Author Topic: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"  (Read 15274 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #30 on: February 17, 2010, 09:49:40 PM »

Offline celticinorlando

  • John Havlicek
  • ****************************
  • Posts: 28539
  • Tommy Points: 661
  • MASTER OF PANIC
i just dont see anything that screams to me long playoff run for this team. i will always have hope but i just can't see them flipping a second half switch like many expect

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #31 on: February 17, 2010, 09:54:48 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18717
  • Tommy Points: 1818
Well then we can give up hope for this season then.  Rebuilding process going to be interesting.

give me a break... ::)

If the best team in the league didn't just get significantly better I would agree that it's silly to come to such a hasty conclusion.  But unless KG, Ray, and Pierce suddenly start playing like they're 3 years younger than they currently are, the Celtics won't have a real shot at beating CLE in the ECF.  Heck, unless the team starts playing like they're better than an average team, they'll have a tough time getting out of the first round.

I'm just extremely skeptical, given how this team has played for the vast majority of this season, that there's any realistic hope for success this season without a big upgrade.

For the vast majority of this season? Right, I see what the problem is here... it's all in the math, you have trouble with your additions and subtractions. It's like the first 30 games or so haven't counted. Also, the last month or so we've been playing with an incomplete roster, or haven't you noticed? So that suddenly is the undeniable representation of what this team is about? Please.

Of course we're not where we want to be at the moment, but give me a break. I swear, people love drawing up conclusions based on flawed logic, premises, and inaccurate facts.

The first 30 games weren't even that impressive.  They were very good for some of those games, and not so impressive in many others.  We're all looking back on the start of this season as if it was the second coming of '08, but it really wasn't.  The same issues were there, they were just less pronounced because KG was relatively healthy and so was Paul.

Ah, so a team playing with Paul and KG who recently came back from injuries is the are the correct representation of our team?

And it's not that we weren't that impressive. It's that you're missing out on many of the key factors. Firstly, during that portion we also didn't have our complete team, though the main pieces were there. During our tough stretch, which was during the time two of our main guys got injured, some players started stepping up and have continued to do so since.

Tony Allen was a non-factor at the beginning of the season, now he's playing quite well. Rasheed Wallace has just come off his best month with the Celtics, and his last couple of games have been great. Daniels missed a great portion too, and he's just returned has has been very good for us. Davis also missed a good portion, and little by little he's getting into rhythm. And now Nate, who I think is an absolute upgrade of House has been added. So what we have here is a complete functioning bench. Though certainly, we don't know how they'll look now.

As all know, our current problem is with our starters, but surprise surprise I want to point out that Pierce and KG just recently returned from injury and a case can be made that they haven't fully healed from those injuries yet. So is it so hard to imagine that they can return to the level they were at the least playing earlier in the season? I don't see why that's so inconceivable. And now Ray is playing like crap, but he's also nursing some injuries of his own... but na', let's ignore those. And remember during that span, we've seen the emergence of Rondo as great contributor to this team.

It's all about getting into rhythm and putting the correct effort, and all should be well. So suddenly we have a fully functioning starting 5, like we had earlier in the year for the most part, with a bench that's hitting it at all cylinders at the moment. Not much more you can ask for.

Will it be enough to get us the championship? Who knows, but we [dang] well have a very good chance to get it. We still have 2 months or so to go before the playoffs start, a lot can happen from here and there.


Well, you're not saying anything that's particularly radical.  If everything goes right - meaning this team puts it together physically and mentally - they might have a chance. 

Still, the teams in the East are a lot better this year than they were in '08, and even with the addition of Sheed and maybe Nate Robinson, you can't argue that our team is better than '08.  KG, Paul, and Ray might get healthier and start playing better than they have, but it won't be a return to the form of '08.  You can't turn back time - not on a 33 year old's knees. 

Even if everything goes right, this team will have to go on quite a run in the playoffs to have a shot at the championship.

