Check out This Rumor

[maverick4]

Completely agree that PP needs to be traded. So, if we trade our pick and get a seasoned vet we will have a window of two or three years to compete. That is not going to satisfy my thirst thats not been quenched since the Bird days. I'll take my chances on #5 (or trading down) and tradeing PP. Ainge is a good judge of talent when it comes to the draft, and top picks usually do not flop. I would rather get a young player or two and wait another few years for a LONG run.

Would Portland trade their #1 pick for Pierce or some combo involving Pierce?

I'd like to draft Oden and Brewer and rebuild the right way.

 

[scout]

Would Portland trade their #1 pick for Pierce or some combo involving Pierce?

I'd like to draft Oden and Brewer and rebuild the right way.

There is no way that Oden gets traded. Oden blew away Durant in a number of categories that by all rights Durant should have owned. I do like Brewer. I think he will be a dominant defensive player, something a lot of fans dismiss. Defense still wins championships, no matter what sport. If we can get two top rookies to go along with our young core, then I'm fine with watching this team develop and make a Patriot type of run.

 

[BradyManny]

I'm not a fan of the Marion deal if it involves #5.

The trade value of #5 is truly not that high at all. Look no further than the fact that the #7 yielded us Sebastian Telfair. Folks thinking that the #5 could somehow be flipped for a KG or Jermaine O'Neal need to curb their expectations. If we get Marion and all we have to give up is the #5 and Ratliff, it would be a huge steal on our end.

What happens if Marion comes here, hates it, and opts out after next season? Plus, is Marion the answer? He plays Pierce's position of SF.

Paul can play SG and Marion can play PF. Whichever one you want to move at any given time, you can go ahead and do that. That's not a disadvantage, that's an advantage. If we want to go big one nite, Paul plays the 2, Marion the 3, Al the 4, Perk the 5. If we want to run and play small, Tony Allen plays the 2, Paul the 3, Marion at 4 and Al at 5.

Someone at CelticsBlog had mentioned making a move for Marcus Camby instead. I like that better. Denver has to move him for Tax purposes, and he wouldn't cost you #5. Adding Camby for Theo's contract, plus a player (telfair/Allen?) & pick (minny's 1st?) would be great since it would bloster our front court, and allow us to draft at #5. Think of a 4/5 rotation of Jefferson/Camby/Perkins with Pierce, Wally, Rondo, West, #5 pick, etc... that's good enough and saves our future.

I wouldn't mind having Camby on our team...if Marion was already on it. We either go for broke and try and win with Pierce while he's still in his prime, or we have to absolutely break it apart and start from scratch.


If we don't make a move for a quality veteran star, and if we do make this #5 pick, and if we in turn do not trade Paul Pierce, it would even more firmly entrench us in the purgatory-like endless cycle of mediocrity we've been in for 2 decades.

If we continue to try and put band-aids on this team rather than either trying to create a legitimate championship team or just tearing the team apart, then within the next two years, we'll have been swept in the first round twice, missed out on two more lotteries, lost Al Jefferson to free agency, lured no free agents, missed Paul Pierce's prime and be stuck with a series of ever-developing youngsters who will all likely get the hell out of Boston the minute their rookie contract expires.

 

[Real World]

Teams trading guys for tax reasons are not going to take back Ratliff's contract. They aren't going to trade with the Celtics because we are over the cap and have to give equal salary back - putting them in the same tax spot with lessor talent. They need to trade to teams under the cap so they reduce salary.

Yes but most of these teams are not going to be over the cap this season necessarily. Some are planning a move now to save them in 2008. Remember, alot of these teams have to sign younger guys, and want to open up space for those signings (Think of the Raef deal we made).

BTW, Theo was an 80% insurance reimbursement this past season for the Celtics, and all signs point to him being an 80% insurance reimbursement for whomever it is that aquires him (Remember Rick Fox's last year was an ins. casualty for the C's). That means an instant savings $10 million (Theo will make $12+ mill in 2007).

Very attractive.

 

[Real World]

Would Portland trade their #1 pick for Pierce or some combo involving Pierce?

I'd like to draft Oden and Brewer and rebuild the right way.

They wouldn't take Pierce and Jefferson for #1, let's put it that way.

