The Warriors are showing us the new NBA, and the Celtics better be taking notes

[LarBrd33]

Bottom line is you aren't replicating golden states success without curry and klay. The same way you can't replicate the mid 90s Bulls success without Jordan and pippen. And you aren't replicating the early 00 lakers success without Kobe and shaq.  And you aren't replicating the Miami heat's success without Lebron, wade and bosh.  And you aren't replicating the 80s Celtics success without bird and Mchale.  And you aren't replicating the show times lakers success without magic and Kareem, you aren't replicating the Spurs success without Duncan.

Superstars gonna superstar.  The most superstary team is winning right now.  There's little to be learned from it.   If you are the wolves you can hope towns develops into a superstar and try to build around his talents.  If you are Philly you can hope Ben Simmons and/or Embiid is the next big thing.  Everyone else can pray Kevin Durant chooses them and try to build a champion around him - but nobody is simply copying golden states style and philosophy to win.   Step 1:  acquire a legendary player.

While there is some truth to this point, that you have to utilize the talents of what you have, it misses the bigger point of the OP: The game is changing, based on how GS plays ball. They have made it clear that guys with practice can hit 30 foot shots almost as consistently as 24 foot shots. The repercussions of this are revolutionary to the game of basketball, requiring defenses to be able to switch at a far more frequent rate than before.

I know you are stuck in the mind set that Philly drafted the best player available each time they selected in the draft. But their talent meter may prove to be anachronistic, especially with the drafting of Okafor over Porzingis (this will only become clearer in the next two years, in my estimation, when Zinger takes over from Anthony as the man in NYC).  I will never fault them for drafting Embiid, who, if healthy, has the athleticism to adapt and thrive in the new NBA.

Okafor at 3 was a no-brainer.

Had they passed on Okafor for Porzingus, they would have been buried.  And there's no telling how Porzingus would have looked on that joke of a roster.  Porzingus is a little overrated right now.

I agree that Porzingis i being overrated right now, however so is Okafor.  Neither of those guys is nearly as good as their reputations / hype would suggest.

However of the two, in my honest opinion, Porzingis has the FAR higher ceiling.  At 7'3" with his mobility and inside/outside game combined with his shotblocking ability, he has the potential to become a perennial All-Star.  There really haven't been a lot of guys like Porzingis - he is a very unique talent, and guys with very unique talent.

Okafor on the other hand will be a good player, but I think he'll max out as a borderline all-star (much like Big Al did over his career).

I was actually very high on Okafor on draft day, and I felt he was going to be the best player in the draft potentially.  After seeing him play against NBA competition I have rapidly changed my tune.

Okafor is pretty underrated right now.  You calling him a potential borderline allstar seems to be a minority opinion.  Seems like most think he's an obsolete big man who will make a team worse.

[LooseCannon]

Bottom line is you aren't replicating golden states success without curry and klay. The same way you can't replicate the mid 90s Bulls success without Jordan and pippen. And you aren't replicating the early 00 lakers success without Kobe and shaq.  And you aren't replicating the Miami heat's success without Lebron, wade and bosh.  And you aren't replicating the 80s Celtics success without bird and Mchale.  And you aren't replicating the show times lakers success without magic and Kareem, you aren't replicating the Spurs success without Duncan.

Superstars gonna superstar.  The most superstary team is winning right now.  There's little to be learned from it.   If you are the wolves you can hope towns develops into a superstar and try to build around his talents.  If you are Philly you can hope Ben Simmons and/or Embiid is the next big thing.  Everyone else can pray Kevin Durant chooses them and try to build a champion around him - but nobody is simply copying golden states style and philosophy to win.   Step 1:  acquire a legendary player.

While there is some truth to this point, that you have to utilize the talents of what you have, it misses the bigger point of the OP: The game is changing, based on how GS plays ball. They have made it clear that guys with practice can hit 30 foot shots almost as consistently as 24 foot shots. The repercussions of this are revolutionary to the game of basketball, requiring defenses to be able to switch at a far more frequent rate than before.

I know you are stuck in the mind set that Philly drafted the best player available each time they selected in the draft. But their talent meter may prove to be anachronistic, especially with the drafting of Okafor over Porzingis (this will only become clearer in the next two years, in my estimation, when Zinger takes over from Anthony as the man in NYC).  I will never fault them for drafting Embiid, who, if healthy, has the athleticism to adapt and thrive in the new NBA.

Okafor at 3 was a no-brainer.

Had they passed on Okafor for Porzingus, they would have been buried.  And there's no telling how Porzingus would have looked on that joke of a roster.  Porzingus is a little overrated right now.

I agree that Porzingis i being overrated right now, however so is Okafor.  Neither of those guys is nearly as good as their reputations / hype would suggest.

However of the two, in my honest opinion, Porzingis has the FAR higher ceiling.  At 7'3" with his mobility and inside/outside game combined with his shotblocking ability, he has the potential to become a perennial All-Star.  There really haven't been a lot of guys like Porzingis - he is a very unique talent, and guys with very unique talent.

Okafor on the other hand will be a good player, but I think he'll max out as a borderline all-star (much like Big Al did over his career).

I was actually very high on Okafor on draft day, and I felt he was going to be the best player in the draft potentially.  After seeing him play against NBA competition I have rapidly changed my tune.

Okafor is pretty underrated right now.  You calling him a potential borderline allstar seems to be a minority opinion.  Seems like most think he's an obsolete big man who will make a team worse.

