Anti-Depressants! Get yer anti-depressants!

[ryanmnelson at verizon.net]

so based on Ainge's stellar track record in acquiring missing pieces, you think he will be able to build a team around Oden/Durant?

I doubt it.  In 4 years all Ainge has shown he can do is draft decently.  he has no idea how to build a team or what players to sign/trade for.  

Colangelo turned Toronto around in a year.  let's just hire his second in command.  he can't do any worse than Ainge.

My point is we are rebuilding anyway, so let's give someone a clean slate.  As far as continuity, keeping bad managers is worse than starting anew.

rmn


>From: "Ryan, Patrick S Maj RES USAFR 439 MSG" <Patrick.Ryan at westover.af.mil>
>Date: 2007/02/26 Mon AM 10:14:03 CST
>To: celtics at igtc.com
>Subject: RE: Anti-Depressants! Get yer anti-depressants!

>"We need to clean house before the draft.  That means Doc and Danny.  Though
>I am not sure who would replace them, I am pretty sure anyone could do just
>as poorly." - RMN
>
> 
>
>This remains a tough sell for me.  I'm more of a one or the other guy
>personally, and I'll tell you why. The NBA is a league of continuity. My
>opinion, and that's what we do here - spout opinion, is that teams that are
>formed, stay relatively constant in management, coach, style, and players
>tends to improve consistently as well. There are exceptions of course in
>both ways; Detroit won with the change to Flip Saunders, but they played the
>same defense which was their core competency anyway, just a new offensive
>system. Miami won with Riley over Van Gundy. In the other direction the
>Knicks crashed and burned with Larry Brown which supports the "it's the
>players' talent stupid" theory you're hanging your hat on.
>
> 
>
>Big picture wise I'm not sure I can be sold on starting all over again - and
>that's what a new GM and coach will be doing - their players, their style,
>their system. So for the third time in twenty years we'll be starting from
>scratch - meaning all the requisite having to take on bad deals to get of
>rid of players on other teams' terms and its related cap nightmare just to
>get the new GM/Coach's "type" players in here, new playing style and the
>players that are maintained getting adjusted to it, etc.  That's why I'm
>much more sold on just a new coach this off-season.  While I agree
>wholeheartedly that this season has been the worst (possibly ever) I'm
>heartened that history, recent and otherwise, has shown that even just one
>top five draft choice tends to return a team to prominence (meaning REAL
>contention) within two to four seasons (this does NOT include expansion
>teams which take longer). Add in my below comment as a potential; a free
>agent with the exemption that can actually contribute (is the exemption
>available this year to us?), and this year is the exception and not the
>rule.
>
> 
>
> 
>"Why would Memphis want to do this trade? Why is it good for them?
>      - Asterix
> 
>They wouldn't.   They wouldn't take on Pierce's contract.   
>They only want a low draft pick, a young prospect or
>two, and an expiring contract to match salaries. 
> 
>Gasol is not a team leader/franchise type player, IMHO.
>He would be a great addition to Pierce, but not a good 
>replacement for Pierce."
> 
>Egg
> 
>
>Nail head meet hammer. Can we put to bed Pierce for Gasol for good now?
>Never is, never was, never shall be. Now I will say that the prospect of
>trading for Gasol at the end of the season is MUCH better now that he didn't
>go at the deadline. Now Ratliff's deal IS expiring (and insured) and if the
>ping pong balls go our way we COULD trade Jefferson AND Green with some
>greater degree of confidence. Add Gasol to Pierce and a #1 or #2 draft pick
>and suddenly we're looking pretty well off.
>
> 
>
> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>The Boston Celtics Mailing List
>celtics at igtc.com
>http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics