Author Topic: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury  (Read 14934 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #30 on: October 26, 2014, 11:51:17 PM »

Offline Smitty77

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3063
  • Tommy Points: 269
I forgot that Roy said that Bynum CANNOT be traded with another player until December 17th.  That doesn't help us reduce our roster size for a while:-)))

Smitty77

P.S.  We will save 3.33 million in this deal:-))

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #31 on: October 28, 2014, 02:48:50 PM »

Offline CelticSince83

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 542
  • Tommy Points: 42
Would the Lakers say no to this?

Celtics Out: Rondo, Wallace
Celtics In: Nash, Lin, Randle

Unless the Lakers think they can get Marc Gasol and Rondo in free agency next summer, not a bad idea for them.  Wallace will still be off the books when Kobe expires and before they need cap space to go after Durant, Westbrook, etc.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #32 on: October 28, 2014, 02:53:44 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Would the Lakers say no to this?

Celtics Out: Rondo, Wallace
Celtics In: Nash, Lin, Randle

Unless the Lakers think they can get Marc Gasol and Rondo in free agency next summer, not a bad idea for them.  Wallace will still be off the books when Kobe expires and before they need cap space to go after Durant, Westbrook, etc.
Celtics would say no and rather emphatically.  what is the incentive for the C's to do this other than to become incredibly bad for the next several years with no all-star caliber player on the roster nor any incentive for an all-star to want to sign here just so they can be on a chronically rebuilding team during their next contract?

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #33 on: October 28, 2014, 03:03:40 PM »

Offline CelticSince83

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 542
  • Tommy Points: 42
You think the Celtics are going to get a haul better than Julius Randle plus shedding Wallace for Rondo?  I don't.  I won't hold my breath while you are waiting for those all star free agents.  Face it, this team needs to build through the draft and not bank on free agency.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #34 on: October 28, 2014, 03:16:25 PM »

Offline kraidstar

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5368
  • Tommy Points: 2478
no way the lakers poison their cap with wallace unless it means also getting rondo, cap space is the only asset the lakers will have to improve.
i do believe that rondo + wallace for nash, lin, kelly, randle, + houston 2015 first (top-14 protected) + lakers 2019 unprotected first is a possibility. i'm not that high on randle, but when you factor in dumping wallace, it's not that terrible of a deal. and where else will the c's get a better deal? we're not getting a vet of equal value for rondo, and there's little use in trading for roleplayers, so really we need young players with upside. there aren't that many teams out there who have the right assets we would want.
another possibility for a lakers trade would be nash + kelly + junk + 2015 houston pick for green + bass.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #35 on: October 28, 2014, 03:22:16 PM »

Offline CelticSince83

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 542
  • Tommy Points: 42
no way the lakers poison their cap with wallace unless it means also getting rondo, cap space is the only asset the lakers will have to improve.
i do believe that rondo + wallace for nash, lin, kelly, randle, + houston 2015 first (top-14 protected) + lakers 2019 unprotected first is a possibility. i'm not that high on randle, but when you factor in dumping wallace, it's not that terrible of a deal. and where else will the c's get a better deal? we're not getting a vet of equal value for rondo, and there's little use in trading for roleplayers, so really we need young players with upside. there aren't that many teams out there who have the right assets we would want.
another possibility for a lakers trade would be nash + kelly + junk + 2015 houston pick for green + bass.

Right.  I agree with most of this.  Rondo is getting traded and I would rather bring back Randle (upgrade to Sully, KO, Bass) in terms of future production than ship him to the Knicks for role players or whatever else has been proposed.  This trade can't possibly be worse than someone suggesting moving him for Jrue Holliday.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #36 on: October 28, 2014, 03:34:16 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Would the Lakers say no to this?

Celtics Out: Rondo, Wallace
Celtics In: Nash, Lin, Randle

Unless the Lakers think they can get Marc Gasol and Rondo in free agency next summer, not a bad idea for them.  Wallace will still be off the books when Kobe expires and before they need cap space to go after Durant, Westbrook, etc.
Celtics would say no and rather emphatically.  what is the incentive for the C's to do this other than to become incredibly bad for the next several years with no all-star caliber player on the roster nor any incentive for an all-star to want to sign here just so they can be on a chronically rebuilding team during their next contract?
You think the Celtics are going to get a haul better than Julius Randle plus shedding Wallace for Rondo?  I don't.  I won't hold my breath while you are waiting for those all star free agents.  Face it, this team needs to build through the draft and not bank on free agency.
you'd be the only one.

let's break this down shall we.

