Danny has quite a bit of blame to fail us to repeat

[Chris]

Andersen would have been much better than either POB or Mikki.  However, having him on the team wouldn't have made a huge difference in terms of our ability to repeat, in my opinion.  Once KG went down, it just wasn't going to happen.

I agree with you that when the opportunity to win a championship is there, the team should be more concerned about the present than the distant future.  In Danny's defense, neither Andersen nor Jones was a sure thing.  However, he misjudged the off-season, and his plan -- such that it was -- was a failure in the short term.

Well said.  Danny made some mistakes this past offseason, that is hard to argue.  But they were not mistakes that submarined the team.  Before KG and Powe went down, this team was still a legit championship contender, and I would argue one of the two best teams in the league. 

Yeah, Danny could have made some moves that would have made them even better, to make it harder for the Cavs to beat them if they were healthy.  However, there were no moves that Danny could have made that would have made this team a true championship contender with KG and Powe injured, given how well the Cavs are playing.

Personally, I prefer to give Ainge credit for the team he put together, rather than dwelling on the mistakes he made.  He put together a team that was so good, that despite the mistakes he did make, and despite the terrible injuries they had, they still won 62 games, and were one lucky bounce here or there from getting to the Eastern Conference Finals.  Yeah, he could have done a better job, but this was still a hell of a team he put together.

[BballTim]

I hope that unlike some posters, Ainge fully understands he took some really bad decisions last Summer. Otherwise, there's the risk he may repeat it this one and that would be extremely depressing.

  Ainge made a few decisions that didn't work out. That doesn't mean that you can't take a realistic look at what happened. The fact that our bench was bad doesn't mean that we were a worse team this year than we were last year. It doesn't mean we didn't have as good of a shot at the title as anyone else. It doesn't mean that the fact that Danny signed Miles to a non-guaranteed contract and cut him before the season began is an immense blunder. It doesn't mean that Paul and Ray being tired was unrelated to KG and Powe (especially KG) being out of the lineup. It doesn't mean that any player that anyone can think of would have been a great improvement. Let's face it, the people who complained about how well our bench was going to play were right. But many of those people let that opinion dominate their view of all things Celtic.

i'm pretty much in agreement with you on this. If the starters were healthy, I think we were right there for another Title run.

but I do think that the bench deficiencies put an added strain on the starters during the regular season. A strain that I think Danny needs to relieve for next seasons run.

We can say that the starters had as much of a burden in the 08 season, but that doesn't just say to me that they are always capable of carrying this load, it says that they are also probably still carrying the wear and tear of that Title winning season.

  It's hard to say that there was too much of a carryover from last year weighing them down when they started the season 27-2. Aside from the fact that they all played the most minutes of their careers the 07-08 season was probably easier than any of them were used to. They were all playing reduced minutes from what they were used to and weren't forced to carry the offense of the team by themselves for long stretches of time. And while a better bench would have helped it still remains true that the Celts were ahead of last year's pace without the big three seeing an increase in minutes when KG went down.

[winsomme]

I hope that unlike some posters, Ainge fully understands he took some really bad decisions last Summer. Otherwise, there's the risk he may repeat it this one and that would be extremely depressing.

  Ainge made a few decisions that didn't work out. That doesn't mean that you can't take a realistic look at what happened. The fact that our bench was bad doesn't mean that we were a worse team this year than we were last year. It doesn't mean we didn't have as good of a shot at the title as anyone else. It doesn't mean that the fact that Danny signed Miles to a non-guaranteed contract and cut him before the season began is an immense blunder. It doesn't mean that Paul and Ray being tired was unrelated to KG and Powe (especially KG) being out of the lineup. It doesn't mean that any player that anyone can think of would have been a great improvement. Let's face it, the people who complained about how well our bench was going to play were right. But many of those people let that opinion dominate their view of all things Celtic.

i'm pretty much in agreement with you on this. If the starters were healthy, I think we were right there for another Title run.

but I do think that the bench deficiencies put an added strain on the starters during the regular season. A strain that I think Danny needs to relieve for next seasons run.

We can say that the starters had as much of a burden in the 08 season, but that doesn't just say to me that they are always capable of carrying this load, it says that they are also probably still carrying the wear and tear of that Title winning season.

