Author Topic: The case against Posey  (Read 4625 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The case against Posey
« on: July 10, 2008, 10:36:48 AM »

Offline Michael Anthony

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 874
  • Tommy Points: 117
Last season, James Posey earned permanant residence in the Boston Hall of So Glad You Were Here - occupied by championship role players like Orlando Cabrera, Bill Mueller, and Troy Brown. Lunch pail guys that do not necesarily produce huge offensive numbers, but do produce beyond their payscale.

Like the summer fling you do not marry, it is always a mistake to sign these guys to long term lucrative contracts. James at the full MLE would hamstring our free agenct options this season, and our spending capabilities in the future. Additionally, am I the only one that remembers Riley complaining about Posey's conditioning and commitment after signing him to his last multi-year deal?

Our one position of need this offseason, true need, is backup center. We have backup power forwards, backup wings (rookies), and a backup guard. They have warts, but at least they are there. We do not have anyone to backup Perk, and have been presented with the oportunity to sign Kwame to a long term deal for about $3m-$4m per.

Give me Kwame, a backup wing for the remaining $2m-$3m of MLE (Barnes, Delfino, Ross, Azubuike, Vujacic), and a backup point (Williams, Pargo, House) for the LLE over Posey's bloated contract weighing down Wyc's pockets for the next four years. Plus, vet minimum wings are much more common than vet minimum bigs. We will be better next season, and much better in the future.
"All I have to know is, he's my coach, and I follow his lead. He didn't have to say anything in here this week. We all knew what we had to do. He's a big part of our family, and we're like his extended family. And we did what good families do when one of their own is affected." - Teddy Bruschi

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2008, 10:38:31 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34023
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
You lost me on 'save the money that could be spent on Posey and spend it on Kwame'

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2008, 10:54:13 AM »

Offline PRIDE

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 488
  • Tommy Points: 41
The case against Posey is this...

Wyc and Danny aren't going to make a bad financial decision to sing Posey for more years than he's worth. The C's have put their offer on the table and now its up to Posey to take it or leave it.

If Posey wants to be here he'll take the 3 year deal. If he doesn't then he is about the money and he can walk.

This needs to be made clear to Bartlestein & Co so we can get past this.

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #3 on: July 10, 2008, 10:55:37 AM »

Offline cordobes

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3556
  • Tommy Points: 576
  • Basketball is like chess, only without the dice
You lost me on 'save the money that could be spent on Posey and spend it on Kwame'

Ditto.

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2008, 11:01:44 AM »

Offline timepiece33

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1747
  • Tommy Points: 78
Like the summer fling you do not marry, it is always a mistake to sign these guys to long term lucrative contracts.

How you treat FA's should be dependent on where you are in your window of opportunity.  If Posey makes the next 3 years more likely to win a championship, I see no harm in giving him the fourth.  I know there are luxury tax considerations.  I also know that Wyc is making a ton of money with a successful team.   

James at the full MLE would hamstring our free agenct options this season, and our spending capabilities in the future. Additionally, am I the only one that remembers Riley complaining about Posey's conditioning and commitment after signing him to his last multi-year deal?

I've heard the argument of "splitting the MLE".  The problem is splitting it gives you the options of two slightly above LLE contracts.   That is not going to get you the names you mentioned. 

What is going to make your bench better?

Kwame Brown, Quinton Ross, and a minimum PG (Williams, Lue)

OR

James Posey, Chris Anderson, and a minimum PG (Williams, Lue)

OR

Kenyon Dooling, Chris Anderson, and a minimum wing (Kirk Snyder?)

Personally, I believe that Posey's combination with other players is the best alternative.  I've yet to see anything that looks better.  Keep on presenting them. 

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #5 on: July 10, 2008, 11:08:04 AM »

Offline celticsfan8591

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 528
  • Tommy Points: 38
Last season, James Posey earned permanant residence in the Boston Hall of So Glad You Were Here - occupied by championship role players like Orlando Cabrera, Bill Mueller, and Troy Brown. Lunch pail guys that do not necesarily produce huge offensive numbers, but do produce beyond their payscale.

Like the summer fling you do not marry, it is always a mistake to sign these guys to long term lucrative contracts. James at the full MLE would hamstring our free agenct options this season, and our spending capabilities in the future. Additionally, am I the only one that remembers Riley complaining about Posey's conditioning and commitment after signing him to his last multi-year deal?

Our one position of need this offseason, true need, is backup center. We have backup power forwards, backup wings (rookies), and a backup guard. They have warts, but at least they are there. We do not have anyone to backup Perk, and have been presented with the oportunity to sign Kwame to a long term deal for about $3m-$4m per.

Give me Kwame, a backup wing for the remaining $2m-$3m of MLE (Barnes, Delfino, Ross, Azubuike, Vujacic), and a backup point (Williams, Pargo, House) for the LLE over Posey's bloated contract weighing down Wyc's pockets for the next four years. Plus, vet minimum wings are much more common than vet minimum bigs. We will be better next season, and much better in the future.

