My problem with signing Daniels

[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

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

6 M in cap space for next year since Foster is signed for two more years and both Allen and Scal are expiring.

[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? 

6 M in cap space for next year since Foster is signed for two more years and both Allen and Scal are expiring.

but foster is a really good player for them, and really affordable.

 i don't think there looking to move him, and if they are they can do a heck of alot better than TA and scal for him.

[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

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

6 M in cap space for next year since Foster is signed for two more years and both Allen and Scal are expiring.

but foster is a really good player for them, and really affordable.

 i don't think there looking to move him, and if they are they can do a heck of alot better than TA and scal for him.

Really good may be a stretch.  He is serviceable. 

[mgent]

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.

You forgot to factor in that all the other teams in the league are getting better too.  It took us 26 games to win the playoffs, I wouldn't call that a domination.

[mgent]

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.

I've tried to say this numerous times, you can't put a guy who can shoot at Center and say the floor will be more spaced.  The guy actually needs to space the floor.  You need someone at the post, and with Rasheed in the game it will probably be Perk or KG.  Rasheed spaces the floor better than Davis and KG by stepping behind the arc, but this is at that 4.  The wonderful thing about Rasheed is he can back-up Perk AND Garnett, but he can't do both at the same time.

[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? 

6 M in cap space for next year since Foster is signed for two more years and both Allen and Scal are expiring.

but foster is a really good player for them, and really affordable.

 i don't think there looking to move him, and if they are they can do a heck of alot better than TA and scal for him.

Really good may be a stretch.  He is serviceable. 

I think you vastly underestimate the value Indiana places on him, and indeed, his skill level in general.

He's far better than serviceable. mikki moore is serviceable.

jeff foster is a legitimate defensive big man off your bench that will give you huge defensive effort and rebounds, or a 12 rebound a night guy if he starts.

there is a reason he's brought up every year in trade talks with Indiana. any contender would love to add him to their rotation, he's not a championship level starter, but he's easily a solid 7th or 8th man and first big off the bench.

the pacers are not going to give him up for an overpaid 4 and an injury prone SG with serious questions about his game when they can get something much better elsewhere, expiring contracts or not.

[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?

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?

I would say he's kind of similar to Daniels, I'm not sure what he would exactly bring to the table.  At this point in the game i would be happiest signing a PG.  Daniels definitely covers the SF role more than he does the point.

[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.

I've tried to say this numerous times, you can't put a guy who can shoot at Center and say the floor will be more spaced.  The guy actually needs to space the floor.  You need someone at the post, and with Rasheed in the game it will probably be Perk or KG.  Rasheed spaces the floor better than Davis and KG by stepping behind the arc, but this is at that 4.  The wonderful thing about Rasheed is he can back-up Perk AND Garnett, but he can't do both at the same time.

You seem to be responding to the post before me, but I'll respond to what you said. You seem to be talking about when the bench players on in the game, since your points are irrelevant when Ray and Pierce are in the game (and Wallace is playing the role Posey played at the end of games 2 years ago except with much more to offer).

If we are talking about the bench, our bench repeatedly struggled to score on offense 2 years ago. Having a 3 off the bench who could shoot jumpers didn't do much for us then. It was the bench defense that kept the leads. I fail to see why people think we need 3 or 4 superior three point shooters off the bench. Look at the starting lineup. We only have 2 3pt shooters. The problem with Rondo isn't his lack of 3's. The problem is his not shooting mid-range jumpers. If Ray or Paul is playing with the current bench guys, or some guard yet to be signed, I don't see a problem with our shooting with Daniels on the floor.

Considering Rondo will be off the floor most of the time that Daniels is in the game, I don't see how Daniels' lack of range in his game is an issue.

[mgent]

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.

I've tried to say this numerous times, you can't put a guy who can shoot at Center and say the floor will be more spaced.  The guy actually needs to space the floor.  You need someone at the post, and with Rasheed in the game it will probably be Perk or KG.  Rasheed spaces the floor better than Davis and KG by stepping behind the arc, but this is at that 4.  The wonderful thing about Rasheed is he can back-up Perk AND Garnett, but he can't do both at the same time.

You seem to be responding to the post before me, but I'll respond to what you said. You seem to be talking about when the bench players on in the game, since your points are irrelevant when Ray and Pierce are in the game (and Wallace is playing the role Posey played at the end of games 2 years ago except with much more to offer).

