Author Topic: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?  (Read 41473 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #75 on: February 25, 2009, 09:09:53 AM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4035
  • Tommy Points: 741
Couldn't it be an average offseason? Who knows who was really available, and for how much. There's no guarantee we won't win a title this year and there's no guarantee that a different move would have solidified a title. To me, a good offseason would have been to get Posey or similarly effective player(s) at a reasonable price. On the other hand, I think a "terrible" offseason would have resulted in a massive long-term contract to a player who wouldn't live up to it...such as the deal Posey ultimately got. Because Ainge didn't saddle himself with such a terrible contract, it can't really be a terrible offseason. It wasn't a good one either, but somewhere in between.


What upsets me is that the New Orleans owners already want a do-over on Posey...while when the deal went down, many of the more rational minds out there knew that it was a terrible deal for a player like Posey. If only New Orleans had had their heads screwed on straight, our offseason could have been much better. Unfortunately, it only takes one idiot with a mid-level exception to screw things for the rest of the teams out there.



To expand, Golden State, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and the Clippers all had "terrible" offseasons. All 4 teams way overpaid for free agents with long term contracts to players on or approaching the wrong side of 30. New Orleans is now looking to trade away Chandler, a much more important player than Posey, just to save money it could have saved by not venturing into the free agent market. Those are terrible offseasons: short term losses with worse long-term ramifications.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #76 on: February 28, 2009, 01:27:55 AM »

Online triboy16f

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21018
  • Tommy Points: 540
he did for a second but he just redeemed himself. He must be the luckiest gm i swear.

The past two years he missed out on that 50 inch lcd during boxing day madness only to find an even better lcd on ebay for a cheaper price if you get my anology

Repeat or not he is the best and luckiest gm in the nba


Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #77 on: February 28, 2009, 01:36:20 AM »

Offline xmuscularghandix

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7620
  • Tommy Points: 280
after he trades away the big three.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #78 on: February 28, 2009, 01:42:00 AM »

Offline guava_wrench

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9931
  • Tommy Points: 777
Couldn't it be an average offseason? Who knows who was really available, and for how much. There's no guarantee we won't win a title this year and there's no guarantee that a different move would have solidified a title. To me, a good offseason would have been to get Posey or similarly effective player(s) at a reasonable price. On the other hand, I think a "terrible" offseason would have resulted in a massive long-term contract to a player who wouldn't live up to it...such as the deal Posey ultimately got. Because Ainge didn't saddle himself with such a terrible contract, it can't really be a terrible offseason. It wasn't a good one either, but somewhere in between.


What upsets me is that the New Orleans owners already want a do-over on Posey...while when the deal went down, many of the more rational minds out there knew that it was a terrible deal for a player like Posey. If only New Orleans had had their heads screwed on straight, our offseason could have been much better. Unfortunately, it only takes one idiot with a mid-level exception to screw things for the rest of the teams out there.



To expand, Golden State, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and the Clippers all had "terrible" offseasons. All 4 teams way overpaid for free agents with long term contracts to players on or approaching the wrong side of 30. New Orleans is now looking to trade away Chandler, a much more important player than Posey, just to save money it could have saved by not venturing into the free agent market. Those are terrible offseasons: short term losses with worse long-term ramifications.
Great point. That is brutal when you think about it. Dumping Chandler because you overpaid on Posey.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #79 on: February 28, 2009, 11:30:53 AM »

Offline Andy Jick

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3795
  • Tommy Points: 89
  • You know my methods, Watson.
Couldn't it be an average offseason? Who knows who was really available, and for how much. There's no guarantee we won't win a title this year and there's no guarantee that a different move would have solidified a title. To me, a good offseason would have been to get Posey or similarly effective player(s) at a reasonable price. On the other hand, I think a "terrible" offseason would have resulted in a massive long-term contract to a player who wouldn't live up to it...such as the deal Posey ultimately got. Because Ainge didn't saddle himself with such a terrible contract, it can't really be a terrible offseason. It wasn't a good one either, but somewhere in between.


