Need to tank hard to ensure Simmons comes to Boston.

[Evantime34]

Is it really "tanking" if you simply prioritize something other than winning in the present?


Like, the team could decide to stop giving Amir, Lee, and Turner playing time -- because they have no future here and they're not that good -- and instead use their playing time to develop Mickey, Young, Rozier, and Hunter.

Is that tanking, i.e. purposefully being worse in order to lose games? 

Or is it just saying, hey, developing our young guys is more valuable toward achieving our goal of building this team into something special than maximizing our chances of winning this game in December in a season in which we might not make the playoffs and have no hope of getting very far if we make it anyway?

In this case, yes, it is tanking. You paid big bucks to bring in players like Amir and Jerebko, role players, for the sake of winning because rookies don't win. Once you prioritize winning, then saying you are changing into developmental mode is just shopspeak for, let's give up on winning and try to lose as much as possible while players that might not be as good as these expensive role players try to develop.

I am pretty sure Hunter will never be as good as Bradley is now. I know Young won't be. Why sit Bradley to play them when they may never ever be as good as Bradley, who is young and still getting better? Same holds true for Mickey. He mightt be a different player than KO or Sully but is there any proof he will be anywhere near as good as those two role players who are still on friendly contracts and still young and getting better.

I think at this point, if the C's switch gears and try to explain to the fanbase they are just trying to develop the youth, then I think they will p!ss off a large portion of their fanbase as they know they will be overtly tanking.

Couldn't you make the argument that they tanked last year with the Green and Rondo deals? Didn't those deals make the C's better by the end of the year?

Amir has been good, but just look at the increased production we have gotten from Olynyk with him out. Moving him for picks might seem like a tanking move but Olynyk could easily outperform Amir given more consistent playing time. In the same vein, Turner has played really well for us so far, but if moving him allows Smart to handle the ball more and Rj more playing time I wouldn't be surprised if moving Turner left the team better in the long run.

As to being sure Hunter and Lee won't be better than Bradley. I think Bradley looked significantly more lost in his rookie year than James Young has in his second year (Bradley was 20 his rookie season Young is now 20).  Hunter seems to have a much better feel for the game than Bradley did at a similar age and he seems like a hard worker, so you never know.

[Granath]

This is all the better reason to trade Bradley now! He's having a career season. Thomas should be shuttled out of town ASAP as well while the damage is only 3 games over .500. This is a treadmill team as currently constructed. They are stuck in that 39-42 win range. If they embrace the tank for one more year they can have TWO lottery picks in a really good draft. Otherwise this team is going to be looking up to the Sixers in the division for the next decade or so especially if they get the next LeBron, Simmons.

If you think Celtics are a 39-42 win team as currently constructed you are kidding yourself and have not been watching them play.  Even knee-jerk reaction after the 3 game skid we were over .500 with a very winnable stretch in front of us.  Put your money where your mouth is if you think we're that bad because you'd get decent odds on under 42.5 wins at this point.

I predicted 43-39 this year and I don't think I'll be too far off. I hope I am (on the low side) but I'm not seeing anything that suggests the Cs are a 50 win team.

With that said, the difference between me and the mouth breather you replied to is that I don't think the Cs are "stuck" at all. This team is very young. The statistical peak for NBA players is 24-27 years old. The key long-term cogs on the Cs are:

Bradley - 25
Sully - 23
KO - 24
IT - 26 (almost 27)
Smart - 21
Crowder - 25

...and their draftees this year are 22 (Hunter), 21 (Rozier) and 21 (Mickey).

There's not a one of them past peak and most aren't even into their peak range yet. Thus it is reasonable to expect that many of these players will improve their games while none - perhaps with the exception of IT - should actually decline the next 2 years unless their is a serious injury (which you can't forecast).

Also, this core has played together less than a year. Continuity and consistency matter which is why older teams tend to win Championships. It's not because they're getting better as individual players but they grow better as a team. This group hasn't yet had that opportunity.   

So just on the basis of these two points alone it is reasonable to expect the Cs to improve. Now can this group be a Championship team? I don't think so. But then again this team isn't done adding pieces. Most teams that get into this scenario have only FA - with historically a tighter cap - and late round picks from which to improve. The Cs have a tremendous amount of picks including the lowly Nets' pick for the next 3 seasons plus abundant cap space.

Stuck? The Cs are about as far away from stuck as they could be. No team in the NBA has more options than they do.

[Celtics18]

Is it really "tanking" if you simply prioritize something other than winning in the present?


Like, the team could decide to stop giving Amir, Lee, and Turner playing time -- because they have no future here and they're not that good -- and instead use their playing time to develop Mickey, Young, Rozier, and Hunter.

Is that tanking, i.e. purposefully being worse in order to lose games? 

Or is it just saying, hey, developing our young guys is more valuable toward achieving our goal of building this team into something special than maximizing our chances of winning this game in December in a season in which we might not make the playoffs and have no hope of getting very far if we make it anyway?

It's "tanking" if the coaching staff doesn't go into every game thinking about making moves regarding rotation and playing time which he feels gives the team the best chance of winning in the present.

