|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 2, 2006 13:49:57 GMT -5
Trading Pierce and Blount to Golden State for Foyle, Troy Murphy and Jason Richardson plus their No 1 sounds like a crummy idea to me.
It's not the greatest trade we can do (I'm also in favor of getting a big time PG--Baron Davis would be ideal, but the Warriors do not have an adequate replacement for him, so I highly doubt they would trade him for Pierce). But I do think a trade for Richardson and Murphy (and a 1st rounder) would be a better return than you think.
Richardson is a better athlete than Ricky, as well as being a better slasher.
PPG: 23.0 RPG: 6.2 APG: 2.7 STLS: 1.4 BLKS: 0.5 FG%: 45% 3PT%: 36% FT%: 70%
He plays the passing lanes better than Pierce because he moves around the floor with more emphasis. I think this is the one thing Pierce is not doing (but of course, he's been doing other things, like rebounding). As we've seen in the Warriors game, we play exceptionally well, even if Pierce doesn't score a lot, if players move around, get open, and hit open shots. And as we've seen, we can still lose games when Pierce has big scoring games, so his big scoring is not necessarily our key to winning. Richardson is a terrific open court player who likes to finish with alley oops and acrobatic layups. This will be a big lift for our fastbreaks.
Every single Celtics fan has been crying for rebounds. We are pathetic on the boards. Troy Murphy may not be the best rebounder in the NBA, but when healthy (and this is an issue), he's a double digit rebounder. But not only that, but he's got a good stroke from midrange, that even extends to beyond the arc. He's definitely a big upgrade over Scalabrine and Blount.
Neither player has greater trade value than Pierce and neither are at his star level. But in this trade, we get back 2 players who may prove to be better fits with the team and make us better. Again, its not how much an individual player can score, but how much better we can be as a team and how many different players we can get baskets from.
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jan 2, 2006 16:41:06 GMT -5
One thing that bothers me about Murphy is his contract. he is getting Raef-like money.
I disagree with Q on not making any trades. I believe we should keep PP unless the right trade comes along, but we gotta get rid of either Blount or Raef. We gotta free up minutes for Al and perk.
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Jan 2, 2006 16:52:56 GMT -5
Trading Pierce and Blount to Golden State for Foyle, Troy Murphy and Jason Richardson plus their No 1 sounds like a crummy idea to me.
That sounds like a decent trade to me. We get rif of a loser and 2 monster contracts and get back a borderline all-star at pf/c, a shot blocking moster at pf that Al J can beat out, and an excellent young sg, PLUS a golden state #1, which is usually pretty good that we can use for a pg. I think the #1 changes things. What if that #1 was Rajon Rondo, or JJ Riddick, or Daniel Gibson?
I also think if we gave GG Tony Allen's, Ryan Gomes, and J Reed's mins there would be enough for him.
I would think if we wanted Baron Davis we'd have too throw in 2 of our young pgs and 2nd rnder to start.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 2, 2006 19:05:30 GMT -5
Oh, I overlooked that part of the deal. I wasn't aware that Murphy was making such a monstrous amount of money. He's locked up until 2011, ranging from 7.3 million this year and escalating every year until he reaches 12 million in his final year.
That is one ugly contract. At least Raef's is not as long. Well, chuck that idea of getting Murphy.
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jan 2, 2006 19:42:32 GMT -5
I wouldnt want foyle either. He also has a terrible contract. I am more inclined to believe that if we do trade PP, it should be for a exp contract, a good youngn, and a lotto pick.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 2, 2006 19:48:09 GMT -5
I am more inclined to believe that if we do trade PP, it should be for a exp contract, a good youngn, and a lotto pick. I don't know how Adonal Foyle's name ever got into this trade scenario. Bingo, I think that's exactly what Ainge is aiming at. In any trade he does, I think these are the 3 aspects he's trying to shoot for.
|
|
|
Post by esco33 on Jan 2, 2006 20:14:37 GMT -5
First of all, I am not in favor of all of this rebuilding talk. I’m more in favor of retooling. I tried posting something about this yesterday in the rebuilding thread but it was too long and timed out. Anyway, I think Ainge feels that way as well. I do not want to get caught up in all of the proposed trade talk especially when it involves Pierce, but I'll give my 2 cents:
We should NOT trade Pierce unless it is for a select few (i.e. Garnett, Lebron, etc.)
Get rid of vets Blunt and Raef packaged with Banks, Allen, Reed, Scal, etc. to free up PT for Perk and Big Al.
Give West an opportunity to shine. So far he has shown great improvement. I do not like to make comparisons, but he is starting to look like a cross between Bibby, and Kidd (Kidd only for the rebounds).
We need to RETOOL not REBUILD. We as fans, as well as the coaches and management need to give an opportunity, a real opportunity for the young guys, namely Perk and Big Al to get a significant increase in PT so that we can actually gauge what we either have or do not have.
