Great C's article by Zach Lowe

[Eddie20]

grantland.com/the-triangle/a-playoff-problem-if-the-celtics-are-trying-to-rebuild-then-why-the-postseason-push/

[D.o.s.]

Lines up pretty well with the (intelligent) consensus on here, this part in particular reads like it could've come right off CB:

Set aside the issue of the star vacancy, and ask yourself this: Does the current Celtics roster include a guy who could start for the next great Boston team? It probably does, since a league-average player can function as the fifth starter on a loaded contender, but it’s unclear if any of Boston’s guys project as anything more than that.

Even Stevens, an optimist on player development, talks about the current Boston roster in realistic terms. “Everyone knows that to win a title you need to have your no. 1, 2, and 3 guys who do everything well — who have basically no weaknesses,” he says. “But championship teams are filled with other guys. And they could be in a bigger role elsewhere. My thing with our guys is this: Maybe you can become better than that, but let’s start by being as good as we can be at the things that got us here.”

Kelly Olynyk is a shooting big man who struggles on defense and doesn’t shoot all that well yet. Jared Sullinger is chronically out of shape and hasn’t cracked 30 percent from deep. James Young is 19 and has barely played outside of the D-League. Avery Bradley is a ravenous defender with legit 3-point range, but he shoots too many long 2s early in the shot clock2 and needs a dynamic off-the-dribble guy to create shots for him. Ainge loves Bradley and has already answered the question of whether he thinks the 24-year-old will be in Boston when the Celtics rise again: Multiple teams offered low first-round picks and expiring contracts for Bradley at the trade deadline, and Ainge flatly refused, per several league sources.

Ainge rejects the idea that the current Celtics lack a key future starter. “I think we have a handful of guys that could be,” Ainge says. “And we certainly have guys who could play some role on a championship team.” Stevens holds out hope that someone can morph into a top-three player on a contender. “I won’t put a ceiling on any of them,” he says. “Maybe some of them hit that next level.”

The team adores Marcus Smart, the only surefire member of the long-term core picked in a place — no. 6 overall — in which it’s reasonable to hope for stardom. Smart is going to be an assassin on defense, but he has looked uncomfortable running the pick-and-roll; he doesn’t drive much, and Boston usually has at least one other ball handler on the floor to ease his workload. Smart has shot and passed better than some within the team expected, and he has shown a bit more drive-and-kick verve over the last month.

“Will Marcus Smart ever be Jeff Teague?” Stevens asks. “No — not in the sense of being someone who can fly 94 feet in four dribbles, jump from the foul line, and finger roll it in. So he has to be a different kind of player, and be good in a different way.”

There is real talent here. Skilled young players make unexpected leaps all the time. One of the picks still due from Brooklyn could land in the lottery, though the Nets will fight like hell to make sure that doesn’t happen.3

Boston is also neck and neck with Philly in the race to pile up the best treasure trove of trade assets should any superstar become available. The Celtics are fond of saying they didn’t tank, and while that’s technically true this time around, the big-picture process isn’t so different from the more blatant teardown happening in Philly. Both teams are concerned mostly with acquiring draft picks and tradable assets. Thomas filled a need in Boston, but the Celtics wouldn’t have dealt for him unless they believed his cheapo long-term contract represented a more liquid trade asset than the first-rounder they sent out. (Ainge informed Stevens of the potential move only an hour before it happened, says Stevens, who feels he has a voice in most key deals.) Boston also had pieces left over from the days when it was trying to win, and unlike the Sixers, the Celtics used first-round picks on guys who resided in America and had working appendages.

[Eddie20]

And some were questioning the value of his contract-

Ainge loves Bradley and has already answered the question of whether he thinks the 24-year-old will be in Boston when the Celtics rise again: Multiple teams offered low first-round picks and expiring contracts for Bradley at the trade deadline, and Ainge flatly refused, per several league sources.

[D.o.s.]