  It's hard to say that there was too much of a carryover from last year weighing them down when they started the season 27-2. Aside from the fact that they all played the most minutes of their careers the 07-08 season was probably easier than any of them were used to. They were all playing reduced minutes from what they were used to and weren't forced to carry the offense of the team by themselves for long stretches of time. And while a better bench would have helped it still remains true that the Celts were ahead of last year's pace without the big three seeing an increase in minutes when KG went down.

it's one thing to start fast and another to finish strong.

There's a cumulative effect the consider here. remember these guys aren't spring chickens.

where they were record-wise compared to last season seems not terribly relevant to the question of how fresh they were going to be for the playoffs.

Like i conceded, in terms of ability, the bench didn't hugely affect our chances of a reapeat if healthy, certainly not a good solid run at it...and of course we won a lot of games, we have the best starting 5 in the NBA..

but it did IMO affect the DURability....

any way you slice it, you need to get more, better, reliable bench players to take the regular season burden off our aging vets  (not to mention Rondo and Perk who are also showing wear and tear too)...

Is this starting unit capable of winning a Title without a better bench? yes. are they going to make it to that dance without a better bench? that's the rub.

bottom line: a better bench does two things. It helps the starters get more rest during the regular season. and it helps you match ups-wise in the post season having more players to throw at your opponets.

it's a double boost to your Title hopes.

[Tr1boy]

Its funny how alot of you mention that the birdman was out of shape yet POB was never in shape to begin with

 

[BballTim]

I hope that unlike some posters, Ainge fully understands he took some really bad decisions last Summer. Otherwise, there's the risk he may repeat it this one and that would be extremely depressing.

  Ainge made a few decisions that didn't work out. That doesn't mean that you can't take a realistic look at what happened. The fact that our bench was bad doesn't mean that we were a worse team this year than we were last year. It doesn't mean we didn't have as good of a shot at the title as anyone else. It doesn't mean that the fact that Danny signed Miles to a non-guaranteed contract and cut him before the season began is an immense blunder. It doesn't mean that Paul and Ray being tired was unrelated to KG and Powe (especially KG) being out of the lineup. It doesn't mean that any player that anyone can think of would have been a great improvement. Let's face it, the people who complained about how well our bench was going to play were right. But many of those people let that opinion dominate their view of all things Celtic.

i'm pretty much in agreement with you on this. If the starters were healthy, I think we were right there for another Title run.

but I do think that the bench deficiencies put an added strain on the starters during the regular season. A strain that I think Danny needs to relieve for next seasons run.

We can say that the starters had as much of a burden in the 08 season, but that doesn't just say to me that they are always capable of carrying this load, it says that they are also probably still carrying the wear and tear of that Title winning season.

  It's hard to say that there was too much of a carryover from last year weighing them down when they started the season 27-2. Aside from the fact that they all played the most minutes of their careers the 07-08 season was probably easier than any of them were used to. They were all playing reduced minutes from what they were used to and weren't forced to carry the offense of the team by themselves for long stretches of time. And while a better bench would have helped it still remains true that the Celts were ahead of last year's pace without the big three seeing an increase in minutes when KG went down.

it's one thing to start fast and another to finish strong.

There's a cumulative effect the consider here. remember these guys aren't spring chickens.

where they were record-wise compared to last season seems not terribly relevant to the question of how fresh they were going to be for the playoffs.

  The team was playing as strong if not stronger when KG went down than they were at the beginning of the season. And where they were record-wise might not be relevant to how fresh they were going to be but the fact that they weren't playing any more minutes in 08-09 than they did in 07-08 is.

[cordobes]

I hope that unlike some posters, Ainge fully understands he took some really bad decisions last Summer. Otherwise, there's the risk he may repeat it this one and that would be extremely depressing.

  Ainge made a few decisions that didn't work out. That doesn't mean that you can't take a realistic look at what happened. The fact that our bench was bad doesn't mean that we were a worse team this year than we were last year. It doesn't mean we didn't have as good of a shot at the title as anyone else. It doesn't mean that the fact that Danny signed Miles to a non-guaranteed contract and cut him before the season began is an immense blunder. It doesn't mean that Paul and Ray being tired was unrelated to KG and Powe (especially KG) being out of the lineup. It doesn't mean that any player that anyone can think of would have been a great improvement. Let's face it, the people who complained about how well our bench was going to play were right. But many of those people let that opinion dominate their view of all things Celtic.

