Author Topic: We really should fire Danny Ainge  (Read 4925 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #60 on: December 02, 2019, 01:37:44 PM »

Offline spikelovetheCelts

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1472
  • Tommy Points: 105
  • Peace it's a board. We all will never agree.
I know I sound crazy. Ainge won a championship in 08, he fleeced Brooklyn and makes good trades. The problem is he gets these pieces that don't fit together. Ainge can't pick a Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again. direction to go. Are we competing or rebuilding? I know we're supposed to be competing but the team is filled with inconsistent players. Our bench has one consistent player in Wanamaker. No one has been consistently knocking down threes. We have no rim protection. I'm tired of the inconsistency.  When he got the picks Ainge walked the line between building young talent and trying to win. In the NBA you cannot do both. This thinking has stunted the growth of Brown and Tatum. A GM needs have a direction. Ainge seems passive and just waiting for an uneven deal no matter if it supports a direction.
Danny is a Top 5 GM. He has a good core in Tatum, Brown and smart. We are only a big away from being the beast in the east. His draft other than Yabu in the last few years have been great. We are on the right track. Hopefully a center will rise up more. We have no bad contracts. No way Danny is getting fired.
"People look at players, watch them dribble between their legs and they say, 'There's a superstar.'  Well John Havlicek is a superstar, and most of the others are figments of writers' imagination."
--Jerry West, on John Havlicek

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #61 on: December 02, 2019, 01:42:07 PM »

Offline RockinRyA

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4026
  • Tommy Points: 536
I agree somewhat..guy cant draft for sure..only hits has been Tatum, Perk, Brown, Rondo, Bradley, might miss someone else..

Al Jefferson, Tony Allen, Delonte West, Leon Powe, Glen Davis, Ryan Gomes, Marcus Smart, Eítwaun Moore, Kelly Olynyk, and Terry Rozier. And arguably Jared Sullinger.

All were solid players, even if Danny didnít always hit on the best available player.

That list is a real whose who of, "who?"

I'm sure you'll agree that only die-hard Celtics fans and followers of TMZ will know who even a third of the guys on that list are.  N'ery a star among them which I think is the OP's point.   

Iím not sure that grading draft picks based upon who casual fans can identify is the best standard.  Every one of those guys with the exception of Leon Powe turned into a regular NBA starter.
Of course you can find a few decent picks out of the 50+ draft choices that Danny has made in his career.

Again, you are welcome to submit evidence by comparing him to his peers. Unless you are able to do so, this is just armchair GMing, where ignorant people pretend to know how to do other people's job. Ainge is known as a good drafter by his peers and other owners. That's a better gauge than the eyes of random fans.

Also about that post regarding how the names are only significant for the Celtics?

****. Just a couple of names there were significant players for other franchise. Only a third? Etwaun moore has been a solid starter for a while now. Al jefferson was a borderline all star for at least 2 teams. Tony allen was a very important part of the grit and grind grizzlies, everybody knows who marcus smart is and rozier just got a huge contract from another team.

Stars? None of these guys were picked in the top 10, where the stars are usually picked. Again, only idiots will ignore draft position and draft depth when analyzing these picks.

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #62 on: December 02, 2019, 01:48:11 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22582
  • Tommy Points: 1074
I wonder if we were be talking about the great LAL plan had Davis destroyed his leg 8min in the season and Hayward hadn't
I think the problems you saw last year with the roster would have had been there that first season had Hayward not gotten hurt.  In addition, I don't think Brown or Tatum is as good today if that injury hadn't happened either.  The reality is the roster was set up poorly and was bound to have the same issues.  I really don't think Hayward missing time and struggling to come back was the cause, it was quite simply the collection of players wouldn't have worked.

I really don't see how you can be sure that the 2017 Cs would have crashed with a healthy Gordon. The problems the Cs had in 2018 didn't materialize that year before Kyrie got hurt. The young guys hadn't made their playoff run yet and didn't have expectations; Kyrie was weird, to be sure, but there's a lot of reporting that he responded badly to some 2018 events - his grandfather's death and Gordon pressing. Kyrie might have deferred to a healthy Gordon, who also might have helped stop the ball from sticking to Kyrie's hands in crunch time.

