THE PLAN, YEAR 3: CELTICS BOSS DANNY AINGE PATIENTLY AWAITS OPPORTUNITY TO STRIKE

WEEI

JOHN TOMASE

Danny Ainge has already built one title winner, but manufacturing a second will be no easy task.

Danny Ainge has heard every theory about his plan to rebuild the Celtics.

He's saving for two massive free agents. He'll patiently build through the draft and develop the players he has. He'll swing a franchise-altering trade like the ones that netted Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen in 2007. He'll win with depth, the brilliance of head coach Brad Stevens, and a little leprechaun magic.

Ainge patiently fields questions on all of the above before something becomes clear: the first rule of The Plan is there can be no Plan. And that is essential to its success.

The battle to restore the Celtics will be guerilla in nature and not a meticulously choreographed frontal assault. Its principle tenet is flexibility – of salary cap management, of trade assets, of player development, of draft pick inventory. But most importantly, it's about flexibility of thought.

Ainge knows the opportunity to make a bold move probably won't be telegraphed months in advance. It will materialize, and in that moment, he must be ready and willing to take aim at what he calls, "a moving target."

"There's no such thing as one plan," Ainge said this week from his office in Waltham, where training camp opens this weekend. "That would indicate that you have an idea of a player that you're targeting or even a handful of players that you're targeting. I don't think any team runs that way or should run that way. I think that you have to be able to think on the move."

IN GOOD HANDS
Ainge has consistently proven creative in this regard since assuming control of basketball operations in 2003. In addition to the Garnett and Allen trades, he swung a draft-day deal for point guard Rajon Rondo, made smart secondary acquisitions like James Posey, Leon Powe, and Big Baby, and coaxed six seasons out of the Big Three Era, including a title, another trip to the Finals, and a loss in the conference finals that saw the outgunned C's push LeBron James and the Heat to the brink.

But when that era was over, it was over, and Ainge didn't get sentimental. In July of 2013, he shipped Pierce and Garnett to Brooklyn for three first-round picks, including one in next June's draft that holds the key to the future, especially if the woebegone Nets are as bad as projected. That deal may end up being his masterstroke.

"It was clear we weren't a championship contender at that phase," Ainge said. "To try and maximize [Garnett and Allen's] value to the organization, and at the same time give them an opportunity to continue to play for a championship, was the real reason behind that. I think we did maximize their value. We set off on a different course."

Two years later, the Celtics aren't close to contending for a title, but they're at least in the playoff hunt. They made a surprise run to the No. 8 seed last year before the Cavaliers dispatched them in a first round sweep.

They return a nucleus of intriguing young players, but none who qualify as franchise cornerstones, at least not yet. Guard Marcus Smart has potential. Veteran Isaiah Thomas could win a Sixth Man Award. Physical Jae Crowder suddenly looks like the best player in the deal that sent Rondo to Dallas. The team's best prospect is probably Stevens, the former Butler coach who has transformed the Celtics into one of the league's toughest outs, even if their overall talent level isn't yet championship-caliber.

"One of our strengths is our depth," Ainge said. "I think everybody in the league would prefer to have three stars. We have to do it a different way."

FINDING THEIR WAY
Ainge entered the NBA in 1981 and has seen teams try to reproduce every formula for victory.

"Right now, San Antonio is a team everyone wants to copy," he said. "It used to be the Lakers, and the Celtics, and the Bulls. Every one of them were unique situations, but ultimately, every one of them had amazing talent. What they do and the offense they run, and the defenses and schemes aren't what's winning. It's the talent level they have."

Left off the list is the influence Ainge himself had on the construction of LeBron's James' Heat and Cavs, or the James Harden-Dwight Howard Rockets. The consortium of stars approach had been done before, but Pierce, Garnett and Allen made it a certified thing.

"Two stars at once. Everybody wants that," Ainge said. "The year we got KG and Ray, we wanted KG and Ray the year before. And we wanted them the year before that. If it wasn't KG and Ray, it was two people like them. Everybody wants that. Everybody's trying to do that. You have to be in the right place at the right time. When those transcendent players come on the market, you have to be in a position to be in the conversation."

