The Boston Celtics won 48 games but couldn't get out of the first round of the playoffs.
Which superstars should the Celtics target, if any? Is Kevin Durant in play? And what should they do with the high lottery pick they hold?
Our NBA Insiders go 5-on-5 on the future of the Celtics.
1. Should the Celtics stay the course or make moves to contend for the title next season?
Amin Elhassan, ESPN.com: I love what Boston has done in its rebuild: amass assets that can one day land a home-run deal while simultaneously building a competitive, disciplined team. They've got one of the best treasure chests of attractive pieces (any combination of future lucrative picks and good young players on team-friendly deals).
But therein lies the NBA's cruel joke: All those assets don't mean a thing if you can't flip them in a worthwhile deal. So basically the Celtics have two potential pitfalls: making a deal for a player who doesn't necessarily move the program forward, or not making any deal and remaining stagnant as those aforementioned asset values start to decay. I encourage risk-taking when appropriate, but team president Danny Ainge has to make his asset stash count.
Bradford Doolittle, ESPN Insider: Boston's biggest star is its coach, Brad Stevens. On the roster, they have a number of solid young professionals. Now is the time to make a splash and bring some definition to a squad laden with redundancy. Go get a top big man (like Al Horford, Dwight Howard or Brook Lopez) and a scoring wing (Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony, DeMar DeRozan), and this all comes into focus.
Kevin Pelton, ESPN Insider: Stay the course, barring a great opportunity. The Celtics certainly shouldn't pass up the opportunity to acquire a star player, but it doesn't make sense for Boston to sell out its future to try to contend now. Only the Detroit Pistons had a younger roster in terms of weighted age among this year's East playoff teams. Time is on the Celtics' side.
Jeremias Engelmann, ESPN Insider: While trading for a superstar sounds enticing, I think the Celtics should stay the course. Many players on the roster are either on cheap rookie deals or on bargain long-term deals (including Jae Crowder, Isaiah Thomas), so it'll be tough to get players of similar value in return. Also, they're also good at drafting, another argument against making trades.
Tom Haberstroh, ESPN Insider: Make moves. It has been five years since the Celtics have won 50 games, and six years and counting since they reached the Finals. With draft picks and youthful talent coupled with a one-horse East, returning to that stage isn't far away.
Jimmy Butler and DeMarcus Cousins should be their homerun swings, but even acquiring a player below that tier would put them on the title path, because sometimes a dollar is worth more than four quarters.
2. What do you foresee and advise for the Celtics this offseason?
Pelton: The series with Atlanta has highlighted Boston's need for more shooting and shot creation. Depending where the Brooklyn pick lands, Buddy Hield could help solve those issues. I'd aim high in free agency. If the Celtics can't get one of the top players on the market, they should probably look for deals with no guaranteed money beyond this season like Amir Johnson and Jonas Jerebko signed last summer.
Elhassan: Boston has to be wise with how they move forward. An aggressive pitch for Kevin Durant should definitely be in play, but I'd love to see the Celtics pursue players like Al Horford and Nicolas Batum, building upon their selfless style of play while simultaneously weakening potential Eastern rivals.
Doolittle: Ainge has his blueprint from 2007, when he leveraged a great coach, young talent, and a high draft pick into an instant title contender. Boston should target a high-level signing, plus cash in on young players and maybe the Brooklyn pick. It doesn't matter which one comes first, though the trade might entice the free agent.
Engelmann: Re-sign the more important free agents, spend a ton of time watching tape and workouts of potential draftees and, like last summer, try to find one or two underrated players to sign to good deals. I'm thinking Jared Dudley and Matthew Dellavedova -- two plus/minus darlings that won't command a lot of money.
Haberstroh: I'm not sure that Boston is a free agent destination quite yet (see below), and I'm not sure if the Brad Stevens factor moves the needle enough. If I'm Danny Ainge, I'm aggressively exploring the trade front. One player I'd target is Danilo Gallinari, who would give the Celtics a much-needed offensive boost, and Denver could add another first-rounder to its youth movement.
3. Which potential free agents should Boston keep?
Engelmann: They should keep Amir Johnson and Jared Sullinger -- both rank in the top 50 in real plus-minus this season and should be worth the money they'd be making. I'm not crazy about Jonas Jerebko, but he's serviceable for the price tag ($5M per season). I'd probably let both Evan Turner (-1.3 RPM) and Tyler Zeller (-2.8 RPM) walk.
Doolittle: Turner and the Celtics are a great match because he's willing to play a role for Stevens, who knows how to maximize on his versatility. Then you go to Sullinger, a great rebounder with a versatile skill set and young enough to get better. Johnson's nonguaranteed year might be too pricey, depending on the market.
Pelton: Johnson and Jerebko both look like keepers. They'd make far more money on the market this summer. Boston should be able to do better than Turner as a secondary creator. Of the restricted free agents, Sullinger looks like the better player -- and possibly the better value if his rough performance in a tough playoff matchup depresses his value.
