The problem isn't the Celtics. It's some of the fans.

[GratefulCs]

Honestly, thank you for this, OP


TP

[jpotter33]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

It is strong evidence, I disagree. If the Bulls offer with Butler was so good, the Wolves would have jumped at it. Having bigs has nothing to do with Butler. They would LOVE to take Butler to add to Towns and Wiggins. 

If Noel and Okafor are supposed to be so good, the Wolves would have jumped at the chance to take one of them. Dieng is no all-star. They also have a borderline all-star PG in Rubio.

As for the Suns, the majority of people here who are angry at Ainge for not trading the #3 pick are also the same people who absolutely hate Bender and don't think much of Chriss, so I as again, if the Sixers and Bulls offers were so good, why did the Suns prefer to take Bender over 'sure-fire all-stars'?

Reread the post. I said nothing about Butler. You also need to stop attributing arguments to me that I haven't made. I'm not an Okafor fan, and I'd be okay with choosing Brown over him. But Noel was my guy, because he fills an absolute need we have and is an excellent fit alongside our other defenders. He has DPOY potential, but AT NO TIME did I say he was a "sure-fire All-Star." That's a weak strawman argument.

I know it's a crazy notion to a lot of people, but "fit" and chemistry is a big concern in making basketball teams. KAT is a center, and he would not have fit with either Okafor or Noel, who would both just clog the paint and bring more defenders toward KAT. Thibs understands this, which is why he wouldn't even entertain anything like that.

As for the Suns, they just had different perspectives with us on Bender and Chriss. I was high on Chriss, and I think he was just as deserving as Brown to go to us at 3, especially with his better fit in an area of need. So they just simply valued him more than Okafor and Noel. Which isn't surprising since A) it seems that nobody wants Okafor due to being in the wrong era, and B) they already have Chandler. The contract situation matters for them, too - why trade for them when you can get at least another year of a rookie scale contract with two new guys?

So, yes, context does matter in this regard. Now if you had another team that outright had the same needs at us in the frontcourt who didn't jump at that offer, then you can make that argument.

[cltc5]

Yet for the past two years we've accumulated assets and still are at .500.  Nothing wrong with fans being impatient. Ainge has been drafting potential instead of talent. By his team has been lacking talent and they need to go out and make an attempt at getting it....unless we as fans are supposed to be happy each year with mediocre players and draft and stash projects

[hpantazo]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

It is strong evidence, I disagree. If the Bulls offer with Butler was so good, the Wolves would have jumped at it. Having bigs has nothing to do with Butler. They would LOVE to take Butler to add to Towns and Wiggins. 

If Noel and Okafor are supposed to be so good, the Wolves would have jumped at the chance to take one of them. Dieng is no all-star. They also have a borderline all-star PG in Rubio.

As for the Suns, the majority of people here who are angry at Ainge for not trading the #3 pick are also the same people who absolutely hate Bender and don't think much of Chriss, so I as again, if the Sixers and Bulls offers were so good, why did the Suns prefer to take Bender over 'sure-fire all-stars'?

Reread the post. I said nothing about Butler. You also need to stop attributing arguments to me that I haven't made. I'm not an Okafor fan, and I'd be okay with choosing Brown over him. But Noel was my guy, because he fills an absolute need we have and is an excellent fit alongside our other defenders. He has DPOY potential, but AT NO TIME did I say he was a "sure-fire All-Star." That's a weak strawman argument.

I know it's a crazy notion to a lot of people, but "fit" and chemistry is a big concern in making basketball teams. KAT is a center, and he would not have fit with either Okafor or Noel, who would both just clog the paint and bring more defenders toward KAT. Thibs understands this, which is why he wouldn't even entertain anything like that.

As for the Suns, they just had different perspectives with us on Bender and Chriss. I was high on Chriss, and I think he was just as deserving as Brown to go to us at 3, especially with his better fit in an area of need. So they just simply valued him more than Okafor and Noel. Which isn't surprising since A) it seems that nobody wants Okafor due to being in the wrong era, and B) they already have Chandler. The contract situation matters for them, too - why trade for them when you can get at least another year of a rookie scale contract with two new guys?

So, yes, context does matter in this regard. Now if you had another team that outright had the same needs at us in the frontcourt who didn't jump at that offer, then you can make that argument.

If the Sixers and the Bulls really wanted Dunn so badly that they were making great offers, they would have made great offers that were a great for for each of those teams. They could have added players like Saric or other future picks in the offers. They didn't. That's the main point. What was reported by so called well respected experts was false. Ainge clearly stated so, and stated he would have easily taken any of those reported offers. The media also has a long standing anti-celtics bias.

