'what we lack in talent is made up by our depth and youth'

[dreamgreen]

We have a lot of talent and are deep, I don't count rookies until they prove themselves. As mentioned we still don't have all-stat level talent and are not athletic enough at the 4/5.

I don't think we are top 10 more like in the 11-15 range, depending on how things shake out I could see us getting a 4 or 5 seed and winning 1 round in the playoffs.

[Jon]

As others have said, this is definitely false. Depth is radically overrated in basketball and even our young talent isn't as impressive as other teams' young talent.

I still think we have a good future because of the possibility of continuing to consolidate our assets and see some of these young guys exceed expectations. But the fact we have good depth isn't going to translate much into wins this year. As others have pointed out, this is a star driven league and the fact we have a nice third string PF doesn't mean that much.

[greece66]

Statement is True.

Only prob is that this team might take some time to shine.

But this is exactly the kind of young, versatile and unpredictable roster (with 12-3 men rotations) CBS loves having.

[Eja117]

True.

I was listening to the radio the other day and they made the case that it was clear on the West Coast road trip the Celts 2nd and 3rd units were exceptional. They were better than the Warriors backups. They were better than the Clippers backups.

CBS isn't afraid to pull an Avery or a Smart or a Zeller because he knows he has IT and Amir that can come right in.

[2short]

Top ten is where you loose the argument right away.  We have youth and depth yes.  A poor mans Hawks team.  If we played true tommy ball and used that depth we could run many teams into the ground.  There isn't much of a drop off from our starter to third string.
The Celtics will be a fun team to watch that plays really good team ball.  Top ten no.  Chance at winning weak Atlantic, maybe?

[LilRip]

I would say true.  This team is deep and young.  Plus I think we have talent which is going to do a lot of good things this year.  Our team is loaded.  I think we are a top 10 team as is.  The issue is what we have isn't it.  Or is it?

Top 10 team? Wow...

Which of these teams is Boston ahead of?

Cleveland - better than Boston
Clippers - just signed Paul Pierce, better than Boston
Spurs
Rockets
Pelicans
Thunder
Warriors
Memphis
Hawks
Bucks

And there are certainly other teams with convincing arguments: Bulls, Heat, Pacers, Suns, Raptors, Wizards, etc.

I'll rate each team and say if they're better or worse than us, or about even.

Cleveland - better: Only because of Mosgov/Thompson control the boards well
Clippers - better: Just signed Celtics HoFer Paul Pierce this offseason
Spurs - worse: Because they're old. even their coach is an older version of CBS.
Rockets - worse: They rely too heavily on a shoot-first SG while C's have a team-first philosphy
Pelicans - even: They were 8th seed last year. We'll see how AD pans out for them.
Thunder - worse: They didn't make the playoffs last year. 'Nuff said.
Warriors - even: Even if they won last year, well, we now have Lee. They have Gerald Wallace. Boom!
Memphis - even: C's backcourt is practically like theirs. Strong perimeter defenders!
Hawks - worse: they lost their heart and soul in Carroll while we kept Crowder
Bucks - worse: what have their young guys proven? Jabari is still practically a rookie

As for the other teams:
Bulls - worse: D-Rose is old and injury-prone
Heat - worse: Getting old and hasn't been the same since Lebron left. Couldn't even make the playoffs last year
Pacers - worse: Lost their bigs so they have no more D. Plus, they didn't make the playoffs.
Suns - worse: Non-playoff team and they lost IT4 to us last year.
Raptors - worse: Lost Amir Johnson and Lou Williams. They'll be worse than last year.
Wizards - worse: Lost Celtics HoFer Paul Pierce

So in conclusion, the Celtics are probably 6th best team, at worst!!11!1!!

</greengoggles>

[D.o.s.]

I would say true.  This team is deep and young.  Plus I think we have talent which is going to do a lot of good things this year.  Our team is loaded.  I think we are a top 10 team as is.  The issue is what we have isn't it.  Or is it?

Top 10 team? Wow...

Which of these teams is Boston ahead of?

Cleveland - better than Boston
Clippers - just signed Paul Pierce, better than Boston
Spurs
Rockets
Pelicans
Thunder
Warriors
Memphis
Hawks
Bucks

And there are certainly other teams with convincing arguments: Bulls, Heat, Pacers, Suns, Raptors, Wizards, etc.

I'll rate each team and say if they're better or worse than us, or about even.

