CelticsStrong
Around the League => Transaction Ideas and Rumors => Topic started by: FatjohnReturns on January 21, 2013, 10:43:22 PM
-
I believe Gasol can be traded for.
I believe Gasol at Center with KG at Power Forward and Sully and Wilcox coming off the bench is as good as any frontcourt in the league.
I like to give Pierce and KG a chance to contend this year and next.
So I would try to trade Rondo and Bass to the Lakers for Gasol. Thoughts?
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=b3jxjvw
-
I wouldn't trade Rondo for Gasol straight up at this point in their careers. Adding Bass to the deal? Ludicrous.
-
Just no.
-
No.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
-
I would say NO.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
-
I like the premise of the topic of the thread:Get Gasol
I'd rather give them Pierce than Rondo,though, because we could dump Bass on them and get some nice peices back in addition to all that Gasol brings.
Gasol's value to the Lakers and in trade is at an all time low for 3 reasons:
1.Gasol's sporadic play this year due to injury
2. Gasol being relegated to the bench and deeply in D'Antoni's doghouse
3. the $$$ he is owed this year and next
Pierce's contract is far more valuable to the Lakers, and Pierce is a huge haul (hometown boy, championship pedigree, etc).
That's why the Lakers would be forced to swallow Bass and give us some nice pieces in return.
Lakers get PP, BB
Celtics get Gasol, Earl Clark, Jordan Hill (injured) and Sacre
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
-
::)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwNgJUDa-Bc
"I wouldn't even consider that" Danny Ainge
-
I like the premise of the topic of the thread:Get Gasol
I'd rather give them Pierce than Rondo,though, because we could dump Bass on them and get some nice peices back in addition to all that Gasol brings.
Gasol's value to the Lakers and in trade is at an all time low for 3 reasons:
1.Gasol's sporadic play this year due to injury
2. Gasol being relegated to the bench and deeply in D'Antoni's doghouse
3. the $$$ he is owed this year and next
Pierce's contract is far more valuable to the Lakers, and Pierce is a huge haul (hometown boy, championship pedigree, etc).
That's why the Lakers would be forced to swallow Bass and give us some nice pieces in return.
Lakers get PP, BB
Celtics get Gasol, Earl Clark, Jordan Hill (injured) and Sacre
Kill me.. i can even think about doing this
-
I like the premise of the topic of the thread:Get Gasol
I'd rather give them Pierce than Rondo,though, because we could dump Bass on them and get some nice peices back in addition to all that Gasol brings.
Gasol's value to the Lakers and in trade is at an all time low for 3 reasons:
1.Gasol's sporadic play this year due to injury
2. Gasol being relegated to the bench and deeply in D'Antoni's doghouse
3. the $$$ he is owed this year and next
Pierce's contract is far more valuable to the Lakers, and Pierce is a huge haul (hometown boy, championship pedigree, etc).
That's why the Lakers would be forced to swallow Bass and give us some nice pieces in return.
Lakers get PP, BB
Celtics get Gasol, Earl Clark, Jordan Hill (injured) and Sacre
I would be ok with this and it makes sense. It would be a hard swallow for Celtics Nation though. Pierce to the Lakers yikes.
-
::)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwNgJUDa-Bc
"I wouldn't even consider that" Danny Ainge
technicaly he didnt denied it
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
He wasn't better this season before the coaching change.
He is an older player having a down year.
He is the exact type of player you do not trade Rondo for. A name recognized by what he used to do on the court.
I would have no issue with Gasol on the Celtics, but I would not give up Rondo, KG or Pierce.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
There are other rebounders out there that would not cost the Celtics Rondo.
Celtics have to get a better return for Rondo then a former all-star having his worst season ever.
-
Take Rondo out of it and keep our Big three out of it and then come talk to me.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
He wasn't better this season before the coaching change.
He is an older player having a down year.
He is the exact type of player you do not trade Rondo for. A name recognized by what he used to do on the court.
I would have no issue with Gasol on the Celtics, but I would not give up Rondo, KG or Pierce.
