CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: KG Living Legend on October 20, 2017, 12:30:11 AM
-
If Irving went down with an injury for multiple weeks, I would tell him to sit and play video games with Hayward. Develop Rozier, Smart, Jaylen, Tatum. And raise the trade values of Nader, Semi, Yabu.
Just need to land one of Bagley, Ayton, Or Bamba, than one of Porter, Doncic, Jarrett Jackson If we can add two of those guys to Jaylen Brown and Tatum that would be awesome.
Bamba
Porter JR
Tatum
Brown
Irving
Horford and Hayward just trade them for Boogie and Davis LoL
-
Sigh.....
-
First off, there's no way we could make ourselves bad enough to compete with all the terrible teams in the league this year. And secondly we need to try to be as competitive as possible to keep the Anthony Davis possibility. He's not gonna want to play for a lottery team, and he's not gonna get traded anywhere he makes clear he doesn't want to be. Thirdly, that's what we have the Lakers pick for. Lastly, I really don't want to watch a awful team this year. So no.
-
nope
-
No free agents are ever gonna come to Boston at this rate.
-
First off, there's no way we could make ourselves bad enough to compete with all the terrible teams in the league this year. And secondly we need to try to be as competitive as possible to keep the Anthony Davis possibility. He's not gonna want to play for a lottery team, and he's not gonna get traded anywhere he makes clear he doesn't want to be. Thirdly, that's what we have the Lakers pick for. Lastly, I really don't want to watch a awful team this year. So no.
Honestly, enough of the Anthony Davis talk. Respect the players on the roster. We do not need Anthony Davis to win. He has not even made the playoffs in all his years in the league.
-
If 10 games after the all star break we are still below 0.500 then yes
-
First off, there's no way we could make ourselves bad enough to compete with all the terrible teams in the league this year. And secondly we need to try to be as competitive as possible to keep the Anthony Davis possibility. He's not gonna want to play for a lottery team, and he's not gonna get traded anywhere he makes clear he doesn't want to be. Thirdly, that's what we have the Lakers pick for. Lastly, I really don't want to watch a awful team this year. So no.
Honestly, enough of the Anthony Davis talk. Respect the players on the roster. We do not need Anthony Davis to win. He has not even made the playoffs in all his years in the league.
He averaged 31.5 ppg during a first round sweep against the eventual champion Warriors in 2015.
-
::) ::) ::)
Never takes long before this thread occurs
-
If Irving went down with an injury for multiple weeks, I would tell him to sit and play video games with Hayward. Develop Rozier, Smart, Jaylen, Tatum. And raise the trade values of Nader, Semi, Yabu.
Just need to land one of Bagley, Ayton, Or Bamba, than one of Porter, Doncic, Jarrett Jackson If we can add two of those guys to Jaylen Brown and Tatum that would be awesome.
Bamba
Porter JR
Tatum
Brown
Irving
Horford and Hayward just trade them for Boogie and Davis LoL
(http://78.media.tumblr.com/509b2c6039c18c66e53cc2507c396c3a/tumblr_inline_nskasaBjRD1shsvef_540.gif)
LarBrd33 is that you in disguise?
-
People are going to be mad, but it worked great for San Antonio.
Of course, there is always luck involved with the lottery and also there's no obvious Tim Duncan in this year's draft. And Robinson was probably more important to that San Antonio team than Hayward is to ours.
Another rare thing about Duncan was that he was a 4 year senior who came in incredibly ready to play. If SA had received a 19 year-old Duncan, they don't necessarily win the title in '99. though considering how important big men were in that era maybe they still do with a prime Robinson and a 20 year-old Duncan.
-
People are going to be mad, but it worked great for San Antonio.
Of course, there is always luck involved with the lottery and also there's no obvious Tim Duncan in this year's draft. And Robinson was probably more important to that San Antonio team than Hayward is to ours.
Another rare thing about Duncan was that he was a 4 year senior who came in incredibly ready to play. If SA had received a 19 year-old Duncan, they don't necessarily win the title in '99. though considering how important big men were in that era maybe they still do with a prime Robinson and a 20 year-old Duncan.
