Pierce saying what we all have been saying:

[winsomme]

And IMO your patchwork plan to fill the bench wing minutes simply doesn't cut it. The biggest need clearly is at the wing. We got by with Scals and TA taking those minutes but it was far less than ideal. TA made the most sense, but he was not getting the job done.

we already had a backup PG in Eddie (and Sam if we needed it) and Eddie has been the most reliable player off the bench.

  Why was TA not getting the job done? Were we losing games because of him? Were we losing all of our leads because of his play? Were backup wings on opposing teams killing us?

  And Eddie hasn't been much more reliable than anyone else and he's only effective this year as a spot up shooter who doesn't handle the ball much. That's not exactly what I look for in a pg.

my framework is looking toward the playoffs and TAs decision making seemed problematic in that regard to me.

I'm not sure how that is going to change with him if he comes back not in game shape just in time for the playoffs...

and i also think that Eddie defends the PG position as well as if not better than Mar.

I think it was worth the shot signing him, but the downside is that you are pretty close to removing Eddie from the rotation if you are going to give significant minutes to Mar to let him do the thing that he is good at....

[xmuscularghandix]

And IMO your patchwork plan to fill the bench wing minutes simply doesn't cut it. The biggest need clearly is at the wing. We got by with Scals and TA taking those minutes but it was far less than ideal. TA made the most sense, but he was not getting the job done.

we already had a backup PG in Eddie (and Sam if we needed it) and Eddie has been the most reliable player off the bench.

  Why was TA not getting the job done? Were we losing games because of him? Were we losing all of our leads because of his play? Were backup wings on opposing teams killing us?

  And Eddie hasn't been much more reliable than anyone else and he's only effective this year as a spot up shooter who doesn't handle the ball much. That's not exactly what I look for in a pg.

my framework is looking toward the playoffs and TAs decision making seemed problematic in that regard to me.

I'm not sure how that is going to change with him if he comes back not in game shape just in time for the playoffs...

and i also think that Eddie defends the PG position as well as if not better than Mar.

I think it was worth the shot signing him, but the downside is that you are pretty close to removing Eddie from the rotation if you are going to give significant minutes to Mar to let him do the thing that he is good at....

Eddie isn't going to lose minutes to Marbury, Steph is going to make Eddie's minutes more productive becuase he doesn't have to handle the ball. House can just run the floor and get to his spots for Steph to find him. when TA comes back he can play the three.

[cordobes]

Man, I have a big=time problem with the over-simplification of this team's wing depth.

Almost everybody on this thread is acting like there is only one type of SF that is mandatory in order to adequately cover the minutes needed at SF, which is not the case.

Here it is the famous and hilarious "there's more than one way to skin a cat so it doesn't really matter" line of reasoning once again. It reminds me that in the pre-season last year's team was "over-reliant on jumpshots" and a few months later what this team needed was jumpshooters to space the floor!
Oh wait, maybe someone with half a brain would understand that the roster with which this team started the season would have a problem spacing the floor... nah, it can't be.

There isn't only one type of SF that is mandatory, nobody actually said that. The problem is that we lack length and size at the wing. And some have been saying this since the off-season, so let's stop pretending it's a new thing.

Frankly, this over-simplification is quite amusing. Minutes allocation are not written on stone, this is not a computer game. The lack of size at the wing is a big weakness teams will explore, just like Curry did on Sunday. Teams like Atlanta, Orlando, Cleveland, Detroit, etc, with big wings, will drool over the  prospect of having Pierce out with foul trouble or gazed out to the point of needing a rest.

the problem was never the 3, but the PG spot for the bulk of this year.

Really? So, was backup PG a problem last season as well? Hmmm... what if the team had signed a wing instead of another PG, what would be your opinion? We all know, don't we?

