Why didn't we consider the BIRDMAN?

[MattG12]

I really don't understand how people can talk about his "questionable character" and at the same time want the Celtics to sign Marbury who has had questionable character everywhere he's gone. The fact that somebody called him a ticking time bomb baffles me... if you're going to make a statement like that can you atleast back it up? Has Chris Andersen ever done or said anything that could prove your point?

Yet when he learned of his positive test, he felt like anything but a man condemned. "I was torn up emotionally, but I realized it was time to make a drastic change," he says, his voice catching. "I could've ended up killing myself."

This doesn't sound like a ticking time bomb or somebody who could relapse.

The thing is he would have absolutely helped our bench and he would have absolutely been an upgrade, a huge one at that, over POB. I have always been behind Danny's moves and I can honestly say not signing Birdman was the only move that has ever really made me mad.

Somebody also mentioned that his tattoos adds to him having questionable character... that is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever heard on here. Tattoos are a part of society right now, Eddie House has tattoos, is his character questionable? Everybody's favorite possible backup guard right now, Stephon Marbury, has a nice new tattoo on his head. Please stop making lame arguments that Chris Andersen is such a bad guy when you really have no idea... Do you know before he started using the drug he was using he had just split up with his girlfriend, his mother stopped talking to him, his house was destroyed in hurricane Katrina, and his team was sent to play in OKC, he showed up 20 pounds overweight. The only clue he has ever given as to what drug he was using was that he said "Let's just say all that [excess] weight went away." I have reason to believe he was using cocaine.

Chris Andersen knows a lot of kids looked up to him, he became a cult hero with his Birdman persona. The fact that he won't mention what drug he was on, probably because he doesn't want to influence kids... and the fact that he now says all of his life struggles at that time are not an excuse for what he did, show some pretty strong character in my opinion. I'm willing to bet on it that Chris Andersen will never relapse, or have another disciplinary problem in his days in the NBA. It's a shame nobody else can see this.

[Roy Hobbs]

The kid has looked phenomenal in his short minutes.

In his short minutes, POB has led the team in turnovers per minute (7.0 per 36) and fouls per minute (11.8 per 36), both by a large margin.  He's also been atrocious defensively.  I'd label him something as less than phenomenal.

[crownsy]

The kid has looked phenomenal in his short minutes.

In his short minutes, POB has led the team in turnovers per minute (7.0 per 36) and fouls per minute (11.8 per 36), both by a large margin.  He's also been atrocious defensively.  I'd label him something as less than phenomenal.

ya i dont get this, he had a good alley opp. WEEEE.

his negitives, as roy pointed out, have far outweighed his alley opps and his decent turnaround jumpshot.

[Chris]

This doesn't sound like a ticking time bomb or somebody who could relapse.

I am going to guess you have not had much experience with addicts.  Yeah, it sounds like he wanted to get clean (it also sounds like he is in fact an addict, which is a huge red flag), which is a big step, but that doesn't mean he won't relapse.  Especially when you put him back into the NBA lifestyle, even if he was clean during his suspension, if he actually is an addict, a relapse is still a very real possibility, no matter how sincerely he doesn't want to.  Addiction is not a choice.

But anyways, the bottom line is even if he had no character questions, I still don't think he would be cracking the rotation of this team.  Marbury on the other hand would immediately be somewhere between the 4th and 6th best player on the team, so the reward is much higher compared to the risk.

[jdpapa3]

Atrocious defensively??? He has protected the rim ten times better than Leon or Baby ever have. Not to mention he is ice cold off of the bench. He still has managed to hit contested tough jumpers from 10-15 feet out. Turnovers are because he is being force fed the ball and is coming off the bench ice cold. Our team has the center facilitate the offense half the time so our centers' TO numbers are unusually high.

Wouldn't we have cut him if he has been as bad as you guys seem to think? There is a reason this team didn't reach out to Mutombo and it's not danny holding out hope that Davis will grow 6 inches.

[MattG12]

This doesn't sound like a ticking time bomb or somebody who could relapse.

I am going to guess you have not had much experience with addicts.  Yeah, it sounds like he wanted to get clean (it also sounds like he is in fact an addict, which is a huge red flag), which is a big step, but that doesn't mean he won't relapse.  Especially when you put him back into the NBA lifestyle, even if he was clean during his suspension, if he actually is an addict, a relapse is still a very real possibility, no matter how sincerely he doesn't want to.  Addiction is not a choice.

