If Daniels signs the LLE, then...

[Neurotic Guy]

Wow, it is amazing how one likely signing changes things so quickly.  Daniels appears to be a very serviceable, versitile, multi-position player which is just what you want coming off the bench.  After that though, I think we have to be careful what we do with BBD.  There are only 96 "big" minutes each night so the 4th big isn't going to play much.  It may actually be a better role for Scal over BBD.

Not saying that Scal is better than BBD, I am just saying a better fit (and much more likely to be happy in that role).  BBD can be a second or third big for most teams.  I think we would be better off signing and trading BBD (or just not signing) and getting a Robert Swift type of player and something else for the BBD money.  This 5th big is not going to play but just sits at the end of the bench and gives Perk someone to practice against or plays when there is foul trouble or other need for a true back-up center.  KG, Wallace, and BBD can play back-up center but it is not what we really want.

I agree and have been feeling for a while that getting BBD back is not the 'key' many seem to think it is.  Baby's minutes will be minimal and I agree that Scal may actually fill the spot minutes role better than BBD.  With that said, the only compelling arguement for matching a BBD contract is injury security.  Unfortunately, the risk is high on this team and having BBD would be a nice luxury. The 'key' (as it is for every contender) is good health!

[GKC]

Wow, it is amazing how one likely signing changes things so quickly.  Daniels appears to be a very serviceable, versitile, multi-position player which is just what you want coming off the bench.  After that though, I think we have to be careful what we do with BBD.  There are only 96 "big" minutes each night so the 4th big isn't going to play much.  It may actually be a better role for Scal over BBD.

Not saying that Scal is better than BBD, I am just saying a better fit (and much more likely to be happy in that role).  BBD can be a second or third big for most teams.  I think we would be better off signing and trading BBD (or just not signing) and getting a Robert Swift type of player and something else for the BBD money.  This 5th big is not going to play but just sits at the end of the bench and gives Perk someone to practice against or plays when there is foul trouble or other need for a true back-up center.  KG, Wallace, and BBD can play back-up center but it is not what we really want.

I agree and have been feeling for a while that getting BBD back is not the 'key' many seem to think it is.  Baby's minutes will be minimal and I agree that Scal may actually fill the spot minutes role better than BBD.  With that said, the only compelling arguement for matching a BBD contract is injury security.  Unfortunately, the risk is high on this team and having BBD would be a nice luxury. The 'key' (as it is for every contender) is good health!

I would like another backup big though. I've said in another post that I like Scal, but he doesn't feel permanent since he might be traded.

[KJ33]

We've been going through this debate for the last 3 years.  The whole backup PG and extra big.  Cassell was deemed not much help, yet House makes you nervous as the backup PG?  Who exactly was the backup PG in the Finals 2 years ago when the Celts won it all?

This backup PG thing is even more overrated than it was 2 years ago.  Who out there is going to accept 10-15 min. a game, tops, that is actually worth it?  The players everybody wants, will want more time than that, only the castoffs that don't excite anybody, will be willing to accept that role.  Therein lies the rub.  I think part of the Daniels signing is that he is versatile for several bench roles.  While he may not be the quintessential backup PG, he can handle the ball, meaning that takes that part of the duties off House if they are in together, while they each can guard a reasonable matchup.

Danny always says he is interested in "guys who can play" when he is asked about certain positional needs.  The Daniels signing represents that philosophy.  While bench depth is important in terms of an 82 game season and the injuries bound to arise, there are still only so many minutes to go around each game.  The guys people like here, both the bigs and the points, are not 10 minute a night guys, those type guys, nobody wants.

Realistically, there are only enough minutes, barely, for 4 guys off the bench consistently, regardless of position.  With Sheed, Daniels, and House, 3 spots are filled.  The 4th spot will either be BBD or some other vet big.  Any further down the bench, will be mediocre, short money players, period, targeted for very few minutes, and/or as insurance policies for the first 9.

[CoachBo]

TP, excellent analysis.

The backup PG now has a couple of options, in addition to Ray and Pierce's ability to run the offense for short periods.

Add a big - Baby, perhaps, if he's willing to be reasonable about what he's worth - and we're done.

And if we're unhappy at the point at the deadline, we've got a nice bag of nothing in Tony and the others that gives us a little trade flexibility.

[hilltopchamps]

I was loving the idea someone suggested yesterday when daniels signed with C's. The idea was to trade scals-TA-pruitt to Kings for nocioni. it would define the bench and rotation. this way the lineup would be

PG: Rondo-Daniels-Hudson?
SG: Ray Allen-House-Giddens
SF: Pierce-Nocioni-Walker
PF: Garnett-Davis/Wallace-Nocioni
C: Perkins-Wallace

Nocioni would give the C's a tough minded defender who isnt on AARP, a 3 point shooter and bring that attitude of im going 110% thru that wall. he has 3 years left on his contract which is the same as wallace, garnett and most likely pierce and possibly rondo. they could extend the window of opportunity from 2007-2010 till 2012 with this group. 

[blceltsfan]

Excited by the Daniels acquisition. I'd like to see him get some time at PG before pursuing another. I like the idea of Nicioni.

I agree with many above that we need another Big.
But what I don't see is the kind of Big we need.
BBD has value, but other than Perk, who is playing the post with their back to the basket on offense? Not BBD who showed his size deficiency down low during the playoffs.

KG's not on the low box, Sheed might on occasion, but his ability to do damage from outside and stretch the defense is where he will spend a great amount of time.

This is also a reminder of the value Powe offered us.
We'll miss him but can't wait for him.

Any suggestions?

[GKC]

Excited by the Daniels acquisition. I'd like to see him get some time at PG before pursuing another. I like the idea of Nicioni.

I agree with many above that we need another Big.
But what I don't see is the kind of Big we need.
BBD has value, but other than Perk, who is playing the post with their back to the basket on offense? Not BBD who showed his size deficiency down low during the playoffs.

KG's not on the low box, Sheed might on occasion, but his ability to do damage from outside and stretch the defense is where he will spend a great amount of time.

This is also a reminder of the value Powe offered us.
We'll miss him but can't wait for him.

Any suggestions?

KG does go on the low block when he needs to though, especially against inferior competition. Remember the Atlanta game where KG went 5-5 in the 4th? When they put Josh Smith on him, it was over.

[Bankshot]

I don't think we need guys like Jack or Watson.  Those guys would warrant more than 10 mpg and with Daniels on board taking all the minutes at the 2, there would be no more than the 10 mpg at pg.  So a vet like Lue or Bobbie Jackson would make sense.  I didn't want Lue before, but that was when I thought we needed someone that could play minutes at the 1 and 2.

[footey]

Yeah, I'd take Lue at this point, just for insurance if Rondo went down for extended time with injury.