He is 32 years old.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
-
I like the premise of the topic of the thread:Get Gasol
I'd rather give them Pierce than Rondo,though, because we could dump Bass on them and get some nice peices back in addition to all that Gasol brings.
Gasol's value to the Lakers and in trade is at an all time low for 3 reasons:
1.Gasol's sporadic play this year due to injury
2. Gasol being relegated to the bench and deeply in D'Antoni's doghouse
3. the $$$ he is owed this year and next
Pierce's contract is far more valuable to the Lakers, and Pierce is a huge haul (hometown boy, championship pedigree, etc).
That's why the Lakers would be forced to swallow Bass and give us some nice pieces in return.
Lakers get PP, BB
Celtics get Gasol, Earl Clark, Jordan Hill (injured) and Sacre
I would be ok with this and it makes sense. It would be a hard swallow for Celtics Nation though. Pierce to the Lakers yikes.
Fatjohn,I agree. It pained me to type those words.....but..
I do that trade in a heartbeat, not just for what Gasol brings, but dumping Bass (addition by subtraction), getting Clark with the bonus of Jordan Hill for next year and Sacre as another C prospect.
Lots of reasons to like this.
-
::)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwNgJUDa-Bc
"I wouldn't even consider that" Danny Ainge
technicaly he didnt denied it
But he won't even entertain the idea because its dumb.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
He wasn't better this season before the coaching change.
He is an older player having a down year.
He is the exact type of player you do not trade Rondo for. A name recognized by what he used to do on the court.
I would have no issue with Gasol on the Celtics, but I would not give up Rondo, KG or Pierce.
He is 32 years old.
In his 13th season. With 101 post season games.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
There are other rebounders out there that would not cost the Celtics Rondo.
Celtics have to get a better return for Rondo then a former all-star having his worst season ever.
Like what? I see the market for Rondo as very limited. Have you heard of other teams calling about Rondo? ever?
Rondo would be a great fit in Mike D's system though. Rondo and Dwight would be a nice fit. You might be able to get more out of the Lakers also.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
Rebounding isn't the problem you think it is. We're a better than average defensive rebounding team and putting Gasol on the roster won't change Doc's OReb philosophy. Losing Rondo will be a lot worse than you think. We won't have a player on the roster capable of being a dominant player in the playoffs and obviously Gasol won't change that.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
There are other rebounders out there that would not cost the Celtics Rondo.
Celtics have to get a better return for Rondo then a former all-star having his worst season ever.
Like what? I see the market for Rondo as very limited. Have you heard of other teams calling about Rondo? ever?
Rondo would be a great fit in Mike D's system though. Rondo and Dwight would be a nice fit. You might be able to get more out of the Lakers also.
I never hear about teams calling for KG.
I never hear about teams calling for Lebron, Durrant, or Scali.
Are they all the same level of players?
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
-
As I have said in my previous "get Gasol" type thread.
I would offer Green/Lee/Bass, that is all.
I would definitely not give up Truth, or Rondo for him at this point.
Green/Bass/Lee is the type of package that they need...gives them athletic players who can all shoot, they would fit D'Antoni's system much more.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
Not to mention his fg% (and TS%) dropped from the previous year in each of his last 5 seasons. That's a fairly serious trend.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
And there are few teams that would trade their 26 year old all-star for him now.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
Rebounding isn't the problem you think it is. We're a better than average defensive rebounding team and putting Gasol on the roster won't change Doc's OReb philosophy. Losing Rondo will be a lot worse than you think. We won't have a player on the roster capable of being a dominant player in the playoffs and obviously Gasol won't change that.
What are you talking about?
We are 28th out of 30 in Total rebounds.
"No Rebounds No Rings"....Pat Riley
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
Rebounding isn't the problem you think it is. We're a better than average defensive rebounding team and putting Gasol on the roster won't change Doc's OReb philosophy. Losing Rondo will be a lot worse than you think. We won't have a player on the roster capable of being a dominant player in the playoffs and obviously Gasol won't change that.
What are you talking about.
We are 28th out of 30 in Total rebounds.
