Perhaps the Celtics don't need fireworks?

[tarheelsxxiii]

Incremental progress and growth mindset.  Brad loves that stuff.

http://blog.mindsetworks.com/blog-page/home-blogs/entry/celtics-brad-stevens-discusses-a-growth-mindset-1

Great share, big TP. Dweck is well-respected in many psych circles, from child to adult researchers. I think this speaks volumes to the quality of Brad's coaching -- moving far beyond X and Os to personal growth and healthy psychological development. This may resonate well with a cerebral guy like Brown, too (I hope!). Thanks for sharing.

[KG Living Legend]

Perhaps Jason pierre-paul does not need fireworks..

[KG Living Legend]

Perhaps Jason pierre-paul does not need fireworks..

[greece66]

if not fireworks (star FA, big trade), then we ll have to be okc/cleveland tier lucky at the draft,sthg unlikely but not impossible given our accumulation of picks.

the only team where incremental change worked was gsw in 2014-15; i frankly have no clue how to replicate that. they put together a big three with great chemistry and none of them was drafted in the top 5.

if danny makes a new big three out of smart, brown and the brooklyn pick i will put his photo in my wallet.

[Vermont Green]

I agree with this.  I like the direction the team is going.  They have a very good team as is.  They have a rookie who may turn out to be very good ( I think he has a ton of potential and seems to be a very hard worker) and they have what should be a very good draft pick next year.  They have a bunch of young guys who could break out and become big parts of a top team.  They are heading in the right direction, just keep heading there.  Who knows, maybe Brown turns out to be great.  Maybe the guy they get next year will.  Maybe they both will. I'd love to find out. 

 I am not a fan of the hired gun move.  Like I do not have any love for Kevin Garnett.  I thought he was great for us and appreciate everything he did but I also would not have a problem if Gerald Green took back the number 5.  To me 2008 was about Pierce and Tony Allen, and Rondo and Perkins.  The other guys were just hired guns.  That's what this team would become if the fireworks happened, a bunch of hired guns.  I don't like to just cheer for laundry.  I am not going to suddenly fall in love with guys I have hated for the last decade or so (Love, Griffin, etc).

So was Parish a hired gun then?

I was too young when he and even DJ were acquired  As far as I knew they were always Celtics.  I actually remember being surprised when I found out Parish played for Golden State.

I must admit that I don't follow the hired gun concern.  Isn't Horford a hired gun?  Why not Isaiah Thomas?  Those are likely to be our two best players.  Crowder too is no less a hire gun than Garnett.

I say Danny get your guns.  Hire them, trade for them, draft them, what ever.

In terms of the core question, we still need fireworks to be a title contender.  We might get there by being lucky in the draft but that is a risky approach.

[Surferdad]

I agree with this.  I like the direction the team is going.  They have a very good team as is.  They have a rookie who may turn out to be very good ( I think he has a ton of potential and seems to be a very hard worker) and they have what should be a very good draft pick next year.  They have a bunch of young guys who could break out and become big parts of a top team.  They are heading in the right direction, just keep heading there.  Who knows, maybe Brown turns out to be great.  Maybe the guy they get next year will.  Maybe they both will. I'd love to find out. 

 I am not a fan of the hired gun move.  Like I do not have any love for Kevin Garnett.  I thought he was great for us and appreciate everything he did but I also would not have a problem if Gerald Green took back the number 5.  To me 2008 was about Pierce and Tony Allen, and Rondo and Perkins.  The other guys were just hired guns.  That's what this team would become if the fireworks happened, a bunch of hired guns.  I don't like to just cheer for laundry.  I am not going to suddenly fall in love with guys I have hated for the last decade or so (Love, Griffin, etc).

So was Parish a hired gun then?

I was too young when he and even DJ were acquired  As far as I knew they were always Celtics.  I actually remember being surprised when I found out Parish played for Golden State.

I must admit that I don't follow the hired gun concern.  Isn't Horford a hired gun?  Why not Isaiah Thomas?  Those are likely to be our two best players.  Crowder too is no less a hire gun than Garnett.

I say Danny get your guns.  Hire them, trade for them, draft them, what ever.

In terms of the core question, we still need fireworks to be a title contender.  We might get there by being lucky in the draft but that is a risky approach.

furball prefers fully home-grown players, that's all.

