Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: L'Equipe Claims He's Coming To Chelsea On Five Year Deal

Doc Gets It

According to Mark Murphy, Doc has a vision for the offseason, and I like what I'm hearing:

The Celtics didn't do enough last off-season:

"[E]very team we competed against this year -- the ones at the top -- added to their team, and we didn’t.”

"Losing P.J. (Brown), (James) Posey and Sam (Cassell from the 2007-08 championship team) took away something like 35 or 40 years of experience, and we got back zero."

The Celts need veteran help:

“We have to add someone this summer if we want to win it (again),” he said. “We have to add shooting, and Paul (Pierce) needs a solid backup, which would help Paul drastically.

“One thing we have to absolutely add is a veteran. One thing that happened (following Garnett’s injury) was that we got young quickly. Bringing in another veteran, having him in the locker room, helps all the young guys.

The time to win is now, not in the future:

“[The window] is shorter,” Rivers said. “We understand that. We want to win now, not in the future, and it’s good to be in the now. Twenty-two teams in this league think about building, and seven live for now. We’re still one of those seven teams.”

The Celts have at least three holes they need to fill:

“I’d say we have to get a (center) first, and we have to get a small forward. Then there’s the point guard situation.”

Sign me up for the Rivers plan.  Seriously, it makes me feel better that Doc recognizes exactly what went wrong this season, and wants to address it to avoid a repeat.

Star-divide

There can be no doubt that the main reason we didn't repeat was the injury situation, primarily to KG but also to Powe.  However, as Doc points out explicitly and implicitly in his interview, last year's team was handicapped from the start.  There were too many projects on the team, who didn't deserve playing time.  The team let veterans like James Posey and P.J. Brown walk away, and replaced them with...  nothing.  Or, Tony Allen and Patrick O'Bryant, if you like, which is the equivalent of nothing.  The team was too worried about the future (i.e., POB and two rookies, and refusing to give Posey a fourth year on his deal), and not worried enough about bringing in guys who could actually play.

However, the past is the past.  There were limited options in free agency last season, so if the team couldn't find any players who would fit the team and the team's salary structure, I can understand that.  However, it will be completely unacceptable if the team doesn't make significant additions this off-season.  There are a ton of good veterans on the market, and with the economy where it is (and many teams saving cap space for next season's free agent bonanza, which we can't participate in), there should be a lot of bargains.

Yes, the team has financial restrictions, as just about every team does.  If the team signs BBD, uses the full MLE, and fills in the roster with the LLE and minimum deals, we're looking at total salary and luxury tax committments in the $100 - $105 million range.  That may be a bridge too far, but even if the team commits to just using the MLE and the LLE, we should be able to sign some very good players.  (For instance:  Grant Hill, Joe Smith, and Antonio McDyess are all coming off deals for the LLE or less, as are Chris Andersen, Matt Barnes, and Quinton Ross.)

Doc gets it.  Now, let's hope the people handling the check book do, too.

Comment 195 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Bye TA

I’m surprised Doc is publicly saying the SF bit as strongly as he is. Clearly he is not thrilled with Tony.

When Perk was asked what he thought of Howard winning the gold medal this summer, he responded: "What’s his impression of me after I won a ring?"

by Green17 on May 21, 2009 7:21 AM EDT reply actions  

I’d be a lot more surprised if he was thrilled with Internet Legend Tony Allen, not to mention disappointed.

I can’t voice how pleased I am, like Roy, that Rivers gets what needs to be done with this team. We’re trying to win now, not obsess over a series of nondescript draft picks.

Props to Doc. He’s absolutely right about what we need to contend next year. If he gets what he wants, we will contend. If he doesn’t, we won’t.

by CoachBo on May 21, 2009 7:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yep...

It’s like he’s been reading Celticsblog. ;-)

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 7:45 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think the reality of the situation is that we have too many needs to offer Davis what some unsuccessful franchise might. As you’ve pointed out, Roy, if it comes down to MLE money for Davis or signing players to plug two holes, well, good luck in OKC, Baby. We can’t invest that kind of money in a limited skillset who’s got the looming spectre of the dinner table hanging over our heads.

If he wants to be a Celtic, he’s going to have to do a hometown discount, and by all indications, he’s more interested in the cash.

by CoachBo on May 21, 2009 7:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yep...

Again, agreed on all fronts.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 7:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

May be he posts here too.

Glad to see the coach have a clear view on how to improve the team. Now the job is Danny’s.

by 33-32-00 on May 21, 2009 7:59 AM EDT up reply actions  

For clarity Bo...

Not sure if this is what you were implying or not, but I wasn’t trying to support TA there just say that Doc doesn’t usually rip guys like that, even implicitly as he’s done there.

TA was awful this year and as much fun as Tony can be, he’s a terrible basketball player at this point.

When Perk was asked what he thought of Howard winning the gold medal this summer, he responded: "What’s his impression of me after I won a ring?"

by Green17 on May 21, 2009 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think...

it’s the security blanket of our starting 5. It’s hard to feel bad about a team going into a season with Rondo, Ray, Paul, KG and Perk.

hopefully, though, this season solidified that you shouldn’t lean too heavily on that and need more reinforcements to keep that crew fresh for the playoffs and have flexibility for the differnents match up you’ll face there.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions  

Powe

Is Powe considered a SF? Doc said we need one now.

by 33-32-00 on May 21, 2009 7:23 AM EDT reply actions  

Nope

Powe is a power forward, through and through.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 7:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

only in height...not in game....

Leon’s a PF

When Perk was asked what he thought of Howard winning the gold medal this summer, he responded: "What’s his impression of me after I won a ring?"

by Green17 on May 21, 2009 7:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

i like his ideas

but i want to see them move some players that dont bring much….tony, moore, scal, marbury and powe (cant wait until midseason for him)

by celticinorlando on May 21, 2009 7:33 AM EDT reply actions  

Marbury

Looks like he is not in Doc’s plan, unless the “point guard situation” Doc referred to is ‘extending Rondo’s contract’.

by 33-32-00 on May 21, 2009 7:33 AM EDT reply actions  

Leon's a small power forward ;-)

…but I’m disappointed that Doc’s stuck on having an old team because that’s what won it for him in ’08.

Billy Walker is a gem just waiting to be polished.

Perk will be in his 7th year playing next year, which you’ve got to say is veteran. And Rondo and Baby will be playing the equivalent of their 4th years—considering how much playoff experience they’ve got.

The C’s definitely need a veteran backup center and I’m okay with a veteran backup for Pierce, too—as long as Doc still actually plays and develops Walker.

by clover on May 21, 2009 7:39 AM EDT reply actions  

I agree...

As much as I want a veteran roster, Doc should attempt to develop the young guys on the roster, particularly Walker. I think he’s going to be a player.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 7:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

I agree as well

Walker needs more playing time. I saw some potential in him this season.

by Marqui on May 21, 2009 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

interesting

based on his comments, I get the following interpretation
TA isn’t the answer at SF or backup wing —> agree 100%
Pruitt’s not the answer at backup PG —> can’t argue with that based on performance
Marbury —> may not be the answer at backup PG or his resigning isn’t likely
Mikki “Won’t be around any” Moore.
Veal isn’t the answer at back up SF —> agree 100%
Walker/Giddens aren’t being counted on as backup wings for next year —> agree somewhat with this. We shouldn’t rely on them for significant contributions but continue to develop them with an eye towards a year or two further down the road.

I get the impression he’d like a revamp of almost the entire bench which is just what the team needs. Keep Walker and Giddens to develop them but everyone else can be upgraded.

by slamtheking on May 21, 2009 7:42 AM EDT reply actions  

The only thing on our bench I’m really interested in keeping is Walker. Giddens and Pruitt are essentially the same commodity at a different position and I would not hesitate to move both of them.

