Doc wants backup point. Where is Dooling?

[Jon]

Again, insurance would be nice with another vet.  But no one the C's have a shot at landing actually will be the primary backup PG when the C's are healthy. 

There aren't enough minutes for the guards we have WITH Terry getting backup PG minutes.  Take that away from him and we have an even bigger crunch.  And there's no way they are going to give Terry, Bradley, and/or Lee and everything they bring to the floor a combined 10-15 minutes fewer per game in the interest of slightly upgrading the ball handling and playmaking in the backcourt. 

[Q_FBE]

We will not miss the regular season Dooling.



Playoff Dooling will be missed.  That needs to be replaced by the time the playoffs roll around.

Jason Terry can't do it??? I suppose there will be a reliable journey man available around the trading deadline / playoff roster deadline. When is Avery Bradley (the DJ type point guard) coming back.

[Chris]

We will not miss the regular season Dooling.



Playoff Dooling will be missed.  That needs to be replaced by the time the playoffs roll around.

Jason Terry can't do it??? I suppose there will be a reliable journey man available around the trading deadline / playoff roster deadline. When is Avery Bradley (the DJ type point guard) coming back.

I think he means they need to replace the savvy veteran who can sit at the end of the bench, but when needed, play quality defense at the 1 and 2, and make a couple big plays, if there are any injuries or foul trouble.

That is what they need to replace before the playoffs.  Maybe one of the young guys will prove to be able to play that role...but more likely, they will have to watch the waiver wire for an opportunity.

[SHAQATTACK]

We will not miss the regular season Dooling.



Playoff Dooling will be missed.  That needs to be replaced by the time the playoffs roll around.

Jason Terry can't do it??? I suppose there will be a reliable journey man available around the trading deadline / playoff roster deadline. When is Avery Bradley (the DJ type point guard) coming back.

I'm not looking for AB in an actual game till Xmas or Jan , unless there is a disaster of health issues.

I suspect  a guard added or subtracted  before the seasons out.
Mostly likey DA is in a wait and see how this new Celtics look is working out , give em a chance to figure it out as team and all.

[BudweiserCeltic]

We will not miss the regular season Dooling.



Playoff Dooling will be missed.  That needs to be replaced by the time the playoffs roll around.

Jason Terry can't do it??? I suppose there will be a reliable journey man available around the trading deadline / playoff roster deadline. When is Avery Bradley (the DJ type point guard) coming back.

I think he means they need to replace the savvy veteran who can sit at the end of the bench, but when needed, play quality defense at the 1 and 2, and make a couple big plays, if there are any injuries or foul trouble.

That is what they need to replace before the playoffs.  Maybe one of the young guys will prove to be able to play that role...but more likely, they will have to watch the waiver wire for an opportunity.

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

If we're thin anywhere is at the SF spot, which essentially be the Pietrus/Pavlovic/Daniels replacements. One of those gets replaced with Green, the other gets replaced because we're carrying additional bigs (a trade off I'm comfortable with) and the other remains to be see... not sure if Joseph is up to the task, but it would be essentially be the Pavlovic/Daniels spot, and forgive me if I don't lose too much sleep over it.

Anyways, I'm not much to in favor of arguments that centered around "we had X player last year, we MUST replace him to succeed" particularly from an ineffective bench player who managed to hold is own when playoffs came around after Avery Bradley got injured. And with our current make-up, Dooling wouldn't be getting on the floor even with Bradley being injured...as mentioned, we've upgraded with the Terry/Lee combo, it's the SF spot we need to figure out more than anything. We have Lee who can slide over, and that's about it. It's one of the reasons I like the versatility Christmas brings regardless of doubts towards his competence for the NBA, particularly on the PG spot.

[Chris]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad. 

[Who]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

I disagree, I think it's the opposite actually ... that Courtney Lee is a much better PG than SF.

I am comfortable with Courtney Lee playing PG minutes if required.

[Chris]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

I disagree, I think it's the opposite actually ... that Courtney Lee is a much better PG than SF.

I am comfortable with Courtney Lee playing PG minutes if required.

Well, I define these positions by who they defend (because you can always shift around who handles the ball, etc.), and I think Lee is more capable of defending most SFs than he is most PGs. 