What upsets me is that the New Orleans owners already want a do-over on Posey...while when the deal went down, many of the more rational minds out there knew that it was a terrible deal for a player like Posey. If only New Orleans had had their heads screwed on straight, our offseason could have been much better. Unfortunately, it only takes one idiot with a mid-level exception to screw things for the rest of the teams out there.



To expand, Golden State, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and the Clippers all had "terrible" offseasons. All 4 teams way overpaid for free agents with long term contracts to players on or approaching the wrong side of 30. New Orleans is now looking to trade away Chandler, a much more important player than Posey, just to save money it could have saved by not venturing into the free agent market. Those are terrible offseasons: short term losses with worse long-term ramifications.
Great point. That is brutal when you think about it. Dumping Chandler because you overpaid on Posey.

the difference, though, is that the celtics are an institution, where the hornets are just another form of entertainment in that city.

posey to the celtics means more than posey to the hornets does.  james took the money, not a title.  i don't begrudge him of that.

but if the cav's get by us because we have no one to stop lebron, or the lakers do because we have no one to stop kobe, then ask me then how much james posey was worth...
"It was easier to know it than to explain why I know it."

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #80 on: February 28, 2009, 11:51:19 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
Couldn't it be an average offseason? Who knows who was really available, and for how much. There's no guarantee we won't win a title this year and there's no guarantee that a different move would have solidified a title. To me, a good offseason would have been to get Posey or similarly effective player(s) at a reasonable price. On the other hand, I think a "terrible" offseason would have resulted in a massive long-term contract to a player who wouldn't live up to it...such as the deal Posey ultimately got. Because Ainge didn't saddle himself with such a terrible contract, it can't really be a terrible offseason. It wasn't a good one either, but somewhere in between.


What upsets me is that the New Orleans owners already want a do-over on Posey...while when the deal went down, many of the more rational minds out there knew that it was a terrible deal for a player like Posey. If only New Orleans had had their heads screwed on straight, our offseason could have been much better. Unfortunately, it only takes one idiot with a mid-level exception to screw things for the rest of the teams out there.



To expand, Golden State, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and the Clippers all had "terrible" offseasons. All 4 teams way overpaid for free agents with long term contracts to players on or approaching the wrong side of 30. New Orleans is now looking to trade away Chandler, a much more important player than Posey, just to save money it could have saved by not venturing into the free agent market. Those are terrible offseasons: short term losses with worse long-term ramifications.
Great point. That is brutal when you think about it. Dumping Chandler because you overpaid on Posey.

the difference, though, is that the celtics are an institution, where the hornets are just another form of entertainment in that city.

posey to the celtics means more than posey to the hornets does.  james took the money, not a title.  i don't begrudge him of that.

but if the cav's get by us because we have no one to stop lebron, or the lakers do because we have no one to stop kobe, then ask me then how much james posey was worth...

  I can't wait for the playoffs. Every time LeBron or Kobe scores we'll all be regaled with tales about how Posey would have stopped that play. Any time we miss a late game shot we'll hear all about how Posey would never miss a shot in that situation. And don't get me started about PJ...

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #81 on: February 28, 2009, 11:55:45 AM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255
Couldn't it be an average offseason? Who knows who was really available, and for how much. There's no guarantee we won't win a title this year and there's no guarantee that a different move would have solidified a title. To me, a good offseason would have been to get Posey or similarly effective player(s) at a reasonable price. On the other hand, I think a "terrible" offseason would have resulted in a massive long-term contract to a player who wouldn't live up to it...such as the deal Posey ultimately got. Because Ainge didn't saddle himself with such a terrible contract, it can't really be a terrible offseason. It wasn't a good one either, but somewhere in between.


What upsets me is that the New Orleans owners already want a do-over on Posey...while when the deal went down, many of the more rational minds out there knew that it was a terrible deal for a player like Posey. If only New Orleans had had their heads screwed on straight, our offseason could have been much better. Unfortunately, it only takes one idiot with a mid-level exception to screw things for the rest of the teams out there.