I do agree that Walker needs about 10 a game in the regular season, but he also needs a veteran ahead of him off the bench at the 3.

by CoachBo on May 21, 2009 7:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

I would keep HOuse too if the price is right.

by 33-32-00 on May 21, 2009 7:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

I don’t ever want to spend a lot of money on Eddie House. As Orlando demonstrated, he’s too easy to take out of the game.

But, if he’s cheap, fine. Sign him up.

by CoachBo on May 21, 2009 7:54 AM EDT up reply actions  

Sure, House is easy to take out of a game if a team wants to do it but he still has value on the floor. His presence means that a team cannot double off of him at all, which leaves more room for our scorers. So even if he is not taking and hitting shots, House still brings something.

by droopdog7 on May 21, 2009 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions  

house

house’s price is already set for next year—if he picks up his option

by slamtheking on May 21, 2009 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

House is probably coming back...

He’s got a player option, and he said that in all likelihood, he’s going to invoke it and come back.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 7:57 AM EDT up reply actions  

giddens

why not keep Giddens. He’s not going to be a core rotation player next year. why not keep him and walker as the DNP—Did Not Dress players or in D league to see if they can be contributors the following year.

I don’t have a problem with the players who don’t suit up being ‘projects’ or under development. It’s the ones that are your 1-10 players that need to be NBA caliber.

by slamtheking on May 21, 2009 10:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

thanks

I put some time into developing Mikki’s nicknames

by slamtheking on May 21, 2009 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm comfortable with House returning--

he’s a sharp-enough shooter to demand attention coming off the bench, which both says and accomplishes something. We know that he’s a good guy who’s okay with his role, and one more year is good timing as well.

by clover on May 21, 2009 8:04 AM EDT reply actions  

I liked what Doc said except for the new point guard part.

by Who on May 21, 2009 8:28 AM EDT reply actions  

PJ

  Danny didn’t replace PJ with POB, he replaced him with Davis, who played a minutes a game in the ’08 playoffs with 9 DNPs.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 8:28 AM EDT reply actions  

Um, no...

That’s not what happened at all. I understand the need for many to be Danny apologists — he’s been a good GM overall — but last season was a disaster. Doc understands the lessons of last year, and is broadcasting them loud and clear. I don’t understand why some fans refuse to listen.

But hey, let’s bring back Gabe, and sign Robert Swift and two more rookies, and then we can all argue all season about whether the team dumpster dived or not.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 8:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

Last off-season, that is...

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 8:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yes, I agree — Danny replaced a PJ, Davis, Powe, Scal rotation with an improving Powe, Davis and a returning Scalabrine.

Then he took a flier on a project for the long term.

by Who on May 21, 2009 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

So . . .

after reading the article I’m assuming Doc and the coaching staff did everything right? Maybe there was more to the interview than what was included by Murphy, but I’d also like to hear Doc talk about what he and his staff did wrong, and what they need to do to improve. To me this sounds like the Doc of pre-2007-2008.

by amenhotep04 on May 21, 2009 8:42 AM EDT reply actions  

Well...

I’ve had my problems with Doc in the past, and I think he should have worked Walker more into the rotation this year. However, Doc has never immediately gone to rookies; he needs to be given other options, or he’s going to defer to his veterans. Doc was given a choice between 1) overplaying Pierce, 2) going to a second round draft pick, or 3) giving Tony Allen heavy minutes. None of those are exactly ideal.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

No Easy with Rookies

Remember Reggie Lewis, he sat on the bench the whole entire season. K.C. wouldn’t even let him go in during garbage time. Next season, bang he sproutted out. Maybe the kid needed to sit tight and observe and then see what hard work is and go after what he wants.

by Ancient Red on May 21, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

Um, really no

  Just because you can’t figure out that the Celts expected Baby to play a bigger role this year doesn’t make me an apologist. It makes your argument stronger if you claim that Danny expected POB to take PJ’s minutes in this year’s playoffs but that doesn’t make it so.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 8:42 AM EDT reply actions  

The fact is...

Danny did nothing to upgrade this team. Not a thing.

Let me repeat Doc’s word’s:

“[E]very team we competed against this year — the ones at the top — added to their team, and we didn’t."

    “Losing P.J. (Brown), (James) Posey and Sam (Cassell from the 2007-08 championship team) took away something like 35 or 40 years of experience, and we got back zero.”

That seems pretty clear to me. Doc’s perspective wasn’t “Well, we lost PJ, Posey, and Sam, but we got an improved Big Baby”. It was “we got back zero”. The team needed to make actual upgrades, not hope the existing players got better. Cleveland and Orlando followed that model. Why couldn’t the Celtics?

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

But Roy, what was Danny supposed to do? They tried for Posey, but weren’t going to give him the years he wanted. They thought McDyess was coming here. Because of the trades the year before, we didn’t have much to offer anyone to get people in return. Sam stayed, but never played. Danny resigned Eddie. He only resigned Tony after they couldn’t get Posey back. Should Danny have signed the Birdman? Absolutely.

So to me, the big mistake was at the five spot, and even that would not have been a problem if McDyess would have come here. Other than that, Danny did not have a lot of options.

by amenhotep04 on May 21, 2009 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions  

There were other options than just Posey, though...

Danny chose to bring back Tony Allen, rather than pursuing guys like Roger Mason Jr., Quinton Ross (minimum), Chris Andersen (minimum), Matt Barnes (minimum), Kurt Thomas, and others. And of course, there was always the choice to give Posey $7 million more, which Danny passed on.

It doesn’t seem like Doc was in love with the idea of losing Posey, although he understood it:

"Yeah," Rivers said referring to whether he regretted losing the swingman to free agency last summer. "Obviously we missed him. But you also have a financial obligation, so I have no problem with the decision that was made."

But the contingency plan didn’t work. The intention of filling Posey’s disparate talents with a cast of others was ill-conceived. The frustrating Tony Allen, for example, has yet to become a regular rotation player.

"Posey’s numbers were never justified in bringing him back, I guess," said Rivers. "But his intangibles were absolutely justified, and we just weren’t able to replace those."

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

Some other guys Danny could have gone after.....

IMO, Brian Skinner, Chris Anderson, Adonal Foyle and even Jake Voskuhl would have been upgrades over POB. Skinner played well for the Clippers when both Camby and Kaman were out. I woulda been fine with taking a chance on POB as a 6th not 5th big.

And Roy points out that Matt Barnes and Quinton Ross got vet. minimums, Ross didn’t even have a guaranteed deal going into MEM’s camp IIRC.

what’s past is past, I suppose. the real test will come this summer. I’m all for adding veteran talent to go with and awesome young core of Rondo-Perkins-Walker-Powe

by Gainesville Celtic on May 21, 2009 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions  

Reading a little much into that quote?

  So you think that Doc’s perspective was that Rondo, Perk and Davis showed no improvement this year and weren’t really capable of playing a bigger role in the playoffs this year than last? Sorry, but I disagree with this sentiment, even just with Baby. I’d also disagree (with Doc, not you) that “we got back zero”, since we got championship experience for our top 8 players.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 9:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

No, I'm saying that Doc indicated that we "got back nothing" and didn't add to our team...

Direct quotes. Nothing to read into.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

PJ was replaced by

Mikki. that was how that went down. Baby was on the team last year, so theoretically Baby could have taken PJs minutes in that year too.

the difference is in the DEPTH department. Last year Doc had a choice between the two. This year the choice was between Baby and Mikki.

The fact remains that even with the improved play of Baby, the team still needed a player off the bench that had some length and could actually warrant minutes in the playoffs. Last year the player with length was PJ, this year it was Mikki…

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

  Sure, if you don’t see the difference between having the 07-08 version of Davis or the 08-09 version of Davis available for the playoffs.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 9:17 AM EDT up reply actions  

why...

did Baby grow in the off season?

