# Celtics-Lakers Trade Done Deal



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Lakers Recieve:
Marcus Banks
Chris Mihm
Chucky Atkins
05 2nd

Celtics Receive:
Gary Payton
Rick Fox
05 1st


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

I don't like what the celtics are getting. :dead:


----------



## amd pwr (Jun 24, 2003)

Celtics got robbed!!!!!!


----------



## rowdyness (Jan 21, 2004)

We could have got Peja for what we gave up and everyone would still be upset. Good trade for the C's. West will be every bit as good as Banks. Trading Mihm means the young guys will play more something everyone wanted, but will now complain about. And GP has something to prove and will be an offensive force in the East as long as Doc doenst go to the triangle offense. Great job MR Ainge !!!!


----------



## lempbizkit (Dec 25, 2003)

This is the first Ainge trade I like. Now get something for Ricky and it will be a good offseason.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Celtics also got some cash.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>amd pwr</b>!
> Celtics got robbed!!!!!!



How did we get robbed? A 2nd rd draft pick = nothing, chucky = backup PG, Mihm= hasnt shown ANYTHING, banks = the only piece i am mad about us trading, but West must be pretty damn good and the Glove sure has a few years left...


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Can't wait until whiterhino hears about this. Bad trade for the Celtics, not terrible, but bad. Payton has really diminshed from his former self. His defense is below average and I seriously would take Chucky Atkins over Payton. Rick Fox is garbage. Marcus Banks has all the potential to turn into a Baron Davis. The pick will be a late first. Bad trade. If GP can play better defense and not demand the ball so much, this trade is a sucess, but I believe Danny could've gotten a better value for what he gives up.

Edit: But I got to admit, this is Danny's best deal. Get's cap room and a mid-first round pick.


----------



## KJay (Sep 22, 2002)

well there's another 2 vets for the team. 

my new just starters

PG Gary
OG Ricky
SF PP
PF JEfferson (- yes I think he's good enough to start, and it keeps LaFrentz on the bench
C Blount


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*Sports Guy and the Payton trade*

Here is a nice article about the Payton trade:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/040806


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Celts11</b>!
> Can't wait until whiterhino hears about this. Bad trade for the Celtics, not terrible, but bad. Payton has really diminshed from his former self. His defense is below average and I seriously would take Chucky Atkins over Payton. Rick Fox is garbage. Marcus Banks has all the potential to turn into a Baron Davis. The pick will be a late first. Bad trade. If GP can play better defense and not demand the ball so much, this trade is a sucess, but I believe Danny could've gotten a better value for what he gives up.
> 
> Edit: But I got to admit, this is Danny's best deal. Get's cap room and a mid-first round pick.


:sour: Uhhgg! What the heck kind of a deal is this for washed up players leaving us with like NO back-up point guard (West is not a PG despite what some want to hope and he also will not be ready to play 15-20min a game even if he learns the position which is what he now HAS to do! Gary Payton five years ago and I'm all over this deal, Gary Payton now, no thanx. They called him the Glove because of his stifling defense but he's older now and his defense is nothing like it was which is why he couldn't contain other points in the playoffs. Fox is total garbage and filler, he's way past prime and was injured all year. A Lakers 1st round draft pick might as well be a 2nd rounder, they still have Kobe and now they have Odom, Caron Butler, etc...they will still be good. 
We gave up Mihm, I could care less but he IS a servicable big man so I think we could have gotten more for him. We gave up Banks, now everyone knows I'm not a Banks fan and never have been, I think he shoots too much and turns it over BUT I wouldn't give up on him this quick for soooo little. Then the kicker we give up Chucky Atkins who really truly is AT LEAST as good as Gary Payton at this point in Gary's career and who was a great voice in the locker room and leader on the floor and who would have been a great 2nd option at PG. What happens if Payton gets injured??? We start Delonte West? I mean come on, there better be another trade following up this one.
The ONLY thing I like about this deal is that we FINALLY made a move towards some cap releif and that is a good thing.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*I like this trade*

This trade will put the Celtics firmly into the 4 - 6 range in the East (with Miami, Indy and Detroit in the top 3).