I can say with much greater confidence that if Davis destroyed his leg the way Gordon did, the Lakers would have been in some very, very deep pain given the way they mortgaged their future to get him.
Because that team had all of the same issues.  It still would have had 4 SF's (Hayward, Tatum, Brown, Morris).  It still would have had Rozier as the 3rd string PG behind Irving and Smart.  It still would have had Irving and his quirks.  At some point that team was going to crash and burn because it was poorly constructed with a lot of difficult personalities.  It just wasn't the right mix of players and it started with Irving, but certainly didn't end with him. 
Historical Draft - Portland Trailblazers
PG - Magic Johnson, Tony Parker
SG - Clyde Drexler, Dennis Johnson, Alvin Robertson
SF - James Worthy, Alex English
PF - Charles Barkley, Ben Wallace
C - Moses Malone, George Mikan, Brad Daugherty

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #63 on: December 02, 2019, 02:28:19 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Tacko Fall
  • Posts: 630
  • Tommy Points: 33
 :o
I agree somewhat..guy cant draft for sure..only hits has been Tatum, Perk, Brown, Rondo, Bradley, might miss someone else..

Al Jefferson, Tony Allen, Delonte West, Leon Powe, Glen Davis, Ryan Gomes, Marcus Smart, Eítwaun Moore, Kelly Olynyk, and Terry Rozier. And arguably Jared Sullinger.

All were solid players, even if Danny didnít always hit on the best available player.

That list is a real whose who of, "who?"

I'm sure you'll agree that only die-hard Celtics fans and followers of TMZ will know who even a third of the guys on that list are.  N'ery a star among them which I think is the OP's point.   

Iím not sure that grading draft picks based upon who casual fans can identify is the best standard.  Every one of those guys with the exception of Leon Powe turned into a regular NBA starter.
Of course you can find a few decent picks out of the 50+ draft choices that Danny has made in his career.

Again, you are welcome to submit evidence by comparing him to his peers. Unless you are able to do so, this is just armchair GMing, where ignorant people pretend to know how to do other people's job. Ainge is known as a good drafter by his peers and other owners. That's a better gauge than the eyes of random fans.

Also about that post regarding how the names are only significant for the Celtics?

****. Just a couple of names there were significant players for other franchise. Only a third? Etwaun moore has been a solid starter for a while now. Al jefferson was a borderline all star for at least 2 teams. Tony allen was a very important part of the grit and grind grizzlies, everybody knows who marcus smart is and rozier just got a huge contract from another team.

Stars? None of these guys were picked in the top 10, where the stars are usually picked. Again, only idiots will ignore draft position and draft depth when analyzing these picks.
I think fans like me are picking on aingeís drafting in the last 12 years outside the top of the lottery.
 I do have the analysis ... it is in another tread with graphs as well. His draft performance outside top 10 pick after 2007 compared to Pop and Morey is really bad... there is no sense to compare him against Ujiri as that wouldnít be fair to him.

comparing Danny to shorter Tenured GMs is difficult and can be inconclusive.
I can dig up my exhibits and graphs I have. 🤷🏻‍♂️

People like me are saying he should do more trading less drafting.
Iím not calling for his head.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2019, 02:52:48 PM by NKY fan »

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #64 on: December 02, 2019, 02:34:59 PM »

Offline Sophomore

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
  • Tommy Points: 372
I wonder if we were be talking about the great LAL plan had Davis destroyed his leg 8min in the season and Hayward hadn't
I think the problems you saw last year with the roster would have had been there that first season had Hayward not gotten hurt.  In addition, I don't think Brown or Tatum is as good today if that injury hadn't happened either.  The reality is the roster was set up poorly and was bound to have the same issues.  I really don't think Hayward missing time and struggling to come back was the cause, it was quite simply the collection of players wouldn't have worked.