I think the big argument against Bradley's deal was in comparison to the comparative players signed for comparative deals at the time the contract was inked -- not that it was an objective "bad contract."

I am glad that Stevens and Ainge are willing to go on the record with realistic expectations of our roster, though. Maybe that'll temper some of the daydreaming and hyperbole.

Also worth pointing out that the intro is solid (the whole piece is good):

It was just one game, but the Clippers’ annihilation of Boston on Sunday was a reminder that the playoff-chasing Celtics of 2015 are a cute feel-good story — and little more. The rebuild is moving faster than expected, with a surprise run at the no. 8 seed in a dreadful conference, but there is a giant chasm separating this plucky, starless group from what it aspires to be.

“The important thing to remember about us,” coach Brad Stevens said in a sit-down with Grantland last week, “is that we have a long, long way to go.”

and for some reason your link isn't hyperlinking:
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/a-playoff-problem-if-the-celtics-are-trying-to-rebuild-then-why-the-postseason-push/

[Celtics4ever]

Ainge rejects the idea that the current Celtics lack a key future starter. “I think we have a handful of guys that could be,” Ainge says. “And we certainly have guys who could play some role on a championship team.” Stevens holds out hope that someone can morph into a top-three player on a contender. “I won’t put a ceiling on any of them,” he says. “Maybe some of them hit that next level.”

A balanced approach, something not always seen on this board, as people think KO is the second coming.   Ainge took some risky, unatheletic picks in Sully and KO but they have some skills.  I think this is GMspeak for do not get too attached to them.

Everyone knows that to win a title you need to have your no. 1, 2, and 3 guys who do everything well — who have basically no weaknesses,” he says. “But championship teams are filled with other guys. And they could be in a bigger role elsewhere. My thing with our guys is this: Maybe you can become better than that, but let’s start by being as good as we can be at the things that got us here.”

   We need that 1, 2 and 3 and we have the "other guys".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6WOoUG1eNo

[CFAN38]

good read,

I agree that there isn't a single player on this roster who will ever be a #1 or #2 option on a contending team but I do think AB, Smart, Thomas and Sully have the potentially to be the #3 guy. Also all of this needing top 3 players is relative to rest of the roster. The Big 3 Cs and the Lebron lead Heat have created this view that it takes 3 stars to win. Dallas had Dirk, Kidd and a cast of specialists. Kobe/Shaq and Wade/Shaq where really two super star built teams. The Spurs started with the Twin Towers then became their own big 3 and this last championship was a major team effort. The team often separated in championship blueprint talks the 03-04 Pistons won 54 games with a starting lineup with essentially 5 2-3rd option type players and a solid group of role players.

I think as a GM DA always has to have an eye towards making a big move to land a stud but in reality also needs to build toward that Pistons model. The 76ers are showing a willingness with the MCW trade to continuously hit restart in the hopes of hitting an OKC like lucky spell in the draft. This is great in theory but hardly seems sustainable. With a solid off-season (even if no fireworks) I expect the Cs to continue this years upward movement and establish themselves as perennial playoff contenders who happen to be cap flexible and loaded with trad-able assets.     

[Csfan1984]

Good read. That is how a lot of people see the team. No elite player on the team but full of role players that can contribute. Sad to say C's are a poor man's Atl Hawks. Also it hits the point of how going for playoffs is nice but it is a negative in the rebuild when you need better draft picks.

[D.o.s.]

@CFAN38: it's probably worth noting that the Pistons were a little bit better than you're suggesting, and also that the key to their dominance was a defensive style that is no longer legal under league rules.

[jonaslopes]

@CFAN38: it's probably worth noting that the Pistons were a little bit better than you're suggesting, and also that the key to their dominance was a defensive style that is no longer legal under league rules.

I guess he was talking about 2004 Pistons (a very good, but definitely not stellar team), not the Thomas/Laimbeer/Rodman Pistons.

[D.o.s.]

@CFAN38: it's probably worth noting that the Pistons were a little bit better than you're suggesting, and also that the key to their dominance was a defensive style that is no longer legal under league rules.