"No Rebounds No Rings"....Pat Riley
Yes, I realize that we're 28th in total rebounds. I also realize that we make more of an effort to get back on defense than go after offensive rebounds, something you seem to have not noticed.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
And there are few teams that would trade their 26 year old all-star for him now.
You have to give something to get something. The only way you can get back enough of a return in a trade to put us back in contention is by trading Pierce or Rondo.
Green,Bass,Lee dont have enough trade value and trading Bradley or Sully when they are out performing their contracts is counterproductive.
Once KG retires its game over So we are either content to be medicore or you have to move a major piece.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
And there are few teams that would trade their 26 year old all-star for him now.
You have to give something to get something. The only way you can get back enough of a return in a trade to put us back in contention is by trading Pierce or Rondo.
Green,Bass,Lee dont have enough trade value and trading Bradley or Sully when they are out performing their contracts is counterproductive.
Once KG retires its game over So we are either content to be medicore or you have to move a major piece.
Of course teams have to give something get something.
That doesn't mean teams have to over pay for former all-stars on huge contracts having the worst season of their career on a team that doesn't want them because of: a) fit and b) money.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
Rebounding isn't the problem you think it is. We're a better than average defensive rebounding team and putting Gasol on the roster won't change Doc's OReb philosophy. Losing Rondo will be a lot worse than you think. We won't have a player on the roster capable of being a dominant player in the playoffs and obviously Gasol won't change that.
What are you talking about.
We are 28th out of 30 in Total rebounds.
"No Rebounds No Rings"....Pat Riley
Yes, I realize that we're 28th in total rebounds. I also realize that we make more of an effort to get back on defense than go after offensive rebounds, something you seem to have not noticed.
No we are not a better than average defensive rebounding team. We are 17th outta 30th in DRB. The league average is 1244 atm. We currently have 1215. You really need to check your facts better.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
And there are few teams that would trade their 26 year old all-star for him now.
You have to give something to get something. The only way you can get back enough of a return in a trade to put us back in contention is by trading Pierce or Rondo.
Green,Bass,Lee dont have enough trade value and trading Bradley or Sully when they are out performing their contracts is counterproductive.
Once KG retires its game over So we are either content to be medicore or you have to move a major piece.
Your trade doesn't put us into contention, it closes the window on this group. KG isn't our best player now, but he would be after the trade, and he's not at the point in his career that he'll dominate games anymore.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
And there are few teams that would trade their 26 year old all-star for him now.
You have to give something to get something. The only way you can get back enough of a return in a trade to put us back in contention is by trading Pierce or Rondo.
Green,Bass,Lee dont have enough trade value and trading Bradley or Sully when they are out performing their contracts is counterproductive.
Once KG retires its game over So we are either content to be medicore or you have to move a major piece.
Of course teams have to give something get something.
That doesn't mean teams have to over pay for former all-stars on huge contracts having the worst season of their career on a team that doesn't want them because of: a) fit and b) money.
Its not overpaying. Its a equal trade. What do you think is a fair deal for Gasol?
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
And there are few teams that would trade their 26 year old all-star for him now.
You have to give something to get something. The only way you can get back enough of a return in a trade to put us back in contention is by trading Pierce or Rondo.
Green,Bass,Lee dont have enough trade value and trading Bradley or Sully when they are out performing their contracts is counterproductive.
Once KG retires its game over So we are either content to be medicore or you have to move a major piece.
Your trade doesn't put us into contention, it closes the window on this group. KG isn't our best player now, but he would be after the trade, and he's not at the point in his career that he'll dominate games anymore.
Your anaylsis is wrong just like your stats.
-
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
Playoffs or regular season?
Rondo shows up every post season, and becomes a top 5 NBA player then.
Also, KG is having quite an off year right now.
-
Gasol puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
It makes the Celtics weaker.
This is not prime or even near prime Gasol.
This is 12.6 pts, 8.1 rebounds 43% shooting Gasol.
No way. Gasol is still a very very good player. He is just not suited for Mike D's offense. If you put Gasol and Kg in the frontcourt together we instantly become very long.
Our weakness in the frontcourt would become a strength. No way Monroe and Drumond have the game they had last night.
