Hornets Regret Signing Posey Already?

[BballTim]

By the way, for those arguing that Posey wasn't as important as some others think, here's the opinion of Celtics co-owner Steve Pagliuca in the off-season:

"James Posey is a huge priority and hopefully we'll get James back. He's is the key to our team," said Pagliuca.

That's one man's opinion, but it's clear to me that at least Pagliuca thought we'd be better with Posey here.  The question is, is it a travesty to pay "the key to our team" an extra $7 million in a 4th year, when the alternative is downgrading our team in the short term (when we are in prime championship contention)? 

  Either he was talking about our free agents or he's a lost cause. Every game we start 5 players that are more key to our team then Posey. I'll assume that you don't agree with him, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

i think the point Roy is making there is that Pose was highly valued by the front office and important part of us winning a Title. not that he was literally more important than KG or Paul or Ray....

  Hence the statement "I'll assume that you don't agree with him".

but i think Roy does agree with him (him being Pagliuca) because i don't think Pags was literally saying that Pose was more important than the KG, Paul, Ray...

  So you think Roy posted a comment that wasn't saying what it said, but Roy agrees with what it didn't say? I think we'd need a little clarification from Roy to continue this.

[winsomme]

let me ask you this, EJ (and Bball too). Is there any scenario that plays out this season under which you would say that not signing Posey to that 4 year MLE deal was a mistake?

and if so, what is that scenario?

  Honestly, no. I'd have to wait the 4 years to say. Here's something of a breakdown, though.

  No Regrets:

  We win a title in the next 2 years.

  We don't win a title in the next 2 years but we win a title in year 3 or 4 aided by someone who we sign with the MLE.

  We lose the title the next 2 years but the series we lose isn't close to a tossup.

  We don't win the title this year and the reason is more the play of our backup pg or c than backup sf.

  We re-sign or replace Ray and Paul with nearly equal players, still contend 3-4 years from now, and have a good player that we signed with the MLE on our roster.

  Regrets:

  We don't win the title and we lose a close series either because TA played really poorly or opposing sfs go off when Paul's not in the game.

  We don't win a title in the next 2-3 years, we don't replace Ray and Paul and drop from the ranks of the contenders.

  I could go on, but you get the picture.

  How would your list go? Do you have more regrets? Do you think that some of my "no regrets" should be "regrets"?

these are all pretty fair. I would boil it down more.

If we win a Title in any of the next 3 seasons, then i think it is fair to say that it was not a mistake to pass on Pose. Three Titles would be nice, but two Titles out of KG and Paul IMO should be the bar....

that said, if we don't win this year or next, I'm not holding my breath for 3 or 4 because those are likely to be wildly different teams personnel-wise.

also, if we don't make the Finals this year (and the team is relatively healthy), i'm really gonna heat up on the decision not to sign Posey.

the problem as i see it is that if we win a Title this year, it's pretty much cut and dry. Clearly we did not need Pose.

but if we lose, it's gonna be very difficult to know how much that was due to not having Pose.

  So if we lose to the Cavs because Z and Varejao outplay our bigs you're going to heat up the Posey decision? What if we lose a series when Eddie or Sam can't deal with pressure in the backcourt?

hard to say. on the Z and V scenario, i actually think that Pose could help in that respect because like i've argued elsewhere, Pose can go to the 4 which forces other teams to go small and thus not play someone that they otherwise would like to be playing....

on Eddie and/or Sam, i guess i would just have to see the series. based on last year, I feel pretty comfortable with what they are capable of bringing in the playoffs...

[Roy Hobbs]

By the way, for those arguing that Posey wasn't as important as some others think, here's the opinion of Celtics co-owner Steve Pagliuca in the off-season:

"James Posey is a huge priority and hopefully we'll get James back. He's is the key to our team," said Pagliuca.

That's one man's opinion, but it's clear to me that at least Pagliuca thought we'd be better with Posey here.  The question is, is it a travesty to pay "the key to our team" an extra $7 million in a 4th year, when the alternative is downgrading our team in the short term (when we are in prime championship contention)? 

  Either he was talking about our free agents or he's a lost cause. Every game we start 5 players that are more key to our team then Posey. I'll assume that you don't agree with him, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

i think the point Roy is making there is that Pose was highly valued by the front office and important part of us winning a Title. not that he was literally more important than KG or Paul or Ray....

