Are you kidding me?

[azzenfrost]

Off season shopping spree.

[MosheP]

I really think a lot of this overreaction is a byproduct of the crazy trade proposals people actually thought were possible.  It seems everyone and his brother thought that JO, Wilcox, and Dooling (and if we ABSOLUTELY have to, a second round pick!) would net us an impact player, now or down the line.  Consequently, when nothing came to fruition, there was major disappointment.  People need to wake up.  We weren't going to get the next cornerstones of the future for the Big Three at this stage of the game.

Nobody believes in that.

It's just a strawman argument you're using because you can't refute the real arguments. So you try to argue against imaginary ones.

Of course, nobody should be too concerned considering you assured everybody the only reason Ainge didn't get some frontcourt help was because he had a secret pact with Kaman and it's a guarantee Kaman will end in Boston. And that there is a "larger reason" why nobody happened. So we'll just have to wait a few days.

[MosheP]

Yes. I am well aware that it happens. However those are very much the exceptions, not the rule. (I'd also argue that part of that wealth of talent came from a disparity in overseas scouting by some teams which had since closed...meaning if Manu or Parker were comIng out today, they wouldn't slip).

All that aside, my point remains, for every one Carlos Boozer who slips there are 20 J. R. Giddens (and that is probably conservative). Is it really worth dealing Ray and all that comes with him (the money and fun of one last hoorah AND the fact they we still hold his rights this summer) for the outside shot we happen to get the next Manu Ginoboli when it is far more likely we get the next Marcus Banks?

And while all those player you list are good players, none are truly great. Hypothetically that team could get lucky like the '04 Pistons and eke out a title, but the fact remains that 95% of the time (it not more) in the NBA you need a transcendent player to win it all (Bird, Jordan, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, KG) and none of those guys are.

This is bizarre. How did Boston acquire a transcendent talent like KG? By trading picks and some good but far from great players (actually just one and a few bums). Picks and young players have value. You can't just say "meh, you need a Jordan to win, so who cares about maximizing value".

And if non lottery picks have so little value, maybe it'd have been a good idea to trade those on hand for immediate help and try to make a last run at the title.

[Casperian]

Honestly, for people saying that you NEED a high lottery pick, how do you explain the fact that there are teams that are consistently bad for years and years, like the Bobcats and the Clippers until recently? By your logic, these teams would become contenders immediately after a bad season, because that's how rebuilding works.

You don´t necessarily need high lottery picks, you need top stars. High lottery picks are just the easiest way to get them.

The current core was compiled through a strategy of acquiring and developing so-called "assets". Since that seems to be the only other feasible way for this franchise to get those top stars, trading our core for anything of value was the best way to speed up our inevitable rebuilding process.

[Jon]

I really think a lot of this overreaction is a byproduct of the crazy trade proposals people actually thought were possible.  It seems everyone and his brother thought that JO, Wilcox, and Dooling (and if we ABSOLUTELY have to, a second round pick!) would net us an impact player, now or down the line.  Consequently, when nothing came to fruition, there was major disappointment.  People need to wake up.  We weren't going to get the next cornerstones of the future for the Big Three at this stage of the game.

Nobody believes in that.

It's just a strawman argument you're using because you can't refute the real arguments. So you try to argue against imaginary ones.

Of course, nobody should be too concerned considering you assured everybody the only reason Ainge didn't get some frontcourt help was because he had a secret pact with Kaman and it's a guarantee Kaman will end in Boston. And that there is a "larger reason" why nobody happened. So we'll just have to wait a few days.

I'm arguing against imaginary arguments?  You're the one writing one paragraph responses to select elements of my multiple arguments that you want to refute.  

