Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Hugh Douglas Admits To Stealing From Jaguars

Deadline Leftovers

We heard that Danny was busy looking into a lot of deals.  Here are a few names that didn't come up in specific rumors before hand (but that you could guess he was at least looking into).

Score one for Celtics - BostonHerald.com

Using Ray Allen and his expiring max contract as the lure, they looked into dealing for a wide array of stars, including Amare Stoudemire (Phoenix), Carlos Boozer (Utah), Michael Beasley (Miami), Andre Iguodala (Philadelphia), Monta Ellis (Golden State) and Caron Butler (Washington before being traded to Dallas).

That is quite a list.  But woulda-coulda-shoulda doesn't matter now.  We got Nate and that's it.

One knock on Robinson has been that he doesn't play defense very well.  Ainge is doing his best to dispel that notion.

"I think Nate is a terrific defender in his way," Ainge said. "He's very feisty. He can pressure the ball.

"I know he hasn't done that in New York this year and last. But he did that in the time before that."

Doc seems optimistic as well.  (What would you expect him to say?)

Trade should get Celtics moving - The Boston Globe

Because of his diminutive frame, Robinson had developed a Napoleon complex and occasionally relished in making the spectacular play in lieu of the smart play. That is what infuriated his previous coaches, but D’Antoni was more irritated by Robinson’s showboating, such as slapping hands with Will Ferrell after a play. "I want him to be free and I want him to be aggressive,’’ Rivers said. "That’s when he’s at his best, so there’s no reason for me to try to screw that up. "I do know he’s competitive, and hopefully that comes out. I can’t wait to get him and to get to work with him. I want him looking at the basket, I don’t want him thinking about the X2Z play. I want him to look at the rim, and that’s why we’re bringing him in here.’’

As for me, while I'm not as excited about the trade as some might be, I'm looking forward to seeing what he can do in a Boston uniform.  He's a Celtic now and I will be looking for the best out of him in this winning environment.

Comment 174 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

More from CelticsBlog

Boston Celtics Daily Links 12/5

Dec 2011 by FLCeltsFan - 7 comments

Comments

Display:

I think he will give us a nice boost off the bench...

…I like the trade but am disappointed that we didn`t do something major. Or at least add another player or two to the bench (a back up SF, big man)…

Like it or not this is pretty much our roster for the next couple of years…

by thebirdman on Feb 19, 2010 6:40 AM EST reply actions  

BACKUP SF!!!!...

Why Danny don´t trade someone???

Nocioni, Prince, Battier, Gomes, R.Butler, Dudley, Luc Richard Mbah a Moute…

:S

by Rogerio on Feb 19, 2010 8:24 AM EST up reply actions  

One of my favorite things is when Tommy calls Luc Richard Mbah a Moute “Ma booty”

by richtrader on Feb 19, 2010 9:29 AM EST up reply actions  

i was also holding out hope that they would somehow reacquire ryan gomes at the deadline. that would have been awesome. and filled a big need on this team.

by birdstache on Feb 19, 2010 10:33 AM EST up reply actions  

"LIke it or not this is pretty much our roster for the next couple of years"

That part scares me. Ray no longer has value, KG has no value, if Paul opts in, he could have value at the trade deadline next year for the ‘11 free agent class which is suppose to be pretty good (Durants draft class I think, other teams may want to make qualifying offers). But yeah, we just get older and older until KG and Sheed are gone. It’s a shame to waste two Rondo years if we dont make any moves.

the few, the proud, the boston celtics

by bleedgreen34 on Feb 19, 2010 11:52 AM EST up reply actions  

I would like to see the big three retire C's

hope it works out so the organization can move forward while still paying the vets their dues.

the few, the proud, the boston celtics

by bleedgreen34 on Feb 19, 2010 12:04 PM EST up reply actions  

No value??

You’re joking, right? Their VALUE is in the fact that they are the CORE of this team, and, we hope and trust, will lead us once again to a title. That’s their value. Or is “value” only defined in what we can get for them from the other side of the fence, the one that always looks greener to some?

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 12:53 PM EST up reply actions  

"I know he hasn't done that in New York this year and last. But he did that in the time before that."

…in the BEFORE TIME -

i’m willing to give the guy a shot

Can’t BELIEVE I’m here at work already – what a game last night!!

Great win, Nate can only help -

If they play defense like that down the stretch – we’re good.

Don't fake the funk on a nasty dunk

by mcpu40 on Feb 19, 2010 8:02 AM EST reply actions  

Speaking of Deadline Leftover...

…the Celtics have only 13 roster spots filled now. What’s the chances we see them fill at least 1 of them spots with some leftovers, somebody bought out of his contract, released, etc? They’ve done that the past 2 years with Marbury and Cassell. Are we really done? Whom might be available?

- JoeB

by joeb on Feb 19, 2010 8:09 AM EST reply actions  

In Order...

1)MIKE MILLER (Or Larry Hughes or Morris Almond)

2)RAJA BELL (Or Rasual Butler or Devean George)

3)Sean Williams

Rondo—————————————-Nate
Miller/Hughes/Almond———RayRay
Pierce—————————————Daniels/Butler/Bell/George
Garnett————————————-BigBaby
Perkins————————————-Sheed/Sean Williams

by Rogerio on Feb 19, 2010 8:37 AM EST up reply actions  

Really

No one is going to beat out ray for his spot. He isn’t losing his starting spot unless someone outplays him. Never happening. People that think so are crazy, and obviously don’t understand how sports teams work.

by stevenfuzz on Feb 19, 2010 11:57 AM EST up reply actions  

You'd want Hughes

Over Ray?

And Sean Williams is useless. Stop talking about him.

by Tai on Feb 19, 2010 12:11 PM EST up reply actions  

I know what you mean but...

I am genetically wired to like the guys we’ve got over the available guys out there. And I particularly loved Eddie. But I would do this trade (ex Walker would have been better). Robinson can be amazing on offense and the few times I’ve seen him his defense has been agressive/gambling. Not lazy. He has the same size knock for a guard as Glen Davis has as a big – can be backed down. But Glen uses what he’s got (wide body) and Nate will use his quickness. Both are tremendous athletes (which was why I did not want to part with Davis)
I think you may be channeling Ricky Davis (who I didn’t mind altogether either), but I think Nate is a gamer.

by Wildblu1 on Feb 19, 2010 8:17 AM EST reply actions  

Scarey Future

I think we are in deep trouble going forward. Trading Ray was our only chance to get a young star. Next year we will have the same team only older… God help us.

Seems like the majority of people aren’t too pysched about Nate. On the radio people seemed to like Eddie better. Well they are all 100% wrong. Nate is LIGHTYEARS better than Eddie and he is a perfect fit on this bench.

