What if you knew the Celts won't win a title?

[PhoSita]

I have a question for all you CBers out there.  I think your answer to this question will be instructive.

What are your priorities?  Is it all about contending for and winning a title?  Or are there goals below that you feel are worth pursuing?

Today's league is as top heavy as it's been since the early 2000s.  It might even be more top heavy than that.  You might argue that we haven't seen such a concentration of elite talent at the top since the 80's.

In this context, I think it's fair to wonder if winning a title in the next five years or so is even realistically achievable.  Of course, injuries are the great leveler of playing fields (and courts, too, presumably).  But in terms of what is likely to happen, it's probably gonna be Bron and the Warriors for the next little while.

OK, so what? 

Imagine for a moment that you can see into the future. 

Let's assume this is a reliable vision. You have no reason to believe the Gods are misleading you.  Let's pretend as well that you have the power to direct the actions of Danny Ainge and Celtics ownership in response to what you've seen in this vision.


What you see is that five years in the future, the Celts have not won a title. 


Knowing that, would you want the Celts to suddenly change direction?  Would you initiate a rebuild?  Would you trade away anybody who will be past his prime five or six years from now?


Or would you double down on the current trajectory, and build the best possible team around the current group of players, because you want to spend the next five years watching a likable and competitive team even if they are definitely not winning a title?


I think the answer to this question turns on your priorities as a fan.  Is a title the only worthwhile goal?  Or can you enjoy watching a team, and even feel that the franchise should pay big money and invest assets into said team, even if you know the ceiling for the team is somewhere below title contention?


I am interested to hear your answers, and see what the breakdown is for the community as a whole.

[wdleehi]

Depends.


Did seeing this vision make the Celtics change their plans leading to no title in the next 5 years? 

[PhoSita]

Depends.


Did seeing this vision make the Celtics change their plans leading to no title in the next 5 years?

I think for this question to work we have to assume that nothing the Celts do will change whether or not they win a title in the next five years. 

Therefore, seeing the vision doesn't change the outcome either way.

I know that if we were writing a science fiction story, this would be problematic.  But just go along with it for the purposes of the question.

It's all about what you want to have happen during those five years, and where you want the team to be at the end of that five year period.


Do you want to watch a good team, knowing the end result is less than a title?

Or do you want the team to focus on having the best possible group of young players at the end of that five year period?

[csfansince60s]

I voted to tear it down if no titles.

I'm all for suffering a little for awhile and building for a chance at a title later. Plus it's fun to see the kids develop and the thrill of the  next great hope who will take you to the promised land.

EDIT: I had so much more fun in the 2-3 years prior to the recent Big 3 going to games with all my kids as tix were more affordable (less in demand) and it was fun acquiring new players and watching them grow as oppose to the last few years of KG/PP.

I think that with Wyc and Stevens here, though, that tack will not be taken, even if they knew that there'd be no titles over the next five years.

They proved that the year we drafted Rozier, much to my chagrin.

[nickagneta]

I cheer and love this team regardless of outcome of games. I want championships but the post Bird era to KG era of Celtics history taught me titles are not coming every year. My favorite years during that run was when the team gave everything they had to try to win. I want my Celtics doing everything in their power to win and compete.....no tanking.

In five year

IT is only 32
Bradley is only 31
Crowder is only 31
Smart is only 27
Rozier is only 27
Brown is only 25

If we do no major trade we still have the Nets picks, the Memphis picks and our own picks in that time. My guess is you can also say that all those picks will be very young in 5 years as well.

So I would have no problem watching that team grow over the next 5 years to see where they are while trying to win.

But if the team wants to trade players for established superstars to try to set up the 2021 Celtics to win thats okay too.

So I guess for me it doesnt matter how the Cs get there, just dont tank.

I

[green_bballers13]

I would want them to put the best team together. I understand that the goal is to win the championship, but probability wise, this should happen every 30 years. Does this mean that 29 years should go by before one can enjoy a basketball team?

The Patriots are held by a certain standard. If they fall short of a Super Bowl victory, this season will be viewed as a failure. The GSW are in the same boat. Too much pressure based on a zero-sum result. The Celtics are not built to be held to the same standard.

I'm fine with watching competitive, fast basketball, knowing that the Celtics have the ability to win most games they play in. If they make it far- great. The process is enjoyable and I like watching young players become good players. Hopefully one becomes a star (I'm thinking JB).

[Eja117]

I clicked other


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zezg0v_qQtI


I don't believe in unwinnable scenarios

[otherdave]

PhoSita thanks for asking this great, great philosophical question.

I have been wanting to post something along the same lines, but have been struggling with how to ask.  I was going down a more specific path of:

Since C's have signed Al Horford are we absolutely in a win now mode  and therefore need to trade several nice young pieces away to get a transcendent player to play along with Al and IT, and hope that there is enough left on the bench...

or

conclude that the odds of a GM parting with their transcendent player is practically nil, so that (even though Al is a nice upgrade/replacement of Sully) this franchise is in for a longer (5 years) path to title contention by way of draft and development.



How we posters answer your question really informs how we respond to almost everything else on this board.


To answer your question, I am mostly in the build a young core that will all be hitting their peaks in 5 or 6 years.  That does not mean that I would immediately initiate a "rebuild" and trade IT and AH for whatever I could get before this Feb trade deadline.  For example, I am OK with both players finishing their current contracts with the C's.  I would just think real hard before resigning them.  I would not feel a rush to do anything rash, but if a trade came along over the next several years involving IT or AH that made a lot of sense for that 5 or 6 year window I probably would do it, even if it meant less wins in the short term.  Personally I get enjoyment/entertainment from watching the kids develop.  I think our young core is far enough along that we would not be horrible if those 2 players were gone in 2 years.

Of course what Danny thinks is much more important than what I think.  I think he is correctly keeping as many paths open as possible so that the C's can act if an opportunity comes along, and continue the development path if major trades are not in the cards.  Its really a fine line to walk and you have to wonder how long he can stay flexible and walk it, especially with the new CBA emphasizing current player retention.

[Surferdad]

This was an easy poll.  I could only vote for: Try to build the best possible team around the current core and enjoy the ride.

I just don't see a scenario where the Celts could beat CLE and/or GS, no matter what trade or FA signing Ainge could make.  That's because LeBron, Durant and Curry aren't going anywhere.  Now, if you think there is some way any one of those guys could end up on the C's, then that's a different scenario, but not in the scope of the question which says "the next 5 years" so that means none of those 3 guys will be on the C's.

So let's be competitive, watch Jaylen and Smart grow, and enjoy the ride.

[PhoSita]

I clicked other


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zezg0v_qQtI


I don't believe in unwinnable scenarios

I mean, the point of this post isn't to argue over whether the Celts actually have zero chance of winning the title in the next five years.  I'm not picking a side on that question.  I'm not asking anybody to pick a side on that question.

As otherdave points out, it's a philosophical question.  I want to get to the heart of your priorities as a fan.

Is it all about titles, or do you see value in watching a team even if you could possibly know they won't win a title?

[Eja117]

I clicked other


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zezg0v_qQtI


I don't believe in unwinnable scenarios

I mean, the point of this post isn't to argue over whether the Celts actually have zero chance of winning the title in the next five years.  I'm not picking a side on that question.  I'm not asking anybody to pick a side on that question.

As otherdave points out, it's a philosophical question.  I want to get to the heart of your priorities as a fan.

Is it all about titles, or do you see value in watching a team even if you could possibly know they won't win a title?

A New England team that can't win a title?

Does not compute. Does not compute. Does not compute

[celticsclay]

I have a question for all you CBers out there.  I think your answer to this question will be instructive.

What are your priorities?  Is it all about contending for and winning a title?  Or are there goals below that you feel are worth pursuing?

Today's league is as top heavy as it's been since the early 2000s.  It might even be more top heavy than that.  You might argue that we haven't seen such a concentration of elite talent at the top since the 80's.

In this context, I think it's fair to wonder if winning a title in the next five years or so is even realistically achievable.  Of course, injuries are the great leveler of playing fields (and courts, too, presumably).  But in terms of what is likely to happen, it's probably gonna be Bron and the Warriors for the next little while.

OK, so what? 

Imagine for a moment that you can see into the future. 

Let's assume this is a reliable vision. You have no reason to believe the Gods are misleading you.  Let's pretend as well that you have the power to direct the actions of Danny Ainge and Celtics ownership in response to what you've seen in this vision.


What you see is that five years in the future, the Celts have not won a title. 


Knowing that, would you want the Celts to suddenly change direction?  Would you initiate a rebuild?  Would you trade away anybody who will be past his prime five or six years from now?


Or would you double down on the current trajectory, and build the best possible team around the current group of players, because you want to spend the next five years watching a likable and competitive team even if they are definitely not winning a title?


I think the answer to this question turns on your priorities as a fan.  Is a title the only worthwhile goal?  Or can you enjoy watching a team, and even feel that the franchise should pay big money and invest assets into said team, even if you know the ceiling for the team is somewhere below title contention?