I really don't see how you can be sure that the 2017 Cs would have crashed with a healthy Gordon. The problems the Cs had in 2018 didn't materialize that year before Kyrie got hurt. The young guys hadn't made their playoff run yet and didn't have expectations; Kyrie was weird, to be sure, but there's a lot of reporting that he responded badly to some 2018 events - his grandfather's death and Gordon pressing. Kyrie might have deferred to a healthy Gordon, who also might have helped stop the ball from sticking to Kyrie's hands in crunch time.

I can say with much greater confidence that if Davis destroyed his leg the way Gordon did, the Lakers would have been in some very, very deep pain given the way they mortgaged their future to get him.
Because that team had all of the same issues.  It still would have had 4 SF's (Hayward, Tatum, Brown, Morris).  It still would have had Rozier as the 3rd string PG behind Irving and Smart.  It still would have had Irving and his quirks.  At some point that team was going to crash and burn because it was poorly constructed with a lot of difficult personalities.  It just wasn't the right mix of players and it started with Irving, but certainly didn't end with him.

No way to be sure, of course, but the 2017 team I remember competed like heck - before and after KI went out. They were 41-19.

Add a *healthy* Gordon and Iím stunned if that team doesnít reach the finals.

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #65 on: December 02, 2019, 02:39:27 PM »

Offline Sophomore

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
  • Tommy Points: 372
If you want to dream really big Ė imagine that Kyrie still has his injury about 60 games into the season, and the Celtics get to the finals without him.

In the off-season, Ainge deals Kyrie for multiple assets.

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #66 on: December 02, 2019, 02:39:50 PM »

Online tstorey_97

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1960
  • Tommy Points: 280
A man named Red Auerbach invented modern NBA basketball.

Red selected Ainge to run the team.


Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #67 on: December 02, 2019, 02:46:10 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Tacko Fall
  • Posts: 630
  • Tommy Points: 33


Again, you are welcome to submit evidence by comparing him to his peers. Unless you are able to do so, this is just armchair GMing, where ignorant people pretend to know how to do other people's job. Ainge is known as a good drafter by his peers and other owners. That's a better gauge than the eyes of random fans.



A few notes:
The title of the graph is wrong it is not WinShares per 48 but WS total as of 30 Oct 2019 ..
One can argue whether 13-14 picks (data points) is a statistically significant sample.
The data measures draft picks in the 10-40 range
Danny has had a slightly higher average drafting position than both his peers

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #68 on: December 02, 2019, 02:55:07 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22582
  • Tommy Points: 1074
I wonder if we were be talking about the great LAL plan had Davis destroyed his leg 8min in the season and Hayward hadn't
I think the problems you saw last year with the roster would have had been there that first season had Hayward not gotten hurt.  In addition, I don't think Brown or Tatum is as good today if that injury hadn't happened either.  The reality is the roster was set up poorly and was bound to have the same issues.  I really don't think Hayward missing time and struggling to come back was the cause, it was quite simply the collection of players wouldn't have worked.

I really don't see how you can be sure that the 2017 Cs would have crashed with a healthy Gordon. The problems the Cs had in 2018 didn't materialize that year before Kyrie got hurt. The young guys hadn't made their playoff run yet and didn't have expectations; Kyrie was weird, to be sure, but there's a lot of reporting that he responded badly to some 2018 events - his grandfather's death and Gordon pressing. Kyrie might have deferred to a healthy Gordon, who also might have helped stop the ball from sticking to Kyrie's hands in crunch time.

I can say with much greater confidence that if Davis destroyed his leg the way Gordon did, the Lakers would have been in some very, very deep pain given the way they mortgaged their future to get him.
Because that team had all of the same issues.  It still would have had 4 SF's (Hayward, Tatum, Brown, Morris).  It still would have had Rozier as the 3rd string PG behind Irving and Smart.  It still would have had Irving and his quirks.  At some point that team was going to crash and burn because it was poorly constructed with a lot of difficult personalities.  It just wasn't the right mix of players and it started with Irving, but certainly didn't end with him.

No way to be sure, of course, but the 2017 team I remember competed like heck - before and after KI went out. They were 41-19.

