Re: The Official Free Agents and Trades 2010 Offseason thread

[Sam]

TJ,

Bench players are not starters. For the most part, their job is to beat other benches, not starters. You and I don't know how the Celtics bench will perform together, what their chemistry will be like, whether they'll perhaps reveal more sides of their individual potential than they did with other teams, as myriad Celtics have done after they have been acquired in trade. Don Nelson is the godfather of that clan, and Nate Robinson most recently shocked me with pretty good man-up defense.

I believe strongly in establishing a context for virtually every discussion. You feel Shaq will perform a certain way based on evidence from the recent past. (News flash; he's now in a different environment.) Tony Allen was the Celtics' best defender against guys like Bron. But he averaged only 15 minutes a game in the playoffs, so apparently others might have played a bit of defense on LJ. The players in Boston's core who are "showing signs of losing athleticism" never really depended on athleticism as much as on other attributes.

Now is not the time to evaluate Harangody's value as a PF versus a SF. It might be a nice gesture to watch how he performs against NBA veterans before making such unsubstantiated claims.

My statement about preferring big men down low was the way I feel or I wouldn't have posted it. No, I don't change my mind just based on what will look positive for the Celtics. I happened to cut my basketball teeth among the riches of a basketball culture with a strong post presence that led to championship after championship.

Sam

[tjmakz]

Many teams core players (including LeBron/Wade/Bosh) are significantly younger and will play more minutes then Boston's core which means their "bench" players (Wafer, Quis, Nate, BBD, Harangody) will be playing against starters for many teams. This will result in many bad matchups for Boston. If Boston would have traded Rasheed and another player for an athletic player that could guard two positions, like an Andre Iguodala, Boston would be better off then trying to build the roster with spare parts.

So, if we can't talk about Harangody, does that mean we can't discuss any newly drafted player that hasn't played in the NBA yet? I am not down on Harangody at all, in fact, I think his offense will make him an important player for many years. He has changed his physique significantly over the last few years and seems to be in very good shape. He is not very athletic or tall and that will hurt him on the defensive side.

I also think that Shaq was a good signing for the veteran minimum. Having one Shaq on the team is great, but I can't imagine any circumstance where Shaq and Perk could be on the floor at the same time for any significant minutes. Shaq seems to be a better fit for L.A's offense because he is a good passer and will draw double teams. In Boston's offense, they are a pick and roll and dribble penetration team, so I don't think Shaq is a great fit for the offense Boston utilizes.

Parish and McHale were dominant big men, but they could also drain 12-15 ft shots all day long if they were left open.

[jeb]

tj

see you in the finals bud. i guess we'll go ahead and play the games with our aging core in hopes of making it back to game 7 of the finals. You guys got better...we got better. Admit it...accept it. It will make you feel better. I think there is an excellent chance there will be a rubber match between our two teams.That is all we can hope for. I cant wait.

[tjmakz]

Boston needs to worry about a team in Florida and not the one from the left coast.

[jeb]

THe Magic are tough.But we beat em before. Doode just admit it...we've made some upgrades...you can do it.

[tjmakz]

THe Magic are tough.But we beat em before. Doode just admit it...we've made some upgrades...you can do it.

That is not the Florida team that I was referring to.
Yes, Boston has made upgrades, primarily JO and Shaq.

Orlando is not better then Boston.
They are like the 2008 and 2009 Cavs.
Nice regular season team, but not a real threat come playoff time.

[jeb]

Atta boy!

[Sam]

TJ,

There's no reason we can't talk about Harangody, but I prefer to stick to the subject, and you apparently don't. I'm also not into distortion by selectivity. I noticed that, when you were talking about matchups that might be faced by the Celtics bench, you neglected to recognize either O'Neal as being (1) a likely bench player and (2) a tough matchup for the other bench. Then you talked about the possibility of Shaq and Perk playing together. Pure fantasyland unless the NBA is going to sponsor halftime team SUMO matches.