5 games until everyone is calling the radio stations loving on Nate.

by Nut from NH on Feb 19, 2010 8:24 AM EST reply actions  

Last night should make you feel better

…about your “Old” team. These “old guys” can still win it all. This year, and next year too. It’s just a matter of health. And maybe a little support from their fans?

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 12:56 PM EST up reply actions  

rebounder please

we need another big if Shelden is out…no Sheed = no chance but it’s hard to see him float thru games after watching Sheldon bust his butt…got till march 1st correct???

by Motown on Feb 19, 2010 8:30 AM EST reply actions  

team has to win back fans

this is all very simple. If the team starts winning games then the fans will get back on the bandwagon. Danny did nothing at the trade deadline to get the fans excited so now it’s on the players which is where it should be. I’m bothered by the lack of smarts that our vets display at times. Bad passes, bad shots etc. it’s been a problem all year and last night we again were sloppy with the ball. I just don’t see the fundamentals with this group. I know they can play better but when you have to overcome age, lack of quickness and sloppy play that’s a lot to fix.

by Red2 on Feb 19, 2010 8:46 AM EST reply actions  

Last night they were "sloppy with the ball"?

Which night was that? The one where they had only 10 TOs? What are you talking about? And btw… they won, against an elite team playing on their court.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 12:58 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah - I've been the first to point out how sloppy they've been these last couple of months

but last night was like a breath of fresh aire.

Only 10 personal TOs (plus one team TO) was awesome, considering we’ve been turning it over at a rate of 17 per 100 possesions (about 16 per game) all season and lately way more than that.

Last night, for the first time in a while it wasn’t TOs that caused our offense to stall – it was just a handful of missed shots early in the 4th. But at least we TOOK the shots!

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 2:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Even more to the guys' credit..

I thought the Lakers were playing great defense at times. They’ve become a much better defensive from two years ago. It was nice to see our guys keep their poise (for the most part).

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 2:39 PM EST up reply actions  

Either the players will kill Nate

or he’ll be in Doc’s doghouse before 10 games go by. People are saying Nate needs a “Player’s Coach” but hasn’t D’Antoni always been described as the ultimate Player’s Coach?

Basically, I cannot see this addressing any of the Celtics’ needs, never mind what Nate needs. He does not initiate offense any better than Eddie House, or Tony Allen or Marquis Daniels for that matter. Does anyone really want these guys running the team in the playoffs? The idea that Daniels could be a back-up point has been shot down several times, none more vividly than last night when he had to be pulled before he completely melted down to Lakers pressure. Rondo will still have to be a 45 minute guy in the playoffs.

Ainge’s rather bizarre comment “But he did that (play defense) in the time before that” is just ludicrous. Is he talking about Middle Earth time when Hobbits and Wizards walked the land? Nate is an atrocious team defender and not too hot on the ball either.

Doug Collins had the figures to show last night how the Celtics have declined in so many categories from their championship year. Can’t see Nate helping any of these problem areas – offensive rebounds, turnovers (he sees lots of open guys in the stands), team defense.

Perhaps there is a buyout guy or two to be brought in. It’s hard to see how that would help at this point given Doc’s preference for sticking with guys. Can you see him benching Rasheed or Baby in favor of another big? Daniels in favor of another wing player?

I think what we are seeing now is what we will see for the balance of the season. If Garnett somehow manages to regain his old pre-injury form; If Ray Allen’s legs get younger; If Paul Pierce starts playing an overall game again rather than being a jump-shooter who doesn’t rebound or defend as well; well, there are a lot of ifs.

We’ll just ride it out like Ainge is doing, but unless something miraculous occurs in the way this team plays I expect to see a much different group of guys wearing green jerseys next year.

by lemonade sky on Feb 19, 2010 9:02 AM EST reply actions  

Sadly It Will Be the Same Core Guys

Even if they don’t resign Ray Allen for a couple of years at reduced dollars, what options do they have? Garnett and Pierce cost 40 million all by themselves.

So the core of next year’s team will be Garnett, Pierce, Rondo and Perkins, They’ll still have Wallace and BBD. Those 6 players bring the payroll up to 61 million. If they give Ray two years at 6 million per, that’s 68 million.

So they need to find 5-6 more players. One of them will be their first round pick in the mid twenties. Another may be Tony Allen, resigned for short dollars. They have their MLE and LLE, but if they use their exceptions they will be bumping up against the luxury tax line, especially if they resign Ray.

So he balance of the roster will be filled out with creaky vets or D-leaguers who could not get more than the minimum anywhere else. Hello Scott Pollard.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 11:52 AM EST up reply actions  

they don't have the LLE

they used it on Daniels for this year.

by slamtheking on Feb 19, 2010 12:09 PM EST up reply actions  

And those core guys

…are perfectly capable of winning championships. They already have, all of them. We can only hope that things “stay the same”… that we stay a championship-caliber team.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:03 PM EST up reply actions  

Teams need 13 players on a roster minimum by league rule

So that’s six more players. The prospects are slim indeed. Might keep our second rounder (if we still have it?) too. I ruled out Tony just based on his injuries but who knows. Given our restrictions odds of finding a better player to replace him (basically with a vet minimum or rookie free agent deal) are not good.

We’d still need three or more. Probably resign Daniels with most of the MLE. Or maybe Robinson, doubt there’s enough to split it on both. There might be enough MLE left over to get a slightly above minimum guy but let’s say there isn’t. I have a feeling Scal will be retained at the minimum. So that’s one more minimum guy. Maybe they take a flyer on Erden or Swifty. Pretty shaky.

One thing they might consider is shipping Sheed out, especially if we have a poor playoffs. Charlotte is probably the first team we could turn to. Might be a quantity over quality deal however…just thinking out loud at this point though.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:03 PM EST up reply actions  

"Does not initiate offense better than Eddie"?

Uh, in what universe it THAT true? New flash: Eddie virtually NEVER initiates his own offense, while Nate, if he has a flaw, it’s that he ALWAYS does. What are you talking about?

Quis had a bad night last night. It happens. Other than that, he’s been doing just fine running point. And Nate will do it too.

After a night where they showed us their old focus and determination, where they gutted out a tough win against an elite team… what’s with all the negativity? I just don’t get it.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Nice game...

last night. Glad for the W. Gonna give Nate a break and see how this works out. The second unit could sure use someone who can create offense ala Crawford in Atl and others. We could use a rebounder but not sure one will be available via buyout. I wouldn’t mind Butler if he is cut by the Clips. He could help. Also wondering whether Pierce will have to adjust his game as he is looking slower and slower. I know the injuries play a big part but maybe he could try something along the lines of how MJ was doing his post up fallaway in his later years. Or Adrian Dantley at the end of his career with Detroit was a tough matchup closer to the basket not out to 20 feet like Pierce likes to start his isolation at.

by celty86 on Feb 19, 2010 9:03 AM EST reply actions  

+1

Paul needs to adjust. And he and Doc need to STOP reverting back to Paul isos at the ends of games. It’s stupid, and doesn’t work anywhere close to how it once did. Time to move on. I think they will.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Here's why I'm optimistic about Nate...

