How can the Celtics improve - we have no one to trade and no cap space?

[Chris]

2) Cleveland and Orlando both look very vulnerable.  If Orlando needs 7 games to take a severely weakened C's squad, there's no way they can beat them with KG, a rested Big Two, and a bench.  Similarly, if Cleveland is getting their butts handed to them by a team we could man-handle when healthy, Cleveland isn't really a match for us.  

Too many people are making this deeply flawed reasoning.

Plus, let's not forget that both Orlando and Cleveland will improve their teams as well (Nelson coming back will be big for Orlando).

Yeah, I hate this reasoning.  What we are seeing right now is mostly about matchups...but the Magic are also a much different team than they were in the first 5-6 games against the C's.  Something snapped after that 6th game, kind of like it did last year for the C's against Detroit, where they went from a team playing scared to an elite team that was hitting clutch shots left and right, executing down the stretch, and playing with an edge they were missing for the first half of the playoffs.

TP4U Chris. Excellent analogy.

I find it funny that of the top three teams in the East that the team that actually made itself better mid season(Orlando with the Alston trade) is the team that looks to be most dominant and is the most successful. Ferry didn't pull the trigger on a Wally deal and Danny really couldn't trade anyone only add others castoffs.

I still disagree.  If Cleveland comes back to win this series, we can talk about matchups (or even if they lose in 7).  But if Orlando takes it tomorrow, matchups aren't an excuse for losing to clearly the third best team in the East in 5 games. 

Oh, Cleveland is choking, there is no doubt about that...but I don't think you can carry anything over to how the C's would have fared in the same series.  Regardless of matchups, I think there is a good chance that the Cavs would have been playing better basketball against the C's. 

[Roy Hobbs]

2) Cleveland and Orlando both look very vulnerable.  If Orlando needs 7 games to take a severely weakened C's squad, there's no way they can beat them with KG, a rested Big Two, and a bench.  Similarly, if Cleveland is getting their butts handed to them by a team we could man-handle when healthy, Cleveland isn't really a match for us.  

Too many people are making this deeply flawed reasoning.

Plus, let's not forget that both Orlando and Cleveland will improve their teams as well (Nelson coming back will be big for Orlando).

Yeah, I hate this reasoning.  What we are seeing right now is mostly about matchups...but the Magic are also a much different team than they were in the first 5-6 games against the C's.  Something snapped after that 6th game, kind of like it did last year for the C's against Detroit, where they went from a team playing scared to an elite team that was hitting clutch shots left and right, executing down the stretch, and playing with an edge they were missing for the first half of the playoffs.

TP4U Chris. Excellent analogy.

I find it funny that of the top three teams in the East that the team that actually made itself better mid season(Orlando with the Alston trade) is the team that looks to be most dominant and is the most successful. Ferry didn't pull the trigger on a Wally deal and Danny really couldn't trade anyone only add others castoffs.

I still disagree.  If Cleveland comes back to win this series, we can talk about matchups (or even if they lose in 7).  But if Orlando takes it tomorrow, matchups aren't an excuse for losing to clearly the third best team in the East in 5 games. 

Oh, Cleveland is choking, there is no doubt about that...but I don't think you can carry anything over to how the C's would have fared in the same series.  Regardless of matchups, I think there is a good chance that the Cavs would have been playing better basketball against the C's. 

I agree.  Sometimes, a team just has another team's number.  Cleveland was the best team in the NBA this season -- the 82 game body of work in the regular season tells us so -- but they don't match up very well with Orlando.  That's why the Magic have won 5 out of 7 games so far this year.

However, the Cavs have shown over the last two years that they match up better with the Celtics.  Just because they're struggling with the Magic suggests absolutely nothing about how they would have done against the Celtics.  The one thing the Magic have shown is that the Cavs aren't invincible at home, but other than that, I don't think we've learned a lot about how we would have done, especially sans KG.  Our team plays a completely different style than Orlando.

[thedawg]

As I have argued in other places, I think the Celtics need to give Giddens and Walkers a serious look this year and see if they can be the athletic swing players the Celtics badly need.

