Posey to the Hornets (Boston Globe Reporting)

[indeedproceed]

Can we please stop calling O'Bryant "O'Blount"?

It's disrespectful to Blount to be compared to such a crap player. Too far, just too far.

Complimenting a player isn't a put down and that's what a comparison to Blount is for O'Bryant.

I take it you're a fan of the signing then?


Kidding, kidding...

[Hoops]

Ainge has said he's NOT signing another big. O'Blount is it. And he doesn't want to go longer than 1 yr on a backup pg. Why do people think he's saving this money to spend on others? He's said as much. This nonmove wasn't about getting someone else or salary cap flexibility. It was about Wyc wanting better profits. Basketball wise, I wouldn't have given Posey 5 yrs, but not offering 3? That's ridiculous. This wasn't a basketball decision. Wyc's trying to buy the LA Kings.

Negotiations 101 says that you offer less (or demand more, depending on which side of the table you're on) than you're actually willing to pay. In an ideal negotiation, you meet in the middle. Ainge knew Posey wanted 4 years. Ainge was probably willing to give him 3. So he correctly offered him 2. If nobody had offered Posey 4 years, it would only have been a matter of time before Posey would came back to the table and said, "Hey Ainge, give me a third year and you've got a deal." And Ainge would have done it.

To say this wasn't a basketball decision is silly. As others have said, Ainge drew a line that we wouldn't cross. 4 years was too much.

[Brendan]

Agree too much for too long. Having the MLE as a ceiling for FA tends to put upward pressure on players' salaray artificially up to that limit. (Note how many guys make max-mle deals and then the big gap until the max guys, with few guys in between.) And four years is rediculously long for a 31 year old wing. He'll still be as effective offensively, because shooting doesn't die, but his offense is not that good - although it WAS VERY CLUTCH this year. Good for him for capitalizing on his market value, good for the Celtics for not over paying.

From a utilization standpoint he played more time behind KG at the PF spot, then he did at SF, and no time at the SG spot. I'd like to see a backup who can protect Ray Allen first and foremost. If this means are front line is Perk, KG, Pierce backed up by BBD, Powe, and Scal - I can live with that.

The big concern is currently Ray Allen and Rajon Rondo are backed up by.... Pruitt (and Giddens if he's signed). So we clearly need to see what DA does with Giddens and Walker, and we need to see what happens with House (who sounds gone as well) and Tony Allen. But even then I'm more scared about the backup guard spot(s), then the minutes we lost from Posey. Giving his PF minutes to Powe should be an improvement, and Scal taking over his SF minutes (which is worst case scenario) won't kill you. Pruitt and Giddens at the guard spots scares me.

Delonte West? Stephone Marbury? There are guys who can play the 1 and 2 spots out there.

[LarBrd33]

The big 3 is this team.

Ubuntu?
 

Well now Posey wanted 4 years 25 million in a deal that would hamper us for the future AND today.

Count me among those that aren't worrying about the future, which could just as well involve another twenty year rebuilding project, regardless of whether or not we overpay Posey on the back end of his deal. Please nobody trot out that tired anecdote about Ainge wanting to trade a banged up Bird and McHale and a aging Parish.

We don't have to rely on scraps anymore, because it's still early in the free agency period and there are several directions we can go to fill this team's needs.

Please be more specific, because Patrick O'Byrant is scraps. Darius Miles, Kirk Snyder and Stephon Marbury are scraps.

It has nothing to do with a 20 year rebuilding project.  It is about a reloading project in 3 years, which is a relevant thing to worry about.  Posey, like all players who contribute to a title, feels indispensible, but he is not.  Pierce, Garnett, THEY are indispensible.  Most title teams have some turnover on the fringes, and this is no different.

In 2005, Theo let core pieces of the 2004 champs go.  The misconception is that the Sox would have repeated keeping Cabrera and Pedro and Lowe, when Pedro's arm was about to fall off his body.  Would those guys have helped the Sox win it all in 2005?  Who knows?  

It was an organizational decision, and a tough one, but one that is entirely defensible.  Turnover is a fact of life, and most champions DO have some turnover on the fringes.  Repeating in the NBA is tough, and the teams that did had the best player in the league on it.  

