Minnesota Sports Forum

I'm really torn on this one. Hard to see how either team can fail over the next several years.

Wolves. You need stars in this league, not just good players and Boston has no stars right now and nobody that's really gonna develop into a star either.

Its a good year when there is two potential superstars in a draft, it's more typical that there's one or none. I'll take the relatively sure assets of the Wolves over the complete unknown of the Celts.

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.

Anthony, your answer is well thought-out, but I wonder if you are answering a different question than Cool posed. You seemed to have answered "Which team is better right now (or even next year)...the Wolves or the Celtics?", and I think everyone would agree that the Celtics are. But which situation is better is a different question, and I voted Wolves. Yes, the Celtics have some nice players with good contracts, but none of them are certain future all-stars like KAT...guys like Crowther, Thomas et al seem more like very good role players to me. They have a very good coach, but not necessarily better than Thibs. They have cap space, but so do the Wolves. The one area where they clearly have a better situation is all those draft picks, but we all know the uncertainty involved with draft picks...especially late first rounders and second round picks. And this year, there doesn't seem to be that much difference between #3 and #5.

The one reason I almost voted Boston is an aspect that nobody has mentioned yet...the report that Durant has directed his agent to give the Celtics a list of free agents they need to pursue to convince him to go there too. Durant and another free agent or two, all those picks, the current Boston roster and Stevens as coach makes me vote Boston over the Wolves.

Carlos Danger wrote: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.

I might have to start a "Carlos Danger has been a real disappointment" thread.

longstrangetrip wrote:Anthony, your answer is well thought-out, but I wonder if you are answering a different question than Cool posed. You seemed to have answered "Which team is better right now (or even next year)...the Wolves or the Celtics?", and I think everyone would agree that the Celtics are. But which situation is better is a different question, and I voted Wolves. Yes, the Celtics have some nice players with good contracts, but none of them are certain future all-stars like KAT...guys like Crowther, Thomas et al seem more like very good role players to me. They have a very good coach, but not necessarily better than Thibs. They have cap space, but so do the Wolves. The one area where they clearly have a better situation is all those draft picks, but we all know the uncertainty involved with draft picks...especially late first rounders and second round picks. And this year, there doesn't seem to be that much difference between #3 and #5.

The one reason I almost voted Boston is an aspect that nobody has mentioned yet...the report that Durant has directed his agent to give the Celtics a list of free agents they need to pursue to convince him to go there too. Durant and another free agent or two, all those picks, the current Boston roster and Stevens as coach makes me vote Boston over the Wolves.

LST, I answered the question based on as it was posed. I would prefer to be winning now AND have hope via a ton of accumulated assets vs. losing now with the hope that the guys we currently have suddenly become All-Stars. I'm normally one of the optimistic guys on here. But I tried to step back and look at things objectively. Who are these young All-Stars we have on our roster that puts us so far ahead of Boston? Towns had a great Rookie year. But he has to show growth to become an All-Star which is not guaranteed. Wiggins and LaVine are freaks that have shown flashes, but neither are certainly not All Stars as of the moment. And while I'm as excited about Thibbs as anyone....he was just fired from his last job and hasn't won anything for us yet. I get why people would be caught up in our own hype. But at the end of the day it comes down to Wins and Losses. Teams like Philly are in perpetual "hope mode". I think the advantage has to go to teams that can actually win.

Carlos Danger wrote: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.

Would you actually trade our assets for theirs though? How many of their picks and / or players would it take for you to let go of Towns. Then how many assets to they have left to swap for Wiggins... Then Lavine, Rubio, #5, Dieng. There's no way I'd trade our assets for theirs, so clearly Wolves for me.

Shumway wrote:

Carlos Danger wrote: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.

Would you actually trade our assets for theirs though? How many of their picks and / or players would it take for you to let go of Towns. Then how many assets to they have left to swap for Wiggins... Then Lavine, Rubio, #5, Dieng. There's no way I'd trade our assets for theirs, so clearly Wolves for me.

It's a loaded question to ask any Wolves fan. We all have a tendency to over value our own guys (myself included). I'd assume if you posed the same question to the Celts they'd give plenty of pause similar to what I posted prior. I'm basing things on as is. We were the 5th worst team in the NBA last year. Being a talented guy on a crappy team = being best of the worst.

Carlos Danger wrote:

Shumway wrote:

Carlos Danger wrote: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.

Would you actually trade our assets for theirs though? How many of their picks and / or players would it take for you to let go of Towns. Then how many assets to they have left to swap for Wiggins... Then Lavine, Rubio, #5, Dieng. There's no way I'd trade our assets for theirs, so clearly Wolves for me.

It's a loaded question to ask any Wolves fan. We all have a tendency to over value our own guys (myself included). I'd assume if you posed the same question to the Celts they'd give plenty of pause similar to what I posted prior. I'm basing things on as is. We were the 5th worst team in the NBA last year. Being a talented guy on a crappy team = being best of the worst.

I'm sure we're all biased. But even doing my best to view things objectively, I really feel the star power of KAT is worth so much more than anything the Celtics could give up. They'd genuinely have to give up most of their assets just for KAT. I tying discount my Wolves biases and think how much that may skew my opinion, but I can't get any different answer in my head. One of the unique things about the NBA is how much it's driven by star power. You can't package mediocre to equal a premium piece. That's where the Celtics assets fall down.

I see the appeal of 48 wins. It's a great perspective to put around it. But I'd definitely keep our position.