What are the Celts going to do?

[Celts17Pride]

I want the Celtics to get Durant but the assets of Boston are constantly overrated. None of the young guys have that much value.

People always say this but they won 48 games with IT and all their so called D Leaguers. Celtics put a team together not a collection of "stars" like for example the Knicks who will win about 30-35 games.

Celtics added a fine young prospect in Jaylen Brown and have $50+ million in cap space. They will be fine with or without Durant.

Durant would be nice.

[76ciology]

Celts are either getting supporting players or star players via nets pick or FA.

Jaylen Brown, like Bradley and Crowder, looks like a likely 2 way multi-positioned wing that is valued nowadays.

[Ambrose]

I want the Celtics to get Durant but the assets of Boston are constantly overrated. None of the young guys have that much value.

People always say this but they won 48 games with IT and all their so called D Leaguers. Celtics put a team together not a collection of "stars" like for example the Knicks who will win about 30-35 games.

Celtics added a fine young prospect in Jaylen Brown and have $50+ million in cap space. They will be fine with or without Durant.

Durant would be nice.

I'm not saying they are a bad team. I'm just saying none of those guys individually have much value. They have a ton of solid guys who are perfect for their role, they are pretty deep and that's why they win a lot. I actually respect it quite a bit. But no one is foaming at the mouth to trade for Marcus Smart, Avery Bradley or Jared Sullinger. I hope Jaylen Brown works out or they get Durant just because I like what they have going. They just aren't this awesome trade destination like everyone think they are.

[pacers33granger]

Atkinson vs losing Thad Young is not a net upgrade for them this season. Not even close.

Atkinson is a major upgrade over Hollins and Thad didn't little to help them win last year. He's a horrid fit next to Lopez. I'm fine with the Pacers getting him for the pick because he fits our team better than the Nets, but he wasn't a net positive for them last year with their team structure.

This is the NBA, where if you have elite talent and you're Doc Rivers you're a 2 time COTY with 2 different teams. And if you don't have talent you're the worst coach of all time. There's nothing you can do about it.

Doc Rivers always was and still is a horrible coach. I'm not sure how that factors in here at all though.

You're bringing up the Twolves who had the #1 pick in the draft and got the rarest of all talents in a franchise Center. The Timberwolves entire roster isn't even worth half of a KAT.

Also not sure how this factors in whatsoever because the poster I quoted was talking about the pick that went to the Clippers way back for Jaric and became Austin Rivers after traded for Chris Paul. That pick was thought to be a huge asset with the chance to be number 1 and it became number 10 despite the Wolves being a bad team.

Beside the 76ers, the Nets are by far the best bet to be the worst team in the league next year. And this is pending that the 76ers find a way to get their head out of their ass and trade one of their bigs for a PG to balance out their roster. But that's never been likely.

I'm not disagreeing that the Nets, as it stands right now, are in line to be the worst team. But a lot can change and every year there's a surprise team or two that does awful and ends up in the bottom 5 when they were supposed to be a playoff team. And teams will tank, especially for a strong draft like 17 is supposed to be.

Bottom line is that the Nets haven't lost much of anything this offseason. Thad is not a major loss for them and JJ is addition by subtraction. Outside of Lopez, Thad, and Bogdanovic, their leading guys in minutes played were Johnson (washed up and didn't want to be there), Larkin (not an NBA player), Ellington (end of bench type guy), Sloan (not an NBA player), and Jarret Jack for 32 games. It really can't get much worse than that so I don't see how it's just a guarantee that they're the worst team in the league next season.

[DarkAzcura]

I want the Celtics to get Durant but the assets of Boston are constantly overrated. None of the young guys have that much value.

People always say this but they won 48 games with IT and all their so called D Leaguers. Celtics put a team together not a collection of "stars" like for example the Knicks who will win about 30-35 games.

Celtics added a fine young prospect in Jaylen Brown and have $50+ million in cap space. They will be fine with or without Durant.

Durant would be nice.

I'm not saying they are a bad team. I'm just saying none of those guys individually have much value. They have a ton of solid guys who are perfect for their role, they are pretty deep and that's why they win a lot. I actually respect it quite a bit. But no one is foaming at the mouth to trade for Marcus Smart, Avery Bradley or Jared Sullinger. I hope Jaylen Brown works out or they get Durant just because I like what they have going. They just aren't this awesome trade destination like everyone think they are.

Sounds like you are describing a bunch of underrated players, not overrated ones!

It's true other fans don't really care for our players. I don't really understand why, but it is what it is. I suspect players have different opinions of the Celtics' roster in general, though. Not that I think they are blowing anyone away with high end talent, but it's probably better than the general consensus amongst general and casual NBA fans.

