Did Danny hire Brad Stevens TOO SOON!!???

[Celtics18]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

[Jailan34]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Hey man im not trying to cause a problem, this is the first forum I've ever actually made an account for, im just here to discuss the celtics and basketball and see how people with different ideas think, not trying to get anyone heated.

[Celtics18]

I think its very clear, we need to draft our next superstar, or acquire enough picks and trade for one which a team thinks they cannot keep. We will not sign one through free agency, it wont happen. If our picks don't pan out we stay bad, or acquire enough picks to trade for a real player.

I trust that danny can pick talent, and if we're bad for 3-4 years while he builds up picks and turns them into a big trade or drafts a great player im fine with waiting, i love this team just as much as you do but every player pretty much comes through the draft, and thats how we need to build our team i feel.

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Right and they are our biggest asset but we dont know where those picks will end up, if they are all mid round picks i think we should try and trade up as high as we can in the draft. There are plenty of good players coming out in the next few years and im excited to see ainge make some good picks and watch a young talented team develop, its why i love basketball.
[/quote]

That's worth considering, but it doesn't require tanking.

[Celtics18]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Hey man im not trying to cause a problem, this is the first forum I've ever actually made an account for, im just here to discuss the celtics and basketball and see how people with different ideas think, not trying to get anyone heated.

Welcome aboard, Jailan.  Here's your first Tommy point.

I think you are misunderstanding me.  I'm not getting heated.  I'm just attempting to win an argument.  That's what we do around here.

Sorry if you misread my tone. 

[Jailan34]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Hey man im not trying to cause a problem, this is the first forum I've ever actually made an account for, im just here to discuss the celtics and basketball and see how people with different ideas think, not trying to get anyone heated.

Welcome aboard, Jailan.  Here's your first Tommy point.

I think you are misunderstanding me.  I'm not getting heated.  I'm just attempting to win an argument.  That's what we do around here.

Sorry if you misread my tone. 

Thanks man, in that case I think we can both agree that high picks are worth more than mid round ones, and theres no garuntee we can get much by trading a bunch of mid round picks.

Which is why the celtics can in a way control their own destiny by giving themselves the best chance at a high pick, or high enough that when coupled with others we can use to trade for a top 3 pick or superstar talent. Because i dont think we can develop anyone on our roster past complementary player, and those dont net much in return in any kind of trade

[Celtics18]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Hey man im not trying to cause a problem, this is the first forum I've ever actually made an account for, im just here to discuss the celtics and basketball and see how people with different ideas think, not trying to get anyone heated.

Welcome aboard, Jailan.  Here's your first Tommy point.

I think you are misunderstanding me.  I'm not getting heated.  I'm just attempting to win an argument.  That's what we do around here.

Sorry if you misread my tone. 

Thanks man, in that case I think we can both agree that high picks are worth more than mid round ones, and theres no garuntee we can get much by trading a bunch of mid round picks.

Which is why the celtics can in a way control their own destiny by giving themselves the best chance at a high pick, or high enough that when coupled with others we can use to trade for a top 3 pick or superstar talent. Because i dont think we can develop anyone on our roster past complementary player, and those dont net much in return in any kind of trade

No, there's no guarantee that we can get much with a couple of mid first rounders, but I trust Danny to find a way to turn the multiple first rounders he has coming up into something of real value, whether that be by continuing to find late first round gems--which he's proven to be good at doing--or trading some of those picks away for more established players, or packaging a couple for a higher pick, or some combination of those things.

As to your last point, I'm not sure exactly what your definition of "complementary player" is (kudos for being one of the rare people to spell complementary right, by the way), but I certainly think that we have a couple of young guys that we can develop beyond complementary players.  Kelly Olynyk and Jared Sullinger are the two who most obviously come to mind. 

I don't think they're likely to turn into franchise altering, transcendent superstars, but I do think they already have some value, and I expect them to keep gaining more value within the next couple of years.  The same goes for Avery Bradley, Jordan Crawford, and Vitor Faverani, for that matter.

I just don't believe that building a contender has to be done in one huge sweep, but that it can be built incrementally and patiently.  I think that's how Danny's doing it, and I like it.

I can't predict every move, but I will predict that it will turn out well and that it won't require tanking. 

[Jailan34]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Hey man im not trying to cause a problem, this is the first forum I've ever actually made an account for, im just here to discuss the celtics and basketball and see how people with different ideas think, not trying to get anyone heated.

