Celtics (14-26) at Nuggets (18-24) Game #41 1/23/15

[greece66]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

[vinnie]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

A "very young" team with not young guys like Bass, Prince and Thornton getting key minutes resulting in victories. It makes no sense.

[inverselock]

14min for Smart.  DNP for Young.

Turner, Thornton and Prince must be an integral part of our future. 

[SCeltic34]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

Exactly. I don't think Prince or Thornton or probably even Bass are part of the future, yet these guys are getting important minutes. So frustrating. What's the point here?

I don't get it either.  These are NBA veterans.  Regardless of recent performance, every GM, incompetent or not, knows what they're getting if they choose to acquire these players.

More than anything, it shows that tanking comes from management and not as much from coaching.  You generally win games with veterans and lose games with youth.  Stevens is trying to win games, despite what some people believe.

[SHAQATTACK]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

This DEAD on post......Danny wants the  Coach and the young team to develop winning habits,  tasting victory......so they will continue to work .

If they loose all the time ...the team moral falls and it messes with the coach and team confidence .

The team has to believe they ArE on the right path ......for their and the coaches sake.

[greece66]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

A "very young" team with not young guys like Bass, Prince and Thornton getting key minutes resulting in victories. It makes no sense.

Guess who is getting traded next.
Still, it is way better than a team which had RR+ JG getting a total of 60+ mins pg.

[jpotter33]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

Exactly. I don't think Prince or Thornton or probably even Bass are part of the future, yet these guys are getting important minutes. So frustrating. What's the point here?

I don't get it either.  These are NBA veterans.  Regardless of recent performance, every GM, incompetent or not, knows what they're getting if they choose to acquire these players.

More than anything, it shows that tanking comes from management and not as much from coaching.  You generally win games with veterans and lose games with youth.  Stevens is trying to win games, despite what some people believe.

Exactly. And not only is it hurting our draft pick, but it's robbing Smart and Young of valuable court time to grow and develop chemistry together.

If we win games with Smart and Young playing 30+ minutes, I'm okay with that. I'm not okay with Turner, Bass, and Prince winning games for us that we should be losing.

[SCeltic34]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

This DEAD on post......Danny wants the  Coach and the young team to develop winning habits,  tasting victory......so they will continue to work .

If they loose all the time ...the team moral falls and it messes with the coach and team confidence .

The team has to believe they ArE on the right path ......for their and the coaches sake.

Winning is achieved with two primary things: (1) continuity and chemistry; and (2) talent.  The veterans on this team will not be here for long haul, so scratch out #1.  Might as well scratch out #2 as well because they're aging, mediocre talent.

The "right way" of wining can be established despite a history of continued losing.  It just takes the right pieces.

[SHAQATTACK]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

A "very young" team with not young guys like Bass, Prince and Thornton getting key minutes resulting in victories. It makes no sense.

Guess who is getting traded next.
Still, it is way better than a team which had RR+ JG getting a total of 60+ mins pg.

That's true .....

I think ......too ..sometimes ......it's just blind luck .......Danny's castoff vets thrown together  just happen to play pretty good ..as a group .....weird......once we dumped Nelson and brought in Crowder and Prince .....the whole deal has changed

[greece66]

[greece66]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

This DEAD on post......Danny wants the  Coach and the young team to develop winning habits,  tasting victory......so they will continue to work .

If they loose all the time ...the team moral falls and it messes with the coach and team confidence .

The team has to believe they ArE on the right path ......for their and the coaches sake.

Winning is achieved with two primary things: (1) continuity and chemistry; and (2) talent.  The veterans on this team will not be here for long haul, so scratch out #1.  Might as well scratch out #2 as well because they're aging, mediocre talent.

The "right way" of wining can be established despite a history of continued losing.  It just takes the right pieces.

We ARE winning the right way. Only Philly's team is younger than ours. And even they have a couple of 'old' guys in the roster. We just traded BOTH RR and JG (let alone Wright and Nelson).
When we lose: 'this team is devoid of talent'
When we win: 'let's trade everyone, so we can tank'
Does this make sense to you?

[Beat LA]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

Exactly. I don't think Prince or Thornton or probably even Bass are part of the future, yet these guys are getting important minutes. So frustrating. What's the point here?

I don't get it either.  These are NBA veterans.  Regardless of recent performance, every GM, incompetent or not, knows what they're getting if they choose to acquire these players.

More than anything, it shows that tanking comes from management and not as much from coaching.  You generally win games with veterans and lose games with youth.  Stevens is trying to win games, despite what some people believe.

