Author Topic: If we don't make the 2016 playoffs, should we think about going even younger?  (Read 88024 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline chambers

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7482
  • Tommy Points: 943
  • Boston Celtics= Championships, nothing less.
I'm not saying this will happen, or that it's likely to happen, but it's not implausible:

- The Celts extend Tyler Zeller for 5 years / $50 million.

- Danny opts not to make a significant trade during the regular season, preferring to preserve cap flexibility.

- The team ends up with one pick in the back half of the top 10 and two picks in the middle of the 1st round.

- The team trades one, two, or all three of Isaiah Thomas, Kelly Olynyk and Avery Bradley along with one or two picks to move up in the draft. The team drafts three or more players who all stand to vie for playing time at the 3, 4, and 5.

- David Lee, Amir Johnson, Jonas Jerebko, and Evan Turner all leave in free agency next summer.

- After a fairly strong season that nonetheless leaves significant concerns about his future, Jared Sullinger gets an offer in excess of $58 million from another team.  The Celts choose not to match.


With all that, the team a year from now could be comprised of:

Smart
Crowder
Rozier
Hunter
Young
Mickey
Zeller
Rookie #1
Rookie #2
Rookie #3

Throw in a couple of short-term make-good deals like what the Celts gave to Jerebko and Amir Johnson this summer.  Example -- Eric Gordon and Roy Hibbert.

It's not so crazy to think the team could be pretty bad in the following season, even though things would look pretty bright for the future if they're developing Smart, Hunter, Young, and Mickey, while integrating a couple of top 10 picks from the 2016 draft.


This type of scenario is actually a silver lining for me.  No matter how much the Celts seem to be invested in trying to be a respectable middle of the road team this season, the potential is still there to take a step back next summer and focus on developing young talent, provided they get some luck with the Nets and Mavs pick and perhaps find a trade partner higher in the lottery.

yep this is the crux of what I've been saying.
With all these picks and young guys at some point after Durant has made his decision clear, then we'll have a very plausible option of waiving the white towel.
Durant coming over to the Eastern Conference would give us more of a reason to go into heavy development mode.
Getting past Washington with Durant, Cleveland with Lebron and teams like the 76ers, Magic, Knicks with Carmelo and Porzingris (assuming he gets better) will make the East a playoff fodder nightmare for us.

I think missing out on Winslow this year may be a key factor in us taking this route. He was a potential franchise guy within our range and we lucked out. Now the Heat have Dragic, Winslow, Whiteside which is another young trio we'd have to get past in the playoffs.

I'd actually prefer to avoid getting the Amir+Jerebko 2.0 contracts and just letting Coach Brad try and tame some top 10 lottery talent.
Brandon Ingram, Malik Pope?
Chad Ford says we've been all over Malik Pope since his high school days.
Having our own top 10 picks+Brooklyn's top 10 picks would be a great way to gamble on some draft talent for 2-3 seasons.

I like Winslow as a player and would've been happy to get him, but lamenting over the playoff run for his sake is awful premature. Besides, no one ever thought our team was sniffing the playoffs after the Rondo/Green trades. It's not like Ainge didn't try for a higher draft pick. The only way we were getting Winslow or someone like him would be by purposely losing games. That's not worth upsetting Stevens.

Plus, do you really think teams like the Knicks or 76ers are gonna make it hard for us to make the playoffs in the next 2-3 years? Anything is possible I guess, but Philly isn't going to be competing for a playoff spot for at least that long. They don't have anywhere near enough talent to make a playoff push. I really like Noel for what he is, I think Okafor has star potential, but one good role player and a developing potential star on a team of D-leaguers plus a couple more rookies isn't enough to get them to the playoffs.

Regardless, the thing I think is totally overlooked when people talk about our current rebuild is the flexibility Ainge has managed to accrue. Basketball is a funny sport. Crazy things happen all the time. If your not a contender, being able to pursue any and all paths to contendership is a smart play. We have the cap space to pursue FA's and a team/coach they might actually consider going to, we have trade assets out the wazoo and draft assets that look like we might be able to get a few lottery picks while playing in the playoffs. That flexibility is a huge asset. Part of the reason is because, should things not go well for us this year, we have the ability to go for a total youth movement and add a few lottery picks to our young core.

