My problem with signing Daniels

[winsomme]

ball-handling really is not a problem on the Cs. Rondo, Ray, Paul and KG all can handle the ball if need-be.

personally in bench players, I want shooters and defenders. guys like Marquis who need the ball in their hands to be effective are not ideal bench players IMO. not for the Cs.

two things here. all four of those guys you listed (and i dont really count KG) are starters. wasn't one of our main problems last year that ball movement became stagnant when we sent the bench in and everyone just kinda stood around waiting to shoot?

Marbury, for all he didnt do shooting, actually helped to get guys open looks, because he could slash and pass. two things that were supposed to be TA's job on the bench unit, but he couldn't do. Daniels is a very good passer, he should help that second unit immensely.


secondly, and this touches on the first point, daniels is a good passer. he had a very nice assist to turnover ratio, always has. yes, he slashes, but unlike TA, he also finds guys for open looks off that penetration.

my prediction is that this back court lineup people are worried about, which has rondo and dainels in it, will rarley, if ever happen. People are discounting the fact that marquis is 6'6, and a good SF backup. as chris and vagrant said, i don't really know where this thought that he's going to be a backup two since he can't guard 3's is coming from.

I would think that having Daniels contribute will be simple, due to that flexibility, as long as you use it.

lineup with rondo sitting-

1. house/ backup PG we sign who can shoot
2. Daniels
3. pierce

lineup with ray sitting

1.rondo
2. pierce
3. dainels

lineup with paul sitting

1. rondo
2. ray
3. dainels

I'm not sure i would say that Daniels is a good passer. he's a good ball-handler, though. especially for his position.

I just don't see ball-handling as the biggest need off the bench.

Daniels is definitely a sold player, so I'm not down the move. I just would have preferred someone like Moon who would fill more pressing needs off the bench IMO...shooting and defense

  If your bench contains Wallace, House and possibly Davis why is a shooter a pressing need?

well in terms of what I personally like to see out of a bench, yeah.

I like bench players, especially wing players, to be guys that can come in and knock down shots. I'm not too big on bench players being guys that need to ball in their hands to be effective.

I'd rather the ball-handlers be one of the starters.

[jdpapa3]

Well, we tried for Moon, and he was too expensive. I think Daniels might be a better fit anyways.

[mgent]

You can't just assume Scal is gone for an expiring...Who would do that? There would have to be salaries that matched up to that.

On a bench with Rasheed, Posey and House, I don't see Scal getting that many minutes.  They're all 20min a night guys, plus Davis or an LLE/trade guy.  We'd offer Scal a minimum contract probably, but i don't think he's worth the tax as much as Posey and Rasheed is.  None of this is gonna happen though, Posey has passed.

Posey has passed. Can we end this conversation?

And how would that rid us of scal? He's still on contract for the rest of this season regardless of who else we have on our team

Not trying to continue the discussion but in that hypothetical situation it probably would've been wise to trade Scal and Tony either for more depth or just to rid us of salary if we were that desperate.  If it was up to me, i'd keep him no matter the cost, but if you're that far over the luxury I'm sure management would've wanted him gone.

[mgent]

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.

Since we are talking about back-up minutes here that will often (or at least at times) be vs. the opposing team's back-up SF -- there is not a huge worry for me about him being dominated by a larger SF.  If you are concerned with Lebron or Odom (fo rinstancs) -- well, we certainly don't have an answer for Lebron defensively (and won't, other than good team defense), however, the few bigger and usually less mobile SF's out there can also be handled in spot minutes adequately by our 6'9" friend Brian Scalabrine.  No big worries for me re: defensive inadequacies, but just as other's have noted, it would be great to get a true stopper for back-up minutes at the 3.  But I don't see how one could argue that Daniels' versatility isn't predominantly a plus for the C's bench.

I agree he is a good player and he makes our bench much better.

[mgent]

Well, we tried for Moon, and he was too expensive. I think Daniels might be a better fit anyways.

No, Moon would've been better.

[Chris]

Well, we tried for Moon, and he was too expensive. I think Daniels might be a better fit anyways.

