Top 5 offseason Losers..and winners

[PhoSita]

you'd have a hard time calling it a bad move because it improved the talent level of the team, and that's the same way I look at most of the moves this offseason

I think if you look at any of the moves Danny made individually this off-season, it would be hard to call them "bad" in a vacuum.  There are defensible reasons for all of them.  None of the moves seem likely to "hurt" the team, except to the extent that they might hurt the team's draft position.

At the same time, the team's status and outlook for next season is more or less the same now as it was before the playoffs ended, and I don't think anybody was added this summer who is likely to be a long term piece.  On top of that, instead of clearing up spots in the rotation for younger guys to potentially break in, Danny brought in / re-signed more veterans than he let go.

So from that standpoint, it's a disappointing off-season to me. 

Basically, nothing that I hoped to see happen ended up happening (not just "fireworks"), and I don't think anything Danny did moved the rebuild forward, he just sort of maintained it and tinkered around the edges.

[clover]

Picking Porzi was no mistake.

[perks-a-beast]

Unlike the losers i listed, i can find a positive in every move the Celtics made this offseason. Except the Jorebko signing. Thats just puzzling. While alot were dissapointed and expected more, Danny continued to stock pile assets while upgrading Bass and Wallace with Lee and Johnson.

[hwangjini_1]

#1 = Portland

Lost LaMarcus Aldridge. Lost Nic Batum. Lost Robin Lopez. Lost Wes Matthews.

Went from a 50+ win team that wasn't far from title contention to a bottom 5 team.

True, though every name after LMA was one they chose to lose once it was clear LMA was gone.



If we're defining being an "Offseason loser" as falling well short of expectations or hopes for what the team was going to accomplish, or just screwing up the opportunities available:

1. Dallas
2. New York
3. Portland (made the most of a bad hand, but they still lost a top 10 guy)
4. Lakers
5. Celtics (failed to upgrade core talent via draft, trade, or FA, settled for stop-gap solutions)

if the criteria for NOT being labeled a loser is "upgrading roster with super stars so as to be an instant contender" then lots of loser teams are out there it seems. why you singled out the celtics among the equally "guilty" teams can only be guessed at.

[nickagneta]

I can't understand how someone can say that the Celtics had one of the 5 worst offseasons since their season ended. Take away your Celtic fandom and lofty expectations for how YOU, as a fan, thought things should have been handled this offseason, and subjectively, I don't see it.

The Celtics upgraded their talent.
The Celtics kept their playoff core.
The Celtics drafted three players that Summer League observers have said have good NBA prospects going forward.
The Celtics maintained their future payroll flexibility.
The Celtics held onto a raft of potential lottery draft picks.

Removing one's fandom and predilection for how Ainge should have progressed and its pretty easy to see that there are a lot of teams that had much worse offseasons than the Celtics.

That said if you wanted trades to get a star or a massive consolidation to open time for youth or a blow it type offseason to tank for draft picks, then yeah, you are most likely going to think the C's offseason sucked.

But it didn't. It just didn't go the way you wanted it to.

[tazzmaniac]

The Spurs should be at the top of the winners list.  LMA was by far the best player who changed teams.  They got West for vet minimum.  They even were able to re-sign Green. 

[BudweiserCeltic]

#1 = Portland

Lost LaMarcus Aldridge. Lost Nic Batum. Lost Robin Lopez. Lost Wes Matthews.

Went from a 50+ win team that wasn't far from title contention to a bottom 5 team.

True, though every name after LMA was one they chose to lose once it was clear LMA was gone.



If we're defining being an "Offseason loser" as falling well short of expectations or hopes for what the team was going to accomplish, or just screwing up the opportunities available:

1. Dallas
2. New York
3. Portland (made the most of a bad hand, but they still lost a top 10 guy)
4. Lakers
5. Celtics (failed to upgrade core talent via draft, trade, or FA, settled for stop-gap solutions)

Adam Himmelsbach ?@AdamHimmelsbach

[aingeforthree]

Unlike the losers i listed, i can find a positive in every move the Celtics made this offseason. Except the Jorebko signing. Thats just puzzling. While alot were dissapointed and expected more, Danny continued to stock pile assets while upgrading Bass and Wallace with Lee and Johnson.

I loved the Jerebko signing.  He fit perfectly in the system, hustles, rebounds, and can shoot the 3.  I think he's great off the pine

[tarheelsxxiii]

Cannot understand how improving talent on your roster when the primary roadblock is not having good enough "assets" to make a significant trade. Maybe one of Amir or Lee can make a big leap forward.

Also, situationally, there wasn't a big trade to be had. When there is, hopefully we'll be ready by then and win out. If we aren't ready/fail to make it happen, then that's another story. But I doubt adding Derozan instead of Amir/Lee would've caused NYK or SAC to call us about their franchises.

