Why doesn't Pierce have no-trade clause?

[More Banners]

I mean, if he really wanted to retire a Celtic...

Was he not willing to sacrifice money on these out-years to stay in Boston? 

This $5M partial guarantee seems to pretty much lock him into being shipped out, and he signed it.

[D.o.s.]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

[nostar]

It's just not that common because as a GM you don't want to give up your personnel control.

[Fafnir]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

didnt Duncan/Dirk get one too? They were eligible at least

[D.o.s.]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

didnt Duncan/Dirk get one too? They were eligible at least

Good catch--Duncan and Dirk both have them, too. My mistake.

[More Banners]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

didnt Duncan/Dirk get one too? They were eligible at least

Good catch--Duncan and Dirk both have them, too. My mistake.

Right.

Pierce is in that group:  Duncan, Dirk, Kobe - career one-team guys that want to retire where they started.

It probably would've taken a discount to get the clause, and he took the cash.

If he were guaranteed $10M next year with a no-trade, I don't think any of us would complain.

Just wondering.  It was in his hands, and he decided retiring a Celtic wasn't that important.

Trade him on draft night.

[Lucky17]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

didnt Duncan/Dirk get one too? They were eligible at least

Good catch--Duncan and Dirk both have them, too. My mistake.

Right.

Pierce is in that group:  Duncan, Dirk, Kobe - career one-team guys that want to retire where they started.

It probably would've taken a discount to get the clause, and he took the cash.

If he were guaranteed $10M next year with a no-trade, I don't think any of us would complain.

Just wondering.  It was in his hands, and he decided retiring a Celtic wasn't that important.

Trade him on draft night.

Pierce has already said he'd sign a one-day contract to retire a Celtic.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/9231445/2013-nba-playoffs-paul-pierce-boston-celtics-wants-play-least-1-more-year

[More Banners]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

didnt Duncan/Dirk get one too? They were eligible at least

Good catch--Duncan and Dirk both have them, too. My mistake.

Right.

Pierce is in that group:  Duncan, Dirk, Kobe - career one-team guys that want to retire where they started.

It probably would've taken a discount to get the clause, and he took the cash.

If he were guaranteed $10M next year with a no-trade, I don't think any of us would complain.

Just wondering.  It was in his hands, and he decided retiring a Celtic wasn't that important.

Trade him on draft night.

Pierce has already said he'd sign a one-day contract to retire a Celtic.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/9231445/2013-nba-playoffs-paul-pierce-boston-celtics-wants-play-least-1-more-year

I've always thought that sort of thing is silly and foolish.

He's happy to play in another jersey.

Let him.

[bfrombleacher]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

didnt Duncan/Dirk get one too? They were eligible at least

Good catch--Duncan and Dirk both have them, too. My mistake.

Right.

Pierce is in that group:  Duncan, Dirk, Kobe - career one-team guys that want to retire where they started.

It probably would've taken a discount to get the clause, and he took the cash.

If he were guaranteed $10M next year with a no-trade, I don't think any of us would complain.

Just wondering.  It was in his hands, and he decided retiring a Celtic wasn't that important.

Trade him on draft night.

Pierce has already said he'd sign a one-day contract to retire a Celtic.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/9231445/2013-nba-playoffs-paul-pierce-boston-celtics-wants-play-least-1-more-year

I've always thought that sort of thing is silly and foolish.

He's happy to play in another jersey.

Let him.

The link he posted says that:

PIERCE said he wants to retire a Celtic.

PIERCE.

[More Banners]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

didnt Duncan/Dirk get one too? They were eligible at least

Good catch--Duncan and Dirk both have them, too. My mistake.

Right.

Pierce is in that group:  Duncan, Dirk, Kobe - career one-team guys that want to retire where they started.

It probably would've taken a discount to get the clause, and he took the cash.

If he were guaranteed $10M next year with a no-trade, I don't think any of us would complain.

Just wondering.  It was in his hands, and he decided retiring a Celtic wasn't that important.

Trade him on draft night.

Pierce has already said he'd sign a one-day contract to retire a Celtic.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/9231445/2013-nba-playoffs-paul-pierce-boston-celtics-wants-play-least-1-more-year

I've always thought that sort of thing is silly and foolish.

He's happy to play in another jersey.

Let him.

The link he posted says that:

PIERCE said he wants to retire a Celtic.

PIERCE.

Fine.  He wants to retire a Celtic, but isn't willing to sacrifice anything to do it.

[pearljammer10]

Because his agent didn't negotiate one.

There are only two players in the entire league that have no trade clauses, KG and Kobe. You really think Pierce has as much pull as either of those guys?

didnt Duncan/Dirk get one too? They were eligible at least

Good catch--Duncan and Dirk both have them, too. My mistake.

And Chris Wilcox to a certain extent.

[Lucky17]

Fine.  He wants to retire a Celtic, but isn't willing to sacrifice anything to do it.

Other than the $10 million he stands to lose if the Celtics decide to waive him.

[More Banners]

Fine.  He wants to retire a Celtic, but isn't willing to sacrifice anything to do it.

Other than the $10 million he stands to lose if the Celtics decide to waive him.

The $5M they WILL pay him will complement his actual playing salary nicely.

In essence, he'll probably take a pay cut to NOT play for the Celtics, but wanted the full $14.5 to finish out his whole career in Boston.

[Lucky17]

Fine.  He wants to retire a Celtic, but isn't willing to sacrifice anything to do it.

Other than the $10 million he stands to lose if the Celtics decide to waive him.

The $5M they WILL pay him will complement his actual playing salary nicely.

In essence, he'll probably take a pay cut to NOT play for the Celtics, but wanted the full $14.5 to finish out his whole career in Boston.

But the decision is the Celtics', not Pierce's. It's not like Pierce can opt out to chase a ring.

I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from.

If it's about a no-trade clause, Pierce was eligible. Perhaps you should be asking why the Celtics didn't give it to him instead?

[More Banners]

Fine.  He wants to retire a Celtic, but isn't willing to sacrifice anything to do it.

Other than the $10 million he stands to lose if the Celtics decide to waive him.

The $5M they WILL pay him will complement his actual playing salary nicely.

In essence, he'll probably take a pay cut to NOT play for the Celtics, but wanted the full $14.5 to finish out his whole career in Boston.

But the decision is the Celtics', not Pierce's. It's not like Pierce can opt out to chase a ring.

I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from.

If it's about a no-trade clause, Pierce was eligible. Perhaps you should be asking why the Celtics didn't give it to him instead?

They didn't "give" it, most likely, because they knew he wouldn't be worth $14.5M next year and wanted a discount, sort of like KG did.


The way this last year is written, it all but assures he's gone.  He should've known that when he signed it. 

The point is that a person who wants to stay and retire with a certain team doesn't take that sort of deal.