[D Dub]

Is Simmons even that good?   I hear he can't shoot.   That's a big problem these days.   

[Evantime34]

Is it really "tanking" if you simply prioritize something other than winning in the present?


Like, the team could decide to stop giving Amir, Lee, and Turner playing time -- because they have no future here and they're not that good -- and instead use their playing time to develop Mickey, Young, Rozier, and Hunter.

Is that tanking, i.e. purposefully being worse in order to lose games? 

Or is it just saying, hey, developing our young guys is more valuable toward achieving our goal of building this team into something special than maximizing our chances of winning this game in December in a season in which we might not make the playoffs and have no hope of getting very far if we make it anyway?

It's "tanking" if the coaching staff doesn't go into every game thinking about making moves regarding rotation and playing time which he feels gives the team the best chance of winning in the present.

I don't agree with this definition. Greg Popovich and other good coaches have been known to give young players rotation minutes early in order to develop them for later in the season, that is how the Spurs consistently develop rotation talent.

In other words he is playing the guys that best give his team a chance to be better at the end of the year instead of winning in the present, but I would hardly call what coach Pop does, tanking.

[Celtics18]

Is it really "tanking" if you simply prioritize something other than winning in the present?


Like, the team could decide to stop giving Amir, Lee, and Turner playing time -- because they have no future here and they're not that good -- and instead use their playing time to develop Mickey, Young, Rozier, and Hunter.

Is that tanking, i.e. purposefully being worse in order to lose games? 

Or is it just saying, hey, developing our young guys is more valuable toward achieving our goal of building this team into something special than maximizing our chances of winning this game in December in a season in which we might not make the playoffs and have no hope of getting very far if we make it anyway?

It's "tanking" if the coaching staff doesn't go into every game thinking about making moves regarding rotation and playing time which he feels gives the team the best chance of winning in the present.

I don't agree with this definition. Greg Popovich and other good coaches have been known to give young players rotation minutes early in order to develop them for later in the season, that is how the Spurs consistently develop rotation talent.

In other words he is playing the guys that best give his team a chance to be better at the end of the year instead of winning in the present, but I would hardly call what coach Pop does, tanking.

I guess I should clarify that by "the present," I meant the current season.

By that understanding, I'm fine with what Pop does to attempt to give his team the best chance of winning in "the present."

[KG Living Legend]

Indeed. Let's strip our team to the studs for, if we're lucky, the 4th best shot at Simmons.  That would mean a 11.9% chance at winning the lottery. 

Come on, Danny. There's only an 88.1% chance at failure. Blow it up!

 Although I don't agree with those horrendous trade proposal's.  You fail to add in the Brooklyn odds.

[KG Living Legend]

Is Simmons even that good?   I hear he can't shoot.   That's a big problem these days.

 Yeah, he is that good. He would change are destiny over the next decade really fast.

[KGs Knee]

Indeed. Let's strip our team to the studs for, if we're lucky, the 4th best shot at Simmons.  That would mean a 11.9% chance at winning the lottery. 

Come on, Danny. There's only an 88.1% chance at failure. Blow it up!

 Although I don't agree with those horrendous trade proposal's.  You fail to add in the Brooklyn odds.

The odds of the Brooklyn pick are totally irrelevant. We get that pick regardless of whether the Celtics make the playoffs or finish in the lottery.

[DesertDweller]

I guess this board wouldn't be much fun if we all had the right answers but input like this just makes me want to eat brains!!!

[celticsclay]

This thread is an embarrassment to the forum and Celtics fans. We already have what, 15 wins? We still play Brooklyn two more times, philly multiple Times and at least one game against the lakers. There are already 3 teams that may not even that many all year. There are already two teams that might not win 15. We tank for at best the 8th or 9th odds? Is this serious? Do we hate math? End the thread

[SHAQATTACK]

I think the OP should write CBS and DA and tell em personally ....

[TheOneTrueRobb]

Tanking's worked well for us in the past. Why, look at all the wins Tim Duncan has brought us since '97! And Durant looks great in green, doncha think?

DesertDweller? Please pass the brains....

[Future Celtics Owner]

I think the Celtics are about winning championships.
I think we could do a much better job of managing players and developing.
I know we are not going to win the championship this year.
I know inflated wins cost us a player we offered 6 picks for
I think its just smart basketball to get rid of players that will not be here next year and give us inflated win totals.

Also OP is being conservative about what we could get for our players. IT and AB are playing great ball( almost all-star level) and have great contracts. I just do not see them getting much better, maybe this is around their prime, if thats the case it would be smart to trade them now/for the right trade...if we were to go this route then we would need to get back at least a young talent(maybe 2) and picks(best in 2017).

[Hemingway]

this thread is disgusting. I get harassed for calling people bad fans, but come on. We are well into the season and over .500 with one of our best players out. This is not NBA 2k. A better title for this thread should be, "trade everyone for picks and simulate the season."

Some of you guys don't realize how lucky we are. We just very recently blew up a team that had won a title and now we are over 500 with a lot of guys with real upside a ton of picks, a good coach and a happy team. Yeah lets go mess with that for a very outside chance at a player that gives us no guarantee that we would be any better with him than what we have now.