Of course it's nothing radical... what I find radical is the surge of loser mentality that is going around here for some reason. Being realistic has suddenly become a synonym with pessimism, and that's just wrong. Looking forward to a positive outlook is just as realistic, particularly if it's based on more accurate data and taking into account all the facts (many which seem to be ignored by the pessimist for some reason).

Of course we aren't the favorites at the moment, and we'll have a tough time getting to the promise land if we manage to get there, but it's no excuse as far as I'm concerned to you concede the season to a team that is apparently better than us at the moment. Proffesional sports are littered with instances of the best failing when it counts... and last year Cleveland was the best, and they failed miserably. You still need to play the games.

And of course, the case may be that we just don't put it together by the end. There's a chance at that, but when all is taken into consideration, there's simply no reason why one has to believe that to be the logical and expected course of events. At the contrary I think. It's just easy to visualize because it's occurring now. Just like a team that is currently playing well seeming invincible.

It was just 2 years ago that we struggled through the first 2 rounds of the playoffs and everyone started doubting and saying that we weren't going anywhere. Then in a matter of days we put it all together and dominated the rest of the way for the championship. We have ways to go.

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #32 on: February 17, 2010, 10:03:32 PM »

Offline Brickowski

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4207
  • Tommy Points: 423
It appears that Celtics ownership has adopted the canary strategy:  "cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep."

But it could be that other teams were simply not offering the right package.  There were rumored deals that Ainge was entirely justified in rejecting.

Re: David Alrdidge: C's wont trade Ray Allen
« Reply #33 on: February 17, 2010, 10:05:33 PM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6499
  • Tommy Points: 385
Well then we can give up hope for this season then.  Rebuilding process going to be interesting.

give me a break... ::)

If the best team in the league didn't just get significantly better I would agree that it's silly to come to such a hasty conclusion.  But unless KG, Ray, and Pierce suddenly start playing like they're 3 years younger than they currently are, the Celtics won't have a real shot at beating CLE in the ECF.  Heck, unless the team starts playing like they're better than an average team, they'll have a tough time getting out of the first round.

I'm just extremely skeptical, given how this team has played for the vast majority of this season, that there's any realistic hope for success this season without a big upgrade.

What happens if they start playing like they're three months younger, like when we were 23-5?

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2010, 10:05:45 PM »

Offline jdpapa3

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3884
  • Tommy Points: 85
I will not throw stones at ownership if they turned down trades that involved paying 15 million to Jamison when he is 35 or 10 million to Hinrich, who is an average NBA player.

We don't know the trades out there, so to throw ownership under the bus is ridiculously unfair.

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2010, 10:06:31 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18717
  • Tommy Points: 1818
It appears that Celtics ownership has adopted the canary strategy:  "cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep."

But it could be that other teams were simply not offering the right package.  There were rumored deals that Ainge was entirely justified in rejecting.

I just think that we didn't have enough enticing assets to offer alongside Ray for the players that Ainge actually wanted. It was pretty clear that Martin and Iggy were his main targets, and absent of either of those, I don't think there's a much out there that will give us a better chance to win this year and give us future talent.

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #36 on: February 17, 2010, 10:08:15 PM »

Offline Brickowski

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4207
  • Tommy Points: 423
I will not throw stones at ownership if they turned down trades that involved paying 15 million to Jamison when he is 35 or 10 million to Hinrich, who is an average NBA player.

We don't know the trades out there, so to throw ownership under the bus is ridiculously unfair.

Ownership couldn't see this coming for the last month and a half?  Who else are you going to throw under the bus, the fans? The media?

It's ownershp's bus and they deserve to have tire tracks all over their backs.

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #37 on: February 17, 2010, 10:08:21 PM »

Offline PosImpos

  • NCE
  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12383
  • Tommy Points: 903
  • Rondo = Good
It appears that Celtics ownership has adopted the canary strategy:  "cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep."

But it could be that other teams were simply not offering the right package.  There were rumored deals that Ainge was entirely justified in rejecting.

Can you blame ownership for being cheap?  The only rumored deal that seemed good for us was the Butler + Jamison for Ray trade, but that was a long shot.

