|
Post by The Eye of the Q is upon you! on Jan 2, 2006 15:54:00 GMT -5
Nobody seems to understand what it takes to win games in todays NBA game - well maybe with the possible exceptions of Pierce, LaFrentz, and Delonte West.
Missing Tony Allen is hurting this team more than most people realize.
Blount had a nice role with the old O'Brien teams but has never adjusted to Doc Rivers - he needs a fresh start.
LaFrentz has been screwed but has the character to fight back be a major contributor. He has too big a contract to be traded.
RD is a nice two guard but his kind are a dime a dozen in this league.
Pierce is our superstar and it would be a serious mistake to trade him just to clear time for the youngsters. I think he wants to stay in Boston and restore the legacy and be remembered for that.
Perkins and Jefferson need to learn to avoid fouling without losing their agressiveness. With Raef LaFrentz being the big man anchor, all we need to do is add a big guy in the draft to replace Blount.
Point Guard play is another sore subject right now, as Pierce and RD seem to act too much as de facto PG's much like the Walker/Pierce/Obie system..... Perhaps that is the reason to trade Pierce and RD, so we can hand the team over to West, Allen, and Jefferson. Getting a play-making PG will be beneficial for everybody on this team.
Getting Tony Allen back is critical to the future of the franchise and keeping Banks progressing as well. I think Tony Allen's athletic prowess is a key piece to the Boston Celtics future (Thinking a dangerous combination of Dennis Johnson and that Martin kid that killed the Celtics last week in Sacremento). Just get his legal schtick taken care of and get his knee healthy. I hope the Celtics don't give up on this kid.
Trading veterans will not solve anything. The onus is on the coaches and players to solve their own basketball problems.
|
|
|
Post by FLCeltsFan on Jan 2, 2006 18:07:13 GMT -5
I have been against making a lot of trades simply because teams that win are teams that grow together and develop chemistry and continuity. We have a good core. PP is an all star, playing the best of his career. Ricky is having an all star year as well. We have young players who have talent, athleticism, and potential. We need to keep them together and let them develop. I like Raef. I think he is really works hard and if his knees hold up, he can help our team. Of course, if we can get younger and more talented players and get rid of his salary well then we have to do it. Blount doesn't fit this team. He is not happy with Doc's system and at 7 ft doesn't put forth the energy to out rebound our guards. He also has the worst hands in basketball. I would love to see him moved but he is the only one I would really like to see traded because his attitude is a cancer on this young team. He tries sometimes and doesn't others and never really works as hard as he should in the rebounding area. Veal would make good trade fodder since he hasn't seemed to fit in either. I don't think that blowing the team up or making big changes will get us where we want to be. We aren't going to win the title this year and probably not next. But if we keep developing the kids we have, we will win #17 possibly the year after. Next year we will make some noise and I still think that we will end this year playing strong as everyone starts to mesh.
I wholeheartedly agree!!! We have the talent and potential here. Doc just needs to learn how to best use it and get them to play consistently.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 2, 2006 19:39:11 GMT -5
Here is the crux of the entire argument, which I don't think many Celtics fans are looking at:
We have veterans and we have extremely young and undeveloped players (9 of them to be exact).
I'm beginning to sound like a broken record, but there is no way we are going to develop the young players' potentials if we aren't playing them 30 - 35 minutes per game. No way are we going to maximize their talent without giving them big time minutes--and we are talking about 9 young players to develop.
Which solid player in the NBA has ever developed playing 15 minutes a game for their first couple of years? If we are banking on our young guys being contributors and solid role players surrounding Pierce, Ricky, Raef, and Blount in 3 - 5 years when we are hopefully contending for a title, it ain't going to happen with the way we are going now.
Even if we were to cut down Ricky's and Pierce's playing time down to under 35 minutes per game to give more time to the young wing players, its still not going to be anywhere near enough. You have to consider that we have Tony Allen, Ryan Gomes, Justin Reed, and especially Gerald Green to give minutes to.
And remember, they are each going to need a lot of playing time to live up to their potential. 15 - 20 minutes a game is not going to be enough to get them anywhere.
We can pray for a miracle that giving them such little time will magically be enough to develop them into playoff-worthy warriors--but let's be honest here, it ain't going to happen.