[ThePaintedArea]

if not fireworks (star FA, big trade), then we ll have to be okc/cleveland tier lucky at the draft,sthg unlikely but not impossible given our accumulation of picks.

the only team where incremental change worked was gsw in 2014-15; i frankly have no clue how to replicate that. they put together a big three with great chemistry and none of them was drafted in the top 5.

if danny makes a new big three out of smart, brown and the brooklyn pick i will put his photo in my wallet.

It should be evident by now that Marcus Smart is unlikely to become a big star - as in, a guy the team relies on to carry a big scoring load. On the other hand, it looks like he's growing into a role as a versatile guy who's a plus on both ends.

Yes, shooting pcts are important. But mostly unnoticed around here are his big leaps forward in turnover percentage and free throw rate, despite the injury issues, in his second year. And he increased his ft% from grade D to a solid B-plus. All this while upping his usage rate.

Big leap possible? Yes. All-Star game in his future?  Doubt it. Keep him? Yes, you need guys like him.

[GratefulCs]

I agree with this.  I like the direction the team is going.  They have a very good team as is.  They have a rookie who may turn out to be very good ( I think he has a ton of potential and seems to be a very hard worker) and they have what should be a very good draft pick next year.  They have a bunch of young guys who could break out and become big parts of a top team.  They are heading in the right direction, just keep heading there.  Who knows, maybe Brown turns out to be great.  Maybe the guy they get next year will.  Maybe they both will. I'd love to find out. 

 I am not a fan of the hired gun move.  Like I do not have any love for Kevin Garnett.  I thought he was great for us and appreciate everything he did but I also would not have a problem if Gerald Green took back the number 5.  To me 2008 was about Pierce and Tony Allen, and Rondo and Perkins.  The other guys were just hired guns.  That's what this team would become if the fireworks happened, a bunch of hired guns.  I don't like to just cheer for laundry.  I am not going to suddenly fall in love with guys I have hated for the last decade or so (Love, Griffin, etc).

So was Parish a hired gun then?

I was too young when he and even DJ were acquired  As far as I knew they were always Celtics.  I actually remember being surprised when I found out Parish played for Golden State.

I must admit that I don't follow the hired gun concern.  Isn't Horford a hired gun?  Why not Isaiah Thomas?  Those are likely to be our two best players.  Crowder too is no less a hire gun than Garnett.

I say Danny get your guns.  Hire them, trade for them, draft them, what ever.

In terms of the core question, we still need fireworks to be a title contender.  We might get there by being lucky in the draft but that is a risky approach.

2nd amendment, ha!

[Moranis]

That Pistons team had more talent, had no real weaknesses, and was put together extremely well.  And let's not underestimate just how good Ben Wallace was on the defensive side of the ball.  He was the best defensive player in basketball for a number of years and was also the best rebounder both by a wide margin (Boston has no one anywhere near Ben Wallace on this team).  Hamilton was a legit scorer from the wing (Boston has no equivalent).  Rasheed was a do it all big man (pretty similar to Horford).  Billups was a steady hand with ice in his veins (Thomas is somewhat close to him).  Prince was a solid all around player (Bradley is a better than he was, but similar in many ways).  The Pistons als had a great bench with Okur, Williamson, Hunter, and James.  Very nice mix of young talent (Okur left that summer and within 2 years was 18/9 starter for a good Jazz team) and cagey veterans (Williams, Hunter, James).

Until Boston has a #1 scorer on the wing and defensive/rebounding monster down low, it has no real shot of being a Pistons like team capable of winning it all without that top 10 talent (though you could argue that Ben Wallace was a top 10 guy even being as one dimensional as he was).  I think you could argue that Boston could get by without the scoring wing if it had the Ben Wallace type center (say Deandre Jordan), but even then there was no Cleveland or Golden State for the Pistons to navigate, just the bickering in-fighting 2 man show that was the Lakers (Malone and Payton were just too old to be any real use in the Finals).  The Pistons couldn't stop Shaq, but keyed on Kobe and shut him down and thus easily beat the Lakers in 5.

[Surferdad]

That Pistons team had more talent, had no real weaknesses, and was put together extremely well.  And let's not underestimate just how good Ben Wallace was on the defensive side of the ball.  He was the best defensive player in basketball for a number of years and was also the best rebounder both by a wide margin (Boston has no one anywhere near Ben Wallace on this team).  Hamilton was a legit scorer from the wing (Boston has no equivalent).  Rasheed was a do it all big man (pretty similar to Horford).  Billups was a steady hand with ice in his veins (Thomas is somewhat close to him).  Prince was a solid all around player (Bradley is a better than he was, but similar in many ways).  The Pistons als had a great bench with Okur, Williamson, Hunter, and James.  Very nice mix of young talent (Okur left that summer and within 2 years was 18/9 starter for a good Jazz team) and cagey veterans (Williams, Hunter, James).

