Uh, nice...bowtie...or whatever.

Just what in the name of Odin's shaggy beard was Danny Ainge thinking? Let's see: The Boston Celtics are led by a 6'6" All-Star perimeter player. So what does Ainge do? He deals the 5th pick in the draft for a 6'5" All-Star perimeter player. Ray Allen is basically just an older, lamer version of Paul Pierce who, in case you didn't know, is already a Celtic. And he's coming off surgery on both ankles. And he's got three years and $52 million left on his contract. Assuming the C's keep him, he and Pierce are going to account for between $30 and $40 million in cap space over the next three seasons, which drastically limits their ability to add other quality players.

This isn't going to work. It won't. It can't. Allen and Pierce are both quality players, All-Stars even. But they play the same position and do the exact same types of things (mostly firing it up from the outside). Does anybody remember how the 2002-03 Wizards teamed Jerry Stackhouse (a mad bomber) with an aging Michael Jordan (whose creaky knees had transformed him into a fall-away jump shooter)? That didn't work either, unless you consider 37 wins and an early vacation "working." Then again, after a 24-win season that featured an 18-game losing streak, 37 wins would be a pretty significant upswing.

Speaking of moves that made me want to whack my head with something hard, how 'bout those Knicks, huh? On paper, it looks like a great move: they essentially dumped Steve Francis and his bloated contract (two years, $33 million) for a legitimate 20/10 guy. Zach Randolph was, without a doubt, one of the best low post players in the West. But the Knicks already had one of the best low post players in the East. Do Randolph and Eddy Curry really complement each other? Of the Knicks many needs, "second inside scorer" was not among them. Plus, they're not exactly making cap room: Zach has four years and over $60 million left on his current contract.

Let me break this down for you: The Celtics and Knicks, two of the worst teams in the league, both brokered deals that brought them more of what they already had, and at a very high price. I don't get it. Am I the only one who doesn't get it? Did I forget everything I ever knew about basketball overnight? Can anyone explain these moves to me?

And lastly, I have to address my Bullies. They drafted Joakim Noah, supposedly a "steal," with the 9th pick. Again, on the surface it was a great move. Noah's a high-energy player with boundless energy and enthusiasm. He's also a character guy and a proven winner. What he is not is anything remotely resembling what the Bulls actually needed, which was (primarily) a low post scorer and (secondarily) a big guard/small forward who can penetrate and create his own shot. Noah is not a scorer. He can't score inside, nor can he shoot from the outside. Most of the 12 PPG he scored in his Junior season at Florida came on layups and tip-ins. You know, last summer, the Bulls spent $60 million on a guy who could rebound, bang bodies, had a winning history, and couldn't score in an empty gym full of five-foot hoops. His name is Ben Wallace, and he already does all the things Noah is predicted to do.

Seriously, my head hurts.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Exactly my thoughts.

As for the Bulls, I got hope that this means Ben Wallace is expendable.
Remember how the Bulls needed "filler" in a trade for Kobe ?!
How they needed PJ to play ball ?!
Well, now they got their filler. And a whole damn lot of filler, in the form of Ben Wallace.

Me thinks/hopes it's gonna be:
Ben Gordon + Ben Wallace + Chris Duhon (+ future 1st maybe) for Kobe + Radmanovic.

Not really that bad for the Lakers, cause they might use Ben Wallace to trade for Lebron/Wade/Bosh in 2009-2010 when they become UFA if any of them is not happy with his team. And LA always lures FAs.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Is it just me or are all of these trades seemingly orchestrated to put bad contracts in bigger markets? Me thinks I detect the liver spotted hand of David Stern at work here.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
That is the most paranoid, Stern-hating comment that I've seen on here. I also think it's more true than I care to admit.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Would you like the trade better if Zach said to Eddy "Hey Eddy! I like your shirt!" and then Eddy replied "Thanks Zach! I like your face!"

Anonymous Anonymous said...
I think you may have been reaching a little bit on this last posting...and I don't believe the Knicks trade and/or the Celtics trade are as bad as you're writing them up to be. You say you don't understand their trades? I do...this is what I know (and what you should know) First, aren't both the Knicks and the Celtics better today than they were yesterday?? Now...as far as long-term thinking goes - yes, you're right that these trades were not the best for the long-term...but - I also know that these teams play in the east. And you don't have to build a great team in the east to make it to the Finals (its not like the Cavs set some new elite standard or anything??)

So now...realizing that it doesn't take much to make it to the Finals from the East...I think there is a good chance that one of these teams could possibly make it to the Eastern Conference finals...or at least they will have roughly the same chance as the Cavs...again, in the east...its all possible. Honestly, I think I'd rather have a healthy Pierce, Allen, and Jefferson to go to battle with over say Lebron, Gooden, and Hughes?!? Moreover, shiiiiid...Zach Randolph is now the "mature, polished and veteran-like Tim Duncan of the east..." to go with Marbury playing T. Parkers role and J. Crawford playing M. Ginobli's role...and throw in a little "Curry" sauce, extract Steve Francis and voila! you have a team!! Don't get me wrong...they're not the Spurs, but in the Eastern Conference...they're very very Spurs'ish.