…our starters are still good. Check out their seasonal plus/minuses: very good. Same last night. Starters way in the plus, bench in the minus. Nate could really help that.

by Fan from VT on Feb 19, 2010 9:10 AM EST reply actions  

I just want to say to all the people who said the Lakers would kill us last night

for example – “nbaisthe worst” -—I hope this quiets your your never-ending negativity…..

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Feb 19, 2010 9:14 AM EST reply actions  

Impossible

Negativity lives forever. Dies for one night when championship is won.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Dissapointed Ainge did not make a bigger trade at the deadline

They really needed a:

Athletic long power forward who could rebound.
and
Athletic long wing defender – scorer.

It would of been great if Ainge could of made a trade for Ray to acuire 2 such players especially to a team who would be going no where, which would of allowed us the chance to resigh Ray via buyout.

If the Ray for Butler – Jamison from the Wizards trade was to be believed it would of done all of the above.

Also its puzzling Ainge could not move Scal to try to find us a power forward or wing defender score.

Maybe Ainge has hopes of buying out some players to obtain such players.

I hope so because we need them if we want a good shot in the playoffs, time will tell.

by fordescort on Feb 19, 2010 9:34 AM EST reply actions  

Questions

1. Any chance PP opts out of his contract?

2. Any chance that KG and PP want another ring so bad they restructer their deals?

3. Who could we possibly get next year, still being over the cap?

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 9:36 AM EST reply actions  

I don’t think that is even an option for KG. Pierce maybe but the more I hear about a lockout, the less likely I think it is. He could lose up to $10M if he opted out and restructured his deal.

They might have to trade Sheed next year, assuming Paul is not going anywhere, to get a bump anywhere on the roster. Otherwise we might be only retaining Daniels or Robinson with the MLE.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 11:35 AM EST up reply actions  

dont think

we have to use the MLE on Daniels and Robinson. we have their bird rights, so we can sign them without using our MLE and instead look at a possible free agent.

the few, the proud, the boston celtics

by bleedgreen34 on Feb 19, 2010 11:59 AM EST up reply actions  

No, we don't.

Marquis has been with us one year.

Nate came off his rookie deal to sign for one year with the knicks; if such a player is traded, his bird rights disappear. that’s why the Knicks needed Robinson or Lee’s permission to trade them.

They fall under the following rule:

NON-BIRD EXCEPTION — This is also a component of the Veteran Free Agent exception. Players who qualify for this exception are called “Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agents” in the CBA. They are veteran free agents who are neither Qualifying Veteran Free Agents nor Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agents, either because they haven’t met the criteria, or because they are Early Bird free agents following the second season of their rookie scale contract and whose team renounced the Early-Bird exception. This exception allows a team to re-sign its own free agent to a salary starting at 120% of the player’s salary in the previous season, 120% of the minimum salary, or the amount needed to tender a qualifying offer (if the player is a restricted free agent — see question number 36), whichever is greater. Raises are limited to 8% of the salary in the first year of the contract, and contracts are limited to five seasons when this exception is used.

So Daniels would need to want to play for $2,388,000 and Robinson for $4,800,000. It’s possible, but if either one receives a better offer, they are both UFA’s and we do NOT have the right or ability to match.

by Fan from VT on Feb 19, 2010 12:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Seems unlikely

Daniels said he had better offers. Yet another injury really doesn’t help his cause, and frankly his play has been underwhelming a good deal of the time he’s been out there. I’d expect him to take the best offer he could get. And considering all the cap space out there, I suspect he can do better than $2.38M. Ditto for Robinson. A team like the Nets comes to mind, esp. with Robinson and his popularity in NYC.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:10 PM EST up reply actions  

Whoops

I think misread that the first time. I didn’t realize we could sign them without using the MLE—thought no bird rights, meant it was just the MLE.

I guess in that case we could sign Robinson at $4.8 and then use the MLE on Marquis.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:16 PM EST up reply actions  

After letting it brew for a bit...

this team could use an energy infusion, therefore I do like the Nate signing.
I’m not saying it’s going to put us over the top.

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 9:37 AM EST reply actions  

Ainge was taken to the cleaners

He also gave up a draft choice. 2nd round, conditional, but still a draft choice. He ought to be shot. Robinson is a two month rental, not a part of this team’s future.

Next year we’ll go through the same drill with Pierce. Everyone here will be saying “Pierce is a Celtics icon, you can’t trade him!” And Ainge won’t. And the team shills in the press will praise Ainge for “keeping the tradition alive.”

The year after that it will be Garnett, who won’t be traded either, and the year after that they’ll be the new New Jersey Nets.

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 9:59 AM EST reply actions  

you could be right but

I thought you quit watching this team last year? lol

HAVE A GOOD WEEKEND

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Feb 19, 2010 10:09 AM EST up reply actions  

You got him on that one MP. Touche

Brickowski knows his NBA but his cup’s always half empty.

by Wildblu1 on Feb 19, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions  

Why is Robinson a two month rental?

He is not going to get big offers in the summer, IMO. If he does well I would like him back. It was a good trade for us. We got rid of some junk (Giddens, Walker) and upgraded the back up PG position…

Obviously we should have made a much bigger trade to stay competitive in the next few years (because now we have no assets) but Nate deal was OK…

by thebirdman on Feb 19, 2010 10:32 AM EST up reply actions  

Still Over the Cap

In June, Robinson will be an unrestricted free agent, and the Celtics do not have Bird rights.

So the Celtics will have the MLE and their LLE. Do you want to use the LLE or part of the MLE on Robinson? Or would you rather use those exceptions on someone like Marquis Daniels or one of the other FA’s who will be available?

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 10:39 AM EST up reply actions  

I don’t think we even have the LLE. We used it on Daniels (which is why they wanted a sign and trade with Indy to avoid that) and a team can only use it every other year. I don’t see how we’re going to get both Robinson and Daniels with the MLE alone. I don’t know who’s going to be available but it doesn’t seem unlikely there is someone more worthwhile than either of those guys. I’d like to see what they bring here down the stretch and in the playoffs though.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 11:40 AM EST up reply actions  

We can sign him for 120% of his previous salary with 8% raises...

…that is 4,8 million…more than enough for Nate. That number could possibly go to 6 million if his contract for this year is calculated as 5 million (he will earn an additional million for reaching the playoffs but I am not sure what counts as his base salary…)

And we don`t have the LLE. We used it on Daniels and the exception is bi-annual…

by thebirdman on Feb 19, 2010 12:03 PM EST up reply actions  

Yes, They Have the Non-Bird Exception

But only if they think he’s worth that much. And if he is, there will be competition from other teams for his services.

