At times, hard to stay positive over the off season moves

[Fan from VT]

Regardless of what Ainge did it would have been nearly impossible to duplicate last season's success. We were lucky with injuries and lots of things went our way. Our team is not built to survive a truly major injury, and nothing Ainge could have done would have fixed that. PJ Brown had one good game but was pretty bad besides that, and Cassell was more often a minus than a plus. So we really only lost Posey, but TA, BBD and Powe should all be better next season as they gain more experience, practice, conditioning and health.

-Starters are the same, but with more time together and playoff experience; Perk and Rondo are also still on the upslope of their careers.
-6th man, instead of Posey, is now determined by who needs to come out first: House or Tony can enter if Ray or Rondo sit, Tony can enter if Ray or Pierce leaves, and Powe enters first if KG or Perk sits.
-Regardless, our first 4 off the bench are House, Tony, Powe, Baby; Baby, Tony and Powe should be ready to do more than they did last season in terms of minutes and contribution. Scal, for all his shortcomings, knows his limits and plays good team D. That's 10.
-Therefore, the question marks are really only players 11-15: Giddens, O'bryant, Walker, Pruitt, Miles. No doubt one of those will be cut if a great midseason buyout happens. In that part of the bench I have no problems messing with projects/gambles, since, as I said above, our roster is far too top heavy to address potential major injury insurance via MLE free agency.


In conclusion, we probably won't win a title, but nothing Ainge could have done in free agency - not even bringing back Posey at any cost - would have guaranteed a title. Ainge could have done better, possibly, but the potential upgrades discussed probably wouldn't have affected actual games that much; most of the team is returning intact.

[Roy Hobbs]

1) By any stretch of the imagination, Posey's $7 million in 2011 wouldn't have "tanked" the season.  

2) We didn't lose any players to Europe.  Regardless of what happens sooner or later, the Celts have the bench they do because of choice, not necessity.

The team wasn't forced to go with a bench full of unproven / unhealthy / poor players.  They deliberately made that choice.  I find it to be a bit surprising, but we'll see how it turns out.

While I think I understand your points Roy, we only had the mid level and minimum contracts to offer. Signing Posey to the deal he wanted would have cost us all of that and we would be minus Eddie, POB, Tony Allen and have very little left to sign another player except the minimum.

(...)

Not true. We added Allen and POB without using the MLE. We could have signed House without using it as well. We had the MLE, the LLE and the non-Bird rights to our own free-agents.

You are telling me that only Eddie House is counted against our MLE? Then we should have about 4 million give or take left over instead of the 1.8 million number I hear being tossed around. Sorry, I am not sure I believe that we have only used the MLE on Eddie.

Why wouldn't you believe it?  We offered Posey a full three-year MLE deal *after* we signed P.O.B.  Thus, he wasn't signed using the MLE.  We had Tony's Bird rights.  Thus, the *only* guy counting against our MLE is House, as cordobes stated.

Where are you hearing $1.8 million from?  That number sounds inaccurate.

[guava_wrench]

3 out of 4 were McDonald's All-Americans, each was a mock-draft top 15 pick at one point in their NCAA careers, and each dropped in perceived value due to circumstances beyond their physical ability--that was my point.

With all due respect to what you do over at draftexpress, wasn't Gerald Green projected as a top 15 pick in a mock draft?  Martynas Andriuskevicius?  Any number of other guys?

Just because somebody is projected to be drafted highly at one point doesn't mean that they were deserving of that distinction.  You guys miss on players all the time, as do NBA GMs.

Also, I think Walker and Miles were valued as much for their insane athleticism as they were for any particular "talent"; I think those two things are separate and apart.  Walker has now had, what, three knee injuries?  And Miles, of course, is looking at knee replacement surgery.

I just don't see a lot utility in the argument (boiled down to its core) that "these guys were projected to be good three years ago".  Big deal, honestly.  P.O.B. has shown nothing, and Miles is unable to play according to NBA doctors.  Walker was good but not great last season, as was Giddens.  Each could pan out (with Walker being the most likely in my opinion, and Giddens having a good chance at being a role player), but none of the four are sure things.  Results and track record are infinitely more important than talent and potential.  I'm definitely interested in the latter, but would be more comfortable if there was a bit more of the former.

