CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: JSD on January 04, 2014, 03:48:09 PM
-
I don't mean to gloat, but it feels good to see this basketball team losing some games. It is a necessary evil in this league if you want to have a better shot at building a winner.
Cheers to other tankers today. We will likely lose all 5 of these games of this West Coast swing.
-
I must say I'm getting sick of the word "tanker." It's thrown around way too much on this site this year.
That said I'm fine with the Celtics not winning as long as they're trying as hard as they can. And I think that just about everyone on this team is doing that. I'm not looking for salvation in this highly overrated draft however.
-
Yesterday was a good night. The C's and Hawks both lost. Now the C's should lose their next 5 which would be great. We just need the Knicks and Nets to stop being so horrible. Good thing the Raptors are starting to run away with the division.
As far as the play of the team, i find this Celtics squad to be extremely boring to watch for some reason. The only guy who can get his own shot is Jordan Crawford. Everyone else has to be spoon fed. To me that equals boring basketball. Hopefully the C's can land in the top 5 in the lottery and draft a guy who can create his own shot.
-
If the season ended today, we'd miss the playoffs and have the 9th best odds in the draft.
We're 2 games out of a Top 5 pick right now. If we hit a massive losing streak, we could be in the land of golden biscuits in no time.
Bad news is, the Bobcats are skidding... we're a mere half game out of the 8th seed (#15 pick). Garbage Leastern Conference.
-
I'm still rooting for the Knicks to be terrible if I'm being honest. That is in addition to the Hawks as well. When the Cs play competitively and lose by 3 points it makes my day. Although I was intrigued with the idea of bringing in Josh Smith and keeping PP and KG, I have been in the "tanking" category since the offseason.
In regards to players not being able to create their own shots, that is because this roster was constructed around Rondo. He is the main shot creator for the team in his own unique way.
-
If the season ended today, we'd miss the playoffs and have the 9th best odds in the draft.
We're 2 games out of a Top 5 pick right now. If we hit a massive losing streak, we could be in the land of golden biscuits in no time.
Bad news is, the Bobcats are skidding... we're a mere half game out of the 8th seed (#15 pick). Garbage Leastern Conference.
Wouldn't it just be hilarious if this state of affairs continued and there was little to no separation?
One team wins the dubious honor of a 4 game sweep by the Heat or Pacers, where the contender contempuously sits all 5 starters to ensure the games have less than a 30 point margin of victory, while a team a half game worse potentially ends up with a franchise caliber player.
Good lord. You'd have to laugh, if you didn't, you'd cry.
-
I don't think it can be overstated how critical it is to the future of this franchise if we lose a few more games that we could have won in the next few months. With the competition in the east being so putrid, we are still within an inch of the playoffs, yet about an equal distance away from a top 3-5 pick in a draft where 5-6 players are projected as franchise cornerstones. Wether we use the pick ourselves or trade it, this is absolutely critical to the immediate future of the celtics. I'm all for players playing hard, but the coach and GM have to do what they need to do to get this team to be a legit contender soon, and a few close loses here and there will make the difference from getting the next superstar to lead the team to #18, 19, and 20, or another role player while we rack up the 1st round exits for the next 5-6 years.
Is the draft overrated? Yes, most likely it is, but assuming it's at least an average draft, a 3-5 pick is always a good chance at a superstar, and if Ainge doesn't think that superstar is there at our pick, plenty of other GMs will trade a lot of value to get that pick.
-
TP's to all my tanking buddies. #brotherhood
-
Overall, i'm enjoying this season. After all the games are played, i'm checking the standings, and checking the upcoming schedules for the teams with worse records than the C's. I'm rooting for the Wizards, Magic, Bobcats, Nets, Knicks, Cavs, Pistons, Kings, Jazz, Lakers (yes even the Lakers), Sixers, and Bucks to all pull upsets and win games. That doesn't happen too often, but it gives me a rooting interest in keeping up with all the final scores on a nightly basis.
-
If the season ended today, we'd miss the playoffs and have the 9th best odds in the draft.
We're 2 games out of a Top 5 pick right now. If we hit a massive losing streak, we could be in the land of golden biscuits in no time.
Bad news is, the Bobcats are skidding... we're a mere half game out of the 8th seed (#15 pick). Garbage Leastern Conference.
Wouldn't it just be hilarious if this state of affairs continued and there was little to no separation?
One team wins the dubious honor of a 4 game sweep by the Heat or Pacers, where the contender contempuously sits all 5 starters to ensure the games have less than a 30 point margin of victory, while a team a half game worse potentially ends up with a franchise caliber player.
Good lord. You'd have to laugh, if you didn't, you'd cry.
I'm really hoping some trades shake up the conference. Someone HAS to be a buyer. The Raptors have gone and made themself respectable, at least. The Nets are only 2 games out of the playoffs. Bobcats entered this season in "win-now" mode, it would be nice to see them land a couple players that would ensure short-term success. Cavs could theoretically improve if they traded Bynum for a position they need (the Richard Jefferson trade, for instance). Maybe the Knicks make a play for Asik. Stuff can change pretty rapidly.
There's currently only 3 games separating Charlotte (8th seed/15th pick) and Orlando #3 pick. That's sick. That literally means that a 4 game win streak/4 game lose streak could dramatically shift the fortunes of a team. There's only 5 games between Orlando and the 5th seed. The entire conference from the 5th seed down is garbage.
The question is... how would you feel if Boston became a buyer? With Rondo soon returning... there's some rationalization to Boston cashing in their chips and going after a playoff slot. It certainly wouldn't be difficult to get a playoff slot this year... and there certainly seems to be talent available if you want it: Asik ... possibly Afflalo and Melo... Several capable role players who don't fit on teams tanking.
-
I don't mean to gloat, but it feels good to see this basketball team losing some games. It is a necessary evil in this league if you want to have a better shot at building a winner.
Cheers to other tankers today. We will likely lose all 5 of these games of this West Coast swing.
For a while I was bummed about spending a long season watching people agonize over every 3-4 game winning or losing streak, swinging back and forth between gloating and hand-wringing. Now I'm just amused by the situation.
-
If the season ended today, we'd miss the playoffs and have the 9th best odds in the draft.
We're 2 games out of a Top 5 pick right now. If we hit a massive losing streak, we could be in the land of golden biscuits in no time.
Bad news is, the Bobcats are skidding... we're a mere half game out of the 8th seed (#15 pick). Garbage Leastern Conference.
Wouldn't it just be hilarious if this state of affairs continued and there was little to no separation?
One team wins the dubious honor of a 4 game sweep by the Heat or Pacers, where the contender contempuously sits all 5 starters to ensure the games have less than a 30 point margin of victory, while a team a half game worse potentially ends up with a franchise caliber player.
Good lord. You'd have to laugh, if you didn't, you'd cry.
I'm really hoping some trades shake up the conference. Someone HAS to be a buyer. The Raptors have gone and made themself respectable, at least. The Nets are only 2 games out of the playoffs. Bobcats entered this season in "win-now" mode, it would be nice to see them land a couple players that would ensure short-term success. Cavs could theoretically improve if they traded Bynum for a position they need (the Richard Jefferson trade, for instance). Maybe the Knicks make a play for Asik. Stuff can change pretty rapidly.
There's currently only 3 games separating Charlotte (8th seed/15th pick) and Orlando #3 pick. That's sick. That literally means that a 4 game win streak/4 game lose streak could dramatically shift the fortunes of a team. There's only 5 games between Orlando and the 5th seed. The entire conference from the 5th seed down is garbage.
The question is... how would you feel if Boston became a buyer? With Rondo soon returning... there's some rationalization to Boston cashing in their chips and going after a playoff slot. It certainly wouldn't be difficult to get a playoff slot this year... and there certainly seems to be talent available if you want it: Asik ... possibly Afflalo and Melo... Several capable role players who don't fit on teams tanking.
The really awful thing is that if Boston acquired both Afflalo and Asik (easily doable, and probably doable without giving up too much in the way of picks), and Rondo does come back looking like 85% of himself, a Rondo-Afflalo-Green-Sully-Asik lineup is the 3rd best in the East, and by a good margin I'd wager.
EDIT: The reason why its awful is because while that's a good team..in a conference like the West, it's probably a strong 5 seed. A strong 5 seed relying on 4 role players and a star whose talent is most predicated upon making life easier for those around him. Its like a really good traditional supreme pizza, and Rondo is perfectly cooked crust.
But the problem with perfect pizza is that its not prime rib or lobster, and it never will be.
-
If the season ended today, we'd miss the playoffs and have the 9th best odds in the draft.
We're 2 games out of a Top 5 pick right now. If we hit a massive losing streak, we could be in the land of golden biscuits in no time.
Bad news is, the Bobcats are skidding... we're a mere half game out of the 8th seed (#15 pick). Garbage Leastern Conference.
Wouldn't it just be hilarious if this state of affairs continued and there was little to no separation?
One team wins the dubious honor of a 4 game sweep by the Heat or Pacers, where the contender contempuously sits all 5 starters to ensure the games have less than a 30 point margin of victory, while a team a half game worse potentially ends up with a franchise caliber player.
Good lord. You'd have to laugh, if you didn't, you'd cry.
I'm really hoping some trades shake up the conference. Someone HAS to be a buyer. The Raptors have gone and made themself respectable, at least. The Nets are only 2 games out of the playoffs. Bobcats entered this season in "win-now" mode, it would be nice to see them land a couple players that would ensure short-term success. Cavs could theoretically improve if they traded Bynum for a position they need (the Richard Jefferson trade, for instance). Maybe the Knicks make a play for Asik. Stuff can change pretty rapidly.
There's currently only 3 games separating Charlotte (8th seed/15th pick) and Orlando #3 pick. That's sick. That literally means that a 4 game win streak/4 game lose streak could dramatically shift the fortunes of a team. There's only 5 games between Orlando and the 5th seed. The entire conference from the 5th seed down is garbage.
The question is... how would you feel if Boston became a buyer? With Rondo soon returning... there's some rationalization to Boston cashing in their chips and going after a playoff slot. It certainly wouldn't be difficult to get a playoff slot this year... and there certainly seems to be talent available if you want it: Asik ... possibly Afflalo and Melo... Several capable role players who don't fit on teams tanking.
The really awful thing is that if Boston acquired both Afflalo and Asik (easily doable, and probably doable without giving up much in the way of picks), and Rondo does come back looking like 85% of himself, a Rondo-Afflalo-Green-Sully-Asik lineup is the 3rd best in the East, and by a good margin I'd wager.
Ainge can say whatever he wants in interviews, but I find it hard to believe he has a buyer's mindset. I think the trade and the roster assembled to start this season regarding our PG situation and bigs speaks for itself.
Oh, and I thoroughly approve of it for the record.
-
this season has become Very annoying to me...I'm getting anxious for SOMETHING to happen---Trade away our Vets and let KO and Vitor play---Stop playing Humphries, unless we are going to trade or re-sign him. NOT if we're letting his contract expire-makes ZERO sense. I hate feeling like these losses will lead to something good---it BETTER.
-
If the season ended today, we'd miss the playoffs and have the 9th best odds in the draft.
We're 2 games out of a Top 5 pick right now. If we hit a massive losing streak, we could be in the land of golden biscuits in no time.
Bad news is, the Bobcats are skidding... we're a mere half game out of the 8th seed (#15 pick). Garbage Leastern Conference.
Wouldn't it just be hilarious if this state of affairs continued and there was little to no separation?
One team wins the dubious honor of a 4 game sweep by the Heat or Pacers, where the contender contempuously sits all 5 starters to ensure the games have less than a 30 point margin of victory, while a team a half game worse potentially ends up with a franchise caliber player.
Good lord. You'd have to laugh, if you didn't, you'd cry.
I'm really hoping some trades shake up the conference. Someone HAS to be a buyer. The Raptors have gone and made themself respectable, at least. The Nets are only 2 games out of the playoffs. Bobcats entered this season in "win-now" mode, it would be nice to see them land a couple players that would ensure short-term success. Cavs could theoretically improve if they traded Bynum for a position they need (the Richard Jefferson trade, for instance). Maybe the Knicks make a play for Asik. Stuff can change pretty rapidly.
There's currently only 3 games separating Charlotte (8th seed/15th pick) and Orlando #3 pick. That's sick. That literally means that a 4 game win streak/4 game lose streak could dramatically shift the fortunes of a team. There's only 5 games between Orlando and the 5th seed. The entire conference from the 5th seed down is garbage.
The question is... how would you feel if Boston became a buyer? With Rondo soon returning... there's some rationalization to Boston cashing in their chips and going after a playoff slot. It certainly wouldn't be difficult to get a playoff slot this year... and there certainly seems to be talent available if you want it: Asik ... possibly Afflalo and Melo... Several capable role players who don't fit on teams tanking.
The really awful thing is that if Boston acquired both Afflalo and Asik (easily doable, and probably doable without giving up too much in the way of picks), and Rondo does come back looking like 85% of himself, a Rondo-Afflalo-Green-Sully-Asik lineup is the 3rd best in the East, and by a good margin I'd wager.
EDIT: The reason why its awful is because while that's a good team..in a conference like the West, it's probably a strong 5 seed. A strong 5 seed relying on 4 role players and a star whose talent is most predicated upon making life easier for those around him. Its like a really good traditional supreme pizza, and Rondo is perfectly cooked crust.
But the problem with perfect pizza is that its not prime rib or lobster, and it never will be.
I'd put perfect pizza up against a lobbie any day. Ever had the clam pie at Pepe's in New Haven? If i had a choice of one last meal before heading for the big house, that might be it...
-
this season has become Very annoying to me...I'm getting anxious for SOMETHING to happen---Trade away our Vets and let KO and Vitor play---Stop playing Humphries, unless we are going to trade or re-sign him. NOT if we're letting his contract expire-makes ZERO sense. I hate feeling like these losses will lead to something good---it BETTER.
It's painful but you have to be patient. I want ainge to make the best trade possible. The team isnt going anywhere this year anyway. This team is years away from making any significant noise in the playoffs.
I imagine that if the trade deadline passes an humphries is still a Celtic, he will probably see a lot less playing time, and just be a nice expiring contract at the end of the season. Until then, he is playing well enough to earn the time, and might as well showcase him for a desperate team in February.
-
If the season ended today, we'd miss the playoffs and have the 9th best odds in the draft.
We're 2 games out of a Top 5 pick right now. If we hit a massive losing streak, we could be in the land of golden biscuits in no time.
Bad news is, the Bobcats are skidding... we're a mere half game out of the 8th seed (#15 pick). Garbage Leastern Conference.
Wouldn't it just be hilarious if this state of affairs continued and there was little to no separation?
