Will 2009-2010 define Ainge more than any year before

[campybatman]

I believe Boston's longterm success is contingent on what happens next off season. He has come too far now. I don't think you can pass the buck. Some pressure and criticism I believe was lifted off of Rivers' shoulders coaching the team with staff to a NBA title, but the weight is still on the shoulders of Ainge. Being in the front office doesn't allow you rest. Next year could be monumental.

Well, Garnett and Perkins are under contract through next season. While Pierce possibly can opt out after next season, House can opt out after this season, (Ray) Allen, Scalabrine, (Tony) Allen, Rondo and O'Bryant (I think there's an option for him after this season) will be in their last year and Cassell, Powe, Davis and Pruitt will be free agents.

I say this is good in that Ainge can retool the entire bench. And it's interesting for the simple reason that you wonder who he'll like to retain among the Celtics players entering free agency. Not to mention, the speculation of whether or not Ray and/or Scalabrine might be traded during their final season under contract.

If Boston were to repeat as national champions of the NBA. I think Ainge's job isn't as stressful assuming that the young players can elevate their stock a tad more during the playoffs. Or he can try to bring most of everyone back for one more run for a three-peat. On the other hand, Ainge could find himself in a carious situation with the team not repeating. Then the idea of retooling the roster becomes a more welcomed suggestion. I don't mean cleaning house. But, maybe you take a chance and see what you can get for Ray or Perkins or Powe.

[Harison]

Bringing Big 3 and winning championship already defined Ainge, because next changes wont be major (maybe 2010 will bring another superstar to play along Big 2-3). The real challenge will be after KG/Pierce/etc. retirement, can Ainge repeat making of another championship team? Only then it will be clear if DA is worthy successor of Red, and I'm pretty sure he will continue the tradition, he is brilliant manager.

[cfan79]

I get what you're saying about the team. We can either be like the recent Detroit and Miami teams and win 1 or 2 titles or we can be a dynasty like the recent LA and San Antonio teams. I'm optimistic and think the Big 3 still has at least 5 years of playing great.

But the main reason LA and San Antonio have won so many titles is because of the roleplayers. They are out there to be had. Vets have already made their money in their careers and tend to want rings more then big contracts. Posey was going through an opposite situation where he hadn't gotten his fat contract until this season.

[Hemingway]

Hopefully we win it all this year. Then we can simply add another good player with our MLE and go for the hat trick. Maybe Sheed? I'm still not clear on exactly how a Ray trade would work out. Kind of stinks that it can't really be talked about on this board with out a ton of negativity. Anyways maybe some sort of deal happens where we trade Ray only to get him back by mid season. Say he is traded as an expiring and then traded again and then bought out. I have a feeling that signing or extending Ray 1 year might be what we end up doing.

[ParticleMan]

This offseason there won't be too much movement. Pruitt isn't a FA, we have a team option, it would be crazy for us not to use it given how cheap it is and that he has potential. Same for POB.

The real decision will be Powe vs Baby vs neither vs both. I suspect we will go after Sheed for the MLE, and if we get him, we would probably either keep one of Powe or Baby, whoever is willing to sign a reasonable deal (eg 3 yr, 9 mil). If not, we may try to keep both, or else keep one and hope that POB can step in as the backup 5. Or maybe Semi Erden.

Other than that there aren't really any decisions. Cassell will become a coach. And unless someone really good suddenly comes on the market, we're not trading any of the Big 3. We don't even have a 1st round pick this year. It's really going to be a very quiet offseason for us, at least by Ainge standards.

[bruno sundov]

I believe Boston's longterm success is contingent on what happens next off season. He has come too far now. I don't think you can pass the buck. Some pressure and criticism I believe was lifted off of Rivers' shoulders coaching the team with staff to a NBA title, but the weight is still on the shoulders of Ainge. Being in the front office doesn't allow you rest. Next year could be monumental.

Well, Garnett and Perkins are under contract through next season. While Pierce possibly can opt out after next season, House can opt out after this season, (Ray) Allen, Scalabrine, (Tony) Allen, Rondo and O'Bryant (I think there's an option for him after this season) will be in their last year and Cassell, Powe, Davis and Pruitt will be free agents.

I say this is good in that Ainge can retool the entire bench. And it's interesting for the simple reason that you wonder who he'll like to retain among the Celtics players entering free agency. Not to mention, the speculation of whether or not Ray and/or Scalabrine might be traded during their final season under contract.

If Boston were to repeat as WORLD champions of the NBA. I think Ainge's job isn't as stressful assuming that the young players can elevate their stock a tad more during the playoffs. Or he can try to bring most of everyone back for one more run for a three-peat. On the other hand, Ainge could find himself in a carious situation with the team not repeating. Then the idea of retooling the roster becomes a more welcomed suggestion. I don't mean cleaning house. But, maybe you take a chance and see what you can get for Ray or Perkins or Powe.

