Israel Gutierrez, ESPN.com: Garnett and Fab Melo to Chicago for Joakim Noah and Marco Belinelli. No trade at all is their best bet. The Celtics are unlikely to get anything close to equal value for Garnett, who's so vital to what Boston does and fits in so well with Rajon Rondo. And if there's any indication he won't play out the final two years of his deal, that's even less leverage for the Celtics. But if -- and this is a huge if -- they can get something significant for KG, I'd do this deal.
Andrew Han, ClipperBlog: Garnett, Avery Bradley to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe, DeAndre Jordan and Trey Thompkins. Garnett's no-trade clause limits the Celtics' options mostly to Los Angeles; he owns a home in Malibu and is godfather to Chauncey Billups' daughter. Boston gets back a coveted player/athlete and turns one of their off-ball guards into a point guard, suddenly a position of need. Add an intriguing prospect in Thompkins and an athletic center in Jordan and the Celtics get young in a hurry.
Curtis Harris, Hardwood Paroxysm: Kevin Garnett to Nuggets for JaVale McGee. Going to Denver keeps KG on a playoff team that needs his defensive prowess in the interior. Meanwhile, Boston would get McGee, who may still blossom into a competent defensive force in his own right. And if it doesn't work, Boston can be woeful, get lottery picks and trade McGee's expiring deal in three seasons for future building blocks.
Sean Highkin, Portland Roundball Soc.: Kevin Garnett to the Thunder for Kendrick Perkins, Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones III and Toronto's lottery-guaranteed first-rounder. Taking back Perkins' contract isn't ideal, but the Celtics load up on cheap, controllable, high-upside rookies and get a pick that could potentially be very high. From the Thunder's perspective, upgrading from Perk to KG would make it hard not to be considered title favorites.
Jack Winter, WarriorsWorld: Garnett and Fab Melo to the Spurs for Kawhi Leonard, Tiago Splitter and Boris Diaw. Leonard is one of the league's true blue-chip prospects, a great athlete with elite defensive potential, and Splitter has value, too. A small-picture view like this is against the Spurs' very fabric as an organization, but Garnett and Tim Duncan on the same frontline? If there was ever a reason to swing for the fences, this might be it.
The Clipperblog one is funny.
So is the Denver trade.
IMO The best trades they can make are
LAC sends: Odom,Bledsoe,Jordan
Bos sends: KG, terry, Bass
OKC sends: Perk, Lamb, Perry Jones + tornto 1st
Bos sends: KG
Spurs send: Splitter , Leonard, Jackson(expiring)
Bos sends : KG and Terry
I don't understand, why would Chicago want anything to do with that deal? Are they so desperate for financial flexibility that they would consider this?Yeah the Chicago one struck me most of all as being wild.
Taj Gibson is real solid, but Noah brings more. I don't get that idea for Chicago.
Similarly, why would SA want to move Leonard, who is essentially their answer to Kevin Durant for the next decade? Splitter has proven to be a real commodity as well. Idle speculation indeed, my friend.
IMO The best trades they can make are
LAC sends: Odom,Bledsoe,Jordan
Bos sends: KG, terry, Bass
OKC sends: Perk, Lamb, Perry Jones + tornto 1st
Bos sends: KG
Spurs send: Splitter , Leonard, Jackson(expiring)
Bos sends : KG and Terry
Might do the clippers and spurs trade, probably not the okc one since Toronto is playing better.
I could sort of deal with the OKC deal because you could flip Perk for a shorter deal and another trade asset.
Pau Gasol and Chris Duhon to the Bucks for Ersan Ilyasova, Beno Udrih, Tobias Harris, and Joel Przybilla.
I could sort of deal with the OKC deal because you could flip Perk for a shorter deal and another trade asset.
Plus, we have a full year before we have to do anything about Perkins contract. Assuming we keep Pierce on the books, we're capped out between Rondo, Pierce, Bass, and Green next season anyways.
If we were going to make a move in free agency, it wouldn't happen until 2014 or later. Almost certainly later.
Armchair GM trade suggestions have just about worn out their welcome for me. And when they come from pro writers, well, that just makes me laugh.I love Armchair gm pieces.
Armchair GM trade suggestions have just about worn out their welcome for me. And when they come from pro writers, well, that just makes me laugh.I love Armchair gm pieces.
I love KG but the OKC deal is hard to say no toSame and same goes for the SA deal too.
The OKC deal is probably the worst of the lot, it's a combination of spare parts and redundant pieces. And a pick. Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.I love KG but the OKC deal is hard to say no toSame and same goes for the SA deal too.
When folks post that Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett should retire as Celtics no matter what, or that you could never ever trade them for a package of young blue chip players, I feel like they just aren't making the connection.
Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.
Rather sink with the kg ship and go down shooting then pull the trigger on those abysmal and laughable trades
I love Kevin Garnett
BUT
We live in a city where one franchise has dominated, in a salary cap league, for more than a decade. To stay competitive, they have maintained an unsentimental front office. They have let a ton of fan favorites go over the years- Randy Moss, Richard Seymour, and Deon Branch.
It just seems obvious that, at some point, you will have chances to make your team better by cutting bait. When folks post that Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett should retire as Celtics no matter what, or that you could never ever trade them for a package of young blue chip players, I feel like they just aren't making the connection.
KG is my favorite player.
Hope he retires a Celtic......Same for Pierce
want to trade somebody ....dump Rondo ...please
Because 2 1/2 years of Kevin Garnett is better for the team than whatever that whatever that hodgepodge of injured and/or unproven players will be able to give you.Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.
Why? For what?
Because 2 1/2 years of Kevin Garnett is better for the team than whatever that whatever that hodgepodge of injured and/or unproven players will be able to give you.Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.
