We should not trade for Butler or George at the deadline, even if offered.

[oldtype]

Stay away from George, Butler, Carmelo, Cousins, or whoever else ends up being available at the deadline.  None of these players would make us competitive with the Warriors.  There is no point wasting our greatest future growth factor (the Brooklyn picks) just so we can be a perennial ECF or Finals loser.  I'd be much more amenable to being a perennial ECF or Finals loser if we had those Brooklyn picks in our back pocket.

This should be our long-term plan:

1) Stand pat at the deadline.  The only deals we do are ones where we give out a few crappy draft picks for minor upgrades on expiring contracts (ex. Bogut, Taj Gibson.)  Nothing that involves the Brooklyn pick, nothing that ties up salary.

2) Maximize the team however you can this summer.  Ideally we sign Griffin, Hayward, or even Milsap.  If that fails, sign two quality rotation players with the money you have.

3) Draft a stud in 17.  Draft a stud in 18.

4) Have the perennial second-best team in the East with up to three top-3 picks coming off the bench, and bide your time until your prospects develop, Lebron declines, and the Warriors break apart.

Flexibility is our greatest strength - no other team in the NBA can have its cake and eat it too like we can.  We shouldn't waste this flexibility on an impatient, ill-advised trade for a star.

[CoachBo]

There isn't a single thing in this post I agree with.

[Ilikesports17]

dont make a bad panic trade. That much I agree with. However, the idea that our core of Brown-'17/'18 is going to be better than the one we have now + Butler is not necessarily true.

How likely is it that we draft a player better than Butler with the '17 pick. How likely is it that Brown becomes better than Thomas? how likely is it that '18 becomes as good as Horford. How likely is it that we can maintain our complement of elite role-players (Bradley, Smart Crowder).

dont make a bad trade, but dont be afraid to make a trade because it doesnt make you better than GSW today.

[sdceltsfan]

The problem with your logic is that every team drafting, especially those with top 10 picks is looking to "draft a stud".....how often does that happen, relative to having a higher pick? If this were somehow a guarantee, your argument is obviously without flaw. Draft two "studs" back to back and have them under controlled contracts. Hopefully every key player on the team as assembled is retained, so we remain competitive as the youth (Smart, Brown, Rozier, Stud 1, Stud 2) all develop together, and we magically are able to keep them all. Zizic, Nader, Yabu also start killing it...

It's just way too much going on in reality, IMO. Too much youth, which isn't a BAD problem to have at all, but it is simply a quality over quantity thing. You need stars to win championships, period. Every 20 years or so, a true balanced team finds their way in some sport, and usually it's baseball. The NBA is predicated on the top 25 or so players ruling every game they play in.

Generally, most of them are that much better than every other player in the league. I would say we currently have 1, and a borderline 2nd in Horford. Are 1 star (IT) also happens to be one of the most noticeable outliers due to his size.

Most teams winning championships have at least 2, if not 3 or 4 of these players.

The Celtics window is NOW and the next 2 years, while everyone is under contract, and their current deals are affordable. After that, whether they stay or not is dependent on our cap situation. I do agree that we need to develop our youth movement, however, it absolutely needs to be consolidated, and the staff must choose which players to retain and focus on.

[Roy H.]

How many teams have followed the "add prime draft picks and we'll be contenders" strategy? How many teams has it worked out for?

The chances of our draft pick ever being as good as Cousins (who won't be available, unfortunately) is extremely small.  I wouldn't move one of the picks for Carmelo, but for the other guys on your list, it's a reasonable decision. My hope is that Hayward is sending signals that he'd sign here, but if not, there's a ton of appeal to George or Butler.

[CoachBo]

How many teams have followed the "add prime draft picks and we'll be contenders" strategy? How many teams has it worked out for?

The chances of our draft pick ever being as good as Cousins (who won't be available, unfortunately) is extremely small.  I wouldn't move one of the picks for Carmelo, but for the other guys on your list, it's a reasonable decision. My hope is that Hayward is sending signals that he'd sign here, but if not, there's a ton of appeal to George or Butler.

I'm not going to rehash Ainge's draft record, except to say I agree entirely with Roy's post.

I haven't really expected a big deadline move, but if Ainge doesn't add a rebounder at lower cost, he's sending a clear message that this season does not matter - to the people who buy tickets and to the locker room.

This summer, Ainge needs to turn this team into a championship contender. Period.,

[oldtype]

Disagree. You know for a fact that the current team + one more star cannot beat Golden State.  Choose any star that could be available in the next two years.  Even if you added Anthony Davis, we wouldn't be at that level.  Why do something that you know will probably not lead to a title and will take away our ability to improve?  Once you commit the Brooklyn picks to Butler or George, the only way to improve further is to go through the entire rebuilding process all over again.

There is a chance that in three or four years, whoever's left from the current team plus our developed prospects will be better than Golden State, or that Golden State will simply break up at some point before that.  That's our window. 

[ManUp]

Is Gordon Hayward really worth the max?

I feel like signing him would only tie us down to mediocrity.