Gary Payton is hungry to prove that the playoffs last year were a fluke. He can be an excellent number 2 scorer. He will make Paul Pierce's job so much easier by setting up plays and taking pressure off Pierce to do it all. GP will also give Jason Kidd alot more trouble than any Celtic has since Kidd has been in NJ.

If Banks explodes and Payton has one bad season followed by retirement then we will all rue this day... but so far Banks is not giving any indication that he will explode any time soon.

Worst case scenerio is that Payton and Fox are gone at the end of the season and the C's clear cap room.

I like the move.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

*Re: Sports Guy and the Payton trade*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> Here is a nice article about the Payton trade:
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/040806


Interesting article, I'll be thrilled if we come out of the gate like that but I just don't see it yet, not trying to be the pessimist, just being realistic, many puzzle peices are still missing and more dead wood must be chopped


----------



## Zalgirinis (Feb 18, 2003)

A good trade  Well, if talking about cap space - then maybe. But look at this: Paul Pierce, Ricky Davis, Gary Payton and one ball.  

Somehow it doesnt get along and knowing their characters too... Unless Ricky is being traded somewhere...


----------



## banner17 (Jun 28, 2003)

I personally like the trade. I was never all that impressed with Banks, and I do know he didn't get as much pt as he should have to be given a better chance. Mihm, not really a piece of the long term picture.

If West can truly transition to point guard and be a starter in the league at that position, than what better where would there be for him than to understudy a Hall of Famer for his rookie season.

As I said in the NBA forum, I bet Ainge trades GP to a contender at the trade deadline for another draft pick. Then for the remainder of the year you have delonte and jiri splitting time at pg and 3 first round picks again next year as well as some cap relief.


----------



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

Here's the Hoops Boston take on the trade. Conservatively speaking it helps both teams.


----------



## faygo34 (Mar 22, 2003)

i dont know why everybody thinks gary is so terrible now and hes not a starter anymore. i remember the first few games of the year gary was running up and down the court and throwing up alley oops to shaq and kobe. it seems to me like he just got upset and couldnt fit in the triangle offense once the season went on. the only stat that really went down was assists and obviously points but we all knew he would score alot less. so overall to me this looks like the C's raped the lakers.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

*Ainge has lost his mind?*

<b>"The ONLY thing I like about this deal is that we FINALLY made a move towards some cap releif and that is a good thing."</b>

That says it all for me. Payton was done when he was with the Bucks, let alone last season with the Lakers. Fox was done before he ever started. So, the logical reason for this "move" has to be cap space, because nothing else makes any sense at all!


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Richie Rich</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> How did we get robbed? A 2nd rd draft pick = nothing, chucky = backup PG, Mihm= hasnt shown ANYTHING, banks = the only piece i am mad about us trading, but West must be pretty damn good and the Glove sure has a few years left...


You really see Payton playing more than one year in Boston?


----------



## Slasher (Jul 11, 2003)

I really don't see the advantage of this deal that will improve the Celtics. They traded Marcus Banks who has a future in this league for Payton, a guy who has 1-2 years left in his jets.


----------



## Stevie B (May 15, 2003)

I think the C's will regret trading Marcus Banks in a few years. I do not like this trade for Boston.


----------



## lochdoun (Jun 11, 2003)

ok, so when is the 2nd part of this deal gonna go down


----------



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

> Originally posted by <b>lochdoun</b>!
> ok, so when is the 2nd part of this deal gonna go down


By Monday.


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

I was very skeptical of this trade at first. The immediate "what the ****!?" moment for me was trading Marcus Banks. Wasn't this guy the future at the Celtics' PG position? Either Ainge saw a deal too good to pass up or they feel Delonte West can make the transition to NBA starting PG (and wasn't West a SG in college?). BJW said that Payton is all but done but I disagree. Payton hated the dysfunctional Lakers atmosphere which didn't allow him to play his game. I still think he can penetrate and score and of course, play some D which we always need. GP at half of what he is was still better than the current Banks/Atkins duo. Speaking of Chucky Atkins, Celtics rid themselves of a backup PG with a large contract at two years left. Lakers wanted Mihm who the Celts did a sign and trade for. Mihm was in foul trouble too much and was keeping the young guys from developing so Mihm leaving will be a positive. A 2005 2nd round pick means nothing so who cares. Celtics also get a 2005 conditional 1st rounder with cash. Oh, and Rick Fox.....*yawn*.