Cleveland - better: Only because of Mosgov/Thompson control the boards well
Clippers - better: Just signed Celtics HoFer Paul Pierce this offseason
Spurs - worse: Because they're old. even their coach is an older version of CBS.
Rockets - worse: They rely too heavily on a shoot-first SG while C's have a team-first philosphy
Pelicans - even: They were 8th seed last year. We'll see how AD pans out for them.
Thunder - worse: They didn't make the playoffs last year. 'Nuff said.
Warriors - even: Even if they won last year, well, we now have Lee. They have Gerald Wallace. Boom!
Memphis - even: C's backcourt is practically like theirs. Strong perimeter defenders!
Hawks - worse: they lost their heart and soul in Carroll while we kept Crowder
Bucks - worse: what have their young guys proven? Jabari is still practically a rookie

As for the other teams:
Bulls - worse: D-Rose is old and injury-prone
Heat - worse: Getting old and hasn't been the same since Lebron left. Couldn't even make the playoffs last year
Pacers - worse: Lost their bigs so they have no more D. Plus, they didn't make the playoffs.
Suns - worse: Non-playoff team and they lost IT4 to us last year.
Raptors - worse: Lost Amir Johnson and Lou Williams. They'll be worse than last year.
Wizards - worse: Lost Celtics HoFer Paul Pierce

So in conclusion, the Celtics are probably 6th best team, at worst!!11!1!!

</greengoggles>

 

You got me until the very last line. Well done.

[greece66]

I would say true.  This team is deep and young.  Plus I think we have talent which is going to do a lot of good things this year.  Our team is loaded.  I think we are a top 10 team as is.  The issue is what we have isn't it.  Or is it?

Top 10 team? Wow...

Which of these teams is Boston ahead of?

Cleveland - better than Boston
Clippers - just signed Paul Pierce, better than Boston
Spurs
Rockets
Pelicans
Thunder
Warriors
Memphis
Hawks
Bucks

And there are certainly other teams with convincing arguments: Bulls, Heat, Pacers, Suns, Raptors, Wizards, etc.

I'll rate each team and say if they're better or worse than us, or about even.

Cleveland - better: Only because of Mosgov/Thompson control the boards well
Clippers - better: Just signed Celtics HoFer Paul Pierce this offseason
Spurs - worse: Because they're old. even their coach is an older version of CBS.
Rockets - worse: They rely too heavily on a shoot-first SG while C's have a team-first philosphy
Pelicans - even: They were 8th seed last year. We'll see how AD pans out for them.
Thunder - worse: They didn't make the playoffs last year. 'Nuff said.
Warriors - even: Even if they won last year, well, we now have Lee. They have Gerald Wallace. Boom!
Memphis - even: C's backcourt is practically like theirs. Strong perimeter defenders!
Hawks - worse: they lost their heart and soul in Carroll while we kept Crowder
Bucks - worse: what have their young guys proven? Jabari is still practically a rookie

As for the other teams:
Bulls - worse: D-Rose is old and injury-prone
Heat - worse: Getting old and hasn't been the same since Lebron left. Couldn't even make the playoffs last year
Pacers - worse: Lost their bigs so they have no more D. Plus, they didn't make the playoffs.
Suns - worse: Non-playoff team and they lost IT4 to us last year.
Raptors - worse: Lost Amir Johnson and Lou Williams. They'll be worse than last year.
Wizards - worse: Lost Celtics HoFer Paul Pierce

So in conclusion, the Celtics are probably 6th best team, at worst!!11!1!!

</greengoggles>

TP brother

[GreenCoffeeBean]

As others have said, this is definitely false. Depth is radically overrated in basketball and even our young talent isn't as impressive as other teams' young talent.

I still think we have a good future because of the possibility of continuing to consolidate our assets and see some of these young guys exceed expectations. But the fact we have good depth isn't going to translate much into wins this year. As others have pointed out, this is a star driven league and the fact we have a nice third string PF doesn't mean that much.

Tell that to the 2014-15 Cavs, 2013-14 Heat, 2012-2013 Pacers and Oklahoma City Thunder for the last 5-6 years.

A positive counter-example are the 2007-08 Celtics, where we blew out teams and closed out games because of our depth.

Of course there's a lot more examples than just those three teams but I'll leave the rest as an exercise for you.

[max215]

I would say true.  This team is deep and young.  Plus I think we have talent which is going to do a lot of good things this year.  Our team is loaded.  I think we are a top 10 team as is.  The issue is what we have isn't it.  Or is it?

Top 10 team? Wow...

Which of these teams is Boston ahead of?

Cleveland - better than Boston
Clippers - just signed Paul Pierce, better than Boston
Spurs
Rockets
Pelicans
Thunder
Warriors
Memphis
Hawks
Bucks

And there are certainly other teams with convincing arguments: Bulls, Heat, Pacers, Suns, Raptors, Wizards, etc.

I'll rate each team and say if they're better or worse than us, or about even.

