Back2Back Victories that will live in INFAMY

[Celtics18]

in the history of the Celtics. Why are we winning on the road against elite Western Conference teams?

Do we want to stay in the basement of the NBA for years to come. Even the Lakers are Tanking.

What is wrong with the people running the Celtics?

Why are we winning games we ought to lose?

For the life of me I don't understand this thought process.  Why do we want this team to lose?  If they start winning lots of games, even with players like Bass and Prince getting some minutes, doesn't that mean the team is better than we think they are?

Wouldn't you rather have a team of 20-24 year olds who win 40 games versus a similarly aged team that wins 14?  Why do you believe that we have to draft in the top 5 to get an impact player?  Why can't we add solid mid-draft talent and one potential FA/trade veteran to put this team back in contention?

Granted this Celtics team is probably not going to win 40 games, but what if they went .500 after the All-Star break.  Why is that BAD??

I can't see why people get so worked up about a bad team winning games. The Celtics will never win the lottery. History has show that you could find quality talent in the 5-10 slot and that any pick in the draft(even the first) does not guarantee anything. 2-5 extra wins doesn't really mean any thing right now.

Exactly:

Damian Lillard: 6th pick
Stephen Curry: 7th pick
Joakim Noah: 9th pick
Gordon Hayward: 9th pick
Paul George: 10th pick
Brook Lopez: 10th pick
Klay Thompson: 11th pick
Kawhi Leonard: 15th pick
Roy Hibert: 17th pick
Eric Bledsoe: 18th pick
Tobias Harris: 19th pick
Serge Ibaka: 24th pick
Kyle Lowry: 24th pick
Jimmy Butler: 30th pick
DeAndre Jordan: 35th pick
Chandler Parsons: 38th pick
Goran Dragic: 45th pick
Marc Gasol: 48th pick

How many of those guys are franchise players?
Gasol and  Steph Curry? Maybe Paul George.

Your list just proves a point.
Now list the best two players on championship teams over the last 20 years and see where they were picked.

Here's a list of guys who have been among the top two players on a champion in the last twenty years picked outside the top 5:

Clyde Drexler, 14th
Kobe Bryant, 13th
Ben Wallace, undrafted
Tony Parker, 28th
Manu Ginobili, 57th
Paul Pierce, 10th
Dirk Nowitzki, 9th
Kawhi Leonard, 15th

Here's a list of guys who were drafted in the top five, but were top two players on championship teams other than the one they were drafted by:

Shaquille O'Neal, 1st
Chauncey Billups, 3rd
Kevin Garnett, 5th
Pau Gasol, 3rd
Tyson Chandler, 2nd
Lebron James, 1st

Here's a complete list of players who were among the top two players on championship teams who were drafted in the top five by the team they won a title/s with over the course of the past twenty years. 

Hakeem Olajuwon
Michael Jordan
Scottie Pippen
Tim Duncan
David Robinson
Dwayne Wade

*Note that only two of the six players on this last list have won titles in this century.

Appreciate the research (TP).  I would add Richard Hamilton to the list (7th pick) and Jason Kidd (2nd).

You can add those if you want. 

I had Tyson Chandler as the 2nd best player on the Mavs champion.  Certainly, J-Kidd was a major factor, though, as were Terry and Marion. 

For the Pistons, I had Billups and Ben Wallace, but that was such an ensemble team that you could surely make the case for Rip Hamilton and 'Sheed, as well.  Even, Tayshaun was fairly crucial to that squad.

[Celtics18]

Here's a complete list of players who were among the top two players on championship teams who were drafted in the top five by the team they won a title/s with over the course of the past twenty years. 

Hakeem Olajuwon
Michael Jordan
Scottie Pippen
Tim Duncan
David Robinson
Dwayne Wade

*Note that only two of the six players on this last list have won titles in this century.

Doesn't matter much but Pippen was actually drafted by the Sonics; he was a draft-day trade.  TP for putting the list together.

