If we received the number 1 pick in the lottery...

[Bahku]

No way Danny would have passed on getting Oden ... not matter what other options there might have been.

[BudweiserCeltic]

No way Danny would have passed on getting Oden ... not matter what other options there might have been.

Yeah, I don't think he would have either. I, myself, am a Durant guy, and was hoping we would've been able to draft him if we had won the lottery.  The main reason being that I've always felt that we needed more playmakers on our team instead of relying on Pierce every single time, and then seeing him lose his dribble or stumble into the floor for one reason or another.

[Roy Hobbs]

So just as some see a dire future, I see a future as bright as any.

I don't see that assessment in any way realistic.  While our future may not be "dire", I think it's hard to argue this team's future is on the same level as Portland, Miami, Seattle, or any of the other teams with young superstars.  Not all of those teams will achieve success, but at least some of them are likely to.  The Celtics, on the other hand, are going to face a very difficult transition, rebuilding without high draft picks or cap space.  The team's future success will have to hinge upon one of the following strategies: 1) hoping to find a diamond-in-the-rough late in the draft who develops into an all-star caliber player, 2) hoping we can cash in the expiring contracts of Ray and/or Pierce for a free agent superstar, or 3) hoping that Rondo becomes a transcendent player who can lift less-talented teammates into contention.

All of the above are possible.  However, I think the likelihood of that happening is substantially less than, say, Oden becoming a top-tier center, or a combo of Wade/Marion/Rose (for instance) becoming a long-term Eastern Conference contender.

As for your other points concerning how a young team may have never been as good as this one, I absolutely agree.  However, I think just about anybody (including Danny) would acknowledge that the team sacrificed some of its long-term future for the ability to "win now".  That strategy is paying off in a big way, of course, but that doesn't mean that our future is just as rosy as any other team's. 

Personally, at this point I couldn't care less about the future, and I accept future rebuilding almost as an inevitability.  That doesn't bother me, though, because there's a very good chance that this team wins a championship, or even more than one, over the next 3 - 5 years.  However, I do not envy the future of any team whose roster structure is: potential borderline all-star (Rondo), talented but ultimately mediocre players (Perk, BBD, Powe), large expiring contracts, late-round draft picks (minus the 2009 pick), and no foreseeable cap space.  The expiring contracts are nice, but sometimes its easier said than done to cash those in (not even taking into account whether Danny will want to ship, say, Paul Pierce out of town at the end of his career.)

[crownsy]

So just as some see a dire future, I see a future as bright as any.

I don't see that assessment in any way realistic.  While our future may not be "dire", I think it's hard to argue this team's future is on the same level as Portland, Miami, Seattle, or any of the other teams with young superstars.  Not all of those teams will achieve success, but at least some of them are likely to.  The Celtics, on the other hand, are going to face a very difficult transition, rebuilding without high draft picks or cap space.  The team's future success will have to hinge upon one of the following strategies: 1) hoping to find a diamond-in-the-rough late in the draft who develops into an all-star caliber player, 2) hoping we can cash in the expiring contracts of Ray and/or Pierce for a free agent superstar, or 3) hoping that Rondo becomes a transcendent player who can lift less-talented teammates into contention.

All of the above are possible.  However, I think the likelihood of that happening is substantially less than, say, Oden becoming a top-tier center, or a combo of Wade/Marion/Rose (for instance) becoming a long-term Eastern Conference contender.

As for your other points concerning how a young team may have never been as good as this one, I absolutely agree.  However, I think just about anybody (including Danny) would acknowledge that the team sacrificed some of its long-term future for the ability to "win now".  That strategy is paying off in a big way, of course, but that doesn't mean that our future is just as rosy as any other team's. 

Personally, at this point I couldn't care less about the future, and I accept future rebuilding almost as an inevitability.  That doesn't bother me, though, because there's a very good chance that this team wins a championship, or even more than one, over the next 3 - 5 years.  However, I do not envy the future of any team whose roster structure is: potential borderline all-star (Rondo), talented but ultimately mediocre players (Perk, BBD, Powe), large expiring contracts, late-round draft picks (minus the 2009 pick), and no foreseeable cap space.  The expiring contracts are nice, but sometimes its easier said than done to cash those in (not even taking into account whether Danny will want to ship, say, Paul Pierce out of town at the end of his career.)

didn't danny set up the big 3's contracts so they come off the books in different years?

if so, wont we have alot of cap space once 2 of them are gone?

