Celtics Long Term Plan

[K For Three]

Brown and Kemba are high quality players. Tatum is very talented but hes a little questionable with shot selection for me. Honestly I think they could get a nice deal by sending out Tatum maybe to Indiana for Turner or Sabonis with fillers as needed

You give me Tatum and you can have Towns in a heartbeat.Hell even take on Haywards over priced deal and give you Covington in return.

If you said Brown over Tatum we could maybe talk.

Pretty sure Tatum gets the max here soon based on what I've heard. He has been the one who has been impressing me with improvements this year the most (his defense is also so underrated) but he's been out with a groin strain unfortunately that he suffered against the Grizzlies last week on Wednesday. He's had more high scoring games this year too since Kemba unlike Kyrie lets other guys thrive more and take over.

He's also extremely popular in Boston, 4th highest selling jersey in the league.

[jpengland]

After back to back seasons of losing in their prime all-stars to career talent ending injuries in IT and Hayward.

And having fluke seasons for their draft capital being destroyed by SAC and MEM

It seems like finally all those setbacks have set Ainge out of the contender route.

They traded Thomas and got great value for him.

The draft capital was always overrated by Celtics fans and is always, always a volatile prospect. Teams without their own pick have no incentive to be bad and outperform their expectations routinely. Ainge didn't cash those chips early enough.

For the past few years Ainge didn't pick a route. He didn't go all in for a title, nor did he go all in on youth. Those picks could have been moved much earlier, when they had the mystery value.

The Celtics are now a reasonably good team, with no clear path to bring very good.

Eh they traded a better player in IT, a great asset in a cheap starting level 3 and D player in Crowder signed for the long term, and a top 10 draft pick for a team cancer in Irving.

That wasn't a great trade for them, it was a massive drain of assets due to a talent ending injury to an all-nba selected player in their prime that was the leader of the team and a perfect captain.

Hindsight. Yes.

But in terms of value, Irving was seen as a big upgrade at the time.

[MugzZo]

To the op. Almost none. That's what I think detaches older fans from the sport they once loved. Lebron is just as good as Kobe but hes not the killer that Kobe was. He was old school in an era where it was cool to be new school. His approach and ruthlessness on the court are not mirrored by any player. It was a privilege to watch his career.

[KrAzY3]

I don't get it, I understand why some people were down on the Celtics coming into the year, when they lost Horford and Kyrie, but after seeing the way things came back together and how Kanter and Walker kind of plugged the holes, what's the problem?

This is the same team that spanked the Lakers not that long ago right? This is still the team that's 4th in the league in point differential. To see some people talk about them, you'd think they were not one of the top teams in the NBA, when in fact they are.

The question is just how their young stars develop and if they can keep things together around them. They're a contender now, but no one would get them confused with a favorite. If they get better though? Well, they don't need to get that much better do they?

[celticfan42487]

They traded Thomas and got great value for him.

The draft capital was always overrated by Celtics fans and is always, always a volatile prospect. Teams without their own pick have no incentive to be bad and outperform their expectations routinely. Ainge didn't cash those chips early enough.

For the past few years Ainge didn't pick a route. He didn't go all in for a title, nor did he go all in on youth. Those picks could have been moved much earlier, when they had the mystery value.

The Celtics are now a reasonably good team, with no clear path to bring very good.

Eh they traded a better player in IT, a great asset in a cheap starting level 3 and D player in Crowder signed for the long term, and a top 10 draft pick for a team cancer in Irving.

That wasn't a great trade for them, it was a massive drain of assets due to a talent ending injury to an all-nba selected player in their prime that was the leader of the team and a perfect captain.

Hindsight. Yes.

But in terms of value, Irving was seen as a big upgrade at the time.

Not really.

He and IT were seen as about equals at the time so the trade signified something must be seriously wrong with IT.

[SmartWentCrazy]

If I where the Celtics I would look to trade Brown/Smart or Tatum/Smart for and all star caliber center to go along side Kemba,Hayward and whomever is left between Brown/Tatum.