No offense to Bass. We are just very small up front and we are getting pounded on the boards. Adding Gasol while keeping Sully would be a drastic improvment in the rebounding.
Your analysis about being weaker is wrong. Sorry
What proof do you have that Gasol is "still a very very good player?" To me, he looks like an aging big who is slowing down and becoming injury prone.
You don't give up your best player for a 32 year-old reclamation project. Like I said, ludicrous.
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
And there are few teams that would trade their 26 year old all-star for him now.
You have to give something to get something. The only way you can get back enough of a return in a trade to put us back in contention is by trading Pierce or Rondo.
Green,Bass,Lee dont have enough trade value and trading Bradley or Sully when they are out performing their contracts is counterproductive.
Once KG retires its game over So we are either content to be medicore or you have to move a major piece.
Of course teams have to give something get something.
That doesn't mean teams have to over pay for former all-stars on huge contracts having the worst season of their career on a team that doesn't want them because of: a) fit and b) money.
Its not overpaying. Its a equal trade. What do you think is a fair deal for Gasol?
At this point, their isn't really one for Gasol.
For his current output, his contract is one of the worst in the NBA.
Maybe Amare for Gasol might work.
But 19 million for 12 points and less then 45% shooting from a 7 footer?
No way would I give up Rondo or Pierce for that player.
-
Rondo is not our best player. KG is and he is going to be 37 in May.
Playoffs or regular season?
Rondo shows up every post season, and becomes a top 5 NBA player then.
Also, KG is having quite an off year right now.
No. KG is doesnt have enough help. He is doing battle with young guys like Drummond and Monroe and most of the time he matches or exceeds them.
-
Rondo for Gasol is absurd. Ainge will never do it. Never!
Green/Bass/Terry is a good starting point for a deal. LAkers might just be inclined to get whatever they can.
I'd probably do it from both sides.
-
No we are not a better than average rebounding team. We are
17th outta 30th in DRB. The league average is 1244 atm. We currently have 1215. You really need to check your facts better.
His reference was to defensive rebounding, right? Raw number of rebounds is an unhelpful stat because it doesn't account for pace. More useful is defensive rebound rate, which measures the percentage of defensive rebounds controlled by the team. The team is 13th in the league in that stat - a tick above average, though not quite good.
-
Gasol is the only trade you can make that puts us in contention.
The loss of Rondo will be blunted some by our depth in the backcourt.
Also Barbosa when given minutes can produce.
How will Gasol turn PP and KG into contenders if he can't turn Dwight and Kobe into contenders?
Its similar to what we have here in Boston. We have a bad mix of players. The Lakers offense is a bad fit for Gasol.
Trading our only point guard for an underperforming big isn't going to magically improve our mix of players.
Adding another big who can give you almost 10 rebounds every night will. Losing Rondo wont be as bad as you think Tim.
Rebounding isn't the problem you think it is. We're a better than average defensive rebounding team and putting Gasol on the roster won't change Doc's OReb philosophy. Losing Rondo will be a lot worse than you think. We won't have a player on the roster capable of being a dominant player in the playoffs and obviously Gasol won't change that.
What are you talking about.
We are 28th out of 30 in Total rebounds.
"No Rebounds No Rings"....Pat Riley
Yes, I realize that we're 28th in total rebounds. I also realize that we make more of an effort to get back on defense than go after offensive rebounds, something you seem to have not noticed.
No we are not a better than average rebounding team. We are
17th outta 30th in DRB. The league average is 1244 atm. We currently have 1215. You really need to check your facts better.
You need to get a better handle on what we're discussing. Teams playing against the Celts don't take a ton of shots, so there are fewer misses to rebound than most teams. We're 12th in the league in terms of the percentage of our opponent's missed shots that we rebound. We grab 73.5% of our opponent's missed shots. A team that grabs 72% of their opponent's missed shots would be a worse defensive rebounding team than we are, but if their opponents missed a ton of shots they would still have more total defensive rebounds than we do.
-
What about Rondo/Green/Bass/Wilcox/Melo for Nash/Ebanks/Pau?