A few notes:

1) You're right.  You can acquire talent through building assets and making trades for guys like KG.  However, we need to realize a few things here.  First, trades like that come along once in a lifetime.  Very rarely is someone of KG's caliber still relatively close to his prime going to come along, be available, and want to come here.  Second, and the much more important point, is that Danny's apparent failure to trade Ray for a marginal role player and a first round pick isn't going to set us back forever.  Will I grant you (as I specifically said in my last post and you conveniently decided to leave out) that we might be marginally better off for the future if Danny had made such a trade?  Sure.  But we'd be marginally better.  The way you people are acting, you'd think Danny turned down Ray for Durant.  

2) I did not guaranteed Kaman is coming here.  I said I suspect that Danny may have something going on under the table.  I fully admit that I may be very wrong on that.  All I'm saying is let's wait until we see what the buyouts look like before we lament Danny's failures.  Certainly if he lands Kaman by next week, the argument that he failed to improve this team for this year goes away.  

I just can't believe the hyperbole going on here.  I don't understand how you guys think we've somehow doomed ourselves to perennial failure because Danny missed out on a late first round pick or two.  If anything, this is a minor gripe.  

[MosheP]

I'm arguing against imaginary arguments?  

Yeps. All the time. In fact, it's all you do.

Case in point:

I don't understand how you guys think we've somehow doomed ourselves to perennial failure because Danny missed out on a late first round pick or two.

.  Second, and the much more important point, is that Danny's apparent failure to trade Ray for a marginal role player and a first round pick isn't going to set us back forever[

Obviously, nobody said that.

You make up hyperboles, dishonestly attribute them to others and then argue against them.

It'd be like people arguing against you by claiming that your thesis is that by doing nothing Danny assure this team would win 5 titles in the next decade.

In the end, losing assets and opportunities for no good reason is a costly mistake in the NBA. You make the big deals by accumulating value with the small ones. Yes, opportunities to get transcendent stars are rare - but that's exactly why you have to do everything you can do grab them as they occur. Or if you have the opportunity - just that, no assurance - to get a Rondo, you don't to go "whatever, it's not like I'm going to get the next Jordan in the late first anyway, so who cares". Very small moves can be the difference between winning and losing a championship.

[vinnie]

The more I watch, the more I believe that Lady Luck and Kevin Mchale were more responsible for the big three being here than Danny's skills.

[Casperian]

I'm arguing against imaginary arguments?     

Well, you do, and you´re not alone, considering I´ve had to read the same stuff on the front page.

I haven´t read a single trade proposal of JO + Dooling for "Young superstar X" on this site, for example.

Just because some 12 year old kid who knows how to use a computer posts a stupid trade idea somewhere on the internet doesn´t mean that everyone who argues pro trades shares the same mindset.

[iamtheman]

The more I watch, the more I believe that Lady Luck and Kevin Mchale were more responsible for the big three being here than Danny's skills.

yeah man, I feel you there.  was just thinking that myself.

[Moranis]

I totally don't understand what the OP and people of the same opinion are thinking.  What exactly is some late first round pick going to get us?  Nearly every late first round pick is either a role player or out of the league in under 5 years.  

To see more, see my post on the #22 pick in the Epic Fail Thread:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=54595.msg1169120#msg1169120

Whatever small chance we have at winning a title this year, we have an even smaller chance of getting an impact player that late in the draft.  

Here is my 15 man team from players taken after 22 in the draft.

C - Marc Gasol, Deandre Jordan, Nikola Peckovic
PF - Carlos Boozer, David Lee, Luis Scola
SF - Gerald Wallace, Nicholas Batum, Tayshaun Prince
SG - Manu Ginobli, Monta Ellis, Kevin Martin
PG - Tony Parker, Kyle Lowry, Louis Williams

I think I could realistically compete for a title with that team even without the A+ superstar that you often need.  


