If the Season Ended Today

[BballTim]

As far as making the playoffs, I believe there is only one question to ask! Does your team have the TALENT to win a championship?  If yes, then definitely go for that playoff spot (ie., the Nets--not playing that good, but have enough players with talent to win if everything came together)
If no, you go for that draft pick!

I believe it's pretty black and white.

Here is one obvious scenario where you are wrong.

If you are a player or two away from having the talent to be a legitimate championship contender and you will have a good opportunity to add those players through free agency, then you should want to make the playoffs because winning is more important than things such as location when it comes to attracting quality free agents.

all true, but Boston doesn't have the cap space to add legit talent so what is the point in the playoffs this year for this team.

  Trades.

Not clear on how the playoffs help the team make trades.

Though I'm pretty sure that a lottery pick would facilitate trades more than making the playoffs, in any case.

  For starters, players would probably be more willing to go to/stay in Boston if the team was fairly good as opposed to being bottom feeders.

Nah.  It's not like a bunch of stars wanted to go to Philly after they upset Rose-less Chicago.

But if you land NBA Gold in the Top 5, you either add a player who CAN attract talent down the road... or you use the pick to trade for all-star talent... which can attract talent down the road.

Simply making the playoffs as the 10th worst team in the league isn't doing much.

  Then it's fortunate that we have all-star talent that other top players in the league have expressed a desire to have on their teams.

[BballTim]

  For starters, players would probably be more willing to go to/stay in Boston if the team was fairly good as opposed to being bottom feeders.

Eh, I think players care more about the talent on the team and the reputation of the coaching staff / management than how many games the team won the year before.  Guys will want to play for Brad Stevens and with Rondo / Sullinger whether or not the Celtics stumble into the playoffs with 30-35 wins.

If the Celtics get highly touted player in this draft, I think that would attract people here, too.

  I would expect that good players have more of an aversion to being on lottery teams than you imagine.

[LarBrd33]

The only argument to the contrary I've heard is that somehow the "good vibes" of making the playoffs will develop some kind of winning culture.  That thinking is delusional.  The absolute BEST-CASE scenario is making the playoffs this year, upsetting Indiana in Round 1 and having a hard-fought 2nd round matchup.  That's the path Philly took two years ago when they upset Rose-less Chicago and gave Boston a 7 game series.  It did nothing for their future... the next year they were out of the playoffs.  This year they are garbage.  And THAT team was above .500 at the time of their little miracle.   We're talking about making the playoffs with 33 wins right now... there's no point to it.  It's a fool's errand.

  One would assume that there are lower seeded teams that made the playoffs and ended up better in the next few years that you're unaware of, what happened to Philly isn't the only outcome. Also, someone had a post within the last week or so about how few of the teams that end up with high draft picks win titles. Getting to the playoffs or getting to the lottery are both "fool's errands", you just don't realize that.

In defense of BballTim and Celtics18, I think those two guys don't actually subscribe to this line of thinking.  I'm of the assumption they believe Superstar Rondo is going to get added to this collection of junk and we'll go 38-4 over the remaining part of the season.  In which case, they think we have a shot at a championship.   All I can say to that is... I feel like they are setting themselves up for some harsh disappointment.

  Even if I did believe that it would be only slightly more far-fetched than your predictions for the Nets (still waiting for that 15 game win streak) or last year's title contending Lakers team. I'd assume that your wildly exaggerating anything I might have said was just an attempt to make it look more ridiculous than your actual claims.

Lol well tim... it fluctuates once a week, but at the moment I appear to be winning that debate.

I said that KG and Paul were the main reason we made the playoffs last year and got above .500.  I said that Brooklyn would be "Fine" and that a huge win streak would inevitably jump them into the playoffs.   I said that Boston would be completely devoid of talent and at the bottom of the standings.

Nothing I debated is inaccurate.  Brooklyn has won 5 in a row.  Pierce and KG and mustering their 20th wind.  They have jumped into the 7th seed of the playoffs and just beat the Heat.

Boston has the 5th worst record in the league and is currently on a 7 game losing streak.

