Celtics Making Pierce Available In Trade Talks

Real GM - Posted
Jan 11, 2013 7:53 PM EST


The Boston Celtics have made it known in exploratory trade talks with other other teams that Paul Pierce could be available via trade, according to team executives around the league.

Only $4 million of Pierce’s $15.3 million salary is guaranteed next season.

Via Ken Berger/CBSSports
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

SB NATION

Ainge taking calls on Pierce, could Rudy Gay make sense?

Mark L. Baer-USA TODAY Sports
Welcome to trade season, everybody. We're going to hear everything from Rajon Rondo to the youngsters like Avery Bradley, Jared Sullinger, and Fab Melo being on the block. Even The Captain isn't immune to the rumor mill.

FACEBOOK

Ken Berger of CBS Sports has this report from the back rooms of the NBA:

Team executives involved in exploratory trade talks report that the Knicks (Amar'e Stoudemire), Lakers (Pau Gasol), Raptors (Bargnani) and Celtics (Paul Pierce) are open to discussing their high-profile names. In every case but one, the early indications are that none could be moved without a bad contract going back in return. (In Stoudemire's case, his health and the $45 million left on his contract after this season almost certainly will prevent any deal from happening.) The lone exception, executives say, may be Pierce, whose ruthless scoring prowess and championship experience come with another attractive feature: only $4 million of his $15.3 million salary is guaranteed next season. With the Celtics playing better since Avery Bradley returned from injury, president Danny Ainge once again finds himself trying to determine whether the remnants of the 2007-08 championship team have enough to make one more run. Some rival executives believe the Celtics recently waived Jarvis Varnado and Kris Joseph to create roster flexibility for a potential trade. If Ainge decides to stand pat, a deal involving Pierce -- which would mark the true end of the Big Three era -- could be re-examined around the draft or during free agency.

I worked retail in college and if I learned anything, you put the bright, shiny stuff up front so people will come into your store. It's not surprise that Danny is shopping The Captain around: his shooting might be a little off this year, but he's a former Finals MVP who can still get to his shot and make it in the clutch. And as Berger points out, Pierce's contract for next season is only partially guaranteed so anybody looking to pick up #$34 has a little bit of an insurance policy in 2013.

Say this is for real. Say Ainge would rip out the hearts of Celtics fans around the world and trade away the second leading scorer in the franchise's history. Who could they get? Yesterday, there was a story that Rondo has been clamoring for his buddy, Rudy Gay, to come to Boston, but that just sounded like two friends commiserating at a family BBQ. But could it be possible? Memphis has made no qualms about shopping Gay. They're trying to eliminate costs and Pierce's contract would fit that bill. The Grizzlies are poised to make a deep run in the Western Conference this season and could use PP's veteran leadership; two seasons ago, they beat the Spurs in the first round and lost to OKC in 7 with Rudy Gay sidelined by an injury. If Chris Wallace can't make a deal for younger talent, Pierce makes perfect sense for the win now, cut payroll later GM.

From the Boston perspective, I'll turn to the first article I ever wrote for the blog, The Captain & His Ship. Paraphrased, I'd rather lose with Pierce than win with anybody else. It's that simple. Disregarding how the team was playing, is playing, and might play down the road, you don't trade The Captain.

It would be unwise to move Pierce at this time. Why disrupt the momentum?

Besides we don't need Rudy.

Dboss

Agree!

112288

we already have Rudy Gay on the roster, his name is Jeff Green.

Writers get paid to fill space on a page. That's the prime criteria, not insightful thinking.

If DA were to trade Pierce at this point....after all those thin years when Paul stuck by this city and this team - it would seriously change my opinion of Danny.

Hopefully this is yet another article from a writer just looking for an angle that isnt there.

Sure hope so.

First; sometimes wild blue-sky comments are turned into headlines, with no basis in fact.

Second; anyone is tradable. This may be especially true if management has decided this team is not likely to get very far in the playoffs.

I'll say that Paul Pierce is my current favorite on the team, and I would hate to see him go. However...trading him now makes perfect sense. I had actually suggested in discussions here that we should do it as far back as this past off-season.

