Celtics too talented not to win 50 games in the East.

[sawick48]

i honestly can't believe the amount of people behind this thought here.  i could use some of whatever you guys are having man.

so 50 wins puts us at the 4 seed this past season, tied with the 3 seeded Bulls. our team is as good as last year's Bulls team? really?  i don't think people realize how much better teams around us talent-wise became this offseason.

Cleveland, Atlanta, Chicago, Washington, Miami, Indiana, Golden State, Houston, Clips, Memphis, Spurs, Thunder, and probably New Orleans all CLEARLY are teams with more talent than us.  you can kick and scream with me about Indiana and the Pelicans if you want but I could just as easily say Detroit, Brooklyn, and Dallas have more talent than we do even though I'm not.  So that alone is 13 teams better than us, 6 of which are in the East.  Since the season after the lockout year, there have been an average of 8.67 teams a year in the whole league finishing with 50 wins, with an average of 2.33 per year residing in the East.  the math alone suggests that if we're on pace for 50 wins, that there would need to be a record number of teams winning less than 20 games in order to even out the total wins and losses.

again, hope i'm wrong but i just think the rose colored viewing is getting a tad out of hand

The western conference doesn't matter unless you're projecting where the C's record falls in terms of lottery standings.

in the East,
- I'd think twice before awarding Indy a spot above us.  Prior to getting Amir and Lee and Indy shipping out Hibbert for nothing, I would have said yes but right now, I think it'll be close even with George returning.
- Unless the injury bug hits them, Miami should finish with a much better record than us.
- Milwaukee was better than us last year and has Parker coming back from injury plus they added Monroe, they're definitely better as well.
- You omitted Toronto as well.  I don't see them taking a step backwards.  I can't really see a reason that they'd fall behind the C's this year.
--> that's 7 teams in the East that figure to be better than the C's and that's without stretching reality.

C's will, at best, be fighting Indy and Detroit for that 8th seed.  I don't see Brooklyn in the fight for the playoffs regardless of how Lopez holds up this year.  NY gets Melo back and added a couple of decent players so they'll be better but I don't see them in the playoff race--then again, with Melo, they do have a stud scorer that can carry the offensive load down the stretch of games which is something we still lack.

uhhh unless we're only talking about our record in the East and not overall, it absolutely matters what teams in the West are better than us.  and the Pacers thing is starting to become funny to me around here.  people don't remember just how good Paul George was before injury.  Indiana is adding a bonafide superstar to their team this year.  Losing West will hurt some, sure.  but i for one am a believer in Monta Ellis and think he can add something special to a playoff team.  not to mention they aren't replacing West with Monta even, they're playing PG13 at the 4 this year, so they're replacing West with Paul freakin George and replacing Solomon Hill and CJ Miles with Monta Ellis.  that team EASILY makes the playoffs. i'll take them over Milwaukee and Toronto right now by a landslide

[LilRip]

so according to SI.com's predictions, Cleveland will win around 50-51 games next season. If that holds any water, then the C's are obviously going to win 50 too

[Big333223]

so according to SI.com's predictions, Cleveland will win around 50-51 games next season. If that holds any water, then the C's are obviously going to win 50 too

Should be a pretty sweet season, then.

[greece66]

I'm just concerned 30-45 win seasons with an ever-changing cast of scrappy / hard-working / underdog / buy-low-asset / borderline-starter type players is what we have to look forward to for the next 4-5 years.

That's a bit unfair 
We all know DA is not planning for this to happen.
Building a contender is not sthg you can plan doing step-by-step as if you were playing a video game, smoothly advancing from one level to the next.
We do need to get lucky at some point.

[Beat LA]

I'm just concerned 30-45 win seasons with an ever-changing cast of scrappy / hard-working / underdog / buy-low-asset / borderline-starter type players is what we have to look forward to for the next 4-5 years.

That's a bit unfair 
We all know DA is not planning for this to happen.
Building a contender is not sthg you can plan doing step-by-step as if you were playing a video game, smoothly advancing from one level to the next.
We do need to get lucky at some point.

Umm, yes it is - look at how Bird put the Pacers together.  How would you rather do it? 

[Big333223]

I'm just concerned 30-45 win seasons with an ever-changing cast of scrappy / hard-working / underdog / buy-low-asset / borderline-starter type players is what we have to look forward to for the next 4-5 years.

That's a bit unfair 
We all know DA is not planning for this to happen.
Building a contender is not sthg you can plan doing step-by-step as if you were playing a video game, smoothly advancing from one level to the next.
We do need to get lucky at some point.

Umm, yes it is - look at how Bird put the Pacers together.  How would you rather do it?

To be fair, the Pacers got pretty lucky drafting Paul George with the #10 pick.

[greece66]

I'm just concerned 30-45 win seasons with an ever-changing cast of scrappy / hard-working / underdog / buy-low-asset / borderline-starter type players is what we have to look forward to for the next 4-5 years.

