"Running it back" is a waste of everyone's time. History shows us this.

[Casperian]

I prefer bananas.

All this historical stuff is completely pointless since it ignores our specific situation, which is all that matters.

If you don´t want to play the draft game to rebuild, you have to bring in free agents.

You know what I would like to see? A reasonable list of potential free agents over the next few years willing to sign for the Celtics, which will bring us back into contention. What is your specific alternative?
It´s easy to shoot down any plan on rebuilding you don´t like, which are all never guaranteed, without providing one yourself.

Who is this star player you want to bring to Boston, a bad weather city with high taxes, full of mediocre players (after the breakup), who doesn´t want to earn more money by staying with the team which drafted him, to get us #18?

All you´re going to get that way is players who a) nobody else wanted and/or b) you overpaid for.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Poor timing for this thread given that the Spurs, a team to have last won a championship in 2006-2007, is one win away for getting a title six seasons later with the same core. Duncan is 37. Ginobili is 35. Tony Parker is 31.

Run it back and forth till the wheels fall off.

[/threadover]

How ignorant. Compare apples to oranges much?

I prefer bananas.

Okay. If you really want to get into it. Only TWICE in the past 27 years has a team earning a top three pick gone on to win a championship over the course of their pick's rookie contract. Those two teams, the above mentioned Spurs and everyone's favorite edge case the Detroit Pistions with the "help" of Darko Milicic.

You know what the most likely outcome is for a team earning a top three pick over their next FOUR seasons - more trips to the lottery. Fully a third of teams don't make the playoffs even once.

Here's a good read if you've got the time. Why Tanking Doesn't Work in the NBA.

Now let's see if you can return serve, Yang.

All this historical stuff is completely pointless since it ignores our specific situation, which is all that matters.

If you don't want to play the draft game to rebuild, you have to bring in free agents.

You know what I would like to see? A reasonable list of potential free agents over the next few years willing to sign for the Celtics, which will bring us back into contention. What is your specific alternative? It's easy to shoot down any plan on rebuilding you don't like, which are all never guaranteed, without providing one yourself.

Who is this star player you want to bring to Boston, a bad weather city with high taxes, full of mediocre players (after the breakup), who doesn´t want to earn more money by staying with the team which drafted him, to get us #18?

All you´re going to get that way is players who a) nobody else wanted and/or b) you overpaid for.

That's not fair, when you haven't provided more detail to your three point strategy of:

1. Draft 2. ?? 3. Profit.

That's even worse than my proposition to run it back.

You suggest that the past twenty-seven years of NBA drafts are all "completely pointless." But if you're going to argue in favor of the lottery then you need *some* evidence that a team can win a title going that route. Don't get cranky with me because there just isn't any.

I understand it's upsetting because the league perpetuates a myth of competitive balance, but the overwhelming evidence is that winning teams continue to win and losing teams continue to lose, draft be [dang]ed.

I'm happy to consider counter evidence?

[Casperian]

That's not fair, you haven't provided more detail to your three point strategy of 1. Draft 2. ?? 3. Profit. That's even worse than my proposition to run it back.

You suggest that the past twenty-seven years of NBA drafts are all "completely pointless." But if you're going to argue in favor of the lottery then you need *some* evidence that a team can win a title going that route. Don't get cranky with me because there just isn't any.

I understand it's upsetting because the league perpetuates a myth of competitive balance, but the overwhelming evidence is that winning teams continue to win and losing teams continue to lose, draft be [dang]ed.

I'm happy to consider counter evidence?

So you have none? That´s what I thought. Nice strawman, anyway.

[PhoSita]

I prefer bananas.

All this historical stuff is completely pointless since it ignores our specific situation, which is all that matters.

If you don´t want to play the draft game to rebuild, you have to bring in free agents.

You know what I would like to see? A reasonable list of potential free agents over the next few years willing to sign for the Celtics, which will bring us back into contention. What is your specific alternative?
It´s easy to shoot down any plan on rebuilding you don´t like, which are all never guaranteed, without providing one yourself.

Who is this star player you want to bring to Boston, a bad weather city with high taxes, full of mediocre players (after the breakup), who doesn´t want to earn more money by staying with the team which drafted him, to get us #18?

All you´re going to get that way is players who a) nobody else wanted and/or b) you overpaid for.

Exactly.

The list of teams who successfully rebuilt their way to a title may be fairly short, but I can guarantee you that the list of teams who did it through free agency and selecting players in the middle of the first round is far, far shorter.

[The Walker Wiggle]

So you have none? That´s what I thought. Nice strawman, anyway.

If I only had a brain?

I don't have to know what will work to know what won't work.

[Lucky17]

Rather than overpay for free agents, I'd rather rebuild by leveraging cap space for draft picks.

That's the smarter way to do it.

[lightspeed5]

Rondo is elite.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Exactly.

The list of teams who successfully rebuilt their way to a title may be fairly short, but I can guarantee you that the list of teams who did it through free agency and selecting players in the middle of the first round is far, far shorter.

Okay, I'll play. Team's that have won titles since 2000 without a top 5 lottery pick of their own.

Los Angeles, Dallas, Boston, Detroit

Your turn.

[PhoSita]

Exactly.

The list of teams who successfully rebuilt their way to a title may be fairly short, but I can guarantee you that the list of teams who did it through free agency and selecting players in the middle of the first round is far, far shorter.

Okay, I'll play. Team's that have won titles since 2000 without a top 5 lottery pick of their own.

Los Angeles, Dallas, Boston, Detroit

Your turn.

LAL don't count because they are the Lakers.  That's how they got Kobe (dropped b/c he wanted to play in LA) and Shaq (free agent).  If you move the Celtics to Los Angeles and have them become a magnet for celebrities, we'll talk.  The Lakers have stayed relevant throughout the years because they're the biggest free agent draw in the league.  The Celtics have never signed a superstar free agent.

Dallas was built around a lottery pick superstar.  Not a top 5 pick, but he was top 10, and would've gone higher in today's NBA where foreigners are better scouted.

Boston used a top 5 pick to trade for Ray Allen, which directly led to KG coming to Boston, so they don't count either.

So you're left with the Pistons.  The only team to do it in the past 40 years.  Even the Pistons had a top 5 pick the summer before winning their title, though they picked Darko, so that doesn't count, for obvious reasons.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Exactly.

The list of teams who successfully rebuilt their way to a title may be fairly short, but I can guarantee you that the list of teams who did it through free agency and selecting players in the middle of the first round is far, far shorter.

Okay, I'll play. Team's that have won titles since 2000 without a top 5 lottery pick of their own.

Los Angeles, Dallas, Boston, Detroit

Your turn.

LAL don't count because they are the Lakers.  That's how they got Kobe (dropped b/c he wanted to play in LA) and Shaq (free agent).  If you move the Celtics to Los Angeles and have them become a magnet for celebrities, we'll talk. 

Dallas was built around a lottery pick superstar.  Not a top 5 pick, but he was top 10, and would've gone higher in today's NBA where foreigners are better scouted.

Boston used a top 5 pick to trade for Ray Allen, which directly led to KG coming to Boston, so they don't count either.

So you're left with the Pistons.  The only team to do it in the past 40 years.  Even the Pistons had a top 5 pick the summer before winning their title, though they picked Darko, so that doesn't count, for obvious reasons.

Next time I'd appreciate it if you'd lay out the rules beforehand. Anyway, who's on your list?

[fantankerous]

Exactly.

The list of teams who successfully rebuilt their way to a title may be fairly short, but I can guarantee you that the list of teams who did it through free agency and selecting players in the middle of the first round is far, far shorter.

Okay, I'll play. Team's that have won titles since 2000 without a top 5 lottery pick of their own.

Los Angeles, Dallas, Boston, Detroit

Your turn.

