next »

[Lightskinsmurf]

Great Question.

Refer back to Febuary 2011 (Perk Trade )

That trade has been discussed on here ad infinitum, but IMO it had a horrible effect on the chemistry.

It was a trade that HAD to be made, I suppose. We needed a backup for Pierce after Marquis went down, and I guess the dominoes fell afterwards.

Fast forward to now? As tantalizing as Pau, Gortat, Josh Smith, etc, etc - look..do we absolutely HAVE to gut the team or trade away a key sub or subs to get a coveted player that we THINK we need?

I'm glad I'm not Danny...GMs have the toughest job in sports, IMO.

My gut is telling me to stand pat with what we have...I thought that during the summer we reloaded to shore up Pierce, KG and Rondo.

When healthy, including Avery Bradley, this team is still world beaters. My gut says go to the playoffs vs BKN, MIA, CHI - whoever - with what we have NOW, including AB.

I just don't want to relive another Feb 2011.

The answer is no and i agree unless we can trade Lee And Sully/bass for one of them. That's as much as id be willing to give up. Before the season started almost everyone agreed we had a team good enough to go the distance. We lose a few games early *Without ab* and all of a sudden we NEED a trade. I'm not buying it. We need ab back and we'll be fine.

[GreenFaith1819]

Great Question.

Refer back to Febuary 2011 (Perk Trade )

That trade has been discussed on here ad infinitum, but IMO it had a horrible effect on the chemistry.

It was a trade that HAD to be made, I suppose. We needed a backup for Pierce after Marquis went down, and I guess the dominoes fell afterwards.

Fast forward to now? As tantalizing as Pau, Gortat, Josh Smith, etc, etc - look..do we absolutely HAVE to gut the team or trade away a key sub or subs to get a coveted player that we THINK we need?

I'm glad I'm not Danny...GMs have the toughest job in sports, IMO.

My gut is telling me to stand pat with what we have...I thought that during the summer we reloaded to shore up Pierce, KG and Rondo.

When healthy, including Avery Bradley, this team is still world beaters. My gut says go to the playoffs vs BKN, MIA, CHI - whoever - with what we have NOW, including AB.

I just don't want to relive another Feb 2011.

The answer is no and i agree unless we can trade Lee And Sully/bass for one of them. That's as much as id be willing to give up. Before the season started almost everyone agreed we had a team good enough to go the distance. We lose a few games early *Without ab* and all of a sudden we NEED a trade. I'm not buying it. We need ab back and we'll be fine.

I'd go as far to say not to trade even Sully/Bass or Lee.

Sully has the basketball IQ of a player that's been in the league a few years...I don't think you can teach that mindset right away.

And he's still learning the NBA game, which is scary. I'd "almost" compare him to Larry Legend as far as IQ at THIS stage.

Sully has a nose for the ball. He is a TRUE lottery pick. Say what we want to about his defense (not very good, yet), but everything else about him oozes NBA starter one day.

KG has even made comparisons to Perk with Sully, as far as work ethic. So Sully has now had an effect on KG, and vice versa.

Bass? I'd hate to part with him, too. He played well during the playoffs last year for us, and he plays good defense.

Both of these guys have bought in. That takes time.

Even Courtney Lee has accepted his role..he's started some games, and lately has come off the bench - seemingly with no complaints.

That Perk trade just gives me cold feet to an extent. Out of all the players rumored, I've clamored the most for Josh Smith in Green, but even with THAT scenario I'm sure Danny Ferry would try to take us to the cleaners.

We'd get a supposedly coveted player, then Ainge would be left trying to fill the holes for Pierce, KG or whomever else we lost depth-wise.

Doc's job then gets harder than what it already is.

God forbid I'd revisit this thread if someone gets injured, but for right now I would just want to stand pat.....go the distance with what we have and get AB back healthy.

[Lightskinsmurf]

Great Question.

Refer back to Febuary 2011 (Perk Trade )

That trade has been discussed on here ad infinitum, but IMO it had a horrible effect on the chemistry.

It was a trade that HAD to be made, I suppose. We needed a backup for Pierce after Marquis went down, and I guess the dominoes fell afterwards.

Fast forward to now? As tantalizing as Pau, Gortat, Josh Smith, etc, etc - look..do we absolutely HAVE to gut the team or trade away a key sub or subs to get a coveted player that we THINK we need?

I'm glad I'm not Danny...GMs have the toughest job in sports, IMO.

My gut is telling me to stand pat with what we have...I thought that during the summer we reloaded to shore up Pierce, KG and Rondo.

