next »

[erisred]

I've been saying for a solid few weeks now all these trade rumors are just a snow job by the media.

It's as if the media WANT KG TO BE TRADED.  Do they honestly think if they say it enough it will happen?  Do think think they are the one's who can convince KG to accept a deal to LA?

KG ain't going anywhere.

I think a large part of the media community, and probably the NBA Administration, would like to have a really strong team coming out of LA to compete for the championship due to location, ratings, and the money it would generate. Especially, if it ended up with a Knicks/Clippers final. Imagine Stern's tears of joy at the going away present he'd be presented with.

Personally, I still think that the KG/PP team can compete with and has a good shot at beating *anybody* in a best of seven series. However, the Celtics have "been there, done that" and trying to get the media...or the public excited about it again is going to be tougher than promoting "the new stars of LA."

OTOH, right now, KG helps the Clippers a lot more than anybody we'd get from the Clippers helps the Celtics. If I were Danny I'd toss a wrench into the gears and hold out for the moon and the stars...especially the stars! If I don't get them then no deal.

As I wrote, I believe these Celtics can still compete this year and next year, too. It's a long shot, but there could still be one more championship in these guys. Stay the course!

KG and Pierce are passing along what it means to be a Celtic, what it takes to compete and win in the playoffs. Green and Bradley, Lee and Sully, T-Will and Melo and maybe another rookie still need those lessons this year and next. Hopefully, one or two of them becomes a core piece to stand with Rondo after this era ends and the C's *really* have to rebuild. For, now, though...stay the course!

[mkogav]

Your issue seems to be that you refuse the scrutinize all aspects of this deal.

I have many issues, but scrutiny ain't one. I just don't care about swapping one like contract for another. Cap room is overrated.

We are talking 2.3 years either way. The Cs can not get under the cap in that time since Danny ran up the Cs credit cards on Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee. I suppose he could pay other teams to take these players with draft picks, $$$, Bradley, or Sully, but what is the point then? A gutted roster and 15 win season?

Mk

[JoT]

I've been saying for a solid few weeks now all these trade rumors are just a snow job by the media.

It's as if the media WANT KG TO BE TRADED.  Do they honestly think if they say it enough it will happen?  Do think think they are the one's who can convince KG to accept a deal to LA?

KG ain't going anywhere.

Thank you because this is what I've been thinking for the past few days. It's like they're starving for him to go to the Clippers (they're the new LA it team) and leave Boston.
The man said he didn't want to be traded, wouldn't pull his NTC, and wants to retire a Celtic yet the media still doesn't  get it. How many times does he have to say no for them to understand the word no.

[ssspence]

Wow, I don't understand all of the Jordan detractors. If roles were reversed and Jordan was drafted by Danny, Jordan is the type of player that would be completely over-rated by Cs fans. However, since he is part of the KG return package, he's the next Darko and nothing more.

Seriously, the kid has game and plays hard. I don't see how anyone can cap his potential at a Darko or Kwame. He's only 24.

Let me explain "the Jordan detractors" for you: He's signed at $12 million per ($10 million salary + $2 million kicker). For multiple years. Do you understand what a cap commitment of this sort means for an NBA team? I'm sorry, but at this price tag, I expect someone a little better than a "kid [who] has game and plays hard".

D.Jordan is more of a finishing piece to a team that already has it's main stars in place than a piece you get early in the rebuilding process and build around.

It's the wrong phase in the Celtics retooling process for D.Jordan.

Still, I would be happy to acquire him in order to trade him somewhere else and pickup additional or better fitting long term assets.

If the Cs still have long term commitments in place for Rondo, Green, Bass, Lee and Terry, not to mention the inevitability that the Cs would re-sign Bradley and / or Bledsoe in the summer of '14, are the Cs actually "early in the rebuilding process"? Terry would likely be traded, but I'd see the Cs wanting to keep Green and Lee, and having a very difficult time trading Bass. 

Jordan's deal is the same length as Rondo's, Bass' and Terry's, while a year shorter than Lee's and Green's. Considering this lack of flexibility. It could very well be that the Cs would rather have Jordan -- even if they feel he's a little overpaid (much like I suspect they looked at, and feel about, Green) -- than to try to find him in the marketplace with what they have to work with.

What is the point in trading Garnett if you don't follow that up by trading those role players on (relatively) expensive multi-year deals?

I say keep Garnett or blow it up properly. No halfway measures.

Much easier said than done. Rondo has value. Green, Bass, Lee... don't have much. Hard to imagine any of them even returning a 1st round pick.

[Brendan]

Reason to not trade KG & PP:
Green, Terry, Bass, and to an extent Lee.

You need to dump those guys first, before you blow it up, or at least two or three of them.

[kozlodoev]

Your issue seems to be that you refuse the scrutinize all aspects of this deal.

I have many issues, but scrutiny ain't one. I just don't care about swapping one like contract for another. Cap room is overrated.

We are talking 2.3 years either way. The Cs can not get under the cap in that time since Danny ran up the Cs credit cards on Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee. I suppose he could pay other teams to take these players with draft picks, $$$, Bradley, or Sully, but what is the point then? A gutted roster and 15 win season?