Welcome aboard, Jailan.  Here's your first Tommy point.

I think you are misunderstanding me.  I'm not getting heated.  I'm just attempting to win an argument.  That's what we do around here.

Sorry if you misread my tone. 

Thanks man, in that case I think we can both agree that high picks are worth more than mid round ones, and theres no garuntee we can get much by trading a bunch of mid round picks.

Which is why the celtics can in a way control their own destiny by giving themselves the best chance at a high pick, or high enough that when coupled with others we can use to trade for a top 3 pick or superstar talent. Because i dont think we can develop anyone on our roster past complementary player, and those dont net much in return in any kind of trade

No, there's no guarantee that we can get much with a couple of mid first rounders, but I trust Danny to find a way to turn the multiple first rounders he has coming up into something of real value, whether that be by continuing to find late first round gems--which he's proven to be good at doing--or trading some of those picks away for more established players, or packaging a couple for a higher pick, or some combination of those things.

As to your last point, I'm not sure exactly what your definition of "complementary player" is (kudos for being one of the rare people to spell complementary right, by the way), but I certainly think that we have a couple of young guys that we can develop beyond complementary players.  Kelly Olynyk and Jared Sullinger are the two who most obviously come to mind. 

I don't think they're likely to turn into franchise altering, transcendent superstars, but I do think they already have some value, and I expect them to keep gaining more value within the next couple of years.  The same goes for Avery Bradley, Jordan Crawford, and Vitor Faverani, for that matter.

I just don't believe that building a contender has to be done in one huge sweep, but that it can be built incrementally and patiently.  I think that's how Danny's doing it, and I like it.

I can't predict every move, but I will predict that it will turn out well and that it won't require tanking. 

See this is where I think we differ, I think that sullinger will be a solid starter, which i consider complementary, same goes for olynk. As for AB, Fav, and JC i think they are what they are and wont develop much further, Faverani is not young, i think hes 26 which is just before a player reaches his prime. I also believe avery is just too small to not be playing PG, i dont think he reaches a Joe Dumars level that some people think he will. I don't think he would net much more than a late 1st rounder.

As for one big sweep I don't think that's what I'm suggesting. Getting an impact player like any of the top three in this draft is only the start, you then can add your smaller pieces to them through free agency and lower round draft picks as the team progresses. If this team had Jabari Parker on it right now with sullinger and olynk and rondo coming back, I'd be dead set against tanking, I just think we're missing that one difference maker. We aren't getting that difference maker through free agency, and I dont see a player on this roster that will develop into one, so thats why I turn to the draft.

The draft gives us two paths to get that superstar player, trading our high pick in a package for one, or just choosing one ourselves.

[Celtics18]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Hey man im not trying to cause a problem, this is the first forum I've ever actually made an account for, im just here to discuss the celtics and basketball and see how people with different ideas think, not trying to get anyone heated.

Welcome aboard, Jailan.  Here's your first Tommy point.

I think you are misunderstanding me.  I'm not getting heated.  I'm just attempting to win an argument.  That's what we do around here.

Sorry if you misread my tone. 

Thanks man, in that case I think we can both agree that high picks are worth more than mid round ones, and theres no garuntee we can get much by trading a bunch of mid round picks.

Which is why the celtics can in a way control their own destiny by giving themselves the best chance at a high pick, or high enough that when coupled with others we can use to trade for a top 3 pick or superstar talent. Because i dont think we can develop anyone on our roster past complementary player, and those dont net much in return in any kind of trade

No, there's no guarantee that we can get much with a couple of mid first rounders, but I trust Danny to find a way to turn the multiple first rounders he has coming up into something of real value, whether that be by continuing to find late first round gems--which he's proven to be good at doing--or trading some of those picks away for more established players, or packaging a couple for a higher pick, or some combination of those things.

As to your last point, I'm not sure exactly what your definition of "complementary player" is (kudos for being one of the rare people to spell complementary right, by the way), but I certainly think that we have a couple of young guys that we can develop beyond complementary players.  Kelly Olynyk and Jared Sullinger are the two who most obviously come to mind. 

I don't think they're likely to turn into franchise altering, transcendent superstars, but I do think they already have some value, and I expect them to keep gaining more value within the next couple of years.  The same goes for Avery Bradley, Jordan Crawford, and Vitor Faverani, for that matter.

I just don't believe that building a contender has to be done in one huge sweep, but that it can be built incrementally and patiently.  I think that's how Danny's doing it, and I like it.

