Talent and Size Wins in the Playoffs

[Celtics18]

Titles generally go to the teams that have multiple stars who are among the best at their position. Great teamwork can only get you so far. The regular season is different than the postseason. Starters play more minutes and due to 7-game series any weakness your team has will definitely be exposed.

Anyway, we knew this going in. The system is imperfect and rewards losing. If you don't want to "intentionally" lose then you have to ensure your roster is non-competitive and will lose regardless of effort/scheme. Going the treadmill route can work but it's risky if you don't have assets like another team's future draft picks or young players with star potential you develop or trade.

I am worried that too many Celtics fans are assuming the Brooklyn picks will be gold and that we can treadmill our way until a star becomes available. There's no guarantee those picks will be in the lottery and no guarantee any star is going to want to sign or be dealt to Boston, especially considering we don't have any young stars to team up with them.

The reality, despite the myth, is that the system doesn't actually reward losing.  Yes, you need stars to be a contender.  More importantly, though, you need experienced stars to win it all in the NBA.

That's the Catch22 on tanking.  Elite, young prospects are great.  However, they need big game seasoning to become ready to lead a team to the promised land.  Of course, they'll never get that seasoning if a team continually is racing to the bottom, waiting for the "next big thing" to land in their lap in the way of a promising nineteen year old. 

[crimson_stallion]

I'm going to annoy everybody right now and say...DeMarcus Cousins! haha

Nah seriously though, I would try to go after:

1) LeMarcus Aldridge - unlike we have a chance, but you try anyway

2) DeAndre Jordan - might have a legit shot, and he's one of the best defenders/rebounds in the league

3) Greg Monroe - he's an improvement over Sully and is around the same age, so sign him to a long term contract (his age/experience means his max should be affordable) and try to trade Sully

4) Marc Gasol - As per LMA except I'm a bit more hesitant with Gasol because he's not young, he's got a fair injury history, and he's not really that 'dominant' so much as he's just consistently very good.

Question is, how effective would Jordan be on offense without a Rondo/CP3 type lobbing him the ball?

Ultimately I'd try to go after both Monroe and Jordan - I think they could make a nice combo.

[crimson_stallion]

Boston has no 1st option... which is why they lost more games this year than they won.  They aren't a good team.   A top 5 pick would have done FAR more for our future than a pointless sweep.

I respectfully disagree.

If we were bad enough to obtain a top 5 pick, then the value of every player on the team takes a dip.  Everybody knows that people have elevated stats on bad teams typically, so Evan Turner's 11/5/5 which looks decent on a playoff team, looks decidedly mediocre on a bottom 5 team.  Ditto Bradley's 15 PPG or Sully's 13/8. 

When your team makes the playoffs those average numbers look more impressive, because it indicates that in order to win so many games, some of those guys must have been playing better then their stats alone would indicate.

So you could argue making the playoffs increases the value of most our players.

Likewise us making the playoffs (even if we get swept) tells upcoming free agents that we are a playoff caliber team, and that their talent might be the extra addition that the team needs in order to take that next step and really be competitive. 

When you are a bottom 5 team, it tell opposing free agents that if they join your team they can expect to lose a lot of games in the near future, and that it could take at least a couple of years before they can expect to be competitive.

This team had the second best record in the easy since the All-Star break (and the 7th best in the East overall) - you can't fake success.

I think making the playoffs gives you certain benefits - increased confidence from your players, increase comradely/chemistry across your team, more hunger to win (when you taste a bit of  success, it often makes you want to succeed even more) and increased attractiveness to free agents. 

I think that's more valuable than trying to tank in the hope of getting a top 5 talent who could become Darko Milicic, Thomas Robinson or Michael Kdd-Gilchrist. 

I understand where you're coming from, but I just don't think you should give up on a young team's chance to gain playoff experience for the hope of draft pick becoming someone great.  Not unless it's one of those ridiculous 2003 style drafts where you KNOW there are 5 or 6 certain superstars in the mix. 

[chambers]

Every year some fanbase gets all excited about their starless group of overachievers and then gets throttled by a talent buzzsaw once the playoffs starts.  You'd think a team that has built 17 champions on the shoulders of 30 Hall of Fame players would understand how important talent is in this league.  It's the professional sports league with the least amount of parity.  The teams with the best talent always win.

Not true.

Miami had more talent than San Antonio last year, and they also had more talent than Dallas in Lebron's first season there.  They lost both years by teams who had more depth and played more like a team.

the Spurs in particular - at this point none of their players (not TD, Parker or Ginobilli) are stars anymore.  There is really nobody on that team that is any more a star than Isaiah Thomas is for us.  Still, they beat Miami's big three despite being far and away the underdogs of that series.

