How many teams would you trade all of our players for all of theirs.

[DarkAzcura]

Interesting question. If I was swapping places with a non-contending team, I would want them to have a more promising handful of rising young players than ours. Thus I would not swap with Brooklyn, Charlotte, Dallas, or Phoenix. I'm on the fence about the Knicks but I'm leaning no because I think Porzingis is going to get broken and Anthony's trade value is falling too fast. Damian Lillard is really good, but I think I would probably take a pass on swapping with Portland as well.

Charlotte has MKG, Batum, Walker, Jefferson, Lamb, Zeller, Kaminsky.  Now not all those guys are young per se, but I think that is probably a better starting point than Boston.  Phoenix has Knight, Bledsoe, Len, Tucker, Morris, Warren plus the vet Chandler.  Again I think that is a bit better starting point.  As for the Knicks, whether Anthony is fading fast, he is still by far the best player on either team and Porzingis is as at least as good a prospect as Smart.  Guys like Lopez, Afflalo, Calderon just add depth and are fairly similar to Boston's players.

Dallas and Brooklyn really are the only debateable ones in my eyes.  Neither has any high end prospects, but both do probably have the best player on either team (though not clear franchise player type players).

I mean it is your opinion and all, but it's tough to see you as anything more than a pessimist if you think Dallas and Brooklyn are still debatable. There is no reason to want either one of those rosters on a full swap. Contracts, player's age, injury concerns, etc. Both teams are in a situation that no one wants to be in. At least Dallas has most of their draft picks. Lopez doesn't even play defense at the position where it is actually super important to play defense. At this point, considering age, production, overall impact, and positional need, I'll take IT over Lopez. Dirk is still awesome, but I'd probably take IT over him just because of age. Dirk could be done by the end of this year or next season for all we know.

Other than those two, I could see the argument for wanting a bunch of other team's rosters. I could make an argument against half of them, but I could see why still.

It's interesting to see you list players like Jefferson, Lamb, Batum, and Zeller as to why Charlotte is in a superior position to us. Those players are not that good, and most Charlotte fans are dying to see Jefferson traded off the team. They are no better than our role player collection of Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, Olynyk, and Crowder. The only thing Charlotte has of truth worth is Walker and MKG. Those are two nice players right there, but we have IT and Smart who are pretty similar if not better. I think Mickey, Rozier, and Hunter all have potential to be better than FK, which is kinda funny considering Jordan denied a trade to get most of those draft picks just to pick FK. We are probably more likely to hit on one of our three picks than Charlotte is to hit on FK. So meh to them. I'll keep our roster pretty easily honestly.

Phoenix has Knight and Bledsoe, but again..we have Smart and IT who are just as good if not better. I have some doubts about Knight and Bledsoe working well together also. Neither one can run an offense at all, and they are both even more trigger happy than IT. Knight was one of the worst offenders of dribbling the clock out for his own shot last season. Good talent between those two, but I'm unsure the fit is right. The rest of their roster is pretty much the same as ours potential wise. There is nothing special about Tucker, Morris (who will probably be traded for nothing after his uproar), Len, or Warren relative to guys like Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, KO, etc. At this point Chandler is no better than Amir. It's a wash to me. What keeps the Celtics over the edge is their 2015 draft selections. Rozier, Hunter, and Mickey is the best I've felt about an overall draft since 2004. I want to see how they develop. With the combo of IT + Smart, Amir, and our 2015 draft selections, I feel pretty comfortable keeping our roster over about 12-15 teams.

New York...Lopez is nice. I think Melo is underrated nowadays, and Porzingis looks good. I could see the argument there, but the rest of the roster is pretty junky. I would consider them, though, because those three players would be a good starting point. Really depends on how much longer I feel Carmelo has left. Lopez and Porzingis aren't enough alone to make me want to swap rosters.

I don't mean to sound offensive or anything, but I feel like you are the ultimate "grass is greener on the other side" kinda person, lol. Think the worst of our guys, but the best of others. 

[Who]

A couple of playoff teams I wouldn't take either

* Atlanta
* Chicago
* Miami
* Memphis
* San Antonio (more of a maybe not than a firm no)

Atlanta, Miami and Chicago as good but not great teams. Miami and Chicago with a couple of aging players and not a lot to build around long term. Atlanta in better shape but limited outside their key guys. Horford and Millsap both around 30 years of age and limited window to sort out of the team's issues. Memphis too old and facing a rebuild in near future. No point in trading Boston's team for another one to go through another ugly rebuilding effort soon after.

I'd also be hesitant about San Antonio too because Duncan will retire soon. Parker has fallen off in a major way. Ginobili already had. Aldridge is 30 and will be entering downward slope of his career. Kawhi Leonard is a major attraction. But I think SAS will have a very tough time recovering from loss of Duncan and decline of Parker. Likely to fall into that good but not great area after those guys leave rather than continuing on as a title contender.

[DarkAzcura]

A couple of playoff teams I wouldn't take either

* Atlanta
* Chicago
* Miami
* Memphis
* San Antonio (more of a maybe not than a firm no)

Atlanta, Miami and Chicago as good but not great teams. Miami and Chicago with a couple of aging players and not a lot to build around long term. Atlanta in better shape but limited outside their key guys. Horford and Millsap both around 30 years of age and limited window to sort out of the team's issues. Memphis too old and facing a rebuild in near future. No point in trading Boston's team for another one to go through another ugly rebuilding effort soon after.