[Dwnflfan]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

I don't necessarily disagree with you here but why is it ok for the Suns to value Bender as a higher ceiling player but it's not ok for the C's to do the same with Brown who is also a player at an area of need.

Also, if the Philly deal was obviously one-sided in our favor it sures seems like the Suns or T-pups could done the deal in a 3-way to get somebody better than Dunn.

Of course this is all speculation because nobody but the Celtics & Sixer front offices actually know what the offers were.

[hpantazo]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

I don't necessarily disagree with you here but why is it ok for the Suns to value Bender as a higher ceiling player but it's not ok for the C's to do the same with Brown who is also a player at an area of need.

Also, if the Philly deal was obviously one-sided in our favor it sures seems like the Suns or T-pups could done the deal in a 3-way to get somebody better than Dunn.

Of course this is all speculation because nobody but the Celtics & Sixer front offices actually know what the offers were.

Exactly. These are the points I am trying to make. It is not nearly so clear cut , obvious rejection of great offers that people want to make it out to be.

[jpotter33]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

It is strong evidence, I disagree. If the Bulls offer with Butler was so good, the Wolves would have jumped at it. Having bigs has nothing to do with Butler. They would LOVE to take Butler to add to Towns and Wiggins. 

If Noel and Okafor are supposed to be so good, the Wolves would have jumped at the chance to take one of them. Dieng is no all-star. They also have a borderline all-star PG in Rubio.

As for the Suns, the majority of people here who are angry at Ainge for not trading the #3 pick are also the same people who absolutely hate Bender and don't think much of Chriss, so I as again, if the Sixers and Bulls offers were so good, why did the Suns prefer to take Bender over 'sure-fire all-stars'?

Reread the post. I said nothing about Butler. You also need to stop attributing arguments to me that I haven't made. I'm not an Okafor fan, and I'd be okay with choosing Brown over him. But Noel was my guy, because he fills an absolute need we have and is an excellent fit alongside our other defenders. He has DPOY potential, but AT NO TIME did I say he was a "sure-fire All-Star." That's a weak strawman argument.

I know it's a crazy notion to a lot of people, but "fit" and chemistry is a big concern in making basketball teams. KAT is a center, and he would not have fit with either Okafor or Noel, who would both just clog the paint and bring more defenders toward KAT. Thibs understands this, which is why he wouldn't even entertain anything like that.

As for the Suns, they just had different perspectives with us on Bender and Chriss. I was high on Chriss, and I think he was just as deserving as Brown to go to us at 3, especially with his better fit in an area of need. So they just simply valued him more than Okafor and Noel. Which isn't surprising since A) it seems that nobody wants Okafor due to being in the wrong era, and B) they already have Chandler. The contract situation matters for them, too - why trade for them when you can get at least another year of a rookie scale contract with two new guys?

So, yes, context does matter in this regard. Now if you had another team that outright had the same needs at us in the frontcourt who didn't jump at that offer, then you can make that argument.

If the Sixers and the Bulls really wanted Dunn so badly that they were making great offers, they would have made great offers that were a great for for each of those teams. They could have added players like Saric or other future picks in the offers. They didn't. That's the main point. What was reported by so called well respected experts was false. Ainge clearly stated so, and stated he would have easily taken any of those reported offers. The media also has a long standing anti-celtics bias.

Oh, he did? He "clearly" stated that there was no offer of Noel, Covington, 22, and 24? No? Yeah, I didn't think so...

[Dwnflfan]

Yet for the past two years we've accumulated assets and still are at .500.  Nothing wrong with fans being impatient. Ainge has been drafting potential instead of talent. By his team has been lacking talent and they need to go out and make an attempt at getting it....unless we as fans are supposed to be happy each year with mediocre players and draft and stash projects

How are they at .500?  They were 48-34, (0.585), last year with the 3rd youngest roster in the league and added a player rated in the top half of the lottery at a position of need?

[hpantazo]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

It is strong evidence, I disagree. If the Bulls offer with Butler was so good, the Wolves would have jumped at it. Having bigs has nothing to do with Butler. They would LOVE to take Butler to add to Towns and Wiggins. 

If Noel and Okafor are supposed to be so good, the Wolves would have jumped at the chance to take one of them. Dieng is no all-star. They also have a borderline all-star PG in Rubio.

