Poll: Over Under 47 Wins

[Rosco917]

How can anyone predict what the C's will do next season, when we haven't drafted or gone through free agency?

So, if we stay just the way we are at present, no free agents, a college player or two, having little or no impact, then we win under 47 games.

[LarBrd33]

Look, last offseason we very clearly were trying to build around Rondo by bringing in Kevin Love and trying to compete immediately.  We failed that plan and we were forced to change direction.

At some point, it became clear that our best course of action was to cash in on the vets, bottom out and keep building around youth.  Everything about this team smelled mediocre.  We took a 25 win team (from 2013-14) and removed the two best players on the roster (Rondo and Green).  Everyone understood what was going on here... we wanted to land a star prospect and try to build this thing organically. 

Ainge himself was very clear with his thoughts on the matter.  He specifically mentioned in interviews that he saw no point in making the playoffs if the team couldn't compete.   It's about as transparent as an NBA GM can get... Landing a top draft pick is better than winning a "participation badge" in a 4 game playoff curb-stomping.   

I know there is always going to be people in denial who doubt the common narrative even when it's blatantly clear it's true (I argued for years with folks who swore there was no way Ainge was trying to trade Rondo even though it was abundantly clear the Celtics were exploring it).   Well we've seen multiple articles that suggest Ainge wasn't entirely happy about our doomed playoff appearance and would have preferred a draft pick.  This falls in line with everything we know about Ainge and how he builds basketball teams.   Ainge will try his best to make due with the limited/weak assets he has at his disposal, but I don't think there's any doubt that Ainge would have preferred to have a top 5 pick in this draft to either offer up in trade packages or pair with Marcus Smart to start forming building blocks for the future.

Overall point... on paper, this is a 25 win team.   Ainge took a literal 25 win team (from 2013-14) and got rid of a couple of the best players...   Yes, he landed Thomas for a late 1st (likely seeing Thomas as a more tradeable chip down the line than the late pick), but this very much was a team designed to bottom out.   On paper... 25 wins.  As many Sports analysts mentioned, there might not be a single player on the Celtics that would start for a top-tier team.  Certainly not for Golden State.  Our best player would be, at best, the 8th best guy on the Warriors.  It's a credit to Brad Stevens and his otherwordly coaching magic that we won 40.   It's proof that "on paper" doesn't always translate to reality.    So the question is whether or not Stevens can once again get this team of 25 win talent to 40 again.  I doubt it.  47?  No way.   Of course, none of this matters if Ainge hits a few home runs this summer and gets some real talent here.   

[D.o.s.]

Getting to 47 with the roster we have now is wishful thinking, I think.

Naturally I voted for the leperchauns.

[Vermont Green]

How can anyone predict what the C's will do next season, when we haven't drafted or gone through free agency?

So, if we stay just the way we are at present, no free agents, a college player or two, having little or no impact, then we win under 47 games.

This is my question as well.  If the question is based on the Celtics just using their picks and going with the team that they have, 47 wins feels very much out of reach.  If they sign Monroe and Butler, that would obviously change everything.

[slamtheking]

Since I don't see fireworks on the horizon, I'm saying under.

Agreed.

It's very early right now, a lot of variables for this summer, but I'd ballpark next year at 30-45 wins.  My expectation skews toward the lower half of that range, but I wouldn't blame somebody for leaning toward the higher end.

as-is i don't think this roster would get back to the playoffs next year.  They overachieved and caught teams off guard. 

a true rarity? I agree with you.

I also agree with the commentary that it's still too early to know without the draft but more importantly free agency.  I just think that several teams that underperformed this year due to injuries and bad chemistry will do much better next year.  we're very unlikely next year to do anywhere near as well as we did at the end of this year

[Future Celtics Owner]

Look, last offseason we very clearly were trying to build around Rondo by bringing in Kevin Love and trying to compete immediately.  We failed that plan and we were forced to change direction.

At some point, it became clear that our best course of action was to cash in on the vets, bottom out and keep building around youth.  Everything about this team smelled mediocre.  We took a 25 win team (from 2013-14) and removed the two best players on the roster (Rondo and Green).  Everyone understood what was going on here... we wanted to land a star prospect and try to build this thing organically. 

Ainge himself was very clear with his thoughts on the matter.  He specifically mentioned in interviews that he saw no point in making the playoffs if the team couldn't compete.   It's about as transparent as an NBA GM can get... Landing a top draft pick is better than winning a "participation badge" in a 4 game playoff curb-stomping.   

I know there is always going to be people in denial who doubt the common narrative even when it's blatantly clear it's true (I argued for years with folks who swore there was no way Ainge was trying to trade Rondo even though it was abundantly clear the Celtics were exploring it).   Well we've seen multiple articles that suggest Ainge wasn't entirely happy about our doomed playoff appearance and would have preferred a draft pick.  This falls in line with everything we know about Ainge and how he builds basketball teams.   Ainge will try his best to make due with the limited/weak assets he has at his disposal, but I don't think there's any doubt that Ainge would have preferred to have a top 5 pick in this draft to either offer up in trade packages or pair with Marcus Smart to start forming building blocks for the future.

Overall point... on paper, this is a 25 win team.   Ainge took a literal 25 win team (from 2013-14) and got rid of a couple of the best players...   Yes, he landed Thomas for a late 1st (likely seeing Thomas as a more tradeable chip down the line than the late pick), but this very much was a team designed to bottom out.   On paper... 25 wins.  As many Sports analysts mentioned, there might not be a single player on the Celtics that would start for a top-tier team.  Certainly not for Golden State.  Our best player would be, at best, the 8th best guy on the Warriors.  It's a credit to Brad Stevens and his otherwordly coaching magic that we won 40.   It's proof that "on paper" doesn't always translate to reality.    So the question is whether or not Stevens can once again get this team of 25 win talent to 40 again.  I doubt it.  47?  No way.   Of course, none of this matters if Ainge hits a few home runs this summer and gets some real talent here.

