Michael beasley...Low Risk, High reward

[Evantime34]

Really, people wouldn't give up a late 1st rounder for Beasley?

Well, for clarification, some people don't want to give up a 1st rounder for 30 games of free-agent-to-be Beasley.  If we hit on the right draft pick, we have a talented rotation player who is cost-controlled on a cheap deal for several seasons.  If we hit on Beasley, we still have to pay him somewhere between $5 and $8 million per season, most likely.

To me the ceiling on Beasley is much higher than what we would likely get with the Clippers pick. Earlier in the year everyone was saying this was going to be a draft for the ages, now even Chad Ford is backing off that statement. I don't think we'd be getting that great of a player at that spot.

[Eja117]

yea, if that deal is on the table, I see no reason not to go for it.  JO gives us very, very little and it's not like Beasley is going to mess up team chemistry with our old guys around

this..and what Roy said

[EvilEmpire]

I see no reason to make this trade. Beasley does not help us win another banner this year. He is not good enough to start on a Wolves team that has Wesley Johnson at the 3 so he backups the 3 and 4. Beasley is due a 8.1 Million Qualifying Offer next year just to stay around and play backup minutes for PP and some backup minutes at the 4, I'm going to pass. The best thing the Celtics have going for them next year are draft picks and cap flexibly; neither of which I would trade or give-up to have Beasley.

I also prefer Bass to Beasley at the 4 and I think we can get Bass for a better deal.

its about having assets though...like danny said, the moves they make may be pre-cursers to a larger move.

if Danny re-signs Green and has Beasley's bird rights...thats two top 5 picks that he can maybe turn into something through a sign and trade...

and beasley could help us this year more than JO is going to..

Beasley and Green were top 5 in their respective draft classes but neither of them is worth a top 20-25 in this up-coming years' draft so there value is very minimum. No one is giving you anything for Green in a sign and trade because he is a unrestricted FA. And if Beasley is not worth 25 and below draft pick I'm not sure your going to get back what you think your going to get back. If Beasley was worth more then the T-pups would want more than JO and cash.  

[RJ87]

Really, people wouldn't give up a late 1st rounder for Beasley?

Well, for clarification, some people don't want to give up a 1st rounder for 30 games of free-agent-to-be Beasley.  If we hit on the right draft pick, we have a talented rotation player who is cost-controlled on a cheap deal for several seasons.  If we hit on Beasley, we still have to pay him somewhere between $5 and $8 million per season, most likely.

That draft pick could also end up being JR Giddens the sequel. The draft is a crapshoot. Keep the pick or trade for Beasley, its a gamble. When you look at the odds of finding a player in the mid-late 20s that can be an impact player, its not promising. Beasley is a huge risk, no question, but sometimes taking a risk leads to a better outcome than playing it safe would have.

[SHAQATTACK]

Keep the pick....I want to see whats behind curtain this draft.

[rondohondo]

Really, people wouldn't give up a late 1st rounder for Beasley?

Well, for clarification, some people don't want to give up a 1st rounder for 30 games of free-agent-to-be Beasley.  If we hit on the right draft pick, we have a talented rotation player who is cost-controlled on a cheap deal for several seasons.  If we hit on Beasley, we still have to pay him somewhere between $5 and $8 million per season, most likely.

That draft pick could also end up being JR Giddens the sequel. The draft is a crapshoot. Keep the pick or trade for Beasley, its a gamble. When you look at the odds of finding a player in the mid-late 20s that can be an impact player, its not promising. Beasley is a huge risk, no question, but sometimes taking a risk leads to a better outcome than playing it safe would have.

Exactly , just look at Zach Randolph basically sent to Memphis  for nothing. He goes on to dominate against the #1 seed Spurs and  took OKC to 7 games .

I really think at his full potential Beasley could have that kind of impact. Same kind of talent level. (Obviously Randloph is a much better rebounder, but I think Beasley could be great in an uptempo style with Rondo)

I Would love to see him with rondo for 30 games and against Miami in the 1st round to see how they play together before we decide on offering a contract for next year. I think it would be a steal to get him for the clippers pick.

[Evantime34]

Really, people wouldn't give up a late 1st rounder for Beasley?

Well, for clarification, some people don't want to give up a 1st rounder for 30 games of free-agent-to-be Beasley.  If we hit on the right draft pick, we have a talented rotation player who is cost-controlled on a cheap deal for several seasons.  If we hit on Beasley, we still have to pay him somewhere between $5 and $8 million per season, most likely.

That draft pick could also end up being JR Giddens the sequel. The draft is a crapshoot. Keep the pick or trade for Beasley, its a gamble. When you look at the odds of finding a player in the mid-late 20s that can be an impact player, its not promising. Beasley is a huge risk, no question, but sometimes taking a risk leads to a better outcome than playing it safe would have.

Exactly , just look at Zach Randolph basically sent to Memphis  for nothing. He goes on to dominate against the #1 seed Spurs and  took OKC to 7 games .

