|
|
Post by VI_CelticsFan on Jul 5, 2005 12:51:42 GMT -5
Boston trades- Paul Pierce, Marcus Banks, Cleveland 2007 first rond pick
Boston recieves- Shaun Livingston, Chris Wilcox, and fillers
Los Angelas trades- Shaun Livingston, Chris Wilcox, and fillers
Los Angelas recieves- Paul Pierce, Marcus Banks, Cleveland 2007 first rond pick
Why for Boston? They get the tall, playmaking starting PG for the future along with a good PF prospect who could be Jefferson's back-up in the future.
Why for Los Angelas? The get a star to play alongside Elton Brand in PP, and a good PG prospect who could, at highest potential, be the next Chauncey Billups, or at least potential, possibly be Bobby Jackson. They also get a potential high pick in 07 to maybe get Oden or Mayo.
The Clipps possibly get the better deal, but we get what we want in a future PG and we get rid of Pierce. What do you guys think?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2005 13:30:52 GMT -5
I like to get Shaun Livingston but giving up an all-star + potential starting pg and a possible lottery pick for a young pg and a bench warmer isn't a good idea.
I say no thnx as we're better off keeping Pierce on the team.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ossric on Jul 5, 2005 13:45:46 GMT -5
I don't feel a need to trade Pierce this summer, it's not as if his stock is going to drop next year. His contract will only become shorter & more attractive. I feel we can get more in return if we trade him in the future as opposed to trading him now.
Also, trading Pierce now, leaves a big hole at SG/SF. The only mature player we have at the 2 or 3 would be Davis. For this aspect alone, it would be more beneficial to hang on to Pierce for at least another year. It would give Green & Allen more time & less pressure to grow. Without Pierce, Jefferson will only be guarded even thighter, i'm not sure whether he can already handle that situation. Assuming we trade him, who going to handle the scoring load? Walker will most probably not return. Outside of Davis, all the scoring load will fall on our rookies & second year players. We can't already demand that from them. Let them grow in Pierce's shadow for at least another year. Let Pierce take all the criticism if we're loosing games.
Plus, trading Pierce/Banks & a 1st round pick for Livingston is giving up to much. I'm not high on Chris Wilcox. He's hasn't proven to be anything more than a role player. A type of player that can easily be obtained thrue free agency.
|
|
|
|
Post by BCHISTORIAN on Jul 5, 2005 14:08:02 GMT -5
all good points oss!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ossric on Jul 5, 2005 14:58:42 GMT -5
i have my moments  , i have been mulling about the Pierce situation for a while now. Somehow i get the feeling that it has been hyped by the media more than that it is an actual "problem". He pushed a guy, big deal. He let his emotions get away with him, so what. I don't see the media still being all over the Pacers' players, the were actually dealing punches! I mean, nobody is talking about it anymore except Peter May & his collegues. They can't say a single good thing about him anymore. They are the only ones still fueling the rumors. Other writers pick up on their headlines & they think "where there's smoke, there's fire" & start writing Pierce trade rumors themselves. So Danny looks around to see what he can get for him, big deal. For Danny, everybody is tradeable (except Big Al). Somehow that notion seems to hard to grasp for Boston media. Nationwide media just copies what they write in Boston, they don't dig deeper. Trade Scenarios for Pierce, like the one discribed above, are the worst thing that can happen to the Celtics. We went to the playoffs last year because of him. Having Walker on board or not didn't change that. This team is lottery bound without him for the reasons i have stated above in my previous reply. Not to mention how disgrunted our veterans would be & how discouraged our youngsters if we would loose night in, night out. He's our lighting rod in a storm, our lifejacket in the open ocean. He's the guy where our young guys hold on to until they learn to swim themselves. They may become Olympian swimming champions in the future, but they will still drown if they don't get the chance to learn how to swim. |
|
|
|
Post by Harris34 on Jul 5, 2005 16:38:17 GMT -5
Wow Ossric, you made a tear drop from my eye.
Hahahaha.
In all seriousness, I agree with you completely.
|
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jul 5, 2005 17:10:37 GMT -5
Yeah, that's just too much to be giving up for Livingston, Wilcox, and fillers anyways.
|
|
|
|
Post by VI_CelticsFan on Jul 5, 2005 17:41:57 GMT -5
Yeah, that's just too much to be giving up for Livingston, Wilcox, and fillers anyways. Yeah, I was thinking when I posted this that this was too much for livingston and wilcox. My bad |
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jul 5, 2005 23:01:40 GMT -5
Yeah, I dont thing we're getting enough back. I'd offer PP, Banks, next yrs #1 (unprotected) for Maggette, Livingston. Throw in a later protected #1 of ours if needed. I dont want to get rid of that Cleveland pick. If Lebrom leaves, that pick will be a lottery pick for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jul 6, 2005 0:39:08 GMT -5
Actually, if its Pierce and Banks and a first rounder, we should get back Maggette, Livingston, and Wilcox/Kaman. That's more like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mev17 on Jul 6, 2005 1:45:05 GMT -5
I read recently that the Clippers were willing to offer Maggette plus "other considerations" (another player + draft pick?) for Pierce, but Ainge turned them down very early in discussions. It seems that if Ainge is going to trade Pierce, he wants a substantial return (as well he should).
|
|
|
|
Post by BCHISTORIAN on Jul 6, 2005 11:09:04 GMT -5
livingston should be included. otherwise there's no point again
|
|
|
|
Post by VI_CelticsFan on Jul 6, 2005 15:04:57 GMT -5
livingston should be included. otherwise there's no point again Yes, Shaun Livingston has to be involved in any trade between us and the clipps with PP included. |
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 6, 2005 21:11:09 GMT -5
I would trade w/ the Clippers, but take out "skinny" (Livingston) and put in Brand. Brand is a force, and if he didn't play for a team like LAC, he would be more well-known.
|
|
|
|
Post by Celtic17 on Jul 6, 2005 21:42:57 GMT -5
What is Brand's contract like?
I've liked his game from his Chi days. Rebounds and muscle. He might fit into a nice rotation.
|
|
, i have been mulling about the Pierce situation for a while now. Somehow i get the feeling that it has been hyped by the media more than that it is an actual "problem". He pushed a guy, big deal. He let his emotions get away with him, so what. I don't see the media still being all over the Pacers' players, the were actually dealing punches! 