Outside of Garnett and Pierce, we've committed roughly $43 million to 8 players. Plus $2 million in cap holds for minimum roster holds. Plus $4 million for the "room exception".

This still leaves ~$10 million to play with -- which can get you a decent player. And given that Garnett and Pierce can retire as early as next season, I don't see the value in having Jordan instead.

[LooseCannon]

I say keep Garnett or blow it up properly. No halfway measures.

Much easier said than done. Rondo has value. Green, Bass, Lee... don't have much. Hard to imagine any of them even returning a 1st round pick.

I think a proper blow-up means trading players such as Bass or Lee either this off-season or the next, not trying to do a trade deadline deal.  Given the structure of the roster/contracts, I'd suggest this team has a potential 2014 blow-up date built in.

[celtsfan84]

Your issue seems to be that you refuse the scrutinize all aspects of this deal.

I have many issues, but scrutiny ain't one. I just don't care about swapping one like contract for another. Cap room is overrated.

We are talking 2.3 years either way. The Cs can not get under the cap in that time since Danny ran up the Cs credit cards on Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee. I suppose he could pay other teams to take these players with draft picks, $$$, Bradley, or Sully, but what is the point then? A gutted roster and 15 win season?

Outside of Garnett and Pierce, we've committed roughly $43 million to 8 players. Plus $2 million in cap holds for minimum roster holds. Plus $4 million for the "room exception".

This still leaves ~$10 million to play with -- which can get you a decent player. And given that Garnett and Pierce can retire as early as next season, I don't see the value in having Jordan instead.

You're forgetting our draft pick (which will add about $1.5 million in salary).  The room exception is $2.5 million, not $4 million. 

Retired players can still count against the cap if they are given a salary.  In Paul's case, that might mean his $5 million buyout.

So that $10 million might be less than half of what you expect it to be, even if KG and Paul retire.

[ssspence]

I say keep Garnett or blow it up properly. No halfway measures.

Much easier said than done. Rondo has value. Green, Bass, Lee... don't have much. Hard to imagine any of them even returning a 1st round pick.

I think a proper blow-up means trading players such as Bass or Lee either this off-season or the next, not trying to do a trade deadline deal.  Given the structure of the roster/contracts, I'd suggest this team has a potential 2014 blow-up date built in.

Sure. Someone like Bass gets much easier to deal in a year, especially if he improves his numbers in Sully's absence.

If the Cs do keep Pierce and Garnett until this summer, there's still the potential for a big shake-up before the draft. If the Cs play hardball with Pierce over guaranteeing his deal, a great deal could change fast.

[kozlodoev]

Your issue seems to be that you refuse the scrutinize all aspects of this deal.

I have many issues, but scrutiny ain't one. I just don't care about swapping one like contract for another. Cap room is overrated.

We are talking 2.3 years either way. The Cs can not get under the cap in that time since Danny ran up the Cs credit cards on Green, Bass, Terry, and Lee. I suppose he could pay other teams to take these players with draft picks, $$$, Bradley, or Sully, but what is the point then? A gutted roster and 15 win season?

Outside of Garnett and Pierce, we've committed roughly $43 million to 8 players. Plus $2 million in cap holds for minimum roster holds. Plus $4 million for the "room exception".

This still leaves ~$10 million to play with -- which can get you a decent player. And given that Garnett and Pierce can retire as early as next season, I don't see the value in having Jordan instead.

You're forgetting our draft pick (which will add about $1.5 million in salary).  The room exception is $2.5 million, not $4 million. 

Retired players can still count against the cap if they are given a salary.  In Paul's case, that might mean his $5 million buyout.

So that $10 million might be less than half of what you expect it to be, even if KG and Paul retire.

Forgot about the draft pick. But then you have to dock one of the roster holds, since we'll need only three. So that's an extra million beyond what I've calculated.

No idea on what terms Garnett and Pierce will retire -- but I didn't expect buyouts to be necessary (Garnett has already said he won't play after Pierce is gone).

And yes, I misread my room exception quotation, and looked at a value for 2020-01 which was well over 3 million. It should be $2.65 mil next season.

[gar]

I would be very sad to see KG go...

I would be sick to my stomach to see Pierce traded...


By the way, think the team might be a bit distracted in Denver tonight?

Will be interested to see who doesn't suit up in games across the league tonight.

If all the rumors are true it seems it might be AB and Collins vs the Nuggets...

TP Ah but you forget. T Will can play multiple positions....
at once

[Lord of Mikawa]

DA is intent on not rebuilding again. But [dang] if it wasn't for those bloated contracts with Green and Bass I feel like KG or Pierce wouldn't be trade bait.

[CelticG1]

I can't take a guy seriously after looking at his power rankings this year.

[LooseCannon]

DA is intent on not rebuilding again. But [dang] if it wasn't for those bloated contracts with Green and Bass I feel like KG or Pierce wouldn't be trade bait.

I feel the opposite.  If it wasn't for handing out long-term contracts to Green/Lee/Bass/Terry, it would be much easier to break this team apart and try to trade Garnett/Pierce along with everyone else.  The contractual commitments handed out to the GLBT tier make sticking it out with this team until some of those guys become expiring contracts seem (to me, at least) to be the wiser long-term plan.