It makes no sense to rebuild when maybe what we are looking for is in front of us. We need to see what we have first before anything. We do not know this by giving Perk and Big Al 15 min/gm.
West has recently shown great strides. I think Perk and Big Al can to if given the opportunity.
We do not need to rebuild. We are already rebuilding. Since Ainge came, we have been rebuilding. That is why we let Walker and Payton walk and we signed Scal and Dickau to hopefully open up more PT for the young guys, which obviously hasn't happened. So let's make a trade that keeps the core together of Pierce, Ricky, Perk, Big Al, and West and free up some space in the rotation so that they all can grow together.
-esco
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 2, 2006 23:59:51 GMT -5
Esco, if you hold onto the core (in your words, Pierce, Ricky, Perk, Big Al, and West) and get rid of the other vets and young players, that is very close to rebuilding. Its basically going with Pierce and Ricky, and hoping the young guys will develop into players who can be factors in the playoffs.
Trading away the young players and replacing them with proven veterans is closer to retooling because we keep the core veterans intact, it involves less development of young players, and it makes us closer to being a team trying to contend for a title (but I don't know how close we are going to get just by trading away the young players).
Its a difficult situation we are in. Its a very thin line between going with the young guys and holding on to what we've got to make a push to be a good team.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2006 1:16:31 GMT -5
Core of PP, RD, Perk, Al, and West sounds good to me. We just need to add top notch talents that will help us compete against other elite teams. Only problem I have with this core is: will Pierce stay with this team if we end up being a lottery team by the trading deadline? Same goes with RD if he sees his buddy leave the team. But I wouldn't make a move unless it's utterly necessary and if it is necessary they should be move with a package of blount or raef so we can get some cap room in the long run. Probably the best team to look at right is chicago since they'll have 23 mil in cap space next off-season and I doubt they'll find a simlar talent like Pierce to spend their bucks on. Not to mention they have some good young talent that might intrigue Ainge.
I'd wait until the trading deadline where I believe will be the time Doc and Ainge decides if youth movement or a playoff run is the right direction to go in.
|
|
|
Post by esco33 on Jan 3, 2006 10:01:24 GMT -5
See that’s where I disagree with you guys. I think the youth movement can and will result in playoffs. I actually think we do just the same if not better with the young guys in there. I’m speaking mostly of Perk and Big Al.
Between Perk and Big Al both, we have the best post scorer on the team, the best rebounder on the team, probably the best shot blocker on the team, the toughest guy on the team, and the best big man defender on the team.
Derren, I think if we stick with the core I mentioned, play and develop the young guys, add a few pieces here, and there, that is retooling not rebuilding. Rebuilding would be if we traded away our star player and cornerstone of the franchise right now in Pierce. I am not saying to trade away all of our vets. Keep Ricky, and trade either one of Blunt or Raef to open up more PT for the young bigs. I call this retooling, not rebuilding. I also believe that Pierce wants to stay. I do not think he wants to leave, and if we surround him with enough talent then I think that we can be very competitive. You all saw what we did to a very good Clippers team the other night, and how we hung in there with Detroit in the beginning of the season. We can play well with what we have. We just need to be a LOT more consistent.
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Jan 4, 2006 17:53:09 GMT -5
I think for similar money I might rather have Troy Murphy till 2011 than Raef till 2009 or whatever the situation is. Troy earns a lot more of his money at an important position than Raef or Blount.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 4, 2006 22:19:12 GMT -5
I think for similar money I might rather have Troy Murphy till 2011 than Raef till 2009 or whatever the situation is. Troy earns a lot more of his money at an important position than Raef or Blount. But Ainge is trying to dump salary--not take on longer sized ones.
|
|
|
Post by BCHISTORIAN on Jan 5, 2006 1:34:52 GMT -5
I think for similar money I might rather have Troy Murphy till 2011 than Raef till 2009 or whatever the situation is. Troy earns a lot more of his money at an important position than Raef or Blount. But Ainge is trying to dump salary--not take on longer sized ones. i agree with you eja. derren, dumping salary doesn't mean much since the free agency always means overpaying someone
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jan 5, 2006 2:17:34 GMT -5
But Ainge is trying to dump salary--not take on longer sized ones. i agree with you eja. derren, dumping salary doesn't mean much since the free agency always means overpaying someone I agree with that. Free Agency only works if you have a specific player in mind a la Phoenix with Nash. It only works if you can find a guy that is actually worth a league maximum contract. Arenas in Washington as well. Usually, you end up giving a guy near max money that just isnt worth it(Joe Johnson, Larry Hughes).
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jan 5, 2006 2:46:47 GMT -5
I don't mind taking on salary. I don't even think we're in bad shape really.
I'm just refering to what Ainge's intentions were. It is said that Ainge is looking to dump salary.
|
|