A lot of solid points in this post.

Thing is, no college players really have a relevant track record or results unless we try to determine how their results will translate to the NBA and, in particular, to a particular role on a team.

I think Danny has done a good job post-Banks of understanding how pre-NBA performance and talent converts to NBA performance. I'll give him a pass on Gerald because I don't know that the Celtics were really prepared for the scenario of him falling to them and if they were, it seems like a desperation move with hopes of the best case big payoff.

I have no problem with roster spots 13-15 going to guys who might not contribute, but is is a little disconcerting to have positions 11-15 all held by guys who might not be NBA ready this year (POB, Miles, JR, Walker, Pruitt).

[KevinGamble]

Good discussion, great posts from both sides. TP to Nick for starting it.

I think wdleehi's point above is absolutely correct.

With one individual "low risk, high reward" player, it's exactly that:  you're taking a gamble on a player, and if he doesn't work out, big deal.

With several "low risk, high reward" players, however, the *collective* risk is high, because if one or more of those players doesn't pan out, suddenly your roster is left with legitimate holes.

Yeps, this sums up my position. The truth is that the probability of the new guys being failures is a reason to be concerned. Players who are picked so late in the draft have more chances to be out of the NBA in 2 years than to be solid rotational players (and I've never heard that Giddens was being considered to be a lottery pick; Walker was considered one before college - like dozens of players that never make the NBA -, I saw him carefully in half-a-dozen of matches last season, when he was as healthy as he's now, and he's simply not lottery material; we still don't know if Pruitt is a NBA player). Tony Allen has never proved he can be good enough to be the 6th man on a contender. Miles would make history if he plays again. Lottery picks who don't get their contracts extentend generally aren't good enough to play in the NBA (and O'Bryant was never considered a sure thing, he carried a huge bust potential since the beggining). So, history is against us. One can say that we added "talent". Well, personally, I don't know. Maybe we did. Maybe not. I guess it depends on the definition of talent: some still say that Gerald Green has talent. But who cares? Fact is that none of these players have proved to be talented. Also, the problem is not that if "none of them" will be ready to contribute next May. That will be a really big problem. But, for example, if O'Bryant fails, we'll have a very big hole on our roster. Can we adress it during the season? Perhaps, but with someone better than Thomas, PJ Brown or Elson?

I predict Doc will be blamed if things don't work. But the fact is that most of our bench players haven't proved yet that they are NBA material, let alone good enough to be rotational players on a playoff run to win it all (I'm less worried about the reg. season). Also, besides the lack of experience, this roster has a glaring hole: not enough players who can shoot the rock from the outside. Teams without good outside shooters end up being teams whose offense is reduced to outside jump-shots.

I think that not re-signing Posey was the big mistake. He was much better than anyone else available and him alone would solve most of our bench problems during this title window.

...are you even remotely aware of how much statistical analysis the Boston Celtics do on the players they evaluate? They aren't "gambling" based off simplistic things like where the player was drafted...these players have been dissected to the Nth degree and compared historically to numerous players in order to get concrete odds on strength, weakness, and projected growth time lines...Boston is one of the most advanced front offices in regards to stat analysis and Ainge mixes that with a careful regard for traditional scouting, (watches more tape than anyone) and considers the mental aspects of the game as well...

These decisions weren't reached arbitrarily...knowing his process and seeing his track record with unproven players, which POB/Walker/Giddens all fall into that category--i REALLY like the chances of at least one of these guys  working out and i'd bank on all 3 actually being solid and still feel like its even money...

...Miles is Miles...if he can actually play,  it doesn't matter if its at or near his former ability...if he's healthy he is a 6th man type no problem...only question with him is IF he truly can play...if attitude is any type of issue he's gone, but if he can physically play, the team just improved...

I agree here, and most of us will look at this celtics roster with a lot of hope for repeating.  the vets will have to use the mettle they gained through a long long playoffs to make up for posey, but this is not a bad gamble either.  I like the moves a lot so far, new infusions of youth and athleticism so we can face the Atlanta's of the league with experience and talent.  A good coach should be able to look at this line-up and find a winner any given night, and I believe in Doc now.

additionally, this roster now has a lot of flexibility in it's parts.  Core guys like Ray and role players like scal have attractive contracts to move.  If Danny sees these gambles faltering, there are options.  We are not stuck with big ugly contracts right now.  Les-go '08!!!