[pacers33granger]

That seems like an overly sure prediction. They were at 20 wins last season with a walking dead lineup of nobodies, vets that had checked out, and a coaching staff/front office that had zero direction. They brought in Marks from the Spurs and Kenny Atkinson who was a key part in turning all of the journeymen and little regarded free agents that the Hawks have into one of the better teams in the East.

30 wins isn't exactly a lofty goal... much like the Wolves team that I brought up who everyone was saying would challenge for Sixerian levels of wins, they still managed to win enough games in the West to push their highly touted pick to 10th. The Clippers were smart to move it as a centerpiece for Paul beforehand rather than counting on the Wolves to gift them a franchise player in the draft.

I tend to agree with this line of thinking. Too many people seem to think it's a for sure top 3 pick from Brooklyn next draft. Hell, they could have the worst record in the league and get knocked down to 4 just through the lotto.

But I could see next year's Nets team being a scrappy team under Atkinson and winning more games than they have any business winning. Plus I expect Marks to try and sign some under the radar guys but also to sign some guys on make good deals. It just makes so much sense as it benefits the Nets and the players. So guys like Sully, Terrence Jones, etc. Let them get tons of minutes and play up their value and have them help win some games on 1 year deals.

I think people are underestimating how much of an upgrade Atkinson will likely be, how little losing Thad Young hurts them, and how not having Joe Johnson as their "leader" helps.

Maybe that's true, but the question you have to ask is what teams are worse than them? Obviously things are still up in the air considering FA hasn't even begun but trying to think of worse teams..who is there? The Kings? I feel Philly and LAL will finally be taking a step forward and will win closer to 30 games next year. That's really all there is. The NBA is just becoming stronger and stronger. Teams are getting better and so far, the Nets have only gotten worse. We will see.

I'm not disagreeing with that. They have the worst roster in the league right now. But they had the worst roster, outside of Philly, last year with tons of injuries and still managed to be better than Philly and LA. Yeah I know there were some weird situations with both those teams, but there's no guarantees and lots of weird stuff happens every year. And I believe that what Marks has done so far has upgraded their situation over last year.

I'm not saying they'll be a playoff team, but it's disingenuous to say that next years pick is guaranteed to be top 3. Like I said before, if they are the worst team and win zero games, there's still a chance three teams jump them in the lotto and the pick is 4th. Not very likely, but it is possible.

[Ambrose]

People always say this but they won 48 games with IT and all their so called D Leaguers. Celtics put a team together not a collection of "stars" like for example the Knicks who will win about 30-35 games.

Celtics added a fine young prospect in Jaylen Brown and have $50+ million in cap space. They will be fine with or without Durant.

Durant would be nice.

I'm not saying they are a bad team. I'm just saying none of those guys individually have much value. They have a ton of solid guys who are perfect for their role, they are pretty deep and that's why they win a lot. I actually respect it quite a bit. But no one is foaming at the mouth to trade for Marcus Smart, Avery Bradley or Jared Sullinger. I hope Jaylen Brown works out or they get Durant just because I like what they have going. They just aren't this awesome trade destination like everyone think they are.

Sounds like you are describing a bunch of underrated players, not overrated ones!

It's true other fans don't really care for our players. I don't really understand why, but it is what it is. I suspect players have different opinions of the Celtics' roster in general, though. Not that I think they are blowing anyone away with high end talent, but it's probably better than the general consensus amongst general and casual NBA fans.

I don't think I ever called the players overrated. In fact I actually do think they are underrated players for the most part. They are overrated assets though.

[pacers33granger]

Sounds like you are describing a bunch of underrated players, not overrated ones!

It's true other fans don't really care for our players. I don't really understand why, but it is what it is. I suspect players have different opinions of the Celtics' roster in general, though. Not that I think they are blowing anyone away with high end talent, but it's probably better than the general consensus amongst general and casual NBA fans.

With a lot of the Celtics players I think it's that, because none of them are "stars," lots of people think similar players can be found without giving up an asset. Which isn't fair, because, using Crowder as an example, yeah you can find other players like him, but they will cost you 15-20 mil like Carroll cost Toronto. And I think people tend to assume that without Stevens the players won't be as good because he's a great coach and lots of guys were cast-offs or afterthoughts, which again, I don't think is fair.

[HotelVitale]

Lakers == got better getting rid of chuck a Kobe and brining in the talented Ingram, this is before free agency starts for them. They should be able to get to 30 wins next year.
Suns == walked away with the #1 C and #1 PF prospect from the draft last night without even trading one of their all-star level PGs. Greatly improved frontcourt for them next year.

I agree with most of the rest but these reasons are huge reaches. Even the biggest supporters of Ingram, Chriss, and Bender don't expect them to add substantial wins to any team this year. They're among the youngest guys in the draft and none of the 3 was a dominant player at the lower level.