What's exactly your point? I'm not as obsessed as you on meta-discussions. I don't care about who had this or that opinion. I'm pretty comfortable with all my predictions about how effective last season roster would be: POB and Darius Miles being appalling bad projects, Scalabrine being more useful than anyone in this board was predicting, Tony Allen being his inconsistent self and basically useless in the playoffs, the lack of a taller and better wing backup, Walker being very far from ready to contribute, etc. etc. I even predicted our winning record to be in the low 60s and Orlando to eliminate us.

Saying that "oh but the team was still a contender and a top-team in the NBA" as an argument when evaluating what Ainge did last Summer strikes me as ridiculous. If Ainge was able to turn a championship team into a non-contender in an off-season (by trading one of the starters or whatever) I'd expect him to be fired. So, no, the obvious fact that the team would still contending for a team if fully healthy doesn't mean that Ainge did a good job last Summer.

I'm more interested on seeing the issue in abstract and learn lessons from it: Ainge's mistake was taking too many risks - and I'm not saying it was a mistake because it didn't work; it was a mistake in itself. I think that's a very flawed approach when you're the NBA champions with an ageing core. Not signing Posey (or not trying to minimize his lost by figuring out someone would offer him a bigger contract that we were willing to) was a truly bad move, not only for last season, but for the consequences it will have also in this one, for example; now it's time to make up for it with some bold moves.

[dlpin]

I agree that Ainge gambled in the offseason with the MLE signings, trying to get Posey at a cheaper price and then trying to get Maggette, and that by taking these risks he lost out on the opportunity to sign Pietrus and other lower profile but also effective free agents.

So in that sense I agree that he took risks that he shouldn't have.

But many in this thread seem upset about the gambles that didnt pay off but wanted other risk gambles that paid off elsewhere.

The reason the Birdman signed for a minimum deal at a franchise that according to some sources was not even his top choice should tell everyone how much of a gamble most people familiar with his situation thought he was.

[cordobes]

I agree that Ainge gambled in the offseason with the MLE signings, trying to get Posey at a cheaper price and then trying to get Maggette, and that by taking these risks he lost out on the opportunity to sign Pietrus and other lower profile but also effective free agents.

So in that sense I agree that he took risks that he shouldn't have.

But many in this thread seem upset about the gambles that didnt pay off but wanted other risk gambles that paid off elsewhere.

The reason the Birdman signed for a minimum deal at a franchise that according to some sources was not even his top choice should tell everyone how much of a gamble most people familiar with his situation thought he was.

As I've said, my problem was to gamble by forming a roster full of question marks (the so-called "low risk, high reward" signings) and with evident flaws that could have been covered. The fact that the gamble didn't work leaves me absolutely indifferent; I don't like to assess moves with the benefit of hindsight (if KG had his knee injury last season and not this one, would that make trading for him a bad move? Of course not, it was the right one).

[wdleehi]

The failing is not having a deep bench lead to heavy minutes for the older guys, which increases the changes for nagging injuries.  (not KG's, of course)



I would love it if they find that swingman and PF/C that can both play 20-25 minutes a game in the regular season without hurting the Celtics chances to win.  (I love Grant Hill and Wallace for those roles)


Celtics then have an older team of vets that will have plenty in the tank for the championship run next year.  (and this offseason is about a champoinship run, not the post 3 star years)

[winsomme]

I hope that unlike some posters, Ainge fully understands he took some really bad decisions last Summer. Otherwise, there's the risk he may repeat it this one and that would be extremely depressing.

