Will we make the playoffs this year? Standings, stats and numbers (merged)

[PhoSita]

Interceptor, if you are for the playoffs, please justify your reasoning.  They all have playoff experience except Kelly, who IMO isn't all that.

Why are we gaining experience for players who wont be on the roster in a year?

Would you rather have a top 5 draft pick with a potential of being a superstar or have this team next year with a middle of the pack draft pick?

Boston isn't a free agent's paradise.  The best way for us to rebuild is through the draft, not by making the playoffs to gain experience.

How do you know who will be on the roster in a year?  Despite all the talk about trading away most of our roster, I expect a large majority of this year's Celtics to remain Celtics next year.

Well, I think you differ from most with that opinion.

If you think that Rondo - Bradley - Green - Sullinger - Olynyk is a five-man unit that can have success long-term, then I guess playoff experience would seem valuable.

But I think that at the very least it's likely that a couple of those guys will be shuffled out for players who are more talented or who are a better fit.

[Interceptor]

Yes, it's a false choice [...]

I agree.

No, I'm not going to give you a citation on playoff experience being better gained as a unit.  I think it's an assertion that stands up purely on the basis of sound reasoning.

You didn't say "better", you said that it wasn't even "useful" unless acquired as a unit. That's very nearly indefensible, goodness gracious.

Interceptor, if you are for the playoffs, please justify your reasoning.  They all have playoff experience except Kelly, who IMO isn't all that.

Playoff experience is not a checkbox on a list. More is better.

Why are we gaining experience for players who wont be on the roster in a year?

This is a big assumption. I agree that this roster won't be the same next year, but I'm not sure that it gets completely turned over. Why would it? We just need a little better roster balance, not a house-cleaning.

Would you rather have a top 5 draft pick with a potential of being a superstar or have this team next year with a middle of the pack draft pick?

False choice. Very hard for this team to be bottom-five. We also have a lot of picks that have nothing to do with this team's performance. Chances are good that Ainge can make something good of what we have in any case.

[Celtics18]

Interceptor, if you are for the playoffs, please justify your reasoning.  They all have playoff experience except Kelly, who IMO isn't all that.

Why are we gaining experience for players who wont be on the roster in a year?

Would you rather have a top 5 draft pick with a potential of being a superstar or have this team next year with a middle of the pack draft pick?

Boston isn't a free agent's paradise.  The best way for us to rebuild is through the draft, not by making the playoffs to gain experience.

How do you know who will be on the roster in a year?  Despite all the talk about trading away most of our roster, I expect a large majority of this year's Celtics to remain Celtics next year.

Well, I think you differ from most with that opinion.

If you think that Rondo - Bradley - Green - Sullinger - Olynyk is a five-man unit that can have success long-term, then I guess playoff experience would seem valuable.

But I think that at the very least it's likely that a couple of those guys will be shuffled out for players who are more talented or who are a better fit.

I don't think I ever intimated that I don't think we'll need to make some improvements to the roster for long term success. 

All I said was that I believe a majority of this year's team will be back next year.  There may be some trades and re-shuffling of the roster this year and in the off-season if the right deal comes along, but I don't think it will be as drastic as many of you seem to think. 

[PhoSita]

Interceptor, if you are for the playoffs, please justify your reasoning.  They all have playoff experience except Kelly, who IMO isn't all that.

Why are we gaining experience for players who wont be on the roster in a year?

Would you rather have a top 5 draft pick with a potential of being a superstar or have this team next year with a middle of the pack draft pick?

Boston isn't a free agent's paradise.  The best way for us to rebuild is through the draft, not by making the playoffs to gain experience.

How do you know who will be on the roster in a year?  Despite all the talk about trading away most of our roster, I expect a large majority of this year's Celtics to remain Celtics next year.

Well, I think you differ from most with that opinion.

If you think that Rondo - Bradley - Green - Sullinger - Olynyk is a five-man unit that can have success long-term, then I guess playoff experience would seem valuable.

But I think that at the very least it's likely that a couple of those guys will be shuffled out for players who are more talented or who are a better fit.

I don't think I ever intimated that I don't think we'll need to make some improvements to the roster for long term success. 

