# Doc Rivers to coach Clippers



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

> The Boston Celtics are deep in discussions with the Los Angeles Clippers on a blockbuster deal to send coach Doc Rivers and Kevin Garnett to Los Angeles, league sources told Yahoo! Sports.
> 
> The final hurdle of a deal centers on the Clippers' willingness to include guard Eric Bledsoe into a trade package with Boston, sources said.
> 
> ...


http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--c...ers--kevin-garnett-to-clippers-201709995.html


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I suppose if the Celtics let Pierce go he ends up there as well. That could possibly be an under the table type component of this deal as well. Not sure if LAC would need to shed salary to make room for him.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Good. That means the CP3/Dwight to Atlanta thing dies.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



King Sancho Fantastic said:


> Good. That means the CP3/Dwight to Atlanta thing dies.


I don't see why anyone would have taken that seriously at this point in time. Way too early to be stressing out over rumors


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> I suppose if the Celtics let Pierce go he ends up there as well. That could possibly be an under the table type component of this deal as well. Not sure if LAC would need to shed salary to make room for him.


Probably he goes to Dallas for Marion, Carter, & #12 to help the Mavs free up cap space to land Howard this summer.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Bledsoe, Jordan, and 2 firsts for a almost done his career Garnett?

I sure hope that's not right.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> Bledsoe, Jordan, and 2 firsts for a almost done his career Garnett?
> 
> I sure hope that's not right.


They are getting off that Jordan contract.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Jordan is not that big of a deal. He's basically only of use if the other center is not a threat offensively...or perhaps if the opposing center is too slow to run down the floor with him. He's a project with a big contract (albeit not a long one now). I don't think Jordan was even playing by the end of the Memphis series because he was so overmatched.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



MemphisX said:


> They are getting off that Jordan contract.


Yea, Jordan on a contract paying him $32 million over the next 3 years is a negative.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Even if you view Jordan as a negative, which I'm not sure you should but I can understand the argument, we're talking about an end of his career KG here.

Bledsoe's trade value will never be higher than it is right now. He's an overhyped young backup getting billed as a quality starter who's on the bench because he has the best PG in the league ahead of him on the depth chart. Darren Collison syndrome.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If this move convinces Paul to resign then its more like CP3, KG and Doc for Bledsoe, Deandre and two first rounders...


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

that


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> Bledsoe's trade value will never be higher than it is right now. He's an overhyped young backup getting billed as a quality starter who's on the bench because he has the best PG in the league ahead of him on the depth chart. Darren Collison syndrome.


They're going to trade Bledsoe if they re-sign Paul. But they'd obviously prefer to pull off this deal without him and use him in a separate deal to fill out their roster (i.e. the Bledsoe/Butler for Afflalo rumor).


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

CP3 and Doc Rivers should be a fantastic combination, and KG's fake tough guy routine might help out Blake Griffin. 

It still might not look like an ideal lineup, but they'd have time to figure it out, and plenty of talent to be competitive and have a real shot at making a title run.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

**** KG. You're getting a top-of-the-line coach and two likely Lottery picks...and most likely securing CP3 for the next four or five years


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> Even if you view Jordan as a negative, which I'm not sure you should but I can understand the argument, we're talking about an end of his career KG here.
> 
> Bledsoe's trade value will never be higher than it is right now. He's an overhyped young backup getting billed as a quality starter who's on the bench because he has the best PG in the league ahead of him on the depth chart. Darren Collison syndrome.


The deal being discussed involves Garnett and Lee going to LA along with their new coach that will help the keep CP3 in tow. I do agree, though, that in theory you want both Garnett and Jordan in the hopes that KG can beat some sense into DAJ. Jordan has to be the one of the worst defensive role players around.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Marcus13 said:


> **** KG. You're getting a top-of-the-line coach and two likely Lottery picks...and most likely securing CP3 for the next four or five years


What are you babbling about? The draft picks would be going to Boston, not the other way around.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> What are you babbling about? The draft picks would be going to Boston, not the other way around.


lmao in that case - those picks are going to be worthless anyway. Boston needs to get Bledsoe out of the deal


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



hobojoe said:


> Yea, Jordan on a contract paying him $32 million over the next 3 years is a negative.


For the next two years it's a negative, for that last year it becomes a big expiring contract in the trade market. If we strike it rich in the 2014 draft and find ourselves on the fast track back to respectability, could come in really handy.

I'm all for this.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Marcus13 said:


> lmao in that case - those picks are going to be worthless anyway. Boston needs to get Bledsoe out of the deal


Well, a 2014 pick isn't worthless. I agree that 2013 & 2015/16 likely are. If I were Boston I'd hold out for 14 & 16 because a CP3 injury that year likely lands Boston a late lottery pick.

However, I'm assuming Bledsoe is the real target as the guy that drafted Rondo just took over the Suns, and having a replacement allows Boston to move on from Rondo and start with a clean slate.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

What I say awhile back...Paul wants KG and Rivers

Everybody's happy too because Griffin gets to stick around and hopefully some of KG's work ethic and defensive acumen wears off 

I'd just feel bad for Paul Pierce all alone again...they'll prolly buy him out and maybe he can make it to LA with the MLE? Would he take that


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Where's Adam?


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Dre said:


> What I say awhile back...Paul wants KG and Rivers
> 
> Everybody's happy too because Griffin gets to stick around and hopefully some of KG's work ethic and defensive acumen wears off
> 
> I'd just feel bad for Paul Pierce all alone again...they'll prolly buy him out and maybe he can make it to LA with the MLE? Would he take that


No need for a buyout, per se. Pierce's contract has a team option for 2014 for $5 million, so he's probably going to be traded draft night to a team looking to free up cap space for Howard. I fully expect something like a Pierce for Marion/Carter/#13 trade to go down draft night.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

:yep:

I'd do it


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

So would I. However, we _are_ talking about the Clippers and I fully expect them to find some way of screwing this up. So I still expect that they'll hire someone else like Brian Shaw for less money, trade Bledsoe and Butler for Aaron Afflalo on draft night, and then watch CP3 walk away in disgust in July.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

^^^It looks like they may have

"Negotiations with the Boston Celtics have seemingly fallen apart, as the Los Angeles Clippers are "moving forward without Doc Rivers," according to Brad Turner of the L.A. Times. The team will now prepare to offer the job to Indiana Pacers assistant Brian Shaw or former Memphis Grizzlies head coach Lionel Hollins soon."

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2013/6/15/4434064/clippers-doc-rivers-rumors-celtics


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Better be Hollins.

They can stay the hell away from Brian Shaw.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Marcus13 said:


> ^^^It looks like they may have
> 
> "Negotiations with the Boston Celtics have seemingly fallen apart, as the Los Angeles Clippers are "moving forward without Doc Rivers," according to Brad Turner of the L.A. Times. The team will now prepare to offer the job to Indiana Pacers assistant Brian Shaw or former Memphis Grizzlies head coach Lionel Hollins soon."
> 
> http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2013/6/15/4434064/clippers-doc-rivers-rumors-celtics


:yesyesyes: :yesyesyes: :yesyesyes:


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Really don't understand the infatuation with Lionel Hollins

What decent coach couldn't have pulled off strong seasons with that team

It's not like they even got to the Finals


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I hope it's Hollins. Leaves Shaw and Scott on the table for us when we fire D'antoni.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

They can offer Peirce the full mid level


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA 27m



> Final hurdle remains unchanged: Clips don't want to part with DeAndre Jordan and Eric Bledsoe in deal, sources tells Y! Ainge wants Bledsoe.
> 
> 
> Throughout this awkward dance with Clips, Boston's been clear with Doc Rivers on this: If it all falls apart, they still want him as coach.
> ...


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA 1m



> Bledsoe had been in Celtics-Clippers discussions until Saturday morning, league sources tell Y! Boston won't do deal without him.


----------



## doctordrizzay (May 10, 2011)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If this happens Clips pretty much turn into the Celtics from 5 years ago.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

It's still so early

They can start and stall and start and stall for another 2-3 weeks. We'll see what happens


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Yep. Definitely a fluid situation.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The rumours out here are that Ainge wants to move on. So I can see why they're holding firm on Bledsoe. Bledsoe and Bradley is a decent start for the backcourt where they're likely moving on from Rondo. What they're looking to avoid is the Wizards situation, they want to make sure they have a decent supporting cast in place when they make their lottery landing so that whoever they draft isn't stepping into a madhouse.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I'd like to take this opportunity to reiterate how frustrating it is that Presti moved a year too early on dealing James Harden. Boston could have put together one of the strongest packages for him this summer.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

God damn it Adam quit lurking and post in this stupid thread. I want more talk about how elite Deandre Jordan is.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

You realize he won't post right?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> You realize he won't post right?


Yep, I blame you. Last time this Jordan/Bledsoe for KG rumor popped up he took on the whole board. 

http://www.basketballforum.com/nba-...-discussing-garnett-bledsoe-jordan-trade.html


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Jamel Irief said:


> Yep, I blame you. Last time this Jordan/Bledsoe for KG rumor popped up he took on the whole board.
> 
> http://www.basketballforum.com/nba-...-discussing-garnett-bledsoe-jordan-trade.html


Well that was a painful read.

Just shows on how people around here buy into hype. I remember someone earlier this year telling me that Gortat's stats would go way up if he was implemented into a teams offense like Jordan is on the Clippers.

It blew my ****ing mind.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> Well that was a painful read.
> 
> Just shows on how people around here buy into hype. I remember someone earlier this year telling me that Gortat's stats would go way up if he was implemented into a teams offense like Jordan is on the Clippers.
> 
> It blew my ****ing mind.


I have a feeling that if the threat of you countering by reminding Adam that he was a virgin was present the thread wouldn't have gotten so out of control. Maybe you should think about the responsibility you have here before you abandon the board again.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Jamel Irief said:


> I have a feeling that if the threat of you countering by reminding Adam that he was a virgin was present the thread wouldn't have gotten so out of control. Maybe you should think about the responsibility you have here before you abandon the board again.


I was too busy sleeping on my girlfriend's couch.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> I was too busy sleeping on my girlfriend's couch.


Figures you drunk *******.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Long a target of the Boston Celtics, Bledsoe could instead be moved in a deal to acquire Danny Granger from the Indiana Pacers or Orlando's Arron Afflalo, ESPN.com reported Sunday. 

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/report-pacers-pursue-granger-afflalo-144025579--nba.html

What an awesome, awesome, awesome deal that would be for the Pacers. It could really put them over the top!


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Marcus13 said:


> Long a target of the Boston Celtics, Bledsoe could instead be moved in a deal to acquire Danny Granger from the Indiana Pacers or Orlando's Arron Afflalo, ESPN.com reported Sunday.
> 
> http://sports.yahoo.com/news/report-pacers-pursue-granger-afflalo-144025579--nba.html
> 
> What an awesome, awesome, awesome deal that would be for the Pacers. It could really put them over the top!


