Danny on T&R: We're Not Good Enough

[Tr1boy]

The biggest criticism I've had of Ainge over basically the last 5 years is that he keeps trying to win now and build for the future at the same time and by doing that he harmed or diminished the title chances of both paths.  Why acquire Irving if you aren't going to pull the trigger on a Leonard trade?  Why do you let George slip through your grasps when his asking price wasn't any prime assets?  Why has Boston not made a move at the trade deadline in like 4 seasons?  Ainge just hasn't had consistency.  He keeps making these moves, that may be good moves on face value, but don't mesh or fit with the totality of other moves or the team.

You can argue both sides of any of these things.  Kyrie had nothing to do with building around Tatum.  Tatum was still in high school then.  The controversy there was moving on from IT.

As to all the Leonard and Paul George and Anthony Davis and ....  I don't know how anyone can say that if only Danny had done X or Y we would have this star player or that star player.  That is just pure speculation.

Now Kemba Walker is a recent enough deal that you can pick it apart if you want.  The rationale at the time was we had lost Horford to Philly and lost Irving, they didn't want to do a sign and trade so we could get a TPE so the deal for Walker had a large element of cap management or preservation to it.

Kemba played well last season and the team did well.  Then he had to shut down for his knee.  If we end up just dumping him, then the deal will not have preserved any cap flexibility. 

I honestly get the feeling that people are like, we aren't positioned to win a title right now so Danny is a bad GM.  My feeling is that if Danny was a bad GM, things would be a whole lot worse. Is the Lakers GM really better than Danny?  How about the Nets GM or the Bucks?  Or is there also an element of being in the right place at the right time?

Pelinka has been pretty spotless so far. The Davis deal was fair. The players he signed were outcasts on their way out (bad shooters). Then he gets infront of the line and trades a very late first rounder for a top 15 point guard in the league while we are dealing with Hayward’s debacle and trading away good prospects like Bane for nothing.
Then the Sean marks turned the nets from the laughing stock of the nba to the theoretical #1 contender in a matter of 3-4 seasons.
I would say that pair has been miles better than Danny the last 3 seasons

Yup. Add to insult, Danny has had the most picks in the last 5 or 6 years. Ever since the Nets trade

But overall the team lacks solid depth (payoff today)

Spurs have had less picks/lower range picks and have better depth

[Kuberski33]

So here's my trying to objective view (best stated when not watching a game and getting p----d off). Danny built the team figuring Hayward was at least picking up his option. 4 all star level starters + Theis and Smart. Fill in the blanks on the rest with cheap guys you draft. 

Turns out he's drafted pretty poorly aside from the Jay's and in particular the 2019 draft was terrible.  Hayward unexpectedly leaves, all he can get is a trade exception, figured Teague was a solid cheap signing (he wasn't) and TT seemed like a good signing but to date has not moved the needle.  What's left is a top heavy roster - but with depth that you can't win with. Its too young and/or just not talented enough.

Injuries have piled up, games are coming too fast, several players have tuned out their coach etc.

A lot of this is Ainge's fault, though he also hasn't had the best of luck. It's going to take time to fix and there is no quick fix move apparently available right now.

The one conclusion - and I'd like to emphasize this for all his haters everywhere - Hayward's departure wrecked this team. 

What to do about it:

Short term he has to focus on keeping the Jay's happy (people don't focus enough on this), and try to find a big or two who can defend without fouling. Theis and G Williams have both regressed in that department.  And R. Williams despite his hustle and athleticism is not a great defender.

Unfortunately it's going to take some time and won't be solved this season.  They probably need to start focusing more on the long term and worry about re-building a winning culture here.  Guys who won't be part of that - either due to ability or attitude should be moved as quickly as possible.  Your keepers are the Jay's and probably Smart because of his impact on the culture.  Everyone else with value is available for the right price.

He also needs to decide if his coach is up to the job still. If the Jays won't play hard for him, he needs to go. Brad's a good coach but there is a shelf life with most NBA coaches.

[Goldstar88]

In the entire history of the league there have been something like 3 champions that didn't have a top 5 player on them.  Those are the last Spurs title, the last Pistons title, and the Sonics/Thunder's only title.  That's basically it.  The Spurs had 4 HOFers at varying career points (TD old, Manu old, Parker in prime, Leonard on rise), the Pistons were incredibly deep with 4 or 5 All Star level players including the 3rd best defensive big/rebounder of all time (only Russell and Rodman eclipse Wallace in those), and the Sonics had 2 HOFers the rise (Sikma, DJ), a multiple time future All Star (Williams), veteran depth, and won in basically the weakest season in the sports history (you know right before Bird and Magic entered the league).

