From kmalo17 at verizon.net Sat Aug 1 00:18:29 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 20:18:29 -0400 Subject: on Walker In-Reply-To: <788980.27109.qm@web39608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <788980.27109.qm@web39608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0KNO000ZZ8VC1SU2@vms173001.mailsrvcs.net> God knows I'm definitely not a glass HAS to be half full type, but still... couldn't it just be as simple as they're smart enough to know they've got to offer something with some legit value, even if it's mostly in potentia with Bill, to get anything reasonable back? Bill is at the low end sacrifice of the things we have with legit value to give up because he's not already part of the rotation and we still don't know how good he could be to see it as a major loss. I've never understood the mentality that actively expects other teams to rush to grab the garbage we're trying to throw away so they can give us something we want more. Shouldn't there be at least an illusion of something in it for them? And who would give us say Daniels for Tony? Pruitt? Giddens? I'm still waiting.... But Walker's scattered minutes certainly showed something there, as did the fact that they kept him on the big league team even as they sent Giddens back to the DLeague ASAP. In other words maybe it's because of what's right, not what's wrong with Bill. At 07:45 PM 7/31/2009, gene kirkpatrick wrote: >All I can figure about the continual mention of Bill Walker in trade >talks is that (a. Ainge & Doc concur that he won't develop soon >enough to help us in the next two years (which is the same as saying >he doesn't have the stuff), (b. we're focused on the next two years >and will do anything to get the veteran pieces to make that work, >(c. he's the only name that gets the talks moving (but they >haven't), (d. he's mostly show and never going to be starter >material. I really doubt their major concern is injury; it would >have to be lack of readiness/skills plus fear of injury. If he's >got the goods, they will keep him and hope he doesn't get injured, >ala Powe two or three years ago. > >Ah, fast forward please. Gene From pdelevett at yahoo.com Sat Aug 1 01:01:30 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Pruitt, Bowen both waived Message-ID: <462381.87515.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Kinda feel Danny blew a chance to get something for Gabe, but I guess other NBA GMs saw what the rest of us did: an inconsistent player who never really seized the opportunity. Will be interesting to see if anybody picks him up now. Ditto the Bowen question. I have to say I really don't see where Bowen would play for us, assuming Daniels is still coming on board; Bowen's a much better outside shooter than Marquis, but I thought we had Sheed and House for that. And at 6'7, he's really not gonna be able to play any power forward. And Kim, as for Walker: my question wasn't "Why is Danny willing to trade Walker" but "Why do I keep reading Danny's insisting teams take Walker off his hands?" Obviously you have to give value to get value, and I agree with you that Bill seems the best of our young perimeter players. But it doesn't sound like the market (nor maybe the GM) agrees. From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Sat Aug 1 02:23:17 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Walker In-Reply-To: <788980.27109.qm@web39608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <329296.2431.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Those all might be true, Gene, but the talk of Walker being in this or that deal always struck me as pure rumor mongering--as in not true. I've heard all kinds of supposed insider reports and they contradict each other--some where Larry was high on TA, some where Danny wouldn't give up Giddens and that was the deal-breaker, or Larry couldn't take TA because of the off-the-court stuff, or this or that. We'll never know and if this wasn't the offseason I don't even think we'd be talking about it. And that's what makes this time of year suck: we're talking about things we'd not even mention if there were real issues to discuss. Ryan --- On Fri, 7/31/09, gene kirkpatrick wrote: > From: gene kirkpatrick > Subject: on Walker > To: "celtics" > Date: Friday, July 31, 2009, 6:45 PM > All I can figure about the continual > mention of Bill Walker in trade talks is that (a.? Ainge > & Doc concur that he won't develop soon enough to help > us in the next two years (which is the same as saying he > doesn't have the stuff), (b. we're focused on the next two > years and will do anything to get the veteran pieces to make > that work, (c. he's the only name that gets the talks moving > (but they haven't), (d. he's mostly show and never going to > be starter material.? I really doubt their major concern is > injury; it would have to be lack of readiness/skills plus > fear of injury.? If he's got the goods, they will keep him > and hope he doesn't get injured, ala Powe two or three years > ago. > > Ah, fast forward please.? Gene > > > > ? ? ? > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From kmalo17 at verizon.net Sat Aug 1 02:30:05 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:30:05 -0400 Subject: Pruitt, Bowen both waived In-Reply-To: <462381.87515.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <462381.87515.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0KNO00590EYPAFF4@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net> At 09:01 PM 7/31/2009, Peter Delevett wrote: >Kinda feel Danny blew a chance to get something for Gabe, but I >guess other NBA GMs saw what the rest of us did: an inconsistent >player who never really seized the opportunity. Will be interesting >to see if anybody picks him up now. > >Ditto the Bowen question. I have to say I really don't see where >Bowen would play for us, assuming Daniels is still coming on board; >Bowen's a much better outside shooter than Marquis, but I thought we >had Sheed and House for that. And at 6'7, he's really not gonna be >able to play any power forward. > >And Kim, as for Walker: my question wasn't "Why is Danny willing to >trade Walker" but "Why do I keep reading Danny's insisting teams >take Walker off his hands?" Obviously you have to give value to get >value, and I agree with you that Bill seems the best of our young >perimeter players. But it doesn't sound like the market (nor maybe >the GM) agrees. Ah, well as you saw, I was responding to Gene's reply, didn't really read your original post. That's why I answered as I did. Sorry if there was some confusion. As to your question, sorry but there's a reason I call this silly season. Just because someone says it and a bunch of others parrot it doesn't mean I believe it to be iron clad truth, much less feel the need to justify it. Especially when it comes to idiot trade talk (that's a generalization of my opinion about most of it, not a personal reference to you). BTW, part of the problem with setting up a deal with Walker anyway isn't necessarily him but, ironically, his low salary, making it tough to set up a mutually beneficial deal. If Danny was all that desperate to get rid of him then he could have cut Walker either instead of or along with Pruitt. It's really small money. Back to rumor mill sort of stuff, your saying Danny missed a chance on Gabe sounds like you're saying he didn't even try to deal him, which is not what the reports were. I mean if you're going to accept them on one thing you should on the other. I don't think inconsistency would have been the deal breaker with a player that young and inexperienced, I think the issues were more a) marked lack of aggressiveness on his part limiting his potential - inconsistent go getter is one thing, inconsistent passive player something else entirely, and b) finding him a position. He's not really tall enough for SG today but he's really not a PG (yes, he can pass and dribble but so can Garnett who isn't a PG either, there's no sense of him controlling pace, really running the team etc when he's out there ) , and doesn't have much to recommend him other than that sweet outside shot which is a not far from the dime a dozen category asset. Kim From patterson.adam at yahoo.com.au Sat Aug 1 11:57:36 2009 From: patterson.adam at yahoo.com.au (Adam Patterson) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 04:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Championship dvd extra All Access Lakers Celtics Message-ID: <210477.8961.qm@web63805.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Highlights from the Celtics-Lakers game on 25/12/2008. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF8pIfo8w8s This year it may be the Cavs in L.A. on Christmas Day (according to the following article). http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2009/07/cleveland_cavaliers_expected_t.html We might be opening the season against the Cavs in Cleveland. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Access Yahoo!7 Mail on your mobile. Anytime. Anywhere. Show me how: http://au.mobile.yahoo.com/mail From pdelevett at yahoo.com Sun Aug 2 05:43:23 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 22:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Tinsley Message-ID: <804508.94035.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> The Celtics have no backup point guard. Marbury is out of his gourd. The Knicks for some reason have decided to sign White Chocolate instead of Tinsley, and now the Heat have canceled a workout with Tinsley, too. He's reportedly willing to take a one-year deal for the minimum; why not bring him in and see what he's got? Can't hurt to kick the tires, especially if the other options are guys like Lue and Ollie. Best case: you get the guy with a 2.5:1 assist/turnover ratio. From jlyell at verizon.net Sun Aug 2 15:29:38 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 08:29:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Tinsley In-Reply-To: <804508.94035.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <804508.94035.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <756697.72088.qm@web84006.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Maybe Larry and Danny have talked and Danny knows the baggage he comes with, but there aren't many options.Other teams have chosen not to also.I think he plans on playing Daniels a the point some. McCants is a decent young layer & cheap Damn raptors got Bellinelli for Deven George, couldn't we have move something for him? john ? ________________________________ From: Peter Delevett To: celtics at igtc.com Sent: Saturday, August 1, 2009 10:43:23 PM Subject: Tinsley The Celtics have no backup point guard. Marbury is out of his gourd. The Knicks for some reason have decided to sign White Chocolate instead of Tinsley, and now the Heat have canceled a workout with Tinsley, too. He's reportedly willing to take a one-year deal for the minimum; why not bring him in and see what he's got? Can't hurt to kick the tires, especially if the other options are guys like Lue and Ollie. Best case: you get the guy with a 2.5:1 assist/turnover ratio. ? ? ? _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From asterix_9_9 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 2 15:31:50 2009 From: asterix_9_9 at yahoo.com (asterix ninetynine) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 08:31:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Egg In-Reply-To: <8CBDF80A092A40B-1140-876@webmail-mf08.sysops.aol.com> References: <453006.77627.qm@web110110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <8CBDF80A092A40B-1140-876@webmail-mf08.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <860820.69637.qm@web65507.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> The funniest thing about Egg's Celticsblog post was that the "editor" of that site felt the need to add a disclaimer to the effect that these were rumors which were unsubstantiated.? As opposed to what? ________________________________ From: "douglas342 at aol.com" To: celtics at igtc.com Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 7:00:11 PM Subject: Re: Egg It's a big business.? These guys are paid millions of dollars and don't hesitate to jump ship for more money.? So don't try to tell me that players are "hurt" and "insulted" by salary offers, let alone rumors of them.? If they are, they're whiners.? If they are so sensitive, then let's see one stay put for less money than he mght get elsewhere. And even though no one asked me, I thought the re-post from Egg was pretty uncontroversial, more so than many of her efforts here.? When this list begins to bar rumors, we'll have one post per week. -----Original Message----- From: Peter Delevett To: celtics at igtc.com Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2009 3:44 pm Subject: Egg Gosh, and to think that just this morning I was saying to myself that I missed Egg and Ray's posts to this list. Personally, I can't image either Daniels or Baby being unhappy about getting paid more than a million dollars next year to put a rubber ball through a metal hoop, no matter where they're playing. There are a lot of people - some reading this post, I'll bet - who are worried about losing their damn jobs and providing health care for their families. So, boo-hoo for Marquis and Davis, if in fact that's how they're feeling. And given this market for free agents, I'm not so sure it is. I also don't understand how "the Celtics are worried about their frontcourt depth" jibes with "they're trying to give away Davis to anybody with a pulse." To me, that makes about as much sense as somebody posting a message full of rumors to a Web site, and then lambasting it for posting messages full of rumors. ? ? ? _______________________________________________ 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 From asterix_9_9 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 2 15:33:15 2009 From: asterix_9_9 at yahoo.com (asterix ninetynine) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 08:33:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Pruitt, Bowen both waived In-Reply-To: <462381.87515.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <462381.87515.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <671819.58298.qm@web65501.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> What would we have gooten for Pruitt?? Seriously. ________________________________ From: Peter Delevett To: celtics at igtc.com Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 9:01:30 PM Subject: Pruitt, Bowen both waived Kinda feel Danny blew a chance to get something for Gabe, but I guess other NBA GMs saw what the rest of us did: an inconsistent player who never really seized the opportunity. Will be interesting to see if anybody picks him up now. Ditto the Bowen question. I have to say I really don't see where Bowen would play for us, assuming Daniels is still coming on board; Bowen's a much better outside shooter than Marquis, but I thought we had Sheed and House for that. And at 6'7, he's really not gonna be able to play any power forward. And Kim, as for Walker: my question wasn't "Why is Danny willing to trade Walker" but "Why do I keep reading Danny's insisting teams take Walker off his hands?" Obviously you have to give value to get value, and I agree with you that Bill seems the best of our young perimeter players. But it doesn't sound like the market (nor maybe the GM) agrees. ? ? ? _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From jlyell at verizon.net Sun Aug 2 15:43:05 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 08:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Cav's offer Powe a contract Message-ID: <110545.72180.qm@web84001.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Cav's have reportedly offered Leon?a contract Des Mason might not be resigned, not sure how he is after injury Rambis to be the T-wolves coach? Lakers payroll $92M next year! From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Sun Aug 2 16:20:10 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 12:20:10 -0400 Subject: Pruitt, Bowen both waived In-Reply-To: <671819.58298.qm@web65501.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <462381.87515.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <671819.58298.qm@web65501.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908021620.n72GKDZE000632@ares.afrc.af.mil> Asterix, didn't you know every NBA GM will gladly send over their all-stars in trade for a Celtics 15th man who is about to be a free agent anyway if his option isn't picked up? -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of asterix ninetynine Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 11:33 AM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: Pruitt, Bowen both waived What would we have gooten for Pruitt?? Seriously. ________________________________ From: Peter Delevett To: celtics at igtc.com Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 9:01:30 PM Subject: Pruitt, Bowen both waived Kinda feel Danny blew a chance to get something for Gabe, but I guess other NBA GMs saw what the rest of us did: an inconsistent player who never really seized the opportunity. Will be interesting to see if anybody picks him up now. Ditto the Bowen question. I have to say I really don't see where Bowen would play for us, assuming Daniels is still coming on board; Bowen's a much better outside shooter than Marquis, but I thought we had Sheed and House for that. And at 6'7, he's really not gonna be able to play any power forward. And Kim, as for Walker: my question wasn't "Why is Danny willing to trade Walker" but "Why do I keep reading Danny's insisting teams take Walker off his hands?" Obviously you have to give value to get value, and I agree with you that Bill seems the best of our young perimeter players. But it doesn't sound like the market (nor maybe the GM) agrees. ? ? ? _______________________________________________ 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 From douglas342 at aol.com Sun Aug 2 18:04:36 2009 From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 14:04:36 -0400 Subject: Pruitt, Bowen both waived In-Reply-To: <200908021620.n72GKDZE000632@ares.afrc.af.mil> References: <462381.87515.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><671819.58298.qm@web65501.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908021620.n72GKDZE000632@ares.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <8CBE1B2D46ACFE7-90-59B4@mblk-d43.sysops.aol.com> Really? We could have had Lebron? Damn, Danny, you blew that one! -----Original Message----- From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil To: celtics at igtc.com Sent: Sun, Aug 2, 2009 9:20 am Subject: RE: Pruitt, Bowen both waived Asterix, didn't you know every NBA GM will gladly send over their all-stars in trade for a Celtics 15th man who is about to be a free agent anyway if his option isn't picked up? -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of asterix ninetynine Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 11:33 AM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: Pruitt, Bowen both waived What would we have gooten for Pruitt?? Seriously. ________________________________ From: Peter Delevett To: celtics at igtc.com Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 9:01:30 PM Subject: Pruitt, Bowen both waived Kinda feel Danny blew a chance to get something for Gabe, but I guess other NBA GMs saw what the rest of us did: an inconsistent player who never really seized the opportunity. Will be interesting to see if anybody picks him up now. Ditto the Bowen question. I have to say I really don't see where Bowen would play for us, assuming Daniels is still coming on board; Bowen's a much better outside shooter than Marquis, but I thought we had Sheed and House for that. And at 6'7, he's really not gonna be able to play any p ower forward. And Kim, as for Walker: my question wasn't "Why is Danny willing to trade Walker" but "Why do I keep reading Danny's insisting teams take Walker off his hands?" Obviously you have to give value to get value, and I agree with you that Bill seems the best of our young perimeter players. But it doesn't sound like the market (nor maybe the GM) agrees. ? ? ? _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From stevebknight at yahoo.com Sun Aug 2 21:18:23 2009 From: stevebknight at yahoo.com (steve knight) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 14:18:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: walker In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <940626.26595.qm@web37405.mail.mud.yahoo.com> honestly, i'm not sure what everyone has seen in walker, other than the obvious athleticism and what appears to be a good head on his shoulders. i think he was ahead of giddens last year because he's more mature and we weren't deep at his position. don't mistake letting him go for a goof on the order of billips or joe johnson. that being said, i hope the kid does well, whether for us or not. i frankly just haven't seen much from him in terms of how to play the game. he's young, so i'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. in any case, i trust danny's judgment on him. speaking of danny's judgment, still not sure i understand why we're not keeping leon for small money and a roster spot. ******************************************* From pdelevett at yahoo.com Mon Aug 3 05:11:08 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: One more option off the market Message-ID: <52596.77016.qm@web110106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> OKC signs Kevin Ollie. If you ask me, he's just the kinda guy we needed behind Rondo; not gonna push for minutes, but can step up if needed. A savvy vet. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4371497 (And yes, I know last night I said we should sign Tinsley instead of Ollie.) From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Mon Aug 3 19:01:57 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 15:01:57 -0400 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Contract details not disclosed but would have to be the vet min. I would guess given the status of the bi-annual tied up with the Daniels situation. BBD insurance or worse..BBD replacement? Discuss. From jeffclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 19:26:21 2009 From: jeffclark at gmail.com (jeffclark at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 15:26:21 -0400 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <84e131670908031226j47dc1c81m32a567ef8102399b@mail.gmail.com> Spears already reported that it isn't BBD replacement. I'm guessing it is Powe replacement. On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:01 PM, wrote: > Contract details not disclosed but would have to be the vet min. I would > guess given the status of the bi-annual tied up with the Daniels situation. > > BBD insurance or worse..BBD replacement? > > Discuss. > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > -- Jeff CelticsBlog.com doughnutholes.wordpress.com From capomycap at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 19:47:30 2009 From: capomycap at gmail.com (George Meyer) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 12:47:30 -0700 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> oh goodie, I eagerly await the deluge of "Clifford Ray will turn him into Moses Malone" talk that has been sorely lacking since Patrick O'Bryant threw all that cold water on the Cult-of-Cliff (or, "Coach Ray"). From BDodgers at aol.com Mon Aug 3 19:52:36 2009 From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 15:52:36 EDT Subject: Steve Aschburner: INSIDE THE NBA Message-ID: Steve Aschburner > INSIDE THE NBA (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/writers/steve_aschburner/archive/) Sixty numbers for 60 NBA years Story Highlights The BAA and the NBL merged to form the NBA on Aug. 3, 1949 NBA began with 17 teams before scaling back to 11 clubs the following year After merger, the league quickly advanced with shot clock, TV, dynastic teams (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/steve_aschburner/08/03/anniversary/index.html?eref=T1#) Sixty years ago today, a future guard for St. Peter's College in Jersey City named Rich Rinaldi was born. Nothing very remarkable about that; Rinaldi played well enough to get drafted 43rd overall by the Baltimore Bullets in 1971 and played 79 games with them over two-plus seasons. After being waived in November 1973, Rinaldi hooked on for five games with the ABA's Nets, wrapping up his pro career with averages of 4.8 points and 10.5 minutes. It just so happens, though, that Rinaldi shares his birthday with the NBA itself. Sixty years ago today, on Aug. 3, 1949, the league as we know it -- well, kind of as we know it -- came into being when the two reigning hoops organizations blended into one. Traditionally, the NBA marks its BC vs. AD point as 1946-47, when the Basketball Association of America began play. That's why it celebrated its 50th anniversary at the 1997 All-Star Game in Cleveland and why last season was considered its 63rd. But it's important not to underestimate the impact of the BAA's merger with the older National Basketball League three years later. Neither the NBL nor the BAA was thriving at the time. The NBL had most of the game's biggest names, including George Mikan and Jim Pollard of the Minneapolis Lakers, but was operating primarily in smallish Midwest towns such as Sheboygan, Moline, Toledo, Fort Wayne and Youngstown. The BAA was located in bigger cities, with more legitimate arenas, but it didn't have the drawing-card players. The lure of bigger paydays enticed four NBL teams to switch leagues before 1948-49, but the official absorption came the following summer. Newly christened as the NBA, the unified league ballooned to 17 teams in 1949-50 -- the Lakers won their second consecutive championship -- then scaled down to 11 clubs for '50-51. Franchises came and went after that, from as few as eight to the current 30, but the die was cast. Advancements and enhancements came ridiculously fast -- the shot clock, Bill Russell, the Celtics' dynasty, Wilt Chamberlain, network television, expansion, dunk contests, Air Jordans, tattoos and Twitter. Boom! Done. Sixty years gone by in a blink, commemorated here by the numbers: 1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's rank in career minutes (57,446), points (38,387), fouls (4,657), MVP awards (six), All-Star berths (19), _Milwaukee Bucks_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/bucks) ' scoring (14,211) and rebounding (7,161) and L.A. Lakers' blocked shots (2,694). 2. People forget that Russell was the second player drafted in 1956, going to Boston when Celtics boss Red Auerbach traded for the No. 2 pick in a pivotal deal with St. Louis. People really forget that the No. 1 pick that year was Duquesne guard Sihugo Green -- the Rochester Royals didn't want to pay a $25,000 bonus Russell was rumored to be seeking. Green averaged 9.2 points across 504 NBA games -- and, in his final season, joined Russell for 10 games in Boston in '65-66. 3. The three-point field goal was adopted for the 1979-80 season, and Boston's Chris Ford officially sank the first one in an Oct. 12, 1979, victory against Houston. 4. Number of ABA franchises that survived the merger on June 17, 1978: San Antonio, Denver, Indiana and New York (later renamed New Jersey). 5. _Dikembe Mutombo_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/425) led the NBA in blocked shots five times, which is the official record. But since blocks, like steals, weren't tracked before 1973-74, odds are good that fellows named Chamberlain, Russell or even Thurmond might hold the real mark. 6. Auerbach spent the sixth pick in the '78 draft on Indiana State's Larry Bird, knowing his Celtics would have to wait a full year for Bird (a junior eligible by rules at that time) to leave school. It proves to be worth the wait. 7. _Karl Malone_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/213) led the NBA in free-throw attempts in seven out of 10 seasons from 1988-89 through '97-98. Only Chamberlain (9) did it more often. 8. In 2002-03, the _Detroit Pistons_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/pistons) played eight overtime games and won them all. In '79-80, the _Golden State Warriors_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/warriors) played eight OT games and lost them all. Both are records, for most overtime games in a season without a loss or a victory, respectively. 9. Years that the American Basketball Association survived as an NBA alternative, driving up players' salaries through bidding wars for their services and bringing a red-white-and-blue basketball, a dunk contest and funk to center stage in pro hoops. No one handled all three better than Julius Erving, who averaged 28.7 points in his five ABA seasons. 10. Losses for the _Chicago Bulls_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/bulls) in '95-96. Which means they won an NBA-record 72 times. This is also the Arabic numeral for "X," which is what former Bulls coach Phil Jackson had on his cap in June after the Lakers got him to 10 NBA championships as a head coach. 11. Jersey number worn by both Earl Lloyd and Chuck Cooper. Lloyd was the first African-American player to appear in an NBA game, participating for Washington on Oct. 31, 1950. Cooper was the first to be drafted (Boston, second round, '50) and Nat (Sweetwater) Clifton was the first black player to sign an NBA contract (Knicks). 12. No NBA player has made more three-pointers in a game than _Kobe Bryant_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/3118) (Jan. 7, 2003) and _Donyell Marshall_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/2627) (March 13, 2005), who each sank a dozen. 13. Moses Malone famously predicted that his Philadelphia team would win the 1983 title in just 12 games ("Fo, fo, fo"). In fact, it took the Sixers one extra because the Milwaukee Bucks fended off a sweep in Game 4 of the Eastern Conference finals. 14. In the second quarter of San Antonio's 157-154 victory over Denver on April 15, 1984, Spurs guard _John Lucas_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/4052) dished 14 assists, most by a player in one quarter. 15. Years between NBA Finals featuring the Lakers and the Celtics, 1969-84. After the Lakers' 4-2 series victory in '85, another 23 years would pass before Boston could seek payback. 16. Washington's _Gilbert Arenas_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/3540) , locked in a scoring duel with Kobe, scored 16 of his 60 points in overtime in a 147-141 victory over the Lakers in L.A. on Dec. 17, 2006. 17. Championships by the _Boston Celtics_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/celtics) . This includes 11 in a stretch of 13 seasons beginning in 1957. 18. Months that the American Basketball League survived from 1961 into '63. Though short-lived, the ABL -- founded by Abe Saperstein of Globetrotters fame -- introduced us to the three-point shot, pro basketball's first black coach (John McLendon) and George Streinbrenner as a team owner (Cleveland Pipers). 19. From 1966 through '84, a coin flip between the teams with the worst records in each conference determined the draft's No. 1 pick. The coin came up tails 12 times, heads just seven. Also, the team calling the flip guessed right just seven times. 20. Percent of their games from which Walter Dukes (21.9) and Vern Mikkelsen (20.1) fouled out during their careers. They're the only guys in league history (minimum 400 games) to be disqualified at a 1-in-5 pace. 21. Numbers retired by the _Boston Celtics_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/celtics) , including No. 18 for both Dave Cowens and Jim Loscutoff. 22. Number of playoff triple-doubles by which Magic Johnson leads Oscar Robertson, 30-8. Robertson holds the NBA career mark in regular-season games, 181 to Johnson's 138. 23. One hundred-eighty-six players have worn No. 23, according to basketball-reference.com, but _Michael Jordan_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/3464) owns it. 24. Seconds to shoot, thanks to the introduction of the shot clock for 1954-55. In the first game played with one, Rochester beat Boston 98-95 on Oct. 30, 1954. Average team scoring jumped from 79.5 to 93.1 in one year. 25. Points scored by Detroit's Isiah Thomas in the third quarter of Game 6 of the 1988 NBA Finals -- on a severely sprained ankle. But the Pistons lost and lost again two nights later when Lakers forward James Worthy picked Game 7 for the only triple-double of his career (36 points, 16 rebounds, 10 assists). 26. In the 1979 playoffs, six of the 11 series went the distance and the six clinching games were decided by a total of 26 points. 27. Rick Barry ('67) and Jordan ('03) hold the record for most shots taken in an All-Star Game. 28. Kobe sank 28 field goals in 43 tries, seven of them from three-point range, en route to scoring 81 points against Toronto on Jan. 22, 2006. It ranks second all-time in points scored to Chamberlain's 100-point bar-setter 44 years earlier. 29. In 1965, the Baltimore Bullets were 29-9 at home, 4-25 on the road and 5-8 at neutral sites. Then they got swept from the playoffs by St. Louis, losing twice at home and once on the road. 30. Most assists in an NBA game (Scott Skiles, Orlando, in a 155-116 rout of Denver on Dec. 30, 1990). 31. Best No. 31 ever? Got to be _Reggie Miller_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/231) , the NBA's all-time three-point leader with 6,486 attempts and 2,560 makes. 32. Chamberlain, despite notorious problems at the foul line throughout his career, shot 32 free throws and made 28 on March 2, 1962. Added to his 36-of-63 field-goal shooting, the Dipper finished with 100 points against the Knicks in Hershey, Pa. 33. With a 134-90 spanking of the _Atlanta Hawks_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/hawks) on Jan. 7, 1972, the _Los Angeles Lakers_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/lakers) won for the 33rd consecutive time, an NBA record. 34. In 34 road games in the NBA Finals, Milwaukee (4-1), Chicago (12-6) and San Antonio (7-4) are the only franchises with winning records. Everybody else is a combined 112-217, .340. That includes the Celtics (27-31, .466) and the Lakers (33-53, .384). 35. The _Miami Heat_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/heat) didn't score 100 points in a game in 2001-02 until a 102-96 victory over the Lakers in L.A. on Jan. 16, 2002. Their streak of 35 games in double digits is the NBA's longest. 36. Total franchises played for by the NBA's three most-traveled performers: Chuck Brown (12 teams), _Jim Jackson_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/832) (12) and _Tony Massenburg_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/219) (12). 37. Fewest points, two teams, in an NBA game: Fort Wayne 19, Minneapolis 18 on Nov. 22, 1950. 38. Elgin Baylor averaged 38.3 points in 1961-62, the most in NBA history by anyone not named Wilt. But his average doesn't officially rate in the league's record book because Baylor, with military obligations, played only 48 games, squeezing in his appearances on weekends. 39. With Cavaliers coach Mike Brown focused more on the playoffs, he goes heavy with subs in Cleveland's final game and loses it in overtime to Philadelphia. As a result, the Cavs join four other teams in NBA history to finish with a 39-2 home record, rather than tying the 1985-86 Celtics at 40-1. 40. Bill Russell grabbed 40 rebounds, a Finals record, in Game 2 of the 1960 series against St. Louis. Two years later, in OT against the Lakers, he grabbed 40 again. 41. You say _Dirk Nowitzki_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/3252) or _Glen Rice_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/281) , I say Wes Unseld. All of them wore No. 41. 42. Jerry West's team lost Game 7 of the 1969 Finals, but his 42 points, with 13 rebounds and 12 assists, earned him the inaugural Finals MVP trophy. He remains the only member of a losing team to win it. 43. Sacramento went the equivalent of a full road schedule (plus) without winning, losing its last 37 in 1991-92 and its first six in '92-93. 44. _Kevin Willis_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/376) -- born in September 1962 -- became the oldest player in league history, playing five games with Dallas in 2006-07 and averaging 2.4 points, 1.6 rebounds and 8.6 minutes. 45. Jordan's alternate jersey number, worn briefly upon his return from Retirement No. 1 in the spring of 1995. 46. At All-Star weekend in Phoenix last season, Oklahoma City's _Kevin Durant_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/4244) scored a record 46 points in the Rookie Challenge, hitting 17-of-25 shots and earning MVP honors. That's four points more than Chamberlain scored in setting the All-Star Game record in 1962. 47. Wish _Patrick Ewing_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/106) (born Aug. 5, 1962) a happy one on Wednesday. 48. Blame it on the sun: New York (20) and Ft. Wayne (28) combined for the fewest rebounds, two teams, in an NBA game. The 1955 game was played on Valentine's Day in Miami. 49. Alaska, 49th in joining the United States, last in NBA players produced. Only Miami guard _Mario Chalmers_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/4496) lists Alaska as his birthplace, as basketball-reference.com notes. 50. Dominique Wilkins, Bernard King, Bob McAdoo, Alex English and Bob Lanier were among those feeling a little snubbed when the NBA honored its alleged 50 Greatest Players at NBA All-Star weekend in Cleveland in 1997 (celebrating an anniversary almost as forced as this one). 51. Denver's Kiki Vandeweghe, with 51 points, holds bragging rights for the high individual scorer in the highest-scoring game in NBA history. In a 186-184 triple-overtime dazzler won by Detroit on Dec. 13, 1983, Isiah Thomas and Alex English each scored 47. John Long had 41 and Kelly Tripucka 35 for the Pistons, while Dan Issel chipped in 28 for the Nuggets. By the way, each team attempted just two three-pointers. 52. Larry Bird's playoff winning percentage (32-20, .615) as a head coach, in 52 games for Indiana, is better than Auerbach's (.589), Tom Heinsohn's (.588), K.C. Jones' (.587) and Bill Russell's (.557). 53. David Thompson scored 53 points in the first half, en route to 73, on the final day of the 1977-78 season, temporarily claiming the scoring title at 27.15 ppg. Seven hours later, though, San Antonio's George Gervin dropped in 63 -- 53 in the first half -- to finish at 27.22 ppg for the crown. 54. People actually thought the _Utah Jazz_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/jazz) , with home-court advantage and free from Finals jitters, had a chance to beat Chicago in 1998. Until Utah scored 54 points, an NBA playoff record low, in losing Game 3 at the United Center. 55. Grabbing 55 rebounds in a game always was a bigger thrill, Wilt Chamberlain said, than scoring 100 points. Probably because he did it against Boston and rival/friend Bill Russell on Nov. 24, 1960. 56. Who's the best ever to wear No. 56? Er, take your pick: _Francisco Elson_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/3364) or _Brandon Hunter_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/3759) ? 57. In 1999, soon after winning their first NBA championship, the _San Antonio Spurs_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/teams/spurs) selected _Manu Ginobili_ (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/players/3380) with the No. 57 pick in the draft. It might be the best late pick in draft history. 58. When the 2008-09 season opened, there were 58 former ACC players on NBA rosters, more than from any other college conference. 59. While Philadelphia (9-73) was sputtering to the worst record in NBA history in 1972-73, the Boston Celtics were going 68-14. That left the Sixers 59 games behind in the Atlantic Division. 60. Candles on the NBA's birthday cake today. From noah.evans at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 19:56:42 2009 From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 21:56:42 +0200 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <56a297000908031256hf485acaqbbda4cb41a20a2c3@mail.gmail.com> I like it. Our team needed a muscle guy to stand up to teams that try to intimidate us(i.e. the lakers last christmas). If he's useful it's an added bonus. On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 9:47 PM, George Meyer wrote: > oh goodie, I eagerly await the deluge of "Clifford Ray will turn him into > Moses Malone" talk that has been sorely lacking since Patrick O'Bryant threw > all that cold water on the Cult-of-Cliff (or, "Coach Ray"). > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From jeffclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 20:18:03 2009 From: jeffclark at gmail.com (jeffclark at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:18:03 -0400 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <56a297000908031256hf485acaqbbda4cb41a20a2c3@mail.gmail.com> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> <56a297000908031256hf485acaqbbda4cb41a20a2c3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <84e131670908031318n6750d14aof2028c5ed576bafa@mail.gmail.com> a sculptor needs clay to work with - at first POB looked like he might be clay, but in fact he was dung Cult-of-Cliff is still my hero, if only for saving a dolphin On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Noah Evans wrote: > I like it. Our team needed a muscle guy to stand up to teams that try > to intimidate us(i.e. the lakers last christmas). If he's useful it's > an added bonus. > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 9:47 PM, George Meyer wrote: > > oh goodie, I eagerly await the deluge of "Clifford Ray will turn him into > > Moses Malone" talk that has been sorely lacking since Patrick O'Bryant > threw > > all that cold water on the Cult-of-Cliff (or, "Coach Ray"). > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- Jeff CelticsBlog.com doughnutholes.wordpress.com From pdelevett at yahoo.com Mon Aug 3 20:18:28 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: I don't know what Marc Spears is smokin' Message-ID: <662479.3366.qm@web110108.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> But there is no way Davis is coming back with Williams on board. KG, Perk and Sheed are each going to play about 30 mpg. That right there represents all the available minutes at the 4 and 5. One can assume they didn't sign Williams - who, I'll concede, is at least a live body with a modicum of inside muscle - to sit on the end of the bench all season long. Plus there's Scal in the mix. I just don't see the Celtics keeping 6 bigs this year. Davis is gone. From cfarinella at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 20:25:50 2009 From: cfarinella at gmail.com (Charles Farinella) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:25:50 -0400 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2c1783860908031325i67c9b339va38fa8f68af8e614@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:47 PM, George Meyer wrote: > oh goodie, I eagerly await the deluge of "Clifford Ray will turn him into > Moses Malone" talk that has been sorely lacking since Patrick O'Bryant threw > all that cold water on the Cult-of-Cliff (or, "Coach Ray"). Has anyone actually seen Eggcentric and George Meyer in the same room together? -- Charlie Farinella cfarinella at gmail.com From jeffclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 20:26:25 2009 From: jeffclark at gmail.com (jeffclark at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:26:25 -0400 Subject: I don't know what Marc Spears is smokin' In-Reply-To: <662479.3366.qm@web110108.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <662479.3366.qm@web110108.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <84e131670908031326p6173e0ffg7609a9cbb1392f38@mail.gmail.com> you cannot assume that KG, Sheed, and Perk are all going to be healthy all year, and I doubt that the Celtics are making that assumption On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Peter Delevett wrote: > But there is no way Davis is coming back with Williams on board. > > KG, Perk and Sheed are each going to play about 30 mpg. That right there > represents all the available minutes at the 4 and 5. One can assume they > didn't sign Williams - who, I'll concede, is at least a live body with a > modicum of inside muscle - to sit on the end of the bench all season long. > Plus there's Scal in the mix. I just don't see the Celtics keeping 6 bigs > this year. Davis is gone. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > -- Jeff CelticsBlog.com doughnutholes.wordpress.com From jwhite128 at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 20:31:48 2009 From: jwhite128 at gmail.com (Jeff White) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:31:48 -0400 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <2c1783860908031325i67c9b339va38fa8f68af8e614@mail.gmail.com> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> <2c1783860908031325i67c9b339va38fa8f68af8e614@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1923cbc90908031331s1771095av82177612fede9fb0@mail.gmail.com> Great minds think alike. I was thinking of posting the same thing. On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Charles Farinella wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:47 PM, George Meyer wrote: > > oh goodie, I eagerly await the deluge of "Clifford Ray will turn him into > > Moses Malone" talk that has been sorely lacking since Patrick O'Bryant > threw > > all that cold water on the Cult-of-Cliff (or, "Coach Ray"). > > Has anyone actually seen Eggcentric and George Meyer in the same room > together? > > -- > Charlie Farinella > cfarinella at gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Mon Aug 3 21:29:16 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:29:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: I don't know what Marc Spears is smokin' In-Reply-To: <662479.3366.qm@web110108.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <725798.16934.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Hey Peter, Respectfully disagree. Williams is nothing more than big man insurance, in the long line of illustrious end-of-bench stiffitude like Scot Pollard, Patrick O'Bryant, and Mikki Moore. I like Williams the best of the that bunch and I think his career *could* be savaged in Green--he does has a 7'4" wingspan, and decent defensive instincts. He could be a Perk-like player on the defensive end with some seasoning. However, there has to be a reason he hasn't gotten off the bench on the other teams he's played on--there was opportunity there and he never seized it. That's not good and also doesn't lead me to believe for a second that Williams is the Baby replacement. As for what this does to Baby--nothing. He's still the team's best option as 4th Big. If anything, this puts Scal's spot in jeopardy and for good reason--now we can deal his expiring contract if necessary. Williams is more 4 than 5 anyway and now Danny's free to include Scal in a sign-and-trade--which might get the Daniels deal back off the ground. I'm also tired of this "Perk, KG, and Wallace with play 30 minutes a night and therefore we don't need to invest in a legitimate 4th big" talk which I've seen almost everywhere, repeated like it's the gospel truth. It's NOT. Instead of looking at minutes per game (which can be foiled by foul trouble, ejections, and injuries), it's more statistically valid to look at minutes per season. At the 4/5 spots over the course of 82 games, there are a total of 7872 minutes throughout the season. For the past 2 seasons, KG has averaged 2065 minutes per season, Perk has averaged 2082.5 minutes per season, and Wallace has averaged 2234.5 minutes per season. That adds up to 6382 minutes per season for all 3--leaving a whooping 1490 minutes left over at the 4/5 spots for the 4th big (assuming the 4th big can play both positions), or roughly 18 minutes per game. There's plenty of minutes for Glen Davis and it'd be prudent and a good use of money to resign him to a contract at his fair market value because he's young, improving, and there's a definite role and need for him in our lineup. Something like 4 years, 18 million sounds fair to me... Ryan --- On Mon, 8/3/09, Peter Delevett wrote: > From: Peter Delevett > Subject: I don't know what Marc Spears is smokin' > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 3:18 PM > But there is no way Davis is coming > back with Williams on board. > > KG, Perk and Sheed are each going to play about 30 mpg. > That right there represents all the available minutes at the > 4 and 5. One can assume they didn't sign Williams - who, > I'll concede, is at least a live body with a modicum of > inside muscle - to sit on the end of the bench all season > long. Plus there's Scal in the mix. I just don't see the > Celtics keeping 6 bigs this year. Davis is gone. > > > ? ? ? > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From pdelevett at yahoo.com Mon Aug 3 22:48:09 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 15:48:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A whooping 1490 minutes Message-ID: <805892.651.qm@web110114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> >>There's plenty of minutes for Glen Davis Ryan, you don't have to convince ME - I'd love for Danny to re-sign Baby, even if he doesn't play as much this season as in years past. He's a nice piece for our future. But I just don't sense that Ainge values him as much, or at least, that he's willing to tie up much of the team's future salary cap for him. I do think you're right, though, that this move was made with an eye toward another one, whether that involves shedding Davis, Scal and/or others. One last thing: where'd you see that Williams has a 7'4 wingspan? I thought one of the reasons William hadn't been able to translate his collegiate dominance into a semblance of NBA success was that his arms are short; they sure look to be. I wish there were a reliable source on the Web for actual stocking-feet measurements of NBA players. From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Mon Aug 3 23:25:40 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:25:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A whooping 1490 minutes In-Reply-To: <805892.651.qm@web110114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <913270.6147.qm@web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Well, if you believe Egg, Danny's doesn't want to give Baby anything more than the qualifying offer. To me, that doesn't sound like the Danny I know (and no I don't know Danny, but you know what I mean). In my opinion, Danny's just being a bad-ass--he gambled that this summer would be a buyer's market and therefore decided to let the market determine Baby's worth. And the market has spoken. Now, it's a matter of when or if Baby's representative comes back to the negotiating table and what they're looking for. But the ball's in Baby's court--at some point he's going to have to decide that his dream of getting MLE money isn't going to happen and at that point I hope they can work out a reasonable contract that's in EVERYONE'S favor. We'll see. Danny's gamble has paid off so far... As for Williams' wingspan, go to: http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Wings--spans--N--Things-Analyzing-the-Pre-Draft-Measurements-1349/ The wingspan info on Williams is in the very last paragraph. Interestingly, he measured at 6'7" and 3/4s of an inch without shoes on... Ryan --- On Mon, 8/3/09, Peter Delevett wrote: > From: Peter Delevett > Subject: A whooping 1490 minutes > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 5:48 PM > >>There's plenty of minutes for > Glen Davis > > Ryan, you don't have to convince ME - I'd love for Danny to > re-sign Baby, even if he doesn't play as much this season as > in years past. He's a nice piece for our future. But I just > don't sense that Ainge values him as much, or at least, that > he's willing to tie up much of the team's future salary cap > for him. > > I do think you're right, though, that this move was made > with an eye toward another one, whether that involves > shedding Davis, Scal and/or others. > > One last thing: where'd you see that Williams has a 7'4 > wingspan? I thought one of the reasons William hadn't been > able to translate his collegiate dominance into a semblance > of NBA success was that his arms are short; they sure look > to be. I wish there were a reliable source on the Web for > actual stocking-feet measurements of NBA players. > > > > ? ? ? > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From jlyell at verizon.net Tue Aug 4 00:18:17 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:18:17 -0700 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <2c1783860908031325i67c9b339va38fa8f68af8e614@mail.gmail.com> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> <2c1783860908031325i67c9b339va38fa8f68af8e614@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <65F77449-5508-4BA8-8FF4-033A224BFB74@verizon.net> Lakers likely would have it they had not resigned odom On Aug 3, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Charles Farinella wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:47 PM, George Meyer > wrote: >> oh goodie, I eagerly await the deluge of "Clifford Ray will turn >> him into >> Moses Malone" talk that has been sorely lacking since Patrick >> O'Bryant threw >> all that cold water on the Cult-of-Cliff (or, "Coach Ray"). > > Has anyone actually seen Eggcentric and George Meyer in the same > room together? > > -- > Charlie Farinella > cfarinella at gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From pdelevett at yahoo.com Tue Aug 4 00:24:33 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:24:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A whooping can of whoop-ass Message-ID: <895315.60344.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Thanks, man. >>>>>> Ryan wrote: As for Williams' wingspan, go to: http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Wings--spans--N--Things-Analyzing-the-Pre-Draft-Measurements-1349/ From renrile at qualcomm.com Tue Aug 4 00:40:43 2009 From: renrile at qualcomm.com (Enrile, Roy) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:40:43 -0700 Subject: A whooping 1490 minutes In-Reply-To: <805892.651.qm@web110114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <805892.651.qm@web110114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0938E4C6C3C7CF48BB2F343EC9CF161814F69A24DB@NASANEXMB02.na.qualcomm.com> Peter, besides the DraftExpress article from an earlier post , here's the web database you're asking for , that has pre-draft camp true wingspans & height_without_shoes for every year. Sheldon Williams entry shows that yes he's a true 6'7.5" w/o shoes & has 7'4.25" wingspan. Perk in past articles was at 7'5" wingspan. http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?year=2006&sort2=DESC&draft=0&pos=0&sort=1 I've tried to watch games w/ Williams since I liked him out of college. It looks like the reason he hasn't translated production to the pros and is only at 15mpg , 5points, 4boards for his career, is that his body language & play shows he doesn't have the desire/hustle of Leon/Baby. Doesn't crash offensive boards, or dive to the floor, & he watches bigs finish, instead of jumping over for help D. He still shows flashes of his rare combo of PF skills ( heavyweight who can defensive rebound , yet also has surprising mobility & potential long-arm shotblocking). So I hope KG & the Celt coaches can light a fire in him so he might take a little of Leon's defender/intimidator minutes, and be widebody insurance for Perk/Baby. ________________________________________ From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Peter Delevett [pdelevett at yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 3:48 PM One last thing: where'd you see that Williams has a 7'4 wingspan? I thought one of the reasons William hadn't been able to translate his collegiate dominance into a semblance of NBA success was that his arms are short; they sure look to be. I wish there were a reliable source on the Web for actual stocking-feet measurements of NBA players. From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 4 00:47:57 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:47:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A whooping can of whoop-ass In-Reply-To: <895315.60344.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <605632.58387.