All I said was that I believe a majority of this year's team will be back next year.  There may be some trades and re-shuffling of the roster this year and in the off-season if the right deal comes along, but I don't think it will be as drastic as many of you seem to think.

That's fair.


What I think other people are saying, then, is that getting playoff experience for the 3-4 guys who are going to be bench players moving forward and the one, two, maybe three guys who are going to be starters moving forward isn't as valuable as a lottery pick.

[Celtics18]

Interceptor, if you are for the playoffs, please justify your reasoning.  They all have playoff experience except Kelly, who IMO isn't all that.

Why are we gaining experience for players who wont be on the roster in a year?

Would you rather have a top 5 draft pick with a potential of being a superstar or have this team next year with a middle of the pack draft pick?

Boston isn't a free agent's paradise.  The best way for us to rebuild is through the draft, not by making the playoffs to gain experience.

How do you know who will be on the roster in a year?  Despite all the talk about trading away most of our roster, I expect a large majority of this year's Celtics to remain Celtics next year.

Well, I think you differ from most with that opinion.

If you think that Rondo - Bradley - Green - Sullinger - Olynyk is a five-man unit that can have success long-term, then I guess playoff experience would seem valuable.

But I think that at the very least it's likely that a couple of those guys will be shuffled out for players who are more talented or who are a better fit.

I don't think I ever intimated that I don't think we'll need to make some improvements to the roster for long term success. 

All I said was that I believe a majority of this year's team will be back next year.  There may be some trades and re-shuffling of the roster this year and in the off-season if the right deal comes along, but I don't think it will be as drastic as many of you seem to think.

That's fair.


What I think other people are saying, then, is that getting playoff experience for the 3-4 guys who are going to be bench players moving forward and the one, two, maybe three guys who are going to be starters moving forward isn't as valuable as a lottery pick.

It is to me.  And, I would hope that winning ball games is as important and as valuable to the players and the coaching staff of the Celtics as it is to me.  That's really all I ask.

Further, if this team as currently constituted (hopefully, with the addition of a healthy Rondo by then) is in a position to make a push for the playoffs by early February, I will be very disappointed if Ainge makes moves that push us closer to the lottery than the playoffs.  I would hope that the players would feel the same way. 

 

 

[Interceptor]

What I think other people are saying, then, is that getting playoff experience for the 3-4 guys who are going to be bench players moving forward and the one, two, maybe three guys who are going to be starters moving forward isn't as valuable as a lottery pick.

I don't know what "people" think. But as for me, I said that this:

There's nothing to celebrate about making the playoffs with a bad team, even if there are some pleasant surprises on the bad team (e.g. Jordan Crawford playing like an NBA player, Jared Sullinger looking like a long-term starter).

... wasn't true. If we make the playoffs with a bad team, there's still something good that can come out of it. Better still if we avoid Miami/Indiana, and have a puncher's chance of making it to the second round.

[guava_wrench]

I don't think there is any benefit from making the playoffs with a bad team that has a bad record and then getting whooped. It can also sometimes lead to delusions of being decent.

[PhoSita]

What I think other people are saying, then, is that getting playoff experience for the 3-4 guys who are going to be bench players moving forward and the one, two, maybe three guys who are going to be starters moving forward isn't as valuable as a lottery pick.

I don't know what "people" think. But as for me, I said that this:

There's nothing to celebrate about making the playoffs with a bad team, even if there are some pleasant surprises on the bad team (e.g. Jordan Crawford playing like an NBA player, Jared Sullinger looking like a long-term starter).

... wasn't true. If we make the playoffs with a bad team, there's still something good that can come out of it. Better still if we avoid Miami/Indiana, and have a puncher's chance of making it to the second round.

Alright.  While technically you're correct that "something" good can come of it, my argument is that the opportunity cost -- i.e. the things you'd get if you didn't make the playoffs -- far outweighs any benefits.

[PhoSita]

I don't think there is any benefit from making the playoffs with a bad team that has a bad record and then getting whooped. It can also sometimes lead to delusions of being decent.

Right.

Might the Celtics now be better off if Derrick Rose and Al Horford hadn't been injured two years ago and the Celtics lost in the 1st or 2nd round to the Hawks or the Bulls?