PHX should be better next year because they'll be healthier, those two top-10 picks are almost certainly irrelevant this season. And the Lakers aren't going to add 13 wins just because Kobe's gone; all depends on FA for them.

[Warriorfan]

I'm sure Bos can get a 2017 RFA or UFA b4 the deadline. Or a salary dump from a contender if a top free agent wishes to jump to a contender.

[Chuck Everett]

Nets are going to be bad, but that doesn't mean they will end up with the #1 pick. Phoenix, Philadelphia (pending offseason moves), Sacramento, New Orleans (always an AD injury away), LA Lakers all could be terrible yet again.

[HeartBreakKid]

Nets are going to be bad, but that doesn't mean they will end up with the #1 pick. Phoenix, Philadelphia (pending offseason moves), Sacramento, New Orleans (always an AD injury away), LA Lakers all could be terrible yet again.

Stacked draft though, anything in the bottom 5 is going to net you a big return as of now (of course could change during the next season).

[Don Ford]

Run on the treadmill some more.
So glad the Bulls didn't take their #3 + role players deal

Wasn't up to the Bulls. Ainge walked away. It's a mistake that will haunt the C's for a long time.

You're saying that Ainge turned down a Bulls offer of Butler for the #3 pick and role players? I have a hard time believing that the Bulls offered that and an even harder time believing that Ainge would have turned it down.

Another question for you. As a Celtics fan, would you have preferred Bendor over Brown with the #3 pick? Just asking because I thought that Bendor was a better fit fit for what the Celtics needed than Brown was/is.

[DarkAzcura]

Run on the treadmill some more.
So glad the Bulls didn't take their #3 + role players deal

Wasn't up to the Bulls. Ainge walked away. It's a mistake that will haunt the C's for a long time.

You're saying that Ainge turned down a Bulls offer of Butler for the #3 pick and role players? I have a hard time believing that the Bulls offered that and an even harder time believing that Ainge would have turned it down.

Another question for you. As a Celtics fan, would you have preferred Bendor over Brown with the #3 pick? Just asking because I thought that Bendor was a better fit fit for what the Celtics needed than Brown was/is.

He probably didn't. It's more likely he turned it down because Chicago wanted the '17 BKN pick which is a complete deal breaker for a guy like Butler unless you have some kind of promise from Durant as a result of a potential Butler trade.

[chrisab123]

Run on the treadmill some more.
So glad the Bulls didn't take their #3 + role players deal

Wasn't up to the Bulls. Ainge walked away. It's a mistake that will haunt the C's for a long time.

You're saying that Ainge turned down a Bulls offer of Butler for the #3 pick and role players? I have a hard time believing that the Bulls offered that and an even harder time believing that Ainge would have turned it down.

Another question for you. As a Celtics fan, would you have preferred Bendor over Brown with the #3 pick? Just asking because I thought that Bendor was a better fit fit for what the Celtics needed than Brown was/is.

I think Jamal Murray would have been the best one for the spot then Bender than Dunn.

[Curmudgeon]

Bender will be the best player in this draft but not for two years. I'm disappointed that Ainge did not select him. The Celtics' loss is the Suns' gain.

[DarthDiggler69]

Run on the treadmill some more.
So glad the Bulls didn't take their #3 + role players deal

Wasn't up to the Bulls. Ainge walked away. It's a mistake that will haunt the C's for a long time.

Doubt thats the way it happened, I mean Celts were the ones who threw the draft party expecting something will happen

[reload141]

Celtics are going to be mediocre for years. Their draft picks have no value. Unless they find Star is draft they are treadmill.

The Brooklyn 2017 pick says hello.

It could be another not to 3 pick

we'll see after FA but currently they are the worst team in the league....

[alessandrux]

I really like the Celtics and their team, and i hope they improve significantly (and i think they will, especially the defensive potential of the back-court is off the charts).

But one point i do not understand is the "48 wins, so in conclusion the teams has potential/is going to be good" .
I'm pretty sure, you could construct a team who can win around 55 games, but won't succeed in the playoffs.

One important missing piece is and adequate front-court player, who is especially good on defense. I think Howard (or better Whiteside) would be great.

[RRyder823]

Ughhh. Gotta just love the logic that gets used around here.

1: We always hear about the importance of getting top picks and as such tanking is a near nessesity for teams in the mid to lower tiers but once you accumulate those high picks you'll most likely be set up better long term than just trudging along on the preverbial treadmill.

2: Apparently getting high picks doesn't count if the team that gets them is allready a good team stocked with some good young talent that just doesn't have the upside of a true blue chipper.

Seriously what kind of mental gymnastics are being used when a team that just selected #3 overall and has another likely top 5 on the way next year is being penalized for being good allready and not being a dumpster fire?

Good luck Celtics fans and I look forward to my Bucks meeting up with you in the Conference finals in 3 years. (Once Lebrons knees go out of course)