  Hence the statement "I'll assume that you don't agree with him".

but i think Roy does agree with him (him being Pagliuca) because i don't think Pags was literally saying that Pose was more important than the KG, Paul, Ray...

  So you think Roy posted a comment that wasn't saying what it said, but Roy agrees with what it didn't say? I think we'd need a little clarification from Roy to continue this.

Haha.  I posted it to show that at least certain members of ownership highly valued Posey, as much as many fans did.  I don't take Pag's words literally, although the words "a key to this team" would have been appropriate.  A lot of people are suggesting that Posey would have had little to no effect on this team, and I don't think that's accurate.

It's interesting, in that there's not necessarily as much 100% synergy between the coaching staff, GM, and ownership as many believe.  I'd be curious to know the candid thinking of all involved.  Doc recently said (among other things) that being a good coach means that you don't always listen to who your GM says to play.  Did this have anything to do with Danny's suggestions, or was it just from Orlando?  Pagliuca valued Posey highly; was it more highly than Danny?  Wyc said this team needs a big man and a guard; does Danny agree?

That's a bit off-topic, of course, but it just suggests that because Danny makes a decision doesn't mean everyone is on board with it.  If we don't win the championship this year, it will be interesting to see how that dynamic plays out, if at all.

[BballTim]

  So if we lose to the Cavs because Z and Varejao outplay our bigs you're going to heat up the Posey decision? What if we lose a series when Eddie or Sam can't deal with pressure in the backcourt?

hard to say. on the Z and V scenario, i actually think that Pose could help in that respect because like i've argued elsewhere, Pose can go to the 4 which forces other teams to go small and thus not play someone that they otherwise would like to be playing....

  Posey's not going to dictate too many matchups because he's so easy to guard. And we stayed away from the Posey at pf lineups in the playoffs because our defense was worse.

on Eddie and/or Sam, i guess i would just have to see the series. based on last year, I feel pretty comfortable with what they are capable of bringing in the playoffs...

  So the fact that neither of them played well enough in the playoffs to hold onto a spot in the rotation make you comfortable?

[winsomme]

  Posey's not going to dictate too many matchups because he's so easy to guard. And we stayed away from the Posey at pf lineups in the playoffs because our defense was worse.

this all theoretical. what I'm saying is based on your proposed scenario of being abused by CLEs bigs, Posey is an option under those circumstances to try and change the dynamic. Like we've talked about before, he changed the complexion of the Finals with that game 4 performance.

  So the fact that neither of them played well enough in the playoffs to hold onto a spot in the rotation make you comfortable?

going into the playoffs, i was worried about that matchup of backup PGs, but i think it proved to be at the very least not a detriment. House had some really nice games and i think that it really all you can expect out of that spot...

[BballTim]

By the way, for those arguing that Posey wasn't as important as some others think, here's the opinion of Celtics co-owner Steve Pagliuca in the off-season:

"James Posey is a huge priority and hopefully we'll get James back. He's is the key to our team," said Pagliuca.

That's one man's opinion, but it's clear to me that at least Pagliuca thought we'd be better with Posey here.  The question is, is it a travesty to pay "the key to our team" an extra $7 million in a 4th year, when the alternative is downgrading our team in the short term (when we are in prime championship contention)? 

  Either he was talking about our free agents or he's a lost cause. Every game we start 5 players that are more key to our team then Posey. I'll assume that you don't agree with him, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

i think the point Roy is making there is that Pose was highly valued by the front office and important part of us winning a Title. not that he was literally more important than KG or Paul or Ray....

  Hence the statement "I'll assume that you don't agree with him".

but i think Roy does agree with him (him being Pagliuca) because i don't think Pags was literally saying that Pose was more important than the KG, Paul, Ray...

  So you think Roy posted a comment that wasn't saying what it said, but Roy agrees with what it didn't say? I think we'd need a little clarification from Roy to continue this.

Haha.  I posted it to show that at least certain members of ownership highly valued Posey, as much as many fans did.  I don't take Pag's words literally, although the words "a key to this team" would have been appropriate.  A lot of people are suggesting that Posey would have had little to no effect on this team, and I don't think that's accurate.