Really, really different situation. Spurs lost not just one, but two of their best players in Sean Ellion and David Robinson in the same season. That's like losing both Kyrie and Hayward. Celtics already got their Duncan in their hands (Brown and Tatum), although not as good as Tim himself (yet).
-
If Irving went down sure. If Horford went down maybe. Right now, no.
-
Based on last night, it looks like the Lakers will tank for us.
-
We didn't even try to secure the worse record when we had a bad team, so tanking isn't in our future.
-
Oh yee of little faith.
-
Our best move will be to just play brown, tatum and rozier as many minutes as possible.
If this results in a better draft position we'll take it...
-
If Irving goes down for multiple weeks like the premise of this thread, then I think it would depend on when he goes down and what Boston's record is like before and during the period he is out. If he goes down soon and it is still early in the season when he comes back, then absolutely not, but if he goes down in the middle of the season and Boston is a back end of the playoff team at best and then just doesn't play well without him, then I might consider sitting him and Hayward (if he could come back) for the rest of the year.
-
With all the really bad teams, it would be hard to tank effectively even if we lost Irving and Horford for extended periods of time.
-
Too talented to tank. Couldn't even if we want to.
-
Even if Irving went down it would be really hard to tank enough to get into the top 5 of this draft, and if we can’t get into the top 5 it’s not worth it to tank IMO.
It’s important our young guys really improve themselves this year to give another reason for Irving to stick around going into his contract year. Not to mention to also improve their trade value.
-
Once Hayward went down, I was actually thinking to myself that the Celtics should tank and wanted to start a topic about it.. Just figured people would go ballistic on me around here.
This is my reasoning, we have no shot. People could argue we never had a shot, which I agree with, difference being finishing 1-2 in the east and losing in the ECF (or finals) still would be a great season for us and make Boston a 'go to' destination.
Now we're looking at a 5-7 seed (IMO) and a possible first round exit. So what did we achieve? Young guys got experience yadda yadda yadda. Boston might still be a desirable destination in this scenario, but at the same token a lot of teams got stronger and we got worse, so maybe in that regard we take a step back in the free agent market. Oh wait "but Gordon is coming back next year, we'll be at the top again, players will want to come here" Who knows if he'll ever be the same player again.
Reason for tanking, we get a good draft pick, young guys are still getting a ton of minutes albeit not playoff minutes. We now have another desirable asset to move (our own pick) for a guy like AD if and when he becomes available, and if he doesn't we have another high draft pick to make up for the one we just gave to Cleveland in the Kyrie trade. If Hayward doesn't come back at full strength thats 130mil we have tied up for another 3 years. We need to go back and consider building this team through the draft. Essentially the new big three attempt is done, do you think Kyrie is going to keep his word and resign with a hobbled Hayward and a aging Horford as our core? and now we have a Chandler Parsons situation on our hands with Hayward.
Obviously I don't want to tank, nor do I think this team would.. but there are legitimate reasons why we should.
-
Absolutely not, it's detrimental to player development and free agent acqusition.
-
Absolutely not, it's detrimental to player development and free agent acqusition.
It most definitely is not detrimental to player development and Boston has no cap space so is only looking at MLE or vet minimum type players anyway from the free agent side of things
-
Too talented to tank. Couldn't even if we want to.
Yeah you gotta play our young guys and shutting down Marcus in a contract year isn't happening. (unless you promise to pay him)
If we get hit with two more major injuries we could miss the playoffs sure, but we wouldn't be low enough to secure a top lottery slot even then.
-
I guess people don't understand the coach Danny hired. CBS is the basketball coaches basketball coach. If Stseven ever lands in the lottery , its not because of not coaching every once of talent out of every player he has .
Danny would totally control any tank , not CBS , and on top of that the owners dn't seem like the tanking types at,all. CBS would never be part of a Brett Brown program . Not happening .
People who,believe in tanking like Philly and expect this organization to , might look for,another team to follow , this Fromt office just has no DNA for a specific tanking program as constructed and run now.
I joke aboit it some when we loose. But , this regime did not tank when the team truely had bad players , its the further thing from their minds .
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
-
Absolutely not, it's detrimental to player development and free agent acqusition.