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 12:14 PM EST up reply actions  

I don`t think anyone will offer him more than that...

…teams are afraid of the new CBA, so I don`t see them overpaying for role players…it all depends on how he does obviously but I think a deal starting at 4 million for Nate is more than enough…

by thebirdman on Feb 19, 2010 2:19 PM EST up reply actions  

sounds right

But it only takes one desperate GM. And Nate seems like a pretty popular draw with all his dunking shenanigans.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Cry

Brick, weren’t you the one who was whining at how shabbily Ainge treated Powe? Now you are advocating heartlessly ditching Pierce (and Ray and KG), in order to obtain players who are going to be inferior to them. Whatever it takes dog on the team, eh?

by Ersatz on Feb 19, 2010 11:39 AM EST up reply actions  

No I'm Just Predicting What Will Happen If They Don't

You can decide if you would rather watch these fading stars or commence rebuilding immediately. The Celtics stuck with their fading stars after 1988. Were you happy with the result?

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 12:10 PM EST up reply actions  

These "fading stars"

… are perfectly capable of winning a championship. There are NO teams in this league with a clearly better chance of doing so… some with a roughly equal chance. They just showed you this last night… and that wasn’t even close to the best they can play.

Wake up and smell what you’re shoveling.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:10 PM EST up reply actions  

You're kidding, right?

A 1-point win against a team that did not have the league’s best player at their disposal is not exactly a statement game. The C’s have made plenty of statements already this year and with the exception of opening night and Christmas Day they have not been good.

by lemonade sky on Feb 19, 2010 6:42 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm so tired of the comparison to the end of the 80s

and how “OH MY!! WE ARE IN FOR ANOTHER TWENTY YEAR DROUGHT!!!!”

It wasn’t just the fading of the original Big 3 that happened. It was far more the tragic deaths of two young men that happened.

The loss of those two were far more damaging to this franchise during that period than simply the fading of Bird, McHale & Parrish.

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 3:41 PM EST up reply actions  

The indifference of ownership didn’t help either. Probably can call the owners a lot of things right now, but indifferent is not one of them.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 4:02 PM EST up reply actions  

Yes. That too.

Ownership is where it all starts and ends in any pro franchise in any sport.

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 4:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Did Ainge give up a draft pick or not?

I have looked everywhere and still can’t find a full description of the trade that actually went down…

by milt palacio's shot on Feb 19, 2010 11:54 AM EST up reply actions  

Protected Second Rounder

I have not seen details on the protections.

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 12:15 PM EST up reply actions  

Why does Doc get a free pass?

He didn’t develop JR or Walker or Lester. Arguably CLifford Ray is the only coach on our team who has actually developed our players. baby, leon ,perk and jefferson all developed under clifford ray but who has doc developed? Rondo? Maybe but I’d say that Rondo developed Rondo more than Doc. Doc sure didn’t teach ROndo to shoot. He went and did that on his own. So in a year when our stars were older and injured Doc never played giddens or walker. He kept taking the short view and tried to win games even though he was playing ray pierce etc too many minutes. As a result our old guys are good for about 1/2 of bball and that’s it. Doc should have cracked the whip on rasheed when he arrived overweight and out of shape. Doc should have had them practicing but instead he pampered them. Doc should have told sheed to stop shooting 3’s and to stop whining to the refs. ditto for Perk. Doc should have come up with new ways to get eddie and ray going and he should have come up with a way to score points down the stretch without going to a Pierce ISO all the time. Doc should have done all of these things but he didn’t. Instead he trotted out the same old plays and same old offense only with a bunch of older and slower guys . Somewhere along the way a coach has to change things when you’re losing games. as much as anything Eddie House is gone because Doc Rivers has refused to change.

by Red2 on Feb 19, 2010 10:31 AM EST reply actions  

hey i agree with you 100% - Doc is allergic or afraid of change.

I don’t think he can ever be called a great coach until he actually does some of the things that coaches do. He’s a great designer of inbounds plays, I’ll give him that. He’s also a good communicator and by all accounts a well-liked guy. A good coach, though, makes the tough decision to bench a player (all star or not) when he’s dogging it, and to loosen the reins a bit and let a rookie get some time to prove himself.

by milt palacio's shot on Feb 19, 2010 10:42 AM EST up reply actions  

You must be clueless...

Rondo was developed by whom? Pierce’s improvement was under which coach? Who hired Clifford Ray? Who hired Tom Thibedou? The tooth fairy?

"You're about as useful as a one-legged man at an arse kicking contest." Rowan Atkinson

by The Village Idiot on Feb 19, 2010 12:01 PM EST up reply actions  

let's not give too much credit to coaches for "developing" their players

it’s the players who actually do the work – it’s not like head coaches are out there giving the players shooting lessons or running skills workouts. Coach provides a system in which a player can learn and develop.

by milt palacio's shot on Feb 19, 2010 12:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Actually they BOTH do...
it’s the players who actually do the work

While I agree with you that coaches should not be given too much credit, the same applies the other way around. The reality is that players and coaches BOTH have to actually do the work . Each has a role to play in achieving their ultimate goal.

it’s not like head coaches are out there giving the players shooting lessons or running skills workouts.

Actually they do exactly that AND more. Sometimes, coaches are like a father some guy never had, or the battle hardened elder who can give insight, and on whose shoulder a player can cry on and seek refuge in tough times.

Coach provides a system in which a player can learn and develop.

Agreed, so under which system was Rondo developed? Which system brought the best out of Paul Pierce? Which system developed Perk? How about Powe and BBD? Which system gave us banner 17?

I am not saying Doc Rivers doesn’t make mistakes, he does. Plenty. But to lay all blame at his feet, while giving him no credot for successes does not reflect reality.

"You're about as useful as a one-legged man at an arse kicking contest." Rowan Atkinson

by The Village Idiot on Feb 19, 2010 2:53 PM EST up reply actions  

not need to call people clueless

after all you are The Villge Idiot…I would argue with some of your quick points – but why bother today…..we won2 in a row

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Feb 19, 2010 12:22 PM EST up reply actions  

Let me repeat myself then...

Let me repeat, you must be clueless if you think that Doc’s presence did not impact the success of the team, but somehow everything that goes wrong is his fault. Why is that not a valid point to make? Is cluelessness an insult to you?

And please feel free to argue with my points. My opinions are fair game for anyone to dissect and/or counter. That is if you can actually make a reasoned argument.

"You're about as useful as a one-legged man at an arse kicking contest." Rowan Atkinson

by The Village Idiot on Feb 19, 2010 1:58 PM EST up reply actions  

ehhh you missed my poit and apprently my humor

you seem angry…. why say things like “if you can actually make a reasoned argument” ….I am guessing you don’t see those often?

Did anybody say “it was ALL his fault” …..settle down

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Feb 19, 2010 4:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Humor me again...
you seem angry….

