With the Clippers looking to shake it up...

[chilidawg]

Reddick seems like a lot of overlap with Bradley.

If NO is interested in moving Ryan Anderson, I think he'd be a good fit in our offense, we need consistent perimeter shooting and we're not getting it from anyone but Bradley.  How about Lee and Young for Anderson?  Maybe add the Dallas or Minny pick.

[number_n9ne]

add another undersized guard to our guard heavy lineup?

I'm not advocating for this trade, but calling Redick undersized is silly. He's 6'4 w/o shoes. Lets just say he doesn't fit the mold of players we should be targeting.

[TheSundanceKid]

This trade doesn't come close to working for salary purposes.  New Orleans needs to send $4.5 million our way to take on Lee.  Doing so would require at least two extra players to be added to the deal, which means we have to release two players to take on these players.  Please suggest which players we should drop.

The trade as stated works on the trade machine, not sure what you mean? If you add Zeller or Young to the trade then yes they would need to send out more salary.

Good trade proposal but I like it a lot more for the other two teams.  I like Redick a lot.  He's a definite starter, not a tweaner, plays defense, shoots, and makes plays for teammates.  If Ainge truly wants to win as much as possible this year it's a good deal.
But with Bradley playing like he has been, Redick's age, the fact that we have to give up a mid first round pick, I don't think I would pull the trigger on this one.  I'd prefer to save the pick for a bigger fish and continue to work on player development. 

True, there is a bit of duplication here and we don't solve a positional need. It's the 3 point prowess that I make the trade for.

Then trade machine is broken.  David Lee makes $15.5 million.  Ryan Anderson makes $8.5 million.  Those don't match at all.

In the trade machine, it looks like the OP included Quincy Pondexter to make the salaries work.

LOL, Pondexter isn't a throw-in.  If you think he's trash, Ainge doesn't want him since he has two more years on his deal after this one, and if you think he's good, he's not a throw-in you ignore.  (Also, Celtics still have to drop a player and this leaves NOP over the luxury tax and increases the Clippers tax bill).

Ah yep, forgot to write out Pondexter  now I'm with you. As I said, after Dec 14th the trade opens up. You'd have the option of adding Cole instead of Pondexter for example. I'm basically just stating the meat of the trade. I would imagine Ainge would eat the contract and waive Cole.
Fair point on the NO tax bill, that would be a potential roadblock to this deal. NO would have to be comfortable that they could make a subsequent move to shed salary. LA don't care about their tax bill.

Norris Cole has the right to veto any trade.  Players don't waive that right just to be waived.  You still have to say who the Celtics would waive.  Whether or not you think they'd waive Cole, they have to waive someone else already in the team since more players are coming in than going out.  And Cole wouldn't be enough to match.  It's a few hundred thousand short.

Respectfully, NBA trades are complex.  You can't just "state the meat" if you want to have a good discussion.  Often it's the fat of the trade that prevents deals from happening.

In the original trade I posted, we would need to waive 1 player. So in the original trade it would be Pondexter that would be waived. Obviously not ideal. This trade would likely need to happen after another trade to avoid the need to waive someone. At this stage it is just a hypothetical, the main point of discussion was around our ability to add a shooter in Redick and whether this trade would represent fair value for that.
Of course when Dec 14th rolls around we could use Amir instead of Lee, but I don't like that trade.

[TheSundanceKid]

Reddick seems like a lot of overlap with Bradley.

If NO is interested in moving Ryan Anderson, I think he'd be a good fit in our offense, we need consistent perimeter shooting and we're not getting it from anyone but Bradley.  How about Lee and Young for Anderson?  Maybe add the Dallas or Minny pick.

That's a fair point, didn't think of that! Anderson is a nice player offensively but I'd worry about him in our scheme defensively. Especially as we seem to like to go small a lot, would he be able to spot minutes at Center?

[Endless Paradise]

Reddick seems like a lot of overlap with Bradley.

If NO is interested in moving Ryan Anderson, I think he'd be a good fit in our offense, we need consistent perimeter shooting and we're not getting it from anyone but Bradley.  How about Lee and Young for Anderson?  Maybe add the Dallas or Minny pick.

That "maybe" about adding a pick should be a "definitely" since there's no way you're getting Anderson for Lee and Young alone.

[slamtheking]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=hugl5ft

Clippers receive: Ryan Anderson
Clippers trade: JJ Redick

Boston receives: JJ Redick
Boston trades: David Lee

NO receives: David Lee, DAL 1st pick
NO trades: Ryan Anderson

This trade really opens up after Dec 14th when you can add in some filler. NO probably need a little more to make this deal work. Say we give them Zeller, they send Cole to LA and we get Wilcox? Or just give them Young and take back Cole

We get a starting SG who gives us a 3 point threat and a much needed offensive boost to the starting lineup.
LA receive a back up big man which is really their weakness. They have Crawford and Stephenson to pick up the empty minutes from Redick.
NO do this for the pick and maybe for Zeller/Young if it interests them. This season doesn't look good for them and they need a bit of a re-tool to build around AD, he's locked in long term so taking a step back this year to build better long term isn't a bad thing.

Trades with this many parts are difficult to complete, but what do you think?

Edit: Forgot to write in Pondexter to C's. After Dec 14th when the trading season opens up, you can replace him with Cole.

no thanks.

We're giving up Lee and a low lottery first for Redick and Pondexter?  Redick is ok but we're guard heavy as it is.  let's address SF or C first.  Pondexter does nothing for me -- same quality of player we already have.

[saltlover]

This trade doesn't come close to working for salary purposes.  New Orleans needs to send $4.5 million our way to take on Lee.  Doing so would require at least two extra players to be added to the deal, which means we have to release two players to take on these players.  Please suggest which players we should drop.

