Celtics' rebuilding plan didn't count on never getting any breaks

http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/story/2015-09-09/nba-free-agency-2015-boston-celtics-danny-ainge-rebuilding-david-lee-amir-johnson




Celtics' rebuilding plan didn't count on never getting any breaks









By Sean Deveney
@seandeveney
Published on Sep. 9, 2015




The obvious concern, by the time the Cavaliers’ sweep of the Celtics in the opening round of last year’s postseason was complete, was talent. The Cavs, with a trio of stars anchoring the roster, simply had more of it, so that no matter how hard the Celtics played and how crisply they executed, no matter how sharp coach Brad Stevens’ game plans, the results were all but predetermined.

Pulling through the rubble of that series, which followed a promising 20-10 stretch to close the season, Celtics president Danny Ainge said, “I think we need to upgrade our talent level on our team. At the same time, I’m very excited about a lot of individuals on our team. … I’m excited about the players we have, at the same time, I feel like we are not on the same level of a team like Cleveland, and I think we found that out.”


We’re just a few months beyond that, and it’s obvious the Celtics are still not on the level of a team like the Cavs. The concern is they’re not on the level of the Hawks, Raptors, Wizards and Bulls, either. The Bucks will likely pull farther ahead of them, too, and there’s danger behind from the healthy Heat, Pacers and Hornets.

All of that puts the Celtics in an awkward position. It could be argued that Ainge has done just about everything right to this point. He’s followed the Rebuilding 101 blueprint, done the same kinds of things Sam Presti did in Oklahoma City, Daryl Morey did in Houston and Danny Ferry did in Atlanta (before his comments about Luol Deng forced his exit, that is).

He first took the remaining pillars of his Big Three, Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett, and turned them into assets, with the expectation that those assets could be combined and converted into a big prize down the road. He did the same last winter with veterans Rajon Rondo and Jeff Green. The Celtics had two first-round draft picks this June and likely will have eight first-rounders (and about 10 second-rounders) in the coming four years.

And Ainge kept the Celtics’ books as clean as they’ve ever been. He pointed out before the offseason that this summer likely marked the first time the Celtics had cap space ever in franchise history, certainly the first time in his tenure running the team. Again, that kind of flexibility has been crucial to rebuilding efforts elsewhere.

But for all the right moves Ainge has made in setting up Boston as an ideal situation — young team, good coach, plenty of financial wiggle room — the Celtics have come away with decidedly little. Where Houston pilfered James Harden and Dwight Howard, and Oklahoma City found lottery and draft luck with Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook, the Celtics emerged from this offseason with one major new signee, forward Amir Johnson, and one new trade acquisition, David Lee.

Those are upgrades, sure. But they’re also new veterans contributing to a frontcourt glutted with good-not-great talent. The Kevin Love dream is yet unfulfilled. Heck, Ainge was not even able to consolidate his assets enough to get Justise Winslow in the draft. All of this puts a lot of pressure on Marcus Smart, the No. 6 pick in the 2014 NBA Draft, to develop into a star. He may be the only player on the roster with that kind of potential.

This is the issue with rebuilding that is so often under-appreciated: You’ve got to be lucky. It has nothing to do with the tired trope about free agents not wanting to sign in Boston. Free agents don’t really like signing anywhere new. They mostly like to stay put, or to be traded before free agency. Ask DeAndre Jordan about that.

Somewhere along the line, something improbable has to happen that shakes free a star player and sends him your way. A general manager in this league can do everything exactly as he should, can plan for trades and free agency carefully and wisely. But he can’t force players like Harden or Howard onto the market — or a guy like Garnett back in 2007, when the Celtics were last able to cash in assets and turn themselves into contenders. Ainge also couldn’t force Michael Jordan to give up his crush on Frank Kaminsky and trade the No. 9 pick.

If you’re running an NBA team, all you can do is keep your roster flexible and your draft-pick balance sheet stocked in your favor. Then you can only wait. It’s a bit like fishing. You might have some excellent new hip waders and the perfect lures, and you might cast a thousand times, but that doesn’t mean you’re going to catch anything.

