We're not that far off....

[LarBrd33]

We aren't far from contending as long as you assume bringing in three all-stars is an easy thing to accomplish.

As-is, this is probably a 35-45 win roster. Without major additions, it would be a 50/50 shot of making the playoffs next year.

Throw all the pessimism you want at this thread, you can't deny that a .500 team is not far off.

A .500 team is not far off from the bottom, either. 

In fact, we're closer to the bottom (24 more wins) than we are to the top (27 less wins).

That's not to say we don't have a chance.  But as much as our "position" is being glorified, I could easily argue that (currently worse) teams like Philly, New York and the Lakers are closer to contending. 

I was asked to make a guest post for a blog back in March that covered my reasoning on that very topic:  http://www.celticslife.com/2015/03/closer-to-contending-knicks-lakers.html

I just picked those teams, because they are all "prestige" teams that are currently in the dumps.   Boston ended up making the playoffs, but I think my points are still valid.  We have a lot of positive things going for us (mainly our coach, management and organization are a draw) and we have a solid chance at adding some talent here, but you could make a case that most of the 15 lotto teams this year have good things going for them as well.   Like, would you rather be in Boston's position... or Minnesota?  I definitely pick Minnesota (Wiggins, #1 projected pick and lots of young assets).   Boston made the playoffs and Oklahoma didn't... who would you rather be?  We finished two games above the Pacers... anyone really think we're further along than them?  Etc.

[Celtics4ever]

We will finally find out if we can attract a free agent this summer.   It ought to be interesting to say the least.

[GC003332]

We aren't far from contending as long as you assume bringing in three all-stars is an easy thing to accomplish.

As-is, this is probably a 35-45 win roster. Without major additions, it would be a 50/50 shot of making the playoffs next year.

Throw all the pessimism you want at this thread, you can't deny that a .500 team is not far off.

A .500 team is not far off from the bottom, either. 

In fact, we're closer to the bottom (24 more wins) than we are to the top (27 less wins).

That's not to say we don't have a chance.  But as much as our "position" is being glorified, I could easily argue that (currently worse) teams like Philly, New York and the Lakers are closer to contending. 

I was asked to make a guest post for a blog back in March that covered my reasoning on that very topic:  http://www.celticslife.com/2015/03/closer-to-contending-knicks-lakers.html

I just picked those teams, because they are all "prestige" teams that are currently in the dumps.   Boston ended up making the playoffs, but I think my points are still valid.  We have a lot of positive things going for us (mainly our coach, management and organization are a draw) and we have a solid chance at adding some talent here, but you could make a case that most of the 15 lotto teams this year have good things going for them as well.   Like, would you rather be in Boston's position... or Minnesota?  I definitely pick Minnesota (Wiggins, #1 projected pick and lots of young assets).   Boston made the playoffs and Oklahoma didn't... who would you rather be?  We finished two games above the Pacers... anyone really think we're further along than them?  Etc.

Every year you make the case for lotto teams having good things going for them, then the reality of the situation comes to bear, lack of on court success , you know wins and losses, not hype and hope.
Look at Sacramento 9 years and counting, Minnesota 11 years and counting, the list goes on , how long do you want to erode the fan base, under this notion of hope for the future before they catch on to somebody is sure getting paid an truck load of cash for stinking up the place, but wait we can let the said rookie stat pad to hype some meaningless award, or stat pad to  try and get into a meaningless all star game.
Sad part about it teams have been doing it for decades and playing farm league for the actual teams that put forth an effort to actually win titles.
How many years do you want to live on this false notion?
Oh let's pay a GM 12 mil a season to just tear down almost the complete roster and try and sign free agents in their prime to partner up with Melo ha ha good idea Knicks.
NBA where the accountability for actual on court performance is at an all time low.
Let's rollout the dancers and have a gimmick giveaway to sell to the fans when the hope and hype subsides, lol, as long as everybody gets paid who cares right.
Good to have owners that have a commitment to actual winning and hire GM's that can actually turn around franchises, not just this false hype and hope line that young potential more often than not leads to.

