Do nothing

[kozlodoev]

We have a +\- 55 win team, one of the youngest rosters in the league and ANOTHER top 5 pick coming next draft if we stay put.

I think it's safe to take the under on this one.

If you were to set the over under what do you think would be a better number?

I think they will win 52-54 games as of their roster today, so 55 isn't that far off.

50, and even so I may take the under.

First, record is relative to the opposition. Even if you believe we've made the team better unconditionally, that doesn't automatically translate in more wins. Many of the teams in the East that we will play a lot of games with are better this season.

Second, this team has a laundry list of things to prove:
* Crowder needs to prove his offensive contribution was not a flash in the pan
* The bigs have to prove they can rebound the ball consistently
* Amir has to prove he can stay healthy
* Rozier has to prove he can replicate Turner's ballhandling and scoring off the bench
* Smart has to prove his three-point shooting woes last year were a fluke
(well, that one might be a longshot)

Sure, adding Horford is great, but it seems that the fanbase has to be repeatedly cautioned that despite his contract, Horford is not a transformational piece. Sure, he's a good player, an overall nice guy, and a clear upgrade over Jared Sullinger, but he's not going to carry you on his back to 5 or 7 more wins by himself.

just curious, but what was your estimate for wins last season? i know i underestimated them.

I think I had the over/under at .500, probably narrowly taking the over. Don't quote me on that, though. I'm sure I didn't expect 48 wins. OTOH, in my book once you outperform expectations by that much, you have to prove it was more than just catching lightning in a bottle.

They outperformed your expectations, but not any of the statistical projections or a lot of the local expert projections. They didn't catch lightning in a bottle because the numbers indicated a 48 ish win team before the season.

Yes, some projections had them at 49 and 47, respectively. One of those publications had Golden State winning 60 games and finish with the second-best record in the NBA, and the other one had Cleveland winning 52 -- so it's somewhat hard to take them seriously at this point.

[86MaxwellSmart]

I think Ainge is really trying to get both Westbrook and Griffin right now--I'd be thrilled with just one of them.

[rochrist]

We have a +\- 55 win team, one of the youngest rosters in the league and ANOTHER top 5 pick coming next draft if we stay put.

I think it's safe to take the under on this one.

If you were to set the over under what do you think would be a better number?

I think they will win 52-54 games as of their roster today, so 55 isn't that far off.

50, and even so I may take the under.

First, record is relative to the opposition. Even if you believe we've made the team better unconditionally, that doesn't automatically translate in more wins. Many of the teams in the East that we will play a lot of games with are better this season.

Second, this team has a laundry list of things to prove:
* Crowder needs to prove his offensive contribution was not a flash in the pan
* The bigs have to prove they can rebound the ball consistently
* Amir has to prove he can stay healthy
* Rozier has to prove he can replicate Turner's ballhandling and scoring off the bench
* Smart has to prove his three-point shooting woes last year were a fluke
(well, that one might be a longshot)

Sure, adding Horford is great, but it seems that the fanbase has to be repeatedly cautioned that despite his contract, Horford is not a transformational piece. Sure, he's a good player, an overall nice guy, and a clear upgrade over Jared Sullinger, but he's not going to carry you on his back to 5 or 7 more wins by himself.

just curious, but what was your estimate for wins last season? i know i underestimated them.

I think I had the over/under at .500, probably narrowly taking the over. Don't quote me on that, though. I'm sure I didn't expect 48 wins. OTOH, in my book once you outperform expectations by that much, you have to prove it was more than just catching lightning in a bottle.

They outperformed your expectations, but not any of the statistical projections or a lot of the local expert projections. They didn't catch lightning in a bottle because the numbers indicated a 48 ish win team before the season.

Yes, some projections had them at 49 and 47, respectively. One of those publications had Golden State winning 60 games and finish with the second-best record in the NBA, and the other one had Cleveland winning 52 -- so it's somewhat hard to take them seriously at this point.

In fact, they collapsed a bit at the end of the year, or they'd have been comfortably in 50+ territor. I had them for 48-50 wins so I felt pretty good. If the O/U is 50 for this year, I'll take the over.

