Do Cs Still Need Another Big?
When JO was still playing for this team, and Perk was going to come back one day (soon)... we were going to have an extra big, as insurance, in the season's second half and the playoffs. The team could lose one and not miss a beat. Now that JO is gone, and looks like he won't be contributing much if he ever returns -- and now that Perk's truly back and looking MIGHTY fine -- I think the team is at approximately "zero bubble" there... just about correctly balanced in the bigs department.
But the comfort of having that one extra big is gone, so if the team loses ANY of them now, they'll feel it. Which begs the question: should they still go out and try to pick up another big? The one reason seems to be: to get that comfort back -- the one that comes from having the extra big. But you can make the same case for EVERY position, couldn't you? Personally, I'd LOVE to have an extra big.... AND an extra PG (besides Delonte), AND an extra 3/4. But we can't always get what we want.
So... what DO we want? Do we want that extra big?
I'd vote no. We're good. We can think about picking up whatever looks really good out there for the right price, if anything comes up. Otherwise, we're full... and, I think, good to go. As is.
Be respectful and keep it clean. Thanks.
62 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Easy answer
You take a big, 2/3 or pg IF a PRIZE becomes available at any of those positions. If there’s no prize, just mediocrity,stay with what we have. We’ll probably only go with a 8 or 9 man rotation in the playoffs anyway.
Nope, no need.
If we’re going to bring in anyone else, it should be a true SF, otherwise, no.
I’m perfectly ok with a Perk/Shaq/Erden rotation, with JO being a bonus, if we happen to get anything out of him. If JO is healthy, he’ll see the playoff minutes and erden will ride the pine. If not, I’m ok with Erden out there even in the playoffs, for 10 minutes or so.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
We don't even really need a back up 3
Once the bench is healthy again, the back up wing players are Nate, West and Quisy. Those three represent the balanced skills set that we want from the point an wing, it’s just not balanced at the positions where we would want to have it most.
Quisy doesn’t have an outside shot, but the bench really doesn’t need him to. Quisy is the slasher/distributer that Rondo is on the first unit. Basically he’s Rondo with a post game.
Nate is a really good catch and shoot player for the most part. He’s not Ray and he’s not Paul, but he’s really good, especially as a back up. He does what Ray does, for the most part, just not as well as Ray.
West is a nice tweener combo kind of guy that can shoot, drive and pass. He’s not great at all of it, but he demands attention because if he’s left alone he’ll be lethal. He does what the Captain does, again, just not as well.
The balance of the second unit is actually really good. It’ll be interesting to see what the bench bigs end up looking like. This post season is gonna be awesome.
Sometimes glass glitters more than diamonds because it has more to prove.
In addition Wafer provides additional depth at wing.
He seems to be fitting in better and better each week.
Operate under the assumption that Shaq, KG, or JO is out come playoff time
and Perk won’t top 75-80% this season. He looked great last night with the Cavs popping like popcorn, but it’s going to take a while to get his hops back and score consistently in the low post.
There will be late-season additions like every year. This year, you’ll see Wafer, Harangody, and possibly Erden get phased out in favor of veteran buyouts or retreads like Rip Hamilton, Peja Stojakovic, Troy Murphy, Rasheed Wallace etc
It’s pretty likely that one of those acquisitions will be a big. Murphy is the most obvious (and most skilled), but if Wallace is in any kind of shape he’s obviously an upgrade over Harangody for the playoffs.
Murphy?
Oh you mean that guy who can’t find the court in New Jersey and lost all his minutes to a rookie?
Yep, he’s definitely the answer.
I disagree that Wallace is an upgrade of Gody. Give me energy, hustle, and a “do anything for the team” mentality over Rasheed “what’s conditioning” Wallace any day.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
that's pretty ignorant, dude
1) The Nets are rebuilding around a bunch of developing young bigs with decent draft pedigrees. Murphy would be playing if the Nets were any kind of contender (assuming his back is ok). Do you even know who Troy Murphy is? Do you realize that he had 150 more rebounds than Kendrick Perkins last year? That he shoots .400 behind the arc? That he was 10th in the league in double-doubles last year?
2) You say “the answer” as though the question is something deeper than “what big could we get to improve our team for the playoffs over what we have?”
