|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Jun 29, 2013 10:08:03 GMT -5
Celtics arent done yet, there is no way Humphries starts the year in Boston.
The Celtics right now are like an 8th seed, Ainge needs to decide if he wants to tank a bit because being an 8th seed is silly. If you wanna add Smith or Jefferson or whomever and start moving towards the top, thats fine.
No need to figure out the rotation now, I bet Lee and or Humphries are gone....ideally like to move Wallace but thats not happening yet.
|
|
|
Post by Chip on Jun 29, 2013 23:23:17 GMT -5
now that the dust has settled a bit, i'm still incredibly pissed off at what happened, but I do understand WHY it happened and really kind of admire the set on Ainge for doing something he KNEW would piss off a LOT of people. That being said....
KG & Pierce should have been able to ride it out. There are plenty of free agents to choose from, sign some better pieces (dump Terry & Lee) to give KG & Pierce a little less playing time and they would have been alright. This whole Re-building concept is for suckers. Name me one NBA team in the past 10 years that has "re-built" and gone on to success. Seriously.
It's more rare & memorable for a player to retire with the team he was drafted by than it is for a team to make a conference final. It's about a legacy. Did anyone really want Jordan to go to the Wizards? or how about when Toronto traded for Olajuwon? Pippen to the Rockets? It's so rare for a great player to stay with his team, that it would be viewed as something really great.
Since 1993 we've had 8 different teams as NBA Champions. EIGHT in TWENTY YEARS. Bulls (Jordan), Rockets, Spurs, Lakers, Heat - (multiples) Detroit, Dallas & Boston - (singles) By those odds, most teams in the NBA are playing for a conference final, nothing more. (18 different teams have made a conference since '93, even that is low % but still).
WE use players to identify our sports teams....especially great players. They, in effect, become the symbol for that team. Become the image that comes to mind when you talk about that team. They don't belong anywhere else.
Pierce got a ring with the Celtics, does he want more? sure, why wouldn't he. What if he gets one with Brooklyn? I know the odds are low, but still...just what if?? 10 years to get one in boston, one season to get one in brooklyn. What if Pierce has 3-4 more years left? and spends them with the Nets. There's so much depth to all this. It was just a reality blow to the fans...."well this guy is "old", so we'll give him to another team for some scrub bench guys and a few scratch tickets over the next couple of years" I'd be willing to bet if Boston worked it out they could have kept Pierce for another 2-3 years at a discount after buying his contract out.
And forget about Garnett, that guy changed the entire look of this team. He's one of the greatest to play the game in the modern era, a huge part of the reason I've enjoyed watching the Celtics because of Garnett. He is one of my favorite players going back to when he was drafted. So was Ray Allen....but Ray took a different route, he saw the easy way out and said "thanks for the ring but i'll go play with the other guys and get another one, f-you" Garnett was supposed to finish here too. An all-time great spending his career in 2 places, getting more success in the 2nd and going up to the rafters there.
In the end, yes, its completely personal for me. I've spent the last 6 years watching a team I ENJOYED...players I LIKED. And now they are gone, left with some guys who are good, some who might be good one day and some who we don't even know what they will be. Besides the fact that Brooklyn & the Clippers are trying to be GOOD....which means they aren't in line for any top 5 picks within the next few years. So how exactly is that stacking your lineup of the future? Celtics can get 22nd pick any time.
