Another Trade Rumor

Now there's a rumor that has Caron Butler going to Dallas.

Nobody knows what's really happening. Not even the GMs since they don't know how truly serious their competitors are nor does the Washington GM know how serious his trade partners are.

Next week should see something, though.

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/64649/20100212/haywood_now_included_in_dallas_talks/

Mrkleen,

Paul Pierce has a lot of bulk for his size, but I don't believe he has the agility ingredient to allow him to use his strength effectively
inside. By the time he gets in there (if he's not stripped in the process), there is a lot of help defense on him. And I don't believe
he has the agility to cover many PGs effectively on defense.

He shoots effectively from the perimeter, but they have to be pretty wide open shots because he's a very deliberate outside shooter. (I was not surprised he bombed out in the distance shooting a few years ago because that requires both speed of release and accuracy.)

IF (and it appears to be shrinking "IF") the Celts are going to trade Ray, the good news is that it appears there could be substantial returns. I like Butler and Jamison, but I'm concerned that the rumored trade would leave the Celtics without a SG who combines a reasonable degree of agility, height and a perimeter threat. That's why I'd prefer Mike Miller over Butler because at least Miller is more of a swing man.

Stockpiling good players is nice, but I'll always be in it for the chemistry. And there's something about the prospect of a Rondo/Pierce backcourt that makes me feel uncomfortable. But I've been surprised many times, so who knows?

Sam

There is no way that PP can play shooting guard. He is too slow on offense and defense to play that position.

Mike Miller is substantially better than Butler.

Jamison would provide that quick PF that we are missing.

With all that said, I doubt that trade will happen. It's too good to be true.

dboss

Boy, would I be thrilled with Jamison AND Miller. Don't feel that trade will happen, however. Would gladly accept Jamison and Butler, as well. Don't feel that will happen, either. If either deal occurs, Ainge will go into HOF as a GM!

Still feel the Celtics must get either Bosch or Wade. Future would be bright for the next 5 - 6 years, unless injury jinx hits Celtics. We remember all too well tragic Celtic history. Nothing is guaranteed, I guess!!

Interesting article on Bosh, Wade and the FA to be class.

Tark

The Mavericks are about ready to steal Butler from the original equation!-MD.

Sam wrote:Mrkleen,

Paul Pierce has a lot of bulk for his size, but I don't believe he has the agility ingredient to allow him to use his strength effectively
inside. By the time he gets in there (if he's not stripped in the process), there is a lot of help defense on him. And I don't believe
he has the agility to cover many PGs effectively on defense.

He shoots effectively from the perimeter, but they have to be pretty wide open shots because he's a very deliberate outside shooter. (I was not surprised he bombed out in the distance shooting a few years ago because that requires both speed of release and accuracy.)

IF (and it appears to be shrinking "IF") the Celts are going to trade Ray, the good news is that it appears there could be substantial returns. I like Butler and Jamison, but I'm concerned that the rumored trade would leave the Celtics without a SG who combines a reasonable degree of agility, height and a perimeter threat. That's why I'd prefer Mike Miller over Butler because at least Miller is more of a swing man.

Stockpiling good players is nice, but I'll always be in it for the chemistry. And there's something about the prospect of a Rondo/Pierce backcourt that makes me feel uncomfortable. But I've been surprised many times, so who knows?

Sam

why is everyone assuming Pierce would be our SG like it has to be etched in stone? if this trade takes place Quis/TA/Butler could also split time there as could Pierce for a stretch with Jamison at SF....I would be for this trade,we would have unbelievable depth and firepower,we wouldn't even need KG's offense,Jamison and Butler can hit their share of outside shots.

Sam wrote:Mrkleen,

Paul Pierce has a lot of bulk for his size, but I don't believe he has the agility ingredient to allow him to use his strength effectively
inside. By the time he gets in there (if he's not stripped in the process), there is a lot of help defense on him. And I don't believe
he has the agility to cover many PGs effectively on defense.

He shoots effectively from the perimeter, but they have to be pretty wide open shots because he's a very deliberate outside shooter. (I was not surprised he bombed out in the distance shooting a few years ago because that requires both speed of release and accuracy.)

IF (and it appears to be shrinking "IF") the Celts are going to trade Ray, the good news is that it appears there could be substantial returns. I like Butler and Jamison, but I'm concerned that the rumored trade would leave the Celtics without a SG who combines a reasonable degree of agility, height and a perimeter threat. That's why I'd prefer Mike Miller over Butler because at least Miller is more of a swing man.