When healthy, including Avery Bradley, this team is still world beaters. My gut says go to the playoffs vs BKN, MIA, CHI - whoever - with what we have NOW, including AB.

I just don't want to relive another Feb 2011.

The answer is no and i agree unless we can trade Lee And Sully/bass for one of them. That's as much as id be willing to give up. Before the season started almost everyone agreed we had a team good enough to go the distance. We lose a few games early *Without ab* and all of a sudden we NEED a trade. I'm not buying it. We need ab back and we'll be fine.

I'd go as far to say not to trade even Sully/Bass or Lee.

Sully has the basketball IQ of a player that's been in the league a few years...I don't think you can teach that mindset right away.

And he's still learning the NBA game, which is scary. I'd "almost" compare him to Larry Legend as far as IQ at THIS stage.

Sully has a nose for the ball. He is a TRUE lottery pick. Say what we want to about his defense (not very good, yet), but everything else about him oozes NBA starter one day.

KG has even made comparisons to Perk with Sully, as far as work ethic. So Sully has now had an effect on KG, and vice versa.

Bass? I'd hate to part with him, too. He played well during the playoffs last year for us, and he plays good defense.

Both of these guys have bought in. That takes time.

Even Courtney Lee has accepted his role..he's started some games, and lately has come off the bench - seemingly with no complaints.

That Perk trade just gives me cold feet to an extent. Out of all the players rumored, I've clamored the most for Josh Smith in Green, but even with THAT scenario I'm sure Danny Ferry would try to take us to the cleaners.

We'd get a supposedly coveted player, then Ainge would be left trying to fill the holes for Pierce, KG or whomever else we lost depth-wise.

Doc's job then gets harder than what it already is.

God forbid I'd revisit this thread if someone gets injured, but for right now I would just want to stand pat.....go the distance with what we have and get AB back healthy.

I can respect that and i certainly wouldn't be mad if we didn't make a trade. The beauty is we have depth and i don't wanna give our bench away for any player that's not a superstar. Our depth is already paying off now.

Ab is out and LEE steps in. Injuries pretty much guaranteed to happen over an 82 game season. Also if you really look at our team what is our main problem? Its not scoring *Which was our problem last year* its defense.

The fact we're missing our best defender makes me relax a little as far as that goes. One thing I've been noticing is even tho we might not have many consistent bench players outside of probably terry *Even tho hes a starter now he will go back to the bench once ab returns*

We still have alot of talent on that bench and the chances of every player being off on one night is slim. One night barbosa goes off for 17 points, the next night its green. Next night it will be terry etc. Our bench will be just fine. Our defense will be just fine once AB returns im sure of it. The kind of defense he plays will inspire the rest of the team.

[gpap]

Chemistry is very important. Especially when I was a junior in high school. Not matter how hard I tried to study, I just couldn't get it. Science was never my strength.  The weekly labs were interesting, however.

[timpiker]

yes I like his D !

[timpiker]

1. Do NOT trade Sully!  Please.
2.  Its early in the year but our #1 issue right now is that PP and KG have to play real well for us to win.  This team should be way better than that. 

[Lightskinsmurf]

yes I like his D !

Whoa...........pause.....

[crimson_stallion]

Nothing - we have no chemistry lol

[LooseCannon]

Part of my idea is that I don't think it makes sense to do a trade until around the All-Star break, especially if you think you are getting a player on an expiring contract.

Do you think that team chemistry, especially on defense, will remain what it is right now or will it get better?  If it does get better, will a trade set the team back?  If it sets the team back, does a February trade make it too late to easily right the ship?

[Mazingerz]

Devastating IMO. We are already getting there. Add a big where Darko left. No need to gut the team again. Bonds have formed since training camp. And it would be disastrous. Let it play out i say. We will gel, and we will win, we will get Banner 18 this year with this group. Defense has already been forming and trust is there.

[Moranis]

All the chemistry in the world doesn't matter if you don't have the talent to beat superior talented teams.  For me I just don't think this team is good enough to realistically compete with the three big boy teams (Miami, OKC, LAL) and thus I don't think perfect chemistry actually matters.

I disagree with this in general.  The 2004 and 2010 NBA Finals are what jump to my mind as counterexamples over the course of a 7 game series.

But in terms of the Celtics, I agree with you because our team has very little chemistry working in its favor thus far.  So in response to the OP, I have no problem with it not because I don't think chemistry matters, but because we have such little chemistry built up so far that would be in danger of being set back.

The Pistons in 2004 made a major mid season trade to add talent (Rasheed).  Not sure what point you are trying to make in 2010.  Boston had a major injury in game 7 and lost to a team that was at least equally as talented and that was playing at home.

