Do you expect the Celts to make the playoffs next season?

[Jailan34]

What you're talking about is kinda part of the Outliers principle that Gladwell came up with.  I talked about it in a thread about Antoine Walker a couple months ago... Walker had huge potential, but didn't reach it, because he had the wrong system.  Meanwhile, Rondo had moderate potential, but vastly exceeded it, because he had a perfect system and perfect mentors showing him the way.

  Rondo had serious potential that was obvious from pretty much the exhibition season of his rookie year. He didn't vastly exceed his potential, you were just unable to spot it. His success has been due to that talent in spite of spending most of his career in a system that suited his teammates more than it suited him.

lol ok.  Whatever.

  Just pointing out the obvious.

Sorry, but if a player doesn't have the talent or doesnt have it in him to be a great player he wont become one because his team wins. He can be apart of a great team but on an individual level he will not become noticeably better at every aspect of the game because his team wins a lot, this is a ridiculous discussion.

[hpantazo]

Two major things wrong with the Paul George example.

1. George was picked #10, a lottery pick. By definition if you advocate making the playoffs, we won't even sniff a #10 pick. We will be picking late teens to early 20's.

2. How many #10 picks end up being superstars on contending teams? Not many, regardless of the "winning culture" of the team.

It's the players and coach that make a winning culture, not the GM. It's the job of the GM to get great players and coaches, any way he can. Telling his team of mediocre players to aim for the playoffs and then closing his eyes and hoping his draft picks from the 17-20 range become the next Pierce or Paul George is the quickest way to long term mediocrity. Tyler Hansborough was drafted #13 by the Pacers. Why didn't the winning culture make him a star?

Sooner or later you have to sign those players to long term deals or they walk. Would you sign Olynyk or Bradley to a max deal if they stay about where they are but the team makes the 1st round? That would be like the Rick Fox and Dee Brown signing we made in the dark era.

If a player actually becomes a star, like Kevin Love, or even Lebron, they need more than a taste of the playoffs and a positive culture to sign with you long term. Lebron went to the [dang] finals and still bolted Cleveland. Shaq went to the playoffs in Orlando and still left for LA. Same for Dwight Howard.

Instead of hoping your mid-late draft picks become stars, and then decide to sign extensions with you, it's much more productive to acquire assets like AInge has done, and then trade them for proven stars to build a legit contender. Either that, or get lucky by landing a Duncan or Lebron in the lottery, but even then you have to get the stars around them to make them stay.

I don't understand why your overlooking our 2014 picks. Especially the possibility of a top 5 pick.

I'm not asking if we will make the playoffs with the team we got now plus a mid lotto to early 20 pick.  The 2014 picks are going to help

Your example of hansborough is a little extreme and mainly to strengthen your point. But i can also strengthen mine and list guys like Stephenson who was chosen in the 2nd round and look where he is now. The spurs also do this with many players with mainly potential/upside helping them reach peak play bc of pops and the system in place.

The bottom line for me is i rather take the Spurs, Pacers route. People will argue well they got great players that should of been chosen much earlier. Well fine, then we can get lucky too. It takes a good GM to pull it off and Danny is a good GM.  Others want to try to do what many teams today are trying to do (but failing and worse having a huge payroll), trade picks, young assets for guys like Love but getting nowhere

the 2008 celts team, 2011 miami heat gangup and Rockets fortunate situation with Harden and Howard don't happen everyday. It happens as often as drafting a Duncan. Building through the draft , building your team within is more realistic.  Danny imo brought in Stevens bc this is the route the org is going to take in the short run. Again if there is a KG/Allen avail you think long and hard to make the trade but none are. Not really confident any big FA will want to sign with us in 2015 also.

I think either you are totally misunderstanding what the Spurs and Pacers are, or you are purposefully miss-stating it.

The Spurs got Duncan with the #1 pick after tanking while David Robinson was out for the year. Not by making the playoffs to maintain a "winning culture".