And from the start, my concern was that Rondo would come back and make a terrible team just good enough that they'd enter perpetual mediocrity.  So far, it's a check, check, check in my argument score sheet.   We're on pace to win 25 games without Rondo.  His addition probably gets us to 35 wins.  Difference between a Top 5 pick and the 8th seed/perpetual mediocrity.

But alas, if we wait a couple weeks... Brooklyn will probably be at the bottom of the conference and Rondo's return might make Boston look temporarily legit.  At any moment during this wild season, either one of us is going to look like an idiot.  Right now it's not me.

[Celtics18]

My two cents... I do believe it's black and white.  It's veering into delusion.  Bottom line:  This team sucks.

Let it sink in. 

This team is garbage.  The current collection of talent on this team is horrible.  We are the 5th worst team in the league.   We've dropped 7 in a row.  We are incapable of beating a good team on a normal night.

This is what we were told to expect.  This roster is crap. 

Adding Rondo should improve them... but at the end of the day they will still be a below-average team.  Easily one of the 10 worst teams in the league even WITH Rondo.

Problem is, being one of the 10 worst teams in a league of 30 teams could get you into the playoffs this year.   

Bottom line:  Our team will be better next year if we add a Top 5 pick vs if our team makes the playoffs.  I don't think there's any scenario where making the playoffs as the 10th worst team (#15 pick) makes us better next year vs adding NBA gold to our below-average roster.

The only argument to the contrary I've heard is that somehow the "good vibes" of making the playoffs will develop some kind of winning culture.  That thinking is delusional.  The absolute BEST-CASE scenario is making the playoffs this year, upsetting Indiana in Round 1 and having a hard-fought 2nd round matchup.  That's the path Philly took two years ago when they upset Rose-less Chicago and gave Boston a 7 game series.  It did nothing for their future... the next year they were out of the playoffs.  This year they are garbage.  And THAT team was above .500 at the time of their little miracle.   We're talking about making the playoffs with 33 wins right now... there's no point to it.  It's a fool's errand.

In defense of BballTim and Celtics18, I think those two guys don't actually subscribe to this line of thinking.  I'm of the assumption they believe Superstar Rondo is going to get added to this collection of junk and we'll go 38-4 over the remaining part of the season.  In which case, they think we have a shot at a championship.   All I can say to that is... I feel like they are setting themselves up for some harsh disappointment.

This isn't the first time you've mentioned the Philly team from two years ago.  It's absurd to say that because the Sixers overachieved two years ago and are now worse than they were then, that somehow our fate is destined to be the same as theirs. 

It's completely faulty logic.  You are not making any sense, whatsoever.


And, I don't believe that Rondo will make this team 38-4.  To be honest, I think we'll be lucky to play slightly above .500 ball once he returns.  Making the playoffs has never been my main goal for this team this season.  At the beginning of the season, I consistently said that my goal for this team was to see them win at least 35 games.  Admittedly, that number is starting to look less and less realistic as the season progresses. 

It's not about the playoffs for me.  It's about seeing this team compete and play good basketball, and letting the chips fall where they may. 

[BballTim]

The only argument to the contrary I've heard is that somehow the "good vibes" of making the playoffs will develop some kind of winning culture.  That thinking is delusional.  The absolute BEST-CASE scenario is making the playoffs this year, upsetting Indiana in Round 1 and having a hard-fought 2nd round matchup.  That's the path Philly took two years ago when they upset Rose-less Chicago and gave Boston a 7 game series.  It did nothing for their future... the next year they were out of the playoffs.  This year they are garbage.  And THAT team was above .500 at the time of their little miracle.   We're talking about making the playoffs with 33 wins right now... there's no point to it.  It's a fool's errand.

  One would assume that there are lower seeded teams that made the playoffs and ended up better in the next few years that you're unaware of, what happened to Philly isn't the only outcome. Also, someone had a post within the last week or so about how few of the teams that end up with high draft picks win titles. Getting to the playoffs or getting to the lottery are both "fool's errands", you just don't realize that.