[BudweiserCeltic]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

Again, if we're talking in comparison to depth chart, Dooling's role from last year has been replaced by that of Jason Terry. The only thing is that Terry is higher on the depth chart than Dooling. But as far as being covered by potential injuries, we're in a better place this year than we were last year in the 1/2 spots, unless you want to give Moore more importance than deserved.

With Bradley currently injured, we're pretty much in the same situation we were during the playoffs, and Dooling as it is would find it difficult to get on the floor this year under this circumstances, and that should tell you something. And if he would get playing time, it would be at the expense of Terry, Lee, or Rondo, and I don't like that trade-off. During the playoffs we needed Dooling, so that should tell you how our make-up differs to that of last year.

That said, Dooling was horrible as a PG. He was good for us off the ball, and I think that's more easy to replace than the concerns towards PG play everyone is fussing about.

So towards the argument, Dooling has been replaced and improved upon. The hypothetical role Dooling was going to fill for this season yet remains to be seen. Terry already has the preaching covered, and I'm actually more comfortable with Christmas with PG duties, limited as they are, than that of Dooling. So I'm not concerned about not having Dooling, we can do better for cheap.

[Chris]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

Again, if we're talking in comparison to depth chart, Dooling's role from last year has been replaced by that of Jason Terry. The only thing is that Terry is higher on the depth chart than Dooling. But as far as being covered by potential injuries, we're in a better place this year than we were last year in the 1/2 spots, unless you want to give Moore more importance than deserved.

With Bradley currently injured, we're pretty much in the same situation we were during the playoffs, and Dooling as it is would find it difficult to get on the floor this year under this circumstances, and that should tell you something. And if he would get playing time, it would be at the expense of Terry, Lee, or Rondo, and I don't like that trade-off. During the playoffs we needed Dooling, so that should tell you how our make-up differs to that of last year.

That said, Dooling was horrible as a PG. He was good for us off the ball, and I think that's more easy to replace than the concerns towards PG play everyone is fussing about.

So towards the argument, Dooling has been replaced and improved upon. The hypothetical role Dooling was going to fill for this season yet remains to be seen. Terry already has the preaching covered, and I'm actually more comfortable with Christmas with PG duties, limited as they are, than that of Dooling. So I'm not concerned about not having Dooling, we can do better for cheap.

I am not comparing to last year, I am comparing to this year, before Dooling retired.

Comparing to last year is too complicated, because of all the injuries messing everything up.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

Again, if we're talking in comparison to depth chart, Dooling's role from last year has been replaced by that of Jason Terry. The only thing is that Terry is higher on the depth chart than Dooling. But as far as being covered by potential injuries, we're in a better place this year than we were last year in the 1/2 spots, unless you want to give Moore more importance than deserved.

With Bradley currently injured, we're pretty much in the same situation we were during the playoffs, and Dooling as it is would find it difficult to get on the floor this year under this circumstances, and that should tell you something. And if he would get playing time, it would be at the expense of Terry, Lee, or Rondo, and I don't like that trade-off. During the playoffs we needed Dooling, so that should tell you how our make-up differs to that of last year.

That said, Dooling was horrible as a PG. He was good for us off the ball, and I think that's more easy to replace than the concerns towards PG play everyone is fussing about.

So towards the argument, Dooling has been replaced and improved upon. The hypothetical role Dooling was going to fill for this season yet remains to be seen. Terry already has the preaching covered, and I'm actually more comfortable with Christmas with PG duties, limited as they are, than that of Dooling. So I'm not concerned about not having Dooling, we can do better for cheap.

I am not comparing to last year, I am comparing to this year, before Dooling retired.

Comparing to last year is too complicated, because of all the injuries messing everything up.

That's cool then, I was actually directing my response more to the initial worry from wdleehi, who was referring to Dooling's role during the playoffs. Which I think we've upgraded upon with someone higher in the depth charts.

I actually didn't like Dooling's supposed role for this year, am actually glad he retired. And that indeed needs to be replaced. I'm more comfortable with Christmas in that role than that of Dooling, we can disagree on that. I'm more curious what we'll do with Joseph though.

He doesn't strike me like he'll have any impact for us, and I'd be willing to find another ball handler (not a small PG mind you) in favor of cutting him. We can talk all about youth and all that, but as it is, we've got quite a young team at the moment.

[Chris]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

Again, if we're talking in comparison to depth chart, Dooling's role from last year has been replaced by that of Jason Terry. The only thing is that Terry is higher on the depth chart than Dooling. But as far as being covered by potential injuries, we're in a better place this year than we were last year in the 1/2 spots, unless you want to give Moore more importance than deserved.