O'Bryant is a useful flyer to take for the minimum salary.  Is he a dropoff from Scot Pollard?  Not at all, since Pollard couldn't stay on the floor.  O'Bryant may or may not be any good, who knows.  But he definitely has some ceiling, and a hypercritical assessment of his time in Golden State has to be tempered by the fact that he played for a coach who generally hates big men.  (hell, Nellie has one of the league's best centers now and does not like playing him) O'Bryant's wounds in GS were self inflicted, but he also played in a situation where he simply did not have a chance to succeed anyway.

How to replace Posey?  Well, not counting the trade market, Quinton Ross offers very similar defense.  He is not the same shooter Posey is obviously, but he showed a slightly higher willingness to take the shot a year ago.  He would fit into the defensive scheme quite nicely, and is probably a better man-to-man defender than Posey.  

I am intrigued more by Josh Childress though, although that will take time.  That is a matter of Josh Smith getting resigned by the bumbling Hawks ownership.  With their cap and ownership questions, really they might have to make an either/or decision there.  Childress is younger, and a much lower risk on the backside of a deal, and he is already a more efficient player on the glass and on the offensive end.

I will cheer when Posey returns.  He helped us win a title.  But he made a decision for his career, and I wish it would have been with us.

Well said.  Great points.  Thanks.   You touched on something important to the "long-term" concept.  The bit about "reloading" in a couple years around Pierce/KG is important.

But It's also important for people to take a look at our current roster and realize there are gaps that need to be filled.  That MLE will provide us with the flexibility to fill it.   Posey refusing to take a shorter deal was enough for the Celtics to move on.  This will all work out.  

[winsomme]

The big 3 is this team.

Ubuntu?
 

Well now Posey wanted 4 years 25 million in a deal that would hamper us for the future AND today.

Count me among those that aren't worrying about the future, which could just as well involve another twenty year rebuilding project, regardless of whether or not we overpay Posey on the back end of his deal. Please nobody trot out that tired anecdote about Ainge wanting to trade a banged up Bird and McHale and a aging Parish.

We don't have to rely on scraps anymore, because it's still early in the free agency period and there are several directions we can go to fill this team's needs.

Please be more specific, because Patrick O'Byrant is scraps. Darius Miles, Kirk Snyder and Stephon Marbury are scraps.

It has nothing to do with a 20 year rebuilding project.  It is about a reloading project in 3 years, which is a relevant thing to worry about.  Posey, like all players who contribute to a title, feels indispensible, but he is not.  Pierce, Garnett, THEY are indispensible.  Most title teams have some turnover on the fringes, and this is no different.

i totally do not understand the "reload in 3 years" theory.

KG and Paul are going to be so much better next year than they are going to be in three years from now......when Paul will be entering his 14th season and KG his 17th!!!  these guys are going to burn out at some point....

why not put the best team out there the next few years and then go back and rebuild? if we have some crappy salaries on the books by then who cares.....let them expire and start the process all over again...

and by the way.....4 years for 25 mil.....i mean how burdensome is that contract really....

[crownsy]

I would guess the % of people that thought Ainge should sign a 7pt career 6 man to whatever he wants is pretty close to the % of people that openly said Ainge didn't know what he was doing prior to May of 2007.  So in the respect maybe they should rethink their opinions.

i still don't have that much confidence in Danny. he made a myriad of bad trades before this year and kinda lucked into KG and the title ........ and this is one more bad decision.

right, not crippling our cap with a 4 year deal to a bench player who will be 35 and 36 years old at a position that traditionaly tends to degrade at age 33 is the worst move he's ever made.

do you guys read what you type? sometimes i wonder.

[Andy Jick]

improvise...adapt...overcome...

good for him - he got his lengthy deal...life moves on and there's no reason to panic.  now he's got a bunch of new guys to give his pre-game hugs to.

but my hat's off to danny for not giving him a 4 year deal...

[LarBrd33]

Congrats to Posey..I thought it would take 4 and that is what he got..I have a feeling that Danny's plan B has really been his plan A all along..we will see. Kind of like Theo in 2004...they both drew the line in the sand and hopefully it will pay dividends for us as well.

Like when Theo let Cabrera and Lowe go, so that he could sign Renteria and Clement? Did that help us repeat? Theo learned from his mistake at least and kept the 2007 champs together. I thought Ainge was learning from his mistakes (like firing Dick Harter and disregarding defense to hiring Thibs and seeing how defense pays). Or trying to be a brain doctor and signing guys like Googs and Scal to making the obvious signings of House, posey, and PJ. But with the O'Blount signing, not offering 3 yrs to Posey, or 2 to House, I don't see tht Ainge has turned the corner. Ainge has no problem biding against no one and signing Scal for 5 yrs or giving Blount 6 yrs or bringing in long term contracts Wally and Raef, but offering Posey and House 3 and 2 yrs respectively to compete once you finally have a good team? No that's too much.