Here are just a sampling of players that weren't good enough for my 3 deep depth chart

C - Samuel Dalembert, Kendrick Perkins, Joel Anthony, Nenad Krstic, Omer Asik, ZaZa Pachulia
PF - Paul Millsap, Anderson Varejao, Serge Ibaka, Darrell Arthur, Carl Landry, Mehmet Okur, Amir Johnson, Brandon Bass, Glen Davis, Taj Gibson, Andrew Blatche
SF - Wilson Chandler, Trevor Ariza, Kenneth Faried, Josh Howard, Kyle Korver, Andrei Kirilenko
SG - Marcus Thornton, Landry Fields, Aaron Afflalo, Tony Allen, Deshaun Stevenson, Marshon Brooks
PG - Maurice Williams, Mario Chalmers, Ramon Sessions, Jeremy Lin, Beno Udrih, Leandro Barbosa, Jarret Jack, Derek Fisher, Gilbert Arenas, Earl Watson

Probably not a contender from that group, but you could probably piece together a playoff team from that collection of players.

Yes. I am well aware that it happens. However those are very much the exceptions, not the rule. (I'd also argue that part of that wealth of talent came from a disparity in overseas scouting by some teams which had since closed...meaning if Manu or Parker were comIng out today, they wouldn't slip).

All that aside, my point remains, for every one Carlos Boozer who slips there are 20 J. R. Giddens (and that is probably conservative). Is it really worth dealing Ray and all that comes with him (the money and fun of one last hoorah AND the fact they we still hold his rights this summer) for the outside shot we happen to get the next Manu Ginoboli when it is far more likely we get the next Marcus Banks?

And while all those player you list are good players, none are truly great. Hypothetically that team could get lucky like the '04 Pistons and eke out a title, but the fact remains that 95% of the time (it not more) in the NBA you need a transcendent player to win it all (Bird, Jordan, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, KG) and none of those guys are.

True, they aren't, but you don't get those players unless you are bad.  Without making any trades, the Celtics aren't really bad and thus won't be in a position to take a transcendant player.  The Celtics should have either blown it up and got whatever they could (and sped up the rebuilding process) or they should have gone all in.  The status quo just means the team delays rebuilding and also doesn't fully capitalize on the finals years of the stars.  The Celtics needed to commit to a course of action, something they didn't do.  The status quo isn't good enough (and I have been saying this since last summer on this board so it isn't monday morning quarterbacking).

I'll grant you that if Danny had traded Ray or all of the Big Three for some late first round draft picks, our future might be slightly brighter.  However, you--and others--are being dramatic and hyperbolic to call this a "debacle."  

I really think a lot of this overreaction is a byproduct of the crazy trade proposals people actually thought were possible.  It seems everyone and his brother thought that JO, Wilcox, and Dooling (and if we ABSOLUTELY have to, a second round pick!) would net us an impact player, now or down the line.  Consequently, when nothing came to fruition, there was major disappointment.  People need to wake up.  We weren't going to get the next cornerstones of the future for the Big Three at this stage of the game.  Now we need to stop pretending that if we traded the Big Three for late first round picks (or as some are suggesting, second round picks) we were assured to magically find the next Manu Ginoboli and Carlos Boozer.  

We also have no idea what Danny was actually being offered or what he actually has planned.  The Big Three all have substantial contracts.  How do we know that all of the first round picks that we imagine he was offered didn't also involve us taking back significant salary beyond this year that would have negatively impacted DA's plans.  We also don't know if Chris Kaman will be bought out within the next week and end up in Beantown, proving why Danny didn't make a deal.  

Finally, as I said before, I think money played a big part in all of this, and quite frankly I don't blame Wyc.  Wyc has been more than generous and willing to spend over his tenure here.  But here's what people need to reaize:

Boston has the HIGHEST payroll in the NBA at over 87 million dollars.  

Trading the Big Three would require us to take nearly as much money back as we give up, so that number wouldn't be going down by much no matter what we did.  Do people honestly expect Wyc to blow the team up, keep an 85+ million dollar payroll, lose out on ticket sales the rest of the season, lose out on playoff revenue, all in the name of some late first or second round picks and so our current first round pick could move up a few spots?  

