New Plan: Draft Wiggins/Exum/Parker, trade our second 1st for Larry Sanders

[vjcsmoke]

To me this makes the most sense.  I don't want Asik's overpaid 15m salary.  And Larry Sanders is one of the best defensive centers in the league.

Sanders is still only 25 so he is going to be in his prime playing for us and he will be a true rim protector.  There was talk of the Bucks shopping him around but there were no takers at the deadline.  It might make sense for the Celtics to trade that mid-round 1st for Sanders instead of gambling on a rookie like Cauley-Stein to fill that 5 spot.

http://www.brewhoop.com/2014/2/5/5380340/nba-trade-rumors-2014-milwaukee-bucks-larry-sanders-ersan-ilyasova

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/sandela01.html

He is signed for 4/44 so we'd need to move some salary in return.  Would the Bucks be willing to take Wallace off our hands or would we need to add Bass or sign and trade Hump to make it work??

[Lucky17]

I'll take Asik's "overpaid", expiring deal over the long-term cap ramifications of Sanders'.

[jambr380]

The plan makes sense in theory, but I really hope we can figure out a solution that is better than Asik or Sanders. We are the Celtics and should have higher expectations than either of these two...unless, of course, we have all-stars at all other positions.

If we get the opportunity to select WCS with our 2nd pick, I would be much happier. He will be very cost controlled for his first few years and if there is anything he can do well, it's play defense. I would also pretty psyched if we could somehow figure out a way to pry Noel away from Philly.

[pearljammer10]

I'll take Asik's "overpaid", expiring deal over the long-term cap ramifications of Sanders'.

I love how, despite every Asik thread saying that his contract DOESN'T COUNT as 15 million against the cap, he is still seen as an "overpaid" player.

I too would much prefer Asik and his deal over four years of an overpaid Sanders.

[D.o.s.]

As opposed to an overpaid Asik, who's going to ask for, and get, a deal similar to Sanders's after his last year on the current contract?

[Lucky17]

As opposed to an overpaid Asik, who's going to ask for, and get, a deal similar to Sanders's after his last year on the current contract?

I cross that bridge later.

[D.o.s.]

As opposed to an overpaid Asik, who's going to ask for, and get, a deal similar to Sanders's after his last year on the current contract?

I cross that bridge later.

You sound like Cleveland's front office circa May, 2010

Not that there's anything wrong with wanting Asik over Sanders, but if you're talking about how much each is getting paid you have to factor in the fact that Asik is getting another big contract much sooner than Sanders is.

[Lucky17]

As opposed to an overpaid Asik, who's going to ask for, and get, a deal similar to Sanders's after his last year on the current contract?

I cross that bridge later.

You sound like Cleveland's front office circa May, 2010

Not that there's anything wrong with wanting Asik over Sanders, but if you're talking about how much each is getting paid you have to factor in the fact that Asik is getting another big contract much sooner than Sanders is.

I'm just going off what most in the Boston media have been saying: Ainge wants to keep the books clear for the summer of 2015.

Asik is an ideal trade target for Ainge for his position, his skill set, and his contract length. A bridge player to the next evolution of the roster.

[LooseCannon]

As opposed to an overpaid Asik, who's going to ask for, and get, a deal similar to Sanders's after his last year on the current contract?

A deal similar to Sanders' would probably be a bargain relative to Asik's production.

[fairweatherfan]

I'll take Asik's "overpaid", expiring deal over the long-term cap ramifications of Sanders'.

I love how, despite every Asik thread saying that his contract DOESN'T COUNT as 15 million against the cap, he is still seen as an "overpaid" player.

Well, the contract still exists - somebody's paying those dollars, it's just that some of them are invisible for salary cap purposes.  That matters not at all to fans, but to the people who'd have to cut those checks it's still going to be meaningful.

As opposed to an overpaid Asik, who's going to ask for, and get, a deal similar to Sanders's after his last year on the current contract?

This has been my issue with trading for Asik all along - he's a fine player but as a high-level complement to star talent.  He wouldn't have made us contenders this year, and probably wouldn't next year either.  Which means we've got to resign or S+T him to get any contention-relevant value. 

[PhoSita]

If you want the team to be better in the short term, go after Asik.

If you want to aim to be better a few years from now, Sanders might make sense.  Sanders is definitely far riskier, though.

[Who]

Milwaukee are not going to trade Larry Sanders for a mid first round pick.

They'll trade him for good value or they'll bring him back next year in order to rebuild his trade value ... but they are not selling him off for 25c on the dollar.

[SHAQATTACK]

Nothing to do with Sanders at all.....not on Celtics

Forget him....Stevens doesn't deserve a bum like that on the team

Dream on...Danny will never be dumb enough to want Sanders. ....issues .....Baby like

[fairweatherfan]

If you want the team to be better in the short term, go after Asik.

If you want to aim to be better a few years from now, Sanders might make sense.  Sanders is definitely far riskier, though.

Yeah Sanders has the higher ceiling but also a far greater chance of being a Wallace-like albatross on the team's cap.  I say play it safe til we know more about some of our other key pieces.

[D.o.s.]

As opposed to an overpaid Asik, who's going to ask for, and get, a deal similar to Sanders's after his last year on the current contract?

A deal similar to Sanders' would probably be a bargain relative to Asik's production.

And that's the crux of the debate between the two, right here -- whether you agree with LC's thesis.

I go back and forth on it, but generally I prefer the idea of a locked-in player to one that'd need to be renegotiated with after one season on a team that's probably not going to be great.

edit: of course, FWF's got a good point above this, too.