Author Topic: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?  (Read 63397 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #135 on: March 01, 2009, 09:22:04 AM »

Offline cordobes

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3556
  • Tommy Points: 576
  • Basketball is like chess, only without the dice
What's the proper way of taking the comments? Getting Mikki Moore had nothing to do with POB and we're never getting that 2nd rounder. I think you're just trying to make the POB's debacle look better.

The cost of POB, besides the money he was paid and the time and effort from the personnel, was even bigger because had Ainge signed a serviceable center instead of POB - like, say, Elson or Skinner, who are not very good but still somewhat better versions of Moore - he wouldn't have been in such a need of pulling the trigger once Moore became available and we'd still have a shot at a player like Smith or Gooden.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #136 on: March 01, 2009, 09:28:26 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18717
  • Tommy Points: 1818
What's the proper way of taking the comments? Getting Mikki Moore had nothing to do with POB and we're never getting that 2nd rounder. I think you're just trying to make the POB's debacle look better.

The cost of POB, besides the money he was paid and the time and effort from the personnel, was even bigger because had Ainge signed a serviceable center instead of POB - like, say, Elson or Skinner, who are not very good but still somewhat better versions of Moore - he wouldn't have been in such a need of pulling the trigger once Moore became available and we'd still have a shot at a player like Smith or Gooden.

By your comments earlier you thought that I had said that we acquired Moore because of POB, which wasn't what I was saying (meant). No matter the way you look at it, Ainge managed to move POB and bring in Moore... doesn't really matter how they came about, just that he did so. That's the bottom line.

The other problem with many of you are saying, is that you're throwing a ton of assumptions of people we could've gotten or people Ainge should've signed, without even knowing if they were realistic options for him and at what price.

If we had signed Elso, like you put it, we would at the moment be in the same situation we're currently at with the Smith and Gooden situation. Our roster would be identical... just substitute Moore for Elson. So your point, in this regard, doesn't mean much.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2009, 09:46:36 AM by BudweiserCeltic »

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #137 on: March 01, 2009, 09:29:20 AM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255
If it's true that we don't have to money to compete with SAS and CLE and LA for the players that could come available, then doesn't that call into question the whole idea to use "buy-outs" as the way to fill out our bench....

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #138 on: March 01, 2009, 09:30:54 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18717
  • Tommy Points: 1818
If it's true that we don't have to money to compete with SAS and CLE and LA for the players that could come available, then doesn't that call into question the whole idea to use "buy-outs" as the way to fill out our bench....

We already filled out our bench. What's your point?

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #139 on: March 01, 2009, 09:41:35 AM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255
If it's true that we don't have to money to compete with SAS and CLE and LA for the players that could come available, then doesn't that call into question the whole idea to use "buy-outs" as the way to fill out our bench....

We already filled out our bench. What's your point?

but we filled it out with a player that is not an impact player when impact players seem to be coming available...

so first the story was "there will be impact players available during the season and we'll grab them then..." and now the story is  "oh, we can't compete for those players, there's too many other teams that will beat us out..."

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #140 on: March 01, 2009, 09:43:07 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18717
  • Tommy Points: 1818
So Marbury is a nobody? We can't have them all you know. It's the same as free-agency... you use your financial means and you're left out of the competition for the rest of it.

And I don't know if the story was "someone of impact" or simply "improving the team". And I'm sure that against teams like the Lakers, where Baby is really of little use, Moore would be something of an impact.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #141 on: March 01, 2009, 09:47:55 AM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255
So Marbury is a nobody? We can't have them all you know. It's the same as free-agency... you use your financial means and you're left out of the competition for the rest of it.

Marbury isn't, but we needed an impact big and they seem to be coming available.

and now all the people who were saying that we should wait till the mid-season buyouts are arguing that we can't possibly compete for them....

we still have no backup 3 and no impact big....

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #142 on: March 01, 2009, 09:49:09 AM »

Offline cordobes

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3556
  • Tommy Points: 576
  • Basketball is like chess, only without the dice
What's the proper way of taking the comments? Getting Mikki Moore had nothing to do with POB and we're never getting that 2nd rounder. I think you're just trying to make the POB's debacle look better.

The cost of POB, besides the money he was paid and the time and effort from the personnel, was even bigger because had Ainge signed a serviceable center instead of POB - like, say, Elson or Skinner, who are not very good but still somewhat better versions of Moore - he wouldn't have been in such a need of pulling the trigger once Moore became available and we'd still have a shot at a player like Smith or Gooden.