The Pacers were pretty bad for a while and got lucky with Paul George and Hibbert. They were far from maintaining a winning culture. They had Ron Artest who Bird loved and was going to keep until Artest asked out, shocking Bird at the time. As for Stephenson, he's a glorified 6th man who the Pacers will likely let walk this summer as some other team overpays for him. Would you build a team around paying a guy like Stephenson the max and expect to contend?

Sure, the 2008 Celtics, the Heat big three, and the Rockets with Harden and Howard don't happen every day, but championship teams don't happen every day either. The route you are advocating for is not a route that any successful team has taken. The examples you list either didn't win a title or didn't actually take the route you are asking for.

[Tr1boy]

Two major things wrong with the Paul George example.

1. George was picked #10, a lottery pick. By definition if you advocate making the playoffs, we won't even sniff a #10 pick. We will be picking late teens to early 20's.

2. How many #10 picks end up being superstars on contending teams? Not many, regardless of the "winning culture" of the team.

It's the players and coach that make a winning culture, not the GM. It's the job of the GM to get great players and coaches, any way he can. Telling his team of mediocre players to aim for the playoffs and then closing his eyes and hoping his draft picks from the 17-20 range become the next Pierce or Paul George is the quickest way to long term mediocrity. Tyler Hansborough was drafted #13 by the Pacers. Why didn't the winning culture make him a star?

Sooner or later you have to sign those players to long term deals or they walk. Would you sign Olynyk or Bradley to a max deal if they stay about where they are but the team makes the 1st round? That would be like the Rick Fox and Dee Brown signing we made in the dark era.

If a player actually becomes a star, like Kevin Love, or even Lebron, they need more than a taste of the playoffs and a positive culture to sign with you long term. Lebron went to the [dang] finals and still bolted Cleveland. Shaq went to the playoffs in Orlando and still left for LA. Same for Dwight Howard.

Instead of hoping your mid-late draft picks become stars, and then decide to sign extensions with you, it's much more productive to acquire assets like AInge has done, and then trade them for proven stars to build a legit contender. Either that, or get lucky by landing a Duncan or Lebron in the lottery, but even then you have to get the stars around them to make them stay.

I don't understand why your overlooking our 2014 picks. Especially the possibility of a top 5 pick.

I'm not asking if we will make the playoffs with the team we got now plus a mid lotto to early 20 pick.  The 2014 picks are going to help

Your example of hansborough is a little extreme and mainly to strengthen your point. But i can also strengthen mine and list guys like Stephenson who was chosen in the 2nd round and look where he is now. The spurs also do this with many players with mainly potential/upside helping them reach peak play bc of pops and the system in place.

The bottom line for me is i rather take the Spurs, Pacers route. People will argue well they got great players that should of been chosen much earlier. Well fine, then we can get lucky too. It takes a good GM to pull it off and Danny is a good GM.  Others want to try to do what many teams today are trying to do (but failing and worse having a huge payroll), trade picks, young assets for guys like Love but getting nowhere

the 2008 celts team, 2011 miami heat gangup and Rockets fortunate situation with Harden and Howard don't happen everyday. It happens as often as drafting a Duncan. Building through the draft , building your team within is more realistic.  Danny imo brought in Stevens bc this is the route the org is going to take in the short run. Again if there is a KG/Allen avail you think long and hard to make the trade but none are. Not really confident any big FA will want to sign with us in 2015 also.

I think either you are totally misunderstanding what the Spurs and Pacers are, or you are purposefully miss-stating it.

The Spurs got Duncan with the #1 pick after tanking while David Robinson was out for the year. Not by making the playoffs to maintain a "winning culture".

The Pacers were pretty bad for a while and got lucky with Paul George and Hibbert. They were far from maintaining a winning culture. They had Ron Artest who Bird loved and was going to keep until Artest asked out, shocking Bird at the time. As for Stephenson, he's a glorified 6th man who the Pacers will likely let walk this summer as some other team overpays for him. Would you build a team around paying a guy like Stephenson the max and expect to contend?

Sure, the 2008 Celtics, the Heat big three, and the Rockets with Harden and Howard don't happen every day, but championship teams don't happen every day either. The route you are advocating for is not a route that any successful team has taken. The examples you list either didn't win a title or didn't actually take the route you are asking for.

