Danny. It's not the trade. It's the lying. And the lying has got to stop. Please

[LooseCannon]

They better not change the rules of a RFA in the next CBA. We better be guaranteed a chance to keep Green if we want to.

The thing you should be rooting against for that purpose is the owners getting the hard cap that they want.

[Carhole]

I still scratch my head on the Danny was lying about KG line they throw around. The excuse people give is that they wanted to sell tickets... really? Do you think the Celtics will have trouble selling tickets without KG? I don't envision it.

Considering that they held off KG from having surgery until the playoffs were over automatically already tells me that they were more honest than dishonest with the injury.

Wyc confirmed the team lied.  His words:

We were being Belichickian . . .

Grousbeck said last week that a heavy dose of gamesmanship went into the trickle of information - or misinformation - regarding Garnett. It might have paid a small playoff dividend to leave opponents - and the media - wondering whether Garnett was coming back, even when the team apparently knew better. . . .

The truth, according to Grousbeck, is the team’s medical staff knew exactly what it would find during the operation on Garnett’s knee last week.

Though Danny Ainge, the executive director of basketball operations, said last week that surgeons “did not have to touch” the tendon during arthroscopic surgery, the inflamed muscle indeed was caused by the bone spur, according to Grousbeck.

Though everyone from Ainge to Doc Rivers intimated during the playoffs that the two knee issues may not be related - that the inflamed tendon somehow was independent of the bone spur - the Celtics managing partner said everyone knew the truth.

“There was no mystery about the problem,” he said. “The only mystery was how (Garnett) was going to be able to do something on it. We just didn’t feel like sharing that with the media at the time.

“It was just a matter of declining to comment on it. I mean, he did come back to play four (regular-season) games, and I believe that he might have tried to play against Cleveland if we had made it that far.

“But this all threw our opponents into some confusion about what was happening.”

In other words, Doc and Danny lied, in an effort to mislead opponents.  Of course, in this specific instance it was a pretty stupid set of lies, since it harmed fan expectations a whole heck of a lot more than it provided any on court benefit.  However, a lot of times it's important for a GM to be "strategically deceptive"; a perfectly candid GM would be disastrous. 

Again, though, it cracks me up that some people do think Danny is candid and honest.  I think Danny is as honest as the average politician. 

See I don't know if I consider this lying.  (Although not really into football, so not sure if being Belichickian means out right lying, being sneaky, being deceptive, not being 100% truthful, etc.)  I read this and I think Wyc is playing part of the Monday morning quarterback.  It's easy to say in hindsight that you knew KG was finished.  I compare it to people in Finance I know.  They say things like "I knew the market was going to crash, or I knew that a particular stock was going to skyrocket or crash.  When really, they were only 75% positive that something was going to happen (or not happen), and that's why you didn't go all in (or all out). 

With this Garnett situation, I believe at the time there was a belief by some in the front office/medical staff that Garnett had a slight chance to come back.  Maybe a 5% chance?  Maybe 10%? Maybe 15%-25%?  Or maybe there's 10 people in the front office/medical staff, etc.  2 of the 10 think there is a slight chance Perk comes back, say 15%, a couple more think there is a very, very remote chance, say 5%, and the other 6 say no way.  This is the kind of thing that easily turns into "we all, 100% thought KG was done and we all knew it." in hindsight.

Comments like "the medical staff knew exactly what they would find"  Does any doctor ever know exactly what they'll find?  I'm sure there are doctors who thought for sure something was wrong, and only to find out it wasn't as bad as they originally thought.  I think this is more of a hindsight, exaggeration kind of thing.

Lol, all in all, I'm just saying I don't take this as absolute proof that Danny was lying.  Maybe it does though.  I just don't take comments like this like they're the absolute truth.  I just know people exaggerate a lot, especially in hindsight.  Or there a things people have been 100% sure about, and ended up wrong.  I've heard "pretty sure", turn into a "100% positive", or "most of us think" to "we all knew." after the fact a lot.  So I'm a little more cautious convicting Danny over this type of comment from Wyc.

