Imagine how good this team would be with a backup small forward!!

[mgent]

Seriously, I don't know why this hole is still left open.  Marquis is busy backing up Rondo and Ray, and Scal isn't a true 3 either.  Walker isn't really up to the job even if he was active.

I'm not saying we NEED one, or that one would even make that much of a difference.  It'd just be nice to have a guy that could come in and play some good D for 5-15 minutes a game (better than Scal), and hopefully spread the floor a little bit for Marquis or Rondo.

I hope we can get a trade in closer to now than the dead line.  Tony, Giddens, Scal, (although I'd be sad to see him go) just do it already.

Is there any good reason for us to not have a Pierce backup yet?

[Rondo_is_better]

Seriously, I don't know why this hole is still left open.  Marquis is busy backing up Rondo and Ray, and Scal isn't a true 3 either.  Walker isn't really up to the job even if he was active.

I'm not saying we NEED one, or that one would even make that much of a difference.  It'd just be nice to have a guy that could come in and play some good D for 5-15 minutes a game (better than Scal), and hopefully spread the floor a little bit for Marquis or Rondo.

I hope we can get a trade in closer to now than the dead line.  Tony, Giddens, Scal, (although I'd be sad to see him go) just do it already.

Is there any good reason for us to not have a Pierce backup yet?

Giddens does a pretty good job of filling your description.

-Defense
-not too many minutes needed (5-15)
-cheap
easy to come by because he's already on the team

Maybe JR will get those minutes....

[mgent]

Seriously, I don't know why this hole is still left open.  Marquis is busy backing up Rondo and Ray, and Scal isn't a true 3 either.  Walker isn't really up to the job even if he was active.

I'm not saying we NEED one, or that one would even make that much of a difference.  It'd just be nice to have a guy that could come in and play some good D for 5-15 minutes a game (better than Scal), and hopefully spread the floor a little bit for Marquis or Rondo.

I hope we can get a trade in closer to now than the dead line.  Tony, Giddens, Scal, (although I'd be sad to see him go) just do it already.

Is there any good reason for us to not have a Pierce backup yet?

Giddens does a pretty good job of filling your description.

-Defense
-not too many minutes needed (5-15)
-cheap
easy to come by because he's already on the team

Maybe JR will get those minutes....

Maybe, but I just don't think he's long enough to really backup Pierce.  I'd rather have a bigger guy just for the sake that size matters a lot on defense.  Plus, his offense really isn't there yet. 

[Tai]

I seriously hope this isn't in reaction to the fact that the Knicks beat us by 5 in a preseason game where the Knicks' starters played our backups in the 4th quarter.

If so, I can't say I care. It's already been said multiple times that there are only 45 minutes behind Rondo, Ray, and Pierce for the bench to eat up those 1-3 minutes. House and Daniels can do that fine.

If Giddens or Hudson show that they can fulfill the couple of minutes the Celtics may need them, they'll get time. We don't to pay extra money/do a trade for someone else who may not be happy for playing for like 5-15 min off the bench. That's why Nocioni nor Jackson are worth it, at least not at this point. MAYBE if there's a long-term injury there will be a need.

[jdpapa3]

Seriously, I don't know why this hole is still left open.  Marquis is busy backing up Rondo and Ray, and Scal isn't a true 3 either.  Walker isn't really up to the job even if he was active.

I'm not saying we NEED one, or that one would even make that much of a difference.  It'd just be nice to have a guy that could come in and play some good D for 5-15 minutes a game (better than Scal), and hopefully spread the floor a little bit for Marquis or Rondo.

I hope we can get a trade in closer to now than the dead line.  Tony, Giddens, Scal, (although I'd be sad to see him go) just do it already.

Is there any good reason for us to not have a Pierce backup yet?

Giddens does a pretty good job of filling your description.

-Defense
-not too many minutes needed (5-15)
-cheap
easy to come by because he's already on the team

Maybe JR will get those minutes....