It most definitely is not detrimental to player development and Boston has no cap space so is only looking at MLE or vet minimum type players anyway from the free agent side of things
Maybe you can point out all the teams that have been successful recently at developing players while encouraging them to lose. Also, contenders get quality free agents with exceptions and minimum contracts all the time. Get a ring, reestablish their value, end their careers on a high note etc.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
I have no interest in watching losing basketball. Period. That was my point.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
I have no interest in watching losing basketball. Period. That was my point.
if we get one more injury, you may not have a choice lol
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
I have no interest in watching losing basketball. Period. That was my point.
if we get one more injury, you may not have a choice lol
Fantastic. Then we can be just mediocre enough to get the 9th pick in the draft and the tankers can bask in the mediocrity.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
I have no interest in watching losing basketball. Period. That was my point.
if we get one more injury, you may not have a choice lol
Fantastic. Then we can be just mediocre enough to get the 9th pick in the draft and the tankers can bask in the mediocrity.
The 9th pick is better than the 13th pick though.
-
First off, there's no way we could make ourselves bad enough to compete with all the terrible teams in the league this year. And secondly we need to try to be as competitive as possible to keep the Anthony Davis possibility. He's not gonna want to play for a lottery team, and he's not gonna get traded anywhere he makes clear he doesn't want to be. Thirdly, that's what we have the Lakers pick for. Lastly, I really don't want to watch a awful team this year. So no.
Honestly, enough of the Anthony Davis talk. Respect the players on the roster. We do not need Anthony Davis to win. He has not even made the playoffs in all his years in the league.
Good point. For some reason this is a knock against Cousins, but a nonissue with Davis.
-
Mostly its a non-issue because Davis made the playoffs.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
I have no interest in watching losing basketball. Period. That was my point.
if we get one more injury, you may not have a choice lol
Fantastic. Then we can be just mediocre enough to get the 9th pick in the draft and the tankers can bask in the mediocrity.
The 9th pick is better than the 13th pick though.
Really? Didn't realize math worked that way.
-
First off, there's no way we could make ourselves bad enough to compete with all the terrible teams in the league this year. And secondly we need to try to be as competitive as possible to keep the Anthony Davis possibility. He's not gonna want to play for a lottery team, and he's not gonna get traded anywhere he makes clear he doesn't want to be. Thirdly, that's what we have the Lakers pick for. Lastly, I really don't want to watch a awful team this year. So no.
Honestly, enough of the Anthony Davis talk. Respect the players on the roster. We do not need Anthony Davis to win. He has not even made the playoffs in all his years in the league.
Good point. For some reason this is a knock against Cousins, but a nonissue with Davis.
Well, it is still a knock on AD, but he did make the playoffs in 2014-2015.
The problem with both players is that they have both been drafted in really terrible situations, and apart of teams with dysfunctional coaching and inconsistent roster fits.
-
Zero interest in tanking barring additional catastrophic injuries. Tanking would be an awful sign for Brad and our current group. I am assuming most of us view Brad as a great coach. Do we really set the bar so low and assume that he can't get this group to develop chemistry after a couple months together? The youth argument is being overplayed IMO. Kyrie, Smart, Rozier, Morris, and Horford collectively have enough experience for this team to win plenty of games during the regular season. Jaylen is also ahead of his years. Let's also not forget that Baynes is in his 6th season. Issues of youth should be more of a playoff problem/excuse IMO.
Tanking the season would be symptomatic of deeper issues within the current group. Also, imagine the pressure and criticism that Kyrie will be facing if the season is a disaster. The Celtics are a winning program with great culture from top to bottom. We should all wish for this to continue.
-
There are only about three players on this team who are even old enough to shave. Let's not teach them that it's okay to tank because you're not going to win the championship.
Mike
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
Isn't a team with horford, smart, Morris, brown, Tatum still better than the Nets without Lin? The Suns that lost their home opener by 40? Whatever the knicks and bulls are putting out there? It seems like there sure is a chance they could miss the playoffs without Hayward and Irving, but highest pick they could maybe get would be 8, 10? What would the point of that be?
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
Isn't a team with horford, smart, Morris, brown, Tatum still better than the Nets without Lin? The Suns that lost their home opener by 40? Whatever the knicks and bulls are putting out there? It seems like there sure is a chance they could miss the playoffs without Hayward and Irving, but highest pick they could maybe get would be 8, 10? What would the point of that be?