[PhoSita]

if the criteria for NOT being labeled a loser is "upgrading roster with super stars so as to be an instant contender" then lots of loser teams are out there it seems.

[PhoSita]

Adam Himmelsbach ?@AdamHimmelsbach

Since nothing about the picks listed on this sheet changed whatsoever this off-season, aside from the acquisition of a couple of second rounders at some indeterminate point in the future, I'm uncertain what this has to do with the off-season.


I'm seeing a lot of "Well, things didn't get any worse so you can't say the off-season was bad" in this thread.


To me, saying "The Celts are pretty much in the same position as before, only they added David Lee and Amir Johnson!" isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of how the off-season went.

That said if you wanted trades to get a star or a massive consolidation to open time for youth or a blow it type offseason to tank for draft picks, then yeah, you are most likely going to think the C's offseason sucked.

So, "the team didn't do / accomplish any of the things you would have wanted to see them do in order to improve its position for the future" doesn't mean "the team had a bad off-season"?

I'm curious what your criteria for a bad off-season is.


I'll stipulate that Ainge didn't make things worse, with the caveat that I don't really see the wisdom of doubling down on a roster likely to finish in the middle. 

"Not making things worse" is only a successful off-season, in my view, if you've got a capped-out contender on your hands and maintenance around the edges is sufficient to keep things going, or perhaps if you've got a young team with all the right pieces in place and all you need is time.

When you're in the midst of a rebuild, still looking for answers, "not making things worse" is not enough to call it a good off-season.

I think intelligent minds could persuasively argue for a number of other teams to be on that list at #5 other than the Celtics, but I care about the Celtics more than those other teams.  I think every summer is important when you're rebuilding, and Danny wasn't able to get anything meaningful done in my view.

[Vox_Populi]

I imagine a lot of teams would categorize maintaining the status quo as a good off-season. If your expectations were to go above that, then I guess the Celtics did have a disappointing summer.

[Rondo9]

Adam Himmelsbach ?@AdamHimmelsbach

Since nothing about the picks listed on this sheet changed whatsoever this off-season, aside from the acquisition of a couple of second rounders at some indeterminate point in the future, I'm uncertain what this has to do with the off-season.


I'm seeing a lot of "Well, things didn't get any worse so you can't say the off-season was bad" in this thread.


To me, saying "The Celts are pretty much in the same position as before, only they added David Lee and Amir Johnson!" isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of how the off-season went.

Amir Johnson helps with rim protection, and David Lee is an expiring who also gives the Celtics rebounding and an inside presence. The Celtics also added 3 rookies and more draft picks. It wasn't a great offseason, but it was hardly a bad one at least not to consider them offseason losers.

[PhoSita]

I imagine a lot of teams would categorize maintaining the status quo as a good off-season. If your expectations were to go above that, then I guess the Celtics did have a disappointing summer.

As I indicated above, I think there are plenty of teams for whom maintaining the status quo could be a successful off-season.  If you've already got a contender on your hands, or a talented young team with all the right pieces in place already, that's fine.  For a team still searching for a long term formula, I don't think it's enough.

That doesn't mean it was a disastrous off-season that is going to cripple the franchise for years or anything like that, but outside of Dallas and Portland, I don't think there are many teams who got totally screwed this summer.


Here are some other candidates, though:

I might point to Sacramento, who made a questionable pick at #6 and a horrible trade with Philly, but they retained Cousins without firing their coach and have an outside shot of being a 35-40 win team this year, which would be a major victory for that franchise, sad as that is.

Toronto is another candidate for me -- two years in a row they've gotten exposed in the playoffs and yet they mostly stood pat this summer, aside from committing big time to a guy who was probably a product of a quality system and great coach in Atlanta.

I think Chicago moving on from Thibs counts as a disappointment for them, even if everybody knew it was coming.  Committing to an unproven head coach without making any major roster changes is a risk.  I think if I were a Bulls fan I would have wanted to see them be more bold, because that roster peaked a couple years ago.

Denver was a mixed bag; they got Mudiay, who probably fell too far in the draft, but they had to move on from Lawson without getting any real value in return, and they committed long term to Wilson Chandler and Dano Gallinari instead of moving them for assets, which is a major headscratcher to me.

[Tr1boy]

So i know the offseason isnt close to over but with no stars on the trading block and no key free agents remaining its hard to believe that too much will change. So lets start with the losers...

