CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: aferris77 on May 26, 2013, 02:57:05 PM
-
From Bob Finnan, a News-Herald guy who covers the Cavs (I think):
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
I'd like to know what the sources are before giving merit to this, but it wouldn't surprise me with the Doc leaving rumors going on.
-
Gross. We're not going to be legit contenders for a while anyway, so why not have pierce retire as a celtic, a 1 team star HoFer?
-
Gross. We're not going to be legit contenders for a while anyway, so why not have pierce retire as a celtic, a 1 team star HoFer?
Because he prevents us from full-blown tanking. Nothing worse than mediocrity in this league. Bottoming out is the best way to kick-start a rebuild.
Wiggins or bust!
-
From Bob Finnan, a News-Herald guy who covers the Cavs (I think):
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
I'd like to know what the sources are before giving merit to this, but it wouldn't surprise me with the Doc leaving rumors going on.
What a bummer this will be if it's true.
The rational part of me understands the logic - and might even be in favor of the move.
But the emotional side of me hates it.
Regardless I'll be first in line to throw PP a parade whenever he hangs them up. He's become one of the all-time Boston greats in any sport.
-
From Bob Finnan, a News-Herald guy who covers the Cavs (I think):
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
I'd like to know what the sources are before giving merit to this, but it wouldn't surprise me with the Doc leaving rumors going on.
Buying out Pierce without any intention of resigning him for less money makes little sense. It doesn't free up any money to sign FAs.
The only way it makes any sense is if Danny is trying to force KGs hand to waive his no trade clause, but again that's an even worse development because none of the rumored KG trades were even remotely satisfying.
I'm starting to feel that Danny has really lost his way as a GM and is starting to panic. That is, if this report is true.
-
Bob Finnan isn't all that reliable. Or accurate.
I wouldn't take this as anything other than a regurgitation of recent rumours.
-
I would hope we would trade Pierce even if it is for future picks and fringe players if we are getting rid of him. Simply waiving hime does not get us under the cap anyway so what is the point of not getting something back for him?
-
Bob Finnan isn't all that reliable. Or accurate.
I wouldn't take this as anything other than a regurgitation of recent rumours.
Yep.
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
Nothing of substance here. Should probably change the thread title, too.
-
Bob Finnan isn't all that reliable. Or accurate.
I wouldn't take this as anything other than a regurgitation of recent rumours.
I go with this. I feel like this is the second Cav writer linking Pierce to the Cavs. I think it's just their little pipe dream trying to make a wish happen that wont come true.
-
From Bob Finnan, a News-Herald guy who covers the Cavs (I think):
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
I'd like to know what the sources are before giving merit to this, but it wouldn't surprise me with the Doc leaving rumors going on.
Buying out Pierce without any intention of resigning him for less money makes little sense. It doesn't free up any money to sign FAs.
The only way it makes any sense is if Danny is trying to force KGs hand to waive his no trade clause, but again that's an even worse development because none of the rumored KG trades were even remotely satisfying.
I'm starting to feel that Danny has really lost his way as a GM and is starting to panic. That is, if this report is true.
You can't buy Pierce out and then resign him. It's against the rules. Danny hasn't done anything yet so why are you saying he's panicking?
-
Either persuade Pierce to use the ETO on his contract to resign for less money or trade him for the best offer if continuing to contend isn't the plan.
Unless all you can get for Pierce is what the Nets offered at the deadline, buying him out (when the cap space still wouldn't be enough to sign a FA) this year is not the smart route to take.
With the players that would remain on the roster and Doc's system in place, the team would still be capable of winning 30-35 games (a borderline lottery pick).
-
Dosen't make any sense unless its going to be full blown tank mode.
Let Rondo take his time to heal and see if KG retires of waves his no trade clause.
Then maybe they get into the lotto,and unless DA has a deal to get into the top 3 its a sketchy move.
If DA wants to get into the draft I'd rather trade PP and KG for good pieces and then move them at trade time or at draft night. But even then thats a long rebuild and new young players that are use to winning wont want to stay around for more than their rookie contract to deal with that.