3) Wallace is an upgrade over Gody. There are a lot of towel boys who would “do anything for the team.” Wallace is one year removed from being a major contributor for a team that was a hair’s breadth away from a title. Look, we all know he dogs it sometimes, can’t rebound any more, and throws up dumb threes, but he was just shy of being a league-average center last year and much better than that in the playoffs. Gody is a project on the end of the bench. He isn’t going to come anywhere close to that this year.
by sofutomygaha on Jan 27, 2011 11:38 AM EST up reply actions
Don't know much about Troy
But Sheed’s another story. Yes, he had pretty decent numbers, and yes he did put forth a tremendous effort in Game 7. But that was last year. Now he’s a year older and slower. And undoubtedly lazier. He is THE wrong kind of influence to insert into this team’s locker room. All wrong. I recognize that my antipathy to Sheed is stronger than most people’s… but I have good reasons, reasons which date back to last January, when Sheed formed the basis for understanding the much-discussed but little-understood 09-10 Celtics season.
This Celtics team is in some ways the opposite of last year’s group, most glaringly when it comes to winning vs. losing those ‘meaningless’ regular season games. Sheed’s return would imperil all that, and tip the balance in ways that can’t be predicted. I understand that right now, Sheed probably still has better skills (and body) than Luke (tho we can’t be sure about his skills until we see him). But Luke has Sheed covered six ways to Sunday when it comes to future potential. And I’ll take Luke’s energy and enthusiasm over Sheed’s length and laziness anytime.
If by "major contributor" you mean, "substantial portion of the negative shooting %s" then yes, I agree.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
Look, I hated watching him too, because we would have been much better off without all of the crybaby shit, the bricks, and the laziness underneath. No one is arguing that Sheed did’t play like a cranky old man. He did.
What I am telling you is that Sheed, acting like a dumbass and phoning it in, was still better than almost half of the centers in the NBA last year because of his defense, passing, screening, scoring, and ability to avoid turnovers.
by sofutomygaha on Jan 28, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
Agree
But I have overriding reasons to want him gone. They’re related to what he brought (and would prob bring again) to the locker room. In 09-10, it was the epitome of what that mid-season team was about. And it’s the antithesis of the current team’s MO. I just don’t want to take that chance with him again. At this point, there’s not much to gain, potentially a lot to lose, and besides he’s prob not available, and I just wanna let that sleeping dog lie.
JO being out (at least some/most of the time) is practically a given
Shaq will probably/hopefully be fine. He’s never been seriously injured so far… just takes breaks.
If KG is out we can bend and kiss our collective butts goodbye, ‘cause we ain’t winning the ring without him. Done and done.
None of the names you mentioned are worth trading for, imo. I’d rather stand pat.
you would rather stand pat than take on Rip Hamilton bost buyout???
by sofutomygaha on Jan 27, 2011 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
Hard to imagine a buyout working
… from everybody’s pov. He’s very expensive. And he brings a skill set that is relatively low on the Cs’ list of needs. So… of course if he were cheap and available, we’d be nuts not to take him, but it’s hard to envision a deal where the end result is palatable. Bottom line: he’s not worth the trouble, because we really don’t need what he brings now. So yeah, I’d rather stand pat than get into that can of worms.
IF Rip did get bought out.
Then it’s a hole different story.
And absolutely, I would jump all over trying to get him into Boston.
That being said, I put the chances of buyout happening about equal with mine at scoring a date with Mila Kunis… Nahgannahappun.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
Sure it would be great.
If I could add one player I’d want it to be a PF/C. You can never have too many bigs. Right now we just do not look 100% solid since EVERY ONE of our 7 footers has health questions right now (including Semih with his bum shoulder).
That said, I just don’t believe that there will be a decent one available for a price worth paying.
Yes, I do think Sheed might be worth that price (we’d have to cut someone, but we wouldn’t have to trade anyone or picks and salary would not be a problem) but I seriously doubt he has any intention of coming out of retirement.
Anybody I can see becoming available through trade looks to me right now to be either too expensive in trade costs or simply not worth acquiring.
That might change if things shake up due to something like a big ’Melo trade. But I doubt it.
Agree
We should ALWAYS be open to possibilities, and it’s always POSSIBLE something will turn up. But as you say, unlikely. Plus, we actually like all 15 of our guys, even Avery getting his workouts in DL… so we’d need a good reason to cut or trade any of them.
hmmm...
Does the fact that Boston is dead last in the rebounding dept not concern you? I agree that injuries have played a role, shouldn’t this then back it that much more of a priority to solve?
Well, yes.
But that rebounding number is misleading a bit.
1) The Celtics play a very slow pace, using the entirety of the clock on most possessions. Slow pace=less shots. Less shots=less rebounds.