The trade as stated works on the trade machine, not sure what you mean? If you add Zeller or Young to the trade then yes they would need to send out more salary.

Good trade proposal but I like it a lot more for the other two teams.  I like Redick a lot.  He's a definite starter, not a tweaner, plays defense, shoots, and makes plays for teammates.  If Ainge truly wants to win as much as possible this year it's a good deal.
But with Bradley playing like he has been, Redick's age, the fact that we have to give up a mid first round pick, I don't think I would pull the trigger on this one.  I'd prefer to save the pick for a bigger fish and continue to work on player development. 

True, there is a bit of duplication here and we don't solve a positional need. It's the 3 point prowess that I make the trade for.

Then trade machine is broken.  David Lee makes $15.5 million.  Ryan Anderson makes $8.5 million.  Those don't match at all.

In the trade machine, it looks like the OP included Quincy Pondexter to make the salaries work.

LOL, Pondexter isn't a throw-in.  If you think he's trash, Ainge doesn't want him since he has two more years on his deal after this one, and if you think he's good, he's not a throw-in you ignore.  (Also, Celtics still have to drop a player and this leaves NOP over the luxury tax and increases the Clippers tax bill).

Ah yep, forgot to write out Pondexter  now I'm with you. As I said, after Dec 14th the trade opens up. You'd have the option of adding Cole instead of Pondexter for example. I'm basically just stating the meat of the trade. I would imagine Ainge would eat the contract and waive Cole.
Fair point on the NO tax bill, that would be a potential roadblock to this deal. NO would have to be comfortable that they could make a subsequent move to shed salary. LA don't care about their tax bill.

Norris Cole has the right to veto any trade.  Players don't waive that right just to be waived.  You still have to say who the Celtics would waive.  Whether or not you think they'd waive Cole, they have to waive someone else already in the team since more players are coming in than going out.  And Cole wouldn't be enough to match.  It's a few hundred thousand short.

Respectfully, NBA trades are complex.  You can't just "state the meat" if you want to have a good discussion.  Often it's the fat of the trade that prevents deals from happening.

In the original trade I posted, we would need to waive 1 player. So in the original trade it would be Pondexter that would be waived. Obviously not ideal. This trade would likely need to happen after another trade to avoid the need to waive someone. At this stage it is just a hypothetical, the main point of discussion was around our ability to add a shooter in Redick and whether this trade would represent fair value for that.
Of course when Dec 14th rolls around we could use Amir instead of Lee, but I don't like that trade.

That's what I keep trying to explain to you.  The rule is that you cant count any of the incoming players as the ones you'd waive if a trade brings you above 15 players.  So it's fine if you want to waive Pondexter and his $7.5 million guaranteed through 2017.  Of course, that's not remotely a small aspect of the trade that you should omit in your OP.  But before you can do that, you have to waive someone already on the C's.

[Lucky17]

The Clippers are looking to shake things up? I've only heard that they'd likely deal Crawford, but that's it.

[Endless Paradise]

http://www.clipsnation.com/2015/11/30/9822598/clippers-exploring-trade-options-not-satisfied-with-current-roster-doc-cp3-griffin-jordan

[ssspence]

I don't see the OP's deal happening, but I could see a deal around Crawford and one or two of the Cs bigs.

I think a deal for a vet chucker like Mayo or Crawford makes sense.

[CelticSooner]

http://www.clipsnation.com/2015/11/30/9822598/clippers-exploring-trade-options-not-satisfied-with-current-roster-doc-cp3-griffin-jordan

GM Doc has been a disaster. All the talk before the season was the Clippers finally having a bench. That team is never getting over the hump.

[Vermont Green]

A so called "unsourced rumor":

http://www.crossmap.com/news/los-angeles-clippers-nba-trade-rumors-la-clippers-to-trade-deandre-jordan-22869

The proposed trade involves the Clippers trading Jordan to the Celtics while Josh Smith and Lance Stephenson go to the 76ers. In the exchange, Boston gives Tyler Zeller to the Clippers, and Jared Sullinger and a 2016 draft pick to the Sixers, who in turn gives Nerlens Noel and Robert Covington to the Clippers. Ever one stands to gain in this proposal

So we get:
DeAndre Jordan for Sullinger, Zeller and a 2016 pick (not specific which one)

The Clips get:
Zeller, Covington and Noel for Jordan

The Sixers get:
Josh Smith, Stephenson, Sullinger and one of our #1s for Noel and Robert Covington

Assuming it is not the Nets #1, I am OK with the deal for the Celtics.  Not sure the Clips get better so not sure they would do it but maybe Doc really likes Noel.  And who knows with the Sixers what they would do.

[TheSundanceKid]

That's what I keep trying to explain to you.  The rule is that you cant count any of the incoming players as the ones you'd waive if a trade brings you above 15 players.  So it's fine if you want to waive Pondexter and his $7.5 million guaranteed through 2017.  Of course, that's not remotely a small aspect of the trade that you should omit in your OP.  But before you can do that, you have to waive someone already on the C's.

Is that true? I wasn't aware of that. That does drastically change things as I wouldn't be happy waiving any of our current roster for this trade. Thanks for clarifying that, its good to learn the detail.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Please watch this entire video, then tell me that you still want DeAndre.  Just watch the whole video before you respond to this comment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ralEhcRPsE

Thank you.  Again, please watch the entire thing.

[86MaxwellSmart]

at least Sullinger HAS trade value now....As long as we hold onto the Brooklyn pics...Bring in Jordan....then we can trade for Cousins.