Author Topic: rebuilding trade  (Read 25973 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #75 on: March 15, 2010, 07:44:33 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52982
  • Tommy Points: 2570
Honestly, I think it is impossible to know when they are going to be good again.  There are so many variables involved, including the new CBA, which could either set them back further, or give them a leg up, depending on how it works out. 
But really, more than anything, luck is going to be the difference between becoming mediocre, and actually building into a contender again.  Whether it is winning the lottery, or a superstar coming on the trade market, right as their assets are reaching their peak value (see: KG trade), they are going to need some luck to go their way. 

Agreed -- too many variables to put a time-line. Any guesses are useless.

It could be one season as a sub .500 team if the C's hit a home run in the draft. Throw Rondo into that and some cap space and suddenly the team is off and running again.

Or it could just as easily be 5-6 years if their personnel moves are mediocre. If they fail to find a top tier talent in draft. If instead they find good but not dominant players with their picks. If they fail to convince elite FAs to join and or instead forced into overpaying third rate stars. And so on .. so on.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #76 on: March 15, 2010, 07:53:11 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52982
  • Tommy Points: 2570
But they are headed down now, down down down, with a bunch of aging players.  The question is not, should they rebuild, the question is, when?  

The longer they remain in NBA purgatory (a 40-45 win team) the longer it will take for them to become really good again.
Agreed

I think we need to wait until the end of the season to see how the rest of this year enfolds for the Celtics. I think that information will be the driving force behind whether or not the C's should begin rebuilding this summer or gear up for one last push and rebuild in 2012.

I expect, as I'm sure you and many others do too, that the Celtics should begin rebuilding this offseason.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #77 on: March 15, 2010, 07:54:58 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52982
  • Tommy Points: 2570
The #1 motivating factor with GMs is keeping their jobs, not winning.
Agreed -- which is why Danny Ainge will fire Doc Rivers at some point despite Danny having great respect for Doc's skills as a coach. Danny will do it to save his own hide.

Sorry, nothing to do with this thread. I have just seen a lot of comments elsewhere on the subject and thought Brickowski's summation was the perfect lead in.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #78 on: March 15, 2010, 07:57:42 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52982
  • Tommy Points: 2570
Hopefully the Oaf Perkins will celebrate his next birthday on another team's roster.

I like Perk. Hard-nosed guy, appropriately paid.

But he doesn't have great trade value unless we resign him, which I wouldn't do going into the lockout.

I would do my best to trade Perkins on draft night.
If the Knicks pick drops down far enough. Say #8-#11. The Utah Jazz may considering trading the pick for a defensive minded center like Perk.

A player they haven't really had since Greg Ostertag retired and something they sorely want to improve their team's defense.

I think Utah would be willing to give up a valuable chip to land a player like Perkins. That is something to watch out for.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #79 on: March 16, 2010, 08:06:16 AM »

Offline wiley

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4855
  • Tommy Points: 386
Who, you seem to favor making next year (or this?) Pierce's last (depending on how things go)...but, like most, you assume he'll get another few years with the Celtics and retire here......my question to Who and everyone else is:  Aside from evaluating Pierce on his own (in other words regardless of your opinion of Pierce's game and predicted game over the next couple of years), do you think going forward with both Rondo and Pierce on the same team is a mistake....via clash of playing styles.....Or, if Pierce stays will his influence fade, possibly coming off the bench, such that Rondo's playing style and general control of the team will be absolute....

I proposed this "rebuilding trade", trading my favorite Celtics,  with this issue in mind....If Pierce is going to be here until he retires, are we wasting Rondo's talent/mojo for the remainder of Pierce's time....or can they continue to co-exist as they do now.....(I personally already see an issue in terms of the team's personality...a bit too divided for my liking at this point...I'd give it all to Rondo if I could).  On the other hand they aren't cooked yet this year and there's always going to be some friction on a team, so I don't want to overstate the perceived issue....bottom line:  if Pierce is here til the end shouldn't we use his remaining time with the Celtics as re-building years (Rubio and Evan Turner in the trade I proposed). 

Actually, my prediction is that if the Celtics do lose in this year's playoffs it's going to be by just a hair, after pushing another team to the edge....I don't think they'll go down with a whimper like in so many games this season...the playoffs are going to be more intense and the urgency is going to go way up not just because it's the playoffs but because the big 3 will get that feeling of "is this it for us together?"

