Author Topic: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)  (Read 9768 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #30 on: November 18, 2010, 07:14:46 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20099
  • Tommy Points: 1331
No way I would do this trade.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #31 on: November 18, 2010, 07:55:10 AM »

Offline Larry Pistol

  • Xavier Tillman
  • Posts: 47
  • Tommy Points: 8
One of the worst trade ideas Iv'e seen on CB and I'll tell you why:

1) Baby is our best big man off the bench;
2) Baby finally realizes his role on this team. The other Celtics have even made note of this in the post-game interviews;
3) Grant Hill is OLD;
4) Baby is our high energy guy, and it's hard to put a price on that;
5) With the O'Neals always injured, do you really find it a good idea to trade away a big for a SF? You can never have too many big men;
6) Semih Erden would be our number 1 big on the bench? No thanks;
7) GRANT HILL IS OLD. He's not the same player he used to be.

Big Baby Glen Davis is our best player off the bench and he brings a lot to the table. I don't foresee the Celtics trading him during the season, and hopefully we resign him. If not, it was worth the risk to keep him here and possibly win #18. Grant Hill is plain and simply, not the answer.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #32 on: November 18, 2010, 10:01:22 AM »

Offline crownsy

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8469
  • Tommy Points: 157
One just gets so [dang]ed tired of folks wanting to get rid of Davis.  We've got a helluva bench spark player, a uniquely versatile guy, and folks just can't stop looking for 'short'comings.  

I suspect most teams would jump at a chance to get Davis.  I suspect Ainge is too smart to even think about it.

It's not about wanting to get rid of Davis, it's about thinking of ideas that might make the team better.

This isn't one of those, however...

But there just have to be possibilities out there that would improve the team.  Danny's managed to assemble an assortment of talented players on reasonable contracts, and still has all draft picks in his pocket  Danny might have enough pieces to deal like it's summer, 2007, BUT WE HAVE TO BE WILLING TO LET GO OF ROLE PLAYERS to get better.

I'm perfectly willing to get rid of glen davis if it makes us better. This trade does not.
“I will hurt you for this. A day will come when you think you’re safe and happy and your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth. And you will know the debt is paid.” – Tyrion

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #33 on: November 18, 2010, 11:14:46 AM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403
pasadena
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #34 on: November 18, 2010, 11:28:15 AM »

Offline Tai

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2230
  • Tommy Points: 32
If the two O'Neals and Perk are healthy, BBD isn't a rotation player. (albeit a big "if")

Grant Hill would be. He is a good improvement over Marquis.

That's 3 centers. We'd be left with one playoff caliber power forward in KG. Jermaine O'Neal is barely fast enough at this point to cover centers: PF for him is out of the question.
There are some power forwards that Jermaine would struggle to defend but there also a large number that he can defend. Especially as a backup PF versus a starter where the quality and athleticism of his opponent is lower.

It would be nice to have BBD to call upon in some of those instances (especially in the regular season) but even then BBD wouldn't be a regular rotation player.

He would be a borderline rotation figure who plays now and then.

So, we get older, and have older guys playing at this point of their careers out of position, ASSUMING they're even healthy enough come the playoffs. And all for a 38-year old SF who picked the Suns over the Celtics as a free agent last offseason.

No offense, but be honest; do you not just like BBD? Or do you just feel the C's can't pay him? Because I don't care how you plan to spin this, Grant Hill is not worth the predicament it would cause in our big man rotation, no matter how small you think it would be.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #35 on: November 18, 2010, 11:47:26 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34114
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
At this point, the Celtics should not trade away or add and of the top 5 big men on this team.   (KG, Perk, Shaq, JO and Davis)


It is great depth.




I would not be afraid to trade 2nd round big men when either JO or Perk returns. 



I would not be afraid to trade Nate if Avery gets healthy and proves to be an NBA level PG now. 


But until then, Wafer/Harangody/2nd rounders is about the limit of the offers. 

Basically, not a whole lot.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #36 on: November 18, 2010, 11:59:16 AM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30863
  • Tommy Points: 1330
I do agree that if Perkins/Jermaine/Shaq/KG are all healthy BBD's minutes should fall considerably.

Basically he'd be splitting backup PF minutes with Jermaine and wouldn't see any at C.

In the playoffs KG should be going 35+ so there just wouldn't be much burn for him.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #37 on: November 18, 2010, 12:02:50 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52860
  • Tommy Points: 2569
If the two O'Neals and Perk are healthy, BBD isn't a rotation player. (albeit a big "if")

Grant Hill would be. He is a good improvement over Marquis.

That's 3 centers. We'd be left with one playoff caliber power forward in KG. Jermaine O'Neal is barely fast enough at this point to cover centers: PF for him is out of the question.
There are some power forwards that Jermaine would struggle to defend but there also a large number that he can defend. Especially as a backup PF versus a starter where the quality and athleticism of his opponent is lower.

It would be nice to have BBD to call upon in some of those instances (especially in the regular season) but even then BBD wouldn't be a regular rotation player.

He would be a borderline rotation figure who plays now and then.

So, we get older, and have older guys playing at this point of their careers out of position, ASSUMING they're even healthy enough come the playoffs. And all for a 38-year old SF who picked the Suns over the Celtics as a free agent last offseason.

No offense, but be honest; do you not just like BBD? Or do you just feel the C's can't pay him? Because I don't care how you plan to spin this, Grant Hill is not worth the predicament it would cause in our big man rotation, no matter how small you think it would be.
Like I said in my previous post in this thread -- not the one above, the one before that -- I would like to wait until further into the season to see how the health status of the C's big men plays out.

To see if Perk does get back healthy and whether Jermaine can get himself together and if Shaq is still in working order. Get a better feel for how risky a move it would be ... and it would definitely be a risk.

