# Rumor: Ainge Rejects Green, Teflair and the #5 Pick to Knicks



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> Lots of teams are targeting the Celtics' No. 5 pick. GMs believe that Celts chief Danny Ainge will want a quicker fix to his team than the No. 5 pick can provide. So far it seems as though the Celtics haven't heard a serious offer. The one that was floating around the gym -- the Knicks' David Lee and Nate Robinson for Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair and the No. 5 pick -- has no chance of happening.


http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2890194&name=ford_chad

Ainge may have done some questionable things as the Celtics GM, but he isn't that damn stupid. Good try....:lol:


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

USSKittyHawk said:


> http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2890194&name=ford_chad
> 
> Ainge may have done some questionable things as the Celtics GM, but he isn't that damn stupid. Good try....:lol:


yea i saw this too, come on isiah, be serious with your offers, thats an offer i expect to see on this board, not in real life


----------



## EwingStarksOakley94 (May 13, 2003)

I would HATE that trade. I don't even wanna hear David Lee's name mentioned if we're not getting a superstar in return.


----------



## KVIP112 (Oct 31, 2005)

We were his name is Gerald Green


----------



## EwingStarksOakley94 (May 13, 2003)

KVIP112 said:


> We were his name is Gerald Green


Wow, that is the overstatement of the year.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

i knew isiah would at least try and get sebastian over here.

still, i dont like giving away Lee to anybody. especially not to boston


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

USSKittyHawk said:


> http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2890194&name=ford_chad
> 
> Ainge may have done some questionable things as the Celtics GM, but he isn't that damn stupid. Good try....:lol:



I might still might be coming off some jet-lag symptoms from the weekend but I do not believe that this deal is so bad. No one on the Celtics said is more proven than the two players we give up, Robinson and Lee. Lee has firmly established himself as one of the best rebounders in the league, offensively and defensively, and has shown signs of improving offenisvely. In either case, Lee is a PF that knows how to play this game and a double double threat every night. Robinson has only shown flashes of all-star play but not nearly enough and that is mostly because he plays without common sense sometimes. On that same note however, Green has only shown flashes of all-star play as well, so wouldn't that part of the trade be mute? The Celtics were almost willing to buy Telfair's contract out this offseason, so we'd almost be doing them a favor and the no.5 pick is just as unproven as Robinson and Green. Guys like DaGrinch made points that this draft has been hyped up largely because of two players, so why should we give up the farm for that draft pick? I'd be willing to give up the no.23 pick in the deal but nothing more than that.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

USSKittyHawk said:


> http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2890194&name=ford_chad
> 
> Ainge may have done some questionable things as the Celtics GM, but he isn't that damn stupid. Good try....:lol:


No one has ever gone broke betting on Danny's stupidity.


----------



## Krstic All-Star (Mar 9, 2005)

I can't think of any GM who'd even consider a deal like this one, unless really, really, REALLY drunk...


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> No one has ever gone broke betting on Danny's stupidity.


To be honest with you, I do not believe Danny Ainge is as stupid as most people believe. He's assembled a solid cast of young players with the Celtics, who he has continued to allow develop. I think the main thing that gets him in trouble is his inability to choose a direction for this team and finally mold them into a specific image. In many ways, he has two divergent plans for the Celtics because he continues to add young potential players but clings to guys like Paul Pierce, Wally Szerzbiak and has attempted to acquire stars like Pau Gasol. Still, he has alot of options at his disposal which is a mark of what a good GM is. Time is just what he needs in order for us to see whether he can convert on the assets he has created.


----------



## thatsnotgross (Dec 4, 2006)

EwingStarksOakley94 said:


> I would HATE that trade. I don't even wanna hear David Lee's name mentioned if we're not getting a superstar in return.





KVIP112 said:


> We were his name is Gerald Green





EwingStarksOakley94 said:


> Wow, that is the overstatement of the year.


Ironic... that KVIP comments makes ewingstarksoakley94's overstatement of the year when....

The same guy who believes that David Lee is worth a superstar back.

Love message boards.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> To be honest with you, I do not believe Danny Ainge is as stupid as most people believe. He's assembled a solid cast of young players with the Celtics, who he has continued to allow develop. I think the main thing that gets him in trouble is his inability to choose a direction for this team and finally mold them into a specific image. In many ways, he has two divergent plans for the Celtics because he continues to add young potential players but clings to guys like Paul Pierce, Wally Szerzbiak and has attempted to acquire stars like Pau Gasol. Still, he has alot of options at his disposal which is a mark of what a good GM is. Time is just what he needs in order for us to see whether he can convert on the assets he has created.


He doesn't "hang on" to guys like Szczerbiak, he goes out and trades for them. And his "solid cast of young players" is incredibly overrated. Jefferson played well, offensively, this year, and finally put in some effort. But that was a first, and it came in a contract year. After that he has a bunch of deeply flawed players, most of whom will probably never be anything more than bench depth.

The anecdote that defines the Ainge Error, however, happened during the 2005 draft. Danny made draft promises to Monta Ellis and Orien Greene. He reneged on Ellis to take Gerald Green, but when Amir Johnson was on the board for him in the second round, he elected to keep his promise to Orien Greene despite knowing that Johnson would be better. If he'd made the right choices, he'd be sitting in a great spot now. Unfortunately what he has is a team that went 4-31 with Pierce injured.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> He doesn't "hang on" to guys like Szczerbiak, he goes out and trades for them. And his "solid cast of young players" is incredibly overrated. Jefferson played well, offensively, this year, and finally put in some effort. But that was a first, and it came in a contract year. After that he has a bunch of deeply flawed players, most of whom will probably never been anything more than bench depth.
> 
> The anecdote that defines the Ainge Error, however, happened during the 2005 draft. Danny made draft promises to Monta Ellis and Orien Greene. He reneged on Ellis to take Gerald Green, but when Amir Johnson was on the board for him in the second round, he elected to keep his promise to Orien Greene despite knowing that Johnson would be better. If he'd made the right choices, he'd be sitting in a great spot now. Unfortunately what he has is a team that went 4-31 with Pierce injured.