Exactly what I was thinking but how likely is that Doc will play them having shunned them totally this wineter?  I can remember Paul Pierce wasn´t nothing special in his rookie season but he start blossoming from the 2nd year on and havent stopped since.  The key to next season will be to allow Walker and Giddens the chance they deserve.  I´d like to see us shop Scalabrine and Tony Allen while we re-sign Marbury, Big Baby Davis and Powe and hope that Eddie House wants more of Celtics.  Then we can go out there and look for a MLE player that will become our sixth man and covers for Pierce and/or the PF position.  
There is absolutely NO WAY that Ray Allen will be untouchables this summer simply because of his lucrative salaries that come off the books in 2010.  I so believe we can get two good players for Ray Allen eventhough I would really want to see Allen next season wearing the C´s uniform.  However, this is business and that´s how it is done.

[Jon]

2) Cleveland and Orlando both look very vulnerable.  If Orlando needs 7 games to take a severely weakened C's squad, there's no way they can beat them with KG, a rested Big Two, and a bench.  Similarly, if Cleveland is getting their butts handed to them by a team we could man-handle when healthy, Cleveland isn't really a match for us.  

Too many people are making this deeply flawed reasoning.

Plus, let's not forget that both Orlando and Cleveland will improve their teams as well (Nelson coming back will be big for Orlando).

Yeah, I hate this reasoning.  What we are seeing right now is mostly about matchups...but the Magic are also a much different team than they were in the first 5-6 games against the C's.  Something snapped after that 6th game, kind of like it did last year for the C's against Detroit, where they went from a team playing scared to an elite team that was hitting clutch shots left and right, executing down the stretch, and playing with an edge they were missing for the first half of the playoffs.

TP4U Chris. Excellent analogy.

I find it funny that of the top three teams in the East that the team that actually made itself better mid season(Orlando with the Alston trade) is the team that looks to be most dominant and is the most successful. Ferry didn't pull the trigger on a Wally deal and Danny really couldn't trade anyone only add others castoffs.

I still disagree.  If Cleveland comes back to win this series, we can talk about matchups (or even if they lose in 7).  But if Orlando takes it tomorrow, matchups aren't an excuse for losing to clearly the third best team in the East in 5 games. 

Oh, Cleveland is choking, there is no doubt about that...but I don't think you can carry anything over to how the C's would have fared in the same series.  Regardless of matchups, I think there is a good chance that the Cavs would have been playing better basketball against the C's. 

I agree.  Sometimes, a team just has another team's number.  Cleveland was the best team in the NBA this season -- the 82 game body of work in the regular season tells us so -- but they don't match up very well with Orlando.  That's why the Magic have won 5 out of 7 games so far this year.

However, the Cavs have shown over the last two years that they match up better with the Celtics.  Just because they're struggling with the Magic suggests absolutely nothing about how they would have done against the Celtics.  The one thing the Magic have shown is that the Cavs aren't invincible at home, but other than that, I don't think we've learned a lot about how we would have done, especially sans KG.  Our team plays a completely different style than Orlando.

I see what you're saying.  And I'll agree with both of you gentlemen if the Cavs win or even make a series of it.  However, the Magic are a miracle shot away from having swept the Cavs and could put them away tomorrow.  If you're truly a great team (which would be the only thing that would negate my earlier point, that the C's could've cruised to #18 with a healthy Garnett), you might struggle with certain teams like the C's did last year; however, you don't lose in 5 games in the ECF.   

[WeMadeIt17]

I am hoping instead of trading for Barbosa which is very unlikely we could trade scal and tony for Raja Bell because he would be perfect in this system for D, and then from there sign some bigs and what not. Raja would help our bench soo much

[fairweatherfan06]

If the PG position wasn't so thin this free agency I'd say let Pruitt walk, but with things being what they are he might be good insurance.  Outside of that I like Who's post, except I'd push Damien Wilkins to the top of the swing man list if he opts out (and he may, though the money might be better than he could get here, he'll get further backing up Pierce than he will Durant in the forseeable future).

There are plenty of affordable wings and bigs this year, but not too many PG's that are good or in our price range.

