No harm, no foul. Danny didn't invest a lot in the gamble, and he lost. Time to move on, get a competent 5 in here and quit trying to make chicken salad out of, uh, something less.
We're 29 games into the season. After rotting on the end of the bench for Golden State, did anyone, including Danny, really expect O'Bryant to contribute for Boston by now?
Yes. Plenty of people in this forum. During the pre-season it was almost consensual he'd be able to contribute right away; just go back to those threads. I mean, I remember reading the question if he'd start over Perkins.
Personally, I still can't see the "talent" and the "skill" people talk about. He's not even good holding the basketball in his hands or setting a pick.
You're right. I phrased my post incorrectly, because in the preaseason a lot of people did assume he would get meaningful minutes immediately. But I never assumed anything, because I knew that I didn't know enough about him to make any judgements. Maybe O'Bryant starting in the preaseason sent the wrong message to people, but looking back at it now, it is obvious that he wasn't going to contribute right away.
Regardless of what the fans thought, you'll have a tough time convincing me that after doing his homework on the kid, Danny thought that he could realistically contribute immediately. Something often overlooked that suppports my argument is that we truly didn't need him to contribute immediately, and Danny knew that as well (27-2 is proof). Danny's smart, and if he wanted a rotation player instead of a project, he would have signed someone else.
I'm not saying that he is or isn't a disappointment (I don't have my hopes up about him), but I'll be shocked if he's cut midseason, because Danny had to have seen him from the start as nothing more than a project.