I'd also be hesitant about San Antonio too because Duncan will retire soon. Parker has fallen off in a major way. Ginobili already had. Aldridge is 30 and will be entering downward slope of his career. Kawhi Leonard is a major attraction. But I think SAS will have a very tough time recovering from loss of Duncan and decline of Parker. Likely to fall into that good but not great area after those guys leave rather than continuing on as a title contender.

I definitely agree with those listed teams except SAS. Duncan, Manu, and Parker will be done as big impact players, but Leonard + Aldridge (even at 30) are too good to deny. I'd trade rosters with them in a second. It's fair to be hesitant if you are worried about LMA, but I think he'll be a solid 20/8 guy for the next 4-5 years.

Anyway, my list of teams I would not want:

Atlanta
Brooklyn
Charlotte
Chicago (borderline)
Dallas
Denver
Indiana (borderline-ish...)
Lakers
Memphis
Miami (borderline)
Bucks
NYK
Orlando
Philly
Phoenix
Portland

The two teams I kinda want to put on this list but just can't are NOP and the Kings. I love Cousins and Davis, but I literally hate every single other thing about their rosters. I could not stand watching the guard rotation of NOP or the Kings. I'd take Cousins or Davis, draft with the Brooklyn picks and blow everything else up.

[PhoSita]

A couple of playoff teams I wouldn't take either

* Atlanta
* Chicago
* Miami
* Memphis
* San Antonio (more of a maybe not than a firm no)

Atlanta, Miami and Chicago as good but not great teams. Miami and Chicago with a couple of aging players and not a lot to build around long term. Atlanta in better shape but limited outside their key guys. Horford and Millsap both around 30 years of age and limited window to sort out of the team's issues. Memphis too old and facing a rebuild in near future. No point in trading Boston's team for another one to go through another ugly rebuilding effort soon after.

I'd also be hesitant about San Antonio too because Duncan will retire soon. Parker has fallen off in a major way. Ginobili already had. Aldridge is 30 and will be entering downward slope of his career. Kawhi Leonard is a major attraction. But I think SAS will have a very tough time recovering from loss of Duncan and decline of Parker. Likely to fall into that good but not great area after those guys leave rather than continuing on as a title contender.

Come on, you're telling me you wouldn't be interested in adding the draft picks we have coming down the pipe to Teague, Millsap, and Horford?  Or Kawhi, Green, and Aldridge?

I'd also be happy to build around Dragic, Winslow, Bosh, and perhaps Whiteside.  Even Memphis, if they keep Conley, should be fine; I don't know about Z-Bo, but I expect Marc Gasol to age OK, considering how his brother has managed.

As for Chicago, it's somewhat of a mess, but Jimmy Butler, Nikola Mirotic, Doug McDermott, Taj Gibson, Tony Snell, and Bobby Portis is not at all a bad place to start.  Add a couple of high draft picks from the Nets to that group, with lots of second round picks to allow guys to audition for supporting roles, and that team could be really, really good.


The Celts have draft assets galore, which puts them in a perfect position to build a team around a talented core that's already in place.  The future for the teams you mentioned is only in doubt because it's not clear how they're going to buttress the main pillars of their team as time goes on and those guys decline.

[Who]

A couple of playoff teams I wouldn't take either

* Atlanta
* Chicago
* Miami
* Memphis
* San Antonio (more of a maybe not than a firm no)

Atlanta, Miami and Chicago as good but not great teams. Miami and Chicago with a couple of aging players and not a lot to build around long term. Atlanta in better shape but limited outside their key guys. Horford and Millsap both around 30 years of age and limited window to sort out of the team's issues. Memphis too old and facing a rebuild in near future. No point in trading Boston's team for another one to go through another ugly rebuilding effort soon after.

I'd also be hesitant about San Antonio too because Duncan will retire soon. Parker has fallen off in a major way. Ginobili already had. Aldridge is 30 and will be entering downward slope of his career. Kawhi Leonard is a major attraction. But I think SAS will have a very tough time recovering from loss of Duncan and decline of Parker. Likely to fall into that good but not great area after those guys leave rather than continuing on as a title contender.

Come on, you're telling me you wouldn't be interested in adding the draft picks we have coming down the pipe to Teague, Millsap, and Horford?  Or Kawhi, Green, and Aldridge?

I'd also be happy to build around Dragic, Winslow, Bosh, and perhaps Whiteside.  Even Memphis, if they keep Conley, should be fine; I don't know about Z-Bo, but I expect Marc Gasol to age OK, considering how his brother has managed.

As for Chicago, it's somewhat of a mess, but Jimmy Butler, Nikola Mirotic, Doug McDermott, Taj Gibson, Tony Snell, and Bobby Portis is not at all a bad place to start.  Add a couple of high draft picks from the Nets to that group, with lots of second round picks to allow guys to audition for supporting roles, and that team could be really, really good.


The Celts have draft assets galore, which puts them in a perfect position to build a team around a talented core that's already in place.  The future for the teams you mentioned is only in doubt because it's not clear how they're going to buttress the main pillars of their team as time goes on and those guys decline.

Yeah, good point. I was too hard on San Antonio. I didn't think enough about the picks. They are back in the yes column. A new star via picks, Kawhi plus Aldridge is a strong core. 

