RealGM

I know I'm going to get hounded, but I think this is somewhat sensible. I never really liked the idea of Ray Allen as that 3rd guy alongside KG and Pierce. I felt with the heavier 2 you get enough scoring....with Posey and House, there really is enough shooting from the wing slots...so what extra asset can Ray Allen really bring. If anything, I felt, he make them worse defensivley (I was wrong) and could actually lose them games when he is shooting erraticley (I was right). Now of course nothing can be proven until we see this Celtics team in the playoffs. People also like to mention the game winners he made against the Bobcats and Raptors. Against the Bobcats, Allen shot horrifically from the field and if you saw that game, nearly lossed it for the C's before hitting a buzzer beater. He also missed 2 huge free throws against at Cleveland with under a minute left that would have given Boston the lead in regulation and most likely the win. So I do not want to hear his late game heroics as a sign to keep him. I think Ray Allen is a terrific player, but he really does need the ball and wil force shots when he hasn't scored a lot. He has shot abysmally during a long stretch because those shots were forced. He would best served in a lineup that needs him to score instead of one that would like him to stretch the floor.

With all of that being said, I think the C's would be better served with a Ron Artest. Artest will be that shutdown wing defender so Pierce can lax on the defensive end. He is also a legit post wing threat inside. Artest has flourished up his offensive game a bit and will not force shots or struggle much from the field in a Celtics offense.

As for the Kings, they would then have an expendable Kevin Martin to use in deals. Martin can be dealt for Gasol, and the Kings can then also play Salmons at his natural SF slot. Thus with a lineup centered by Allen, Gasol, Miller, and eventually Bibby...the Kings can mix in the youth of Salmons and Garcia.

The Kings could also add Kenny Thomas or SAR to this deal. The C's also need a scoring PF (Big Baby has been nice, but a vet can't hurt either). A guy like SAR would be an asset down the stretch off of Boston's bench if he can regain health.

No way the Celtics would ruin what they have now with trading Allen for Artest.

Ray Allen fits their style to a "T" he is the best 3 point shooter of all-time and is a good playmaker. He is there to take heat off Garnett and Pierce to spot up and knock down jumpers and play off screens. Artest would be redundant to Pierce as they are both big shooting guards with Piecre being better. Artest wouldn't give the Celtics anything better then they have with Allen.

Celtics wouldn't touch Thomas' deal unless your willing to take Scalbrine's

and no way would a rebuilding Kings team trade their best chip for a SG who's on the wrong side of 30 (with injury problems coming up as well)

Plus, Allen and K. martin are redundant in Sac

and rpa, I would say that Martin has more value as a trade piece than Artest

and would Pierce and Artest coexist?


basically this deal just does not work

Yeah, this deal doesnt make sense on a lot of levels.

Boston isnt going to ruin what they have going.

SAC has absolutely no use for Ray.

Ray is worth mare than Ron.

FARMERMAN10 wrote:Plus, Allen and K. martin are redundant in Sac

and rpa, I would say that Martin has more value as a trade piece than Artest

and would Pierce and Artest coexist?


basically this deal just does not work

Never said Martin didn't have more trade value than Artest. I think he does. I just think this trade makes no sense whatsoever for the Kings.

FARMERMAN10 wrote:basically this deal just does not work

9 out of 10 people would rather have Kevin Martin than Ray Allen.

^ Yes, but that is relevant how???

gswhoops wrote:^ Yes, but that is relevant how???

Because trading Ron Artest for Ray Allen, a starting SG, when we already have Kevin Martin, would probably mean that Martin would be traded in a later deal.

Therefore, I would rather keep Kevin Martin than have Ray Allen.

Fair enough. You could always trade Martin to us...

gswhoops wrote:Fair enough. You could always trade Martin to us...

In your dreams

xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



In your dreams

Well, no harm in tryin', right?

The notion of a Ray Allen in Boston seemed ok, but it's not really working. The truth is the C's are not worse without Ray in the lineup for the most part. I threw the Artest deal out there, but others could be done as well if Sacto is not a good home for Ray. I feel that Boston would be better suited to have a defensive minded wing, backup big, and backup 1. How about a deal sending Ray for AK47. It would be an entirely different direction for Utah and the C's could start KG at the 5 with AK at the 4 and T. Allen at the 2. What are thoughts on that variation.

boston wouldn't want to ruin what it has

^ Honestly, if I were Boston and I was trading one of the big 3...it would be Pierce.

Send him to Detroit and you can probably get Price, McDyess, Maxiell and a 1st round pick...hell, you could even follow that by sending Dice and Max to Philly for Andre Miller.

Perkins
Garnett
Price
Allen
Miller

SIIIIICK.

Boston is 30-6...

No reason to panic and trade one of their key players.

gswhoops wrote:^ Honestly, if I were Boston and I was trading one of the big 3...it would be Pierce.

Send him to Detroit and you can probably get Price, McDyess, Maxiell and a 1st round pick...hell, you could even follow that by sending Dice and Max to Philly for Andre Miller.

Perkins
Garnett
Price
Allen
Miller

SIIIIICK.

who is this price guy?

Prince, its a typo.

one of the worst trade ideas i've ever seen(not value wise).why would the team with the best record make a big trade?why would kings trade artest for a 32 years allen that plays exactly like their young star kevin martin?