If David Lee has a Monster year

[Moranis]

David Lee is on this team to be pumped up and dumped off to the highest bidder, or barring that allowed to quietly expire.  He's not in our long- or medium-term plans no matter what happens.  So in the unlikely event he has a monster year, we'll probably start looking to trade him to a contender ASAP.

I think that depends on what Boston's record is.  I can't see Boston dumping Lee if it is leading the Atlantic or even looking like a 45 to 50 win team.  Now sure if Boston is headed for under .500 again, then I'd be surprised if he lasts the season.

I think a lot of fans would be very unhappy in that case, but I still think we'd do it if the trade was there.  I don't think Danny would be willing to pass up a deal that could improve the team in the long run just for a modestly better chance of maybe making the 2nd round.  Especially if resigning Lee is not at all in our plans (seems likely).  Success like that might elevate what kind of return Danny would want from a deal, but I just don't see it leading to us ruling out a deal entirely.

Problem is, of course, we'll never know if a trade is available until it actually happens.  So there'll always be a major element of guesswork.

Ainge never rules out a deal for anyone, but if Boston looks like it may be a top 4 team in the East (especially avoiding the cavs till the ECF), I wouldn't expect a move unless some team blows Ainge away, and that just isn't happening for David Lee.  Any team acquiring Lee isn't going to make an offer that blows Ainge away, so he isn't going to move Lee if Lee is a big part of a top 4 team.  Just won't happen.  Now if Boston isn't a top tier team, I would fully expect Lee to get moved even if it is just a couple of 2nd rounders or something like that. 

[D.o.s.]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

[PhoSita]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

If the Raps continue their downward trend from last year, winning the division is within the realm of possibility.

But if the Heat are healthy and calamity fails to befall the Wizards, Hawks, Bulls, or Cavs, it's hard to see the Celts ending up top 4.

[Moranis]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

People on here sure do think 50 wins is possible.  50 wins is very likely a top 4 team in the East (I mean the 50 win Bulls were the 3 seed last year and the Raptors were 4 with 49 wins).

[D.o.s.]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

People on here sure do think 50 wins is possible.  50 wins is very likely a top 4 team in the East (I mean the 50 win Bulls were the 3 seed last year and the Raptors were 4 with 49 wins).

I agree that a 50 win team is very likely to be top 4.

I'm not sure I'm onboard with the idea that our team is a 50 win squad right now.

[Donoghus]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

People on here sure do think 50 wins is possible.  50 wins is very likely a top 4 team in the East (I mean the 50 win Bulls were the 3 seed last year and the Raptors were 4 with 49 wins).

I agree that a 50 win team is very likely to be top 4.

I'm not sure I'm onboard with the idea that our team is a 50 win squad right now.

People on here also aren't the most objective when it comes to the Celtics. 

Can't say I'm on board with the 50 win thing.  I like the optimism but I don't think this team is quite there yet.

[Moranis]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

People on here sure do think 50 wins is possible.  50 wins is very likely a top 4 team in the East (I mean the 50 win Bulls were the 3 seed last year and the Raptors were 4 with 49 wins).

I agree that a 50 win team is very likely to be top 4.

I'm not sure I'm onboard with the idea that our team is a 50 win squad right now.

I don't think that.  I think Boston is an upper 30's win team.  There are however a lot of people that do think Boston is an upper 40's win team (which puts them close to 50).

Of course if David Lee does have a monster year, that would certainly boost the wins.

[PhoSita]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

People on here sure do think 50 wins is possible.  50 wins is very likely a top 4 team in the East (I mean the 50 win Bulls were the 3 seed last year and the Raptors were 4 with 49 wins).

I agree that a 50 win team is very likely to be top 4.

I'm not sure I'm onboard with the idea that our team is a 50 win squad right now.

On average, what seed would 45 wins get you in the East over the last 5 years?  42-45 seems like a more realistic high end win total, to me.

[D.o.s.]

Um I can get back to you on that in about half an hour or so.

In the meantime here's a great reaction gif:

[Moranis]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

People on here sure do think 50 wins is possible.  50 wins is very likely a top 4 team in the East (I mean the 50 win Bulls were the 3 seed last year and the Raptors were 4 with 49 wins).

I agree that a 50 win team is very likely to be top 4.

I'm not sure I'm onboard with the idea that our team is a 50 win squad right now.

On average, what seed would 45 wins get you in the East over the last 5 years?  42-45 seems like a more realistic high end win total, to me.

