If we do a 3-for-1 trade for Daniels, how do we fill out our roster?

[Fan from VT]

Good thread, I was thinking about starting a similar one myself. So, assuming Daniels is acquired via trade, I'd be happy with:

1. Sign and trade Glen Davis for Travis Outlaw. Portland is committed to Webster, Roy, and Fernandez at the 2/3. We know they were looking for a PF, making a big offer for Milsap (admittedly a much better player than Davis). They have some cap room, so a BYC contract could be traded without much problem.

2. Sign and trade Glen Davis for Hakim Warrick. Similar logic as above; rumors were Memphis liked Davis and I think Warrick's athleticism and ability to play the 3/4 are more important now that Wallace is on board.

LLE or Minimum options (these players may command more than the minimum; if so, use the LLE):

1. Von Wafer. I like him as a bench scorer that can play the point or wing. Would he sign for as low as the LLE? If so, probably a bargain.

2. Carney. Been discussed around here before, but he might fill a need as a good-sized athletic 3 (maybe some small ball 4 a la posey?) that can shoot the 3 ball and defend.

3. Rashad McCants. Bit of a knucklehead, but a good shooter and scorer. Could be used as a spark off the bench and help stretch the floor.

Minimum deal (only worth it for the vet min.)

1. Ike Diogu. Kind of a fill in for Powe, knack for scoring down low. Not a great defender, apparently, but he's always been very efficient offensively. Would be worth a look for the min. to put him on a team that could cover him defensively and doesn't have a lot of post-scoring options.

[KungPoweChicken]

Let's assume that the Tony / Walker / Pruitt deal for Marquis Daniels is accurate.  Also, let's assume that we resign BBD.  If it is, that leaves us with:

C: Perk / Rasheed
PF: KG / BBD / Scal
SF: Pierce / Daniels
SG: Ray / House / Giddens
PG: Rondo / ?

That leaves us with 11 players.  If we sign Lester Hudson, that leaves us with 12.  Teams are required to carry 13 players.

Therefore, we *have* to sign one player (plus Hudson), and can sign as many as four.  Who should Danny target?

The glaring need, obviously, is backup point guard.  Eddie isn't as bad as some has suggested, but the last two seasons the team has targeted veteran PGs, so it makes sense they would again.

I also think the team will try to sign a legitimate seven footer for deep depth, basically to fill the Scot Pollard role of a couple seasons ago.  It wouldn't shock me if this turns out to be Robert Swift, although there are a lot of options.

If we go that route with our first two roster spots, I'd really like to see Danny bring back Leon Powe on a two-year (non-guaranteed) deal.  The team is lacking a true inside scorer other than Perk, and the bench could also use another good rebounder.  It's obviously a gamble, but right now we have the space to take a chance.

I'm in the minority here in that I think Eddie will be the point guard this season. I really don't think Danny is going to actively pursue a point. If one happens to fall into our laps, I think he'll make the move; otherwise, I think he's fine with Eddie, and, quite frankly, so am I.

I, like you, think we need a seven footer for depth. I wouldn't be opposed to throwing Swift a bone. He's got legitimate size. And didn't Birdman come into a workout out of shape last year? Now, I'm not comparing Swift to Birdman, but you just never know. There's really no harm in having Swift on board. I'm down with that.

So, including Swift, Daniels, Davis, and subtracting Allen, Pruitt, and Walker, that gives us a twelve man Roster. I don't think Danny gives Hudson a contract. He seems like he might have some skills, but I just don't see it, not on the the Celtics, anyway.

For the thirteenth spot, I'd love to lock up Powe; he's a big favorite of mine. But it doesn't look like that will happen. We'll probably fill it out with an emergency (just in case) point guard. Some names to throw out there would be Juan Dixon, Jacque Vaughn, and Tyronn Lue. I don't have much interest in those guys, but Lue would be a nice guy to have in case of crisis. He's experienced and seems like a good guy.

With all that being said, I'm excited about our team next year. Of course, a lot of that excitement is riding on if we re-sign Davis or another power forward of equal skill. We clearly have a better bench on paper than we did last year at this time. The additions of Garnett, Wallace, and Daniels will be huge difference makers in the playoffs. Let's get it done!