I can't predict every move, but I will predict that it will turn out well and that it won't require tanking. 

See this is where I think we differ, I think that sullinger will be a solid starter, which i consider complementary, same goes for olynk. As for AB, Fav, and JC i think they are what they are and wont develop much further, Faverani is not young, i think hes 26 which is just before a player reaches his prime. I also believe avery is just too small to not be playing PG, i dont think he reaches a Joe Dumars level that some people think he will. I don't think he would net much more than a late 1st rounder.

As for one big sweep I don't think that's what I'm suggesting. Getting an impact player like any of the top three in this draft is only the start, you then can add your smaller pieces to them through free agency and lower round draft picks as the team progresses. If this team had Jabari Parker on it right now with sullinger and olynk and rondo coming back, I'd be dead set against tanking, I just think we're missing that one difference maker. We aren't getting that difference maker through free agency, and I dont see a player on this roster that will develop into one, so thats why I turn to the draft.

The draft gives us two paths to get that superstar player, trading our high pick in a package for one, or just choosing one ourselves.

I'm guessing you'd agree that both Sully and Klynyk are not done developing as players.  You say you expect them to be solid starters.  I'd agree with that, and I would also say that "solid starter" can encompass a fairly wide range.  Out of the other three we are talking about, I do expect Avery to keep improving.  It sometimes seems like he's been around forever, but he actually just turned 23 today (Happy Birthday, Avery!!), and he's only played one full season worth of NBA ball so far in his career. 

I think Crawford is what he is, but he is showing me so far this season that what he is can actually be quite valuable.  I can envision him playing a similar role as his brother Jamal for somebody as an off the bench scoring lead guard.  Favs, too, probably is more or less what he is, but, again, with a little more NBA seasoning, I think he can be a real solid NBA center, maybe not a full time starter, but a very serviceable back up. 

Anyway, we don't have to agree, but I suspect that ultimately you, and everyone else rooting for the tank, will end up being disappointed by the end of this season,  I don't expect us to be anywhere near Wiggins or Parker territory. 

I'm not judging anyone's fandom here, but it just seems weird to put yourself in a position where you might get to the end of the season and be deeply disappointed because your team didn't  . . . lose enough?

[Jailan34]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Hey man im not trying to cause a problem, this is the first forum I've ever actually made an account for, im just here to discuss the celtics and basketball and see how people with different ideas think, not trying to get anyone heated.

Welcome aboard, Jailan.  Here's your first Tommy point.

I think you are misunderstanding me.  I'm not getting heated.  I'm just attempting to win an argument.  That's what we do around here.

Sorry if you misread my tone. 

Thanks man, in that case I think we can both agree that high picks are worth more than mid round ones, and theres no garuntee we can get much by trading a bunch of mid round picks.

Which is why the celtics can in a way control their own destiny by giving themselves the best chance at a high pick, or high enough that when coupled with others we can use to trade for a top 3 pick or superstar talent. Because i dont think we can develop anyone on our roster past complementary player, and those dont net much in return in any kind of trade

No, there's no guarantee that we can get much with a couple of mid first rounders, but I trust Danny to find a way to turn the multiple first rounders he has coming up into something of real value, whether that be by continuing to find late first round gems--which he's proven to be good at doing--or trading some of those picks away for more established players, or packaging a couple for a higher pick, or some combination of those things.

As to your last point, I'm not sure exactly what your definition of "complementary player" is (kudos for being one of the rare people to spell complementary right, by the way), but I certainly think that we have a couple of young guys that we can develop beyond complementary players.  Kelly Olynyk and Jared Sullinger are the two who most obviously come to mind. 

I don't think they're likely to turn into franchise altering, transcendent superstars, but I do think they already have some value, and I expect them to keep gaining more value within the next couple of years.  The same goes for Avery Bradley, Jordan Crawford, and Vitor Faverani, for that matter.

I just don't believe that building a contender has to be done in one huge sweep, but that it can be built incrementally and patiently.  I think that's how Danny's doing it, and I like it.

I can't predict every move, but I will predict that it will turn out well and that it won't require tanking. 

See this is where I think we differ, I think that sullinger will be a solid starter, which i consider complementary, same goes for olynk. As for AB, Fav, and JC i think they are what they are and wont develop much further, Faverani is not young, i think hes 26 which is just before a player reaches his prime. I also believe avery is just too small to not be playing PG, i dont think he reaches a Joe Dumars level that some people think he will. I don't think he would net much more than a late 1st rounder.