I have no doubt in my mind Wyc would've bit the bullet and done it have the Celtics actually been offered a legitimate cornerstone for the future.  However, I don't think any of us can expect him to bit the bullet on so slight of an upgrade that is more likely to mean nothing 5 years from now than actually pan out.  

I say the status quo isn't good enough and some how that is being overly dramatic and debacle.  Right.  Cause I said that.

Unless you think this team as presently construed has a realistic shot at the title, you should be upset moves weren't made.  

The team either should have gone into full bore rebuilding and gotten whatever it could (which would have made the team worse this year and better positioned in the draft) or it should have packaged draft picks and filler for pieces to help make the team better.  


The status quo just delays the inevitable and without Howard on the market and with Williams not going to come here, there are no worthy free agents to utilize the cap space on.  Now there may be a trade or two the Celtics can use the cap space on, but they aren't going to get a real star in that space especially without assets to trade (which is why the extra pieces might come in handy).  

Say the Celtics did trade Allen to Indiana for a 1st (or a future 1st, which might actually be better).  I think that trade may have been possible given some of the reported comments and trades made (i.e they took on Barbosa and gave up a 2nd, I think Allen is worth more than barbosa and Bird said Ainge wanted both a player and pick, I got the impression just a pick may have been good enough).  Celtics take on no salary and get an asset that can be packaged in a future trade.  

Maybe New Jersey would have rather had Pierce than Gerald Wallace.  Maybe you get a draft pick from them (perhaps it has more protection than the Portland deal).  Celtics would have cut out some future salary and picked up another draft pick.  

Maybe you take on Blatche (who has a bad contract, but it isn't cap prohibitive) for O'Neal and get a pick from Washington as was rumored as being out there.  

The more assets you have the more flexibility you have to make moves.  After free agency starts if the team has cap room and either some new draftees or future picks, perhaps it can trade for an all star type player by taking on the salary and giving up some picks.  A Josh Smith type trade.  You can't do that if you don't have assets though.



Or maybe you go the other way and try to win now by using the firsts, taking on future salary, etc.  Perhaps the team should have explored a trade for Okafor by using O'Neal (maybe even get a first out of it).  Maybe you trade O'Neal and a 1st for Stephen Jackson (add Johnson or Moore if necessary).  Maybe you package O'Neal, Dooling, and Johnson for Camby (throw in a first if needed).  Maybe you pick up Sessions from the Cavs for filler and the Clippers pick.  Or Jordan Hill from the Rockets.  And for the most part similar trades to those actually happened so I'm not just making stuff up.  

The problem I had with yesterday (and even the off season to a lesser extent) was that Boston seems happy with the status quo and the status quo in my eye is not a legit title contender and not a team on the way back up.  

[snively]

The only rationale I can see for Ainge standing pat, other than the dubious notion that he believes a team with Dooling and Stiemsma as rotation cogs can contend, is that he values Ray and KG as free agents next year.  That he'd prefer to give this team another shot by bringing back Ray, KG and maybe Bass, Green, Pietrus and whoever we get in the draft for another run next year instead of seeing them resign elsewhere and plunging the Celtics into the uncertainty of a new rebuilding era.

If it doesn't work he can put them back on the block (probably on easier to move deals; I think Ray/KG/Pierce sizable contracts made deals with contenders too awkward to pull off without saddling the C's with undesirable contracts like Rip) next year, in hopes of landing a Cambyesque haul.

[MBunge]

In the end, losing assets and opportunities for no good reason is a costly mistake in the NBA.

Ainge hasn't lost any assets and no one really knows what opportunities he may have passed on.  The one real deal that anybody knows about is Hansborough and a 1st for Ray and Indiana turned that down.

