Unhappy with Danny?

[ssspence]

Not trading Ray will set the Cs back 4+ years. They are now in cap hell until KG comes off the books with no good picks or young assets outside of Rondo to trade, and Rondo shouldnt be traded. Expect mediocre play and picks in the low 20's and high teens for 4-5 years.

We got the one title this is what is the back lash. Was it worth it? I still say yes.

Why would not trading ray set the C's back anymore than having him come off the books if no teams wanted to trade young impact players for our pieces. that makes zero sense.

All the crazy trade hypo's people tossed up that didn't come to pass we're significantly worse than the trades made in reality.

Teams are not required to take bad deals from us because we're the celtics.

To me, all the crazy trade hypos were about money. Posters (myself included) wanted Cs ownership to take on salary (i.e. one good player, one bad contract) in order to improve the teams chances to win this year, and make us more competitive next.

At the end of the day, they weren't prepared to do that. But I do believe if they had there were deals out there to be done. I can't blame them because it ain't my $$$, but I can't help but feel a little disappointed. We've heard how management "likes the team we have" since we let posey sign elsewhere two summers ago, but the results haven't been there. Some moves have been good, but for the most part the jury has been out since -- the moves haven't been bold enough to ensure we stay competitive. Do we have a chance to win it all this year? Yes. Is it a good chance? No -- i think any fan who tells themselves that with a straight face needs to get real. We're not a top contender right now.

Moving to the summer, what avenue are the Cs going to have to improve between now and the end of Paul contract? Are we going to trade Pierce? Really? Does he have substantial value? Or are we looking at waiting until the KG's deal? It could be a rough slide down the hill.

 

[More Banners]

Not trading Ray will set the Cs back 4+ years. They are now in cap hell until KG comes off the books with no good picks or young assets outside of Rondo to trade, and Rondo shouldnt be traded. Expect mediocre play and picks in the low 20's and high teens for 4-5 years.

We got the one title this is what is the back lash. Was it worth it? I still say yes.

Why would not trading ray set the C's back anymore than having him come off the books if no teams wanted to trade young impact players for our pieces. that makes zero sense.

All the crazy trade hypo's people tossed up that didn't come to pass we're significantly worse than the trades made in reality.

Teams are not required to take bad deals from us because we're the celtics.

To me, all the crazy trade hypos were about money. Posters (myself included) wanted Cs ownership to take on salary (i.e. one good player, one bad contract) in order to improve the teams chances to win this year, and make us more competitive next.

At the end of the day, they weren't prepared to do that. But I do believe if they had there were deals out there to be done. I can't blame them because it ain't my $$$, but I can't help but feel a little disappointed. We've heard how management "likes the team we have" since we let posey sign elsewhere two summers ago, but the results haven't been there. Some moves have been good, but for the most part the jury has been out since -- the moves haven't been bold enough to ensure we stay competitive. Do we have a chance to win it all this year? Yes. Is it a good chance? No -- i think any fan who tells themselves that with a straight face needs to get real. We're not a top contender right now.

Moving to the summer, what avenue are the Cs going to have to improve between now and the end of Paul contract? Are we going to trade Pierce? Really? Does he have substantial value? Or are we looking at waiting until the KG's deal? It could be a rough slide down the hill.

 

I think you're definitely right.  Money is the issue.  In a way, they're still reaping the dividends from what they spent two years ago when they won, in tickets, merchandise, and tv deals, even though the team has clearly not been as good.  As long as they can keep selling us what they've got, they can hold firm on the contracts.  When PP stops selling, THEN they will NEED to reload for a star, even at the expense of a bad deal.  Why spend now for only a marginal improvement in play that doesn't improve revenue?

[JIMTONIK]

in professional basketball the important aspect is doing facts.
And Danny did it by winning the title in 2008.
But now he can't live over this title forever.
Actually I'm not angry with  him,I'm only a little bit disappointed because the future is not bright for our celtics, and for the next year (this one included) we'r not championship material.

