Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat)

[Laimbeer]

I just can't believe how many quality players they have whose natural position is the three. I mean, why trade for Morris and trade down to draft Tatum? Along with signing Hayward?

That said, pulling in those assets rates the off-season an A-.

[jbk1234]

I'm lower than the average grade here (B-). Signing Hayward saved their off season but it's a win-now move coupled with more long-run moves. Missing out on Butler and PG means they're not contending this year. They did nothing to address the weakness in their front court & Johnson, their toughest PF, left. I think trading Bradley is a significant loss. He's the player I would've paid next summer. Smart or Crowder should've gone out instead. Olynyk was a lottery pick who walked without the Celtics getting anything back. In the end, it's still hard to see when this team peaks & what that peak looks like in terms of ceiling.

[Gant]

A

Amir Johnson's role and minutes will be filled by Baynes and either Theis or Zizic. This adds some muscle in key situations, and relieves Horford of having to deal with the league's behemoths. They actually did improve in this area.

The Bradley trade means no more pairing a small guard with a tiny guard. The Celtics can go with Brown or Hayward in the starting backcourt should they choose to.

Hayward's addition is an enormous upgrade. The Celtics offense just got much more versatile with an alternate prime scorer. Teams will no longer be able to scheme for Isaiah Thomas as they have, which will help against better clubs, particularly in the playoffs.

The expected growth in Brown's game, along with Rozier and Smart will add to the team's productivity. Tatum will add even more. At some point he will be yet another natural scorer, making their offense even more potent.

Olynyk was a fine but hesitant outside shooter, with erratic production. His short arms limited him (though MIami is a good fit for him next to Whiteside). His minutes are very replaceable from a variety of talented players.

Bradley's point of attack D on guys like Curry was special, but the upgrade offensively to Hayward will make Boston even stronger. As good as Bradley was, the Celtics winning percentage was higher in the games he missed than the games he played. The Celtics will now have a constant flow of talented interchangeable bigger players who can switch on to multiple positions at the off guard/wing spots. This should give them numerous new match up advantages.

The Celtics have had two good drafts in a row. Since they had 3 stashes, players from both years are included in their 6 rookies this season. A few will contribute.

Brad Stevens now has muscle, shooting, and versatility added to his toolbox. The Celtics are significantly better. Offensively they will be a nightmare to deal with.

[patman52]

A+, the won 53 games and the conf record. They added Tatum, Hayward, Morris and Bynes and another lottery pick which most likely will be a top 1/2 of the lottery either this or next year. They lost a "great" player and teammate but he was going to leave next summer anyway. I think they took a large step to competing in 2019 and the following 5 years.

[Mystical Apples]

Looking at projected/guessed wins thus far: 56, 55, 55, 63, 58, 60 = 57.8 wins. I find 58 wins and universal agreement of improving upon last season's win total a little surprising. Based on depth concerns and defensive 3P% reversion, I'd expect a marginal 1 or 2 wins reduction.

So ~ 52 regular season wins but an extra playoff gear.

[HartfordWhalers]

Looking at projected/guessed wins thus far: 56, 55, 55, 63, 58, 60 = 57.8 wins. I find 58 wins and universal agreement of improving upon last season's win total a little surprising. Based on depth concerns and defensive 3P% reversion, I'd expect a marginal 1 or 2 wins reduction.

So ~ 52 regular season wins but an extra playoff gear.

That is not far off from my thinking except the bold:

Projected Win/Loss: 56-26 It should be higher but I have some concerns. I think a midseason trade is in order, or else I would have had it lower even.

I think Boston can 'fix' their big rotation with an in season tweak. I just don't know how yet. And if they fix it, they are a really good team.

[brackdan70]

things I liked about the Offseason: signing Hayward, turning the#1 pick into Tatum and future Lotto pick, signing Baynes, 2nd round Pick Ojeleye.

things that made me say Meh. didn't manage a trade that consolidated assets into another star, but at the same time didn't waste those assets. Signing last years stash guys, and Theis. Trading Bradley for Morris (though it had to happen). other 2nd round picks. Larkin.

things I didn't like: losing Olynyk though it had to happen to sign Hayward. Losing Amir Johnson but also had to happen.

all in all the Cs upgraded and balances the Roster a little. 10 solid rotation guys, so can't complain.

gave them an A-.
projected record 82-0...



or maybe 56-26

[Trippinskarlo]

Celtics improved the starting unit and bench unit while adding more future assets. It's an A unless your expectations were completely unrealistic.