Rondo - all star PG on a reasonable deal
Wallace - overpaid SF that can still defend and hustle and can be used as an expiring deal in a trade for a well-paid player next year.
FOR
Nash --> broken down player that will not play this year --> negative asset
Lin --> overpaid and overhyped PG that probably could not beat out Smart and Turner for time at PG --> negative asset
Randle --> Rookie PF that has shown no defensive abilities that would be stuck behind Sully, KO and Bass on the depth chart --> pointless acquisition.

I'm not moving Rondo for anything less than a better player in a trade.  Taking back another team's crap to make them better is no reason to make a deal.  The concept that Wallace has to be moved is a fallacy.  As an expiring next year, his deal provides the salary balance to bring in a player making big money allowing us to send out less good prospects (as opposed to picks) should this type of deal become available. 
Consider this, there's few top FAs next year so having cap space doesn't have a lot of advantages-->no immediate need to unload Wallace to get a FA.  The likeliest best option for Danny to acquire a top player is via a trade.  need a contract to balance that out financiall -- voila, Wallace, who becomes more palatable as an expiring deal after this year.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #37 on: October 28, 2014, 03:56:31 PM »

Offline 2short

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6080
  • Tommy Points: 428
Would the Lakers say no to this?

Celtics Out: Rondo, Wallace
Celtics In: Nash, Lin, Randle

Unless the Lakers think they can get Marc Gasol and Rondo in free agency next summer, not a bad idea for them.  Wallace will still be off the books when Kobe expires and before they need cap space to go after Durant, Westbrook, etc.
Celtics would say no and rather emphatically.  what is the incentive for the C's to do this other than to become incredibly bad for the next several years with no all-star caliber player on the roster nor any incentive for an all-star to want to sign here just so they can be on a chronically rebuilding team during their next contract?
what?  :o
i can see wallace is overpaid but no way do we do that trade to get rid of him

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #38 on: October 28, 2014, 04:12:05 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
You think the Celtics are going to get a haul better than Julius Randle plus shedding Wallace for Rondo?  I don't.  I won't hold my breath while you are waiting for those all star free agents.  Face it, this team needs to build through the draft and not bank on free agency.

The Celtics already have Brandon Bass, Jared Sullinger and Kelly Olynyk who are all natural PF's.  How would adding Randle to that group possibly help us more than keeping Rondo?

There is a good chance that Randle will develop in to a better player than Sully,  but there really aren't any guarantees.   Randle is probably even worse than Sully Defensively and has no jump shot and certainly no the point range.  We'd be getting him purely as a trade asset,  and he isn't worth enough (trade wise) to justify that.

I'm also not a fan of Lin at all. 

I'd much rather keep Rondo and hope to resign him (and risk him maybe walking away)  than to trade him for a mediocre return like this.

People are all like "do you really think you'll get a better return than this for Rondo".

My answer is maybe,  or maybe not.   But the reality is we don't actually HAVE to trade him,  so I wouldn't do so unless a deal comes along that makes it worthwhile.

Not at all interested in adding another 'below the rim' PF who can't defend and can't play center.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #39 on: October 28, 2014, 04:14:57 PM »

Offline CelticSince83

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 542
  • Tommy Points: 42
Would the Lakers say no to this?

Celtics Out: Rondo, Wallace
Celtics In: Nash, Lin, Randle

Unless the Lakers think they can get Marc Gasol and Rondo in free agency next summer, not a bad idea for them.  Wallace will still be off the books when Kobe expires and before they need cap space to go after Durant, Westbrook, etc.

Celtics would say no and rather emphatically.  what is the incentive for the C's to do this other than to become incredibly bad for the next several years with no all-star caliber player on the roster nor any incentive for an all-star to want to sign here just so they can be on a chronically rebuilding team during their next contract?
You think the Celtics are going to get a haul better than Julius Randle plus shedding Wallace for Rondo?  I don't.  I won't hold my breath while you are waiting for those all star free agents.  Face it, this team needs to build through the draft and not bank on free agency.
you'd be the only one.

let's break this down shall we.

