Trade Idea: Humphries+Lee for Boozer+Picks

[crimson_stallion]

Chicago will be clinging to that Bobcats pick for dear life.

not a fan of the deal with or without those picks.  Lee's deal isn't so bad that it's worth taking on 2 years of Boozer's deal

On the contrary, Lee gives us next to zero production.  Boozer doesn't help us at all financially, but he be a major improvement for us from a basketball perspective.  He'd probably fo back to his 20/10 Utah output on a team like this because bs be our #1/#2 scoring option along with Green.  We really could use that second legit offensive threat which right now, we just don't have.  Someone like Boozer could transform the Tam in the short term and create call space in the long term.

[More Banners]

I'd rather keep Humpries' big ole expiring contract than take on anything to do with Carlos Boozer.

And frankly, I don't think we need to add any more draft picks.  The roster can only absorb so many each year anyway, and we have quite a few coming up, including two each year for the next three drafts.

If there is any type of player to trade for, it would be to bring in someone at the top of the roster.  Boozer doesn't really fit that mold, and further would only get in the way of Sully and Olynyk, and fill a role that we already have the steady Brandon Bass currently filling for the next two years for half the money Boozer makes.

No way.

[JBcat]

I'd rather keep Humpries' big ole expiring contract than take on anything to do with Carlos Boozer.

And frankly, I don't think we need to add any more draft picks.  The roster can only absorb so many each year anyway, and we have quite a few coming up, including two each year for the next three drafts.

If there is any type of player to trade for, it would be to bring in someone at the top of the roster.  Boozer doesn't really fit that mold, and further would only get in the way of Sully and Olynyk, and fill a role that we already have the steady Brandon Bass currently filling for the next two years for half the money Boozer makes.

No way.

I don't mind even more picks.  It gives you more chances to strike gold even later in the first round ala Rondo, or even more flexibility in future trades or trading up or down in a draft.  I only really consider Rondo, Bradley, Green, Sully, and, KO as potential future core pieces unless part of bigger deal so say if we draft 3 players next year we could trade off other players if need be.   In the short term though you could play some ball with Boozer at C, and still leave plenty of time for Sully and KO.

[LooseCannon]

And frankly, I don't think we need to add any more draft picks.  The roster can only absorb so many each year anyway, and we have quite a few coming up, including two each year for the next three drafts.

I wouldn't mind having enough firsts so that the team doesn't feel like it is mortgaging the future if it gambles on giving 2-3 picks to a team with a superstar on an expiring contract who wants to test free agency and isn't guaranteed to re-sign with the Celtics.

[celticslove]

no playoff choker boozer please stay away.

[JSD]

Hold the picks and have Chi throw in their 2014 1st rounder, this deal actually makes some sense for both teams.

Celtics
- Compress roster a bit
- Get out of Lee's deal
- Pick up another trade chip in that pick

Chicago
- Gets some much needed SG help
- Gains cap relief
- Can now comfortably sign Deng with said relief.

Now a trade that makes more sense to me would be:

Bass, Lee and Crawford

For

Boozer


The Celtics compress their roster, eliminate a year of Lee, gain a large expiring next offseason. Chicago adds depth and more immediate finacial flexibility.

[Sketch5]

no playoff choker boozer please stay away.

But we're probably not going to be in the playoffs this year, so its all good.

[More Banners]

And frankly, I don't think we need to add any more draft picks.  The roster can only absorb so many each year anyway, and we have quite a few coming up, including two each year for the next three drafts.

I wouldn't mind having enough firsts so that the team doesn't feel like it is mortgaging the future if it gambles on giving 2-3 picks to a team with a superstar on an expiring contract who wants to test free agency and isn't guaranteed to re-sign with the Celtics.

We still have such an embarrassment of riches after picking up 4 1st so quickly (3 from BKN and 1 from LAC), and then having our own 3 over the next 3 drafts.  we only need to keep one (in 2015), per the rules of needing one every other year.

So 6 1st round picks are, potentially, tradable.  WE can give up 2 1sts each in 3 possible deals, or 3 1sts in 2 deals, for Pete's sake.

Were it my call, we'd be looking first to take back talented players over the mystery of adding more picks somewhere in future drafts. 