**** that shit. Unless he's fine coming off the bench, I don't want him.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Really? I think he'd fit in pretty well in Indiana. George Hill is also a pretty awesome combo guard to come off the bench if it came to that.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Luke said:


> Really? I think he'd fit in pretty well in Indiana. George Hill is also a pretty awesome combo guard to come off the bench if it came to that.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Hill didn't sign his contract to become a backup though. Indiana's chemistry is one of its biggest strengths. I'm not looking to go shaking that up.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Best you could do in that scenario is put Hill to the 2 guard, and have Stephenson as the 6th man.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> Best you could do in that scenario is put Hill to the 2 guard, and have Stephenson as the 6th man.


I actually like this better. Lance has spark plug written all over him.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Apparently DeAndre Jordan has a trade kicker in his deal. Meaning that the contract is closer to 2/26. **** Jordan, the Clippers can keep him.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If your plan is to suck next year than half of DeAndre's contract doesn't matter. In fact you can try to coach him up and hope something sticks. You somehow teach how to move his feet on defense and that contract isn't that bad. Either way it becomes a huge expiring deal after next season. So as long as you don't need anything from him in the short term it's not as dreadful as it seems. Hell if you want to tank the guy's perfect for that plan.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> If your plan is to suck next year than half of DeAndre's contract doesn't matter. In fact you can try to coach him up and hope something sticks. You somehow teach how to move his feet on defense and that contract isn't that bad. Either way it becomes a huge expiring deal after next season. So as long as you don't need anything from him in the short term it's not as dreadful as it seems. Hell if you want to tank the guy's perfect for that plan.


The problem is that Boston is proposing to turn themselves into the 2009-2012 Wizards, which is the exact opposite of a good idea. The last thing you want to do while crashing and burning into the lotto is to turn your team into a zoo. The fact that five years into his NBA career Jordan is still a liability on both sides of the ball, is a jackass, and that Boston would be teaming up with other jackasses is how they'll end up derailing the career of whoever they draft next year. 

No thanks. Better to put together a collection of roleplayers that will still suck but be able to help whomever they draft make the leap to the NBA level. I always thought that the Cavs did the right thing by cleaning house after drafting James and surrounding him with stabilising players for his first two years. Where they made their mistake was in drafting complete busts and then wasting their free agent money on quantity over quality.

EDIT: And to clarify my earlier post, the Clippers are proposing that Boston gift them one of the better centers in the NBA, one of the best coaches in the NBA, and get them out from under that Jordan contract, while only returning the 25th pick in this year's draft as compensation. If the Clippers would agree to 2014/16/18 picks (hence, no lottery protection) then I'm fine with Boston digging them out from under that Jordan deal so long as they're cleaning the zoo out in short order.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Marcus13 said:


> Long a target of the Boston Celtics, Bledsoe could instead be moved in a deal to acquire Danny Granger from the Indiana Pacers or Orlando's Arron Afflalo, ESPN.com reported Sunday.
> 
> http://sports.yahoo.com/news/report-pacers-pursue-granger-afflalo-144025579--nba.html
> 
> What an awesome, awesome, awesome deal that would be for the Pacers. It could really put them over the top!


Lol since when is Eric Bledsoe worth Danny Granger? Even if he was injured all season come on now.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Hibachi! said:


> Lol since when is Eric Bledsoe worth Danny Granger? Even if he was injured all season come on now.


It would be a salary dump by Indiana. The Pacers, in theory, are looking for Bledsoe and Butler to solidify their backcourt and get them out from under Granger's contract. Which allows them to re-sign West while extending George and Bledsoe.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> It would be a salary dump by Indiana. The Pacers, in theory, are looking for Bledsoe and Butler to solidify their backcourt and get them out from under Granger's contract. Which allows them to re-sign West while extending George and Bledsoe.


The Pacers already can re-sign West.

And next season is Grangers final year in the deal, where one would assume if he stays, the money coming off the books would be going to re-up Paul George.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> The Pacers already can re-sign West.
> 
> And next season is Grangers final year in the deal, where one would assume if he stays, the money coming off the books would be going to re-up Paul George.


Bledsoe & Butler cost $3-$4 million less than Granger, ameliorate the need to sign a guard in free agency, and make it a lot easier to re-up West while maintaining profitability. Right now Granger plays the same position as their best player and is awfully expensive for a sixth man. I also wouldn't be shocked to see the Pacers kick the tires on a Rondo for Granger/whatever deal.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If the Clippers insist on keeping Bledsoe out of the deal, and Garnett could be talked into okaying it, I wouldn't hate the idea of sending him to OKC for Perkins and either the 12th pick or Jeremy Lamb. Doc for a pair of future first round picks could then be worked out separately.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> If the Clippers insist on keeping Bledsoe out of the deal, and Garnett could be talked into okaying it, I wouldn't hate the idea of sending him to OKC for Perkins and either the 12th pick or Jeremy Lamb. Doc for a pair of future first round picks could then be worked out separately.


I could well live with that. I mean, 12,13, & 16 in a crap draft isn't great. But it means they can take flyers on some lottery ticket types like Schroeder and Ledo and hope for the best.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

KG and Rivers are the same thing from appearances. They both go or they both stay. They pretty much only go where they wanna go as well.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> I could well live with that. I mean, 12,13, & 16 in a crap draft isn't great. But it means they can take flyers on some lottery ticket types like Schroeder and Ledo and hope for the best.


That's what I figure, it lets Ainge leapfrog the guys looking at Schroeder (who the C's apparently like) and maybe stash a guy or two overseas for a year as well (looking at you, Saric and/or Kasarev).


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Exactly don't start speculating that now KG is suddenly on the block, Rivers too this is either an LA or Boston situation

KG was super adamant last year when Paul and Billups were trying to convince him...I guess bringing Rivers along quells things for him

You gotta figure he has one/two years left at most he probably doesn't want to waste half of that time with no familiarity on his new team...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> That's what I figure, it lets Ainge leapfrog the guys looking at Schroeder (who the C's apparently like) and maybe stash a guy or two overseas for a year as well (looking at you, Saric and/or Kasarev).


Sairc pulled out of the draft as far as I know.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> Sairc pulled out of the draft as far as I know.


He said he was going to, but he never actually did (as far as I've seen), and now there's speculation that he's going to stay in because there are some teams high in the draft who like him. I suppose we'll know for sure at the end of the day (today's the deadline to pull out), and if he's officially done it already then there you go. Either way, you could stash the Greek kid too, if you need to.



Dre said:


> Exactly don't start speculating that now KG is suddenly on the block, Rivers too this is either an LA or Boston situation


If Pierce is traded and Doc is let go, and KG isn't quite ready to retire, he may sign off on going to one of the best five or six teams in the league instead of playing on a lottery squad. It's why I prefaced it by saying KG would have to be talked into it.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

meh


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> Either way, you could stash the Greek kid too, if you need to.


Given that the Greek kid weighed about 200 soaking wet, and struggled to compete against the superior athletes in the Greek League, I'd say that he's going to be overseas for a looooong time.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> Given that the Greek kid weighed about 200 soaking wet, and struggled to compete against the superior athletes in the Greek League, I'd say that he's going to be overseas for a looooong time.


I know, you don't like him or the Croatian. I'm not even pushing them particularly hard, just saying that if Ainge wanted to take a flier on one having three picks makes it much more palatable.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> He said he was going to, but he never actually did (as far as I've seen), and now there's speculation that he's going to stay in because there are some teams high in the draft who like him. I suppose we'll know for sure at the end of the day (today's the deadline to pull out), and if he's officially done it already then there you go. Either way, you could stash the Greek kid too, if you need to.
> 
> 
> 
> If Pierce is traded and Doc is let go, and KG isn't quite ready to retire, he may sign off on going to one of the best five or six teams in the league instead of playing on a lottery squad. It's why I prefaced it by saying KG would have to be talked into it.


http://espn.go.com/nba/draft2013/st...a-draft-agent-says-dario-saric-withdraw-draft

I think they decided this morning to withdraw. No big deal either way, just putting it out there.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> I know, you don't like him or the Croatian. I'm not even pushing them particularly hard, just saying that if Ainge wanted to take a flier on one having three picks makes it much more palatable.


Oh, I agree, that was my point earlier about rolling up some mid round picks. It's easier to take a flyer on someone like Ledo if you can draft someone else you need.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Send Jordan to the Blazers and the 10th pick to Boston.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> http://espn.go.com/nba/draft2013/st...a-draft-agent-says-dario-saric-withdraw-draft
> 
> I think they decided this morning to withdraw. No big deal either way, just putting it out there.


Fair enough. Seems an odd decision, since next year is supposed to be so much more stacked. Then again, staying in Europe for two more years probably doesn't sound so bad to a European.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Send Jordan to the Blazers and the 10th pick to Boston.


Unfortunately the Blazers are over the cap until July 1st, so it can't work until the summer. And the Blazers don't trade kids. So it's a moot point.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Looks like Bledsoe is out of the trade, and the Clippers are in turn being asked to take on the contract of either Jason Terry or Courtney Lee. If one of those guys has to stick around in Boston, I'd prefer it be Lee, if for no other reason than he's younger and less likely to become a malcontent on a non-contender. Not happy about this development, though. Wanted a chance to see what Bradley and Bledsoe could do defensively in the same backcourt.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Clipps would be smart to take on Lee and not Terry. They already have Crawford. No need for another undersized SG that doesn't play D.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If Lee goes to the Clippers, I suppose Terry goes to the first team that coughs up an expiring contract for him.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I think the sticking point is that the Clippers only want it to be a single first round pick (because a late first rounder this year is the equivalent of a 45-55 pick most years). At this point Boston should just stop taking their phone calls.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Donald Sterling will meet Byron Scott tomorrow and Brian Shaw on Wednesday


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

C'mon Sterling, you can do it! Hire Scott and then trade Bledsoe & Butler for Granger.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If the Clippers take back Terry that is half the same salary as Jordan roughly and Terry looks like he has nothing left at this point.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I would take Lee over Terry


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> If the Clippers take back Terry that is half the same salary as Jordan roughly and Terry looks like he has nothing left at this point.


As far as being reported from LA reporters the Clippers are refusing to include Bledsoe or Butler, refusing to take any additional salary, demanding that Boston eat Jordan's contract and get stuck with two years guaranteed salary for a second round talent, let them hire Doc Rivers, _and_ buy out Pierce so that he can sign with LA. And that's it. Their take it or leave it offer. So now I want to watch them hire Byron Scott instead and have the whole thing blow up in their face.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I wonder what would be happening right now if the Clippers didn't waste their pick in a trade to us that ended up being the first overall pick. Paul and Irving on the same team...ugh.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If the Clippers had Irving at the time he'd've either been part of the deal for CP3 or Paul would have ended up in Boston.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Clippers will continue their discussions on a trade involving Kevin Garnett and the right to hire Doc Rivers as coach on Tuesday.

The two parties are at an impasse after discussing the deal heavily over the past few days.

