Who will be resigned in the off-season, Nate or TA?

[celtics2]

I would keep Nate. Seems like point guards are tougher to acquire. Especially someone as explosive as Robinson. I owe no Allegiance to players. It's all about the team. I saw what happened after hanging on to Bird, Parish and McHale. With Rondo this team would have beaten them. All being healthy that is. Tony has given us some memorable moments. Time to move on.

[Finkelskyhook]

Without Thibodeau we're going to need all of the defensive-oriented players we can hold on to.  Rivers is an awful (being charitable) defensive coach.

That and that I believe Tony will end up with us by default...ala Glen Davis... on the cheap.  I think somebody will overpay for Nate....Maybe Danny will.  Even though they play different positions, I believe if Ray stays Nate doesn't get signed and if Ray goes Nate does.

[Rondo_is_better]

I'm not confusing anything. I know who is attainable and who is available. But the question asked was who could we get that was better than Tony and Nate? I never said that the players were both attainable or that only one was attainable or that even any of them were likely to be attained. Just that I felt they were better and that we could get them, even if it was extremely unlikely.

Honestly, as I later followed up with, I think the team would be better off keeping Nate and trying to replace Tony and draft young players to fill backup SF, SG and big positions. Also, I think Nate makes better trade bait than Tony does as well.

That's a really literal interpretation of what I said... When I asked "who are we gonna get that's better" I meant "who are we actually going to conceivably get that's better?". Most of the guys you listed either are not attainable or IMHO just terrible (like Larry Hughes).

[snively]

There are dozens of players that are available and better than these two. But at what price?

They have played admirably in these playoffs and I thank them for that. But that doesn't mean that replacing them with better players would not be out of the realm of possibility.

I would like Luke Ridnour, Steve Blake, Earl Watson, C.J. Watson, Raymond Felton, Rafer Alston and Chris Duhon more than I would Nate Robinson for this team over the next two years. And I would rather have Mike Miller, Randy Foye, Wes Matthews, Roger Mason, Matt Barnes, J.J. Redick, John Salmons, Dorrell Wright, Ronnie Brewer, Rudy Gay, Rasual Butler, Anthony Morrow or Larry Hughes rather than Tony Allen.

But the financial ramifications of things probably means we will be stuck with re-signing one and/or both of these guys and I don't like that. I think either can lose a game, any game, for you just as easily as they can win a game for you because so much of their game deals in emotion rather than intelligence.

Your list underwhelms.  Rafer Alston was one of the worst players in the league this season (shot under 35% from the field and ranked beneath Nate in virtually every statistical category) and Larry Hughes hasn't sniffed 40% shooting in ages (and has failed in virtually every role he's been given since his Washington stint).  Randy Foye has been brutal and regressed since his mediocre rookie campaign.  Earl Watson and Chris Duhon are terribly mediocre, no upgrade there.  Ditto for Rasual Butler.  Wes Matthews is a glorified Bill Walker. 

The only real upgrades I see on your list are Raymond Felton (solid all-around PG), maybe Ridnour and Blake (streaky shooters who tend to be defensive liabilities) at point and Mike Miller, maybe John Salmons (people forget how inconsistent he is; when he's off his game, he's a lot like Larry Hughes), maybe JJ Redick, Morrow  and Rudy Gay (how did he even make it on this list?  Why not throw on Joe Johnson while we're at it?).  Pretty much all of those guys would probably cost the full MLE.

These are the roles I want off the bench next season:
shooting point to back-up Rondo, lockdown defensive wing, shooting wing, athletic rebounding big, stretch big, extra beef.
 
Nate and TA are great fits for the first two roles, see no need to waste the MLE on an upgrade to these roles if they are willing to come back at reasonable prices.  Rasheed would seem to be passable as the stretch big for another year.  I would prefer if Baby were slotted into the extra beef role, but he's hustled his way into a passable impression of the athletic rebounder role.  Thus the role that really needs upgrading is Michael Finley's shooting wing role, with the athletic rebounder a close 2nd.  Fail to resign TA and Nate however and the shooting 1 and lockdown wing jump right back up to the top of the list.