I think it would take a certain set of circumstances to see it happen (We fall out of the playoff picture, young guys regress, we get trades that are too good to pass up, etc.) but I think it's totally possible. I like our chances this year and I think this team could even win 50 games if all goes right. But if that doesn't work out, which could totally happen, I can see us going right back into development mode. I'm glad we have that flexibility. If we end up in the lottery and those Brooklyn and Dallas picks fall our way we could add three top 15 talents to our already fairly large core. That's a great option to have.

I'm not saying we should have lost games, I'm just saying that because we didn't capitalize on Winslow (and Charlotte were too desperate to win now) that it could shape our future in the next few years differently. If these Brooklyn picks don't pan out in the top 10, then we are left with a roster of young guys and role players- good enough to make the playoffs in a terrible East, but not good enough to ever be a championship contender without binking multiple major free agents or angry players like Cousins.

If it gets to that point, I think Ainge will strongly consider just wiping the slate and starting over with no one over 25 years old or similar.

Your point about Philly cuts two ways. They may not be a problem for us in the next 2-3 years, but how are we supposed to get good enough to beat the Cavs? How about 5 years from now while we try and string together a 4th or 5th seed caliber team in the East and Philly actually develops a better team while we wait around?

I think our front office, coaching staff and environment would be perfect for a ground up rebuild. We aren't the Kings. We aren't the Bobcats.
God if we could put the Kings roster in Celtics uniforms with Danny and Brad at the helm? Wow.

Anyway we could argue about it all day, my point is that it's easy for people to say 'we are the Celtics we need to trade picks for stars and forget about the draft', yet there's no actual reason given as to which stars or how we'll get them.
If Durant comes to the East and makes the East as competitive at the top as the Western Conference is, then there is a strong argument for focusing on rebuilding via the draft, because our chances of winning a championship for the next 6 or 7 years would be pretty bad. Say 5 or 10 %?
eg: Durant and Lebron are in the East. Jimmy Butler stays with the Bulls and they sign a top 20 player to put next to him.

5 years from now it's plausible to say that Philadelphia will be much closer to competing with those teams than we will be.
"We are lucky we have a very patient GM that isn't willing to settle for being good and coming close. He wants to win a championship and we have the potential to get there still with our roster and assets."

quoting 'Greg B' on RealGM after 2017 trade deadline.
Read that last line again. One more time.

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17835
  • Tommy Points: 2661
  • bammokja
No reason to trade young players for more draft picks. 


The Celtics are loaded with picks.   



The Celtics need to make moves that get them closer to adding a star.
i didnt that the majority posters here at cb were aware of the fact that the celtics need to get a star player. most of the posts i have read state the opposite.

Finally. Someone who gets it.
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804
Zeller is older than both Sully and KO and has a full season over KO. Now up to be paid ridiculous money when he isn't better than either of them. I can see shipping out Sully for other reasons but you are talking about getting younger, how is it that Zeller stays?

Zeller is more durable and reliable, and plays a position with a lot of talent scarcity.

Sullinger and Olynyk are redundant and hurt the team defensively.


In zeller's first 2 seasons he only played around 10-15 more games than KO did. It's not something to really mention because a lot of people are more durable than Sully. I can't believe you mentioned their defense as if Zeller's D is better or anything to write home about. Although CBS says he doesn't go by positions, KO plays that position and it doesn't matter if you want it or not.


If you like Zeller more, I get it, he is a very solid player, just be honest about that instead of throwing things out there that hold little weight.


