We need a GM that is hungry again

[freshinthehouse]

Threads like this remind of the original CB message boards around 2004 to 2006, when some posters admonished Danny for not trading for the likes of Baron Davis, or a washed up Allen Iverson.  Some people have no patience, and would rather root for a 50-55 win club that has no shot at winning a title, than roll the dice and try to build a club that can actually take home the Larry O'Brien trophy.

[Sixth Man]

 Wait. Are you saying we should hire Sullinger for the new GM? It doesn't get any more hungry than that.

He'd be the only GM in the league with a buffet table instead of a desk in his office.  Even Vlade couldn't top that! 

[Celtics4ever]

The guy need to be called out.

How has Cousins helped New Orleans thus far?   Have they even won a game yet since getting Cousins?   

You just called yourself out as being impatient and a few other words, I won't say.

[Roy H.]

Danny has been a top tier GM.

I don't think we should dismiss the OP's primary concern, though. I think it's an interesting question: is Danny too cautious lately?

There's the DMC debate, obviously. He passed on Giannis in the draft. Are those indicative of a GM being too risk averse? We've seen this from Danny at least once before, when he took JR Giddens because he was presumed to be more NBA-ready than guys like DeAndre Jordan.

There's a concern that Danny could hold on to our "assets" too long. Look at Philly: they dealt Noel for basically a couple of second rounders, and they can't get a decent first rounder for a recent #2 pick in the draft. Could that be us? A good percentage of even top-4 picks are busts.  If Danny misses, should there be criticism for not cashing in for a sure thing?

Remember, in 2007 Danny and the franchise were facing a crossroads. Pierce was threatening to leave. Danny talked publicly about potentially trading our pick, even if it was Oden or Durant. He definitely was in "championship or bust" mode.

Has he become cautious? If so, is that a bad thing? Remember, "hungry" Danny brought us a title, but he also may have traded the Durant pick.

[ederson]

For me a team needs a hungry GM when they are at the bottom. Nets need a hungry manager , Kings....

Celtics have too much to lose with a wrong decision. So now i want a cool headed GM.

Having said that if i was DA i would have gone after Cousins harder (unless BS said no).

[Clench123]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Danny would not have hesitated to trade for Cousins had this been the 2007 season.  One could say that the 2008 Celtics team was not really a well-mannered team.  Danny would've traded for Cousins that year when he needed anything and everything to happen and Cousins would fitted right in. 

The thing about failure or one's journey to success is that the edge is ever sharp and ready and the needed quality to be a risk-taker is ever present.  Once success is attained it produces complacency, which is what we are seeing in Danny's case.  He hung his hat on that 2008 championship and relaxed.  His job is secured and no demands are made of him.  He's become (too) careful and methodical and it has hurt us more than it has benefited us.  One could point to flipping the big three for high draft picks as one of Danny's greatest achievement and it would be but luck had a lot to do with it, thanks to the Nets for being one of the worst managed teams in the league. 

Outside of the championship, I feel Brad Stevens is Danny's greatest achievement.  Trading Perkins (for Jeff Green), his fetish with small guards, passing on big trades, never addressing the center position since Perkins, awful at drafting, overpaying talents that aren't worth it, and then the most recent we are all aware of...

Doing absolutely nothing at the deadline while we have the world in our hands to significantly upgrade this team and become a contender. 

Danny has lost IT.  I'm going to get a lot of flak for this thread but screw it.  The guy need to be called out.

Okay, so which GM do you propose should be the replacement for Danny Ainge? Shoot some names.

Me? I trust Ainge.

I'm not calling for Ainge to be fired per se.  All i'm saying is people shouldn't let him get away with so much.  Ordaining him the title of one of the best GM provides a good excuse for never having to challenge anything he does.  The guy is far from being above reproach or a great GM for that matter.

[ederson]

there are good reasons for not trading for cousins. i would have but it is easy to decide sitting on the couch without risking anything..... and i am pretty sure there are more that we are not aware off. GMs are not Gods but they have more info than us

[Rida]

Threads like this remind of the original CB message boards around 2004 to 2006, when some posters admonished Danny for not trading for the likes of Baron Davis, or a washed up Allen Iverson.  Some people have no patience, and would rather root for a 50-55 win club that has no shot at winning a title, than roll the dice and try to build a club that can actually take home the Larry O'Brien trophy.

