Ringer re: "Reconsidering the Celtics"

[PhoSita]

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/2/28/17060646/reconsidering-boston-celtics

The Celtics are in limbo right now. They’re simultaneously beating and failing to meet expectations. They’re a good, fun team that’s performing better than expected without Hayward, yet there’s still a feeling that they’re behind schedule. After making considerable progress in each of the past four seasons, things feel stagnant—which is perhaps the worst feeling possible.

I couldn't possibly disagree more.

This paragraph seems out of sync with the analysis in the rest of the article.

The Celts were expected to challenge the Cavs this season due to the addition of Hayward, with the possibility of improvement in the future if Brown and Tatum turn out as prospects.

Hayward's injury dashed those expectations on Day 1, but it now appears as though the team can meet expectations without Hayward, in large part due to the surprising effectiveness of Tatum in Year 1 and Brown in Year 2.

What does that say for the future?

If anything, I would think the conclusion should be that the Celts are set up as well as anybody outside of Golden State and Houston to compete for the next 3-4 years, and the young core led by Brown and Tatum means they're set up as well as anybody to be in well-off for the next 5-8 years.

How anybody can see "limbo" or "stagnation" in that is beyond me.

[Moranis]

I can see limbo (given the uncertainty with Hayward), but yeah the stagnation part doesn't make sense at all.

[Green-18]

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/2/28/17060646/reconsidering-boston-celtics

The Celtics are in limbo right now. They’re simultaneously beating and failing to meet expectations. They’re a good, fun team that’s performing better than expected without Hayward, yet there’s still a feeling that they’re behind schedule. After making considerable progress in each of the past four seasons, things feel stagnant—which is perhaps the worst feeling possible.

I couldn't possibly disagree more.

This paragraph seems out of sync with the analysis in the rest of the article.

The Celts were expected to challenge the Cavs this season due to the addition of Hayward, with the possibility of improvement in the future if Brown and Tatum turn out as prospects.

Hayward's injury dashed those expectations on Day 1, but it now appears as though the team can meet expectations without Hayward, in large part due to the surprising effectiveness of Tatum in Year 1 and Brown in Year 2.

What does that say for the future?

If anything, I would think the conclusion should be that the Celts are set up as well as anybody outside of Golden State and Houston to compete for the next 3-4 years, and the young core led by Brown and Tatum means they're set up as well as anybody to be in well-off for the next 5-8 years.

How anybody can see "limbo" or "stagnation" in that is beyond me.

Couldn't agree with you more.  The team has done nothing but progress while maintaining excellent flexibility since the trade of Pierce and KG.  Any impatience by the local fan base is most likely due to the crazy amount of titles that New England sports teams have won over the past 15+ years.  No team without LeBron has come out of the East since the Celtics in 2010. 

There will always be things to complain about but Danny and company have done an excellent job of setting this team up for the next decade.   

[fairweatherfan]

Yeah that's bizarre. We're very likely going to win more games than last year's team, we have a very strong batch of rookies/2nd year guys, another likely high draft pick on the horizon, our best player is a talent and age upgrade from last year, and we have an All-Star wing who isn't even playing yet. About the worst things you can say is that Horford's getting older and we have a decision to make on Smart.

Inexplicably it seems like we wouldn't be getting this take if losing Hayward really had knocked us back to the middle of the pack in the East like many expected.

[wdleehi]

Is the biggest concern really "holding onto the pick to long waiting for AD"?   What the worst thing that happens?   Another young player on a rookie contract like from the lotto portion of the draft?   

[PhoSita]

Yeah that's bizarre. We're very likely going to win more games than last year's team, we have a very strong batch of rookies/2nd year guys, another likely high draft pick on the horizon, our best player is a talent and age upgrade from last year, and we have an All-Star wing who isn't even playing yet. About the worst things you can say is that Horford's getting older and we have a decision to make on Smart.

Inexplicably it seems like we wouldn't be getting this take if losing Hayward really had knocked us back to the middle of the pack in the East like many expected.

It seems that there's an element in the media (and to be fair, in the fanbase) that is always going to move the goalposts on what constitutes "success" for the Celtics unless and until they win a championship, and even then there will be handwringing about how they're going to continue their success unless they win several titles in a row.

Personally I really like the Kyrie, Brown, Hayward, Tatum, Horford core group and I can't wait to see them play together next season.

I hope that group stays together for a long time, even if it costs a lot of $$.  They ought to be able to be among the best in the East for a while.

It seems like we ought to be able to keep at least a few of the likable supporting cast, too, which I'd say includes Rozier, Smart, Morris, Theis, and Semi.

