Celts Building Around 2-Stars

I previously suggested that the Celtics may not add a 3rd star and instead go with our 2-star configuration surrounded by quality talent. This weekend I saw a sports Podcast that pretty much said the same thing.

The lab is set up right now to take this strategy on a trial run.

Last season Danny announced his intentions to build the team around his two young stars. He had already started that process when he drafted PP and AN. RW certainly falls into that category and the recent Marcus Smart deal solidifies the core on this team moving forward.

Brad has made multiple moves to add quality depth to this team. Even though our Cap space moving forward does not afford an opportunity to add a 3rd star, we will have a lot of contracts coming off the books next season.

The Celtics head into the season as a tax paying team however the bill does not get calculated until the end of the season. Not sure what they can do to land below that tax though.

We have several TPE's still available to use. I could see us using one of the smaller ones during the season but the big $17 million one may be better spent next summer when our FA pursuits are limited.

All of our key guys are locked in. That is very important because a team needs stability to get better as a team.

Brad still has at least one more transaction to complete because we have to get down to 15 players. I think the odds are that Parker is the odd man else because Brad would have to make a trade otherwise. Grant Williams needs to play PF exclusively this year but that is a coaches decision. He logged 18 MPG last year and I just do not see there being enough minutes at the 5 for him.

So, the question before us is: Can the Celtics be a legit contender without adding a 3rd star to the team. If the answer is no, what level of 3rd star are we talking about. (Elite, Allstar or borderline allstar. Should the Celtics consider positional needs if they added that 3rd guy?

Who was Milwaukee's 3rd star this year?  Jrue Holiday?  Well, when you have an absolutely elite player like Giannis, and a 2X All-Star like Middleton, then maybe a one-time All-Star like Holiday can do it, but he's 31 years old.  Forget about youth.  Middleton is 29.  Brook Lopez is 33.  PJ Tucker was 36.  There's their playoff starting 5:  Arguably the best player on Earth in Giannis, 29 year old Middleton, 31 year old Holiday, 33 year old Lopez and 36 year old Tucker.  They had 26 year old Bobby Portis coming off the bench along with 28 year old Pat Connaughton.  Donte DiVincenzo is 24 and played in 3 games.  Bryn Forbes is 27 years old and played 13.3mpg in 20 games.  Nobody else on that team averaged double-digit minutes/game in the playoffs.  NOT a young team and NOT a team with a 3rd star.  Phoenix overachieved but they really didn't have a chance, not this year.  They're still too wet behind the ears.

Who was the Lakers' 3rd star when they won last year?  You got LeBron and AD, but who else?  Most of their team were older, like Howard and Rondo and Bradley.  Caruso was younger and Kuzma was younger, but the anchors of that team were the older players.

In my opinion you do not need a 3rd All-Star to win a Championship but the two you have must play above their heads in the playoffs, and one of those two must be elite.  Tatum is elite.  Brown is pretty close to elite (and he has improved every single year he has been here, so his next step is 'elite').  After that you need players who are veterans and who play above their heads in the playoffs.  Smart, for one.  Horford, for as long as he's with us, has to deliver at least as well as Brook Lopez did for Milwaukee.  Counting on The Time Lord and Fast PP and 3Smith is not going to get it done.  It might, sure, but almost by definition they're unknowns and that increases doubt.  The beauty of veterans is that the coach knows what he'll get from them and they know what their strengths and weaknesses are at this point in their careers.  Brad has added veterans in Schroder and Richardson, and that's good, but they're short-term rentals.  I don't have a problem with short-term rentals, Eddie House and PJ Brown were short-term rentals too, but they came into a situation where all the other pieces were already there.  They were just finishing pieces.  Are we "there" now, and Schroder and Richardson and Horford are just "finishing pieces"?  I think not.  However, if we show well this year then, with or without them, we will be close enough to where we can talk about "finishing pieces".  COVID and injuries wrecked our Championship march last year.  Yes, RWill grew and all but going deep into the playoffs against an elite team like the Nets turns heads, and that's what you need to do to attract high-quality "finishing pieces".  You need to show them that you're close enough that all you need is them.