Really? Because I challenged you to make a reasoned argument? And that made me seem angry? Interesting.

why say things like "if you can actually make a reasoned argument"

Simple… I say so because you’re challenging my use of the word “clueless” without giving a reason. That like me saying you shouldn’t be saying I can respect a reasoned argument even if I disagree. So, I repeat… if you can make a reasoned argument for asking me not to say “clueless”, please feel free to do so.

Did anybody say "it was ALL his fault"

Yeah, pretty much. Did you read the relevant posts I was responding to? Let’s not go to extrmees here; you’re not a Doc hater and I’m not a Doc apologist. But some balance might be in order, don’t you think?

…..settle down

You work yourself into a tizzy and then tell someone else to settle down. Ha.

"You're about as useful as a one-legged man at an arse kicking contest." Rowan Atkinson

by The Village Idiot on Feb 19, 2010 4:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Oh Come On!

Whatever good points you raise in this post (The PP ISOs, new offensive sets in the fourth quarter) are offset by the hilarious imbalance in your reasoning, which amounts to ‘everything is Doc’s fault.’

I LOVE how Clifford Ray gets all the credit for our big men improving but Doc gets none for ANYONE improving. “Clifford Ray is the only coach on our team who has actually developed our players.” Seriously, you actually believe Doc’s had NOTHING to do with Rondo’s improvement? And that Doc doesn’t coach the big players? He gets NO credit for their improvement. Please.

You want Doc to rest the starters but also suggest that he pampered them instead of making them practice. You can’t have it both ways.

My guess is that Giddens and Walker aren’t NBA rotation players and Doc and Danny knew it. And that’s why they didn’t play. They weren’t talented enough. And/or couldn’t pick up the system. Neither of them has been particularly interesting in games (with the odd flash from Walker) and presumably they’re not impressive in practice or they would have played.

The truth is that we don’t know what Doc told Perk and Sheed about technicals, we only know the public party line. Sheed’s taking less threes lately. Does Doc get any credit for that? Or is that Clifford Ray again?

Look, I have as many criticisms of Doc as the next guy, but Eddie House is gone because no amount of coaching will help him stay in front of quick point guards, or develop a better handle or create his own shot. He’s utterly one dimensional. And when he’s not hitting shots, he’s useless.

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 12:12 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm turning into a Doc apologist here

But I’ve heard him blame himself for a number of things, most notably that the offense got away from feeding the right guys, or that ball movement stagnated.

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 12:50 PM EST up reply actions  

Concur

Doc has often said “…and that’s on me…” or " and that’s our (meaning the coaches) job to …".

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 3:46 PM EST up reply actions  

Love this post, except the last phrase, which is NUTS

How do you jump from Doc’s faults… and he has some, no question… to blaming him for Eddie’s trade? You mean, it’s Doc’s fault somehow that D’Antoni wanted Eddie, and only Eddie, for Nate, and that we thought, correctly, that Nate would bring us a lot more than Eddie did? That last phrase… did you have a stroke in mid-sentence?

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:13 PM EST up reply actions  

You misread me (or I wasn't clear)

I’m not blaming Doc for any of Eddie’s issues. My point is that there was nothing Doc could do to make Eddie a better player, given the limitations Eddie has. He is what he is, as KG might say. Nate is an upgrade. Good trade.

Love your passion – keep raging!

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 1:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Wasn't referring to your post

Was talking about Red2’s. You know, the one where he says “Eddie House is gone because Doc Rivers has refused to change.” Amazing.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Oh yeah

That’s a ridiculous idea.

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 1:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Thanks, tho

…will rage on… tho I think I’m done for now :)

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:27 PM EST up reply actions  

What is left for our roster?

Second coming of Robert Swift, Michael Sweetney or Nick Fazekas? ;-)

Pat Carroll or Chris Lofton? lol

Looks like the Cav’s will get Z back so who do you guys think will be bought out that we may be interested in?

Actually Loften DID light it up in the Summer League ;-)

by Staubach on Feb 19, 2010 11:08 AM EST reply actions  

Winning environment?

What winning environment? We have been a sub .500 team for two months now.

by bewareofdware on Feb 19, 2010 11:15 AM EST via mobile reply actions  

Trade Allen before June 30?

I think there is still a chance to trade Ray Allen at the end of the season for someone who wants the expiring contract (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong). If that is the case, then Danny could trade him for a free agent and sign him immediately or for another player with a longer contract on a team that needs cap relief. It would definitely hook the team for a lot more tax money, but if possible it could help them reload and then resign Allen.

by funkstarrdeluxe on Feb 19, 2010 11:20 AM EST reply actions  

Nothing says "let's have some trade ideas"...

Like the trade deadline ending and the Celtics beating the lakers.

Ray is retiring a Celtics. And, isn’t TA playing great?

by stevenfuzz on Feb 19, 2010 2:24 PM EST up reply actions  

We all knew this could and most likely would....

happen. This was a three year window. We got our ring.
How long will it take to recover form this. Only time will tell.

On a separate not I love Pierce, but he’s got to go. If there was anyway to
get him out of here with Ray I’d love to see if happen. I’m getting to old
to wait 21 years between championships again.

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 11:30 AM EST reply actions  

get out of here
  1. Pierce has got to go? Why? Because he has been this team’s identity since he was drafted? Since he led us to the finals and took home finals mvp? I agree tat the last 2 months Paul Pierce has been the major issue that people aren’t talking about. He looks awful out there, and it affects our offense much more than KG’s struggles have, because PP is a major scorer for us. But I also haven’t forgotten that up until 2 months ago Pierce looked as good as ever. He is clearly playing hurt still – but he’s not so old or so hurt that we shouldn’t expect him to be back to himself
  1. The Big 3 growing old didn’t doom the Celtics for 21 years. Much more important were the deaths of Bias and Lewis, and the horrible work that Chris Wallace did for most of the 90’s

by milt palacio's shot on Feb 19, 2010 12:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Relax, buddy

We don’t have to “recover” from anything. We have a championship-caliber team, and we’re running with it. Paul’s not playing well, true… but let’s give him a couple of games to get back to form, shall we?

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:15 PM EST up reply actions  

Fair point

If anyone on this team is likely to return to previous form, it’s PP.

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 1:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Paul's been weighing us down with his forth quarter ISO's for years.

How about run the normal set offense for once. I’m sick of seeing him being stripped, floundering and crying. Love what Paul has done for this organization and respect him but after this year it’s time to see if we can move him.

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 1:22 PM EST up reply actions  

Not my favorite play

and it’s been ugly since he came back from the foot injury, but I think this gets a little overblown…especially when we see Rondo when he gets the ball and tries to run the clock out.