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> No prob, man. Williams has an impressive wing span, but it doesn't translate well on the offensive end. In fact, it doesn't translate well into a standing reach either, which is only 8'8". But check out these FG% numbers: 69% of Williams field goal attempts are 'inside'--and he hits those at a 48.9% clip. 40% of Baby's field goal attempts are 'inside'--and he hits those at a 55.9% clip. Even worse, check out out Williams' % on dunks--12% of his field goal attempts are dunks and he only hits 62.5% of those dunks! That's beyond terrible. Baby shoots a cool 100% on dunks. These #s are from 82games.com People love to pick on Baby's ability to score down low, but he's a vastly superior inside scorer when compared to Williams. The only place where Williams' wing span translates into any sort of positive is on the defensive boards and in the shot blocking department, the only areas where Williams compares favorably to Baby... Ryan --- On Mon, 8/3/09, Peter Delevett wrote: > From: Peter Delevett > Subject: A whooping can of whoop-ass > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 7:24 PM > Thanks, man. > > >>>>>> > > Ryan wrote: > > As for Williams' wingspan, go to: > > http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Wings--spans--N--Things-Analyzing-the-Pre-Draft-Measurements-1349/ > > > > > ? ? ? > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From kmalo17 at verizon.net Tue Aug 4 02:43:10 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:43:10 -0400 Subject: A whooping 1490 minutes In-Reply-To: <913270.6147.qm@web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <805892.651.qm@web110114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <913270.6147.qm@web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0KNT008U2ZMF22T3@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net> At 07:25 PM 8/3/2009, Ryan W wrote: >Well, if you believe Egg, Danny's doesn't want to give Baby anything >more than the qualifying offer. To me, that doesn't sound like the >Danny I know (and no I don't know Danny, but you know what I mean). > >In my opinion, Danny's just being a bad-ass--he gambled that this >summer would be a buyer's market and therefore decided to let the >market determine Baby's worth. And the market has spoken. I don't fundamentally disagree, au contraire, but it's not quite that simple. The realities of Baby are this - teams know that if they offer him about what he's really worth (and we disagree slightly about that Ryan, with me saying a bit lower and maybe a year or two less) the Cs will almost certainly match, so why should they bother to tie up money in the offer they might want to use elsewhere, even if it's only tied up temporarily. So to get him they'd have to significantly overpay what the legit market for him would be without the restricted FA factor, and he's not a player you really overpay for unless he perfectly fits a last missing slot or two on your particular team. This is the restricted FA speaking much louder than the market per se. >Now, it's a matter of when or if Baby's representative comes back to >the negotiating table and what they're looking for. But the ball's >in Baby's court--at some point he's going to have to decide that his >dream of getting MLE money isn't going to happen and at that point I >hope they can work out a reasonable contract that's in EVERYONE'S >favor. We'll see. Danny's gamble has paid off so far... I think he has to already realize he's unlikely to get the full MLE - he's far from stupid - but he may have to lower what he expects to get below MLE money too. Which is not to say to just the qualifying offer - I agree that that's nonsense. But more like $3-3.5MM and maybe fewer years. Kim From kmalo17 at verizon.net Tue Aug 4 02:50:12 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:50:12 -0400 Subject: I don't know what Marc Spears is smokin' In-Reply-To: <725798.16934.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <662479.3366.qm@web110108.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <725798.16934.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0KNT003R7ZY4LPF4@vms173005.mailsrvcs.net> At 05:29 PM 8/3/2009, Ryan W wrote: >Hey Peter, > >Respectfully disagree. Williams is nothing more than big man >insurance, in the long line of illustrious end-of-bench stiffitude >like Scot Pollard, Patrick O'Bryant, and Mikki Moore. I like >Williams the best of the that bunch and I think his career *could* >be savaged in Green--he does has a 7'4" wingspan, and decent >defensive instincts. He could be a Perk-like player on the >defensive end with some seasoning. However, there has to be a >reason he hasn't gotten off the bench on the other teams he's played >on--there was opportunity there and he never seized it. That's not >good and also doesn't lead me to believe for a second that Williams >is the Baby replacement. I suspect the lesson got burned into management's psyche that a big part of the problem in the Chicago series, especially with the OTs, and whose echoes carried over to the next series, was that between fouls and injuries we simply ran out of bodies up front. Not good, much less great, alternatives, but at times just bodies who could fill even a minimal role of acting as a roadblock and staying on the court long enough to let us do something in between fouls, while at other times we simply ran out of bodies, as in merely breathing and upright. Kim From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 4 11:24:34 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 07:24:34 -0400 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <65F77449-5508-4BA8-8FF4-033A224BFB74@verizon.net> References: <416448.24338.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006701ca0113$c36011e0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> <3f0c87180907110914i55d16e45t59e39fa2dc3bd51e@mail.gmail.com> <200908031902.n73J210u028647@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <253b689a0908031247m459cf4aao2bf81dfc48fd58db@mail.gmail.com> <2c1783860908031325i67c9b339va38fa8f68af8e614@mail.gmail.com> <65F77449-5508-4BA8-8FF4-033A224BFB74@verizon.net> Message-ID: <200908041124.n74BObCM018426@ares.afrc.af.mil> The Lakers would've seen George and Egg in the same room? Egg is Jeannie Buss? -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of John Lyell Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 8:18 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Cc: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: Cs sign Shelden Williams Lakers likely would have it they had not resigned odom On Aug 3, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Charles Farinella wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:47 PM, George Meyer > wrote: >> oh goodie, I eagerly await the deluge of "Clifford Ray will turn >> him into >> Moses Malone" talk that has been sorely lacking since Patrick >> O'Bryant threw >> all that cold water on the Cult-of-Cliff (or, "Coach Ray"). > > Has anyone actually seen Eggcentric and George Meyer in the same > room together? > > -- > Charlie Farinella > cfarinella at gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From gk_tyler at yahoo.com Tue Aug 4 13:08:48 2009 From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 06:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden Message-ID: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I like the signing.? It's limited and focused.? It gives us a tough big who can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes.? He comes cheap.? A lot of good things. I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more.? Is it the Krewsheshefski (and Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent than others that cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA?? Is it that the teams he went to needed more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was outscored by his competitors?? Is he just under-motivated?? I would think that he should get the message by now that his career is on the edge.? Alternative:? busting out of the league and managing his wife's career?? I doubt he wants that. So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid backup down the road.? POB could shoot and block shots, but wasn't a lunch-pail type PF.? Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that as much as rebounding and shot-blocking, which he brings.? So, he's an upgrade, imo.? I agree that he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the completion of the Daniels deal.? Also nice to see L. Hudson repairing and able to work out in a few weeks.? It would be interesting if he were our NBDL guy this year, to see what he could bring.? Not so good to begin the season with a true backup point.? Cheers, Gene From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 4 13:33:12 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:33:12 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908041333.n74DXEBL025356@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> Duke players failing in the NBA? Easy. They go from one of the most structured offensive systems in the NCAA built on movement without the ball, picking away from the ball and passing to a spot timing offense to an NBA rife with "stand around and watch the star go one on five" at worst and two man game pick and roll/pick n pop at best. Duke players are typically not the most athletically gifted players which is why the vast majority end up complementary types at the next level (with exceptions of course). Defensively they're better prepared, although Duke runs a deny the ball defense which can be destroyed by teams that could run Pete Carrill's old back cut offense, but there aren't many of those out there. Add in that the incentive of making it to the NBA no longer exists. High salaries right out of college. Coaches that MUST be players "friends" unless they want to be fired. And a host of other dis-incentives and you have a situation where it is the breakout player who is the exception and the player that doesn't quite live up as the norm. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of gene kirkpatrick Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 9:09 AM To: celtics Subject: on Shelden I like the signing.? It's limited and focused.? It gives us a tough big who can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes.? He comes cheap.? A lot of good things. I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more.? Is it the Krewsheshefski (and Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent than others that cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA?? Is it that the teams he went to needed more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was outscored by his competitors?? Is he just under-motivated?? I would think that he should get the message by now that his career is on the edge.? Alternative:? busting out of the league and managing his wife's career?? I doubt he wants that. So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid backup down the road.? POB could shoot and block shots, but wasn't a lunch-pail type PF.? Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that as much as rebounding and shot-blocking, which he brings.? So, he's an upgrade, imo.? I agree that he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the completion of the Daniels deal.? Also nice to see L. Hudson repairing and able to work out in a few weeks.? It would be interesting if he were our NBDL guy this year, to see what he could bring.? Not so good to begin the season with a true backup point.? Cheers, Gene _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 13:33:43 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:33:43 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908040633h17ba1dc5p2f43eb37bdce2f78@mail.gmail.com> I like House as a backup point much better than Marb anyway.... No much need in his ball handling: both Paul and Ray often times play the point running the backup 5... AG On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:08 AM, gene kirkpatrick wrote: > I like the signing. It's limited and focused. It gives us a tough big who > can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes. He comes cheap. A lot of good > things. > > I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more. Is it the Krewsheshefski (and > Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent than others that > cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA? Is it that the teams he went to needed > more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was outscored by his competitors? > Is he just under-motivated? I would think that he should get the message by > now that his career is on the edge. Alternative: busting out of the league > and managing his wife's career? I doubt he wants that. > > So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid backup down the > road. POB could shoot and block shots, but wasn't a lunch-pail type PF. > Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that as much as rebounding > and shot-blocking, which he brings. So, he's an upgrade, imo. I agree that > he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the completion of the > Daniels deal. Also nice to see L. Hudson repairing and able to work out in > a few weeks. It would be interesting if he were our NBDL guy this year, to > see what he could bring. Not so good to begin the season with a true backup > point. Cheers, Gene > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 13:39:57 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:39:57 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <200908041333.n74DXEBL025356@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200908041333.n74DXEBL025356@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908040639o73508449u5516b7cba5eebcb3@mail.gmail.com> Btw, some info leaking on Baby: http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/celtics/jeff-goodman/2009/08/03/big-baby-still-waiting-find-destination 2MM/yr is right in the wheelhouse I expected. No way he's an MLE player... AG On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:33 AM, wrote: > Duke players failing in the NBA? > > Easy. They go from one of the most structured offensive systems in the NCAA > built on movement without the ball, picking away from the ball and passing > to a spot timing offense to an NBA rife with "stand around and watch the > star go one on five" at worst and two man game pick and roll/pick n pop at > best. Duke players are typically not the most athletically gifted players > which is why the vast majority end up complementary types at the next level > (with exceptions of course). Defensively they're better prepared, although > Duke runs a deny the ball defense which can be destroyed by teams that could > run Pete Carrill's old back cut offense, but there aren't many of those out > there. > > Add in that the incentive of making it to the NBA no longer exists. High > salaries right out of college. Coaches that MUST be players "friends" unless > they want to be fired. And a host of other dis-incentives and you have a > situation where it is the breakout player who is the exception and the > player that doesn't quite live up as the norm. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf > Of gene kirkpatrick > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 9:09 AM > To: celtics > Subject: on Shelden > > I like the signing. It's limited and focused. It gives us a tough big who > can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes. He comes cheap. A lot of good > things. > > I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more. Is it the Krewsheshefski (and > Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent than others that > cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA? Is it that the teams he went to needed > more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was outscored by his competitors? > Is he just under-motivated? I would think that he should get the message by > now that his career is on the edge. Alternative: busting out of the league > and managing his wife's career? I doubt he wants that. > > So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid backup down the > road. POB could shoot and block shots, but wasn't a lunch-pail type PF. > Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that as much as rebounding > and shot-blocking, which he brings. So, he's an upgrade, imo. I agree that > he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the completion of the > Daniels deal. Also nice to see L. Hudson repairing and able to work out in > a few weeks. It would be interesting if he were our NBDL guy this year, to > see what he could bring. Not so good to begin the season with a true backup > point. Cheers, Gene > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 4 14:27:52 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 07:27:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908040639o73508449u5516b7cba5eebcb3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <22119.36409.qm@web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> There's a hell of a lot of difference between 2 and 5.8 million. I'd be very surprised if Baby settles for anything less than 3 million per... Ryan --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 8:39 AM > Btw, some info leaking on Baby: > > http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/celtics/jeff-goodman/2009/08/03/big-baby-still-waiting-find-destination > > > 2MM/yr is right in the wheelhouse I expected. No way he's > an MLE player... > > AG > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:33 AM, > wrote: > > > Duke players failing in the NBA? > > > > Easy. They go from one of the most structured > offensive systems in the NCAA > > built on movement without the ball, picking away from > the ball and passing > > to a spot timing offense to an NBA rife with "stand > around and watch the > > star go one on five" at worst and two man game pick > and roll/pick n pop at > > best.? Duke players are typically not the most > athletically gifted players > > which is why the vast majority end up complementary > types at the next level > > (with exceptions of course). Defensively they're > better prepared, although > > Duke runs a deny the ball defense which can be > destroyed by teams that could > > run Pete Carrill's old back cut offense, but there > aren't many of those out > > there. > > > > Add in that the incentive of making it to the NBA no > longer exists. High > > salaries right out of college. Coaches that MUST be > players "friends" unless > > they want to be fired. And a host of other > dis-incentives and you have a > > situation where it is the breakout player who is the > exception and the > > player that doesn't quite live up as the norm. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf > > Of gene kirkpatrick > > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 9:09 AM > > To: celtics > > Subject: on Shelden > > > > I like the signing.? It's limited and > focused.? It gives us a tough big who > > can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes.? He > comes cheap.? A lot of good > > things. > > > > I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more.? Is > it the Krewsheshefski (and > > Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent > than others that > > cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA?? Is it that > the teams he went to needed > > more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was > outscored by his competitors? > > Is he just under-motivated?? I would think that > he should get the message by > > now that his career is on the edge.? > Alternative:? busting out of the league > > and managing his wife's career?? I doubt he wants > that. > > > > So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid > backup down the > > road.? POB could shoot and block shots, but > wasn't a lunch-pail type PF. > > Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that > as much as rebounding > > and shot-blocking, which he brings.? So, he's an > upgrade, imo.? I agree that > > he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the > completion of the > > Daniels deal.? Also nice to see L. Hudson > repairing and able to work out in > > a few weeks.? It would be interesting if he were > our NBDL guy this year, to > > see what he could bring.? Not so good to begin > the season with a true backup > > point.? Cheers, Gene > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 4 14:36:51 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 07:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908040633h17ba1dc5p2f43eb37bdce2f78@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <957737.39456.qm@web65602.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> The last 2 years have shown, unequivocally, that House at the point is good for no one, not House and not the players around him. How much more proof do we need? House's limitations are not worth the strain he puts on the rest of the lineup... Ryan --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 8:33 AM > I like House as a backup point much > better than Marb anyway.... No much need > in his ball handling: both Paul and Ray often times play > the point running > the backup 5... > > AG > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:08 AM, gene kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > I like the signing.? It's limited and > focused.? It gives us a tough big who > > can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes.? He > comes cheap.? A lot of good > > things. > > > > I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more.? Is > it the Krewsheshefski (and > > Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent > than others that > > cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA?? Is it that > the teams he went to needed > > more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was > outscored by his competitors? > > Is he just under-motivated?? I would think that > he should get the message by > > now that his career is on the edge.? > Alternative:? busting out of the league > > and managing his wife's career?? I doubt he wants > that. > > > > So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid > backup down the > > road.? POB could shoot and block shots, but > wasn't a lunch-pail type PF. > > Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that > as much as rebounding > > and shot-blocking, which he brings.? So, he's an > upgrade, imo.? I agree that > > he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the > completion of the > > Daniels deal.? Also nice to see L. Hudson > repairing and able to work out in > > a few weeks.? It would be interesting if he were > our NBDL guy this year, to > > see what he could bring.? Not so good to begin > the season with a true backup > > point.? Cheers, Gene > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 15:49:45 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:49:45 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <957737.39456.qm@web65602.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <3f0c87180908040633h17ba1dc5p2f43eb37bdce2f78@mail.gmail.com> <957737.39456.qm@web65602.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908040849v43ba7b43n93e71ffa67ad70ee@mail.gmail.com> We won the big one with him at the point. Need another one?... I could do a deep dive why he's good at the point for this particular team, but I see no use here... AG On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Ryan W wrote: > > The last 2 years have shown, unequivocally, that House at the point is good > for no one, not House and not the players around him. How much more proof > do we need? > > House's limitations are not worth the strain he puts on the rest of the > lineup... > > Ryan > > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > > > From: Alex Goldblatt > > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 8:33 AM > > I like House as a backup point much > > better than Marb anyway.... No much need > > in his ball handling: both Paul and Ray often times play > > the point running > > the backup 5... > > > > AG > > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:08 AM, gene kirkpatrick > > wrote: > > > > > I like the signing. It's limited and > > focused. It gives us a tough big who > > > can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes. He > > comes cheap. A lot of good > > > things. > > > > > > I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more. Is > > it the Krewsheshefski (and > > > Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent > > than others that > > > cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA? Is it that > > the teams he went to needed > > > more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was > > outscored by his competitors? > > > Is he just under-motivated? I would think that > > he should get the message by > > > now that his career is on the edge. > > Alternative: busting out of the league > > > and managing his wife's career? I doubt he wants > > that. > > > > > > So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid > > backup down the > > > road. POB could shoot and block shots, but > > wasn't a lunch-pail type PF. > > > Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that > > as much as rebounding > > > and shot-blocking, which he brings. So, he's an > > upgrade, imo. I agree that > > > he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the > > completion of the > > > Daniels deal. Also nice to see L. Hudson > > repairing and able to work out in > > > a few weeks. It would be interesting if he were > > our NBDL guy this year, to > > > see what he could bring. Not so good to begin > > the season with a true backup > > > point. Cheers, Gene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From jeffclark at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 15:51:50 2009 From: jeffclark at gmail.com (jeffclark at gmail.com) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:51:50 -0400 Subject: Schedule is out (early) Message-ID: <84e131670908040851r104621a6yc4e6ad46a3c59a3d@mail.gmail.com> http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=30962.0 Tue, Oct 27 Boston Cleveland 7:30 AM ET TNT -- Wed, Oct 28 Charlotte Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Oct 30 Chicago Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Sun, Nov 01 New Orleans Boston 6:00 PM ET NBATV -- Tue, Nov 03 Boston Philadelphia 7:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Nov 04 Boston Minnesota 8:00 PM ET -- -- Fri, Nov 06 Phoenix Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sat, Nov 07 Boston New Jersey 7:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Nov 11 Utah Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Nov 13 Atlanta Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Sat, Nov 14 Boston Indiana 7:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Nov 18 Golden State Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Nov 20 Orlando Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Sun, Nov 22 Boston New York 1:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Nov 25 Philadelphia Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Nov 27 Toronto Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Nov 29 Boston Miami 6:00 PM ET NBATV -- Tue, Dec 01 Boston Charlotte 7:00 PM ET -- -- Thu, Dec 03 Boston San Antonio 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Fri, Dec 04 Boston Oklahoma City 8:00 PM ET -- -- Tue, Dec 08 Milwaukee Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Thu, Dec 10 Boston Washington 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Sat, Dec 12 Boston Chicago 8:00 PM ET NBATV -- Mon, Dec 14 Boston Memphis 8:00 PM ET -- -- Fri, Dec 18 Philadelphia Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Dec 20 Minnesota Boston 6:00 PM ET -- -- Tue, Dec 22 Indiana Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Dec 25 Boston Orlando 2:30 PM ET ABC -- Sun, Dec 27 Boston L.A. Clippers 9:30 PM ET -- -- Mon, Dec 28 Boston Golden State 10:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Dec 30 Boston Phoenix 9:00 PM ET NBATV -- Sat, Jan 02 Toronto Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Jan 06 Boston Miami 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Jan 08 Boston Atlanta 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Sun, Jan 10 Boston Toronto 1:00 PM ET -- -- Mon, Jan 11 Atlanta Boston 7:30 PM ET NBATV -- Wed, Jan 13 Boston New Jersey 7:30 PM ET -- -- Thu, Jan 14 Chicago Boston 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Mon, Jan 18 Dallas Boston 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Wed, Jan 20 Boston Detroit 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Jan 22 Portland Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Mon, Jan 25 L.A. Clippers Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Thu, Jan 28 Boston Orlando 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Fri, Jan 29 Boston Atlanta 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Jan 31 L.A. Lakers Boston 3:30 PM ET ABC -- Mon, Feb 01 Boston Washington 7:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Feb 03 Miami Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Fri, Feb 05 New Jersey Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Feb 07 Orlando Boston 2:30 PM ET ABC -- Wed, Feb 10 Boston New Orleans 8:00 PM ET NBATV -- Tue, Feb 16 Boston Sacramento 10:00 PM ET -- -- Thu, Feb 18 Boston L.A. Lakers 10:30 PM ET TNT -- Fri, Feb 19 Boston Portland 10:30 PM ET ESPN -- Sun, Feb 21 Boston Denver 3:30 PM ET ABC -- Tue, Feb 23 New York Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Thu, Feb 25 Cleveland Boston 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Sat, Feb 27 New Jersey Boston 1:00 PM ET -- -- Tue, Mar 02 Boston Detroit 7:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Mar 03 Charlotte Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Mar 05 Boston Philadelphia 7:00 PM ET -- -- Sun, Mar 07 Washington Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Tue, Mar 09 Boston Milwaukee 8:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Mar 10 Memphis Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Mar 12 Indiana Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Mar 14 Boston Cleveland 3:30 PM ET ABC -- Mon, Mar 15 Detroit Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Wed, Mar 17 New York Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Mar 19 Boston Houston 8:30 PM ET NBATV -- Sat, Mar 20 Boston Dallas 9:00 PM ET -- -- Mon, Mar 22 Boston Utah 9:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Mar 24 Denver Boston 7:00 PM ET ESPN -- Fri, Mar 26 Sacramento Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Mar 28 San Antonio Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Wed, Mar 31 Oklahoma City Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Apr 02 Houston Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Apr 04 Cleveland Boston 1:00 PM ET ABC -- Tue, Apr 06 Boston New York 7:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Apr 07 Boston Toronto 7:00 PM ET -- -- Fri, Apr 09 Washington Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sat, Apr 10 Boston Milwaukee 8:30 PM ET -- -- Tue, Apr 13 Boston Chicago 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Wed, Apr 14 Milwaukee Boston 8:00 PM ET -- -- -- Jeff CelticsBlog.com doughnutholes.wordpress.com From eggcentric at aol.com Tue Aug 4 16:08:43 2009 From: eggcentric at aol.com (eggcentric) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:08:43 -0400 Subject: Cs sign Shelden Williams In-Reply-To: <200908041124.n74BObCM018426@ares.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <2EBE845D.EC7E.4C0C.A357.FBE6EB583426@aol.com> On Aug 4, 2009, at 7:24:34 AM, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: Egg is Jeannie Buss? ------------------ It was a calculated risk dumping John McEnroe for sweet ole father figure, Philly?Jackson.? Especially when I kept rubbing it in to Philly,? ?I love Danny Ainge more; I love Danny boy ?more despite his drafting Pruitt at #32 and Big??(and getting bigger by the year)?Baby at #35 instead of Marc Gasol at #48 and Ramon Sessions at #56." Eggy ?Buss From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 4 16:12:06 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:12:06 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908040849v43ba7b43n93e71ffa67ad70ee@mail.gmail.com> References: <3f0c87180908040633h17ba1dc5p2f43eb37bdce2f78@mail.gmail.com> <957737.39456.qm@web65602.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <3f0c87180908040849v43ba7b43n93e71ffa67ad70ee@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908041612.n74GC7hS022085@artemis.afrc.af.mil> Actually we won the big one with Rondo and Cassell at the point when it mattered in the playoffs. I agree with Ryan (not myself, the first name Ryan guy). House is best as a shooter (preferably spot up or off a pick) with someone else handling the ball. Maybe Marquis Daniels is that guy or they go back to Pierce or Allen providing that aspect, but I think you'd agree the offense works much better when those two are moving without the ball. Given that Daniels is a slasher I would tend to think he's not a fit either. Now that Pruitt is gone we're left with House and "maybe" Hudson in the under 6' "let's make him a PG" school of thought. Okay in an emergency, and even through a regular season, but playoffs - that's a disaster or a guaranteed 48 min per game out of Rondo. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 11:50 AM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: on Shelden We won the big one with him at the point. Need another one?... I could do a deep dive why he's good at the point for this particular team, but I see no use here... AG On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Ryan W wrote: > > The last 2 years have shown, unequivocally, that House at the point is good > for no one, not House and not the players around him. How much more proof > do we need? > > House's limitations are not worth the strain he puts on the rest of the > lineup... > > Ryan > > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > > > From: Alex Goldblatt > > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 8:33 AM > > I like House as a backup point much > > better than Marb anyway.... No much need > > in his ball handling: both Paul and Ray often times play > > the point running > > the backup 5... > > > > AG > > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:08 AM, gene kirkpatrick > > wrote: > > > > > I like the signing. It's limited and > > focused. It gives us a tough big who > > > can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes. He > > comes cheap. A lot of good > > > things. > > > > > > I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more. Is > > it the Krewsheshefski (and > > > Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent > > than others that > > > cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA? Is it that > > the teams he went to needed > > > more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was > > outscored by his competitors? > > > Is he just under-motivated? I would think that > > he should get the message by > > > now that his career is on the edge. > > Alternative: busting out of the league > > > and managing his wife's career? I doubt he wants > > that. > > > > > > So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid > > backup down the > > > road. POB could shoot and block shots, but > > wasn't a lunch-pail type PF. > > > Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that > > as much as rebounding > > > and shot-blocking, which he brings. So, he's an > > upgrade, imo. I agree that > > > he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the > > completion of the > > > Daniels deal. Also nice to see L. Hudson > > repairing and able to work out in > > > a few weeks. It would be interesting if he were > > our NBDL guy this year, to > > > see what he could bring. Not so good to begin > > the season with a true backup > > > point. Cheers, Gene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 4 16:13:53 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:13:53 -0400 Subject: Schedule is out (early) In-Reply-To: <84e131670908040851r104621a6yc4e6ad46a3c59a3d@mail.gmail.com> References: <84e131670908040851r104621a6yc4e6ad46a3c59a3d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908041613.n74GDu7m008065@ares.afrc.af.mil> Given this schedule I can determine two things: 1) We're on national TV a lot (good for me in ATL) 2) Either Barkley, EJ or the Jet REALLY like Orlando since TNT is broadcasting EVERY Celts/Magic evening hookup this year. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of jeffclark at gmail.com Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 11:52 AM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Schedule is out (early) http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=30962.0 Tue, Oct 27 Boston Cleveland 7:30 AM ET TNT -- Wed, Oct 28 Charlotte Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Oct 30 Chicago Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Sun, Nov 01 New Orleans Boston 6:00 PM ET NBATV -- Tue, Nov 03 Boston Philadelphia 7:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Nov 04 Boston Minnesota 8:00 PM ET -- -- Fri, Nov 06 Phoenix Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sat, Nov 07 Boston New Jersey 7:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Nov 11 Utah Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Nov 13 Atlanta Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Sat, Nov 14 Boston Indiana 7:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Nov 18 Golden State Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Nov 20 Orlando Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Sun, Nov 22 Boston New York 1:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Nov 25 Philadelphia Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Nov 27 Toronto Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Nov 29 Boston Miami 6:00 PM ET NBATV -- Tue, Dec 01 Boston Charlotte 7:00 PM ET -- -- Thu, Dec 03 Boston San Antonio 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Fri, Dec 04 Boston Oklahoma City 8:00 PM ET -- -- Tue, Dec 08 Milwaukee Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Thu, Dec 10 Boston Washington 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Sat, Dec 12 Boston Chicago 8:00 PM ET NBATV -- Mon, Dec 14 Boston Memphis 8:00 PM ET -- -- Fri, Dec 18 Philadelphia Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Dec 20 Minnesota Boston 6:00 PM ET -- -- Tue, Dec 22 Indiana Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Dec 25 Boston Orlando 2:30 PM ET ABC -- Sun, Dec 27 Boston L.A. Clippers 9:30 PM ET -- -- Mon, Dec 28 Boston Golden State 10:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Dec 30 Boston Phoenix 9:00 PM ET NBATV -- Sat, Jan 02 Toronto Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Jan 06 Boston Miami 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Jan 08 Boston Atlanta 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Sun, Jan 10 Boston Toronto 1:00 PM ET -- -- Mon, Jan 11 Atlanta Boston 7:30 PM ET NBATV -- Wed, Jan 13 Boston New Jersey 7:30 PM ET -- -- Thu, Jan 14 Chicago Boston 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Mon, Jan 18 Dallas Boston 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Wed, Jan 20 Boston Detroit 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Jan 22 Portland Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Mon, Jan 25 L.A. Clippers Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Thu, Jan 28 Boston Orlando 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Fri, Jan 29 Boston Atlanta 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Jan 31 L.A. Lakers Boston 3:30 PM ET ABC -- Mon, Feb 01 Boston Washington 7:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Feb 03 Miami Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Fri, Feb 05 New Jersey Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Feb 07 Orlando Boston 2:30 PM ET ABC -- Wed, Feb 10 Boston New Orleans 8:00 PM ET NBATV -- Tue, Feb 16 Boston Sacramento 10:00 PM ET -- -- Thu, Feb 18 Boston L.A. Lakers 10:30 PM ET TNT -- Fri, Feb 19 Boston Portland 10:30 PM ET ESPN -- Sun, Feb 21 Boston Denver 3:30 PM ET ABC -- Tue, Feb 23 New York Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Thu, Feb 25 Cleveland Boston 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Sat, Feb 27 New Jersey Boston 1:00 PM ET -- -- Tue, Mar 02 Boston Detroit 7:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Mar 03 Charlotte Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Mar 05 Boston Philadelphia 7:00 PM ET -- -- Sun, Mar 07 Washington Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Tue, Mar 09 Boston Milwaukee 8:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Mar 10 Memphis Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Mar 12 Indiana Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Mar 14 Boston Cleveland 3:30 PM ET ABC -- Mon, Mar 15 Detroit Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Wed, Mar 17 New York Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Mar 19 Boston Houston 8:30 PM ET NBATV -- Sat, Mar 20 Boston Dallas 9:00 PM ET -- -- Mon, Mar 22 Boston Utah 9:00 PM ET -- -- Wed, Mar 24 Denver Boston 7:00 PM ET ESPN -- Fri, Mar 26 Sacramento Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Mar 28 San Antonio Boston 8:00 PM ET ESPN -- Wed, Mar 31 Oklahoma City Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Fri, Apr 02 Houston Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sun, Apr 04 Cleveland Boston 1:00 PM ET ABC -- Tue, Apr 06 Boston New York 7:30 PM ET -- -- Wed, Apr 07 Boston Toronto 7:00 PM ET -- -- Fri, Apr 09 Washington Boston 7:30 PM ET -- -- Sat, Apr 10 Boston Milwaukee 8:30 PM ET -- -- Tue, Apr 13 Boston Chicago 8:00 PM ET TNT -- Wed, Apr 14 Milwaukee Boston 8:00 PM ET -- -- -- Jeff CelticsBlog.com doughnutholes.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 4 17:11:31 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:11:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908040849v43ba7b43n93e71ffa67ad70ee@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <139550.6269.qm@web65603.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> So, it was a complete coincidence that the entire 2nd unit (House, Baby, and Powe) started to play well at the same time that House was moved off-the-ball in early January? Look at House's 3 point % from Oct. 28th to January 4th (which was the date of TA's 2nd ankle injury and which in turn made way for Gabe Pruitt's insertion in the lineup and which basically moved House off-the-ball for the rest of the year). He was 52 of 141 from 3 before January 4th (over 34 games). That's 36.9% from 3--not bad. But look at the numbers *after* he moved off-the-ball. He was 99 for 199 from 3--about 49.7% from 3! His overall FG% numbers also improved by a similar amount. House's shooting % gets dragged down when he's burdened by point guard responsibilities. Also, ook at Baby's #s before January 4th. He was averaging about 3.4 points a game (112 points in 33 games) on a blistering 37% shooting (44 of 118). Post January 4th, Baby averaged 9.7 points a game (418 points in 43 games) on a more robust 46.6% shooting (155 of 332). Yes, Baby started 16 games for Feb. 1st onwards, and playing with Rondo definitely helped his scoring and FG%. But so did NOT playing w/House at the point. And is it also a coincidence that House has been replaced at backup point guard by late season signings (Cassell and Marbury) for the last two years running? House at point guard is an abomination. I'd love to see a rational defense of his point guard abilities--but that's impossible. Ryan --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 10:49 AM > We won the big one with him at the > point. Need another one?... I could do a > deep dive why he's good at the point for this particular > team, but I see no > use here... > > AG > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Ryan W > wrote: > > > > > The last 2 years have shown, unequivocally, that House > at the point is good > > for no one, not House and not the players around > him.? How much more proof > > do we need? > > > > House's limitations are not worth the strain he puts > on the rest of the > > lineup... > > > > Ryan From jlyell at verizon.net Tue Aug 4 14:45:30 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 07:45:30 -0700 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> We need exactly what he can bring Potential Upside- leon powe or a Ben Wallace type late developer Potential Downside- another acie earl, blount,mikki Moore, Vin baker, etc On Aug 4, 2009, at 6:08 AM, gene kirkpatrick wrote: > I like the signing. It's limited and focused. It gives us a tough > big who can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes. He comes > cheap. A lot of good things. > > I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more. Is it the > Krewsheshefski (and Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their > talent than others that cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA? Is it > that the teams he went to needed more scoring from their PF and so > Shelden was outscored by his competitors? Is he just under- > motivated? I would think that he should get the message by now that > his career is on the edge. Alternative: busting out of the league > and managing his wife's career? I doubt he wants that. > > So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid backup down > the road. POB could shoot and block shots, but wasn't a lunch-pail > type PF. Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that as > much as rebounding and shot-blocking, which he brings. So, he's an > upgrade, imo. I agree that he imperils Scal and think this move may > presage the completion of the Daniels deal. Also nice to see L. > Hudson repairing and able to work out in a few weeks. It would be > interesting if he were our NBDL guy this year, to see what he could > bring. Not so good to begin the season with a true backup point. > Cheers, Gene > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From douglas342 at aol.com Tue Aug 4 20:18:36 2009 From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:18:36 -0400 Subject: roster Message-ID: <8CBE357E201D9C1-10C8-149D@webmail-mh20.sysops.aol.com> I'm trying to keep track of the roster. The starting five, Wallace, House, Tony Allen, Bill Walker, Eddie House, Giddens, Scal, and Williams are signed and under contract, right? Davis, Marbury, and Powe are free agents. Pruitt is really, really gone - his name doesn't even show up on the roster as a free agent. Hudson was drafted, but isn't signed yet. I see 13 names locked on the roster now. What's the deal with Daniels? Is he a sure thing to join the team? After a big noise about his "signing," I have seen nothing at all about his signing. If he does get signed, that's 14 spots filled, and the competition for that final slot comes from: Davis Powe Hudson Marbury/unknown backup PG mid-season vet acquisition From gk_tyler at yahoo.com Tue Aug 4 21:29:14 2009 From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 14:29:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: roster In-Reply-To: <8CBE357E201D9C1-10C8-149D@webmail-mh20.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <124642.41357.qm@web39608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I see House and Eddie House on your list of 13.? You're not old enough to be doing that, are you?? Gene --- On Tue, 8/4/09, douglas342 at aol.com wrote: From: douglas342 at aol.com Subject: roster To: celtics at igtc.com Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 3:18 PM I'm trying to keep track of the roster. The starting five, Wallace, House, Tony Allen, Bill Walker, Eddie House, Giddens,? Scal, and Williams? are signed and under contract, right? Davis, Marbury, and Powe are free agents. Pruitt is really, really gone - his name doesn't even show up on the roster as a free agent. Hudson was drafted, but isn't signed yet. I see 13 names locked on the roster now.? What's the deal with Daniels?? Is he a sure thing to join the team?? After a big noise about his "signing," I have seen nothing at all about his signing.? If he does get signed, that's 14 spots filled, and the competition for that final slot comes from: Davis Powe Hudson Marbury/unknown backup PG mid-season vet acquisition _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 22:11:09 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 18:11:09 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> "Also, ook at Baby's #s before January 4th. He was averaging about 3.4 points a game (112 points in 33 games) on a blistering 37% shooting (44 of 118). Post January 4th, Baby averaged 9.7 points a game (418 points in 43 games) on a more robust 46.6% shooting (155 of 332). Yes, Baby started 16 games for Feb. 1st onwards, and playing with Rondo definitely helped his scoring and FG%. But so did NOT playing w/House at the point. And is it also a coincidence that House has been replaced at backup point guard by late season signings (Cassell and Marbury) for the last two years running? House at point guard is an abomination. I'd love to see a rational defense of his point guard abilities--but that's impossible." Huh?!... Eddie is not a point - that is true. Baby cannot create his own shot - true as well. What it has to do with the rest of? In the finals vs. LAL he played more minutes, and had much more meaningful time on the floor than the corps of Cassell that did not play almost no time during the regular season. I'm not even talking about the last game in the finals with Cassell getting a DNP. Nobody makes a true point out of House, but he is a good option to stretch the floor to allow low-post players to get it done. With 'Sheed in the fold it becomes much more essential that having a true point. Sheldon has no mid-range, all in the post as well. Btw, that's why Powe was a better fit than Baby back in the 07/08. Moving Baby to the starting lineup was a poor attempt to stretch the floow to allow slashers like Paul to play inside. Did not really work - because Baby has 18 feet limit. Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. Eddie will be a good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have legit 3pt range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true point guard skills. AG On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:45 AM, John Lyell wrote: > We need exactly what he can bring > > Potential Upside- leon powe or a Ben Wallace type late developer > > Potential Downside- another acie earl, blount,mikki Moore, Vin baker, etc > > > On Aug 4, 2009, at 6:08 AM, gene kirkpatrick wrote: > > I like the signing. It's limited and focused. It gives us a tough big who >> can fill the 4 or 5 spot for short minutes. He comes cheap. A lot of good >> things. >> >> I'm puzzled as to why he hasn't shown more. Is it the Krewsheshefski (and >> Bobby Knight) ability to make more out of their talent than others that >> cause the Dukies to fade in the NBA? Is it that the teams he went to needed >> more scoring from their PF and so Shelden was outscored by his competitors? >> Is he just under-motivated? I would think that he should get the message >> by now that his career is on the edge. Alternative: busting out of the >> league and managing his wife's career? I doubt he wants that. >> >> So, anyway, I think he can help, and could be a solid backup down the >> road. POB could shoot and block shots, but wasn't a lunch-pail type PF. >> Shelden can't shoot, it seems, but we don't need that as much as rebounding >> and shot-blocking, which he brings. So, he's an upgrade, imo. I agree that >> he imperils Scal and think this move may presage the completion of the >> Daniels deal. Also nice to see L. Hudson repairing and able to work out in >> a few weeks. It would be interesting if he were our NBDL guy this year, to >> see what he could bring. Not so good to begin the season with a true backup >> point. Cheers, Gene >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > From Eric at ericalbert.net Tue Aug 4 22:44:10 2009 From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:44:10 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.co m> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> >Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. Eddie will be a >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have legit 3pt >range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true point >guard skills. > >AG The point folks are trying to make (and that I agree with) is this: Eddie (and other Celtics) are much more effective when he is *not* the point guard. Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can also hit the three to stretch the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He can play point guard (poorly) *or* he can stretch the offense -- not both. When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded closely. This makes him shoot a lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes him take many fewer shots. When it counted in the finals, he was basically shut down. When someone else plays the point, Eddie gets free and can rain down those devastating threes. If you're going to make Eddie effective, someone (anyone!) else has to be playing point. I think Eddie could really help this team, but only if there's a point guard playing with him. -- Eric From douglas342 at aol.com Tue Aug 4 23:40:14 2009 From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:40:14 -0400 Subject: roster In-Reply-To: <124642.41357.qm@web39608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8CBE3740CD2DE8B-7F4-24DD@webmail-me08.sysops.aol.com> There's two of 'em? Damn, they run around so fast! And I was just starting to keep all them Rondos straight! Thanks for pointing out my senility. So I guess there's a fight for TWO spots, eh? And what IS the deal with Daniels? I guess I should add him in with the FAs until he's signed. -----Original Message----- From: gene kirkpatrick To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Sent: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 2:29 pm Subject: Re: roster I see House and Eddie House on your list of 13.? You're not old enough to be doing that, are you?? Gene --- On Tue, 8/4/09, douglas342 at aol.com wrote: From: douglas342 at aol.com Subject: roster To: celtics at igtc.com Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 3:18 PM I'm trying to keep track of the roster. The starting five, Wallace, House, Tony Allen, Bill Walker, Eddie House, Giddens,? Scal, and Williams? are signed and under contract, right? Davis, Marbury, and Powe are free agents. Pruitt is really, really gone - his name doesn't even show up on the roster as a free agent. Hudson was drafted, but isn't signed yet. I see 13 names locked on the roster now.? What's the deal with Daniels?? Is he a sure thing to join the team?? After a big noise about his "signing," I have seen nothing at all about his signing.? If he does get=2 0signed, that's 14 spots filled, and the competition for that final slot comes from: Davis Powe Hudson Marbury/unknown backup PG mid-season vet acquisition _______________________________________________ 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 From jlyell at verizon.net Tue Aug 4 23:46:33 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 16:46:33 -0700 Subject: roster In-Reply-To: <8CBE3740CD2DE8B-7F4-24DD@webmail-me08.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CBE3740CD2DE8B-7F4-24DD@webmail-me08.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <32698DD6-08A7-4E13-9FE1-024AF7A851C5@verizon.net> House the Dr with no first name like Quincy is on the roster even with his bum leg? On Aug 4, 2009, at 4:40 PM, douglas342 at aol.com wrote: > There's two of 'em? Damn, they run around so fast! And I was just > starting to keep all them Rondos straight! > > Thanks for pointing out my senility. So I guess there's a fight for > TWO spots, eh? > > And what IS the deal with Daniels? I guess I should add him in with > the FAs until he's signed. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: gene kirkpatrick > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Sent: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 2:29 pm > Subject: Re: roster > > > > I see House and Eddie House on your list of 13. You're not old > enough to be > doing that, are you? Gene > > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, douglas342 at aol.com wrote: > > From: douglas342 at aol.com > Subject: roster > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 3:18 PM > > I'm trying to keep track of the roster. > > The starting five, Wallace, House, Tony Allen, Bill Walker, Eddie > House, > Giddens, Scal, and Williams are signed and under contract, right? > > Davis, Marbury, and Powe are free agents. > > Pruitt is really, really gone - his name doesn't even show up on the > roster as a > free agent. > > Hudson was drafted, but isn't signed yet. > > I see 13 names locked on the roster now. What's the deal with > Daniels? Is he a > sure thing to join the team? After a big noise about his "signing," > I have seen > nothing at all about his signing. If he does get=2 > 0signed, that's 14 spots > filled, and the competition for that final slot comes from: > > Davis > Powe > Hudson > Marbury/unknown backup PG > mid-season vet acquisition > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From douglas342 at aol.com Wed Aug 5 01:03:23 2009 From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 21:03:23 -0400 Subject: roster In-Reply-To: <32698DD6-08A7-4E13-9FE1-024AF7A851C5@verizon.net> References: <8CBE3740CD2DE8B-7F4-24DD@webmail-me08.sysops.aol.com> <32698DD6-08A7-4E13-9FE1-024AF7A851C5@verizon.net> Message-ID: <8CBE37FAA82D3AD-560-1D9A@WEBMAIL-DY38.sysops.aol.com> Yeah, but he can set a mean pick with that cane... -----Original Message----- From: John Lyell To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Sent: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 4:46 pm Subject: Re: roster House the Dr with no first name like Quincy is on the roster even with his bum leg?? ? On Aug 4, 2009, at 4:40 PM, douglas342 at aol.com wrote:? ? > There's two of 'em? Damn, they run around so fast! And I was just > starting to keep all them Rondos straight!? >? > Thanks for pointing out my senility. So I guess there's a fight for > TWO spots, eh?? >? > And what IS the deal with Daniels? I guess I should add him in with > the FAs until he's signed.? >? >? > -----Original Message-----? > From: gene kirkpatrick ? > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List ? > Sent: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 2:29 pm? > Subject: Re: roster? >? >? >? > I see House and Eddie House on your list of 13. You're not old > enough to be? > doing that, are you? Gene? >? > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, douglas342 at aol.com wrote:? >? > From: douglas342 at aol.com ? > Subject: roster? > To: celtics at igtc.com? > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 3:18 PM? >? > I'm trying to keep track of the roster.? >? > The starting fiv e, Wallace, House, Tony Allen, Bill Walker, Eddie > House,? > Giddens, Scal, and Williams are signed and under contract, right?? >? > Davis, Marbury, and Powe are free agents.? >? > Pruitt is really, really gone - his name doesn't even show up on the > roster as a? > free agent.? >? > Hudson was drafted, but isn't signed yet.? >? > I see 13 names locked on the roster now. What's the deal with > Daniels? Is he a? > sure thing to join the team? After a big noise about his "signing," > I have seen? > nothing at all about his signing. If he does get=2? > 0signed, that's 14 spots? > filled, and the competition for that final slot comes from:? >? > Davis? > Powe? > Hudson? > Marbury/unknown backup PG? > mid-season vet acquisition? >? > _______________________________________________? > 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? >? > _______________________________________________? > The Boston Celtics Mailing List? > celtics at igtc.com? > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics? ? _______________________________________________? The Boston Celtics Mailing List? celt ics at igtc.com? http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics? From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 02:35:32 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 22:35:32 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> Not exactly. He played the same off-ball during the 07-08, but roster allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with Eddie, Pos, TA in the rotation. Situation has changed last year with badly depleted roster, but it does not mean that we will have to get back to the same old. MD is as good fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and slasher - not sharp shooter. Basically, same idea like it used to be with the hope that TA will pick it up at some point. Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact that he was shifted to the 2-guard because he played the point really bad, and even playing the 2-guard did it poorly - problem was that the team had no inside game, thus making it all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only banger in the post - really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. You simply cannot compare anything if you will not start considering bigger picture instead of just writing off players just because they cannot play like the max players. Ediie's game did not change, and will not change. Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point in the 07-08, if you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - combined. IMO there is a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless we will figure out how to trade few contracts for less, and will retain Baby. Right now it does not look all that promising, negotiation with the Paces kind of stalled. But - you never know.. AG On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Eric Albert wrote: > > >Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. Eddie will be a > >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have legit > 3pt > >range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true point > >guard skills. > > > >AG > > The point folks are trying to make (and that I agree with) is this: Eddie > (and other Celtics) are much more effective when he is *not* the point > guard. > > Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can also hit the three to stretch > the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He can play point guard (poorly) > *or* he can stretch the offense -- not both. > > When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded closely. This makes him shoot a > lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes him take many fewer shots. When > it counted in the finals, he was basically shut down. > > When someone else plays the point, Eddie gets free and can rain down those > devastating threes. If you're going to make Eddie effective, someone > (anyone!) else has to be playing point. > > I think Eddie could really help this team, but only if there's a point > guard playing with him. > > -- Eric > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From kmalo17 at verizon.net Wed Aug 5 02:51:30 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:51:30 -0400 Subject: roster In-Reply-To: <8CBE3740CD2DE8B-7F4-24DD@webmail-me08.sysops.aol.com> References: <124642.41357.qm@web39608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <8CBE3740CD2DE8B-7F4-24DD@webmail-me08.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0KNV003HEUM1H630@vms173009.mailsrvcs.net> Doug - It was part of the initial reports on the Daniels acquisition that they're still working out how we acquire him, whether as part of a sign and trade so he can make a bit more money or using our LLE. Issue seems to be who to trade, since TA etc don't seem to appeal. So it's not a question of if, just one of how and when. Kim At 07:40 PM 8/4/2009, douglas342 at aol.com wrote: >There's two of 'em? Damn, they run around so >fast! And I was just starting to keep all them >Rondos straight! Thanks for pointing out my >senility. So I guess there's a fight for TWO >spots, eh? And what IS the deal with Daniels? I >guess I should add him in with the FAs until >he's signed. -----Original Message----- From: >gene kirkpatrick To: The >Boston Celtics Mailing List >Sent: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 2:29 pm Subject: Re: >roster I see House and Eddie House on your list >of 13.? You're not old enough to be doing that, >are you?? Gene --- On Tue, 8/4/09, >douglas342 at aol.com wrote: >From: douglas342 at aol.com >Subject: roster To: celtics at igtc.com Date: >Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 3:18 PM I'm trying to >keep track of the roster. The starting five, >Wallace, House, Tony Allen, Bill Walker, Eddie >House, Giddens,? Scal, and Williams? are >signed and under contract, right? Davis, >Marbury, and Powe are free agents. Pruitt is >really, really gone - his name doesn't even show >up on the roster as a free agent. Hudson was >drafted, but isn't signed yet. I see 13 names >locked on the roster now.? What's the deal with >Daniels?? Is he a sure thing to join the >team?? After a big noise about his "signing," I >have seen nothing at all about his signing.? If >he does get=2 0signed, that's 14 spots filled, >and the competition for that final slot comes >from: Davis Powe Hudson Marbury/unknown backup PG mid-season vet acquisition From Eric at ericalbert.net Wed Aug 5 02:51:47 2009 From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:51:47 -0400 Subject: on Shelden Message-ID: <20090805025224.760F7E1AB99@ignite.igtc.com> >Alex Goldblatt wrote: > >Eddie's game did not change, and will not change. >Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point in the 07-08, if >you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - combined. Perhaps. But that's setting the bar insanely low! -- Eric From jlyell at verizon.net Wed Aug 5 03:59:43 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 20:59:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Daniels Message-ID: <165685.72138.qm@web84008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I have read of them using Daniels at the point. Has he played this? I recall him being a more of a 2/3 John From jeffclark at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 09:46:07 2009 From: jeffclark at gmail.com (jeffclark at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 05:46:07 -0400 Subject: Daniels In-Reply-To: <165685.72138.qm@web84008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <165685.72138.qm@web84008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <84e131670908050246r4a6ebfeflab716691438a21ce@mail.gmail.com> If I remember right, Don Nelson used him at the point in Dallas when Nash was hurt for a few games. But Don Nelson does a lot of unconventional things. I think the idea is that he could do it but it isn't ideal. On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:59 PM, John Lyell wrote: > I have read of them using Daniels at the point. Has he played this? I > recall him being a more of a 2/3 > > John > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > -- Jeff CelticsBlog.com doughnutholes.wordpress.com From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Wed Aug 5 11:12:32 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 07:12:32 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908051112.n75BCYm7007137@apollo.afrc.af.mil> "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited range to 8 feet at the most." Did you even watch the playoffs last year? Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs long (after a solid regular season as well), but he consistently hit a 10-15 foot jumper to make Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in the paint. Its etched in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his arsenal either until that time. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:36 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: on Shelden Not exactly. He played the same off-ball during the 07-08, but roster allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with Eddie, Pos, TA in the rotation. Situation has changed last year with badly depleted roster, but it does not mean that we will have to get back to the same old. MD is as good fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and slasher - not sharp shooter. Basically, same idea like it used to be with the hope that TA will pick it up at some point. Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact that he was shifted to the 2-guard because he played the point really bad, and even playing the 2-guard did it poorly - problem was that the team had no inside game, thus making it all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only banger in the post - really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. You simply cannot compare anything if you will not start considering bigger picture instead of just writing off players just because they cannot play like the max players. Ediie's game did not change, and will not change. Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point in the 07-08, if you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - combined. IMO there is a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless we will figure out how to trade few contracts for less, and will retain Baby. Right now it does not look all that promising, negotiation with the Paces kind of stalled. But - you never know.. AG On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Eric Albert wrote: > > >Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. Eddie will be a > >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have legit > 3pt > >range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true point > >guard skills. > > > >AG > > The point folks are trying to make (and that I agree with) is this: Eddie > (and other Celtics) are much more effective when he is *not* the point > guard. > > Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can also hit the three to stretch > the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He can play point guard (poorly) > *or* he can stretch the offense -- not both. > > When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded closely. This makes him shoot a > lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes him take many fewer shots. When > it counted in the finals, he was basically shut down. > > When someone else plays the point, Eddie gets free and can rain down those > devastating threes. If you're going to make Eddie effective, someone > (anyone!) else has to be playing point. > > I think Eddie could really help this team, but only if there's a point > guard playing with him. > > -- Eric > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 14:01:48 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:01:48 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <200908051112.n75BCYm7007137@apollo.afrc.af.mil> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> <200908051112.n75BCYm7007137@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908050701g62d1328evd3daba672ed62907@mail.gmail.com> Yep, that's why we've lost... Single coverage in the post and totally shut perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally planted in the paint... Having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 pts on the low percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, etc. You getting biased - poor approach to game analysis or player eval. I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the best option, but that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 superstars on the team. So, here is the question: how much you guys willing to pay for such a player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - real options on todays market, not some hypothetical players that are either not available or played 50 yrs ago.... AG On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, wrote: > "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited range to 8 feet at > the most." > > Did you even watch the playoffs last year? > > Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs long (after a solid > regular season as well), but he consistently hit a 10-15 foot jumper to make > Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in the paint. Its etched > in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his arsenal either until > that time. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf > Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:36 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > Not exactly. He played the same off-ball during the 07-08, but roster > allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with Eddie, Pos, TA in the > rotation. Situation has changed last year with badly depleted roster, but > it > does not mean that we will have to get back to the same old. MD is as good > fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and slasher - not sharp shooter. > Basically, same idea like it used to be with the hope that TA will pick it > up at some point. > > Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact that he was shifted to the > 2-guard because he played the point really bad, and even playing the > 2-guard > did it poorly - problem was that the team had no inside game, thus making > it > all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only banger in the post - > really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, but he has no low post game, > plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. > > You simply cannot compare anything if you will not start considering bigger > picture instead of just writing off players just because they cannot play > like the max players. Ediie's game did not change, and will not change. > Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point in the 07-08, if > you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - combined. IMO there is > a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless we will figure out how to > trade few contracts for less, and will retain Baby. > > Right now it does not look all that promising, negotiation with the Paces > kind of stalled. But - you never know.. > > AG > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Eric Albert wrote: > > > > > >Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. Eddie will be > a > > >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have legit > > 3pt > > >range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true > point > > >guard skills. > > > > > >AG > > > > The point folks are trying to make (and that I agree with) is this: Eddie > > (and other Celtics) are much more effective when he is *not* the point > > guard. > > > > Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can also hit the three to > stretch > > the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He can play point guard (poorly) > > *or* he can stretch the offense -- not both. > > > > When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded closely. This makes him shoot a > > lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes him take many fewer shots. > When > > it counted in the finals, he was basically shut down. > > > > When someone else plays the point, Eddie gets free and can rain down > those > > devastating threes. If you're going to make Eddie effective, someone > > (anyone!) else has to be playing point. > > > > I think Eddie could really help this team, but only if there's a point > > guard playing with him. > > > > -- Eric > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Wed Aug 5 14:14:10 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:14:10 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908050701g62d1328evd3daba672ed62907@mail.gmail.com> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> <200908051112.n75BCYm7007137@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908050701g62d1328evd3daba672ed62907@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908051414.n75EEDbI006518@apollo.afrc.af.mil> You didn't specify "must draw double coverage in the paint". You said Perkins had NO low post game which is patently not true. If you had said - "Perk didn't draw double teams freeing up perimeter players for more open looks" I would've agreed with you. Two patently different things. However, even in that particular situation, why then isn't equal blame placed with Eddie House for not getting open even one on one? Or on Doc for not using more picks away from the ball, player movement, back door cuts, and other offensive wrinkles designed to compensate for players not drawing double teams? Or maybe on ownership and management for signing Mikki Moore instead of Joe Smith? Or perhaps Ray Allen for having an abyssmal playoff? I have more if you'd like. But getting back to the "point" at hand (no pun intended); Eddie House. If you're fine with him as the PG backup - that's cool, but the majority of us are not. His role as a shooter is too important to saddle him with additionally handling the ball against pressure and setting up other guys for open looks. Ryan easily showed Eddie's game DID change - his scoring efficiency increased significantly when moved to the 2 guard. The other stats are less telling because they are not concrete - baby's scoring increase could be just as much his own maturation as who he was paired with on the floor or it could be more Pierce drawing double and triple teams (Orlando game winning shot anyone?) that got Baby open looks and not the PG. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 10:02 AM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: on Shelden Yep, that's why we've lost... Single coverage in the post and totally shut perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally planted in the paint... Having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 pts on the low percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, etc. You getting biased - poor approach to game analysis or player eval. I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the best option, but that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 superstars on the team. So, here is the question: how much you guys willing to pay for such a player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - real options on todays market, not some hypothetical players that are either not available or played 50 yrs ago.... AG On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, wrote: > "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited range to 8 feet at > the most." > > Did you even watch the playoffs last year? > > Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs long (after a solid > regular season as well), but he consistently hit a 10-15 foot jumper to make > Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in the paint. Its etched > in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his arsenal either until > that time. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf > Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:36 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > Not exactly. He played the same off-ball during the 07-08, but roster > allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with Eddie, Pos, TA in the > rotation. Situation has changed last year with badly depleted roster, but > it > does not mean that we will have to get back to the same old. MD is as good > fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and slasher - not sharp shooter. > Basically, same idea like it used to be with the hope that TA will pick it > up at some point. > > Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact that he was shifted to the > 2-guard because he played the point really bad, and even playing the > 2-guard > did it poorly - problem was that the team had no inside game, thus making > it > all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only banger in the post - > really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, but he has no low post game, > plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. > > You simply cannot compare anything if you will not start considering bigger > picture instead of just writing off players just because they cannot play > like the max players. Ediie's game did not change, and will not change. > Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point in the 07-08, if > you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - combined. IMO there is > a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless we will figure out how to > trade few contracts for less, and will retain Baby. > > Right now it does not look all that promising, negotiation with the Paces > kind of stalled. But - you never know.. > > AG > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Eric Albert wrote: > > > > > >Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. Eddie will be > a > > >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have legit > > 3pt > > >range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true > point > > >guard skills. > > > > > >AG > > > > The point folks are trying to make (and that I agree with) is this: Eddie > > (and other Celtics) are much more effective when he is *not* the point > > guard. > > > > Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can also hit the three to > stretch > > the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He can play point guard (poorly) > > *or* he can stretch the offense -- not both. > > > > When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded closely. This makes him shoot a > > lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes him take many fewer shots. > When > > it counted in the finals, he was basically shut down. > > > > When someone else plays the point, Eddie gets free and can rain down > those > > devastating threes. If you're going to make Eddie effective, someone > > (anyone!) else has to be playing point. > > > > I think Eddie could really help this team, but only if there's a point > > guard playing with him. > > > > -- Eric > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From noah.evans at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 14:21:37 2009 From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 16:21:37 +0200 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <200908051414.n75EEDbI006518@apollo.afrc.af.mil> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> <200908051112.n75BCYm7007137@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908050701g62d1328evd3daba672ed62907@mail.gmail.com> <200908051414.n75EEDbI006518@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <56a297000908050721y26a58c0ep11e8a20c5261a670@mail.gmail.com> That's why it's such a shame we didn't get grant hill. Having him handling the ball and eddie shooting would be great against other second teams. On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:14 PM, wrote: > You didn't specify "must draw double coverage in the paint". You said Perkins had NO low post game which is patently not true. If you had said - "Perk didn't draw double teams freeing up perimeter players for more open looks" I would've agreed with you. Two patently different things. > > However, even in that particular situation, why then isn't equal blame placed with Eddie House for not getting open even one on one? Or on Doc for not using more picks away from the ball, player movement, back door cuts, and other offensive wrinkles designed to compensate for players not drawing double teams? Or maybe on ownership and management for signing Mikki Moore instead of Joe Smith? Or perhaps Ray Allen for having an abyssmal playoff? ?I have more if you'd like. > > But getting back to the "point" at hand (no pun intended); Eddie House. If you're fine with him as the PG backup - that's cool, but the majority of us are not. His role as a shooter is too important to saddle him with additionally handling the ball against pressure and setting up other guys for open looks. > > Ryan easily showed Eddie's game DID change - his scoring efficiency increased significantly when moved to the 2 guard. The other stats are less telling because they are not concrete - baby's scoring increase could be just as much his own maturation as who he was paired with on the floor or it could be more Pierce drawing double and triple teams (Orlando game winning shot anyone?) that got Baby open looks and not the PG. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 10:02 AM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > Yep, that's why we've lost... Single coverage in the post and totally shut > perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally planted in the paint... > > > Having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 pts on the low > percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, etc. You getting > biased - poor approach to game analysis or player eval. > I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the best option, but > that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 superstars on the > team. So, here is the question: how much you guys willing to pay for such a > player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - real options on todays > market, not some hypothetical players that are either not available or > played 50 yrs ago.... > > AG > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, wrote: > >> "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited range to 8 feet at >> the most." >> >> Did you even watch the playoffs last year? >> >> Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs long (after a solid >> regular season as well), but he consistently hit a 10-15 foot jumper to make >> Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in the paint. Its etched >> in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his arsenal either until >> that time. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf >> Of Alex Goldblatt >> ?Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:36 PM >> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List >> Subject: Re: on Shelden >> >> Not exactly. He played the same off-ball during the 07-08, but roster >> allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with Eddie, Pos, TA in the >> rotation. Situation has changed last year with badly depleted roster, but >> it >> does not mean that we will have to get back to the same old. MD is as good >> fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and slasher - not sharp shooter. >> Basically, same idea like it used to be with the hope that TA will pick it >> up at some point. >> >> Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact that he was shifted to the >> 2-guard because he played the point really bad, and even playing the >> 2-guard >> did it poorly - problem was that the team had no inside game, thus making >> it >> all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only banger in the post - >> really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, but he has no low post game, >> plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. >> >> You simply cannot compare anything if you will not start considering bigger >> picture instead of just writing off players just because they cannot play >> like the max players. Ediie's game did not change, and will not change. >> Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point in the 07-08, if >> you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - combined. IMO there is >> a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless we will figure out how to >> trade few contracts for less, and will retain Baby. >> >> Right now it does not look all that promising, negotiation with the Paces >> kind of stalled. But - you never know.. >> >> AG >> >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Eric Albert wrote: >> >> > >> > >Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. ?Eddie will be >> a >> > >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have legit >> > 3pt >> > >range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true >> point >> > >guard skills. >> > > >> > >AG >> > >> > The point folks are trying to make (and that I agree with) is this: Eddie >> > (and other Celtics) are much more effective when he is *not* the point >> > guard. >> > >> > Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can also hit the three to >> stretch >> > the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He can play point guard (poorly) >> > *or* he can stretch the offense -- not both. >> > >> > When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded closely. This makes him shoot a >> > lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes him take many fewer shots. >> When >> > it counted in the finals, he was basically shut down. >> > >> > When someone else plays the point, Eddie gets free and can rain down >> those >> > devastating threes. If you're going to make Eddie effective, someone >> > (anyone!) else has to be playing point. >> > >> > I think Eddie could really help this team, but only if there's a point >> > guard playing with him. >> > >> > -- Eric >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 5 16:25:21 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <565967.49010.qm@web65602.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:11 PM > "Also, ook at Baby's #s before > January 4th.? He was averaging about 3.4 > points a game (112 points in 33 games) on a blistering 37% > shooting (44 of > 118).? Post January 4th, Baby averaged 9.7 points a > game (418 points in 43 > games) on a more robust 46.6% shooting (155 of 332).? > Yes, Baby started 16 > games for Feb. 1st onwards, and playing with Rondo > definitely helped his > scoring and FG%.? But so did NOT playing w/House at > the point. > > And is it also a coincidence that House has been replaced > at backup point > guard by late season signings (Cassell and Marbury) for the > last two years > running? > House at point guard is an abomination.? I'd love to > see a rational defense > of his point guard abilities--but that's impossible." > > Huh?!... > > Eddie is not a point - that is true. Baby cannot create his > own shot - true > as well. What it has to do with the rest of? Double 'huh?!' is more like it--as in, what are you talking about, Alex? You've already stated in this thread that a.) you like House better at point than Marbury and that b.) House is a good point for this team. I set out, with the above post, to show why House at the point is bad--bad for House, bad for his teammates, and bad for this team. And your response? "Eddie is not a point--that is true." What the fuck are we talking about, then? That was my entire point--he's not a point guard and there's unlimited amounts of evidence that prove it. If Eddie is "not a point," then why are you SO willing to let him continue to masquerade as one? Is his floor-spacing ability really worth the detriment the rest of his game brings forth? Is the mere threat of his 3 point shot worth wasting the talents of the shooting guard, small forward, and power forward, players who are usually dependent on someone creating shots for them? > > Nobody makes a true point out of House, but he is a good > option to stretch > the floor to allow low-post players to get it done. With > 'Sheed in the fold > it becomes much more essential that having a true point. > Sheldon has no > mid-range, all in the post as well. Btw, that's why Powe > was a better fit > than Baby back in the 07/08. Moving Baby to the starting > lineup was a poor > attempt to stretch the floow to allow slashers like Paul to > play inside. Did > not really work - because Baby has 18 feet limit. You're making a ton of half-points and not drawing the right conclusions from any of them. House's floor-stretch ability is vastly over-rated when he's playing point guard. Why? Because his masturbate-with-the-ball routine, where he dribbles 30 feet from the basket, takes valuable seconds off the shot clock, often not initiating the offense until 14 or less seconds, leads to low percentage, shot-clock-beating heaves instead of properly developed plays which go past the 1st option to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th options. When the offense starts late, the ball doesn't move and, thus, the vaunted floor-stretch-ability of House never comes into play. Bottom line: House at point leads to zero ball-movement. On the other hand, even a putz like Gabe Pruitt, who has only marginal point guard skills, can get the offense started quickly enough that sufficient ball movement occurs which allows House's floor-stretching to actual develop into a threat the defense has to account for... 'Sheed, in theory, can play in the post, but the trend throughout his career has been towards the perimeter, which actually indicates that a true point guard would be more beneficial on the 2nd unit, since the dribble penetration of a true point would draw defenders to the paint and allow openings on the perimeter. Wallace thrives in the pick-and-pop game as well, something House can't run. In fact, with a 3 point bomber like Wallace on the 2nd unit, do we really need a one-dimensional, easy-to-guard, supposed 'floor-stretcher' at the point? I'd rather we had a more balanced attack, one that didn't depend on 3 point shots going in. And, um, Powe was a better fit in 07-08 because he was, um, better in 07-08. Baby hadn't developed his 15 footer at that point, and he was still finding his place in the league. There IS a place for a jump shooting big in this offense, be it PJ Brown, KG, Wallace, etc. Moving Baby to the starting lineup wasn't a 'poor attempt' of stretching the floor--it was the only option they had because everyone else was injured. And I'm not sure what Baby's limited-to-18-feet range has to do with anything--KG doesn't shoot threes either, but the offense still functions just fine. > > Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box > score.? Eddie will be a > good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot > should have legit 3pt > range for this season. And it will be much more essential > than true point > guard skills. > > AG Ah, the last bastion of the argument-deficient--stats don't matter when they don't agree with my infallible sense perception! Okay, well, that explains a lot. Ryan From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 5 16:53:44 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:53:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <506093.25123.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 9:35 PM > Not exactly. He played the same > off-ball during the 07-08, but roster > allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with Eddie, Pos, > TA in the > rotation. Situation has changed last year with badly > depleted roster, but it > does not mean that we will have to get back to the same > old. MD is as good > fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and slasher - not > sharp shooter. > Basically, same idea like it used to be with the hope that > TA will pick it > up at some point. First things first, House played 1180 of his 1480 minutes at the point guard position in 2007-2008 (from http://www.82games.com/0708/07BOS4C.HTM), with most of his 2 guard minutes coming after Cassell came aboard. I know you don't like stats because they tend to invalidate your sense perceptions, but, hey, they actually track these things. You're right, THAT team was able to survive having a terrible point guard because they had enough veteran leadership and capable ball-handlers to make up for it (TA, Posey, who played a little point forward and who specialized in hitting late-in-the-shot-clock 3s, Cassell, and PJ Brown). You're also right that Daniels can play the de facto point guard role next season. My point was simply: why do we keep building our 2nd unit around such a one-dimensional player like House? Wouldn't it be simpler and easier to accomplish if we just got a real point guard with decent 3 point range instead of having to bring in all these de facto point guards who play the 2 or 3 just so we can unleash House's deadly floor-space-ability? > > Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact that he was > shifted to the > 2-guard because he played the point really bad, and even > playing the 2-guard > did it poorly - problem was that the team had no inside > game, thus making it > all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only banger in > the post - > really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, but he has > no low post game, > plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. It works both ways. No inside game makes the defense more aggressive on the perimeter, but so does a one-dimensional, short, bad-dribbling point guard. House is easy to defend not because we don't have low post players to draw double teams but because HOUSE IS EASY TO DEFEND! It seems like your arguing that House's deficiencies can be explained away because he wasn't playing with a low-post player who can draw double teams--my argument is that the entire 2nd unit's ineffectiveness can be explained away by House's inability to dribble, penetrate the lane, create for his teammates, and initiate the offense in a timely manner. Instead of replacing our 2nd teamers with All-Stars, wouldn't it just be easier to replace the bad dribbling, non-penetrating, easy-to-defend, one-dimensional chucker who masquerades as a point guard? > > You simply cannot compare anything if you will not start > considering bigger > picture instead of just writing off players just because > they cannot play > like the max players. Yeah, the big picture. Glad you mentioned it. The big picture states rather unequivocally that instead of replacing 3-4 players who don't mesh well with an undersized, one-dimensional chucker, it might be easier to just replace the chucker. As I said above, YOU'RE the one who's arguing that House's problems stemmed from not playing with All-Star post talent. I ask you, who's the one distorting the big picture now? > Ediie's game did not change, and will > not change. > Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point > in the 07-08, if > you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - > combined. IMO there is > a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless we will > figure out how to > trade few contracts for less, and will retain Baby. Um, two problems here. First, you said above that House played off the ball in 07-08 (a point which I refuted with your personal demon--statistics). Second, in what sense was House 'efficient'? You might want to use statistics in your answer, since personal observation doesn't lend itself to the analysis of efficacy, especially if you wish to persuade others. Marbury is a clearly superior player, especially at the point, even last season after a year long layoff, and even after eating vasoline. He can dribble, penetrate, run and initiate the offense in a timely manner, and deliver the ball on-time and in the right place. House can shoot--that's ALL he does. That's the beginning, middle and end of every House discussion. > > Right now it does not look all that promising, negotiation > with the Paces > kind of stalled. But - you never know.. > > AG I'll tell you what I do know--a point guard of some ability will be brought in--for the 3rd straight year. My only hope is that House/Scal/TA can be packaged for that point guard. A guy like Kirk Hinrich--a real combo guard--is what we lack. Ryan From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 5 17:22:55 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:22:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908050701g62d1328evd3daba672ed62907@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <53430.28930.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> We lost for a variety of reasons. We didn't rely on a post game all season so I'm not sure how not having a post game against Orlando killed us--we're a perimeter/penetration team and have been one for a while now. Instead, it was the fatigue of Ray/Paul, Ray's inability to hit anything in games 1 and 6 (his hamstring injury being a big problem), and Rondo's inability/unwillingness to make Orlando pay for doubling off him, something Doc was complicit in allowing to occur (but that's a matter for another post). I love how you accuse Pat of 'getting biased'. First of all, YOU were the one who sloppily announced that Perk had 'no low post game,' and then later backpedaled into saying that you meant that 'Perk doesn't have an All-Star low post game.' Well, that's a real newsflash. And another thing, what's this "having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 pts on the low percentage shots"? Perk has one of the highest shooting percentages on the team and in the league--all his shots are 'high percentage'--and we actually would have been better served going to him more often during the Orlando series--since it's clear the Howard's biggest defensive weakness is in one-on-one situations. As for a realistic list of potential players to replace House with, Marbury and Jamaal Tinsley come to mind. Marbury could easily replace the scoring House brings, AND do everything else a point guard is supposed to do. So could Tinsley. There are also a ton of potential targets via trades (using some combo of the House/TA/Scal expirings as bait), such as: Hinrich Delonte Ridnour Antonio Daniels Duhon Barbosa Steve Blake Some of those guys are rumored to be available, or could be pried away at the deadline if their teams are out of contention for maybe a future first plus our expirings. Whatever the case, the Daniels saga shows that if we want to use our expirings to make an improvement to our team, we're going to either have to wait until teams are ready to deal (during the season), or we're going to have to include somebody with value. And as much as I think House is a very limited player, he's also the only expiring we have with value--and thus, if we made any trade, I'm thinking House has to be in it.... Ryan --- On Wed, 8/5/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 9:01 AM > Yep, that's why we've lost... Single > coverage in the post and totally shut > perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally > planted in the paint... > > > Having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 > pts on the low > percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, etc. > You getting > biased - poor approach to game analysis or player eval. > I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the best > option, but > that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 > superstars on the > team. So, here is the question: how much you guys willing > to pay for such a > player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - real > options on todays > market, not some hypothetical players that are either not > available or > played 50 yrs ago.... > > AG > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, > wrote: > > > "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited > range to 8 feet at > > the most." > > > > Did you even watch the playoffs last year? > > > > Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs > long (after a solid > > regular season as well), but he consistently hit a > 10-15 foot jumper to make > > Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in > the paint. Its etched > > in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his > arsenal either until > > that time. > > From jozersky at optonline.net Wed Aug 5 17:33:10 2009 From: jozersky at optonline.net (jozersky at optonline.net) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:33:10 +0000 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <53430.28930.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <3f0c87180908050701g62d1328evd3daba672ed62907@mail.gmail.com><53430.28930.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <903263945-1249493540-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-343480527-@bxe1296.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> I agree. Spot up shooters are a dime a dozen. At least little ones. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Ryan W Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:22:55 To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: on Shelden We lost for a variety of reasons. We didn't rely on a post game all season so I'm not sure how not having a post game against Orlando killed us--we're a perimeter/penetration team and have been one for a while now. Instead, it was the fatigue of Ray/Paul, Ray's inability to hit anything in games 1 and 6 (his hamstring injury being a big problem), and Rondo's inability/unwillingness to make Orlando pay for doubling off him, something Doc was complicit in allowing to occur (but that's a matter for another post). I love how you accuse Pat of 'getting biased'. First of all, YOU were the one who sloppily announced that Perk had 'no low post game,' and then later backpedaled into saying that you meant that 'Perk doesn't have an All-Star low post game.' Well, that's a real newsflash. And another thing, what's this "having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 pts on the low percentage shots"? Perk has one of the highest shooting percentages on the team and in the league--all his shots are 'high percentage'--and we actually would have been better served going to him more often during the Orlando series--since it's clear the Howard's biggest defensive weakness is in one-on-one situations. As for a realistic list of potential players to replace House with, Marbury and Jamaal Tinsley come to mind. Marbury could easily replace the scoring House brings, AND do everything else a point guard is supposed to do. So could Tinsley. There are also a ton of potential targets via trades (using some combo of the House/TA/Scal expirings as bait), such as: Hinrich Delonte Ridnour Antonio Daniels Duhon Barbosa Steve Blake Some of those guys are rumored to be available, or could be pried away at the deadline if their teams are out of contention for maybe a future first plus our expirings. Whatever the case, the Daniels saga shows that if we want to use our expirings to make an improvement to our team, we're going to either have to wait until teams are ready to deal (during the season), or we're going to have to include somebody with value. And as much as I think House is a very limited player, he's also the only expiring we have with value--and thus, if we made any trade, I'm thinking House has to be in it.... Ryan --- On Wed, 8/5/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 9:01 AM > Yep, that's why we've lost... Single > coverage in the post and totally shut > perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally > planted in the paint... > > > Having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 > pts on the low > percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, etc. > You getting > biased - poor approach to game analysis or player eval. > I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the best > option, but > that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 > superstars on the > team. So, here is the question: how much you guys willing > to pay for such a > player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - real > options on todays > market, not some hypothetical players that are either not > available or > played 50 yrs ago.... > > AG > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, > wrote: > > > "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited > range to 8 feet at > > the most." > > > > Did you even watch the playoffs last year? > > > > Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs > long (after a solid > > regular season as well), but he consistently hit a > 10-15 foot jumper to make > > Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in > the paint. Its etched > > in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his > arsenal either until > > that time. > > _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 18:54:26 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 14:54:26 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <200908051414.n75EEDbI006518@apollo.afrc.af.mil> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> <200908051112.n75BCYm7007137@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908050701g62d1328evd3daba672ed62907@mail.gmail.com> <200908051414.n75EEDbI006518@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908051154j5f74a915s38622f0969554b26@mail.gmail.com> I have a low post game too... If you have a low post game sufficient just to clog the middle - you can call it whatever you want but not a low post O. This is not a 101 game - but 5-on-5. Having Perk in the post and Baby at the elbow was a terrible combination, to the degree that Paul's game as a slasher was totally shut. Not a good reason to be upbeat about having them at the 4/5 any time soon. Eddie: he was moved to the off-guard simply because we had nobody else. His overall game suffered a huge blow - even though Marb was "officially" on the floor, his scoring punch came primarily from playing with the 1st unit - no miracles here. As to Baby, let's differentiate maturity from D gambling off him. When you have 2 players on the floor at the same time (i.e. Rondo and Baby) to gamble off, plus Perk having 0 game beyond 8ft range - this called "trouble".... That's why we had such a difficult time throughout the playoffs. Eddie stretched the floor, and apparently played better than Rondo in some stretches just because he kept the D honest with his range. What I'm trying to say is very simple: you getting caught into some details, while refusing to see the bigger picture. Baby was good because he played with the 1st unit and saw no coverage: makes sense to cover everybody but an overweight PF with a flat 15-footer only, no low post and no above the rim game. Put him on a bad team - you will see the difference right away. AG On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:14 AM, wrote: > You didn't specify "must draw double coverage in the paint". You said > Perkins had NO low post game which is patently not true. If you had said - > "Perk didn't draw double teams freeing up perimeter players for more open > looks" I would've agreed with you. Two patently different things. > > However, even in that particular situation, why then isn't equal blame > placed with Eddie House for not getting open even one on one? Or on Doc for > not using more picks away from the ball, player movement, back door cuts, > and other offensive wrinkles designed to compensate for players not drawing > double teams? Or maybe on ownership and management for signing Mikki Moore > instead of Joe Smith? Or perhaps Ray Allen for having an abyssmal playoff? > I have more if you'd like. > > But getting back to the "point" at hand (no pun intended); Eddie House. If > you're fine with him as the PG backup - that's cool, but the majority of us > are not. His role as a shooter is too important to saddle him with > additionally handling the ball against pressure and setting up other guys > for open looks. > > Ryan easily showed Eddie's game DID change - his scoring efficiency > increased significantly when moved to the 2 guard. The other stats are less > telling because they are not concrete - baby's scoring increase could be > just as much his own maturation as who he was paired with on the floor or it > could be more Pierce drawing double and triple teams (Orlando game winning > shot anyone?) that got Baby open looks and not the PG. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf > Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 10:02 AM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > Yep, that's why we've lost... Single coverage in the post and totally shut > perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally planted in the > paint... > > > Having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 pts on the low > percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, etc. You getting > biased - poor approach to game analysis or player eval. > I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the best option, but > that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 superstars on the > team. So, here is the question: how much you guys willing to pay for such a > player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - real options on > todays > market, not some hypothetical players that are either not available or > played 50 yrs ago.... > > AG > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, wrote: > > > "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited range to 8 feet at > > the most." > > > > Did you even watch the playoffs last year? > > > > Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs long (after a > solid > > regular season as well), but he consistently hit a 10-15 foot jumper to > make > > Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in the paint. Its > etched > > in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his arsenal either > until > > that time. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On > Behalf > > Of Alex Goldblatt > > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:36 PM > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > > > Not exactly. He played the same off-ball during the 07-08, but roster > > allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with Eddie, Pos, TA in the > > rotation. Situation has changed last year with badly depleted roster, but > > it > > does not mean that we will have to get back to the same old. MD is as > good > > fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and slasher - not sharp > shooter. > > Basically, same idea like it used to be with the hope that TA will pick > it > > up at some point. > > > > Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact that he was shifted to the > > 2-guard because he played the point really bad, and even playing the > > 2-guard > > did it poorly - problem was that the team had no inside game, thus making > > it > > all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only banger in the post - > > really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, but he has no low post > game, > > plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. > > > > You simply cannot compare anything if you will not start considering > bigger > > picture instead of just writing off players just because they cannot play > > like the max players. Ediie's game did not change, and will not change. > > Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point in the 07-08, > if > > you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - combined. IMO there > is > > a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless we will figure out how > to > > trade few contracts for less, and will retain Baby. > > > > Right now it does not look all that promising, negotiation with the Paces > > kind of stalled. But - you never know.. > > > > AG > > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Eric Albert wrote: > > > > > > > > >Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. Eddie will > be > > a > > > >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have > legit > > > 3pt > > > >range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true > > point > > > >guard skills. > > > > > > > >AG > > > > > > The point folks are trying to make (and that I agree with) is this: > Eddie > > > (and other Celtics) are much more effective when he is *not* the point > > > guard. > > > > > > Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can also hit the three to > > stretch > > > the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He can play point guard > (poorly) > > > *or* he can stretch the offense -- not both. > > > > > > When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded closely. This makes him shoot a > > > lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes him take many fewer shots. > > When > > > it counted in the finals, he was basically shut down. > > > > > > When someone else plays the point, Eddie gets free and can rain down > > those > > > devastating threes. If you're going to make Eddie effective, someone > > > (anyone!) else has to be playing point. > > > > > > I think Eddie could really help this team, but only if there's a point > > > guard playing with him. > > > > > > -- Eric > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 5 19:15:33 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 12:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908051154j5f74a915s38622f0969554b26@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <82327.60859.