Rondo and Gordon Tandem

[Monkhouse]

Why are people hung up on Gordon? He isn't even that good. He can score, but he isn't effiecent.

45.1% FG%, 41.9% 3PT%, .513 eFG%, .558 TS%

Gordon has been efficient.  He's a very good offensive player, or at least scorer.

If we're going to try to go after someone over 14 million cap space then go after Melo.

That's why I think that Wallace needs to be included.  You then convert a $10 million sunk cost into a $14 million productive player.  It basically works out to paying an extra $4 million to get a productive player.

Gordon has been efficient, but that hasn't been the story of his career. Hes been known for his inconsistencies, and a knack for getting injured.

I'm sorry Roy, but I would stay far far away from him. Would you like him on the Celtics?

[D.o.s.]

Why are people hung up on Gordon? He isn't even that good. He can score, but he isn't effiecent. Plus this guy has been injured too many times to even be worth 12 million.

Does anyone seriously think we'd want to go after Gordon who may be taking up a good chunk of our cap space?

If we're going to try to go after someone over 14 million cap space then go after Melo.

Someone brought this up in another thread--New Orleans wants to move Gordon, so if you could get them to grab Wallace's contract (Wallace + Bogans expiring works) you're paying 4 million a year to upgrade to a solid offensive SG who would, on paper, work well with Rondo.


That doesn't hold much water if you think that Bradley can be our 2 of the future, because he's almost certainly not going to get as large of a contract.

But the thing is..

People NEED to stop posting that trade idea!

The Pelicans were expected to make the playoffs. At this time its a toss up to whether or not they can turn it around. But why would they risk and jeopardize 2 years of their cap space taking on Gerald Wallace? Bogans expiring contract is nice, but even if we offered a first round pick I don't think the Pelicans would bite.

Nothing about Wallace screams leadership or role model. His shooting is terrible, and his FT is worse than Deandre Jordan who is shooting just as paltry 49.1% of his FTs.

They're not jeopardizing two years of their cap space, they're getting cap relief (relative to Gordon's contract).

Now, as to why they'd take Wallace the player--there's no real good reason, unless they're extremely desperate to get rid of EG--which is the whole premise of the trade idea.

[AB_Celtic]

Eric Gordon at $14-15 mil or Bradley at, say, $7 mil? I say Bradley.

Unless NOP takes Wallace, this isn't worth discussing.

[stes]

I've got mixed feelings about this idea. I mean, if getting Gordon means no Bradley extension, then I think I'd pass. I would also be hesitant to part with our expiring contracts (and in result lose our cap space flexibility) for him. And I don't see Pelicans taking Wallace.
My idea is: Green + Bass (to a third team) for Eric Gordon. Say something like this: http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=m9d8wg8.
I think we could get some picks in such deal, as both Bass and Green are on a much better contracts and at the same time are potent rotation players.

[Roy H.]

Why are people hung up on Gordon? He isn't even that good. He can score, but he isn't effiecent.

45.1% FG%, 41.9% 3PT%, .513 eFG%, .558 TS%

Gordon has been efficient.  He's a very good offensive player, or at least scorer.

If we're going to try to go after someone over 14 million cap space then go after Melo.

That's why I think that Wallace needs to be included.  You then convert a $10 million sunk cost into a $14 million productive player.  It basically works out to paying an extra $4 million to get a productive player.

Gordon has been efficient, but that hasn't been the story of his career. Hes been known for his inconsistencies, and a knack for getting injured.

I'm sorry Roy, but I would stay far far away from him. Would you like him on the Celtics?

I vastly prefer him to Wallace. I would rather pay $15 million to a good-but-not-great player as opposed to a $10 million sunk cost / untradeable contract.

[VitorSullyandKOFan]

Wallace,Bredley for Gordon.

[Kane3387]

Why are people hung up on Gordon? He isn't even that good. He can score, but he isn't effiecent.

45.1% FG%, 41.9% 3PT%, .513 eFG%, .558 TS%

Gordon has been efficient.  He's a very good offensive player, or at least scorer.

If we're going to try to go after someone over 14 million cap space then go after Melo.

That's why I think that Wallace needs to be included.  You then convert a $10 million sunk cost into a $14 million productive player.  It basically works out to paying an extra $4 million to get a productive player.

Thats a solid way to look at it. If Wallace is included then you haven't changed the fact that 10 mill of salary is allocated to one player over the next 2.5 years. You only changed the name of the player on paper.

Gordon's skillset is similar to ray Allen's skill set. We know that is a nice fit beside rondos skill set.

[LooseCannon]

Rondo and Gordon really looks good... but what will happen to AB??

