Prediction: C's will be This year's Hawks.

[86MaxwellSmart]

With no Star player to speak of, the Celtics with lots of role players-playing for their next contracts, will over achieve with 50 + wins. Of course, with no star-they'll most likely get bounced in the first round of the playoffs. I highly doubt they end up 10th in the division like Hoopshype says. It will still be a fun season, with lots of exciting wins...We have way too many GOOD players on this team for it not to happen.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Comparing them as two teams with "no stars" is too vague, though. I'll agree with you that neither team had/has a franchise player, but they also happen to have 3 all-star caliber players, any one of whom would be the best player on our team this year.

I appreciate your optimism, at any rate. I'd be very happy to see them overachieve this year.

[BDeCosta26]

I think that's a pretty optimistic projection, but I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility. Kevin Pelton at ESPN has been making that statement for a couple months now. I've got them pegged for right around 45 wins, but I'd say 50 wins and 4th seed is probably a bit more likely than us finishing with a worse record than last year.

It really surprises me that so many people around here really overlook the way we finished the season. We were the 2nd best team in the East for like a solid 1/3 of the season (24-12 over the final 36), after the current roster came together. Even after adding David Lee and Amir Johnson, were still the 5th youngest team in the league, and while their was no "fireworks" we did manage to plug up some of our biggest holes this offseason. We really struggled with rebounding, scoring and interior defense last season and the additions of Lee (Interior scoring, rebounding) and Johnson (Interior Defense, Rebounding) will make our top 15 defense a top 10 one. Plus with the development of our own young guys (a Contract year Sully, Smart taking a leap, Young's development, the rookies contribution) And the continued progression of our coaching staff and culture (Stevens, the establishment of Smart, Bradley, Crowder etc as the leaders of this group) will make us a pretty good team this year. Certainly one that will be tough to beat night in and night out.

My hope is we win 44-48 games, grab a 5th seed and make it to the 2nd round while the Nets and Mavs gift us two top-10 picks.

[KGs Knee]

but they also happen to have 3 all-star caliber players, any one of whom would be the best player on our team this year.

This about sums it up. Teague/Millsap/Horford are all better than any player on the Celtics. Big difference.

[PhoSita]

They  might be a poor man's Hawks, which is what they were in the second half of last season.

[pearljammer10]

The Hawks had four all stars last year. If the Celtics have one this year I'd be shocked.

[Celtics4ever]

I don't think we will be as good as last year Hawks.

[Vox_Populi]

I agree to an extent. One of the Hawks' advantages last season was that they didn't have anyone realiy bad getting minutes. You look at the minutes distribution relative to individual player differential and they didn't have to play an overly negative player a lot. Zach Lowe talked about it once, about having a bunch of players with no one being great some being good but most being okay.

The Celtics roster is actually like that, obviously with a lower season. Over a season, this should lend itself to a good i.e. at least .500 record but not much beyond that.

[viulo]

With respect, I disagree with the latest posts. Teague, Millsap, Horford were All-stars because of the Hawks records. They wouldn't have been All-stars if, having played the same (minutes, points, PER, etc..), the Hawks had had a 50% record.
So, if the Celtics go into the all-star break at 43-11, I bet we'll have 4 all-stars too. Whoever starts.
I like all 3, but let's see when next season is over if Thomas isn't rated higher than Teague or Amir Johnson higher than Millsap and/or Horford.

[86MaxwellSmart]

I don't think we will be as good as last year Hawks.

I think the Hawks won like 60 games--I'm predicting 50 for us....I think we will be a lot like them in style of play.

[Vermont Green]

I don't think we will be as good as last year Hawks.

I don't think the Hawks will be as good as last year's Hawks either.  The Hawks had a perfect storm.  They definitely clicked and played well be in a division and conference that was not that strong.  They weren't really that good.  In the playoffs, they beat Brooklyn and Washington (without Wall).

But even saying that, were better than the Celtics will be.  Maybe a perfect storm will fall onto the Celtics too but I don't see it (of course I didn't see 40 wins for the Celtics last year either).

[Denis998]

I don't think we will be as good as last year Hawks.

I don't think the Hawks will be as good as last year's Hawks either.  The Hawks had a perfect storm.  They definitely clicked and played well be in a division and conference that was not that strong.  They weren't really that good.  In the playoffs, they beat Brooklyn and Washington (without Wall).

But even saying that, were better than the Celtics will be.  Maybe a perfect storm will fall onto the Celtics too but I don't see it (of course I didn't see 40 wins for the Celtics last year either).

The hawks played well during the first half of the season, and regressed there afterwards. I see them as a 8-5 seed this year. Nothing to special, the hype will drop and so will their fan base. I can see Boston, Washington, or Miami taking their place.

[tarheelsxxiii]

With respect, I disagree with the latest posts. Teague, Millsap, Horford were All-stars because of the Hawks records. They wouldn't have been All-stars if, having played the same (minutes, points, PER, etc..), the Hawks had had a 50% record.
So, if the Celtics go into the all-star break at 43-11, I bet we'll have 4 all-stars too. Whoever starts.
I like all 3, but let's see when next season is over if Thomas isn't rated higher than Teague or Amir Johnson higher than Millsap and/or Horford.

Yeah, records influence all-star selections every season. So if we remove that variable and just judge them based on talent, would any one of Teague/Millsap/Horford not be the best player on our team this season? That's a tough argument to make...

Teague > IT (2-way player, inferior 3p shooter, better finisher and facilitator)
Millsap > Sully (hard to even judge Sully, but Millsap still > versatility, 3p%, defense)
Horford > Johnson/KO (across the board)

[Moranis]

Horford is a 3 time all star.  Millsap is a 2 time all star.  They didn't make the all star game last year because the Hawks were so good.  Teague is a young guy just entering his prime.  All 3 would clearly be Boston's best player.  There is no comparison.

Korver made the all star team because the Hawks were good but he is still a top 3ish player on Boston. 

[GetLucky]

With respect, I disagree with the latest posts. Teague, Millsap, Horford were All-stars because of the Hawks records. They wouldn't have been All-stars if, having played the same (minutes, points, PER, etc..), the Hawks had had a 50% record.
So, if the Celtics go into the all-star break at 43-11, I bet we'll have 4 all-stars too. Whoever starts.
I like all 3, but let's see when next season is over if Thomas isn't rated higher than Teague or Amir Johnson higher than Millsap and/or Horford.

This is kind of a "chicken and egg" type of situation. You basically just said that if the Hawks' top 3 players: 1) didn't play as much 2) didn't score as much 3) weren't as good as they actually were/are then the Hawks would have been a worse team, and the players would not have been all-stars.