Great Oden's raven!

It's Super Bowl Sunday and the Knicks are tied for 1st place and still the jokes persist. While I don't presently consider myself a Knicks fan, I think there's something funny about that.

@SeanDeveney

Sources tell Sporting News that the #Clippers have contacted the #Celtics about Kevin Garnett. Offer would include Caron Butler and Beldsoe.

Answer would presumably be "Yes, please."

I like the idea for the Clippers. The championship is within reach and Garnett is still elite. You have to go for it now because how long do you have Paul?

To everyone who laughed at me when I said 3-4-5-6 in the West is all in play...after the LAC loss today becomes official their lead on in the loss column on MEM, GS, and DEN will now be 1, 2, and 3, respectively.

It's easy to see why Boston would do this, but it's a terrible trade for the Clippers. The Clips are already strong at KG's position with Griffin and Jordan (not to mention Odom off the bench) and weak at PG now with Paul out. Bledsoe's hugely important right now for this group, especially defensively where he's the only guy who can keep up with other teams' waterbug point guards. The Clips were killing teams when they were healthy, they shouldn't panic now just because they're banged up. They pull this deal, and not only will it weaken them while CP3 is out, but they saddle themselves with KG's $12 million/per for two more seasons after this, making it harder to give Paul the max contract they need to offer to keep him.

[6] Can't you go over the cap to extend your own guy? Also, if Paul is healthy, Bledsoe isn't as important and if Paul isn't healthy, then you're not winning anything anyway. I think the gambit here would be that Paul is going to be back and healthy and if they add KG who, old as he is, is a much better defensive player than Jordan and not to mention a worlds better offensive option given the LAC big man FT issue. It's a risky move for LAC basically putting all your chips on '13 but I can kind of see it.

EDIT: I actually have more questions about the BOS angle. What do you do with a Rondo, Bledsoe, Bradley G rotation?

[6] Can't you go over the cap to extend your own guy?

You can, but this is Donald Sterling we're talking about. Griffin's already getting the max extension ($95 million over five years) starting next season and Jordan's getting $11M+ until 2015. Throw in KG's $12M, and that's $42 million before you even consider the $21 million+ Paul will command.

Also, if Paul is healthy, Bledsoe isn't as important and if Paul isn't healthy, then you're not winning anything anyway.

That's right, but if Paul's not healthy, then they're not winning with either KG or Bledsoe. The Clips need help at the guard spot, and trading Bledsoe doesn't.

That's right, but if Paul's not healthy, then they're not winning with either KG or Bledsoe. The Clips need help at the guard spot, and trading Bledsoe doesn't.

They only need help at G because Paul isn't healthy though, right?

KG at 12 mil per season is an absolute steal of a contract. and if the goal is to win a championship, you are not winning one without Chris Paul anyway so what makes them a better team with Chris Paul out is not really important.

I don't see KG accepting a move to LAC anyway.

The other argument for dealing Bledsoe for Garnett is that LAC may not be able to keep Bledsoe long-term anyway, assuming they re-sign Paul to go along with Griffin and Jordan (much the way OKC couldn't quite keep Harden after renewing Durant, Westbrook, and Ibaka).

Of course, Paul isn't re-signed yet, and his long-term health is in question, which are probably the top two reasons you don't make the trade.

The real gung ho move would be to somehow get both Pierce and Garnett (which would also make the trade more amenable to KG, probably). But I'm not sure how the Clippers manage to make that happen. You could get the salaries to work by including a team with cap room (Houston, e.g.), and sending a draft pick their way. But is Bledsoe alone worth both Pierce and Garnett to Boston?* Possibly not. So then Ainge would demand another pick and/or player, and it would all get very complicated.

I do think Garnett has major Rasheed-to-Detroit potential. He could put some team out west over the top.

* As for what Boston does with Bradley, Bledsoe, and Rondo: trades one of them, probably, though there wouldn't be any hurry, considering how long Rondo's out.