According to Bleacher Report, there are at least six likely destinations for Gordon, all of which possess enough assets to hammer the trade. The Denver Nuggets, Cleveland Cavaliers, Charlotte Bobcats, Memphis Grizzlies and the Detroit Pistons could make a run at the explosive swingman, though the Celtics have the package to make the trade work.

The Celtics might be the most ideal team to make a trade for Gordon, given that they have the assets the Pelicans would like to acquire. Kris Humphries and his expiring contract worth $12 million would surely entice the Pelicans, who will try to create more cap space for the upcoming free agency period. Moreover, the Pelicans will also get Brandon Bass, a player capable of giving the Pelicans more toughness in the interior.

This makes me think that a logical deal would be Humphries to the Pelicans, Gordon to a third team, and a pupu platter of veterans to Boston, who also get picks out of the deal.

Effectively, it would be Humphries for non-expiring contracts and draft considerations.  That could expand the number of teams who can swing a deal for Gordon.

[pearljammer10]

Why are people hung up on Gordon? He isn't even that good. He can score, but he isn't effiecent.

45.1% FG%, 41.9% 3PT%, .513 eFG%, .558 TS%

Gordon has been efficient.  He's a very good offensive player, or at least scorer.

If we're going to try to go after someone over 14 million cap space then go after Melo.

That's why I think that Wallace needs to be included.  You then convert a $10 million sunk cost into a $14 million productive player.  It basically works out to paying an extra $4 million to get a productive player.

And every team needs a scorer whose job solely is to score. Gordon has that mentality and with Sully and Green as two and three options, he would fit in nicely. Id like to keep Bradley if we traded for him though. Wallace and a first with a bogans filler to make money work would be as far as Id go for him.

[LooseCannon]

Why are people hung up on Gordon? He isn't even that good. He can score, but he isn't effiecent.

45.1% FG%, 41.9% 3PT%, .513 eFG%, .558 TS%

Gordon has been efficient.  He's a very good offensive player, or at least scorer.

If we're going to try to go after someone over 14 million cap space then go after Melo.

That's why I think that Wallace needs to be included.  You then convert a $10 million sunk cost into a $14 million productive player.  It basically works out to paying an extra $4 million to get a productive player.

Gordon has been efficient, but that hasn't been the story of his career. Hes been known for his inconsistencies, and a knack for getting injured.

I'm sorry Roy, but I would stay far far away from him. Would you like him on the Celtics?

I vastly prefer him to Wallace. I would rather pay $15 million to a good-but-not-great player as opposed to a $10 million sunk cost / untradeable contract.

If Wallace has an untradeable contract, then by the very definition of the word "untradeable", then you can't expect to include him in a trade.

Of course, no contract is untradeable if you throw enough draft picks at it, so the question is how many picks do you draw the line at when given a choice of Gordon plus loss of picks vs Wallace and keeping those picks.

[ssspence]

I'm all for a Gordon for Wallace and pick or two deal (not Bradley, tho).... but why would NOP do it? Just hard to believe anyone is taking him unless the package is really attractive.

[TheWatersEdge]

Eric Gordon at $14-15 mil or Bradley at, say, $7 mil? I say Bradley.

Unless NOP takes Wallace, this isn't worth discussing.

This

[Monkhouse]

Why are people hung up on Gordon? He isn't even that good. He can score, but he isn't effiecent.

45.1% FG%, 41.9% 3PT%, .513 eFG%, .558 TS%

Gordon has been efficient.  He's a very good offensive player, or at least scorer.

If we're going to try to go after someone over 14 million cap space then go after Melo.

That's why I think that Wallace needs to be included.  You then convert a $10 million sunk cost into a $14 million productive player.  It basically works out to paying an extra $4 million to get a productive player.

Gordon has been efficient, but that hasn't been the story of his career. Hes been known for his inconsistencies, and a knack for getting injured.

I'm sorry Roy, but I would stay far far away from him. Would you like him on the Celtics?

I vastly prefer him to Wallace. I would rather pay $15 million to a good-but-not-great player as opposed to a $10 million sunk cost / untradeable contract.

I mean I would too. But I was asking on a general point of view Roy, would you accept giving a first round pick, Bradley, and Wallace for Gordon? Cause realistically that what is the Pelicans are going to ask for in return. No one in their right mind would ever take on Wallace without a pick in return, unless they want to get fired.

[ssspence]

Eric Gordon at $14-15 mil or Bradley at, say, $7 mil? I say Bradley.

Unless NOP takes Wallace, this isn't worth discussing.

This

Better bump that Bradley number up.