SI on Celtics, Ainge, Stevens. "Celtics aim to develop talent, not tank for more

[Interceptor]

Good point. Totally missed that! OF COURSE, the caveat there is Danny could very well be eyeing a certain player in the top 10 next year, but doesn't want to reveal that.

In other words, I don't think you'll ever hear him say "man, I REALLY want that Julius Randle kid next summer! He can ball!(lol)"

Well, in this specific case it's because he probably doesn't want to get fined. 

[BballTim]

Are there really people that go up to Ainge and plead with him for the Celtics not to win too many games so they can get a high draft pick???

Please tell me that was a figure of speech.

  I'd be willing to wager that people say that to him on a fairly regular basis.

[Tr1boy]

I think it strange that in an article where Ainge claims that he does not see a franchise changing player coming out in this year's draft when people on this blog have been salivating over high school kids and calling them the next Lebron, Durant, Rose or Carmelo, the major topic in the discussion is whether a reporter who has followed the team a long time exaggerated a bit about seeing a future HOFer on the roster every year he has followed the team.

Danny Ainge doesn't see Wiggins or Randle or Parker or Smart as being franchise changing players. Never mind Jabbar or Duncan, he doesn't even see a Durant.

That is the big news in this article. That and the fact that it appears he would rather go the route he took in 2007 to get franchise guys(by trading for them) than drafting potential one and possibly never seeing that materialize or watch it materialize and then see the player leave. His talk about the perceived value of his players around the league was very telling, IMHO.

because its true. None of these kids have proved anything but that they can destroy competition in HS. How many 2nd round to non drafted players in the past 10 years were able to do that also?? 

The Under 20 USA vs WORLD game is prob one of the better indicators of how these players will do in the future. And in the last two years nobody really stood out. In 2012 it was Saric (better than wiggins), and i don't think anyone from the us team stood out. In 2013, Schroeder, Livio Jean Charles stood out from the world team and Randle, Exum had their moments. But none of these guys for example pulled a Dirk 34 point night "i'm the man"

I'm glad danny is not like alot of ppl that go overboard about guys like wiggins bc he has been scouted since he can walk. If wiggins or any of these young guns take their team to the final 8 or at least help them be a top 2-3 seed in the regular season , than the excitement will be real

[manl_lui]

I think it strange that in an article where Ainge claims that he does not see a franchise changing player coming out in this year's draft when people on this blog have been salivating over high school kids and calling them the next Lebron, Durant, Rose or Carmelo, the major topic in the discussion is whether a reporter who has followed the team a long time exaggerated a bit about seeing a future HOFer on the roster every year he has followed the team.

Danny Ainge doesn't see Wiggins or Randle or Parker or Smart as being franchise changing players. Never mind Jabbar or Duncan, he doesn't even see a Durant.

That is the big news in this article. That and the fact that it appears he would rather go the route he took in 2007 to get franchise guys(by trading for them) than drafting potential one and possibly never seeing that materialize or watch it materialize and then see the player leave. His talk about the perceived value of his players around the league was very telling, IMHO.

because its true. None of these kids have proved anything but that they can destroy competition in HS. How many 2nd round to non drafted players in the past 10 years were able to do that also?? 

The Under 20 USA vs WORLD game is prob one of the better indicators of how these players will do in the future. And in the last two years nobody really stood out. In 2012 it was Saric (better than wiggins), and i don't think anyone from the us team stood out. In 2013, Schroeder, Livio Jean Charles stood out from the world team and Randle, Exum had their moments. But none of these guys for example pulled a Dirk 34 point night "i'm the man"

I'm glad danny is not like alot of ppl that go overboard about guys like wiggins bc he has been scouted since he can walk. If wiggins or any of these young guns take their team to the final 8 or at least help them be a top 2-3 seed in the regular season , than the excitement will be real

because tanking just to get a #1 pick is always risky. A. because if you don't get it (see 2007), the player you want might get taken. B. What if the player don't pan out like they are supposed to. Yes, most superstars are drafted in the lottery, but even during that time, it was still a risk and they panned out. I remember KG coming out of high school wasn't exactly playing like ROY. Ask Portland how their lottery picks panned out: see Greg Oden, Sam Bowie, Brandon Roy. How about Adam Morrison, Kwame Brown. Don't get me wrong, I like this upcoming draft class a lot, specifically Julius Randle and Wiggins. But as of right now, none of those kids are proven in the college level, let alone the NBA level. I will have to say, wait until the NCAA season is over than evaluate.