One team wins the dubious honor of a 4 game sweep by the Heat or Pacers, where the contender contempuously sits all 5 starters to ensure the games have less than a 30 point margin of victory, while a team a half game worse potentially ends up with a franchise caliber player.
Good lord. You'd have to laugh, if you didn't, you'd cry.
I'm really hoping some trades shake up the conference. Someone HAS to be a buyer. The Raptors have gone and made themself respectable, at least. The Nets are only 2 games out of the playoffs. Bobcats entered this season in "win-now" mode, it would be nice to see them land a couple players that would ensure short-term success. Cavs could theoretically improve if they traded Bynum for a position they need (the Richard Jefferson trade, for instance). Maybe the Knicks make a play for Asik. Stuff can change pretty rapidly.
There's currently only 3 games separating Charlotte (8th seed/15th pick) and Orlando #3 pick. That's sick. That literally means that a 4 game win streak/4 game lose streak could dramatically shift the fortunes of a team. There's only 5 games between Orlando and the 5th seed. The entire conference from the 5th seed down is garbage.
The question is... how would you feel if Boston became a buyer? With Rondo soon returning... there's some rationalization to Boston cashing in their chips and going after a playoff slot. It certainly wouldn't be difficult to get a playoff slot this year... and there certainly seems to be talent available if you want it: Asik ... possibly Afflalo and Melo... Several capable role players who don't fit on teams tanking.
The lack of separation is painfull. I am looking forward to seeing the celtics slide down the standings during this west swing, and brutal January schedule.
The lottery talent in this draft is really intriguing. Gotta get those ping pong balls!
-
I'd put perfect pizza up against a lobbie any day. Ever had the clam pie at Pepe's in New Haven? If i had a choice of one last meal before heading for the big house, that might be it...
Its funny, when I was typing all that in the back of my head my inner foodie was like.."Yeah, but remember that pizza you had in New York (http://www.thepatsyspizza.com/)? The one where you froze the last slice so you could enjoy it later? That was pretty good pizza. And you've paid a lot more at prime rib joints for far less satisfaction."
-
I'm still rooting for the Knicks to be terrible if I'm being honest. That is in addition to the Hawks as well. When the Cs play competitively and lose by 3 points it makes my day. Although I was intrigued with the idea of bringing in Josh Smith and keeping PP and KG, I have been in the "tanking" category since the offseason.
In regards to players not being able to create their own shots, that is because this roster was constructed around Rondo. He is the main shot creator for the team in his own unique way.
TP.
-
The upcoming stretch may be the roughest of the season, but February looks to be a breeze by comparison. Only 12 games but the only playoff teams (if season ended today) are the Mavs, Spurs, Suns, and Hawks. Also, who knows how the Suns and Hawks will look by mid to late Feb? Throw in a possibly 100% Rondo,...oh I don't even want to think about what could happen....we could go 7-5.
Edit: Only 11 games in February.
-
At the beginning of the season it was; "Wiggins/Parker of bust!". Now it's; "woo hoo, ninth pick!"
Congratulations, tankers . . . I guess.
-
At the beginning of the season it was; "Wiggins/Parker of bust!". Now it's; "woo hoo, ninth pick!"
Congratulations, tankers . . . I guess.
I don't think a 9th pick is anyone's best case scenario, but I also doubt anyone who thinks that getting a top-5 pick in this draft believes the C's will remain at the 9th spot. There's no real separation yet, lotta basketball.
-
After we lose these next 5 straight we will be 13 - 25 or .342
That's good for the 6th worst record in the NBA.
-
Cheers, JSD!
-
Since my dream of Banner 18 coming this year while the Nets finish with the worst record isn't likely, then the more losses the merrier in my opinion.
-
The upcoming stretch may be the roughest of the season, but February looks to be a breeze by comparison. Only 12 games but the only playoff teams (if season ended today) are the Mavs, Spurs, Suns, and Hawks. Also, who knows how the Suns and Hawks will look by mid to late Feb? Throw in a possibly 100% Rondo,...oh I don't even want to think about what could happen....we could go 7-5.
Edit: Only 11 games in February.
Rondo won't be 100% until next season. No player who returned from acl surgery has ever been anywhere close to 100% until at least 4-5 months after returning to game action.
Just a few examples, Rose sucked when he came back this year, and he was out a lot longer than Rondo. Shumpert is just now this week finally showing signs of returning to his pre-injury self. Perk never returned to his pre-acl self, and neither did Josh Howard, or Leon Powe, or countless other players. Those who did, took about a season of NBA action to do so.
-
If the season ended today, we'd miss the playoffs and have the 9th best odds in the draft.
We're 2 games out of a Top 5 pick right now. If we hit a massive losing streak, we could be in the land of golden biscuits in no time.
Bad news is, the Bobcats are skidding... we're a mere half game out of the 8th seed (#15 pick). Garbage Leastern Conference.
Wouldn't it just be hilarious if this state of affairs continued and there was little to no separation?
One team wins the dubious honor of a 4 game sweep by the Heat or Pacers, where the contender contempuously sits all 5 starters to ensure the games have less than a 30 point margin of victory, while a team a half game worse potentially ends up with a franchise caliber player.
Good lord. You'd have to laugh, if you didn't, you'd cry.
I'm really hoping some trades shake up the conference. Someone HAS to be a buyer. The Raptors have gone and made themself respectable, at least. The Nets are only 2 games out of the playoffs. Bobcats entered this season in "win-now" mode, it would be nice to see them land a couple players that would ensure short-term success. Cavs could theoretically improve if they traded Bynum for a position they need (the Richard Jefferson trade, for instance). Maybe the Knicks make a play for Asik. Stuff can change pretty rapidly.
There's currently only 3 games separating Charlotte (8th seed/15th pick) and Orlando #3 pick. That's sick. That literally means that a 4 game win streak/4 game lose streak could dramatically shift the fortunes of a team. There's only 5 games between Orlando and the 5th seed. The entire conference from the 5th seed down is garbage.
The question is... how would you feel if Boston became a buyer? With Rondo soon returning... there's some rationalization to Boston cashing in their chips and going after a playoff slot. It certainly wouldn't be difficult to get a playoff slot this year... and there certainly seems to be talent available if you want it: Asik ... possibly Afflalo and Melo... Several capable role players who don't fit on teams tanking.
The really awful thing is that if Boston acquired both Afflalo and Asik (easily doable, and probably doable without giving up too much in the way of picks), and Rondo does come back looking like 85% of himself, a Rondo-Afflalo-Green-Sully-Asik lineup is the 3rd best in the East, and by a good margin I'd wager.
EDIT: The reason why its awful is because while that's a good team..in a conference like the West, it's probably a strong 5 seed. A strong 5 seed relying on 4 role players and a star whose talent is most predicated upon making life easier for those around him. Its like a really good traditional supreme pizza, and Rondo is perfectly cooked crust.
But the problem with perfect pizza is that its not prime rib or lobster, and it never will be.
Yeah, the problem is, there is zero chance of putting together a team that beats Miami/Indy, and if you lock yourself into a "good" team this year, you can't reasonably expect the East to be this bad for very long, so you'd essentially be locking yourself into a mediocre team in a normal future season just to "go for it" this year.
My opinion is we should be looking to sell Green/Wallace/Humphries types to Wash/Chi/Char/Det/Cle/Mil (who never seem to want to rebuild).
-
The upcoming stretch may be the roughest of the season, but February looks to be a breeze by comparison. Only 12 games but the only playoff teams (if season ended today) are the Mavs, Spurs, Suns, and Hawks. Also, who knows how the Suns and Hawks will look by mid to late Feb? Throw in a possibly 100% Rondo,...oh I don't even want to think about what could happen....we could go 7-5.
Edit: Only 11 games in February.
Rondo won't be 100% until next season. No player who returned from acl surgery has ever been anywhere close to 100% until at least 4-5 months after returning to game action.
Just a few examples, Rose sucked when he came back this year, and he was out a lot longer than Rondo. Shumpert is just now this week finally showing signs of returning to his pre-injury self. Perk never returned to his pre-acl self, and neither did Josh Howard, or Leon Powe, or countless other players. Those who did, took about a season of NBA action to do so.
King LeBron James himself could descend from the heavens and join this Celtic team... and I still think they would struggle to contend. If the 2nd best player on your team is 21 year old Jared Sullinger, you're probably not going very far.
If Rondo looks great when he returns, I still think it just expedites his ticket out of here. This very much is a team built for the future. Sully, Oly, Bradley, two 2014 picks, two 2015 picks, etc... 27 year olds don't really fit with the long-view of this squad. Especially when you consider the kind of offers a "100% healthy" Rondo might lure in. Last month the Kings were rumored to be offering Thomas, 20-year-old Ben McLemore, two 1st round picks and a couple serviceable players (Thompson and THornton) for Rondo and Wallace. If that's the kind of offers "Question Mark Rondo" gets, a 100% Rondo should give Danny some intriguing options. Should be interesting to see what happens.
-
Feels nice to have a thread for us.
It's tough watching this team lose games but every night that they and the hawks both lose is just another step closer to rebuilding the team.
I'm not sure what AB's value is because of his alleged contract demands but I'd love DA to trade him and Green for some more picks. I don't know if we will end up in the top five, but if we don't I want to be able to trade up as far as possible.
Hoping for some smart moves by Danny and a great draft night for all C's fans.
-
The upcoming stretch may be the roughest of the season, but February looks to be a breeze by comparison. Only 12 games but the only playoff teams (if season ended today) are the Mavs, Spurs, Suns, and Hawks. Also, who knows how the Suns and Hawks will look by mid to late Feb? Throw in a possibly 100% Rondo,...oh I don't even want to think about what could happen....we could go 7-5.
Edit: Only 11 games in February.
Rondo won't be 100% until next season. No player who returned from acl surgery has ever been anywhere close to 100% until at least 4-5 months after returning to game action.
Just a few examples, Rose sucked when he came back this year, and he was out a lot longer than Rondo. Shumpert is just now this week finally showing signs of returning to his pre-injury self. Perk never returned to his pre-acl self, and neither did Josh Howard, or Leon Powe, or countless other players. Those who did, took about a season of NBA action to do so.
King LeBron James himself could descend from the heavens and join this Celtic team... and I still think they would struggle to contend. If the 2nd best player on your team is 21 year old Jared Sullinger, you're probably not going very far.
If Rondo looks great when he returns, I still think it just expedites his ticket out of here. This very much is a team built for the future. Sully, Oly, Bradley, two 2014 picks, two 2015 picks, etc... 27 year olds don't really fit with the long-view of this squad. Especially when you consider the kind of offers a "100% healthy" Rondo might lure in. Last month the Kings were rumored to be offering Thomas, 20-year-old Ben McLemore, two 1st round picks and a couple serviceable players (Thompson and THornton) for Rondo and Wallace. If that's the kind of offers "Question Mark Rondo" gets, a 100% Rondo should give Danny some intriguing options. Should be interesting to see what happens.
I don't know if that rumor was ever anything more than blog gossip--was it ever reported by anyone with a twitter handle (and a modicum of accountability)?
-
"Anti-Tankers" want us to limp into the playoffs as a losing team (say 34 wins, for instance) only to get curb-stomped by Indiana, simply because they want to feel the rush of 4 or 5 playoff games. They are either clinging to this delusion that a 34 win Celtic team can shock the world (like the 44 win 76er team who upset 1st seed Chicago in 2012 after Rose got injured.. then subsequently missed the playoffs the next two years) or they just really really really want to watch 4 playoff games NOW. NOW NOW NOW.
Pretty sure those folks would have failed the Marshmallow Test as children:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614HQ
Boys and girls, you can either have one Marshmallow now (one playoff series) ... or you can wait (tank) and have two marshmallows (a proper foundation built around one of the elite prospects in this draft and the rest of our youth... resulting in perhaps a decade of contention)
-
In regards to the Marshmallow test;
I watch hoops to enjoy the aesthetics behind playing basketball, then to enjoy watching my team compete, and then to enjoy my team win. I root for a good, close games, where the Celtics emerge victorious.
As such, I tend to side with Drew Magary on this one (he's talking about football, but the idea applies here):
I watched the Vikings lose to the Ravens in the most Vikings-like way possible last Sunday and it was agony. They won, and then they lost, and then they won, and then they lost for good, because that's how the Vikings work. They wouldn't be the Vikings otherwise. They'd be some other, awesomer team. Anyway, I watched Vikes-Ravens from beginning to end even though, superficially speaking, the Vikings had "nothing" to play for. They were 3-8-1 with a lame-duck coach and three lame-duck quarterbacks. In theory, the only thing at stake when the Vikings played the Ravens in that snowstorm was their draft position. Their precious, precious draft position.
If the Vikings had won that game on Sunday, they could have theoretically screwed themselves out of a good draft pick, given that there's a raft of 4-9 teams waiting right behind them. Hop on Twitter during any game and you will hear fans of a [bad] team rooting for draft position, or consoling themselves after a loss by celebrating the maintenance of draft position. Six years ago, Bill Simmons coined the term "fantanking" for this exercise: the act of rooting against your own team for what you perceive as its long-term benefit. And you now see fantanking regularly as the NFL regular season comes to a close and [bad] teams burn off games.
Now here's the thing: If you are someone who is fantanking honestly, and not just [comforting] yourself after a tough loss, then you are a moron. You suck. You really, truly suck.
And I'm not saying this as some kind of moral scolding. I don't think I'm a better fan than you. (I know I'm not.) This is strictly a practical matter, because fantanking makes rooting for a football team an even greater waste of time than it already is. Mathematically speaking, your favorite sports team will play a LOT of supposedly meaningless games in your lifetime. They will make the playoffs only sporadically. They will win a title once in a blue moon, if at all. There's a lot of meaningless horse[stuff] in between all of that, and it make far more sense to CARE. It's more enjoyable to want your team to win every game, no matter what that game is, so that you can get the most out of your time with them.
-
"Anti-Tankers" want us to limp into the playoffs as a losing team (say 34 wins, for instance) only to get curb-stomped by Indiana, simply because they want to feel the rush of 4 or 5 playoff games. They are either clinging to this delusion that a 34 win Celtic team can shock the world (like the 44 win 76er team who upset 1st seed Chicago in 2012 after Rose got injured.. then subsequently missed the playoffs the next two years) or they just really really really want to watch 4 playoff games NOW. NOW NOW NOW.
