CelticsBlog: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Once A Metro covering Red Bull New York!

Why We Have To Consider Trading Ray Allen

Lets get one thing straight right off the bat.  I'm a huge fan of Ray Allen.  He's one of my favorite Celtics and I the only guy I'd rather have taking a last second shot is named Larry Bird.  I'm completely comfortable hanging onto Ray Allen and I think he gives us a great chance at another banner.

With that said, as the title suggests, I am here to tell you that we have to at least think about trading Ray Allen.

The biggest reason is simply that his value may never be higher in a trade.  He doesn't just have an expiring contract.  He's got 19.7M in salary that we can match up with just about anyone in the league.  Let me put this in perspective for you.  If for some reason the Miami Heat decided that they just can't stand T-Mobile commercials, we could take Dwyane Wade off their hands and still have enough money left to throw Michael Beasley in the deal too.  That's what close to $20M could buy you in salaries.  Of course, just because we might be willing to buy doesn't mean other teams are selling.

For that I give you one of the oddest offseasons in recent memory.  You might have heard a few times lately that teams have an eye on the 2010 offseason.  Considering how New Jersey, New York and other teams made set-up moves for 2010 last year, I can only imagine what kind of posturing will happen this year.

So you need to find a team that is looking to drop salary for 2010.  Ideally you'd want to only take back guys that have 2 or 3 years left on their deals (so you can maintain some flexibility of your own as Pierce and KG age).  The question isn't who would be willing to deal for Ray.  The question is "who wouldn't?"

Before we start naming names, let me remind everyone that even if we decide to trade Ray, we have several timeframes to make the deal.  The offseason would seem logical.  More teams are willing to make moves in the offseason and on draft night in particular.  Then there's the option of trading him during the season - at the trade deadline for instance. 

Consider this dream scenario:  Team A trades for Ray Allen, shedding nearly 20M per year in salary after this season.  They are out of the running for the playoffs, so to further cut costs, they buy out Ray Allen and he spends 30 days resting his ankles and returns to the Celtics for the stretch run.

Ok, enough lead in.  You want names.  I'll preface this with this caveat:  I don't have any rumors supporting these ideas.  Some of them are insanely lopsided in our favor.  Some we wouldn't even do unless Ray suffered a career ending injury.  I'm just offering you a pallet of ideas to discuss and pick apart if you like.  Enjoy.

Star-divide

The Hornets tried to trade Chandler last year and Posey wasn't the missing piece they thought he might be.
Ray Allen for T. Chandler & J. Posey

Say the Bobcats decide to shed salary.
Ray Allen for G. Wallace & D. Diop

Say the Bucks become desperate for flexibility.
Ray Allen for A. Bogut & R. Jefferson

Say Gilbert Arenas has another season ending surgery and the Wizards have buyers remorse and start selling off.  Here's two for them.
Ray Allen for A. Jamison & C. Butler
Ray Allen for A. Jamison & B. Haywood

Utah has been trying to figure out what to do with Kirilenko for years.
Ray Allen for A. Kirilenko & R. Brewer

Say we sign or trade for a near-All Star shooting guard.  Would you turn around and trade Ray Allen for an entire bench?
Ray Allen for J. Przybilla, M. Webster, T. Outlaw, S. Blake
Ray Allen for E. Watson, N. Collison, N. Kristic

Will any of these happen?  No, probably not.  The idea here is to illustrate that Ray gives us a ton of buying power if we chose to use him.  I'm pretty sure we would only trade him if we got knocked over with a fantastic deal by a desperate team.  But it only takes one desperate team to make that happen.  This is why Danny will never say "we are 100% never going to trade Ray Allen.

I'm sure I've missed a lot of options and I'm also sure that many of you have ideas of your own.  Feel free to offer up your own ideas in the Trade Ideas forums.  By the way, I'm also sure that several people will only look at the trades, not read what I wrote in the intro, and proceed to tell me how terrible and/or unrealistic all my ideas are.  That's fine, I'm ready for it.  At least I put some names on the table to discuss.  Enjoy.

 

0 recs  |  Comment 125 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I'd make two of those trades...

The ones for Richardson / Bogut and Jamison / Butler (not likely).

The rest seem to be in the “three dimes for a quarter” category (or in some cases, a dime and two nickels for a quarter.) Obviously, these are meant for illustrative purposes. I’m just hoping we can get something better than mediocre and/or injured players.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 8:08 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

with Roy

I like the Jamison/Butler deal and wouldn’t be terribly disappointed with Jefferson/Bogut.

by slamtheking on Jun 8, 2009 8:23 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

While I do think three dimes for a quarter could help this team...

most of these trade don’t really work. In some cases, it’s an extremely lopsided deal (like Jamison & Butler) or it creates more problems than it solves (ala Jamison & Haywood). If he make the latter deal, we don’t have a starting SG and we’ve added 10 million to 2010’s ledger so we’re in the same position (or worse) we’ve been in. We’d only have cap space to throw small contracts at people in order to evade the salary tax.

The strength of an expiring deal is to take back contracts and the Celtics really aren’t in the position to take back any contracts unless the owners become more willing to stay or go deeper into the luxury tax..

The Hangover @ www.soulhonky.com

by SoulHonky on Jun 8, 2009 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

thank you

Right now we’re in a position with no cap space being able to only offer MLE’s and other small contracts.

And now everyon wants to trade Ray and get back longer term contracts for the same amount further binding us financially.

This only works if Wyc is really going to open up the check book – or somehow we find a trade with players making below their true market value.

by bob3698 on Jun 8, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree completely.

The only trades above that make us better are the ones that have no chance of happening.

Its insanely hard to find value for Ray that makes us a better team.

by alskor on Jun 9, 2009 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, I agree, Roy.

And I’d take a shot at Shinn to see if he’d bite on Ray and Rondo for CP3 and West – with whatever filler and cash thrown in to make it work, sin’ce I’m not a contract expert.

by CoachBo on Jun 8, 2009 8:12 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

wow

that’s the first trade proposal I’ve heard involving Rondo that I would agree to no questions asked

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Jun 8, 2009 8:16 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, I'd find it similarly difficult to pass that one up

Solid thought, Coach.

-sw

"I didn't go there with the intentions of getting ejected. I went there with the intentions of just telling Kobe, 'You got to relax. You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?'" -Ron Artest, 05.06.09

by Steve Weinman on Jun 8, 2009 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

wow...if NO made that trade

that might be the end of the city. 34-35 year old ray allen with a top ten PG for a 28 year old all-star power forward and the best franchise player almost MVP PG?
you would have to call their GM right in the middle gras and even then mumble about allen’s age and his declining efficiency…

by lakersbluedevil on Jun 8, 2009 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Shinn’s broke. I agree that he wouldn’t be likely to say yes, but it’d be interesting to dangle $20 million under his nose and see what he thinks.

by CoachBo on Jun 8, 2009 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

He'd probably be thinking how screwed he would be

if he made that terrible, terrible trade and no fans show up next year.

by alskor on Jun 9, 2009 1:18 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

WOW !!! WOW!!!!

Jeff

The first thing in your post was keeping Ray and I think that is the way it will go down. I see Danny hanging on to all 3 and have them retire as Celtics. Some re-tooling with a Big, Wing and back up PG seems to make the most sense. I don’t see us keep BBD either, with him looking for a big payday. Hopefully we sign Leon even though he’s out til Feb.

However, George Shinn might be desperate enough to dump CP3 with Posey, Chandler or Posey. I would be willing to make that type deal. If we are giving up Ray to a team that wants to save $$$$ then we have to be substantially better for the deal – the Gasol deal comes to mind.

I might think about a deal involving AK47, Brewer and maybe a 1st rd pick. or something else from Utah. But I have to get more than AK and Brewer. They are in a bind trying to sign Boozer, Milsap and their Center (can’t think of his name right now). So they might be desperate enough to fill my trade needs.

I liked some of the Wash trade ideas but can’t see Wash doing them as they say they want to win NOW!!!! My idea with Wash would be either Jamison or Butler plus Blatch, Stevenson and Crittendon. We’d need a shooter to replace Ray. Crittendon might be able to play backup PG. This deal gives us some youth as well as Vets to compete right now. Gives us a chance to reload and still have our expiring contracts and both exceptions.

Again, I’m only speculating, as I agree with Jeff that we should keep Ray.

by badax33 on Jun 9, 2009 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I Say ... Keep Ray

"Some people want it to happen, some wish it would happen, others make it happen"
~ Michael Jordan

by ChiBullsFan on Jun 11, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

i think it's ridiculous to think

That if we trade Ray – and he gets bought out – that he would come back to play for the C’s. If the team I help win a title dealt me because they thought I was too old to make that much money, I certainly wouldn’t go back. But that’s just me. I understand that it does happen occasionally….