Without a healthy KG, it's not worth it for the Celtics to take on long term money.  There doesn't seem to be much of a guarantee that KG will ever be 100% again, so ownership didn't sign off on taking on a bad contract like Nocioni or Dalembert.  Totally understandable.
Never forget the Champs of '08, or the gutsy warriors of '10.

"I know you all wanna win, but you gotta do it TOGETHER!"
- Doc Rivers

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #38 on: February 17, 2010, 10:09:50 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30859
  • Tommy Points: 1327
It appears that Celtics ownership has adopted the canary strategy:  "cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep."

But it could be that other teams were simply not offering the right package.  There were rumored deals that Ainge was entirely justified in rejecting.

Can you blame ownership for being cheap?  The only rumored deal that seemed good for us was the Butler + Jamison for Ray trade, but that was a long shot.

Without a healthy KG, it's not worth it for the Celtics to take on long term money.  There doesn't seem to be much of a guarantee that KG will ever be 100% again, so ownership didn't sign off on taking on a bad contract like Nocioni or Dalembert.  Totally understandable.
Philly refused to trade AI2 for Amar'e, we never had a shot of getting Iggy.

Likewise I don't think the Martin + Nocioni deal was ever even considered by the Kings.

Re: David Alrdidge: C's wont trade Ray Allen
« Reply #39 on: February 17, 2010, 10:10:51 PM »

Offline PosImpos

  • NCE
  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12383
  • Tommy Points: 903
  • Rondo = Good
Well then we can give up hope for this season then.  Rebuilding process going to be interesting.

give me a break... ::)

If the best team in the league didn't just get significantly better I would agree that it's silly to come to such a hasty conclusion.  But unless KG, Ray, and Pierce suddenly start playing like they're 3 years younger than they currently are, the Celtics won't have a real shot at beating CLE in the ECF.  Heck, unless the team starts playing like they're better than an average team, they'll have a tough time getting out of the first round.

I'm just extremely skeptical, given how this team has played for the vast majority of this season, that there's any realistic hope for success this season without a big upgrade.

What happens if they start playing like they're three months younger, like when we were 23-5?

Then they'll make the ECF.
Never forget the Champs of '08, or the gutsy warriors of '10.

"I know you all wanna win, but you gotta do it TOGETHER!"
- Doc Rivers

Re: David Alrdidge: C's wont trade Ray Allen
« Reply #40 on: February 17, 2010, 10:12:27 PM »

Offline Roy Hobbs

  • In The Rafters
  • The Natural
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33333
  • Tommy Points: 6430
  • Doc could learn a thing or two from Norman Dale
Well then we can give up hope for this season then.  Rebuilding process going to be interesting.

give me a break... ::)

If the best team in the league didn't just get significantly better I would agree that it's silly to come to such a hasty conclusion.  But unless KG, Ray, and Pierce suddenly start playing like they're 3 years younger than they currently are, the Celtics won't have a real shot at beating CLE in the ECF.  Heck, unless the team starts playing like they're better than an average team, they'll have a tough time getting out of the first round.

I'm just extremely skeptical, given how this team has played for the vast majority of this season, that there's any realistic hope for success this season without a big upgrade.

What happens if they start playing like they're three months younger, like when we were 23-5?

Then they'll make the ECF.

If this team plays like they did when they were at their peak this season, no team will touch them, including Cleveland.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Portland CrotoNats:  2009 CB Draft Champions

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2010, 10:12:34 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47663
  • Tommy Points: 2411
It appears that Celtics ownership has adopted the canary strategy:  "cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep."

But it could be that other teams were simply not offering the right package.  There were rumored deals that Ainge was entirely justified in rejecting.

Can you blame ownership for being cheap?  The only rumored deal that seemed good for us was the Butler + Jamison for Ray trade, but that was a long shot.

Without a healthy KG, it's not worth it for the Celtics to take on long term money.  There doesn't seem to be much of a guarantee that KG will ever be 100% again, so ownership didn't sign off on taking on a bad contract like Nocioni or Dalembert.  Totally understandable.
Philly refused to trade AI2 for Amar'e, we never had a shot of getting Iggy.

