Why has it been so difficult to find a back up for Pierce?

[ScoobyDoo]

I've generally been a huge Ainge supporter. While disagreeing with some of his micro moves ( certain trades or signings, etc.), I've generally liked his macro approach.

But one thing I just haven't been able to understand is why on God's earth has he not been able to get a legitimate and consistent back up for Paul Pierce the last four years? He's had F-O-U-R years to accomplish this feat. Based on the success rate, you'd think is was like trying to put a man on the moon.

Many an available wing player would be more than willing to come back up Pierce "on this team" for a reasonable deal. But what have we seen for Pierce's back ups?

2008 - James Posey - this was good - we dominate and win a ring
2009 - TAllen ( too small ) Scal ( too slow )
2010 - TAllen ( too small ) Marquis ( really an off guard from a physical stanpoint.
2011 - thus far? Marquis and maybe Larry Hughes?...Really?

This has also been an issue with Rondo and Perk as well while Ainge has been here. I was absolutely ecstatic when we resigned Nate Robinsons and signed Jermaine O'neal.

Why? Not because I think Nate's an all star and I've actually never really been a J. O'neal fan. But I do know one thing, they are both good solid back up players for Rondo and, when he comes back and is helthy, Perkins. This is HUGE in terms of both Rondo's and perkins' overall effectiveness throughout the season.

I love the fact that Rondo and Nate can mesh, gel and find a rythym together all season, "from day one", FOR ONCE in Rondo's time here.

I just don't understand why we have not been able to get one decent guy behind Pierce and sign him for a 3-4 year contract like we did Baby for KG.

And we don't need a superstar behind Pierce. Just a simple, decent guy with legit SF size ( 6'7" to 6'9") and weight (220 to 240 ) who can hang and bang while Pierce is resting for 10-15 a night. That's it, just an average dude.

And what's been worse to me is, if we aren't giving Paul that one legit guy he can lean on, like he had with posey in 2008...and instead we're giving him Scal, TAllen, Daniels, Gody, etc. can we do Pierce a favor?

Can we play whoever we DO have, win, lose or draw, a solid 15 minutes a night between them. Yes, play Gody, or Baby, or Marquis at the SF spot and keep Pierce's minutes around 30-32 a night? Can we do that? Is it humanly possible? Do we have the technology?!

I'd rather see baby out there getting worked at the samll forward position for 15 minute a night than watching Pierce drag his exhausted body around the court from the 3/4 mark of the season onward...again....

For me, if Ainge isn't going to, once again, bring in a Bobby Simmons or other legit SF forward body behind Pierce?...I'd be looking to play Gody and Baby at the SF spot when we need a big match up.

I would absolutely throw Gody into the fire this year if I had to. I'd do whatever it took, at wehatever costs, in terms of regular season losses, to keep Pierce well rested and fresh. 

Above was my rant...

But my main question to you all is, why do you think it has been such a monumental and seemingly impossible feat, to get Pierce a legit rotation level guy behind him. Why has Ainge not been able to do it? I think it should have been slam dunk easy to find the right guy behind Pierce if you pursued it. Posey was perfect, after that, it seems that no serious effort to get Paul a running mate was made in earnest and to the significant detriment of the team.











     

[Who]

Danny has used his assets on other positions

• MLE on big men like Sheed and Jermaine
• Draft picks spent on a best player available and one gone in a previous trade
• The Celtics haven't had much in the trade asset department either. They had the Sheed contract recently but not a lot else. The next best asset was probably Glen Davis.

Two other notes

• Also, the year Posey left, by the time Posey signed with New Orleans a fair amount of alternative options were already off the board.
• And, last year, Danny found a quality wing player with the LLE (Marquis Daniels) but unfortunately he didn't work out.

So the assets that Danny used elsewhere (MLE, draft picks) greatly reduced his opportunities to acquire a talented backup SF.

[Roy Hobbs]

By season:

2009:  I think Danny waited too long on Posey, and by the time he got back into the market, there were no really viable options left.  Danny misjudged the market, and how much veteran players would want to play for a title team.

2010:  I thought the Marquis Daniels signing was going to be huge, it just didn't work out.  When healthy, he's a very competent small forward.  Danny also came very close to getting a commitment from Grant Hill.

2011:  There's still time to fill the void, and Danny has been attempting to do so.  However, a lot of our off-season was thrown into flux with the Perk injury.  That required us to use the MLE on a Perk replacement, rather than on a 2/3.  For the assets we have, I think Danny has done very well so far.  I agree, though, that we need to sign somebody with legit size to fill in if / when Marquis gets injured.