If we do trade him – we need a big and a shoot in return. And we still need a back up pg, a wing player, and a defender / kobe/lebron stopper.

by bob3698 on Jun 8, 2009 8:51 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

maybe

but I think Ray, of all people, understands that this is a business

I think he’d go to the place where he thought he had the best shot at re-signing a multi-year deal with in the offseason – and I think Boston is one of the most likely places to expect that kind of offer

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Jun 8, 2009 8:54 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

what’s the rule about trades? the team that gets the best player wins? I have some misgivings about Ray and how much longer he has but if we keep him until his contract expires what’s so bad about that? We will have $20M to spend on free agents. Ray is clearly on the decline but he’s still a great shooter and he was our best clutch shooter this year. With KG backRay’s game will elevate. I think if we found another shooter to put on the floor with ray that would also help. Bottom Line I don’t trade Ray now

by Red2 on Jun 8, 2009 8:54 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Actually, we won’t necessarily have 20 mil to spend. We’ll just be sligthly under the cap if Ray’s contract expires, which means our buying power for free agents will be limitied.

by droopdog7 on Jun 8, 2009 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

this is a common misconception. if the Cs let ray’s contract expire, they will NOT have $20M to spend on free agents. this is patently false. i believe that roy discussed this in greater detail in a previous post. i think that ray’s contract works out to a maximum of $10M in spending, with it more likely to be around $7M. check the older posts though for the exact numbers.

by k96ps02 on Jun 8, 2009 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

on trading RAllen

I agree that trading Ray and getting younger would be to the Celtics benefit long term. However, he is like the old car that costs a lot and is priced higher than any prospective buyer would pay. Nice idea. Probably won’t happen unless packaged with some value added.

by old_fan on Jun 8, 2009 8:54 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

exactly

that is the reality of the situation. ray allen is amazing and was even more amazing, but in this economy particularly, it will never happen. you will either have to expend cash to get rid of such an extremely pricey player or add some other value which with your 58th pick and medicore bench, i am not sure you actually have to deal presently,he will remain a celtic.

by lakersbluedevil on Jun 8, 2009 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why?

As Brick said below, he’s an expiring deal. They have value in and of themselves, as Lakers fans should know from the Pau Gasol trade.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

His value to US is greater than any value he might represent to another team...

Usually, guys with huge expiring contracts are traded because they’ve fallen out of favor with their current team. The other team takes them because they represent salary cap savings the following season and because they can get rid of some of their higher salaried players as well. In our case, Ray a valued member of our team, so it’s not exactly the same situation of other salary dumps because the value of Ray to this team is much higher than the value of Ray’s expiring contract to some team looking to shed salary…thus, almost any deal is going to be a losing proposition to us in terms of talent coming back. That’s why Ray won’t be traded…

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jun 8, 2009 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No, Ray Allen is an expiring contract who could save a team like Charlotte or New Orleans MILLIONS if they trade him for players with multiple years remaining on their deals.

The point is that he does NOT cost alot, because his contract ends this year.

by Brickowski on Jun 8, 2009 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

exactly

which is the whole point of the article that I’m sure many people didn’t read ;)

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Jun 8, 2009 9:42 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

"WE" ??????

WE – here at the blog don’t trade anyone – WE pontificate, WE whine when trades don’t go our way. WE hope, and mostly WE wait while rumors die or come to fruition……..but in the end WE watch the games……and I for one hope WE are watching Ray Allen take a feed from KG coming off a curl screen and nailing a sweet jesus jumper next season in a Celtic uniform and WE are winning. But trade? WE ain’t on that committee last time I checked.

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Jun 8, 2009 9:09 AM EDT reply actions   1 recs

someone is on fire this morning…..

When Perk was asked what he thought of Howard winning the gold medal this summer, he responded: "What’s his impression of me after I won a ring?"

by Green17 on Jun 8, 2009 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

WE!!!

I make no apologies for using the term “we” or “us” or whatever (never have, never will)

we are a part of this team, we bleed green and pay green to the team to pay for players and we have a say (however distant it may be)

we can effect change and have in the past

we are the Celtics and we matter

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Jun 8, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

OK I meant Wii

I now go back to the temple to walk on hot coals

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Jun 8, 2009 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Charlotte Trade

As I keep saying, the trade to make is Ray Allen to Charlotte for Bell, Diop and Diaw. You get a reasonable replacement for Ray (Bell), a good young defensive backup center who is a legitimate 7 footer (Diop), and a very versatile 6-9 forward who can defend three positions and has an excellent floor game (Diaw).

The downside of this trade (and of several other trades posed above), is that management has to be willing to take on the salary commitments.

by Brickowski on Jun 8, 2009 9:38 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

the other part of this that you haven’t mentioned is charlotte agreeing to the deal. frankly, i don’t think they’d make this trade. larry brown loved bell and diaw, and the team made a nice little run at the end of the season this past year … why bring in ray? they don’t get better in the deal. i understand the financial side of the deal, but i don’t think that they make this trade.

by k96ps02 on Jun 8, 2009 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

exactly!

and besides they have a Ray Allen caliber outside shooter in Adam Morrison…….oh wait

by whambulance on Jun 9, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is it!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is the only trade that I’ll do with Ray but Idon’t think Charlotte being stupid to do it!!!!! Or not.
Call them

by celt4ever on Jun 8, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

In what world is Bell a "reasonable replacement for Ray"?

Diaw I love, but Diop is a spare part. This trade would make our team much worse.

by alskor on Jun 9, 2009 1:21 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Some further reasonings of why to trade Ray.

This is the way I see it. If the Celtics are going to try to win it all next year with the roster they have plus a couple additions, then obviously, don’t trade Ray. But if that occurs, regardless of whether the Celtics win the championship next year, when the 2010 season ends, there will almost be an end to this era. Why?

Well, unless the Celtics sign Ray Allen after his current contract expires to a contract that is no longer than 2 years and no more than say, $12 million total($6 million per), they are killing their financial flexibility to improve. Rondo and Perk will need extension and while a Perk extension won’t cost us anything more for 2011, Rondo’s will. Probably to the tune of $10 million a year minimum depending upon the year he has in 2010. That’s going to mean having Pierce, Perk, KG, Rondo, Giddens(if they pick up his option), Walker(if they don’t walk away from him),probably an MLE signee from this year, the 2010 draftee and maybe an LLE signee from this year. Nine players signed and probably already closing in on $58-$63 million in total salary. Six roster spots to fill with only Ray’s Bird rights and the MLE and vet mins to fill out the roster.

Resigning Ray for anything more than $6 million per for two years is looking pretty ludicrous. Plus the Celtics’ Big Three will be one more year older and that much more worn and slow and off their games. Honestly, at that point, Wyc might be very direct with Danny and say to start rebuilding because given the age of the team and salary involved the certainty is going to be that much less that they will win.

So, maybe trading Ray would be best to help control salary structure while ensuring that the Celtics can stay competitive for a championship, all the way to the end of the KG contract. Perhaps trading Ray will be necessary to keeping salary structure in line so as not to top the $80 million barrier because the preservation of Ray’s salary slot of close to $20 million is more important than keeping Ray. Also, by trading Ray, there’s a pretty great chance the C’s will get back an extra player, hopefully filling in one or two of the necessary positions that need to be filled(backup C and/opr PF , SF, PG).

The scenarios and what ifs are pretty astounding when considering just how large Ray’s contract is and what that salary slot means to salary stability for this team going forward until 2012 ends. The Celtics might need to trade Ray this year because they feel that they could still win it all without him this year if they bring in the right package and because trading him might also be the best way to fill out the roster beyond 2010 in a controlled manner that will allow the Celtics the ability to compete for a ring for two more years beyond 2010.

by nickagneta on Jun 8, 2009 9:41 AM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Your math seems off

I’m not sure how you got the 6 million per figure.

To my mind, you can look at it in this simple manner…as long as the combined salary of Ray/Rondo stays roughly similar pre and post 2010, our salary structure will be no more better or worse than it is right now. Assuming Rondo gets his 10 million per extension, Ray will be in line for about 10 million per himself, which is fair and reasonable given his age and the team’s ability to compete for a championship.

It’s also important to remember that TA/Scal/House/Giddens (if we decline his option) represent almost 10 million dollars in expiring salary after the 2010 season. It’s always been my feeling that simply letting those contracts expire is the best move and would help offset any additional expenditure we might want to make, such as this season’s MLE signing, Baby’s contract, Perk’s next extension, and our 2010 first rounder…

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jun 8, 2009 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Possible 2010-2011 salary structure

KG – $18.8 million
Pierce – $21.5 million
Perk – $4.9 million
Giddens – $1.1 million
Walker – $900,000
Full MLE signed this year – $6.0 million
2010 !st round pick – $1.0 million

So that’s 7 possible players signed for that year and I’m taking a flyer that both Giddens and Walker make it to their third years, that the C’s signed a full MLE cotract with someone this year for say a minimum 2-3 year duration, and the 1st round pick next year. Total = $54.2 million.

Now what you are suggesting is to give a 35 year old SG $10 million a year for how long??

I’m sorry I think that is just not good financial sense.