Stockpiling good players is nice, but I'll always be in it for the chemistry. And there's something about the prospect of a Rondo/Pierce backcourt that makes me feel uncomfortable. But I've been surprised many times, so who knows?

Sam

Sam I think thats harsh criticism on Pierce,you love defending Scal,then you attack Pierce like that?Pierce carried us on his back in 08 playoff run,don't think he has agility,look at game 5 of that Finals again,Pierce ripped Lakers for 38 attacking and finishing at rim all game.And by the way he just won the 3 point contest so guess his delberate slow stroke worked for him.Too slow to cover guards?he covers Kobe as good as anyone in league.Lets hope he gets his health back.Pierce for the generation that missed Russell,Cousy,Cowens,Hondo and Bird is a Celtic immortal/superstar.

Cow,

I didn't attack Pierce gratuitously. I said I think he's not agile enough to play the "2." This season, he having great difficulty going to the hoop successfully for some reason; I have to assume it relates to agility, because I doubt he's lost any strength. He commites 2.7 turnovers per game, and as many as 5 or 6 in some games, playing SF...and I believe that high, slow dribble would get stripped even more if he were at SG.

What does Paul's place in Celtics history have to do with whether he'd now be equipped to play the "2?" I said in 2006 that he deserved to have his number retired. Does that mean he would now be able to cover Rip Hamilton and Dwayne Wade effectively?

I think Paul is slowed by injuries, and he was probably their MVP in their first few games. But, right now, I see an offense that's at least partly predicated on getting certain things out of Paul Pierce, and he's not providing those things consistently. Would moving him to a position requiring greater agility improve that situation? I think not!

I hope his injuries heal quickly and that he can reclaim as many as possible of his capabilities. But I don't think moving him to the "2" would accomplish that. What is there about that statement that constitutes an attack on him or besmirches his place in Celtics history?

What's Scal got to do with anything? I evaluate all players as I see them. I'm not in love with Scal, although it may seem
that way because it happens I feel a lot of people are inaccurate in their assessments of him because they want only stars. I've said he's
not a difference-maker but he's a chemistry guy...able to help enable good players but less able to be a bench catalyst. I've said he's a
better defender against less mobile forwards than against more mobile forwards. Tell me what's inaccurate about any of that! Frankly, at this point in time, I believe Scal (when he gets into a game) plays closer to his peak performance than Paul does, although Scal's peak performance is obviously a lot lower. (I'm not comparing the two. You brought up Scal.) And I don't "love to defend" Scal. I've suggested him many times as potential trade bait. And I don't defend him; I comment on evaluative criteria I feel are inadequate. I've done the same thing with respect to many Celtics players.

Sam

Sam
I agree with you that Pierce after getting off to a great start to the season,giving us whatever we needed it seems has regressed lately,I feel its due to injuries which could be due to age,but young players and players in their peak get injured all the time too(Chris Paul),so hoping Pierce can get his health and game back.His winning some contest that has no relevence on the season was thrilling to watch for me and great to see Pierce can still turn it on.Didn't know it at the time,but guess I needed that.Just thought your comments were alittle harsh,he may have trouble chasing some 2's,but those 2's would have trouble covering Pierce too,especially if he gets his health all the way back.I wish Pierce would play the 2 or at least get covered by other teams 2's to make it easier on him,less pounding,but teams will always put their biggest and best wing defender on him because hes Paul Pierce. cow

bobheckler wrote:Isn't there a rule that says if you trade for a player you have to keep them on your roster for at least a month? If so, with the trade deadline looming, how could this be a setup for another "tweak". We'll run out of time.

bob

Bob,

Multi-player trades involving a recently traded player are out, but teams can take a single player and spin him off to another team:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances:

For two months after receiving the player in trade or claiming him off waivers, if the player is being traded in combination with other players. However, the team is free to trade the player by himself (not packaged with other players) immediately. This restriction applies only to teams over the salary cap. (Also see question number 74 for a special case where players can be traded together in less than two months.)

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q87

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So, the Celtics can do a multi-player trade and then take any single player recieved in that trade and immediately spin him off to another team.