By your comments earlier you thought that I had said that we acquired Moore because of POB, which wasn't what I was saying. No matter the way you look at it, Ainge managed to move POB and bring in Moore... doesn't really matter how they came about, just that he did so. That's the bottom line.

The other problem with many of you are saying, is that you're throwing a ton of assumptions of people we could've gotten or people Ainge should've signed, without even knowing if they were realistic options for him and at what price.

If we had signed Elso, like you put it, we would at the moment be in the same situation we're currently at with the Smith and Gooden situation. Our roster would be identical... just substitute Moore for Elson. So your point, in this regard, doesn't mean much.

You said Ainge "CONVERTED" POB into Moore and a 2nd rounder. Not true.

Yeah, having Elson or Skinner over Moore would be the worst case scenario. It's a better situation than the one we're now, especially considering that the said player would have a training camp and the entire season to mesh with the team, not just a couple of months (plus, he'd help us in the entire reg. season). Plus, it'd have saved some money, that could be spent on other things (I think that a guy who sings for the minimun with the Clippers would also sing for the minimum with the Celtics, especially considering he'd have some minutes available to play).

And it'd be easier to drop him now and sign Gooden/Smith if they become available (there's no way Ainge can now fire Moore when he just arrived, agents wouldn't like that).

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #143 on: March 01, 2009, 10:07:55 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18717
  • Tommy Points: 1818
What's the proper way of taking the comments? Getting Mikki Moore had nothing to do with POB and we're never getting that 2nd rounder. I think you're just trying to make the POB's debacle look better.

The cost of POB, besides the money he was paid and the time and effort from the personnel, was even bigger because had Ainge signed a serviceable center instead of POB - like, say, Elson or Skinner, who are not very good but still somewhat better versions of Moore - he wouldn't have been in such a need of pulling the trigger once Moore became available and we'd still have a shot at a player like Smith or Gooden.

By your comments earlier you thought that I had said that we acquired Moore because of POB, which wasn't what I was saying. No matter the way you look at it, Ainge managed to move POB and bring in Moore... doesn't really matter how they came about, just that he did so. That's the bottom line.

The other problem with many of you are saying, is that you're throwing a ton of assumptions of people we could've gotten or people Ainge should've signed, without even knowing if they were realistic options for him and at what price.

If we had signed Elso, like you put it, we would at the moment be in the same situation we're currently at with the Smith and Gooden situation. Our roster would be identical... just substitute Moore for Elson. So your point, in this regard, doesn't mean much.

You said Ainge "CONVERTED" POB into Moore and a 2nd rounder. Not true.

Which is why you took things too literally. Whatever, let's move on from this. As I said, bottom line is that POB's roster spot is now Moores, regardless of how it came about.

Quote
Yeah, having Elson or Skinner over Moore would be the worst case scenario. It's a better situation than the one we're now, especially considering that the said player would have a training camp and the entire season to mesh with the team, not just a couple of months (plus, he'd help us in the entire reg. season). Plus, it'd have saved some money, that could be spent on other things (I think that a guy who sings for the minimun with the Clippers would also sing for the minimum with the Celtics, especially considering he'd have some minutes available to play).

And it'd be easier to drop him now and sign Gooden/Smith if they become available (there's no way Ainge can now fire Moore when he just arrived, agents wouldn't like that).

As far as I can tell Elson wasn't signed to a minimum contract, so I don't think we would've saved anything. He signed a two year 3.4m contract with the bucks. In fact, it would've diminished our chances of getting other players... let me know if I'm wrong though.

I like Brian, always liked him... but are we really going to bunch our panties over him? Seriously. I'd take Moore over Skinner anyways. Also, Skinner has ties with the Clipper franchise, so who knows whats on his mind. Also, if we're talking about money, Brian's minimum salary is higher than POB's.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #144 on: March 01, 2009, 10:16:31 AM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255

As far as I can tell Elson wasn't signed to a minimum contract, so I don't think we would've saved anything. He signed a two year 3.4m contract with the bucks. In fact, it would've diminished our chances of getting other players... let me know if I'm wrong though.