The difference between Gerald Green and Monta Ellis is that Ellis has been given a shot while Green is stuck behind a star. Green was the better shooter, more athletic, and taller at draft time. As for the rest of the Celtics cast, to each his own but they got some very talented guys over there IMO.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> The difference between Gerald Green and Monta Ellis is that Ellis has been given a shot while Green is stuck behind a star. Green was the better shooter, more athletic, and taller at draft time. As for the rest of the Celtics cast, to each his own but they got some very talented guys over there IMO.


Green got a lot of p-laying time last year. But the more time he got the worse he looked. Unlike Green, Ellis picked up the pro game quickly. He also has a much broader game than Green. Green can shoot, so long as he's doing it with his feet set. He can dunk, but he's so weak and his handle is so bad that he struggles to create separation and thus can only get to the rim on the fast break. Ellis earned his shot on a good team, Gerald couldn't keep his spot on a 4-31 squad. And West, Allen, Perkins, Gomes, and Powe are the antithesis of "very talented". They're mostly guys without an NBA position and without the talent to carry it. In other words, roleplayers.


----------



## EwingStarksOakley94 (May 13, 2003)

thatsnotgross said:


> Ironic... that KVIP comments makes ewingstarksoakley94's overstatement of the year when....
> 
> The same guy who believes that David Lee is worth a superstar back.
> 
> Love message boards.


I think you've missed something in our exchange. I believe for the Knicks to give up Lee they would have to receive a superstar in return, because he's one of the few enticing pieces that COULD possibly land them a superstar. Now first of all, let me be clear that I do not believe David Lee alone is equal to a superstar. Obviously it would take more pieces, likely pieces that the Knicks do not have, to yield a superstar. 

The reason I labled KVIP's comment an overstatement is because he implied that Gerald Green is a superstar. I do not agree with that comment. I do not believe it would be worth give up Lee as well as other trading chips when there would not be a significant upgrade. I'd much rather hold on to Lee, a good, solid, young player, and wait until a sweeter trade scenario came along. If it didn't, it's not the end of the world.

Really, it's pretty easy to understand. Maybe you love message boards because you enjoy starting arguments.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I might still might be coming off some jet-lag symptoms from the weekend but I do not believe that this deal is so bad. No one on the Celtics said is more proven than the two players we give up, Robinson and Lee. Lee has firmly established himself as one of the best rebounders in the league, offensively and defensively, and has shown signs of improving offenisvely. In either case, Lee is a PF that knows how to play this game and a double double threat every night. Robinson has only shown flashes of all-star play but not nearly enough and that is mostly because he plays without common sense sometimes. On that same note however, Green has only shown flashes of all-star play as well, so wouldn't that part of the trade be mute? The Celtics were almost willing to buy Telfair's contract out this offseason, so we'd almost be doing them a favor and the no.5 pick is just as unproven as Robinson and Green. Guys like DaGrinch made points that this draft has been hyped up largely because of two players, so why should we give up the farm for that draft pick? I'd be willing to give up the no.23 pick in the deal but nothing more than that.


i take the unproven lottery pick who has a chance to be a stud over the role player any day of the week.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Ainge and Thomas working out a deal is like that scene in Zoolander when Ben Stiller and and Owen Wilson are trying to get the information out of the computer.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

^lol

i was watching that the other day


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Ainge and Thomas working out a deal is like that scene in Zoolander when Ben Stiller and and Owen Wilson are trying to get the information out of the computer.


Hah!!! Quoted.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

knickstorm said:


> i take the unproven lottery pick who has a chance to be a stud over the role player any day of the week.


After just 2 seasons of play where he's seen unlimited time but unlimited potential, I would not designate Robinson anything as of yet. In either case, this draft would not nearly be as special had Oden and Durant not been in it so I do not believe that the pick carries that much weight especially hearing rumors Ainge is not interested in it.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> Green got a lot of p-laying time last year. But the more time he got the worse he looked. Unlike Green, Ellis picked up the pro game quickly. He also has a much broader game than Green. Green can shoot, so long as he's doing it with his feet set. He can dunk, but he's so weak and his handle is so bad that he struggles to create separation and thus can only get to the rim on the fast break. Ellis earned his shot on a good team, Gerald couldn't keep his spot on a 4-31 squad. And West, Allen, Perkins, Gomes, and Powe are the antithesis of "very talented". They're mostly guys without an NBA position and without the talent to carry it. In other words, roleplayers.


Green averaged 22mpg last year which was actually overinflated from Paul Pierce going down earlier in the year. During that span, Green posted some very impressive games but did not manage to have a consistent role on a team that consistently saw people move in and out of the rotation. He's a bit inconsistent and does not possess the ball handling ability as you say but at the same time, no one should be expecting a complete player at 21. As far as I'm concerned, he earned his role as much as Ellis has, who began seeing big minutes after Baron Davis went down with an injury.

I do not believe Perkins is as special a talent as people make him out to be and I do not know much of Powe's game but I've seen West, Allen and Gomes extensively and they appear to be solid young players. Gomes was averaging a damn near double double his *first year when he got minutes.* West has proven to be a very solid all around player that knows how to play this game and Allen has proven to be a very explosive player offensively and have an ability to play the lanes when he's healthy and not got issues with the law.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Green averaged 22mpg last year which was actually overinflated from Paul Pierce going down earlier in the year. During that span, Green posted some very impressive games but did not manage to have a consistent role on a team that consistently saw people move in and out of the rotation. He's a bit inconsistent and does not possess the ball handling ability as you say but at the same time, no one should be expecting a complete player at 21. As far as I'm concerned, he earned his role as much as Ellis has, who began seeing big minutes after Baron Davis went down with an injury.


