# Walker Trade Rumor



## el_raulin (Jun 5, 2003)

I just saw this on an article published by NBAdraft.net

"We're hearing from sources that a blockbuster trade is on the table involving 3 teams. The trade would include Boston, New York and Seattle. The trade would have Antoine Walker going to New York, Kurt Thomas and 9 going to Seattle, and Boston receiving 12, 14, and 30."

http://www.nbadraft.net/draftbuzz007.htm

What do you think about this?


----------



## nyksju (Feb 11, 2003)

interesting very interesting


----------



## CelticsRule (Jul 22, 2002)

So we're basically trading Antoine an all star for 3 rookies who have never proven anything in the NBA. Also if we were to do that trade wer trade up to a top 5 pick. No team needs 4 first rounders and the first of the second round.


----------



## bballin (Jun 3, 2003)

If Wallace was the person making the picks, I'd hate it (see last year)
Ainge I don't have an opinion on yet, but trading the 2nd best player on the team for picks is risky. If its done right the C's could start challenging the elite. If it goes pear shaped, the the C's would end up looking like this season's Magic with one superstar and not much else.


----------



## sologigolos (May 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>celticsrule0873</b>!
> So we're basically trading Antoine an all star for 3 rookies who have never proven anything in the NBA. Also if we were to do that trade wer trade up to a top 5 pick. No team needs 4 first rounders and the first of the second round.



i'm really guessing we will not keep all four 1st rounders. will likely trade up. 
at the same time, i really wouldn't mind the trade as it is. it is a deep draft. 

that, packaged with a possibility of a top 10 pick (via another trade), and the fact that I think Walker is the antithesis to good basketball player, 

i would like to see this deal done.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

This is not a good trade for the Celts, IMO. I know I've advocated trading Walker before, but you should only trade a guy if you think it will benefit your team. It's not as if this is a particularly deep draft or anything- you will be trading an allstar and a leader for three players that will most likely be mediocre on the NBA level. 
And anyway, this deal does not work under the cap, so i wouldn't worry about it.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> And anyway, this deal does not work under the cap, so i wouldn't worry about it.


Right. The Celtics would have to receive players with salaries within plus or minus 15% of Antoine's salary. Draft picks have a value of zero for purposes of this rule.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

This trade would be my worst nightmare.
There is only two teams in the league I would not be able to root for Antoine if he was apart of and those are New York and New Jersey.

This BETTER not happen


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> This trade would be my worst nightmare.
> There is only two teams in the league I would not be able to root for Antoine if he was apart of and those are New York and New Jersey.
> 
> This BETTER not happen


You wouldn't take Latrell Sprewell and New York's #9 pick for Antoine? Or how about Antoine for McDyess and a bunch of draft picks? Both deals work under the CBA, and even though McDyess can't play, his deal expires in a year, freeing up all that cap space.

I would not do either of these deals, since I happen to think Antoine is a tremendous asset. But if people are going to discuss trading Antoine, they should limit the discussion to deals that actually work.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> 
> 
> You wouldn't take Latrell Sprewell and New York's #9 pick for Antoine? Or how about Antoine for McDyess and a bunch of draft picks? Both deals work under the CBA, and even though McDyess can't play, his deal expires in a year, freeing up all that cap space.
> ...


I would not trade Antoine for any of the deals you mentioned. I actually appreciate what Antoine brings to this team and I don't want him gone under any circumstances that doesn
't involve bringing someone like Tim Duncan to the Celtics.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>celticsrule0873</b>!
> So we're basically trading Antoine an all star for 3 rookies who have never proven anything in the NBA. Also if we were to do that trade wer trade up to a top 5 pick. No team needs 4 first rounders and the first of the second round.


I agree! :yes:


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Do we really need 5 rookies? What are we gonna do with them? We can't even develop the one's we had or have the right way. 

If Pierce and Walker didn't know how to teach themselves (and if they didn't have a lot of talent) they would have never made it this far. OB should stop playing his favorites, and start to develop the rookies we have (I still consider Brown a 3 year rookie) and develop an offense.


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

The only way we could get cap to work is for them to put Spree or Dyess in the trade. I wouldnt take either of them. I dont like Spree and I think Dyess is done.