I am going to stick with my "no" to Chicago and Miami. I do not see what Chicago has as a base that is so much better than Boston. As for Miami, I am unconvinced by Whiteside. Wade is finished. Bosh is becoming a role player. Deng is a role player. I do not see Miami's base as superior to Boston's base. I am going to stick with the no to Memphis as well. Too old. Too short a window with a lot of work left to do.

Atlanta is another good one. You could trade off the picks and go all in with Horford, Millsap and Teague. That is a maybe in my books. Could go either way. I'd prefer a longer window. Two undersized bigs and how well that team ages would be a concern.

[Moranis]

Interesting question. If I was swapping places with a non-contending team, I would want them to have a more promising handful of rising young players than ours. Thus I would not swap with Brooklyn, Charlotte, Dallas, or Phoenix. I'm on the fence about the Knicks but I'm leaning no because I think Porzingis is going to get broken and Anthony's trade value is falling too fast. Damian Lillard is really good, but I think I would probably take a pass on swapping with Portland as well.

Charlotte has MKG, Batum, Walker, Jefferson, Lamb, Zeller, Kaminsky.  Now not all those guys are young per se, but I think that is probably a better starting point than Boston.  Phoenix has Knight, Bledsoe, Len, Tucker, Morris, Warren plus the vet Chandler.  Again I think that is a bit better starting point.  As for the Knicks, whether Anthony is fading fast, he is still by far the best player on either team and Porzingis is as at least as good a prospect as Smart.  Guys like Lopez, Afflalo, Calderon just add depth and are fairly similar to Boston's players.

Dallas and Brooklyn really are the only debateable ones in my eyes.  Neither has any high end prospects, but both do probably have the best player on either team (though not clear franchise player type players).

I mean it is your opinion and all, but it's tough to see you as anything more than a pessimist if you think Dallas and Brooklyn are still debatable. There is no reason to want either one of those rosters on a full swap. Contracts, player's age, injury concerns, etc. Both teams are in a situation that no one wants to be in. At least Dallas has most of their draft picks. Lopez doesn't even play defense at the position where it is actually super important to play defense. At this point, considering age, production, overall impact, and positional need, I'll take IT over Lopez. Dirk is still awesome, but I'd probably take IT over him just because of age. Dirk could be done by the end of this year or next season for all we know.

Other than those two, I could see the argument for wanting a bunch of other team's rosters. I could make an argument against half of them, but I could see why still.

It's interesting to see you list players like Jefferson, Lamb, Batum, and Zeller as to why Charlotte is in a superior position to us. Those players are not that good, and most Charlotte fans are dying to see Jefferson traded off the team. They are no better than our role player collection of Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, Olynyk, and Crowder. The only thing Charlotte has of truth worth is Walker and MKG. Those are two nice players right there, but we have IT and Smart who are pretty similar if not better. I think Mickey, Rozier, and Hunter all have potential to be better than FK, which is kinda funny considering Jordan denied a trade to get most of those draft picks just to pick FK. We are probably more likely to hit on one of our three picks than Charlotte is to hit on FK. So meh to them. I'll keep our roster pretty easily honestly.

Phoenix has Knight and Bledsoe, but again..we have Smart and IT who are just as good if not better. I have some doubts about Knight and Bledsoe working well together also. Neither one can run an offense at all, and they are both even more trigger happy than IT. Knight was one of the worst offenders of dribbling the clock out for his own shot last season. Good talent between those two, but I'm unsure the fit is right. The rest of their roster is pretty much the same as ours potential wise. There is nothing special about Tucker, Morris (who will probably be traded for nothing after his uproar), Len, or Warren relative to guys like Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, KO, etc. At this point Chandler is no better than Amir. It's a wash to me. What keeps the Celtics over the edge is their 2015 draft selections. Rozier, Hunter, and Mickey is the best I've felt about an overall draft since 2004. I want to see how they develop. With the combo of IT + Smart, Amir, and our 2015 draft selections, I feel pretty comfortable keeping our roster over about 12-15 teams.

New York...Lopez is nice. I think Melo is underrated nowadays, and Porzingis looks good. I could see the argument there, but the rest of the roster is pretty junky. I would consider them, though, because those three players would be a good starting point. Really depends on how much longer I feel Carmelo has left. Lopez and Porzingis aren't enough alone to make me want to swap rosters.

I don't mean to sound offensive or anything, but I feel like you are the ultimate "grass is greener on the other side" kinda person, lol. Think the worst of our guys, but the best of others.

I am all about championships.  Building championships is about top end players not role players.  Boston has a lot of real nice role players (Smart may someday be more than that), but you don't win titles with role players.  Dallas and Brooklyn both probably have players better than any player currently on Boston, but overall don't have much in the way of young players or depth, which is why they are debateable.  The fact that they have a better player in the starting point puts them in a position of strength if titles are what you care about.  They both also are in pretty good cap positions (like Boston). 

If Boston is going to win a title with its current group, it has to hit a home run on Brooklyn's lottery pick and hope more draft home runs come down the line.  I think the need to hit multiple home runs in the draft is a bit less if you have better players (like Brook Lopez) already in place.  There is also the added advantage of just not being very good this year and getting an even better pick from Boston's own draft pick.  Imagine having the 1st and 2nd pick in the next draft.   

[Moranis]

A couple of playoff teams I wouldn't take either

* Atlanta
* Chicago
* Miami
* Memphis
* San Antonio (more of a maybe not than a firm no)

Atlanta, Miami and Chicago as good but not great teams. Miami and Chicago with a couple of aging players and not a lot to build around long term. Atlanta in better shape but limited outside their key guys. Horford and Millsap both around 30 years of age and limited window to sort out of the team's issues. Memphis too old and facing a rebuild in near future. No point in trading Boston's team for another one to go through another ugly rebuilding effort soon after.

