How Good is Our Future, Really?

[obnoxiousmime]

The reason those three teams have better cores:

1) Celtics weren't willing to truly tank, and the years they did (or had Brooklyn's pick) they weren't lucky in the lottery. The Smart year there really wasn't anybody else worth taking at 6 that would have moved the needle either. That was a year where if you didn't get Embiid or Wiggins you probably got an OK but not great player (jury's out on Parker and Gordon still).

2) Milwaukee was smart enough to pick Giannis in 2013. Celtics were not.

3) Minnesota has been lucky twice - winning the Towns lottery and having Love at the exact time the Cavs had a first overall pick where there was an obvious no-brainer no 1 in Wiggins. I don't really give them a whole lot of credit for making those moves because most GMs wouldn't be dumb enough to not do it exactly the same way. If the timing had been different, they would have had to take a lesser deal for Love as at the time his value was definitely not "first overall pick" level. But LeBron basically told Cleveland they had to make the deal and here we are.

4) The Sixers were willing to tank and the more chances you have in the lottery, eventually you'll get some good picks. They had better odds last year and got Simmons while we got Brown. Not much you can do about ping pong balls falling the wrong way there.

So with a little luck, the Celtics could have easily had Simmons and/or Embiid, but it didn't happen that way. In the Towns draft they played too well unexpectedly to have a good pick and missed out on a chance to draft Devin Booker or Myles Turner, but they wanted Isaiah so what can you do?

Boston decided they didn't really want to go a full tank route, and that's commendable, but that also means they needed to draft awesomely with the picks they did have. So far, they haven't drafted awesomely, they've just drafted allright/mediocrely, and they also haven't been lucky the couple times they had a shot at the top picks. Finally they didn't take Giannis. So that's why we are where we are.

I should also note that the Celtics were hurt by being in a significantly weaker Eastern Conference for a few of those years. Their record was inflated and it hurt their draft position. The Sixers were so bad those years that they practically gave all Eastern Conference teams an extra 1-2 automatic wins.

[CoachBo]

I posted a majority of this comment on another thread, but realized it was kind of off-topic.

I see a lot of talk on the Blog about how the future is our time.  Names like Jaylen, Smart, both Nets picks, and sometimes Rozier get thrown out there.  And I don't disagree.  However...

How good of a future are our young people/assets, really?  The Nets picks are still unknowns and I won't enter the controversy about Danny being a 'bad drafter', but we should all be able to agree that drafting isn't his strongest suit.  I'd say he's gone 1 for 2  in the top 6 so far.

Let's be real.  The Bucks, Wolves and even Philly with their picks look like they may have brighter future cores than ours.  The Sixers could own two top 5 picks this year, and let's not forget Embiid and Simmons both have higher upside than anyone on our entire roster. 

I love Smart's D but offense is simply more important, and Smart is bad at it.  He's less of a prospect than Wiggins; he's probably less of a prospect than Middleton.  Jaylen is less of a prospect than both Towns and the Greek Freak.  And that doesn't even include Lavine's upside, a Wolves lotto pick in a deep draft, Jabari Parker, Maker, & Brogdon (who owns us).

Even if the future is our time, and even if we pick the BPA with both picks (however high they turn out to be) - can we really say in early 2017 that we have a top 3 young core/asset pool?

Good questions, one and all.

I, too, am less than sold on the future of this franchise, particularly if the draft is where we end up putting all our marbles because Ainge lacks the fortitude to deal.

His draft record, wildly distorted on this this blog by his supporters, simply isn't good enough to warrant my faith.

LOL.

We all know that if you were running things we would be hunting banner 22 right now.

Ainge is a clear cut, no debate, top 5 GM in this league.

Your constant whining on the matter gets quite old.

Who did you think Danny needed to pick in this draft again?

when you compare anyone to perfection it is easy to pick at their faults.

"Ainge lacks the fortitude to deal"?

That is legitimately one of the most foolish things I have ever read on this board.

His nickname is trader Danny, but he lacks the fortitude to deal?

What?

Can we have Coachbo post without people immediately attacking him (or her, don't want to be presumptuous.) Sure he is a bit more pessimistic than the average CBer, but every board needs that. And this is coming from someone on the other side of the Jaylen fence as him.

"A bit more pessimistic"

lol, that is like saying mount everest is just a hill.