The Boston starters may be mainly a "pick-and-roll and dribble penetration" unit as you claimed (although I suspect Doc and players,beginning with Ray, would laugh themselves silly at the thought of such an overly simplistic characterization). However, the Celtics bench is a relatively new entity that will be shaped in accordance with the strengths of the bench players rather than simply adopting the system of the starters. Shaq may very well be playing primarily with the bench, where his rebounding and (your quote) "good passing" can potentially fuel a lot of uptempo ball. In fact, it's very possible that uptempo ball, rather than pick-and-rolls and dribble-penetration, will be the hallmark of the bench offense, with Shaq and Davis to rebound and outlet while the other three fill lanes and distribute the ball, leaving Shaq and Davis to be trailers.

Which is exactly why I actually hope the Celtics bench will be playing some minutes against opposing starters at a time when said starters have been out there a while. I've seen it work before. A bench that can ramp up the pace against opposing starters who are starting to look forward to a blow can really wreak havoc on those starters, and it tends to leave them debilitated at crunch time. Moreover, the more I read about the defensive pros and cons of guys like Von Wafer, the more it appears the bench can be really disruptive in the passing lanes of opponents. Which would exacerbate that debilitating effect.

I'm not predicting that any or all of these things will occur because I'm not ill-advised enough to get into the prediction business. But they're at least as probable as some of the stuff you're stating—and definitely more grounded in reality.

And, finally, it's quite premature to make sweeping assessments of a team that very likely isn't yet fully constructed, has at least one possible major trading chip left, and won't play a minute together for more than two months. But there's certainly nothing wrong with speculation for those who find it fun.

Sam

[RosalieTCeltics]

Touche' Sam. I am with you on all counts.

[112288]

Shaq brings many positive elements to the Celtic game:

1) an additional 7-9 points more a game then Rasheed if you count that Shaq average about 6 pts better and 3+ rebounds more per game which if you convert just 2 hoops gives you an additional 4 pts per.

2) better looks for our real shooters since Shaq will not be hitting 3's any time soon. Let's us not forget the wild 3 pointers Rasheed threw up last year. With Rasheed taking those 3's he was out of position to help the team rebound and with each miss have a team get the rebound and hussle up court and score. Shaq will be perched under the basket for what they want him for...rebounding which can turn into potential points.

3) Most important....the Celtics now can throw multiple offense/defensive looks at teams with Shaq. This throws a wrench into other teams game plans and can upset their rhythm. Celtics now can show multiple looks on offense. If teams choose to come out to the arch, THE BIG FELLER can be fed the ball and ......... get teams into early foul trouble which adds additional point to our scoring. Remember once in the bonus situation anyone gets fouled its an automatic 2 shot foul. If they want to crowd Shaq down low, Ray will pick their eyes out from the outside!

All I am waiting for is to see how much guts THE QUEEN has to drive on Shaq!
You'll find him getting very familar with the RED Aurback Parque Floor!

112288

[112288]

Shaq brings many positive elements to the Celtic game:

1) an additional 7-9 points more a game then Rasheed if you count that Shaq average about 6 pts better and 3+ rebounds more per game which if you convert just 2 hoops gives you an additional 4 pts per.

2) better looks for our real shooters since Shaq will not be hitting 3's any time soon. Let's us not forget the wild 3 pointers Rasheed threw up last year. With Rasheed taking those 3's he was out of position to help the team rebound and with each miss have a team get the rebound and hussle up court and score. Shaq will be perched under the basket for what they want him for...rebounding which can turn into potential points. Additionally, teams will have to lay back and rebound and not cheat up the floor like last year. Remember the Celtic were near dead last in total rebounding last year and it killed us in some of the loses in the finals.

3) Most important....the Celtics now can throw multiple offense/defensive looks at teams with Shaq. This throws a wrench into other teams game plans and can upset their rhythm. Celtics now can show multiple looks on offense. If teams choose to come out to the arch, THE BIG FELLER can be fed the ball and ......... get teams into early foul trouble which adds additional point to our scoring. Remember once in the bonus situation anyone gets fouled its an automatic 2 shot foul. If they want to crowd Shaq down low, Ray will pick their eyes out from the outside!