He's an obsolete big man who wpuld make the Celtics worse, but who will score enough points to get at least one All-Star appearance because ppg is an overrated stat.

[passesofftodj]

Okafor to me is the new Elton Brand.  Pass.

[Scintan]

He's an obsolete big man who wpuld make the Celtics worse, but who will score enough points to get at least one All-Star appearance because ppg is an overrated stat.

Low post big men are not obsolete.  We saw one win the title as recently as 2013-2014.

[Who]

I don't like J.Okafor being called obsolete.

It doesn't matter what era he was in. Big men who don't play team defense + man defense + are below par rebounders + bad at team offense and are only good at individual scoring are hoop are ineffective players in any era.

It is his lack of all-round play outside the low post skills that is problem.
If he could do those things and score in the low post, he'd be phenomenal.

[IDreamCeltics]

Okafor to me is the new Elton Brand.  Pass.

Elton Brand was really good.  I think you mean he's the new Eddy Curry.

[PhoSita]

People so often overlook the fact that rookie big men very rarely help their teams much. Especially teenagers.

Jahlil has a refined post game but he's raw in many other categories. Why he is so frequently assessed as if he's a finished product is beyond me. Its not like we are talking about a guy with poor measurables.

[LooseCannon]

People so often overlook the fact that rookie big men very rarely help their teams much. Especially teenagers.

Jahlil has a refined post game but he's raw in many other categories. Why he is so frequently assessed as if he's a finished product is beyond me. Its not like we are talking about a guy with poor measurables.

His trajectory is being compared to similar players who had a combination of solid inside scoring ability and similarly poor defense at the same stage in their careers.  Most of those players were better rebounders, though.

[Donoghus]

People so often overlook the fact that rookie big men very rarely help their teams much. Especially teenagers.

Jahlil has a refined post game but he's raw in many other categories. Why he is so frequently assessed as if he's a finished product is beyond me. Its not like we are talking about a guy with poor measurables.

His trajectory is being compared to similar players who had a combination of solid inside scoring ability and similarly poor defense at the same stage in their careers.  Most of those players were better rebounders, though.

And the other question is how many of those other guys did a 180 defensively? 

Think that's one of the big reasons he's getting hammered by many on this board.

[PhoSita]

He doesn't need to do a 180 and become a great defender. He just needs to develop into a competent team defender.

As I've said elsewhere, if you are of the school of thought that the center has to do the lion's share of the work defensively and cover up other players mistakes, then yeah, he's probably a lost cause. If you have a more flexible outlook on how a successful team could be put together, I think there's reason to believe Jahlil could become quite valuable in the right situation.

[Donoghus]

He doesn't need to do a 180 and become a great defender. He just needs to develop into a competent team defender.

As I've said elsewhere, if you are of the school of thought that the center has to do the lion's share of the work defensively and cover up other players mistakes, then yeah, he's probably a lost cause. If you have a more flexible outlook on how a successful team could be put together, I think there's reason to believe Jahlil could become quite valuable in the right situation.

And what exactly is the "right situation" with the roster the Celtics have now? 

"Right situation" is awfully vague.

[Ed Hollison]

I'm honored that this threat was brought back from the dead. Someone had to make a comment on the fact that the Dubs lost by 30 last night, so here goes...

Well, the original post acknowledged after the first two games that the Cavs still had a chance. And they do; never underestimate the power of homecourt in the NBA playoffs.

But last night the Cavs basically won with Kyrie Irving and Lebron James hero ball. In Irving's case in particular, it was almost laughable how many posessions he just dribbled down and took a shot off an isolation, without a single pass. If I remember correctly, their bench didn't score a single point until the 4th quarter. That will cut it for a game, maybe two, but not a series.

Ironically, the fact that everyone's kissing Richard Jefferson's rear-end today after the game fits very well with the whole point of the post: switching everything on defense and being able to do lots of different things on offense is how teams win. I don't think they're a better team without Kevin Love, but Richard Jefferson definitely brings more of that type of thing than Love does.

[PhoSita]

He doesn't need to do a 180 and become a great defender. He just needs to develop into a competent team defender.

As I've said elsewhere, if you are of the school of thought that the center has to do the lion's share of the work defensively and cover up other players mistakes, then yeah, he's probably a lost cause. If you have a more flexible outlook on how a successful team could be put together, I think there's reason to believe Jahlil could become quite valuable in the right situation.

And what exactly is the "right situation" with the roster the Celtics have now? 

"Right situation" is awfully vague.

Good coaching. Veteran leadership. Defensive role players around him. An offensive system that emphasizes and rewards spacing and ball movement.

[PhoSita]

Which  rookie big men are we talking about when we say guys like Jahlil haven't turned out well in the past?

Because if you look at young rookie 6'11''+ bigs that have put up at least 16 points and 7 rebounds on 50% shooting... Well, I'm wondering which of those guys you're saying has turned out poorly.

Is it Pau Gasol? As a 21 year old rookie he barely rebounded more than Jahlil. He's had his defensive struggles during his career but you know I think I'd be just fine having a player like that on the Celts.

[LooseCannon]

I look at Okafor and I see a player who is highly likely to be an offense-oriented guy who has the tools to be an adequate defender, but won't care enough about defense to be anything other than a defensive liability.  I think he is more likely than the average poor defender to be unresponsive to good coaching and veteran leadership.