Most depressing Celtics article ever

[Beat LA]

Sometimes I get the feeling that some fans think last year's 25 win season didn't actually happen... like they have convinced themselves the team is still relevant and a playoff threat... we just had a down year.   That's one of the main points this article brings up... a lot of denial going around... fans riding the former glory of 2008-10 are kind of ignoring that we finished in the bottom 5 last year and we haven't really upgraded anything.  Our bench might be a bit better, but a slightly improved bench isn't going to make much of an impact when the Starting 5 is still average-to-terrible.  This team is really really bad right now.  We're in the thick of it.  Maybe we can get out of it eventually, but right now... we're in it.  This is actually happening.  We have a 25-32 win team right now.

Also.. .this idea that Ainge is moving away from the star model isn't accurate.  We tanked with hopes of landing a star.  We spent most of the summer desperately offering the entire team to Minny for Kevin Love.  This is still very much a team that wants a star.  We don't have one at the moment and don't seem to have the assets to acquire one.  We have some assets heading into 2018, though.  In a few years we should be in a better position.

I think a lot of posters here have too much of their ego invested in the idea the Celtics are going to suck to the point they, like this article, exaggerate the negative and are in denial about anything positive.

Mike

Or we're just pessimists lol.  I wouldn't over think it.

How can you be that pessimistic after one bad season?  It's not like this team has been horrible for half a decade?

Mike

It's probably to do with the fact that we got squat in the lottery and then subsequently failed to bring in any big-name players like Kevin Love.  Perhaps it's more of a, "here we go again," type of thing, I don't know.

[Rondo9]

Marcus Smart is a nobody? Here we go again.... 

[Kadin]

As far as I'm concerned, this is a new season. Our team is different, and the same is true of most of the other teams in the NBA too. Last year was last year. Boston wants to get better, and I think that's what they're going to do. I'll reserve judgement until we see what they can do.

[cb8883]

Sometimes I get the feeling that some fans think last year's 25 win season didn't actually happen... like they have convinced themselves the team is still relevant and a playoff threat... we just had a down year.   That's one of the main points this article brings up... a lot of denial going around... fans riding the former glory of 2008-10 are kind of ignoring that we finished in the bottom 5 last year and we haven't really upgraded anything.  Our bench might be a bit better, but a slightly improved bench isn't going to make much of an impact when the Starting 5 is still average-to-terrible.  This team is really really bad right now.  We're in the thick of it.  Maybe we can get out of it eventually, but right now... we're in it.  This is actually happening.  We have a 25-32 win team right now.

Also.. .this idea that Ainge is moving away from the star model isn't accurate.  We tanked with hopes of landing a star.  We spent most of the summer desperately offering the entire team to Minny for Kevin Love.  This is still very much a team that wants a star.  We don't have one at the moment and don't seem to have the assets to acquire one.  We have some assets heading into 2018, though.  In a few years we should be in a better position.

I think a lot of posters here have too much of their ego invested in the idea the Celtics are going to suck to the point they, like this article, exaggerate the negative and are in denial about anything positive.

Mike

Or we're just pessimists lol.  I wouldn't over think it.

How can you be that pessimistic after one bad season?  It's not like this team has been horrible for half a decade?

Mike

It's probably to do with the fact that we got squat in the lottery and then subsequently failed to bring in any big-name players like Kevin Love.  Perhaps it's more of a, "here we go again," type of thing, I don't know.

Ainge is the person to blame for this. He needed to tank and refused to do so. That's why the Celtics ended up with the worst pick out of the top 10, Marcus Banks 2.0. Hell he could have salvaged it by taking Randle but nope...Danny Ainge has to draft underwhelming point guards. Rondo was the loan exception and has shown value obviously. Not Tony Parker by any stretch but still solid value as a good solid role player. But for every Rondo there is a Smart, Banks, Gabe Pruitt etc...

Julius Randle was there...and you didn't take him? No excuse! If they had only tanked harder they could have ended up in the top 3 and maybe they get the opportunity to go the Philly route. That the correct way for a mid market team to rebuild.

[Endless Paradise]

Five other teams passed on Randle.  With both Olynyk and Sullinger, as well as Bass still on the roster, Ainge didn't see much of a reason to draft another power forward who wasn't projected to be a franchise-type talent.  It's not like he passed on Wiggins, Parker, or Embiid for Smart.

Rondo's expiring and may not be a Celtic past this season.  Ainge did the smart thing (el oh el) and drafted his potential replacement.

