next »

[PhoSita]

I don't agree with the OP's statement.

These are team wins.  As well, Bass has been quite solid.  He's actually been playing defense for the first time all year and blocking some shots.

You'd also change your tune real quick if someone went down with an injury.

If we could just trade Bass and a pick for a big that'd be fine.  But I don't see it happening.

In this win streak Terry is contributing very little, so I think we could stand to lose him without changing much of what we're doing well right now.

And any trade of Bass assumes we'd be getting a more capable big in return.  Bass has been nice in this stretch, but he has been far from indispensible.  He makes some solid defensive plays and hits some mid-range shots.  We'd still be better off with a guy who has legitimate size and who can bother shots near the rim.  We're still expecting KG and Jason Collins to do all of the work of protecting the rim.

[kozlodoev]

And any trade of Bass assumes we'd be getting a more capable big in return.

First of all, this is questionable. Why would anyone trade you a better version of Brandon Bass for Brandon Bass. Trades don't happen this way.

Second, the main problem here is we need both Bass (or someone like him) and another capable big man, which to me is a clear indication Bass is not going anywhere unless it's a multiplayer trade with two big men coming back our way.

[danglertx]

And any trade of Bass assumes we'd be getting a more capable big in return.

First of all, this is questionable. Why would anyone trade you a better version of Brandon Bass for Brandon Bass. Trades don't happen this way.

Second, the main problem here is we need both Bass (or someone like him) and another capable big man, which to me is a clear indication Bass is not going anywhere unless it's a multiplayer trade with two big men coming back our way.

And the answer to your question would be a player on the last year of his deal who isn't a max type player.  The team he is on has no real value in keeping him but a player signed for three years might have value.

Lets use Dallas and Kaman as an example.  He has one year on his contract left and Dallas probably isn't sniffing the playoffs and certainly isn't a contender in the West.  What real value does Kaman have to them?  Trading him for a lessor player might even help them in the lottery if you think about it.

Despite what many people around here think of Bass he is an athletic big who usually has an outstanding mid range game and is money on the free throw line.  If you are building a team of fast penetrating guards who likes getting up and down the floor and want a spot up big who can sink the mid range shot who isn't a liability in the 4th quarter at the line, Bass can have a lot of value.

Now is Bass as good a player as Kaman?  I'd say no way.  But does that make this trade unreasonable?  I'd also say no.  The value of a player isn't always just which player looks better to you.  There are other factors involved.

[kozlodoev]

And any trade of Bass assumes we'd be getting a more capable big in return.

First of all, this is questionable. Why would anyone trade you a better version of Brandon Bass for Brandon Bass. Trades don't happen this way.

Second, the main problem here is we need both Bass (or someone like him) and another capable big man, which to me is a clear indication Bass is not going anywhere unless it's a multiplayer trade with two big men coming back our way.

And the answer to your question would be a player on the last year of his deal who isn't a max type player.  The team he is on has no real value in keeping him but a player signed for three years might have value.

Lets use Dallas and Kaman as an example.  He has one year on his contract left and Dallas probably isn't sniffing the playoffs and certainly isn't a contender in the West.  What real value does Kaman have to them?  Trading him for a lessor player might even help them in the lottery if you think about it.

Despite what many people around here think of Bass he is an athletic big who usually has an outstanding mid range game and is money on the free throw line.  If you are building a team of fast penetrating guards who likes getting up and down the floor and want a spot up big who can sink the mid range shot who isn't a liability in the 4th quarter at the line, Bass can have a lot of value.

Now is Bass as good a player as Kaman?  I'd say no way.  But does that make this trade unreasonable?  I'd also say no.  The value of a player isn't always just which player looks better to you.  There are other factors involved.

This is a complete nonstarter. A team with close to zero ability to sign free agents in the observable future is not going to trade a rotation-capable player who is under team control for someone who will have to walk or be overpaid next season.

[danglertx]

And any trade of Bass assumes we'd be getting a more capable big in return.

First of all, this is questionable. Why would anyone trade you a better version of Brandon Bass for Brandon Bass. Trades don't happen this way.

Second, the main problem here is we need both Bass (or someone like him) and another capable big man, which to me is a clear indication Bass is not going anywhere unless it's a multiplayer trade with two big men coming back our way.

