Nab a couple more picks? w/ Boston

[RCG] · Post #1 » by **[RCG]** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:25 am

I'm thinking that our best shot of landing an additional impact player may come through this draft. We may also be able to package multiple picks to move up. Boston needs to stay somewhat competitive this season in order to remain an attractive landing spot. Would anyone be down for the following deal?

Wolves receive: O'Neal, Dooling, Wilcox, LAC '12 1st, BOS '12 1st
Celtics receive: Ridnour, Milicic, Webster (or Beasley), MEM '13 1st

Rondon/Ridnour
Allen/Ridnour
Pierce/Beasley
Garnett/Beasley
Milicic/Bass

All of the incoming contracts expire which would also give us some more cap-room this summer.
All 3 picks will most likely be in the 15-20 range, which will give us a lot of flexibility to a) fill multiple positions b) move up c) trade back or for future 1sts

*EDIT*
Our depth chart would be:
Rubio/Barea
Ellington/Lee
Johnson/(Webster/Beasley)
Love/Williams/Randolph/Tolliver
Pekovic/Miller/O'Neal

After the season it'd be:
Rubio/Barea
Lee/Ellington
Johnson/Williams
Love/Williams
Pekovic
+ Jazz 1st, Clippers 1st, Celtics 1st & $39.6 in dedicated salary to those 8 players. It would allow us to go after a couple top R-FAs and fill out the roster w/ the draft.

Piecake · Post #2 » by **Piecake** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:34 am

I dont think we need to send webster/beasley in this deal to make this work

jade_hippo · Post #3 » by **jade_hippo** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:10 am

I really hate giving up 3 guys who can play for only 1 back. Oneal is washed up and Wilcox is like Tolliver level fill in the gap. If I'm giving up Darko, we need someone back who can play D in return. KG is about the only big on that team who can play D not named Rondo.

Dooling is the only servicable player coming from them and he's still a SG in a PG body.

shrink · Post #4 » by **shrink** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:15 am

I'd do it, and use the picks later to bring in a starting SG or C. I could certainly see BOS getting use out of all three. If Beasley is included, I don't think we need to include the MEM 1st.

All these incoming players are expirings, so they'd help make a deal for a starter from a team when they start to tank as well.

Piecake · Post #5 » by **Piecake** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:17 am

shrink wrote:I'd do it, and use the picks later to bring in a starting SG or C. I could certainly see BOS getting use out of all three. If Beasley is included, I don't think we need to include the MEM 1st.

All these incoming players are expirings, so they'd help make a deal for a starter from a team when they start to tank as well.

I would probably do it too, but I think we could get more giving up 3 people who can play for 3 people who cant. Or, at least we should get more :lol:

I dont want to give up Webster though

darthkiller · Post #6 » by **darthkiller** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:47 am

danny ainge would laugh so hard for this he might die from laughter .

so they give up 2 first rounder for a upgrade from JO to Darko . cool trade bro :lol:

teamwillow · Post #7 » by **teamwillow** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 9:56 am

We have a really good thing going...dunno why we give up a big piece of it

jade_hippo · Post #8 » by **jade_hippo** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 10:11 am

teamwillow wrote:We have a really good thing going...dunno why we give up a big piece of it

none of those are big pieces of what we are doing. Ridnour is about the only one that actually fits well because of how well he shoots. Webster is injury prone, Beasley is an offense killer, and Darko is inept offensively half the time if not more, he's jsut the only guy on the roster over 6'10" at the moment.

shangrila · Post #9 » by **shangrila** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 10:50 am

Do we really need more youth? How about signing some veterans in the offseason instead?

Saltine · Post #10 » by **Saltine** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 12:17 pm

It doesn't make sense to send out a few players for a few players. If we send out 3 decent players we should try to get 1 good one back. Boston has nobody to give us, very poor trading partner.

shrink · Post #11 » by **shrink** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:58 pm

Saltine wrote:It doesn't make sense to send out a few players for a few players. If we send out 3 decent players we should try to get 1 good one back. Boston has nobody to give us, very poor trading partner.

By sending the players to a team that desperate needs help, I think we get two picks and expirings that have more trade value to a rebuilding team that may send us a good player later.

Steve_Holiday · Post #12 » by **Steve_Holiday** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:07 pm

This trade only makes sense if we have another trade partner. Move the picks(+) for an sg or c.

[RCG] · Post #13 » by **[RCG]** » Sun Jan 29, 2012 6:37 pm

shrink wrote:
Saltine wrote:It doesn't make sense to send out a few players for a few players. If we send out 3 decent players we should try to get 1 good one back. Boston has nobody to give us, very poor trading partner.

By sending the players to a team that desperate needs help, I think we get two picks and expirings that have more trade value to a rebuilding team that may send us a good player later.

Shrink is more on point, sorry if I wasn't clear.

Ridnour is the best piece going out but none of the players we trade out are considered major building blocks for our future. Pekovic has done really well, making Darko expendable. Webster has played one game, so we have shown that we can win w/out him, we've won without Beasley who will be a R-FA after the season anyway and he can stop offensive flow anyway.

We are trading expendable pieces for expirings and 1sts. We can use those 1sts for players who will fit nicely with the core we have and fill positions of need. The expirings will allow us to take on a contract of a team looking to move another player by including a third team in this deal or we can just take the expirings and have the additional cap=space at the end of the season to go after vets or R-FAs ourselves.