We are in an unfortunate situation

[Celtics18]

I don't argue with making the playoffs - teams should try and win. I do not think our four and out will attract any free agents, however.

I don't think we will be any good for many years. Smart is not good enough. Olynyk and Sullinger and James Young are not good enough; and Zeller is good enough to be a back-up, but not good enough to be a major cog in the machine.

It is a sad thing, but I do not think we will get anyone at 16 or 28 who will matter THAT much in our rebuilding. Stevens is a great coach, but he doesn't have THAT much to work with here. If, casual fans, we can all recognize that Kevin Looney and Chris McCollough are not game changers, then don't you think rival executives can see that?

It is unfortunate, but we are not in a position to make a splash this off-season, and I am afraid we don't have much to look forward to next year

I think we're actually a lot closer to a championship-contending team than given credit for, especially in the East. A legitimate contender must have an effective starting line-up and a solid bench (even with Lopez, Matthews, Aldridge and Lillard, blazers were still first round fodder just like us). Our approach has been to add solid players that could in the future become a very effective bench, if not starters.

Smart, Young, Sully, KO may very well be stars in the making they've only been here for 3 seasons. Everyone keeps forgetting that stars can also be drafted and groomed and not only traded for...

I don't think anyone has forgotten that: some posters just don't see star potential in anyone currently on our roster.

The thing is, you know almost immediately if a player has a real shot at being a franchise player, an all star, or even a starter. It is very rare that you don't have an idea as early as a player's rookie season.  Now sure they are raw and have a lot of improvement to make to reach full potential, but it isn't like you didn't know Lebron James, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Kevin Durant, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, etc. were going to be very good players almost immediately.  The Jermaine O'Neal's and Steve Nash's of the world are very much the exception to the rule. 

No one currently on Boston has franchise level talent or we would have seen it already.  Smart has a chance to be an all world defender, but he is never going to be a franchise player as he just isn't good enough offensively and is a guard (which minimizes his defensive impact).  Everyone else could be a 4th or 5th starter on a championship team level at best.

You're probably right about the first one.  I don't think there are many players in that "franchise" category that there wasn't a fairly good indication of their stardom starting with their rookie season (maybe Dirk and Kobe).

The league is littered with all stars and good starters who were far from surefire hits in their first season or two, though.

I think if you actually started looking at the starters on true legit contenders and then looked at their rookie years, I think you would be surprised at how much potential they showed.  Obviously they aren't nearly as good or as consistent as rookies, but you saw it. 

I could totally see Smart, Sullinger and Olynyk as being a 4th or 5th starter on a real contender.  I've seen enough to know they have that sort of potential, but none of them have shown me enough for me to believe they could be all star level or better players.  Sullinger compares fairly well with a guy like Josh Smith, not the defender Smith is, but a bit better touch on his shooting.  That seems to be his peak level i.e. not an all star, but a good starter level player.

Despite the fact that Moranis is wrong about all things pertaining to the desirability of his home state, he is 110% correct on this one.

No he isn't.

I've compiled a by no means complete list of some NBA All Stars who had the same or worse win shares as both Marcus Smart and Kelly Olynyk in their rookie seasons (they both had 2.9).

Klay Thompson, Jimmy Butler, Paul George, Jeff Teague, Demar Derozan, Russell Westbrook, Roy Hibbert, Kyle Lowry, Rajon Rondo, Andrew Bynum, David Lee, David West, Kyle Korver, Tyson Chandler, Gerald Wallace, Zach Randolph, Michael Redd, Rip Hamilton, Baron Davis, Metta World Peace, Rashard Lewis, Dirk Nowitzki, Chauncey Billups, Peja Stojakovic, Tracy McGrady, Jermaine O'Neal, Steve Nash, Kobe Bryant, Rasheed Wallace, Sam Cassell, Allen Houston, Kenny Anderson . . .

I say it's too early to tell whether or not Marcus Smart or Kelly Olynyk can be all stars.  I'm glad you guys have made up your minds based on . . . actually, I have no idea what your opinions are based on. 

[chambers]

So pessimistic. We have a dynamic backcourt trio in Smart, AB and IT, we have solid roleplayers in Sully, Olynyk, Zeller, Crowde

I wish I was this optimistic but a thing called realism always wakes me up from dreams like this one.

realism doesn't REALLY exist anyway. It's all just viewpoints


Hop on the optimist bandwagon!