Don't you know the 9th pick is better than the 13th pick?
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
Isn't a team with horford, smart, Morris, brown, Tatum still better than the Nets without Lin? The Suns that lost their home opener by 40? Whatever the knicks and bulls are putting out there? It seems like there sure is a chance they could miss the playoffs without Hayward and Irving, but highest pick they could maybe get would be 8, 10? What would the point of that be?
I know Don's was being funny, but 8 is better than 13, both in trade value or as a potential player. If the team loses Irving after already having lost Hayward, what is the point in winning a few extra basically meaningless games? Wouldn't the team also be better served giving guys like Theis, Nader, Semi, and Yabu a lot more experience and playing time making them better players down the line (or figuring out who is worth saving and who is not).
The premise of the thread is if Irving goes down what do you do? As I said, it would depend on when Irving went down, how long he was down for, and what the team's record was before and while out, on what I'd do, but I can certainly see the potential merit in tanking depending on the answers to those questions.
-
I would trade Kyrie for a sizeable return without hesitation. He's highly marketable, and certainly the third best player on a contender (obv 2nd when alongside the best in the world). Brown and Tatum are really impressing - I'd like to build around them and Hayward with a young, transcendent big man.
-
I would trade Kyrie for a sizeable return without hesitation. He's highly marketable, and certainly the third best player on a contender (obv 2nd when alongside the best in the world). Brown and Tatum are really impressing - I'd like to build around them and Hayward with a young, transcendent big man.
Dont hold your breath.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
I have no interest in watching losing basketball. Period. That was my point.
if we get one more injury, you may not have a choice lol
Fantastic. Then we can be just mediocre enough to get the 9th pick in the draft and the tankers can bask in the mediocrity.
The 9th pick is better than the 13th pick though.
Thats not even tanking tho.
Thats called losing your two best players makes it really hard to win.
We dont have a bench full of veteran guys. We have Baynes and a bunch of rookie contract guys. Im not trading big Al. If our two best players get hurt, then we will certainly have to play a ton of young guys and we will certainly not be very good.
-
I would trade Kyrie for a sizeable return without hesitation. He's highly marketable, and certainly the third best player on a contender (obv 2nd when alongside the best in the world). Brown and Tatum are really impressing - I'd like to build around them and Hayward with a young, transcendent big man.
Dont hold your breath.
With Ainge's lovefest for him, I understand there's virtually no chance of it happening. I'm just saying I would, though I'm probably in the minority on that around here.
-
Mostly its a non-issue because Davis made the playoffs.
That can be amended to “Davis has never won a playoff game” and thus again an issue for him.
He’s a great talent for sure, but let’s not act like he’s carrying his (trash) team anywhere. People often compared him to KG, but KG did a lot more with a pretty similar supporting cast in Minnesota. AD is still young, but how long should we give him? He’s got a veteran leader in Rondo and a top-15 talent in Cousins.
-
I would trade Kyrie for a sizeable return without hesitation. He's highly marketable, and certainly the third best player on a contender (obv 2nd when alongside the best in the world). Brown and Tatum are really impressing - I'd like to build around them and Hayward with a young, transcendent big man.
Dont hold your breath.
I'd be fine with a tar heel fan holding their breath. Nobody likes tar heel fans, not even their own mothers.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
I have no interest in watching losing basketball. Period. That was my point.
if we get one more injury, you may not have a choice lol
Fantastic. Then we can be just mediocre enough to get the 9th pick in the draft and the tankers can bask in the mediocrity.
The 9th pick is better than the 13th pick though.
Thats not even tanking tho.
Thats called losing your two best players makes it really hard to win.
We dont have a bench full of veteran guys. We have Baynes and a bunch of rookie contract guys. Im not trading big Al. If our two best players get hurt, then we will certainly have to play a ton of young guys and we will certainly not be very good.
If the C's lose Irving for an extended period, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Al Horford come down with a miraculous injury.
-
If Irving went down with an injury ,...
Okay, if we start with that as the premise, then frankly, I'd be ballistic with hindsight on the trade because we would be screwed relative to having NOT made the KI trade.
