I cant even begin to describe how disappointed.
Danny has always insisted that hes spent all these years collectibg assets in the hope a chance comes up to make a deal for a big name star.
He had for big name stars made available this deadline along with multiple other quality players and he s did nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Im sick to death of draft picks. Im tired of hearing the [dang] words. I dont care about then over bit. I'm not interested in waiting for 3 or 4 years for some teenage hot shot to develop into a useful player, while our current stars age and we continue to pile up early playoff exits.
Ainge is great at collecting assets, he's proven that. He's clearly completely incapable of doing anything with them once he has them. Time for him to move aside and let somebody who has some balls do his job for him.
Yeah, we need someone with the balls to, say, trade the 5th pick for an aging Ray Allen in the hopes that it makes KG want to come here
It's one thing to be mad at Danny when a deal actually happened that he could have been a part of (like the Boogie deal), but it's another to start calling for his job when we don't even know if the other team was actually considering trading their star. For all we know Bird had no intent to make a trade, but everyone's first reaction is just to say Danny was unreasonable and call for his job (despite him putting us in a position that any other fan base, short of the Cavs and Warriors, would kill to be in).
Did you even consider the possibility that maybe Bird was the unreasonable one overvaluing his asset? (Not saying it was, because we don't know, just trying to point out the WE DON'T KNOW part)
They could have had cousins, Danny didn't do a thing. Now he joined Anthony Davis in NO to form the best front court we've seen since I don't know...maybe the best front court in history. Now there's another team to potentially compete with us for free agent interest, since anybody with a brain knows that team is a couple of parts away from a contender.
I'm not gonna argue with you about the Boogie deal because I'm not a huge fan of why he didn't do it (I understand why he didn't, but I disagree with the choice), but I'm not ready to crown that the best frontcourt pairing ever until they at least play a game. Until then, I'm gonna stick to my opinion that the Admiral and Duncan were the best pair. And free agents can consider NO all they want, but they won't have enough cap room (this summer or likely ever if they elect to resign Jrue Holiday long term) to sign anyone serious
They could have had ibaka for nothing - he would have made us significantly better and improved our odds of beating a beaten and bruised Cavs team. Instead he went to Toronto, so now we probably won't even see the Cavs because the raptors will murder us. Why doesn't we get him? Doesn't want to include rozier. Those critical 9 minutes a game, you know.
Ibaka wasn't available for "nothing", it would likely have been Rozier and a first rounder. That's a good price if you plan on resigning him long term, but that's too much for a 25-40 game rental and there's no way anyone should be excited by the prospect of paying Ibaka a max for 4 or 5 years after this. You think Horford has been disappointing (despite still doing what he's always done)? Just wait until you see Ibaka getting paid more to do less in 2 or 3 years.
We could have had Butler but Ainge refused to include the awe inspiring role player that is Joe Crowder. Now if we do play Cleveland again, we can watch while Lebron single handedly dismantles us while Crowder looks around with a bewildered look on his face not knowing what to do, because everybody in the world know that for Lebron, Crowder is just an annoyong little fly waiting to get swatted.
First off, there's no evidence that Butler was even really available. If they were hell bent on making trading him, not including Crowder would not have been a deal breaker (and if it was, it would just mean that Danny and the Bulls GM were just as unreasonable). And that doesn't even bring in the fact that we don't have any idea what the package was. For all we know, Ainge could have been willing to trade AB, Brown, Smart, and both Nets picks for Butler, but said no when the Bulls tried to add Crowder (that's unlikely, but so is the Bulls taking a return that was based around Crowder, which would be the only case where not wanting Crowder in the deal is definitely unreasonable). And if we had managed to swing a deal for Butler, we could have instead watched Lebron and co pick apart our much thinner team, because this team minus, say, Crowder, AB, and the pick but with Butler isn't going to dethrone the King, either
We likely could have had Carmelo for next to nothing, but Danny apparently want interested. Because we needed to hold off on these moves so we could maintain cap flexibility. Why? Because Danny decided it was genius to commit $26m+ to a 30 year old Al Horford who continues to dissapoint on a daily basis like everybody with half a brain knew he would after his complete disappearance all of last year - especially the playoffs. Now we're stuck with him for 3 more years.
