Do we include Wallace in any Ray Allen trade?

[slam]

In my mind, all trades including Ray Allen, should also include Rasheed Wallace.  The man is too lazy, and I truly believe the negatives outweigh the positives. 

I do see positives.  I love that he can pull his defender out to the 3 point line, and I love that doing so opens up the paint.  He’s a big, long body, and a deterrent for anyone slashing to the hoop.

But the list of negatives is long.  He is lazy.  He doesn’t have good lateral movement to stay with his man.  He picks up technicals at an unacceptable rate, some of which really hurt our team.  He shoots far too many 3’s when his percentage is far below average.  He is unaware that he helps us the most when he’s in the low post, but again, back to where I started; he seems too lazy to get down there and work.

What do we need from our third big guy?  On this team, if you’re getting superior defense, rebounding, and hustle, you should be more than happy.  That’s what this team is about.  We have plenty offensive options at other spots.

This isn’t a trade proposal thread.  I’ve already done a couple of those (including one that I’ll mention below).  This is just about whether you think we’re better off moving Wallace if we do move Allen.  Having said that, I finally accept that a trade with Philly is our best option.  Ray Allen and Rasheed Wallace for Iguodala and Dalembert, or Iguodala and Brand.  Take your pick.  Either way, we’re better off than we were with Sheed on the team.

Thoughts?  Do we move Wallace if we move Allen?

[mgent]

Please.

[Evantime34]

Would I like to include Wallace? yes.
Would another team be willing to take on his salary? probably not.

[wdleehi]

Sure, if you think putting an MLE contract into such a trade is worth getting back less talent in a Ray trade.



No, Ray should only have draft picks, last year contracts and young bench players other teams like attached.  

[BballTim]

  All the Sheed hate is way overblown. Is he playing great? No. Should we ever consider taking on a contract like Brand's to get rid of him? No a chance in the world. It would make more sense to cut Sheed and eat the rest of his deal.

[wdleehi]

  All the Sheed hate is way overblown. Is he playing great? No. Should we ever consider taking on a contract like Brand's to get rid of him? No a chance in the world. It would make more sense to cut Sheed and eat the rest of his deal.

Agree.



Plus, let's wait till we get to the playoffs.  You know, the point in time when they got him to play. 

[Kwhit10]

I can't imagine all the bashing and mouthing that would come from Sheed if we traded him.

[droopdog7]

Would I like to include Wallace? yes.
Would another team be willing to take on his salary? probably not.

Yeah, you only try to include Rasheed if you want to downgrade the overall package.

This is truly one of my pet peeves about fans.  You almost always hear the phrase, "he sucks" followed "trade him".  That is about as wrong as it gets.  First, if you want to trade a guys, you talk him up, not down.  What makes anyone think that another team will give you something of value for a player if you think they are garbage?  Whenever you trade from that position, you will almost always lose.

No, if you want to trade someone, you want to do it as the player gets better.  An example is someone like TA, who is on a high right now.  Maybe, just maybe, another team looks at him as an asset and not just an expiring contract.  I doubt it, but nonetheless, it is the best way to think about maximizing trade value.  You trade when a player is doing well (assuming it would imrpove the team), not when a player uis sucking.

[ssspence]

teams would trade for ray for financial flexibility first and foremost.

so unless you want to take back someone who is not as good and makes more money over the same or more years, no.

[Tai]

I'd rather see a topic that suggests the whole bench (except Daniels) is traded. At least it implies that people are spreading the blame for this team around. This is all Sheed's fault? Really?

Don't make me laugh.

[slam]

Would I like to include Wallace? yes.
Would another team be willing to take on his salary? probably not.

Yeah, you only try to include Rasheed if you want to downgrade the overall package.

This is truly one of my pet peeves about fans.  You almost always hear the phrase, "he sucks" followed "trade him".  That is about as wrong as it gets.  First, if you want to trade a guys, you talk him up, not down.  What makes anyone think that another team will give you something of value for a player if you think they are garbage?  Whenever you trade from that position, you will almost always lose.

I'm 100% sure that if the fans say "he sucks", it has no bearing on whether another team will take him.  If Danny said it, sure, but he would never say that, so I really don't understand what you're saying.

[droopdog7]

Would I like to include Wallace? yes.
Would another team be willing to take on his salary? probably not.

Yeah, you only try to include Rasheed if you want to downgrade the overall package.

This is truly one of my pet peeves about fans.  You almost always hear the phrase, "he sucks" followed "trade him".  That is about as wrong as it gets.  First, if you want to trade a guys, you talk him up, not down.  What makes anyone think that another team will give you something of value for a player if you think they are garbage?  Whenever you trade from that position, you will almost always lose.

I'm 100% sure that if the fans say "he sucks", it has no bearing on whether another team will take him.  If Danny said it, sure, but he would never say that, so I really don't understand what you're saying.

What I am saying is that the majority fans, who criticize GM's, would be really stupid GM's themselves.  Most sensible fans understand this but the very fans that like to play GM do not.  And it annoys me.

[Fan from VT]

More than Sheed's play, which is exactly what should have been reasonably expected, the way Doc rotates Sheed and Perk is killing this team right now. Perk was gangbusters in the playoffs last year and early on; Doc has succeeded in absolutely destroying his rhythm and esteem with the way he, in typical Doc fashion, has to placate the veterans on the team over doing what's best to maximize the chances of winning. Doc will always take the Vet's side; this is fine when that's what's best for the team but not with the current talent distribution on the Celtics.

[arctic 3.0]

In my mind, all trades including Ray Allen, should also include Rasheed Wallace.  The man is too lazy, and I truly believe the negatives outweigh the positives. 

I do see positives.  I love that he can pull his defender out to the 3 point line, and I love that doing so opens up the paint.  He’s a big, long body, and a deterrent for anyone slashing to the hoop.

But the list of negatives is long.  He is lazy.  He doesn’t have good lateral movement to stay with his man.  He picks up technicals at an unacceptable rate, some of which really hurt our team.  He shoots far too many 3’s when his percentage is far below average.  He is unaware that he helps us the most when he’s in the low post, but again, back to where I started; he seems too lazy to get down there and work.

What do we need from our third big guy?  On this team, if you’re getting superior defense, rebounding, and hustle, you should be more than happy.  That’s what this team is about.  We have plenty offensive options at other spots.

This isn’t a trade proposal thread.  I’ve already done a couple of those (including one that I’ll mention below).  This is just about whether you think we’re better off moving Wallace if we do move Allen.  Having said that, I finally accept that a trade with Philly is our best option.  Ray Allen and Rasheed Wallace for Iguodala and Dalembert, or Iguodala and Brand.  Take your pick.  Either way, we’re better off than we were with Sheed on the team.

Thoughts?  Do we move Wallace if we move Allen?

absolutely, though that means we need another big.
So while iggy is pretty low on my list of SG's i that i want, if we could swing allen & wallace for iggy & dalembert i'd have to say go for it.

[Chris]

If Wallace is in the deal, we don't get any value back for Ray.  This team is much better off sticking with Wallace (who is still a net positive in the games he is actually trying), and then trying to get actual value for Ray.  It would only make sense to include Wallace in a Ray deal, if they were trying to really blow it up, and planned on cleaning house, and shooting for cap room after next season.