TP back.  I missed that.  Thanks for catching it . . . traded for the eighth pick (Olden Polynice) and some future picks. 

[LB3533]

Draft picks do not win championships.....players playing within the appropriate systems do.

Franchise players, super star players, starter, bench & role players can arise from any draft pick number.

Do we have players right now? Do we need to find more players? Are the current players or future players the right fit for our system? Do we have a system? Do we have a good system?

The only answer I personally can express is: I like the fight I am seeing in our current squad, regardless of where any player was drafted, regardless of any system we are currently playing.

[droopdog7]

in the history of the Celtics. Why are we winning on the road against elite Western Conference teams?

Do we want to stay in the basement of the NBA for years to come. Even the Lakers are Tanking.

What is wrong with the people running the Celtics?

Why are we winning games we ought to lose?

For the life of me I don't understand this thought process.  Why do we want this team to lose?  If they start winning lots of games, even with players like Bass and Prince getting some minutes, doesn't that mean the team is better than we think they are?

Wouldn't you rather have a team of 20-24 year olds who win 40 games versus a similarly aged team that wins 14?  Why do you believe that we have to draft in the top 5 to get an impact player?  Why can't we add solid mid-draft talent and one potential FA/trade veteran to put this team back in contention?

Granted this Celtics team is probably not going to win 40 games, but what if they went .500 after the All-Star break.  Why is that BAD??

I can't see why people get so worked up about a bad team winning games. The Celtics will never win the lottery. History has show that you could find quality talent in the 5-10 slot and that any pick in the draft(even the first) does not guarantee anything. 2-5 extra wins doesn't really mean any thing right now.

Exactly:

Damian Lillard: 6th pick
Stephen Curry: 7th pick
Joakim Noah: 9th pick
Gordon Hayward: 9th pick
Paul George: 10th pick
Brook Lopez: 10th pick
Klay Thompson: 11th pick
Kawhi Leonard: 15th pick
Roy Hibert: 17th pick
Eric Bledsoe: 18th pick
Tobias Harris: 19th pick
Serge Ibaka: 24th pick
Kyle Lowry: 24th pick
Jimmy Butler: 30th pick
DeAndre Jordan: 35th pick
Chandler Parsons: 38th pick
Goran Dragic: 45th pick
Marc Gasol: 48th pick

How many of those guys are franchise players?
Gasol and  Steph Curry? Maybe Paul George.

Your list just proves a point.
Now list the best two players on championship teams over the last 20 years and see where they were picked.

Here's a list of guys who have been among the top two players on a champion in the last twenty years picked outside the top 5:

Clyde Drexler, 14th
Kobe Bryant, 13th
Ben Wallace, undrafted
Tony Parker, 28th
Manu Ginobili, 57th
Paul Pierce, 10th
Dirk Nowitzki, 9th
Kawhi Leonard, 15th

Here's a list of guys who were drafted in the top five, but were top two players on championship teams other than the one they were drafted by:

Shaquille O'Neal, 1st
Chauncey Billups, 3rd
Kevin Garnett, 5th
Pau Gasol, 3rd
Tyson Chandler, 2nd
Lebron James, 1st

Here's a complete list of players who were among the top two players on championship teams who were drafted in the top five by the team they won a title/s with over the course of the past twenty years. 

Hakeem Olajuwon
Michael Jordan
Scottie Pippen
Tim Duncan
David Robinson
Dwayne Wade

*Note that only two of the six players on this last list have won titles in this century.

Appreciate the research (TP).  I would add Richard Hamilton to the list (7th pick) and Jason Kidd (2nd).

You can add those if you want. 

I had Tyson Chandler as the 2nd best player on the Mavs champion.  Certainly, J-Kidd was a major factor, though, as were Terry and Marion. 

For the Pistons, I had Billups and Ben Wallace, but that was such an ensemble team that you could surely make the case for Rip Hamilton and 'Sheed, as well.  Even, Tayshaun was fairly crucial to that squad.