If one is playing "What if ...?" scenarios, then "What if Kyrie never asked for a trade?" Then we'd be sitting here with Hayward out and Thomas out and we'd be asking ourselves? Do we tank?
The difference would be that we'd still have Zizic and the BKN18 pick. The allure of tanking would be less. But if you did just proceed to, "play the youngsters" for the season and maybe you don't get a top lotto pick, but even if it's just a pick somewhere in the mid-teens, combined with the LAL & BKN picks, that represents a hell of a lot of draft pick value that could be used or packaged (all or in part).
In some alternate universe, that is what is happening.
-
I've learned something from this thread. Some people just don't like winning.
-
I would trade Kyrie for a sizeable return without hesitation. He's highly marketable, and certainly the third best player on a contender (obv 2nd when alongside the best in the world). Brown and Tatum are really impressing - I'd like to build around them and Hayward with a young, transcendent big man.
Dont hold your breath.
With Ainge's lovefest for him, I understand there's virtually no chance of it happening. I'm just saying I would, though I'm probably in the minority on that around here.
I was going to start a thread on this, but since it has come up -
Say the Kyrie experiment proves to be a failure, would you do:
Irving, Horford, LAL/Sac pick for AD and filler (either Hill or Asik)
It is certainly a haul - especially considering what we gave up to get Irving - but with Tatum and Jaylen proving to be top level assets and Hayward likely coming back at 100%, it would be pretty exciting to add AD to that core. Smart/Rozier may not be ready for full time PG duty, but the future sure would be exciting with AD leading the charge.
For NOP, I don't see how they get a better package than that. It would also allow them to get out of one of their bad contracts. If they re-sign Cousins, they have a really solid core moving forward, in addition to the LAL/Sac pick (as well as their own).
-
I've learned something from this thread. Some people just don't like winning.
some people also don't like waiting, it seems..
-
I've learned something from this thread. Some people just don't like winning.
If Boston loses Irving after already losing Hayward, what exactly do you think Boston is going to be winning?
-
I would trade Kyrie for a sizeable return without hesitation. He's highly marketable, and certainly the third best player on a contender (obv 2nd when alongside the best in the world). Brown and Tatum are really impressing - I'd like to build around them and Hayward with a young, transcendent big man.
Dont hold your breath.
With Ainge's lovefest for him, I understand there's virtually no chance of it happening. I'm just saying I would, though I'm probably in the minority on that around here.
I was going to start a thread on this, but since it has come up -
Say the Kyrie experiment proves to be a failure, would you do:
Irving, Horford, LAL/Sac pick for AD and filler (either Hill or Asik)
It is certainly a haul - especially considering what we gave up to get Irving - but with Tatum and Jaylen proving to be top level assets and Hayward likely coming back at 100%, it would be pretty exciting to add AD to that core. Smart/Rozier may not be ready for full time PG duty, but the future sure would be exciting with AD leading the charge.
For NOP, I don't see how they get a better package than that. It would also allow them to get out of one of their bad contracts. If they re-sign Cousins, they have a really solid core moving forward, in addition to the LAL/Sac pick (as well as their own).
Why would you include Horford in that package? He isn't needed for salary matching (because Irving's current salary already matches AD's current salary (barely within the 5M allowed difference)) and it creates a need to bring back a bunch of junk salaries which then leads to all kinds of compensatory moves to balance values.
Keep Horford out of that package and it simplifies any potential deal quite a bit. That also allows you to keep his veteran presence and he would make a great front-court partner for Davis.
-
I would trade Kyrie for a sizeable return without hesitation. He's highly marketable, and certainly the third best player on a contender (obv 2nd when alongside the best in the world). Brown and Tatum are really impressing - I'd like to build around them and Hayward with a young, transcendent big man.
Dont hold your breath.
With Ainge's lovefest for him, I understand there's virtually no chance of it happening. I'm just saying I would, though I'm probably in the minority on that around here.
I was going to start a thread on this, but since it has come up -
Say the Kyrie experiment proves to be a failure, would you do:
Irving, Horford, LAL/Sac pick for AD and filler (either Hill or Asik)
It is certainly a haul - especially considering what we gave up to get Irving - but with Tatum and Jaylen proving to be top level assets and Hayward likely coming back at 100%, it would be pretty exciting to add AD to that core. Smart/Rozier may not be ready for full time PG duty, but the future sure would be exciting with AD leading the charge.
