My problem with signing Daniels

[jdpapa3]

Well, it looks like they went after Moon first, but he wouldn't take the LLE and Miami didn't want any of our guys. This might be a blessing in disguise.

I think Daniels would only sign 1 year for the LLE(can you do this?), but they'd rather lock up him longer term for like 3 years for 10 million, since he will hopefully be a solid bench contributor for our window. They probably don't want to rely on FA every year for guys who will be 7th-9th men. I would say role players get better when they are in a situation for a while, but Roger Mason and PJ Brown are knocking me on the head.  

I'm curious who else they could have in mind for the LLE, but flexibility while dumping off some useless roster players(Giddens,Walker having the same role, TA with Daniels here) is always a decent option.

[Jon]

There are very few perfect bench players, and none that we can afford.  I'm very happy with the Daniels signing.

I'd love to see the team add more depth at PG, wing, and big man (depending on whether a sign-and-trade is worked out), but if the off-season turns out to be Rasheed, Daniels, BBD, and a backup PG, I'll be fine with it.

I tend to agree with this.  Yeah, we'd all like a backup SG/SF who can knock down the 3, penetrate, handle the ball, create for others, rebound, and defend, but if they could do all those things, they'd probably be Paul Pierce.  

Overall, Daniels isn't perfect, but he's a world better than anyone we had at the backup 2/3 last year.  Moreover, we don't need miracles at the backup 2/3.  In crunch time, it's always going to be Pierce and Allen out there anyway.  All we need is someone to come in, defend, play with in the offense, and strike some sort of fear in opposing defenders.  I think Daniels can do that.  So I'm pretty happy.  

I could care less if they could do all that, that's why i don't mind having role players.  A guy who could defend his position nicely and at least spread the floor would be good enough.  We don't need a guy that can score because we have House, and we don't need a guy that can handle the ball because i was hoping we would use the LLE on a PG.
I agree with all you guys, he's a good player and i'm happy with him.  It just seems we could've done better.

For a team with only the LLE and little in the way of desirable contracts to trade, I think landing a backup wing who averaged 13-4-2 who has Finals experience (when the Mavs lost to the Heat in '05-06) is pretty darn good.  

Would I be happier with Grant Hill or James Posey?  Probably.  But considering that we won 62 games with Tony Allen and Bill Walker backing up the 2/3 last year (and missing KG for 25 games), I think Daniels will do just fine.  

[GKC]

There are very few perfect bench players, and none that we can afford.  I'm very happy with the Daniels signing.

I'd love to see the team add more depth at PG, wing, and big man (depending on whether a sign-and-trade is worked out), but if the off-season turns out to be Rasheed, Daniels, BBD, and a backup PG, I'll be fine with it.

I tend to agree with this.  Yeah, we'd all like a backup SG/SF who can knock down the 3, penetrate, handle the ball, create for others, rebound, and defend, but if they could do all those things, they'd probably be Paul Pierce.  

Overall, Daniels isn't perfect, but he's a world better than anyone we had at the backup 2/3 last year.  Moreover, we don't need miracles at the backup 2/3.  In crunch time, it's always going to be Pierce and Allen out there anyway.  All we need is someone to come in, defend, play with in the offense, and strike some sort of fear in opposing defenders.  I think Daniels can do that.  So I'm pretty happy.  

I could care less if they could do all that, that's why i don't mind having role players.  A guy who could defend his position nicely and at least spread the floor would be good enough.  We don't need a guy that can score because we have House, and we don't need a guy that can handle the ball because i was hoping we would use the LLE on a PG.
I agree with all you guys, he's a good player and i'm happy with him.  It just seems we could've done better.

You have to recognize a few things however;

1. With the emergence of Eddie as an offensive option, Tony was actually asked to be an inside scorer and creator. He didn't finish at the rim too well, and didn't create (caused a lot of turnovers.

Though Daniels may not be an amazing passer when setting up the offense, in Dallas, he was amazing going to the whole and distributing to others. Look at his numbers in his first 2 seasons in Dallas. Great FG%, and a very good assist / turnover ratio as well as assist percentage.

2. With Rasheed, we don't need Daniels to space the floor.

People are talking about 3point floor spacers, but Rasheed does that with the bench.

3. No-one is providing better alternatives

We had the LLE to spend, and Marquis Daniels is accepting that; something I think is great value since this was a guy getting paid 7 mill last year. Jamario Moon took a 3 mill offer, something similar to what Anthony Parker got. 3 mill also went to Grant Hill. The only decent alternative I see out there is Matt Barnes, and I don't see how Matt Barnes is better than Daniels.

I like the move.

[Jon]

I agree.  I really think this is a talent issue.  Would it be nice to have a 2/3 backup who could space the floor a little more?  Sure.  However, if Daniels had that skill, he'd be out of our price range.  And with 2 future Hall of Famers starting at the 2 and 3 spots, we really don't have the minutes to give two guys meaningful backup minutes at the 2 and 3 spots. 

