Win it all next year vs. economic suicide

[jay_jay54]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 
 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

wdlh, i'm not sure until you know who the the "other" player is that you can say they have "just as good a chance" of winning....

as for GPA being enough, i again point you too DET. they kept that core together and i'm sure there were people in DET saying the exact same thing you are saying about GPA. i'm sure many felt the Chauncey, Rip, Prince and Rasheed was enough that you could plug in new role players and they would be fine.

it matters who the replacements are, and until we know who is going to be filling that role (by the way this is a totally theoretical debate because for all we know Posey will be back), but until we know the actual player, there is no way to be certain that we will be as good as last season.

the planning for the future strategy is such a crap shoot any way. i mean, look at Utah. their front office must be in a total panic at the thought of losing Boozer.....IMO when you got people locked up like we have with GPA, you can't be afraid of something like a 5th year on an MLE contract.

the contracts to be afraid of IMO are the one's Rashard Lewis signed in ORL. now THAT is a contract that could cause problems down the road.

TP for your post,because i agree with your take on role(bench)players... i feel they play a big role in a team's success.Also Congrats for making it to 100 TP's w/the tp i gave.

[winsomme]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 
 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

wdlh, i'm not sure until you know who the the "other" player is that you can say they have "just as good a chance" of winning....

as for GPA being enough, i again point you too DET. they kept that core together and i'm sure there were people in DET saying the exact same thing you are saying about GPA. i'm sure many felt the Chauncey, Rip, Prince and Rasheed was enough that you could plug in new role players and they would be fine.

  They didn't keep their core together. They lost Ben Wallace to free agency. He was their best defender and rebounder.

well that is sort of a shell game. i would say that in DETs eyes they thought he was not essential and what he did could be replaced.  much like many are saying about Posey, ironically.

also, they had BWallace the next season when they lost in the Finals. they lost Okur, Williamson and Mike James....who's to know what would have happened with some or all of them on board the following year. what we do know is that they have not repeated. and some could argue squandered what they had assembled. it is difficult to repeat under the best of circumstances, so i'm not sure that i would make that argument, but there is some credibility to it.

anyway, the point is that anybody can theoretically be relaced. i mean, we could lose Ray and get Wade for instance....

the main point is that it MATTERS who the replacement is.....and 6th man is a huge role on Title teams....

[winsomme]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 
 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

wdlh, i'm not sure until you know who the the "other" player is that you can say they have "just as good a chance" of winning....

as for GPA being enough, i again point you too DET. they kept that core together and i'm sure there were people in DET saying the exact same thing you are saying about GPA. i'm sure many felt the Chauncey, Rip, Prince and Rasheed was enough that you could plug in new role players and they would be fine.

it matters who the replacements are, and until we know who is going to be filling that role (by the way this is a totally theoretical debate because for all we know Posey will be back), but until we know the actual player, there is no way to be certain that we will be as good as last season.

the planning for the future strategy is such a crap shoot any way. i mean, look at Utah. their front office must be in a total panic at the thought of losing Boozer.....IMO when you got people locked up like we have with GPA, you can't be afraid of something like a 5th year on an MLE contract.

the contracts to be afraid of IMO are the one's Rashard Lewis signed in ORL. now THAT is a contract that could cause problems down the road.

TP for your post,because i agree with your take on role(bench)players... i feel they play a big role in a team's success.Also Congrats for making it to 100 TP's w/the tp i gave.

thanks jay, i appreciate that....TP.

[Steve Weinman]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

He is a good player.  He helped the Celtics win.


But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 


I am not trying to downgrade Posey as a player or what he can do. 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

I'm not sure I'm on board with that line of thinking.  This team would no doubt win a lot of games with a variety of role players given the core that it has -- I don't dispute that -- but it's worth remembering that the Celts didn't necessarily cruise through the playoffs on the shoulders of the three stars scoring a hundred points per game between them.  They got huge efforts from those three players -- as they should have -- but one of the most wonderful parts of this postseason was the regularity with which one of the 'supporting cast' members stepped up in a big spot to put this team over the top in a particular game or series.

