Author Topic: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!  (Read 7421 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #75 on: January 11, 2013, 08:36:29 PM »

Offline OsirusCeltics

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2013
  • Tommy Points: 198
I rather trade Rondo instead of Pierce to be honest

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #76 on: January 11, 2013, 08:38:21 PM »

Offline dark_lord

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8810
  • Tommy Points: 1103
I rather trade Rondo instead of Pierce to be honest

co-sign

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #77 on: January 11, 2013, 08:43:01 PM »

Offline alajet

  • Rajon Rondo
  • Posts: 790
  • Tommy Points: 54
Some reasonable trades.  Obviously some are better than others and some would require additional trades, but I think they are all reasonable value for Pierce and would in theory be realistic for the teams involved.

3 Team
Bos - Gay, Bledsoe
LAC - Pierce, Arthur
MEM - Odom, Butler

Bos - Leonard, Blair, Jackson, Bonnar
SAS - Pierce, Wilcox

Bos - Barnes, Jefferson, Ezeli, Tyler, Jenkins
GS - Pierce, Melo

Bos - Granger, T. Hansborough
Ind - Pierce

Bos - Deng, Belinelli
Chi - Pierce

Bos - Sanders, Udrih, Dunleavy (thiw would depend on how much Ainge likes Sanders going forward)
Mil - Pierce, Wilcox

Aside from the Pacers one, these are debatable for me. I don't want Granger, though. He is nearly 30 now. Not a future asset.
I like Gay-Bledsoe the most. Gets a starting SF in return, and a very good 1-2 guy in Bledsoe to back up both backcourt positions.
GSW trade is good, but I don't think GSW will be willing to give up both Barnes and Ezeli.
If we aren't trading Terry elsewhere, I don't want Marco back with that Chicago trade, although I like his game.
For the SAS trade, Blair is undersized at C, so, if Sullinger is to stay as a future PF, they aren't a good combination in terms of size.
Bucks trade is a step for future. I like Sanders since he first showed up in Summer League in his rookie season. Getting him somehow would be great.

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #78 on: January 11, 2013, 08:47:28 PM »

Online Who

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30360
  • Tommy Points: 1274
Some reasonable trades.  Obviously some are better than others and some would require additional trades, but I think they are all reasonable value for Pierce and would in theory be realistic for the teams involved.

3 Team
Bos - Gay, Bledsoe
LAC - Pierce, Arthur
MEM - Odom, Butler

Bos - Leonard, Blair, Jackson, Bonnar
SAS - Pierce, Wilcox

Bos - Barnes, Jefferson, Ezeli, Tyler, Jenkins
GS - Pierce, Melo

Bos - Granger, T. Hansborough
Ind - Pierce

Bos - Deng, Belinelli
Chi - Pierce

Bos - Sanders, Udrih, Dunleavy (thiw would depend on how much Ainge likes Sanders going forward)
Mil - Pierce, Wilcox

Aside from the Pacers one, these are debatable for me. I don't want Granger, though. He is nearly 30 now. Not a future asset.
I like Gay-Bledsoe the most. Gets a starting SF in return, and a very good 1-2 guy in Bledsoe to back up both backcourt positions.
GSW trade is good, but I don't think GSW will be willing to give up both Barnes and Ezeli.
If we aren't trading Terry elsewhere, I don't want Marco back with that Chicago trade, although I like his game.
For the SAS trade, Blair is undersized at C, so, if Sullinger is to stay as a future PF, they aren't a good combination in terms of size.
Bucks trade is a step for future. I like Sanders since he first showed up in Summer League in his rookie season. Getting him somehow would be great.
Bledsoe would need to go to Memphis in that trade.

Doesn't make sense for him to end up in Boston and for Memphis to get so little.

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #79 on: January 11, 2013, 08:52:24 PM »

Offline alajet

  • Rajon Rondo
  • Posts: 790
  • Tommy Points: 54
Some reasonable trades.  Obviously some are better than others and some would require additional trades, but I think they are all reasonable value for Pierce and would in theory be realistic for the teams involved.