[loserX]

Don't overthink it. They added an elite FA and a top 3 pick, and another likely top 5 pick for next year.

Well, and "lost" the first pick overall. You can't judge what they added, without considering what they gave up. Even my Jazz had a great offseason if they're allowed to do that

They did have a very good offseason, I gave them an A. But could they have done better, given what resources they had? Put another way, did they maximize their assets this summer? They added a lot, but they also had opportunities other teams didn't have. Should we judge them based on what they accomplished compared to zero, or compared to what they might have done? It's an interesting debate.

[Tai]

Don't overthink it. They added an elite FA and a top 3 pick, and another likely top 5 pick for next year.

Well, and "lost" the first pick overall. You can't judge what they added, without considering what they gave up. Even my Jazz had a great offseason if they're allowed to do that

They did have a very good offseason, I gave them an A. But could they have done better, given what resources they had? Put another way, did they maximize their assets this summer? They added a lot, but they also had opportunities other teams didn't have. Should we judge them based on what they accomplished compared to zero, or compared to what they might have done? It's an interesting debate.

I'm confuzzled, whether it was the 1st or the 3rd pick, they could only pick one guy, and supposedly Danny got who he wanted with an extra pick next year to boot. It's not like they had the 1st AND 3rd pick and traded one of them.

[bondom34]

Don't overthink it. They added an elite FA and a top 3 pick, and another likely top 5 pick for next year. That's in like the 98th percentile or above as far as NBA offseasons go historically.

And we are talking about Jonathan Isaac, and Boogie Cousins, a cancerous career loser halfway through his career?

Yikes.

But after last year's horrific Celtics offseason thread here, which I just read, doesn't surprise me a bit.

That's not really how we judge these. Context and expected value are taken into account, otherwise only good teams get good grades no matter what. I wouldn't expect the Nets to add a top pick or free agent, but to work with what is available.

[Tai]

I'll say a B+ cause they didn't trade for the marquee player, and I'll just say I personally wanted Paul George over someone like Butler or ****ing Cousins (Sorry HartfordWhalers). It honestly deep down hurt more that the Celtics were close to getting George and couldn't pull it off (or so it seemed close) than they were never interested. That shows they DO want to compete for a championship, with the right guy, but if it's not Anthony Davis who seems to be a stratosphere away from being possible let alone happening, then who?

That all said, they DID get Hayward, who was the #1 priority this off-season, like it or not. Honestly, Morris was a pretty good get for a guy who I've been figuring will get paid by someone in Bradley as much as I loved him in Boston; thanks for the memories, man. Aron Baynes' supposedly has a jump shot and can bang in the paint which is more than adequate enough to replace Amir, and that's before seeing what Zizic and Yabusele can do to help address the rebounding problem. Cause as much as I liked Olynyk, heaven knows he sure wasn't solving it.

I'm overall pleased that for the most part the reviewers are reasonable with the win expectations, cause they really should be better, I won't go far as to say they can compete with the Cavs yet, but they're at absolute worst the #3 team in the East, and easily a near 60 win team at best.

[Captain_Caveman]

Don't overthink it. They added an elite FA and a top 3 pick, and another likely top 5 pick for next year.

Well, and "lost" the first pick overall. You can't judge what they added, without considering what they gave up. Even my Jazz had a great offseason if they're allowed to do that

They did have a very good offseason, I gave them an A. But could they have done better, given what resources they had? Put another way, did they maximize their assets this summer? They added a lot, but they also had opportunities other teams didn't have. Should we judge them based on what they accomplished compared to zero, or compared to what they might have done? It's an interesting debate.

Well, I don't think turning a #1 overall into two #3 overalls would be "losing a pick", especially when it was a draft that was pretty flat at the top.

Honestly, I think they get just knocked for being in the middle of every major trade rumor the last several years before ultimately not pulling the trigger on blockbusters. As a result, there has repeatedly been this impression that they could have or should have done more. Even when our prospective trade partners in those blockbuster deals were being totally unreasonable in their trade demands. Even when we end up making the major adds that we just did this summer.

