Trade Targets, Part Deux

[Paradise]

They want CJ Watson in a separate deal according to Woj.

[enetric]

If BK got JOSH SMITH to the Nets contracts aside he has pulled off the most incredible 2 year span of trades I can remember in any sport He deserves a lot of credit for it and he deserves the credit for the team he assembled this year(It ain't his fault most of the starting 5 is playing below avg ball)

Why does he deserve so much credit?

He turned young assets in Deron. OK good trade...but that is what you are supposed to do after years of losing. He made a terrible trade for Crash. Then because he couldnt get the guys he wanted for all our cap space he turned the cap space into an overpaid guy no one in the entire league would have touched due to his contract.


So the Deron trade was the one he got right and of course Deron is a shell of what we expected right now. Sorry I cant give King credit for having major cap space and a deep pocket owner.

[AntwanBoldin]

Watson for bass is interesting if you think Ty Taylor is ready for PT

[enetric]

Bucks won't trade Sanders.

It really comes down to what Atlanta thinks is more value:

Something like:
Dalembert's expiring contract
Ekpe Udoh
Tobias Harris
1st round pick

or:
Humphries contract (pretty sure Atlanta doesn't really want to take it)
MarShon Brooks
2 1st round picks (which would end up being late round picks assuming the Nets keep Josh Smith).

I think between those choices, they'll take Milwaukee's trade. If they don't, perhaps another team swoops in or perhaps Milwaukee gives up Monta Ellis/Dalembert/Udoh or Draft pick for Josh Smith and Devin Harris.

We'll see. I think the Bucks are in the drivers seat. But in the 11th hour if they want him bad enough...I can see them adding in a guy no one expected to be included.

I don't think Hammond would move Sanders for Smith straight up. Sanders is the most untouchable guy on the team.

If someone is added last second, I could see them maybe giving in and throwing in John Henson.

That could be as well. Seems to me the second they add one of these guys Smith goes to the Bucks.

[NyCeEvO]

Am I the only person not excited at the thought of us trading for a 35 year old Paul Pierce??

I like the idea of adding Pierce. I still say that there is an angle here to add him and KG together if we can turn Crash into an expiring contract like Jax from the Spurs. I really do believe KG would waive the NT clause if it meant being dealt a 1 hour plan ride away to still play with Pierce and the team that acquired him didnt give up any of their top 3 guys who play the other 3 starting spots.

Its a good fit and and great cash dump for Boston.

As for Pierce...doesnt he have a partially guaranteed contract? We can re-trade him in his walk year for value.

Look adding overpaid veterans is the only way over capped teams with no trade assets can gain a lopsided trade advantage on the talent side. Pierce is a good short term upgrade and a long term huge expiring non guaranteed contract when the time comes.

See my post above; he's guaranteed $5 million next season. I forgot about the option of trading him away in the offseason. Would we be below the apron then?

S&T for D12?

[N Ireland Nets]

Pierce's deal is only guaranteed $5 million for 2013. If we waive him, would that $5M be a cap hit? Trying to figure out what would happen in regards to the apron as an alternate deal for Gordon, if we were to hypothetically trade for him.

FWIW, I don't think Boston moves Pierce anyway. He's the heart and soul of their franchise, not team.

The way I read it is that if Pierce is waived his cap hit is $5m instead of $16m odd, so it's roughly a $10m savings.

Not worth giving up our assets for it when you could get Gordon for free to swing as a huge expiring at the next deadline along with all our future picks & Brooks.

[AntwanBoldin]

@hpbasketbsll Well, SINCE THERE'S NOTHING HAPPENING, I'm going to go to the store and be away from my computer now. HOPE NOTHING HAPPENS! /stomp stomp

lol

[Jersey Generals]

He deserves a lot of credit for it and he deserves the credit for the team he assembled this year(It ain't his fault most of the starting 5 is playing below avg ball)

You're right, it's not his fault the players he assmebled are terrible, aging, have humongous flaws in their game that make playing them counter-productive, or all of the above for some of them.

[Jersey Generals]

By the way, Paul Pierce would not put the Nets under the apron for a sign and trade, so that idea is not the reason King is looking into trading for him.

[Paradise]

Why would we trade Pierce to just waive him? He'd say here until his deal is over and if anything in the off-season comes along, then we would move him but if it were to happen. It would be a playoff move.

[enetric]

What?

We need defense, not more offense.

PP is a good player but he's not the answer to our problems.

We need both. 80% of the team's struggles in games comes from the fact, teams will gamble and leave Wallace AND Evans open.

If Pierce is the starting SF, that's not going to happen anymore. Plus, as much as I'd hate to go from Smith to Pierce...Pierce would bring that Jason Kidd savvy that gave the Knicks the lift they got this year.

If It's Pierce straight up...I'd hate it. If It's Pierce + fillers (depending on who)....I'd be okay with it depending on who we give up.

I'm open minded to anything at this point. It's better than Gordon alone.

I agree we need both.


So many posts talking about our lack of D. Under Avery it was...oh we play good D but the offense isnt clicking. On the year what are we 6th lowest ppg allowed? Its not like we dont have guys who can play D. Its that we dont consistently commit to D.

I am sorry...but I actually do worry more about us offensively. Maybe its because we try to rely defensively on useless offensive players like Crash and Evans but at some point you have to look at the offense and say...cant believe we start those two guys.

Lets just be honest. We arent good enough and stop with the "we need ONE or the other".

[Ronito]

Pierce's deal is only guaranteed $5 million for 2013. If we waive him, would that $5M be a cap hit? Trying to figure out what would happen in regards to the apron as an alternate deal for Gordon, if we were to hypothetically trade for him.

