I just don't see anything happening in terms of a deal. We don't really have much worth offering. Then again, neither did the Lakers and they still got Pau Gasol, so who knows?
The Lakers had a ton to offer for Gasol - it just turns out they didn't have to use most of it. The big expiring deal of Brown was enormous, which is why it didn't cost much more - just late first rounders and a mid-first round rookie point guard. You would think that they'd have to include Bynum or at least Farmar to get a guy like Gasol, but Pau was undervalued by Wallace, and they really just wanted the big cash savings. If we had an $8-10 million expiring deal on the roster, we'd be right in the thick of all the trade talk. Not having the expiring money is really the biggest factor.
Since we don't have the expirings, we would have to make a deal in which we take on a couple mil extra over what we're giving out. To do that, we would have to give up a lot of young guys to make the salaries add up. Since most of the guys are on 2+ year deals, we probably have to take on a guy who's overpaid for at least 3 more years. This means being willing to give up at least one of Davis and Powe (not all that desirable since they both have low salaries that expire this year, so keeping them would cost a team a good deal of money), plus be willing to part with Pruitt, O'Bryant, Allen, Scalabrine and probably even Walker and Giddens as salary filler/pieces. We don't have the expiring contracts teams want with the luxury tax level declining next year.
Bottom line to me is we have 15 guys on the roster, but only about 8 roles filled out of a needed, in my mind, 12 roles (starters plus 2 reserve shooters, 1 reserve point guard, 2 reserve wing defenders, 1 reserve center, 1 other reserve inside player). Last year, we had House and Posey for the 1st 2, Cassell filled the 3rd, Posey and TA filled the 4th and 5th, PJ and Powe filled the last two. Right now, we have 1 shooter (House), 1 wing defender (Allen) and 1 extra inside player (Scalabrine, Powe or Davis can do that, but none fill the center role - playing Davis and Powe together is killing us). The way this team is built, more than anything else, we need another guy who can shoot from the outside while playing passable perimeter defense, and a real center. Since only Allen, House and 1 of the 3 power forwards we have are necessary, I'm at the point where I would part with any other asset or combination of assets to fill those roles.
As for the deals mentioned, Redick would fill a need by adding another shooter, but since he can't play any defense, we are not giving up Allen to get him unless Walker and/or Giddens looks to be ready to step in and play 8-10 minutes a night of championship-caliber playoff defense - I just don't see that happening. Not to mention, Orlando has a more pressing need at the point, so it's unlikely they'll use Redick to get a reserve wing defender who doesn't play the point or fit their team strategy of bombs-away.
I like Joe Smith a lot, and would absolutely give up Pruitt for him, but giving up Scalabrine, who sadly looks like he might actually be needed for interior defense, might cause too many problems IF we don't make another move to bring in a center. As for the Ratliff thing, if I thought he actually would hold up, I would be okay with giving up Davis and O'Bryant to get him, and it would make Scal absolutely expendable. We've used up a bunch of roster spots on guys in the hopes that we'll still have a team in three years' time - I just don't see the point. O'Bryant and Davis are not going to be stars in the league - losing them is not going to haunt us for years to come. Not making the moves to get another championship now might very well haunt us for years. Same with Pruitt, Allen, Powe, and pretty much every young guy except Rondo. A bench of House, Cassell, Allen, Powe, Smith, Marshall and Ratliff, plus Giddens and Walker, would give us a much better bench without any bad salary implications. We'd still be missing a shooter - I don't think Marshall will actually give us many minutes, his shooting numbers were in serious decline until this season when he jumped to 50% on 3s, but it's hard to say how seriously to take any numbers this year since he's only played 80 minutes - and a backup point, but the deals would also give us the roster space to add Marbury if he does get bought out which could fill both roles. And since we just had Cassell and House at point last year, that role, particularly with Rondo's further emergence and likely increased playoff minutes, is not the highest priority.
Side note: while I'd do those two deals, I don't really see why the other teams would. Smith is expiring, I don't see why they would want to add on a lesser player who is not young and due to make $3.4 million next year. Plus, Scalabrine, because he might actually be the guy on our bench who would enable us to go "small" on certain occasions since he can spread the floor at least a bit plus he can play interior defense, is worth more to us than to the Thunder. His salary would be necessary to make the deal work, but is it worth for the Thunder to pay $4 million, or even, with the Celtics throwing in 3, $1 million for the rights to Gabe Pruitt? Maybe it could work if we gave the cash and OKC bought out the remaining two years on Scal's contract (probably about $1.4 mil left this year and $3.4 for next year) for $3 mil, with a promise that we'd make up the $1.8 or so and thensome by signing Scal for the next two seasons. But would Scal give up his Bird rights to get a bit more money and help us out? (Given that he'll end up with about $6 million more than he could've hoped for on the life of his contract, I feel like he owes it to us.) It's doubtful, but to me, it's the only way the deal makes any sense for Oklahoma City. As for the Ratliff deal, intradivision trading is rare and always difficult to work. Plus, why would Philly bring in a young guy who likely won't help them much this year since he doesn't play the run and gun style that suits them best, and they could get him in the offseason if they decided they want a backup for Brand, to whom they're committed for 4 more years?
All that said, our championship window will keep closing and in my mind, we've got to go for 2 more over the next 2 seasons because there's no telling how well we'll be able to deal with the void created when Allen, KG and Pierce finish up. I'm not sure these trades would actually work in practice, but I think it identifies good targets for the Cs while highlighting how limited the Celtics' options are because they don't have those trade assets right now.
Finally - why would PJ come back? He toiled in the league for a long time and had a very good career. He was content to be retired, but really wanted that elusive ring. He got to end his career by being a key contributor on a championship team. Why would he risk changing that ending when he already got more than he ever expected? PJ Brown is NOT coming back.
Yeah, I realize the salary implications of the Pau deal. It was still a boneheaded move by the Griz. Had they waited till the summer, they would've gotten more.
I also agree about PJ: he's isn't coming back and I don't blame him. He got his ring, in a rather fairy tale-like manner, why mess with that? He left the game on the top, why risk coming back and losing in the second round? There certainly isn't much financial incentive, since the C's can only offer him a prorated portion of the minimum.
Topic: Trade deadline looming - Feb 19 (Read 3682 times)