Add a *healthy* Gordon and Iím stunned if that team doesnít reach the finals.
They also had the flukey 16 game win streak right after Hayward went down.  They were an upper 40's type team without that win streak (and I know you can't just disregard it, since it happened, but that team clearly wasn't that type of team either). 

They might have beaten the train-wreck that was Cavs that year and made the Finals, but the Warriors would have run them out of the building.  That would have been more a function of the conference than the actual team.  I think last years team might have made the Finals the year before as well, warts and all as the Bucks and Sixers just weren't ready, the Raptors were well the Raptors, and the Cavs were a mess (though Lebron was well Lebron).  Sometimes the conference just aligns right, but that doesn't mean the team was truly that good.  I had that same discussion all last season on here.  I think the fan base got a bit blinded by the ECF without Irving and Hayward and thought the C's were actually better than they were.  At the end of the day though, top end talent wins in the playoffs and the C's just don't have top end talent right now (maybe Tatum gets there).  Whether Hayward stayed healthy or not, it wouldn't have changed the fact that every team Boston played would have had the best player in the series if everyone was fully healthy. 
Historical Draft - Portland Trailblazers
PG - Magic Johnson, Tony Parker
SG - Clyde Drexler, Dennis Johnson, Alvin Robertson
SF - James Worthy, Alex English
PF - Charles Barkley, Ben Wallace
C - Moses Malone, George Mikan, Brad Daugherty

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #69 on: December 02, 2019, 05:21:41 PM »

Offline Sophomore

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
  • Tommy Points: 372
I wonder if we were be talking about the great LAL plan had Davis destroyed his leg 8min in the season and Hayward hadn't
I think the problems you saw last year with the roster would have had been there that first season had Hayward not gotten hurt.  In addition, I don't think Brown or Tatum is as good today if that injury hadn't happened either.  The reality is the roster was set up poorly and was bound to have the same issues.  I really don't think Hayward missing time and struggling to come back was the cause, it was quite simply the collection of players wouldn't have worked.

I really don't see how you can be sure that the 2017 Cs would have crashed with a healthy Gordon. The problems the Cs had in 2018 didn't materialize that year before Kyrie got hurt. The young guys hadn't made their playoff run yet and didn't have expectations; Kyrie was weird, to be sure, but there's a lot of reporting that he responded badly to some 2018 events - his grandfather's death and Gordon pressing. Kyrie might have deferred to a healthy Gordon, who also might have helped stop the ball from sticking to Kyrie's hands in crunch time.

I can say with much greater confidence that if Davis destroyed his leg the way Gordon did, the Lakers would have been in some very, very deep pain given the way they mortgaged their future to get him.
Because that team had all of the same issues.  It still would have had 4 SF's (Hayward, Tatum, Brown, Morris).  It still would have had Rozier as the 3rd string PG behind Irving and Smart.  It still would have had Irving and his quirks.  At some point that team was going to crash and burn because it was poorly constructed with a lot of difficult personalities.  It just wasn't the right mix of players and it started with Irving, but certainly didn't end with him.

No way to be sure, of course, but the 2017 team I remember competed like heck - before and after KI went out. They were 41-19.

Add a *healthy* Gordon and Iím stunned if that team doesnít reach the finals.
They also had the flukey 16 game win streak right after Hayward went down. They were an upper 40's type team without that win streak (and I know you can't just disregard it, since it happened, but that team clearly wasn't that type of team either). 

They might have beaten the train-wreck that was Cavs that year and made the Finals, but the Warriors would have run them out of the building.  That would have been more a function of the conference than the actual team.  I think last years team might have made the Finals the year before as well, warts and all as the Bucks and Sixers just weren't ready, the Raptors were well the Raptors, and the Cavs were a mess (though Lebron was well Lebron).  Sometimes the conference just aligns right, but that doesn't mean the team was truly that good.  I had that same discussion all last season on here.  I think the fan base got a bit blinded by the ECF without Irving and Hayward and thought the C's were actually better than they were.  At the end of the day though, top end talent wins in the playoffs and the C's just don't have top end talent right now (maybe Tatum gets there).  Whether Hayward stayed healthy or not, it wouldn't have changed the fact that every team Boston played would have had the best player in the series if everyone was fully healthy.