As for one big sweep I don't think that's what I'm suggesting. Getting an impact player like any of the top three in this draft is only the start, you then can add your smaller pieces to them through free agency and lower round draft picks as the team progresses. If this team had Jabari Parker on it right now with sullinger and olynk and rondo coming back, I'd be dead set against tanking, I just think we're missing that one difference maker. We aren't getting that difference maker through free agency, and I dont see a player on this roster that will develop into one, so thats why I turn to the draft.

The draft gives us two paths to get that superstar player, trading our high pick in a package for one, or just choosing one ourselves.

I'm guessing you'd agree that both Sully and Klynyk are not done developing as players.  You say you expect them to be solid starters.  I'd agree with that, and I would also say that "solid starter" can encompass a fairly wide range.  Out of the other three we are talking about, I do expect Avery to keep improving.  It sometimes seems like he's been around forever, but he actually just turned 23 today (Happy Birthday, Avery!!), and he's only played one full season worth of NBA ball so far in his career. 

I think Crawford is what he is, but he is showing me so far this season that what he is can actually be quite valuable.  I can envision him playing a similar role as his brother Jamal for somebody as an off the bench scoring lead guard.  Favs, too, probably is more or less what he is, but, again, with a little more NBA seasoning, I think he can be a real solid NBA center, maybe not a full time starter, but a very serviceable back up. 

Anyway, we don't have to agree, but I suspect that ultimately you, and everyone else rooting for the tank, will end up being disappointed by the end of this season,  I don't expect us to be anywhere near Wiggins or Parker territory. 

I'm not judging anyone's fandom here, but it just seems weird to put yourself in a position where you might get to the end of the season and be deeply disappointed because your team didn't  . . . lose enough?

I can't be disappointed in this team as long as the young players continue to develop, and the team continues to move towards the goal of winning another title.

At the same time I know the NBA is what it is, for better or worse (and I figure worse) a superstar driven league. To get those kinds of players you need top picks or a collection of young promising high potential players.

I think relying on trading a bunch of mid to late lottery picks(picks 8-13) coupled with some of our younger players for a superstar is a longer shot than getting a high draft pick through tanking.

However at this point I feel like we're talking in circles and just want to take different paths to the same goal. So as long DA makes smart moves and Stevens continues to gain experience I'll look forward to seeing the team continue to grow and develop into hopefully something special.

[Celtics18]

I happen to think we've got enough assets to rebuild the team into a contender without taking that cynical an approach to try to get there.

Welp, there's the divide between us.  Grand canyon, really.

For what it's worth, I'd be pleased if you were right.

I'll repeat what I wrote in response to Jailan:

You are aware that we own the rights to something like 10 first round draft picks (including our own) over the course of the next five seasons, right?

Hey man im not trying to cause a problem, this is the first forum I've ever actually made an account for, im just here to discuss the celtics and basketball and see how people with different ideas think, not trying to get anyone heated.

Welcome aboard, Jailan.  Here's your first Tommy point.

I think you are misunderstanding me.  I'm not getting heated.  I'm just attempting to win an argument.  That's what we do around here.

Sorry if you misread my tone. 

Thanks man, in that case I think we can both agree that high picks are worth more than mid round ones, and theres no garuntee we can get much by trading a bunch of mid round picks.

Which is why the celtics can in a way control their own destiny by giving themselves the best chance at a high pick, or high enough that when coupled with others we can use to trade for a top 3 pick or superstar talent. Because i dont think we can develop anyone on our roster past complementary player, and those dont net much in return in any kind of trade

No, there's no guarantee that we can get much with a couple of mid first rounders, but I trust Danny to find a way to turn the multiple first rounders he has coming up into something of real value, whether that be by continuing to find late first round gems--which he's proven to be good at doing--or trading some of those picks away for more established players, or packaging a couple for a higher pick, or some combination of those things.

As to your last point, I'm not sure exactly what your definition of "complementary player" is (kudos for being one of the rare people to spell complementary right, by the way), but I certainly think that we have a couple of young guys that we can develop beyond complementary players.  Kelly Olynyk and Jared Sullinger are the two who most obviously come to mind. 

I don't think they're likely to turn into franchise altering, transcendent superstars, but I do think they already have some value, and I expect them to keep gaining more value within the next couple of years.  The same goes for Avery Bradley, Jordan Crawford, and Vitor Faverani, for that matter.