Go Celts!

[BillfromBoston]

3 out of 4 were McDonald's All-Americans, each was a mock-draft top 15 pick at one point in their NCAA careers, and each dropped in perceived value due to circumstances beyond their physical ability--that was my point.

With all due respect to what you do over at draftexpress, wasn't Gerald Green projected as a top 15 pick in a mock draft?  Martynas Andriuskevicius?  Any number of other guys?

Just because somebody is projected to be drafted highly at one point doesn't mean that they were deserving of that distinction.  You guys miss on players all the time, as do NBA GMs.

Also, I think Walker and Miles were valued as much for their insane athleticism as they were for any particular "talent"; I think those two things are separate and apart.  Walker has now had, what, three knee injuries?  And Miles, of course, is looking at knee replacement surgery.

I just don't see a lot utility in the argument (boiled down to its core) that "these guys were projected to be good three years ago".  Big deal, honestly.  P.O.B. has shown nothing, and Miles is unable to play according to NBA doctors.  Walker was good but not great last season, as was Giddens.  Each could pan out (with Walker being the most likely in my opinion, and Giddens having a good chance at being a role player), but none of the four are sure things.  Results and track record are infinitely more important than talent and potential.  I'm definitely interested in the latter, but would be more comfortable if there was a bit more of the former.

....this is semantics Roy, forget where players are PROJECTED, players who are DRAFTED straight-up don't live up to  their draft position...the purpose of projections is about the perception of their talent, that was my point...

...and FYI, the mock drafts created at DX,(I have nothing to do with them) are created by contacting numerous scouts and front office execs and getting THEIR consensus on talent..the DX mock has NEVER been about DX's singular opinion on prospects...their are dozens of guys Givony would never rank as high as they are, but he does so because that's where teams have them ranked...

[no kidding]

Yes, Posey was about as close as you get to being a 'sure thing', at least for a couple of years.  But not for the four years that he wanted. And certainly, there's nothing sure about anyone producing out of the group of Tony Allen, Giddens, Walker, O'Bryant, Pruitt, and Miles.  But if any of them do, then in four years they're likely to be more valuable to the Celtics than Posey would be. And that counts for something.

[BillfromBoston]

Isn't THIS a little bit presumptuous?  Why assume Giddens and Walker are are better than 15 of the 30 or so players drafted before them, just because Ainge was the one that drafted them?  Are the other teams just so thick that they didn't think to draft these guys themselves?

Not saying these guys are going to be busts, I have faith that the team *might* have made some savvy picks here (of course they could have done better, but most teams could as well)...  And it's not like I'm against rooting for/hyping up your home team guys..  But if they were lottery players, they would have atleast gone early 20s, right?  What if these guys are the the 30th and 47th best players in the 08 draft, should I be riled up for that?

O'bryant and Miles were lottery picks. Experts have all said that Giddens and Walker would've been lottery little to do with their talent level.picks had it not been for some particular circumstances like "attitude problems" and injury concerns. They had

Could not disagree more with this. Paddy was a misspent lottery pick, and anyone who saw him play in college knew that. Miles, I don't know about. But being deemed unable to play isn't encouraging.

Billy Walker I saw a bunch of over a year and a half in college. The bad condition of his legs make calling him a lottery pick erroneous, as does his tendency to blow up emotionally. Giddens has shooting issues, and to a lesser degree character issues. I understand the desire to support Ainge. He had a great summer. Last year. But it's hideously presumptuous to call everyone he's added a lottery pick just because he added them.

There's nothing to disagree with. The statement in question was about the talent level, not about wether they should've been picked in the lottery or not. The general concensus between scouts and experts have considered Walker and Giddens as lottery level talent. As I mentioned, there were particular circumstances that prevented them from being so.

Links, please? I need to know who to take less seriously in the future.