But I also tend to give people the benefit of the doubt a lot too

It was a lie. A charitable or necessary lie, but still a lie. They knew the muscle strain wasn't the (only) injury. No need to overthink this.

Havent been back to this thread for a bit. Am surprised to see it revert back to the KG injury two years ago.

Are there people saying that Ainge (or any person in team management of any sport) has never and will never lie?

This thread started calling out ainge for lying on 5 very specific things and telling him to stop. None of the 5 things were lies. If we go back over everyones career in sports I can pretty much promise you, you can find a lie

[Tai]

I'm not comparing Perk to Brady.

If the Pats trade Brady for Chad Henne and Vonte Davis next week and then Bob Kraft says "We think Chad Henne is a starter in this league" I'll be like "What a big huge liar".

Then the apologists will come out of the woodwork and say "He knows what he's doing. Why do you have such an emotional attachment to Brady? Weren't you the one who said we should trade him"?

Like someone else said, stop claiming you're not comparing players. Of course I would be mind boggled if Brady was traded. He's a 2-team season MVP (first unanimous AND reigning one as of now) and a one-time Super Bowl MVP.  Perkins could only hope to become the equivalent of that in the NBA. Based off his playoff performances lately, at absolute worse Brady could be compared to...Peyton Manning! NOT Chad Henne.

How does Perk match up to the equivalent of either Peyton or Brady in the NBA?

Why do you think Nenad is a starter in this league?  Presumably a good one too, because I don't think he wanted us to think he was saying "We think Nenad is a bad stater in this league"

I personally have told you this in this topic, but I'll say it again; he is very offensively gifted in this league as far as centers go. He can spread the floor, and he can finish around the rim, overall every bit of an improvement fundamentally on offense than Perkins. He's a starter for his skills offensively the same way Perkins is for his skills defensively. Yes, you know what I'm implying; if Krstic's not a starter, then why should I consider Perkins one? People HAVE wanted Perkins traded before you know, especially last season, for his weaknesses on the offensive side. They have dared to ask if Kendrick Perkins is really a starting center the same way you have asked if Nenad Krstic is a starting center.

But at the end of the day, Nenad HAS been a starting center in this league for a while the same way Perkins has; why am I, or Danny supposed to believe otherwise? Why is Danny called a liar for saying that? Wouldn't be a violation of forum rules to say that to any member of these boards? To call their opinion a lie?

Why do you think Jermaine will be healthy for the playoffs?

That's easy. The only things supposedly working against JO is:

a) This stigma that JO supposedly just wants to collect a pay-check, and as one poster (he knows who he is) put it, is only doing this cause it's his non-contract year. No one would've said this about Perkins, even though he's supposed to be out for around the same time, and while Perk may have earned that benefit of the doubt, he's no more guaranteed to be good to go for the playoffs as JO is. JO's even played more games than Perkins (17 to 12) this season. Overall though, people in Boston don't trust JO like they do Perkins. Most on this  board won't admit it, but to me personally, they haven't proven they have any other reason to believe JO won't be healthy for the playoffs.

b) They said KG would comeback in 08-09, and he didn't. Like I also said before in this topic, KG decided to hold off surgery when he probably should've had it to take out the bone spurs. JO did too, but fortunately he didn't wait too long. We'll see if it makes a difference.

One week before the trade did you think Semih was going to be leaving? What changed to make you think this?

I already asked you to tell me whether it was reported that Semih has wanted to back to Turkey in a while, or was it reported after he was traded to the Cavs and he developed Ricky Rubio syndrome and realized being in the NBA isn't worth it anymore if he has no chance at a ring for a while like he did with the Celtics, or, as that infamous Youtube video goes, Cleveland sucks! 

If it's the latter (that he wanted back to Turkey after being traded to the Cavs), I dunno why that's being assumed as a lie to you. Does my hypothesis really have ZERO ground to you? Don't tell me you never thought about that. 

One week before the trade did you think Perk was itching to be out of here?  Do you really think Perk was going to try to get every cent he could in free agency?  What makes you think this?