Pierce could make a great addition for a team in serious contention that needs to add a little more scoring punch. With no specific team or player in mind we need to find ourselves a good young power forward or center and Pierce could be the player we can trade or include in a deal to get that piece. Draft picks are a secondary possibility, but are less reliable.

This is a veteran team, as currently built, that is made to peak late and could try for a playoff run as is. If we're realistic, however, it's probably not a club that will get that far in the postseason and we have seen the many obstacles already. Building for the future on the fly while staying competitive is difficult and rare, but if we're willing to be open-minded and think ahead this could be a great time to pull that rare feat off.

I would pursue any course of action if I were Ainge. The only players I would try and hang on to at all costs at this point are Rondo and Green. We keep KG too because despite the fact that he can still play some his decline has started to accelerate and is steep enough that I don't think he brings any value. As far as providing any sentimental value with a link to the quickly fading era started in '07, which has zero to do with winning basketball, KG can provide that as well as Pierce. If that helps to keep seats filled that's OK to a point, not that it's ever been a serious problem in Boston.

It's an idea whose time has come and I give Danny credit if he's truly floating it out there. I can still keep my Paul Pierce autographed picture of the Big Three if I need a reminder, but I'd rather reload for the long run if the opportunity presents itself.

NYCelt wrote:First; sometimes wild blue-sky comments are turned into headlines, with no basis in fact.

Second; anyone is tradable. This may be especially true if management has decided this team is not likely to get very far in the playoffs.

I'll say that Paul Pierce is my current favorite on the team, and I would hate to see him go. However...trading him now makes perfect sense. I had actually suggested in discussions here that we should do it as far back as this past off-season.

Pierce could make a great addition for a team in serious contention that needs to add a little more scoring punch. With no specific team or player in mind we need to find ourselves a good young power forward or center and Pierce could be the player we can trade or include in a deal to get that piece. Draft picks are a secondary possibility, but are less reliable.

This is a veteran team, as currently built, that is made to peak late and could try for a playoff run as is. If we're realistic, however, it's probably not a club that will get that far in the postseason and we have seen the many obstacles already. Building for the future on the fly while staying competitive is difficult and rare, but if we're willing to be open-minded and think ahead this could be a great time to pull that rare feat off.

I would pursue any course of action if I were Ainge. The only players I would try and hang on to at all costs at this point are Rondo and Green. We keep KG too because despite the fact that he can still play some his decline has started to accelerate and is steep enough that I don't think he brings any value. As far as providing any sentimental value with a link to the quickly fading era started in '07, which has zero to do with winning basketball, KG can provide that as well as Pierce. If that helps to keep seats filled that's OK to a point, not that it's ever been a serious problem in Boston.

It's an idea whose time has come and I give Danny credit if he's truly floating it out there. I can still keep my Paul Pierce autographed picture of the Big Three if I need a reminder, but I'd rather reload for the long run if the opportunity presents itself.

NYCelt,

Who would you be satisfied trading Pierce for? What would you consider "value" than another team wouldn't just roll their eyes at?


bob


.

Bob,

No particular player that I'm even making the effort to guess at. It's simply the fact that Pierce's trade value may never be higher than right now as teams begin to evaluate their chances at making a run this spring.

If Rondo is our most valuable asset, and Green is doing enough to suggest he's ready for a bigger role, we have two key players to build from. Pierce is the one player that makes sense to move if he brings us back a 4 or 5 with good potential; I'm not suggesting who, just that the idea has merit.

Regards

NYCelt

You are certainly correct about Pierce's trade value.

But I think that making a mid season trade on a team that has just found their identity is "Risky Business"

Every contending team has a go-to-guy. Without Pierce who is our go-to-guy?

While the emergence of Green may on the surface make Pierce expendable, it also strengthens our 3 spot. That has to be considered a advantage that most teams would love to have.

I think that the Celtics have a delicate balance to maintain. Remember what happend when the team moved Perkins in the middle of the season. We lost our swag.

