RealGM

I put a similar trade on the Boston board and they seemed interested.

Indy Out:

Murphy/ Rush/ Solo

Boston Out:
Sheed (immediate exp)
Big Baby (exp)
Avery Bradley
Future consideration ( 1st or young prospect)

I know we need to move Ford, but a trade like this makes it possible to move him. I have faith that Bradley could atleast be a decent b/u. We add nothing to our payroll and get about 8 mill. in savings instantly. The late first is nice because we need to compile picks, not trade them. And finally, I believe a combo of Hans/Foster/ Rolle/ McBob/& Big Baby can replace Troy's production.

*** Edit : Avery can't be traded until Aug 1, according to RealGM. Post 8/1 proposal.

Boneman2 wrote:I put i similar trade on the Boston board and they seemed interested.

Indy Out:

Murphy/ Rush/ Solo

Boston Out:
Sheed (immediate exp)
Big Baby (exp)
Avery Bradley
Future consideration ( 1st or young prospect)

I know we need to move Ford, but a trade like this makes it possible to move him. I have faith that Bradley could atleast be a decent b/u. We add nothing to our payroll and get about 8 mill. in savings instantly. The late first is nice because we need to compile picks, not trade them. And finally, I believe a combo of Hans/Foster/ Rolle/ McBob/& Big Baby can replace Troy's production.

*** Edit : Avery can't be traded until Aug 1, according to RealGM. Post 8/1 proposal.

What have you heard about Bradley's return from ankle surgery?

^^^should be good to go before camp starts.

The Celtics know he can do nothing for them, but for us, he could play & learn from it.

I like Bradley, and I'd do this deal. I'd prefer to leave out Rush and then drop the extra prospect back from Boston if that works financially, but either way I'd be interested in a deal like this. I think Bradley would be a good fit for us, and would have been happy if we'd grabbed him at #10 (though I'm excited about George now as well).

I think this is a good deal for both teams actually, since Boston seems like a great destination for Murphy since they're trying to win now and could use a big who can shoot. Can we give them TJ as well? They need a Rondo backup...

^^^ Boston would probably rather invest in their frontline, as opposed to paying Ford 8.5 to back up Rondo. With the uncertainty surrounding Perk, their need for a potential starter is a real concern. They just signed JO, but I truly believe his days of making an impact are over, have been for a awhile. Boston's only real liquid asset is Sheed's contract, because he is retiring. After that they really don't have much to work with, as far as finding another 8.5 on their roster.

I believe TJ can be traded at some point, probably as cap filler if we do something drastic. However, that is why I prefer a trade like this, where our 2011 plans are still a priority and left undisturbed. We need to cherish every last dime of our expirings.

We give Boston a starter/6th man/ & b/u center. In such a way, they can retool w/o any longterm obligations as well. They won't miss the pick or Bradley, preferring to go with established players until PP retires.

Boneman2 wrote:^^^should be good to go before camp starts.

The Celtics know he can do nothing for them, but for us, he could play & learn from it.

I'd do this trade then. I'd miss Murph, but I think this makes sense for both teams. Rush could really learn from some HOF type players as well, could help his career in a big way.

Bradley Would be great, especially when he pair with Stephenson at back-court, who has good vision and can play point guard. But I would like it if we deal Dahntay Jones not Brandon Rush.

Rush was their preference over Jones. In reality moving Rush opens the door for George, Lance, and Mike to compete for the 2-spot.

I'd likely do it. A little more breathing room under the cap is nice w/ Sheed's expiring contract.

Big Baby can contribute immediately at the PF spot in case Hansbrough isn't healthy, and Avery Bradley is a PG project to go with Stephenson, bring nice young competition and the potential of one of them being the future guy.

With another PG on board, perhaps it will make things easier to move Ford, b/c right now we only have Stephenson and an injured Price, so trading Ford isn't really beneficial unless we get another PG back (one reason the rumored OKC deal didn't go through on draft night, b/c Maynor was not included)

At first look, i'd do this. But with a package like that (Murphy+Rush+S.Jones), i think we can do something better. Bradley's the only one i'd like to have in that bunch from boston.
I don't know, i like the idea but Murphy + Rush for me is different.
Those are two proven guys, i just think maybe we can settle for something BIGGER than Bradley and Davis.

I look at it like this... By acquring Sheed's instant savings before the season, we can put ourself in a position to take in more than we send out if a deal came our way. If a sweetheart deal becomes available from a team looking to shed salary, before the deadline then we can atleast be in the conversation.


If you look at it in a different light, no team is going to give up great value for Murphy when he is about to expire. Sure a contender might offer a late first around the deadline, but they won't really give up solid prospects, and they probably wouldn't have favorable contracts to send back our way. Boston has the perfect scenario for us, and I feel like we are just as perfect for them.

