Celtics Elevating Interest In J.J. Redick

112288 wrote:TJ

It is simple & clear, Boston has to do it if they cannot trade Pierce! Look, Pierce lives in Malibu on the off season...it's his home base and where he will retire to, not Boston. Look to the Lakers or Clippers for a trade. It may just be 2 years of draft picks or a young guy who brings a certain something to be a role player.

However what about Memphis? They are knocking at the door step of making serious noise...a vet like Pierce could make sense if there are trade pieces that match.

112288

Memphis just off loaded $6m in salaries to Cleveland.
They are no longer looking to trade Gay or Randolph to reduce their team salary.

112288 wrote:TJ

What if you took out Melo and added Bass?

112288

Yes, that works but why would Atlanta even consider that?
Green is locked into a 4 year contract and Bass a 3 year contract.
Both players are having pretty poor seasons.
Atlanta is looking for payroll flexibility, not being tied to players that are making millions per year more then they should be.

112288,

I realize you're in the camp that thinks the Celtics might be wise to blow it all up and focus on planning for the future. Whether or not Danny sees it that way will become evident during the next month.

I'm of the camp that you play for the present season and, lest there be any doubt, I'm of the camp that anything less than a championship represents failure. If they have a shot to sign or trade for a potential franchise-changer this summer, Paul Pierce could come into play at that time as either trade bait or am amnestied player, or he could be traded now—but only with an eye to improving the team immediately.

As for whether the team can improve enough to contend this season (through enhanced play/chemistry, better rotations, improved strategy, trades, signings, or whatever), see me in April and I'll feel equipped to assess the situation. Short of devastating injuries (heaven forbid), there's zero per cent chance that I'll change my mind on that score.

Sam

Redick for lee = mindless trade

TJ,

Step out and consider this.

1) Atl gets a serviceable PF for 2.5 years at a great price $6M and is young.
2) Atl gets a wing who although some what expensive is young and could have great upside beyond his $9M per for 3.5 years if he succeeds.

Maybe a sweeten' it with a draft pick.

112288

112288 wrote:TJ,

Step out and consider this.

1) Atl gets a serviceable PF for 2.5 years at a great price $6M and is young.
2) Atl gets a wing who although some what expensive is young and could have great upside beyond his $9M per for 3.5 years if he succeeds.

Maybe a sweeten' it with a draft pick.

112288

If you were Atlanta, would you make that trade?
1) Bass is not young. Melo and Sullinger are young. Bass will be 28 soon. There are plenty of players that can do what Bass does at a much cheaper of a price. He is not a special player compared to other PF's in the league.
2) Green has already shown what he will be. Every team knows that if Green had great upside, Boston would keep him. For another team to commit to $32m to Green for the next 3 1/2 years is unrealistic.

Sam,

No I am not fully in the "Blow-up Camp" per say. The best fix now that would keep us in the hunt for #18 this year is to do some pruning of some dead wood role players, i.e. Terry, Bass, Barbosa (although he is on a 1 year deal) as is Wilcox. Bring in new role models that can play the in the Celtic system and add instant performance now without giving up our young core like Sully, Rondo, Lee, Bradley and Melo. Melo will be a stud ....give him some time!

If we had those 2, 3 or 4 performing at what they were expected to perform at we would have at least 10 more wins and we would not be posting like this.

However, they have not performed, and to be more specific I think they are not capable of playing in the Celtic methodology established by Doc.

Green is an enigma who I think is all fxxked up mentally and does not understand his role. I'll give him a pass as his operation may have slowed his learning progress this year. However, if a good swap can be made or he is the piece to a larger, more complex deal, then Ainge has to include him.

Paul Pierce is done as a full time player and more and more as this season goes by...he is laboring.....his shots are off...no lift in the legs...line drive shots...and his foul shooting is getting worse. To hold him and get nothing back to regentrify the forest makes no sense either.

Paul Pierce was paid max $$$$$ dollars.......won a title and was treated pretty good by management and the fans.........perhaps he gives back to Boston something in return.........through a young player.

You know what you wind up with after being a sentimental old fool ........

YOU ARE LEFT WITH JUST BEING AN OLD FOOL!

112288

TJ

First BB is in his prime for a player (27-32). His contract expires at 30.
What PF at BB age and locked in contract can be had for less?

If I am to read between the tea leaves....your saying BB sucks and Danny Ainge made a bad signing?

If you say yes........I happen to agree with you!

As far as Green goes....no not straight up ...it would have to be a much larger deal involving a number of teams.