Not wanting to take an extension around MLE level (4 years/22M to be exact I believe), which is what Perkins said he was offered, sounds like trying to get every cent to me. Before that, probably not. I don't think I was the only one  that started to worry about whether he'd still be a Celtics after this year when it was reported that Perkins wanted more than that. This is one of the reasons I was ok with this trade, and I'm glad I called your bluff on simply not believing he was ever offered an extension worth MLE money. And what does Perk have now from OKC? A 4 year contract worth $34.8M after this year, averaging around $8.7M per season. I'm glad the Celtics aren't the one paying Perk that.

[Rondo_is_better]

LOL @ overly personal title and genuine, heartfelt emotion.

[Roy H.]

That's easy. The only things supposedly working against JO is:

a) This stigma that JO supposedly just wants to collect a pay-check, and as one poster (he knows who he is) put it, is only doing this cause it's his non-contract year. No one would've said this about Perkins, even though he's supposed to be out for around the same time, and while Perk may have earned that benefit of the doubt, he's no more guaranteed to be good to go for the playoffs as JO is. JO's even played more games than Perkins (17 to 12) this season. Overall though, people in Boston don't trust JO like they do Perkins. Most on this  board won't admit it, but to me personally, they haven't proven they have any other reason to believe JO won't be healthy for the playoffs.

b) They said KG would comeback in 08-09, and he didn't. Like I also said before in this topic, KG decided to hold off surgery when he probably should've had it to take out the bone spurs. JO did too, but fortunately he didn't wait too long. We'll see if it makes a difference.

Well, no.  You left out the other big reason that people are skeptical of JO:  we've been promised numerous times about a timetable for his recovery, and its been pushed back.

In training camp, we were told that JO was day to day, and would be playing if it was the regular season.  Then, the regular season arrived and JO wasn't playing consistently.

Then, we were told that JO was going to be given extended rest, so that he'd be able to come back and contribute without limitation.  We were told that surgery wouldn't be helpful at the time.  He rested, came back for about a week, and was back on the shelf again.

Then, we were told that the team was exploring surgery, and that if JO was going to get it done, it should be immediately, since there wasn't much time left in the season and that if JO wasted time, he'd be coming back too late in the season to contribute.  JO elected to rest and wait.

Then, after two weeks of resting, the team announced that JO had surgery.  Now, the team is saying that they expect him to be a contributor in the playoffs (which, of course, is directly contrary to their reasoning when they said he shouldn't wait.)

Despite all that, you expect people to assume that the medical staff has it right this time?  Isn't it fair to judge based upon the team's and JO's track record?  I like the guy, think it was a good signing at the time, think that JO is a lot left soft than some suggest, etc., etc.  However, I'm pretty skeptical that we'll be seeing a healthy and contributing JO this season.

[Tai]

That's easy. The only things supposedly working against JO is:

a) This stigma that JO supposedly just wants to collect a pay-check, and as one poster (he knows who he is) put it, is only doing this cause it's his non-contract year. No one would've said this about Perkins, even though he's supposed to be out for around the same time, and while Perk may have earned that benefit of the doubt, he's no more guaranteed to be good to go for the playoffs as JO is. JO's even played more games than Perkins (17 to 12) this season. Overall though, people in Boston don't trust JO like they do Perkins. Most on this  board won't admit it, but to me personally, they haven't proven they have any other reason to believe JO won't be healthy for the playoffs.

b) They said KG would comeback in 08-09, and he didn't. Like I also said before in this topic, KG decided to hold off surgery when he probably should've had it to take out the bone spurs. JO did too, but fortunately he didn't wait too long. We'll see if it makes a difference.

Well, no.  You left out the other big reason that people are skeptical of JO:  we've been promised numerous times about a timetable for his recovery, and its been pushed back.

In training camp, we were told that JO was day to day, and would be playing if it was the regular season.  Then, the regular season arrived and JO wasn't playing consistently.

Then, we were told that JO was going to be given extended rest, so that he'd be able to come back and contribute without limitation.  We were told that surgery wouldn't be helpful at the time.  He rested, came back for about a week, and was back on the shelf again.