I really think at his full potential Beasley could have that kind of impact. Same kind of talent level.

I Would love to see him with rondo for 30 games and against Miami in the 1st round to see how they play together before we decide on offering a contract for next year. I think it would be a steal to get him for the clippers pick.

Agree with all this except the part about I would love to see Rondo and the Celtics go against Miami in the first. I think we can still get up to the 5 or 6 seed if we play well.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Really, people wouldn't give up a late 1st rounder for Beasley?

Well, for clarification, some people don't want to give up a 1st rounder for 30 games of free-agent-to-be Beasley.  If we hit on the right draft pick, we have a talented rotation player who is cost-controlled on a cheap deal for several seasons.  If we hit on Beasley, we still have to pay him somewhere between $5 and $8 million per season, most likely.

To me the ceiling on Beasley is much higher than what we would likely get with the Clippers pick. Earlier in the year everyone was saying this was going to be a draft for the ages, now even Chad Ford is backing off that statement. I don't think we'd be getting that great of a player at that spot.

The point of giving the late 1st for Beasley is so we could be back to contending now. Our window of winning is definitely closing, and as we pick up our games again, a little more help could be useful. Beasley can be that guy.

Now if we really are giving up the season and just play through it without even worrying about if we will win or not, then I agree to not give up a first rounder and just try to sign him for the right amount of money.

[EvilEmpire]

Really, people wouldn't give up a late 1st rounder for Beasley?

Well, for clarification, some people don't want to give up a 1st rounder for 30 games of free-agent-to-be Beasley.  If we hit on the right draft pick, we have a talented rotation player who is cost-controlled on a cheap deal for several seasons.  If we hit on Beasley, we still have to pay him somewhere between $5 and $8 million per season, most likely.

To me the ceiling on Beasley is much higher than what we would likely get with the Clippers pick. Earlier in the year everyone was saying this was going to be a draft for the ages, now even Chad Ford is backing off that statement. I don't think we'd be getting that great of a player at that spot.

The point of giving the late 1st for Beasley is so we could be back to contending now. Our window of winning is definitely closing, and as we pick up our games again, a little more help could be useful. Beasley can be that guy.

Now if we really are giving up the season and just play through it without even worrying about if we will win or not, then I agree to not give up a first rounder and just try to sign him for the right amount of money.

I don't think people are underestimating the purpose of the Beasley trade, I just think they are being realistic about what to expect in the playoffs. We didn't beat the Heat last year as a 3 seed. Lost to the Heat in 5 games. This year we are currently an 8th seed and playing terrible basketball. the Heat are a number 1 seed. The Heat are playing the best they have in the year in a half they have been together. So to say we have a shot this year is like the 1 in a million line from Dumb and Dumber. So your saying we have a shot.

[Celts Fan 92]

When I wake up nd log onto CB I wanna see a deal for Beasley completed we cant afford to go in an offensive drought against the knicks on sunday

[goCeltics]

i like the beasley trade (even for the clipper's pick) it's insurance on green, and only way we don't match beasley is if c's somehow sign dwight and deron in which case we have nothing to complain of.

think beasley can be the scorer we have being looking for now paul's decline is here

[PosImpos]

Really, people wouldn't give up a late 1st rounder for Beasley?

Well, for clarification, some people don't want to give up a 1st rounder for 30 games of free-agent-to-be Beasley.  If we hit on the right draft pick, we have a talented rotation player who is cost-controlled on a cheap deal for several seasons.  If we hit on Beasley, we still have to pay him somewhere between $5 and $8 million per season, most likely.

To me the ceiling on Beasley is much higher than what we would likely get with the Clippers pick. Earlier in the year everyone was saying this was going to be a draft for the ages, now even Chad Ford is backing off that statement. I don't think we'd be getting that great of a player at that spot.

The point of giving the late 1st for Beasley is so we could be back to contending now. Our window of winning is definitely closing, and as we pick up our games again, a little more help could be useful. Beasley can be that guy.

Now if we really are giving up the season and just play through it without even worrying about if we will win or not, then I agree to not give up a first rounder and just try to sign him for the right amount of money.

I disagree re: contending now.  I don't think Beasley could make that big of an impact, and I don't think Danny is under that impression, either.

I think the motivation would be to see how well Beasley could fit here, get a close-up look at him, in the second half of the season and consider keeping him long-term.  He is "Green Insurance," though he could also perhaps fit with Green if both were starters.

[RockinRyA]

i prefer us going for mayo than beasley. one reason is we might have green who has less upside but has fewer question marks.

[Celtics4ever]

It depends on whether we keep Rondo.   Beasley is a good running guy and athletic.   He might bloom next to Rondo.

[cman88]

It depends on whether we keep Rondo.   Beasley is a good running guy and athletic.   He might bloom next to Rondo.

Which is why id take the risk on beasley..he has potential to be a possible cornersttone. While a pick in the late 20s at most may be a solid roleplayer