Ok, so the next solution is to trade away most of the young one's and keep the best of the best and develop them. But again, in order for a young player to fully develop their talent and maximize their potential, they should be playing big time minutes, as in 30 - 35 minutes a game. That's how Delonte is making such big strides in his game, because he's getting 30 minutes a game. So let's say we get rid of Tony Allen, Ryan Gomes, and Justin Reed in order to give all the playing time to Gerald Green--how is Gerald Green ever going to get that amount of playing time with Pierce and Ricky playing at least that much? Pitino traded away Ron Mercer to give the budding Pierce all the playing time, the Fakers traded the All-Star Eddie Jones to Charlotte to clear playing time for Kobe Bryant.
And by doing this, we lose out on Allen, Gomes, and Reed--3 players who could turn out to be key players for us.
How are Jefferson and Perkins going to get 35 minutes a game if Raef and Blount are still here? Do we give Raef and Blount just 13 minutes of playing time each? Are they going to be good soldiers and accept their enormous reduction in playing time?
So this is what it comes down to. If you want to stick with the veterans we have and not make wholesale changes, getting rid of the youngsters in exchange for proven role players is the only way to go. We can't hold onto our veterans and expect all of our young players to develop with such little playing time. OR, you can trade some of our veterans (Raef or Blount, Ricky or Pierce) in order to give the young future stars the playing time they need to blossom.
I once believed it could be done, but I just wasn't looking at the whole picture. I think it finally dawned on me when I'd seen Gerald Green in street clothes in the Celtics huddle, giving high 5's to Ricky. He looked so young that I wondered how long it was going to take him to finally arrive and become that star player he has the talent to become. I thought maybe next year he'll get some playing time, and a little more the following year, and then in his 4th year, he'll be a starter. But then I think back on Jefferson's learning curve and I realize that giving Jefferson 15 minutes a game is going nowhere. He looks good during parts of the game, but he's still such a long ways off.
There's no way star caliber players ever develop into stars by getting so little minutes. They need full blown starter's minutes for a couple of years, and then they finally breakout.
|
|
|
Post by BCHISTORIAN on Jan 3, 2006 0:38:17 GMT -5
trading pp for picks will not work that's all i know. just look at the bulls or clippers. year after year they have top picks and they just continue to be mediocre. you can trade all the vets if you want to but pp has to stay...
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 3, 2006 0:54:23 GMT -5
Well, we don't have to trade Pierce (I just bring him up because Ainge is also looking for some ways to bring down our team salary). We can keep Pierce, but we'll need to get rid of Ricky. Having both guys on the team playing 32+ minutes will not leave enough minutes for Tony Allen and Gerald Green to reach their potential (unless we are looking at them living up to their potentials in 7 years). And that's kicking off Ryan Gomes and Justin Reed off the team.
Same goes for Jefferson and Perkins. There's not enough minutes to give both of them 30+ minutes for development.
So if fans are insisting on keeping both Piece and Ricky, along with the core veterans we have now, the only young players we have time to develop will be Delonte and Jefferson. All the rest will not get enough playing time to fully develop their games. So the core will be:
Blount Raef Jefferson Pierce Ricky Delonte
This is similar to the core we play now. Nice offensive group, but defensive is terrible. Will this core be enough to win a title?
What about this core:
Perkins Jefferson Gerald Tony Delonte Gomes and a couple of high draft picks that could possibly land us Greg Oden, Adam Morrison, Rudy Gay, Rajon Rondo, Tiago Splitter, JJ Redick, etc., and also the players we'd receive from trading away our veterans (possiboly Jason Richardson, Ron Artest, etc.).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2006 0:57:35 GMT -5
trading pp for picks will not work that's all i know. just look at the bulls or clippers. year after year they have top picks and they just continue to be mediocre. you can trade all the vets if you want to but pp has to stay... I agree, keep PP unless he wants out otherwise. He's a hall of famerk and a proven winner for this ball club. It's the other vets that are truely holding us back especially at the foward/center positions.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 3, 2006 1:06:57 GMT -5
trading pp for picks will not work that's all i know. just look at the bulls or clippers. year after year they have top picks and they just continue to be mediocre. you can trade all the vets if you want to but pp has to stay... I agree, keep PP unless he wants out otherwise. He's a hall of famerk and a proven winner for this ball club. It's the other vets that are truely holding us back especially at the foward/center positions. Again, hold onto Pierce if it makes us better, but having both Pierce and Ricky will not give much time for Gerald Green and Tony Allen to develop into the players they can be. If we hold onto Pierce, Ricky would have to go, if we are looking towards Green and Allen being big time players for us down the line. Pierce's contract expires in 3 years. That means that the young guys will need to be developing rapidly during the next 2 years so that in Pierce's final year, the team will be close to being contenders. That's most likely the only way Pierce stays with us after his contract expires--if we are close to competing for a title. Now, with the team we have, we desperately need Perkins to develop into a big time rebounder and defensive player, we need Jefferson to rapidly develop into a bonafide offensive star in the post, as well as being a big time rebounder and shot blocker, we need Delonte to develop into a big game PG, we need Tony Allen developing into a reliable scoring threat and a defensive stalwart, and we need Gerald Green and Ryan Gomes developing into solid bench players--all this in order for us to be competing against the East's best. Will the young players be able to develop into these roles if they aren't getting a lot of minutes?
