Old School Plan
by Jeff Clark on Jul 5, 2009 1:22 PM EDT
in Articles
80 comments
Paul Pierce is 31 years old. Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett are each 33 right now (Ray will be 34 at the end of the month). The Celtics main target this offseason, Rasheed Wallace, will be 35 when the season starts. Another free agent target is Grant Hill, who will be 37 in October.
To quote Master PO in the comments:
Hill, Sheed, Garnett, Pierce, Allen. If we get any more Veteran than this, we will need more than Billy Walker – we will actually need "walkers" and maybe some adult diapers.
The strategy makes sense really. When you have 3 superstars making the kind of scratch that our guys make, you have to fill in the gaps with low price talent and/or pay the luxury tax. Last year the team attempted to do the former with mostly younger players. But as Doc mentioned, when we lost key players, we got real young real fast. So the team appears to have adopted a different course.
Doc said he wanted veterans. The younger veterans (Hedo, Ariza, Gortat) were all out of our price range. So Danny has focused more on the older veterans looking for one last contract and a run at the championship. It is possible that Ainge might be able to land Rasheed and Grant Hill, though it will cost ownership some money. Zach Lowe breaks it down like this:
Remember, the C's already have about $73 million committed next season, with the luxury tax expected to be somewhere around $68 million. Toss in the mid-level ($5.6 million or so) for Wallace, say, $5 million for Davis, a $2 million bi-annual exception for a wing player (Doc is meeting with Grant Hill, FanHouse reports), and you're already up to nearly $86 million-which is equivalent to shelling out $104 million once the luxury tax is factored in. And it remains unclear who will back up Rajon Rondo next season.
First of all, I'm not sure Davis will actually command $5M on the open market. On the other hand, when you start to add it all up like that, I wonder if the Celtics would bring Davis back for any price (if they land Wallace). There are other things the Celtics could do to shed salary (maybe by trading Tony Allen to the Griz for a draft pick we'll never use?) but it seems that the ownership will be on the hook for some luxury cash this year. I'm also not sure what Grant Hill's price tag will be (but we do have Doc and a chance at a title on our side).
I'm sure that Danny is exploring all sorts of options, but one plan might just be to sign Wallace, Hill, and Tyronn Lue (32 years old) and call it a day (meaning let Big Baby walk for the best offer he can get). That would give us a solid 9-10 man rotation with the option of trading Scal's expiring contract for mid season help.
The added benefit of signing older vets to short term contracts is that they line up nicely with the rest of the Big 3 - both in contract expiration dates and career goals.
If everyone is healthy, that's a pretty solid, savvy, veteran group that could very well win the title. Of course with that many thirtysomethings, you almost have to bank on a few injuries. So what do you think? Is this plan reasonable? Would you sign up for it?
0 recs |
80 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
my sentiments exactly.
‘Sheed, Grant, and anybody but Tryonn Lue… I’d rather roll into the season with Lester Hudson penciled in as the primary back up. Actually if we can sign Hill his ball handling and passing give us the option of running Billy Walker out to defend the point, while the offense would run through the 2 and 3 spots.
by dead dog aids on Jul 5, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
really?
Ty Lue is the difference between a good and bad offseason for you guys?
the guy is going to play maybe 10-12 minutes a game – less if House is hot
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
by Jeff Clark on Jul 5, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say so
Lue, in my opinion, doesn’t have very much to offer. He doesn’t really do anything particularly well, whereas someone like Bobby Jackson, who could most likely be had for the same price, is a good perimeter shooter. Jackson also has had very low turnover rates through his career, albiet he is not much of a passer. I just think Jackson would be a better fit.
by 420celticsFAN on Jul 5, 2009 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ty Lue can’t beat out Gabe Pruitt for the third string PG position. Nevermind crack the C’s rotation for regular minutes.
Lue isn’t deserving of minutes.
by Who on Jul 5, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
Pruitt had some flashed of great D and good shooting touch, I don’t think lue could provide more than what Pruitt brings.
by Champzilla on Jul 5, 2009 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
Ty Lue is terrible and I dont want him anywhere near this team.
I’ll take Sheed and Grant though.
by Marqui on Jul 5, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
my point is....
…regardless of who they pick up for backup PG, I think Sheed and Grant are a good offseason
I’m not a fan of Lue either, but I don’t think he swings the pendulum into “bad offseason”
or said another way, signing Marbury didn’t lose us the season this year (wait, that might be a bad example for some in here)
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
by Jeff Clark on Jul 5, 2009 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed on the fact that i would still be pleased with the offseason.