The rebuild might have started a year sooner.  The Celtics might have gotten better value for Pierce and Garnett.

At the least we wouldn't have spent money on Terry and Lee.

[BballTim]

Interceptor, if you are for the playoffs, please justify your reasoning.  They all have playoff experience except Kelly, who IMO isn't all that.

Why are we gaining experience for players who wont be on the roster in a year?

Would you rather have a top 5 draft pick with a potential of being a superstar or have this team next year with a middle of the pack draft pick?

Boston isn't a free agent's paradise.  The best way for us to rebuild is through the draft, not by making the playoffs to gain experience.

How do you know who will be on the roster in a year?  Despite all the talk about trading away most of our roster, I expect a large majority of this year's Celtics to remain Celtics next year.

Well, I think you differ from most with that opinion.

If you think that Rondo - Bradley - Green - Sullinger - Olynyk is a five-man unit that can have success long-term, then I guess playoff experience would seem valuable.

But I think that at the very least it's likely that a couple of those guys will be shuffled out for players who are more talented or who are a better fit.

I don't think I ever intimated that I don't think we'll need to make some improvements to the roster for long term success. 

All I said was that I believe a majority of this year's team will be back next year.  There may be some trades and re-shuffling of the roster this year and in the off-season if the right deal comes along, but I don't think it will be as drastic as many of you seem to think.

That's fair.


What I think other people are saying, then, is that getting playoff experience for the 3-4 guys who are going to be bench players moving forward and the one, two, maybe three guys who are going to be starters moving forward isn't as valuable as a lottery pick.

  That probably depends on how high the lottery pick is. Out of that list of players, it wouldn't be at all surprising to see 3-4 of Rondo/Bradley/Green/Sully as starters moving forward.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I don't think there is any benefit from making the playoffs with a bad team that has a bad record and then getting whooped. It can also sometimes lead to delusions of being decent.

Right.

Might the Celtics now be better off if Derrick Rose and Al Horford hadn't been injured two years ago and the Celtics lost in the 1st or 2nd round to the Hawks or the Bulls?

The rebuild might have started a year sooner.  The Celtics might have gotten better value for Pierce and Garnett.

At the least we wouldn't have spent money on Terry and Lee.

Or if we ignore that we performed well in the playoffs despite being severely injured ourselves...

We had no Green, Ray was playing injured, Avery Bradley went out with his shoulder problems, Wilcox was out, etc., etc.

Or if we ignore how we would've performed this year come playoff time had we remained healthy, instead of suffering 3 season ending injuries, including one to our all-star PG who carried us through much of our previous playoff run.

All that said, considering the packages that were reported for Garnett and Pierce, I think we ended up with the better collection of assets right now going forward, and still have a roster full capable players with value around the league, so we really aren't done collecting.

[PhoSita]

Interceptor, if you are for the playoffs, please justify your reasoning.  They all have playoff experience except Kelly, who IMO isn't all that.

Why are we gaining experience for players who wont be on the roster in a year?

Would you rather have a top 5 draft pick with a potential of being a superstar or have this team next year with a middle of the pack draft pick?

Boston isn't a free agent's paradise.  The best way for us to rebuild is through the draft, not by making the playoffs to gain experience.

How do you know who will be on the roster in a year?  Despite all the talk about trading away most of our roster, I expect a large majority of this year's Celtics to remain Celtics next year.

Well, I think you differ from most with that opinion.

If you think that Rondo - Bradley - Green - Sullinger - Olynyk is a five-man unit that can have success long-term, then I guess playoff experience would seem valuable.

But I think that at the very least it's likely that a couple of those guys will be shuffled out for players who are more talented or who are a better fit.

I don't think I ever intimated that I don't think we'll need to make some improvements to the roster for long term success. 

All I said was that I believe a majority of this year's team will be back next year.  There may be some trades and re-shuffling of the roster this year and in the off-season if the right deal comes along, but I don't think it will be as drastic as many of you seem to think.

That's fair.


What I think other people are saying, then, is that getting playoff experience for the 3-4 guys who are going to be bench players moving forward and the one, two, maybe three guys who are going to be starters moving forward isn't as valuable as a lottery pick.