If we give Rondo $10 million a year extension starting that year that makes 8 players and we would be at $64.2 million. Adding an aging Ray for $10 million only to get to 9 players on the roster and be at $74 million already spent will never happen. The team might spend upwards towards $80 million this year in salary plus whatever luxury tax penalty they might have to pay, but I see it being financial suicide to sign Ray for anywhere near $10 million at the expense of not having more money available to help fill out the rest of the roster.

by nickagneta on Jun 8, 2009 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Assumptions upon assumptions...

Going 2 years into the future is quite daunting, Nick, but thanks for trying. In doing so, I think you made a couple unreasonable assumptions…

Giving Giddens his 1.1 million option is a HUGE assumption…Danny spent last week lamenting in the papers over the fact that George Hill got scooped up before the Cs selection (which turned out to be Giddens), which tells me they aren’t picking up that option…

Walker WILL probably be given a shot to stick around though…since he’s cheaper and had a better head on his shoulders.

The full MLE on one player? That doesn’t seem to be a realistic assumption either. I think we’re more likely to split it among 2 players, and PROBABLY not even use the whole thing.

Rondo’s extension MIGHT average 10 million over the course of the contract, but I think it’s doubtful it starts AT 10 million…

Last, it’s quite possible that 2010’s 1st rounder is stashed overseas. I’m not counting on it, but let’s not discount the possibility…

So, removing some of those unreasonable assumptions, let’s look at something like this:

KG – 18.8 million
Pierce – 21.5 million
Perk – 4.9 million
Walker – .9 million
2010 1st round pick – 1 million

Sub-total: 47.1 million for 5 players

Assume Rondo signs a 4-year, 40.1 million dollar contract, with salaries of 8.9, 9.6, 10.38, 11.21 million annually. That puts Rondo’s 2010 salary at 8.9 million. Of course, if the Cs are so concerned with 2010, they could easily backload more money to years 2, 3 or 4. But, for simplicity’s sake, let’s say he’s at 8.9 million in 2010.

Sub-total w/Rondo’s extension: 56 million

Next, let’s assume we split the MLE and sign Grant Hill and Antonio McDyess this offseason. Grant Hill signs a 1 year, 2.5 million dollar contract (because Grant is getting old and Walker can be counted on in 2010 to be the backup 3 man), with a team option for 2010 (just in case), while McDyess signs a 2 year, 5 million dollar contract. Our salary outlay in 2010 will only be 2.5 million, with another 2.5 team option.

Sub-total w/McDyess: 58.5 million (for 7 players)

Next, let’s assume the Erden comes over and signs a 3 year deal similar to Bill Walkers, making him a $700,000 cost in 2010.

Sub-total w/Erden: 62.2 million (for 8 players)

Next, let’s assume both Baby and Powe are extended their qualifying offers. Powe accepts because he doesn’t have a choice. He comes back next season, has a so-so season, and is resigned with a 2 year, 4 million dollar contract, with a player option in 2011. That makes his 2010 salary 2 million. Baby also hunts around for a good deal, and eventually signs a 3 year, 12 million dollar offer, which we match. His 2010 salary is 4 million (to make it easy).

Sub-total w/Baby and Powe: 68.2 million (for 10 players).

Let’s assume that Ray Allen decides to return. As I mentioned earlier, it’s very hard peering this far into the future. It’s reasonable to say that Ray could ‘settle’ for almost any contract figure, depending on his 2009-2010 season goes. I can imagine him getting anywhere from 5-10 million per…let’s split the diff at 7.5 over 2 seasons, with a team option for a 3rd season.

Sub-total w/resigned Ray Allen: 75.7 million (for 11 players).

Now, let’s add a veteran point making the minimum (at 1.1 million), a free agent rookie wingman (at $700,000).

Sub-total w/generic veteran point and rookie: 77.5 million (for 13 players).

We go into the season with 2 open roster spots to scoop up veteran free agents bought-out after the trading deadline…

Conversely, we can still have Giddens on the team (and his 1.1 million dollar option) and we’re at 78.5 million for 14 players. Whatever the case, we’re at pretty much the same salary outlay as we were in 2008-2009, WHICH WAS MY ENTIRE POINT.

Remember, if we’re looking to scrimp a little in 2010, we can always backload Rondo’s extension, or even backload Ray’s new contract, giving him, for example, 6 million in 2010, and 10 million in 2011…

Further caveat: this is assuming the salary cap #s we have are accurate. For example, there is some discrepancy about Perk’s salary…I’ve seen 4.89 million in 2010…and I’ve also seen 4.39…

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jun 8, 2009 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Assumptions upon assumptions

I think we can agree on the point that we are both making rather large assumption. I think a couple of your assumptions are as bad as what you think mine are:

- Baby matched at $4 million??
- Erden coming aboard when, from all indications, he has looked lost in Europe.
- Splitting the MLE?? We did that last year and ended up and it was awful. They will be better off giving the whole thing, or nearly the whole thing, to an impact guy that they might get cheap, like Pachulia, Gortat, Marion, Odom, etc.
- And I just don’t see Ray getting anything from the C’s above $5-6 mllion per for two year. I see you moved pretty quick off the $10 million per stance. Good call.

But you see, I understand your original point and think that that is the problem. If the C’s win it all next year, they will cemented their legacy in Celtic lore by winning more than one title and being perceived as probably being good enough to win three in a row except for injury problems, ala the 74-76 teams. I don’t see this ownership group allwing 2010-11 going deep into the luxury tax unless they are dealing with some superstars that could bridge the gap between this championship group and another and that would mean trading one or two of the Big hree over the next year or two.

As I posted lower, if Ray could be traded for someone theoretically as good Kevin Martin, then maybe with a core of Martin, Rondo, Perk and the aging stars of the Big Three then Wyc and Co. allow continued spending deep into the $75-80 million salary area. But without that trade or trades to change the team to a more star laden team with money invested in young superstar talent, I think the days of huge salaries ends next year.

by nickagneta on Jun 9, 2009 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Okay

I’m in agreement with your last paragraph. To my thinking, as long as we’re viable championship contenders, our salary outlay has to be in the 75-80 million dollar range. Your right to wonder how long that can include the Big 3—at a certain point, they won’t be enough and we’ll have to translate their talents and money into other players. Personally, I’m counting on Rondo and Perk’s improvement, plus either Baby or Walker to develop enough to provide ample transition talent for the Big 3—provided we can get them signed to reasonable extensions I expect them to retire as Cs.

Baby is worth 4 million a season. It’s another question as to whether we’ll be able to sign him at that (if we use the MLE on other players, we’ll only be able to use his Early Bird Rights to sign him, which pretty much locks him into an MLE salary—at 5.5 million a season, which is too much. Thus, the only way to get him signed to a fair contract will probably be if another team does it and we match). Honestly, though, if I was forced to bet, I’d say that due to the financial climate and other valuable free agents available, we might just get away with giving Baby his qualifying offer…I doubt he gets ANY offers…but we’ll see…that’s the most unreasonable thing either of us has written, but that’s what my gut is telling me…

Erden was just an example of some low-priced rookie big man that we MIGHT need on our roster in 2010. You can fill in about any name there…Suton outta Michigan might be another possibility, especially if we get him at #58 and tell him to take a year in Europe to refine his game…

I personally think we’re targeting McDyess and Hill, hoping we can use the MLE to get them both…maybe one gets part of the MLE and the other gets the LLE or the veterans minimum. But from a roster standpoint, I think it’s a must that we get TWO veterans this offseason by some avenue…

I didn’t back off Ray getting 10 million; I just said I could see him getting anywhere from 5-10 million next season, depending on how the year goes. If Ray plays like he did this season, and we win it all again, I’d tend towards 10 million per (maybe a one year deal, with a team option). If he has an injury plagued season and the team plays well in his absence, I could see something in the 5 million per range. It’s too early to tell—it depends on what happens next year.

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jun 9, 2009 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not to harp on the point

but why would Danny offer a 35 year old Ray a multi-year cntract at somewhere near $10 million per year when he already refused to give a 32 year old Posey the fourth year on a contract that would pay significantly less than $10 million per year. I can’t see Danny thinking resigning Ray at over $5-6 million per season is very good business.

by nickagneta on Jun 8, 2009 8:17 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't equate the two

Posey is declining at a MUCH higher rate than Ray, is a less important player than Ray, and comes off the bench, so it’s easy to see why Danny would want to give him a lesser salary.

That said, don’t underestimate Ray’s willingness to sacrifice to be on a winner. We don’t know how low he’d go, nor is there any indication that he would simply ‘go where the money’ is, unlike Posey…

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jun 8, 2009 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also..

don’t just assume that Ray would be given a contract from the Celtics. Danny knows how fast SGs decline at Ray’s age and I seriously doubt that a large contract offer, if any, is going to be extended Ray’s way after this contract. I just think that that type of thinking is a function of fans being infatuated with current players and refusing to look at the larger picture from the business side of te ball.

by nickagneta on Jun 9, 2009 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Could be...

