Who's rebuild is better: Boston or Philly?

[celticslove]

Would you take MCW or Smart right now ?

smart by a mile. i still think that mcw's roy season is a fluke. on topic i think philly has a slightly better rebuild materials, plus they got twitter's golden boy embiid.lol

[Future Celtics Owner]

Its hard to say because we do not know what direction the Celtics are going with Rondo. Also we just finished year 1 of our rebuild.

Saric and Joel Embiid may never never play or play meaningful minutes for the sixers. Saric could stay over there and Joel could be super injury prone.

[footey]

Philly's future is much better than ours, let's face it.  Williams, Embiid, Noel, Saric and Bennett Soon via Cleveland trade).

I am so jealous.

Bennet ain't going to the 6ers, they weren't even in the trade talks

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/234567/76ers-To-Acquire-Anthony-Bennett;-Thad-Young-To-Wolves-As-Part-Of-Love-Trade

[footey]

Philly went all in on the tank mode. Danny did it half baked, and Brad Stevens did not get the memo.

[Mencius]

Philly went all in on the tank mode. Danny did it half baked, and Brad Stevens did not get the memo.

I agree.  Danny could still go in that direction if he decides to trade Rondo either before the season starts, or really early on in the season (more so if he finds a taker for Bass in the process).  If they do trade Rondo and go really young this season, they're likely looking at a top 5 pick.

It's still not 'all in' to the degree Philly went all in, but it'd qualify as close enough.  Danny's still fence straddling as it is.

Much as the Philly process is maligned, I think they've got a bright future.  I'm thinking ours will turn out well, too, but I rather respect that they chose a path, and pursued it full throttle.

[Cman]

Who cares?
Let's give it a couple years and wait and see. For the past several years everyone (on celticsblog at least) wanted to hand D. Morey GM of the year awards for building a contender. He still hasn't gotten it done yet. There are multiple ways to approach a rebuild, and saying that one is "better" than another is sort of silly, I think.

[Celtics4ever]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

[LooseCannon]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

That's sort of the point of tanking.  It's is the correct strategy for teams that pretty much have no other option but to hope they get lucky.  It's generally a poor strategy for teams who have a legitimate chance to do something else.

[Eja117]

Definitely definitely definitely the Celts. I get that MCW is just great and all, but once Rondo, AB, and Smart punch him in the mouth things will get real.

Ditto for Nerlens Noel, and even Embiid for that matter.

Philly is doing fine I suppose, but give me the Celts and all their draft picks.

Evan Turner did very very well for them last year as well he should. Was their pick at #2, right?

He's like 3rd string for us on a tiny contract. 

And I'll take our coach and our fans too.

[LarBrd33]

It's Philly.  No contest.  Boston will be better in the short-term, maybe... but long-term Philly has some players who could be transcendent.  Not even close.  I wouldn't be surprised if Boston is better for a few years... but then Boston will continue to be a 25-45 win also-ran while Philly starts to turn the corner and potentially end up a 60+ win dynasty for a decade or so.

MCW is the least interesting of that bunch.  Bennett can be a star.  Noel can be amazing.  Embiid can be dominant.  Saric should be outstanding... plus whoever they draft in 2015 by bottoming out this year.  Nasty rebuild going on there.

It could all fail, but also Philly might be the only team with any realistic shot of slowing down the Cavs in 5 years.

[obnoxiousmime]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

That's sort of the point of tanking.  It's is the correct strategy for teams that pretty much have no other option but to hope they get lucky.  It's generally a poor strategy for teams who have a legitimate chance to do something else.

Right, but holding onto your star whose contract is up next year is also a risk. If he leaves for nothing than you've wasted two years with nothing but slightly improved gate receipts to show for it, along with the added wins the player ostensibly adds to your team to worsen your lottery odds.

Also, I want to point out again that only the first three picks are technically a lottery. After that it's based on record so yes, losses do "guarantee" you something even if it's not the first three picks. If Exum ends up being a star then a win here or there would have made a huge difference.

[BballTim]

It's Philly.  No contest.  Boston will be better in the short-term, maybe... but long-term Philly has some players who could be transcendent.  Not even close.  I wouldn't be surprised if Boston is better for a few years... but then Boston will continue to be a 25-45 win also-ran while Philly starts to turn the corner and potentially end up a 60+ win dynasty for a decade or so.

MCW is the least interesting of that bunch.  Bennett can be a star.  Noel can be amazing.  Embiid can be dominant.  Saric should be outstanding... plus whoever they draft in 2015 by bottoming out this year.  Nasty rebuild going on there.

It could all fail, but also Philly might be the only team with any realistic shot of slowing down the Cavs in 5 years.

  We could also win the lottery with all of the future nets picks. It's less likely than your expectations for Philly, but not by much.

[Rondo9]

It's Philly.  No contest.  Boston will be better in the short-term, maybe... but long-term Philly has some players who could be transcendent.  Not even close.  I wouldn't be surprised if Boston is better for a few years... but then Boston will continue to be a 25-45 win also-ran while Philly starts to turn the corner and potentially end up a 60+ win dynasty for a decade or so.

MCW is the least interesting of that bunch.  Bennett can be a star.  Noel can be amazing.  Embiid can be dominant.  Saric should be outstanding... plus whoever they draft in 2015 by bottoming out this year.  Nasty rebuild going on there.

It could all fail, but also Philly might be the only team with any realistic shot of slowing down the Cavs in 5 years.

If Bennett can be a star then Sullinger and Smart can be All stars.

[Rondo9]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

That's sort of the point of tanking.  It's is the correct strategy for teams that pretty much have no other option but to hope they get lucky.  It's generally a poor strategy for teams who have a legitimate chance to do something else.

Right, but holding onto your star whose contract is up next year is also a risk. If he leaves for nothing than you've wasted two years with nothing but slightly improved gate receipts to show for it, along with the added wins the player ostensibly adds to your team to worsen your lottery odds.

Also, I want to point out again that only the first three picks are technically a lottery. After that it's based on record so yes, losses do "guarantee" you something even if it's not the first three picks. If Exum ends up being a star then a win here or there would have made a huge difference.

What if Smart becomes a star? Would a win here and there make a huge difference?

[obnoxiousmime]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

That's sort of the point of tanking.  It's is the correct strategy for teams that pretty much have no other option but to hope they get lucky.  It's generally a poor strategy for teams who have a legitimate chance to do something else.

Right, but holding onto your star whose contract is up next year is also a risk. If he leaves for nothing than you've wasted two years with nothing but slightly improved gate receipts to show for it, along with the added wins the player ostensibly adds to your team to worsen your lottery odds.

Also, I want to point out again that only the first three picks are technically a lottery. After that it's based on record so yes, losses do "guarantee" you something even if it's not the first three picks. If Exum ends up being a star then a win here or there would have made a huge difference.

What if Smart becomes a star? Would a win here and there make a huge difference?

It depends on the draft but yes, sometimes one slot can make a huge difference. Smart may become a solid player but he doesn't have great athleticism and he plays a position that is very deep. Other skills can be developed, athleticism and height cannot. That was the cost of drafting sixth.

Frankly, the goal should be to secure someone who could be the best or second-best player on a title team and it didn't happen in year one of the rebuild. We got some more talent but they are more complementary pieces than the main ones.