10/11 - 5th seed
11/12  - 8th seed (shortened season but win %)
12/13 - 5th seed
13/14 - 4th seed
14/15 - 6th seed

So aside from the strike shortened season you would average out at the 5th seed. 

If Boston is looking like the 5th seed, I think Ainge would be more inclined to go for it by trading assets then dumping players for minimal value.  I mean why else would Ainge be hoarding assets if not to use them when the team has a chance to make some noise.

[PhoSita]

Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).

People on here sure do think 50 wins is possible.  50 wins is very likely a top 4 team in the East (I mean the 50 win Bulls were the 3 seed last year and the Raptors were 4 with 49 wins).

I agree that a 50 win team is very likely to be top 4.

I'm not sure I'm onboard with the idea that our team is a 50 win squad right now.

On average, what seed would 45 wins get you in the East over the last 5 years?  42-45 seems like a more realistic high end win total, to me.

10/11 - 5th seed
11/12  - 8th seed (shortened season but win %)
12/13 - 5th seed
13/14 - 4th seed
14/15 - 6th seed

So aside from the strike shortened season you would average out at the 5th seed. 

If Boston is looking like the 5th seed, I think Ainge would be more inclined to go for it by trading assets then dumping players for minimal value.  I mean why else would Ainge be hoarding assets if not to use them when the team has a chance to make some noise.

Well, I'm optimistic that Ainge won't leverage a bunch of assets just for the short-term benefit of maybe getting the 4th seed and winning a first round playoff series, but who knows.

I think that'd have to be a pretty huge upgrade, anyway.  There's a good space between making the playoffs as a middle seed and having what it takes to win playoffs games and get beyond the first round.  Just ask the Raptors.

[LooseCannon]

David Lee is on this team to be pumped up and dumped off to the highest bidder, or barring that allowed to quietly expire.  He's not in our long- or medium-term plans no matter what happens.  So in the unlikely event he has a monster year, we'll probably start looking to trade him to a contender ASAP.

If David Lee has a monster year, the team might be close enough to looking like a longshot contender that Ainge looks to acquire someone.

I think there is a non-zero chance that Lee is a Celtic in 2016-2017.

[PhoSita]

Again, my question -- who is going to trade us value for half a season of David Lee? 

What team out there is going to think "trading for David Lee and starting him at power forward could take us to another level right away"?

[fairweatherfan]

David Lee is on this team to be pumped up and dumped off to the highest bidder, or barring that allowed to quietly expire.  He's not in our long- or medium-term plans no matter what happens.  So in the unlikely event he has a monster year, we'll probably start looking to trade him to a contender ASAP.

If David Lee has a monster year, the team might be close enough to looking like a longshot contender that Ainge looks to acquire someone.

I think there is a non-zero chance that Lee is a Celtic in 2016-2017.

I think we'll be looking to acquire someone regardless of how we do this year - the 2016 offseason seems like the dropdead date for at least moderate roster consolidation, otherwise we'll have like 18-20 roster-worthy players to sort out.  So we'll almost certainly be looking for moves, though of course it's a lot easier to look than to find.

In addition to being far older than the rest of our rotation, Lee is our biggest expiring contract, which is also why he'd be a logical guy to try and deal this season (though again if he expires and signs elsewhere that's also one more free roster spot for next year).  He'd have to be playing at a pretty amazing level for us to forgo that to try and contend right away.  Not impossible, but not very likely.

I agree there's a non-zero chance he stays with us after this season, but that isn't really saying much either.  If you had to bet on him resigning here I'd imagine it'd take some pretty good odds to do it.

[PhoSita]

I think we'll be looking to acquire someone regardless of how we do this year - the 2016 offseason seems like the dropdead date for at least moderate roster consolidation, otherwise we'll have like 18-20 roster-worthy players to sort out.  So we'll almost certainly be looking for moves, though of course it's a lot easier to look than to find.

The trouble is that quantity-for-quality is the hardest type of trade to find in the NBA.  If you're consolidating, it's a heck of a lot easier to trade role players for expiring contracts and lesser picks, but the Celts have probably already reached the point of diminished returns on lesser picks, and Danny has never been inclined to trade guys just to clear space.

Not to mention, consolidating has a tendency to undermine the one noteworthy strength this team has, which is depth.

Eventually, all of these picks and young guys have to turn into a smaller number of more exciting pieces, or else the team will have to take a significant step back by virtue of making roster room for all of these rookie contract players.