Danny Ainge:" Would Consider Trading The Big Three For Younger Talent "

[wdleehi]

What year was Danny's Christmas party conversation?  I'd guess Christmas of '87.  That year, Larry Bird was 31 years old, and averaged 29.9 points, plus over 9 rebounds and 6 assists.  The Celtics were coming off of a Finals run.  

Person + Williams + Stipanovich would have been a bad trade for us at the time, and in hindsight, having those guys wouldn't have helped our team a whole lot.  We would have had a good-but-not-great player in Person (zero career all-star games), a mediocre guy in Williams, and a guy who would quickly be out of the league in Stipanovich.

If that is the level of trades Danny is considering, look out.  I just don't see the sense in picking up mid-level players and attempting to build around them; it ensures mediocrity.

I agree with your assesment in hindsight, but I think your persepctive should be inversed.  I may be just young enough not to have a valuable / wise opinion, and it still may have been an unwise proposal.

better perspective is: what was the value / prospects of Person + Williams + The Stipanovich at the time of the proposed trade?

It is a warning about what can happen to those prospects.


But this situations is different.  This team is not coming off a title.  The players are not playing up to their standards.


And the money aspect makes it hard to get a good trade for KG. 


I am fine with a good deal.  I think the issue is that it will be near impossible to get a good deal with KG.

[Moranis]

BTW, if you put Detlef, Perkins, Person, Stipanovic, and Herb with Reggie Lewis, the Chief, DJ, Ainge, etc.  I think that team gets far closer to a title than what the Celtics ended up with for the 7 years after those trades weren't made.

Bird and McHale kept the team in mediocrity for a long time.

[SHAQATTACK]

Like Danny said, it's a different era.  He's not going to get a young potential All-Star for any of the Big 3.

I believe this is a very true statement, the strongest way to get better a this point in time in the NBA is the draft.

The Celtics (I think) don't have the ability anymore to swing the door open and superstars walk in like they did 30 years ago. Just being the Celtics isn't good enough anymore to draw the best talent. Having a Great coach is a huge asset.

The team needs lots of new potential young superstar talent , then you can trade and entice players like DH to come.

Fact is Winners want to play with Other Winners. TO get more talented superstars we got to have some awesome young up and comming talent , like the CLippers and Minn. ; we'll have to draft em , cause they aren't going to trade em away., like they might have years ago.

This is a new era of the NBA and drafting is "KING" unless you are the LA LAKERS and of course get who you want pretty much anytime.

Let er tank folks

[Surferdad]

Like Danny said, it's a different era.  He's not going to get a young potential All-Star for any of the Big 3.

I believe this is a very true statement, the strongest way to get better a this point in time in the NBA is the draft.

The Celtics (I think) don't have the ability anymore to swing the door open and superstars walk in like they did 30 years ago. Just being the Celtics isn't good enough anymore to draw the best talent. Having a Great coach is a huge asset.

The team needs lots of new potential young superstar talent , then you can trade and entice players like DH to come.

Fact is Winners want to play with Other Winners. TO get more talented superstars we got to have some awesome young up and comming talent , like the CLippers and Minn. ; we'll have to draft em , cause they are going to trade em away.

Let er tank folks

This is true.  Look at LAC.  Very doubful that C.Paul, C. Billups and C.Butler would be there without Griffin and D.Jordan.

[Eja117]

I don't think you trade MJ and Scottie for whatever the kids-du-jour were back after their 5th or 6th title.  6th may not be a good example, but you see what I'm saying

[OhioGreen]

There are trades out there:
Think Nets trade MBrooks to C's for PP to try and keep DW there?
I do! There's a good, promising young talent! Talent and you get rid of PP 32mil for 2 years!

[Chris]

There are trades out there:
Think Nets trade MBrooks to C's for PP to try and keep DW there?
I do! There's a good, promising young talent! Talent and you get rid of PP 32mil for 2 years!

I don't think Marshon Brooks is anywhere near enough for Pierce...and I also don't think the Nets even consider that unless Howard is traded to the Lakers first.  They have one goal right now, and that is to get Howard and Williams together.  They won't sacrifice their cap space next summer to bring in an aging borderline all-star.

[Moranis]

I don't think you trade MJ and Scottie for whatever the kids-du-jour were back after their 5th or 6th title.  6th may not be a good example, but you see what I'm saying

No, but you probably trade them a few years later if they weren't winning titles.   The Celtics were a year and a half removed from the last title at Christmas 87 and the team was getting worse and more injured.  I probably don't trade them then either given they were just in the finals the June prior to that, but I certainly would have moved them in 89-90 or 90-91 and wouldn't have given it a second thought, which is exactly the situation the current Celtics are in.  It has been 3.5 years since the last title and 1.5 years since the last finals appearance.  This team isn't going to win a title so if you can some value you trade them.  Period.

[Eja117]

I don't think you trade MJ and Scottie for whatever the kids-du-jour were back after their 5th or 6th title.  6th may not be a good example, but you see what I'm saying

No, but you probably trade them a few years later if they weren't winning titles.   The Celtics were a year and a half removed from the last title at Christmas 87 and the team was getting worse and more injured.  I probably don't trade them then either given they were just in the finals the June prior to that, but I certainly would have moved them in 89-90 or 90-91 and wouldn't have given it a second thought, which is exactly the situation the current Celtics are in.  It has been 3.5 years since the last title and 1.5 years since the last finals appearance.  This team isn't going to win a title so if you can some value you trade them.  Period.

