More experience not more players

[Csfan1984]

You tell me how a 55, 62, 59 win previous seasons and multiple division winner can't win more than 20 games with 85% of the same roster. It's called tanking they should won at least 40 games. On top of that Robinson should of also played a lot more than 6 games. It's a joke to argue against the fact the Spurs tanked.

Keep humping that chicken.

We're waiting.

Really you proved nothing I gave you much more real numbers and facts. You don't trade guys if a window is closing when they are still top 35 players for scrubs if you are not tanking. Spurs you got crushed on. Warriors, and Cavs are also known. No need for same chicken

[Csfan1984]

People have laughed at the Spurs anti tank rebuttal from their fans a long time now. Have you seen David Robinson or Elliott or any spurs players' expression when they talk about that tank year. It's a big coup for them and it shows. Don't spread those team lies. And every gm knows you can strategically tank a few games when you are out of it for draft position as C's should have done last year. You don't have to tank a full season to tank. You can give up a few games for better picks. Not opinion facts.

Actually, why don't you go interview David Robinson about that year? Because I've seen interviews and he says he was hurt. I tend to believe David Robinson over you. As far as Elliott somehow faking his injury and playing in only 39 games that year, tell me why that continued for the rest of his career (his last 5 years he played in 39, 36, 50, 19 and 52 games)?

Not to mention you've already been proven factually wrong in a number of your other examples - i.e., the Cs getting Marcus Smart, Klay Thompson, Pierce in 2006, etc. You keep pulling stuff out of your butt and it keeps coming right back at ya.

Do teams occasionally lose the last couple games to get a better pick? No one is debating that. But tanking has nothing to do with where the Cs are now and it's not a strategy they can currently employ. Which is exactly my response to Future Celtics Owner's comment that "we need to lose and trade our best players aka AB IT and then Sully etc." and that you're currently defending.

But since you're such a fan of losing, we're all still waiting to hear your glorious Celtics tanking strategy. Come on, out with it.

2006 wasn't a tank job if that ain't blinded homerism what on earth is lol Pierce went from day to day to out months. Complete tank job.

[Granath]

People have laughed at the Spurs anti tank rebuttal from their fans a long time now. Have you seen David Robinson or Elliott or any spurs players' expression when they talk about that tank year. It's a big coup for them and it shows. Don't spread those team lies. And every gm knows you can strategically tank a few games when you are out of it for draft position as C's should have done last year. You don't have to tank a full season to tank. You can give up a few games for better picks. Not opinion facts.

Actually, why don't you go interview David Robinson about that year? Because I've seen interviews and he says he was hurt. I tend to believe David Robinson over you. As far as Elliott somehow faking his injury and playing in only 39 games that year, tell me why that continued for the rest of his career (his last 5 years he played in 39, 36, 50, 19 and 52 games)?

Not to mention you've already been proven factually wrong in a number of your other examples - i.e., the Cs getting Marcus Smart, Klay Thompson, Pierce in 2006, etc. You keep pulling stuff out of your butt and it keeps coming right back at ya.

Do teams occasionally lose the last couple games to get a better pick? No one is debating that. But tanking has nothing to do with where the Cs are now and it's not a strategy they can currently employ. Which is exactly my response to Future Celtics Owner's comment that "we need to lose and trade our best players aka AB IT and then Sully etc." and that you're currently defending.

But since you're such a fan of losing, we're all still waiting to hear your glorious Celtics tanking strategy. Come on, out with it.

2006 wasn't a tank job if that ain't blinded homerism what on earth is lol Pierce went from day to day to out months. Complete tank job.

I love how you keep trying to change the bar because you know you're wrong and too immature to admit it. That's how you end up with over 2,000 posts and under 100 Tommy Points.

Tell me, if the Cs were so intent on losing in 2006, why were the last 4 games all decided by two points? Why did they win the 81st game of the year against a 44 win Miami team?

We're now to page 2 of this thread and still waiting with baited breath for you to explain to us how and why the Cs should lose this year.

[colincb]

No that takes a lot of talent. David Robinson was healthy and could of played everyone knows this but they wanted in the Duncan sweeps. Same as when Pierce sat for the Oden and KD sweeps. Warriors tanked for Barnes and Klay everyone knows that. Cavs tanked by shutting down players three out of four years. Those are facts. What you wrote is the lie teams spew.

