Reports indicate that he is looking for the full MLE and a starting job, both of which we can offer. I think we need to pursue him so that we can draft and groom another big man. Guys like Johan Petro, Channing Frye, and Charlie Villaneuva come to mind. Chances are one of the three will be there when we pick and I like the prospect of all three. I'd still take Jarrett Jack above all, but I doubt he will be available at 18 now.
Pursue Daniels. I would much rather sign him and already have a point guard so we can draft another big man to play with Jefferson. Channing Frye will be a great big man in a few years. Go ahead and take him so we will be secure with our post players in the future. Daniels can run our offense and be our floor general. I'm all for signing him!
Just wondering, what do you guys plan on doing with Raef and/or Blount once if you draft a "big" like Frye? You also have Perkins, but he's easier to move than the other two and doesn't seem to be as big as a rotation player. Their contracts aren't really moveable, you could probably move Raef's contract when it's about to expire, but that won't be for a few years. You could elect to give Frye and Jefferson big minutes up front in a year or two, and Blount/LaFrentz as a backup for both posistions. This would leave one of those players (with their huge contracts) with limited PT. I would say Raef's contract is easier to move even if he has some knee/back problems since he doesn't have a kicker in his deal like Blount, and his contract is due to expire sooner than Blount's. -- Since I posted in this thread, I need to talk about Daniels atleast. A Full MLE for him would seem reasonable because the PG spot is really the Celtics biggest need, and they are pretty solid at the other posistions. However, although Daniels is good overall player, I wouldn't give him a long contract; 3 years max (plus TO). He's 30 years old, and he will be looking to stay in a place long term since he has played for 4 teams in his 7 year career. I wouldn't bite if the deal he's wanting is for over 3 years because chances are, their are gonna be better, younger players out there (for trade, draft or Free Agency) in a couple of years.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Banks:</div><div class="quote_post">Just wondering, what do you guys plan on doing with Raef and/or Blount once if you draft a "big" like Frye? You also have Perkins, but he's easier to move than the other two and doesn't seem to be as big as a rotation player. Their contracts aren't really moveable, you could probably move Raef's contract when it's about to expire, but that won't be for a few years. You could elect to give Frye and Jefferson big minutes up front in a year or two, and Blount/LaFrentz as a backup for both posistions. This would leave one of those players (with their huge contracts) with limited PT. I would say Raef's contract is easier to move even if he has some knee/back problems since he doesn't have a kicker in his deal like Blount, and his contract is due to expire sooner than Blount's. </div>See, here's where people get carried away when discussing offseason plans/moves. It would be assanine to change our draft plans just because we have Blount and LaFrentz. Obviously those guys aren't great centers, so it's still a need of ours at this point. Just because they have big contracts doesn't make them unmovable, either. With the possibility of Pierce and Walker being traded, a team wouldn't have a huge problem taking Blount along with one of them, because he isn't a bad player at all. But even if they can't, who really cares how much playing time a guy gets if he doesn't deserve it? If we start playing guys based on what they make and not how they play, we're screwed anyway.
Daniels is a good player and definitely one of the better choices at the PG spot in the free agent market. However, I wouldn't think he's worth the full MLE. He's steady with the ball and is a good penetrator, but he is 30 and his three point percentage has dropped significantly this season. With his age, would any team dare to offer him the MLE and maybe four years? Daniels is also a Rockets' possibility at the point guard position but I'd go nuts if Houston spends its full MLE on him.
Well, that's what he wants and somebody is going to give it to him. I don't think it's too high at all, and 3-4 years isn't that bad, either. Especially considering the contracts that guys like Derek Fisher and Rafer Alston signed last year.
I'd be worried about handing over full point guard control to Daniels and Banks. Neither is what I'd call a pure point. Daniels is nice as a change of pace combo guard (all he's ever really been in his career) but if he's your starter I think it could be a less than optimal situation.
As a Sonics fan I think Daniels can be a starting point. He has great leadership on the floor and can dominate control of the ball reliably considering he has the second highest assist-to-turnover ratio in the league (3.96). He has great ball handling skills and is a decent defensive player. His passing abilities are average, if pressed I think he could average a good 6-7 APG. He is also very clutch and very sturdy. In the playoffs this year he repeatedly drove to the hoop and drew fouls, going down hard many times only to spring right back up and hit both his foul shots. From his play this year in Seattle I would say he deserves an MLE at the most if it's for a few years, after which he should be dealt with according to how he ages.
Aha! Finally, a brilliant free agent prospect for the Celtics. Alas, we all forget... when was the last time the Celtics aquired a player via free agency who made a huge difference at all? Sure, Danny Ainge has proven himself as a risk-taker and an impulsive deal maker... but when was the last time he dished out big cash to a free agent outside his own club? To answer my own question, not one player (with the exception of the questionable Gary Payton deal) on the Celtics roster has been signed from another team in the past 2 years. What will it take for Ainge to have the motivation to give his money to someone other than his core of mediocre role players? (Excuse my use of the word mediocre, however it is infact the correct phrase to describe characters such as Mark Blount, Gary Payton, etc.) He's become obsessed with the 'young' generation of players. He becomes the GM I like to become when playing NBA Live, trade around for all rookies and sophmores and make an unstoppable young gun team that will go from an '82' overall rating to a '99' in 2 years time. Well, Danny, this isn't NBA Live, and you can't rig the game to give your young guys intense experience and perpetual improvement. This is why he must act on the acquisition of Antonio Daniels. Trading away one (or two) of his second round picks in addition to Mark Blount would free up mountains of cap space, and give him the cushion of risk to do something he hasn't done before: sign a free agent that will make a difference. Please Antonio Daniels, I beg you. Give us the opportunity to get rid of GP and get the ball out of Marcus Banks' hands at the starting tip of any game next season. Please.