With Bradley currently injured, we're pretty much in the same situation we were during the playoffs, and Dooling as it is would find it difficult to get on the floor this year under this circumstances, and that should tell you something. And if he would get playing time, it would be at the expense of Terry, Lee, or Rondo, and I don't like that trade-off. During the playoffs we needed Dooling, so that should tell you how our make-up differs to that of last year.

That said, Dooling was horrible as a PG. He was good for us off the ball, and I think that's more easy to replace than the concerns towards PG play everyone is fussing about.

So towards the argument, Dooling has been replaced and improved upon. The hypothetical role Dooling was going to fill for this season yet remains to be seen. Terry already has the preaching covered, and I'm actually more comfortable with Christmas with PG duties, limited as they are, than that of Dooling. So I'm not concerned about not having Dooling, we can do better for cheap.

I am not comparing to last year, I am comparing to this year, before Dooling retired.

Comparing to last year is too complicated, because of all the injuries messing everything up.

That's cool then, I was actually directing my response more to the initial worry from wdleehi, who was referring to Dooling's role during the playoffs. Which I think we've upgraded upon with someone higher in the depth charts.

I actually didn't like Dooling's supposed role for this year, am actually glad he retired. And that indeed needs to be replaced. I'm more comfortable with Christmas in that role than that of Dooling, we can disagree on that. I'm more curious what we'll do with Joseph though.

He doesn't strike me like he'll have any impact for us, and I'd be willing to find another ball handler (not a small PG mind you) in favor of cutting him. We can talk all about youth and all that, but as it is, we've got quite a young team at the moment.

I think the idea though, is that Dooling during the playoffs was a very valuable player.  And to have that kind of guy deep on your bench is immensely valuable. 

It is a security blanket, and a luxury.  But as soon as you have a couple injuries, and have to throw out undrafted rookies, rather than game tested veterans, it is missed.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

Again, if we're talking in comparison to depth chart, Dooling's role from last year has been replaced by that of Jason Terry. The only thing is that Terry is higher on the depth chart than Dooling. But as far as being covered by potential injuries, we're in a better place this year than we were last year in the 1/2 spots, unless you want to give Moore more importance than deserved.

With Bradley currently injured, we're pretty much in the same situation we were during the playoffs, and Dooling as it is would find it difficult to get on the floor this year under this circumstances, and that should tell you something. And if he would get playing time, it would be at the expense of Terry, Lee, or Rondo, and I don't like that trade-off. During the playoffs we needed Dooling, so that should tell you how our make-up differs to that of last year.

That said, Dooling was horrible as a PG. He was good for us off the ball, and I think that's more easy to replace than the concerns towards PG play everyone is fussing about.

So towards the argument, Dooling has been replaced and improved upon. The hypothetical role Dooling was going to fill for this season yet remains to be seen. Terry already has the preaching covered, and I'm actually more comfortable with Christmas with PG duties, limited as they are, than that of Dooling. So I'm not concerned about not having Dooling, we can do better for cheap.

I am not comparing to last year, I am comparing to this year, before Dooling retired.

Comparing to last year is too complicated, because of all the injuries messing everything up.

That's cool then, I was actually directing my response more to the initial worry from wdleehi, who was referring to Dooling's role during the playoffs. Which I think we've upgraded upon with someone higher in the depth charts.

I actually didn't like Dooling's supposed role for this year, am actually glad he retired. And that indeed needs to be replaced. I'm more comfortable with Christmas in that role than that of Dooling, we can disagree on that. I'm more curious what we'll do with Joseph though.

He doesn't strike me like he'll have any impact for us, and I'd be willing to find another ball handler (not a small PG mind you) in favor of cutting him. We can talk all about youth and all that, but as it is, we've got quite a young team at the moment.

I think the idea though, is that Dooling during the playoffs was a very valuable player.  And to have that kind of guy deep on your bench is immensely valuable. 

It is a security blanket, and a luxury.  But as soon as you have a couple injuries, and have to throw out undrafted rookies, rather than game tested veterans, it is missed.