-
No way this is true.
Pierce's contract is far too valuable to teams like Dallas, Atlanta for Ainge to dump him for nothing.
Pierce the player (irrespective of the contract) is too valuable to teams like the Clippers/Fakers for the Cs to get nothing for him.
Only reason would be to save $$ and give up on contending. That is pretty shortsighted of these owners and not totally in character with them.
The may save $$$$ in salary, penalties, etc, but will lose far more $$$ in revenue generated (or not generated) on a lottery bound, non-playoff income generating team.
-
From Bob Finnan, a News-Herald guy who covers the Cavs (I think):
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
I'd like to know what the sources are before giving merit to this, but it wouldn't surprise me with the Doc leaving rumors going on.
The title to this thread should contain "possibly" or "rumor".
-
Gross. We're not going to be legit contenders for a while anyway, so why not have pierce retire as a celtic, a 1 team star HoFer?
Because he prevents us from full-blown tanking. Nothing worse than mediocrity in this league. Bottoming out is the best way to kick-start a rebuild.
Wiggins or bust!
You have to bottom out for multiple years and you still may not get a shot at someone like a Lebron or Durrant.
-
Here lately, unless it's from CBS Sports' Ken Berger or Yahoo's Adrian Wajnoski, I don't read too much into it.
-
You going to hear all kind of rumors from now till training camp with trades and FA signings..so i wont believe anything until it's official!!
-
if so, June 30th 2013 will be the worst day in my life
-
if so, June 30th 2013 will be the worst day in my life
Nice life you lead.
-
if so, June 30th 2013 will be the worst day in my life
Nice life you lead.
awful and funny at the same time. smh
-
I seriously don't get the buyout Pierce angle.
Unless we get someone who as productive as Paul's production last year via FA, why release him when he only has one more year in his contract? Why not just let him play, he can still be helping this team. Are we just releasing Paul to save salary? Who are we signing with that cap room we just saved? Is he going to average 18/5/6 a game?
Same as trading him, unless we're getting someone who can produce like he does, why the heck do we have to trade Paul?
He has one year left, let him play that contract out.
-
This doesn't make sense at all... I don't think Ainge is THAT dumb! However, I do believe he's about to start panicking, so... you never know!
-
He'll either be moved via trade or be here but not released as I see it.
-
Only thing that is certain is that PP will not be making 15 mil. next year. Would not be surprised to see his sign with the C's at a discount.
-
I seriously don't get the buyout Pierce angle.
Unless we get someone who as productive as Paul's production last year via FA, why release him when he only has one more year in his contract? Why not just let him play, he can still be helping this team. Are we just releasing Paul to save salary? Who are we signing with that cap room we just saved? Is he going to average 18/5/6 a game?
Same as trading him, unless we're getting someone who can produce like he does, why the heck do we have to trade Paul?
He has one year left, let him play that contract out.
If you waive Pierce, then acquire a big contract player in the summer of 2014, it means you might avoid paying the repeater luxury tax. If you think the window is closed and envision a quick rebuild, that makes building the next contender more financially viable. Depending on how ownership feels about shelling out money, it may be more important than how getting rid of Pierce affects the team's drafting position.
-
if so, June 30th 2013 will be the worst day in my life
Even worst than June 17, 2010?! :o
-
I seriously don't get the buyout Pierce angle.
Unless we get someone who as productive as Paul's production last year via FA, why release him when he only has one more year in his contract? Why not just let him play, he can still be helping this team. Are we just releasing Paul to save salary? Who are we signing with that cap room we just saved? Is he going to average 18/5/6 a game?
Same as trading him, unless we're getting someone who can produce like he does, why the heck do we have to trade Paul?
He has one year left, let him play that contract out.
If you waive Pierce, then acquire a big contract player in the summer of 2014, it means you might avoid paying the repeater luxury tax. If you think the window is closed and envision a quick rebuild, that makes building the next contender more financially viable. Depending on how ownership feels about shelling out money, it may be more important than how getting rid of Pierce affects the team's drafting position.
