We should not have bought out David Lee

[MJohnnyboy]

I feel Lee's production in Dallas reflects more off of him just being a massive tool when he was a Celtic than it reflects off the "mistake" of letting him go.

How on earth was Lee a 'tool' in Boston?

He's a former two time All-Star who just came off winning an NBA title, and who (at 32 years of age) still has at least a couple of productive basketball years left in him. 

He was traded to the Celtics, after which the Celtics staff went on record saying he would have a key role for the team - then he was eliminated from the rotation completely despite putting up very productive Per 36 numbers while he was on the court.

The guy has maybe 2 or 3 years of productive basketball left in him, and he wants to spend the last couple of years of his career doing something other than sitting on the bench and waving towels.  I don't see anything wrong with that.

Yeah he forced things a number of times when he got on the court, but what do you expect?  If you are player with his resume and you know you can be productive, but you're being benched on a nightly basis, then you're going to be dying for minutes.  Any chance you get on the court you're going to be over eager to try and prove yourself when in the opportunity arises. I can understand that.

This is after spending a season buried on the bench in Golden State.
 
I don't blame Lee for anything.  I wish him well, I think he deserves it.

Did you miss the part where Lee came into the season out of shape and didn't really work himself into shape until he knew the Celtics were going to get rid of him? The reason why I think that's a tool move is he could have worked himself into better shape while the Celtics were playing him but no. It was only until he lost his spot and knew he was leaving that he decided to care about his personal fitness. I also find that baffling because he was in a **** contract year. I guess if that doesn't p--- you off then you are just more sympathetic than I am.

Lee had plenty of chances to prove himself in the rotation with the Celtics but he took it for granted and didn't take himself seriously until he knew that he blew it. That to me is being a tool. I've already seen that happen twice already in the past 6 years with others Celtics bigs such Jermaine O'Neal and Rasheed Wallace.

I aint even saying Lee sucks or that he's a bad teammate. He still has game and I know he took his role like a man, but it seemed to me that he just didn't care while being on the team. I can forgive him for not fitting in, but the fact that he only NOW seems motivated to play at 100% physically as opposed to before gets me to think he's a tool.

[Chris22]

Lee was a +10 tonight.
Dallas has won three in a row since he joined them.

Played three lottery teams. Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

10 days ago the Mavs lost to the Magic and the jazz.

[alldaboston]

Lee was a +10 tonight.
Dallas has won three in a row since he joined them.

Played three lottery teams. Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

10 days ago the Mavs lost to the Magic and the jazz.

The Jazz aren't bad by any means.

[ayer]

He wanted to play. The Celtics  didn't need his contract anymore and it made sense to buy him out and pay less of it and let him play somewhere else.   Mickey, Zeller and Jerebko fits us better in spot minutes anyways.   He could have taken their minutes but then none of those guys would have been playing.

It worked out for  both parties. Just because he's playing well doesn't mean it wasn't the right move.

This. End of story.

I Still think this is the end of the story

[Alleyoopster]

Lee was a +10 tonight.
Dallas has won three in a row since he joined them.

Played three lottery teams. Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

10 days ago the Mavs lost to the Magic and the jazz.

FWIW:  They lost by two points against the Jazz at home before the All Star game.  Later they lost an away game to Orlando.  And, their last three have been home games.

[Chris22]

Lee was a +10 tonight.
Dallas has won three in a row since he joined them.

Played three lottery teams. Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

10 days ago the Mavs lost to the Magic and the jazz.

FWIW:  They lost by two points against the Jazz at home before the All Star game.  Later they lost an away game to Orlando.  And, their last three have been home games.

Thanks for proving my point.

[nickagneta]

David Lee was the 15th man here in Boston. He was unhappy about not getting playing time in a contract year because it wouldn't give him the opportunity to prove he still had something to give to a team, making him lose money in his next contract. He has already won a ring. At this point of his career he needs playing time to get that next, and possibly last, contract he will sign. He wasn't going to get that playing time here.

David Lee was a good soldier. He was given his opportunity here early and failed. He had a handful of good games helping us win a game or two. He was probably and excellent practice guy and overall a good locker room player and team mate. But he didn't want to be here. He wanted playing time.

It suggest that Danny Ainge should keep someone who didn't want to be here simply because of where he might end up is ludicrous. Danny couldn't have made a deal in the buyout that he couldn't sign with another team, that's not how this league works. I am sure it is 100% illegal in a free agency system where non-compete clauses are not part of the landscape. So Danny had two choices:

1. Keep Lee around and hope that he doesn't start to cause a problem in the locker room over not being able to get a buyout or

2. Buy him out and let him go where he may

Ainge chose option 2, which helps to build rapport and relationships with professional agents. Ainge once again, like most smart GMs, decided that a veteran that wants out can get out through a buyout if they can't be traded and don't want to be here.

Who cares where he goes. Who cares what he does.

So he is giving the Mavs a little something for a few games, games in which, if David Lee was not playing for the Mavs, they most likely would have won anyone with whoever was playing instead of David Lee giving them some production off the bench. Lee is not a difference making player. He had very little to do with those wins. All his stats point to a net negative player.

