The Celtics are the new Atlanta Hawks

[Celtics18]

Are people just assuming that Rondo won't play next season?

[AusCeltic]

That team would be horrible 30 wins max, who is going to score? There are no shooters on that team and no one who commands a double team. Even with Rondo, who I think would struggle with that team and the lack of shooters to spread the floor; teams would just clog the lane and make it harder for him to drive. Add to that it would be a poor defensive team inside as Sully and Olynk are not remotely close to KG and you have a lotto bound team

[tarheelsxxiii]

Agree with OP re: both our standing among the teams in the East and how much these draft picks are being overvalued.

Does you honestly think we're going to S&T for another KG? That was the perfect scenario for such a move, and it's not happening again. 

[PhoSita]

You're really overrating that lineup / underrating the Hawks.

The Hawks had 3 All-Star caliber players when they were winning 45-50 games each season.

[tarheelsxxiii]

You're really overrating that lineup / underrating the Hawks.

The Hawks had 3 All-Star caliber players when they were winning 45-50 games each season.

The point is not that we will be nearly as good as the Hawks. OP is merely saying we are going to find ourselves in the same predicament of being a mediocre, early exit team for many years.

[KCattheStripe]

As long as we don't draft Marvin Williams over  CP3 , I 'm fine with being the Hawks.

[LarBrd33]

Man some fans really don't understand the concept of homerism.  Just because you've heard of a player doesn't make him better than his peers.

A Healthy Rondo-lead Celtic team was below .500 until he went out.  They improved with him injured and limped into the playoffs with 41 wins... and were promptly beaten by a better Knicks team.   Our best defensive player by far was Kevin Garnett.  Pierce basically carried our offense down the stretch.  You get rid of our two best per-minute players and think this team is somehow going to improve? 

With Rondo they win 25-38.  Without him it's the bottom of the standings.

By "new Atlanta Hawks" are you referring to a hypothetical "new Atlanta Hawks" team that loses Josh Smith to free agency and doesn't make any additions?  Because then I'd agree with you... 25-38 wins.

[clover]

You're really overrating that lineup / underrating the Hawks.

The Hawks had 3 All-Star caliber players when they were winning 45-50 games each season.

Exactly.  Minus Rondo the C's don't have a single player who has ever made an NBA All-Star team.

[CelticsFan9]

Maybe I wasn't clear: I'm not saying the Celtics have the same talent-level as the '08-'13 Atlanta Hawks.  What I am saying is the Celtics are going to end up finding themselves as a playoff team that won't do anything special in the playoffs.

Also: could anyone who disagrees with me name eight Eastern Conference teams that are undoubtedly better than the lineup I listed in the OP?

[tarheelsxxiii]

Man some fans really don't understand the concept of homerism.  Just because you've heard of a player doesn't make him better than his peers.

A Healthy Rondo-lead Celtic team was below .500 until he went out.  They improved with him injured and limped into the playoffs with 41 wins... and were promptly beaten by a better Knicks team.   Our best defensive player by far was Kevin Garnett.  Pierce basically carried our offense down the stretch.  You get rid of our two best per-minute players and think this team is somehow going to improve? 

With Rondo they win 25-38.  Without him it's the bottom of the standings.

By "new Atlanta Hawks" are you referring to a hypothetical "new Atlanta Hawks" team that loses Josh Smith to free agency and doesn't make any additions?  Because then I'd agree with you... 25-38 wins.

You may be missing a substantial population of  "homers" - there are those fans that overvalue the players of their hometown team, and then there are those "homers" who overvalue the GMs of their hometown team.

[BballTim]

Maybe I wasn't clear: I'm not saying the Celtics have the same talent-level as the '08-'13 Atlanta Hawks.  What I am saying is the Celtics are going to end up finding themselves as a playoff team that won't do anything special in the playoffs.

Also: could anyone who disagrees with me name eight Eastern Conference teams that are undoubtedly better than the lineup I listed in the OP?

