Memphis/Boston/Minnesota - McHale's Love for Ainge is 4ever

pardon_my_interruption · Post #1 » by **pardon_my_interruption** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:11 pm

BOSTON

Incoming: Mike Miller/Greg Buckner/Marko Jaric/#2 pick (rights to Ricky Rubio)
Outgoing: Rajon Rondo/Ray Allen/Gabe Pruitt/2011 1st round pick

MEMPHIS

Incoming: Kevin Love/Sebastian Telfair/Gabe Pruitt/Brian Cardinal/2011 1st (Boston - top 1 protected)
Outgoing: Greg Buckner/Marko Jaric/#2 pick (rights to Ricky Rubio)

MINNESOTA

Incoming: Rajon Rondo/Ray Allen
Outgoing: Kevin Love/Sebastian Telfair/Mike Miller/Brian Cardinal

pardon_my_interruption · Post #2 » by **pardon_my_interruption** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:20 pm

On second look this is a horrible trade for the Grizzlies. :-)

Devilzsidewalk · Post #3 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:21 pm

plus McHale has no more say in personnel decisions than I do

Esohny · Post #4 » by **Esohny** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:23 pm

I don't know. I'd put Love's value close to the #2, and they get to dump 2 bad contracts. Not sure if they do it, but it's not terrible.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #5 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:26 pm

I think it's worst for Boston actually; if they ever traded Rondo it'd be because he can't shoot and keep defenses honest, so they trade him for a fresh young PG prospect that can't shoot?

john2jer · Post #6 » by **john2jer** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:34 pm

From the sounds of it, McHale won't even work for the Wolves by the end of this week.

This isn't terrible for the Grizzlies. It's not all that great, but it's not bad. They cut salary and pick up the final piece to their starting rotation.

Wolves take it and run. If Harden drops in the draft...

C - Jefferson/#18Mullens
PF - Gomes/Smith
SF - #6Harden/Brewer
SG - Allen/Foye
PG - Rondo/#28Beaubois

We sign Rondo in 2010 to $10-12mil per. Sign Foye to $6mil per. Quick math says we're still left with $10mil to sign a free agent in 2010. Assuming Harden has a solid season, it shouldn't be too tough to find a free agent to fill the gap at either the 4 or 5. We lose our 2009 first round pick, but with Allen and Rondo being added to Jefferson, Foye, Gomes, and Harden, my assumption would that the pick wouldn't be a very good one anyways.

Celtics get hosed.

greenbeans · Post #7 » by **greenbeans** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:34 pm

That deal is terrible from Boston's perspective. Ray>Miller and Rondo>Rubio(atleast for the next 2-3 years when we'll be contending)

john2jer · Post #8 » by **john2jer** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:39 pm

greenbeans wrote:That deal is terrible from Boston's perspective. Ray>Miller and Rondo>Rubio(atleast for the next 2-3 years when we'll be contending)

Completely disagree with everything in your post, except for the part about "Ray>Miller and Rondo>Rubio. Oh and the "terrible" part. So basically you're totally wrong except for the parts where you're right, which is all of it.

pardon_my_interruption · Post #9 » by **pardon_my_interruption** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:44 pm

I don't see it as so bad for Boston.

1) They get Rubio.
2) Yes Allen>Miller but they do get production from the bench at SF which is a plus for Boston who finds a hard time resting Paul Pierce who looked dead in the playoffs.
3) Buckner's buyout saves them at minimum 6 million dollars with the luxury tax implications Boston is facing. If they decide to use the MLE and re-sign some of their players..that's also a big bonus.
4) Jaric is a veteran player that can play 3 positions off the bench for Doc Rivers.
5) His wife would be more inclined to go to Celtics games than Grizzlies.
6) They get Rubio.

shrink · Post #10 » by **shrink** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:52 pm

A $9.8 mil Mike Miller > a $19.8 mil Ray Allen ...

... however, not for BOS. the Celtics have a year, maybe two, that they can still win an nba championship. They sacrificed all their youth save rondo to have that shot with aging vet stars. They know how to play together, and their window is short. The deal makes sense for most any other team, but BOS is committed to the path they now walk. They can't trade Ray and Rondo, and risk a long development time together.

john2jer · Post #11 » by **john2jer** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:55 pm

After what Rondo just did in the play-offs? I think Rondo's value is greater than Rubio's, even though he's about to be extended.

Boston might get production off the bench at SF, but they take a huge hit at SG. I can't believe you used that as justification.

Boston doesn't give a rip about the luxury tax if they're winning championships.

Marko Jaric sucks.

Boston is in win now mode. No matter how good people think Rubio is, he's not making the jump to NBA Championship caliber point guard in the next two years, which is Boston's window.

This is TERRIBLE for Boston.

greenbeans · Post #12 » by **greenbeans** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:58 pm

john2jer wrote:
greenbeans wrote:That deal is terrible from Boston's perspective. Ray>Miller and Rondo>Rubio(atleast for the next 2-3 years when we'll be contending)

Completely disagree with everything in your post, except for the part about "Ray>Miller and Rondo>Rubio. Oh and the "terrible" part. So basically you're totally wrong except for the parts where you're right, which is all of it.

rightt..