----------



## HickFromFrenchLick (Jun 18, 2003)

Even though I don't believe this rumor I do that that the Celts have to make a decision. If they are not going to sign Walker to an extension then PLEASE trade him and get something in return for him. Picks may be the best we can hope for. We wont get a top level talent in return for Walker and I would rather a bunch of picks then a couple middle of the road guys. Trading Walker is a huge gamble that could either make us a real good team or a real bad team. But as the team stands now I don't think its a championship contender and I think everyone is interested in trying to win a title not making the playoffs so why not take a chance. What have we got to lose?? another first/second round exit from the playoffs?? Big deal.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BleedGreen</b>!
> The only way we could get cap to work is for them to put Spree or Dyess in the trade. I wouldnt take either of them. I dont like Spree and I think Dyess is done.


Well there are other ways. A package of Kurt Thomas, Shandon Anderson and Doleac would also work. A third team could also be involved. You can dream up dozens of hypothetical trades, most of which make no basketball sense whatsoever.


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

I know there are other ways. But I wouldnt do any of them. I wouldnt trade Walker to begin with. I cant stand all these threads about gettinf rid of Toine. If it aint broken dont fix it. This team is not broken, it just needs to be added to.


----------



## HickFromFrenchLick (Jun 18, 2003)

I think the problem is that they CAN'T add on to the team as it stands now. With Bakers contract they are stuck. Really the only thing they have to work with is the mid level exception.


----------



## el_raulin (Jun 5, 2003)

I don't like any of the recent Walker trade rumors either. I just posted the information 'cause I thought you wanted to check out what's being discussed out there.

I feel that this is not the right time to trade Walker (if we ever decide to trade him). That will only set us back in our playoffs aspirations since we only have Pierce and Walker as valuable all around options. And... we can't expect to have consistent production from any draft pick outside the top three (maybe none since all are projects), so I don't think 2 draft picks in the teens and #30 will do it.

I see us keeping Pierce/Walker, and drafting Banks and either Pavlovic/Cabarkapa if available.

I liked the 30th pick though... some good ballplayer will slide to 30. So, that pick may turn out useful.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

If we did this trade (hypotheticaLLy speaking) We wouLd trade the 5 picks and try to get into the top ten w/ them and move up w/ others and end up w/ 3 picks @ most, proLLy one in the top 10, one or maybe 2 from 10-20 and or one other in the late 20's or 30...but, I don't see this trade happening...its Liek rebuiLding...you don't trade one of your 2 super stars for unproven rookies and fiLLers, sorry........


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>CeLtZ in 04</b>!
> If we did this trade (hypotheticaLLy speaking) We wouLd trade the 5 picks and try to get into the top ten w/ them and move up w/ others and end up w/ 3 picks @ most, proLLy one in the top 10, one or maybe 2 from 10-20 and or one other in the late 20's or 30...but, I don't see this trade happening...its Liek rebuiLding...you don't trade one of your 2 super stars for unproven rookies and fiLLers, sorry........



I agree - I think one builds a championship by addition - not subtraction. I think Red did it that way when he was a younger man.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Red was great...*

but he didn't have to deal with the CBA, free agency after 4 years, a salary cap and the luxury tax. Trading Walker doesn't make any sense now that his value is so low, but we are totally hamstrung by the cap. Seeing as how we are nowhere near contending, even in the weak East, that might be a possibility next year.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Chad Ford was just talking about a Fizer, JWill and D. Marshall for Twan. Or something like that. 

He also said the Raptors have interest in Walker, Antonio Davis and #4 for Twan.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

And you think thats all? Your dead wrong.

Ainge also plans on trading Delk +20 for Rogers +22.
Then we got Brent Barry and Drabajnvic (Seattle) for JR and Williams.
and 
Ainge wants to get rid of Baker, (Hawks, Heat, and Bucks interested) if Battie and 1st rounders are involved.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*wow*

Aqua where did you get the info on the trades you listed?

That is alot of activity!


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: wow*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> Aqua where did you get the info on the trades you listed?
> 
> That is alot of activity!


The first two from ESPN and insider.

The second 3 from another guy.

EDIT: its a rumor, but I just wanted to share it with you guys.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

*Re: Re: wow*



> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> The first two from ESPN and insider.
> ...








I read the same thing on another board and they said it was heard on ESPN NEWS and /or Insider........


----------



## el_raulin (Jun 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> And you think thats all? Your dead wrong.
> 
> Ainge also plans on trading Delk +20 for Rogers +22.
> ...


