BOS - POR - MIN

Krapinsky · Post #1 » by **Krapinsky** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 5:35 pm

BOS OUT: RONDO
BOS IN: D. WILLIAMS & FELTON

POR OUT: BATUM, MATTHEWS & FELTON
POR IN: RONDO & W. JOHNSON

MN OUT: D. WILLIAMS & W. JOHNSON
MN IN: BATUM & W. MATTHEWS

WHY FOR BOSTON?
BASED ON PREMISE THAT BOSTON WANTS TO TRADE RONDO SO BOSTON TRADES RONDO FOR THE BEST PROSPECT THEY CAN GET. WITH D. WILLIAMS ON ROOKIE DEAL WILL HAVE CAP SPACE NEXT YEAR TO BUILD AROUND PIERCE AND D.WILL.

WHY FOR PORTLAND?
GET SERIOUS UPGRADE AT POINT GUARD IN RONDO AND AVOID HAVING TO PAY BIG $$ TO KEEP BATUM. JOHNSON BECOMES A RECLAMATION PROJECT FOR McMILLAN AND CO.

WHY FOR WOLVES?
WOLVES SERIOUSLY IMPROVE THEIR TEAM BY ADDING TWO PLAYERS AT A POSITION OF NEED AND GETTING BATUM, THE JEWEL OF KAHN'S EYE AND THE WOLVES VERY UNKEPT SECRET TARGET THIS OFFSEASON. WOLVES WOULD STILL HAVE THE OPTION TO KEEP BEASLEY IF THEY COULD AFFORD TO SPEND THE $$.

Nice 9 (or 10 if you count three point guards) rotation.
RUBIO/BAREA/RIDNOUR/LEE
MATTHEWS/WEBSTER/ELLINGTON
BATUM/BEASLEY
LOVE/TOLLIVER/RANDOLPH
PEKOVIC/DARKO

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=6nukgmd

Esohny · Post #2 » by **Esohny** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 5:44 pm

I like it.

Does Boston value Rondo more though? Not that I don't think this is solid for them, but didn't they think that Rondo could get them Westbrook?

Narf · Post #3 » by **Narf** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 6:07 pm

Nice trade Krap

If Boston is going to trade Pierce, they're going to rebuild. This is a nice start on rebuilding.
As long as we're at it we might as well add KG for Memphis's pick, Webster, Miller, Randolph, and Tolliver. Boston gets a 2 month trial run on a couple of young players that they might want to keep and we get a great 3 man rotation at PF/C and KG's defense would be awful nice to have. No long term damage outside of losing that pick.

Esohny wrote:I like it.

Does Boston value Rondo more though? Not that I don't think this is solid for them, but didn't they think that Rondo could get them Westbrook?

I think that ship has sailed, and OKC is happy with Westbrook again. Boston's fans might think otherwise, but I can't imagine Ainge wouldn't have pulled the trigger already if he could have.

Krapinsky · Post #4 » by **Krapinsky** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 6:07 pm

Esohny wrote:I like it.

Does Boston value Rondo more though? Not that I don't think this is solid for them, but didn't they think that Rondo could get them Westbrook?

If they did, then everyone else = :lol:

Devilzsidewalk · Post #5 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 6:15 pm

I'm on board, lets get it done

I also think the trade is even valued and has good thought to each team's current status w/ the players and the positions played. Trade Boarders will find complaints, but I think this is as close to realistic as you'll see on realgm involving upper status players. High 5

Narf · Post #6 » by **Narf** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 6:22 pm

On a side note, I've been thinking that Boston should trade Pierce to the Clippers if they do trade out Rondo for something (I wasn't thinking with us, but this works perfect with that trade).

LA Clippers out:
Mo Williams, Chauncey Billups contract (out for year)
LA Clippers in:
Paul Pierce

jpatrick · Post #7 » by **jpatrick** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 6:51 pm

I'd do it because I'm down on D-Will a bit, but we have to remember with Batum we're basically trading for his bird rights and the right to match other teams offers when he becomes a FA this offseason. If we trade a chip like Williams, does his agent think we're forced to sign Batum at any price and insist on a max or very close to max deal?

Krapinsky · Post #8 » by **Krapinsky** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 6:59 pm

jpatrick wrote:I'd do it because I'm down on D-Will a bit, but we have to remember with Batum we're basically trading for his bird rights and the right to match other teams offers when he becomes a FA this offseason. If we trade a chip like Williams, does his agent think we're forced to sign Batum at any price and insist on a max or very close to max deal?

He's a RFA. We can match what the market bears.

Esohny · Post #9 » by **Esohny** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:00 pm

Krapinsky wrote:
Esohny wrote:I like it.

Does Boston value Rondo more though? Not that I don't think this is solid for them, but didn't they think that Rondo could get them Westbrook?

If they did, then everyone else =

I agree, but it wouldn't be the first time that a team overvalued its own player. I'm just saying that if that was true, they might just stand pat with Rondo. Personally, I think it's balanced.

Fire Mchale · Post #10 » by **Fire Mchale** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:09 pm

I think the core elements of this deal works though I could see Portland wanting more and possibly even Boston. I think there could be some pot sweetening with a pick or two, but the overall concept works. If this was on the table for the Wolves, Kahn does it and nearly damages his vocal chords saying yes.

slinky · Post #11 » by **slinky** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:19 pm

jpatrick wrote:I'd do it because I'm down on D-Will a bit, but we have to remember with Batum we're basically trading for his bird rights and the right to match other teams offers when he becomes a FA this offseason. If we trade a chip like Williams, does his agent think we're forced to sign Batum at any price and insist on a max or very close to max deal?