Cleveland - better: Only because of Mosgov/Thompson control the boards well
Clippers - better: Just signed Celtics HoFer Paul Pierce this offseason
Spurs - worse: Because they're old. even their coach is an older version of CBS.
Rockets - worse: They rely too heavily on a shoot-first SG while C's have a team-first philosphy
Pelicans - even: They were 8th seed last year. We'll see how AD pans out for them.
Thunder - worse: They didn't make the playoffs last year. 'Nuff said.
Warriors - even: Even if they won last year, well, we now have Lee. They have Gerald Wallace. Boom!
Memphis - even: C's backcourt is practically like theirs. Strong perimeter defenders!
Hawks - worse: they lost their heart and soul in Carroll while we kept Crowder
Bucks - worse: what have their young guys proven? Jabari is still practically a rookie

As for the other teams:
Bulls - worse: D-Rose is old and injury-prone
Heat - worse: Getting old and hasn't been the same since Lebron left. Couldn't even make the playoffs last year
Pacers - worse: Lost their bigs so they have no more D. Plus, they didn't make the playoffs.
Suns - worse: Non-playoff team and they lost IT4 to us last year.
Raptors - worse: Lost Amir Johnson and Lou Williams. They'll be worse than last year.
Wizards - worse: Lost Celtics HoFer Paul Pierce

So in conclusion, the Celtics are probably 6th best team, at worst!!11!1!!

</greengoggles>

[Scintan]

As others have said, this is definitely false. Depth is radically overrated in basketball and even our young talent isn't as impressive as other teams' young talent.

I still think we have a good future because of the possibility of continuing to consolidate our assets and see some of these young guys exceed expectations. But the fact we have good depth isn't going to translate much into wins this year. As others have pointed out, this is a star driven league and the fact we have a nice third string PF doesn't mean that much.

Tell that to the 2014-15 Cavs, 2013-14 Heat, 2012-2013 Pacers and Oklahoma City Thunder for the last 5-6 years.

A positive counter-example are the 2007-08 Celtics, where we blew out teams and closed out games because of our depth.

Of course there's a lot more examples than just those three teams but I'll leave the rest as an exercise for you.

Losing top players kills even teams with depth.  That's not the issue at hand.

[GreenCoffeeBean]

As others have said, this is definitely false. Depth is radically overrated in basketball and even our young talent isn't as impressive as other teams' young talent.

I still think we have a good future because of the possibility of continuing to consolidate our assets and see some of these young guys exceed expectations. But the fact we have good depth isn't going to translate much into wins this year. As others have pointed out, this is a star driven league and the fact we have a nice third string PF doesn't mean that much.

Tell that to the 2014-15 Cavs, 2013-14 Heat, 2012-2013 Pacers and Oklahoma City Thunder for the last 5-6 years.

A positive counter-example are the 2007-08 Celtics, where we blew out teams and closed out games because of our depth.

Of course there's a lot more examples than just those three teams but I'll leave the rest as an exercise for you.

Losing top players kills even teams with depth.  That's not the issue at hand.

The Cavs lost some players last year but they didn't have depth before that.

The 2013-14 Heat were healthy and had no depth.

The 2012-13 Pacers were healthy and had no depth.

The Thunder, aside from last year, were always healthy but had no depth outside a 6th man.

[max215]

As others have said, this is definitely false. Depth is radically overrated in basketball and even our young talent isn't as impressive as other teams' young talent.

I still think we have a good future because of the possibility of continuing to consolidate our assets and see some of these young guys exceed expectations. But the fact we have good depth isn't going to translate much into wins this year. As others have pointed out, this is a star driven league and the fact we have a nice third string PF doesn't mean that much.

Tell that to the 2014-15 Cavs, 2013-14 Heat, 2012-2013 Pacers and Oklahoma City Thunder for the last 5-6 years.

A positive counter-example are the 2007-08 Celtics, where we blew out teams and closed out games because of our depth.

Of course there's a lot more examples than just those three teams but I'll leave the rest as an exercise for you.

Add the Clippers of the last half decade to that list.

[PhoSita]

TRUE or FALSE?

You'll need to specify what you mean in order for me to answer.


The lack of talent is off-set to a certain degree by the depth and youth of the team.  That is true.

Just how much is it off-set?  Probably enough to win 40-45 games and make the playoffs.  Not enough to win the division or a playoff series.

[PhoSita]

True.

I was listening to the radio the other day and they made the case that it was clear on the West Coast road trip the Celts 2nd and 3rd units were exceptional. They were better than the Warriors backups. They were better than the Clippers backups.

Yes, but the starting lineup is probably in the bottom third of the league.  So . . . which is most important: 1st unit, 2nd unit, or 3rd string?