How did we win 48 games?

[danglertx]

I read these forums and our players are horrible and have zero value around the league even though most are signed to way below market value for multiple years.  Yet the entire front court of the worst team in NBA history the last three years is apparently worth half our team and the #3 pick in the draft.  It makes no sense.

Must be that we have a great coach, but that can't be it or free agents would want to come here.  But these forums say no good free agents ever want to come to Boston. 

If you read these forums we would trade our entire team for 4 of the Milwakee Bucks starting five, but they only won 33 games and missed the playoffs.  We should have been the third seed.  Yet all their players are better than ours.  It is confounding and frankly embarrassing.

[alldaboston]

The haters will say we play in the weaker east.

[Evantime34]

Great post! TP

Celticsblog seems to place a lot more critical eye on our players and assets than they do for the assets of other teams. In general c's blog is the most negative Celtics forum there is on the internet.

[Smokeeye123]

I read these forums and our players are horrible and have zero value around the league even though most are signed to way below market value for multiple years.  Yet the entire front court of the worst team in NBA history the last three years is apparently worth half our team and the #3 pick in the draft.  It makes no sense.

Must be that we have a great coach, but that can't be it or free agents would want to come here.  But these forums say no good free agents ever want to come to Boston. 

If you read these forums we would trade our entire team for 4 of the Milwakee Bucks starting five, but they only won 33 games and missed the playoffs.  We should have been the third seed.  Yet all their players are better than ours.  It is confounding and frankly embarrassing.

You seem to be making a lot of straw man arguments. Did anyone ever say we would trade our entire team for four of the Bucks starting five? Did anyone ever say our players have zero value around the league? There was the thread alluding to the Celtics having a hard time trying to package their assets for "a legit starter" (code for allstar) but that's completely different than having zero value.

The Bucks can have a few good players and still have a bad record. Look at Cousins on the Kings or Gordon Hayward and Favors on Utah, or Karl Anthony Towns and Wiggins on the Wolves, etc. Middleton is a great player and I'd love for the Celtics to trade for him. It would probably take more than #3 though. That's not being negative, it's just being realistic.

[alldaboston]

Great post! TP

Celticsblog seems to place a lot more critical eye on our players and assets than they do for the assets of other teams. In general c's blog is the most negative Celtics forum there is on the internet.

huh, i think RealGM is more negative. and theyre negative in a really mean way, like it actually hurts you the way they respond sometimes.

[danglertx]

The haters will say we play in the weaker east.

Will the haters point out that MIlwaukee also plays in the East?  How are their players all worth the 3rd pick and most of our team when they can't win 35 games?   And the Sixers... they are obviously in the East and frankly have been an embarrassment to the NBA.  Yet we want their front court.  It makes no sense.

[chiken Green]

I read these forums and our players are horrible and have zero value around the league even though most are signed to way below market value for multiple years.  Yet the entire front court of the worst team in NBA history the last three years is apparently worth half our team and the #3 pick in the draft.  It makes no sense.

Must be that we have a great coach, but that can't be it or free agents would want to come here.  But these forums say no good free agents ever want to come to Boston. 

If you read these forums we would trade our entire team for 4 of the Milwakee Bucks starting five, but they only won 33 games and missed the playoffs.  We should have been the third seed.  Yet all their players are better than ours.  It is confounding and frankly embarrassing.

Amen my friend..  sometimes It sounds like we just watched 82 plus games of 76'er basketball and are mad as hell because of it.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Brad Stevens

[i believe in brad]

In all fairness, teams can have awful records yet have very valuable players because of potential.  Twolves are a great example - they were 29-53 but you wouldn't trade our entire team + the 3rd pick for KAT and Wiggins?

I'm also starting to worry that all our cheap contracts aren't as valuable as we think in 2016.  Increasing cap really de-values those guys as trade chips.

Overall I do agree with you though, people are acting like the sky is falling for no reason.