TP. Or I could see Ainge stripping the team of its better, short term, role players:ET, AB. I wouldn't give Stevens the pieces to win useless games with players we won't have in our future. HE IS TOO GOOD OF A COACH.

[greece66]

47+ wins is far from a certainty (it's only June), but I think it is quite likely we make it.

If we perform close to what we did in the post-break last season, 47 wins is an attainable target.

[LGC88]

Whatever they get 2 stars at FA or via trades or just get help at the 3 & 5 position through the draft, this team will reach 47 wins next season.
Why? Because the machine is on, we are on the way to the top.
Brad has its way to use each player as its full potential while maintaining great chemistry as a team.
Danny has no choice than to improve our roster now.
In this franchises' jungle where most of the organisations still don't understand what it takes to win (obsession of talent), Boston has proven last season that winning takes way more than talent.
Now that everything is in place, all we need is a bit of talent to go on top.
47 wins is reasonable in the east for Boston, even if they only draft an SF and a glorified PF at Center. We have the depth for a long season success, but not the appropriate roster for playoff. That's 2 different things.
Hopefully we can get great FAs that will make us compete in the playoffs.

[Moranis]

How can anyone predict what the C's will do next season, when we haven't drafted or gone through free agency?

So, if we stay just the way we are at present, no free agents, a college player or two, having little or no impact, then we win under 47 games.

This is my question as well.  If the question is based on the Celtics just using their picks and going with the team that they have, 47 wins feels very much out of reach.  If they sign Monroe and Butler, that would obviously change everything.

I'm not so sure it would.  Only 4 teams won 48 or more games in the East last year.  Granted 7 teams did it from the West though 4 were in the SW.  The year before only 4 teams in the East (though 9 in the West).  Year before only 4 teams in the East (and just 5 in the West).  11/12 shortened season but 5 teams from each conference on pace for that.  Year before that 4 from east, 6 from west.

I guess my point is, 48 wins isn't all that easy to get and I can't see how Boston is a top 4 team in the conference next year (4 seed is possible as the Atlantic is terrible, but doubt Boston has a top 4 record).  I'm not really sure even adding Monroe and Butler gets Boston there next year. 

[chilidawg]

I voted yes.  Sign Monroe, trade up to the 8 and get WCS/Hezonga/Winslow, and there's no stopping the juggernaut.

Get me more koolaid!

[saltlover]

The Celtics went 24-12 over their final 36 games, with a roster that for the most part looked like the one we ended the season with as opposed to the fluctuating one we had the first three months.  That's a 54 win pace.  Heck, even if you take away the two wins vs. the resting Cavs at the end of the year, they'd still be on a 50 win pace.  I'm not saying they'll win 54 games with no changes next year, but at the same time, it does imply that 48 wins is well within their reach.  Add to it that they have the flexibility to upgrade the roster, yeah, I'm taking the over.

[SHAQATTACK]

Just ONE player ......if it's the right one could have a huge impact. Added or in Rondos case subtracted .   

I think under .  Too many Ifs .....and Danny might trade what we have now for chance at Thon Maker or other up coming talent.
On the other hand .....Aldridge could easily push this team to 50 plus wins with Smart in the front court.

Lots of IFs....

If .....KO .....blossoms with new confidence.

If .......Sully .....gets down to 260 and plays like he can

IF .....IT. Stay healthy

IF ......James Young  .....hits the ground running

IF ........Danny can recruit a STAR  or at least trade up for a young better Rim protector


So last season .......I was off like 27 wins short .....HA hA ...LOL ...a lot unforeseen stuff happened



Maybe one thing that caused me to be so cautious  .....I under estimated the coaching job CBS could do......his impact on sealing victories, he seems to,be getting the hang of NBA coaching , and unshackled from Rondo s diva ness seem to unleash his full ability as a floor coach.

Given CBS is coach .....no matter what pile of players he is given .......also the confidence given to the young team and coach at the end to make the playoffs ....could really pay dividends.

I'm thinking he'll come up with 40 wins ......that's twice what I predicted last year.

[Donoghus]

Under.

[Atzar]

Based on the team we see right now, I'll take the under.  Too many things would have to go right IMO.  There IS more upside - Smart, Sullinger, Olynyk, and Young all have substantial room for growth.  Guys like Zeller and Bradley could make some incremental improvements as well.  But I felt that, based on their level of talent, they had to play way over their heads just to hit 40 last year. 

Having said that, it wouldn't surprise me if I looked up in October and saw a team markedly different from the one we have right now.  Hell, it could look markedly different at the end of next week, and that's before any of the free agency stuff shakes out. 

[D.o.s.]

The Celtics went 24-12 over their final 36 games, with a roster that for the most part looked like the one we ended the season with as opposed to the fluctuating one we had the first three months.  That's a 54 win pace.  Heck, even if you take away the two wins vs. the resting Cavs at the end of the year, they'd still be on a 50 win pace.  I'm not saying they'll win 54 games with no changes next year, but at the same time, it does imply that 48 wins is well within their reach.  Add to it that they have the flexibility to upgrade the roster, yeah, I'm taking the over.

Sure, if we were only playing teams with the February>April mentality.