  Ainge made a few decisions that didn't work out. That doesn't mean that you can't take a realistic look at what happened. The fact that our bench was bad doesn't mean that we were a worse team this year than we were last year. It doesn't mean we didn't have as good of a shot at the title as anyone else. It doesn't mean that the fact that Danny signed Miles to a non-guaranteed contract and cut him before the season began is an immense blunder. It doesn't mean that Paul and Ray being tired was unrelated to KG and Powe (especially KG) being out of the lineup. It doesn't mean that any player that anyone can think of would have been a great improvement. Let's face it, the people who complained about how well our bench was going to play were right. But many of those people let that opinion dominate their view of all things Celtic.

i'm pretty much in agreement with you on this. If the starters were healthy, I think we were right there for another Title run.

but I do think that the bench deficiencies put an added strain on the starters during the regular season. A strain that I think Danny needs to relieve for next seasons run.

We can say that the starters had as much of a burden in the 08 season, but that doesn't just say to me that they are always capable of carrying this load, it says that they are also probably still carrying the wear and tear of that Title winning season.

  It's hard to say that there was too much of a carryover from last year weighing them down when they started the season 27-2. Aside from the fact that they all played the most minutes of their careers the 07-08 season was probably easier than any of them were used to. They were all playing reduced minutes from what they were used to and weren't forced to carry the offense of the team by themselves for long stretches of time. And while a better bench would have helped it still remains true that the Celts were ahead of last year's pace without the big three seeing an increase in minutes when KG went down.

it's one thing to start fast and another to finish strong.

There's a cumulative effect the consider here. remember these guys aren't spring chickens.

where they were record-wise compared to last season seems not terribly relevant to the question of how fresh they were going to be for the playoffs.

  The team was playing as strong if not stronger when KG went down than they were at the beginning of the season. And where they were record-wise might not be relevant to how fresh they were going to be but the fact that they weren't playing any more minutes in 08-09 than they did in 07-08 is.

KG went down two months before the end of the regular season.

plus, like i said, comparing MPG this season to last season neglects the cumulative effect of these seasons.

The fact is that GPA are not as durable as they were 5 or 6 years ago...

If we go into next season without a much better bench, we are going to end up worn out and possibly just as injury riddled as we are this season.

It's a mistake IMO to think that the MPG from the 08 season should be the norm every year....

just look at SAS and DET if you need to examples of the cumulative effects of Title runs on aging stars.

[QuinielaBox]

Danny gets an F for last summers off season work. No question about it. He gets a D for the midseason acquistions.

He gets one more chance to strengthen our team in our final year of our three year window with KG-PP-RA. He has the tools to do it. Now Git-er-done, Danny, Git-er-done

[winsomme]

I hope that unlike some posters, Ainge fully understands he took some really bad decisions last Summer. Otherwise, there's the risk he may repeat it this one and that would be extremely depressing.

  Ainge made a few decisions that didn't work out. That doesn't mean that you can't take a realistic look at what happened. The fact that our bench was bad doesn't mean that we were a worse team this year than we were last year. It doesn't mean we didn't have as good of a shot at the title as anyone else. It doesn't mean that the fact that Danny signed Miles to a non-guaranteed contract and cut him before the season began is an immense blunder. It doesn't mean that Paul and Ray being tired was unrelated to KG and Powe (especially KG) being out of the lineup. It doesn't mean that any player that anyone can think of would have been a great improvement. Let's face it, the people who complained about how well our bench was going to play were right. But many of those people let that opinion dominate their view of all things Celtic.

i'm pretty much in agreement with you on this. If the starters were healthy, I think we were right there for another Title run.

but I do think that the bench deficiencies put an added strain on the starters during the regular season. A strain that I think Danny needs to relieve for next seasons run.

We can say that the starters had as much of a burden in the 08 season, but that doesn't just say to me that they are always capable of carrying this load, it says that they are also probably still carrying the wear and tear of that Title winning season.

  It's hard to say that there was too much of a carryover from last year weighing them down when they started the season 27-2. Aside from the fact that they all played the most minutes of their careers the 07-08 season was probably easier than any of them were used to. They were all playing reduced minutes from what they were used to and weren't forced to carry the offense of the team by themselves for long stretches of time. And while a better bench would have helped it still remains true that the Celts were ahead of last year's pace without the big three seeing an increase in minutes when KG went down.

it's one thing to start fast and another to finish strong.

There's a cumulative effect the consider here. remember these guys aren't spring chickens.

where they were record-wise compared to last season seems not terribly relevant to the question of how fresh they were going to be for the playoffs.

