Jeff Green Traded to the Memphis Grizzlies (official woj tweet page 1)

Andrew McCeltic · Post #1001 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:27 pm

I'm a grad student, so I'd love some real-world perspective on this- it seems very easy to go down the rabbit hole with interpreting negotiations- like, is Boston REALLY "working the phones" to find a taker for Austin? Or are they posturing so that they can extract something else from NOP?

GreenMachine · Post #1002 » by **GreenMachine** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:27 pm

jfs1000d wrote:What r we doing?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

Trying to get the maximum value possible.

Post #1003 » by **165bows** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:28 pm

andy582 wrote:It means there are some high-level nutty negotiations here.. Boston was probably insistent on not taking back any salary, wanted someone they could waive immediately. Possibly a negotiating stance.. If you're "relenting" on swapping Salmons for Rivers, you're either doing a great job on purpose or you're doing a great job by dumb luck.

My guess is that Danny wants to force NOP into taking back Jameer Nelson, and that'll be his counter if they can't find a good team to take Austin- we'll settle for him if you take Jameer off our hands, because we 'have too many guards.'

Would make the deal even better if NO took back Nelson.

I would think their end of the deal looked terrible, but not my problem. :lol:

GreenMachine · Post #1004 » by **GreenMachine** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:29 pm

andy582 wrote:I'm a grad student, so I'd love some real-world perspective on this- it seems very easy to go down the rabbit hole with interpreting negotiations- like, is Boston REALLY "working the phones" to find a taker for Austin? Or are they posturing so that they can extract something else from NOP?

Probably actually working the phones. Rivers was already a step up from Salmons, who was the other NOP option.

Zaschrona · Post #1005 » by **Zaschrona** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:31 pm

I would gladly take both Rivers and Salmons if we can move on Nelson. I really don't want to seeing us paying him that player option if he has to be waived. We can waive Salmons much easier and take a chance on Austin. Come on Danny.

humblebum · Post #1006 » by **humblebum** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:32 pm

Ainge: "So Doc..."

Andrew McCeltic · Post #1007 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:33 pm

Yup, I think the logical extension is that NOP and BOS agree to do a separate Jameer/Salmons deal (Nelson can't be in this trade). We waive Salmons immediately, NOP gets a back-up point who can hit 3s. And they're in this deal for Poindexter- they need a wing defender desperately, and even a Memphis cast-off helps them..

ermocrate · Post #1008 » by **ermocrate** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:33 pm

Well we can give them Nelson and Prince for Rivers, Davis and a 1st...

Ed Pinkney · Post #1009 » by **Ed Pinkney** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:37 pm

Perhaps if they are trying to avoid taking Rivers they really want to open up playing time for Young in the second half of the season? Taking on Rivers could be an interesting experiment but would require an investment playing time wise in order for Ainge and Stevens to see what they have and if he can be anything more than what he has shown to date in New Orleans.

Celtic Esquire · Post #1010 » by **Celtic Esquire** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:39 pm

Rivers to the Clippers to rejoin his dad.

Andrew McCeltic · Post #1011 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:40 pm

GreenMachine wrote:
andy582 wrote:I'm a grad student, so I'd love some real-world perspective on this- it seems very easy to go down the rabbit hole with interpreting negotiations- like, is Boston REALLY "working the phones" to find a taker for Austin? Or are they posturing so that they can extract something else from NOP?

Probably actually working the phones. Rivers was already a step up from Salmons, who was the other NOP option.

So they're trying to take another step up by flipping Rivers? Or are they pretending to be dissatisfied with Rivers so that they can swap Nelson for Salmons? I guess it doesn't have to be one or the other..

rickrolled · Post #1012 » by **rickrolled** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:47 pm

andy582 wrote:Yup, I think the logical extension is that NOP and BOS agree to do a separate Jameer/Salmons deal (Nelson can't be in this trade). We waive Salmons immediately, NOP gets a back-up point who can hit 3s. And they're in this deal for Poindexter- they need a wing defender desperately, and even a Memphis cast-off helps them..

I like this.

Then hope there's a wink wink deal that Prince gets waived and signs with the Pelicans, and improve their bench/SF production. That will help them overcome the Clippers in the playoff race.

Post #1013 » by **darrendaye** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:47 pm

Hopefully they can get a 2019 2nd rounder from the Clippers for Rivers

Valid · Post #1014 » by **Valid** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:49 pm

I put this in the Rivers thread, but I figured I may as well put it here, too:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JeffZillgitt/status/554057971194679296[/tweet]

rickrolled · Post #1015 » by **rickrolled** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:49 pm

Austin Rivers traded to the Clippers :lol:

Andrew McCeltic · Post #1016 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:49 pm

Milwaukee supposedly had some interest in Rivers last year, but that was the old regime.. Bass for Ryan Anderson is another possibility..

Andrew McCeltic · Post #1017 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:50 pm

Ok A. are we getting a first? B. Doc's a clown.

Andrew McCeltic · Post #1018 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:51 pm

They do actually need bench depth..

KamikazeK · Post #1019 » by **KamikazeK** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:54 pm

To the Clippers for what..?

ermocrate · Post #1020 » by **ermocrate** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:55 pm

KamikazeK wrote:To the Clippers for what..?

The rights to Manute Bol