<div class="quote_poster">Quoting CourtVision:</div><div class="quote_post">BC: First before they made the playoffs you said that aiming for a lottery pick is a good thing. And then you change you story later to say that the playoffs is a good thing not the lottery. And now you say that playoffs with young players is the way to go now? Why do you change stories so much? Me personally I would want to improve my team while still being competitive. Danny Ainge didn't have any idea these guys would make the playoffs in the first place after his trades. He could have kept Walker and built around him and Pierce while still improving his team to make it to the finals. I think he did those trades to improve his team but when it didn't work out at the beginning he made an excuse about rebuilding. I don't want to bring up the "what ifs" anymore. But I just don't agree with the major moves that Danny did (with the exception of Ricky....pending). BTW if Danny wanted to rebuild then why trade Mike James for Chucky Atkins? Doesn't this contradict what he's doing? Don't give me that veteran presence bull either. You guys HAVE a good young team right now. But I really believe in continous improvement rather than taking steps back. I can see where you are coming from but thats just not me. Danny Ainge could have improved his team while keeping a solid nucleus to go deep into the playoffs.</div> The James trade was strictly a true PG in Atkins to mentor Banks and add a first rounder to add a HS. It was a win/win.
Atkins is a true PG and James isn't? I've always seen Chucky Atkins as an undersized combo guard, some sort of Vinnie Johnson clone who can score in bunches. He is not a great passer and his game is not the calming style that is required of a point guard. James, on the other hand, is a steady ball-handler and has good floor vision. He does not shoot the ball when he is not asked to and he does a good job defensively. Which one is the better real PG now?
Hahaha, then why did they traded James for Atkins? Because they needed a veteran that knows what to do in the playoffs! Also, to help Marcus Banks.
Danny Ainge is sick in the head unless he's really building for the future (ahem....10 yrs from now) Although i can see why he'd trade him....
I couldn't fathom the thought of dealing Pierce either. Paul Pierce gives the Celtics 110% every game and is a natural born leader on the court. He's the ideal franchise player for an NBA team and deserves the support of his GM. Leaving Pierce open to trade possibilities doesn't do anything, but hurt the Celtics. For starters it degrades Pierce's trade value when other teams hear he's available. Quickly GM's around the league will try to figure out why Ainge is giving up on Pierce. It also takes away from the "we all want what we can't have" mentality. A better alternative is when a GM commits to player and tells them he is their guy. If Danny Boy isn't willing to commit to building around Pierce, why would other players look to Pierce as their leader, and why would Pierce devote himself strictly to the Celtics. Last off-season there were talks of Kobe being swapped for Pierce. It just goes to show the high regard Pierce has received as a player in this league. Trading him now would be a mistake for the Celtics and once again set their franchise back. They cannot get equal value for him and they will be hard pressed to find another player comparable to what Pierce brings to the court every night.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">I couldn't fathom the thought of dealing Pierce either. Paul Pierce gives the Celtics 110% every game and is a natural born leader on the court. He's the ideal franchise player for an NBA team and deserves the support of his GM. Leaving Pierce open to trade possibilities doesn't do anything, but hurt the Celtics. For starters it degrades Pierce's trade value when other teams hear he's available. Quickly GM's around the league will try to figure out why Ainge is giving up on Pierce. It also takes away from the "we all want what we can't have" mentality. A better alternative is when a GM commits to player and tells them he is their guy. If Danny Boy isn't willing to commit to building around Pierce, why would other players look to Pierce as their leader, and why would Pierce devote himself strictly to the Celtics. Last off-season there were talks of Kobe being swapped for Pierce. It just goes to show the high regard Pierce has received as a player in this league. Trading him now would be a mistake for the Celtics and once again set their franchise back. They cannot get equal value for him and they will be hard pressed to find another player comparable to what Pierce brings to the court every night.</div> PERFECTLY SAID-PERFECTLY PUT. Ainge won't last a day longer if he loses (note i said loses not 'trades') Paul Pierce....Bank on it.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Knicks Analyst:</div><div class="quote_post">PERFECTLY SAID-PERFECTLY PUT. Ainge won't last a day longer if he loses (note i said loses not 'trades') Paul Pierce....Bank on it.</div> hey man how do you do the sigs dude dang could you explain to me please lloyd banks
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Knicks Analyst:</div><div class="quote_post">PERFECTLY SAID-PERFECTLY PUT. Ainge won't last a day longer if he loses (note i said loses not 'trades') Paul Pierce....Bank on it.</div> He will if he can engineer a sign and trade for someone along the lines of T-Mac . Rivers certainly can be the lure. Ridding Pierce for some future stars like say a Tyson Chandler and Jamal Crawford duo and than freeing up money for a Kenyon Martin or a Erick Dampier would make this a better TEAM than with Pierce and the current cast. Dont know what the midlevel can yield as far as impact but a real PG and some bangers who can score on the blocks is a huge need.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">He will if he can engineer a sign and trade for someone along the lines of T-Mac . Rivers certainly can be the lure. Ridding Pierce for some future stars like say a Tyson Chandler and Jamal Crawford duo and than freeing up money for a Kenyon Martin or a Erick Dampier</div> I'm going to keep reitterating this everytime I see it mentioned, so please be tolerant: NO TMAC in BOSTON. He's a ME-First type player and does not possess the leadership or loyalty qualities that I want in someone who's supposed to be the guy other players look towards. Paul Pierce would do anything for this franchise and I don't see trading that for a guy who's only going to provide a few more points per game. Chandler and Crawford are future stars? Crawford in the right situations, maybe. Chandler's been tagged with that for years and hasn't produced jack. Dampiers lazy and played his way into FA market consideration in his contract year, IMO. I can't see Martin coming to Boston, but stranger things have happened and I personally would welcome him with open arms, for the right price.