How did the Twolves trade of Young to the Nets for KG help out their on court performance, sold a few more tickets to home games , how about actually winning some games.Diverted attention from yet another woeful season for a few weeks , yippee KG is back.

[Celtics4ever]

How did the Twolves trade of Young to the Nets for KG help out their on court performance, sold a few more tickets to home games , how about actually winning some games.Diverted attention from yet another woeful season for a few weeks , yippee KG is back.

On the other hand, some fans felt the same way about our playoff run.   I enjoyed watching us a few more games.   But not everyone shared that consensus and some wanted a higher pick and advocated not making the playoffs.   I am not saying that they were right or wrong but the sentiment was and still is out there.

[celticsclay]

We aren't far from contending as long as you assume bringing in three all-stars is an easy thing to accomplish.

As-is, this is probably a 35-45 win roster. Without major additions, it would be a 50/50 shot of making the playoffs next year.

Throw all the pessimism you want at this thread, you can't deny that a .500 team is not far off.

A .500 team is not far off from the bottom, either. 

In fact, we're closer to the bottom (24 more wins) than we are to the top (27 less wins).

That's not to say we don't have a chance.  But as much as our "position" is being glorified, I could easily argue that (currently worse) teams like Philly, New York and the Lakers are closer to contending. 

I was asked to make a guest post for a blog back in March that covered my reasoning on that very topic:  http://www.celticslife.com/2015/03/closer-to-contending-knicks-lakers.html

I just picked those teams, because they are all "prestige" teams that are currently in the dumps.   Boston ended up making the playoffs, but I think my points are still valid.  We have a lot of positive things going for us (mainly our coach, management and organization are a draw) and we have a solid chance at adding some talent here, but you could make a case that most of the 15 lotto teams this year have good things going for them as well.   Like, would you rather be in Boston's position... or Minnesota?  I definitely pick Minnesota (Wiggins, #1 projected pick and lots of young assets).   Boston made the playoffs and Oklahoma didn't... who would you rather be?  We finished two games above the Pacers... anyone really think we're further along than them?  Etc.

I would agree with you about Minnesota, not only do they have better younger players, but they also have better veterans in Rubio and Pek. Oklahoma I would also agree with, although if Durant is not healthy or bolts, it could become a very different situation very quickly.

However, I am not really high on Indiana at all. West is pretty much at the end of the line. George is a star, but one that is locked in for about 80 million over the next 4 years. Hibbert and West will almost assuredly lock in for their player options for next year (27 million combined) Behind that they really have no young players with talent what so ever. They also don't have the future first rounders coming in that Boston does. So I think they are going to be rebuilding after next season. I would rather take the chances with Smart, Thomas, a clean cap and 10 first rounders coming in over the next few years.

[celticsclay]

How did the Twolves trade of Young to the Nets for KG help out their on court performance, sold a few more tickets to home games , how about actually winning some games.Diverted attention from yet another woeful season for a few weeks , yippee KG is back.

On the other hand, some fans felt the same way about our playoff run.   I enjoyed watching us a few more games.   But not everyone shared that consensus and some wanted a higher pick and advocated not making the playoffs.   I am not saying that they were right or wrong but the sentiment was and still is out there.

Young is an asset though that is probably more valuable than the difference between the 16th and 12th pick. KG could have just signed with them this offseason rather than the 8 games he played. I guess Young must have said there was no way he would play for them after this  year. Otherwise the trade made no sense.

[GC003332]

How did the Twolves trade of Young to the Nets for KG help out their on court performance, sold a few more tickets to home games , how about actually winning some games.Diverted attention from yet another woeful season for a few weeks , yippee KG is back.

On the other hand, some fans felt the same way about our playoff run.   I enjoyed watching us a few more games.   But not everyone shared that consensus and some wanted a higher pick and advocated not making the playoffs.   I am not saying that they were right or wrong but the sentiment was and still is out there.