Saying Ainge "lacks the fortitude to deal" is an absolutely rediculous thing to say, and should be called out.

It's "ridiculous."

And I'm certain you're prepared to list the trades Ainge made to strengthen the club at the trade deadline.

Or last summer.

Or at the 2016 trade deadline ...

Shall I continue?

[CoachBo]

The reason those three teams have better cores:

1) Celtics weren't willing to truly tank, and the years they did (or had Brooklyn's pick) they weren't lucky in the lottery. The Smart year there really wasn't anybody else worth taking at 6 that would have moved the needle either. That was a year where if you didn't get Embiid or Wiggins you probably got an OK but not great player (jury's out on Parker and Gordon still).

2) Milwaukee was smart enough to pick Giannis in 2013. Celtics were not.

3) Minnesota has been lucky twice - winning the Towns lottery and having Love at the exact time the Cavs had a first overall pick where there was an obvious no-brainer no 1 in Wiggins. I don't really give them a whole lot of credit for making those moves because most GMs wouldn't be dumb enough to not do it exactly the same way. If the timing had been different, they would have had to take a lesser deal for Love as at the time his value was definitely not "first overall pick" level. But LeBron basically told Cleveland they had to make the deal and here we are.

4) The Sixers were willing to tank and the more chances you have in the lottery, eventually you'll get some good picks. They had better odds last year and got Simmons while we got Brown. Not much you can do about ping pong balls falling the wrong way there.

So with a little luck, the Celtics could have easily had Simmons and/or Embiid, but it didn't happen that way. In the Towns draft they played too well unexpectedly to have a good pick and missed out on a chance to draft Devin Booker or Myles Turner, but they wanted Isaiah so what can you do?

Boston decided they didn't really want to go a full tank route, and that's commendable, but that also means they needed to draft awesomely with the picks they did have. So far, they haven't drafted awesomely, they've just drafted allright/mediocrely, and they also haven't been lucky the couple times they had a shot at the top picks. Finally they didn't take Giannis. So that's why we are where we are.

I should also note that the Celtics were hurt by being in a significantly weaker Eastern Conference for a few of those years. Their record was inflated and it hurt their draft position. The Sixers were so bad those years that they practically gave all Eastern Conference teams an extra 1-2 automatic wins.

This is one of the few honest takes on the Celtics' actual situation, not littered with one fabrication after another, that I've seen recently on this board. Ordinarily have to rely on Roy Hobbs for those.

Well done. TP.

[wayupnorth]

I posted a majority of this comment on another thread, but realized it was kind of off-topic.

I see a lot of talk on the Blog about how the future is our time.  Names like Jaylen, Smart, both Nets picks, and sometimes Rozier get thrown out there.  And I don't disagree.  However...

How good of a future are our young people/assets, really?  The Nets picks are still unknowns and I won't enter the controversy about Danny being a 'bad drafter', but we should all be able to agree that drafting isn't his strongest suit.  I'd say he's gone 1 for 2  in the top 6 so far.

Let's be real.  The Bucks, Wolves and even Philly with their picks look like they may have brighter future cores than ours.  The Sixers could own two top 5 picks this year, and let's not forget Embiid and Simmons both have higher upside than anyone on our entire roster. 

I love Smart's D but offense is simply more important, and Smart is bad at it.  He's less of a prospect than Wiggins; he's probably less of a prospect than Middleton.  Jaylen is less of a prospect than both Towns and the Greek Freak.  And that doesn't even include Lavine's upside, a Wolves lotto pick in a deep draft, Jabari Parker, Maker, & Brogdon (who owns us).

Even if the future is our time, and even if we pick the BPA with both picks (however high they turn out to be) - can we really say in early 2017 that we have a top 3 young core/asset pool?

Good questions, one and all.

I, too, am less than sold on the future of this franchise, particularly if the draft is where we end up putting all our marbles because Ainge lacks the fortitude to deal.

His draft record, wildly distorted on this this blog by his supporters, simply isn't good enough to warrant my faith.

LOL.

We all know that if you were running things we would be hunting banner 22 right now.

Ainge is a clear cut, no debate, top 5 GM in this league.

Your constant whining on the matter gets quite old.

Who did you think Danny needed to pick in this draft again?

when you compare anyone to perfection it is easy to pick at their faults.

