What Has Danny Done?

[LooseCannon]

If he's right and a top 5 pick is a lock for a star... do you really think that winning 35 games this season is best for our long-term future?

I believe that winning 20 games this season means that all the young players suck and will never be good starters in this league, so I'd rather have a team good enough to come close to making the playoffs as a solid foundation to build upon rather than a top 5 pick and a bunch of dead weight.

I hear what you're saying.  It's a fair point.  You're suggesting that if we win a mere 20 games, it means that Sully and Oly probably played like garbage.  Whereas if we win 35, it means those guys exceeded expectations for 21/22 year olds.  Interesting thought. 

I think that's why I feel a lot better about wins where Sully/Oly/Bradley are the main contributors vs wins where the mediocre vets are the main contributors.  It gives you hope for the future... "How good can Sully and Oly get?!"

I don't know if I completely agree, though.  Rondo and Perk showed good potential the year we tanked in 07.  You could see talent there.  They contributed to a champion the next year.  Losing didn't stick with them...

That team was 20-27 when Pierce played, which is the same winning percentage as a 35-win team over a full season.

If you look at teams that have been described as building a successful team after a tank job, you see that they usually weren't teams that hit rock bottom in terms of talent, they were teams that had talent in place and got a good draft pick by under-performing due to injury. 

Having the worst roster if you assume every player in the NBA is completely healthy is a horrible place to be.  So, I can't really root for the team to be that bad because it is such a hole that even the #1 draft pick might not fix that.  I also can't root for Celtics to be injured to torpedo the season, but I would certainly agree to shifting into what might be a more obvious tank mode if the team gets wrecked by injuries.

[VitorSullyandKOFan]

The young players are developing and playing hard but we will lose a lot of games because the talent gap is going to catch up.

[Celtics18]

The young players are developing and playing hard but we will lose a lot of games because the talent gap is going to catch up.

Au contraire.  The talent gap is going to be closed shortly with the return of an All Star point guard. 

[kozlodoev]

We won 36 Pitino's first season.  How'd that do for our long-term success?... It took us a full decade until we were a 50 win team.

And the reason for that were Pitino's 36 wins? Nah.

The Celtics had high picks in 1996 (6), 1997 (3 and 6), 1998 (10), 2000 (11), and 2001 (10 and 11).

No form of tanking effort will give us a better crop of picks over the next 5 years. The reason the team flailed and failed in the late 1990s is the incompetent management, not lack of drafting position -- Ainge managed more with less.

Ironically, the 36-win Pitino season produced Paul Pierce. Take that for what you will.

[Celtics4ever]

No form of tanking effort will give us a better crop of picks over the next 5 years. The reason the team flailed and failed in the late 1990s is the incompetent management, not lack of drafting position -- Ainge managed more with less.

Not to mention Pitino getting rid of guys like Joe Johnson and Chauncey Billups on a whim for nothing in return.

[mmmmm]

No form of tanking effort will give us a better crop of picks over the next 5 years. The reason the team flailed and failed in the late 1990s is the incompetent management, not lack of drafting position -- Ainge managed more with less.

Not to mention Pitino getting rid of guys like Joe Johnson and Chauncey Billups on a whim for nothing in return.

Which illustrates that by far, Pitino's greatest failings weren't as an NBA coach, coming from the college ranks.   They were as an NBA General Manager with jack for experience and no real understanding of the CBA or skill for the job.

That's why I think all the comparisons after the hiring between Stevens and Pitino's situations were alway stupid.

Stevens is not the GM.   He's the head coach.  Danny is the GM.

[kozlodoev]

No form of tanking effort will give us a better crop of picks over the next 5 years. The reason the team flailed and failed in the late 1990s is the incompetent management, not lack of drafting position -- Ainge managed more with less.

Not to mention Pitino getting rid of guys like Joe Johnson and Chauncey Billups on a whim for nothing in return.

Precisely. In fact, for the draft picks I listed, we had a royal ransom of players: Billups, Johnson, Pierce, Walker... Even if we had to get rid on some of them, there's no excuse for getting back a pittance. These resources should have been enough to build a solid team.

[kozlodoev]

No form of tanking effort will give us a better crop of picks over the next 5 years. The reason the team flailed and failed in the late 1990s is the incompetent management, not lack of drafting position -- Ainge managed more with less.

Not to mention Pitino getting rid of guys like Joe Johnson and Chauncey Billups on a whim for nothing in return.

Which illustrates that by far, Pitino's greatest failings weren't as an NBA coach, coming from the college ranks.   They were as an NBA General Manager with jack for experience and no real understanding of the CBA or skill for the job.

That's why I think all the comparisons after the hiring between Stevens and Pitino's situations were alway stupid.

Stevens is not the GM.   He's the head coach.  Danny is the GM.

This thread is not about Stevens. It's about the fact that the team's poor performance in the late 90s was not because of our "failure to tank", it was because the GM squandered a collection of above average resources.

