blowing it up is very unattractive to me.  What are the odds of getting the #1 pick in the 2014 draft to get Wiggins? If KG, PP and Doc all move on, a Rondo led team will win at least 30 games, giving the Cs a 3% or worst chance at the top pick.  A full tank job and the worst record is a 1 in 4 chance.

Theoretically, if the Cs tank and get Wiggins, how long will it take for a Wiggins, Rondo, Green, Sullinger core take to contend?  Probably at least a half decade.  To me, retooling is a better option.   

You think if both KG and Pierce are gone and replaced with whoever about 8 million in cap room can buy, the 16th pick in the draft and whoever they can get in a trade for Terry, Lee and Bass, that the Celtics going to win At LEAST 30 games on the will of Rondo?  I don't see it.  They're are going to be horrible defensively and unless Pierce and Garnett were the ones holding this club back offensively, I can't see them jumping out of the 20s in offensive efficiency either.  I'm not putting a bottom on a team that could be ranked in the 20s in both offensive and defensive efficiency.

In a projected loaded draft, it's also not only about the no.1 pick.  That's the luxury of it, that it's not all about one pick.  It's not all for naught if the Celtics "only" get the fifth pick in the draft, possibly.

Thing is, after about the 4th or 5th pick next year, the next pick through about the 20th will all be about the same talent level and you probably have an equal chance to get a great player.

So why tank? The C's had the worst record in 1996 and a 33% chance at the #1 pick as they owned someone else's pick that was also in the lottery. They ended up with picks 3 and 6. In 2007 they had the second best chance at the #1 pick and ended up getting the 5th pick.

Tanking guarantees nothing in the top 3. The percentages are much, much higher that a team with the worst record ends up with pick #4 than a top 3 pick.

My reason to tank is two fold.  First, would be to get multiple picks in that draft.  I think that to really do that, you have to trade Rondo, but I'm ok with that.  Second, next years teams is going to look an awful lot like this years team and there is no reason for an old team to barely make the playoffs and then lose in the first round. 

My rooting philosophy, which I've put on here a lot.  Is that if you are not realistically competing for a title or a young team on the way up then you are just wasting time and delaying the inevitable. 

Boston is at that point.  This isn't a young team on the way up and it isn't a team that can realistically compete for a title.  There is no point in doing the status quo, it just delays the inevitable and if you can get multiple picks in what everyone is calling the best draft in a decade, then you just have to do it.  Next year is the year to rebuild in as that is the year where you could really get a number of assets that could form the basis for the next championship team.

[Moranis]

I'm referring to missing the playoffs and winning the lottery. I don't think a team built around Rondo & Green makes the playoffs next year.

Winning the lottery is easier said then done. Even if we were the absolute worst team in the nba, there are still no guarantees.

Been there, done that, didn't get the top pick.  The way to rebuild I'd to stockpile some young talent and then deal it for a vet, like Danny did to get Allen and KG.   I think the key this year is Al Jefferson and trying to do a sign and trade for him.  I'd build it around a package of Bradley and Sullinger .

And the way to stockpile talent is to get as many picks as you can, especially in a very strong and deep draft like 2014.

[BballTim]

In the post-MJ era, There's been only two teams with their original Top 5 picks to win titles, the Spurs and Wade's Heat.  Both sides are correct.  You usually need franchise superstars to win titles, and you can get those guys by either drafting them high, getting lucky with picks 6-15, or by using assets to trade for them, like the Cs and Lakers did with KG and Gasol. 

With this Celtics team, blowing it up is very unattractive to me.  What are the odds of getting the #1 pick in the 2014 draft to get Wiggins? If KG, PP and Doc all move on, a Rondo led team will win at least 30 games, giving the Cs a 3% or worst chance at the top pick.  A full tank job and the worst record is a 1 in 4 chance.

Theoretically, if the Cs tank and get Wiggins, how long will it take for a Wiggins, Rondo, Green, Sullinger core take to contend?  Probably at least a half decade.  To me, retooling is a better option.   