Rondo - all star PG on a reasonable deal
Wallace - overpaid SF that can still defend and hustle and can be used as an expiring deal in a trade for a well-paid player next year.
FOR
Nash --> broken down player that will not play this year --> negative asset
Lin --> overpaid and overhyped PG that probably could not beat out Smart and Turner for time at PG --> negative asset
Randle --> Rookie PF that has shown no defensive abilities that would be stuck behind Sully, KO and Bass on the depth chart --> pointless acquisition.

I'm not moving Rondo for anything less than a better player in a trade.  Taking back another team's crap to make them better is no reason to make a deal.  The concept that Wallace has to be moved is a fallacy.  As an expiring next year, his deal provides the salary balance to bring in a player making big money allowing us to send out less good prospects (as opposed to picks) should this type of deal become available. 
Consider this, there's few top FAs next year so having cap space doesn't have a lot of advantages-->no immediate need to unload Wallace to get a FA.  The likeliest best option for Danny to acquire a top player is via a trade.  need a contract to balance that out financiall -- voila, Wallace, who becomes more palatable as an expiring deal after this year.

I agree that the concept of moving desperately needing to move Wallace is a fallacy, but if you can get rid of him in a deal that makes sense, there is a benefit. 

That being said, you grossly misrepresented the value of each player included in this deal. 

Nash and Lin are expiring contracts that wouldn't be included in the future.  You could buy out Nash and possibly move Lin to a contender that needs help scoring the ball or see if he fits in with Bradley and Smart since he can actually shoot the ball. 

I don't see how Randle is stuck behind KO, Bass and Sullinger.  The guy was picked 7th in a draft where those 3 guys wouldn't even sniff the lottery.

Rondo isn't sticking around for a full rebuild so losing him is negligible.  Getting rid of Wallace is just cake and also would fit in well with the Lakers who need help on the wing and defensively. 

I'm not trying to be stuck in first round purgatory for the next 3 years so I could care less that Nash can't play and that this deal hurts the team this year (which is also the point). 

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #40 on: October 28, 2014, 04:33:19 PM »

Offline pearljammer10

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13129
  • Tommy Points: 885
Would the Lakers say no to this?

Celtics Out: Rondo, Wallace
Celtics In: Nash, Lin, Randle

Unless the Lakers think they can get Marc Gasol and Rondo in free agency next summer, not a bad idea for them.  Wallace will still be off the books when Kobe expires and before they need cap space to go after Durant, Westbrook, etc.

Celtics would say no and rather emphatically.  what is the incentive for the C's to do this other than to become incredibly bad for the next several years with no all-star caliber player on the roster nor any incentive for an all-star to want to sign here just so they can be on a chronically rebuilding team during their next contract?
You think the Celtics are going to get a haul better than Julius Randle plus shedding Wallace for Rondo?  I don't.  I won't hold my breath while you are waiting for those all star free agents.  Face it, this team needs to build through the draft and not bank on free agency.
you'd be the only one.

let's break this down shall we.

Rondo - all star PG on a reasonable deal
Wallace - overpaid SF that can still defend and hustle and can be used as an expiring deal in a trade for a well-paid player next year.
FOR
Nash --> broken down player that will not play this year --> negative asset
Lin --> overpaid and overhyped PG that probably could not beat out Smart and Turner for time at PG --> negative asset
Randle --> Rookie PF that has shown no defensive abilities that would be stuck behind Sully, KO and Bass on the depth chart --> pointless acquisition.

I'm not moving Rondo for anything less than a better player in a trade.  Taking back another team's crap to make them better is no reason to make a deal.  The concept that Wallace has to be moved is a fallacy.  As an expiring next year, his deal provides the salary balance to bring in a player making big money allowing us to send out less good prospects (as opposed to picks) should this type of deal become available. 
Consider this, there's few top FAs next year so having cap space doesn't have a lot of advantages-->no immediate need to unload Wallace to get a FA.  The likeliest best option for Danny to acquire a top player is via a trade.  need a contract to balance that out financiall -- voila, Wallace, who becomes more palatable as an expiring deal after this year.

I agree that the concept of moving desperately needing to move Wallace is a fallacy, but if you can get rid of him in a deal that makes sense, there is a benefit. 

That being said, you grossly misrepresented the value of each player included in this deal. 

