Can We Kill This Narrative ...

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Can we kill the narrative that says that we don't have a star? By definition, we officially have an All-Star.

And many different articles said that Jae Crowder should have been mentioned too, even if he didn't deserve a spot this year.

No doubt I would like more elite talent on our roster, but let's kill and bury the narrative. Every team wants more talent, but we have what many teams do not have: an All-star.

[sahara]

but we have what many teams do not have: an All-star.

And no other team has an All-star with this kind of deal:

http://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/isaiah-thomas/

[Donoghus]

Technically, the Celtics do have a star.  Or at least an all star.  However, we're not talking multi-year all star yet.

We're also not taking a guy who is a top 20 player or what I would describe as an "alpha dog".

He's having a heckvua year & he's being rewarded for it.  Can he be the #1 guy on a title contender (a true alpha dog star)?  I don't think so.

[PhoSita]

To the extent that the "We don't have a star refrain" has been based in a feeling that the Celts lack that essential element of a good team: the high usage scorer you can depend on for 20+ points night after night, then yes, we can put that to bed, I think.

Isaiah Thomas is an exceptional scorer.  Play him 30+ minutes a game and he'll put up 20+ points more often than he doesn't, even if there aren't any other really potent scorers on the floor with him.  Take it to the bank.


I guess there are lots of definitions for what a "star" is, though.  I think Isaiah qualifies, at least in many senses of the term, because he's the unquestioned offensive leader and primary scorer for a team that's on track to make the playoffs.  He's a pretty good playmaker, too, and he competes to make plays for rebounds and on defense, so he's not just a guy who gets you points.


While I don't know where Isaiah or Crowder properly rank in the hierarchy of NBA players -- they're certainly better in the roles they currently occupy than I expected they could be -- I do think they represent a good starting point for the Celtics.  This isn't a great team by any stretch, but with one or two significant additions it might be. 

What the Celts unquestionably have right now is something they didn't have a year ago: at least one player who is regularly, on his own, worth the price of admission.  It's really fun to have a player like IT on the team, and he perfectly embodies where the Celts are at right now: scrappy, undersized, frequently underestimated, never satisfied, probably not talented enough to go as far as he'd like to go, but persistent and impressive nonetheless.

[fairweatherfan]

Isaiah is a star, legitimately.  What he isn't is a franchise player, where you can build a team around him and have championship hopes every year that supporting cast is solid.  There are dozens of stars and fewer than 10 franchise players.  No shame in that, but we need more than a single star.

[Eja117]

This is Boston.

When we say "star" we mean Bird, Russell, Brady, Gronk, Orr, Pierce.

We don't mean Toine or David Lee.

So I don't think we can kill this narrative. Maybe give it a rest, but not kill it.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

This is Boston.

When we say "star" we mean Bird, Russell, Brady, Gronk, Orr, Pierce.

We don't mean Toine or David Lee.

So I don't think we can kill this narrative. Maybe give it a rest, but not kill it.

Let's say the Celtics maintain this level of play over the next few years, and Thomas continues to stay healthy and play at a high level, I think he will be an All-star each year.

At what point does a multiple-time all-star become a "Celtic Star" type player?

That's actually a question. What do you think?

[Celtics18]

To the extent that the "We don't have a star refrain" has been based in a feeling that the Celts lack that essential element of a good team: the high usage scorer you can depend on for 20+ points night after night, then yes, we can put that to bed, I think.

Isaiah Thomas is an exceptional scorer.  Play him 30+ minutes a game and he'll put up 20+ points more often than he doesn't, even if there aren't any other really potent scorers on the floor with him.  Take it to the bank.


I guess there are lots of definitions for what a "star" is, though.  I think Isaiah qualifies, at least in many senses of the term, because he's the unquestioned offensive leader and primary scorer for a team that's on track to make the playoffs.  He's a pretty good playmaker, too, and he competes to make plays for rebounds and on defense, so he's not just a guy who gets you points.


While I don't know where Isaiah or Crowder properly rank in the hierarchy of NBA players -- they're certainly better in the roles they currently occupy than I expected they could be -- I do think they represent a good starting point for the Celtics.  This isn't a great team by any stretch, but with one or two significant additions it might be. 

What the Celts unquestionably have right now is something they didn't have a year ago: at least one player who is regularly, on his own, worth the price of admission.  It's really fun to have a player like IT on the team, and he perfectly embodies where the Celts are at right now: scrappy, undersized, frequently underestimated, never satisfied, probably not talented enough to go as far as he'd like to go, but persistent and impressive nonetheless.