As a Wolves fan I would be willing to trade Towns for Tatum/Smart or maybe Brown/Smart with a 1st thrown in.If you could get Towns to go alongside Kemba & Tatum you would have a true big three and 2/3 that are 25 years or young on long term deals.

Would guess that this is going to be the base of Boston’s offer, with som additional assets thrown on top of it.

[MagicBagley18]

Brown and Kemba are high quality players. Tatum is very talented but hes a little questionable with shot selection for me. Honestly I think they could get a nice deal by sending out Tatum maybe to Indiana for Turner or Sabonis with fillers as needed

Lol at trading Tatum for Myles Turner haha

[tcheco]

Brown and Kemba are high quality players. Tatum is very talented but hes a little questionable with shot selection for me. Honestly I think they could get a nice deal by sending out Tatum maybe to Indiana for Turner or Sabonis with fillers as needed

Lol at trading Tatum for Myles Turner haha

It was a weird proposal, I mean, fillers would be what, Oladipo and picks?

[HotelVitale]

Im assuming Hayward will take the 34 million player option next year. If he does, Hayward's expiring deal and other assets should be used to try to trade for a star. Yes, this will mean Ainge will have to stop hoarding late first round picks years in the future. I know that will be hard for him.

To me Boston should make a run at Beal. Adding him to their big 3 would make them a contender. I know there's a bit of replication but with Kemba, 3 all star caliber swingmen, all you need is a solid athletic center to do the dirty work and they have a really solid shot at a title.

Cool but you don’t get close to Beal for a couple of late 1sts and some okay prospects. The Celtics mo longer have any blue chip assets, the MEM pick was the last one and that’s looking like it’ll 12-17th. Every team would want Beal and the Wiz have no incentive to deal him, so it’s going to take a big big offer that the Celtics would struggle to keep up with.

[ATLTimekeeper]

I don't get it, I understand why some people were down on the Celtics coming into the year, when they lost Horford and Kyrie, but after seeing the way things came back together and how Kanter and Walker kind of plugged the holes, what's the problem?

This is the same team that spanked the Lakers not that long ago right? This is still the team that's 4th in the league in point differential. To see some people talk about them, you'd think they were not one of the top teams in the NBA, when in fact they are.

The question is just how their young stars develop and if they can keep things together around them. They're a contender now, but no one would get them confused with a favorite. If they get better though? Well, they don't need to get that much better do they?

I don't think they should be disrespected, but their record is actually only slightly better than last year's at the same time. I don't think that makes them a contender, especially in light of Milwaukee improving to near "all-time" great level. They should be a tough out, but the difference between Milwaukee and the rest of the 2-6 teams in the East is the difference between those teams and the Bulls.

[daswunderboy]

The plan was to do a quick rebuild with high draft picks that turned into stars, and supplement them with free agents and trades. They've succeeded in part, but the high draft picks didn't quite turn into the level of stars they needed (but still young and have time), and the trades and free agent signings have been mixed at best.

It happens, can't really say Ainge was wrong to do it this way, but you can't really predict how players will develop or mesh on the court. His draft picks of Brown and Tatum were correct. Brown I'd take over everyone after him not named Siakim, and no one knew Siakim would develop like this. In Tatums draft, Donovan Mitchell is really the only player with a case over him right now.

So the plan has been fine, you just can't plan a title into existence, you need luck too.

[KrAzY3]

I don't think they should be disrespected, but their record is actually only slightly better than last year's at the same time. I don't think that makes them a contender, especially in light of Milwaukee improving to near "all-time" great level. They should be a tough out, but the difference between Milwaukee and the rest of the 2-6 teams in the East is the difference between those teams and the Bulls.

I get that they don't have a Giannis and they're not Milwaukee. Having said that, only slightly better than last year when they had Horford and Kyrie sounds like a win all things considered. Also, perhaps we have a different definition of contender. If a team is top 4 in their conference, I'd call them a contender. Otherwise, is it just the Bucks, Lakers, and Clippers?