But ultimately, the story of Boston's offseason was that Ainge's patience was validated emphatically across the board this summer. He held onto those Nets picks and his cap room hell or high water for several seasons, through multiple trade deadlines, drafts and offseasons, and was repeatedly and often heavily criticized for doing so. And yet, both of those decisions paid off *gloriously* this summer.

Is that "maximizing resources"? Let's put it this way... Ainge has now landed IT, Hayward, Horford, and two 3rd overall picks for almost nothing in recent years. He will probably add another two top 5 picks within the next two drafts for almost nothing. Even Crowder was a throw-in.

Even limiting to just this offseason, adding a borderline top 15 player with cap room and turning a #1 overall into two likely top 3-5 picks for almost nothing is looking like a fine use of resources. And surely a much better use of resources than any of the following:

1. Sacto asking for multiple Nets picks before ultimately trading Boogie for 50% of what we would have given up.
2. Indy asking for multiple Nets picks and three starters before ultimately trading George for 30% of what we would have given up.
3. Chicago asking for multiple Nets picks and a starter before ultimately trading Butler for 60% of what we would have given up.
4. Phoenix trading IT to us for a 28th overall pick.
5. Atlanta losing Horford to us for nothing in return after refusing to take picks from us for him the year before.
6. Utah losing Hayward to us for nothing in return after refusing to trade him to us the year before.

It's all good. It will sink in for people eventually.

[Captain_Caveman]

Don't overthink it. They added an elite FA and a top 3 pick, and another likely top 5 pick for next year. That's in like the 98th percentile or above as far as NBA offseasons go historically.

And we are talking about Jonathan Isaac, and Boogie Cousins, a cancerous career loser halfway through his career?

Yikes.

But after last year's horrific Celtics offseason thread here, which I just read, doesn't surprise me a bit.

That's not really how we judge these. Context and expected value are taken into account, otherwise only good teams get good grades no matter what. I wouldn't expect the Nets to add a top pick or free agent, but to work with what is available.

What was your expected value on the Celtics cap room this summer? More than adding Gordon Hayward? Tough crowd, lol.

Or your expected value for the pick that Ainge got for trading down two spots? The better of the Lakers or Sixers picks if 2nd-5th in 2018, or a top 1 protected Kings pick in 2019? Power to Philly and all, but you'd have to really prefer Fultz to Tatum to think that's not a stellar trade for us, IMO.

I'm thinking any criticism of our offseason is rooted in Indy inexplicably taking that Thunder deal. Nothing more or less.

I just read your expectations for Jaylen in last year's thread, btw.

[HartfordWhalers]

Or your expected value for the pick that Ainge got for trading down two spots? The better of the Lakers or Sixers picks if 2nd-5th in 2018, or a top 1 protected Kings pick in 2019? Power to Philly and all, but you'd have to really prefer Fultz to Tatum to think that's not a stellar trade for us, IMO.

Just an FYI, but you have the pick situation described inaccurately.

[giberish]

Looking at projected/guessed wins thus far: 56, 55, 55, 63, 58, 60 = 57.8 wins. I find 58 wins and universal agreement of improving upon last season's win total a little surprising. Based on depth concerns and defensive 3P% reversion, I'd expect a marginal 1 or 2 wins reduction.

So ~ 52 regular season wins but an extra playoff gear.

I'd call for something like 52 wins as well. They outperformed their scoring margin considerably - that usually doesn't last year to year so their base is more like a 50 win team from last year.

Losing Amir is a 20 mpg downgrade. I'd expect rookie Tatum to be about as good as Jerebko (more interesting, but probably not better). Brown should improve noticeably into his 2nd year. Olynik for Morris is a wash or even small downgrade. I'd say the role player group is about the same as last year overall.

The two big issues are Hayward and Thomas. Hayward is significantly better then Bradley. He's even an upgrade on defense just getting more size in the backcourt. I could easily see some regression from Thomas though. That could bring back a lot of the Hayward upgrade.

[Spens1]

B+ i'd say. I still think they did a very stupid thing at the draft given that Thomas is a F.A next offseason. Sure Tatum is offensively talented but Fultz looks to be a franchise caliber talent and the perfect fit in that system.