I agree with what you saying besides the one major correction I had to make. IF BOS wins aain this year it wont be hard retooling the bench. people will want to come and pay here. They might not be all stars, but that isn't really what is needed. The celts are by far the best team in the L.

[Kids Are Alright]

Maybe Sheed? I'm still not clear on exactly how a Ray trade would work out. Kind of stinks that it can't really be talked about on this board with out a ton of negativity..

Hey, he's been a fav player of mine for years...just about the most fluid player in my memory. (I'm thinking about his work on Rip last year). I'd trade him for a lot of players, but at his age, I'd hate to see us get lousy compensation. Ray's a better ball player than Sheed IMO....Still, he may go Wally on us, you never know.

[greenbeans]

Good or bad I don't think Ainge can outdo last offseason. I sure hope he comes close though

[campybatman]

Ray's a major sticking point in that he can help Ainge facilitate a trade for another still young All-Star caliber player to replace him or add to Pierce and Garnett by virtue of eliminating his salary. Moreover, what's conflicting with Ray is that you would prefer to retain him beyond his final year for chemistry and continuity sake. But, you don't want to fall into the trap of holding onto an aging trio like Bird, McHale and Parish where you're torn between fan loyalty and appeasing them and reloading at the expense of one or two of your top three players when their time is near. That trio and this trio are obviously different as their bodies were beginning to breakdown. The reasons to split them up are different from today's trio but the point was made. I'm simply saying you've to think longterm. That's how the better general managers keep their jobs; they maintain a level of success by giving the team each season an opportunity to be in contention for winning a NBA championship. I think Ainge wants to maintain something here in Boston. Therefore, next off season is so important for this reason and for the reason that bringing in Garnett and (Ray) Allen helped Pierce and company win a title like Curt Schilling helping the Red Sox win a World Series championship in his first season with the team. But, it isn't so much about topping that off season as it's about ultimately achieving what the better general managers manage to do. Maintain that longevity. The San Antonio Spurs are an example of this. They aren't repeating.... But, they didn't experience that long of a long hiatus from the NBA Finals each time that they'd won a title. They're having success while Tim Duncan is still relevant in the league. Boston must think the same way while they've Garnett. But, don't limit yourself. Keep thinking ahead, if you're Ainge.

[Maple Green]

Danny A had a secret plan beyond and I loved the way he works. Develop potential cheap young ones and trade to the big guns. or already big gun trade to much bigger gun.

[ParticleMan]

i agree we need to think ahead. so i expect the most interesting season should be 2010-11. the big 3 should start showing signs of decline, injury, etc, and our young crew will have sorted themselves out a bit more. we can't hang on to aging stars for sentimental reasons, we need to use them plus the young kids to trade for some frontline allstars who can carry on the tradition.

as for ainge's "secret" plan, it really wasn't any secret if you were paying attention, but of course it was much more fun for the media to just kick dirt on the C's when they were down instead of realizing what ainge was up to. i don't see any reason not to stick with this plan, since ainge's drafting skills and the staff's development skills will keep us stocked in young talent.

[Havlicek17]

I agree with the original post. A lot will depend if we repeat this year or not.

If we repeat, we won't change much. Nor should we. We'll sign Powe to a bigger contract in the offseason, use the MLE for some veteran help, and maybe make a small trade for roster space. Housecleaning only. AND, if we keep winning, we have a built-in staggered salary situation with the big three that will allow us to keep the team intact for years to come. With Ray taking less after 09/10, we will have room to sign Rondo to a bigger contract. It also allows us to bring in a veteran or two (MLE) to round out the bench.

If we don't repeat, we will make changes, but there's no way to predict what will happen. I think it will depend on how our team is playing and what the main reason for losing will be. As an example, if it's interior size, then that will be the area that gets the attention for improvement, etc, etc.

Danny will continue to acquire and develop good young talent and have some flexibility when the time comes. But the way we are constructed and currently playing, I don't believe that will involve the big 3, nor do I believe that time will come this offseason or next year.

I am really enjoying watching the Celtics play as a team, and putting three, maybe four (Rondo?) future HOF'ers on the floor, who can step up every night. It's going to be hard to replace this team when it is finally over, but I am one of those that believes it ain't over yet.

[bruno sundov]

My advice is just enjoy beng on to or a while. It feels great winning by 15 every night.

[campybatman]

About Ainge, I'm not going to discredit him in any way by saying he'd lucked into acquiring Garnett. Still, I believe timing is everything. Ainge probably had a plan to build up the value of his young players and see what he can acquire for them. So, he didn't deviate from that course. What he probably didn't expect was for Garnett to actually consider the idea put before him of playing for another team. Here's a case of where perfect timing coincided with an once in a life time opportunity. So, I don't believe acquiring Garnett or even Ray Allen were the results of a master plan. I'm sure Ainge's always thinking big. But, again, this couldn't have been something that Ainge knew would occur before it occurred. Wouldn't that be tampering? Unless, he and McHale were indeed in cahoots. And I've a tough time believing that if you figure that most likely Minnesota ownership wasn't in on it. Hence, this would've had to be an under the table dealing that could've very well put McHale as risk to get fired, if details were leaked to the media. Would Al Jefferson have been worth getting canned and ruining your reputation around the league and blacklisting yourself? I doubt it.

