Do we really come off as being almost arrogant simply because we want our team to continue to win now while not doing it at the expense of ruining tomorrow for many years to come?
Do we really come off as almost arrogant for wanting, as Roy so aptly stated, to win now while also planning to win later?
If this was a bad team everyone on this board would be doing exactly what I am trying to do, which is to build a team that can win for a long time. Older, expensive role players wanting 5 year deals wouldn't even contemplated because the idea is against the basic unwritten rule of trying to maintain growth and excellence over a period of time.
So instead the same people who would reject this signing in a heartbeat if we had not won it all last year are willing to throw away tens of millions of Wyc Groubeck's money simply because having the 7th best player on the team return next year is all that is important in winning now. Does anyone realize that a full MLE could well effect the resigning of Eddie House who I think was every bit as important to this team as James posey was.
And giving Posey that contract guarantees only that Posey returns it does not guarantee another title run. Posey was a cog in the engine that won it all. But he wasn't that big a cog that someone couldn't come in to replace him(Barnes, Pietrus, Bonzi Wells) on the cheap while also using some money to upgrade the backup center position(Kurt Thomas) so that Posey's replacement would have to try to defend the 4 like Posey did.
So as much as Posey's replacement might not be as good as Posey, the upgrade in another position can keep us overall just as likely to repeat while maintaining that almost arrogant plan of trying to be title contenders even after the Big Three start to break apart and we need to move forward without them.
i think, nick, the problem is we have seen this "plug and play" strategy not work and really good "cores" not win as many Titles as they might have.
we don't have a very big window with GPA, so it seems to me that maximizing that window is the priority.
i don't see many people saying that we can't win without Posey, but who replaces him matters.
for instance, the difference between Bonzi and Posey is massive.
remember that DET fans thought the same thing about their role players and now they are on the verge of busting up their team...
You keep bringing up Detroit but that Detroit championship, at least IMHO, was an aberration. Non superstar teams that win using team play are a giantic NBA aberration. Detroit shouldn't have expected to win again without adding a superstar and they haven't and won't. That core wasn't that good.
The Celtics have 3 superstars. The San Anonio teams had at least 2 and during other years three superstars. The Lakers of Kobe/Shaq had superstars as well. Those Spurs and Lakers teams locked in their stars and starers long term and everyone else were short term renewable contracts. Those teams were not locking in bench players long term. This kept the team competitive enough to win now with SUPERSTARS and viable long term to do it later as they developed or brought on other star type talent.
The Pistons never had that SUPERSTAR that could be built around or who could carry a team to the championship. It's why plugging in didn't work there because their excellent coach was replaced by a moron and because they didn't have the ultimate talent in the core in the first place.
The Celtics core is as talented as any core that has been together since MJ, Pippen, Rodman. The intermingling of complimentary role players will work and keep titles coming because it is that core that wins rings not the 7th, 8th, and 9th guys off the depth chart that do. Posey was good last year but not essential otherwise last year doesn't happen good. Other could do his job.
And just because Wells isn't as good a player as Posey, that doesn't mean he couldn't give us most of what Posey gives us and then have someone else pick up the rest of the slack.
Again who replaces him matters but don't downplay what upgrading other areas on the roster can and will do to offset that loss of performance that anyone who replaces Posey has.
DET was an aberration? they have been to the ECF 6 straight years!!! and the FInals twice......call it what you want, "core" or "superstars", that team had the talent to win Titles and they have done a lot of tinkering and not won since 2004. and it's not like they beat some softy. they beat the Lakers and then went to seven with the Spurs the very next year.
and the Lakers IMO did bring back their key role players in Fox, Horry and Fisher. and they were big in all their Title wins. in fact, Horry is the PERFECT example of why we SHOULD bring back Posey.
and on the Spurs, it mattered WHO their role players were....i would actually argue that if they had brought back Stephen Jackson, they could have won MORE Titles and they also had a bigger window with their "core" of TD, TP and Ginobili (remember i am not arguing that we can't win without Posey). so they could afford to have comobs that didn't work (ie Nesterovic and Turkoglu) and just try again (ie Nazr and Brent Barry). so again, to me, the Spurs once again show that it matters WHO the replacements are....
we have a very small window with our "core", so if we for instance sign a Pietrus for 3 years and it doesn't work, we've wasted one of these few opportunities with GPA...
the Isiah DET teams were defined as much by their RPs as their stars with Vinnie, Salley and Rodman...the Rockets with Elie, Horry and Cassell....the Bulls with Kerr, Rodman and Kukoc.
IMO there is a great tradition of RPs on Title teams.
like i have said over and over here, it is certainly possible to replace Posey, but it matters who the replacement is....and remember that our window is small, so one mistake could make it even smaller....thus, for me, why risk it when we KNOW what Posey can do...
anyway, like i have also said, i do trust Danny. and that is most important of all.
Topic: Win it all next year vs. economic suicide (Read 38789 times)