To be fair, Bradley wasn't signed as a stopgap at the time -- he was given a deal to be the starting point guard on a playoff/ECF at best bound team.
There's no excuse for Evan Turner. Ever.
Did we really re-sign Bradley to be a starting point guard?
I think Bradley was signed as a decent, relatively young off-guard who might still have some upside that would make his deal a bargain. That's Danny's MO.
My point in calling Bradley and Turner stop-gaps is that they've both been in the league 5+ years, they've both shown everything they can do when given a substantial starting role, and neither is above average. Neither is a long term answer at the 1, 2, or 3, and their value is as highly as it is ever likely to be.
I'm not sure I agree with that analysis, in all honesty.
I would consider Bradley an above average player, I believe he could be a long term solution at the 2 spot, and I think he still has untapped potential.
There have been many guys in the league who, even in their mid to late 20's, have continued to develop skills and add to their game. Brandon Bass and Paul Milsap are just two examples.
I don't think Bradley will ever be an All-Star, but I think that every year he's going to make small improvements to his game. I think he'll continue to improve as a passer and ball handler (which I feel he has done over the past couple of years) and I think he'll continue to develop as a scorer (which I also feel he's done over the past couple of years).
Do I believe Bradley is irreplacable? No.
Do I believe Bradley will ever be a star? No.
Do I acknowledge that his game has significant weaknesses? Absolutely. He's extremely streaky on offense, and his passing and ball handling skills are below average for a guard.
Despite this however, I still believe that he is a good player, that his intangibles (athleticism, work ethic, motor, hustle, team-first attitude) make him valuable beyond what the stat sheet suggests, and that he's generally the most under-appreciated player on the Celtics roster.
Everybody complains about guys like Sully - his lack of work ethic, lack of drive, apparent lack of interest in improving and being the best player he can be. You can never
ever say those things about Avery Bradley. He brings it every night.
As for Turner, he's an interesting player. On one hand he can be incredibly frustrating - he's decision making can be horrendous (in terms of both shot selection and tendancy to be a turnover machine) but he's also the only guy we have at the wing positions who can do all of the above:
a) Pass
b) Handle the ball
c) Rebound a decent rate
d) Score with some degree of consistency
e) Get to the basket
His defense improved a lot last year too.
The Small Forward / Wing position is arguably our least versatile right now, because the other guy who play that spot for us are really pretty one dimensional. Jerebko is a pure 3+D guy, Crowder is just a pure D and energy guy, Hunter and Young aren't yet ready for NBA minutes. That really leaves Turner as (ironically enough) the most complete and versatile player we have at the SF spot.
In fact a Turner is, in a lot of ways, like a swingman version of Rajon Rondo. He can go on a scoring tear on any night, can get a triple double on any night, will hit huge clutch shots when you least expect it - but then the next night he'll go 2-10 from the field with 7 turnovers.
I don't mind keeping Turner on the team because he's cheap, he can create offense, and he can play in a point-forward role when we don't have a pure PG on the court.
I'm by no means attached to Turner (if we had a chance to trade him and score an upgrade, I'd be all in) but I also wouldn't push to trade him out just for the sake of it.
Plus I think he's on an expiring contract anyway, so it's not like he's going to hurt the team's long term plans.
One thing I do know - if Turner can EVER develop a reasonably consistent three point shot (even just 34%-35% from three) he'd immediately become a very good player.