#NBAFrontOffice on the Celtics Rebuild

[PhoSita]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/13369018/nba-nba-front-office-analyzes-boston-celtics-do-next?ex_cid=espnapi_public

Amir Elhassan, Kevin Pelton, PJ Carlessimo, and Tom Penn discuss where the Celtics are at in their rebuild and how they step forward.

Basic points:

- Smart is the only player on the team that the Celtics can point to as having the potential for greatness.

- Many of the Celtics' hopes rest with the picks they are owed, especially the Nets and Mavs picks.

- The Celts' best hope of getting a star player in the near future is to be good enough to convince somebody to choose Boston instead of somewhere else.  Al Horford or Mike Conley could be targets in free agency.  The Celts will have lots of cap space to use, but so will many teams.

- Danny Ainge needs to monitor the situations around the league that might go bad or lead a player to want out, e.g. Bledsoe, Cousins, Love.  The Celts are set up well to make a draft night trade in 2016 if the Nets and Mavs picks turn out well.

- Taking one step forward by adding a player like Horford or Love could be followed the next year by the addition of the final piece that makes the team a contender.




Some interesting points.  My misgivings with the situation, as I've made clear before, is placing hopes on picks from other teams turning out in our favor, trying to convince a big name free agent to leave a better situation to join a younger team without high end talent already on board, and attempting to win a bidding war for a guy like Cousins with a quantity of assets rather than a few high quality assets.

But this panel certainly paints an enticing picture for the team. 

If the Nets and Mavs picks both end up in the top 10, and the Celts finish with a middle seed and win a couple playoff games, then follow that up by signing Al Horford and Mike Conley in free agency, suddenly we're in business.

[KG Living Legend]

Nice so say we sign Conley and Horford what's the lineup look like.

 Horford
 Olynyk
 Crowder
 Smart
 Conley

[celticsclay]

I can see how it would be a lot more comforting for us if we were not relying on other teams failures as you say. The Dallas pick in particular I really have very little confidence projecting because I think Carlisle is a good coach, they have some decent veterans and a few guys you could envision really having bounce back campaigns (for example Deron Williams). If everything breaks right for them they could be a 6th seeded playoff team.

However, with the Nets pick I don't understand why we can't be really optimistic. Yes they will not not shut it down like a traditional bad team because they won't reap the rewards, but where is the upside on their roster? Joe Johnson is 35 years old. I do not believe there has been a 35 year old in the history of the NBA that has not at least slightly regressed at that age. Many players that age have seen their games fall off a cliff. He is their second best player.

You then have Lopez. Even if he stays healthy, he is what he is at this point with a number of years experience playing in the league. He gets a few boards, and is a really good post scorer, but he is a below average defensive player.

They then have thaddeus young who is really not much different from Jeff Green.

All their other players would be off the bench off on other teams and their young guys are for the most part late first, second round drafts picks or undrafted guys. They don't have a team full of lottery picks.

Why is this not an awful team?

[max215]

I can see how it would be a lot more comforting for us if we were not relying on other teams failures as you say. The Dallas pick in particular I really have very little confidence projecting because I think Carlisle is a good coach, they have some decent veterans and a few guys you could envision really having bounce back campaigns (for example Deron Williams). If everything breaks right for them they could be a 6th seeded playoff team.

However, with the Nets pick I don't understand why we can't be really optimistic. Yes they will not not shut it down like a traditional bad team because they won't reap the rewards, but where is the upside on their roster? Joe Johnson is 35 years old. I do not believe there has been a 35 year old in the history of the NBA that has not at least slightly regressed at that age. Many players that age have seen their games fall off a cliff. He is their second best player.

You then have Lopez. Even if he stays healthy, he is what he is at this point with a number of years experience playing in the league. He gets a few boards, and is a really good post scorer, but he is a below average defensive player.

They then have thaddeus young who is really not much different from Jeff Green.

All their other players would be off the bench off on other teams and their young guys are for the most part late first, second round drafts picks or undrafted guys. They don't have a team full of lottery picks.

Why is this not an awful team?

TP for perfectly summarizing my sentiments toward the Nets. Good points about the Mavs as well.

[max215]

Anyone else think Horford would be a great target next year? The thought crossed my mind a few times before reading this article, but the article reinforced how suitable a target he would be. I think he could consider coming here if we wind up being as good or marginally worse than the Hawks, which I don't think is out of the realm of possibility.

[Evantime34]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/13369018/nba-nba-front-office-analyzes-boston-celtics-do-next?ex_cid=espnapi_public

Amir Elhassan, Kevin Pelton, PJ Carlessimo, and Tom Penn discuss where the Celtics are at in their rebuild and how they step forward.

Basic points:

- Smart is the only player on the team that the Celtics can point to as having the potential for greatness.

- Many of the Celtics' hopes rest with the picks they are owed, especially the Nets and Mavs picks.

- The Celts' best hope of getting a star player in the near future is to be good enough to convince somebody to choose Boston instead of somewhere else.  Al Horford or Mike Conley could be targets in free agency.  The Celts will have lots of cap space to use, but so will many teams.

- Danny Ainge needs to monitor the situations around the league that might go bad or lead a player to want out, e.g. Bledsoe, Cousins, Love.  The Celts are set up well to make a draft night trade in 2016 if the Nets and Mavs picks turn out well.

- Taking one step forward by adding a player like Horford or Love could be followed the next year by the addition of the final piece that makes the team a contender.




Some interesting points.  My misgivings with the situation, as I've made clear before, is placing hopes on picks from other teams turning out in our favor, trying to convince a big name free agent to leave a better situation to join a younger team without high end talent already on board, and attempting to win a bidding war for a guy like Cousins with a quantity of assets rather than a few high quality assets.