[Moranis]

I actually didn't find that article that depressing, overly critical, or even all that bad.  This team isn't going to be very good.  That was the gist of the article.  And at the end of last season, I think most people thought this team would look vastly different and it doesn't (either by trading for stars or going all in on the rebuild).  Boston did not win the lottery and Boston did not use all of the "assets" to improve the team.  Perhaps the reality is maybe all those "assets" aren't what a lot of this fan base thought they were or maybe there just wasn't anyone worth trading for (aside from Love and which Boston could not beat Cleveland's offer).  He pointed out the good points on the team, but then said what is pretty much reality, the good points don't make this team very good.  This is a bad team and that really is the bottom line.

[Rondo9]

I actually didn't find that article that depressing, overly critical, or even all that bad.  This team isn't going to be very good.  That was the gist of the article.  And at the end of last season, I think most people thought this team would look vastly different and it doesn't (either by trading for stars or going all in on the rebuild).  Boston did not win the lottery and Boston did not use all of the "assets" to improve the team.  Perhaps the reality is maybe all those "assets" aren't what a lot of this fan base thought they were or maybe there just wasn't anyone worth trading for (aside from Love and which Boston could not beat Cleveland's offer).  He pointed out the good points on the team, but then said what is pretty much reality, the good points don't make this team very good.  This is a bad team and that really is the bottom line.

Anytime someone says that Bradley is shooter shy or Sullinger is an undersized center then you know that the article is poorly researched and is just being overly negative. The celtics may not have won the lottery but that does not mean they got a bad player. Just because this is a negative article doesn't mean it's realistic.

[Moranis]

I actually didn't find that article that depressing, overly critical, or even all that bad.  This team isn't going to be very good.  That was the gist of the article.  And at the end of last season, I think most people thought this team would look vastly different and it doesn't (either by trading for stars or going all in on the rebuild).  Boston did not win the lottery and Boston did not use all of the "assets" to improve the team.  Perhaps the reality is maybe all those "assets" aren't what a lot of this fan base thought they were or maybe there just wasn't anyone worth trading for (aside from Love and which Boston could not beat Cleveland's offer).  He pointed out the good points on the team, but then said what is pretty much reality, the good points don't make this team very good.  This is a bad team and that really is the bottom line.

Anytime someone said that Bradley is shooter shy or Sullinger is an undersized center then you know that the article is poorly researched and is just being overly negative. The celtics may not have won the lottery but that does not mean they got a bad player. Just because this is a negative article doesn't mean it's realistic

He didn't say Bradley was shooter shy.  And Sullinger is undersized at center.

[Celtics18]

I'm not overly depressed by that article.  The pop culture professor who wrote that article certainly isn't alone in his assessment of this year's Celtics. The list of people for our team to attempt to prove wrong is lengthy.  And, to be honest, this guy is probably near the bottom of the list.

The top of the list is surely inhabited by local buffoons like Gary Tanguay and Mike Felger.   

[BudweiserCeltic]

I actually didn't find that article that depressing, overly critical, or even all that bad.  This team isn't going to be very good.  That was the gist of the article.  And at the end of last season, I think most people thought this team would look vastly different and it doesn't (either by trading for stars or going all in on the rebuild).  Boston did not win the lottery and Boston did not use all of the "assets" to improve the team.  Perhaps the reality is maybe all those "assets" aren't what a lot of this fan base thought they were or maybe there just wasn't anyone worth trading for (aside from Love and which Boston could not beat Cleveland's offer).  He pointed out the good points on the team, but then said what is pretty much reality, the good points don't make this team very good.  This is a bad team and that really is the bottom line.

Anytime someone said that Bradley is shooter shy or Sullinger is an undersized center then you know that the article is poorly researched and is just being overly negative. The celtics may not have won the lottery but that does not mean they got a bad player. Just because this is a negative article doesn't mean it's realistic

He didn't say Bradley was shooter shy.  And Sullinger is undersized at center.

He did lump him in a group of shooting-averse players, and there's a difference of Sullinger being undersized AT center and being an undersized center. Semantics I know, but when he's analyzing a player's skillset it's a very important distinction to make.

[greece66]

First... most depressing Celtics article ever probably had to do with Len Bias.

Second... What's wrong with this article?  This was a bottom 5 team last year without star talent.   We haven't made significant additions.  Smart might end up being a star-caliber player, but he currently plays the same position as our only fringe all-star.  The young guys might show improvement, but none of them (other than Smart) has star potential and even if they were to take significant leaps, it's unlikely to vault us into relevance.  We're a bad team. 

The draft picks might pan out.  Some stuff could work out.  We might be in good position to steal a good player via trade.  But right now, this team stinks.  We're probably still a bottom 5 team.