1. Re 49 wins - having seen healthy Hayward this year, do you really, honestly think he wasn't worth a few wins? To push some of the starters onto bench units where they might have dominated and - a counterfactual we'll never have the answer to - might have kept the style of play closer to the motion and fastbreak style he facilitates so very well?

2. Re whether Boston had the best player - against Cleveland they wouldn't have had the best player, but they would have had the 2d best, 3d best, and probably 2 or three of the next slots.

3. But here is the biggest point. We're trying to judge a GM's moves. Fine. He picked up too many wings and a PG who turned out to be moodier than ppl expected. But look where he came from and consider the moves. Two top-drawer free agents, the best available aside from Durant, the other major coulda-been. Two stud young draft picks he acquired through a hugely lopsided trade. A solid, solid sixth pick in Smart. Some solid acquisitions like Baynes and Theis. That core he put together was incredible.

Re the inevitability of the collapse, I continue to believe that you're applying the 2018 yardstick to 2017, for reasons I've already stated. But even if you are right and the worst case happened and the team blew up in 2017, look at all the options he had to rebalance with a *healthy* Gordon.  Could have fixed those problems. Heck, even having lost so much, look at what's left.

I'd rather have a title too, and to have picked Giannis over Kelly. But I'm also glad we have Tatum instead of Fultz, and the current core over what many other teams have to deal with.

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #70 on: December 02, 2019, 08:02:51 PM »

Offline Surferdad

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10855
  • Tommy Points: 729
  • "He fiddles...and diddles..."
I wonder if we were be talking about the great LAL plan had Davis destroyed his leg 8min in the season and Hayward hadn't
I think the problems you saw last year with the roster would have had been there that first season had Hayward not gotten hurt.  In addition, I don't think Brown or Tatum is as good today if that injury hadn't happened either.  The reality is the roster was set up poorly and was bound to have the same issues.  I really don't think Hayward missing time and struggling to come back was the cause, it was quite simply the collection of players wouldn't have worked.

I really don't see how you can be sure that the 2017 Cs would have crashed with a healthy Gordon. The problems the Cs had in 2018 didn't materialize that year before Kyrie got hurt. The young guys hadn't made their playoff run yet and didn't have expectations; Kyrie was weird, to be sure, but there's a lot of reporting that he responded badly to some 2018 events - his grandfather's death and Gordon pressing. Kyrie might have deferred to a healthy Gordon, who also might have helped stop the ball from sticking to Kyrie's hands in crunch time.

I can say with much greater confidence that if Davis destroyed his leg the way Gordon did, the Lakers would have been in some very, very deep pain given the way they mortgaged their future to get him.
Because that team had all of the same issues.  It still would have had 4 SF's (Hayward, Tatum, Brown, Morris).  It still would have had Rozier as the 3rd string PG behind Irving and Smart.  It still would have had Irving and his quirks.  At some point that team was going to crash and burn because it was poorly constructed with a lot of difficult personalities.  It just wasn't the right mix of players and it started with Irving, but certainly didn't end with him.

No way to be sure, of course, but the 2017 team I remember competed like heck - before and after KI went out. They were 41-19.

Add a *healthy* Gordon and Iím stunned if that team doesnít reach the finals.
They also had the flukey 16 game win streak right after Hayward went down. They were an upper 40's type team without that win streak (and I know you can't just disregard it, since it happened, but that team clearly wasn't that type of team either). 

They might have beaten the train-wreck that was Cavs that year and made the Finals, but the Warriors would have run them out of the building.  That would have been more a function of the conference than the actual team.  I think last years team might have made the Finals the year before as well, warts and all as the Bucks and Sixers just weren't ready, the Raptors were well the Raptors, and the Cavs were a mess (though Lebron was well Lebron).  Sometimes the conference just aligns right, but that doesn't mean the team was truly that good.  I had that same discussion all last season on here.  I think the fan base got a bit blinded by the ECF without Irving and Hayward and thought the C's were actually better than they were.  At the end of the day though, top end talent wins in the playoffs and the C's just don't have top end talent right now (maybe Tatum gets there).  Whether Hayward stayed healthy or not, it wouldn't have changed the fact that every team Boston played would have had the best player in the series if everyone was fully healthy.

