Ainge says Red Kept the Big Three too Long

[Michael Anthony]

So lets assume he will not. After this season, and hopefully after more glory and immortality, lets say Danny decides to break up his aging stars. Here is my take:

BOS Sends: Garnett, R. Allen, T. Allen, Scalabrine
BOS Gets: Millsap, Kirilenko, Koufos, Roy, Lafrentz, Picks

Utah Sends: Millsap, Kirilenko, Koufos
Utah Gets: R. Allen, T. Allen, Scalabrine

POR Sends: Aldridge, Outlaw, Roy, Lafrentz, Picks
POR Gets: Garnett, Deng

CHI Sends: Deng
CHI Gets: Aldridge, Outlaw

Couple of notes: Millsap is a sign and trade for around $9m per, Lafrentz is a sign and trade for the salary cap difference, Deng's BYC falls off after this season, Garnett's salary resets to $16m next season.

Rondo
Roy
Pierce
Millsap
Perkins

Pruitt
Kirilenko
Koufos

Giddens
Walker
Pick
O'Bryant
Lafrentz

[Roy Hobbs]

Why would Portland trade Roy and Aldridge for a couple of years of KG, especially when it leaves them with little talent to surround him with?  Deng + KG isn't going to come close to a championship.

Also, Kirilenko still has a bad contract, and has cracked under pressure in the past.  That particular part of the trade, I'd pass on.

I think Ainge's "trade the Big Three" philosophy is flawed.  It's unlikely that trading any of the Big Three would have increased the Celts chances at a championship, even if it would have delayed the rebuilding process for awhile.  The team did the right thing by keeping its core together as long as possible; they pretty much stayed in legit title contention until Larry retired, which is as good as they could have done had they traded one of them.

Of course, it's interesting to see how this philosophy is playing out with this team.  The team passed on Posey, because of how it might have impacted financial flexibility in four years.  The team signed POB and kept two rookies on the roster, despite them not making contributions to this year's team. 

The question is, does it make sense to worry about four years from now, or should you maximize your opportunity to win in the future?  I'm of the latter mindset:  since we have three elite players who are approaching the end of their primes, you need to do everything in your power to win now.  You don't worry about down the road, and you don't worry about trading them away.

[OhioGreen]

Would be absolutely shocked if in three years Garnett and Ray are still here! DA really bucked the trend in building teams with his trades, but nowadays without a couple of great players from the draft it is really difficult to do!
Keeping HOF player past their prime just doesn't make sense anymore, and probably didn't back with the original big three----though LBias definitely accelerated the downward spiral!
Get some young up and coming players or #1 picks, and maybe Danny can pull off another coup in a couple of years!

[dark_lord]

So lets assume he will not. After this season, and hopefully after more glory and immortality, lets say Danny decides to break up his aging stars. Here is my take:

BOS Sends: Garnett, R. Allen, T. Allen, Scalabrine
BOS Gets: Millsap, Kirilenko, Koufos, Roy, Lafrentz, Picks

Utah Sends: Millsap, Kirilenko, Koufos
Utah Gets: R. Allen, T. Allen, Scalabrine

POR Sends: Aldridge, Outlaw, Roy, Lafrentz, Picks
POR Gets: Garnett, Deng

CHI Sends: Deng
CHI Gets: Aldridge, Outlaw

Couple of notes: Millsap is a sign and trade for around $9m per, Lafrentz is a sign and trade for the salary cap difference, Deng's BYC falls off after this season, Garnett's salary resets to $16m next season.

Rondo
Roy
Pierce
Millsap
Perkins

Pruitt
Kirilenko
Koufos

Giddens
Walker
Pick
O'Bryant
Lafrentz

why would portland make this deal?  they would never trade roy and aldridge for for deng and an aging kg.

why would utah do this deal? the way millsap is playing, i dont think they would trade him away for an aging ray, an injury prone-turnover-basketball iq challenged-swingman, and scal.

i understand ur trying to improve the celts with ur trade ideas, but they shouldnt be made while wearing these:

[Andy Jick]

if len bias and reggie lewis had lived, red probably would have never uttered those words...

[Chief]

if len bias and reggie lewis had lived, red probably would have never uttered those words...

Whether they lived or not, it was still stupid. I'm a supporter of trading Ray, Pierce, and KG at some point, if it keeps this team winning titles.

[dark_lord]

i think ainge has a good point, but hindsight is 20/20.  i think teams were a lot more loyal to its players, and vice versa, back then.  nowadays, superstar players rarely stick with one team their entire career. (and b4 anyone says anything, i realize chief played for other teams)

[amenhotep04]

i think ainge has a good point, but hindsight is 20/20.  i think teams were a lot more loyal to its players, and vice versa, back then.  nowadays, superstar players rarely stick with one team their entire career. (and b4 anyone says anything, i realize chief played for other teams)

No, not true.  It was pretty common knowledge then that Bias's death kept everything in tact for the Celtics.  Bird was going to move to the four, Bias would play the three, and McHale was going to get traded.  Bias was more or less a taller version of MJ. The Celtics would have been great for many more years.