I hope that answers your question.

gyso

gyso wrote:

bobheckler wrote:Isn't there a rule that says if you trade for a player you have to keep them on your roster for at least a month? If so, with the trade deadline looming, how could this be a setup for another "tweak". We'll run out of time.

bob

Bob,

Multi-player trades involving a recently traded player are out, but teams can take a single player and spin him off to another team:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances:

For two months after receiving the player in trade or claiming him off waivers, if the player is being traded in combination with other players. However, the team is free to trade the player by himself (not packaged with other players) immediately. This restriction applies only to teams over the salary cap. (Also see question number 74 for a special case where players can be traded together in less than two months.)

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q87

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So, the Celtics can do a multi-player trade and then take any single player recieved in that trade and immediately spin him off to another team.

I hope that answers your question.

gyso

gyso,

I guess it does. What it says to me is that we can do a Ray Allen for Jamison and Butler/Miller trade and, as long as we do it before the Thursday deadline, can spin one of those two off for another player. Right?

So, we could, for example:

Keep Miller (to replace Ray at SG) and trade Jamison to Dallas for Jason Terry (who could back up Rondo at point)?

The key, I think, is to make something happen earlier in the week, so the second trade has a chance to come to a boil by Thursday.

bob

bobheckler wrote:

gyso wrote:

bobheckler wrote:Isn't there a rule that says if you trade for a player you have to keep them on your roster for at least a month? If so, with the trade deadline looming, how could this be a setup for another "tweak". We'll run out of time.

bob

Bob,

Multi-player trades involving a recently traded player are out, but teams can take a single player and spin him off to another team:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances:

For two months after receiving the player in trade or claiming him off waivers, if the player is being traded in combination with other players. However, the team is free to trade the player by himself (not packaged with other players) immediately. This restriction applies only to teams over the salary cap. (Also see question number 74 for a special case where players can be traded together in less than two months.)

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q87

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So, the Celtics can do a multi-player trade and then take any single player recieved in that trade and immediately spin him off to another team.

I hope that answers your question.

gyso

gyso,

I guess it does. What it says to me is that we can do a Ray Allen for Jamison and Butler/Miller trade and, as long as we do it before the Thursday deadline, can spin one of those two off for another player. Right?

So, we could, for example:

Keep Miller (to replace Ray at SG) and trade Jamison to Dallas for Jason Terry (who could back up Rondo at point)?

The key, I think, is to make something happen earlier in the week, so the second trade has a chance to come to a boil by Thursday.

bob

Bob,

Your second trade is legal, that's my understanding from reading the rule.

gyso

Trading Paul Pierce would likely help the Celtic franchise more than a Ray Allen trade in the future, but probably rightfully so, the Celtics may never trade Pierce. He is part of that Celtic tradition that stars don't get traded.

That is fine with me, but will cripple the franchise somewhat. Simply, Pierce is not the player he was 2 years ago. His decision-making and isolations have not been those of a veteran superstar. Playing Pierce at a 2 would slow the Celtics even more!

The Celtics must get quicker, more athletic, not slower and less athletic. It is as plain as the noses on most Celtic fan's faces (which would be out of joint if Pierce were traded ).

sdcelt

For the first 25 games I would not tend to agree with you. The last 20 erso you are right no doubt.

Maybe winning the 3 point contest will awaken something in him. Seriously sometimes it's as simple as thinking yes instead of no.

Jeb

cowens/oldschool wrote:Sam
I agree with you that Pierce after getting off to a great start to the season,giving us whatever we needed it seems has regressed lately,I feel its due to injuries which could be due to age,but young players and players in their peak get injured all the time too(Chris Paul),so hoping Pierce can get his health and game back.His winning some contest that has no relevence on the season was thrilling to watch for me and great to see Pierce can still turn it on.Didn't know it at the time,but guess I needed that.Just thought your comments were alittle harsh,he may have trouble chasing some 2's,but those 2's would have trouble covering Pierce too,especially if he gets his health all the way back.I wish Pierce would play the 2 or at least get covered by other teams 2's to make it easier on him,less pounding,but teams will always put their biggest and best wing defender on him because hes Paul Pierce. cow

If that scenario developed, I could see situations in which PP would gain advantage on the offensive end with size, guile and shooting ability.

My strategy would be to switch on D and put him on the SF and let Daniels, TA or the acquired SF play the opposing SG.

All the best,

Tark