Ainge still rues the 2012 trade that sent Harden from the Thunder to the Rockets. A year earlier, Ainge had engaged the Thunder on Harden before acquiring Jeff Green.

No one expected Harden to be available with a year left on his deal and the Thunder coming off a Finals loss to the Heat, but Oklahoma City decided it couldn't afford him, and shipped him to Houston for two players and two first-round picks.

"We knew James Harden was a star," Ainge said. "We would've loved to have been in the market for James Harden. We didn't have the assets to even be in that conversation. We have the assets now to be in that conversation if a transcendent player is available, and so we'll be in that conversation.

"When James Harden became available to Houston, draft picks were valuable, but we didn't have those at that time. Right now we have picks."

That they do. The Celtics potentially hold four first-rounders in 2016, two in 2017, and four in 2018. The most valuable for the purposes of this discussion is Brooklyn's in 2016. With the Nets in disarray (only Joe Johnson remains from the Deron Williams-Pierce-Garnett-Johnson core), that pick represents a glimmer of hope.

"You really have to hang onto even the smallest of percentages of picks that could turn into a transcendent player, because transcendent players are so hard to find and acquire," Ainge said.

THE THREE D'S
So as the Celtics begin camp, we'll be watching the team with a twin focus. On one hand, there's the here and now. Will Smart develop into a more reliable shooter and scorer? Will first-round pick Terry Rozier complement him or simply duplicate him? Will Avery Bradley rebound from the slight step back he took last season?

But the more overarching concern is that of the long-term. Are the Celtics on a path to glory, or are they setting themselves up for an extended stay in NBA purgatory, where they're too good for the lottery, but not good enough to win a title?

That's where The Plan that's not a Plan comes in, and Ainge will keep his options open, as he always has. The Celtics are blessed with tremendous cap space -- potentially enough to offer two max deals next offseason, when Kevin Durant will be available -- more picks than anyone, and a bright young coach. Somewhere in that combination is a potential return to contention. It's up to Ainge to find it.

"There's the three D's: Deals, draft, and development," he said. "From the day I took this job, I don't think there's any one I put more emphasis on. All three of those are critical in building a championship team. That's all we can do. I can't force a deal. I can't beg for a deal. The more you beg, the less a deal's going to happen. You have to develop your players and you have to do well in the draft. We're always talking."

At some point, talk yields an opportunity for action. When that time comes, Ainge knows he cannot miss.

112288

I read this article either today or yesterday and it is yet another review of exactly what Ainge has been saying/doing since he traded Pierce and Garnett.

All three parts of getting better players on your team will not change although the better your talent level is the less likely it is to draft a difference maker.

Stevens and his staff seem to have a different approach with their younger players than Rivers did in that they seem to spend more time making these younger players better all the time while Rivers may have ignored them to some extent.

That is an understatement when it comes to Doc and young players. Rivers was his own worst enemy and for that matter the Celtics as a whole. He did not advance any young talent.

112288

112288 wrote:That is an understatement when it comes to Doc and young players.  Rivers was his own worst enemy and for that matter the Celtics as a whole.  He did not advance any young talent.

112288

112288,

Rondo.
Powe
West
Gomes
Bradley
Perk
Big Al
Big Baby

All developed by Doc.

bob


.

Bob,

Sure, during non championship potential years when they had a crap team.  Doc was forced to play Bradley and oh guess what..........he was a beast on defense. Sadly to say no one else had that opportunity.  

What made Al Arbour the great Islander coach so successful was his ability to integrate into his team 10% new players (rookie) each year so his team would not grow old at once.  that is why he was so successful for so long. And they all had significant ice time with meaningful minutes unlike Doc where he would insert players with 2 minutes to go or less.

Doc on a selfish note did not do the same and knew eventually that the team would get to a point that it would cease to be good because everyone grew old.


112288

112288

Below link list all the players that Doc coached while in Boston. Which of those rookies that Doc neglected to play, went on to have decent careers elsewhere in the nba, after they left the Celts?

http://bkref.com/tiny/4T2qA

swish

When you do not develop players by not playing them and sharping their skills, you destroy any level of confidence and skill that player has. That is what happens to many players in the league. We have such a player in Evan Turner. Philly destroyed that kid and there are other teams and players.

