Author Topic: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy  (Read 8462 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #15 on: December 07, 2011, 04:28:16 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20148
  • Tommy Points: 1335
Dunleavy is a better player than Sasha, period.  Marquis is always hurt.  Defense wise its up in the air none of them are very good.   Foot speed is but one aspect of defense, length and anticipation are other aspects that he would own both Sasha and Marquis on.  But there is a reason he has started more than Sasha or Marquis in his career and it's that he is the better player.

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #16 on: December 07, 2011, 04:33:04 PM »

Offline 2short

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6080
  • Tommy Points: 428
I actually think marquis is a good defender.  Of course none of them are currently with celtics.  My main point is that if we are shipping out green and dunleavy is the backup sf we are in trouble.  To get through the east is carmelo & lebron at sf.  Pierce does a good job but can't be expected to play a whole game.  I feel dunleavy's outside jumper and good passing won't make up for his bad defense.

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #17 on: December 07, 2011, 04:34:37 PM »

Offline j804

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9348
  • Tommy Points: 3072
  • BLOOD SWEAT & TEARS
yea I would rather have Quis
"7ft PG. Rondo leaves and GUESS WHAT? We got a BIGGER point guard!"-Tommy on Olynyk


Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #18 on: December 07, 2011, 04:41:16 PM »

Offline RebusRankin

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9143
  • Tommy Points: 923
Decent backup at the 2/3 especially for the vet minimum.

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #19 on: December 07, 2011, 04:58:57 PM »

Offline Corey

  • Joe Mazzulla
  • Posts: 131
  • Tommy Points: 14
Dunleavy would be an absolute STEAL for the veteran minimum. Who called him a poor man's Mike Miller? He's arguably better.

61 games last year 45%+ from the field, 40%+ from 3pt range. .129 WS/48, 115 ORTG, .590 TS%.

Very strong offensive player, and he rebounds VERY well for someone his size (6 rebounds per game last year)

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #20 on: December 07, 2011, 05:07:57 PM »

Offline RebusRankin

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9143
  • Tommy Points: 923
So if we get Paul, add Dunleavy for the vet minimum, say Reggie Evans for the vet minimum, resign Dwest, who would be a good C target with the MLE?

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #21 on: December 07, 2011, 05:16:20 PM »

Offline Corey

  • Joe Mazzulla
  • Posts: 131
  • Tommy Points: 14
So if we get Paul, add Dunleavy for the vet minimum, say Reggie Evans for the vet minimum, resign Dwest, who would be a good C target with the MLE?
After Nene, Jordan, Chandler, Dalembert, and Gasol there is a huge dropoff.

Hawes, Foster, Kwame, Pryzbilla, Magloire, Gray...Bleh.

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #22 on: December 07, 2011, 05:26:59 PM »

Offline jdub1660

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1355
  • Tommy Points: 87
*Vomit*

Always injured and can't play D, non athletic...pass

Richard Jefferson.

Just amnestied so easy pick up if willing to accept vet min so we can use the mini mle on a big.
Can't stop, Rondo!

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #23 on: December 07, 2011, 05:49:15 PM »

Offline Corey

  • Joe Mazzulla
  • Posts: 131
  • Tommy Points: 14
How is Jefferson an easy pickup? First of all, he has to go unclaimed...Second of all, he has to actually WANT to come here...Third of all, he has to settle for the minimum, and he deserves more than that.

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #24 on: December 07, 2011, 05:56:56 PM »

Offline pearljammer10

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13129
  • Tommy Points: 885
Ugh troy murphy didnt do it for us, i put him on the same level as dunleavy...

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #25 on: December 07, 2011, 06:02:50 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37811
  • Tommy Points: 3030
I don't like shopping at Walmart for the next Celtics players

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #26 on: December 07, 2011, 06:10:19 PM »

Offline hardlyyardley

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1212
  • Tommy Points: 149
Would rather have Jefferson also.....he could take less as he is getting all that $$$ from amnesty....remember, we could had him but took Kedrick Brown instead

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #27 on: December 07, 2011, 06:20:03 PM »

Offline Moreover

  • Joe Mazzulla
  • Posts: 129
  • Tommy Points: 10
Dunleavy will never sign for the vet minimum. It'll probably take the full MLE.

(and Jefferson will be claimed off waivers by one of the teams under the cap. Possibly Nets or Clippers. Or maybe Pacers if they trade Granger or George in the Rondo deal).

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #28 on: December 07, 2011, 06:30:19 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 53113
  • Tommy Points: 2574
Dunleavy will never sign for the vet minimum. It'll probably take the full MLE.

(and Jefferson will be claimed off waivers by one of the teams under the cap. Possibly Nets or Clippers. Or maybe Pacers if they trade Granger or George in the Rondo deal).
I am thinking someone will offer Dunleavy the mini-MLE (three years, $9.4million).

Good point on Richard Jefferson and that amnesty waivers ... very unlikely to see free agency. Someone will claim him.

Re: C's interested in signing Mike Dunleavy
« Reply #29 on: December 07, 2011, 06:47:01 PM »

Offline Celts Fan 92

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1423
  • Tommy Points: 122
*Vomit*

Always injured and can't play D, non athletic...pass
Richard Jefferson.

Just amnestied so easy pick up if willing to accept vet min so we can use the mini mle on a big.
same thing I was thinkin hope we dont spend money on tht dude