Early in the year, when the Celtics were relatively healthy, and Green wasn't getting a lot of time, he looked good. Once he was force fed minutes, and had to score because Pierce was out, he didn't look nearly so good. He was averaging over 30 m/g in March and April, and shooting just above .430 aFG% with no defense that anyone could see. He just wasn't the superstar that people are making him out to be



TwinkieFoot said:


> I do not believe Perkins is as special a talent as people make him out to be and I do not know much of Powe's game but I've seen West, Allen and Gomes extensively and they appear to be solid young players. Gomes was averaging a damn near double double his *first year when he got minutes.* West has proven to be a very solid all around player that knows how to play this game and Allen has proven to be a very explosive player offensively and have an ability to play the lanes when he's healthy and not got issues with the law.


Allen's had two reconstructive knee surgeries, no one knows how much explosiveness he has left. And he relies on that explosiveness to an unholy degree because he still can't shoot to save his life and his one offensive move consists of putting his head down and bull-rushing the net. As for West he still has no right hand, is a terrible defender, 6'2", weak, soft, and injury prone, and he makes _a lot_ of boneheaded plays for someone that "just knows how to play the game". We Celtics fans screamed in frustration at West as he repeatedly ignored open shooters in an attempt to play catch with Wally Szczerbiak & Brian Scalabrine. Pierce had to start stealing the ball from West just to get Jefferson shots. Gomes is another player without a position. A 6'7" PF without sufficient athleticism to get the job done, and unable to defend the 3. They have far too many players like that.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> Early in the year, when the Celtics were relatively healthy, and Green wasn't getting a lot of time, he looked good. Once he was force fed minutes, and had to score because Pierce was out, he didn't look nearly so good. He was averaging over 30 m/g in March and April, and shooting just above .430 aFG% with no defense that anyone could see. He just wasn't the superstar that people are making him out to be
> 
> 
> 
> Allen's had two reconstructive knee surgeries, no one knows how much explosiveness he has left. And he relies on that explosiveness to an unholy degree because he still can't shoot to save his life and his one offensive move consists of putting his head down and bull-rushing the net. As for West he still has no right hand, is a terrible defender, 6'2", weak, soft, and injury prone, and he makes _a lot_ of boneheaded plays for someone that "just knows how to play the game". We Celtics fans screamed in frustration at West as he repeatedly ignored open shooters in an attempt to play catch with Wally Szczerbiak & Brian Scalabrine. Pierce had to start stealing the ball from West just to get Jefferson shots. Gomes is another player without a position. A 6'7" PF without sufficient athleticism to get the job done, and unable to defend the 3. They have far too many players like that.


So your telling me that you'd expect a 21 year old Gerald Green to essentially carry the Celtics with players you claim are all overrated? I'm kind of confused by that. Personally, I didn't expect him to be a consistent big time scorer but I thought he'd show flashes of it and he most certainly did. You can't have the world in just a day.

As for the rest of the Celtic players, they are young and starting to just finding themselves. Allen has had both of those surgeries but he is young and may have a chance to have a healthy career despite them (see Amare Stoudemire). When he was healthy (and recieved the few minutes left from having Pierce on the team), he looked very effective breaking teams down and finishing with the contact. I was also impressed with his developing ability to play the lanes and even defend.

Delonte West has been one of the guys whose game I have most admired. I find it interesting that you call him "soft" yet plays so hard-nosed that Doc Rivers went on record discussing how he did not want to play him extended amount of minutes because of his aggressively reckless play that. He is injury prone but not because he takes it easy on the court but because he's a hell bent player and gives all the effort possible on the floor. I also feel a bit befuddled by the fact that you call him a bad defender yet at 6-4 (and not 6-2 like you mentioned) when the guy effectively blankets his opponents and also proven to be an excellent shot blocker at his position. His decision making as a PG is not one of the best but then again, it is not one of the worst considering that he is not a tradional PG. I also don't know about how many "mistakes" West can make when he only turns the ball over twice during the game, which is very impressive given the fact that he plays 32mpg.

As for Gomes, he's an undersized 4. Does any of that matter if the guy manages to still do what he does in spite of that? Ben Wallace is undersized for the 4 position yet height never seemed to faze him. Elton Brand is 6-8, the same size as Gomes and not much more athletic, yet his height has not seemed to hinder him. The fact of the matter is that Gomes may not be tall enough to be considered an average 4 but he's smart enough to get around that fact. He may not be stronger than most 4's but he uses his speed in those instances to get his points; vice versa if his opponent is faster than him. He also is a solid rebounder, so obviously the guy has some game.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> So your telling me that you'd expect a 21 year old Gerald Green to essentially carry the Celtics with players you claim are all overrated? I'm kind of confused by that. Personally, I didn't expect him to be a consistent big time scorer but I thought he'd show flashes of it and he most certainly did. You can't have the world in just a day.


You referred to him as a "superstar". I expect that a "superstar" could shoot an aFG% a little higher than .430. What it boils down to is that Green can score efficiently when he's nothing more than a kickout shooter. But as he moved up the foodchain he couldn't make the grade. I made the observation after his performance in the 2005 VSL that I thought he was on the Ricky Davis career path (in that it would take 5-6 years for him to pan out), and he did nothing last year to change my mind.



TwinkieFoot said:


> As for the rest of the Celtic players, they are young and starting to just finding themselves. Allen has had both of those surgeries but he is young and may have a chance to have a healthy career despite them (see Amare Stoudemire). When he was healthy (and recieved the few minutes left from having Pierce on the team), he looked very effective breaking teams down and finishing with the contact. I was also impressed with his developing ability to play the lanes and even defend.


Amare Stoudemire is a far more skilled basketball player than Tony Allen. TA relies on that explosiveness to get by his man because his handle is mediocre at best. Without it there won't be any bull rushes to the net, and no weakside swoops for putbacks. That's about 80% of his offensive game.