It'd be an all-in for this season...... We'd certainly have more talent this year than currently, but it'd be a risk. Defense would be worse but our offense would be incredibly efficient.
Celtics become:
Nash/Terry
Bradley/Lee
Pierce/Ebanks
Gasol/Sullinger
KG/Gasol/Collins
Very very potent team. I'd probably switch Lee and Bradley actually to give us that extra shooter with the starters and Bradley's energy off the bench.
-
What about Rondo/Green/Bass/Wilcox/Melo for Nash/Ebanks/Pau?
It'd be an all-in for this season...... We'd certainly have more talent this year than currently, but it'd be a risk. Defense would be worse but our offense would be incredibly efficient.
Celtics become:
Nash/Terry
Bradley/Lee
Pierce/Ebanks
Gasol/Sullinger
KG/Gasol/Collins
Very very potent team. I'd probably switch Lee and Bradley actually to give us that extra shooter with the starters and Bradley's energy off the bench.
Gasol doesn't fit into the offense Nash likes to run.
Why trade for both of them?
-
No we are not a better than average rebounding team. We are
17th outta 30th in DRB. The league average is 1244 atm. We currently have 1215. You really need to check your facts better.
His reference was to defensive rebounding, right? Raw number of rebounds is an unhelpful stat because it doesn't account for pace. More useful is defensive rebound rate, which measures the percentage of defensive rebounds controlled by the team. The team is 13th in the league in that stat - a tick above average, though not quite good.
No cant agree sorry.
-
No way should Rondo be traded to the Lakers under ANY circumstance. Particularly not for the Lakers old guys. Even if we get one chip I don't like the idea of setting LA up for the next dynasty
-
What about Rondo/Green/Bass/Wilcox/Melo for Nash/Ebanks/Pau?
It'd be an all-in for this season...... We'd certainly have more talent this year than currently, but it'd be a risk. Defense would be worse but our offense would be incredibly efficient.
Celtics become:
Nash/Terry
Bradley/Lee
Pierce/Ebanks
Gasol/Sullinger
KG/Gasol/Collins
Very very potent team. I'd probably switch Lee and Bradley actually to give us that extra shooter with the starters and Bradley's energy off the bench.
Half the teams in the league would run a lineup that old off the court, and that's a conservative estimate.
-
Not sure there is any doubt Gasol would make this team better. Trading 3 bench players for him is probably worth it. Trading a PG who is starting in the All-Star game is absolutely nuts. If the Lakers could have moved Gasol for young talent and/or draft picks they would have already. Seems like the next best thing is role players who fit their system, or at least have more trade-able contracts. I think the Lakers have to at least take the call.
-
No we are not a better than average rebounding team. We are
17th outta 30th in DRB. The league average is 1244 atm. We currently have 1215. You really need to check your facts better.
His reference was to defensive rebounding, right? Raw number of rebounds is an unhelpful stat because it doesn't account for pace. More useful is defensive rebound rate, which measures the percentage of defensive rebounds controlled by the team. The team is 13th in the league in that stat - a tick above average, though not quite good.
No cant agree sorry.
lol, can't agree with what? It's a valid stat - look it up yourself. I pulled it from hoopdata.com.
Assume one team gets 60 rebound opportunities per game and gets the ball on 60% of them. Another team gets 80 opportunities, but gets 50%. The second team will have more total rebounds than the first (40 to 36) despite having a lower likelihood of getting the rebound on any given play.
Like I said, rebound rate is much more useful than total rebounds.
-
No we are not a better than average rebounding team. We are
17th outta 30th in DRB. The league average is 1244 atm. We currently have 1215. You really need to check your facts better.
His reference was to defensive rebounding, right? Raw number of rebounds is an unhelpful stat because it doesn't account for pace. More useful is defensive rebound rate, which measures the percentage of defensive rebounds controlled by the team. The team is 13th in the league in that stat - a tick above average, though not quite good.
No cant agree sorry.
To take your logic to something of an extreme, team A could rebound 71 of their opponent's 90 missed shots while team B could rebound all 70 of their opponent's misses and you'd insist that team A, which gave up 19 offensive rebounds, is a better defensive rebounding team than the team that gave up *zero* offensive boards because they got 71 defensive rebounds compared to 70 for team B.