I'd also be hesitant about San Antonio too because Duncan will retire soon. Parker has fallen off in a major way. Ginobili already had. Aldridge is 30 and will be entering downward slope of his career. Kawhi Leonard is a major attraction. But I think SAS will have a very tough time recovering from loss of Duncan and decline of Parker. Likely to fall into that good but not great area after those guys leave rather than continuing on as a title contender.

Come on, you're telling me you wouldn't be interested in adding the draft picks we have coming down the pipe to Teague, Millsap, and Horford?  Or Kawhi, Green, and Aldridge?

I'd also be happy to build around Dragic, Winslow, Bosh, and perhaps Whiteside.  Even Memphis, if they keep Conley, should be fine; I don't know about Z-Bo, but I expect Marc Gasol to age OK, considering how his brother has managed.

As for Chicago, it's somewhat of a mess, but Jimmy Butler, Nikola Mirotic, Doug McDermott, Taj Gibson, Tony Snell, and Bobby Portis is not at all a bad place to start.  Add a couple of high draft picks from the Nets to that group, with lots of second round picks to allow guys to audition for supporting roles, and that team could be really, really good.


The Celts have draft assets galore, which puts them in a perfect position to build a team around a talented core that's already in place.  The future for the teams you mentioned is only in doubt because it's not clear how they're going to buttress the main pillars of their team as time goes on and those guys decline.

Yeah, good point. I was too hard on San Antonio. I didn't think enough about the picks. They are back in the yes column. A new star via picks, Kawhi plus Aldridge is a strong core. 

I am going to stick with my "no" to Chicago and Miami. I do not see what Chicago has as a base that is so much better than Boston. As for Miami, I am unconvinced by Whiteside. Wade is finished. Bosh is becoming a role player. Deng is a role player. I do not see Miami's base as superior to Boston's base. I am going to stick with the no to Memphis as well. Too old. Too short a window with a lot of work left to do.

Atlanta is another good one. You could trade off the picks and go all in with Horford, Millsap and Teague. That is a maybe in my books. Could go either way. I'd prefer a longer window. Two undersized bigs and how well that team ages would be a concern.

Jimmy Butler alone makes Chicago more attractive than Boston.  Add in Mirotic, Rose, Gibson, Dougy Fresh, Portis and it is an easy no brainer. 

Bosh and Wade would still be far the best player on Boston.  Dragic might very well be as well.  Then you have Whiteside who could be a monster or Zeller, but either way would be Boston's starting center right now. 

You guys are going crazy in this thread.  Boston is a team with a lot of depth, but it is depth comprised of role players.  Smart is the only guy that really has "star" potential and he is a long way off from reaching that potential.   

[Vox_Populi]

Add in Mirotic, Rose, Gibson, Dougy Fresh, Portis and it is an easy no brainer. 

The best player out of that group is still Rose. Who might be worse than Rondo now.

[BitterJim]

Interesting question. If I was swapping places with a non-contending team, I would want them to have a more promising handful of rising young players than ours. Thus I would not swap with Brooklyn, Charlotte, Dallas, or Phoenix. I'm on the fence about the Knicks but I'm leaning no because I think Porzingis is going to get broken and Anthony's trade value is falling too fast. Damian Lillard is really good, but I think I would probably take a pass on swapping with Portland as well.

Charlotte has MKG, Batum, Walker, Jefferson, Lamb, Zeller, Kaminsky.  Now not all those guys are young per se, but I think that is probably a better starting point than Boston.  Phoenix has Knight, Bledsoe, Len, Tucker, Morris, Warren plus the vet Chandler.  Again I think that is a bit better starting point.  As for the Knicks, whether Anthony is fading fast, he is still by far the best player on either team and Porzingis is as at least as good a prospect as Smart.  Guys like Lopez, Afflalo, Calderon just add depth and are fairly similar to Boston's players.

Dallas and Brooklyn really are the only debateable ones in my eyes.  Neither has any high end prospects, but both do probably have the best player on either team (though not clear franchise player type players).

I mean it is your opinion and all, but it's tough to see you as anything more than a pessimist if you think Dallas and Brooklyn are still debatable. There is no reason to want either one of those rosters on a full swap. Contracts, player's age, injury concerns, etc. Both teams are in a situation that no one wants to be in. At least Dallas has most of their draft picks. Lopez doesn't even play defense at the position where it is actually super important to play defense. At this point, considering age, production, overall impact, and positional need, I'll take IT over Lopez. Dirk is still awesome, but I'd probably take IT over him just because of age. Dirk could be done by the end of this year or next season for all we know.

Other than those two, I could see the argument for wanting a bunch of other team's rosters. I could make an argument against half of them, but I could see why still.

It's interesting to see you list players like Jefferson, Lamb, Batum, and Zeller as to why Charlotte is in a superior position to us. Those players are not that good, and most Charlotte fans are dying to see Jefferson traded off the team. They are no better than our role player collection of Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, Olynyk, and Crowder. The only thing Charlotte has of truth worth is Walker and MKG. Those are two nice players right there, but we have IT and Smart who are pretty similar if not better. I think Mickey, Rozier, and Hunter all have potential to be better than FK, which is kinda funny considering Jordan denied a trade to get most of those draft picks just to pick FK. We are probably more likely to hit on one of our three picks than Charlotte is to hit on FK. So meh to them. I'll keep our roster pretty easily honestly.