In defense of BballTim and Celtics18, I think those two guys don't actually subscribe to this line of thinking.  I'm of the assumption they believe Superstar Rondo is going to get added to this collection of junk and we'll go 38-4 over the remaining part of the season.  In which case, they think we have a shot at a championship.   All I can say to that is... I feel like they are setting themselves up for some harsh disappointment.

  Even if I did believe that it would be only slightly more far-fetched than your predictions for the Nets (still waiting for that 15 game win streak) or last year's title contending Lakers team. I'd assume that your wildly exaggerating anything I might have said was just an attempt to make it look more ridiculous than your actual claims.

Lol well tim... it fluctuates once a week, but at the moment I appear to be winning that debate.

I said that KG and Paul were the main reason we made the playoffs last year and got above .500.  I said that Brooklyn would be "Fine" and that a huge win streak would inevitably jump them into the playoffs.   I said that Boston would be completely devoid of talent and at the bottom of the standings.

Nothing I debated is inaccurate.  Brooklyn has won 5 in a row.  Pierce and KG and mustering their 20th wind.  They have jumped into the 7th seed of the playoffs and just beat the Heat.

  You spent much of this offseason talking about what a good team Brooklyn would be, just as you spent much of the previous offseason talking about what a juggernaut the Lakers were going to be. You said that last year's team wouldn't miss Rondo in the playoffs at all. When Brooklyn was stinking up the league you made multiple posts about how they were bound to go on a 15 game winning streak (which I think you gave up on after I pointed out how rare they are). I'm not sure I'd characterize your claim that nothing you said was inaccurate as anything other than unsurprising.

And from the start, my concern was that Rondo would come back and make a terrible team just good enough that they'd enter perpetual mediocrity.  So far, it's a check, check, check in my argument score sheet.   We're on pace to win 25 games without Rondo.  His addition probably gets us to 35 wins.  Difference between a Top 5 pick and the 8th seed/perpetual mediocrity.

  We may or may not be mediocre. There's no evidence that it will be perpetual. You're under the impression that 40 wins and the 8th seed is like quicksand, and if you land there one year it's practically impossible to extricate a team from that position. That's not the case. You also seem to think that the future of our franchise hangs in the balance of whether we get a high pick in the draft or not. That's not the case either.

But alas, if we wait a couple weeks... Brooklyn will probably be at the bottom of the conference and Rondo's return might make Boston look temporarily legit.  At any moment during this wild season, either one of us is going to look like an idiot.  Right now it's not me.

  Sorry, you're alone in that regard. I haven't made any real claims that the Celts would end up the season in or out of the playoffs, although I did point out more than once that people who were all but guaranteeing our terrible season were overly optimistic about other teams. I've also agreed that in the long run the team's better off with a high draft pick (duh) but people were underestimating the team's interest in winning and their reasons for not losing on purpose for a high draft pick. You know, stuff that isn't inaccurate. I don't fit into the tanker camp, but that's more opposition to tearing the team down in order to get worse than anything else.

  Good luck with your roller coaster though.

[LarBrd33]

The only argument to the contrary I've heard is that somehow the "good vibes" of making the playoffs will develop some kind of winning culture.  That thinking is delusional.  The absolute BEST-CASE scenario is making the playoffs this year, upsetting Indiana in Round 1 and having a hard-fought 2nd round matchup.  That's the path Philly took two years ago when they upset Rose-less Chicago and gave Boston a 7 game series.  It did nothing for their future... the next year they were out of the playoffs.  This year they are garbage.  And THAT team was above .500 at the time of their little miracle.   We're talking about making the playoffs with 33 wins right now... there's no point to it.  It's a fool's errand.

  One would assume that there are lower seeded teams that made the playoffs and ended up better in the next few years that you're unaware of, what happened to Philly isn't the only outcome. Also, someone had a post within the last week or so about how few of the teams that end up with high draft picks win titles. Getting to the playoffs or getting to the lottery are both "fool's errands", you just don't realize that.

