Remember when Wyc said we're probably making moves

[Chris]

on air maybe a month ago? Well what happened to that plan. Just because we won another 12 straight doesn't mean we are guaranteed to repeat this year. We have, after all, lost the last two home games to legitimate teams. And those legitimate teams might prevent us from winning the chip again this year. I know what you are thinking - great idea, no practical solutions. We can make room. Forget Marbury and Horry at this point. Why not trade for a Nick Collison, or a Joe Smith, or at PG a Raymond Felton. There are some names available, and in this economy some teams are looking to dump salary. Scalabrine's and Tony Allen's contracts expire in 2010, which is only a year from now, and we have some young talent too that we could afford to mortgage. Radical as it may seem, sometimes the best GMs make their mark with their courage. There's courageously stupid, but courageously courageous. Yes.

I guarantee you Danny is on the phone about 10 hours a day trying to make a move.  Unfortunately for those who are impatient, most of those smaller trades don't happen until much closer to the trade deadline...like on it.

And even more importantly, the C's don't have much to trade, so they are looking much more at signing FA's...but they will not do that until they see who is bought out after the trade deadline, and they are absolutely positive, they won't be making any trades.

So, the moral of the story is...patience.

[celts55]

I think they could get Joe Smith for TA, POB, and Giddens. TA being the key guy. The salaries fit.

Who plays back up 2/3? The only way this makes sense is if you play Eddie at the 2, but then you need a PG. Are we banking on Gabe and Walker to help us get to the promised land? Or are we banking on Cassell still having something left in the tank, in which case we are still hoping that Walker can fill in for Paul. Scal certainly has proved this season, and last, that he is much better suited for being the back up 4 defensively and I would be worried about a 2 unit front court of Baby, Joe Smith and Scal.

First, I would do that trade in a heartbeat. Tony Allen hasn't even played in the last few weeks, and I don't see how it's hurt at all. He's not the answer as far as I'm concerned and would not be much od a lose. Second, I think it's been pretty clear that House adds much more to this team when he does play the 2, he's not a point guard. Third, point guard, I think you have to see if Pruitt can step it up or decide if Cassel has anything left in the tank. Forth, if you were to make this trade, you would have two open roster spots as it's a 3 for 1. Perhaps someone like Horry, who has said he is interested in comming to the Celtics, as a backup 3? I'm not really sure about back up point guard options, but I don't see how ridding themselves of TA changes that.

[BballTim]

I think that what CoachBo is saying is fairly easy to understand. Winning basketball teams share some common traits. The fact that Rondo improve doesn't necessarily make up for the lack of Posey or PJ Brown because Rondo doesn't have the same skill-set, hence doesn't provide the team with the same stuff. For example, if it was Rondo walking, PJ Brown staying and we added another quality center, would the improvement on the big men department upset the lack of a quality PG? Of course not. Rondo simply can't play Posey's or PJ's roles, so it's difficult to make the comparison.

  What CoachBo is saying is easy to understand, but that doesn't make it correct. Look at the Cavs. They strengthened their backcourt at the expense of a valuable bench big. The net effect was positive. Or simply look at the Celts. They're on a pace similar to last year despite the loss (without replacement) of two key bench players. How is this possible? The big three aren't playing more minutes or putting up better stats. I doubt that people are going to claim that the bench is equal to last year's bench. Why haven't we taken a step back? A good deal of the reason must be, as was stated, Rondo's improvement.

  If you (or CoachBo) disagree with this, why are we still 42-11 after losing 2 key bench players?

But Cleveland still has good options at the 4/5, they replaced Joe Smith not with Mo Williams, as you seem to think, but with better play from Varejão, Z/BW and Hickson.

  What I said in now way implied that the Cavs replaced Smith with Williams. What I was  saying was that even though the Cavs might have weakened themselves at one spot they strengthened themselves at another spot and are a better team in spite of the loss of Smith.

What's exactly your point? Use a reductio ad absurdum to understand it better: do you believe you could let every center and PF go away if you add enough quality guards? Would a NBA roster with CP, Kobe, Deron Williams, Roy, Manu, Parker, Kevin Martin, Pierce, Wade, Carter, Rondo, Calderon, etc., win a NBA title? Of course not. Or imagine a roster without a single player who can hit 3's consistently (this comparison is better, as the focus should be more on the skill-set and not on the position) - do you think a team like that could win it all? Surely not.