To expand, Golden State, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and the Clippers all had "terrible" offseasons. All 4 teams way overpaid for free agents with long term contracts to players on or approaching the wrong side of 30. New Orleans is now looking to trade away Chandler, a much more important player than Posey, just to save money it could have saved by not venturing into the free agent market. Those are terrible offseasons: short term losses with worse long-term ramifications.
Great point. That is brutal when you think about it. Dumping Chandler because you overpaid on Posey.

the difference, though, is that the celtics are an institution, where the hornets are just another form of entertainment in that city.

posey to the celtics means more than posey to the hornets does.  james took the money, not a title.  i don't begrudge him of that.

but if the cav's get by us because we have no one to stop lebron, or the lakers do because we have no one to stop kobe, then ask me then how much james posey was worth...

  I can't wait for the playoffs. Every time LeBron or Kobe scores we'll all be regaled with tales about how Posey would have stopped that play. Any time we miss a late game shot we'll hear all about how Posey would never miss a shot in that situation. And don't get me started about PJ...

and every time Moore or Marbury does something good we'll hear about how PJ or Posey wouldn't have done that...

that is gonna cut both ways and is the nature of the beast.

the only thing that is really going to matter is results.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #82 on: February 28, 2009, 12:51:27 PM »

Offline BillfromBoston

  • Author
  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 498
  • Tommy Points: 79
Danny doing his KG impression after signing Moore and on the verge of signing Marbury:

What you gonna say now?!  What you gon-na say NOW?

I think it's a little premature.  While I'm optimistic about both players, they could both be busts.  Furthermore it doesn't change two facts:

1) This isn't the offseason.  So Danny still had a bad offseason. 

2) It was still a terrible risk.  There's no way Danny could guarantee that Marbury and Moore were going to be available.  When you have three aging superstars, you don't roll the dice that buyouts will work out in your favor and risk not being the best you can be in a given year. 

Quite true. I find the contention that this is "all part of a plan" patently absurd and extremely laughable.

But we're interrupting a record moment of hyperbole on this board.

Then you were also completely blind-sided by the KG and Ray Allen trades sir...

There is a difference between having a plan to get a type of player IDed from a list of potential acquisitions and stating a specific target down to the man himself...

Coincidentally, as with KG, Marbury was the primary target, but that doesn't mean that Ainge put all his eggs in that basket...

If you can't understand the nuances of strategic planning for an NBA executive, its your understanding of team management that is absurd and laughable.

I'm sorry - don't mean to be harsh - but you are always so conceited about your viewpoint on this matter and its just completely wrong - its not even up for debate - this is how team management works.

The team games out possible scenarios on the FA market up to 5 years in advance in some cases - they weigh the pros and cons of the moves they contemplate and try and factor in growth curves and other performance factors using data models to project with percentile accuracy.

These moves require some amount of "luck" but only within the parameters of the approximations they fall within -- these are moves made on probability, not coin-toss randomness.

The moves Ainge did not make this past off-season were calculated based on his perception of the market going toward the trade deadline and waiver wire, coupled with his estimates on player development internally, and finalized with an eye toward future expenditure.

I'd say he had a phenominal 2008 season - as only after March 1st does his job truly conclude...getting an All Star talent for a million dollars is probably the BEST move made this year - if Marbury plays team ball, the Celtics become prohibitive favorites by virtue of their sheer talent coupled with teamwork...that's all there is to it...

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #83 on: February 28, 2009, 12:54:43 PM »

Offline BillfromBoston

  • Author
  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 498
  • Tommy Points: 79
Danny doing his KG impression after signing Moore and on the verge of signing Marbury:

What you gonna say now?!  What you gon-na say NOW?

I think it's a little premature.  While I'm optimistic about both players, they could both be busts.  Furthermore it doesn't change two facts:

1) This isn't the offseason.  So Danny still had a bad offseason. 

2) It was still a terrible risk.  There's no way Danny could guarantee that Marbury and Moore were going to be available.  When you have three aging superstars, you don't roll the dice that buyouts will work out in your favor and risk not being the best you can be in a given year. 