They still have a couple firsts belonging to other teams, nothing of tremendous value, but enough to build more depth if nothing else. I just think all things considered, the Celtics are in a very good position. They're built more for the long-term than most of the teams I'd consider contenders, with not just a young core but still some assets as well, while other teams have burned through theirs. The Celtics don't have to win now, but their current success bodes well for future success in my opinion.

Everyone on the team is under 30 except one guy. They have 4 firsts in the next two drafts. If I'm picking a roster to have 3 years out, there's only two or three teams I'd consider putting ahead of them.

It happens, can't really say Ainge was wrong to do it this way

There have been hits and misses, but for Ainge to execute a rebuild and still be doing major roster changes while on a playoff team is a heck of a feat to pull off. Perhaps the greatest example of the toll that takes is the Kyrie trade. If Ainge was on a project two or three years out, no way he pulls the trigger on that. Even then, what did he really lose? The pick that would become Collin Sexton? So, the way I see it, considering a franchise like the Celtics wasn't going to tolerate tanking for any length of time, the fact that the Celtics were only really bad for one year says a lot. Things could have gone better, but as a Magic fan I can attest to the fact that things could have gone much worse.

[MagicBagley18]

Im assuming Hayward will take the 34 million player option next year. If he does, Hayward's expiring deal and other assets should be used to try to trade for a star. Yes, this will mean Ainge will have to stop hoarding late first round picks years in the future. I know that will be hard for him.

To me Boston should make a run at Beal. Adding him to their big 3 would make them a contender. I know there's a bit of replication but with Kemba, 3 all star caliber swingmen, all you need is a solid athletic center to do the dirty work and they have a really solid shot at a title.

Cool but you don’t get close to Beal for a couple of late 1sts and some okay prospects. The Celtics mo longer have any blue chip assets, the MEM pick was the last one and that’s looking like it’ll 12-17th. Every team would want Beal and the Wiz have no incentive to deal him, so it’s going to take a big big offer that the Celtics would struggle to keep up with.

Tommy sheppard?

[Fencer reregistered]

I think some of the team evaluations in this thread are a bit off.

1. The Celtics are one of three teams in the league to beat both the Bucks and Lakers so far this season. They've been top 4 most of the season (commonly top 2 or 3) in point differential, along with the Bucks, Lakers, and Mavs (another of the ones who's beaten both the Bucks and Lakers). So please let's not go too far in denigrating the current Celtics team.

2. It IS true that the Celtics bench is very inexperienced, but most of those inexperienced guys have upside to at least the level of very good bench role player, and in some cases (e.g. Rob Williams) well higher than that. Specifically I'd say that about:

Romeo Langford
Rob Williams
Grant Williams
Tremont Waters
Tacko Fall
Carsen Edwards
Javonte Green

(I don't see much potential at that level in Ojeleye or Poirier.)

[daswunderboy]

I don't think they should be disrespected, but their record is actually only slightly better than last year's at the same time. I don't think that makes them a contender, especially in light of Milwaukee improving to near "all-time" great level. They should be a tough out, but the difference between Milwaukee and the rest of the 2-6 teams in the East is the difference between those teams and the Bulls.

I get that they don't have a Giannis and they're not Milwaukee. Having said that, only slightly better than last year when they had Horford and Kyrie sounds like a win all things considered. Also, perhaps we have a different definition of contender. If a team is top 4 in their conference, I'd call them a contender. Otherwise, is it just the Bucks, Lakers, and Clippers?

They still have a couple firsts belonging to other teams, nothing of tremendous value, but enough to build more depth if nothing else. I just think all things considered, the Celtics are in a very good position. They're built more for the long-term than most of the teams I'd consider contenders, with not just a young core but still some assets as well, while other teams have burned through theirs. The Celtics don't have to win now, but their current success bodes well for future success in my opinion.

Everyone on the team is under 30 except one guy. They have 4 firsts in the next two drafts. If I'm picking a roster to have 3 years out, there's only two or three teams I'd consider putting ahead of them.