I will say I was going nuts when he was out there on the island with Artest last night at the end. It seemed like a 60-40 split he would get stripped. But he actually made a great drive. I was surprised they didn’t call the foul on Gasol.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:27 PM EST up reply actions  

short memories

Just last Fall, Pierce was doing everything right and we are all talking about why he should be given at least a little MVP love.

Back then we weren’t complaining about his ISOs. We all wanted him to have the ball in the last minutes of a game.

A couple of injuries later and he’s a bum – move him on out!

I totally concur that his isos have hurt us these last few weeks since he was injured and he so clearly doesn’t have the drive and power to do his thing. But if he DOES get healthy, I don’t see why he shouldn’t get back to being at least close to as effective as he was just 3 months ago.

Folks act like that was 3 years ago!

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 3:54 PM EST up reply actions  

You're wrong

The contract will have expired. Ray will be an unrestricted free agent. You could do a sign and trade, but that assumes that some other team will want Ray as a basketball player. He has no further value for cap relief purposes. That value went “poof!” at 3:00 pm yesterday.

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 11:31 AM EST reply actions  

AND

It assumes it’s a contract Ray likes and will sign.

by Fan from VT on Feb 19, 2010 12:37 PM EST up reply actions  

Interestingly enough,

That’s why you see smart teams signing contracts like the Andre Miller one and the Dampier one (i mean smartly STRUCTURED. that Dampier contract was overall terrible).

Both of those contracts were for multimillion dollar final years, but the final year was not a team option or a player option, it was “unguaranteed” for a VERY low price. So Dampier has next year on his contract, but the team doesn’t have to pay it, so he was basically an expiring deal this year. Additionally, because it was “unguaranteed,” the contract stays in effect AFTER June 30, but can be dissolved anytime before October for very little money…so it could basically be used as instant-offseason cap relief in a trade.

by Fan from VT on Feb 19, 2010 12:40 PM EST up reply actions  

Didn't know that

That is interesting, thanks for sharing. That is smart, although I imagine a player either has to be getting a lot in the up front years or doesn’t have much leverage on the whole to sign that kind of deal.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Ray's high value in a trade is gone

But his value as a player hasn’t disappeared. I expect Ray will continue to play for the Cs. And the team will benefit from the same thing other teams coveted… huge salary relief.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:16 PM EST up reply actions  

"Poof!"

Love it.

Just like Keyser Söze.

Gone.

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 11:42 AM EST reply actions  

Haters Debators and Traitors

Nate the great….

Does initiate offense, and create his own shot, easily. We don’t have this on the bench right now. Eddie on Steroids as Barkley said. He can and will often go off for more than 20, from the bench. He is also one of the top 10 fastest guys in the league. D’Antoni hated his showboating. I think Doc sees this as a way to get his guys fired up. When the starters on the bench see Nate dribble the ball through someones legs and posterize an elite center, it is seriously going to fire them up. Wasn’t he 3rd in voting for 6th man award last year?

It’s interesting, a lot of media is all about this trade. Out on the West coast, they think it’s a great move by the C’s. Even the Nicks fans think they got shafted (that Nate is better than 2 x the-entire-trade). But basically all I have seen is negativity here.

by stevenfuzz on Feb 19, 2010 12:07 PM EST reply actions  

I'd rather have....

Ray Allen retire a Celtics and groom our next shooting guard, then have made a panic-button trade for a arguably less talented player (K Martin).

by stevenfuzz on Feb 19, 2010 2:27 PM EST up reply actions  

Nothing Wrong With the Robinson Trade

If nothing else, he’s fun to watch.

The problem I have is with the trade that wasn’t made. It may not have been Ainge’s fault, but the fact is that the rebuilding just got deferred for another two years— because there is no way they will trade Pierce. We’re stuck with the aging core until Garnett’s deal expires, and then we become the New Jersey Nets. That’s just the way it is.

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 12:19 PM EST reply actions  

sometimes things work out better than expected

I said long ago we were assembling old players – I was making jokes at the time on this site about Assisted Living and Nursing Homes if any of you can recall…..

Sometimes you get lucky in life including sports. You can sometimes find a diamond in the rough where you least expect it that changes everything…..the unexpected “good” can always happen….I try never to forget that depsite my being sometimes a very negative person

I do hate that DA gave up a draft pick of any kind….for the Nate deal, and I would have liked a bit more time to see if Billy Walker had some hidden gem qualities…..but I can’t go around in the middle-to late season predicting the degree of DOOM in what happens 1-2 years from no it takes fun out of it for me – and I am too old for too much DOOM.

Variables always come into play – always

I will say that after really watching Cleveland last night (despite having talent) is so very much a one demensional team ……if Lebron ever gets hurt the rest of the team has no clue what to do at the end of close games because it is 100% Lebron ,,,,,they may win it if he does not get hurt because he is so good……. but to me they are not fun to watch – of course I hate Lebron so I am biased.

“They see me rollin – they hatin”

Peace

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Feb 19, 2010 12:38 PM EST up reply actions  

It's true.

That’s why if it’s not a homerun deal, Ainge shouldn’t do it.

Healthy, we can handle everyone but Cleveland. But an ankle tweak here, and maybe Kobe hits the wall and doesn’t fully recover, and we squeak the title. Unlikely, but at the very least, we’re still in a position where if something lucky happens, we’re ready to pounce.

by Fan from VT on Feb 19, 2010 12:43 PM EST up reply actions  

We always were "stuck with the core"

Thank heavens for small favors. This is a great team, with potential to win it all at any time till KG retires… depending on health, of course.

Contrary to the opinion of many on this thread, the grass is NOT always greener on the other side of the fence.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:18 PM EST up reply actions  

Exactly

The plain truth is that trading Ray was NOT going to bring a big enough upgrade in the front line (even for the future) to overcome the loss of himself in the back court.

Only a tiny handful of all the various proposals made any basketball sense and those all ended up being impossible due to financial or technical constraints.

Ride it out. KG’s contract (along with Sheed’s and possibly Rays) will give us a huge tool with which to reload come 2012.

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 4:02 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd rather have....

Ray Allen retire a Celtics and groom our next shooting guard, then have made a panic-button trade for a arguably less talented player (K Martin).

by stevenfuzz on Feb 19, 2010 2:28 PM EST up reply actions  

That seems like the worst case scenario if not overdramatic. I agree on Pierce, but they could potentially parlay Garnett in a deal like with Ilguaskus just now. As long as they have a max slot open on the cap they could still take back salary. A lot could happen by then.

Next season is the one I’m worried about. I don’t see a lot of wiggle room.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:41 PM EST up reply actions  

true - 2010-2011 will be a gut check year.

but after that, we’ll get a ton of financial relief.

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Jamison

Isn’t he older than anyone on our “old” roster?

by liamail on Feb 19, 2010 12:46 PM EST reply actions  

This is why I was against resigning Rondo this season.

No we have no options. What we’ll have in a few years is an unhappy PG that has no one to pass the ball too. He better develop that shot, quick.