Tommy point. 

[jambr380]

This is Boston.

When we say "star" we mean Bird, Russell, Brady, Gronk, Orr, Pierce.

We don't mean Toine or David Lee.

So I don't think we can kill this narrative. Maybe give it a rest, but not kill it.

Let's say the Celtics maintain this level of play over the next few years, and Thomas continues to stay healthy and play at a high level, I think he will be an All-star each year.

At what point does a multiple-time all-star become a "Celtic Star" type player.

Well, he did mention that Toine does not fit the bill (and put him in the same sentence as Lee...yuck) so I guess the answer is still a no. I guess he would still need to take his game to another level.

[Celtics18]

TP, DWC

[TheTruthFot18]

but we have what many teams do not have: an All-star.

And no other team has an All-star with this kind of deal:

http://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/isaiah-thomas/

I almost feel bad about how much he makes. Almost. I just saw what he made his first 3-4 years. Not surprising considering he was the last pick of the draft.

Aside from guys on rookie contracts who else brings so much production to a team for so little? See the link below. IT is 107th in the league for salary. Dirk and Curry are on cheaper contracts and Harden and Cousins could make more but that's about it.

http://espn.go.com/nba/salaries/_/page/3

[LarBrd33]

David Lee is a 2x All-Star, so technically we already have 2/3rds of a Big Three. 

[CelticPride2016]

Isaiah's problem is his crazy turnovers. He needs to tighten his game. He needs to keep improving on defense. He could be the answer.

Crowder and Bradley could also be all-stars.

Too bad we got Amir a few years late. He is the truth but working through foot problems.

Olynyk has all-star potential.

If Sully the non-all star talent is moved, we will finally get the great starting five of Isaiah, Bradley, Crowder, Olynyk, and Johnson.

I would also move Turner for a serviceable pg and switch Smart with Bradley or Thomas. Perhaps do this depending on match-ups.

We were very good with Rondo and Bradley, so if Smart can handle pg, Smart and Bradley is going to work out well.

Prune off Sully and Turner and you have a lot of all-star potential you can roll the dice with and maybe get to the NBA Finals.

The team would be running non-stop if we could get rid of the deadwood.

Anyway, my main point I want to declare is you don't need Hollywood styled NBA talent. It tends to be very overrated, e.g. Kevin Love or Carmelo Anthony.

We could have five all-stars with none transcendent and still win the title. In fact, that might be the way the NBA ultimately heads if the NBA corruption is cleaned up.

[loco_91]

Isaiah's problem is his crazy turnovers. He needs to tighten his game. He needs to keep improving on defense. He could be the answer.

Crowder and Bradley could also be all-stars.

Too bad we got Amir a few years late. He is the truth but working through foot problems.

Olynyk has all-star potential.

If Sully the non-all star talent is moved, we will finally get the great starting five of Isaiah, Bradley, Crowder, Olynyk, and Johnson.

I would also move Turner for a serviceable pg and switch Smart with Bradley or Thomas. Perhaps do this depending on match-ups.

We were very good with Rondo and Bradley, so if Smart can handle pg, Smart and Bradley is going to work out well.

Prune off Sully and Turner and you have a lot of all-star potential you can roll the dice with and maybe get to the NBA Finals.

The team would be running non-stop if we could get rid of the deadwood.

Anyway, my main point I want to declare is you don't need Hollywood styled NBA talent. It tends to be very overrated, e.g. Kevin Love or Carmelo Anthony.

We could have five all-stars with none transcendent and still win the title. In fact, that might be the way the NBA ultimately heads if the NBA corruption is cleaned up.

IT doesn't turn the ball over very much considering his usage. He's 17th overall in the league in AST/TOV, above a lot of great PG's such as Westbrook, Wall and Lowry.

Interestingly there are only two non-PGs above him, and guess who they both play for? (GSW.)

[Neurotic Guy]

The narrative is alive and well.  I love Isaiah -- exciting and gifted athlete.  If he was 6'6" he'd be a top 10 superstar.  But he isn't.   No guy under 6' has ever led a team to a championship.   Calvin Murphy was on a team that went to the finals, but that team had in-his-prime Moses Malone.

Calvin Murphy is the shortest guy to make an all-star team -- until now (tied with Isaiah).  HOFer Murphy only made one ASG.

I'll be glad if the C's still have Isaiah after they've added Star 1 and Star 2.