Pretty sure those folks would have failed the Marshmallow Test as children:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614HQ
Boys and girls, you can either have one Marshmallow now (one playoff series) ... or you can wait (tank) and have two marshmallows (a proper foundation built around one of the elite prospects in this draft and the rest of our youth... resulting in perhaps a decade of contention)
I want us to lose and draft as high as possible, but I don't know if all the "anti-tankers" are as dimwitted as you try to present them to be. Everybody understands the logic(I think) that a higher pick offers a better chance at drafting a great player, but there have been other ways of putting a contender together that have been mentioned a million times in a million other threads on these boards over the last several months/years. Just look at Indiana, or Houston (if you can consider them a contender). Yes, we got Allen with the 5th pick, but traded for KG with Jefferson, the 15th pick.
And Hpantazo you're right. I'm maybe getting ahead of myself with Rondo. I just hope he gets back to at least near 100% at some point.
-
In regards to the Marshmallow test;
I watch hoops to enjoy the aesthetics behind playing basketball, then to enjoy watching my team compete, and then to enjoy my team win. I root for a good, close games, where the Celtics emerge victorious.
As such, I tend to side with Drew Magary on this one (he's talking about football, but the idea applies here):
I watched the Vikings lose to the Ravens in the most Vikings-like way possible last Sunday and it was agony. They won, and then they lost, and then they won, and then they lost for good, because that's how the Vikings work. They wouldn't be the Vikings otherwise. They'd be some other, awesomer team. Anyway, I watched Vikes-Ravens from beginning to end even though, superficially speaking, the Vikings had "nothing" to play for. They were 3-8-1 with a lame-duck coach and three lame-duck quarterbacks. In theory, the only thing at stake when the Vikings played the Ravens in that snowstorm was their draft position. Their precious, precious draft position.
If the Vikings had won that game on Sunday, they could have theoretically screwed themselves out of a good draft pick, given that there's a raft of 4-9 teams waiting right behind them. Hop on Twitter during any game and you will hear fans of a [bad] team rooting for draft position, or consoling themselves after a loss by celebrating the maintenance of draft position. Six years ago, Bill Simmons coined the term "fantanking" for this exercise: the act of rooting against your own team for what you perceive as its long-term benefit. And you now see fantanking regularly as the NFL regular season comes to a close and [bad] teams burn off games.
Now here's the thing: If you are someone who is fantanking honestly, and not just [comforting] yourself after a tough loss, then you are a moron. You suck. You really, truly suck.
And I'm not saying this as some kind of moral scolding. I don't think I'm a better fan than you. (I know I'm not.) This is strictly a practical matter, because fantanking makes rooting for a football team an even greater waste of time than it already is. Mathematically speaking, your favorite sports team will play a LOT of supposedly meaningless games in your lifetime. They will make the playoffs only sporadically. They will win a title once in a blue moon, if at all. There's a lot of meaningless horse[stuff] in between all of that, and it make far more sense to CARE. It's more enjoyable to want your team to win every game, no matter what that game is, so that you can get the most out of your time with them.
I hear what Drew's saying, but he's not thinking about it straight.
I honestly believe if we land a Top 5 pick in this draft, it will dramatically improve the fortunes of this team. It will dramatically impact how many games we win from 2015-2025. I truly believe that we will win a lot less games from 2015-2025 if we make the playoffs this year. It could mean the difference between 10 years of 35-42 wins... and 10 years of 50-60 wins.
People have argued with me that that line of thinking is wrong and that the draft isn't a sure thing. Yeah... i got that, but also they are using random drafts to prove their point. This is a transcendent draft with as many as 8 potential all-stars. As proven in 2007... even a Top 5 pick in a "normal" draft was enough to land an all-star player. A top 5 pick in this draft?... absolute gold. So yes, I've thought it through... yes, I understand the value of trade chips. And yes... I absolutely believe the best thing for us to do this year would be to bottom out. I equate it to future success.
Sports is entertainment to me. I want to see Boston win as many games possible in my lifetime. Watching them lose sucks. Fans who want to watch them lose for the next decade, suck. I'm like this with any entertainment. If I want to see a movie about Robots fighting Monsters, I could just watch some B-Movie slapped together mediocre ripoff called "Atlantic Rim"... or I could have a little patience and wait a few days for "Pacific Rim" to come out. I skip the B-Movie every time and wait for the blockbuster. http://www.shortlist.com/entertainment/films/most-blatant-movie-rip-offs ... I'm happy to skip this season and wait for the Celtic blockbuster.
I don't blame anyone for rooting for this sitting duck team to win nightly. They would probably be comfortable with their 1 marshmallow and their decade of mediocrity. I long ago realized this season was a necessary sacrifice for my long-term fandom. Hold off on eating that Marshmallow now... and I should be looking at a far more entertaining team next season and beyond. Marshmallow heaven.
-
It's painful but you have to be patient. I want ainge to make the best trade possible. The team isnt going anywhere this year anyway. This team is years away from making any significant noise in the playoffs.
I imagine that if the trade deadline passes an humphries is still a Celtic, he will probably see a lot less playing time, and just be a nice expiring contract at the end of the season. Until then, he is playing well enough to earn the time, and might as well showcase him for a desperate team in February.
TP. We may as well wait for the best possible offer for Humphries. What does it hurt? If no offer comes around we can either bench him or cut him. Either way Sully and KO will get minutes.
-
Guys, this draft is way overrated.
-
I hear what Drew's saying, but he's not thinking about it straight.
I honestly believe if we land a Top 5 pick in this draft, it will dramatically improve the fortunes of this team. It will dramatically impact how many games we win from 2015-2025. I truly believe that we will win a lot less games from 2015-2025 if we make the playoffs this year. It could mean the difference between 10 years of 35-42 wins... and 10 years of 50-60 wins.
People have argued with me that that line of thinking is wrong and that the draft isn't a sure thing. Yeah... i got that, but also they are using random drafts to prove their point. This is a transcendent draft with as many as 8 potential all-stars. As proven in 2007... even a Top 5 pick in a "normal" draft was enough to land an all-star player. A top 5 pick in this draft?... absolute gold. So yes, I've thought it through... yes, I understand the value of trade chips. And yes... I absolutely believe the best thing for us to do this year would be to bottom out. I equate it to future success.
Sports is entertainment to me. I want to see Boston win as many games possible in my lifetime. Watching them lose sucks. Fans who want to watch them lose for the next decade, suck. I'm like this with any entertainment. If I want to see a movie about Robots fighting Monsters, I could just watch some B-Movie slapped together mediocre ripoff called "Atlantic Rim"... or I could have a little patience and wait a few days for "Pacific Rim" to come out. I skip the B-Movie every time and wait for the blockbuster. http://www.shortlist.com/entertainment/films/most-blatant-movie-rip-offs ... I'm happy to skip this season and wait for the Celtic blockbuster.
I don't blame anyone for rooting for this sitting duck team to win nightly. They would probably be comfortable with their 1 marshmallow and their decade of mediocrity. I long ago realized this season was a necessary sacrifice for my long-term fandom. Hold off on eating that Marshmallow now... and I should be looking at a far more entertaining team next season and beyond.
See, for me following sports is my job, so when I'm rooting for the Celtics while the game is on, I'm allowed a rare moment of reptile brain glory, totally bypassing the frontal cortex in a way that I don't get to do 99.999999% of the time. I don't care about draft picks, really, I don't care about getting my armchair GM on, really, and I certainly don't care about what moves the team could make to get better... while the game is on.
Afterwards? Yeah, sure, whatever. Bring on the Chad Ford and the Excel Spreadsheet of draft pick probability. During the game? That'd be like thinking about the potential eye color of your possible offspring during a recreational act of conception. Probably not the right time, and probably not the right place.
-
Lakers blog fans also have reached the point of .......wishing for a 8 th pace seed is a waste of time........reading them wishing their team to loose an d Kobe to take the year off is funny ........sounds like Rondo deal here......please stay out ;D
Let's bent over , take our suppository get it over with, Bottom out, get a pic , make some trades and next year begin to rises from the ashes
Tank goodness ........god bless all the tankers
-
Lakers blog fans also have reached the point of .......wishing for a 8 th pace seed is a waste of time........reading them wishing their team to loose an d Kobe to take the year off is funny ........sounds like Rondo deal here......please stay out ;D
Let's bent over , take our suppository get it over with, Bottom out, get a pic , make some trades and next year begin to rises from the ashes
Tank goodness ........god bless all the tankers
Amen
-
I hear what Drew's saying, but he's not thinking about it straight.
I honestly believe if we land a Top 5 pick in this draft, it will dramatically improve the fortunes of this team. It will dramatically impact how many games we win from 2015-2025. I truly believe that we will win a lot less games from 2015-2025 if we make the playoffs this year. It could mean the difference between 10 years of 35-42 wins... and 10 years of 50-60 wins.
People have argued with me that that line of thinking is wrong and that the draft isn't a sure thing. Yeah... i got that, but also they are using random drafts to prove their point. This is a transcendent draft with as many as 8 potential all-stars. As proven in 2007... even a Top 5 pick in a "normal" draft was enough to land an all-star player. A top 5 pick in this draft?... absolute gold. So yes, I've thought it through... yes, I understand the value of trade chips. And yes... I absolutely believe the best thing for us to do this year would be to bottom out. I equate it to future success.
Sports is entertainment to me. I want to see Boston win as many games possible in my lifetime. Watching them lose sucks. Fans who want to watch them lose for the next decade, suck. I'm like this with any entertainment. If I want to see a movie about Robots fighting Monsters, I could just watch some B-Movie slapped together mediocre ripoff called "Atlantic Rim"... or I could have a little patience and wait a few days for "Pacific Rim" to come out. I skip the B-Movie every time and wait for the blockbuster. http://www.shortlist.com/entertainment/films/most-blatant-movie-rip-offs ... I'm happy to skip this season and wait for the Celtic blockbuster.
I don't blame anyone for rooting for this sitting duck team to win nightly. They would probably be comfortable with their 1 marshmallow and their decade of mediocrity. I long ago realized this season was a necessary sacrifice for my long-term fandom. Hold off on eating that Marshmallow now... and I should be looking at a far more entertaining team next season and beyond.
See, for me following sports is my job, so when I'm rooting for the Celtics while the game is on, I'm allowed a rare moment of reptile brain glory, totally bypassing the frontal cortex in a way that I don't get to do 99.999999% of the time. I don't care about draft picks, really, I don't care about getting my armchair GM on, really, and I certainly don't care about what moves the team could make to get better... while the game is on.
Afterwards? Yeah, sure, whatever. Bring on the Chad Ford and the Excel Spreadsheet of draft pick probability. During the game? That'd be like thinking about the potential eye color of your possible offspring during a recreational act of conception. Probably not the right time, and probably not the right place.
My fandom doesn't waver when I'm rooting for them to bottom out. If anything, I'm more in tune with my franchise, more involved with watching the games and interacting with my fellow fans during the tank years.
Interesting, I vaguely remember seeing a quote in 2008 from Jeff or someone who helps run Celticblog. They were basically saying that there was more traffic to the blog and forum when the team sucked. More things to talk about. More potential trades to discuss. More things to debate about. Someone can confirm, but I'm pretty sure once they started winning the Celticsblog traffic took a major hit.
If you're looking at CEltic fandom from the aspect of entertainment... The Boston Celtics probably take up twice as much of my allotted "entertainment" time when they are tanking than when they are winning. When they are winning I just have a 2 hour game every couple days... then maybe a trip to Celticsblog once a week to reiterate "yup, we're really good".
That's not to say that I prefer the tank years. It's just a commentary on the facets of sports entertainment. I'm completely comfortable with rooting for this team to bottom out this year. I'll be entertained by the Celtics this year regardless. This is slightly being meta, but the fact that 150 people are reading this thread at this very moment... on a non-game day and weekend, no less... proves that this season is entertaining as hell. And heading forward, I believe that bottoming out would result in a far better product on the floor for the next decade. More enjoyable games to watch. More potential wins to cheer for.
-
The upcoming stretch may be the roughest of the season, but February looks to be a breeze by comparison. Only 12 games but the only playoff teams (if season ended today) are the Mavs, Spurs, Suns, and Hawks. Also, who knows how the Suns and Hawks will look by mid to late Feb? Throw in a possibly 100% Rondo,...oh I don't even want to think about what could happen....we could go 7-5.
Edit: Only 11 games in February.
Rondo won't be 100% until next season. No player who returned from acl surgery has ever been anywhere close to 100% until at least 4-5 months after returning to game action.
Just a few examples, Rose sucked when he came back this year, and he was out a lot longer than Rondo. Shumpert is just now this week finally showing signs of returning to his pre-injury self. Perk never returned to his pre-acl self, and neither did Josh Howard, or Leon Powe, or countless other players. Those who did, took about a season of NBA action to do so.
King LeBron James himself could descend from the heavens and join this Celtic team... and I still think they would struggle to contend. If the 2nd best player on your team is 21 year old Jared Sullinger, you're probably not going very far.
If Rondo looks great when he returns, I still think it just expedites his ticket out of here. This very much is a team built for the future. Sully, Oly, Bradley, two 2014 picks, two 2015 picks, etc... 27 year olds don't really fit with the long-view of this squad.
You're probably more likely listing trade assets as the long term future of the team. It's fairly unlikely that Danny (and Wyc) are going to want to stay out of the playoffs for a long rebuild. It makes sense to try and add to Rondo before you throw in the towel and try to rebuild through the draft.
-
"Anti-Tankers" want us to limp into the playoffs as a losing team (say 34 wins, for instance) only to get curb-stomped by Indiana, simply because they want to feel the rush of 4 or 5 playoff games. They are either clinging to this delusion that a 34 win Celtic team can shock the world (like the 44 win 76er team who upset 1st seed Chicago in 2012 after Rose got injured.. then subsequently missed the playoffs the next two years) or they just really really really want to watch 4 playoff games NOW. NOW NOW NOW.
Pretty sure those folks would have failed the Marshmallow Test as children:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614HQ
Boys and girls, you can either have one Marshmallow now (one playoff series) ... or you can wait (tank) and have two marshmallows (a proper foundation built around one of the elite prospects in this draft and the rest of our youth... resulting in perhaps a decade of contention)
Nice strawman. Let me try:
Pro-tankers would have you think that this lottery contains not one, but several franchise messiahs, any of whom will magically grant their teams a legitimate chance of a title within their first few years of entering the league--and not one, not two, not three, but several banners before they hang up their ethereal sneakers.
And despite the vagaries of chance, and the significant head starts for the bottom that Orlando, Utah, and Milwaukee all currently enjoy, all the Celtics have to do is lose--at whatever cost--and the future of the club will be incandescently bright. Sure, they may need to gut the roster via a serious of trades that bring back pennies on the dollar, but it's going to be worth it when Banner Twenty gets raised on Opening Night 2018.
How'd I do?
