Anxiety

I have been suffering through anxiety also. I really, really want the Celtics to get a top pick. I want the curse that has hovered over the Celtics for the past 21 years lifted. I want the Celtics to be relevant again. It all starts with the ping pong balls. I remember all too well the crushing feeling during the 1997 lottery and don’t want that feeling again. 3 days to wait and I am as nervous as a long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs.

I’ve been compulsive obsessive over the draft for 20 years now, and I just don’t remember this level of anxiety/importance on getting a top pick, even during Duncans draft. I’d love to get Oden or Durant, but but there’s lots of talent here, and I’ve always loved the one I’m with.

Frankly the draft will be more interesting for me if the Celtics don’t get one of the top two picks. A lower pick will be a better test of Ainge’s player evaluation skills and his understanding of how to construct a winning roster.

That’s some pretty funny stuff right there.

In keeping with the wow is us theme from this and the Bill Simmons piece, I’m not sure why but I find myself disagreeing once again with most of the onsite bloggers. The question was, if you get Durant, do you then trade Pierce and 2/3 are saying “NO”.

Gosh, now that gives us 4 players in the small forward spot- Pierce, Durant, G. Green and Wally. What do we do, limit Durant to 15 minutes a game? Oh I know, we trade Wally- but who the heck is knocking on our door wanting him? Do we cut the strings with Gerald Green and due to his lack of consistency thus far probably not get what we could or should for him? If Greens stays a Celtic with Pierce, Wally, Durant, expect him to be back down to 10 min. a game. You absolutely have to make a trade if we get Durant, and Pierce is the logical odd man out because of what we can get back in return.

At some point, this organization needs to make the moves that are needed to get us into contention. A good team for us to measure ourselves against IMO are the Bulls. I don’t see us competing with them with 4 small forwards.

…I think it´s a shame…our lives a ping pong ball???…please, take it easy…just take a look around….

Tim Duncan, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Bill Russell, etc ain’t going to be walking thru that door. Hope I’m wrong. The important thing is that we make the right move regardless of silly ping pong balls.

Geez, it’s a draft pick. I like the PP/Al core. Get them a couple of vets and they’ll be competitive. Yes, a good top pick will help, but let’s get real. Whatever the Celts get, that kid will be 1 one of 10 or so players under 25. Relax.

Brick- Are you serious?! You’d rather we had a lesser player? What, are you wanting to have Toronto get it somehow?! (Yes I know they aren’t in the lottery) I’m starting to really wonder if you aren’t a Celtics fan at all. Who would possibly hope that we get a worse player vs. one who could more likely help us become perennial playoff contenders?!

Also, how come no one else called him out on this?! Bunch of sheep?!

I didn’t say I’d rather have a lesser player. I said the draft will be more interesting if the Celtics don’t get #1 or #2.

If they get #1 or #2, there will be a million threads “Oden vs Durant” but you know it’s going to be one or the other. If they get pick #3 there are about 5-6 possible choices, plus lots of interesting trade scenarios.

Glad to hear you hadn’t totally lost it Brick! My fault!! I guess that the “interesting” line of discussion would more likely favor 3-5. If we get 1 or 2 we may be better off with 2 so that the decision is made for us. I think at 1 you’d have to take Oden, and I think that Durant is the more sure thing between the two. I don’t think we would have the guts to take Durant at 1…

I agree, it would be more interesting to see what Danny does with pick from 3 to 5, but I too (and everyone else I presume) don’t want to go there. I just hope ca-ching, that machine spits out a Celt #1 or #2.

Can someone explain to me why the NBA sucks? Why can you get top-tier talent deeper in the draft in other leagues (MLB and NFL, for example), but unless you get a top 5 in the NBA (or sometimes a top 1 or 2), you are hosed? Maybe the 12-man roster is to blame. And perhaps it is just the Celtics front office and their knack of blowing draft after draft (across regimes even) or trading away superb talent for nothing (see Chauncey Billups). I’m going to make a prediction — the Celtics curse will continue, Oden and Durant will slip away, and there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth heard throughout Celtic-land.

I was being positive in the comment above. Reality is much, much worse.