I'll agree to that, although I'm just guessing it would have been much easier moving Bird then than KG and his $21mill contract now. Maybe not, but still. His contract comes off the books anyway and we can try to bring him back for MLE type money

[Fafnir]

I don't think you trade MJ and Scottie for whatever the kids-du-jour were back after their 5th or 6th title.  6th may not be a good example, but you see what I'm saying

No, but you probably trade them a few years later if they weren't winning titles.   The Celtics were a year and a half removed from the last title at Christmas 87 and the team was getting worse and more injured.  I probably don't trade them then either given they were just in the finals the June prior to that, but I certainly would have moved them in 89-90 or 90-91 and wouldn't have given it a second thought, which is exactly the situation the current Celtics are in.  It has been 3.5 years since the last title and 1.5 years since the last finals appearance.  This team isn't going to win a title so if you can some value you trade them.  Period.

I'll agree to that, although I'm just guessing it would have been much easier moving Bird then than KG and his $21mill contract now. Maybe not, but still. His contract comes off the books anyway and we can try to bring him back for MLE type money

The salary cap was new back then and the numbers much lower for everyone, it was easier to trade players as GMs didn't know exactly the best manage the cap.

[Moranis]

I don't think you trade MJ and Scottie for whatever the kids-du-jour were back after their 5th or 6th title.  6th may not be a good example, but you see what I'm saying

No, but you probably trade them a few years later if they weren't winning titles.   The Celtics were a year and a half removed from the last title at Christmas 87 and the team was getting worse and more injured.  I probably don't trade them then either given they were just in the finals the June prior to that, but I certainly would have moved them in 89-90 or 90-91 and wouldn't have given it a second thought, which is exactly the situation the current Celtics are in.  It has been 3.5 years since the last title and 1.5 years since the last finals appearance.  This team isn't going to win a title so if you can some value you trade them.  Period.

I'll agree to that, although I'm just guessing it would have been much easier moving Bird then than KG and his $21mill contract now. Maybe not, but still. His contract comes off the books anyway and we can try to bring him back for MLE type money

The salary cap was new back then and the numbers much lower for everyone, it was easier to trade players as GMs didn't know exactly the best manage the cap.

Not to mention Bird was better then than KG is now.

[OhioGreen]

There are trades out there:
Think Nets trade MBrooks to C's for PP to try and keep DW there?
I do! There's a good, promising young talent! Talent and you get rid of PP 32mil for 2 years!

I don't think Marshon Brooks is anywhere near enough for Pierce...and I also don't think the Nets even consider that unless Howard is traded to the Lakers first.  They have one goal right now, and that is to get Howard and Williams together.  They won't sacrifice their cap space next summer to bring in an aging borderline all-star.

He may not be enough, but he's more than PP walking for nothing(yeah I know its year after). Point is there are deals to be made for young talent in exchange for Big 3(4) that gets us more than more than likely useless cap space at the end of the year.
Also, DW AND PP, might entice DH to come to the Nets, not hinder the process, as the three together would be formidable.

[clover]

There are trades out there:
Think Nets trade MBrooks to C's for PP to try and keep DW there?
I do! There's a good, promising young talent! Talent and you get rid of PP 32mil for 2 years!

I don't think Marshon Brooks is anywhere near enough for Pierce...and I also don't think the Nets even consider that unless Howard is traded to the Lakers first.  They have one goal right now, and that is to get Howard and Williams together.  They won't sacrifice their cap space next summer to bring in an aging borderline all-star.

He may not be enough, but he's more than PP walking for nothing(yeah I know its year after). Point is there are deals to be made for young talent in exchange for Big 3(4) that gets us more than more than likely useless cap space at the end of the year.
Also, DW AND PP, might entice DH to come to the Nets, not hinder the process, as the three together would be formidable.

What would be the matching salary we'd be taking back in trade?

[BballTim]

I don't think you trade MJ and Scottie for whatever the kids-du-jour were back after their 5th or 6th title.  6th may not be a good example, but you see what I'm saying

No, but you probably trade them a few years later if they weren't winning titles.   The Celtics were a year and a half removed from the last title at Christmas 87 and the team was getting worse and more injured.  I probably don't trade them then either given they were just in the finals the June prior to that, but I certainly would have moved them in 89-90 or 90-91 and wouldn't have given it a second thought, which is exactly the situation the current Celtics are in. 

  The Celts were pretty much held hostage by Larry's health. When he was healthy they were probably the best team in the league. When his back was acting up they were mediocre. It's easy to say that they should have traded Larry, but if he was on the team they'd have a chance at winning a title, if he wasn't they wouldn't. The trades would have made us more competitive after the big three left but that's all.

  I think Danny saw the same thing a few years ago. The big three still had value, but also still had a chance at winning the title. He was trying to thread the needle with a trade that made them younger and still contenders (Kevin Martin) but didn't find a trade that fit.

 

[wahz]

from danny:

"but we don’t expect him to be MVP Kevin Garnett anymore or even All-Star Kevin Garnett anymore. But a very good player."

I think that will be a GREAT thing for Kevin to read. If he doesn't realize what he has looked like he needs to. Yesterday I saw him go higher a couple times more than I have this season. Now I make it a point to not comment on games I haven't see ALL of but I saw yesterdays whole game and KG blew defensive positioning at least 3x obviously, and went for rebounds in his often sloppy manner. Still vs the other 5 games I saw, he was better positionally, went for more rebounds with 2 hands, and even jumped for more rebounds. The drive to the hoop miss was a nice effort. If he will at least TRY to do these things we have a chance to be cpompetitive. Im hoping he has had a minor ankle injury that he is working through.