TwinkieFoot said:


> Delonte West has been one of the guys whose game I have most admired. I find it interesting that you call him "soft" yet plays so hard-nosed that Doc Rivers went on record discussing how he did not want to play him extended amount of minutes because of his aggressively reckless play that. He is injury prone but not because he takes it easy on the court but because he's a hell bent player and gives all the effort possible on the floor. I also feel a bit befuddled by the fact that you call him a bad defender yet at 6-4 (and not 6-2 like you mentioned) when the guy effectively blankets his opponents and also proven to be an excellent shot blocker at his position. His decision making as a PG is not one of the best but then again, it is not one of the worst considering that he is not a tradional PG. I also don't know about how many "mistakes" West can make when he only turns the ball over twice during the game, which is very impressive given the fact that he plays 32mpg.


Delonte West is 6'2.5" _in shoes_, not 6'4". He can't muscle anyone, and gets overpowered on a regular basis. As far as I know, that's the definition of soft. He doesn't blanket anyone at either guard position. And that's largely playing backups, he looks worse against the starters. Of course, he _is_ the coach's pet, so the (Not So) Good Doctor gives West free reign to gamble for rebounds & steals. Of course the result of that is that West's man is wide open on the other end of the floor. If he were a smarter player he'd know when to pick his spots. He isn't. And there are lots of mistakes that don't show up on a scoresheet. When you play catch with Brian Scalabrine, while Al Jefferson has his man sealed off in the post and is calling for the ball, you've just made a mistake. Even though you didn't turn the ball over. West is suffering from AWS*. The owners have been promoting him as the face of the Boston Celtics, and he thinks he's a star. And, unfortunately, his coach enables him (it's O'Brien/Walker all over again, only without the winning). He'd be OK coming off the bench for someone like San Antonio (where the vet players would put him in his place). In Boston he's a liability.



TwinkieFoot said:


> As for Gomes, he's an undersized 4. Does any of that matter if the guy manages to still do what he does in spite of that? Ben Wallace is undersized for the 4 position yet height never seemed to faze him. Elton Brand is 6-8, the same size as Gomes and not much more athletic, yet his height has not seemed to hinder him. The fact of the matter is that Gomes may not be tall enough to be considered an average 4 but he's smart enough to get around that fact. He may not be stronger than most 4's but he uses his speed in those instances to get his points; vice versa if his opponent is faster than him. He also is a solid rebounder, so obviously the guy has some game.


ummmm, Elton Brand is a whole lot more athletic than Ryan Gomes. Ben Wallace, in his 30s, is still more athletic than Ryan will ever be. And if you haven't noticed, Big Ben's game's been falling off as his athleticism declines. Gomes can't start next to Jefferson as they're both undersized, and opponents were able to generate too many close shots and too many rebounds with them paired on the floor. He was a defensive disaster at the small forward position. If the Celtics had one guy without an NBA position in their rotation, they could survive, but they had five or six like that in their lineup. The result was a team that went 4-31 without Pierce on the floor. They really aren't all that talented. Aside from Jefferson, they're basically roleplayer level guys. Sure, everyone needs roleplayers. But if that's your whole team, you're in a lot of trouble without a great coach. And Boston ain't got one of them.


*Antoine Walker Syndrome


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> You referred to him as a "superstar". I expect that a "superstar" could shoot an aFG% a little higher than .430. What it boils down to is that Green can score efficiently when he's nothing more than a kickout shooter. But as he moved up the foodchain he couldn't make the grade. I made the observation after his performance in the 2005 VSL that I thought he was on the Ricky Davis career path (in that it would take 5-6 years for him to pan out), and he did nothing last year to change my mind.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You should reread my original posts. No where did I mention Gerald Green being a superstar. In fact, I actually mentioned that he has not proven to be anything more than a guy capable of good games which is a far-cry from the description of a superstar; your confusing me with another poster. Still, his 43% shooting is not any indication of why he can't be a superstar because Kobe during his young career has down that on many occassions over a season (6) and that was with Shaq. The list continues with guys who fall short of the superstar label in my opinion with Chauncey Billups whose never shot above 43% in a season, Tracy McGrady whose shot 43% or worse in 5 seasons and many other notable stars in the league. As for Green being nothing more than a kickout shooter, I disagree, but he can certainly become a star on our team by doing so. We have one of the best low post scorers in the league and a guy whose still one of the best penetraters in the league who Gerald would have a field day playing with.

Outside of his amazing athleticism there has been nothing skilled about Amare's game. Although he has improved his ball handling ability, Amare's skills are mediocre at best which explains why he does nothing well besides score the ball. It takes more than just amazing athleticism to cut it in the back court which explains why guys like Gerald Green have not broken out yet and how guys like Fred Jones still have not contributed much to a NBA team. Allen is a solid young player that has shown the ability to know how to get minutes and make the most out of them.

You can believe whatever you want to believe about Delonte's height but NBA.com which is as official as you can get, lists him at 6-4. When he plays, he usually looks much bigger than PG's who on average of 6-2 so I believe that the 6-4 listing is accurate. You can complain about Delonte all you want but the fact of the matter is that he gets minutes when the Celtics have 4 other PG's they can turn to and develop. They also have a pretty solid pick this year and have the option of selecting a PG but likely won't. Obviously, he's good enough to earn the respect where they feel comfortable with the position as is and continue to give him minutes considering the number of options they have. *As for him being soft because he doesn't muscle anyone, Marcus Camby never muscled anyone in his life on the basketball floor and he's Defensive Player of the Year. I doubt you'd call Marcus Camby soft.*

Why does a player have to start in order for him to be considered good? Why can't Gomes just come off the bench and be a 6th man? The Knicks have one of only a few big man that averaged a double double last year (one of the best rebounders in the league) and he came off the bench. Former all-star Manu Ginobli has come off the bench for the 3-time champion Spurs who currently are in the Finals. Although Gomes does not possess the potential of Al Jefferson and although he is not supremely athletic, he plays the game effective enough for him to be relevent. Carlos Boozer for instance is not much taller than Gomes and not that much more athletic yet he has managed to be one of the biggest playoff stars this year. It all depends on knowing how to use what you've got and Gomes has shown the ability to do so muscling the guys he can muscle or taking the slower guys off the dribble. There's a reason why he's still on the team and it's not because the Celtics like to waste money.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Still, his 43% shooting is not any indication of why he can't be a superstar because Kobe during his young career has down that on many occassions over a season (6) and that was with Shaq. The list continues with guys who fall short of the superstar label in my opinion with Chauncey Billups whose never shot above 43% in a season, Tracy McGrady whose shot 43% or worse in 5 seasons and many other notable stars in the league.