-
"Anti-Tankers" want us to limp into the playoffs as a losing team (say 34 wins, for instance) only to get curb-stomped by Indiana, simply because they want to feel the rush of 4 or 5 playoff games. They are either clinging to this delusion that a 34 win Celtic team can shock the world (like the 44 win 76er team who upset 1st seed Chicago in 2012 after Rose got injured.. then subsequently missed the playoffs the next two years) or they just really really really want to watch 4 playoff games NOW. NOW NOW NOW.
Pretty sure those folks would have failed the Marshmallow Test as children:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614HQ
Boys and girls, you can either have one Marshmallow now (one playoff series) ... or you can wait (tank) and have two marshmallows (a proper foundation built around one of the elite prospects in this draft and the rest of our youth... resulting in perhaps a decade of contention)
Nice strawman. Let me try:
Pro-tankers would have you think that this lottery contains not one, but several franchise messiahs, any of whom will magically grant their teams a legitimate chance of a title within their first few years of entering the league--and not one, not two, not three, but several banners before they hang up their ethereal sneakers.
And despite the vagaries of chance, and the significant head starts for the bottom that Orlando, Utah, and Milwaukee all currently enjoy, all the Celtics have to do is lose--at whatever cost--and the future of the club will be incandescently bright. Sure, they may need to gut the roster via a serious of trades that bring back pennies on the dollar, but it's going to be worth it when Banner Twenty gets raised on Opening Night 2018.
How'd I do?
No actually let's put it this way.
Let's say there's 6 guys in this draft everyone really really loves: Embiid, Parker, Wiggins, Smart, Randle, Exum.
Let's forget about the aspect of wanting trades... Let's say that all the rosters say exactly the same between now and the end of the season. Rondo, Bass, Lee, etc all stay.
There's currently 2 games separating the team with the 6th worst record and the team with the 8th seed/#15 pick. Just a mere 2 games. It's massive parity. Everyone from the 5th seed down sucks. There's a mere 5 games separating the 5th seed (14-16 Washington) and the team with the 3rd worst record in the league (10-23 Orlando). It's a disaster conference with interchangeable pieces... none of which (Washington, Detroit, Chicago, Bobcats, Celtics, Cavs, 76ers, Nets, Knicks, Magic) actually stand a chance of winning a championship this year.
Completely interchangeable teams that will either make the playoffs by default as "also-rans"... or make the lottery. Question is, would you rather be in the position of Washington, Detroit, Chicago and Charlotte (currently projected to make the playoffs and pick #15-18) ... or would you rather have a shot at one of those 6 studs in the draft?
Or a more to-the-point question. Would you rather have the 6th worst record in the league and come away with either Embiid, Parker, Wiggins, Smart, Randle, Exum... or would you rather be 2 games better and make the playoffs? Which improves your long-term enjoyment more?
If you had a choice... do you go with making the playoffs and trying your luck with some unknown draft prospects? Or would you rather skip the playoffs this year and add Dante Exum to your rebuilding assets?
-
You conflate an anti-tanking stance with wanting to make the playoffs. That's your problem.
Your definition of "tanking" is not shared by all.
-
You conflate an anti-tanking stance with wanting to make the playoffs. That's your problem.
Your definition of "tanking" is not shared by all.
Yeah to be clear, I don't think the players or coach should throw games. I think Danny already did the work for them. I just can't honestly say that I'd be happy about making the playoffs with 34 wins.
-
I, along with the majority of "tankers", share the opinion of LarBrd33 on the defintion of tankers.
Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not by those on the front line. We want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough. That's Ainge's job.
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
-
"Anti-Tankers" want us to limp into the playoffs as a losing team (say 34 wins, for instance) only to get curb-stomped by Indiana, simply because they want to feel the rush of 4 or 5 playoff games. They are either clinging to this delusion that a 34 win Celtic team can shock the world (like the 44 win 76er team who upset 1st seed Chicago in 2012 after Rose got injured.. then subsequently missed the playoffs the next two years) or they just really really really want to watch 4 playoff games NOW. NOW NOW NOW.
You seem to be rankled that not everyone's rooting for losses, but you're missing the bulk of the argument. Rooting for wins or losses isn't the real issue in the tank debate. Pro tankers have been in favor of dismantling the team and making it as bad as possible with the expectation that we'll get the next LeBron in the draft. The other side doesn't hold that view. The team's going to play the way the team's going to play, and whether that results in a top 5 pick or a playoff berth is unknown. The real question is whether the team tries to add to it's core or blow it up.
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
-
Rejoice ...Rejoice ...
Jus...
Tank it to d limit ......tank it to d limit ......tank it to d limit
One mo time .... ;D
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Can't say I subscribe to this point of view. Free agency always means overspending (Ainge knows this, and has said as much).
And as numerous articles, including on the blog, have illustrated, if the Celtics are clearing the books to make a max offer to a free agent this summer, it's going to mean the roster is cleared of everyone except for Rondo, rookie year deals, and possibly (depending on the scenario) a resigned Bradley. And, it'll require moving some other contracts (Lee, Wallace) likely at the cost of one or two future first rounders.
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Can't say I subscribe to this point of view. Free agency always means overspending (Ainge knows this, and has said as much).
And as numerous articles, including on the blog, have illustrated, if the Celtics are clearing the books to make a max offer to a free agent this summer, it's going to mean the roster is cleared of everyone except for Rondo, rookie year deals, and possibly (depending on the scenario) a resigned Bradley. And, it'll require moving some other contracts (Lee, Wallace) likely at the cost of one or two future first rounders.
I don't see how that's true looking at the numbers I'm looking at. Yes, Crawford and Bradley would likely have to be renounced, but if Lee and Bass are cleared off the books, we would have enough for 1 max deal, even with the incoming rookie scales.
Note: Maybe that's not something we look to do, but at least it would be an option this summer if we shed that salary. Perhaps there would be noone worthwhile to do it for. I'm all about the options, flexibility and losing games at this point.
-
You conflate an anti-tanking stance with wanting to make the playoffs. That's your problem.
Your definition of "tanking" is not shared by all.
Yeah to be clear, I don't think the players or coach should throw games. I think Danny already did the work for them. I just can't honestly say that I'd be happy about making the playoffs with 34 wins.
Well said Larrybird ....this is he short and long of the situation , the team is what it is , part of DA plan to rebuild.......they can play hard , entertain the fans, try as they might .......I think DA gauged the situation.......knowing he Celtics would run out fuel "wins" and would wind up in favorable draft position .........maybe not the worst team......but is top ten pick .....
Hawks lost and Bulls win......dis is good news !
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Yeah... trading Bass for a 2nd rounder would be a heist. That's almost like arguing we shouldn't trade Wallace, because he's a serviceable rotation player. If you can get an expiring for Wallace, you do it whether your are tanking or not.
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Yeah... trading Bass for a 2nd rounder would be a heist.
Edit: Ok, a heist for us. I agree.
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Yeah... trading Bass for a 2nd rounder would be a heist.
What if it were Bass and Lee?
15 million for a veteran to come off your bench for the next 3 years is the luxury of contenders. I'm pretty sure a 34 win team (whether playoff-bound or lotto bound) would be happy to rid themselves of Lee's contract.
-
That's my point: you have to dump Bass and Lee for expirings, which will require at least one 1st round pick, more likely two, plus let Bradley walk (unless you're also able to dump Wallace, at the costs of additional picks).
Here's the list of FAs next year:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9947573/nba-free-agents-2014-2015
The addition of which player on this list makes Rondo, Green, and the rookies (and either Wallace or Bradley) a championship contender?
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Yeah... trading Bass for a 2nd rounder would be a heist.
What if it were Bass and Lee?
15 million for a veteran to come off your bench for the next 3 years is the luxury of contenders. I'm pretty sure a 34 win team (whether playoff-bound or lotto bound) would be happy to rid themselves of Lee's contract.
No team GM in the NBA will give up an expiring for Lee.
Dumping Bass' salary doesn't move the needle on the prospects for next year's squad. $6 mil of cap space amounts to very little. You need at least twice that much to do anything of importance in the free agent market.
-
That's my point: you have to dump Bass and Lee for expirings, which will require at least one 1st round pick, more likely two, plus let Bradley walk (unless you're also able to dump Wallace, at the costs of additional picks).
Here's the list of FAs next year:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9947573/nba-free-agents-2014-2015
The addition of which player on this list makes Rondo, Green, and the rookies (and either Wallace or Bradley) a championship contender?
I wouldn't argue that we should give up picks to dump anyone. We are bad enough to get a decent pick as is. But if the opportunity presents itself to shed one of these guys you do it.
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Yeah... trading Bass for a 2nd rounder would be a heist.
What if it were Bass and Lee?
15 million for a veteran to come off your bench for the next 3 years is the luxury of contenders. I'm pretty sure a 34 win team (whether playoff-bound or lotto bound) would be happy to rid themselves of Lee's contract.
No team GM in the NBA will give up an expiring for Lee.
Dumping Bass' salary doesn't move the needle on the prospects for next year's squad. $6 mil of cap space amounts to nothing. You need at least twice that much to do anything of importance in the free agent market.
Then don't trade him.
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Yeah... trading Bass for a 2nd rounder would be a heist.
What if it were Bass and Lee?
15 million for a veteran to come off your bench for the next 3 years is the luxury of contenders. I'm pretty sure a 34 win team (whether playoff-bound or lotto bound) would be happy to rid themselves of Lee's contract.
No team GM in the NBA will give up an expiring for Lee.
Dumping Bass' salary doesn't move the needle on the prospects for next year's squad. $6 mil of cap space amounts to nothing. You need at least twice that much to do anything of importance in the free agent market.
Then don't trade him.
OK, then back to my original question: what if Bass is helping the team win games? What do you do if the objective is a bottom-6 finish this season?
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Yeah... trading Bass for a 2nd rounder would be a heist.
What if it were Bass and Lee?
15 million for a veteran to come off your bench for the next 3 years is the luxury of contenders. I'm pretty sure a 34 win team (whether playoff-bound or lotto bound) would be happy to rid themselves of Lee's contract.
No team GM in the NBA will give up an expiring for Lee.
Dumping Bass' salary doesn't move the needle on the prospects for next year's squad. $6 mil of cap space amounts to nothing. You need at least twice that much to do anything of importance in the free agent market.
Then don't trade him.
OK, then back to my original question: what if Bass is helping the team win games? What do you do if the objective is a bottom-6 finish this season?
Not really the original question...
If he's playing well, that improves his value around the league, thus allowing us the ability to trade him without giving up as much as a straight $6 M dump. I think trading Bass in a shedding fashion is within the realm of possibility given how he's played this season and his contract not being too bad.
-
At the beginning of the season it was; "Wiggins/Parker of bust!". Now it's; "woo hoo, ninth pick!"
Congratulations, tankers . . . I guess.
I don't think a 9th pick is anyone's best case scenario, but I also doubt anyone who thinks that getting a top-5 pick in this draft believes the C's will remain at the 9th spot. There's no real separation yet, lotta basketball.
In that case, it's a little early for the tankers to be rejoicing.
-
I want us to win and root for us to win, but if we lose, I don't care. I'm just like "whatever, at least it helps our chances at getting a high lottery pick."
What's that make me?
-
At the beginning of the season it was; "Wiggins/Parker of bust!". Now it's; "woo hoo, ninth pick!"
Congratulations, tankers . . . I guess.
I don't think a 9th pick is anyone's best case scenario, but I also doubt anyone who thinks that getting a top-5 pick in this draft believes the C's will remain at the 9th spot. There's no real separation yet, lotta basketball.
In that case, it's a little early for the tankers to be rejoicing.
Well we started the season as "hey they could sneakily not be as awful as everyone thought."
Then the first four game losing streak happened, and we all started watching college hoops and becoming experts on the draft.
Then we started to reach for .500, and it became all about being "one or two pieces away"
Now we're a little more than a third of the way through the season, and we're back to arguing about tanking... with fewer trade discussions now that the deadline is starting to loom. It's cyclical.
I hope we beat the thunder.
-
At the beginning of the season it was; "Wiggins/Parker of bust!". Now it's; "woo hoo, ninth pick!"
Congratulations, tankers . . . I guess.
I don't think a 9th pick is anyone's best case scenario, but I also doubt anyone who thinks that getting a top-5 pick in this draft believes the C's will remain at the 9th spot. There's no real separation yet, lotta basketball.
In that case, it's a little early for the tankers to be rejoicing.
Well we started the season as "hey they could sneakily not be as awful as everyone thought."
Then the first four game losing streak happened, and we all started watching college hoops and becoming experts on the draft.
Then we started to reach for .500, and it became all about being "one or two pieces away"
Now we're a little more than a third of the way through the season, and we're back to arguing about tanking... with fewer trade discussions now that the deadline is starting to loom. It's cyclical.
I hope we beat the thunder.
Me too.
-
There is so much talk about tanking all over the league that I am rooting for Ainge to show that it is possible to rebuild without getting a top five pick. I don't believe in such a rigid fixation on only one way to do things, like those who believe that the Celtics can't win a title without a high draft pick. I leave that sort of binary thinking to the talking heads on ESPN.
-
I don't mean to gloat, but it feels good to see this basketball team losing some games. It is a necessary evil in this league if you want to have a better shot at building a winner.
Cheers to other tankers today. We will likely lose all 5 of these games of this West Coast swing.
totally, dead-blunt honest...
i'm disgusted by this
it is what it is, I guess
-
"Anti-Tankers" want us to limp into the playoffs as a losing team (say 34 wins, for instance) only to get curb-stomped by Indiana, simply because they want to feel the rush of 4 or 5 playoff games. They are either clinging to this delusion that a 34 win Celtic team can shock the world (like the 44 win 76er team who upset 1st seed Chicago in 2012 after Rose got injured.. then subsequently missed the playoffs the next two years) or they just really really really want to watch 4 playoff games NOW. NOW NOW NOW.
Pretty sure those folks would have failed the Marshmallow Test as children:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614HQ
Boys and girls, you can either have one Marshmallow now (one playoff series) ... or you can wait (tank) and have two marshmallows (a proper foundation built around one of the elite prospects in this draft and the rest of our youth... resulting in perhaps a decade of contention)
That's cute, but it's a terrible analogy. If that lady had said to seven year old me; "here's a marshmallow, there's a chance that I'll give you another marshmallow whether you eat that one or not, but if you don't eat it, there's a slightly higher chance that I'll give you another one," seven year old me would have eaten the marshmallow.
What I've described is much closer to the Celtics current situation. We really don't know if that second marshmallow is coming or where it's coming from, whether we tank or not.
You are right. I want the marshmallow. Once I eat it, I'm counting on uncle Danny to get me another one.