I don’t discount Danny’s ability to be a cold-ass business man. But I also believe that the Big 3 were put together to contend for the championship in 2008-2010. If 2010 is another championship season, or close, I think the Big 3 will remain together. What we don’t know is how low Ray will go to stay, whether he’d willingly take a bench role, and how his body will hold up. Personally, I think he’d go pretty low, if we asked him to (and if his game started to deteriorate), and he’d probably be willing to come off the bench too. I also think he’s going to have a career like Reggie Miller and be good for 12-15 points until he’s 38/39…

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jun 9, 2009 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Just curious...

….why everyone keeps listing Giddens above Walker in terms of who’d the team rather keep around. Maybe I missed some games where Giddens was suddenly called up from the D-League and lit it up for for 30 and 10 but I saw Walker do some pretty amazing things in Green this season.

by whambulance on Jun 9, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oui!!!

With as many holes as WE have on our team, it’s pretty tempting to consider how much $19 million could get US. But WE will either have to add value or—more likely—take back some toxic contracts.

But I think Doc is 100% right, in that we really only need some bench help to be right back in the thick of things next season: a backup C, a backup SF, and a backup PG. We may not need to change the foundation of the team in order to make those acquisitions.

"People don't understand, if you can't live the rest of your life off one year in the NBA, you can't live off 21." -- Keon Clark

by Eeyore III on Jun 8, 2009 9:49 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Sure

People are getting too cute with the trade Ray stuff.

We have needs, as you say, backup C, backup PG, backup wing who can defend 3’s. If we trade Ray we need to get back a SG that doesnt lessen our starting lineup AND fill at least one of those holes. Otherwise why do it? Danny certainly isnt going to make our starting five weaker to get a decent backup C or PG. That’s crazy.

Its not gonna happen. Ray will be here because there is no way we can trade him and actually make our team better. We cant actually make our team better while making our starting five worse. We’re going to do the obvious thing and try to hit on some cheap pickups.

by alskor on Jun 9, 2009 1:28 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't Trade Ray

Ray is probably going into the Hall Of Fame. If we trade we must get a potential HOFer in return. Ray is a 95% free throw shooter. Ray hits game winning shots on a consistent basis. If we want to win another championship we need Ray. What we need is what Doc says we need in addition to Ray, not at the expense of Ray.

"I don't come to play, I come to WIN"--Larry Bird
"Criminally Negligent Officiating"--Tommy Heinsohn

by TrueGreen on Jun 8, 2009 9:56 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

To Add To The Above

The return of KG makes Ray that much more valuable to us. We know Ray and Ray knows us. There’s no learning curve needed if we keep one of the best players in the league.

"I don't come to play, I come to WIN"--Larry Bird
"Criminally Negligent Officiating"--Tommy Heinsohn

by TrueGreen on Jun 8, 2009 9:58 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

of course ray is tradeable, but it won’t happen. the contract is nice, but… anyone who wants him doesn’t want to give up what we want because they want to win too.

by nazzbo on Jun 8, 2009 10:03 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Which teams are looking to land a big name in 2010?

Those might be our best options due to cap space. I can’t seem to think of anyone except for the Clippers (if they want to make a run at a LeBron or someone) that would offer us much back (Knicks & Nets just don’t have any real good players that fill our needs). Maybe one of those Texas teams?

by funkstarrdeluxe on Jun 8, 2009 10:03 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Bottom line for me is I only trade Ray if it makes us better (or at least even) for NEXT year. If trading Ray will hurt our chances, then I’m not doing it. Wit that in mind, I like the Chandler Posey deal the most. It gives us a young, athletic, defensive presence to pair with Perk. It gives us a versatile 3 to back up PP. What we would need to do then is find an SG with the midlevel and sign Marbury for near minimum.

by droopdog7 on Jun 8, 2009 10:24 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Well Done Nick!

That about sums it up perfectly as to why Ainge would / should consider moving Ray this summer. It’s the debate of going for it all again this coming season versus planning for seasons down the road. He made that decision last summer on Posey. He has another one to make on Ray this summer.

by celty86 on Jun 8, 2009 10:34 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Danny, being the nice guy that he is, would never argue about the fans being included in the “we.” Niether would Wyc, he likes to sell tickets and turn a profit and the two greatest weapons to do that are winning, and creating a sense of community. However, don’t let that fool you into believing any fan or group of fans have one ioda or pinch of influence when it comes to personel decision made by the Celtic organization.

Having said that. Ray Allen isn’t going to be traded unless it’s going to somehow improve the team in a big way. Danny isn’t necessarily looking for long range financial burdens that might hamstring future cap flexibility (see his reasons for letting Posey go). So somehow I highly doubt Ray Allen goes anywhere. And, if you remember Danny and Doc also have a policy of discussing personel moves with the captains of the team I highly doubt that moving Ray Allen, and disrupting the lockeroom and on court chemistry of this team, would Any relief Ray’s expiring contract might bring would be just as big a benefit to the Celtics as it would to another team.

A man who was an integral part of #17, and who was a huge part of the success of this offseason, and fans are chanting to trade the guy. Fans here might be loyal to the jersey, but apparently there is little to no loyaly to players. Sad day.

by tmcdon on Jun 8, 2009 10:38 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Posey ...

was let go, not primarily because of hurting future cap flexibility (as Roy Hobbs has explained, we have none in any event for the foreseeable future), but because he is already old, and will not be worth $6+ million a year after next season. While it is impossible to know for sure, if Posey had been 25 instead of 32, DA would likely have paid him.

"People don't understand, if you can't live the rest of your life off one year in the NBA, you can't live off 21." -- Keon Clark

by Eeyore III on Jun 8, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bottom line is that a solid move to trade Ray for a bench and a Ray replacement puts as back as favorites

we won’t have cap room in 2010 anyway, DA has to do something to make up for misjudging everything but Perk and Rajons growth this year.

NO is hurting so badly I am not sure that a cp3 trade is improbable. But we don’t need to even pull that big of a shocker. Charlotte has everything we need too and they are motivated. We can add TA or Scal if need be to make it work on salaries or add draft picks if we are getting too much talent back.

by wahz on Jun 8, 2009 10:39 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

it should finish:

on court chemistry of this team, would recieve the blessing of KG and PP.

by tmcdon on Jun 8, 2009 10:40 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Trade Pierce

I´d only trade Ray if he accepts a buyout and comes back one month later.
I just don´t see any realistic trades on the horizon, yet (as you said yourself, the ideas you posted aren`t realistic). Ray has not the only expiring contract in the NBA, so the number of takers might be smaller than people think.

Now, how about trading Pierce?
He´s still one of the best SF in the game, and could put several teams over the top.

Trade him for a big expiring contract. and a Draft Pick in 2010. Let´s say to Utah, who have the Knicks´ 1st next Draft. Or the Clippers, who have the Wolves pick.
You´d still have a team with KG, Ray, Rondo and Perk, a high Draft Pick in 2010, and ~40 million in expiring contracts.for the summer of 2010.

Tell me we aren´t the prime candidate for a young superstar willing to win a ring.

(Btw, I was just playing devil´s advocate, but the point remains: Is trading Ray really smarter than trading Pierce?)

by Casperian on Jun 8, 2009 10:52 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Thanks for this article

It sums up pretty well the different scenarios and what we could get by trading Ray but I just can’t see the interest of trading Ray to acquire a pair of big men (like Bogut, Jamison, Chandler, etc). The current starting lineup of the team is just great, we need to acquire a good big man for the bench but it would be a fatal error to trade one of our best players just to acquire a big man (or some wingman to backup Pierce).

As you may know I’m clearly against any Ray Allen trade idea… because whatever is the scenario, and despite my green glasses and attachment to Ray, I just think that none of these trades is a gain for the Celtics.

by Drucci on Jun 8, 2009 10:58 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Hurting Teams

Charlotte, NO and Memphis are hurting financially and there may be other teams in trouble. We know that the Bobcats and Grizzlies are for sale. The Bobcats have the cap structure from hell. I don’t know how much of it is Jordan’s fault, but some of it has to be.

Small market teams like Milwaukee, Indiana and Atlanta may also be experiencing financial difficulties. These are the 6 teams most likely to be involved in a trade for Ray Allen and his expiring contract.

by Brickowski on Jun 8, 2009 11:06 AM EDT reply actions   1 recs

I have beem a celtic since 1969, I can not beleive just how dumb celtics fans have gotten ." Pay attention" the starting five is not the problem. The problem is the bench. Take our starting five against there’s and we win. If there is no problem dont create one. As Ray get’s older dont you think his salery will decrease and he could come off the bench. Who in the world are we going to trade for that can score 51 points if you ask him

We were down two big men Powe and Kevin tired broken up and still gave Orlando all the hell they could stand. Dont let fear cloud your judgment. We should get rid of T. Allen.
Mikki Moore, Scal, Stephon and Eddie House.

by tyquinton on Jun 8, 2009 11:11 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Unfortunately, that’s not how it works. In order to trade something, it has to have perceived value. Ray’s contract has value to a team looking to shed payroll and/or create cap space for a 2010 free agent signing. Mikki Moore and Steph are free agents, we don’t have their rights. Tony Allen and Brian Scalabrine may have expiring deals, but are too small to make an impact on teams that need cap relief and they don’t have any value as players. Eddie House has a player option, if he exercises it he is at or below market value for a player of his caliber.