Phoenix has Knight and Bledsoe, but again..we have Smart and IT who are just as good if not better. I have some doubts about Knight and Bledsoe working well together also. Neither one can run an offense at all, and they are both even more trigger happy than IT. Knight was one of the worst offenders of dribbling the clock out for his own shot last season. Good talent between those two, but I'm unsure the fit is right. The rest of their roster is pretty much the same as ours potential wise. There is nothing special about Tucker, Morris (who will probably be traded for nothing after his uproar), Len, or Warren relative to guys like Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, KO, etc. At this point Chandler is no better than Amir. It's a wash to me. What keeps the Celtics over the edge is their 2015 draft selections. Rozier, Hunter, and Mickey is the best I've felt about an overall draft since 2004. I want to see how they develop. With the combo of IT + Smart, Amir, and our 2015 draft selections, I feel pretty comfortable keeping our roster over about 12-15 teams.

New York...Lopez is nice. I think Melo is underrated nowadays, and Porzingis looks good. I could see the argument there, but the rest of the roster is pretty junky. I would consider them, though, because those three players would be a good starting point. Really depends on how much longer I feel Carmelo has left. Lopez and Porzingis aren't enough alone to make me want to swap rosters.

I don't mean to sound offensive or anything, but I feel like you are the ultimate "grass is greener on the other side" kinda person, lol. Think the worst of our guys, but the best of others.

I am all about championships.  Building championships is about top end players not role players.  Boston has a lot of real nice role players (Smart may someday be more than that), but you don't win titles with role players.  Dallas and Brooklyn both probably have players better than any player currently on Boston, but overall don't have much in the way of young players or depth, which is why they are debateable.  The fact that they have a better player in the starting point puts them in a position of strength if titles are what you care about.  They both also are in pretty good cap positions (like Boston). 

If Boston is going to win a title with its current group, it has to hit a home run on Brooklyn's lottery pick and hope more draft home runs come down the line.  I think the need to hit multiple home runs in the draft is a bit less if you have better players (like Brook Lopez) already in place.  There is also the added advantage of just not being very good this year and getting an even better pick from Boston's own draft pick.  Imagine having the 1st and 2nd pick in the next draft.

Unless you think swapping rosters with Dallas, Brooklyn, or NYK would give us enough assets to build a contender before Dirk, Lopez, or Melo decline (and I think Dirk has already), I don't see how you can think they'd put us in a better place.  Better now/next year?  Maybe.  Better long term (like when the draft picks have developed)?  No way.

[slamtheking]

Even swap all of ours for all of theirs. We keep all our pics obviously. I wish we could trade with the Twolves right now. GS would be a neat team to swap with.
 Maybe the better question is how many would you not swap with. I don't want the Nets roster, or Philly.

it'd be a much shorter list of the teams we wouldn't swap for.  the ability to keep the picks makes a huge difference.

[Moranis]

Interesting question. If I was swapping places with a non-contending team, I would want them to have a more promising handful of rising young players than ours. Thus I would not swap with Brooklyn, Charlotte, Dallas, or Phoenix. I'm on the fence about the Knicks but I'm leaning no because I think Porzingis is going to get broken and Anthony's trade value is falling too fast. Damian Lillard is really good, but I think I would probably take a pass on swapping with Portland as well.

Charlotte has MKG, Batum, Walker, Jefferson, Lamb, Zeller, Kaminsky.  Now not all those guys are young per se, but I think that is probably a better starting point than Boston.  Phoenix has Knight, Bledsoe, Len, Tucker, Morris, Warren plus the vet Chandler.  Again I think that is a bit better starting point.  As for the Knicks, whether Anthony is fading fast, he is still by far the best player on either team and Porzingis is as at least as good a prospect as Smart.  Guys like Lopez, Afflalo, Calderon just add depth and are fairly similar to Boston's players.

Dallas and Brooklyn really are the only debateable ones in my eyes.  Neither has any high end prospects, but both do probably have the best player on either team (though not clear franchise player type players).

I mean it is your opinion and all, but it's tough to see you as anything more than a pessimist if you think Dallas and Brooklyn are still debatable. There is no reason to want either one of those rosters on a full swap. Contracts, player's age, injury concerns, etc. Both teams are in a situation that no one wants to be in. At least Dallas has most of their draft picks. Lopez doesn't even play defense at the position where it is actually super important to play defense. At this point, considering age, production, overall impact, and positional need, I'll take IT over Lopez. Dirk is still awesome, but I'd probably take IT over him just because of age. Dirk could be done by the end of this year or next season for all we know.

Other than those two, I could see the argument for wanting a bunch of other team's rosters. I could make an argument against half of them, but I could see why still.

It's interesting to see you list players like Jefferson, Lamb, Batum, and Zeller as to why Charlotte is in a superior position to us. Those players are not that good, and most Charlotte fans are dying to see Jefferson traded off the team. They are no better than our role player collection of Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, Olynyk, and Crowder. The only thing Charlotte has of truth worth is Walker and MKG. Those are two nice players right there, but we have IT and Smart who are pretty similar if not better. I think Mickey, Rozier, and Hunter all have potential to be better than FK, which is kinda funny considering Jordan denied a trade to get most of those draft picks just to pick FK. We are probably more likely to hit on one of our three picks than Charlotte is to hit on FK. So meh to them. I'll keep our roster pretty easily honestly.