The big 3 is this team.  Perk and Rondo are the other starters.   The bench is the big question.  Last year we made the most of what was left of NBA scraps by bringing in Pollard, House and Posey.  Mid-season we made the most of buyouts by bringing in Sam Cassell ... and eventually convincing PJ Brown to come out of retirement.   Ainge was basically throwing together pieces to fit around the starting 5 and it ended up working.   

Well now Posey wanted 4 years 25 million in a deal that would hamper us for the future AND today.   Again, this team needs needs a backup big man, a backup point guard, some defense off the bench... and Ainge clearly felt that our best chance of filling those gaps was using the MLE.  We'll see what he does with the MLE now that he has more options and flexibility.  We don't have to rely on scraps anymore, because it's still early in the free agency period and there are several directions we can go to fill this team's needs.   I'm not worried.  I'm not in a state of panic.  And neither should anyone else on this board.  If we head into the season without signing anyone else... feel free to freak out.  But that's clearly not happening.  Ainge already basically mentioned that he has offers out and he's just waiting to see what happens.  Now that Posey is out of the picture, he can be more aggressive in his attempts to fill this team out (not just relying on vet minimums).

Ainge has said he's NOT signing another big. O'Blount is it. And he doesn't want to go longer than 1 yr on a backup pg. Why do people think he's saving this money to spend on others? He's said as much. This nonmove wasn't about getting someone else or salary cap flexibility. It was about Wyc wanting better profits. Basketball wise, I wouldn't have given Posey 5 yrs, but not offering 3? That's ridiculous. This wasn't a basketball decision. Wyc's trying to buy the LA Kings.

I absolutely agree. This move has nothing to do with maintaining "financial flexibility."  From a purely basketball management perspective, a four year contract for Posey would not have harmed the team.  Any of the mle not used this year is essentially lost, and they wont be under the cap in 4 years anyway.

If the ownership does not end up using the full mle (on who, I don't know), this move can be seen as nothing else but a financial / money saving tactic for them, not the club. 

Also, any comparisons to the Patriots or Red Sox are completely irrelevant.  The Patriots work under a hard cap.  And the Sox vastly outspend all but 1 team in the league.

where would it save them money if they were offering him the full MLE?

plus, they must know that the best money maker is getting this team BACK to the Finals......money saving is illogical IMO.

It would only save them $ in year 4, which is why this move is hard to fathom (unless Ainge really has something else he is working on - or feels splitting the mle on the likes of House, others, and locking up Walker is more valuable to the club).  I guess my point is the following: when you are going to be over / around the salary cap anyway in 4 years, giving the extra / 4th year to Posey would have in no way hampered the clubs ability to sign / trade for other players at that time or over the next three years.

Thus, it appears to come down to how much ownership is willing to spend (again, unless there is some other plan in place / players they are targeting).

Of course, this does not always mean that ownership is being cheap.  I have no sense of ownership's profit margin or how much the team has increases in value since their purchase.  Perhaps the team is in the red, with no real increase to value.  If that is the case, then cost saving moves are understandable.  But, I doubt that is the case.

Look, I wanted to bring Posey back too, but that doesn't mean I wanted the Celtics to be a stupid franchise.  

Two things:

#1 - Giving Posey that contract would mean we were stuck trying to fill the rest of this roster with vet min contracts

#2 -  I don't want to see this team become the Knicks in a a few years with guys like Posey making 8 million a year.  I've had my fair share of stupid management and contracts tying this franchise down.   Believe it or not, this roster is currently constructed in a way that will allow us to be competitive after this perceived "2 year window".   WE'll have some options with Ray's contract when it's up as far as retooling this roster... and we'll be able to fill some needs around the aging KG/Pierce when that time comes.   I love that this management is smart enough not to get this team into some deal that is going to hamper us in the future.   And really... I think overpaying an overrated player when there are other options out there is a dumb idea.  

I'm happy for Posey, but this team will be just fine.    

[cordobes]

Can we please stop calling O'Bryant "O'Blount"?

It's disrespectful to Blount to be compared to such a crap player. Too far, just too far.

Complimenting a player isn't a put down and that's what a comparison to Blount is for O'Bryant.

 

This needed to be said. Personally, I can't agree more.