More on the Vin Baker rumor involving Hawks and Rockets:

To Boston: Theo Ratliff, Glen Rice, D. Dickau and Atlanta's #37 pick

To Atlanta: Vin Baker, Tony Battie, the 20th pick and a future pick to Atlanta. 

To Houston: Kedrick Brown and Alan Henderson

But It will be hard to believe all the rumors that will be on the air for the next few days.

I'll stick with my two draft picks for now.


----------



## el_raulin (Jun 5, 2003)

*EW JR trade*

That trade does not makes much sense to me. Who's the other guy besides Barry?


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

That trade is total BS. If they do that I will become a Nets fan. No lie.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Bleed Green*

Go become a Nets Fan<strike> As I said to Big John, goodbye and good riddance.</strike>

<font color=blue>:naughty: Now, now - no telling the posters good bye and good riddance. That is a no-no


----------



## el_raulin (Jun 5, 2003)

The thing that I like about the draft is all the speculation that happens. It's not that we are going to trade our players for nothing, but I like the fact that at least the are searching for options to "improve" the team.

But sometimes, this rumors are just rumors. But... just wait a few more days to see which one are true.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: EW JR trade*



> Originally posted by <b>el_raulin</b>!
> That trade does not makes much sense to me. Who's the other guy besides Barry?


Sorry its Drobnjak.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>el_raulin</b>!
> 
> 
> More on the Vin Baker rumor involving Hawks and Rockets:
> ...


Yup thats the same one I heard about, I didn't wanna post it because it looked bougus to me.


----------



## sologigolos (May 27, 2003)

espn insider sez

Walker and the No. 20 pick to the Raptors for Antonio Davis and the No. 4 pick in the draft. The Celtics are pretty high on Chris Bosh.


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

*Re: Bleed Green*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> Go become a Nets Fan.<strike> As I said to Big John, goodbye and good riddance. <strike>


<font color=blue>

Truth34, Do NOT tell other posters that they should leave!</font> :naughty:

So then you think its a good trade? That trade gets us NOTHING. Ratliff is always injured. Dickau is DEFINATLY not the answer to our pg problems. Glen Rice isnt gonna do anything of importance. And what kind of a player will we get with the 37th pick? A decent benchie if we are LUCKY. 

Getting rid of Battie ruins our chances of having a decent center for the next few years. Trading Kedrick and #20 ruins our future. 

That trade just plain sucks. If this trade happens I'm changing my avatar and my name. Then I'm going to start rooting for the nets. And start posting in that forum.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

*Re: Red was great...*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> but he didn't have to deal with the CBA, free agency after 4 years, a salary cap and the luxury tax. Trading Walker doesn't make any sense now that his value is so low, <b>but we are totally hamstrung by the cap. </b> Seeing as how we are nowhere near contending, even in the weak East, that might be a possibility next year.




Red didn't have to deal with that, and it's a good thing because his time was taken up with coaching on the side.  

As for being hamstrung - whose fault is that(?) when they did that trade with Kenny A and his <b>one year</b> 9 million for Vinny and his<b>4 year 12 Million</b> - rather stupid move - what else can we say - other than subtracting Toine is NOT the answer to their own stupidity? I mean one stupid move doesn't mean they should then compound it with more stupid moves.

It is much like the 6ers situation - who allowed Larry Brown to GM them into the bottomless pit of the cap and the luxury tax and then let the guy walk out on the mess HE created with his BAD GM moves.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

As someone else said, the best trades are often the ones that do not get made. If Ainge makes any of these he will be a laughingstock.

Antonio Davis? lol lol. His contract is worse than Vin Baker's. Why trade one millstone around your neck for another?

BTW, as a point of clarification, in the Baker deal the C's also unloaded Vitaly's contract, which had 3 years more to run at the time at about 4.75 mil a year. It was not just KA's 9 mil.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*I'll say it again.*

Anyone who would even consider being a Net fan, or any team, for that matter, is not a Celtic fan. 'Nuff said on that point. 

Keep in mind that although the Baker mistake was made in the past, we are dealing with it for the next three years. New Jersey gets Krstic next year, Detroit gets Darko AND a good free agent. We are not in either of their leagues with the present cast. So trade away, Danny. Getting rid of Battie hurts, but Baker and Brown are garbage. The Chicago trade also looked pretty good to me.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: I'll say it again.*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> So rade away, Danny.


Hey Pitino, I tought you left....

lol just kidding.


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

So we should get rid of Battie and garbage for some more garbage? That makes alot of sense.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BleedGreen</b>!
> So we should get rid of Battie and garbage for some more garbage? That makes alot of sense.