Boston doesn't have a top 5 player.  Boston doesn't even have a top 10 player.  Boston has 2 All Star (and possibly All NBA) players, a clearly injury hampered former All Star, and basically nothing else.  This idea permeating this board that this team was going to compete for a title this year was just strange to me.  There is a reason so few teams win titles without top 5 players.  There is a reason teams without top 5 players rarely compete for titles for more than an odd season or two.  In basketball, you quite simply, need a top 5 player to really and truly compete for a title.  If you don't have a top 5 player, then you aren't really going to compete year in and year out.  It just doesn't happen.

What about when Dallas beat the Heat in 2011? Dirk was not a top 5 player at that point. I think the Celtics could be a contender if they had more veterans, legitimate big men and an overall more balanced roster. Too many young guys on this team and Kemba is just not effective as a third option, making max dollars.

 In what universe was Dirk not a top 5 player. He was bettet than Bosh, D Wade, and Lebron.


 In the finals Lebron Avg 17.6 ppg

 Dirk Avg 26 ppg and 10 rpg and shot 45 for 46 from the free throw line. That dude was easy top 5.

Big picture, not just for that one series.

[Donoghus]

In the entire history of the league there have been something like 3 champions that didn't have a top 5 player on them.  Those are the last Spurs title, the last Pistons title, and the Sonics/Thunder's only title.  That's basically it.  The Spurs had 4 HOFers at varying career points (TD old, Manu old, Parker in prime, Leonard on rise), the Pistons were incredibly deep with 4 or 5 All Star level players including the 3rd best defensive big/rebounder of all time (only Russell and Rodman eclipse Wallace in those), and the Sonics had 2 HOFers the rise (Sikma, DJ), a multiple time future All Star (Williams), veteran depth, and won in basically the weakest season in the sports history (you know right before Bird and Magic entered the league).

Boston doesn't have a top 5 player.  Boston doesn't even have a top 10 player.  Boston has 2 All Star (and possibly All NBA) players, a clearly injury hampered former All Star, and basically nothing else.  This idea permeating this board that this team was going to compete for a title this year was just strange to me.  There is a reason so few teams win titles without top 5 players.  There is a reason teams without top 5 players rarely compete for titles for more than an odd season or two.  In basketball, you quite simply, need a top 5 player to really and truly compete for a title.  If you don't have a top 5 player, then you aren't really going to compete year in and year out.  It just doesn't happen.

What about when Dallas beat the Heat in 2011? Dirk was not a top 5 player at that point. I think the Celtics could be a contender if they had more veterans, legitimate big men and an overall more balanced roster. Too many young guys on this team and Kemba is just not effective as a third option, making max dollars.

 In what universe was Dirk not a top 5 player. He was bettet than Bosh, D Wade, and Lebron.


 In the finals Lebron Avg 17.6 ppg

 Dirk Avg 26 ppg and 10 rpg and shot 45 for 46 from the free throw line. That dude was easy top 5.

Big picture, not just for that one series.

He was still 2nd team All-NBA that season.  If he wasn't at #5, he was certainly sitting just on the outside at 6 or 7.

[NKY fan]

So here's my trying to objective view (best stated when not watching a game and getting p----d off). Danny built the team figuring Hayward was at least picking up his option. 4 all star level starters + Theis and Smart. Fill in the blanks on the rest with cheap guys you draft. 

Turns out he's drafted pretty poorly aside from the Jay's and in particular the 2019 draft was terrible.  Hayward unexpectedly leaves, all he can get is a trade exception, figured Teague was a solid cheap signing (he wasn't) and TT seemed like a good signing but to date has not moved the needle.  What's left is a top heavy roster - but with depth that you can't win with. Its too young and/or just not talented enough.

Injuries have piled up, games are coming too fast, several players have tuned out their coach etc.

A lot of this is Ainge's fault, though he also hasn't had the best of luck. It's going to take time to fix and there is no quick fix move apparently available right now.

Short term he has to focus on keeping the Jay's happy (people don't focus enough on this), and try to find a big or two who can defend without fouling. Theis and G Williams have both regressed in that department.  And R. Williams despite his hustle and athleticism is not a great defender.