The Celtics are seeking a trade package centered around DeAndre Jordan and Eric Bledsoe. The Clippers are reluctant to part ways with Bledsoe.

The Celtics have been considered a trade that would unload several of their veteran players in the package.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Celtics need to take a page from the Clippers and negotiate through the press. Only in this case with the public announcement "We got into these negotiations thinking the Clippers were serious, but apparently they're just trying to convince everyone that they are. So we wish them well but we're moving on." Let the Clippers deal with the fallout as CP3 tunes them out.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Celtics want to make the deal though. That's why they are talking. They want to blow it up and in all likelihood they want to be rid of their obligations to Doc, KG and Pierce. That is what is in their best interest and unless KG says otherwise, the Clippers are the only game in town.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> The Celtics want to make the deal though. That's why they are talking. They want to blow it up and in all likelihood they want to be rid of their obligations to Doc, KG and Pierce. That is what is in their best interest and unless KG says otherwise, the Clippers are the only game in town.


Not really. I'm sure that any of the contenders would be happy to have Garnett as their center and would be willing to talk to him about coming in. If Boston's giving Garnett away for nothing there will be plenty of under the cap teams willing to give Boston nothing for Garnett.

To date the Clippers have only been negotiating through the press in order to force Boston to screw up their cap for two years while getting nothing in return. So the deal doesn't actually help them any. At this point the Clippers are on the verge of losing Paul, so Boston should definitely give the house of cards a good shove to force LA to give up _something_ in the deal.

Honestly Boston made the playoffs this year because the entire Eastern conference was ravaged by injury. Odds say that at least some of those injury casualties will play next year (or at the least replace their injured players with productive ones) and Boston will still be a sub .500 team and make it into the lottery.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



> @BA_Turner: The Clippers have called off the deal with the Celtics. Clippers executive said Celtics asking for too much, the Times told today.





> @BA_Turner: Clippers refused to give in the Boston's request for 2 first round draft picks, sources.


..


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Well, good. If Ainge wasn't going to hold firm on Bledsoe, I'm glad he didn't cave and take only one draft pick. Let Garnett make a list of two or three teams he wouldn't mind playing for and figure out a decent deal with one of them.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

lol the Clipper's draft picks were worthless. They basically wanted to unload Jordan's crappy contract, get KG and Rivers, and give up nothing in return.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Are those two first round draft picks for this year? I'd do it if I'm the clippers. Considering how this years draft isn't really all that great in terms of it's players, I'd give up the picks.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I'm pretty sure it was the Clippers picks in '13/'15 that the Celtics were after. Considering they'd have also been frontrunners for Pierce when he's bought out, it's surprising they let a 2015 first derail the whole deal.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> I'm pretty sure it was the Clippers picks in '13/'15 that the Celtics were after. Considering they'd have also been frontrunners for Pierce when he's bought out, it's surprising they let a 2015 first derail the whole deal.


The Celtics wanted '14 & '16 the Clippers were only willing to part with the 27th pick this year, which is essentially a liability as you need to give an NBDL player two guaranteed years. **** the Clippers.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I wonder where CP3 ends up? He has to be getting really pissed off about now.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Sterling really opened the door for Mark Cuban here. Dallas just needs to convince KG to accept a trade there for Marion and the 13th, throw a recruiting blitz at Chris Paul, and wait for Pierce to be waived, selling all these guys on Dirk taking one for the team and giving Dallas a ton of space again next summer. 

Meanwhile, the Clippers are left to explain to Paul how paying Jason Terry and Doc Rivers would have been _really expensive_ and that the guy they draft in 2016 might be a real force sometime around 2018.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Looking at the full panoply of Sterling's actions since the season ended, are we really sure that he wants Paul back? I mean first he publicly throws Paul under a bus after they refuse to extend Del *****, and now this debacle where after putting this on Paul he insisted that Boston assume the liability of LA's 2013 #1, get nothing else, and get them out from under Jordan's contract, and then publicly negotiate with Rivers, just to throw him off at the last moment to go cheaper. 

Maybe the real reason for not budging on Bledsoe was that they knew he was their 2014 PG all along?


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Not saying the Clippers are making a fair offer, but honestly what do you guys really expect to get out of KG. The Celtics are going to move on and no one is going to give that dumbass leprechaun anything magically delicious for KG.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> Not saying the Clippers are making a fair offer, but honestly what do you guys really expect to get out of KG. The Celtics are going to move on and no one is going to give that dumbass leprechaun anything magically delicious for KG.


I don't really think that asking for two late first round picks is really an outrageous price for bailing the Clippers out of a shitty contract while simultaneously providing the Clippers with a guy that's still one of the best centers in the game as well as one of the best coaches in the game. The Clippers demanded that Boston assume all the liabilities in the deal, which they agreed to, but when they asked, "OK, what's in this for us?" the Clippers went silent. So **** them. Let Paul walk and the franchise return to oblivion. They've earned it.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> Not saying the Clippers are making a fair offer, but honestly what do you guys really expect to get out of KG. The Celtics are going to move on and no one is going to give that dumbass leprechaun anything magically delicious for KG.


Something worthwhile. Failing that, cap relief. I mean, really, what was in it for Boston?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The right to spend $29 million? That's about it.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> I'm pretty sure it was the Clippers picks in '13/'15 that the Celtics were after. Considering they'd have also been frontrunners for Pierce when he's bought out, it's surprising they let a 2015 first derail the whole deal.


Okay so they don't want to have those picks go away, why? If they plan on being a playoff team for the time being, those picks won't be very valuable. I'd still do it if I'm the Clippers.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



XxIrvingxX said:


> Okay so they don't want to have those picks go away, why? If they plan on being a playoff team for the time being, those picks won't be very valuable. I'd still do it if I'm the Clippers.


Boston was willing to accept the liability of LA's 2013 #1 (which is useless as it's a $2.5-$3 guaranteed contract to a guy that won't be in the NBA), but they wanted 2014 & 2016 #1s as compensation for eating Jordan and the worthless 2013 #1. LA made their offer a take-it-or-leave-it and Boston decided to call them to find out if they were willing to budge only to find that Sterling had shot the whole thing down. 

So Paul's probably gone as this is twice that Sterling's publicly embarrassed him in less than a month and he has to be really fuming by now.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> Boston was willing to accept the liability of LA's 2013 #1 (which is useless as it's a $2.5-$3 guaranteed contract to a guy that won't be in the NBA), but they wanted 2014 & 2016 #1s as compensation for eating Jordan and the worthless 2013 #1. LA made their offer a take-it-or-leave-it and Boston decided to call them to find out if they were willing to budge only to find that Sterling had shot the whole thing down.
> 
> So Paul's probably gone as this is twice that Sterling's publicly embarrassed him in less than a month and he has to be really fuming by now.


Ah so I see. 

And I don't see Paul sticking around tbh. This will be a interesting off season.


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



XxIrvingxX said:


> Ah so I see.
> 
> And I don't see Paul sticking around tbh. This will be a interesting off season.


Where will he go that has a better team than the Clippers? You guys act as if Paul will find a better situation without playing for less.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

There's other trade opportunities like Paul Milsap, Al Jefferson, Gortat, Verajo, etc


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



NOFX22 said:


> There's other trade opportunities like Paul Milsap, Al Jefferson, Gortat, Verajo, etc


I don't think that Phoenix, Cleveland, or Utah have much interest in spending $30 million on junk in order to help the Clippers out. And Jefferson doesn't really help the Clippers with their glaring weakness, interior D. But, you're right, they can always sign Big Al outright after CP3 leaves.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> I don't think that Phoenix, Cleveland, or Utah have much interest in spending $30 million on junk in order to help the Clippers out. And Jefferson doesn't really help the Clippers with their glaring weakness, interior D. But, you're right, they can always sign Big Al outright after CP3 leaves.


Cleveland was interested in Jordan last year and was almost traded before verajo was hurt. Jazz was also interested in bledsoe last season and they need a future PG


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



NOFX22 said:


> Cleveland was interested in Jordan last year and was almost traded before verajo was hurt. Jazz was also interested in bledsoe last season and they need a future PG


Great, who plays PG next year then when CP3 is in Dallas?


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> Great, who plays PG next year then when CP3 is in Dallas?


L.A. According to espn Cp3 like the other coaching candidates in Shaw, Scott and hollins. He ain't playing in Dallas with dirk a year away from retirement. plus he loves the city of L.A


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> Great, who plays PG next year then when CP3 is in Dallas?


Ill take Bledsoe and not having to pay an overrated PG to get us to the first round for the third season.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



> @ArashMarkazi: Draft is June 27. RT @MarkHeisler Source: Celtics, Clippers to re-engage before draft, assuming LAC still needs coach & Doc still wants out.


...


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

You can hardly blame him. The rumour is that Ainge wants to rebuild around Rondo & Green. I don't think Rivers has any interest in coaching the east coast chapter of the Milwaukee Bucks while having to deal with Rondo. I mean he's currently viewed as one of the top five coaches in the game, but 3-4 years of 38-44 years and his star will fade.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Just get it done already


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Talk to Sterling.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



> @WojYahooNBA: The Celtics and Clippers have started talks again on the Doc Rivers-Kevin Garnett deal, league sources tell Y! Sports.


...


> @WojYahooNBA: The Clippers reached out to the Celtics this afternoon to resume dialogue on a possible deal, league sources tell Y! Sports.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Annoying. Do it or don't.

I can rest easy once I see something happens and Brian Shaw isn't hired by either club.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I doubt Shaw would take the Boston job. If Ainge is serious this is the sort of job that causes head coaching careers to be stillborn. No one wants their first head coaching job to be "The guy that coached the 16th-18th best team in the NBA". At least if you coach a shitty team you don't catch the flak. When you coach a borderline playoff team you do.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Apparently it's Chris Paul pushing for the deal to happen.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Good


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Like I said, if this deal goes through its basically CP3, KG, Doc and possibly Pierce for Deandre and picks.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*











> _*Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine*
> Most likely framework, amid signs of progress in talks, remains DeAndre Jordan for KG & two first-rounders for Doc Rivers' coaching rights
> 
> Latest w/@ramonashelburne: One source close to Clips/Celts talks expressing optimism parties could agree to trade terms as soon as tonight_


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

This deal probably gets announced real soon. There goes the Clips athletic center. But it fills the need for shooting on the wing and opens up the lane for Mr. Griffin.

What CP3 wants, CP3 gets. First get rid of Vinny, then orchestrate this deal. Hope he resigns with the Clips after making all these moves. Or maybe he just switches teams and asks The Donald for an ownership stake in the Clips.

After all, he is calling the shots.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Is it kinda weird that Doc, Ainge and KG were all over Ray Allen for 'selling out' and joining a contender...and then the next year they go sell their soul to the _Clippers_?


