I'll say it again, we need Pierce off the bench

[17wasEZ]

we dont need to bench pierce, we just need green to live up to his potential and be efficient off the bench...that way, Pierce can be fresh for the 4th quarter in close games when he needs to be clutch...

If pierce is well rested in those games against the heat, we likely have a different outcome as he wouldnt be as gassed

I think if Green has someone on the 2nd team with him pushing the ball upcourt, Green could be what we want him to be.

[CelticsFanNC]

  I don't think it's really about whether or not Pierce or Ray can still do it.  It is about what is best for the team.  It is about this team needing to be more athletic to deal with the new and improved Eastern Conference.  It's about trying to have a bench that wont lose leads and can extend them.

  This argument that Pierce is still too good to come off the bench makes no sense to me.  Kevion McHale came off the bench when he was clearly better the Cedric Maxwell.  John Havlicek came off the bench when he was clearly better then the guys starting in front of him.  Manu Ginboli comes off the bench when he is clearly one of San Antonio's top 3 players.

  Some of you guy want to keep doing the same thing but expect a different result.  It doesn't often work that way especially on an aging team like this one. 

Change is needed and an upgrade of the bench we have with what little we have to work with to get that bench is unlikely to happen.  The best option of making the bench instantly better without really effecting the starting line up too much is to bring one of the big three off the bench.  Pierce makes the most sense because he is the most versatile of the three, the only one of the three who can create offense for himself and for others and the only one with a reasonable option(Green)on the roster as we speak who can and has started on a winning team just this past season.

[dmopower]

  I don't think it's really about whether or not Pierce or Ray can still do it.  It is about what is best for the team.  It is about this team needing to be more athletic to deal with the new and improved Eastern Conference.  It's about trying to have a bench that wont lose leads and can extend them.

  This argument that Pierce is still too good to come off the bench makes no sense to me.  Kevion McHale came off the bench when he was clearly better the Cedric Maxwell.  John Havlicek came off the bench when he was clearly better then the guys starting in front of him.  Manu Ginboli comes off the bench when he is clearly one of San Antonio's top 3 players.

  Some of you guy want to keep doing the same thing but expect a different result.  It doesn't often work that way especially on an aging team like this one. 

Change is needed and an upgrade of the bench we have with what little we have to work with to get that bench is unlikely to happen.  The best option of making the bench instantly better without really effecting the starting line up too much is to bring one of the big three off the bench.  Pierce makes the most sense because he is the most versatile of the three, the only one of the three who can create offense for himself and for others and the only one with a reasonable option(Green)on the roster as we speak who can and has started on a winning team just this past season.

I agree completly!

[housecall]

 I don't think it's really about whether or not Pierce or Ray can still do it.  It is about what is best for the team.  It is about this team needing to be more athletic to deal with the new and improved Eastern Conference.  It's about trying to have a bench that wont lose leads and can extend them.

  This argument that Pierce is still too good to come off the bench makes no sense to me.  Kevion McHale came off the bench when he was clearly better the Cedric Maxwell.  John Havlicek came off the bench when he was clearly better then the guys starting in front of him.  Manu Ginboli comes off the bench when he is clearly one of San Antonio's top 3 players.

  Some of you guy want to keep doing the same thing but expect a different result.  It doesn't often work that way especially on an aging team like this one.  

Change is needed and an upgrade of the bench we have with what little we have to work with to get that bench is unlikely to happen.  The best option of making the bench instantly better without really effecting the starting line up too much is to bring one of the big three off the bench.  Pierce makes the most sense because he is the most versatile of the three, the only one of the three who can create offense for himself and for others and the only one with a reasonable option(Green)on the roster as we speak who can and has started on a winning team just this past season.

TP,I do agree with your larger points but it has to be put to a test.A successful 6th man has to bring a certain mentality as well as being able to get his game into rhythm quickly.

[MBz]

we dont need to bench pierce, we just need green to live up to his potential and be efficient off the bench...that way, Pierce can be fresh for the 4th quarter in close games when he needs to be clutch...