  The team was playing as strong if not stronger when KG went down than they were at the beginning of the season. And where they were record-wise might not be relevant to how fresh they were going to be but the fact that they weren't playing any more minutes in 08-09 than they did in 07-08 is.

another point to take into consideration, Bball, is that this upcoming season is even more important to have better depth than the last - considering that our whole starting unit is hobbled as a result of this season.

[Chris]

I agree that Ainge gambled in the offseason with the MLE signings, trying to get Posey at a cheaper price and then trying to get Maggette, and that by taking these risks he lost out on the opportunity to sign Pietrus and other lower profile but also effective free agents.

So in that sense I agree that he took risks that he shouldn't have.

But many in this thread seem upset about the gambles that didnt pay off but wanted other risk gambles that paid off elsewhere.

The reason the Birdman signed for a minimum deal at a franchise that according to some sources was not even his top choice should tell everyone how much of a gamble most people familiar with his situation thought he was.

As I've said, my problem was to gamble by forming a roster full of question marks (the so-called "low risk, high reward" signings) and with evident flaws that could have been covered. The fact that the gamble didn't work leaves me absolutely indifferent; I don't like to assess moves with the benefit of hindsight (if KG had his knee injury last season and not this one, would that make trading for him a bad move? Of course not, it was the right one).

Yeah, see, I think Danny's logic last summer was relatively sound.  He felt that he was in a position to take a risk on a couple low risk, high reward guys, with the knowledge that even if none of them panned out (which happened), he still had a good chance to bring in reinforcements late in the season...and even if THAT didn't pan out, I think he genuinely believed that he had a team that could still win the championship. 

To me, that logic made much more sense than signing less risky players, who would have possibly helped a little more, but would not have made a big difference come playoff time.

Of course the real mistake Danny made was thinking that the combination of backup wings he brought in could handle things. Other than the injuries, the lack of a competent backup to spell Pierce and Allen all season long is what submarined this team's chances (although again, it was a moot point once KG went down).

I actually think Danny did a good job with the big men.  If they did not have so many injuries, a rotation of Perk, Garnett, Davis, Powe, and Scal is pretty [dang] good.  I know people wanted more length, but not many teams have more than 2 quality 7 footers (Perk plays like a 7 footer with his length), and not many teams have 3 players as good as Powe, Davis, and Scal coming off the bench in the front court.  Yeah, Davis and Powe were still getting better throughout the season, but by the time the postseason came around (which is all that really matters), they both were top notch backup big men, and Scal was as solid as ever.

Yeah, they got exposed a little once the injuries started happening, but team is not exposed when two of their top 3 big men (and for much of the season, 3 of their top 5) are out with injuries.  Anyone using that as a reason to complain about Ainge is just being greedy IMO.

[winsomme]

I agree that Ainge gambled in the offseason with the MLE signings, trying to get Posey at a cheaper price and then trying to get Maggette, and that by taking these risks he lost out on the opportunity to sign Pietrus and other lower profile but also effective free agents.

So in that sense I agree that he took risks that he shouldn't have.

But many in this thread seem upset about the gambles that didnt pay off but wanted other risk gambles that paid off elsewhere.

The reason the Birdman signed for a minimum deal at a franchise that according to some sources was not even his top choice should tell everyone how much of a gamble most people familiar with his situation thought he was.

As I've said, my problem was to gamble by forming a roster full of question marks (the so-called "low risk, high reward" signings) and with evident flaws that could have been covered. The fact that the gamble didn't work leaves me absolutely indifferent; I don't like to assess moves with the benefit of hindsight (if KG had his knee injury last season and not this one, would that make trading for him a bad move? Of course not, it was the right one).

yeah, I'm with you Cor.

KG going down doesn't in and of itself take Danny off the hook for the way he filled out the bench. That's a hindsight argument.

It does, however, make it difficult to answer the question of whether or not the bench was good enough to have brought us another Title if not for the KG injury...

[bbd24]

How do you grade out an F when the team hits 62 wins, loses out in the semi's to a tough Orlando team, and is without 2 major components that log major minutes ?

I don't get it.