Wallace and Rasheed, and hopefully BBD give us a lot of versatility and a proven bench, something we were begging for last year. If we got Rasheed, Hill, and carrottop, i’d still be somewhat pleased…but
I’d feel a lot better having a proven player or a solid guard with upside getting those 10-12 minutes a game. A suspect guard, especially at the point can wreak havok on the team for the time they are in there. (see Cassell, Sam ’08).
I’m subconsiously hoping for one of the young guys to explode, and break out. Either Pruitt, Hudson, or Mullins at the point, or Walker of Giddens at the 2 or 3 and moing house to get more backup 1 minutes. I’ve got the same disease as a lot of people. Love that dirty little ‘P’ word. Po-Tent-ial.
Anyone else pumped for Summer League?
by cordialb on Jul 5, 2009 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't like Lue either
But i’d be happy still. Hell, I’d be happy if we signed Sheed and that was it.
God bless and good night!
by BrickJames on Jul 5, 2009 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Signing the Vets
Im all up for signing Rasheed and Grant Hill but im not totaly sold on Tyron Lue… I would love if there was some way we could keep Marbury but it doesn’t look like it… If there was anyway we could get a back up point guard better than Tyronn Lue then I think the bench would be the BEST IN THE NBA if not the best with Tyronn Lue as our backup point gaurd.
by Mike-Dub on Jul 5, 2009 1:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Davis Question?
When Big Baby Davis gets his new contract, and his money, does he then become “The Lazy Overfed Expanding Large Toddler” (who suddenly blows up to look like Tractor Trailer was his illegitimate papa) or…… does he remain The “Infuriated High Energy Infant” consuming Slim-Jims and Rondo RedBull?
If he remains as he was last year, grabbing defensive and offensive rebounds like Scali grabs an extra helping of mashed potatoes, then we really cannot afford to lose that youthful energy to mix in and help the Retirement Village veterans.
From a movie that Jeff sometimes quotes….. “Pay the man his money” and take our chances.
Is it Soup Yet?
by Master Po on Jul 5, 2009 1:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Davis Question?
I keep hearing all these wild rumors that BBD is going to get a deal at or near the MLE. I don’t believe it. The MLE salary is pretty much a starter salary. Someone pls tell me what team BBD would project as a starter. I don’t see any.
BBD is a decent reserve, but nothing more. He’s still young, he not a rebounder or shot blocker and below average defensively. And I think most teams are going to be scared of his weight – Oliver Miller comes to mind. I’ve seen reports that he was 320 this year and only now is at 299 since taking some kind of kick boxing. I just don’t see anyone offering his MLE money. I believe he’s worth 8M, maybe a little more. If someone offers him the MLE or close I can’t see Danny matching and wasting the money. We can get Chris Wilcox or someone similar for the Vet’s min or possible resign Leon later in the season.
Personnally, I think he’d be better to take our tender, have another successful season, show improvement in those areas that are weaknesses and become a free agent next year. This year there are only a few teams with money, the economy is horrible and most team have already spent their cap money. Next year many teams have money and although there are many stars out there, let’s face it most will resign with their current team. That leaves a bunch of teams flush with money, and once the big stars are gone they will be desperate to make a free agent splash. I think that might be his best chance for a big payday.
by badax33 on Jul 5, 2009 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be a HUGE mistake to let BBD walk if all we get this year is Wallace. We’re so thin at the four and five. Doc doesn’t like to play young guys if there are vets dressed in green. BBD is an exception. Having KG, Perk, Sheed, BBD, and Scal at the four and five gives us enough depth, and maybe add a sneaker in one of the three bigs from the summer team.
Also remember with the younger guys, Doc was playing the starters so many minutes that he was letting practice slide. So then the younger guys weren’t getting practice time in. So their play on the court became even more inconsistent.
Hill may come this way, but I’m not convinced about Lue. Unless Gabe totally blows in Orlando, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Danny not sign an additional one beyond what we already have (including summer players).
by amenhotep04 on Jul 5, 2009 2:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Again
No Hill please. We need an athletic aggressive swing that can spell Pierce guarding Bron & Bryant and such…37 years and several ankle surgeries is not gonna cut it! He might have some pep left, but the man cannot guard elite swings right now (not to mention he’s coming from Phoenix).
