Decision Time on Hudson

[wdleehi]

I just don't see it.


What I did see was when the starting PG was out, the Celtics start three SGs.  



The Celtics need that spot filled with a player that can step in and play when Rondo is out.  

How many third string point guards can actually do that?

Well, when the team doesn't have a 2nd string PG, they need to have a 3rd string that can.  And there are 3rd PGs out there that do play.  Heck, sign Lou.  He may not be that good, but he can step in and play for limited minutes at PG.

[clover]

I would not be surprised to see him gone and replaced by Lou.

I think a team would have to floor them with a trade offer for them to give up Hudson.  And it's a no-brainer on guaranteeing his contract.  The guy has been whisked up about 5 levels of competition in the last few months and has been playing under control and contributing virtually every time he's been put out there.  I think they penciled him in for regular minutes in the second half back during the pre-season and it looks like he's right on schedule.

[Bankshot]

I just don't see it.


What I did see was when the starting PG was out, the Celtics start three SGs.  



The Celtics need that spot filled with a player that can step in and play when Rondo is out.  

How many third string point guards can actually do that?

Well, when the team doesn't have a 2nd string PG, they need to have a 3rd string that can.  And there are 3rd PGs out there that do play.  Heck, sign Lou.  He may not be that good, but he can step in and play for limited minutes at PG.

Tony Allen?

[wdleehi]

I just don't see it.


What I did see was when the starting PG was out, the Celtics start three SGs.  



The Celtics need that spot filled with a player that can step in and play when Rondo is out.  

How many third string point guards can actually do that?

Well, when the team doesn't have a 2nd string PG, they need to have a 3rd string that can.  And there are 3rd PGs out there that do play.  Heck, sign Lou.  He may not be that good, but he can step in and play for limited minutes at PG.

Tony Allen?

Are you trying to make me cry?   

[scoop]

I think this team's backcourt rotation is Rondo/Ray/Pierce/House/Marquis plus someone like Scal or Tony Allen getting situational minutes. It seems good enough for me.

[liam]

They need to make a decision and if they decide to keep him they need to get him at least 6 minutes a game until we get back to health so he can get use to the speed and intensity of an actual NBA game. He looks good but he was underestimating the speed and size of his NBA opponents last night and turned the ball over a couple of times. He should also be looking to score more with the players that his been in with. Hudson can score the ball.

[hwangjini_1]

actually, if lue is brought on board i dont think it will be hudson he replaces. hudson is showing he can become a good back up pg for the celtics in the next year or so.

walker and giddens have not proven much aside from athleticism. it seems that the skills walker and giddens bring, and the shortcomings they also bring, make them less valuable to the celtics than hudson.

But that would cost the Celtics significantly more money than cutting Hudson. Is the difference between Hudson and them worth that to the C's?

perhaps i am missing your question, but if you are saying that cutting hudson saves the celtics money over keeping walker, i dont really follow your argument.

2009 salaries for:

walker = $736,420, with a team option for 2 more years.
hudson = $457,588, no options.

a total difference of $278,832 is not much to the celtics and i am not sure how it would make any real difference in their decision. (though i admit it is more than the cost of my house.  )

[scoop]

Walker's contract is guaranteed this season, Hudson's isn't. So, the difference is bigger than that plus you have to factor the luxury tax.

[wdleehi]

actually, if lue is brought on board i dont think it will be hudson he replaces. hudson is showing he can become a good back up pg for the celtics in the next year or so.

walker and giddens have not proven much aside from athleticism. it seems that the skills walker and giddens bring, and the shortcomings they also bring, make them less valuable to the celtics than hudson.

But that would cost the Celtics significantly more money than cutting Hudson. Is the difference between Hudson and them worth that to the C's?

perhaps i am missing your question, but if you are saying that cutting hudson saves the celtics money over keeping walker, i dont really follow your argument.

2009 salaries for:

walker = $736,420, with a team option for 2 more years.
hudson = $457,588, no options.

a total difference of $278,832 is not much to the celtics and i am not sure how it would make any real difference in their decision. (though i admit it is more than the cost of my house.  )

I believe the point is Walker is already on the books for the total amount this year.

If Hudson is waived now, the Celtics are not on the hook for the total amount of the contract for this year.

Throw in lux tax, and I imagine they get close to a million saved.

[Reggie's Ghost]

This is a no brainer.  He's the only real backup we have on the roster, and the only young player at the end of our rotation that has shown me any signs that he could be a player in this league.  For the record, I'm sold on this kid.  He plays fantastic defense, has the gumption and talent to score the ball, and his teammates love him.  The C's will hold onto him, play him short mins this year, and he will be a usable option here next year when Doc is convinced he knows the system.  No doubt in my mind.  If he was another young player who was all potential and couldn't truly contribute yet (see: Giddens and Walker) I could see them letting him go, but they're not gonna cut a talented player at a position of need for such a minor monetary reward...

Not sure where the Gabe Pruit / Allen Ray comparisons are coming from, those guys (and Giddens too btw) were/are the ones who are out there sucking their thumbs whenever they see playing time.  They had no spirit, no pluck, and could only do 1 thing well.  Lester has many things to prove to me before I'm buying him as a very GOOD player, but his heart and his balls aren't among them...

[Jon]

I wouldn't be shocked to see Hudson gone either.  And I don't care.  More than likely if they cut him they could probably get him back next year.  He's hardly a sought after commodity. 

[clover]

actually, if lue is brought on board i dont think it will be hudson he replaces. hudson is showing he can become a good back up pg for the celtics in the next year or so.

walker and giddens have not proven much aside from athleticism. it seems that the skills walker and giddens bring, and the shortcomings they also bring, make them less valuable to the celtics than hudson.

But that would cost the Celtics significantly more money than cutting Hudson. Is the difference between Hudson and them worth that to the C's?

perhaps i am missing your question, but if you are saying that cutting hudson saves the celtics money over keeping walker, i dont really follow your argument.

2009 salaries for:

walker = $736,420, with a team option for 2 more years.
hudson = $457,588, no options.

a total difference of $278,832 is not much to the celtics and i am not sure how it would make any real difference in their decision. (though i admit it is more than the cost of my house.  )

I believe the point is Walker is already on the books for the total amount this year.

If Hudson is waived now, the Celtics are not on the hook for the total amount of the contract for this year.

Throw in lux tax, and I imagine they get close to a million saved.

You wouldn't save on salary and luxury tax for what he's already paid, and I'm convinced he's in the top 10 of the players they want to keep, while being a bargain, anyway.

[xmuscularghandix]

As a PG himself, Doc is hard on his guards. He'd rather have the player who is most familiar with the system rather than the player who might be most fitting athletically.

[Tai]

I wouldn't be shocked to see Hudson gone either.  And I don't care.  More than likely if they cut him they could probably get him back next year.  He's hardly a sought after commodity. 

What would be the point in that?

I definitely think Hudson's worth a mil, luxury tax included. Gimme a break, it's clear Doc likes Hudson.

[wdleehi]

I wouldn't be shocked to see Hudson gone either.  And I don't care.  More than likely if they cut him they could probably get him back next year.  He's hardly a sought after commodity. 

What would be the point in that?

I definitely think Hudson's worth a mil, luxury tax included. Gimme a break, it's clear Doc likes Hudson.

It is?   

Then why isn't he given more of a chance?