All I am waiting for is to see how much guts THE QUEEN has to drive on Shaq!
You'll find him getting very familar with the RED Aurback Parque Floor!

112288

[Sam]

112288,

Nice to hear from you. One thing's for sure. Shaq's acquisition has livened things up on this board.

When I sat down and had a good talk with myself, it was the rebounding thing that helped me shed my instinctive dislike of the idea of Shaq's becoming a Celtic. Not just the few rebounds per game that he may garner in his 15 minutes or whatever. But the effect his bulk can have on changing the entire dynamic of the bench under the boards.

I'm particularly interested in how Davis and Shaq will play together. At face value, it seems that perhaps Glen can furnish the big man agility that may not characterize Shaq's game, while Shaq and his sheer bulk can occupy one or two big opponents while Davis can use his offensive rebounding and putback skills without being blocked so much.

It remains to be seen how the two of them will coexist without clogging the middle, which might not be consistent with taking best advantage of Quis' penetration skills. That would place a premium on the mid-range and perimeter games of Von Wafer and Nate to open things up a bit. The important thing, from my point of view, is that each of those five bench guys has very strong attributes that can complement one another quite well. And it should be very interesting to observe how and if they make it happen.

There's one other factor that that holds great interest for me. Last season, I steadfastly maintained that any apparent lack of energy among the Celtics (both starters and the bench) was the result of the frustration they repeatedly experienced due to lack of continuity. I believe the turnaround toward the end of the season and throughout the playoffs supports that theory. They had much more continuity,much less frustration, and much more energy.

I've been thinking about that frustration and what fueled it. It could be argued that there was one major personnel difference between last season and the two previous campaigns—Rasheed Wallace.

I'm not trying to make him a scapegoat, but I do believe (1) he has a strong personality and (2) at this point in his career, he has a greater tendency to yield to frustration than he might have earlier in his career. And I suspect that tendency may have been infectious, particularly among the younger and more impressionable members of the team.

I don't necessarily mean guys were quitting on their team, but I think they were more susceptible to the negative effects of frustration on their games than they might have been with greater focus in the face of discontinuity. And, to some extent, they may have been influenced by Sheed's example.

If there is any truth in that theory, I feel better about having Shaq on the team than having Sheed on the team. For one thing, Shaq joins the team under much more humbling circumstances than Sheed did. Despite his notoriety as a player, I suspect Sheed's more highly motivated than Sheed to give full effort regardless of the circumstances. And I believe his imprint in the rebounding department alone will be more consistent than Sheed's imprint on any single aspect of the game.

This may be wishful thinking, and it's really far too early to look for evidence in either direction. Sometimes it just comes down to having a feeling; and, for the moment at least, I'm getting a good feeling about this acquisition. And, believe me, it's not a feeling that came naturally.

I also feel it's appropriate to recognize that Sheed ranked third among all Celtics in games played last season (79), and he played far more minutes than any other primarily bench player—not a bad feat for an older guy and certainly not the sign of a quitter. He was pretty much the de facto defensive captain for the bench, and there were a number of games (including playoff contests) in which he was a strong contributor. So I come here not to bury Sheed but to point out one difference between him and Shaq that I believe could be a favorable one for the 2010-11 Celtics.

Sam

[RosalieTCeltics]

I have to say that from the beginning I have had many reservations about Shaq joining this team. It bothers me that there will be discussions all year long about the "chemistry" of this team. The 2007-2008 team just seemed to gel so quickly, with everyone putting their egos aside. Last year it seemed as if there were some "egos" that needed to be soothed many times, and Pierce was the main culprit there. There were many times when it was obvious to anyone with any basketball knowledge at all, that Pierce just hated giving up that leadership role to Rondo. Let's face it, this kid is the face of the franchise n The isolation plays at the end of the game were the most obvious. Pierce was not giving up that ball. Maybe that is River's fault, I don't know.