I am interested to hear your answers, and see what the breakdown is for the community as a whole.

I have a question for all you CBers out there.  I think your answer to this question will be instructive.

What are your priorities?  Is it all about contending for and winning a title?  Or are there goals below that you feel are worth pursuing?

Today's league is as top heavy as it's been since the early 2000s.  It might even be more top heavy than that.  You might argue that we haven't seen such a concentration of elite talent at the top since the 80's.

In this context, I think it's fair to wonder if winning a title in the next five years or so is even realistically achievable.  Of course, injuries are the great leveler of playing fields (and courts, too, presumably).  But in terms of what is likely to happen, it's probably gonna be Bron and the Warriors for the next little while.

OK, so what? 

Imagine for a moment that you can see into the future. 

Let's assume this is a reliable vision. You have no reason to believe the Gods are misleading you.  Let's pretend as well that you have the power to direct the actions of Danny Ainge and Celtics ownership in response to what you've seen in this vision.


What you see is that five years in the future, the Celts have not won a title. 


Knowing that, would you want the Celts to suddenly change direction?  Would you initiate a rebuild?  Would you trade away anybody who will be past his prime five or six years from now?


Or would you double down on the current trajectory, and build the best possible team around the current group of players, because you want to spend the next five years watching a likable and competitive team even if they are definitely not winning a title?


I think the answer to this question turns on your priorities as a fan.  Is a title the only worthwhile goal?  Or can you enjoy watching a team, and even feel that the franchise should pay big money and invest assets into said team, even if you know the ceiling for the team is somewhere below title contention?


I am interested to hear your answers, and see what the breakdown is for the community as a whole.

Phosita, the 5 year timeline on this is pretty ridiculous. When Lebron went to the Heat it was said they would dominate the next decade. While they did dominate the East a team (mavericks) won when many thought they had zero chance. The Spurs also won it around a mostly aging core that most thought thought really had no chance (and the Spurs probably should have won a second one) Then Lebron left. That was the dynasty. They didn't even stay together as a team for 5 years.

Lebron is going to turn 32 in a few weeks. No player in the modern history of the sport was completely dominant at 37. Heck who was even dominant when they were 35? Jordan retired when he was 34 (minus wizards stuff) and maybe he could have squeezed out one more year. That was a guy that had much fresher legs than Lebron ever did.

So then you got the Warriors. You really think these guys will all stay together for 5 years? That pretty much goes against how the NBA currently works. Shaq and Penny maybe could have been a dynasty couldn't stay together egos. Shaq and Kobe could have been a long term dynasty. Couldn't stay together egos. Allen, KG, Pierce could have been a mini dynasty. Couldn't do it. Injuries and aging. Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka. Could have been a dynasty did not salary/roles. Do you really think it is wise to pretend that Klay Thompson, Draymond Green, Durant and Curry are all this unique kind of person in a moment of time that are going to do something that players in the NBA really haven't done in the free agency era for the next 5 years? Not to mention Curry and Durant are both free agents this year.

If you want to say 2-3 years that is at least possible. 5 years is a bit preposterous 

[TrueFan]

The GM needs to hold the long term interest of the team above everything else.

There is no greater long term benefit to this team other then drafting well in 2017 and 18 and letting these guys develop with Brown Smart and Roz.

IT, Crowder and AB are fine players but they don't move the needle enough. Horford is probably the best player we have but we don't have enough with him. This team will eventually age and lose its value.

Ainge should be looking to get value for his veterans while making sure players like Brown and Roz get a chance to maximize their potential.

[Evantime34]

I want the C's to remain competitive while building through the draft. I believe that players develop better when put in winning competitive environments.

I am fine keeping our team together being a mid seed in the playoffs while developing guys like Brown, Smart and the Nets pick who hopefully will give the team a chance to win the title once the Nets draft picks are in their prime.

My favorite thing about watching the C's are 1. watching wins 2. seeing young players develop. If the C's do both I am happy.

[Moranis]

My sports philosophy which I've shared on this blog many times is that the goal of every sport is to win the championship and if the team I'm rooting for doesn't have the pieces in place to win a championship it should be doing everything in its power to alter that position and put itself in a position to win a title.

In this scenario, that would mean blow it up.  Though how and when you blow it up is the more interesting question in this scenario because if Boston for example just traded Horford I think that could have significant long term repercussions for the future.  I could also see a scenario where the best option might actually be to trade a Brooklyn pick even though that is counterintuitive to what you normally think of as a blow it up scenario.