Wouldn't you want to tank too with this upcoming 2014 draft class?

[Celtics Insider]

Just because there's a high chance that he'll be a star doesn't mean he WILL be (Wiggins).

For all you know, he'll come in, shoot .350% from the field and average 4 PPG in 35 minutes. You just never know.

That's not at all likely.  That's not giving enough credit to the basketball experts watching these guys.  This isn't a common thing when they say someone is a phenom.  They aren't just making this stuff up.   Barring major injury or drug problems, there's no way Wiggins comes in and averages 4 ppg in 35 minutes on 35% shooting.

Okay, you can maintain that irrational belief. I'll save my judgement on him until he actually produces in the NBA.

You cannot seriously believe that ANYONE knows what the future holds for ANY player. Just educated guesses.

everyone knew Lebron would be great, Tim Duncan would be great, Shaq would be great, KG would be great, etc. Sure, there are always unkowns in the draft, but once in a while there are sure things, and the 2014 draft has 2 of them.

No one is a "sure-thing". Anything can happen that can change any player's circumstances and turn their career for the better or worse. Maybe an injury. Maybe a bad coach/GM/owner. Maybe bad chemistry with their teammates. Maybe the media attention and hype gets to their heads. Maybe they have a bad stretch and have a big mental lapse. You just never know. Nothing is absolute.

well, following your logic then, you can say the exact same thing about trading for Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Lebron James, etc. They can get injured, not get along with a coach, just decide to go on autopilot and collect money, etc.

Except they're seasoned NBA veterans who have proven themselves, not high school players...

does that mean that they are immune to injury, arguments with coaches and teammates, and flat out coasting?

If anything, they are more likely to break down physically, be stubborn with coaches and teammates, and be happy with what they've already accomplished.

Few examples: Tracy McCgrady, Vince Carter, Grant Hill, Bernard King, Jermaine Oneal (he was a legit top young center at one point) Yao Ming, Sheed, the list can go on

Heck, even Dwight Howard, back injury, flip-floping on organizations, and never taking blame or showing leadership

You are being ridiculous. High school players are not on the same level as NBA veterans until they prove otherwise by playing in the NBA.

Here's Wiggins' NBA resume:

-Played well in high school
-....
-....
-???
-...

Lebron or KG or Kobe before coming to the NBA...

played well in high school

What's your point? Talent is talent.

My point is that HIGH SCHOOL talent and COLLEGE talent is not the same as NBA talent.

I'm not saying we shouldn't draft Wiggins, for example, if we have the chance. He has a very high chance of becoming a star. But it's not absolute. I'm saying that we shouldn't tank and bank on Wiggins living up to the hype. I mean, why the f*ck would we lose on purpose? If we tanked, I'd literally turn into a Lakers fan immediately. No respect should be given to players/coaches/GMs/fans who want to tank. You play to win the game.

[hpantazo]

Just because there's a high chance that he'll be a star doesn't mean he WILL be (Wiggins).

For all you know, he'll come in, shoot .350% from the field and average 4 PPG in 35 minutes. You just never know.

That's not at all likely.  That's not giving enough credit to the basketball experts watching these guys.  This isn't a common thing when they say someone is a phenom.  They aren't just making this stuff up.   Barring major injury or drug problems, there's no way Wiggins comes in and averages 4 ppg in 35 minutes on 35% shooting.

Okay, you can maintain that irrational belief. I'll save my judgement on him until he actually produces in the NBA.

You cannot seriously believe that ANYONE knows what the future holds for ANY player. Just educated guesses.

everyone knew Lebron would be great, Tim Duncan would be great, Shaq would be great, KG would be great, etc. Sure, there are always unkowns in the draft, but once in a while there are sure things, and the 2014 draft has 2 of them.

No one is a "sure-thing". Anything can happen that can change any player's circumstances and turn their career for the better or worse. Maybe an injury. Maybe a bad coach/GM/owner. Maybe bad chemistry with their teammates. Maybe the media attention and hype gets to their heads. Maybe they have a bad stretch and have a big mental lapse. You just never know. Nothing is absolute.

well, following your logic then, you can say the exact same thing about trading for Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Lebron James, etc. They can get injured, not get along with a coach, just decide to go on autopilot and collect money, etc.