I'm still a little bit iffy because trading Banks so soon could be a Billups II move. But here's the positives in my mind:

1. Gary Payton is here. Some argue he's done, I don't. You think a HOF will go out looking like a punk? He'll either step up and prove once again he's for real or if not, he's got a one-year deal and we'll let him walk. Gary Payton at 50%, I would still take over Atkins/Banks.

2. Mihm gone will allow for younger guys to log minutes which I think we should all agree that Jefferson and Perkins need playing time.

3. Atkins' had two years left on his contract. Big cap clearing move.

4. Rick Fox is in his last year of his contract. Another cap clearing move.

5. 2005 1st round conditional pick and cash.

Negatives:

1. Banks was supposedly the future and hopefully he won't turn into a Chauncey Billups type. But nothing has been proven of Banks as of yet. Although, impatience (Hello Pitino) can hurt badly sometimes.

2. Yes, we picked up a HOF PG that had his worst season and he's 36. The "36" really jumped out at me. He has one year left on his contract and he's 36 so that tells me we'd be lucky to have his services for more than a year but he exercised to come back to L.A. and the Lakers dealt him. He should feel like showing up the Lakers and everyone that doubted him.

This move doesn't sound too bad to me because: 1) Celtics acquire two guys that have one-year deals and trade away Atkins' contract. Assuming Payton and Fox walk after this year, which they probably will, we'll have cap space to sign some guys. 2) the draft pick we got could be used for PG next draft if we want. 3) Short-term, Celtics solve the PG position and long-term, they create options to sign or re-sign guys and they get a few goodies in return (pick and cash).

I'm predicting Ricky Davis will be traded by next trade deadline. Now, if only the Celtics could move LaFragile, we'd be set.

Terrific post except for the masking. ---agoo


----------



## rowdyness (Jan 21, 2004)

So is Shareef the 2nd part of the "deal" and why do people think that is going down by monday? Who are they trading to get Rahim?


----------



## theBirdman (Jun 20, 2003)

For me this deal is just horrible! Fox is crap and payton is waaaay past his prime. Yes, their contracts run out next year, but dont tell me we couldnt get more for Banks, Mihm and Atkins!?!

We gave up on Banks too soon. Remember Billups, Johnson....Why cant we, for once, give some more time to our rookies?!?

Want some cap space, Danny? GET RID OF LAFRENTZ!!!:upset:


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

Anyone else feel the average BBB poster is smarter than ainge?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Marcus13</b>!
> Anyone else feel the average BBB poster is smarter than ainge?


Gahahahahaha. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: 

"We need to be patient, if there's one thing we did terrible over the past 10 years is that we've been very impatient with players, especially with the young guys"

1 Year ago.....nice one Danny.

I, of course, oppose the trade. Danny has showed he can make a Championship team, so he wants to continue that and give the Lakers now room to grow...as if they weren't good enough already.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

So with this trade how much younger are we?

I like Gary Payton, I think he was a great player in his prime but I don't think he will be happy here.
This trade probably stinks in his opinion (regardless of what he might say)
He wants to go to a team with a chance of winning a title and now he is stuck in Boston?
I feel sorry for him. I don't see him being happy.

The funniest part of this is the Walker thread is longer and he isn't even on this team anymore.

Don't the "Celtics fans" have something to say about this trade? oh that is right. You can't bash Walker in this thread so I guess the 3 of them (yea right) just happened to have no opinion on this trade. sure

What happened to Chris Mihm being the second coming of the Chief?