One comes to mind right off the the bat > E'Twaun Moore.

112288
112288

When your the 55th pick in the draft its not uncommon to be a journeymen performer. Mis- handled or lack of talent. Who knows for certain ?

swish

IMO, Doc didn't have much to work with, with only late round picks.  My beef with him was that he rode his vets too hard during the regular season and didn't take the long view, like Pop.

Doc should have rested his vets more and mixed in the young guys more during the regular season.  It may have cost a win or two, but when the playoffs came around, his vets may have not been so broken down and the young guys wouldn't have acted like deer in the headlights.

With not much time during the season for practice, he should have used actual games to incorporate youth into his roster.  You know, actually coach instead of sitting back and letting his vets take control of the situation.  His failure to do that leaves a hole in his resume, as far as I am concerned.  

gyso

Gyso

Agreed.

112288

So then I said, 'throw in another pick and you can have Jason Terry'




bob



.

That Moore only played 331 minutes as a 22 year old is a fact. But on that same Celtic team that year was another youthful player by the name of Bradley, who at the age of 21 logged 1368 minutes which ranked him 6th in minutes played on the team. Is it just possible that sometimes its the level of talent that dictates the number of minutes ?

swish

swish wrote:That Moore only played 331 minutes as a 22 year old is a fact. But on that same Celtic team that year was another youthful player by the name of Bradley, who at the age of 21 logged 1368 minutes which ranked him 6th in minutes played on the team. Is it just possible that sometimes its the level of talent that dictates the number of minutes ?

swish

swish,

E'Tuan Moore was a 22 year old rookie on a team with veterans Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, Mickael Pietrus, Sasha Pavlovic, Keyon Dooling and Marquis Daniels in front of him, as well as Avery Bradley.  In his next year, as a 23 sophomore, he played 1682 minutes.  When Bradley was 21 years old, the year you cited, he was a sophomore and he still played fewer minutes in his sophomore year (1368) than E'tuan Moore played in his sophomore year with Orlando (1682).  In Bradley's rookie year he only played 162 minutes, half the number Moore played in his rookie year.  Furthermore, Bradley's minutes took a big jump up in his sophomore year because of Ray Allen's ankle problems, which opened minutes up for someone else.  Moore played more minutes in his sophomore year than Bradley played in his sophomore year.

I don't doubt that Bradley has more talent than Moore, but there is more to it than just that.  There's the depth chart at his position, it's number of years in the league (Bradley was drafted at 19, Moore was 22; so Bradley was already a veteran at 21) and injuries.


bob


.

The Celtics need to draft a high end player.

I just do not see them becoming a contender just through trades and free agency.

The Celtics do not have a building block.  We still need that one player that is really really good.

Danny probably would not have been able to build the last championship team the way he did unless Paul Pierce was already on the roster.  

It is easier to acquire that 2nd piece when you have 1 and that 3rd piece when you have two.

But all the great young talent comes into the league through the draft.  We have not hit a home run yet.  

dboss

Bob

The issue here is whether or not Doc played his young players. In Moore's case, it was the also youthful Bradley that got the nod to back up Rondo.

swish

Doc was pretty much convinced that you cannot win with young players. That may have impacted the developmental process that went on.

Doc has stated that he could not win with the players he had. This is a bit off track. But let me loop things around. Stevens has made NO excuses for anything. I believe that the really good coaches are able to coach players up. Given Steven's inexperience coaching at this level he has already proven that he knows how to coach players up.

Before the big move to get KG and RA the Celtics were an absolutely horrible team but I think they had more talent back then than they do now yet Rivers could not help them get better.

dboss

dboss wrote:Doc was pretty much convinced that you cannot win with young players.   That may have impacted the developmental process that went on.

Doc has stated that he could not win with the players he had.  This is a bit off track.  But let me loop things around.  Stevens has made NO excuses for anything.  I believe that the really good coaches are able to coach players up.  Given Steven's inexperience coaching at this level he has already proven that he knows how to coach players up.