-
What about Rondo/Green/Bass/Wilcox/Melo for Nash/Ebanks/Pau?
It'd be an all-in for this season...... We'd certainly have more talent this year than currently, but it'd be a risk. Defense would be worse but our offense would be incredibly efficient.
Celtics become:
Nash/Terry
Bradley/Lee
Pierce/Ebanks
Gasol/Sullinger
KG/Gasol/Collins
Very very potent team. I'd probably switch Lee and Bradley actually to give us that extra shooter with the starters and Bradley's energy off the bench.
Gasol doesn't fit into the offense Nash likes to run.
Why trade for both of them?
I don't see how...
-Nash can absolutely run a half court offense with the best of them.
-They both can play pick and roll basketball together.
-Pau is a great iso player. Nash can space the floor.
-If the offense doesn't want to iso or directly involve Pau, Pau is a very good shooter for a big man.
What about Rondo/Green/Bass/Wilcox/Melo for Nash/Ebanks/Pau?
It'd be an all-in for this season...... We'd certainly have more talent this year than currently, but it'd be a risk. Defense would be worse but our offense would be incredibly efficient.
Celtics become:
Nash/Terry
Bradley/Lee
Pierce/Ebanks
Gasol/Sullinger
KG/Gasol/Collins
Very very potent team. I'd probably switch Lee and Bradley actually to give us that extra shooter with the starters and Bradley's energy off the bench.
Half the teams in the league would run a lineup that old off the court, and that's a conservative estimate.
Playoff basketball is about half court basketball. I don't think Rondo/Bass are what are preventing teams from running fast breaks on us. Teams don't run on us because of the not crashing o-board style of basketball we play that you've brought up earlier.
-
I do it.
-
What about Rondo/Green/Bass/Wilcox/Melo for Nash/Ebanks/Pau?
It'd be an all-in for this season...... We'd certainly have more talent this year than currently, but it'd be a risk. Defense would be worse but our offense would be incredibly efficient.
Celtics become:
Nash/Terry
Bradley/Lee
Pierce/Ebanks
Gasol/Sullinger
KG/Gasol/Collins
Very very potent team. I'd probably switch Lee and Bradley actually to give us that extra shooter with the starters and Bradley's energy off the bench.
Gasol doesn't fit into the offense Nash likes to run.
Why trade for both of them?
I don't see how...
-Nash can absolutely run a half court offense with the best of them.
-They both can play pick and roll basketball together.
-Pau is a great iso player. Nash can space the floor.
-If the offense doesn't want to iso or directly involve Pau, Pau is a very good shooter for a big man.
What about Rondo/Green/Bass/Wilcox/Melo for Nash/Ebanks/Pau?
It'd be an all-in for this season...... We'd certainly have more talent this year than currently, but it'd be a risk. Defense would be worse but our offense would be incredibly efficient.
Celtics become:
Nash/Terry
Bradley/Lee
Pierce/Ebanks
Gasol/Sullinger
KG/Gasol/Collins
Very very potent team. I'd probably switch Lee and Bradley actually to give us that extra shooter with the starters and Bradley's energy off the bench.
Half the teams in the league would run a lineup that old off the court, and that's a conservative estimate.
Playoff basketball is about half court basketball. I don't think Rondo/Bass are what are preventing teams from running fast breaks on us. Teams don't run on us because of the not crashing o-board style of basketball we play that you've brought up earlier.
Playoff basketball is more half-court based because better teams generally play better transition defense and don't allow tons of fast break opportunities.
-
Green, Bass, Terry for Gasol tell the Lakers stick it if they don't like.
-
No way should Rondo be traded to the Lakers under ANY circumstance. Particularly not for the Lakers old guys. Even if we get one chip I don't like the idea of setting LA up for the next dynasty
Yeah, really ... that's like a worst nightmare scenario.
Trading Rondo, (our future), for another old guy and an ageing, inconsistent one?
That's just crazy, and not even a realistic option.
I would never consider this trade.
Man, would Dwight love it, though, lol!