Why? For what?
Gives us a chance to be competitive each year. The trade with OKC gives us a round wad of nothing.Because 2 1/2 years of Kevin Garnett is better for the team than whatever that whatever that hodgepodge of injured and/or unproven players will be able to give you.Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.
Why? For what?
Give you what? A second-round exit?
if this is the best that's out there, would rather stand pat. all these ideas -- ALL of em -- make us worse & the other team much much better.
Gives us a chance to be competitive each year. The trade with OKC gives us a round wad of nothing.Because 2 1/2 years of Kevin Garnett is better for the team than whatever that whatever that hodgepodge of injured and/or unproven players will be able to give you.Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.
Why? For what?
Give you what? A second-round exit?
Now, the premsise of the article is speculation on loose rumors. There is no news here, and there are no solid leads. This is speculation only, and idle speculation at that (I'm assuming idle speculation is the worst).Quote from: The best deals for top trade targets (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-130204/nba-best-deals-top-trade-targets)Israel Gutierrez, ESPN.com: Garnett and Fab Melo to Chicago for Joakim Noah and Marco Belinelli. No trade at all is their best bet. The Celtics are unlikely to get anything close to equal value for Garnett, who's so vital to what Boston does and fits in so well with Rajon Rondo. And if there's any indication he won't play out the final two years of his deal, that's even less leverage for the Celtics. But if -- and this is a huge if -- they can get something significant for KG, I'd do this deal.
Andrew Han, ClipperBlog: Garnett, Avery Bradley to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe, DeAndre Jordan and Trey Thompkins. Garnett's no-trade clause limits the Celtics' options mostly to Los Angeles; he owns a home in Malibu and is godfather to Chauncey Billups' daughter. Boston gets back a coveted player/athlete and turns one of their off-ball guards into a point guard, suddenly a position of need. Add an intriguing prospect in Thompkins and an athletic center in Jordan and the Celtics get young in a hurry.
Curtis Harris, Hardwood Paroxysm: Kevin Garnett to Nuggets for JaVale McGee. Going to Denver keeps KG on a playoff team that needs his defensive prowess in the interior. Meanwhile, Boston would get McGee, who may still blossom into a competent defensive force in his own right. And if it doesn't work, Boston can be woeful, get lottery picks and trade McGee's expiring deal in three seasons for future building blocks.
Sean Highkin, Portland Roundball Soc.: Kevin Garnett to the Thunder for Kendrick Perkins, Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones III and Toronto's lottery-guaranteed first-rounder. Taking back Perkins' contract isn't ideal, but the Celtics load up on cheap, controllable, high-upside rookies and get a pick that could potentially be very high. From the Thunder's perspective, upgrading from Perk to KG would make it hard not to be considered title favorites.
Jack Winter, WarriorsWorld: Garnett and Fab Melo to the Spurs for Kawhi Leonard, Tiago Splitter and Boris Diaw. Leonard is one of the league's true blue-chip prospects, a great athlete with elite defensive potential, and Splitter has value, too. A small-picture view like this is against the Spurs' very fabric as an organization, but Garnett and Tim Duncan on the same frontline? If there was ever a reason to swing for the fences, this might be it.
I'd put in a kidney if the thunder sent back Perkins, Lamb, Jones, and the Toronto pick.
Most of the trades that have a chance of actually happening don't involve young blue chip players.
Right. We've only been to the finals, and to a couple of EC finals. Peanuts.Gives us a chance to be competitive each year. The trade with OKC gives us a round wad of nothing.Because 2 1/2 years of Kevin Garnett is better for the team than whatever that whatever that hodgepodge of injured and/or unproven players will be able to give you.Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.
Why? For what?
Give you what? A second-round exit?
We haven´t won a title in 5 years, in other words, half a decade. That ship has sailed a long time ago.
Gives us a chance to be competitive each year. The trade with OKC gives us a round wad of nothing.Because 2 1/2 years of Kevin Garnett is better for the team than whatever that whatever that hodgepodge of injured and/or unproven players will be able to give you.Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.
Why? For what?
Give you what? A second-round exit?
We haven´t won a title in 5 years, in other words, half a decade. That ship has sailed a long time ago.
Gives us a chance to be competitive each year.
No, it doesn't. The trade with OKC (which I am specifically discussing here) does not put you any closer to rebuilding that holding on to Garnett does.Gives us a chance to be competitive each year.
And makes the inevitable rebuilding process just a little bit harder for every year older KG gets, all for a team that was under .500 halfway through the season with both KG, Rondo and Sully healthy.
You´re all acting like Theo Huxtable, trying to argue your way out of the realities of life.
I'm with you..I don't get the point of holding onto KG and pp just because. You stay just good enough to not get in the lottery but too bad to win anything? The worst place you can be in the nba.
I'm with you..I don't get the point of holding onto KG and pp just because. You stay just good enough to not get in the lottery but too bad to win anything? The worst place you can be in the nba.
The problem is if you are locked into a core of players who have you cemented on the treadmill of mediocrity for several years. I'd argue that whether or not you hold onto Garnett and Pierce, the Celtics as currently structured are built to have this core intact through next season (or possibly one season after that). That's when the team starts to have cap space and expiring contracts that can be used in a rebuilding process. There is a natural built-in expiration date for this team. Whether this team can reload or whether it has to clear the decks for a more long-term rebuilding project depends on Ainge and what is available.
One thing that could change that is if Pierce and Garnett both retire, but I expect them to believe that this team has a shot at contention next season. Another thing that could change the plan is if Ainge can acquire a superstar worthy of a max-contract.
Right. We've only been to the finals, and to a couple of EC finals. Peanuts.