I do think Garnett has major Rasheed-to-Detroit potential. He could put some team out west over the top.

Houston. The Rocks have Harden and Lin and a legion of young swingmen that can shoot and run, but they don't have size. Boston could use an infusion of athleticism and youth, and KG would make Houston real contenders.

That is a horrible trade from the Celtics' perspective. It's not "Jason Terry for DeMarcus Cousins" dumb, but it's a lot closer to that than to viable. Unless they're gauging interest in those guys for a potential Pierce trade, that leak just seems like trolling. Who starts at center in this scenario? Jason Collins?

[Edited for J-Teeth]

#13: Except that Houston's best player is 23 and their second-best player is 26. And they're just barely over .500. Why go for broke now? Seems to make more sense for a team (like SAS or LAC) that is closer to the top of the heap and whose best player is not so young.

Also not sure Houston has a player who makes it worthwhile from Boston's perspective.

Also not sure Houston has a player who makes it worthwhile from Boston's perspective.

Probably not, but that's the dilemma of trading KG. At his price, you're just not going to get equal value for this season. For Houston, adding KG would only strengthen their weaknesses and not take away from any of their strengths, whereas the Clippers would take a hard hit to their PG and bench strength if Bledsoe were traded. (And Bledsoe showed off his goods in today's game 17, 5, and 4 in the 2nd half.)

Pierce + Garnet would be $29 million (prorated) this season and $27 million next year. That's a lot of cash for teams to have to match to pull off a trade.

Who starts at center in this scenario? Jason Collins?

Probably Wilcox. Or they get LAC to throw in Turiaf or something. Either way, when Ainge is considering KG deals, "Who is my starting center from now until we probably miss the playoffs?" is hardly the most pressing question.

To everyone who laughed at me when I said 3-4-5-6 in the West is all in play...after the LAC loss today becomes official their lead on in the loss column on MEM, GS, and DEN will now be 1, 2, and 3, respectively.

The Clippers have a really tough February, especially if Paul isn't healthy. Monday @ Washington is their 1st of 3 B-2-Bs. Also @NY/@PHil, and Houston/@LAL. Home games include Utah and San Antonio, also play @ Miami and @ Indiana. Could wind up going 6-7 or 5-8.
Golden State's schedule is also on the rough side. At Houston/OKC (B-2-B), at Memphis/Dallas (B-2-B), home games with Houston, San Antonio, @ Utah, @ Minnesota, @ Indiana/NY (B-2-B). Could go 5-7.
Denver has 4 home games, none easy but all winnable - Milwaukee, Chicago, Boston, LAL. Especially for a team that is pretty healthy and starting to learn to play very aggressive at home. Only 2 B-2-Bs, Toronto/Brooklyn and Washington/Charlotte. Also at Cleveland, Boston, Portland. Could easily go 8-4 or 9-3.
Memphis has the easiest schedule, B-2-Bs are Phoenix/@ Atlanta, and @Detroit/@Toronto. Lots of winnable home games (Orlando, Dallas, Sacramento, Phoenix). Even with the roster changes, should go 8-3 or 7-4.

Seeing the bulls as a winnable game bugged me a lot at first, but thinking for more than a second I realize it's true. Until Rose is back and playing 30+ min any game is a chance to beat the bulls. There are too many times where they just play terrible. I know it's not the norm but it can happen anytime at random. And well they have yet to win 4 in a row so it's not like they have been close to unstoppable

Seeing the bulls as a winnable game bugged me a lot at first

Also, Denver is good enough to beat anybody in the NBA if they are having a good night.

Also, Denver is good enough to beat anybody in the NBA if they are having a good night.

Especially on their turf. Every home game is a winnable game for the Nuggs right now.

As others said, Houston's not really one trade away from a championship anyway. there non PF position are still all showing different degree on inconsistency as is their bench.

meanwhile, they actually have an interesting cast of guys at PF, non has panned into a reliable option yet, but most show enough that you want to at least give it this season or the next to figure out. Patterson has largely followed the team's trend of having some great games with a lot of meh to bad once in between. though his inability to grab rebounds even when he's going well is annoying. (fun fact, per game base Patterson grab about as much rebound as Parson and Harden, though per 36 he is slightly better but not by much.). last game was his on game again when he scored 12 strait in the 4th to help Houston avoid the embarrassment of losing to the Bobcats at home. part of that is the Bobcats having no one who can match his size... and them being the Bobcats.

I'd think aside from figuring out PF, they really need to figure out a better consistent working relationship between Lin and Harden, they probably should try to split the two's time more. they already is trying that, but that usually end up just being Harden being ran into the ground while Lin ending up with the 3rd team. there has to be a more optimal configuration then that.

still this team is fun to watch most of the time, that loss to the Nuggets was the typically hilarious both team with no defense and just try to beat each other's brain in type of game .

[17] I forgot Wilcox was back. But I still don't see Bledsoe as a piece that can swing a championship, and I doubt the Celtics would be willing to trade Garnett for anything less, especially without any picks. Nor would San Antonio for Duncan or Dallas for Dirk. I guess my conclusion here is that "an internet trade rumor will never happen", which is not exactly earthshattering.

To pick up a thread from last month's thread, a JaVale for Josh Smith trade is interesting because it gives Atlanta one of the highest-upside players in the league who is actually movable and allows them to move Horford down to the 4; Denver also has a surplus of solid wings with midlevel-level contracts, and Atlanta could use one or two more (JaVale and Wilson Chandler together are also a viable salary match for trading purposes, for starters). Denver's rationale would be a bit more obvious: adding a passer, finisher (Andre Miller throwing lobs to J-Smoove? Yes, please.) and defender of that quality would make them a fascinating, dangerous team.

Well, you gotta trade Garnett to a contender. And a contender isn't looking to create a new hole on their roster. They're not going to trade anyone unless the player's position is well-filled even without him. Given all that, Bledsoe -- a starter-quality player who is currently backing up a superstar -- might literally be the best player they could ever hope to get. The Celts would be fools to turn it down IMO. They can figure out who to play where later.

Denver's rationale would be a bit more obvious: adding a passer, finisher (Andre Miller throwing lobs to J-Smoove? Yes, please.) and defender of that quality would make them a fascinating, dangerous team.

While Denver definitely wins this trade on talent, this presents lineup problems for Denver. They're already weak at the 5 and this would leave them with only Koufos and Mozgov as their centers. Faried can fill in in a pinch - his PER is the same at the 4 or the 5, but he doesn't have the size to guard 5's.

Well, you gotta trade Garnett to a contender.

No trade clause (one of four(?) in the league). So, they can consider it, float the idea to KG, but it may not happen.

While Denver definitely wins this trade on talent, this presents lineup problems for Denver. They're already weak at the 5 and this would leave them with only Koufos and Mozgov as their centers. Faried can fill in in a pinch - his PER is the same at the 4 or the 5, but he doesn't have the size to guard 5's.

Smith's love for taking jumpers he can't make would also compound DEN's already hugely problematic, no one on our team can shoot issue.

EDIT: To clarify the issues I see with acquiring Smith at the cost of McGee are: exasperating size/defense issues at the 5, Smith's shooting (Javale can't shoot either but I think he has a better grasp of his limitations even if he's always one second away from doing something GIFworthy). The former is more pressing than the latter, but overall, while Smith is the better talent/player I do think DEN would have to think hard about the fit.

Denver is not weak at the 5, Koufus is pretty damn good, and McGee is one of, if not the best backup 5 in the game (Drummond/Splitter).

Reports: Clippers trade for Kevin Garnett unlikely

K.C Johnson ?@KCJHoop
Hinrich out. Noah says he doesn't think he'll be able to go. Boozer optimistic to play vs. Pacers. #Bulls

The Bulls were stay close to BKN and beat ATL because neither were able to exploit the Bulls size disadvantage with Boozer/Noah out. I don't think that'll be the case against Indiana.

It might get ugly tonight, may skip out on watching it

And World Peace should get another suspension for "punching" Brandon Knight.

Posts like [32] is what makes his name so great. I had no idea World Peace had even been established for it to be suspended :D

Bledsoe -- a starter-quality player who is currently backing up a superstar -- might literally be the best player they could ever hope to get. The Celts would be fools to turn it down IMO. They can figure out who to play where later.

That's all well and good, but the Celtics as currently constituted don't have a need at the guard position. They have Bradley/Lee/Terry/Barbosa, and Rondo coming back (presumably) fairly early next season. Bledsoe is better than any of the non-Rondo players (unless you're really high on Bradley's defensive impact), but the Celtics have much greater need for a big man. If they were going to blow up their locker room by moving Garnett (or even risking alienating him by broaching the subject), I would imagine it would only be for a player that was both very good and addressed their biggest roster weakness, which would only be exacerbated by trading away their current best big (and overall player).

To pick up a thread from last month's thread, a JaVale for Josh Smith trade is interesting because it gives Atlanta one of the highest-upside players in the league who is actually movable and allows them to move Horford down to the 4; Denver also has a surplus of solid wings with midlevel-level contracts, and Atlanta could use one or two more (JaVale and Wilson Chandler together are also a viable salary match for trading purposes, for starters). Denver's rationale would be a bit more obvious: adding a passer, finisher (Andre Miller throwing lobs to J-Smoove? Yes, please.) and defender of that quality would make them a fascinating, dangerous team.

i'm pretty sure that ATL has gone out of its way to clear salary in order to make a run at dwight howard and chris paul this offseason, rather than for the purpose of acquiring javale mcgee.


i don't think there's any way that danny ferry takes his eye off of that particular ball.

if Paul isn't healthy, then you're not winning anything anyway.

A couple people mentioned this line of thought, so I wanted to say that I don't really agree with it. It makes the issue way too black and white. He can be at 80-90%, in which case they are still a real contender if everyone else is playing well. He also can get hurt and miss only a couple of games, similar to Bosh's injury in the middle of the playoffs last year. You need to have some ability to weather the storm for a short term period of time with your roster.

If they were going to trade for Garnett, I'd probably want to keep Bledsoe and get rid of Jordan. But presumably if they were thinking along those lines, they'd have done things differently.

@ Meatwad: Seeing the bulls as a winnable game bugged me a lot at first, but thinking for more than a second I realize it's true.

No disrespect intended. I think I picked the Bulls at #3 in the conference before the season. I can see Denver losing to Chicago, @ Portland (they struggle there), @ Brooklyn at the end of a B-2-B.

Seeing the bulls as a winnable game bugged me a lot at first, but thinking for more than a second I realize it's true.

Pretty sure Denver can beat anyone at home, even a Bulls team with a healthy Rose - that'd be what, the 4th or 5th best team in the NBA?

Pelton weighs in on a potential Garnett to LAC deal on Insider:

...while organizations can't hang partial banners, improving the chances of flying the real thing makes trading for Garnett worth it for the Clippers

He also can get hurt and miss only a couple of games, similar to Bosh's injury in the middle of the playoffs last year. You need to have some ability to weather the storm for a short term period of time with your roster.

Bosh missing time is like Blake Griffin missing time - painful, but it's not a death blow when you have a top 4 player and quality parts around him. Paul missing time is like LBJ missing time.

They have Bradley/Lee/Terry/Barbosa, and Rondo coming back (presumably) fairly early next season. Bledsoe is better than any of the non-Rondo players (unless you're really high on Bradley's defensive impact), but the Celtics have much greater need for a big man.

Then trade Terry, whose contract is very reasonable. Heck, take the anti-suggestion in #14 and see if the SuperKings will trade DeMarcus Cousins for him ;-) (Hint: They won't.)

Or, of course, you might not have as many good guards as you thought because Rondo isn't the same player when he returns. Or who knows what. It's all an issue for later, IMO. If you're rebuilding, you worry about amassing total talent. You don't worry about how best to get all the talent on the floor until you have enough total talent to make that point worth considering.

As reported, Bledsoe/Garnett is apparently not happening anyway. I assume that the Celts are reluctant to trade Garnett because they feel loyalty to him and because they're reluctant to pull the trigger on a rebuild, which is all fine. But I hope they're not holding out for a better young player, because I don't see that as very plausible.

(It's a little different than baseball in this respect, BTW. Because baseball is less predictable in general and especially in the postseason, a team may view itself as a contender when it's really not and act accordingly, e.g. the Mets when they traded Scott Kazmir. But that's unlikely to happen in basketball, so we can be pretty confident that only a few elite teams would potentially be interested in Garnett.)

Nate Robinson won Eastern Conf player of the week for last week!

I'm a Celtics fan and think the DA has pretty much nailed it. I don't love taking Butler back, but I'd be shocked if they could do better than Bledsoe. Do the Clips have any draft picks left? That would always be nice. When Rondo is back, you trade him, or you trade Bledsoe, or you keep them both and trade Bradley. All of these guys are good enough to want, but none of them are great enough to prevent you from getting one of the others (if that sentence makes any sense).

I assume that the Celts are reluctant to trade Garnett because they feel loyalty to him and because they're reluctant to pull the trigger on a rebuild, which is all fine. But I hope they're not holding out for a better young player, because I don't see that as very plausible.

My assumption is that the rebuild point is key. How good does Ainge think they could be next year if the best case scenario plays out, and Rondo is back, Sullinger is back and keeps improving, neither Pierce nor Garnett falls off a cliff, and maybe (just maybe) Fab Melo provides a defensive presence in the paint and occasional roll man for Rondo? And is that more or less likely than them trading Garnett (with his ok) for a good young piece or three and drafting well to rebuild? Ainge seems to operate at least somewhat optimistically about his own team, though not delusionally (Jeff Green aside), so I'm not anticipating a move. But I still suspect that if they do, it would be a move for size, not for a guy like Bledsoe (whom I really like).

Bulls get Boozer back tonight. That's good news. Noah thinks he might be ready to play Thursday, in Denver. Also, good news. Hinrich's return date is unknown, still good news.

799. STEAGLES does what STEAGLES does for STEAGLES Posted: January 28, 2013 at 11:37 AM (#4356501)
Hardwood Paroxysm ?@HPbasketball

Personally? I'm terrified of Boston without Rondo. They're a worse team, but remember THE WORSE THEY ARE THE MORE THEY WIN. #playoffs2012

I don't understand why the Clippers would want to trade Crawford and Blesdoe.

Who mentioned Crawford?

I'm with jmurph. If you're trading Garnett, all you care about is how much talent you get back, not what positions you're filling. Guys like Terry and (especially) Barbosa could not be less relevant to the situation.

And the CBS link didn't really clear anything up. The report (which appears to be more than "an internet rumor") is still that LAC offered something like Bledsoe and Butler for Garnett and Boston turned it down. If that's true, it would not surprise me if the teams continued checking in between now and Feb. 21. Is a deal "unlikely"? Probably. But that doesn't mean some significant trade involving those two teams definitely won't happen before the deadline.

The Iron Sheik ?@the_ironsheik
the @spencerhawes00 make slam dunk like he take a #$!&@ on the Ultimate Warrior face. I respect him more forever than the jabroni Shaq

Boogie Cousins now is my least-favorite player. He's like an unentertaining train wreck.