Kobe Bryant's lowest aFG% is .477 (for his career). That .430 was taking into account his treys, his raw FG% was closer to .380. The reason he was such a poor shooter after getting the minutes is that he struggles getting separation from his defender. He can't cross his man over, he can't overpower or outleverage them. Simply put it was too easy for defenders to keep a hand in his face. Early in the year those threes dropped like rain because he could set up and wait for Pierce to swing him the ball on the kickout. Eventually he should be a good player, but I doubt it will be before the end of his rookie deal.



TwinkieFoot said:


> As for Green being nothing more than a kickout shooter, I disagree, but he can certainly become a star on our team by doing so. We have one of the best low post scorers in the league and a guy whose still one of the best penetraters in the league who Gerald would have a field day playing with.


I think Green's in the wrong situation. He would be more effective if the Celtics were teaching him to play a Reggie Miller/Rip Hamilton game, and shoot off screens. I think he would be incredibly effective that way. Of course, that would minimise the ESPN Sportscenter dunks. Our owners want the highlight reel dunks, alas.



TwinkieFoot said:


> Outside of his amazing athleticism there has been nothing skilled about Amare's game. Although he has improved his ball handling ability, Amare's skills are mediocre at best which explains why he does nothing well besides score the ball. It takes more than just amazing athleticism to cut it in the back court which explains why guys like Gerald Green have not broken out yet and how guys like Fred Jones still have not contributed much to a NBA team. Allen is a solid young player that has shown the ability to know how to get minutes and make the most out of them.


For one thing, Amare Stoudemire shoots jumpers at a 20% higher clip than Tony Allen (I don't mean 20 points, higher, either). That takes _some_ skill at the least, no? Hell, he shot jumpers at about the same clip as Wally Szczerbiak Szczuperstar, Master of _Ye Olde Tyme Basquetteballe Skylls_. Are you now admitting that Tony's a hack and that Wally's nothing more than an "unskilled athlete"? Your preconceptions about Amare have blinded you to his game. He has a very effective perimeter game, and he's worked relentlessly at it. He also has that whole 6'10" 260 lb thing going for him that Tony Allen doesn't. He also has a lot of ways to score. Tony Allen doesn't. With Tony it's "Put my head down and charge through traffic" or "Wait till the defenders backs are turned after the shot and outleap them for the putback". Those are pretty tough things to do without explosion.



TwinkieFoot said:


> You can believe whatever you want to believe about Delonte's height but NBA.com which is as official as you can get, lists him at 6-4. When he plays, he usually looks much bigger than PG's who on average of 6-2 so I believe that the 6-4 listing is accurate.


Really? So why did he measure in at 6'1-1/2" at the Pre-Draft camp in Chicago? Look it up. He only looks bigger than 6'2" guys that aren't 6'2". Because he looked a whole lot smaller matched up against Deron Williams. Who isn't, ummm, 6'4".



TwinkieFoot said:


> You can complain about Delonte all you want but the fact of the matter is that he gets minutes when the Celtics have 4 other PG's they can turn to and develop. They also have a pretty solid pick this year and have the option of selecting a PG but likely won't. Obviously, he's good enough to earn the respect where they feel comfortable with the position as is and continue to give him minutes considering the number of options they have. *As for him being soft because he doesn't muscle anyone, Marcus Camby never muscled anyone in his life on the basketball floor and he's Defensive Player of the Year. I doubt you'd call Marcus Camby soft.*


Unlike Delonte West, Camby is actually quick and athletic for his position. And I'm not the world's biggest fan of the oft-injured, soft Camby. He's the Fred Lynn of the NBA.



TwinkieFoot said:


> Why does a player have to start in order for him to be considered good? Why can't Gomes just come off the bench and be a 6th man?


In other words, you're conceding my point that what the Celtics have is a collection of developing roleplayers, and not the "best young talent in the NBA". If you're not good enough to start, the odds of you're being a cornerstone player are nil. Ginobli me no Ginoblis. He should be donating a third of his paycheck to whatever charity Tim Duncan names. And Gomes remains an awful defender, which is a severe obstacle to being "good". And Gomes is about one of a handful of players like that. If Gomes were the only player without a position on the roster, it wouldn't be a big deal. But the Celtics had so many that they were a .111 team without Pierce. That's usually a dead giveaway that the team, in fact, sucks.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

> Kobe Bryant's lowest aFG% is .477 (for his career). That .430 was taking into account his treys, his raw FG% was closer to .380. The reason he was such a poor shooter after getting the minutes is that he struggles getting separation from his defender. He can't cross his man over, he can't overpower or outleverage them. Simply put it was too easy for defenders to keep a hand in his face. Early in the year those threes dropped like rain because he could set up and wait for Pierce to swing him the ball on the kickout. Eventually he should be a good player, but I doubt it will be before the end of his rookie deal.


Bryant's lowest FG% as I see it on NBA.com is 41.7%. For his career he shot 45.5% but that was not without a couple poor seasons shooting the ball that were not to long ago. During the 2004-2005 season he shot just 43.3% from the field. 

Anyway, I find it interesting how you just seem to not even consider the fact that Green just struggled through stretches because the whole situation was new to him. He had just as many games during the stretch that Pierce was out where he shot the ball well from the field and put up a good amount of points. I do believe his handle could stand to improve but considering the fact he was capable of that kind of offensive play without having the rest of his game refined, is definately something to respect. Also, who the hell cares if he does not become a "good player" during his rookie deal. I think this is the center issue we have in this discussion about Green and his potential. It seems as though the more and more I speak to you that you feel he should already be a star. He is only 21 and just starting to get his feet wet in the NBA so have some sort of patience.