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions  

No, generally those nba executive-types generally have no idea whether players will show any improvement from year to year.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

i'm talking about growth in

the vertical direction…

regardless of the improvement Baby would show as a player, we still needed depth and flexibility at the position.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yep

No viable center hurt. P.J. could play the position consistently. BBD could play the position sometimes.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

I don't necessarily disagree

  But with Perk playing 37 minutes a game we could get 10 minutes at center from KG with Davis playing mainly the pf and make it through the playoffs.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

So, Danny knew BBD would be ready to step up?

And that’s why he made no upgrades to the roster? That was a pretty bold prediction, which only partially played out. (BBD is still inconsistent and mistake prone, although he did improve.)

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think he had an idea

  There are plenty of people here who are all over Ainge for not signing Andersen. My recollection from last summer was that he had some bigs in for a mini-camp and Davis was well better than what we brought in. I’d say that it’s probable that he did expect Davis to step up. As for not replacing Sam, he did bring Sam back. Pruitt was outplaying him in practice. Should we have kept him because of his experience? TA seems to have been a mistake since Doc wasn’t going to play him much in the postseason.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

are you really saying that...

the mistake with signing TA is that Doc wasn’t going to play him?

and again, as for Baby taking PJs role, maybe you’ve matched production but you’ve still hurt depth.

unless of course Baby from this season can replace both PJ and Baby from last season.

Baby’s a big dude, but he’s not two people…

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

yes

  Yes, the mistake with signing TA is that Doc wasn’t likely to play him in the playoffs. And Big Baby and PJ combined for about 18 minutes a game, which Davis could handle without being cloned. Figure they get 38 from KG and 36 from Perk that leaves 22 minutes for Baby and a little of Scal. Not really beyond the realm of possibilities.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

so TA actually..

warranted more minutes than Doc gave him?

c’mon, BBall…seriously?

as for Baby and PJ, the key thing you keep missing here is the depth and flexibility aspect.

As big as Baby is, he can’t be his own back up for match ups that aren’t ideal for him.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

you claimed that...

signing TA was a mistake because Doc wasn’t going to play him.

that implies that Doc should have been playing him.

if TA didn’t deserve the minutes, then that is why it was a bad signing, not that Doc was somehow burying him on the bench.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Sti;ll npot what I was saying

  TA this season wasn’t much better or worse than expected, but Doc didn’t play him in the playoffs. This leads me to think that there was some sort of disconnect between Danny and Doc.I’m not sure there were much better options available though.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not better or worse than expected?

Expected by whom? I think we have to revisit some pre-season threads on Tony Allen.

by cordobes on May 21, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

???

  Revisit all of the preseason threads you want. I don’t see the point.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

either...

you think he deserved the minutes or you think he didn’t…

there was no disconnect, TA was a total panic practically every minute he was on the floor in the playoffs. and this is coming from someone who has been a supporter of his over the years. he was treating the ball on offense like it was a game of “hot potato.”

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

  You have enough knowledge of conversations between Danny and Doc to just proclaim that there was no disconnect between them on TA?

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

i have knowledge that

both Doc and Danny were watching the games and could see that TA was totally erratic out there and that is why he was taken of out or not put in games.

again, do you really think TA was deserving or more minutes?

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

fine, but...

what’s the answer? just out of curiosity.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

  If Doc wasn’t going to play TA on the postseason then signing him to be our backup sf was the wrong move.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

what's the answer to the question of

whether or not you think TA deserved more minutes?

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

Still unrelated to the entire discussion. Being out for so long work against him for a number of reasons. I didn’t see enough of his play after the injury to really say.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

how is a guys worthiness

of getting playing time unrelated to why signing him was a mistake?

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

you haven't

explained it. at all actually.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

i guess the question Bball

is why are you so sure that TA not playing in the playoffs wasn’t based on performance, but instead was some disconnect between Danny and Doc with Doc never having any intention of playing TA?

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

one more thing on this..

where is the evidence that Doc never intended to play TA in the playoffs?

and where is the evidence that Doc doesn’t play guys for any other reason than he doesn’t think they are ready or give the team the best chance to win…?

I just don’t see where this sentiment is coming from.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

TA should have played anyway

People forget the 2:14 he got in Game 4 against LAL, we went on a 10-0 run that changed the game. 2:14 and the guy is +10 in our most important win in 22 years, TA deserved more respect.

by star18 on May 21, 2009 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

respect?

I thought it was pretty clear that TA had no feel for the game when he was in there.

if you want to attribute that to being out with injuries, that’s one thing.

but to suggest that this was anything other than a “what’s best for the team” decision on Doc’s part doesn’t seem substantiated by his play….

plus, his play was erratic before the injury as well…

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

so what

PP & Ray were exhausted and that led to erratic play for them as well. We needed energy case closed.

by star18 on May 21, 2009 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

you're still in...

the “closer by committee” mindset.

Looks doable on paper, but just doesn’t play out that way. Just like the combo of Ray, TA and Scal couldn’t replace Pose, the combo of Perk, Baby and Scal can’t replace PJ (or Baby of last season, however you slice it).

you just need guys to fill the role that actually fill the role.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

no, you're still in

 the “everything has to be identical to 07-08” mode. If PJ gave us 13 minutes a game last year and Perk gave us 36 minutes a game this year why is PJ’s role unfillable? Did PJ give us so much more last year than Perk was giving us this year?

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

tell me..

how many teams left in the playoffs don’t have a backup wing taller than 6’4" or a backup big taller than 6’8"….

we’re not reinventing the wheel here Bball. you flexibility in your roster for the different match ups that teams can throw at you, you need players that can fill positions without creating negative mismatches for your team and most importantly you need bench players who’s play is deserving of minutes in high pressure situations…

Mikki and TA did not fit the requisites. and Mar was struggling to do so…their play was subpar and they created mismatches against us with their ability and their dimensions.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

interesting

  but somewhat unrelated to what we were discussing. The bench didn’t do well in the playoffs but injuries caused many of the problems. Having KG on the floor when we had some of those bad stretches would have helped. Having Leon and Baby come off the bench instead of Scal and Moore would have helped. And. again, getting an extra 10-12 minutes a game from Perk helped our overall play.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

what i would say is that instead of injuries...

causing the problems of/holes in our bench, they clarified them.

if KG and Powe were healthy, we could have compensated better for the holes, but the holes would be there none-the-less.

We’d still not have a long big and we’d still not have a legit backup SF.

just to reiterate from another post, with Perk’s continued shoulder problems, and now KGs knees, a backup big taller than 6’8" becomes even more important IMO

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

  every team has holes. If you take starters and key reserves out of any rotation those holes become much bigger for more than one reason. No team left standing could withstand the injuries we’ve had because it would thrust players into roles that they aren’t able to fill.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

well...

looking at the rosters of the remaining teams in the playoffs, i would argue that they each have a diverse, balanced bench. especially ORL and CLE who were in our path to the Finals and LA who would have been the likely foe had the injuries not happened and we made it there…

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

  I’d say we have better starters and they have better benches. But even with those diverse, balanced bench, which of those teams could withstand losing their best and 3rd-4th best bigs? Who are Orlando and LA’s 5th bigs and how well could they fill key roles in the playoffs?

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

but...

how many of those teams don’t have a 3rd or 4ht big that isn’t undersized for the position?

the 5th big on the Cs is more important than other teams because both our 3rd and 4th bigs are undersized.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

or

  It’s not necessarily more important because our pf is 7’2"

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

a 7'2" (if he is that) that

is at a point in his career where he needs to not be his own backup.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

  I didn’t say there was. But if there’s a difference between not having a tall backup big if Rashard Lewis is your pf than if KG is.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

well..