Unfortunately it's going to take some time and won't be solved this season.  They probably need to start focusing more on the long term and worry about re-building a winning culture here.  Guys who won't be part of that - either due to ability or attitude should be moved as quickly as possible.

He also needs to decide if his coach is up to the job still. Brad's a good coach but there is a shelf life with most NBA coaches.

If Danny replaces TL, TT and KW with adequate defenders we will be golden.
Horford, Shroeder, Thadeus Young were all available for pennies on the $ if Danny was a little more proactive.
I know it is revisionist history but still.
So they are communicating constantly and he cant figure that Gordon is not picking his option? What if he was planning on GH picking his option and trading him as an expiring deal ? How many more contingencies he was planning on lol

[Goldstar88]

https://twitter.com/Toucherandrich/status/1362405762052595720

Sounds like Ainge will do something before the deadline

Good listen, TP for the post. Sounds like he wants to make a move, but will not be doing so until at or right before the trade deadline, which makes sense. He wants to have more time to evaluate his players(as well as other teams). Prices for players are currently  steep as most are still in the playoff hunt. Deadline is well over a month away.

If I heard correctly.... Danny did mention during the interview something about looking to add a center and a point guard. That it would help their objective to win playoff games. Couldn’t agree more 

[Vermont Green]

I honestly get the feeling that people are like, we aren't positioned to win a title right now so Danny is a bad GM.  My feeling is that if Danny was a bad GM, things would be a whole lot worse. Is the Lakers GM really better than Danny?  How about the Nets GM or the Bucks?  Or is there also an element of being in the right place at the right time?

Pelinka has been pretty spotless so far. The Davis deal was fair. The players he signed were outcasts on their way out (bad shooters). Then he gets infront of the line and trades a very late first rounder for a top 15 point guard in the league while we are dealing with Hayward’s debacle and trading away good prospects like Bane for nothing.
Then the Sean marks turned the nets from the laughing stock of the nba to the theoretical #1 contender in a matter of 3-4 seasons.
I would say that pair has been miles better than Danny the last 3 seasons

See I think this is very debatable.  Did LeBron go to the Lakers because of some great strategy or wisdom by the GM?  Did Davis decide to play for the Lakers because of the GM?  Did Harden allow himself to be traded to the Nets because the GM was better then the Celtics GM?  I think in both cases, the GMs were the beneficiaries of things the players wanted.  It was not great GM'ing.  In both cases, there was likely some savvy deal making by the GMs but was it really something no other even half decent GM could have done?

[NKY fan]

I honestly get the feeling that people are like, we aren't positioned to win a title right now so Danny is a bad GM.  My feeling is that if Danny was a bad GM, things would be a whole lot worse. Is the Lakers GM really better than Danny?  How about the Nets GM or the Bucks?  Or is there also an element of being in the right place at the right time?

Pelinka has been pretty spotless so far. The Davis deal was fair. The players he signed were outcasts on their way out (bad shooters). Then he gets infront of the line and trades a very late first rounder for a top 15 point guard in the league while we are dealing with Hayward’s debacle and trading away good prospects like Bane for nothing.
Then the Sean marks turned the nets from the laughing stock of the nba to the theoretical #1 contender in a matter of 3-4 seasons.
I would say that pair has been miles better than Danny the last 3 seasons

See I think this is very debatable.  Did LeBron go to the Lakers because of some great strategy or wisdom by the GM?  Did Davis decide to play for the Lakers because of the GM?  Did Harden allow himself to be traded to the Nets because the GM was better then the Celtics GM?  I think in both cases, the GMs were the beneficiaries of things the players wanted.  It was not great GM'ing.  In both cases, there was likely some savvy deal making by the GMs but was it really something no other even half decent GM could have done?

It is debatable but facts and outcomes are what they are.
Lebron was considered "old" and "injuries catching up to him" at the time of Davis' trade. I myself was super happy that they "overpaid" because Danny "helped" push up AD price. Pelinka got lucky with Lebron but after that he has done everything right.
Ok so what type of moves was Danny making when we had the big three? Von Wafer, Jermaine O'neal .. trading away your starting center - Perk because he might get a few million more on the open market?
Refuse to bring in very good and cheap center who was available for a late first rounder - See Robin Lopez and Suns (Danny had 2 first rounders at the time, which he used on Centers (massive disappointments both)).
Nets created winning culture to attract the buddies in 2019...its not like it was an amazing move but that allowed them to be a player for a top 5 player requesting a trade. Harden did put us on his list but we were last resort to be used as "bidder".

