You kinda came in a little late to the discussion. One Celtic fan started this off by arguing that the Celtics were the favorites to win it all next year. Then another came in saying that they are serious title challengers to dethrone the Warriors. That kinda set the table.
Of course the Celtics can beat the Warriors. So can the Rockets. So can the Sixers. So can whatever team Lebron goes to. But without a change in any of their rosters, it isn't very likely.
Sure but the Cavs are missing the sort of assets that would likely entice the Spurs.
Yeah I definitely came in late and my posts may not have been as defensive if I understood the place they were coming from. I was adding on to others posts without understanding where the discussion stemmed from.
Collectively, as in the overall average sum of their parts. The Warriors have 3 elite scorers, and 2 who are basically after thoughts most games.
I mean, it's just my opinion that I believe that the Celtics if healthy as constructed would give the Warriors a real challenge. What I see is potential areas where the Celtics could exploit the Warriors. The Warriors are not invulnerable. But I feel like most around here just want to dismiss it as "nah, that won't happen".
As has been stated... almost nobody "stops" KD... so I'm tempted to ask what kind of question is this?Who do the Celtics have that can stop KD?
The C's still have Horford and Brown... 2 top notch individual defenders... in that starting line up. Tatum and Hayward aren't slouches, either... and they're versatile.flyer said:Yes but instead of having guys like Tucker and Capela providing stout defense, they are going to have a bunch of guys that are more offensive minded. It is guys like Baynes, Morris, and Smart that provided the defensive backbone to the Celtics this year.
I could certainly be wrong and that starting 5 could play great defense but I remain skeptical.
Boston, would have the means to give the Spurs back players of good value without having to deal with a team in their conference - so giving up a quality player - teaming Leonard with Kyrie Irving and Boston could be one hell of a teamThe problem with Boston and Kawhi is money.
No team can carry 4 max players.
Boston already has Horford on a max, Hayward on a max, and Kyrie on a max.
Kyrie or Hayward or Horford would HAVE to go out in a deal.
Not only that- but they have to be cognizant of the fact that at some point Brown, Rozier, and Tatum will be up for new contracts. No time soon for Tatum- but as i said- 4 max guys is just not feasible under the current CBA.
Its why if Boston does step up and make an offer- Kyrie or Horford basically HAVE to be in the deal.
for the Sixers its not much of an issue since they dont have guys on those deals yet- and only Simmons and Embiid will garner those type of deals. They still have a slot for a 3rd max guy.
its basically why the Warriors are not operating on borrowed time.....having 4 max guys is practically impossible unless they take significant discounts. A "max" is roughly 30-35% of the cap depending on status, years in the league, whether yo uare a "Rose Rule" guy etc.....
you cant have 4 guys making 30%-35% of the cap- PLUS the rest of your team is whawt it comes down to.
As has been stated... almost nobody "stops" KD... so I'm tempted to ask what kind of question is this?
That aside: the C's are the best defensive team in the NBA... and they do it not only with great individual defenders (they have more than a few)... but with a team defensive concept and game plan.
Who would likely get the call against KD? A mix of Brown, Morris, Tatum and Ojeleye... after that, there would almost certainly be a game plan... to either try to limit KD or let him get his with as much resistance as possible.
The C's still have Horford and Brown... 2 top notch individual defenders... in that starting line up. Tatum and Hayward aren't slouches, either... and they're versatile.
This isn't theory, btw... these 4 are all proven "not bad at all" NBA defenders... collectively there is a great amount of versatility too... I can't see why you're so "skeptical"...
Kyrie is the weakest link... but even he showed last season that when motivated he is not a bad defender.
The argument proffered is that 4 to 5 players on the floor at a time who are legitimate triple threats can match the productivity of one offensive focal point...When it is all said and done, history tells you that if you don't have an MVP level player, you aren't going to win too many championships.
Of course Ainge is working the phones... that's his job... and the C's are attached to every possible trade going down in the NBA according to most every media outlet, dotchaknow.flyerhawk said:It is possible that the Celtics are the exception to the rule but it is really tough to do. Danny Ainge knows that as well as anyone which is why he is trying to get an MVP level player.
Every one of those guys is (at least) a decent defender... no one "has to" sit or else defense is thrown out the window.But this is the issue here. The Celtics can put Morris or Ojeleye out there but that means one of Brown, Tatum, Hayward would have to sit.
Fair enough, here.flyerhawk said:I'm skeptical that the Celtics can stop the Warriors in the playoffs since no one really has in 4 years without injuries and suspensions getting involved.
The argument proffered is that 4 to 5 players on the floor at a time who are legitimate triple threats can match the productivity of one offensive focal point...
... frankly, you don't seem to have a substantive counterpoint to this claim beyond falling back on on the same time tested wisdom that you started with... 'you need an elite player to win.'
It's a shame the C's choked away game 7 vs the Cav's. The team offensive strategy didn't fail... rather, young guys like Brown and Rozier tightened up in the big moment and missed shot after shot after shot. Getting Irving and Hayward back gives them steadiness and even the one man offense (Kyrie) that is sometimes great to fall back on.
Of course Ainge is working the phones... that's his job... and the C's are attached to every possible trade going down in the NBA according to most every media outlet, dotchaknow.
If the C's give up a haul for Kawhi or whatever... you may have a point. But until then Ainge is just doing his due diligence... perhaps looking for a steal.
What exactly would that chance be? Tough to pin that down... and, of course, it would be a spiffball, made up %. But if you put a gun to my head... somewhere between 1 in 5 and 1 in 3.
The problem with Boston and Kawhi is money.
No team can carry 4 max players.
Boston already has Horford on a max, Hayward on a max, and Kyrie on a max.
Kyrie or Hayward or Horford would HAVE to go out in a deal.
Not only that- but they have to be cognizant of the fact that at some point Brown, Rozier, and Tatum will be up for new contracts. No time soon for Tatum- but as i said- 4 max guys is just not feasible under the current CBA.
Its why if Boston does step up and make an offer- Kyrie or Horford basically HAVE to be in the deal.
for the Sixers its not much of an issue since they dont have guys on those deals yet- and only Simmons and Embiid will garner those type of deals. They still have a slot for a 3rd max guy.
its basically why the Warriors are not operating on borrowed time.....having 4 max guys is practically impossible unless they take significant discounts. A "max" is roughly 30-35% of the cap depending on status, years in the league, whether yo uare a "Rose Rule" guy etc.....
you cant have 4 guys making 30%-35% of the cap- PLUS the rest of your team is whawt it comes down to.
Kyrie I'd trade given that he's not healthy and has given no indication that he plans on re-signing with Boston. Boston of course would also have to throw in multiple picks as well.
I think a bit too much is being made of Kyrie's comments about resigning with the Celtics.
If Kyrie were to re-sign now, he would lose something like 20 million in salary.
For the record,
I think a potential trade of Kyrie + picks for Kawhi would give the Celtics a lot more than a puncher's chance against GS.
Kawhi is the game's best 2 way player, he can handle the ball and has great length. Kyrie is not a 2 way player. He isn't a terrible defender anymore, but he isn't an asset there either.
Can you imagine a team with Brown,Tatum,Hayward, Kawhi, Horford all playing interchangeably. I love Kyrie but damn that team and Smart at point would be the tsunami of defense
This history isn't in dispute... I again concede it. Here are my two counter-points, though:Well yeah. I have 40 years of history on my side. 38 champions had at least one MVP on their team. 2 didn't.