As far as situational subs go, while Scalabrine certainly cannot stay with ALL SF's, he can and HAS played quality perimeter defense against SOME SF's...drum roll...mostly the BIGGER, STRONGER 3's that rely on size over quickness - exactly what many here have been lamenting as the team's need - not the case.

No he can't. He tries, but he's not good. As the only person here who said in the off-season Scal would get meaningful minutes and who said a few games later that Doc should work him into the regular rotation I'm now appalled by how over-appreciated Scal is - often by the same people who were ready to cut him a few months ago.

Yet, all I see on this board is revisionist ****ing about not waiting for Smith and Gooden to be bought out, which happened at literally the LAST hour possible. Conveniently enough most of the loudest complainers are the same people who were berating him for not playing the conservative hand and signing vets 4 months ago before the season started.

Revisionist? I've been saying the exact same thing before we signed Moore. How exactly is that revisionist?

If Ainge had signed a vet of Moore quality in the off-season instead of a complete bum like O'Bryant, he wouldn't be forced to pull the trigger on Moore so quickly - he would have the luxury of waiting.

This team has had all types of depth at the wing all season.

One day you'll understand it's okay to have different opinions. For the last 2 weeks I've been writing here that our biggest need by far would be another wing; I've been saying since the start of the season we needed more depth at the wing. The injuries just turned a pressing need into the biggest need.
 

If Scal or TA had not performed well when healthy this team may very well have looked for other wing options with experience, that was not the case.

TA performed well? Even his biggest supporters admited he's having a bad season, that he's been underwhelming. Talk about revisionism...

[Roy Hobbs]

“I probably played too much last game,” Pierce conceded yesterday. “I felt it after the game and today.”

... “Especially down the stretch I think it’s important to start using other guys,” Pierce said. “It’s really important to be rested going into the playoffs, because you remember how long the season was last year and all the playoff games we played. That can really wear on you, and I have to be ready because we plan on playing into June.”

... “I think [the rookies can handle the assignment],” he said. “They’ve been around and they’ve practiced all year long. Hopefully they can give us some spot minutes.”

“That was a bad job by me,” Rivers said the day after exposing Pierce to all but 18.5 seconds against Detroit. “I’ve got to get him out no matter what, even if we’re losing the lead.”

... "On those nights right now we’re going to have to go with either Billy (Walker) or J.R. (Giddens) to give us three or four minutes until we get Tony (Allen) or Scal (Brian Scalabrine) back.”

Of course, Doc said almost the exact same thing a couple of days ago, and didn't change at all.  He's driving our superstar into the ground, and until he finds a way to get Pierce some rest, he's hampering our playoff chances (not to mention increasing the chance of an injury).

http://news.bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view/2009_03_03_Doc_Rivers_takes_blame_for_Paul_Pierce_fatigue/srvc=home&position=recent

At this point, Paul Pierce has gone to the media I believe three times saying he was fatigued and/or asking to give somebody else some minutes.  How long until Doc actually gets the message?

[winsomme]

“I probably played too much last game,” Pierce conceded yesterday. “I felt it after the game and today.”

... “Especially down the stretch I think it’s important to start using other guys,” Pierce said. “It’s really important to be rested going into the playoffs, because you remember how long the season was last year and all the playoff games we played. That can really wear on you, and I have to be ready because we plan on playing into June.”

... “I think [the rookies can handle the assignment],” he said. “They’ve been around and they’ve practiced all year long. Hopefully they can give us some spot minutes.”

“That was a bad job by me,” Rivers said the day after exposing Pierce to all but 18.5 seconds against Detroit. “I’ve got to get him out no matter what, even if we’re losing the lead.”

... "On those nights right now we’re going to have to go with either Billy (Walker) or J.R. (Giddens) to give us three or four minutes until we get Tony (Allen) or Scal (Brian Scalabrine) back.”

