How the Celtics can become the Patriots of the NBA

The Patriots are basically known as a 15 long dynasty at this point, even though they've "only" won 4 Super Bowls.

While most NFL teams took an occassional "all in" gamble to compete for a Super Bowl, the Patriots never gambled their long-term stability and competitiveness to gamble on one season.

There's a strong argument for trading away long-term competitiveness for one good shot at a championship, but there's another, perhaps equally strong argument for consistently putting forth a competitive team, without throwing away long term competitiveness.

The odds of winning one championship might increase in any given year by trading away future draft picks and/or young players for win-now veterans, but the odds of winning one title over a 10 year period are probably higher just by trotting out a competitive team year after year.

There's always a significant amount of luck that goes into most championships, and just being in position to get lucky improves the odds of winning a title over 10 years.

The Spurs appear to be an example of this, getting to the WCF or Finals most years, and just being in a position to get a little lucky, and to use experience and continuity as their key strengths.

Most times when a team goes "all in" on a season, risking their entire future in the process, the team ends up coming up short because they lack continuity and familiarity and experience.

How can Danny assemble a team that consistently competes in the ECF, and regularly gets to the Finals, like the Patriots regularly get to the Super Bowl?

Draft smart - nail a majority of the draft picks that he does make. Singles and doubles are fine, and singles and doubles who have Triple/HR upside is even better.

Acquire draft picks when they are cheap, and trade draft picks when they are most valuable, draft day.

Analogy: Right now is the best time to buy summer clothing. Next May is probably the best time to be selling summer clothing. If you wait until May to buy your summer clothes, don't complain when you can't find a great deal anywhere. And if you're looking to sell summer clothes in September, don't complain or be surprised when nobody's buying.

Same thing with our draft picks. Danny offered Michael Jordan a bunch of "summer" clothes (aka future picks) on draft day, when Jordan was looking at Frank Kaminsky as a ready to wear warm jacket. Bad analogy, but the point is that those "summer" clothes still have major future value, regardless of their market rate in "september".

Danny can secure a competitive long-term future just by buying and selling in the right seasons, and acquiring picks 2-5 years down the line.

The hardest work is already done. Danny has already acquired a mountain of draft picks, and faced the slight public backlash of trading away KG and Pierce at the expense of short term competitiveness. And thanks to Danny and Brad, the Celtics were only non-competitive for one season.

Keep long-term cap flexibility - That means signing more free agents like Amir Johnson to flexible contracts, rather than throwing huge guaranteed contracts to slightly better players who are not major game changers, aka Tobias Harris/Greg Monroe type free agents. It's always better to slightly overpay in the short-term than to lose cap flexibility by signing expensive guys who don't seriously impact the game.

That might mean passing on a huge extension for Tyler Zeller or Sully, when current players (Olynyk, Amir, Lee) are already on the team, and when a future rookie might reasonably be expected to replace most of the impact of the second tier guys like Zeller and Sully.

Replace expensive second tier vets with rookies - Mark Cuban recently spoke about how draft picks are going to become much more valuable, as contracts for regular NBA players skyrocket. Why pay a Reggie Jackson 15 million per year when you can get the same thing from a late lottery-mid-first round pick?

Why pay Tyler Zeller 12-14 million per year guaranteed if you're able to draft a Jacob Poetl in the teens? Or if you already have Olynyk playing for 3 million a year?

Bill Belichick has a system, and he doesn't overpay his vets, even if that means watching a Wes Welker or a past-prime Vince Wilfork (or even Tom Brady) walk away for more money elsewhere.

As long as Danny maintains a stockpile of picks, like Belichick generally does, Danny can make calculated risks like refusing to pay top dollar to second tier guys.

Maintain the stockpile of picks - We all remember how Danny offered 4+ first round picks to move up just a few spots on Draft Day in June. Well, somebody else is going to be just as desperate to move up (or into) next year's draft.

If the Celtics find themselves with two top 10 picks next year, the Celtics could easily trade one of them for a boatload of future picks on draft day. What do we need more picks for? To have the flexibility needed to remain competitive every single year for the next 10-20 years.