Not younger
Not a better defender
Not a better player
Durability over Sully and the jury is out until KO plays his third season

Z is like 5th oldest on the team. He is about to get his second contract, in a youth movement, you don't pay Zeller 10m with everyone else on a rookie contract. If DA goes for youth, Sully is the youngest at 23 (ship him off b/c of his pay raise). If I was forced to go all youth, I would probably trade every player in line for contract 2+ and/or paid more than rookie money.
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Offline GC003332

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 804
  • Tommy Points: 62
These claims that the Celtics are championship driven are just that claims, 1 title in the past 29 years, that is the reality of the Celtics championship driven state.Yes Ainge wants to put together a legit contender, just like many of the GM's around the league,It is a star driven league and if 2 or 3 of the tops guys decide that they want to team up like the Heat did a few years back what can the Celtics do about it?
All this talk about culture that the Celtics are building is great and all, get me some legit talent, I don't care if they talk like early cave man and are public enemy no 1, if they win games for the C's that's all that matters to me.
Accepting that since no 6 retired the Celtics have won 6 championships in 46 years , lowering expectations of Championships helps the angst.

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182


Not younger
Not a better defender
Not a better player
Durability over Sully and the jury is out until KO plays his third season


Zeller is still only 25/26, so age is not really an issue here.

I disagree about him not being a better defender.

He's not a more talented player, and his ceiling is lower, but he's a more efficient and consistent contributor who requires a smaller role on offense.


In any case, this is not a zero sum game.  Keeping Zeller doesn't mean getting rid of Sullinger and Olynyk.  If you want to make it about choosing between them, though, I'd rather commit $8-10 million per year to Zeller. 

I have a feeling somebody will offer Sullinger a Tobias Harris like contract, especially if he has a relatively healthy and productive season this year.  I'm not sure it'll be a good idea to match that kind of offer, because I'm concerned about Sully's ability to stay trim and fit, so that he can actually play, over the course of a season, especially if he gets paid.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804


Not younger
Not a better defender
Not a better player
Durability over Sully and the jury is out until KO plays his third season


Zeller is still only 25/26, so age is not really an issue here.

I disagree about him not being a better defender.

He's not a more talented player, and his ceiling is lower, but he's a more efficient and consistent contributor who requires a smaller role on offense.


In any case, this is not a zero sum game.  Keeping Zeller doesn't mean getting rid of Sullinger and Olynyk.  If you want to make it about choosing between them, though, I'd rather commit $8-10 million per year to Zeller. 

I have a feeling somebody will offer Sullinger a Tobias Harris like contract, especially if he has a relatively healthy and productive season this year.  I'm not sure it'll be a good idea to match that kind of offer, because I'm concerned about Sully's ability to stay trim and fit, so that he can actually play, over the course of a season, especially if he gets paid.

It is about age... title of thread. Nothing but your feelings backup him being a better defender. Sure, if you take the player of Sully or Z you will probably have to pay Sully more, I could buy keeping Z if Sully makes a lot more. KO is still on his rookie contract and isn't up for extension until next season, he is the cheapest option and Zeller was (MAYBE) slightly better in yr3 vs. KO yr2.


Again, if it's about going full blown youth, Zeller is older than both. If you don't keep them for the reasons you mentioned then we need to send them all on their way.
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182

It is about age... title of thread. Nothing but your feelings backup him being a better defender. Sure, if you take the player of Sully or Z you will probably have to pay Sully more, I could buy keeping Z if Sully makes a lot more. KO is still on his rookie contract and isn't up for extension until next season, he is the cheapest option and Zeller was (MAYBE) slightly better in yr3 vs. KO yr2.


Again, if it's about going full blown youth, Zeller is older than both. If you don't keep them for the reasons you mentioned then we need to send them all on their way.

At this point I honestly have no idea what this argument is even about.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804

It is about age... title of thread. Nothing but your feelings backup him being a better defender. Sure, if you take the player of Sully or Z you will probably have to pay Sully more, I could buy keeping Z if Sully makes a lot more. KO is still on his rookie contract and isn't up for extension until next season, he is the cheapest option and Zeller was (MAYBE) slightly better in yr3 vs. KO yr2.


Again, if it's about going full blown youth, Zeller is older than both. If you don't keep them for the reasons you mentioned then we need to send them all on their way.

At this point I honestly have no idea what this argument is even about.


I never knew. I just replied to keeping Zeller of all of the players except 2nd yr/rookies.
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182

It is about age... title of thread. Nothing but your feelings backup him being a better defender. Sure, if you take the player of Sully or Z you will probably have to pay Sully more, I could buy keeping Z if Sully makes a lot more. KO is still on his rookie contract and isn't up for extension until next season, he is the cheapest option and Zeller was (MAYBE) slightly better in yr3 vs. KO yr2.