[GreenFaith1819]

I'd love to have both back, and for TA to work on his J-range this summer. We haven't had too much success in the backup PG search, and the way that Nate has played I think he is our man.

[nickagneta]

There are dozens of players that are available and better than these two. But at what price?

They have played admirably in these playoffs and I thank them for that. But that doesn't mean that replacing them with better players would not be out of the realm of possibility.

I would like Luke Ridnour, Steve Blake, Earl Watson, C.J. Watson, Raymond Felton, Rafer Alston and Chris Duhon more than I would Nate Robinson for this team over the next two years. And I would rather have Mike Miller, Randy Foye, Wes Matthews, Roger Mason, Matt Barnes, J.J. Redick, John Salmons, Dorrell Wright, Ronnie Brewer, Rudy Gay, Rasual Butler, Anthony Morrow or Larry Hughes rather than Tony Allen.

But the financial ramifications of things probably means we will be stuck with re-signing one and/or both of these guys and I don't like that. I think either can lose a game, any game, for you just as easily as they can win a game for you because so much of their game deals in emotion rather than intelligence.

Your list underwhelms.  Rafer Alston was one of the worst players in the league this season (shot under 35% from the field and ranked beneath Nate in virtually every statistical category) and Larry Hughes hasn't sniffed 40% shooting in ages (and has failed in virtually every role he's been given since his Washington stint).  Randy Foye has been brutal and regressed since his mediocre rookie campaign.  Earl Watson and Chris Duhon are terribly mediocre, no upgrade there.  Ditto for Rasual Butler.  Wes Matthews is a glorified Bill Walker. 

The only real upgrades I see on your list are Raymond Felton (solid all-around PG), maybe Ridnour and Blake (streaky shooters who tend to be defensive liabilities) at point and Mike Miller, maybe John Salmons (people forget how inconsistent he is; when he's off his game, he's a lot like Larry Hughes), maybe JJ Redick, Morrow  and Rudy Gay (how did he even make it on this list?  Why not throw on Joe Johnson while we're at it?).  Pretty much all of those guys would probably cost the full MLE.

These are the roles I want off the bench next season:
shooting point to back-up Rondo, lockdown defensive wing, shooting wing, athletic rebounding big, stretch big, extra beef.
 
Nate and TA are great fits for the first two roles, see no need to waste the MLE on an upgrade to these roles if they are willing to come back at reasonable prices.  Rasheed would seem to be passable as the stretch big for another year.  I would prefer if Baby were slotted into the extra beef role, but he's hustled his way into a passable impression of the athletic rebounder role.  Thus the role that really needs upgrading is Michael Finley's shooting wing role, with the athletic rebounder a close 2nd.  Fail to resign TA and Nate however and the shooting 1 and lockdown wing jump right back up to the top of the list.

Exsqueeze me if I completely disagree with you and your Nate and Tony love and your opinion of the players I mentioned. In this system, I believe every single one of them would be better players than the mighty immature and bone headed duo of Nate and Tony.

[Fafnir]

While I do think you have a point Nick about Tony/Nate's limitations, Rafer Alston isn't a good example to use as a better player. His year was so awful I wouldn't even take him as a veteran minimum player.

The danger of providing too many examples  .

I do think Tony as a 10-18 minute player has value despite his limitations. He's been good enough defensively this playoff run for me to support bringing him back. As long as we can add a SF who can shoot (and isn't a statue on the other end like Finley)

[kozlodoev]

Without Thibodeau we're going to need all of the defensive-oriented players we can hold on to.  Rivers is an awful (being charitable) defensive coach.

You're not going to win anything with a bunch of defensive players, because you will still have no defense.

[Marqui]

Without Thibodeau we're going to need all of the defensive-oriented players we can hold on to.  Rivers is an awful (being charitable) defensive coach.