I agree that we shouldn't overpay Posey, but why Kwame Brown.  IMO we should look at Kurt Thomas, Francisco Elson, Dikembe Mutombo, or Alonzo Mourning. 

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #6 on: July 10, 2008, 11:11:42 AM »

Offline soap07

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1557
  • Tommy Points: 145
You lost me on 'save the money that could be spent on Posey and spend it on Kwame'

Let's not go overboard. Kwame for approximately 3 million, which is what the OP suggested roundabouts, would be a decent signing. Kwame has averaged 8 and 6 for his career and is still 25-26 years old. 3 million is really that much to shell out for a 26 year old 7 foot back up big man who has averaged 8/6 in his career ? Look past the name and the fact that he's was a number one pick. Obviously, he's a bust for a #1 pick but that doesn't mean he's useless on the basketball court.

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2008, 11:16:45 AM »

Offline soap07

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1557
  • Tommy Points: 145
I agree that we shouldn't overpay Posey, but why Kwame Brown.  IMO we should look at Kurt Thomas, Francisco Elson, Dikembe Mutombo, or Alonzo Mourning. 

Completely agree. However, you have to imagine that Thomas would demand more than Kwame. Will Mutumbo even come back with any team other than Houstin? Ditto for Zo and Miami.

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #8 on: July 10, 2008, 11:20:25 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34023
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
You lost me on 'save the money that could be spent on Posey and spend it on Kwame'

Let's not go overboard. Kwame for approximately 3 million, which is what the OP suggested roundabouts, would be a decent signing. Kwame has averaged 8 and 6 for his career and is still 25-26 years old. 3 million is really that much to shell out for a 26 year old 7 foot back up big man who has averaged 8/6 in his career ? Look past the name and the fact that he's was a number one pick. Obviously, he's a bust for a #1 pick but that doesn't mean he's useless on the basketball court.


You can his type of out put for less money.


It is much harder to get similar output to Posey for less then the MLE this year. 


I am against 5 years at MLE.

I do not like 4 years at MLE

I think 3 years at MLE is a great idea.

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #9 on: July 10, 2008, 11:27:02 AM »

Offline KJ33

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 461
  • Tommy Points: 78
Other than the Kwame Brown part, I can see your points.  Interestingly, on many of the teams showing interest, Posey would not be as a valuable as he would on the C's.  There is a reason he didn't command huge attention in last year's market.  Winning the Championship in Boston has brought him a higher profile now, but wasn't he already a key cog in a championship team in Miami and wasn't all the press last year when we signed him that we brought in championship experience, i.e. a winner?? So how has his rep changed so much because he contributed again, in a way he already had?  Some of it is the current market and the people's tendency to remember best what has happened so recently.  

Yes, Posey was a huge contributor on the Celts last year, but he would never have been in those clutch situations he is known for if not playing on a team that was capable otherwise of getting that far.  People seem to forget the long stretches during the year when the second unit, with Posey included, struggled mightily to find any offense without any of GPA on the court.  Posey's greatest value is as the glue guy who fits in the gaps of other stars, doing the dirty work, enjoying the role, not wishing he was one of the teams best 3 players as a younger player might who reluctantly takes this role, but aspires for greater things.  On a team not top-loaded with talent, Posey would not be nearly as valuable, his greatest strength is being the 5th option and knocking down open shots created by the guys everyone is covering closely.  Yes, he plays good defense, but he only averaged around 20-25 minutes, less than half the game, so that skill should not be overvalued either.  

My point is, even on Cleveland, he would not be nearly as good, having to do more than he is capable of, requiring more of him than his talent dictates.  There is a reason he has been a 25 minute a night player for the past several years, he is not really starting NBA material.  Anybody who put him there, would be disappointed, as without other great players around him, his skills would not matter nearly as much, his limitations would be exposed.  We'll see if he goes strictly for the money, but the C's are the best fit for what he brings to the table.  Don't forget, the C's had to actually be in the Finals for Posey to have gained his most recent rep as a big game player, if he is on a playoff team, but not a championship caliber team, more will be asked of him than he is capable, and he won't be effective playing 35 minutes a game.  We all love Posey with good reason, but let's not mistake what level his talent really is as we remember the most recent series we watched him play.  If Posey is honest with himself, he realizes in a basketball sense, Boston is the best place, if he is all set with rings and wants more cash, he can get that elsewhere, but he risks being an overpaid role player who will disappoint whichever teams' fans he signs with, unless they go all the way or almost all the way and James plays a big role in that run.  That of course is the hope in signing him, but is it really worth tying up one of the most financially valuable resources a team like the C's have that is over the cap, for the next 5 years?  That is a tough thing, even though as a fan, I want to see James back next year.  They would not have won without him last year, but we have no way of knowing if that will be true for a 20 minute a night bench player for the next 4-5 years.

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #10 on: July 10, 2008, 11:33:49 AM »

Offline Chief

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21217
  • Tommy Points: 2450
Last season, James Posey earned permanant residence in the Boston Hall of So Glad You Were Here - occupied by championship role players like Orlando Cabrera, Bill Mueller, and Troy Brown. Lunch pail guys that do not necesarily produce huge offensive numbers, but do produce beyond their payscale.