-
"Anti-Tankers" want us to limp into the playoffs as a losing team (say 34 wins, for instance) only to get curb-stomped by Indiana, simply because they want to feel the rush of 4 or 5 playoff games. They are either clinging to this delusion that a 34 win Celtic team can shock the world (like the 44 win 76er team who upset 1st seed Chicago in 2012 after Rose got injured.. then subsequently missed the playoffs the next two years) or they just really really really want to watch 4 playoff games NOW. NOW NOW NOW.
Pretty sure those folks would have failed the Marshmallow Test as children:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614HQ
Boys and girls, you can either have one Marshmallow now (one playoff series) ... or you can wait (tank) and have two marshmallows (a proper foundation built around one of the elite prospects in this draft and the rest of our youth... resulting in perhaps a decade of contention)
That's cute, but it's a terrible analogy. If that lady had said to seven year old me; "here's a marshmallow, there's a chance that I'll give you another marshmallow whether you eat that one or not, but if you don't eat it, there's a slightly higher chance that I'll give you another one," seven year old me would have eaten the marshmallow.
What I've described is much closer to the Celtics current situation. We really don't know if that second marshmallow is coming or where it's coming from, whether we tank or not.
You are right. I want the marshmallow. Once I eat it, I'm counting on uncle Danny to get me another one.
I hear you. I think we still have some disagreement over whether there is a big difference between a Top 8 pick in this draft vs the #15 pick. I tend to think the pick itself has significant trade value if it falls within the Top 8 of this draft. #15 pick... not so much.
I don't think that using history of past drafts is very helpful in that debate. It's different every year. Sometimes there is a consensus Top 3... sometimes a consensus Top 2... sometimes it's thought to be 5 players deep. This draft is unique. I think bagging this season and landing one of those golden biscuits can be helpful in a multitude of ways. Ford says he has 8 players in his top 2 tiers this year. I want a Top 8 pick. You might luck out with #15, but you're better off with a Top 8 this year.
#1 - Gives you a shot at a star.
#2 - If Ainge goes against the consensus and covets players later in the draft, he could easily trade his Top 8 pick for two picks later in the 1st round.
#3 - It opens up real trade possibilities for existing all-star players.
You don't really have that kind of opportunity with your #15 pick.
-
At the beginning of the season it was; "Wiggins/Parker of bust!". Now it's; "woo hoo, ninth pick!"
Congratulations, tankers . . . I guess.
I don't think a 9th pick is anyone's best case scenario, but I also doubt anyone who thinks that getting a top-5 pick in this draft believes the C's will remain at the 9th spot. There's no real separation yet, lotta basketball.
In that case, it's a little early for the tankers to be rejoicing.
That's OUR word.
Kidding...it is soooo early for anyone to be rejoicing in anything other than Jared Sullinger. And maybe Bradley, a little.
-
Speaking of tanking... anyone rooting for the Bynum for Gasol trade? Gasol would make the Cavs significantly better this year. That'd be one less opponent in the tank race.
-
"Anti-Tankers" want us to limp into the playoffs as a losing team (say 34 wins, for instance) only to get curb-stomped by Indiana, simply because they want to feel the rush of 4 or 5 playoff games. They are either clinging to this delusion that a 34 win Celtic team can shock the world (like the 44 win 76er team who upset 1st seed Chicago in 2012 after Rose got injured.. then subsequently missed the playoffs the next two years) or they just really really really want to watch 4 playoff games NOW. NOW NOW NOW.
Pretty sure those folks would have failed the Marshmallow Test as children:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614HQ
Boys and girls, you can either have one Marshmallow now (one playoff series) ... or you can wait (tank) and have two marshmallows (a proper foundation built around one of the elite prospects in this draft and the rest of our youth... resulting in perhaps a decade of contention)
That's cute, but it's a terrible analogy. If that lady had said to seven year old me; "here's a marshmallow, there's a chance that I'll give you another marshmallow whether you eat that one or not, but if you don't eat it, there's a slightly higher chance that I'll give you another one," seven year old me would have eaten the marshmallow.
What I've described is much closer to the Celtics current situation. We really don't know if that second marshmallow is coming or where it's coming from, whether we tank or not.
You are right. I want the marshmallow. Once I eat it, I'm counting on uncle Danny to get me another one.
I hear you. I think we still have some disagreement over whether this is a big difference between a Top 8 pick in this draft vs the #15 pick. I tend to think the pick itself has significant trade value if it falls within the Top 8 of this draft. #15 pick... not so much.
Yes, I do disagree. I think that a top three pick would give us a really good shot at getting a franchise player, a four or five pick would give us decent odds as well. But, I think that once you move out of the top five, the draft--and this goes for any draft, good ones as well as bad ones--becomes more or less a crap shoot.
You can land a good player at eight or you can land a good player at eighteen. I think history has shown that the draft is nowhere near as exact a science as those rooting for ping pong balls would like it to be.
We have a GM who has gotten us Rajon Rondo, Al Jefferson, Jared Sullinger, Tony Allen, Kendrick Perkins, and Avery Bradley all outside of the lottery.
My take on this draft is that not only does it have a couple of potential superstars at the top, but it also has a lot of depth. With two first round picks in it, I like our chances of coming away with a nice prize regardless of what record we finish up with.
-
Philly, Bobcats, Nets, Bulls all win! Hawks lose!
Great night for us tankers!!!!!
-
You can land a good player at eight or you can land a good player at eighteen. I think history has shown that the draft is nowhere near as exact a science as those rooting for ping pong balls would like it to be.
If you go back and look at every draft from the last 30 years, this is true in the letter but not in implication, at least the implication I got from what you said.
True: You can land a player at pick 8 or pick 18
False: you have about as good a chance of landing a good player at 8 as you do at 18
There is actually a pretty big discrepancy between the odds of landing a good play at 8 compared with landing a good player at 18. That's a tangential argument, Id be pretty annoyed if we suffered through a rebuilding year and only got an 8th overall, but it's a commonly made, 'well player x was picked at 18, and that just proves there is still talent at 18', because while it's true, it doesn't acknowledge there is a much better chance of getting a dud there as well. The counterpoint to this is 'Kwame Brown was a first overall, how did that turn out?', and it's no less of a false equivalency.
-
Speaking of tanking... anyone rooting for the Bynum for Gasol trade? Gasol would make the Cavs significantly better this year. That'd be one less opponent in the tank race.
But likely hurt the Lakers who are right in the mix with us at the bottom....though if the Cavs can catch up to and pass Brooklyn and Atlanta I guess that would be positive....I thought that trade was dead anyways...
-
Speaking of tanking... anyone rooting for the Bynum for Gasol trade? Gasol would make the Cavs significantly better this year. That'd be one less opponent in the tank race.
But likely hurt the Lakers who are right in the mix with us at the bottom....though if the Cavs can catch up to and pass Brooklyn and Atlanta I guess that would be positive....I thought that trade was dead anyways...
Outstanding point. That would likely lead to a Kobe/Randle/LeBron threesome next year. I'm no longer rooting for the trade.
-
Philly, Bobcats, Nets, Bulls all win! Hawks lose!
Great night for us tankers!!!!!
TP. The Hawks are dropping fast and i'm loving it.
-
Speaking of tanking... anyone rooting for the Bynum for Gasol trade? Gasol would make the Cavs significantly better this year. That'd be one less opponent in the tank race.
But likely hurt the Lakers who are right in the mix with us at the bottom....though if the Cavs can catch up to and pass Brooklyn and Atlanta I guess that would be positive....I thought that trade was dead anyways...
Outstanding point. That would likely lead to a Kobe/Randle/LeBron threesome next year. I'm no longer rooting for the trade.
Also it doesn't really help our draft position's biggest threat, IE that Boston somehow wins the Atlantic with the 8th worst record in the league.
-
You can land a good player at eight or you can land a good player at eighteen. I think history has shown that the draft is nowhere near as exact a science as those rooting for ping pong balls would like it to be.
If you go back and look at every draft from the last 30 years, this is true in the letter but not in implication, at least the implication I got from what you said.
True: You can land a player at pick 8 or pick 18
False: you have about as good a chance of landing a good player at 8 as you do at 18
There is actually a pretty big discrepancy between the odds of landing a good play at 8 compared with landing a good player at 18. That's a tangential argument, Id be pretty annoyed if we suffered through a rebuilding year and only got an 8th overall, but it's a commonly made, 'well player x was picked at 18, and that just proves there is still talent at 18', because while it's true, it doesn't acknowledge there is a much better chance of getting a dud there as well. The counterpoint to this is 'Kwame Brown was a first overall, how did that turn out?', and it's no less of a false equivalency.
I mean people always bring up Rondo and Big Al. Technically Rondo wasn't even our draft pick... they were giving picks away for free that year. We bought Rondo after the Suns drafted him.
Pretty sure Boston has never drafted a superstar with a pick 15 and above. They have drafted superstars in the Top 8, though. ;)
You look over our list of guys taken 15 and over and you'll see names like Lucas Nogueira, Sullinger, Fab Melo, Marshon Brooks, Avery Bradley, JR Giddens, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Delonte West, Tony Allen, Troy Bell, Dahntay Jones, Joe Forte, Acie Earl. Sure there's some good players and good role players there, but lots of garbage too.
Boston's picks in the top 8 since 1970:
Dave Cowens, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Len Bias, Antoine Walker, Chauncey Billups, Ron Mercer, Randy Foye, Jeff Green
Sure there's some duds in there too, but I like our track record. Hah.
-
We bought Rondo after the Suns drafted him.
That's not the correct story. Ainge was desperately in love with Rondo. When it looked like Rondo might slip into the 20s, Ainge got permission to buy a pick and worked out an agreement to give the Suns a future pick and take on Brian Grant's contract. The deal was agreed to before Rondo was drafted, conditional on things such as Isaiah Thomas not taking him. (the Knicks went with Renaldo Balkman.)
Sure, Phoenix technically drafted Rondo, but Rondo probably wouldn't have been drafted if there hadn't been a deal with the Celtics in place before Rondo's name was called. Even if the Suns submitted his name, Ainge chose Rondo and deserves all the credit for picking him.
-
Yup, a lot of people seem to think we just shelled out some cash for that pick when that is just not the case. We got that pick(and the last of Brian Grant's contract) in exchange for a future pick
-
TP's to all my tanking buddies. #brotherhood
lol the brotherhood.
I'm actually not a fan of deliberately throwing games but I am a fan of Danny building a young squad that, because of a lack of experience, game minutes and a new coach- will ultimately suck whilst improving. 8)
The great consequence of sucking would be a shot at the next NBA superstar or even an All Star.
Wouldn't it be great if our young guys could improve slowly whilst adding an elite level talent out of the draft to this young roster as part of the process?
I haven't looked at the full road trip schedule but I saw that OKC is on the second leg of a back to back.
I wonder how many will be back to backs?
I also worry that teams like Toronto and Detroit will meet very tough schedules towards the end of the season when we have a cake-walk. Our last 6 or 7 games are complete gimmes if I remember correctly.
I wonder just how hard teams will self-enforce a huge collapse by March/April.
God I hope we are one of the teams that decides to play only young guys come March.
I'm with you brother.
-
Wow... "tankers rejoice"? ;D
This reminded me of this thread (http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1282199) on the RealGM Raptors board, Tank World Order. Hilarious.
The Eastern Conference is too Tank Powerful to predict, but I'd expect the Cs to have a 30-34 wins and be out of the Playoffs. A top 10 pick is our most probable reward in June for Danny's (unfinished) trade job. Rondo's return, combined with trades still to happen will keep the Cs on the .400 mark, more or less.
Hey, Tank brotherhood, the Celtics won't become the Bobcats in order to get a top 5 pick. Danny will trade players for basketball/financial reasons, not for the tank. He's set a talented yet unbalanced roster this season to get the tank job done while developing and maximizing players' value.
Bass and Lee won't be traded to lose more games, they'll be sent to teams that can use good role players to try to win. Celtics will ask for picks/young players/financial flexibility, but they don't need to trade anyone. Crawford, Humphries, Bogans... also could be on the move. We'll see. If they stay put, that's fine.
Yeah, we're tanking and here's the irrefutable evidence:
(http://imageshack.us/a/img24/8029/ozhj.jpg)
-
That tank poster makes the whole discussion worthwhile.
-
Wow... "tankers rejoice"? ;D
This reminded me of this thread (http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1282199) on the RealGM Raptors board, Tank World Order. Hilarious.
The Eastern Conference is too Tank Powerful to predict, but I'd expect the Cs to have a 30-34 wins and be out of the Playoffs. A top 10 pick is our most probable reward in June for Danny's (unfinished) trade job. Rondo's return, combined with trades still to happen will keep the Cs on the .400 mark, more or less.
Hey, Tank brotherhood, the Celtics won't become the Bobcats in order to get a top 5 pick. Danny will trade players for basketball/financial reasons, not for the tank. He's set a talented yet unbalanced roster this season to get the tank job done while developing and maximizing players' value.
Bass and Lee won't be traded to lose more games, they'll be sent to teams that can use good role players to try to win. Celtics will ask for picks/young players/financial flexibility, but they don't need to trade anyone. Crawford, Humphries, Bogans... also could be on the move. We'll see. If they stay put, that's fine.
Yeah, we're tanking and here's the irrefutable evidence:
(http://imageshack.us/a/img24/8029/ozhj.jpg)
Love the poster .... :D. TP
Tank On Dude !
-
Maybe Ainge isn't really enthralled with any of the alleged can't-miss guys in this draft, so doesn't care if the team makes the playoffs, and his long-term plan is to tank for the 2015 draft, where he sees a shot at drafting a franchise big man.
How would you feel if the Celtics sneak into the playoffs and take the #1 seed to seven games then follow that up with a 20-win season?
-
Speaking of tanking... anyone rooting for the Bynum for Gasol trade? Gasol would make the Cavs significantly better this year. That'd be one less opponent in the tank race.
I would much rather the Celtics jump in there and offer Green, Lee and Bass for all of Cleveland's expiring contracts and then cut Bynum for instant cap relief. I would also like to see the Lakers remain in cap hell.
-
game to tomorrow
It would be really really helpful for "The Cause " for the
Nets to beat the Hawks ......please please please let the Nets win. LoLa :)
-
game to tomorrow
It would be really really helpful for "The Cause " for the
Nets to beat the Hawks ......please please please let the Nets win. LoLa :)
I'd rather the Hawks win that one. I think with Horford out, the Hawks will start to fall, and every time the Nets win I worry that they'll put it together. I want both of those teams to somehow miss the playoffs.
-
game to tomorrow
It would be really really helpful for "The Cause " for the
Nets to beat the Hawks ......please please please let the Nets win. LoLa :)
I'd rather the Hawks win that one. I think with Horford out, the Hawks will start to fall, and every time the Nets win I worry that they'll put it together. I want both of those teams to somehow miss the playoffs.