Until Boston has a #1 scorer on the wing and defensive/rebounding monster down low, it has no real shot of being a Pistons like team capable of winning it all without that top 10 talent (though you could argue that Ben Wallace was a top 10 guy even being as one dimensional as he was).  I think you could argue that Boston could get by without the scoring wing if it had the Ben Wallace type center (say Deandre Jordan), but even then there was no Cleveland or Golden State for the Pistons to navigate, just the bickering in-fighting 2 man show that was the Lakers (Malone and Payton were just too old to be any real use in the Finals).  The Pistons couldn't stop Shaq, but keyed on Kobe and shut him down and thus easily beat the Lakers in 5.

TP. In short, they had multiple all-stars on their starting-5, IIRC -- Billups, both Wallaces, maybe Hamilton?  Anyway, it was a great team and many thought they were at the vanguard of a future trend of deep teams without a top-5 player.  It didn't work out that way so
I think it is hard to argue that the approach will ever be consistently successful in today's NBA.

[Ed Hollison]

I think the recent rise in the salary cap has distracted from the fact that the new CBA rewards teams that build through the draft. The reason why is that in the new CBA, going over the cap in consecutive years to pay multiple mature, veteran superstars (what the C's did with Garnett, Pierce, and Allen) is prohibitively expensive with the luxury tax. It's just too expensive to build a super team AND have good role players, even as this fact has been temporarily disrupted by the jump in the cap.

In the years ahead you will need young players, especially young superstars. Jaylen Brown will make $4.7m this year (about half of what Matthew Dellavedova will make). By the time Brown has three years of experience and development under his belt, he will still only make about $6.5m. If Brown turns into a superstar, because of how the salary cap works you can sign him to a max contract for 25% of the cap, rather than the 30-35% for an older player (like Horford).

You have two more shots at this with the 2017 and 2018 Brooklyn picks. Roll the dice and see if you can come up with 1-3 superstars, any of which will be on reasonable money. That sounds like fireworks to me.

[CelticPride2016]

Thanks to everyone who responded. I can only take in so much surreal politics, so basketball is a good escape.

The fifth best team in the league last year was the Clippers, right?

I could see the Celts maybe having a season like that, if all goes really well. Even then, they'd need a lot to break in their favor to get to the Finals.

I think we can compete with the Clippers, San Antonio and anyone else with potential to be considered right outside the elite of the elite. I will call that the kool-aid line. Orlando and Cleveland used to dominate the East with one superstar each. Everything flowed through Superman and LeBron. We destroyed them with somewhat over the hill or players towards the end as superstars who gave up a little ego in exchange for the team winner label. We broke superstar spirits by overwhelming them with team play.

We were in LeBron's head so much that he quit the Cavs to form his own superteam. Durant is attempting the same thing. LeBron and Durant seem to be the two best players from the last ten to fifteen years. LeBron and Durant can't do it alone and don't seem to have the bravery to face challenges. They are trying to manufacture sure-fire championships.

I agree everything would have to break right for us to seriously challenge for title #18.

We played GS very tough last year. That has to mean something. As for the debate between regular season versus playoff ball, we were extremely injured or banged up both playoffs. I was impressed we won two games.

A big flaw with the Celtics could be our conditioning coaches, although I don't want to open that can of worms right now. Maybe this year will be different and we won't end up broken down again and then the green goggle analysis will finally get its opportunity to prove itself as a methodology.

They are heading in the right direction, just keep heading there.  Who knows, maybe Brown turns out to be great.  Maybe the guy they get next year will.  Maybe they both will. I'd love to find out. 

 I am not a fan of the hired gun move.  Like I do not have any love for Kevin Garnett.  I thought he was great for us and appreciate everything he did but I also would not have a problem if Gerald Green took back the number 5.  To me 2008 was about Pierce and Tony Allen, and Rondo and Perkins.  The other guys were just hired guns.

