I can't see the Celtics being conservative with their money at this point. They have to spend more to get more FA's. Because if they don't they know they're not going to be able to compete with deeper teams in the playoffs.</p> And Dikembe not being interested in the Celtics doesn't suprise me one bit. Didn't he say he wanted to retire in Houston?</p>
does marcus williams not exist any more? does no one think he can make a difference?</p> out of all the nets and celtics reserves, he may be the only (non-rookie) player with the potential to be a good natural point guard. </p> and i have seen nothing about hite. did he just disappear? he seems to be a great shooter, who could be equal to eddie house.</p>
When I started this post I did not mean to imply that I know the Celtics are done. I was referring to how things are looking now that the signings are unfolding and the roster spots filling up.</p> Of course they could still use the MLE, but it's not looking likely. We feel your penny-pinching pain Celtics fans!</p> As for the bench debate, everyone is over looking Collins. I know the guy is an offensive liability, but do the Celtics have anyone on their bench that can come in and bang with Shaq or limit Chris Bosh? Out of the bench bigs people can argue that Powe and Boone are equal and that Sean Williams and Big Baby are equal, but I don't think there is an argument that Collins has better strengths than Pollard. If the Celtics go out and get Motumbo or PJ it would make a difference.</p> Marcus Williams is better than Pruitt at this stage. And the collection of wings of Wright, Nachbar, and Robinson is slightly better than Scalabrine, Allen, and House. Our wing collection isa little more defense oriented, which is ironic since that is actually what the Celtics need with potent scorers like KG, Allen, and Pierce.</p> DISCLAIMER:The above analysis assumes everyone makes a full recovery and starts the season healthy.</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate)</div><div class='quotemain'> Maybe you're talking to the wrong poster here... </p> </p></div>Maybe I have higher expectations for you.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted)</div><div class='quotemain'> When I started this post I did not mean to imply that I know the Celtics are done. I was referring to how things are looking now that the signings are unfolding and the roster spots filling up.</p> Of course they could still use the MLE, but it's not looking likely. We feel your penny-pinching pain Celtics fans!</p> As for the bench debate, everyone is over looking Collins. I know the guy is an offensive liability, but do the Celtics have anyone on their bench that can come in and bang with Shaq or limit Chris Bosh? Out of the bench bigs people can argue that Powe and Boone are equal and that Sean Williams and Big Baby are equal, but I don't think there is an argument that Collins has better strengths than Pollard. If the Celtics go out and get Motumbo or PJ it would make a difference.</p> Marcus Williams is better than Pruitt at this stage. And the collection of wings of Wright, Nachbar, and Robinson is slightly better than Scalabrine, Allen, and House. Our wing collection is a little more defense oriented, which is ironic since that is actually what the Celtics need with potent scorers like KG, Allen, and Pierce.</p> DISCLAIMER: The above analysis assumes everyone makes a full recovery and starts the season healthy.</p></div>Because it is unclear whether Collins or Magloire will be the starter, I kind of glossed over both of them. As for Marcus, I compared him to House, which I think pushed the wing comparison much stronger in the Nets favor. . I agree that Marcus is better than Pruitt, both now and interms of potential. Pruitt and Hite are probably a good comparison in terms of potential and skill, if not an exact match for position.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'>Because it is unclear whether Collins or Magloire will be the starter, I kind of glossed over both of them. As for Marcus, I compared him to House, which I think pushed the wing comparison much stronger in the Nets favor. . I agree that Marcus is better than Pruitt, both now and interms of potential. Pruitt and Hite are probably a good comparison in terms of potential and skill, if not an exact match for position.</div>House can't be counted on to be the everyday back-up at PG. I think he's more of a wing and emergency PG.</p> You have to make a choice of either Collins or Magloire starting, otherwise you wind up excluding both from the bench comparison. I just chose Magloire to start, which I think will actually happen this year.</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted)</div><div class='quotemain'> When I started this post I did not mean to imply that I know the Celtics are done. I was referring to how things are looking now that the signings are unfolding and the roster spots filling up.</p> Of course they could still use the MLE, but it's not looking likely. We feel your penny-pinching pain Celtics fans!</p> As for the bench debate, everyone is over looking Collins. I know the guy is an offensive liability, but do the Celtics have anyone on their bench that can come in and bang with Shaq or limit Chris Bosh? Out of the bench bigs people can argue that Powe and Boone are equal and that Sean Williams and Big Baby are equal, but I don't think there is an argument that Collins has better strengths than Pollard. If the Celtics go out and get Motumbo or PJ it would make a difference.</p> Marcus Williams is better than Pruitt at this stage. And the collection of wings of Wright, Nachbar, and Robinson is slightly better than Scalabrine, Allen, and House. Our wing collection is a little more defense oriented, which is ironic since that is actually what the Celtics need with potent scorers like KG, Allen, and Pierce.</p> DISCLAIMER: The above analysis assumes everyone makes a full recovery and starts the season healthy.