In defense of BballTim and Celtics18, I think those two guys don't actually subscribe to this line of thinking.  I'm of the assumption they believe Superstar Rondo is going to get added to this collection of junk and we'll go 38-4 over the remaining part of the season.  In which case, they think we have a shot at a championship.   All I can say to that is... I feel like they are setting themselves up for some harsh disappointment.

  Even if I did believe that it would be only slightly more far-fetched than your predictions for the Nets (still waiting for that 15 game win streak) or last year's title contending Lakers team. I'd assume that your wildly exaggerating anything I might have said was just an attempt to make it look more ridiculous than your actual claims.

Lol well tim... it fluctuates once a week, but at the moment I appear to be winning that debate.

I said that KG and Paul were the main reason we made the playoffs last year and got above .500.  I said that Brooklyn would be "Fine" and that a huge win streak would inevitably jump them into the playoffs.   I said that Boston would be completely devoid of talent and at the bottom of the standings.

Nothing I debated is inaccurate.  Brooklyn has won 5 in a row.  Pierce and KG and mustering their 20th wind.  They have jumped into the 7th seed of the playoffs and just beat the Heat.

  You spent much of this offseason talking about what a good team Brooklyn would be, just as you spent much of the previous offseason talking about what a juggernaut the Lakers were going to be. You said that last year's team wouldn't miss Rondo in the playoffs at all. When Brooklyn was stinking up the league you made multiple posts about how they were bound to go on a 15 game winning streak (which I think you gave up on after I pointed out how rare they are). I'm not sure I'd characterize your claim that nothing you said was inaccurate as anything other than unsurprising.

And from the start, my concern was that Rondo would come back and make a terrible team just good enough that they'd enter perpetual mediocrity.  So far, it's a check, check, check in my argument score sheet.   We're on pace to win 25 games without Rondo.  His addition probably gets us to 35 wins.  Difference between a Top 5 pick and the 8th seed/perpetual mediocrity.

  We may or may not be mediocre. There's no evidence that it will be perpetual. You're under the impression that 40 wins and the 8th seed is like quicksand, and if you land there one year it's practically impossible to extricate a team from that position. That's not the case. You also seem to think that the future of our franchise hangs in the balance of whether we get a high pick in the draft or not. That's not the case either.

But alas, if we wait a couple weeks... Brooklyn will probably be at the bottom of the conference and Rondo's return might make Boston look temporarily legit.  At any moment during this wild season, either one of us is going to look like an idiot.  Right now it's not me.

  Sorry, you're alone in that regard. I haven't made any real claims that the Celts would end up the season in or out of the playoffs, although I did point out more than once that people who were all but guaranteeing our terrible season were overly optimistic about other teams. I've also agreed that in the long run the team's better off with a high draft pick (duh) but people were underestimating the team's interest in winning and their reasons for not losing on purpose for a high draft pick. You know, stuff that isn't inaccurate. I don't fit into the tanker camp, but that's more opposition to tearing the team down in order to get worse than anything else.

  Good luck with your roller coaster though.

34 wins and the 8th seed would be an epic disaster. Yes.  Very little positive would come from that.  I've seen Boston stuck in perpetual mediocrity before.  It sucks.  When did you become a fan of the Celtics, Tim?  Were you around back in the Walker/Pierce days?

[BballTim]

The only argument to the contrary I've heard is that somehow the "good vibes" of making the playoffs will develop some kind of winning culture.  That thinking is delusional.  The absolute BEST-CASE scenario is making the playoffs this year, upsetting Indiana in Round 1 and having a hard-fought 2nd round matchup.  That's the path Philly took two years ago when they upset Rose-less Chicago and gave Boston a 7 game series.  It did nothing for their future... the next year they were out of the playoffs.  This year they are garbage.  And THAT team was above .500 at the time of their little miracle.   We're talking about making the playoffs with 33 wins right now... there's no point to it.  It's a fool's errand.

  One would assume that there are lower seeded teams that made the playoffs and ended up better in the next few years that you're unaware of, what happened to Philly isn't the only outcome. Also, someone had a post within the last week or so about how few of the teams that end up with high draft picks win titles. Getting to the playoffs or getting to the lottery are both "fool's errands", you just don't realize that.