I would think that would allow us to sign a monster FA and some mid level players...right? I really don't know, but i swear i heard he set it up so that they come off the books close to each other so we'll have a ton of cap space.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Well, lets see how this year's draft goes before anything and how Danny deals with it, and we'll get a better sense on how Danny will protect our future without compromising our present.  If he trades our pick, in my opinion, it will be to improve our draft position.  If it's to get talent to help us, I think he'll trade for a young/young-veteran player that can currently help us and still be part of our future.  The only way I see him trading for an oldie it would be because it's for an extremely talented player or to somehow fill some sort of need we have.  Hopefully Danny will have a good idea on how Posey, Cassell, Tony, and House will be handled before the draft comes up.  Other than that, it's keep the pick and hope he uses good judgment on who he picks (and I think he's done a good job of that in the past).

We have both our draft picks this year right? I didn't think we had our second round one, but from what I'm reading around we still have it.

While we are at it, along the points I brought before, I think the NBA needs to change their rules a little bit in how roster space and money that counts towards the cap is used. I think young teams would benefit from a system that would allow them to send players to the NBDL, and those players not count towards your roster or your cap or something, so that they can use resources to get good players and compete each year. Kinda like how some draft picks go overseas to play before coming to the NBA.

didn't danny set up the big 3's contracts so they come off the books in different years?

if so, wont we have alot of cap space once 2 of them are gone?

I would think that would allow us to sign a monster FA and some mid level players...right? I really don't know, but i swear i heard he set it up so that they come off the books close to each other so we'll have a ton of cap space.

It's a bit deceptive because it'll be quite hard to get enough under the cap to bring in MAX level talent, and that won't happen until Garnett stops playing.  Here's my wish and hope: that Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, and Garnett keep playing for the Celtics, but that once their current contract is up they really take a paycut.  If they're not willing to do that, we might as well trade them.  But until Garnett's current contract is off the books, it'll be very hard to get some free-agents with star power or potential.  Maybe when Paul Pierce is off, but I still hope he stays with a paycut (assuming he can still play)

[Roy Hobbs]

So just as some see a dire future, I see a future as bright as any.

I don't see that assessment in any way realistic.  While our future may not be "dire", I think it's hard to argue this team's future is on the same level as Portland, Miami, Seattle, or any of the other teams with young superstars.  Not all of those teams will achieve success, but at least some of them are likely to.  The Celtics, on the other hand, are going to face a very difficult transition, rebuilding without high draft picks or cap space.  The team's future success will have to hinge upon one of the following strategies: 1) hoping to find a diamond-in-the-rough late in the draft who develops into an all-star caliber player, 2) hoping we can cash in the expiring contracts of Ray and/or Pierce for a free agent superstar, or 3) hoping that Rondo becomes a transcendent player who can lift less-talented teammates into contention.

All of the above are possible.  However, I think the likelihood of that happening is substantially less than, say, Oden becoming a top-tier center, or a combo of Wade/Marion/Rose (for instance) becoming a long-term Eastern Conference contender.

As for your other points concerning how a young team may have never been as good as this one, I absolutely agree.  However, I think just about anybody (including Danny) would acknowledge that the team sacrificed some of its long-term future for the ability to "win now".  That strategy is paying off in a big way, of course, but that doesn't mean that our future is just as rosy as any other team's. 

Personally, at this point I couldn't care less about the future, and I accept future rebuilding almost as an inevitability.  That doesn't bother me, though, because there's a very good chance that this team wins a championship, or even more than one, over the next 3 - 5 years.  However, I do not envy the future of any team whose roster structure is: potential borderline all-star (Rondo), talented but ultimately mediocre players (Perk, BBD, Powe), large expiring contracts, late-round draft picks (minus the 2009 pick), and no foreseeable cap space.  The expiring contracts are nice, but sometimes its easier said than done to cash those in (not even taking into account whether Danny will want to ship, say, Paul Pierce out of town at the end of his career.)

didn't danny set up the big 3's contracts so they come off the books in different years?

if so, wont we have alot of cap space once 2 of them are gone?