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Let me see, you send one post chastising people for expecting an all-star at positions 1-15 (in defense of House) and then in your next post you crucify Perk and Baby for not being all-stars.... Meanwhile, in the same post, you tear down Baby, saying he got his #s because played w/the 1st unit, forgetting that you just said the same thing IN DEFENSE of Eddie House, saying he's a good point guard because he fits well with the 1st unit. Is your irony meter broken or something? Ryan --- On Wed, 8/5/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 1:54 PM > I have a low post game too... > > If you have a low post game sufficient just to clog the > middle - you can > call it whatever you want but not a low post O. This is not > a 101 game - but > 5-on-5. Having Perk in the post and Baby at the elbow > was? a terrible > combination, to the degree that Paul's game as a slasher > was totally shut. > Not a good reason to be upbeat about having them at the 4/5 > any time soon. > > Eddie: he was moved to the off-guard simply because we had > nobody else. His > overall game suffered a huge blow - even though Marb was > "officially" on the > floor, his scoring punch came primarily from playing with > the 1st unit - no > miracles here. > > As to Baby, let's differentiate maturity from D gambling > off him. When you > have 2 players on the floor at the same time (i.e. Rondo > and Baby) to gamble > off, plus Perk having 0 game beyond 8ft range - this called > "trouble".... > That's why we had such a difficult time throughout the > playoffs. Eddie > stretched the floor, and apparently played better than > Rondo in some > stretches just because he kept the D honest with his > range. > > What I'm trying to say is very simple: you getting caught > into some details, > while refusing to see the bigger picture. Baby was good > because he > played with the 1st unit and saw no coverage: makes sense > to cover everybody > but an overweight PF with a flat 15-footer only, no low > post and no above > the rim game. Put him on a bad team - you will see the > difference right > away. > AG > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:14 AM, > wrote: > > > You didn't specify "must draw double coverage in the > paint". You said > > Perkins had NO low post game which is patently not > true. If you had said - > > "Perk didn't draw double teams freeing up perimeter > players for more open > > looks" I would've agreed with you. Two patently > different things. > > > > However, even in that particular situation, why then > isn't equal blame > > placed with Eddie House for not getting open even one > on one? Or on Doc for > > not using more picks away from the ball, player > movement, back door cuts, > > and other offensive wrinkles designed to compensate > for players not drawing > > double teams? Or maybe on ownership and management for > signing Mikki Moore > > instead of Joe Smith? Or perhaps Ray Allen for having > an abyssmal playoff? > >? I have more if you'd like. > > > > But getting back to the "point" at hand (no pun > intended); Eddie House. If > > you're fine with him as the PG backup - that's cool, > but the majority of us > > are not. His role as a shooter is too important to > saddle him with > > additionally handling the ball against pressure and > setting up other guys > > for open looks. > > > > Ryan easily showed Eddie's game DID change - his > scoring efficiency > > increased significantly when moved to the 2 guard. The > other stats are less > > telling because they are not concrete - baby's scoring > increase could be > > just as much his own maturation as who he was paired > with on the floor or it > > could be more Pierce drawing double and triple teams > (Orlando game winning > > shot anyone?) that got Baby open looks and not the > PG. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf > > Of Alex Goldblatt > >? Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 10:02 AM > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > > > Yep, that's why we've lost... Single coverage in the > post and totally shut > > perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally > planted in the > > paint... > > > > > > Having low post game is not a definition of Perk > scoring 10 pts on the low > > percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, > etc. You getting > > biased - poor approach to game analysis or player > eval. > > I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the > best option, but > > that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 > superstars on the > > team. So, here is the question: how much you guys > willing to pay for such a > > player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - > real options on > > todays > > market, not some hypothetical players that are either > not available or > > played 50 yrs ago.... > > > > AG > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, > wrote: > > > > > "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus > limited range to 8 feet at > > > the most." > > > > > > Did you even watch the playoffs last year? > > > > > > Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all > playoffs long (after a > > solid > > > regular season as well), but he consistently hit > a 10-15 foot jumper to > > make > > > Howard play him honestly in that series vs > camping in the paint. Its > > etched > > > in my memory because I didn't know he had that in > his arsenal either > > until > > > that time. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On > > Behalf > > > Of Alex Goldblatt > > >? Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:36 PM > > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > > > > > Not exactly. He played the same off-ball during > the 07-08, but roster > > > allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with > Eddie, Pos, TA in the > > > rotation. Situation has changed last year with > badly depleted roster, but > > > it > > > does not mean that we will have to get back to > the same old. MD is as > > good > > > fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and > slasher - not sharp > > shooter. > > > Basically, same idea like it used to be with the > hope that TA will pick > > it > > > up at some point. > > > > > > Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact > that he was shifted to the > > > 2-guard because he played the point really bad, > and even playing the > > > 2-guard > > > did it poorly - problem was that the team had no > inside game, thus making > > > it > > > all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only > banger in the post - > > > really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, > but he has no low post > > game, > > > plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. > > > > > > You simply cannot compare anything if you will > not start considering > > bigger > > > picture instead of just writing off players just > because they cannot play > > > like the max players. Ediie's game did not > change, and will not change. > > > Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running > the point in the 07-08, > > if > > > you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and > Marb - combined. IMO there > > is > > > a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless > we will figure out how > > to > > > trade few contracts for less, and will retain > Baby. > > > > > > Right now it does not look all that promising, > negotiation with the Paces > > > kind of stalled. But - you never know.. > > > > > > AG > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Eric Albert > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >Bottom line: there is a bit more game > that the box score.? Eddie will > > be > > > a > > > > >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point > taking this spot should have > > legit > > > > 3pt > > > > >range for this season. And it will be > much more essential than true > > > point > > > > >guard skills. > > > > > > > > > >AG > > > > > > > > The point folks are trying to make (and that > I agree with) is this: > > Eddie > > > > (and other Celtics) are much more effective > when he is *not* the point > > > > guard. > > > > > > > > Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can > also hit the three to > > > stretch > > > > the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He > can play point guard > > (poorly) > > > > *or* he can stretch the offense -- not > both. > > > > > > > > When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded > closely. This makes him shoot a > > > > lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes > him take many fewer shots. > > > When > > > > it counted in the finals, he was basically > shut down. > > > > > > > > When someone else plays the point, Eddie > gets free and can rain down > > > those > > > > devastating threes. If you're going to make > Eddie effective, someone > > > > (anyone!) else has to be playing point. > > > > > > > > I think Eddie could really help this team, > but only if there's a point > > > > guard playing with him. > > > > > > > > -- Eric > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Wed Aug 5 19:17:46 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 15:17:46 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908051154j5f74a915s38622f0969554b26@mail.gmail.com> References: <948734.84371.qm@web39604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <46E550B3-6DEB-4263-AE0E-4971E9638196@verizon.net> <3f0c87180908041511j27adfeb7v3264ec41a49d6de7@mail.gmail.com> <20090804224441.B8CD2E1AB96@ignite.igtc.com> <3f0c87180908041935k69433981t4886e4da4f3a82d5@mail.gmail.com> <200908051112.n75BCYm7007137@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908050701g62d1328evd3daba672ed62907@mail.gmail.com> <200908051414.n75EEDbI006518@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908051154j5f74a915s38622f0969554b26@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908051917.n75JHpkV003983@ares.afrc.af.mil> I never called it a low post "offense". I said Perk has a low post game (individually). The last low post offense in this league I think went through a guy called Hakeem the Dream in Houston. You're splitting these hairs thinner and thinner here. We didn't even run a low post based offense when Al Jeff, maybe the purest post scorer left in the league, was here. We ran, and continue to run, a perimeter passing offense based on the pick & roll from the perimeter with the post as an option off that system, but not the basis of that system. If you believe the NBA is a 5-on-5 offense I've got a bridge to sell you. Most NBA offense (including ours) is either two man game or three man game on one side of the floor with the weak side usually set to specific "spots" (usually behind the three point line) to clear room. There are a couple exceptions (D'Antoni and D. Nelson come to mind) that run a little more motion type sets, but even they default to the basic 2 and 3 man game if you slow them down. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 2:54 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: on Shelden I have a low post game too... If you have a low post game sufficient just to clog the middle - you can call it whatever you want but not a low post O. This is not a 101 game - but 5-on-5. Having Perk in the post and Baby at the elbow was a terrible combination, to the degree that Paul's game as a slasher was totally shut. Not a good reason to be upbeat about having them at the 4/5 any time soon. Eddie: he was moved to the off-guard simply because we had nobody else. His overall game suffered a huge blow - even though Marb was "officially" on the floor, his scoring punch came primarily from playing with the 1st unit - no miracles here. As to Baby, let's differentiate maturity from D gambling off him. When you have 2 players on the floor at the same time (i.e. Rondo and Baby) to gamble off, plus Perk having 0 game beyond 8ft range - this called "trouble".... That's why we had such a difficult time throughout the playoffs. Eddie stretched the floor, and apparently played better than Rondo in some stretches just because he kept the D honest with his range. What I'm trying to say is very simple: you getting caught into some details, while refusing to see the bigger picture. Baby was good because he played with the 1st unit and saw no coverage: makes sense to cover everybody but an overweight PF with a flat 15-footer only, no low post and no above the rim game. Put him on a bad team - you will see the difference right away. AG On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:14 AM, wrote: > You didn't specify "must draw double coverage in the paint". You said > Perkins had NO low post game which is patently not true. If you had said - > "Perk didn't draw double teams freeing up perimeter players for more open > looks" I would've agreed with you. Two patently different things. > > However, even in that particular situation, why then isn't equal blame > placed with Eddie House for not getting open even one on one? Or on Doc for > not using more picks away from the ball, player movement, back door cuts, > and other offensive wrinkles designed to compensate for players not drawing > double teams? Or maybe on ownership and management for signing Mikki Moore > instead of Joe Smith? Or perhaps Ray Allen for having an abyssmal playoff? > I have more if you'd like. > > But getting back to the "point" at hand (no pun intended); Eddie House. If > you're fine with him as the PG backup - that's cool, but the majority of us > are not. His role as a shooter is too important to saddle him with > additionally handling the ball against pressure and setting up other guys > for open looks. > > Ryan easily showed Eddie's game DID change - his scoring efficiency > increased significantly when moved to the 2 guard. The other stats are less > telling because they are not concrete - baby's scoring increase could be > just as much his own maturation as who he was paired with on the floor or it > could be more Pierce drawing double and triple teams (Orlando game winning > shot anyone?) that got Baby open looks and not the PG. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf > Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 10:02 AM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > Yep, that's why we've lost... Single coverage in the post and totally shut > perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally planted in the > paint... > > > Having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 pts on the low > percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, etc. You getting > biased - poor approach to game analysis or player eval. > I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the best option, but > that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 superstars on the > team. So, here is the question: how much you guys willing to pay for such a > player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - real options on > todays > market, not some hypothetical players that are either not available or > played 50 yrs ago.... > > AG > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, wrote: > > > "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited range to 8 feet at > > the most." > > > > Did you even watch the playoffs last year? > > > > Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs long (after a > solid > > regular season as well), but he consistently hit a 10-15 foot jumper to > make > > Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in the paint. Its > etched > > in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his arsenal either > until > > that time. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On > Behalf > > Of Alex Goldblatt > > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:36 PM > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > > > Not exactly. He played the same off-ball during the 07-08, but roster > > allowed to have the full 10-man rotation with Eddie, Pos, TA in the > > rotation. Situation has changed last year with badly depleted roster, but > > it > > does not mean that we will have to get back to the same old. MD is as > good > > fix as it gets, he's a solid ball handler and slasher - not sharp > shooter. > > Basically, same idea like it used to be with the hope that TA will pick > it > > up at some point. > > > > Problem with Eddie last year was not the fact that he was shifted to the > > 2-guard because he played the point really bad, and even playing the > > 2-guard > > did it poorly - problem was that the team had no inside game, thus making > > it > > all so much easier to defend. Paul was the only banger in the post - > > really bad choice for the slasher. Perk tried, but he has no low post > game, > > plus limited range to 8 feet at the most. > > > > You simply cannot compare anything if you will not start considering > bigger > > picture instead of just writing off players just because they cannot play > > like the max players. Ediie's game did not change, and will not change. > > Actually - he was surprisingly efficient running the point in the 07-08, > if > > you ask me. Much better than both Cassell and Marb - combined. IMO there > is > > a big chance that he'll play the backup - unless we will figure out how > to > > trade few contracts for less, and will retain Baby. > > > > Right now it does not look all that promising, negotiation with the Paces > > kind of stalled. But - you never know.. > > > > AG > > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Eric Albert wrote: > > > > > > > > >Bottom line: there is a bit more game that the box score. Eddie will > be > > a > > > >good fit, moreover - ANY backup point taking this spot should have > legit > > > 3pt > > > >range for this season. And it will be much more essential than true > > point > > > >guard skills. > > > > > > > >AG > > > > > > The point folks are trying to make (and that I agree with) is this: > Eddie > > > (and other Celtics) are much more effective when he is *not* the point > > > guard. > > > > > > Yes, it's nice to have a point guard who can also hit the three to > > stretch > > > the offense. But Eddie is not that guy. He can play point guard > (poorly) > > > *or* he can stretch the offense -- not both. > > > > > > When Eddie plays point, he gets guarded closely. This makes him shoot a > > > lower percentage, and, even worse, it makes him take many fewer shots. > > When > > > it counted in the finals, he was basically shut down. > > > > > > When someone else plays the point, Eddie gets free and can rain down > > those > > > devastating threes. If you're going to make Eddie effective, someone > > > (anyone!) else has to be playing point. > > > > > > I think Eddie could really help this team, but only if there's a point > > > guard playing with him. > > > > > > -- Eric > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From pdelevett at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 05:58:33 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 22:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Twits? Message-ID: <263201.93849.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Just thinkin', after reading Big Baby whine about how nobody loves him: if you were an agent for an NBA player, wouldn't you insist he stay the hell away from Twitter, blogging, etc? Consider: it's widely believed that Marbury has killed his career with the StarburyTV stunt, which seemed to reveal actual mental problems. JR Smith is being accused of gang ties for his Tweets (and interestingly, has apparently said he's going to stop posting amid the criticism; it's not like that guy needs any more legal trouble). Now Baby is living up to his name. I like Glen, and of course I'm all in favor of the First Amendment. But say you're a GM who's considering giving Davis a contract; do you start to wonder, "Gee, is this guy a whining, self-serving headcase? Do I want that on my team?" From noah.evans at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 07:45:28 2009 From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 09:45:28 +0200 Subject: Twits? In-Reply-To: <263201.93849.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <263201.93849.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <56a297000908060045n71d3489s57fd1aa5d93270ce@mail.gmail.com> GMs already know this. Twitter just means that we all know it now too. On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Peter Delevett wrote: > Just thinkin', after reading Big Baby whine about how nobody loves him: if you were an agent for an NBA player, wouldn't you insist he stay the hell away from Twitter, blogging, etc? > > Consider: it's widely believed that Marbury has killed his career with the StarburyTV stunt, which seemed to reveal actual mental problems. JR Smith is being accused of gang ties for his Tweets (and interestingly, has apparently said he's going to stop posting amid the criticism; it's not like that guy needs any more legal trouble). Now Baby is living up to his name. > > I like Glen, and of course I'm all in favor of the First Amendment. But say you're a GM who's considering giving Davis a contract; do you start to wonder, "Gee, is this guy a whining, self-serving headcase? Do I want that on my team?" > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Thu Aug 6 11:13:27 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 07:13:27 -0400 Subject: I tot I taw a Puddy Tat In-Reply-To: <56a297000908060045n71d3489s57fd1aa5d93270ce@mail.gmail.com> References: <263201.93849.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <56a297000908060045n71d3489s57fd1aa5d93270ce@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908061113.n76BDSdw017221@ares.afrc.af.mil> I am not on Twitter; hence I didn't see any "tweets"; however the Herald was nice enough to relay them for me. Here is Davis' string of recent tweets: "Why is this (thing) taking so long!!! I really don't understand!!!!" "Anybody know what's going on with the Celtics? Cause I don't!" "Well I'm not worried about Shelden!!! Great guy and great player!!! But we are different players you know!!!!!" "I wonder how the weather (is in) Boston cause I haven't been there in so long!!!!" "I like some of you guys' ideas!!!! (I'm) going to tell Danny (Ainge) about some of you guys' ideas!!!! I don't know why then they sign (Williams) before me!!" "Well I don't know where I'm going to be!!! Where (you) guys think I'm going to be!!! Who needs a pf?" If none of you have thought anything similar right after a job interview then you have way more self-discipline then I. Another example of privacy being displayed publicly. The same thoughts 99% of us have when our job situation is up in the air. That's all this is, but now it's public because we have another medium with which to share what used to be thoughts only friends and family heard. I sound old don't I? From noah.evans at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 11:22:33 2009 From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 13:22:33 +0200 Subject: I tot I taw a Puddy Tat In-Reply-To: <200908061113.n76BDSdw017221@ares.afrc.af.mil> References: <263201.93849.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <56a297000908060045n71d3489s57fd1aa5d93270ce@mail.gmail.com> <200908061113.n76BDSdw017221@ares.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <56a297000908060422i5e6b5122t193e887b162a8178@mail.gmail.com> http://twitter.com/account/profile_image/bigbabybball?hreflang=en On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:13 PM, wrote: > I am not on Twitter; hence I didn't see any "tweets"; however the Herald was nice enough to relay them for me. > > Here is Davis' string of recent tweets: > > "Why is this (thing) taking so long!!! I really don't understand!!!!" > > "Anybody know what's going on with the Celtics? Cause I don't!" > > "Well I'm not worried about Shelden!!! Great guy and great player!!! But we are different players you know!!!!!" > > "I wonder how the weather (is in) Boston cause I haven't been there in so long!!!!" > > "I like some of you guys' ideas!!!! (I'm) going to tell Danny (Ainge) about some of you guys' ideas!!!! I don't know why then they sign (Williams) before me!!" > > "Well I don't know where I'm going to be!!! Where (you) guys think I'm going to be!!! Who needs a pf?" > > If none of you have thought anything similar right after a job interview then you have way more self-discipline then I. Another example of privacy being displayed publicly. The same thoughts 99% of us have when our job situation is up in the air. That's all this is, but now it's public because we have another medium with which to share what used to be thoughts only friends and family heard. > > I sound old don't I? > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 12:40:27 2009 From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 05:40:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <53430.28930.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <592287.72572.qm@web63108.mail.re1.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 8/5/09, Ryan W wrote: From: Ryan W Subject: Re: on Shelden To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" Date: Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 1:22 PM We lost for a variety of reasons.? We didn't rely on a post game all season so I'm not sure how not having a post game against Orlando killed us--we're a perimeter/penetration team and have been one for a while now.? Instead, it was the fatigue of Ray/Paul, Ray's inability to hit anything in games 1 and 6 (his hamstring injury being a big problem), and Rondo's inability/unwillingness to make Orlando pay for doubling off him, something Doc was complicit in allowing to occur (but that's a matter for another post).? I love how you accuse Pat of 'getting biased'.? First of all, YOU were the one who sloppily announced that Perk had 'no low post game,' and then later backpedaled into saying that you meant that 'Perk doesn't have an All-Star low post game.'? Well, that's a real newsflash.? And another thing, what's this "having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 pts on the low percentage shots"?? Perk has one of the highest shooting percentages on the team and in the league--all his shots are 'high percentage'--and we actually would have been better served going to him more often during the Orlando series--since it's clear the Howard's biggest defensive weakness is in one-on-one situations. As for a realistic list of potential players to replace House with, Marbury and Jamaal Tinsley come to mind.? Marbury could easily replace the scoring House brings, AND do everything else a point guard is supposed to do. So could Tinsley. There are also a ton of potential targets via trades (using some combo of the House/TA/Scal expirings as bait), such as: Hinrich Delonte Ridnour Antonio Daniels Duhon Barbosa Steve Blake Some of those guys are rumored to be available, or could be pried away at the deadline if their teams are out of contention for maybe a future first plus our expirings.? Whatever the case, the Daniels saga shows that if we want to use our expirings to make an improvement to our team, we're going to either have to wait until teams are ready to deal (during the season), or we're going to have to include somebody with value.? And as much as I think House is a very limited player, he's also the only expiring we have with value--and thus, if we made any trade, I'm thinking House has to be in it.... Ryan --- On Wed, 8/5/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 9:01 AM > Yep, that's why we've lost... Single > coverage in the post and totally shut > perimeter and inside game because Howard was totally > planted in the paint... > > > Having low post game is not a definition of Perk scoring 10 > pts on the low > percentage shots - go watch 'Sheed, KG, Big Al, Brand, etc. > You getting > biased - poor approach to game analysis or player eval. > I agree that having Eddie running the point is not the best > option, but > that's the destiny of the backup point. We all want 15 > superstars on the > team. So, here is the question: how much you guys willing > to pay for such a > player? Who is the best option on your list?... But - real > options on todays > market, not some hypothetical players that are either not > available or > played 50 yrs ago.... > > AG > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:12 AM, > wrote: > > > "Perk tried, but he has no low post game, plus limited > range to 8 feet at > > the most." > > > > Did you even watch the playoffs last year? > > > > Not only was Perk a GREAT low post option all playoffs > long (after a solid > > regular season as well), but he consistently hit a > 10-15 foot jumper to make > > Howard play him honestly in that series vs camping in > the paint. Its etched > > in my memory because I didn't know he had that in his > arsenal either until > > that time. > > ? ? ? _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 13:12:06 2009 From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 06:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <592287.72572.qm@web63108.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <68484.89126.qm@web63108.mail.re1.yahoo.com> what I meant was,?? I always liked Duhon, and think he's especially suited for coming off the bench.? The Knicks are looking left and right for a PG, so he may indeed be available.?? The other one I love on this list is Hinrich.? He can play both guard positions, so would get more minutes than just being a backup to Rondo.? Gene, you always liked Blake.? Is he still up there? Ellie --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Ellie Cutler wrote: <...> There are also a ton of potential targets via trades (using some combo of the House/TA/Scal expirings as bait), such as: Hinrich Delonte Ridnour Antonio Daniels Duhon Barbosa Steve Blake From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 13:20:08 2009 From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 06:20:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: I tot I taw a Puddy Tat In-Reply-To: <200908061113.n76BDSdw017221@ares.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <222910.90805.qm@web63105.mail.re1.yahoo.com> >That's all this is, but now it's public because we have another medium >with which to share what used to be thoughts only friends and family heard. Or not even friends and family - twitter is a brain dump.? Try being a publicist, agent, or manager - where details need to be kept secret - in the age of twitter! I'm w/you, Patrick, I feel old on this one, too. how tweet it is! ?-Ellie --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Subject: I tot I taw a Puddy Tat To: celtics at igtc.com Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 7:13 AM I am not on Twitter; hence I didn't see any "tweets"; however the Herald was nice enough to relay them for me. Here is Davis' string of recent tweets: "Why is this (thing) taking so long!!! I really don't understand!!!!" "Anybody know what's going on with the Celtics? Cause I don't!" "Well I'm not worried about Shelden!!! Great guy and great player!!! But we are different players you know!!!!!" "I wonder how the weather (is in) Boston cause I haven't been there in so long!!!!" "I like some of you guys' ideas!!!! (I'm) going to tell Danny (Ainge) about some of you guys' ideas!!!! I don't know why then they sign (Williams) before me!!" "Well I don't know where I'm going to be!!! Where (you) guys think I'm going to be!!! Who needs a pf?" If none of you have thought anything similar right after a job interview then you have way more self-discipline then I. Another example of privacy being displayed publicly. The same thoughts 99% of us have when our job situation is up in the air. That's all this is, but now it's public because we have another medium with which to share what used to be thoughts only friends and family heard. I sound old don't I? _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From jlyell at verizon.net Thu Aug 6 13:29:00 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 06:29:00 -0700 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <68484.89126.qm@web63108.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <68484.89126.qm@web63108.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <53CF678F-8CFB-474C-A54A-F0F7E605DAFB@verizon.net> Duhon is overrated & overpaid Heinrich, barbosa, Blake , and maybe bayless or is it rodriquez from Portland? On Aug 6, 2009, at 6:12 AM, Ellie Cutler wrote: > what I meant was, I always liked Duhon, and think he's especially > suited for coming off the bench. The Knicks are looking left and > right for a PG, so he may indeed be available. The other one I > love on this list is Hinrich. He can play both guard positions, so > would get more minutes than just being a backup to Rondo. > > Gene, you always liked Blake. Is he still up there? > > Ellie > > --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Ellie Cutler wrote: > > <...> > There are also a ton of potential targets via trades (using some > combo of the House/TA/Scal expirings as bait), such as: > > Hinrich > Delonte > Ridnour > Antonio Daniels > Duhon > Barbosa > Steve Blake > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From jahillsr at comcast.net Thu Aug 6 15:14:25 2009 From: jahillsr at comcast.net (Jim Hill) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:14:25 -0400 Subject: on Shelden Message-ID: <000001ca16a8$95dc73d0$c1955b70$@net> > Duhon is overrated & overpaid I don't know about that, but I'll take your opinion on it. That being said I would take Duhon as our back up because he knows how to play the Pg position and with our team he would be "better" then he would on others. He has his negitives on the court but I think his ability to get the ball to the right guy, with the right pass is just what our second team needs with a lower drop off when he is with the First team. As to overpaid, it's all funny money to me. Message-ID: <528535.97488.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Duhon *has* been rumored to be available--he's got one year left on the full MLE deal he signed last summer and the Knicks are rumored to be looking heavily at Ramon Sessions or Jason Williams. Duhon's a real possibility . Speaking of Jason Williams, there are rumblings that he's considering the Celtics--I didn't include him on the below list because his rights are technically with the Knicks right now. But, assuming he's healthy and in shape, his true point guard game coupled with unlimited range would give the 2nd unit a real kick in the ass. Ryan --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Ellie Cutler wrote: > From: Ellie Cutler > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 8:12 AM > what I meant was,?? I always liked > Duhon, and think he's especially suited for coming off the > bench.? The Knicks are looking left and right for a PG, so > he may indeed be available.?? The other one I love on this > list is Hinrich.? He can play both guard positions, so > would get more minutes than just being a backup to Rondo.? > > > Gene, you always liked Blake.? Is he still up there? > > Ellie > > --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Ellie Cutler > wrote: > > <...> > There are also a ton of potential targets via trades (using > some combo of the House/TA/Scal expirings as bait), such > as: > > Hinrich > Delonte > Ridnour > Antonio Daniels > Duhon > Barbosa > Steve Blake > > > > > > ? ? ? > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From gk_tyler at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 19:54:53 2009 From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 12:54:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <528535.97488.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <327254.41180.qm@web39608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > Gene, you always liked Blake.? Is he still up there? > > Ellie Blake makes somewhere around 3 1/2 or 4 1/2 mil, so he's pretty much unavailable, although the Blazers have several other points, I think.? We would have to trade Scal plus something to get him.? I'm hopeful we get a serious backup since injury is always possible; we don't want to rely on House or Daniels or Tony or even Hudson in a starting role.? Gene From eggcentric at aol.com Thu Aug 6 19:57:28 2009 From: eggcentric at aol.com (eggcentric) Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:57:28 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <528535.97488.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <112513B2.BEEC.4F63.A896.D0930C677A2B@aol.com> On Aug 6, 2009, at 1:23:59 PM, "Ryan W" wrote: Duhon's a real possibility . For who - three or four of our discards to match his $6 mill. ?expiring contract? As you mention, NY is looking to sign PG Sessions, maybe Williams. ?But if we trade - hypothetical - Scal, Walker, T. Allen, or Giddens, ?we then have to restock our roster with similarly inferior players (vet. minimum contracts) to bring our roster to our ideal 14. Speaking of which, why has it been reported and copied from misleading blog to blog that we signed Sheldon Williams for $1.3 mill? ?Isn't his min. salary morelike $826,000?since he has only been in the league for three years (with three teams)? And why was Marc Spears both credited and damned on this list for breaking the news that ?"The {Sheldon Williams} signing will not have bearing on C interest in Davis." After all, it was Wojnarowski, not Spears, who submitted the original story on Yahoo.com.? As usual, Spears apparently quickly dashed to his twitter and tweeted it moments later, as has seemed his?pattern all along with other's breaking news. ? So Big Baby is unhappy and aptly-named after all. ?Surprise, surprise. ?If my arm wasn't already tender?from patting myself on the back, I'd reprint one of ?the paragraphs which caused such furor on?CelticsBlog on 7/30. ?Oh what the hey, I will anyway: < - that Danny and Wyc would happily welcome Big Baby back for the bargain basement qualifying offer of $889,396 (125% of his rookie scale contract). Isn't that what they have hoped for all along? But match an offer for $4-5 million, forget it! Meanwhile, the emotional and now hostile Baby has apparently become impatient and bitter over the Celtics not offering him a lucrative contract. Like Daniels, will he be a happy camper playing for us for chump change? > From wayoftheray at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 21:12:32 2009 From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 14:12:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: I'm Being Held Captive on A Russian Sub Somewhere Off The East Coast Message-ID: <908402.39432.qm@web110115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I've tapped in to their communications system using a bottle of vodka, a pair of nail clippers, a solenoid and the latest issue of Pravda featuring villagers in Dagestan being abducted by Aliens. I saw this on MacGyver, and damn, if it doesn't work to perfection. I will have all the latest juicy rumors and Celtics updates in about an hour, as the sub commander just announced that Bill Clinton is outside the sub in scuba gear with the entire Russian women's swim team and I will be freed. Hooray, I'm saved... Ray From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 21:43:50 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 14:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <112513B2.BEEC.4F63.A896.D0930C677A2B@aol.com> Message-ID: <991476.94913.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 8/6/09, eggcentric wrote: > From: eggcentric > Subject: Re: on Shelden > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 2:57 PM > > On Aug 6, 2009, at 1:23:59 PM, "Ryan W" > wrote: > > Duhon's a real possibility . > For who - three or four of our discards to match his $6 > mill. ?expiring contract? Actually, you'd only need House and Scal to make it work. With Duhon, we wouldn't need House--and I'm pretty sure we can replace Scal... > > As you mention, NY is looking to sign PG Sessions, maybe > Williams. ?But if we > trade - hypothetical - Scal, Walker, T. Allen, or Giddens, > ?we then have to restock > our roster with similarly inferior players (vet. minimum > contracts) to bring our > roster to our ideal 14. > > Speaking of which, why has it been reported and copied from > misleading blog to blog > that we signed Sheldon Williams for $1.3 mill? ?Isn't his > min. salary morelike $826,000?since he has only been in the > league for three years (with three teams)? Good question. Maybe Kim knows what the veteran minimum is for a player of Williams' service time. > So Big Baby is unhappy and aptly-named after all. > ?Surprise, surprise. ?If my arm wasn't > already tender?from patting myself on the back, I'd > reprint one of ?the paragraphs which > caused such furor on?CelticsBlog on 7/30. I'm not sure how much prescience it takes to predict that Big Baby will react emotionally to something that doesn't live up to his expectations :) And, from what I've heard from Micheal Holley, Marquis Daniels sought out the Cs and offered his services at the 1.9 million exception. The Cs brought up the sign-and-trade because it's a better business move. Regardless, I doubt he's re-assessing his decision... Why the hate on Marc Spears? I don't get it--with the Internet, it's not all about scoops anymore. Scoops are so 1980s... Ryan From jwhite128 at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 21:54:24 2009 From: jwhite128 at gmail.com (Jeff White) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:54:24 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <991476.94913.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <112513B2.BEEC.4F63.A896.D0930C677A2B@aol.com> <991476.94913.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1923cbc90908061454t63f50dabu8057d65b55fda33b@mail.gmail.com> Scal is a concussion away from an early retirement. Jeff On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Ryan W wrote: > > --- On Thu, 8/6/09, eggcentric wrote: > > > From: eggcentric > > Subject: Re: on Shelden > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 2:57 PM > > > > On Aug 6, 2009, at 1:23:59 PM, "Ryan W" > > wrote: > > > > Duhon's a real possibility . > > For who - three or four of our discards to match his $6 > > mill. expiring contract? > > Actually, you'd only need House and Scal to make it work. With Duhon, we > wouldn't need House--and I'm pretty sure we can replace Scal... > > > > > As you mention, NY is looking to sign PG Sessions, maybe > > Williams. But if we > > trade - hypothetical - Scal, Walker, T. Allen, or Giddens, > > we then have to restock > > our roster with similarly inferior players (vet. minimum > > contracts) to bring our > > roster to our ideal 14. > > > > Speaking of which, why has it been reported and copied from > > misleading blog to blog > > that we signed Sheldon Williams for $1.3 mill? Isn't his > > min. salary morelike $826,000 since he has only been in the > > league for three years (with three teams)? > > Good question. Maybe Kim knows what the veteran minimum is for a player of > Williams' service time. > > > > So Big Baby is unhappy and aptly-named after all. > > Surprise, surprise. If my arm wasn't > > already tender from patting myself on the back, I'd > > reprint one of the paragraphs which > > caused such furor on CelticsBlog on 7/30. > > I'm not sure how much prescience it takes to predict that Big Baby will > react emotionally to something that doesn't live up to his expectations :) > > And, from what I've heard from Micheal Holley, Marquis Daniels sought out > the Cs and offered his services at the 1.9 million exception. The Cs > brought up the sign-and-trade because it's a better business move. > Regardless, I doubt he's re-assessing his decision... > > Why the hate on Marc Spears? I don't get it--with the Internet, it's not > all about scoops anymore. Scoops are so 1980s... > > Ryan > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 21:58:37 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 14:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <1923cbc90908061454t63f50dabu8057d65b55fda33b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <650663.6632.qm@web65611.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Jeff White wrote: > Scal is a concussion away from an > early retirement. > > Jeff Yeah, so what? Are you saying the Knicks wouldn't want him or he's not worth the tears if we have to move him? You wouldn't be trading for Scal to get Scal--he just makes the #s work. FYI--apparently the twitter account associated w/Baby (and the one that Mark Murphy used in his story) is FAKE. Now there's a Mark who ought to get some crap, Egg :) Ryan From jwhite128 at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 23:11:30 2009 From: jwhite128 at gmail.com (Jeff White) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 19:11:30 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <650663.6632.qm@web65611.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <1923cbc90908061454t63f50dabu8057d65b55fda33b@mail.gmail.com> <650663.6632.qm@web65611.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1923cbc90908061611h56427f5dqd3213aeb4d571783@mail.gmail.com> I'm saying that it's unlikely that Scal will figure prominently as a player in any team's plans for 2009-10 and beyond, given his shaky medical status. I appreciate the value of his contract. On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Ryan W wrote: > > > > --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Jeff White wrote: > > > Scal is a concussion away from an > > early retirement. > > > > Jeff > > Yeah, so what? Are you saying the Knicks wouldn't want him or he's not > worth the tears if we have to move him? > > You wouldn't be trading for Scal to get Scal--he just makes the #s work. > > FYI--apparently the twitter account associated w/Baby (and the one that > Mark Murphy used in his story) is FAKE. Now there's a Mark who ought to get > some crap, Egg :) > > Ryan > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com Thu Aug 6 23:22:01 2009 From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 16:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Duhon In-Reply-To: <528535.97488.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <367580.22358.qm@web63102.mail.re1.yahoo.com> we could have Duhon & Sheldon Williams playing together on the 2nd unit, a la: http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/4186054/ !! Ellie --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Ryan W wrote: From: Ryan W Subject: Re: on Shelden To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 1:23 PM Duhon *has* been rumored to be available--he's got one year left on the full MLE deal he signed last summer and the Knicks are rumored to be looking heavily at Ramon Sessions or Jason Williams.? Duhon's a real possibility . Speaking of Jason Williams, there are rumblings that he's considering the Celtics--I didn't include him on the below list because his rights are technically with the Knicks right now.? But, assuming he's healthy and in shape, his true point guard game coupled with unlimited range would give the 2nd unit a real kick in the ass. Ryan - From tsb33 at windstream.net Fri Aug 7 02:24:51 2009 From: tsb33 at windstream.net (TroySusieBrady) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 22:24:51 -0400 Subject: Side Note Thibs Message-ID: <01d601ca1706$3e9b53d0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> Maybe I missed it with all the Wallace, Daniels & Baby talk, but did we resign Tommy Thibs or not? I just saw where we lost Dave Wohl to the Timberpups. Anyone know for sure where we stand with Thibs? Troy From kmalo17 at verizon.net Fri Aug 7 06:18:21 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:18:21 -0400 Subject: Side Note Thibs In-Reply-To: <01d601ca1706$3e9b53d0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> References: <01d601ca1706$3e9b53d0$6601a8c0@troyscomputer> Message-ID: <0KNZ002BUTKAFWNI@vms173005.mailsrvcs.net> At 10:24 PM 8/6/2009, TroySusieBrady wrote: >Maybe I missed it with all the Wallace, Daniels & Baby talk, but did we >resign Tommy Thibs or not? I just saw where we lost Dave Wohl to the >Timberpups. Anyone know for sure where we stand with Thibs? Troy They've been intentionally leaving him unsigned as a courtesy to him while the head coaching jobs were sorting out and I believe he was still in the running for the TWolves, although that's looking to end up being Rambis. He was reportedly on the verge of signing a while back, with just length of contract to sort out http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view.bg?articleid=1178865&srvc=rss and they just held off while there were still openings. I don't think there are reasons for concern. Kim From eggcentric at aol.com Fri Aug 7 13:40:36 2009 From: eggcentric at aol.com (eggcentric) Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 09:40:36 -0400 Subject: on Shelden In-Reply-To: <650663.6632.qm@web65611.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <65CE4CC4.628E.4A71.A32F.5C2180EAD011@aol.com> On Aug 6, 2009, at 5:58:37 PM, "Ryan W" wrote: FYI--apparently the twitter account associated w/Baby (and the on that Mark Murphy used in his story) is FAKE. Now there's a Mark who ought to get some crap, Egg :)? Ryan ----------------------------- Think maybe his agent finally got to him to stop the madness? ? Like suggesting something like??"You better lay off the bitter twitters and deny everything." - Herald Meanwhile, Daniels, Williams, Big Baby (and a backup PG?) have yet to officially be signed, ?Something bigger in the works? Egg From BDodgers at aol.com Fri Aug 7 22:49:46 2009 From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 18:49:46 EDT Subject: SEAHAWKS GET TALK FROM BILL RUSSELL Message-ID: SEAHAWKS GET TALK FROM BILL RUSSELL The _Seattle Seahawks_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=sea) thought they were sitting down for another ho-hum evening meeting. Instead, they got one of the greatest winners of all time. _Boston Celtics_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=bos) legend and five-time NBA MVP Bill Russell came from his home in suburban Mercer Island, Wash., on Thursday night to awe the Seahawks with an hour-long talk on what it takes to win as a team. The players were silent and applauded throughout the speech. The stately, 75-year-old former center renowned for team play then posed for pictures with the Seahawks, who are coming off a 4-12 season and have a new coach in Jim Mora. When Mora was Atlanta's coach from 2004 to 2006, he brought in Russell and former Atlanta mayor and United Nations ambassador Andrew Young to talk to the Falcons. -- The Associated Press **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=115&bcd =JulystepsfooterNO115) From wayoftheray at yahoo.com Fri Aug 7 23:52:47 2009 From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:52:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos Message-ID: <761385.93155.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> - Denver just traded Steven Hunter to Memphis. Why is that important? Because Little Aingettes, the Celtics have inquired about a Davis for Kleiza exchange. Of course, Kleiza is rumoured to be heading to Olympiakos, but now the Nuggets have a 3 million-plus TPE, in which to fit in Davis. Because Kleiza is BYC, Celtics would still have to ditch an expiring contract somewhere other than Denver to accommodate Kleiza. - As regards Glen Davis, teams have been doing to Ainge, what he often does to them: low-balling - very little of anything good has been offered for Davis. But it could change, as the free agent crop dries up. - Big Baby, meanwhile seems to be living up to his nickname, as Ainge is playing him like a fiddle. And good job by the Celtics of leaking that story about teams worrying about weight issues concerning Davis. - Celtics signed Shelden Williams today and will now unleash his giant forehead of death against the rest of the NBA. Shelden can rebound and defend, so a decent pickup as the 5th big person. - And Shelden is proof that not everyone in the WNBA is a lesbian. - Yes, Robert Swift will be the 3rd string center. Ainge has pursued him for four years, as Simmons notes, so they're not ditching him for Williams. - No truth to the rumor that Austin Ainge is the love child of Danny Ainge and Bobby Hurley. - Will Susan Boyle sing the National Anthem at a Celtics game this season? Ask Wyc. - CJ Miles is the guy the Celtics want from the Jazz. - Quisy arrives next week it appears, unless something changes, by the LLE. - Bowen, said to want the LLE himself (doesn't mean he'll get it), probably Orlando, but Boston has a chance. - Marbury, won't surprise me if he runs out of Vaseline and returns to the Celtics. He's better than Lue for example. - For some strange reason, I agree with Matthew "The Rumor Man" Hume, that it's a longshot, but keep an eye on Iverson. We know Ainge loves certain players and continues to pursue them year after year, so why not Iverson? - Celtics stealing Jason Williams away from the Knicks? Hume thinks it's a possibility; ESPN Bucher said he would sign with the Celtics - so who knows? - Celtics consider Giddens to be a better player than Walker - he's won the battle ha ha, just wanted to toss that out for all you Walker fans. - Sorry, don't see Lester Emperor Hudson making the roster, unless there's a big expiring contracts swap. They should encourage him to go to Europe. He could flourish there. - The Wall will be the 1st pick in next year's NBA draft. Ray From bradybonz at cox.net Sat Aug 8 00:04:47 2009 From: bradybonz at cox.net (bradybonz at cox.net) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 20:04:47 -0400 Subject: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos In-Reply-To: <761385.93155.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20090807200447.KIY5H.56080.imail@eastrmwml38> Isn't Davis BYC also? ---- Way Of The Ray wrote: > - Denver just traded Steven Hunter to Memphis. Why is that important? Because Little Aingettes, the Celtics have inquired about a Davis for Kleiza exchange. Of course, Kleiza is rumoured to be heading to Olympiakos, > but now the Nuggets have a 3 million-plus TPE, in which to fit in Davis. Because Kleiza is BYC, Celtics would still have to ditch an expiring contract somewhere other than Denver to accommodate Kleiza. > > - As regards Glen Davis, teams have been doing to Ainge, what he often does to them: low-balling - very little of anything good has been offered for Davis. But it could change, as the free agent crop dries up. > > - Big Baby, meanwhile seems to be living up to his nickname, as Ainge is playing him like a fiddle. And good job by the Celtics of leaking that story about teams worrying about weight issues concerning Davis. > > - Celtics signed Shelden Williams today and will now unleash his giant forehead of death against the rest of the NBA. Shelden can rebound and defend, so a decent pickup as the 5th big person. > > - And Shelden is proof that not everyone in the WNBA is a lesbian. > > - Yes, Robert Swift will be the 3rd string center. Ainge has pursued him for four years, as Simmons notes, so they're not ditching him for Williams. > > - No truth to the rumor that Austin Ainge is the love child of Danny Ainge and Bobby Hurley. > > - Will Susan Boyle sing the National Anthem at a Celtics game this season? Ask Wyc. > > - CJ Miles is the guy the Celtics want from the Jazz. > > - Quisy arrives next week it appears, unless something changes, by the LLE. > > - Bowen, said to want the LLE himself (doesn't mean he'll get it), probably Orlando, but Boston has a chance. > > - Marbury, won't surprise me if he runs out of Vaseline and returns to the Celtics. He's better than Lue for example. > > - For some strange reason, I agree with Matthew "The Rumor Man" Hume, that it's a longshot, but keep an eye on Iverson. We know Ainge loves certain players and continues to pursue them year after year, so why not Iverson? > > - Celtics stealing Jason Williams away from the Knicks? Hume thinks it's a possibility; ESPN Bucher said he would sign with the Celtics - so who knows? > > - Celtics consider Giddens to be a better player than Walker - he's won the battle ha ha, just wanted to toss that out for all you Walker fans. > > - Sorry, don't see Lester Emperor Hudson making the roster, unless there's a big expiring contracts swap. They should encourage him to go to Europe. He could flourish there. > > - The Wall will be the 1st pick in next year's NBA draft. > > Ray > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From jeffclark at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 01:14:31 2009 From: jeffclark at gmail.com (jeffclark at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 21:14:31 -0400 Subject: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos In-Reply-To: <20090807200447.KIY5H.56080.imail@eastrmwml38> References: <761385.93155.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20090807200447.KIY5H.56080.imail@eastrmwml38> Message-ID: <84e131670908071814h23aabd96i396aa68c1f90b61b@mail.gmail.com> I would have gone with the nickname "Good Hume-r Man" myself, but good stuff all around cheers On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:04 PM, wrote: > Isn't Davis BYC also? > ---- Way Of The Ray wrote: > > - Denver just traded Steven Hunter to Memphis. Why is that important? > Because Little Aingettes, the Celtics have inquired about a Davis for Kleiza > exchange. Of course, Kleiza is rumoured to be heading to Olympiakos, > > but now the Nuggets have a 3 million-plus TPE, in which to fit in Davis. > Because Kleiza is BYC, Celtics would still have to ditch an expiring > contract somewhere other than Denver to accommodate Kleiza. > > > > - As regards Glen Davis, teams have been doing to Ainge, what he often > does to them: low-balling - very little of anything good has been offered > for Davis. But it could change, as the free agent crop dries up. > > > > - Big Baby, meanwhile seems to be living up to his nickname, as Ainge is > playing him like a fiddle. And good job by the Celtics of leaking that story > about teams worrying about weight issues concerning Davis. > > > > - Celtics signed Shelden Williams today and will now unleash his giant > forehead of death against the rest of the NBA. Shelden can rebound and > defend, so a decent pickup as the 5th big person. > > > > - And Shelden is proof that not everyone in the WNBA is a lesbian. > > > > - Yes, Robert Swift will be the 3rd string center. Ainge has pursued him > for four years, as Simmons notes, so they're not ditching him for Williams. > > > > - No truth to the rumor that Austin Ainge is the love child of Danny > Ainge and Bobby Hurley. > > > > - Will Susan Boyle sing the National Anthem at a Celtics game this > season? Ask Wyc. > > > > - CJ Miles is the guy the Celtics want from the Jazz. > > > > - Quisy arrives next week it appears, unless something changes, by the > LLE. > > > > - Bowen, said to want the LLE himself (doesn't mean he'll get it), > probably Orlando, but Boston has a chance. > > > > - Marbury, won't surprise me if he runs out of Vaseline and returns to > the Celtics. He's better than Lue for example. > > > > - For some strange reason, I agree with Matthew "The Rumor Man" Hume, > that it's a longshot, but keep an eye on Iverson. We know Ainge loves > certain players and continues to pursue them year after year, so why not > Iverson? > > > > - Celtics stealing Jason Williams away from the Knicks? Hume thinks it's > a possibility; ESPN Bucher said he would sign with the Celtics - so who > knows? > > > > - Celtics consider Giddens to be a better player than Walker - he's won > the battle ha ha, just wanted to toss that out for all you Walker fans. > > > > - Sorry, don't see Lester Emperor Hudson making the roster, unless > there's a big expiring contracts swap. They should encourage him to go to > Europe. He could flourish there. > > > > - The Wall will be the 1st pick in next year's NBA draft. > > > > Ray > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- Jeff CelticsBlog.com doughnutholes.wordpress.com From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Sat Aug 8 04:27:08 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 21:27:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Here's a Scoop for You Message-ID: <780389.95463.