[gift]

I honestly get the feeling that people are like, we aren't positioned to win a title right now so Danny is a bad GM.  My feeling is that if Danny was a bad GM, things would be a whole lot worse. Is the Lakers GM really better than Danny?  How about the Nets GM or the Bucks?  Or is there also an element of being in the right place at the right time?

Pelinka has been pretty spotless so far. The Davis deal was fair. The players he signed were outcasts on their way out (bad shooters). Then he gets infront of the line and trades a very late first rounder for a top 15 point guard in the league while we are dealing with Hayward’s debacle and trading away good prospects like Bane for nothing.
Then the Sean marks turned the nets from the laughing stock of the nba to the theoretical #1 contender in a matter of 3-4 seasons.
I would say that pair has been miles better than Danny the last 3 seasons

See I think this is very debatable.  Did LeBron go to the Lakers because of some great strategy or wisdom by the GM?  Did Davis decide to play for the Lakers because of the GM?  Did Harden allow himself to be traded to the Nets because the GM was better then the Celtics GM?  I think in both cases, the GMs were the beneficiaries of things the players wanted.  It was not great GM'ing.  In both cases, there was likely some savvy deal making by the GMs but was it really something no other even half decent GM could have done?

It is debatable but facts and outcomes are what they are.
Lebron was considered "old" and "injuries catching up to him" at the time of Davis' trade. I myself was super happy that they "overpaid" because Danny "helped" push up AD price. Pelinka got lucky with Lebron but after that he has done everything right.
Ok so what type of moves was Danny making when we had the big three? Von Wafer, Jermaine O'neal .. trading away your starting center because he might get a few million more on the open market?
Refuse to bring in very good and cheap center who were available for late first rounders - See Robin Lopez and Suns (Danny had 2 first rounders at the time, which he used on Centers (massive disappointments both)).
Nets created winning culture to attract the buddies in 2019...its not like it was an amazing move but that allowed them to be a player for a top 5 player requesting a trade. Harden did put us on his list but we were last resort to be used as "bidder".

You can't really compare Ainge's end of the bench moves around the big 3 with the Lakers adding Davis and pieces. The Lakers had Lebron and could part with everything else. Notably, they failed to attract Kawhi or acquire a third star which they hoped to do.

[konkmv]

Wouldn't it be fun to get as buy out players rondo griffin and Drummond?  And trade away theis williams and let Teague  go?

[Jiri Welsch]

Wouldn't it be fun to get as buy out players rondo griffin and Drummond?  And trade away theis williams and let Teague  go?

It definitely would not be enjoyable to get rid of Theis or Robert Williams. Grant Williams I’m still hoping can become a serviceable 9th or 10th guy. Teague on the other hand...sign me up!

[Moranis]

In the entire history of the league there have been something like 3 champions that didn't have a top 5 player on them.  Those are the last Spurs title, the last Pistons title, and the Sonics/Thunder's only title.  That's basically it.  The Spurs had 4 HOFers at varying career points (TD old, Manu old, Parker in prime, Leonard on rise), the Pistons were incredibly deep with 4 or 5 All Star level players including the 3rd best defensive big/rebounder of all time (only Russell and Rodman eclipse Wallace in those), and the Sonics had 2 HOFers the rise (Sikma, DJ), a multiple time future All Star (Williams), veteran depth, and won in basically the weakest season in the sports history (you know right before Bird and Magic entered the league).

Boston doesn't have a top 5 player.  Boston doesn't even have a top 10 player.  Boston has 2 All Star (and possibly All NBA) players, a clearly injury hampered former All Star, and basically nothing else.  This idea permeating this board that this team was going to compete for a title this year was just strange to me.  There is a reason so few teams win titles without top 5 players.  There is a reason teams without top 5 players rarely compete for titles for more than an odd season or two.  In basketball, you quite simply, need a top 5 player to really and truly compete for a title.  If you don't have a top 5 player, then you aren't really going to compete year in and year out.  It just doesn't happen.