If we win it all I would still be tempted to do a re-building trade rather than try to repeat, which is difficult enough for players in their prime, let alone older players.  However, I think you've got to let them try as a reward for winning it all.....Interesting question though, if we win it all our vets' value will be much higher than it is today March 18th.  Do you try for an unlikely repeat or trade off the glowing big 3 for a quicker re-build....You can't deny that sending them out of town after a championship, second in three years, would definitely cement the glory (going out on top, etc..)

Minny would probably want a first rounder from us the following year, or a couple of second rounders, as well as what's proposed above.....which should include a good to decent pick since we'd be re-building...and to trade Flynn for a middle first round draft pick this year...and to sign Ray Allen to go all veteran and really start winning...Besides our pick they'll have a Bobcats pick just outside the lottery, and their own pick in the 20's via some other team.....

Rondo, Ray Allen, James Anderson (via trade of Flynn), Kevin Garnett, Perkins

Kevin Love (monster minutes), Larry Sanders (via Charlotte pick), Varnado (via Celt's pick), Avery Bradley/Kalin Lucas/Paul George with their final first rounder.....and Wayne Ellington rounding out the bench

That Minny team, under the leadership of 4 ex-Celtics, could start winning, but even more importantly, the vets would teach the young TWolves how to play and win....Right now Minny's in position for the second pick in the draft....So for all their talent, they keep sucking year after year after year.....time to win over their in Minny...

Ex-TWolve Garnett would fill the seats in Minny, even if he's not at big minutes, they'll watch him teach KLove and the rest how to play.....Rondo will also fill the seats.....




Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #80 on: March 16, 2010, 10:19:30 AM »

Offline Brickowski

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4207
  • Tommy Points: 423
If you are rebuilding, you want to get first round picks.  You do not want to give them up under any circumstances.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #81 on: March 16, 2010, 10:38:04 AM »

Online jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13765
  • Tommy Points: 2061
  • Sometimes there's no sane reason for optimism
If you are rebuilding, you want to get first round picks.  You do not want to give them up under any circumstances.

The Celtics did when they traded [essentially] Brandon Roy for Telfair to get rid of Raef's contract...sometimes by trading firsts with bad contracts, a team can rebuild faster.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #82 on: March 16, 2010, 11:33:59 AM »

Offline Brickowski

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4207
  • Tommy Points: 423
If you are rebuilding, you want to get first round picks.  You do not want to give them up under any circumstances.

The Celtics did when they traded [essentially] Brandon Roy for Telfair to get rid of Raef's contract...sometimes by trading firsts with bad contracts, a team can rebuild faster.

Only if it puts you under the cap.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #83 on: March 16, 2010, 11:38:00 AM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
If you are rebuilding, you want to get first round picks.  You do not want to give them up under any circumstances.

The Celtics did when they traded [essentially] Brandon Roy for Telfair to get rid of Raef's contract...sometimes by trading firsts with bad contracts, a team can rebuild faster.

Only if it puts you under the cap.

It doesn't need to immediately.  Teams have often used first rounders to entice a team to trade a shorter contract for a longer contract.  Although it is rarely a lottery pick.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #84 on: March 16, 2010, 11:55:20 AM »

Offline Birdbrain

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2939
  • Tommy Points: 235
  • 36 charges and counting..
If you are rebuilding, you want to get first round picks.  You do not want to give them up under any circumstances.

The Celtics did when they traded [essentially] Brandon Roy for Telfair to get rid of Raef's contract...sometimes by trading firsts with bad contracts, a team can rebuild faster.

Only if it puts you under the cap.

Was Boston under the cap when they made the KG trade?
Little Fockers 1.5/10
Gulliver's Travels 1/10
Grown Ups -20/10
Tron Legacy 6.5/10

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #85 on: March 16, 2010, 12:00:43 PM »

Offline Brickowski

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4207
  • Tommy Points: 423
Well the LaFrentz deal brought Ratliff, whose expiring contract enabled the Garnett Deal. Also, pick #7 was Randy Foye, not Brandon Roy.  The pick swap had nothing to do with the Celtics. It was just a bad move by the Wolves.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #86 on: March 16, 2010, 12:11:31 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
Well the LaFrentz deal brought Ratliff, whose expiring contract enabled the Garnett Deal. Also, pick #7 was Randy Foye, not Brandon Roy.  The pick swap had nothing to do with the Celtics. It was just a bad move by the Wolves.