Rubio is sure to be a great player imo, but Rondo is already the perfect fit for pretty much our whole team concept.
Sure Miller shores up the 2/3 off the bench problems, but we're left with no starting quality 2. So we'd be forced to move Pierce back to sg or Miller there.
It's just too much of a lateral move for it to be worth breaking up what is already a great team.

john2jer · Post #13 » by **john2jer** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:04 pm

greenbeans wrote:
john2jer wrote:
greenbeans wrote:That deal is terrible from Boston's perspective. Ray>Miller and Rondo>Rubio(atleast for the next 2-3 years when we'll be contending)

Completely disagree with everything in your post, except for the part about "Ray>Miller and Rondo>Rubio. Oh and the "terrible" part. So basically you're totally wrong except for the parts where you're right, which is all of it.

rightt..

Rubio is sure to be a great player imo, but Rondo is already the perfect fit for pretty much our whole team concept.
Sure Miller shores up the 2/3 off the bench problems, but we're left with no starting quality 2. So we'd be forced to move Pierce back to sg or Miller there.
It's just too much of a lateral move for it to be worth breaking up what is already a great team.

Sorry, my bad. I was kinda joking with you. I completely agree with you. This trade is horrible for Boston.

pardon_my_interruption · Post #14 » by **pardon_my_interruption** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:05 pm

john2jer wrote:After what Rondo just did in the play-offs? I think Rondo's value is greater than Rubio's, even though he's about to be extended.

I agree. But I'm not the one with the rumor coming out of Boston that Rondo may be on the block.

Boston might get production off the bench at SF, but they take a huge hit at SG. I can't believe you used that as justification.

I'm not using anything for 'justification'. I merely acknowledged one positive of a Mike Miller addition, who coincidentally can also play PG and SG.

Boston doesn't give a rip about the luxury tax if they're winning championships.

Which they didn't do this year, so that $10 million dollar price tag they will have to pay to the league this year is a bit tougher to swallow. At least for this year.

Marko Jaric sucks.

Can't argue there. But you can't expect the Grizzlies to just hand Boston the #2 pick, now can we.

greenbeans · Post #15 » by **greenbeans** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:08 pm

john2jer wrote:
Sorry, my bad. I was kinda joking with you. I completely agree with you. This trade is horrible for Boston.

ha. ain't gonna take much to throw me off atm. been climbing the proverbial tree

john2jer · Post #16 » by **john2jer** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:13 pm

Weren't the "rumors" that were denied, that Rondo was untouchable and Ray Allen's name was briefly mentioned in trade talks?

Boston would be insane to trade Rondo. He's the cornerstone of that franchise as they continue to age.

PMI, you're the one that mentioned Jaric's ability to play three positions as why it's not bad for Boston.

You mentioned a positive while completely ignoring the monumental negatives. You did that a lot in this trade, actually.

So because the Celtics didn't win the championship this year, while KG was hurt, they should blow it all up with a rebuilding trade?

john2jer · Post #17 » by **john2jer** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:13 pm

And it's not even really a rebuilding trade, it's a "lack of direction" trade.

pardon_my_interruption · Post #18 » by **pardon_my_interruption** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:22 pm

john2jer wrote:PMI, you're the one that mentioned Jaric's ability to play three positions as why it's not bad for Boston.

You mentioned a positive while completely ignoring the monumental negatives. You did that a lot in this trade, actually.

So because the Celtics didn't win the championship this year, while KG was hurt, they should blow it all up with a rebuilding trade?

No. Not at all. But exploring options would be a good idea. If this isn't the right option and Rubio does not fit, then I don't understand where the rumors of Boston's interest in the #2 is coming from. Perhaps they want Harden. Who knows. All I know is Rubio is the perceived #2 pick. It has been reported Boston has interest in the #2 pick. After all I don't hear those rumors coming out of San Antonio or Chicago.

john2jer · Post #19 » by **john2jer** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:25 pm

I don't really put too much value in Boston wanting the #2 pick. I think there are 29 teams that would like that pick. Well, maybe 24 when you take out New Orleans, Chicago, Utah, and other teams that have young all-star quality PGs.

But Rondo has a better all around game than Rubio and is a proven championship caliber point guard.

MVP16 · Post #20 » by **MVP16** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:56 pm

shrink wrote:A $9.8 mil Mike Miller > a $19.8 mil Ray Allen ...

... however, not for BOS. the Celtics have a year, maybe two, that they can still win an nba championship. They sacrificed all their youth save rondo to have that shot with aging vet stars. They know how to play together, and their window is short. The deal makes sense for most any other team, but BOS is committed to the path they now walk. They can't trade Ray and Rondo, and risk a long development time together.

Kendrick Perkins? The only youth that was sacrificed was Bil Al and the 5th pick. Everyone else (Gomes, Telfair, West, Green) are just role players who can be easily replaced. Out of the best 3 young players they originally had, the Celtics kept 2 of them in Rondo and Perk.

As for the trade, why would the Celtics start gutting a team that won a championship a year ago and took a team that's in the finals and a potential champion to 7 games without KG?