Maybe, but I just don't think he's long enough to really backup Pierce.  I'd rather have a bigger guy just for the sake that size matters a lot on defense.  Plus, his offense really isn't there yet. 

Length is not an issue for JR.

[Roy Hobbs]

It's already been said multiple times that there are only 45 minutes behind Rondo, Ray, and Pierce for the bench to eat up those 1-3 minutes. House and Daniels can do that fine.

Well said.  That's basically how I see it, and I think 45 might be an overestimate.  If Pierce, Ray, and Rondo all get 35 minutes (a realistic estimate, based on Doc's earlier words), that leaves 39 minutes.  24 minutes for Daniels, and 15 for Eddie, seems doable.

[lon3lytoaster]

I wish we got to see Billy Walker during the preseason. It would be been nice to see if he could contribute.

Either way, I'm not too worried about it. A fulltime Pierce would be nice but I'll just take our chances with Giddens/Walker/Daniels

[Bahku]

I like Scal (personality-wise) as much as anyone, but I really think he's not contributing anything solid on a consistent basis, and it's time to do something about him and TA toward our weakness in the SF area. As soon as Scal came in the game in the 4th, they started launching 3's and poorly-selected jump-shots, instead of continuing to attack the basket, (which is what's most effective against New York). Thank God Eddie was in a "groove", or the score would have been much more lop-sided. Scal has some abilities and a great knowledge of the game, but the negatives outweigh the positives at this point, and things just fall apart when he comes on the floor.

[Roy Hobbs]

I like Scal (personality-wise) as much as anyone, but I really think he's not contributing anything solid on a consistent basis, and it's time to do something about him and TA toward our weakness in the SF area. As soon as Scal came in the game in the 4th, they started launching 3's and poorly-selected jump-shots, instead of continuing to attack the basket, (which is what's most effective against New York). Thank God Eddie was in a "groove", or the score would have been much more lop-sided. Scal has some abilities and a great knowledge of the game, but the negatives outweigh the positives at this point, and things just fall apart when he comes on the floor.

Scal doesn't produce a lot, but in his defense, the Celts outscored the Knicks when he was on the floor tonight.  I agree that I'd like to see more of a contributor getting his minutes, but there's some value added in having a guy who fits in, makes the extra pass, doesn't make a lot of mistakes, and usually plays solid defense.

[snively]

I liked what I saw from Giddens last night (and for most of the preseason).  He defended Nate Robinson well, contested a bunch of shots and rebounded like a maniac.  He missed a rotation on a pick and roll but in fairness the starters were awful on defense for most of the game.  

If Giddens can continue to emulate Gerald Wallace and not Gerald Green then we could have a nice useful player.

[mgent]

I seriously hope this isn't in reaction to the fact that the Knicks beat us by 5 in a preseason game where the Knicks' starters played our backups in the 4th quarter.

If so, I can't say I care. It's already been said multiple times that there are only 45 minutes behind Rondo, Ray, and Pierce for the bench to eat up those 1-3 minutes. House and Daniels can do that fine.

If Giddens or Hudson show that they can fulfill the couple of minutes the Celtics may need them, they'll get time. We don't to pay extra money/do a trade for someone else who may not be happy for playing for like 5-15 min off the bench. That's why Nocioni nor Jackson are worth it, at least not at this point. MAYBE if there's a long-term injury there will be a need.

I never said this had anything to do with tonight's game.

As far as minutes, I think Daniels and House could give up a few minutes if it means a bringing more defense into the second unit.  In '08, we worked it with Posey, Eddie, and Sam (Tony Allen for the first half of the season).

Here's three ways it would help out our bench:
1. It would limit Eddie's minutes at the 2 (where his height is sometimes a problem)
2. It would help us out against larger 3s that Marquis might have a problem with
3. It would remove the disadvantage of having Rondo and Marquis on the floor (two guys who have trouble with their outside shot)

It would obviously help more than it would hurt, so why not?

[mgent]

I wish we got to see Billy Walker during the preseason. It would be been nice to see if he could contribute.