Likewise I don't think the Martin + Nocioni deal was ever even considered by the Kings.
Very likely that Ainge could have gotten Jamison for Ray Allen + a first round pick with an agreement that Washington would buyout Ray.

The rest of the reported trades, I agree, they weren't ever available.

I also think Jason Richardson could have been had for Ray Allen.

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #42 on: February 17, 2010, 10:13:05 PM »

Offline PosImpos

  • NCE
  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12383
  • Tommy Points: 903
  • Rondo = Good
It appears that Celtics ownership has adopted the canary strategy:  "cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep."

But it could be that other teams were simply not offering the right package.  There were rumored deals that Ainge was entirely justified in rejecting.

Can you blame ownership for being cheap?  The only rumored deal that seemed good for us was the Butler + Jamison for Ray trade, but that was a long shot.

Without a healthy KG, it's not worth it for the Celtics to take on long term money.  There doesn't seem to be much of a guarantee that KG will ever be 100% again, so ownership didn't sign off on taking on a bad contract like Nocioni or Dalembert.  Totally understandable.
Philly refused to trade AI2 for Amar'e, we never had a shot of getting Iggy.

Likewise I don't think the Martin + Nocioni deal was ever even considered by the Kings.

Those deals might never have been rumored - or discussed - because ownership wasn' t willing to take on those contracts.

In any case, my point is that if Danny wasn't able to pull off a major trade because ownership wouldn't allow him to take on a bad contract, you can't blame the ownership.  They had very good reason not to think paying that extra money over the next few years would actually be worth it.
Never forget the Champs of '08, or the gutsy warriors of '10.

"I know you all wanna win, but you gotta do it TOGETHER!"
- Doc Rivers

Re: David Alrdidge: C's wont trade Ray Allen
« Reply #43 on: February 17, 2010, 10:14:11 PM »

Offline jdpapa3

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3884
  • Tommy Points: 85
Well then we can give up hope for this season then.  Rebuilding process going to be interesting.

give me a break... ::)

If the best team in the league didn't just get significantly better I would agree that it's silly to come to such a hasty conclusion.  But unless KG, Ray, and Pierce suddenly start playing like they're 3 years younger than they currently are, the Celtics won't have a real shot at beating CLE in the ECF.  Heck, unless the team starts playing like they're better than an average team, they'll have a tough time getting out of the first round.

I'm just extremely skeptical, given how this team has played for the vast majority of this season, that there's any realistic hope for success this season without a big upgrade.

What happens if they start playing like they're three months younger, like when we were 23-5?

Then they'll make the ECF.

If this team plays like they did when they were at their peak this season, no team will touch them, including Cleveland.

Right, and I don't see why this is such a farfetched scenario for most around here.

Re: David Aldridge: "C's wont trade Ray Allen"
« Reply #44 on: February 17, 2010, 10:14:44 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30859
  • Tommy Points: 1327
It appears that Celtics ownership has adopted the canary strategy:  "cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep."

But it could be that other teams were simply not offering the right package.  There were rumored deals that Ainge was entirely justified in rejecting.

Can you blame ownership for being cheap?  The only rumored deal that seemed good for us was the Butler + Jamison for Ray trade, but that was a long shot.

Without a healthy KG, it's not worth it for the Celtics to take on long term money.  There doesn't seem to be much of a guarantee that KG will ever be 100% again, so ownership didn't sign off on taking on a bad contract like Nocioni or Dalembert.  Totally understandable.
Philly refused to trade AI2 for Amar'e, we never had a shot of getting Iggy.

Likewise I don't think the Martin + Nocioni deal was ever even considered by the Kings.
Very likely that Ainge could have gotten Jamison for Ray Allen + a first round pick with an agreement that Washington would buyout Ray.

The rest of the trades, I agree, they weren't ever available.
Yeah Ainge could have pulled the trigger on that deal.

I don't think anyone should blame him for refusing to pay yet another 30+ PF a ton of money. If they could have moved Rasheed for an expiring deal maybe you could justify it. But that is/was impossible obviously.