In defense of BballTim and Celtics18, I think those two guys don't actually subscribe to this line of thinking.  I'm of the assumption they believe Superstar Rondo is going to get added to this collection of junk and we'll go 38-4 over the remaining part of the season.  In which case, they think we have a shot at a championship.   All I can say to that is... I feel like they are setting themselves up for some harsh disappointment.

  Even if I did believe that it would be only slightly more far-fetched than your predictions for the Nets (still waiting for that 15 game win streak) or last year's title contending Lakers team. I'd assume that your wildly exaggerating anything I might have said was just an attempt to make it look more ridiculous than your actual claims.

Lol well tim... it fluctuates once a week, but at the moment I appear to be winning that debate.

I said that KG and Paul were the main reason we made the playoffs last year and got above .500.  I said that Brooklyn would be "Fine" and that a huge win streak would inevitably jump them into the playoffs.   I said that Boston would be completely devoid of talent and at the bottom of the standings.

Nothing I debated is inaccurate.  Brooklyn has won 5 in a row.  Pierce and KG and mustering their 20th wind.  They have jumped into the 7th seed of the playoffs and just beat the Heat.

  You spent much of this offseason talking about what a good team Brooklyn would be, just as you spent much of the previous offseason talking about what a juggernaut the Lakers were going to be. You said that last year's team wouldn't miss Rondo in the playoffs at all. When Brooklyn was stinking up the league you made multiple posts about how they were bound to go on a 15 game winning streak (which I think you gave up on after I pointed out how rare they are). I'm not sure I'd characterize your claim that nothing you said was inaccurate as anything other than unsurprising.

And from the start, my concern was that Rondo would come back and make a terrible team just good enough that they'd enter perpetual mediocrity.  So far, it's a check, check, check in my argument score sheet.   We're on pace to win 25 games without Rondo.  His addition probably gets us to 35 wins.  Difference between a Top 5 pick and the 8th seed/perpetual mediocrity.

  We may or may not be mediocre. There's no evidence that it will be perpetual. You're under the impression that 40 wins and the 8th seed is like quicksand, and if you land there one year it's practically impossible to extricate a team from that position. That's not the case. You also seem to think that the future of our franchise hangs in the balance of whether we get a high pick in the draft or not. That's not the case either.

But alas, if we wait a couple weeks... Brooklyn will probably be at the bottom of the conference and Rondo's return might make Boston look temporarily legit.  At any moment during this wild season, either one of us is going to look like an idiot.  Right now it's not me.

  Sorry, you're alone in that regard. I haven't made any real claims that the Celts would end up the season in or out of the playoffs, although I did point out more than once that people who were all but guaranteeing our terrible season were overly optimistic about other teams. I've also agreed that in the long run the team's better off with a high draft pick (duh) but people were underestimating the team's interest in winning and their reasons for not losing on purpose for a high draft pick. You know, stuff that isn't inaccurate. I don't fit into the tanker camp, but that's more opposition to tearing the team down in order to get worse than anything else.

  Good luck with your roller coaster though.

34 wins and the 8th seed would be an epic disaster. Yes.

  It wouldn't be ideal in terms of building for the future, that's true. Epic disaster is quite an overreaction though.

[Celtics18]

The only argument to the contrary I've heard is that somehow the "good vibes" of making the playoffs will develop some kind of winning culture.  That thinking is delusional.  The absolute BEST-CASE scenario is making the playoffs this year, upsetting Indiana in Round 1 and having a hard-fought 2nd round matchup.  That's the path Philly took two years ago when they upset Rose-less Chicago and gave Boston a 7 game series.  It did nothing for their future... the next year they were out of the playoffs.  This year they are garbage.  And THAT team was above .500 at the time of their little miracle.   We're talking about making the playoffs with 33 wins right now... there's no point to it.  It's a fool's errand.