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Everyone in Boston knows it's over there and there's no reason for them to not start over. That is why everyone who is at the end of the line wants out.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Ron said:


> This deal probably gets announced real soon. There goes the Clips athletic center. But it fills the need for shooting on the wing and opens up the lane for Mr. Griffin.
> 
> What CP3 wants, CP3 gets. First get rid of Vinny, then orchestrate this deal. Hope he resigns with the Clips after making all these moves. Or maybe he just switches teams and asks The Donald for an ownership stake in the Clips.
> 
> After all, he is calling the shots.


I just hope he's finally held accountable for the team's success/failure like the superstar he is. He's already forced his way out of one city, forced a coach out of L.A., now he's picking his new coach and picking his teammates. At some point it has to fall on him, no? 

I will say this though, the Clippers (particularly Paul and Griffin) could really benefit from Garnett's toughness rubbing off on them a little. They're too soft to be taken seriously in the playoffs as is.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

KG does make them a tough ass team. He's old, but he still kills it.

Paul / ? / Pierce / Griffin / KG...interesting mix of athleticism and veteran savvy. Who'se the starting 2 guard?


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

They're going to try to trade Bledsoe/Butler's expiring for Aaron Afflalo


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

^ That's right, remember hearing that along the grapevine.

That's a solid starting 5. They'll need a new backup PG, unless they play Crawford there. Bring back Barnes too. Need a backup Center that can play though.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Los Angeles Clippers have held ongoing talks with the Orlando Magic on a trade involving Eric Bledsoe for Arron Afflalo.

The Clippers prefer to hold onto Bledsoe in the interim in hopes of landing a better offer, according to sources.

Afflalo is owed $23 million over the next three seasons.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If Chris Paul is forcing the Clippers' hand on this then we need to extract every single last pound of flesh they can afford to part with. Jordan plus two picks (that may not even be 2014) would be a pretty disappointing return.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Wade County said:


> Is it kinda weird that Doc, Ainge and KG were all over Ray Allen for 'selling out' and joining a contender...and then the next year they go sell their soul to the _Clippers_?


Boston's owners pulled a bait & switch on Rivers. The story out here is that the owners want Rondo in charge, and Rivers has zero interest in tarnishing his record by getting stuck with the Wizards Redux. So he wanted out, and when CP3 expressed interest in having him come to LA and the Clippers asked for permission, our owners were only too glad to let their $28 million coach go with compensation.

Ultimately this team is headed for an unpleasant explosion, because the next coach will essentially be a figurehead. Hopefully next summer the owners smarten up and unload Rondo before it's too late.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Los Angeles Clippers are seeking approval from ownership to complete a deal for Doc Rivers and Kevin Garnett.

The hope is that Donald Sterling will approve the financial commitment and finalize the agreement on Thursday.

The Clippers will send DeAndre Jordan and two first round picks to the Celtics, according to sources.

Rivers is accepting the job assuming Chris Paul will re-sign with the Clippers.

"Doc is taking the job to coach Chris Paul," a league source told Yahoo! Sports on Wednesday. "This isn't happening if Chris planned to leave."

Paul communicated to the Clippers that hiring Rivers and trading for Garnett was essential to him re-signing in July. Paul's pushing for the deal forced the Clippers to reengage with the Celtics on Wednesday.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Bullshit. Chris Paul hardballs his team back into trade talks, and DeAndre Jordan and two bad firsts is all the Celtics can come away with?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Floods said:


> Bullshit. Chris Paul hardballs his team back into trade talks, and DeAndre Jordan and two bad firsts is all the Celtics can come away with?


The only other thing the Clippers have is Bledsoe, but he appears to be off the table as Paul insurance/a centerpiece for a second trade. Firsts in 14 and 16 is about as good as it gets for Garnett right now.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Then tell them to shove their insurance up their ass. Tell them either include Bledsoe or get a third team involved who can send more value our way, or watch the deal fall apart and Chris Paul leave town. Jordan's contract and two shitty firsts (one of which may not even be 2014, who knows) is a horrible deal for the Celtics.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Floods said:


> Bullshit. Chris Paul hardballs his team back into trade talks, and DeAndre Jordan and two bad firsts is all the Celtics can come away with?


KG, Paul and Rivers are the ones who are driving this trade. It is not just Paul and KG has a no trade clause. He and Doc can both just retire for that matter. Boston has very little leverage in this, they can make the best deal they can get from the Clippers.

Paul may well be the one telling them not to include Bledsoe as well. He knows that he still needs a shooting guard


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Floods said:


> Then tell them to shove their insurance up their ass. Tell them either include Bledsoe or get a third team involved who can send more value our way, or watch the deal fall apart and Chris Paul leave town. Jordan's contract and two shitty firsts (one of which may not even be 2014, who knows) is a horrible deal for the Celtics.


.....and two years of Garnett and Rivers probably isn't enough to keep Paul happy for the next five years. They need Bledsoe to trade for Dwight or a real shooting guard, because as good as Garnett has been the last two years since switching to center he _is_ turning 38 next season. He's a short-term rental.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> KG, Paul and Rivers are the ones who are driving this trade. It is not just Paul and KG has a no trade clause. He and Doc can both just retire for that matter. Boston has very little leverage in this, they can make the best deal they can get from the Clippers.


Chris Paul, under the threat of leaving in free agency, ****ing hardballed his team back into trade negotiations after they fell apart, and the _Celtics_ have no leverage? Are you kidding me? If the other team's superstar dictating their course of action isn't an invitaiton for us to scalp them for everything they can afford to part with, nothing is.

KG and Rivers aren't driving shit.



> Paul may well be the one telling them not to include Bledsoe as well. He knows that he still needs a shooting guard


You really think Chris Paul cares about Eric Bledsoe? Really?


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> .....and two years of Garnett and Rivers probably isn't enough to keep Paul happy for the next five years.


It wouldn't be enough keep _you_ happy if you were Chris Paul. But you're not an NBA superstar with a swelled head.

Why on earth would Paul force the Clippers back into trade talks if he didn't think Garnett and Rivers was enough?



> They need Bledsoe to trade for Dwight or a real shooting guard, because as good as Garnett has been the last two years since switching to center he _is_ turning 38 next season. He's a short-term rental.


**** em. Let somebody else cough up a contract and two shitty draft picks for Garnett. As far as Celtics-Clippers talks are concerned, it should be Bledsoe or bust.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Floods said:


> It wouldn't be enough keep _you_ happy if you were Chris Paul. But you're not an NBA superstar with a swelled head.
> 
> Why on earth would Paul force the Clippers back into trade talks if he didn't think Garnett and Rivers was enough?


There's a difference between Paul saying "Get me Kevin Garnett and Doc Rivers at all costs. Trade the entire roster if you have to" and his camp telling the Clippers management that he'll be really unhappy if they walk away over a 2016 draft pick. Chris Paul wants to play with the guy that Bledsoe nets, as well. 




Floods said:


> **** em. Let somebody else cough up a contract and two shitty draft picks for Garnett. As far as Celtics-Clippers talks are concerned, it should be Bledsoe or bust.


It's a nice sentiment, but it looks like the Clippers genuinely will walk away over Bledsoe. The tough-guy act is impressive and all, but the Clippers screwing up a trade opportunity (as the Clippers are prone to doing) leaves the Celtics in a pretty decent-sized hole as well. I want Bledsoe, I really do. I want to watch him and Avery Bradley defend together, and I want what Rondo will return in a trade. By all accounts he's truly off the table, though.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> There's a difference between Paul saying "Get me Kevin Garnett and Doc Rivers at all costs. Trade the entire roster if you have to" and his camp telling the Clippers management that he'll be really unhappy if they walk away over a 2016 draft pick. Chris Paul wants to play with the guy that Bledsoe nets, as well.


And you assume Chris Paul has that kind of vision based on... what.

Superstars using their clout to make power plays within the organization aren't really worthy of the benefit of the doubt.



> It's a nice sentiment, but it looks like the Clippers genuinely will walk away over Bledsoe. The tough-guy act is impressive and all, but the Clippers screwing up a trade opportunity (as the Clippers are prone to doing) leaves the Celtics in a pretty decent-sized hole as well. I want Bledsoe, I really do. I want to watch him and Avery Bradley defend together, and I want what Rondo will return in a trade. By all accounts he's truly off the table, though.


Then flip them the bird, tell them to enjoy watching Chris Paul hold up a Mavericks jersey at a press conference next month, and let someone else cough up a worthless package for Garnett.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Floods said:


> Then flip them the bird, tell them to enjoy watching Chris Paul hold up a Mavericks jersey at a press conference next month, and let someone else cough up a worthless package for Garnett.


The 2016 pick (if that's what it winds up being) has a solid chance of being a lottery pick if the Clippers screw everything up (as they do from time to time). But hey, I hope you're right man.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

As long as the picks are '14 & '16 and unprotected I'm fine with the deal.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

With a starting lineup of Paul, affalo, pierce, Griffin, and Garnett! It's a lock to the finals!


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I honestly don't get why the Clippers wouldn't just plug Courtney Lee (who the Cetlics are trying to give away) into that two-guard spot and use Eric Bledsoe to get another big man and a journeyman backup point guard instead of Afflalo. Jamal Crawford is going to play a ton of those minutes anyway. Alternatively, they could just insist on getting the second overall pick from Orlando instead of Afflalo and take Otto Porter.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If I'm Orlando, I don't think I'm trading the 2nd overall pick for Bledsoe.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> I honestly don't get why the Clippers wouldn't just plug Courtney Lee (who the Cetlics are trying to give away) into that two-guard spot and use Eric Bledsoe to get another big man and a journeyman backup point guard instead of Afflalo. Jamal Crawford is going to play a ton of those minutes anyway. Alternatively, they could just insist on getting the second overall pick from Orlando instead of Afflalo and take Otto Porter.


If we get Lee than butler expiring would have to be included. We need butler expiring and bledsoe for Granger or affalo. But if it was bledsoe straight up than trade for Ben Mclemore


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



NOFX22 said:


> If we get Lee than butler expiring would have to be included. We need butler expiring and bledsoe for Granger or affalo. But if it was bledsoe straight up than trade for Ben Mclemore


You would rather have McLemore over Bledsoe. The problem is, I'm pretty sure Orlando would as well.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Orlando wants to do this trade so that they don't feel the need to get a point guard with the second pick or trade it for one. They probably want to get rid of Afflalo as well, probably thinking he impedes their tanking and the development of McLemore if they take him 2nd


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> Orlando wants to do this trade so that they don't feel the need to get a point guard with the second pick or trade it for one. They probably want to get rid of Afflalo as well, probably thinking he impedes their tanking and the development of McLemore if they take him 2nd


Why can't they just move forward with Nelson for the time being?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Orlando would rather have McLemore and Bledsoe versus Afflalo and Bledsoe, but Bledsoe is also the most available point guard on the market without having to break the bank, and Orlando badly needs a point guard going forward and they can live with Afflalo at the two. Unless, of course, Ainge decides to cut ties with Rondo as well and commit to the 2014 draft - then Rondo's the best point guard available.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> Orlando would rather have McLemore and Bledsoe versus Afflalo and Bledsoe, but Bledsoe is also the most available point guard on the market without having to break the bank, and Orlando badly needs a point guard going forward and they can live with Afflalo at the two. Unless, of course, Ainge decides to cut ties with Rondo as well and commit to the 2014 draft - then Rondo's the best point guard available.