Either way, I'm not too worried about it. A fulltime Pierce would be nice but I'll just take our chances with Giddens/Walker/Daniels

This is what I'm talking about...Why bother taking a chance?

[snively]

I like Scal (personality-wise) as much as anyone, but I really think he's not contributing anything solid on a consistent basis, and it's time to do something about him and TA toward our weakness in the SF area. As soon as Scal came in the game in the 4th, they started launching 3's and poorly-selected jump-shots, instead of continuing to attack the basket, (which is what's most effective against New York). Thank God Eddie was in a "groove", or the score would have been much more lop-sided. Scal has some abilities and a great knowledge of the game, but the negatives outweigh the positives at this point, and things just fall apart when he comes on the floor.

Scal doesn't produce a lot, but in his defense, the Celts outscored the Knicks when he was on the floor tonight.  I agree that I'd like to see more of a contributor getting his minutes, but there's some value added in having a guy who fits in, makes the extra pass, doesn't make a lot of mistakes, and usually plays solid defense.

Scal's also great at guarding Al Harrington.  Scal just isn't quick enough to do very well against most other 3s.  The bench struggled most with Gallonari (spelling?), Chandler and the two-pg line-up.  We just didn't have the quickness to match-up.

Daniels isn't quite the answer either.  He's more of a team defense guy than a one-on-one pest who can hassle the hot hand and pick up people in transition.  There'd be a definite part-time role along those lines for Giddens/Walker/Allen if any of them can earn it.  A 10th man who can keep Scal as a specialty player for defending Harrington, Rashard Lewis, David West and a few others in a pinch.

[Bahku]

I like Scal (personality-wise) as much as anyone, but I really think he's not contributing anything solid on a consistent basis, and it's time to do something about him and TA toward our weakness in the SF area. As soon as Scal came in the game in the 4th, they started launching 3's and poorly-selected jump-shots, instead of continuing to attack the basket, (which is what's most effective against New York). Thank God Eddie was in a "groove", or the score would have been much more lop-sided. Scal has some abilities and a great knowledge of the game, but the negatives outweigh the positives at this point, and things just fall apart when he comes on the floor.

Scal doesn't produce a lot, but in his defense, the Celts outscored the Knicks when he was on the floor tonight.  I agree that I'd like to see more of a contributor getting his minutes, but there's some value added in having a guy who fits in, makes the extra pass, doesn't make a lot of mistakes, and usually plays solid defense.

As I stated, I like Scal, and would love to see him be a force on the floor, but I can't help but mentally "cross my fingers" whenever he comes on the floor. However you feel about Scal and TA, I don't think there's much question that the money they represent could be spent in a much more productive way.   

[mgent]

I like Scal (personality-wise) as much as anyone, but I really think he's not contributing anything solid on a consistent basis, and it's time to do something about him and TA toward our weakness in the SF area. As soon as Scal came in the game in the 4th, they started launching 3's and poorly-selected jump-shots, instead of continuing to attack the basket, (which is what's most effective against New York). Thank God Eddie was in a "groove", or the score would have been much more lop-sided. Scal has some abilities and a great knowledge of the game, but the negatives outweigh the positives at this point, and things just fall apart when he comes on the floor.

Scal doesn't produce a lot, but in his defense, the Celts outscored the Knicks when he was on the floor tonight.  I agree that I'd like to see more of a contributor getting his minutes, but there's some value added in having a guy who fits in, makes the extra pass, doesn't make a lot of mistakes, and usually plays solid defense.

As I stated, I like Scal, and would love to see him be a force on the floor, but I can't help but mentally "cross my fingers" whenever he comes on the floor. However you feel about Scal and TA, I don't think there's much question that the money they represent could be spent in a much more productive way.   

Definitely.

I think Scal is a tremendous player.  But asking him to guard a small forward is a little too much of a stretch.  He's got quick feet, but that's just not his position.  I'd like to resign him at the minimum just as a 5th or 6th big.