I would find it hard to believe that Ainge will not look for a PG.  The past two seasons are proof that he wants someone other then House to be the bench PG.  (while wanting House to be a shooter)

I really don't think management sees Eddie being the backup point as the radical idea that some posters do. While the past two seasons give evidence that they prefer to play Eddie off the ball, getting a backup point guard clearly hasn't been a priority this season; furthermore, the past two veteran point guards have been disasters (Cassell and Marbury). And are we really going to be able to get anyone right now for the minimum that would have any more skill than what Cassell or Marbury had? No. Remember, We did win the championship with Eddie playing the point. We cannot forget that. Let me say this one more time: while I agree that management prefers to play Eddie off the ball, I just don't see it as being some big, bad glaring weakness when Eddie's playing point, and I don't think management sees it that way either.

[Fan from VT]

And to add to the previous discussion, the nice thing about Daniels is that he and House can play together in the backcourt, with Daniels handling the ball up the court and initiating the offense, allowing eddie to focus on cutting and shooting, while they can cross match on defense. Everything I read about Daniels says he can handle like a point, good enough for the backup unit if need be.

[blackbird]

What about that kid who was on our summer league team? I don't remember his name, but he was the one who had cancer and scored 61 in Turkey last year.

Some columnist (maybe Marc Stein or Henry Abbott) wrote that he believes that this guy was too good of a shooter to not get at least a training camp invitation. Anyway, worth keeping him in mind.

[celticinorlando]

i think they will sign a back up point with the LLE...i am hoping it is anthony carter. i think they will keep swift around as the 3rd big. i think hudson will be signed to play the point and the 2

1. rondo
2. ray
3. PP
4 KG
5. Perk
6. sheed
7. eddie
8. daniels
9. baby
10. giddens
11. scal
12. hudson
13. TBA PG with LLE
14. swift
15. TBA swing/power forward with vet min,

[P2]

Easy.

#13 Backup point: Lue (I'm pretty sure about this one)
#14 Another wing: Bowen (after bought out) or Udoka
#15 Project: Powe (project as in "injured project") or Swift

[celticinorlando]

Easy.

#13 Backup point: Lue (I'm pretty sure about this one)
#14 Another wing: Bowen (after bought out) or Udoka
#15 Project: Powe (project as in "injured project") or Swift

i would like to see powe signed over swift

[P2]

Easy.

#13 Backup point: Lue (I'm pretty sure about this one)
#14 Another wing: Bowen (after bought out) or Udoka
#15 Project: Powe (project as in "injured project") or Swift

i would like to see powe signed over swift

Same here, but he would be kind of expendable with Wallace and Baby signed for 3 years. So basically it's Baby + Swift or Vet (Joe Smith, Big Ben, Gooden) + Powe.

[P2]

And isn't the better question, how long will it take both teams to figure out what to do? Was the "Daniels to Boston" talk a done but premature deal? Will it take into August (Q-Rich for Zach took quite a while for whatever reason), or will we know by the end of next week?

[Thruthelookingglass]

Let's assume that the Tony / Walker / Pruitt deal for Marquis Daniels is accurate. 

Apologies in advance for arguing against your assumption, Roy.   

Straight up, I am concerned about trading away bench players who are (we hope) familiar with the C's rotations.  I think what gives our 12-15 players a prayer of hitting the floor and contributing (injuries aside) is their understanding of the system and how to play within it.  That's why Scal gets burn.  Our current players are also more familiar with each other, which is also a factor in how much they can contribute.

We lucked out 2 years ago and had a new team play very well together.  I think we ought to accept that and understand that experience with the system and experience playing together matter and are real factors to consider.  I think Danny knows that, but I'm not sure how many C's bloggers aren't overly enamored by the prospect of new but marginal talent.

[Roy Hobbs]

Let's assume that the Tony / Walker / Pruitt deal for Marquis Daniels is accurate. 

Apologies in advance for arguing against your assumption, Roy.   

Straight up, I am concerned about trading away bench players who are (we hope) familiar with the C's rotations.  I think what gives our 12-15 players a prayer of hitting the floor and contributing (injuries aside) is their understanding of the system and how to play within it.  That's why Scal gets burn.  Our current players are also more familiar with each other, which is also a factor in how much they can contribute.