Phoenix has Knight and Bledsoe, but again..we have Smart and IT who are just as good if not better. I have some doubts about Knight and Bledsoe working well together also. Neither one can run an offense at all, and they are both even more trigger happy than IT. Knight was one of the worst offenders of dribbling the clock out for his own shot last season. Good talent between those two, but I'm unsure the fit is right. The rest of their roster is pretty much the same as ours potential wise. There is nothing special about Tucker, Morris (who will probably be traded for nothing after his uproar), Len, or Warren relative to guys like Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, KO, etc. At this point Chandler is no better than Amir. It's a wash to me. What keeps the Celtics over the edge is their 2015 draft selections. Rozier, Hunter, and Mickey is the best I've felt about an overall draft since 2004. I want to see how they develop. With the combo of IT + Smart, Amir, and our 2015 draft selections, I feel pretty comfortable keeping our roster over about 12-15 teams.

New York...Lopez is nice. I think Melo is underrated nowadays, and Porzingis looks good. I could see the argument there, but the rest of the roster is pretty junky. I would consider them, though, because those three players would be a good starting point. Really depends on how much longer I feel Carmelo has left. Lopez and Porzingis aren't enough alone to make me want to swap rosters.

I don't mean to sound offensive or anything, but I feel like you are the ultimate "grass is greener on the other side" kinda person, lol. Think the worst of our guys, but the best of others.

I am all about championships.  Building championships is about top end players not role players.  Boston has a lot of real nice role players (Smart may someday be more than that), but you don't win titles with role players.  Dallas and Brooklyn both probably have players better than any player currently on Boston, but overall don't have much in the way of young players or depth, which is why they are debateable.  The fact that they have a better player in the starting point puts them in a position of strength if titles are what you care about.  They both also are in pretty good cap positions (like Boston). 

If Boston is going to win a title with its current group, it has to hit a home run on Brooklyn's lottery pick and hope more draft home runs come down the line.  I think the need to hit multiple home runs in the draft is a bit less if you have better players (like Brook Lopez) already in place.  There is also the added advantage of just not being very good this year and getting an even better pick from Boston's own draft pick.  Imagine having the 1st and 2nd pick in the next draft.

Unless you think swapping rosters with Dallas, Brooklyn, or NYK would give us enough assets to build a contender before Dirk, Lopez, or Melo decline (and I think Dirk has already), I don't see how you can think they'd put us in a better place.  Better now/next year?  Maybe.  Better long term (like when the draft picks have developed)?  No way.

Put it this way, how many players does Boston have that you think would actually be a starter on a championship team any time in the next 5 years?  I think the answer is possibly Smart and no one else.  I think Lopez (from Brooklyn) and Parsons (from Dallas) for sure could be. 

A team like the Knicks is easy because you have Melo (and Porzingis, Lopez, and Afflalo).  I know Melo is old, but Melo provides a much better starting point to attract free agents or to get players to agree to trades.  If you are a guy like Kevin Love (who isn't available but just using him as an example), would you rather play with Melo or Smart for the next 3 years?

[DarkAzcura]

Interesting question. If I was swapping places with a non-contending team, I would want them to have a more promising handful of rising young players than ours. Thus I would not swap with Brooklyn, Charlotte, Dallas, or Phoenix. I'm on the fence about the Knicks but I'm leaning no because I think Porzingis is going to get broken and Anthony's trade value is falling too fast. Damian Lillard is really good, but I think I would probably take a pass on swapping with Portland as well.

Charlotte has MKG, Batum, Walker, Jefferson, Lamb, Zeller, Kaminsky.  Now not all those guys are young per se, but I think that is probably a better starting point than Boston.  Phoenix has Knight, Bledsoe, Len, Tucker, Morris, Warren plus the vet Chandler.  Again I think that is a bit better starting point.  As for the Knicks, whether Anthony is fading fast, he is still by far the best player on either team and Porzingis is as at least as good a prospect as Smart.  Guys like Lopez, Afflalo, Calderon just add depth and are fairly similar to Boston's players.

Dallas and Brooklyn really are the only debateable ones in my eyes.  Neither has any high end prospects, but both do probably have the best player on either team (though not clear franchise player type players).

I mean it is your opinion and all, but it's tough to see you as anything more than a pessimist if you think Dallas and Brooklyn are still debatable. There is no reason to want either one of those rosters on a full swap. Contracts, player's age, injury concerns, etc. Both teams are in a situation that no one wants to be in. At least Dallas has most of their draft picks. Lopez doesn't even play defense at the position where it is actually super important to play defense. At this point, considering age, production, overall impact, and positional need, I'll take IT over Lopez. Dirk is still awesome, but I'd probably take IT over him just because of age. Dirk could be done by the end of this year or next season for all we know.

Other than those two, I could see the argument for wanting a bunch of other team's rosters. I could make an argument against half of them, but I could see why still.

It's interesting to see you list players like Jefferson, Lamb, Batum, and Zeller as to why Charlotte is in a superior position to us. Those players are not that good, and most Charlotte fans are dying to see Jefferson traded off the team. They are no better than our role player collection of Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, Olynyk, and Crowder. The only thing Charlotte has of truth worth is Walker and MKG. Those are two nice players right there, but we have IT and Smart who are pretty similar if not better. I think Mickey, Rozier, and Hunter all have potential to be better than FK, which is kinda funny considering Jordan denied a trade to get most of those draft picks just to pick FK. We are probably more likely to hit on one of our three picks than Charlotte is to hit on FK. So meh to them. I'll keep our roster pretty easily honestly.