[Evantime34]

We have a +\- 55 win team, one of the youngest rosters in the league and ANOTHER top 5 pick coming next draft if we stay put.

I think it's safe to take the under on this one.

If you were to set the over under what do you think would be a better number?

I think they will win 52-54 games as of their roster today, so 55 isn't that far off.

50, and even so I may take the under.

First, record is relative to the opposition. Even if you believe we've made the team better unconditionally, that doesn't automatically translate in more wins. Many of the teams in the East that we will play a lot of games with are better this season.

Second, this team has a laundry list of things to prove:
* Crowder needs to prove his offensive contribution was not a flash in the pan
* The bigs have to prove they can rebound the ball consistently
* Amir has to prove he can stay healthy
* Rozier has to prove he can replicate Turner's ballhandling and scoring off the bench
* Smart has to prove his three-point shooting woes last year were a fluke
(well, that one might be a longshot)

Sure, adding Horford is great, but it seems that the fanbase has to be repeatedly cautioned that despite his contract, Horford is not a transformational piece. Sure, he's a good player, an overall nice guy, and a clear upgrade over Jared Sullinger, but he's not going to carry you on his back to 5 or 7 more wins by himself.

just curious, but what was your estimate for wins last season? i know i underestimated them.

I think I had the over/under at .500, probably narrowly taking the over. Don't quote me on that, though. I'm sure I didn't expect 48 wins. OTOH, in my book once you outperform expectations by that much, you have to prove it was more than just catching lightning in a bottle.

They outperformed your expectations, but not any of the statistical projections or a lot of the local expert projections. They didn't catch lightning in a bottle because the numbers indicated a 48 ish win team before the season.

Yes, some projections had them at 49 and 47, respectively. One of those publications had Golden State winning 60 games and finish with the second-best record in the NBA, and the other one had Cleveland winning 52 -- so it's somewhat hard to take them seriously at this point.

That is fine, I'm just saying the "caught lightning in a bottle" narrative doesn't apply to this team because they won a similar amount to what they were projected to win.

[Donoghus]

We have a +\- 55 win team, one of the youngest rosters in the league and ANOTHER top 5 pick coming next draft if we stay put.

I think it's safe to take the under on this one.

If you were to set the over under what do you think would be a better number?

I think they will win 52-54 games as of their roster today, so 55 isn't that far off.

50, and even so I may take the under.

First, record is relative to the opposition. Even if you believe we've made the team better unconditionally, that doesn't automatically translate in more wins. Many of the teams in the East that we will play a lot of games with are better this season.

Second, this team has a laundry list of things to prove:
* Crowder needs to prove his offensive contribution was not a flash in the pan
* The bigs have to prove they can rebound the ball consistently
* Amir has to prove he can stay healthy
* Rozier has to prove he can replicate Turner's ballhandling and scoring off the bench
* Smart has to prove his three-point shooting woes last year were a fluke
(well, that one might be a longshot)

Sure, adding Horford is great, but it seems that the fanbase has to be repeatedly cautioned that despite his contract, Horford is not a transformational piece. Sure, he's a good player, an overall nice guy, and a clear upgrade over Jared Sullinger, but he's not going to carry you on his back to 5 or 7 more wins by himself.

just curious, but what was your estimate for wins last season? i know i underestimated them.

I think I had the over/under at .500, probably narrowly taking the over. Don't quote me on that, though. I'm sure I didn't expect 48 wins. OTOH, in my book once you outperform expectations by that much, you have to prove it was more than just catching lightning in a bottle.

They outperformed your expectations, but not any of the statistical projections or a lot of the local expert projections. They didn't catch lightning in a bottle because the numbers indicated a 48 ish win team before the season.

Yes, some projections had them at 49 and 47, respectively. One of those publications had Golden State winning 60 games and finish with the second-best record in the NBA, and the other one had Cleveland winning 52 -- so it's somewhat hard to take them seriously at this point.