The only chip that has value to move is Ray. While he is a great player and of unquestionable talent and character, it is likely we could also receive a top player with a longer deal in exchange for him to a team that needs the aforementioned cap relief.

by funkstarrdeluxe on Jun 8, 2009 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agree 100% with this article. We just need to be patient the right deal will come along. Expiring contract is extremely valuable more so than people realize…

by thebirdman on Jun 8, 2009 11:21 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The only off-season Ray trade I might consider

I think we are limited in who would actually trade for Ray in the off-season. (During the season next year is another matter.) Most of the trades nbeing mentioned are one-sided and the other team would never do them.

Here is a trade I think Milwaukee would do: (No the Bucks will not trade Bogut.)

Boston trades: R. Allen, T. Allen, Scal, Giddens, Pruitt
Milwaukee trades: Redd, Gadzuric, Ridnour, Alexander, 2009 no. 1 pick (1oth overall)

the trade clears at RealGM.

Why Milwaukee does it: Money.Money and Money. Did I mention money? The Bucks unload $28 million in salary in 10-11, so it can re-sign Villanueva and Sessions (two of their four or five best players) w/o going very deep into luxury tax hell. Ray is very popular in Milwaukee, where he began his career. Redd is coming off ACL and is way overpaid.

Why Boston does it: Redd when healthy is not a huge drop-off from Ray, if he is at all. He is a solid citizen type, too. Get quality veteran back-ups at the 1 and the 5 in Gadzuric and Ridnour. Upgrade in the prospect department with Alexander and no. 1 pick over Giddens and Pruitt. Love to see what Danny can do with a lotto pick.

But Wyc must be willing to swallow the salaries. That is the catch.

by elrod enchilada on Jun 8, 2009 11:40 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The problems with Redd...

… are his contract and his health. He’s missed at least 10 games in each of the last three seasons, including 29 three years ago and 49 this season. With 2 years, $35 million left on his contract, that may be too big of a pill to swallow.

I have no interest in Gadzuric or Ridnour; both are vastly overpaid. Ridnour at least expires, but Gadz is making $14 million over two seasons.

The only way I take back Redd is if I’m getting Bogut and/or Sessions and/or Charlie V. in a sign-and-trade (and perhaps two of the three).

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well this is the whole point. Trading an expiring contract is about saving money for the other team and eating money from our side.

by droopdog7 on Jun 8, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I tend to agree

we overpay for our bench but that’s part of the idea

if we can upgrade our bench without trading Ray, great, but this deal is an example of how we could replace him and upgrade the bench in one deal

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Jun 8, 2009 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Here's the problem...

People don’t have a conception of how much we’d be overpaying.

This season, assuming that the #10 pick signs for the maximum scale amount, this trade costs us as extra $7,496,110. Factor in the luxury tax, and the actual amount is $14,992,220.

Next season, this trade adds in excess of $30 million to the payroll. It also takes us from under the luxury tax, to as much as $7 to $10 million above it, even before we add any new contract for Rondo or a free agent. Realistically, total costs to the team could be as much as $50 million (assuming $10 million in other contracts are added).

So, we’re looking at Wyc paying as much as an extra $65 million (and no less than $52 million extra) for an injured player (Redd), a player who averaged 4 ppg (Gadz), a player who averaged 4.7 ppg (Alexander), a backup point guard who had suffered a major injury (Ridnour), and the #10 pick in a weak draft.

Somehow, I don’t think that’s a good investment. I’d rather have Ray, the expirings, and the extra money.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

you are right

I didn’t look at the numbers that closely

good points all around

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Jun 8, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well I agree there as I am on the fence about trading Ray as well. Bu it is clear that we will certainly be eating a bunch of money if we do. But the biger question is, would it be more or less expensive than signing players to the bench and keeping Ray? And of course, I also understand the comment on damaged goods. We can’t get a player that may not even play due to injury. That would suck royally.

by droopdog7 on Jun 8, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Of course it would be...

Don’t you think we could get better players than Gadzuric (4 ppg) for $7 million per season? Or a backup as good as Ridnour (or at least nearly as good) for less than $6.5 million?

I’m not opposed to trading Ray if it makes the team better. But adding $65 million in payroll for a bunch of guys who aren’t very good (and one guy who is amazing, but has missed substantial parts of 3 straight seasons) isn’t a good gamble.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, the only question I have is that we would be adding players on top of what Ray is making. If we could cover holes WITH Ray’s contract, then we woud certainly save money this year by trading Ray. The unknown would be how much money do we spend this year to add replacement parts and whether we would still need to add replacement parts even with trading Ray.

by droopdog7 on Jun 8, 2009 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Most teams wanting financial flexibility...

… will also want us to take back more in salaries than we’re sending out. We can trade Ray for roughly $24.8 million in incoming salary, and I think most teams would try to take advantage of that.

I mean, most of those hurting teams are hurting now, and immediate cap relief is worth much more than future relief. Thus, they’ll try to shave up to an additional $5 million (roughly) off their payrolls.

Does that make sense for us? Or does it make more sense to keep Ray and commit that $5 million to bench help? Ultimately, it (of course) depends upon the type of offers we receive.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

There's a limit to that money, isn't there?

There’s a difference between long and expensive contracts that are a financial burden for their teams, and absolutely atrocious contracts.

This deal would cost the Celtics a ton of money, because it launches them right back into guaranteed luxury tax territory next season. All told, Wyc would end up paying literally tens of millions of extra dollars. Why would he do that, especially when the primary player coming back has been repeatedly injured recently?

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

There are problems with almost all of the players who would be coming back. Chandler is also damaged goods; you may recall that NO tried to trade him last year and OK City sent him back after he flunked the physical.

The reality is that you won’t be getting back a single player as good as Ray. But you may get guys to fill bench holes who are alot better than what you can get for the MLE or less in the free agent market.

I’m willing to weaken the starting 5 a little to strenghten the bench. It was the bench that failed in the playoffs. Also, Ray Allen’s post-season performance was spotty. He had that one 50 point game, but against Orlando he couldn’t create his own shot against JJ Redick, which was very disappointing. They say he was hurt, but that’s going to happen.. He isn’t getting any younger.

by Brickowski on Jun 8, 2009 12:05 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Rip. . .

Hamilton? Detroit is trying to cut salary, and Rip is the last big contract on their books. Plus, he plays a very similar role to Ray. So if they throw in some of their bench bigs, that could work well for us.

by MetroGlobe on Jun 8, 2009 12:09 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Rip, Amir Johnson, Kwame Salami

their salaries add up to 18mil. would Dumars bite on that?

by MetroGlobe on Jun 8, 2009 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Caron Butler

If some how we could get Caron Butler I’d be so stoked. Throw in Jamison as our 6th man and I’d pass out. Love Jeff’s dream scenario of trading Ray, him resting for 30 days, and then resigning him too.

by johnnyrondo on Jun 8, 2009 12:13 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

hey roy hobbs

good points,though droopdog and Jeff get the spirit of the trade.

let’s have Milwaukee toss in their 2011 no. 1 pick too. we can give them rights to semih erden.

by elrod enchilada on Jun 8, 2009 12:23 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Look at the breakdown I did above...

The spirit of the trade costs Wyc $50 to $65 million, for damaged goods (and goods that aren’t that great). The trade is terrible for the Celtics, in my opinion.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

devil in the details

the problem with naming names is that there are hundreds of factors we need to consider and it sometimes distracts from the main point

in theory we could do any of the deals mentioned above, …IF other stuff happened

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Jun 8, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

True...

The problem I see with a lot of the Ray trades, though, is that they make starting lineup weaker, and they add a ton of money to the payroll, without making our team any better than if we just added to the bench in free agency.

Would people rather have Ray + Bobby Jackson + Grant Hill + Antonio McDyess + tens of millions of dollars, or Redd / Gadz / Ridnour / Alexander / #10?

I’d take the former in a heart beat. The only way I want to see Allen moved is if we find a younger (healthy) player who can step into his role without the Celts losing too much.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

With ya

-sw

"I didn't go there with the intentions of getting ejected. I went there with the intentions of just telling Kobe, 'You got to relax. You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?'" -Ron Artest, 05.06.09

by Steve Weinman on Jun 9, 2009 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Jesus Shuttlesworth tossed under the Trade Shuttle Bus this morning

Ray if you are reading any of this ……I wouldn’t trade you (or even think about it). Of course Cornbread got traded after he carried the Celtics on his back and won Banner 13 or 14?
So in a business, loyalty and bringing a banner is essentially saying " what have you done for me lately". I get it as a necessity……. but I hate it

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Jun 8, 2009 12:55 PM EDT reply actions   2 recs

15

Max carried them on his back for #14 and was here for #15 as well. It was the perception he didn’t work hard enough to get back from injury in ’85 that inspired the trade for Walton and netted #16

by slamtheking on Jun 8, 2009 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

To legitimately have a shot at a title, we’d need quality backups at the 1, 3, and 4/5 slots.