But anyways, the bottom line is even if he had no character questions, I still don't think he would be cracking the rotation of this team.  Marbury on the other hand would immediately be somewhere between the 4th and 6th best player on the team, so the reward is much higher compared to the risk.

I come from a family of addicts, so I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Explain to me how somebody averaging 6 points, 5 rebounds, 2 blocks, and a steal doesn't see the rotation? If he was never going to see the rotation why were Doc and Danny interested in him in the first place. I know exactly what addiction is like and I'm telling you the guy is not going to relapse. I am positive about that.

[Chris]

This doesn't sound like a ticking time bomb or somebody who could relapse.

I am going to guess you have not had much experience with addicts.  Yeah, it sounds like he wanted to get clean (it also sounds like he is in fact an addict, which is a huge red flag), which is a big step, but that doesn't mean he won't relapse.  Especially when you put him back into the NBA lifestyle, even if he was clean during his suspension, if he actually is an addict, a relapse is still a very real possibility, no matter how sincerely he doesn't want to.  Addiction is not a choice.

But anyways, the bottom line is even if he had no character questions, I still don't think he would be cracking the rotation of this team.  Marbury on the other hand would immediately be somewhere between the 4th and 6th best player on the team, so the reward is much higher compared to the risk.

I come from a family of addicts, so I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Explain to me how somebody averaging 6 points, 5 rebounds, 2 blocks, and a steal doesn't see the rotation? If he was never going to see the rotation why were Doc and Danny interested in him in the first place. I know exactly what addiction is like and I'm telling you the guy is not going to relapse. I am positive about that.

OK, I suppose this is a discussion for a different forum, but let's just say I disagree that anyone can make a comment like that about an addict, let alone someone who doesn't even know him.

But anyways, the reason I don't think he sees the rotation is that he has always had a lot of trouble playing team defense, and making rotations.  Considering that is one of the prerequisites to see any time in a regular rotation on this team, I don't think he would get off the bench other than in garbage time.  He is putting up nice numbers in Denver, but let's just say that Doc has different expectations of his players than George Karl does.

[MattG12]

Marbury on the other hand would immediately be somewhere between the 4th and 6th best player on the team, so the reward is much higher compared to the risk.

How do you know this? Marbury hasn't even played for a year... It's going to take him some time to get back to his level of play just like it is taking Chris Andersen. How do we even know that Marbury will ever get back to his level of play? This shouldn't even be an argument. We need help from a big man right now, not a guard. When given good minutes off the bench Pruitt will do fine and we also have Sam Cassell.

[jdpapa3]

Marbury looked like he was in his prime in the preseason. That's the only thing we have to go off of.

[crownsy]

Atrocious defensively??? He has protected the rim ten times better than Leon or Baby ever have. Not to mention he is ice cold off of the bench. He still has managed to hit contested tough jumpers from 10-15 feet out. Turnovers are because he is being force fed the ball and is coming off the bench ice cold. Our team has the center facilitate the offense half the time so our centers' TO numbers are unusually high.

Wouldn't we have cut him if he has been as bad as you guys seem to think? There is a reason this team didn't reach out to Mutombo and it's not danny holding out hope that Davis will grow 6 inches.

you have got to be kidding me. he gets destroyed every rotation. He had one decent block on a third string SF.

That doesn't excuse the multiple easy baskets he gives up to scrubs because he forgets to rotate.


also, if he's so valuable that the team needs him, why can't he get any minutes with the starting center for this team out?

Doc would rather rotate leon and baby at the 5 then play your vaunted defensive stopper 1 minute.

[Chris]

Marbury on the other hand would immediately be somewhere between the 4th and 6th best player on the team, so the reward is much higher compared to the risk.

How do you know this? Marbury hasn't even played for a year... It's going to take him some time to get back to his level of play just like it is taking Chris Andersen. How do we even know that Marbury will ever get back to his level of play? This shouldn't even be an argument. We need help from a big man right now, not a guard. When given good minutes off the bench Pruitt will do fine and we also have Sam Cassell.

Wait, what is Chris Andersen getting back to?  He was always a marginal player.  He is a human pogo-stick, who makes some loud plays, and in certain systems, where he has no real defensive responsibility, he can be a decent player.  But whether we are talking about him pre or post suspension, he would struggle in the Celtics system.