Before the big move to get KG and RA the Celtics were an absolutely horrible team but I think they had more talent back then than they do now yet Rivers could not help them get better.

dboss

dboss,

There was also the fact that Doc was winning with the veterans. The name of the game is to win and if you are winning why introduce inferior talent, inferior execution and inferior experience into the equation? Isn't "young player development" French for "rebuild"?

He did develop Pierce, although he was 26 when Doc got here (which made it even harder since Pierce was resistant to Doc's ideas initially. It took a while before he acquiesced and went along). He did develop Rondo and named him a starter as a sophomore. He did develop Big Al. He did develop role player Ryan Gomes. He did develop Delonte West. If he hadn't developed Jefferson, Gomes and West, then the Allen and KG trades might not have happened. You have to be able to offer value to get value.


bob


.

There's a lot to be said about having veteran star quality players on the roster. Witness the Spurs threesome of Duncan, Parker and Ginobili. All 3 have been fortunate to have been able to avoid crippling injuries over the last 13 years that they have been together. It should not be surprising that the Spurs have been so successful.

swish

Good points Bob

However he was not convinced that he could win with that group of players.  There was actually a lot of talent on that team.  In 2006 Jefferson was already a double double guy at 15 and 11.  PP was dropping 25 per game.

That year we lost a zillion games in a row and Doc pretty much blamed it on youth.  It had nothing to do with the quality of coaching according to him.

The point being that Brad Stevens does not make excuses and has done a better job developing the players that he has as compared to what Doc did back then.

dboss

dboss wrote:Good points Bob

However he was not convinced that he could win with that group of players.  There was actually a lot of talent on that team.  In 2006 Jefferson was already a double double guy at 15 and 11.  PP was dropping 25 per game.

That year we lost a zillion games in a row and Doc pretty much blamed it on youth.  It had nothing to do with the quality of coaching according to him.

The point being that Brad Stevens does not make excuses and has done a better job developing the players that he has as compared to what Doc did back then.

dboss

dboss,

I agree with you about the tempermental differences between Doc and Brad.  Doc was an emotional, in-your-face type of guy who demanded things of his players while ice cream wouldn't melt in Brad's mouth.  Considering the flotsam and jetsam Danny has passed through the locker room over the past 2 years it's good that Brad does have that kind of temperment.  We have had a lot of players who have bounced around a bit (e.g. Turner, IT) and having a coach that is supportive like Brad might make a big difference.  Someone like Evan Turner must have a bit of an "abused dog" complex by now.  Raising your voice or hand to him will make him cringe rather than aggressive and/or want to play.

I didn't know what kind of coach Brad was going to be when he showed up 2 years ago.  I don't watch college sports and, while I knew of the success of the Butler Bulldogs, I didn't know anything about their coach.  I think I was more patient with him than you and others were but that didn't mean I expected him to succeed.  There have been way too many college coaches, some VERY successful college coaches, try to switch to the pros and struggle (Pitino, PJ Carlesimo, Calipari) and fail for me to have felt like Brad was anything but a gamble.  At this point, to be honest, I am almost in awe of him.  His learning curve has flattened out faster than any of us had a right to expect.  He's a natural.  The two things he has limited experience in are the playoffs (and he should get more experience this year) and coaching all-star veterans (Rondo was one and Gerald Wallace was another but only 1x).  Now he has Lee and we shall see how well that works out.  My gut is it will be fine.  If Lee can be a good soldier last year then he should be a good soldier this year too.  The NBA is a small fraternity, the players all know each other and hang with each other in the off-seasons and work out.  It can't hurt to have Wallace and Lee and Amir saying nice things about Brad.  



bob


.

Brad has certainly exceeded my expectations.

He has the team on the right track but now he needs to be a bit more demanding.  

He has a lot on his plate given all of the additions to the team.  He is going to be forced to try different combinations until he gets the right fit.  Potential priorities to deal with...

First priority is to figure out who gets cut or traded

Second how to use Johnson and Lee

Third is to determine if any of the 3 rookies should be active.

dboss