Phoenix has Knight and Bledsoe, but again..we have Smart and IT who are just as good if not better. I have some doubts about Knight and Bledsoe working well together also. Neither one can run an offense at all, and they are both even more trigger happy than IT. Knight was one of the worst offenders of dribbling the clock out for his own shot last season. Good talent between those two, but I'm unsure the fit is right. The rest of their roster is pretty much the same as ours potential wise. There is nothing special about Tucker, Morris (who will probably be traded for nothing after his uproar), Len, or Warren relative to guys like Bradley, Zeller, Sullinger, KO, etc. At this point Chandler is no better than Amir. It's a wash to me. What keeps the Celtics over the edge is their 2015 draft selections. Rozier, Hunter, and Mickey is the best I've felt about an overall draft since 2004. I want to see how they develop. With the combo of IT + Smart, Amir, and our 2015 draft selections, I feel pretty comfortable keeping our roster over about 12-15 teams.

New York...Lopez is nice. I think Melo is underrated nowadays, and Porzingis looks good. I could see the argument there, but the rest of the roster is pretty junky. I would consider them, though, because those three players would be a good starting point. Really depends on how much longer I feel Carmelo has left. Lopez and Porzingis aren't enough alone to make me want to swap rosters.

I don't mean to sound offensive or anything, but I feel like you are the ultimate "grass is greener on the other side" kinda person, lol. Think the worst of our guys, but the best of others.

I am all about championships.  Building championships is about top end players not role players.  Boston has a lot of real nice role players (Smart may someday be more than that), but you don't win titles with role players.  Dallas and Brooklyn both probably have players better than any player currently on Boston, but overall don't have much in the way of young players or depth, which is why they are debateable.  The fact that they have a better player in the starting point puts them in a position of strength if titles are what you care about.  They both also are in pretty good cap positions (like Boston). 

If Boston is going to win a title with its current group, it has to hit a home run on Brooklyn's lottery pick and hope more draft home runs come down the line.  I think the need to hit multiple home runs in the draft is a bit less if you have better players (like Brook Lopez) already in place.  There is also the added advantage of just not being very good this year and getting an even better pick from Boston's own draft pick.  Imagine having the 1st and 2nd pick in the next draft.

Unless you think swapping rosters with Dallas, Brooklyn, or NYK would give us enough assets to build a contender before Dirk, Lopez, or Melo decline (and I think Dirk has already), I don't see how you can think they'd put us in a better place.  Better now/next year?  Maybe.  Better long term (like when the draft picks have developed)?  No way.

Put it this way, how many players does Boston have that you think would actually be a starter on a championship team any time in the next 5 years?  I think the answer is possibly Smart and no one else.  I think Lopez (from Brooklyn) and Parsons (from Dallas) for sure could be. 

A team like the Knicks is easy because you have Melo (and Porzingis, Lopez, and Afflalo).  I know Melo is old, but Melo provides a much better starting point to attract free agents or to get players to agree to trades.  If you are a guy like Kevin Love (who isn't available but just using him as an example), would you rather play with Melo or Smart for the next 3 years?

A couple of playoff teams I wouldn't take either

* Atlanta
* Chicago
* Miami
* Memphis
* San Antonio (more of a maybe not than a firm no)

Atlanta, Miami and Chicago as good but not great teams. Miami and Chicago with a couple of aging players and not a lot to build around long term. Atlanta in better shape but limited outside their key guys. Horford and Millsap both around 30 years of age and limited window to sort out of the team's issues. Memphis too old and facing a rebuild in near future. No point in trading Boston's team for another one to go through another ugly rebuilding effort soon after.

I'd also be hesitant about San Antonio too because Duncan will retire soon. Parker has fallen off in a major way. Ginobili already had. Aldridge is 30 and will be entering downward slope of his career. Kawhi Leonard is a major attraction. But I think SAS will have a very tough time recovering from loss of Duncan and decline of Parker. Likely to fall into that good but not great area after those guys leave rather than continuing on as a title contender.

Come on, you're telling me you wouldn't be interested in adding the draft picks we have coming down the pipe to Teague, Millsap, and Horford?  Or Kawhi, Green, and Aldridge?

I'd also be happy to build around Dragic, Winslow, Bosh, and perhaps Whiteside.  Even Memphis, if they keep Conley, should be fine; I don't know about Z-Bo, but I expect Marc Gasol to age OK, considering how his brother has managed.

As for Chicago, it's somewhat of a mess, but Jimmy Butler, Nikola Mirotic, Doug McDermott, Taj Gibson, Tony Snell, and Bobby Portis is not at all a bad place to start.  Add a couple of high draft picks from the Nets to that group, with lots of second round picks to allow guys to audition for supporting roles, and that team could be really, really good.


The Celts have draft assets galore, which puts them in a perfect position to build a team around a talented core that's already in place.  The future for the teams you mentioned is only in doubt because it's not clear how they're going to buttress the main pillars of their team as time goes on and those guys decline.

Yeah, good point. I was too hard on San Antonio. I didn't think enough about the picks. They are back in the yes column. A new star via picks, Kawhi plus Aldridge is a strong core. 