[Evantime34]

Great post! TP

Celticsblog seems to place a lot more critical eye on our players and assets than they do for the assets of other teams. In general c's blog is the most negative Celtics forum there is on the internet.

huh, i think RealGM is more negative. and theyre negative in a really mean way, like it actually hurts you the way they respond sometimes.

I stand corrected. I never go on RealGm, so you are probably right.

C Blog is absolutely more negative than reddit or celticsnuts which are the two other forums I frequent.

[i believe in brad]

The haters will say we play in the weaker east.

Will the haters point out that MIlwaukee also plays in the East?  How are their players all worth the 3rd pick and most of our team when they can't win 35 games?   And the Sixers... they are obviously in the East and frankly have been an embarrassment to the NBA.  Yet we want their front court.  It makes no sense.

Well they've also been actively tanking so you can't really hold that against Okafor and Noel.  Those guys are super young potentially star players but have been stuck in an awful situation since getting to the NBA, so you can't extrapolate Okafor and Noel's value from the sixers record.

[Evantime34]

I read these forums and our players are horrible and have zero value around the league even though most are signed to way below market value for multiple years.  Yet the entire front court of the worst team in NBA history the last three years is apparently worth half our team and the #3 pick in the draft.  It makes no sense.

Must be that we have a great coach, but that can't be it or free agents would want to come here.  But these forums say no good free agents ever want to come to Boston. 

If you read these forums we would trade our entire team for 4 of the Milwakee Bucks starting five, but they only won 33 games and missed the playoffs.  We should have been the third seed.  Yet all their players are better than ours.  It is confounding and frankly embarrassing.

You seem to be making a lot of straw man arguments. Did anyone ever say we would trade our entire team for four of the Bucks starting five? Did anyone ever say our players have zero value around the league? There was the thread alluding to the Celtics having a hard time trying to package their assets for "a legit starter" (code for allstar) but that's completely different than having zero value.

The Bucks can have a few good players and still have a bad record. Look at Cousins on the Kings or Gordon Hayward and Favors on Utah, or Karl Anthony Towns and Wiggins on the Wolves, etc. Middleton is a great player and I'd love for the Celtics to trade for him. It would probably take more than #3 though. That's not being negative, it's just being realistic.

Pretty much every glass half full person ever has framed themselves as "just being realistic". I don't agree that Middleton is worth more than the third, let alone worth more than the third and other assets. Both of us think we are being realistic but your realism happens to be negative on our assets while mine is more positive. Both are sharing our opinions.

The general theme of his post is how negative people on here are on our assets despite winning 48 games. Maybe you can point to individual lines and say they are straw men arguments but the general idea of the post makes the point that this blog tends to me more negative on our assets than positive.

[celticmania]

Our great coach and IT

[alldaboston]

Great post! TP

Celticsblog seems to place a lot more critical eye on our players and assets than they do for the assets of other teams. In general c's blog is the most negative Celtics forum there is on the internet.

huh, i think RealGM is more negative. and theyre negative in a really mean way, like it actually hurts you the way they respond sometimes.

I stand corrected. I never go on RealGm, so you are probably right.

C Blog is absolutely more negative than reddit or celticsnuts which are the two other forums I frequent.

I like Reddit. It's pretty positive and funny

[gift]

I think the way the season ended is part of the perception. Guys like Jae Crowder, Avery Bradley were hugely valued in February. Bradley gets hurt and is out, Crowder plays when he's clearly not healthy and can't buy an outside shot in the playoffs. People always doubt IT and always will. Olynyk was hurt during the finish when the spotlight was on. Sullinger couldn't stay on the court.

All of these guys looked a lot better a month or two earlier. With the exception of Sullinger I think it's right to value them closer to what they were in February than what they were in April.

The league (even the professional front offices, but certainly the media) is fickle. That's why Danny likes to buy low/sell high so much. He understands the value swings. Maybe the best recent example was Jordan Crawford.