112288

112288 wrote:TJ

First BB is in his prime for a player (27-32). His contract expires at 30.
What PF at BB age and locked in contract can be had for less?

If I am to read between the tea leaves....your saying BB sucks and Danny Ainge made a bad signing?

If you say yes........I happen to agree with you!

As far as Green goes....no not straight up ...it would have to be a much larger deal involving a number of teams.

112288

You didn't answer my question about would you make that trade if you were Atlanta.
Bass is in his prime but is not considered a young player in my opinion.
About Bass, I would not want to pay him $6m/year for the next 3 years.
Boston most likely isn't thrilled about his salary compared to his contributions. I doubt any other team would want to acquire him.

Green might be dealt in a multi-team trade, but my opinion is that he will stay.
They would have to acquire a SF if Green is dealt.

TJ,

My point was not the formula as applied to specific annual salaries. My point was whether (1) the salary cap "hit" represented by a given player was taken into account and (2) the figure used in a given trade calculation related to annual salary or just that portion of annual salary.

Trade Checker uses "salary ratio" rather than actual salaries, which Trade Machine does use.

I've done all sorts of googling to try to pin down the difference between salary ratio and actual salaries, because I had thought salary ratio had reference to the salary cap. All I could find is that (1) Trade Checker may be using salary ratio because Trade Machine may have exclusive rights to use actual salaries (seems strange) and (2) salary ratio apparently becomes less applicable as the season progresses, which is what led me to wonder whether the entire season's salary or the remaining salary at the time of the trade was used in the calculation.

Regardless of how all the definitions net out, it's a fact that Trade Checker approves a hypothetical trade of Green and Melo for Smith, while Trade Machine does not approve it. According to Trade machine, you'd have to shave considerably more from the value received by the Celtics to get under the tax than to equalize the salaries.

So I guess I need to become a Trade Machine convert, although the issues posed above still kind of bug me.

Thanks for the heads-up.

Sam

TJ, DH only has a one year contract with the Lakers which will expire in April 2013 if they don't make the playoffs. Having PP on their roster in 2013 and 2014 would be a plus for them.

Sam,

I have no idea what that salary ratio means on the Trade Checker website.
There is a new provision under the new CBA that allows teams under the Luxury Tax line to receive a player whose salary is within 150% plus $100,000 of the outgoing salaries. Atlanta is not a tax paying team but Boston is a tax paying team, so they would have to abide by the 125% plus $100,000 rule. There could be something that I am missing here...

Below is from the NBA's FAQs of the CBA.

For non-taxpaying teams (again, they must be under the tax level after the trade), the salaries that can be acquired depend on the total salaries the team is trading away:

Non-Taxpaying Teams Outgoing salary Maximum incoming salary
$0 to $9.8 million 150% of the outgoing salary, plus $100,0001
$9.8 million to $19.6 million The outgoing salary plus $5 million1
$19.6 million and up 125% of the outgoing salary, plus $100,000

Taxpaying teams can take back up to 125% of their outgoing salaries, plus $100,000, no matter how much salary the team is sending away. For example, a taxpaying team trading away $10 million in salaries can acquire one or more replacement players making up to $12.6 million.
Taxpaying Teams Outgoing salary Maximum incoming salary
Any 125% of the outgoing salary, plus $100,000

worcester wrote:TJ, DH only has a one year contract with the Lakers which will expire in April 2013 if they don't make the playoffs. Having PP on their roster in 2013 and 2014 would be a plus for them.

Pierce only has one year left after this season.
LA would have to pay him $15.33 m next year.
We all know this would not be a good trade for the Lakers and they would never do it.

TJ,

If you look at it on the surface, no Atlanta would not make that trade. However we do not know Atlanta's rebuilding strategy nor what they need nor what lies in their heart.

I have seen crazier trades done in sports i.e. Dodgers with Red Sox last year or in the NBA with a max contract with Amar'e Stoudemire. Red was famous for following PT Barnum's philosophy that "There is a sucker born every day"! He picked the pockets of most GM's!

So I did not hear what your answer is on Danny signing Bass...good or bad?

112288

TJ, Only $4M of Pierces contract is guaranteed unless there are contractual clauses stating that if traded it has to pay him max next year.
.

112288

112288 wrote:TJ, Only $4M of Pierces contract is guaranteed unless there are contractual clauses stating that if traded it has to pay him max next year.
.

112288

Yes, only $5m is guaranteed for Pierce for next season, but why would the Lakers want to trade Howard for Pierce for this season, then pay $5m for Pierce not to play for them next season?