[ParticleMan]

I don't think Ainge knew he was going to get Garnett and Allen 4 years ago, but there's always SOME big-time players who are looking to move for one reason or another. So yes, it was a master plan not necessarily to get KG & Ray exactly, but at least one or probably two other big-time allstars next to Pierce. It happened to be KG and Ray, but it could have been Shaq and Vince, or Iverson and Gasol. I love KG and Ray, but we could have made a damn good run with any of those trios. The point is, you have to have the chips lined up, your ducks in a row, whatever, in order to make a play for them when they come available. That's what Ainge was setting up for all along.

[campybatman]

Would've been interesting to see how the team could've done last season with Ray Allen and no Garnett. Because Pierce was already excited when the thought was only on Ray. Then everyone's expectations changed once Garnett changed his feelings toward playing for Boston.

I think Pierce would've been cool with Ray as the main acquisition last off season, but he wouldn't change how things worked out instead either.

[Al-Haqq]

I think it's funny that people are suggesting that Danny Ainge on purpose accumulated young players so they develop enough value to trade for Allen and KG a few years later on. Lol, that simply isn't true ...!

We lost out on draft lottery night so Ainge wanted to make a move for the present, which is why he traded for Ray Allen.

... and while I'm at it, the media has completely fabricated the notion that Ainge knew KG would come to Boston if he got Allen. THIS IS NOT TRUE.

Even Ainge said he didn't bring in Allen knowing it would bring in KG.

But anyway, the Celtics have 2 championship years left, maybe 3, but that's it. Allen and KG will be too old by then. A huge year for Ainge in 2010.

[ParticleMan]

I think it's funny that people are suggesting that Danny Ainge on purpose accumulated young players so they develop enough value to trade for Allen and KG a few years later on. Lol, that simply isn't true ...!

how do you know this isn't true?

if you go back and read ainge's quotes, the plan is pretty much written in them.
he said, shortly after he took over, that the C's had few tradeable assets, and his first job was to increase the assets so that he could make trades.
he said that young players don't win in the nba.
he said that pierce is a guy he wanted to build around.
he said he had a 3-year plan to compete for a title (turned out to be 4, but i think we'll take it).

and the coup de grace is that it actually happened. you don't trade for two allstars in their prime in a single offseason (something that's never happened before in the CBA era) without some preparation. Pulling that off takes some serious planning. Or do you really think Ainge was like "gee, all my other plans didn't work, and we got a crappy lottery pick, why don't we just trade for two allstars in their prime to go along with pierce." i mean, if it was that easy, how come none of the other 29 GMs in the league ever figured this out?

[canman1971]

I think it's funny that people are suggesting that Danny Ainge on purpose accumulated young players so they develop enough value to trade for Allen and KG a few years later on. Lol, that simply isn't true ...!

how do you know this isn't true?

if you go back and read ainge's quotes, the plan is pretty much written in them.
he said, shortly after he took over, that the C's had few tradeable assets, and his first job was to increase the assets so that he could make trades.
he said that young players don't win in the nba.
he said that pierce is a guy he wanted to build around.
he said he had a 3-year plan to compete for a title (turned out to be 4, but i think we'll take it).

and the coup de grace is that it actually happened. you don't trade for two allstars in their prime in a single offseason (something that's never happened before in the CBA era) without some preparation. Pulling that off takes some serious planning. Or do you really think Ainge was like "gee, all my other plans didn't work, and we got a crappy lottery pick, why don't we just trade for two allstars in their prime to go along with pierce." i mean, if it was that easy, how come none of the other 29 GMs in the league ever figured this out?

Well said Particle, I think Ainge planned this all along. I'm sure he didn't know it would be KG or Allen, but he knew PP wasn't doing it with young players. If the KG or Allen thing didn't work out, Ainge would've traded PP for young players and looked to trade them later. Ainge is all about collecting assets and selling high. Look what he got for freaking Jiri Welcsh? And he did it all with no pick higher than 5, which in itself is as impressive as it gets. Anyone who doubts Ainge now is just silly, not saying anyone here is.

[Kefa461]

I get what you're saying about the team. We can either be like the recent Detroit and Miami teams and win 1 or 2 titles or we can be a dynasty like the recent LA and San Antonio teams. I'm optimistic and think the Big 3 still has at least 5 years of playing great.

But the main reason LA and San Antonio have won so many titles is because of the roleplayers. They are out there to be had. Vets have already made their money in their careers and tend to want rings more then big contracts. Posey was going through an opposite situation where he hadn't gotten his fat contract until this season.

We as a team wrote the book on building and keeping winners (SAS-it's been 3 years)(LAL-it's been since 2001) Danny knows what to do. He knows to follow, not to ignore Red's lessons. The team is in good hands. I am enjoying the ride.