There's plenty of room any the weather is always great!

actually it does exist, that's why it's derived from the word 'reality'.
But I understand what you're saying

[Moranis]

I don't argue with making the playoffs - teams should try and win. I do not think our four and out will attract any free agents, however.

I don't think we will be any good for many years. Smart is not good enough. Olynyk and Sullinger and James Young are not good enough; and Zeller is good enough to be a back-up, but not good enough to be a major cog in the machine.

It is a sad thing, but I do not think we will get anyone at 16 or 28 who will matter THAT much in our rebuilding. Stevens is a great coach, but he doesn't have THAT much to work with here. If, casual fans, we can all recognize that Kevin Looney and Chris McCollough are not game changers, then don't you think rival executives can see that?

It is unfortunate, but we are not in a position to make a splash this off-season, and I am afraid we don't have much to look forward to next year

I think we're actually a lot closer to a championship-contending team than given credit for, especially in the East. A legitimate contender must have an effective starting line-up and a solid bench (even with Lopez, Matthews, Aldridge and Lillard, blazers were still first round fodder just like us). Our approach has been to add solid players that could in the future become a very effective bench, if not starters.

Smart, Young, Sully, KO may very well be stars in the making they've only been here for 3 seasons. Everyone keeps forgetting that stars can also be drafted and groomed and not only traded for...

I don't think anyone has forgotten that: some posters just don't see star potential in anyone currently on our roster.

The thing is, you know almost immediately if a player has a real shot at being a franchise player, an all star, or even a starter. It is very rare that you don't have an idea as early as a player's rookie season.  Now sure they are raw and have a lot of improvement to make to reach full potential, but it isn't like you didn't know Lebron James, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Kevin Durant, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, etc. were going to be very good players almost immediately.  The Jermaine O'Neal's and Steve Nash's of the world are very much the exception to the rule. 

No one currently on Boston has franchise level talent or we would have seen it already.  Smart has a chance to be an all world defender, but he is never going to be a franchise player as he just isn't good enough offensively and is a guard (which minimizes his defensive impact).  Everyone else could be a 4th or 5th starter on a championship team level at best.

You're probably right about the first one.  I don't think there are many players in that "franchise" category that there wasn't a fairly good indication of their stardom starting with their rookie season (maybe Dirk and Kobe).

The league is littered with all stars and good starters who were far from surefire hits in their first season or two, though.

I think if you actually started looking at the starters on true legit contenders and then looked at their rookie years, I think you would be surprised at how much potential they showed.  Obviously they aren't nearly as good or as consistent as rookies, but you saw it. 

I could totally see Smart, Sullinger and Olynyk as being a 4th or 5th starter on a real contender.  I've seen enough to know they have that sort of potential, but none of them have shown me enough for me to believe they could be all star level or better players.  Sullinger compares fairly well with a guy like Josh Smith, not the defender Smith is, but a bit better touch on his shooting.  That seems to be his peak level i.e. not an all star, but a good starter level player.

Despite the fact that Moranis is wrong about all things pertaining to the desirability of his home state, he is 110% correct on this one.

No he isn't.

I've compiled a by no means complete list of some NBA All Stars who had the same or worse win shares as both Marcus Smart and Kelly Olynyk in their rookie seasons (they both had 2.9).

Klay Thompson, Jimmy Butler, Paul George, Jeff Teague, Demar Derozan, Russell Westbrook, Roy Hibbert, Kyle Lowry, Rajon Rondo, Andrew Bynum, David Lee, David West, Kyle Korver, Tyson Chandler, Gerald Wallace, Zach Randolph, Michael Redd, Rip Hamilton, Baron Davis, Metta World Peace, Rashard Lewis, Dirk Nowitzki, Chauncey Billups, Peja Stojakovic, Tracy McGrady, Jermaine O'Neal, Steve Nash, Kobe Bryant, Rasheed Wallace, Sam Cassell, Allen Houston, Kenny Anderson . . .

I say it's too early to tell whether or not Marcus Smart or Kelly Olynyk can be all stars.  I'm glad you guys have made up your minds based on . . . actually, I have no idea what your opinions are based on.

win shares are a terrible measure as they actually require your team to win and most of the players were on terrible teams as rookies. 

[D.o.s.]

It's also worth noting that any form of measurement putting those players under one lump ceiling (even if it is just a "this player wasn't bad" umbrella) is probably in need of further evaluation.