3 Team
Bos - Gay, Bledsoe
LAC - Pierce, Arthur
MEM - Odom, Butler

Bos - Leonard, Blair, Jackson, Bonnar
SAS - Pierce, Wilcox

Bos - Barnes, Jefferson, Ezeli, Tyler, Jenkins
GS - Pierce, Melo

Bos - Granger, T. Hansborough
Ind - Pierce

Bos - Deng, Belinelli
Chi - Pierce

Bos - Sanders, Udrih, Dunleavy (thiw would depend on how much Ainge likes Sanders going forward)
Mil - Pierce, Wilcox

Aside from the Pacers one, these are debatable for me. I don't want Granger, though. He is nearly 30 now. Not a future asset.
I like Gay-Bledsoe the most. Gets a starting SF in return, and a very good 1-2 guy in Bledsoe to back up both backcourt positions.
GSW trade is good, but I don't think GSW will be willing to give up both Barnes and Ezeli.
If we aren't trading Terry elsewhere, I don't want Marco back with that Chicago trade, although I like his game.
For the SAS trade, Blair is undersized at C, so, if Sullinger is to stay as a future PF, they aren't a good combination in terms of size.
Bucks trade is a step for future. I like Sanders since he first showed up in Summer League in his rookie season. Getting him somehow would be great.
Bledsoe would need to go to Memphis in that trade.

Doesn't make sense for him to end up in Boston and for Memphis to get so little.

Probably. Besides, I don't think Memphis will also want to give away Arthur and bring in Odom.

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #80 on: January 11, 2013, 08:58:51 PM »

Offline tenn_smoothie

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1172
  • Tommy Points: 105
i hate Danny Ainge !!!!!

just when the Celts get Bradley back and look like a new team and start playing together, Danny sticks his big mouth in to disrupt harmony and momentum.

he seems to have some sick tendency to do this - the Celts were rolling when he traded Perk and the team hasn't been the same since.

now this ?

does it always have to be about him ? Paul is playing great and the team is starting to come around. actually, they are starting to benefit from Danny's acquisitions this summer (except for the return of Green, which has been mixed).

i want Paul Pierce retiring as a Celtic - that used to be the norm in Boston - until Mr. Trade-O-Matic became GM.

Wiretap: Celtics Making Pierce Available In Trade Talks
« Reply #81 on: January 12, 2013, 04:53:07 AM »

Offline lightspeed5

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • ****
  • Posts: 4111
  • Tommy Points: 283
only exploratory trade discussions have been made.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/225550/Celtics_Making_Pierce_Available_In_Trade_Talks

im opposed because I feel like any pierce trade would be mostly lateral with the chance to mess up chemistry.

Re: Wiretap: Celtics Making Pierce Available In Trade Talks
« Reply #82 on: January 12, 2013, 05:40:31 AM »

Offline jdz101

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2421
  • Tommy Points: 308
In breaking realgm worthy news; "teams are willing to trade core players, but only for the right deal"

I really hate this time of year....

Not a knock on the OP by the way. Worth posting here.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2013, 06:07:45 AM by jdz101 »


how much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck was chris bosh?

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #83 on: January 12, 2013, 08:09:08 AM »

Offline PhoSita

  • Antoine Walker
  • *****
  • Posts: 5133
  • Tommy Points: 328

Bledsoe would need to go to Memphis in that trade.

Doesn't make sense for him to end up in Boston and for Memphis to get so little.

Honestly, I'd rather have Bledsoe as a cheap young piece rather than Gay, who is overpaid not as good as Pierce.
Quote from: BBallTim
Parker isn't going to score 30 ppg and rebuilds generally take longer than 1 year. Relax.

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #84 on: January 12, 2013, 08:16:11 AM »

Online Who

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30360
  • Tommy Points: 1274

Bledsoe would need to go to Memphis in that trade.

Doesn't make sense for him to end up in Boston and for Memphis to get so little.

Honestly, I'd rather have Bledsoe as a cheap young piece rather than Gay, who is overpaid not as good as Pierce.

Yeah, that's another way to go with it.

I think it'd be pretty tough for the Clippers to give Bledsoe for a 35 year old Paul Pierce + the other pieces they'd need to include to match salaries. Better chance with Rudy Gay (26 years old) since he'd be a long term piece alongside CP3, Griffin and D.Jordan.

That offer probably wouldn't be on the table for Pierce.