The Celtics, if the Nets fall out of the playoff mix as the East improves and if the woebegone Mavericks miss the playoffs but hold one of the No. 8-14 spots in the draft, could wind up with three lottery picks in 2016. That certainly represents an upgrade in the Celtics’ assets and another chance to improve the talent level, either through draft or trade.

But Ainge and the Celtics only have so much say in how others will value those assets, and which players might be available in a swap at all. It’s not a bad set-up in Boston. All that is missing is a little luck.



bob




.

This one really irritated me.

This dude acts like we were somehow expected to make the playoffs last year, in just year two of the rebuild. He acts like we've been in purgatory for ages now, just treading water.

No lucky breaks, he says, even though the season started 13-26 and finished with a 24-12 streak. Nope, nothing to see there. Nothing to praise there. No lucky breaks there. Not trading Rondo for a veritable fortune of assets compared to Rondo's current worth. Not trading Green for a first round pick plus Tayshaun Prince, who turned into Jerebko and Datome.

Nope, this genius not only suggests he fully expected the Celtics making the playoffs after a 13-26 start (Sure He Did!), but going from a 33% winning team to a 66% winning team in the second half of the season just doesn't strike him as anything other than treadmill mediocrity.

Yup, the fact that we didn't beat LeBron F James and the EC Champion Cavs in YEAR TWO of the rebuild is just unacceptable to this guy.

Give me a break.

IMO, Danny has done many, but not all things right in his rebuilding quest. He unloaded aging stars in a brilliant trade with the Nets, he landed an excellent coach, but so far he has not timed his moves to maximize his draft assets. Look at how much he was willing to sacrifice to move up a few spots to land Winslow, who was given to Charlotte for losing just 7 more games than the Celtics. Had we lost 8 more games, we could have had Winslow without giving up anything. No, I'm not talking about tanking: which in my book is a coach and team not trying to win every game. I'm talking about the timing of acquiring Isaiah Thomas and the 8 or more wins he insured last season. Wait or pass on that acquisition and your draft assets loom far larger.
  I don't know whether Winslow is the star we need; all I know is Danny was willing to sell his grandmother to get him because his earlier move had made it impossible to cash in on draft assets the way he thought he should.
  Who decided the path to the future was stock-piling picks? Danny. Who determined that our draft position was no good so we had to try to trade up? Danny. Who engineered deals to improve our record in a year we hoped to draft a star? Danny.
  The luck the author mentions may still help us if our draft picks pan out, or the Nets stink and I hope they do. But relying on luck in drafting is a losing strategy in the long run. Hope springs eternal, but acquiring Johnson and Lee may do just what Thomas did, help us win another 6-8 games, just enough to make it harder to cash in on picks.
  To be clear, I root exclusively for the green. I hope I'm wrong, that the author is wrong, in assessing our current talent and that we have a contender. I hope the Nets fizzle and Mavericks play middling ball, but I don't think Danny can take credit for either circumstance, should they come to pass. True, Rambone, It's early in the rebuild and I could be wrong. Go Celtics! Hawk

I think Danny can definitely take some credit, though he got extremely lucky that his awful trade proposal was turned down by Charlotte and Miami.

Usually Danny seems smart enough to stay out of the emotional hysteria that occurs on draft week/draft day, but this year he was Billie King/Michael Jordan level emotional and irrational.

Winslow probably isn't much, if at all better than Jae Crowder. Winslow is a very short SF without a good 3 point shot, and because he is still gaining weight at 19 years old, we can see his athleticism/explosiveness becoming more mediocre. This (natural) weight gain and loss of explosiveness was on full display in summer league.

Right now we truly have the best of all worlds. The bulk of the re-build is already over, in the past, and while the Celtics will be building off our awesome half-season and playoff experience, we outsourced our tank/rebuild to the Nets, and now the Mavs.

Imagine not having the Nets 2016 pick to look forward to, because Danny traded it away with a bunch of other good picks for a slight upgrade over Jae Crowder.

Now THAT would be the definition of being unlucky, and stuck on a treadmill of sorts.