Yeah, we're getting down to some subjective decisions here.  And it is not a coincidence I think that the Pistons and Mavs were more "team" oriented than most other champions. 

So using your list, we have six out of 20 top five players winning a title on their own team. That's 30% exactly, which in itself is fairly strong evidence that having a early pick is important. And while I understand why you broke out top 5 players that won on other teams, I think the pattern here fairly persuasive.  60% of championship teams had a player drafted in the top five as one of the two best.  I mean, I think that's pretty [dang] high, considering that the first five picks represent only about 16% of the first round alone, never mind the second round and free agents.

[mctyson]

in the history of the Celtics. Why are we winning on the road against elite Western Conference teams?

Do we want to stay in the basement of the NBA for years to come. Even the Lakers are Tanking.

What is wrong with the people running the Celtics?

Why are we winning games we ought to lose?

For the life of me I don't understand this thought process.  Why do we want this team to lose?  If they start winning lots of games, even with players like Bass and Prince getting some minutes, doesn't that mean the team is better than we think they are?

Wouldn't you rather have a team of 20-24 year olds who win 40 games versus a similarly aged team that wins 14?  Why do you believe that we have to draft in the top 5 to get an impact player?  Why can't we add solid mid-draft talent and one potential FA/trade veteran to put this team back in contention?

Granted this Celtics team is probably not going to win 40 games, but what if they went .500 after the All-Star break.  Why is that BAD??

I can't see why people get so worked up about a bad team winning games. The Celtics will never win the lottery. History has show that you could find quality talent in the 5-10 slot and that any pick in the draft(even the first) does not guarantee anything. 2-5 extra wins doesn't really mean any thing right now.

Exactly:

Damian Lillard: 6th pick
Stephen Curry: 7th pick
Joakim Noah: 9th pick
Gordon Hayward: 9th pick
Paul George: 10th pick
Brook Lopez: 10th pick
Klay Thompson: 11th pick
Kawhi Leonard: 15th pick
Roy Hibert: 17th pick
Eric Bledsoe: 18th pick
Tobias Harris: 19th pick
Serge Ibaka: 24th pick
Kyle Lowry: 24th pick
Jimmy Butler: 30th pick
DeAndre Jordan: 35th pick
Chandler Parsons: 38th pick
Goran Dragic: 45th pick
Marc Gasol: 48th pick

How many of those guys are franchise players?
Gasol and  Steph Curry? Maybe Paul George.

Your list just proves a point.
Now list the best two players on championship teams over the last 20 years and see where they were picked.

Give me a guarantee we get what you call a "Franchise Player" in the Top 5 and I will be mad if we miss out on that chance.

But guess what?  You can't, and no one can.  We could draft the next Greg Oden #1. 

I'd much rather my current team win with the young core they have, so we can add on to it and get better...versus getting worse to hope for a savior.

[jonaslopes]

in the history of the Celtics. Why are we winning on the road against elite Western Conference teams?

Do we want to stay in the basement of the NBA for years to come. Even the Lakers are Tanking.

What is wrong with the people running the Celtics?

Why are we winning games we ought to lose?

For the life of me I don't understand this thought process.  Why do we want this team to lose?  If they start winning lots of games, even with players like Bass and Prince getting some minutes, doesn't that mean the team is better than we think they are?

Wouldn't you rather have a team of 20-24 year olds who win 40 games versus a similarly aged team that wins 14?  Why do you believe that we have to draft in the top 5 to get an impact player?  Why can't we add solid mid-draft talent and one potential FA/trade veteran to put this team back in contention?

Granted this Celtics team is probably not going to win 40 games, but what if they went .500 after the All-Star break.  Why is that BAD??

I can't see why people get so worked up about a bad team winning games. The Celtics will never win the lottery. History has show that you could find quality talent in the 5-10 slot and that any pick in the draft(even the first) does not guarantee anything. 2-5 extra wins doesn't really mean any thing right now.