</p> </div>in the cetlics' defense, allen is a really good defensive sg, probably as good as or better than wright. except, with allen's injury, who knows if he'll regain form.</p> but nachbar>>scalabrine, and as of now, house>>hite. </p> and robinson hasn't even gotten good playing time in the nba since charlotte a couple years ago, so it remains to be seen what he can do in a nets uniform. looking at his stats (which only tell part of the story), he seems to be a productive player when given minutes, with the ability to score, rebound, and steal pretty good. </p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted)</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'>Because it is unclear whether Collins or Magloire will be the starter, I kind of glossed over both of them. As for Marcus, I compared him to House, which I think pushed the wing comparison much stronger in the Nets favor. . I agree that Marcus is better than Pruitt, both now and interms of potential. Pruitt and Hite are probably a good comparison in terms of potential and skill, if not an exact match for position.</div>House can't be counted on to be the everyday back-up at PG. I think he's more of a wing and emergency PG.</p> You have to make a choice of either Collins or Magloire starting, otherwise you wind up excluding both from the bench comparison. I just chose Magloire to start, which I think will actually happen this year.</p></div>yeah, except that Collins and Perkins might be a better comparison. Like Collins, Perkins' role will probably be just to bang--and never to touch the ball. Certainly never to shoot.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted)</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'>Because it is unclear whether Collins or Magloire will be the starter, I kind of glossed over both of them. As for Marcus, I compared him to House, which I think pushed the wing comparison much stronger in the Nets favor. . I agree that Marcus is better than Pruitt, both now and interms of potential. Pruitt and Hite are probably a good comparison in terms of potential and skill, if not an exact match for position.</div> House can't be counted on to be the everyday back-up at PG. I think he's more of a wing and emergency PG.</p> You have to make a choice of either Collins or Magloire starting, otherwise you wind up excluding both from the bench comparison. I just chose Magloire to start, which I think will actually happen this year.</p></div>yeah, except that Collins and Perkins might be a better comparison. Like Collins, Perkins' role will probably be just to bang--and never to touch the ball. Certainly never to shoot.</div> but perkins will probably start. then wouldn't you compare perkins to magloire? or would you compare magloire to pollard? i'm confused.
[quote name='peg182'][quote name='Dumpy'][quote name='Netted'] [quote name='Dumpy']Because it is unclear whether Collins or Magloire will be the starter, I kind of glossed over both of them. As for Marcus, I compared him to House, which I think pushed the wing comparison much stronger in the Nets favor. . I agree that Marcus is better than Pruitt, both now and interms of potential. Pruitt and Hite are probably a good comparison in terms of potential and skill, if not an exact match for position.[/QUOTE]House can't be counted on to be the everyday back-up at PG. I think he's more of a wing and emergency PG.</p> You have to make a choice of either Collins or Magloire starting, otherwise you wind up excluding both from the bench comparison. I just chose Magloire to start, which I think will actually happen this year.</p>[/QUOTE]yeah, except that Collins and Perkins might be a better comparison. Like Collins, Perkins' role will probably be just to bang--and never to touch the ball. Certainly never to shoot.[/QUOTE] but perkins will probably start. then wouldn't you compare perkins to magloire? or would you compare magloire to pollard? i'm confused.[/QUOTE]I guess I'd prefer to pretend that Collins will definitely start, so I can compare him to Perkins and claim that they are equivalent. Then, the Nets' advantage in the bench becomes more pronounced, because they have no one who can match up with Magloire. So, we could then respond to the position that the Nets' bench is only better because of Boki with the claim that it is better by Boki and Magloire, which looks a lot better.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'>I guess I'd prefer to pretend that Collins will definitely start, so I can compare him to Perkins and claim that they are equivalent. Then, the Nets' advantage in the bench becomes more pronounced, because they have no one who can match up with Magloire. So, we could then respond to the position that the Nets' bench is only better because of Boki with the claim that it is better by Boki and Magloire, which looks a lot better.</div>But Collins still improves our bench was my original point. Currently, the Celtics do not have a better bigman and that says a lot. Rookie comparisons are Williams and Big baby. 2nd year players are Boone and Powe. That leaves Collins and Pollard and I think the majority of people would take Collins even if he is horrific on offense.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticBalla32)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted)</div><div class='quotemain'> BOSTON (Ticker) - The Boston Celtics have apparently taken a step towards filling out their bench by agreeing to a deal with free agent center Scot Pollard. </p> The Boston Globe is reporting on its web site that the Celtics will sign Pollard to a one-year deal worth the NBA's minimum for a veteran player - $1.2 million. Link</p> Poor Celtics fans that thought they were spending the MLE and LLE to round out the roster are getting league min vets like House, Manuel, and Pollard. Welcome to our world. I really hope the Nets don't mortgage everything for JON and then do this.