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo "Glen Davis is close to signing a two-year contract to stay with Boston, a source told Y! Sports. Deal should be complete next week." From eggcentric at aol.com Sat Aug 8 13:45:08 2009 From: eggcentric at aol.com (eggcentric) Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 09:45:08 -0400 Subject: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos In-Reply-To: <761385.93155.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Funny stuff as usual, Ray. ? Looking forward to seeing you and George (Meyer) and? Harry (Blaine), and the left side of Pat (Ryan) and the? quarter end of Ravi (Singh) and the full body of popular Kim Jong-il,?and other Celt blog true blue ?mavericks? at Chelsea?Clinton?s wedding to Marc Mezvinsky?on Martha?s Vineyard?come Aug. 29th.? Oh crap crappy crappola crapolise crapolisier, I forgot.? DOWNER ALERT!? I?ll end up attending the wedding el solo? (in my vintage1959 prom dress with tiara ... hello, Ebay)? since no one has actually seen any of us in the same? room together. ? How could they,? when I can?t even see my own damn? reflection in a mirror. ? It?s all Danny?s fault!? Ya hear me? Egg From capomycap at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 16:15:39 2009 From: capomycap at gmail.com (George Meyer) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 09:15:39 -0700 Subject: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos In-Reply-To: References: <761385.93155.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <253b689a0908080915v2e50f981rb0f9a7858881c99b@mail.gmail.com> Egg, It'll be the largest gathering of troublemakers, malcontents and washouts since Danny Ainge's last pre-draft workout. Should we all get matching Marquis Daniels shotgun-suicide tattoos? -G.M 2009/8/8 eggcentric > Funny stuff as usual, Ray. > > Looking forward to seeing you and George (Meyer) and > Harry (Blaine), and the left side of Pat (Ryan) and the > quarter end of Ravi (Singh) and the full body of > popular Kim Jong-il, and other Celt blog true blue > ?mavericks? at Chelsea Clinton?s wedding to Marc > Mezvinsky on Martha?s Vineyard come Aug. 29th. > > Oh crap crappy crappola crapolise crapolisier, I forgot. > DOWNER ALERT! I?ll end up attending the wedding el solo > (in my vintage1959 prom dress with tiara ... hello, Ebay) > since no one has actually seen any of us in the same > room together. > > How could they, when I can?t even see my own damn > reflection in a mirror. > > It?s all Danny?s fault! Ya hear me? > > Egg > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Sat Aug 8 19:53:11 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:53:11 -0400 Subject: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos Message-ID: <200908081953.n78JrDlS021551@apollo.afrc.af.mil> You always pick my left side. It's definitely more egotistical, but then my right side has that sleep apnea issue. I was originally asked to be best man, but could only live up to fair to middlin. PSR ------Original Message------ From: eggcentric To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List ReplyTo: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Sent: Aug 8, 2009 09:45 Subject: Re: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos Funny stuff as usual, Ray. ? Looking forward to seeing you and George (Meyer) and? Harry (Blaine), and the left side of Pat (Ryan) and the? quarter end of Ravi (Singh) and the full body of popular Kim Jong-il,?and other Celt blog true blue ?mavericks? at Chelsea?Clinton?s wedding to Marc Mezvinsky?on Martha?s Vineyard?come Aug. 29th.? Oh crap crappy crappola crapolise crapolisier, I forgot.? DOWNER ALERT!? I?ll end up attending the wedding el solo? (in my vintage1959 prom dress with tiara ... hello, Ebay)? since no one has actually seen any of us in the same? room together. ? How could they,? when I can?t even see my own damn? reflection in a mirror. ? It?s all Danny?s fault!? Ya hear me? Egg _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics Patrick S. Ryan 22 AF/A6 Sent from my Blackberry wireless From jahillsr at comcast.net Sun Aug 9 04:43:09 2009 From: jahillsr at comcast.net (Jim Hill) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 00:43:09 -0400 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. Message-ID: <000901ca18ab$e575b050$b06110f0$@net> Reports are 2 years at $3M+ per. Seems about right. Let me do the math here. The Celtics currently have 11 players under contract. Daniels and Williams are on their way. That leaves two spots. You're telling us that Ainge is going to trade for Kleiza and Miles, sign Swift and possibly re-sign Marbury? Oh, and maybe sign Bowen, White Chocolate and Iverson too? I guess in your world Stern will let the Celtics have a 20-man roster. And 13 of those guys would be 6'7 and under? How much vodka did you drink on that Russian sub? From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Sun Aug 9 04:51:39 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 21:51:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <000901ca18ab$e575b050$b06110f0$@net> Message-ID: <865994.21291.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Yep--fair deal for both parties. Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge opens negotiations towards extending Rondo and possibly Ray. Ryan --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill wrote: > From: Jim Hill > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 PM > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > per. > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From capomycap at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 21:32:40 2009 From: capomycap at gmail.com (George Meyer) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:32:40 -0700 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <865994.21291.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <000901ca18ab$e575b050$b06110f0$@net> <865994.21291.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> It makes absolutely no sense for Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I highly doubt he'll try to. In this economic climate, the last thing you do is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't have to, and Wyc said immediately before the off-season that signing Rondo wasn't a priority since we can just match whatever he gets offered next year. Further, Rondo wants near-max money, so it's not like his value can increase insofar as he and his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the season, see where the team stands (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that the shrinking market, contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally non-max-type game give him a better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or he'll be traded. As for Ray, it makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, particularly when he has one of the best expiring contracts in the league and the 2010 trading deadline promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way I see it, Ainge's offseason is essentially finished. On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W wrote: > > Yep--fair deal for both parties. > > Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge opens negotiations towards extending > Rondo and possibly Ray. > > Ryan > > --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill wrote: > > > From: Jim Hill > > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 PM > > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > > per. > > > > > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > celtics at igtc.com > > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From pmaymin at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 04:08:26 2009 From: pmaymin at gmail.com (Phil Maymin) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:08:26 -0400 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> References: <000901ca18ab$e575b050$b06110f0$@net> <865994.21291.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8c863cee0908092108v71a7f95dhc4644637efcd7918@mail.gmail.com> Great points. Still wish we'd gotten Big Ben instead of Shelden. Hope I'm wrong. On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 5:32 PM, George Meyer wrote: > It makes absolutely no sense for Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I > highly doubt he'll try to. In this economic climate, the last thing you do > is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't have to, and Wyc said > immediately before the off-season that signing Rondo wasn't a priority since > we can just match whatever he gets offered next year. Further, Rondo wants > near-max money, so it's not like his value can increase insofar as he and > his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the season, see where the team stands > (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that the shrinking market, > contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally non-max-type game give him a > better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or he'll be traded. As for Ray, it > makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, particularly when he has one > of the best expiring contracts in the league and the 2010 trading deadline > promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way I see it, Ainge's offseason > is essentially finished. > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W wrote: > >> >> Yep--fair deal for both parties. >> >> Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge opens negotiations towards extending >> Rondo and possibly Ray. >> >> Ryan >> >> --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill wrote: >> >> > From: Jim Hill >> > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. >> > To: celtics at igtc.com >> > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 PM >> > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ >> > per. >> > >> > >> > >> > Seems about right. >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From kmalo17 at verizon.net Mon Aug 10 05:16:45 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 01:16:45 -0400 Subject: Not so fast on Baby to the Suns.... Message-ID: <0KO500A09ASNGDJ6@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> Both Sunday Boston papers say he's on the verge of signing a deal with Boston that makes sense if the Herald is right about the specifics (Mark Murphy isn't always notable for accuracy on details IMO and he did the story, not Bulperr), 2 years for a total of $6.3MM. The two years lets him try FA again as an unrestricted FA when the new collective bargaining agreement will likely be in place perhaps opening up cap room and when teams disappointed after freeing up money for the 2010 stakes they couldn't use to buy what they really wanted may still have some to spend and be more willing to spend on useful lesser talent. It also gives Boston a bit of stability and extra time for him to show if the end of last season was a fluke / the end of his growth as a player or if he might be worth spending more to keep here. While IMO the price is reasonably close to his true value at this point http://bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view/20090808celtics_glen_davis_set_to_sign/ http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/2009/08/baby_celtics_cl.html From pmaymin at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 07:05:33 2009 From: pmaymin at gmail.com (Phil Maymin) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 03:05:33 -0400 Subject: Not so fast on Baby to the Suns.... In-Reply-To: <0KO500A09ASNGDJ6@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> References: <0KO500A09ASNGDJ6@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <8c863cee0908100005i39f2b189rea042ea693b05970@mail.gmail.com> Baby to the Suns? On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Kim Malo wrote: > Both Sunday Boston papers say he's on the verge of signing a deal with > Boston that makes sense if the Herald is right about the specifics (Mark > Murphy isn't always notable for accuracy on details IMO and he did the > story, not Bulperr), 2 years for a total of $6.3MM. The two years lets him > try FA again as an unrestricted FA when the new collective bargaining > agreement will likely be in place perhaps opening up cap room and when teams > disappointed after freeing up money for the 2010 stakes they couldn't use to > buy what they really wanted may still have some to spend and be more willing > to spend on useful lesser talent. It also gives Boston a bit of stability > and extra time for him to show if the end of last season was a fluke / the > end of his growth as a player or if he might be worth spending more to keep > here. While IMO the price is reasonably close to his true value at this > point > http://bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view/20090808celtics_glen_davis_set_to_sign/ > http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/2009/08/baby_celtics_cl.html > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From kmalo17 at verizon.net Mon Aug 10 07:28:30 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 03:28:30 -0400 Subject: Not so fast on Baby to the Suns.... In-Reply-To: <8c863cee0908100005i39f2b189rea042ea693b05970@mail.gmail.co m> References: <0KO500A09ASNGDJ6@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> <8c863cee0908100005i39f2b189rea042ea693b05970@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0KO500D51GWGOQS1@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net> Sorry about that, I don't know HOW I managed to read that header wrong in both the original and each follow up in that thread. Mea culpa, mea culpa mea maxima culpa Kim At 03:05 AM 8/10/2009, Phil Maymin wrote: >Baby to the Suns? > >On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Kim Malo wrote: > > Both Sunday Boston papers say he's on the verge of signing a deal with > > Boston that makes sense if the Herald is right about the specifics (Mark > > Murphy isn't always notable for accuracy on details IMO and he did the > > story, not Bulperr), 2 years for a total of $6.3MM. The two years lets him > > try FA again as an unrestricted FA when the new collective bargaining > > agreement will likely be in place perhaps opening up cap room and > when teams > > disappointed after freeing up money for the 2010 stakes they > couldn't use to > > buy what they really wanted may still have some to spend and be > more willing > > to spend on useful lesser talent. It also gives Boston a bit of stability > > and extra time for him to show if the end of last season was a fluke / the > > end of his growth as a player or if he might be worth spending more to keep > > here. While IMO the price is reasonably close to his true value at this > > point > > > http://bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view/20090808celtics_glen_davis_set_to_sign/ > > > http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/2009/08/baby_celtics_cl.html > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > celtics at igtc.com > > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > > > >_______________________________________________ >The Boston Celtics Mailing List >celtics at igtc.com >http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Mon Aug 10 14:13:56 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:13:56 -0400 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> References: <000901ca18ab$e575b050$b06110f0$@net> <865994.21291.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908101414.n7AEDxGE026573@ares.afrc.af.mil> While on the surface I agree with George's assessment; it will still be a bit of a poker match. While from the Ainge side, it would make sense to play hardball as he's done with Baby this year; there's always a wild card GM out there that could spoil it with a max offer to the restricted Rondo forcing Ainge's hand. Now those offers will be limited not just by availability and lower salary cap, but the deeper question of if losing out in the LeBron/Wade/Bosh sweepstakes will make a GM "panic" into trying to recoup such a loss in the bidding war for those three and therefore think Rondo is worthy. So straight up hands waiting for the flop - is Ainge holding pocket aces, or deuces? -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of George Meyer Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 5:33 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. It makes absolutely no sense for Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I highly doubt he'll try to. In this economic climate, the last thing you do is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't have to, and Wyc said immediately before the off-season that signing Rondo wasn't a priority since we can just match whatever he gets offered next year. Further, Rondo wants near-max money, so it's not like his value can increase insofar as he and his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the season, see where the team stands (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that the shrinking market, contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally non-max-type game give him a better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or he'll be traded. As for Ray, it makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, particularly when he has one of the best expiring contracts in the league and the 2010 trading deadline promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way I see it, Ainge's offseason is essentially finished. On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W wrote: > > Yep--fair deal for both parties. > > Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge opens negotiations towards extending > Rondo and possibly Ray. > > Ryan > > --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill wrote: > > > From: Jim Hill > > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 PM > > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > > per. > > > > > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From jeffclark at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 14:42:49 2009 From: jeffclark at gmail.com (jeffclark at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:42:49 -0400 Subject: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos In-Reply-To: <200908081953.n78JrDlS021551@apollo.afrc.af.mil> References: <200908081953.n78JrDlS021551@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <84e131670908100742t5d04ee6en3333b6f52882799a@mail.gmail.com> FYI: Spears is reporting that Kleiza is headed to Olympiakos http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAYahoo/status/3225700462 On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 3:53 PM, wrote: > You always pick my left side. It's definitely more egotistical, but then my > right side has that sleep apnea issue. > > I was originally asked to be best man, but could only live up to fair to > middlin. > > PSR > ------Original Message------ > From: eggcentric > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > ReplyTo: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Sent: Aug 8, 2009 09:45 > Subject: Re: Juicy Rumors Lies Innuendos > > Funny stuff as usual, Ray. > > Looking forward to seeing you and George (Meyer) and > Harry (Blaine), and the left side of Pat (Ryan) and the > quarter end of Ravi (Singh) and the full body of > popular Kim Jong-il, and other Celt blog true blue > ?mavericks? at Chelsea Clinton?s wedding to Marc > Mezvinsky on Martha?s Vineyard come Aug. 29th. > > Oh crap crappy crappola crapolise crapolisier, I forgot. > DOWNER ALERT! I?ll end up attending the wedding el solo > (in my vintage1959 prom dress with tiara ... hello, Ebay) > since no one has actually seen any of us in the same > room together. > > How could they, when I can?t even see my own damn > reflection in a mirror. > > It?s all Danny?s fault! Ya hear me? > > Egg > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > > > Patrick S. Ryan > 22 AF/A6 > > Sent from my Blackberry wireless > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > -- Jeff CelticsBlog.com doughnutholes.wordpress.com From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Mon Aug 10 15:08:51 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Sun, 8/9/09, George Meyer wrote: > From: George Meyer > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 4:32 PM > It makes absolutely no sense for > Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I > highly doubt he'll try to. George, your primary mistake is a lack of foresight and imagination vis a vis the market forces at play and Rondo's overall ability and worth in the 2010 free agent class. Almost all the factors that led to Baby's strike out in restricted free agency this summer--lack of overall money this summer due to the economy and teams looking to save money for 2010, Baby's weight and athleticism issues, better available players on the market, and Baby relatively small sample size of MLE-worthy play--will not be present next summer for Rondo. Given Rondo's steady progression and improvement the last 3 seasons, his relative youth (still only 23), and his proven ability to lead a team to a championship, it only goes to figure that he'll continue that development in the upcoming season, pushing his value higher. Simply put, it's going to be cheaper to extend him this summer than next summer. And so, yes, there's *some* sense in locking him down this summer at a cheaper rate rather than waiting next season and running the risk that we either end up having to give him a max deal or watch as some other team, perhaps the Knicks after they are spurned by Lebron, comes and gives him a max dollar offer sheet. If you're truly worried about Rondo's demand for max dollars, you sign him this summer--which will be the last time in the next 7 years when Rondo WON'T be worth max dollars. He's going to be THAT good. Also, notwithstanding *your* assertion that Rondo thinks he's worth max dollars, that has been reported NOWHERE. In fact, Maxwell reported his own conversation where he asked Rondo if it'd take 10 million per to resign him and Rondo's response was, "Where do I sign?" Fact is, Rondo's average of 12 points, 8 assists, 5 rebounds, and 2 steals per game at age 23 outclasses Devin Harris at a similar age (he had less than stellar averages of 10 points and 3 assists at age 24--and still got a contract that averages 8.5 million per), and compares favorably to what Tony Parker was averaging (about 16 points and 6 assists) when he signed his contract averaging 11 million per. The prudent, forwarding thinking, Danny Ainge-esque thing to do would be to engage Rondo's agent in conversation and attempt to work out something reasonable for each side this summer...thus providing stability going forward and saving money in the long run. You like saving money right? That is, when you're not criticizing the Celtics for doing the same thing? :) 5 years, 50 million sounds about right for Rondo. As for Ray, you completely underestimate both the Cs willingness to trade Ray midseason (which won't happen or even be considered unless we have a rash of season-ending injuries) and his worth as an expiring contract. Teams looking to cut salary won't be willing or able to cut salary on the scale of Ray Allen's contract, nor will the Cs be willing to take on 20 million in non-expiring contracts unless that deal clearly benefits the Cs in 2010 and going forward. How many of those trades are out there? Not many. And since this team is structured to win in the next 2-3 seasons--Ray will be a part of that. A cap friendly deal for 2 years at about 7 million per sounds about right for Ray Allen, and brings his contract off the books the same year as KG and Wallace, setting us up to restructure the team in 2012, right about the time that Ray and Wallace will be nearing retirement, KG and Pierce will be in the last 2-3 years of their career, and Rondo and Perk will still be in the prime of their careers (as well as both being All-Star caliber players). Ryan > In this economic climate, the > last thing you do > is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't have to, > and Wyc said > immediately before the off-season that signing Rondo wasn't > a priority since > we can just match whatever he gets offered next year. > Further, Rondo wants > near-max money, so it's not like his value can increase > insofar as he and > his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the season, see > where the team stands > (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that the > shrinking market, > contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally non-max-type > game give him a > better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or he'll be > traded. As for Ray, it > makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, > particularly when he has one > of the best expiring contracts in the league and the 2010 > trading deadline > promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way I see it, > Ainge's offseason > is essentially finished. > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W > wrote: > > > > > Yep--fair deal for both parties. > > > > Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge opens > negotiations towards extending > > Rondo and possibly Ray. > > > > Ryan > > > > --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill > wrote: > > > > > From: Jim Hill > > > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 PM > > > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > > > per. > > > > > > > > > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Mon Aug 10 17:24:14 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:24:14 -0400 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> A cap friendly deal for 2 years at about 7 million per sounds about right for Ray Allen, and brings his contract off the books the same year as KG and Wallace, setting us up to restructure the team in 2012, right about the time that Ray and Wallace will be nearing retirement, KG and Pierce will be in the last 2-3 years of their career, and Rondo and Perk will still be in the prime of their careers (as well as both being All-Star caliber players). - Ryan Sorry man, too homer for me. See exhibit A - current Red Sox. Too much risk of (sudden) decline in play, increase in injury, inability to trade, and blocked cap space to tie up all three aging players. Prefer current arrangement of consecutive expirations of contracts with which to reload. The Belichick model is the one that has shown ability to transcend time - cut/trade/let expire the contracts of the aging without letting sentimentality get in the way of winning (exhibits B, C, D, and E - Lawyer Milloy, Daniel Graham, Willie McGinest, maybe Mike Vrabel). Secondly, Perk MIGHT make an All-star team...but I think it's a little much to think of him in terms of All-star. Perhaps my definition is too stringent, but I always put the word "perennial" in front of it when talking of cornerstone players. Doesn't mean Perk isn't a key complimentary piece - he is, especially defensively and I'd take him as a starting center any day in the NBA, but he's not a perennial, build your team around him, tie up max dollars or even close contract all star player. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:09 AM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. --- On Sun, 8/9/09, George Meyer wrote: > From: George Meyer > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 4:32 PM > It makes absolutely no sense for > Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I > highly doubt he'll try to. George, your primary mistake is a lack of foresight and imagination vis a vis the market forces at play and Rondo's overall ability and worth in the 2010 free agent class. Almost all the factors that led to Baby's strike out in restricted free agency this summer--lack of overall money this summer due to the economy and teams looking to save money for 2010, Baby's weight and athleticism issues, better available players on the market, and Baby relatively small sample size of MLE-worthy play--will not be present next summer for Rondo. Given Rondo's steady progression and improvement the last 3 seasons, his relative youth (still only 23), and his proven ability to lead a team to a championship, it only goes to figure that he'll continue that development in the upcoming season, pushing his value higher. Simply put, it's going to be cheaper to extend him this summer than next summer. And so, yes, there's *some* sense in locking him down this summer at a cheaper rate rather than waiting next season and running the risk that we either end up having to give him a max deal or watch as some other team, perhaps the Knicks after they are spurned by Lebron, comes and gives him a max dollar offer sheet. If you're truly worried about Rondo's demand for max dollars, you sign him this summer--which will be the last time in the next 7 years when Rondo WON'T be worth max dollars. He's going to be THAT good. Also, notwithstanding *your* assertion that Rondo thinks he's worth max dollars, that has been reported NOWHERE. In fact, Maxwell reported his own conversation where he asked Rondo if it'd take 10 million per to resign him and Rondo's response was, "Where do I sign?" Fact is, Rondo's average of 12 points, 8 assists, 5 rebounds, and 2 steals per game at age 23 outclasses Devin Harris at a similar age (he had less than stellar averages of 10 points and 3 assists at age 24--and still got a contract that averages 8.5 million per), and compares favorably to what Tony Parker was averaging (about 16 points and 6 assists) when he signed his contract averaging 11 million per. The prudent, forwarding thinking, Danny Ainge-esque thing to do would be to engage Rondo's agent in conversation and attempt to work out something reasonable for each side this summer...thus providing stability going forward and saving money in the long run. You like saving money right? That is, when you're not criticizing the Celtics for doing the same thing? :) 5 years, 50 million sounds about right for Rondo. As for Ray, you completely underestimate both the Cs willingness to trade Ray midseason (which won't happen or even be considered unless we have a rash of season-ending injuries) and his worth as an expiring contract. Teams looking to cut salary won't be willing or able to cut salary on the scale of Ray Allen's contract, nor will the Cs be willing to take on 20 million in non-expiring contracts unless that deal clearly benefits the Cs in 2010 and going forward. How many of those trades are out there? Not many. And since this team is structured to win in the next 2-3 seasons--Ray will be a part of that. A cap friendly deal for 2 years at about 7 million per sounds about right for Ray Allen, and brings his contract off the books the same year as KG and Wallace, setting us up to restructure the team in 2012, right about the time that Ray and Wallace will be nearing retirement, KG and Pierce will be in the last 2-3 years of their career, and Rondo and Perk will still be in the prime of their careers (as well as both being All-Star caliber players). Ryan > In this economic climate, the > last thing you do > is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't have to, > and Wyc said > immediately before the off-season that signing Rondo wasn't > a priority since > we can just match whatever he gets offered next year. > Further, Rondo wants > near-max money, so it's not like his value can increase > insofar as he and > his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the season, see > where the team stands > (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that the > shrinking market, > contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally non-max-type > game give him a > better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or he'll be > traded. As for Ray, it > makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, > particularly when he has one > of the best expiring contracts in the league and the 2010 > trading deadline > promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way I see it, > Ainge's offseason > is essentially finished. > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W > wrote: > > > > > Yep--fair deal for both parties. > > > > Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge opens > negotiations towards extending > > Rondo and possibly Ray. > > > > Ryan > > > > --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill > wrote: > > > > > From: Jim Hill > > > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 PM > > > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > > > per. > > > > > > > > > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Mon Aug 10 17:56:53 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:56:53 -0400 Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> References: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <200908101756.n7AHustu021153@artemis.afrc.af.mil> >From today's Globe touting BBDs official signing: "...Williams, 25, a one-year bi-annual exception contract worth $1.9 million." So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as I know, there's only ONE biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have had Daniels than Sheldon Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a VET MIN contract OR Bird agrees to Tony Allen (ain't gonna happen)...Daniels ain't walkin' through that door. From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 18:20:59 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:20:59 -0400 Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <200908101756.n7AHustu021153@artemis.afrc.af.mil> References: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <200908101756.n7AHustu021153@artemis.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908101120j633b06cdv9f7dcb36fa104799@mail.gmail.com> $1.3 million deal worth the veteran?s minimum and $1.9 million biannual exception has nothing to do with each other. AG On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, wrote: > >From today's Globe touting BBDs official signing: "...Williams, 25, a > one-year bi-annual exception contract worth $1.9 million." > > So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as I know, there's only ONE > biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have had Daniels than Sheldon > Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a VET MIN contract OR Bird agrees > to Tony Allen (ain't gonna happen)...Daniels ain't walkin' through that > door. > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Mon Aug 10 18:40:27 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:40:27 -0400 Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908101120j633b06cdv9f7dcb36fa104799@mail.gmail.com> References: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <200908101756.n7AHustu021153@artemis.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908101120j633b06cdv9f7dcb36fa104799@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908101840.n7AIeTuU022622@apollo.afrc.af.mil> May I refer you to the earlier articles wherein Daniels was coming to the Cs for either the "biennial exemption" or via sign and trade (for Tony Allen which was kiboshed, not to be confused with Chris Boshed, by LB). If Sheldon William was signed with the biennial then that therefore means if the sign and trade is dead, then there is no more biennial with which to sign Marquis Daniels. I think it is thou that doth confused. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:21 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? $1.3 million deal worth the veteran's minimum and $1.9 million biannual exception has nothing to do with each other. AG On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, wrote: > >From today's Globe touting BBDs official signing: "...Williams, 25, a > one-year bi-annual exception contract worth $1.9 million." > > So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as I know, there's only ONE > biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have had Daniels than Sheldon > Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a VET MIN contract OR Bird agrees > to Tony Allen (ain't gonna happen)...Daniels ain't walkin' through that > door. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Mon Aug 10 18:58:33 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <200908101840.n7AIeTuU022622@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <129755.44038.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Let's just assume that Frank Dell'Apa made a mistake--that's the most likely explanation at this point. In fact, I just checked--http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/--and it's been mysteriously changed and they're reporting that Williams signed for the 1.3 million veteran's minimum. More sloppy reporting by the Globe....and they expect people to pay for that! Ryan --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 1:40 PM > May I refer you to the earlier > articles wherein Daniels was coming to the Cs for either the > "biennial exemption" or via sign and trade (for Tony Allen > which was kiboshed, not to be confused with Chris Boshed, by > LB). > > If Sheldon William was signed with the biennial then that > therefore means if the sign and trade is dead, then there is > no more biennial with which to sign Marquis Daniels. > > I think it is thou that doth confused. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:21 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only > one to use? > > $1.3 million deal worth the veteran's minimum and $1.9 > million biannual > exception has nothing to do with each other. > > AG > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, > wrote: > > > >From today's Globe touting BBDs official signing: > "...Williams, 25, a > > one-year bi-annual exception contract worth $1.9 > million." > > > > So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as I know, > there's only ONE > > biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have had > Daniels than Sheldon > > Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a VET MIN > contract OR Bird agrees > > to Tony Allen (ain't gonna happen)...Daniels ain't > walkin' through that > > door. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Mon Aug 10 19:00:59 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:00:59 -0400 Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <129755.44038.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <200908101840.n7AIeTuU022622@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <129755.44038.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908101901.n7AJ10YW023766@artemis.afrc.af.mil> On the positive front - I'm liking the BBD signing - both for the bench depth and the final price. Good signing. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:59 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: RE: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? Let's just assume that Frank Dell'Apa made a mistake--that's the most likely explanation at this point. In fact, I just checked--http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/--and it's been mysteriously changed and they're reporting that Williams signed for the 1.3 million veteran's minimum. More sloppy reporting by the Globe....and they expect people to pay for that! Ryan --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 1:40 PM > May I refer you to the earlier > articles wherein Daniels was coming to the Cs for either the > "biennial exemption" or via sign and trade (for Tony Allen > which was kiboshed, not to be confused with Chris Boshed, by > LB). > > If Sheldon William was signed with the biennial then that > therefore means if the sign and trade is dead, then there is > no more biennial with which to sign Marquis Daniels. > > I think it is thou that doth confused. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:21 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only > one to use? > > $1.3 million deal worth the veteran's minimum and $1.9 > million biannual > exception has nothing to do with each other. > > AG > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, > wrote: > > > >From today's Globe touting BBDs official signing: > "...Williams, 25, a > > one-year bi-annual exception contract worth $1.9 > million." > > > > So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as I know, > there's only ONE > > biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have had > Daniels than Sheldon > > Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a VET MIN > contract OR Bird agrees > > to Tony Allen (ain't gonna happen)...Daniels ain't > walkin' through that > > door. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Mon Aug 10 19:01:00 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:01:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <618144.66822.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> So, what are you suggesting Pat? I mean, like what would you do? Let Ray go? Try to sign him for less money or less years? And, yes, Perk isn't a 'perennial' All-Star--but by age 27, he'll be going to the All-Star game. He's already the best man-to-man defender at the center position and his offensive game has improved steadily each season. Ryan --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 12:24 PM > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at > about 7 million per sounds about right for Ray Allen, and > brings his contract off the books the same year as KG and > Wallace, setting us up to restructure the team in 2012, > right about the time that Ray and Wallace will be nearing > retirement, KG and Pierce will be in the last 2-3 years of > their career, and Rondo and Perk will still be in the prime > of their careers (as well as both being All-Star caliber > players). - Ryan > > Sorry man, too homer for me. See exhibit A - current Red > Sox. Too much risk of (sudden) decline in play, increase in > injury, inability to trade, and blocked cap space to tie up > all three aging players. Prefer current arrangement of > consecutive expirations of contracts with which to reload. > The Belichick model is the one that has shown ability to > transcend time - cut/trade/let expire the contracts of the > aging without letting sentimentality get in the way of > winning (exhibits B, C, D, and E - Lawyer Milloy, Daniel > Graham, Willie McGinest, maybe Mike Vrabel). > > Secondly, Perk MIGHT make an All-star team...but I think > it's a little much to think of him in terms of All-star. > Perhaps my definition is too stringent, but I always put the > word "perennial" in front of it when talking of cornerstone > players. Doesn't mean Perk isn't a key complimentary piece - > he is, especially defensively and I'd take him as a starting > center any day in the NBA, but he's not a perennial, build > your team around him, tie up max dollars or even close > contract all star player. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:09 AM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > --- On Sun, 8/9/09, George Meyer > wrote: > > > From: George Meyer > > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 4:32 PM > > It makes absolutely no sense for > > Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I > > highly doubt he'll try to. > > George, your primary mistake is a lack of foresight and > imagination vis a vis the market forces at play and Rondo's > overall ability and worth in the 2010 free agent > class.? Almost all the factors that led to Baby's > strike out in restricted free agency this summer--lack of > overall money this summer due to the economy and teams > looking to save money for 2010, Baby's weight and > athleticism issues, better available players on the market, > and Baby relatively small sample size of MLE-worthy > play--will not be present next summer for Rondo.? Given > Rondo's steady progression and improvement the last 3 > seasons, his relative youth (still only 23), and his proven > ability to lead a team to a championship, it only goes to > figure that he'll continue that development in the upcoming > season, pushing his value higher.? Simply put, it's > going to be cheaper to extend him this summer than next > summer.? And so, yes, there's *some* sense in locking > him down this summer at a > cheaper rate rather than waiting next season and running > the risk that we either end up having to give him a max deal > or watch as some other team, perhaps the Knicks after they > are spurned by Lebron, comes and gives him a max dollar > offer sheet.? If you're truly worried about Rondo's > demand for max dollars, you sign him this summer--which will > be the last time in the next 7 years when Rondo WON'T be > worth max dollars.? He's going to be THAT good. > > Also, notwithstanding *your* assertion that Rondo thinks > he's worth max dollars, that has been reported > NOWHERE.? In fact, Maxwell reported his own > conversation where he asked Rondo if it'd take 10 million > per to resign him and Rondo's response was, "Where do I > sign?"? Fact is, Rondo's average of 12 points, 8 > assists, 5 rebounds, and 2 steals per game at age 23 > outclasses Devin Harris at a similar age (he had less than > stellar averages of 10 points and 3 assists at age 24--and > still got a contract that averages 8.5 million per), and > compares favorably to what Tony Parker was averaging (about > 16 points and 6 assists) when he signed his contract > averaging 11 million per.? The prudent, forwarding > thinking, Danny Ainge-esque thing to do would be to engage > Rondo's agent in conversation and attempt to work out > something reasonable for each side this summer...thus > providing stability going forward and saving money in the > long run.? You like saving money right? > That is, when you're not criticizing the Celtics for doing > the same thing? :) > > 5 years, 50 million sounds about right for Rondo.? > > As for Ray, you completely underestimate both the Cs > willingness to trade Ray midseason (which won't happen or > even be considered unless we have a rash of season-ending > injuries) and his worth as an expiring contract.? Teams > looking to cut salary won't be willing or able to cut salary > on the scale of Ray Allen's contract, nor will the Cs be > willing to take on 20 million in non-expiring contracts > unless that deal clearly benefits the Cs in 2010 and going > forward.? How many of those trades are out there?? > Not many.? And since this team is structured to win in > the next 2-3 seasons--Ray will be a part of that. > > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at about 7 million per > sounds about right for Ray Allen, and brings his contract > off the books the same year as KG and Wallace, setting us up > to restructure the team in 2012, right about the time that > Ray and Wallace will be nearing retirement, KG and Pierce > will be in the last 2-3 years of their career, and Rondo and > Perk will still be in the prime of their careers (as well as > both being All-Star caliber players). > > Ryan > > > > In this economic climate, the > > last thing you do > > is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't have > to, > > and Wyc said > > immediately before the off-season that signing Rondo > wasn't > > a priority since > > we can just match whatever he gets offered next year. > > Further, Rondo wants > > near-max money, so it's not like his value can > increase > > insofar as he and > > his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the season, > see > > where the team stands > > (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that the > > shrinking market, > > contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally > non-max-type > > game give him a > > better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or he'll be > > traded. As for Ray, it > > makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, > > particularly when he has one > > of the best expiring contracts in the league and the > 2010 > > trading deadline > > promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way I see > it, > > Ainge's offseason > > is essentially finished. > > > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Yep--fair deal for both parties. > > > > > > Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge opens > > negotiations towards extending > > > Rondo and possibly Ray. > > > > > > Ryan > > > > > > --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill > > wrote: > > > > > > > From: Jim Hill > > > > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > > > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 PM > > > > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > > > > per. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From pdelevett at yahoo.com Mon Aug 10 19:07:58 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:07:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Shelden and the LLE Message-ID: <438409.14044.qm@web110103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Man, wouldn't that be a great name for a band? Anyway, Globe now is reporting this: "Williams, 25, [signed] a one-year veteran's minimum contract worth $1.3 million." So, it looks like the biennenial exemption is still available. Sign Daniels and get it done. Then let's get a backup PG and put a bow on the roster. From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Mon Aug 10 19:32:39 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:32:39 -0400 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <618144.66822.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <618144.66822.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908101932.n7AJWfkb011608@apollo.afrc.af.mil> I would entertain letting him go, yes. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:01 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. So, what are you suggesting Pat? I mean, like what would you do? Let Ray go? Try to sign him for less money or less years? And, yes, Perk isn't a 'perennial' All-Star--but by age 27, he'll be going to the All-Star game. He's already the best man-to-man defender at the center position and his offensive game has improved steadily each season. Ryan --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 12:24 PM > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at > about 7 million per sounds about right for Ray Allen, and > brings his contract off the books the same year as KG and > Wallace, setting us up to restructure the team in 2012, > right about the time that Ray and Wallace will be nearing > retirement, KG and Pierce will be in the last 2-3 years of > their career, and Rondo and Perk will still be in the prime > of their careers (as well as both being All-Star caliber > players). - Ryan > > Sorry man, too homer for me. See exhibit A - current Red > Sox. Too much risk of (sudden) decline in play, increase in > injury, inability to trade, and blocked cap space to tie up > all three aging players. Prefer current arrangement of > consecutive expirations of contracts with which to reload. > The Belichick model is the one that has shown ability to > transcend time - cut/trade/let expire the contracts of the > aging without letting sentimentality get in the way of > winning (exhibits B, C, D, and E - Lawyer Milloy, Daniel > Graham, Willie McGinest, maybe Mike Vrabel). > > Secondly, Perk MIGHT make an All-star team...but I think > it's a little much to think of him in terms of All-star. > Perhaps my definition is too stringent, but I always put the > word "perennial" in front of it when talking of cornerstone > players. Doesn't mean Perk isn't a key complimentary piece - > he is, especially defensively and I'd take him as a starting > center any day in the NBA, but he's not a perennial, build > your team around him, tie up max dollars or even close > contract all star player. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:09 AM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > --- On Sun, 8/9/09, George Meyer > wrote: > > > From: George Meyer > > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 4:32 PM > > It makes absolutely no sense for > > Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I > > highly doubt he'll try to. > > George, your primary mistake is a lack of foresight and > imagination vis a vis the market forces at play and Rondo's > overall ability and worth in the 2010 free agent > class.? Almost all the factors that led to Baby's > strike out in restricted free agency this summer--lack of > overall money this summer due to the economy and teams > looking to save money for 2010, Baby's weight and > athleticism issues, better available players on the market, > and Baby relatively small sample size of MLE-worthy > play--will not be present next summer for Rondo.? Given > Rondo's steady progression and improvement the last 3 > seasons, his relative youth (still only 23), and his proven > ability to lead a team to a championship, it only goes to > figure that he'll continue that development in the upcoming > season, pushing his value higher.? Simply put, it's > going to be cheaper to extend him this summer than next > summer.? And so, yes, there's *some* sense in locking > him down this summer at a > cheaper rate rather than waiting next season and running > the risk that we either end up having to give him a max deal > or watch as some other team, perhaps the Knicks after they > are spurned by Lebron, comes and gives him a max dollar > offer sheet.? If you're truly worried about Rondo's > demand for max dollars, you sign him this summer--which will > be the last time in the next 7 years when Rondo WON'T be > worth max dollars.? He's going to be THAT good. > > Also, notwithstanding *your* assertion that Rondo thinks > he's worth max dollars, that has been reported > NOWHERE.? In fact, Maxwell reported his own > conversation where he asked Rondo if it'd take 10 million > per to resign him and Rondo's response was, "Where do I > sign?"? Fact is, Rondo's average of 12 points, 8 > assists, 5 rebounds, and 2 steals per game at age 23 > outclasses Devin Harris at a similar age (he had less than > stellar averages of 10 points and 3 assists at age 24--and > still got a contract that averages 8.5 million per), and > compares favorably to what Tony Parker was averaging (about > 16 points and 6 assists) when he signed his contract > averaging 11 million per.? The prudent, forwarding > thinking, Danny Ainge-esque thing to do would be to engage > Rondo's agent in conversation and attempt to work out > something reasonable for each side this summer...thus > providing stability going forward and saving money in the > long run.? You like saving money right? > That is, when you're not criticizing the Celtics for doing > the same thing? :) > > 5 years, 50 million sounds about right for Rondo.? > > As for Ray, you completely underestimate both the Cs > willingness to trade Ray midseason (which won't happen or > even be considered unless we have a rash of season-ending > injuries) and his worth as an expiring contract.? Teams > looking to cut salary won't be willing or able to cut salary > on the scale of Ray Allen's contract, nor will the Cs be > willing to take on 20 million in non-expiring contracts > unless that deal clearly benefits the Cs in 2010 and going > forward.? How many of those trades are out there?? > Not many.? And since this team is structured to win in > the next 2-3 seasons--Ray will be a part of that. > > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at about 7 million per > sounds about right for Ray Allen, and brings his contract > off the books the same year as KG and Wallace, setting us up > to restructure the team in 2012, right about the time that > Ray and Wallace will be nearing retirement, KG and Pierce > will be in the last 2-3 years of their career, and Rondo and > Perk will still be in the prime of their careers (as well as > both being All-Star caliber players). > > Ryan > > > > In this economic climate, the > > last thing you do > > is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't have > to, > > and Wyc said > > immediately before the off-season that signing Rondo > wasn't > > a priority since > > we can just match whatever he gets offered next year. > > Further, Rondo wants > > near-max money, so it's not like his value can > increase > > insofar as he and > > his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the season, > see > > where the team stands > > (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that the > > shrinking market, > > contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally > non-max-type > > game give him a > > better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or he'll be > > traded. As for Ray, it > > makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, > > particularly when he has one > > of the best expiring contracts in the league and the > 2010 > > trading deadline > > promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way I see > it, > > Ainge's offseason > > is essentially finished. > > > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Yep--fair deal for both parties. > > > > > > Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge opens > > negotiations towards extending > > > Rondo and possibly Ray. > > > > > > Ryan > > > > > > --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill > > wrote: > > > > > > > From: Jim Hill > > > > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > > > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 PM > > > > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > > > > per. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Mon Aug 10 19:36:06 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <200908101932.n7AJWfkb011608@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <686569.53700.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> You do realize that we won't have much, if any cap room, even after letting Ray go, and that we'd be forced to replace him by using the MLE? And I guess you think we can find someone better than Ray for the MLE? We'll see--Artest signed for the MLE. Ryan --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 2:32 PM > I would entertain letting him go, > yes. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:01 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > So, what are you suggesting Pat?? I mean, like what > would you do?? Let Ray go?? Try to sign him for > less money or less years? > > And, yes, Perk isn't a 'perennial' All-Star--but by age 27, > he'll be going to the All-Star game.? He's already the > best man-to-man defender at the center position and his > offensive game has improved steadily each season.? > > Ryan > > --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > wrote: > > > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 12:24 PM > > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at > > about 7 million per sounds about right for Ray Allen, > and > > brings his contract off the books the same year as KG > and > > Wallace, setting us up to restructure the team in > 2012, > > right about the time that Ray and Wallace will be > nearing > > retirement, KG and Pierce will be in the last 2-3 > years of > > their career, and Rondo and Perk will still be in the > prime > > of their careers (as well as both being All-Star > caliber > > players). - Ryan > > > > Sorry man, too homer for me. See exhibit A - current > Red > > Sox. Too much risk of (sudden) decline in play, > increase in > > injury, inability to trade, and blocked cap space to > tie up > > all three aging players. Prefer current arrangement > of > > consecutive expirations of contracts with which to > reload. > > The Belichick model is the one that has shown ability > to > > transcend time - cut/trade/let expire the contracts of > the > > aging without letting sentimentality get in the way > of > > winning (exhibits B, C, D, and E - Lawyer Milloy, > Daniel > > Graham, Willie McGinest, maybe Mike Vrabel). > > > > Secondly, Perk MIGHT make an All-star team...but I > think > > it's a little much to think of him in terms of > All-star. > > Perhaps my definition is too stringent, but I always > put the > > word "perennial" in front of it when talking of > cornerstone > > players. Doesn't mean Perk isn't a key complimentary > piece - > > he is, especially defensively and I'd take him as a > starting > > center any day in the NBA, but he's not a perennial, > build > > your team around him, tie up max dollars or even > close > > contract all star player. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > > On Behalf Of Ryan W > > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:09 AM > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > > > > --- On Sun, 8/9/09, George Meyer > > wrote: > > > > > From: George Meyer > > > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > > Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 4:32 PM > > > It makes absolutely no sense for > > > Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I > > > highly doubt he'll try to. > > > > George, your primary mistake is a lack of foresight > and > > imagination vis a vis the market forces at play and > Rondo's > > overall ability and worth in the 2010 free agent > > class.? Almost all the factors that led to Baby's > > strike out in restricted free agency this summer--lack > of > > overall money this summer due to the economy and > teams > > looking to save money for 2010, Baby's weight and > > athleticism issues, better available players on the > market, > > and Baby relatively small sample size of MLE-worthy > > play--will not be present next summer for Rondo.? > Given > > Rondo's steady progression and improvement the last 3 > > seasons, his relative youth (still only 23), and his > proven > > ability to lead a team to a championship, it only goes > to > > figure that he'll continue that development in the > upcoming > > season, pushing his value higher.? Simply put, it's > > going to be cheaper to extend him this summer than > next > > summer.? And so, yes, there's *some* sense in > locking > > him down this summer at a > >? cheaper rate rather than waiting next season and > running > > the risk that we either end up having to give him a > max deal > > or watch as some other team, perhaps the Knicks after > they > > are spurned by Lebron, comes and gives him a max > dollar > > offer sheet.? If you're truly worried about Rondo's > > demand for max dollars, you sign him this > summer--which will > > be the last time in the next 7 years when Rondo WON'T > be > > worth max dollars.? He's going to be THAT good. > > > > Also, notwithstanding *your* assertion that Rondo > thinks > > he's worth max dollars, that has been reported > > NOWHERE.? In fact, Maxwell reported his own > > conversation where he asked Rondo if it'd take 10 > million > > per to resign him and Rondo's response was, "Where do > I > > sign?"? Fact is, Rondo's average of 12 points, 8 > > assists, 5 rebounds, and 2 steals per game at age 23 > > outclasses Devin Harris at a similar age (he had less > than > > stellar averages of 10 points and 3 assists at age > 24--and > > still got a contract that averages 8.5 million per), > and > > compares favorably to what Tony Parker was averaging > (about > > 16 points and 6 assists) when he signed his contract > > averaging 11 million per.? The prudent, forwarding > > thinking, Danny Ainge-esque thing to do would be to > engage > > Rondo's agent in conversation and attempt to work out > > something reasonable for each side this summer...thus > > providing stability going forward and saving money in > the > > long run.? You like saving money right? > >? That is, when you're not criticizing the Celtics > for doing > > the same thing? :) > > > > 5 years, 50 million sounds about right for Rondo.? > > > > As for Ray, you completely underestimate both the Cs > > willingness to trade Ray midseason (which won't happen > or > > even be considered unless we have a rash of > season-ending > > injuries) and his worth as an expiring contract.? > Teams > > looking to cut salary won't be willing or able to cut > salary > > on the scale of Ray Allen's contract, nor will the Cs > be > > willing to take on 20 million in non-expiring > contracts > > unless that deal clearly benefits the Cs in 2010 and > going > > forward.? How many of those trades are out there?? > > Not many.? And since this team is structured to win > in > > the next 2-3 seasons--Ray will be a part of that. > > > > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at about 7 million > per > > sounds about right for Ray Allen, and brings his > contract > > off the books the same year as KG and Wallace, setting > us up > > to restructure the team in 2012, right about the time > that > > Ray and Wallace will be nearing retirement, KG and > Pierce > > will be in the last 2-3 years of their career, and > Rondo and > > Perk will still be in the prime of their careers (as > well as > > both being All-Star caliber players). > > > > Ryan > > > > > > > In this economic climate, the > > > last thing you do > > > is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't > have > > to, > > > and Wyc said > > > immediately before the off-season that signing > Rondo > > wasn't > > > a priority since > > > we can just match whatever he gets offered next > year. > > > Further, Rondo wants > > > near-max money, so it's not like his value can > > increase > > > insofar as he and > > > his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the > season, > > see > > > where the team stands > > > (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that > the > > > shrinking market, > > > contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally > > non-max-type > > > game give him a > > > better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or > he'll be > > > traded. As for Ray, it > > > makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, > > > particularly when he has one > > > of the best expiring contracts in the league and > the > > 2010 > > > trading deadline > > > promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way > I see > > it, > > > Ainge's offseason > > > is essentially finished. > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Yep--fair deal for both parties. > > > > > > > > Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge > opens > > > negotiations towards extending > > > > Rondo and possibly Ray. > > > > > > > > Ryan > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Jim Hill > > > > > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > > > > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 > PM > > > > > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > > > > > per. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Mon Aug 10 19:51:54 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:51:54 -0400 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <686569.53700.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <200908101932.n7AJWfkb011608@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <686569.53700.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908101951.n7AJpudh017233@artemis.afrc.af.mil> Yep, but that was the plan all along right? If we re-sign him we go the "all at once" route - therefore no flexibility if we can't lure anyone to play with KG/Sheed/Pierce for the MLE then we have to try and lure someone for JUST money vs the money and "chance to win" allure. Sounds rather Chcago Bullish post-MJ - "we'll have tons of cap room to sign the big stars..." Oops...the big stars didn't want to sign there without MJ. There were other factors in that case, but that was one of the primary reasons they had to go the doormat route for quite a few years until the hit the lottery with their new PG last year. Let me backstep a bit...I'd let Ray hang - like BBD this year through the free agency period taking the chance no one else scoops him up either. Then if we can't sign an MLE try to get him back (seriously, are other teams going to beat down his door????? I'm not convinced they will - and not for much money either.) Then I'm evil...some wouldn't do that - I mean Ray helped us win a championship didn't he - we have to "take care of him"...regardless of age and performance. (Yes, I also would've let Varitek go this year too BTW). -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:36 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. You do realize that we won't have much, if any cap room, even after letting Ray go, and that we'd be forced to replace him by using the MLE? And I guess you think we can find someone better than Ray for the MLE? We'll see--Artest signed for the MLE. Ryan --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 2:32 PM > I would entertain letting him go, > yes. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:01 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > So, what are you suggesting Pat?? I mean, like what > would you do?? Let Ray go?? Try to sign him for > less money or less years? > > And, yes, Perk isn't a 'perennial' All-Star--but by age 27, > he'll be going to the All-Star game.? He's already the > best man-to-man defender at the center position and his > offensive game has improved steadily each season.? > > Ryan > > --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > wrote: > > > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 12:24 PM > > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at > > about 7 million per sounds about right for Ray Allen, > and > > brings his contract off the books the same year as KG > and > > Wallace, setting us up to restructure the team in > 2012, > > right about the time that Ray and Wallace will be > nearing > > retirement, KG and Pierce will be in the last 2-3 > years of > > their career, and Rondo and Perk will still be in the > prime > > of their careers (as well as both being All-Star > caliber > > players). - Ryan > > > > Sorry man, too homer for me. See exhibit A - current > Red > > Sox. Too much risk of (sudden) decline in play, > increase in > > injury, inability to trade, and blocked cap space to > tie up > > all three aging players. Prefer current arrangement > of > > consecutive expirations of contracts with which to > reload. > > The Belichick model is the one that has shown ability > to > > transcend time - cut/trade/let expire the contracts of > the > > aging without letting sentimentality get in the way > of > > winning (exhibits B, C, D, and E - Lawyer Milloy, > Daniel > > Graham, Willie McGinest, maybe Mike Vrabel). > > > > Secondly, Perk MIGHT make an All-star team...but I > think > > it's a little much to think of him in terms of > All-star. > > Perhaps my definition is too stringent, but I always > put the > > word "perennial" in front of it when talking of > cornerstone > > players. Doesn't mean Perk isn't a key complimentary > piece - > > he is, especially defensively and I'd take him as a > starting > > center any day in the NBA, but he's not a perennial, > build > > your team around him, tie up max dollars or even > close > > contract all star player. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > > On Behalf Of Ryan W > > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:09 AM > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > > > > --- On Sun, 8/9/09, George Meyer > > wrote: > > > > > From: George Meyer > > > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > > Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 4:32 PM > > > It makes absolutely no sense for > > > Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I > > > highly doubt he'll try to. > > > > George, your primary mistake is a lack of foresight > and > > imagination vis a vis the market forces at play and > Rondo's > > overall ability and worth in the 2010 free agent > > class.? Almost all the factors that led to Baby's > > strike out in restricted free agency this summer--lack > of > > overall money this summer due to the economy and > teams > > looking to save money for 2010, Baby's weight and > > athleticism issues, better available players on the > market, > > and Baby relatively small sample size of MLE-worthy > > play--will not be present next summer for Rondo.? > Given > > Rondo's steady progression and improvement the last 3 > > seasons, his relative youth (still only 23), and his > proven > > ability to lead a team to a championship, it only goes > to > > figure that he'll continue that development in the > upcoming > > season, pushing his value higher.? Simply put, it's > > going to be cheaper to extend him this summer than > next > > summer.? And so, yes, there's *some* sense in > locking > > him down this summer at a > >? cheaper rate rather than waiting next season and > running > > the risk that we either end up having to give him a > max deal > > or watch as some other team, perhaps the Knicks after > they > > are spurned by Lebron, comes and gives him a max > dollar > > offer sheet.? If you're truly worried about Rondo's > > demand for max dollars, you sign him this > summer--which will > > be the last time in the next 7 years when Rondo WON'T > be > > worth max dollars.? He's going to be THAT good. > > > > Also, notwithstanding *your* assertion that Rondo > thinks > > he's worth max dollars, that has been reported > > NOWHERE.? In fact, Maxwell reported his own > > conversation where he asked Rondo if it'd take 10 > million > > per to resign him and Rondo's response was, "Where do > I > > sign?"? Fact is, Rondo's average of 12 points, 8 > > assists, 5 rebounds, and 2 steals per game at age 23 > > outclasses Devin Harris at a similar age (he had less > than > > stellar averages of 10 points and 3 assists at age > 24--and > > still got a contract that averages 8.5 million per), > and > > compares favorably to what Tony Parker was averaging > (about > > 16 points and 6 assists) when he signed his contract > > averaging 11 million per.? The prudent, forwarding > > thinking, Danny Ainge-esque thing to do would be to > engage > > Rondo's agent in conversation and attempt to work out > > something reasonable for each side this summer...thus > > providing stability going forward and saving money in > the > > long run.? You like saving money right? > >? That is, when you're not criticizing the Celtics > for doing > > the same thing? :) > > > > 5 years, 50 million sounds about right for Rondo.? > > > > As for Ray, you completely underestimate both the Cs > > willingness to trade Ray midseason (which won't happen > or > > even be considered unless we have a rash of > season-ending > > injuries) and his worth as an expiring contract.? > Teams > > looking to cut salary won't be willing or able to cut > salary > > on the scale of Ray Allen's contract, nor will the Cs > be > > willing to take on 20 million in non-expiring > contracts > > unless that deal clearly benefits the Cs in 2010 and > going > > forward.? How many of those trades are out there?? > > Not many.? And since this team is structured to win > in > > the next 2-3 seasons--Ray will be a part of that. > > > > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at about 7 million > per > > sounds about right for Ray Allen, and brings his > contract > > off the books the same year as KG and Wallace, setting > us up > > to restructure the team in 2012, right about the time > that > > Ray and Wallace will be nearing retirement, KG and > Pierce > > will be in the last 2-3 years of their career, and > Rondo and > > Perk will still be in the prime of their careers (as > well as > > both being All-Star caliber players). > > > > Ryan > > > > > > > In this economic climate, the > > > last thing you do > > > is hand over huge money to a guy when you don't > have > > to, > > > and Wyc said > > > immediately before the off-season that signing > Rondo > > wasn't > > > a priority since > > > we can just match whatever he gets offered next > year. > > > Further, Rondo wants > > > near-max money, so it's not like his value can > > increase > > > insofar as he and > > > his agent perceive it. Ainge will wait the > season, > > see > > > where the team stands > > > (w/KG's knee being the key factor), and hope that > the > > > shrinking market, > > > contracting salary cap, and Rondo's generally > > non-max-type > > > game give him a > > > better chance to sign him to a sane deal. Or > he'll be > > > traded. As for Ray, it > > > makes even less sense to re-sign him this year, > > > particularly when he has one > > > of the best expiring contracts in the league and > the > > 2010 > > > trading deadline > > > promises many fiscally-driven fireworks. The way > I see > > it, > > > Ainge's offseason > > > is essentially finished. > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Ryan W > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Yep--fair deal for both parties. > > > > > > > > Next up after Daniels is signed, Ainge > opens > > > negotiations towards extending > > > > Rondo and possibly Ray. > > > > > > > > Ryan > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Jim Hill > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Jim Hill > > > > > Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > > > To: celtics at igtc.com > > > > > Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 11:43 > PM > > > > > Reports are 2 years at $3M+ > > > > > per. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Seems about right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From capomycap at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 20:11:37 2009 From: capomycap at gmail.com (George Meyer) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:11:37 -0700 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <253b689a0908101311r11da0003qbaed18f409655aea@mail.gmail.com> Ryan, and your primary mistake is confusing your own contrarianism with counter-intuition. Sometimes a cigar is a cigar, and after the extraordinary back-and-forth we saw earlier this summer, we have a right to assume that Ainge has at least a degree of reluctance about resigning Rondo to big money. As for my lack of imagination "vis a vis the market forces" for 2010, I simply ask you, why would the Knicks offer a max contract to a point guard who specifically does NOT fit into the run-n-gun system instilled by their marquee coach? (Rondo, after all, can run but cannot gun) And if not the Knicks, then who? The Rockets and OKC are the most logical suitors (w/ presumed cap space and PG need), but are they going to break the bank in a bad economy for a non-"name" guy who will not sell jerseys or season tickets? As for Ray Allen, he'll be 35 next summer. His market value is probably not much greater than the mid-level and can only go down. Why would Ainge destroy the little flexibility he has available to him? Aside from all that, I'm not really sure what your point is. Is it that Ainge WILL do these things or that he SHOULD? Because if we enter the season with Rondo and Ray Ray unchanged in contract status, will that mean... shudder... you were wrong? -G.M PS: putting an emoticon after a condescending statement only makes it more condescending. :) On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Ryan W wrote: > > --- On Sun, 8/9/09, George Meyer wrote: > > > From: George Meyer > > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 4:32 PM > > It makes absolutely no sense for > > Ainge to extend Rondo this offseason, and I > > highly doubt he'll try to. > > George, your primary mistake is a lack of foresight and imagination vis a > vis the market forces at play and Rondo's overall ability and worth in the > 2010 free agent class. Almost all the factors that led to Baby's strike out > in restricted free agency this summer--lack of overall money this summer due > to the economy and teams looking to save money for 2010, Baby's weight and > athleticism issues, better available players on the market, and Baby > relatively small sample size of MLE-worthy play--will not be present next > summer for Rondo. Given Rondo's steady progression and improvement the last > 3 seasons, his relative youth (still only 23), and his proven ability to > lead a team to a championship, it only goes to figure that he'll continue > that development in the upcoming season, pushing his value higher. Simply > put, it's going to be cheaper to extend him this summer than next summer. > And so, yes, there's *some* sense in locking him down this summer at a > cheaper rate rather than waiting next season and running the risk that we > either end up having to give him a max deal or watch as some other team, > perhaps the Knicks after they are spurned by Lebron, comes and gives him a > max dollar offer sheet. If you're truly worried about Rondo's demand for > max dollars, you sign him this summer--which will be the last time in the > next 7 years when Rondo WON'T be worth max dollars. He's going to be THAT > good. > > Also, notwithstanding *your* assertion that Rondo thinks he's worth max > dollars, that has been reported NOWHERE. In fact, Maxwell reported his own > conversation where he asked Rondo if it'd take 10 million per to resign him > and Rondo's response was, "Where do I sign?" Fact is, Rondo's average of 12 > points, 8 assists, 5 rebounds, and 2 steals per game at age 23 outclasses > Devin Harris at a similar age (he had less than stellar averages of 10 > points and 3 assists at age 24--and still got a contract that averages 8.5 > million per), and compares favorably to what Tony Parker was averaging > (about 16 points and 6 assists) when he signed his contract averaging 11 > million per. The prudent, forwarding thinking, Danny Ainge-esque thing to > do would be to engage Rondo's agent in conversation and attempt to work out > something reasonable for each side this summer...thus providing stability > going forward and saving money in the long run. You like saving money > right? > That is, when you're not criticizing the Celtics for doing the same thing? > :) > > 5 years, 50 million sounds about right for Rondo. > > As for Ray, you completely underestimate both the Cs willingness to trade > Ray midseason (which won't happen or even be considered unless we have a > rash of season-ending injuries) and his worth as an expiring contract. > Teams looking to cut salary won't be willing or able to cut salary on the > scale of Ray Allen's contract, nor will the Cs be willing to take on 20 > million in non-expiring contracts unless that deal clearly benefits the Cs > in 2010 and going forward. How many of those trades are out there? Not > many. And since this team is structured to win in the next 2-3 seasons--Ray > will be a part of that. > > A cap friendly deal for 2 years at about 7 million per sounds about right > for Ray Allen, and brings his contract off the books the same year as KG and > Wallace, setting us up to restructure the team in 2012, right about the time > that Ray and Wallace will be nearing retirement, KG and Pierce will be in > the last 2-3 years of their career, and Rondo and Perk will still be in the > prime of their careers (as well as both being All-Star caliber players). > > Ryan > > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Mon Aug 10 20:57:08 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:57:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908101311r11da0003qbaed18f409655aea@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <920241.55488.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 8/10/09, George Meyer wrote: > From: George Meyer > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 3:11 PM > Ryan, > and your primary mistake is confusing your own > contrarianism with > counter-intuition. Sometimes a cigar is a cigar, and after > the extraordinary > back-and-forth we saw earlier this summer, we have a right > to assume that > Ainge has at least a degree of reluctance about resigning > Rondo to big > money. Or maybe Ainge's 'degree of reluctance' was the opening salvo in the Rondo extension talks? Surely nothing Ainge said could be inferred that Rondo isn't worth big money--he was only identifying potential areas of improvement. And surely you realize that Ainge thinks a couple moves ahead when it comes to negotiation techniques, right? The so-called shopping of Rondo was a two-fold strategy--to see if we could turn Ray/Rondo into Chris Paul, and the attempt to lower Rondo's value (in terms of his next contract) around the league. > As for my lack of imagination "vis a vis the market > forces" for 2010, > I simply ask you, why would the Knicks offer a max contract > to a point guard > who specifically does NOT fit into the run-n-gun system > instilled by their > marquee coach? (Rondo, after all, can run but cannot gun) > And if not the > Knicks, then who? The Rockets and OKC are the most logical > suitors (w/ > presumed cap space and PG need), but are they going to > break the bank in a > bad economy for a non-"name" guy who will not sell jerseys > or season > tickets? WTF? I can't even believe you just wrote that. Rondo is THE PERFECT player for D'Antoni's run-and-gun system. He could easily average a triple double for AN ENTIRE SEASON if he played in that system. And they currently NEED a point guard who can run the fast break, defend, dish the rock and get to the rim. That's Rondo to a T. In fact, you could say that Rondo's the closest thing to Nash in the entire league, minus the shooting ability but WITH good defense (unlike Nash's non-defense). And after they miss out on Lebron, you're telling me they wouldn't gladly give Rondo an extension, especially after he averages a double double this upcoming season on a championship team? At the risk of offending you, you have no idea what you're talking about...a 24 year old, double-double averaging point guard with 2 rings and the perfect skills to play uptempo ball is more than worth max dollars--and I don't think the fact that his name isn't as big as Lebron is going to matter much to the Knicks. > > As for Ray Allen, he'll be 35 next summer. His market value > is probably not > much greater than the mid-level and can only go down.? > Why would Ainge > destroy the little flexibility he has available to him? He has no flexibility--the question is, as I posited to Pat, is whether we can replace Ray's production with somebody else at MLE money--I'm not sure we can. In fact, I don't see Ray's game deteriorating THAT much in the next two seasons. I'd like to move him to the bench at some point, but only if there's a viable replacement. > > Aside from all that, I'm not really sure what your point > is. Is it that > Ainge WILL do these things or that he SHOULD? Because if we > enter the season > with Rondo and Ray Ray unchanged in contract status, will > that mean... > shudder... you were wrong? > -G.M These are things he SHOULD do and things I expect he WILL do--of course, I don't know what Rondo's agent wants or where exactly Ainge values Rondo (I'd guess it's at about 10 million per). But it's complete foolishness to think Ainge won't at least sit down and discuss the possibility of an extension w/Ray and Rondo and see if he can't work out a deal that satisfies both parties. Rondo is MUCH, MUCH more likely to be extended because of the danger of his value going sky high after 09-10. The same risk doesn't apply to Ray and there's almost no risk in going into the summer of '10 with Ray as a pending free agent--there's plenty of risk of doing that with Rondo, so I expect there will be some heavy negotiations between Rondo's agent and the Cs in the coming 2 months... But, as a matter of courtesy, it makes sense for Danny to at least sit down with Ray and have preliminary talks about an extension--again, that's something he SHOULD do and I expect he WILL--it's called doing good business. I'll put my record of right and wrong up against yours any day of the week, George, but self-congratulation isn't my style. Ryan From gk_tyler at yahoo.com Mon Aug 10 21:24:56 2009 From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: all the talk about Ray & Rondo Message-ID: <293843.63611.qm@web39606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I would pay to see the superbly conditioned Ray Allen come off the bench for 15 minutes a night, completely bombing the opposition.? He would make Eddie House and another $2 million sub unnecessary.? I'd go $5 million for that, a year or two out.? Even better, it would set a precedent for Paul to follow. I would hope we could sign Rondo early--just to take away the uncertainty and focus the kid on this year completely.? I don't know what he's worth, but I think I know what we would be like without him--about 4th or 5th in the East.? That's a bit of hyperbole, but consider that we don't have a solid backup either.? Cheers, Gene From noah.evans at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 22:08:53 2009 From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:08:53 +0200 Subject: all the talk about Ray & Rondo In-Reply-To: <293843.63611.qm@web39606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <293843.63611.qm@web39606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <56a297000908101508y26cb29d9yafccbfad2c457d67@mail.gmail.com> Truly great shooters age well. That's why people were after reggie miller into his 40s and eddie johnson played so long. On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:24 PM, gene kirkpatrick wrote: > I would pay to see the superbly conditioned Ray Allen come off the bench for 15 minutes a night, completely bombing the opposition.? He would make Eddie House and another $2 million sub unnecessary.? I'd go $5 million for that, a year or two out.? Even better, it would set a precedent for Paul to follow. > > I would hope we could sign Rondo early--just to take away the uncertainty and focus the kid on this year completely.? I don't know what he's worth, but I think I know what we would be like without him--about 4th or 5th in the East.? That's a bit of hyperbole, but consider that we don't have a solid backup either.? Cheers, Gene > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From keltsfan at comcast.net Mon Aug 10 22:28:59 2009 From: keltsfan at comcast.net (keltsfan) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:28:59 -0700 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <920241.55488.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <253b689a0908101311r11da0003qbaed18f409655aea@mail.gmail.com> <920241.55488.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <010201ca1a09$f4cdb430$de691c90$@net> Ryan, Unlike you, I do not have the ability to get inside Ainge's head, but I would speculate that he does indeed have reservations about giving Rondo a big $$ deal. I would. Rondo's worth and abilities are difficult to gauge given that he plays with three future hall of famers. Is Rondo's success largely a function of playing alongside Garnett, Allen and Pierce? Can he be the cornerstone of a franchise like a Chris Paul? Would defenses have an easier time taking away his strengths and relegating him to a lesser status, even in the eyes of Celtics fans, without his current crop of teammates? These are questions that have yet to be answered and many GMs around the league, including Ainge, will be seeking answers to them. As to your ability to offend others on the list, I must say you do it well. These discussions are after-all a matter of opinion and to suggest another poster has no idea what they are talking about when all we have here is opinion is quite obnoxious. What makes your opinion any better than George's? It ain't better or worse...just different. Can you please leave it at that? Ravi > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 1:57 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > --- On Mon, 8/10/09, George Meyer wrote: > > > From: George Meyer > > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 3:11 PM > > Ryan, > > and your primary mistake is confusing your own > > contrarianism with > > counter-intuition. Sometimes a cigar is a cigar, and after > > the extraordinary > > back-and-forth we saw earlier this summer, we have a right > > to assume that > > Ainge has at least a degree of reluctance about resigning > > Rondo to big > > money. > > Or maybe Ainge's 'degree of reluctance' was the opening salvo in the Rondo extension > talks? Surely nothing Ainge said could be inferred that Rondo isn't worth big money--he > was only identifying potential areas of improvement. And surely you realize that Ainge > thinks a couple moves ahead when it comes to negotiation techniques, right? The so-called > shopping of Rondo was a two-fold strategy--to see if we could turn Ray/Rondo into Chris > Paul, and the attempt to lower Rondo's value (in terms of his next contract) around the > league. > > > > As for my lack of imagination "vis a vis the market > > forces" for 2010, > > I simply ask you, why would the Knicks offer a max contract > > to a point guard > > who specifically does NOT fit into the run-n-gun system > > instilled by their > > marquee coach? (Rondo, after all, can run but cannot gun) > > And if not the > > Knicks, then who? The Rockets and OKC are the most logical > > suitors (w/ > > presumed cap space and PG need), but are they going to > > break the bank in a > > bad economy for a non-"name" guy who will not sell jerseys > > or season > > tickets? > > WTF? I can't even believe you just wrote that. Rondo is THE PERFECT player for > D'Antoni's run-and-gun system. He could easily average a triple double for AN ENTIRE > SEASON if he played in that system. And they currently NEED a point guard who can run > the fast break, defend, dish the rock and get to the rim. That's Rondo to a T. In fact, you > could say that Rondo's the closest thing to Nash in the entire league, minus the shooting > ability but WITH good defense (unlike Nash's non-defense). And after they miss out on > Lebron, you're telling me they wouldn't gladly give Rondo an extension, especially after he > averages a double double this upcoming season on a championship team? At the risk of > offending you, you have no idea what you're talking about...a 24 year old, double-double > averaging point guard with 2 rings and the perfect skills to play uptempo ball is more than > worth max dollars--and I don't think the fact that his name isn't as big as Lebron > is going to matter much to the Knicks. > > > > > As for Ray Allen, he'll be 35 next summer. His market value > > is probably not > > much greater than the mid-level and can only go down. > > Why would Ainge > > destroy the little flexibility he has available to him? > > He has no flexibility--the question is, as I posited to Pat, is whether we can replace Ray's > production with somebody else at MLE money--I'm not sure we can. In fact, I don't see > Ray's game deteriorating THAT much in the next two seasons. I'd like to move him to the > bench at some point, but only if there's a viable replacement. > > > > > Aside from all that, I'm not really sure what your point > > is. Is it that > > Ainge WILL do these things or that he SHOULD? Because if we > > enter the season > > with Rondo and Ray Ray unchanged in contract status, will > > that mean... > > shudder... you were wrong? > > -G.M > > These are things he SHOULD do and things I expect he WILL do--of course, I don't know > what Rondo's agent wants or where exactly Ainge values Rondo (I'd guess it's at about 10 > million per). But it's complete foolishness to think Ainge won't at least sit down and discuss > the possibility of an extension w/Ray and Rondo and see if he can't work out a deal that > satisfies both parties. Rondo is MUCH, MUCH more likely to be extended because of the > danger of his value going sky high after 09-10. The same risk doesn't apply to Ray and > there's almost no risk in going into the summer of '10 with Ray as a pending free agent-- > there's plenty of risk of doing that with Rondo, so I expect there will be some heavy > negotiations between Rondo's agent and the Cs in the coming 2 months... But, as a matter > of courtesy, it makes sense for Danny to at least sit down with Ray and have preliminary > talks about an extension--again, that's something he SHOULD do and I expect he > WILL--it's called doing good business. > > I'll put my record of right and wrong up against yours any day of the week, George, but > self-congratulation isn't my style. > > Ryan > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From capomycap at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 22:27:29 2009 From: capomycap at gmail.com (George Meyer) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:27:29 -0700 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <920241.55488.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <253b689a0908101311r11da0003qbaed18f409655aea@mail.gmail.com> <920241.55488.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <253b689a0908101527w31049fd5y27e16869649ae56e@mail.gmail.com> "In fact, you could say that Rondo's the closest thing to Nash in the entire league, minus the shooting ability but WITH good defense (unlike Nash's non-defense)" Yes, and I'm John Hamm minus the good looks but with a physics degree. So what? Nash hit over TEN times more three pointers in his last season w/D'Antoni than Rondo has in his entire career. You may not think I know what I'm talking about, but D'Antoni's system requires a point guard who can nail shots in transition, not just get to the rim. Even his most ardent backer would admit that Rondo is easily exposed once you force him to take jumpshots. "And after they miss out on Lebron, you're telling me they wouldn't gladly give Rondo an extension, especially after he averages a double double this upcoming season on a championship team?" For someone who picks apart everyone else's arguments for the slightest missteps, this kind of hectoring is a bit hypocritical. What am I supposed to say? "He won't get average a double double and the Celtics might not win a championship"? What's the point? If what you mean to say is that Rondo has a chance to bolster his value this season, I fully agree. My point has been that it's reasonable to assume Rondo is asking for an amount that is high enough to eliminate the incentive to sign him a year early (ie: he wants near max money anyway, so if his value goes up it's not going up by much), and so it'll probably be wiser to wait the year and assume the market will not value him quite that highly (what with the Depression and all). That said, I actually think we don't really disagree on much, only except IF any of this will happen. If Rondo was willing to take 5/50, I'd jump all over that. The thing is, I think Ainge would too, and it doesn't seem like that's the salary neighborhood Rondo's people are talking (regardless of what he might say to Cedric Maxwell... good lord, like that's a reliable spin-free zone). I'll simply repeat what I said before about Grousbeck seemingly unconcerned about re-signing him this year, the bizarre public shaming, and the overall lack of talk... I choose, unimaginatively yet reasonably, to assume these things are fairly accurate indicators of how the C's are handling the situation. If we read a report next week that says Rondo is on board for those figures, I'll be delighted. I just don't think it's going to happen. As for "your style," I think it speaks for itself. But I believe we can easily discuss the Celtics without resorting to weasel words ("at the risk of offending you" Precious!) and not-so-subtly layered insults. I respect your opinions and I think you're a smart guy, but this technique of answering my posts about the Celtics with an explication of my various intellectual/imaginative/social shortcomings is more than a bit grating. From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Mon Aug 10 23:46:16 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:46:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908101527w31049fd5y27e16869649ae56e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <566211.38481.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 8/10/09, George Meyer wrote: > From: George Meyer > Subject: Re: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 5:27 PM > "In fact, you could say that Rondo's > the closest thing to Nash in the entire > league, minus the shooting ability but WITH good defense > (unlike Nash's > non-defense)" > > Yes, and I'm John Hamm minus the good looks but with a > physics degree. To drop Jon Hamm's name you must be as excited about the "Mad Men" season premiere on Sunday night as I am... > So > what? Nash hit over TEN times more three pointers in his > last season > w/D'Antoni than Rondo has in his entire career. You may not > think I know > what I'm talking about, but D'Antoni's system requires a > point guard who can > nail shots in transition, not just get to the rim. Even his > most ardent > backer would admit that Rondo is easily exposed once you > force him to take > jumpshots. 7 seconds or less--that's the system--it's predicated on getting a good, open shot very early in the shot clock. A 3 point chucking point guard can definitely find a home in that system, but it's a little strong to suggest that it 'requires' one. It's important to note that Rondo's jumper is only exposed in the half court--in transition you really can't back off him or he'll shoot layups all day. So, while a team can cheat off the Cs because we tend to play alot in the half court, such a scheme doesn't work in uptempo basketball. As such, his jumper would be less of a weakness on the Knicks than it is on the Cs. In short, Rondo is deadly in transition and the Knicks do their best to play in transition all the time. It's a match made in heaven. > > "And after they miss out on Lebron, you're telling me they > wouldn't gladly > give Rondo an extension, especially after he averages a > double double this > upcoming season on a championship team?" > > For someone who picks apart everyone else's arguments for > the slightest > missteps, this kind of hectoring is a bit hypocritical. > What am I supposed > to say? "He won't get average a double double and the > Celtics might not win > a championship"? What's the point? If what you mean to say > is that Rondo has > a chance to bolster his value this season, I fully agree. > My point has been > that it's reasonable to assume Rondo is asking for an > amount that is high > enough to eliminate the incentive to sign him a year early > (ie: he wants > near max money anyway, so if his value goes up it's not > going up by much), > and so it'll probably be wiser to wait the year and assume > the market will > not value him quite that highly (what with the Depression > and all). Can you explain this reasoning again? Why is it "reasonable to assume Rondo is asking for an amount that is high enough to eliminate the incentive to sign him a year early," because I've never read anything like that anywhere. All I've read are indictments of Rondo's character and Internet pop-psychology that assumes that he's some kind of ego-maniac and thus he must think he's already worth the max. I've said all along that if Rondo wants max money this year, then obviously you don't do--but we don't know that, nor do we really have any reason to assume it. Until we do, and even after, entering into negotiations for a contract extension makes the most sense. > > That said, I actually think we don't really disagree on > much, only except IF > any of this will happen. If Rondo was willing to take 5/50, > I'd jump all > over that. The thing is, I think Ainge would too, and it > doesn't seem like > that's the salary neighborhood Rondo's people are talking > (regardless of > what he might say to Cedric Maxwell... good lord, like > that's a reliable > spin-free zone). I'll simply repeat what I said before > about Grousbeck > seemingly unconcerned about re-signing him this year, the > bizarre public > shaming, and the overall lack of talk... I guess we are on the same page in terms of Rondo's worth, as we'll as in agreement that Rondo isn't worth the max this summer. Also, I seem to remember Wyc's words differently (not that Wyc's words hold much weight anyway), but didn't he say that Rondo and Ray's extension talks weren't a 'priority' until after the summer? All I took that to mean is that Danny will deal with putting the team together in July and August, and once that's down, then we move on extension talks. Priority meaning in this instance that it's not first on the to-do list. > I choose, > unimaginatively yet > reasonably, to assume these things are fairly accurate > indicators of how the > C's are handling the situation. If we read a report next > week that says > Rondo is on board for those figures, I'll be delighted. I > just don't think > it's going to happen. Yeah, it appears that all we differ on is this: you seem to think Rondo wants the max and I seem to think he'll take a reasonable contract. Two perfectly reasonable opinions, I guess. Ryan From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 00:00:34 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:00:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. Message-ID: <405571.18771.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 8/10/09, keltsfan wrote: > From: keltsfan > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: "'The Boston Celtics Mailing List'" > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 5:28 PM > Ryan, > > Unlike you, I do not have the ability to get inside Ainge's > head, but I > would speculate that he does indeed have reservations about > giving Rondo a > big $$ deal. I would.? Rondo's worth and abilities are > difficult to gauge > given that he plays with three future hall of famers.? > Is Rondo's success > largely a function of playing alongside Garnett, Allen and > Pierce?? Can he > be the cornerstone of a franchise like a Chris Paul?? > Would defenses have an > easier time taking away his strengths and relegating him to > a lesser status, > even in the eyes of Celtics fans, without his current crop > of teammates? > These are questions that have yet to be answered and many > GMs around the > league, including Ainge, will be seeking answers to > them.? No question, Ravi.? But regardless of what Rondo might do in the future, or where his true ceiling might end up, the fact remains that he's already put up #s which, relative to his age, put him in some pretty select company.? It's clear he's worth 10 million per year--right now.? The prudent move is to attempt to lock him up at that number this summer and not be forced to pay him more--or potentially lose him--next season.? If Rondo wants to gamble that he can get max dollars after 2010, you let him try.? Until then, you try to sign him to a reasonable deal this season based on the #s he's already put up.? And there's no question about it... > > As to your ability to offend others on the list, I must say > you do it well. > These discussions are after-all a matter of opinion and to > suggest another > poster has no idea what they are talking about when all we > have here is > opinion is quite obnoxious.? What makes your opinion > any better than > George's?? It ain't better or worse...just > different.? Can you please leave > it at that?? All opinions are equal--but the support underpinning such opinions tends to vary. And it's that support that's either better or worse and which makes up the marrow of the discussions and disagreements that occur on this list serve. It's fine to have an opinion and express an opinion--but you should also be willing to defend such an opinion with some support. Otherwise, your opinion, however justified in its existence, tends to have no meaning. Ryan From keltsfan at comcast.net Tue Aug 11 00:48:41 2009 From: keltsfan at comcast.net (keltsfan) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:48:41 -0700 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <405571.18771.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <405571.18771.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <011201ca1a1d$7920b1c0$6b621540$@net> Ryan, I do not want to get into the obvious need to defend opinions but in the case of George and your discussion, you provided no support that was "better" than his. Beyond that, you missed the point I made, which was to say that in a good discussion of varying opinions, there is no place for suggesting someone doesn't know what they are talking about. Unless it is a matter of fact that is in dispute of course. I suppose you might believe your opinion to be fact as that is the way your posts tend to come off but I, for one, do not. As to what a player is worth, I'll leave that to the folks trying to put together a competitive team for the years when Garnett, Allen and Pierce are gone but I wouldn't place too much emphasis on numbers as the gauge. As far as numbers, Rondo has not put them up in a vacuum which was my other point. He's put those numbers up playing alongside Garnett, Allen and Pierce and those three have enhanced his effectiveness considerably allowing him to be on the court much longer than he might be otherwise were he playing for a lesser team like say, Milwaukee. Anywho..... Ravi > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 5:01 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > --- On Mon, 8/10/09, keltsfan wrote: > > > No question, Ravi.? But regardless of what Rondo might do in the future, or where his true > ceiling might end up, the fact remains that he's already put up #s which, relative to his age, > put him in some pretty select company.? It's clear he's worth 10 million per year--right now. > The prudent move is to attempt to lock him up at that number this summer and not be > forced to pay him more--or potentially lose him--next season.? If Rondo wants to gamble > that he can get max dollars after 2010, you let him try.? Until then, you try to sign him to a > reasonable deal this season based on the #s he's already put up.? And there's no question > about it... > > All opinions are equal--but the support underpinning such opinions tends to vary. And it's > that support that's either better or worse and which makes up the marrow of the discussions > and disagreements that occur on this list serve. > > It's fine to have an opinion and express an opinion--but you should also be willing to defend > such an opinion with some support. Otherwise, your opinion, however justified in its > existence, tends to have no meaning. > > Ryan > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 01:19:39 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:19:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <011201ca1a1d$7920b1c0$6b621540$@net> Message-ID: <691349.47435.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 8/10/09, keltsfan wrote: > From: keltsfan > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: "'The Boston Celtics Mailing List'" > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 7:48 PM > Ryan, I do not want to get into the > obvious need to defend opinions but in > the case of George and your discussion, you provided no > support that was > "better" than his.? Beyond that, you missed the point > I made, which was to > say that in a good discussion of varying opinions, there is > no place for > suggesting someone doesn't know what they are talking > about.? Unless it is a > matter of fact that is in dispute of course.? I > suppose you might believe > your opinion to be fact as that is the way your posts tend > to come off but > I, for one, do not. Okay. I actually tend to think my opinions are supported by good evidence--and when I say I don't think somebody knows what they're talking about, it's usually because they failed to provide much support for their opinion, which was the point of my response. But, technically, both of our opinions were plausible, not falsifiable, and, as such, you're right, I shouldn't go around saying that. Point taken. > > As to what a player is worth, I'll leave that to the folks > trying to put > together a competitive team for the years when Garnett, > Allen and Pierce are > gone but I wouldn't place too much emphasis on numbers as > the gauge.???As > far as numbers, Rondo has not put them up in a vacuum? > which was my other > point. He's put those numbers up playing alongside Garnett, > Allen and Pierce > and those three have enhanced his effectiveness > considerably allowing him to > be on the court much longer than he might be otherwise were > he playing for a > lesser team like say, Milwaukee. > > Anywho..... > > Ravi Yeah, nobody's #s are put up in a vacuum...but if you feel like perusing the list of 23 year old point guards who've put up lines like 12/8/5/2, you'll see that regardless of who's around him, that's some very select company. And I don't buy that Rondo wouldn't have put up some Harris-like #s, if, like Harris, he was given the green light to do anything he wanted to do for 40 minutes a night, while playing zero defense. But I suppose you'd call that a vacuum too, because it's assumed to be easy to put up #s on a bad team. That leads me to a good question: what kind of #s do you consider to be a good gauge of a player's worth? #s put up on a good team or a bad team? Each situation can be 'explained' away, either because it's easy to put up good #s on a bad team, or it's easy to put up good #s when you're surrounded by good players. In my opinion, #s tend to speak for themselves, especially when used in comparison to what other players have done. In Rondo's case, he's putting up #s that compare favorably to about any other 23-year old point guard in NBA history, except for perhaps Magic Johnson. Ryan From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 03:12:38 2009 From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:12:38 -0400 Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <200908101840.n7AIeTuU022622@apollo.afrc.af.mil> References: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <200908101756.n7AHustu021153@artemis.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908101120j633b06cdv9f7dcb36fa104799@mail.gmail.com> <200908101840.n7AIeTuU022622@apollo.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <3f0c87180908102012x5da7a3ci5024690c6dd74eef@mail.gmail.com> Who said Sheldon used biannual? Can you point me to the source, except yourself? On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:40 PM, wrote: > May I refer you to the earlier articles wherein Daniels was coming to the > Cs for either the "biennial exemption" or via sign and trade (for Tony Allen > which was kiboshed, not to be confused with Chris Boshed, by LB). > > If Sheldon William was signed with the biennial then that therefore means > if the sign and trade is dead, then there is no more biennial with which to > sign Marquis Daniels. > > I think it is thou that doth confused. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf > Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:21 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? > > $1.3 million deal worth the veteran's minimum and $1.9 million biannual > exception has nothing to do with each other. > > AG > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, wrote: > > > >From today's Globe touting BBDs official signing: "...Williams, 25, a > > one-year bi-annual exception contract worth $1.9 million." > > > > So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as I know, there's only ONE > > biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have had Daniels than Sheldon > > Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a VET MIN contract OR Bird > agrees > > to Tony Allen (ain't gonna happen)...Daniels ain't walkin' through that > > door. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 03:33:20 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:33:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908102012x5da7a3ci5024690c6dd74eef@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <802478.16783.qm@web65614.