I like Brian, always liked him... but are we really going to bunch our panties over him? Seriously. I'd take Moore over Skinner anyways. Also, Skinner has ties with the Clipper franchise, so who knows whats on his mind. Also, if we're talking about money, Brian's minimum salary is higher than POB's.

the problem Bud is the expectations...If all you wanted out of the Moore signing was someone "better than POB" or like many have said "better than nothing", then make the signing in the off-season...

the whole reason to hold out till now was to get better players because they all would jump at the chance to play for the defending champs.

but now we are bowing out of the process because we can possibly compete for them....

my argument is: we can get guys that are "better than nothing", but why bow out of the process to get the impact guys when that was the whole strategy to begin with...

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #145 on: March 01, 2009, 10:19:06 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18717
  • Tommy Points: 1818

As far as I can tell Elson wasn't signed to a minimum contract, so I don't think we would've saved anything. He signed a two year 3.4m contract with the bucks. In fact, it would've diminished our chances of getting other players... let me know if I'm wrong though.

I like Brian, always liked him... but are we really going to bunch our panties over him? Seriously. I'd take Moore over Skinner anyways. Also, Skinner has ties with the Clipper franchise, so who knows whats on his mind. Also, if we're talking about money, Brian's minimum salary is higher than POB's.

the problem Bud is the expectations...

Well, I suggest you manage your expectations a bit better.

I like Moore, so I don't see this as a "we simply got someone better than POB".

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #146 on: March 01, 2009, 10:21:11 AM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255

As far as I can tell Elson wasn't signed to a minimum contract, so I don't think we would've saved anything. He signed a two year 3.4m contract with the bucks. In fact, it would've diminished our chances of getting other players... let me know if I'm wrong though.

I like Brian, always liked him... but are we really going to bunch our panties over him? Seriously. I'd take Moore over Skinner anyways. Also, Skinner has ties with the Clipper franchise, so who knows whats on his mind. Also, if we're talking about money, Brian's minimum salary is higher than POB's.

the problem Bud is the expectations...

Well, I suggest you manage your expectations a bit better.

I like Moore, so I don't see this as a "we simply got someone better than POB".

they're not my expectations they're the expectations of the plan to wait for bought out players...


Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #147 on: March 01, 2009, 10:25:51 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18717
  • Tommy Points: 1818

As far as I can tell Elson wasn't signed to a minimum contract, so I don't think we would've saved anything. He signed a two year 3.4m contract with the bucks. In fact, it would've diminished our chances of getting other players... let me know if I'm wrong though.

I like Brian, always liked him... but are we really going to bunch our panties over him? Seriously. I'd take Moore over Skinner anyways. Also, Skinner has ties with the Clipper franchise, so who knows whats on his mind. Also, if we're talking about money, Brian's minimum salary is higher than POB's.

the problem Bud is the expectations...

Well, I suggest you manage your expectations a bit better.

I like Moore, so I don't see this as a "we simply got someone better than POB".

they're not my expectations they're the expectations of the plan to wait for bought out players...



No. The expectations of the "plan to wait for bought out players" is to fill our roster with people that can help us at cheap prices. Any more than that, is simply being hopeful.

We got Marbury and we got Moore very cheap. We did VERY good.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #148 on: March 01, 2009, 10:29:54 AM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255

As far as I can tell Elson wasn't signed to a minimum contract, so I don't think we would've saved anything. He signed a two year 3.4m contract with the bucks. In fact, it would've diminished our chances of getting other players... let me know if I'm wrong though.

I like Brian, always liked him... but are we really going to bunch our panties over him? Seriously. I'd take Moore over Skinner anyways. Also, Skinner has ties with the Clipper franchise, so who knows whats on his mind. Also, if we're talking about money, Brian's minimum salary is higher than POB's.

the problem Bud is the expectations...

Well, I suggest you manage your expectations a bit better.

I like Moore, so I don't see this as a "we simply got someone better than POB".

they're not my expectations they're the expectations of the plan to wait for bought out players...



No. The expectations of the "plan to wait for bought out players" is to fill our roster with people that can help us at cheap prices. Any more than that, is simply being hopeful.

We got Marbury and we got Moore very cheap. We did VERY good.

we could have gotten players just as cheap in the off season.

the plan was to get impact players that are released by teams trying to save money and players looking to make a run at a Title.

it's great that you like Moore. Some people liked Anderson. I like Pollard. There are a bunch of players that each of us like...

the plan was to nab impact players that weren't available in the off season...

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #149 on: March 01, 2009, 10:34:29 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
If it's true that we don't have to money to compete with SAS and CLE and LA for the players that could come available, then doesn't that call into question the whole idea to use "buy-outs" as the way to fill out our bench....

  Present evidence not withstanding, of course. Are you arguing that it was unlikely to have worked after it worked?