1. Re 49 wins - having seen healthy Hayward this year, do you really, honestly think he wasn't worth a few wins? To push some of the starters onto bench units where they might have dominated and - a counterfactual we'll never have the answer to - might have kept the style of play closer to the motion and fastbreak style he facilitates so very well?

2. Re whether Boston had the best player - against Cleveland they wouldn't have had the best player, but they would have had the 2d best, 3d best, and probably 2 or three of the next slots.

3. But here is the biggest point. We're trying to judge a GM's moves. Fine. He picked up too many wings and a PG who turned out to be moodier than ppl expected. But look where he came from and consider the moves. Two top-drawer free agents, the best available aside from Durant, the other major coulda-been. Two stud young draft picks he acquired through a hugely lopsided trade. A solid, solid sixth pick in Smart. Some solid acquisitions like Baynes and Theis. That core he put together was incredible.

Re the inevitability of the collapse, I continue to believe that you're applying the 2018 yardstick to 2017, for reasons I've already stated. But even if you are right and the worst case happened and the team blew up in 2017, look at all the options he had to rebalance with a *healthy* Gordon.  Could have fixed those problems. Heck, even having lost so much, look at what's left.

I'd rather have a title too, and to have picked Giannis over Kelly. But I'm also glad we have Tatum instead of Fultz, and the current core over what many other teams have to deal with.
Well-stated summary of the past 3 years.  TP.

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #71 on: December 02, 2019, 08:16:05 PM »

Offline RockinRyA

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4026
  • Tommy Points: 536
:o
I agree somewhat..guy cant draft for sure..only hits has been Tatum, Perk, Brown, Rondo, Bradley, might miss someone else..

Al Jefferson, Tony Allen, Delonte West, Leon Powe, Glen Davis, Ryan Gomes, Marcus Smart, Eítwaun Moore, Kelly Olynyk, and Terry Rozier. And arguably Jared Sullinger.

All were solid players, even if Danny didnít always hit on the best available player.

That list is a real whose who of, "who?"

I'm sure you'll agree that only die-hard Celtics fans and followers of TMZ will know who even a third of the guys on that list are.  N'ery a star among them which I think is the OP's point.   

Iím not sure that grading draft picks based upon who casual fans can identify is the best standard.  Every one of those guys with the exception of Leon Powe turned into a regular NBA starter.
Of course you can find a few decent picks out of the 50+ draft choices that Danny has made in his career.

Again, you are welcome to submit evidence by comparing him to his peers. Unless you are able to do so, this is just armchair GMing, where ignorant people pretend to know how to do other people's job. Ainge is known as a good drafter by his peers and other owners. That's a better gauge than the eyes of random fans.

Also about that post regarding how the names are only significant for the Celtics?

****. Just a couple of names there were significant players for other franchise. Only a third? Etwaun moore has been a solid starter for a while now. Al jefferson was a borderline all star for at least 2 teams. Tony allen was a very important part of the grit and grind grizzlies, everybody knows who marcus smart is and rozier just got a huge contract from another team.

Stars? None of these guys were picked in the top 10, where the stars are usually picked. Again, only idiots will ignore draft position and draft depth when analyzing these picks.
I think fans like me are picking on aingeís drafting in the last 12 years outside the top of the lottery.
 I do have the analysis ... it is in another tread with graphs as well. His draft performance outside top 10 pick after 2007 compared to Pop and Morey is really bad... there is no sense to compare him against Ujiri as that wouldnít be fair to him.

comparing Danny to shorter Tenured GMs is difficult and can be inconclusive.
I can dig up my exhibits and graphs I have. 🤷🏻‍♂️

People like me are saying he should do more trading less drafting.
Iím not calling for his head.

Didnt we refute you in that thread? (Roy I think basically destroyed you there) You used some unreliable metrics, (I mean for one, you basically gave a player who played in the nba a lower score than someone who failed to make it.) That thread shouldnt be taken seriously at all, why mention it?