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

WOW what are u guys talking about the lakers got the best of the deal they got 2 good gaurds and a tall guy they needed, the celts got a 76 year old PG and a guy who is goin to retire or should retire the only thing fox should be doin is acting. OO yeah the celts sure got the best of the deal (drinking motion)


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

I liked the idea of getting Payton, but not at the cost of Marcus Banks. Having GP in town to tutor Marcus Banks (same skill set, more athletic, just has to get his head in the game) would have payed huge dividends this year and even more in the future. Lets not kid ourselves, Payton is an upgrade over Atkins. Mihm wasn't going to be here next season so it was just a matter of where and whatfor with him. 

I just don't like dealing Banks so quickly. I see him and its not a matter of if, but when. Maybe it won't be in his rookie contract, but his skills and athleticism are waaaaaaay too good for him to not be an all-star top 3 PG in this league. One of these days, things are going to click for this guy and we'll have to move him up to the head of the list that Joe Johnson and Chauncey Billups are on.


----------



## bencollins (Sep 30, 2002)

I can say this honestly:
Those who think that the Celtics will regret trading Marcus Banks never saw any more than ten minutes of him actually playing basketball last year.

Simmons' notice of a Pack resemblance is astonishing. That's right on. Pack had some good years, but no great ones. I like this trade for both teams.


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

It's simple to me: Banks turns into a stud, then Ainge is a huge sucker. Banks becomes Robert Pack, then Ainge pulled off a steal.

I think Davis or Payton will be traded before next season's trade deadline which'll probably get the Celtics another draft pick which will be reminiscient of last year's draft where they had three in the 1st round.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

What's the point in havnig draft picks if Danny trades them away.

2003: 

Banks-gone
Perkins-almost left unprotected
Hunter-gone

2004:
Jefferson-same hype as Banks
West-new pg of the future
Allen-we'll see what happens to him
Reed-unsigned

2005:
1st rounder
1st rounder
2nd rounder

probably another 1st rounder
and then we'll let the 2004 guys go....


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

We had cap space this summer to sign someone and we got NO ONE so why is everyone so happy about having some more cap space for next year?


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> We had cap space this summer to sign someone and we got NO ONE so why is everyone so happy about having some more cap space for next year?


Well, we didn't use cap space to sign anyone this summer because we didn't have cap space to sign anyone this summer. We had the MLE and that was it. I didn't really see anyone worth throwing that at, did you? McDyess would have been nice, but we weren't going to get him here offering the same mone ythat Detroit offered. Did you want Ainge to throw the whole MLE at Brian Cardinal? Perhaps Adonal Foyle would have been more of interest to you?

If we get Rahim, like is being rumored, we'll have actual cap space.

Lets learn this now everyone. Cap space means you are under the cap more than the cost of the MLE. The only teams that had real cap space this summer were Atlanta, Utah, Phoenix, LA Clippers, and Charlotte. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Boston is none of those teams.


----------



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

Actually, Detroit had real cap space as well, they invested it in Rasheed and McDyess, though.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Antonio Mcdyss
Eric Williams
Rodney Rogers

Those are the 3 guys Danny wanted and none of them wanted to play here. Mcdyss took a year less on his deal to play for a winner.

Cap space, MLE It all means the same thing. Money to sign players. Too bad NOT ONE SINGLE PLAYER worth anything wanted to come here.

We could be 20 million under the cap (and just not to confuse you we could also have a MLE worth 20 million, (not possible but you get the gist) and we are not getting Tracy Mgrady, Shaq, Kobe etc... Heck we aren't even getting Mickey Mouse, the Tooth Fairy or Nomar to come play here.

Some of you need to grip reality.


> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, we didn't use cap space to sign anyone this summer because we didn't have cap space to sign anyone this summer. We had the MLE and that was it. I didn't really see anyone worth throwing that at, did you? McDyess would have been nice, but we weren't going to get him here offering the same mone ythat Detroit offered. Did you want Ainge to throw the whole MLE at Brian Cardinal? Perhaps Adonal Foyle would have been more of interest to you?
> ...


----------



## Stevie B (May 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bencollins</b>!
> I can say this honestly:
> Those who think that the Celtics will regret trading Marcus Banks never saw any more than ten minutes of him actually playing basketball last year.
> 
> Simmons' notice of a Pack resemblance is astonishing. That's right on. Pack had some good years, but no great ones. I like this trade for both teams.