The Spurs weren't far and away underdogs once the finals started.
I gotta disagree with you that they had no stars. Parker and Duncan were both and arguably still are top 5 for their position. They also drafted and developed Kawahi Leonard who was the finals MVP and is a better player than anyone on our team. If you think that Ginbobli is better than Isaiah Thomas, that makes 4 players better than our best player and two players (Parker and Duncan) who are worlds above Thomas.
Thomas is a great player, but he's a defensive liability which we saw exploited in pick and roll tonight.

We've got an excellent coach, we've got Smart, we've got Sully and KO. We've got a great 6th man who would start for many NBA teams and crushes the regular season, but it's even harder on him without other star talent to take over at certain points in the game once the opponent works out our weaknesses.

But we need star talent which we currently don't have.

[Celtics18]

Every year some fanbase gets all excited about their starless group of overachievers and then gets throttled by a talent buzzsaw once the playoffs starts.  You'd think a team that has built 17 champions on the shoulders of 30 Hall of Fame players would understand how important talent is in this league.  It's the professional sports league with the least amount of parity.  The teams with the best talent always win.

Not true.

Miami had more talent than San Antonio last year, and they also had more talent than Dallas in Lebron's first season there.  They lost both years by teams who had more depth and played more like a team.

the Spurs in particular - at this point none of their players (not TD, Parker or Ginobilli) are stars anymore.  There is really nobody on that team that is any more a star than Isaiah Thomas is for us.  Still, they beat Miami's big three despite being far and away the underdogs of that series.

The Spurs weren't far and away underdogs once the finals started.
I gotta disagree with you that they had no stars. Parker and Duncan were both and arguably still are top 5 for their position. They also drafted and developed Kawahi Leonard who was the finals MVP and is a better player than anyone on our team. If you think that Ginbobli is better than Isaiah Thomas, that makes 4 players better than our best player and two players (Parker and Duncan) who are worlds above Thomas.
Thomas is a great player, but he's a defensive liability which we saw exploited in pick and roll tonight.

We've got an excellent coach, we've got Smart, we've got Sully and KO. We've got a great 6th man who would start for many NBA teams and crushes the regular season, but it's even harder on him without other star talent to take over at certain points in the game once the opponent works out our weaknesses.

But we need star talent which we currently don't have.

Is Kawhi Leonard a star yet? 

Just for perspective, I want to remind you that in his rookie season, he averaged eight points and five rebounds per game.

Kawhi Leonard is hardly that surefire, high lottery type prospect.  He has developed into a really good player in a winning environment, though.

Would Kawhi Leonard be Kawhi Leonard if he had been drafted by, say, the Charlotte Bobcats, or would he be more Michael Kidd-Gilchrist?

[safecracker]

Ultimately I'd try to go after both Monroe and Jordan - I think they could make a nice combo.

Drummond and Monroe has been a dysfunctional combo for two years. There is no way replacing Drummond with Jordan would change anything, the paint would be as clogged.
Monroe is an offensively skilled 5 with zero athleticism, limited range and no defense.
Trust me, I've been following Detroit for years.

[LarBrd33]

Every year some fanbase gets all excited about their starless group of overachievers and then gets throttled by a talent buzzsaw once the playoffs starts.  You'd think a team that has built 17 champions on the shoulders of 30 Hall of Fame players would understand how important talent is in this league.  It's the professional sports league with the least amount of parity.  The teams with the best talent always win.

Not true.

Miami had more talent than San Antonio last year, and they also had more talent than Dallas in Lebron's first season there.  They lost both years by teams who had more depth and played more like a team.

the Spurs in particular - at this point none of their players (not TD, Parker or Ginobilli) are stars anymore.  There is really nobody on that team that is any more a star than Isaiah Thomas is for us.  Still, they beat Miami's big three despite being far and away the underdogs of that series.

The Spurs weren't far and away underdogs once the finals started.
I gotta disagree with you that they had no stars. Parker and Duncan were both and arguably still are top 5 for their position. They also drafted and developed Kawahi Leonard who was the finals MVP and is a better player than anyone on our team. If you think that Ginbobli is better than Isaiah Thomas, that makes 4 players better than our best player and two players (Parker and Duncan) who are worlds above Thomas.
Thomas is a great player, but he's a defensive liability which we saw exploited in pick and roll tonight.

We've got an excellent coach, we've got Smart, we've got Sully and KO. We've got a great 6th man who would start for many NBA teams and crushes the regular season, but it's even harder on him without other star talent to take over at certain points in the game once the opponent works out our weaknesses.

But we need star talent which we currently don't have.

The Spurs had the best record in the league last year.  Was there something surprising about them meeting Miami in the Finals?

Perhaps my point wasn't clear.  40 win teams filled with nobodies don't win championships in the NBA.  Talent wins out every year.

[obnoxiousmime]

Titles generally go to the teams that have multiple stars who are among the best at their position. Great teamwork can only get you so far. The regular season is different than the postseason. Starters play more minutes and due to 7-game series any weakness your team has will definitely be exposed.

