Alter Danny's drafting (2013-14). Would we win it all this year?

[perks-a-beast]

So if you had a time machine and a way to contact Danny Ainge to..

Draft Gianni's over Olynyk in 2013. Giannis taken 2 spots behind Olynyk

Draft Julius Randle over Smart in 2014. Randle taken 1 spot behind Smart

Draft Gary Harris over James Young in 2014. Harris taken 2 spots behind Olynyk.

Then leave all the trades/signings post rebuild the same..

That leaves us with a roster of...

PG - Isaiah Thomas - Terry Rozier
SG - Avery Bradley - Gary Harris
SF - G. Antetokounmpo - Jae Crowder
PF - Julius Randle - Amir Johnson
C - Al Horford - Tyler Zeller

Is that team good enough To win it all? If not this year, in the next 2-3?

I am inclined to say that team could go head to head with warriors or Cavs in a seven game series no problem.

While this post wasn't made to desparage Ainge (I know how much of a crap shoot the draft is), it is quite frustrating to look back and have these guys picked 1-2 slots behind us...

[Phantom255x]

This is a pretty interesting scenario. I'd honestly still take Smart over Randle (although that would create a bit of a logjam at SG and a hole at PF).

I think that team would have the potential to win it all, yes.

Still think they wouldn't, but based on the current ages/timeline of the players, I'd say they'd win it all in a year or two.

[perks-a-beast]

Forgot to mention that team would also have Jaylen Brown + next 2 years BKN picks as well 

[positivitize]

Taking Smart over Randle every day.

But yeah, a big 3 of ABC, IT, and Horford would be enough to threaten (maybe beat) CLE

[perks-a-beast]

This is a pretty interesting scenario. I'd honestly still take Smart over Randle (although that would create a bit of a logjam at SG and a hole at PF).

I think that team would have the potential to win it all, yes.

Still think they wouldn't, but based on the current ages/timeline of the players, I'd say they'd win it all in a year or two.

Smart over Randle? I hope you are just kidding. Randle is a stud of a 22 year old who just came off a season averaging 13/9/4. He also plays at PF, our weakest position may I remind you. Meanwhile, Smart is an over rated tweaner with no real speed/blow by ability who may never shoot above 40% in his career.

I thought it was unanimously decided amongst Celtics fans that Smart over Randle was a mistake..I'm honestly shocked by that statement.

[Phantom255x]

This is a pretty interesting scenario. I'd honestly still take Smart over Randle (although that would create a bit of a logjam at SG and a hole at PF).

I think that team would have the potential to win it all, yes.

Still think they wouldn't, but based on the current ages/timeline of the players, I'd say they'd win it all in a year or two.

Smart over Randle? I hope you are just kidding. Randle is a stud of a 22 year old who just came off a season averaging 13/9/4. He also plays at PF, our weakest position may I remind you. Meanwhile, Smart is an over rated tweaner with no real speed/blow by ability who may never shoot above 40% in his career.

I thought it was unanimously decided amongst Celtics fans that Smart over Randle was a mistake..I'm honestly shocked by that statement.

I mean, someone above this post echoed the same sentiment.

I truthfully think if you switch Randle/Smart's teams, their strengths wouldn't be utilized as well.

[RockinRyA]

This is a pretty interesting scenario. I'd honestly still take Smart over Randle (although that would create a bit of a logjam at SG and a hole at PF).

I think that team would have the potential to win it all, yes.

Still think they wouldn't, but based on the current ages/timeline of the players, I'd say they'd win it all in a year or two.

Smart over Randle? I hope you are just kidding. Randle is a stud of a 22 year old who just came off a season averaging 13/9/4. He also plays at PF, our weakest position may I remind you. Meanwhile, Smart is an over rated tweaner with no real speed/blow by ability who may never shoot above 40% in his career.

I thought it was unanimously decided amongst Celtics fans that Smart over Randle was a mistake..I'm honestly shocked by that statement.

Because its not. Randle is a net negative. He plays 0 defense, he takes rebounds away from teammates. His stat is padded that way. He is a 1 dimensional player. Id take Smart over and over again.

[positivitize]

Smart over Randle? I hope you are just kidding. Randle is a stud of a 22 year old who just came off a season averaging 13/9/4. He also plays at PF, our weakest position may I remind you. Meanwhile, Smart is an over rated tweaner with no real speed/blow by ability who may never shoot above 40% in his career.

I thought it was unanimously decided amongst Celtics fans that Smart over Randle was a mistake..I'm honestly shocked by that statement.

Randle is about 6 months younger than Smart so let's not act like he's got a HUGE advantage over Smart re age. I see the argument for Randle and admit that Smart's not everyone's cup of tea, but I feel that Tony Allen 2.0 or Ron Artest 2.0 is more valuable than a poor man's Okafor (an over-rated offensively talented big man that puts up points on a bad team)

[perks-a-beast]

This is a pretty interesting scenario. I'd honestly still take Smart over Randle (although that would create a bit of a logjam at SG and a hole at PF).