"Ainge lacks the fortitude to deal"?

That is legitimately one of the most foolish things I have ever read on this board.

His nickname is trader Danny, but he lacks the fortitude to deal?

What?

Can we have Coachbo post without people immediately attacking him (or her, don't want to be presumptuous.) Sure he is a bit more pessimistic than the average CBer, but every board needs that. And this is coming from someone on the other side of the Jaylen fence as him.

"A bit more pessimistic"

lol, that is like saying mount everest is just a hill.

Saying Ainge "lacks the fortitude to deal" is an absolutely rediculous thing to say, and should be called out.

It's "ridiculous."

And I'm certain you're prepared to list the trades Ainge made to strengthen the club at the trade deadline.

Or last summer.

Or at the 2016 trade deadline ...

Shall I continue?

Please do, because you really don't have anywhere else to go with that.

Because he didn't make a trade the last two seasons he doesn't have the fortitude to trade?

Even though, out of all GM's, he is one of the more active traders out there?

Your logic is painful...


We have a top 5 GM, who, like every other GM, isn't perfect.

Get over yourself.

[bucknersrevenge]

I posted a majority of this comment on another thread, but realized it was kind of off-topic.

I see a lot of talk on the Blog about how the future is our time.  Names like Jaylen, Smart, both Nets picks, and sometimes Rozier get thrown out there.  And I don't disagree.  However...

How good of a future are our young people/assets, really?  The Nets picks are still unknowns and I won't enter the controversy about Danny being a 'bad drafter', but we should all be able to agree that drafting isn't his strongest suit.  I'd say he's gone 1 for 2  in the top 6 so far.

Let's be real.  The Bucks, Wolves and even Philly with their picks look like they may have brighter future cores than ours.  The Sixers could own two top 5 picks this year, and let's not forget Embiid and Simmons both have higher upside than anyone on our entire roster. 

I love Smart's D but offense is simply more important, and Smart is bad at it.  He's less of a prospect than Wiggins; he's probably less of a prospect than Middleton.  Jaylen is less of a prospect than both Towns and the Greek Freak.  And that doesn't even include Lavine's upside, a Wolves lotto pick in a deep draft, Jabari Parker, Maker, & Brogdon (who owns us).

Even if the future is our time, and even if we pick the BPA with both picks (however high they turn out to be) - can we really say in early 2017 that we have a top 3 young core/asset pool?

Good questions, one and all.

I, too, am less than sold on the future of this franchise, particularly if the draft is where we end up putting all our marbles because Ainge lacks the fortitude to deal.

His draft record, wildly distorted on this this blog by his supporters, simply isn't good enough to warrant my faith.

LOL.

We all know that if you were running things we would be hunting banner 22 right now.

Ainge is a clear cut, no debate, top 5 GM in this league.

Your constant whining on the matter gets quite old.

Who did you think Danny needed to pick in this draft again?

when you compare anyone to perfection it is easy to pick at their faults.

"Ainge lacks the fortitude to deal"?

That is legitimately one of the most foolish things I have ever read on this board.

His nickname is trader Danny, but he lacks the fortitude to deal?

What?

Can we have Coachbo post without people immediately attacking him (or her, don't want to be presumptuous.) Sure he is a bit more pessimistic than the average CBer, but every board needs that. And this is coming from someone on the other side of the Jaylen fence as him.

"A bit more pessimistic"

lol, that is like saying mount everest is just a hill.

Saying Ainge "lacks the fortitude to deal" is an absolutely rediculous thing to say, and should be called out.

It's "ridiculous."

And I'm certain you're prepared to list the trades Ainge made to strengthen the club at the trade deadline.

Or last summer.

Or at the 2016 trade deadline ...

Shall I continue?

Is this for real?? Three years ago, Danny made approximately 9 billion trades to completely remake the roster including one where he acquired a future MVP candidate for what amounted to a a ham sandwich and a side of pickles. Last year, he didn't make a move to "strengthen" the roster because "strengthen the roster to what??" I'm sorry Danny didn't feel the need to waste assets on an incomplete roster and sabotage future flexibility for your immediate viewing pleasure. He chose not to trade for Horford because he believed they could get him in the offseason. And whaddayaknow?? It happened. "Shall I continue?" Hilarious...

