Author Topic: How could we let Hump go?  (Read 9786 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2014, 12:31:08 AM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7682
  • Tommy Points: 447
Are you kidding me?

This guy was one of the bright stars of last season. How much did he sign for? We better be setting up for a huge tankaloosa next season because that is the only thing that looks like any plan here.

I think the plan is: if we aren't going to compete for a championship, compete for the lottery. We are in year one of a multi-year rebuild. No surprises here (actually, I'm surprised we were able to get a TPE for Humphries).
We are in year two of the rebuild.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2014, 12:35:12 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19003
  • Tommy Points: 1833
Are you kidding me?

This guy was one of the bright stars of last season. How much did he sign for? We better be setting up for a huge tankaloosa next season because that is the only thing that looks like any plan here.

I think the plan is: if we aren't going to compete for a championship, compete for the lottery. We are in year one of a multi-year rebuild. No surprises here (actually, I'm surprised we were able to get a TPE for Humphries).


We'll see what further moves will be done, but none of the moves so far are "compete for the lottery" types of moves.

1-4 we have a very solid group of players, with a lo to depth (except in the SF position so far). And we acquired a decent young center.

If you guys are having expectations for the lottery, you'll be severely disappointed. But who knows what further moves will be made, and personally if we don't make the playoffs with this team and Brad Stevens is coaching in earnest, I'm going to start having serious doubts about his coaching ability (with the assumption of a healthy roster).

All moves though have been geared towards collecting assets while maintaining 2015 flexibility. None so far have been moves that deteriorate our roster, but the opposite if anything.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #32 on: July 16, 2014, 12:42:24 AM »

Offline Alleyoopster

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1315
  • Tommy Points: 151
This move was made so we can keep Pressey.  Hopes are that after taking 2000 3 point shots next season he'll boost his accuracy to 7%.  If that doesn't get the Celtics a lottery pick, then nothing will.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #33 on: July 16, 2014, 01:25:05 AM »

Offline Mikedmx6

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 113
  • Tommy Points: 11
Would anyone on here be interested in getting boozer here on the cheap?  Seeing as he's still getting his 15 mil from Chicago

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #34 on: July 16, 2014, 02:24:52 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
To be honest, I would really like for anybody here to try to explain to me how our team is NOT better right now than it was last season.

We have lost Hump and Bayless.

We have added Smart, Young, Thornton and Zeller and will mostly likely see improvement from our current prospects (Sully, Olynyk, Pressey, Bradley). 

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #35 on: July 16, 2014, 02:46:34 AM »

Offline kiwiceltic

  • Sam Hauser
  • Posts: 160
  • Tommy Points: 16
Would anyone on here be interested in getting boozer here on the cheap?  Seeing as he's still getting his 15 mil from Chicago

I don't really think there is a need for Boozer on the Cs... Just like there was no need to keep Hump around. Boozer will just take minutes away from the young guys the Celts are trying to develop.
I think Boozer would probably prefer to be on a contender too. Sadly, the Cs are not gonna contend this season.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #36 on: July 16, 2014, 02:53:29 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
Would anyone on here be interested in getting boozer here on the cheap?  Seeing as he's still getting his 15 mil from Chicago

I don't really think there is a need for Boozer on the Cs... Just like there was no need to keep Hump around. Boozer will just take minutes away from the young guys the Celts are trying to develop.
I think Boozer would probably prefer to be on a contender too. Sadly, the Cs are not gonna contend this season.

I agree

Plus at this point in his career, I'm not convinced Boozer is any better than Sully

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #37 on: July 16, 2014, 03:25:03 AM »

Offline LatterDayCelticsfan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2257
  • Tommy Points: 176
  • Ruto Must Go!
To respond to the OP. I'm pleasantly suprised we got something from him. His position was crowded, and we need the minutes elsewhere. I wish him well an Washington.
Ruto Must Go!

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #38 on: July 16, 2014, 05:14:45 AM »

Offline YoungOne87

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1167
  • Tommy Points: 65
right now we're just above the tax line and we have more talented PF's on the roster.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #39 on: July 16, 2014, 06:38:49 AM »

Offline Future Celtics Owner

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3097
  • Tommy Points: 191
  • Celtic's only raise championship Banners
I think Bass will be next or be involved in a bigger trade. He really would help a contender and since he's not in our long term plans Id be happy with it.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #40 on: July 16, 2014, 07:37:57 AM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
Bayless is close to signing with the bucks next.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #41 on: July 16, 2014, 07:41:09 AM »

Offline Cman

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13074
  • Tommy Points: 121
To be honest, I would really like for anybody here to try to explain to me how our team is NOT better right now than it was last season.

We have lost Hump and Bayless.

We have added Smart, Young, Thornton and Zeller and will mostly likely see improvement from our current prospects (Sully, Olynyk, Pressey, Bradley).

And Rondo is now fully healed and will be back for a full season...

But, the argument is not so much that the Cs haven't improved, but whether or not the team has improved enough relative to other teams in the league for it to make much of a difference in terms of the standings. I'd argue that the changes you and I describe above are ultimately pretty incremental. Whereas other teams in the East have made some pretty significant changes (Charlotte, Washington, Cleveland, perhaps Detroit), and the "negative changes" to teams like Miami and Indiana aren't enough such that they are in tank mode.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #42 on: July 16, 2014, 11:23:01 AM »

Offline MSceltic

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 239
  • Tommy Points: 23
I loved Hump his game is ugly but so important to a team. In saying that, he did not have a place on this team that currently is not a contender and won't be for the foreseeable future. I'm glad he signed with the wizards because it gives him a chance to compete and we now have a less crowded frontcourt.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #43 on: July 16, 2014, 11:40:35 AM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
You're right. Should of maxed him out.

Hahahahaha
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: How could we let Hump go?
« Reply #44 on: July 16, 2014, 11:44:25 AM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Would anyone on here be interested in getting boozer here on the cheap?  Seeing as he's still getting his 15 mil from Chicago

Moot point, somebody will put in a bid for him (we can't, we'd have to be under the cap). 

Either way I don't think Boozer makes sense here.