Except they're seasoned NBA veterans who have proven themselves, not high school players...

does that mean that they are immune to injury, arguments with coaches and teammates, and flat out coasting?

If anything, they are more likely to break down physically, be stubborn with coaches and teammates, and be happy with what they've already accomplished.

Few examples: Tracy McCgrady, Vince Carter, Grant Hill, Bernard King, Jermaine Oneal (he was a legit top young center at one point) Yao Ming, Sheed, the list can go on

Heck, even Dwight Howard, back injury, flip-floping on organizations, and never taking blame or showing leadership

You are being ridiculous. High school players are not on the same level as NBA veterans until they prove otherwise by playing in the NBA.

Here's Wiggins' NBA resume:

-Played well in high school
-....
-....
-???
-...

Lebron or KG or Kobe before coming to the NBA...

played well in high school

What's your point? Talent is talent.

My point is that HIGH SCHOOL talent and COLLEGE talent is not the same as NBA talent.

I'm not saying we shouldn't draft Wiggins, for example, if we have the chance. He has a very high chance of becoming a star. But it's not absolute. I'm saying that we shouldn't tank and bank on Wiggins living up to the hype. I mean, why the f*ck would we lose on purpose? If we tanked, I'd literally turn into a Lakers fan immediately. No respect should be given to players/coaches/GMs/fans who want to tank.

ok, that argument i can certainly respect.

We already did tank under ML Car, and again under Ainge, and we lost out both times. The first time we ended up not getting Duncan and instead got Mercer and Billups, and then TRADED away Billups (thanks Pitino)

and the second time we missed out on Oden/Durant and Ainge somehow turned it around and got KG and Ray.

Tanking is offensive to fans, but one could argue that we are due for it work out for us this time

[Celtics Insider]

ok, that argument i can certainly respect.

We already did tank under ML Car, and again under Ainge, and we lost out both times. The first time we ended up not getting Duncan and instead got Mercer and Billups, and then TRADED away Billups (thanks Pitino)

and the second time we missed out on Oden/Durant and Ainge somehow turned it around and got KG and Ray.

Tanking is offensive to fans, but one could argue that we are due for it work out for us this time

I don't think we tanked to get Oden. I think we just sucked. If we had tanked (intentionally lost), I doubt Pierce would have been asking out of Boston.

[hpantazo]

ok, that argument i can certainly respect.

We already did tank under ML Car, and again under Ainge, and we lost out both times. The first time we ended up not getting Duncan and instead got Mercer and Billups, and then TRADED away Billups (thanks Pitino)

and the second time we missed out on Oden/Durant and Ainge somehow turned it around and got KG and Ray.

Tanking is offensive to fans, but one could argue that we are due for it work out for us this time

I don't think we tanked to get Oden. I think we just sucked. If we had tanked (intentionally lost), I doubt Pierce would have been asking out of Boston.

We tanked smartly, LOL. We shut down Pierce early and Doc played useless vets into the ground, literally, while showcasing Big Al, Delonte, and Gomes. We played Gerald just enough to keep teams intrigued without revealing that he really sucked.

[hwangjini_1]

Imagine a Rondo/Wiggins/Jordan fast break.

the other team immediately fouls jordan and makes him shoot foul shots.

[LGC88]

Imagine a Rondo/Wiggins/Jordan fast break.

the other team immediately fouls jordan and makes him shoot foul shots.

lol

[PaulPierce34G]

Just because there's a high chance that he'll be a star doesn't mean he WILL be (Wiggins).

For all you know, he'll come in, shoot .350% from the field and average 4 PPG in 35 minutes. You just never know.

That's not at all likely.  That's not giving enough credit to the basketball experts watching these guys.  This isn't a common thing when they say someone is a phenom.  They aren't just making this stuff up.   Barring major injury or drug problems, there's no way Wiggins comes in and averages 4 ppg in 35 minutes on 35% shooting.

Okay, you can maintain that irrational belief. I'll save my judgement on him until he actually produces in the NBA.

You cannot seriously believe that ANYONE knows what the future holds for ANY player. Just educated guesses.

everyone knew Lebron would be great, Tim Duncan would be great, Shaq would be great, KG would be great, etc. Sure, there are always unkowns in the draft, but once in a while there are sure things, and the 2014 draft has 2 of them.