For NOP, I don't see how they get a better package than that. It would also allow them to get out of one of their bad contracts. If they re-sign Cousins, they have a really solid core moving forward, in addition to the LAL/Sac pick (as well as their own).
Honestly, I don't think I could include one of Horford or the LA/SAC pick. I'm sure NOP would demand both, but that is quite a haul.
It would be really exciting, though. With how the young guys look this early, that team could develop into a perennial contender.
Part of my reasoning is also colored by my dislike of Kyrie, too. Eventually I'll get over it (and apologize here for being so obnoxious lately), probably after his first 40 point game or two. But ultimately, I'd probably bite on your proposed trade if Horford was not involved.
-
If the premise is we lose Irving too, we will lose more games because Larken will be playing more. But Stevens isn't going to sit Horford, Morris, Baynes, and Smart and that core with Jaylen and Jayson are going to win a bunch of games. As someone mentioned earlier in the thread, Stevens isn't going to coach to lose so the whole tanking discussion is irrelevant. It wouldn't happen. We would lose more games but we wouldn't tank.
-
If the premise is we lose Irving too, we will lose more games because Larken will be playing more. But Stevens isn't going to sit Horford, Morris, Baynes, and Smart and that core with Jaylen and Jayson are going to win a bunch of games. As someone mentioned earlier in the thread, Stevens isn't going to coach to lose so the whole tanking discussion is irrelevant. It wouldn't happen. We would lose more games but we wouldn't tank.
That team isn't going to win a bunch of games. It is quite bad on the whole, so I really don't see why the team wouldn't give more burn for Theis, Nader, Semi, and Yabu.
-
If the premise is we lose Irving too, we will lose more games because Larken will be playing more. But Stevens isn't going to sit Horford, Morris, Baynes, and Smart and that core with Jaylen and Jayson are going to win a bunch of games. As someone mentioned earlier in the thread, Stevens isn't going to coach to lose so the whole tanking discussion is irrelevant. It wouldn't happen. We would lose more games but we wouldn't tank.
That team isn't going to win a bunch of games. It is quite bad on the whole, so I really don't see why the team wouldn't give more burn for Theis, Nader, Semi, and Yabu.
First, I have seen people, possibly even you, argue that even without Hayward, this team is better than last year's team. If we lose Kyrie suddenly we become a team with a horrible core that can't win games with players like Smart, Rozier, Brown, Tatum, Horford, Baynes and Morris?
Second, with Kyrie out all that will happen is Rozier's minutes will increase and we will see a bit more Larken and Nader. Not a lot more of Larken and Nader but more. Stevens isn't going to suddenly change his big man rotation because he lost a PG.
Third, Stevens isn't going to coach to lose. Its just not happening.
So we would lose more games if Kyrie gets hurt, but we won't be tanking.
-
I've learned something from this thread. Some people just don't like winning.
If Boston loses Irving after already losing Hayward, what exactly do you think Boston is going to be winning?
Games. I don't like tanking. Well' it would have been understandable four years ago. Not now.
I guess you are the kind of people who preferred to have tanked the year we made a final run and get into the playoffs, the first IT's season.
I'm the kind of people who think that young players learn a lot more in a winning culture than losing 60 games per season.
-
To answer the OP's question, I am not interested in tanking this year and I will hazard a guess that neither are Brad Stevens, Danny Ainge, and all the players on the Boston Celtics.
-
About as interested as I am in nuclear war!! ::)
-
If Boston loses Irving after already losing Hayward, what exactly do you think Boston is going to be winning?
Keep trying. This may be acceptable in the CAVs forums which I wager you haunt, but not in Boston! Seasons are about winning.
-
If Boston loses Irving after already losing Hayward, what exactly do you think Boston is going to be winning?
Keep trying. This may be acceptable in the CAVs forums which I wager you haunt, but not in Boston! Seasons are about winning.
And that doesn't answer the question.