> I think Green's in the wrong situation. He would be more effective if the Celtics were teaching him to play a Reggie Miller/Rip Hamilton game, and shoot off screens. I think he would be incredibly effective that way. Of course, that would minimise the ESPN Sportscenter dunks. Our owners want the highlight reel dunks, alas.


To be honest with you, that kind of game has given guys multiple all-star berth's in the NBA so I have no problem with him doing that. Personally, I definately agree with you that this is where his game presently is but I think it has much more room for growth. This is where we seem to disagree. I guess we're just going to agree to disagree. On the Knicks though, that kid would be dangerous.





> For one thing, Amare Stoudemire shoots jumpers at a 20% higher clip than Tony Allen (I don't mean 20 points, higher, either). That takes _some_ skill at the least, no? Hell, he shot jumpers at about the same clip as Wally Szczerbiak Szczuperstar, Master of _Ye Olde Tyme Basquetteballe Skylls_. Are you now admitting that Tony's a hack and that Wally's nothing more than an "unskilled athlete"? Your preconceptions about Amare have blinded you to his game. He has a very effective perimeter game, and he's worked relentlessly at it. He also has that whole 6'10" 260 lb thing going for him that Tony Allen doesn't. He also has a lot of ways to score. Tony Allen doesn't. With Tony it's "Put my head down and charge through traffic" or "Wait till the defenders backs are turned after the shot and outleap them for the putback". Those are pretty tough things to do without explosion.


Amare Stoudemire also plays more minutes than Allen, has the ball in his hand more often than Allen and has players capable of giving him more space than Allen. There has definately been an improvement in Amare's jump shooting game but at the same time, there has also been an improvement in Tim Duncan's free throw shooting. Do you see where I'm going with this? 

With you being such a big Celtic fan, I'm surprised you had not noticed that Wally was only a shadow of himself this season because of the injuries that limited to him to only 19 games of relevant play. Worst of all, that problem that was effecting Wally were his ankles which prevented him from getting the lift he normally got to get his shot off. Wally shot only 41.5% which is well below his 49.3% career shooting average (which was actually down because of his poor showing this season). So this is what your comparing Amare to?




> Really? So why did he measure in at 6'1-1/2" at the Pre-Draft camp in Chicago? Look it up. He only looks bigger than 6'2" guys that aren't 6'2". Because he looked a whole lot smaller matched up against Deron Williams. Who isn't, ummm, 6'4".


I guess NBA.com is lieing then because they hate you so much. You can't get much more official than NBA.com so feel however you'd like to about this subject. I'm not going to sit here and argue about another man's height especially when it has no baring on how he can play this game.




> Unlike Delonte West, Camby is actually quick and athletic for his position. And I'm not the world's biggest fan of the oft-injured, soft Camby. He's the Fred Lynn of the NBA.


Still, the fact is that just because you don't muscle anyone does not mean your soft. As a long time Knick fan I can tell you that Reggie never was a physical guy and never muscled anyone. Still, he was one of the most grittiest players I've seen because of his resilence. Delonte isn't the player Reggie is but at the same time, he does not back down from anyone.




> In other words, you're conceding my point that what the Celtics have is a collection of developing roleplayers, and not the "best young talent in the NBA". If you're not good enough to start, the odds of you're being a cornerstone player are nil. Ginobli me no Ginoblis. He should be donating a third of his paycheck to whatever charity Tim Duncan names. And Gomes remains an awful defender, which is a severe obstacle to being "good". And Gomes is about one of a handful of players like that. If Gomes were the only player without a position on the roster, it wouldn't be a big deal. But the Celtics had so many that they were a .111 team without Pierce. That's usually a dead giveaway that the team, in fact, sucks.


I mention Ryan Gomes as capable of being a good player off the bench and now I'm conceding your point that he's representative of the collection of the young Celtic players? Interesting. Moving on, bench players are often a key reason behind their team's success so I do believe they can be a cornerstone to the franchise. Guys like Robert Horry, Manu Ginboli, Leonardo Barbosa, etc. have been bench players at some point or another yet have been critical to their teams success. You take a look at the Pistons and alot of people felt that their demise last season was caused from them not being able to play their bench players for long stretches. Although Gomes may not be a starter (could be in a different situation), he still could be a player that contributes in a big way to the Celtic's success. As for issues of too many players without a position, the Pistons became the Pistons from mismatched pieces that people gave up on. Does anyone recall Clifford Robinson playing the 5 position, Chauncey Billups, Corliss Williamson as the 6th man, Ben Wallace starting, Damon Jones and Tayshaun Prince. All of those guys were considered tweeners at some point or another yet each contributed to the inevitable success of the Pistons as a player. The Celtics don't suck, they are just young and looking for the right pieces.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Bryant's lowest FG% as I see it on NBA.com is 41.7%. For his career he shot 45.5% but that was not without a couple poor seasons shooting the ball that were not to long ago. During the 2004-2005 season he shot just 43.3% from the field.


Please read more carefully, _adjusted_ FG%, not raw FG%. When discussing perimeter players the FG% number is worthless, anyway. You use the aFG% to take into account the value of three point shots. As I explained in my last post, his raw FG% was closer to .380.



TwinkieFoot said:


> Anyway, I find it interesting how you just seem to not even consider the fact that Green just struggled through stretches because the whole situation was new to him.


What he struggled with was creating separation from his defender. When teams can't focus on him, defensively, he looks good. But once you ask him to do more he gets lost. He's still a ways from being an NBA player. 



TwinkieFoot said:


> Also, who the hell cares if he does not become a "good player" during his rookie deal.


Because he'll be a free agent looking for a payday and you could end up overpaying for a turkey.