At that point, it is impossible to know who we would have drafted because trading McHale would have got multiple picks for the Celtics.  Since there was no salary cap at that time, there would have been no need to get salary back for him.

[BballTim]

Rondo
Roy
Pierce
Millsap
Perkins

Pruitt
Kirilenko
Koufos

Giddens
Walker
Pick
O'Bryant
Lafrentz

  This is a good team that will not win any titles.

[dark_lord]

i think ainge has a good point, but hindsight is 20/20.  i think teams were a lot more loyal to its players, and vice versa, back then.  nowadays, superstar players rarely stick with one team their entire career. (and b4 anyone says anything, i realize chief played for other teams)

No, not true.  It was pretty common knowledge then that Bias's death kept everything in tact for the Celtics.  Bird was going to move to the four, Bias would play the three, and McHale was going to get traded.  Bias was more or less a taller version of MJ. The Celtics would have been great for many more years.

At that point, it is impossible to know who we would have drafted because trading McHale would have got multiple picks for the Celtics.  Since there was no salary cap at that time, there would have been no need to get salary back for him.

i think u meant to quote someone else, i made no mention of bias at all.  

my post was pretty clear (i thought) in stating that teams back then tended to be more loyal to its players, and vice versa, and it was more common for superstar players to play with one organization during their career.  that was the only point i was trying to make, which was more of an observation.

personally, i would have looked at trading one or two of the big 3 after the 1988 season.  however, it is unclear what offers were on the table and if they would have helped us.  red may have looked around to make a deal but didnt receive an offer worth the trading for.

[Brendan]

I think the loss of Posey is over rated, he got most of his minutes at PF (with Perk or KG at C I'd guess), where its more productive to play Powe anyways. I really think after the starting 5, Doc doesn't use his bench well, not that the bench doesn't have valuable players. Signing MLE guys can be like chasing a market down in real estate.

IMO he should be using Garnett more at C (he played almost twice as much at C last year and Powe at PF / Garnett at C has been an extremely productive pairing.) He's also got a varied set of wings in Scal, TAllen, and House - but has used the bench as a complete second unit.

And then there is Eddie House, who last year was a shooting PG, who played with three or four starters, and let the three HOF players run the offense. But this year was often out there with BBD, Powe, and Tony Allen for extended minutes.

Anyways - the real problem here is that Ainge didn't get a big man who can play Center, but I don't see how keeping his draft picks or resigning Allen and House, or even POB is tied to that. He can always cut Sam I Am or POB, or probably dump one of the rookies if Alonzo wants to come here.

As for the original trade its a ridiculous attempt. Roy is POR best chance to win a title and having a couple nice big men will be important. The only way they get into those guys is if they get a real elite guy back, which KG is not anymore (at least statistically.)

[Brickowski]

I agree that Red kept the big 3 too long. Bird was probably untradeable at that point, since he had that huge salary and teams knew about his back problems.  McHale and Parish could have been moved, however.

With the current team, IMHO Garnett is here for life.  7 footers can be productive for quite a long time, as players like Parish, Mutumbo and Kevin Willis have shown.

I expect Ray Allen to be traded next year at the deadline.  The real test of Ainge's resolve to rebuild will be Pierce.  Can he bear to part with such a marketing icon via trade?  

[Roy Hobbs]

I expect Ray Allen to be traded next year at the deadline.  The real test of Ainge's resolve to rebuild will be Pierce.  Can he bear to part with such a marketing icon via trade?  

Danny won't trade Pierce unless he requests / demands to leave town.  At this point, I don't think Wyc would let him.

[moiso]

Wow, this trade proposal is a lot to digest.  I have a feeling Paul and KG are going to be here for a few more years, and that Ray will be traded for a quality younger player by the time his contract is up.

[BballTim]

I think Ainge's "trade the Big Three" philosophy is flawed.  It's unlikely that trading any of the Big Three would have increased the Celts chances at a championship, even if it would have delayed the rebuilding process for awhile.  The team did the right thing by keeping its core together as long as possible; they pretty much stayed in legit title contention until Larry retired, which is as good as they could have done had they traded one of them.

  I agree with this. With the players we brought in we'd turn into the old Milwaukee Bucks.

Of course, it's interesting to see how this philosophy is playing out with this team.  The team passed on Posey, because of how it might have impacted financial flexibility in four years.  The team signed POB and kept two rookies on the roster, despite them not making contributions to this year's team. 

  I don't mind having the two rookies. Last year people complained about having Pruitt on the roster and that looks like it was a worthwhile move. And people are just speculating about the exact reason that Posey wasn't signed, without having any real ideas about what other moves he's going to make over the next 2-3 years. Some people here (not necessarily you) are obsessed with the "win today at any cost" philosophy. Last year we were crazy to have Pruitt on the roster and we were stupid to trade for KG and Ray if we were going to start inexperienced players like Rondo and Perk.This year it's "we should have signed Posey to help us win this year no matter how much he wanted and for how long".