Near as I could see it, Posey was as big in that department as anybody on this team.  Players who fill out the triple role of defender, shooter and selfless team guy don't come around every day.

Whether it's about Posey or otherwise, I think I'd be very wary of falling into the "it's about the three stars, and everyone else is interchangeable" trap of thinking.  I don't purport to suggest that the Celts couldn't win with changes made to the supporting cast, but there is a reason why certain guys (i.e. Horry, Robert; Posey, James; Kerr, Steve) seem to gravitate toward winners.

-sw

[winsomme]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

He is a good player.  He helped the Celtics win.


But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 


I am not trying to downgrade Posey as a player or what he can do. 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

I'm not sure I'm on board with that line of thinking.  This team would no doubt win a lot of games with a variety of role players given the core that it has -- I don't dispute that -- but it's worth remembering that the Celts didn't necessarily cruise through the playoffs on the shoulders of the three stars scoring a hundred points per game between them.  They got huge efforts from those three players -- as they should have -- but one of the most wonderful parts of this postseason was the regularity with which one of the 'supporting cast' members stepped up in a big spot to put this team over the top in a particular game or series.

Near as I could see it, Posey was as big in that department as anybody on this team.  Players who fill out the triple role of defender, shooter and selfless team guy don't come around every day.

Whether it's about Posey or otherwise, I think I'd be very wary of falling into the "it's about the three stars, and everyone else is interchangeable" trap of thinking.  I don't purport to suggest that the Celts couldn't win with changes made to the supporting cast, but there is a reason why certain guys (i.e. Horry, Robert; Posey, James; Kerr, Steve) seem to gravitate toward winners.

-sw

i totally agree, SW. TP.

how many huge shots did Derek Fisher hit for those Kobe-Shaq teams.....

[wdleehi]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

He is a good player.  He helped the Celtics win.


But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 


I am not trying to downgrade Posey as a player or what he can do. 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

I'm not sure I'm on board with that line of thinking.  This team would no doubt win a lot of games with a variety of role players given the core that it has -- I don't dispute that -- but it's worth remembering that the Celts didn't necessarily cruise through the playoffs on the shoulders of the three stars scoring a hundred points per game between them.  They got huge efforts from those three players -- as they should have -- but one of the most wonderful parts of this postseason was the regularity with which one of the 'supporting cast' members stepped up in a big spot to put this team over the top in a particular game or series.

Near as I could see it, Posey was as big in that department as anybody on this team.  Players who fill out the triple role of defender, shooter and selfless team guy don't come around every day.

Whether it's about Posey or otherwise, I think I'd be very wary of falling into the "it's about the three stars, and everyone else is interchangeable" trap of thinking.  I don't purport to suggest that the Celts couldn't win with changes made to the supporting cast, but there is a reason why certain guys (i.e. Horry, Robert; Posey, James; Kerr, Steve) seem to gravitate toward winners.

-sw

I am not saying replace the rest of the team and expect to be just as good.



But replacing Posey isn't going to lower the Celtics chance of winning a title.  A player like Pietrus could fill that role.  He may not be as good as Posey, but Posey wasn't as good as Posey early in the playoffs.


Plus, how many good years in a row has Posey had?  He seems to yo-yo. 


If Posey would sign for a three year MLE, great.  But I think it will cost 5 years of MLE with full % raises.  That will just about guarantee that the Celtics will not be trading Ray for a large contract. 

[Steve Weinman]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

He is a good player.  He helped the Celtics win.


But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 


I am not trying to downgrade Posey as a player or what he can do. 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

I'm not sure I'm on board with that line of thinking.  This team would no doubt win a lot of games with a variety of role players given the core that it has -- I don't dispute that -- but it's worth remembering that the Celts didn't necessarily cruise through the playoffs on the shoulders of the three stars scoring a hundred points per game between them.  They got huge efforts from those three players -- as they should have -- but one of the most wonderful parts of this postseason was the regularity with which one of the 'supporting cast' members stepped up in a big spot to put this team over the top in a particular game or series.

Near as I could see it, Posey was as big in that department as anybody on this team.  Players who fill out the triple role of defender, shooter and selfless team guy don't come around every day.

