No, I am not kidding nor do I think pinning responsibility on Ainge is obnoxious. LIke the poster above me mentioned, none of the guys you mentioned are guys that could and would help us contend.
They were all role players and quite frankly most of them weren't very good (Pavlovic, Dooling, Hollins, Lee, Terry, etc.) And Darko Milicic? He was off the 2012-13 roster before the season even began.
As for your reference to the Perk/Green deal, sorry but so far I fail to see how that trade benefited the Celtics.
In 2010/11, the Celts were on a roll and Ainge made a very unnecessary move by dealing Perk considering Shaq was not 100 percent.
This year, we needed another big, badly. Instead of signing Birdman or KMart for the minimum, Ainge brought in a bunch of guys from China who contributed nothing.
First off, we came much closer to the Finals in 2011-12 so I believe moves he made that season and the preseason prior ought to take priority when considering overall value. Boston wants championships, not second-round exits. We made a bunch of fantastic moves which really paid off in the Playoffs; Steamer was a steal and a great second big off the bench who played a crucial role in us even making the playoffs, never mind advancing. Dooling hit threes for us in the Playoffs (remember how we were 0/18 in the Philly series and didn't make a three till what, game three? Yeah, Dooling saved us there). Even Ryan Hollins made an impact and played minutes. Good thing we signed him because had we not, we wouldn't have even had a full roster. Injuries plagued us, no doubt, and Danny did a great job in keeping us competitive and without him, we never would've come as close to the championship as we did. Did anybody really think we were gonna push Miami to 7? Most of the analysts counted us out in February!
The next offseason was even better. We started off by drafting a steal at 21, named Jared Sullinger. He of the double-double per36. And then remember that fantastic deal we pulled off to net Courtney Lee? Remember how good he was in Houston the season prior? The perfect 3-and-D player that cost us only E'Twaun, JJuan and Sean Williams (what a great signing by the forward-thinking Danny, right?). Courtney Lee was lights out from trey in Houston and had it been any other GM but Danny, I doubt we would've been able to land a top-10 SG. Yet we did. Now how about the midseason, where we made a great deal to get ourselves out of Jason Collins and an injured Leandro Barbosa to land a healthy player in Jordan Crawford. Who else could have traded a player with a torn ACL and a big who averages 1/1 for a decent bench player? A great under-the-radar move.
Did I even mention that great deal we made by trading Glen Davis for Brandon Bass? BBass is a solid PF and he had a fantastic year in 2011-12 and without him, we DEFINITELY wouldn't have advanced as far as we did. It looked like a lateral move at the time, but looked at the advanced metrics now: we clearly won that deal.
I'm not going to go in the details on Mickael Pietrus who was a great Celtic that could make a three. I'm not going to go in the details on Darko Milicic who looked like a decent option to most Celtics fans (it was DOC, not Danny who made him leave). I'm not going to go into the great deal we made to send Pierce/KG/Terry off for a bevy of first-rounders that will surely help us out in the future.
The past two years have been full of great moves by Danny, and I still think Green was a fantastic deal. Regardless, that was more than two years ago anyways and I don't really feel like arguing that out.
Danny is a top GM and without him we'd have been in the lottery two seasons ago.
Danny is pretty good but listing a bunch of average to below average moves from the last two years and calling them great doesn't help you make your point. And you don't mention the players he should have signed but didn't.
I agree that many of Danny's moves fall into the 'meh' category, but one other thing to consider is that many of Danny's moves were made with an eye toward preserving future assets as well as winning now.
At the end of 2011, there were arguably four teams in positions similar to that of the Celts: aging core and little to no cap room. These were BOS, DAL, LAL and SAS.
I guess the question is, who did a better job of contending while preserving assets for the future?
SAS has obviously done well, no shocker there. But as always, if you compare yourself to the Spurs, you're going to be disappointed.
But I think the Celtics have done significantly better than either Dallas or Los Angeles.
Dallas let walk a major piece of its championship core and have floundered for two years. They did end up with cap room this year, but is the re-assembled team any better than what they would've had if they'd kept Chandler? And, they also have fewer young assets than the C's, and owe one of their future firsts to another team.
LA might make a decent playoff run this year, but could just as easily struggle to make the playoffs. The Howard trade ended up being a disaster. And, they have no good prospects under 28 and owe two future first round picks to other teams.
I'll take the Celtics' performance over the last two years and current prospects for the future over either of those two.
Obviously this is not a pure apples-to-apples comparison, but Danny has I think done pretty well. We have 2-3 solid young prospects and a boatload of future picks. Our cap situation isn't ideal but that I think is just Danny recognizing that if something has to give it should be that - we aren't a big FA destination.
And of course you can argue that we should have gone for broke - doing anything to win now regardless of the future implications - but many other teams have done that and suffered for years. And, we don't have the deep pockets or other amenities (weather, low taxes) that DAL or LAL have, so rebuilding by collecting assets is pretty much our only viable strategy.
Topic: Pierce: I might still be a Celtic if Rondo didn't get injured (Read 13941 times)