PLEASE READ: I very much look forward to hearing intellectual arguments against this proposition, but so far the majority of these comments completely ignore every major point of this post. I know this is a wordy post, but please at least skim it to get an idea of what I'm trying to say. Thank you.
It seems a lot of people here are embodying the casual fan mindset and thinking that tanking for the 2014 and continuing to pile on assets for further drafts is the absolute best, and only, way to go right now. This post is to show why a much quicker retool that does not involve turning the franchise into a miserable joke for the next few seasons is not just possible, but the better choice.
The whole Thunder model looks so appealing. The Thunder have been championship contenders for a few years now, and look poised to remain that way for many years to come. As such, many lottery teams have tried to go that way. But why aren't teams like Minnesota, Cleveland, and Washington seeing that same success? I mean, none of those teams are even seeing the slightest of improvements over the past few years. Of course, Durant is simply on another level. But did the Nuggets go anywhere when they drafted Carmelo? How about the Raptors with Bosh? Of all these teams, none have become champions, and only the Thunder have been able to become championship contenders. The Thunder model is enticing to say the least, but it requires so much luck and skill. We certainly have the skill in Ainge, but nothing can control that much luck.
The alternative that I believe is much better is MUCH safer that would produce a same result, if not better, than the much riskier tank method. The Pacers came so close to the Finals this year because despite a lack of a superstar, they had solid contributions from the whole team. None of Hill, Stephenson, George, West, or Hibbert have names that truly blow you away, but they all play solid team basketball. With the Spurs, Parker and Ginobili really underproduced in the Finals, and it's arguable that Duncan could be called their "star", but it was guys like Leonard, Green, and even Diaw of all people who were key contributors.
What could Boston do? For some reason, the names that are most often thrown around here are the worst options available. Josh Smith? Al Jefferson? Even Andy Varejao? PASS x3! People do realize that Paul Millsap is available? JJ Hickson or Carl Landry would be an excellent hustle backup if Sully/Olynyk are needed in a trade. Guys like Jarrett Jack and JJ Redick are also available. Moving even further down, a guy like Eric Maynor would be an excellent backup PG behind Rondo. And through trades, even more names are available, like Marcin Gortat.
You may note that none of these names are flashy. There are no Dwight Howard's or Chris Paul's. There aren't even Josh Smith's. But that's the point. As opposed to a Heat model or a Thunder model, look at this as a Pacers/Grizzlies model, if you will.
The Pacers make do with Hill, Stephenson, George, West, and Hibbert. The Grizzlies make do with Conley, Allen, Prince, Randolph, and Gasol. Why couldn't the C's make do with Rondo, Lee, Green, Millsap, and Gortat? That's a solid starting lineup, and Rondo, Green, and Millsap are all proven Heat killers. Say we gave up Bass and Bradley for Gortat. That still means we have Crawford, Sullinger, and Olynyk on the bench, with the potential for guys like Maynor and Aminu to round it out. A bench with a backbone like that looks better than Indiana's and Memphis's, too.
I'll be the first to say that if Boston did this, we'd be a first or second round exit for the first few years. That's always a terrible ending, but I actually WANT this sort of team to be a first or second round exit early on. We'll build experience and chemistry through these exits, and become contenders afterwards. Look at Memphis. They were ousted by a Clippers team led by Vinny Del Negro of all coaches, and came right back to advance all the way to the WCF. Even without Hollins, you can bet that they'll be one of the favorites to come out of the West again this year.
And another thing to consider with all these teams is that all of them can retool on the fly without having to sacrifice a few years of absolute ugliness. The Thunder traded Green and then Harden. The Grizzlies let Mayo walk and traded Gay. And so on. This is what smart teams do. Once they're in a good spot, they don't relinquish it. They don't give it all up for CHANCE of all things in the lottery. If they need to make changes, they do so without blowing everything up. Boston is in this position right now. We have assets, and we could've traded KG/PP for more that didn't involve taking back Gerald Wallace. We have Rondo and Green, two young players entering their prime, on team-friendly contracts. Guys like Gerald Wallace, Deandre Jordan, and Andrea Bargnani are getting paid around what Rondo and Green get paid. Very few teams entering a new era have the privilege of saying they're in a situation like we are right now.
Ainge is a good GM, and I have faith in his plans. It's just incredibly depressing to think that we could've remained a playoff team and then have a legitimate shot in about 2-3 years. Now, we're locked in to be borderline unwatchable for about that same time, and then wait an additional ~5 years after that before we have a shot at being championship contenders.
Topic: In Summary: Why we should have retooled, not rebuilt (Read 8093 times)