next »

[Celtics18]

If the Celts deal Pierce for Gay, wouldn't that help them compete for this year as much as it would help them "for the future"?

I think a lineup of Bradley, Lee, Gay, Sullinger and KG is pretty darn good to just be a "rebuilding" team

Nope.  I wouldn't have liked this deal even before Rondo went down, but now that we've lost our point guard, we need the Captain more than ever to play point forward for us.  I would have absolutely no confidence that Rudy Gay could fill that role anywhere near at Paul Pierce's level. 

[pearljammer10]

If the Celts deal Pierce for Gay, wouldn't that help them compete for this year as much as it would help them "for the future"?

I think a lineup of Bradley, Lee, Gay, Sullinger and KG is pretty darn good to just be a "rebuilding" team

Nope.  I wouldn't have liked this deal even before Rondo went down, but now that we've lost our point guard, we need the Captain more than ever to play point forward for us.  I would have absolutely no confidence that Rudy Gay could fill that role anywhere near at Paul Pierce's level.

Agreed. And also, you would probably have to take KG out of the rebuilding lineup as I would think he would retire before going into rebuilding mode.

[MBunge]

There's 0 reason to trade Pierce unless you've also got a deal to ship out KG.  Would Utah, Golden state or Denver want KG?

Mike

[pearljammer10]

There's 0 reason to trade Pierce unless you've also got a deal to ship out KG.  Would Utah, Golden state or Denver want KG?

Mike

In my bogus trade ideas I wondered if Pierce to Utah for Jefferson's expiring would make sense for either party involved. Even though I dont want to trade Pierce and I dont particularly want Jefferson.

Trade KG to OKC and Pierce to Utah to maximize our return and cap space.

KG and Terry for Martin's expiring, Maynor's expiring, and Perry Jones.

Pierce to Utah for Jefferson's expiring.

[gpap]

If the Celts deal Pierce for Gay, wouldn't that help them compete for this year as much as it would help them "for the future"?

I think a lineup of Bradley, Lee, Gay, Sullinger and KG is pretty darn good to just be a "rebuilding" team

Nope.  I wouldn't have liked this deal even before Rondo went down, but now that we've lost our point guard, we need the Captain more than ever to play point forward for us.  I would have absolutely no confidence that Rudy Gay could fill that role anywhere near at Paul Pierce's level.

Not quite sure I am following this line of thinking. So, what you are saying is if the Celtics keep Pierce, they have a slim chance of competing. If they swap him with Gay (which I could make an argument is every bit the player Pierce is if not better at this stage) then the Celtics season is done.

Not quite buying that one. I think if the Celts can land Gay for Pierce and then land a PG to replace Rondo like Lowry, then your starting line up is on par if not better than it was when you had Rondo, AB, Pierce, KG and Bass.

[sofutomygaha]

Is Gay really an asset, though?

The Grizzlies want to trade Gay for good reason. He's one of the most overpaid players in the league.

For 16.5 million per year, Gay is not playing extremely well and, worse, is not really improving. The analytics mostly agree on this... theNBAgeek actually rates him as below average for his career: he produces about 0.08 wins per 48 minutes while the average SF produces about 0.1

His player efficiency rating is generally in the 17 range, while an average player rates a 15. Salary-wise, a player with a 17 PER is worth about 10-12 million per year, which would make Gay overpaid by about 50%.

We like to overlook PER when we are talking about excellent defensive players, but Gay is not one. Last year, the Grizzlies gave up 6 fewer points per possession when they swapped him out for guys like Quincy Pondexter and Donte Cunningham.

His adjusted plus minus is also extremely ordinary. The Grizzlies are a solid team, but they have generally been less than one point better when Gay is on the floor. This year, he's actually a zero. A player in his tax bracket ought to have an adjusted plus minus in the 3-10 point range. Paul Pierce, with the terrible time he's having this year, is still a +2 for us.

Gay is coming into his prime, and yet all of the metrics I mention here are trending DOWN, not up. Gay's performance has been in slow decline since 2010-11.

[Celtics18]

If the Celts deal Pierce for Gay, wouldn't that help them compete for this year as much as it would help them "for the future"?

I think a lineup of Bradley, Lee, Gay, Sullinger and KG is pretty darn good to just be a "rebuilding" team

Nope.  I wouldn't have liked this deal even before Rondo went down, but now that we've lost our point guard, we need the Captain more than ever to play point forward for us.  I would have absolutely no confidence that Rudy Gay could fill that role anywhere near at Paul Pierce's level.

Not quite sure I am following this line of thinking. So, what you are saying is if the Celtics keep Pierce, they have a slim chance of competing. If they swap him with Gay (which I could make an argument is every bit the player Pierce is if not better at this stage) then the Celtics season is done.

Not quite buying that one. I think if the Celts can land Gay for Pierce and then land a PG to replace Rondo like Lowry, then your starting line up is on par if not better than it was when you had Rondo, AB, Pierce, KG and Bass.

You've pretty much got that right.  Although, I wouldn't use the adjective "slim."

I've got a return question for you;  once you trade Pierce for Gay, who do you trade to get Lowry?  I don't think Toronto is planning to just give him away. 

[pearljammer10]

If the Celts deal Pierce for Gay, wouldn't that help them compete for this year as much as it would help them "for the future"?

I think a lineup of Bradley, Lee, Gay, Sullinger and KG is pretty darn good to just be a "rebuilding" team

Nope.  I wouldn't have liked this deal even before Rondo went down, but now that we've lost our point guard, we need the Captain more than ever to play point forward for us.  I would have absolutely no confidence that Rudy Gay could fill that role anywhere near at Paul Pierce's level.