Quite true. I find the contention that this is "all part of a plan" patently absurd and extremely laughable.

But we're interrupting a record moment of hyperbole on this board.

  More posts about how Danny killed our chances of repeating, or other hyperbole?

BANG! ;D

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #84 on: February 28, 2009, 12:58:30 PM »

Offline Celtics17

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 845
  • Tommy Points: 106
BillfromBoston, your last reply was about as eloquently put as any I have read on this board. I do, however, beg to differ, at least to a certain extent. If you are trying to put together a championship team, which I believe that Danny should be doing now, then you do go all in. If you are trying to be competitive and maybe go for a title a year or two down the road then that is a different "strategic" plan altogether. When you just won a title, and are probably favored to do so again, you do not plan instead for what might happen two or three years from now unless you are quite certain that you will be competing for it again then.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #85 on: February 28, 2009, 01:31:02 PM »

Offline Carhole

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 283
  • Tommy Points: 63


but if the cav's get by us because we have no one to stop lebron...
[/quote]

You watched that series last year and believe that posey was the reason that we slowed down lebron? Pose actually played horribly agaist him.

Or are you just saying that, that arguement will be made whether or not it is the reality of the situation?

I loved posey but his individual defense is highly overrated. His clutch shooting and help D are what I am most concerned about missing.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #86 on: February 28, 2009, 01:39:21 PM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255


but if the cav's get by us because we have no one to stop lebron...

You watched that series last year and believe that posey was the reason that we slowed down lebron? Pose actually played horribly agaist him.

Or are you just saying that, that arguement will be made whether or not it is the reality of the situation?

I loved posey but his individual defense is highly overrated. His clutch shooting and help D are what I am most concerned about missing.
[/quote]


not sure what the other poster was getting at, but i would love to see Pierce not having to guard LBJ the whole game.

maybe TA will be back and take some time there for Paul....

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #87 on: February 28, 2009, 02:28:13 PM »

Offline Mencius

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1121
  • Tommy Points: 103
Any GM worth his salt is aware of what teams have expiring contracts in a given year.  More specifically, contending teams are aware of rebuilding teams that have expirings.  If rebuilding teams have expiring veteran contracts that they were unable to trade at the deadline, there is always a fair chance that they'd be willing negotiate a buyout to save the franchise money (and provide the veteran to go to a contender).  That's merely due diligence.

So yes, Ainge was aware that certain veterans on certain struggling teams might well be available.  As expiring contracts are often times viewed as highly desirable purely for the financial benefits, sometimes those same struggling teams can turn the expiring contract into better talent (but with more onerous (read longer) contracts.  So there's the added risk that the veterans that Ainge had targeted might be traded and thus unavailable.

Add to that possibility that even if bought out, the player might choose a contender other than the Celtics to latch on to, and there is a definite risk factor.

The whole buyout phenomena seems of recent vintage to me.  Not something that you could take to the bank as a given.  PJ wasn't even a buyout.  He came out of retirement (thankfully).  Sam was brought on board as insurance in case Rondo was deemed unready.

There is foresight involved, but there is no denying that there is luck involved as well. 

As to being surprised by the KG and Ray signings, and whether they were part of a plan, I'd just say that Danny had skillfully positioned himself to be in a flexible position.

They were certainly not plan A.  Plan A was tanking the season and Getting Oden or Durant and putting them beside Pierce, Jefferson and Rondo.  When that went out the window, Danny immediately had to decide whether he was going to keep Pierce and cash in his chips immediately, or lose Pierce and continue with the slower build.  We all know how that went.

More than anything, Danny deserves credit for recognizing, when he took over, that what he inherited had no upside, and no real shot at contending, and having the courage to dismantle it.  Every move was about upgrading talent, even when it involved taking on guys with less than stellar reputations, character-wise, and even when it meant going with young, talented guys who were not yet ready to win, but who ultimately had more value on the market.

I always knew that Danny would trade some of them in.  Had no idea that he'd go the all in strategy that he eventually took.  I think his hand was a bit forced, in that it was either cash in or lose Paul.  Once he got rid of that 5th pick, 'all in' was really the only way to go, because just picking up Ray would not have put us even near to championship contender.