[saltlover]

I don't know about the whole smokescreen subterfuge thing about the draft. Ainge made it extremely clear there were franchise changing players in the 2007 draft and that there were two, well ahead of the draft. I don't see a need to be setting up smokescreens regarding the quality of players in a draft. Their pick will be determined by their record. The salary of that player is per-determined. They aren't going to be moving pieces to acquire a second top 10 pick next year(major assumption but I think it a good one).

He has a bad team. He has an injured star. His team's record is going to be bad. A smokescreen isn't going to stop some massive investigation into the team for purposeful tanking. So why do it?

I don't see a motive for setting up a smokescreen for the perceived quality of the talent coming out of college next year. I do not see what such a thing would accomplish. I think he just believes these young kids have been massively over-hyped(they have) and won't be as good as advertised(most usually aren't).

I think it's because he doesn't see this year's team as likely getting enough lottery balls to get fans' hopes up.   Philly and Phoenix are doing such a tankfest that it'll be nearly impossible to finish worse than either, and there's probably a half-dozen other teams we could be reasonably expected to be better than.  Picking in the 8-12 range isn't going to get one of the top 2-3 potential superstars, so why talk them up only to get your fans disappointed?

[Galeto]

I don't know about the whole smokescreen subterfuge thing about the draft. Ainge made it extremely clear there were franchise changing players in the 2007 draft and that there were two, well ahead of the draft. I don't see a need to be setting up smokescreens regarding the quality of players in a draft. Their pick will be determined by their record. The salary of that player is per-determined. They aren't going to be moving pieces to acquire a second top 10 pick next year(major assumption but I think it a good one).

He has a bad team. He has an injured star. His team's record is going to be bad. A smokescreen isn't going to stop some massive investigation into the team for purposeful tanking. So why do it?

I don't see a motive for setting up a smokescreen for the perceived quality of the talent coming out of college next year. I do not see what such a thing would accomplish. I think he just believes these young kids have been massively over-hyped(they have) and won't be as good as advertised(most usually aren't).

I think it's because he doesn't see this year's team as likely getting enough lottery balls to get fans' hopes up.   Philly and Phoenix are doing such a tankfest that it'll be nearly impossible to finish worse than either, and there's probably a half-dozen other teams we could be reasonably expected to be better than.  Picking in the 8-12 range isn't going to get one of the top 2-3 potential superstars, so why talk them up only to get your fans disappointed?

If Rondo's going to be out a while and considering that early December would only be nine months since his surgery, he might be out a really long time, I find it hard to believe the Celtics will finish in the 8-12 range.  I would take Phoenix's roster over the Celtic's without Rondo for sure.  What you're saying about how awful other teams will be, other fans are saying about the Celtics.  At the end of the season, it might be laughable to have expected this team, with its severe lack of firepower, big man defensive presence and the rookiest of rookie coaches to win something like 35 games.  This team is one of the most expensive collection of role players I can recall. 

At any rate, the good thing about this draft is that it might be deep in potential franchise players.  It won't be the end of the world to get the fifth or sixth pick. 

[chambers]

I don't know about the whole smokescreen subterfuge thing about the draft. Ainge made it extremely clear there were franchise changing players in the 2007 draft and that there were two, well ahead of the draft. I don't see a need to be setting up smokescreens regarding the quality of players in a draft. Their pick will be determined by their record. The salary of that player is per-determined. They aren't going to be moving pieces to acquire a second top 10 pick next year(major assumption but I think it a good one).

He has a bad team. He has an

[Tr1boy]

I don't know about the whole smokescreen subterfuge thing about the draft. Ainge made it extremely clear there were franchise changing players in the 2007 draft and that there were two, well ahead of the draft. I don't see a need to be setting up smokescreens regarding the quality of players in a draft. Their pick will be determined by their record. The salary of that player is per-determined. They aren't going to be moving pieces to acquire a second top 10 pick next year(major assumption but I think it a good one).

He has a bad team. He has an injured star. His team's record is going to be bad. A smokescreen isn't going to stop some massive investigation into the team for purposeful tanking. So why do it?

I don't see a motive for setting up a smokescreen for the perceived quality of the talent coming out of college next year. I do not see what such a thing would accomplish. I think he just believes these young kids have been massively over-hyped(they have) and won't be as good as advertised(most usually aren't).

I think it's because he doesn't see this year's team as likely getting enough lottery balls to get fans' hopes up.   Philly and Phoenix are doing such a tankfest that it'll be nearly impossible to finish worse than either, and there's probably a half-dozen other teams we could be reasonably expected to be better than.  Picking in the 8-12 range isn't going to get one of the top 2-3 potential superstars, so why talk them up only to get your fans disappointed?