TwinkieFoot said:


> Amare Stoudemire also plays more minutes than Allen, has the ball in his hand more often than Allen and has players capable of giving him more space than Allen. There has definately been an improvement in Amare's jump shooting game but at the same time, there has also been an improvement in Tim Duncan's free throw shooting. Do you see where I'm going with this?


The problem is that there hasn't been any improvement in Tony Allen's jumpshooting. As I indicated, Amare's busted his *** to improve his skillset. Tony Allen? Not so much. Amare's aFG% on jumpers has gone from .307 as a rookie to .436 last year. Tony's gone from .361 to .362, Without that explosion he's going to have start relying on that jumper.




TwinkieFoot said:


> With you being such a big Celtic fan, I'm surprised you had not noticed that Wally was only a shadow of himself this season because of the injuries that limited to him to only 19 games of relevant play. Worst of all, that problem that was effecting Wally were his ankles which prevented him from getting the lift he normally got to get his shot off. Wally shot only 41.5% which is well below his 49.3% career shooting average (which was actually down because of his poor showing this season).


With you being such a basketball expert and all I'm surprised that you only noticed this phenomenon this year. Szczerbiak hasn't been healthy in years.



TwinkieFoot said:


> I guess NBA.com is lieing then because they hate you so much. You can't get much more official than NBA.com so feel however you'd like to about this subject.


You're seriously claiming that the NBA scouts launched a diabolical anti-Delontian conspiracy and deliberately mismeasured him? I mean, seriously? The fact that he's openly shorter than Deron Williams has no effect on your views whatsoever? 



TwinkieFoot said:


> I mention Ryan Gomes as capable of being a good player off the bench and now I'm conceding your point that he's representative of the collection of the young Celtic players?


You claimed that Boston had a fantastic stable of young players, I pointed out that what they really had was potential roleplayers, and a paucity of A-Level talent. You essentially retreated and said "But they'd be so good coming off the bench!!!!" But, ummm, isn't that what a roleplayer is? More or less? 



TwinkieFoot said:


> Moving on, bench players are often a key reason behind their team's success so I do believe they can be a cornerstone to the franchise.


No, they can't. They're useful, but if you don't have the stars in the starting lineup your bench is taking you nowhere. In the last 30 years three teams without a top 10 NBA player have won a title. After this year that will be 2 in 30 years (or 3 in 31). 



TwinkieFoot said:


> Guys like Robert Horry, Manu Ginboli, Leonardo Barbosa, etc. have been bench players at some point or another yet have been critical to their teams success.


 Yeah, it nothing whatsover to do with Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe, Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Steve Nash, or Amare Stoudemire. It was all the roleplayers. :lol: :lol: :lol: 



TwinkieFoot said:


> You take a look at the Pistons and alot of people felt that their demise last season was caused from them not being able to play their bench players for long stretches.


What the hell are you talking about? The Pistons have spent five straight years either in the Conference Finals or NBA Finals. What demise? They didn't lose to Cleveland because of their bench, they lost because they couldn't stop LeBron in game 5 and when they stopped him in game 6 Daniel Gibson killed them



TwinkieFoot said:


> As for issues of too many players without a position, the Pistons became the Pistons from mismatched pieces that people gave up on. Does anyone recall Clifford Robinson playing the 5 position, Chauncey Billups, Corliss Williamson as the 6th man, Ben Wallace starting, Damon Jones and Tayshaun Prince. All of those guys were considered tweeners at some point or another yet each contributed to the inevitable success of the Pistons as a player.


Tayshaun was a college 4 that had to make a transition to the 3 in the NBA. He was athletic enough to play the 3, and had great size for the position. So I'm not sure how he was a "tweener". He actually had an NBA position. Chauncey had made the transition to the point in Minnesota, and signed Dertroit's 6/36 deal upon hitting UFA status. The T'wolves didn't give up on him, he left. Corliss Williamson was a more athletic version of Ryan Gomes. Mehmet Okhur was the center for much of their 2004 title campaign, until Rasheed Wallace showed up. In fact, the Pistons were a team of guys with NBA positions and only a couple of players without one. And those guys, Wallace & Williamson, were athletic enough to carry it off. Whereas Gomes is not. If Gomes were alone on the Celtics roster in this regard, it would be one thing, but he isn't.



TwinkieFoot said:


> The Celtics don't suck, they are just young and looking for the right pieces.


4-31. No matter how much makeup you slap on a pig it's still going to end up LA County jail for driving without a license.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

Appaling trade idea with no credible source 

(sorry for lack of an essay why not but it seems so obviously bad that one line will suffice)


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

> Please read more carefully, _adjusted_ FG%, not raw FG%. When discussing perimeter players the FG% number is worthless, anyway. You use the aFG% to take into account the value of three point shots. As I explained in my last post, his raw FG% was closer to .380.


This was the first time that I've really had a chance to take a look at aFG%. At first, I simply did not recognize what it was but have been reading up on it and it's basis. I just find it interesting that you believe Green's main strength is shooting jumpers yet your stat proves that he is more efficient as a scorer below the arch. Would you like to explain a little bit? By the way, as much as I love Kobe's game, you can not devalue the kind of operating room Shaq proved for him early in his career that a guy like Green has never had.




> What he struggled with was creating separation from his defender. When teams can't focus on him, defensively, he looks good. But once you ask him to do more he gets lost. He's still a ways from being an NBA player.


Which is to be expected of a young player. There are only a few in the league that break this mold but they are very rare which makes them very special. I'm not sure whether he has superstar potential but he does have the potential to be a star in this league. On a team like the Knicks, where we have two solid big men to provide better floor spacing for him, he should thrive.





> Because he'll be a free agent looking for a payday and you could end up overpaying for a turkey.


You could say that about any free agent. This is why negotiations last as long as they do when your name is not LeBron James, Chris Bosh, Carmelo Anthony or Dwayne Wade. Swingmen come a dime a dozen so his market value is likely not to be as high as you believe it to be.