Without trading Ray, can we fill all those needs? I think we could fill two of them; one by the MLE, and the other by packaging the expirings of Scal, TA, etc. Don’t think we could fill all three slots without trading Ray. I hate to get to the trade deadline hoping/praying for buyouts. That’s really hit or miss. Of course, if we do go the trade Ray route, then obviously, we need a starting 2 as well. All told, assuming we keep House, we’d have near 28 mil in expirings to get it done.

Of the trade proposals in this thread, I’ve seen only two team trades. I don’t have any ideas right now to throw out, but I’m sure Danny would consider multi-team trades as well. Of the proposals I’ve seen here though, the Charlotte one looks like the best and most realistic.

Danny would be negligent if he didn’t at least consider trading Ray. Say, for instance, trading Ray landed 3 of the 4 needs. You could still use the MLE to pick up the last need. I honestly think the chances of seeing Ray traded are 50-50.

It’s gonna be interesting to see how the roster plays out, but I trust Danny, in spite of a poor off season last year.

by Mencius on Jun 8, 2009 1:12 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I think we can fill in the bench

We won a title with Posey, P.J., and Sam as our primary backups. I think that’s the level of players we need to get back to improve the bench.

Would McDyess / Grant Hill (or Anthony Parker) / Bobby Jackson fill that void? I think it would. There will be a ton of players that sign smaller than expected contracts this season. There’s no reason to trade Ray until at the very least seeing what bargains we can get.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think we need at least those levels of players...

… because KG, PP, and Ray are all two years further removed from their primes. In other words, I don’t expect any of the three to be as good as they were 2 years ago. Further, only Posey was a before season signing, and Sam basically, was useless, or deemed not as good as House by the time the finals rolled around. I don’t think we want to get toward the end of the season just hoping that we can pick up a bought out player, or that someone will come out of retirement. That didn’t work well last year.

I liked Grant Hill for a long time, but truly wonder what he’s got left in the tank. Ditto Bobby Jackson. Seems like they may be Sam Cassell-like in the running on fumes department. I think McDyess would be a fine pickup.

My point is, to be as good as we were in year one, I think we need even better reserves than we had in PJ, Posey, and Cassell, given the PGA’s anticipated dropoff, even taking into consideration Perk and Rondo’s improvement.

We shall see. I think we’ve got one of the better GMs out there (in spite of last off-season). It’ll be interesting.

by Mencius on Jun 8, 2009 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, that cuts both ways...

Arguably, Pierce, Ray, and KG are worse. Almost undoubtedly, Rondo and Perk are better.

I agree we need to upgrade the bench, I’m just not sure that that should be done at the expense of downgrading the starting lineup.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

DREAM SCENARIO

My dream scenario (which I may have stated before is)

BOS Trades: Ray Allen, Rajon Rondo, Brian Scalabrine and 2011 First Round Pick
NO Trades: Chris Paul, David West, James Posey

BOS Trades: Tony Allen, Eddie House, Bill Walker
PHO Trades: Leandro Barbosa

BOS 09-10 Lineup:
PG: Chris Paul / Gabe Pruitt / Vet PG Pickup
SG: Leandro Barbosa / JR Giddens / Vet SG Pickup
SF: Paul Pierce / James Posey
PF: David West / Glen Davis
C: Kevin Garnett / Kendrick Perkins

I love perkins but i think he has proven that he can’t stay on the floor to play full starters minutes and would probably be even more effective not being counted on for more minutes. I also think that its not crazy to look at Kevin Garnett as a guy who should only play 25 min during the regular season for the rest of his career. Call me crazy but I’d rather save him for the playoffs than burn him out during the season. This Scenario also doesnt spend any of MLE but can be split on pg/sg back ups

by RoyJanteen on Jun 8, 2009 1:34 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

It's hard to go wrong with that trade...

But New Orleans wouldn’t trade a superstar + an all-star just to save money, in my opinion. Rondo is a good player, but CP3 is a future first ballot Hall of Famer.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I pretty much agree ...

Like I said it was my dream scenario, the only defense I can offer for that trade, is that I believe Rondo to be a future allstar and has 10 good years ahead of him. I also think that he probably is not a max player like CP3. I think Rondo’s extension will look more like Devin Harris 5 years 40 mi, which is like 8-9 mil a year, as opposed to CP3 who is a max player. If you weigh in the difference in pay scale their value’s may be similar. They would also save an insane amount of money and atleast during 09-10 they wouldnt have a huge drop off in production.

by RoyJanteen on Jun 8, 2009 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

you forgot the trade to get lebron james too … Cs fans are digging deep out of desperation.

by k96ps02 on Jun 8, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

not so sure

I must be a wicked homer for cringing at the thought of trading away our starting backcourt for CP3, another backup 4 and a bench guy we had last year under a contract we didn’t want to offer.

by slamtheking on Jun 8, 2009 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes...

I think “wicked homer” would describe that mindset. ;-)

I think it’s hard to call David West “another backup 4”; he’d immediately become probably the best backup in the NBA, and would be playing 30 minutes per night. We’d also be landing a top-4 player in the NBA.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 8, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

West

I’m in complete agreement West would be a great backup, but that’s what he would be. I wouldn’t sit KG for him and I wouldn’t sit Perk & move KG to center to put him at PF.

I’m still being a ‘wicked homer’ and thinking I wouldn’t move a starting championship backcourt for a PG and 2 guys coming off the bench.

I don’t see much of CP3’s games so I’m not as enamored with him as many other people seem to be. He has a more complete game than Rondo, especially in terms of being a legit threat to score, but I don’t think he’s better than Rondo and Ray combined.

by slamtheking on Jun 9, 2009 7:50 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The only guy I would trade Ray Allen for is Al Jefferson, and then The Celtics would have to put McHale on the payroll too.

by johnnymost on Jun 8, 2009 1:37 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The Only way I trade Ray Allen.....

is if I get an all-star caliber 2-guard back in return to replace him. One who is younger.

That’s it. you don’t sacrifice a legitimate chance at a title for anything less than an equal replacement.

by bewareofdware on Jun 8, 2009 2:07 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

no way Jose

What all of these trade scenarios fail to contemplate is the chemistry inherent in the Pierce/Allen/Garnett trifecta. You won’t be able to replicate that with any of these deals, plus you commit to taking on long term salaries to potentially extend a window to win another title. But face it, this window is closing and the key components are getting up there in age. I would rather stay the course with the current team and let Ray Allen expire and see what we can do in FA in 2010. Ray Allen is not some broken down piece of junk.

by dobbs on Jun 8, 2009 2:14 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

chemistry...

I think we’d be surprised at how good the chemistry would still be between athletes like Rondo, Pierce, and KG + whoever we got in the trade. It’s easy to have chemistry among a group of really good players.

by Fan from VT on Jun 8, 2009 2:37 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Tell that to Denver and Detroit...

You might want to spend more time in chemistry lab. Experiments can definitely go awry. Perennial cool heads/steady hands such as Ray and Billups have far more value to a contender than their declining #s may suggest to the roto league.

by The Walker Wiggle on Jun 8, 2009 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Rehashed Forum Posting:

1. Philadelphia

Allen for Dalembert, Williams, Young

Phil-
With Sammy D off the books they can justify extending Andre Miller, helping gear up for a playoff run with a healthy Brand. Clears room for Speights and adds a shooter scorer at the wings alongside Iguodala.

Bos-
Depth and athleticism. Dalembert adds a lot of speed, size and rebounding off the bench. Williams is a very quick scorer, and Young is a very young and athletic SF who is rapidly learning how to shoot from deep.

2. Dallas:

Ray for Howard and Terry

Dal-
Never know when Cuban will shake things up. Gives them excellent outside shooting to complement Kidd, assuming they extend him at a reduced rate. Saves them a bunch of long-term money.

Bos-
Get a defender/athlete in Howard and Bench scoring/backup point that can handle the ball.

3. Clippers

Ray for Randolph and Gordon

LAC-
Most people consider Randolph untouchable, and LAC is about to commit to Griffin at PF. They’d love to dump him. Allen may be an initial upgrade over Gordon, and they have a lot committed to Davis to try to make the playoffs sooner rather than later.

Bos-
Big question mark. But with Marbury probably not coming back, we need a reputed headcase, right? Additionally, despite his shortcomings, Randolph always brings post scoring and size. He’d relieve the offensive burden from KG, allowing him to move further away from the basket (saving wear and tear) and allowing him to focus on defense to make up for Randolph’s problems there. Gordon looks to be a solid player in the making, and, paired with Rondo, would help pave the way into the future.

4. New Jersey

Ray and Scal for Carter, Najera, Lopez

NJ-
Who knows what they’re doing. But they have quite a few big guys up front and this would give them a boatload of cash to go after 2010 free agents as well as potentially a more media friendly swap in terms of Carter for Allen. This was much more intriguing when a move to brookly was imminent; will they still make a 2010 free agent splash?

Bos-
I believe that Carter is in the same class as Ray and Pierce were 2 years ago. He’s a very good shooter and still a very good athlete; how would he do on a great team? I think he’d surprise a lot of naysayers. Obviously Lopez would be great on this team; he’d probably be the reason NJ says no, but on the other hand I don’t think i’d do Ray for Carter and Boone from the C’s perspective.