That is fine, I'm just saying the "caught lightning in a bottle" narrative doesn't apply to this team because they won a similar amount to what they were projected to win.

Well, if they take a step backwards this year (which I don't expect) then that narrative could still be relevant in regards to looking at '15-16 but I think that's a long shot.

[mctyson]

This is the smartest thing Ainge can do.   We got Horford.  Too many players are paid huge contracts that don't necessarily improve our team or put us in position to win.  I'm excited for our team.  Isaiah, Bradley, Crowder, Amir and Horford is a formidable lineup.  I'm more excited for our bench and developing players like Rozier, Smart, Brown, jerebko and Olynyk.  the celtics have a good team.   We could use a star but I'm not willing to give up Smart or Brown to do that.  Smart in particular is getting cast aside in deals here where I don't think it's smart. Keep the nets 17 draft pick.  Unless we can add a couple stars without giving up our core, there is no reason to do that.

The Celtics are in position where they can be sitting really pretty with that 17 draft pick. I would possibly move that or the 18 for a surefire star, but no way I am giving up our core.

Smart
Brown
Isaiah
Horford

should not be traded.  Avery, Crowder and draft picks potentially to land a surefire star, but I would not move our core.

I agree. 

Let's see how this team improves with Horford vs. Sullinger in our lineup.  Let's see if Marcus YGC Smart takes the next step.  Let's see if Brown is ready to contribute right away.  Let's see if Hunter can be that bench shooter we desperately need.

Let's at least see all of that first.  No need to ship off assets or young core players now for a year of Griffin or Westbrook when both are likely to be available at the deadline.  Who knows how next year will play out for some teams, and who will also be available?  If the Cs are winning at a 70% clip and they clearly look like a contender...then let's think about a rental.

[LarBrd33]

This is the smartest thing Ainge can do.   We got Horford.  Too many players are paid huge contracts that don't necessarily improve our team or put us in position to win.  I'm excited for our team.  Isaiah, Bradley, Crowder, Amir and Horford is a formidable lineup.  I'm more excited for our bench and developing players like Rozier, Smart, Brown, jerebko and Olynyk.  the celtics have a good team.   We could use a star but I'm not willing to give up Smart or Brown to do that.  Smart in particular is getting cast aside in deals here where I don't think it's smart. Keep the nets 17 draft pick.  Unless we can add a couple stars without giving up our core, there is no reason to do that.

The Celtics are in position where they can be sitting really pretty with that 17 draft pick. I would possibly move that or the 18 for a surefire star, but no way I am giving up our core.

Smart
Brown
Isaiah
Horford

should not be traded.  Avery, Crowder and draft picks potentially to land a surefire star, but I would not move our core.

The only move I see us making is if we can get a star player for cheap who has informed his team he is leaving in free agency.  So maybe Blake.  Maybe Westbrook.  More likely Hayward.  And that probably isn't happening until mid season. And in that scenario we'll have to weigh the benefit of giving up assets now as opposed to just waiting until free agency 2017.  It's the reason why we didn't trade for Horford at the deadline, for instance.  Why waste assets if you can just sign the guy.

There's not a lot of reasons for a team to trade away an all-star in their mid 20s.  Legitimate sources have repeatedly said there's nothing currently in play. 

ALso, Ainge isn't the type to go all-in on a deal unless he thinks it's the move that will make us likely to win a championship.   Golden State basically broke the league.  There's no move to be made that is going to make us competitive with them any time soon... so patience is the most logical move here.

[walker834]

The way the NBA is set up is weird now.  If you manage your  team well and develop your players you are going to have a ton of cap room regardless.  We can either pay our own guys or go out and get someone.  Teams now are bought instead of developed. I don't know how I feel about that honestly.  If we like Smart, Brown etc which I do, why are we trading them is how I feel.

I agree in ways if we can get Westbrook or Blake on the cheap while keeping our prime assets and the 17 pick that's a possibility, but I'd rather get the right players in ways and just build this team the way I want.