[Clench123]

So just because, in your estimation, we wouldn't be able to compete with GW even if we trade for those guys, we shouldn't trade for them even if they are available.  That is dumb as sh!t.  The people who's been making this ridiculous suggestion I wonder what planet they live on.

Just because it wouldn't make me a millionaire, I shouldn't accept an inheritance of 250 thousand grandpa left me.  You see how dumb that sound?

[Ilikesports17]

Disagree. You know for a fact that the current team + one more star cannot beat Golden State.  Choose any star that could be available in the next two years.  Even if you added Anthony Davis, we wouldn't be at that level.  Why do something that you know will probably not lead to a title?

There is a chance that in three or four years, whoever's left from the current team plus our developed prospects will be better than Golden State, or that Golden State will simply break up at some point before that.  That's our window.

you do not know that our current team + Butler cant beat GSW.

You  do know our current team + Butler wont be better than GSW.

this distinction is huge.

Cleveland wasnt better than GSW last year.

Dallas wasnt half as good as Miami.

You cant worry about other teams. You must maxmize YOUR talent and assets.

Right now you have the Isaiah Thomas Al Horford Jae Crowder Avery Bradley Marcus Smart and an opportunity to add a borderline top 10 player who can defend Lebron James and KD as well as anyone outside of Kawhi Leonard.

There is zero guarantee that your core of draft picks in 5 years is even as close to as good as the core we have right now.

Again will brown ever be as good as Thomas
will '17 ever be as good as Butler?
will '18 ever reach Horford's level
how will we recreate this current elite supporting cast.

Its not necessarily a bad idea to keep the picks and build for 5 years, but if you close your eyes to the possibility of going for it now, then that is stupid.

[oldtype]

So just because, in your estimation, we wouldn't be able to compete with GW even if we trade for those guys, we shouldn't trade for them even if they are available.  That is dumb as sh!t.  The people who's been making this ridiculous suggestion I wonder what planet they live on.

Just because it wouldn't make me a millionaire, I shouldn't accept a gift of 250 thousand my gradfather left me.  You see how dumb that sound?

If your goal is to become a millionaire, and you know that the 250 thousand would remove your ability to make any additional money, you would not accept that gift.

[CoachBo]

Disagree. You know for a fact that the current team + one more star cannot beat Golden State.  Choose any star that could be available in the next two years.  Even if you added Anthony Davis, we wouldn't be at that level.  Why do something that you know will probably not lead to a title and will take away our ability to improve?  Once you commit the Brooklyn picks to Butler or George, the only way to improve further is to go through the entire rebuilding process all over again.

There is a chance that in three or four years, whoever's left from the current team plus our developed prospects will be better than Golden State, or that Golden State will simply break up at some point before that.  That's our window.

Completely and thoroughly disagree.

[Roy H.]

Is Gordon Hayward really worth the max?

I feel like signing him would only tie us down to mediocrity.

A comparison:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&hint=Gordon+Hayward&player_id1_select=Gordon+Hayward&y1=2017&player_id1=haywago01&hint=Paul+George&player_id2_select=Paul+George&y2=2017&player_id2=georgpa01&hint=Jimmy+Butler&player_id3_select=Jimmy+Butler&y3=2017&player_id3=butleji01&hint=Paul+Pierce&player_id4_select=Paul+Pierce&y4=2005&player_id4=piercpa01

Hayward is really, really good.

[oldtype]

Disagree. You know for a fact that the current team + one more star cannot beat Golden State.  Choose any star that could be available in the next two years.  Even if you added Anthony Davis, we wouldn't be at that level.  Why do something that you know will probably not lead to a title and will take away our ability to improve?  Once you commit the Brooklyn picks to Butler or George, the only way to improve further is to go through the entire rebuilding process all over again.

There is a chance that in three or four years, whoever's left from the current team plus our developed prospects will be better than Golden State, or that Golden State will simply break up at some point before that.  That's our window.

Completely and thoroughly disagree.

The idea that you could add Jimmy Butler to this team and beat Golden State in a seven-game series is borderline delusional.  I doubt you'd even be a favorite against full-strength Cleveland.

[Ilikesports17]

Disagree. You know for a fact that the current team + one more star cannot beat Golden State.  Choose any star that could be available in the next two years.  Even if you added Anthony Davis, we wouldn't be at that level.  Why do something that you know will probably not lead to a title and will take away our ability to improve?  Once you commit the Brooklyn picks to Butler or George, the only way to improve further is to go through the entire rebuilding process all over again.

There is a chance that in three or four years, whoever's left from the current team plus our developed prospects will be better than Golden State, or that Golden State will simply break up at some point before that.  That's our window.

Completely and thoroughly disagree.

The idea that you could add Jimmy Butler to this team and beat Golden State in a seven-game series is borderline delusional.  I doubt you'd even be a favorite against full-strength Cleveland.

do you concede that they would enter Cleveland's tier with a roughly 50% chance to make the finals (especially when considering that Love's inury probably give the Cs the 1 seed)?