Trade idea: BOS/POR/SAC

[CelticG1]

So Portland gives away the most talent, and takes back the worst contract.  Somehow I don't see them going for this.

Webster and Nocioni's contracts are very similar -- same length and they're only about 1.7mil different in the final year. Noce has been the better player to date. Not sure I see Portland of all teams getting hung up on the money if they improve.

Is it worth it to them to add a quality 4 in Baby? Do you think they improve in this trade?

No, I don't think they improve - they'd be significantly worse short and long term. They get worse financially (Nocioni may be a better player than Webster now, but Webster is 23 years old and making $14.3 millions in the next 3 years; Nocioni is 30 and making $21 millions in the next 3 seasons; and, in any case, to play the exclusively at the 3, I'd take Webster); they lose Outlaw's bird rights; they'd trade decimate their bench even more (who would play off the bench for them? Miller/Blake and Davis/Pryzbilla and the rookies?); they give away potential to receive back-ups.

If Portland wanted to trade Bayless+Outlaw+Webster they would get much more value than this.

Honestly? What type of package do you think they could get that would be better than ours? I think this trade makes sense for us and Portland. It's about addressing the needs of the team anyway not the talent. We have needs right now and Portland has needs. With this trade we both get players that would help us and fill a need without messing around with the core of our teams

[badax33]

The probelm with your idea is that it takes 2 or in this case 3 teams to tangle.  Portland is not doing this trade.  Sacto gets ABSOLUTELY NOTHING so they are doing this.  And althougH, I liked Bayless (in college he hasn't progressed much) and I like Outlaw. But Bayless isn't playing and hasn't shown much, Outlaw is probably out all year and is a free agent.  His injury makes him a risky signing.  Webster has been hurt for a couple of years and I think he just signed a big or decent size contract. So I can't see Danny doing this trade either.

If we decide to trade our expiring contracts I want something really good coming back, not someone else's problems and 1 old relic.  I'd take David West or Gerald Wallace but not this fodder!!!

[Atzar]

You seem convinced that Outlaw will be out for the remainder of his contract with Portland.  If that's the case, then why should we want him?  I don't want to give up players - even TA, JR, Scal, etc. - for a player I may not ever see in a Celtics uniform.

Just a thought.

There's a decent chance he'll be back for the playoffs. But the fact is that TA, JR and Scal are not really NBA players. If they didn't have guaranteed contracts there's an excellent chance each would be out of the league. I mean, would you rather have JR Giddens or Morris Almond? Would you rather have Stackhouse or Scal?

Regardless, this is a minor point in what is a pretty large deal. I'd rather consider the idea of both an NBA caliber PG and SF than get caught up on meaningless bodies.

Remember, you'd have Outlaw's Bird Rights and he therefore could be signed in the offseason without using any of the MLE. He's a talented player and could fit in well with Rondo and Perk as the Big 3 ages...

It’s far from a minor point - we're talking about probably the best player in the deal never putting on a uniform for us.  I don't buy the "he'll be back for the playoffs" thing - he won't have any time to gel with the team and the playoffs aren't the time for experiments.  If he doesn't get minutes in the regular season, he won't play in the playoffs. 

Unless I have some kind of guarantee that Outlaw would sign with us - admittedly feasible - then I wouldn't take the risk on him this year.

This is basically what the deal looks like:

Portland gives up scraps, an injured player, and Webster – currently their only natural backup SF.  They take back Nocioni and Glen Davis.  BBD is very useful for them – a good piece at a position of need.  They swap Martell for Andres.  On that deal, they lose a useful player with some room to improve – he’s only 23- and gain a player who is better now but won’t improve.  Also, Nocioni’s contract is horrid for the role of backup SF that he’d likely be playing for the Blazers.  In terms of talent, Portland likes this deal a lot; in financial terms, not so much. 

Sacramento gives up Andres for expiring contracts.  This saves them a lot of money in the long run.  They’re not going anywhere with or without Nocioni, so they probably like this deal. 

