Say the c's struggle through January, Could Danny tank it?

[Ilikesports17]

The closest thing to tanking I could see would be moving sully and et. It would be future-minded and would allow more minutes to young rozier hunter and Mickey but would certainly hurt the on court product.

[LooseCannon]

Absolutely.  Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

Keep telling yourself that.  But please stop telling everyone else that.  It's beyond monotonous.

It was fun first couple of hundred post but after that it really gets old and tiring.

Glass half-full.  It makes posting after every Celtics win more enjoyable.

[SHAQATTACK]

Would have to trade IT and Sully to tank .

They bring a good game nearly every game anymore.

Getting where AB is becoming a more reliable veteran scorer.

Danny an't trading Marcus Smart .....dream on if you believe otherwise.

Tank would involve trading these guys off . 


More over ......CBS doesn't understand " tanking".   The word is not in his vocabulary

If all CBS had was 15 D leaguers .....he d still find a way to win a game or three , he loves the challenge , and being a teacher.

Resting Marcus is about close as a tank as you'll be witnessing long as CBS is coach

[LarBrd33]

Absolutely.  Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

Keep telling yourself that.  But please stop telling everyone else that.  It's beyond monotonous.

Yes

It was fun first couple of hundred post but after that it really gets old and tiring.

My bad for posting a relevant response to a thread that literally asks if Boston would tank after struggling.  The thing is, Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

The thing is, if the team loses focus, has a lack of execution or too many injuries, it will easily be a bottom 10 team. They don't have much talent.  If they fail to overachieve, tanking will be an option. 

When a team lacks talent, they need to try really hard and overachieve to win games.  That means tanking is always an option. You never know when they might get hit with injuries or the players will lose focus.  If they don't execute, it wouldn't be hard for them to fall into the bottom 10. 

[Celtics18]

Absolutely.  Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

Keep telling yourself that.  But please stop telling everyone else that.  It's beyond monotonous.

Yes

It was fun first couple of hundred post but after that it really gets old and tiring.

My bad for posting a relevant response to a thread that literally asks if Boston would tank after struggling.  The thing is, Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

The thing is, if the team loses focus, has a lack of execution or too many injuries, it will easily be a bottom 10 team. They don't have much talent.  If they fail to overachieve, tanking will be an option. 

When a team lacks talent, they need to try really hard and overachieve to win games.  That means tanking is always an option. You never know when they might get hit with injuries or the players will lose focus.  If they don't execute, it wouldn't be hard for them to fall into the bottom 10.

The Celtics aren't overachieving.  They are achieving almost exactly where almost everyone in the basketball world expected them to achieve. 

The chances of this team tanking at any point during this season are almost nil.  I know that's a bold statement, but, c'mon, even the pessimists know this team isn't tanking, right?

We're too good for that.  Time to admit that the goal for this team is to win games. 

[Csfan1984]

They are closer to a sub .500 team than a 50 game winner and have no star. Don't know why some are so shocked a few posters think they might tank.

[hwangjini_1]

Absolutely.  Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

Keep telling yourself that.  But please stop telling everyone else that.  It's beyond monotonous.

Yes

It was fun first couple of hundred post but after that it really gets old and tiring.

My bad for posting a relevant response to a thread that literally asks if Boston would tank after struggling.  The thing is, Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

The thing is, if the team loses focus, has a lack of execution or too many injuries, it will easily be a bottom 10 team. They don't have much talent.  If they fail to overachieve, tanking will be an option. 

When a team lacks talent, they need to try really hard and overachieve to win games.  That means tanking is always an option. You never know when they might get hit with injuries or the players will lose focus.  If they don't execute, it wouldn't be hard for them to fall into the bottom 10.

lb, you again avoid the point of the posters and shift the focus to an irrelevant issue. this is a virtual trademark for you.

if GSW were to suffer a few injuries, lack execution, or lose focus i bet they might be a bottom 10 team.

if ANY TEAM were to suffer a few injuries, lack execution, or lose focus i bet they might be a bottom 10 team.

you originally stated the obvious but pointed it directly at the celtics exclusively and thereby diminished the team as if the celtics alone were a team on your imaginary edge. as has been noted by numerous posters numerous times, whether you recognize it or not, your repeated and uneven negativity towards the celtics gets old.

you frequently post very good arguments so a careful self-reflection on this point would make your posts even better. thank you.

[MBunge]

Tanking is not an option.

1.  LA and Philly are already waaaaay ahead in the race for ping pong balls.

2.  As well as this team has looked at times this season, any attempt to tank would have to replace IT, Sully, Smart, Bradley and Turner with inferior talent.  How would that ever happen?

Mike

[LarBrd33]

Absolutely.  Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

Keep telling yourself that.  But please stop telling everyone else that.  It's beyond monotonous.

Yes

It was fun first couple of hundred post but after that it really gets old and tiring.

My bad for posting a relevant response to a thread that literally asks if Boston would tank after struggling.  The thing is, Tanking has been an option all season if the team failed to overachieve again.  We don't have much talent... A couple injuries, players losing focus, a lack of execution and we will be a bottom 10 team.