I don't agree with that. I don't see how any team justifies trading the second pick for Bledsoe. If they absolutely want to move away from Nelson, there's free agent point guards they could target, or they could trade for a mid first and give the reigns to someone like Larkin since there will be 0 accountability for their record next year.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



NOFX22 said:


> If we get Lee than butler expiring would have to be included. We need butler expiring and bledsoe for Granger or affalo. But if it was bledsoe straight up than trade for Ben Mclemore


No, they don't. Once you factor in DAJ's trade kicker the Clippers just have to include Willie Green to remain under the hard cap.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Maan the Clippers are going to be quite formidable if they pick up Pierce as well.

PG - Paul
SG - Butler
SF - Pierce
PF -Griffin
C - KG

Bench:
Barnes?
Crawford
Odom
Bledsoe

That's pretty formidable.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Can Butler even play the 2? They'd be better suited trading Bledsoe for Afflalo or someone else.


----------



## JonMatrix (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Clippers will find a way screw this up. CP3 could very well end up wearing an Atlanta or Dallas jersey next season. 

I think the Clippers are going to try and call his bluff...Even with CP3, Dallas and Atlanta wouldn't be better than the Clippers current roster.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Hibachi! said:


> Maan the Clippers are going to be quite formidable if they pick up Pierce as well.
> 
> PG - Paul
> SG - Butler
> ...


I don't want butler or Odom on my team anymore


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> I don't agree with that. I don't see how any team justifies trading the second pick for Bledsoe. If they absolutely want to move away from Nelson, there's free agent point guards they could target, or they could trade for a mid first and give the reigns to someone like Larkin since there will be 0 accountability for their record next year.


I don't necessarily disagree with you - Bledsoe strikes me as a guy that's great to have in a limited, defined role, but I don't know that you _really_ want to lean on him as the guy to lead your team and make everything work. I just think his stock is really high right now, Orlando badly needs a young point guard, and after McLemore disappointed in workouts the #2 pick may not be as highly valued by Orlando as it once was.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Butler has to go to Orlando in the Afflalo deal as salary ballast. He isn't good enough to be a starter on a good team any more at any rate.

Bledsoe really never had to run the team at all for the Clippers. He played with Paul a lot and with Crawford and Crawford would actually be the guy initiating the offense. He is still raw, but he's very good on defense and he's a great athlete.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> Can Butler even play the 2? They'd be better suited trading Bledsoe for Afflalo or someone else.


They'd be best suited just taking back Courtney Lee and letting him be the fifth-best starter on the team! I don't get why they're avoiding him like the plague.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> They'd be best suited just taking back Courtney Lee and letting him be the fifth-best starter on the team! I don't get why they're avoiding him like the plague.


I don't disagree. If I had a team I'd much rather Lee at the 2 than trying to shoe horn a injury prone, past his prime Butler in there.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



R-Star said:


> I don't disagree. If I had a team I'd much rather Lee at the 2 than trying to shoe horn a injury prone, past his prime Butler in there.


They still have Jamal Crawford providing scoring punch at that position off the bench, as well. All they need is a guy to play twenty minutes a night while doing a respectable job on defense and hitting his threes at an acceptable rate. That's Courtney Lee's game in a nutshell.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> They still have Jamal Crawford providing scoring punch at that position off the bench, as well. All they need is a guy to play twenty minutes a night while doing a respectable job on defense and hitting his threes at an acceptable rate. That's Courtney Lee's game in a nutshell.


That's fine but i would still take affalo over Lee


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> They still have Jamal Crawford providing scoring punch at that position off the bench, as well. All they need is a guy to play twenty minutes a night while doing a respectable job on defense and hitting his threes at an acceptable rate. That's Courtney Lee's game in a nutshell.


As an added plus for Boston adding Lee and Green to the deal allows the Celtics to take a flyer on Thomas Robinson.




NOFX22 said:


> That's fine but i would still take affalo over Lee


If they were that desperate for Afflalo they could still have both. As I said earlier, they don't need Butler for Lee, just Willie Green. Or, I guess, they could set up a three way deal with Bledsoe and Lee going to Orlando, Afflalo & Garnett to LA, and DAJ/Green/picks going to Boston.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> As an added plus for Boston adding Lee and Green to the deal allows the Celtics to take a flyer on Thomas Robinson.


May as well try. I'm not willing to give up on a guy as quick as some are here. I think he could still turn into a quality player.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If it didn't take him three years to find his feet at Kansas I would be more down on him. He just seems to be a slow bloomer, and in Boston's situation they need to take every lottery ticket they can find.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



NOFX22 said:


> That's fine but i would still take affalo over Lee


I'd take Lee plus who you can get for Bledsoe and Butler in a separate trade over Afflalo, though.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Worst case scenario he doesn't pan out, and you just let his rookie deal run out. Not much risk compared to the possible reward if you're a rebuilding team.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I'm completely on board with Robinson, I think he can have a year next season similar to what Tristan Thompson did this past year. Getting back on point, I wonder if the NBA will block this move, since it so obviously violates the rules against side deals depending on other ones. It _does_ help both teams and keeps a signature star in a big market, though.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Bogg said:


> I'd take Lee plus who you can get for Bledsoe and Butler in a separate trade over Afflalo, though.


Yeah, Lee & Granger>>>Afflalo.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Stern has blocked the Celtics/clippers trade smh


----------



## Bubbles (Nov 12, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

:stern:


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

As the Los Angeles Clippers and Boston Celtics seemingly inched closer to an agreement that would bring an end to their on-again, off-again negotiations and finally send both Celtics star forward Kevin Garnett and coach Doc Rivers to Los Angeles, sources close to the process said Thursday that a hurdle at league level threatens to scuttle the talks yet again.

Sources told ESPN.com that it has been communicated to both teams by the league office that the NBA has questions about the proposed transactions involving Garnett and Rivers and the appearance that they are connected.

The teams awoke Thursday, sources said, close to an agreement on separate transactions that would land Garnett and Rivers in Los Angeles. The first is a proposed one-for-one player swap that would send Clippers center DeAndre Jordan to Boston for Garnett, who would waive his no-trade clause to clinch the deal. The second move would require the Clippers to convey two first-round picks to Boston as compensation for the Celtics agreeing to let Rivers out of the three years and $21 million left on his contract.

League rules not only prohibit coaches from being formally “traded” but likewise prevent teams from making any trade or free-agent signing with contingencies or side deals attached. So it is incumbent on the Celtics and Clippers to convince the league office that these transactions would be made independently.

One source with knowledge of the talks told ESPN.com on Thursday that the Celtics and Clippers have been negotiating for days knowing that league rules could well prohibit the transactions from going through.

Another source connected to the talks said Thursday that the Celtics and the Clippers, in the wake of ESPN.com’s report about the league’s concerns, have begun discussing alternative trade constructions to address any potential misgivings from the NBA.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

There's nothing in the contract that will state that Rivers must go to the Clippers. As such, there's nothing the league should be able to do about. The key word, is "should" though.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Clippers would have to trade Deandre and picks for KG and hope that Doc come through later in a regards to agreeing to become coach. It's a bit of a gamble.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I think Stern's position is that he won't let Rivers coach the Clippers period. Which is, honestly, stupid.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I don't think Stern can stop them if they follow the rules or at least make it impossible for Stern to prove them guilty. He can definitely be a pain in the ass about it though.


----------



## JonMatrix (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

One last kick in the balls by Stern on his way out the door.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Clips should focus on the Doc deal. KG can come later. KG isn't going anywhere he doesn't want to go with that no trade clause.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> I don't think Stern can stop them if they follow the rules or at least make it impossible for Stern to prove them guilty. He can definitely be a pain in the ass about it though.


Apparently the workaround the Clippers are thinking about is sending Boston two first round picks for Doc and then revisiting Garnett after July 1st.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Check that, the Clippers new strategy is to ask Boston to trust them. **** the Clipppers


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

They really do seem to be asking that Boston release Doc without compensation now and trust that LA will offer the same package two weeks from now for Garnett, huh?

EDIT: Garnett to Chicago for Rip's non-guaranteed contract, Hinrich, and either the Euro forward or Charlotte's first!


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I'm confused. You can't TRADE for a coach. That's the rule. How can they send two picks for Doc and then hope KG comes later? It should be the other way around.

*BTW* 
Apparently the unwillingness by the Clippers to compensate the Celtics for Rivers' contract buyout is allegedly the current holdup. The Clippers organization is a joke. Can't wait until Sterling kicks the bucket.

**Second BTW**
The Clippers really expect the Celtics to RELEASE Rivers, and then be stuck with a KG who for sure will want out and play nowhere else but LA, just on the Clipper's word that they won't lower the deal with the much increased leverage? Really?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Technically you are allowed to compensate a team if you want to hire their active coach. However coaches aren't allowed to be part of player trades. I think that everyone thought that so long as they were separate transactions that the deal fulfilled the letter of the law.

I'm just not sure whether Stern's trying to stick it to LA by antagonizing CP3 or to Boston to force the Celtics into letting both go for the Jordan millstone.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I was wondering earlier as to whether or not Sterling could try to sue Stern if Paul left. You could probably estimate the damages as something like a quarter of a billion dollars without stretching the truth much. You're talking about 205 home games over the next five years and if you have Paul you're going to start raising your ticket prices. You figure in everything and Sterling will lose truckloads of money if Paul leaves and everyone knows that he won't leave if he has a roster that gives him a good chance to compete.


----------



## 23isback (Mar 15, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Clippers sure have a lot of negative buzz this offseason...


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Celtics scheduled a press conference to announce that talks were done because the Clippers were yanking their chain and LA called to beg them to postpone the presser to continue negotiations. On the bright side they've changed the #1 from 2013 to 2015. However the story merits a huge


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

"The Deal is Completely Dead"

Clippers really blew this one.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Than tomorrow it will be back on


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*











> _*Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA*
> Rivers informed the Clippers on Friday afternoon that he no longer had interest in L.A.'s job, sources tell Y! It's Celtics or TV now._


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Hibachi! said:


> "The Deal is Completely Dead"
> 
> Clippers really blew this one.


How so? By not giving up their future for a coach who doesn't want to be here anyway?

And even if he did want to be here, how is he much better than Brian Shaw? Or Byron Scott? He sure ain't two number ones better, not even one number one.

It was always on the Celtics to make a deal. They don't, so they are stuck with Garnett. Who the else even wants him? You have to ask yourself that question.