He was a rookie who didn't get consistent playing time. I saw enough of him at UNLV and in Boston to know what he can and can't do. He's never going to be a great shooter but he doesnt have to be with his defensive skills and quickness. He will be very good.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I was going to say bad trade for the Celtics, however, I now believe they win the Atlantic with this deal. They may regret losing Banks, but next year is a very good year for PGs in the draft (which they have an extra 1st now) and I think this speaks volumes for Delonte West. Not a bad deal.

Payton will like the running attack of Doc Rivers, that's for sure. I will have more thoughts on the roster, when I come back from the wedding.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ehmunro</b>!
> Actually, Detroit had real cap space as well, they invested it in Rasheed and McDyess, though.


Technically not. For them to get space, they would have had to renounced the rights to Rasheed.



> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> Antonio Mcdyss
> Eric Williams
> Rodney Rogers
> ...


Cap space and the MLE don't mean the same thing. Speculating about an MLE worth 20 million makes me wonder if you're familiar with the concept of the MLE to begin with.

If we had 20 million in cap space, we could atleast get Boozer and Okur and that level of player in town. We probably would have had a shot at Kenyon Martin and Quentin Richardson as well.

Now the first person to respond negatively to this will say, "Atlanta has space and they haven't gotten anyone in town. The Clippers too." Well, if you pick the two losingest franchises in the NBA, and in the case of the Clippers, all of sport, you're not exactly picking comperable teams. K-Mart went to Denver over Atlanta because the Nuggets are a playoff team and their best days are ahead of them with Melo, Nene, and Skita if he gets around to it. Boozer and Okur went to Utah because they have been a playoff team consistently for years and have the best coach in the NBA, in addition to a young Kirilenko and their recent additions of Snyder and Humphries. The Celtics have the most history of any franchise in the NBA, a good coach, a playoff worthy roster, and a good future with Jefferson West, Allen, Perkins, Welsch, Davis, and a young (still) star in Pierce. If we had the money to match, I have no doubt we would be major players in free agency.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

So what happens if Payton retires or refuses to report? What happens then? Do they scramble to find another point guard, or do they use Jiri Welsch and Delonte West? And what happens if one of those guys is injured?

There was also the rumor that Boston was going to use the cash that LA included in the deal to sign Rebracca. Is that part of the deal still on?


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> So what happens if Payton retires or refuses to report? What happens then? Do they scramble to find another point guard, or do they use Jiri Welsch and Delonte West? And what happens if one of those guys is injured?
> 
> There was also the rumor that Boston was going to use the cash that LA included in the deal to sign Rebracca. Is that part of the deal still on?



I was waiting for your response Big John, you always have insightful comments, whatz your take on the trade? Thinking behind it? Anyone else? I'm in between, while I loved Marcus and his potential and can picture him hoisting that trophy for the lakers w/ Kobe down the road just as Chauncey did w/ RIP, i hope this helps us somehow, someway...///..


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

I think that Grousbeck didn't like paying the luxury tax this year and wanted to make damn sure there would be no exposure next year.

Basketball wise, even a Payton with diminished skills is a huge upgrade over Atkins-- but only if he is motivated. The question is whether or not he'll even report. Fox is going to retire. Even if he doesn't, he's just another Chris Mills.

Yes, Banks has potential, but he was clearly outplayed by Delonte West in the Summer league. I do not think Rivers wanted to invest in the development of two rookie pgs at the same time-- there just aren't enough minutes. So they chose West, making Banks expendable.

Lastly, this gives Boston 15Mil. in expiring contracts to bundle at the trading deadline to another team looking to dump salary, in return for a good player. Jason Kidd anyone?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> I think that Grousbeck didn't like paying the luxury tax this year and wanted to make damn sure there would be no exposure next year.
> 
> Basketball wise, even a Payton with diminished skills is a huge upgrade over Atkins-- but only if he is motivated. The question is whether or not he'll even report. Fox is going to retire. Even if he doesn't, he's just another Chris Mills.
> ...