That move aside, they moved Bradley for not that much really but overall those two things don't nearly outweigh all the positives (Morris is a good fit and Hayward, if he's in the backcourt with Thomas is probably a top 3 backcourt in the league).

[Drax]

Slava’s Boston Offseason Review

Key Losses:
Avery Bradley
Kelly Olynyk

I think the bigger loss here is going to be Olynyk rather than Bradley. Despite his 3 pt % dropping a whopping 5% from the season before his TS% & eFG% ticked higher last year owing to much improved finishing ability from < 10ft in and the mid range. His defensive rebounding percentage improved and he posted solid defensive metrics. Even though they got Morris as a cheaper replacement, he is not nearly the same caliber of offensive player as Olynyk.

There’s always rave reviews for Bradley but his DRPM has slid since 2014-15 into the negative territory and most of his minutes will be covered by a better play in Hayward.

I just want to highlight this one sentence, because i don't think it gets enough attention even among Celtics fans. People (Celtics fans and neutral observers) love to mock Olynyk for the way he moves arround the court and how soft of a player he is. For his flaws, slow, bad rebounder, not a rim protector, not very athletic and too inconsistent. While all those things might be true, if you ignore Olynyk or don't defend him properly his ability to space the floor can cost you a game (hey there Wiz fans, still have game 7 nightmares).

Olynyk is just a super solid modern NBA big man, not a star or even borderline star but checks a lot of boxes for a guy you plays 20 to 30 minutes a night. He'll be great in Miami, i could see most improved player for him if Spo features Kelly in his offense and gets in Olynyks head to take as many shots as possible.

[HartfordWhalers]

Slava’s Boston Offseason Review

Key Losses:
Avery Bradley
Kelly Olynyk

I think the bigger loss here is going to be Olynyk rather than Bradley. Despite his 3 pt % dropping a whopping 5% from the season before his TS% & eFG% ticked higher last year owing to much improved finishing ability from < 10ft in and the mid range. His defensive rebounding percentage improved and he posted solid defensive metrics. Even though they got Morris as a cheaper replacement, he is not nearly the same caliber of offensive player as Olynyk.

There’s always rave reviews for Bradley but his DRPM has slid since 2014-15 into the negative territory and most of his minutes will be covered by a better play in Hayward.

I just want to highlight this one sentence, because i don't think it gets enough attention even among Celtics fans. People (Celtics fans and neutral observers) love to mock Olynyk for the way he moves arround the court and how soft of a player he is. For his flaws, slow, bad rebounder, not a rim protector, not very athletic and too inconsistent. While all those things might be true, if you ignore Olynyk or don't defend him properly his ability to space the floor can cost you a game (hey there Wiz fans, still have game 7 nightmares).

Olynyk is just a super solid modern NBA big man, not a star or even borderline star but checks a lot of boxes for a guy you plays 20 to 30 minutes a night. He'll be great in Miami, i could see most improved player for him if Spo features Kelly in his offense and gets in Olynyks head to take as many shots as possible.

I'm with you on the lose, but entirely for defensive and rebounding numbers. Boston has enough options and will be playing some 3's at the 4 spot enough to have spacing.

[Mystical Apples]

Looking at projected/guessed wins thus far: 56, 55, 55, 63, 58, 60 = 57.8 wins. I find 58 wins and universal agreement of improving upon last season's win total a little surprising. Based on depth concerns and defensive 3P% reversion, I'd expect a marginal 1 or 2 wins reduction.

So ~ 52 regular season wins but an extra playoff gear.

I'd call for something like 52 wins as well. They outperformed their scoring margin considerably - that usually doesn't last year to year so their base is more like a 50 win team from last year.

Losing Amir is a 20 mpg downgrade. I'd expect rookie Tatum to be about as good as Jerebko (more interesting, but probably not better). Brown should improve noticeably into his 2nd year. Olynik for Morris is a wash or even small downgrade. I'd say the role player group is about the same as last year overall.

The two big issues are Hayward and Thomas. Hayward is significantly better then Bradley. He's even an upgrade on defense just getting more size in the backcourt. I could easily see some regression from Thomas though. That could bring back a lot of the Hayward upgrade.

Yeah their wins over expected caught me off guard. I was thinking +2 or +3 but taking a closer look it was +5 over 48 wins.

r^ .945 for wins and NetRtg (5 year sample).

Spoiler: