# Lakers and Celtics in Trade Talks?



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

I do not take this as an official rumor, as it is just message board jibber-jabber. Anyways, I don't see why he would make this up and there was talk of the Lakers being interested in Chris Mihm. Nonetheless, chances are that we never hear of this trade again.

The proposed deal would send

PG Marcus Banks
PG Chucky Atkins
C Chris Mihm
and 1 more player to be announced

FOR
PG Gary Payton
and 
SF Rick Fox 

LINK 

What would you think of it, though?


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

I would do this trade. 

Banks
Atkins
Mihm

For

GP
Fox


I'd do it why not. I'm not a big fan of GP with our current roster. Banks is wild and outta control at times but he can't be guarded 1on1 he's lightening quick. In our new system Kobe and odom will be setting the table so he wouldn't be need to run a pure point. Plus Banks is a good defender. 

Mihm gives us more depth downlow. I like him better than I do Slava. 

And Atkins is a vet who can shoot the 3. 

Fox is done and GP I think is gonna still have problems with Odom and Kobe handling the ball fulltime. GP likes to dominate the ball and its not gonna happen with our roster. 

I'd make this trade .


----------



## spiraling (Feb 16, 2003)

Its a great trade for the lakers. The lakers get another big man and a young talent pg. If we can get Banks I don't mind throwing in George.


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

I don't like it. I think we can get more out of Fox and Payton because of thier contracts. Mihm is very soft, Atkins is slow and aging, but he can shoot the 3. Banks has good upside, but is not ready.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

The Lakers can fill two holes glaring defensive holes at the 1 and 5 with this trade. Banks is absolute greased lightening and is a superb man-up defender. Fills a hole Lakers have had since 2000. Atkins is just average through and through, not bad and not good. Mihm is the real key here, as he can play 20-25 mpg at the 5 (either in front of or behind Vlade), where he can grab 6 boards and swat 1.0-1.5 shots a game as he has in the past. 

Payton can't stay in front of his man anymore, and the thought of Vlade trying to help Payton on pick and rolls is too terrifying to think about. With Mihm you get much better quickness than Vlade to cover the pick and roll and with Banks you get a guy who can stay in front of his man with no problem. The Lakers will be getting solid coverage on the P&R instead of giving up layup drills with a Payton-Vlade tandem. 

Bad part about this is that Payton is still easily good for 15-4-6, especially with a running offense. Banks and Atkins have no where near that ability. Plus, if Payton leaves, that may convince Malone to retire. Though, that's pretty difficult to predict at this point. 

In the end, however, Lakers get defense and youth on the cheap with the option of dealing them in 1-2 years if better prospects arise. I like it.


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

If this rumor has any legs I hope the Lakers go for it. I don't like Mihm at all but Banks can turn into a very good player. But as for Mihm, we're going to have to get another center somewhere and it's not like there's a whole lot of good ones running around anyway. Plus we'd be getting rid of Fox.

Atkins could be a decent insurance policy just in case Vujacic doesn't get it his first year.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

It probably doesn't have any legs to stand on but I'd do it in a heartbeat. Banks could shore up the PG position for a long time. Sasha looks to be a very good player but he just might be better as a 6th man coming off the bench. Banks is incredibly quick and strong and that is why he's one of the best defenders in the league. Offensively, he's wild and his shot is erratic but he is still developing his skills. He'll be better with time. Mihm is nothing more than a big body but that is what this team needs. Divac can't play 40 mins per game anymore and he'd be decent in a backup role. Atkins is nothing more than a filler. We don't really lose anything in GP and Fox so I'd do it. I don't know if Boston will, though.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

Guys Gary Payton isnt that bad, if u think about it payton will do better this year then last. He averaged 15 ppg last year and with no solid scoring beside kobe he will get more ppg and more apg IMO


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

The stupidity of this deal from the Celtics standpoint is absolutely unbelieveable.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

This is the most lopsided trade rumor I've seen on this site since Caron Butler for Ron Artest.

Can't say I'm surprised that both rumors came out of LA.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> This is the most lopsided trade rumor I've seen on this site since Caron Butler for Ron Artest.
> 
> Can't say I'm surprised that both rumors came out of LA.


I forgot Artest is a superstar.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> I forgot Artest is a superstar.


Well...he's the best defensive player in the league and he's better than Butler on offense.

I guess I forgot that the Artest for Butler idea made sense.


----------



## lempbizkit (Dec 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> The stupidity of this deal from the Celtics standpoint is absolutely unbelieveable.


I fail to see the problem w/ the trade here. Payton is better than Atkins, Fox won't be around long. Mihm sucks. And Banks is the only wild card, but did you see anything out of him last year that showed that we might miss him?


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> The stupidity of this deal from the Celtics standpoint is absolutely unbelieveable.


Yeah I was waiting for somebody to actually look at this from a Celtic POV. They're giving up their starting PG, their promising young PG, and a talented C for two expiring geriatrics? It makes no sense, and I can't believe there are any Laker fans that wouldn't do this.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lempbizkit</b>!
> 
> 
> I fail to see the problem w/ the trade here. Payton is better than Atkins, Fox won't be around long. Mihm sucks. And Banks is the only wild card, but did you see anything out of him last year that showed that we might miss him?


Exactly. It's perfectly fair. It's just that [some people] come into this board and act like every trade proposed in here is unfair because they have this idea in their head that all Lakers fans are insane. While there are some people who propose things like "George for Nene", many of the proposed trades and rumors are fair. Also, we Lakers fans don't go around making negative comments about a team every time we see their name just because we don't like them. I would argue that we are much more in touch with reality than MANY of the other fans on this board.

Celtics fans have no problem with it. Lakers fans have no problems with it. *edited*


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Captain Obvious</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah I was waiting for somebody to actually look at this from a Celtic POV. They're giving up their starting PG, their promising young PG, and a talented C for two expiring geriatrics? It makes no sense, and I can't believe there are any Laker fans that wouldn't do this.


1) Chucky Atkins is a BACKUP.
2) They have no need for Chris Mihm.
3) The Celtics are VERY unimpressed with Marcus Banks and are looking to deal him. They want Delonte West to be their future PG.

This trade puts the Celtics in the playoffs and gives Delonte West a great mentor to have while he's still growing, Gary Payton. Unlike bandwagoners who say stuff like "GP is washed up! ARGH!", NBA execs know that Gary is still a very good PG and can lead a team to the playoffs. Rick Fox relieves them of Chucky Atkins' long-term contract.

Any-hoo...the deal won't happen. I see the Lakers focusing on trying to get Jason Kidd, re-signing Karl Malone or just staying with what they already have.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> 1) Chucky Atkins is a BACKUP.
> ...


When have the Celtics been VERY unimpressed with Marcus Banks? As someone who lives in Boston and reads the Globe sports section daily, I'd like to think that I would have heard of that. Based on the fact that I haven't, I question your sources.

Also, that trade doesn't put the Celtics in the playoffs. It keeps us there. We were in the playoffs last year. And we will be again this year with or without this trade.

Additionally, what "long term contract" does Atkins have? It expires the year after next.

The only plus I can see in that deal for the Celtics is that we get ten mil in expiring contracts. But then, look at the Celtics cap situation, and even with ten mil, we still won't be able to go over the MLE.

Also, why bring Gary Payton in to tutor Delonte West when there's no way in hell that West will ever be remotely similar to Payton? Bringing in Payton to tutor Banks makes sense, as Banks has the speed and the astounding defensive skills that Payton had, but West? I don't see the similarities there to make it worth the effort and the loss of Marcus.


----------



## lempbizkit (Dec 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> 
> 
> When have the Celtics been VERY unimpressed with Marcus Banks? As someone who lives in Boston and reads the Globe sports section daily, I'd like to think that I would have heard of that. Based on the fact that I haven't, I question your sources.
> ...


I also haven't seen anything in the Globe, Herald or anywhere else where they publicly say that they are unimpressed w/ Banks. But I still fail to see what we are losing if Banks leaves. He is an erratic shooter, not a pass first PG, and he was OK on d, nothing special.

If they see anything in Banks as PG of the future then not only will he not be traded, then he should be the starter. But he won't be the starter, and I don't think we're gonna miss much if he is gone.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Taken from Sky @ LT:
http://lakerstalk.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=470006&highlight=#470006

Here's why Ainge could consider it. 

1. Overstocked roster, needs to send out more players and get less back. This essentially becomes a 4:1 deal in bodies since Fox would retire. 

2. Boston ownership is cheap, wants to avoid luxury taxes and cut costs. Celtics save 8M on next year's payroll through this deal. 

3. Celtics are a very young team, could use a vet head on the floor like Payton. 

4. Mihm is 3rd string behind Blount and Raef. He'd be an unrestricted FA next year that woudl be guaranteed to bolt since Blount and raef aren't going anywhere. They also need to make room for Jefferson and Perkins. At 1 they really like Delonte West, moving Atkins and Banks gives him minutes to develop. 

Boston has dealt with us before, Battie-TK420 deal. Sacrilege has struck before. 

As to why LA would do this. 

1. Young centers are very hard to come by, so is shotblocking and this team has neither. We don't add shotblocking and it's the In-N-Out drive thru lane all year. 

2. Get Mihm this way and they add a shotblocking center without giving up Butler. 

3. A doberman 1 in Banks. Cheap and locked in. Fill in a critically improant defensive skill set that has been ignored going on 6 years. if Vlade is the starting center, you better have a 1 that can man up. 

4. Add two 2005-06 last years that can become trade bait a year from now. Combine them with Devean and that's 10M in last years. Not bad.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> Taken from Sky @ LT:
> http://lakerstalk.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=470006&highlight=#470006
> 
> ...


Your Celtics reasons:

1. Can't deny that, but also remember that Mihm isn't officially on the roster, so its 3 for 1. 

2. Ownership is cheap, but they're under the luxury tax anyway, and the talk is that there won't be one next season anyway. 

3. Can't deny that either. But we've retained Blount, are adding Raef (as he only played 20 games last season), and will have Atkins, who established himself as the team leader, for the whole season, so we're not exactly aching for a vet presence.

4. We could sit the season with another seven footer on the roster and then try to sign and trade next season.

The Celtics and Lakers have dealt before, but that was under past ownership and a different front office. Though I don't doubt that Ainge would hesitate to make a move that benefited the Celtics as the Battie for Knight deal did again.

The Lakers reasons make me wonder if you've seen the timid player that Chris Mihm is.


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> 1) Chucky Atkins is a BACKUP.
> ...


Wrong, Chucky Atkins is a STARTER. Putting it in caps doesn't make you right. They don't have a need for Mihm, but he is valuable to several teams, like the Lakers, and he has trade value. The part about dealing Banks you just totally made up. Ask any Celts fans and they will tell you that West is not ready to run an NBA team. Banks is their future and he won't be thrown away for a one year rental of a quickly declining GP and some cap space.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Captain Obvious</b>!
> 
> 
> Wrong, Chucky Atkins is a STARTER. Putting it in caps doesn't make you right. They don't have a need for Mihm, but he is valuable to several teams, like the Lakers, and he has trade value. The part about dealing Banks you just totally made up. Ask any Celts fans and they will tell you that West is not ready to run an NBA team. Banks is their future and he won't be thrown away for a one year rental of a quickly declining GP and some cap space.


OMG, just because he starts for the Celtics, it doesn't mean he is deserving of an NBA starting job. Ask anyone, ANYONE if Chucky Atkins is really starter material and they will tell you "no". Yes, Marcus Banks did not do well in the summer league and their are rumors that they are looking to trade him and that Delonte West is their future PG. Don't ever tell me that I made something up when you can't be sure of it.

Captain Obvious? More like "Captain Underpants"! :kissmy:


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> OMG, just because he starts for the Celtics, it doesn't mean he is deserving of an NBA starting job. Ask anyone, ANYONE if Chucky Atkins is really starter material and they will tell you "no". Yes, Marcus Banks did not do well in the summer league and their are rumors that they are looking to trade him and that Delonte West is their future PG. Don't ever tell me that I made something up when you can't be sure of it.
> ...


Let's see, if that trade went down he would start for the Lakers, so what exactly are you talking about? I said in my original post that the Celts would be trading their starter, Atkins. Then you tell me no, Atkins is a BACKUP, when he's not. I know Banks didn't have a great summer league but there are no rumors of him being traded. You say there are but I haven't heard anything about it, and neither have actual Celtic fans, so I think it's logical to assume you fabricated that bit of information to support your argument. West isn't even a PG, he proved that in the summer league. The point is that the Celts wouldn't do this trade when after next season they'd be left with Delonte West at the point, when he isn't even a point guard. I also liked the line at the end, your maturity and wit are evident in all of your posts :| .


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> Ask anyone, ANYONE if Chucky Atkins is really starter material and they will tell you "no".


Teams Chucky could conceivably start for:

Atlanta
Boston
Charlotte
Golden State
Houston
LA Clippers
LA Lakers (after Laker fantasy trade)
Seattle
Toronto

He is a serviceable point guard, good for 12 ppg and 5 apg when he starts.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> OMG, just because he starts for the Celtics, it doesn't mean he is deserving of an NBA starting job. Ask anyone, ANYONE if Chucky Atkins is really starter material and they will tell you "no". Yes, Marcus Banks did not do well in the summer league and their are rumors that they are looking to trade him and that Delonte West is their future PG. Don't ever tell me that I made something up when you can't be sure of it.
> ...


If Atkins doesn't deserve a starting NBA job, then there has to be 30 point guards in the NBA that are better. Do you want to name those 30, or should I just continue to assume that you're wrong?

Also, where are these rumors? Do you have a source at all? I can say that the sky is green all I want, doesn't make it true. If you didn't make this up, where did you hear it? Did a bird fly up to your window and chirp at you? I'm a Celtics fan and I haven't heard this rumor. Where did it come from?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

People on this board are sleeping on Gary too much. Just looking at him as a expiring deal or something. He is better than Atkins or Banks would be next season.

Look at his season as a whole, not just the playoffs.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> People on this board are sleeping on Gary too much. Just looking at him as a expiring deal or something. He is better than Atkins or Banks would be next season.
> 
> Look at his season as a whole, not just the playoffs.


Alright, look at him from a Celtics perspective, which, understandably, people here aren't doing.

Does Payton make us a championship team right now or at any point in the future? Will Payton be around in three or four years when Al Jefferson, Kendrick Perkins, Jiri Welsch, Delonte West, and Tony Allen all hit their stride? 

I don't see any real benefit for the Celtics in this deal. If we start Payton at point, what does that do for us? We win a game, maybe two more than we would have with Atkins and Banks around. And then we get smacked in the first round again anyway. Why give up a young man with significant potential for a win or two this season?


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> I don't see any real benefit for the Celtics in this deal. If we start Payton at point, what does that do for us? We win a game, maybe two more than we would have with Atkins and Banks around.


That's what it comes down to. Payton is much better as a starting point guard than Atkins on Banks right now, but after this trade, the Celtics wouldn't have any backup point guard at all. I can't see this trade improving the Celtics by more than a couple of games this year, before Payton leaves as a free agent next summer.

And for that, they're supposed to throw away the promising Marcus Banks?

Damian, you started this thread trying to get Marcus Banks and now you're telling us he's not that good. Why don't you just let the Celtics keep him then?


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> 
> 
> That's what it comes down to. Payton is much better as a starting point guard than Atkins on Banks right now, but after this trade, the Celtics wouldn't have any backup point guard at all. I can't see this trade improving the Celtics by more than a couple of games this year, before Payton leaves as a free agent next summer.
> ...


I understand a Payton-Atkins/Mihm swap. I'd advocate that for the Celtics because Marcus Banks is supposed to be everything that Payton was. Who better than Gary Payton to help someone become Gary Payton? But bring in Payton to tutor Delonte West? What in the history of Delonte West would lead you to believe that he's ever going to be anything like Gary Payton was? I'm not just talking about being on an elite level, but even their games are astoundingly dissimmilar.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Ok, but I never said it was a good deal for the Celtics. Just pointing out that downgrading a starting position to get a backup pg (whoever would lose the Banks/Atkins battle) and a backup center isn't that great of a deal.



> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> 
> 
> Alright, look at him from a Celtics perspective, which, understandably, people here aren't doing.
> ...


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

Reading this thread is hilarious after seeing the trade actually go through, LOL. People just arguing saying "what a horrible trade", "extremely lop-sided", "will never happen". I've been gone for a week at the Basketball Hall of Fame, so I missed it.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> This is the most lopsided trade rumor I've seen on this site since Caron Butler for Ron Artest.
> 
> Can't say I'm surprised that both rumors came out of LA.


 HAHA! YES!


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> HAHA! YES!


I've eaten crow for dinner the past couple of days, and it tastes pretty awful. Can I go back to eating regular food again?


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> I've eaten crow for dinner the past couple of days, and it tastes pretty awful. Can I go back to eating regular food again?


Try it with some hot sauce. It tastes much better that way.  Oh and Be aware of the West Nile Virus!


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Do You Recommend It Like That????? Never Had Crow Personally


----------

