The star is missing

[konkmv]

Cavs lebron and irving and love
Heat wade and dragic and bosh
Pacers george and ellis
Hawks horford and milsap
Bulls rose and butler and gasol
Wizzards wall and beal
Bucks monroe and giannis and parker

Detroit magic hornetts raptors all have potential stars

Us? Ok we have a coach, a system but but... i am not so optimistic than others
Nba is a star league.. i see some players who could be great... star potential? None. Maybe smart maybe...
I do not see us reaching the playoffs... unless everyone gets injured again

[PhoSita]

Yup, the Celts are doing everything well that they can do, but none of it will matter until they find a way to get a star.

Have to get some luck to break their way first, though.

[Celtics18]

I enjoy rooting for a team without a superstar.  Of course it makes your chances of winning it all very slim, but it's fun (at least for me) when a team full of role players can come together, play hard, play smart, play for each other, and be competitive against teams with more top level talent.

It's what the Celtics were able to do last year, and I'm hoping for improvement on that this year.

[SHAQATTACK]

No star for the sake of having a star.


When you get him..l.....

Make him count.

[Rosco917]

I'm just not seeing the stars that you see.

Labron is a star for sure, he controls the game and can dominate when he chooses, every night, so let jump past him.

Love had great stats when he went to Cleveland, and if he and LBJ had a ball apiece he would most likely have a huge impact, but we don't play with 2 balls in the NBA, we share one. His numbers in Cleveland were good but not eye popping, throw in his defense ability and "yada yada yada" 

Some of the player you name are good talented ball players, Monroe, Butler, Bosh, Wall, Beal, but not dominating stars in the caliber of Labron. They're very controllable, some nights great, some regular. 

Some stars you mentioned are past their prime or continually injured, Wade, Rose, are past their prime, with "big names", but are mostly a shell of their prime years. I wouldn't want either to build around.

Giannis, has a great nick name, and potential, but you can't call him a star. Parker, was having a nice rookie year until he blew his knee out, the jury is still out there.

My point is, there is a difference between a real LBJ type star, and a good solid pro with a recognized name, mostly because he was once a free agent.

[PhoSita]

I enjoy rooting for a team without a superstar.  Of course it makes your chances of winning it all very slim, but it's fun (at least for me) when a team full of role players can come together, play hard, play smart, play for each other, and be competitive against teams with more top level talent.

It's what the Celtics were able to do last year, and I'm hoping for improvement on that this year.

The biggest impediment to me investing in this team is not the lack of a star, but the fact that because the team lacks a star, everybody on the roster now (Smart being a possible exception) is just an "asset" to be shuffled around.  There isn't a single player on the roster right now who I would bet good money to be on the roster in two or three years.

That's a big reason why I feel like, who cares if they win a few games?  There's no long term blueprint here.  They're not building anything.  They're just building up individual pieces and waiting for an opportunity to secure a real core.


All of that said, I respect the people who can get excited about the team.  I envy that in a lot of ways.  I still enjoy watching them, I just don't really see anybody on the team now who will be more than a trivia question ten years from now, so I don't get too excited myself.

[Tr1boy]

Cavs lebron and irving and love
Heat wade and dragic and bosh
Pacers george and ellis
Hawks horford and milsap
Bulls rose and butler and gasol
Wizzards wall and beal
Bucks monroe and giannis and parker

Detroit magic hornetts raptors all have potential stars

Us? Ok we have a coach, a system but but... i am not so optimistic than others
Nba is a star league.. i see some players who could be great... star potential? None. Maybe smart maybe...
I do not see us reaching the playoffs... unless everyone gets injured again

Half of the guys you have listed are not stars. Like Monroe, Ellis.

How is Monroe a star?

[SHAQATTACK]

Cavs lebron and irving and love
Heat wade and dragic and bosh
Pacers george and ellis
Hawks horford and milsap
Bulls rose and butler and gasol
Wizzards wall and beal
Bucks monroe and giannis and parker

Detroit magic hornetts raptors all have potential stars

Us? Ok we have a coach, a system but but... i am not so optimistic than others
Nba is a star league.. i see some players who could be great... star potential? None. Maybe smart maybe...
I do not see us reaching the playoffs... unless everyone gets injured again

Half of the guys you have listed are not stars. Like Monroe, Ellis.

How is Monroe a star?

True ...Monroe is a good player .....has he even been close to being voted an all star. 

Parker hasn't played a season yet .....how can he be a star ...LOL

Sorry friend Giannis is a nice player .....not even a fringe star yet ......maybe one day.


Three excellent players ...maybe one day

[Boris Badenov]

I enjoy rooting for a team without a superstar.  Of course it makes your chances of winning it all very slim, but it's fun (at least for me) when a team full of role players can come together, play hard, play smart, play for each other, and be competitive against teams with more top level talent.