By staying disciplined and not giving Zeller and/or Sully big contracts, the Celtics probably have room on next year's roster for three rookies. But they don't have to be our top 3 picks in the '16 draft. Let's say the Mavs pick is #10, the Nets pick is # 6, and the Celtics pick is #19. The Celtics could probably trade the Mavs pick for 3-4 future first rounders, while still getting two good rookies, and using the PHI top 2nd round pick on a third rookie. Then they could trade the rest of their second rounders for future second rounders, nothing wrong with that.

By balancing short-term need with long-term prosperity, the Celtics might have a slightly worse chance of winning any particular year, but they can greatly improve their chances of winning at least once over a 10 year period.

If Danny can stay disciplined, and not waste all these draft picks on a less-than-dominant trade target like Al Horford (older, injury prone), Danny can really lock in a highly competitive "dynasty" or actual dynasty. By being patient, selling high, buying low, and waiting for GREAT deals, Danny can really take advantage of the desperation of other teams who simply can't afford to think in terms of a dynasty because they don't have the assets, or discipline and patience, to assemble what Danny has.

Pick a historical example of a team you though was "stuck in the middle", and I'll guarantee they didn't have a stockpile of valuable future draft picks. Otherwise, they wouldn't be thought of as "stuck in the middle" at all.

Some people like to ignore the draft pick stockpile, and the longterm cap flexibility Danny has established, and just declare that the Celtics are stuck in the middle. There's no substance to the allegation, which relies on basically pointing out the crappy value of summer clothes in September.

It's almost as if they forget that summer comes back every year, just like Christmas.
And right now, the Celtics are "stuck" with a whole bunch of mystery Christmas presents, for the next 5 years.

Don't cry just because you can't open them all at once, or know what's inside the boxes all at once.

Oh whatever.... everyone knows a deflated basketball will be no good to anyone...

(Ducks)

rambone,

An interesting treatise.  Well thought out and explained.  Quite comprehensive too.

However, I am leery of cross-sports comparisons.  In the case of the salary cap, the NBA salary cap is $61M and is set to explode while the NFL salary cap is $143M.  The Celtics have to spread that money around 15 players (or at least 14) while the Patriots have to spread it around 53.  Furthermore, the NBA is a star-oriented league and stars get the calls from the refs.  The NFL is a slower sport, pace-wise.  Refs in basketball will often give the stars the benefits of the doubt and will take it out on the lesser famous players.  Therefore, it is better to have stars and stars cost money.

You may see Belichick cut a receiver or CB loose, but he paid Tom Brady whatever it took when Brady was young.  Why?  Because Brady was the #1 key irreplaceable cog in the machine on offense.

How many offensive weapons does Brady have on the field with him on every single play, between RB, WR and TE?    More players than Brad can put on the court at one time total.  With that many options you can afford a lesser commodity, you can replace a Wes Welker with a Julian Edelman and that's ok because he still has Gronk etal.  You can replace a RT with another and get away with it by running left or by helping him by having the TE block down on his man with him.  If you're weak at PG, say, then that is an obvious place to attack and with only 5 players on the court at any time, how would you hide and protect him?

I'm going to let Danny and Wyc worry about the money.  Unless and until we hit the hard cap, who cares how much they pay in luxury tax?  Will anybody complain if their payroll, including penalties, approaches $200M if we win #18?

The goal is to get the players you need to compete for a championship.  Danny didn't think twice about signing both Pierce and KG to long term deals because he knew they were the ones he wanted.  If he can get DeMarcus Cousins you can bet the ranch Danny will do whatever he can to lock him up long term because he's the guy he wants in the middle and bonafide NBA starting centers of that quality do not grow on trees and cannot be replaced with 2 lesser players.  Two mediocre power forwards do not equal one Aldridge or Davis even if they do cost less.  Amir might be the man.  If he is then we have a team option on him for next year, but he's not such an obvious keeper that he's worth signing him to 4 or 5 years right off the bat.  He has never been an all-star, never been an all-league, never been a champion.