I'm excited for this team

Starters

Isaiah
Bradley
Crowder
Amir
Horford

Bench

Rozier
Smart
Brown
jerebko
Oklynyk

final roster spots

Hunter
Young
Bentil
jackson
Zeller

Keep or Stash. Yabusele and Zizic

Trying to figure out the puzzle there if we add a player like Westbrook and Griffin.  Who goes in that scenario?  Isaiah gets moved to teh bench and Westbrook starts?  Griffin becomes our PF so Amir is expendable.  Do Bradley or Crowder go or do Smart or Brown if they are going to ever get a legit shot somewhere? What happens with the 17 and 18 draft picks?

We are set up well either way.  Do we want to just draft a couple guys or trade assets for them?

[mctyson]

Kind of on topic...I thought this was funny:

http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/blakely-westbrook-best-chance-celtics-getting-star

http://www.csnne.com/russell-westbrook-not-available-boston-celtics-oklahoma-city-thunder-nba-rumor

This is why you only believe a handful of reporters in the NBA.

[walker834]

I don't know what to believe there the way it's been reported.  Danny and Isaiah are out in california.  Articles still have us searching for a star.  Espn has an article today about how our star may already be on our roster.  I think our own players are more valuable than other teams players I'll say that.  We drafted these guys.  We obviously liked them. I know I liked Smart and Brown before we even drafted them.

http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics-russell-westbrook-blake-griffin-nba-trade-rumor-tyler-zeller-angling-for-blockbuster

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/celtics/post/_/id/4723613/is-boston-celtics-next-star-already-on-the-roster

[walker834]

I think Ainge is trying to get a star this offseason if he can. Maybe even two and just going for it.   It concerns me if he gives up too much though.

I think OKC and the Clippers are going to lose Blake and Westbrook.  Getting them to come here for a year doesnt make a whole lot of sense though.  I feel like both guys are LA type of guys.

I am not a huge fan of Westbrook or Blake.  Blake's injury also concerns me.  They are exciting and great players though. 

If we can get both and sign them while keeping the 4 players mentioned I'm for it though.

I'd offer up any combination of Crowder, BRadley, Amir, KO plus draft picks to land both where we keep some of that and one of the nets picks particularly the 17 pick.

[rochrist]

Kind of on topic...I thought this was funny:

http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/blakely-westbrook-best-chance-celtics-getting-star

http://www.csnne.com/russell-westbrook-not-available-boston-celtics-oklahoma-city-thunder-nba-rumor

This is why you only believe a handful of reporters in the NBA.

Certainly not Sherrod, he's not the sharpest tool in the shade.

[walker834]

IT doesn't seem like either player is going to sign before next season, so why are we trading for them and giving up valuable assets.  For one year and then we do this again next year?

[walker834]

I think Ainge is trying too hard in this regard.  I get it's in the instance we can get a star to sign longterm and find the ideal fit, but we are going to have cap space regardless.  Trading for a player is better than having him sign here in certain circumstances but not sure this is it if they are going to walk anyways.

He's probably on a beach somewhere taking pictures of dead whales anyways.

[flybono]

This is the smartest thing Ainge can do.   We got Horford.  Too many players are paid huge contracts that don't necessarily improve our team or put us in position to win.  I'm excited for our team.  Isaiah, Bradley, Crowder, Amir and Horford is a formidable lineup.  I'm more excited for our bench and developing players like Rozier, Smart, Brown, jerebko and Olynyk.  the celtics have a good team.   We could use a star but I'm not willing to give up Smart or Brown to do that.  Smart in particular is getting cast aside in deals here where I don't think it's smart. Keep the nets 17 draft pick.  Unless we can add a couple stars without giving up our core, there is no reason to do that.

The Celtics are in position where they can be sitting really pretty with that 17 draft pick. I would possibly move that or the 18 for a surefire star, but no way I am giving up our core.

Smart
Brown
Isaiah
Horford

should not be traded.  Avery, Crowder and draft picks potentially to land a surefire star, but I would not move our core.

When do you propose the Celtics win another championship, 2026?

The time is now, if there's $ spend it, if there is a trade to be made, make it!