Or imagine not getting IT4, locked in for 3 more years, and not having a half season of winning basketball and all that playoff experience for not just our young guys, but for our young coach.

Even LeBron needed a couple/few years of playoff experience before he got really good at it.

Most of the people who think improving dramatically last year was a step back are the same guys who thought we should be tanking all along. So they convince themselves that our 24-12 finish was merely a short-term gain at the expense of the "big picture". As if IT4 was a free agent this summer or something dumb.
As if Winslow was/is somehow a clearly better player/prospect than IT4. As if a slight upgrade over Crowder is more valuable to this team than a point guard who can actually get into the lane at will, draw lots of fouls, and generally be a major offensive weapon.

As if some other team won't be offering us 4-5 first round draft picks next summer for our Nets pick.

As if the Champion Golden State Warriors didn't need the valuable playoff experience of the past couple/few years to help them actually win the championship this year.

The Warriors lost in the first round of the playoffs last year. Should they have tank instead? Was it clear that they were still several years away from being a contender? What if they already had the Nets first round picks for the next three years? Should they have tanked anyway?

Just one year ago a lot of people were calling Golden State dumb for not trading Klay Thompson and David Lee for Kevin Love, especially since they lost in the first round of the playoffs and were clearly* not equipped to contend/win a title as they were built.

Would Draymond Green have broken out, not just as a starter but as a max contract player, if he was backing up Kevin Love this year? No. Would Golden State have won the title this year without Draymond Green's defense, and just one Splash Brother? Very doubtful.

Most basketball analysis is extremely simplistic. People can't analyze talent, so they tell themselves that top 10 draft picks have a magical ability to automatically be stars and make a team a contender.

The same bad talent evaluators who thought Rondo and Green were the only good players on our team last year. The one's who basically think IT4 was only valuable last year, and not going forward, because he wasn't drafted in the top 10 like Winslow was.

The same type who thought one year ago that Kevin Love was a vastly superior player to Draymond Green, because Kevin Love was drafted in the top 5, while Draymond was a second rounder.

And this year Warriors most likely would not have beat the Cavs if Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love were healthy and playing.

Tankers always make the argument that unless you're 99-100% sure your team can/will win the title that year, you're better off tanking for another "superstar".

In reality, almost every single Championship in NBA history required at least a bit of luck, especially with injuries to other teams.

But for some reason tankers are super willing to roll the dice on the draft lottery, hoping for the next Tim Duncan, even though the odds are very low of actually getting such a player, say 10% each tanking year.

But to roll the dice on just putting your best team out there, playing your hardest, and giving yourself a chance to get lucky in the playoffs? Tankers hate that kind of gamble, if the odds are anything lower than 90%.

The math is as bad as the talent evaluation abilities of these tankers.

rambone wrote:This one really irritated me.

This dude acts like we were somehow expected to make the playoffs last year, in just year two of the rebuild. He acts like we've been in purgatory for ages now, just treading water.

No lucky breaks, he says, even though the season started 13-26 and finished with a 24-12 streak. Nope, nothing to see there. Nothing to praise there. No lucky breaks there. Not trading Rondo for a veritable fortune of assets compared to Rondo's current worth. Not trading Green for a first round pick plus Tayshaun Prince, who turned into Jerebko and Datome.

Nope, this genius not only suggests he fully expected the Celtics making the playoffs after a 13-26 start (Sure He Did!), but going from a 33% winning team to a 66% winning team in the second half of the season just doesn't strike him as anything other than treadmill mediocrity.

Yup, the fact that we didn't beat LeBron F James and the EC Champion Cavs in YEAR TWO of the rebuild is just unacceptable to this guy.

Give me a break.

rambone,

I concur.

Admittedly the EC sucked last year, but we didn't sneak into the 8th spot neither.  We put on a helluva surge in the last 40% or so of the season and held off several contenders to earn (earn!) the 7th slot.  Setting aside the question as to whether we would have been better off not making the playoffs, there is no doubt, at least not in my mind, that as far as organic growth and a few additions (Thomas, for example) we are WAY ahead of schedule on the rebuild.