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Jeez, cool it, Alex. Frank Dell'Apa, on the celticsblog portion of the boston.com website (at http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/), put out an early report--around noon eastern time--which erroneously reported that Shelden had signed for the Biannual exception. After several bloggers noted that that it was extremely unlikely that the Cs had used the Biannual, the report was surreptitiously changed to read that Shelden had signed for the veteran's minimum of 1.3 million. And then, after several more bloggers (notably Roy Hobbs from Celticsblog.com) noted that the veteran minimum for a player of Williams' service time was actually about $855,189, the report was once again surreptitioiusly changed to reflect what we can only hope at this point is the truth. So, no, there's no source to point you too--it's in the ether at this point and Globe is either too embarrassed or too secretive to print what amounts to a retraction for something that was online for a matter of hours. It was just a case of sloppy reporting by Frank Dell'Apa, who apparently is so pissed about being passed over for Marc Spears' old job that he can't even accurately report what any idiot with a computer and internet access could figure out in about 5 minutes time. Ryan --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Alex Goldblatt wrote: > From: Alex Goldblatt > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 10:12 PM > Who said Sheldon used biannual? Can > you point me to the source, except > yourself? > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:40 PM, > wrote: > > > May I refer you to the earlier articles wherein > Daniels was coming to the > > Cs for either the "biennial exemption" or via sign and > trade (for Tony Allen > > which was kiboshed, not to be confused with Chris > Boshed, by LB). > > > > If Sheldon William was signed with the biennial then > that therefore means > > if the sign and trade is dead, then there is no more > biennial with which to > > sign Marquis Daniels. > > > > I think it is thou that doth confused. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf > > Of Alex Goldblatt > > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:21 PM > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption > imply...umm...only one to use? > > > > $1.3 million deal worth the veteran's minimum and $1.9 > million biannual > > exception has nothing to do with each other. > > > > AG > > > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, > wrote: > > > > > >From today's Globe touting BBDs official > signing: "...Williams, 25, a > > > one-year bi-annual exception contract worth $1.9 > million." > > > > > > So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as I > know, there's only ONE > > > biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have had > Daniels than Sheldon > > > Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a VET > MIN contract OR Bird > > agrees > > > to Tony Allen (ain't gonna happen)...Daniels > ain't walkin' through that > > > door. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 03:37:11 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:37:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <802478.16783.qm@web65614.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <266948.28664.qm@web65614.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Actually, I just re-checked the Globe's website and they've updated the article to include a semi-retraction: "Editor's note: Earlier in the day, the value of William's contract was incorrectly reported at the veteran minimum of $1.3 million, which would be the minimum for a player with 10 years of NBA service." I guess half a retraction is better than nothing...but the bigger mistake was reporting that Williams had signed for the Biannual exception. Ryan --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Ryan W wrote: > From: Ryan W > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 10:33 PM > > Jeez, cool it, Alex. Frank Dell'Apa, on the > celticsblog portion of the boston.com website (at http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/), > put out an early report--around noon eastern time--which > erroneously reported that Shelden had signed for the > Biannual exception. After several bloggers noted that > that it was extremely unlikely that the Cs had used the > Biannual, the report was surreptitiously changed to read > that Shelden had signed for the veteran's minimum of 1.3 > million. And then, after several more bloggers > (notably Roy Hobbs from Celticsblog.com) noted that the > veteran minimum for a player of Williams' service time was > actually about $855,189, the report was once again > surreptitioiusly changed to reflect what we can only hope at > this point is the truth. > > So, no, there's no source to point you too--it's in the > ether at this point and Globe is either too embarrassed or > too secretive to print what amounts to a retraction for > something that was online for a matter of hours. It > was just a case of sloppy reporting by Frank Dell'Apa, who > apparently is so pissed about being passed over for Marc > Spears' old job that he can't even accurately report what > any idiot with a computer and internet access could figure > out in about 5 minutes time. > > Ryan > > --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Alex Goldblatt > wrote: > > > From: Alex Goldblatt > > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption > imply...umm...only one to use? > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 10:12 PM > > Who said Sheldon used biannual? Can > > you point me to the source, except > > yourself? > > > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:40 PM, > > wrote: > > > > > May I refer you to the earlier articles wherein > > Daniels was coming to the > > > Cs for either the "biennial exemption" or via > sign and > > trade (for Tony Allen > > > which was kiboshed, not to be confused with > Chris > > Boshed, by LB). > > > > > > If Sheldon William was signed with the biennial > then > > that therefore means > > > if the sign and trade is dead, then there is no > more > > biennial with which to > > > sign Marquis Daniels. > > > > > > I think it is thou that doth confused. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > > On Behalf > > > Of Alex Goldblatt > > > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:21 PM > > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption > > imply...umm...only one to use? > > > > > > $1.3 million deal worth the veteran's minimum and > $1.9 > > million biannual > > > exception has nothing to do with each other. > > > > > > AG > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, > > wrote: > > > > > > > >From today's Globe touting BBDs > official > > signing: "...Williams, 25, a > > > > one-year bi-annual exception contract worth > $1.9 > > million." > > > > > > > > So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as > I > > know, there's only ONE > > > > biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have > had > > Daniels than Sheldon > > > > Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a > VET > > MIN contract OR Bird > > > agrees > > > > to Tony Allen (ain't gonna > happen)...Daniels > > ain't walkin' through that > > > > door. > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 03:52:03 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland Message-ID: <69734.59184.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with team doctors Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal with the Cavs, a source told Y! Sports." I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to see Powe make his comeback for the Cavs. But you gotta wish him well. Great kid. I just hope he doesn't kill us in the playoffs. Ryan P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with the best of them... From keltsfan at comcast.net Tue Aug 11 03:52:19 2009 From: keltsfan at comcast.net (keltsfan) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:52:19 -0700 Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. In-Reply-To: <691349.47435.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <011201ca1a1d$7920b1c0$6b621540$@net> <691349.47435.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <011801ca1a37$202e5030$608af090$@net> To me the game is about much more than numbers Ryan and if I were a GM it would be only one factor in determining a player's worth and whether I was going to lay out significant dollars to lock him up long term. I'd want to know if he can lead, can follow direction, can work with his teammates and coaches, can put aside his ego for the betterment of the team and then assess how he fits within the needs and current and future structure of the team, what his basketball strengths and weaknesses are, whether the stats he does put up are meaningful, how his skills translate under different circumstances, and other factors to put a dollar figure on it. There are many max or near max players out there that wouldn't meet my definition of max type player because they would not meet my standards in many of these categories. The Orlando series indicated to me that Rondo is not yet a cornerstone type player despite what the stats may show. He needs to be able to make jump shots consistently so that defenses get burned for leaving him to double and trap his teammates. It is the significant reason why the Celtics lost to the Magic. When Pierce, Allen and Garnett are gone, will Rondo be the player you build around? As of right now, I don't believe so and that is why I would've traded Allen and Rondo for Chris Paul in a second. It takes a very special player to be the foundation of a franchise. That might change if Rondo proves able to develop a consistent jump shot and passes the muster on these other fronts when projecting out the loss of GAP but until then, I think the Ainge/Grousbeck strategy of letting it play out is the correct one. If he proves it, they'll match any offer, even a max one, and will be glad to do so. But specifically to your question, for me the circumstances would dictate how to assess the impact of a players stats on his worth. Agents may not like that method. It's not so formulaic IMO. It is difficult to compare one player to another when each player might be putting up numbers in entirely different circumstances. The skill is in being able to assess whether those numbers translate under different circumstances and then paying accordingly. Ravi > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 6:20 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > > > > > Yeah, nobody's #s are put up in a vacuum...but if you feel like perusing the list of 23 year > old point guards who've put up lines like 12/8/5/2, you'll see that regardless of who's around > him, that's some very select company. > > And I don't buy that Rondo wouldn't have put up some Harris-like #s, if, like Harris, he was > given the green light to do anything he wanted to do for 40 minutes a night, while playing > zero defense. But I suppose you'd call that a vacuum too, because it's assumed to be easy to > put up #s on a bad team. That leads me to a good question: what kind of #s do you > consider to be a good gauge of a player's worth? #s put up on a good team or a bad team? > Each situation can be 'explained' away, either because it's easy to put up good #s on a bad > team, or it's easy to put up good #s when you're surrounded by good players. > > In my opinion, #s tend to speak for themselves, especially when used in comparison to what > other players have done. In Rondo's case, he's putting up #s that compare favorably to > about any other 23-year old point guard in NBA history, except for perhaps Magic Johnson. > > Ryan > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 11 11:35:39 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:35:39 -0400 Subject: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180908102012x5da7a3ci5024690c6dd74eef@mail.gmail.com> References: <253b689a0908091432v9f275a2j1868867c7e6dea78@mail.gmail.com> <45318.65776.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908101724.n7AHOHaM025967@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <200908101756.n7AHustu021153@artemis.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908101120j633b06cdv9f7dcb36fa104799@mail.gmail.com> <200908101840.n7AIeTuU022622@apollo.afrc.af.mil> <3f0c87180908102012x5da7a3ci5024690c6dd74eef@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200908111135.n7BBZecS029646@apollo.afrc.af.mil> As was pointed out (I posted the excerpt from the Globe in my first post) it appears the Globe made an error and quickly retracted it to the vet minimum 1.3M number. I am a victim of my own haste to post; and of either a typo or just plain editorial mistake by the Globe. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:13 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? Who said Sheldon used biannual? Can you point me to the source, except yourself? On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:40 PM, wrote: > May I refer you to the earlier articles wherein Daniels was coming to the > Cs for either the "biennial exemption" or via sign and trade (for Tony Allen > which was kiboshed, not to be confused with Chris Boshed, by LB). > > If Sheldon William was signed with the biennial then that therefore means > if the sign and trade is dead, then there is no more biennial with which to > sign Marquis Daniels. > > I think it is thou that doth confused. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf > Of Alex Goldblatt > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:21 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Whoa!!! Doesn't exemption imply...umm...only one to use? > > $1.3 million deal worth the veteran's minimum and $1.9 million biannual > exception has nothing to do with each other. > > AG > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, wrote: > > > >From today's Globe touting BBDs official signing: "...Williams, 25, a > > one-year bi-annual exception contract worth $1.9 million." > > > > So much for Marquis Daniels huh? As far as I know, there's only ONE > > biennial exemption. I think I'd rather have had Daniels than Sheldon > > Williams. Unless Daniels has now agreed to a VET MIN contract OR Bird > agrees > > to Tony Allen (ain't gonna happen)...Daniels ain't walkin' through that > > door. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 11 11:44:16 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:44:16 -0400 Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: <69734.59184.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <69734.59184.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908111144.n7BBiJCA024800@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> If you define "kills us" (reasonably) I'll gladly buy you beverage of your choice under $40 if he does, in fact, do so in the playoffs vs the Cs. It'll have to be shippable from the internet however as I'm kind've far away. Something like one game of over either 15 pts or 12 rebs helping lead to a Cavs win? That sounds like "killing us" to me. As Ben Bailey says on Cash Cab: you in? -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:52 PM To: celtics at igtc.com Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with team doctors Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal with the Cavs, a source told Y! Sports." I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to see Powe make his comeback for the Cavs. But you gotta wish him well. Great kid. I just hope he doesn't kill us in the playoffs. Ryan P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with the best of them... _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From whitla at netvigator.com Tue Aug 11 14:26:54 2009 From: whitla at netvigator.com (Paul Whitla) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:26:54 +0800 Subject: Interesting.....very interesting... In-Reply-To: <200908111144.n7BBiJCA024800@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> References: <69734.59184.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908111144.n7BBiJCA024800@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <8AC5C907588C4610A95D09307A5C81A8@paulPC> from the Atlanta Journal Constitution..... The Hawks' secret weapon: Shelden the sleeper is a Celtic 7:07 am August 11, 2009, by Mark Bradley Billy Knight's most daring stratagem nears its fruition at long last. Only now have I discovered what Billy Knight was doing that June night in 2006. Only now have I grasped the brilliance of his grand design. He drafted Shelden Williams not to bolster the Hawks but, years down the road, to sink the Boston Celtics. Those of us who read spy novels - and I once took a college class in the history of the spy novel - know all about "moles" and "sleepers," agents recruited young to infiltrate the enemy's intelligence service and wreak havoc from within. But only now have I applied my college learnin' to basketball. And now (and only now) it makes perfect sense. The Landlord is a mole. Knight took him with the fifth overall pick in Round 1 not because he'd turn out to be a good player but because the mysterious GM saw the big board and sensed, years ahead of time, that the barrier to the 2010 Eastern Conference finals would run through Boston. So he trained the Landlord, which is Williams' code name, in the dark art of counterespionage. And then in February 2008 he gave him a cover story so convincing that even the late Red Auerbach wouldn't have smelled a rat/mole. "Landlord, we're trading you to Sacramento," Knight said, "and we want you to spend the next couple of years working your way back East. Try to wind up in Minnesota in 2009, and then we'll fix it - Doc Rivers is an old Hawk, and we brainwashed him back in the '80s - so you land with the Celtics. And then you'll be in place." It will work like this: Game 7, Eastern semis, TD Banknorth Garden. Big Baby Davis pulls a hamstring and Rasheed Wallace gets ejected for griping and Kevin Garnett gets ejected for screaming and Kendrick Perkins fouls out and Paul Pierce has been suspended for more "menacing gestures," and the C's have nowhere to turn but to the Landlord. Who, on cue, trots on the floor, yields the deciding three-point play to Al Horford - Agent Horfy was Part 2 of Knight's grand scheme - and then slips away on the first train to Alewife. And the NBA has no cause to suspect anything because everybody knows the Landlord isn't an NBA player. And the Hawks are in the Eastern Conference finals, where they've never been, and Billy Knight stands revealed as the greatest spymaster since George Smiley unhorsed Karla. I know, I know. It's far-fetched. That's the beauty therein. And sometimes sleeper schemes even outlast their creators. (Knight, as we know, was so secretive he chose to resign last summer rather than reveal the rationale behind Operation Landlord.) But how else to explain this stunning news item? >From Frank Dell'Apa of the Boston Globe: "[Celtics GM Danny] spoke yesterday after announcing the signings of forwards Glen Davis and Shelden Williams." And somewhere Billy Knight took a sip of brandy, stroked the Persian cat on his lap and chortled, "Soon the world will be mine. All mine." From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 15:22:30 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 08:22:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: <200908111144.n7BBiJCA024800@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <845898.29386.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> That's a generous offer, Patrick. I'm in. Let's define 'kill us' as either the 15 pts or 12 rebs in a Cavs win, OR a performance instrumental in a Cavs win, such as 10 or more points in the 4th quarter, or a momentum changing 8 points in the 3rd quarter. There are some good PFs on the Cavs (Varejao, and JJ Hickson), and Leon's impact, if there's any, is going to come in some limited minute stint here or there. He's going to be a surprise killer, which will make it that much harder to stomach when it comes out of nowhere. Ryan --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 6:44 AM > If you define "kills us" (reasonably) > I'll gladly buy you beverage of your choice under $40 if he > does, in fact, do so in the playoffs vs the Cs. It'll have > to be shippable from the internet however as I'm kind've far > away. Something like one game of over either 15 pts or 12 > rebs helping lead to a Cavs win? That sounds like "killing > us" to me. As Ben Bailey says on Cash Cab: you in? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:52 PM > To: celtics at igtc.com > Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > > > From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo > > "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with team doctors > Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal with the Cavs, > a source told Y! Sports." > > > I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to see Powe make > his comeback for the Cavs. But you gotta wish him > well. Great kid. I just hope he doesn't kill us > in the playoffs. > > Ryan > > P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with the best of > them... > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 11 15:30:35 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:30:35 -0400 Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: <845898.29386.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <200908111144.n7BBiJCA024800@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> <845898.29386.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908111530.n7BFUbfM006780@ares.afrc.af.mil> Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm amenable to those terms. 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win during a playoff series game vs the Cs OR 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win during a playoff series game vs the Cs OR 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during a playoff series game vs the Cs Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 season playoff match Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet, but I think that about covers it. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:23 AM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland That's a generous offer, Patrick. I'm in. Let's define 'kill us' as either the 15 pts or 12 rebs in a Cavs win, OR a performance instrumental in a Cavs win, such as 10 or more points in the 4th quarter, or a momentum changing 8 points in the 3rd quarter. There are some good PFs on the Cavs (Varejao, and JJ Hickson), and Leon's impact, if there's any, is going to come in some limited minute stint here or there. He's going to be a surprise killer, which will make it that much harder to stomach when it comes out of nowhere. Ryan --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 6:44 AM > If you define "kills us" (reasonably) > I'll gladly buy you beverage of your choice under $40 if he > does, in fact, do so in the playoffs vs the Cs. It'll have > to be shippable from the internet however as I'm kind've far > away. Something like one game of over either 15 pts or 12 > rebs helping lead to a Cavs win? That sounds like "killing > us" to me. As Ben Bailey says on Cash Cab: you in? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:52 PM > To: celtics at igtc.com > Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > > > From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo > > "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with team doctors > Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal with the Cavs, > a source told Y! Sports." > > > I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to see Powe make > his comeback for the Cavs. But you gotta wish him > well. Great kid. I just hope he doesn't kill us > in the playoffs. > > Ryan > > P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with the best of > them... > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 11 15:35:09 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:35:09 -0400 Subject: Interesting.....very interesting... In-Reply-To: <8AC5C907588C4610A95D09307A5C81A8@paulPC> References: <69734.59184.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908111144.n7BBiJCA024800@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> <8AC5C907588C4610A95D09307A5C81A8@paulPC> Message-ID: <200908111535.n7BFZCST022575@artemis.afrc.af.mil> I live in Hawks country right now - you do not even begin to understand the animosity toward Billy Knight by Hawks fans. You thought people hated Ainge or Gaston or Pitino during the down years? Hawks fans literally (it happened yesterday during pickup ball) get this combination sour and psychotic look when you even bring his name up. And they don't even have the Celtics gloried past to fall back on as source of their anger. The best basketball player in the Williams family is currently in her regular season. I'd have signed her instead for the vet minimum. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Paul Whitla Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 10:27 AM To: celtics at igtc.com Subject: Interesting.....very interesting... from the Atlanta Journal Constitution..... The Hawks' secret weapon: Shelden the sleeper is a Celtic 7:07 am August 11, 2009, by Mark Bradley Billy Knight's most daring stratagem nears its fruition at long last. Only now have I discovered what Billy Knight was doing that June night in 2006. Only now have I grasped the brilliance of his grand design. He drafted Shelden Williams not to bolster the Hawks but, years down the road, to sink the Boston Celtics. Those of us who read spy novels - and I once took a college class in the history of the spy novel - know all about "moles" and "sleepers," agents recruited young to infiltrate the enemy's intelligence service and wreak havoc from within. But only now have I applied my college learnin' to basketball. And now (and only now) it makes perfect sense. The Landlord is a mole. Knight took him with the fifth overall pick in Round 1 not because he'd turn out to be a good player but because the mysterious GM saw the big board and sensed, years ahead of time, that the barrier to the 2010 Eastern Conference finals would run through Boston. So he trained the Landlord, which is Williams' code name, in the dark art of counterespionage. And then in February 2008 he gave him a cover story so convincing that even the late Red Auerbach wouldn't have smelled a rat/mole. "Landlord, we're trading you to Sacramento," Knight said, "and we want you to spend the next couple of years working your way back East. Try to wind up in Minnesota in 2009, and then we'll fix it - Doc Rivers is an old Hawk, and we brainwashed him back in the '80s - so you land with the Celtics. And then you'll be in place." It will work like this: Game 7, Eastern semis, TD Banknorth Garden. Big Baby Davis pulls a hamstring and Rasheed Wallace gets ejected for griping and Kevin Garnett gets ejected for screaming and Kendrick Perkins fouls out and Paul Pierce has been suspended for more "menacing gestures," and the C's have nowhere to turn but to the Landlord. Who, on cue, trots on the floor, yields the deciding three-point play to Al Horford - Agent Horfy was Part 2 of Knight's grand scheme - and then slips away on the first train to Alewife. And the NBA has no cause to suspect anything because everybody knows the Landlord isn't an NBA player. And the Hawks are in the Eastern Conference finals, where they've never been, and Billy Knight stands revealed as the greatest spymaster since George Smiley unhorsed Karla. I know, I know. It's far-fetched. That's the beauty therein. And sometimes sleeper schemes even outlast their creators. (Knight, as we know, was so secretive he chose to resign last summer rather than reveal the rationale behind Operation Landlord.) But how else to explain this stunning news item? >From Frank Dell'Apa of the Boston Globe: "[Celtics GM Danny] spoke yesterday after announcing the signings of forwards Glen Davis and Shelden Williams." And somewhere Billy Knight took a sip of brandy, stroked the Persian cat on his lap and chortled, "Soon the world will be mine. All mine." _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 15:54:32 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 08:54:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. Message-ID: <136976.77052.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 8/10/09, keltsfan wrote: > From: keltsfan > Subject: RE: Baby to sign with C's on Sun. > To: "'The Boston Celtics Mailing List'" > Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 10:52 PM > To me the game is about much more > than numbers Ryan and if I were a GM it > would be only one factor in determining a player's worth > and whether I was > going to lay out significant dollars to lock him up long > term. I'd want to > know if he can lead, can follow direction, can work with > his teammates and > coaches, can put aside his ego for the betterment of the > team and then > assess how he fits within the needs and current and future > structure of the > team, what his basketball strengths and weaknesses are, > whether the stats he > does put up are meaningful, how his skills translate under > different > circumstances, and other factors to put a dollar > figure on it. There are > many max or near max players out there that wouldn't meet > my definition of > max type player because they would not meet my standards in > many of these > categories. Great definition, and I mean that, well thoughtout and thorough. It is, however, a bit idealistic and, if you were GM, your idealism might come off as cheapness. That fact is, only so many good-to-great players come down the pike and while you might have an ideal player mind, often they're not so easy to find. As you admit, 'there are many max or near max player out there that wouldn't meet my definition of a max type player because they would not meet my standards in many of these categories.' So, to amend a little your standard, I'd submit that a GM should take notice of a player's market value around the league and be willing to re-evaluate that player's worth if the league values him more than the GM, especially if that player is the difference between winning a championship, or is very important to the structure of the team as currently constituted. Just a small alteration, but one I think takes heed of the realities of running a team... > > The Orlando series indicated to me that Rondo is not yet a > cornerstone type > player despite what the stats may show. He needs to > be able to make jump > shots consistently so that defenses get burned for leaving > him to double and > trap his teammates. It is the significant reason why > the Celtics lost to > the Magic. When Pierce, Allen and Garnett are gone, > will Rondo be the > player you build around? As of right now, I don't > believe so and that is > why I would've traded Allen and Rondo for Chris Paul in a > second. It takes > a very special player to be the foundation of a > franchise. That might > change if Rondo proves able to develop a consistent jump > shot and passes the > muster on these other fronts when projecting out the loss > of GAP but until > then, I think the Ainge/Grousbeck strategy of letting it > play out is the > correct one. I'd do a Chris Paul trade too--but I think too much is made of Rondo's performance against Orlando. Sure, Rondo struggled with his jumpshot and NEEDS to improve upon that part of his game. However, plenty of point guards have struggled with their shots, especially early in their careers, so I don't see his lack of a jump shot at this point in his development as being THAT big of a concern. I also place a greater bit of the blame on Doc, for his complicity in the double off Rondo strategy, and also on Ray Allen, who if he would have hit the shots he normally makes in either Game 1 or Game 6, would have put the Cs in the Conference Finals. As you said yourself, you can't judge a player in a vacuum--and to me, Doc Rivers gets a lot of the blame taking the ball out of Rondo's hands (rendering him a spot up shooter at the same time the Magic were daring him to take spot up shots). It's fine and all to say Rondo's #s are inflated by playing with the Big 3, but at least recognize that we play a style of ball that is purposefully slanted to get the most out of the Big 3 and that we aren't getting as much out of Rondo as we could (or should). > > If he proves it, they'll match any offer, even a max one, > and will be glad > to do so. Good point, and I think this quote from Danny yesterday at the Glen Davis/Shelden Williams press conference backs you up and pretty much illustrates Danny's feelings towards the restricted free agency process in a way that's never been articulated before: from http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/sports/celtics/ ?Glen?s been with us for two years and as a restricted free agent we had a little more leverage than we certainly will at the end of this contract in two years where Glen will be an unrestricted free agent and only 25 years old and a great future still ahead of him. This was our time to get Glen at a fair price. I think that he wanted something a little bit bigger, and that?s what the hang-up has been over this time, but I think as the process has gone on, there are good things that happen as a result of it. And one of those things is that Glen understands that he?s loved by other teams out there too and we?re fortunate to have him on our team.? To me, that says that Danny views a player's first 4 seasons (when they're restricted) as 'fair price' time. 'Fair price' not only involves what the Cs are willing to pay, it also involves what the market will bear. As we saw, Danny was willing to play the market against itself, threatening to match any offer and thus effectively scaring off other teams from extending Glen a good offer. I expect he'll use the same strategy with Rondo, if Rondo becomes a restricted free agent. It remains to be seen if it will work as well, though Danny's public criticism of Rondo earlier this summer seems more and more like it was about lowering Rondo's value around the league with an eye towards the summer of 2010. > > But specifically to your question, for me the circumstances > would dictate > how to assess the impact of a players stats on his worth. > Agents may not > like that method. It's not so formulaic IMO. It is > difficult to compare one > player to another when each player might be putting up > numbers in entirely > different circumstances. The skill is in being able > to assess whether those > numbers translate under different circumstances and then > paying accordingly. Yeah, agents wouldn't like that at all, nor does the world work like that. The salaries given in the past to comparable players dictate the salaries given in the future--that's the way it is. Specifically, in Rondo's case, I think it's clear that he already worth 10 million a year--and so, as I've explained before, I'd use this extension period in an attempt to get Rondo signed at his 'fair price,' knowing full well that another good season will undoubtedly raise his 'fair price' another couple million or more. Ryan From jlyell at verizon.net Tue Aug 11 17:46:46 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:46:46 -0700 Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: <200908111530.n7BFUbfM006780@ares.afrc.af.mil> References: <200908111144.n7BBiJCA024800@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> <845898.29386.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908111530.n7BFUbfM006780@ares.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: It pretty much came down to Williams was fairly much the same player less 2 knee injuries On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:30 AM, wrote: > Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm amenable to those > terms. > > 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > OR > 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > OR > 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > > Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 season playoff match > Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). > > I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet, but I think that > about covers it. > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On > Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:23 AM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > > > That's a generous offer, Patrick. I'm in. > > Let's define 'kill us' as either the 15 pts or 12 rebs in a Cavs > win, OR a performance instrumental in a Cavs win, such as 10 or more > points in the 4th quarter, or a momentum changing 8 points in the > 3rd quarter. There are some good PFs on the Cavs (Varejao, and JJ > Hickson), and Leon's impact, if there's any, is going to come in > some limited minute stint here or there. He's going to be a > surprise killer, which will make it that much harder to stomach when > it comes out of nowhere. > > Ryan > > --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > wrote: > >> From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil >> Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland >> To: celtics at igtc.com >> Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 6:44 AM >> If you define "kills us" (reasonably) >> I'll gladly buy you beverage of your choice under $40 if he >> does, in fact, do so in the playoffs vs the Cs. It'll have >> to be shippable from the internet however as I'm kind've far >> away. Something like one game of over either 15 pts or 12 >> rebs helping lead to a Cavs win? That sounds like "killing >> us" to me. As Ben Bailey says on Cash Cab: you in? >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com >> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] >> On Behalf Of Ryan W >> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:52 PM >> To: celtics at igtc.com >> Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland >> >> >> From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo >> >> "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with team doctors >> Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal with the Cavs, >> a source told Y! Sports." >> >> >> I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to see Powe make >> his comeback for the Cavs. But you gotta wish him >> well. Great kid. I just hope he doesn't kill us >> in the playoffs. >> >> Ryan >> >> P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with the best of >> them... >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 18:06:24 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <901598.43863.qm@web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Yeah, 2 less knee injuries AND almost zero ability to score around the basket. Williams is a similar rebounder to Powe, and perhaps a better shotblocker, but he pales in comparison to Leon when it comes to scoring down low and getting to the line... Ryan --- On Tue, 8/11/09, John Lyell wrote: > From: John Lyell > Subject: Re: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 12:46 PM > It pretty much came down to Williams > was fairly much the same player less 2 knee injuries > > > > On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:30 AM, > wrote: > > > Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm > amenable to those terms. > > > > 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win during a > playoff series game vs the Cs > > OR > > 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win during a > playoff series game vs the Cs > > OR > > 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during a > playoff series game vs the Cs > > > > Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 season > playoff match Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). > > > > I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet, but > I think that about covers it. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:23 AM > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > w/Cleveland > > > > > > That's a generous offer, Patrick.? I'm in. > > > > Let's define 'kill us' as either the 15 pts or 12 rebs > in a Cavs win, OR a performance instrumental in a Cavs win, > such as 10 or more points in the 4th quarter, or a momentum > changing 8 points in the 3rd quarter.? There are some > good PFs on the Cavs (Varejao, and JJ Hickson), and Leon's > impact, if there's any, is going to come in some limited > minute stint here or there.? He's going to be a > surprise killer, which will make it that much harder to > stomach when it comes out of nowhere. > > > > Ryan > > > > --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > wrote: > > > >> From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > >> Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > w/Cleveland > >> To: celtics at igtc.com > >> Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 6:44 AM > >> If you define "kills us" (reasonably) > >> I'll gladly buy you beverage of your choice under > $40 if he > >> does, in fact, do so in the playoffs vs the Cs. > It'll have > >> to be shippable from the internet however as I'm > kind've far > >> away. Something like one game of over either 15 > pts or 12 > >> rebs helping lead to a Cavs win? That sounds like > "killing > >> us" to me. As Ben Bailey says on Cash Cab: you > in? > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > >> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > >> On Behalf Of Ryan W > >> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:52 PM > >> To: celtics at igtc.com > >> Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > w/Cleveland > >> > >> > >> From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo > >> > >> "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with team > doctors > >> Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal with > the Cavs, > >> a source told Y! Sports." > >> > >> > >> I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to see > Powe make > >> his comeback for the Cavs.? But you gotta > wish him > >> well.? Great kid.? I just hope he > doesn't kill us > >> in the playoffs. > >> > >> Ryan > >> > >> P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with the > best of > >> them... > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From pdelevett at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 18:26:50 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ainge should just go ahead and sign Marbury, and here's why Message-ID: <704135.56582.qm@web110106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> 1) The Davis/Williams signings mean our frontcourt is stacked. Ainge could have used that last big-man spot to sign a 7-footer like Swift or held it open in case Powe came back healthy, but Williams is less of a gamble than either option. He's limited, but 5 rpg in less than 15 mpg isn't too shabby. And with guys like Howard and Shaq between us and the Finals, it was smart of Danny to add beef. 2) With Daniels coming on board, we're also loaded at the swing spots. Heck, Ainge right now has three guys (Tony, Walker and Giddens) who might not get any PT next year but could be serviceable on a number of other teams. 3) That means our only glaring hole (for the third season in a row) is backup PG. True, Danny's probably right that the combo of House and Marquis can get by against most opponents; Daniels brings the ball up, and he and House switch off on defense against the other team's guards. But as I've said before, come playoff time you're going to want a seasoned vet, as insurance if nothing else or as a steadying hand. And as much as I'd be happy to see Hudson turn into something special, counting on a rookie to be clutch deep in the postseason is folly. Even if you sign a guy who rarely plays, you need that veteran option. The alternatives for landing a backup, then, are trying to trade some package of Tony/Scal/Walker/Giddens, or inking one of the few decent vets left on the market. Trading expiring contracts for a guy you really don't need to play many minutes seems dumb; for one thing, if anybody key (God forbid) gets hurt this season, you'll want to have those contracts on hand to trade for a replacement. That leaves basically these options: Anthony Carter, Tyronn Lue, Bobby Jackson, Jacque Vaughn, Tinsley, Jason Williams and Marbury. Maybe toss Jason Hart in there, but I don't know much about his game. The trick is, you don't want somebody here who's going to carp for minutes, but on the other hand, you need somebody who's got enough left to step in if needed (and just maybe, to keep Rondo looking over his shoulder a bit). I expect Carter and Vaughn will go back to their current teams; it's not like Ainge is going to offer AC more than the one-year minimum deal Denver's dangling. Is B-Jax willing to spend most of the season cheerleading? If so, he'd be a nice option, though I don't know if his game is really what we most need (a guy who can run an offense more than a scorer, since we seemingly have plenty of bench firepower). Tinsley seems like too much of a wildcard, and I don't know if either he or Williams would be keen about sitting a lot. That leaves Marbury and Lue. Steph's bigger, has some experience with our system and is more skilled overall. Yes, the YouTube thing scares me, but you know what? If he comes in and is a distraction, you just cut him - same as last season. And you're no worse off than you currently are. Hudson, in this scenario, goes to Europe unless Ainge can figure out a way to unload, say, Giddens or Tony. Though as I said above, I think it makes the most sense to keep Tony's expiring contract for now, unless you're gonna get something really good in exchange for it. That might be the roster spot to sign Bruce Bowen as an emergency wing-stopper who can help in the playoffs against LeBron and Ainge. But again, if I had to choose between a guy like Bowen on our bench or a real-live backup PG, I think the latter is a greater need. I suspect Ainge will wait until after training camp next month to see if Hudson really can play the point, and maybe that's OK; Lue and Marbury might still be on the market then, or might be willing to wait a bit for the chance to latch on with the C's. But I'll be watching nervously until this issue gets resolved. From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 11 18:29:57 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:29:57 -0400 Subject: Ainge should just go ahead and sign Marbury, and here's why In-Reply-To: <704135.56582.qm@web110106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <704135.56582.qm@web110106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908111830.n7BIU0xS024739@artemis.afrc.af.mil> "That might be the roster spot to sign Bruce Bowen as an emergency wing-stopper who can help in the playoffs against LeBron and Ainge." I know, it's a typo, but I LMAO when I saw this. I didn't know we had to guard our GM in the playoffs...actually on second thought, maybe we do... -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Peter Delevett Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 2:27 PM To: celtics at igtc.com Subject: Ainge should just go ahead and sign Marbury, and here's why 1) The Davis/Williams signings mean our frontcourt is stacked. Ainge could have used that last big-man spot to sign a 7-footer like Swift or held it open in case Powe came back healthy, but Williams is less of a gamble than either option. He's limited, but 5 rpg in less than 15 mpg isn't too shabby. And with guys like Howard and Shaq between us and the Finals, it was smart of Danny to add beef. 2) With Daniels coming on board, we're also loaded at the swing spots. Heck, Ainge right now has three guys (Tony, Walker and Giddens) who might not get any PT next year but could be serviceable on a number of other teams. 3) That means our only glaring hole (for the third season in a row) is backup PG. True, Danny's probably right that the combo of House and Marquis can get by against most opponents; Daniels brings the ball up, and he and House switch off on defense against the other team's guards. But as I've said before, come playoff time you're going to want a seasoned vet, as insurance if nothing else or as a steadying hand. And as much as I'd be happy to see Hudson turn into something special, counting on a rookie to be clutch deep in the postseason is folly. Even if you sign a guy who rarely plays, you need that veteran option. The alternatives for landing a backup, then, are trying to trade some package of Tony/Scal/Walker/Giddens, or inking one of the few decent vets left on the market. Trading expiring contracts for a guy you really don't need to play many minutes seems dumb; for one thing, if anybody key (God forbid) gets hurt this season, you'll want to have those contracts on hand to trade for a replacement. That leaves basically these options: Anthony Carter, Tyronn Lue, Bobby Jackson, Jacque Vaughn, Tinsley, Jason Williams and Marbury. Maybe toss Jason Hart in there, but I don't know much about his game. The trick is, you don't want somebody here who's going to carp for minutes, but on the other hand, you need somebody who's got enough left to step in if needed (and just maybe, to keep Rondo looking over his shoulder a bit). I expect Carter and Vaughn will go back to their current teams; it's not like Ainge is going to offer AC more than the one-year minimum deal Denver's dangling. Is B-Jax willing to spend most of the season cheerleading? If so, he'd be a nice option, though I don't know if his game is really what we most need (a guy who can run an offense more than a scorer, since we seemingly have plenty of bench firepower). Tinsley seems like too much of a wildcard, and I don't know if either he or Williams would be keen about sitting a lot. That leaves Marbury and Lue. Steph's bigger, has some experience with our system and is more skilled overall. Yes, the YouTube thing scares me, but you know what? If he comes in and is a distraction, you just cut him - same as last season. And you're no worse off than you currently are. Hudson, in this scenario, goes to Europe unless Ainge can figure out a way to unload, say, Giddens or Tony. Though as I said above, I think it makes the most sense to keep Tony's expiring contract for now, unless you're gonna get something really good in exchange for it. That might be the roster spot to sign Bruce Bowen as an emergency wing-stopper who can help in the playoffs against LeBron and Ainge. But again, if I had to choose between a guy like Bowen on our bench or a real-live backup PG, I think the latter is a greater need. I suspect Ainge will wait until after training camp next month to see if Hudson really can play the point, and maybe that's OK; Lue and Marbury might still be on the market then, or might be willing to wait a bit for the chance to latch on with the C's. But I'll be watching nervously until this issue gets resolved. _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Tue Aug 11 18:37:57 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:37:57 -0400 Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: <901598.43863.qm@web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <901598.43863.qm@web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908111838.n7BIc3T9020517@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> Williams has the same issues as BBD inside - he can't elevate. He's a good position rebounder and uses his bulk well enough, but in the land of trees he's a shrub. Leon's advantage despite being the same height was always explosiveness - he consistently out quicked his opponents and could get up high enough to negate or at least equalize their height advantage. Neither BBD nor Williams have that quickness nor elevation to get the ball up on the glass fast enough (or just dunk it through) to avoid being blocked or even fear of being blocked by bigger 4/5s. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 2:06 PM To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Subject: Re: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland Yeah, 2 less knee injuries AND almost zero ability to score around the basket. Williams is a similar rebounder to Powe, and perhaps a better shotblocker, but he pales in comparison to Leon when it comes to scoring down low and getting to the line... Ryan --- On Tue, 8/11/09, John Lyell wrote: > From: John Lyell > Subject: Re: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 12:46 PM > It pretty much came down to Williams > was fairly much the same player less 2 knee injuries > > > > On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:30 AM, > wrote: > > > Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm > amenable to those terms. > > > > 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win during a > playoff series game vs the Cs > > OR > > 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win during a > playoff series game vs the Cs > > OR > > 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during a > playoff series game vs the Cs > > > > Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 season > playoff match Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). > > > > I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet, but > I think that about covers it. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:23 AM > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > w/Cleveland > > > > > > That's a generous offer, Patrick.? I'm in. > > > > Let's define 'kill us' as either the 15 pts or 12 rebs > in a Cavs win, OR a performance instrumental in a Cavs win, > such as 10 or more points in the 4th quarter, or a momentum > changing 8 points in the 3rd quarter.? There are some > good PFs on the Cavs (Varejao, and JJ Hickson), and Leon's > impact, if there's any, is going to come in some limited > minute stint here or there.? He's going to be a > surprise killer, which will make it that much harder to > stomach when it comes out of nowhere. > > > > Ryan > > > > --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > wrote: > > > >> From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > >> Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > w/Cleveland > >> To: celtics at igtc.com > >> Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 6:44 AM > >> If you define "kills us" (reasonably) > >> I'll gladly buy you beverage of your choice under > $40 if he > >> does, in fact, do so in the playoffs vs the Cs. > It'll have > >> to be shippable from the internet however as I'm > kind've far > >> away. Something like one game of over either 15 > pts or 12 > >> rebs helping lead to a Cavs win? That sounds like > "killing > >> us" to me. As Ben Bailey says on Cash Cab: you > in? > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > >> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > >> On Behalf Of Ryan W > >> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:52 PM > >> To: celtics at igtc.com > >> Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > w/Cleveland > >> > >> > >> From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo > >> > >> "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with team > doctors > >> Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal with > the Cavs, > >> a source told Y! Sports." > >> > >> > >> I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to see > Powe make > >> his comeback for the Cavs.? But you gotta > wish him > >> well.? Great kid.? I just hope he > doesn't kill us > >> in the playoffs. > >> > >> Ryan > >> > >> P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with the > best of > >> them... > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 19:02:16 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: <200908111838.n7BIc3T9020517@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <569900.5355.qm@web65613.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> True, Pat. But it's also safe to say that amongst Williams and Big Baby, Baby is clearly the superior inside player, in terms of inside shooting percentage and overall offensive niftiness, especially in terms of using his left hand or getting to the rim via reverse spin moves, even if it's true that he struggles at times getting his shot off. Also, it appears that he may have lost a bit of weight with a new kickboxing routine. If he can keep it off throughout the season, this new bit of athleticism may help him in the low block. Ryan --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 1:37 PM > Williams has the same issues as BBD > inside - he can't elevate. He's a good position rebounder > and uses his bulk well enough, but in the land of trees he's > a shrub.? Leon's advantage despite being the same > height was always explosiveness - he consistently out > quicked his opponents and could get up high enough to negate > or at least equalize their height advantage. Neither BBD nor > Williams have that quickness nor elevation to get the ball > up on the glass fast enough (or just dunk it through) to > avoid being blocked or even fear of being blocked by bigger > 4/5s. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > On Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 2:06 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > > > Yeah, 2 less knee injuries AND almost zero ability to score > around the basket.? Williams is a similar rebounder to > Powe, and perhaps a better shotblocker, but he pales in > comparison to Leon when it comes to scoring down low and > getting to the line... > > Ryan > > --- On Tue, 8/11/09, John Lyell > wrote: > > > From: John Lyell > > Subject: Re: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > w/Cleveland > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 12:46 PM > > It pretty much came down to Williams > > was fairly much the same player less 2 knee injuries > > > > > > > > On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:30 AM, > > wrote: > > > > > Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm > > amenable to those terms. > > > > > > 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win > during a > > playoff series game vs the Cs > > > OR > > > 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win > during a > > playoff series game vs the Cs > > > OR > > > 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during > a > > playoff series game vs the Cs > > > > > > Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 > season > > playoff match Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). > > > > > > I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the > internet, but > > I think that about covers it. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > > On Behalf Of Ryan W > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:23 AM > > > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > > > Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > > w/Cleveland > > > > > > > > > That's a generous offer, Patrick.? I'm in. > > > > > > Let's define 'kill us' as either the 15 pts or 12 > rebs > > in a Cavs win, OR a performance instrumental in a Cavs > win, > > such as 10 or more points in the 4th quarter, or a > momentum > > changing 8 points in the 3rd quarter.? There are > some > > good PFs on the Cavs (Varejao, and JJ Hickson), and > Leon's > > impact, if there's any, is going to come in some > limited > > minute stint here or there.? He's going to be a > > surprise killer, which will make it that much harder > to > > stomach when it comes out of nowhere. > > > > > > Ryan > > > > > > --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil > > > > >> Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year > Deal > > w/Cleveland > > >> To: celtics at igtc.com > > >> Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 6:44 AM > > >> If you define "kills us" (reasonably) > > >> I'll gladly buy you beverage of your choice > under > > $40 if he > > >> does, in fact, do so in the playoffs vs the > Cs. > > It'll have > > >> to be shippable from the internet however as > I'm > > kind've far > > >> away. Something like one game of over either > 15 > > pts or 12 > > >> rebs helping lead to a Cavs win? That sounds > like > > "killing > > >> us" to me. As Ben Bailey says on Cash Cab: > you > > in? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com > > >> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] > > >> On Behalf Of Ryan W > > >> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:52 PM > > >> To: celtics at igtc.com > > >> Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal > > w/Cleveland > > >> > > >> > > >> From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo > > >> > > >> "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with > team > > doctors > > >> Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal > with > > the Cavs, > > >> a source told Y! Sports." > > >> > > >> > > >> I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to > see > > Powe make > > >> his comeback for the Cavs.? But you gotta > > wish him > > >> well.? Great kid.? I just hope he > > doesn't kill us > > >> in the playoffs. > > >> > > >> Ryan > > >> > > >> P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with > the > > best of > > >> them... > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> 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 > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From jlyell at verizon.net Tue Aug 11 19:31:01 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:31:01 -0700 Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: <200908111838.n7BIc3T9020517@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> References: <901598.43863.qm@web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908111838.n7BIc3T9020517@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <198B05BC-506C-43A2-BE11-2E4F45EEB078@verizon.net> Will leon coming off a second surgery? Evidently a gamble the cav's are willing to take that the c's were not Did people say the same thing about Ben Wallace when he was released, before he was was given the opportunity? We don't need a lot of scoring, just physical inside play and rebounding On Aug 11, 2009, at 11:37 AM, wrote: > Williams has the same issues as BBD inside - he can't elevate. He's > a good position rebounder and uses his bulk well enough, but in the > land of trees he's a shrub. Leon's advantage despite being the same > height was always explosiveness - he consistently out quicked his > opponents and could get up high enough to negate or at least > equalize their height advantage. Neither BBD nor Williams have that > quickness nor elevation to get the ball up on the glass fast enough > (or just dunk it through) to avoid being blocked or even fear of > being blocked by bigger 4/5s. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On > Behalf Of Ryan W > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 2:06 PM > To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List > Subject: Re: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland > > > Yeah, 2 less knee injuries AND almost zero ability to score around > the basket. Williams is a similar rebounder to Powe, and perhaps a > better shotblocker, but he pales in comparison to Leon when it comes > to scoring down low and getting to the line... > > Ryan > > --- On Tue, 8/11/09, John Lyell wrote: > >> From: John Lyell >> Subject: Re: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland >> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" >> Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 12:46 PM >> It pretty much came down to Williams >> was fairly much the same player less 2 knee injuries >> >> >> >> On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:30 AM, >> wrote: >> >>> Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm >> amenable to those terms. >>> >>> 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win during a >> playoff series game vs the Cs >>> OR >>> 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win during a >> playoff series game vs the Cs >>> OR >>> 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during a >> playoff series game vs the Cs >>> >>> Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 season >> playoff match Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). >>> >>> I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet, but >> I think that about covers it. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com >> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] >> On Behalf Of Ryan W >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:23 AM >>> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List >>> Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal >> w/Cleveland >>> >>> >>> That's a generous offer, Patrick. I'm in. >>> >>> Let's define 'kill us' as either the 15 pts or 12 rebs >> in a Cavs win, OR a performance instrumental in a Cavs win, >> such as 10 or more points in the 4th quarter, or a momentum >> changing 8 points in the 3rd quarter. There are some >> good PFs on the Cavs (Varejao, and JJ Hickson), and Leon's >> impact, if there's any, is going to come in some limited >> minute stint here or there. He's going to be a >> surprise killer, which will make it that much harder to >> stomach when it comes out of nowhere. >>> >>> Ryan >>> >>> --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil >> >> wrote: >>> >>>> From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil >> >>>> Subject: RE: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal >> w/Cleveland >>>> To: celtics at igtc.com >>>> Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 6:44 AM >>>> If you define "kills us" (reasonably) >>>> I'll gladly buy you beverage of your choice under >> $40 if he >>>> does, in fact, do so in the playoffs vs the Cs. >> It'll have >>>> to be shippable from the internet however as I'm >> kind've far >>>> away. Something like one game of over either 15 >> pts or 12 >>>> rebs helping lead to a Cavs win? That sounds like >> "killing >>>> us" to me. As Ben Bailey says on Cash Cab: you >> in? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com >>>> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] >>>> On Behalf Of Ryan W >>>> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:52 PM >>>> To: celtics at igtc.com >>>> Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal >> w/Cleveland >>>> >>>> >>>> From: http://twitter.com/SpearsNBAyahoo >>>> >>>> "If Leon Powe's rehabbing knee is OK with team >> doctors >>>> Tuesday in Cleve, he will sign a 2-year deal with >> the Cavs, >>>> a source told Y! Sports." >>>> >>>> >>>> I ain't gonna lie--it's going to be hard to see >> Powe make >>>> his comeback for the Cavs. But you gotta >> wish him >>>> well. Great kid. I just hope he >> doesn't kill us >>>> in the playoffs. >>>> >>>> Ryan >>>> >>>> P.S. Looks like Marc Spears can scoop it with the >> best of >>>> them... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From pdelevett at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 20:28:50 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 13:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: WHOOPS Message-ID: <318902.18826.qm@web110106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I mean, "who can help in the playoffs against LeBron and KOBE." Man, wonder what that particular Freudian slip means ... From pmm at igtc.com Wed Aug 12 03:27:34 2009 From: pmm at igtc.com (Paul M Moriarty) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:27:34 -0700 Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: <200908111530.n7BFUbfM006780@ares.afrc.af.mil> References: <200908111144.n7BBiJCA024800@poseidon.afrc.af.mil> <845898.29386.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <200908111530.n7BFUbfM006780@ares.afrc.af.mil> Message-ID: <970FAE95-6327-408D-B199-3A086AD6B9FF@igtc.com> On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:30 AM, wrote: > Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm amenable to those > terms. > > 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > OR > 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > OR > 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > > Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 season playoff match > Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). > > I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet, but I think that > about covers it. > Please send the drinks to me and I will hold them until such time as the outcome is determined. Or until I have to go to the bathroom. Whichever comes first. ;) - Paul - From Douglas342 at aol.com Wed Aug 12 04:46:47 2009 From: Douglas342 at aol.com (Douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:46:47 EDT Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland Message-ID: And inasmuch as I am a law school graduate (Northeastern '76) and member of the Massachusetts and California Bars, I'll take my percentage up front, please. n a message dated 8/11/2009 8:28:20 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, pmm at igtc.com writes: On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:30 AM, wrote: > Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm amenable to those > terms. > > 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > OR > 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > OR > 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > > Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 season playoff match > Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). > > I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet, but I think that > about covers it. > Please send the drinks to me and I will hold them until such time as the outcome is determined. Or until I have to go to the bathroom. Whichever comes first. ;) - Paul - _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Wed Aug 12 10:42:03 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 06:42:03 -0400 Subject: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200908121042.n7CAg4JS000780@ares.afrc.af.mil> I'm a member of many Utah bars; or at least was when I lived there and membership was required to imbibe alcohol. Oh, you meant the Bar Association...sorry, I am obviously easily distracted. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Douglas342 at aol.com Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 12:47 AM To: celtics at igtc.com Subject: Re: Powe Close to Signing 2-year Deal w/Cleveland And inasmuch as I am a law school graduate (Northeastern '76) and member of the Massachusetts and California Bars, I'll take my percentage up front, please. n a message dated 8/11/2009 8:28:20 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, pmm at igtc.com writes: On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:30 AM, wrote: > Okay - I guess everyone here is a witness. I'm amenable to those > terms. > > 15 pts OR 10 rebs in a single game Cavs win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > OR > 10 pts in a single fourth qtr of a CAVS win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > OR > 8pts in a single 3rd quarter of a CAVs win during a playoff series > game vs the Cs > > Any of which must take place in a 2009-2010 season playoff match > Celtics vs Cavs (if it occurs). > > I aint a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet, but I think that > about covers it. > Please send the drinks to me and I will hold them until such time as the outcome is determined. Or until I have to go to the bathroom. Whichever comes first. ;) - Paul - _______________________________________________ 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 From jahillsr at comcast.net Wed Aug 12 15:27:45 2009 From: jahillsr at comcast.net (jahillsr at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:27:45 +0000 Subject: Pitino in the news Message-ID: <943009590-1250090865-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-2095759309-@bxe1146.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Not exactly what he would want to be talked about I would think. Story of a blackmail attempt against him by an equipment manger and his wife at Louisville in the NY papers. Sorry I don't have a link. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry From BDodgers at aol.com Wed Aug 12 16:11:21 2009 From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:11:21 EDT Subject: McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV analyst job Message-ID: Charley Walters: Former Minnesota Timberwolves coach Kevin McHale won't comment on his successor Kurt Rambis Pioneer Press Kevin McHale is out of the basketball business for now, he said Tuesday, so he's offering no opinion on the hiring of his Timberwolves coaching successor and former Los Angeles Lakers playing rival, Kurt Rambis. "I'm just 'Joe Citizen' now," McHale said. "I don't want to comment." McHale also shunned comment about a 1 percent ownership in the Timberwolves that owner Glen Taylor has been said to offer him as a severance deal. That would have a value of approximately $3 million. McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV analyst job. A month ago, word was that he and Charles Barkley would team up on TNT for the coming season. "We'll see," he said. From wayoftheray at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 17:00:19 2009 From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? Message-ID: <971443.4469.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Ol' Danny Age ran a team, E I E I O. And on this team he needed another point guard, E I E I O... So, what will Gramp's final Celtics roster shakedown to? Bear in mind, the following things: - Ainge has sought to acquire Robert Swift for the last four years. Hard to believe Ainge can't squeeze out the final roster spot for Swifty. - Marbury is still around... and on the Internet daily. Hey. - Ainge has already said there was room for only one of the Giddens - Walker duo. - Tony Allen, Dead Man Walking, will they just buy out his contract? - And this is Ainge, so shouldn't we expect a trade between now and the season opener? And thus the final roster begat may be... 1ST UNIT C- Whiny Wallace PF - Kevin Foulmouth SF - "Snake Eyes" Pierce SG - "Please Give Me An Extension" Allen PG - Inhabiting The Rondoverse 2ND UNIT C - Snap, Crackle & Pop PF - Big Tweeter Davis SF - Quisy Daniels SG - Knife Safety Giddens PG - House Foreclosed 3RD UNIT C - Bob, The Deliverance Boy PF - Giant Forehead SF - The Redhead, or Walker, Knees Like A Texas Ranger SG - Dirty Bowen or Tony Death Watch PG - Melted Chocolate or Skip To The Lue or Lester, Life On The Street or Arroyo Con Beans From wayoftheray at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 17:30:18 2009 From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Celtics Having Discussions With Allen Iverson Message-ID: <668790.14332.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> So quoteth the Hume-Man: http://twitter.com/MatthewDHume The Celtics and Patriots Remain Mum While Interacting With Allen Iverson & Michael Vick! DJ, Moss, Dillon and Savard All Worked Just Fine!! From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil Wed Aug 12 17:39:19 2009 From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:39:19 -0400 Subject: Celtics Having Discussions With Allen Iverson In-Reply-To: <668790.14332.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <668790.14332.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200908121739.n7CHdL8E008868@apollo.afrc.af.mil> I'm going to sound eerily similar to my response re: Marbury, but - takes/needs too many shots, doesn't defend. He's Eddie House Redux in that he has to have a BIG PG on the floor with him to defend the 2 guards and he is not a PG himself. Five years ago this was a no brainer, today forget it - please. -----Original Message----- From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 1:30 PM To: Celtics Stuff; Celtics Are Idiots List Subject: Celtics Having Discussions With Allen Iverson So quoteth the Hume-Man: http://twitter.com/MatthewDHume The Celtics and Patriots Remain Mum While Interacting With Allen Iverson & Michael Vick! DJ, Moss, Dillon and Savard All Worked Just Fine!! _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 17:39:29 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:39:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? In-Reply-To: <971443.4469.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <827708.65494.qm@web65614.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 8/12/09, Way Of The Ray wrote: > > Bear in mind, the following things: > > - Ainge has sought to acquire Robert Swift for the last > four years. Hard > to believe Ainge can't squeeze out the final roster spot > for Swifty. Bear in mind that we have 3 centers already on the roster (Perk/Wallace/Baby), and two other guys, KG and Williams, who can fill it at the 5 in a pinch. There's no need for Swift--he would have been signed over Williams if Ainge wanted him. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Swift is invited to camp, but I would be surprised if he made the cut--unless a trade involving Scal happens... > > - Marbury is still around... and on the Internet daily. > Hey. Ainge hasn't closed the door on Marbury/Hudson yet--I'd bet one of those get that last spot. > > - Ainge has already said there was room for only one of the > Giddens - Walker duo. Nope--incorrect. What Ainge said is that they're both competing for the same role--one will get that role, the other might go back to the D-League. Regardless, both will be on the team. > > - Tony Allen, Dead Man Walking, will they just buy out his > contract? Pure stupidity and something Ainge hasn't even contemplated. Remember all the cut Scal talk last year? Same situation, only that TA has value both as an expiring contract to dangle at the trading deadline and he has also has value as injury insurance for Ray/Paul/House/Daniels. TA will start the season as the 10th man. > > - And this is Ainge, so shouldn't we expect a trade between > now and the season opener? No; I'm sure he'll be looking and unless he needs to clear a roster spot to sign someone else, I doubt he forces his hand. The market is pretty closed at this time, but it'll open up again between December and February. If a trade happens, that's when I'd look for it to occur. > > And thus the final roster begat may be... > Perk KG Paul Ray Rondo Wallace Daniels Baby House TA Scal Walker Williams Giddens Hudson Ryan From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 17:42:17 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:42:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Celtics Having Discussions With Allen Iverson In-Reply-To: <668790.14332.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <587905.17092.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Yeah, I saw that too, Ray. Ainge is crazy enough (like a fox) to at least have discussions with AI--especially if he can get him at the minimum. If he did get him, you can expect House to get traded (and we should be able to get some value for him)... I'd put the odds of Allen Iverson in green being about 1 in 20. Ryan --- On Wed, 8/12/09, Way Of The Ray wrote: > From: Way Of The Ray > Subject: Celtics Having Discussions With Allen Iverson > To: "Celtics Stuff" , "Celtics Are Idiots List" > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 12:30 PM > So quoteth the Hume-Man: > > http://twitter.com/MatthewDHume > > The Celtics and Patriots Remain Mum While Interacting With > Allen Iverson & Michael Vick! DJ, Moss, Dillon and > Savard All Worked Just Fine!! > > > ? ? ? > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From BDodgers at aol.com Wed Aug 12 18:13:59 2009 From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:13:59 EDT Subject: Hornets get 2nd-round pick in return Message-ID: Hornets get 2nd-round pick in return By Marc Stein ESPN.com The _New Orleans Hornets_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=nor) , in a move to shed some payroll after the recent acquisition of _Emeka Okafor_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=2399) , have agreed to trade swingman _Rasual Butler_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=1767) to the _Los Angeles Clippers_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=lac) for a future second-round pick, according to NBA front-office sources. The trade is expected to be announced later Wednesday. Butler is scheduled to earn $3.9 million next season. With the Clippers looking for an extra shooter and depth at both shooting guard and small forward, sources said the team was amenable to absorbing the final year of Butler's contract, which will save New Orleans nearly $8 million when factoring in the luxury-tax implications. Marc Stein is a senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. From douglas342 at aol.com Wed Aug 12 18:51:26 2009 From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:51:26 -0400 Subject: McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV analyst job In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CBE99507F1F78B-16C-F82@WEBMAIL-DZ07.sysops.aol.com> Rambis is a regular on several of the sportstalk stations here in LA. He seems like a very pleasant and funny guy. I wish him well in Minnesota. -----Original Message----- From: BDodgers at aol.com To: celtics at igtc.com; Celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, Aug 12, 2009 9:11 am Subject: McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV analyst job Charley Walters: Former Minnesota Timberwolves coach Kevin McHale won't comment on his successor Kurt Rambis Pioneer Press Kevin McHale is out of the basketball business for now, he said Tuesday, so he's offering no opinion on the hiring of his Timberwolves coaching successor and former Los Angeles Lakers playing rival, Kurt Rambis. "I'm just 'Joe Citizen' now," McHale said. "I don't want to comment." McHale also shunned comment about a 1 percent ownership in the Timberwolves that owner Glen Taylor has been said to offer him as a severance deal. That would have a value of approximately $3 million. McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV analyst job. A month ago, word was that he and Charles Barkley would team up on TNT for the coming season. "We'll see," he said. _______________________________________________ The Boston Celtics Mailing List celtics at igtc.com http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics From wayoftheray at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 21:28:44 2009 From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:28:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The Door Message-ID: <503283.59934.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> "Pitino should know that there are times to drive hard to the hole, and there are times to pull-up and take the outside shot." Bankshot1 You would think, Pitino would have had his own brand of condoms, as large as his ego. LOL. Ray __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From capomycap at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 21:39:12 2009 From: capomycap at gmail.com (George Meyer) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:39:12 -0700 Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? In-Reply-To: <827708.65494.qm@web65614.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <971443.4469.qm@web110101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <827708.65494.qm@web65614.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <253b689a0908121439o3335ea0h793326308dfa7d09@mail.gmail.com> "Pure stupidity and something Ainge hasn't even contemplated. Remember all the cut Scal talk last year? Same situation, only that TA has value both as an expiring contract to dangle at the trading deadline and he has also has value as injury insurance for Ray/Paul/House/Daniels. TA will start the season as the 10th man." The key difference is that Scal didn't embarrass the franchise by drawing death threats from a drug dealer during the playoffs. It's hard to see Wyc allowing TA to remain when he stripped Bassy of his locker room nameplate for far lesser mideeds. My guess, be it "pure stupidity" or not, is that if TA is still on the roster at the start of the season he'll be put in cold-storage as the 13th man until he can be moved. There aren't any luxury tax savings when you outright cut a guy, are there? There's a Comcast Sports Tonight clip from earlier this summer (which I can't figure out how to directly link to) with Wyc where Mark Spears predicts that Bill Walker will back up Pierce, and when Holley presses him if that means he'll take Tony Allen's minutes, Spears repeats that Walker will be the one backing up Pierce, and Wyc appears to nod. If anyone can find it on the website, it happens around minute 3:45. (you can find it by going to http://www.csnne.com/videocsn/all-videos/ , clicking on "Celtics" on the side panel, then clicking forward to 28-36, and it's the one titled "Celtics Now Panel - Offseason Moves") and WOTR, phenomenal work as always. From jlyell at verizon.net Wed Aug 12 21:40:34 2009 From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:40:34 -0700 Subject: McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV analyst job In-Reply-To: <8CBE99507F1F78B-16C-F82@WEBMAIL-DZ07.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CBE99507F1F78B-16C-F82@WEBMAIL-DZ07.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <688025FF-ACD1-47D6-8906-3D9AD4A8D872@verizon.net> Kevin mchale isn't walking through that door;) Sent from my iPhone On Aug 12, 2009, at 11:51 AM, douglas342 at aol.com wrote: > Rambis is a regular on several of the sportstalk stations here in > LA. He seems like a very pleasant and funny guy. I wish him well > in Minnesota. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: BDodgers at aol.com > To: celtics at igtc.com; Celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wed, Aug 12, 2009 9:11 am > Subject: McHale did say he has been talking with several networks > about a TV analyst job > > > > > Charley Walters: Former Minnesota Timberwolves coach Kevin McHale > won't > comment on his successor Kurt Rambis > Pioneer Press > > > > Kevin McHale is out of the basketball business for now, he said > Tuesday, > so he's offering no opinion on the hiring of his Timberwolves > coaching > successor and former Los Angeles Lakers playing rival, Kurt Rambis. > > "I'm just 'Joe Citizen' now," McHale said. "I don't want to comment." > McHale also shunned comment about a 1 percent ownership in the > Timberwolves > that owner Glen Taylor has been said to offer him as a severance deal. > That would have a value of approximately $3 million. > McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV > analyst > job. A month ago, word was that he and Charles Barkley would team up > on > TNT for the coming season. > "We'll see," he said. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From capomycap at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 21:55:54 2009 From: capomycap at gmail.com (George Meyer) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:55:54 -0700 Subject: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The Door In-Reply-To: <503283.59934.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <503283.59934.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <253b689a0908121455p1cccb7cbr2dcec37ed399a817@mail.gmail.com> at least this abortion wasn't paid for by Celtics season ticket holders On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Way Of The Ray wrote: > "Pitino should know that there are times to drive hard to the hole, and > there are times to pull-up and take the outside shot." > Bankshot1 > > You would think, Pitino would have had his own brand of condoms, as large > as his ego. LOL. > > Ray > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 22:22:13 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908121439o3335ea0h793326308dfa7d09@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <683224.99051.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 8/12/09, George Meyer wrote: > From: George Meyer > Subject: Re: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 4:39 PM > "Pure stupidity and something Ainge > hasn't even contemplated.? Remember all > the cut Scal talk last year?? Same situation, only > that TA has value both as > an expiring contract to dangle at the trading deadline and > he has also has > value as injury insurance for Ray/Paul/House/Daniels.? > TA will start the > season as the 10th man." > > The key difference is that Scal didn't embarrass the > franchise by drawing > death threats from a drug dealer during the playoffs. It's > hard to see Wyc > allowing TA to remain when he stripped Bassy of his locker > room nameplate > for far lesser mideeds. My guess, be it "pure stupidity" or > not, is that if > TA is still on the roster at the start of the season he'll > be put in > cold-storage as the 13th man until he can be moved. There > aren't any luxury > tax savings when you outright cut a guy, are there? Let's not blame the victim here, George. Last time I checked, you're not at fault for *being* the object of death threats. The Bassy situation was a little different--he broke the law. That's the bigger, not lesser misdeed. We'll see about TA--Giddens needs to beat him out, and based off what I saw in SL, Giddens doesn't have it yet. TA is capable in a pinch as 10th man, and he's good injury insurance. Throughout it all, TA's always been a team player and I doubt he'll pout. Even in the Bassy situation which you referenced, he wasn't cut outright--that's just not the way the Cs operate. They'll never buyout--it only makes sense in limited instances. And, no, there are no luxury tax savings from buying someone out... > There's a Comcast Sports Tonight clip from earlier this > summer (which I > can't figure out how to directly link to) with Wyc where > Mark Spears > predicts that Bill Walker will back up Pierce, and when > Holley presses him > if that means he'll take Tony Allen's minutes, Spears > repeats that Walker > will be the one backing up Pierce, and Wyc appears to nod. > If anyone can > find it on the website, it happens around minute 3:45. > > (you can find it by going to http://www.csnne.com/videocsn/all-videos/ > , > clicking on "Celtics" on the side panel, then clicking > forward to 28-36, and > it's the one titled "Celtics Now Panel - Offseason Moves") Doc has never liked TA at small forward--even though that's the best fit for his skills. I wouldn't doubt that Daniels will be Paul's primary backup, with Walker getting any minutes that are left over at small forward. I called TA 10th man material because I foresee he'll be the backup, backup 2-guard, behind House. However, if they go to a full bench lineup at certain points in the game (and they are much much more able to go to such a lineup this season), I foresee TA being out there at the 2-guard, with House/Daniels/Baby/Sheed, with TA/Daniels doing the bulk of the ball-handling. As the backup to the backup at the 2-guard, TA's obviously not going to get much playing time and it's pretty clear the Cs are looking to move him. It's also pretty clear that NOBODY wants him--so the Cs (and specifically Doc) will continue to put their best players out there in the meantime, and that means TA as 10th man. Giddens will be given every opportunity to beat out TA in training camp--I just don't think he has the game or experience to do it. TA's no slouch, he's just been caught in a bad situation the past 2 seasons. Ryan From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 22:23:20 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The Door In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908121455p1cccb7cbr2dcec37ed399a817@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <101069.42535.qm@web65611.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Actually, I think it was, only it was a partial abortion and it lasted 3 and half seasons and ruined Antoine Walker in the process. --- On Wed, 8/12/09, George Meyer wrote: > From: George Meyer > Subject: Re: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The Door > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 4:55 PM > at least this abortion wasn't paid > for by Celtics season ticket holders > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Way Of The Ray wrote: > > > "Pitino should know that there are times to drive hard > to the hole, and > > there are times to pull-up and take the outside > shot." > >? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? > ? Bankshot1 > > > > You would think, Pitino would have had his own brand > of condoms, as large > > as his ego. LOL. > > > > Ray > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam?? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 22:31:04 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:31:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The Door In-Reply-To: <101069.42535.qm@web65611.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <608335.81770.qm@web65613.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Err...can't read...forget about it :( --- On Wed, 8/12/09, Ryan W wrote: > From: Ryan W > Subject: Re: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The Door > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 5:23 PM > Actually, I think it was, only it was > a partial abortion and it lasted 3 and half seasons and > ruined Antoine Walker in the process. > > --- On Wed, 8/12/09, George Meyer > wrote: > > > From: George Meyer > > Subject: Re: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The > Door > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 4:55 PM > > at least this abortion wasn't paid > > for by Celtics season ticket holders > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Way Of The Ray wrote: > > > > > "Pitino should know that there are times to drive > hard > > to the hole, and > > > there are times to pull-up and take the outside > > shot." > > >? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? > > ? Bankshot1 > > > > > > You would think, Pitino would have had his own > brand > > of condoms, as large > > > as his ego. LOL. > > > > > > Ray > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Tired of spam?? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > protection around > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > ? ? ? > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From douglas342 at aol.com Wed Aug 12 22:30:58 2009 From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:30:58 -0400 Subject: McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV analyst job In-Reply-To: <688025FF-ACD1-47D6-8906-3D9AD4A8D872@verizon.net> References: <8CBE99507F1F78B-16C-F82@WEBMAIL-DZ07.sysops.aol.com> <688025FF-ACD1-47D6-8906-3D9AD4A8D872@verizon.net> Message-ID: <8CBE9B3B3190E16-890-642@mblk-d17.sysops.aol.com> No kidding! I think it's a good deal for Rambis. Cut your teeth in a small market, learn all the details of coaching, maybe lift the team's spirits a bit, and pretty soon you get a permanent seat on the merry-go-round that is NBA coaching. -----Original Message----- From: John Lyell To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Cc: celtics at igtc.com Sent: Wed, Aug 12, 2009 2:40 pm Subject: Re: McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV analyst job Kevin mchale isn't walking through that door;)? ? Sent from my iPhone? ? On Aug 12, 2009, at 11:51 AM, douglas342 at aol.com wrote:? ? > Rambis is a regular on several of the sportstalk stations here in > LA. He seems like a very pleasant and funny guy. I wish him well > in Minnesota.? >? >? > -----Original Message-----? > From: BDodgers at aol.com? > To: celtics at igtc.com; Celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com? > Sent: Wed, Aug 12, 2009 9:11 am? > Subject: McHale did say he has been talking with several networks > about a TV analyst job? >? >? >? >? > Charley Walters: Former Minnesota Timberwolves coach Kevin McHale > won't? > comment on his successor Kurt Rambis? > Pioneer Press? >? >? >? > Kevin McHale is out of the basketball business for now, he said > Tuesday,? > so20he's offering no opinion on the hiring of his Timberwolves > coaching? > successor and former Los Angeles Lakers playing rival, Kurt Rambis.? >? > "I'm just 'Joe Citizen' now," McHale said. "I don't want to comment."? > McHale also shunned comment about a 1 percent ownership in the > Timberwolves? > that owner Glen Taylor has been said to offer him as a severance deal.? > That would have a value of approximately $3 million.? > McHale did say he has been talking with several networks about a TV > analyst? > job. A month ago, word was that he and Charles Barkley would team up > on? > TNT for the coming season.? > "We'll see," he said.? >? > _______________________________________________? > 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? ? _______________________________________________? The Boston Celtics Mailing List? celtics at igtc.com? http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics? From douglas342 at aol.com Wed Aug 12 22:31:27 2009 From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:31:27 -0400 Subject: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The Door In-Reply-To: <253b689a0908121455p1cccb7cbr2dcec37ed399a817@mail.gmail.com> References: <503283.59934.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <253b689a0908121455p1cccb7cbr2dcec37ed399a817@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CBE9B3C4430D9E-890-64A@mblk-d17.sysops.aol.com> POST OF THE YEAR!!!! Still LMAO! Bravo! -----Original Message----- From: George Meyer To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Sent: Wed, Aug 12, 2009 2:55 pm Subject: Re: That Foetus Isn't Walking Through The Door at least this abortion wasn't paid for by Celtics season ticket holders On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Way Of The Ray wrote: > "Pitino should know that there are times to drive hard to the hole, and > there are times to pull-up and take the outside shot." > Bankshot1 > > You would think, Pitino would have had his own brand of condoms, as large > as his ego. LOL. > > Ray > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From kmalo17 at verizon.net Wed Aug 12 22:57:57 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:57:57 -0400 Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? In-Reply-To: <683224.99051.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <253b689a0908121439o3335ea0h793326308dfa7d09@mail.gmail.com> <683224.99051.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0KOA008L5D5U59V2@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> At 06:22 PM 8/12/2009, Ryan W wrote: >--- On Wed, 8/12/09, George Meyer wrote: > > > From: George Meyer > > Subject: Re: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 4:39 PM > > "Pure stupidity and something Ainge > > hasn't even contemplated. Remember all > > the cut Scal talk last year? Same situation, only > > that TA has value both as > > an expiring contract to dangle at the trading deadline ...There > > aren't any luxury > > tax savings when you outright cut a guy, are there? > >And, no, there are no luxury tax savings from buying someone out... Actually you're both wrong and right. He asked about just cutting someone, which is different. You're right that there's no relief then *unless* another team picks him up off waivers, which means they acquire the contract. Buyout is a different matter though (don't have to buyout to cut) and is usually for less than the original contract amount, with both the cap hit and luxury tax him adjusted accordingly. Oh and the idea of dangling Tony as a desirable expiring contract is kind of ridiculous. He only makes 2.5MM. More than he's worth but not enough that teams will be leaping eagerly for the bait. As part of a larger deal to encourage someone to take him, sure you can push it as a factor. But as something with much value on its own? Er, that would be no. The whole every expiring contract is a huge asset thing is waaaaay overrated. Not as many of them get moved as people seem to think, including the big ones that clear enough space to be worthwhile.. Kim From pdelevett at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 23:09:02 2009 From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:09:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Butler trade Message-ID: <111219.78362.qm@web110106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Interesting. Butler was a guy I was interested in before the C's agreed to add Daniels. He's kind of a poor-man's Posey - good length, good shooter, middling defender from what I've read. (If I were New Orleans and had just added a low-post scorer, I might want to keep a shooter like Butler around so take advantage of double-teams, but maybe that's just me.) Could the Clips do this deal 'cause they were under the cap? >>The New Orleans Hornets, in a move to shed some payroll after the recent acquisition of Emeka Okafor, have agreed to trade swingman Rasual Butler to the _Los Angeles Clippers for a future second-round pick. From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 23:12:05 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:12:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? In-Reply-To: <0KOA008L5D5U59V2@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <942889.29547.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> thanks for the clarification, Kim. TA's value as an expiring contract (2.5 million) is in concert with all the other little expirings on this team--House (2.8 million), Scal (3.5 million), Giddens (.9 million), which total almost 10 million overall. Expirings do tend to be overrated, but with all the expirings we have, we have a lot of flexibility in terms of matching salary. I expect Ainge to horde the expirings until he needs to use them--perhaps if we suffer an injury he'll be able to strike out and get a replacement. I also think we're going to see the trade market for expirings heat up around Jan/Feb, when certain teams start to fall out of the playoff race and decide to fatten their bottom line. Ryan --- On Wed, 8/12/09, Kim Malo wrote: > From: Kim Malo > Subject: Re: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" , "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 5:57 PM > At 06:22 PM 8/12/2009, Ryan W wrote: > > > --- On Wed, 8/12/09, George Meyer > wrote: > > > > > From: George Meyer > > > Subject: Re: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final > Celtics Roster? > > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > > > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 4:39 PM > > > "Pure stupidity and something Ainge > > > hasn't even contemplated.? Remember all > > > the cut Scal talk last year?? Same > situation, only > > > that TA has value both as > > > an expiring contract to dangle at the trading > deadline ...There > > > aren't any luxury > > > tax savings when you outright cut a guy, are > there? > > > > And, no, there are no luxury tax savings from buying > someone out... > > Actually you're both wrong and right. He asked about just > cutting someone, which is different. You're right that > there's no relief then *unless* another team picks him up > off waivers, which means they acquire the contract. Buyout > is a different matter though (don't have to buyout to cut) > and is usually for less than the original contract amount, > with both the cap hit and luxury tax him adjusted > accordingly. > > Oh and the idea of dangling Tony as a desirable expiring > contract is kind of ridiculous. He only makes 2.5MM. More > than he's worth but not enough that teams will be leaping > eagerly for the bait. As part of a larger deal to encourage > someone to take him, sure you can push it as a factor. But > as something with much value on its own? Er, that would be > no. The whole every expiring contract is a huge asset thing > is waaaaay overrated. Not as many of them get moved as > people seem to think, including the big ones that clear > enough space to be worthwhile.. > Kim > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 23:13:16 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Butler trade In-Reply-To: <111219.78362.qm@web110106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <846451.56697.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Yep, that deal was a pure salary dump. The Clips, being under the cap, were able to absorb all of Butler's incoming salary without having to send back a similar amount of salary. Ryan --- On Wed, 8/12/09, Peter Delevett wrote: > From: Peter Delevett > Subject: Butler trade > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 6:09 PM > Interesting. Butler was a guy I was > interested in before the C's agreed to add Daniels. He's > kind of a poor-man's Posey - good length, good shooter, > middling defender from what I've read. (If I were New > Orleans and had just added a low-post scorer, I might want > to keep a shooter like Butler around so take advantage of > double-teams, but maybe that's just me.) > > Could the Clips do this deal 'cause they were under the > cap? > > >>The New? Orleans Hornets, in a move to shed > some payroll after the recent? acquisition of Emeka > Okafor, have agreed to trade swingman Rasual Butler to the > _Los? Angeles Clippers for a future second-round pick. > > > ? ? ? > > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From Douglas342 at aol.com Wed Aug 12 23:24:52 2009 From: Douglas342 at aol.com (Douglas342 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:24:52 EDT Subject: Butler trade Message-ID: In a message dated 8/12/2009 4:13:58 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com writes: Yep, that deal was a pure salary dump. The Clips, being under the cap, were able to absorb all of Butler's incoming salary without having to send back a similar amount of salary. NO! It's Donald Sterling on his stealth plan to make the Clippers contenders! **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=115&bcd =JulystepsfooterNO115) From kmalo17 at verizon.net Wed Aug 12 23:35:41 2009 From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:35:41 -0400 Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? In-Reply-To: <942889.29547.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <0KOA008L5D5U59V2@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> <942889.29547.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0KOA00NWLEWS1VZ0@vms173003.mailsrvcs.net> At 07:12 PM 8/12/2009, Ryan W wrote: >thanks for the clarification, Kim. > >TA's value as an expiring contract (2.5 million) is in concert with >all the other little expirings on this team--House (2.8 million), >Scal (3.5 million), Giddens (.9 million), which total almost 10 >million overall. Expirings do tend to be overrated, but with all >the expirings we have, we have a lot of flexibility in terms of >matching salary. I expect Ainge to horde the expirings until he >needs to use them--perhaps if we suffer an injury he'll be able to >strike out and get a replacement. I also think we're going to see >the trade market for expirings heat up around Jan/Feb, when certain >teams start to fall out of the playoff race and decide to fatten >their bottom line. Well, we do and we don't have flexibility. The big problem for us with deal making is that we still have a pretty polarized salary structure. We have a few huge salaries and then yes, as you point out, we have a number of not far apart little ones. We don't have the sort of middle ground salaries to swap in between. And the problem with having to get a team to take 3-4 expiring contracts to make the deal work is that they've got to have a lot of existing roster space or we have to take some garbage back to clear room. As to the demand for expirings heating up around the deadline, well yeah, that's when they're usually traded, if they are, for the reason you give - but that if was my point: there's still a lot more talk about them and how wonderful, even then, than there is actual deals done. Anyway, I do agree that even the smaller expiring contracts give Ainge something more to work with. I was just countering George seeming to think that Tony's not so big expiring contract is a serious asset, as in something people would be actively looking for. It's more in the range of a reason we might find someone willing to take him in the end, but likely still as part of a larger deal vs because they the contract for itself. Kim From capomycap at gmail.com Wed Aug 12 23:59:12 2009 From: capomycap at gmail.com (George Meyer) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:59:12 -0700 Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? In-Reply-To: <0KOA00NWLEWS1VZ0@vms173003.mailsrvcs.net> References: <0KOA008L5D5U59V2@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> <942889.29547.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <0KOA00NWLEWS1VZ0@vms173003.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <253b689a0908121659h1ce55a52i73d971e3158308f1@mail.gmail.com> "I was just countering George seeming to think that Tony's not so big expiring contract is a serious asset, as in something people would be actively looking for." Where in anything I wrote did I say this, Kim? I said if he's still on the team, I would guess he'll be put in cold-storage until he can be moved. "Until he can be moved" doesn't mean he will be moved, or that I view his contract as a "serious asset." If you read what I said in context, the point was simply that, IMO, Tony is not in the team's future as an active member of the roster. Whether or not Ainge can get anything for him, who knows, but that he dangled him for Daniels in the s-n-t indicates he's trying. On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Kim Malo wrote: > At 07:12 PM 8/12/2009, Ryan W wrote: > >> thanks for the clarification, Kim. >> >> TA's value as an expiring contract (2.5 million) is in concert with all >> the other little expirings on this team--House (2.8 million), Scal (3.5 >> million), Giddens (.9 million), which total almost 10 million overall. >> Expirings do tend to be overrated, but with all the expirings we have, we >> have a lot of flexibility in terms of matching salary. I expect Ainge to >> horde the expirings until he needs to use them--perhaps if we suffer an >> injury he'll be able to strike out and get a replacement. I also think >> we're going to see the trade market for expirings heat up around Jan/Feb, >> when certain teams start to fall out of the playoff race and decide to >> fatten their bottom line. >> > > Well, we do and we don't have flexibility. The big problem for us with deal > making is that we still have a pretty polarized salary structure. We have a > few huge salaries and then yes, as you point out, we have a number of not > far apart little ones. We don't have the sort of middle ground salaries to > swap in between. And the problem with having to get a team to take 3-4 > expiring contracts to make the deal work is that they've got to have a lot > of existing roster space or we have to take some garbage back to clear room. > As to the demand for expirings heating up around the deadline, well yeah, > that's when they're usually traded, if they are, for the reason you give - > but that if was my point: there's still a lot more talk about them and how > wonderful, even then, than there is actual deals done. > > Anyway, I do agree that even the smaller expiring contracts give Ainge > something more to work with. I was just countering George seeming to think > that Tony's not so big expiring contract is a serious asset, as in something > people would be actively looking for. It's more in the range of a reason we > might find someone willing to take him in the end, but likely still as part > of a larger deal vs because they the contract for itself. > > > Kim > _______________________________________________ > The Boston Celtics Mailing List > celtics at igtc.com > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics > From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Thu Aug 13 01:33:19 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:33:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? In-Reply-To: <0KOA00NWLEWS1VZ0@vms173003.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <31440.21217.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- On Wed, 8/12/09, Kim Malo wrote: > From: Kim Malo > Subject: Re: What Will Be Grandpa Ainge's Final Celtics Roster? > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" , "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 6:35 PM > At 07:12 PM 8/12/2009, Ryan W wrote: > > thanks for the clarification, Kim. > > > > TA's value as an expiring contract (2.5 million) is in > concert with all the other little expirings on this > team--House (2.8 million), Scal (3.5 million), Giddens (.9 > million), which total almost 10 million overall. > Expirings do tend to be overrated, but with all the > expirings we have, we have a lot of flexibility in terms of > matching salary. I expect Ainge to horde the expirings > until he needs to use them--perhaps if we suffer an injury > he'll be able to strike out and get a replacement. I > also think we're going to see the trade market for expirings > heat up around Jan/Feb, when certain teams start to fall out > of the playoff race and decide to fatten their bottom line. > > Well, we do and we don't have flexibility. The big problem > for us with deal making is that we still have a pretty > polarized salary structure. We have a few huge salaries and > then yes, as you point out, we have a number of not far > apart little ones. We don't have the sort of middle ground > salaries to swap in between. And the problem with having to > get a team to take 3-4 expiring contracts to make the deal > work is that they've got to have a lot of existing roster > space or we have to take some garbage back to clear > room. As to the demand for expirings heating up around > the deadline, well yeah, that's when they're usually traded, > if they are, for the reason you give - but that if was my > point: there's still a lot more talk about them and how > wonderful, even then, than there is actual deals done. Another good point, Kim, vis a vis the fact that trading 3-4 expiring contracts is hard to do. Two counters however: with the economic slowdown, it's been estimated that up to half the teams in the league might only carry 13 players during the upcoming season--so some teams might have the room to indulge in a 2- or 3-for-1 deal. Point 2 is that we can include up to 3 million in any deal--money would would offset TA's salary, for example, and allow a team to cut TA after a potential trade and still come out $500,000 ahead, while also getting back under the 15 player roster limit. It's my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong), that a team can do trades that leave them over the 15 player limit provided they cut somebody (or 2 somebodys) right after the trade goes through to get back under the limit. > > Anyway, I do agree that even the smaller expiring contracts > give Ainge something more to work with. I was just > countering George seeming to think that Tony's not so big > expiring contract is a serious asset, as in something people > would be actively looking for. It's more in the range of a > reason we might find someone willing to take him in the end, > but likely still as part of a larger deal vs because they > the contract for itself. I think you might be referring to me, not George, though in my defense I don't think I was saying that TA's expiring contract is a *serious* asset--only that it *was* an asset and a reason why they just wouldn't eat the contract by cutting him. Ryan From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com Thu Aug 13 01:36:26 2009 From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:36:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Butler trade In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <702159.5377.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> I don't know, Douglas, the Clipper just might, I stress might, have a chance of making the playoffs. They've got a nice frontline (Camby, Kaman, and #1 pick Blake Griffin) and a pretty good backcourt (Baron Davis and Eric Gordon). Of course, their bench kinda sucks, which might explain why they basically bought Butler--he pretty solid off the bench. The Clipper's main problem remains their coach, IMO. Ryan --- On Wed, 8/12/09, Douglas342 at aol.com wrote: > From: Douglas342 at aol.com > Subject: Re: Butler trade > To: celtics at igtc.com > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 6:24 PM > > In a message dated 8/12/2009 4:13:58 P.M. Pacific Daylight > Time, > ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com > writes: > > Yep, that deal was a pure salary dump. The > Clips, being under the cap, > were able to absorb all of Butler's incoming salary >