Here's an interesting thought

[DERRENMATTS]

Ok, lets hear what you think about this:

How would we be if our Big 3 was Big Al, Pierce, and Ray Allen? Meaning, we didn't make the trade with Minnesota.

Think about it--we'd still have Big Al Jefferson, who is currently putting up 21 and 12, we'd have Ryan Gomes (who recently put up a 35 pt game), and we'd still have 2 first round picks in this draft.

Big Baby and Pruitt will still be in the mix because they came over in the Ray Allen trade.

There's no way we'd be 33-7, but I think 25-15 would be reasonable.

This thought crossed my mind as both Jefferson and Gomes are putting up big numbers lately. Big Al and the Wolves beat the Suns, as he put up 39 pts and 15 boards, and Gomes had 14 and 9.

[freshnthehouse]

We'd be a slightly above .500 team. KG is the man that makes this team go. No KG = No legitimate title shot.

[eddietours]

it all comes down to defense that KG bring to the team

[FLCeltsFan]

I have thought about this a lot. We would still be years off with that line up. I love Al and while his offense and rebounding are incredible, his defense is still in the developing process. It is KG's defensive intensity and leadership that makes this Celtics defense go.

[runrondo]

flceltsfan12 said:

I love Al and while his offense and rebounding are incredible, his defense is still in the developing process. It is KG's defensive intensity and leadership that makes this Celtics defense go.

Exactly, Big Al might look really good offensively but he's no where near ready to be a big defensive guy yet..KG puts this team on a higher level...Also, if we didn't make the trade would we still have House and Posey?..They bring key veteran leadership and energy off the bench and really make our bench what it is..

[DERRENMATTS]

There's no way we'd be title contenders without KG. That's not my point, though. My point is we'd still be a solid team, and the best part is we'd still have a bright future--Big Al is our future. Plus, with our 1st round pick we wouldn't have to surrender to Minnesota, we'd probably have a pick in the low 20's, and then we'd still have Minnesota's future first rounder.

Of course, in order for this hypothetical team to reach the level our team right now is at, we'd have to eventually move Pierce and RAllen for some real good pieces--which is the difficult part. PP and RA won't be part of a supposed future powerhouse.

I guess its hard to say what will be because we just don't know the moves Ainge will, or won't make, down the line.

[eja117]

kool aid for some of those good points. It's kinda like trading Michael Jordan for Jerry Stackhouse or even Iverson in their rookie years. It's just not the same.

I'd rather have a bright right now than a bright future

[moreese]

There are a lot of good teams in the NBA. If we did not make this trade we would be one of those. However, there are very few title contenders in the NBA (San Antonio, Detroit, Boston). I'm not sure that I totally agree that we would have a bright future if we did not make the move for KG. Mainly because the term bright future is one that is completely overused. Having Al Jefferson, Rajon Rondo, Ryan Gomes and Tony Allen is certainly a nice crop of young players, but it is not championship contending. In fact, it isn't even close. Mainly because of the age of both Pierce and Allen, this would never have manifested itself in time for a serious run at a title. However, if the move was not made for KG, the Allen move would definitely not have been executed. Because it would not have made any sense. Ray Allen was brought in specifically to be a piece for a 3-4 year run at a title, or more. Even though the Allen move was made first, we all know that Ainge's mindset was not to stop there.

Al Jefferson is as good as it gets in the low post scoring. However he is not nearly the fascilitator that KG is and on the defensive end Big Al is about as bad as it gets. Jefferson's overall basketball IQ is extremely low, KG's is extremely high. KG is a born leader, Big Al is a good guy but not a general. For all of these reasons Big Al will forever be a number 2 option on a championship team. For that reason he is not a franchise player if you are looking to win a ring. So would Boston have a "bright future" with Big Al and a cast of young guys with potential? Absolutely. They just would not have a legitimate shot at a title ever. They could have dealt Pierce but if they did that would they be able to acquire a number 1 option on a contending team? Absolutely not. As good as Pierce is, he is a number 2 player on most contending championship teams. Detroit remains one of the only title winners to not really have a legit number 1 option on a contending team. However they have 4 all stars, and they are all very good leaders. Rondo, T. Allen and Big Al all have the potential to be all stars, but none strike me as having the leadership qualities of a Prince, Billups, Hamilton, etc...

