The NBA Finals are now over so this means it's time for the off-season to begin. One of the biggest storylines going into this off-season is where is LeBron going? If you haven't seen it yet, ESPN's Stephen A Smith said LeBron will meet with seven teams and one of these teams is the Boston Celtics. Granted, Smith is the only one who has reported this so naturally all of Boston was sent into a frenzy about the possibility of James coming here. Whereas just a couple weeks ago these same people were saying wait until next year with this team and keep them intact, now blow it up? Come on Celtics fans, let's be smarter here. The massive roster reconstruction it would take to bring James here may leave the Celtics with less than what they started. At 100% health, this lineup (even without LeBron) is the clear favorite to come out of the East next season and a legitimate challenger to the NBA Champion Golden State Warriors. I mean we've only seen the starting five of Horford, Tatum, Hayward, Brown, Irving for a total five minutes. Let's take this thing out for a spin and see what it can do. Speaking of gutting the lineup, LeBron actually does not make his teammates all that better as some may think. Don't believe me? You'll find out later on.. Finally, how do you plan on affording Lebron? With the Celtics cap situation, you're going to have to get really creative if you'd want him here such as a sign and trade (we'll get into this later).

Let's start with how our starting 5 was only on the floor for 5 minutes. That lineup for sure will contend next year and something you don't want to tinker with. With everything we've seen from Ainge over the last few seasons, it's clear he has a vision how he wants his team to line up in terms of age. He wants to contend now, and also 5-10 years from now. As constructed, he currently has the roster to do just that. The Celtics rebuild is not a situation like Houston where the addition of Lebron aligns with their win now mode. You look at their roster and you can see why the GM Morey will try his best to figure something out. Whereas with the Celtics roster, you have all this young talent locked up for the foreseeable future and most of the young talent is on rookie deals so they are on the cheap. Based on how your roster is constructed it is in such a way that will allow the team to maintain this core for years to come if Ainge continues to play his cards right. With Lebron, you bring him in and you can say goodbye to all that. The development of Boston's beloved young wings Jayson Tatum & Jaylen Brown (along with everyone else on the floor) would be reduced to spot-up shooters. Making most of the roster especially Brown and Tatum change their games to be spot-up shooters is just not their game. Brown and Tatum love to get to the hoop and Tatum create his own shot so having LeBron here will prevent that since his game is mainly drives to the hoop or drive and kick out. Iso ball is not what this team does, they like to pass it around and create a good shot so having James here will completely change how the Celtics play and that's not what got them to where they are. LeBron would also impact the development of Brad too because as we all know, LeBron is a notorious coach killer (and we love our coach.) Do you really want to see LeBron ignore, undermine and emasculate Brad Stevens on a nightly basis? Then talk about what he needs to do better to get his team prepared after losses? If you tell me "oh but LeBron never had a coach of Brad's caliber so he would never undermine him!", you're lying to yourself. LeBron's ego is almost as big as his missing hairline there is no way he would EVER change his ways because it's always about him and everyone else around him needs to be better. Having LeBron undermine Brad's coaching will impact him in a negative way since he won't be able to run his scheme and will just have to be LeBron's which this team is not at all constructed for.

Speaking of the team, would LeBron actually make the teammates better? From the eyeball test seeing how this team plays, no he would not. He would definitely impact them negatively as you just read. But don't take my word for it, take ESPN's Kevin Pelton's. Pelton defines how a player makes his teammates better by "With the exception of the occasional situation in which a player is inspired to improve his game by the example of a star teammate, we don't actually mean that the teammates become better players. What we mean is they perform better because of the playmaking provided by or defensive attention drawn by a star". Therefore, if a value metric is well-calculated, that uptick in performance should be credited to the star player through his assist and usage rates. As for any improvement in their efficiency would be offset by a decline in their usage rates and an uptick in assisted field goals. Take a look at the chart below:

LeBron James Teammate Usage RatesESPN

Shockingly though, Jose Calderon, Kyle Korver, and Jeff Green performed well being on a minimum salary along with Larry Nance Jr's usage rate increase compared to his time with the Lakers. Thompson also became better when LeBron came back too. However, on average these new James teammates, weighted by minutes played have performed 6.3 percent worse than forecast. Taking a further look into this, Pelton breaks it down by looking further at their component statistics in terms of the ratio of their actual and projected performance:

• 2-point percentage: 1.021
• 3-point percentage: .978
• Offensive rebounding percentage: 1.079
• Defensive rebounding percentage: .967
• Assist percentage: .805
• Steal percentage: .890
• Block percentage: 1.183
• Usage: .937
• 3-point attempt percentage: 1.070
• FT attempt percentage: .946
• Turnover percentage: 1.011

These results seem to offer an important takeaway for any team that signs James this summer (including the Cavaliers). While some additional shot creators are necessary, particularly in a playoff setting, any team with James must be careful not to invest too many resources on players who are best with the ball in their hands (like the Celtics). Instead, the focus should be on finding role players whose games will mesh well with LeBron's. Last time I looked at this Celtics roster, not many role player type of guys there so having LeBron apart of your team based off these stats, will make them worse.

Finally, comes the part everyone really seems to be talking about. How can we afford him? Obviously, the Celtics don't have the cap space to sign Lebron outright once he opts out of his deal, meaning the only way to make it happen is through a sign and trade. You will hear fans throw out the idea they should unload Horford or Hayward or Kyrie in order to make this happen. Here's the problem with that whole idea. First, if you trade Hayward, and Kyrie does not opt in because he hates LeBron, what are you left with exactly? If you want to move Kyrie, why are the Cavs going to do whatever they could to help the Celtics again after everything with Kyrie? Obviously though, Horford/Hayward's salaries would bring you close money standpoint but you'd need to throw in more to make it all line up. My question is why would Cavs want Horford when they have Love/Thompson (unless they trade Love first w/ Lebron gone). You would be crazy if you think Ainge would trade Hayward this summer for a number of reasons. There's the whole Brad Stevens thing, the fact that he's really good, how it would look to potential free agents, the list goes on and on. Not to mention if you trade other pieces besides Kyrie, why are we risking the fact even more that Kyrie may not resign by bringing in Lebron? I mean just recently Kyrie said he's only living in the moment which isn't entirely awful but not a full on commitment to next year. Bringing in LeBron would just make the odds of Kyrie coming back way worse. Say you do bring him in though, he holds your franchise hostage by signing short-term deals. Then he becomes your defacto GM (and we love our GM) forcing you to trade away your assets (and we love our assets to) for only LeBron approved players. Ask yourself this, who do you want making the deals LeBron or Trader Danny?

Now, this situation is something that is fun to talk about on the internet, but when you really think about it, it doesn't make all that much sense given everything Ainge has done. Why would you want to potentially give up pieces that could be major factors for the next 5-10 years just so that you can maybe have 3 of Lebron if that? Personally, the potential damage isn't worth it. Think about it too, the damage ranges not only from the players but the team as a whole. When it comes to free agency, nobody would want to come here seeing how 'loyal' your team is after you'd trade away Hayward or Kyrie. Why do Celtics fans have the sudden urge to blow the team up? This group already showed their ability to compete, and they are just getting started. So thanks but no thanks LeBron. You're obviously the best player of this and maybe any generation, but you can take your talents elsewhere. We'll stick with what we've got.