Then, we were told that the team was exploring surgery, and that if JO was going to get it done, it should be immediately, since there wasn't much time left in the season and that if JO wasted time, he'd be coming back too late in the season to contribute.  JO elected to rest and wait.

Then, after two weeks of resting, the team announced that JO had surgery.  Now, the team is saying that they expect him to be a contributor in the playoffs (which, of course, is directly contrary to their reasoning when they said he shouldn't wait.)

Despite all that, you expect people to assume that the medical staff has it right this time?  Isn't it fair to judge based upon the team's and JO's track record?  I like the guy, think it was a good signing at the time, think that JO is a lot left soft than some suggest, etc., etc.  However, I'm pretty skeptical that we'll be seeing a healthy and contributing JO this season.

Like I said....Maybe JO SHOULD have taken surgery from the start. Take Nate. He was terrible before he was traded, and then as soon as he's on the Thunder, he has arthroscopic knee surgery too and is out for 3-6 weeks, too.

I mean, it's one thing to be skeptical, but calling Danny a liar? A bit much, everything considered. Surgery's different from simply resting, let's see how it works out for JO.

[Roy H.]

Like I said....Maybe JO SHOULD have taken surgery from the start. Take Nate. He was terrible before he was traded, and then as soon as he's on the Thunder, he has arthroscopic knee surgery too and is out for 3-6 weeks, too.

I mean, it's one thing to be skeptical, but calling Danny a liar? A bit much, everything considered. Surgery's different from simply resting, let's see how it works out for JO.

I think Danny lies pretty consistently (like all GMs), although on this issue I think calling it "spin" is more appropriate.  It could be genuine optimism, but I'm doubtful of that.

And yes, JO should have just gotten the surgery.

[Eja117]

Let's say 3 weeks ago the Magic send D Howard to the Bobcats and get back Stephen Jackson and Nazr Mohammed.

Then the GM says "Well we think Nazr is a starting center in this league"

and "We think we probably weren't going to able to resign Howard"

and "There's a good player on the team that hasn't been healthy all year, but we're pretty sure will be healthy for the playoffs"

and "We had to do this because we were positive Fran Vazquez was going to report"


Should the Magic fans believe all that?  There's a difference between giving a guy the benefit of the "spin" doubt and just drinking cool-aid.

Yeah yeah yeah.. ....Now I'm comparing D Howard to Perk.   Oh wait.  I'm kinda glad I did that.


Hey in the mean time Dennis Rodman wasn't a great offensive player.  Not a starter or something right?

By the way. Is this the part where someone calls Raef LaFrentz an offensively gifted center in the same way that Perk is a defensively gifted center?

[BballTim]

I think Danny lies pretty consistently (like all GMs), although on this issue I think calling it "spin" is more appropriate.  It could be genuine optimism, but I'm doubtful of that.

  I think it's pretty weird that people are complaining that a GM would be less that truthful (generally due to the competitive nature of their jobs) but I think that Danny is about as straightforward as you could reasonably expect him to be.

[Tai]

Let's say 3 weeks ago the Magic send D Howard to the Bobcats and get back Stephen Jackson and Nazr Mohammed.

Then the GM says "Well we think Nazr is a starting center in this league"

and "We think we probably weren't going to able to resign Howard"

and "There's a good player on the team that hasn't been healthy all year, but we're pretty sure will be healthy for the playoffs"

and "We had to do this because we were positive Fran Vazquez was going to report"


Should the Magic fans believe all that?  There's a difference between giving a guy the benefit of the "spin" doubt and just drinking cool-aid.

Yeah yeah yeah.. ....Now I'm comparing D Howard to Perk.   Oh wait.  I'm kinda glad I did that.


Hey in the mean time Dennis Rodman wasn't a great offensive player.  Not a starter or something right?

By the way. Is this the part where someone calls Raef LaFrentz an offensively gifted center in the same way that Perk is a defensively gifted center?

Yea...honestly, it's not so much D. Howard vs Perk, but D.Howard vs Mohammed. Magic aren't doing that trade, and I hope they would for our sake, but they wouldn't.

Perk and Krstic? A more fair comparison, and Danny agreed.