Adding a new face or three to this mix is going to be interesting. Will Wafer be able to give the rest to Allen and Pierce that they deserve during games?
Will Shaq adapt to being second and maybe third off the bench? I know that alot has been said about Rasheed and his game. Certainly the number of those missed three pointers was something to worry about. But, I will be the first to say, we never would have made it to the finals without him. He came up big when the money was on the line. I found myself hoping he would come back, maybe in January/February and give the Celts something
for their money.

I hope that this works out for the Celtics, and for Danny Ainge. He will really take the heat if this falls on it's face. In the mean time, I just hope that Shaq doesn't become the face of the Boston Celtics, we have four great players right now that I will call the FACE of this team. I pray he doesn't take over. That is where the chemistry problem will come in BIG

[jeb]

Sam

Inre Glen and Shaq clogging the middle. A gentle reminder that during the 09 playoffs Glen exhibited a reliable 15 to 19 foot jumper. He banged last year because thats what was asked of him. Now ask yourself this...all those chippies Glen got blocked last year? Would those blocks have happened if it was Shaq in the same position with the ball. Now envision Glen doing what comes natural to him...spacing the floor with that sweet jumper.

We are reloaded and I take my hat off to Danny. And we aint done yet.

[Sam]

Jeb,

Glen's improving jumper is one reason I'm not all that concerned about he and Shaq collectively clogging the middle. I also like the idea that Glen can offer a good mid-range jumper as a trailer on the fast break. But I'm also looking forward to Glen's being able to get more unmolested putbacks because the tall timber on the opposition will be preoccupied with keeping Shaq off the offensive boards. Having both Shaq and Glen under the boards could result in explosions of seismic proportions, but it could be really interesting to watch 600 pounds of aggressiveness in action. We were recently introduced to Shrek and Donkey. Here come Shrek and Shaq!

As for Shaq's defense against the pick-and-roll, it will be interesting to see what schemes the Celtics devise to address the situation. We could see Shaq and Glen sharing responsibilities because both have experience in defending against centers. It could be that, when the opposing center goes out to set a high pick, it will be Glen, rather than Shaq, who moves out with him.

One thing that drives me crazy is when people make projections into the future based on assuming the future must duplicate the past. I find Doc to be pretty good at making adjustments, which are a big part of what winning basketball is all about.

Sam

[jeb]

Sam

You are rightly prolly aghast at the slew of predictions descending upon sam's place but damn it's hard not to!

[tjmakz]

When players have physical limitations, the best defensive schemes in the world won't help to cover over those limitations.

[mrkleen09]

When players have physical limitations, the best defensive schemes in the world won't help to cover over those limitations.

I think the truth is exactly the opposite. Good coaching schemes are devised TO help deal with inherent physical limitations. The Syracuse zone defense - the motion offense of Pete Carill at Princeton - and the Celtics defense was built to work with a number of players and personalities.

Does it work better with KG and Perk anchoring the front court - sure. But when it was clicking, even people like Sheed - Eddie House and Scal (none of which you could call physically gifted at this point in their careers) did just fine with it.

[tjmakz]

Is it really the system or is it the players?
In 2006-07 Boston gave up 99.2 ppg.
After the trades for Garnett and Allen, Boston only gave up 90.3 ppg in the 2007-08 season.
To my knowledge Boston had the same coaches and defensive schemes both years.

Now that Boston's players are older and have more physical limitations, they gave up 95.6 ppg in the 09-10 season.

[mrkleen09]

Is it really the system or is it the players?
In 2006-07 Boston gave up 99.2 ppg.
After the trades for Garnett and Allen, Boston only gave up 90.3 ppg in the 2007-08 season.
To my knowledge Boston had the same coaches and defensive schemes both years.

Now that Boston's players are older and have more physical limitations, they gave up 95.6 ppg in the 09-10 season.

