Lowe: Celtics are a Tier 3 Team with A-/B+ Max Players

[SHAQATTACK]

I'd elevate Boston to Tier 2, and elevate Cleveland to Tier 1.5.

this ^

[Who]

Celtics should be in Tier 2. Lowe is underestimating our balance and depth.

And overestimating OKC (no depth), Houston (fit of CP3/Harden), Spurs (lack of quality outside of Kawhi) and Cleveland (too many bad fits and depth).

I am not sure if I am ready to put Boston ahead of Cleveland but ... it is a real question in my mind because of the Cavs flaws in their supporting cast. Boston could very well be the 2nd best team in the league behind Golden State.

[incoherent]

Tier 1 - Celtics
Tier 2 - Golden State / Cavs
Tier 3 - HOU
Tier 4 - SAS / OKC
Tier 5 - Wiz / Raps / Clippers

[slamtheking]

I see Lowe's reasoning. Every team in tier 1 and 2 have a top 6 player in the league with Golden State having 2. Also, I believe all those teams have proven depth, the Celtics do not. Now if everything gels for the Celtics and they get starter level play from Tatum and Brown and rotational level play from a couple of other rookies, the Cs could be tier 2 by season's end.

this.  until the team shows it has gelled with all the new additions, it's kind of in a "prove it to me" state.  If the parts come together as well as we hope, we easily have the talent to be tier 2

[PhoSita]

Celtics should be in Tier 2. Lowe is underestimating our balance and depth.

I think if the team had any experience playing together at all he'd have placed them there.

The problem is that this is almost entirely a new team, so we should expect the first 20-40 games to be a bit up and down.

Especially when you consider how young the bench is.

[jambr380]

I'd elevate Boston to Tier 2, and elevate Cleveland to Tier 1.5.

This.

I get that this is probably NOT like Chad Ford's draft system where the qualifiers for each tier remain consistent from year to year, but Boston belongs solidly in the 2nd group of teams, while GSW belongs solidly by themselves at the top.

We added Western Conference All-Star Gordon Hayward (and otherwise shuffled the chairs around); I am not sure how we remain at the same level we were at last year.

[biggs]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/20960590/zach-lowe-2017-18-nba-tiers-ratings

Tier 1: GSW

Tier 2: CLE, OKC, HOU and SAS

Tier 3: BOS, WIZ, TOR

Personally, I feel that by the end of the season, we will be as good as CLE, and better than HOU and SAS. 

I just don't know what to expect from OKC.  They could be great, or a disaster.

Fake news. OKC/Houston/SAS trash. OKC no depth. Houston - no defense Harden a clown/ SAS OLD besides injury prone Kawhi.

Last year you might have been able to make that argument. Not sure if this reporter has been living under a rock for the last few months, but we made some changes to that team..

[PhoSita]

We added Western Conference All-Star Gordon Hayward (and otherwise shuffled the chairs around); I am not sure how we remain at the same level we were at last year.

Because the supporting cast got younger and there are more question marks on defense.  The team was only average on defense last year.

The core guys have no experience whatsoever playing together.


These are reasonable considerations when trying to project how good the team will be this year.

I think it's totally reasonable to have them in line with Toronto and Washington and a step behind the Cavs.


Although if IT's injury is for real, the Cavs likely won't be any better than those teams, at least not in the regular season.

[Ed Hollison]

It's not just the tiers. I also think Lowe's text is too dismissive of this year's Celtics team.

The remade Celtics, with their collection of A-minus/B-plus max players, have a lot to prove before we bump them into the hallowed tier above. They were only a hair better than league average on defense last season, and they tossed away two ballhawks -- Avery Bradley and Jae Crowder -- in turning over 75 percent of their roster.

Rebounding will be an issue again, though Brad Stevens may deploy Aron Baynes as something of a utility glass-eating starter. Opponents shot just 33 percent from deep and 34 percent on corner 3s -- the second-lowest marks in the league. How much of that was luck? We'll see. Boston is stocked with huge wings; Gordon Hayward starts as the nominal shooting guard. If the team switches a ton, dial in on closeouts, and gang rebound, Boston will retain some of last season's peskiness.

They are also relying on young players and unproven long-range shooters -- a big deal for a team that jacked more triples than everyone but Houston and Cleveland. Opponents will dare Jaylen Brown, Marcus Morris, Terry Rozier, Jayson Tatum and svelte Marcus Smart, and Stevens will likely encourage them to let fly -- at least from the corners, where Brown quietly drilled 44 percent.