As for the Suns, the majority of people here who are angry at Ainge for not trading the #3 pick are also the same people who absolutely hate Bender and don't think much of Chriss, so I as again, if the Sixers and Bulls offers were so good, why did the Suns prefer to take Bender over 'sure-fire all-stars'?

Reread the post. I said nothing about Butler. You also need to stop attributing arguments to me that I haven't made. I'm not an Okafor fan, and I'd be okay with choosing Brown over him. But Noel was my guy, because he fills an absolute need we have and is an excellent fit alongside our other defenders. He has DPOY potential, but AT NO TIME did I say he was a "sure-fire All-Star." That's a weak strawman argument.

I know it's a crazy notion to a lot of people, but "fit" and chemistry is a big concern in making basketball teams. KAT is a center, and he would not have fit with either Okafor or Noel, who would both just clog the paint and bring more defenders toward KAT. Thibs understands this, which is why he wouldn't even entertain anything like that.

As for the Suns, they just had different perspectives with us on Bender and Chriss. I was high on Chriss, and I think he was just as deserving as Brown to go to us at 3, especially with his better fit in an area of need. So they just simply valued him more than Okafor and Noel. Which isn't surprising since A) it seems that nobody wants Okafor due to being in the wrong era, and B) they already have Chandler. The contract situation matters for them, too - why trade for them when you can get at least another year of a rookie scale contract with two new guys?

So, yes, context does matter in this regard. Now if you had another team that outright had the same needs at us in the frontcourt who didn't jump at that offer, then you can make that argument.

If the Sixers and the Bulls really wanted Dunn so badly that they were making great offers, they would have made great offers that were a great for for each of those teams. They could have added players like Saric or other future picks in the offers. They didn't. That's the main point. What was reported by so called well respected experts was false. Ainge clearly stated so, and stated he would have easily taken any of those reported offers. The media also has a long standing anti-celtics bias.

Oh, he did? He "clearly" stated that there was no offer of Noel, Covington, 22, and 24? No? Yeah, I didn't think so...

He did. He clearly, unequivocally stated this morning that the offers that were reported were not accurate, and that he would have easily accepted those reported offers, AND that the reports from respected reporters were false. He said this very clearly.

[PAOBoston]

The day after any draft is horrible. Everyone becomes an internet GM thinking they know best. The players haven't played a single minute yet they have all been labeled busts, asking for new ownership and GM, and calling the next season a failure already.

[Dwnflfan]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

I don't necessarily disagree with you here but why is it ok for the Suns to value Bender as a higher ceiling player but it's not ok for the C's to do the same with Brown who is also a player at an area of need.

Also, if the Philly deal was obviously one-sided in our favor it sures seems like the Suns or T-pups could done the deal in a 3-way to get somebody better than Dunn.

Of course this is all speculation because nobody but the Celtics & Sixer front offices actually know what the offers were.

Exactly. These are the points I am trying to make. It is not nearly so clear cut , obvious rejection of great offers that people want to make it out to be.

Sorry if I misunderstood.  That's not what I was getting from your post.

[jpotter33]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

I don't necessarily disagree with you here but why is it ok for the Suns to value Bender as a higher ceiling player but it's not ok for the C's to do the same with Brown who is also a player at an area of need.

Also, if the Philly deal was obviously one-sided in our favor it sures seems like the Suns or T-pups could done the deal in a 3-way to get somebody better than Dunn.

Of course this is all speculation because nobody but the Celtics & Sixer front offices actually know what the offers were.

Exactly. These are the points I am trying to make. It is not nearly so clear cut , obvious rejection of great offers that people want to make it out to be.

It gets tiring repeating the same arguments over and over when people can't follow them.

I've repeatedly said that it WASN'T a one-sided deal, which IS EXACTLY THE REASON AINGE DIDN'T DO IT. It was a good, fair deal that I think we won, because Noel has shown that he belongs in this league where Brown could turn out being Derrick Williams 2.0.

I also question that Brown is in a position of need. He essentially plays the same position as Crowder, Bradley, and Smart, i.e. the 2/3 position. It's been said that Crowder is highly, highly valued by Danny and our guys, so how is that position in need, especially when we had the opportunity to get a REAL position of need with a rim-protecting 5?

[Snakehead]

Crowder, Bradley, and Smart, i.e. the 2/3 position.

Can I just ask why you keep saying PG/SG's are wings/SFs?  I am so confused by this.