ORL has two backup bigs with length and Rashard isn’t exactly short or unathletic….not to mention the 6’10 Turk…

you’ve got match up problems with ORL even with KG.

match up problems that could be better managed with a long big off the bench…

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

not to mention

a long wing in the Posey mold…

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

  Think you’re going to get quality minutes at center from Lewis? If not, you HAVE to have a backup center capable of playing a lot of minutes.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

you have to have one, but they...

have two backup bigs on the top side of 6’8".

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

  You keep repeating yourself. Lewis is incapable of playing center, KG is not. It seems pretty obvious to me that that would influence what type of subs you have.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

he couldn't

guard KG when KG is playing center?

so Lewis guards KG when he plays PF, but can’t guard him at center when he plays center?

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

  according to 82games he didn’t play a minute of center all year. I also noticed that he’s a worse rebounder than Rondo. Regular season Rondo, not playoff Rondo. I can’t believe that you look at Lewis and see a player that can play center. The guy’s pretty soft.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 8:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

what i'm saying is...

…if he can guard KG at PF, he can guard him at center. in terms of match ups…

but yeah, he’s not playing center. like i said, they have two bench pieces that are able to do that…types of pieces that the Cs should have at least one of…

and just on a general point, in terms of flexibility, you keep pointing to KG and Perk to fill holes, but we’re trying trim responsibilities for these two guys not add to them.

Perk because he keeps getting these shoulders injuries and KG because he’s entering his 15th season….

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

by the way...

i keep repeating myself because you keep ignoring the element of having depth AND flexibility in your bench personnel.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

So BBall

does this improved play of Baby mean that you would be comfortable with him and Mikki being our back up bigs for next season?

Like i said, the problem was a lack of depth and flexibility at the position….

regardless of whether Baby improved or not, we need someone with more length who could actually get on the court. Mikki couldn’t even get on the court with KG down…

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

  Not for a full season, we’d need someone else (Leon or his replacement). But I could live with Perk/KG/Baby/Moore for the playoffs. You have to consider your standards. We could always improve. But with a healthy KG we would have won 65+ games. I think a rotation that will win you 65 games isn’t perfect but it’s good enough. Likewise, with a healthy KG we could have won the title. Very few people dispute this. Again, while far from perfect, I’d classify a rotation that’s good enough to win a title as good enough.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions  

how about SF..

is there any spot on this bench that you think needs upgrading?

I’m not sure how you can still be holding on to Mikki as a backup big when he couldn’t even get on the court with both KG and Powe out with injury….

as for the things that very few people dispute, let’s add the lack of bench depth on this year’s squad.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 9:58 AM EDT up reply actions  

i asked you this question earlier in the season...

and can’t remember if you answered it.

do you think that we could fill out our bench with D-League guys and assorted unsigned FAs milling about and still be good enough (Stromile, Bonzi, Pops, Toine, JWill, etc…) and still be "good enough to win a Title?

the fact is that “good enough” is simply too broad a measuring stick at this point. with our starting 5, it would be pretty hard to field a team that isn’t “good enough” to win a Title.

but the same could be said for the starting 5 of ORL, CLE, SAS, LA, etc…

yet with our small window of opportunity with GPA, honestly, “good enough” (not to be cheeky) just isn’t good enough…not when it is very realistic to do much better than “good enough”

we had two key bench players that couldn’t even get on the floor (TA and Mikki), one that struggled to stay on the floor (Mar) and a position that didn’t even have a back up (SF).

gots to do better than that.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

  Moore wasn’t meant to be a key player for us. That happened because of injury.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

the is definitely not...

..true.

we needed a long big off the bench for match ups that Baby would struggle with.

the injuries just highlighted how unable Mikki was to get PT and contribute.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

You keep confusing two different things

A good enough team/rotation to win the title and maximizing our assets last off-season in order to maximize our chances to win the title.

If Ainge’s goal this off-season is having a team good enough to win the title next off-season, he only has to do two things:

- keep everybody
- sign some other big to replace Powe

Would that be good? No, it won’t; it will be another terrible off-season. However, we’ll still have a contender in our hands.

by cordobes on May 21, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

  I think the main thing that he passed on to maximize our assets last offseason was to pass on giving Posey a 4th year and I still see that as a reasonable decision. The other main complaint people have was POB, but he was our 5th big. I don’t see a rotation of Perk/KG/Davis/Powe as being a big problem in the playoffs.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

the plan..

wasn’t for POB to contribute. The plan was to convince PJ to come out of retirement or fill the role with a waiver wire player.

PJ never came back and the waiver wire guy was someone who couldn’t get on the floor.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

finally

  I get agreement from the other side that Danny wasn’t replacing PJ with POB, which was my original statement.

by BballTim on May 21, 2009 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is the truth

I don’t always agree with cordobes but he’s absolutely right here and it admittedly took me a little while to realize it.. The question Danny has to ask is “Are you trying to build a contender? Or are you trying to build a WINNER?” We can absolutely build a contender right now with a few minimal moves. But if we want a winner, we gotta pony up with better than bargain basement options and rookies.

by bucknersrevenge on May 21, 2009 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

These discussions usually grow out of people who are intent on keeping Danny’s draft picks, at whatever the cost to the overall team. The fact is Davis is a tweener – too short, jumps poorly for the 5, not quick enough to play the 4.

We simply cannot pay him $5 million a year because he’s a spare part – an improving spare part, but a player with significant limitations that make the acquisition of a veteran 5-4 man critical. As critical as getting Pierce help? That’s questionable.

by CoachBo on May 22, 2009 8:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

Not sure if you mean me or not

  But I’m pretty sure that I’ve made all of the comments about Davis that you just did at one time or another. Since Big Al’s gone, Rondo and Perk are the only draft picks of Danny’s that I’m really concerned about one way or the other, although I’d like to see some of Walker/Giddens/Pruitt make a jump.

by BballTim on May 22, 2009 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

I disagree with Doc too — Rondo and Perk’s development was a massive gain for the Celtics

In terms of player transactions and acquisitions, Doc is right, the team got back zero. But the development of Rondo and Perkins, and to a lesser extent Davis and Powe, added a huge amount of talent to the C’s.

by Who on May 21, 2009 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Both definitely improved – in same areas.

But people need to understand that improvement does nothing to offset the loss of certain skill-sets – the big guy who can control the defensive glass, the long wing who can lock down a scorer for four or five minutes.

This is a game of assembling distinct and diverse pieces.

by CoachBo on May 22, 2009 8:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

calling out Danny?

pretty plain comments from Doc. wonder how come of these things sounded behind the scenes during the year.

Marbury and Mikki represent an important point here — veterans don’t always represent a veteran presense. their inability to calm or lead left the locker room too dependant on paul and ray. this should be carefully considered in at least 1 of the 2 players brought in — can you say, Grant Hill? I bet his and McDyess’ are ringing off the hook.

by ssspence on May 21, 2009 8:50 AM EDT reply actions  

Nice point about the veteran presence.

by amenhotep04 on May 21, 2009 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

postseason minutes

didn’t make sense, just like the regular season minutes didn’t either. Who cares if Pruitt was playing better than Cassel, after a 27-2 start why not just play with Cassel for 40 games to eat up minutes from the BIG 3, the guy knows how to play we underestimated him. Our minutes in the ORL series didn’t make sense either. TA played 11, Mikki 16 and Scalabrine 162. How do any of you think we are going to win like that. Scals gets 7 times the playing time of TA & Mikki? That’s not team basketball. The expecations for TA, Mikki and even Marbury were way too high and I think they did what they are supposed to do. What do you want TA & Mikki to do in 27 minutes against ORL considering some of those minutes were during garbage time. How do you have a top 8 that doesn’t consist of KG, include Scals and your 9th and 10th guys don’t get minutes? Explain that one. PP played 549 and Ray 557 in the playoffs thats way too many.

by star18 on May 21, 2009 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

wonder which side of the fence wyc falls on....

my sense is, while a business man thru and thru, he’s more tempted to lead with his heart than his head when it comes to choices like posey. i’m sure he’s listening here — his reaction will be interesting to see this offseason…

by ssspence on May 21, 2009 9:00 AM EDT reply actions  

Also, as a pure business decision...