Miami wanted Winslow.  Period.  They see him as the successor to DWade.  I think the only way Danny could have gotten him from Pat Riley is by prying him out of his cold, dead fingers.  As far as MJ and Kaminsky goes, well, look at how well he has done building his team through the draft to-date and that might explain why he couldn't be enticed.  A corrollary to Acton's Axiom might be "Arrogance destroys and absolute arrogance destroys absolutely".  That might describe Danny's old golf buddy.

Bottom line:  If MJ was fixated on Kaminsky and Riley was drooling over Winslow then who else could have been Danny's trading partner to move up?

We are now two full years into a minimum 3, probably 5 year rebuild.  It's hard being patient, especially when we got used to winning, but sometimes there are no shortcuts.  Sometimes the fans have to be grinders, just like we love our players to be.


bob


.

bobheckler wrote:


We are now two full years into a minimum 3, probably 5 year rebuild.  It's hard being patient, especially when we got used to winning, but sometimes there are no shortcuts.  Sometimes the fans have to be grinders, just like we love our players to be.


bob


.

+1

I'm not even sure fans have to be patient. I enjoyed every minute of last season's playoff run, having predicted a mid-season trade for an impact player like IT4 turned out to be. I knew Smart was already a good, impactful player. Same with Zeller and Turner, and KO. Most people chose not to see those guys as anything more than afterthoughts, because they weren't "stars".

The playoff run last year was entirely predictable because of the mountain of assets Danny was sitting on.

This season, I get the feeling if we win 50 games, the whole NBA world will be talking about how dramatically we improved from last year, but to me, it will be just par for the course, and basically the same exact winning % as how we played for just about the entire 2nd half of last season.

To me, it shouldn't even come as a surprise if the Celtics cash in the 2016 Nets pick early, trading it mid-season for Another, even better impact player than IT4.
So why would it be a shocker if the Celtics ended up winning 55-60 games, and being very legit contenders, THIS coming season? In a relatively weak Eastern conference?

Danny could even hold on to the Nets '16 pick, and still have tons of valuable 2016 draft picks to trade. Now just imagine if he Really tapped into the asset stockpile in his mid-season trades.

The Celtics are arguably as well positioned to win the 2015-16 title as all but 3-4 teams, at most. Because while that huge stockpile of future picks might not have had great value on draft night, all those 2016 picks start rising in value as soon as the college season starts, and even (much) more by the trade deadline. Future picks just don't have much value in the irrational emotional frenzy of draft week/night.

Count on it guys, we're a lot closer to being a top team THIS year than people realize. In fact, the Celtics could trade the Mavs and Celtics '16 first rounders, plus the top 2nd rounder from the 76ers, for a REAL difference maker. Then they can be legit contenders THIS year, while still drafting in the top 5-10 with the Nets pick.

This is the state of our franchise right now.

Celtics got IT4 for a late first rounder last year. And not even a current first rounder, it was for a future first rounder. A current (2015) first rounder would have been worth even more.

Now sure, deals like that don't come around all the time, but when the Cavs traded two future first rounders to Denver for Mozgov, a lot of people thought it was an overpay.

Do you not think a Mozgov level defensive center would make us contenders this year, in a weak eastern conference?

Of course, a great defensive center isn't always available by trade, or for two first rounders, but just remember that a lot of people thought it was an overpay last year.

Whether it takes one draft pick, or two draft picks, or three draft picks, or four draft picks, the Celtics are simply extremely well positioned to make a major impact trade or two, while retaining much of our draft pick stockpile.

Even though the draft night madness has everybody down on our draft pick stockpile.

Sorry, I must be in Major Rant Mode today. I guess I'm just realizing how close we are to REALLY contending this year.

At most, I'd say we're a stud scoring SF, and a Perk-like backup center away from being the clear-cut #2 team in the East.

Smart, Bradley, Danillo Gallinari, David Lee, Amir

That's a top Eastern conference starting 5, and the bench is the strength of the team! IT4, Hunter, Crowder, Sully, Zeller/KO. With tons of depth behind all that with Rozier, Mickey, Jerebko, Turner, Zeller/KO.