Bottom line is I wouldn’t exchange that 2007 title and memories for any of this.

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 12:46 PM EST reply actions  

Will be an interesting choice on PP next summer

How much will they really want to commit to him in dollars/years? I’m sure he’ll be back but the temptation will be to move onto younger players and rebuild.

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 12:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Wow... did you really say that?

You did NOT want to re-sign Rondo? And why?… because he might not have anybody to pass the ball to??? Huh? Did i just land in an alternate universe??

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:20 PM EST up reply actions  

I nominate this thread for WORST THREAD OF THE SEASON

I haven’t seen one SO full of nonsense yet. Feels like stepping into an alternate universe, where the Cs didn’t play a great game just last night, didn’t beat the Lakers just last night, and aren’t right there in the running as they are. So many bad posts… can’t list them all. Will go through them upstairs.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 12:51 PM EST reply actions  

11 pts in a 4th quarter isnt great
KGs 13/8 and getting blown by and dunked n by Odom, not great
Pierce, was awful
a 1 pt win against a kobe-less lakers, isnt good

Glad u can be so optmistic with such a mediocre win and performance

by lennz on Feb 19, 2010 1:17 PM EST up reply actions  

"beat the Lakers just last night"

without Kobe. Guess you didn’t watch. Struggled to beat the Lakers without Kobe.
That’s nonsense….buddy.

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 1:26 PM EST up reply actions  

This has been addressed before

… and I could repeat that this Lakers team just won 4 straight against good teams without Kobe, and that Kobe in his last few games was a LIABILITY to this team, not an asset… shooting about 25%, broken body and all…. and that beating them wasn’t even the point, it was that the starters all played a great game and the whole team showed renewed passion and focus, etc.

I could repeat all that… and I could say “what’s the point?”… except that I just did repeat it, so that must be the point.

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:30 PM EST up reply actions  

did we play it in the Garden?

Because I thought I saw a few LA regulars along the sidelines (George Lopez looking VERY sad at the end).

A lot of purple & gold – it sure didn’t look like the Garden.

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 4:07 PM EST up reply actions  

Nate

Personally, I think Nate is gonna bring something to the table we desperately need – the ability for a guy in an ISO to get his own shot AND finish.

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 12:57 PM EST reply actions  

Continuing with our worst thread of the season theme...

Living in CT, I’m sick of hearing about how the Knicks think they will get 2 “Max” guys.
Just because it’s the all mighty NY. Please who would want to play in the dump MSG with about 3 banners hanging from the rafters. One of which is the Rangers from ’94.

Also I don’t know if there’s anyway to stop Vince McMahon, I mean David Stern from getting what he wants in the finals. Especially since he didn’t get it last year.

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 1:02 PM EST reply actions  

Yeah

the Knicks literally have no one to put around two stars. Even if they are Wade and LeBron, they can’t win a title with what that team has. New Jersey would be a better option for the two of them: Lopez, CDR, Harris, are all players you can use.

by Ersatz on Feb 19, 2010 1:16 PM EST up reply actions  

Look at the bright side (from NY's POV)

They either get the stars, or they save a ton of money. Good either way. Except, of course, that they have no team……..

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 1:22 PM EST up reply actions  

They had no choice but to blow it up

That Walsh got out from all those contracts gives him two attractive options – rebuild cheap with young players or hit a homerun with stars and build around them. The truth will probably fall somewhere in between.

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 1:23 PM EST up reply actions  

You celtics fans whine too much

You celtic fans need to stop whining.. If you talk to any knick fan like myself youll find out that you guys got a steal.. There is no one who can guard nate.. He is an excellent 3 point shooter.. good passer.. and all this talk about showboating.. It cant get any worse than what Kg does every game.. Or rasheed wallace who cant even control his temper..

nate has had amazing games.. several 20 point quaters.. 41 off the bench.. talk about no defense the dude blocks shots at 5’7.. Nate can do the impossible.. and you guys got a steal.. nate has done everything he has on probably the worst team in the past decade.. Imagine how good hell be with 4 other players on the floor who demand respect.. A Rondo and Robinson backcourt maybe the fastest in Nba history and you guys are whining.. Smh.. let the play do the talking.. the game is not played on the blog, newspaper, its played on the court..

by Schutt on Feb 19, 2010 1:09 PM EST reply actions  

Good point on KG’s showboating…I love how people ignore his, the worst showboater in NBA history, but point to a guy like Nates, who doesnt taunt anyone, he basically just has fun out there

by lennz on Feb 19, 2010 1:16 PM EST up reply actions  

Thank you, Schutt

I mean, for pete’s sake, Rondo got t’d for taunting last night. According to SI, 4 of the top 10 trash talkers in the NBA are Celtics, including Rondo. Nate making 5 is supposed to be reason enough to not take him when he’s clearly an upgrade over Eddie?

Go figure. I’m ready to criticize Nate if he’s not doing his part, but I will at least give him a chance unlike some people on this board.

by Tai on Feb 19, 2010 2:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Rondo? Really?

I didn’t see that…just the 3 in the top 5. Anybody figure out what Rondo got that T for? He looked kind perplexed then perturbed and the TNT guys never said a word after about what actually precipitated it.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:53 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah it was a real quick call right after Ray's big dunk on the breakaway

I couldn’t find a replay that showed what happened. Rondo looked pretty puzzled.

The other T (on Sheed) was quick and lame also – if it was a T at all it should have been a double on both Sheed and Pau. But really, it was just two big men tangled up and trying to get up court. They shouldn’t be calling Ts on that.

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 4:15 PM EST up reply actions  

Totally agree

The frequency of calling techs and fining coaches when in the right against this team is ridiculous and irritating

by nba is the worst on Feb 19, 2010 9:30 PM EST up reply actions  

You make some good points

Especially, about “showboating.”

Although I have read message boards with Knicks fans who don’t have much nice to say about Robinson, and a friend of mine (a Knicks fan, imagine that) who thinks he’s a no defense, gunner.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:51 PM EST up reply actions  

showboating has never bothered me.

In fact I get far more annoyed at fans who get all hot & bothered by it.

I just want Nate to be able to pull defenders around to help create space. I think he will. He may not always do it with just the long ball threat (ala Eddie) but he’s got other tools to do it with (such as his speed around picks).

Beyond that job, everything he does will be just good.

I’ve decided to go whole heartedly into PRO-Nate land. I loved watching his dad Jacque run the rock in college at the UW ( I was there at the same time) so I’m gonna go all legacy and give him major benefit of any doubts. :-D

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 4:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Schutt

Go back to your Knicks blog and cry about Starks 2 for 18 Game 7.

Easy for you to be happy, your getting 2 MAX players next year.

by Steal by Bird on Feb 19, 2010 1:16 PM EST reply actions  

Too bad...

