Maxwell: Doc, Garnett, Pierce won't be back!

  1. This post has been removed.

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Maxwell: Doc, Garnett, Pierce won't be back!

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    "Saves the owners money though.  I could care less how much money they save."

    That's the problem, you want the owners to pay KG and Pierce one more year and you don't care about the owners. So why would the owners care about you?

    The repeater tax is not something to be taken lightly. Paying KG 12.4m and Pierce 15.3m next season puts the Celts in repeater tax territory. Before it was just 1 dollar per dollar over the cap. The repeater tax can cost 2.50 per dollar over the cap. 

    Again I could care less about how much money they make.  I don't want to be lottery bound again for the next ten years hoping to get that stud that comes along every 5-10 years.  We have been down that road,  how did that work out.

    I am not any of the the problem with the Celtics.  If you think the owners care about you or me then I have a bridge to sell you.  I didn't' tell the owners to pay those guys that money, they did it all on their own.  If they want to get rid of them then they will, and guess what,  it doesn't matter one bit what I want.

    Again teams are built thru trades and that is what PP and KG can bring.  Just getting rid of them doesn't do a lot for our team other than make us a 20-30 win team.


    From Forsberg:

    Below are longer explanations for our decisions (sometimes five words just isn't enough to elaborate in the main piece). For the purpose of this year's exercise, we ran with the idea that the Celtics would bring back veterans Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett. While many have expressed a desire for Celtics president of basketball operations Danny Ainge to dismantle this roster, we subscribe to the notion that the shred-the-team path won't be particularly easy to do. That's not to say that Boston won't explore trade avenues before -- and during -- the 2013-14 season, it just seems that one of the clearer paths to roster turnover, while still remaining competitive, actually involves keeping the veteran core intact for season seven of a three-year plan.

    By bringing back Garnett and Pierce, and making some tweaks, Boston can stay in the mix, while still maintaining long-term flexibility. And both Garnett and Pierce might have even more value when the trade deadline rolls around as contenders might be willing to pay a steeper price than what Ainge will find this summer. 

    Sure, you can go the nuclear route, but does it make sense to eat $5 million on Pierce, when it will offer little in terms of cap relief? Ultimately, Ainge might elect to go this route because you can't guarantee health with this core and a first-round exit hammers home the flaws of this team. But a roster with Pierce and Garnett as its third and fourth options -- as opposed to carrying the Celtics on a night-to-night basis -- has potential to be a contender.

    With that in mind, read on for our detailed Take 'Em or Leave 'Em explanations: 

    Nathaniel S. Butler/NBAE/Getty ImagesDo you want to see Kevin Garnett back? We play a game of Take 'em or Leave 'em.

    Garnett -- Take 'em -- At age 37, he can't give you much more than 30 minutes per night in the regular season and you worry about injuries (like the ankle inflammation that hindered him at the finish line of the 2012-13 campaign). But Garnett's defense (and the rebounding he showcased in the postseason) is so vital to this team's success. Plus, he's the conscience of the entire Boston organization. At a reasonable price tag ($12.4 million), Garnett is simply too valuable to give up just to get younger. 

    Pierce -- Take 'em -- This has nothing to do with sentimentality. Unless Pierce is retiring at age 36 -- or taking a hefty paycut on his next deal -- he's probably finishing his career in another uniform. The Celtics will cringe at the idea of paying him $15.3 million, but you know what's worse? Paying $5 million to not have your best all-around player. If the Celtics elect to move on, they either need to find a worthwhile trade or go the amnesty route (they'll have to likely pay more than the $5 million buyout would cost, but would get some relief when he signs elsewhere). Remember that Pierce was still the regular-season MVP of this team. 


    Exactly what I have been saying for a few days now.

  3. This post has been removed.

  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BCSP. Show BCSP's posts

    Re: Maxwell: Doc, Garnett, Pierce won't be back!

    Yahoo Sports:

    Ainge may wish to deal his fading stars' $28 million of combined salaries and 29 years of combined NBA service. But he won't net a 25-year-old powerhouse like Griffin and a 23-year-old athletic guard like Bledsoe.

    Smith remains as ridiculous as Jay Pharoah's impressions. However, the concept of Pierce, Garnett and Rivers departing Boston should still be regarded as a distinct possibility.

    Ainge will likely buy Pierce out for $5 million, saving the organization $10 million of the $15.33 million he would have earned in green next year. Garnett would then probably pack his bags and hit the old dusty trail known as retirement, or approve a trade in disgust.

    Then there's Rivers, who the Brooklyn Nets have reportedly sought for their open head coaching position. When asked about his future after the Game 6 loss to the New York Knicks, the nine-year Celtic said he's given a return to Boston "zero thought." Cedric Maxwell, the team's color analyst,seems to think he'll be gone -- and not just until November.

    Get your popcorn ready, folks. It could be a wild summer. Hopefully, you like actions better than classics, because the KG era seems just about over.