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #72 on: December 02, 2019, 10:13:22 PM »

Offline chambers

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7470
  • Tommy Points: 941
  • Boston Celtics= Championships, nothing less.
OP, you're fired!
"We are lucky we have a very patient GM that isn't willing to settle for being good and coming close. He wants to win a championship and we have the potential to get there still with our roster and assets."

quoting 'Greg B' on RealGM after 2017 trade deadline.
Read that last line again. One more time.

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #73 on: December 02, 2019, 10:38:22 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Tacko Fall
  • Posts: 630
  • Tommy Points: 33
:o
I agree somewhat..guy cant draft for sure..only hits has been Tatum, Perk, Brown, Rondo, Bradley, might miss someone else..

Al Jefferson, Tony Allen, Delonte West, Leon Powe, Glen Davis, Ryan Gomes, Marcus Smart, Eítwaun Moore, Kelly Olynyk, and Terry Rozier. And arguably Jared Sullinger.

All were solid players, even if Danny didnít always hit on the best available player.

That list is a real whose who of, "who?"

I'm sure you'll agree that only die-hard Celtics fans and followers of TMZ will know who even a third of the guys on that list are.  N'ery a star among them which I think is the OP's point.   

Iím not sure that grading draft picks based upon who casual fans can identify is the best standard.  Every one of those guys with the exception of Leon Powe turned into a regular NBA starter.
Of course you can find a few decent picks out of the 50+ draft choices that Danny has made in his career.

Again, you are welcome to submit evidence by comparing him to his peers. Unless you are able to do so, this is just armchair GMing, where ignorant people pretend to know how to do other people's job. Ainge is known as a good drafter by his peers and other owners. That's a better gauge than the eyes of random fans.

Also about that post regarding how the names are only significant for the Celtics?

****. Just a couple of names there were significant players for other franchise. Only a third? Etwaun moore has been a solid starter for a while now. Al jefferson was a borderline all star for at least 2 teams. Tony allen was a very important part of the grit and grind grizzlies, everybody knows who marcus smart is and rozier just got a huge contract from another team.

Stars? None of these guys were picked in the top 10, where the stars are usually picked. Again, only idiots will ignore draft position and draft depth when analyzing these picks.
I think fans like me are picking on aingeís drafting in the last 12 years outside the top of the lottery.
 I do have the analysis ... it is in another tread with graphs as well. His draft performance outside top 10 pick after 2007 compared to Pop and Morey is really bad... there is no sense to compare him against Ujiri as that wouldnít be fair to him.

comparing Danny to shorter Tenured GMs is difficult and can be inconclusive.
I can dig up my exhibits and graphs I have. 🤷🏻‍♂️

People like me are saying he should do more trading less drafting.
Iím not calling for his head.

Didnt we refute you in that thread? (Roy I think basically destroyed you there) You used some unreliable metrics, (I mean for one, you basically gave a player who played in the nba a lower score than someone who failed to make it.) That thread shouldnt be taken seriously at all, why mention it?
Ufff. I didnít get destroyed or refuted.. I can defend my methodology and metrics.
This tread is becoming gradually more and more hostile towards differing opinions.
It reminds me of political debates between those on the ultra left and ultra right.

The point I was trying to make is that Danny should trade more and draft less. I donít propose him being fired. If you scroll up to the first page you will see that I stated that the OP is exaggerating.
If you are a fan of Dannyís drafting no amount of statistical evidence would convince you otherwise as you would always point to the few good picks heís made 🤷🏻‍♂️
« Last Edit: December 02, 2019, 11:20:05 PM by NKY fan »

Re: We really should fire Danny Ainge
« Reply #74 on: December 03, 2019, 03:26:26 AM »

Offline Androslav

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2748
  • Tommy Points: 504
OP that is so bold to say that Ainge has to be fired should at least know track records of the last 50-60 GMS in this league for his statement to have some merit. Then he would be able to put Ainge's work in perspective.

Useful data:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/executives/

I promised myself not to engage in this thread, but I failed.
"The joy of the balling under the rims."