I'm sure it will all work itself out, and Pierce is still gonna "retire a Celtic"...hell Garnett might too. But I'm going to not enjoy watching this team as much as I did when those guys were on it, to me that is the biggest problem out of all this.
|
|
|
Post by LA Times on Jun 30, 2013 8:44:13 GMT -5
now that the dust has settled a bit, i'm still incredibly pissed off at what happened, but I do understand WHY it happened and really kind of admire the set on Ainge for doing something he KNEW would piss off a LOT of people. That being said.... KG & Pierce should have been able to ride it out. There are plenty of free agents to choose from, sign some better pieces (dump Terry & Lee) to give KG & Pierce a little less playing time and they would have been alright. This whole Re-building concept is for suckers. Name me one NBA team in the past 10 years that has "re-built" and gone on to success. Seriously.It's more rare & memorable for a player to retire with the team he was drafted by than it is for a team to make a conference final. It's about a legacy. Did anyone really want Jordan to go to the Wizards? or how about when Toronto traded for Olajuwon? Pippen to the Rockets? It's so rare for a great player to stay with his team, that it would be viewed as something really great. Since 1993 we've had 8 different teams as NBA Champions. EIGHT in TWENTY YEARS. Bulls (Jordan), Rockets, Spurs, Lakers, Heat - (multiples) Detroit, Dallas & Boston - (singles) By those odds, most teams in the NBA are playing for a conference final, nothing more. (18 different teams have made a conference since '93, even that is low % but still). WE use players to identify our sports teams....especially great players. They, in effect, become the symbol for that team. Become the image that comes to mind when you talk about that team. They don't belong anywhere else. Pierce got a ring with the Celtics, does he want more? sure, why wouldn't he. What if he gets one with Brooklyn? I know the odds are low, but still...just what if?? 10 years to get one in boston, one season to get one in brooklyn. What if Pierce has 3-4 more years left? and spends them with the Nets. There's so much depth to all this. It was just a reality blow to the fans...."well this guy is "old", so we'll give him to another team for some scrub bench guys and a few scratch tickets over the next couple of years" I'd be willing to bet if Boston worked it out they could have kept Pierce for another 2-3 years at a discount after buying his contract out. And forget about Garnett, that guy changed the entire look of this team. He's one of the greatest to play the game in the modern era, a huge part of the reason I've enjoyed watching the Celtics because of Garnett. He is one of my favorite players going back to when he was drafted. So was Ray Allen....but Ray took a different route, he saw the easy way out and said "thanks for the ring but i'll go play with the other guys and get another one, f-you" Garnett was supposed to finish here too. An all-time great spending his career in 2 places, getting more success in the 2nd and going up to the rafters there. In the end, yes, its completely personal for me. I've spent the last 6 years watching a team I ENJOYED...players I LIKED. And now they are gone, left with some guys who are good, some who might be good one day and some who we don't even know what they will be. Besides the fact that Brooklyn & the Clippers are trying to be GOOD....which means they aren't in line for any top 5 picks within the next few years. So how exactly is that stacking your lineup of the future? Celtics can get 22nd pick any time. I'm sure it will all work itself out, and Pierce is still gonna "retire a Celtic"...hell Garnett might too. But I'm going to not enjoy watching this team as much as I did when those guys were on it, to me that is the biggest problem out of all this. The Oklahoma City Thunder? Did you see how bad they were their final years in Seattle? But they are the exception to the norm. There are teams that get 10 years worth of draft picks and still go nowhere.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyb on Jun 30, 2013 9:13:26 GMT -5
now that the dust has settled a bit, i'm still incredibly pissed off at what happened, but I do understand WHY it happened and really kind of admire the set on Ainge for doing something he KNEW would piss off a LOT of people. That being said.... KG & Pierce should have been able to ride it out. There are plenty of free agents to choose from, sign some better pieces (dump Terry & Lee) to give KG & Pierce a little less playing time and they would have been alright. This whole Re-building concept is for suckers. Name me one NBA team in the past 10 years that has "re-built" and gone on to success. Seriously.It's more rare & memorable for a player to retire with the team he was drafted by than it is for a team to make a conference final. It's about a legacy. Did anyone really want Jordan to go to the Wizards? or how about when Toronto traded for Olajuwon? Pippen to the Rockets? It's so rare for a great player to stay with his team, that it would be viewed as something really