More importantly, titles are won with defense. If you have a great core of young potential guys who really can't play a whole lot of defense (Rondo, Jefferson) then your peak potential is that of the Phoenix Suns, which in the eyes of title contention, is nothing at all really. I will sacrafice 20 years of being the Phoenix Suns for 3-4 years of trying to be the San Antonio Spurs any day of the week. I'm pretty sure anybody would. It's all about titles, nothing else matters. That will never change.

[DERRENMATTS]

Good points, everyone. I don't have much to say about this matter, just thought it would be interesting to think about.

[Roadrunner]

Either way, the team would be fun to watch. The past few years, have been ugly Celtics basketball.

[findawgg]

I understand what you're saying but what's the point of playing if not to win a title. The future is never certain that's why you make the move for now instead of later. Red would be the first to say a team is measured by titles won not the proliferation of future potential.

--Fin

[DERRENMATTS]

Maybe its just me, but I would rather be a team like the Blazers who had made the playoffs 20+ straight seasons at one point but never won it all, than be a team who is great for 5 seasons but pretty bad for the other 15. At least we'd consistently be a team to cheer for.

I thought we were laying down the foundation to be a really good team for years to come. We gave up a bulk of it to be a special team for the next few years, but after this, we may be looking at many lean years once again.

[findawgg]

I don't think you're giving Danny Ainge enough credit. Less we forget a key reason why the Celtics had so many lean years had a lot to do with tragedy (Reggie Lewis and Len Bias) and horrendous luck (improbable lottery issues). Ask any player that has ever laced them up, they will take a title or two over playoff appearances every time. You can have your 20 straight playoff appearances, I'll take the titles.

--Fin

[DERRENMATTS]

Ainge has proved to be a good evaluator of talent, and we've also had some lucky picks in the draft. I'm hoping for more magic in the next couple of seasons cause we're picking in the very late 1st round. Got a couple of good players who I think might fall to us, but none who, on the surface, have superstar potential.

Yes, winning titles are definitely what players strive for, but as a fan, if my team is in the playoffs year in, year out, I'll be content if we don't become champions. I don't know if I can stomach another 20 year drought of bad basketball. And I'm not outright doubting Ainge and his ability to bring in quality players. But I just don't see how he can bring in upper level players for our future team. That's why I've thrown out ideas of trading members of our Big 3 to bring in guys like Andrew Bynum--all with the thought of our future team. KG is aging, RAllen is aging, Pierce is aging, and beyond them, we don't have big time players to take over for them.

But let me make this clear--I am glad that we are in the position to be champions this year and the next. Sure we lost Big Al, and that hurt me a lot, but I realize that this is what's needed to win right now. Now, the challenge for Ainge will be to replenish the team with star talent to take over for the Big 3 after they have run their course in Boston.

[cfoo]

I think we'll be fine Derren. As you said it woul dbe nice to have all those young guys in Telfair and Al, and Green and Gomes. We got KG instead who is more of an impact right now on both ends of the court. We can always bring those guys back. It's much easier to get a player like those guys then a player like Garnett.

Like I was saying in the miami thread we basically saw what we'd be like without Kg and Allen. WE still have a nice young core.

Rondo
TA
Pierce
Scal
Perk

was the starting lineup. We will have powe off the bench. Davis is getting better and will be really good in a year or so imo. Pruitt is a nice young backup guard. The reason I list that lineup is basically what we'd be if we subtract Ray and Garnett.

The thing is I think we have a bright future because Pierce is still young and is going to play at a high level for a long time still imo. KG could as well for all we know. Allen has at least 3 years left. It's not like these guys are on their way out here. We are going to eb good for quite some time, and when the time comes where KG starts slipping or Allen does Rondo is going to better. So is TA. etc, etc. . If you look at that lineup the only glaring hole is pf. We can add guards and sf's to fill roles and we could even bring Green or Gomes or someone back for all we know. We could even bring telfair back to backup Rondo at some point. We aren't going to be in a position where we need to replace Garnett for a while. As our current young guys get better his decline and Ray allen's decline will coincide and lesson the blow per say where i think we will continue to roll even after those guys are gone. We will bring in someone and we will still have a bunch of our current young guys in their prime.