Again, if it's about going full blown youth, Zeller is older than both. If you don't keep them for the reasons you mentioned then we need to send them all on their way.

At this point I honestly have no idea what this argument is even about.


I never knew. I just replied to keeping Zeller of all of the players except 2nd yr/rookies.

Ah well, there's the problem.  I don't think I ever advocated such a thing, though I did outline a scenario in which the team extends Zeller, keeps or trades Olynyk, and chooses not to match an offer for Sullinger in RFA.

For my part, I was just suggesting that it could make sense to do that, not that it necessarily will be the right way to go.

Maybe Sully comes into training camp looking like a Greek God and becomes a cross between Paul Millsap and David West for the next 6 years.  Maybe Zeller has an injury plagued season and falls out of the rotation entirely.

Based on what we know now, though, I think Zeller is a better long term bet than Sullinger, especially if somebody wants to offer Sully $12-14 million a season.  I'm just concerned Sully is going to continue to have trouble with playing more than 24 good minutes a night and being healthy enough to play, period.  Whereas Zeller played all 82 games last season and was arguably the team's most consistent contributor. 

I'm not worried about Zeller turning into an albatross if the Celts sign him to a 4 or 5 year deal for decent money.  I am worried about that happening with Sullinger.  As for Kelly, we'll have to wait and see how the next couple of seasons go for him, but right now I'm not sure he'll even get much playing time this season.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Offline Rondo9

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5379
  • Tommy Points: 277

It is about age... title of thread. Nothing but your feelings backup him being a better defender. Sure, if you take the player of Sully or Z you will probably have to pay Sully more, I could buy keeping Z if Sully makes a lot more. KO is still on his rookie contract and isn't up for extension until next season, he is the cheapest option and Zeller was (MAYBE) slightly better in yr3 vs. KO yr2.


Again, if it's about going full blown youth, Zeller is older than both. If you don't keep them for the reasons you mentioned then we need to send them all on their way.

At this point I honestly have no idea what this argument is even about.


I never knew. I just replied to keeping Zeller of all of the players except 2nd yr/rookies.

Ah well, there's the problem.  I don't think I ever advocated such a thing, though I did outline a scenario in which the team extends Zeller, keeps or trades Olynyk, and chooses not to match an offer for Sullinger in RFA.

For my part, I was just suggesting that it could make sense to do that, not that it necessarily will be the right way to go.

Maybe Sully comes into training camp looking like a Greek God and becomes a cross between Paul Millsap and David West for the next 6 years.  Maybe Zeller has an injury plagued season and falls out of the rotation entirely.

Based on what we know now, though, I think Zeller is a better long term bet than Sullinger, especially if somebody wants to offer Sully $12-14 million a season.  I'm just concerned Sully is going to continue to have trouble with playing more than 24 good minutes a night and being healthy enough to play, period.  Whereas Zeller played all 82 games last season and was arguably the team's most consistent contributor. 

I'm not worried about Zeller turning into an albatross if the Celts sign him to a 4 or 5 year deal for decent money.  I am worried about that happening with Sullinger.  As for Kelly, we'll have to wait and see how the next couple of seasons go for him, but right now I'm not sure he'll even get much playing time this season.

You honestly believe that some team is going offer Sullinger a massive contract considering his problems?

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804

It is about age... title of thread. Nothing but your feelings backup him being a better defender. Sure, if you take the player of Sully or Z you will probably have to pay Sully more, I could buy keeping Z if Sully makes a lot more. KO is still on his rookie contract and isn't up for extension until next season, he is the cheapest option and Zeller was (MAYBE) slightly better in yr3 vs. KO yr2.


Again, if it's about going full blown youth, Zeller is older than both. If you don't keep them for the reasons you mentioned then we need to send them all on their way.

At this point I honestly have no idea what this argument is even about.


I never knew. I just replied to keeping Zeller of all of the players except 2nd yr/rookies.

