Tony Allen is a great fail-safe for Posey if he leaves. Tough not to make that qualifying offer, Danny should make it.
Personally, I hope he doesn't.
Tony Allen is overrated by many on this board. I like his defense and his athleticism, but his turnover rate and low basketball IQ is the spitting image of the type of player that gets overpaid in free agency.
I'd rather pursue Michael Peitrus, Corey Maggette, or Josh Childress as a fail safe for Posey with Eddie House getting a little raise via non Bird Rights to keep the LLE.
Ditto, like Gerald Green. Time to move on from Tony Allen.
And rely on Giddens? Do we truely want to rely solely on a rookie as the back-up SG? What makes us all think that Giddens won't have the same dribbling problems Tony had, in fact, even more? Why the sudden relief to get Gidden so that we can get rid of Tony? I'll say it again, he shouldn't be the replacement of Tony... somebody else should, Giddens should be an addition to this person or an addition to Tony.
Too many here are basing their opinions too much on a year of recovery (funny how many didn't expect anything from him last year prior to the season, and then were disapointed in the way he played), a year we he played a ton out of position a position that he had rarely played prior to the season, a position that uses very little of his strengths and magnifies his weaknesses... did you guys really expect for him to perform any better than he did?
I'll say this, he was quite good through the playoffs, in my opinion, in the short stretches that we used him. Nothing spectacular, but usable. From what I remember he only looked bad against Detroit and it was because he had trouble chasing Hamilton around... but that's simply a tough assignment for anyone, Posey looked like a rookie trying to defend him too. Pruitt could be the answer to him. But other than that, he was quite solid in his short minutes off the bench through the playoffs.
And when I start considering how his turnover rate more than doubled when he played PG over SG, it tells me that we're unfairly judging him upon a performance that is a bit irrelevant to his value to play his real position.
I hope that our confidence in Pruitt is warranted, he's the X factor here to me... but we shouldn't be content with just keeping Giddens, even if we simply are able to bring back House and Posey. One injury to one of our wings or guards, and there'll be cause for concern... Tony could've alleviated that. He's affordable, and most importantly, we could've had him as opposed to many of the players we all like in the free-agency.
Hopefully, for me, this just all means that Danny wants to get him for cheaper.
I agree. I hope Danny re-signs Tony for cheap. I'm really not comfortable counting on rookies to contribute to a championship team. Giddens might contribute, but I wouldn't count on it.
Exactly how much did Tony Allen contribute to this team winning a championship this year? Remove Tony from last year's equation and the Celtics in all probability still win 66 games or at the very least 64 games and still win the championship in the same amount of postseason games.
I have no problem turning over the responsibilities Tony Allen contributed to this team last year over to a rookie to see if he can match or exceed those accomplishments. Because quite honestly, those accomplishments didn't go a long way towards putting the Celtics in the championship Rolling Rally they had.
If Giddens falls flat on his face we have still saved the team millions of dollars and probably are exactly where we would have been if Tony was still on the team.
Come on guys, we are talking about the 6th or 7th man off the bench after House, Posey, Baby, Powe, Pollard and in Pollard's place later on Cassell and Brown.
If Tony had never been hurt he may have been already signed long term and a part of this team with very special skills. But his injuries ended his chances of coming back here. It's unfortunate because his injuries never allowed him the time he needed to grow his game. He was always playing catch up.
The Celtics in the luxury tax area don't have the time to continue to be patient with him any longer. It's better business to invest less money in a rookie that has a higher potential return on the investment at this point. Especially a guy that at best will be a 10th or 11th man on the roster.
The thing is that I could care less about the business side of it because it really doesn't concern the ability to add players to our team. It only concerns the owners pocket and their willingness, but people have little control over that... I'm interested in putting the best team together that's possible. Do I understand the owner's position? Sure. But it doesn't mean it is the right decision as far as the roster is concerned.
His value is not in the post season, his value is in the season and as insurance during the playoffs. The thing is that Giddens can't take over the responsabilities of Tony, he simply can't because Tony was forced to play pointguard at times through the season. Do you guys really envision Giddens doing that?
And I've said it before, keeping Tony in addition to Giddens is the could be the key of running an effective small ball line-up in my opinion.
The fact that you guys are taking for granted to is that our team was very fortunate to be healthy through most of the season and during the playoffs. We can't take that for granted... it would be a big mistake.
I agree we do take health for granted. But, come on BC, you know Tony Allen shouldn't be anywhere near the point guard position for this team.
Danny Ainge purposely didn't get a true PG last year during the season to force Doc into using and developing Rondo. That's why Doc was forced on occasion to go with Allen as an emergency PG. But that is not going to happen this year. No way, no how.
Rondo has developed and proven he deserves 35-38 MPG. House and/or another backup PG will be playing the point with Rondo. If Tony was returning he was returning as a 2 and maybe defender of 3s. He wasn't going to get a sniff of the PG position anymore.
Giddens for better or worse is our new "Tony Allen".
And as for not caring about the money end and wanting only the best team, I feel the same way. But if giving Allen money that is better spent elsewhere retaining a player or attaining a player that we be the 1st or 2nd guy off the bench, then those money matters now become important. We don't know what instructions Danny has from the ownership regarding payroll. But Danny's first priority has to be Posey and House or their replacements. Since Giddens is guaranteed a contract no matter what, he's your Allen replacement and Allen's money will be spent where it is better suited.
Sorry, that's just NBA nowadays.
Besides do you want the best team no matter the cost or Tony Allen no matter the cost? For what a qualifying offer would have cost to guarantee Tony being here next year the Celtics could get a much better player on the open market.
Nor would I want Tony playing the PG. But, that he's capable of playing it is valuable... again in case of injuries AND in when unique situations arise. Other than that he can be on the bench or play his SG role when needed.
Do we like KG playing center? No. But that he can play it is of high value to this team. Now, not saying that Tony is as effective as KG is playing PG respectively, but it is useful to have him around in certain situations.
Danny purposely not getting a true PG during the season is crap and you know it. We didn't have the resources to get someone we liked, and everyone since November knew what the plan was, wait for a Cassell buy-out.
But, we all want Posey back. We get Posey back. We're in pretty much the same situation as last year, with little resources to bring players in. We want this, we want that... we can't have all of it nor afford it. We can have Tony, as a utility man of sorts and he should be quite cheap. It's a no brainer.
But hey, you bring me a big PG that can play the 2 too in addition to Giddens, and hey bye bye Tony with little regret. But until that happens, Tony should be the one to be here... but I also question what type of player we'll get for cheap and if he's truely a better option than Tony.
As for the qualifying offer thing, you know I don't care about that to tell you the truth. I don't mind the team not offering it to him much, it makes sense in a way. I just hate the notion the he's incapable of helping the team or that he's useless and that we're better off without him because we're not. If Danny figures he can get him for cheaper, I'm all up for that. But Giddens shouldn't be his replacement, someone else should... I'm just having a very hard time finding a suitable replacement that we can afford. Let's say we bring in Roger Mason as you want, then sure I would be more comfortable letting Tony go... but I'm quite skeptical of us being able to get him.
And I'll bring it up again, I think our small ball lineup can use Tony in there or at the least an athletic 2 or a great shooter that can defend together with Giddens. You pair those two with Posey, Rondo, and Garnett, and in theory we should have a highly energetic and athletic team, that can defend and rebound. That's a great unit to have.
Topic: Is DAnny making a qualifying offer to Tony tonight or not?? (Read 19596 times)