-
First off, there's no way we could make ourselves bad enough to compete with all the terrible teams in the league this year. And secondly we need to try to be as competitive as possible to keep the Anthony Davis possibility. He's not gonna want to play for a lottery team, and he's not gonna get traded anywhere he makes clear he doesn't want to be. Thirdly, that's what we have the Lakers pick for. Lastly, I really don't want to watch a awful team this year. So no.
Honestly, enough of the Anthony Davis talk. Respect the players on the roster. We do not need Anthony Davis to win. He has not even made the playoffs in all his years in the league.
TP. Spot on.
I will start coveting players like Davis, Cousins, Embiid, Towns, etc when they prove that they can win in the playoffs. I'm talking 2nd/3rd round wins.
-
First off, there's no way we could make ourselves bad enough to compete with all the terrible teams in the league this year. And secondly we need to try to be as competitive as possible to keep the Anthony Davis possibility. He's not gonna want to play for a lottery team, and he's not gonna get traded anywhere he makes clear he doesn't want to be. Thirdly, that's what we have the Lakers pick for. Lastly, I really don't want to watch a awful team this year. So no.
Honestly, enough of the Anthony Davis talk. Respect the players on the roster. We do not need Anthony Davis to win. He has not even made the playoffs in all his years in the league.
TP. Spot on.
I will start coveting players like Davis, Cousins, Embiid, Towns, etc when they prove that they can win in the playoffs. I'm talking 2nd/3rd round wins.
I respect the player son the roster enough to think that tanking this year is impossible/ a bad idea. As for Anthony Davis he's a factor whether we want to discuss him or not. He's the one top 5-10 nab player who may soon be availble and get us to the warriors level, theres been numerous reports and conjecture that he's the celtcis target, and you can bet Dany Ainge considers how his actions impact the celtics ability to get him.
-
First off, there's no way we could make ourselves bad enough to compete with all the terrible teams in the league this year. And secondly we need to try to be as competitive as possible to keep the Anthony Davis possibility. He's not gonna want to play for a lottery team, and he's not gonna get traded anywhere he makes clear he doesn't want to be. Thirdly, that's what we have the Lakers pick for. Lastly, I really don't want to watch a awful team this year. So no.
Honestly, enough of the Anthony Davis talk. Respect the players on the roster. We do not need Anthony Davis to win. He has not even made the playoffs in all his years in the league.
TP. Spot on.
I will start coveting players like Davis, Cousins, Embiid, Towns, etc when they prove that they can win in the playoffs. I'm talking 2nd/3rd round wins.
If players such as Davis can hardly be within reach when their teams are bad, you won't be able to covet them if they win in the playoffs.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
Let me get this straight..... you're already thinking about another season-ending injury to either Kyrie or Horford?
Yikes.
-
No thanks.
This team already bottomed out. Absolutely no interest going there again.
A one year tank when your two best players are injured is no where near the same thing as bottoming out.
Let me get this straight..... you're already thinking about another season-ending injury to either Kyrie or Horford?
Yikes.
This. Times 100.
Seriously.
-
Just need to land one of Bagley, Ayton, Or Bamba, than one of Porter, Doncic, Jarrett Jackson If we can add two of those guys to Jaylen Brown and Tatum that would be awesome.
The grass is always greener, isn't it, on the other side of the hill? On the other hand, having just watched the Lakers' and Lonzo Ball's debut, it looks to me as though a 2-5 pick next summer is a real possibility.
But the Celtics tanking? Won't happen. No point in entertaining it.
Horford and Hayward just trade them for Boogie and Davis LoL
The Boogie ship has sailed. Given what it took New Orleans to get him, surely it is safe to say that Danny Ainge could have made that one happen if he'd wanted him. DeMarcus Cousins is poison and will never be a Celtic.
-
I'm a little confused by the premise. If Kyrie were to go down for the season, what would "tanking" mean, exactly?
Would it mean instructing players on the floor to not play to win? The answer to that is always no.
Would it mean instructing Brad Steven to not coach to win? I don't think Stevens has any interest in that and I wouldn't trust a coach that did.
Would it mean trading our valuable vets to get young players and assets? If Kyrie goes down, then the whole team is going to be made up of young players and Al Horford.
So is the question, "If Kyrie goes down, should be trade Al Horford?" I say no.