If Rondo's going to be out a while and considering that early December would only be nine months since his surgery, he might be out a really long time, I find it hard to believe the Celtics will finish in the 8-12 range.  I would take Phoenix's roster over the Celtic's without Rondo for sure.  What you're saying about how awful other teams will be, other fans are saying about the Celtics.  At the end of the season, it might be laughable to have expected this team, with its severe lack of firepower, big man defensive presence and the rookiest of rookie coaches to win something like 35 games.  This team is one of the most expensive collection of role players I can recall. 

At any rate, the good thing about this draft is that it might be deep in potential franchise players.  It won't be the end of the world to get the fifth or sixth pick.

How did miami win last year without two out of their big three ? How did they win without any of their big three? Yes it was not for a long stretch but they did win 5 or 6 out of 8. The team without their big three is a collection of role players players. No jeff green, no wallace.

The celts have a collection of guys who starting or near starting types. The team has three rookies only. As for the lack of defensive presence issue, just look at how indiana has overcome this issue.

We are not like the magic or cats, just full of young players praying to gel.

[chambers]

I don't know about the whole smokescreen subterfuge thing about the draft. Ainge made it extremely clear there were franchise changing players in the 2007 draft and that there were two, well ahead of the draft. I don't see a need to be setting up smokescreens regarding the quality of players in a draft. Their pick will be determined by their record. The salary of that player is per-determined. They aren't going to be moving pieces to acquire a second top 10 pick next year(major assumption but I think it a good one).

He has a bad team. He has an injured star. His team's record is going to be bad. A smokescreen isn't going to stop some massive investigation into the team for purposeful tanking. So why do it?

I don't see a motive for setting up a smokescreen for the perceived quality of the talent coming out of college next year. I do not see what such a thing would accomplish. I think he just believes these young kids have been massively over-hyped(they have) and won't be as good as advertised(most usually aren't).

Well it's all opinion but to me it makes perfect sense. This is classic Danny Ainge.
Everyone knows we'll suck. Everything he's said goes against the idea of tanking. He's conveyed a message of why it's easier said than done etc.. but he has to do that. What else is he supposed to say? That were not aiming for the playoffs?

He said we don't have that 'star' other than Rondo. In his publicly conveyed opinion about the draft.

Stating that there's no star in this draft-when the rest of the basketball world is frothing over at least 3 or 4 guys who all have the size, length + athleticism to be All Stars is somewhat ridiculous.

Not to mention his man crush on fellow Mormon Jabari Parker...

Again, it's all subjective opinion but when does Danny ever reveal his plans. He keeps his cards close to his chest and plays the NBA management game like a very  good poker player. Extremely conservative   with his chips..often appearing reckless or as a 'gambler'...but usually seems to come away with the goods...putting all his money in at the right time.

I don't buy it for a minute and if he really wanted a top 5 guy, why would he tell everyone he wants them?
Danny Ainge the day before we traded Pierce...(along the lines of) 'we're not looking at doing anything in the immediate future, there are no trades imminent'.
The next day Pierce, Terry and KG were gone.

There's no reason to smokescreen our season expectations. We are underdogs with the goal of making the playoffs as we enter training camp.

He's established that our one star won't be back till December- but that's a 'guess' too.

I think the most important thing to remember here is that even if Danny honestly doesn't see a player he likes enough to tank, that still doesn't mean there's not reason to...
Landing a top 8 pick would give us a huge trade asset to get a player that Danny likes..ie Durant or Love or Aldridge etc..

I noticed that he described Avery,Sully,Green and even Rondo as players with 'value'.

Hmmmmm.

Make of it what you want- that's part of the fun of the off season. Personally he's conveying the same old Danny Ainge. Saying all the right things, thinking something completely different-or considering the exact opposite.
Ultimately he'll keep his options open without saying/revealing too much and waiting for the time to strike.

And how can he realistically determine that there's not a single guy in the draft that could be a franchise player? They haven't even played a day of college yet haha.
Classic Ainge.

[D.o.s.]

I don't know about the whole smokescreen subterfuge thing about the draft. Ainge made it extremely clear there were franchise changing players in the 2007 draft and that there were two, well ahead of the draft. I don't see a need to be setting up smokescreens regarding the quality of players in a draft. Their pick will be determined by their record. The salary of that player is per-determined. They aren't going to be moving pieces to acquire a second top 10 pick next year(major assumption but I think it a good one).