Look at the spurs lineup now with an elderly duncan. Dont think i have say more

The way u want to do it is kind of cheating imo. But if u want to win miami style then thats your choice. Winning within is not alien. Most teams from looking at history have done it this way

[freshinthehouse]

No. I think this is a multiple-year rebuild.

This.  We picked a good time to be bad.  The 2014 and 2015 draft appear to be full of quality top end talent.  My guess is we are awful for another year, possibly an late seed playoff team by 2016 (depending how awful the east is), and hopefully we are on our way the season after.

[freshinthehouse]

Paul George and Hibbert were correctly drafted where they were. And they are the players today bc they have been influenced and grown due to the pacers winning culture in place. Now they are adding to the this environment further

David Lee was drafted near the end of the first round and became an all-star caliber talent, all the while playing in the cesspool that was mid-00s Knicks basketball.

Teams make mistakes and talent drops in the draft.  Having a stable, winning culture is nice, but it doesn't make that big of a difference in the long run.  Kevin Durant came of age on some hideous Sonic/Thunder teams.  He seems to be doing all right.

[hpantazo]

Two major things wrong with the Paul George example.

1. George was picked #10, a lottery pick. By definition if you advocate making the playoffs, we won't even sniff a #10 pick. We will be picking late teens to early 20's.

2. How many #10 picks end up being superstars on contending teams? Not many, regardless of the "winning culture" of the team.

It's the players and coach that make a winning culture, not the GM. It's the job of the GM to get great players and coaches, any way he can. Telling his team of mediocre players to aim for the playoffs and then closing his eyes and hoping his draft picks from the 17-20 range become the next Pierce or Paul George is the quickest way to long term mediocrity. Tyler Hansborough was drafted #13 by the Pacers. Why didn't the winning culture make him a star?

Sooner or later you have to sign those players to long term deals or they walk. Would you sign Olynyk or Bradley to a max deal if they stay about where they are but the team makes the 1st round? That would be like the Rick Fox and Dee Brown signing we made in the dark era.

If a player actually becomes a star, like Kevin Love, or even Lebron, they need more than a taste of the playoffs and a positive culture to sign with you long term. Lebron went to the [dang] finals and still bolted Cleveland. Shaq went to the playoffs in Orlando and still left for LA. Same for Dwight Howard.

Instead of hoping your mid-late draft picks become stars, and then decide to sign extensions with you, it's much more productive to acquire assets like AInge has done, and then trade them for proven stars to build a legit contender. Either that, or get lucky by landing a Duncan or Lebron in the lottery, but even then you have to get the stars around them to make them stay.

I don't understand why your overlooking our 2014 picks. Especially the possibility of a top 5 pick.

I'm not asking if we will make the playoffs with the team we got now plus a mid lotto to early 20 pick.  The 2014 picks are going to help

Your example of hansborough is a little extreme and mainly to strengthen your point. But i can also strengthen mine and list guys like Stephenson who was chosen in the 2nd round and look where he is now. The spurs also do this with many players with mainly potential/upside helping them reach peak play bc of pops and the system in place.

The bottom line for me is i rather take the Spurs, Pacers route. People will argue well they got great players that should of been chosen much earlier. Well fine, then we can get lucky too. It takes a good GM to pull it off and Danny is a good GM.  Others want to try to do what many teams today are trying to do (but failing and worse having a huge payroll), trade picks, young assets for guys like Love but getting nowhere

the 2008 celts team, 2011 miami heat gangup and Rockets fortunate situation with Harden and Howard don't happen everyday. It happens as often as drafting a Duncan. Building through the draft , building your team within is more realistic.  Danny imo brought in Stevens bc this is the route the org is going to take in the short run. Again if there is a KG/Allen avail you think long and hard to make the trade but none are. Not really confident any big FA will want to sign with us in 2015 also.

I think either you are totally misunderstanding what the Spurs and Pacers are, or you are purposefully miss-stating it.

The Spurs got Duncan with the #1 pick after tanking while David Robinson was out for the year. Not by making the playoffs to maintain a "winning culture".