Championships bring in a ton of revenue and increase the value of a franchise. Hard fought second round exits, not so much.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

Good to see that Doc is on the same page as we are.

He speaks the truth and I hope that these statements will make Danny react to give us a good bench.

by Drucci on May 21, 2009 9:06 AM EDT reply actions  

Doc and Danny

You’ll be hard pressed to find a better General Manager-Coach relationship in the NBA when it comes to Danny and Doc. While Danny might have final say, he is obviously going to take Doc’s opinions and observations into consideration and since Doc has gone great ones in that article, we should be in good shape.

by Greg Payne on May 21, 2009 9:16 AM EDT reply actions  

Excusesss

Where was Doc earlier in the season and the beginning complaining about not signing anyone?? this is all typical Nurse propaganda and excuses for being blownout in game 7 at the Garden. The team gave up on him. The defensive strategy against Orlando was disgusting. Nurse never says what he did wrong, only what others do. He’s a punk!

by Adrigol6 on May 21, 2009 9:17 AM EDT reply actions  

What was Doc supposed to do?

He was playing with a depleted roster. He had no reliable backup at PG, SF, PF, or C by the end of the season, and Eddie House is more of a tweener.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:22 AM EDT reply actions  

I agree with Doc

I’ve been agreeing with what he said since last Summer. Here’s hoping Danny is paying attention.

Like who I don’t agree with the PG part, except if they’re going to sign McIntyre.

by cordobes on May 21, 2009 9:27 AM EDT reply actions  

i agree...

with the order of importance. especially if Eddie is back. We absolutely have to get a reliable backup big and SF/PF.

PG is less important to me.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

From Doc's other comments in the article...

He seems to want a point guard who can shoot. Can McIntyre do that? I haven’t studied his game much at all.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah

A high 30s/low 40s 3PT shooter. He’s particularly good shooting off the dribble from distance. McIntyre’s problem is lack of size, but in the current league, I don’t think that’s such a problem any more, especially for a backup PG. He’s also a good defensive player, creating havoc with his energy and quick hands (very much like Will Bynum).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss6pgPKGfc4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWWpnmxamEo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTHbBGfVtxQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxQHCfzYFeE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StLcVRqTpEY

by cordobes on May 21, 2009 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

nice, but..

i’d focus first on the post and the wing…those seem like tougher spots to fill at the moment.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think that´s cordobes` point

We are not necessarily limited to the US market.

You can find productive role-players in europe.. If McIntyre is good enough to be our backup PG, we`d have more budget to fill the more important positions at Center and Wing.

by Casperian on May 21, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

oh, i don't have any

problem looking overseas. I just think the other two spots are bigger needs right now.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I agree

This is a very low priority move for me. I’d settle with House at the PG spot, so, we’re talking about a 3rd string PG. I’m just saying if they’re going to go for a veteran PG that can contribute, then McIntyre is cheap, is at his peak and is way better than guys that will be available for the same price (Pargos, Lues, Dieners and the likes).

by cordobes on May 21, 2009 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

nice piece, Roy, happy to see Doc's comments...

I am sure Danny and Doc and other ex-celtic players and current coaches will all have back and forths about the options and will make some strong moves to improve the team.

by jyrecelts on May 21, 2009 9:27 AM EDT reply actions  

Thanks... Feedback is always appreciated

I was thrilled when I saw the comments this morning, as well.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 21, 2009 9:45 AM EDT up reply actions  

I recall Nurse saying at one point during the season that THE TEAM WAS BETTER THIS YEAR because Baby, Rondo, Perk and Powe were all playing more mins to compansate for Posey’s losss. The guy flip flops more the Verajao !

by Adrigol6 on May 21, 2009 9:38 AM EDT reply actions  

Baby's Growth

I doubt Baby shows his growth this year with a healthy KG or Powe. The only reason Baby was able to show growth was because we had no choice but to play him.

Had we had a full healthy roster, Doc would probably have gone to Scal, first off the bench over Baby.

by LB3533 on May 21, 2009 10:30 AM EDT reply actions  

hmmm…wrong…Baby was developing when both those guys were healthy, that and leon powe is drastically overrated by celtics fans, he had one good week, other then that he had regressed

by ohc on May 21, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

I love it

Agree 100%.

On the other hand, he could´ve easily avoided this situation if he just asked me :D j/k

The only concnern I have is that they might go with too many veterans next season. As it is, the team already lacks the typical strengths young players bring (athelticism etc)

by Casperian on May 21, 2009 10:43 AM EDT reply actions  

I knew it all along

The Celtics committed to being contenders for three years after they successfully traded for Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett. Given their past patterns of winning a Championship, losing next year, and then winning the following year, I say 2010 is the year the Celtics bring home 18. 1974-1976, 1984-1986, 2008-2010.

After 2010, we have to rebuild around Rondo and Perkins. This may entail trading Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett away and I would not put it past Danny Ainge to do just that.

Glen Davis is a nice role player but he could land a rich contract with another team. We should go after McDyess or Rasheed Wallace. I’d like to pick up Artest or Marion, too. We have 25 million in expiring contracts to get veteran help.

Boston Celtics - 2008 World Champions

by QuinielaBox on May 21, 2009 10:43 AM EDT reply actions  

And the Baby hate needs to stop

It reminds me of the “Posey wasn´t that important” justification a lot of people used last off-season. All of a sudden, Baby´s height is an important factor for his contribution, when that wasn´t the case in the last two years.

Who knows what Baby can get on the open market? I still have hope that he comes back.
15 mil/4 years is not too much for one of the best big man projects of the last two years. I mean, it´s arguable that Baby is a better player than Greg Oden at this point.

Last year, everyone and their mother loved Leon Powe, and said how great he allegedly was for a second-year player.
You never hear the argument that Powe is “too short”. In the minds of most fans, Powe has “unlimited potential”, while Baby has “hit his ceiling”. Leon´s history of serious knee injuries is obviously not that important, but the two inches Baby lacks makes him a “4th big man” at best.

That is up there with “TA can replace Posey” as the biggest nonsense I´ve heard all year.

by Casperian on May 21, 2009 10:57 AM EDT reply actions  

doc is an honest man and i think he speaks for danny too. let’s develop bill walker. goodbye tony-injury prone and a bit of a head case.

by nazzbo on May 21, 2009 11:15 AM EDT reply actions  

I would think that Doc and Danny would want the per game minutes of the big 3 coming down next year significantly. Thus it should afford Doc the opportunity to give both the veteran pick up and a young player enough minutes to help rest the starters and develope the youth.

by celty86 on May 21, 2009 11:17 AM EDT reply actions  

Wyc

Wyc was on Celtics Now this week and said he had a specific player in mind that he wanted the team to get as a free agent but wasn’t going to divulge the name. My guess is Grant Hill.

by celty86 on May 21, 2009 11:22 AM EDT reply actions  

the point guard situation comment is interesting. it could mean almost anything

Rajon is inconsistent, he can’t shoot , Marbury won’t be back etc. Interesting

by wahz on May 21, 2009 11:42 AM EDT reply actions  

Doc may be speaking to help negotiations...

with Rondo and Marbury’s agents.