Marbury on the other hand is a player who is still in his prime, has averaged something like 20 and 8 for his career, came into the preseason in the best shape he has been in for a couple years. 

I just don't see how the two can be compared.

[MattG12]

Marbury looked like he was in his prime in the preseason. That's the only thing we have to go off of.

Chris Andersen averaged like 10/10 in the preseason, and he's a big man which is what we need, and he has actually played in the regular season.

[MattG12]

Marbury on the other hand would immediately be somewhere between the 4th and 6th best player on the team, so the reward is much higher compared to the risk.

How do you know this? Marbury hasn't even played for a year... It's going to take him some time to get back to his level of play just like it is taking Chris Andersen. How do we even know that Marbury will ever get back to his level of play? This shouldn't even be an argument. We need help from a big man right now, not a guard. When given good minutes off the bench Pruitt will do fine and we also have Sam Cassell.

Wait, what is Chris Andersen getting back to?  He was always a marginal player.  He is a human pogo-stick, who makes some loud plays, and in certain systems, where he has no real defensive responsibility, he can be a decent player.  But whether we are talking about him pre or post suspension, he would struggle in the Celtics system.

Marbury on the other hand is a player who is still in his prime, has averaged something like 20 and 8 for his career, came into the preseason in the best shape he has been in for a couple years. 

I just don't see how the two can be compared.

1. Marbury is definitely not in his prime anymore
2. You even said it yourself George Karl is not somebody who worries about defense... so how do we know Chris Andersen wouldn't be an excellent defender in the Celtics system... I'm sure he would he better than POB... which is the player I've been comparing him to, it makes no sense comparing his to a guard. The only reason I ever mentioned Marbury is because he too has questionable character, and because we do not need a guard.

I would rather have an average big man who could be good in the Celtics defensive system than a good PG (if we are lucky) when we already have Rondo, House, Allen, Pruitt, and Cassell at that position.

Chris Andersen would not complain about not getting enough minutes... I seriously don't think Marbury would ever stop complaining until he became the starter over Rondo. Marbury is a punk, Andersen is somebody who made a mistake and was disciplined for it. Andersen would be a great person to have on the bench with his size. Marbury would be a great player to have on the bench if you want the Celtics franchise to look like a circus in a couple years, like the Knicks.

[crownsy]

Marbury on the other hand would immediately be somewhere between the 4th and 6th best player on the team, so the reward is much higher compared to the risk.

How do you know this? Marbury hasn't even played for a year... It's going to take him some time to get back to his level of play just like it is taking Chris Andersen. How do we even know that Marbury will ever get back to his level of play? This shouldn't even be an argument. We need help from a big man right now, not a guard. When given good minutes off the bench Pruitt will do fine and we also have Sam Cassell.

Wait, what is Chris Andersen getting back to?  He was always a marginal player.  He is a human pogo-stick, who makes some loud plays, and in certain systems, where he has no real defensive responsibility, he can be a decent player.  But whether we are talking about him pre or post suspension, he would struggle in the Celtics system.

Marbury on the other hand is a player who is still in his prime, has averaged something like 20 and 8 for his career, came into the preseason in the best shape he has been in for a couple years. 

I just don't see how the two can be compared.

1. Marbury is definitely not in his prime anymore
2. You even said it yourself George Karl is not somebody who worries about defense... so how do we know Chris Andersen wouldn't be an excellent defender in the Celtics system... I'm sure he would he better than POB... which is the player I've been comparing him to, it makes no sense comparing his to a guard. The only reason I ever mentioned Marbury is because he too has questionable character, and because we do not need a guard.

I would rather have an average big man who could be good in the Celtics defensive system than a good PG (if we are lucky) when we already have Rondo, House, Allen, Pruitt, and Cassell at that position.

Chris Andersen would not complain about not getting enough minutes... I seriously don't think Marbury would ever stop complaining until he became the starter over Rondo. Marbury is a punk, Andersen is somebody who made a mistake and was disciplined for it. Andersen would be a great person to have on the bench with his size. Marbury would be a great player to have on the bench if you want the Celtics franchise to look like a circus in a couple years, like the Knicks.

also, the birdman  can fly in any weather.

Coo-KOOOOO Coo-KOOOOO

/end rap referance

[Finkelskyhook]

For the same reason Marbury won't be signed.  Danny idiot-proofed the roster.  Andersen may be past his baggage.  But I doubt Danny would take a chance on anybody with issues...Tony Allen notwithstanding.