And the answer to your question would be a player on the last year of his deal who isn't a max type player.  The team he is on has no real value in keeping him but a player signed for three years might have value.

Lets use Dallas and Kaman as an example.  He has one year on his contract left and Dallas probably isn't sniffing the playoffs and certainly isn't a contender in the West.  What real value does Kaman have to them?  Trading him for a lessor player might even help them in the lottery if you think about it.

Despite what many people around here think of Bass he is an athletic big who usually has an outstanding mid range game and is money on the free throw line.  If you are building a team of fast penetrating guards who likes getting up and down the floor and want a spot up big who can sink the mid range shot who isn't a liability in the 4th quarter at the line, Bass can have a lot of value.

Now is Bass as good a player as Kaman?  I'd say no way.  But does that make this trade unreasonable?  I'd also say no.  The value of a player isn't always just which player looks better to you.  There are other factors involved.

This is a complete nonstarter. A team with close to zero ability to sign free agents in the observable future is not going to trade a rotation-capable player who is under team control for someone who will have to walk or be overpaid next season.

I think you are saying Boston wouldn't trade Bass for Kaman because they wouldn't be able to resign him next year, which is 100% wrong.  Boston very easily could trade for a guy they think gives them a better chance at winning this year with the FULL EXPECTATION AND INTENT on not resigning him to get salary flexibility next year.

In fact, I'm not sure that isn't a good move on Ainge's part.  Just being able to offer slightly more than the free agent minimum can often swing a backup player.  Look no further than Greg Steimsma for evidence of that.

[2short]

not basing it on win streak but whole season
terry-hasn't clicked, if he isn't scoring he brings very little to the team
bass-slump for most of year but has been playing much better defense as of late, sully's play makes him movable if a big can come back

[kozlodoev]

I think you are saying Boston wouldn't trade Bass for Kaman because they wouldn't be able to resign him next year, which is 100% wrong.  Boston very easily could trade for a guy they think gives them a better chance at winning this year with the FULL EXPECTATION AND INTENT on not resigning him to get salary flexibility next year.

In fact, I'm not sure that isn't a good move on Ainge's part.  Just being able to offer slightly more than the free agent minimum can often swing a backup player.  Look no further than Greg Steimsma for evidence of that.

This would be true if the team was indeed getting any sort of salary flexibility next season by not resigning whoever they get, which they aren't.

So as proposed, this constitutes giving away Bass for a half-season rental of a big man who isn't all that great to begin with. Not going to happen.

[Chris]

And any trade of Bass assumes we'd be getting a more capable big in return.

First of all, this is questionable. Why would anyone trade you a better version of Brandon Bass for Brandon Bass. Trades don't happen this way.

Second, the main problem here is we need both Bass (or someone like him) and another capable big man, which to me is a clear indication Bass is not going anywhere unless it's a multiplayer trade with two big men coming back our way.

And the answer to your question would be a player on the last year of his deal who isn't a max type player.  The team he is on has no real value in keeping him but a player signed for three years might have value.

Lets use Dallas and Kaman as an example.  He has one year on his contract left and Dallas probably isn't sniffing the playoffs and certainly isn't a contender in the West.  What real value does Kaman have to them?  Trading him for a lessor player might even help them in the lottery if you think about it.

Despite what many people around here think of Bass he is an athletic big who usually has an outstanding mid range game and is money on the free throw line.  If you are building a team of fast penetrating guards who likes getting up and down the floor and want a spot up big who can sink the mid range shot who isn't a liability in the 4th quarter at the line, Bass can have a lot of value.

Now is Bass as good a player as Kaman?  I'd say no way.  But does that make this trade unreasonable?  I'd also say no.  The value of a player isn't always just which player looks better to you.  There are other factors involved.

This is a complete nonstarter. A team with close to zero ability to sign free agents in the observable future is not going to trade a rotation-capable player who is under team control for someone who will have to walk or be overpaid next season.

While I agree that its a nonstarter, I think its Dallas that doesn't consider it.  The only reason they signed Kaman to that contract was so they could have cap space again this summer to make another run at Howard along with Paul and Smith.  They aren't taking on a contract like Bass'.

[kozlodoev]

While I agree that its a nonstarter, I think its Dallas that doesn't consider it.  The only reason they signed Kaman to that contract was so they could have cap space again this summer to make another run at Howard along with Paul and Smith.  They aren't taking on a contract like Bass'.