[Dino Pitino]

I posted a majority of this comment on another thread, but realized it was kind of off-topic.

I see a lot of talk on the Blog about how the future is our time.  Names like Jaylen, Smart, both Nets picks, and sometimes Rozier get thrown out there.  And I don't disagree.  However...

How good of a future are our young people/assets, really?  The Nets picks are still unknowns and I won't enter the controversy about Danny being a 'bad drafter', but we should all be able to agree that drafting isn't his strongest suit.  I'd say he's gone 1 for 2  in the top 6 so far.

Let's be real.  The Bucks, Wolves and even Philly with their picks look like they may have brighter future cores than ours.  The Sixers could own two top 5 picks this year, and let's not forget Embiid and Simmons both have higher upside than anyone on our entire roster. 

I love Smart's D but offense is simply more important, and Smart is bad at it.  He's less of a prospect than Wiggins; he's probably less of a prospect than Middleton.  Jaylen is less of a prospect than both Towns and the Greek Freak.  And that doesn't even include Lavine's upside, a Wolves lotto pick in a deep draft, Jabari Parker, Maker, & Brogdon (who owns us).

Even if the future is our time, and even if we pick the BPA with both picks (however high they turn out to be) - can we really say in early 2017 that we have a top 3 young core/asset pool?

Compare us to Philly. In my reading of the situation, Smart is still an elite prospect, because he's becoming Ron Artest 2.0, which is valuable. Let's say that Philly doesn't get LA's pick, their top assets are:

Embiid
Saric
Simmons
Philly '17 pick
Philly '18 pick

Ours are:

Marcus Smart
Jaylen Brown
Ante Zizic
Brooklyn '17 pick
Brooklyn '18 pick

I think our top 5 assets and theirs are close in value. Imagine the opportunity to put up stats that any/all of Smart/Brown/Zizic would have had on Philly's dreadful roster. Embiid and Simmons being injury-prone is something to think about, too.

[bucknersrevenge]

The original post in this thread has an extremely lazy premise. The post chooses to identify the "future" primarily as an observation of our current recent draftees as if that encompasses the totality of that term. Confirmation bias at its highest. The reason our future is so bright has more to do with the totality of our options and avenues to improve our current roster. What other franchise is in the position to outsource their tanking?? Seriously. They have cap space. They have flexible contracts. They have a young coach who has coached an All-Star team already. Over the next couple of years we will be in position to truly flesh out a core of talented players through multiple avenues. Doesn't mean, all rookies from the draft. Doesn't mean all free agents. Doesn't mean exclusively through trades. So if you want to whine about Danny's "bad drafting"? Good news: Danny won't acquire all of his new talent specifically as 19 year old rookies. You want to complain about his trades. "Danny doesn't trade enough for my personal satisfaction." Guess what. Danny is likely gonna make some moves through the draft and through free agency. Or if you're one of those "Danny signed Horford...he doesn't know what he's doing in free agency!!!!! And I'm MAD!!! GGRRRRRRRR!!!!!!" Good news for you too buddy. There's the draft and trades. Seriously, there's something in here for EVERYONE. That's what he's done. Unless you just don't like Danny period, which is possible. Maybe you just don't like his face. And that's totally cool. But looking at assets in a vacuum is an easiest way to misevaluate what we have going for us here.

[kozlodoev]

I posted a majority of this comment on another thread, but realized it was kind of off-topic.

I see a lot of talk on the Blog about how the future is our time.  Names like Jaylen, Smart, both Nets picks, and sometimes Rozier get thrown out there.  And I don't disagree.  However...

How good of a future are our young people/assets, really?  The Nets picks are still unknowns and I won't enter the controversy about Danny being a 'bad drafter', but we should all be able to agree that drafting isn't his strongest suit.  I'd say he's gone 1 for 2  in the top 6 so far.

Let's be real.  The Bucks, Wolves and even Philly with their picks look like they may have brighter future cores than ours.  The Sixers could own two top 5 picks this year, and let's not forget Embiid and Simmons both have higher upside than anyone on our entire roster. 

I love Smart's D but offense is simply more important, and Smart is bad at it.  He's less of a prospect than Wiggins; he's probably less of a prospect than Middleton.  Jaylen is less of a prospect than both Towns and the Greek Freak.  And that doesn't even include Lavine's upside, a Wolves lotto pick in a deep draft, Jabari Parker, Maker, & Brogdon (who owns us).