It's close to a no-lose, but I tend (for the time being) to agree with saltlover. I think the Hawks will crash and the Nets will rise over the next few months. Any Nets loss now will be good for later.
-
I'd put perfect pizza up against a lobbie any day. Ever had the clam pie at Pepe's in New Haven? If i had a choice of one last meal before heading for the big house, that might be it...
Its funny, when I was typing all that in the back of my head my inner foodie was like.."Yeah, but remember that pizza you had in New York (http://www.thepatsyspizza.com/)? The one where you froze the last slice so you could enjoy it later? That was pretty good pizza. And you've paid a lot more at prime rib joints for far less satisfaction."
Patsy's is good, but can't match some other NY pies. John's on Bleecker comes to mind. Lombardy's = strong. I love Arturo's on Houston St. None of them can touch Pepe's or Sally's in New Haven. Go!
-
Rejoicing over losing streaks...counter intuitive.
Ainge set this team up for 30 wins or so....obviously. Looks like he will get his wish. I suggest that the draft pick will be traded. This is fine as I prefer not to watch too many rookies "develop."
This roster needs a lot. If a high pick helps meet those needs? At least the Patriots are killin' it.
-
You can land a good player at eight or you can land a good player at eighteen. I think history has shown that the draft is nowhere near as exact a science as those rooting for ping pong balls would like it to be.
If you go back and look at every draft from the last 30 years, this is true in the letter but not in implication, at least the implication I got from what you said.
True: You can land a player at pick 8 or pick 18
False: you have about as good a chance of landing a good player at 8 as you do at 18
There is actually a pretty big discrepancy between the odds of landing a good play at 8 compared with landing a good player at 18. That's a tangential argument, Id be pretty annoyed if we suffered through a rebuilding year and only got an 8th overall, but it's a commonly made, 'well player x was picked at 18, and that just proves there is still talent at 18', because while it's true, it doesn't acknowledge there is a much better chance of getting a dud there as well. The counterpoint to this is 'Kwame Brown was a first overall, how did that turn out?', and it's no less of a false equivalency.
I mean people always bring up Rondo and Big Al. Technically Rondo wasn't even our draft pick... they were giving picks away for free that year. We bought Rondo after the Suns drafted him.
Pretty sure Boston has never drafted a superstar with a pick 15 and above. They have drafted superstars in the Top 8, though. ;)
You look over our list of guys taken 15 and over and you'll see names like Lucas Nogueira, Sullinger, Fab Melo, Marshon Brooks, Avery Bradley, JR Giddens, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Delonte West, Tony Allen, Troy Bell, Dahntay Jones, Joe Forte, Acie Earl. Sure there's some good players and good role players there, but lots of garbage too.
Boston's picks in the top 8 since 1970:
Dave Cowens, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Len Bias, Antoine Walker, Chauncey Billups, Ron Mercer, Randy Foye, Jeff Green
Sure there's some duds in there too, but I like our track record. Hah.
My point is that a vast majority of bona fide superstars are taken in the top five. Once you get outside the top five, it is very rare that you get a "franchise type superstar." Larry Bird, for example, is the only sixth pick taken since 1970 who makes Elrod Enchilada's much discussed list of superstars.
The seventh pick has yielded two lower level superstars, Bernard King and Chris Mullin, over that time period.
Robert Parish is the only one selected eighth.
Ninth did fairly well with Nowitzki, McGrady, and Stoudemire all selected there.
Tenth has two stars named Paul, Pierce and George. There have been no stars picked eleventh.
Dr. J. was picked 12th.
Bryant and Karl Malone were both selected thirteenth.
Clyde Drexler and Tim Hardaway at 14.
Nash, Stockton, Shawn Kemp, Joe Dumars, and Tiny Archibald were taken in the late teens from fifteen to nineteen.
Twentieth is Gus Williams, twenty-first, Rondo.
None taken at twenty-two. Alex English at twenty-three.
The 24th, 25th, and 26th picks have yielded no Enchilada superstars since 1970.
Rodman was taken 27th, Tony Parker 28th, and Dennis Johnson 29th. Spencer Haywood was taken 30th, and the Ice Man, George Gervin was taken 40th.
Finally, there's Ben Wallace, who went undrafted.
By my count, 38 of Enchilada's superstars drafted since 1970 were taken in the top five. 28 were taken outside of the top five. Of the 28 superstars taken outside the top five, fourteen were selected at spots 6 through 14, the lower lottery. The other fourteen were taken outside the lottery.
Of course, there have been a lot of very good to great players who aren't on Enchilada's list of superstars. Often times, these very good players are selected outside the lottery. Some have been taken later in the lottery.
I guess my overall point here is that if you are really rooting for tanking, you should be rooting for a bottom five record and a top five pick. There's no point in tanking for a mid-lottery pick.
Rejoicing in the possibility of a pick somewhere in the 6 to 12 range seems pointless. If that's where we are going to end up, I'd rather see the team maximize their win potential and hope for some good talent in the draft, regardless of where in the first round we end up picking.
And, by the way, I'm still not rooting for a bottom five finish. I simply don't think I can bear to see this team lose enough games to get that low, considering the competition for worst. And, despite this rough West coast trip coming up, I just don't think we'll end up with enough losses to be in the bottom five.
I'm rooting for wins every time out. I'm strong enough to deal with the losses.
-
Rejoicing over losing streaks...counter intuitive.
Ainge set this team up for 30 wins or so....obviously. Looks like he will get his wish. I suggest that the draft pick will be traded. This is fine as I prefer not to watch too many rookies "develop."
This roster needs a lot. If a high pick helps meet those needs? At least the Patriots are killin' it.
Since everything is about perspective -- not what IS happening but how we view what is happening, I offer that I (for one) am not rejoicing in losing streaks, but rather, am rejoicing in the prospect of a high draft pick and what I believe to be the best chance for remergence and lasting contention.
-
game to tomorrow
It would be really really helpful for "The Cause " for the
Nets to beat the Hawks ......please please please let the Nets win. LoLa :)
I'd rather the Hawks win that one. I think with Horford out, the Hawks will start to fall, and every time the Nets win I worry that they'll put it together. I want both of those teams to somehow miss the playoffs.
It's close to a no-lose, but I tend (for the time being) to agree with saltlover. I think the Hawks will crash and the Nets will rise over the next few months. Any Nets loss now will be good for later.
Don't forget that the Nets winning is also beneficial to our own pick. We're currently the 9th worst record... the Nets going on a win streak and making the playoffs doesn't really impact us unless you REALLY think Atlanta is going to plummet. All a Brooklyn win streak does is put us into the Top 8 of the draft.
-
Of course, there have been a lot of very good to great players who aren't on Enchilada's list of superstars. Often times, these very good players are selected outside the lottery. Some have been taken later in the lottery.
Alright. Alright fine. FINE!!!!
I'll go through the drafts of the last 20 years. Sonofabiscuit. Only cuz I have an obsessive need to be right that frustrates myself and those around me. BUT ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT.
I shall...return.
-
You can land a good player at eight or you can land a good player at eighteen. I think history has shown that the draft is nowhere near as exact a science as those rooting for ping pong balls would like it to be.
If you go back and look at every draft from the last 30 years, this is true in the letter but not in implication, at least the implication I got from what you said.
True: You can land a player at pick 8 or pick 18
False: you have about as good a chance of landing a good player at 8 as you do at 18
There is actually a pretty big discrepancy between the odds of landing a good play at 8 compared with landing a good player at 18. That's a tangential argument, Id be pretty annoyed if we suffered through a rebuilding year and only got an 8th overall, but it's a commonly made, 'well player x was picked at 18, and that just proves there is still talent at 18', because while it's true, it doesn't acknowledge there is a much better chance of getting a dud there as well. The counterpoint to this is 'Kwame Brown was a first overall, how did that turn out?', and it's no less of a false equivalency.
I mean people always bring up Rondo and Big Al. Technically Rondo wasn't even our draft pick... they were giving picks away for free that year. We bought Rondo after the Suns drafted him.
Pretty sure Boston has never drafted a superstar with a pick 15 and above. They have drafted superstars in the Top 8, though. ;)
You look over our list of guys taken 15 and over and you'll see names like Lucas Nogueira, Sullinger, Fab Melo, Marshon Brooks, Avery Bradley, JR Giddens, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Delonte West, Tony Allen, Troy Bell, Dahntay Jones, Joe Forte, Acie Earl. Sure there's some good players and good role players there, but lots of garbage too.
Boston's picks in the top 8 since 1970:
Dave Cowens, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Len Bias, Antoine Walker, Chauncey Billups, Ron Mercer, Randy Foye, Jeff Green
Sure there's some duds in there too, but I like our track record. Hah.
My point is that a vast majority of bona fide superstars are taken in the top five. Once you get outside the top five, it is very rare that you get a "franchise type superstar." Larry Bird, for example, is the only sixth pick taken since 1970 who makes Elrod Enchilada's much discussed list of superstars.
The seventh pick has yielded two lower level superstars, Bernard King and Chris Mullin, over that time period.
Robert Parish is the only one selected eighth.
Ninth did fairly well with Nowitzki, McGrady, and Stoudemire all selected there.
Tenth has two stars named Paul, Pierce and George. There have been no stars picked eleventh.
Dr. J. was picked 12th.
Bryant and Karl Malone were both selected thirteenth.
Clyde Drexler and Tim Hardaway at 14.
Nash, Stockton, Shawn Kemp, Joe Dumars, and Tiny Archibald were taken in the late teens from fifteen to nineteen.
Twentieth is Gus Williams, twenty-first, Rondo.
None taken at twenty-two. Alex English at twenty-three.
The 24th, 25th, and 26th picks have yielded no Enchilada superstars since 1970.
Rodman was taken 27th, Tony Parker 28th, and Dennis Johnson 29th. Spencer Haywood was taken 30th, and the Ice Man, George Gervin was taken 40th.
Finally, there's Ben Wallace, who went undrafted.
By my count, 38 of Enchilada's superstars drafted since 1970 were taken in the top five. 28 were taken outside of the top five. Of the 28 superstars taken outside the top five, fourteen were selected at spots 6 through 14, the lower lottery. The other fourteen were taken outside the lottery.
Of course, there have been a lot of very good to great players who aren't on Enchilada's list of superstars. Often times, these very good players are selected outside the lottery. Some have been taken later in the lottery.
I guess my overall point here is that if you are really rooting for tanking, you should be rooting for a bottom five record and a top five pick. There's no point in tanking for a mid-lottery pick.
Rejoicing in the possibility of a pick somewhere in the 6 to 12 range seems pointless. If that's where we are going to end up, I'd rather see the team maximize their win potential and hope for some good talent in the draft, regardless of where in the first round we end up picking.
And, by the way, I'm still not rooting for a bottom five finish. I simply don't think I can bear to see this team lose enough games to get that low, considering the competition for worst. And, despite this rough West coast trip coming up, I just don't think we'll end up with enough losses to be in the bottom five.
I'm rooting for wins every time out. I'm strong enough to deal with the losses.
I realize that by bringing up that stuff (our track record with picks), I was being hypocritical. Bottom line is it's a lot of history that has nothing to do with the 2014 draft.
If the experts say this draft is 8 players deep... we're best served drafting in the Top 8. Nuff said.
-
Of course, there have been a lot of very good to great players who aren't on Enchilada's list of superstars. Often times, these very good players are selected outside the lottery. Some have been taken later in the lottery.
Alright. Alright fine. FINE!!!!
I'll go through the drafts of the last 20 years. Sonofabiscuit. Only cuz I have an obsessive need to be right that frustrates myself and those around me. BUT ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT.
I shall...return.
Pretty sure someone did an extensive study in a thread a month or two ago that basically proved your chances of landing a star in the Top 6 was dramatically higher than landing a star later in the draft. There are rare exceptions that people love to bring up (Rondo at 21), but generally if you're goal is to land an impact player through the draft, you're obviously better off picking with a Top pick. There's countless guys picked 15-30 who were horrible.
And again... none of this is all that relevant. What matters is the 2014 draft. If experts say this draft is 8 players deep, I want a Top 8 pick. In 2007 they said it was a 2 player draft... I wanted a Top 2 pick. This year, there's a lot more options. Sounds like Wiggins, Parker, Randle, Embiid, Smart and Exum are the consensus top picks in some order... and by the end of March we might be throwing a couple more names into the fire.
The drooling over this draft by experts scares some fans who fear a League-changing draft that might not involve their team... so it's caused some backlash where fans say "no way it's that good... they are all overrated". We're seeing a post about that once a week with someone who has watched 2 college games and thinks they are an expert now.
-
Of course, there have been a lot of very good to great players who aren't on Enchilada's list of superstars. Often times, these very good players are selected outside the lottery. Some have been taken later in the lottery.
Alright. Alright fine. FINE!!!!
I'll go through the drafts of the last 20 years. Sonofabiscuit. Only cuz I have an obsessive need to be right that frustrates myself and those around me. BUT ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT.
I shall...return.
I've already done it, but only because I have the same obsessive need that you do. I actually posted a thread about it elsewhere.
I eagerly await your findings.
-
You can land a good player at eight or you can land a good player at eighteen. I think history has shown that the draft is nowhere near as exact a science as those rooting for ping pong balls would like it to be.
If you go back and look at every draft from the last 30 years, this is true in the letter but not in implication, at least the implication I got from what you said.
True: You can land a player at pick 8 or pick 18
False: you have about as good a chance of landing a good player at 8 as you do at 18
There is actually a pretty big discrepancy between the odds of landing a good play at 8 compared with landing a good player at 18. That's a tangential argument, Id be pretty annoyed if we suffered through a rebuilding year and only got an 8th overall, but it's a commonly made, 'well player x was picked at 18, and that just proves there is still talent at 18', because while it's true, it doesn't acknowledge there is a much better chance of getting a dud there as well. The counterpoint to this is 'Kwame Brown was a first overall, how did that turn out?', and it's no less of a false equivalency.
I mean people always bring up Rondo and Big Al. Technically Rondo wasn't even our draft pick... they were giving picks away for free that year. We bought Rondo after the Suns drafted him.
Pretty sure Boston has never drafted a superstar with a pick 15 and above. They have drafted superstars in the Top 8, though. ;)
You look over our list of guys taken 15 and over and you'll see names like Lucas Nogueira, Sullinger, Fab Melo, Marshon Brooks, Avery Bradley, JR Giddens, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Delonte West, Tony Allen, Troy Bell, Dahntay Jones, Joe Forte, Acie Earl. Sure there's some good players and good role players there, but lots of garbage too.