Yeah but the trades that Ainge made from a pure basketball perspective to give Stevens some more actual talent( IT4)to work with seemed legit.Wether they made the playoffs or not I don't think would have influenced his thinking at the trade deadline considering the C's record at the time, he was just looking to make the best deal available to him.

[GreenWarrior]

Also, its pointless to say we will be a bad team next year as it's assume we will sit on our hands all summer and bring in no help.

Right, but we can acknowledge that it's possible the best move on the table will be to make the most of the draft picks, maybe make one or two modest buy-low signings, and head into next year with a very similar roster.

God I hope this doesn't end up being the case.

IMO, I really dont think  any "Buy Low" players can help our team in the long run as far as contending is concern. We have a team which is just a giant supporting Cast.  Lowest Tier player I'd sign is like a Tobias or  a Wesley Matthews and im sure their expecting to get paid as well.

I REALLY FEEL STRONG if were not signing or trading for  an AllStar caliber player, we'll trade are role players, draft picks, and use TPE's do get more "Mid Tier" players.


No sense in having a team full of 4th and 5th options. Welll end up i na building loop like the Hawks were in prior

I like what the Hawks have done.  They may not get to the NBA finals (they still aren't a sure thing to get to the conference finals).

I just have so much respect for the way they have successfully bucked the "superstar or bust" rebuilding model that so many fans and talking heads seem to advocate as the gold standard for rebuilding an NBA contender.

They chose Al Horford and Jeff Teague (two very good players, but not elite superstars) as their core guys to build around, and have spent the last few years putting a team together around those guys with additional very good, non-superstar players.

The Grizzlies, another team that I respect and root for, have built their team in a similar manner.

Although the two teams have very different styles on the court, I'm a big fan of these teams that have found ways to be highly competitive without the uber-stars.

I'd love to see the Celtics be able to follow a similar path.  To me, Marcus Smart and Kelly Olynyk seem like a good start.

it's admirable what ATL & Memphis have done. but it's not acceptable in Boston imo. the Celtics are one of the top teams in all of sports and they should have expectations to live up to.

while I personally would be fine if the Celtics chose to build the team the way ATL & Mem. have I don't want them to and don't want them to feel it's ok to do so.

[LarBrd33]

We aren't far from contending as long as you assume bringing in three all-stars is an easy thing to accomplish.

As-is, this is probably a 35-45 win roster. Without major additions, it would be a 50/50 shot of making the playoffs next year.

Throw all the pessimism you want at this thread, you can't deny that a .500 team is not far off.

A .500 team is not far off from the bottom, either. 

In fact, we're closer to the bottom (24 more wins) than we are to the top (27 less wins).

That's not to say we don't have a chance.  But as much as our "position" is being glorified, I could easily argue that (currently worse) teams like Philly, New York and the Lakers are closer to contending. 

I was asked to make a guest post for a blog back in March that covered my reasoning on that very topic:  http://www.celticslife.com/2015/03/closer-to-contending-knicks-lakers.html

I just picked those teams, because they are all "prestige" teams that are currently in the dumps.   Boston ended up making the playoffs, but I think my points are still valid.  We have a lot of positive things going for us (mainly our coach, management and organization are a draw) and we have a solid chance at adding some talent here, but you could make a case that most of the 15 lotto teams this year have good things going for them as well.   Like, would you rather be in Boston's position... or Minnesota?  I definitely pick Minnesota (Wiggins, #1 projected pick and lots of young assets).   Boston made the playoffs and Oklahoma didn't... who would you rather be?  We finished two games above the Pacers... anyone really think we're further along than them?  Etc.