[Andy Jick]

Can we please stop calling O'Bryant "O'Blount"?

It's disrespectful to Blount to be compared to such a crap player. Too far, just too far.

Complimenting a player isn't a put down and that's what a comparison to Blount is for O'Bryant.

 

This needed to be said. Personally, I can't agree more.

it's impossible to disrespect mark blount...

[winsomme]

Congrats to Posey..I thought it would take 4 and that is what he got..I have a feeling that Danny's plan B has really been his plan A all along..we will see. Kind of like Theo in 2004...they both drew the line in the sand and hopefully it will pay dividends for us as well.

Like when Theo let Cabrera and Lowe go, so that he could sign Renteria and Clement? Did that help us repeat? Theo learned from his mistake at least and kept the 2007 champs together. I thought Ainge was learning from his mistakes (like firing Dick Harter and disregarding defense to hiring Thibs and seeing how defense pays). Or trying to be a brain doctor and signing guys like Googs and Scal to making the obvious signings of House, posey, and PJ. But with the O'Blount signing, not offering 3 yrs to Posey, or 2 to House, I don't see tht Ainge has turned the corner. Ainge has no problem biding against no one and signing Scal for 5 yrs or giving Blount 6 yrs or bringing in long term contracts Wally and Raef, but offering Posey and House 3 and 2 yrs respectively to compete once you finally have a good team? No that's too much.

The big 3 is this team.  Perk and Rondo are the other starters.   The bench is the big question.  Last year we made the most of what was left of NBA scraps by bringing in Pollard, House and Posey.  Mid-season we made the most of buyouts by bringing in Sam Cassell ... and eventually convincing PJ Brown to come out of retirement.   Ainge was basically throwing together pieces to fit around the starting 5 and it ended up working.   

Well now Posey wanted 4 years 25 million in a deal that would hamper us for the future AND today.   Again, this team needs needs a backup big man, a backup point guard, some defense off the bench... and Ainge clearly felt that our best chance of filling those gaps was using the MLE.  We'll see what he does with the MLE now that he has more options and flexibility.  We don't have to rely on scraps anymore, because it's still early in the free agency period and there are several directions we can go to fill this team's needs.   I'm not worried.  I'm not in a state of panic.  And neither should anyone else on this board.  If we head into the season without signing anyone else... feel free to freak out.  But that's clearly not happening.  Ainge already basically mentioned that he has offers out and he's just waiting to see what happens.  Now that Posey is out of the picture, he can be more aggressive in his attempts to fill this team out (not just relying on vet minimums).

Ainge has said he's NOT signing another big. O'Blount is it. And he doesn't want to go longer than 1 yr on a backup pg. Why do people think he's saving this money to spend on others? He's said as much. This nonmove wasn't about getting someone else or salary cap flexibility. It was about Wyc wanting better profits. Basketball wise, I wouldn't have given Posey 5 yrs, but not offering 3? That's ridiculous. This wasn't a basketball decision. Wyc's trying to buy the LA Kings.

I absolutely agree. This move has nothing to do with maintaining "financial flexibility."  From a purely basketball management perspective, a four year contract for Posey would not have harmed the team.  Any of the mle not used this year is essentially lost, and they wont be under the cap in 4 years anyway.

If the ownership does not end up using the full mle (on who, I don't know), this move can be seen as nothing else but a financial / money saving tactic for them, not the club. 

Also, any comparisons to the Patriots or Red Sox are completely irrelevant.  The Patriots work under a hard cap.  And the Sox vastly outspend all but 1 team in the league.

where would it save them money if they were offering him the full MLE?

plus, they must know that the best money maker is getting this team BACK to the Finals......money saving is illogical IMO.

It would only save them $ in year 4, which is why this move is hard to fathom (unless Ainge really has something else he is working on - or feels splitting the mle on the likes of House, others, and locking up Walker is more valuable to the club).  I guess my point is the following: when you are going to be over / around the salary cap anyway in 4 years, giving the extra / 4th year to Posey would have in no way hampered the clubs ability to sign / trade for other players at that time or over the next three years.

Thus, it appears to come down to how much ownership is willing to spend (again, unless there is some other plan in place / players they are targeting).