But most first- and second-year players are net negatives. Chemistry takes time. Boston may be a little schizophrenic between and within games. There will be extended stretches when it clicks -- when Kyrie Irving, Gordon Hayward and Al Horford ping the ball around, the cuts and handoffs are zippy, and open 3s find bottom.

There will be entire quarters that are clunky and clanky. If Boston disappoints, it will be tough for it to match salaries in any impact trade. The Celtics are saving their powder for You-Know-Who anyway.

This just feels a bit lazy, which is disappointing from as talented a writer/analyst as Lowe. Same old tropes, eg. "How do they replace Bradley and Crowder's defense?"

I truly believe this team can be as good as any besides the Warriors. Vegas has them winning in the high 50s for a reason.

[fairweatherfan]

The rankings aren't that crazy but the implication that picking up a top 3 FA, draftee, and at least top 5 trade target (in the wildest trade season for stars in memory) is treading water or even losing a bit of ground seems misplaced. Even with the guys we lost.

My completely half-baked counter would be:

Tier 1 - overwhelming title favorite: GSW
Tier 2 - small chance of title, favorites for conference final: CLE, BOS, HOU
Tier 3 - fringe chance of title, solid chance at conference final: SAS, OKC
Tier 4 - no chance of title, small chance of conference final, likely 2nd rd fodder: WAS, TOR

[Who]

Celtics should be in Tier 2. Lowe is underestimating our balance and depth.

I think if the team had any experience playing together at all he'd have placed them there.

The problem is that this is almost entirely a new team, so we should expect the first 20-40 games to be a bit up and down.

Especially when you consider how young the bench is.

Chemistry will come quickly because of how well the pieces fit together and fit within our already existing system. The roster turnover is not much of an issue because of these two things.

Other teams face a harder time because they have to make more changes to their system to accommodate new players (OKC) or have players who do not fit so well alongside one another (Cleveland).

[jambr380]

We added Western Conference All-Star Gordon Hayward (and otherwise shuffled the chairs around); I am not sure how we remain at the same level we were at last year.

Because the supporting cast got younger and there are more question marks on defense.  The team was only average on defense last year.

The core guys have no experience whatsoever playing together.


These are reasonable considerations when trying to project how good the team will be this year.

I think it's totally reasonable to have them in line with Toronto and Washington and a step behind the Cavs.


Although if IT's injury is for real, the Cavs likely won't be any better than those teams, at least not in the regular season.

That is why I agreed with Roy that Cleveland should be at 1.5 - I don't think the Cs should be below Houston, OKC, and SAS.

Besides, it's not like we totally decimated our team, just made replacements. Hayward, Morris, Baynes, and Tatum compared to AB, Crowder, Amir, and KO is a clear improvement (mostly due to Hayward). This doesn't even take into account the likely improvements from Brown, Smart, and Rozier or Kyrie over IT (IT wasn't considered a superstar prior to last season).

[keevsnick]

I think this is basically right. Clearly GS should bee in a league all their own. Clev, Hou, Okc, Sas all have top six players in this league and seem to be regarded as better than Boston by most of the national media. I think Boston is better than Tor and Was so maybe they could be in a Tier 2.5. I think right now Tier three is fine with a chance to get up to tier 2 by the end of the year.

[PhoSita]

I think it's reasonable to treat this Celts team as almost an entirely new team.  Unproven.

Talent wise I think they compare favorably to the Wiz and Raps but those teams have much more experience playing together and have more proven role players in their supporting cast.

Lowe is right to point out that guys like Brown, Tatum, Theis, Yabu, Semi etc. don't typically contribute to winning.

So you have Irving, Hayward, and Horford who are really good but have not played a single regular season game together.

Then you have Smart, Rozier, Baynes, Morris as supporting players with some track record.  Rozier and Baynes were 10-15 mpg players last year.


My expectation for the team is to win about the same number of games as TOR / WAS / CLE, but to be right there behind Cleveland by the time the playoffs roll around.

[PhoSita]

The rankings aren't that crazy but the implication that picking up a top 3 FA, draftee, and at least top 5 trade target (in the wildest trade season for stars in memory) is treading water or even losing a bit of ground seems misplaced. Even with the guys we lost.

Apart from the continuity thing, I would point out that the Expected W/L for the Celts last year based on their point differential was only 48 wins.

That may be part of why prognosticators like Lowe think they may not win more games in the regular season than the Wiz and Raps.