I am going to stick with my "no" to Chicago and Miami. I do not see what Chicago has as a base that is so much better than Boston. As for Miami, I am unconvinced by Whiteside. Wade is finished. Bosh is becoming a role player. Deng is a role player. I do not see Miami's base as superior to Boston's base. I am going to stick with the no to Memphis as well. Too old. Too short a window with a lot of work left to do.

Atlanta is another good one. You could trade off the picks and go all in with Horford, Millsap and Teague. That is a maybe in my books. Could go either way. I'd prefer a longer window. Two undersized bigs and how well that team ages would be a concern.

Jimmy Butler alone makes Chicago more attractive than Boston.  Add in Mirotic, Rose, Gibson, Dougy Fresh, Portis and it is an easy no brainer. 

Bosh and Wade would still be far the best player on Boston.  Dragic might very well be as well.  Then you have Whiteside who could be a monster or Zeller, but either way would be Boston's starting center right now. 

You guys are going crazy in this thread.  Boston is a team with a lot of depth, but it is depth comprised of role players.  Smart is the only guy that really has "star" potential and he is a long way off from reaching that potential.

Adding competitive role players is harder than you think. To me, the Knicks are 4-5 pieces away from contending (another consistent high level scorer and a few glue guys). The Celtics are 1 piece away from contending in the East (another consistent high level scorer).

You underrate the talent on this team significantly, and you've not mentioned IT once so I feel like I will get the same response I get if someone underrates him..he's short and can't play defense. Doesn't change the fact that he is a 20/6 guy on 56-58% TS. I don't care if he is 5'5", 5'10", 130 pounds, 190 pounds, plays with the starters, comes off the bench, etc. He is a high level player who is capable of being a second option on a contending team. We have that guy already. Since IT has been here, whenever he enters the game, the Celtics have an offense that ranks in the top 5 of the league. Without him in the lineup it falls into the bottom 10. He is a significant impact player, and you should stop overlooking him, and I really hope you aren't overlooking it for superficial reasons that have proved meaningless for him (his height and bench role). We are missing a #1. IT and Smart are #2 and #3 guys (Smart potentially..). I think realistically Smart ends up a solid #4 offensive option, but he has potential to go a bit higher. IT, no question in my mind, can be a #2 pretty easily. He's much more than just a spark plug.

We have three or four players on this team that could potentially play starting level minutes on a championship squad (~27-30 MPG). Isaiah Thomas, Marcus Smart, and Amir. Two of them have star potential (or are already there, IT).

Defensive talent should not be overlooked either. Most of the players you listed are very good offensive players but I question their defensive ability at the current stage of their careers. Bradley, Crowder, Smart, and Amir are elite defensive players, which also should not be overlooked. This is a lot more debatable than you think. I'd prefer adding a top 3 Brooklyn pick to THIS team than the 12-15 teams I listed. Ben Simmons, for example, projects to be a #1 guy at the spot where we desperately need help. He's a good fit for this team in particular, and I'd rather add him to this roster than a team like the Knicks or Miami. I think we'd be closer to contention than those teams would be with the additions we could make via draft because like I said filling the team with defensive talent and glue players isn't an easy task.

[Moranis]

I like IT a lot, and there is value in an instant offense guy off the bench, but he can't even start for a team that finished last year with 40 wins and is 1-2 thus far this year.  The IT's and Jamal Crawford's of the world are nice pieces for contenders to have on their bench, but they are the on the bench for a reason.

Boston's great depth is mostly comprised of middle to late first round picks (in the last few drafts).  Those aren't difficult to come by.  Heck Boston could easily have 3 of those in the very next draft.  Additionally, guys are always willing to play for the minimum/LLE/MLE to fill those roles on true contenders (see Mo Williams for the Cavs or Paul Pierce for the Clippers).  The pieces that are hard to come by are the cornerstone type pieces.  Boston MAY have 1 of those in Smart, and the key word is may (which is why I capitalized it).  Pretty much every other team in the league has 1 such player already or has more opportunities for such players in the future. 

[PhoSita]

Add in Mirotic, Rose, Gibson, Dougy Fresh, Portis and it is an easy no brainer. 

The best player out of that group is still Rose. Who might be worse than Rondo now.

You haven't watched enough Mirotic.

[ThaPreacher]

Delete this thread!
Go ahead!
  It only make sense.  You know you should.

 Or one of the Celticsblog moderators- move it to the section next to the What song are you listening to....

Consider this-
If you would trade our team for someone else's team- why not stop watching the Celtics?
If we trade the Celtics- we won't be the Celtics, we will be someone else....lol

Take out your Red Auerbach cigar, and use it to burn the 17  faux banners hanging in your bedroom, assemble your Celtics gear and torch it.  Because you are not really a Celtic Fan.
Now mind you, I'm all for a few good trades. A few players. A few cheerleaders. A few draft choices.
A few forum writers on Celticsblog, but the whole team----Nhilistic nonsense

This is like poor Yossarian in Joesph Heller's Catch 22. 
The more he complains about the missions he has to fly means that he is sane-because only insane people would want to fly because they risk being killed, therefore since he is sane-he is ordered to fly more missions.

We are Celtic Fans.  We might trade a few players from time to time (Danny may trade even more), but this is our team. 

This isn't some John Y Brown, Irv Levin Crap.  We not trading our entire team!
Or our draft picks.

So go ahead -do it- press delete

When you cannot be another- be thyself!