Not quite sure I am following this line of thinking. So, what you are saying is if the Celtics keep Pierce, they have a slim chance of competing. If they swap him with Gay (which I could make an argument is every bit the player Pierce is if not better at this stage) then the Celtics season is done.

Not quite buying that one. I think if the Celts can land Gay for Pierce and then land a PG to replace Rondo like Lowry, then your starting line up is on par if not better than it was when you had Rondo, AB, Pierce, KG and Bass.

You've pretty much got that right.  Although, I wouldn't use the adjective "slim."

I've got a return question for you;  once you trade Pierce for Gay, who do you trade to get Lowry?  I don't think Toronto is planning to just give him away.

Gay is certainly more youthful but he is not better than Pierce. Especially this season thus far.

[sofutomygaha]

There's 0 reason to trade Pierce unless you've also got a deal to ship out KG.  Would Utah, Golden state or Denver want KG?

Mike

I thought the same thing, Mike. We could be a king-maker for Denver or Golden State by trading both KG and Pierce in exchange for bad contracts and a young assets.

For example, we could send both to Golden State and take back Bogut (who has been hurt all season), Barnes (the asset), and either Biedrins or Jefferson, who are expensive dead weight for them.

[gpap]

I've got a return question for you;  once you trade Pierce for Gay, who do you trade to get Lowry?  I don't think Toronto is planning to just give him away.
[/quote]

Yeah it's a tough one. I THINK if the Celtics agree to pick up Barganini as a throw-in, then they could be able to obtain Lowry.

From what I read, Toronto is looking to unload him

Problem there is coming up with the assets. If you could land Lowry and Bargiani by dealing Lee and Bass, then go for it.

Between Terry, Barbosa and AB, Lee becomes expendable (although Lee is starting to pick it up.)

If Toronto requests Jeff Green, then that might be a different story. It all really depends on Pierce's situation.

If Pierce stays (which I think he will) then Green becomes somewhat expendable. If Pierce goes, then you will need Green for depth at the 3.

[sofutomygaha]

Yeah it's a tough one. I THINK if the Celtics agree to pick up Barganini as a throw-in, then they could be able to obtain Lowry.

From what I read, Toronto is looking to unload him

...but then you would have Bargnani on your team. Ewww

I also can't imagine Toronto having interest in Jeff Green unless we take back Landry Fields... an overpaid, below average back-up small forward, i.e. their version of Jeff Green.

[pearljammer10]

I've got a return question for you;  once you trade Pierce for Gay, who do you trade to get Lowry?  I don't think Toronto is planning to just give him away.


Yeah it's a tough one. I THINK if the Celtics agree to pick up Barganini as a throw-in, then they could be able to obtain Lowry.

From what I read, Toronto is looking to unload him

Problem there is coming up with the assets. If you could land Lowry and Bargiani by dealing Lee and Bass, then go for it.

Between Terry, Barbosa and AB, Lee becomes expendable (although Lee is starting to pick it up.)

If Toronto requests Jeff Green, then that might be a different story. It all really depends on Pierce's situation.

If Pierce stays (which I think he will) then Green becomes somewhat expendable. If Pierce goes, then you will need Green for depth at the 3.

I dont really see Bargs as a "throw in". Plus, Lowry and Bargs together make 16 - 17 mil. Lee and Bass would only be returning 11.

Plus I dont want to see Lee traded unless we land a big fish/all star with him in the deal which is not going to happen. Lee has been playing really good ball for us in his minutes. If Green can play D on everybody like he did on Lebron this sunday, then Bradley, Lee, and Green provide a great youthful defensive trio that can also hold their own on the offense as well.

[Celtics18]

I've got a return question for you;  once you trade Pierce for Gay, who do you trade to get Lowry?  I don't think Toronto is planning to just give him away.

[/b]

Yeah it's a tough one. I THINK if the Celtics agree to pick up Barganini as a throw-in, then they could be able to obtain Lowry.

From what I read, Toronto is looking to unload him

Problem there is coming up with the assets. If you could land Lowry and Bargiani by dealing Lee and Bass, then go for it.

Between Terry, Barbosa and AB, Lee becomes expendable (although Lee is starting to pick it up.)

If Toronto requests Jeff Green, then that might be a different story. It all really depends on Pierce's situation.

If Pierce stays (which I think he will) then Green becomes somewhat expendable. If Pierce goes, then you will need Green for depth at the 3.
[/quote]

If we could get Lowry and Bargs for Lee and Bass, I might be interested (that seems unlikely to me, but I guess stranger things have happened).  I still wouldn't do Pierce for Gay, though.

[DavorCroatiaFan]

Would annyone make this trade:
BOS: out Pierce, Bass, Collins
      in Gortat, Lowry, Beasley
MEM: out Gay
      in Pierce
PHO: out Gortat, Beasley, Johnson, Brown
      in Gay, Bass, Collins
TOR: out Lowry
      in Johnson, Brown, BOS 2nd round, PHO 2nd round

Lowry / Terry / Barbosa
Bradley / Lee / Terry
Green / Beasley / Lee
Garnett / Sullinger / Wilcox
Gortat / Garnett / Melo

[RIPRED]

Sorry, but never trade Pierce.

+1

Unless we're going into complete tank for draft pick mode, Pierce woul dbe the last person I trade from the team.