 

[Real World]

The trade value of #5 is truly not that high at all. Look no further than the fact that the #7 yielded us Sebastian Telfair. Folks thinking that the #5 could somehow be flipped for a KG or Jermaine O'Neal need to curb their expectations. If we get Marion and all we have to give up is the #5 and Ratliff, it would be a huge steal on our end.

The trade value of a pick is relevant to the quality of the players that would be available. Is last years #1 pick as valuable as this years? Not in any way, shape, or form. This years draft is supposedly one of the strongest in recent memory, and as strong as the Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh, Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony year (2003). Teams want this years #5 pick because they know there is a potential allstar at the pick, whereas in most years, there is not.

Also, last years draft was not considered to be very strong, especially at the #7 spot. That trade involving #7 was about moving the disgusting contract of Raef LAfrentz. Remember that Ainge was considering taking Rajon Rondo at #7. Brandon Roy looks like a nice player on an aweful team, but don't be surprised if he has a similar career to Ron Mercur. We all remember him early, and on a bad team right?

Paul can play SG and Marion can play PF. Whichever one you want to move at any given time, you can go ahead and do that. That's not a disadvantage, that's an advantage. If we want to go big one nite, Paul plays the 2, Marion the 3, Al the 4, Perk the 5. If we want to run and play small, Tony Allen plays the 2, Paul the 3, Marion at 4 and Al at 5.

Marion's ability, and talent is not the issue. It's his cost, and where it takes you. Everything is relative, and if we pass up a Bosh/Wade type talent at #5 for 1-2 years of Marion and the 2nd round, is that worth it? I don't think so.

I wouldn't mind having Camby on our team...if Marion was already on it. We either go for broke and try and win with Pierce while he's still in his prime, or we have to absolutely break it apart and start from scratch.


If we don't make a move for a quality veteran star, and if we do make this #5 pick, and if we in turn do not trade Paul Pierce, it would even more firmly entrench us in the purgatory-like endless cycle of mediocrity we've been in for 2 decades.

If we continue to try and put band-aids on this team rather than either trying to create a legitimate championship team or just tearing the team apart, then within the next two years, we'll have been swept in the first round twice, missed out on two more lotteries, lost Al Jefferson to free agency, lured no free agents, missed Paul Pierce's prime and be stuck with a series of ever-developing youngsters who will all likely get the hell out of Boston the minute their rookie contract expires.

What are you going to win in the next two years with Marion? Can you win a championship in the two years that you have Marion? What happens after that? Another 20 years of mediocrity? Draft at #5, try to aquire a lesser vet like Rashard Lewis, or Marcus Camby, if you intend to keep Pierce and compete now, or look to move Paul Pierce. Do you think Chicago would take Pierce for Gordon & #9? Gordon and Thomas? How about moving him to Atlanta for some of their young players, and maybe their #3 pick? Atlanta has to win as their pick goes to Phoneix next year without protections. My position is simple really, don't include #5 for some of the names I am hearing.

 

[BradyManny]

Draft at #5, try to aquire a lesser vet like Rashard Lewis, or Marcus Camby, if you intend to keep Pierce and compete now, or look to move Paul Pierce.

To me, it's very simply one or the other. If we take the #5 pick, we better trade Paul Pierce. And if we do not trade Paul Pierce, then the #5 pick is essentially worthless to us.

Danny has to commit, C's fans will accept either option, but it's really one or the other.

The reason why I prefer trying to win with Paul is quite simple: I am nervous that players such as Al Jefferson, Gerald Green & whoever we draft at #5 will NOT remain on this Celtic team after their contract expires for the same reasons we can't attract ANY free agents, b/c NBA players see Boston and think this: the team has been mediocre for two decades, the nightlife is mediocre, and the weather sucks.

I think you're underestimating the HUGE risk involved in going young. It takes the entire length (at least) of a player's rookie contract for him to really develop and there is no guarantee we will retain their services.

 

[Real World]

To me, it's very simply one or the other. If we take the #5 pick, we better trade Paul Pierce. And if we do not trade Paul Pierce, then the #5 pick is essentially worthless to us.

Danny has to commit, C's fans will accept either option, but it's really one or the other.

