|
Perk
Aug 17, 2006 15:15:16 GMT -5
Post by eja117 on Aug 17, 2006 15:15:16 GMT -5
I would have to agree with that and I don't think we know for sure what Minn would want. I could definitely see them wanting bigs much more than PP.
I mean you can have swing man PP and his salary when you already have Ricky Davis, Julian Reed (who they already gave a new contract to and annointed a starter) Rashad McCants, and Randy Foye, or you can have Wally at a reduced rate and AL J on a rookie contract.
If KG is complaining during the season and they aren't going anywhere it wouldn't be shocking if they let him and his contract go for a bunch of positive, young, cheap guys like Al J and Telfaire
|
|
|
Perk
Aug 17, 2006 20:35:53 GMT -5
Post by jb on Aug 17, 2006 20:35:53 GMT -5
Wally and Ratliff are banged up, salary fodder. No big trade will take place without sending Pierce along. His new contract should enhance his trade value. Pau Gassol anyone?
|
|
|
Perk
Aug 17, 2006 21:14:28 GMT -5
Post by FLCeltsFan on Aug 17, 2006 21:14:28 GMT -5
I thought the idea was to bring in another star to play along side Pierce, and not to trade Pierce for said star. I really don't think Pierce is going anywhere... If Danny brings in another star it will be to play with Pierce and not in place of him.
I think it will be some of our talented young guys for a disenchanted star on another team. That is unless one of our young guys becomes a star in the meantime.
|
|
|
Perk
Aug 17, 2006 21:17:42 GMT -5
Post by eja117 on Aug 17, 2006 21:17:42 GMT -5
I'm confused. How on Earth do we know a big trade can't take place without sending PP? Was Iverson a big trade, cause I don't think we were sending PP in that. Is Pau Gasol a big trade? So is it Pau for PP? When Shaq was traded the Lakers didn't get much back that was so great and Toronto got pretty much nothing at all for Vince Carter so I don't see how on Earth it's a forgone conclusion we have to trade PP for KG when we have other stuff and I for one would love love love to trade PP for KG. I'd rather not if I don't have to but if we did that would be great.
|
|
|
Perk
Aug 17, 2006 22:24:00 GMT -5
Post by Roadrunner on Aug 17, 2006 22:24:00 GMT -5
What I like best about Perks is his desire. Has the killer instinct. Wants to get better.
|
|
|
Perk
Aug 18, 2006 10:27:27 GMT -5
Post by jb on Aug 18, 2006 10:27:27 GMT -5
"I think it will be some of our talented young guys for a disenchanted star on another team. That is unless one of our young guys becomes a star in the meantime." FlCeltsFan
"I don't see how on Earth it's a forgone conclusion we have to trade PP for KG when we have other stuff " eja117
Sorry folks, you caught me being a bit overly dogmatic. What I should have said is: "in the present market and with the current injury questions regarding our higher salaried players; Szczerbiak and Ratliff, I don't see how we can trade for another high contract player without trading Pierce." As time goes on and if Wally and Theo show they are in "game shape," that could change. Remember though, it takes 5, three million dollar contracts to get a fifteen million one and that the Iverson deal reportedly died because Philly didn't want to take on the risk of Wally's knees. They allegedly tried doing it with a third team, but there were no takers.
|
|
|
Perk
Aug 18, 2006 10:43:19 GMT -5
Post by eja117 on Aug 18, 2006 10:43:19 GMT -5
i used the ESPN trade making machine and was able to generate a trade of Wally, Al, Delonte, DJ, Powe, and Scala (it was a lot like that anyway) for Kg, or Kg and Mark madsen, or KG, Madsen, and Bracy Wright. The machine won't let me trade Telfair or Ratliff cause of trade rules, and the same goes for Pitt and Allan Ray. You've got a point about teams not wanting hurt players. In a year or two it might get easier to make trades in the sense that all our young guys have contracts for like 1.5-2 mill. In a year or two guys like Perk and Al will have contracts for more like 4-8 mill. That could make things easier or harder.
|
|