you can then root for the Bucks.
You have misunderstood what I am trying to say. I am not trying to tear down your optimism about the Celtics. In fact, I applaud it, and, guess what?
I hope you're right! I am simply defending myself after you deemed what I said about the Bucks to be nonsense, which in all fairness, was kind of rude.
And it's up to you. If you think the Bucks are better that is fine. Realistically they are not alot better like some people make them out to be.
My prediction was based off what I think their potential could be. Never once did I say the words, "They're going to be a lot better" but that's not what sticks out to me. "Realistically"? Wow. There is a big difference between what is realistic and what is your opinion. Since we've had this debate I have not seen a lot of realism as much as I have seen optimism and why? Because I haven't seen a whole lot of facts come out of you. I've only seen opinion. See, in the word "realism", the word "real" is in it for a reason.
"The only guy of our young core who shows that he might have some upside to be a special player in this league is Smart, and that's it."
So what about IT, PJ3, Rozier, Mickey, Hunter . Mediocre talent right? And you don't know if the 1st year guys will play or not. CBS plays you if you can help the team
I didn't list IT because frankly, in my opinion (that is an opinion and may or may not be "realistic"), IT is our best player but he's a finished product. I don't expect him to play much better this season than he did last season. Don't get me wrong he's a great player, but he's our sixth man. One of the league's better role players as the scoring punch/energy guy off the bench, but not a franchise guy. I see Smart becoming the franchise guy some day.
But, Rozier, Hunter, and Mickey? Those are guys who you have deemed to be our young talent? Based off of what? Unlike the Bucks players who I mentioned, they have not played a single NBA minute. Hence, why I'm holding my tongue about them. Do I want them to be good players? You bet I do, but I'm not going to hold them in such high regard until they actually prove something. and if you want to use summer league as evidence that the rookies are the future, let me ask you. Kedrick Brown and Joe Forte dazzled in summer league even more than our current rookies did. Did those guys turn out great? You tell me.
And PJIII, the guy who OKC included a second rounder in the deal to get him just to get him off their payroll, that is our deemed "future talent"? He's hardly done anything in the NBA. He had one three game stretch of good games and that was it. Never did it before. Never did it again. In fact he has a much more troubling flaw than any of the Bucks you listed: His motor. That is worse. Sully has proved a lot more than PJII has, and let's face it, we Celtics fans aren't the most keen on Sully right now, but I digress. I hope PJIII is a steal, but again, he has yet to verify any of my hopes.
Your thoughts of these 4 guys are not realistic, they are optimistic. Plain and simple. Not to mention, "I don't know if the 1st year players are going to play or not". Oh I'm sorry, do you? I'm simply saying they probably won't because they have NBA proven teammates who play the same position who have thrived in Brad's rotations, but if they beat those guys then GREAT! I just don't see it happening.
Also I can combat that with, "You don't know really what the Bucks players are capable of." Because you don't. Just as much as I don't. And you don't have a "realistic" opinion on the Bucks. You have a pessimistic opinion. That leads to my next point.
Btw these guys are "special" or have the potential right?
Giannis = can't shoot
Parker = poor defender
MCW = poor shooter and mediocre defender
Monroe = mediocre defender. Poor shooter. Not very good pnr defender
First off, I never listed MCW. Not once. In fact when he was brought up, I said he was up in the air, but their season does not hinge on him entirely. Read it again. Second off, just because I think these guys have potential to be great players does not mean they don't have flaws. Is there anyone in the NBA who is completely and utterly flawless? I don't think so. But, since they are young and figuring out who they are as players, they can always improve. That's the upshot of being young and talented. Your prime doesn't come until you reach your late 20s. Third, even if they have flaws, they've proven a lot more than 4 of the 5 guys you listed as the Celtics future talent. Don't believe me, look at their stats. Ask any Celtics fan who they would take between Giannis/Jabari/Monroe/Middleton (The guy who I was talking about) and IT/PJIII/Hunter/Rozier/Mickey and I firmly believe they'll take option number 1, and they wouldn't think twice, and why? Because the 4 of them have actually done something in the NBA
What we've been discussing is simply a matter of optimistic and pessimistic points of view, but you claim that you're opinion is "realistic". Claiming your opinion is realistic compared to mine and that my opinion is nonsense is quite an obnoxious, not to mention pretentious, thing to say my friend. Especially since you haven't had much basis to back it up outside of your biased observation. I'm not claiming mine is a realistic either. I'm simply making claims based off of what I've observed from these guys. We'll have to see this season.
Good day to you.