Of course, I don’t see who is available that can do that for the price we want…
by newyorkceltics on Jul 5, 2009 2:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe given the budget and cap restraints, the best case would be signing Hill to hold down the fort through the first half of the season and Walker comes on in the second half to supplant him. I’ve got doubts about Hill as well, but it seems like his role last year in PHX was bigger than anticipated (altho I might be mistaken about that). He’ll definitely be asked to do less here (I would hope).
by Berkcelt on Jul 5, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we're going to want to count on Walker in the post-season, he's going to need minutes all year--
not that there’s a chance Doc will give them to him unless Hill is injured…but now that I think of it that may be a likely and productive scenario!
by clover on Jul 5, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
marquis daniels, linas kleiza?
don’t know if they’ll come in cheap tho… but those two are pretty good sf’s, imo. young at that…
by jaimsitecom on Jul 5, 2009 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unless you can sign McDyess too
for the vet minimum or something, then there’s no way you can just let Baby walk and “call it a day”. We need another big that can play. I guess it doesn’t have to be McDyess, but it’s gotta be somebody of Baby’s calilber at least.
I’m cautiously optimistic about Sheed. Hill doesn’t do a lot for me, but I’d be ok with him. Lue does zilch for m but I’m not sure what the other options are there.
by Berkcelt on Jul 5, 2009 2:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Focus
If we get Sheed and bring back BBD, Sheed will end up with the majority of the minutes at either the C/PF spot. BBD would probably only get about 10 min/per. I’m not sure how focused BBD would be with such few minutes, now that he has proven he can play substantial minutes and be effective.
by 420celticsFAN on Jul 5, 2009 2:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Seems like you haven’t seen how Doc rotates players yet.
by BudweiserCeltic on Jul 5, 2009 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would hope that Doc will be cognizant about overplaying KG. You gotta figure too that Perk will miss some time. I think BBD would play closer to 16 minutes a game and then more during times of injury, foul trouble, and match-ups.
by amenhotep04 on Jul 5, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats a good point
I like Big Baby, but does it make sense to tie up that much money for potentially so few minutes?
by Silhouette on Jul 5, 2009 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're going to need
two heavy weights playing D. Howard in a seven game series. I don’t think Wallace and I know KG can’t play him inside. At least Baby can push him out of the paint.
by Little D on Jul 5, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd be happy with those three, but...
The Cs will still need a 4th big, and will need a young wing player to back up the Old 3. I have hope that Bill W. can do the job this year, and maybe Giddens too, who, BTW is two months older than six year veteran LeBron James.
I think Lue is a good backup PG for a couple of reasons. One he’s as good a percentage three point shooter as Eddie House (39.1% vs 39.6% for Eddie for their careers). Two he knows how to run a team. And three, he seems to have been a good last second guy over his career. Plus he won’t grumble when Rondo gobbles up 40 mpg.
With all the good veteran FAs around this summer, BBD might not get an MLE offer. His true market value is 3 yrs/$11m, which the Cs would either match, or S and T. Maybe one of the undercap teams will want him, and the celtics can pawn off TA and BBF on them in an S and T. Both guys are BYCs, so the Cs could take around $4m in salary back, I think. If the OKC Carpetbaggers want BBD, they could take Scal off our hands and send us Earl Watson, which would preclude the need for Lue.
Memphis could send us Hakim Warrick for BBD and TA. He could be the 4th big and 4th wing.
by TripleOT on Jul 5, 2009 2:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So, let`s review what we know thus far...
-Of the $73M Boston has committed in salaries….3 players will pocket about 85% of that total. The same 3 who have already pocketed about $425M in their careers.
-“Wallace & Hill” sounds promising…but so did “Payton & Malone” in 2003.
-What is clearly obvious : The Celts want Wallace & Hill
-What is not obvious : Wallace & Hill want the Celts
-Very scary trend that might be unfolding :
-1986 & 2008….Celtic domination!
-1987 & 2009….Injuries prevent repeat
-1988 & 2010….Further slippage????
by Title 18 on Jul 5, 2009 2:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I realize winning the Finals is the goal
but that Lakers team did reach the Finals. And if they had another PF on their roster aside from a then injured Malone (unless we’re counting Slava Medvedenko and I think…Samaki Walker?) they might have had a better showing than a 5 game sweep.