Kaman was just an example, I guess. Dallas already has Nowitzki, Brand, and Marion -- they have zero need or use for Bass.

[Snakehead]

I don't agree with the OP's statement.

These are team wins.  As well, Bass has been quite solid.  He's actually been playing defense for the first time all year and blocking some shots.

You'd also change your tune real quick if someone went down with an injury.

If we could just trade Bass and a pick for a big that'd be fine.  But I don't see it happening.

In this win streak Terry is contributing very little, so I think we could stand to lose him without changing much of what we're doing well right now.

And any trade of Bass assumes we'd be getting a more capable big in return.  Bass has been nice in this stretch, but he has been far from indispensible.  He makes some solid defensive plays and hits some mid-range shots.  We'd still be better off with a guy who has legitimate size and who can bother shots near the rim.  We're still expecting KG and Jason Collins to do all of the work of protecting the rim.

1) Terry not doing too much doesn't mean he won't ever do anything.  Or Lee, Rondo, or Bradley won't get hurt.  6 games is a season now?  He has had his moments even on this streak.

2) You aren't going to get that for Bass.  If you can, by all means do.  But I don't see it happening.

[danglertx]

I think you are saying Boston wouldn't trade Bass for Kaman because they wouldn't be able to resign him next year, which is 100% wrong.  Boston very easily could trade for a guy they think gives them a better chance at winning this year with the FULL EXPECTATION AND INTENT on not resigning him to get salary flexibility next year.

In fact, I'm not sure that isn't a good move on Ainge's part.  Just being able to offer slightly more than the free agent minimum can often swing a backup player.  Look no further than Greg Steimsma for evidence of that.

This would be true if the team was indeed getting any sort of salary flexibility next season by not resigning whoever they get, which they aren't.

So as proposed, this constitutes giving away Bass for a half-season rental of a big man who isn't all that great to begin with. Not going to happen.

Ok, not going to go over the salary ramifications because it isn't really why I first answered your question of why a team would trade a better version of Bass for Bass.  I thought I made my point, but instead you got caught up in the minutia of the example.  My point was that teams often trade for a lesser player for a couple of reasons.

[Neurotic Guy]

Terry's been frustrating but I think having a guy who is capable of a red hot shooting/scoring streak off the bench is important.  Though he's dissappointed at times, JET is a guy who can win you a game or 2 in the playoffs with his shooting (Eddie House).  Without Terry, Pierce is really the only one left who can 'go off' (maybe Lee or Green to some exent -- but JET is able to do what Ray or Eddie did with his shot).  I think (hope) JET will show his value soon.

[Rtpas11]

Everyone's expendable but Pierce & K.G.

The players I would most definitely FedEx outta here are "Green, Terry, Lee, & Collins

[nickagneta]

I'm not sure expendable is the right word to use for any of our players. I think currently that there is a core of players that it wouldn't be wise to trade as they appear to make up the components of a real title contender. Those players are:

KG
Pierce
Rondo
Bradley
Sullinger

I then think there is a group of extremely valuable role players that are helping this team or could in the future but could be moved if there is an upgrade to be had or a player to be had that would fit into the first group of players. Those players are:

Green
Lee
Terry
Bass
Melo

Then I think there's a group of players that basically can be moved at any time for whatever reason because they aren't a long term part of this team:

Collins
Wilcox
Barbosa

I had a problem placing Melo in the second group as he has shown nothing that demonstrates he will be a contributing role player one day but he could be and might not be easily replaceable if he pans out, so I didn't put him in the last group.

[2short]

Terry's been frustrating but I think having a guy who is capable of a red hot shooting/scoring streak off the bench is important.  Though he's dissappointed at times, JET is a guy who can win you a game or 2 in the playoffs with his shooting (Eddie House).  Without Terry, Pierce is really the only one left who can 'go off' (maybe Lee or Green to some exent -- but JET is able to do what Ray or Eddie did with his shot).  I think (hope) JET will show his value soon.

I hope terry starts showing an eddie house streak to his game.  He does a nice job at backup pg but not sure he is any better than lee (with pierce in) or barbosa and he's paid $4? million
Could be as easy as we aren't running pick and roll plays for him.  We really don't have many plays for terry, green, lee or sully.  They get looks but it appears to be on breaks, before defense settles or one on one.