No, Moon would've been better.

Well, that's your opinion.  I think it would have depended on who else they signed.  If they signed Moon, I think they would have had to also find a top-notch backup PG, which there really were not many out there to pick from, while with Daniels, it allows them to go with House as the backup PG, and then try to find some extra depth on the wing, which is much easier to find.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Well, we tried for Moon, and he was too expensive. I think Daniels might be a better fit anyways.

No, Moon would've been better.

No, Daniels is better.

[mgent]

Well, we tried for Moon, and he was too expensive. I think Daniels might be a better fit anyways.

No, Moon would've been better.

Well, that's your opinion.  I think it would have depended on who else they signed.  If they signed Moon, I think they would have had to also find a top-notch backup PG, which there really were not many out there to pick from, while with Daniels, it allows them to go with House as the backup PG, and then try to find some extra depth on the wing, which is much easier to find.

Yes, Moon+PG is better than Daniels+whoever we're going after with the LLE now.
If we could only go after one guy, i would agree Daniels would be the better pick.  But i think we need a PG anyway, so why wouldn't a guy like Moon be better?

[Chris]

Well, we tried for Moon, and he was too expensive. I think Daniels might be a better fit anyways.

No, Moon would've been better.

Well, that's your opinion.  I think it would have depended on who else they signed.  If they signed Moon, I think they would have had to also find a top-notch backup PG, which there really were not many out there to pick from, while with Daniels, it allows them to go with House as the backup PG, and then try to find some extra depth on the wing, which is much easier to find.

Yes, Moon+PG is better than Daniels+whoever we're going after with the LLE now.
If we could only go after one guy, i would agree Daniels would be the better pick.  But i think we need a PG anyway, so why wouldn't a guy like Moon be better?

Two problems, first, we could not get a Moon deal done.  He would not have taken the LLE, and apparently Miami was not interested in a sign and trade.  And second, who is this PG that we were going to pick up?

Here's a question though, if they go out and sign someone like Udoka as the backup SF, will you be happy with it?

[Jon]

I still can't believe people are whining about the Daniels signing.  Here's a team that had won 62 games with guys who arguably don't belong in the NBA backing up Pierce and Allen (not to mention no KG).  We bring in a veteran All Star big man and are left with just the LLE.  And Ainge manages to bring in a veteran swingman who put up 13/4/3 last year and has Finals experience (perhaps without using the LLE and simply giving away garbage) and people have a problem with this? 

Would I be happier with James Posey?  Sure.  But that wasn't going to happen.  However, who even if he is a poor shooter, teams are at least going to have to think twice about when he's on the court, which is more than what we can say about last year.  Furthermore, he's a guy who can step in and play 30 mpg or so and pretty much cover backing up the 2 and 3 spots, which really allows us to not really have to go after another 2/3 and simply rely on Gidden or Walker for the spare 5-10 mpg that might be needed.  And that could be huge for their development. 

Seriously guys, this team won 66 games with Rondo half the player he is today and 62 games with no backup 2/3 and no KG for 25.  If they can stay healthy, with further improvements with Rondo and Perk, the addition of Wallace (who I don't think I exaggerate in saying is the best bench player we've had in 20 years), and the addition of a legit backup SG/SF, I see no reason why #18 isn't very attainable and a possible shot at the Bulls' single season win record. 

[snively]

I still can't believe people are whining about the Daniels signing.  Here's a team that had won 62 games with guys who arguably don't belong in the NBA backing up Pierce and Allen (not to mention no KG).  We bring in a veteran All Star big man and are left with just the LLE.  And Ainge manages to bring in a veteran swingman who put up 13/4/3 last year and has Finals experience (perhaps without using the LLE and simply giving away garbage) and people have a problem with this? 

Would I be happier with James Posey?  Sure.  But that wasn't going to happen.  However, who even if he is a poor shooter, teams are at least going to have to think twice about when he's on the court, which is more than what we can say about last year.  Furthermore, he's a guy who can step in and play 30 mpg or so and pretty much cover backing up the 2 and 3 spots, which really allows us to not really have to go after another 2/3 and simply rely on Gidden or Walker for the spare 5-10 mpg that might be needed.  And that could be huge for their development. 