I agree with this. And while it probably wouldn't be enough to turn down this deal. This does basically force the wolves to match whatever offer is out there even a max deal. No way Kahn/taylor can trade D Will for Batum and then turn down any contract for Batum in the offseason.

But the difference is...would we rather have D Will + and a 50/50 shot at overpaying(because it would take over payment for the blazers not to match) for Batum in the offseason, or a guarantee of Batum with a strong likely hood that we will overpay for him? I probably begrudingly take the guarantee of Batum...

If that is the case and we end up overpaying for Batum anyways...do we still want Matthews? He is better than what we have now, but is he better than what we could have in the future? Seems like a hefty contract for an average SG....it feels like this would be the 'last' move the wolves make for 4-5 years...

Rubio(extend), Matthews(long term deal), Batum(extend), Love(long term deal), Pekovic(extend)

Post #12 » by **C.lupus** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:39 pm

Yes please.

cpfsf · Post #13 » by **cpfsf** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:42 pm

I try to leave RGM, but RGM keeps pulling me back in. I don't have much goof off time, so I have to keep this brief...

I imagine Portland would demand more, and I could easily see Minnesota just being removed from this trade altogether.

Post #14 » by **The J Rocka** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:43 pm

I'd do this in a heartbeat.

Celtics shop Rondo pretty much every season. They think he's worth a Westbrook swap straight up or worth that caliber of player. For rebuilding, I like it for the Celtics, but just depends on if they want to build around him (not the ideal player to build around) or move him for "winning" pieces so they have another two year window of competing (they're already done IMO).

Portland may want to hold onto Batum and make a run at Nash. If they're being offered Rondo though I don't think you can turn that down.

Post #15 » by **C.lupus** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:52 pm

cpfsf wrote:I try to leave RGM, but RGM keeps pulling me back in. I don't have much goof off time, so I have to keep this brief...

I imagine Portland would demand more, and I could easily see Minnesota just being removed from this trade altogether.

We could send Ridnour their way if necessary. It's probably overpaying from our end but it would help roster balance and potentially free up some $. Or even switch Luke in for Wes in the deal.

Boston has to start rebuilding and I think they realize that, too.

phonzadellika · Post #16 » by **phonzadellika** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 8:13 pm

slinky wrote:
jpatrick wrote:I'd do it because I'm down on D-Will a bit, but we have to remember with Batum we're basically trading for his bird rights and the right to match other teams offers when he becomes a FA this offseason. If we trade a chip like Williams, does his agent think we're forced to sign Batum at any price and insist on a max or very close to max deal?

I agree with this. And while it probably wouldn't be enough to turn down this deal. This does basically force the wolves to match whatever offer is out there even a max deal. No way Kahn/taylor can trade D Will for Batum and then turn down any contract for Batum in the offseason.

But the difference is...would we rather have D Will + and a 50/50 shot at overpaying(because it would take over payment for the blazers not to match) for Batum in the offseason, or a guarantee of Batum with a strong likely hood that we will overpay for him? I probably begrudingly take the guarantee of Batum...

If that is the case and we end up overpaying for Batum anyways...do we still want Matthews? He is better than what we have now, but is he better than what we could have in the future? Seems like a hefty contract for an average SG....it feels like this would be the 'last' move the wolves make for 4-5 years...

Rubio(extend), Matthews(long term deal), Batum(extend), Love(long term deal), Pekovic(extend)

Lot's of good stuff in this post. Since I'm now thinking about it, I'd probably want to err on the side of risking Portland matching Batum and keeping Derrick Williams for the time being rather than rolling the dice with Batum and Matthews as the pieces that get us to the finals. I think Batum fits perfectly with the long term plans, but Matthews doesn't bring enough to the table to make it work. We would need someone who could kind of create their own shot at the 2, and I don't think Matthews is that guy. It would kinda suck if we didn't get Batum, so I think we should offer him slightly less than the max to give us the best shot of making it happen and not offend Love at the same time.

Also, not 100% convinced that KLove stays beyond his contract extension, although I hope he does. I am 100% convinced that Derrick Williams can be a star in this league despite his slow start. I'd rather keep Derrick Williams because if KLove walks we can still sign Ricky and DWill to max deals after their rookie deals are up and keep our current positions of strength strong.

As to the trade itself, I think it was good trade, fair to all parties. Good thread.

moss_is_1 · Post #17 » by **moss_is_1** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 8:33 pm

I don't think Batum is going to be moved anymore. ?

18.67 / 6.1 / 2 / 1.2 steals / 1.4 blocks on 48$ /40% in his 9 games as a starter...I'd kill for him to be on our team though, and they might bite on wanting to get Rondo / LMA.

Sundog · Post #18 » by **Sundog** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 9:54 pm

I love this deal, from both a Wolves and a Celtic perspective. I don't know Portland's salary cap situation -- will they be able to pay Batum what the market will bear next year, if they don't move him? I imagine the Wolves would have to clear additional cap space (ie, not re-sign Beasley, amnesty Darko, etc.) to do so, but I'd do that in a heart-beat (even though I'm as big a Beasley supporter as there is).

Narf · Post #19 » by **Narf** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 11:32 pm

Good call on adding Ridnour to the trade Lupus

SSUBluesman · Post #20 » by **SSUBluesman** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 11:33 pm

Can't really see POR willing to pull the trigger as they give up too much on the wings and too much perimeter shooting.

We give up two bench players and get back two starters. I'd say we have to add and I would be more than fine (as long as it's not Rubio/Love/Pekovic).