Notice neither he nor Danny has mentioned a need at power forward, which makes me think Baby may be a priority for them. Either that or they feel very good about Powe’s recovery.

by clover on May 21, 2009 11:57 AM EDT reply actions  

Think we could get Desmond Mason? I think he would be a good fit.

by 44Thrilla on May 21, 2009 12:18 PM EDT reply actions  

tired of doc whining

I get tired of doc whining he doesn’t have a team of veteran all-stars. His title is head coach and not head manager. If Walker, Pruitt, BB, etc can’t be counted on, who is to blame?. I understand the center issue and Celtics need a big body shot blocker who can play serious defense when Perk goes to the bench. However the other situations require “coaching”. It is easy to ask for a $110+M dollar payroll of superstars. The Celtics owners spend enough money to expect a championship run (assuming they get a real backup center). Doc should show he is a real coach and get Walker, BB, Pruitt and Giddens to improve. Walker has serious athletic talent and is willing to work. Saying they are young is just a cop-out.

by oldmanspeaks on May 21, 2009 12:41 PM EDT reply actions  

No

Our bench this year was just plain awful.

by Marqui on May 21, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

and

they hardly played so what were they supposed to do. I don’t think the bench was plain awful in the time they got, they didn’t play well thats for sure but they didn’t get more of a chance which they deserved. When TA gets 1 turnover everybody is rolling around in disgust, guess what PP & Ray made some bad turnovers also we don’t call them out on their bad plays so why does TA always get called out when he makes a mistake, like he’s supposed to play perfect basketball being our 9th or 10th guy. He’s our 9th or 10th guy, why do people expect him to play as good as the BIG 3, and when he doesn’t he supposedly is no good for the team. Remember, TA can hit an alley oop(like Game 6 against CHI) make a spectacular dunk or a great steal for an easy two(end of Game 7 against ORL) and he can do some things that alot of our players who played aren’t that good at doing. TA can make that exciting play to spark a rally(alley oop dunk to put us up 43 Game 6 against LAL), and that play can go a long way, but people don’t respect him for that. PP,Ray,Scals,House, make great plays and hit awesome jump shots, but they don’t make that power dunk that gets people off their seats and puts the bench in a frenzy and that was something we needed this year.

by star18 on May 21, 2009 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

3 Years

I don’t think you will see Ainge bringing in anybody new for longer than 3 years contractually. Center and wing is my guess.

by celty86 on May 21, 2009 1:37 PM EDT reply actions  

Additions

Gortat from Orlando and Outlaw from Portland

by celty86 on May 21, 2009 1:38 PM EDT reply actions  

Yes But

Without being an apologist for Danny, I don’t think he’s an idiot — I think he knew that these were our needs last off-season, too, and just wasn’t willing or able to keep Posey for the money he got from NO, to pay a guy like Pietrus what he got from the Magic, etc. I’m not saying that we maximized our off-season even then, by any means. But I think that identifying our needs is the easy part; actually filling them at a price acceptable to ownership is the hard part.

What gives me some hope is that a) everyone has now seen what happens when we lean too much on the Big 3 during the regular season, and so it must be a team imperative to prevent that next year even if it means a few additional losses getting new guys up to speed and/or giving younger players minutes; and b) that Wyc and company have now experienced the difference — in game revenue, merchandise, ticket renewals, etc. — between a Championship team and a 2nd round team, and hopefully those are additional millions that they’ll be willing to risk spending this off-season.

by MattD on May 21, 2009 1:45 PM EDT reply actions  

He had the money

He offered Posey a 3 years contract. I doubt that an additional $6 millions in 4 years (4 years that could be used to put the team under the luxury tax threshold) would be such a big problem. More, he spend money signing House and Tony Allen, plus buying an additional pick, signing Moore, Cassell, Marbury and POB. The C’s carried a $80 millions payroll last season, it wasn’t a budgetary problem. And there were cheap options that he missed. Not signing Mutombo when he was available still puts me sick.

And if identifying the needs is now so easy and consensual, why all the debate here in CB last Summer and throughout this season?

by cordobes on May 21, 2009 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

All the players he signed/resigned were inexpensive — that suggests to me that it was, at least in part, a budgetary problem. Not completely, no…maybe there was too much loyalty shown to guys who helped us win, maybe there was more caring about where the team will be in 4 years compared to winning this year than many fans would agree with, maybe there were some questionable calls on talent evaluation. My point is just that most of the moves Danny made last year seemed to be aimed toward filling the same holes we’re talking about now (POB as a big man, buying a pick so we could draft Walker as an SF, drafting Giddens as an SG, resigning Cassell as a PG) and that makes me wonder how much we, as fans, did not see of Danny’s attempts to find better fits for those holes, that didn’t work out.

Re: Mutombo, it never seemed to me that he truly wanted to play anywhere other than Houston, whatever he may have said after the fact to explain his decision. And most of the debate here has been exactly that sort of thing: it’s not so much debate over whether we need a big man, it’s which big man (or 3-pt shooting, defense-playing SF; or backup PG) should & could we get.

by MattD on May 21, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yep, Danny had enough money to build a top bench and spent enough money to build a very good one.

I think the minimum contract signings were a large problem, choosing the wrong players with those contracts.

by Who on May 21, 2009 7:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Part with one of the Big Three

Don’t be surprised if Danny Deals one of the Big Three. Dead serious about that. Danny first hands saw what holding onto Larry, Robert, & Kevin did to the Celtics. He might just decide to trade one of them for a more younger player(s).

He has Ray Allens contract expiring next year, and if some teams are looking to trading good players with longer contracts, Danny might just do that and also allow him to hit the free agent market with one or two players.

I truly believe he is heading in that direction, he’s looking at every option available to him at the moment

by Ancient Red on May 21, 2009 1:53 PM EDT reply actions  

You know what pains me the most about this thought?

The feeling that it would be the smartest thing to trade Pierce, if we were willing to trade one of the big 3.

KG is just too good to simply trade away, and Pierce seems to bring more value in return than Ray.
I mean, a team like Portland, for example, could use a guy like Pierce. Pierce for Batum and Fernandez + Filler/Pick/or Przybilla seems to me like a reasonable trade, and I can´t think of a trade for Ray that would bring similar value. Sure, Ray still has enough left and a big expiring contract, but Pierce` skill-set is more rare and coveted in the league, imo .

I hope I´m wrong and this won´t happen, though.

by Casperian on May 21, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

Trade Pierce?
KG simply too good, la dea da?

.disagree 100%, id trade KG and ray before trading pierce

by ohc on May 21, 2009 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

My heart agrees, my brain disagrees.

by Casperian on May 21, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Doc shares plenty of blame...

Rivers blew MANY opportunities to give Walker & Giddens quality playing time. Without getting it, nobody really knows their skill level.

How many times did you see Paul or Ray or both on the floor, with 3 minutes left in the game, and Boston up by 15 points? Lots of times!

Walker & Giddens should have seen lots of fourth quarter minutes, when the team enjoyed huge leads. Then, come playoff time, they would`ve had some experience, and could have contributed.

by Title 18 on May 21, 2009 3:07 PM EDT reply actions  

total agree

The Big 3 should have been eating peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and playing XBOX on the sideline after a 27-2 start, yet Doc had to leave PP & Ray in games we were up 20+ with 3 minutes left. I couldn’t believe those guys were in the game at some points like that.

by star18 on May 21, 2009 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Sam Cassel? um no
I dont see why he includes sams name in talking about who we missed, we freaking had the guy half the year, never played him and then traded him, that and he sucked for us anyways

by ohc on May 21, 2009 3:54 PM EDT reply actions  

Great Season

I keep reading the posts and wonder what some of you are thinking.

This was a great year. Could we have upgraded the roster better? Certainly, but unitl KG went down they were 2nd in the league 1-2 games behind Cleve and might have caught them. And still finished with the 3rd best record.

