When the Boston Celtics picked up free agent Evan Turner the other day, the question being asked by an awful lot of Celtics’ fans was, “Why?”
the celtics got evan turner. my column: pic.twitter.com/BTGLjhbdDb
— Jack Maloney (@jmaloney9) July 21, 2014
How did I miss Evan Turner signing with the Celtics? Also, why did the Celtics sign Evan Turner? Seriously. — Chris Towers (@CTowersCBS) July 23, 2014
Let’s face it: acquiring Turner was not the sort of fireworks we fans had in mind. Don’t we already have a bit of an under-achieving small forward on the roster in Jeff Green? And don’t we have guys coming off of the bench who can handle the rock? Adding Turner to the lineup doesn’t seem to address any of the deficiencies that this team has – notably, solid outside shooting and a serious presence in front of the rim.
Some people believe that Turner is just the sort of player whose career coach Brad Stevens can salvage . . . but shouldn’t Stevens be spending time on young players such as Jared Sullinger, Kelly Olynyk, Marcus Smart, and James Young? So that theory kind of does nothing for me, because Stevens already has more on his plate than he knows what to do with.
The real question, then, is this: are the Boston Celtics planning on making a big trade, and added Turner to the roster in order in anticipation of such a trade? (Turner himself cannot be traded for three months). Or are the Boston Celtics trying to both make their fanbase happy, while building a roster that is once again NBA Draft Lottery-bound? Signing Turner would never qualify for the fireworks Wyc Grousbeck promised, but then again, grabbing him is better than nothing, right?
I don’t think anyone, from Boston’s front office to Brad Stevens to even the most die-hard Celtics fan honestly feels Boston added Evan Turner simply because he makes the team better – but I’ve been wrong before! Vote for what you feel the Boston Celtics REALLY had in mind when they made this move. As always, I love to chat – leave comments below!
Tags: Boston Celtics