I think you are way off base. The Clippers always held the cards in this deal, they just decided not to play them.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I think most contenders would take a guy that's still one of the best centers in the game. I hope the Clipper fans enjoy the Griffin/Bledsoe/Jordan era.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I would be fine with Shaw, or hollins as coach but we need to trade Jordan for Garnett


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



E.H. Munro said:


> I think most contenders would take a guy that's still one of the best centers in the game. I hope the Clipper fans enjoy the Griffin/Bledsoe/Jordan era.


If that's the case, why is Boston so keen on moving him?


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Ron said:


> If that's the case, why is Boston so keen on moving him?
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


Because they aren't a contender and are preparing to miss the playoffs next year. Having Garnett turn their 30 win team into a possible playoff team actually hurts their long term plans. 

The owners want a shiny new star to market, and last year they found out the hard way that Rondo isn't it. And Pierce no longer has the ability to carry a team on his back for a season. So now they want to move their two best players out and take a quick dip into the lottery in hopes of actually winning one for a change.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

So which black coach does Chris Paul want next?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I'm not too concerned, since the Clippers weren't willing to actually give up much of value for Garnett. I imagine that a combination Pierce(if he's still around)/Garnett salary dump is plan C or D for the Mavericks, anyway. I just can't imagine the Clippers' front office being unable to put together a successful deal for the coach Paul wanted, _while the other team was actively trying to facilitate it_, is going to do much to inspire confidence in LA's ownership/management from Chris Paul.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



OneBadLT123 said:


> So which black coach does Chris Paul want next?


I think Paul and Byron Scott are BFFs, aren't they?


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Floods said:


> I think Paul and Byron Scott are BFFs, aren't they?


Yea but I'm sure the coaching job Scott did in Cleveland hurt his reputation quite a bit, I don't think a team is going to hire Byron just so they can have a chance at Paul.


----------



## letsgoceltics (Aug 19, 2012)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I'd like Garnett to retire a Celtic. I don't care about Deandre Jordan or those picks. Rebuilding for the sake of rebuilding doesn't make sense to me anymore. We trade Garnett and then go back to those medicore playoff teams? Nah, at least with KG, Doc, and Pierce, I know I'm going to get a gritty brand of basketball. That's the product I want there. Not a bunch of young idiots running in circles.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

If Washington and the Sixers stay healthy Boston is in the lottery right now. You go into the next season with that roster and it is going to be a first round exit or you miss 20 or 30 games from KG and/or Pierce and you end up winning 25 to 30 games. Mediocrity is the best case scenario for the roster that Boston has right now. Mediocrity is not where you want to be either and you'd have a hard time selling that shit to the paying fans.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> If Washington and the Sixers stay healthy Boston is in the lottery right now. You go into the next season with that roster and it is going to be a first round exit or you miss 20 or 30 games from KG and/or Pierce and you end up winning 25 to 30 games. Mediocrity is the best case scenario for the roster that Boston has right now. Mediocrity is not where you want to be either and you'd have a hard time selling that shit to the paying fans.


That sure was a great strategy for Boston for 93 to 2001. 

Mediocrity is for shitty franchises that can't rebuild any other way. Rivers is probably their best asset. Players want to play for him. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Rivers is worth nothing to Boston unless he decides to go somewhere and somewhere else that is willing to pay for him. Memphis, Denver and LAC are the three open jobs he might take. LAC is the only one interested and they are from all appearances willing to hire Hollins instead of giving up what Boston is asking. That doesn't prevent a KG deal and it doesn't cost them two picks.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Jamel Irief said:


> That sure was a great strategy for Boston for 93 to 2001.
> 
> Mediocrity is for shitty franchises that can't rebuild any other way. Rivers is probably their best asset. Players want to play for him.


Speaking of Rivers, Denver reportedly contacted Boston about him when they fired Karl. If they're still interested, and they could come to an agreement with Doc, I wouldn't mind getting back the 2014 first they don't send to Orlando(they have NY's and their own, and owe the least favorable to Orlando). Since there isn't a good KG swap, unless Denver wants to trade Gallo for Garnett straight up, you don't have to worry about the league blocking anything, either.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> Rivers is worth nothing to Boston unless he decides to go somewhere and somewhere else that is willing to pay for him. Memphis, Denver and LAC are the three open jobs he might take. LAC is the only one interested and they are from all appearances willing to hire Hollins instead of giving up what Boston is asking. That doesn't prevent a KG deal and it doesn't cost them two picks.


Disagree. Players like to play for great organizations with great coaches. That goes further than the 14th pick in the draft. 

Lakers have only been to the lottery twice and both times it was the tenth pick. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Chris Paul is unhappy that the Los Angeles Clippers have been unable to execute a deal to hire Doc Rivers as head coach.

The Clippers backed out of talks with the Boston Celtics due to their unwillingness to part with a first round pick.

Paul was privately pushing for Rivers to come to the Clippers.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Jamel Irief said:


> That sure was a great strategy for Boston for 93 to 2001.
> 
> Mediocrity is for shitty franchises that can't rebuild any other way. Rivers is probably their best asset. Players want to play for him.


I agree, I'd rather keep Rivers, move out Rondo and accept the one down year. Because with a clean cap, a lottery pick, and Doc Boston will be able to find someone to play there.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Jamel Irief said:


> Disagree. Players like to play for great organizations with great coaches. That goes further than the 14th pick in the draft.
> 
> Lakers have only been to the lottery twice and both times it was the tenth pick.
> 
> ...



Since I know that the Archivist has a long boring off season ahead of him I will relate the fact that the Lakers have drafted four players before the tenth pick, in fact well before it.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Byron Scott starts negotiation for clippers head coaching job smh


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> Since I know that the Archivist has a long boring off season ahead of him I will relate the fact that the Lakers have drafted four players before the tenth pick, in fact well before it.


So 4 picks before ten for a franchise with 16 rings. And how many of those picks were attained by being mediocre? Jerry West?

Meanwhile the bobcats have 4 picks below ten in what, 3 years? Hey I hate the celtics so I certainly hope they gut whats turned into a once again stable franchise.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I'm sure you can figure it out before October. Unless your archives are inadequate


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Since 1975 the Lakers have had zero picks lower than 10 that they didn't trade for. Since 1975 the Lakers have 10 championships.

Archived.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The @LAClippers have just called the @celtics 2day and said they will give up the 1st round pick for Doc Rivers


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA 16m



> Clippers called Celtics today, offered a future 1st round pick for rights to coach Doc Rivers and sides near agreement, source tells Y!


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

The Clippers are still not going to make noise in the playoffs so I don't understand what all the fuss is about.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Well the Clippers are desperately trying to make a deal on the cheap, but Boston has been firm that it wants no part of LA's 2013 #1 as an "asset" as it's actually a financial liability. 

Again, on another board they've been citing Chad Ford's mock as proof that the draft is "deep" because it has a lot of players in his fifth tier. Only whereas this year he's calling it the "late first" tier in every other year the fifth tier was the 25-50 range players. Only this year that range will start in the lottery. So no one wants that $3 million expense as a "return".


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Please finally get it done


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

I haven't really been following this, you mean to tell me that whats holding this up is the clippers giving up their first rounder? This trade makes or breaks them being a contender and they're worried about that?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Jamel Irief said:


> I haven't really been following this, you mean to tell me that whats holding this up is the clippers giving up their first rounder? This trade makes or breaks them being a contender and they're worried about that?


I'm still not convinced they really want him. They're going to be a multiple luxury tax offender if they really add the necessary supporting cast. Add in Rivers' salary and that team suddenly gets _very_ expensive. So I have this sneaking suspicion that what they really want to go with someone cheaper like Bledsoe once Paul walks out on them. Because they couldn't do any more to piss off CP3 if they were trying.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

After days of wrangling, negotiating and posturing, the Los Angeles Clippers have agreed in principle to a deal with the Celtics for Glenn "Doc" Rivers, pending league approval, according to sources.

Sources confirmed on Sunday that the Clippers will sign Rivers to a three-year, $21 million contract. They will send a first-round pick as compensation for the Boston Celtics, who have agreed to release the coach from the three years, $21 million he has remaining on his deal with the club.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Am I the only one who cares so little about this that I'm not even willing to pay attention to what the details of the trade are?


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Link to story here:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9...clips-agree-principle-doc-rivers-deal-sources


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



XxIrvingxX said:


> Am I the only one who cares so little about this that I'm not even willing to pay attention to what the details of the trade are?


Not sure, but you are probably the only one who claims to not care enough to pay attention to the trade yet cares enough to post about your indifference. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



hobojoe said:


> Not sure, but you are probably the only one who claims to not care enough to pay attention to the trade yet cares enough to post about your indifference.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Do you think Irving will ever be quiet about a topic? Even one he doesn't care about?


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*

Rivers by himself does not really help the Clippers enough. He is an upgrade over Del *****, but their problem is that they have been starting three players who aren't really good enough. The least they really need is a starting caliber two guard and a center who can move his feet on defense. Of course that would mean moving Barnes into the starting lineup and they'd need to replace him, so it'd obviously be better to have a starting SF too.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Diable said:


> Rivers by himself does not really help the Clippers enough. The least they really need is a starting caliber two guard and a center who can move his feet on defense. Of course that would mean moving Barnes into the starting lineup and they'd need to replace him, so it'd obviously be better to have a starting SF too.


It's a draw for KG and Pierce. It also helps keep Paul there.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

So I've heard conflicting reports about whether the pick is a '15 or '16. Supposedly it's unprotected, so I'm hoping that it's a '16, which gives more time for the bottom to drop out in some way. In other news, it sounds pretty definitively like Stern isn't going to allow the Clippers to trade for Garnett in any form.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Unprotected 2015 pick. With the Clippers' luck that will somehow manage to end up being a top 3 pick.


----------



## Drizzy (Mar 23, 2012)

Can someone explain why the Clips can't trade for KG now? Read something about stern having an issue with the coach being involved but didn't read into it much.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

They can trade for him. It just has to look like it is not contingent on the Rivers deal or a part of it. Or Stern has to decide that he does not really care any longer.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Yea, it's not that the Clippers _can't_ trade for Garnett, it's that Stern has to view the deal as unconnected to the Rivers deal, and the noise right now is that there's no trade they can put together where he would feel that way. It may actually work out for the Celtics, because if Doc and Pierce are both gone and the league is blocking any attempt to send him home to LA, KG may soften his stance on where he'd allow himself to be traded.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

E.H. Munro said:


> Unprotected 2015 pick. With the Clippers' luck that will somehow manage to end up being a top 3 pick.


Not bad. Everyone assumes right now that it'll be a late 20s pick, but a lot can happen between now and then. No risk move for Boston, time to start stock piling the picks and young talent.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I would imagine that what the ownership in Boston wanted most of all is to get out of paying Rivers 21 million dollars. You don't need to pay a coach that much when you are really looking to stockpile ping pong balls.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

Doc Rivers was a very average head coach in Orlando... then he looked like a genius in Boston with his 3 hall of famers. I am curious to which Doc shows up in LA.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Diable said:


> I would imagine that what the ownership in Boston wanted most of all is to get out of paying Rivers 21 million dollars. You don't need to pay a coach that much when you are really looking to stockpile ping pong balls.