Oh btw, we already know Otis Smith's a moron, so for all we know, we wouldn't know if he was lying when he claimed some player that's been injured all season will be healthy.  What player for them has been chronically injured that's a big? Bass? He's already back....

Oh, and I don't remember Danny ever claiming that Troy Murphy would report.

[EDWARDO]

Like I said....Maybe JO SHOULD have taken surgery from the start. Take Nate. He was terrible before he was traded, and then as soon as he's on the Thunder, he has arthroscopic knee surgery too and is out for 3-6 weeks, too.

I mean, it's one thing to be skeptical, but calling Danny a liar? A bit much, everything considered. Surgery's different from simply resting, let's see how it works out for JO.

I think Danny lies pretty consistently (like all GMs), although on this issue I think calling it "spin" is more appropriate.  It could be genuine optimism, but I'm doubtful of that.

And yes, JO should have just gotten the surgery.

Frankly, I find Ainge disarmingly honest. He probably talks too much is one issue. As a GM, there's a lot of things you can't really say, so by going on WEEI fairly consistently and talking about the team and its needs, you open yourself up to being questioned. Better to pull a Belichik and not say anything. I have never listened to him and thought... "man, I just don't believe what this guy telling me..." I think he's as honest as it gets really, but he's not going to go out and say "Perk is done, he's hurt two knees now and we don't think there's a very high chance of playing 40-50 games the rest of the way", even though he might well be thinking that and we all might be thinking that...

OK, Roy H., think it might be time to call you out on something....

You talk about spin coming out of Danny, but some of your recent posts have also shown some major stretches trying to support your negative outlook on this trade.

1) A long post on why Perk is as good an offensive player as Krstic, supported by some dubious statistics about offensive efficiency. I don't think Ainge has ever tried to pull the wool over our eyes on anything so dubious. There is no way with a straight face you can tell me that you think Perkins is as good an offensive player as Krstic. NO WAY!! Its plain to anyone that has seen either guy play that Krstic is a MUCH better offensive player.

If Danny had ever said anything THAT absurd (and he hasn't), I'd say "my god, what a liar!".

2) You said that saying Green can guard 3 positions is like saying Dan Dickau can guard 2 positions. Again, I think Green can absolutely cover 3 positions (not all 2s and not all 4s, but can do reasonably on MOST of both) and you compare him to a guy who PHYSICALLY CAN'T COVER ANYONE!! All this in the post about the WEEI interview about where some people claim he said Green is a better defender. Go back and listen to the interview again. Actually, it seems like most people DIDN'T listen to that interview. He doesn't say that Green is better defender than Perk ever was. He says Perk is limited right now, hurt in BOTH knees, and that Green has the ability to cover a lot of different kinds of guys very well... ALL TRUE!!!!

[BudweiserCeltic]

Much of the problem is relying on what the media provides and how they provide it rather than going to the source material.

[The DarkPassenger]

Like I said....Maybe JO SHOULD have taken surgery from the start. Take Nate. He was terrible before he was traded, and then as soon as he's on the Thunder, he has arthroscopic knee surgery too and is out for 3-6 weeks, too.

I mean, it's one thing to be skeptical, but calling Danny a liar? A bit much, everything considered. Surgery's different from simply resting, let's see how it works out for JO.

Yeah I thought that was interesting that Nate got surgery not long after being traded. I'm thinking maybe, just maybe, he never said a thing about his injury cause he knew West was out and Avery wasn't ready. It seems far fetched but I think some players did that for us this year. Semih hasn't played for Cavs either so he's healing up. 

[Eja117]

On WEEI last week

"Yes we knew it was risky. Every trade has risk in it".

Danny. Just stop. Just stop. By that logic it's ok to trade MJ for Harold Miner because after all there's risk in every trade.

I hate it when he says stuff like that.

[Redz]

On WEEI last week

"Yes we knew it was risky. Every trade has risk in it".

Danny. Just stop. Just stop. By that logic it's ok to trade MJ for Harold Miner because after all there's risk in every trade.

I hate it when he says stuff like that.

(hyperbole alert)