ESPN (rumor): Green, Wallace, and Bradley - all on the block

[Quetzalcoatl]

This is funny:

http://www.lakersnation.com/lakers-trade-rumors-kevin-love-100-percent-will-join-lakers/2014/01/30/

The Lakers fans are all excited about a rumor from ESPN saying that a GM believes there is a 100% chance that Love forces his way to LA, but their comment section is all people going "wait, Broussard authored the ESPN piece?  That means it's not happening, doesn't it  " 

Even with all our differences, it's kind of nice to think of all the things we have in common with Lakers fans: 1.) love of the game, 2.) rooting for storied franchises and 3.) strong anti-Broussard sentiments and total skepticism for literally everything he is associated with

[Fred Roberts]

I'm not opposed to keeping Bradley, but given that he's trying to get pretty big money, I'd be okay seeing him go in the right trade. If we could keep him for $5M/yr, that would work. If he wants $8 or $9, forget it.

Green, I believe, is still a good value even if he's not blowing up as much as we hoped this season. He is far from a weak link.

[D.o.s.]

Why does ESPN let Chris Broussard write articles for them? It's been pointed out time and time again he makes up his own "rumors." He's the one who said the Clippers wanted to trade Griffin for Melo and got laughed at by numerous sportswriters, players and coaches.

Sorry if that comes off salty at you heyvik, it's not at all. Just find Broussard's journalistic integrity lacking.

isn't he the one who got the Lebron decision? you know in trade for being a plant for whatever Lebron's management company is called. every once in a while they give him a real scoop and in return any time they want anything to appear in print he writes it. so 95% of his stuff is BS, but 5% is true breaking news. i guess the BS still gets page hits and ESPN considers the 5% worth whatever they pay him.

Pretty much, yeah.

[LooseCannon]

I'm not opposed to keeping Bradley, but given that he's trying to get pretty big money, I'd be okay seeing him go in the right trade. If we could keep him for $5M/yr, that would work. If he wants $8 or $9, forget it.

If you can't trade Bradley, would you rather let him walk for nothing or pay him more than you would prefer in the hopes that he will either surprise you and justify the contract or else be a tradeable asset (or at least sufficiently useful trade ballast that you don't have to add a pick to get someone to take his contract) part-way through his new deal?

[Yoki_IsTheName]

I'm not opposed to keeping Bradley, but given that he's trying to get pretty big money, I'd be okay seeing him go in the right trade. If we could keep him for $5M/yr, that would work. If he wants $8 or $9, forget it.

If you can't trade Bradley, would you rather let him walk for nothing or pay him more than you would prefer in the hopes that he will either surprise you and justify the contract or else be a tradeable asset (or at least sufficiently useful trade ballast that you don't have to add a pick to get someone to take his contract) part-way through his new deal?

I think Bradley's play this year and his pending RFA status is what's making his value low.

Everyone knows how good he is on defense. But will he more than just a defender?

This is why I don't think we'll get fair value. If we're not keeping hi, meaning we need to trade Bradley, we may end up having to settle for $0.75 for the dollar, unless he's included in a good package.

[celtic -_- pride]

obviously we all want to get out of the wallace contract but it's a question of what we give up. also i'm not going to trade green or bradley without getting talent and or a high draft pick. we are rebuilding not tanking, that's how you play the lottery without putting all your eggs in one basket. i don't see how you can trade 2/3 of your franchises top players without getting value back ? that's digging our hole a little deeper in my opinion. i don't want to see desperation moves out of ainge. the team is already horrible. we need to move bass before anyone else

[Eddie20]

I'm not opposed to keeping Bradley, but given that he's trying to get pretty big money, I'd be okay seeing him go in the right trade. If we could keep him for $5M/yr, that would work. If he wants $8 or $9, forget it.

If you can't trade Bradley, would you rather let him walk for nothing or pay him more than you would prefer in the hopes that he will either surprise you and justify the contract or else be a tradeable asset (or at least sufficiently useful trade ballast that you don't have to add a pick to get someone to take his contract) part-way through his new deal?

I think Bradley's play this year and his pending RFA status is what's making his value low.

Everyone knows how good he is on defense. But will he more than just a defender?

But hasn't he proven to be more than just a defender? Let's not forget he just turned 23 2 months ago. He still has a ton of room for growth, so yes, I would re-sign him and not lose him as an asset.

[LilRip]

I would probably keep Bradley but try to move green and Wallace. I would trade Green and Wallace for Okafor and a first rounder, tbh. As for Bradley, I do think he'll have a place in the C's future. I just worry about his health.

[BleedGreen1989]

I would probably keep Bradley but try to move green and Wallace. I would trade Green and Wallace for Okafor and a first rounder, tbh. As for Bradley, I do think he'll have a place in the C's future. I just worry about his health.

Im sure you would. But PHX likely wouldnt

[PickNRoll]

Some shooting guard salaries for reference:

Kevin Martin: 6.5M
Jamal Crawford: 5.2M
Tony Allen: 4.4M

I like Avery's hustle, but I don't like him any better than these guys.

[317]

Some shooting guard salaries for reference:

Kevin Martin: 6.5M
Jamal Crawford: 5.2M
Tony Allen: 4.4M

I like Avery's hustle, but I don't like him any better than these guys.

hes 5+ years younger then all of them, maybe closer to 10 years. i think hes worth maybe 250k per more then the full mid level.

[LilRip]

I would probably keep Bradley but try to move green and Wallace. I would trade Green and Wallace for Okafor and a first rounder, tbh. As for Bradley, I do think he'll have a place in the C's future. I just worry about his health.

Im sure you would. But PHX likely wouldnt

Suns do have a need in the wing position and they want to make a splash in the playoffs. Okafor is an expiring so if they don't deal him, they'll only get more salary cap relief - something they already have oodles of with or without him.

[CelticG1]

This is funny:

http://www.lakersnation.com/lakers-trade-rumors-kevin-love-100-percent-will-join-lakers/2014/01/30/

The Lakers fans are all excited about a rumor from ESPN saying that a GM believes there is a 100% chance that Love forces his way to LA, but their comment section is all people going "wait, Broussard authored the ESPN piece?  That means it's not happening, doesn't it  " 

Even with all our differences, it's kind of nice to think of all the things we have in common with Lakers fans: 1.) love of the game, 2.) rooting for storied franchises and 3.) strong anti-Broussard sentiments and total skepticism for literally everything he is associated with

Maybe its just a newish thing but it reallh bugs me when 2 teams fans like LA and the Knicks route for/ expect to get players who force their way to their teams.

Its just so lame. The Celtics and their fans look to build teams where their fans just seem to route for disgruntled players to throw tantrums, whine to the media, and hope they want to hang out with celebrities.

[Celtics4ever]

I think all those guys are on the block.   Add Bass too to that list.

[erisred]

Danny will trade anybody for the right package. So, this isn't news.