Like the summer fling you do not marry, it is always a mistake to sign these guys to long term lucrative contracts. James at the full MLE would hamstring our free agenct options this season, and our spending capabilities in the future. Additionally, am I the only one that remembers Riley complaining about Posey's conditioning and commitment after signing him to his last multi-year deal?

Our one position of need this offseason, true need, is backup center. We have backup power forwards, backup wings (rookies), and a backup guard. They have warts, but at least they are there. We do not have anyone to backup Perk, and have been presented with the oportunity to sign Kwame to a long term deal for about $3m-$4m per.

Give me Kwame, a backup wing for the remaining $2m-$3m of MLE (Barnes, Delfino, Ross, Azubuike, Vujacic), and a backup point (Williams, Pargo, House) for the LLE over Posey's bloated contract weighing down Wyc's pockets for the next four years. Plus, vet minimum wings are much more common than vet minimum bigs. We will be better next season, and much better in the future.

I agree that we shouldn't overpay Posey, but why Kwame Brown.  IMO we should look at Kurt Thomas, Francisco Elson, Dikembe Mutombo, or Alonzo Mourning. 

Francisco Elson stinks. He only could average 3 ppg, in 22 games, with Seattle. No thanks. As far as Thomas, Mutombo, and Mourning go, I think their combined age is around 120. Plus, Alonzo is coming off a major injury and Mutombo said last year that Boston was too cold. That leaves K. Thomas who is short and can't hit the jumper anymore.

At least Kwame is only 26 and still could have a good career. The problem is that MJ is terrible at evaluating talent. It's not Kwame's fault that he's got the talent to be a career backup C/PF and not a franchise player.
Once you are labeled 'the best' you want to stay up there, and you can't do it by loafing around.
 
Larry Bird

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #11 on: July 10, 2008, 11:36:47 AM »

Offline slamdunk

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 309
  • Tommy Points: 56
  • I'mPossible
Last season, James Posey earned permanant residence in the Boston Hall of So Glad You Were Here - occupied by championship role players like Orlando Cabrera, Bill Mueller, and Troy Brown. Lunch pail guys that do not necesarily produce huge offensive numbers, but do produce beyond their payscale.

Like the summer fling you do not marry, it is always a mistake to sign these guys to long term lucrative contracts. James at the full MLE would hamstring our free agenct options this season, and our spending capabilities in the future. Additionally, am I the only one that remembers Riley complaining about Posey's conditioning and commitment after signing him to his last multi-year deal?

Our one position of need this offseason, true need, is backup center. We have backup power forwards, backup wings (rookies), and a backup guard. They have warts, but at least they are there. We do not have anyone to backup Perk, and have been presented with the oportunity to sign Kwame to a long term deal for about $3m-$4m per.

Give me Kwame, a backup wing for the remaining $2m-$3m of MLE (Barnes, Delfino, Ross, Azubuike, Vujacic), and a backup point (Williams, Pargo, House) for the LLE over Posey's bloated contract weighing down Wyc's pockets for the next four years. Plus, vet minimum wings are much more common than vet minimum bigs. We will be better next season, and much better in the future.

I have no problem with this argument. If you think the others are better fits than Posey for next season than you do that. I just can't understand the people that think he's the best fit for the next couple years but would let him go just to save money four years from now. By then, you're probably rebuilding again so it won't matter.

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #12 on: July 10, 2008, 12:00:40 PM »

Offline PRIDE

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 488
  • Tommy Points: 41
Its not just about saving money in the 4th year of the contract. Every dollar we pay him this year we have to pay another dollar for the luxury tax. We're going to be in the luxury tax until Ray Allen's contract is up and then we'll have to re-sign Rajon Rondo. Poseys contract will hurt us in every season until we free up some cap space.

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #13 on: July 10, 2008, 12:08:22 PM »

Offline cordobes

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3556
  • Tommy Points: 576
  • Basketball is like chess, only without the dice
Its not just about saving money in the 4th year of the contract. Every dollar we pay him this year we have to pay another dollar for the luxury tax. We're going to be in the luxury tax until Ray Allen's contract is up and then we'll have to re-sign Rajon Rondo. Poseys contract will hurt us in every season until we free up some cap space.

So, what's exactly the solution for that? Not spending the MLE?

Re: The case against Posey
« Reply #14 on: July 10, 2008, 12:12:11 PM »

Offline Truth Hurts

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 109
  • Tommy Points: 16
Its not just about saving money in the 4th year of the contract. Every dollar we pay him this year we have to pay another dollar for the luxury tax. We're going to be in the luxury tax until Ray Allen's contract is up and then we'll have to re-sign Rajon Rondo. Poseys contract will hurt us in every season until we free up some cap space.

How exactly does it hurt us? We're allowed to pay the luxury tax. All it hurts is the owners' bottom line.

"Odom drains another 16-footer. It's 24-7, Lakers. They look so possessed on both ends that they've earned at least five sitting ovations from the Lakers' crowd." - Simmons