Schroder and Richardson will likely be gone next year (Schroder almost certainly).  By this time next year we have to be settled on Pritchard and Nesmith.  That might not be fair, it'll only be the end of their 2nd year and it usually takes at least 3 years for young'uns to take that big next step up, but if we're going to compete for a Championship before Tatum and/or Brown are free agents again we need to get close enough to only need "finishing pieces".  That means PP and AN or maybe they get moved for the pieces because, as DBoss pointed out, this team is built around two stars and neither of these two are them.  Therefore, almost by definition, their continued career in green is secondary to Tatum and Brown's careers continuing in green, and they want to win.  


Bob


.

I’d prefer as many stars as possible. Like to see a 3rd star but if building around these 2 on top of savvy moves by the FO gets us there then so be it.

You mentioned the $ and cap but with those contracts coming off the books after next season doesn’t that give us enough room to get a top FA star? If not a trade certainly would. Might mean moving Smart but lets hope its not necessary.
I prefer not to get into the math, cap, luxury etc. As I said before, thats their job. Other teams have found a way to maneuver $ and contend so there is a way. Those dead Presidents with be squinting their eyes when and if Wyc’s wallet opens up and lets some sunshine in. 5th Dimension, SING!!

Playoffs are about maximizing the minutes played by your best lineups and players. The 80s Celts used to regularly play their starters 40+ mins.

2014-15 Atlanta Hawks had a 60-22 record, were 1st in East and lost 0-4 to the Cavs in EC Finals. This was a team made up of a bunch of good players. Teague and Horford may have been the two best players, avg stars at best.

Even with two great players and a good roster, you may not win. Just check out the 2015-16 Warriors. They were the next level of 14-15 Hawks. 73-9 record. Two super stars. Lost to a team with 3 super stars.

2020-21 Brooklyn Nets: Lost 3-4 to the Bucks in EC Finals. KD played a 48 mins game. Despite KI and Harden injuries, Nets almost won.

Bottom line, nobody matches up to the Nets right now. And perhaps not for another couple of years unless they get hobbled by injuries.

You can get lucky and win with 2 stars. Like the 2014-15 Warriors when Love was out and KI got injured in the finals. Like the 2018-19 Raptors helped by the Warriors injuries. Like the 2019-20 Lakers helped by a weird shortened season in a bubble. Like the 2020-21 Bucks helped by the Nets injuries.

Good points..
I’m assuming that you consider Kevin Love as the Cav’s 3rd “super star”?
IMO they had 2. LJ, KI and a very good 3rd player in KL.

Yes, LJ and KI were super stars and KL was much better than and 3rd player on the Warriors. Warriors also had other issues. Bogut injury and Draymond suspension. But watching that series you could tell that they did not have the same level of belief as the Cavs.

What teams have won with three equal superstars? The 2008 Celtics and LBJ/DW/CB teams seem closest, but even on those teams, I would argue that Ray and Bosh accepted lesser roles. Most superstars are scorers. There is only one ball - there is no way you can get your money's worth from 3 guys who are primarily scorers. The greatest teams seem to have a clear hierarchy in terms of roles. I agree with Heckler - getting a bunch of grizzled vets or awesome role players willing to accept clearly defined roles is a totally valid path.

I understand that 3 super stars have to fit in. Even on the Nets, Harden has adjusted to adopt a more of a facilitator role.

Still, I believe that if the Nets are healthy, no team in NBA can stay with them. Having the 3 stars gives them so much more flexibility and the ability to attack all the lineups they face.

One big risk with the 3 star setup where most of the salary is spent, is the injury factor.

Year after year we see teams lose a main guy and they lack enough quality depth to compensate for it.  I guess it can also happen with big 2 configurations.  

The Celtics can compete provided there is real quality 3-9.  I think Marcus can have a similar impact that DG has in GS.  In some respects you could make a case that we have a big 3 or at the very least a 2.75

The key to maximizing quality depth is to establish specific roles for the players that surround our 2 main guys.

There are 5 quality teams in the East not including the Celtics.  I have them finishing no lower than 4th.   Too high?

Didn't Josh just extend for another year at $12M?

worcester wrote:Didn't Josh just extend for another year at $12M?

London Bridge is falling down.

dboss wrote:One big risk with the 3 star setup where most of the salary is spent, is the injury factor.

Year after year we see teams lose a main guy and they lack enough quality depth to compensate for it.  I guess it can also happen with big 2 configurations.  

The Celtics can compete provided there is real quality 3-9.  I think Marcus can have a similar impact that DG has in GS.  In some respects you could make a case that we have a big 3 or at the very least a 2.75

The key to maximizing quality depth is to establish specific roles for the players that surround our 2 main guys.