Every year you make the case for lotto teams having good things going for them, then the reality of the situation comes to bear, lack of on court success , you know wins and losses, not hype and hope.
Look at Sacramento 9 years and counting, Minnesota 11 years and counting, the list goes on , how long do you want to erode the fan base, under this notion of hope for the future before they catch on to somebody is sure getting paid an truck load of cash for stinking up the place, but wait we can let the said rookie stat pad to hype some meaningless award, or stat pad to  try and get into a meaningless all star game.
Sad part about it teams have been doing it for decades and playing farm league for the actual teams that put forth an effort to actually win titles.
How many years do you want to live on this false notion?
Oh let's pay a GM 12 mil a season to just tear down almost the complete roster and try and sign free agents in their prime to partner up with Melo ha ha good idea Knicks.
NBA where the accountability for actual on court performance is at an all time low.
Let's rollout the dancers and have a gimmick giveaway to sell to the fans when the hope and hype subsides, lol, as long as everybody gets paid who cares right.
Good to have owners that have a commitment to actual winning and hire GM's that can actually turn around franchises, not just this false hype and hope line that young potential more often than not leads to.

How did the Twolves trade of Young to the Nets for KG help out their on court performance, sold a few more tickets to home games , how about actually winning some games.Diverted attention from yet another woeful season for a few weeks , yippee KG is back.

You just illustrated the point well... it's exceptionally hard to move from irrelevance to contending.   By saying I think Philly, New York and the Lakers are "closer" to contending, I'm not saying they will get there.  Boston might not get there either.  I'm just saying that I like the cards in their hand more.  That doesn't guarantee them success.  Gotta see how it plays out.  There's a shot we'll get lucky in spite of having a weaker hand.

My central point is that all those teams are arguably closer to landing a star (or already have one).  Because Boston is further away from landing a star, I see them as further away from contending.  Yet, at the moment... we're a better team.  So what?   In 2012, Philly upset the #1 seed Bulls and took the Ray/Pierce/KG/Rondo Celtics to 7 games... next year they were back in the lotto.

[GC003332]

Also, its pointless to say we will be a bad team next year as it's assume we will sit on our hands all summer and bring in no help.

Right, but we can acknowledge that it's possible the best move on the table will be to make the most of the draft picks, maybe make one or two modest buy-low signings, and head into next year with a very similar roster.

God I hope this doesn't end up being the case.

IMO, I really dont think  any "Buy Low" players can help our team in the long run as far as contending is concern. We have a team which is just a giant supporting Cast.  Lowest Tier player I'd sign is like a Tobias or  a Wesley Matthews and im sure their expecting to get paid as well.

I REALLY FEEL STRONG if were not signing or trading for  an AllStar caliber player, we'll trade are role players, draft picks, and use TPE's do get more "Mid Tier" players.


No sense in having a team full of 4th and 5th options. Welll end up i na building loop like the Hawks were in prior

I like what the Hawks have done.  They may not get to the NBA finals (they still aren't a sure thing to get to the conference finals).

I just have so much respect for the way they have successfully bucked the "superstar or bust" rebuilding model that so many fans and talking heads seem to advocate as the gold standard for rebuilding an NBA contender.

They chose Al Horford and Jeff Teague (two very good players, but not elite superstars) as their core guys to build around, and have spent the last few years putting a team together around those guys with additional very good, non-superstar players.

The Grizzlies, another team that I respect and root for, have built their team in a similar manner.

Although the two teams have very different styles on the court, I'm a big fan of these teams that have found ways to be highly competitive without the uber-stars.

I'd love to see the Celtics be able to follow a similar path.  To me, Marcus Smart and Kelly Olynyk seem like a good start.

it's admirable what ATL & Memphis have done. but it's not acceptable in Boston imo. the Celtics are one of the top teams in all of sports and they should have expectations to live up to.

while I personally would be fine if the Celtics chose to build the team the way ATL & Mem. have I don't want them to and don't want them to feel it's ok to do so.

That is [dang] straight , thankfully Ownership and Ainge have proven that they have those expectations and delivered once before, time is a ticking ha ha, how about another sure fire squad put together sooner rather than later please, these mid level free agents just don't excite me one bit , unless they are a potential all NBA player or top 20 player in this league move on.

[GC003332]

We aren't far from contending as long as you assume bringing in three all-stars is an easy thing to accomplish.

As-is, this is probably a 35-45 win roster. Without major additions, it would be a 50/50 shot of making the playoffs next year.

Throw all the pessimism you want at this thread, you can't deny that a .500 team is not far off.