The thing is, if the team loses focus, has a lack of execution or too many injuries, it will easily be a bottom 10 team. They don't have much talent.  If they fail to overachieve, tanking will be an option. 

When a team lacks talent, they need to try really hard and overachieve to win games.  That means tanking is always an option. You never know when they might get hit with injuries or the players will lose focus.  If they don't execute, it wouldn't be hard for them to fall into the bottom 10.

lb, you again avoid the point of the posters and shift the focus to an irrelevant issue. this is a virtual trademark for you.

if GSW were to suffer a few injuries, lack execution, or lose focus i bet they might be a bottom 10 team.

if ANY TEAM were to suffer a few injuries, lack execution, or lose focus i bet they might be a bottom 10 team.

you originally stated the obvious but pointed it directly at the celtics exclusively and thereby diminished the team as if the celtics alone were a team on your imaginary edge. as has been noted by numerous posters numerous times, whether you recognize it or not, your repeated and uneven negativity towards the celtics gets old.

you frequently post very good arguments so a careful self-reflection on this point would make your posts even better. thank you.

If GSW lost Steph Curry and Klay Thompson, They move Iggy (Finals MVP) and Livingston (veteran PG) into the starting line-up, lean more on Green and Barnes... and still probably play solid basketball. 

Yes, any team that loses focus, gets injured or doesn't execute is going to struggle.  But Boston in particular is on fragile ground.  Most teams can rely on talent.  Knicks can dog it and Melo is still going to drop his 25 a night.   Boston relies on elite coaching and meticulous execution.   If another guy was coaching this group, they wouldn't be 9-7 right now clutching onto the 11th best spot in the NBA.   They'd likely be under .500... a bottom 10 team.  That's how much respect I have for Brad.  But if they hit a rough patch and the players tune out Brad... a bottom 10 team is what you'd get.  My point was that if come January, the team was well below .500, I wouldn't be too surprised to see Danny make a couple moves to fortify our future and help push us down for the remainder of the season.  It's basically what he did last year by trading away our two best players... but don't count out Brad's ability to win games with the new group regardless.  Lol. 

On the flip side, there's no way I'd believe a talented team like the Kings would be 6-11 if Brad Stevens was coaching them. 

[rondohondo]

Tanking is not an option.

1.  LA and Philly are already waaaaay ahead in the race for ping pong balls.

2.  As well as this team has looked at times this season, any attempt to tank would have to replace IT, Sully, Smart, Bradley and Turner with inferior talent.  How would that ever happen?

Mike

no just move IT and turner, all of a sudden our offense takes a nose dive with no true ball handlers/play makers.....

[MBunge]

But Boston in particular is on fragile ground.  Most teams can rely on talent.  Knicks can dog it and Melo is still going to drop his 25 a night.

It's stuff like this which drives people up the wall.  The Knicks do not have a more talented roster than Boston.  No one who knows anything about basketball thinks they do.  No one who has watched the respective teams play this season would say they do.  And to suggest the Kings are some great collection of talent being held back by George Karl?

It's like you turn off your brain when it comes to every other team in the league.

Mike

[MBunge]

Tanking is not an option.

1.  LA and Philly are already waaaaay ahead in the race for ping pong balls.

2.  As well as this team has looked at times this season, any attempt to tank would have to replace IT, Sully, Smart, Bradley and Turner with inferior talent.  How would that ever happen?

Mike

no just move IT and turner, all of a sudden our offense takes a nose dive with no true ball handlers/play makers.....

Frankly, our defense and ball movement would probably improve if we got rid of IT and Turner.

Mike

[LarBrd33]

But Boston in particular is on fragile ground.  Most teams can rely on talent.  Knicks can dog it and Melo is still going to drop his 25 a night.

It's stuff like this which drives people up the wall.  The Knicks do not have a more talented roster than Boston.  No one who knows anything about basketball thinks they do.  No one who has watched the respective teams play this season would say they do.  And to suggest the Kings are some great collection of talent being held back by George Karl?

It's like you turn off your brain when it comes to every other team in the league.

Mike

Knicks have more top-level talent than Boston.   Quality over quantity.   Boston and New York are both borderline playoff teams.

[LooseCannon]

The Celtics aren't overachieving.  They are achieving almost exactly where almost everyone in the basketball world expected them to achieve. 

The chances of this team tanking at any point during this season are almost nil.  I know that's a bold statement, but, c'mon, even the pessimists know this team isn't tanking, right?

We're too good for that.  Time to admit that the goal for this team is to win games.

A legitimate case can be made that the Celtics are currently underachieving.  Their Pythagorean win-loss is 11-5.

[Vox_Populi]

The Celtics aren't overachieving.  They are achieving almost exactly where almost everyone in the basketball world expected them to achieve. 

The chances of this team tanking at any point during this season are almost nil.  I know that's a bold statement, but, c'mon, even the pessimists know this team isn't tanking, right?

We're too good for that.  Time to admit that the goal for this team is to win games.

A legitimate case can be made that the Celtics are currently underachieving.  Their Pythagorean win-loss is 11-5.

To put this further into perspective, the Celtics have an SRS of 3.89. Which is typically indicitive of a team with a win% of at least 60. So they've definitely underachieved thus far.