[Celtics18]

I don't argue with making the playoffs - teams should try and win. I do not think our four and out will attract any free agents, however.

I don't think we will be any good for many years. Smart is not good enough. Olynyk and Sullinger and James Young are not good enough; and Zeller is good enough to be a back-up, but not good enough to be a major cog in the machine.

It is a sad thing, but I do not think we will get anyone at 16 or 28 who will matter THAT much in our rebuilding. Stevens is a great coach, but he doesn't have THAT much to work with here. If, casual fans, we can all recognize that Kevin Looney and Chris McCollough are not game changers, then don't you think rival executives can see that?

It is unfortunate, but we are not in a position to make a splash this off-season, and I am afraid we don't have much to look forward to next year

I think we're actually a lot closer to a championship-contending team than given credit for, especially in the East. A legitimate contender must have an effective starting line-up and a solid bench (even with Lopez, Matthews, Aldridge and Lillard, blazers were still first round fodder just like us). Our approach has been to add solid players that could in the future become a very effective bench, if not starters.

Smart, Young, Sully, KO may very well be stars in the making they've only been here for 3 seasons. Everyone keeps forgetting that stars can also be drafted and groomed and not only traded for...

I don't think anyone has forgotten that: some posters just don't see star potential in anyone currently on our roster.

The thing is, you know almost immediately if a player has a real shot at being a franchise player, an all star, or even a starter. It is very rare that you don't have an idea as early as a player's rookie season.  Now sure they are raw and have a lot of improvement to make to reach full potential, but it isn't like you didn't know Lebron James, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Kevin Durant, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, etc. were going to be very good players almost immediately.  The Jermaine O'Neal's and Steve Nash's of the world are very much the exception to the rule. 

No one currently on Boston has franchise level talent or we would have seen it already.  Smart has a chance to be an all world defender, but he is never going to be a franchise player as he just isn't good enough offensively and is a guard (which minimizes his defensive impact).  Everyone else could be a 4th or 5th starter on a championship team level at best.

You're probably right about the first one.  I don't think there are many players in that "franchise" category that there wasn't a fairly good indication of their stardom starting with their rookie season (maybe Dirk and Kobe).

The league is littered with all stars and good starters who were far from surefire hits in their first season or two, though.

I think if you actually started looking at the starters on true legit contenders and then looked at their rookie years, I think you would be surprised at how much potential they showed.  Obviously they aren't nearly as good or as consistent as rookies, but you saw it. 

I could totally see Smart, Sullinger and Olynyk as being a 4th or 5th starter on a real contender.  I've seen enough to know they have that sort of potential, but none of them have shown me enough for me to believe they could be all star level or better players.  Sullinger compares fairly well with a guy like Josh Smith, not the defender Smith is, but a bit better touch on his shooting.  That seems to be his peak level i.e. not an all star, but a good starter level player.

Despite the fact that Moranis is wrong about all things pertaining to the desirability of his home state, he is 110% correct on this one.

No he isn't.

I've compiled a by no means complete list of some NBA All Stars who had the same or worse win shares as both Marcus Smart and Kelly Olynyk in their rookie seasons (they both had 2.9).

Klay Thompson, Jimmy Butler, Paul George, Jeff Teague, Demar Derozan, Russell Westbrook, Roy Hibbert, Kyle Lowry, Rajon Rondo, Andrew Bynum, David Lee, David West, Kyle Korver, Tyson Chandler, Gerald Wallace, Zach Randolph, Michael Redd, Rip Hamilton, Baron Davis, Metta World Peace, Rashard Lewis, Dirk Nowitzki, Chauncey Billups, Peja Stojakovic, Tracy McGrady, Jermaine O'Neal, Steve Nash, Kobe Bryant, Rasheed Wallace, Sam Cassell, Allen Houston, Kenny Anderson . . .

I say it's too early to tell whether or not Marcus Smart or Kelly Olynyk can be all stars.  I'm glad you guys have made up your minds based on . . . actually, I have no idea what your opinions are based on.

win shares are a terrible measure as they actually require your team to win and most of the players were on terrible teams as rookies.

Fair point.  I just picked something as a point of reference.  Go ahead and check the numbers for the guys listed in their rookie seasons, though.  I can tell you that none of them were seen as surefire All Stars at the time.

The point is, generally speaking, rookies struggle.  It's actually quite common for players who have below mediocre rookie season to blossom two or three years into their careers and improve dramatically.