Ah well, there's the problem.  I don't think I ever advocated such a thing, though I did outline a scenario in which the team extends Zeller, keeps or trades Olynyk, and chooses not to match an offer for Sullinger in RFA.

For my part, I was just suggesting that it could make sense to do that, not that it necessarily will be the right way to go.

Maybe Sully comes into training camp looking like a Greek God and becomes a cross between Paul Millsap and David West for the next 6 years.  Maybe Zeller has an injury plagued season and falls out of the rotation entirely.

Based on what we know now, though, I think Zeller is a better long term bet than Sullinger, especially if somebody wants to offer Sully $12-14 million a season.  I'm just concerned Sully is going to continue to have trouble with playing more than 24 good minutes a night and being healthy enough to play, period.  Whereas Zeller played all 82 games last season and was arguably the team's most consistent contributor. 

I'm not worried about Zeller turning into an albatross if the Celts sign him to a 4 or 5 year deal for decent money.  I am worried about that happening with Sullinger.  As for Kelly, we'll have to wait and see how the next couple of seasons go for him, but right now I'm not sure he'll even get much playing time this season.


My point from the beginning wasn't to argue for keeping either, I just didn't get the reason for keeping him in a full youth movement when he is the older big of the 3. If the idea is to go younger, he will be 26 in Jan., he has to be the one on the outside looking in. Not only is he older but he and Sully are up for massive raises, you shouldn't keep either when everyone else will have 3-4 years on rookie scale contracts.
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Offline chambers

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7482
  • Tommy Points: 943
  • Boston Celtics= Championships, nothing less.
The smartest thing about the rebuild, so far, seems to be that Danny isn't holding to a certain kid of blueprint. Acquiring assetts and maintaining flexibility means he'll be able to make whatever the best deal is whenever the situation dictates it.

If the Celtics pick up where they left off in last year's regular season playing better than .500 ball, he can try to consolodate and get a star. If they flounder, he can do what he did the last two seasons and fire sale the team to try to get a better pick (and probably not get the late season resurgence the team gave last year).

It's the ability to go in a number of different directions that will be most valuable going forward.

Spot on man TP
"We are lucky we have a very patient GM that isn't willing to settle for being good and coming close. He wants to win a championship and we have the potential to get there still with our roster and assets."

quoting 'Greg B' on RealGM after 2017 trade deadline.
Read that last line again. One more time.

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182

My point from the beginning wasn't to argue for keeping either, I just didn't get the reason for keeping him in a full youth movement when he is the older big of the 3. If the idea is to go younger, he will be 26 in Jan., he has to be the one on the outside looking in. Not only is he older but he and Sully are up for massive raises, you shouldn't keep either when everyone else will have 3-4 years on rookie scale contracts.

I'm not worried about Zeller's age.  He's only been in the league a few years (read: not much wear on his knees), and players of his type usually stay productive through age 33-34.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182

You honestly believe that some team is going offer Sullinger a massive contract considering his problems?

I think some pretty silly contracts are going to be given out next summer to players who even have a whiff of "potential All-Star" about them, as teams scramble to use their cap space in potentially interesting ways after the major free agents have all been signed.

For the most part, I don't think it's a bad idea to lock up a young, reasonably productive player long term, even if it seems like an overpay at the time.

My issue with Sullinger is the concern that once he's paid he'll stop giving more than lip service to the need to stay fit, and that his weight issues will continue to result in injuries that prevent him from playing at all.  The weight issues make Sullinger a bad long-term bet.  He seems like the sort of player that needs to be kept on shorter term contracts in order to keep him motivated.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2015, 03:17:09 PM by PhoSita »
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804

My point from the beginning wasn't to argue for keeping either, I just didn't get the reason for keeping him in a full youth movement when he is the older big of the 3. If the idea is to go younger, he will be 26 in Jan., he has to be the one on the outside looking in. Not only is he older but he and Sully are up for massive raises, you shouldn't keep either when everyone else will have 3-4 years on rookie scale contracts.

I'm not worried about Zeller's age.  He's only been in the league a few years (read: not much wear on his knees), and players of his type usually stay productive through age 33-34.


Pho, I get it, you love Zeller. That doesn't make that argument correct in this scenario.
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)