Anyway, we knew this going in. The system is imperfect and rewards losing. If you don't want to "intentionally" lose then you have to ensure your roster is non-competitive and will lose regardless of effort/scheme. Going the treadmill route can work but it's risky if you don't have assets like another team's future draft picks or young players with star potential you develop or trade.

I am worried that too many Celtics fans are assuming the Brooklyn picks will be gold and that we can treadmill our way until a star becomes available. There's no guarantee those picks will be in the lottery and no guarantee any star is going to want to sign or be dealt to Boston, especially considering we don't have any young stars to team up with them.

The reality, despite the myth, is that the system doesn't actually reward losing.  Yes, you need stars to be a contender.  More importantly, though, you need experienced stars to win it all in the NBA.

That's the Catch22 on tanking.  Elite, young prospects are great.  However, they need big game seasoning to become ready to lead a team to the promised land.  Of course, they'll never get that seasoning if a team continually is racing to the bottom, waiting for the "next big thing" to land in their lap in the way of a promising nineteen year old.

True, organizations can screw up having a star. We are assuming that the Celtics are a good organization that will not totally screw things up if they ever get a franchise star in tow. We are also assuming that Stevens is a coach good enough to win a championship someday given he has a team talented enough to do so.

If we don't draft our own star we need to trade or sign one in free agency. In both cases you need to convince a star to come over and that's not going to happen if you don't already have other secondary stars as bait. We don't have primary stars, secondary stars, or even tertiary stars right now to attract anyone.

[cb8883]

The Celtics have neither. IT is a midget who gets abused by bigger PG's and Marcus Banks 2.0 gets abused by everyone. He needs to layoff the cheeseburgers. Looks like he needs to lose some weight but not as bad as Sullinger. Sully is an absolute waste out on the court and looks like a high schooler next to Thompson let alone Kevin Love. This is the outcome all of you "non tankers" wanted. Make the playoffs again quick. Well how do you feel now? An embarrassing playoff game for the ages and with our luck the Heat get 1st pick. Then how exactly would everyone feel? I'd take a top 10 pick over an embarrassing playoff run any day of the week. The Celtics are playing against the GOAT, Kyrie and Love that's too much to handle even if its only one let alone all 3. They aren't going to come close to winning a game and LeBron can take the rest of the series off.

[cb8883]

Every year some fanbase gets all excited about their starless group of overachievers and then gets throttled by a talent buzzsaw once the playoffs starts.  You'd think a team that has built 17 champions on the shoulders of 30 Hall of Fame players would understand how important talent is in this league.  It's the professional sports league with the least amount of parity.  The teams with the best talent always win.

And the Celtics are playing against the eventual champs. They're playing against the best to ever play and he's still not done! So while the 13 point loss isn't as embarrassing as the turnovers and the defense it was just a reminder that talent wins and the Celtics have none. This is the worst roster to ever make the playoffs. I can say that with certainty. Stevens pride stopped this team from doing the right thing.

[Celtics18]

Titles generally go to the teams that have multiple stars who are among the best at their position. Great teamwork can only get you so far. The regular season is different than the postseason. Starters play more minutes and due to 7-game series any weakness your team has will definitely be exposed.

Anyway, we knew this going in. The system is imperfect and rewards losing. If you don't want to "intentionally" lose then you have to ensure your roster is non-competitive and will lose regardless of effort/scheme. Going the treadmill route can work but it's risky if you don't have assets like another team's future draft picks or young players with star potential you develop or trade.

I am worried that too many Celtics fans are assuming the Brooklyn picks will be gold and that we can treadmill our way until a star becomes available. There's no guarantee those picks will be in the lottery and no guarantee any star is going to want to sign or be dealt to Boston, especially considering we don't have any young stars to team up with them.

The reality, despite the myth, is that the system doesn't actually reward losing.  Yes, you need stars to be a contender.  More importantly, though, you need experienced stars to win it all in the NBA.

That's the Catch22 on tanking.  Elite, young prospects are great.  However, they need big game seasoning to become ready to lead a team to the promised land.  Of course, they'll never get that seasoning if a team continually is racing to the bottom, waiting for the "next big thing" to land in their lap in the way of a promising nineteen year old.

True, organizations can screw up having a star. We are assuming that the Celtics are a good organization that will not totally screw things up if they ever get a franchise star in tow. We are also assuming that Stevens is a coach good enough to win a championship someday given he has a team talented enough to do so.

If we don't draft our own star we need to trade or sign one in free agency. In both cases you need to convince a star to come over and that's not going to happen if you don't already have other secondary stars as bait. We don't have primary stars, secondary stars, or even tertiary stars right now to attract anyone.

But we've got some top notch quaternary stars.