I would think that would allow us to sign a monster FA and some mid level players...right? I really don't know, but i swear i heard he set it up so that they come off the books close to each other so we'll have a ton of cap space.

I don't think Danny really set it up that way on purpose; Pierce got a max-length deal, and we acquired Ray on a pre-existing deal.  KG was signed to a three-year deal so that his trade-kicker could be disbursed over such time period, allowing the agreed upon trade to go through.  Also, it's a pretty good bet that in five years KG's skills have at least begun to decline.

But, regardless of intent or not, yes, the contracts expire over three consecutive seasons.  Upon Ray's expiration following the 2009-10 season, we won't have any cap room; we've already committed $44.7 million to three players (KG, Pierce, Perk), meaning it's going to be impossible to sign a free agent under the cap.  After Pierce expires, sure, we could potentially have cap room, as we only have one salary committed for 2011-12.  However, that's assuming that we allow Ray to walk away and we don't resign Pierce (or that he agrees to a substantially reduced salary).  Even then, a lot of our cap is likely to be taken up by KG and Rondo, with whatever role players we've kept along the way.

But yes, in 2011, we could have a team of Rondo, a 35-year old KG, a couple of late-round picks on rookie deals and cap space to sign a free agent.  That doesn't have me salivating over the state of our future, and I think it's off-base to argue that "we're no worse off than any other team".  That's simply not the case, but again, I'm not all that worried about it, though, because it should be a fun 3 to 5 years.  We might not have the future that some teams will, but we're going to have a much better present.

[Roy Hobbs]

Well, lets see how this year's draft goes before anything and how Danny deals with it, and we'll get a better sense on how Danny will protect our future without compromising our present.  If he trades our pick, in my opinion, it will be to improve our draft position.  If it's to get talent to help us, I think he'll trade for a young/young-veteran player that can currently help us and still be part of our future.  The only way I see him trading for an oldie it would be because it's for an extremely talented player or to somehow fill some sort of need we have.  Hopefully Danny will have a good idea on how Posey, Cassell, Tony, and House will be handled before the draft comes up.  Other than that, it's keep the pick and hope he uses good judgment on who he picks (and I think he's done a good job of that in the past).

We have both our draft picks this year right? I didn't think we had our second round one, but from what I'm reading around we still have it.

First, yes, we have both our own picks this year, the #30 and the #60.  We also had the rights to Portland's from the Telfair deal, but we traded that to Seattle in the Ray Allen trade.

As for the draft, here's Danny's stated philosophy for this year's draft (which is, as always, subject to change):

``The second difference for us this year is that our objective is to win more immediately,'' Ainge said. ``We have a good mixture of veterans and youth, and the biggest thing we think about now when we look at a player is whether he's better than what we already have. We're not just trying to draft the best player; we want to know if it's someone who can help us.

``We like our young players. They've already contributed. But we have a very good young player in Gabe Pruitt and we can't even get him on the court. So even though someone we see out here might look good, we have to figure out if they're better than Gabe or better than Glen Davis or Leon Powe.''

With Eddie House, Scot Pollard, Sam Cassell and P.J. Brown on one-year deals and Tony Allen a restricted free agent, it's not like the Celts won't have any openings next year. But it's harder to get a job with them these days.

``We're evaluating people in a little different way because our talent level is higher now,'' said Ainge.

"We can find someone that can help us," Ainge said. "The big question is, will we draft someone to the team? We have some good young guys and some good veterans. Do we add a veteran? Trade the pick for a veteran?"

To me, that sounds like Danny is squarely focused on the present, especially when he talks about passing on "the best" players for players who can step in immediately.

[BudweiserCeltic]

You can read that in many different ways.  What does he consider a veteran? A proven player? A 30+ year old?

What I take most from it is that he's not going to draft projects, aka High School players among other promising young players that still need much development.

Sure he's going to be thinking more in terms of the present, but I don't think he'll be foolish and not take a look on what the player we add to our team can bring in to the future too as well as his fit to our present plans.