Boston gives up BBD and expiring contracts for scraps, an injured player, and Webster.  I don’t want Outlaw for reasons I’ve already mentioned.  Juwan gives us nothing we need, and Bayless wouldn’t see the court – Webster is therefore the only piece of real present value in this deal for us.  We need to get more in return for BBD and our expiring contracts than just Webster.  I like this deal for the next few seasons, especially if Outlaw does agree to resign with us – Outlaw is a good piece, and Webster and Bayless both have upside.  As championship contenders, though, I need more help now.  And that’s why, as Boston, I say ‘no’ to this deal.

TP for the effort – after I wrote this out, it looked a lot better than I thought it did at first glance.  Still, I don’t do this deal.

[Atzar]

The probelm with your idea is that it takes 2 or in this case 3 teams to tangle.  Portland is not doing this trade.  Sacto gets ABSOLUTELY NOTHING so they are doing this.  And althougH, I liked Bayless (in college he hasn't progressed much) and I like Outlaw. But Bayless isn't playing and hasn't shown much, Outlaw is probably out all year and is a free agent.  His injury makes him a risky signing.  Webster has been hurt for a couple of years and I think he just signed a big or decent size contract. So I can't see Danny doing this trade either.

If we decide to trade our expiring contracts I want something really good coming back, not someone else's problems and 1 old relic.  I'd take David West or Gerald Wallace but not this fodder!!!

Sacramento is the one team that I think loves this deal - they don't mind the loss of talent because they aren't going anywhere anyway, and they trade a bad contract for a bunch of expirings.  They love the flexibility this just gave them, especially with the free agent market that's coming up.

[PosImpos]

This might make sense if Portland weren't going to trade Andre Miller instead.

[ssspence]

The probelm with your idea is that it takes 2 or in this case 3 teams to tangle.  Portland is not doing this trade.  Sacto gets ABSOLUTELY NOTHING so they are doing this.  And althougH, I liked Bayless (in college he hasn't progressed much) and I like Outlaw. But Bayless isn't playing and hasn't shown much, Outlaw is probably out all year and is a free agent.  His injury makes him a risky signing.  Webster has been hurt for a couple of years and I think he just signed a big or decent size contract. So I can't see Danny doing this trade either.

If we decide to trade our expiring contracts I want something really good coming back, not someone else's problems and 1 old relic.  I'd take David West or Gerald Wallace but not this fodder!!!

The expression is "tango".... it takes two to "tango"...

welcome to the blog.

[ssspence]

This might make sense if Portland weren't going to trade Andre Miller instead.

For Portland, this trade is about their ability to win now. So they may not want to put their best PG in the deal.

[ssspence]

You seem convinced that Outlaw will be out for the remainder of his contract with Portland.  If that's the case, then why should we want him?  I don't want to give up players - even TA, JR, Scal, etc. - for a player I may not ever see in a Celtics uniform.

Just a thought.

There's a decent chance he'll be back for the playoffs. But the fact is that TA, JR and Scal are not really NBA players. If they didn't have guaranteed contracts there's an excellent chance each would be out of the league. I mean, would you rather have JR Giddens or Morris Almond? Would you rather have Stackhouse or Scal?

Regardless, this is a minor point in what is a pretty large deal. I'd rather consider the idea of both an NBA caliber PG and SF than get caught up on meaningless bodies.

Remember, you'd have Outlaw's Bird Rights and he therefore could be signed in the offseason without using any of the MLE. He's a talented player and could fit in well with Rondo and Perk as the Big 3 ages...

It’s far from a minor point - we're talking about probably the best player in the deal never putting on a uniform for us.  I don't buy the "he'll be back for the playoffs" thing - he won't have any time to gel with the team and the playoffs aren't the time for experiments.  If he doesn't get minutes in the regular season, he won't play in the playoffs. 

Unless I have some kind of guarantee that Outlaw would sign with us - admittedly feasible - then I wouldn't take the risk on him this year.

This is basically what the deal looks like:

Portland gives up scraps, an injured player, and Webster – currently their only natural backup SF.  They take back Nocioni and Glen Davis.  BBD is very useful for them – a good piece at a position of need.  They swap Martell for Andres.  On that deal, they lose a useful player with some room to improve – he’s only 23- and gain a player who is better now but won’t improve.  Also, Nocioni’s contract is horrid for the role of backup SF that he’d likely be playing for the Blazers.  In terms of talent, Portland likes this deal a lot; in financial terms, not so much. 