|
|
|
Post by BCHISTORIAN on Jan 3, 2006 1:47:29 GMT -5
i agree that ricky could be our biggest asset in a trade.
|
|
|
Post by mev17 on Jan 3, 2006 2:42:35 GMT -5
I would love to see Blount traded so that Doc would have to play Perk and Jefferson more, the way he was forced to play West since our only veteran PG was _an _ickau, who is now out for the year.
Davis puts up great numbers at a reasonable salary; he might yield a good return. If it is a package deal, we may be able to use him to move LaFrentz' salary (since Davis is such a bargain $wise we may be able to combine he and Raef for a couple of expiring contracts that are somewhere in between his and Raef's salaries, and a draft pick or two.)
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jan 3, 2006 5:30:20 GMT -5
I would love to see Blount traded so that Doc would have to play Perk and Jefferson more, the way he was forced to play West since our only veteran PG was _an _ickau, who is now out for the year. Davis puts up great numbers at a reasonable salary; he might yield a good return. If it is a package deal, we may be able to use him to move LaFrentz' salary (since Davis is such a bargain $wise we may be able to combine he and Raef for a couple of expiring contracts that are somewhere in between his and Raef's salaries, and a draft pick or two.) I've thought about combining Davis w/ Raef as well. I'd be all for it. I can't imagine who pissed Pierce would be if we traded his boy away and all we got in return was a short term contract.
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Jan 3, 2006 14:42:34 GMT -5
Did somebody say proven winner? Like as in PP is a proven winner? Of what? What has he won at any level of basketballl? here are thproven winners in NBA ball. Guys that have made others around them better and elevated sorry teams to major playoff contention at some point in their career. Shaq. Duncan, Nash, Kidd, and that's the end of that list. PP hasn't even gotten to an NBA finals let alone win one. He isn't even the NBA equivalent of Peyton Manning or Marino. That would go to Kevin Ganett. I'd say PP is just good enough to keep us from landing a good draft pick or signing a good free agent and that's about it and that's why I don't mind trading him.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 3, 2006 14:44:51 GMT -5
If that were the case (packaging Ricky and Raef together), I think Ainge would settle for a bad contract that will expire sooner than Raef's, as long as we are getting a good young talent in return. It'll be a waste to lose Ricky just to get rid of Raef's big contract.
Like Mev said, getting rid of Blount would be ideal. But getting rid of both Raef and Blount would be the best thing for Perkins and Jefferson. Oh, we are going to lose a ton of games because of their inexperience, no doubt about that. But down the road, this is the best thing we can do for ourselves.
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Jan 3, 2006 16:13:29 GMT -5
Derren, I think you said that we have only tow possibilities, which is keep the vets and the young guys won't develop, or dump the vets and they do. I would think there is another possibility, which is give the young guys the vet's minutes and give the vets the young guy's minutes. There is no reason that Al j and Perk can't be starting while Raef and Blount sit, and there is no reason Gerald Green can't get like 20 mins a nite and PP and Ricky get only 30.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 3, 2006 21:27:10 GMT -5
Well, even 20 minutes a game is not enough, IMO. Has there been any star player that has ever become a star by only playing 20 minutes a game? Not even KG or Kobe would have reached stardom with only 20 minutes a game.
Imagine if T-Mac were to stay with Toronto and played only 20 minutes in back of Vince Carter--would he even be the star player he is? His 3rd year was his coming out party (15.4 ppg), and by that time he was averaging 31.2 minutes. Will Gerald Green ever average 31 minutes a game with Pierce and Ricky playing the bulk of the minutes?
|
|
|
Post by eddietours on Jan 3, 2006 21:31:38 GMT -5
call me nuts but i think that ainge will trade for artest i know it sounds crazy but theres too much mystery.
|
|