rob4748 wrote:ConstableGeneva wrote:
Terrible.. Huge L for Ainge. Just let the guy go and get something back. Move on. This is handcuffing us from signing other FA's.
He doesnt want turner guys.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Moderators: bisme37, Parliament10, canman1971, shackles10, snowman, Froob, Darthlukey, Shak_Celts
rob4748 wrote:ConstableGeneva wrote:
Terrible.. Huge L for Ainge. Just let the guy go and get something back. Move on. This is handcuffing us from signing other FA's.
leper-con wrote:According to this forum , Dannys getting blamed for dogs pooping in peoples yards all over the country.
It's like people are internalizing the lack of trade onto Danny.
There is another team involved and a player , all of which have a say.
not to mention the deal could already be done and we are trying to do some others things salary wise that will affect the team, and need to be done in a certain order. I take common sense for granted sometimes, reading these threads make me realize, common sense isn't so common.
GoCeltics123 wrote:
LarryBirdsFingr wrote:How is everyone doing in this nuthouse today
jfs1000d wrote:rob4748 wrote:ConstableGeneva wrote:
Terrible.. Huge L for Ainge. Just let the guy go and get something back. Move on. This is handcuffing us from signing other FA's.
He doesnt want turner guys.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
flintsky21 wrote:return2glory wrote:Not my first choice, but if McDermott is part of the deal, it’s not bad.
He is coming off a career year. He played about 20 minutes a game and averaged 10 points. He also shot 49% from the field and nearly 44% on 3s on 4 attempts her game.
I don’t know if we have room for him too play that much here, but he is another shooter. And a pretty good one.
40% career 3 point shooter on his final year of contract. Why are people so opposed to his addition?
flintsky21 wrote:return2glory wrote:Not my first choice, but if McDermott is part of the deal, it’s not bad.
He is coming off a career year. He played about 20 minutes a game and averaged 10 points. He also shot 49% from the field and nearly 44% on 3s on 4 attempts her game.
I don’t know if we have room for him too play that much here, but he is another shooter. And a pretty good one.
40% career 3 point shooter on his final year of contract. Why are people so opposed to his addition?
jfs1000d wrote:rob4748 wrote:ConstableGeneva wrote:
Terrible.. Huge L for Ainge. Just let the guy go and get something back. Move on. This is handcuffing us from signing other FA's.
He doesnt want turner guys.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CeltsfanSinceBirth wrote:Fencer reregistered wrote:CeltsfanSinceBirth wrote:
I think out of the 3, Boston has the most leverage. Hayward loses leverage when each team with capspace left spends money. He's not leaving Boston to play for the Hornets or Knicks.
And Indiana loses leverage each day knowing that Oladipo is damaged goods, and that Hayward is their best shot at landing a good wing player if/when Oladipo leaves. Even when the Pacers are flush with capspace, the only FA that would willingly go there will be locked into a deal with the Celtics.
Give us a pick, a pick swap, or Goga if you really want us to take McDermott. Danny shouldn't even answer the calls unless the Pacers give in on one of those demands.
In the meantime, Danny should be working the phones looking for a Center and a veteran PG.
Your last bit is what gives Indy leverage. Danny can't afford to wait as long as Indy can, because they're not winning much next season anyway, and hence have less need of vet additions.
Also, once the best FAs are taken, foisting McDermott off on somebody might become easier.
I disagree. The Pacers have never tanked. Ever. What's the highest pick they've ever received in the draft? I'm not sure they've ever had one in the top 5. They know that if they throw away the season, fans won't come to games. Hayward is a guy who will keep them competitive, and at the very least, keep fanbase interest high since they love their local guys.
DarkAzcura wrote:flintsky21 wrote:return2glory wrote:Not my first choice, but if McDermott is part of the deal, it’s not bad.
He is coming off a career year. He played about 20 minutes a game and averaged 10 points. He also shot 49% from the field and nearly 44% on 3s on 4 attempts her game.
I don’t know if we have room for him too play that much here, but he is another shooter. And a pretty good one.
40% career 3 point shooter on his final year of contract. Why are people so opposed to his addition?
I’m confused by this as well. The only viable reason I can think of is the luxury tax. If we can avoid it for one more year, it would be good, but from what I have seen out there it seems like we can stay under the tax even with McDermott. Anything we can do to push off the repeater tax is probably beneficial as when Tatum’s extension kicks in, we are probably going to be in the luxury tax pretty consistently.
I’ve seen us struggling with shooting for so long, though, that it is weird that people are so against adding a 40-43% dead eye shooter. He won’t play a lot, but he is an expiring who can really help open things up for Brown, Tatum, and Kemba which is something the rest of our team is laughable at, lol.