I'm not interested in rebuilding forever.

[camjadis]

i Say we should trade wallace bass and lee for boozer with a second pick get rid of the cap make room for boozer and still keep kris for his contract the celts will place 5th this year in out division granted rondo is healthy and green turns on beast mode like he was during last season at the end clears cap and gives us a good 4 in the process we don't need pics we got picks we need cap and a good starting five now so we can be ready to make a key move like we did for garnett and ray ray

[Galeto]

Chicago doesn't need Humphries and/or Lee at the expense of Boozer.  With Rose back and completely healthy, they're contenders.  Boozer has his weaknesses but he's still a good player and they'd be getting worse by acquiring inferior players for him.  For a team without a lot of scorers, his scoring and passing in addition to great two-way rebounding really get undervalued amid his high salary and defensive breakdowns.

Chicago has Dunleavy, Hinrich and Snell as backup wings.  They don't need Lee, not at his price and not at the cost of losing their starting power forward.  If they need to cut payroll next season, they can go the amnesty route with Boozer.  It seems highly implausible that Chicago would give up the best player in the deal AND picks to the Celtics. 

Should the Celtics really be acquiring an expensive and aging power forward when they're not even close to contending?  With Boozer they're going to be close to the luxury tax next season too and for what?  Hey, it's not my money but I doubt the owners want to shell out 70 plus million for a roster with a ceiling as first round fodder.

[EDWARDO]

Humphries and Lee for Boozer is kinda interesting, but is a trade neither team would do. Definitely not Chicago.

Throwing the the picks in makes the whole thing ludicrous.

[YoungOne87]

this trade makes no sense at all for both teams

why not,
for us: taking on extra salary and not developing our young pf in sully and kelly
for chicago: they need boozers scoring and they have deng, butler, dunleavy, hinrich, cook for the SG/SF position.

[connor]

Chicago doesn't need Humphries and/or Lee at the expense of Boozer.  With Rose back and completely healthy, they're contenders.  Boozer has his weaknesses but he's still a good player and they'd be getting worse by acquiring inferior players for him.  For a team without a lot of scorers, his scoring and passing in addition to great two-way rebounding really get undervalued amid his high salary and defensive breakdowns.

Chicago has Dunleavy, Hinrich and Snell as backup wings.  They don't need Lee, not at his price and not at the cost of losing their starting power forward.  If they need to cut payroll next season, they can go the amnesty route with Boozer.  It seems highly implausible that Chicago would give up the best player in the deal AND picks to the Celtics. 

Should the Celtics really be acquiring an expensive and aging power forward when they're not even close to contending?  With Boozer they're going to be close to the luxury tax next season too and for what?  Hey, it's not my money but I doubt the owners want to shell out 70 plus million for a roster with a ceiling as first round fodder.

While I agree with you that the Bulls don't need to move Boozer and could just amnesty him if they wanted to get the cap savings, I think the fact that they were rumored to be considering a straight up Boozer for Barnani swap last year suggests to me that they'd still like to be getting some kind of return for him rather than paying him to not play for them.

With this deal I don't see it as a realistic option since the Bulls aren't in a position where they need to be packaging draft picks with Boozer just to clear him off their payroll, while getting worse in the process.

BUT I think a return package of Humprhies and Lee is exactly what the Bulls would be expecting in return for Boozer if they did try and trade him. Humprhies isn't anywhere near as talented as Boozer, but he is 12m expiring and with starter minutes he can give you close to 10 and 10, which isn't too far off from the 16 and 10 Boozer is putting up. Additionally I think Lee can still give them valuable minutes despite them picking up Dunleavy and Snell (who I thought was more of a SF prospect). He is versatile and a good 3 and D guy with reasonable contract and still only 27.

I don't think the Bulls would put up the Charlotte pick while simultaneously getting worse, but maybe their own pick in 2014 or beyond. But therein lies the problem because why would Boston do that trade? It does nothing really for us.

The only way I could see this deal working is with Boozer heading to a third team that is actually competitive and looking to improve at PF, Humphries and Lee going to Chicago and Boston eating this phantom 3rd team's bad contracts in exchange for draft picks from the Bulls and the 3rd team. Seems more like a deadline deal to me than anything else.