It's interesting, in that there's not necessarily as much 100% synergy between the coaching staff, GM, and ownership as many believe.  I'd be curious to know the candid thinking of all involved.  Doc recently said (among other things) that being a good coach means that you don't always listen to who your GM says to play.  Did this have anything to do with Danny's suggestions, or was it just from Orlando?  Pagliuca valued Posey highly; was it more highly than Danny?  Wyc said this team needs a big man and a guard; does Danny agree?

That's a bit off-topic, of course, but it just suggests that because Danny makes a decision doesn't mean everyone is on board with it.  If we don't win the championship this year, it will be interesting to see how that dynamic plays out, if at all.

  That is an interesting topic, but we don't have a ton of insight into it.

  I'd argue that even though at least one of the owners agree with many posters (on both sides of the issue) that having Posey makes us better they seem to have told Danny to fit him into his budget as opposed to telling Ainge to forget about the budget and sign him anyway, which is the position that many on this board (not necessarily Roy) have taken.

[BballTim]

  Posey's not going to dictate too many matchups because he's so easy to guard. And we stayed away from the Posey at pf lineups in the playoffs because our defense was worse.

this all theoretical. what I'm saying is based on your proposed scenario of being abused by CLEs bigs, Posey is an option under those circumstances to try and change the dynamic. Like we've talked about before, he changed the complexion of the Finals with that game 4 performance.

  So pretty much whatever the reason we lose, it's because of Posey.

  So the fact that neither of them played well enough in the playoffs to hold onto a spot in the rotation make you comfortable?

going into the playoffs, i was worried about that matchup of backup PGs, but i think it proved to be at the very least not a detriment. House had some really nice games and i think that it really all you can expect out of that spot...

  So Eddie spends much less time handling the ball than last year because it makes him an inefective player and Sam (who was looking pretty old last year) hasn't even broken a sweat and you're not concerned at all?

[winsomme]

  So pretty much whatever the reason we lose, it's because of Posey.

BBall you are really into the overstatement today. I acknowledged it's hard to say. but based on your proposed scenario, I was merely pointing out that Posey could have affected it.

Man, this is a really freaking good game!!

[winsomme]

these last 30 secs have been brutal.

[winsomme]

can i also just point out the +/- of our bench...another argument for Pose.

[BballTim]

  So pretty much whatever the reason we lose, it's because of Posey.

BBall you are really into the overstatement today. I acknowledged it's hard to say. but based on your proposed scenario, I was merely pointing out that Posey could have affected it.

Man, this is a really freaking good game!!

  If the bench gets outplayed at the wing, it's because we don't have Posey. If we get outplayed at center, it's arguably because of Posey. If the bench gets outplayed at pg, you'll have to see the series and then decide if it was because of Posey.

  I think your claim of my making an overstatement may have been an overstatement.

[Roy Hobbs]

Here's one game that Posey very well could have made a difference in.

[BballTim]

Here's one game that Posey very well could have made a difference in.

  Especially if he knows how to inbound the ball properly.

[Roy Hobbs]

Here's one game that Posey very well could have made a difference in.

  Especially if he knows how to inbound the ball properly.

If the bench had played a little better, the game may not have come down to one play.  Posey not only would have added talent to our bench, but he would have helped with unity.

[winsomme]

  So pretty much whatever the reason we lose, it's because of Posey.

BBall you are really into the overstatement today. I acknowledged it's hard to say. but based on your proposed scenario, I was merely pointing out that Posey could have affected it.

Man, this is a really freaking good game!!

  If the bench gets outplayed at the wing, it's because we don't have Posey. If we get outplayed at center, it's arguably because of Posey. If the bench gets outplayed at pg, you'll have to see the series and then decide if it was because of Posey.

  I think your claim of my making an overstatement may have been an overstatement.

the overstatement is the notion that i am conclusively claiming that Posey would have made the difference in a theoretical game that hasn't happened yet.

what i am saying is that at this point "small ball" is an option when you are in a game when your bigs are getting out played...and with our roster now, we do not have an effective small ball lineup...

but as far games that actually have been played, the LA game and SAS game are two games where we certainly could have used Pose..