He has a bad team. He has an injured star. His team's record is going to be bad. A smokescreen isn't going to stop some massive investigation into the team for purposeful tanking. So why do it?

I don't see a motive for setting up a smokescreen for the perceived quality of the talent coming out of college next year. I do not see what such a thing would accomplish. I think he just believes these young kids have been massively over-hyped(they have) and won't be as good as advertised(most usually aren't).

I think it's because he doesn't see this year's team as likely getting enough lottery balls to get fans' hopes up.   Philly and Phoenix are doing such a tankfest that it'll be nearly impossible to finish worse than either, and there's probably a half-dozen other teams we could be reasonably expected to be better than.  Picking in the 8-12 range isn't going to get one of the top 2-3 potential superstars, so why talk them up only to get your fans disappointed?

If Rondo's going to be out a while and considering that early December would only be nine months since his surgery, he might be out a really long time, I find it hard to believe the Celtics will finish in the 8-12 range.  I would take Phoenix's roster over the Celtic's without Rondo for sure.  What you're saying about how awful other teams will be, other fans are saying about the Celtics.  At the end of the season, it might be laughable to have expected this team, with its severe lack of firepower, big man defensive presence and the rookiest of rookie coaches to win something like 35 games.  This team is one of the most expensive collection of role players I can recall. 

At any rate, the good thing about this draft is that it might be deep in potential franchise players.  It won't be the end of the world to get the fifth or sixth pick.

How did miami win last year without two out of their big three ? How did they win without any of their big three? Yes it was not for a long stretch but they did win 5 or 6 out of 8. The team without their big three is a collection of role players players. No jeff green, no wallace.

The celts have a collection of guys who starting or near starting types. The team has three rookies only. As for the lack of defensive presence issue, just look at how indiana has overcome this issue.

We are not like the magic or cats, just full of young players praying to gel.

By having an above-average defensive center (not to mention that, he's you know, an All-Star) who makes teams work much harder at driving to the hoop?

Yeah, ok.

[Tr1boy]

I don't know about the whole smokescreen subterfuge thing about the draft. Ainge made it extremely clear there were franchise changing players in the 2007 draft and that there were two, well ahead of the draft. I don't see a need to be setting up smokescreens regarding the quality of players in a draft. Their pick will be determined by their record. The salary of that player is per-determined. They aren't going to be moving pieces to acquire a second top 10 pick next year(major assumption but I think it a good one).

He has a bad team. He has an injured star. His team's record is going to be bad. A smokescreen isn't going to stop some massive investigation into the team for purposeful tanking. So why do it?

I don't see a motive for setting up a smokescreen for the perceived quality of the talent coming out of college next year. I do not see what such a thing would accomplish. I think he just believes these young kids have been massively over-hyped(they have) and won't be as good as advertised(most usually aren't).

I think it's because he doesn't see this year's team as likely getting enough lottery balls to get fans' hopes up.   Philly and Phoenix are doing such a tankfest that it'll be nearly impossible to finish worse than either, and there's probably a half-dozen other teams we could be reasonably expected to be better than.  Picking in the 8-12 range isn't going to get one of the top 2-3 potential superstars, so why talk them up only to get your fans disappointed?

If Rondo's going to be out a while and considering that early December would only be nine months since his surgery, he might be out a really long time, I find it hard to believe the Celtics will finish in the 8-12 range.  I would take Phoenix's roster over the Celtic's without Rondo for sure.  What you're saying about how awful other teams will be, other fans are saying about the Celtics.  At the end of the season, it might be laughable to have expected this team, with its severe lack of firepower, big man defensive presence and the rookiest of rookie coaches to win something like 35 games.  This team is one of the most expensive collection of role players I can recall. 

At any rate, the good thing about this draft is that it might be deep in potential franchise players.  It won't be the end of the world to get the fifth or sixth pick.

How did miami win last year without two out of their big three ? How did they win without any of their big three? Yes it was not for a long stretch but they did win 5 or 6 out of 8. The team without their big three is a collection of role players players. No jeff green, no wallace.

The celts have a collection of guys who starting or near starting types. The team has three rookies only. As for the lack of defensive presence issue, just look at how indiana has overcome this issue.

We are not like the magic or cats, just full of young players praying to gel.

By having an above-average defensive center (not to mention that, he's you know, an All-Star) who makes teams work much harder at driving to the hoop?

Yeah, ok.

Whatever man. Hibbert all star or not has never been considered a scary defensive presence. But he is 7 ft with good iq and ok mobility right?

And then there is david west. No comment. The bottom line is, they play as a team and play really good team d.

