Is Danny totally to blame?

[Berry, Mark S]

I'm an Ainge supporter, but I have to think he gets one more year. He
gets his chance in the draft, in the summer through trades, and with his
decision on the coach. There are enough good things and extenuating
circumstances to give him that. And he has some serious assets suddenly
-- Al, the pick, and Pierce especially, but also Rondo, Delonte, Gomes,
Green, Perk. If he can't get it done next season, it will be impossible
to argue that he deserves more time.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On
Behalf Of Sean Giovanello
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 9:13 AM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: Re: Is Danny totally to blame?

I am not so much upset as just frustrated with the lack of expectations
for
Danny and this team.  I do not see how a GM can take over a team and
people
make excuses over and over while the team gets worse rather than better.
In
the past, I have defended Ainge and still think he does a good job with
finding value in the draft.  Outside of that one component of a GMs job,
I
would say he has been at best so so and at worst terrible.

In response to your questions:

> 1.  Which veterans were available that would have helped us and how
would
> > you have acquired them?
>
>
In regards to veterans available, there have been any number over the
years.  We never made a play for a quality mid-level player.  Earl
Watson,
Juwan Howard, Bob Sura, the list goes on and on for guys that the mid
level
could have gotten.  I wont pretend to say this guy or that guy, but the
fact
remains that every year there are quality veteran free agents available
for
the mid-level or some amount below that.  We fill out our roster with
the
Orien Greenes and Justin Reeds of the world rather than veterans who can
both teach the younger players and also provide a steadying influence in
the
locker room.

There have also been plenty of veterans available via trade over the
years.
There are dozens of deals that could be made each year that while not
dramatically transforming a roster can make a real difference in
improving a
team.   We could have traded Pierce and rebuilt from scratch a couple
years
ago and likely been seeing the light at the end of the tunnel now.  We
could
have traded for some guys who might blossom with a change of scenery.  I
always thought a guy like Carlos Arroyo might have been a nice pickup
with
some upside.  A guy like that wont dramatically change the team by
himself,
but if you have a philosophy about the type of team you want to build
you
will value certain types of players more than others and try to build a
squad of guys who run or play the half-court etc.  Instead, it appears
we
have just tried to stockpile young talent (which no one values as much
as we
do) via the draft in the hope of packaging them for an established
number 1A
or 2.  As the failure to land any of those guys shows, this is not a
good
way to build a team.  We havent appeared to place a premium on guys who
can
shoot or guys who can run or guys who play well in the half court or
anything like that - instead we simply stockpile guys who maybe we can
trade
if they develop.  The veterans we bring in are generally brought in and
then
sent packing to fix prior mistakes or with an eye on the budget.  I just
dont see much progress and outside of Oden/Durant much hope for this
team.

2. What is "championship driven" other than a tired cliche?  Some have
> pointed to the 10-14 record at the time of Pierce's injury, however
others
> point out that the team had reeled off an impressive 5 game winning
streak
> and that a  2 key young players (Jefferson and West) were unavailable
for
> most of November.  The fully constituted team pulled off the 5 game
win
> streak, but couldn't shake the injury bug.  I think that adds weight
to the
> argument of those that say the team, when healthy, isn't that bad.


Well, most people when they follow competitive sports place a premium on
wins and try to avoid losses.  Danny came in full of criticisms for the
way
things were done here and the type of team that was built and said
changes
were needed to make the franchise  championship driven.  If might appear
a
tired old cliche at this point, but that just reflects horribly on the
person who said the Celtics would be just that under his
administration.
You point to optimism at 10-14 and I could just as easily say that was
the
easiest stretch of schedule during the season and it would have only
gotten
harder.  Even if we accept what you say does a season with 30-36 wins
really
qualify as a feather in the cap of a GM?

3.  I am not surprised that Wally was hurt and was not a advocate of
trading
> for him.  But his injuries are to his ankles, not his knees.  Wally is
a
> good player to have off the bench that's about it.  Would you rather
have
> Banks, Blount, and Davis back?


I guess the question is here whether  they could have gotten a different
deal down the road.  Blount and Davis both had very tradeable contracts
and
Banks was expiring.  They knew Wally, like Raef, had knee problems and
still
took on massive deals irregardless.  Again, this is another deal that is
merely digging out from bad drafting/player development (Banks), a bad
signing (Blount) and a bad dude (Davis) and taking on a contract that
will
hamstring a financially iffy team for years to come.

4. Who has more trade value Raef or Telfair?  I wouldn't be so hasty as
to
> label Telfair a bust.  He's just not being used properly by Doc
BrainFreeze.
>  I've said all along that he is more of a SG than a PG.  It's funny
too, but
> I remeber the exact same arguments being made about Chauncey Billups,
who
> bounced through 4 teams before landing with the Pistons.  Sometimes
fans
> aren't as smart as they think they are.