The reason why I prefer trying to win with Paul is quite simple: I am nervous that players such as Al Jefferson, Gerald Green & whoever we draft at #5 will NOT remain on this Celtic team after their contract expires for the same reasons we can't attract ANY free agents, b/c NBA players see Boston and think this: the team has been mediocre for two decades, the nightlife is mediocre, and the weather sucks.

I think you're underestimating the HUGE risk involved in going young. It takes the entire length (at least) of a player's rookie contract for him to really develop and there is no guarantee we will retain their services.

Placating Pierce is not the C's goal, it's to win a championship. We traded a future all-star in joe Johnson to "win now" with a team that was flawed, and going nowhere. How'd that work out for us? Would you take that ill-fated effort in 2002, or would you rather have Joe Johnson for the last 4-5 years? Like I said, everything is relative. You can draft at #5, and still aquire a player that makes you better this year, both via that spot, and a trade. There is talk in Utah that Kilirenko and his contract are available. He would not cost you #5 (nor do I think Lewis would, unless DA is dumb), and would cost you Wally +, or Theo +. The problem is taking on 4 years and $63 million. To me, losing #5 for fools gold is a very bad move. I'd look to at a less costly vet, and draft at #5. This would solve all problems as it would make us more competitive now, and would allow us some time to break in our pick. Don't forget that this team won 24 games, but was 2-20 (close to that) in the games Pierce missed, and Wally/Allen missed virtually the whole season. They should be able to compete for the playoffs at least, as constituted.

 

[BradyManny]

Placating Pierce is not the C's goal, it's to win a championship.

I don't think Ainge is worried about placating Paul at all, if he thinks the team's future is better served by shipping Paul, I doubt he'd hesitate.

We traded a future all-star in joe Johnson to "win now" with a team that was flawed, and going nowhere. How'd that work out for us? Would you take that ill-fated effort in 2002, or would you rather have Joe Johnson for the last 4-5 years?

It was a really, really stupid trade, and so was the Chauncey Billups trade, particularly considering Paul was still young back then and there was plenty of time for patience, only Pitino didn't have it.

The difference now is that Paul Pierce probably only has 3-4 years of his prime left, so the question is, do you start the rebuilding process now, or take one last effort with the franchise player you DO currently have - and if you fail, rebuild for real 3-4 years from now?

I think either work, but we have to commit to one or the other.

Me, I'd rather spend the next 3-4 years giving it a go since players like Paul Pierce are not acquired lightly, and we could be waiting another dozen years for a franchise player like him. Is Big Al it? Is Gerald Green it? If they are good enough to be that guy, it won't be for 3 years or so anyway and we don't even know if we can resign them at that point.

Safer bet is to try and win with Paul and blow it up in 3-4 years if you fail. Thanks to the F-ing ping pong balls, if we trade Paul, there's just no end in sight in terms of the mediocre cycle. It's all down to luck, which so far, we've had none of.

 

[Real World]

The Celtics will not win a championship, with Paul Pierce on the roster, in the next 3-4 years.

 

[BradyManny]

The Celtics will not win a championship, with Paul Pierce on the roster, in the next 3-4 years.

I'd say it's "unlikely" they would win a championship in the next 3-4 years with Paul Pierce, but it beats the "impossible" over the 3-4 and the "almost impossible" from there forward.

In short, would you rather be "fu*ked" or "extremely fu*ked". Those are the C's options right now since they got screwed in the lottery.

 

[BelichickFan]

The Celtics will not win a championship, with Paul Pierce on the roster, in the next 3-4 years.

Things can change very quickly in basketball.

Another rumor from Chad Ford is :

"The talk here in Italy is that the Warriors are trying to move Jason Richardson and the No. 16 pick to move up higher into the draft to grab Yi Jianlian. Their targeted trade partners appear to be the Grizzlies (for Stromile Swift, Damon Stoudamire and the No. 4 pick), the Celtics (for Theo Ratliff and the No. 5) and the Bobcats."

 

[DarrylS]

Things can change very quickly in basketball.

Another rumor from Chad Ford is :

"The talk here in Italy is that the Warriors are trying to move Jason Richardson and the No. 16 pick to move up higher into the draft to grab Yi Jianlian. Their targeted trade partners appear to be the Grizzlies (for Stromile Swift, Damon Stoudamire and the No. 4 pick), the Celtics (for Theo Ratliff and the No. 5) and the Bobcats."