If pierce is well rested in those games against the heat, we likely have a different outcome as he wouldnt be as gassed

I think if Green has someone on the 2nd team with him pushing the ball upcourt, Green could be what we want him to be.

The whole issue is the concept of the 2nd team.  Just bring Green in with the starters.  Have him give Pierce a breather at the 6 min mark of the 1st quarter.  Than bring Pierce in at 10 for Ray Allen.  Doc Rivers needs to fix rotations that's the biggest issue.  When watching Dallas last night I don't think I ever saw less than 2 of Kidd, Terry, Marion, Dirk and Chandler at once and their bench is much deeper than the Celtics. 

[wdleehi]

Keep what works.  (the four starters)


Improve what is failing.  (starting C.  A bench that earns minutes) 



KG starts.  He has backups Doc trust.  KG minutes are controlled.



Pierce (or Ray or KG) does not have to come off the bench to have his minutes reduced. 


Players like Green need to play well enough to warrant more minutes on the court.

[Roy H.]

Kevion McHale came off the bench when he was clearly better the Cedric Maxwell.  John Havlicek came off the bench when he was clearly better then the guys starting in front of him

The difference was, McHale and Havlicek came into the league as bench players, and learned in that role behind excellent players.  The Celtics had cohesive starting units, and rather than inserting the more talented player into the starting unit, the team respected player roles and the chemistry that the starters had developed.  However, when the guys in front of them moved on, both McHale and Havlicek became starters; the team didn't make the decision to continue to bring them off the bench because of some notion that it would improve the team.  The Celtics recognized that your best players start the game, unless there's a compelling reason not to do so.

In moving Pierce to the bench, you'd be doing the exact opposite of what happened with McHale and Havlicek.  Rather than keeping players in their roles, you'd be disrupting them.  Rather than boosting cohesion and chemistry, you'd be disrupting it.  Rather than elevating a great player into the starting lineup, you'd be demoting one.

It doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense to me.  The strongest part of our team is the starting unit; I don't see the logic in weakening that strength.  It's inconsistent with the Celtics tradition, and it defies common sense.

[ScoobyDoo]

I think the reason why some people, me being one, like the idea of Jeff Green being shoe horned into a starting SF position is that I am just tired of seeing KG, Ray and PP playing big minutes all season and then fading down the stretch because of it. Facts are facts, they are getting old-er - we need to get on with the transition.

This big three has an incredible collective heart and that's why we love them as a core for this Celtics team. But the bottom line is, if we want to max out what they have left, we need to take a load off of them, immediately. For me, anything less would be a disservice to them.

It's nice to see Jeff Green streaking down the court "with" Rondo. I know he struggled in adjusting after the trade. But who wouldn't, coming to a HOF laden team one month before the playoffs. Give Green a full camp and season.

Imagine this scenario for next season and truly tell me you don't think it would be a pretty nice situation.

Let's say that between our mid level and possible trades using some combination of resigned Big Baby, a resigned Krstic and a draft pick of some sort, we could land this off season:
Carl Landry, Rudy Fernandez & Aaron Gray. Then we start:

A. gray - Or someone else
KG
Jeff Green
Ray Allen
Rondo

And we bring off the bench:

JO or Shaq
Carl Landry
Paul Pierce
Rudy Fernandez
DWest or Bradley

I don't know about you, but if I see Pierce, Landry and Fernandez coming off the bench I think that would be pretty devastating.

Let Rondo Green and Allen be the focal point of the offense for the first team.

I don't think, given we could sign and trade Big baby, possibly Krstic, and use our mid level and possibly a pick...that landing guys like Landry, Gray and Fernandez is that far fetched.
   

[ScoobyDoo]

My other question about leaving the starting lineup in status quo mode is that I just think these guys are getting gassed by 3/4 of the way through the season. Maybe it's because of injuries to our bench or that our bench just isn't that strong - not sure. This off season, I'd like to see:

1. A combo of Landry, Gray or Dalembert, Fernandez or someone comparable added.

2. I'd like Ainge to, for once, put the team together "before" the season starts and outside of a minor addition at the trade deadline - LEAVE THE TEAM ALONE!    Let them work and build together for a full 82 games!!