great. Since 1993 we've had 8 different teams as NBA Champions. EIGHT in TWENTY YEARS. Bulls (Jordan), Rockets, Spurs, Lakers, Heat - (multiples) Detroit, Dallas & Boston - (singles) By those odds, most teams in the NBA are playing for a conference final, nothing more. (18 different teams have made a conference since '93, even that is low % but still). WE use players to identify our sports teams....especially great players. They, in effect, become the symbol for that team. Become the image that comes to mind when you talk about that team. They don't belong anywhere else. Pierce got a ring with the Celtics, does he want more? sure, why wouldn't he. What if he gets one with Brooklyn? I know the odds are low, but still...just what if?? 10 years to get one in boston, one season to get one in brooklyn. What if Pierce has 3-4 more years left? and spends them with the Nets. There's so much depth to all this. It was just a reality blow to the fans...."well this guy is "old", so we'll give him to another team for some scrub bench guys and a few scratch tickets over the next couple of years" I'd be willing to bet if Boston worked it out they could have kept Pierce for another 2-3 years at a discount after buying his contract out. And forget about Garnett, that guy changed the entire look of this team. He's one of the greatest to play the game in the modern era, a huge part of the reason I've enjoyed watching the Celtics because of Garnett. He is one of my favorite players going back to when he was drafted. So was Ray Allen....but Ray took a different route, he saw the easy way out and said "thanks for the ring but i'll go play with the other guys and get another one, f-you" Garnett was supposed to finish here too. An all-time great spending his career in 2 places, getting more success in the 2nd and going up to the rafters there. In the end, yes, its completely personal for me. I've spent the last 6 years watching a team I ENJOYED...players I LIKED. And now they are gone, left with some guys who are good, some who might be good one day and some who we don't even know what they will be. Besides the fact that Brooklyn & the Clippers are trying to be GOOD....which means they aren't in line for any top 5 picks within the next few years. So how exactly is that stacking your lineup of the future? Celtics can get 22nd pick any time. I'm sure it will all work itself out, and Pierce is still gonna "retire a Celtic"...hell Garnett might too. But I'm going to not enjoy watching this team as much as I did when those guys were on it, to me that is the biggest problem out of all this. Lakers rebuilt after Shaq. Celtics rebuilt after Bird, then rebuilt again after the peak of the Pierce/Walker teams. The Rockets just rebuilt after the T-Mac/Yao era and now look like the favorites to land Howard and become a contender (though they'll be a playoff team without him). The Heat rebuilt after trading Shaq. The Thunder are another example, as was mentioned.These teams rebuilt by building up their stables of young talent that garnered them superstars in trades (or drafted players that turned into superstars). To say that the Celtics should have just cleared the books and went after a bunch of free agents this year doesn't make a lot of sense to me, since the only team that has done that over the past 10 years and been successful was the Heat, and they arguably only came together through the collusion of Wade/LeBron/Bosh. The current Celtics didn't have any cap space to pursue any free agents worth getting this year. They probably could have traded away multiple first round picks with Lee, Terry and Bass to try to either clear some space or acquire guys through trades, but they wouldn't have been able to do so without totally mortgaging their future. What would that have been for? Two more competitive years, tops, with this core? Even a totally healthy Celtics roster last year is probably only the 3rd or 4th best team in the East. Are they better this year after just getting a year older? I bet the Celtics will suck hard for a couple of years, stock up on young guys, make one or two dynamite trades, and be right back in it by 2016. But if they would have cleared the books this year and missed out on CP3/Dwight, they would have been chasing the likes of Bynum, Josh Smith and David West. None of those guys can be the best player on your team and get you into the playoffs. They're better off riding it out for a couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by LA Times on Jun 30, 2013 10:04:59 GMT -5
Trading Jarvis Crittendon and Kwame Brown for Pau Gasol cannot really be considered rebuilding.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyb on Jun 30, 2013 10:38:40 GMT -5
Trading Jarvis Crittendon and Kwame Brown for Pau Gasol cannot really be considered rebuilding. Don't forget that they also included Marc Gasol (the young asset) in that deal, and that a huge part of that team's success was the progression of Bynum. The championship Lakers and the post-Shaq Lakers were completely different teams. It wasn't the Lakers trading him for expiring contracts so they could use their cap space on free agents.