But to sit here and say Daniels doesn't fit because he doesn't have range is like saying the Bulls should've traded Michael Jordan for Mitch Richmond to help spread the floor.  Sure, Daniels isn't in the same universe as Michael Jordan; however, the C's other options at the 2/3 who are knockdown three point shooters, are about as as far away from Daniels in terms of talent as Richmond was from Jordan. 

[Truck Lewis]

in short Daniels will be what some people thought tony could be but ulitmately couldnt be.....energy off the bench that provides D and some scoring

Tony gave us some D, with mental lapses, and a horror show on offense

[cdif911]

Daniels will be a glue guy coming off the bench, I really think we got between him and Rasheed, 2009's Posey, Cassell, Brown + we get them for the whole year to gel... if Steph comes back and Baby is signed, my perfect (realistic) offseason will be complete

[GKC]

We also have to know that Rasheed is MUCH better than PJ, so we can take some offensive load off of the rest of the bench (not to mention Eddie is much better than Eddie of 07, and is in a contract year this year).

with a better bench interior defender, it means guys like Daniels don't have to be amazing, but good enough to move their man into a taller person when they are beat.

[bucknersrevenge]

It is ironic to hear a few people complain about Daniels who has already proven he can play in the league and then pine for Giddens who has shown nothing.

Of course, with the number of us here on celticsblog, we will all have some quirky beliefs about players that would cover all possible opinions.

That's weird. I haven't seen a single person on this thread pine for Giddens. Not sure where that just came from.

In regard to Daniels he potentially fits well with House in the backcourt because House stretches the floor while Daniels slashes to the lane. Both while not terrific ballhandlers can share the duties enough to make it work. It allows House(who is a shooter NOT a scorer) to play his position at PG and not have to be part of an undersized backcourt.

[gustusias]

I ain't nuts about him either. I am on guard and nervous. We will see in Novemeber. He can't shoot too well and is among the worst in the league at the 3pt.shot. He isn't a great defender. He's good. He is slightly built and injury prone. Every year he has played except one he has been injured and missed many games. Rondo and him together also has me deeply concerned.

[2short]

There are very few perfect bench players, and none that we can afford.  I'm very happy with the Daniels signing.

I'd love to see the team add more depth at PG, wing, and big man (depending on whether a sign-and-trade is worked out), but if the off-season turns out to be Rasheed, Daniels, BBD, and a backup PG, I'll be fine with it.

I tend to agree with this.  Yeah, we'd all like a backup SG/SF who can knock down the 3, penetrate, handle the ball, create for others, rebound, and defend, but if they could do all those things, they'd probably be Paul Pierce.  

Overall, Daniels isn't perfect, but he's a world better than anyone we had at the backup 2/3 last year.  Moreover, we don't need miracles at the backup 2/3.  In crunch time, it's always going to be Pierce and Allen out there anyway.  All we need is someone to come in, defend, play with in the offense, and strike some sort of fear in opposing defenders.  I think Daniels can do that.  So I'm pretty happy.  

I could care less if they could do all that, that's why i don't mind having role players.  A guy who could defend his position nicely and at least spread the floor would be good enough.  We don't need a guy that can score because we have House, and we don't need a guy that can handle the ball because i was hoping we would use the LLE on a PG.
I agree with all you guys, he's a good player and i'm happy with him.  It just seems we could've done better.

You have to recognize a few things however;

1. With the emergence of Eddie as an offensive option, Tony was actually asked to be an inside scorer and creator. He didn't finish at the rim too well, and didn't create (caused a lot of turnovers.

Though Daniels may not be an amazing passer when setting up the offense, in Dallas, he was amazing going to the whole and distributing to others. Look at his numbers in his first 2 seasons in Dallas. Great FG%, and a very good assist / turnover ratio as well as assist percentage.

2. With Rasheed, we don't need Daniels to space the floor.

People are talking about 3point floor spacers, but Rasheed does that with the bench.

3. No-one is providing better alternatives

We had the LLE to spend, and Marquis Daniels is accepting that; something I think is great value since this was a guy getting paid 7 mill last year. Jamario Moon took a 3 mill offer, something similar to what Anthony Parker got. 3 mill also went to Grant Hill. The only decent alternative I see out there is Matt Barnes, and I don't see how Matt Barnes is better than Daniels.