If you can please explain how trading Garnett for the calcified remains of the player that was once Kendrick Perkins and a pile of, well, garbage helps us in the long or short term, be my guest.
No, it doesn't. The trade with OKC (which I am specifically discussing here) does not put you any closer to rebuilding that holding on to Garnett does.Gives us a chance to be competitive each year.
And makes the inevitable rebuilding process just a little bit harder for every year older KG gets, all for a team that was under .500 halfway through the season with both KG, Rondo and Sully healthy.
I'm all for rebuilding. But if your idea of "inevitable rebuilding process" is Perkins (paid a ton of money for the same amount of years as Garnett), Jeremy Lamb (who hasn't even shown he's an NBA player), and PJIII (who was red-flagged for his knee) then I'm just going to laugh at you.
I'm with you..I don't get the point of holding onto KG and pp just because. You stay just good enough to not get in the lottery but too bad to win anything? The worst place you can be in the nba.
The problem is if you are locked into a core of players who have you cemented on the treadmill of mediocrity for several years. I'd argue that whether or not you hold onto Garnett and Pierce, the Celtics as currently structured are built to have this core intact through next season (or possibly one season after that). That's when the team starts to have cap space and expiring contracts that can be used in a rebuilding process. There is a natural built-in expiration date for this team. Whether this team can reload or whether it has to clear the decks for a more long-term rebuilding project depends on Ainge and what is available.
One thing that could change that is if Pierce and Garnett both retire, but I expect them to believe that this team has a shot at contention next season. Another thing that could change the plan is if Ainge can acquire a superstar worthy of a max-contract.
I actually agree with you about how this teams salary cap situation is but even afterwards everybody keeps saying go get a great free agent!
Who was the last very good player who signed in Boston?
Now, the premsise of the article is speculation on loose rumors. There is no news here, and there are no solid leads. This is speculation only, and idle speculation at that (I'm assuming idle speculation is the worst).
Andrew Han, ClipperBlog: Garnett, Avery Bradley to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe, DeAndre Jordan and Trey Thompkins. Garnett's no-trade clause limits the Celtics' options mostly to Los Angeles; he owns a home in Malibu and is godfather to Chauncey Billups' daughter. Boston gets back a coveted player/athlete and turns one of their off-ball guards into a point guard, suddenly a position of need. Add an intriguing prospect in Thompkins and an athletic center in Jordan and the Celtics get young in a hurry.
Sean Highkin, Portland Roundball Soc.: Kevin Garnett to the Thunder for Kendrick Perkins, Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones III and Toronto's lottery-guaranteed first-rounder. Taking back Perkins' contract isn't ideal, but the Celtics load up on cheap, controllable, high-upside rookies and get a pick that could potentially be very high. From the Thunder's perspective, upgrading from Perk to KG would make it hard not to be considered title favorites.
Jack Winter, WarriorsWorld: Garnett and Fab Melo to the Spurs for Kawhi Leonard, Tiago Splitter and Boris Diaw. Leonard is one of the league's true blue-chip prospects, a great athlete with elite defensive potential, and Splitter has value, too. A small-picture view like this is against the Spurs' very fabric as an organization, but Garnett and Tim Duncan on the same frontline? If there was ever a reason to swing for the fences, this might be it.
And I've gone over this before with you, but it doesn't seem to sink in. Whatever you may think of Perkins, Lamb and PJII, they're better than nothing. 3 years from now, a Celtic team with those 3 guys will be far more "competitive" than a team where KG has just retired and Boston has nothing more than some salary cap space.That's because you somehow mistakently believe that those guys have any potential as NBA players 3 years from now.
You´re all acting like Theo Huxtable, trying to argue your way out of the realities of life.
What was that about outlandish, absolute statements?
You´re all acting like Theo Huxtable, trying to argue your way out of the realities of life.
What was that about outlandish, absolute statements?
You tell me. What was that?
I don't understand, why would Chicago want anything to do with that deal? Are they so desperate for financial flexibility that they would consider this?Yeah the Chicago one struck me most of all as being wild.
Taj Gibson is real solid, but Noah brings more. I don't get that idea for Chicago.
Similarly, why would SA want to move Leonard, who is essentially their answer to Kevin Durant for the next decade? Splitter has proven to be a real commodity as well. Idle speculation indeed, my friend.
Not surprised by it though given the source, not a fan of his work.
Now, the premsise of the article is speculation on loose rumors. There is no news here, and there are no solid leads. This is speculation only, and idle speculation at that (I'm assuming idle speculation is the worst).with the exception of JaVale these are all too good to be true, which is why all except JaValle should be looked atQuote from: The best deals for top trade targets (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-130204/nba-best-deals-top-trade-targets)Israel Gutierrez, ESPN.com: Garnett and Fab Melo to Chicago for Joakim Noah and Marco Belinelli. No trade at all is their best bet. The Celtics are unlikely to get anything close to equal value for Garnett, who's so vital to what Boston does and fits in so well with Rajon Rondo. And if there's any indication he won't play out the final two years of his deal, that's even less leverage for the Celtics. But if -- and this is a huge if -- they can get something significant for KG, I'd do this deal.
Andrew Han, ClipperBlog: Garnett, Avery Bradley to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe, DeAndre Jordan and Trey Thompkins. Garnett's no-trade clause limits the Celtics' options mostly to Los Angeles; he owns a home in Malibu and is godfather to Chauncey Billups' daughter. Boston gets back a coveted player/athlete and turns one of their off-ball guards into a point guard, suddenly a position of need. Add an intriguing prospect in Thompkins and an athletic center in Jordan and the Celtics get young in a hurry.
