|
Post by jb on Jul 4, 2006 11:20:01 GMT -5
<http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2006/07/04/slim_pickins_out_there?mode=PF>
{The Boston Globe CELTICS NOTEBOOK Slim pickin's out there Ainge not thrilled by free agent crop
By Peter May, Globe Staff | July 4, 2006
If the Celtics are going to make more personnel changes this summer -- and that's always a possibility as Danny Ainge continues to reshape the team -- they are not going to come from free agency via the mid-level exception. The Celtics have a mid-level exception, but do not intend to use it.
``We have 14 players on our roster right now," Ainge said after yesterday's news conference to introduce Sebastian Telfair and Leon Powe. ``The mid-level guys, we just don't see anyone out there that really fits that would be worth the price."}
The above excerpt , from the Peter May column in today's Globe is pretty emphatic. Barring that trade for an all-star, the team we see now is what the C's will open the season with. We're pretty thin at the 4/5. If Ratliff can't play consistent starter, or rotation minutes, I say we are in for another long fruitless season. If Theo is injured for a spell, who is the back up center? We've read that Perkins being ready for training camp is doubtful. Is his operation a guarantee that this problem will not recur? Is Powe ready to play 25-30 minutes a game as the primary or back up power forward? Are Jefferson's ankles and lack of defensive skills sufficiently considered in building this roster? As far as trades, Ainge has already "emphatically" said he would not trade for complimentary pieces, only "all-stars." Is he serious? How many all-star players at the power positions are out there? Kenyon Martin? Carlos Boozer? They are available and close to all-star caliber. Anyone think Ainge will shop in those directions? My cynicism regarding the willingness of Pierce to sign a five year extension now and forfeit the chance to be under a max contract until age 35, instead of 33, is compounded by the suggestions that, we either are, or are about to become, a "running team." Over Pierce's traded body, I say. I love the new players and commitment to a running, point guard oriented style, but something doesn't add up here. With the Bulls signing Ben Wallace, it seems they have decided to take the immediate plunge for the championship . Would they be more than ever interested in Paul? Does the Gordon, Deng and pick scenario loom? With Chandler heading to NO/KC for P.J. Brown, would P.J. be of interest here? Even Sweetney and/or Othella Harrington would be able to help the Celtics. Ainge seems awfully smug, considering the thin front line. The chance of trading for an all-star? I'd say just above nill. I'll say it over and over until Paul is either signed or traded, There has to be issues with the attempt to slice two years off his tenure and make him sign another contract at age 33.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2006 13:26:41 GMT -5
Celtics would have to take Chandler back in order to get that trade done (after Wallace signging I believe they aren't under the cap anymore). So, we're talking a Chandler, Gordon, and NYK pick for Paul Pierce. Would I go for it? Nope. Basically you get a volume shooter in Gordon and a injured prone big man in chandler for a premeir top 5 sg in the nba. You just don't make trades like that unless you believe Gordon is an all-star in this league which he's not.
Stick with Pierce, Try to sign him to an extension and lets hit the road with the roster we have right now.
|
|
|
Post by jb on Jul 4, 2006 19:26:51 GMT -5
Celtics would have to take Chandler back in order to get that trade done (after Wallace signging I believe they aren't under the cap anymore). So, we're talking a Chandler, Gordon, and NYK pick for Paul Pierce. Would I go for it? Nope. Basically you get a volume shooter in Gordon and a injured prone big man in chandler for a premeir top 5 sg in the nba. You just don't make trades like that unless you believe Gordon is an all-star in this league which he's not. Stick with Pierce, Try to sign him to an extension and lets hit the road with the roster we have right now. Good point about the trading restrictions now that the Bulls are over the cap . I've read that P.J. Brown is on the way for Chandler, so I suppose he could be included instead of Tyson. To me the key to the deal was Deng, with Gordon a limited but explosive weapon. Of course Brown can't be traded in a multi player swap, for 60 days, I think. As for my reasoning that Paul won't accept the extension, since it might cut 2 years off his max deal potential (see Ben Wallace), he really has no choice but to sign it, or play his !!!GREENIAC!!! of for another two years before he can walk. As for his lack of enthusiasm for filling the wing on the break, I'm thinking that West will start and play a half court game, with Telfair coming off the bench to change the tempo, so there won't be that much impact on Paul. Last season, we had a very hard time getting offense from the subs. It was pass the ball around the perimeter and no body wanted to take the outside shot. With Telfair, hopefully we'll get points in transition and hide some of the weak shooters on the bench. All this talk of us being a "running team" is just talk, until It happens. At best, we'll see them work towards that goal with the second unit, to see how successful it is. Wally, Paul, Jefferson and West are not suited to that style, but Green, Allen and Gomes are. Ideally, I'd like to see Szczerbiak be the sixth man and Gomes start at the three for defense and rebounding, but I doubt that will happen.
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 4, 2006 21:25:52 GMT -5
Chandler is an underpreformer like Eddy Curry was. Kraus showed the GM he was when he drafted both of them. And, Kraus didn't draft Jordan, Rod Thorn did.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jul 5, 2006 0:08:31 GMT -5
I view Jefferson as an uptempo player--when he's in the game, he's sprinting down court (especially after he rebounds the ball and hands it off). But I agree that Pierce isn't, and I really want him to try and get out and run.
Mostly, its the wing player's priority to run the breaks and fortunately for us, we've got a bunch of quick and athletic wings who like to run. The second unit is more of a running team (like it was 2 years ago when we had Marcus, Ricky, and Allen in the second unit).
Ainge and Rivers have been saying the same old thing about wanting the team to run, but it hasn't happened yet. I think mainly because we didn't have the right personel to run a lot. Now we do, but they need to get better first.
|
|
|
Post by BCHISTORIAN on Jul 5, 2006 0:10:00 GMT -5
the trade rule that you are referring to jb is over36 rule so we could sign him until he's 35 without any complications with ths salary cap
|
|
|
Post by jb on Jul 5, 2006 7:58:41 GMT -5
the trade rule that you are referring to jb is over36 rule so we could sign him until he's 35 without any complications with ths salary cap I think that's the situation where the salary for years when the player is over 35 count against the cap in the earlier year(s), mais non? I'm not sure where that fits into this thread, unless that aspect of Ben Wallace's contract is what put the Bulls over the cap. The deal for Pierce is that the Celtics want to extend him now, for five more years, making him 33, when that deal expires. If he waits another two years, when the present contract runs out, he could sign for the five years (maximum on a contract) and be 35 when that deal is over. The perplexing issue for Pierce and his agent is that he might not be able to command a max, or near max, deal at age 33 and lose two big salary years in the bargain. I was being refreshed on the fact that with Chicago being over the cap, after the Wallace signing, trading for Pierce would fall under the normal cap rules and salaries would have to match, making it much tougher to make that deal. In any event, it's great to have such cap knowledgeable posters here.
|
|