[Roy H.]

I think that it’s just a case of poor writing. He ends the article with:

Hayward’s return, whether it comes this season (miraculously) or next, will automatically make the Celtics a whole lot better. Factor in the development of other young players—and the potential departure of LeBron James to the Western Conference this summer—and the Celtics are in position to become East favorites for the foreseeable future. The moment feels motionless, but take a step back and you’ll see that they’re still ascending.

[GRADYCOLNON]

Agree and Disagree.  The team went through a transformation after Front office determined the last roster peaked.  This year, Hayward injury hurts, the team has made progress from youngsters, which has 'hit the wall' or stagnated, and is trying to rediscover its mojo.  This leads me to say the team needs an injection of something to get us where we expect to be, so I kind of agree.

The other side, where I disagree, is considering where this team was before the Hayward injury, the talk Wyc had, I don't think we are done growing.  This roster can give us more and everyone knows this.  There will be even more if Hayward does return. 

Next year, I do expect Danny to go back and move things around to put us in the fast lane because right now things are slowing down.

[PhoSita]

I think that it’s just a case of poor writing. He ends the article with:

Hayward’s return, whether it comes this season (miraculously) or next, will automatically make the Celtics a whole lot better. Factor in the development of other young players—and the potential departure of LeBron James to the Western Conference this summer—and the Celtics are in position to become East favorites for the foreseeable future. The moment feels motionless, but take a step back and you’ll see that they’re still ascending.

Yeah.  Like I said, the paragraph stands out from the rest of the article.  It makes me wonder if an editor told him to put something in there to be negative or dubious of the Celts, so it doesn't come off like a puff piece from a guy who used to write for Celticsblog.

[gift]

Don't see how you can forecast "stagnant" or "limbo" when 3/5ths of the core starters haven't peaked yet (Irving, Tatum, Brown). One is a star and the other two have star potential. The team will also be adding an All Star to the group in Hayward, who still should have prime years left.

Beyond that, the team still has assets to develop and/or move. There is nothing close to stagnation there.

[gift]

I think that it’s just a case of poor writing. He ends the article with:

Hayward’s return, whether it comes this season (miraculously) or next, will automatically make the Celtics a whole lot better. Factor in the development of other young players—and the potential departure of LeBron James to the Western Conference this summer—and the Celtics are in position to become East favorites for the foreseeable future. The moment feels motionless, but take a step back and you’ll see that they’re still ascending.

Yeah.  Like I said, the paragraph stands out from the rest of the article.  It makes me wonder if an editor told him to put something in there to be negative or dubious of the Celts, so it doesn't come off like a puff piece from a guy who used to write for Celticsblog.

Might not have even had to say it. He might have thrown it in there to make his overall take appear more authentic. If so, it's a case of overcompensating.

[Spilling Green Dye]

Only someone really young like Kevin O'Connor would write "After making considerable progress in each of the past four seasons, things feel stagnant—which is perhaps the worst feeling possible."

As someone who watched most every Celtics game in the 90's, quite a few too many in the 2000's, and just about every draft lottery, I can name far too many worse feelings than the "stagnation" of this team.

We're in one of the boring stretches of the season.  There are plenty of teams not improving right now.  To me, the true litmus test will be to see how this team responds to the playoffs, which will be harder than last year b/c the East is overall better.  If this team can make a Toronto or Cleveland a close series then we're well on our way to becoming the best team in the East in a year or two.

I was really hoping for more from Kevin's article.  Oh well, still good people are writing about the Celtics.

[liam]

I always read anything with Kevin O'Connor's by line but he really phoned it in on this piece. He offers nothing new and doesn't even mention the 3 game winning streak. This could've been written a month ago.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I chuckled when he said that the Raptors have two superstars, but the Celtics only have one.

DeRozan may have (possibly) ascended to superstar status at this point, but Lowry is not a superstar. Heck, Brown is only averaging two points less per game than him. Of the ten players on both teams' starting lineups, we would have the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 10th best player.

Otherwise, it was a good article. I agree -- we should be patient with youth while being proactive.

His thoughts on possibly trading for a RFA in a sign-and-trade were interesting. I'm not sure either Gordon or Parker are worth the Lakers/Kings pick. Plus, we'd have to somehow match salary (likely with Smart). That's a pretty tough type of trade to make.

[droopdog7]

After contending for titles, this team dipped into the lottery ONE time before quickly rising into second level contention status and we're BEHIND schedule?  Bunch of teams have been terrible for years!