Ainge: Maybe Celtics' superstar is already here

http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/danny-ainge-says-maybe-celtics-superstar-is-already-here?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo



Ainge: Maybe Celtics' superstar is already here


October 29, 2015, 11:00 am











BOSTON – Danny Ainge loves the balance he sees with the Celtics' roster.

But he has been around enough championship-caliber teams to know that having a roster with as much parity as the Celtics do now, probably won’t get the Larry O’Brien Trophy back in Boston anytime soon.

That’s why it’s so important for the Celtics to continue to build off of last season’s surprising push towards the playoffs, with another strong season.

Because even though they don’t have a proven superstar on their roster now, continuing to create a culture of winning could change that quickly.

“That’s our objective, is to be attractive for other players to want to come in and play,” Ainge, Boston’s president of basketball operations, said on 98.5 The Sports Hub's Toucher & Rich show, also simulcast on Comcast SportsNet New England. “Our objective is to be as good as we can be, to have our players become as good as they can possibly be. That’s the only way we think we can go around it.”

Ainge acknowledges there are many approaches teams can take when it comes to building themselves into a title contender.

While he has seen some teams with no true superstar win it all, those teams are the exception – not the rule.

And then there are some teams that choose to get stronger primarily through the draft as they strategically plot out ways to be as close to the top of the draft board as possible  … yes, we know it as tanking.

“You can be like some franchises and have nine straight years of top-10 picks and still not be relevant,” Ainge said. "So I think that, there’s … we’re trying to be the best that we can be.”

And that in itself may result in a player currently on the roster evolving into a super talented, All-Star caliber performer.

In Boston’s 112-95 season-opening win against Philadelphia on Wednesday, Isaiah Thomas had a game-high 27 points off the bench. Amir Johnson (15 points, seven rebounds) and Jared Sullinger (12 points, seven rebounds) had near double-doubles,  as well.

And while all of them as well as the rest of their Celtics teammates have specific roles on this team, there’s no way to tell if any of them could develop into being the kind of difference-making player that would strengthen Boston’s hopes of becoming a title contender.

“Who knows if one of them could develop and become a superstar player?" Ainge said.



bob
MY NOTE: Whole lotta not much here, to be honest, but he does make a good point. You could have numerous years of top 10 picks and still suck and that will not attract top talent. What attracts top talent is winning and seeing a program that brings out the best in players' games. As far as the next superstar already being here, which one?


.

Superstar? Not a big believer of the superstar. Would rather have a team of very good players with high NBA IQ to play the game. A superstar needs to be pampered above the rest of the players on the team. Build a team with these type of basketball high IQ players. If a superstar wants to come to the team after a team of good players made it happen, then your not needed unless you want to be part of the team. It's nice to have a couple of veteran's to guide younger players, but the superstar coming cause the Celtics are winning. NOT. Build very good players and play the game. I believe DA is heading in the right direction. Go Green.

I think there is an interesting topic buried in here that Ol' A. Sherrod couldn't quite pull out. I'm talking about the question of whether superstars make teams good, or whether good teams make superstars. I'm thinking of players like Steph Curry or Kawhi Leonard. Although Steph was drafted kind of high, I'm not sure anyone saw him becoming a franchise cornerstone, and Kawhi was drafted in the mid/late teens I believe. However, in both cases, the player was drafted into a great system, with good coaches who could see how to develop them as players. Similarly, I am sure there are a number of players who actually had the physical talent and mental make-up to be stars, but they never really got the opportunity to develop and showcase their strengths. Brad and Danny have established systems like SA and SF, where players learn how to incorporate their strengths into a winning formula. So yes, I think its very possible one of the current Celtics could blossom into a star. Maybe Brad will end up like the Belichik of the NAB, a coach who seems to always find stars other coaches/GMs miss (TB12 anybody??)

Yeah, if Draymond Green or Kawhi Leonard played for Orlando, we'd hardly know who they were, and would scoff at the idea that they were major stars. And without his playoff success, Paul George wouldn't be thought of as a borderline MVP candidate.

When I hear the word superstar, I think of Dwight Howard in his Super Man pajamas being a clown at the dunk contest.

Most casual basketball fans are into it because they like watching Spiderman and the Incredible Hulk and Batman and Superman.

Then these casual fans run into a phone booth every six months and come out unrecognizable, wearing another team's jersey with another super hero's name on the back.

Shamrock1000 wrote:I think there is an interesting topic buried in here that Ol' A. Sherrod couldn't quite pull out. I'm talking about the question of whether superstars make teams good, or whether good teams make superstars. I'm thinking of players like Steph Curry or Kawhi Leonard. Although Steph was drafted kind of high, I'm not sure anyone saw him becoming a franchise cornerstone, and Kawhi was drafted in the mid/late teens I believe. However, in both cases, the player was drafted into a great system, with good coaches who could see how to develop them as players. Similarly, I am sure there are a number of players who actually had the physical talent and mental make-up to be stars, but they never really got the opportunity to develop and showcase their strengths. Brad and Danny have established systems like SA and SF, where players learn how to incorporate their strengths into a winning formula. So yes, I think its very possible one of the current Celtics could blossom into a star. Maybe Brad will end up like the Belichik of the NAB, a coach who seems to always find stars other coaches/GMs miss (TB12 anybody??)

spot on, I have been saying the same thing fro a while now. the hawks of last year are a better comparison to me. they had what 4 guys on the all-star team last year, why?

Horford is an all-star type player granted, but Teague and Millsap are simply good quality NBA starters on a 40 win team . Carroll is slightly less frankly and Korver is nothing but a old one trick pony NBA player. But lead the NAB in wins and you have a roster full of all-stars......NOT.