[ssspence]

To further my point above, here's a quote from the Herald:

"A team source said that the Cs looked into acquiring Phoenix forward Amar’e Stoudemire, for instance. Management also looked into possible trades for Utah’s Carlos Boozer, Miami’s Michael Beasley, Philadelphia’s Andre Iguodala and Golden State’s Monta Ellis."

The Celtics recognized a need for an upgrade, but they weren't prepared to pay for it. All of these teams wanted to ditch a contract with the player, and the Cs said 'thanks, but no thanks' when that was made clear.

Was it the right choice? Time will tell. But any rhetoric about spending what they need to to compete is not valid anymore.

[ScalPal]

This link shows well have 64M on the books next year with a shrinking cap we wont have cap space. We will the next year when Pierce is gone but by then KG is VERY VERY basketball old and making 20M I just dont see a bright future. Im not upset just saying the window is now closed.

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=28668.0

[ScalPal]

in professional basketball the important aspect is doing facts.
And Danny did it by winning the title in 2008.
But now he can't live over this title forever.
Actually I'm not angry with  him,I'm only a little bit disappointed because the future is not bright for our celtics, and for the next year (this one included) we'r not championship material.

AMEN!

[jdpapa3]

This link shows well have 64M on the books next year with a shrinking cap we wont have cap space. We will the next year when Pierce is gone but by then KG is VERY VERY basketball old and making 20M I just dont see a bright future. Im not upset just saying the window is now closed.

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=28668.0

I don't get your point. Trading Ray adds more salary to future years. Is your suggestion trading KG?

[ForexPirate]

Danny opened up 3 (maybe 4 roster spots if he buys out landry) - let's see what he does with those before we cast judgement.  Maybe there is a method to his madness.

Long term - I would like to see Ray here on a sweet deal next year. 

3-4 open spots -  Danny has probably already got an eye on someone

[the_Bird]

To further my point above, here's a quote from the Herald:

"A team source said that the Cs looked into acquiring Phoenix forward Amar’e Stoudemire, for instance. Management also looked into possible trades for Utah’s Carlos Boozer, Miami’s Michael Beasley, Philadelphia’s Andre Iguodala and Golden State’s Monta Ellis."

The Celtics recognized a need for an upgrade, but they weren't prepared to pay for it. All of these teams wanted to ditch a contract with the player, and the Cs said 'thanks, but no thanks' when that was made clear.

Was it the right choice? Time will tell. But any rhetoric about spending what they need to to compete is not valid anymore.

I agree.  I think there were deals to be had, but they would have required absorbing a bad contract or two - Nooch or Jamison or someone like that.  Agree, it ain't my money so I can't really Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline....   but it makes me feel pretty [dang] disappointed.

[ScalPal]

This link shows well have 64M on the books next year with a shrinking cap we wont have cap space. We will the next year when Pierce is gone but by then KG is VERY VERY basketball old and making 20M I just dont see a bright future. Im not upset just saying the window is now closed.

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=28668.0

I don't get your point. Trading Ray adds more salary to future years. Is your suggestion trading KG?

My point is that if they traded Ray for a young impact player that had a contact beyond next year we would be able to be a better team over the cap. Now we lose Ray and since we are over the cap and cant get a better quality player in return via FAs or trade. Ray is not a good starter on a Title team, he's a great 6th man on title  team. The point of this league is to contend for titles. This years team wont come close. And since they didnt trade Ray next years wont either.

[JIMTONIK]

Danny opened up 3 (maybe 4 roster spots if he buys out landry) - let's see what he does with those before we cast judgement.  Maybe there is a method to his madness.

Long term - I would like to see Ray here on a sweet deal next year. 

3-4 open spots -  Danny has probably already got an eye on someone

what did he can do at this point?
Absolutely nothing.
maybe to sign a couple of veterans,but our chance to win this year is still low.

[Tai]

This link shows well have 64M on the books next year with a shrinking cap we wont have cap space. We will the next year when Pierce is gone but by then KG is VERY VERY basketball old and making 20M I just dont see a bright future. Im not upset just saying the window is now closed.

