Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

by **steve3344** Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:53 am

One man's opinion (although it is a writer from the Herald and not just some clueless blogger):

http://bostonherald.com/sports/celtics_nba/boston_celtics/2013/06/score_a_point_for_doc_rivers

Prediction seems a bit harsh unless Rondo doesn't come back until February or so and isn't entirely effective.

by **gyso** Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:35 am

I liked the end part:

Gerry Callihan of the Herald wrote:

The Celtics got an unprotected first-round pick in 2015 for Rivers — and these are the Clippers after all; they could end up in the lottery at any moment — and they will save at least $10 million after hiring Doc’s replacement. They could not have done this if Doc resisted. Not sure who started the conversation, but this was a smart, honest trade by Ainge, and Rivers made it possible.

On the pro sports food chain, the Celtics are the fourth team in town now. They probably won’t win more than 24 games next year, which is how many they won in 2006-07, Rivers’ third season here. They finished in fifth place, 17 games out. That got them the fifth pick in the draft, which they used to select Green, who they then traded for Ray Allen, who then helped lure Garnett to Boston. And Ubuntu was born six summers ago.

It had a good run, but Ubuntu is dead. The Celtics sent Doc to LA for a first-round pick, and Doc swapped Rajon Rondo for Chris Paul. Congratulations all around. That’s a damn good deal for the Celtics and an all-time great deal for Doc Rivers.

by **mrkleen09** Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:24 am

Talk about premature extrapolation Rolling Eyes

by **worcester** Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:14 am

Danny is one class act of a GM. I really tip my hat to him. Gerry Callahan - well that's another story. I'd bet him $100 for every game we win over 24 next season, and that would probably be enough for me to take Sam to Paris all expenses paid next year. Gerry would never take the bet. Words are cheap.

by **mrkleen09** Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:22 am

Gerry Callahan should have been off the air decades ago when he joked about black kids in roxbury being like Gorillas from the Franklin Park Zoo.

by **worcester** Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:27 am

Unconscionable, really!

by **bobheckler** Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:32 am

24 wins next year? After winning 41 last year with Rondo, Sully and Barbosa missing half of them? Really?

We're heading into this season with a lot of question marks.

1. No head coach, so who knows how the players will respond/adapt?
2. Is Rondo at or near 100%?
3. Will Sully be at or near 100%?
4. Pierce, in or out?
5. KG, in or out?
6. JET, the old one or this on-the-downside one we saw last year?

So, it's not like there isn't some reason to question what our record will end up next season, but 24 wins? We're going to lose 17 more games? Really?

Either Gerry Callahan is the reincarnation of Red Auerbach or he's an idiot. If early retirement is a high priority for you, I'd bet on the former, the odds will be longer and the payoff bigger. As in, CA Mega lottery odds.

bob

.

by **cowens/oldschool** Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:38 am

Right now I'd give up Pierce and our new #1 draft choice that we just got for Doc in exchange for Josh Smith, we pull this off, were gonna win 60 games next year....

by **steve3344** Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:55 am

Maybe he's right. We've been gutted.

by **cowens/oldschool** Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:18 pm

Steve winning 24 would be a good thing, we need to get in the lottery.

by **mrkleen09** Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:24 pm

steve3344 wrote:Maybe he's right. We've been gutted.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

by **sinus007** Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:40 pm

Hi,
If RR, Sully and JG are healthy I doubt that Celtics fall into the lotto-land.

AK

by **bobheckler** Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:43 pm

Next year would be an excellent year to suck.

by **steve3344** Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:44 pm

cowens/oldschool wrote:Steve winning 24 would be a good thing, we need to get in the lottery.

Absolutely.

by **steve3344** Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:49 pm

I'm looking forward to following the Nets next year. I know they're in our division but I'd love them to take out Miami and if everyone's healthy come playoff time, with that roster, they'd have a good shot.

by **mrkleen09** Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:10 pm

Only one team in history has won the draft lottery and then gone on to win a title.

Sinking that low should not be the goal of any responsible franchise.

by **bobheckler** Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:14 pm

mrkleen09 wrote:Only one team in history has won the draft lottery and then gone on to win a title.

Sinking that low should not be the goal of any responsible franchise.

MrKleen,

True on both counts.

However, that team has won multiple titles and came damn close this year too.

bob

.

by **mrkleen09** Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:21 pm

You are right Bob.

Only caveat is that, the Spurs were actually a good team.....and then lost the best player "David Robinson" to a season ending injury that left them decimated that season.

So after wining the lottery (with the 4th worst record that year), they drafted Tim Duncan and immediately got The Admiral back.

So it essence they were not the typical "lottery team" and are more of a red herring.

by **Outside** Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:26 pm

"Winning the lottery" can indeed be a false hope. But if the ping-pong ball falls your way and you can get Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker, you're not going to turn it down.

It takes more than that one stroke of luck, and from what I can see, Ainge is working on that part. A little luck thrown in wouldn't hurt.

by Sponsored content

Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."

Re: Celts "probably won't win more than 24 games next year."