Anyways, I'm not worried about the future and I think is a bit foolish to try and convince people not to worry much about it, when one thing we can agree with is that we love how our current team is. Sure, our alternate future might've looked brighter, but just the same there are too many unknowns to assume that they would at some point amount to a championship caliber team; and that's my main point and the bottom line for me.  And if they did become a championship caliber team, how long will it take for them to get there?  How long can they play at a championship level before blowing up the team?

My argument wasn't really to show that our alternative young core would be just as good as the future will confront in this path.  My argument was to show that there are too many unknowns to assume how things will play out 5+ years from now.  I've seen too many NBA teams rebuilding around youth and not get anywhere after years of mediocrity; we were pretty much in that boat for the past years.  So I figure that our unknown future is just as good as any (a generalization of course).  Just as I can't assume that we'll have a championship caliber team in the future with the hypothetical team, I can't assume that we'll automatically field a crap of a team after our current run is said and done.  Which once again goes back to my balance argument, and I think right now we have fairly good balance between youth and veterans.

[hardlyyardley]

If you think things would have looked up with a core of Oden, Jefferson, Pierce and Rondo....then look no further than the 2008-9 Portland team with a core of Oden, Aldridge Roy,Outlaw and Webster with point guard depth and a 2008 lottery pick.

That would be as close to a mirror of the theoretical C's core.

[Andy Jick]

i believe you can compare our current situation to that of detroit and san antonio.  we'll be good for awhile, but eventually some tough decisions will have to be made.  but we're NOTHING near miami.

but the key is staying healthy...and that's something that no one can control.

danny has to be careful not to overpay for average players, like the milwaukee bucks did...that will drive this team into the ground.

[BudweiserCeltic]

danny has to be careful not to overpay for average players, like the milwaukee bucks did...that will drive this team into the ground.

This is what I'm most afraid of, if anything.  I don't mind overpaying average players, I mind the contract length of them overpaying them.  By the time Pierce's and/or Garnett's contract is up, we better not have none of these nonsense contracts.

In my opinion, this is what also killed Minnesota.  Too many 5+ million and 10+ million players that didn't produce in the team.

[sk7326]

Oden, if healthy etc, would have given them the defensive backbone they lacked (and that KG has given them).  big Al and Pierce would carry the scoring.  Wally would have provided some depth.  They would have not been a 66-16 team, but they'd have been a factor in the East very very quickly.

[Chris]

danny has to be careful not to overpay for average players, like the milwaukee bucks did...that will drive this team into the ground.

This is what I'm most afraid of, if anything.  I don't mind overpaying average players, I mind the contract length of them overpaying them.  By the time Pierce's and/or Garnett's contract is up, we better not have none of these nonsense contracts.

In my opinion, this is what also killed Minnesota.  Too many 5+ million and 10+ million players that didn't produce in the team.

I am not too worried about this.  Right now, everyone wants to play on the C's, which means that they can get quality players for bargain prices.

I guess it could be a concern when it comes to resigning our young guys, but I don't think it will be a problem at all with Free Agents.

[Who]

danny has to be careful not to overpay for average players, like the milwaukee bucks did...that will drive this team into the ground.

This is what I'm most afraid of, if anything.  I don't mind overpaying average players, I mind the contract length of them overpaying them.  By the time Pierce's and/or Garnett's contract is up, we better not have none of these nonsense contracts.

In my opinion, this is what also killed Minnesota.  Too many 5+ million and 10+ million players that didn't produce in the team.

I am not too worried about this.  Right now, everyone wants to play on the C's, which means that they can get quality players for bargain prices.

I guess it could be a concern when it comes to resigning our young guys, but I don't think it will be a problem at all with Free Agents.

I'm not worried about this either

It's unlikely Danny shells out 36mil on some 26 year old hoping he comes good ala Troy Hudson or Chauncey Billups. You just don't see many championship teams rolling the dice like that.

It's more likely cagey veterans like Grant Hill or a Michael Finley (like James Posey). Those guys won't be on 6 year contracts. It'll be 2-3-4 year deals. They likely won't have to pay over the nose to get them either.