I just don't believe that building a contender has to be done in one huge sweep, but that it can be built incrementally and patiently.  I think that's how Danny's doing it, and I like it.

I can't predict every move, but I will predict that it will turn out well and that it won't require tanking. 

See this is where I think we differ, I think that sullinger will be a solid starter, which i consider complementary, same goes for olynk. As for AB, Fav, and JC i think they are what they are and wont develop much further, Faverani is not young, i think hes 26 which is just before a player reaches his prime. I also believe avery is just too small to not be playing PG, i dont think he reaches a Joe Dumars level that some people think he will. I don't think he would net much more than a late 1st rounder.

As for one big sweep I don't think that's what I'm suggesting. Getting an impact player like any of the top three in this draft is only the start, you then can add your smaller pieces to them through free agency and lower round draft picks as the team progresses. If this team had Jabari Parker on it right now with sullinger and olynk and rondo coming back, I'd be dead set against tanking, I just think we're missing that one difference maker. We aren't getting that difference maker through free agency, and I dont see a player on this roster that will develop into one, so thats why I turn to the draft.

The draft gives us two paths to get that superstar player, trading our high pick in a package for one, or just choosing one ourselves.

I'm guessing you'd agree that both Sully and Klynyk are not done developing as players.  You say you expect them to be solid starters.  I'd agree with that, and I would also say that "solid starter" can encompass a fairly wide range.  Out of the other three we are talking about, I do expect Avery to keep improving.  It sometimes seems like he's been around forever, but he actually just turned 23 today (Happy Birthday, Avery!!), and he's only played one full season worth of NBA ball so far in his career. 

I think Crawford is what he is, but he is showing me so far this season that what he is can actually be quite valuable.  I can envision him playing a similar role as his brother Jamal for somebody as an off the bench scoring lead guard.  Favs, too, probably is more or less what he is, but, again, with a little more NBA seasoning, I think he can be a real solid NBA center, maybe not a full time starter, but a very serviceable back up. 

Anyway, we don't have to agree, but I suspect that ultimately you, and everyone else rooting for the tank, will end up being disappointed by the end of this season,  I don't expect us to be anywhere near Wiggins or Parker territory. 

I'm not judging anyone's fandom here, but it just seems weird to put yourself in a position where you might get to the end of the season and be deeply disappointed because your team didn't  . . . lose enough?

I can't be disappointed in this team as long as the young players continue to develop, and the team continues to move towards the goal of winning another title.

At the same time I know the NBA is what it is, for better or worse (and I figure worse) a superstar driven league. To get those kinds of players you need top picks or a collection of young promising high potential players.

I think relying on trading a bunch of mid to late lottery picks(picks 8-13) coupled with some of our younger players for a superstar is a longer shot than getting a high draft pick through tanking.

However at this point I feel like we're talking in circles and just want to take different paths to the same goal. So as long DA makes smart moves and Stevens continues to gain experience I'll look forward to seeing the team continue to grow and develop into hopefully something special.

Cheers

[Future Celtics Owner]

Only if Brad may have gone elsewhere if not for the Celtic's deal. I like the fact that we have this young budding coach. It adds to our legacy of Great coaches, and players.

[guava_wrench]

I think Crawford is what he is, but he is showing me so far this season that what he is can actually be quite valuable.  I can envision him playing a similar role as his brother Jamal for somebody as an off the bench scoring lead guard. 

Jamal is not Jordan's brother.

I'm not judging anyone's fandom here, but it just seems weird to put yourself in a position where you might get to the end of the season and be deeply disappointed because your team didn't  . . . lose enough?

Personally, no outcome will leave me disappointed because I have no expectations for this team. I think the people who are more likely to be disappointed are those who overrate guys who put up numbers on bad teams and think that such stats are an indicator of future success.

[pokeKingCurtis]

Ainge should have given me a shot at the coaching job.

I would coach the team into the ground.

I would coach them so deep under they'd be playing in the Chinese Basketball Association.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

Only if Brad may have gone elsewhere if not for the Celtic's deal. I like the fact that we have this young budding coach. It adds to our legacy of Great coaches, and players.

stevens will be really solid in his 3rd year plus he will have alot more talent by then to work with also.

[Onslaught]

Stevens reminds me of a young Roy Williams.... UNC coach

No need to insult Stevens.