Yeah, this is oft-repeated, but I haven't heard Walker described as a lottery-talent since his first knee injury (there have been, what, three now?) and I don't think Giddens has been projected at that level since he transferred to the Lobos.  Walker lost some of his athleticism (much of the reason he was projected so highly was because people thought he had the hops of Vince Carter; he doesn't have those any more), and Giddens showed that he wasn't as good as he looked coming out of high-school.  As much as it gets repeated, the reason Giddens didn't get drafted isn't because of character; players with character concerns get drafted every year (Sean Williams, for instance).  Rather, it was those character concerns combined with scouts not being as high on his upside any more.  Keep in mind, the kid is going to be 24 next season, and never dominated college.  *That's* why he slipped (and was projected to slip a lot farther if not drafted by Danny).

Just because a player was once highly-regarded or hyped doesn't mean he has a tremendous amount of talent.  NBA scouts miss all the time, which is why some of those same scouts had Gerald Green as a top-three pick at one time. 

I like Danny, and I hope the draft picks work out.  On paper, they certainly seem to have near-elite athleticism.  That does not, however, make them "lottery picks", and it doesn't make them sure things, either.

...not entirely true...

1. Walker was projected as a lottery talent until his 2nd knee injury, which eliminated his freshmen year at KSU...his 1st knee injury was as a freshmen in HS, which he showed recovery from...this past draft was deep in big men and wings were going to drop...even then, Walker was getting a lot of buzz at 15-19 until the meniscus tear...at that point, he fell off the map...team's were already wanting him to go back to school another year and dominate in order to review his game more, Walker wanted to be "one and done" so he left despite the recommendations..even then he was still a top 20 projection by a number of teams and was getting draft promises until the meniscus.

2. Giddens was valued the highest as a freshmen in college, no doubt about that. But it was his off-court stabbing after his sophmore year that really damaged his stock. Scouts were sky-high on him after his freshmen year and he followed it up with a solid 2nd season...it was the altercation that started the downward trend...when he transfered and got in trouble again, his stock went to an all-time low...the fact that his game still looked the same further dropped his value to the point where he was no longer considered a draft prospect at all-we're talking rookie FA at best...then his senior season his game finally developed and his attitude was reported as being top-notch...it didn't undo the past 3 seasons he played, but he really started getting his "buzz" back on the scouting radar...Giddens was projected as a late first rounder on many draftboards, but as certain players slipped, Giddens dropped to 30 from the 22-30 area he was slotted on draft-boards...being a wing, older, and with question marks on attitude found him at 30-which was still a MAJOR comeback from the scouting oblivion he was in to begin the year.

That's how it went down with these two guys...they weren't evaluated as having "less talent" than before, it was the natural progress up-and-down scouts prospect lists based on their tenure as prospects being evaluated...

1. So Walker was projected as a lottery talent basically before playing in college - how many games has he played as a freshman? Five? I consider that kind of draft stock highly irrelevant. If he was projected to be a 15-19 pick in this draft, why had he hurt his knee working out for the Pistons, who had the 29th pick?

2. If Giddens was considered lottery talent after his freshman year, why didn't he declare to the draft? DX labels his freshmen year as "promising", but that's all.

Walker got injured in GS at a 15 team workout-nothing to do with Detroit...I don't know why Giddens didn't come out, but looking at the 04 and 05 draft, it seems pretty logical that he stayed in part to come out during a weaker draft year...then he got in trouble and things spiraled...Giddens could have come straight from HS as well, but he didn't, which leads me to believe he has something going on upstairs that's positive...

[cordobes]

Isn't THIS a little bit presumptuous?  Why assume Giddens and Walker are are better than 15 of the 30 or so players drafted before them, just because Ainge was the one that drafted them?  Are the other teams just so thick that they didn't think to draft these guys themselves?

Not saying these guys are going to be busts, I have faith that the team *might* have made some savvy picks here (of course they could have done better, but most teams could as well)...  And it's not like I'm against rooting for/hyping up your home team guys..  But if they were lottery players, they would have atleast gone early 20s, right?  What if these guys are the the 30th and 47th best players in the 08 draft, should I be riled up for that?

O'bryant and Miles were lottery picks. Experts have all said that Giddens and Walker would've been lottery little to do with their talent level.picks had it not been for some particular circumstances like "attitude problems" and injury concerns. They had

Could not disagree more with this. Paddy was a misspent lottery pick, and anyone who saw him play in college knew that. Miles, I don't know about. But being deemed unable to play isn't encouraging.