  That probably depends on how high the lottery pick is. Out of that list of players, it wouldn't be at all surprising to see 3-4 of Rondo/Bradley/Green/Sully as starters moving forward.

That 5th guy better be really, really good.

[BballTim]

Interceptor, if you are for the playoffs, please justify your reasoning.  They all have playoff experience except Kelly, who IMO isn't all that.

Why are we gaining experience for players who wont be on the roster in a year?

Would you rather have a top 5 draft pick with a potential of being a superstar or have this team next year with a middle of the pack draft pick?

Boston isn't a free agent's paradise.  The best way for us to rebuild is through the draft, not by making the playoffs to gain experience.

How do you know who will be on the roster in a year?  Despite all the talk about trading away most of our roster, I expect a large majority of this year's Celtics to remain Celtics next year.

Well, I think you differ from most with that opinion.

If you think that Rondo - Bradley - Green - Sullinger - Olynyk is a five-man unit that can have success long-term, then I guess playoff experience would seem valuable.

But I think that at the very least it's likely that a couple of those guys will be shuffled out for players who are more talented or who are a better fit.

I don't think I ever intimated that I don't think we'll need to make some improvements to the roster for long term success. 

All I said was that I believe a majority of this year's team will be back next year.  There may be some trades and re-shuffling of the roster this year and in the off-season if the right deal comes along, but I don't think it will be as drastic as many of you seem to think.

That's fair.


What I think other people are saying, then, is that getting playoff experience for the 3-4 guys who are going to be bench players moving forward and the one, two, maybe three guys who are going to be starters moving forward isn't as valuable as a lottery pick.

  That probably depends on how high the lottery pick is. Out of that list of players, it wouldn't be at all surprising to see 3-4 of Rondo/Bradley/Green/Sully as starters moving forward.

That 5th guy better be really, really good.

  It would probably help, although I expect Sully (if healthy) to be a pretty good player going forward. They may end up including one of them in a trade for that better player. I think the players we have are somewhat better than people think they are, hence the hand-wringing that we aren't the 2-3 win team people were expecting us to be at this point in the season.

[LarBrd33]

Scary stuff.  This goes beyond "Least"ern conference.  This is a complete joke.  Yes, we'll make the playoffs.  Right now there are 2 great teams in the Eastern Conference (Miami and Indiana).  Beyond them, it's a conference made up of 13 garbage teams.    All of them are struggling to even make it to .500.  Right now the Wizards are 9-9... everyone else in the conference has a losing record.   

I think most of us predicted to have a below .500 record... I don't think anyone actually predicted the entire conference would also have a below .500 record.  SO yeah, we'll make the playoffs.  We might even win a round.  Right now the Atlantic division is so dreadful that we're actually winning it with a 8-12 record.   Unbelievable.  4 games under .500 and if the playoffs started today we'd have the 4th seed.

Meanwhile, every Western Conference playoff team is better than us.  There are 5 Western conference teams with better records than us who aren't currently projected to make the playoffs.  NOt to mention that Western Conference teams have skewed records, because they play other Western Conference teams more than they play Eastern Conference teams.  The timberwolves, for instance, would probably be a 3rd seed in the East, but are currently sitting in 13th place.  Crazy crazy stuff.

So we'll probably make the playoffs.  We'll lock up a pick in the 15-20 range.  Meanwhile 5 solid Western Conference teams will enter the lotto with a shot at a franchise player.  Imagine the Timberwolves adding someone like Wiggins next to Kevin Love.  Imagine the Pelicans adding Jabari Parker next to Anthony Davis.   The rich are going to get richer.  The mediocre will likely stay mediocre.  Wild.

[Interceptor]

Alright.  While technically you're correct [...]

Thanks.

[...] my argument is that the opportunity cost -- i.e. the things you'd get if you didn't make the playoffs -- far outweighs any benefits.

Perhaps, but at the same time I don't really like the implications of a Celtics team that's so bad that they miss the playoffs in the Leastern Conference. That's a team that's quite far away from being good, and all they've picked up is someone who's probably going to be a pretty good rookie and might be a superstar someday when Rondo is in his 30's.