Author Topic: Not signing Fournier…  (Read 19611 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2021, 11:54:44 PM »

Offline blink

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18076
  • Tommy Points: 1474
Yes, we should have kept him.  He’s on a reasonable contract, and he can play.  He’s fairly one dimensional, but we could really use that one dimension.

Yeah that one dimension, when his shots are falling, is about the most important dimensions you can have.

Honestly the Knicks may be a better spot for EF than the C's.  If Kemba play keeps falling off a cliff, EF might be more happy being a #2 to Randle, versus a #3 to JT/JB.

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2021, 11:55:22 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3141
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
It’s only one game but it’s looking like it may not have been a great move to not resign a reliable 3rd scoring option… even funnier that Fournier is the one that killed them in the end.

Can only hope somebody else steps up or this is going to get ugly. Smart/Schroder are not reliable enough.

Horford is a reliable 3rd scoring option. Team desperately needs his shooting.
He's fairly reliable, but he's also 35 and could decline imminently.

So could Lebron, CP3, Melo, Lowry, Tucker who are all older than Horford.
LeBron is one of the greatest players of all time. CP3 is a top 3-5 PG of all time.

The other 3 you listed all have declined. Lowry has declined a fair bit, while Melo and PJ Tucker are shells of their former selves.

Also, none of those guys you listed are big men.
'23 Historical Draft: Orlando Magic.

PG: Terry Porter (90-91) / Steve Francis (00-01)
SG: Joe Dumars (92-93) / Jeff Hornacek (91-92) / Jerry Stackhouse (00-01)
SF: Brandon Roy (08-09) / Walter Davis (78-79)
PF: Terry Cummings (84-85) / Paul Millsap (15-16)
C: Chris Webber (00-01) / Ralph Sampson (83-84) / Andrew Bogut (09-10)

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #17 on: October 21, 2021, 12:08:54 AM »

Offline Goldstar88

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10773
  • Tommy Points: 1431
It’s only one game but it’s looking like it may not have been a great move to not resign a reliable 3rd scoring option… even funnier that Fournier is the one that killed them in the end.

Can only hope somebody else steps up or this is going to get ugly. Smart/Schroder are not reliable enough.

Horford is a reliable 3rd scoring option. Team desperately needs his shooting.
He's fairly reliable, but he's also 35 and could decline imminently.

So could Lebron, CP3, Melo, Lowry, Tucker who are all older than Horford.
LeBron is one of the greatest players of all time. CP3 is a top 3-5 PG of all time.

The other 3 you listed all have declined. Lowry has declined a fair bit, while Melo and PJ Tucker are shells of their former selves.

Also, none of those guys you listed are big men.

Athletes in general are performing at a high level later into their careers than ever before.  Better science and technology.
Quoting Nick from the now locked Ime thread:
Quote
At some point you have to blame the performance on the court on the players on the court. Every loss is not the coach's fault and every win isn't because of the players.

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #18 on: October 21, 2021, 02:24:00 AM »

Online ozgod

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16889
  • Tommy Points: 1370
It’s only one game but it’s looking like it may not have been a great move to not resign a reliable 3rd scoring option… even funnier that Fournier is the one that killed them in the end.

Can only hope somebody else steps up or this is going to get ugly. Smart/Schroder are not reliable enough.

Horford is a reliable 3rd scoring option. Team desperately needs his shooting.

Horford has only averaged 12-13 points here and that was 2 years ago. We need Schroder to be OKC Schroder. Or even LA Schroder. Otherwise we're going to have a big hole in our team scoring wise, with the loss of both Kemba and Evan. I was hoping Langford + Nesmith combined would be our 4th scorer and give us around 12-15 ppg but we need Schroder to step up. He was abysmal today but it's only one game.
Any odd typos are because I suck at typing on an iPhone :D

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #19 on: October 21, 2021, 05:10:09 AM »

Offline pearljammer10

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13129
  • Tommy Points: 885
1 game or not Fournier can play and gives us something of great need. Giving away a couple draft picks for essentially nothing is a tough pill to swallow.

He would have been great in the starting five (Smart/Fournier/Brown/Tatum/Horford) or would have been great in our second unit as the first or second guy off the bench.

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #20 on: October 21, 2021, 07:47:17 AM »

Offline jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13029
  • Tommy Points: 1762
  • Everybody knows what's best for you
Two things on this:

1) We made Fournier look really good by going under about 5 screens in a row for him.  Credit to him for making the wide open 3s, but man, I don’t understand that.  Know your opponent, especially when he was your teammate 5 months ago.

2) We effectively chose between Richardson and Schröder over Fournier.  Let’s maybe let Richardson play a game?

The pitchforks already seem ready for JRich. The $12M extension and the fact that he is taking time away from Romeo/Nesmith make him the prime candidate for Cs fans to take out all of their frustration.