[jpotter33]

I think there are just too many emotional over reactions from fans who had high expectations for unrealistic trades based on misinformation. If we had drafted Dunn, and the Sixers and Bulls refused to put together a good trade offer, these same fans would now be clamoring over the fact that we have too many guards and we have to trade one of Dunn/Smart and the league knows this so we're screwed.

IF the Bulls or Sixers were serious enough to get Dunn, they would have done so with the Suns or Wolves after us. They didn't manage to make a trade with 3 different teams that could have gotten them Dunn, so it is very apparent that they were not making good offers and what was reported was inaccurate.

TP  If the Sixer's offer was so good why didn't the Suns or Minneapolis take it?

Exactly. I address this question to ShAQATTACK and CoachBo and everyone who insists Ainge passed on a great deal last night.

A) Minnesota is already stuffed with bigs (one of which has HOF potential), so it makes absolutely no sense that they would trade with Philly. They also extremely loved Dunn and had a need for him, so Minny would make no sense taking that deal. It's called context.

B) The Suns obviously viewed Bender and Chriss as better, higher-ceiling prospects than Noel and Okafor, which are reasonable arguments. They also already have Chandler, who does essentially the same thing as Noel just not as athletically or good anymore due to him losing his athleticism.

So, no, just posting these two teams as evidence that it wasn't a good trade doesn't work when you take their context into consideration.

It is strong evidence, I disagree. If the Bulls offer with Butler was so good, the Wolves would have jumped at it. Having bigs has nothing to do with Butler. They would LOVE to take Butler to add to Towns and Wiggins. 

If Noel and Okafor are supposed to be so good, the Wolves would have jumped at the chance to take one of them. Dieng is no all-star. They also have a borderline all-star PG in Rubio.

As for the Suns, the majority of people here who are angry at Ainge for not trading the #3 pick are also the same people who absolutely hate Bender and don't think much of Chriss, so I as again, if the Sixers and Bulls offers were so good, why did the Suns prefer to take Bender over 'sure-fire all-stars'?

Reread the post. I said nothing about Butler. You also need to stop attributing arguments to me that I haven't made. I'm not an Okafor fan, and I'd be okay with choosing Brown over him. But Noel was my guy, because he fills an absolute need we have and is an excellent fit alongside our other defenders. He has DPOY potential, but AT NO TIME did I say he was a "sure-fire All-Star." That's a weak strawman argument.

I know it's a crazy notion to a lot of people, but "fit" and chemistry is a big concern in making basketball teams. KAT is a center, and he would not have fit with either Okafor or Noel, who would both just clog the paint and bring more defenders toward KAT. Thibs understands this, which is why he wouldn't even entertain anything like that.

As for the Suns, they just had different perspectives with us on Bender and Chriss. I was high on Chriss, and I think he was just as deserving as Brown to go to us at 3, especially with his better fit in an area of need. So they just simply valued him more than Okafor and Noel. Which isn't surprising since A) it seems that nobody wants Okafor due to being in the wrong era, and B) they already have Chandler. The contract situation matters for them, too - why trade for them when you can get at least another year of a rookie scale contract with two new guys?

So, yes, context does matter in this regard. Now if you had another team that outright had the same needs at us in the frontcourt who didn't jump at that offer, then you can make that argument.

If the Sixers and the Bulls really wanted Dunn so badly that they were making great offers, they would have made great offers that were a great for for each of those teams. They could have added players like Saric or other future picks in the offers. They didn't. That's the main point. What was reported by so called well respected experts was false. Ainge clearly stated so, and stated he would have easily taken any of those reported offers. The media also has a long standing anti-celtics bias.

Oh, he did? He "clearly" stated that there was no offer of Noel, Covington, 22, and 24? No? Yeah, I didn't think so...

He did. He clearly, unequivocally stated this morning that the offers that were reported were not accurate, and that he would have easily accepted those reported offers, AND that the reports from respected reporters were false. He said this very clearly.

Again, I'll just keep posting the same thing over and over. Perhaps eventually you'll try to objectively answer the question.

He "clearly" stated that the Philly offer of Noel, Covington, 22, and 24 was not offered. Did he or did he not explicitly say that? I didn't listen to the interview, but I highly doubt he explicitly named that offer wasn't on the table, i.e. damage control.

[Scintan]

The day after any draft is horrible. Everyone becomes an internet GM thinking they know best. The players haven't played a single minute yet they have all been labeled busts, asking for new ownership and GM, and calling the next season a failure already.

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=85639.0

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=85636.0

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=85585.0

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=85612.0

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=85589.0

etc....