Considering all we have to offer is vet. min. right? So, what the heck. Give him a shot, very low risk investment.
I'd rather give the minutes to Dooling/Bradley and see if the can become more comfortable offensively.
Bradley still has ways to go development wise, and I Gilbert wouldn't take much away from Dooling. I envision them playing together. If anything, he'd take away minutes away from Marquis, particularly when Pietrus comes back.
I don't like that plan because playing Dooling at SG so much has already been painful for our defense. Adding another poor defender next to him in Arenas instead of two superior ones (Rondo/Bradley) would mean our backup bigs would be in foul trouble every game.
Only in the scenario in which Rondo is coming back into the game will there need to be a choice between Arenas and Dooling, let them duke it out and see who wins the role. That aside, I'd gladly sacrifice Bradley's defense for a better offensive flow if Arenas is capable of bringing it. Dooling as a SG/PG would be a complete non-issue with Arenas here, as he'd help with ball control and essentially draw the focus of defenders to him.
If we find ourselves in a scenario in which defense is needed then just bring in Rondo/Bradley, whomever. Having Arenas is simply an option, nothing more. It's up to the coach to use him wisely.
Remember, he was being fairly effective in Washington before being traded.
No he wasn't, go look at the splits again:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/arenagi01.html
He was chucking up 7 threes per game, and only hitting 32% of them. He also shot 8 other two point attempts at around 45%. This is while bottom of the barrel defense and dominating the ball to the detriment of his team's overall offense.
Then when given a lesser role on a better team he got worse, the C's would give him even less time to work with and would probably get worse results.
I'd take those numbers from a bench player who'll have a limited role, who promises to give us excellent performances offense wise at any given time. Again, consistency will be an issue, but I'd take that considering how many other options we can go to in our bench if he's having a poor game. Consistency is an issue regardless, and more than anything it's our offensive lulls that kill us.
And really got no problem with Arenas chucking shots off our bench. I'd worry about it if he was playing with our starters, which would be very limited situations if we consider how Doc rotates players.
Also consider, that we don't have a big guy who clogs the middle, it should Arenas have better penetrating lanes with us, than with the Magic who teams game planned into stopping penetration and double teaming Dwight when needed, essentially closing the middle as much as possible.
Anyways, regardless of all the crap we're talking about, fact is he can be a very dangerous player any given time, and can be had very cheaply in a manner that it's not restrictive to anything the Celtics might want to do in the near future, or in the far future.
Seriously, what do you have to lose? The only thing I'd worry about is Doc mismanaging the situation, which is certainly a concern. Other than that, you might lose on giving Bradley playing time, and are we seriously going to worry too much about that given the chance that someone like Arenas might actually work out for us?
Topic: 2nd unit needs offense: What about Agent Zero? (Read 5620 times)