I Liek Battie, his game is sweet...he's not a scorer, but w/ a good knee his rebounds wiLL be up and he, as you aLL know, is an exceLLent defender, do not trade him........


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*More Garbage?*

You get rid of Baker's contract, which essentially kills any chance the Celts have of contending for the next 3 years, pick up a shotblocker, and a PG. Now before you bite my head off, please tell me what Steve Nash did his rookie year.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

*Re: More Garbage?*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> You get rid of Baker's contract, which essentially kills any chance the Celts have of contending for the next 3 years, pick up a shotblocker, and a PG. Now before you bite my head off, please tell me what Steve Nash did his rookie year.








RatLiff is injury prone if I remember correctLy, and Dickau I don't think is right for us for whatever reason........


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

Dickau is not that good. I dont think he will ever be as good as Steve Nash. Dickau is NOT the answer to our pg problems. He isnt gonna come in and make us better. He might get better in a few years. But I'm sure Bremer will be a helluva lot better then too.

Battie is better than Ratliff. Ratliff's contract would put us in as much of a hole as Bakers does. But Ratliff has a little game and would get some minutes. But he is NOT better than Battie. So thats a major downgrade. Battie is about as good if not better than Ratliff defensively. And Ratliff is constantly injured.

This trade still sucks.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BleedGreen</b>!
> Dickau is not that good. I dont think he will ever be as good as Steve Nash. Dickau is NOT the answer to our pg problems. He isnt gonna come in and make us better. He might get better in a few years. But I'm sure Bremer will be a helluva lot better then too.
> 
> Battie is better than Ratliff. Ratliff's contract would put us in as much of a hole as Bakers does. But Ratliff has a little game and would get some minutes. But he is NOT better than Battie. So thats a major downgrade. Battie is about as good if not better than Ratliff defensively. And Ratliff is constantly injured.
> ...








Yep it does, and I Love Battie's game, and he is actuaLLy pretty young, this is onLy his 6th year coming up...in fact we have a fairLy young team overaLL if you disregard CoLes, Long, and Bryant who won't be here next yearr........







http://www.nba.com/celtics/roster/index.html


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BleedGreen</b>!
> Dickau is not that good. I dont think he will ever be as good as Steve Nash. Dickau is NOT the answer to our pg problems. He isnt gonna come in and make us better. He might get better in a few years. But I'm sure Bremer will be a helluva lot better then too.
> 
> Battie is better than Ratliff. Ratliff's contract would put us in as much of a hole as Bakers does. But Ratliff has a little game and would get some minutes. But he is NOT better than Battie. So thats a major downgrade. Battie is about as good if not better than Ratliff defensively. And Ratliff is constantly injured.
> ...


I don't get how Battie is better than Ratliff. Ratliff led the league in blocks this year. He's a top 5 center in the East.

I do see the arguments that he is injury-prone and his contract, but as a player, Ratliff is better than Battie.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>digital jello</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't get how Battie is better than Ratliff. Ratliff led the league in blocks this year. He's a top 5 center in the East.
> ...








He is not as injury prone as RatLiff, besides his knee which is good now, he is a LittLe younger, and RatLiff has a bad contract...we aLready have one too many of those........


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

Ratliff is one hell of a defensive player. And he is good. I will admit that. But Battie has many of the same abilitys. He had a bad knee this year so he wasnt as good as he could have been.

Saying hes a top 5 center in the east isnt saying much. I dont think there are 5 good centers in the east.

And then the injury problems and contract. And the fact that I'm a Celtics fan and we tink out players are way better than anyone else's.:angel:


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Ratliff v. Battie*

You guys are a little shortsided on this one. If we become a weaker team by doing this trade (which is still open to debate), so be it. The flexibility we gain by doing it is the reason for making the trade. 

Rice's contract expires at the end of the season, so that cuts more than $9 million off the cap.

Ratliff has a player option after next year, but he could retire. If he doesn't we only have him for 2 years, instead of 3 for Baker. 

Plus, Ratliff could learn from Dick Harter and be a better defender. He is a MUCH BETTER shot blocker than Battie and I think is a better player.

This deal is a no-brainer. A move that cuts our cap obligations, adds two decent players AND allows us to keep Walker and Pierce together.

C'MON GUYS!!!


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

*Re: Ratliff v. Battie*

Rice's 9 million doesnt put us under the cap. So thats not much help. It gets us closer but it still doesnt help.