Jason Kidd is too rich for my blood, and especially for Grousebeck's. Raef, Kidd, Pierce, and Baker would take up a huge amount of money.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Whoa, we are over 60 million in payroll already. Even with 15 million in expiring deals we still don't have cap space.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> Whoa, we are over 60 million in payroll already. Even with 15 million in expiring deals we still don't have cap space.


The idea is to avoid the luxury tax, not to get below the cap.

The 15 mil in expiring contracts can be traded for 15 mil of other salaries. It doesn't have to be Kidd. These expiring deals could be traded to any team that wants to unload players. That's exactly how Detroit got Rasheed Wallace.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Jason Kidd is not coming here. He will dictate where he wants to go just like Rasheed saying if he was sent to Boston he would make everyones lives miserable.
He already said he wants Dallas or San Antonio and he will get what he wants just like Tracy did.

You need to learn to read if you are going to try and insult me. Yes the MLE and cap space all intertwine because it is all about having the money to pay players and being under the cap to allow those players on the team.
The owners only care about saving money and not paying a luxery tax. period. They even talked on TV about how much more money using the MLE will cost them and that they aren't going to use it on a player that won't be a real help. Why do you think they didn't even attempt to really go after Williams or Rogers and use the MLE? because these aren't game changing players and they refused to spend the money on them.





> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> 
> 
> Technically not. For them to get space, they would have had to renounced the rights to Rasheed.
> ...


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> 
> 
> The idea is to avoid the luxury tax, not to get below the cap.
> ...


Actually we are taking on 2 more million this year then we would have had with Banks, Atkins, and Mihm. Not to mention that Mihm was a FA and the Celtics didn't have a gun held up to their heads to sign him.

But let's say we do get Kidd (trade 15 million for 15 million) will the owners accept paying the lux tax for the next 4 years?


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

Yes, Kidd would put them over the luxury tax threshhold until 2007. To acquire Kidd and avoid the tax, Pierce or LaFrentz would have to be included in the deal.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> I just don't like dealing Banks so quickly. I see him and its not a matter of if, but when. Maybe it won't be in his rookie contract, but his skills and athleticism are waaaaaaay too good for him to not be an all-star top 3 PG in this league.


The only top 3 PG list Banks is going to make is on the Lakers depth chart.


----------



## sologigolos (May 27, 2003)

it comes down to how good you think banks can be.
i for one, do not think he would be. and therefore i think this trade was even a steal for the celtics.

banks was 22 when he came into the league, had 4 years in college. and while not a TOP program, a major program too. one would expect he would AT LEAST be able to beat out the likes of Mike James for the job, no?
even after a year on the job, now at 23, he is still where he wass, and still not looking like he was getting any PT. and looking at him in the SL, it was clear that he was, what, 3rd option after atkins and west, and still wouldn't play unless it was garbage time.
sure, he's athletic and he's a good defender. but we've said the same things about kedrick brown.
above all, big men who are athletic are an asset. guards who are athletic are dime a dozen. and point guard is the one position where athleticism is not a factor. stockton and magic, anyone? they weren't tutrles on the floor, but never was touted for their athleticism
even since before the draft i didn't like him, so maybe i'm a little biased, but i am happy to see him go.

mihm, i am sad of losing, i think he *could* be a huge contributor. but he definitely didn't fit into the celtics plan, which is a shame. and he was an RFA anyways and we didn't have an interest in resigning him, so we didn't really love much.

and atkins, really a marginal figure in this trade. i'm sure none of you are crushed to see him go.



in return, we get GP, who, at worst, is an upgrade over atkins, and at best, a figure who can teach West to play pint, teach Allen to play D, and reinvigorate Paul Pierce (who has NEVER played with an NBA caliber point) while teaching the young bigs what it means to play with an NBA point guard. he may not be the same GP that led the sonics to the finals in the late 90s, but he is still one of the better point guards in the league, and has a ton of experience, ESPECIALLY playing with talented power forwards.

