Based on recent events in the courts, we are all but assured there will be no action on the court anytime soon.
The NBA has returned fire. Actually, it preempted some potential fire with the first shot. The league has filed two unfair labor practice claims against the NBA Players Association, charging it with what the NBAPA threatened to do to the NBA for months. The NBA thinks the NBAPA is being uncooperative in negotiations, and they've taken it up with the National Labor Relations Board in the form of two legal claims. And if you had any hope for the 2011-12 season to start on time, it's likely been blown to bits.
So, if there's a shortened season, does that help the Celtics? A few weeks ago I tried to use the Spurs as an example of why I thought there was some hope. This Grantland author seems to believe that the Utah Jazz are a better comparison.
Jonathan Abrams on the lessons learned from the previous NBA lockout - Grantland
The 2011-12 Boston Celtics could be devastated by a prolonged lockout. It's perfectly reasonable for someone to make the argument that Boston can rebound after last season when they were unsettled by the Kendrick Perkins trade and Shaquille O'Neal's will-he-or-won't-he-play drama. It's harder to see Boston's veteran legs outlasting teams in a shortened season in which games would be played on a tighter schedule. Additionally, if a whole season is missed and the contracts of 2011-12 never come into play, Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett will become free agents and Boston will likely be denied ever having a last run with the core of the 2007-08 championship team. Only Rajon Rondo, Paul Pierce, and Avery Bradley are currently under contract for the 2012-13 season.
He also goes on to use Glen Davis as an example of a guy that could go Fat Shawn Kemp over the lockout (which I think is kind of a cheap shot and probably unlikely considering his free agent standing).