Of course, Doc said almost the exact same thing a couple of days ago, and didn't change at all.  He's driving our superstar into the ground, and until he finds a way to get Pierce some rest, he's hampering our playoff chances (not to mention increasing the chance of an injury).

http://news.bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view/2009_03_03_Doc_Rivers_takes_blame_for_Paul_Pierce_fatigue/srvc=home&position=recent

At this point, Paul Pierce has gone to the media I believe three times saying he was fatigued and/or asking to give somebody else some minutes.  How long until Doc actually gets the message?

Roy, he's got the message.

Don't you think that this is even more evidence of how worried the Cs are about the Cavs?

Doc knows how important HC could be in this playoffs. That's the way it seems to me anyway.

I guarantee he has been going into every game planning to play Walker and then the rest time comes and he goes "wow am i really going to give this game away...."

[BudweiserCeltic]

Here it is the famous and hilarious "there's more than one way to skin a cat so it doesn't really matter" line of reasoning once again. It reminds me that in the pre-season last year's team was "over-reliant on jumpshots" and a few months later what this team needed was jumpshooters to space the floor!
Oh wait, maybe someone with half a brain would understand that the roster with which this team started the season would have a problem spacing the floor... nah, it can't be.

Ray, House, Pierce, Scal, Davis, Cassell, Garnett were tools to space the floor. We had the means to do so. Among those, three of them can play the 3. And we're not even considering Pruitt, who can shoot, and the rookies that many here since the beginning of the season have felt they could play... and they can too hit the jumper.

You don't always need the spacing to come from the small forward either. Most of our spacing problems come from our bigs (which Scal helped to solve) and Rondo.

There isn't only one type of SF that is mandatory, nobody actually said that. The problem is that we lack length and size at the wing. And some have been saying this since the off-season, so let's stop pretending it's a new thing.

It's not a new thing, just as some here are not worried about length at the 3. Just as many since the beginning of the season have felt that either Giddens or Walker could adequately fill the size/length wing role.

Frankly, this over-simplification is quite amusing. Minutes allocation are not written on stone, this is not a computer game. The lack of size at the wing is a big weakness teams will explore, just like Curry did on Sunday. Teams like Atlanta, Orlando, Cleveland, Detroit, etc, with big wings, will drool over the  prospect of having Pierce out with foul trouble or gazed out to the point of needing a rest.

What you may be pointing out here could very well be a coaching problem, not a roster problem.

the problem was never the 3, but the PG spot for the bulk of this year.

Really? So, was backup PG a problem last season as well? Hmmm... what if the team had signed a wing instead of another PG, what would be your opinion? We all know, don't we?

Backup PG was a problem last year, as it was the starting PG through the playoffs. There was a clear lack of consistency from that position. In my opinion adding a wing instead of another PG would've been a mistake.

This team has had all types of depth at the wing all season.

One day you'll understand it's okay to have different opinions. For the last 2 weeks I've been writing here that our biggest need by far would be another wing; I've been saying since the start of the season we needed more depth at the wing. The injuries just turned a pressing need into the biggest need.

Isn't this what we're having? A difference of opinion, that many here don't fill that we have a pressing need for a wing? That we have plenty of players in our roster to fill that "need" if used appropiately. What about understanding that opinion?
 

If Scal or TA had not performed well when healthy this team may very well have looked for other wing options with experience, that was not the case.

TA performed well? Even his biggest supporters admited he's having a bad season, that he's been underwhelming. Talk about revisionism...

I don't think TA's supporters have said that he's had a bad season, at least I haven't personally. I myself think he's had a good enough season. And when it comes down to it, I have no problem throwing him against all these big small forwards some of you people are afraid of.

It was also our big man rotation in the playoffs last year that helped contain LeBron, not Posey. We were constantly putting 3 bodies between him and the basket.

[BballTim]

And IMO your patchwork plan to fill the bench wing minutes simply doesn't cut it. The biggest need clearly is at the wing. We got by with Scals and TA taking those minutes but it was far less than ideal. TA made the most sense, but he was not getting the job done.

we already had a backup PG in Eddie (and Sam if we needed it) and Eddie has been the most reliable player off the bench.