|
|
|
Post by Quanthor on Jun 30, 2013 11:52:57 GMT -5
Every team has to rebuild or retool eventually. You need desirable assets if you're going to land a player via trade, those assets come in the form of draft picks, expiring contracts and young promising talent. Landing superstars in free agency isn't something that's very common, more often than not the star is traded. In the last 10 years I can only think of Steve Nash and Amare who signed elsewhere in free agency. Lebron and Bosh were technically traded, even though they were leaving anyways. You try to shore up cap space for free agents you're likely going to just come away with some ancillary talent.
|
|
jeffro2000
Main Eventer
Joined on: May 16, 2011 14:23:29 GMT -5
Posts: 1,858
|
Post by jeffro2000 on Jun 30, 2013 18:39:54 GMT -5
I agree with Chip. It is tough to rebuild in the NBA. Some of these examples given weren't rebuilding efforts they were re-tooling. Lakers after Shaq? They still had Kobe. Heat still had Wade who was the star of that team. Others weren't championship teams to begin with. Did Yao/Mcgrady ever see the 2nd rd of the playoffs? Celtics after Bird? It took 20+ yrs to get a title.
OKC was a rebuilding effort but they stunk for so long they got good picks and good players. A team not far removed from a title/contender trading away everyone is a big undertaking. I don't disagree with it, they weren't going anywhere anymore with that group. The Bulls have rebuilt since Jordan (D. Rose #1pk) but its been 15yrs. The best effort was L.A. after Magic getting Shaq, and then Kobe.
You need a Superstar to win in the NBA and they don't grow on trees. Going back to 1980, 1 team has won a title without a superstar or at least a guy who played at a superstar level in the playoffs. Got to draft him very high generally or hope a big time FA is available which doesn't happen often.
To go from a Championship team to a complete rebuild back to a Championship team has proven to be a long process. Lakes did it, Bulls are close but not there yet, took Boston 20yrs or so, Houston hasn't done it, Utah no, Knicks after Ewing?, Portland?, Detroit did it unconventionally took over a decade.
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Jun 30, 2013 21:55:07 GMT -5
Boston just had some awful luck in the last 20 years....Len Bias, Reggie Lewis, Rick Pitino. If Ainge has a plan and sticks to it, we will at least be relevant again.
You need luck to rebuild and to be good again, and I dont really trust Ainge drafting, but we'll see.
He needs to either keep dumping or add another star for Rondo. Can not be in between.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 18:59:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2013 22:28:44 GMT -5
Havent seen anybody talk about this, so I'll start. Why didnt the Bobcats pick Mclemore? God pretty much just handed them a fantastic player, a future star in this league and they take Cody Zeller. No disrespect to Cody but he's no Howard or Hibbert, but Mclemore is something amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Jun 30, 2013 22:42:51 GMT -5
Bobcats shoulda taken Noel, or anyone but Zeller.