We lucked out 2 years ago and had a new team play very well together.  I think we ought to accept that and understand that experience with the system and experience playing together matter and are real factors to consider.  I think Danny knows that, but I'm not sure how many C's bloggers aren't overly enamored by the prospect of new but marginal talent.

I understand your points, but I'm not sure that Walker and Pruitt have learned enough of the system to make their experience valuable.  As for Tony, I think he's a net-negative for the team, so losing him in my mind is addition by subtraction.

I think, though, that that's probably best discussed in a different thread.

[BrickJames]

Let's assume that the Tony / Walker / Pruitt deal for Marquis Daniels is accurate.  Also, let's assume that we resign BBD.  If it is, that leaves us with:

C: Perk / Rasheed
PF: KG / BBD / Scal
SF: Pierce / Daniels
SG: Ray / House / Giddens
PG: Rondo / ?

That leaves us with 11 players.  If we sign Lester Hudson, that leaves us with 12.  Teams are required to carry 13 players.

Therefore, we *have* to sign one player (plus Hudson), and can sign as many as four.  Who should Danny target?

The glaring need, obviously, is backup point guard.  Eddie isn't as bad as some has suggested, but the last two seasons the team has targeted veteran PGs, so it makes sense they would again.

I also think the team will try to sign a legitimate seven footer for deep depth, basically to fill the Scot Pollard role of a couple seasons ago.  It wouldn't shock me if this turns out to be Robert Swift, although there are a lot of options.

If we go that route with our first two roster spots, I'd really like to see Danny bring back Leon Powe on a two-year (non-guaranteed) deal.  The team is lacking a true inside scorer other than Perk, and the bench could also use another good rebounder.  It's obviously a gamble, but right now we have the space to take a chance.

Backup PG:  Marbury, Bobby Jackson, Lue, in that order.

Sheed is our #1 option for an inside scorer.  Not Perk.

[Thruthelookingglass]

Let's assume that the Tony / Walker / Pruitt deal for Marquis Daniels is accurate. 

Apologies in advance for arguing against your assumption, Roy.   

Straight up, I am concerned about trading away bench players who are (we hope) familiar with the C's rotations.  I think what gives our 12-15 players a prayer of hitting the floor and contributing (injuries aside) is their understanding of the system and how to play within it.  That's why Scal gets burn.  Our current players are also more familiar with each other, which is also a factor in how much they can contribute.

We lucked out 2 years ago and had a new team play very well together.  I think we ought to accept that and understand that experience with the system and experience playing together matter and are real factors to consider.  I think Danny knows that, but I'm not sure how many C's bloggers aren't overly enamored by the prospect of new but marginal talent.

I understand your points, but I'm not sure that Walker and Pruitt have learned enough of the system to make their experience valuable.  As for Tony, I think he's a net-negative for the team, so losing him in my mind is addition by subtraction.

I think, though, that that's probably best discussed in a different thread.

Probably I should have put this another way:  if we are talking about which marginal players will fill out our roster, I'd prefer our guys since I think they have an edge fitting in.  Pruitt's been around more, Walker less than a season with his stints in NBDL.  I'll understand that most here would consider TA a "special exception" to that rule; my guess is he could do better on another team that could turn over more of the offense to him -- like he did with the damaged C's of 3 years ago.

[Eeyore III]

The most important spot by far is backup PG.  Here, I agree with Brick James: Starbury, Jackson, and Lue.  Eddie isn't suited to PG; it messes up his shot.

After that, I'd focus on a player who can contribute especially against the perimeter longs in LA, Cleveland and Orlando: Udoka.

I don't know which is more unbelievable, that Flip Murray is still available, or that Chris doesn't know he isn't a PG (Was that the real Chris?).

Next, Rasho.

Having seen the whole of both summer leagues, I'm ready to dump all our own end-of-bench guys.  There's much better out there.   

[Finkelskyhook]

I also think the team will try to sign a legitimate seven footer for deep depth, basically to fill the Scot Pollard role of a couple seasons ago.

Why would Wyc want to waste the payroll dollars on somebody to play the Scot Pollard role?  If he wants to do that, he should leave the roster spot open for Powe.