I don’t care who we added, if KG goes down, we go down. Simple as that. We might be able to lose Ray or Pierce (don’t want to) but not KG. He spearheads the defense, is our inside presence and the emotional leader. He allows PP to be PP and allows Ray to do his stuff. He also opens things up for Eddie and everyone else. In the playoffs you need an inside presence, a threat, which is KG. He commands double teams, that’s how Eddie and Ray and PP get so wide open. Perk improved in the post, but will never demand a double team.

Pls remember that this is a business and news flash, the economy SUCKS! The C’s payroll is, I believe over $80-85M, which means they are paying the tax, which puts the true salary at close to $100M.

I think Danny expected more from BBD and Powe and he got it until injuries deleted the roster. I think he expected and expects more from TA, who was also hurt for the last half of the season (thumb). Hopefully he will play better next year, if not he’s an expiring contract. And yes, he’s been disappointing.

I agree with most people who think we need a Big, Wing Player and a PG. BTW, I love Bill Walker and hope he can make an impact next year. But you don’t win championships with young people establishing themselves, it takes vets.

I don’t see BBD coming back if he wants big buxks more than $2.5-3M. I can see him in a sign and trade if it fills a hole.

I’d like to see Danny explore bringing in Rasheed Wallace. I know he’s a jerk, but he can play.. Danny and Doc would have to make sure that he’s willing to be a backup, wouldn’t disrupt the team chemistry and would have to be willing to play for the MLE. He would give us both an inside and outside presence pretty rate in one player.

by badax33 on May 21, 2009 4:02 PM EDT reply actions  

Very rarely

 In his two years as a Celtic the times any team has double teamed KG have been few and far between.
Not saying he isn’t the most important of the big three, he probably is, but it’s mostly on the defensive end.

by Jaycelt on May 21, 2009 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

I Thought Teams Doubled KG Alot This Year

The problem is that all that does is keep him from putting the ball on the floor and maybe shooting over the double. I think one of the things that hasn’t been mentioned much is how great a passer KG is. When he is doubled he can look over everyone, holding the ball high, and make the right pass. It’s actually to the team’s advantage for the opponent to double KG. As to which of the “big three” is most important is almost a meaningless question. It is the combination of the 3 that makes everything work. When they are all playing and healthy it’s hard to beat them. If one is out for an extended period it eventually hurts the team. This team did a great job of covering for his absence, but it eventually took it’s toll. I think the same thing would have happened if either Paul or Ray was out for an extended period of time

"I don't come to play, I come to WIN"--Larry Bird
"Criminally Negligent Officiating"--Tommy Heinsohn

by TrueGreen on May 21, 2009 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

$ for 3 HOF

The fundamental problem, spending 60+ M for just 3 players, forcing DA to use cheap draft pics, and bought out players to fill out the other 12 players, catches up with you. When you have 3 HOF’s you, in theory, can fill out the rest with whatever, and still get a ring.

But when your best HOF goes down, the whole gamble goes down with him. Doc can complain all he wants, but the situation is, what it is. He needs to figure out how to make due with whatever DA can get on the cheap to fill in around the Big $ 3. This team would not have gotten here without the Big $ 3. But at the same time, its tough to find decent players with the scraps you have left over to work with.

Danny can bring in draft pics for cheap, or bought out players for cheap, or FA willing to sign for cheap. But the common theme is “Cheap”. And as long as you have 3 players sucking up 60+, that is what you are stuck with. That said, you still might be able to pull off another banner, if the 3 stay healthy, and you get a break on getting someone to come in here.

by Bozo on May 21, 2009 4:04 PM EDT reply actions  

actually no

he does not get it. he blames everyone but himself. one of the most overrated coaches in league history.

"if my kid said 'uhh' that much, i would say, Hey! ... stop saying 'uhh' that much..." - dennis miller

by Longhorn on May 21, 2009 4:28 PM EDT reply actions  

Josh Childress

Childress is the type of defensive wing and offensive spark off the bench that we need. I highly doubt he would come cheaply since he followed the money to Europe. Does anyone know if he would become an UFA if he opts out of Olympiacos?

by Ookii Akachan Hawaii on May 21, 2009 4:28 PM EDT reply actions  

If he opts out of Olympiakos he is still the property of the Hawks.

by Brickowski on May 21, 2009 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

A point of clarification about the "point guard situation"

I just read the article that these quotes come from. Doc goes on to say that Marbury would be much better next year, and that he thinks that training camp would be really helpful. If anything it seams like he is looking into re-signing Marbury. I don’t hate it. I really felt like he was gearing up to break out at any time. He just got here to late to get back into the swing of things. That’s what pre-season is for.

by stevenfuzz on May 21, 2009 4:47 PM EDT reply actions  

I agree with doc’s assessment but did he just give danny an impossible wish list? I mean seriously can danny get all that done? if we weren’t willing to sign posey last year why is danny now going to go on a spending spree? frankly I thought the celts got tight last year

by Red2 on May 21, 2009 5:48 PM EDT reply actions  

Well, I agree with Rivers as to what they need. The question is, what players will be selected to fill those needs?

But the notion that they “suddenly got younger” is bogus. Marbury and Moore are in their 30’s.

What haqppened is that their bench suddenly got worse. Marbury and Moore were major disappointments, and while BBD grew as a player, he’s no Garnett.

I also believe that Rivers made a very poor decision in giving so many minutes to Marbury when it obviously wan’t working.

by Brickowski on May 21, 2009 6:28 PM EDT reply actions  

doc gets it

i think the loss of powe ang kg done the celtics in along with they let players go instead of replacing them they had no backup for perk and no backup for rondo and they got a big fat zero out of tony allen who i think will be gone next year this team can still win one more title but time is running out the big three are aging so this year they better add some vets to add some playoff no how a guy like rasheed wallace would be nice and how about a guy like za za pachula for perks backup he brings alot of energy just look at the battles him and kg done in the 08 championship season he did,nt back away from kg we need energy guys like that and bring back big baby as long as it dont break the bank if we can improve that way with those kind of players #18 is not to long from having ……….

by lohaus#54 on May 21, 2009 6:46 PM EDT reply actions  

Doc Does Get It

If KG didn’t get hurt we wouldn’t be having this discussion. I think we got so used to things with him that we forgot how much he gives to the team regardless of everything else that went on. With KG all the starters are better and the bench is better. KG going down changed all this.

"I don't come to play, I come to WIN"--Larry Bird
"Criminally Negligent Officiating"--Tommy Heinsohn

by TrueGreen on May 21, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Big Man Rotation

I think the big man rotation is getting far too much criticism.

I know it’s not an ideal big man rotation — KG, Perk, Powe and BBD, and Scal as the fifth big — that it lacks length and a legitimate center, but it’s still a very strong group overall and they complement each other well.

I don’t they backup big men are getting enough credit for the quality they provide the team.

by Who on May 21, 2009 9:45 PM EDT reply actions  

speaking for myself..

I think you have it exactly right.

the big man rotation we have is a very strong group overall, but it lacks length and legit backup center. That’s what most people have been arguing, actually.

the point is that one, it really helps to have that backup center and two, it’s a totally doable addition.

I mean, Bball mentioned in an earlier section when we were comparing our bench to the benches on the remaining playoff teams that we have the better starting five against the teams that may have the better/deeper/more flexible bench….

I would agree with that, but then wouldn’t it stand to reason that having those same elements on our bench would make us that much more dangerous in the playoffs if we already have the better starting 5.

if you agree with this, then tell me why it is so impossible to add these missing elements to our bench.

the fact is that we had these elements (legit length at backup center and SF) and it worked to our advantage.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Let me ask you a question — assuming the rest of the bench is in order — is that big man rotation good enough to win a title?

by Who on May 21, 2009 11:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

Let me ask you a different question - is “good enough” “good enough”?