Peace,,,and Keep it pimpin...pimpin!

-My Name is Earl!

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Allen and Pierce's games aren't the same, and they don't play the same position: Ray's a pure shooting guard, and Pierce is one of the best small forwards in the game. Allen plays on the perimeter, while Pierce attacks the basket. The value of the trade is arguable, but at least get your facts straight. You're as bad as Steven A. Smith.

Blogger Basketbawful said...

With all due respect, I think you need to get your facts straight. Pierce is forced to play both forward AND shooting guard, because his size -- 6'6" -- makes him a "tweener." He can't match up size-wise with some of the bigger SFs in the league.

As for this myth about Pierce valiantly attacking the basket, go over and check out Paul's stats on 82games.com. He shoots jump shots 74% of the time. Allen shoots jump shots 81% of the time. Look, guys who are shooting 7 or 8 out of every 10 shots from outside are perimeter players, plain and simple. Pierce drives a little more than allen, but only a little.

Do you have any actual facts you'd like to share?

Blogger Basketbawful said...
Hey -My Name is Earl!,

I'm not sure I believe the C's are really any better. First off, playing Allen at SG and Pierce at SF will make them a small team, which is a defensive liability. And Allen is a notoriously bad defender coming of dual-ankle surgery. That doesn't bode well. So they may have improved their offense, but they took a defensive hit.

You begin rebuilding a bad team with defense. The C's were one of the worst defensive squads in the league. How did they improve that? And who's going to create plays now that Delonte West is gone? Look, the Celtics took a step back.

I'm also not ready to annoint the Knicks as Spurs-ish. Marbury is on the decline and he was a selfish gunner to begin with. I mean, Tony Parker is a speed demon, shot 53% from the field, and was in the top ten in points in the paint this year. Starbury can't play that role. Eddy Curry is a big who can't rebound, pass, or play defense. And he needs lots of touches to score, just like Randolph. How many post plays can the Knicks run per game and keep everyone else involved. Crawford is inconsistent from long range. I don't know. I just don't think those parts fit together well.

But I guess we'll see...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Bonespurs are a cleanup surgery.

Allen sat down because the Sonics were tanking for the #1 or #2 pick. He could have played through it all season, but instead was voted to the all-star game - again.

And to say that Allen and Pierce are the same player is to put your ignorance on full display. Ray Allen thrives on coming off screens and shooting from the outisde. Pierce thrives on taking the ball to the hoop and will never see another double team that doesn't result in an open shot for Allen (one of the best shooters in the game) or Jefferson (one of the best low-post scorers in the game).

Allen is a huge upgrade over Wally, Jeff Green is most likely a fringe all-star at best and West is at best a backup on a great team. In other words, they gave up nothing for him and still have contract flexiblity. Ray's deal is only three years. If they trade for Garnett, they pay the luxury tax and we'll see you in the finals. If they don't, they pay it once, during Allen's last season and they can still move Green and Ratliff for another piece.

Two years ago the Celtics won 37 games with Pierce, West at PG, Jefferson doing nothing and a combination of Wally and Ricky Davis at the two. Anything that thinks Allen isn't a hugely massive upgrade over West, Ricky and Wally should be banned from talking about basketball. Now they Jefferson on the verge of becoming and all-star and Rondo who is better already at the point and has more potential for growth at the position than West.

Blogger bigyaz said...
"Ray Allen is basically just an older, lamer version of Paul Pierce..."

Really, how often have you watched Ray Allen play in the past few years (since the Sonics don't make it on national TV very often...). His game is not at all like Pierce's. And he's been anything but lame; he pretty much was the Sonics offense this year, before getting injured.

In fact, I think he can complement Pierce quite well; the defense can't afford to leave him alone for even a few seconds (he's as good a pure shooter as there is in the NBA), which means there'll be more room for Pierce to operate.

All of which doesn't mean I think it's a great trade for the Celtics. For one thing, Allen's defensive deficiencies are well-known, and his contract is huge for a player his age.

But to suggest his game is just like Pierce's is so off the mark that, frankly, it makes me question your basketball knowledge.

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Basketbawful said...
Oh gosh. Somebody found a spelling error on my site. Well, I guess the last laugh really is on me. Congratulations, Mr. Giant Throbbing Brain! You win the official Basketbawful Spelling Bee for Pretentious Douchebags Award. If you post your address, I'll send you some Strawberry Shortcake stickers and a free subscription to Words Weekly. Thanks for your insightful contribution.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
dude, allen is a shooting guard, pierce is a forward. theres a hundred reasons it won't work, but pierce and allen playing the same positino isn't one of them.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Totally agree with your Celts analysis. Half-agree with your Knicks points (but only because I think Randolph is a much better player than Curry and therefore worth it).

I disagree with the Bulls thing though. Noah was a great pick.

Yes, he doesn't fit a need. But no rookie would give you consistent low post scoring, not when you're picking at number 9.

I mean, people tend to forget that, except for bona fide superstars, rookies take a while to become solid contributors. Won't happen in the first year.

And yeah, the Bulls have Ben Wallace, but Big Ben will be on top of his game for another year or two, tops. That's when Noah - who fits the Skiles system perfectly - becomes useful. So, a great pick.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Alright genius, what'd the Knicks need then? They really aren't lacking skill-wise at any position. They have guards out the wazoo, decent forwards (especially Lee), and Curry at Center.

So explain how they did so horrible? Yeah.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
wow, basketbawful. are stats the only basketball you know? have you ever SEEN Paul Pierce play? it's almost a world of difference in how he gets his points compared to Ray Allen. it's a shame Pierce hasn't been in the playoffs on a decent team, his knack for getting to the line to gut out his points would be pretty useful.

Blogger Basketbawful said...
The Knicks aren't lacking skillwise any any position? Are you kidding me?

Let's look at the Knicks weaknesses, shall we? They turn the ball over more than any team in the league. What's worse, they rank third-to-last in assists per game. The Knicks' passing and ball movement is terrible. Yet they added Zach Randolph, who requires lots of touches, holds the ball too long, and is a poor passer (2 APG versus 3 TO per).

They also need defense. The force the second fewest turnovers in the league and they're next to last in blocks per game as well. Randolph averages 0.8 steals and 0.2 blocks per game. So he's not going to have much of an impact on the defensive end either.

You know, he's not even as efficient on offense as Eddy Curry. Curry averaged almost 20 PPG on only 12 shot attempts. Randolph averaged 23 PPG on 19 shot attempts. Hey, if I have to give a guy the ball in the post, I'm going to choose the 57 percent shooter (Curry) versus the 46 percent shooter (Randolph) any day.

A lot has been made of the fact that Randolph is a stronger rebounder than Curry, but so what? The Knicks were fourth in the league in rebounding last season, so, again, adding another rebounder doesn't address an active need.

The Knicks did need a consistent three-point threat, though. They're the seventh worst 3-point shooting team in the league. Maybe they should have been looking for some deep threats to take advantage of the fact that they already had a great post player. That would have improved their spacing, which probably would have helped their ball movement problems.

In short, they need an outside threat, a defensive guard, and a big man who can clog the lane and block shots. Randolph doesn't address any of these needs, and he complicates their spacing/ball movement issues.

Got any more to say?

Blogger Basketbawful said...

I have NBA league pass. I've watched both guys play. While they aren't exactly alike, in terms of style of play, they're closer than most people realize. Seriously, go to YouTube and watch highlights of both players. Go to HoopsHype and read their scouting reports. They're both perimeter players who can also take it to the hoop. Allen takes a few more threes per game, and Pierce drives to the hoop a little bit more. But they both shooter jumpers 70 to 80 percent of the time (according to 82games.com), they're both volume shooters (21 shot attempts per game for Allen, almost 19 for Pierce), they both shoot the three almost as often (38 percent of Allen's shots are 3s, 33 percent of Pierces shots are 3s).

They're also about the same height (6'5" and 6'6"). According to 82games.com, Pierce spends more time at shooting guard than small forward, because he's small for a forward. But now he'll be forced to play forward all the time, and the bigger guys will have a mismatch. That alone would hurt their team defense, but toss in the fact that Allen is known as a bad defender, and you're in trouble.

You know, everybody keeps talking about what a great pure shooter Allen is. While he does have a pretty jumper, he's not a great percentage shooter: 37 percent last season. Pierce, in point of fact, shot better at 38 percent. Fact is, Allen didn't even rank in the top 30 in 3-point percentage last season. He ranked 36th in 3-point percentage among SHOOTING GUARDS. Believe it or not, efficiency is actually important in basketball.

And for the record, I was using the textbook definition of lame. His age and surgeries mean that he is, physically, on the downside of his career. Any leg surgery, however minor, tends to sap the strength from a players legs, which can be disasterous for shooters like Allen.

Anonymous will said...
hahahaha and now the celtics are one of the three best (if not the best) teams in the NBA

Anonymous Anonymous said...
haaaahahahahahahahahaaaa i just came across this site and it def made me laugh...obviously u had nooo idea what you were talking about!!! LMAO

Anonymous Anonymous said...
i just stumbled across this piece of shit site as well...the author is a faggot and has absolutely NO fucking clue wtf hes talking about... it must suck to know how good the celtics are now, hahaha!!! kill urself.

Anonymous Inaproppriate Kangaroo said...
Love the flashbacks and hindsight. I am guessing the Celtics went OK out of this on.