Sacramento gives up Andres for expiring contracts.  This saves them a lot of money in the long run.  They’re not going anywhere with or without Nocioni, so they probably like this deal. 

Boston gives up BBD and expiring contracts for scraps, an injured player, and Webster.  I don’t want Outlaw for reasons I’ve already mentioned.  Juwan gives us nothing we need, and Bayless wouldn’t see the court – Webster is therefore the only piece of real present value in this deal for us.  We need to get more in return for BBD and our expiring contracts than just Webster.  I like this deal for the next few seasons, especially if Outlaw does agree to resign with us – Outlaw is a good piece, and Webster and Bayless both have upside.  As championship contenders, though, I need more help now.  And that’s why, as Boston, I say ‘no’ to this deal.

TP for the effort – after I wrote this out, it looked a lot better than I thought it did at first glance.  Still, I don’t do this deal.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Look at it this way: Outlaw skills are incidental here -- if he gives us anything this year or in the future it's gravy. He's a financial throw-in in the deal.

The deal for the Cs is Baby for Bayless and Webster. Howard gives us a little insurance behind KG, Rasheed and Sheldon. This would be an absolute steal for the Cs (regardless of your personal view on Bayless, which is a little over the top -- he'd immediately supply us a guy who can get to the hole on the second unit, of which we currently have zero; he's also a pretty good defender).

[Atzar]

You seem convinced that Outlaw will be out for the remainder of his contract with Portland.  If that's the case, then why should we want him?  I don't want to give up players - even TA, JR, Scal, etc. - for a player I may not ever see in a Celtics uniform.

Just a thought.

There's a decent chance he'll be back for the playoffs. But the fact is that TA, JR and Scal are not really NBA players. If they didn't have guaranteed contracts there's an excellent chance each would be out of the league. I mean, would you rather have JR Giddens or Morris Almond? Would you rather have Stackhouse or Scal?

Regardless, this is a minor point in what is a pretty large deal. I'd rather consider the idea of both an NBA caliber PG and SF than get caught up on meaningless bodies.

Remember, you'd have Outlaw's Bird Rights and he therefore could be signed in the offseason without using any of the MLE. He's a talented player and could fit in well with Rondo and Perk as the Big 3 ages...

It’s far from a minor point - we're talking about probably the best player in the deal never putting on a uniform for us.  I don't buy the "he'll be back for the playoffs" thing - he won't have any time to gel with the team and the playoffs aren't the time for experiments.  If he doesn't get minutes in the regular season, he won't play in the playoffs. 

Unless I have some kind of guarantee that Outlaw would sign with us - admittedly feasible - then I wouldn't take the risk on him this year.

This is basically what the deal looks like:

Portland gives up scraps, an injured player, and Webster – currently their only natural backup SF.  They take back Nocioni and Glen Davis.  BBD is very useful for them – a good piece at a position of need.  They swap Martell for Andres.  On that deal, they lose a useful player with some room to improve – he’s only 23- and gain a player who is better now but won’t improve.  Also, Nocioni’s contract is horrid for the role of backup SF that he’d likely be playing for the Blazers.  In terms of talent, Portland likes this deal a lot; in financial terms, not so much. 

Sacramento gives up Andres for expiring contracts.  This saves them a lot of money in the long run.  They’re not going anywhere with or without Nocioni, so they probably like this deal. 

Boston gives up BBD and expiring contracts for scraps, an injured player, and Webster.  I don’t want Outlaw for reasons I’ve already mentioned.  Juwan gives us nothing we need, and Bayless wouldn’t see the court – Webster is therefore the only piece of real present value in this deal for us.  We need to get more in return for BBD and our expiring contracts than just Webster.  I like this deal for the next few seasons, especially if Outlaw does agree to resign with us – Outlaw is a good piece, and Webster and Bayless both have upside.  As championship contenders, though, I need more help now.  And that’s why, as Boston, I say ‘no’ to this deal.

