If losing Ray is inevitable... we might as well sign-and-trade him to New York for Eddie Curry and maybe get NY to throw us a future protected 1st rounder or something.
Why?
Because Eddie Curry only has a year left on his deal... and we might be able to flip his 11.2 million deal at the trade deadline for replacement talent. If you're going to lose Ray anyways... might as well get a contract out of it.
Then New York brings in Ray... and by removing Curry they can target two more max contracts.
I'm not sure why the C's wouldn't just let ray walk rather than trade for that lazy turd?
Umm because then the CEltics are left with nothing. If you send him to NY for a sign-and-trade, you pick up Eddie Curry's expiring contract... which at the deadline could theoretically land you an overpaid player on a team desperate to dump him (Iguodala, Monta Ellis... Gilbert Arenas)
It's an asset. Boston is going in the toilet anyways... lets be honest with ourselves. Either Chicago, NY or Miami owns the next decade... and we can't beat the Lakers regardless.
I think Wyc would argue that the right to pay Eddie Curry's buffet bills is not really an asset, compared to just letting Ray walk.
Now, if the Knicks were also throwing in someone like Wilson Chandler, then perhaps it could be worth it. But this is not monopoly money we are talking about here. They are not going to pay a guy $11 million just for the chance that they MIGHT be able to trade him at the deadline.
And lets remember, 90% of the deals that would be available at the deadline for an expiring contract will just be taking on another teams bad contracts. You need real assets, along with the expiring contracts, to get good players.
I disagree, if you’re going to compete in this league you have to be willing to make savvy, unorthodox moves such as this to compete. Who knows what will be available this upcoming deadline or what type of assets the C's will have after a 1/2 season of basketball? At the least, we'll be in position to reap the benefits if a team decides to unload. What did Washington get for Butler? Jamison? Think Gasol, Garnett, and Maggette.
Every year teams are willing to give up talent for financial help and this year will be no different.
There is a difference between "terrible value" and "savvy and unorthodox".
This move, without anything else coming to the C's is terrible value. They trade a guy with very good value (Ray) to a team that desperately wants to get rid of a terrible contract (Curry), in order to open up more cap space.
They gave up a lottery pick from last years draft (Hill), a 2012 first rounder, and the right to swap 2011 first rounders, just to get rid of the less offensive contract of Jared Jeffries at the trade deadline, for the same reason...to open up cap space.
While the Knicks could just sign Ray for nothing, they have a lot to gain by doing this sign and trade. Much more to gain than the C's have by taking on that contract.
So the point is, while having a contract to trade at a future date is nice, in this case, the C's absolutely need to get value in return for taking it off their hands. And by value, I mean actual assets like picks or player who actually play basketball.
Topic: If we are going to lose Ray... might as well trade him for Eddie Curry (Read 11238 times)