[BASS_THUMPER]

really tho

has anyone even seen pruitt play enough minutes to say bye bye?

i havent, jus like walker got mad crazy hops..ive seen that.

we keep what we got trade mikki mouse and have a big mac a coke and a smile

[nickagneta]

2) Cleveland and Orlando both look very vulnerable.  If Orlando needs 7 games to take a severely weakened C's squad, there's no way they can beat them with KG, a rested Big Two, and a bench.  Similarly, if Cleveland is getting their butts handed to them by a team we could man-handle when healthy, Cleveland isn't really a match for us.  

Too many people are making this deeply flawed reasoning.

Plus, let's not forget that both Orlando and Cleveland will improve their teams as well (Nelson coming back will be big for Orlando).

Yeah, I hate this reasoning.  What we are seeing right now is mostly about matchups...but the Magic are also a much different team than they were in the first 5-6 games against the C's.  Something snapped after that 6th game, kind of like it did last year for the C's against Detroit, where they went from a team playing scared to an elite team that was hitting clutch shots left and right, executing down the stretch, and playing with an edge they were missing for the first half of the playoffs.

TP4U Chris. Excellent analogy.

I find it funny that of the top three teams in the East that the team that actually made itself better mid season(Orlando with the Alston trade) is the team that looks to be most dominant and is the most successful. Ferry didn't pull the trigger on a Wally deal and Danny really couldn't trade anyone only add others castoffs.

I still disagree.  If Cleveland comes back to win this series, we can talk about matchups (or even if they lose in 7).  But if Orlando takes it tomorrow, matchups aren't an excuse for losing to clearly the third best team in the East in 5 games. 

Oh, Cleveland is choking, there is no doubt about that...but I don't think you can carry anything over to how the C's would have fared in the same series.  Regardless of matchups, I think there is a good chance that the Cavs would have been playing better basketball against the C's. 

I agree.  Sometimes, a team just has another team's number.  Cleveland was the best team in the NBA this season -- the 82 game body of work in the regular season tells us so -- but they don't match up very well with Orlando.  That's why the Magic have won 5 out of 7 games so far this year.

However, the Cavs have shown over the last two years that they match up better with the Celtics.  Just because they're struggling with the Magic suggests absolutely nothing about how they would have done against the Celtics.  The one thing the Magic have shown is that the Cavs aren't invincible at home, but other than that, I don't think we've learned a lot about how we would have done, especially sans KG.  Our team plays a completely different style than Orlando.

I see what you're saying.  And I'll agree with both of you gentlemen if the Cavs win or even make a series of it.  However, the Magic are a miracle shot away from having swept the Cavs and could put them away tomorrow.  If you're truly a great team (which would be the only thing that would negate my earlier point, that the C's could've cruised to #18 with a healthy Garnett), you might struggle with certain teams like the C's did last year; however, you don't lose in 5 games in the ECF.   

But what I think Chris was trying to originally say was that for some reason game 5 against Boston hardened this Orlando team and made them a tougher, more confident, and more mental tough club. One of the reasons that I think Cleveland is having such a tough time with Orlando, besides match ups, is that they are playing a team that truly feels they can beat anyone.

I know, I know!! They all believe they can win but now this Orlando team thinks they can't lose. They are playing with a completely different edge and attitude than they were playing in the first five games against Boston. And because of that, Cleveland doesn't have that mental edge that they would have over most other teams.

Whether Boston in their beat up and mentally exhausted state they were playing in would have fared as well against Cleveland is debatable and unknown. Cleveland always seemed to have our number in Cleveland, regardless of who played, and we seemed to have their number here, regardless of who plays. So maybe the at this point it's 2-2 if it was Cavs vs. C's but I don't think we can just assume that because we played Orlando to 7 that we would have beaten Cleveland.

[cordobes]

See I think we are nuts to just let Baby go. If he signs for more than what we want elsewhere I think Danny needs to play a game of Chicken with that team and try to force a sign and trade.  It's a great way to fill a hole elsewhere. Of course, the caveat there is that he has to be willing to match that offer.