Eh, the only reason the picks fell that way was because the Wolves, who wanted Foye (as did Danny), got wind that Portland was trading into the number 7 spot in order to get Roy...so they snatched him up, and held him hostage so they could get their man (Foye), and a little extra value as well.  If Boston had stayed in that spot, Roy would have fell to them, because Minnesota would not have been able to pull that deal with Danny, who did not want Roy.

Anyways, I suppose this doesn't have much to do with the topic at hand, but just wanted to clarify things.  If Boston picked #7, Roy was absolutely going to still be on the board.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #87 on: March 16, 2010, 12:56:51 PM »

Offline More Banners

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3845
  • Tommy Points: 257
Well the LaFrentz deal brought Ratliff, whose expiring contract enabled the Garnett Deal. Also, pick #7 was Randy Foye, not Brandon Roy.  The pick swap had nothing to do with the Celtics. It was just a bad move by the Wolves.

Right.

McHale gets a lot of flack for that deal, though the two were projected to be very similar players on draft day.  I think constantly trying to play Foye as a PG, instead of his natural SG position, hurt his performance and development in way that Roy never had to deal with.  Roy is clearly the better player, though.

Personally, I didn't like the deal.  It was a money deal, not a basketball deal.  Those suck.  The deal didn't help us in the short term, and the long term impact is questionable, even in spite of the KG trade*.  Perhaps the best long-term outcome is the C's (at times) stubborn refusal to take on anything that may become a bad contract, perhaps so they never have to make money deals again.

I expect Danny to work diligently to reload the cupboard this offseason, regardless of what happens in the playoffs.  Trading away draft picks just doesn't make sense.

*Nothing wrong with Rondo/Roy/Pierce/Al Jeff/Perk, right?  And we still would've had the assets MN wanted for KG plus Delonte and whatever the 2007 pick would've been, except Ratliff, so it is still possible it could've gotten done, IMHO.

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #88 on: March 16, 2010, 01:01:03 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Quote
*Nothing wrong with Rondo/Roy/Pierce/Al Jeff/Perk, right?
 
Nothing wrong, if you prefer to have a good rather than a great team.

Quote
And we still would've had the assets MN wanted for KG plus Delonte and whatever the 2007 pick would've been, except Ratliff, so it is still possible it could've gotten done, IMHO.
Garnett only accepted the deal to Boston because Ray Allen and Pierce were already here.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: rebuilding trade
« Reply #89 on: March 16, 2010, 01:13:23 PM »

Offline Birdbrain

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2939
  • Tommy Points: 235
  • 36 charges and counting..
Well the LaFrentz deal brought Ratliff, whose expiring contract enabled the Garnett Deal. Also, pick #7 was Randy Foye, not Brandon Roy.  The pick swap had nothing to do with the Celtics. It was just a bad move by the Wolves.

Right.

McHale gets a lot of flack for that deal, though the two were projected to be very similar players on draft day.  I think constantly trying to play Foye as a PG, instead of his natural SG position, hurt his performance and development in way that Roy never had to deal with.  Roy is clearly the better player, though.

Personally, I didn't like the deal.  It was a money deal, not a basketball deal.  Those suck.  The deal didn't help us in the short term, and the long term impact is questionable, even in spite of the KG trade*.  Perhaps the best long-term outcome is the C's (at times) stubborn refusal to take on anything that may become a bad contract, perhaps so they never have to make money deals again.

I expect Danny to work diligently to reload the cupboard this offseason, regardless of what happens in the playoffs.  Trading away draft picks just doesn't make sense.

*Nothing wrong with Rondo/Roy/Pierce/Al Jeff/Perk, right?  And we still would've had the assets MN wanted for KG plus Delonte and whatever the 2007 pick would've been, except Ratliff, so it is still possible it could've gotten done, IMHO.

Yeah nothing except no chance for a championship.
Little Fockers 1.5/10
Gulliver's Travels 1/10
Grown Ups -20/10
Tron Legacy 6.5/10