I am still seeing that nothing is official, correct? That he might be waived, there may be on going discussions but nothing official?
In any case, I don't see a fit for Chris Paul on the Celtics. Even if released and willing to sign a vet min, there will be other places more attractive to him. So the Celtics don't need him and he isn't going to want to come here anyway.
I think you're correct that he's got preferable destinations readily available. Heck, one destination would be back to the Suns. The Lakers are obviously out there, too.
As for whether we need him... "Need" isn't the right word, but I expect our offense would be better with him as PG. The defense would suffer. I guess it would depend on which our brain trust wants to emphasize.
I remember in bubble how Brad spoke so glowingly about CP as his Thunder team dismantled Celtics. Spoke of how Paul was such a great communicator on the court.
He's unquestionably one of the best point guards to ever play the game. His lack of postseason success is very (singularly?) peculiar.
Is it? Stockton, Nash, and Paul never won and Kidd and Payton picked their 1 title up long after their prime (they were still important contributors but not the guy). Heck even Oscar's only title came at the end of his career when he ended up with Kareem in Milwaukee. Magic, Curry, and Cousy are the only all time great PG's with more than 2 titles (Thomas and Frazier each have 2). Parker might be the only other HOF PG with more than 2. PG's tend to be small and small guys don't tend to have the great post season success. Cousy ended up with Russell and Magic was built like a PF (or modern center). Curry and Thomas are the only 2 PG's in history to have at least 2 titles as their teams best player and they both only have 2 with that criteria. So Paul not winning a title isn't exactly peculiar for all time great PG's.
I agree with this. I don't believe the Celtics need a "Pure PG" to be successful. Even if you consider Steph Curry, is he really a pure PG? Is his contribution ball handling and distributing the ball, getting the team into the offense? Or is his success related to being the best pure shooter in the history of the game?
Magic Johnson may be the one PG that used traditional PG skills to lead his team to success. So I am not saying it is impossible, just not necessary in general and not necessary for this Celtics team.
I am a proponent of acquiring Paul. I think he'd help in areas of weakness for this team. I was merely commenting on the idea that Paul's lack of post season success was peculiar. That I just didn't agree with.
A few years ago, I looked at every Finals team since the Magic Lakers until Curry's Warriors and going off memory it was something like 5 starting PG's of the two finals teams were all stars that season. I believe it was Payton, Stockton (only 1 of the 2 seasons), Kidd x2 (the NJ years), and 1 season from Parker. I may have missed 1 in the memory, but there weren't many. In the entire history of the league basically Thomas' 2 and Curry's 2 are the only 4 championships where the best player on the title team was smaller than 6'4". Heck the only 2 guys at 6'4" who were or at least arguably were the best player on a title team were DJ and Wade.
Small guys haven't historically mattered much until very recently. However, with the changes to the game, I do think they are now more important