2) The choose transition D over crashing for offensive boards.
3) The shoot the best % in the league. There are no rebounds on made shots.
Now if you want to talk defensive rebounding %, then yes, that is a concern. They’ve been pretty league average there so far this year, which is acceptable, but the last few games seem to have seen a rash of offensive rebounds, so it’s definitely a concern.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
To answer your question
consistent with what I have said in the past : No, that (Boston is dead last in the rebounding dept) does not concern me.
Being ‘dead last’ in rebound totals is meaningless.
Injuries are indeed a huge concern – but I don’t see any solutions for that concern to be found in the trade market. Like I said, that could change if the market shakes up. But I doubt it.
Wonder how long this can go on?
Um, no.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
Garbage man?
Get it.. get it? Cause his shot is garbage?
Ha! I made a funny!
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
i agree lets bring sheed back for the last 20 games and see what he has. thats only if JO is out for good .
lohaus #54
And who would you cut?
Tho I don’t agree that we should go anywhere near Sheed, I am curious who the Sheed-cravers might wanna cut….?
You only cut a guaranteed contract.
If you have an EXTREME need (i.e. season ending injury) or, there is a guy you can’t pass up, instant impact type player.
Neither of these cases exist for Sheed. Should he actually ever even want to come out, there’s only any need for him at all, IF neither Shaq or JO can give us anything. That seems unlikely, at least one of them should be healthy, and will certainly be playing through more issues in the playoffs than they are (or are allowed to) right now. And Sheed certainly isn’t an “impact” player anymore. He’s, at best, a moderately useful bench player… sometimes.
So, no, there’s no logical reason to do it right now. Even if he did want to.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
bring sheed bak tell him u get only two three point attempt a game and you gotta abuse the inside ga,me
by 81bos on Jan 27, 2011 1:29 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Ya cause that worked SO well last year.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
haha!
oh, um, wait, it actually did work out pretty well…
by sofutomygaha on Jan 27, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
I must have been watching different games.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
Getting to mere seconds from winning a title
doesn’t qualify as ‘working out pretty well’? Tough crowd!
Sheed had little, if anything to do with that.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
bring sheed bak tell him u get only two three point attempt a game and you gotta abuse the inside ga,me
by 81bos on Jan 27, 2011 2:10 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yes. They just decided to guarantee Von
… a couple of weeks ago. They’re not about to turn around and throw that contract away unless there’s a compelling reason. We can differ in our opinions about Sheed, but I doubt there are many who’d consider him “compelling.”
Let Sheed enjoy his retirement - we deserve it.
Lygafe
Lionel Gaffen / Fotomix
http://lygaffen.blogspot.com/
http://community.webshots.com/user/lygafe
http://forums.internationalhockey.net/showthread.php?t=7448&page=2
International Hockey Forums > Europe > ISRAEL
Israel Recreational Hockey Association 2009-2010 & 2010-2011 [ Lygafe ]
Israel Ice Skating Federation - From the Media [ Lionel Gaffen ]
http://www.eurohockey.net/news/story.html?id=20090408104226_herzliya_emerges_as_israeli_national_league_champions
Amen
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
See above, garbage man.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
C's could absolutely use another BIG
1. JO is done
2. Having Shaq’s services come playoff time will help if he is healthy. However, even if he is ‘healthy’ come playoff time, how many minutes and games during each series will his body be able to tolerate?
3. I am really excited that Perk is back. However, as we all witnessed with KG, will Perk need the same amount of time to get back to original form?
4. BBD has been huge for this team (excuse the pun). Yet we all remember how his lack of height hurt the team during the finals last season. BBD is wide, strong, athletic and hard workng, but he gets his (bleep) blocked too many times. He’s simply too short and can’t jump high enough to defend the leagues top BIGs (esp Gasol)
5. Erden is a work in progress. He has a tremendous amount of skill but lacks experience. You match him up with Bynum or Gasol and he’s going to have problems.
I’m not saying getting another BIG would be easy for Boston, but it is possible and necessary.
Eh..
1) Maybe, don’t say it like you can see into the future.
2) About 20 or so, which is all we’d need. No back to backs in the playoffs, less travel. It’s tailor made for veterans.
3) Don’t know, but he looked great the other night, and came back a month ahead of schedule. ACL injuries can be overcome, just ask Welker… and he does a lot more moving and cutting on that leg than Perk does. KG’s injury was also entirely different, if I’m not mistaken, he had spurs in the knee, not ligament damage.
4) Agreed.