  Why was TA not getting the job done? Were we losing games because of him? Were we losing all of our leads because of his play? Were backup wings on opposing teams killing us?

  And Eddie hasn't been much more reliable than anyone else and he's only effective this year as a spot up shooter who doesn't handle the ball much. That's not exactly what I look for in a pg.

my framework is looking toward the playoffs and TAs decision making seemed problematic in that regard to me.

I'm not sure how that is going to change with him if he comes back not in game shape just in time for the playoffs...

and i also think that Eddie defends the PG position as well as if not better than Mar.

I think it was worth the shot signing him, but the downside is that you are pretty close to removing Eddie from the rotation if you are going to give significant minutes to Mar to let him do the thing that he is good at....

  So "TA made the most sense, but he was not getting the job done" really meant "my framework is looking toward the playoffs and TAs decision making seemed problematic in that regard to me". How foolish of me to respond to what you said instead of the completely different meaning.

[BballTim]

If Scal or TA had not performed well when healthy this team may very well have looked for other wing options with experience, that was not the case.

TA performed well? Even his biggest supporters admited he's having a bad season, that he's been underwhelming. Talk about revisionism...

  TA hasn't played great but he hasn't been that bad. Is he costing us games? Are we losing our leads when he plays? Are we getting killed by opposing wings when he plays?

[winsomme]

If Scal or TA had not performed well when healthy this team may very well have looked for other wing options with experience, that was not the case.

TA performed well? Even his biggest supporters admited he's having a bad season, that he's been underwhelming. Talk about revisionism...

the question, BBall, is the playoffs. Even if it is conceded that he would be an adequate replacement for Pierce, how ready and/or healthy is he going to be? he had surgery, right?

  TA hasn't played great but he hasn't been that bad. Is he costing us games? Are we losing our leads when he plays? Are we getting killed by opposing wings when he plays?

[cordobes]

If Scal or TA had not performed well when healthy this team may very well have looked for other wing options with experience, that was not the case.

TA performed well? Even his biggest supporters admited he's having a bad season, that he's been underwhelming. Talk about revisionism...

  TA hasn't played great but he hasn't been that bad. Is he costing us games? Are we losing our leads when he plays? Are we getting killed by opposing wings when he plays?

He's been the same TA of ever: he has one good game, a couple of decent ones, a couple of meh ones and then a horrid one, where he's a huge liability on the floor. He's as unreliable and inconsistent as it gets. His defence has been underwhelming and disappointing, as Coach Thibodeau rightly pointed out.

Whatever the way you slice it, he hasn't performed well, unless the expectations were really low. And I can easily dig a couple of threads that will allow us to compare what those expectations were and how well is he playing.

[cordobes]

What you may be pointing out here could very well be a coaching problem, not a roster problem.

Really? Amazing, I also predicted in the pre-season Doc would be blamed by the lack of quality and diversity of this roster.

So, would you care to explain to us what would you have done do when Curry put two 6'99 wings like Walter and Tayshaun on the floor? I'm very curious.

Just as many since the beginning of the season have felt that either Giddens or Walker could adequately fill the size/length wing role.

Yeah, yeah, I remember that amusing "Walker is NBA ready" stuff. I guess they were wrong once again. And Walker isn't even 6'6'' and his defence is ordinary - very rare for a rookie to become a solid defensive player in the NBA, especially if he wasn't even good in college.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Really? Amazing, I also predicted in the pre-season Doc would be blamed by the lack of quality and diversity of this roster.

When he starts using the tools many of us feel he has at his disposal appropiately, and we still fail then that would be when I start blaming Ainge. Until then, Doc is not using the tools appropiately.

Also, I'm not blaming Doc for loses or anything like that. I'm blaming him for not using his tools appropiately.