Whether it's about Posey or otherwise, I think I'd be very wary of falling into the "it's about the three stars, and everyone else is interchangeable" trap of thinking.  I don't purport to suggest that the Celts couldn't win with changes made to the supporting cast, but there is a reason why certain guys (i.e. Horry, Robert; Posey, James; Kerr, Steve) seem to gravitate toward winners.

-sw

i totally agree, SW. TP.

how many huge shots did Derek Fisher hit for those Kobe-Shaq teams.....

Thanks, winsomme.  It's funny -- I actually had Fisher as the fourth guy in my examples list before deciding that three was sufficient -- I swear this is true.  And the answer to your question is "too many for my liking."

-sw

[Steve Weinman]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

He is a good player.  He helped the Celtics win.


But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 


I am not trying to downgrade Posey as a player or what he can do. 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

I'm not sure I'm on board with that line of thinking.  This team would no doubt win a lot of games with a variety of role players given the core that it has -- I don't dispute that -- but it's worth remembering that the Celts didn't necessarily cruise through the playoffs on the shoulders of the three stars scoring a hundred points per game between them.  They got huge efforts from those three players -- as they should have -- but one of the most wonderful parts of this postseason was the regularity with which one of the 'supporting cast' members stepped up in a big spot to put this team over the top in a particular game or series.

Near as I could see it, Posey was as big in that department as anybody on this team.  Players who fill out the triple role of defender, shooter and selfless team guy don't come around every day.

Whether it's about Posey or otherwise, I think I'd be very wary of falling into the "it's about the three stars, and everyone else is interchangeable" trap of thinking.  I don't purport to suggest that the Celts couldn't win with changes made to the supporting cast, but there is a reason why certain guys (i.e. Horry, Robert; Posey, James; Kerr, Steve) seem to gravitate toward winners.

-sw

I am not saying replace the rest of the team and expect to be just as good.



But replacing Posey isn't going to lower the Celtics chance of winning a title.  A player like Pietrus could fill that role.  He may not be as good as Posey, but Posey wasn't as good as Posey early in the playoffs.


Plus, how many good years in a row has Posey had?  He seems to yo-yo. 


If Posey would sign for a three year MLE, great.  But I think it will cost 5 years of MLE with full % raises.  That will just about guarantee that the Celtics will not be trading Ray for a large contract. 

wd, I hear what you're saying, but we may have to agree to disagree on this one.  In my book, if you replace one player with another who isn't quite as good, unless the other 29 teams are absurdly far behind, I think it inherently lowers your chances to win to some extent.  Doesn't make them impossibly low; doesn't turn into "the coming season is going to be a wash" (nothing even close; I hesitate to even make that remark lest anyone take it seriously), but I think it does lower them.  Since you mention Pietrus, I'll register my belief that he would be -- at this point in his career -- a significant drop from what Pose gives us.  I like Pietrus and have had my eye on him for a while, and I could live with having him on board if we were able to get him at some point, but I do think there is a marked difference in what we'd get from him rather than Posey -- and it isn't a good one.

-sw

[winsomme]

I like Posey.  I like what he did for this team.


But he is replaceable.  He is not one of the three stars.   He isn't even Rondo or Perkins.



He is a SF that defends and can hit an open three.  He is a 15-20 minute player on this team.  He wasn't even the best defender at his position (Pierce was)


Magette is a big upgrade.  I think he will buy into the defense 1st approach the Celtics took last year and can be the 2nd best swing defender. 


Pietrus could also step in a fill that roll.  He might not be quite as good as Posey, but he would be good enough that the Celtics have the same chance to win a title. 



So to me, there is no need to give Posey a 4-5 year contract if the Celtics can replace him with an almost equal player. 


(If Posey was a starting player playing 30-35 minutes a game, this would be a different situation)

it is amazing to me how quickly people downplay  what Posey did for this team.

of course Posey is replaceable. the question is who is the replacement. Pietrus is a big step down in terms of ability to fill a role and in terms of intensity and versatility.

heck, we could play Giddens in that role and it would still be "possible" to win a Title, but it would hurt our chances.

a lot of teams have made the mistake that you can just keep the "core" and still have the same chances to win again. while it is possible, i think we are looking for probable.