Our Big 3 of Pierce, KG, and Ray distorted our sense of what a winning team looks like. We think a winning team looks like one thing, and one thing only: three superstars.

There are other ways to win, and the Celtics have already shown they can win at a very high rate for an extended period of time. With rapidly more valuable draft picks sitting in our pocket.

It could be Gallinari, it could be Jusuf Nurkic, it could be Rudy Gay, or Cousins, or WCStein, or a dozen other impact players that will become available as the regular season unfolds. Some locker room problems might even pop up in pre-season.

But everything is really coming together all of a sudden, in large part because Danny didn't blow it all on a terrible trade.

Rambone, First, I like your enthusiasm and respect your knowledge, particularly of college players about to be rookies. But sometimes your assertions are hard to swallow and you seem to want to tangle. Before writing this (in a work break), I had to ask myself if you were calling me a "tanker"? It would appear so as your references to tankers come in posts about Winslow and IT4 - players I mentioned in mine.
First, let me say that tanking in my definition occurs when coach and players don't go all out to win games and I don't like it. I don't think that management decisions to add or subtract to the roster to achieve long-term goals qualifies as tanking. Do you see this differently?
You write "Tankers always make the argument that unless you're 99-100% sure your team can/will win the title that year, you're better off tanking for another "superstar"."
Can you back this up with any facts? How did you come to know so much about tankers?
And you write: " Tankers hate that kind of gamble, if the odds are anything lower than 90%." Same questions.
And "The math is as bad as the talent evaluation abilities of these tankers."
Who are these math challenged tankers you speak of? Do they throw facts and figures around without any basis of knowledge?
Not everyone is always enamored with management's decisions. I started my post with saying: "IMO, Danny has done many, but not all things right in his rebuilding quest."
I never said Winslow or Love or any other non-Celtic was key to our future. I noted that Danny was willing to sell the farm for Winslow. I've never been a Love fan (feel free to check previous posts). I like Thomas, but I think he can be neutralized because he is so short.
Bob, This fan has been grinding out for the C's since 1961, listening to games with the incomparable Johnny Most. And of course, I'm from Springfield. Hawk

I'm trying to think of a list of realistic potential trade targets

Gallinari
Nurkic
Rudy Gay
Cousins
WCS
Brook Lopez
Al Horford
Jeff Teague (Dennis Schroeder almost too good to sit on bench. Celtics could trade back guys like Zeller, Turner, and/or Sully. A Teague/Smart backcourt is undoubtedly better than a Bradley/Smart backcourt, for instance)
Tobias Harris (it's crowded with Gordon and Hezonja)
Gorgui Dieng (overrate, like Brandon Wright was)
Shabbazz Mohammad (would be a nice scorer at SF, even off the bench)
Chandler Parsons
Tyson Chandler
Markieff Morris
Kelly Oubre (draft day trade target for Danny)
Otto Porter (If Oubre breaks out. Porter would actually be a nice 3 and D SF for us)
Carmelo Anthony
J Noah
Taj Gibson (they have too many bigs)
Al Jefferson (if Charlotte goes for a different look and they get Sully and/or Zeller back, plus pick(s))
MKGilchrist (probably an upgrade over Crowder)

Lots of potential available trade targets, and Celtics could make more than one of them easily.

hawksnestbeach wrote:Rambone, First, I like your enthusiasm and respect your knowledge, particularly of college players about to be rookies. But sometimes your assertions are hard to swallow and you seem to want to tangle. Before writing this (in a work break), I had to ask myself if you were calling me a "tanker"? It would appear so as your references to tankers come in posts about Winslow and IT4 - players I mentioned in mine.
  First, let me say that tanking in my definition occurs when coach and players don't go all out to win games and I don't like it. I don't think that management decisions to add or subtract to the roster to achieve long-term goals qualifies as tanking. Do you see this differently?
  You write "Tankers always make the argument that unless you're 99-100% sure your team can/will win the title that year, you're better off tanking for another "superstar"."
Can you back this up with any facts? How did you come to know so much about tankers?
  And you write: " Tankers hate that kind of gamble, if the odds are anything lower than 90%." Same questions.
  And "The math is as bad as the talent evaluation abilities of these tankers."
  Who are these math challenged tankers you speak of? Do they throw facts and figures around without any basis of knowledge?
  Not everyone is always enamored with management's decisions. I started my post with saying: "IMO, Danny has done many, but not all things right in his rebuilding quest."
  I never said Winslow or Love or any other non-Celtic was key to our future. I noted that Danny was willing to sell the farm for Winslow. I've never been a Love fan (feel free to check previous posts). I like Thomas, but I think he can be neutralized because he is so short.
  Bob, This fan has been grinding out for the C's since 1961, listening to games with the incomparable Johnny Most. And of course, I'm from Springfield. Hawk