Even if the future is our time, and even if we pick the BPA with both picks (however high they turn out to be) - can we really say in early 2017 that we have a top 3 young core/asset pool?

Compare us to Philly. In my reading of the situation, Smart is still an elite prospect, because he's becoming Ron Artest 2.0, which is valuable. Let's say that Philly doesn't get LA's pick, their top assets are:

Embiid
Saric
Simmons
Philly '17 pick
Philly '18 pick

Ours are:

Marcus Smart
Jaylen Brown
Ante Zizic
Brooklyn '17 pick
Brooklyn '18 pick

I think our top 5 assets and theirs are close in value. Imagine the opportunity to put up stats that any/all of Smart/Brown/Zizic would have had on Philly's dreadful roster. Embiid and Simmons being injury-prone is something to think about, too.

Comparable? We probably have one of the top 5 assets in this entire lot.

[incoherent]

Question...   Why are we comparing out assets to Philly?

Lets look at this more as a whole, Philly has endured the worst losing stretch in NBA history to obtain this talent. 

We've been in the playoffs the last 3 years.  Shouldn't we compare our assets to other playoff teams?

I mean, surely no one can honestly think we have better assets then Philly, whos tanked 4 years in a row to obtain them, while we are winning 40-50 games a season.  Why we doing this?

[wayupnorth]

The reason those three teams have better cores:

1) Celtics weren't willing to truly tank, and the years they did (or had Brooklyn's pick) they weren't lucky in the lottery. The Smart year there really wasn't anybody else worth taking at 6 that would have moved the needle either. That was a year where if you didn't get Embiid or Wiggins you probably got an OK but not great player (jury's out on Parker and Gordon still).

2) Milwaukee was smart enough to pick Giannis in 2013. Celtics were not.

3) Minnesota has been lucky twice - winning the Towns lottery and having Love at the exact time the Cavs had a first overall pick where there was an obvious no-brainer no 1 in Wiggins. I don't really give them a whole lot of credit for making those moves because most GMs wouldn't be dumb enough to not do it exactly the same way. If the timing had been different, they would have had to take a lesser deal for Love as at the time his value was definitely not "first overall pick" level. But LeBron basically told Cleveland they had to make the deal and here we are.

4) The Sixers were willing to tank and the more chances you have in the lottery, eventually you'll get some good picks. They had better odds last year and got Simmons while we got Brown. Not much you can do about ping pong balls falling the wrong way there.

So with a little luck, the Celtics could have easily had Simmons and/or Embiid, but it didn't happen that way. In the Towns draft they played too well unexpectedly to have a good pick and missed out on a chance to draft Devin Booker or Myles Turner, but they wanted Isaiah so what can you do?

Boston decided they didn't really want to go a full tank route, and that's commendable, but that also means they needed to draft awesomely with the picks they did have. So far, they haven't drafted awesomely, they've just drafted allright/mediocrely, and they also haven't been lucky the couple times they had a shot at the top picks. Finally they didn't take Giannis. So that's why we are where we are.

I should also note that the Celtics were hurt by being in a significantly weaker Eastern Conference for a few of those years. Their record was inflated and it hurt their draft position. The Sixers were so bad those years that they practically gave all Eastern Conference teams an extra 1-2 automatic wins.

This is one of the few honest takes on the Celtics' actual situation, not littered with one fabrication after another, that I've seen recently on this board. Ordinarily have to rely on Roy Hobbs for those.

Well done. TP.

lol...I like how you can't dispute that Danny is a top 5 GM yet you constantly complain and act like you know better.

Good for some comedy on this slow Friday afternoon at least.

[hwangjini_1]

I posted a majority of this comment on another thread, but realized it was kind of off-topic.

I see a lot of talk on the Blog about how the future is our time.  Names like Jaylen, Smart, both Nets picks, and sometimes Rozier get thrown out there.  And I don't disagree.  However...

How good of a future are our young people/assets, really?  The Nets picks are still unknowns and I won't enter the controversy about Danny being a 'bad drafter', but we should all be able to agree that drafting isn't his strongest suit.  I'd say he's gone 1 for 2  in the top 6 so far.