Danny's hands have been tied a bit by having lots of needs every off-season, but very few resources in terms of trade chips and salary exceptions.  I think he could have done a better job in 2009, but that's the only off-season I fault him for.  In the off-seasons prior to 2008, 2010, and 2011, he's been excellent.

[Surferdad]

I don't understand why people are writing off Marquis Daniels.  "just didn't work out" is not really correct.  He was actually good early in the season, then he got injured.

Now that Ainge is pretty much done with off-season moves, I think folks should give Quis another chance to show what he can do.  He is capable of putting up a 20-point night.  He kind of sneaky offensive player and personally I like him as Pierce's backup.

[BballTim]

Many an available wing player would be more than willing to come back up Pierce "on this team" for a reasonable deal. But what have we seen for Pierce's back ups?

2008 - James Posey - this was good - we dominate and win a ring
2009 - TAllen ( too small ) Scal ( too slow )
2010 - TAllen ( too small ) Marquis ( really an off guard from a physical stanpoint.
2011 - thus far? Marquis and maybe Larry Hughes?...Really?

  I can see complaining about Tony Allen's lack of offensive production, but the "too small" thing is more theoretical than actual.

[Roy Hobbs]

I don't understand why people are writing off Marquis Daniels.  "just didn't work out" is not really correct.  He was actually good early in the season, then he got injured.

Now that Ainge is pretty much done with off-season moves, I think folks should give Quis another chance to show what he can do.  He is capable of putting up a 20-point night.  He kind of sneaky offensive player and personally I like him as Pierce's backup.

The ". . . then he got injured" thing is pretty consistent, though, isn't it?

Marquis has never played more than 74 games.  He's missed 20+ games in 6 out of 7 seasons.  Over his career, he's missed 172 out of a potential 574 games, which averages out to 25 missed games per season.

In other words, him being injured is no surprise.  If he makes it through this year playing in every game, it will be unprecedented.  Therefore, it makes a lot of sense to prepare for the possibility (inevitability) that Marquis will be injured, and will miss a serious amount of time.

Due to that, he's not a great option as a primary backup, in my opinion.  I hope that I'm wrong, but history says that I won't be.

[Fafnir]

Many an available wing player would be more than willing to come back up Pierce "on this team" for a reasonable deal. But what have we seen for Pierce's back ups?

2008 - James Posey - this was good - we dominate and win a ring
2009 - TAllen ( too small ) Scal ( too slow )
2010 - TAllen ( too small ) Marquis ( really an off guard from a physical stanpoint.
2011 - thus far? Marquis and maybe Larry Hughes?...Really?

  I can see complaining about Tony Allen's lack of offensive production, but the "too small" thing is more theoretical than actual.

Tony Allen's size doesn't hurt him defensively, but it does contribute to him being a poor rebounder at the SF postion. He did a good job of it this year but in the past that has been a problem for him.

[ScoobyDoo]

Good points Roy and I do like alot of what Ainge has done this off season and in general since he's been here. Loved the J. O'Neal, Shaq, Nate and Marquis signings. We'll see on Von Wafer...

The off season I had the most trouble with was 2009. WE went inot a title defense year with no legit back up for Perkins, Pierce or Rondo.
Perkins: Mikki Moore
Pierce: TAllen & Scal
Rondo: Gabe Pruitt?

I also liked the Marquis signing an I will definately give him another shot. I was hoping we'd see alot more of him behind Pierce once he came back last season. I do like Marquis alot.

The only problem I have with Marquis is that he's so injury prone and he's not that physical of a SF. If he' goes down, which is highly likely....what then?

I'd really like to see one more, bigger SF behind him which is why I was hoping to get someone somehow with Rasheed's contract.

To be honest, I think Harangody, like Gomes, could play the power 3 spot for short bursts for us, this year. I think he's experienced enough with the four years of college.

He might get killed on D to a point but he might also make up for it on Offense in the block against other small forwards...

I loook at it like the 80's team. When we had a just a decent bench behind that starting unit, we dominated. When we didn't, we struggled.

I see this starting unit the same way. One of the key things that has been missed, sorely on this Celtics team, is that complimentary swing guy that can sufficiently support both Ray and Paul. WE havent' been able to find that guy in four seasons, outside of Posey for one year.

And I think it's a critical cog.    

[BballTim]

Many an available wing player would be more than willing to come back up Pierce "on this team" for a reasonable deal. But what have we seen for Pierce's back ups?