Anyway, just observing that the fact that Danny was well aware of which veterans might be buyout candidates is no earth shattering revelation.  It's the mere due diligence that any competent GM would do.

Beyond that, yes, there was some luck involved, and this present path we are on is very much owing to the serendipity of ping pong balls, even though at the time it seemed like the end of the world.  He did a [dang]ed good job of acquiring assets with which to trade (the proof being that teams did actually trade for them).  In Danny's case, flexibility served him well.

My view is that Danny took a calculated risk by not addressing a couple of the needs during the off-season, and fortunately it paid off, but risk it was.

I still would be more comfortable with a rugged and reliable veteran swing (bigger than 6'4"), so that has gone unaddressed, in my view.  Still, Marbury is an extraordinary talent to have gotten at such a bargain basement price, and hopefully his effect on the second unit will be enough to get us over the hump.

Sorry for the full length novel.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #88 on: February 28, 2009, 03:07:08 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
BillfromBoston, your last reply was about as eloquently put as any I have read on this board. I do, however, beg to differ, at least to a certain extent. If you are trying to put together a championship team, which I believe that Danny should be doing now, then you do go all in.

  What if he'd gone "all in" last year because he was going for the title? What if he'd traded Davis and Powe for an aging vet that we wouldn't have this year? What if he'd traded Rondo for a more experienced pg to better our chances?

  It's Danny's job to try and balance what makes us better this year with what makes us viable in the long run. Going all in doesn't guarantee a title. It just guarantees that your time as a contender will be limited and/or your rebuilding will be harder.

Re: When can we say that Ainge had a terrible offseason?
« Reply #89 on: February 28, 2009, 03:27:57 PM »

Offline Toine43

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1352
  • Tommy Points: 219
  • "Spare change?"
Danny doing his KG impression after signing Moore and on the verge of signing Marbury:

What you gonna say now?!  What you gon-na say NOW?

I think it's a little premature.  While I'm optimistic about both players, they could both be busts.  Furthermore it doesn't change two facts:

1) This isn't the offseason.  So Danny still had a bad offseason. 

2) It was still a terrible risk.  There's no way Danny could guarantee that Marbury and Moore were going to be available.  When you have three aging superstars, you don't roll the dice that buyouts will work out in your favor and risk not being the best you can be in a given year. 

Quite true. I find the contention that this is "all part of a plan" patently absurd and extremely laughable.

But we're interrupting a record moment of hyperbole on this board.

Then you were also completely blind-sided by the KG and Ray Allen trades sir...

There is a difference between having a plan to get a type of player IDed from a list of potential acquisitions and stating a specific target down to the man himself...

Coincidentally, as with KG, Marbury was the primary target, but that doesn't mean that Ainge put all his eggs in that basket...

If you can't understand the nuances of strategic planning for an NBA executive, its your understanding of team management that is absurd and laughable.

I'm sorry - don't mean to be harsh - but you are always so conceited about your viewpoint on this matter and its just completely wrong - its not even up for debate - this is how team management works.

The team games out possible scenarios on the FA market up to 5 years in advance in some cases - they weigh the pros and cons of the moves they contemplate and try and factor in growth curves and other performance factors using data models to project with percentile accuracy.

These moves require some amount of "luck" but only within the parameters of the approximations they fall within -- these are moves made on probability, not coin-toss randomness.

The moves Ainge did not make this past off-season were calculated based on his perception of the market going toward the trade deadline and waiver wire, coupled with his estimates on player development internally, and finalized with an eye toward future expenditure.

I'd say he had a phenominal 2008 season - as only after March 1st does his job truly conclude...getting an All Star talent for a million dollars is probably the BEST move made this year - if Marbury plays team ball, the Celtics become prohibitive favorites by virtue of their sheer talent coupled with teamwork...that's all there is to it...
As always, an amazing post by BillfromBoston.


Eddie House - for THREEEEEEE!

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required