Exactly:

Damian Lillard: 6th pick
Stephen Curry: 7th pick
Joakim Noah: 9th pick
Gordon Hayward: 9th pick
Paul George: 10th pick
Brook Lopez: 10th pick
Klay Thompson: 11th pick
Kawhi Leonard: 15th pick
Roy Hibert: 17th pick
Eric Bledsoe: 18th pick
Tobias Harris: 19th pick
Serge Ibaka: 24th pick
Kyle Lowry: 24th pick
Jimmy Butler: 30th pick
DeAndre Jordan: 35th pick
Chandler Parsons: 38th pick
Goran Dragic: 45th pick
Marc Gasol: 48th pick

How many of those guys are franchise players?
Gasol and  Steph Curry? Maybe Paul George.

Your list just proves a point.
Now list the best two players on championship teams over the last 20 years and see where they were picked.

Give me a guarantee we get what you call a "Franchise Player" in the Top 5 and I will be mad if we miss out on that chance.

But guess what?  You can't, and no one can.  We could draft the next Greg Oden #1. 

I'd much rather my current team win with the young core they have, so we can add on to it and get better...versus getting worse to hope for a savior.

Greg Oden or Anthony Bennett or Andrea Bargagni. Michael Beasley and Derrick Williams were #2.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Has anybody mentioned the Stanford Marshmellow Test yet?

From Wiki:

The Stanford marshmallow experiment was a series of studies on delayed gratification in the late 1960s and early 1970s led by psychologist Walter Mischel, then a professor at Stanford University. In these studies, a child was offered a choice between one small reward provided immediately or two small rewards if they waited for a short period, approximately 15 minutes, during which the tester left the room and then returned. (The reward was sometimes a marshmallow, but often a cookie or a pretzel.) In follow-up studies, the researchers found that children who were able to wait longer for the preferred rewards tended to have better life outcomes, as measured by SAT scores, educational attainment, body mass index (BMI), and other life measures.

Basically, if you can put off a small gain for a large gain down the road, you are smarter and better looking.  Team tank all the way baby! 

[fairweatherfan]

Has anybody mentioned the Stanford Marshmellow Test yet?

From Wiki:

The Stanford marshmallow experiment was a series of studies on delayed gratification in the late 1960s and early 1970s led by psychologist Walter Mischel, then a professor at Stanford University. In these studies, a child was offered a choice between one small reward provided immediately or two small rewards if they waited for a short period, approximately 15 minutes, during which the tester left the room and then returned. (The reward was sometimes a marshmallow, but often a cookie or a pretzel.) In follow-up studies, the researchers found that children who were able to wait longer for the preferred rewards tended to have better life outcomes, as measured by SAT scores, educational attainment, body mass index (BMI), and other life measures.

Basically, if you can put off a small gain for a large gain down the road, you are smarter and better looking.  Team tank all the way baby!

The flaw with the analogy is that in the marshmallow test, a better outcome is guaranteed.  Not so with tanking.  But similar ideas, yeah.

It does remind me a little of when we cashed in Denver's (?) pick a year earlier than we needed to take I think Kedrick Brown.  Next year it was a higher pick with better players available.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

Has anybody mentioned the Stanford Marshmellow Test yet?

From Wiki:

The Stanford marshmallow experiment was a series of studies on delayed gratification in the late 1960s and early 1970s led by psychologist Walter Mischel, then a professor at Stanford University. In these studies, a child was offered a choice between one small reward provided immediately or two small rewards if they waited for a short period, approximately 15 minutes, during which the tester left the room and then returned. (The reward was sometimes a marshmallow, but often a cookie or a pretzel.) In follow-up studies, the researchers found that children who were able to wait longer for the preferred rewards tended to have better life outcomes, as measured by SAT scores, educational attainment, body mass index (BMI), and other life measures.

Basically, if you can put off a small gain for a large gain down the road, you are smarter and better looking.  Team tank all the way baby!