But this panel certainly paints an enticing picture for the team. 

If the Nets and Mavs picks both end up in the top 10, and the Celts finish with a middle seed and win a couple playoff games, then follow that up by signing Al Horford and Mike Conley in free agency, suddenly we're in business.

No bullet point on Pelton saying we could be better than the Hawks next year?

[PhoSita]

No bullet point on Pelton saying we could be better than the Hawks next year?

You're right, I totally forgot that! 

I think Pelton's just a little crazy to say that, but then again, he makes his money by making such statements and backing them up with possibly misleading stats.

I'd be interested to read an argument suggesting the Celts could be better than the Hawks.

[Evantime34]

No bullet point on Pelton saying we could be better than the Hawks next year?

You're right, I totally forgot that! 

I think Pelton's just a little crazy to say that, but then again, he makes his money by making such statements and backing them up with possibly misleading stats.

I'd be interested to read an argument suggesting the Celts could be better than the Hawks.

I don't get insider so if he made such an argument I can't pull it up (my friend just sends me articles when I ask). I think he probably comes up with the stats and then makes arguments based off them, not the other way around.

My argument for the C's being better
1. Hawks had a very healthy team during the regular season en route to their great season. With the injury history of their players this is unlikely to happen again. Their depth is such that the wheels could very easily fall off with some injuries.
2. The Pythagorean Win total indicates that they were lucky last year, more often than not this type of luck has a mean reversion. I'll have to look this up but I believe I've read that team who made a huge jump in win totals often find themselves reverting back to pack next year.
3. DeMarre Carroll was actually very important to what they do and they will not be able to replace him.

If they implode and the C's improve it would increase the chances we have at luring him away (even if they are slim).

[PhoSita]

I don't get insider so if he made such an argument I can't pull it up (my friend just sends me articles when I ask). I think he probably comes up with the stats and then makes arguments based off them, not the other way around.

I don't have insider either but for whatever reason I was able to read the whole piece.  Pelton doesn't elaborate beyond stating the Celts might be better.

[Bostoncelticsforlife7]

Dang this gets me really really exited. I remember watching Atlanta in the 2013-14 season because I wanted Atlanta to lose their games because we were going to get the least favorably of the hawks and the nets 1st rounders and Al Horford got me sooo mad. I hated him because he was their est player and his jumper was freaking wet! I would be so happy if we got Horford. If we get Horford in 2016 that would probably put us in the top 3 in the east.

[Quetzalcoatl]

However, with the Nets pick I don't understand why we can't be really optimistic. Yes they will not not shut it down like a traditional bad team because they won't reap the rewards, but where is the upside on their roster?

I will say I can see a scenario where they make the playoffs as a 7 or 8 seed, but I think it's extremely unlikely that both the Celtics and the Nets make the playoffs next year.  The Wiz, Cavs, Bulls, Bucks, Pacers, Hawks and Heat I feel like are all clearly better than either of us.  That's 7 teams.  Even if someone on one of those teams (like Paul George) are injured early on and their team drops out of contention, there are still the Bobcats, Raptors, Pistons, Knicks and Hornets who should all be theoretically capable of grabbing the 8 seed.  So I think we'll have at least one lottery ticket next year and there's a decent enough chance for two.  Unfortunately, only the 1st and 2nd picks seem like they have transcendent potential and then there's a much steeper drop off after than than other years.

[celticsclay]

Again I don't know how people can't look at the Nets roster and look at their offseason moves and be absolutely giddy. They were pretty much completely healthy last year, which was a minor miracle considering lopez' history and Johnson's age.

From that team that barely grabbed the 7 spot they have lost their backup big (plumlee), their starting point guard (williams) and two more solid rotation players in Teletovic (who I admit missed a lot of time last year) and alan anderson. These were all solid NBA players. Their only addition of even slight NBA pedigree is Barginani who is a one dimensional and injury prone player they got for close to the min and a raw rookie. How are they not way worse?

[PhoSita]

I think the Nets will end up in the 10-15 range, but I'd love to be wrong.

I've gone into this at length elsewhere, but I just don't think it's that hard to win 30ish games in the East. 

Our only hope on that front is Brook Lopez breaking his foot / ankle again.  Definitely plausible.  But he was relatively healthy last year.

[celticsclay]

I think the Nets will end up in the 10-15 range, but I'd love to be wrong.

I've gone into this at length elsewhere, but I just don't think it's that hard to win 30ish games in the East. 

Our only hope on that front is Brook Lopez breaking his foot / ankle again.  Definitely plausible.  But he was relatively healthy last year.

The problem is that you are not really providing any reasoning for this optimistic prediction for them. They won 38 games last year with good health. Of the 8 players that were part of their rotation in the playoffs 3 of them are gone, while a 4th (Telotivic) played 20 minutes a game for them for half the season. Who is offsetting those loses? Barg or a 20 year old rookie everyone is describing as raw?


Edit: I'll be honest your predictions for the nets, with no explanations, really just come off as extremely pessimistic.

[TheFlex]

I thought Elhassen had a fantastic point near the end of the piece, which is that the Celts' next star could be a player they have more faith in than anyone else and overpay for in FA. His example was Orlando in 2000 paying TMac like he was already star, vs. everyone else offering him sidekick money.

Of course, for that to happen, the Celts need to believe in a guy more than anyone else does (apparently that wasn't the case with Tobias Harris), and that guy has to appreciate the pay raise more than he values returning to his previous team.