# Randolph To Boston?



## LUMPI-44 (Jan 23, 2004)

I read some posts on Portland board&around the league and one interesting trade acured to me:

Trade Idea!

BOSTON trades: 
SG Paul Pierce 
PF Vin Baker 

for PORTLANDs: 
PF Zach Randolph
C Dale Davis 
PG Damon Stoudamire 

It works:Trade ID number 1488323

WHY IT IS A SMART MOVE:

BOSTON:
1)Bakers 2 year contract is gone
2)You get allstar potecial PF Randolph in return 
(Becouse it is Pierce Portland would do that trade)
3)You get 2 contract which expire next year both worth combine
24.000.000$ and you have two options:
-let both go and clear enormous amount of salary cap for posible big free agent signing or
-make a trade with a team which want salary cap and you can get great players back (just look what Portland did with Rasheds contract)

PORTLAND:
1)Know when getting SAR and Ratliff, also having Miles..maybe there is no need to stick with Randolph as franchise player..and trade him for SG Pierce looks tentative enough to do it.
2)You get back Baker and have two options:
-get him on the right track
-pay him out (better option as paying both stoudamire and Davis contracts the whole next season)

So the teams would look like this:

BOS:
STOUDAMIRE
WELSCH
DAVIS
RANDOLPH/LAFRENTZ
MIHM/DAVIS

04/05
?
WELSCH
DAVIS
RANDOLPH
MIHM/LAFRENTZ
+ posibility to make a big trade with Davis and Staudamire contracts OR let them go and sign allstar free agent!!

POR:
ANDERSON
PIERCE
MILES
ABDUL RAHIM/BAKER
RATLIFF

WHAT DO YOU THINK!!!

-------------
Personally I would rather include Lafrentz instead of Baker...becouse in two years Baker contract will be useful(trade or for salary cap) and in that scenario with Randolph and Mihm we dont need Lafrentz...but I didnt do it because Ainge would not!

But trading Pierce, I thing Ainge has the guts to do it !!!


----------



## TyGuy (Apr 19, 2003)

I think that is a great trade actually. You arent exactly getting stiffed for Pierce getting a guy like randolph in return. Also with Reef on the blazers its kind of hard to have room for both randolph and reef, being very similar players and all. Although im not sure Portland can afford to give up a point guard when they just traded one away.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Interesting.....especially the Raef/Pierce one.

Listen to this:
1) We get Randolph who can score and REBOUND=RUN. But plays almost no defense.

1B) We got a guy that will help us run for a guy that won't run, and a guy who's injured.

2) Get Dale Davis' 9 million expiring contract for next season...add that to Mills' it ='s 15 million.

3) We get Stoudemire's 15 million contract that expirs after next season, followed by Vin Bakers.

4) If Perkins becomes somewhat special soon...holy ****. Another thing to think about is that Raef can be replacable if Perkins emerges and Mihm stays to play for us.

5) They just got Dan Dickau (lol), and I would be MORE then happy to include Mike James' minimum deal.


Banks...Stoudemire
Jiri...John Salmons (from Philly with the deal we talked about)
Davis...Jones (Davis can almost replace Pierce's numbers, has the unselfishness, and comits less turnovers)
Randolph....Perkins
Samuel Dalembert...Mihm (from Philly with the deal we talked about...maybe add a 1st round...and 2nd....but I don't think OB will like rookies)

I can dream can't I?


----------



## SKiP (Jan 28, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>LUMPI-44</b>!
> I read some posts on Portland board&around the league and one interesting trade acured to me:
> 
> Trade Idea!
> ...


This is a very good trade for both teams.

PORTLAND
PG-Derek Anderson
SG-Pierce
SF-Miles
PF-Abdur Rahim
C-Theo Ratliff

BOSTON
PG-Stoudemire
SG-Jiri Welsch
SF-Ricky Davis
PF-Randolph
C-Davis

I actually think Portland gets the better end of the deal. SAR and Randolph are both low post scoreres so I don't see them coexisting in Portland. With Pierce they would be one of the best teams in the West and they also have a good bench with Woods, Patterson, Baker and Dickau.

This would also give the East a good big man and Randolph could become one of the best Forwards. Paul Pierce and Ricky Davis both need a lot of shots so they shouldn't be on the same team. This is a perfect deal but I don't know if Ricky Davis can play Small Forward because he's kind of weak. But you put him at SG with Welsch at PG for the future so it all looks good.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> Banks...Stoudemire
> Jiri...John Salmons (from Philly with the deal we talked about)
> ...


That's your dream? Uh... ok. I just don't see that team competing with the elite. Randolph may be having a great season, but the Blazers are under .500, and even he had Sheed on his team. It's a decent roster, but I wouldn't call it a dream.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> 
> That's your dream? Uh... ok. I just don't see that team competing with the elite. Randolph may be having a great season, but the Blazers are under .500, and even he had Sheed on his team. It's a decent roster, but I wouldn't call it a dream.


Lots of potential, and young guys. Of course my ultimate dream is having Duncan.


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>LUMPI-44</b>!
> I read some posts on Portland board&around the league and one interesting trade acured to me:
> 
> Trade Idea!
> ...



I wouldn't do this trade if you put a gun to my head.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

wow seriously guys. i don't want to blast you guys too much but have any of you been following the blazers? z bo is their future man and they're not trading him away.


----------



## walkon4 (Mar 28, 2003)

Give me a f*&(&* break.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FanOfAll8472</b>!
> wow seriously guys. i don't want to blast you guys too much but have any of you been following the blazers? z bo is their future man and they're not trading him away.


Read their forum, was suggested by a mod of theirs first.

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LUMPI-44</b>!
> I read some posts on Portland board&around the league and one interesting trade acured to me:
> 
> Trade Idea!
> ...


Why not try to unload Raef instead of Baker? There is a chance Baker loses his contract even before Damon's is up next season.

-Petey


----------



## bballin (Jun 3, 2003)

not a bad idea really, in that its a trade for Pierce(nad for the blazer fans Randolph) that isn't met with an immediate NO!

I think if we were to trade PP, it would have to be for a developing big. PP is one of the best wings in the game, but no one would trade the big ticket or tim b dunkin for him. Randolph is still developing, and a PP/Abdul Rahim/Ratliff team would be a force inside and out.

Randolph would monster the eastern conference, including our good friend K-Mart.

Definately not the worst trade idea i've heard in quite a while


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>bballin</b>!
> Randolph would monster the eastern conference, including our good friend K-Mart.


How are your friends with KMart?

-Petey


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> 
> 
> How are your friends with KMart?
> ...


We don't like him, lets put it that way. :upset: :grinning:


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> Read their forum, was suggested by a mod of theirs first.
> 
> -Petey


i read their forum a lot and i guess i missed it. but seriously, it's a ridiculous idea. fun to think about it, but to actually get excited about it...:uhoh:


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

Well its a star for a potential star. I think if it were on the table they would do it. Getting Pierce now means they resign Shareef. Would that duo be so poor?

Futhermore Shareef could slide to his natural position.

-Petey


----------



## BostonCeltics_33 (Jun 1, 2003)

*Not bad*

From Bostons point of view we are a little swingman heavy, and while Pierce is certainly one of the better talents at that position, that is the easiest position in basketball to fill.

However, I was told long ago that you don't trade young for old, and you don't trade big for small, (see Wallace, Rasheed for Strickland, Rod and Webber for Richmond) and in while there are exceptions these two rules serve you pretty well, making Portland pretty unlikely to do this deal.


----------



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

Yes i think that if paul is traded, this is the type of deal.. However we have to find some leadership somewhere to fill pps void.. this trade would be easier if we still had ewill..


----------



## solo (Nov 29, 2002)

> Yes i think that if paul is traded, this is the type of deal.. However we have to find some leadership somewhere to fill pps void.. this trade would be easier if we still had ewill..


Before the season started the Blazers management talked to Zach about stepping up and becoming a leader and maybe he's taken this step and will be able to fill in the leadership.

IMO Walker was the real leader of the team.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

I just don't like the idea of trading a star for a potential star. I know it's done all the time, but I still think it takes at least two stars on a team to go anywhere. I think the best situation would be to somehow have Pierce plus a developing big man and build around that. Of course, that's easier said than done, but I think that should be the main goal.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> I just don't like the idea of trading a star for a potential star. I know it's done all the time, but I still think it takes at least two stars on a team to go anywhere. I think the best situation would be to somehow have Pierce plus a developing big man and build around that. Of course, that's easier said than done, but I think that should be the main goal.








Yea, we have to keep Pierce and find someone to put next to him (sigh Walker)


----------



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

No sighs here...


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> I just don't like the idea of trading a star for a potential star. I know it's done all the time, but I still think it takes at least two stars on a team to go anywhere. I think the best situation would be to somehow have Pierce plus a developing big man and build around that. Of course, that's easier said than done, but I think that should be the main goal.


Big man are VERY hard to find, especially really good ones....with Zach we get a big man and we can easily fullfil SG/SF...in fact we have a very talented SG/SF on our bench.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> Big man are VERY hard to find, especially really good ones....with Zach we get a big man and we can easily fullfil SG/SF...in fact we have a very talented SG/SF on our bench.


True, but Randolph is still only 6'9". Plays well for his size but's not a monster. Who's to say Hunter or Perkins couldn't become what Randolph is? This is Randolph's third year. I say let the rookies prove what they can or can't do. I just don't think Randolph puts us over the top if we give up Pierce. It's easy to find good SG/SF, but not ones that average over 20, 5, and 5. I'm all for Pierce plus Randolph but not Pierce for Randolph.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> 
> True, but Randolph is still only 6'9". Plays well for his size but's not a monster. Who's to say Hunter or Perkins couldn't become what Randolph is? This is Randolph's third year. I say let the rookies prove what they can or can't do. I just don't think Randolph puts us over the top if we give up Pierce. It's easy to find good SG/SF, but not ones that average over 20, 5, and 5. I'm all for Pierce plus Randolph but not Pierce for Randolph.


Look at Elton Brand. He's not more than 6-10. Randolph puts up 20/10. Look at the Contract Space we'll have. Over 25 MILLION. Plus we could sway Obie for the Walter deal and get Younger Talents. Ricky Davis would step up in Scoring. Maybe 18/5/3. Welsch would step up. 14/6/4. Banks would get to control the ball. We Would REBOUND. If Raef was traded instead of Baker, Hunter and Perkins would get more P/T.

We would have in 2004-2005

C: Dalembert/Perkins
PF: Randolph/Hunter
SF: Davis/Hunter/Jones
SG: Welsch/Salmons
PG: Banks/James

THATS REBUILDING..


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Celts11</b>!
> 
> 
> Look at Elton Brand. He's not more than 6-10. Randolph puts up 20/10.


Neither Brand's nor Randolph's teams are faring well in the West. When you're competing with Shaq, Duncan, Yao, and Garnett, you need more than just decent big men. You need at least a second star if not more. The Kings and Mavs compete because they're stocked with talent better than what's on that roster you listed. You can argue in the East they would dominate, but if a championship is on people's minds, you still have to win a seven game series against best of the West, so it doesn't matter if you're the king of the East. Plus, even in the East, you still have to contend with Ben Wallace and Jermaine O'Neal. I'm not sure Randolph is better. You could argue that the Celtics could land another star with the money they save, but I don't think Boston will be that attractive to big name players. 

I would hold out to see what we can get in addition to Pierce. Apparently, we may have been close to getting Reef for almost nothing, so it's not out of the question. Plus, Ainge seems to be getting people Pierce is familiar with (LaFrentz and Davis), so it doesn't look like he wants to move Pierce.


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




yes, exactly right. PP should be here to stay, if they trade him I will not watch another C's game as long as Ainge is GM!


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Even if no one wants to come here...we could always trade Stoudemire in the last year of his contract for a maximum guy with 3/4 years left who's really good. A 15 million expiring contract...weeee, followed by another 15 million expiring contract...weeeeeeee.

Raef and Paul have HUGE 5 year contracts remaining (even if Paul is worth it).


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>voice of reality</b>!
> No sighs here...


Your happy with the way this team is going?

How many Celtics games have you watched this year.

Pierce fans don't care about how the team does. As long as he gets his points your fine.
Disgusting but not un-expected.


----------



## bballin (Jun 3, 2003)

This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]


----------



## voice of reality (Sep 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> 
> 
> Your happy with the way this team is going?
> ...


Ignore goes on...


----------



## 24-7 (Feb 4, 2004)

[strike]I wish there was a way we could put you on permanent ignore.
You have posted some of the dumbest, most clueless comments in the history of the Internet.
You should change you name to voice of stupidity.[/strike]




> Originally posted by <b>voice of reality</b>!
> 
> 
> Ignore goes on...


This is completely unacceptable. DO NOT attack posters on this board. ---agoo


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

LMAO Well said 24-7. The truth hurts and you said the truth.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Pierce and Mills for Randolph, Stoudamire?

That work?


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PatBateman</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...








Bravo. Couldnt agree more.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>voice of reality</b>!
> 
> 
> Ignore goes on...








:yes: :yes:


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> LMAO Well said 24-7. The truth hurts and you said the truth.








Thank you almighty posting savior. Let us all bow down to you, everything you post makes sense and is always right, let us follow in your footsteps. :no:


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

The guy we should be looking to unload is Ricky Davis NOT Paul Pierce. Ricky has been a very good team player while he's been in Boston but it's not his game and he needs to go somewhere he can be highlighted. Him and Paul and Jiri can not all continue to play on the same team, it is a waste. You do not get rid of Pierce, this was a team that had 2 all-stars when camp began do you really want them to have 0 when camp begins next year. With a package of Ricky, Blount, McCarty, and Mills we should be able to get a very good big guy, of course I think we have 2 very good big guys sitting on our bench in Perkins and Hunter.:sigh:


----------



## bballin (Jun 3, 2003)

true, i'd prefer to hold on to PP, but at least this trade made some sense. If we can get a top 25% big man without losing PP, then we have to keep him. Lets hope Perkins, Hunter, Mihm and even Blount continue to develope. Even 3 out of that 4 becoming decent NBA frontliners will make us a top team in the east.


----------



## 24-7 (Feb 4, 2004)

That doesn't sound much like the Celtics fan you proclaim yourself to be. It sounds more like the Paul Pierce fan I pegged you for long, long ago. Now deny it. If you were a real Celtics fan you would root for them no matter what.

You've been cold busted.

By the way, Why are you agreeing with yourself? Just how many names do you use?
 :laugh: :grinning: :yes: 







> Originally posted by <b>Richie Rich</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 :laugh: :grinning: :yes:


----------

