trade idea Bos/Utah

cfan79 · Post #1 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 4:51 pm

Baby and Ray

for

Boozer, R.Brewer, C.J. Miles

New Roster

Perkins/R.Wallace
KG/Boozer/Scala
Pierce/B.Walker
R.Brewer/C.J.Miles/Giddens
Rondo/House/Hudson

Jimmy103 · Post #2 » by **Jimmy103** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:07 pm

24 minutes a pop for KG/Perkins/Sheed/Boozer? That's a pretty tough sell. Now if they land Ty Thomas and match Millsap, would they consider something to bring Ty Thomas in as a 4th big/future PF? They'd already have Millsap in tow.

Kefa461 · Post #3 » by **Kefa461** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:12 pm

cfan79 wrote:Baby and Ray

for

Boozer, R.Brewer, C.J. Miles

New Roster

Perkins/R.Wallace
KG/Boozer/Scala
Pierce/B.Walker
R.Brewer/C.J.Miles/Giddens
Rondo/House/Hudson

IMO.....denied......no more Ray trade ideas......

8-)

KyleCleric · Post #4 » by **KyleCleric** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:13 pm

The deal would have to be split into two trades. Baby for Brewer and Fesenko would be one part. The second part would be perhaps Ray and Walker for Boozer and Miles. Baby would have to be signed at between about $4.19M and $4.58M.

cfan79 · Post #5 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:13 pm

Jimmy103 wrote:24 minutes a pop for KG/Perkins/Sheed/Boozer? That's a pretty tough sell. Now if they land Ty Thomas and match Millsap, would they consider something to bring Ty Thomas in as a 4th big/future PF? They'd already have Millsap in tow.

Yep, I hear what your saying. But Boozer seems like he's going to walk like he did with Cleveland. So they have to get something for him. I'm not sure if our current bigs would want to have decreased minutes, but it might be best for the team.

cfan79 · Post #6 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:16 pm

KyleCleric wrote:The deal would have to be split into two trades. Baby for Brewer and Fesenko would be one part. The second part would be perhaps Ray and Walker for Boozer and Miles. Baby would have to be signed at between about $4.19M and $4.58M.

I'd be down with that. Even though I like Willy Walker its worth throwing him in to seal the deal.

tfmiii · Post #7 » by **tfmiii** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:31 pm

no no no

turns our advantage at SG into a definite weakness.

no room for boozer and he is undersized already, great fantasy player but can't stack up in playoffs

GreenGrizz · Post #8 » by **GreenGrizz** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:34 pm

Boozer is injury-prone and Brewer has a crooked arm.

Andrew McCeltic · Post #9 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:04 pm

So we downgrade at the 2, lose our expiring shooting guard who we had the potential to resign at reasonable money- and we upgrade from Davis to Boozer as our BACK-UP power forward, 12 million a year to back up Garnett and he walks at the end of the year.

Celtics_85 · Post #10 » by **Celtics_85** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:17 pm

The only way I see Ainge involved in any deal for Boozer is if we were a throw in Davis to a team losing a bigman. Davis in a sign and trade for a good backup 2/3 type player is the only way. It would be nice if we could throw House and TA, or both in there and get a 1/2 type bench player also.

cfan79 · Post #11 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:18 pm

I love Ray Allen just as much as the next guy, but our shooting guard position would be good enough. Big guys are the main reason a team wins a title and we'd be very deep at Center and Power Forward. Orlando made it to the finals with Courtney Lee and Redick at shooting guard.

Celtics_85 · Post #12 » by **Celtics_85** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:21 pm

We need money next year to resign Rondo, and hopefully bring Ray back also at a cheaper price.

Post #13 » by **ParticleMan** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:28 pm

cfan79 wrote:I love Ray Allen just as much as the next guy, but our shooting guard position would be good enough. Big guys are the main reason a team wins a title and we'd be very deep at Center and Power Forward. Orlando made it to the finals with Courtney Lee and Redick at shooting guard.

yeah but boozer is worse than all 3 bigs we have now, who will each play about 30 mins. is boozer worth paying all that dough just to be a 10 min/gm player?

if we were hurting for big men that's one thing, but we've got a pretty damn good rotation of 4/5 players now. meanwhile we have nobody to back up ray other than tony allen. is that good enough? i don't think so.

cfan79 · Post #14 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:03 pm

ParticleMan wrote:
yeah but boozer is worse than all 3 bigs we have now, who will each play about 30 mins. is boozer worth paying all that dough just to be a 10 min/gm player?

if we were hurting for big men that's one thing, but we've got a pretty damn good rotation of 4/5 players now. meanwhile we have nobody to back up ray other than tony allen. is that good enough? i don't think so.

Say they each play 24 mins this season and we win a title. It will be worth the sacrifice of minutes. Besides it could help their longevity getting Boozer. and if KG gets injured or isn't 100% we won't be totally screwed.

Ray is probably the best shooter in the game no doubt, but I think his expiring contract has to be used. We can just sign him next year if the experiment fails and we'd get him for a cheaper price.

Post #15 » by **ParticleMan** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:00 pm

we're not winning a title with tony allen at SG, sorry.
and i'm not sure how it's better to give boozer 24 mins. he is not as good as our other 3 bigs. so this actually hurts us. all our bigs are perfectly capable of playing 32 mins, or at least 30.
i think we need a 4th big, but we surely don't have to give up ray allen for him.
and no, we don't "need" to use his expiring deal. it's nice to have that chip but it may just be better to resign him for low $.

i'm think it's a terrible idea to change our starting 5 + sheed unless it is an obvious and clear improvement (eg Wade or something).

TheOGJabroni · Post #16 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:02 pm

Rondo and Brewer would be easily the worst shooting backcourt in the league.

No.

Post #17 » by **Darth Celtic** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:08 pm

I rate this trade another "O"

as in, OH MY GOD that's (Please Use More Appropriate Word).

instead we hold on to ray, and hope we make the "OMG" that team blew it up because they struggled and wanted to get something for there star and free up cap move.

how about miami struggles, is a 6-9 seed, wade demands a trade or he's leaving for nothing. we offer allen, gidd, 2 future firsts for wade and jones. They get rid of there only real contract so the are like 40m under cap and get 2 future firsts, we get wade, win a ring, and he signs extension to be on a championship team?

stranger things have happened. remember, we got kg and ray allen from a team that won like 22 games and we kept peirce.

Red2 · Post #18 » by **Red2** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:28 pm

I will never want boozer on this team and at this stage of their respective careers I'd rather have Ray any day and a young Big Baby

avi623 · Post #19 » by **avi623** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:08 am

This makes no sense for either team. Utah is not going to give away the farm just to get rid of Boozer. Brewer is a really good player for what they do, as is CJ Miles.

And what do we do with Boozer? Does he suddenly become our BACKUP power forward? He would be miserable. It would be a locker room nightmare. There is such a thing as having too much talent, to the point where players become disenfranchised because they are not a main guy. And Ronnie Brewer, as much as I like the guy, cannot shoot. He works well with Deron Williams, but it would be a struggle playing next to Rajon Rondo.

And while we are here, something needs to be made clear about trade ideas involving Ray Allen. We absolutely cannot trade him, because his shooting is so important for our offense to run. BUT ALSO, other teams, for the most part, do not really have an incentive to trade good players for a guy who is almost 34 on several ankle surgeries and is no longer a bona fide star. We shouldn't trade him, and other teams have no real incentive to pick him up (except if they aren't trading very much to get him).

Johnson · Post #20 » by **Johnson** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 6:14 am

jazz say no so it doesnt matter