So, would you care to explain to us what would you have done do when Curry put two 6'99 wings like Walter and Tayshaun on the floor? I'm very curious.

I would've taken out House, and placed Giddens or Walker in there. Would it have worked on this particular day? Maybe not, because this players haven't hit the floor at all this season. That's why you give them time on the floor throughout the season, even in short stints. But, Walter was hitting some tough turnaround shots, so I give him his props. Even so, without a doubt, Walker and Giddens in my opinion would've limited the damage done by him.

Just as many since the beginning of the season have felt that either Giddens or Walker could adequately fill the size/length wing role.

Yeah, yeah, I remember that amusing "Walker is NBA ready" stuff. I guess they were wrong once again. And Walker isn't even 6'6'' and his defence is ordinary - very rare for a rookie to become a solid defensive player in the NBA, especially if he wasn't even good in college.

You can't just talk about height. You have to consider wingspand, and strength also.

Also, I like Giddens over Walker. I think he's more NBA ready. And surely this is a matter of opinion and not a 100% guarantee that they would be able to get the job done. But they aren't seeing floor time, so who knows right? Who knows how they would be playing at this particular time had Doc given one of them some decent minutes over the last 1 or 2 months or so?

And don't feed me the crap that "coaches know best". The don't always know. They don't always make the right decision. The don't always weight and prioritize matters correctly. I'm a huge Doc supporter, but in this particular matter I think he's mistaken.

[winsomme]

And IMO your patchwork plan to fill the bench wing minutes simply doesn't cut it. The biggest need clearly is at the wing. We got by with Scals and TA taking those minutes but it was far less than ideal. TA made the most sense, but he was not getting the job done.

we already had a backup PG in Eddie (and Sam if we needed it) and Eddie has been the most reliable player off the bench.

  Why was TA not getting the job done? Were we losing games because of him? Were we losing all of our leads because of his play? Were backup wings on opposing teams killing us?

  And Eddie hasn't been much more reliable than anyone else and he's only effective this year as a spot up shooter who doesn't handle the ball much. That's not exactly what I look for in a pg.

my framework is looking toward the playoffs and TAs decision making seemed problematic in that regard to me.

I'm not sure how that is going to change with him if he comes back not in game shape just in time for the playoffs...

and i also think that Eddie defends the PG position as well as if not better than Mar.

I think it was worth the shot signing him, but the downside is that you are pretty close to removing Eddie from the rotation if you are going to give significant minutes to Mar to let him do the thing that he is good at....

  So "TA made the most sense, but he was not getting the job done" really meant "my framework is looking toward the playoffs and TAs decision making seemed problematic in that regard to me". How foolish of me to respond to what you said instead of the completely different meaning.

if you look back, BBall, at the FULL post that you responded to, you would see that my criticism of the patchwork plan was what would happen to it in the playoffs.

In the playoffs, holes get exploited. IMO patchwork solutions to those holes unravel.

[Casperian]

TA, Scal or Big Baby didn´t even play in last year`s playoffs, they were not good enough.
Now they are?

The team lost PJ and Posey, two key contributors, and didn´t replace them properly.

Teams like the Lakers, Magic and Cavs became much better since last season. If the Spurs get Gooden, they´re also significantly improved. We´re not the clear #1 contender in the NBA anymore, not even amongst fans of this team.

There were people on this board who wanted a good backup wing since the off-season. Me, cordobes, CoachBo, Who...just to name a few. They all were concerned about the spacing, about a backcourt of Rondo/TA without an outside shot, but the majority wore the green-colored glasses and tried to argue about how TA´s driving ability would give us Oh soo many weapons.  

There was a poll after the Moore signing about wether we should´ve waited or not, and the result was almost 50/50. Read the comments on the articles about the Moore signing on the frontpage, and how people said they would prefer a wing. It´s all there, for everyone to see.

To say anything else is the real revisionism.

In short: cordobes gets a TP.