Perspectives on Management Philosophies

I am aware that some people have had difficulties in responding with their own comments.  A few have been able to do so, but the appearance of their comments on the site has been a bit of a struggle.  Please be aware that I'm making every effort to obtain a detailed procedure for you to make comments that will be displayed; and thanks for your indulgence.  At least I've discovered that the way for people to access comments made by all of you is (1) at the end of each of my posts, it tells you how many comments there are; (2) if there is at least one comment, just click on the word "link" to reveal all the comments under that post (including my responses to comments).

While I'm trying to figure out the easiest way for you to make a comment on the blog, the makeup of the blog seems to make it easier for me to post; so I'll continue doing so...starting with the next paragraph.  Those who have figured out how to comment are welcome to do so, and I've fixed it so I don't have to review each one before it's accepted by the blog.  (I can still delete offensive ones after the fact.)

There's always a dearth of Celtics news during the offseason.  But it's a good time to think through some of the logic that usually applies to the actions of management and the front office.

Perhaps the most controversial Celtics issue of the summer has been the extent of KG's knee injury and how soon (if ever) he'll be able to return to full-strength.  If one believes the comments of Danny, Doc, and KG himself, it seems that he'll be his same old frisky, intense self when training camp opens.  On the other hand, troubling media reports continue to surface.  The most recent claims that Kevin's surgical procedure didn't simply entail removing bone spurs but involved a partially damaged tendon that had to be reattached to the bone with staples.

It would be silly for me to add to the conjecture about KG's availability, which we'll know about soon enough.  I'm hoping he'll be sufficiently ready to get into game shape gradually during preseason, while Doc can take advantage of reduced minutes for KG to do additional experimentation with some of the myriad player combinations at Doc's disposal.  But I'm more interested in discussing the expectations of many fans that the Celtics should adopt a policy of making timely, frequent, accurate announcements as to the condition of injured players.

As far as I'm concerned, that doesn't really make a lot of sense.  As far as I know, the league mandates clubs to announce (by game time) which players will be activated for the game, and that's it as far as regulations are concerned.  Left to their own devices, why should general managers or coaches help other clubs with their advance planning?  Why should a general manager who feels a pressing need for backup to a seriously injured player give trade leverage to other teams by letting them know the true urgency of the need?  Why should Danny or Doc have speculated negatively this summer about the possible seriousness of KG's injury when (1) their conjectures could have been deceptively alarmist and (2) they could have thrown a monkey wrench into the other players' very healthy desire to report early and to develop a highly enthusiastic outlook?

Trade leverage is an extremely important consideration and is probably underrated by many fans.  For every trade we hear about, there are probably scores of potential trades that have been discussed and rejected.  And at the core of those discussions is an ongoing struggle for the upper hand in trading leverage.  I'm not suggesting that a general manager distort the medical condition of a potential trading chip from the rival general manager, who will presumably discover during the obligatory physical anyway...while valuable time has passed.  But I do believe extent of need is a key factor in establishing trading leverage.  It's one reason why a player does a dramatic disservice to his team by publicly demanding a trade.  He's ceding "pennies on the dollar" leverage advantage to opponents for certain.

I'd also like to write a few words about another common misconception concerning trades.  Message boards are full of trade suggestions, and many of them are extremely unrealistic.  Typical of what I'm referring to is a situation in which someone will dutifully refer to the RealGM Trade Checker and will dream up a "brainstorm" involving dumping his three least-liked Celtics for one highly desirable incoming player.

Here's a good rule of thumb in thinking about dumping players in trades.  If you don't think much of a player, it's very likely that other teams don't think much of him either.  And simply compounding the attempted larceny by adding more "undesirables" to the mix makes the proposition even more preposterous.  Because quantity is seldom a substitute for quality.  And it's rare that a team wants to clutter its precious few roster slots with mediocrity.

Of course, there may be exceptions to this general rule, as in the KG trade.  Minnesota was interested in stocking their roster with promising youth, and the Celtics needed a veteran defensive intimidator.  But, in that trade, both teams parted with considerable value.  Al Jefferson and Ryan Gomes alone are two young guys who should have very good NBA careers.

So expectations of getting something for practically nothing are usually unrealistic.  In fact, it sometimes makes sense to risk "over-paying" for the right player.   Some fans initially felt the Celtics did so by trading Wally Szczerbiak, Delonte West and Jeff Green for an aging Ray Allen and his suspect ankles.  But Ray's clutch heroics, steadiness and veteran leadership have proven to be an integral part of a championship team and a perennial contender, while Delonte's very unfortunate dilemmas, alone, underscore the tricky risk/reward nature of trades.

Sam