The big difference in that comparison would be Wallace projects as a substitute whereas Malone was a crucial starter. I remember Payton being an especially poor fit on that team in addition to entering a steep decline in his skills. Grant Hill doesn’t seem so mismatched to our team but he’s not a three point shooter which disturbs me a little especially with a lack of shooters on our bench (Plus I’d kind of like to rely on Sheed’s defense rather than his 3-pt chuck..er shooting).
by Berkcelt on Jul 5, 2009 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Once we don’t get Wallace I’m hoping we can convince McDyess to sign for less than the MLE and then bring back BB. Swift will end up on our roster come the fall. Will he be the primary backup center or third string that is the question. I still want to see Ainge get Diop as the primary backup to Perk. Also can I sign up for the Earl Watson plan please? Jeff’s article says it all. Ainge has all the cash tied up in three ‘stars" and is forced to fill in the blanks as "cheaply’ as possible. Last summer it didn’t work. Unless Wallace miraculously says yes to Danny, he will attempt to do the same again this summer. He just needs to get lucky and get some scrubs who can actually play.
by celty86 on Jul 5, 2009 3:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So are you implying that Davis won’t be resigned if Wallace and the Cs come to terms?
I think they can sign both, I don’t think Baby will get any prohibitive offers.
by Berkcelt on Jul 5, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
if they got hill and wallace
would it be the oldest ever 7 man rotation?
with both wallace and hill, then having the big three also all be over 31, i think it has to be.
by lakersbluedevil on Jul 5, 2009 3:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’d rather have old players, than players with criminal pasts, cough kobe cough.
by Champzilla on Jul 5, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
3s and 4s and 5s
If you have Perk, KG, Sheed and BBD, are there enough minutes to go around? Perk and KG will each get about 35, leaving about 15 mins each for Sheed and BBD. (obviously, I’m rounding…)
I guess that could work, but meanwhile, we have a pretty big liability – the human turnover machine that is Tony Allen – backing up PP. Could we package BBD and TA to a team that has extra depth at the 3, and look to pick up a cheaper banger to fill in at backup 4?
There are even some 3s who go about 6’8" who could do spot duty at the 4 in case of injury. Hakim Warrick? He’s young and can take more of Paul’s minutes as he ages.
Your second unit would then have Wallace, House and Warrick to score, a competent point guard to bring the ball up, and a decent banger to help collect rebounds.
by Sophomore on Jul 5, 2009 3:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget
Injuries (Perk’s shoulder, KG and Sheed are old), extra rest for KG (30-32 mpg), the fact that 29.6 mpg last season was Perk’s career high, and the simple fact that, though surprisingly productive for a 2nd round 2nd year player, Davis is not someone you want contributing more than bench minutes anyway, and there’d be plenty of minutes to go around. If there’s 96 PF/C minutes per game, I’d be happy with 32 for KG, 28 for Perk, 28 Sheed, 8 for Davis on the average day, with Davis as injury security.
by Fan from VT on Jul 5, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but yes, I’d rather have Warrick than Davis, assuming Wallace signs.
by Fan from VT on Jul 5, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying that's ideal
but that is more than sufficient for trying to make another run at the title. That would be a tough team to beat.
by Prof. Clutch on Jul 5, 2009 4:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What I’m implying is that I believe Ainge has budgetary constraints and has certain figures allotted on certain players with an overall payroll figure in mind. If he spends the full MLE on Wallace and needing to still add a backup three and to a lesser degree (not in my mind though) a point, he won’t spend very much, if anything, on bringing back Big Baby (despite what he may say). Ainge has to answer to ownership and has his hands tied somewhat with three max players. So he tries to fill in the blanks as cheaply as possible. I don’t think Rasheed will sign with us so I hope Ainge can convince McDyess to sign here for less than the MLE and then it may allow him to bring back Big Baby at around 3 mil a year. I would like McDyess here but I’m not so sure that the money couldn’t be spent better on a 3/4 such as Warrick or a shooter such as Kleiza as opposed to bringing back BB. I guess we’ll know more in the next couple of weeks .
by celty86 on Jul 5, 2009 4:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I can definitely see something like Davis leaving because of a budgetary constraint. But if he is in between $3-4M for 3yrs, then the FO might have already budgeted for that even with the full MLE in play. If they can be under the lux tax for 2010-11 season maybe they don’t mind taking the hit this upcoming year. I’m guessing they have different scenarios for multiple years they wouldn’t mind trying if they thought it would balance out. Of course there’s probably a definite can’t surpass number for this year; it’ll be interesting to see just how far they’ll go.
by Berkcelt on Jul 5, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Sheed and Hill but....