Billy Walker I saw a bunch of over a year and a half in college. The bad condition of his legs make calling him a lottery pick erroneous, as does his tendency to blow up emotionally. Giddens has shooting issues, and to a lesser degree character issues. I understand the desire to support Ainge. He had a great summer. Last year. But it's hideously presumptuous to call everyone he's added a lottery pick just because he added them.

There's nothing to disagree with. The statement in question was about the talent level, not about wether they should've been picked in the lottery or not. The general concensus between scouts and experts have considered Walker and Giddens as lottery level talent. As I mentioned, there were particular circumstances that prevented them from being so.

Links, please? I need to know who to take less seriously in the future.

Yeah, this is oft-repeated, but I haven't heard Walker described as a lottery-talent since his first knee injury (there have been, what, three now?) and I don't think Giddens has been projected at that level since he transferred to the Lobos.  Walker lost some of his athleticism (much of the reason he was projected so highly was because people thought he had the hops of Vince Carter; he doesn't have those any more), and Giddens showed that he wasn't as good as he looked coming out of high-school.  As much as it gets repeated, the reason Giddens didn't get drafted isn't because of character; players with character concerns get drafted every year (Sean Williams, for instance).  Rather, it was those character concerns combined with scouts not being as high on his upside any more.  Keep in mind, the kid is going to be 24 next season, and never dominated college.  *That's* why he slipped (and was projected to slip a lot farther if not drafted by Danny).

Just because a player was once highly-regarded or hyped doesn't mean he has a tremendous amount of talent.  NBA scouts miss all the time, which is why some of those same scouts had Gerald Green as a top-three pick at one time. 

I like Danny, and I hope the draft picks work out.  On paper, they certainly seem to have near-elite athleticism.  That does not, however, make them "lottery picks", and it doesn't make them sure things, either.

...not entirely true...

1. Walker was projected as a lottery talent until his 2nd knee injury, which eliminated his freshmen year at KSU...his 1st knee injury was as a freshmen in HS, which he showed recovery from...this past draft was deep in big men and wings were going to drop...even then, Walker was getting a lot of buzz at 15-19 until the meniscus tear...at that point, he fell off the map...team's were already wanting him to go back to school another year and dominate in order to review his game more, Walker wanted to be "one and done" so he left despite the recommendations..even then he was still a top 20 projection by a number of teams and was getting draft promises until the meniscus.

2. Giddens was valued the highest as a freshmen in college, no doubt about that. But it was his off-court stabbing after his sophmore year that really damaged his stock. Scouts were sky-high on him after his freshmen year and he followed it up with a solid 2nd season...it was the altercation that started the downward trend...when he transfered and got in trouble again, his stock went to an all-time low...the fact that his game still looked the same further dropped his value to the point where he was no longer considered a draft prospect at all-we're talking rookie FA at best...then his senior season his game finally developed and his attitude was reported as being top-notch...it didn't undo the past 3 seasons he played, but he really started getting his "buzz" back on the scouting radar...Giddens was projected as a late first rounder on many draftboards, but as certain players slipped, Giddens dropped to 30 from the 22-30 area he was slotted on draft-boards...being a wing, older, and with question marks on attitude found him at 30-which was still a MAJOR comeback from the scouting oblivion he was in to begin the year.

That's how it went down with these two guys...they weren't evaluated as having "less talent" than before, it was the natural progress up-and-down scouts prospect lists based on their tenure as prospects being evaluated...

1. So Walker was projected as a lottery talent basically before playing in college - how many games has he played as a freshman? Five? I consider that kind of draft stock highly irrelevant. If he was projected to be a 15-19 pick in this draft, why had he hurt his knee working out for the Pistons, who had the 29th pick?

2. If Giddens was considered lottery talent after his freshman year, why didn't he declare to the draft? DX labels his freshmen year as "promising", but that's all.

Walker got injured in GS at a 15 team workout-nothing to do with Detroit...I don't know why Giddens didn't come out, but looking at the 04 and 05 draft, it seems pretty logical that he stayed in part to come out during a weaker draft year...then he got in trouble and things spiraled...Giddens could have come straight from HS as well, but he didn't, which leads me to believe he has something going on upstairs that's positive...