  Sure, let's see how your theory holds up to the same test. If we replace Rondo and House with Chris Paul and Dwayne Wade, are we less likely to win the title than we were last year because neither of them duplicate the skills of Posey and PJ? Just as surely not. My point was never "Rondo makes up for Posey on the floor because he does everything Posey does", but your point sure seems to be "no matter the improvement at PG we'll always be worse than we were last year because we haven't duplicated Posey's skillset".

  And why did your come up with your "reductio ad absurdum" example instead of just answering my question? If the big three aren't playing clearly better than last year and the bench seems to be playing worse than last year, why haven't we taken a significant step back?

[BballTim]

I think they could get Joe Smith for TA, POB, and Giddens. TA being the key guy. The salaries fit.

Who plays back up 2/3? The only way this makes sense is if you play Eddie at the 2, but then you need a PG. Are we banking on Gabe and Walker to help us get to the promised land? Or are we banking on Cassell still having something left in the tank, in which case we are still hoping that Walker can fill in for Paul. Scal certainly has proved this season, and last, that he is much better suited for being the back up 4 defensively and I would be worried about a 2 unit front court of Baby, Joe Smith and Scal.

First, I would do that trade in a heartbeat. Tony Allen hasn't even played in the last few weeks, and I don't see how it's hurt at all.

  Other than Paul having to play more minutes than usual...

[cordobes]

My point was never "Rondo makes up for Posey on the floor because he does everything Posey does"

Great. Now, unless you believe that winning teams don't share some common traits and skill-sets, we basically agree.

but your point sure seems to be "no matter the improvement at PG we'll always be worse than we were last year because we haven't duplicated Posey's skillset".

No, it isn't. Don't use strawman arguments, it's not proper from educated people.

If the big three aren't playing clearly better than last year and the bench seems to be playing worse than last year, why haven't we taken a significant step back?

You should read other people posts more carefully (assuming you indeed read them). I already answered that.

[celts55]

I think they could get Joe Smith for TA, POB, and Giddens. TA being the key guy. The salaries fit.

Who plays back up 2/3? The only way this makes sense is if you play Eddie at the 2, but then you need a PG. Are we banking on Gabe and Walker to help us get to the promised land? Or are we banking on Cassell still having something left in the tank, in which case we are still hoping that Walker can fill in for Paul. Scal certainly has proved this season, and last, that he is much better suited for being the back up 4 defensively and I would be worried about a 2 unit front court of Baby, Joe Smith and Scal.

First, I would do that trade in a heartbeat. Tony Allen hasn't even played in the last few weeks, and I don't see how it's hurt at all.

  Other than Paul having to play more minutes than usual...

Well, first to be fair, Scal was getting some of those minutes at the 3 before he got konked on the head. He's do back soon. Second, I also suggested that they could pick up someone like Horry with one of the roster spots they would open up, if that trade was ever made.

[BballTim]

My point was never "Rondo makes up for Posey on the floor because he does everything Posey does"

Great. Now, unless you believe that winning teams don't share some common traits and skill-sets, we basically agree.

  Of course winning teams share some common traits. We possess many of those traits. Do you disagree?

but your point sure seems to be "no matter the improvement at PG we'll always be worse than we were last year because we haven't duplicated Posey's skillset".

No, it isn't. Don't use strawman arguments, it's not proper from educated people.

  Let me get this straight. You try to disprove my argument that Rondo's improvement compensates for the loss of Posey by claiming that a team made up of all guards won't win, and then you complain about strawman arguments?  That's much higher on the list of things that educated people refrain from doing.

If the big three aren't playing clearly better than last year and the bench seems to be playing worse than last year, why haven't we taken a significant step back?

You should read other people posts more carefully (assuming you indeed read them). I already answered that.

  Did you? Are you referring to "Even if it compensates, other contenders have clearly got better" or possibly "The fact that Rondo improve doesn't necessarily make up for the lack of Posey or PJ Brown because Rondo doesn't have the same skill-set"? Or maybe you answered it differently somewhere else? I was hoping for one clarified answer instead of trying to guess your position by reading your various responses.