Let's be real.  The Bucks, Wolves and even Philly with their picks look like they may have brighter future cores than ours.  The Sixers could own two top 5 picks this year, and let's not forget Embiid and Simmons both have higher upside than anyone on our entire roster. 

I love Smart's D but offense is simply more important, and Smart is bad at it.  He's less of a prospect than Wiggins; he's probably less of a prospect than Middleton.  Jaylen is less of a prospect than both Towns and the Greek Freak.  And that doesn't even include Lavine's upside, a Wolves lotto pick in a deep draft, Jabari Parker, Maker, & Brogdon (who owns us).

Even if the future is our time, and even if we pick the BPA with both picks (however high they turn out to be) - can we really say in early 2017 that we have a top 3 young core/asset pool?

Compare us to Philly. In my reading of the situation, Smart is still an elite prospect, because he's becoming Ron Artest 2.0, which is valuable. Let's say that Philly doesn't get LA's pick, their top assets are:

Embiid
Saric
Simmons
Philly '17 pick
Philly '18 pick

Ours are:

Marcus Smart
Jaylen Brown
Ante Zizic
Brooklyn '17 pick
Brooklyn '18 pick

I think our top 5 assets and theirs are close in value. Imagine the opportunity to put up stats that any/all of Smart/Brown/Zizic would have had on Philly's dreadful roster. Embiid and Simmons being injury-prone is something to think about, too.

you may be spot on. but, as greece666 used to say, prediction is difficult, especially about the future.

for example, what were the early predictions about okafur? about noel? i see your list for philly and perhaps it will all pan out, giving them multiple all stars. but i also think the player ceilings might turn out something such as this:

embiid - injuries make him oden 2.0, or limit his abilities
saric - a great rotation guy, but not a go-to guy on a top quality team
simmons - great passer who cannot play defense, is timid in scoring, medicore rebounder, and cant shoot. ala some of the cb predictions for smart - valuable, but flawed rotation player.
Philly picks in 17 and 18...see noel and okafur above. the lottery is really is a gamble and thus far philly is batting .500, tops.

philly might be sitting pretty in 5 years. but it is not a lock. conversely, philly might have a handful of talented but flawed players with important limitations. let's wait and see. 

[wdleehi]

Let's see.



50 win team
Flexibility up to a max player in terms of cap
top 4 pick this year.
Another lotto pick next year without having to tank. 

I am good with the current future.

But if the C's get swept by the Bulls or lose to the #8 seeded Bulls, free agents will not want to come play for Boston- they simply suck and are overrated. That leaves us with lottery luck.

Why?   Celtic's didn't win a series last year and Horford came. 


A 50 win team in need of a star to come play with good players and a coach that seem to be well liked. 

[incoherent]

To say we dont have a good future because other teams are further along in their rebuild is dumb.

For how many seasons have the bucks been terrible?  In the last 10 years the bucks have 8 seasons under 40 wins.  We won a championship 9 years ago.

Philly has has been tanking for HALF A DECADE to get where they are.  We had 1 year where we missed the playoffs.


We cant be compared to these teams.  It's pointless.  We do have a bright future, not as bright as theirs, but they have suffered way way more then us to get that.  Thats typically how it goes. 

So why are people arguing about it? 

[Dino Pitino]

I think we should feel good about the comparison to Philly. They've been tanking for years. We've had an early-exit playoff team to root for overlaid on top of that comparable pile of assets. We've got all the same fruits for almost none of the suffering. We haven't even discussed what extra assets a fire sale of our starting lineup would hypothetically fetch us. Our future is superb. Best future in the league or very close to it.

[green_bballers13]

The Celtics have a very promising future. They have two young players with potential (Smart and Brown), two very solid players in IT and Horford, and two decent two-way players in Avery Bradley and Jae Crowder. 6 players that I like on this current roster.

They have the ability to draft in the top 4 this year, and most likely in the next year. No other team with 50+ wins can come close to saying that. Look at the teams drafting with the Celtics in the 2014 draft (when I consider the Celtics hitting their bottom inflection point). Other than the Cavs and arguably Milwaukee, the Celtics are in a better position than virtually every other team in the top 20.

In three years, Danny has catapulted this franchise into the top 10 based on roster, reg season wins, and future draft capital.

Are they top 3? Nope.

I'll take the glass half full view on the team. The haters can try to patch together some reason that the Celtics are in some bad situation....