Posey was more than a backup SF. he was the 6th man, and that can be a very hard/tricky role to fill.

anyway, i do trust Danny to fill the role well if he goes a different direction. and i guess that is the most important factor of all.

He is a good player.  He helped the Celtics win.


But the Celtics have just as good of a chance winning with another player there. 


I am not trying to downgrade Posey as a player or what he can do. 

The talent of the three stars is high enough that role players are interchangeable. 

I'm not sure I'm on board with that line of thinking.  This team would no doubt win a lot of games with a variety of role players given the core that it has -- I don't dispute that -- but it's worth remembering that the Celts didn't necessarily cruise through the playoffs on the shoulders of the three stars scoring a hundred points per game between them.  They got huge efforts from those three players -- as they should have -- but one of the most wonderful parts of this postseason was the regularity with which one of the 'supporting cast' members stepped up in a big spot to put this team over the top in a particular game or series.

Near as I could see it, Posey was as big in that department as anybody on this team.  Players who fill out the triple role of defender, shooter and selfless team guy don't come around every day.

Whether it's about Posey or otherwise, I think I'd be very wary of falling into the "it's about the three stars, and everyone else is interchangeable" trap of thinking.  I don't purport to suggest that the Celts couldn't win with changes made to the supporting cast, but there is a reason why certain guys (i.e. Horry, Robert; Posey, James; Kerr, Steve) seem to gravitate toward winners.

-sw

i totally agree, SW. TP.

how many huge shots did Derek Fisher hit for those Kobe-Shaq teams.....

Thanks, winsomme.  It's funny -- I actually had Fisher as the fourth guy in my examples list before deciding that three was sufficient -- I swear this is true.  And the answer to your question is "too many for my liking."

-sw

yeah, and i remember a conversation i had with a friend of mine during the season who was not a huge Posey guy.....and i kept telling him that Posey is better than advertised. he was hitting so many threes and taking so many charges......(just like Fisher by the way).....that i was stunned.

i mean, i knew he was good on D, but i had no idea what he was going to bring to the table....

replacing him is possible, but it won't be IMO as easy as many think.....if it happens...which i hope it doesn't.

but i don't have problem with Posey cashing in. he does deserve it. and that might be what it comes down to for him.

[BballTim]

  Another point that you need to consider is the size of Posey's role on the team next year. Last year we basically had no backup center at all (Pollard). If we sign a backup center then that cuts down on the number of minutes that KG and Powe and Davis play at center, which will cut down on the number of minutes Posey plays at PF. Also, almost all of the minutes that Giddens or Walker get would come directly from Posey's minutes.

[Brickowski]

The Celtics know they can win with Posey.  Can they win with Maggette? People really need to stop looking at the scoring numbers.  There is only one ball. In LA, Maggette had it.  In Boston, the ball will go to KG, Pierce and Allen.

The skills (plus intangibles) that Posey brings are mnore difficult to replace than scoring. Is Maggette really that much better than Ricky Davis? 

[NicaraguanFan]

People talk a lot about Big 3, I love those guys, RA, PP and KG, but they didn't get number 17 just by themselves, though.   They have a very good supporting cast and Posey was an important member of it, as well as Rajon and Perk.  I would prefer to give James full MLE than Corey any day. I was wondering if we can offer him a 5 year deal with team option in fifth year.


NF.

[jay_jay54]

Check out the last five minutes in Game 4 of the finals.Also,look at Game 6 second,third quarters,those reminded me,just a little of what JP brings to the floor.What videoclips does any of the players being mentioned in this thread got to show,playoff wise,that can match the effort JP gave in the finals?So,when i asked myself,if it makes a difference in 4-5yrs.to me on his contract,absolutely not,because,we are already ahead of the game with having him.

[timepiece33]

I lose Posey as a player and view Maggette as a pipedream, but if I had a choice between the two ... Maggette in a landslide.   He's younger and a better overall player.  That said, Posey was a very important part of our championship run AND if we can secure him for 3 years at the MLE, I am open to it.  At 4, I'd consider it.

[Roy Hobbs]

Is Maggette really that much better than Ricky Davis? 

Yes.