They aren't looking for that though. We were discussing that before Diabled out of the thread. Are they looking to win a championship? No. But they want a competitive team out there.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Yea, it wasn't that they didn't want Doc in Boston, it was that Doc's heart wasn't in going through a rebuild and he was one of the teams' best chances at getting additional first for a rebuild. Also, keeping Rivers in Boston made it harder to deal KG.


----------



## doctordrizzay (May 10, 2011)

The Cavaliers have offered two second round picks for Paul Pierce, Celtics have not accepted or declined deal yet.
6:46 PM - 23 Jun 2013
[/Tweet]
Not exactly sure how Pierce fits into the Cavs plans and you would think a contender would offer more for him.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

The Cavs deal would create a large trade exception. I don't know what they value a 2nd rounder for in the calculations. For a first rounder it is 3 million I believe, so you're talking about something like a 12 million dollar trade exception I assume. Something less than the full 15.6 million Pierce is owed obviously.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

doctordrizzay said:


> The Cavaliers have offered two second round picks for Paul Pierce, Celtics have not accepted or declined deal yet.
> 6:46 PM - 23 Jun 2013
> [/Tweet]
> Not exactly sure how Pierce fits into the Cavs plans and you would think a contender would offer more for him.


Cavs are looking to make a playoffs next year while (I assume) rolling their max cap space over to next summer. The really attractive thing about the offer for Pierce isn't the second round pick, it's the trade exception that it generates by way of Boston not having to take back any salary from cap-flush Cleveland.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

I've seen lopsided trades that still had lottery protections on the team trading a pick. Who the hell gives unprotected picks for a coach? You're not likely to fall apart but who knows what could happen? Especially with guys like Paul and Griffin. Stupid to not get some protection in that situation. All such protection would be saying is, "In the event the worst possible outcome happens we want to protect ourselves."


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

I won't be cheering for a team with a racist as its best player anymore. Doc shouldn't soil his legacy.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

*Re: Celtics in trade talks to send Doc Rivers, Garnett to Clippers*



Jamel Irief said:


> Do you think Irving will ever be quiet about a topic? Even one he doesn't care about?


I was quiet about the winning ring or having fun topic, I could easily go on but I'd rather not have Mayo, Hobo (btw I still have you ignored, but you can continue to waste your time if you'd like) and god knows who else bitch about my long posts so I'll just keep it at one.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

Tom said:


> I won't be cheering for a team with a racist as its best player anymore. Doc shouldn't soil his legacy.


Wait. Racist? What'd I miss?


Sent from my iPhone using VS Free


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Bogg said:


> Cavs are looking to make a playoffs next year while (I assume) rolling their max cap space over to next summer. The really attractive thing about the offer for Pierce isn't the second round pick, it's the trade exception that it generates by way of Boston not having to take back any salary from cap-flush Cleveland.


Don't the Cavs know they aren't winning a championship? Shouldn't the objective be to accumulate lottery balls then?



Adam said:


> I've seen lopsided trades that still had lottery protections on the team trading a pick. Who the hell gives unprotected picks for a coach?


Oh wow, how embarrassing for you.



> On Sept. 1, 1995, the Heat made the only trade to date with the New York Knicks in their 24 seasons, when they agreed to send a first-round pick previously acquired from the Atlanta Hawks and $1 million for the rights to name Pat Riley team president and coach.


Didn't your user name used to be "93 heat"?


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Oh wow, how embarrassing for you.
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't your user name used to be "93 heat"?


Shots fired!

Bang bang!


Sent from my iPhone using VS Free


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

roux2dope said:


> Doc Rivers was a very average head coach in Orlando... then he looked like a genius in Boston with his 3 hall of famers. I am curious to which Doc shows up in LA.


Wait, you mean the guy that coached a team whose best player was Darrell ****ing Armstrong to a .500 record was "very average"? I'm sure the Clippers would be thrilled with a coach that "average".


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Marcus13 said:


> Wait. Racist? What'd I miss?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using VS Free


Rumors that Paul specifically wanted a black coach.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Drizzy (Mar 23, 2012)

Tom said:


> I won't be cheering for a team with a racist as its best player anymore. Doc shouldn't soil his legacy.


Care to explain? Did I miss something?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Wait, he could root for the Clippers even though they're owned by an avowed racist but can't root for them because CP3 wanted Rivers as coach? I think Tom's been hitting this stuff pretty hard tonight...


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Jamel Irief said:


> Don't the Cavs know they aren't winning a championship? Shouldn't the objective be to accumulate lottery balls?


Our owner said we would win a title before Lebron did, and that was with a team that had the longest losing streak in NBA history. Now with the team we have he probably thinks we're the next Bill Russell led Celtics.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

E.H. Munro said:


> Wait, you mean the guy that coached a team whose best player was Darrell ****ing Armstrong to a .500 record was "very average"? I'm sure the Clippers would be thrilled with a coach that "average".


No i am talking about the guy that couldn't get out of the first round with Mcgrady as his best player.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

How crazy would it be if CP3 still left anyways. Then the Clippers were a lottery team and gave up two lotto picks for Doc Rivers.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

> Clippers free-agent guard Chris Paul kept lobbying franchise management to pursue Rivers throughout the past week. Paul hasn't formally committed to signing a five-year maximum contract in July, but Rivers is taking the job with full knowledge that he'll be coaching Paul, sources said.
> 
> The possibility of Boston Celtics forward Kevin Garnett reuniting with Rivers in Los Angeles is a remote possibility, largely because of the NBA's unwillingness to approve a trade that suspiciously looks like an extension of the coaching transaction.
> 
> ...


http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--c...cs-to-hire-doc-rivers-as-coach-202137296.html


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

roux2dope said:


> No i am talking about the guy that couldn't get out of the first round with Mcgrady as his best player.


Was _any_ coach that great? I mean only one team whose best player was named McGrady _ever_ made it out of the first round. The year he was injured come playoff time.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

E.H. Munro said:


> Wait, he could root for the Clippers even though they're owned by an avowed racist but can't root for them because CP3 wanted Rivers as coach? I think Tom's been hitting this stuff pretty hard tonight...


Bingo. If you're going to talk "racist" and "clippers" you need to mention Donald Tokowitz first. Unless Tom doesn't care unless someone is racist towards whites. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

roux2dope said:


> No i am talking about the guy that couldn't get out of the first round with Mcgrady as his best player.


Rick Adelman, Lenny Wilkens and Jeff van gundy want to know why you don't think they're good coaches. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Don't the Cavs know they aren't winning a championship? Shouldn't the objective be to accumulate lottery balls then?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not really the same thing. It wasn't a trade so much as it was ransom. We were forced to give the pick after the fact. I also think most teams learned their lesson from the Otis Thorpe deal. I've always been kind of on the lookout since that deal happened for another situation like that and I've noticed teams are very careful nowadays to prevent it and it's really rare. If the Clips didn't write any protections for a pick 3 years from now that would be pretty pathetic on their part.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Adam said:


> Not really the same thing. It wasn't a trade so much as it was ransom. We were forced to give the pick after the fact. I also think most teams learned their lesson from the Otis Thorpe deal. I've always been kind of on the lookout since that deal happened for another situation like that and I've noticed teams are very careful nowadays to prevent it and it's really rare. If the Clips didn't write any protections for a pick 3 years from now that would be pretty pathetic on their part.


I honestly didn't realize it was for 3 years from now. I assumed it was for this upcoming draft.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

Jamel Irief said:


> Rick Adelman, Lenny Wilkens and Jeff van gundy want to know why you don't think they're good coaches.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


I never said Doc Rivers was a bad coach.. i don't think that at all. He just looked a hell of alot smarter once KG and Allen came to town. He had 273-312 record with zero playoff success from 1999-00 through 2006-07 with Orlando and Boston the year before the big three came together. 314-161 record since. Not really difficult to figure out what made Doc a genius over night


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

So Popovich is an average coach now?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

roux2dope said:


> I never said Doc Rivers was a bad coach.. i don't think that at all. He just looked a hell of alot smarter once KG and Allen came to town. He had 273-312 record with zero playoff success from 1999-00 through 2006-07 with Orlando and Boston the year before the big three came together. 314-161 record since. Not really difficult to figure out what made Doc a genius over night


You said he was average. He took below average talent to average records. The teams from 99-07 had players like Bo Outlaw and Raef as their best big men, Darrel Armstrong and Delonte West as their best guards. He was the 2000 coach of the year. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

I guess you can't give Doc the GM job (Ainge) and/or he still wants to coach but not a rebuilding team, but it's sad that Boston is shipping out a big name like that. I can't even imagine where the Heat would be if we shipped out Pat Riley or he left. Definitely would be no LeBron and probably no Shaq and no rings.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Adam said:


> I guess you can't give Doc the GM job (Ainge) and/or he still wants to coach but not a rebuilding team, but it's sad that Boston is shipping out a big name like that. I can't even imagine where the Heat would be if we shipped out Pat Riley or he left. Definitely would be no LeBron and probably no Shaq and no rings.


He wants no part of Rondo and I really can't blame him. Next year is going to be ugly if they clear out Pierce and Garnett too. At that point they will have essentially gotten rid of every player that stands up to him and the coach. The next guy might hang himself before the All Star break.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

roux2dope said:


> I never said Doc Rivers was a bad coach.. i don't think that at all. He just looked a hell of alot smarter once KG and Allen came to town. He had 273-312 record with zero playoff success from 1999-00 through 2006-07 with Orlando and Boston the year before the big three came together. 314-161 record since. Not really difficult to figure out what made Doc a genius over night


Phil Jackson couldn't get out of the first round with Kobe until Pau came to town and made him look a hell of a lot smarter. The Lakers went from first round fodder to three straight Finals appearances overnight. Not difficult to figure out what got them there.


----------



## letsgoceltics (Aug 19, 2012)

Doc has proven he's good enough coach to win a championship. He's not Phil Jackson in the sense that Doc is not the key to getting guys over the hump in the same way Phil has been with the superstars he's coached.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

letsgoceltics said:


> Doc has proven he's good enough coach to win a championship. He's not Phil Jackson in the sense that Doc is not the key to getting guys over the hump in the same way Phil has been with the superstars he's coached.