TP for the effort – after I wrote this out, it looked a lot better than I thought it did at first glance.  Still, I don’t do this deal.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Look at it this way: Outlaw skills are incidental here -- if he gives us anything this year or in the future it's gravy. He's a financial throw-in in the deal.

The deal for the Cs is Baby for Bayless and Webster. Howard gives us a little insurance behind KG, Rasheed and Sheldon. This would be an absolute steal for the Cs (regardless of your personal view on Bayless, which is a little over the top -- he'd immediately supply us a guy who can get to the hole on the second unit, of which we currently have zero; he's also a pretty good defender).


I'm not sure who

So we give BBD and our expiring contracts for Webster and a player who likely wouldn't play any minutes for us.  And this is a steal?

As I just said... if we weren't a championship contender I'd like this trade.  We are though, so I need some more help now than an unused PG and a SF who hasn't even played well for them this year.

[PosImpos]

This might make sense if Portland weren't going to trade Andre Miller instead.

For Portland, this trade is about their ability to win now. So they may not want to put their best PG in the deal.

My point was instead of doing the trade you proposed in order to get talent back and free up their depth at PG (by trading Bayless), they are most likely going to trade Andre Miller.  They'll probably also be able to get more in terms of talent back in any deal involving Miller.

Miller hasn't really worked out on their team so far this year and has expressed discontent (from what I gather), so it's much more likely that the Blazers will trade Miller.  Since we're probably not looking to get a hold of Miller, I don't see us trading with Portland.

[ssspence]

This might make sense if Portland weren't going to trade Andre Miller instead.

For Portland, this trade is about their ability to win now. So they may not want to put their best PG in the deal.

My point was instead of doing the trade you proposed in order to get talent back and free up their depth at PG (by trading Bayless), they are most likely going to trade Andre Miller.  They'll probably also be able to get more in terms of talent back in any deal involving Miller.

Miller hasn't really worked out on their team so far this year and has expressed discontent (from what I gather), so it's much more likely that the Blazers will trade Miller.  Since we're probably not looking to get a hold of Miller, I don't see us trading with Portland.

Fair point. Interest in Miller should be there, and his contract is not too bad. But he's not a great fit in many places. A quick look around both conferences doesn't reveal many teams who'd be like to take him on. I don't see Portland helping the Lakers by trading him there. It could take time, and Portland has some pretty immediate needs.

[ssspence]

You seem convinced that Outlaw will be out for the remainder of his contract with Portland.  If that's the case, then why should we want him?  I don't want to give up players - even TA, JR, Scal, etc. - for a player I may not ever see in a Celtics uniform.

Just a thought.

There's a decent chance he'll be back for the playoffs. But the fact is that TA, JR and Scal are not really NBA players. If they didn't have guaranteed contracts there's an excellent chance each would be out of the league. I mean, would you rather have JR Giddens or Morris Almond? Would you rather have Stackhouse or Scal?

Regardless, this is a minor point in what is a pretty large deal. I'd rather consider the idea of both an NBA caliber PG and SF than get caught up on meaningless bodies.

Remember, you'd have Outlaw's Bird Rights and he therefore could be signed in the offseason without using any of the MLE. He's a talented player and could fit in well with Rondo and Perk as the Big 3 ages...

It’s far from a minor point - we're talking about probably the best player in the deal never putting on a uniform for us.  I don't buy the "he'll be back for the playoffs" thing - he won't have any time to gel with the team and the playoffs aren't the time for experiments.  If he doesn't get minutes in the regular season, he won't play in the playoffs. 

Unless I have some kind of guarantee that Outlaw would sign with us - admittedly feasible - then I wouldn't take the risk on him this year.

This is basically what the deal looks like:

Portland gives up scraps, an injured player, and Webster – currently their only natural backup SF.  They take back Nocioni and Glen Davis.  BBD is very useful for them – a good piece at a position of need.  They swap Martell for Andres.  On that deal, they lose a useful player with some room to improve – he’s only 23- and gain a player who is better now but won’t improve.  Also, Nocioni’s contract is horrid for the role of backup SF that he’d likely be playing for the Blazers.  In terms of talent, Portland likes this deal a lot; in financial terms, not so much. 