The Pacers were pretty bad for a while and got lucky with Paul George and Hibbert. They were far from maintaining a winning culture. They had Ron Artest who Bird loved and was going to keep until Artest asked out, shocking Bird at the time. As for Stephenson, he's a glorified 6th man who the Pacers will likely let walk this summer as some other team overpays for him. Would you build a team around paying a guy like Stephenson the max and expect to contend?

Sure, the 2008 Celtics, the Heat big three, and the Rockets with Harden and Howard don't happen every day, but championship teams don't happen every day either. The route you are advocating for is not a route that any successful team has taken. The examples you list either didn't win a title or didn't actually take the route you are asking for.

Look at the spurs lineup now with an elderly duncan. Dont think i have say more

The way u want to do it is kind of cheating imo. But if u want to win miami style then thats your choice. Winning within is not alien. Most teams from looking at history have done it this way

Have they won a title with the elderly Duncan? I'm not sure what you are referring to by "most teams from history". The celtics in the 80's got Bird from sucking and getting a good draft pick, and then traded another great draft pick to get McHale and Parrish.

The Bulls sucked forever until they got lucky enough to land Jordan in the lottery, and still sucked until they got lucky again and landed Pippen as the 5th pick.

The lakers signed Shaq as a FA and traded assets for Kobe who was drafted in the lottery.

Hakeem Olajuwon was picked #1 by a crappy Rockets team as another championship example.

Looking at history clearly shows you that you either have to suck and tank for years and get lucky, or you have to trade for a superstar, or if you are LA you sign one in the offseason.

Teams from the early NBA days you can't even compare to today. Back then the best team got the 1st pick in the draft. It was a different world. Heck, with the new CBA, you can't even compare the teams from the 80's and 90's to today in terms of how to build a contender.

[Tr1boy]

Paul George and Hibbert were correctly drafted where they were. And they are the players today bc they have been influenced and grown due to the pacers winning culture in place. Now they are adding to the this environment further

David Lee was drafted near the end of the first round and became an all-star caliber talent, all the while playing in the cesspool that was mid-00s Knicks basketball.

Teams make mistakes and talent drops in the draft.  Having a stable, winning culture is nice, but it doesn't make that big of a difference in the long run.  Kevin Durant came of age on some hideous Sonic/Thunder teams.  He seems to be doing all right.

Dont think you read everything before posting but i mentioned players like lebron, durant are exceptional players that can change a dirt team to a contender. The only 2 players right now that can. And they are not coming our way any time soon

[hpantazo]

Paul George and Hibbert were correctly drafted where they were. And they are the players today bc they have been influenced and grown due to the pacers winning culture in place. Now they are adding to the this environment further

David Lee was drafted near the end of the first round and became an all-star caliber talent, all the while playing in the cesspool that was mid-00s Knicks basketball.

Teams make mistakes and talent drops in the draft.  Having a stable, winning culture is nice, but it doesn't make that big of a difference in the long run.  Kevin Durant came of age on some hideous Sonic/Thunder teams.  He seems to be doing all right.

Exactly. This "winning culture" breeds talent is a myth. Talent and leadership breed a winning culture.

[Tr1boy]

Two major things wrong with the Paul George example.

1. George was picked #10, a lottery pick. By definition if you advocate making the playoffs, we won't even sniff a #10 pick. We will be picking late teens to early 20's.

2. How many #10 picks end up being superstars on contending teams? Not many, regardless of the "winning culture" of the team.

It's the players and coach that make a winning culture, not the GM. It's the job of the GM to get great players and coaches, any way he can. Telling his team of mediocre players to aim for the playoffs and then closing his eyes and hoping his draft picks from the 17-20 range become the next Pierce or Paul George is the quickest way to long term mediocrity. Tyler Hansborough was drafted #13 by the Pacers. Why didn't the winning culture make him a star?

Sooner or later you have to sign those players to long term deals or they walk. Would you sign Olynyk or Bradley to a max deal if they stay about where they are but the team makes the 1st round? That would be like the Rick Fox and Dee Brown signing we made in the dark era.