I guess he was talking about 2004 Pistons (a very good, but definitely not stellar team), not the Thomas/Laimbeer/Rodman Pistons.

So was I. 
From the NBA's own website:

2004-05
• New rules were introduced to curtail hand-checking, clarify blocking fouls and call defensive three seconds to open up the game.

You won't get anyone on the record, but that was in direct response to the Los Angeles/Detroit Finals -- a series which was neigh unwatchable for the average fan.

[Evantime34]

Great article. I was intrigued that other teams around the league were offering a late first and an expiring for Bradley and I'm glad they didn't accept.

The C's seem to have given up on building their franchise around a top 5 pick, rather their strategy is that they are going to be the best team right now out of the rebuilding teams with the goal of signing free agents or (more likely) convincing a traded player to sign long term.

Honestly the top 5 pick way of rebuilding is the easiest but the method of incrementally improving is the much more enjoyable for fans (if it succeeds)

Lowe really seemed to pan the idea of bringing in Greg Monroe this summer. I could see the Celtics going hard after Love, then turning their attention to trade packages for the best 3 RFA, then going after guys they think are under valued. If they are forced to go with the third option next year will be a slight improvement over this year but nothing more.

[jonaslopes]

@CFAN38: it's probably worth noting that the Pistons were a little bit better than you're suggesting, and also that the key to their dominance was a defensive style that is no longer legal under league rules.

I guess he was talking about 2004 Pistons (a very good, but definitely not stellar team), not the Thomas/Laimbeer/Rodman Pistons.

So was I. 
From the NBA's own website:

2004-05
• New rules were introduced to curtail hand-checking, clarify blocking fouls and call defensive three seconds to open up the game.

You won't get anyone on the record, but that was in direct response to the Los Angeles/Detroit Finals -- a series which was neigh unwatchable for the average fan.

Sorry then, I misundertood you.

[D.o.s.]

no worries -- the Bad Boy Pistons were definitely instrumental in changing the rules of the game, too. 

[MBunge]

Lines up pretty well with the (intelligent) consensus on here, this part in particular reads like it could've come right off CB:

The Celtics are fond of saying they didn’t tank, and while that’s technically true this time around, the big-picture process isn’t so different from the more blatant teardown happening in Philly. Both teams are concerned mostly with acquiring draft picks and tradable assets. Thomas filled a need in Boston, but the Celtics wouldn’t have dealt for him unless they believed his cheapo long-term contract represented a more liquid trade asset than the first-rounder they sent out.

There's a big difference between Boston and Philly's rebuild.  "Be as bad as we possibly can and then get lucky in the draft" is really not at all like "accumulate as many assets as possible for a future move."  I mean, Ainge has brought in Zeller, IT, Jerebko and Crowder while and kept Sully, Bradley and Bass while rebuilding.  Philly has brought in Luc Mbah a Moute and gotten rid of the reigning Rookie of the Year.

Mike

[KeepRondo]

Great article. I was intrigued that other teams around the league were offering a late first and an expiring for Bradley and I'm glad they didn't accept.

The C's seem to have given up on building their franchise around a top 5 pick, rather their strategy is that they are going to be the best team right now out of the rebuilding teams with the goal of signing free agents or (more likely) convincing a traded player to sign long term.

Honestly the top 5 pick way of rebuilding is the easiest but the method of incrementally improving is the much more enjoyable for fans (if it succeeds)

Lowe really seemed to pan the idea of bringing in Greg Monroe this summer. I could see the Celtics going hard after Love, then turning their attention to trade packages for the best 3 RFA, then going after guys they think are under valued. If they are forced to go with the third option next year will be a slight improvement over this year but nothing more.

I have to admit that I feel pretty dumb for giving up on Bradley. I started as a big time supporter but as the season wore on, I started listening to all the voices on Celtics blog. I'm glad Ainge didn't trade him. He's starting to gain some consistency. He's also converting on more of his layups and shots near the rim.