There are 5 quality teams in the East not including the Celtics.  I have them finishing no lower than 4th.   Too high?

2.75 stars.

Sounds right.

dboss wrote:One big risk with the 3 star setup where most of the salary is spent, is the injury factor.

Year after year we see teams lose a main guy and they lack enough quality depth to compensate for it.  I guess it can also happen with big 2 configurations.  

The Celtics can compete provided there is real quality 3-9.  I think Marcus can have a similar impact that DG has in GS.  In some respects you could make a case that we have a big 3 or at the very least a 2.75

The key to maximizing quality depth is to establish specific roles for the players that surround our 2 main guys.

There are 5 quality teams in the East not including the Celtics.  I have them finishing no lower than 4th.   Too high?

My position has been that nobody matches up to the Nets. After that, the Celts will be competitive with the Bucks and Miami. I believe that 76ers are good but also vulnerable. That is what I am looking forward to.

NYCelt wrote:

dboss wrote:One big risk with the 3 star setup where most of the salary is spent, is the injury factor.

Year after year we see teams lose a main guy and they lack enough quality depth to compensate for it.  I guess it can also happen with big 2 configurations.  

The Celtics can compete provided there is real quality 3-9.  I think Marcus can have a similar impact that DG has in GS.  In some respects you could make a case that we have a big 3 or at the very least a 2.75

The key to maximizing quality depth is to establish specific roles for the players that surround our 2 main guys.

There are 5 quality teams in the East not including the Celtics.  I have them finishing no lower than 4th.   Too high?

2.75 stars.

Sounds right.

I was thinking 2 1/2 stars, which led me to 2 1/2 men. Now I can't get that song outa my head!

gyso wrote:

NYCelt wrote:

dboss wrote:One big risk with the 3 star setup where most of the salary is spent, is the injury factor.

Year after year we see teams lose a main guy and they lack enough quality depth to compensate for it.  I guess it can also happen with big 2 configurations.  

The Celtics can compete provided there is real quality 3-9.  I think Marcus can have a similar impact that DG has in GS.  In some respects you could make a case that we have a big 3 or at the very least a 2.75

The key to maximizing quality depth is to establish specific roles for the players that surround our 2 main guys.

There are 5 quality teams in the East not including the Celtics.  I have them finishing no lower than 4th.   Too high?

2.75 stars.

Sounds right.

I was thinking 2 1/2 stars, which led me to 2 1/2 men.  Now I can't get that song outa my head!

Maybe until Smart becomes more widely recognized as a top-shelf player, or until we add other bigger names, you've just come up with a suitable nickname for Tatum, Brown and Smart.

You're right about that damn song though!

prakash wrote:

dboss wrote:One big risk with the 3 star setup where most of the salary is spent, is the injury factor.

Year after year we see teams lose a main guy and they lack enough quality depth to compensate for it.  I guess it can also happen with big 2 configurations.  

The Celtics can compete provided there is real quality 3-9.  I think Marcus can have a similar impact that DG has in GS.  In some respects you could make a case that we have a big 3 or at the very least a 2.75

The key to maximizing quality depth is to establish specific roles for the players that surround our 2 main guys.

There are 5 quality teams in the East not including the Celtics.  I have them finishing no lower than 4th.   Too high?

My position has been that nobody matches up to the Nets.  After that, the Celts will be competitive with the Bucks and Miami.  I believe that 76ers are good but also vulnerable.  That is what I am looking forward to.

No doubt the Nets have the best threesome in terms of fire power. But there remain several teams that can put up a lot of points as well. The Nets do not play lock down defense and I do not think they can just shoot their way into a title.

Matchup up with their 3 top guys is not possible but you can still match up with them (The Team)

How? Well you still need to have enough offense to put points on the board and that would require really good offensive depth. The main difference would have to come on the defensive end where you have multiple guys that can switch on defense. You need very physical players, you need high energy defensive players, you need bulk, you need rim protection, you need rebounding.

Ime is considered a guy that is a defensive minded coach. Brad has added mostly defensive minded guys to the team that also can score enough to help the offense.

We are going to get a much better take on this team when pre season starts

Until the Nets win a title, which they haven't two full years into their experiment, how can anyone say they can't be beaten? If everything breaks perfectly for a lot of teams, they could win.