My list is an example of that, whether you care for WinShares as a measure or not.   

[D.o.s.]

Rookies struggle, sure, but if I were to dip into the eye test (heresy) I would say that, even within that list, there are pretty clear delineation between who was going to/had the capacity to be great and players that could fairly obviously pan out as role players.

There are exceptions to those rules, obviously, but like someone said earlier, Steve Nash is the exception, not the rule.

[Celtics18]

Rookies struggle, sure, but if I were to dip into the eye test (heresy) I would say that, even within that list, there are pretty clear delineation between who was going to/had the capacity to be great and players that could fairly obviously pan out as role players.

There are exceptions to those rules, obviously, but like someone said earlier, Steve Nash is the exception, not the rule.

Of course.  Nobody who saw rookie Tracy McGrady, Steve Nash, Chauncey Billups, Gary Payton, Paul George, Kobe Bryant, Jimmy Butler, or Dirk Nowitzki et. al. play in their rookie seasons didn't know they'd be superstars.

Hindsight being 20/20 and all that. 

[D.o.s.]

That's not what I said, though.

between who was going to/had the capacity to be great and players that could fairly obviously pan out as role players.

Kobe always had the capacity to be an all-time great player. Same with T-Mac. To pluck an example from nowhere in particular, Avery Bradley surprised a lot of people with his improvement, but no one seriously thought he had Hall of Fame potential.

So even removed from hindsight, I would say, that, for example, Andrew Wiggins has the potential to be a Great Player. Aaron Gordon does not.

[fairweatherfan]

I think the next step in breaking down that argument is to look at players who were widely thought to have superstar/HOF potential in their rookie year, but didn't get there (ideally for non-injury reasons).  Admittedly it's harder to think of examples, but I'd start with Shawn Kemp and Damon Stoudamire.

EDIT: Eh, I just read the full argument and I guess that's not so relevant to the point, since they really did have some kind of shot to get there.  Still an interesting idea in my opinion, though.

[D.o.s.]

I think the next step in breaking down that argument is to look at players who were widely thought to have superstar/HOF potential in their rookie year, but didn't get there (ideally for non-injury reasons).  Admittedly it's harder to think of examples, but I'd start with Shawn Kemp and Damon Stoudamire.

To paraphrase Kenny Powers, Shaun Kemp hurt himself. He hurt his nose.

[fairweatherfan]

I think the next step in breaking down that argument is to look at players who were widely thought to have superstar/HOF potential in their rookie year, but didn't get there (ideally for non-injury reasons).  Admittedly it's harder to think of examples, but I'd start with Shawn Kemp and Damon Stoudamire.

To paraphrase Kenny Powers, Shaun Kemp hurt himself. He hurt his nose.

Nice.  Plus his GI tract.

Joe Barry Carroll is another example - from 19 and 9 with a block and a half to a punchline in less than a decade.

[Who]

I think the next step in breaking down that argument is to look at players who were widely thought to have superstar/HOF potential in their rookie year, but didn't get there (ideally for non-injury reasons).  Admittedly it's harder to think of examples, but I'd start with Shawn Kemp and Damon Stoudamire.

EDIT: Eh, I just read the full argument and I guess that's not so relevant to the point, since they really did have some kind of shot to get there.  Still an interesting idea in my opinion, though.

In recent years = Tyreke Evans

[D.o.s.]

Sure (and also because I love Tyreke Evans, particularly rookie year 'Reke), but we're looking for his opposite, right? The Matthew Dellavedova of an NBA career, rather than just a Finals series.

It is pretty clear, for example, that if McGrady had been able to stay healthy we'd be arguing about who was better: Kobe or T-Mac. Vince Carter has dealt with a reputation of being an underachiever for his entire career exactly because his ceiling/potential/physical gifts were so obvious.

Ideally, we're looking for the guy that took what was his widely recognized 'ceiling' and blew it out of the water for an entire career. Maybe Gilbert Arenas (a second-round pick) if he stays healthy, but he didn't. Tony Parker, but he was just as much a victim of the failures of international scouting, rather than any underestimation of his abilities. Etc.

[tarheelsxxiii]

I don't know if Ben Wallace ever had a "widely recognized" ceiling, so may not fit here.. but I'd say he blew expectations out of the water. Maybe the Mailman, too? David West? Can't think of many..

[D.o.s.]

Ben Wallace is a great example, actually.