I agree with this for the most part. That team's heart and soul was Pierce, Rondo and Perk. KG was actually the heart and soul, but he was also that kind of all-in move bringing in an outsider. PJ Brown, Posey and Cassell were more like hired guns than KG. I mean, KG is one of the greatest players of all time and not the diva entitled type, plus we got him in a trade. Powe was drafted. Eddie House was probably also a hired gun.

Yes, I never want certain types of hired guns, specifically the Carmelo Anthony's or Kevin Love's. KG had a chip on his shoulder. He was going to end up a Barkley or Iverson, great players, elite of the elite, yet nothing to show for it in regards to being champions.

We got horford.  That's fireworks.

I agree with Csfan1984 that Horford is small time fireworks, but who knows, he might be enough to light the skies.

Incremental progress and growth mindset.  Brad loves that stuff.

http://blog.mindsetworks.com/blog-page/home-blogs/entry/celtics-brad-stevens-discusses-a-growth-mindset-1

Thanks for the link. In it there is an interview with Brad Stevens. He says the role of the coaches is not to teach players skills. He says they are arriving with them. Brad is proving that the Doc Rivers/Phil Jackson just show up and punch in a stacked lineup card form of coaching is not real life and basketball growth. Brad says that the process is the same whether a team is good or bad. The mindset is that people can always improve and change, that there are not only hired guns and then everyone else as treadmill leftovers or filler.

I agree with spikelovetheCelts and walker834 we could have fireworks already built into the team and that we just might have to let the process unfold.

I do not believe in trades as fireworks or don't expect them to happen. We are starting to accumulate solid players from top picks. Even Olynyk was a #13 pick, not that low. Great players do emerge who weren't a top pick. Sully could have been one, but he lacked the mindset.

Smart at a minimum is serviceable and competitive. Jaylen Brown would truly have to mess up to not develop into a decent player. Guys like Bradley, Isaiah and Crowder are not chopped liver.

We do have more top picks coming in the next two years unless there is a miracle turnaround in Brooklyn.

Just making the roster has become an issue for players such as RJ Hunter and perhaps Jordan Mickey. No one expects James Young to return. There are good prospects now stashed.

I doubt Ainge does anything too rash. He'd have to totally choke as a GM to ruin what looks like a guaranteed ten straight years of NBA relevance. Our job as fans seems to have become very easy over the last year. We just need to remain patient.

Tarheelsxxiii looked at the mindset article and agrees.

Vermont Green - I don't think Isaiah, KG or even Ray can be looked at as hired guns because they were acquired in trades. A hired gun was Ray going to Miami. The Red Sox went out and hired a gun named Manny Ramirez.

A hired gun is Durant signed by Golden State. That would be a pure hired gun. It's about the George Steinbrenner approach to team building to basically try to buy titles.

Ed Hollison also seems to understand that a chain reaction has already been started. It was the Ainge trade to Brooklyn! At the time, it didn't seem like it would pay off too well, but it turned out to be better than we ever could have expected.

I always looked at the rebuild as a three year process. Gerald Wallace was the penalty for all the #1 picks. Once his contract ran out, I knew we'd be well on our way. I didn't expect us to get this good, though, and so quickly.

It has to be because of Brad Stevens and the team atmosphere he has established. Ainge also deserves credit for making all those small incremental trades that have paid off big time. Isaiah and Crowder are 25% of a playoff rotation. Neither of those deals at the time were considered fireworks. It took a long time for Isaiah to remove doubts that he could be a starter and not tank us on the defensive end.

Hollison is correct. The CBA makes it difficult to buy more than one or two championships. It makes it tough for a George Steinbrenner type owner to buy titles and make a mockery out of the word competition.

We couldn't even keep Posey and Tony Allen. We couldn't keep Perk.

Ainge and Stevens are geniuses. I also think most of the players are geniuses too in regards to basketball.

Some guys like Zeller seem limited, yet he still has value as an asset. I think what is happening is that Danny is revolutionizing the use of an NBA roster. Usually there are one or two good to great players and so-called filler. Danny is hiring quality for every slot. There are no negatives assets on the roster except for James Young and that will probably be resolved soon.

[SHAQATTACK]

I need fireworks

Not a want.

[dannyboy35]

Ainge got Thomas at a ridiculous value. Without Thomas we'd be an atrocious team with no Horford. Stevens is good I'm sure but it's Danny waaaay more.

[dannyboy35]

All the same, I still think we need a another star to really contend with the cavs. I'm not even gonna waste time with golden state because they'd have to beat themselves .. Again.