5. Phoenix

a. Ray and Giddens for Amare and Barbosa
b. Ray and Pruitt for Amare and Barbosa
c. Ray, Scal, Tony for Amare and Jason Richardson

PHO-
We know phoenix wants to dump salary, and word was they’d be willing to move Amare to do so. The above trades allow Phoenix to save 5 million or more right away and then be 24 million under their projected budget going into the 2010 offseason. They then surround Shaq and Nash with shooters: Richardson, Barnes, and Allen, to stay competitive.

Bos-
Barbosa can do a lot of the things that Ray can and is cheaper and only 26. Amare would add a new dimension alongside KG on offense, and KG can help cover his defense. He could also help ease the minutes on KG by playing alongside Perk. Perk/KG/Amare would be a great PF/C rotation.

c. Ray, Scal, Tony for Amare and Richardson

PHO-
Same as above, but they save about 5-6 mil right away and 30 million the next year. They go small (except for Shaq), still surrounding Shaq and Nash with shooters.

Bos-
Same as above. More financial obligation; Richardson might be a better overall player but is older.

6. Golden State (the Holy Grail of “Ray Allen 2 for 1 possibilities”)
The following ideas are contingent upon a. Nelly’s upredictability; b. Nelly’s dislike of youth; c. Nelly feeling like he can address a need with the 7th pick; d. Golden State making decisions based on financial info as well as basketball info; e. Nelly’s well-documented ability to make and keep odd grudges.

a. Ray for Biedrins and either Ellis, Jackson, Maggette, or Crawford.

GS-
I think Biedrins is a great basketball player. Great rebounder, good defender, good finisher at the basket. Nelly doesn’t play him as much as he should. He also must look at how Denver gave away Camby (similar player to Biedrins), started Nene at Center, ran the bejesus out of the ball and had their best season and just be jealous. Say he trades Biedrins and Ellis. He could start Turiaf at center, one of his pups at PF, draft Jennings, and throw stephen Jackson and Maggette out there and still have Crawford off the bench. Question is, would he trade Biedrins? If so, who is more likely to be traded? Obviously, Maggette. But we know that Nelly wants Crawford gone. Ellis has the biggest contract of them all and really ****ed off management last year. Jackson contract is pretty bad, but he was kind of a leader there.

Bos-
Biedrins is young and is an outstanding defender/rebounder. Crawford is the best shooter of the three guards, and has the friendliest contract. I think Maggette is underrated around here; he’s a scorer, an athlete, and great at drawing fouls. But he’s not as young as you’d think and has injury problems. Jackson is a good defender and solid offensive player 2 years younger than Ray but not at Ray’s offensive level. Ellis is blazing fast and a great finisher, but doesn’t shoot well from 3. Can the C’s have 2 guards like that in the backcourt? On the otherhand, Pierce is likely to be driving to the hoop less and less, while Rondo and Ellis can do that with great skill. I think Boston would have to consider any of the 3 offers; Biedrins is that good.

Let’s say that GS is willing to deal Biedrins, but needs a Center in return

Ray and Perk for Biedrins, one of group 1: (Randolph or Wright), and one of group 2: (Maggette, Jakcosn, Ellis or Crawford.)

GS-
Same reasons as above: Financial flexibility, consolidation of skill. Only now they get a center back but have to give up a super athletic, talented prospect in return.

Bos-
Would be so sad to see Perk go, but Randolph and Wright (I like Wright more) are very talented athletes with good size, and Biedrins is an upgrade from Perk with one of the guards taking over for Ray.

Let’s say there’s no way GS deals Biedrins

c. Ray and 1 of (Scal or Tony) for Turiaf and 2 of (Maggette, Jackson, Ellis or Crawford). Possibly GS would need to throw in Wright or Randolph as well for taking back 2 long deals for swingmen.

GS-
They keep Beidrins and offload some longterm money and clear some space at the 2/3

Bos-
Turiaf is a very good defender at the 4/5. He’s probably an upgrade over Davis on the offensive end and definitely one on defense. If they get, say, Ellis and Jackson, they can start whomever they want and have a bench centered around House, Ellis or Jackson, Davis, and Turiaf.

What if they won’t deal a big man?

d. Ray for 2 of (maggette, Ellis, Crawford, Jackson) and 1 of (Randolph, Wright)

GS-
Clear space at the wings, dump a lot of salary. Giving up one of their prospects is the price for financial help.

Bos-
Diversify their money, gain some youth and depth. Their thinking would have to be that Ray is aging, and though he’s still a better starter than any of those guards, the value added to the bench and to lessening the starters’ minutes would benefit the team more than not making the trade.

Thank you and have fun.

by Fan from VT on Jun 8, 2009 2:47 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Please. No Vince Carter.

by johnnymost on Jun 8, 2009 2:52 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

As long as everybody realizes that Danny's #1 F.A. target at SG would be Iverson...

Assuming Ray is open to signing a more modest extension; someone explain to me why that doesn’t make more $ and sense? He’s still an elite perimeter threat, the games best FT shooter, an All Star willing to cede shots and the spot light. Sure he’s owed a large figure next season, but then possibly becomes a bargain in 2010.

Instead a lot of people want to bring in shot happy third bananas, difficult personalities, defensive liabilities, and serious injury concerns, all of whom are still either owed larger sums or would likely need to be resigned for longer, larger deals…

Let’s just please add to the bench.

by The Walker Wiggle on Jun 8, 2009 3:08 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Anytime I start to get even remotely compelled by the Ray trade winds,

Wiggle returns to set me straight. This is good.

Thank you, sir.

-sw

"I didn't go there with the intentions of getting ejected. I went there with the intentions of just telling Kobe, 'You got to relax. You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?'" -Ron Artest, 05.06.09

by Steve Weinman on Jun 9, 2009 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The problem is, they may not be able to add enough to the bench with the MLE to win #18. If they can get Sheed for the MLE, I’m happy to keep Ray.

They’ve got a two year window. After that, they will need a complete rebuild. So the time to upgrade is now.

But please no more bargain basement trash like Marbury and Moore. I wasn’t particularly happy with Cassell either.

by Brickowski on Jun 8, 2009 3:57 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

First prize is..........

We hold onto Ray. He showed this year he has plenty still in his tank. Then WE get $20 mil off the cap for 2010. I only sped briefly through all the posts above but you included Earl Watson and I see Dan Gadzuric. Any Tyronn Lue mentions yet? I know trade spec is blog gold but it does bring out the worst “what ifs” from many.

by Wildblu1 on Jun 8, 2009 4:06 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

next person to claim that “we” get $20M off the cap by holding on to ray’s expiring contract should be fined $5. please develop a rudimentary understanding of the cap, luxury tax threshold, and other issues related to payroll before posting.

by k96ps02 on Jun 8, 2009 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Uh...

Overall, the article was good until you threw out your trade suggestions…all of which would favor the Celtics in a major way. I know, why not trade Ray’s expiring deal to the Cavs for Lebron James and Delonte West! That trade works out in the trade machine!

On a more realistic note, why not trade Ray Ray, Pruitt and Walker to the Nets for Vince Carter, Sean Williams and Ed Najera. The Nets’ plan to build in Brooklyn has the green light, so they’ll still be looking to attract Lebron next year (especially since the Cavs got bounced by the Magic).

Playing in Brooklyn, with a legit center (Lopez) and a legit point guard (Harris) looks a lot more promising then the No show of Mo and the slow mo of Big Z.

Getting rid of Carter’s contract would go a long way to doing that. For the Cs, adding Sean Williams could be a plus with KG barking in his mug all year and Najera is the type of glue/D/grit guy the Celts were lacking without Posey. The men in green take back a lot of salary, but they actually get younger with Carter who is more versatile than Ray and has a pretty good stroke from deep.

The Nets clear salary, and get an athletic wing locked up on a very, very reasonable contract, who many compared to VC just a couple of years ago (before his injury). They also get a potential back up point guard.

by Dodgerblue15 on Jun 8, 2009 4:11 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

No, all of the trade suggestions have major financial benefits to the other team, and are financially detrimental to the Celtics.

Does Celtics’ ownership want to spend more to win? That’s the real question.

by Brickowski on Jun 8, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ray Allen trade

I don’t even want to think about it, so my head is planted firmly in the sand until I am forced to confront a completed trade, and even then I may be in a state of denial for months! I will not be fun to be around, anyway….This is one of those things I have a definite opinion on (do not trade Ray) but I am not at all sure my opinion is the correct one. I have an idea….ask for a team vote..put the onus on the ones with the most to lose or gain.

by thirstyboots18 on Jun 8, 2009 4:52 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Re-sign Ray to Big Money

Yep, you heard me. I don’t know how much Wyc’s bank account wants to hear this; however, I’d extend Ray one year at the same money. That way we keep the nucleus together one more year and the C’s still have his valuable salary to use as a trade chip next year.

