It's all just re-arranging deck chairs...

[Section301]

Rome wasn't built in a day, and the summer is not over yet.

And an apple a day keeps the doctor away, but homespun cliches won't get the Celtics any closer to a dynasty this year.

[Celtics18]

Some people on here are completely satisfied with just competing. They just want to be apart of the playoff experience, even if it is a first round exit. To me thats crazy.

I'm one of those crazy people.  Of course, I'd rather see the Celtics win a title than be a bottom seed first round out in the playoffs, but I'd rather see the Celtics be a first round out in the playoffs than a team competing for the worst record in the league. 

I don't for a second buy the theory that the only way to build a championship contender is to draft a transcendent superstar.  History has categorically shown that this theory simply isn't true. 

[LilRip]

I half-agree with this. Yes, transcendent players generally win it all, and those guys are generally top 3 picks (which is why what the sixers are doing is quite interesting). What I dont agree with is that only transcendent players win it all. (of course, it depends on what you mean when you say "transcendent").

I think guys like healthy D-Rose, future Anthony Davis and even future Andrew Wiggins, have a chance to win it all. A troika of Dwight-Harden-Bosh will have a legit chance and who's transcendent there?

[MBunge]

Bottom line is - teams don't win without a transcendent player.  An elite, for the ages talent.  The Celtics don't have one, and won't have one until they draft him.  Until then, it truly doesn't matter what they do, as much as we would like to believe otherwise. 

No one like that is available via trade right now.  Honestly, seriously, and for true - does anyone really believe Kevin Love is an all time great?   He's good, but he's not on a Bird-Magic-Isiah level.  Nor is he on a LeBron-Duncan-Durant level.

The Pistons won a title without a transcendent player.  The Spurs just won one without any player currently producing at a transcendent level.  And can Love be as good as Dirk Nowitski, 'cause he won a title with Jason Terry and Tyson Chandler as the 2nd and 3rd most important on the roster.

Mike

Dominant.  Dominant.  I don't want a one - off, we already had one of those.  I want a decade plus of being in the conversation for the finals.  Anything less is just....rearranging deck chairs.  We were talking about the "window" closing on the KG Celtics before they even played a game.

If two trips to the Finals and one title aren't enough for you, perhaps you need to become a fan of another sport.  Darts, perhaps?

Mike

[Al91]

I generally agree with everything you said but I noticed you left Kobe out, twice.

Kobe was never the best player on any of his championship teams.

I don't know man. Kobe and Shaq is Kobe and Shaq. Only one of them won two rings without the other. Some could argue Shaq was better and some could argue Kobe..but both still took their teams to the promise land with superbly talented players around them.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Some people on here are completely satisfied with just competing. They just want to be apart of the playoff experience, even if it is a first round exit. To me thats crazy.

I'm one of those crazy people.  Of course, I'd rather see the Celtics win a title than be a bottom seed first round out in the playoffs, but I'd rather see the Celtics be a first round out in the playoffs than a team competing for the worst record in the league. 

I don't for a second buy the theory that the only way to build a championship contender is to draft a transcendent superstar.  History has categorically shown that this theory simply isn't true.

Thats fine, I just completely disagree. Maybe if we were not talking about the celtics and just discussing another team. But IMO being a Celtic is about honor and about championships. Championships are what counts and also how you do it. Even your name Celtics18 counts the championships we have/will won; not the finals appearances, or playoff wins, all stars, or fav moment .....but championships. Its something everyone of us is proud of....including you, which is great.

I never chimed in on the transcendent player

[Future Celtics Owner]

I generally agree with everything you said but I noticed you left Kobe out, twice.

Kobe was never the best player on any of his championship teams.

I don't know man. Kobe and Shaq is Kobe and Shaq. Only one of them won two rings without the other. Some could argue Shaq was better and some could argue Kobe..but both still took their teams to the promise land with superbly talented players around them.

Shaq was much much more dominant in my opinion.

[Chris22]

Rome wasn't built in a day, and the summer is not over yet.

And an apple a day keeps the doctor away, but homespun cliches won't get the Celtics any closer to a dynasty this year.

But the point is well made. Free agent season has not arrived yet.

[Beat LA]

To finish the title of this thread, I just hope that we're not rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

[Section301]

Bottom line is - teams don't win without a transcendent player.  An elite, for the ages talent.  The Celtics don't have one, and won't have one until they draft him.  Until then, it truly doesn't matter what they do, as much as we would like to believe otherwise. 

No one like that is available via trade right now.  Honestly, seriously, and for true - does anyone really believe Kevin Love is an all time great?   He's good, but he's not on a Bird-Magic-Isiah level.  Nor is he on a LeBron-Duncan-Durant level.

The Pistons won a title without a transcendent player.  The Spurs just won one without any player currently producing at a transcendent level.  And can Love be as good as Dirk Nowitski, 'cause he won a title with Jason Terry and Tyson Chandler as the 2nd and 3rd most important on the roster.

Mike

Dominant.  Dominant.  I don't want a one - off, we already had one of those.  I want a decade plus of being in the conversation for the finals.  Anything less is just....rearranging deck chairs.  We were talking about the "window" closing on the KG Celtics before they even played a game.