But Pierce's going to expire next year, we would still have that 15 clear in 2014 regardless. We'll be way under the cap by then. Why release a still productive expiring contract? Again, unless we can use that cleared room to get someone as productive.
-
I seriously don't get the buyout Pierce angle.
Unless we get someone who as productive as Paul's production last year via FA, why release him when he only has one more year in his contract? Why not just let him play, he can still be helping this team. Are we just releasing Paul to save salary? Who are we signing with that cap room we just saved? Is he going to average 18/5/6 a game?
Same as trading him, unless we're getting someone who can produce like he does, why the heck do we have to trade Paul?
He has one year left, let him play that contract out.
If you waive Pierce, then acquire a big contract player in the summer of 2014, it means you might avoid paying the repeater luxury tax. If you think the window is closed and envision a quick rebuild, that makes building the next contender more financially viable. Depending on how ownership feels about shelling out money, it may be more important than how getting rid of Pierce affects the team's drafting position.
But Pierce's going to expire next year, we would still have that 15 clear in 2014 regardless. We'll be way under the cap by then. Why release a still productive expiring contract? Again, unless we can use that cleared room to get someone as productive.
Maybe I wasn't clear. It would be to avoid paying the luxury tax for 2013-2014. That affects team spending for the seasons after that.
-
Gross. We're not going to be legit contenders for a while anyway, so why not have pierce retire as a celtic, a 1 team star HoFer?
Because he prevents us from full-blown tanking. Nothing worse than mediocrity in this league. Bottoming out is the best way to kick-start a rebuild.
Wiggins or bust!
I guess it's bust then, because the chances of us getting Wiggins is slim
-
I seriously don't get the buyout Pierce angle.
Unless we get someone who as productive as Paul's production last year via FA, why release him when he only has one more year in his contract? Why not just let him play, he can still be helping this team. Are we just releasing Paul to save salary? Who are we signing with that cap room we just saved? Is he going to average 18/5/6 a game?
Same as trading him, unless we're getting someone who can produce like he does, why the heck do we have to trade Paul?
He has one year left, let him play that contract out.
If you waive Pierce, then acquire a big contract player in the summer of 2014, it means you might avoid paying the repeater luxury tax. If you think the window is closed and envision a quick rebuild, that makes building the next contender more financially viable. Depending on how ownership feels about shelling out money, it may be more important than how getting rid of Pierce affects the team's drafting position.
But Pierce's going to expire next year, we would still have that 15 clear in 2014 regardless. We'll be way under the cap by then. Why release a still productive expiring contract? Again, unless we can use that cleared room to get someone as productive.
Maybe I wasn't clear. It would be to avoid paying the luxury tax for 2013-2014. That affects team spending for the seasons after that.
Okay, I understand now. I get it now.
With that being said, that's sad if they do release Paul.
-
I think this is mumbo jumbo. I am betting a dozen tommy points that Pierce and Garnett are back next season in green.
I have no doubt Ainge is highly tempted to move one of them or both. But at the end of the day, I just don't think he's going to get equal value.
Bank on it ;)
-
The whole idea of Pierce leaving would sadden me greatly, as he's always bled Green. I remember being at the game in 2002 vs the Nets when they came back from 21 down in the 4th (and 25 in the late 3rd), with Pierce atop the scorer's table pounding his chest afterwards in victory.
BTW. I've seen other reports of this on the web, but it's all based on Bob Finnan, so while "sources" are unfounded, so is Bob Finnan. If not, then Danny better not only have a good plan in mind, but execute it successfully too.
-
Cutting him only makes sense if the ownership mandated that they get under the tax apron, but I bet they can do that by giving away someone else to get under.
If they cut him they will not be able replace his talent with a similarly talented player. I think we either deal him before June 30th or keep him until the trade deadline.
-
Cutting him only makes sense if the ownership mandated that they get under the tax apron, but I bet they can do that by giving away someone else to get under.
Can they do that without giving up a draft pick?