Yeah, I meant he was working out for the Pistons before the injury. Here's what they were saying about Walker before the draft:

Walker was one of 24 players at the Golden State Warriors' facility to work out in front of representatives from 21 NBA teams. The players in attendance were projected as being between the 20th and 45th picks. (...)Walker has worked out for Detroit (29th pick) and Toronto (17th).

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/news/story?id=3445779

(remember that Toronto traded that 17th, so they were probably working him out for the 2nd round pick)

And here's what DraftExpress said about him after the season (and before his meniscus injury):

If Walker decides to enter the draft, he would be very wise to do so without hiring an agent, as he’s still very much hovering on the cusp of the first and second round, like many other players.

I don't see a lot of buz about him being picked at the 15-19 range. Rather about being picked in the late 1st round-early 2nd round, probably the reason he attended the Pistons workout.

Do you have any kind of reference about Giddens ever being labeled as a lottery pick? Because a "promising year" isn't the kind of assessment that usually translates to being drafted in the lottery.

[billysan]

Why wouldn't you believe it?  We offered Posey a full three-year MLE deal *after* we signed P.O.B.  Thus, he wasn't signed using the MLE.  We had Tony's Bird rights.  Thus, the *only* guy counting against our MLE is House, as cordobes stated.

Where are you hearing $1.8 million from?  That number sounds inaccurate.

I am sure you are right Roy, I probably came away from one of the rookie or FA signing discussion threads with that number from a speculation.

Apology to Cordobes.

How much do we have left? Since I am wrong, what is the correct number?

[Roy Hobbs]

Why wouldn't you believe it?  We offered Posey a full three-year MLE deal *after* we signed P.O.B.  Thus, he wasn't signed using the MLE.  We had Tony's Bird rights.  Thus, the *only* guy counting against our MLE is House, as cordobes stated.

Where are you hearing $1.8 million from?  That number sounds inaccurate.

I am sure you are right Roy, I probably came away from one of the rookie or FA signing discussion threads with that number from a speculation.

Apology to Cordobes.

How much do we have left? Since I am wrong, what is the correct number?

Roughly $3 million.  $5.5 million (MLE) minus $2.5 million (House's approx. salary) = $3 million.

[NYCelt]

"...not even bringing back Posey at any cost - would have guaranteed a title."

                                                         Fan from VT

No truer statement could be made.

However to NOT be positive from '08 off season moves?

Bottom line is one reserve is gone; that's it.  A key player, yes, but relatively small damage in the NBA these days.  Cassel, and Brown are really no big loss and haven't we already forgotten the name of the backup center going into last season? Began with a "P" I think, played in Indiana or somewhere prior.  Braided beard I think.

There is almost no way for O'Bryant to give us less than Pollard did.  Even if he does flop we go back to Davis or Powe; didn't that suffice last year?  Tony Allen is well on the mend and won't cost that much of a drop off on D.  House can still cover the outside shooting we got from Posey and T Allen is more of a slasher anyway which should be a positive.

Personally, I doubt we'll see Miles by opening day; if we do it's a bonus.  Any contribution from Walker, Pruitt or Giddens and this team is almost certainly going to be more athletic and may even be improved on offense compared to last year.  

It's too soon to say for certain but that's enough to keep me positive.

Regards

 

[KungPoweChicken]

I do not know why people are skeptical about the talents Danny Ainge has acquired this off season.

It is true that JR, Walker, Miles,and O'bryant are unproven in the NBA. However, these players are

going to see minimal minutes, if they see any minutes. Last year Doc went with Powe and Davis at the

4 and 5 many times. Is it irrational to think that with another year of basketball experience, Powe

and Davis cannot hold their own at the 4 and 5 for 10 - 15 minutes a night? I feel extremely

confident that they can get this job done.



We have two all star wing players on this team. For this reason, Posey was expendable. Is it

irrational for Tony Allen to play 10 - 15 minutes a night? I feel Tony Allen will be extremely

effective in this role. Granted, Tony Allen has not proven himself to be a sure thing, but barring

any injury, many people feel this will be the best season of his career. It is possible we may see
Scal getting some match up minutes in certain games. And I am comfortable with that.



Nothing changes at the point guard position. House has shown he is a very capable, and effective back up.