|
|
|
Post by Quanthor on Jul 1, 2013 0:36:17 GMT -5
I agree with Chip. It is tough to rebuild in the NBA. Some of these examples given weren't rebuilding efforts they were re-tooling. Lakers after Shaq? They still had Kobe. Heat still had Wade who was the star of that team. Others weren't championship teams to begin with. Did Yao/Mcgrady ever see the 2nd rd of the playoffs? Celtics after Bird? It took 20+ yrs to get a title. OKC was a rebuilding effort but they stunk for so long they got good picks and good players. A team not far removed from a title/contender trading away everyone is a big undertaking. I don't disagree with it, they weren't going anywhere anymore with that group. The Bulls have rebuilt since Jordan (D. Rose #1pk) but its been 15yrs. The best effort was L.A. after Magic getting Shaq, and then Kobe. You need a Superstar to win in the NBA and they don't grow on trees. Going back to 1980, 1 team has won a title without a superstar or at least a guy who played at a superstar level in the playoffs. Got to draft him very high generally or hope a big time FA is available which doesn't happen often. To go from a Championship team to a complete rebuild back to a Championship team has proven to be a long process. Lakes did it, Bulls are close but not there yet, took Boston 20yrs or so, Houston hasn't done it, Utah no, Knicks after Ewing?, Portland?, Detroit did it unconventionally took over a decade. It is a long process. Tearing down a team can take a couple of seasons, drafting the right players can take many seasons and once you do find them it takes a few years before they're able to compete at a high level. It could take 5-10 years or longer. If you have a player like the Lakers did with Kobe or Heat with Wade, it's definitely a lot easier to revamp and be competitive again, but otherwise you're left to drafting your core and that does take brains and luck to achieve. There's not a lot of options in the NBA, especially if you're a smaller market team. You have to rebuild.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 18:59:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2013 20:09:19 GMT -5
I remembered hearing something about the Bobcats liking Zeller but thought none of it, then that happened and I thought, they really went for it.
|
|
|
Post by Quanthor on Jul 2, 2013 0:18:10 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be hilarious if Howard signed a single season contract just so he can continue the "Dwightmare" saga another year?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 18:59:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2013 11:36:44 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be hilarious if Howard signed a single season contract just so he can continue the "Dwightmare" saga another year? Dwight Howard-Ultimate Troll
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 18:59:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2013 19:48:57 GMT -5
Watching the Tigers game on FSN Detroit and according to the scroller the Celtics have hired Brad Stevens of Butler as their head coach.
|
|
|
Post by Quanthor on Jul 5, 2013 15:57:06 GMT -5
The only team making smart moves this offseason is the Pelicans. Every other team is too desperate or has accepted the fate of tanking for the 2014 draft class.
I also love how every big offseason deal last year has backfired. That Iggy, Bynum and Howard deal has sucked for all teams involved. The Thunder trade for Martin sucked too.
If somehow the Warriors signing Iggy entices Howard to do an S&T deal with them, I don't get the move at all. They have Harrison Barnes who is exponentially cheaper than Andre and can equal his production, but now he's back to fighting for more shots and playing time? You saw just how much better he looked when Lee got hurt. Barnes is good, they need to give him opportunity and this does the opposite.
|
|
Nash
Main Eventer
True join date = May 2006
Joined on: Apr 8, 2010 14:48:43 GMT -5
Posts: 1,695
|
Post by Nash on Jul 5, 2013 18:13:24 GMT -5
D12 to Houston. Finally over, that's all I care about.
Doesn't look like they're done though. Rumored sign and trade with Josh Smith may be in the works. Possibly involving Asik.
|
|
jeffro2000
Main Eventer
Joined on: May 16, 2011 14:23:29 GMT -5
Posts: 1,858
|
Post by jeffro2000 on Jul 5, 2013 18:14:02 GMT -5
Howard to the Rockets USA today is reporting. They made the most sense if he wasn't going to resign with LA. They are younger than LA/Dallas and have a future post Kobe/Dirk.
USA Today has been reporting this for a couple of hours and now on ESPN it is Chris Broussard and USA today confirm he is signing with Houston.
**Nash got in seconds before me. I will be like ESPN and confirm what he is reporting. ESPN is doing their job and of course they have to confirm stuff, but they don't have to attach a guy's name to the story saying Broussard and USA Today confirm it when USA Today confirmed it from sources 2 hours ago. They do it all the time. Pet peeve among many with ESPN these days.
|
|
|
Post by BV on Jul 5, 2013 18:34:17 GMT -5
|
|