> The problem is that there hasn't been any improvement in Tony Allen's jumpshooting. As I indicated, Amare's busted his *** to improve his skillset. Tony Allen? Not so much. Amare's aFG% on jumpers has gone from .307 as a rookie to .436 last year. Tony's gone from .361 to .362, Without that explosion he's going to have start relying on that jumper.


Well that improvement has been hard to advertise considering how he's been injuried so often. When he can get to the rim as well as he can, why would he settle for jumpers anyway?

Even more interesting to me is the fact that the aFG% can not be taken seriously when comparing a perimeter player to a big man who does not operate on the perimeter. The formula for aFG% is:
Adj FG%= (Total FG+0.5*3ptFG)/Total FGA 
*Considering Amare was 0-3 from 3 point range this season, the formula is obviously irrelevant for comparing whose the better 3 pointer shooter. Even more than that, THE FORMULA DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT HOW GOOD A JUMP SHOOTER YOU ARE WHICH IS NOT ALWAYS REFLECTED FROM HOW MANY 3'S YOU TAKE OR MAKE.* Richard Hamilton is one of the best mid-range shooters in the league, if not the best, yet it would appear as though this stat does not really take that into account because his success is only measured by the 3 ball. Even though he is not necessarily a 3 point shooter, he is more effective farther from the basket than Carlos Boozer yet Boozer actually has a higher aFG% than Richard. Explain this to me.



> With you being such a basketball expert and all I'm surprised that you only noticed this phenomenon this year. Szczerbiak hasn't been healthy in years.


Actually, I knew he was *HURT* since his Timberwolve does but obviously this is the first time he is seriously *INJURIED* considering the fact he's missed the most games and put up a career low this season.




> You're seriously claiming that the NBA scouts launched a diabolical anti-Delontian conspiracy and deliberately mismeasured him? I mean, seriously? The fact that he's openly shorter than Deron Williams has no effect on your views whatsoever?


And your seriously claiming that the NBA has some reason to post false information? As for NBA scouts, they get it wrong all the time.





> You claimed that Boston had a fantastic stable of young players, I pointed out that what they really had was potential roleplayers, and a paucity of A-Level talent. You essentially retreated and said "But they'd be so good coming off the bench!!!!" But, ummm, isn't that what a roleplayer is? More or less?


I'm not sure whose post you are reading but they certainly are not mine. I also never stated "but they'd be so good coming off the bench," a clear indication your making **** up. All I said was that Ainge assembled a team of some talented young players or more specifically "solid young talent" which I made clear on June 5th at 5:45PM. Go find the quote.




> No, they can't. They're useful, but if you don't have the stars in the starting lineup your bench is taking you nowhere. In the last 30 years three teams without a top 10 NBA player have won a title. After this year that will be 2 in 30 years (or 3 in 31).


LOL, the whole top 10 NBA player thing is just pure speculation since that is an opinion. Teams are built on a combination of good players, some more noteworthy than others. This does not mean that those who do not rank among the best on their team, do not contribute to that success. This is why guys like Tracy McGrady and Kevin Garnett have not been on many good teams and why Kobe Bryant is struggling to win right now despite being the best player in the NBA.




> Yeah, it nothing whatsover to do with Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe, Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Steve Nash, or Amare Stoudemire. It was all the roleplayers. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Once again, it takes the right balance of players in order to be successful. You can laugh all you want but 3 of the top 10 players in the league (Kobe Bryant; Tracy McGrady; and Kevin Garnett) IMO have not experienced much playoff success or wins the past few years. Obviously they can not do it on their own so who tells you some other stars can?



> What the hell are you talking about? The Pistons have spent five straight years either in the Conference Finals or NBA Finals. What demise? They didn't lose to Cleveland because of their bench, they lost because they couldn't stop LeBron in game 5 and when they stopped him in game 6 Daniel Gibson killed them


Please read carefully. We are talking about last year chief, not this year. Last year when the Pistons played the Heat they lost mainly because they did not have reserves capable of keeping up a certain level of play. 




> Tayshaun was a college 4 that had to make a transition to the 3 in the NBA. He was athletic enough to play the 3, and had great size for the position. So I'm not sure how he was a "tweener". He actually had an NBA position. Chauncey had made the transition to the point in Minnesota, and signed Dertroit's 6/36 deal upon hitting UFA status. The T'wolves didn't give up on him, he left. Corliss Williamson was a more athletic version of Ryan Gomes. Mehmet Okhur was the center for much of their 2004 title campaign, until Rasheed Wallace showed up. In fact, the Pistons were a team of guys with NBA positions and only a couple of players without one. And those guys, Wallace & Williamson, were athletic enough to carry it off. Whereas Gomes is not. If Gomes were alone on the Celtics roster in this regard, it would be one thing, but he isn't.


Tayshaun Prince is a player that knows how to use what he has. I don't think his lateral quickness is up to par for most NBA 3's but he does an effective job of using his length to distract opponents. Take away that knowledge and he does appear to be a tweener; a guy too weak to play the 4 but a guy not quick enough to stay in front of perimeter players. 
Billups was shipped to 3 different teams before he happened to end up with the Wolves and even then he was characterized as a guy that was a SG in a PG's body. It began to work with the T-Wolves simply because they had a guy in the post that could run a team effectively from there and help take some of the burden off of Billups (who was actually splitting minutes with an injuried Terrell Brandon).
Not sure what Corliss Williamson you were watching but he definately wasn't a guy that I'd consider more athletic than Gomes.
Memhet Okur was the Pistons starting center in 2004 but not before that when the team was playing Clifford Robinson there.



4-31. No matter how much makeup you slap on a pig it's still going to end up LA County jail for driving without a license.[/QUOTE]
This could just be percieved as a lack of ability to ride between the lines. The Celtics need to figure out what kind of basketball team they are trying to build but in the meantime, they have some nice players that can serve as the foundation for a good team down the road.


----------