  One would assume that there are lower seeded teams that made the playoffs and ended up better in the next few years that you're unaware of, what happened to Philly isn't the only outcome. Also, someone had a post within the last week or so about how few of the teams that end up with high draft picks win titles. Getting to the playoffs or getting to the lottery are both "fool's errands", you just don't realize that.

In defense of BballTim and Celtics18, I think those two guys don't actually subscribe to this line of thinking.  I'm of the assumption they believe Superstar Rondo is going to get added to this collection of junk and we'll go 38-4 over the remaining part of the season.  In which case, they think we have a shot at a championship.   All I can say to that is... I feel like they are setting themselves up for some harsh disappointment.

  Even if I did believe that it would be only slightly more far-fetched than your predictions for the Nets (still waiting for that 15 game win streak) or last year's title contending Lakers team. I'd assume that your wildly exaggerating anything I might have said was just an attempt to make it look more ridiculous than your actual claims.

Lol well tim... it fluctuates once a week, but at the moment I appear to be winning that debate.

I said that KG and Paul were the main reason we made the playoffs last year and got above .500.  I said that Brooklyn would be "Fine" and that a huge win streak would inevitably jump them into the playoffs.   I said that Boston would be completely devoid of talent and at the bottom of the standings.

Nothing I debated is inaccurate.  Brooklyn has won 5 in a row.  Pierce and KG and mustering their 20th wind.  They have jumped into the 7th seed of the playoffs and just beat the Heat.

  You spent much of this offseason talking about what a good team Brooklyn would be, just as you spent much of the previous offseason talking about what a juggernaut the Lakers were going to be. You said that last year's team wouldn't miss Rondo in the playoffs at all. When Brooklyn was stinking up the league you made multiple posts about how they were bound to go on a 15 game winning streak (which I think you gave up on after I pointed out how rare they are). I'm not sure I'd characterize your claim that nothing you said was inaccurate as anything other than unsurprising.

And from the start, my concern was that Rondo would come back and make a terrible team just good enough that they'd enter perpetual mediocrity.  So far, it's a check, check, check in my argument score sheet.   We're on pace to win 25 games without Rondo.  His addition probably gets us to 35 wins.  Difference between a Top 5 pick and the 8th seed/perpetual mediocrity.

  We may or may not be mediocre. There's no evidence that it will be perpetual. You're under the impression that 40 wins and the 8th seed is like quicksand, and if you land there one year it's practically impossible to extricate a team from that position. That's not the case. You also seem to think that the future of our franchise hangs in the balance of whether we get a high pick in the draft or not. That's not the case either.

But alas, if we wait a couple weeks... Brooklyn will probably be at the bottom of the conference and Rondo's return might make Boston look temporarily legit.  At any moment during this wild season, either one of us is going to look like an idiot.  Right now it's not me.

  Sorry, you're alone in that regard. I haven't made any real claims that the Celts would end up the season in or out of the playoffs, although I did point out more than once that people who were all but guaranteeing our terrible season were overly optimistic about other teams. I've also agreed that in the long run the team's better off with a high draft pick (duh) but people were underestimating the team's interest in winning and their reasons for not losing on purpose for a high draft pick. You know, stuff that isn't inaccurate. I don't fit into the tanker camp, but that's more opposition to tearing the team down in order to get worse than anything else.

  Good luck with your roller coaster though.

34 wins and the 8th seed would be an epic disaster. Yes.  Very little positive would come from that.  I've seen Boston stuck in perpetual mediocrity before.  It sucks.  When did you become a fan of the Celtics, Tim?  Were you around back in the Walker/Pierce days?

Obviously you don't know what "perpetual" means. 

[pokeKingCurtis]

"They think Rondo's gonna make this team contend."

Strawman. Also an implied ad hominem. All that's missing is for ssspence to straight up call someone delusional and obsessed with Rondo.

"[A team/list of teams] made the playoffs. Now they suck. Playoffs or bust."

Cherry picking and drawing a conclusion from insufficient data. Subsequently a false dilemma.




Here's why I find the "misconceptions about tankers" thread absurd when PhoSita posed "tankers" as victims. The vocal "tankers" hold very strong positions and are the ones dogmatically misrepresenting the positions of the "non-tankers".