Curtis Harris, Hardwood Paroxysm: Kevin Garnett to Nuggets for JaVale McGee. Going to Denver keeps KG on a playoff team that needs his defensive prowess in the interior. Meanwhile, Boston would get McGee, who may still blossom into a competent defensive force in his own right. And if it doesn't work, Boston can be woeful, get lottery picks and trade McGee's expiring deal in three seasons for future building blocks.
Sean Highkin, Portland Roundball Soc.: Kevin Garnett to the Thunder for Kendrick Perkins, Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones III and Toronto's lottery-guaranteed first-rounder. Taking back Perkins' contract isn't ideal, but the Celtics load up on cheap, controllable, high-upside rookies and get a pick that could potentially be very high. From the Thunder's perspective, upgrading from Perk to KG would make it hard not to be considered title favorites.
Jack Winter, WarriorsWorld: Garnett and Fab Melo to the Spurs for Kawhi Leonard, Tiago Splitter and Boris Diaw. Leonard is one of the league's true blue-chip prospects, a great athlete with elite defensive potential, and Splitter has value, too. A small-picture view like this is against the Spurs' very fabric as an organization, but Garnett and Tim Duncan on the same frontline? If there was ever a reason to swing for the fences, this might be it.
I'd put in a kidney if the thunder sent back Perkins, Lamb, Jones, and the Toronto pick.
And I've gone over this before with you, but it doesn't seem to sink in. Whatever you may think of Perkins, Lamb and PJII, they're better than nothing. 3 years from now, a Celtic team with those 3 guys will be far more "competitive" than a team where KG has just retired and Boston has nothing more than some salary cap space.That's because you somehow mistakently believe that those guys have any potential as NBA players 3 years from now.
As a matter of fact, I find all three will be out of the league by that time more likely than at least one of them being a reasonable NBA starter by the time when Garnett's contract expires.
Because 2 1/2 years of Kevin Garnett is better for the team than whatever that whatever that hodgepodge of injured and/or unproven players will be able to give you.Thanks, I'd rather keep Garnett.
Why? For what?
Give you what? A second-round exit?
you do not trade kevin garnett. period.This is on Yahoo today:
definitely not lebron, but reminds me a lot of Jrue holidayyou do not trade kevin garnett. period.This is on Yahoo today:
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/trade-season-round-featuring-kevin-garnett-dwight-howard-182216771--nba.html
Kelly Dwyer called Bledsoe "mini-Lebron" and wasn't kidding. He should stick to BDL columns, since he's obviously only good for comic relief.
Kevin Garnett reportedly will not waive his no-trade clause unless the Celtics have already traded Paul Pierce. KG is more than content to keep fighting for the Celtics, who have won four straight without Rajon Rondo. If he does agree to be dealt, he reportedly won't go anywhere but L.A., as he lives in Malibu. A rumor this weekend suggested the Clippers wanted to trade for him in a deal including Eric Bledsoe and Caron Butler, but Celts' GM Danny Ainge will listen to anything and there are no sourced reports to go on. File this in your rumor bin.
Related: Paul Pierce Source: Shaun Powell on Twitter
you do not trade kevin garnett. period.This is on Yahoo today:
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/trade-season-round-featuring-kevin-garnett-dwight-howard-182216771--nba.html
Kelly Dwyer called Bledsoe "mini-Lebron" and wasn't kidding. He should stick to BDL columns, since he's obviously only good for comic relief.
you do not trade kevin garnett. period.This is on Yahoo today:
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/trade-season-round-featuring-kevin-garnett-dwight-howard-182216771--nba.html
Kelly Dwyer called Bledsoe "mini-Lebron" and wasn't kidding. He should stick to BDL columns, since he's obviously only good for comic relief.
"Mini-Lebron" isn't something that was made up by Dwyer. It was actually made up by Jamal Crawford and even Lebron himself has used the nickname. Mostly, because it's true. The guys everything Lebron is athletically, in a much, much smaller package
The best trade?
Boston keeps: Kevin Garnett
Why are people so anxious for us to get young and suck? I am 41yrs old, I've been through the young and suck phase and I am in no hurry to go there again.
You're saying that Perkins won't be a reasonable NBA starter? He's currently a starter on the best team in the NBA. Perkins contract expires at the end of that 3 year period, so if he's not a "reasonable starter" 3 years from now, we can let him walk and still have the other 3 assets.And I've gone over this before with you, but it doesn't seem to sink in. Whatever you may think of Perkins, Lamb and PJII, they're better than nothing. 3 years from now, a Celtic team with those 3 guys will be far more "competitive" than a team where KG has just retired and Boston has nothing more than some salary cap space.That's because you somehow mistakently believe that those guys have any potential as NBA players 3 years from now.
As a matter of fact, I find all three will be out of the league by that time more likely than at least one of them being a reasonable NBA starter by the time when Garnett's contract expires.
Why are people so anxious for us to get young and suck? I am 41yrs old, I've been through the young and suck phase and I am in no hurry to go there again.
I remember McHale's last game and it was pretty awesome.QuoteWhy are people so anxious for us to get young and suck? I am 41yrs old, I've been through the young and suck phase and I am in no hurry to go there again.
Young and suck was bad but watching Bird, Parish and McHale and DJ get old was bad as well. I think watching McHale's final season was worse than the young guys playing.
I like how this team win's a few games after being terrible all season and now they have a "punchers chance" to beat miami, chicago, etc. They don't. They won't next year either. It's fine, keep them together. But stop pretending you're rooting for anything other than an average team and average results.
Why are people so anxious for us to get young and suck?
Because we'll have to get young and suck eventually.
Why are people so anxious for us to get young and suck?
They want to prove that even the worst NBA GMs are better than your typical "guy on internet".
I remember McHale's last game and it was pretty awesome.QuoteWhy are people so anxious for us to get young and suck? I am 41yrs old, I've been through the young and suck phase and I am in no hurry to go there again.
Young and suck was bad but watching Bird, Parish and McHale and DJ get old was bad as well. I think watching McHale's final season was worse than the young guys playing.
I remember McHale's last game and it was pretty awesome.QuoteWhy are people so anxious for us to get young and suck? I am 41yrs old, I've been through the young and suck phase and I am in no hurry to go there again.
Young and suck was bad but watching Bird, Parish and McHale and DJ get old was bad as well. I think watching McHale's final season was worse than the young guys playing.
Yeah, I enjoyed watching Bird, and especially McHale for whatever reason, in their twilight.
It was definitely more fun than having 95% of the fan base rooting for the team to lose, and almost hoping for injuries (or "injuries") to our stars.
ESPN: Trade possibilities for KG and Pierce
In the context of this recent tweet from long-time NBA writer Shaun Powell:
A recent ESPN 5-on-5 discussed some of the trade possibilities Boston could make in dealing Kevin Garnett or Paul Pierce.
These are just suggestions and only two have actually been brought up as rumor.
1. What's the best Kevin Garnett trade the Celtics can make?
Israel Gutierrez, ESPN.com: Garnett and Fab Melo to Chicago for Joakim Noah and Marco Belinelli. No trade at all is their best bet. The Celtics are unlikely to get anything close to equal value for Garnett, who's so vital to what Boston does and fits in so well with Rajon Rondo. And if there's any indication he won't play out the final two years of his deal, that's even less leverage for the Celtics. But if -- and this is a huge if -- they can get something significant for KG, I'd do this deal.
Andrew Han, ClipperBlog: Garnett, Avery Bradley to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe, DeAndre Jordan and Trey Thompkins. Garnett's no-trade clause limits the Celtics' options mostly to Los Angeles; he owns a home in Malibu and is godfather to Chauncey Billups' daughter. Boston gets back a coveted player/athlete and turns one of their off-ball guards into a point guard, suddenly a position of need. Add an intriguing prospect in Thompkins and an athletic center in Jordan and the Celtics get young in a hurry.
Curtis Harris, Hardwood Paroxysm: Garnett to the Nuggets for JaVale McGee. Going to Denver keeps KG on a playoff team that needs his defensive prowess in the interior. Meanwhile, Boston would get McGee, who may still blossom into a competent defensive force in his own right. And if it doesn't work, Boston can be woeful, get lottery picks and trade McGee's expiring deal in three seasons for future building blocks.
Sean Highkin, Portland Roundball Soc.: Garnett to the Thunder for Kendrick Perkins, Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones III and Toronto's lottery-guaranteed first-rounder. Taking back Perkins' contract isn't ideal, but the Celtics load up on cheap, controllable, high-upside rookies and get a pick that could potentially be very high. From the Thunder's perspective, upgrading from Perk to KG would make it hard not to be considered title favorites.
Jack Winter, WarriorsWorld: Garnett and Melo to the Spurs for Kawhi Leonard, Tiago Splitter and Boris Diaw. Leonard is one of the league's true blue-chip prospects, a great athlete with elite defensive potential. Splitter has value, too. A small-picture view like this is against the Spurs' very fabric as an organization, but Garnett and Tim Duncan on the same front line? If there was ever a reason to swing for the fences, this might be it.
Reaction:
The Joakim Noah trade is pretty laughable.
Of course the Clippers blog guy would want Avery Bradley with KG for Bledsoe and Jordan. For me, having Bradley is one of the major reasons to get Bledsoe, not to include him in the deal for Bledsoe.
I really like McGee’s potential, but he would be best served playing alongside KG and learning from him instead of joining another team with no veteran legit big men to learn from.
Trading KG for Perkins and the young assets in OKC is not horrible, but it would mean Danny Ainge was wrong to trade Perkins away and GMs don’t like to make those kind of concessions.
Leonard is a very good player, but adding him to the already clogged wingman spot just doesn’t make sense. And anyone who is a longtime KG fan will want to throw up in their mouth at the idea of KG and Duncan on the same team.
5. What's the best Paul Pierce trade the Celtics can make?
Gutierrez: Pierce to Lakers for Gasol. This would essentially be a basketball crime. The two great rival franchises trading former titlists for each other? And frankly, from the Lakers' end, it wouldn't exactly fit their need. But we're talking about the best thing for Boston, and having a big like Gasol to pair with Garnett, should he stay put, would make the Celtics suddenly intriguing, even without Rondo this season.
Han: Pierce to the Jazz for Al Jefferson and a first-round pick (lower of two available). Boston moves some long-term money and pairs Garnett with another legitimate low-post big man in Jefferson, the former Celtic who was once traded for Garnett. Not only do the Celtics plan for the future with a first-round pick, this trade also gives them a stylistic advantage in the smaller East.
Harris: Paul Pierce to Jazz for Paul Millsap and Marvin Williams. The Celtics get Pierce's temporary replacement in Williams and a stud power forward in Millsap. Pierce would give the Jazz a much-needed 3-point shooter while moving Millsap clears up their logjam at power forward.
Highkin: Paul Pierce to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe, Caron Butler and Lamar Odom. The Celtics get one of the most-sought-after backcourt prospects in the league in Bledsoe, and can either use him to make Rajon Rondo expendable or play him at shooting guard; a Rondo-Bledsoe-Bradley lineup would make for one of the toughest perimeter defense combos out there. The Clippers get out of Butler's contract and go all-in on a title run in the next two years.