Wait, did you just say the Celtics ran the same defensive schemes with Al Jefferson, Michael Olowokandi, and Wally Szczerbiak in 2006-07, as they did a year later with KG, James Posey, and Ray Allen? Of course Doc and Coach Tibs changed their schemes to take advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of their players. To suggest otherwise is just ridiculous.

[jeb]

Tj

Wonder what "limitations" Kobes destroyed finger and incred high mileage will manifest in this very long nba season that awaits? hmmmmmmm or maybe you dont want to talk about the fact that the Lakers key guy is rapidly aging.

Your arguments are getting really sloppy. Serious dude YOU GUYS are old is pretty playground. How old did we seem when we were up 12 on yall in game 7 missing a starter last year. Your glasses are more and more yellow.

[Sam]

Jeb, I realize that a lot of people consider predicting to be a lot of fun, which is fine with me. I'm in a business that involves predicting things ranging from future population trends to changes in attitudes in the population to likely acceptance of new products. And, if I'm not right most of the time, my income suffers dramatically.

What bothers me is when, in making basketball predictions, some people assume all conditions will be the same as previously. For example, if a player goes to a new team, they shape their opinions around implicit assumptions that his play or attitude will be the same as it previously was. They fail to take account of changing contexts. A simple change in scenery can make a difference, as can the way he'll be used in his new system, or the coach's approach, the system his new team employs, a shot at a championship, being given more responsibility than he previously had, his recovery from prior injuries, crowd support, clicking with certain new teammates, being taken under the wing of a veteran, or myriad other factors.

So many of the predictions involve shots from the hip that I can't see the sense of them. But, as long as it adds to the fun of the game for people, there's nothing really wrong with going out on a very skinny limb.

Sam

[cowens/oldschool]

One of the reasons I'd like to see Shaq start is I'd like to see him play with the talent of all the starters,doing what he does.I didn't see Shaq getting abused in the playoffs,like Jamison or Mo,I want to see how having such a physical presence will enable other starters to play off his game and how their games can also make Shaq better.I especially want to see Shaq and KG play together,Shaq has never played with a great PF,who did he play with?Horry,Haslem,Jamison got exposed by KG,KG's game is all about making others better and I have a feeling KG is still determined to comeback stronger than last year.We will have so many great pairings at 4-5 this year,will be great to see as it unfolds,Shaq-KG,Shaq-JO,JO-KG,Shaq-Baby,Perk-KG,JO.....it should be really interesting.

[tjmakz]

Tj

Wonder what "limitations" Kobes destroyed finger and incred high mileage will manifest in this very long nba season that awaits? hmmmmmmm or maybe you dont want to talk about the fact that the Lakers key guy is rapidly aging.

Your arguments are getting really sloppy. Serious dude YOU GUYS are old is pretty playground. How old did we seem when we were up 12 on yall in game 7 missing a starter last year. Your glasses are more and more yellow.

Kobe very well could be limited because of his finger or other injuries and over the course of the next 4 years, I expect his production to go down each year.

I'm not going to pretend that LA's weaknesses aren't there and not talk about them, like how many Celtics fans want to ignore the Celtics weaknesses.

[tjmakz]

Is it really the system or is it the players?
In 2006-07 Boston gave up 99.2 ppg.
After the trades for Garnett and Allen, Boston only gave up 90.3 ppg in the 2007-08 season.
To my knowledge Boston had the same coaches and defensive schemes both years.

Now that Boston's players are older and have more physical limitations, they gave up 95.6 ppg in the 09-10 season.

Wait, did you just say the Celtics ran the same defensive schemes with Al Jefferson, Michael Olowokandi, and Wally Szczerbiak in 2006-07, as they did a year later with KG, James Posey, and Ray Allen? Of course Doc and Coach Tibs changed their schemes to take advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of their players. To suggest otherwise is just ridiculous.

Why is Boston giving up 5+ more points per game now then they were a couple of years ago? Is Garnett the same defensive player? No. Is Pierce? No. Is Ray Allen? No.
Same schemes, different physical limitations...

[Sponsored content]