[PaulAllen]

David Lee reminds me of the glove in the OJ Simpson murder case..

He just didnt fit..

[footey]

David Lee was the 15th man here in Boston. He was unhappy about not getting playing time in a contract year because it wouldn't give him the opportunity to prove he still had something to give to a team, making him lose money in his next contract. He has already won a ring. At this point of his career he needs playing time to get that next, and possibly last, contract he will sign. He wasn't going to get that playing time here.

David Lee was a good soldier. He was given his opportunity here early and failed. He had a handful of good games helping us win a game or two. He was probably and excellent practice guy and overall a good locker room player and team mate. But he didn't want to be here. He wanted playing time.

It suggest that Danny Ainge should keep someone who didn't want to be here simply because of where he might end up is ludicrous. Danny couldn't have made a deal in the buyout that he couldn't sign with another team, that's not how this league works. I am sure it is 100% illegal in a free agency system where non-compete clauses are not part of the landscape. So Danny had two choices:

1. Keep Lee around and hope that he doesn't start to cause a problem in the locker room over not being able to get a buyout or

2. Buy him out and let him go where he may

Ainge chose option 2, which helps to build rapport and relationships with professional agents. Ainge once again, like most smart GMs, decided that a veteran that wants out can get out through a buyout if they can't be traded and don't want to be here.

Who cares where he goes. Who cares what he does.

So he is giving the Mavs a little something for a few games, games in which, if David Lee was not playing for the Mavs, they most likely would have won anyone with whoever was playing instead of David Lee giving them some production off the bench. Lee is not a difference making player. He had very little to do with those wins. All his stats point to a net negative player.

You forgot the Keith Bogans option 3: If he does cause problems, tell him to stay away from the team, but don't trade him.  Not saying that was a viable option here, but it has been done by Danny.

[fairweatherfan]

David Lee was the 15th man here in Boston. He was unhappy about not getting playing time in a contract year because it wouldn't give him the opportunity to prove he still had something to give to a team, making him lose money in his next contract. He has already won a ring. At this point of his career he needs playing time to get that next, and possibly last, contract he will sign. He wasn't going to get that playing time here.

David Lee was a good soldier. He was given his opportunity here early and failed. He had a handful of good games helping us win a game or two. He was probably and excellent practice guy and overall a good locker room player and team mate. But he didn't want to be here. He wanted playing time.

It suggest that Danny Ainge should keep someone who didn't want to be here simply because of where he might end up is ludicrous. Danny couldn't have made a deal in the buyout that he couldn't sign with another team, that's not how this league works. I am sure it is 100% illegal in a free agency system where non-compete clauses are not part of the landscape. So Danny had two choices:

1. Keep Lee around and hope that he doesn't start to cause a problem in the locker room over not being able to get a buyout or

2. Buy him out and let him go where he may

Ainge chose option 2, which helps to build rapport and relationships with professional agents. Ainge once again, like most smart GMs, decided that a veteran that wants out can get out through a buyout if they can't be traded and don't want to be here.

Who cares where he goes. Who cares what he does.

So he is giving the Mavs a little something for a few games, games in which, if David Lee was not playing for the Mavs, they most likely would have won anyone with whoever was playing instead of David Lee giving them some production off the bench. Lee is not a difference making player. He had very little to do with those wins. All his stats point to a net negative player.

You forgot the Keith Bogans option 3: If he does cause problems, tell him to stay away from the team, but don't trade him.  Not saying that was a viable option here, but it has been done by Danny.

I think the reason that was the option with Bogans is that nobody wanted to trade for or sign him.  He was pretty much just a contract at that point.

[CelticsBR]

Danny has recently used the 15th spot to bring over the minimum non-guaranteed contracts to help in offseason trades. THIS could be way more useful than Lee sitting on a bench for the rest of the season.

[hwangjini_1]

Danny has recently used the 15th spot to bring over the minimum non-guaranteed contracts to help in offseason trades. THIS could be way more useful than Lee sitting on a bench for the rest of the season.

and why do think this tactic, one already used by ainge, was not the case this time? obviously, ainge was aware of it but decided against it. i dont know why, but i am not sure you do either. please explain more. thanks.

[Snakehead]

David Lee reminds me of the glove in the OJ Simpson murder case..

He just didnt fit..

He should've taken that ring off.

[Evantime34]

Who cares if Lee is putting up good numbers in Dallas?

The players we currently have are playing well and with his departure from the team Mickey now dresses for every game. Zeller is much better than Lee at this stage in his career, so keeping Lee wouldn't have helped us at all.

You can tell things are good for the Celtics when all anyone can complain about is that a player who used to be on the end of our bench is now doing better for another team.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Who cares if Lee is putting up good numbers in Dallas?

The players we currently have are playing well and with his departure from the team Mickey now dresses for every game. Zeller is much better than Lee at this stage in his career, so keeping Lee wouldn't have helped us at all.

You can tell things are good for the Celtics when all anyone can complain about is that a player who used to be on the end of our bench is now doing better for another team.

The context of discussion is on the Dallas 1st round pick (at least the discussion I care for).

Other than that, yeah.