EJPLAYA: As for calling all of us sheep… I forgive ewe.

greenkite71 said:
  Can someone explain to me why the NBA sucks? Why can you get top-tier talent deeper in the draft in other leagues (MLB and NFL, for example), but unless you get a top 5 in the NBA (or sometimes a top 1 or 2), you are hosed?

I believe it’s due to the change in college basketball. Putting in the three point line (not at the pro distance) started the end of the pure Big. By making the 3 doable for almost anyone, everyone wanted to shoot threes, pad their stats and look more presentable to the pros. Also taking players out of high school (which I don’t oppose) led to good players, without good basketball knowledge, to skip college. (I don’t think the one year rule changes this). Together these 2 events led to more players leaving college early, some after 1 or 2 years and entering the pros. At first some had success, some didn’t. Some had success early, some didn’t. As the good player pool from the “good old days” is getting old and retiring we are left with players who are young, athletic (but not schooled in the fundamentals). Now there are still enough full time college players left to show how bad these new types are, but things will level out soon and the brand of basketball will become more uniform, but at a lower level. It used to be that a good college coach would have a player for 3 or 4 years and really teach the game. A good college coach no longer has this opportunity. Players like Micheal Jordan were much better pro players than they appeared to be in college because the discipline instilled by the coach made them play team basketball according to the fundamentals. They also didn’t have to deal with 7 footers shooting 3’s. If they wanted to make it in the pros they needed to play under the basket. That’s why I’m not so excited about this draft. We are still getting a young high school player who never learned the fundamentals as our prospects. The one college year is like “fool’s gold”. The learning now has to be done at the pro level and that takes time. It will take less time when all the players are from this generation.

Perhaps with the developing international contributions to the draft talent pool it’s time to change the draft probability format.

But wouldn’t this change encourage teams to TANK? What do you suppose is going on with the present system? There probably is no system that’s ideal but the current one still doesn’t usually do what it’s designed to do. Just look at draft history and see how often the balls drop according to the present design. Perhaps the present system would work better if it were weighted differently?

For instance, give Memphis a 40% chance, the Celtics a 30% chance, Atlanta a 20% chance etc. with the team with the 4th worst record getting a 10% chance. The worst team might still not get the top pick but at least the two worst teams would have a 70% chance at changing their pitiful outlook.

This system could also fail if the team with the highest selections fail to choose the best players but that fault more squarely rests with the FRANCHISE and not the lottery system, per se.

I’m not looking at this year’s draft and the Celtic’s position in it as a blueprint for change but the system, as presently constructed, is in need of improvement.

Thus if Memphis actually got to choose first, the percentages would repeat with the Celtic’s now having a 40% chance at #2 (giving them a cumulative 70% chance at #’s 1 or 2. The weighted system continues to repeat itself according to the inverse order of their respective win/loss record.

This improved system would give a much higher probability that the worst teams actually got the best chances at success. For instance, if Memphis didn’t get to pick first, they would now have an 80% chance at a top 2 pick.

To have ALL teams entering the lottery with a “potential” chance (although slim) to get the top pick seems to defeat the lottery intention of getting immediate help to the most needy teams and not necessarily the “luckiest” teams.

I would also propose that if we get the #1 or 2 that we trade it and some of the players on our current roster for a young (5 tear pro experience) quality veteran(s) and a later pick. The safe thing for Danny to do in this current climate of criticism would be to take the 1 or 2. I don’t know the players in the draft and maybe Oden and Durant are as good as people say and will project to be good or great pros. I just have my doubts. If Danny gets the opportunity to take 1 or 2 and doesn’t, I can just imagine what the emails and airwaves will be like. For all I know Danny does project the 1 or 2 as impact players, but I have a hunch he doesn’t. Alot may depend on what he knows of the character of these players and whether or not they really like to play basketball. In other words, are they “gym rats”.

Forgot to say now let me have it with all you’ve got.

Brick ,you want interesting….wait till Danny shops the top 2 picks if he gets them and tries for a McHale-type trade…now that’ll be interesting…lol

Motown, I’m not sure if you really mean what you’re saying, but that’s what I would consider doing if he can get the right McHale-type player.