Okay, imagine that you match an offer sheet some team offers to Baby. Would you still spend the MLE? If so, who's going to pay for all that money?

Your plan puts the salary roll above $100 millions (luxury tax already included). I think that's wildly unrealistic.

[BudweiserCeltic]

See I think we are nuts to just let Baby go. If he signs for more than what we want elsewhere I think Danny needs to play a game of Chicken with that team and try to force a sign and trade.  It's a great way to fill a hole elsewhere. Of course, the caveat there is that he has to be willing to match that offer.

Okay, imagine that you match an offer sheet some team offers to Baby. Would you still spend the MLE? If so, who's going to pay for all that money?

Your plan puts the salary roll above $100 millions (luxury tax already included). I think that's wildly unrealistic.

We balance it out a bit with all the expiring contracts as I doubt the salary will be as high next year. Knicks, Cavs, Dallas, Portland have been on the same boat, and the Lakers look like they'll be on heavy tax land next year. I don't think it's wildly unrealistic at all. Especially with limited resources to get players.

[nickagneta]

See I think we are nuts to just let Baby go. If he signs for more than what we want elsewhere I think Danny needs to play a game of Chicken with that team and try to force a sign and trade.  It's a great way to fill a hole elsewhere. Of course, the caveat there is that he has to be willing to match that offer.

Okay, imagine that you match an offer sheet some team offers to Baby. Would you still spend the MLE? If so, who's going to pay for all that money?

Your plan puts the salary roll above $100 millions (luxury tax already included). I think that's wildly unrealistic.

Maybe, maybe not. I think something like that should at least be tried.

And Wyc was pretty non committal about how much over the luxury tax he would go to secure a winner in a recent interview so who knows, maybe $90-$100 million isn't out of the question for a team salary for a couple of championship seasons.

This whole thing could come down to acting fast and what happens first. If they act fast and rap up Wallace or McDyess early(not my first choices, just an example) and it costs them a lot or all of the MLE, then maybe they let Baby go. If Baby signs elsewhere first, depending on how much he signs for, the Celtics will need to make a hard decision. They might have to threaten to match just to ensure they have a big available because they will still have no takers for their big man position.

I think timing might mean everything this off season. Much like last season. Danny might have waited too long dealing with the Posey situation and it cost him a bunch of good free agent possibilities.

[cordobes]

I agree about the timing. That's exactly why I wouldn't wait on a decision by Davis. I'd immediately offer McDyess a contract and make him my first big off the bench; then I'd contact a good wing backup (e.g. Hill) and I'd go from there.

[Chris]

I agree about the timing. That's exactly why I wouldn't wait on a decision by Davis. I'd immediately offer McDyess a contract and make him my first big off the bench; then I'd contact a good wing backup (e.g. Hill) and I'd go from there.

Agreed.  The C's need to move quickly this offseason, and be aggressive.  They can wait Davis out, and let him test the market. 

I am sure they will put the word out that they are willing to match offers, whether it is true or not, hoping that teams will shy away from giving him an offer sheet, and possibly pushing them to engage the C's in sign and trade talks, but there is absolutely no reason for them to wait to do anything else until they deal with Davis.  This is very different than the Posey situation, since they needed to use the MLE to sign him.  Since Baby has early bird rights, the C's can wait him out, and use the MLE elsewhere (which may also put them in a better negotiating position, if they get someone like McDyess or Sheed).

[BudweiserCeltic]

I agree about the timing. That's exactly why I wouldn't wait on a decision by Davis. I'd immediately offer McDyess a contract and make him my first big off the bench; then I'd contact a good wing backup (e.g. Hill) and I'd go from there.

Yep, timing is the key... something that I hated with the Posey negotiations, though understandable. Also, remember that once Davis signs an offer sheet, the Celts have a limited time to match or not (a week?).

[Fafnir]

I agree about the timing. That's exactly why I wouldn't wait on a decision by Davis. I'd immediately offer McDyess a contract and make him my first big off the bench; then I'd contact a good wing backup (e.g. Hill) and I'd go from there.

Those would be my first two offers. The decision on Baby is going to take a while to shake out, we shouldn't wait.