5) Probably, but with Oneals/Perk healthy, that wouldn’t be an issue. I also wouldn’t have a problem asking for 10-15 minutes out of Erden, if we absolutely had to. He’s proved capable enough and has shown a great toughness, I have 0 doubt he wouldn’t step up to the challenge and not give an inch to them. Whether or not he’ll have the ability anyway, who knows, but for short minutes, give him a shot.
It is possible, probably helpful. Not essential.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
Ummm...
1. “O’Neal will rehab his knee for the next four weeks to strengthen the areas around his knee before attempting to return. We’re not too optimistic about O’Neal’s chances to contribute this season. He’s already rehabbed the knee and tried to continue playing, only to be sidelined again.” ESPN.com
2. Even if Shaq does play 20 or so minutes, how many games will he be able to play?
3. Comparing Perk to Welker nonsensical, as Welker’s recovery time is representative of extreme outliers, not the norm. He is a genetic freak in this regard. He also has about 3/5 of Perk’s mass to bear on his knee.
4. Now you’re starting to make sense.
5. (Refer back to 1-3)
Sir, your rebuttal?
Well, don’t mind if I do!
1) Great quote, doesn’t mean anything. Bottom line is we don’t know what will happen with JO, they’re obviously confident this rehab will work, or they wouldn’t be doing it. So again, you can’t make declarative statements like “he’d done” only time will tell.
2) No reason to think he wont play all of them. He’ll play through more pain in the playoffs than regular season. So those knick knack injuries they sideline him for a game or 2 from time to time, I’d expect him to play through in the playoffs. They’ll also get more time off inbetween games, allow him to rest up those bumps and bruises injuries he’s been piling up.
3) How is it nonsensical? It’s the same injury. Of course Perk’s frame is bigger and there’s more weight on that knee, no question. But at the same time, he doesn’t put as much stress on it as Welker does, with the quick cuts and hits he takes. All I’m saying is it’s possible, Welker has proved that, and Perk works harder than anyone. If there is another human being alive who can prove the Doctors wrong, it’s Perk.
4) I don’t like agreeing with you, BABY CAN GUARD ANYONE. (/end sarcasm)
5) Refer back to 1-3.
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
Not essential?
In addition to getting killed on the boards during the finals last season, Boston is current dead last in rebounding this season.
If they scored games by rebounds, yes, it would be a major problem
The system works, EVEN WITH the relatively poor rebounding we’ve had to date because of all the injuries to our bigs. Also — going forward, with Perk back, Erden coming into his own, and Shaq contributing… those numbers can be expected to change. I.e., that’s HISTORICAL data you’re quoting, and the facts on the ground have changed. We must wait and see what the numbers are NOW, after Perk’s return and the rest of the points are in place.
Oh, sorry. I forgot to continue the headline conversation you two are having. My response is: “Errr…”
Really?
Yeah your right nobody knows what will happen in the feature. Your whole entire post is based on speculation and hypothetical debate isn’t it?
Ofcourse we don’t know what’s going to happen in the future…but this doesn’t make your opinion anymore valid than mine.
No need for the caps, my friend...Doesn't making your stance any stronger, believe me.
If you suggest that “We must wait” and see how everything pans out then why then write the post in the first place?
What I meant...
….was the data we have now is not relevant to what the future holds, because the situation has changed so much. i.e., for all we know, we might not have anything to worry about on the rebounding front… we have no data on what the numbers are when these new pieces are in place.
look ma, no caps!!
Anyway… I actually mostly agree with all your points. I think Perk will be near his 100% in a few games, btw. And Erden is looking great now. He may be as productive and effective as any backup center in the league, right now. I think we’re good, going forward.
+1
"Phil is obviously a good coach. You don't win that many games without being a damn good coach, ... Remember one thing: He's been very fortunate. He picks his spots. That's all I can say." - Red Auerbach
This is my final point on this subject...
“This point can’t be stressed enough. The Celtics lost the NBA championship because they were a poor rebounding team and in Game 7 the Lakers grabbed 23 offensive rebounds. Maybe Kendrick Perkins would have made a difference, but this was a season-long issue for the Celtics and it caught up with them at the worst possible moment.” -Jeff Clark
In other words, we may not “score games” games by how many rebounds a team gets, but certainly a team can LOSE games (and championships) by their inability to rebound.
As Jeff points out, this is an on going issue that needs to be fixed.
Case closed.

by 



