No one is a "sure-thing". Anything can happen that can change any player's circumstances and turn their career for the better or worse. Maybe an injury. Maybe a bad coach/GM/owner. Maybe bad chemistry with their teammates. Maybe the media attention and hype gets to their heads. Maybe they have a bad stretch and have a big mental lapse. You just never know. Nothing is absolute.

well, following your logic then, you can say the exact same thing about trading for Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Lebron James, etc. They can get injured, not get along with a coach, just decide to go on autopilot and collect money, etc.

Except they're seasoned NBA veterans who have proven themselves, not high school players...

does that mean that they are immune to injury, arguments with coaches and teammates, and flat out coasting?

If anything, they are more likely to break down physically, be stubborn with coaches and teammates, and be happy with what they've already accomplished.

Few examples: Tracy McCgrady, Vince Carter, Grant Hill, Bernard King, Jermaine Oneal (he was a legit top young center at one point) Yao Ming, Sheed, the list can go on

Heck, even Dwight Howard, back injury, flip-floping on organizations, and never taking blame or showing leadership

You are being ridiculous. High school players are not on the same level as NBA veterans until they prove otherwise by playing in the NBA.

Here's Wiggins' NBA resume:

-Played well in high school
-....
-....
-???
-...

Lebron or KG or Kobe before coming to the NBA...

played well in high school

What's your point? Talent is talent.

My point is that HIGH SCHOOL talent and COLLEGE talent is not the same as NBA talent.

I'm not saying we shouldn't draft Wiggins, for example, if we have the chance. He has a very high chance of becoming a star. But it's not absolute. I'm saying that we shouldn't tank and bank on Wiggins living up to the hype. I mean, why the f*ck would we lose on purpose? If we tanked, I'd literally turn into a Lakers fan immediately. No respect should be given to players/coaches/GMs/fans who want to tank. You play to win the game.

I think everyone understands the point which is trying to be made...Yes, in a sense, nothing is a sure thing.  A guy can come in, break his ankles, his career won't ever be the same...but at the same time, you just 'know' if a player is going to be good...and I say 'know' meaning not to predict the future, but that there's a very, very, very good chance the player will come in and tear up the league. 

Again, anything can happen, this is true, but don't knock the scouting or the talent.  If a kid has it, they have it.  It's not 100% set in stone that the kid will be a phenom, but if you are betting money, it would probably be smart to bet that the kid pans out.  I think that's what most of these other guys/girls (if there are any women posters in this debate) are trying to say.

[Celtics Insider]

It's not 100% set in stone that the kid will be a phenom, but if you are betting money, it would probably be smart to bet that the kid pans out.  I think that's what most of these other guys/girls (if there are any women posters in this debate) are trying to say.

Agreed.

[Kane3387]

I think 2013-14 is 2006-07 all over again. Hopefully just no losing streak.

[chambers]

This draft is supposed to be like 2003, yes then its worth tanking for.

Funny, isn't it, how San Antonio never has to tank?

You know that's how they got Tim Duncan right? a one year mini tank while Robinson was injured? inserted Duncan, got lucky with Parker and Ginobli (great picks, lucky no one else picked them earlier is what I mean by lucky)and never had to rebuild.
This is essentially what Danny is trying to do.
They drafted a guy who pretty much the greatest power forward of all time  along with Garnett by tanking.
lol

[syfy9]

Tanking may not be an acceptable notion to the fans, but GM wise, it's been proven to work. 

To those who think that it isn't the way to go: remember that most dynasties began by tanking first.

Tanking paid off in '84, big time. The Bulls got Jordan by dropping 14 of their last 15 games that spring, including their final five. The Rockets earned Olajuwon by losing 14 of their last 17, nine of their last 10, and their final five. Aging Elvin Hayes, a shadow of his old self, played a full 53 minutes of an overtime game for Houston during a 129-128 loss to San Antonio in the 81st game of the season.

We are talking Hakeem, Jordan, and Duncan type players.

[aporel#18]

If keeping Rondo off the floor like Chicago did with Rose is tanking, then yes, the Celtics will tank. They'll also suck enough to get a top 10 pick, even a top 5 pick if lucky, by showcasing the young players and expiring contracts who can help some contender.