2008 - James Posey - this was good - we dominate and win a ring
2009 - TAllen ( too small ) Scal ( too slow )
2010 - TAllen ( too small ) Marquis ( really an off guard from a physical stanpoint.
2011 - thus far? Marquis and maybe Larry Hughes?...Really?

  I can see complaining about Tony Allen's lack of offensive production, but the "too small" thing is more theoretical than actual.

Tony Allen's size doesn't hurt him defensively, but it does contribute to him being a poor rebounder at the SF postion. He did a good job of it this year but in the past that has been a problem for him.

  I just quickly glanced at the "dreaded" per48 stats on espn, but he seems pretty comparable to PP over the last 3-4 years in rebounding.

[ScoobyDoo]

Yeah, that's a great point Fafnir re TAllen. I've always liked TAllen, actually very disappointed we lost him this year. A rotation of Ray, TAllena dn Wafer at the off guard would have been ideal. You've Ray and then two complimentary specialists coming off the bench behind him.

But TAllen at the three? He suprisingly plays great D against much larger guys, but he can't shoot, and is just really not a three. The same way Scal "really shouldn't play the three"...though "he can" if he has to...

TAllen is really a power two who can come in and beat up points and offs. I love that about him.

With Marquis, that's also exactly the point as well Roy. I'm not saying I don't like Marquis as a back up for Pierce. I actually love his game, the herky jerky, all around game. But I'd feel one helluva alot better if Matt Barnes ( or equal ) were sitting on the bench with Marquis behind Pierce. Now with Pierce, Barnes and Marquis...now we've got something. We have some options and we're covered when, not if, Marquis gets injured. That's not a knock on Marquis, it's just a fact.

That's why I say I'd actually be happy if I heard Gody is going to be our big three AND THE TEAM IS COMMITTED TO GETTING HIM REGUALR BURN ALL SEASON BEHIND PIERCE, so he will be in groove come playoff time. I actually think Gody could handle that and produce for us, though I know Doc might not play him much.

So if Gody isn't going to be our guy behind Marquis and get Burn....Marquis goes down, Ray and paul's minutes go up, up, up...    

[ScoobyDoo]

I really thought when we got Shaq for the Vet min, we were going to get loaded for bear using Sheed's contract and a pick to land that small forward, maybe Posey or even Jamario Moon or Stephen Graham, someone. But that bubble burst.

We'll see

[Fafnir]

Many an available wing player would be more than willing to come back up Pierce "on this team" for a reasonable deal. But what have we seen for Pierce's back ups?

2008 - James Posey - this was good - we dominate and win a ring
2009 - TAllen ( too small ) Scal ( too slow )
2010 - TAllen ( too small ) Marquis ( really an off guard from a physical stanpoint.
2011 - thus far? Marquis and maybe Larry Hughes?...Really?

  I can see complaining about Tony Allen's lack of offensive production, but the "too small" thing is more theoretical than actual.

Tony Allen's size doesn't hurt him defensively, but it does contribute to him being a poor rebounder at the SF postion. He did a good job of it this year but in the past that has been a problem for him.

  I just quickly glanced at the "dreaded" per48 stats on espn, but he seems pretty comparable to PP over the last 3-4 years in rebounding.

Pierce's rebounding at the SF position has been one of the problems for the Celtics lately.

Tony's numbers are actually worse than Pierce's defensively, but makes up for it by getting more offensive boards. Which makes sense as Tony doesn't space the floor and should be crashing more often without being boxed out.

Tony's rebounding is good for a SG, but bad for a SF.

For rebounding I like to look at rate rather than per/48. Tony's put up a 7.1, 7.3, 10.00 the last three years. Pierce has 8.5, 9.2, 7.9.

[BballTim]

Many an available wing player would be more than willing to come back up Pierce "on this team" for a reasonable deal. But what have we seen for Pierce's back ups?

2008 - James Posey - this was good - we dominate and win a ring
2009 - TAllen ( too small ) Scal ( too slow )
2010 - TAllen ( too small ) Marquis ( really an off guard from a physical stanpoint.
2011 - thus far? Marquis and maybe Larry Hughes?...Really?

  I can see complaining about Tony Allen's lack of offensive production, but the "too small" thing is more theoretical than actual.

Tony Allen's size doesn't hurt him defensively, but it does contribute to him being a poor rebounder at the SF postion. He did a good job of it this year but in the past that has been a problem for him.