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=28668.0

I don't get your point. Trading Ray adds more salary to future years. Is your suggestion trading KG?

My point is that if they traded Ray for a young impact player that had a contact beyond next year we would be able to be a better team over the cap. Now we lose Ray and since we are over the cap and cant get a better quality player in return via FAs or trade. Ray is not a good starter on a Title team, he's a great 6th man on title  team. The point of this league is to contend for titles. This years team wont come close. And since they didnt trade Ray next years wont either.

We won't come close?

Wait a second...hold up...if we don't win, we don't win, but I'm starting to think people wanted Danny to be driven by the excess pessimism that this site seems to possess daily. If that's the case.....wow, god bless Danny for knowing better.

[BballTim]

To further my point above, here's a quote from the Herald:

"A team source said that the Cs looked into acquiring Phoenix forward Amar’e Stoudemire, for instance. Management also looked into possible trades for Utah’s Carlos Boozer, Miami’s Michael Beasley, Philadelphia’s Andre Iguodala and Golden State’s Monta Ellis."

The Celtics recognized a need for an upgrade, but they weren't prepared to pay for it. All of these teams wanted to ditch a contract with the player, and the Cs said 'thanks, but no thanks' when that was made clear.

Was it the right choice? Time will tell. But any rhetoric about spending what they need to to compete is not valid anymore.

  It doesn't say that all of the players that were looked at were available, and it didn't say what the other teams wanted in return. It doesn't say that the Celts didn't have to offer talent in return, just take on bad contracts. You're making assumptions that aren't in the story. The only thing that is clear is that Ainge made an effort to try and get those guys.

[BballTim]

Not trading Ray will set the Cs back 4+ years. They are now in cap hell until KG comes off the books with no good picks or young assets outside of Rondo to trade, and Rondo shouldnt be traded. Expect mediocre play and picks in the low 20's and high teens for 4-5 years.

We got the one title this is what is the back lash. Was it worth it? I still say yes.

Why would not trading ray set the C's back anymore than having him come off the books if no teams wanted to trade young impact players for our pieces. that makes zero sense.

All the crazy trade hypo's people tossed up that didn't come to pass we're significantly worse than the trades made in reality.

Teams are not required to take bad deals from us because we're the celtics.

To me, all the crazy trade hypos were about money. Posters (myself included) wanted Cs ownership to take on salary (i.e. one good player, one bad contract) in order to improve the teams chances to win this year, and make us more competitive next.

At the end of the day, they weren't prepared to do that. But I do believe if they had there were deals out there to be done. I can't blame them because it ain't my $$$, but I can't help but feel a little disappointed. We've heard how management "likes the team we have" since we let posey sign elsewhere two summers ago, but the results haven't been there. Some moves have been good, but for the most part the jury has been out since -- the moves haven't been bold enough to ensure we stay competitive. Do we have a chance to win it all this year? Yes. Is it a good chance? No -- i think any fan who tells themselves that with a straight face needs to get real. We're not a top contender right now.

  Letting Posey go was the right move. Having him for another 2.5 years would suck.

[Jon]

Still think people are jumping the gun.  I don't buy into this theory that the Celtics got old overnight.  They were good enough to be a top 3 team in the NBA two months ago, and now all of the sudden it's impossible that they ever contend again?  

I'm not buying it.  It's too early to tell anything.  

Plus, Nate might actually make a sizable (despite his size) contribution.  I don't have any fantasies about him being a star, but let's face it, one of the big problems on this team is that they too often rely on jumpers and set plays to score.  Nate really gives them a nice out-valve when PP and Rondo aren't in the game to create his own offense when a play breaks down.  

Now, of course, he could be selfish and mess things up.  But he also could be productive in keeping the momentum going in the third quarter when the starters start to go the bench.  Even if his presence means that a 10 point lead only diminishes to a 5 point lead, it's still an improvement over going away entirely and could potentially lead to more wins.