What Situation Would you Prefer

[TheFuture]

As it sits currently, i'll take our Wolves. I'd like to revisit this poll after the offseason though. If Boston trades #3 for Okafor and attracts some quality free agents then it would be difficult to not take them with their picks in the next 3 drafts. Remember, they have something ridiculous like 8 picks this year. I expect them to turn at least 4 of those into more future picks. Minnesota should make moves of their own outside of the #5 pick, but i expect them to be minor compared to what Boston does.

Are we also taking into account the conferences each roster is in? We have to worry about future contending with GS, Spurs, Utah, OKC, Lakers, NO, Clippers, Denver, Dallas etc., basically the whole Western Conference is always a tough fight to get an 8th seed. Boston has to worry about who in the near future? Cleveland, Toronto, milwaukee, miami, washington? Boston should have a much easier path to the Finals unless things shake up a lot this offseason and next.

[AbeVigodaLive]

I'm the A-hole who voted for the Celts. Reason: Celts just finished with 48 wins. Wolves haven't done that in 13 years (and only 4 times in their history). While it's true the Celts don't have any sexy stars right now, they certainly will have opportunity to get one via tons of accumulated draft picks, free agency or trade. In a nutshell, if you voted for the Wolves, it was probably based on hope. Hope that Wiggins/LaVine get better. Hope that we make the right draft pick this year. Hope that Thibbs turns our shitty defense around. Hope that it all comes together. But none of that is guaranteed. As is, we could be an injury to Towns or Rubio away from another 20 win season. The Celtics are winning now and have the same hope we do, just in a different form (accumulated draft picks instead of undeveloped stars). So that's the rationale for my blasphemy.

Dig this post.

Both teams have reasons for hope. Wolves fans HOPE their young stars keep improving.
The Celtics are winning and have HOPE that all their assets are enough to lure a star.

I'm fine with either answer. It's just good to be in the discussion.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I don't like the reasoning that because the Celtics are already winning their situation is better. Firstly, they're in the East, which has been a weaker conference for what, decades now? I know some will point to the East/West records and try to prove me wrong, but if you watched the playoffs this year, you know which conference is better.

If Thibs was coaching our squad this year, how many wins would we have? 35? 40? I'm confident we have 40-ish wins in a harder conference. I'm not trying to downplay what the Celtics have done because overachieving like they have in back to back years is noteworthy, but they do not have a Karl-Anthony Towns, nor do they have an Andrew Wiggins. And if you asked me to pick between their All-Star point guard in Isaiah Thomas or our very own Ricky Rubio, I'd probably lean toward the Spaniard because of his ability to positively impact both ends of the court. I'm fine with being the homer if that's what that makes me.

[AbeVigodaLive]

I don't like the reasoning that because the Celtics are already winning their situation is better. Firstly, they're in the East, which has been a weaker conference for what, decades now? I know some will point to the East/West records and try to prove me wrong, but if you watched the playoffs this year, you know which conference is better.

If Thibs was coaching our squad this year, how many wins would we have? 35? 40? I'm confident we have 40-ish wins in a harder conference. I'm not trying to downplay what the Celtics have done because overachieving like they have in back to back years is noteworthy, but they do not have a Karl-Anthony Towns, nor do they have an Andrew Wiggins. And if you asked me to pick between their All-Star point guard in Isaiah Thomas or our very own Ricky Rubio, I'd probably lean toward the Spaniard because of his ability to positively impact both ends of the court. I'm fine with being the homer if that's what that makes me.

Yes. The East is terrible for offering up more than one team at near-championship-level.

But what's that matter? The Celtics are in the East. That's part of their situation... and it's a favorable one at the moment.
As for the W/Ls, I think it's very important considering that's how we ultimately judge this, right?

The Celtics are winning and are HOPING to get better. They have assets to get there. Probably.
The Wolves are not winning (yet) and are HOPING to get better. They have assets to get there. Probably.

Both teams are in great shape. Potentially. But if everything breaks bad for the Wolves... all we know for certain is that it was a 29 win team. Even if all those assets are wasted by Boston... they've won 48 games with the current roster.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

So, by that definition, the Chicago Bulls have a better situation than us too... Current W/L record means little to nothing to me when discussing which team has the best situation for the future. Think that kind of rationale ignores that three of our best four players are 20/21-years old. That's not the case in Boston. Progression and development isn't guaranteed, but it's absolutely EXPECTED. Does anyone think that a Towns in his prime couldn't carry a team to 45 wins practically alone? When's the last time Tom Thibodeau was coaching and won less than 45 games (never)? I don't see how this is really even a comparison, but clearly that's just me.

[AbeVigodaLive]

So, by that definition, the Chicago Bulls have a better situation than us too... Current W/L record means little to nothing to me when discussing which team has the best situation for the future. Think that kind of rationale ignores that three of our best four players are 20/21-years old. That's not the case in Boston. Progression and development isn't guaranteed, but it's absolutely EXPECTED. Does anyone think that a Towns in his prime couldn't carry a team to 45 wins practically alone? When's the last time Tom Thibodeau was coaching and won less than 45 games (never)? I don't see how this is really even a comparison, but clearly that's just me.

I don't get your Chicago take.

I'm not denying the Wolves have a great future and that they probably improve significantly because of it.
I'm just acknowledging that the Celtics have already proven to be an improving team with a bunch of assets that could probably help them improve.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

This difference between the two is the Wolves top assets are already on the team while Boston's are in this draft and the next few. I think having the top assets on the team already makes us a much better situation than hoping your draft luck just gets you in the same position we already are.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

So, by that definition, the Chicago Bulls have a better situation than us too... Current W/L record means little to nothing to me when discussing which team has the best situation for the future. Think that kind of rationale ignores that three of our best four players are 20/21-years old. That's not the case in Boston. Progression and development isn't guaranteed, but it's absolutely EXPECTED. Does anyone think that a Towns in his prime couldn't carry a team to 45 wins practically alone? When's the last time Tom Thibodeau was coaching and won less than 45 games (never)? I don't see how this is really even a comparison, but clearly that's just me.

I don't get your Chicago take.

I'm not denying the Wolves have a great future and that they probably improve significantly because of it.
I'm just acknowledging that the Celtics have already proven to be an improving team with a bunch of assets that could probably help them improve.

Yeah, that's the part that makes it somewhat close in my opinion (in terms of the original poll question). It's also not that outlandish to think that because of these things (Wins + Coach + Assets), they could be in the running for a player like Durant.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

This difference between the two is the Wolves top assets are already on the team while Boston's are in this draft and the next few. I think having the top assets on the team already makes us a much better situation than hoping your draft luck just gets you in the same position we already are.

.....but those assets won us 29 games last year. Just like it's speculative to assume Boston can turn those assets into stars, isn't it also speculative to assume our young core will become stars? Last time I checked, we had zero all-stars on our roster.

(I am by the way, not outright arguing in favor of Boston's situation, but I think it's a little closer than the poll results would indicate).

[thedoper]

Is the elephant in the room beyond the rosters themselves? We mention a max contract for a free agent and we're already worried about the luxury tax when we're nowhere near it. Our market and ownership will always be a factor that tips these discussions away from us. Why aren't we in the mix for Durant?

I'll take our roster and our potential easy over Boston even with their picks. But we already got Ricky putting conditions on his commitment to the team, and it's almost a given that we wont target Horford or Durant. And because of the financial implications 4 years from now when we will be theoretically in a new CBA.