Edit: Oh, that's the original trade. Pierce to LAC. Yeah, I'm not sure there is enough value there for the Clippers. They are losing three big rotation pieces with Odom, Bledsoe and Caron. I think they need more value going there way for it to be worthwhile for them. Maybe take Bledsoe out of the deal. Then there is nowhere near enough for Memphis. Ahh ... I don't know.

It doesn't look like there is a workable three team trade there between the Clips (Pierce), Boston (Gay) and Memphis. Not enough assets available for Memphis to receive if losing Pierce and not getting Pierce to make it worthwhile for everyone.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2013, 08:23:57 AM by Who »

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #85 on: January 12, 2013, 09:17:20 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9545
  • Tommy Points: 410

Bledsoe would need to go to Memphis in that trade.

Doesn't make sense for him to end up in Boston and for Memphis to get so little.

Honestly, I'd rather have Bledsoe as a cheap young piece rather than Gay, who is overpaid not as good as Pierce.

Yeah, that's another way to go with it.

I think it'd be pretty tough for the Clippers to give Bledsoe for a 35 year old Paul Pierce + the other pieces they'd need to include to match salaries. Better chance with Rudy Gay (26 years old) since he'd be a long term piece alongside CP3, Griffin and D.Jordan.

That offer probably wouldn't be on the table for Pierce.

Edit: Oh, that's the original trade. Pierce to LAC. Yeah, I'm not sure there is enough value there for the Clippers. They are losing three big rotation pieces with Odom, Bledsoe and Caron. I think they need more value going there way for it to be worthwhile for them. Maybe take Bledsoe out of the deal. Then there is nowhere near enough for Memphis. Ahh ... I don't know.

It doesn't look like there is a workable three team trade there between the Clips (Pierce), Boston (Gay) and Memphis. Not enough assets available for Memphis to receive if losing Pierce and not getting Pierce to make it worthwhile for everyone.
By trading for Butler and Odom they save a ton of cash.  And sure Butler isn't as good as Gay, but he is a similar type player.  Plus they add Odom creating a nice 3 man big man rotation.
2014 Pick 2 Draft 18th pick of 20
Sacramento Kings
Starters - Isaiah Thomas, Eric Gordon, Jimmy Butler, Dirk Nowitzki, Demarcus Cousins
Bench - Kendall Marshall, Michael Carter-Williams, Vince Carter, Wesley Johnson, Marcus Morris, Miles Plumlee, Nerlens Noel

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #86 on: January 12, 2013, 09:29:10 AM »

Offline PhoSita

  • Antoine Walker
  • *****
  • Posts: 5133
  • Tommy Points: 328

Bledsoe would need to go to Memphis in that trade.

Doesn't make sense for him to end up in Boston and for Memphis to get so little.

Honestly, I'd rather have Bledsoe as a cheap young piece rather than Gay, who is overpaid not as good as Pierce.

Yeah, that's another way to go with it.

I think it'd be pretty tough for the Clippers to give Bledsoe for a 35 year old Paul Pierce + the other pieces they'd need to include to match salaries. Better chance with Rudy Gay (26 years old) since he'd be a long term piece alongside CP3, Griffin and D.Jordan.

That offer probably wouldn't be on the table for Pierce.

Edit: Oh, that's the original trade. Pierce to LAC. Yeah, I'm not sure there is enough value there for the Clippers. They are losing three big rotation pieces with Odom, Bledsoe and Caron. I think they need more value going there way for it to be worthwhile for them. Maybe take Bledsoe out of the deal. Then there is nowhere near enough for Memphis. Ahh ... I don't know.

It doesn't look like there is a workable three team trade there between the Clips (Pierce), Boston (Gay) and Memphis. Not enough assets available for Memphis to receive if losing Pierce and not getting Pierce to make it worthwhile for everyone.

I think you're probably right -- would be tough for the Clips to sacrifice depth to upgrade at SF.

But Butler to Pierce is a pretty huge upgrade.  And I'm sure the Clips realize that their depth won't mean as much in the playoffs.  Adding another elite scorer to their starting lineup could make them much harder to beat in a series against the Thunder or the Heat.