-
if so, June 30th 2013 will be the worst day in my life
Nice life you lead.
awful and funny at the same time. smh
yeah, i know, but true fact...i'm 23 and so far i can't complain, so losing our captain for some money he WILL earn is stupid, i bet teams will be lining up to sign him
-
losing our captain for some money he WILL earn is stupid, i bet teams will be lining up to sign him
DA knows that, too, and that's why he'll have to see something *really good* before he does any kind of trade, in my humble opnion.
-
Cutting him only makes sense if the ownership mandated that they get under the tax apron, but I bet they can do that by giving away someone else to get under.
I do think ownerships say they want to keep them for the public and probably say another to DA behind closed doors. They do not want to be the bad guys.
-
Pierce will not be bought out before the NBA Draft on June 27th. His contract has significant trade value, I expect Ainge will try to use it up until draft night.
-
From Bob Finnan, a News-Herald guy who covers the Cavs (I think):
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
I'd like to know what the sources are before giving merit to this, but it wouldn't surprise me with the Doc leaving rumors going on.
Buying out Pierce without any intention of resigning him for less money makes little sense. It doesn't free up any money to sign FAs.
The only way it makes any sense is if Danny is trying to force KGs hand to waive his no trade clause, but again that's an even worse development because none of the rumored KG trades were even remotely satisfying.
I'm starting to feel that Danny has really lost his way as a GM and is starting to panic. That is, if this report is true.
You wouldn't have taken the bledsoe and Jordan trade? I don't even think that would put the Clippers over the top but it would at least set us up with a big and a future pg or tradable asset.
-
Rich Levine @rich_levine 4h
Spoke to someone with the Celtics last night, and they laughed off the recent report that the Celtics are "likely" to buy out Pierce.
-
The "buy out" just doesn't make sense to me.
It does not create cap room to sign a replacement.
Better to either let Pierce play out his contract or wait for a better trade offer.
-
How would a Cavs reporter know? I won't trust it
-
Well, at least THIS rumor isn't from Incarcerated Bob.......
-
From Bob Finnan, a News-Herald guy who covers the Cavs (I think):
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
I'd like to know what the sources are before giving merit to this, but it wouldn't surprise me with the Doc leaving rumors going on.
Buying out Pierce without any intention of resigning him for less money makes little sense. It doesn't free up any money to sign FAs.
The only way it makes any sense is if Danny is trying to force KGs hand to waive his no trade clause, but again that's an even worse development because none of the rumored KG trades were even remotely satisfying.
I'm starting to feel that Danny has really lost his way as a GM and is starting to panic. That is, if this report is true.
You wouldn't have taken the bledsoe and Jordan trade? I don't even think that would put the Clippers over the top but it would at least set us up with a big and a future pg or tradable asset.
I would prob do that but how about Dj a complete no show in the playoffs and with his FT shooting cant even keep him in during crunch time
-
From Bob Finnan, a News-Herald guy who covers the Cavs (I think):
Sources indicate Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge will likely buy out forward Paul Pierce's $15 million contract for next year ($5 million is guaranteed). If that happens, Grant should be first in line to try to acquire Pierce's services. However, before anyone gets too giddy, Pierce will likely want to go to a serious contender.
I'd like to know what the sources are before giving merit to this, but it wouldn't surprise me with the Doc leaving rumors going on.
Buying out Pierce without any intention of resigning him for less money makes little sense. It doesn't free up any money to sign FAs.
The only way it makes any sense is if Danny is trying to force KGs hand to waive his no trade clause, but again that's an even worse development because none of the rumored KG trades were even remotely satisfying.
I'm starting to feel that Danny has really lost his way as a GM and is starting to panic. That is, if this report is true.
You wouldn't have taken the bledsoe and Jordan trade? I don't even think that would put the Clippers over the top but it would at least set us up with a big and a future pg or tradable asset.
You should know one thing by now. If we did trade for Jordan and Bledsoe, they would not have been our future. They would be the assets (like Al Jefferson and others) that would bring a superstar to the team.