112288 wrote:TJ,

If you look at it on the surface, no Atlanta would not make that trade. However we do not know Atlanta's rebuilding strategy nor what they need nor what lies in their heart.

I have seen crazier trades done in sports i.e. Dodgers with Red Sox last year or in the NBA with a max contract with Amar'e Stoudemire. Red was famous for following PT Barnum's philosophy that "There is a sucker born every day"! He picked the pockets of most GM's!

So I did not hear what your answer is on Danny signing Bass...good or bad?

112288

There are often reasons why teams will overpay to sign or acquire players.
We have pretty much seen what Atlanta's strategy is.
Move out expensive long term contracts when they get an opportunity.

The Dodgers knew a windfall of money was coming their way from their new TV deal with Fox.
With a new deal on the horizon, they wanted to acquire some marquis names instead of the James Loney's and Juan Rivera's who were regular players for LA.

The Knicks did overpay Amare but they do generate a tremendous amount of revenue and they wanted to a premier player on the roster to help attract free agents to sign there.

In retrospect the re-signing of Bass is bad. But at the time, it was probably just a little more then market rate for how he was playing at the time.

With LA, it would not be bad to have Pierce as a vet playing 20 min. For Pierce living near his home, home in warm weather and picking up some pocket change of $5M is not all bad......while he adds to his HOF numbers.

I'll bet anything, Pierce will not play for $5M for the Celtics next year...he'll want Garnett type money....and frankly he is not worth that amount and so we should part now if we can get a young raw player to mold into a good bench player for Pierce in a trade. I like a young raw player verses a draft choice because you have some measure of NBA playing experience.

112288

112288

What young player making about 15 million are you suggesting the Celts trade Pierce for. Draft picks have 0 dollar value so that can't happen since we have to get about equal salary back.

swish

112288 wrote:With LA, it would not be bad to have Pierce as a vet playing 20 min. For Pierce living near his home, home in warm weather and picking up some pocket change of $5M is not all bad......while he adds to his HOF numbers.

I'll bet anything, Pierce will not play for $5M for the Celtics next year...he'll want Garnett type money....and frankly he is not worth that amount and so we should part now if we can get a young raw player to mold into a good bench player for Pierce in a trade. I like a young raw player verses a draft choice because you have some measure of NBA playing experience.

112288

I think you are mis-understanding how the partial guarantees work.
If Boston keeps Pierce next year, they have to pay him $15.33m.
If they let him go, they owe him $5m.
Boston can't request that he plays for $5m.
It's either $15.33m or he will not be on the team.
If Boston traded him to another team this season, the same scenario would apply.

Again, It makes sense to trade him NOW for Dwight. LA gets to keep him next year for perhaps 5 M. We get Dwight for this run at #18. Thereafter who knows.

worcester wrote:Again, It makes sense to trade him NOW for Dwight. LA gets to keep him next year for perhaps 5 M. We get Dwight for this run at #18. Thereafter who knows.

Of course it makes sense for Boston to trade Pierce for Dwight.
It doesn't make sense for the Lakers.
No, LA can't get Pierce for $5m.
It is either $15.33m or he is waived and walks away with $5m.

Well, the Lakers were smart enough to spurn Phil Jackson in favor of Mike D'Antoni.
Maybe Jimmy Buss will get another bright idea and trade Dwight for Paul. It could happen. We Celtics fans are a strong prayer group.

This is a Ric Bucher tweet, 1/25/13. IF TRUE, that means Sully's safe, since he definitely qualifies as "young talent on a rookie contract".

There remains a chance that JJ Redick is dealt before the February trade deadline and if not then, in a deal this summer. But a league source dismissed the possibility of a trade to Boston and the Pacers, while also interested, appear to be a longshot as well. "There's no deal to be had," the source said of Boston. The Magic are supposedly looking for draft picks and young talent on a rookie contract. No one on the Celtics' roster apparently fits the bill. about 12 hours ago


bob


.

Ric Bucher can rest easy. The Celtics will never trade any young core players - Sully or Bradley (not both) unless they get 2 vets back per 1 Celtic player and that is not happening.

You trade Sully and get what a SF or C, now you have a missing piece at PF.

Only way you can get 2x for 1x is trade Rondo for a good young PG and a vet PF or C and that is not going to happen.

Got to trade now with non-performing secondary role players and fill your team with top starting vets in the summer. This is not for this year...we are looking at next season which has to start now. Anyone talking this year #18 is dreaming......but next year with what I outlined is very feasible.

112288

112288