My last point relates to the need for another big. Sully's play as of late certainly changes the need to go out there and get a front line big. But we need a tweak not a makeover.

Pierce is worth a lot more than getting a player with good potential.

Anyways I really do not disagree with you in total. I do think that PP days in Boston are numbered but I do not belive that his number has come up just yet.

dboss

NY Celt,

Right now, I'd have to add Sully to the definite keepers. It's not just what he's been showing lately but rather the brevity of his learning curve that could very well suggest an Unseld-like future. Of course, the competition is different from what it was in Wesley's day, but I happen to think today's competition is actually softer. I'm amazed at how quickly Sully is finding ways to avoid getting his shot blocked, and I think his defense has rapidly improved too.

I just wrote to Bob Heckler in another thread about seeing what I believe is a new Sully move—a turnaround, step back jumper (okay, a one-inch jumper) that looked like vintage KG. The feeling I get is that Sully will never rest in an effort to improve himself, and he's already got a darned good base on which to improve.

As for Sully's back, that factor seems to be fading into the background as other players around the league go down but Sully just keeps pulverizing opponents at an ever-growing pace.

Finally, Sully's attitude, smarts, unflappability, and work ethic are just plain made to order for the Celtics. Red would have been all over his case because of the potential he would have seen in this guy.

As far as Pierce is concerned, I am concerned about what he might be like by next year. Emotion and sentimentality aside (which is not easy for me), I believe he'd bring as much next summer as he would now. Whether or not the Celtics will have a realistic shot at contending for the championship, see me in April. I'm not predicting anything. But, as things stand right now, and based on the fact this team may very well be coming together in a big way, why toss away the possibility that they could be a contender this season? If losing Perk can be blamed for the team's lack of success a couple of years ago, what might losing an absolute cornerstone like Pierce mean this season? Sure, it could be argued that whomever they might get for him could be a strong asset this season (to say nothing of a cornerstone for the future), but I'll play my continuity card on that score. If they were to acquire a big for chips other than Pierce, Paul would play a major role in helping the team integrate the new guy with a minimum of discontinuity.

Best to the family,

Sam

Hi,
First - trade Rondo, now - trade Pierce. What's next - moving Celtics to Bismark, ND?

IMO, trading PP now makes sense only if the front office decided to rebuild the team from ground up.
Whatever they decided, as I said before, don't touch AB and Sully. Thank you.

AK

NYCelt

If its true that Memphis wants to do a salary dump I'd do Pierce for Gay in a flash. I supose that ones opinions vary on this subject depending on ones view of the future (near and distant). I,m not to high on their chances to win it all this year therefore I'm more concerned about the future.

Swish

If the Celtics continue to play defense the way they have the past few games they will be a contender.

With one more big (or maybe Wilcox finally rounding into form) I think this team could contend for the title this year.

While I don't like the idea of trading Pierce I'd be open to anyone but Bradley and Sullinger being moved.

However I think the best course would to stay with what we've got and build on the ever increasing team play which we are seeing on both ends of the court.

Actually I think we are one decent big man from being a contender ourselves. We are finally clicking on all cylinders and I hate to see players leave and disrupt the chemistry we have finally attained. Getting Gortat or Dalembert, it might not cost that much and shouldn't disrupt.

I believe even the thought of trading Pierce is foolish thought. I do not care who you may think of trading him for (Rudy Gay?), no one has the heart that Paul Pierce has. He listened to Danny back when he became a free agent, when Danny did all he could to convince him to stay with the Celtics, and that he would surround him with players who would help him get to the promised land. Danny did that, Pierce took a hometown discount and stayed. He has been a loyal soldier, and, I for one, would be soooo disappointed in the Celtics organization if they traded him away instead of having him finish his career here in Boston.

These are the thoughts of someone who has followed this team for many, many years. It was not Red's way to trade away aging stars who had been so loyal to the Boston Celtics, I feel the same way.

Rosalie

Down the stretch in tight games the Celtics have exactly ONE option who is unafrald to take the big shot. You cannot trade that guy. Period. Full Stop.