That's a bit unfair 
We all know DA is not planning for this to happen.
Building a contender is not sthg you can plan doing step-by-step as if you were playing a video game, smoothly advancing from one level to the next.
We do need to get lucky at some point.

Umm, yes it is - look at how Bird put the Pacers together.  How would you rather do it?

To be fair, the Pacers got pretty lucky drafting Paul George with the #10 pick.

The Pacers are no longer a contender 
They were one two seasons ago, but even then, they were much behind MIA and SAS.

Anyway, the point here is not about the Pacers - and incidentally I do like a lot Bird's work as a GM.

Point is that you need to get a star. Stars arguably have more impact in bball than in any other team sport.
And since each and every of the other 30 teams is looking for a star too, you'll need some luck: there are simply not enough high impact players for everyone.

IMO in every other aspect of the rebuild planning is important: getting a good coach, building a reliable roster, scouting and drafting players.

But acquiring a star is more like hunting: you have to wait patiently until the right opportunity arises, and then you have to be ready to respond instantly.

Ainge was ready to seize the moment if the opportunity appeared this year; it simply did not happen. Next year we might be more lucky; or maybe not; this is something outside our control.

Hence, other than remaining flexible and patient, there is not much we can do about it.

[KG Living Legend]

I like you're enthusiasm and I hope you're right.

But there's no guarentee Lee has anything left. The Celtics don't have a legit starting center on the roster. All of our young guys have something to prove in their games. This team snuck up on a lot of people last season and they'll be less likely to do that again this season. Plus, they went on that great streak in the second part of the season when a lot of teams in the East had fully resigned themsevles to tanking.

I still hope you're right, but I'm less certain than you.

 I would say between Zeller and Amir we are about Avg to slightly above avg at center.
 We also have the options to go strong in Sully, shooter with Kelly, and throw in some Mickey possibly.
 Overall center is looking better than last year.

[PhoSita]

I'm just concerned 30-45 win seasons with an ever-changing cast of scrappy / hard-working / underdog / buy-low-asset / borderline-starter type players is what we have to look forward to for the next 4-5 years.

That's a bit unfair 
We all know DA is not planning for this to happen.

Of course he's not planning for it.  He's planning to be ready when a superstar becomes available via trade.

What if it doesn't pan out?  What if there's always some Cleveland with a top 5 pick to trump whatever pu pu platter we can offer?

It seems to me like a great deal is riding on the Nets finishing with a bottom 5 record (or moving way up into the top 3 via the lottery) sometime in the next three years.

[colincb]

I'm just concerned 30-45 win seasons with an ever-changing cast of scrappy / hard-working / underdog / buy-low-asset / borderline-starter type players is what we have to look forward to for the next 4-5 years.

That's a bit unfair 
We all know DA is not planning for this to happen.

Of course he's not planning for it.  He's planning to be ready when a superstar becomes available via trade.

What if it doesn't pan out?  What if there's always some Cleveland with a top 5 pick to trump whatever pu pu platter we can offer?

It seems to me like a great deal is riding on the Nets finishing with a bottom 5 record (or moving way up into the top 3 via the lottery) sometime in the next three years.

We could go backwards if we have strategic injuries or a slew of injuries.  I've yet to see any team that couldn't be derailed by health issues. It's difficult to predict those and if that's what you are worried about, light some candles.

Otherwise, the rebuild is ahead of schedule, they already are a .500 team, they are young, they've added talent, they have plenty of future cap room, they have plenty of assets they can develop into better players, they have arguably as good a selection of picks as anyone in the league, they have a very good coach, they have a very good GM, and they have a very good ownership group. It will take any number of things, including luck, to get to pretender and then contender status given where we are, but I don't see any way to go backwards to where you think we could end up other than bad health.

What if this, what if that? What if they hit on a pick that turns into a top tier talent, what if they win enough to attract a higher level talent that leads to more wins and more free agents, what if one or two of these young talents emerge, etc, etc. etc. It doesn't always have to be downside outcomes does it?

[footey]

Our depth is our biggest current asset (forgetting future assets like picks). In that sense we are less vulnerable to an injury to any single player.  Not many teams can say that.  Am confident that we have plenty of guys who could step in without missing a beat.

[greece66]

I'm just concerned 30-45 win seasons with an ever-changing cast of scrappy / hard-working / underdog / buy-low-asset / borderline-starter type players is what we have to look forward to for the next 4-5 years.

That's a bit unfair 
We all know DA is not planning for this to happen.

Of course he's not planning for it.  He's planning to be ready when a superstar becomes available via trade.

What if it doesn't pan out?  What if there's always some Cleveland with a top 5 pick to trump whatever pu pu platter we can offer?

It seems to me like a great deal is riding on the Nets finishing with a bottom 5 record (or moving way up into the top 3 via the lottery) sometime in the next three years.

And the alternative plan is...?