I think that team would have the potential to win it all, yes.

Still think they wouldn't, but based on the current ages/timeline of the players, I'd say they'd win it all in a year or two.

Smart over Randle? I hope you are just kidding. Randle is a stud of a 22 year old who just came off a season averaging 13/9/4. He also plays at PF, our weakest position may I remind you. Meanwhile, Smart is an over rated tweaner with no real speed/blow by ability who may never shoot above 40% in his career.

I thought it was unanimously decided amongst Celtics fans that Smart over Randle was a mistake..I'm honestly shocked by that statement.

Because its not. Randle is a net negative. He plays 0 defense, he takes rebounds away from teammates. His stat is padded that way. He is a 1 dimensional player. Id take Smart over and over again.

You'd take Smart over Randle? Okay, well no other Coach, GM, player, consultant, broadcaster, fan of any of the other 29 teams in the league would. Just goes to show how prevalent homerism is in Boston.

Will you still be saying the same thing in 4 years when Randle is averaging 20/12/5? Ill be shocked if around that time Smart is putting up 12/5/5 on 40% shooting. But it will be okay because he will still be playing "gritty defense" 

And don't give me that Randle is a team killer shpeal. He's not exactly able to show his value on the Lakers, arguably the worst team in the league.

[perks-a-beast]

Seriously, if we called and offered the Lakers Smart for Randle, I think Rob Pelinka would become the shortest tenured GM in history because he would laugh himself dead. I'm shocked - no I think appalled is the word - that any viewer of basketball would prefer Smart over Randle.

[PhoSita]

I mean, sure.

Take Giannis in 2013.

Jokic and Capela in 2014.

Norm Powell and montrezl Harrell in 2015.

Hield and Brogdon in 2016.


But I mean... Hindsight is 20/20.

[Boris Badenov]

This is a pretty interesting scenario. I'd honestly still take Smart over Randle (although that would create a bit of a logjam at SG and a hole at PF).

I think that team would have the potential to win it all, yes.

Still think they wouldn't, but based on the current ages/timeline of the players, I'd say they'd win it all in a year or two.

Smart over Randle? I hope you are just kidding. Randle is a stud of a 22 year old who just came off a season averaging 13/9/4. He also plays at PF, our weakest position may I remind you. Meanwhile, Smart is an over rated tweaner with no real speed/blow by ability who may never shoot above 40% in his career.

I thought it was unanimously decided amongst Celtics fans that Smart over Randle was a mistake..I'm honestly shocked by that statement.

Because its not. Randle is a net negative. He plays 0 defense, he takes rebounds away from teammates. His stat is padded that way. He is a 1 dimensional player. Id take Smart over and over again.

You'd take Smart over Randle? Okay, well no other Coach, GM, player, consultant, broadcaster, fan of any of the other 29 teams in the league would. Just goes to show how prevalent homerism is in Boston.

Will you still be saying the same thing in 4 years when Randle is averaging 20/12/5? Ill be shocked if around that time Smart is putting up 12/5/5 on 40% shooting. But it will be okay because he will still be playing "gritty defense" 

And don't give me that Randle is a team killer shpeal. He's not exactly able to show his value on the Lakers, arguably the worst team in the league.

The Lakers are indeed a terrible team, and yet when Randle is on the court they are 7 points *worse* than when he's off it.

They actually rebound worse as a team with him on the court. They score less and they surrender more points.

[PhoSita]

Part of the issue with Randle on the Lakers is they don't have any centers who can cover for him defensively, so they're going to be better with Nance on the floor who doesn't need to have a mobile defensive big beside him nearly as much.

You really have to look at context when you cite on off numbers, it's not as simple as "so and so added / subtracted x points when he was on the floor."

[MBunge]

Seriously, if we called and offered the Lakers Smart for Randle, I think Rob Pelinka would become the shortest tenured GM in history because he would laugh himself dead. I'm shocked - no I think appalled is the word - that any viewer of basketball would prefer Smart over Randle.

And that kind of thinking is how some NBA franchises can be horrible for years despite a system designed to help them get better.  Smart has been a key figure in Boston going from the draft lottery to best record in the East.  Randle has done nothing but put up pedestrian numbers on a non-competitive Laker team.  But it's the one who looks better on Sportscenter that people fall in love with.

Mike

[positivitize]

Seriously, if we called and offered the Lakers Smart for Randle, I think Rob Pelinka would become the shortest tenured GM in history because he would laugh himself dead. I'm shocked - no I think appalled is the word - that any viewer of basketball would prefer Smart over Randle.

And that kind of thinking is how some NBA franchises can be horrible for years despite a system designed to help them get better.  Smart has been a key figure in Boston going from the draft lottery to best record in the East.  Randle has done nothing but put up pedestrian numbers on a non-competitive Laker team.  But it's the one who looks better on Sportscenter that people fall in love with.

Mike

TP
Sounds like "homerism" to me /s