What about when Dallas beat the Heat in 2011? Dirk was not a top 5 player at that point. I think the Celtics could be a contender if they had more veterans, legitimate big men and an overall more balanced roster. Too many young guys on this team and Kemba is just not effective as a third option, making max dollars.

Dirk was a top 5 player in 2011 (I think he was 5th behind Lebron, Kobe, Durant, and Howard).  Still in his prime, though the tail end of it.

You left Derrick Rose off your list and he was MVP that year, so Dirk was definitely not a top 5 player at that point. Players ahead of him Lebron, Rose, Wade, Kobe, Durant, CP3, Howard, Westbrook. You could argue that Duncan, Love and Griffin were as good as Dirk that year as well.

I didn't leave Rose off my list, I believe Dirk was a better player than Rose.  Rose had a great season (though Lebron clearly should have been MVP), but I don't think Rose was better than Dirk.

[Moranis]

The biggest criticism I've had of Ainge over basically the last 5 years is that he keeps trying to win now and build for the future at the same time and by doing that he harmed or diminished the title chances of both paths.  Why acquire Irving if you aren't going to pull the trigger on a Leonard trade?  Why do you let George slip through your grasps when his asking price wasn't any prime assets?  Why has Boston not made a move at the trade deadline in like 4 seasons?  Ainge just hasn't had consistency.  He keeps making these moves, that may be good moves on face value, but don't mesh or fit with the totality of other moves or the team.

You can argue both sides of any of these things.  Kyrie had nothing to do with building around Tatum.  Tatum was still in high school then.  The controversy there was moving on from IT.

As to all the Leonard and Paul George and Anthony Davis and ....  I don't know how anyone can say that if only Danny had done X or Y we would have this star player or that star player.  That is just pure speculation.

Now Kemba Walker is a recent enough deal that you can pick it apart if you want.  The rationale at the time was we had lost Horford to Philly and lost Irving, they didn't want to do a sign and trade so we could get a TPE so the deal for Walker had a large element of cap management or preservation to it.

Kemba played well last season and the team did well.  Then he had to shut down for his knee.  If we end up just dumping him, then the deal will not have preserved any cap flexibility. 

I honestly get the feeling that people are like, we aren't positioned to win a title right now so Danny is a bad GM.  My feeling is that if Danny was a bad GM, things would be a whole lot worse.  Is the Lakers GM really better than Danny?  How about the Nets GM or the Bucks?  Or is there also an element of being in the right place at the right time?

Tatum and Brown were both Boston Celtics when Ainge traded for Irving.  And sure, no one knew how good they would become, but the point remains, that there was no point in acquiring a 2nd star like Irving, if you were never going to pull the trigger when the 1st star (i.e. Leonard) became available.  It just wasted assets.  And to be fair, I'm not saying Ainge shouldn't have acquired Irving, I'm saying if you are going to go that route, then you have to be willing to part with prime assets to actually build a title contender.  It is Ainge's constant indecision that has left this team bare and no real great shot at winning a title any time soon.  And it has already been 13 years since the last title and 11 years since the last Finals appearance.  Boston hasn't picked a real direction since basically the day after the Nets trade was made.  It has just been floating along in the trying to win and trying to build stage for nearly a decade, and by doing that, the team is in worse shape.

[nickagneta]

I completely agree with Ainge that the best way to improve this team is to get better from the inside out.

Get everyone healthy. Re-establish the chemistry of last year's playoff starting five that was so successful. Put others into their defined roles. Establish a set rotation with set 5 man groupings for consistency. Start to give better effort, in order to get better performance on the defensive side of the ball. Hope like hell that the youth develop quickly.

Do all that for the next month plus, until the deadline, then, if a trade(s) comes up that makes sense, make it(them).

[Csfan1984]

Get everyone healthy. Re-establish the chemistry of last year's playoff starting five that was so successful. Put others into their defined roles. Establish a set rotation with set 5 man groupings for consistency. Start to give better effort, in order to get better performance on the defensive side of the ball. Hope like hell that the youth develop quickly.

Do all that for the next month plus, until the deadline, then, if a trade(s) comes up that makes sense, make it(them).

Problem is BS and the players arent capable of most of that.

Kemba isn't getting healthier. Chemistry was good enough last year. BS loves to tinker with rotations for data. They don't have 10 total players to go to two units.  Effort isn't there because BS doesn't reward good play or punish bad play, BS picks favorites to play.The youth can't develop without practice and playing time which they aren't getting enough of either one.