Ratliff is a better shot blocker. But Battie is still pretty damn good. He might be a better player, but not by much. In that once year less with Baker, contracts will still be going up and could most likely even out. But it would be better to get rid of them quicker.

Cutting down on cap is nice and keeping Walker and Pierce is great. But I still dont think Battie should be traded. If there is a way around that then it would be a pretty decent deal.

I dont wanna see Kedrick gone, but if its best for the team he will have to go.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Not good enough?*

You're kidding right? That money off the cap may not put us under...but it shaves off an awful lot of luxury tax money and makes us more viable in free agency. I love Tony Battie, but I don't think he's that much better than Ratliff. 

I'm sorry, but no team is going to take Vin Baker and Bruno Sundov for their star players. It's a great deal that would hurt from a sentimental standpoint, but would strengthen the Celtics hand flexibilitywise without hurting the product on the court. Am I the only one who sees this?


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BleedGreen</b>!
> That trade is total BS. If they do that I will become a Nets fan. No lie.


I understand your frustrations. I however could never become a Nets fan after what they did to Boston the last two seasons in the playoffs (and I don't mean beating us, I mean the way they tried to make Boston fans the bad guys because Jason Kidd was called on being a wife beater)
Can someone tell me why the Celtics would trade Vin Baker for an even bigger contract when the other guy is basically always hurt? especially when Vin could come out and be a great player this year after his life is back together. Same with Tony Battie. He might have that knee injury but the kid played hurt all year long and never once complained.

Then again I don't get why the Celtics fans think we should trade away Antoine either so what do I know:sigh:


----------



## el_raulin (Jun 5, 2003)

Baker is a complete question mark. And he will be receiving max money for the next three years I think. That will kill almost any chance of Boston being a contender for the next three years, in the case that Baker does not work out (12ppg / 6rpg). At some point we will have to make a move. 

If the Baker deal allows Boston some financial flexibility to build a contender... that's fine with me. If trading Walker, we manage to build a championship team, that's fine with me also. I really don't see anyone that's willing to take Baker now for picks or promising players with flexible contracts.

I support Danny, at least for this next year. What I hope is that we retain the 2 first round draft picks, 'cause I think there are several players that have enough potential to be very good in two years.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*8*

I don't think that Danny will just make one trade, I think he'll do all 5 of them. If he wants to get rid of anyone he'll go with Walker, Vin and Battie first. I think Walker will be the first one to go if anyone is gonna go. 

If we trade Twan, we'll be going to the lottery next year, Ainge is probably trying to rebuild....again.


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

I hate Danny Ainge. I cant stand all these rumors and stuff. Its driving me crazy.:banghead:


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BleedGreen</b>!
> I hate Danny Ainge. I cant stand all these rumors and stuff. Its driving me crazy.:banghead:


Don't worry about it that much, its mostly ESPN insider and they have to write something to sell it. If its in the Globe, or Herald then you can start crying.


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

Thats true, the do seem to put out alot of crap. Maybe thats why I'm not paying to get it.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BleedGreen</b>!
> Thats true, the do seem to put out alot of crap. Maybe thats why I'm not paying to get it.


It's not just ESPN insider. Who knows where these silly rumors start? The Internet definitely helps them spread. Here is a list of some that I have seen over the past 2-3 months.

1. JR Bemer for Darius Miles. This doesn't work under the CBA. This was expanded by hopeful Cleveland fans to be Miles and Diop for Bremer and Eric Williams. As if anyone would trade two solid contributors for two of the biggest flops in NBA draft history.

2. Baker plus #16 for Cato and Taylor (or Norris and Rice). This was started by a hopeful Rockets fan. Taken together, the contracts of Cato and Taylor are worse than Baker's contract. I would do the Norris/Rice version of this deal, but Houston wouldn't.

3. All proposed trades involving Atlanta deadwood. Hawks fans have no idea how utterly valueless their players are. The only one worth considering in a trade is Nazr Mohammed. Abdur-Rahim is overpaid and does not play defense. Ditto in spades for Glenn Robinson. Ratliff used to be a good defensive center but he is on his last legs. His career will be over in 2 years max. Dickau is a 6-0 guard who can shoot but can't do anything else.

4. Walker and #16 for Antonio Davis and #4. Can you imagine having to carry Baker's contract AND Antonio Davis' contract at the same time? The Celtics would have two huge long term contracts with players who can't play. How old is Davis? 35 or 36?