I like this deal because we lose no flexibility in 2011, essentially gaining Bradley and a 1st for Rush. It is addition by subtraction in a weird sort of way, by thinning out the pecking order, we can see what we've got to look forward to.

It's been posted elsewhere but I agree with the sentiment that we don't need to be picking up more expiring contracts. Especially when we're giving up an expiring with some value in that he can actually play and help a playoff team to get in return an expiring with no value to us at all. I'm in the boat that we're not going to get the value in free agency that we can get by trading our expirings.

I'm also not keen on Bradley as our point. He didn't run the point at Texas, Balbay and Justin Mason did. Moving him to point guard would be similar to what we have with Lance, except Bradley does not have nearly the same ceiling that Lance does.

You combine those two points and you get a "No" to this deal.

I'm not in love with this deal... to me kind of seems like it's one of those deals that would be done just for the sake of making a deal. Unless Bradley or Rush would explode on a new team, I see no real reason either team would make this deal.

They keep big baby, we keep rush. sounds good to me.

I'm not sure I'd do it. Avery Bradley just isn't that impressive IMO. Big Baby is decent, but with the recent FA market, I'd hate to see how much $$$ he'd get in the open market.

Murphy is our most valuable trade piece. He can still help us this season, until a trade comes along. I think a team will offer more than an unproven converted pg, and a backup pf.

Jackson Jiggle wrote:Murphy is our most valuable trade piece. He can still help us this season, until a trade comes along. I think a team will offer more than an unproven converted pg, and a backup pf.

And instant expirings, and a first round pick.

That's an awful lot to leave out.

Boneman2 wrote:

Jackson Jiggle wrote:Murphy is our most valuable trade piece. He can still help us this season, until a trade comes along. I think a team will offer more than an unproven converted pg, and a backup pf.

And instant expirings, and a first round pick.

That's an awful lot to leave out.

Murphy's got an expiring contract too, and he'll be more productive than Sheed and Big Baby combined. I agree, he's our most valuable expiring and if there's one guy that's worthy to be re-signed, it's him (a bit cheaper i guess).
I'm not that excited about the first round pick, sorry. Boston would likely offer a 2011 or a 2012 first rounder, which means it could still be in the late 20's and not lottery picks. With their big three intact, it'll be hard to get excited with the thought of acquiring a first rounder from them. Even if we say they're aging, Ainge will still build a contending team around those three for as long as they're playing.
And i really really doubt they'll be willing to trade their "post-big three" first rounders in 2013, 2014 and so on. They'dd be in a rebuilding mode in those years.

^^^ What if a situation comes up like the Beasley give away during the coarse of the season. Where we could've gotten a freebie only if we had cap-space.

Also this deal would put the Pacers in a position to absorb Sessions from Minny if they thought it was necessary. Minny would've done it last week.

How does the deal look if I continue to connect the dots for you.

OUT
Murphy
Jones/Rush
Solo
IN
4 mill cap-space
Big-baby
Bradley
1st
Sessions

Boneman2 wrote:^^^ What if a situation comes up like the Beasley give away during the coarse of the season. Where we could've gotten a freebie only if we had cap-space.

Also this deal would put the Pacers in a position to absorb Sessions from Minny if they thought it was necessary. Minny would've done it last week.

How does the deal look if I continue to connect the dots for you.

OUT
Murphy
Jones/Rush
Solo
IN
4 mill cap-space
Big-baby
Bradley
1st
Sessions

Yes, Minnesota could be looking for a salary dump but i don't think they'd do it like Miami did with Beasley. Those are two different scenarios and Minnesota's not in desperation mode, meaning they would likely dump Sessions IN EXCHANGE for a useful young vet or an expiring, someone that could be a big part of their rebuilding, plus a sure draft pick for the draft monster David Kahn. I'd rather transact with Minnesota straight up if i want Sessions. Plus, it will be less costly than the Boston-Indiana proposal. And Sessions is clearly a better choice for us than Bradley.

If the Boston-Indiana proposal pushes through, Bradley would be nice alongside Lance, but they both play the same position, neither is a pure PG, and both are still "projects" in terms of their transition from SG to PG. Not to mention we're kinda projecting George to fully develop into an SG so that he could play alongside Granger. I'd rather give more minutes to Lance so if everything turns out as planned, we could probably see a Stephenson/George backcourt.

We currently have a pretty decent lineup already, the only thing lacking is a starting PG.
In this case, i believe it's better to transact with Minnesota straight up if it's Sessions we're going after. We see our expirings as valuable trade chips but on the other hand, we can also benefit from keeping them until their contract expires next year. Less complicated, less risky, less costly.