A .500 team is not far off from the bottom, either. 

In fact, we're closer to the bottom (24 more wins) than we are to the top (27 less wins).

That's not to say we don't have a chance.  But as much as our "position" is being glorified, I could easily argue that (currently worse) teams like Philly, New York and the Lakers are closer to contending. 

I was asked to make a guest post for a blog back in March that covered my reasoning on that very topic:  http://www.celticslife.com/2015/03/closer-to-contending-knicks-lakers.html

I just picked those teams, because they are all "prestige" teams that are currently in the dumps.   Boston ended up making the playoffs, but I think my points are still valid.  We have a lot of positive things going for us (mainly our coach, management and organization are a draw) and we have a solid chance at adding some talent here, but you could make a case that most of the 15 lotto teams this year have good things going for them as well.   Like, would you rather be in Boston's position... or Minnesota?  I definitely pick Minnesota (Wiggins, #1 projected pick and lots of young assets).   Boston made the playoffs and Oklahoma didn't... who would you rather be?  We finished two games above the Pacers... anyone really think we're further along than them?  Etc.

Every year you make the case for lotto teams having good things going for them, then the reality of the situation comes to bear, lack of on court success , you know wins and losses, not hype and hope.
Look at Sacramento 9 years and counting, Minnesota 11 years and counting, the list goes on , how long do you want to erode the fan base, under this notion of hope for the future before they catch on to somebody is sure getting paid an truck load of cash for stinking up the place, but wait we can let the said rookie stat pad to hype some meaningless award, or stat pad to  try and get into a meaningless all star game.
Sad part about it teams have been doing it for decades and playing farm league for the actual teams that put forth an effort to actually win titles.
How many years do you want to live on this false notion?
Oh let's pay a GM 12 mil a season to just tear down almost the complete roster and try and sign free agents in their prime to partner up with Melo ha ha good idea Knicks.
NBA where the accountability for actual on court performance is at an all time low.
Let's rollout the dancers and have a gimmick giveaway to sell to the fans when the hope and hype subsides, lol, as long as everybody gets paid who cares right.
Good to have owners that have a commitment to actual winning and hire GM's that can actually turn around franchises, not just this false hype and hope line that young potential more often than not leads to.

How did the Twolves trade of Young to the Nets for KG help out their on court performance, sold a few more tickets to home games , how about actually winning some games.Diverted attention from yet another woeful season for a few weeks , yippee KG is back.

You just illustrated the point well... it's exceptionally hard to move from irrelevance to contending.   By saying I think Philly, New York and the Lakers are "closer" to contending, I'm not saying they will get there.  Boston might not get there either.  I'm just saying that I like the cards in their hand more.  That doesn't guarantee them success.  Gotta see how it plays out.  There's a shot we'll get lucky in spite of having a weaker hand.

My central point is that all those teams are arguably closer to landing a star (or already have one).  Because Boston is further away from landing a star, I see them as further away from contending.  Yet, at the moment... we're a better team.  So what?   In 2012, Philly upset the #1 seed Bulls and took the Ray/Pierce/KG/Rondo Celtics to 7 games... next year they were back in the lotto.

The only thing is that having a better team right now as compared to Philly New York and LA could do is potentially  convince a top flight free agent or two that the coaching is legit and have more faith that Boston can get back into contention quicker.Given Ainge's track record you would hope so.

[celticsclay]

We aren't far from contending as long as you assume bringing in three all-stars is an easy thing to accomplish.

As-is, this is probably a 35-45 win roster. Without major additions, it would be a 50/50 shot of making the playoffs next year.

Throw all the pessimism you want at this thread, you can't deny that a .500 team is not far off.

A .500 team is not far off from the bottom, either. 

In fact, we're closer to the bottom (24 more wins) than we are to the top (27 less wins).

That's not to say we don't have a chance.  But as much as our "position" is being glorified, I could easily argue that (currently worse) teams like Philly, New York and the Lakers are closer to contending. 