Nash and Lin are expiring contracts that wouldn't be included in the future.  You could buy out Nash and possibly move Lin to a contender that needs help scoring the ball or see if he fits in with Bradley and Smart since he can actually shoot the ball. 

I don't see how Randle is stuck behind KO, Bass and Sullinger.  The guy was picked 7th in a draft where those 3 guys wouldn't even sniff the lottery.

Rondo isn't sticking around for a full rebuild so losing him is negligible.  Getting rid of Wallace is just cake and also would fit in well with the Lakers who need help on the wing and defensively. 

I'm not trying to be stuck in first round purgatory for the next 3 years so I could care less that Nash can't play and that this deal hurts the team this year (which is also the point).

The Lakers wouldnt hesitate to say no but the Celtics would certainly hesitate to offer it. That's an awful trade for us.

And of course Randle would be stuck behind Sully, Bass, and KO. What does them sniffing the lottery have to do with anything? I guess we should start Evan Turner over Rondo based on your logic.

Why add Randle when we are already heavy in the no above the rim game 4 department?

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #41 on: October 28, 2014, 04:40:53 PM »

Offline CelticSince83

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 542
  • Tommy Points: 42
Would the Lakers say no to this?

Celtics Out: Rondo, Wallace
Celtics In: Nash, Lin, Randle

Unless the Lakers think they can get Marc Gasol and Rondo in free agency next summer, not a bad idea for them.  Wallace will still be off the books when Kobe expires and before they need cap space to go after Durant, Westbrook, etc.

Celtics would say no and rather emphatically.  what is the incentive for the C's to do this other than to become incredibly bad for the next several years with no all-star caliber player on the roster nor any incentive for an all-star to want to sign here just so they can be on a chronically rebuilding team during their next contract?
You think the Celtics are going to get a haul better than Julius Randle plus shedding Wallace for Rondo?  I don't.  I won't hold my breath while you are waiting for those all star free agents.  Face it, this team needs to build through the draft and not bank on free agency.
you'd be the only one.

let's break this down shall we.

Rondo - all star PG on a reasonable deal
Wallace - overpaid SF that can still defend and hustle and can be used as an expiring deal in a trade for a well-paid player next year.
FOR
Nash --> broken down player that will not play this year --> negative asset
Lin --> overpaid and overhyped PG that probably could not beat out Smart and Turner for time at PG --> negative asset
Randle --> Rookie PF that has shown no defensive abilities that would be stuck behind Sully, KO and Bass on the depth chart --> pointless acquisition.

I'm not moving Rondo for anything less than a better player in a trade.  Taking back another team's crap to make them better is no reason to make a deal.  The concept that Wallace has to be moved is a fallacy.  As an expiring next year, his deal provides the salary balance to bring in a player making big money allowing us to send out less good prospects (as opposed to picks) should this type of deal become available. 
Consider this, there's few top FAs next year so having cap space doesn't have a lot of advantages-->no immediate need to unload Wallace to get a FA.  The likeliest best option for Danny to acquire a top player is via a trade.  need a contract to balance that out financiall -- voila, Wallace, who becomes more palatable as an expiring deal after this year.

I agree that the concept of moving desperately needing to move Wallace is a fallacy, but if you can get rid of him in a deal that makes sense, there is a benefit. 

That being said, you grossly misrepresented the value of each player included in this deal. 

Nash and Lin are expiring contracts that wouldn't be included in the future.  You could buy out Nash and possibly move Lin to a contender that needs help scoring the ball or see if he fits in with Bradley and Smart since he can actually shoot the ball. 

I don't see how Randle is stuck behind KO, Bass and Sullinger.  The guy was picked 7th in a draft where those 3 guys wouldn't even sniff the lottery.

Rondo isn't sticking around for a full rebuild so losing him is negligible.  Getting rid of Wallace is just cake and also would fit in well with the Lakers who need help on the wing and defensively. 

I'm not trying to be stuck in first round purgatory for the next 3 years so I could care less that Nash can't play and that this deal hurts the team this year (which is also the point).

The Lakers wouldnt hesitate to say no but the Celtics would certainly hesitate to offer it. That's an awful trade for us.

And of course Randle would be stuck behind Sully, Bass, and KO. What does them sniffing the lottery have to do with anything? I guess we should start Evan Turner over Rondo based on your logic.