Injuries are what broke this team down last year and the more old players you add the more you invite injury. With Sheed the Celtics really don’t have much of a choice because big men are hard to get so you go with what’s out there, but I would seriously look into younger options over Hill.
Tyron Lue’s a joke, no way do I want that guy. Veteran doesn’t mean better Doc.
by jackscompletelackofsurprise on Jul 5, 2009 4:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I would be glad if we sign Sheed and Hill.
I don’t know about Lue though, he didn’t play this season if I’m not mistaken?
It will cost a lot of money to the team if this scenario comes true but the ownership must pay the price in order to get a bench.
by Drucci on Jul 5, 2009 4:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Also, don't be too suprised
If we go into the season with Giddens getting time instead of Bill Walker. I love Walker and he def brings energy but I feel like Doc and Danny’s knock on him is that he doesn’t shoot particularly well. It sounds like JR has been working really hard since the end of the season and if he develops some knock-down shots and an outside game he could be the one we use for backup.
Personally I think my preference would be Sheed, Matt Barnes, and a cheap vet PG not named Tyronn Lue. And of course Nick Fazekas heh.
by Silhouette on Jul 5, 2009 4:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
LOL
sorry I ever brought up Lue
can’t believe he derailed this topic so much
should have just said “backup PG X”
:)
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
by Jeff Clark on Jul 5, 2009 5:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm excited
For backup PG X. I think he can bring a lot to the table.
by Silhouette on Jul 5, 2009 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll bet back up point guard X could...
beat out Rondo because his attitude is so much better! :)
by VtCeltics on Jul 5, 2009 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are right about that
I feel that I watch enough NBA to say that Tyron Lue is no better than what we’ve got (meaning Pruitt). He’s old and he’ll scare the Celtics cheerleaders.
What I don’t watch enough NBA to know is whether Grant Hill has enough gas left in tank to put one of our youngs (winner of Walker, Giddens) on bench for another year.
by Wildblu1 on Jul 5, 2009 5:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Sheed and Hill and Lue plus a trade.
This comes down to how bad the Celtics want to be the best franchise in the NBA. The Lakers want it badly they want to take us in the championship count. Im not worried about the big 3’s age. They have 2-3 years left of winning championships. They need the talent around them. Hill can split minutes with Paul,and Ray He can give us a solid 20-30 minutes a game. We are not asking him to play 40 plus minutes. Wallace can play the 4 and 5 spot. Its the same minutes per game. NBA has showed in the past decade. That the older players are still effective,and are in good heath. We don’t need Lue to score.Just take care of the basketball.
I think we need to trade our youth,and the 2 contracts that are off the books next year. Tony Allen,and Brian Scals combined have 5-6 million to trade for veteran talent. Then Pruitt,Walker,Giddens have not got a chance,and they won’t on a championship team. We have players to move. We can still keep 1 or 2 of the 3 young guys. I would keep Walker. We have the best strarting 5 in the League. The media,and the league will jump on the Lakers band wagon because they won. They have Kobe he’s the best player. Other than that. We beat them at every spot. Perkins can take care of Bynum. Paul can out play Kobe in our team setting. Bottom line if we have Lue back up point. Eddie House back up 2 guard. Hill back up SF. Then if baby stays back up PF. Wallace back up Center. I see us winning 60- 68 games in the regular season,and winning 18!
by green20 on Jul 5, 2009 5:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Just a thought
Jason Willams anyone? Come on, we’re talking Tyrone Lue. Doesn’t White Chocolate shoot, pass and dribble better. From what I’ve read, he’s looking to play. I only brought his name up because we are all reaching at this point.
by Little D on Jul 5, 2009 5:33 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
i was thinking that last week. he said he wanted to play this year
im gonna be all up on you like a spider monkey!
by remembering9ergods on Jul 5, 2009 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Team him with Swift and we’ll have more tats than most of the league.
by Sophomore on Jul 5, 2009 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i wouldnt be upset with those 3 players. id rather have booby jackson than lue though. id also want baby back. he developed alot last year and will only get better this year playing against bench players instead of starters like last year.
scal and tony should be traded for a center if we can, the more bigs the better. especially after last year.
as for the $104m or whatever, the team makes alot of money in the playoffs with exposure and everything else. if we make the finals, especially win teh finals alot more money can be made. as danny sayd 3 year window, why not go for it all when you can
im gonna be all up on you like a spider monkey!
by remembering9ergods on Jul 5, 2009 5:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
They will bust the budget in 2009-2010
I’m sure management has a both a long term and short term budgets.They probably see that the window to win #18 is short with the big 3 and that 2009-2010 is their best shot to win again. I’m equally sure that they still want the team to be at least competitve for a championship for years to come.