If the Celtics win 50 or more this year people will be talking about how Smart is one of the best young Guards in the association and Bradley or another player on our team will be called "all-stars".

and finally when he get the first overall pick in next years draft thanks to the Nets, we'll have a young guy that the media will LOVE (whoever it is).

win and the" all-stars" come from within in this league, IMO.

Shamrock1000 wrote:I think there is an interesting topic buried in here that Ol' A. Sherrod couldn't quite pull out. I'm talking about the question of whether superstars make teams good, or whether good teams make superstars. I'm thinking of players like Steph Curry or Kawhi Leonard. Although Steph was drafted kind of high, I'm not sure anyone saw him becoming a franchise cornerstone, and Kawhi was drafted in the mid/late teens I believe. However, in both cases, the player was drafted into a great system, with good coaches who could see how to develop them as players. Similarly, I am sure there are a number of players who actually had the physical talent and mental make-up to be stars, but they never really got the opportunity to develop and showcase their strengths. Brad and Danny have established systems like SA and SF, where players learn how to incorporate their strengths into a winning formula. So yes, I think its very possible one of the current Celtics could blossom into a star. Maybe Brad will end up like the Belichik of the NAB, a coach who seems to always find stars other coaches/GMs miss (TB12 anybody??)

shamrock,

Nice slice on the original article.

When people talk about "franchise players" they tend to think of bigs or truly transcendent talents. Howard, Davis, Durant, Griffin and Okafur for the bigs. Smaller players like Chris Paul (#4), Curry (#7) and Westbrook (#4) have to come in and prove they can carry a team in a big man's league before they are annointed. It is assumed that, if you are big and you have talent, you can play and if you can't people wonder what's wrong with you. Poor Robert Upshaw is a textbook example of a player that should be in the NBA but isn't.

kdp is also right about being on the right team at the right time. Would Noah be an all-star and DPOY somewhere else, or was he those things because he was the defensive centerpiece of defensive genius Tom Thibodeaux's team?


bob


.

in todays NBA we have an organization where a guy who plays 3.2 minutes a game yet could be a all star just because he is from china..

when I hear this term all star anymore I give it as much value as something I flushed down the toilet few hrs ago. Nope we don't need all stars on this team, we just need great players who when they play together are an even greater sum than the whole of their parts seperatly. We have that now, and all that is left is to keep tht culture alive while upgrading a bit.

stars, all stars, superstars... don't gimme none of that crap

Matty, i'm not talking about over-hyped draft fads, i'm talking about genuinely talented players who are better at the game of basketball. I like this team and the current culture, but if we could get a transcendent talent, well, gimme that crap

The "need" for a superstar has been prevalent since the Magic-Bird rivalry. Then it was the need for a "Big Three". Celtics fans have always known it's about TEAM. The TEAM has to have that special "IT". So we got Isaiah, right, Danny?

mulcogiseng wrote:The "need" for a superstar has been prevalent since the Magic-Bird rivalry. Then it was the need for a "Big Three". Celtics fans have always known it's about TEAM. The TEAM has to have that special "IT". So we got Isaiah, right, Danny?

No doubt team play is essential, but don't forget, all the championship teams from the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 00s had multiple stars. The most "star-less" champions I can think of off-hand are last year's Warriors and the early 00s Detroit teams.

It's interesting how the game is changing though - seems like people are finally figuring out how 5 guys playing together can beat one or tow stars jacking up shots.

It is a changing game and the pendulum is swinging back towards a focus on team play...but with wicked talented players. LIke was mentioned in another thread the worst player in the NBA today is so much better then just about anyone else. What I do like about this years edition in Green is how well they play for and with each other. Just a little more rise in the overall talent level and this team is deep competitive.

I would rather take the time to develop the young players we have into formidable strong team players. The way the league is going, there are going to be more players overpaid and not becoming the players they should. This new CBA for next year is going to send the league into a real "tizzy". Take a player like Tristan Thompson, is he really worth the money he was demanding? Just for a great playoff run while there were other superstars sitting hurt on the bench.

Give me a good team, players who know their role and perform accordingly.
One night one is great, another it is someone else. One man does not make a team. The other thing is the way players are getting hurt in the past couple of years. Guys making millions sitting on the bench and the hands of the team tied because they have so much money tied up with these super players. If this sounds naive, maybe it is, but it is the way I enjoy watching the Celtics develop good, strong teams.

Rosalie

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I would rather take the time to develop the young players we have into formidable strong team players. The way the league is going, there are going to be more players overpaid and not becoming the players they should. This new CBA for next year is going to send the league into a real "tizzy".  Take a player like Tristan Thompson, is he really worth the money he was demanding? Just for  a great playoff run while there were other superstars sitting hurt on the bench.  

Give me a good team, players who know their role and perform accordingly.
One night one is great, another it is someone else.  One man does not make a team. The other thing is the way players are getting hurt in the past couple of years. Guys making millions sitting on the bench and the hands of the team tied because they have so much money tied up with these super players.  If this sounds naive, maybe it is, but it is the way I enjoy watching the Celtics develop good, strong teams.

Rosalie

Good points, was thinking the same thing about the soon-to-explode cap - alot of teams are going to seriously overpay for marginal talent. Let's hope the Celtics aren't one of them.

mulcogiseng wrote: It is a changing game and the pendulum is swinging back towards a focus on team play...but with wicked talented players. LIke was mentioned in another thread the worst player in the NBA today is so much better then just about anyone else. What I do like about this years edition in Green is how well they play for and with each other. Just a little more rise in the overall talent level and this team is deep competitive.

Agreed