Son, you also have an interesting definition of "facts". Here's a hint - you're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts.

Start by reading the link that was provided and go from there. That will educate you on the Spurs getting Tim Duncan. Because if they meant to tank, they did a pretty awful job of it. Tell me David Robinson was healthy with a broken foot. Was Sean Elliott faking injuries that year too - he must have gotten so good at it he faked them for the rest of his career too!!! As far as Pierce sitting in 2006, you realize he had a stress fracture in his foot, right? All the way back in December? And that he came back in March (how's that for a tanking strategy?) before re-injuring it? (see, those are facts - see the difference?).

Seriously, do you even believe the stuff you write? That the Warriors "tanked" to get the 11th pick in the draft?   

So tell us this glorious tanking strategy. How exactly should the Celtics tank this year? I'm all ears...

People have laughed at the Spurs anti tank rebuttal from their fans a long time now. Have you seen David Robinson or Elliott or any spurs players' expression when they talk about that tank year. It's a big coup for them and it shows. Don't spread those team lies. And every gm knows you can strategically tank a few games when you are out of it for draft position as C's should have done last year. You don't have to tank a full season to tank. You can give up a few games for better picks. Not opinion facts.

Facts?

They Spurs didn't enter that season with the intent to tank despite your "facts." They were a top team the year before, but traded Rodman because he was a royal PITA. Robinson broke his foot just before Christmas and would have been out 6-8 weeks after missing the first 18 games because of a bad back. That he didn't play at all for the last 6-8 weeks of the season certainly helped their chances, but they had also lost their second best player in Elliott and were 13-43 by the end of February. They still had to win the lottery and leapfrog two teams. Not exactly a tank of the sort you tankers love.

[Csfan1984]

People have laughed at the Spurs anti tank rebuttal from their fans a long time now. Have you seen David Robinson or Elliott or any spurs players' expression when they talk about that tank year. It's a big coup for them and it shows. Don't spread those team lies. And every gm knows you can strategically tank a few games when you are out of it for draft position as C's should have done last year. You don't have to tank a full season to tank. You can give up a few games for better picks. Not opinion facts.

Actually, why don't you go interview David Robinson about that year? Because I've seen interviews and he says he was hurt. I tend to believe David Robinson over you. As far as Elliott somehow faking his injury and playing in only 39 games that year, tell me why that continued for the rest of his career (his last 5 years he played in 39, 36, 50, 19 and 52 games)?

Not to mention you've already been proven factually wrong in a number of your other examples - i.e., the Cs getting Marcus Smart, Klay Thompson, Pierce in 2006, etc. You keep pulling stuff out of your butt and it keeps coming right back at ya.

Do teams occasionally lose the last couple games to get a better pick? No one is debating that. But tanking has nothing to do with where the Cs are now and it's not a strategy they can currently employ. Which is exactly my response to Future Celtics Owner's comment that "we need to lose and trade our best players aka AB IT and then Sully etc." and that you're currently defending.

But since you're such a fan of losing, we're all still waiting to hear your glorious Celtics tanking strategy. Come on, out with it.

2006 wasn't a tank job if that ain't blinded homerism what on earth is lol Pierce went from day to day to out months. Complete tank job.

I love how you keep trying to change the bar because you know you're wrong and too immature to admit it. That's how you end up with over 2,000 posts and under 100 Tommy Points.

Tell me, if the Cs were so intent on losing in 2006, why were the last 4 games all decided by two points? Why did they win the 81st game of the year against a 44 win Miami team?

We're now to page 2 of this thread and still waiting with baited breath for you to explain to us how and why the Cs should lose this year.

It's called going out with players looking good. You have to even when tanking still showcase players or else you lose trade value. No way KG trade happens if AL doesn't show 18/9 potential. Which is why on last page you can see how I explain you tank.

[Csfan1984]

No that takes a lot of talent. David Robinson was healthy and could of played everyone knows this but they wanted in the Duncan sweeps. Same as when Pierce sat for the Oden and KD sweeps. Warriors tanked for Barnes and Klay everyone knows that. Cavs tanked by shutting down players three out of four years. Those are facts. What you wrote is the lie teams spew.

Son, you also have an interesting definition of "facts". Here's a hint - you're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts.