Sacramento gives up Andres for expiring contracts.  This saves them a lot of money in the long run.  They’re not going anywhere with or without Nocioni, so they probably like this deal. 

Boston gives up BBD and expiring contracts for scraps, an injured player, and Webster.  I don’t want Outlaw for reasons I’ve already mentioned.  Juwan gives us nothing we need, and Bayless wouldn’t see the court – Webster is therefore the only piece of real present value in this deal for us.  We need to get more in return for BBD and our expiring contracts than just Webster.  I like this deal for the next few seasons, especially if Outlaw does agree to resign with us – Outlaw is a good piece, and Webster and Bayless both have upside.  As championship contenders, though, I need more help now.  And that’s why, as Boston, I say ‘no’ to this deal.

TP for the effort – after I wrote this out, it looked a lot better than I thought it did at first glance.  Still, I don’t do this deal.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Look at it this way: Outlaw skills are incidental here -- if he gives us anything this year or in the future it's gravy. He's a financial throw-in in the deal.

The deal for the Cs is Baby for Bayless and Webster. Howard gives us a little insurance behind KG, Rasheed and Sheldon. This would be an absolute steal for the Cs (regardless of your personal view on Bayless, which is a little over the top -- he'd immediately supply us a guy who can get to the hole on the second unit, of which we currently have zero; he's also a pretty good defender).


I'm not sure who

So we give BBD and our expiring contracts for Webster and a player who likely wouldn't play any minutes for us.  And this is a steal?

As I just said... if we weren't a championship contender I'd like this trade.  We are though, so I need some more help now than an unused PG and a SF who hasn't even played well for them this year.

If you don't think Bayless is capable of playing 15 minutes a game, you're not going to like this trade. All I can suggest is you reconsider his skills -- handle, turnovers (lack there of), speed, defense, ability to improve in a backcourt not completely cluster****ed by its team's front office, etc.

[slamtheking]

No way Portland does this....too little back....too much going out

I don't follow.

They trade one rotation player (webster), one occasional player where they're deep (bayless), a guy who is out indefinitely, likely until he's a Free Agent this summer (outlaw) and a relic (howard) for two guys who would play 25 minutes each at positions of serious need considering outlaw, batum and oden all being out of the line-up.

They start Miller, Roy, Nocioni, Baby and Aldridge bringing Blake, Rudy and Pryz off the bench. They're immediately improved and a major player in the west.

Um, hate to come across like a smartass  but you just made the case for the C's NOT to make this deal.  All the points you made about why they give up those players was the same thing that ran through my mind why this wasn't a good deal when I read your proposal.

Philly alternative would be the same response.  C's get a redundant relic in Howard, a no-pass/no-ballhandling guard with Bayless, a IR-player with Outlaw and a marginal forward with Webster.  No thanks.

Incorrect, my man. These are reasons why Portland does it. Where do they need help? At the starting 3 and 4. They get it. Where do the Cs need help? At the back-up 1 and back-up wing. They get it. Not every trade involves someone getting ripped off. It's about team needs, and this certainly deepens our bench, and you'd have a hard time arguing they lose on talent.

The Cs trade a back-up PF for a back-up 1 and a wing player who can come off the bench and do two things at the same time: shoot and play defense. These are items the Cs DO NOT have.

Bayless can't dribble? Ever seen him play?

incorrect? don't think so.

From a C's perspective, they get nothing.  BBD is better than Howard at this stage of their careers.  Outlaw is injured and likely out for the year.  Bayless does not provide the backup point they need nor is he big enough to play backup SF.  Webster, marginal player that's not worth this deal by himself.  If Outlaw were healthy, this would be a deal that might be worth making.

Portland certainly does ok when picking up BBD and Nocioni. 

The Cs get nothing? Come on, dude.

When you've got a (moderately realistic) trade idea that nets us better players with the not-so-fine bunch I'm offering up -- ping me.

OK, they didn't get "nothing", they got 4 different players than the ones they currently have.  The point is that the 4 bodies they brought in do not address the team's primary deficiencies which are a better backup ballhandler than House and a wing player that can replace Daniels for the short term and going forward another couple of seasons.  This trade doesn't accomplish that.

