Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.
I wondered why this could get this much response, but...
Why don't we just go ahead and get Danny signed to an extension? Then we could go back to not giving a **** about Darius Miles.
I think Tinsley and Bender were bad mistakes, but Artest, Foster, and Harrington were all reasonable decisions. (Though, I admit, I questioned the Foster signing at the time, but not Jonathan, under the "burgeoning potential" theory that I've since thrown in the trash.)
This seems to be a reasonable approach that's seen two recent players that they let go to free agency (Brad Miller, Peja) get offered contracts that were 20-30% above reasonable expectations.
There will be risks with Danny's contract, signed this year or next. However, I believe that (a) we will be able to sign him for less this summer, and (b) it will help us stabilize our basketball and financial framework so we can move on to the next step in the rebuild.
I would also be in favor of extending a guy like Jarrett Jack, if you could get him for something like 4-years, $16mm. A guy like Jack, I'd be willing to set a relatively (but not insultingly) low price and see if he bites. If not, let him play and test the market.
I know you believe that guys who sign long term contracts (generally) stop improving. I would tend to agree, but I don't think that's what you're worried about. Some guys who get their first long-term contract for big bucks promptly get complacent and backslide. I don't believe this will be the case with Danny. There seems to be plenty of evidence that he has his head on straight, and , even if he doesn't "improve", I think I could live with paying $60mm over five years for 20ish & 7ish production with solid defense and a pretty good on- and off-court demeanor. (Yes, it's more than I would've said previously, but I think this summer has given us a pretty good idea of what the market pays for a guy of Danny's calibre.)
So we've been burned on that particular strategy, but the problem is that it still seems to be the best, or at least the most sound, strategy for a team in our situation. I think we'll all acknowledge that it is unlikely, at best, that we'd ever land a huge prize through the Free Agent market. We also don't have owners with (seemingly) unlimited resources, and therefore largely operate as if the tax threshhold was our hardcap. Therefore, this team will need to grow through good drafting and prudent trading.
We will need to balance the development of our "homegrown" players (that leads to the strategy being discussed here of locking our young guys up long term) and the ability to have "tradeable" assets (which generally means short, small-to-mid-sized movable contracts). Sometimes we'll make smart moves, sometimes they'll blow up in our face. However, I believe that if we, as a franchise, don't sign a player like Danny to an extension because the Tinsley signing has blown up in our face, then we're done.
I prefer sins of commission to sins of ommission. I'd rather make an active decision to commit to Danny, along with the associated risks, than to wait and find out that someone actually will be willing to offer Danny more than we're willing to pay. To me, that's allowing outside factors to have too much sway on a core decision for your franchise.
Hopefully, things will turn around now....
"Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
(Watching You Like A Hawk!)
We were a better basketball team without Brad Miller. Brad's contract was and is horrific, and not re-signing him at that price was the right decision. If we could've not re-signed Bender and then kept Miller, then maybe we could've gotten away with it. However, if you're going to ask me to choose between Foster and Miller, I'll choose Foster 12 times out of 10.
Even today I look at Brad's contract as normal for an All-Star NBA Center. Especially considering the first couple of years were on par with what we were paying Austin Croshere. At the time there were a ton of ridiculously high-priced contracts at center - Vlade Divac, Magloire, a rapidly declining Mutombo just to name a few. He received the going rate for centers at that time.
He only has 2 years remaining at 11 and then 12 million. That's not horrific to me. Choosing to extend Bender and paying him what they agreed to pay was horrific.
Speaking of Bender, isn't ironic that both he and Darius Miles had comparable hype surrounding them coming into the league, they were at one point compared and debated by Pacers fans, the both received contract extensions they didn't deserve, and they both were forced to quit playing because of knee injuries?
Miles though is the better player and he may be able to return and play out his contract. If he's healthy, he could be a good back up for the Celts.
Last edited by naptownmenace; 08-26-2008 at 03:56 PM.
If TPTB wanted to keep Brad, they would have. That says it all...
* Most Humorous Poster Nominee (2004, 2005, 2010)
* Off Topic Post of the Year Winner (2009)
* Off Topic Thread of the Year Nominee (2010)
Formerly a naturallystoned, badinfluence...