I still hate pretty much any trade. To me, the C’s not only were clearly the best team in the NBA were healthy, they have the potential to be historically good with a little bench depth. To think that we can make a trade and be better next year is really a pipe dream. And while some trades may upgrade the “Ray Allen” salary slot 2 years from now, what good is that if PP and KG are in decline?

by Jon on Jun 8, 2009 5:44 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Why Trading Ray Allen is Dumb

His value as an expiring contract is less than his value to the Celtics as their starting shooting guard. Ergo, any Ray trade made would be losing proposition for the Celtics…

Danny brought in Ray and KG with the idea that the new Big 3 would compete for championships in 2008, 2009, 2010. He’s not going to break them up now after they won one championship in 2008 and valiantly fought in sans KG all the way to game 7 against the eventual Eastern Conference Champions in 2009. Nope, what he’s going to do use his MLE to get better backups at center and point guard, and hopefully sign Baby with his Early Bird Rights, give Powe a make-good qualifying offer, and give Bill Walker the opportunity to be our backup 3 man.

Next summer, when Ray’s a free agent, we’re going to have to face post Big 3 reality and even then it’s most likely that Ray comes back on a reduced contract (around 8-10 million per), assuming we have another fruitful playoff run.

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jun 8, 2009 6:29 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I still say the trading partner that makes the most sense for the C's is Sacramento

Sactown is in huge financial problems. It’s part of the reason that they did two trades with the Celtics last year. They need cash right away and the C’s were able to provide it. So, since we already have a working relation with them, why no try to pry Kevin Martin from them.

Say we send Ray and Walker and $2 million

They send Kevin Martin, Francisco Garcia and Andres Nocioni.

Sacramento gets a replacement for Martin, a $20 million expiring contract. They save $2 million in salary and get $2 million more. They also dump $74 million in future contracts.

The Celtics do it because they get a young superstar at a reasonable long term price to replace Ray. And they get two wing players that can score off the bench and I like Nocioni’s toughness on the defensive end. If Garcia doesn’t do it for Danny maybe they discuss Udrih or discuss getting a third team in the trade sending Garcia there and getting back a decent back up PG

by nickagneta on Jun 8, 2009 8:41 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I can't imagine that Sacramento would be that desperate...

… and if they were, I’m sure another team with an expiring contract would beat our offer. For instance, Cleveland could send Wallace (buyout candidate), Pavlovic (only $1.5 guaranteed) and Hickson (seen as a better prospect than Walker).

I like all three of the guys mentioned, I just don’t think Sacramento is willing to literally give away its team, financial difficulties or not.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 9, 2009 7:27 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I, for one,

am on the forget (for lack of being able to use a much stronger word) this “Trade Ray Allen” bs. Talk about it all you want but none of these names mentioned will ever hit as many game winning shots as Ray has in the last two seasons.

They are all parts who’s abilities do not add up to the accomplishments of Ray. How many of them would have played injured as Ray did in the playoffs?

I’ll take an aging Ray and expiring contract over any of those players who have a third of his skills, heart and attitude.

Shop Smart! Shop S-Mart!

by alecquaid on Jun 8, 2009 8:53 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Chorus:

No Vince Carter
No Allen Iverson

by johnnymost on Jun 8, 2009 10:56 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Hard to argue with that.

-sw

"I didn't go there with the intentions of getting ejected. I went there with the intentions of just telling Kobe, 'You got to relax. You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?'" -Ron Artest, 05.06.09

by Steve Weinman on Jun 9, 2009 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's too bad, too...

Because skills-wise, VC would be a perfect Ray replacement. Unfortunately, skills aren’t everything.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jun 9, 2009 7:28 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ray to stay

Just get Rondo to polish his shots like Tony Parker did a few years ago. This way his guy won’t come at Ray. Teach Perk a few more offensive moves down low so his guy won’t come at Ray too. Then get Ray healthy. With these three things done, we will see Ray hitting jumper after jumper.

Even though Ray struggled in the playoff, teams still always kept at least a guy on him. There are still a lot of basketball left in Ray. The Celtics can us some of those.

by 33-32-00 on Jun 9, 2009 12:38 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

As a non-Celtics fan

I think the Jamison/Haywood, G Wallace/Diop, and AK-47/R Brewer trades are the most feasible. You’re dreaming on a few of them (Jamison AND Butler? That’s 2 All-Stars!). But the majority are realistic.

by oldenpolynice on Jun 9, 2009 12:45 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

A vote for Ray to stay

Allen had to play big minutes down the stretch of the season. That limited his & PP’s effectiveness. Combine that with injury, and lack of space to shoot and his game was pared down to nothing.

I still thought Ray gave full effort, but all the work the C’s had done in the previous season went down the tubes because guys were sagging off of Rondo and Baby to cover Ray.

Ray & PP need a reliable defensive player & scorer to spot them off the bench. Besides a backup for Rondo & Perk, I think that is their biggest need.

by LuckyNumber07 on Jun 9, 2009 6:28 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Depending on signing McDyess and Hill at bargain prices, both of whom to me seem likely to stay put, is a risky strategy.

But I do think it’s a good idea to see what can be achieved through free-agency before making a trade.

by Tugboat on Jun 9, 2009 2:56 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I can fill your holes on the bench and replace ray with a decent shooter and a good defender

I am Bobcats fan( Yes there are still some out there). I think Management will accept a trade that would include Ray and Kendrick Perkins for Raja Bell, DJ Augustin, Nazr Mohammed, and Emeka Okafor.

You get a starting center to replace Perkin’s defense. Emeka has ok offensive skills and very good defense without being paid a ridiculous amount of money. The replacement to ray is a career starting SG with better defense than Ray. Raja is a good shooter, not at the same caliber as Ray, but you can funnel the offense to two HOF players in Pierce and Garnett. DJ Augustin is a young back up point if Rondo really is a head case. Nazr is a decent Back up center with Finals experience(Nazr played for both San Antonio and Detroit Championship teams).

We get much needed Cap relief after the shopping spree last year with Ray’s expiring contract and we get the offense we lacked this year. We also get a guy who can make the big shot in the end of the game. We get a replacement for our Center. Both Okafor and Perkins are defensive minded centers. I am okay with letting DJ go because of the good array of PGs available in this draft but I believe he is good enough to start for other teams.

I think it is a win win for everyone. What do you guys think?

by tidiespi64 on Jun 9, 2009 9:08 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

trading ray allen

never ever i wudnt trade allen foe kobe lebron and wade together not cause he is better but u talking bout nbas best 3 pointshooter best jumper sweetest one and the one that made u win have of those games during playoffs and regular season buzzer beater game and if was ainge dont trade anybody give all these players a cahnce to try to win next year adn then decide and by the way wasnt this the team that one 2007-08 title heck yea and if u had to trade i wud let go off pruitt and walker get posey back and no more big three big 4 with the way rondo improved the celtics are the best team no lakers no magic and no cavaliers

by beat4life on Jun 18, 2009 12:55 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

CelticsBlog is a growing interactive community dedicated to providing fresh, comprehensive coverage of the Boston Celtics.
Start posting about the Celtics »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Aliens man, it's some sort of a conspiracy!
Allen_gw_1_4-1-09_small
Celts need to keep winning the key stats,and handle the ball.
Small
WOW
Small
Andrew Bynum Out For Season (probably)
Small
SB Nation Survey + Chance to donate $500 to a charity of this community's choice
Small
As season winds down, Celtics confident they can end lull
Small
lets find out
Small
NBA Scheduling
Small
Heart
Small
08 Champs vs. Current Team Positional Breakdown

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Sponsors

SBNation.com Recent Stories

San Antonio Spurs guard Malik Hairston is fouled on a dunk attempt over the Golden State Warriors' Anthony Tolliver during the second half of an NBA basketball game at the AT&T Center in San Antonio, Friday, March 19, 2010. The Spurs beat the Warriors, 147-116. (AP Photo/Bahram Mark Sobhani)

Spurs Torch Warriors, 147-116, In Highest Scoring Game Since 1991

Atlanta Hawks forward Marvin Williams, looks for a shot against Charlotte Bobcats forward Boris Diaw, left, of France, during the first quarter of an NBA basketball game at Philips Arena, Friday, March 19, 2010 in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Gregory Smith)

Johnson Does His Best Jordan Impersonation, Hits Winning Shot In OT

New Orleans Hornets forward James Posey, left, reaches in for the ball as Denver Nuggets forward Carmelo Anthony looks for a shot in the fourth quarter of the Nuggets' 93-80 victory in an NBA basketball game in Denver on Thursday, March 18, 2010. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski) link

Nuggets Rout Hornets 93-80

More from SBNation.com >


Managers

Shamrock-blk-trans_small Jeff Clark

Editors

Hoosiers-dvdcover_small Roy_Hobbs

Leon_powe_small Green17

Ud_small indeedproceed

300h_small Wide Load

Celtics_shirt_small Greg Payne

Authors

Photo_14_small Steve Weinman

1_koolaid_avi_small FLCeltsFan

Po3_small Master Po

Images_small Bent

Small tenaciousT

Big_4_small Jimmy Toscano

Small Fafnir