[action781]

All the chemistry in the world doesn't matter if you don't have the talent to beat superior talented teams.  For me I just don't think this team is good enough to realistically compete with the three big boy teams (Miami, OKC, LAL) and thus I don't think perfect chemistry actually matters.

I disagree with this in general.  The 2004 and 2010 NBA Finals are what jump to my mind as counterexamples over the course of a 7 game series.

But in terms of the Celtics, I agree with you because our team has very little chemistry working in its favor thus far.  So in response to the OP, I have no problem with it not because I don't think chemistry matters, but because we have such little chemistry built up so far that would be in danger of being set back.

The Pistons in 2004 made a major mid season trade to add talent (Rasheed).  Not sure what point you are trying to make in 2010.  Boston had a major injury in game 7 and lost to a team that was at least equally as talented and that was playing at home.

Yes, but they were still very very much less talented than the stacked Lakers of that year.  Those Lakers were one of the best collections of talent the league has seen since I've started really following the NBA in the mid 90's.  But Detroit's chemistry trumped the Lakers talent.

And sorry, I meant 2011, not 2010, when the Mavs beat Miami.  Miami was clearly had far more talent on that team.

[mgent]

All the chemistry in the world doesn't matter if you don't have the talent to beat superior talented teams.  For me I just don't think this team is good enough to realistically compete with the three big boy teams (Miami, OKC, LAL) and thus I don't think perfect chemistry actually matters.

I disagree with this in general.  The 2004 and 2010 NBA Finals are what jump to my mind as counterexamples over the course of a 7 game series.

But in terms of the Celtics, I agree with you because our team has very little chemistry working in its favor thus far.  So in response to the OP, I have no problem with it not because I don't think chemistry matters, but because we have such little chemistry built up so far that would be in danger of being set back.

The Pistons in 2004 made a major mid season trade to add talent (Rasheed).  Not sure what point you are trying to make in 2010.  Boston had a major injury in game 7 and lost to a team that was at least equally as talented and that was playing at home.

Yes, but they were still very very much less talented than the stacked Lakers of that year.  Those Lakers were one of the best collections of talent the league has seen since I've started really following the NBA in the mid 90's.  But Detroit's chemistry trumped the Lakers talent.

And sorry, I meant 2011, not 2010, when the Mavs beat Miami.  Miami was clearly had far more talent on that team.

That's somewhat debatable.  Are 10 championship-quality talented players really that far below 3 extra talented guys?  It's a team sport.

When Miami won they had much more talent in Battier and a healthy Miller than they did in Bibby, James Jones, and Big Z.


Edit:

Same thing with the Lakers, yeah they had SOME talent left in a 35 year old Payton and 40 year old Malone, but it was still 2 vs 5.  Kobe and Shaq were probably even more talented than LeBron and Wade, but when you have 5 all stars that talent adds up.

[Moranis]

All the chemistry in the world doesn't matter if you don't have the talent to beat superior talented teams.  For me I just don't think this team is good enough to realistically compete with the three big boy teams (Miami, OKC, LAL) and thus I don't think perfect chemistry actually matters.

I disagree with this in general.  The 2004 and 2010 NBA Finals are what jump to my mind as counterexamples over the course of a 7 game series.

But in terms of the Celtics, I agree with you because our team has very little chemistry working in its favor thus far.  So in response to the OP, I have no problem with it not because I don't think chemistry matters, but because we have such little chemistry built up so far that would be in danger of being set back.

The Pistons in 2004 made a major mid season trade to add talent (Rasheed).  Not sure what point you are trying to make in 2010.  Boston had a major injury in game 7 and lost to a team that was at least equally as talented and that was playing at home.

Yes, but they were still very very much less talented than the stacked Lakers of that year.  Those Lakers were one of the best collections of talent the league has seen since I've started really following the NBA in the mid 90's.  But Detroit's chemistry trumped the Lakers talent.

And sorry, I meant 2011, not 2010, when the Mavs beat Miami.  Miami was clearly had far more talent on that team.

That's somewhat debatable.  Are 10 championship-quality talented players really that far below 3 extra talented guys?  It's a team sport.

When Miami won they had much more talent in Battier and a healthy Miller than they did in Bibby, James Jones, and Big Z.


Edit:

Same thing with the Lakers, yeah they had SOME talent left in a 35 year old Payton and 40 year old Malone, but it was still 2 vs 5.  Kobe and Shaq were probably even more talented than LeBron and Wade, but when you have 5 all stars that talent adds up.

exactly.  t.p.

[angryguy77]

One thing is for sure, a trade would destroy the wonderful defensive chemistry we have