5. Washington. What the Wiz did this offseason was swap out Paul Pierce for Jared Dudley...who will miss months with an injury. They had the chance to get a guy in the draft who could have come in and contributed right away, but decided to go with Kelly Oubre, who may be a stud a ways down the line but is in no way ready to contribute in the NBA as of right now. Gary Neal was a nice pickup to add some scoring punch, but what the Wiz really needed was front court depth to back up the injury prone Nene and the inconsistent Gortat, which they did not get. I think the Wiz drop a Few spots in the east, unless Otto Porter harnesses his potential and has a moster year. The team is really going to miss the presence of Pierce alot more than people think.

4. New York. It all started on draft night when the Knicks took Porzingiz. While i actually think the kid will develope into a real nice player down the line, it was a huge gamble for the Knicks to take at this juncture of their rebuilding stage. I thought they should have played it safe and gone for a guy like Mudiay or Winslow (who i still cant believe dropped). Then, agter striking out in free agency, they tie up a bunch of money in Lopez and Afflalo as if theyre gunning for a playoff spot, when what they really need to do is bottom out for a couple of years like Philly and trade Carmelo (which i know isnt going to be an easy task).

3. Atlanta. Hotlantas defense is going to take a huge hit with the subtraction of Carroll, who was one of the leagues most versatile defenders last year. What they should have done in the draft is go after a guy like HollisJefferson or Andersen, but instead traded the pick for the horribly inefficient Tim Hardaway Jr. Getting Splitter and resigning Millsap were good moves, but i still dont expect Atlanta to be nearly as good as last year and may drop a few spots, and maybe even be beat put in the division by Miami or Washington.

2. Charlotte. MJ done it again. First, he trades Lance Stephenson for next to nothing. Then trades Gerald Henderson, whose on a more than reasonable contract, and Noah Vonleh (who he gives up on in under a year) for Nicolas Batum, whose a nice player, but plays the same position as MKG, who MJ put alot of stock in drafting him 2nd overall. They also passed on Winslow, Turner and others for A guy named Frank the Tank. But its okay because they got Spencer Hawes.

1. Dallas. Poor poor Dallas. And its all DeAndre Jordans fault. I can see why the cubes is attempting to put together a competitive team after they got burned. But imo they should just ship out Dirk and Parsons and bottom out instead of ensuring theyre not bad enough to keep their pick (top 7 protected). Just a crappy situation.

Winners.   

5. Sacramento. The Kings would be even higher on the list if they were in the eastern conference. Then these additions would actually maybe get them somewhere. But they did a great job of adding talent after a tumultuous start to the offseason. They got a potentially elite rim protector in WCS and the perfect guy to throw him lobs in Rondo. Belinelli and Koufos were great additions and getting rid of Stauskas, Landry and Thompson was a classic case if addition by subtraction. I think the Kings will finally make the leap from a bottom 3 team in the West to a 7 or 8 seed, which is pretty impressive in that conferance.


4. Milwaukee. The Bucks sort of just came out of nowhere and snagged Greg Monroe when some were certain he"d go to New York or elsewhere. Resigning Middleton, who proved he could make big shots in last years playoffs was huge. They added Miles Plumlee and Greivis Vasquez for very little and even got some value for Zaza. Ill be honest this Bucks team fills me with fear and envy..minus the whole Jason Kidd as head coach thing.

3. Houston. It started out by the Rockets having a terrific draft. Dekker and Harrell were both steals for where they were drafted. Then they go ahead and upgrade their weakest position by trading 4 scrubs and a late draft pick for Lawson, who has been a borderline allstat talent in the past. Resigning Brewer was key.

2. LA Clippers. Lance Stephenson, Jamal Crawford, Paul Pierce, Josh Smith, Cole Aldrich. The Clippers bench be looking like a eastern conference playoff team. Its funny because The Clips were one bad decision from DeAndre Jordan away from being on the other list. Im far from a fan of Blake Griffin or Chris Paul fan but im gunna be gunning for this team just for Paul Pierce. Its also nice seeing Doc find success as a GM.

1. Cleveland. Assuming Tristan Thompson will finally resign. The Cavs are on this list mostly because of the players they were able to keep. They were able to avoid a disaster in KLove leaving after giving up a future supertar for the guy. Then they add Mo Williams back, who many thought was over the hump then acored 50 points last year! Varejao coming back is also going to make a big difference. Ill end by saying i hate this team and it annoys me greatly that this will be the 6th consecutive year we have to see Lebron in the finals.

good list, except the Clippers and Rockets had the best offseason.  You need to add the Celtics on the list by getting Amir, Lee (for little to nothing). 3 excellent draft picks

Cavs are in the top 10 but not #1.  Love was going nowhere.  Mo Williams is not the same player he once was.  Varejao is injury prone.  Irving may never be the same again.

Don't forget also the Spurs had a top offseason by adding Aldrige. Aldrige and Duncan (even though he is old now) will be a load to deal with.   A combination like this could make the league forget about "Small" ball and return to the big frontcourt ball