FWIW, I don't think Boston moves Pierce anyway. He's the heart and soul of their franchise, not team.

The way I read it is that if Pierce is waived his cap hit is $5m instead of $16m odd, so it's roughly a $10m savings.

Not worth giving up our assets for it when you could get Gordon for free to swing as a huge expiring at the next deadline along with all our future picks & Brooks.

Now that's interesting. Pierce is far better than Gordon, IMO, and would be even a bigger asset than Humphries/Gordon next year if we guaranteed his deal. But the tradeoff would be a pick + Brooks.

I wonder what kind of value he'd have in the offseason because of the partially guaranteed part.

Just hypothetically speaking of course, because I'd be shocked to see Boston make that move.

[j_angel]

I think if we (Boston) make this move we would ask for more.

But if we decide to tank (trade KG for Bledsoe/Jordan and Pierce for youth/picks) Terry would also be available, if that would interest you?

Maybe find a third team to take Wallace?

[enetric]

I'd choose Josh Smith over the proposed Pierce trade. I'd only favor PP if he's packaged with KG.

Dwill
JJ
PP
KG
BLo

Now that team would go far in the playoffs...

I would rather have Smith as well. But I dont see us getting him. What we have to sell is the ability to help someone salary dump. Hawks adding Hump to get Marshon doesnt do that. But for Boston there are ways we can help them save a ton of cash for a 35 year old guy no one else is going to want.

And that's why I came up with the PP/KG trade in the first place.

[N Ireland Nets]

S&T for D12?

Now that's interesting. Pierce is far better than Gordon, IMO, and would be even a bigger asset than Humphries/Gordon next year if we guaranteed his deal. But the tradeoff would be a pick + Brooks.

I wonder what kind of value he'd have in the offseason because of the partially guaranteed part.

Just hypothetically speaking of course, because I'd be shocked to see Boston make that move.

Hump, Brooks & a pick for Pierce would leave our salary at $87,675,313 where Pierce's contract is $15,333,334. If he is only guareteed $5m that year you could pay him off and the salary would be at $77,341,979. That included Watson taking his player option of $1,106,942 with 10 players total under contract in 2013/14.

So moves would need to be made but you could get below the tax line with a few moves but then your looking at trading Wallace & Lopez to add something like MWP & Howard.

Highly doubt it really.

[Paradise]

We will find out if Ainge is a true tease or he's serious because this will be the 2nd attempt that Billy has made to land Pierce. A year ago, it went from Howard to Pierce to landing Wallace.

[enetric]

Pierce's deal is only guaranteed $5 million for 2013. If we waive him, would that $5M be a cap hit? Trying to figure out what would happen in regards to the apron as an alternate deal for Gordon, if we were to hypothetically trade for him.

FWIW, I don't think Boston moves Pierce anyway. He's the heart and soul of their franchise, not team.

You do realize that cash over rules heart and soul in sports right? Think of some of the names in sports throughout history who have worn more than one uniform.

As for the contract...why dump him? Trade him AGAIN at the trade deadline of the walk year and that contract is worth a lot to someone else. Its a smart contract to acquire long term and a big upgrade short term. And if we can get rid of Crash to a third team...we didnt make things worse for ourselves...we made them better.

[vincecarter4pres]

Am I the only person not excited at the thought of us trading for a 35 year old Paul Pierce??

It's the same offer for Smith; obvious smokescreen. Guess King can't get Atlanta to return his phone calls.

I'd imagine he's trying to put pressure on Ferry because he wants to get a Smith done ASAP so he can try and parlay that into a second move such as a Hail Mary at Dwight or something. I don't mean including Smith in the follow up, I'm talking like what E's been saying and even if Dwight is completely off limits just some sort of follow up deal for a lower salary player.

[enetric]

I just don't get why BOS would tank their playoff chances right now.

PP and Hump have the same length of their contracts.

Do they really like MarShon that much?

See that I agree with. And its why I cant see them doing it. The key is...KG and PP together. People have to stop with heart and soul stuff or what Boston could get for KG from the Clips.

If Boston can move both guys and the bottom line long term savings is greater...they should do it. Boston's window is closed. Forget one more first round and out in the playoffs. Its DONE.



So lets say there are no takers for PP. And KG would have to be wowed to drop the NT clause. Wouldnt trading them together to play with our big 3 possibly fit the bill?

[enetric]

Am I the only person not excited at the thought of us trading for a 35 year old Paul Pierce??

I like the idea of adding Pierce. I still say that there is an angle here to add him and KG together if we can turn Crash into an expiring contract like Jax from the Spurs. I really do believe KG would waive the NT clause if it meant being dealt a 1 hour plan ride away to still play with Pierce and the team that acquired him didnt give up any of their top 3 guys who play the other 3 starting spots.

Its a good fit and and great cash dump for Boston.

As for Pierce...doesnt he have a partially guaranteed contract? We can re-trade him in his walk year for value.

Look adding overpaid veterans is the only way over capped teams with no trade assets can gain a lopsided trade advantage on the talent side. Pierce is a good short term upgrade and a long term huge expiring non guaranteed contract when the time comes.

See my post above; he's guaranteed $5 million next season. I forgot about the option of trading him away in the offseason. Would we be below the apron then?

Trade him at the next trade deadline if you have to. But why would the Apron matter if its not an S&T deal?

We just have to match within 5mil right? So why couldnt you go shopping from the next team looking to dump? its a salary match and a savings for them after they buy him out.