We can worry about just having vet presence though, and I'm fine with that. I just dislike the notion that we're missing Dooling in the depth charts as a PG because we really don't. He sucked in that role. With him we couldn't take Rondo off the floor because he couldn't manage those responsibilities, and the few breathing minutes we gave Rondo, it wasn't Dooling doing the ball handling. He was great for us off the ball, and showed good energy defensively... that was his contribution. And when Dooling did any ball handling, our offense suffered.

[Chris]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

Again, if we're talking in comparison to depth chart, Dooling's role from last year has been replaced by that of Jason Terry. The only thing is that Terry is higher on the depth chart than Dooling. But as far as being covered by potential injuries, we're in a better place this year than we were last year in the 1/2 spots, unless you want to give Moore more importance than deserved.

With Bradley currently injured, we're pretty much in the same situation we were during the playoffs, and Dooling as it is would find it difficult to get on the floor this year under this circumstances, and that should tell you something. And if he would get playing time, it would be at the expense of Terry, Lee, or Rondo, and I don't like that trade-off. During the playoffs we needed Dooling, so that should tell you how our make-up differs to that of last year.

That said, Dooling was horrible as a PG. He was good for us off the ball, and I think that's more easy to replace than the concerns towards PG play everyone is fussing about.

So towards the argument, Dooling has been replaced and improved upon. The hypothetical role Dooling was going to fill for this season yet remains to be seen. Terry already has the preaching covered, and I'm actually more comfortable with Christmas with PG duties, limited as they are, than that of Dooling. So I'm not concerned about not having Dooling, we can do better for cheap.

I am not comparing to last year, I am comparing to this year, before Dooling retired.

Comparing to last year is too complicated, because of all the injuries messing everything up.

That's cool then, I was actually directing my response more to the initial worry from wdleehi, who was referring to Dooling's role during the playoffs. Which I think we've upgraded upon with someone higher in the depth charts.

I actually didn't like Dooling's supposed role for this year, am actually glad he retired. And that indeed needs to be replaced. I'm more comfortable with Christmas in that role than that of Dooling, we can disagree on that. I'm more curious what we'll do with Joseph though.

He doesn't strike me like he'll have any impact for us, and I'd be willing to find another ball handler (not a small PG mind you) in favor of cutting him. We can talk all about youth and all that, but as it is, we've got quite a young team at the moment.

I think the idea though, is that Dooling during the playoffs was a very valuable player.  And to have that kind of guy deep on your bench is immensely valuable. 

It is a security blanket, and a luxury.  But as soon as you have a couple injuries, and have to throw out undrafted rookies, rather than game tested veterans, it is missed.

We can worry about just having vet presence though, and I'm fine with that. I just dislike the notion that we're missing Dooling in the depth charts as a PG because we really don't. He sucked in that role. With him we couldn't take Rondo off the floor because he couldn't manage those responsibilities, and the few breathing minutes we gave Rondo, it wasn't Dooling doing the ball handling. He was great for us off the ball, and showed good energy defensively... that was his contribution. And when Dooling did any ball handling, our offense suffered.

Well, I should also be clear that I think Dooling got a bum wrap for his play.  I think he played solid defense, and while his shooting was not what it has been in the past, he still provided a valuable asset, as a guy who Doc could count on when called upon.  The problem was that they were asking him to be part of the rotation for much of the season, which was beyond what he was capable at that point in his career.

I felt the same thing about Scal, who could go from 14th man, to starting when KG was down with an injury, and basically shutting Dirk down for stretches. 

Those types of guys are very valuable at the end of your bench.  They are not guys you ever want playing on a regular basis, but they are immensely valuable at the end of the bench, so you are not forced to play guys who don't know the system, or just aren't NBA players, when there are short term injuries.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Other than as far as depth charts go, the addition of Terry (with the assumption of Lee being a Ray Allen replacement) is actually the Dooling replacement. Just because Terry is not bad enough to be an end of bench player doesn't mean we should ignore the upgrade.

All I am talking about is depth chart.  Dooling was valuable, because he gave us an extra body, who could play the 1 or 2 in case of injuries. 

With Bradley out, we are now 2 deep with NBA players who can play PG (Rondo and Terry).  It will be less of an issue when Bradley comes back, but even then, given that Bradley is also the backup SG, it isn't a ton of depth.

That is an issue.  I think Lee is much more capable of playing SF, than he is of playing PG.  So, we are 3 deep at SF (Pierce, Green, and Lee), which isn't bad.