So the plan must be to exceed $100 million budget this season with Wallace/Hill and determine this summer if Pruitt can back up Rondo, and if not then bring in someone like Lue. Then, the plan would be to come under the lux tax starting 2010-2011, which is quite doable given expiring contracts. This also means that they will resign BBD if it is at all reasonable — less than $5 million — to help win this year and sustain a competitive team for 2010-2011 and beyond,
by Ainge wantabe on Jul 5, 2009 6:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
About the disdain for Grant Hill...
Here’s what he did for the Suns this season.
30 minutes a game, averaging 12 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists and 1 steal on 52% shooting, 31% from three point land. Hill’s also been a good defender through his career, though obviously he’s got some physical limitations now.
I’d love to see Bill Walker get a chance to back up Pierce at the 3 in the regular season, but I’d also feel a lot better about having Hill to do it during the playoffs.
Given that the #1 priority for Doc during the regular season HAS to be playing Pierce and Ray fewer minutes, even if it costs the Cs a few victories, Hill would be a great addition.
Mike
by MBunge on Jul 5, 2009 6:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
All the Celtics fans are lucky I’m not part of its ownership. If I agreed to the signing of Wallace, and even at a reduced price, Glen Davis, then I’d be sitting in the basement with my mind totally blown, thinking about the total budget. If Ainge then came down and said we needed to sign Grant Hill, or some backup point guard, at first I’d be speechless. But eventually I’d be sputtering in rage, “Grant Hill? What the heck are Walker, Giddens, Scalabrine and Pruitt for?”
by no kidding on Jul 5, 2009 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's more an issue with Doc
Not Danny. Doc just will not give the young guys much of a chance, so short of firing Doc, Danny’s best option seems to be signing vets.
by Silhouette on Jul 5, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If BW or Giddens...
If Bill Walker or JR Giddens can play good enough this season to sit Grant Hill on the bench, the Cs will be in great shape.
I’ll take Jason Williams over Lue, but i wonder if White Choc will quit on a team again this year. Lue is more stable.
by TripleOT on Jul 5, 2009 6:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I think it`s crazy
Does anyone remember a champion in any sport that relies just a bit on athleticism, who were as old as our rotation would be? I don`t, and Basketball relies more on explosiveness and quickness than any other sport, imo. Not to mention the group dynamics if you have a team full of veterans. Who`s going to be the leader? Groups work better if you have a few leaders and a majority of followers than the other way around.
What I do know is that we`re not the first team who tries to trick father time, and that they all regretted it.
I also know that we were not willing to give Posey a 4th year, because he would be too old (35) in his 4th year, but one year later, we`re willing to give three years of the full MLE to a guy who already is 35.
And, if we`re really willing to go the route of old guys, wouldn`t it be smarter to split the MLE, and go for guys like Nesterovic on a one-year-deal?
This whole thing just seems to me like a blatant marketing move to sell tickets. “All we need is Yi Jianlian, and we`re set.”
If I were Ainge, I would probably simply stick to the plan he had last off-season, however that plan looked like. I wasn`t happy with the way last off-season went, but that doesn`t matter. What is more important now, imo, is to stick with the plan, or last summer, actually the whole last year, was even more disastrous than it already appears.
I thought Ainge would have a masterplan, and that this was the reason why he let Posey walk. I was hoping he would redeem himself, and turn last year`s mistakes into this year`s advantage. I guess I was wrong. It appears more and more as if Ainge is just building this team on the fly, trying to grab every name availlable, no matter how good or bad a fit that player is.
Simply put, I am already disappointed with this off-season.
by Casperian on Jul 5, 2009 6:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree, to an extent...
I do agree, and I do think we really lack athleticism and explosiveness, however, athleticism without direction is still not very useful, and we have to remember that the “primes” of players’ careers will continue to expand as advances in health, nutrition, conditioning, and workout routines continue.