Danny is using Pierce only as a stalking horse to get feelers on who is and who is not in play and start dialog among teams.

Strategy has been used for a thousand years!

112288

Me too Rosale.

Easier to respond in general rather than individually...

Pierce is my favorite Celtic. Sentiment aside he's a valuable asset to trade at this time. Contenders value his scoring skill, his contract makes him favorable for someone to take for a short time, and we're fighting just to climb past the eighth seed. We have a fast aging center and after that our best big is an undersized, albeit promising and fast learning rookie. We can remake ourselves to contend, and do so practically on the fly, if we take an opportunity when it's presented. We need a young big now and for the future. Pierce only has a year or two left, tops and KG has been referred to in some publications as "The human remains of Kevin Garnett." We could possibly have a chance to get stronger now by using Pierce's remaining value to help set the team up to take advantage of the type of game Rondo can run as the point. We might even be able to give Paul a run at a title somewhere as a parting gift. It's time.

No matter where his final games are played Pierce will be remembered as a Celtic, his number will take it's place in the rafters and he will be inducted to The Hall in Springfield.

Nothing personal to Paul, it's just business. And so far it's just a concept that needs to be viewed as such.

I am sorry, I stand by my remarks, LOYALTY MEANS ALOT, maybe not to this generation, but it does to me, and I would lose a tremendous amount of respect for the Celtics if they did anything like trade Paul.

I wish Danny or Wyc would just come out and say that they are NOT going to trade Paul Pierce and get this over with.

Rosalie,

Although you're the one person I nearly always agree with I'll differ on this one. Just for the record though, if in your comment about loyalty you're including me in the current generation; thanks! I can't accept the compliment, however, since I was born in 1959. Don't let my young son in the avatar fool you, I'm just a late starter.

Not for you alone, but for anyone who considers this idea a parting with old Celtic ways, it's hardly that at all. Red certainly did it. In a re-hash of a WBUR article from last season...

'In the spring of 1956, Celtics Coach and General Manager Red Auerbach reluctantly traded future Hall-of-Famers Ed Macauley and (draft pick) Cliff Hagan to St. Louis for the Hawks’ second round draft pick, Bill Russell. In 1957, the rookie lead Boston to its first ever NBA title.

The Hawks countered the following year by winning their first and only championship. In 1958, it appeared an even deal. But the Celtics, with Russell as their defensive anchor, captured the flag in each of the next eight seasons. They tacked on another two championships in the late 60′s just for good measure. Advantage: Celtics.'

How about trading away the popular and promising young Al Jefferson along with a bus load of other Celtics for a past-his-prime power forward? That worked out OK.

Examples from other teams and sports abound too. A great comparison I've seen in two other places debating this same topic already is the Dallas Cowboys trade of the popular and talented but getting older Herschel Walker for a bunch of draft picks that led to their titles in the 90's. Unfortunately my Bills were a part of that one.

What would Red do? If history is an indicator, what was best for the team.

I'm not saying I want Pierce to go, I'm just saying it makes sense and I understand if he does.

I'll go back to agreeing with you on everything else now!

Regards

nycelt

The East is wide open this year, every team has flaws, we just beat 4 playoff teams in a row and we can still play better as we are just finding ourselves with the arrival of AB. We just found ourselves, our mojo, we can win with Pierce and KG playing smaller minutes so that they are fresher for the really big games. These are 2 HoF players that know how to win and lead. We also have a raw athletic big man still honing his game ready to come up at some point at worst by next year. Suddenly I really feel we can get to the Finals this year, we match up well with Miami and the Knicks and the Bulls.....no team scares me, our defense with AB is scary fierce and good.

We will have defensive stud puppy AB and Courtney Lee going right at D Wade and Pierce and Jeff Green going at Lebron, and we are the faster deeper team. Since I feel we will gell further and get stronger as season wears longer, the bench parts can excel at their roles and be better and better....why mess up a possible Finals aspiration? I don't think Noah, D Howard or Tyson Chandler is stepping through that door for Paul Pierce.

cow