Seriously guys, this team won 66 games with Rondo half the player he is today and 62 games with no backup 2/3 and no KG for 25.  If they can stay healthy, with further improvements with Rondo and Perk, the addition of Wallace (who I don't think I exaggerate in saying is the best bench player we've had in 20 years), and the addition of a legit backup SG/SF, I see no reason why #18 isn't very attainable and a possible shot at the Bulls' single season win record. 

Good points, sums up my thoughts.

I do understand the gripes though, and the preference for Moon.  The importance of shooting from the wing is not so much to improve the play of the bench unit but to have a guy who could play with an all-starters line-up, like Posey was able to.  We start two non-shooters at the 1 and 5 position.  That puts a premium on shooting from the wing and the 4 when Rondo and Perk are in the game. As was the case with Tony Allen, Doc probably won't want to put Daniels on the floor with these two.

Fortunately the addition of Sheed allows us to add shooting at the 5 without losing quality and thus make shooting from both wing spots less important when Rondo is on the floor.  As I expect Sheed to be on the floor in most crunch time minutes, I think Daniels will be able to plug in for a starting wing adequately if foul trouble or fatigue set in.

[crownsy]

Well, we tried for Moon, and he was too expensive. I think Daniels might be a better fit anyways.

TP for your sig

[guava_wrench]

I still can't believe people are whining about the Daniels signing.  Here's a team that had won 62 games with guys who arguably don't belong in the NBA backing up Pierce and Allen (not to mention no KG).  We bring in a veteran All Star big man and are left with just the LLE.  And Ainge manages to bring in a veteran swingman who put up 13/4/3 last year and has Finals experience (perhaps without using the LLE and simply giving away garbage) and people have a problem with this? 

Would I be happier with James Posey?  Sure.  But that wasn't going to happen.  However, who even if he is a poor shooter, teams are at least going to have to think twice about when he's on the court, which is more than what we can say about last year.  Furthermore, he's a guy who can step in and play 30 mpg or so and pretty much cover backing up the 2 and 3 spots, which really allows us to not really have to go after another 2/3 and simply rely on Gidden or Walker for the spare 5-10 mpg that might be needed.  And that could be huge for their development. 

Seriously guys, this team won 66 games with Rondo half the player he is today and 62 games with no backup 2/3 and no KG for 25.  If they can stay healthy, with further improvements with Rondo and Perk, the addition of Wallace (who I don't think I exaggerate in saying is the best bench player we've had in 20 years), and the addition of a legit backup SG/SF, I see no reason why #18 isn't very attainable and a possible shot at the Bulls' single season win record. 

Good points, sums up my thoughts.

I do understand the gripes though, and the preference for Moon.  The importance of shooting from the wing is not so much to improve the play of the bench unit but to have a guy who could play with an all-starters line-up, like Posey was able to.  We start two non-shooters at the 1 and 5 position.  That puts a premium on shooting from the wing and the 4 when Rondo and Perk are in the game. As was the case with Tony Allen, Doc probably won't want to put Daniels on the floor with these two.

Fortunately the addition of Sheed allows us to add shooting at the 5 without losing quality and thus make shooting from both wing spots less important when Rondo is on the floor.  As I expect Sheed to be on the floor in most crunch time minutes, I think Daniels will be able to plug in for a starting wing adequately if foul trouble or fatigue set in.

This is an important point.

Wither Perk & KG or KG & Wallace will be in at the end of the game. There is no need for the Posey small lineup anymore with Wallace and a more experienced Perk.

[jv2764]

Daniels is a decent consolation but they should have pursued a 3 team trade with Indy and Houston.

Tony Allen to Indy
Scal to Indy

Battier to Boston

Jeff Foster to Houston

[crownsy]

Daniels is a decent consolation but they should have pursued a 3 team trade with Indy and Houston.

Tony Allen to Indy
Scal to Indy

Battier to Boston

Jeff Foster to Houston

why on earth would indy do that trade? because there super secret Celtics fans?