If we are talking about the bench, our bench repeatedly struggled to score on offense 2 years ago. Having a 3 off the bench who could shoot jumpers didn't do much for us then. It was the bench defense that kept the leads. I fail to see why people think we need 3 or 4 superior three point shooters off the bench. Look at the starting lineup. We only have 2 3pt shooters. The problem with Rondo isn't his lack of 3's. The problem is his not shooting mid-range jumpers. If Ray or Paul is playing with the current bench guys, or some guard yet to be signed, I don't see a problem with our shooting with Daniels on the floor.

Considering Rondo will be off the floor most of the time that Daniels is in the game, I don't see how Daniels' lack of range in his game is an issue.

I apologize if my comment was misdirected at you, it seems you understand.  Daniels on the floor with House and either Ray/Paul is no problem.  The problem is I'm afraid our bench will become stagnant without Rondo or a PG other than House.  And if we DO sign a PG like Marbury than Daniels ability to carry to ball becomes irrelevant, and his lack of shooting kind of turns him into Tony Allen.  See, I'm not saying he's the problem because he can't shoot 3's, the problem is we don't have a 2nd string PG, and if we get one Daniels will be less valuable as a SF than a SG with Eddie.
And our bench wasn't GREAT at scoring 2 years ago, but our bench last year was much worse.  Defense off the bench is all we truly need, but a guy like House is nice too.  Last year the defense off the bench was poor though, and Daniels still doesn't replace ALL of what Posey was.

[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.

I've tried to say this numerous times, you can't put a guy who can shoot at Center and say the floor will be more spaced.  The guy actually needs to space the floor.  You need someone at the post, and with Rasheed in the game it will probably be Perk or KG.  Rasheed spaces the floor better than Davis and KG by stepping behind the arc, but this is at that 4.  The wonderful thing about Rasheed is he can back-up Perk AND Garnett, but he can't do both at the same time.

You seem to be responding to the post before me, but I'll respond to what you said. You seem to be talking about when the bench players on in the game, since your points are irrelevant when Ray and Pierce are in the game (and Wallace is playing the role Posey played at the end of games 2 years ago except with much more to offer).

If we are talking about the bench, our bench repeatedly struggled to score on offense 2 years ago. Having a 3 off the bench who could shoot jumpers didn't do much for us then. It was the bench defense that kept the leads. I fail to see why people think we need 3 or 4 superior three point shooters off the bench. Look at the starting lineup. We only have 2 3pt shooters. The problem with Rondo isn't his lack of 3's. The problem is his not shooting mid-range jumpers. If Ray or Paul is playing with the current bench guys, or some guard yet to be signed, I don't see a problem with our shooting with Daniels on the floor.

Considering Rondo will be off the floor most of the time that Daniels is in the game, I don't see how Daniels' lack of range in his game is an issue.

I apologize if my comment was misdirected at you, it seems you understand.  Daniels on the floor with House and either Ray/Paul is no problem.  The problem is I'm afraid our bench will become stagnant without Rondo or a PG other than House.  And if we DO sign a PG like Marbury than Daniels ability to carry to ball becomes irrelevant, and his lack of shooting kind of turns him into Tony Allen.  See, I'm not saying he's the problem because he can't shoot 3's, the problem is we don't have a 2nd string PG, and if we get one Daniels will be less valuable as a SF than a SG with Eddie.
And our bench wasn't GREAT at scoring 2 years ago, but our bench last year was much worse.  Defense off the bench is all we truly need, but a guy like House is nice too.  Last year the defense off the bench was poor though, and Daniels still doesn't replace ALL of what Posey was.

I fail to see the relevance of Posey in the discussion of Daniels. Posey is horrible going to the hole. Daniels actually has moves going to the hole. Why do you only mention what Posey could do and Daniels couldn't? Posey was a horrible finisher with his only hope of points off a pass down low being at the FT line. And did Posey ever hit a jumper that wasn't at the 3pt line?

We didn't have any bigs off the bench with range 2 years ago among BBD, Powe, Pollard and Brown. If Daniels can hit from 12 feet and Wallace is at the 3 pt line, where is the problem? A midrange game is good enough.

There are so many possible lineups and ways to play the players in it. I cannot understand why there is this romanticized view of Posey being the perfect 3 off the bench. I especially don't understand this view when talking about offense, considering the bench offense was very frustrating when he was here. He was an important part in the great comeback game and had many great 3's in the finals, but what else was he going to do offensively?

[mgent]

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.