Elhassan: Deciding who to keep is always a tricky proposition. Sometimes it comes down to the cost of retaining a guy, while other times you are weighing whether you can find a reasonable facsimile or even an upgrade. Without all the details, I'd lean heaviest toward retaining Amir Johnson, for his defensive versatility and IQ, and Tyler Zeller, for his efficient finishing around the rim and out of the pick and roll.
Haberstroh: Amir Johnson and Tyler Zeller are my favorite pieces of the bunch, and neither priced themselves out with an exceptional season. I'm still puzzled why Zeller wasn't a bigger part of the Celtics' plans this season. Johnson gives them the biggest defensive punch as the only rim protector on the roster.
4. You're a GM looking to trade a superstar to Boston. Which players and/or draft picks do you want in return?
Elhassan: I'm asking for the sun, the moon and the stars: Avery Bradley and Jae Crowder, Brooklyn's pick this year (depending on how the lottery turns out) and another future first, plus R.J. Hunter, the young shooting guard. I might ask for a couple of future seconds. You get only one chance to raid Ainge's cupboard.
Pelton: I think the 2016 Brooklyn pick is the Celtics' most valuable trade chip. The Nets are likely to still be in the lottery in future years but have at least shown indications they can become more competitive. After that, I'd be asking for Jae Crowder off Boston's current roster and then Marcus Smart.
Doolittle: Two answers. If you're a team with a star looking to hit reset, you start with Boston's first 2016 choice (the one from Brooklyn) and Marcus Smart. The other type of trade partner is the team with multiple All-Stars looking to shake up its core. That team is going after prime role players: Avery Bradley and Jae Crowder, to start.
Engelmann: I'd probably want rights to two or three of the Brooklyn picks (2016 first-round pick, 2017 first-round pick swap, 2018 first-round pick) if I'm the GM of a rebuilding team, as these should be very high picks. If I'm the GM of a contender, I'd try to snag Jae Crowder -- one of the best two-way players in the game who is locked up through 2019-20 on an extremely cheap deal.
Haberstroh: I'd want the 2016 first-round pick from Brooklyn and Jae Crowder, who is tailor-made for the modern NBA. Also, the Celtics need a No. 2 scorer to complement Isaiah Thomas, and Crowder isn't there yet. With Marcus Smart and Avery Bradley, they can get by without Crowder on the perimeter.
5. Some say the Celtics are not a free-agent destination. What do you say?
Elhassan: Whether it's justified, the sentiment is definitely out there. The NBA is heavily populated with young black men. As a man of color and someone who talks to NBA players, I know that Boston doesn't have a rep as a friendly town for young black men.
Is that a case of perception coloring the interpretation of reality? Perhaps! Bostonians can point to the popularity of athletes of color on their local teams as evidence that the reputation is unfair.
But what you need to recognize is for a lot of NBA players that perception is reality, and it works against Boston's desirability.
Engelmann: The Celtics might not have signed a superstar free agent in a while, but I don't think it matters. First, they made two of the best free-agent signings last summer with Johnson and Crowder. Second, they can always bring in superstars via trades, the way they did with Garnett and Ray Allen in 2007.
Doolittle: It's hard to argue with that assessment when you look at their history. For decades, Boston has built through the draft and the trade market. That said, it's hard to come up with an obvious explanation for why the Celtics wouldn't be high on the list of any elite free agent. Someday, they'll land one.
Pelton: Boston is not a free-agent destination in the sense that players want to go there no matter what, but if the Celtics are winning I don't think it's a minus for their chances. While Boston hasn't tried to sign a marquee free agent in years, Kevin Garnett did agree to waive his no-trade clause to join the Celtics, which is close enough.
Haberstroh: I still don't see it. Boston is cold, and a star hasn't signed as a free agent in Beantown in a long, long time. Stevens helps matters and Thomas is an All-Star, but it's hard to see someone like Kevin Durant or Al Horford leaving his situation to head up north without a clear championship core.
Bonus question: If you must buy stock in the Celtics or Lakers for five years from now (2020-21), which one do you buy?
Elhassan: Celtics, without a doubt. It's a well-run organization with stable ownership and excellent coaching. Basically everything the Lakers aren't.
Engelmann: Celtics, without a doubt. Boston has one of best GMs in the league and multiple picks incoming, while the Lakers are not only missing a first-round draft pick, but also have a roster that doesn't come close to Boston's based on overall talent.
Doolittle: Celtics, even though most of their major pieces will be at least 30 in five years. Ainge is smart and the Celtics probably will enter a window of elite play in the next year or two that will still be open in 2021. For the Lakers, a lot that could go wrong in a process that really is just beginning.
Haberstroh: Celtics. They wield one of the top coaches in the league, a functional front office, a treasure trove of assets and an All-Star on the roster. Tim Duncan might not be walking through that door, but still, this one isn't close for me.
Pelton: Lakers. Over the next five years total, I'd take Boston, whose floor is much higher -- the Lakers have a long way to get to where the Celtics are right now. But one free agent could change that outlook in an instant, and the Lakers have a much better chance of landing such a transcendent star than Boston does.