So, you prefer all those years before the big 3? Nah, I'll take winning now while having the assests to get more players to win more in the future.  We aren't in a situation where we HAVE to tank. This isn't tank or break.

[Quetzalcoatl]

So, you prefer all those years before the big 3? Nah, I'll take winning now while having the assests to get more players to win more in the future.  We aren't in a situation where we HAVE to tank. This isn't tank or break.

No, I liked that we tanked to get a higher pick which was in turn more valued in a trade which lead to the Big 3.  I didn't prefer the years where we treaded water and were never serious contenders to do anything, but also didn't have the draft positioning or roster space to become better.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

So, you prefer all those years before the big 3? Nah, I'll take winning now while having the assests to get more players to win more in the future.  We aren't in a situation where we HAVE to tank. This isn't tank or break.

No, I liked that we tanked to get a higher pick which was in turn more valued in a trade which lead to the Big 3.  I didn't prefer the years where we treaded water and were never serious contenders to do anything, but also didn't have the draft positioning or roster space to become better.

I don't think being NOP fan is all that great and they have AD or Kings with Cousins. We could tank and come out of if with a great player but we waste years to get that player, have him and still have a crappy team.

I'm not arguing against tanking as if it doesn't have any good results, I'm saying I would rather watch good basketball than watch a great player on a TERRIBLE team.

Edit: Danny has forced the tank on me, I don't like it. Yes, I would rather be the "mediocre" Hawks every season (leave this season out of it) than be a fan of the kings with Cousins.

[LooseCannon]

Edit: Danny has forced the tank on me, I don't like it. Yes, I would rather be the "mediocre" Hawks every season (leave this season out of it) than be a fan of the kings with Cousins.

Who is else is thinking that the Hawks have been mediocre in the past due to poor coaching and Josh Smith?

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

Edit: Danny has forced the tank on me, I don't like it. Yes, I would rather be the "mediocre" Hawks every season (leave this season out of it) than be a fan of the kings with Cousins.

Who is else is thinking that the Hawks have been mediocre in the past due to poor coaching and Josh Smith?

Dunno, but they seemed to have the talent to be better than they were.

[Celtics18]

Has anybody mentioned the Stanford Marshmellow Test yet?

From Wiki:

The Stanford marshmallow experiment was a series of studies on delayed gratification in the late 1960s and early 1970s led by psychologist Walter Mischel, then a professor at Stanford University. In these studies, a child was offered a choice between one small reward provided immediately or two small rewards if they waited for a short period, approximately 15 minutes, during which the tester left the room and then returned. (The reward was sometimes a marshmallow, but often a cookie or a pretzel.) In follow-up studies, the researchers found that children who were able to wait longer for the preferred rewards tended to have better life outcomes, as measured by SAT scores, educational attainment, body mass index (BMI), and other life measures.

Basically, if you can put off a small gain for a large gain down the road, you are smarter and better looking.  Team tank all the way baby!

The flaw with the analogy is that in the marshmallow test, a better outcome is guaranteed.  Not so with tanking.  But similar ideas, yeah.

It does remind me a little of when we cashed in Denver's (?) pick a year earlier than we needed to take I think Kedrick Brown.  Next year it was a higher pick with better players available.

Interesting point on Kedrick Brown.  I don't remember the particulars, but it seems to me that the big mistake there was keeping Kedrick over Joe Johnson.

Sure, every once in a while there's a Shaquille O'Neal or a Lebron James or a Tim Duncan who is an almost sure fire star (even then, there's sometimes a Greg Oden), but otherwise, I have always felt that it's more important how you draft and how well you develop your players than where you draft. 

There's a certain amount of luck involved both in what position you get in the draft and how the nineteen year old that you pick will end up maturing as a basketball player.

Ironically, the Spurs who are often held up as the model of how a "good" NBA franchise is run, is the one example of a successful "tank job" that really set that team up for a very long time.

Of course even the Spurs needed quite a bit of luck to go their way. 

[Ogaju]

Oh no NOT AGAIN??