Not sure how Richardson will fit in here, looks like a #2 or #3, good scorer, plays tough.. but does this move make this team that much better?? Said before think you have to blow the whole thing up, build around Jefferson and crew.

 

[patsfan55]

Things can change very quickly in basketball.

Another rumor from Chad Ford is :

"The talk here in Italy is that the Warriors are trying to move Jason Richardson and the No. 16 pick to move up higher into the draft to grab Yi Jianlian. Their targeted trade partners appear to be the Grizzlies (for Stromile Swift, Damon Stoudamire and the No. 4 pick), the Celtics (for Theo Ratliff and the No. 5) and the Bobcats."

i love jrich, and thats a great trade
but, we aready have paul, tony allen, gerald, and wally at the 2/3
jrich is like a rich mans tony/gerald

 

[BradyManny]

i love jrich, and thats a great trade
but, we aready have paul, tony allen, gerald, and wally at the 2/3
jrich is like a rich mans tony/gerald

While J Rich would be a huge upgrade over Wally, it doesn't get us any closer to being competitive.

If they really are going to build around Pierce, I wouldn't hesitate to use either our 08 first rounder or the one (I think) we're getting from the T-Wolves in 08 or 09.

I know folks will be quick to point out that Pierce only has 3-4 years left of his prime and that the same goes for Marion, KG, or whoever.

I'd be just as quick to point out Al Jefferson only has 2 seasons left on his contract, and that while he might be good for another decade+, there's decent chances he's doing it in another uniform.

 

[Real World]

I'd say it's "unlikely" they would win a championship in the next 3-4 years with Paul Pierce, but it beats the "impossible" over the 3-4 and the "almost impossible" from there forward.

In short, would you rather be "fu*ked" or "extremely fu*ked". Those are the C's options right now since they got screwed in the lottery.

I'd rather be extremely ****ed over the next 3 years and kick azz for the 6-8 years after, by trading Pierce, drafting at #5, and having a stud team with all the talent we'd be getting.

 

[Real World]

i love jrich, and thats a great trade
but, we aready have paul, tony allen, gerald, and wally at the 2/3
jrich is like a rich mans tony/gerald

That trade is aweful. Richardson is coming off a couple of injury plagued seasons, and is not the player he once was. Plus, I think he still has some serious money on his deal. He can't play defense mind you, and is terrible value for this years #5.

 

[Real World]

While J Rich would be a huge upgrade over Wally, it doesn't get us any closer to being competitive.

If they really are going to build around Pierce, I wouldn't hesitate to use either our 08 first rounder or the one (I think) we're getting from the T-Wolves in 08 or 09.

I know folks will be quick to point out that Pierce only has 3-4 years left of his prime and that the same goes for Marion, KG, or whoever.

I'd be just as quick to point out Al Jefferson only has 2 seasons left on his contract, and that while he might be good for another decade+, there's decent chances he's doing it in another uniform.

Yeah but the way the cap is set up in the NBA, the C's can offer Jefferson much more money, and an extra year on a deal, whereas other teams couldn't. Most players don't leave their respective teams, and if they do, it's because they are not franchise types, and it comes via a sign and trade. Phoenix missed nothing from Johnson, and got 2 firsts, and Boris Diaw in return. Next years Atlanta pick is unprotected.

 

[DarrylS]

The newest rumor is Garnett, for #5, Jefferson and a few more... don't like this as this would lead to a playoff team, not a championship team.. he and pierce are getting too old.

 

[scout]

The newest rumor is Garnett, for #5, Jefferson and a few more... don't like this as this would lead to a playoff team, not a championship team.. he and pierce are getting too old.

That trade has my head spinning. Why would you trade away a player who will be better then Garnett in two years (Garnett may be out of the league or with another team). Some people are salivating over Pierce and Garnett, so what. Does that mean the Celts will raise an Eastern Conference Championship Banner? That team does not beat the Spurs or the Suns. Add the right draftee, or two (32) to this squad and with luck this team wins the Eastern Conf., but more importantly, will get a lot better by not trading.