3. Get me this type of combination of players to go along with KG, Pierce, Ray and Rondo and I think we can hang #18. Then continue on with the transition.     

[Chris]

My other question about leaving the starting lineup in status quo mode is that I just think these guys are getting gassed by 3/4 of the way through the season. Maybe it's because of injuries to our bench or that our bench just isn't that strong - not sure. This off season, I'd like to see:
 

But I don't think anyone is saying it should stay the status quo.  We just don't see taking guys who deserve to be starters, and have had a ton of success playing together as a unit, out of the starting unit to serve the purpose of lowering the minutes for these guys.

Starters do not need to play 40 minutes to game.  They don't even need to play 30 minutes per game.  It is just as easy to manage a players minutes who starts games as it is to manage a players minutes coming off the bench. 

The key is always having players capable of picking up the slack, which needs to be the goal this summer.  But whose starting games is really irrevalent to the question of how many minutes they will play.

[wdleehi]

I think another big push to get minutes down is to add players that fit better with the starters. 


That would allow for more bench/starter mixes out there instead of the Hockey line changes. 

[ScoobyDoo]

Yeah...I understand it isn't necessary to pull a player from the starting lineup in order to manage his minutes. But I also don't think guys just "deserve" to keep starting as they get well past their prime either.

I think the people who might favor starting Green vs. Ray or Paul, are guys who lean towards "getting on with it" as far as the inevitable transition from this big three to the next team.

I think KG should still start the next season and stay at around 25-28 minutes. And I actually think Pierce has a lot left in his tank as well, is definitely a starter and still an all star in this league for the next 2-3 years maybe - depending on his health.

My Main issue is with Ray. The guy is 36 years old. He averaged what, 37 minutes a game last year? Ray was toast during the playoffs and Wade had a lay up line in the second round - it wasn't pretty.

So my question is, should we have this conversation about Ray, next year, when he's 37 years old?

Having the young legs of Green to carry more of the load during the season, makes Pierce a possible attractive option to either slide to OG as a starter or simply come off the bench early for Ray.

If we had TA still here or could get another young guy who's good enough to start - maybe Fernandez or Sonny Weeems type - I'd simply yank Ray and turn him into our sixth man, leave Pierce starting - knowing I've got Green to spell him all he needs...

[ScoobyDoo]

Yes. I like Doc, but have never liked his rotations much. Not sure how much of that is what he has to work with or just his own doing.

I think a more athletic 4 than Baby and a borderline starter at OG who is athletic would help. Some sort of post presence would also go a long way for us.

[MBz]

Yeah...I understand it isn't necessary to pull a player from the starting lineup in order to manage his minutes. But I also don't think guys just "deserve" to keep starting as they get well past their prime either.

I think the people who might favor starting Green vs. Ray or Paul, are guys who lean towards "getting on with it" as far as the inevitable transition from this big three to the next team.

I think KG should still start the next season and stay at around 25-28 minutes. And I actually think Pierce has a lot left in his tank as well, is definitely a starter and still an all star in this league for the next 2-3 years maybe - depending on his health.

My Main issue is with Ray. The guy is 36 years old. He averaged what, 37 minutes a game last year? Ray was toast during the playoffs and Wade had a lay up line in the second round - it wasn't pretty.

So my question is, should we have this conversation about Ray, next year, when he's 37 years old?

Having the young legs of Green to carry more of the load during the season, makes Pierce a possible attractive option to either slide to OG as a starter or simply come off the bench early for Ray.

If we had TA still here or could get another young guy who's good enough to start - maybe Fernandez or Sonny Weeems type - I'd simply yank Ray and turn him into our sixth man, leave Pierce starting - knowing I've got Green to spell him all he needs...

Was he toast though?  He was our best offensive player during the playoffs. 

[Steve Weinman]

I think the people who might favor starting Green vs. Ray or Paul, are guys who lean towards "getting on with it" as far as the inevitable transition from this big three to the next team.

If the intimation here is that Jeff Green is to be a starting member of this team in the post-Big 3 era, I'm already not thrilled with where this is going.

-sw