At this point in time, I would be reluctant to make the trade. Too many unknowns and concerns about the other big men's health. And that may still be true come All-Star break ... but hopefully there would be enough clarity to figure out whether BBD is more of a need than Hill or not.

Hopefully enough information to make a decision then.

---------------------------------------------------

If Perk and the two O'Neals were healthy, I think Grant Hill offers more to the Celtics than BBD does. I think Davis is a borderline rotation player in that scenario whereas Grant Hill would be a big improvement over Marquis Daniels.

So in that light, I do have interest in this trade idea.

Hence, if I was comfortable enough with the other big men's health, I would make the trade.

----------------------------------------------------
 
I am a big admirer of Grant Hill. I think he is still a very effective player in this league. A high quality reserve or a capable starting small forward.

A solid defender, an above average rebounder, a very good ball-handler and good passer. A good complementary scorer who runs the floor very well, moves without the ball well, is a decent slasher and has a good jump shot out to about 22 feet.

He is a player I rate highly. Even at his advanced age. A very good role player.

------------------------------------------------------

It's more my interest in Hill than a disinterest in BBD.

I like BBD. He is a good to very good fourth big man + a decent first big off the bench in the NBA. A rotation worthy player.

Given his current form, I think it's very likely that he'll be overpaid this summer (full MLE over five years ... which I don't think he's worth. I have him in the $3.5 to $4.5 million range depending on available minutes).

I don't view him as a player who is capable of playing at a high enough level to become a full-time starter + because of his likely contract demands, I do not view him as a long term fixture with the franchise which is why I am fine with giving up a young quality role player like BBD for an old man like Grant Hill.

I think there is a very good chance that this is Davis' final season with the Celtics. Just like it probably would be for 38 year old Grant Hill albeit for different reasons. Anyway, that's why the age difference isn't a big factor for me.

My focus here is on who offers more this season and this season alone.

-----------------------------------------------------

If the other big men aren't healthy, I would much rather end up depending on Daniels as a rotation player than Erden.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #38 on: November 18, 2010, 12:04:35 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
I do agree that if Perkins/Jermaine/Shaq/KG are all healthy BBD's minutes should fall considerably.

Basically he'd be splitting backup PF minutes with Jermaine and wouldn't see any at C.

In the playoffs KG should be going 35+ so there just wouldn't be much burn for him.

  Even if they are all healthy, you can't count on that lasting. Even if you assume he won't get a lot of minutes you can't go into the playoffs with a 4 man big rotation containing Shag and JO. It's a recipe for disaster.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #39 on: November 18, 2010, 12:09:10 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30863
  • Tommy Points: 1330
I do agree that if Perkins/Jermaine/Shaq/KG are all healthy BBD's minutes should fall considerably.

Basically he'd be splitting backup PF minutes with Jermaine and wouldn't see any at C.

In the playoffs KG should be going 35+ so there just wouldn't be much burn for him.

  Even if they are all healthy, you can't count on that lasting. Even if you assume he won't get a lot of minutes you can't go into the playoffs with a 4 man big rotation containing Shag and JO. It's a recipe for disaster.
Yeah I wouldn't trade him because of the huge health concerns.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #40 on: November 18, 2010, 12:14:16 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52860
  • Tommy Points: 2569
Marquis Daniels is a big injury risk too + the team lacks alternatives behind him.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #41 on: November 18, 2010, 12:18:03 PM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34114
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
Marquis Daniels is a big injury risk too + the team lacks alternatives behind him.


I think the Celtics can get past having Ray play more minutes at SF with West playing more SG minutes then having to go in the playoffs short big men. 



Neither is a great situation, but size kills in the NBA still. 

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #42 on: November 18, 2010, 12:25:43 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52860
  • Tommy Points: 2569
Marquis Daniels is a big injury risk too + the team lacks alternatives behind him.


I think the Celtics can get past having Ray play more minutes at SF with West playing more SG minutes then having to go in the playoffs short big men. 



Neither is a great situation, but size kills in the NBA still. 
Generally speaking, I agree ... but I would be very worried about using that tactic against the Lakers.

They have two big physical wing players in Kobe Bryant and Ron Artest. Both are talented post players who could feast on undersized wings/guards.

Unlike most other teams who lack two wing players with those attributes.

---------------------------------------------------

If I have Garnett for 35 minutes and Perk for 30 minutes and at least one of the O'Neals ... versus that scenario ... I'm not sure which one worries me more.

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #43 on: November 18, 2010, 12:29:14 PM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34114
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
Marquis Daniels is a big injury risk too + the team lacks alternatives behind him.


I think the Celtics can get past having Ray play more minutes at SF with West playing more SG minutes then having to go in the playoffs short big men. 



Neither is a great situation, but size kills in the NBA still. 
Generally speaking, I agree ... but I would be very worried about using that tactic against the Lakers.

They have two big physical wing players in Kobe Bryant and Ron Artest. Both are talented post players who could feast on undersized wings/guards.

---------------------------------------------------

If I have Garnett for 35 minutes and Perk for 30 minutes and at least one of the O'Neals ... versus that scenario ... I'm not sure which one worries me more.


Give me the big men and do what ever you have to to make Kobe drive inside more and pound him.  Sure, he will get to the line, but over a 7 game series, it will effect him. 


Plus, limit the time the Kobe is on the floor against West.  When Kobe goes to the bench, so does Ray. 

Re: Big Baby Davis for Grant Hill?? (idea)
« Reply #44 on: November 18, 2010, 01:21:17 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
Marquis Daniels is a big injury risk too + the team lacks alternatives behind him.

  If they can't use Wafer in that spot they need to cut him and sign a late season castoff to replace him (unless they decided to trade Nate or something).