The lottery is never a sure thing, and I doubt the plan is getting Wiggins/Parker, although I'd love that. Ainge is trying to maximize the flexibility of the roster, and try to get a future star in the draft or an All Star by trading picks/assets. Just like in 2007.

Teams won't give you first rounders for next year's draft, so unless you can get the Bobcat's one which is owned by the Bulls (top 10 protected in 2014, top 8 in 2015 and unprotected in 2016), you better aim for 2013 first rounders which will be a lot cheaper.

If Doc/KG/(Terry) end up playing for the Clips, you get their 2013 first rounder, Jordan and maybe Butler/Bledsoe/future pick (2015 or 2016 would be ideal). Butler will have trade value, Jordan too, and Bledsoe or the future pick would be even more valuable.

Then Danny will trade Pierce to another team that can buy him out/waive him so he can join Doc and KG. Yes, not easy but doable. Two ideas:

- Pierce + Bass to Chicago for Boozer+filler and the Bobcats pick. Chicago starts Gibson, gets his backup in Bass, and saves at least 10M by releasing the Captain.

- Pierce to Dallas for Marion+VC and their 2013 pick. Dallas was trying to unload money, right?

Boston can trade those expiring veterans to contenders for trade exceptions/picks/young players, during the season or around the trade deadline.

If they trade for Boozer, they can showcase him and keep Sully out alongside Rondo. Minus the expiring veterans, at the deadline they could field a team of

Bradley/TWill
Lee/Ledo-Hardaway-Bullock(clippers pick)
Green/Shabazz(celtics pick)
Boozer/Shav
Jordan/Melo

That team won't get to the playoffs but they could make the highlight reels every week. If they trade with Dallas, you could add Michael Carter-Williams with their pick, and trade Bass for assets to showcase Sully at the 4. Then, around the 2014 Draft you have a lot of young prospects and a top 10 pick, and the flexibility to make it work. Danny will do the right thing.

[tyrone biggums]

We're talking about players that have yet to play a single minute in the NBA. You can profess that you know how good or bad a player may or may not be, but you don't know. You can't know. ANY player could be a bust. ANY player could be a gem.

Tanking for unproven players is retarded.

well no, this is about the same talent level as the 2003 draft class. every scout knew lebron was going to be good. the same thing with wiggins and parker. they are certified superstars in the nba

Why do people still think like this. Do you remember who the #2 pick was in that draft. He was supposed to become the next Dirk. He was can't miss too!

Tanking for unproven players is moronic unless of course you are 9-60 and have nothing else to play for. Not to mention...the ping pong balls rarely go the Celtics way.

[tyrone biggums]

Tanking may not be an acceptable notion to the fans, but GM wise, it's been proven to work. 

To those who think that it isn't the way to go: remember that most dynasties began by tanking first.

Tanking paid off in '84, big time. The Bulls got Jordan by dropping 14 of their last 15 games that spring, including their final five. The Rockets earned Olajuwon by losing 14 of their last 17, nine of their last 10, and their final five. Aging Elvin Hayes, a shadow of his old self, played a full 53 minutes of an overtime game for Houston during a 129-128 loss to San Antonio in the 81st game of the season.

We are talking Hakeem, Jordan, and Duncan type players.

If you are talking about the comparison between where the players were drafted then sure. But there is no Hakeem or Duncan in the draft and probably not a Jordan either. Maybe a Wade or Melo...just stop with the nonsense

[Celtics18]

As always, the "tank" crowd make some valid points, but I'd rather push for the playoffs, even if it means winning 38 games and just missing the playoffs. 

Sure, it worked out for us in 2007, but if we try it again now, I think we'd basically be pushing our luck too much, and there's a good shot we could end up paying for it for a very, very long time.

The idea that tanking is the only way to get back to contention is nonsense.  There are many avenues to acquire good to great players that don't involve losing games on purpose.

The fact that many fans not only accept losing, but actually root for it, is what's wrong with the way things work in the current NBA.  Management shouldn't be given the opportunity to feed this completely unsporting culture of rooting for losing that has taken hold and is spreading like an insidious cancer throughout the game that we love.