If a player actually becomes a star, like Kevin Love, or even Lebron, they need more than a taste of the playoffs and a positive culture to sign with you long term. Lebron went to the [dang] finals and still bolted Cleveland. Shaq went to the playoffs in Orlando and still left for LA. Same for Dwight Howard.

Instead of hoping your mid-late draft picks become stars, and then decide to sign extensions with you, it's much more productive to acquire assets like AInge has done, and then trade them for proven stars to build a legit contender. Either that, or get lucky by landing a Duncan or Lebron in the lottery, but even then you have to get the stars around them to make them stay.

I don't understand why your overlooking our 2014 picks. Especially the possibility of a top 5 pick.

I'm not asking if we will make the playoffs with the team we got now plus a mid lotto to early 20 pick.  The 2014 picks are going to help

Your example of hansborough is a little extreme and mainly to strengthen your point. But i can also strengthen mine and list guys like Stephenson who was chosen in the 2nd round and look where he is now. The spurs also do this with many players with mainly potential/upside helping them reach peak play bc of pops and the system in place.

The bottom line for me is i rather take the Spurs, Pacers route. People will argue well they got great players that should of been chosen much earlier. Well fine, then we can get lucky too. It takes a good GM to pull it off and Danny is a good GM.  Others want to try to do what many teams today are trying to do (but failing and worse having a huge payroll), trade picks, young assets for guys like Love but getting nowhere

the 2008 celts team, 2011 miami heat gangup and Rockets fortunate situation with Harden and Howard don't happen everyday. It happens as often as drafting a Duncan. Building through the draft , building your team within is more realistic.  Danny imo brought in Stevens bc this is the route the org is going to take in the short run. Again if there is a KG/Allen avail you think long and hard to make the trade but none are. Not really confident any big FA will want to sign with us in 2015 also.

I think either you are totally misunderstanding what the Spurs and Pacers are, or you are purposefully miss-stating it.

The Spurs got Duncan with the #1 pick after tanking while David Robinson was out for the year. Not by making the playoffs to maintain a "winning culture".

The Pacers were pretty bad for a while and got lucky with Paul George and Hibbert. They were far from maintaining a winning culture. They had Ron Artest who Bird loved and was going to keep until Artest asked out, shocking Bird at the time. As for Stephenson, he's a glorified 6th man who the Pacers will likely let walk this summer as some other team overpays for him. Would you build a team around paying a guy like Stephenson the max and expect to contend?

Sure, the 2008 Celtics, the Heat big three, and the Rockets with Harden and Howard don't happen every day, but championship teams don't happen every day either. The route you are advocating for is not a route that any successful team has taken. The examples you list either didn't win a title or didn't actually take the route you are asking for.

Look at the spurs lineup now with an elderly duncan. Dont think i have say more

The way u want to do it is kind of cheating imo. But if u want to win miami style then thats your choice. Winning within is not alien. Most teams from looking at history have done it this way

Have they won a title with the elderly Duncan? I'm not sure what you are referring to by "most teams from history". The celtics in the 80's got Bird from sucking and getting a good draft pick, and then traded another great draft pick to get McHale and Parrish.

The Bulls sucked forever until they got lucky enough to land Jordan in the lottery, and still lucked until they got lucky again and landed Pippen as the 5th pick.

The lakers signed Shaq as a FA and traded assets for Kobe who was drafted in the lottery.

Hakeem Olajuwon was picked #1 by a crappy Rockets team as another championship example.

Looking at history clearly shows you that you either have to suck and tank for years and get lucky, or you have to trade for a superstar, or if you are LA you sign one in the offseason.

Teams from the early NBA days you can't even compare to today. Back then the best team got the 1st pick in the draft. It was a different world. Heck, with the new CBA, you can't even compare the teams from the 80's and 90's to today in terms of how to build a contender.

So we are tanking now arent we? We will get a big pick or possibly 2 in the upcoming draft. Lets go from there.