I was asked to make a guest post for a blog back in March that covered my reasoning on that very topic:  http://www.celticslife.com/2015/03/closer-to-contending-knicks-lakers.html

I just picked those teams, because they are all "prestige" teams that are currently in the dumps.   Boston ended up making the playoffs, but I think my points are still valid.  We have a lot of positive things going for us (mainly our coach, management and organization are a draw) and we have a solid chance at adding some talent here, but you could make a case that most of the 15 lotto teams this year have good things going for them as well.   Like, would you rather be in Boston's position... or Minnesota?  I definitely pick Minnesota (Wiggins, #1 projected pick and lots of young assets).   Boston made the playoffs and Oklahoma didn't... who would you rather be?  We finished two games above the Pacers... anyone really think we're further along than them?  Etc.

Every year you make the case for lotto teams having good things going for them, then the reality of the situation comes to bear, lack of on court success , you know wins and losses, not hype and hope.
Look at Sacramento 9 years and counting, Minnesota 11 years and counting, the list goes on , how long do you want to erode the fan base, under this notion of hope for the future before they catch on to somebody is sure getting paid an truck load of cash for stinking up the place, but wait we can let the said rookie stat pad to hype some meaningless award, or stat pad to  try and get into a meaningless all star game.
Sad part about it teams have been doing it for decades and playing farm league for the actual teams that put forth an effort to actually win titles.
How many years do you want to live on this false notion?
Oh let's pay a GM 12 mil a season to just tear down almost the complete roster and try and sign free agents in their prime to partner up with Melo ha ha good idea Knicks.
NBA where the accountability for actual on court performance is at an all time low.
Let's rollout the dancers and have a gimmick giveaway to sell to the fans when the hope and hype subsides, lol, as long as everybody gets paid who cares right.
Good to have owners that have a commitment to actual winning and hire GM's that can actually turn around franchises, not just this false hype and hope line that young potential more often than not leads to.

How did the Twolves trade of Young to the Nets for KG help out their on court performance, sold a few more tickets to home games , how about actually winning some games.Diverted attention from yet another woeful season for a few weeks , yippee KG is back.

You just illustrated the point well... it's exceptionally hard to move from irrelevance to contending.   By saying I think Philly, New York and the Lakers are "closer" to contending, I'm not saying they will get there.  Boston might not get there either.  I'm just saying that I like the cards in their hand more.  That doesn't guarantee them success.  Gotta see how it plays out.  There's a shot we'll get lucky in spite of having a weaker hand.

My central point is that all those teams are arguably closer to landing a star (or already have one).  Because Boston is further away from landing a star, I see them as further away from contending.  Yet, at the moment... we're a better team.  So what?   In 2012, Philly upset the #1 seed Bulls and took the Ray/Pierce/KG/Rondo Celtics to 7 games... next year they were back in the lotto.

I don't really get using Philadelphia as an example at all, in fact using them seems to be making the opposite of the point you are trying to make. They traded away their best player, Andre Igodula who was probably the definition of a star at that point in his career coming off a second team all defensive and all star season and traded him for a guy that wouldn't play a game for them. They also lost a still very solid Elton brand who was one of their better big defenders and still putting up 11 and 6 that year. It also looks like they traded away Vucevic after that season. If they had stayed the course and kept Vucevic, Brand and Iggy they very welll could have been a championship contender at some point in the next few seasons with a few smart mid level signings.

Edit: I just realized they lost Lou Williams after that seasons too. Man how interesting would it have been to see that team together.

[Celtics18]

Also, its pointless to say we will be a bad team next year as it's assume we will sit on our hands all summer and bring in no help.

Right, but we can acknowledge that it's possible the best move on the table will be to make the most of the draft picks, maybe make one or two modest buy-low signings, and head into next year with a very similar roster.

God I hope this doesn't end up being the case.

IMO, I really dont think  any "Buy Low" players can help our team in the long run as far as contending is concern. We have a team which is just a giant supporting Cast.  Lowest Tier player I'd sign is like a Tobias or  a Wesley Matthews and im sure their expecting to get paid as well.

