Reply With Quote
eh. I don't see PP as a good choice for us.
Paul Pierce | 34
Position: F-G
Born: Oct 13, 1977
Height: 6-6 / 1,98
Weight: 230 lbs. / 104,3 kg.
College : Kansas
Info
The Spurs would have to adjust their lineup if they managed to acquire Pierce. If the league is going to make life easier for perimeter scorers, well, bringing this guy in wouldn't be that bad. He does have a substantial contract, with him slated to pull down $15.1 mil in 2006-07 and $16.4 mil in 2007-08, but that's all that's left. The Spurs have a collection of tradeable assets which they could put together to make a deal work under the CBA. If the Celtics are ready to blow things up, a combination of cap relief plus young prospects might not look so bad.
eh. I don't see PP as a good choice for us.
i dont either
Great player but he wouldn't fit well with the Spurs.
No.
Who do we have that Boston would take & the salaries match up? Ainge just said on Friday that he was getting ready to get together with Pierce & his agent to discuss an extension. He might be available, but unless Boston is getting a superstar back, I dont see them trading him.
You have an aging perimeter rotation. Barry's already gone in most minds. Finley? Maybe another worthwhile year. Bowen's getting up there. Ginobili is more of a 28 to 30 minute a night guy.
It would take Tony and Manu to get him. Maybe either Tony or Manu plus a boatload of draft picks also. Paul pierce did play the best basketball of his career the second half of last season and was utterly brilliant, but he is not worth that.
Last edited by Quadzilla99; 06-25-2006 at 10:41 PM.
Is their even .0000001% chance of Pierce being a Spur? Why would the Celtics even entertain the notion of trading Pierce for anything the Spurs would be willing to package? Parker and Ginobili together they might consider, but the Spurs would not consider that.
Other than that? Is it even remotely feasible?
If they're blowing it up, they're not going to want Nazr, so you have to start thinking in terms of salary match. We'd have to dump damn near that $15M, so you'd be talking Williams, Barry, Big Shot and Oberto. That would be 3 expiring deals (Horry player option and Oberto team option) and one with two years left. It works after 21 August when Williams can be moved again.
Refresh me on what Toronto got for VC again?
Throw in Beno and Scola. Plus a future first, perhaps. The Spurs can put together a package of cap relief + young prospects. If a team is looking to blow it up and start all over, the Spurs do have some nice pieces to that end.
No. It's not feasible. Just more off-season unicorn wishes.
VC was averaging 15 points a game and quit playing (look it up). Not coming off the best stretch of basketball of his career. Besides that was maybe the worst trade in NBA history, Zo opted out and they ended up with Aaron Williams for VC. Keep waiting for that kind of trade to happen again.
Um, if I may say something here to those that don't want Paul Pierce..........ARE YA"LL ING INSANE!?!?!?!?
If the Spurs can get Paul Pierce without giving up Tim, Manu, Tony...that'd be insane to pass that up. No matter what else they have to give up. Paul Pierce is a straight up ing stud. Don't want Paul Pierce WTF is wrong with people...you'd have to be on crack to turn that deal down.
Uh, There have been rumblings out of Bsoton wanting to move Pierce for over a year now.
It's not so much people don't want Paul Pierce, it's that we all tend to understand basketball and basketball front offices and understand that they'd never give him up for Nazr Mohammed and a smattering of other serviceable players we may have lying around.
Yes, bad trades happen. Also, trades happen for reasons other than picking up the best players in return. It's certainly not unheard of for a team to look to dump a great player in return for lesser value and value which allows them to retool. Between Barry, Williams, Horry, and Oberto the Spurs have guys on contracts which will allow them to pare down their payroll substantially in the near term. Guys like Udrih and Scola offer a team the ability to add players who can contribute on the cheap. What ultimately matters is the Spurs' willingness to take back a substantial long-term contract. With the Rose and Nesterovic trades they've rid themselves of some rather large long-term commitments, something on the order of $40 million from 2006-09 (assuming Mohammed walks).
Read the underlined passage.
IF THEY ARE ING BLOWING UP THE TEAM, there aren't going to be too many better packages of ending contracts than that. Teams with young prospects are going to be scared off by the mere two years left on Pierce's deal, but the Spurs probably WANT that short a deal coming in.
Dude only puts down 26 6 and 5 per game @ 47 and 35% from the field, as the only threat on his team...he even throws in a steal and a half per game. He can do it outside, he can do it inside, he can post up, he can slash...
WTF is not to want?
And on top off all that he is ing clutch.
Guy isn't a headcase either...
Why wouldn't you want Paul Pierce? That's my question to those of you that don't.
I want to hear this.
Because he got stabbed? What?
This isn't NBA Live 2007 where you add superstars wily-nily for scrubs. Why don't we get Kevin Garnett, too? He's on the trading block!
Give the Spurs FO a call. Tell them we want Paul Pierce and they should give 100% effort to make it happen. Watch while our team falls apart while they don't make any of the reasonable efforts to contribute to the team.
Did the Lakers get back equal value in '04 when they dealt Shaq? I guess that was on NBA Live so it doesn't count.
Kobe Bryant told Danny Ainge he has to trade Paul Pierce or Kobe won't resign with the Celtics.
SPARKY gets a big woody thinking about player transactions during the offseason.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
