So Is the roster set?

[cfoo]

Or is Ainge still going to wheel and deal some more? We basically have a pretty good rotation down low imo. We have 5 guys over 6'10" plus Scalabrine and Gomes.. We still have a glut of sg/sf's. Do you think Woods is here for now or do you think he will be cut/traded? Just seems to me like this was such a big trade if there was a suitor for any of these guys they would have been included right off the bat.

[cfoo]

Also could someone explain to me how the trade exeption works? Can we use that to unload someone like Blount?

[Ossric]

i guess it all depends on whether Ainge wants another vet PG or not & whether we'll send somebody to the NBDL. If we get a vet point, Woods will likely be waived. But if we don't get another point nor acquire another player Woods will probably stay on the roster as nothing more than a possible trading piece. If he's really the cancer that everybody says he is, all this won't matter & he'll be waived no questions asked.

But if Ainge is thinking about doing an additional move, it probably won't happen before august 15. The last day that players can be waived under the "Houston Rule". Just as with the end of the FA moratorium, august 15 will cause a lot of teams to shift their attention to other players, making it an entirely different situation to deal in. Players that were under the radar for the whole time will suddenly draw more attention etc...

[Ossric]

cf00 said:

Also could someone explain to me how the trade exeption works? Can we use that to unload someone like Blonut?

*The trade exeption expires in 365 days
*It cannot be used to sign FA's
*You can't combine it with a BYC contract. (Blonut's BYC expires one of these months so it could be used for Blonut after that)
*You can use the exeption to trade for a player without the salaries having to match. For example, when Blonut"s BYC expires, we could trade him to Chicago for Antonio Davis if we also send them the exeption. (salary player + exeption =salary player other team)

At least, that's how i understand it...

[cfoo]

Good info Ossric. Thanks. I would tend to agree with you on all points.

[cfoo]

Pierce is the next question although it's been discussed at nauseum to this point. I'm kind of feeling the rebuilding mode and if the young kids are going to be given the reigns then they need to be allowed to lead, and Im not sure they will be able to do that with Pierce around.

[meltinjohn]

Maybe Ainge will use the Houston rule and rid Paul Pierce. Then again, he'd get nothing for him.

[DERRENMATTS]

I think we are still going to tinker with the lineup a bit more. Word around the organization is that Ainge is looking to get rid of Blount. Ainge may just want to get rid of him and not care too much what we get for him.

If Orien Greene can really play at this level, I think Ainge will move Banks. There's not going to be enough minutes to spread around for 3 young PG's who need playing time. If we don't get a vet PG, I'm assuming Delonte will get 20 - 25 minutes. If Greene moves ahead of Banks, he'll maybe get 10 minutes a game. Can Banks learn and develop from only playing the left over minutes, which is about 10 minutes?

Plus, I think Ainge will do what he said he was going to do when the offseason started, and get a vet PG. So if we do get a vet PG, Banks will be even more strapped for playing time.

I don't think Qyntel Woods is going to come here. That's why Miami was said to have given us cash consideration--so that we can waive Woods and not have to pay for his contract.

I really like the direction in which we are heading. But I feel like we need a couple more vet players to smooth out the learning process.

[meltinjohn]

Dan Dickau would be a good example of a guy to learn from in terms of passing. He has the basics he can teach to the kids even if he isn't known for being a true mentor.
And about Blonut, he should be waived like Vin Baker was and his contract is also cheaper than Vins.

[Ossric]

meltinjohn said:

Maybe Ainge will use the Houston rule and rid Paul Pierce. Then again, he'd get nothing for him.

That won't happen, the Celtics will rather trade Pierce for peanuts than waive him.

1)we're not in luxury tax territory.
2)his contract will still count against our salary cap, but he's not playing for us.

It just wouldn't have any benefits for us.

[Celtic17]

So many rules and loop-hole to keep up with.
Thanks, Oss and Mev for your knowledge of them.

[freshnthehouse]

If we started this season with this roster, I wouldnt mind. The only moves I think could benefit this club are

A) pick up an older PG on the cheap to help the kids BUT not take minutes from them.

B)Trade Blount or Banks if the opprotunity arises.

C)If a slam dunk Paul Pierce trade materializes.

Anything more than that< I might start whining, and nobody wants that.

[Celtic17]

It'll be ok Fresh... ;D


My rotation =

5- Reaf
4- Al
3- Justin
2- Paul
1- Delonte

6- Ricky
7- Kendrick / Mark
8- Brian / Ryan
9- Marcus / Orien

I like this 9-12 man rotation.

[meltinjohn]

freshnthehouse said:

If we started this season with this roster, I wouldnt mind. The only moves I think could benefit this club are

A) pick up an older PG on the cheap to help the kids BUT not take minutes from them.

That is Dickau. He wouldn't command many minutes but he would be a veteran compared to whos there now.

[DERRENMATTS]

Dickau is no more a veteran than Banks is. He's still pretty green behind the gills. He seems to have a better idea of how to move the ball around than Banks, but I'd prefer a real veteran who we won't have to develop. But, to his credit, Dickau reminds me of a young Mark Price, and that's not too shabby.