I REALLY FEEL STRONG if were not signing or trading for  an AllStar caliber player, we'll trade are role players, draft picks, and use TPE's do get more "Mid Tier" players.


No sense in having a team full of 4th and 5th options. Welll end up i na building loop like the Hawks were in prior

I like what the Hawks have done.  They may not get to the NBA finals (they still aren't a sure thing to get to the conference finals).

I just have so much respect for the way they have successfully bucked the "superstar or bust" rebuilding model that so many fans and talking heads seem to advocate as the gold standard for rebuilding an NBA contender.

They chose Al Horford and Jeff Teague (two very good players, but not elite superstars) as their core guys to build around, and have spent the last few years putting a team together around those guys with additional very good, non-superstar players.

The Grizzlies, another team that I respect and root for, have built their team in a similar manner.

Although the two teams have very different styles on the court, I'm a big fan of these teams that have found ways to be highly competitive without the uber-stars.

I'd love to see the Celtics be able to follow a similar path.  To me, Marcus Smart and Kelly Olynyk seem like a good start.

it's admirable what ATL & Memphis have done. but it's not acceptable in Boston imo. the Celtics are one of the top teams in all of sports and they should have expectations to live up to.

while I personally would be fine if the Celtics chose to build the team the way ATL & Mem. have I don't want them to and don't want them to feel it's ok to do so.

Fair enough.  I'm not sure that there's a realistic path that brings a guarantee of getting them back into contention any faster, though. 

It's fine to say that titles are the only acceptable outcome for a franchise as storied as the Boston Celtics.  The reality of course is that this is much easier said than done. 

Believe me, I want to see the Celtics win more titles, but I would rather see them put together a competitive team while trying to get there than just be a loser and wait for that magical saviour to arrive in the draft. 

[chambers]

We aren't far from contending as long as you assume bringing in three all-stars is an easy thing to accomplish.

As-is, this is probably a 35-45 win roster. Without major additions, it would be a 50/50 shot of making the playoffs next year.

Throw all the pessimism you want at this thread, you can't deny that a .500 team is not far off.

A .500 team is not far off from the bottom, either. 

In fact, we're closer to the bottom (24 more wins) than we are to the top (27 less wins).

That's not to say we don't have a chance.  But as much as our "position" is being glorified, I could easily argue that (currently worse) teams like Philly, New York and the Lakers are closer to contending. 

I was asked to make a guest post for a blog back in March that covered my reasoning on that very topic:  http://www.celticslife.com/2015/03/closer-to-contending-knicks-lakers.html

I just picked those teams, because they are all "prestige" teams that are currently in the dumps.   Boston ended up making the playoffs, but I think my points are still valid.  We have a lot of positive things going for us (mainly our coach, management and organization are a draw) and we have a solid chance at adding some talent here, but you could make a case that most of the 15 lotto teams this year have good things going for them as well.   Like, would you rather be in Boston's position... or Minnesota?  I definitely pick Minnesota (Wiggins, #1 projected pick and lots of young assets).   Boston made the playoffs and Oklahoma didn't... who would you rather be?  We finished two games above the Pacers... anyone really think we're further along than them?  Etc.

Every year you make the case for lotto teams having good things going for them, then the reality of the situation comes to bear, lack of on court success , you know wins and losses, not hype and hope.
Look at Sacramento 9 years and counting, Minnesota 11 years and counting, the list goes on , how long do you want to erode the fan base, under this notion of hope for the future before they catch on to somebody is sure getting paid an truck load of cash for stinking up the place, but wait we can let the said rookie stat pad to hype some meaningless award, or stat pad to  try and get into a meaningless all star game.
Sad part about it teams have been doing it for decades and playing farm league for the actual teams that put forth an effort to actually win titles.
How many years do you want to live on this false notion?
Oh let's pay a GM 12 mil a season to just tear down almost the complete roster and try and sign free agents in their prime to partner up with Melo ha ha good idea Knicks.
NBA where the accountability for actual on court performance is at an all time low.
Let's rollout the dancers and have a gimmick giveaway to sell to the fans when the hope and hype subsides, lol, as long as everybody gets paid who cares right.
Good to have owners that have a commitment to actual winning and hire GM's that can actually turn around franchises, not just this false hype and hope line that young potential more often than not leads to.