Again, if we're talking in comparison to depth chart, Dooling's role from last year has been replaced by that of Jason Terry. The only thing is that Terry is higher on the depth chart than Dooling. But as far as being covered by potential injuries, we're in a better place this year than we were last year in the 1/2 spots, unless you want to give Moore more importance than deserved.

With Bradley currently injured, we're pretty much in the same situation we were during the playoffs, and Dooling as it is would find it difficult to get on the floor this year under this circumstances, and that should tell you something. And if he would get playing time, it would be at the expense of Terry, Lee, or Rondo, and I don't like that trade-off. During the playoffs we needed Dooling, so that should tell you how our make-up differs to that of last year.

That said, Dooling was horrible as a PG. He was good for us off the ball, and I think that's more easy to replace than the concerns towards PG play everyone is fussing about.

So towards the argument, Dooling has been replaced and improved upon. The hypothetical role Dooling was going to fill for this season yet remains to be seen. Terry already has the preaching covered, and I'm actually more comfortable with Christmas with PG duties, limited as they are, than that of Dooling. So I'm not concerned about not having Dooling, we can do better for cheap.

I am not comparing to last year, I am comparing to this year, before Dooling retired.

Comparing to last year is too complicated, because of all the injuries messing everything up.

That's cool then, I was actually directing my response more to the initial worry from wdleehi, who was referring to Dooling's role during the playoffs. Which I think we've upgraded upon with someone higher in the depth charts.

I actually didn't like Dooling's supposed role for this year, am actually glad he retired. And that indeed needs to be replaced. I'm more comfortable with Christmas in that role than that of Dooling, we can disagree on that. I'm more curious what we'll do with Joseph though.

He doesn't strike me like he'll have any impact for us, and I'd be willing to find another ball handler (not a small PG mind you) in favor of cutting him. We can talk all about youth and all that, but as it is, we've got quite a young team at the moment.

I think the idea though, is that Dooling during the playoffs was a very valuable player.  And to have that kind of guy deep on your bench is immensely valuable. 

It is a security blanket, and a luxury.  But as soon as you have a couple injuries, and have to throw out undrafted rookies, rather than game tested veterans, it is missed.

We can worry about just having vet presence though, and I'm fine with that. I just dislike the notion that we're missing Dooling in the depth charts as a PG because we really don't. He sucked in that role. With him we couldn't take Rondo off the floor because he couldn't manage those responsibilities, and the few breathing minutes we gave Rondo, it wasn't Dooling doing the ball handling. He was great for us off the ball, and showed good energy defensively... that was his contribution. And when Dooling did any ball handling, our offense suffered.

Well, I should also be clear that I think Dooling got a bum wrap for his play.  I think he played solid defense, and while his shooting was not what it has been in the past, he still provided a valuable asset, as a guy who Doc could count on when called upon.  The problem was that they were asking him to be part of the rotation for much of the season, which was beyond what he was capable at that point in his career.

I felt the same thing about Scal, who could go from 14th man, to starting when KG was down with an injury, and basically shutting Dirk down for stretches. 

Those types of guys are very valuable at the end of your bench.  They are not guys you ever want playing on a regular basis, but they are immensely valuable at the end of the bench, so you are not forced to play guys who don't know the system, or just aren't NBA players, when there are short term injuries.

If our roster circumstances were different, say Avery Bradley was a more capable PG, I'd be more than happy with Dooling and the role he could play for us. I just think we need more ball handlers than what Dooling actually brings.

The only thing I'd be wary about is Doc putting Dooling on point, regardless of better options in that position. I don't trust Doc to make the correct call under those circumstances.

Assuming we have two open roster spots, our needs as I see them is adding a ball-handler who has some length (which is why I like the prospect of Christmas, who can play 3 positions) and adding another player who can fill in as a SF as needed (even better if he can slide to the 2 when needed too). I think looking for a PG for the sake of looking for a PG, or a veteran for the sake of getting a veteran it's a mistake if they don't fit those parameters I envision.

As for Scal, I think much the same as you. The only thing is that I loved Scal as a starter when he played alongside KG. When he started in favor of Perk, it's one of the few times I've really seen our offense clicking like it should. The defense intensity was kept, and the floor spacing was phenomenal.

That biggest problem with Scal, is that Doc insisted in giving him SF responsibilities. He was a good stretch four for us, I just don't believe Doc put him in situations to succeed often, particularly with the guys he put on the floor to surround him.