</p> </div></p> We're still not done, and we still have the MLE to work with. There is absolutely nothing wrong with signing Scot Pollard for the veteran's mininum, which doesn't even count against the MLE. He can help us defensively and on the boards in small doses, he has experience, and he's a major goof ball that will be great in the locker room. </p> </div></p> Fourteen players under contract. Pretty much done. Maybe well done. </p> </p> </div></p> We actually have 11 guys under contract with guaranteed money. Glen Davis and Gabe Pruitt will be signed, but haven't yet, that would make 13. The 14th guy is Jackie Manuel, who has a completely non-guaranteed contract that likely will get him nothing more than a ticket to training camp and a pat on the back before he returns to the D-League. I bet we have 15-16 guys in camp. </p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'>I guess I'd prefer to pretend that Collins will definitely start, so I can compare him to Perkins and claim that they are equivalent. Then, the Nets' advantage in the bench becomes more pronounced, because they have no one who can match up with Magloire. So, we could then respond to the position that the Nets' bench is only better because of Boki with the claim that it is better by Boki and Magloire, which looks a lot better.</div> But Collins still improves our bench was my original point. Currently, the Celtics do not have a better bigman and that says a lot. Rookie comparisons are Williams and Big baby. 2nd year players are Boone and Powe. That leaves Collins and Pollard and I think the majority of people would take Collins even if he is horrific on offense.</div></p> Wouldn't you compare Collins with Perkins if he comes off the bench?</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GM3)</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'>I guess I'd prefer to pretend that Collins will definitely start, so I can compare him to Perkins and claim that they are equivalent. Then, the Nets' advantage in the bench becomes more pronounced, because they have no one who can match up with Magloire. So, we could then respond to the position that the Nets' bench is only better because of Boki with the claim that it is better by Boki and Magloire, which looks a lot better.</div>But Collins still improves our bench was my original point. Currently, the Celtics do not have a better bigman and that says a lot. Rookie comparisons are Williams and Big baby. 2nd year players are Boone and Powe. That leaves Collins and Pollard and I think the majority of people would take Collins even if he is horrific on offense.</div></p> Wouldn't you compare Collins with Perkins if he comes off the bench?</p></div>Perkins will be starting.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Premier)</div><div class='quotemain'>I doubt Brandon Wallace's contract is fully guaranteed.</div></p> It's not, but he does have some guaranteed money. I think he'll be on the roster, though.</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GM3)</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'>I guess I'd prefer to pretend that Collins will definitely start, so I can compare him to Perkins and claim that they are equivalent. Then, the Nets' advantage in the bench becomes more pronounced, because they have no one who can match up with Magloire. So, we could then respond to the position that the Nets' bench is only better because of Boki with the claim that it is better by Boki and Magloire, which looks a lot better.</div> But Collins still improves our bench was my original point. Currently, the Celtics do not have a better bigman and that says a lot. Rookie comparisons are Williams and Big baby. 2nd year players are Boone and Powe. That leaves Collins and Pollard and I think the majority of people would take Collins even if he is horrific on offense.</div></p> Wouldn't you compare Collins with Perkins if he comes off the bench? </p></div> ugh. this thread has become confusing as hell.
Their big 3 are a solid group of playmakers and ball handlers, they don't need to spend too much on a PG. I can see them trying to find a Damon Jones/Eric Snow combo....unless they feel Rondo is like snow defensively. They do need a shooter at the point to open up the lanes. Pollard's good for only 15 minutes a night.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Premier)</div><div class='quotemain'> The Celtics are owned by investment bankers and venture capitalists. They are naturally cheap, but they do have money. Steve Pagiluca, a managing partner for the Celtics, offered to buy the thirty NHL teams for 3.5B. Wyc Grousbeck ran Highland Capital. They are definitely wealthy and accoridng to Paglicua, the Celtics will pay five to ten million dollars in luxury tax this season, meaning they will likely use another 2.4M-7.4M to fill out the roster - money they will definitely make up for if the team can advance to the Eastern Conference Finals.</p> By the way. How does the following Herald quote state tahat Mutombo wanted more money than the Celtics were willing to offer?:</p> <font><font><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The Pollard signing may also signal the end of the Celtics’ interest in Dikembe Mutombo - the veteran free agent center who appears to be more interested in remaining in Houston.</div> Houston made a veteran's minimum offer, too.</font></font></div></p> I see we are in denial here. This is good. The evidence is quite clear, or should be, that the Celtics ownership has shot their wad on the "Big Three (Who Haven't Made the Playoffs in Two Years". I see no response re the choice of two subpar journeymen, House and Pollard as the first signings after the KG trade. None of the owners, I reiterate, are fabulously wealthy like Allen ($25 BILLION) or Cuban ($8 BILLION) or Kroneke ($2+ BILLION plus his wife is a Walton). </p> These guys have quite obviosly given Ainge his marching orders: make due with what you have. NO more big contracts, no more mid level contracts either. Good Luck featuring Brian "Brain Type" Scalabrine.</div>Celtics unwilling to spend? You, sir, are wrong.</p>