Of course, this does not always mean that ownership is being cheap.  I have no sense of ownership's profit margin or how much the team has increases in value since their purchase.  Perhaps the team is in the red, with no real increase to value.  If that is the case, then cost saving moves are understandable.  But, I doubt that is the case.

well there certainly is value to repeating and possibly becoming a Dynasty as opposed to say losing in the ECF the next couple of seasons....

saving money doesn't really make sense as a reason here...the ownership must know the money maker they have here if they are able to win a couple more Titles...

i still think that the only way this makes sense is if they are fairly confident that they can put someone in Posey's spot that will be as productive. because to bring a team next season that is weaker just doesn't make sense on any level....basketball-wise or money-making wise...

[LarBrd33]

winsomme... obviously they aren't going to head into the season without making further signings...

And obviously they had a problem with overpaying Posey when other options were available.

Don't worry about it.  Lets look at this in a few months when we see what we use the MLE on and what we ultimately "traded" Posey for.

[johnnyrondo]

right, not crippling our cap with a 4 year deal to a bench player who will be 35 and 36 years old at a position that traditionaly tends to degrade at age 33 is the worst move he's ever made.

do you guys read what you type? sometimes i wonder.

Well Ainge wouldn't offer 3 yrs. At the end of 3 yrs, Posey would have been 34. I would gladly give ourselves the best chance to win the next two years and if Posey "degrades at age 33" oh well he's an expiring contract.

[sk7326]

The big 3 is this team.

Ubuntu?
 

Well now Posey wanted 4 years 25 million in a deal that would hamper us for the future AND today.

Count me among those that aren't worrying about the future, which could just as well involve another twenty year rebuilding project, regardless of whether or not we overpay Posey on the back end of his deal. Please nobody trot out that tired anecdote about Ainge wanting to trade a banged up Bird and McHale and a aging Parish.

We don't have to rely on scraps anymore, because it's still early in the free agency period and there are several directions we can go to fill this team's needs.

Please be more specific, because Patrick O'Byrant is scraps. Darius Miles, Kirk Snyder and Stephon Marbury are scraps.

It has nothing to do with a 20 year rebuilding project.  It is about a reloading project in 3 years, which is a relevant thing to worry about.  Posey, like all players who contribute to a title, feels indispensible, but he is not.  Pierce, Garnett, THEY are indispensible.  Most title teams have some turnover on the fringes, and this is no different.

i totally do not understand the "reload in 3 years" theory.

KG and Paul are going to be so much better next year than they are going to be in three years from now......when Paul will be entering his 14th season and KG his 17th!!!  these guys are going to burn out at some point....

why not put the best team out there the next few years and then go back and rebuild? if we have some crappy salaries on the books by then who cares.....let them expire and start the process all over again...

and by the way.....4 years for 25 mil.....i mean how burdensome is that contract really....

1. With the luxury tax considerations that leaps to a 4 year, 50 million contract.  Not my money, but ...

2. I am not expecting to build around Pierce and KG in 3 years.  But I am expecting the Celts to be under the cap or have very very few obligations (only core guys).  

The thing with reloading is that, and I think the league has shown this, that franchises go from being loser franchises to being "winning" franchises overnight.  The Celtics now are not only a champion, but they are "winners" again.  With the individual salary maximum in the NBA, at some level, attracting players is a lot like recruiting in college football.  A blue chip running back would often rather be 3rd string at USC rather than a starter at Temple.  

Since Massachusetts does have a state income tax, no celebrity industry, and relatively lousy weather, what makes the Celtics most attractive to good players is that they are the flagship franchise of the NBA.  When we were in NBA purgatory these last 22 years, it was hard to give our midlevel away, because the guys who you'd want, would rather take that sort of paycut to play for a winner.  The idea of staying flexible not only has to do with the cap itself, but about maintaining the perception that the Celtics are a "winning" franchise.  For instance, Memphis is collecting all of this cap space.  Do you really think that they will be able to give that away when the summer of reckoning shows up?  Why?  If they are perceived as a rubbish organization, players will do something else.  

The "reloading" is not about trying to work around KG and Pierce when they are old.  It is about being able to have the financial flexibility to add another big core player at a time when we might have to (because KG and Pierce are not getting younger), and in a position where the franchise is respected and valued enough in the league that we can attract somebody to take the mantle.

I tasted irrelevance in the NBA hierarchy and I'd like to not feel that again. 

[D Dub]

Can we please stop calling O'Bryant "O'Blount"?

It's disrespectful to Blount to be compared to such a crap player. Too far, just too far.

Complimenting a player isn't a put down and that's what a comparison to Blount is for O'Bryant.

That's it, tear into the kid without even seeing him play a pro game.  Very informed commentary...