You're not going to win anything with a bunch of defensive players, because you will still have no defense.

wat

[BballTim]

Without Thibodeau we're going to need all of the defensive-oriented players we can hold on to.  Rivers is an awful (being charitable) defensive coach.

  Thibodeau would have been an awful defensive coach with the team we had before we got KG.

[cordialb]

IMO, keep Nate and Tony in their roles they have this year and
I believe Tony is still young, and has learned to play within himself and use his strengths (a top notch defender) while minimizing his weaknesses (anything but catch and finish offensively).  For that i think he deserves some credit.

Draft an upside big (Alabi please).  This years draft is deep on bigs, and our 5th big might as well be a guy who can contribute with eyes toward playing a more meaningful role post KG/sheed.

Then fill the backup 3 spot with an athletic wing with the MLE.  Experience at this position is more important as they will see more playing time than our 5th big.

[kozlodoev]

Without Thibodeau we're going to need all of the defensive-oriented players we can hold on to.  Rivers is an awful (being charitable) defensive coach.

You're not going to win anything with a bunch of defensive players, because you will still have no defense.

wat

It's called "team defense".

It's also the chief reason why, for example, Ray Allen has been a more efficient defender in this series than Ron Artest.

[Finkelskyhook]

Without Thibodeau we're going to need all of the defensive-oriented players we can hold on to.  Rivers is an awful (being charitable) defensive coach.

  Thibodeau would have been an awful defensive coach with the team we had before we got KG.

Disagree.

Every player on our roster has improved defensively both individually and as a team under Thibodeau.

Every player on Rivers' roster pre-Thibodeau (except Perk) regressed defensively.  Veterans and young players alike.  The team defense was an embarassment and got worse each year pre-Thibodeau.   Guaranteed that wouldn't have happened had Thibodeau been part of the coaching staff. 

Obviously Garnett made a huge difference.  But Garnett wouldn't have helped very much without a coherent defense being implemented.

I guess we'll see for ourselves if Rivers stays next season.

[BballTim]

Without Thibodeau we're going to need all of the defensive-oriented players we can hold on to.  Rivers is an awful (being charitable) defensive coach.

  Thibodeau would have been an awful defensive coach with the team we had before we got KG.

Disagree.

Every player on our roster has improved defensively both individually and as a team under Thibodeau.

Every player on Rivers' roster pre-Thibodeau (except Perk) regressed defensively.  Veterans and young players alike.  The team defense was an embarassment and got worse each year pre-Thibodeau.   Guaranteed that wouldn't have happened had Thibodeau been part of the coaching staff.  

Obviously Garnett made a huge difference.  But Garnett wouldn't have helped very much without a coherent defense being implemented.

I guess we'll see for ourselves if Rivers stays next season.

  We had Paul, who was a very good defender when younger, who plays better defense in no small part because he doesn't have to carry the team offensively every minute he's in the game, and we had Rondo/Perk/TA, who have all improved with experience but who were good defenders to begin with. I don't think it's a given that we'd have seen the same level of improvement from Al, Wally, Gerald, Delonte and Gomes. Thibs isn't a miracle worker.

[nickagneta]

Thibs didn't exactly do miracles with Sam Cassell, Patrick O'Bryant and Mikki Moore. He's a good teacher of defense but some players can play defense and some can't. The players we dumped before Thibs got here were players playing big minutes who have proven elsewhere to be just as poor defenders under other coaches.

Coach Thibodeau had a Doc's great base defense to work with(which is a hybrid of Pat Reilly's and Mike Fratello's) smoothed out some of the stuff and taught it very well. It helps that he ran extremely similar defenses under Jeff Van Gundy. Thibodeau was an incredible asset but much credit has to be given to the system as well as the players brought into and kept in the system as well as Doc's ability to get every player to buy into the system.

This Coach Thibodeau was solely responsible mumbo-jumbo I hear about our defense is, IMHO, pretty ludicrous.