You think if both KG and Pierce are gone and replaced with whoever about 8 million in cap room can buy, the 16th pick in the draft and whoever they can get in a trade for Terry, Lee and Bass, that the Celtics going to win At LEAST 30 games on the will of Rondo?  I don't see it.  They're are going to be horrible defensively and unless Pierce and Garnett were the ones holding this club back offensively, I can't see them jumping out of the 20s in offensive efficiency either.  I'm not putting a bottom on a team that could be ranked in the 20s in both offensive and defensive efficiency.

In a projected loaded draft, it's also not only about the no.1 pick.  That's the luxury of it, that it's not all about one pick.  It's not all for naught if the Celtics "only" get the fifth pick in the draft, possibly.

Thing is, after about the 4th or 5th pick next year, the next pick through about the 20th will all be about the same talent level and you probably have an equal chance to get a great player.

So why tank? The C's had the worst record in 1996 and a 33% chance at the #1 pick as they owned someone else's pick that was also in the lottery. They ended up with picks 3 and 6. In 2007 they had the second best chance at the #1 pick and ended up getting the 5th pick.

Tanking guarantees nothing in the top 3. The percentages are much, much higher that a team with the worst record ends up with pick #4 than a top 3 pick.

My reason to tank is two fold.  First, would be to get multiple picks in that draft.  I think that to really do that, you have to trade Rondo, but I'm ok with that.  Second, next years teams is going to look an awful lot like this years team and there is no reason for an old team to barely make the playoffs and then lose in the first round. 

My rooting philosophy, which I've put on here a lot.  Is that if you are not realistically competing for a title or a young team on the way up then you are just wasting time and delaying the inevitable. 

Boston is at that point.  This isn't a young team on the way up and it isn't a team that can realistically compete for a title.  There is no point in doing the status quo, it just delays the inevitable and if you can get multiple picks in what everyone is calling the best draft in a decade, then you just have to do it.  Next year is the year to rebuild in as that is the year where you could really get a number of assets that could form the basis for the next championship team.

  No offense, but haven't you been saying Boston's at that point since 2009 or so? Sorry if it wasn't you, but a pretty healthy number of people have.

[BringToughnessBack]

If, and I say If since nobody knows for sure KG and PP are leaving. But If PP and KG do in fact leave, Rondo on a team with Green, Bradley, Sully and whatever 8 million can buy is going to be beyond horrible.

Rondo will B**tch and Moan all day long with no superstars to pass to. Plus, we will most likely get to see what his real offensive capability will be since he will have few to pass to that can actually score beyond Green.

I also dont see him rushing back from injury to play with Green and spare parts. Imagine our starting line up without Rondo, PP and KG to start the season. Yikes...stuff of nightmares for sure.

Green could actually score high 20's low 30's a game with no other stars on team that can score. But this team has little to no chance of not being a bottom five team with no other tier 1-2 players to rely on.

I dont think Big Al is coming for  5-8 million a year either.

How long before Rondo demands to be traded? I have never been one for the lets tank and waste a season but hard to argue with the results of the last tank job and what it eventually brought to our team.

Personally, as much as I hate to see KG and PP leaving, postponing the inevitable to a put a 5-8th seed team back into the playoffs with older legs and probably even less chance of a miracle run does not make a ton of sense to me.


IF PP and KG do come back, I will root as hard as anyone and pray a miracle does happen, but we all need to be realistic here- we have 2 choices

1. Tank and Pray Danny locates the next superstar who will lead us to our next stretch of titles over the next 10 years

2. Bring back PP and KG and a few parts for a chance to be middle seed and experience early exit once again.

Older legs do not get better with time. They are best used as integral parts off the bench for a team ready for title contention(Denver? Clippers? OKC)


I love KG and PP but I do not want another year of mediocre to prolong our chance at returning to greatness.

Get your tanking caps on..it is going to be a long year next year.