  I just quickly glanced at the "dreaded" per48 stats on espn, but he seems pretty comparable to PP over the last 3-4 years in rebounding.

Pierce's rebounding at the SF position has been one of the problems for the Celtics lately.

Tony's numbers are actually worse than Pierce's defensively, but makes up for it by getting more offensive boards. Which makes sense as Tony doesn't space the floor and should be crashing more often without being boxed out.

Tony's rebounding is good for a SG, but bad for a SF.

For rebounding I like to look at rate rather than per/48. Tony's put up a 7.1, 7.3, 10.00 the last three years. Pierce has 8.5, 9.2, 7.9.

  You're right to check the rebounding rate, I just didn't take the time to do it myself. You also have to consider the fact that Tony puts in a lot of time at shooting guard as well, so you wouldn't expect his rebounding numbers to be as high as Paul's.

[Fafnir]

Many an available wing player would be more than willing to come back up Pierce "on this team" for a reasonable deal. But what have we seen for Pierce's back ups?

2008 - James Posey - this was good - we dominate and win a ring
2009 - TAllen ( too small ) Scal ( too slow )
2010 - TAllen ( too small ) Marquis ( really an off guard from a physical stanpoint.
2011 - thus far? Marquis and maybe Larry Hughes?...Really?

  I can see complaining about Tony Allen's lack of offensive production, but the "too small" thing is more theoretical than actual.

Tony Allen's size doesn't hurt him defensively, but it does contribute to him being a poor rebounder at the SF postion. He did a good job of it this year but in the past that has been a problem for him.

  I just quickly glanced at the "dreaded" per48 stats on espn, but he seems pretty comparable to PP over the last 3-4 years in rebounding.

Pierce's rebounding at the SF position has been one of the problems for the Celtics lately.

Tony's numbers are actually worse than Pierce's defensively, but makes up for it by getting more offensive boards. Which makes sense as Tony doesn't space the floor and should be crashing more often without being boxed out.

Tony's rebounding is good for a SG, but bad for a SF.

For rebounding I like to look at rate rather than per/48. Tony's put up a 7.1, 7.3, 10.00 the last three years. Pierce has 8.5, 9.2, 7.9.

  You're right to check the rebounding rate, I just didn't take the time to do it myself. You also have to consider the fact that Tony puts in a lot of time at shooting guard as well, so you wouldn't expect his rebounding numbers to be as high as Paul's.

This is true, but he's still a below average rebounder at the position any way you slice it. As is Pierce at this point. This is really the only area I think his size hurts him.

[MBunge]

Many an available wing player would be more than willing to come back up Pierce "on this team" for a reasonable deal. But what have we seen for Pierce's back ups?

2008 - James Posey - this was good - we dominate and win a ring
2009 - TAllen ( too small ) Scal ( too slow )
2010 - TAllen ( too small ) Marquis ( really an off guard from a physical stanpoint.
2011 - thus far? Marquis and maybe Larry Hughes?...Really?

  I can see complaining about Tony Allen's lack of offensive production, but the "too small" thing is more theoretical than actual.

Tony Allen's size doesn't hurt him defensively, but it does contribute to him being a poor rebounder at the SF postion. He did a good job of it this year but in the past that has been a problem for him.

  I just quickly glanced at the "dreaded" per48 stats on espn, but he seems pretty comparable to PP over the last 3-4 years in rebounding.

Pierce's rebounding at the SF position has been one of the problems for the Celtics lately.

Tony's numbers are actually worse than Pierce's defensively, but makes up for it by getting more offensive boards. Which makes sense as Tony doesn't space the floor and should be crashing more often without being boxed out.

Tony's rebounding is good for a SG, but bad for a SF.

For rebounding I like to look at rate rather than per/48. Tony's put up a 7.1, 7.3, 10.00 the last three years. Pierce has 8.5, 9.2, 7.9.

  You're right to check the rebounding rate, I just didn't take the time to do it myself. You also have to consider the fact that Tony puts in a lot of time at shooting guard as well, so you wouldn't expect his rebounding numbers to be as high as Paul's.

This is true, but he's still a below average rebounder at the position any way you slice it. As is Pierce at this point. This is really the only area I think his size hurts him.

Last season was Pierce's worst as a rebounder since he came into the league.  His career rebound average is 6.1, while LeBron's is 7.  Given the weird funk the Celtics played in for the last 2/3rds of the season, let's see what Pierce is like on the boards next season before getting too concerned.  He did average 6 boards a game in the playoffs, including 8.3 during the conference finals.

Mike