I think the proper way  of framing this is who has more trade value
Telfair
or Roy?  Thats a pretty easy answer.  Ratliff has more trade value than
Raef
because his deal expires a year sooner.  Telfair isnt even 6 feet though
he
is listed at that.  Given that he cant really shoot and is too short to
play
the 2 in the NBA, I dont see how you can make that comparison.  Billups
is 3
or 4 inches taller and plays the point.

At some point, this team has to be about winning games, making the
playoffs,
and contending for a championship.  Does Ainge need another four years
for
that?  Its time for a new start for this team in terms of a coach and GM
for
next season.


On 2/8/07, asterix ninetynine <asterix_9_9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Sean, I can see why you're upset.  But your reasons don't make sense
to me
> and although they are passioned, they beg the following questions:
>
>   1.  Which veterans were available that would have helped us and how
> would you have acquired them?
>
>   2. What is "championship driven" other than a tired cliche?  Some
have
> pointed to the 10-14 record at the time of Pierce's injury, however
others
> point out that the team had reeled off an impressive 5 game winning
streak
> and that a  2 key young players (Jefferson and West) were unavailable
for
> most of November.  The fully constituted team pulled off the 5 game
win
> streak, but couldn't shake the injury bug.  I think that adds weight
to the
> argument of those that say the team, when healthy, isn't that bad.
>
>   3.  I am not surprised that Wally was hurt and was not a advocate of
> trading for him.  But his injuries are to his ankles, not his knees.
Wally
> is a good player to have off the bench that's about it.  Would you
rather
> have Banks, Blount, and Davis back?
>
>   4. Who has more trade value Raef or Telfair?  I wouldn't be so hasty
as
> to label Telfair a bust.  He's just not being used properly by Doc
> BrainFreeze.  I've said all along that he is more of a SG than a PG.
It's
> funny too, but I remeber the exact same arguments being made about
Chauncey
> Billups, who bounced through 4 teams before landing with the
> Pistons.  Sometimes fans aren't as smart as they think they are.
>
>   5.  Well, duh.
>
>
>
> Sean Giovanello <giovanello at gmail.com> wrote:
>   I think a lot of blame can be pinned on Ainge for the following
reasons:
>
> 1. He assembled a roster loaded with young players and continued a
thread
> of choosing young unproven players to fill out his roster instead of
> veterans.
> 2. Even with Pierce playing, this team was not good and did not appear
> "championship driven."
> 3. Are you surprised that Wally has been hurt? The guy has a chronic
knee
> condition - he is always going to be hurt. Very few GMs would trade
for
> him
> with that knee and that contract and his performance in Boston has
likely
> reduced to that 0 GMs.
> 4. Sebastian Telfair is not very good. Danny traded a lottery pick for
him
>
> (I know we get out of a year of Raef and that Theo's contract is
insured
> which allows the owners to not pay out that money). He appears to be
the
> third PG on this team and deservedly so. I do not think he has much,
if
> any, trade value.
> 5. If your are well into your rebuilding program and your team is now
> tanking for the lottery in what was supposed to be a season of
improvement
> well the sands of time for you are running low.
>
> I think the problem for Danny is that he has had a number of years to
turn
> this around and...the team is now a laughingstock. It has set the
Celtic
> record for consecutive losses and is being mocked on ESPN for how bad
it
> is
> as they countdown 9 more to go until the Celts get the longest losing
> streak
> in league history. Danny took over a marginal team and has not
improved
> it. I think that a reasonable person would say that we have generally
been
>
> one of the worse teams in the league in his tenure. How long does a GM
get
> to turn it around?
>
> On 2/7/07, Ryan Lee wrote:
> >
> > I haven't posted in a while since the celts have not given me much
> > reason to discuss them but as an avid AM sports radio listener, it's
> amusing
> > how a significant amount of callers pin all of this season's woes on
> Danny
> > Ainge. When the franchise player is injured as well as the
"#2"(notice
> the
> > quotes) player, Wally, and the rest of the team is entirely made up
of 1
> or
> > 2 year players, how can anyone really pin this season on Danny? Put
it
> this
> > way, if Cleveland were to lose Lebron to injury all season or the
Lakers
> to
> > lose both Kobe and Odom, how would either of those teams fare? I
don't
> > care who's the coach, nobody can win with a team of secondary
players
> > (except maybe Jerry Sloan). Do I think Danny is the right one for
the
> > job? No, not really but I know enough to see it was injuries and bad
> luck
> > that derailed this season and not so much his bizarre managerial
moves.
> >
> > I keep hearing about this college kid Kevin Durant being the best
> > college player in the last 10 years and how he should go higher than
> Greg
> > Odin. Anyone ever seen this guy play?
> >
> > R
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________
____________
>
> > 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
> > with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
> > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news
> > _______________________________________________
> > The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> > celtics at igtc.com
> > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> >
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
> with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>
_______________________________________________
The Boston Celtics Mailing List
celtics at igtc.com
http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics