On first blush, seems like a decent deal to me. Telfair has shown promise, Ratliff has one year fewer on his deal than LaFrentz, and there are no sure things in this year's draft, particularly at #7. Plus, Danny has been able to pick up talent later in the draft, so assuming we also get their #1 this year, that could work to our benefit too. Of course, the question is why Portland wants to dump Telfair...
Some trade to this effect has been rumored for a while. Simmons mentions it in his piece today. He seems to indicate this would be an okay scenario, but it isn't his "recommended" course of aciton (see column for context).
Speaking of Simmons, he's nearly as high on Chicago as RM is. Of course, given what RM thinks of Simmons, I'm not sure how he'll react to this news.
What I like the most about this deal is that the Celtics traded Ratliff for LaFrentz. Ratliff's game has deteriorated a lot but LaFrentz isn't that great and Ratliff's deal is a year shorter.
But, as I understand it, the Ratliff-for-LaFrentz portion of this deal was a last-minute throw-in. The deal was driven by the Celtics' desire to get Telfair.
That part I don't understand. It is now clear that the Celtics could have had Roy, Foye, or Gay with that pick. I like all three more than Telfair.
I've heard it mentioned in one place that the Celtics made this trade because the Sixers want Telfair as part of a Iverson deal. If that's true, then this makes sense. Otherwise, I'm less enthusiastic about this.
One thing I keep hearing in coverage of the Celtics that should disturb all of you Celtics fans out there is that apparently Ainge realizes that Pierce will only perform at this level for 2-3 more years, thus making it urgent to "win now." Personally I don't think there's a shot in hell that the Celtics are going to win a championship in the next 2-3 years. If he trades away your youngsters for vets, I think the long-term picture for the Celtics looks bleak. So far, of course, he hasn't done that. But that's part of the problem as well--this team lacks direction.
As far as the Bulls go, I'm not nearly as high on our team as Simmons is. We're not "set to contend" with our current core. We have a very nice young group but we're going to need a superstar to get to the next level. Maybe that star will come from within--it's certainly possible--but that's far from guaranteed. I'm really hoping we get Garnett this summer.
A Voluntary Association Dedicated To Moderately Timely And Occasionally Incisive Commentary On Professional Sports, With Particular Emphasis On The Teams Of The Boston Area. Since 2006.
3 comments:
On first blush, seems like a decent deal to me. Telfair has shown promise, Ratliff has one year fewer on his deal than LaFrentz, and there are no sure things in this year's draft, particularly at #7. Plus, Danny has been able to pick up talent later in the draft, so assuming we also get their #1 this year, that could work to our benefit too. Of course, the question is why Portland wants to dump Telfair...
Some trade to this effect has been rumored for a while. Simmons mentions it in his piece today. He seems to indicate this would be an okay scenario, but it isn't his "recommended" course of aciton (see column for context).
Speaking of Simmons, he's nearly as high on Chicago as RM is. Of course, given what RM thinks of Simmons, I'm not sure how he'll react to this news.
Of course I meant Portland's second #1 at 30.
What I like the most about this deal is that the Celtics traded Ratliff for LaFrentz. Ratliff's game has deteriorated a lot but LaFrentz isn't that great and Ratliff's deal is a year shorter.
But, as I understand it, the Ratliff-for-LaFrentz portion of this deal was a last-minute throw-in. The deal was driven by the Celtics' desire to get Telfair.
That part I don't understand. It is now clear that the Celtics could have had Roy, Foye, or Gay with that pick. I like all three more than Telfair.
I've heard it mentioned in one place that the Celtics made this trade because the Sixers want Telfair as part of a Iverson deal. If that's true, then this makes sense. Otherwise, I'm less enthusiastic about this.
One thing I keep hearing in coverage of the Celtics that should disturb all of you Celtics fans out there is that apparently Ainge realizes that Pierce will only perform at this level for 2-3 more years, thus making it urgent to "win now." Personally I don't think there's a shot in hell that the Celtics are going to win a championship in the next 2-3 years. If he trades away your youngsters for vets, I think the long-term picture for the Celtics looks bleak. So far, of course, he hasn't done that. But that's part of the problem as well--this team lacks direction.
As far as the Bulls go, I'm not nearly as high on our team as Simmons is. We're not "set to contend" with our current core. We have a very nice young group but we're going to need a superstar to get to the next level. Maybe that star will come from within--it's certainly possible--but that's far from guaranteed. I'm really hoping we get Garnett this summer.
Post a Comment