The Opportunity Cost of our Success

elrod enchilada · Post #1 » by **elrod enchilada** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 5:21 pm

my latest tome. I hope you enjoy it.

http://celtics.realgm.com/articles/351/ ... f_success/

lojowo · Post #2 » by **lojowo** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 5:58 pm

Great article, love looking at What If scenarios when it comes to draftng and trades.

I few things should be noted when readers look at what we could have had and how they are performing currently.

1) They players on the what if Celtics wouldnt not be getting the same playing time due to only 240 minutes in a game spread over 5 positions. The What If Celtics are logging 314 minutes per game. Their stats would be 76.43 % of what they are now, if minutes are spread equaling.

2) Scoring opportunity/shots would not be as plentiful as they are on their current teams. Look at Pierces/Allens and Garnetts scoring averages last year- 25 Paul/ 26.4 Ray/ 22.4 Kevin.

There scoring average is at 81% of last years pace 21.6 Paul/ 19.1 Ray/ 18.8 Kevin.

3) Game Knowledge.Doc has said many times that the veteran experience has made coaching easier this year. With the young players who would have stay and who we would have added ( Roy and Yi ) I doubt this experience factor would have been any better then last years.

4) Garnetts defensive presence- I doubt our current Celtics would look as good defensively without Garnett on the team, but I cant give a number that illustrates that effect.

5) Free Agents- No one was beating down the Celtics door to be signed after the Ray Allen deal and before the Garnett trade, so its safe to say the Celtics would not have drawn Free Agents the caliber of House, Pollard or Posey.

Though the What If Celtics future would look bright, I dont think they would have been that as good as you think.

I feel would would still be in the " Building through Youth " treadmill, getting close to the playoffs or just making the playoffs, getting bounced in the first round.

Post #3 » by **ParticleMan** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 6:51 pm

Great article indeed!

I honestly think this is exactly what Ainge envisioned when he took over the franchise. He repeatedly said that he had to biuld up assets, that he had to restock the cupboard. For what? For getting a big-name player, of course! I don't think he had any intention of just continuing to build with youth, unless he absolutely had to. He said he had a 3-year plan; it was slightly optimistic, but here we are after 4 years and we're a championship contender. He saw what Miami did getting Shaq, what Detroit did getting Sheed, what SA did getting Ginobli and other key reserves. He had 1 star in Paul, he needed a couple of other good young players (Perk, Rondo) and then he needed trading chips. Along with draft picks and expiring deals like Theo Corpseliff, he had the foresight to set up a blockbuster offseason. Then he had to work hard to not blow his wad on the wrong guy (AI) or spend too much on 1 guy (Allen) so there was nothing left.

It's true we could have built thru youth into a solid team, but I don't think that the team we had would EVER be a championship team, even given 5-7 years to grow together.

elrod enchilada · Post #4 » by **elrod enchilada** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 7:22 pm

I agree. You need a genuine superstar, a top 5 player, to win an NBA title, in general, and without KG the Cs might get close, but I don't think they could ever really get a title. That is why it was a great trade to get KG.

DorfonCeltics · Post #5 » by **DorfonCeltics** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 7:25 pm

Superb job Elrod. One of your best yet!

Cyclical · Post #6 » by **Cyclical** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 8:25 pm

Great job man!

(although someone needs to write an article in defense of Ringo Starr - the feel baby, the feel. It's one of a kind. But yes, he's one lucky bastard.)

Jimmy103 · Post #7 » by **Jimmy103** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 8:34 pm

The true what if has to include a trade of Paul Pierce

My favorite rumor was always Tyson Chandler and Ben Gordon or Luol Deng

PG - Ben Gordon/Rajon Rondo
SG - Brandon Roy/Delonte West
SF - Yi Jianlian/Gerald Green
PF - Al Jefferson/Ryan Gomes
C - Tyson Chandler/Kendrick Perkins

Man_Up · Post #8 » by **Man_Up** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 8:53 pm

Sorry, but I can't stand "What If" type ideas. Too many possibilities to just pick one.

tombattor · Post #9 » by **tombattor** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 9:06 pm

Man_Up wrote:Sorry, but I can't stand "What If" type ideas. Too many possibilities to just pick one.

You know when you are making a big decision of any kind, you have to explore all the what-ifs to evaluate your decision and potential of other options. It's interesting to see what the other choices would have resulted in.

Man_Up · Post #10 » by **Man_Up** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 9:23 pm

tombattor wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

You know when you are making a big decision of any kind, you have to explore all the what-ifs to evaluate your decision and potential of other options. It's interesting to see what the other choices would have resulted in.

The problem is that this isn't a would have type thing it's a could have. There are simply too many possibilities for Danny's course of action.

If we didn't trade for Telfair would we really have picked Roy? I highly doubt it. If we did pick up Roy would we still have gotten Rondo later in the draft? Who would Portland pick up?How do we know Portland or someone else wouldn't pick him up? If we got Roy would we still have the worst Record in the east?

This is just an example (probably a bad one). What I see is to many possibilities to pick one course definitively as if it were a forgone conclusion.

Celtics_85 · Post #11 » by **Celtics_85** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 9:23 pm

I like this article. This what if was exactly what I was thinking when we made the Garnett deal. I was wundering what the future was for this team. We could have been a great team for years to come or we could go for the now and more probable with Garnett.
Ainge did a great job of putting us where we are now, but his job as one of the best GMs ever will come when we start to lose production from the big three. He needs to make sure we are going to stay a great team for years.

tombattor · Post #12 » by **tombattor** » Wed Jan 2, 2008 9:41 pm

Man_Up wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
The problem is that this isn't a would have type thing it's a could have. There are simply too many possibilities for Danny's course of action.

If we didn't trade for Telfair would we really have picked Roy? I highly doubt it. If we did pick up Roy would we still have gotten Rondo later in the draft? Who would Portland pick up?How do we know Portland or someone else wouldn't pick him up? If we got Roy would we still have the worst Record in the east?

This is just an example (probably a bad one). What I see is to many possibilities to pick one course definitively as if it were a forgone conclusion.

Have you ever played chess? Same thing here.

Post #13 » by **Darthlukey** » Wed Mar 18, 2020 10:26 am

elrod enchilada wrote:I agree. You need a genuine superstar, a top 5 player, to win an NBA title, in general, and without KG the Cs might get close, but I don't think they could ever really get a title. That is why it was a great trade to get KG.

As true today as it was 13 years ago