I've tried to say this numerous times, you can't put a guy who can shoot at Center and say the floor will be more spaced.  The guy actually needs to space the floor.  You need someone at the post, and with Rasheed in the game it will probably be Perk or KG.  Rasheed spaces the floor better than Davis and KG by stepping behind the arc, but this is at that 4.  The wonderful thing about Rasheed is he can back-up Perk AND Garnett, but he can't do both at the same time.

You seem to be responding to the post before me, but I'll respond to what you said. You seem to be talking about when the bench players on in the game, since your points are irrelevant when Ray and Pierce are in the game (and Wallace is playing the role Posey played at the end of games 2 years ago except with much more to offer).

If we are talking about the bench, our bench repeatedly struggled to score on offense 2 years ago. Having a 3 off the bench who could shoot jumpers didn't do much for us then. It was the bench defense that kept the leads. I fail to see why people think we need 3 or 4 superior three point shooters off the bench. Look at the starting lineup. We only have 2 3pt shooters. The problem with Rondo isn't his lack of 3's. The problem is his not shooting mid-range jumpers. If Ray or Paul is playing with the current bench guys, or some guard yet to be signed, I don't see a problem with our shooting with Daniels on the floor.

Considering Rondo will be off the floor most of the time that Daniels is in the game, I don't see how Daniels' lack of range in his game is an issue.

I apologize if my comment was misdirected at you, it seems you understand.  Daniels on the floor with House and either Ray/Paul is no problem.  The problem is I'm afraid our bench will become stagnant without Rondo or a PG other than House.  And if we DO sign a PG like Marbury than Daniels ability to carry to ball becomes irrelevant, and his lack of shooting kind of turns him into Tony Allen.  See, I'm not saying he's the problem because he can't shoot 3's, the problem is we don't have a 2nd string PG, and if we get one Daniels will be less valuable as a SF than a SG with Eddie.
And our bench wasn't GREAT at scoring 2 years ago, but our bench last year was much worse.  Defense off the bench is all we truly need, but a guy like House is nice too.  Last year the defense off the bench was poor though, and Daniels still doesn't replace ALL of what Posey was.

I fail to see the relevance of Posey in the discussion of Daniels. Posey is horrible going to the hole. Daniels actually has moves going to the hole. Why do you only mention what Posey could do and Daniels couldn't? Posey was a horrible finisher with his only hope of points off a pass down low being at the FT line. And did Posey ever hit a jumper that wasn't at the 3pt line?

We didn't have any bigs off the bench with range 2 years ago among BBD, Powe, Pollard and Brown. If Daniels can hit from 12 feet and Wallace is at the 3 pt line, where is the problem? A midrange game is good enough.

There are so many possible lineups and ways to play the players in it. I cannot understand why there is this romanticized view of Posey being the perfect 3 off the bench. I especially don't understand this view when talking about offense, considering the bench offense was very frustrating when he was here. He was an important part in the great comeback game and had many great 3's in the finals, but what else was he going to do offensively?

He played his role, beyond that you can't criticize.  I have not once criticized Daniels' weaknesses, just that his role is not of greatest importance here.

[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. 

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.

I've tried to say this numerous times, you can't put a guy who can shoot at Center and say the floor will be more spaced.  The guy actually needs to space the floor.  You need someone at the post, and with Rasheed in the game it will probably be Perk or KG.  Rasheed spaces the floor better than Davis and KG by stepping behind the arc, but this is at that 4.  The wonderful thing about Rasheed is he can back-up Perk AND Garnett, but he can't do both at the same time.

You seem to be responding to the post before me, but I'll respond to what you said. You seem to be talking about when the bench players on in the game, since your points are irrelevant when Ray and Pierce are in the game (and Wallace is playing the role Posey played at the end of games 2 years ago except with much more to offer).

If we are talking about the bench, our bench repeatedly struggled to score on offense 2 years ago. Having a 3 off the bench who could shoot jumpers didn't do much for us then. It was the bench defense that kept the leads. I fail to see why people think we need 3 or 4 superior three point shooters off the bench. Look at the starting lineup. We only have 2 3pt shooters. The problem with Rondo isn't his lack of 3's. The problem is his not shooting mid-range jumpers. If Ray or Paul is playing with the current bench guys, or some guard yet to be signed, I don't see a problem with our shooting with Daniels on the floor.

Considering Rondo will be off the floor most of the time that Daniels is in the game, I don't see how Daniels' lack of range in his game is an issue.