It's what the Celtics were able to do last year, and I'm hoping for improvement on that this year.

Fair enough, but rooting for the scrappy underdog gets kind of old after the third or fourth straight first-round beatdown.

I'll hope for another 40-45 win season and be happy with anything close to that, but I'll also hope our picks and other assets end up giving us a shot at a star or potential star, via moving up or trade.

[anewframe]

I enjoy rooting for a team without a superstar.  Of course it makes your chances of winning it all very slim, but it's fun (at least for me) when a team full of role players can come together, play hard, play smart, play for each other, and be competitive against teams with more top level talent.

It's what the Celtics were able to do last year, and I'm hoping for improvement on that this year.

TP! Me too. My hope is that we can be another exception to the rule of needing a star player.

[moiso]

I enjoy rooting for a team without a superstar.  Of course it makes your chances of winning it all very slim, but it's fun (at least for me) when a team full of role players can come together, play hard, play smart, play for each other, and be competitive against teams with more top level talent.

It's what the Celtics were able to do last year, and I'm hoping for improvement on that this year.

The biggest impediment to me investing in this team is not the lack of a star, but the fact that because the team lacks a star, everybody on the roster now (Smart being a possible exception) is just an "asset" to be shuffled around.  There isn't a single player on the roster right now who I would bet good money to be on the roster in two or three years.

That's a big reason why I feel like, who cares if they win a few games?  There's no long term blueprint here.  They're not building anything.  They're just building up individual pieces and waiting for an opportunity to secure a real core.


All of that said, I respect the people who can get excited about the team.  I envy that in a lot of ways.  I still enjoy watching them, I just don't really see anybody on the team now who will be more than a trivia question ten years from now, so I don't get too excited myself.

Lrbd33?  A little different but awfully similar.

[PhoSita]

I enjoy rooting for a team without a superstar.  Of course it makes your chances of winning it all very slim, but it's fun (at least for me) when a team full of role players can come together, play hard, play smart, play for each other, and be competitive against teams with more top level talent.

It's what the Celtics were able to do last year, and I'm hoping for improvement on that this year.

Fair enough, but rooting for the scrappy underdog gets kind of old after the third or fourth straight first-round beatdown.

I'll hope for another 40-45 win season and be happy with anything close to that, but I'll also hope our picks and other assets end up giving us a shot at a star or potential star, via moving up or trade.

Yeah best case for me would be the team actually winning a couple playoff games and then getting multiple top ten picks from the Nets and Mavs.   Head into next year with some legitimate young pieces and maybe a modestly exciting free agent signing in top of the infrastructure already in place.

[Greyman]

Agree we could use someone who has star qualities like consistently hitting 20 points and adding in some assists, or 15 points and a bucket load of rebounds.

I am happy the team will be improved, Amir and Lee are good gets, Sullinger is fit (last I heard) and could impose himself this year and Smart played well enough in Summer league to suggest he is closer to being able to manage games.

I think if the group can improve on last season then 'stars' start to take more notice. This has already happened a bit and I think, largely thanks to CBS, Boston is more of a desirable destination.

Despite our 'team of role players' I am confident that they can perform well enough to make that next piece more attainable.

[Hemingway]

I enjoy rooting for a team without a superstar.  Of course it makes your chances of winning it all very slim, but it's fun (at least for me) when a team full of role players can come together, play hard, play smart, play for each other, and be competitive against teams with more top level talent.

It's what the Celtics were able to do last year, and I'm hoping for improvement on that this year.

The biggest impediment to me investing in this team is not the lack of a star, but the fact that because the team lacks a star, everybody on the roster now (Smart being a possible exception) is just an "asset" to be shuffled around.  There isn't a single player on the roster right now who I would bet good money to be on the roster in two or three years.

That's a big reason why I feel like, who cares if they win a few games?  There's no long term blueprint here.  They're not building anything.  They're just building up individual pieces and waiting for an opportunity to secure a real core.


All of that said, I respect the people who can get excited about the team.  I envy that in a lot of ways.  I still enjoy watching them, I just don't really see anybody on the team now who will be more than a trivia question ten years from now, so I don't get too excited myself.

You are probably right but you never know.for example we could make a trade based mainly on picks and Lee's contract, get a star and have most of the team intact. If we could trade for  star mid season, off season or next midseason we would have most of the guys we have now. There is also the chance that smart becomes a star, so that's fun to watch, and Crowder could turn into a star on D.

I get your overall point, but I bet Ainge trys his best to keep Smart, IT, AB, Crowder and Zeller. They seem to be "ainge guys." We really need everyone to step up this year to make us a destination in free agency. Everyone will have money, which really sucks for us because if not for the cap increae we should be one of a few teams. So without a star in place we need to have everything else go right for us so a KD type could look at us and say, yeah this will work.

[max215]

If Monta Ellis is a star, so is Isaiah Thomas. If Parker is a star, so is Smart.