Which is why it continues to puzzle me that we have to 'showcase' these guys.  Umm, hello, they are who they are as players by this point in their respective careers, so it's not like other gms should have to see that they can contribute consistently.  It just...there are no words.  Ugh.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

Exactly. I don't think Prince or Thornton or probably even Bass are part of the future, yet these guys are getting important minutes. So frustrating. What's the point here?

I don't get it either.  These are NBA veterans.  Regardless of recent performance, every GM, incompetent or not, knows what they're getting if they choose to acquire these players.

More than anything, it shows that tanking comes from management and not as much from coaching.  You generally win games with veterans and lose games with youth.  Stevens is trying to win games, despite what some people believe.

Which is why it continues to puzzle me that we have to 'showcase' these guys.  Umm, hello, they are who they are as players by this point in their respective careers, so it's not like other gms should have to see that they can contribute consistently.  It just...there are no words.  Ugh.

If it makes no sense, then why are a lot of you still saying we are showcasing them? No one within the organization has said that's what we are doing but a lot of you keep saying it. Maybe the coach is just playing the players that are good enough to play... take the winning out of it, all of our players deserve and have earned playing time.

Like another poster said, we lose people say we have no talent, when we win you say it's too much! Make up your minds!

[SCeltic34]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

This DEAD on post......Danny wants the  Coach and the young team to develop winning habits,  tasting victory......so they will continue to work .

If they loose all the time ...the team moral falls and it messes with the coach and team confidence .

The team has to believe they ArE on the right path ......for their and the coaches sake.

Winning is achieved with two primary things: (1) continuity and chemistry; and (2) talent.  The veterans on this team will not be here for long haul, so scratch out #1.  Might as well scratch out #2 as well because they're aging, mediocre talent.

The "right way" of wining can be established despite a history of continued losing.  It just takes the right pieces.

We ARE winning the right way. Only Philly's team is younger than ours. And even they have a couple of 'old' guys in the roster. We just traded BOTH RR and JG (let alone Wright and Nelson).
When we lose: 'this team is devoid of talent'
When we win: 'let's trade everyone, so we can tank'
Does this make sense to you?

The question is not whether we're winning the "right way" or not with these particular wins.  People act as if a continued losing season dooms a franchise to a culture of perpetual losing and negativity.  This simply is not the case.

And those two quotes you just made definitely do not represent my thoughts, nor do I imagine it represents the opinion of many people on this board.

What it boils down to is establishing a contending team as soon as we possibly can.  I'd much rather have two more losses over an 82 game season than two wins if it means a significantly higher chance of landing a player who can truly serve as a key asset to our rebuild, whether it's through a trade or as somebody we develop internally.

If you think players and coaches are so feeble minded that a few extra losses in the middle of a season damages the entire culture of a franchise, I don't know what to tell you.

[jpotter33]

These two wins moved us in front of Indy, Orlando, and Utah and is severely detrimental to our chances at landing a high draft pick.  It really makes no sense to win games with our roster as constructed.

So, your suggestion is that Ainge has a chat with Brad and explains him to stop winning games?
This is NOT how it works. Everything is wrong with an expensive team of veterans that gets mediocre results (this is what we were before the trade season). There is nothing wrong with a very cheap and very young team winning games. It is good for their psychology, good for the coach, makes us a better team long term.

This DEAD on post......Danny wants the  Coach and the young team to develop winning habits,  tasting victory......so they will continue to work .

If they loose all the time ...the team moral falls and it messes with the coach and team confidence .

The team has to believe they ArE on the right path ......for their and the coaches sake.

Winning is achieved with two primary things: (1) continuity and chemistry; and (2) talent.  The veterans on this team will not be here for long haul, so scratch out #1.  Might as well scratch out #2 as well because they're aging, mediocre talent.

The "right way" of wining can be established despite a history of continued losing.  It just takes the right pieces.

We ARE winning the right way. Only Philly's team is younger than ours. And even they have a couple of 'old' guys in the roster. We just traded BOTH RR and JG (let alone Wright and Nelson).
When we lose: 'this team is devoid of talent'
When we win: 'let's trade everyone, so we can tank'
Does this make sense to you?

But are we winning the right way? Young didn't even play, and Smart only played 14 minutes. What good does a win do us if our future players hardly even play?

Like I said, I'm totally fine with us winning if it's on the backs of Smart, Young, Sully, Bradley, Crowder etc. But I'm not okay with the pieces of trade bait in Bass, Turner, Thornton, and Prince winning us games, which is what happened tonight.