I like the move.

eh pretty much what he says!
rasheed wallace while not my favorite player is the best sub we've had here in ainges years, he can stretch the floor so daniels outside shooting is not needed
daniels to me is a guy like ryan gomes (who has the jumper) a glue guy who can help in many ways
he should be able to consistantly spell both pp and ra all season and not hurt us (ta)
how are we getting him is a big ? that maybe i'm missing, if we are giving up pruitt than we need a pg on bench besides eddie and daniels
and/or which young one is leaving giddens or walker? because who ever stays needs to be able to play 5 minutes at sf even if its a small lineup
of course i'm assuming tony is going to indy? and daniels is resigning for less $$
anyone know the actual breakdown

[Chris]

The more I think of it, the more I come to the conclusion that Daniels is exactly what this team needed.  If they wanted to play House major minutes, what they really needed was a wing who could handle the ball, and who could penetrate the defense.  Let's face it, they were not going to find a PG who could run the offense, and is big enough to cover SG's, for the type of money they had.  Really the only guy available was Jarrett Jack, and he was way out of their price range. 

I think the whole thing about needing a guy to cover SF's thing is very overrated.  First off, Daniels can cover SF's.  There are maybe 2 or 3 in the league that would give him much trouble, and they are starters that would be covered mostly by Pierce anyways.  And they can still find a 9th or 10th man (or you may already have them on the roster) who could do that for spot minutes against certain matchups, the same way Tony Allen did for SG's two years ago, since Posey wasn't really quick enough to stay with some of them.

What Boston did was greatly improve the talent-level of their bench, by adding two legit 6th men in Wallace and Daniels.  Now they can build around them with more roleplayers.

Honestly, I think expecting anything more is just greedy. 

[crownsy]

I ain't nuts about him either. I am on guard and nervous. We will see in Novemeber. He can't shoot too well and is among the worst in the league at the 3pt.shot. He isn't a great defender. He's good. He is slightly built and injury prone. Every year he has played except one he has been injured and missed many games. Rondo and him together also has me deeply concerned.

Him and rondo will rarley, if ever, be on the court together.

 you don't get a 6'6 wing man and play him at the 2 with your non-shooting PG.

he will be the 3 when rondo and ray are on the floor, and the 2 when eddie/ whatever backup we sign is running the point.

[MrTripleDouble10]

I agree he is a good player and he makes our bench much better, but I'm not sure he's our best option.  People here have been talking for weeks about how we need a back-up SF for Paul and a back-up PG.  We decide to sign a swingman who can score and handle the ball.
This solves some of our problems, but not all.  No one thought Pruitt could handle backing up Rondo at the beginning of the post-season, and i don't think many people's thoughts have changed.
Daniels might be able to score, but not as good as House, and he can't shoot the 3.  This also creates a spacing issue when he's paired with Rondo.  Daniels will be best when paired with House to allow Eddie to play off the ball, and guard the 2 on D.  Finally, I do not see him being largely effective on defense against larger SF's.  So in conclusion I can not see him being a sufficient back-up for Pierce either.
In my opinion i think we should've gone after a true SF who is more defensively able, or one that is able to shoot a decent 3.  Don't worry about Paul's back-up having to handle to ball.  A player similar to Posey is what we need.

"A player similar to Posey is what we need"

how about just keeping Posey to begin with ? we've been chasing his ghost for two off-seasons now. If Danny had not screwed up and let him go to begin with - we wouldn't be doing all this hand-wringing since Posey left.

Ugh you do realize that if Ainge had re-signed Posey there would be no Sheed, right?

[Brendan]

When it comes to the starting five you get a chance to really impact the talent level of the team. When it comes to the bench your into a balancing act. A pure SF who could shoot, but didn't have the handle Daniels has - would have forced the C's to pickup a backup PG. Daniels allows House to play more minutes. I'm not sure the C's will be able to add a PG that provides more talent than House. Having Posey as the backup wing, would be a better fit with a guard more like Marbury's skill set off the bench, rather than House. That made more sense two years ago when Rondo still had question marks.

C's have the following guys to play both guard spots and SF (in order of expected MPG) - Rondo, Pierce, Allen, Daniels, House. Everyone, but House has good handle for their position and 3/5 are good 3pt shooters. Four big men are likely to get minutes Perk, KG, Sheed, and Scal. Both guys off the bench are good 3pt shooters, and KG has a good outside game. All are above average ball handlers. I think offensively the team has a good enough blend of skills to make things work. I do wonder if Daniels will see a jump in defensive ability like Ray Allen and Eddie House in the C's system and under Thibs. If he's able to play the other teams better wing while in off the bench this is a great signing. If Pierce (or Allen) retain that responsibility it's probably just a good one.

In terms of filling out the backup PG spot - if Pruitt goes, they need a guy who is capable enough starting for a few games in case of a Rondo minor injury, but not going to complain riding the pine. They don't need someone who plays ten minutes a night. If Rondo goes down with something serious (a la Jameer Nelson) Danny will have to find a replacement on the fly.

[vagrantwade]

Didn't Daniels spend over half his playing time last year at the 3 spot?

I'm pretty sure he did.