It happens, can't really say Ainge was wrong to do it this way

There have been hits and misses, but for Ainge to execute a rebuild and still be doing major roster changes while on a playoff team is a heck of a feat to pull off. Perhaps the greatest example of the toll that takes is the Kyrie trade. If Ainge was on a project two or three years out, no way he pulls the trigger on that. Even then, what did he really lose? The pick that would become Collin Sexton? So, the way I see it, considering a franchise like the Celtics wasn't going to tolerate tanking for any length of time, the fact that the Celtics were only really bad for one year says a lot. Things could have gone better, but as a Magic fan I can attest to the fact that things could have gone much worse.

Right, the perpetual rebuild that teams are on, teams that have been early lotto picks for a decade or more even, shows how things can indeed go wrong, again and again and again and "oh god how can they never get it right why do i follow this team???" So I give Ainge big kudos for that. Morey too. He transitioned the Rockets from the McGrady/Ming era, which ended far too soon (McGrady finished as a good player in 2007-8, Ming in 2008-9. Ages 28 and 29...crazy). The record of the Rockets as they retooled and then became contenders again:

09/10 - 42-40
10/11 - 43-39
11/12 - 34-32

The next year, they get Harden. So no losing seasons, despite losing two All-NBA talents in their prime. "you have to strip it to the studs, the process!!!!". There are other ways, and i respect guys like Ainge and Morey and Ujiri who do it without the tanking. Because tanking sucks as a fan. Really **** bad.

[Godaddycurse]

people comparing year 3 or 4 stats of tatum and brown vs butler/george etc need to keep in mind the pace is much faster now so (counting) stats will be more inflated as well.

[Fencer reregistered]

people comparing year 3 or 4 stats of tatum and brown vs butler/george etc need to keep in mind the pace is much faster now so (counting) stats will be more inflated as well.

Tatum exceeds George per 100 possessions, year by year, on points and blocks, but George is higher in rebounds, steals, assists. Something similar (not identical) is true of Brown and Butler. And in both cases the Celtic is a year or two younger than the other guy was.

[ballup]

people comparing year 3 or 4 stats of tatum and brown vs butler/george etc need to keep in mind the pace is much faster now so (counting) stats will be more inflated as well.

Counterpoint:
According to NBA's tracking stats, 4th year Butler had the ball in his hands more than Brown does this season.

The tracking doesn't go into PG's 3rd season so can't really compare him with Tatum's. However, PG's 4th season averaged 6 more front court touches than Tatum is averaging now.

[daswunderboy]

At this point it's dumb to compare Tatum to either of those guys, he's his own player for good and bad. He can improve, but he clearly isn't a player who plays like either George or Butler, who also play nothing alike, so who cares!

He's also only in year 3, and his scoring numbers are perfectly fine. I don't know what he'll be, but you can't rule out a 28PPG guy in a couple of years. You also can't rule out a 22PPG. Let him play! He's no Siakim, but they can't all be legends

[Fencer reregistered]

At this point it's dumb to compare Tatum to either of those guys, he's his own player for good and bad. He can improve, but he clearly isn't a player who plays like either George or Butler, who also play nothing alike, so who cares!

He's also only in year 3, and his scoring numbers are perfectly fine. I don't know what he'll be, but you can't rule out a 28PPG guy in a couple of years. You also can't rule out a 22PPG. Let him play! He's no Siakim, but they can't all be legends

Tatum is explicitly modeling himself somewhat on George, specifically in his defensive focus. And the upside for his results in that is, approximately, George. Could Tatum be a frequent all-defensive team guy? Yes. Could he be on that higher level of legendary defenders -- Pippen, Kawhi, et al? Not realistically. Tatum is elite at jumping passing lanes and otherwise making defensive plays from reading the situation on the floor, but he doesn't have the reactive quickness or physical strength that the greatest in-your-shirt man defenders commonly have.

But that's a general observation. The specifics of the great players are always different, especially but not only on offense.