My apologies for not being clear that I wasn't talking about you. That was insensitive of me, and probably not pleasant on your part. I was ranting about the mentality of the guy who wrote the article, and the many pro-tankers at places like Celticsblog and realgm.

Again, I apologize. I absolutely was not looking to stir up an argument with anyone.

Thanks for clarifying, keep writing! I'm probably on edge because I just found out about Sam and it's like a sucker punch. Hawk

Yeah this forum here is a nice getaway from the relentless tanker brigade that plagues other Celtics fan forums. You guys are lucky to have less exposure to them. And tankers often make up the ranks of the moderators, to the point that Official Tank Threads get stickied at the top so everybody sees it all the time.

But soon the Celtics bandwagon will be in full effect again.

Just my opinion.

hawksnestbeach wrote:Thanks for clarifying, keep writing! I'm probably on edge because I just found out about Sam and it's like a sucker punch. Hawk

I know. And I'm trying to be on my best behavior out of respect for our MVP. I'd rather step away from the forum than let him down, if you know what I mean.

I was definitely with Bob on the general length of the rebuild, at minimum 3 years, with this being the third year, even if we made the ECF. I guess today I just realized how valuable these 2016 draft picks are about to become, right in the middle of the season.

If the Celtics start out hot, or fairly hot, It will be the first time since at least 2011-12, if that. In 2012-13 we started out 20-23 before Rondo went down, and every year since has been as pedestrian or (much) worse. Now of course we would accept that 20-23 start, but I think we can significantly out-perform that start. Why not start 25-15. I think we could do that. Very much within the realm of possibility. And an impact trade in Jan-Feb, when a few teams decide to tank? That could leave us with a top 3 seed and a great shot at getting to the ECF. But once you're in the ECF, you're suddenly with two strokes of luck of getting a banner. That's how the Warriors won it this year after bowing out in the first round last year.

Hawk

"First, let me say that tanking in my definition occurs when coach and players don't go all out to win games and I don't like it. I don't think that management decisions to add or subtract to the roster to achieve long-term goals qualifies as tanking."

I agree 100% with your above statement. I was hoping for a much higher draft pick this past June. Should we fail to strike it rich over the next 2 or 3 years in the free agency market it will be imperative that we be well stocked with high draft picks to develop or use in a trade. So yes, I am hoping that all the teams that we have picks coming from have real lousy years - and that includes this years coming addition of the Celtics.

swish

Swish, I think most here agree that teams need to reboot, even when it sets them back in the short run. And there's nothing worse than prolonged mediocrity because it's a hard cycle to break, especially when competitors, like the Spurs, are clever at extending their runs (as we would have if Bias had played with Bird and co.). I'm going to root for this team and hope they're great, and Rambone gives me hope. It's Danny who underscored the importance of draft order by what he was willing to give up to move up. Hawk

hawksnestbeach

 During rebuilding years team loses do not bother me because I get my kicks by concentrating on the performances of the individual PLAYERS , with an eye to the future. In 2007-08 I was very happy with the outlook for the team going into the draft lottery anticipating the drafting of either Oden or Durant with the 2nd pick,  to go along with Pierce, Jefferson and the other young players on the roster. However the ping pong balls dropped us down to the 5th pick and as a result the trades for Allen and Garnett. It all ended on a happy note. Perhaps I view the game, during rebuilding years, more through the eyes of a general manager than a fan.

swish