How did the Twolves trade of Young to the Nets for KG help out their on court performance, sold a few more tickets to home games , how about actually winning some games.Diverted attention from yet another woeful season for a few weeks , yippee KG is back.

You just illustrated the point well... it's exceptionally hard to move from irrelevance to contending.   By saying I think Philly, New York and the Lakers are "closer" to contending, I'm not saying they will get there.  Boston might not get there either.  I'm just saying that I like the cards in their hand more.  That doesn't guarantee them success.  Gotta see how it plays out.  There's a shot we'll get lucky in spite of having a weaker hand.

My central point is that all those teams are arguably closer to landing a star (or already have one).  Because Boston is further away from landing a star, I see them as further away from contending.  Yet, at the moment... we're a better team.  So what?   In 2012, Philly upset the #1 seed Bulls and took the Ray/Pierce/KG/Rondo Celtics to 7 games... next year they were back in the lotto.

I don't really get using Philadelphia as an example at all, in fact using them seems to be making the opposite of the point you are trying to make. They traded away their best player, Andre Igodula who was probably the definition of a star at that point in his career coming off a second team all defensive and all star season and traded him for a guy that wouldn't play a game for them. They also lost a still very solid Elton brand who was one of their better big defenders and still putting up 11 and 6 that year. It also looks like they traded away Vucevic after that season. If they had stayed the course and kept Vucevic, Brand and Iggy they very welll could have been a championship contender at some point in the next few seasons with a few smart mid level signings.

Edit: I just realized they lost Lou Williams after that seasons too. Man how interesting would it have been to see that team together.

I think it's grasping to call Iggy a 'star' of franchise proportions.
He had a great few years and got up near the 20 ppg range on decent shooting, but even his one All Star appearance was as a replacement wasn't it?

[chambers]

I would be really happy with Butler, DeAndre, moving up into lottery to snag a scorer and/or athletic + defensive wing in the draft, and resigning Pierce for a last hurrah. I doubt any of those happen though. I'm excited for this off-season but don't expect to make a big splash. IT was a nice surprise though, so trying to remain optimistic. As long as we don't draft Dekker, Kaminsky, or someone 6'10 with a 205 lb frame, that'd be a relief too. 

I don't think of Love, LMA, or the guys I've listed as superstars. Top 5 in league are superstars, the next 10-15 are very, very good players. Highly doubt we win a championship with Love as the best player on our team. Think of all the teams in the league with a better 1, and even 1 + 2. I'm too brain-dead to list, but I'm sure there is more than 5... LeBron + Kyrie, Steph and Klay (Id argue Dray too), Duncan + Leonard, Paul + Griffin, Gasol + Zbo/Conley, Westbrook + Durant, maybe even Wall + Beal or Teague + Horford/Millsap. Dead serious. I get he is being trumped due to the culture, his limited/adjusted role, and nightly comparison to best player in the world. But he plays one end of the floor... that's crap, especially considering our need for frontcourt toughness and a two way guy. We don't compete without dominant, go-to scorer (2 way guy, too), but we need a rim protector even more than that. 

Edit: Don't mean to minimize your point, Monkhouse. I respect you as a poster and agree with a vast majority of your opinions. Just feeling like we need more than one of those guys - perhaps 2 is the magic number? And I do strongly agree with have great glue guys that are championship pieces.

PLEASE explain to me WHY you don't want Dekker?  Why???  Was ANYONE more clutch in the big NCAA tourney games??  If the Badgers needed a shot at a critical time, he simply delivered virtually EVERY time!!!!  Please educate me on this one. 

Thanks,

Smitty77

Just think about it this way.
In what world is Sam Dekker going up against starting NBA small forwards and scoring more than 10 ppg as an average?

Is Sam Dekker ever on the starting 5 of a championship team? Hell Naw.