And btw u ask any team if they just want to just get a chance to get to the conference finals or finals but u dont have a lebron, every team would say yes. Pacers took the heat to 7 and so did the spurs. Spurs almost won

[Tr1boy]

Paul George and Hibbert were correctly drafted where they were. And they are the players today bc they have been influenced and grown due to the pacers winning culture in place. Now they are adding to the this environment further

David Lee was drafted near the end of the first round and became an all-star caliber talent, all the while playing in the cesspool that was mid-00s Knicks basketball.

Teams make mistakes and talent drops in the draft.  Having a stable, winning culture is nice, but it doesn't make that big of a difference in the long run.  Kevin Durant came of age on some hideous Sonic/Thunder teams.  He seems to be doing all right.

Exactly. This "winning culture" breeds talent is a myth. Talent and leadership breed a winning culture.

Parker, ginobelli, stephenson, hibbert disagree

[Rondohara]

If nobody on contract is traded, young players like Sully and Olynyk progress in their development and the main source of talent addition is through the draft?  (example 3rd and 17th pick)

yes or no?

In your example I would say no, although the team record should improve. Depending on injuries here and in other teams we could get the 6th seed or so.

But there will be trades that will add talent, so in that case, yes.

[LarBrd33]

What you're talking about is kinda part of the Outliers principle that Gladwell came up with.  I talked about it in a thread about Antoine Walker a couple months ago... Walker had huge potential, but didn't reach it, because he had the wrong system.  Meanwhile, Rondo had moderate potential, but vastly exceeded it, because he had a perfect system and perfect mentors showing him the way.

  Rondo had serious potential that was obvious from pretty much the exhibition season of his rookie year. He didn't vastly exceed his potential, you were just unable to spot it. His success has been due to that talent in spite of spending most of his career in a system that suited his teammates more than it suited him.

lol ok.  Whatever.

  Just pointing out the obvious.

It's not true, though.  If Rondo had been drafted by the Suns or something, he wouldn't be the player he is today.  He was a late 1st rounder and vastly exceeded expectations... in part because of the team he joined and the mentors he had along the road.  The point is that he still needed potential.  It's not like every Jajuan Johnson can be converted to 4 time all-star.  Hence, we need the best pick possible to maximize our return. Sure, you might get some raw prospect with potential (Perry Jones, for example) and stick him on a contender (OKC for example), but even then, it's not a given it will work out.

Do me a favor and try not to respond to every message i post.  You don't have to take every single comment as a slight on your idol.  Sometimes... just let it go. 

[BballTim]

What you're talking about is kinda part of the Outliers principle that Gladwell came up with.  I talked about it in a thread about Antoine Walker a couple months ago... Walker had huge potential, but didn't reach it, because he had the wrong system.  Meanwhile, Rondo had moderate potential, but vastly exceeded it, because he had a perfect system and perfect mentors showing him the way.

  Rondo had serious potential that was obvious from pretty much the exhibition season of his rookie year. He didn't vastly exceed his potential, you were just unable to spot it. His success has been due to that talent in spite of spending most of his career in a system that suited his teammates more than it suited him.

lol ok.  Whatever.

  Just pointing out the obvious.

It's not true, though.  If Rondo had been drafted by the Suns or something, he wouldn't be the player he is today. 

  He'd have been in a system that suited his game more and he'd been more the focus of his team's offense, so he'd have better numbers. Most of his detractors here would be talking about what a star he was. Rondo had the same mentors that players like Glen Davis, Avery Bradley, Tony Allen, JR Giddens and the like did. Those mentors helped Rondo become a star as they helped all of those other players become stars.

[Tr1boy]

for those that think we won't make the playoffs next season, unless a major trade happens, how will that affect the ability for Danny to sign Rondo for the long term?

[D.o.s.]

for those that think we won't make the playoffs next season, unless a major trade happens, how will that affect the ability for Danny to sign Rondo for the long term?

If we don't make the playoffs next season, in the East with a healthy Rondo playing all season long, then Ainge should be able to sign Rondo for relatively cheap - which would be good. We've already seen that he can be the 4th best player on a championship team, and if we can get away with paying him like that we'll be in good shape to add more talent.