If we doesn't have Horford on that ludicrous deal we could easily trade for anybody we wanted and still have max space to go after any free a agent we want.
Horford's deal is not an overpay. He's doing the same **** he's done every year (more threes and passing now, a few less points but he's playing on a pass-heavy team with a ball dominant PG that also happens to be the best scorer he's ever played with), with the same efficiency that got him max offers from a handful of different teams. The only reason to be disappointed by Horford is if you expected a traditional rebounding and post scoring big man or a real go to scorer, in which case it's not Horford that's the issue, it's your expectations.
Sure, if we didn't have Horford, we'd have tons of space for a max free agent. We wouldn't have nearly as good of a chance to sign one (and certainly not one as good as Horford), but, sure, we'd have the money to sign them
It also seems odd that you call Horford's deal "ludicrous", but want Danny to give up assets to pay a two-year older Carmelo Anthony just 1 or 2 million less for the next three years
But Danny doesn't want to give up anything. He gets one or two bargain deals, and now he won't do anything at all unless it involves completely ripping off another team and getting gold in return for paper.
Its total BS.
I'm sure Danny would have loved to have made a deal for a star, but that doesn't mean he needs to get fleeced to do so. There's no evidence that he wouldn't have made a fair deal for a guy like George or Butler, so suggesting that he'll only make a deal if he fleeces somebody is ridiculous. Why is it that, if Danny and another GM both can;t meet on a price, the only explanation is that Danny is overvaluing his assets and trying to fleece the opposing GM? Other GMs are just as likely to try and come out of trades as the winner.
Honestly, the likelihood of any deal including the 2017 pick happening today was small. It doesn't make sense for a team to trade their star for a pick like that before the lottery because the value difference between #1 and #4 is too big. Talks will likely reopen after the lottery, but in the meantime the only way Chicago or Indy was gonna make a deal including that pick was if we overpaid by a ton, because if you trade Paul George (or similar) for a decent starter or two and the #4 pick, you'll be in hot water. If you're Bird, it's better to keep him for now (and hope that the Celtics and Lakers both get top 2 picks and start a bidding war)
And are you really criticizing Ainge for being unwilling to make moves that aren't clear wins? Looking back to the trade deadline in 2015, most of the moves have been standard, no-real-winner deals. I don't really have a problem with him not making a deal now for the sake of making a deal or to improve on a non-contender. I would have liked a small deal for a guy like JaMychel Green, but in the end, does it even matter? In a year or two would we be looking back and talking about the deal at all? I doubt it
How is Horford doing what he's always done?
In his younger days Horford played physical and aggressive. He played in the paint. He got to the line. He rebounded at an at least average level for a PF /C.
The last two or 3 seasons he's gotten soft, gotten lazy, stopped playing in the paint, stopped drawing fouls, started spending all his time hanging around the three point line, and has been rebounding like a small forward.
It didn't take a genius to see he's declining. He looked slower on the court. His efficient has dropped. His outright numbers have dropped. This year his FG% is possibly the lowest of his career.
He's not worth close to a max deal. He never looked like he would be. Dwight signed for less then the max, and he's been playing way better then Horford so far. I told everybody we should have gone after Dwight instead. He's not scoring like vintage Dwight but at least he's efficient and he's rebounding like a monster.
As I said last year, Horford is a modest upgrade over Sully. He's Sully with better conditioning, a better three point shot, and no rebounding.
He played great in meaningless games, collapses like a broken chair any time he plays important games or quality opponents. It's embarrassing.
2 years from now hell be earning about $30m and we'll be lucky if he's playing 26mins a game. By that time this may well be the worst contract in the nba.
You think the Melo deal looks bad?
Wait till 32 year old Horford is averaging 11 points and 5 rebounds while shooting 44% from the field, and making $30m a year doing it.
Let's not pay dumb. We all know the only reason Danny made the Horford signing is because he was hoping and praying it would get him Durant - and we all know how that went. Ainge got played. Ainge's visions of grandeur got us in to that mess.
Poll
Topic: If Danny doesn't make a move by the Trade Deadline. How disappointed will you be (Read 20474 times)