This is such a dumb post

a) The Kings wanted a first round pick in 2017
b) I don't think anyone on this board including you would be happy to trade the Bkn pick for Cousins
C) Ranadive has an unhealthy fascination with Hield who he believes has "Steph Curry potential"
d) New Orleans are 0-3 since the trade
e) Cousins is suspended for their next game
f) every other tech he recives this season will result in a suspension
g) We have a top 3 pick in a loaded draft and we are ranked 2nd in the east
h) we have a max contract spot availible this summer

What exactly has Ainge done wrong?

[The One]

I am more than happy with Daniel R. Ainge.

He's a top 5...possibly a top 3 GM in the Association.

Perfect?  No.

Really, really, really good?  Yes!

[colincb]

 Wait. Are you saying we should hire Sullinger for the new GM? It doesn't get any more hungry than that.

Big Baby Davis > Sullinger {and he's available too).

[slamdunk]

Nah man, Ainge is the best GM in Boston right now!!

[manl_lui]

Sully is waived and always hungry. so am I..

hehehehehehehehehehe

[CoachBo]

Danny has been a top tier GM.

I don't think we should dismiss the OP's primary concern, though. I think it's an interesting question: is Danny too cautious lately?

There's the DMC debate, obviously. He passed on Giannis in the draft. Are those indicative of a GM being too risk averse? We've seen this from Danny at least once before, when he took JR Giddens because he was presumed to be more NBA-ready than guys like DeAndre Jordan.

There's a concern that Danny could hold on to our "assets" too long. Look at Philly: they dealt Noel for basically a couple of second rounders, and they can't get a decent first rounder for a recent #2 pick in the draft. Could that be us? A good percentage of even top-4 picks are busts.  If Danny misses, should there be criticism for not cashing in for a sure thing?

Remember, in 2007 Danny and the franchise were facing a crossroads. Pierce was threatening to leave. Danny talked publicly about potentially trading our pick, even if it was Oden or Durant. He definitely was in "championship or bust" mode.

Has he become cautious? If so, is that a bad thing? Remember, "hungry" Danny brought us a title, but he also may have traded the Durant pick.

I think there are legitimate risk averse-oriented questions to be asked, as to whether Ainge and Grousbeck are actually championship hungry or whether they're satisfied with the current improvement. Chasing a title is expensive; history and Ainge's track record do not support his ability to draft a champion.

Good thoughts. TP.

[kraidstar]

Danny has been a top tier GM.

I don't think we should dismiss the OP's primary concern, though. I think it's an interesting question: is Danny too cautious lately?

There's the DMC debate, obviously. He passed on Giannis in the draft. Are those indicative of a GM being too risk averse? We've seen this from Danny at least once before, when he took JR Giddens because he was presumed to be more NBA-ready than guys like DeAndre Jordan.

There's a concern that Danny could hold on to our "assets" too long. Look at Philly: they dealt Noel for basically a couple of second rounders, and they can't get a decent first rounder for a recent #2 pick in the draft. Could that be us? A good percentage of even top-4 picks are busts.  If Danny misses, should there be criticism for not cashing in for a sure thing?

Remember, in 2007 Danny and the franchise were facing a crossroads. Pierce was threatening to leave. Danny talked publicly about potentially trading our pick, even if it was Oden or Durant. He definitely was in "championship or bust" mode.

Has he become cautious? If so, is that a bad thing? Remember, "hungry" Danny brought us a title, but he also may have traded the Durant pick.

I would say Brown, Yabusele, Bradley, and Rozier were all "aggressive" draft picks. Same with Fab Melo. High upside guys who had a lot of wrinkles to be ironed out.

Not "safe" picks at all.

Ainge was obviously very aggressive when he went after Ray and KG - it was rumored for months he'd been pursuing KG hard - he just needed the right deal, and he needed Ray first to convince KG to come. Acquiring one of the best players of all time in KG was possible because of Ray, and also because Ainge did NOT use his assets on a lesser deal before those 2 trades.

Maybe he's not seeing a viable path right now to a championship with what trades and players were available, and is waiting for a better opportunity to either draft or trade for a true superstar.

This isn't his first rodeo, gonna trust his judgment.

[Monkhouse]

I'm going out on a limb here, and say OP should just petition himself as the new GM of the Boston Celtics.

We'll see how long it'll take before Fire Clench123! threads start popping up.