Winter: Pierce and Jason Terry to the Warriors for Harrison Barnes, Jarrett Jack, Richard Jefferson and Festus Ezeli. Barnes has quietly had a good rookie season for the Warriors, already offering value as a "three-and-D" type while showing flashes of star power as an individual scorer. His ceiling is relatively akin to an in-prime Pierce, actually, and Boston rids itself of Terry's three-year deal in this scenario, too. Golden State is one of the league's biggest surprises, but to be anything more than that this season, it'll need to make a move. Acquiring Pierce, still an elite two-way player, could be just the one who makes the Warriors a true contender.
Reaction:
Pierce for Gasol. Boston and the Lakers trading marquee players. No.
Pierce for Jefferson has way too many storylines connected to it. Trading Jefferson for KG and then later getting Jefferson to play with KG by trading Pierce? It wouldn’t be a horrible basketball move and fans might even be somewhat acceptable to it by getting back Jefferson, but it just doesn’t feel right. Not enough separation.
Now trading Pierce for the other Jazz big on the outs wouldn’t be horrible, but Marvin Williams is just awful. They would have to include a better player like Mo Williams to make that deal at least serviceable.
Pierce for Bledsoe, Butler and Odom just seems like too much for the Clippers to give up. I’d entertain this proposal as Odom still does so many things on the court and can play so many positions and Butler has something left in the tank. Odom is on an expiring deal too, so it could be a way to have one last push until really entering rebuild mode.
Pierce and Terry for Barnes is the most compelling deal as Barnes should be a great player in the future. The idea of a core of Barnes, Bradley and Sullinger with another potentially great young big if Rondo is dealt is just too good to pass up. It also keeps the Celtics relevant with a decent PG in Jack and Richard Jefferson. Oh and the Celtics would deal away Terry’s contract which should help next year if Boston decides to hold onto Rondo.
Follow Eric
@ericblaisdell13
Why are people so anxious for us to get young and suck?
They want to prove that even the worst NBA GMs are better than your typical "guy on internet".
For me, it's because you eventually gotta do it. If you want to be truly special, you've got to make smart picks, get a little lucky, and make special trades. Our road back gets a lot easier with a top 5 pick, and if we're not in the hunt for a title, I don't see the point in being ordinary. Id rather be bad to get good.
Not that Im advocating trading pierce or Kg just to be worse, but if we had real potential building blocks coming back, Id be okay with it.
ESPN: Trade possibilities for KG and Pierce
In the context of this recent tweet from long-time NBA writer Shaun Powell:
A recent ESPN 5-on-5 discussed some of the trade possibilities Boston could make in dealing Kevin Garnett or Paul Pierce.
These are just suggestions and only two have actually been brought up as rumor.
1. What's the best Kevin Garnett trade the Celtics can make?
Israel Gutierrez, ESPN.com: Garnett and Fab Melo to Chicago for Joakim Noah and Marco Belinelli. No trade at all is their best bet. The Celtics are unlikely to get anything close to equal value for Garnett, who's so vital to what Boston does and fits in so well with Rajon Rondo. And if there's any indication he won't play out the final two years of his deal, that's even less leverage for the Celtics. But if -- and this is a huge if -- they can get something significant for KG, I'd do this deal.
Andrew Han, ClipperBlog: Garnett, Avery Bradley to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe, DeAndre Jordan and Trey Thompkins. Garnett's no-trade clause limits the Celtics' options mostly to Los Angeles; he owns a home in Malibu and is godfather to Chauncey Billups' daughter. Boston gets back a coveted player/athlete and turns one of their off-ball guards into a point guard, suddenly a position of need. Add an intriguing prospect in Thompkins and an athletic center in Jordan and the Celtics get young in a hurry.
Curtis Harris, Hardwood Paroxysm: Garnett to the Nuggets for JaVale McGee. Going to Denver keeps KG on a playoff team that needs his defensive prowess in the interior. Meanwhile, Boston would get McGee, who may still blossom into a competent defensive force in his own right. And if it doesn't work, Boston can be woeful, get lottery picks and trade McGee's expiring deal in three seasons for future building blocks.
Sean Highkin, Portland Roundball Soc.: Garnett to the Thunder for Kendrick Perkins, Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones III and Toronto's lottery-guaranteed first-rounder. Taking back Perkins' contract isn't ideal, but the Celtics load up on cheap, controllable, high-upside rookies and get a pick that could potentially be very high. From the Thunder's perspective, upgrading from Perk to KG would make it hard not to be considered title favorites.
Jack Winter, WarriorsWorld: Garnett and Melo to the Spurs for Kawhi Leonard, Tiago Splitter and Boris Diaw. Leonard is one of the league's true blue-chip prospects, a great athlete with elite defensive potential. Splitter has value, too. A small-picture view like this is against the Spurs' very fabric as an organization, but Garnett and Tim Duncan on the same front line? If there was ever a reason to swing for the fences, this might be it.
Reaction:
The Joakim Noah trade is pretty laughable.
Of course the Clippers blog guy would want Avery Bradley with KG for Bledsoe and Jordan. For me, having Bradley is one of the major reasons to get Bledsoe, not to include him in the deal for Bledsoe.
I really like McGee’s potential, but he would be best served playing alongside KG and learning from him instead of joining another team with no veteran legit big men to learn from.
Trading KG for Perkins and the young assets in OKC is not horrible, but it would mean Danny Ainge was wrong to trade Perkins away and GMs don’t like to make those kind of concessions.
Leonard is a very good player, but adding him to the already clogged wingman spot just doesn’t make sense. And anyone who is a longtime KG fan will want to throw up in their mouth at the idea of KG and Duncan on the same team.