[guava_wrench]

This arguments do get silly.

Last year is marginally significant at most in evaluating this team. This team needs to be evaluated based on its current problems. We do not need to worry about what Posey or Brown did on a good day (and not all days were good), but what we are lacking at present.

You don't need to replace players. You need to complete a team. Completing the team depends upon not only the skill sets of the current players, but also the system implemented.

[Edgar]

nnnnnnnooooooooo
I wanted JO AND Marion...

      

[slamtheking]

This arguments do get silly.

Last year is marginally significant at most in evaluating this team. This team needs to be evaluated based on its current problems. We do not need to worry about what Posey or Brown did on a good day (and not all days were good), but what we are lacking at present.

You don't need to replace players. You need to complete a team. Completing the team depends upon not only the skill sets of the current players, but also the system implemented.

Well Stated -- TP for you

[winsomme]

If the big three aren't playing clearly better than last year and the bench seems to be playing worse than last year, why haven't we taken a significant step back?

I don't think that anybody is arguing that the Cs have taken a significant step backwards. But they do seem to have matchup questions against the teams that they will likely face on the way to another Title.....matchups questions that, based on last season, were addressed by PJ and Posey and this season, remain questions without the best answers....

if you acknowledge that CLE, for instance improved their back court with the addition of Mo, doesn't that mitigate to some extent the improvement of Rondo in a potential matchup of the teams?

i think we are at a point in the season where we need to be a little less abstract about this team and start thinking about the actual matchups. because that is where series are won and lost.

and at least for me, the way that we have played against the teams that i expect to face, the loss of Pose and PJ could be problematic...

I would love to see those two spots addressed in the next couple of weeks...

[fairweatherfan06]

The truth is this, regardless of whether we can trade for someone decent or not we NEED to make a move. The roster is currently running at CAPACITY which means to sign a player off the waiver wire their needs to be roster spots open, so even if its for picks or somebody we'll waive immediately, a transaction (hopefully a trade) needs to take place for the team to be available to sign somebody, it  would be a horrible waste to have to waive a trade asset in order to sign someone. It makes much more sense to do a 2 or 3 for one trade to free up the roster space to sign people who are waived after the deadline.

[BballTim]

If the big three aren't playing clearly better than last year and the bench seems to be playing worse than last year, why haven't we taken a significant step back?

I don't think that anybody is arguing that the Cs have taken a significant step backwards.

  People have said that the team is unlikely or unable to win the title with this roster. You don't consider that a significant step backwards for the defending champs?

[hpantazo]

If the big three aren't playing clearly better than last year and the bench seems to be playing worse than last year, why haven't we taken a significant step back?

I don't think that anybody is arguing that the Cs have taken a significant step backwards.

  People have said that the team is unlikely or unable to win the title with this roster. You don't consider that a significant step backwards for the defending champs?

the competition (Lakers, Cavs, Magic) has improved, and this year's celtics team is still on last year's pace and has the best record in the NBA going into the all-star break, so how is this team any less likely to win the title this year, and how can you say the big three and/or the bench are not playing as well? If they really are not playing as well and they have the best record in the nba, then they should totally dominate once they start playing as well as last year's team. This team does not need to rush to add anyone, and can take the title again with the current roster if no good options for an updgrade show up.

[winsomme]

If the big three aren't playing clearly better than last year and the bench seems to be playing worse than last year, why haven't we taken a significant step back?

I don't think that anybody is arguing that the Cs have taken a significant step backwards.

  People have said that the team is unlikely or unable to win the title with this roster. You don't consider that a significant step backwards for the defending champs?

not sure why others are arguing that, but for me their chances are lessened by a combination of the other teams getting better from last year and our bench being weaker than last year.

so, did the Cs take a significant step backwards...no. I actually think the sum total is about the same when you weigh the improvement of the starters vs. the weakening of the bench....

but unfortunately, where we are in relation to last season doesn't meant too much when you have to beat this years teams - which IMO have gotten better...

there are some key match ups that i am worried about and i hope Danny is able to address them in the coming weeks....

if not, let's hope the guys we have rise to the occasion...