The fact is that Danny thought Raef was better than Antione. But we all know LaFrentz was a disaster. Also, I distinctly remember Danny saying Jiri was a big part of the trade. Had Welsch not been included in the deal, Danny said he wouldn't have gone through with the trade. I don't even think Welsch is in the league anymore. Ainge got beat badly on this deal because he didn't judge the talent correctly. Ainge thought he was getting a good big man, and a potentially high scoring guard to start for years. But we know neither of these guys were any good. Antoine was a better player than both of these guys. Common sense tells us that he could have gotten more value for Antoine. At the time, every basketball analysis said the trade was atrocious for the Celtics. All because the Celtics won a championship doesn't negate a terrible trade that happened years ago.
Danny said that Welsch was a big part of the trade, but he also referred to him as a good chip to have going forward, which he took advantage of when he flipped him for a 1st rounder. The total take on that trade was Raef, Delonte, Tony Allen and whoever we got from that Cavs pick (Rondo or Antoine maybe? I don't recall). Raef was a pretty good player before his injury, at least as valuable to us as Antoine. I think his plan was to spend the time to get Raef healthy and end up with a serviceable big man (which we didn't really have). It was a bad move to gamble like that on an injured player, but it would have been a decent trade if Raef had come around.
The Telfair trade was a nightmare. This move doesn't need much explaining because everyone knows it was a mistake. And don't tell me Danny knew in advance that this trade was the way to get Garnett. He knew that he might be able to use Ratliff's contract as a chip to get a good player. However, the fact that Garnett became available was merely luck. Every year teams have expiring contracts of 14 million (plus young talent to trade too) and they don't get players of Garnett's caliber. Therefore, you see that getting Garnett was not "genius" as much as it was luck. And common sense tells us that Danny was desperate to get rid of Raef's contract in that trade. Yes, that is how much of a disaster LaFrentz was. He was so bad we had to give away a draft pick for some team to take him. How soon we forget.
Danny might not have known for sure that the Wolves would trade KG but he (like many people) must have seen it as a likely event. What were Minny's options? To keep paying KG more than anyone else in the league to keep them out of the top of the lottery when they didn't have any way of surrounding him with enough talent to be a contender? And what if we hadn't gotten him? We might have gotten Gasol and had Pau, PP, Big Al, Perk, Rondo and Ray Allen. I could live with that.
The Ray Allen deal was mostly luck as well. Danny was in the right place at the right time. Seattle was willing to give away a future hall of fame player for a draft pick and scrubs. This wasn't a genius deal, Seattle was rebuilding and wanted no part of arguably the best shooter on the planet. This deal wasn't thought of years in advance as you say in your posts. Danny became aware Ray was available, offered a pick, West, and Wally. It was largely luck. Had Danny gotten the first or second pick in that draft we would still be in the lottery today. He probably would have traded Pierce when his value was at an all time low and gotten another Raef and Jiri in return.
Why was it lucky for Ainge that Seattle wanted to make a trade when it wasn't lucky for any of the other 28 teams? Do you think Seattle called Ainge and said "Hey Danny, this is your lucky day! We'll give you Ray Allen for whatever you want to offer and won't let anyone else bid on him". The other teams all had the option to try and trade for KG and Ray but they didn't get it done. Ainge did.
By your standards there's no such thing as a shrewd or clever gm, because every trade in the history was just blind luck. You can look at any team that ever won even a division title and show the "luck" involved: trades that were available that the gm couldn't have predicted years in advance, fortuitous bounces of ping pong balls, players drafted because other teams passed on them. It's just 30 blind squirrels hoping to trip over acorns.
Everyone understands that there is a butterfly effect involved when a team trades players. But to analyze these these moves and say Ainge won because he eventually got Garnett and Allen is ridiculous. Not only is it ridiculous, but it is stupid as well.
Ainge won because he was better prepared for that summer than any other team in the league. That didn't happen by chance. Claiming that it was all luck is not only ridiculous, but stupid as well. For starters, Danny's "luck" had to begin with losing what was seen as the best lottery to win since Duncan came out. I'd love to see you pull up some posts from after the lottery was announced where people were talking about how lucky Ainge was. Also, you have to consider some of the other scenarios: We do better in the lottery and end up with Oden, Jefferson, Perkins, Pierce and Rondo and still have Wally and Theo's contracts to deal. We get Durant to play with Paul and Rajon and Al and trade for Pau or we still trade Al for KG and have Perk, KG, Durant Pierce and Rondo. That's off the top of my head.
Remember, we didn't win the title just because we traded for KG and RA. We won the title because Ainge was able to trade for them and still keep Rondo and Perkins and Pierce. Ainge had us set up well enough to trade for the two best players on the market that year without giving up our best player or 2 of our 3 best young players. That's not all luck. Some planning has to be involved.