LAL don't count because they are the Lakers.  That's how they got Kobe (dropped b/c he wanted to play in LA) and Shaq (free agent).  If you move the Celtics to Los Angeles and have them become a magnet for celebrities, we'll talk. 

Dallas was built around a lottery pick superstar.  Not a top 5 pick, but he was top 10, and would've gone higher in today's NBA where foreigners are better scouted.

Boston used a top 5 pick to trade for Ray Allen, which directly led to KG coming to Boston, so they don't count either.

So you're left with the Pistons.  The only team to do it in the past 40 years.  Even the Pistons had a top 5 pick the summer before winning their title, though they picked Darko, so that doesn't count, for obvious reasons.

More importantly on the LAL example, they signed Shaq under a CBA without the restrictions and incentives that make landing a free agent superstar prohibitive today.  In fact, Shaq was largely the reason these changes were instituted.  Therefore, LAL cannot serve as a model for a Celtics rebuild because the context is far different.

[LB3533]

Running it back with an injury riddled team doesn't work. But running it back with a healthy team consisting of a good mix of star veterans and role players who know how to play defense and team offense surely leads to a contending team.

Every season we have been healthy we have contended for some kind of championship (2008, 2010, 2012). In 2009 and 2011 we were ousted by the eventual Finals Eastern represented team (Orlando, Miami).

[PhoSita]

Exactly.

The list of teams who successfully rebuilt their way to a title may be fairly short, but I can guarantee you that the list of teams who did it through free agency and selecting players in the middle of the first round is far, far shorter.

Okay, I'll play. Team's that have won titles since 2000 without a top 5 lottery pick of their own.

Los Angeles, Dallas, Boston, Detroit

Your turn.

LAL don't count because they are the Lakers.  That's how they got Kobe (dropped b/c he wanted to play in LA) and Shaq (free agent).  If you move the Celtics to Los Angeles and have them become a magnet for celebrities, we'll talk. 

Dallas was built around a lottery pick superstar.  Not a top 5 pick, but he was top 10, and would've gone higher in today's NBA where foreigners are better scouted.

Boston used a top 5 pick to trade for Ray Allen, which directly led to KG coming to Boston, so they don't count either.

So you're left with the Pistons.  The only team to do it in the past 40 years.  Even the Pistons had a top 5 pick the summer before winning their title, though they picked Darko, so that doesn't count, for obvious reasons.

Next time I'd appreciate it if you'd lay out the rules beforehand. Anyway, who's on your list?

Who's on my list of teams that got a title by rebuilding through free agency and picks in the middle of the first round or later?  Well, I think the list since the merger includes the 2004 Pistons and the early 2000s Lakers.  Only the Pistons really count for our purposes.  The Lakers are kind of their own unique thing and shouldn't be used as a model for any other team.


In the league today, we have a couple of young teams that are close to being elite teams who never tanked for a high pick.  The Rockets got Harden last year after spending multiple years just outside of the playoffs.  But the jury is still out on whether Morey will manage to put the necessary pieces around Harden to be truly elite.  But they got their superstar, at least.

The Pacers look like a very nice young team, but I think they may have already come close to their ceiling, with all respect to Paul George.  We'll see.  Even Paul George was a #10 pick.

I'm a big believer in teams needing at least a top 10 pick, and usually more than one, to find the assets necessary to put together a championship contending core.

Some of the teams that got top 10 picks that turned into superstars weren't all-out tanking a la Charlotte or Orlando this year, or the Spurs tanking for Duncan.  But you have to at least abandon the idea of trying to be competitive if you want to get a top 10 pick.

[The Walker Wiggle]

What? No, I thought you were arguing in favor of the draft. Who's on your list of team's that have won a title within five years of drafting a top 3 pick?

San Antonio
Detroit (technically, but I slipped them past you)

That's it. Miami if we say top 5, but somebody just told me that signing a free agent superstar is now prohibitively expensive. So you can't have them.

I guess we're tied 1-1. Good match.

[dark_lord]

The superstars have a stranglehold on determining the future course of the NBA and not the GMs or coaches.

this