5. Walker to Chicago for some combination of mediocre players including Marcus Fizer and Jay Williams. Williams' motorcycle accident has put an end to those rumors-- at least for the time being. Some people (myself included) thought Williams' career was over before the accident.

6. Boston, NY Seattle three-way with Walker going to the Knicks and the Celtics receiving #12, #14 and #30. This doesn't work under the CBA. Even if the deal were structured to provide cap fodder to Boston (McDyess?) it would be a silly deal. Why trade an NBA all-star for 5 rookies, none of whom is even a top ten pick?

7. Delk plus #20 for Rodgers and #22. Why would NJ do this deal? If the Nets have actually offered this I would do it in a heartbeat. The player you get at #22 is going to be no worse than the one you get at #20.

8. Brent Barry and Drobnjak for Bremer and Williams. Brent Barry has chronic knee problems (patellar tendonitis). Drobnjak would certainly help in the frontcourt, but he is not a particularly good rebounder for his size. I might do this deal if I thought Barry was healthy. It would, however, leave the Celtics without a pg.

9. Boston, Atlanta, Houston three-way in which Boston gets Ratliff, Glen Rice, D. Dickau and Atlanta's #37 pickfor Baker, Battie, Kedrick Brown, #20 and a future pick. See paragraph #3 above. So, in order to be free of Baker's contract, the Celtics are forced to give up Battie, Kedrick and a first round pick. In return they get two broken-down horses (Ratliff and Rice), a drafting mistake (Dickau) and a second round pick. No thanks.

During the next few days we will see at least 3-4 more of these rumors. Most of them will involve Antoine going somewhere in return for some package of lesser players, or Vin Baker going elsewhere for trash that other teams don't want.

If Ainge is smart he will resign Blount, take Malik Badiane and David West with his two picks, and sign a FA point guard with the $2M exception. He would then have a team with 50 win potential without incurring the luxury tax.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> If Ainge is smart he will resign Blount, take Malik Badiane and David West with his two picks, and sign a FA point guard with the $2M exception. He would then have a team with 50 win potential without incurring the luxury tax.








I agree w/ Big John, but do you think Badiane is better than SOFO? I honestLy do not know much about Badiane, can you fiLL me in...John, this wouLd work out perfect IMO, two big frontcourt pLayers, either BAdiane, West, or SOFO, depending whose on the board I guess, and if we can get a PG via FA....I hope a good PG comes to us in FA then...nice post John........


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That, is a bad trade, for both teams.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>hellbot</b>!
> 
> That, is a bad trade, for both teams.








This is true, and why we wiLL not do it........


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>CeLtZ in 04</b>!
> I agree w/ Big John, but do you think Badiane is better than SOFO?


Well I've seen several clips of Badiane and also saw him on TV last Summer. He is very athletic. Great shot blocker with a huge wingspan. He is almost 7 feet with wide shoulders. He can't shoot.

I have only seen clips of Schoriantis. He is obviously a wide body with a huge butt. He's built like Danny Fortson but without Fortson's arm strength. The clips mostly show monster dunks against smaller players. They don't really tell you what you want to know.

Maybe the Celtics ought to take both of them lol. However, I think that Badiane has more upside potential. Badiane has the build of a true center; he would not be a pf masquerading as a center. And Badiane can really run the floor.


----------



## BleedGreen (Jun 24, 2002)

So then I think we should go for Pavlovic with 16 and then Badaine at 20. Pavlovic might not be at 16 so we could take Sofo there. That gets us our big men. The Celtics need to work hard to get these guys developed. Or whoever they draft for that matter.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BleedGreen</b>!
> So then I think we should go for Pavlovic with 16 and then Badaine at 20. Pavlovic might not be at 16 so we could take Sofo there. That gets us our big men. The Celtics need to work hard to get these guys developed. Or whoever they draft for that matter.








Thanks for the insight Big John...Yep, I say if PavLovic is there @ 16 we get him, otherwise, I wouLd honestLy be happy w/ SOFO @ 16 and Badiane @ 20...We wud have a sick front-court........


----------



## andy787 (Jun 9, 2003)

just thinking about this scenario.

Portland trades
R. Wallace
Stoudamire
Mc Innis

Boston trades
Walker
Delk
Baker

wouldn't it be perfect for both teams ? Portland would get a leader they need and Boston would get the pg and post presence they need.


----------

