I'm a big believer that Ainge tanked the season 4 months ago by trading away Pierce and KG. The coach and players don't need to intentionally throw the games. We're already set up to fail. Lack of talent will take care of the job for them.
That said... benching our best scorer for an entire 4th quarter and playing him a mere 20 minutes is about as blatantly "tanky" as it gets. Also surprised Fav didn't get more than 19 minutes... he seemed pretty effective.
It doesn't bother me. I'm sure some fans will make excuses. But it's hard not to see that as a tank job.
Meanwhile, Wallace and Bass both get 36 minutes... not a surprise considering we're desperate to trade those bums.
Danny's MO pre-KG was definitely to have some guys showcased for trades, while young keepers were sometimes developed around the edges.
Really, like who? I can't remember Ainge flipping guys who were seemingly made to look useful via "showcasing." His philosophy before KG (well, actually including KG) were more about hitting home runs to speed up the time table. Ricky, Gerald Green, trading out of the 2006 draft because he didn't think any of the prospects were special--they all fit that model.
there was a stretch where Mark Blount was getting major minutes over Al Jefferson/Perk despite the fact those guys should have been getting a lot more minutes. It was to showcase Blount for a trade imo.
I don’t know man, I usually agree with you, but I think you’re grasping at straws with that. You’re talking about two very raw 21 year olds playing for Doc Rivers in a team that was trying to make the playoffs. Is playing a somewhat consistent and solid and experienced center that unbelievable, especially compared to not playing 2 inconsistent and still raw guys who were both averaging about 5.5 fouls per 36? Al Jefferson actually played fewer minutes after the trade, and Perk played more minutes in the 10 games before the trade, then all the games after, and only saw a small increase in minutes overall (if you exclude the first 10 games when he barely played, unless that’s when you think Blount was being showcased).
I really don't think there was any Blount showcasing going on.
It was like 8 years ago so the details are a little fuzzy, but I specifically remember Boston showcasing Blount.
We won 33 games. The team kind of stunk. Blount was one of the crappiest starting centers in the league. He couldn't get a rebound to save his life. He had gotten a fat contract a couple years prior, because he was averaging 10 points, 7 boards and a block on a contract year. Now two years later, the dude was averaging 4 rebounds and ticking off most of the fanbase who wanted him GONE. Meanwhile, we had Perk averaging 6 boards and 1.5 blocks in 19 minutes and Big Al averaging 8 points, 5 rebounds per 18 minutes. There was a lot of outrage about not playing them enough minutes.
It seemed the only reason Blount was getting minutes was because his contract was dog crap and we were trying to showcase him. I remember arguing this point over and over AS IT WAS HAPPENING. "Calm down guys... it's clear to me Doc is being forced to play Blount minutes. He doesn't hate the young kids. Danny clearly is telling him to showcase Blount."... I was saying this AS IT WAS HAPPENING. We had given Mark Blount 6 years and 41 million dollars. He was 30 years old, tragically underpeforming and had another 30 million dollars left to be paid to him. Most fans felt we should have buried Blount on the bench and given minutes to the young guys who actually gave a crap. If we had benched him at that point, there's no way a team would have traded for him. Luckily, since we kept feeding the bum minutes, he performed enough that we were able to ship him out mid-season to the Timberwolves.
This Gerald Wallace and Brandon Bass situation remminds me of that. They both have millions of dollars on their deal. The team sucks. It makes more sense to develop the young guys... but we gotta keep feeding them minutes if we ever hope to sucker some team into trading for them. I stand by it.