Why add Randle when we are already heavy in the no above the rim game

You realize the NBA goes beyond 2015, right?  So why wouldn't you want to add Randle since Bass is expiring and Sullinger will probably eat himself out of the league by 2018?  None of those current power forwards are starting on a legit playoff team.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #42 on: October 28, 2014, 04:44:08 PM »

Offline CelticSince83

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 542
  • Tommy Points: 42
You know what, I give up on the Randle thing.  Rondo is going to get re-signed and then they are going to add Marc Gasol and Kevin Durant in free agency the next 2 summers.  At that point James Harden will probably want to come too, so we are actually all set.  Just hold still Rondo, plenty of help on the way.

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #43 on: October 28, 2014, 04:55:29 PM »

Offline kraidstar

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5368
  • Tommy Points: 2478
Would the Lakers say no to this?

Celtics Out: Rondo, Wallace
Celtics In: Nash, Lin, Randle

Unless the Lakers think they can get Marc Gasol and Rondo in free agency next summer, not a bad idea for them.  Wallace will still be off the books when Kobe expires and before they need cap space to go after Durant, Westbrook, etc.
Celtics would say no and rather emphatically.  what is the incentive for the C's to do this other than to become incredibly bad for the next several years with no all-star caliber player on the roster nor any incentive for an all-star to want to sign here just so they can be on a chronically rebuilding team during their next contract?
You think the Celtics are going to get a haul better than Julius Randle plus shedding Wallace for Rondo?  I don't.  I won't hold my breath while you are waiting for those all star free agents.  Face it, this team needs to build through the draft and not bank on free agency.
you'd be the only one.

let's break this down shall we.

Rondo - all star PG on a reasonable deal
Wallace - overpaid SF that can still defend and hustle and can be used as an expiring deal in a trade for a well-paid player next year.
FOR
Nash --> broken down player that will not play this year --> negative asset
Lin --> overpaid and overhyped PG that probably could not beat out Smart and Turner for time at PG --> negative asset
Randle --> Rookie PF that has shown no defensive abilities that would be stuck behind Sully, KO and Bass on the depth chart --> pointless acquisition.

I'm not moving Rondo for anything less than a better player in a trade.  Taking back another team's crap to make them better is no reason to make a deal.  The concept that Wallace has to be moved is a fallacy.  As an expiring next year, his deal provides the salary balance to bring in a player making big money allowing us to send out less good prospects (as opposed to picks) should this type of deal become available. 
Consider this, there's few top FAs next year so having cap space doesn't have a lot of advantages-->no immediate need to unload Wallace to get a FA.  The likeliest best option for Danny to acquire a top player is via a trade.  need a contract to balance that out financiall -- voila, Wallace, who becomes more palatable as an expiring deal after this year.


you're downplaying the value of nash and lin's expirings, then saying in the next breath that wallace's expiring next year is really valuable. with nash and lin, the odds of ainge making a trade this year increase.
and no-one is saying we HAVE to get rid of wallace now, but it would be a nice bonus. he'd be a minimum salary guy if he were a free agent today. having him gone gives us flexibility, it helps when you're making a trade if the guys involved aren't total stiffs.
and while i'm not that impressed with randle, he has a lot of value, and could be flipped to a third team, maybe we swap him for vonleh, for instance.
and, in my proposal above, we also land houston's 1st-rounder this year (probably 18-22 range), and the lakers 2019 pick, which could be a lotto pick, considering how badly jim buss is running that team. kelly has some value too.
i think rondo will leave in free agency if we don't trade him, i don't see how he fits in after drafting smart. and considering he's coming off an injury, is on an expiring deal, and has some character concerns, his value isn't as high as some here think it is.
do you think rondo fits in with the c's future plans? do you think he's a max player? or do you just think we can get a better trade? if so, what would you suggest?

Re: Can we capitalize on Nash-injury
« Reply #44 on: October 28, 2014, 05:05:45 PM »

Offline CelticSince83

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 542
  • Tommy Points: 42
They don't have any rondo trade suggestions.  Like I said, they just plan on keeping him and then signing Team USA since everyone will be looking to team up with Rondo.  Also don't bother trying to add a PF, because evidently Bass, Sullinger and Olynyk have 10x the present and future value I assumed.