NYK seemingly overpaid a little for Fournier in FA. If that number had been like $2M/yr less, then he would probably be here right now. I also don't think that would have prevented bringing in Schroder. It's kind-of a whatever - we know who Fournier is as a player and it isn't a star - but we essentially gave the Knicks their starting backcourt for free and, as proven last night, we could definitely use another shooter.

You're right, though, hopefully we can get positive contributions from our two new additions. In another world, Schroder would be getting paid more than Fournier right now.

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #21 on: October 21, 2021, 07:48:55 AM »

Offline boscel33

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2668
  • Tommy Points: 166
If Fournier were giving indications he wasn't re-signing, then this was a great move.  Opened up a 17M TPE that can be used (hopefully). 

Issue I see is, holy crap, what happened to the bench that everyone had been touting.  Zero points from Nesmith and PP and a whole lot of DNP-CD?  I thought we were supposed to be deeper this year?

Yes, I'm not going to over react too much, it's game one, but wow!
"There's sharks and minnows in this world. If you don't know which you are, you ain't a shark."

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #22 on: October 21, 2021, 07:59:33 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34023
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
If Fournier were giving indications he wasn't re-signing, then this was a great move.  Opened up a 17M TPE that can be used (hopefully). 

Issue I see is, holy crap, what happened to the bench that everyone had been touting.  Zero points from Nesmith and PP and a whole lot of DNP-CD?  I thought we were supposed to be deeper this year?

Yes, I'm not going to over react too much, it's game one, but wow!

One starter missing and one main bench player missing.   Both being veterans.  Both having size.   

I think the Celtics played to small with some of the bench units but don't really have another big that can defend off the bench.   

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #23 on: October 21, 2021, 08:09:19 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58670
  • Tommy Points: -25629
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
If Fournier were giving indications he wasn't re-signing, then this was a great move.  Opened up a 17M TPE that can be used (hopefully).

Fournier said that Boston was his first choice.  He would have signed here for the same contract the Knicks gave him. 

Fournier at $17 million is better value than Richardson at $11 million.  But, of course, we could have had both.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #24 on: October 21, 2021, 08:48:52 AM »

Offline Alleyoopster

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1311
  • Tommy Points: 150
Don't understand why Ime kept Langford out of the game while Fournier was having a field day. He has proven to be one of the best perimeter defenders on the team.

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #25 on: October 21, 2021, 09:19:31 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33583
  • Tommy Points: 1544
Boston went to double OT on the road against a team that was a top 4 seed last year in a game where Tatum was 7 of 30 overall and 2 of 15 from 3 and in which Horford and Richardson were unavailable to play.  Let that sink in and remember it is 1 game.  No need to overreact.   
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #26 on: October 21, 2021, 09:26:06 AM »

Offline tonydelk

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1848
  • Tommy Points: 467
Boston went to double OT on the road against a team that was a top 4 seed last year in a game where Tatum was 7 of 30 overall and 2 of 15 from 3 and in which Horford and Richardson were unavailable to play.  Let that sink in and remember it is 1 game.  No need to overreact.   

This.  Also, the C's looked like the better team to me last night.  If Tatum, Nesmith and PP hit their normal percentages the C's win by 20. 

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2021, 09:31:08 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58670
  • Tommy Points: -25629
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Boston went to double OT on the road against a team that was a top 4 seed last year in a game where Tatum was 7 of 30 overall and 2 of 15 from 3 and in which Horford and Richardson were unavailable to play.  Let that sink in and remember it is 1 game.  No need to overreact.   

Do you know who would be helpful to have on nights when Tatum isn’t hitting his shots?

Evan Fournier.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2021, 09:31:15 AM »

Offline footey

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15966
  • Tommy Points: 1833
Two things on this:

1) We made Fournier look really good by going under about 5 screens in a row for him.  Credit to him for making the wide open 3s, but man, I don’t understand that.  Know your opponent, especially when he was your teammate 5 months ago.

2) We effectively chose between Richardson and Schröder over Fournier.  Let’s maybe let Richardson play a game?

I'd take Fournier for Richardson and Schroder in a heartbeat.  And we signed Schroder well after we let Fournier walk, so I don't understand why you would lump him into this.

Re: Not signing Fournier…
« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2021, 09:33:51 AM »

Offline td450

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2330
  • Tommy Points: 254
Before last night, there were a number of stories out there about how poorly Fournier shot in the preseason.

I give a significant amount of credit to Randle. He was able to consistently knock off Boston defenders with picks that were illegal but apparently subtle enough to get away with.

It was a bit worrisome to me that we weren't better prepared for those actions and got caught up so often. You have more time to prep for a 1st game like this than you do normally.