Might as well get serious and recognize that this year both Oden and Durant are “franchise-type” players and they’re not for sale!

You wait 10 years for an Oden-type player and the first thought is getting IMMEDIATE help by trading for a veteran? And why do you do this? Because the clock is ticking on Paul Pierce? Do you then believe that an Oden-type player who can stabilize the MOST important position on a team is NOT more valuable than a wing player?

Or, take Durant as well. We’ve NEVER had his type dominate the game as a freshman as Durant has. He apparently does everything well, has size and athleticism…needs only NBA experience to deliver all the goods and you want to trade him? For whom? At what salary increase?

We don’t NEED scoring? I’ve heard that before but in actuality the Celtic’s had the 10th worst shooting percentage in the NBA last year.

flip flop picks….not trade out entirely…just saying Ainge is a gambler of sorts….let’s wait till tuesday

moskqq, I’m saying what I’m saying because I’m not so sure these two guys are as good as people say. Maybe they are and that’s fine. But if they’re a three to 5 year project why not go for a young quality player who has many years left to play in the NBA. Say a Tayshaun Prince type or maybe Richard Jefferson. I’m not saying to do this as a quick fix, but as a long-term deal and a really good player. I also don’t think PP has anything to do with what we do in the draft. I’m just saying to do what will make the team competitive for the long term. If Oden or Durant are the answer, fine if we get the chance to get them.

TrueGreen, I’d endorse your suggestion if you were actually talking about picks 3-5. In fact, I’d seriously consider trading for Phoenix’s 3 picks (if Atlanta doesn’t get a top 3 pick) to include our own #3 plus anyone on our roster that’s not a core player. The depth of this draft would provide some interesting pieces and could improve our talent level as well as team balance.

As for trading Oden or Durant, with their “potential” for greatness I’d hate to be trading away the next NBA “superstar”.

moskqq, obviously you think Oden and Durant are that good. I just really don’t know. I think we are talking about another young high school player who will take many years to achieve his potential. I don’t think either is a LeBron James or Amare Stoudamire. If you’re right I agree with you, but I think they would have to make a near immediate impact if this team is going to grow. Wonder what others think. I’d also like to add that this is becoming a civilized discussion of ideas.

You absolutely get any notion of trading Oden or Durant out of your head period! IMO.

Athough Oden looks like a WWII veteran (Michigan joke), you put all your marbles in the pot with this guy! Secondly, if Oden is gone, and you trade Durant, you are looking at a star player for the next dozen years in the league.

If we trade Durant, and then Pierce fights injuries like he had last season and the end of the season before that, we are stuck in limbo even with a veteran trade.

Build this team around Big Al, Durant/Oden (if either available), and possibly. Rondo. Anything less than that if that scenario is possible is another stake in the heart for C fans.

bceltfan, good points. We’ve been building around PP with the thought (in my mind) that someone would develop and take over his role at some point. The idea of now making a switch to build around Al and Rondo is a good one, one I’ve not thought of. I’ll temper this by saying I’m taking your word (and others) that Oden and Durant will be that good. That’s my hangup with them. I’m not convinced they will because they are basically very young high school players and I’m not sure they’re in the same league as LeBron James and Amare Stoudamire. Are they in your opinion?

Both LeBron James and Amare Stoudamire needed time to acclimate to the NBA game. Neither Oden nor Durant are likely to be their equal IMMEDIATELY but we’re looking at the health of the Celtic’s for the next 10-12 years. Besides, I doubt that we could get either LeBron or Amare for Oden or Durant. They are “untouchables” with their fan base and ownership.

IMO – Oden is for real. A monster in the middle. He will take time to mature but it’s not like he can’t rebound and block shots right away. If Phoenix offered me Stoudamire for Oden on draft night, I would decline.

Truegreen, I’ll gladly stick my neck out and as others have posted, they are probably going to take a year or two to grow into their dominant roles- ala Big Al. To me though you absolutely go that way. It is the “intelligent” decision IMO. If it doesn’t work out, then its on me and the other 90% Celt fans saying keep Oden/Durant.

Love the lithographs…. :)