I apologize if my comment was misdirected at you, it seems you understand.  Daniels on the floor with House and either Ray/Paul is no problem.  The problem is I'm afraid our bench will become stagnant without Rondo or a PG other than House.  And if we DO sign a PG like Marbury than Daniels ability to carry to ball becomes irrelevant, and his lack of shooting kind of turns him into Tony Allen.  See, I'm not saying he's the problem because he can't shoot 3's, the problem is we don't have a 2nd string PG, and if we get one Daniels will be less valuable as a SF than a SG with Eddie.
And our bench wasn't GREAT at scoring 2 years ago, but our bench last year was much worse.  Defense off the bench is all we truly need, but a guy like House is nice too.  Last year the defense off the bench was poor though, and Daniels still doesn't replace ALL of what Posey was.

I fail to see the relevance of Posey in the discussion of Daniels. Posey is horrible going to the hole. Daniels actually has moves going to the hole. Why do you only mention what Posey could do and Daniels couldn't? Posey was a horrible finisher with his only hope of points off a pass down low being at the FT line. And did Posey ever hit a jumper that wasn't at the 3pt line?

We didn't have any bigs off the bench with range 2 years ago among BBD, Powe, Pollard and Brown. If Daniels can hit from 12 feet and Wallace is at the 3 pt line, where is the problem? A midrange game is good enough.

There are so many possible lineups and ways to play the players in it. I cannot understand why there is this romanticized view of Posey being the perfect 3 off the bench. I especially don't understand this view when talking about offense, considering the bench offense was very frustrating when he was here. He was an important part in the great comeback game and had many great 3's in the finals, but what else was he going to do offensively?

He played his role, beyond that you can't criticize.  I have not once criticized Daniels' weaknesses, just that his role is not of greatest importance here.

I'm a great believer in team cohesion and teams having players that compliment each other.  That's why I think the C's have been able to throw so much talent together and have it work while others teams have had it blow up in their face.  However, I think at some point you have to simply look at the facts: last year we won 62 games with no KG for 25 games and players backing up Allen and Pierce that arguably didn't belong in the NBA.

Now we have a guy who was a contributor on a team that went to the NBA Finals only a few years ago. 

Might Moon or Posey been a better fit?  Maybe.  But that didn't happen and I think we at least have to be happy that we have someone who belongs in a championship rotation backing up Pierce and Allen. 

[vjcsmoke]

Last year the defense off the bench was poor though, and Daniels still doesn't replace ALL of what Posey was.

So your MAIN problem is that Daniels isn't Posey.  Well, DUH.  IF Ainge had wanted Posey and that contract he would have traded for him.  But he didn't.  And Posey looks to be in decline quite honestly. 

The Celts need a backup PG sure, and they need another backup big who can guard the taller SFs in the league.  But those are filler guys.  Daniels is a quality backup who can slash and score.  He's like Brian Shaw or Rickey Davis but without a 3 pt shot or the head issues.  That's perfectly fine for the second unit and helps balance out the shooters we have in House and Wallace and hopefully Big Baby in unit 2.

[MBunge]

Last season, Jamario Moon averaged a whopping 4 pt and 3 rbs for Miami in the playoffs.  In the regular season, it was 7.2 pts, 4.6 rebs and 1.1 stls in 26 minutes a game.

Daniels averaged 13.6 pts, 4.6 rebs, 2.1 asts and 1.1 steals in 32 minutes a game, regular season.  Daniels is also younger and more experienced.

Daniels is by pretty much any measure the better player.  Moon only has a couple inches in height and a bit more athleticism.  Boston's need for a long, athletic 3 is greatly lessed because KG, Perk and Sheed will allow them to have defensive length on the court at all times.

Mike

[mgent]

Last year the defense off the bench was poor though, and Daniels still doesn't replace ALL of what Posey was.

So your MAIN problem is that Daniels isn't Posey.  Well, DUH.  IF Ainge had wanted Posey and that contract he would have traded for him.  But he didn't.  And Posey looks to be in decline quite honestly. 

The Celts need a backup PG sure, and they need another backup big who can guard the taller SFs in the league.  But those are filler guys.  Daniels is a quality backup who can slash and score.  He's like Brian Shaw or Rickey Davis but without a 3 pt shot or the head issues.  That's perfectly fine for the second unit and helps balance out the shooters we have in House and Wallace and hopefully Big Baby in unit 2.

I disagree that these guys HAVE to be filler guys.  Why couldn't we fill one of those positions with a quality backup who will more fit our needs?