Start by reading the link that was provided and go from there. That will educate you on the Spurs getting Tim Duncan. Because if they meant to tank, they did a pretty awful job of it. Tell me David Robinson was healthy with a broken foot. Was Sean Elliott faking injuries that year too - he must have gotten so good at it he faked them for the rest of his career too!!! As far as Pierce sitting in 2006, you realize he had a stress fracture in his foot, right? All the way back in December? And that he came back in March (how's that for a tanking strategy?) before re-injuring it? (see, those are facts - see the difference?).

Seriously, do you even believe the stuff you write? That the Warriors "tanked" to get the 11th pick in the draft?   

So tell us this glorious tanking strategy. How exactly should the Celtics tank this year? I'm all ears...

People have laughed at the Spurs anti tank rebuttal from their fans a long time now. Have you seen David Robinson or Elliott or any spurs players' expression when they talk about that tank year. It's a big coup for them and it shows. Don't spread those team lies. And every gm knows you can strategically tank a few games when you are out of it for draft position as C's should have done last year. You don't have to tank a full season to tank. You can give up a few games for better picks. Not opinion facts.

Facts?

They Spurs didn't enter that season with the intent to tank despite your "facts." They were a top team the year before, but traded Rodman because he was a royal PITA. Robinson broke his foot just before Christmas and would have been out 6-8 weeks after missing the first 18 games because of a bad back. That he didn't play at all for the last 6-8 weeks of the season certainly helped their chances, but they had also lost their second best player in Elliott and were 13-43 by the end of February. They still had to win the lottery and leapfrog two teams. Not exactly a tank of the sort you tankers love.

I never said Spurs went right into the season tanking. Putting words in people's mouths to try and prove your point. That is very weird lol. I also made it a point that you don't have to tank a full season to tank.

[Csfan1984]

People have laughed at the Spurs anti tank rebuttal from their fans a long time now. Have you seen David Robinson or Elliott or any spurs players' expression when they talk about that tank year. It's a big coup for them and it shows. Don't spread those team lies. And every gm knows you can strategically tank a few games when you are out of it for draft position as C's should have done last year. You don't have to tank a full season to tank. You can give up a few games for better picks. Not opinion facts.

Actually, why don't you go interview David Robinson about that year? Because I've seen interviews and he says he was hurt. I tend to believe David Robinson over you. As far as Elliott somehow faking his injury and playing in only 39 games that year, tell me why that continued for the rest of his career (his last 5 years he played in 39, 36, 50, 19 and 52 games)?

Not to mention you've already been proven factually wrong in a number of your other examples - i.e., the Cs getting Marcus Smart, Klay Thompson, Pierce in 2006, etc. You keep pulling stuff out of your butt and it keeps coming right back at ya.

Do teams occasionally lose the last couple games to get a better pick? No one is debating that. But tanking has nothing to do with where the Cs are now and it's not a strategy they can currently employ. Which is exactly my response to Future Celtics Owner's comment that "we need to lose and trade our best players aka AB IT and then Sully etc." and that you're currently defending.

But since you're such a fan of losing, we're all still waiting to hear your glorious Celtics tanking strategy. Come on, out with it.

2006 wasn't a tank job if that ain't blinded homerism what on earth is lol Pierce went from day to day to out months. Complete tank job.

I love how you keep trying to change the bar because you know you're wrong and too immature to admit it. That's how you end up with over 2,000 posts and under 100 Tommy Points.

Tell me, if the Cs were so intent on losing in 2006, why were the last 4 games all decided by two points? Why did they win the 81st game of the year against a 44 win Miami team?

We're now to page 2 of this thread and still waiting with baited breath for you to explain to us how and why the Cs should lose this year.

Like TPs mean something big. I have no fear for debates with anyone which is why there are plenty on here who will never TP. I am as even kill as they come. I take pride in it. No matter the poster I will battle my position. Also you do know we TP a guy in jest and he now has the most ridiculous TP to post ratio right.

[NHHillbilly]

I could not disagree more with you. We neeed to lose and trade our best players aka AB IT and then Sully etc.

We need a star. Then we need another star. And if CBS is good enough we wont need another.