5. What's the best Paul Pierce trade the Celtics can make?
Gutierrez: Pierce to Lakers for Gasol. This would essentially be a basketball crime. The two great rival franchises trading former titlists for each other? And frankly, from the Lakers' end, it wouldn't exactly fit their need. But we're talking about the best thing for Boston, and having a big like Gasol to pair with Garnett, should he stay put, would make the Celtics suddenly intriguing, even without Rondo this season.
Han: Pierce to the Jazz for Al Jefferson and a first-round pick (lower of two available). Boston moves some long-term money and pairs Garnett with another legitimate low-post big man in Jefferson, the former Celtic who was once traded for Garnett. Not only do the Celtics plan for the future with a first-round pick, this trade also gives them a stylistic advantage in the smaller East.
Harris: Paul Pierce to Jazz for Paul Millsap and Marvin Williams. The Celtics get Pierce's temporary replacement in Williams and a stud power forward in Millsap. Pierce would give the Jazz a much-needed 3-point shooter while moving Millsap clears up their logjam at power forward.
Highkin: Paul Pierce to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe, Caron Butler and Lamar Odom. The Celtics get one of the most-sought-after backcourt prospects in the league in Bledsoe, and can either use him to make Rajon Rondo expendable or play him at shooting guard; a Rondo-Bledsoe-Bradley lineup would make for one of the toughest perimeter defense combos out there. The Clippers get out of Butler's contract and go all-in on a title run in the next two years.
Winter: Pierce and Jason Terry to the Warriors for Harrison Barnes, Jarrett Jack, Richard Jefferson and Festus Ezeli. Barnes has quietly had a good rookie season for the Warriors, already offering value as a "three-and-D" type while showing flashes of star power as an individual scorer. His ceiling is relatively akin to an in-prime Pierce, actually, and Boston rids itself of Terry's three-year deal in this scenario, too. Golden State is one of the league's biggest surprises, but to be anything more than that this season, it'll need to make a move. Acquiring Pierce, still an elite two-way player, could be just the one who makes the Warriors a true contender.
Reaction:
Pierce for Gasol. Boston and the Lakers trading marquee players. No.
Pierce for Jefferson has way too many storylines connected to it. Trading Jefferson for KG and then later getting Jefferson to play with KG by trading Pierce? It wouldn’t be a horrible basketball move and fans might even be somewhat acceptable to it by getting back Jefferson, but it just doesn’t feel right. Not enough separation.
Now trading Pierce for the other Jazz big on the outs wouldn’t be horrible, but Marvin Williams is just awful. They would have to include a better player like Mo Williams to make that deal at least serviceable.
Pierce for Bledsoe, Butler and Odom just seems like too much for the Clippers to give up. I’d entertain this proposal as Odom still does so many things on the court and can play so many positions and Butler has something left in the tank. Odom is on an expiring deal too, so it could be a way to have one last push until really entering rebuild mode.
Pierce and Terry for Barnes is the most compelling deal as Barnes should be a great player in the future. The idea of a core of Barnes, Bradley and Sullinger with another potentially great young big if Rondo is dealt is just too good to pass up. It also keeps the Celtics relevant with a decent PG in Jack and Richard Jefferson. Oh and the Celtics would deal away Terry’s contract which should help next year if Boston decides to hold onto Rondo.
Follow Eric
@ericblaisdell13
I disagree that trading with OKC would be seen as confirming that trading Perkins was a "mistake," as Perkins is in no way the key of the deal. He's basically salary ballast with some sentimental value; the point is the young prospects and picks.
Because we'll have to get young and suck eventually.
I'm not convinced that the Celtics have to go through a "young and suck" phase between the current and the next championship windows.
Dallas Mavs were an average team!
I remember McHale's last game and it was pretty awesome.QuoteWhy are people so anxious for us to get young and suck? I am 41yrs old, I've been through the young and suck phase and I am in no hurry to go there again.
Young and suck was bad but watching Bird, Parish and McHale and DJ get old was bad as well. I think watching McHale's final season was worse than the young guys playing.
Yeah, I enjoyed watching Bird, and especially McHale for whatever reason, in their twilight.
It was definitely more fun than having 95% of the fan base rooting for the team to lose, and almost hoping for injuries (or "injuries") to our stars.
Is it weird that I remember that soul-crushing 06/07 season fondly now? Al Jefferson's #7 jersey is still on my wall, retired fondly because it was through grasping at the straws of that season and the ones before it are the seasons that turned me into a truly obsessive fan.
I wonder if that guy stole my idea ... the KG to OKC deal is EXACTLY what I proposed this weekend.
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=62450.0 (http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=62450.0)
I remember McHale's last game and it was pretty awesome.QuoteWhy are people so anxious for us to get young and suck? I am 41yrs old, I've been through the young and suck phase and I am in no hurry to go there again.
Young and suck was bad but watching Bird, Parish and McHale and DJ get old was bad as well. I think watching McHale's final season was worse than the young guys playing.
Yeah, I enjoyed watching Bird, and especially McHale for whatever reason, in their twilight.
It was definitely more fun than having 95% of the fan base rooting for the team to lose, and almost hoping for injuries (or "injuries") to our stars.
Is it weird that I remember that soul-crushing 06/07 season fondly now? Al Jefferson's #7 jersey is still on my wall, retired fondly because it was through grasping at the straws of that season and the ones before it are the seasons that turned me into a truly obsessive fan.
Same here. I still have nightmares of one game in 05/06 when Gerald Green fouled somebody heaving a halfcourt shot at the end of a half because he bit an upfake (at half court!) and tried to block his shot. Our record was probably like 20-35 at the time, but I was running around my apartment screaming in disbelief and wonder at why he would bite a half court up fake. This was when, despite all the hope I was clinging onto for Geralds "superstar potential", I started to come back to earth and question if Gerald would ever be a competent player. Oh yeah, and we lost the game by 2 points.