Basketball is also a sport where the players usually need some seasoning before they reach their potential.  It is unusual for a player to come out of college and just dominate.  Anthony Davis didn't do it, Blake Griffin didn't do it and they were the #1 picks BY FAR.  If you're always churning when do they develop?  On someone else's roster, that's where, and if you keep them because they are young and cheap then how do you convince the all-stars/all-leaguers you want to come here when we suck because we're too young?  

Nothing succeeds like success.  James Posey, Eddie House, PJ Brown all came here because Danny effectively gutted our team to get KG and Ray Allen.  Shane Battier, Chris Anderson, Ray Allen all went to Miami because they had their big 3.  If you build it, they will come.  If you're constantly building it, well, maybe they'll come and maybe they'll go somewhere they'll still get the money and maybe a ring too.  Why did LaMarcus Aldridge pick San Antonio instead of the Lakers?  God knows Jim Buss was ready to throw money at him by the bucketful.  Why did David West sign for the vet minimum in San Antonio?  It's because they're winners and/or perennial contenders.  How do we get to that if we're tossing out proven commodities for the cheap price of the annual crap shoot.

We had no draft picks.  Now, we're up to our eyeballs in them, TOO many.  Why?  Because Danny shipped some people out.  Who is to say that he won't do that again and again and again?

Superstars get the calls.  Does the name LeBron James ring a bell?  Lets get some players near that quality and then we'll worry about filling in around them.  I have no doubt Danny's phone will be jumping off the hook with agents' caller IDs.  If I had a Tim Duncan and got lucky with a Tony Parker or Ginobili you'll see the roster, and our season record, change almost overnight.  Would we see that if Belichick got the younger, newer model of Wilfork?  Hell, at age 38 Tom Brady is still one of the best in the game.  If he wants to play another 3-4 years, and his health was still good, don't you think Belichick and Kraft wouldn't trip over each other to sign him up fast?


bob


.

Bob, my point is not to chase after the Greg Monroes and Tobias Harrises and the Reggie Jacksons and the Tyler Zellers for near max money.

That's how re-builds get stuck in the mud.

Amir Johnson might be a slightly worse player but he's not going to leave us stuck in the mud.

LeBron James getting calls, and being a superstar, doesn't mean just label Tobias Harris a star and give him a long-term guaranteed contract for huge money. Same with Zeller.

If the Spurs had mortgaged their future a couple years ago, they would be rebuilding or treading water as a late playoff seed rather than been in position to land Aldridge. Aldridge didn't sign with San Antonio because they are the BEST positioned team to win a title THIS year, he signed with them because they are the best run franchise over the long-term, and he can count on them being competitive every year going forward.

A few years ago, the Spurs took a slight step back by trading pg George Hill for the draft rights to Kawhi Leonard or something. Most teams would have gone the exact opposite direction, and tried to "win now" with George Hill and the Spurs stars. Most teams would have traded away their future first round draft picks, tried to "win now" with George Hill, and by right now they would have been stuck in nowheresville without Kawhi Leonard (and Aldridge).

That's the kind of longterm thinking Danny needs to keep in mind at all times. Most GMs would have rode Pierce and KG and Rondo right into nowheresville, trading away future picks just to make the team more "competitive".

Brad Stevens already has the respect of LeBron, and his reputation is spreading like wildfire already. In another year or two an occasional Real star free agent will give Boston a strong look, but it won't matter if we already spent the cap space on Tyler Zeller and Evan Turner, or the next Tobias Harris or Reggie Jackson.

It's okay to go into a season with significant cap space available, especially when you already have guys like Amir, KO, and Rookie X to compensate for the loss of a guy like Zeller. And depending on the development of rookie X, and new rookie Y, KO might just be the next to get Belichicked out of Boston because the price was too high.

Don't forget that the Patriots have a transcendent superstar in Tom Brady (the Spurs have had a comparable player/leader in Duncan). Also, as Bob pointed out, most nba players need at least a few years before they come into their own, whereas NFL rookies often contribute and if they don't blossom by yeaer 2, they are often considered busts. Another difference is that in the NBA quality starters generally come from the 1st half of the 1st round (which only bad teams have access to), whereas in the NFL, starters come from the first several rounds. In general though, I agree with many aspects of your premise - this is indeed how the Spurs have done it - just pointing out that the NFL and NBA are not entirely equivalent.