If Pruitt, O'bryant, Miles, JR, or Walker can contribute this season then great! That would be a

huge benefit. Especially if Miles is healthy enough to play. If Miles is healthy he will

contribute. Also, Allen and Miles off the bench at the 2 - 3 would be scary. But I am getting

off topic. My whole point is that we do not need the unproven players to be factors this season.

We can compete for championship #18 with house, Allen, Davis, and Powe as key role players.


And if it turns out we need help for the playoffs, we can try and acquire a veteran like we did

last season. We would just have to cut one of the unproven players. (probably Pruitt)



Also, the great thing about the House and Allen signings is that they expire when Scals contract

does. This leaves the door open for a possible trade in 2009 or 2010. 


I am not the slightest bit worried going into this season. Am I disappointed with the players we

acquired? No, not really. I am excited to see the young talent play. I would of been disappointed

if I felt we could not compete for banner 18 without getting a Pietrus, Posey, or a Maggette.

But I do not feel that is the case. I am content with the players we have. I am definitely not

ready to hit the panic button. 


And unfortunately, this is turning into another summer time hyperbole thread...

[JR Giddens]

Great piece I agree.

However most "critics" on here have declared that Tony Allen should be included on the list of "Unproven Players". Their on the TA haterade.

The only thing I disagree with is backup center. BBD is only 6'7(he's listed much higher) and Powe is 6'8.

Other than that I happier with this season's offeseason roster compared to last years. Well obviously because no one really knew what James Posey was all about at the time.

[nickagneta]

One thing I want to chime in on regarding mock draft positioning and perceived talent is that so, so, so many of the mock drafts that come out are based on the opinion that the teams will choose based on need and not based on best available talent.

Hence, many, many, many times tons of big guys are projected high in the draft because good big man talent is so hard to find. The same holds true for other positions during other years.

So the point I think I'm trying to make is that saying that someone had top 15-20 pick talent based on mock drafts that year is a load of crap. That doesn't mean that that person was a top 15-20 talent. It only means that during that year based on needs of teams, he was projected to go somewhere between 15-20.

Heck that doesn't even get into the quality of any given draft. The year Kenyon Martin went #1 that draft class was awful from a quality standpoint. Saying that someone drafted that year in the top 10 had more talent than someone who was drafted 10-20 in 2007 would be ridiculous as the 2007 class was loaded with talent and the year KMart came out it wasn't.

So I think it is very deceptive to make the claim that we got a lot more talent based on where two guys were drafted and where two other guys were once perceived to be drafted.

POB was drafted high in a draft with bad big men. Miles was rightfully drafted high but is now severely injured. Much of his talent was based on his athleticism. If his athleticism is hampered by injury then obviously he must right now be much less talented than he once was. The same holds true for Walker. Who cares where his talent was once perceived to position him in a certain draft years ago. Right now his injury which hampers his athleticism which hampers his talent puts him at a 2nd round draft talent and there are only so many truly good talents that come out of the second round.

My point ultimately being, everyone has talent. Everyone may have been rated higher talent wise than they currently are. But what matters isn't what they were once rated at talent wise it is where they currently are talent wise. And currently, talent wise, they are all a lot worse than once perceived and it is possible those perceptions were wrong.

So let's stick with what we actually know about these guys and what we currently know is that one guy is one of the very few top 10 picks ever not to be given a qualifying offer after their second year. Another we know has been declared physically unable to ever perform again in the NBA by several doctors. Yet another we know had great upside but is now a 2nd round rookie draftee that just finished getting his third major knee surgery. And yet another was on three separate college teams and was a problem child on all three but put up some okay numbers, finally at a mid major conference and has yet to prove he can be a consistent good team mate.

For me, that's just not a lot to be positive about when looking at the off season moves.

I still think this team is the team to beat. But that has more to do with position 1-8 on the roster and not from who will be taking up positions 9-15 on the roster.

[wdleehi]

Great piece I agree.

However most "critics" on here have declared that Tony Allen should be included on the list of "Unproven Players". Their on the TA haterade.

The only thing I disagree with is backup center. BBD is only 6'7(he's listed much higher) and Powe is 6'8.

Other than that I happier with this season's offeseason roster compared to last years. Well obviously because no one really knew what James Posey was all about at the time.

TA is inconsistent.  And the many times he was bad last year, it was really bad.  He hurt the team out there when he was off.