Tanking is a crapshoot. We got nothing when we tanked, and got the best player of the lot when we didn't.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Hmmm?  The road the Celtics gone down?  I reckon another team went down that road not too long ago.  It was back in '11 when the...I believe those boys were called the Nuggets went down that road.  Went way further down than anybody 'spected.  Had a kid, Faried, who was just as good as anybody.  Could rebound over the tallest oak you'd ever done seen.  Thing is, they never got that one elite player to get them to the end.  These days I reckon they don't look so good

[mmmmm]

No form of tanking effort will give us a better crop of picks over the next 5 years. The reason the team flailed and failed in the late 1990s is the incompetent management, not lack of drafting position -- Ainge managed more with less.

Not to mention Pitino getting rid of guys like Joe Johnson and Chauncey Billups on a whim for nothing in return.

Which illustrates that by far, Pitino's greatest failings weren't as an NBA coach, coming from the college ranks.   They were as an NBA General Manager with jack for experience and no real understanding of the CBA or skill for the job.

That's why I think all the comparisons after the hiring between Stevens and Pitino's situations were alway stupid.

Stevens is not the GM.   He's the head coach.  Danny is the GM.

This thread is not about Stevens. It's about the fact that the team's poor performance in the late 90s was not because of our "failure to tank", it was because the GM squandered a collection of above average resources.

Tanking is a crapshoot. We got nothing when we tanked, and got the best player of the lot when we didn't.

Are you arguing with someone?  Not me.  I totally agree with that.

[BballTim]

A lot of back tracking going on around here.  All of a sudden, there seem to be a lot of folks who are just now realizing that having this team stay competitive this season is good not just for this season, but for the future as well.

Some of us have been singing this tune for a while. 

Welcome aboard, folks!

Not sure who you're calling out here, but there's a difference between enjoying the team's current run of success and saying we'll be better off for it in the future. Right?

I read a lot of the comments above as being very simply about the first thing - enjoying how the team has played for the past few games - rather than any grand statements about what our (very small-sample) run says about the future.

I for one prefer to enjoy the team's success right now without resorting to the same tired debates we've been having for months. Not to mention, it's a little early for I-told-you-so's in either direction.

I'm enjoying the team's play so far and I'll leave it at that.

You're right, it's too early for I-told-you-sos.  I'll retract mine and save it for later.

listen to this brief interview with Chad Ford:  http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/63972/chad-ford-this-draft-worth-tanking-for

If he's right and a top 5 pick is a lock for a star... do you really think that winning 35 games this season is best for our long-term future?

  Top 5 picks are never locks for stars. Claiming that they're locks to be starters is even a reach. Ford's job is to hype the draft, take what he says with a grain of salt.

[jdredskin44]

I think people are getting a little ahead of themselves about this upcoming draft. A lot of these sure fire prospects are freshman. Some may come out next year and some might stay in school. If I was a betting man ,I would bet on Parker staying at least two years at Duke. Anyway ,the kids are playing great for the Celts. Sit back and watch them develop.

[D.o.s.]

I think people are getting a little ahead of themselves about this upcoming draft. A lot of these sure fire prospects are freshman. Some may come out next year and some might stay in school. If I was a betting man ,I would bet on Parker staying at least two years at Duke. Anyway ,the kids are playing great for the Celts. Sit back and watch them develop.

How much would you wager on that?

Because I would take that bet seven times over.

[jdredskin44]

I think people are getting a little ahead of themselves about this upcoming draft. A lot of these sure fire prospects are freshman. Some may come out next year and some might stay in school. If I was a betting man ,I would bet on Parker staying at least two years at Duke. Anyway ,the kids are playing great for the Celts. Sit back and watch them develop.

How much would you wager on that?

Because I would take that bet seven times over.

I said if I was a betting man

[kozlodoev]

No form of tanking effort will give us a better crop of picks over the next 5 years. The reason the team flailed and failed in the late 1990s is the incompetent management, not lack of drafting position -- Ainge managed more with less.

Not to mention Pitino getting rid of guys like Joe Johnson and Chauncey Billups on a whim for nothing in return.

Which illustrates that by far, Pitino's greatest failings weren't as an NBA coach, coming from the college ranks.   They were as an NBA General Manager with jack for experience and no real understanding of the CBA or skill for the job.

That's why I think all the comparisons after the hiring between Stevens and Pitino's situations were alway stupid.

Stevens is not the GM.   He's the head coach.  Danny is the GM.

This thread is not about Stevens. It's about the fact that the team's poor performance in the late 90s was not because of our "failure to tank", it was because the GM squandered a collection of above average resources.

Tanking is a crapshoot. We got nothing when we tanked, and got the best player of the lot when we didn't.

Are you arguing with someone?  Not me.  I totally agree with that.

I'm known to argue with myself. Professional deformation (and no, I'm not Jeff Dunham; he's at least funny).