[Celtics18]

Of course I think Danny would love to see this team win at least 35 games and make a run at the playoffs.  If they can do that, then it's more or less a given that some of the young guys on this team will need to step up their games considerably, making them much more lucrative assets than they are currently.  Heck, the same goes for some of the older guys for that matter.

Making the playoffs would, in my opinion, actually mean that we have considerably more assets going forward than if we stink up the joint and tank for a top five draft pick. 

If the latter scenario becomes reality, then our team really will be seen as a collection of nothing but scrubs. 

[SHAQATTACK]

Hope the coach can handle losing.

[moiso]

like it or not, Rick P. is a Hall of Famer in the Basketball Hall of Fame (note: not just the NBA)

good point

He didn't coach those two teams that were listed though.

[D.o.s.]

I don't know about the whole smokescreen subterfuge thing about the draft. Ainge made it extremely clear there were franchise changing players in the 2007 draft and that there were two, well ahead of the draft. I don't see a need to be setting up smokescreens regarding the quality of players in a draft. Their pick will be determined by their record. The salary of that player is per-determined. They aren't going to be moving pieces to acquire a second top 10 pick next year(major assumption but I think it a good one).

He has a bad team. He has an injured star. His team's record is going to be bad. A smokescreen isn't going to stop some massive investigation into the team for purposeful tanking. So why do it?

I don't see a motive for setting up a smokescreen for the perceived quality of the talent coming out of college next year. I do not see what such a thing would accomplish. I think he just believes these young kids have been massively over-hyped(they have) and won't be as good as advertised(most usually aren't).

I think it's because he doesn't see this year's team as likely getting enough lottery balls to get fans' hopes up.   Philly and Phoenix are doing such a tankfest that it'll be nearly impossible to finish worse than either, and there's probably a half-dozen other teams we could be reasonably expected to be better than.  Picking in the 8-12 range isn't going to get one of the top 2-3 potential superstars, so why talk them up only to get your fans disappointed?

If Rondo's going to be out a while and considering that early December would only be nine months since his surgery, he might be out a really long time, I find it hard to believe the Celtics will finish in the 8-12 range.  I would take Phoenix's roster over the Celtic's without Rondo for sure.  What you're saying about how awful other teams will be, other fans are saying about the Celtics.  At the end of the season, it might be laughable to have expected this team, with its severe lack of firepower, big man defensive presence and the rookiest of rookie coaches to win something like 35 games.  This team is one of the most expensive collection of role players I can recall. 

At any rate, the good thing about this draft is that it might be deep in potential franchise players.  It won't be the end of the world to get the fifth or sixth pick.

How did miami win last year without two out of their big three ? How did they win without any of their big three? Yes it was not for a long stretch but they did win 5 or 6 out of 8. The team without their big three is a collection of role players players. No jeff green, no wallace.

The celts have a collection of guys who starting or near starting types. The team has three rookies only. As for the lack of defensive presence issue, just look at how indiana has overcome this issue.

We are not like the magic or cats, just full of young players praying to gel.

By having an above-average defensive center (not to mention that, he's you know, an All-Star) who makes teams work much harder at driving to the hoop?

Yeah, ok.

Whatever man. Hibbert all star or not has never been considered a scary defensive presence. But he is 7 ft with good iq and ok mobility right?

And then there is david west. No comment. The bottom line is, they play as a team and play really good team d.

Yes, they play good-to-great team defense.

Otherwise: Are you serious?

Hibbert finished in the top ten for DPOY. He repeatedly made the Heat look foolish during the ECF last year. In the playoffs. In (Chris Webber voice) "Playoff Basketball."

Here's some description from ESPN:

The Heat shot 58.5 percent in the restricted area in the Heat/Pacers series with Hibbert on the floor.

When he was on the bench it was 67.6 percent.

When Hibbert mans the court, the Heat take 33.1 percent of their shots in the restricted area. When Hibbert sits, that numbers rises to 42.0 percent.

This isn't just a one-series blip. In a research paper presented at the MIT Sports Conference, Grantland's Kirk Goldsberry found that when players shot the ball inside five feet with Hibbert nearby, they converted those shots at just 38.2 percent, the lowest rate in the league this season. Hibbert also prevented those shots from even happening at one of the highest rates in the league.

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2013/story/_/page/hibbert-130601/roy-hibbert-making-heat-change-their-ways

With all due respect, weren't you the guy saying David Lee was a good defender? I've got to seriously question what you're watching on the court if you think Hibbert's not a great defensive presence.