The lottery system isn't even all that old (1985) when you consider how many NBA dynasties last over a decade. Plus, only recently have more teams started getting smart about it. And, add to that, the changes in the CBA, in basketball itself...

Anomalies like the 2012-2014 Rockets and the '04 Pistons may very well be flukes. But considering the scope, it's not unreasonable to believe there may be more to it. It's also reasonable to chalk them up as flukes.

The best you could do is speculate. "Tankers" and "non-tankers" are just cutting the data in different ways.

Yet "tankers" assert that tanking is some sort of universal truth.

On the other hand, I don't see "non-tankers" holding their beliefs so vehemently. Hell, I think most "non-tankers" accept that tanking could lead to success.

When you presuppose the truth, what is there to discuss?

[Celtics18]

"They think Rondo's gonna make this team contend."

Strawman. Also an implied ad hominem. All that's missing is for ssspence to straight up call someone delusional and obsessed with Rondo.

"[A team/list of teams] made the playoffs. Now they suck. Playoffs or bust."

Cherry picking and drawing a conclusion from insufficient data. Subsequently a false dilemma.




Here's why I find the "misconceptions about tankers" thread absurd when PhoSita posed "tankers" as victims. The vocal "tankers" hold very strong positions and are the ones dogmatically misrepresenting the positions of the "non-tankers".

The lottery system isn't even all that old (1985) when you consider how many NBA dynasties last over a decade. Plus, only recently have more teams started getting smart about it. And, add to that, the changes in the CBA, in basketball itself...

Anomalies like the 2012-2014 Rockets and the '04 Pistons may very well be flukes. But considering the scope, it's not unreasonable to believe there may be more to it. It's also reasonable to chalk them up as flukes.

The best you could do is speculate. "Tankers" and "non-tankers" are just cutting the data in different ways.

Yet "tankers" assert that tanking is some sort of universal truth.

On the other hand, I don't see "non-tankers" holding their beliefs so vehemently. Hell, I think most "non-tankers" accept that tanking could lead to success.

When you presuppose the truth, what is there to discuss?

Well done.  TP.

[BballTim]

The only argument to the contrary I've heard is that somehow the "good vibes" of making the playoffs will develop some kind of winning culture.  That thinking is delusional.  The absolute BEST-CASE scenario is making the playoffs this year, upsetting Indiana in Round 1 and having a hard-fought 2nd round matchup.  That's the path Philly took two years ago when they upset Rose-less Chicago and gave Boston a 7 game series.  It did nothing for their future... the next year they were out of the playoffs.  This year they are garbage.  And THAT team was above .500 at the time of their little miracle.   We're talking about making the playoffs with 33 wins right now... there's no point to it.  It's a fool's errand.

  One would assume that there are lower seeded teams that made the playoffs and ended up better in the next few years that you're unaware of, what happened to Philly isn't the only outcome. Also, someone had a post within the last week or so about how few of the teams that end up with high draft picks win titles. Getting to the playoffs or getting to the lottery are both "fool's errands", you just don't realize that.

In defense of BballTim and Celtics18, I think those two guys don't actually subscribe to this line of thinking.  I'm of the assumption they believe Superstar Rondo is going to get added to this collection of junk and we'll go 38-4 over the remaining part of the season.  In which case, they think we have a shot at a championship.   All I can say to that is... I feel like they are setting themselves up for some harsh disappointment.

  Even if I did believe that it would be only slightly more far-fetched than your predictions for the Nets (still waiting for that 15 game win streak) or last year's title contending Lakers team. I'd assume that your wildly exaggerating anything I might have said was just an attempt to make it look more ridiculous than your actual claims.

Lol well tim... it fluctuates once a week, but at the moment I appear to be winning that debate.

I said that KG and Paul were the main reason we made the playoffs last year and got above .500.  I said that Brooklyn would be "Fine" and that a huge win streak would inevitably jump them into the playoffs.   I said that Boston would be completely devoid of talent and at the bottom of the standings.