Boston's picks in the top 8 since 1970:
Dave Cowens, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Len Bias, Antoine Walker, Chauncey Billups, Ron Mercer, Randy Foye, Jeff Green
Sure there's some duds in there too, but I like our track record. Hah.
My point is that a vast majority of bona fide superstars are taken in the top five. Once you get outside the top five, it is very rare that you get a "franchise type superstar." Larry Bird, for example, is the only sixth pick taken since 1970 who makes Elrod Enchilada's much discussed list of superstars.
The seventh pick has yielded two lower level superstars, Bernard King and Chris Mullin, over that time period.
Robert Parish is the only one selected eighth.
Ninth did fairly well with Nowitzki, McGrady, and Stoudemire all selected there.
Tenth has two stars named Paul, Pierce and George. There have been no stars picked eleventh.
Dr. J. was picked 12th.
Bryant and Karl Malone were both selected thirteenth.
Clyde Drexler and Tim Hardaway at 14.
Nash, Stockton, Shawn Kemp, Joe Dumars, and Tiny Archibald were taken in the late teens from fifteen to nineteen.
Twentieth is Gus Williams, twenty-first, Rondo.
None taken at twenty-two. Alex English at twenty-three.
The 24th, 25th, and 26th picks have yielded no Enchilada superstars since 1970.
Rodman was taken 27th, Tony Parker 28th, and Dennis Johnson 29th. Spencer Haywood was taken 30th, and the Ice Man, George Gervin was taken 40th.
Finally, there's Ben Wallace, who went undrafted.
By my count, 38 of Enchilada's superstars drafted since 1970 were taken in the top five. 28 were taken outside of the top five. Of the 28 superstars taken outside the top five, fourteen were selected at spots 6 through 14, the lower lottery. The other fourteen were taken outside the lottery.
Of course, there have been a lot of very good to great players who aren't on Enchilada's list of superstars. Often times, these very good players are selected outside the lottery. Some have been taken later in the lottery.
I guess my overall point here is that if you are really rooting for tanking, you should be rooting for a bottom five record and a top five pick. There's no point in tanking for a mid-lottery pick.
Rejoicing in the possibility of a pick somewhere in the 6 to 12 range seems pointless. If that's where we are going to end up, I'd rather see the team maximize their win potential and hope for some good talent in the draft, regardless of where in the first round we end up picking.
And, by the way, I'm still not rooting for a bottom five finish. I simply don't think I can bear to see this team lose enough games to get that low, considering the competition for worst. And, despite this rough West coast trip coming up, I just don't think we'll end up with enough losses to be in the bottom five.
I'm rooting for wins every time out. I'm strong enough to deal with the losses.
I realize that by bringing up that stuff (our track record with picks), I was being hypocritical. Bottom line is it's a lot of history that has nothing to do with the 2014 draft.
If the experts say this draft is 8 players deep... we're best served drafting in the Top 8. Nuff said.
Nuff said, nothing. If you have managed to convince yourself that there are 8 superduperstars in this year's draft, then congratulations. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
-
I found a few things before I started burning away my Sunday.
This one seems the most in line with the question being raised (what is the value of a pick by number?)
http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
This one is a little harder to read but is more raw:
http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/ranking-thirty-years-of-draft-picks/
-
Of course, there have been a lot of very good to great players who aren't on Enchilada's list of superstars. Often times, these very good players are selected outside the lottery. Some have been taken later in the lottery.
Alright. Alright fine. FINE!!!!
I'll go through the drafts of the last 20 years. Sonofabiscuit. Only cuz I have an obsessive need to be right that frustrates myself and those around me. BUT ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT.
I shall...return.
Pretty sure someone did an extensive study in a thread a month or two ago that basically proved your chances of landing a star in the Top 6 was dramatically higher than landing a star later in the draft. There are rare exceptions that people love to bring up (Rondo at 21), but generally if you're goal is to land an impact player through the draft, you're obviously better off picking with a Top pick. There's countless guys picked 15-30 who were horrible.
And again... none of this is all that relevant. What matters is the 2014 draft. If experts say this draft is 8 players deep, I want a Top 8 pick. In 2007 they said it was a 2 player draft... I wanted a Top 2 pick. This year, there's a lot more options. Sounds like Wiggins, Parker, Randle, Embiid, Smart and Exum are the consensus top picks in some order... and by the end of March we might be throwing a couple more names into the fire.
The drooling over this draft by experts scares some fans who fear a League-changing draft that might not involve their team... so it's caused some backlash where fans say "no way it's that good... they are all overrated". We're seeing a post about that once a week with someone who has watched 2 college games and thinks they are an expert now.
That was me, and it's top five, not top six. The sixth pick has actually historically yielded surprisingly mediocre results compared to many of the picks later in the draft.
I'm all for this draft being "historically good." I guess nothing's impossible, so eight superstars could happen, but based on history, it just seems highly, highly unlikely, even if it is a draft that rivals--even surpasses--the likes of '84, '96, and '03.
-
That was me, and it's top five, not top six. The sixth pick has actually historically yielded surprisingly mediocre results compared to many of the picks later in the draft.
The sixth pick is worse than the top 5 but better than most of the picks after it (predictably) but the dropoff from 5 to 6 is worth remembering.
Basically if you want more than 50% chance of a star, you need a top 5 pick.
If you want at-worst a solid player, you're best off taking 12 or higher, but you've got a decent chance of landing one in the picks 13-20 although there are some outliers (picks that for whatever reason are usually bad..like 11, 15, 12).
As always there are no guarantees, but I stand by my statement, if you want a good player, the earlier the pick the better. SCIENCE!
-
I found a few things before I started burning away my Sunday.
This one seems the most in line with the question being raised (what is the value of a pick by number?)
http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
This one is a little harder to read but is more raw:
http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/ranking-thirty-years-of-draft-picks/
I did the same things as the guy from 82games. My twenty year span was from 1991 to 2010. Instead of taking averages, I simply added up the total winshares for each draft position over that time span.
Here are my results:
Total Winshares Draft Position
1,354.1 1st
1,056.8 5th
1,055.1 3rd
1,030.8 4th
987.8 2nd
837.9 9th
815.4 10th
658.4 13th
596.5 7th
499.6 8th
484.1 24th
460.2 15th
457.0 21st
418.5 17th
413.2 6th
368.1 11th
353.5 23rd
343.6 18th
334.2 16th
320.4 14th
315.5 26th
296.9 12th
293.3 20th
258.6 25th
246.2 19th
203.3 27th
203.1 28th
202.2 22nd
Note: I stopped at the 28th pick. Partially because for many of those years, there were only 28 first round picks, and partially because I simply ran out of gas.
I realize that total Winshares is far from a perfect measurement of a given player's NBA contributions, but I like it better than the method used by 82games, because it seems to me that the averages of players taken early in the draft could very well be inflated by high draft picks playing for lousy teams getting big minutes early in their careers, and therefore putting up decent numbers. While, on the other hand, ultimately better players, drafted later by better teams, aren't getting those kinds of minutes from the start, but ultimately end up having much better careers.
-
That was me, and it's top five, not top six. The sixth pick has actually historically yielded surprisingly mediocre results compared to many of the picks later in the draft.
The sixth pick is worse than the top 5 but better than most of the picks after it (predictably) but the dropoff from 5 to 6 is worth remembering.
Basically if you want more than 50% chance of a star, you need a top 5 pick.
If you want at-worst a solid player, you're best off taking 12 or higher, but you've got a decent chance of landing one in the picks 13-20 although there are some outliers (picks that for whatever reason are usually bad..like 11, 15, 12).
As always there are no guarantees, but I stand by my statement, if you want a good player, the earlier the pick the better. SCIENCE!
That's not science, that's probability.
... I think?
-
I found a few things before I started burning away my Sunday.
This one seems the most in line with the question being raised (what is the value of a pick by number?)
http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
This one is a little harder to read but is more raw:
http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/ranking-thirty-years-of-draft-picks/
I did the same things as the guy from 82games. My twenty year span was from 1991 to 2010. Instead of taking averages, I simply added up the total winshares for each draft position over that time span.
Here are my results:
Total Winshares Draft Position
1,354.1 1st
1,056.8 5th
1,055.1 3rd
1,030.8 4th
987.8 2nd
837.9 9th
815.4 10th
658.4 13th
596.5 7th
499.6 8th
484.1 24th
460.2 15th
457.0 21st
418.5 17th
413.2 6th
368.1 11th
353.5 23rd
343.6 18th
334.2 16th
320.4 14th
315.5 26th
296.9 12th
293.3 20th
258.6 25th
246.2 19th
203.3 27th
203.1 28th
202.2 22nd
Note: I stopped at the 28th pick. Partially because for many of those years, there were only 28 first round picks, and partially because I simply ran out of gas.
I realize that total Winshares is far from a perfect measurement of a given player's NBA contributions, but I like it better than the method used by 82games, because it seems to me that the averages of players taken early in the draft could very well be inflated by high draft picks playing for lousy teams getting big minutes early in their careers, and therefore putting up decent numbers. While, on the other hand, ultimately better players, drafted later by better teams, aren't getting those kinds of minutes from the start, but ultimately end up having much better careers.
I think the biggest problem with using total winshares is that it inflates the value of role players or solid players who play long careers.
For instance, Shawn Marion has a better total winshares than Scottie Pippen. Stuff like that. Derek Harper over James Worthy.
-
That was me, and it's top five, not top six. The sixth pick has actually historically yielded surprisingly mediocre results compared to many of the picks later in the draft.
The sixth pick is worse than the top 5 but better than most of the picks after it (predictably) but the dropoff from 5 to 6 is worth remembering.
Basically if you want more than 50% chance of a star, you need a top 5 pick.
If you want at-worst a solid player, you're best off taking 12 or higher, but you've got a decent chance of landing one in the picks 13-20 although there are some outliers (picks that for whatever reason are usually bad..like 11, 15, 12).
As always there are no guarantees, but I stand by my statement, if you want a good player, the earlier the pick the better. SCIENCE!
That's not science, that's probability.
... I think?
Look if you're not gonna use exclamation points to make your argument I'm not hearin you. I'm on a science high right now and can't nothin bring me down. I'M GONNA LIVE FOREVER!!
-
I found a few things before I started burning away my Sunday.
This one seems the most in line with the question being raised (what is the value of a pick by number?)
http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
This one is a little harder to read but is more raw:
http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/ranking-thirty-years-of-draft-picks/
I did the same things as the guy from 82games. My twenty year span was from 1991 to 2010. Instead of taking averages, I simply added up the total winshares for each draft position over that time span.
Here are my results:
Total Winshares Draft Position
1,354.1 1st
1,056.8 5th
1,055.1 3rd
1,030.8 4th
987.8 2nd
837.9 9th
815.4 10th
658.4 13th
596.5 7th
499.6 8th
484.1 24th
460.2 15th
457.0 21st
418.5 17th
413.2 6th
368.1 11th
353.5 23rd
343.6 18th
334.2 16th
320.4 14th
315.5 26th
296.9 12th
293.3 20th
258.6 25th
246.2 19th
203.3 27th
203.1 28th
202.2 22nd
Note: I stopped at the 28th pick. Partially because for many of those years, there were only 28 first round picks, and partially because I simply ran out of gas.
I realize that total Winshares is far from a perfect measurement of a given player's NBA contributions, but I like it better than the method used by 82games, because it seems to me that the averages of players taken early in the draft could very well be inflated by high draft picks playing for lousy teams getting big minutes early in their careers, and therefore putting up decent numbers. While, on the other hand, ultimately better players, drafted later by better teams, aren't getting those kinds of minutes from the start, but ultimately end up having much better careers.
I think the biggest problem with using total winshares is that it inflates the value of role players or solid players who play long careers.
For instance, Shawn Marion has a better total winshares than Scottie Pippen. Stuff like that. Derek Harper over James Worthy.
Yeah, unfortunately, there's no perfect system for deciding which players are better than others. That said, I don't have a problem putting Shawn Marion--in my opinion, probably the most underrated player of the last decade and a half--in a conversation with Scottie Pippen.
-
That said, I don't have a problem putting Shawn Marion--in my opinion, probably the most underrated player of the last decade and a half--in a conversation with Scottie Pippen.
What the...but he...and the..I just...Well what I'm saying is tha....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ
-
That said, I don't have a problem putting Shawn Marion--in my opinion, probably the most underrated player of the last decade and a half--in a conversation with Scottie Pippen.
What the...but he...and the..I just...Well what I'm saying is tha....
While I don't think that Marion's on Pippen's level, it's interesting to consider how many more accolades Marion would have received if he had the same career but MJ for a teammate.
-
That said, I don't have a problem putting Shawn Marion--in my opinion, probably the most underrated player of the last decade and a half--in a conversation with Scottie Pippen.
What the...but he...and the..I just...Well what I'm saying is tha....
While I don't think that Marion's on Pippen's level, it's interesting to consider how many more accolades Marion would have received if he had the same career but MJ for a teammate.
That's true, but that's true for anyone. Imagine if Steve Kerr labored all his days next to Keith Van Horn and Sharif Abdur Rahim.
-
That said, I don't have a problem putting Shawn Marion--in my opinion, probably the most underrated player of the last decade and a half--in a conversation with Scottie Pippen.
What the...but he...and the..I just...Well what I'm saying is tha....
While I don't think that Marion's on Pippen's level, it's interesting to consider how many more accolades Marion would have received if he had the same career but MJ for a teammate.
Meh, Shawn Marion played next to a lot of talented dominant players...
-
Like I said; The Matrix is vastly underrated.
-
That said, I don't have a problem putting Shawn Marion--in my opinion, probably the most underrated player of the last decade and a half--in a conversation with Scottie Pippen.
What the...but he...and the..I just...Well what I'm saying is tha....
While I don't think that Marion's on Pippen's level, it's interesting to consider how many more accolades Marion would have received if he had the same career but MJ for a teammate.
Meh, Shawn Marion played next to a lot of talented dominant players...
I'll go out on a limb and guess you don't consider any of them to be close to as dominant as MJ. If Marion had won multiple titles he'd be seen as a much better player by many people.
-
I along with the majority of "tankers" share the opinion of LarBrd33. Tanking is done at the exuctive level, not those on the line. I want these Celtics to play their heart out and just not be good enough.
Meaning: Ainge should trade say, Bass, for a 2nd rounder just to get one of the few rotation worthy players off the roster in order to increase the chances of a bottom-6 finish?
That I do not agree with.
Trading Bass for a 2nd rounder frees up an additional $6 M to use in free agency this upcoming summer.
I think having enough cap space to offer a max deal, along with improving the chances of landing a top pick, is a worthwhile goal and a good approach to building a contender in the near future. I make that trade all day long given our current situation.