fox, marginal

and the first rounder. i am unhappy with the protection, but what can we do? we already have an extra 05 pick, so might as well this pick be 06 pick. lakers won't be a top 15 team anytime soon, so the pick wil end up being a mid-first rounder at worst, which is about the range we picked banks at. and seeing as we have already valued banks as "not worth keeping", it is, if anything, a bit of an upgrade, no?

so we basically traded 3 pieces that we had ABSOLUTELY NO USE for (if it wasn't for the CBA, we would have cut them, no?) for, at WORST, caproom and a first rounder (euqal value to banks).


and this is all subjective to what you think banks is gonna be.

if he is going to be a top 3 PG as agoos said, obviously, it's a retarded trade. but it's clear that Danny didn't share this view. and GIVEN that, if you can accept for a minute that banks is worthless, then this trade was a steal.




on giving up on banks too soon: (again, think from ainge's POV in thinking that banks = garbage)

why not? if you realize he's not your guy, what's the purpose of holding on to him? danny already had his PG in west. why waste roster space and $$$ on banks?

same with the walker trade. you gotta figure out what you want and what you don't want. with finite resources and time that is not kind (ballooning contract, declining potential), you move quick. like i pointed out, banks is 22-23, and ainge thought that was it. 

cut your losses short. that's what jerry west does.


so attack ainge, attack me, for the fact that we can't recognize a top 3 PG when we see one. but within the limitations of our misguided talent judgment, this is a damn good deal.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*Payton trade*

I like the Payton trade for the Celtics.

Payton is a legit second scoring option for the Celtics. Even last year in an offense that was not suited to his skills he averaged 15 points a game and 5.5 assists. His addition ends speculation on how good the Celtics will be at the point this year. With Gary we know what to expect. Word is out that GP has been very hungry in his off season to prove that last years playoff flop is not the real GP. 

Pierce has never played with a great point guard. Payton should take some of the leadership burden, and ball handling chores off Pierce.

Yes, I do worry that Banks will be another Billups. But in reality I have not seen that type of talent from Banks. This summer league said alot about Banks... he is still very prone to turnovers, he is still a below average shooter. He is fast, he is a good defender, he can get to the hole. But he is not a true point guard and did not dominate the light competition in the Summer the way a 23 year old one year vet should.

Atkins did not want to be in Boston. He was very upset when he was left unprotected. He was an overpaid back up point guard.

Mihm is not a huge loss. I like his rebounding and hustling but his departure opens up a roster spot for someone else and opens up playing time for Al Jefferson and Perkins.

With the loss of key players in NJ and the draft and moves the C's have made this off season I think they will win the Atlantic. Having Pierce and Payton come playoff time makes them contenders in the East. I put them in the 4 - 6 range in the East.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Payton trade*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> I like the Payton trade for the Celtics.
> 
> Payton is a legit second scoring option for the Celtics. Even last year in an offense that was not suited to his skills he averaged 15 points a game and 5.5 assists. His addition ends speculation on how good the Celtics will be at the point this year. With Gary we know what to expect. Word is out that GP has been very hungry in his off season to prove that last years playoff flop is not the real GP.
> ...


Here's to another year of a 2nd round playoff exit.:buddies:

1 Gary Payton or 10 Gary Paytons, we aren't contenders with him. We are better but we won't win a championship.

To Ainge:
No Championship=the same as finishing 2nd or 30th in the NBA.
To me:
No Championship=we could have had 2nd round playoff exits with Walker still here.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Good point, Aqua*

Of course, we wouldn't be developing the youngsters we have, ie. Welsch, West, Allen, and Jefferson (our draft pick would have been higher). 

Payton will be gone in a year; Fox is already gone.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Good point, Aqua*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> Of course, we wouldn't be developing the youngsters we have, ie. Welsch, West, Allen, and Jefferson (our draft pick would have been higher).
> 
> Payton will be gone in a year; Fox is already gone.


While we're at it, since we are calling "West our PG of the future" now, how will he play in 12 minutes per game? Payton is a competitor, just like Pierce, and I don't see those two playing under 36 minutes.

Getting playoff experiance to our youngsters is priceless, but if they will be sitting on the bench it's not really worth much.

Here's to the young guys playing next year. :buddies:


----------