Pierce, Allen and Garnett had won titles before arriving in Boston?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Danny Ainge is considering coaching the Celtics next year. So the first official entry in the Andrew Wiggins sweepstakes may be on hand.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

I hope he coaches the team for a year or two. The Boston job isn't attractive right now, and bringing in somebody as a fall guy just to fire them in a year or two when the team is in a better spot just looks bad. At least Ainge running the show for a year or two and then stepping back into a front office only role, like what Riley did a few years ago in Miami, provides some semblance of stability.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

hobojoe said:


> Rumors that Paul specifically wanted a black coach.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


thought he was talking about the slum lord owner who didn't even know that Elgin Baylor had an NBA career prior to working for him (for like 25 years)

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hill/110905

http://www.sportsgrid.com/media/donald-sterling-racist-remarks/

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ba...dn-t-know-Elgin-Baylor-was-a-b?urn=nba-334481


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

I still think giving up a first round draft pick for a COACH is absurd. But all well. It's only a good move if they can use Rivers to swing for Garnett and/or Pierce.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Hibachi! said:


> I still think giving up a first round draft pick for a COACH is absurd. But all well. It's only a good move if they can use Rivers to swing for Garnett and/or Pierce.


It's a good move for the Clippers if the pick is somewhere in the twenties, because Doc's going to have a more positive effect on your franchise than a solid rotation player will, to say nothing of Chris Paul re-upping. If something goofy happens like Paul still leaving or demanding a trade next summer, or injuries ravaging the team in 2014-2015, then the picks' unprotected status makes it a possible home-run for Boston. It's why I wish the pick was a 2016 instead of a 2015.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Hibachi! said:


> I still think giving up a first round draft pick for a COACH is absurd. But all well. It's only a good move if they can use Rivers to swing for Garnett and/or Pierce.


would you give up a late first rounder to keep Paul?


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

e-monk said:


> would you give up a late first rounder to keep Paul?


Yes. But at least make it protected in case anything disastrous happens.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Boston was willing to take a lottery protected #1, but LA wasn't willing to part with a late #1 in 2014, and Boston wasn't willing to accept a conditional pick in a far future draft. So the unprotected 2015 #1 was the compromise.


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

So, the Clippers roster is the season started today would look like?

Paul
Bledsoe
Barnes
Griffin
Jordan

If that is the starting lineup they will be booted in the first round again. Even if they have a roster as below they still aren't a threat to a healthy OKC.

Paul 
Affalo
Pierce
Griffin
Garnett


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Pablo5 said:


> So, the Clippers roster is the season started today would look like?
> 
> Paul
> Bledsoe
> ...


And keep in mind the Cavaliers are gunning for Pierce as well, and they have certain benefits that give them the advantage to the deal.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

XxIrvingxX said:


> And keep in mind the Cavaliers are gunning for Pierce as well, and they have certain benefits that give them the advantage to the deal.


Hey, if the Cavs up their offer to a 2014 #1 Boston will gladly put them in the playoffs.


----------



## doctordrizzay (May 10, 2011)

http://www.complexmag.ca/sports/2013/06/antoine-walker-wants-to-be-celtics-next-coach


Antoine Walker ✔ @WalkerAntoine8

Boston fans its time for me to be the celtics coach !!!!


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

E.H. Munro said:


> Hey, if the Cavs up their offer to a 2014 #1 Boston will gladly put them in the playoffs.


I want them to make some kind of trade, but I don't think Pierce would be worth a first overall pick, not at this stage in his career.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I would guess that the Cavs are going to try to figure out what sort of play they can make in the free agent market before they commit their cap space to Pierce. They have to at least make an offer to Iggy or Josh Smith


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Diable said:


> I would guess that the Cavs are going to try to figure out what sort of play they can make in the free agent market before they commit their cap space to Pierce. They have to at least make an offer to Iggy or Josh Smith


Pierce isn't a fallback option for them. If they don't make a trade for him he will be a free agent this time next week and won't be signing there.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

XxIrvingxX said:


> I want them to make some kind of trade, but I don't think Pierce would be worth a first overall pick, not at this stage in his career.


*2014*, not 2013.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

Doc rivers is also vice president of basketball operations


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

@KBergCBS:


> Doc Rivers' compensation agreement states that Celts & Clips can't exchange players until after 2013-14 season, source says


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Dissonance said:


> @KBergCBS:


Good. DeAndre Jordan is a 25-year-old "project" who hasn't gotten any better in three years.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Herr Stern with a little overreach again


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

e-monk said:


> Herr Stern with a little overreach again


It's the Clippers fault. You can't leak everything to the media to pressure the other side when what you're planning is blatantly illegal. If they had quickly and quietly made a "first for Rivers" trade last week and then followed up with "DAJ and a first for Garnett" in the middle of July everything would have gone smoothly. Instead they shot themselves in the foot and will have a hard time upgrading the center position.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

true, they're still the clippers


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Dissonance said:


> @KBergCBS:


Lol, ouch. There goes the Clipper's plans.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

That is so absurd that Stern is blocking the Celtics/Clippers trades. Incredibly absurd.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Hibachi! said:


> That is so absurd that Stern is blocking the Celtics/Clippers trades. Incredibly absurd.


Not really, they _blatantly_ attempted to skirt the rules and do something that isn't allowed. It's better the league is just outright with a "you two stay the hell away from each other" than it is to let them propose a dozen different variations on "KG to the Clippers because Doc is there". 

EDIT: If Stern allowed the follow-up trade to take place all you'd read is how he was going out of his way ignoring the rules to help the Clippers yet again, and that Boston was gifted an extra pick by Stern.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Actually Stern is violating the rules now. Because there is no rule against any such trade. I would suspect that any such clause would be of highly dubious legality in fact. The Clippers and Boston are free to make any trade that does not violate the rules. By pre judging any trade to violate the rules, Stern is doing exactly that. Any future move would have to be judged on it's own merits.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Diable said:


> Actually Stern is violating the rules now. Because there is no rule against any such trade. I would suspect that any such clause would be of highly dubious legality in fact. The Clippers and Boston are free to make any trade that does not violate the rules. By pre judging any trade to violate the rules, Stern is doing exactly that. Any future move would have to be judged on it's own merits.


I promise you this decision was vetted by sharper legal minds than you and I. When the rules say that you can't have deals contingent on each other, and one of the teams openly leak that the deals were contingent on each other, then _that violates the rules_. Didn't they even submit the deals together at one point?


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

In fact you could get Al Sharpton involved in this stuff, because when you make a ruling that only applies to one person, that's a Civil Rights case.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

I'm confused. The rule is that you cannot trade for a coach. So they trade a first round pick... for a coach. Am I missing something here? I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Hibachi! said:


> I'm confused. The rule is that you cannot trade for a coach. So they trade a first round pick... for a coach. Am I missing something here? I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something.


I've actually been wondering this as well, but I keep thinking the answer is so blatantly obvious that I didn't even bother asking haha.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

XxIrvingxX said:


> I've actually been wondering this as well, but I keep thinking the answer is so blatantly obvious that I didn't even bother asking haha.


well for that you can thank one Herr David "the smurf" Stern who set the price for Pat Riley at $4m and a 1st back in the 90s when he bopped from the knicks to the heat


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Hibachi! said:


> I'm confused. The rule is that you cannot trade for a coach. So they trade a first round pick... for a coach. Am I missing something here? I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something.


Coaches can't be traded as part of player transactions. You are allowed to reach compensatory deals for coaches so long as they're not contingent on a player transaction. If the Clippers hadn't been trying to force a trade by leaking _everything_ to the press it would never have come up.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Diable said:


> In fact you could get Al Sharpton involved in this stuff, because when you make a ruling that only applies to one person, that's a Civil Rights case.


This is like where Chris Paul was going to be able to sue the league for lost wages and mental anguish because he didn't get traded to the Lakers?


----------



## WithHotCompanyInMiami (Feb 9, 2013)

We can add Garnett and Paul Pierce...


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

3 unprotected firsts from an aging 47 win team that's going to fall off the cliff in two years? My week's going fine.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Floods said:


> 3 unprotected firsts from an aging 47 win team that's going to fall off the cliff in two years? My week's going fine.


I like this optimism. Brooklyn's two best players are under 30. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

Brooke Lopez is one of their two best players?

Oh man, they're ****ed.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Jamel Irief said:


> I like this optimism. Brooklyn's two best players are under 30.


'16,'17,'18 are the picks that matter, and Lopez just had to have surgery on his foot _again_. They're lottery tickets, but if Lopez keeps getting hurt and Williams tails off as he enters his early/mid-thirties (it's not like he's some demon when it comes to keeping in shape), all three of those could wind up lottery picks. Or Prokhorov spends like crazy to keep them in the playoffs forever. Either way, Boston's kicking off their rebuild with four extra first-round picks and might get more for Rondo. If they can get a future star or two with their own picks in the next two drafts, they'll have a ton of assets to throw into trades to complete a rebuild sometime around 2015 or 2016.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Jamel Irief said:


> I like this optimism. Brooklyn's two best players are under 30.


If Brook Lopez _were_ their second best player those picks would be gold. Fortunately for the Nets he isn't.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Wasn't Lopez just coming off of an all star season? I think people are being a little to hard on him.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

If he did anything out there besides putting the ball in the basket, maybe I'd agree.

Between him and the always shot-hungry Joe Johnson, the Nets already have two players like that. Pierce is gonna make 3 pretty soon, due to his advancing age. Terry makes 4 out of their top 6. There's only one basketball.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Bogg said:


> '16,'17,'18 are the picks that matter, and Lopez just had to have surgery on his foot _again_. They're lottery tickets, but if Lopez keeps getting hurt and Williams tails off as he enters his early/mid-thirties (it's not like he's some demon when it comes to keeping in shape), all three of those could wind up lottery picks. Or Prokhorov spends like crazy to keep them in the playoffs forever. Either way, Boston's kicking off their rebuild with four extra first-round picks and might get more for Rondo. If they can get a future star or two with their own picks in the next two drafts, they'll have a ton of assets to throw into trades to complete a rebuild sometime around 2015 or 2016.


I think the nets are the new mavs. As long as Williams is good and prokhorov is there they should be a lock for the playoffs. 

They play in New York now too. The only reason to be optimistic is if you can strike Marc gasol gold. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Jamel Irief said:


> I think the nets are the new mavs. As long as Williams is good and prokhorov is there they should be a lock for the playoffs.
> 
> They play in New York now too. The only reason to be optimistic is if you can strike Marc gasol gold.


An all-star hits the market(if not moves) more or less every year(at least), be it through trade or free agency. Boston's either going to be able to sign them outright or offer some combination of expiring contracts or cap relief, prospects, and/or multiple first-round picks(Brooklyn/LA/whoever-for-Rondo and their own), aka exactly what every team trading a star and rebuilding wants. _IF_ Ainge drafts well the first two or three years of rebuilding he'll be in the drivers' seat when it comes to rounding out the roster. I'm not too worried about not having the assets to make a trade two-three years down the line, it's just going to be about getting the _right_ guys.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Floods said:


> If he did anything out there besides putting the ball in the basket, maybe I'd agree.
> 
> Between him and the always shot-hungry Joe Johnson, the Nets already have two players like that. Pierce is gonna make 3 pretty soon, due to his advancing age. Terry makes 4 out of their top 6. There's only one basketball.


Now hold on here he averaged 2 blocks a game that season, the Nets definitely benefit from his play on both sides of the floor, not just one.


----------

