We NEED to resign Powe and Baby...

[Cman]

We'e not going to spend - I suspect - the kind of money it will take to sign both of them. And we've got to find a competent backup wing.

I wouldn't hold my breath about the wing.  They may feel that the combination of a healthy Tony Allen, and Scalabrine, plus Walker with a year under his belt might be enough to hold down the fort.    That's why this time Walker is getting right now is so important.  He likely won't see the floor much in the playoffs this year, but they are evaluating him to see if he will be ready for a bigger role next year.

Really a poor plan, then, IMHO. The Allen experiment has failed; time to move on. Not sure how you can count on Scal with the concussions. Walker is the only part of that trifecta that I see with ANY potential to morph into a useable wing.

And next year's unlikely for him; he's still a kid who should have stayed in college.

This becomes a "window maximization" issue for the Celtics in the now, and I'd submit they don't have a workable option at the wing for next season.

I don't disagree, but I don't know if they have much of a choice, unless a better option is willing to come for the vet minimum.

The fact is, the C's will have a greater need up front (especially if they don't bring back Powe AND Davis), and possibly at PG (if they decide Pruitt isn't the answer next year), and they already have too much money tied up in the wings.

Now, if they are able to make a trade, where they are not taking on significantly more money, I think they will jump on it.  But I think their first priority in the FA market will be going after an upgrade up front to replace Davis or Powe (Wallace, Zaza, etc). 

Of course if Scal's injury doesn't get better, and he ends up being out for next year, or retiring (they won't admit it, but I think its a legit possibility), they may be more willing to throw a little more money at a wing, because of the insurance money, but I just don't think its a top priority.

Interesting point about Scal's injury and potential retirement.  If there is a good possibility he will retire because of injury, his contract could be a valuable trading chip in the offseason.  For example, Tony Allen + Scals to Charlotte for Raja Bell might start to look more appealing to Charlotte.

In short, if the Cs were able to trade Allen + Scalabrine for a quality backup wing, sign a quality backup big man (Zaza, McDyess) and keep Eddie House and one of Leon Powe or BBD, then I think they would have a very productive off season.  Other pieces can be filled in with vet min contracts (eg: for a vet backup PG or vet backup big).

[Mr October]

Could the C's pay 3 years $9mil for each (Powe and Baby), or would they only be able to pay one of them?

They COULD pay them both, without having to use any exceptions.  They could pay Powe any amount up to the max (they have full bird rights on him), and Davis, any amount up to the MLE (they have early bird rights on him).

The issue of course is can they afford the actual dollar amounts.  Given the economy, and the fact they are in luxury tax land, I don't expect them to go that high for them.  In fact, I doubt they go much higher than $3 million for BOTH of them combined, unless they do not plan on using the MLE.

If we have to pick between reisginging both powe and davis; or using the MLE on someone else - I'll easily let one of our undersized backup forwards go. I'd rather get Sheed, McDyess, etc.

I'll pretty much keep the cheaper of the 2 (powe/davis).

[Bankshot]

Could the C's pay 3 years $9mil for each (Powe and Baby), or would they only be able to pay one of them?

They COULD pay them both, without having to use any exceptions.  They could pay Powe any amount up to the max (they have full bird rights on him), and Davis, any amount up to the MLE (they have early bird rights on him).

The issue of course is can they afford the actual dollar amounts.  Given the economy, and the fact they are in luxury tax land, I don't expect them to go that high for them.  In fact, I doubt they go much higher than $3 million for BOTH of them combined, unless they do not plan on using the MLE.

If we have to pick between reisginging both powe and davis; or using the MLE on someone else - I'll easily let one of our undersized backup forwards go. I'd rather get Sheed, McDyess, etc.

I'll pretty much keep the cheaper of the 2 (powe/davis).

I prefer the best fit for the team rather than the cheaper player.  Hopefully the player that fits better takes a reasonable deal.

[wdleehi]

Could the C's pay 3 years $9mil for each (Powe and Baby), or would they only be able to pay one of them?

They COULD pay them both, without having to use any exceptions.  They could pay Powe any amount up to the max (they have full bird rights on him), and Davis, any amount up to the MLE (they have early bird rights on him).

The issue of course is can they afford the actual dollar amounts.  Given the economy, and the fact they are in luxury tax land, I don't expect them to go that high for them.  In fact, I doubt they go much higher than $3 million for BOTH of them combined, unless they do not plan on using the MLE.

If we have to pick between reisginging both powe and davis; or using the MLE on someone else - I'll easily let one of our undersized backup forwards go. I'd rather get Sheed, McDyess, etc.

I'll pretty much keep the cheaper of the 2 (powe/davis).

I prefer the best fit for the team rather than the cheaper player.  Hopefully the player that fits better takes a reasonable deal.

I think they both fit, so I am on board with the cheaper of the two if it allows the Celtics to use a little more money somewhere else.

[xmuscularghandix]

Could the C's pay 3 years $9mil for each (Powe and Baby), or would they only be able to pay one of them?

They COULD pay them both, without having to use any exceptions.  They could pay Powe any amount up to the max (they have full bird rights on him), and Davis, any amount up to the MLE (they have early bird rights on him).

The issue of course is can they afford the actual dollar amounts.  Given the economy, and the fact they are in luxury tax land, I don't expect them to go that high for them.  In fact, I doubt they go much higher than $3 million for BOTH of them combined, unless they do not plan on using the MLE.

If we have to pick between reisginging both powe and davis; or using the MLE on someone else - I'll easily let one of our undersized backup forwards go. I'd rather get Sheed, McDyess, etc.

I'll pretty much keep the cheaper of the 2 (powe/davis).