Nothing I debated is inaccurate.  Brooklyn has won 5 in a row.  Pierce and KG and mustering their 20th wind.  They have jumped into the 7th seed of the playoffs and just beat the Heat.

  You spent much of this offseason talking about what a good team Brooklyn would be, just as you spent much of the previous offseason talking about what a juggernaut the Lakers were going to be. You said that last year's team wouldn't miss Rondo in the playoffs at all. When Brooklyn was stinking up the league you made multiple posts about how they were bound to go on a 15 game winning streak (which I think you gave up on after I pointed out how rare they are). I'm not sure I'd characterize your claim that nothing you said was inaccurate as anything other than unsurprising.

And from the start, my concern was that Rondo would come back and make a terrible team just good enough that they'd enter perpetual mediocrity.  So far, it's a check, check, check in my argument score sheet.   We're on pace to win 25 games without Rondo.  His addition probably gets us to 35 wins.  Difference between a Top 5 pick and the 8th seed/perpetual mediocrity.

  We may or may not be mediocre. There's no evidence that it will be perpetual. You're under the impression that 40 wins and the 8th seed is like quicksand, and if you land there one year it's practically impossible to extricate a team from that position. That's not the case. You also seem to think that the future of our franchise hangs in the balance of whether we get a high pick in the draft or not. That's not the case either.

But alas, if we wait a couple weeks... Brooklyn will probably be at the bottom of the conference and Rondo's return might make Boston look temporarily legit.  At any moment during this wild season, either one of us is going to look like an idiot.  Right now it's not me.

  Sorry, you're alone in that regard. I haven't made any real claims that the Celts would end up the season in or out of the playoffs, although I did point out more than once that people who were all but guaranteeing our terrible season were overly optimistic about other teams. I've also agreed that in the long run the team's better off with a high draft pick (duh) but people were underestimating the team's interest in winning and their reasons for not losing on purpose for a high draft pick. You know, stuff that isn't inaccurate. I don't fit into the tanker camp, but that's more opposition to tearing the team down in order to get worse than anything else.

  Good luck with your roller coaster though.

34 wins and the 8th seed would be an epic disaster. Yes.  Very little positive would come from that.  I've seen Boston stuck in perpetual mediocrity before.  It sucks.  When did you become a fan of the Celtics, Tim?  Were you around back in the Walker/Pierce days?

  I was around back in the Pierce/Walker days. Were you a fan of the team during the Ricky Davis days, or the Szerbiak days? Yes, they were mediocre. No, it wasn't perpetual.

[D.o.s.]

I do think that we can safely retire the LooseCannon/BBallTim "We've played .500 ball since Bradley stopped being the point guard" though.

[kraidstar]

there's solid talent on this team, but elite players win titles. it's not about tanking per se, it's about finding ways to acquire championship-level core players. we'll be getting one all-star back from injury soon. get a stud in the draft, and make a trade or sign another free agent using draft picks and/or prospects, then we're in business. we have assets galore: movable contracts, young talent, and a whole bunch of tasty draft picks. houston traded for harden and then signed duh-wight howard, and their best player before the trade was kevin martin, and they didn't have a high draft pick in a loaded draft like we're going to have. we're in very good shape, ainge just needs to make the right moves.   
most of the teams stuck in perpetual cycles of awfulness have bad ownership/management. that's why the c's were bad (or at least not really contending) for so long in the 90's etc. bad drafting, bad signings, terrible trades, giving up guys like billups and joe johnson too soon... gaston was an awful owner, and chris wallace builds championship teams for other organizations, not his own. can't believe that guy is still employed.
i genuinely think we'll be a contender again within a few years.

[BballTim]

I do think that we can safely retire the LooseCannon/BBallTim "We've played .500 ball since Bradley stopped being the point guard" though.

  Congratulations on that.

[D.o.s.]

I do think that we can safely retire the LooseCannon/BBallTim "We've played .500 ball since Bradley stopped being the point guard" though.

  Congratulations on that.

I remain relatively nonplussed about the whole situation. This thread, though, is hilarious.