I basically agree that we have a fine big man rotation, but there are some valid arguments for another 5 – mainly KG`s and Powe´s injuries, Perk`s shoulder, but also the lack of height.

If Perk gets in foul trouble, or one of Powe/Baby gets injured, that takes a lot away from the rotation. The big men we have all excel at certain areas of the game, but they also have holes in their skill-sets.

There are just too many question marks if one of Perk/Powe/Baby goes down with an injury, and there are even minor question marks if everyone`s healthy. A real backup 5 removes most of these doubts…

by Casperian on May 22, 2009 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions  

I want to stay away from those talking points for a little while.

I’d like to focus on the guys that are here, about the quality they bring to the table, and whether they’re being given enough credit for those contributions. As a generality, I don’t think they are.

by Who on May 22, 2009 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

yeah..

i’ve already conceded that.

with our starting five + health, it is very difficult to put together a team that is not capable of winning a Title. Like i said, you could fill out our bench with D-Leaguers and you’d still have a chance at a Title.

but that’s not a reason to leave obvious holes in the bench that you could actually fill.

could we have won last year without Posey and PJ? Sure. Did having them increase our chances of winning said Title? Definitely.

by winsomme on May 21, 2009 11:23 PM EDT reply actions  

Okay, that’s not really what I was trying to say. Emm …

Very Poor Big Man Rotation — New Orleans Hornets trot out Hilton Armstong, Sean Marks, and Melvin Ely. Can we agree to call that a very poor big man rotation? They have three decent big men who can be useful as fifth bigs in the rotation, but are generally liabilities when asked to play larger roles (first big off the bench, and fourth big in the rotation) than that off the bench.

Excellent Big Man Rotation
— Then the opposite side of the scale being Orlando and Cleveland. Who with Gortat, Battie, Foyle and Varejao/Wallace, Smith and Hickson … have excellent big man rotations.

Celtics Big Man Rotation — How highly would you regard a Leon Powe, Glen Davis, and Brian Scalabrine rotation?

Considering both (1) their own individual talent and (2) how well they play alongside the starting two big men, how well they complement them or do not complement them.

How would you rate them? Very poor, poor, mediocre, solid, good, very good, or excellent.

by Who on May 22, 2009 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

Individually: Solid
Collectively: Poor

Is still remember both Laker games this season when KG and Perk were guarding their frontcourt fine until Leon/Davis came in and Gasol was shooting over them like they weren’t even there.

Length isn’t a luxury. It’s a must have in the nba. I’m surprised people haven’t figured that out yet.

by Marqui on May 22, 2009 3:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

well...

like i said, our big man rotation was solid.

but there are two key elements to look at big man bench players, there’s ability level and there’s skill sets.

And while the ability level for Baby and Leon is quite good for bench bigs, in the skill set department we are definitely lacking because we really don’t have a bench guy that can protect the rim.

it’s a pretty key element to be missing off the bench and one that seems like there is no reason not to fill.

by winsomme on May 22, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

The only thing Nurse gets..

.. is making ridiculous excuses and being a hypocrite.

by Adrigol6 on May 22, 2009 7:18 AM EDT reply actions  

Mark Murphy today...
A grade is included here for the simple fact that last summer’s decisions came to bear over 14 playoff games. A decision not to overpay for James Posey burned a hole in the Celtics bench – if not management’s pockets – as most knew it would when injuries started to pile up. Danny Ainge, more interested in chasing the stats-heavy, intangibly-light Corey Maggette, left the statistically light but intangibly-heavy Posey on the back burner, before deciding that four years plus the full mid-level was too much. Patrick O’Bryant, and then Mikki Moore, never earned anyone’s trust. The plan to replace Posey with a Frankenstein monster of Tony Allen, Brian Scalabrine and whoever else had something to give, never worked. Stephon Marbury, though part of the solution, was not the gamebreaker everyone hoped for. Sometimes, when faced with a small window, a team has to overpay to protect its aging core.

Yep.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on May 22, 2009 9:49 AM EDT reply actions  

you know who...

would move would have made me feel a lot better right now…

picking DeAndre Jordan. He’s already shown that he plays hard and has the dimensions to be a legit backup center.

I guess he could be looked at as a project like POB, but we already had a pretty clear tack record on him and how hard he plays…

by winsomme on May 22, 2009 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

yeah Doc gets it alright but to me he’s getting it a little too late !
In hind sight its easy to talk about what you could’ve done and should do.
I wonder why Doc didn’t get it with Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, Rondo, Eddie House and Tony Allen.
Giving Paul Pierce the ball from the top of the key to take his man one on one is one very difficult play for Piece because he’s not a very good ball handler, and half the time if he doesn’t get the shot off his passes nearly always results in a turnover, Doc hasn’t figured this out over the years with Paul !
Ray Allen is and was a very poor defender and for some strange reason ended up guarding the opponents better offensive players, Doc didn’t figure that out.
Rondo though he has next to no consistency with a jump shot he’s nearly unguardable taking the ball to the basket. In the Chicago and Orlando series instead of giving the ball to Paul from so far out from the basket the right play would’ve been to give the ball to Rondo for a drive against whoever was guarding him, his driving to the basket was very successful in both series !
Eddie House should’ve have gotten more minutes especially in crunch time, his presence on the floor alone opens up the middle for penetration, and if he get the ball off penetration for a catch and shoot it was more than likely to be a score !
Tony Allen should’ve been given more minutes, early minutes to get him into the feel of the game, and later minutes for defensive purposes, Ray Allen was getting slaughtered by whoever he as guarding !
Doc coaching was on display and he did a very poor job
After failing its easy to say what he did about improving his team but what’s equally important here is Doc improving his coaching skills, I was not impressed

by martin kenneth on May 24, 2009 9:27 AM EDT reply actions  

The c’s are in discussion with Grant Hill, Rasheed Wallace and Yes Ron Artest- and yes I have an inside leak- and no I will not leak my lead. From what I understand they are only talking- TA ,Gabe,Moore are all outta here. TA too injury prone,Gabe DUI sealed the deal and Moore Need I say More ?

by fadeawayswish17 on May 24, 2009 6:15 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

CelticsBlog is a growing interactive community dedicated to providing fresh, comprehensive coverage of the Boston Celtics.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
"We really have only 2 options to keep winning."
Small
Celtics vs. Heat - ECF Matchup
Small
How Avery Bradley's absence affects everyone else
Small
Thoughts on Celtics vs. Heat
Small
Already Doubting The Celtics?
Small
Start Pavlovic over Ray to cover Dirty Wade
Small
Why we can beat the heat
Mchale_small
Can the C's Cool Down the Heat?
Small
Fourth Quarter of Game 7: A Glimpse of the Future with Rondo?
Small
Is Rondo out of his mind? Or just on some other level?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


CEO

Shamrock-blk-trans_small Jeff Clark

Authors/Editors

Hoosiers-dvdcover_small Roy_Hobbs

300h_small Wide Load

Big_4_small Jimmy Toscano

Leon_powe_small Green17

Ud_small Tom Bellinger

Grawful3_small Kiorrik

Authors/Mods

1_koolaid_avi_small FLCeltsFan

Po3_small Master Po

Images_small Bent

Green_avatar_small Fafnir

Small Tom Halzack

N23879518902_8484_small Jon Duke - CSL

Small jose3030

5bill_small Jack Jemsek

Small wjsy

Small Ryan Desmarais

250_small Brendan O'Hare

1119816_small JoshZavadil

Small TLayman

Small Anthony_Bruzzese

Small theoriginalhagrid

Sheed_small evansclinchy

Moderators

Photo_14_small Steve Weinman

Too_much_coffe_man_small Edgar

Small Chris72

Small thirstyboots18

Small CfanMissippi