  I don't understand how you're projecting what the Celts will be like for a number of years when you have no idea what moves Danny will make or who will be on the team in the future. Right now that's pretty much up in the air.

[LarBrd33]

Man some fans really don't understand the concept of homerism.  Just because you've heard of a player doesn't make him better than his peers.

A Healthy Rondo-lead Celtic team was below .500 until he went out.  They improved with him injured and limped into the playoffs with 41 wins... and were promptly beaten by a better Knicks team.   Our best defensive player by far was Kevin Garnett.  Pierce basically carried our offense down the stretch.  You get rid of our two best per-minute players and think this team is somehow going to improve? 

With Rondo they win 25-38.  Without him it's the bottom of the standings.

By "new Atlanta Hawks" are you referring to a hypothetical "new Atlanta Hawks" team that loses Josh Smith to free agency and doesn't make any additions?  Because then I'd agree with you... 25-38 wins.

You may be missing a substantial population of  "homers" - there are those fans that overvalue the players of their hometown team, and then there are those "homers" who overvalue the GMs of their hometown team.

There's been like 9 teams to win a championship in the past 40 years.  It's not an easy thing to do.  Ainge took over a garbage celtic team and turned them into a contender in 4 years.  He's worthy of praise.

I fully support his decision to tank it up this year.  He knows what he's doing. 

[bfrombleacher]

Maybe I wasn't clear: I'm not saying the Celtics have the same talent-level as the '08-'13 Atlanta Hawks.  What I am saying is the Celtics are going to end up finding themselves as a playoff team that won't do anything special in the playoffs.

Also: could anyone who disagrees with me name eight Eastern Conference teams that are undoubtedly better than the lineup I listed in the OP?

  I don't understand how you're projecting what the Celts will be like for a number of years when you have no idea what moves Danny will make or who will be on the team in the future. Right now that's pretty much up in the air.

This can be said for so many comments around these parts haha. People be psychic!

[CelticsFan9]

Man some fans really don't understand the concept of homerism.  Just because you've heard of a player doesn't make him better than his peers.

A Healthy Rondo-lead Celtic team was below .500 until he went out.  They improved with him injured and limped into the playoffs with 41 wins... and were promptly beaten by a better Knicks team.   Our best defensive player by far was Kevin Garnett.  Pierce basically carried our offense down the stretch.  You get rid of our two best per-minute players and think this team is somehow going to improve? 

With Rondo they win 25-38.  Without him it's the bottom of the standings.

By "new Atlanta Hawks" are you referring to a hypothetical "new Atlanta Hawks" team that loses Josh Smith to free agency and doesn't make any additions?  Because then I'd agree with you... 25-38 wins.

You may be missing a substantial population of  "homers" - there are those fans that overvalue the players of their hometown team, and then there are those "homers" who overvalue the GMs of their hometown team.

There's been like 9 teams to win a championship in the past 40 years.  It's not an easy thing to do.  Ainge took over a garbage celtic team and turned them into a contender in 4 years.  He's worthy of praise.

I fully support his decision to tank it up this year.  He knows what he's doing.

I think the Celtics should tank, and I agree that the moves Danny has made thus far reflect that.

However, looking at the team's roster, and looking at the rosters of other Eastern Conference teams, I see us making the playoffs UNLESS Danny tells the new coach to throw games and/or tells the players to sit out ala '07.

[CelticsFan9]

Maybe I wasn't clear: I'm not saying the Celtics have the same talent-level as the '08-'13 Atlanta Hawks.  What I am saying is the Celtics are going to end up finding themselves as a playoff team that won't do anything special in the playoffs.

Also: could anyone who disagrees with me name eight Eastern Conference teams that are undoubtedly better than the lineup I listed in the OP?

  I don't understand how you're projecting what the Celts will be like for a number of years when you have no idea what moves Danny will make or who will be on the team in the future. Right now that's pretty much up in the air.

I'm going under the assumption that the Celtics' lineup will look like what I posted in the OP, with maybe a few FAs thrown in (nothing big).