I prefer the best fit for the team rather than the cheaper player.  Hopefully the player that fits better takes a reasonable deal.

I think they both fit, so I am on board with the cheaper of the two if it allows the Celtics to use a little more money somewhere else.

they both add different things but are both valuable, i'd say Baby though.

[Fan from VT]

First, I know Offense isn't everything. I understand that defense is a major part of the game. However, I do feel that on this board, defense has entered the "so frequently stated that it's underrated that it's become overrated" stage. That said, in these Powe vs. Davis debates, people often state that Powe has "an edge" in "post offense," but Davis's "edge" in "defense" makes up for that. Do people fully understand the difference in offensive efficiency between these two players? I just need to point out that other NBA players in Powe's offensive efficiency range are: Richard Hamilton, Ben Gordon, Brad Miller, Rashard Lewis and John Salmons, while other NBA players in Davis's range are: Telfair, Ollie, Reggie Evans, Mardy Collins and Mike James. So I ask you: If you can only keep one player, Powe or Davis, is the questionable and debatable difference in defense between Powe and Davis worth the difference between Rashard Lewis and Kevin Ollie on offense?

[BillfromBoston]

We'e not going to spend - I suspect - the kind of money it will take to sign both of them. And we've got to find a competent backup wing.

I am almost positive that the team is going to give the backup wing role to Bill Walker for development and not sit him behind some low priced vet for the length of his rookie deal.

If they can get a 1 year deal for a Grant Hill or something like that, maybe - but they drafted Bill Walker to be a player, not an observer the next 3 years.

[BillfromBoston]

We'e not going to spend - I suspect - the kind of money it will take to sign both of them. And we've got to find a competent backup wing.

I wouldn't hold my breath about the wing.  They may feel that the combination of a healthy Tony Allen, and Scalabrine, plus Walker with a year under his belt might be enough to hold down the fort.    That's why this time Walker is getting right now is so important.  He likely won't see the floor much in the playoffs this year, but they are evaluating him to see if he will be ready for a bigger role next year.

Walker is also highly likely to be sticking around Waltham all summer, so they'll have quite a bit of time to review his game before making FA decisions...

[BillfromBoston]

First, I know Offense isn't everything. I understand that defense is a major part of the game. However, I do feel that on this board, defense has entered the "so frequently stated that it's underrated that it's become overrated" stage. That said, in these Powe vs. Davis debates, people often state that Powe has "an edge" in "post offense," but Davis's "edge" in "defense" makes up for that. Do people fully understand the difference in offensive efficiency between these two players? I just need to point out that other NBA players in Powe's offensive efficiency range are: Richard Hamilton, Ben Gordon, Brad Miller, Rashard Lewis and John Salmons, while other NBA players in Davis's range are: Telfair, Ollie, Reggie Evans, Mardy Collins and Mike James. So I ask you: If you can only keep one player, Powe or Davis, is the questionable and debatable difference in defense between Powe and Davis worth the difference between Rashard Lewis and Kevin Ollie on offense?

The sad truth is that many posters on this board just don't look at the game in a way that puts values on different aspects: interior play vs. perimeter, scoring against a set defense vs. open or rotating, generating FTs, points per shot, % rebounding, etc....

Both Davis and Powe do some good things on the court - I think every metric basically supports Powe as the superior player at the PF position. The debate deepens when discussing versatility, role, and future of this team.

However, its the "dime a dozen" crowd that always talks about how many players are available to replace these guys that gets me - Davis has an imminently more replaceable skill set when it comes to hitting the shot - but its hard to find as agile and mobile a player at his position.

Powe's skill set is almost non-existent in a backup in the league - low post big men don't grow on trees and are rarely found on a team's bench.

If the team is forced to choose between the two it'll be for economic reasons, not because either is so easily replaced from a talent standpoint.

[expobear]

First, I know Offense isn't everything. I understand that defense is a major part of the game. However, I do feel that on this board, defense has entered the "so frequently stated that it's underrated that it's become overrated" stage. That said, in these Powe vs. Davis debates, people often state that Powe has "an edge" in "post offense," but Davis's "edge" in "defense" makes up for that. Do people fully understand the difference in offensive efficiency between these two players? I just need to point out that other NBA players in Powe's offensive efficiency range are: Richard Hamilton, Ben Gordon, Brad Miller, Rashard Lewis and John Salmons, while other NBA players in Davis's range are: Telfair, Ollie, Reggie Evans, Mardy Collins and Mike James. So I ask you: If you can only keep one player, Powe or Davis, is the questionable and debatable difference in defense between Powe and Davis worth the difference between Rashard Lewis and Kevin Ollie on offense?

The sad truth is that many posters on this board just don't look at the game in a way that puts values on different aspects: interior play vs. perimeter, scoring against a set defense vs. open or rotating, generating FTs, points per shot, % rebounding, etc....

Both Davis and Powe do some good things on the court - I think every metric basically supports Powe as the superior player at the PF position. The debate deepens when discussing versatility, role, and future of this team.

However, its the "dime a dozen" crowd that always talks about how many players are available to replace these guys that gets me - Davis has an imminently more replaceable skill set when it comes to hitting the shot - but its hard to find as agile and mobile a player at his position.

Powe's skill set is almost non-existent in a backup in the league - low post big men don't grow on trees and are rarely found on a team's bench.

If the team is forced to choose between the two it'll be for economic reasons, not because either is so easily replaced from a talent standpoint.

Bill,

Assuming the Celtics let him go, will Powe's rare skillset be desirable enough by other NBA teams to give him a reasonable long term contract?

Also, do you know anything about Powe's injury?  Is it related to his previous surgeries?  I'm kind of concerned it may set him back a bit after all that he's accomplished in the past couple of years.