If two trips to the Finals and one title aren't enough for you, perhaps you need to become a fan of another sport.  Darts, perhaps?

Mike

If two trips to the finals and one title is enough for you, perhaps you need to become a fan of a different team.  Cleveland, perhaps?  We are talking about the Celtics, right?   This is Boston isn't it? 

Seriously, is one title ever enough? 

[Celtics18]

Some people on here are completely satisfied with just competing. They just want to be apart of the playoff experience, even if it is a first round exit. To me thats crazy.

I'm one of those crazy people.  Of course, I'd rather see the Celtics win a title than be a bottom seed first round out in the playoffs, but I'd rather see the Celtics be a first round out in the playoffs than a team competing for the worst record in the league. 

I don't for a second buy the theory that the only way to build a championship contender is to draft a transcendent superstar.  History has categorically shown that this theory simply isn't true.

Thats fine, I just completely disagree. Maybe if we were not talking about the celtics and just discussing another team. But IMO being a Celtic is about honor and about championships. Championships are what counts and also how you do it. Even your name Celtics18 counts the championships we have/will won; not the finals appearances, or playoff wins, all stars, or fav moment .....but championships. Its something everyone of us is proud of....including you, which is great.

I never chimed in on the transcendent player

Maybe I phrased that wrong.  I'm not "completely satisfied" with just competing.  I want to see the Celtics competing for and winning titles.  On the other hand, I always want to see them competing, whether a championship is a realistic goal for a given season or not. 

I've never been one to throw my hands in the air and say, "oh well, if we aren't winning a title, it's a wasted season so it doesn't matter what we do."  I've never bought into that line of thinking, and I never will. 

[Section301]

I half-agree with this. Yes, transcendent players generally win it all, and those guys are generally top 3 picks (which is why what the sixers are doing is quite interesting). What I dont agree with is that only transcendent players win it all. (of course, it depends on what you mean when you say "transcendent").

I think guys like healthy D-Rose, future Anthony Davis and even future Andrew Wiggins, have a chance to win it all. A troika of Dwight-Harden-Bosh will have a legit chance and who's transcendent there?

I'd say come back and ask me that question when they DO win.  At the time, the Shaq-Penny tandem looked like a sure fire dynasty.  How'd that work out for them? 

And last time I saw him, Davis looked like he just might be the next dominant player.

[LilRip]

I half-agree with this. Yes, transcendent players generally win it all, and those guys are generally top 3 picks (which is why what the sixers are doing is quite interesting). What I dont agree with is that only transcendent players win it all. (of course, it depends on what you mean when you say "transcendent").

I think guys like healthy D-Rose, future Anthony Davis and even future Andrew Wiggins, have a chance to win it all. A troika of Dwight-Harden-Bosh will have a legit chance and who's transcendent there?

I'd say come back and ask me that question when they DO win.  At the time, the Shaq-Penny tandem looked like a sure fire dynasty.  How'd that work out for them? 

And last time I saw him, Davis looked like he just might be the next dominant player.

Penny got injured. Shaq went on it win titles in LA (and Miami). What's your point?

And regarding your barb towards the KG-PP era, how many titles do you need for a core to win it all for it to be considered successful?

[pokeKingCurtis]

I half-agree with this. Yes, transcendent players generally win it all, and those guys are generally top 3 picks (which is why what the sixers are doing is quite interesting). What I dont agree with is that only transcendent players win it all. (of course, it depends on what you mean when you say "transcendent").

I think guys like healthy D-Rose, future Anthony Davis and even future Andrew Wiggins, have a chance to win it all. A troika of Dwight-Harden-Bosh will have a legit chance and who's transcendent there?

I'd say come back and ask me that question when they DO win.  At the time, the Shaq-Penny tandem looked like a sure fire dynasty.  How'd that work out for them? 

And last time I saw him, Davis looked like he just might be the next dominant player.

Penny got injured. Shaq went on it win titles in LA (and Miami). What's your point?

And regarding your barb towards the KG-PP era, how many titles do you need for a core to win it all for it to be considered successful?

Multiple.

Like OKC has.

In theory.

[LilRip]

I half-agree with this. Yes, transcendent players generally win it all, and those guys are generally top 3 picks (which is why what the sixers are doing is quite interesting). What I dont agree with is that only transcendent players win it all. (of course, it depends on what you mean when you say "transcendent").

I think guys like healthy D-Rose, future Anthony Davis and even future Andrew Wiggins, have a chance to win it all. A troika of Dwight-Harden-Bosh will have a legit chance and who's transcendent there?

I'd say come back and ask me that question when they DO win.  At the time, the Shaq-Penny tandem looked like a sure fire dynasty.  How'd that work out for them? 

And last time I saw him, Davis looked like he just might be the next dominant player.

Penny got injured. Shaq went on it win titles in LA (and Miami). What's your point?

And regarding your barb towards the KG-PP era, how many titles do you need for a core to win it all for it to be considered successful?

Multiple.

Like OKC has.

In theory.

Pokekingcurtis, get out of here with that Durant is transcendent talk. Come back to me when they DO win.