Anyway, as I've said previously, the Clippers are the only team I can even imagine trading for Pierce.  Nobody else has both the assets and the situation for it to make sense.  Teams like the Pacers aren't close enough to real title contention to make it worthwhile.  Ainge isn't going to trade Pierce for a highly paid player with no upside like Granger or Gay.
Quote from: BBallTim
Parker isn't going to score 30 ppg and rebuilds generally take longer than 1 year. Relax.

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #87 on: January 12, 2013, 09:42:26 AM »

Offline tenn_smoothie

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1172
  • Tommy Points: 105
"Danny would not be doing his job if he wasn't shopping Pierce.  He is the GM and VP of Personnel.  His job is one thing and one thing only:  to give Doc the absolute best talent he can that gives them the best shot to win Banner 18, and to do so under the owner's financial requirements."


Wasn't the "more talented" argument used for the Jeff Green deal ? look where that one got us - we have been looking for a center ever since.

maybe you have not ever played team sports, but chemistry and playing as a unit is half the battle. look at the mess the "very talented" Lakers are in right now. i said when Nash was acquired that he and Kobe's styles would clash and sure enough. then they go and get the absolute wrong coach for their strongest playing style (half court - pound it inside).

but this "talent" emphasis has been going on since the league started - the late 60's Lakers couldn't win a title, the mid 70's sixers also lost in the finals, the 90's Knicks and the 2004 Lakers]. talent only gets you part way there - gotta have chemistry and the talented parts have to mesh and not clash.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2013, 09:57:29 AM by tenn_smoothie »

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #88 on: January 12, 2013, 09:48:17 AM »

Offline tenn_smoothie

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1172
  • Tommy Points: 105
I take solace in the fact that I don't think Wyc would allow this.

That would be pretty awful if Wyc blocked a trade that would benefit the team.

Actually, i would look at such a scenario as a father stopping his young, impulsive son from buying that sparkly new car even though the older car he currently has is still a better vehicle and has unique features that new cars don't have anymore..

Re: Celtics "open to discussing Paul Pierce"?!
« Reply #89 on: January 12, 2013, 09:51:57 AM »

Offline PhoSita

  • Antoine Walker
  • *****
  • Posts: 5133
  • Tommy Points: 328
Quote from: mctyson or during free agency. [/quote

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/21539972/postups-gay-trade-bait-as-grizzlies-maneuver-between-winning-taxes
[
Danny would not be doing his job if he wasn't "shopping" Pierce.  He is the GM and VP of Personnel.  His job is one thing and one thing only:  to give Doc the absolute best talent he can that gives them the best shot to win Banner 18, and to do so under the owner's financial requirements.


Wasn't the "more talented" argument used for the Jeff Green deal ? look where that one got us - we have been looking for a center ever since.

maybe you have not ever played team sports, but chemistry and playing as a unit is half the battle. look at the mess the "very talented" Lakers are in right now. i said when Nash was acquired that he and Kobe's styles would clash and sure enough. then they go and get the absolute wrong coach for their strongest playing style (half court - pound it inside).

but this "talent" emphasis has been going on since the league started - the late 60's Lakers couldn't win a title, the mid 70's sixers also lost in the finals, the 90's Knicks and the 2004 Lakers]. talent only gets you part way there - gotta have chemistry and the talented parts have to mesh and not clash.

Your point about chemistry is well-taken.

But the talent argument is a valid one, also.

I think what you're getting at is that prioritizing talent over chemistry is not always going to benefit you in the short term.  It's not always a win-now move.  The Green trade certainly didn't seem to improve the 2010-2011 team in the short term, though I still strongly believe that team was never going anywhere without a healthy Shaq; if Shaq had been healthy for the playoff run, we might view the trade a lot differently in terms of how it affected the team that year.  In the long term, I am of the opinion that the Green trade really benefited the Celtics.  We're much better off with Green than we would be with Perk making similar money, in my opinion. 

Similarly, trading Pierce for the sake of talent probably wouldn't improve the team this year.  But in any case trading Pierce would be a sign that Ainge doesn't think the team is going to win it all this year -- he'd be positioning the team to be more competitive in the future (i.e. post-Pierce/KG).
Quote from: BBallTim
Parker isn't going to score 30 ppg and rebuilds generally take longer than 1 year. Relax.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsBlog Forums.

Welcome to CelticsBlog