Schutt is right though. I (somewhat unfortunately) moved to New York 2 years ago and have managed to sit through a few Knicks games without throwing up from boredom. Nate can blow up without anyone’s help. He creates. He breaks ankles. He’s not consistent, but neither was Eddie.

All the C’s fans need to get over the nostalgia factor for the old championship bench. Posey is gone, Powe is gone, House is gone. The only tool Eddie had was his catch and shoot 3 pointer. Nate can score from anywhere.

Obviously, you're not a golfer.

by adubson on Feb 19, 2010 2:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Brick, why do you assume in two years we will be the New Jersey Nets? I assume you believe that no one of any significance will sign with the C’s the summer that KG’s deal is done? If so, that is an opinion, not necessarily fact.

by celty86 on Feb 19, 2010 1:24 PM EST reply actions  

Catch 22

It’s the old conundrum: the aging stars will be just good enough to keep them out of the lottery, so they won’t get better that way. As for free agent signings, who knows? The Nets have plenty of cap space this June, plus a good young center in Brook Lopez. Let’s see who signs with New Jersey this summer. That may be an indcation of what the Celtics can expect in the Summer of 2012.

We can assume that Rondo will still be here in July, 2012, plus Perkins if they have resigned him. After that, the composition of the team that these free agents will be asked to join is a complete black box. There’s no assurance that Ainge and Rivers will still be here, either.

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 1:34 PM EST up reply actions  

The good, the bad and the lucky (how to build a team)

    The good way is too really suck and get the Numero Uno draft pick in the year a Uber player comes out. EG: Orlando with Shaq, Cleveland with Lebron, OK with Durant. Then continue to suck for another year and get another Uber player.

    The bad (worst way) example would be an Indiana example. Have the team go from good to bad overnight almost (The Artest, Jackson, The center with Miami now – can’t think of his name. Then be good enought to draft in the mid to high teens every year, meaning you get decent players who keep you a decent team, continuously fighting to get to a first round dump out of the playoffs.

    The lucky: Great luck is drafting a player in the mid first to late second round who becomes a star. Doesnt happen every day but it does happen. The Unlucky: Lose players like Bias and Reggie Lewis to totally unforseen circumstances.

     Also the other factors: Be in a city with vast tv revenue and endorsements, warm weather and no state income tax. This gives you a strong chance for the best free agents. NOTE: DANNY DID A GREAT JOB being in a city with heavy taxes and truly nasty weather and mediocre TV and endorsements, and still bringing home KG, RA in trade for mostly late drafted players and future picks in the first round that were too low to matter much.

by Dipper on Feb 19, 2010 1:50 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

Agent Zero is the Real Target

We are really just positioning ourselves for an Agent Zero signing on July 1 (because the Wizards will definitely not leave him on their roster).

by funkstarrdeluxe on Feb 19, 2010 1:52 PM EST reply actions  

Free as a Bird...

Brick, What you say is true except that there’s a different perception by potential free agents of the Nets franchise vs the C’s. Players want to play with winners, not have to rebuild a franchise from the ground up. It will be interesting to see who wants to take the Knicks cap space this summer to sign with them. I bet James doesn’t. My guess is that Wade stays in Miami. I bet the Knicks are privately praying that they can land Bosh and Joe Johnson but I don’t see that either. Johnson is the one guy I see changing uniforms. I wouldn’t be surprised even to see Bosh stay with the Raptors. With a harder cap coming by the time KG is gone more teams could be in a tighter payroll situation than the C’s giving Danny more wiggle room on salary than most. As long as we stay pretty competitive these next two years, which I think we will, we should look ok as a destination to whomever is out on the market that summer.

by celty86 on Feb 19, 2010 2:03 PM EST reply actions  

Bosh makes way more money staying in TO

Unless he gets the full max in a S&T.

Wouldn’t be shocked if he stayed in TO. People underrate how much he loves it here.

by TheOutletPass on Feb 19, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions  

Perceptions change quickly

Wasn’t it a few short years ago that the Nets, with Kidd, KMart and Jefferson, were routinely drubbing the lowly Celtics?

I’ll tell you what the Nets have that the Celtics don’t have: 1) New York City 2) a billionaire owner who is willing to spend money 3) Brook Lopez

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 2:23 PM EST reply actions  

Celts have

1) Boston (not NYC but a town with a rich sports history and clearly more preferable than Philly etc.) 2) Owners who haven’t been shy about spending money when opportunities to win present themselves, and 3) Rajon Rondo (I like Lopez a lot, but is he really more desirable than Rondo? do centers set people up for good shots the way point guards do?).

by Ersatz on Feb 19, 2010 2:27 PM EST up reply actions  

but on top of Rondo

The Celtic’s also have Perk. Who may not be Lopez, but he’s already a proven championship quality C.

You can argue about the individual pieces, but Rondo+Perk >> Lopez when it comes to building out a franchise.

by mmmmm on Feb 19, 2010 4:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Also don't forget

In the new CBA if the owners get a hard cap, billionaire won’t be that much of an advantage.

Brook Lopez is a pretty nice advantage, however.

by Berkcelt on Feb 19, 2010 3:57 PM EST up reply actions  

I Don't Think the Owners Really Want a Hard Cap

It ties their hands too much, and my guess is that they well trade it for other concessions. Besides, it’s really hard to sit across from Billy Hunter at the negotiating table and ask the union to save the owners from themselves.

What the owners DO want is lower maximum salaries and a limit on the number of years that can be guaranteed. On these points they have a solid argument, because paying outrageous guaranteed amounts to players who are no longer producing just takes money away from other guys who are more deserving, and those other guys happen to be union members too.

by Brickowski on Feb 19, 2010 4:48 PM EST reply actions  

And they want half-guarantees

I.e., contracts can be guaranteed up to one-half the salary involved, not fully as they are now. That’s the best one of all… helps eliminate the anti-capitalist aspect of NBA contracts, where players, once fully guaranteed for years to come, lose that motivation to keep performing (until their next contract year…if they have one.)

by DRJ1 on Feb 19, 2010 4:54 PM EST up 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
Observations / Questions
Bigstock_shamrock_-__1306880-1_small
PAMPLONA? ILLINOIS
Small
Gasol, Deron, or Have Faith In Rondo?
Small
This Team is Complete Garbage
Small
Frustrations..
Small
Rondo and back to backs
Small
Steve Kerr on Rondo's jump shot: "It gets frustrating for the Celtics"
Small
Debunking The "Build around Rondo" Myth
Small
What's up with Phoenix? Is a trade brewing?
Small
Look to Denver

+ 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 Ryan Desmarais

250_small Brendan O'Hare

1119816_small JoshZavadil

Small TLayman

Moderators

Photo_14_small Steve Weinman

Too_much_coffe_man_small Edgar

Small Chris72

Small thirstyboots18

Small CfanMissippi