Then we disagree.  It seems to me that your opinion is that the only way to get a all star is to get a top 3 pick?  But looking at the 2015 all star draft positions, 21% were #1s, 21% were 2-3, 29% were 4-12, and 18% were 13-30.  Celtics never had a #1 pick, yet plenty of championships.  What if we tank and our top 3 pick turns out to be Evan Turner quality.  You really want to pay for that with a year of lousy basketball?

* Carmelo Anthony (Knicks)
3
* LeBron James (Cavaliers)
1
* Pau Gasol (Bulls)
3
* John Wall (Wizards)
1
*# Kyle Lowry (Raptors)
24
Chris Bosh (Heat)
4
# Jimmy Butler (Bulls)
30
Al Horford (Hawks)
3
Kyrie Irving (Cavaliers)
1
# Kyle Korver (Hawks)
51
Paul Millsap (Hawks)
47
# Jeff Teague (Hawks)
19
Dwyane Wade (Heat)
5

*^ Blake Griffin (Clippers)
1
* Marc Gasol (Grizzlies)
48
*^ Kobe Bryant (Lakers)
13
*^ Anthony Davis (Pelicans)
1
* Stephen Curry (Warriors)
7
LaMarcus Aldridge (Trail Blazers)
2
# DeMarcus Cousins (Kings)
5
Tim Duncan (Spurs)
1
Kevin Durant (Thunder)
2
James Harden (Rockets)
3
Damian Lillard (Blazers)
6
Dirk Nowitzki (Mavericks)
9
Chris Paul (Clippers)
4
# Klay Thompson (Warriors)
11
Russell Westbrook (Thunder)
4

[guava_wrench]

I could not disagree more with you. We neeed to lose and trade our best players aka AB IT and then Sully etc.

We need a star. Then we need another star. And if CBS is good enough we wont need another.

Then we disagree.  It seems to me that your opinion is that the only way to get a all star is to get a top 3 pick?  But looking at the 2015 all star draft positions, 21% were #1s, 21% were 2-3, 29% were 4-12, and 18% were 13-30.  Celtics never had a #1 pick, yet plenty of championships.  What if we tank and our top 3 pick turns out to be Evan Turner quality.  You really want to pay for that with a year of lousy basketball?

* Carmelo Anthony (Knicks)
3
* LeBron James (Cavaliers)
1
* Pau Gasol (Bulls)
3
* John Wall (Wizards)
1
*# Kyle Lowry (Raptors)
24
Chris Bosh (Heat)
4
# Jimmy Butler (Bulls)
30
Al Horford (Hawks)
3
Kyrie Irving (Cavaliers)
1
# Kyle Korver (Hawks)
51
Paul Millsap (Hawks)
47
# Jeff Teague (Hawks)
19
Dwyane Wade (Heat)
5

*^ Blake Griffin (Clippers)
1
* Marc Gasol (Grizzlies)
48
*^ Kobe Bryant (Lakers)
13
*^ Anthony Davis (Pelicans)
1
* Stephen Curry (Warriors)
7
LaMarcus Aldridge (Trail Blazers)
2
# DeMarcus Cousins (Kings)
5
Tim Duncan (Spurs)
1
Kevin Durant (Thunder)
2
James Harden (Rockets)
3
Damian Lillard (Blazers)
6
Dirk Nowitzki (Mavericks)
9
Chris Paul (Clippers)
4
# Klay Thompson (Warriors)
11
Russell Westbrook (Thunder)
4

While your point is good, it is also flawed.

Comparing a single spot, like #1, with 9 spots (4-12) obscures how unlikely you are to hit gold in spots 4-12 compared to spot #1. Drafting involves a lot of guessing about how guys will develop as college players are not yet very good at basketball. You will have a lot of disappointment 4-12.

Using all star rosters is also not a very convincing argument. The numbers get even more top heavy when we split out the HOF caliber guys like Lebron, Paul, Durant and Curry from guys who can make an all-star team in their better years, like Milsap, Korver, Lowry, Teague and Thompson. Then again, the 3 Atlanta guys made it due to the hot start. Now that Atlanta is winning at only a .591 pace, it is possible none of those three sniff an all star spot. Granted, Milsap could be an all star regular with the new focus on small ball and bigs who can shoot from 3.

[CelticPride2016]

Tank talk made sense the year after the big trade. It even made sense last year. Tank talk this year makes absolutely no sense at all and is a waste of time, imho.