-
If you don't play to win a championship why play at all
Disgusting that you even mentioned tanking, go to the 76ers forums and gloss over the process 8)
-
If the basketball gods take Kyrie away from us this year due to some unfortunate injury, we wont need to tank. We will be God awful. Horford and two players under 21 are not gonna win us many games- lets be real here.
-
ven if we loose tonight im not tanking......i doubt CBS understands the term.
-
If Irving went down with an injury for multiple weeks, I would tell him to sit and play video games with Hayward. Develop Rozier, Smart, Jaylen, Tatum. And raise the trade values of Nader, Semi, Yabu.
Just need to land one of Bagley, Ayton, Or Bamba, than one of Porter, Doncic, Jarrett Jackson If we can add two of those guys to Jaylen Brown and Tatum that would be awesome.
Bamba
Porter JR
Tatum
Brown
Irving
Horford and Hayward just trade them for Boogie and Davis LoL
no, please stop with the sillyness.
-
Nope not me, the Lakers are doing it for us!
-
Even if you tank, you're probably still just getting a pick in the mid-teens b/c there are SO MANY bad teams this year (in East especially) and the C's have played neck and neck with the likes of Cleveland and MIL so far (even w/o Hayward and Morris).
I don't think Ainge and Stevens will appreciate that, and neither will Horford (guy signed here to compete, NOT tank...)
-
Trout ...
Trout ...
pretty little Trout ...
Jump right in .....and Jump right out.....
no Tank you verrrry much
-
I can't control what the team does but I will be tanking my posts for the remainder of the season in solidarity.
-
If this man
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRbCBsO5ONrlP_6ERdm9Pun3LCMpkAfZPclUbyZM4ubHyza-CNCuQ)
didn't allow us to tank when IT first arrived in BOS then I have complete trust in him to make BOS competitive even now.
Give him time and he'll max out every single one of our player's abilities - like he's done so many times before.
Even with GH's temporary situation, this is a playoff team. Kyrie WILL get better, we'll get Marcus back and the youngsters (Jaylen and Taytum) will continue to grow and shine.
-
(https://www.askideas.com/media/48/Funny-Mouth-Meme-You-Think-You-Are-Funny-Shut-Your-Mouth-Picture.jpg)
-
Boogie Cousins has plenty of x factors over Davis but he would be soooooo much cheaper to get. He shoots 38% from 3 and basically averages 12rpg and would also help a TON keeping the other teams frontcourt from getting those pesky offensive rebounds. He also takes 4x more fta than Big Al and is 4 years YOUNGER ...getting the other frontcourt in foul trouble.
Boogie has a 7'6'' wingspan and a YUUUUGE 9'5'' STANDING REACH.
Does anyone know the un-obvious repercussions from the cap if we did:
Omer Asik (3 years $11m per)
Boogie Cousins (have to sign him in off-season)
4
Big Al
-
Boogie Cousins has plenty of x factors over Davis but he would be soooooo much cheaper to get. He shoots 38% from 3 and basically averages 12rpg and would also help a TON keeping the other teams frontcourt from getting those pesky offensive rebounds. He also takes 4x more fta than Big Al and is 4 years YOUNGER ...getting the other frontcourt in foul trouble.
Boogie has a 7'6'' wingspan and a YUUUUGE 9'5'' STANDING REACH.
Does anyone know the un-obvious repercussions from the cap if we did:
Omer Asik (3 years $11m per)
Boogie Cousins (have to sign him in off-season)
4
Big Al
Don't want to make this into another 'get boogie' thread, but the fact is that if Ainge wanted him, he could have had him, and WITHOUT giving up Al, who by-the-way, is a 34.5% career 3-pt shooter. That is not much worse than boogie's HIGHEST season last year 37.5%.
-
With hindsight I think most were proved right when saying ranking in IT's first season wouldn't have paid off. We can say the same again here. Development is what a team like this needs, guys learning to play a bigger role so that next year when we are hopefully fully healthy we can be even better.
-
All of these years of BKN picks and some folks still don't get it. Tanking is best outsourced.
-
I have given it more thought. Not possible to tank because the bulls, knicks, lakers suns and hawks are really really bad. Then the other group of teams like nets and magic are still bad