Am I against making a deal that improves the team?  Absolutely not.  Am I against moving the players you've used?  not at all.  Do I have a better deal?  can't say that I have one at the moment but just because I don't have something better does not make this deal one worth making.  but to recap what I said previously---if Outlaw were healthy and the C's could get him under contract for 2-3 years, the deal may be worth considering provided thay can also fill the backup PG issue at some point. 

If Pruitt and Hudson aren't good enough for Doc then I don't see Bayless as good enough for Doc either.  The kid isn't that impressive based on what little I've seen. 

[ssspence]

No way Portland does this....too little back....too much going out

I don't follow.

They trade one rotation player (webster), one occasional player where they're deep (bayless), a guy who is out indefinitely, likely until he's a Free Agent this summer (outlaw) and a relic (howard) for two guys who would play 25 minutes each at positions of serious need considering outlaw, batum and oden all being out of the line-up.

They start Miller, Roy, Nocioni, Baby and Aldridge bringing Blake, Rudy and Pryz off the bench. They're immediately improved and a major player in the west.

Um, hate to come across like a smartass  but you just made the case for the C's NOT to make this deal.  All the points you made about why they give up those players was the same thing that ran through my mind why this wasn't a good deal when I read your proposal.

Philly alternative would be the same response.  C's get a redundant relic in Howard, a no-pass/no-ballhandling guard with Bayless, a IR-player with Outlaw and a marginal forward with Webster.  No thanks.

Incorrect, my man. These are reasons why Portland does it. Where do they need help? At the starting 3 and 4. They get it. Where do the Cs need help? At the back-up 1 and back-up wing. They get it. Not every trade involves someone getting ripped off. It's about team needs, and this certainly deepens our bench, and you'd have a hard time arguing they lose on talent.

The Cs trade a back-up PF for a back-up 1 and a wing player who can come off the bench and do two things at the same time: shoot and play defense. These are items the Cs DO NOT have.

Bayless can't dribble? Ever seen him play?

incorrect? don't think so.

From a C's perspective, they get nothing.  BBD is better than Howard at this stage of their careers.  Outlaw is injured and likely out for the year.  Bayless does not provide the backup point they need nor is he big enough to play backup SF.  Webster, marginal player that's not worth this deal by himself.  If Outlaw were healthy, this would be a deal that might be worth making.

Portland certainly does ok when picking up BBD and Nocioni. 

The Cs get nothing? Come on, dude.

When you've got a (moderately realistic) trade idea that nets us better players with the not-so-fine bunch I'm offering up -- ping me.

OK, they didn't get "nothing", they got 4 different players than the ones they currently have.  The point is that the 4 bodies they brought in do not address the team's primary deficiencies which are a better backup ballhandler than House and a wing player that can replace Daniels for the short term and going forward another couple of seasons.  This trade doesn't accomplish that.

Am I against making a deal that improves the team?  Absolutely not.  Am I against moving the players you've used?  not at all.  Do I have a better deal?  can't say that I have one at the moment but just because I don't have something better does not make this deal one worth making.  but to recap what I said previously---if Outlaw were healthy and the C's could get him under contract for 2-3 years, the deal may be worth considering provided thay can also fill the backup PG issue at some point. 

If Pruitt and Hudson aren't good enough for Doc then I don't see Bayless as good enough for Doc either.  The kid isn't that impressive based on what little I've seen. 

Considering you're comparing Bayless to d-league talent, it's clear you really don't know his game.

Bayless is a far superior ballhandler and defender to House (he doesn't replace him -- Eddie plays off the ball again where he belongs). Ask yourself this --- when was the last time you saw House get a lay-up? He's not a PG, he's a short minutes bench shooter. And Webster is a legit NBA small forward who can defend and shoot. His skills are not currently duplicated by anyone on the Cs bench, including Daniels (very different players, and ones who could play off of one another).

I'm not sure which trade your reading, but if you don't think this deal improves our 2nd unit PG and SF depth, then i sugguest you a) watch a Blazers game, b) reassess your views Tony Allen and Brian Scalabrine, or c) both. 

[moiso]

So Portland gives away 3 nice prospects for a pile of poop?