Just consider that 20 years ago, red meat and smoking wasn’t seen as that detrimental to an athlete’s longevity. Advances such as that alone are why 35 might be the new 32, which is a significant difference.
by Fan from VT on Jul 5, 2009 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looking around in the world of sports...
…I can´t see any evidence for that.
We have KG, Pierce, Ray, Scal, Eddie and we had Marbury and Moore. More than enough direction if you ask me.
by Casperian on Jul 5, 2009 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think people place too much emphasis on veterans’ ability to direct young players’ athleticism. what i meant was that though I agree that i wish the C’s were more athletic, simply adding athletic players is not helpful if those individuals themselves are not also good at basketball. For example, the two Graham brothers are ridiculously athletic, and can barely play basketball. No amount of playing with KG, Pierce, etc. will change that. However, in addition to being great basketball players, Wallace and Hill have been fantastic athletes. Yes, they are older now, but I do believe that with advances in health, conditioning, nutrition, and medicine, being 35 now may be like being 30-32 five years ago; still able to perform at a high enough level to hang with the josh smiths of the world.
by Fan from VT on Jul 5, 2009 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Got it
but I´m not sure I agree, to be honest.
by Casperian on Jul 5, 2009 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough
But it’s nice to be at a point at which we can understand each other and disagree than just talk past each other for hours. Also, i can not guarantee that i am “right” with anything i post. merely throwing ideas and thoughts out there.
by Fan from VT on Jul 5, 2009 10:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn`t that always the case?
If I were always right, I wouldn`t post on Celticsblog…I would own the Celtics.
;-)
by Casperian on Jul 5, 2009 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anything is possible!
I beat my college nephew one on one yesterday.
by GreenGrizz on Jul 5, 2009 6:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Don’t ever let him forget it, or ever give him a rematch.
by no kidding on Jul 5, 2009 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah – definitely let all his friends know.
by Sophomore on Jul 5, 2009 7:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Let Baby Davis walk?
I don’t think letting a guy like that “walk” is how you build and maintain a team. You draft a guy at a good spot and he starts to produce for you, and just when he gets to the point where he can really produce for you (either in production or by trade) you don’t let him walk. Sign the guy and trade him if you want but never et him walk. That’s would be idiotic and disappointing.
by correcttitle on Jul 5, 2009 7:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Deal Done!
http://www.celticsblog.com/2009/7/5/938889/sheed-a-celtic
http://bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view.bg?articleid=1183106&pos=breaking
by alskor on Jul 5, 2009 8:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
SHHHHEEEEEEEDDDDDDDD BABY.....NOW GET HILL..RESIGN
BABY AND A POINT GUARD
by celticinorlando on Jul 5, 2009 8:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Sheed
I can understand the Sheed deal but im more concern about the backup wing this season…seems like all the energy and focus has gone to Sheed and putting the other needs on the back burner.I wish DA and Wyc pursue Matt Barnes with some of that same drive as they went after Sheed this past week.I could also see them looking at Josh Childress if the Sheed deal falls through.I know our needs are Bigs but where is the pursuit for Pierce’s backup .I hope we don’t get caught short by being to late to the dance.
by house_call on Jul 5, 2009 8:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
show
will there be a show to talk about all this good new tonite
by tcelt on Jul 5, 2009 8:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
casperian’s point about not giving posey the 4th year because he’d be too old is a good one. hill’s too old. they are appeasing the vet lover doc too much. we need young depth. with all this talk about kg monitoring troublemakers, let him monitor some youths.
by nazzbo on Jul 5, 2009 8:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey Jeff
Marc Spears just reported Rasheed is coming to Boston: http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/
by Champzilla on Jul 5, 2009 8:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
KEEP BIG BABY, thank god for Rasheed, and let’s get Hill too. Let’s not forget Hill is built in the Scottie Pippen mold. He can bring the ball up the floor as point forward and cause match up nightmares for the opposing team. Hill, Ray Ray, Pierce, Sheed (or Perk), & KG. That’s a huge lineup and don’t forget Sheed’s got RRRAAANNNGGGGGEEEE
by mthwsms on Jul 6, 2009 1:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Grant Hill is one of the reasons, why I watched the Suns last season… He is the perfect replacement for Pierce with his high-rated mid-range Shot, If we could get Barbosa too, I would skip watching the Suns anymore ^^
I asked god and he said: L.A. will lose again next year!! ^_°
by greenmech on Jul 6, 2009 5:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