If we ever go through another true rebuilding phase, we need to start a thread dedicated to stories like these.
I never root to loose in the ML year. I can't do it. But I do think we are setting ourselves for some dark years to come if we do not act now. We are not winning it this year.
I never root to loose in the ML year. I can't do it. But I do think we are setting ourselves for some dark years to come if we do not act now. We are not winning it this year.
This.I never root to loose in the ML year. I can't do it. But I do think we are setting ourselves for some dark years to come if we do not act now. We are not winning it this year.
There are going to be dark years regardless of whether we blow up the team. I mean, who are we going to acquire in trade that prevents / seriously shortens our rebuilding?
My thought is, since that process is going to suck terribly, why not get a year or two more of enjoyment out of this team? Watching playoff basketball, and watching Hall of Famers as they wind down their careers, is a lot better of an experience than being in the lottery.
I wonder if that guy stole my idea ... the KG to OKC deal is EXACTLY what I proposed this weekend.
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=62450.0 (http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=62450.0)
I think a lot of the same trades are being proposed by multiple people because there aren't a ton of options for KG / Pierce trades.
I never root to loose in the ML year. I can't do it. But I do think we are setting ourselves for some dark years to come if we do not act now. We are not winning it this year.
There are going to be dark years regardless of whether we blow up the team. I mean, who are we going to acquire in trade that prevents / seriously shortens our rebuilding?
My thought is, since that process is going to suck terribly, why not get a year or two more of enjoyment out of this team? Watching playoff basketball, and watching Hall of Famers as they wind down their careers, is a lot better of an experience than being in the lottery.
I never root to loose in the ML year. I can't do it. But I do think we are setting ourselves for some dark years to come if we do not act now. We are not winning it this year.
There are going to be dark years regardless of whether we blow up the team. I mean, who are we going to acquire in trade that prevents / seriously shortens our rebuilding?
My thought is, since that process is going to suck terribly, why not get a year or two more of enjoyment out of this team? Watching playoff basketball, and watching Hall of Famers as they wind down their careers, is a lot better of an experience than being in the lottery.
Funny, I disagree. What I love most about basketball is building a team and hope for improvement. When a team has peaked and there's no longer any hope for a title and no longer any hope for individual improvement towards the next title, I get bored - even if they are led by 2 future hall of famers. Get a team with 5-6 young assets and every night we will see some kind of promise towards the next title, however small - at least we can dream. And, if they lose, there's always the hope of a good lotto pick. It's clear not everyone agrees with this sentiment, but it's where I'm coming from.
Lots of fans feel that way. To me, though, "hope for improvement" reminds me of these days:
(http://www.nedyken.com/greenhops.jpg)
Lots of fans feel that way. To me, though, "hope for improvement" reminds me of these days:
(http://www.nedyken.com/greenhops.jpg)
Ya, but just after those days were the young Al Jefferson, Rondo, Perk, Delonte and Tony Allen days. And, even while we got to enjoy those young talents, there was that exciting hope of landing Durant (or Oden, I know, I know) during that period. Call me crazy, but that period didn't bum me out at all.
Because we'll have to get young and suck eventually.
I'm not convinced that the Celtics have to go through a "young and suck" phase between the current and the next championship windows.
The only way I could see that being the case is if Rondo turns into a superstar (i.e. legitimate top 4-5 MVP candidate) when he gets back from his injury.
We aren't building a contender post-Pierce/KG without a superstar, and we aren't getting one in free agency. So it's Rondo, tank for the lottery, or acquire various young assets over the course of a few years and make some trades.
Personally, I view the latter of the three options as the most likely one. But it means we have to get young and suck for a few years (at least).
Because we'll have to get young and suck eventually.
I'm not convinced that the Celtics have to go through a "young and suck" phase between the current and the next championship windows.
The only way I could see that being the case is if Rondo turns into a superstar (i.e. legitimate top 4-5 MVP candidate) when he gets back from his injury.
We aren't building a contender post-Pierce/KG without a superstar, and we aren't getting one in free agency. So it's Rondo, tank for the lottery, or acquire various young assets over the course of a few years and make some trades.
Personally, I view the latter of the three options as the most likely one. But it means we have to get young and suck for a few years (at least).
I'm thinking it's going to be a combination of one and three.
Because we'll have to get young and suck eventually.
I'm not convinced that the Celtics have to go through a "young and suck" phase between the current and the next championship windows.
The only way I could see that being the case is if Rondo turns into a superstar (i.e. legitimate top 4-5 MVP candidate) when he gets back from his injury.
We aren't building a contender post-Pierce/KG without a superstar, and we aren't getting one in free agency. So it's Rondo, tank for the lottery, or acquire various young assets over the course of a few years and make some trades.
Personally, I view the latter of the three options as the most likely one. But it means we have to get young and suck for a few years (at least).
I'm thinking it's going to be a combination of one and three.
That's fine, but it still requires us to get bad enough to be a borderline lottery team for a few seasons.
Because we'll have to get young and suck eventually.
I'm not convinced that the Celtics have to go through a "young and suck" phase between the current and the next championship windows.
The only way I could see that being the case is if Rondo turns into a superstar (i.e. legitimate top 4-5 MVP candidate) when he gets back from his injury.
We aren't building a contender post-Pierce/KG without a superstar, and we aren't getting one in free agency. So it's Rondo, tank for the lottery, or acquire various young assets over the course of a few years and make some trades.
Personally, I view the latter of the three options as the most likely one. But it means we have to get young and suck for a few years (at least).
I'm thinking it's going to be a combination of one and three.
That's fine, but it still requires us to get bad enough to be a borderline lottery team for a few seasons.
Could you explain why that's the case?