Yeah... trading Bass for a 2nd rounder would be a heist.
What if it were Bass and Lee?
15 million for a veteran to come off your bench for the next 3 years is the luxury of contenders. I'm pretty sure a 34 win team (whether playoff-bound or lotto bound) would be happy to rid themselves of Lee's contract.
No team GM in the NBA will give up an expiring for Lee.
Ouch, Lucky17.
So how do you feel today? Would you agree to moving to Bass for a 2nd rounder. We are, today, a major step closer to getting max contract money freed up for next offseason's use.
-
Never been happier to be so wrong on Lee.
My joy is tempered by the fact that dumping Bass for a 2nd seems that much more possible. I still think it's a bad move, and a fool's errand to pursue. Not to mention, counter to Ainge's philosophy about spending cap space on free agents.
Also, if the goal is to free up the space for a max free agent, nick did a nice breakdown on how much work still needs to be done to make that happen.
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=68895.msg1598751#msg1598751
-
Never been happier to be so wrong on Lee.
My joy is tempered by the fact that dumping Bass for a 2nd seems that much more possible. I still think it's a bad move, and a fool's errand to pursue. Not to mention, counter to Ainge's philosophy about spending cap space on free agents.
Utah had a ton of cap space last offseason too. So there are creative ways to utilize cap space that don't involve overspending for free agents.
For the record, I agreed with you yesterday, that nobody would give an expiring for Lee. I'm delighted to be wrong as well.
-
Never been happier to be so wrong on Lee.
My joy is tempered by the fact that dumping Bass for a 2nd seems that much more possible. I still think it's a bad move, and a fool's errand to pursue. Not to mention, counter to Ainge's philosophy about spending cap space on free agents.
Utah had a ton of cap space last offseason too. So there are creative ways to utilize cap space that don't involve overspending for free agents.
For the record, I agreed with you yesterday, that nobody would give an expiring for Lee. I'm delighted to be wrong as well.
This is true, and it's the smarter way to use cap space.
But the Celtics already have that large TE from the Nets megadeal, which acts the same way, but doesn't require any additional dumping of salary.
Whatever Ainge does between now and the deadline, I hope he gets the best return possible on any and every deal.
-
The idea that a team could or should be dismantled to qualify for a high pick to lead it toward championships is absurd. The Cavs drafted #1, got the Flopping Crybaby for the prize and were still awful before just being mediocre because the rest of the roster couldn't play up to the requisite level. Parenthetically, the Cavs other #1 picks since then haven't brought much either. Teams generally win championships, not single players, as we all know, and I believe that DA wants to retain a solid core upon which to build. If the Celtics finish as the last team into the playoffs, they'll still have a relatively high pick (single number - 9) that can be packaged with other picks and a player/players to trade up. That scenario will not likely play out, but there may be a GM willing to stock up with sterling silver players rather than go for a gold(en boy) in the hope that his best players and the picks/players received in return can get them over the top.
-
The idea that a team could or should be dismantled to qualify for a high pick to lead it toward championships is absurd.
Nobody's arguing that. Or at least the tiniest of minorities are arguing that. There's nuance involved here. Believing that its in the teams best interest to move Green, Rondo, or whoever now in a trade brining back valuable assets and advocating wholesale dismantling just to get a little worse are different things. By stating your position like that, you're just giving us a strawman for you to call absurd.
The Cavs drafted #1, got the Flopping Crybaby for the prize and were still awful before just being mediocre because the rest of the roster couldn't play up to the requisite level.
Were still awful? From LeBron's rookie year to the time he left Cleveland, CLE had the 6th best record in the NBA, with 349 wins. That made them better than 3/4 of the league in that time. If you just look at the Cavs from the time LeBron came into his own as a player (say 05/06-2010), Cleveland had the 3rd best total record in the NBA.
This all with a supporting cast that while tailored to LeBron's skillset, was probably among the lowest in overall talent within the entire NBA. CLE, while they didn't get to keep him, did pretty well by LeBron.
Parenthetically, the Cavs other #1 picks since then haven't brought much either.
Kyrie Irving has been pretty good, an All-Star at age 21, rookie of the year, NBD.
Anthony Bennett looks like a whiff.
Teams generally win championships, not single players, as we all know, and I believe that DA wants to retain a solid core upon which to build. If the Celtics finish as the last team into the playoffs, they'll still have a relatively high pick (single number - 9) that can be packaged with other picks and a player/players to trade up. That scenario will not likely play out, but there may be a GM willing to stock up with sterling silver players rather than go for a gold(en boy) in the hope that his best players and the picks/players received in return can get them over the top.
There are a few points here.
The first one, if the difference is still so thin that team A, a half game ahead of team B, gets to get spanked by Indiana or Miami in the first round while team B gets the 9th overall pick, it might behoove us to no have a high chance of being team A. Team A (the one that squeaks in the playoffs) gets to be embarrassed on a national stage and then get a pick in the lottery that typically yields a role player. Team B gets the chance to get a higher caliber prospect by a considerable margin, AND they get at least their foot in the door of the lottery, so they also have a chance of winning the whole thing.
Trading up from 9th, or anywhere really, and into the top 7 or higher also seems like it has a very poor probability of happening. Not that it couldn't..but really, someone is gonna whiff on a pick in the top-8 for some reason. If we're picking 9th, you're better off just weathering the top 8 picks and taking BPA, because with the trove of picks we still have remaining, there is little to no payoff in the long-run for over-paying (which I'm implying would be a necessity to move up) to move up 3-4 spots when the prize at the 9th pick could be Noah Vonleh, Willie Caulie-Stien, or Dario Saric. Yeah, they're not Parker/WIggins/Randle, but neither is Aaron Gordon or Dante Exum.
-
The idea that a team could or should be dismantled to qualify for a high pick to lead it toward championships is absurd.
Nobody's arguing that. Or at least the tiniest of minorities are arguing that. There's nuance involved here. Believing that its in the teams best interest to move Green, Rondo, or whoever now in a trade brining back valuable assets and advocating wholesale dismantling just to get a little worse are different things. By stating your position like that, you're just giving us a strawman for you to call absurd.
I think that we've seen a fair amount of trades that didn't help the team improve in either the short term or the long term and were justified by the superstar we were going to draft. That's probably what they mean. If you go back to the pre and early season trade proposals you'll be able to find trades that result in a fairly bad team aside from having Wiggins or Randle or Parker inserted into the lineup.
-
The idea that a team could or should be dismantled to qualify for a high pick to lead it toward championships is absurd.
Nobody's arguing that. Or at least the tiniest of minorities are arguing that. There's nuance involved here. Believing that its in the teams best interest to move Green, Rondo, or whoever now in a trade brining back valuable assets and advocating wholesale dismantling just to get a little worse are different things. By stating your position like that, you're just giving us a strawman for you to call absurd.
I think that we've seen a fair amount of trades that didn't help the team improve in either the short term or the long term and were justified by the superstar we were going to draft. That's probably what they mean. If you go back to the pre and early season trade proposals you'll be able to find trades that result in a fairly bad team aside from having Wiggins or Randle or Parker inserted into the lineup.
I don't doubt that's the case, but isn't that true with some part of all genres of trade proposals?
If someone advocates moving Green, Bass, and Humphries for Carmelo Anthony, and 1 out of every 5 trades is that ridiculous, is it fair to label all 'win now' trades as fancifully unrealistic and absurd?
Because effectively when people say, "To the tankers who just want to trade the team away to move up a few precious spots in the lottery..", they're effectively talking to a near non-existent group of people. Even Rondo's most persistent critics (I imagine you probably know of one or two) wouldn't advocate just giving him away for no future gain.
Whether the gain is salary relief, picks, players, poppers, uppers, downers, screamers, laughers, whatever...we'd get something back in most non-trolling scenarios.
-
The idea that a team could or should be dismantled to qualify for a high pick to lead it toward championships is absurd.
Nobody's arguing that. Or at least the tiniest of minorities are arguing that. There's nuance involved here. Believing that its in the teams best interest to move Green, Rondo, or whoever now in a trade brining back valuable assets and advocating wholesale dismantling just to get a little worse are different things. By stating your position like that, you're just giving us a strawman for you to call absurd.
I think that we've seen a fair amount of trades that didn't help the team improve in either the short term or the long term and were justified by the superstar we were going to draft. That's probably what they mean. If you go back to the pre and early season trade proposals you'll be able to find trades that result in a fairly bad team aside from having Wiggins or Randle or Parker inserted into the lineup.
I don't doubt that's the case, but isn't that true with some part of all genres of trade proposals?
I'm confused. You said only the tiniest of minorities want to dismantle the team to get a high pick, I said that a fair amount of trades fit that description and you agree with me. Is that your idea of what happened?
If someone advocates moving Green, Bass, and Humphries for Carmelo Anthony, and 1 out of every 5 trades is that ridiculous, is it fair to label all 'win now' trades as fancifully unrealistic and absurd?
I didn't say "all".
Because effectively when people say, "To the tankers who just want to trade the team away to move up a few precious spots in the lottery..", they're effectively talking to a near non-existent group of people. Even Rondo's most persistent critics (I imagine you probably know of one or two) wouldn't advocate just giving him away for no future gain.
Whether the gain is salary relief, picks, players, poppers, uppers, downers, screamers, laughers, whatever...we'd get something back in most non-trolling scenarios.
Sure, they don't advocate cutting Rondo, they get something back. But again, if someone proposes a trade where the trade itself doesn't help us in the long term or the short term and justify it by claiming we'll get better draft picks if we make the trade they're talking about dismantling the team to get a high draft picks. It's not a tiny minority that feel that way.
-
The idea that a team could or should be dismantled to qualify for a high pick to lead it toward championships is absurd.
Nobody's arguing that. Or at least the tiniest of minorities are arguing that. There's nuance involved here. Believing that its in the teams best interest to move Green, Rondo, or whoever now in a trade brining back valuable assets and advocating wholesale dismantling just to get a little worse are different things. By stating your position like that, you're just giving us a strawman for you to call absurd.
I think that we've seen a fair amount of trades that didn't help the team improve in either the short term or the long term and were justified by the superstar we were going to draft. That's probably what they mean. If you go back to the pre and early season trade proposals you'll be able to find trades that result in a fairly bad team aside from having Wiggins or Randle or Parker inserted into the lineup.
I don't doubt that's the case, but isn't that true with some part of all genres of trade proposals?
I'm confused. You said only the tiniest of minorities want to dismantle the team to get a high pick, I said that a fair amount of trades fit that description and you agree with me. Is that your idea of what happened?
Well it depends what a 'fair amount' means then. I thought you meant like..a handful of trades. A smidgen, a pinch, a bit, a morsel, to wit, a fraction. Now how big a fraction appears to be where you and I part ways. I am assuming that a fair amount can also be a small fraction made by a small minority of a larger group of people who probably don't really make trade proposals by and large.
I'm also saying using the anecdotal trade proposals to represent a viewpoint probably isn't accurate.
If someone advocates moving Green, Bass, and Humphries for Carmelo Anthony, and 1 out of every 5 trades is that ridiculous, is it fair to label all 'win now' trades as fancifully unrealistic and absurd?
I didn't say "all".
I didn't say you said anything.
Because effectively when people say, "To the tankers who just want to trade the team away to move up a few precious spots in the lottery..", they're effectively talking to a near non-existent group of people. Even Rondo's most persistent critics (I imagine you probably know of one or two) wouldn't advocate just giving him away for no future gain.
Whether the gain is salary relief, picks, players, poppers, uppers, downers, screamers, laughers, whatever...we'd get something back in most non-trolling scenarios.
Sure, they don't advocate cutting Rondo, they get something back. But again, if someone proposes a trade where the trade itself doesn't help us in the long term or the short term and justify it by claiming we'll get better draft picks if we make the trade they're talking about dismantling the team to get a high draft picks. It's not a tiny minority that feel that way.
It is. It is a tiny minority. I'll prove it to you.
EDIT: And by 'tiny minority', so we can talk actual turkey, I'm talking less than 10%.
-
Sure, they don't advocate cutting Rondo, they get something back.
I seem to recall at least one poster saying yes when I asked whether they would be willing to trade Rondo for absolutely nothing in return to ensure a tank job.
-
According to hollinger's rankings, the celtics have played the 4th easiest strength of schedule so far.
The hawks have played the 2nd easiest.
http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings/_/page/2/sort/sos (http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings/_/page/2/sort/sos)
This bodes well for the draft positions in June. Tankers rejoice.
-
Sure, they don't advocate cutting Rondo, they get something back.
I seem to recall at least one poster saying yes when I asked whether they would be willing to trade Rondo for absolutely nothing in return to ensure a tank job.
Yeah i recall hearing a number of trade ideas involving selling rondo or green for nothing, for the sake of getting worse. I would only trade rondo for another star, or a great pick in a great draft. It is hard to get all star players onto your team. Once you have them you cant just give them away for the sake of forming a 25 years old and younger roster, bound for multiple trips to the lottery.
-
According to hollinger's rankings, the celtics have played the 4th easiest strength of schedule so far.
The hawks have played the 2nd easiest.
http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings/_/page/2/sort/sos (http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings/_/page/2/sort/sos)
This bodes well for the draft positions in June. Tankers rejoice.
With our conference/division, we're likely going to end up with one of the easier schedules for the year. I don't think this will even out over time.
-
Looks like Ryan Anderson may be out for the year, the Pelicans record isn't very good without him and the fans over there are hoping to join the tanking wagon, so add them and the bulls (potentially) and this should get interesting. The sad part is the teams that don't get say get into the top 5 will be in build mode for a long time.
-
According to hollinger's rankings, the celtics have played the 4th easiest strength of schedule so far.
The hawks have played the 2nd easiest.
http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings/_/page/2/sort/sos (http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings/_/page/2/sort/sos)
This bodes well for the draft positions in June. Tankers rejoice.
With our conference/division, we're likely going to end up with one of the easier schedules for the year. I don't think this will even out over time.
True. But the east will even a bit wth each other. Everyone in the east only plays 2 good east teams 6-8 times. And then Miami and Indiana will have the easiest of schedules as the only good team that they will play in the east are each other 4 times.
-
1. The Celtics are not tanking
2. Trading away Lee is a cap saving maneuver for the future, it's not about trying to unload talent for nothing.
3. We freed up some playing time for our guard logjam but Pressey might be on the outside looking in now that Bayless is a Celtic.
4. We still have a logjam at power forward, so Ainge is far from done.
I don't mean to gloat, but it feels good to see this basketball team losing some games. It is a necessary evil in this league if you want to have a better shot at building a winner.
Cheers to other tankers today. We will likely lose all 5 of these games of this West Coast swing.