There is no evidence ANYONE was willing to give the Celtics good young players and picks for ANYONE on our roster except maybe Rondo.  There is no evidence that ANYONE was willing to trade Boston a great player, even if Ainge was willing to accept a big contract.

There are a lot of teams who wish they were in Boston's shoes right now, coming off two Finals trips, one title and with a top 5 point guard and lots of cap room.

Mike

[dlpin]

If you are going to rebuild, it is better to really suck for a while to get top draft picks, and to have a lot of cap space, which then can be used to either sign people or trade for people (either facilitating trades for other teams in exchange for draft picks, or by outright acquiring pieces from other teams).


The absolute worst you can do in the NBA is be mediocre. Being mediocre and doing stuff for the sake of doing stuff is Joe Dumars' model since 2004.

So I don't get why people are upset we didn't blow it up midseason to get late 1st round draft picks or mediocre talent. Is giving up assets to land a back up big worthwhile? No. Is giving up talent for the 25th-30th pick in the draft worth it? No.


So the best strategy going forward is to get to this offseason with cap space, see if you can get a good player, and if not, then blow it up and trade the cap space away for picks and all that.

[Moranis]

If you are going to rebuild, it is better to really suck for a while to get top draft picks, and to have a lot of cap space, which then can be used to either sign people or trade for people (either facilitating trades for other teams in exchange for draft picks, or by outright acquiring pieces from other teams).


The absolute worst you can do in the NBA is be mediocre. Being mediocre and doing stuff for the sake of doing stuff is Joe Dumars' model since 2004.

So I don't get why people are upset we didn't blow it up midseason to get late 1st round draft picks or mediocre talent. Is giving up assets to land a back up big worthwhile? No. Is giving up talent for the 25th-30th pick in the draft worth it? No.


So the best strategy going forward is to get to this offseason with cap space, see if you can get a good player, and if not, then blow it up and trade the cap space away for picks and all that.

There are no good players in free agency except for Deron Williams and he won't come here.  The rest of the free agent class are role players and lesser starters.  Not players to build around, but guys that can put a contender over the top. 

The only way to use the cap space is to trade with teams that might have a disgruntled star.  The problem is, aside from cap space, Boston has very little in the way of actual assets to trade (aside from Rondo) so they would get outbid if the player was really that type of transcendent player (like Dwight).

[Jon]

I'm arguing against imaginary arguments?  

Yeps. All the time. In fact, it's all you do.

Case in point:

I don't understand how you guys think we've somehow doomed ourselves to perennial failure because Danny missed out on a late first round pick or two.

.  Second, and the much more important point, is that Danny's apparent failure to trade Ray for a marginal role player and a first round pick isn't going to set us back forever[

Obviously, nobody said that.

You make up hyperboles, dishonestly attribute them to others and then argue against them.

It'd be like people arguing against you by claiming that your thesis is that by doing nothing Danny assure this team would win 5 titles in the next decade.

In the end, losing assets and opportunities for no good reason is a costly mistake in the NBA. You make the big deals by accumulating value with the small ones. Yes, opportunities to get transcendent stars are rare - but that's exactly why you have to do everything you can do grab them as they occur. Or if you have the opportunity - just that, no assurance - to get a Rondo, you don't to go "whatever, it's not like I'm going to get the next Jordan in the late first anyway, so who cares". Very small moves can be the difference between winning and losing a championship.

How am I exaggerating?  You called Ainge's lack of a move a "debacle."  Courtesy of Merriam Webster:

: a tumultuous breakup of ice in a river
2
: a violent disruption (as of an army) : rout
3
a : a great disaster
b : a complete failure : fiasco

My claim is simple: if Ainge failed at all during this deadline, it's a minor failure, not a major one.  

We don't even know if he could've landed a first round pick, and even if he had, you're completely disregarding my argument about the financial repercussions of such a move.  If you're Danny Ainge, are you really going to ownership and telling them to lose out ticket revenue for the rest of the year and the playoffs because of a late first round pick or two?