Quantcast
Red's Army

Your Morning Dump… Where Danny Ainge can now trade Kris Humphries and Gerald Wallace

Chuck - Red's Army September 12, 2013 Celtics News, The Morning Dump 9 Comments

wallace-humphries

Every morning, we compile the links of the day and dump them here… highlighting the big storyline. Because there’s nothing quite as satisfying as a good morning dump. 

In the two months to pass since their trade with the Brooklyn Nets became official, the Boston Celtics technically could have traded any player they acquired in the deal. But for those two months since July 12, a stipulation in the Collective Bargaining Agreement restricted moves Boston could make with Kris Humphries, Gerald Wallace and MarShon Brooks.

Not anymore. As of Thursday, the two-month restrictions have passed; the trio can now be traded freely in accordance with other CBA rules. Specifically, the three former Nets can now be traded in tandem with other teammates.

Keith Bogans, who took part in a sign-and-trade to join the Celtics, still can’t be dealt until Dec. 15.

MassLive

Thank you Jay King for bringing a hint of joy to my traffic-filled morning.

But just because Danny Ainge can trade Hump and Crash (has the ring of 70s detective show) doesn’t mean he will. Why? Because there will be no takers. Not now.

I fully expect both players to be on the roster at least until February (trade deadline).

Meanwhile, the folks at Nets Daily felt the the need to criticize Danny Ainge for how he handled Paul Pierce’s departure:

Here’s our bottom line: the Celtics were about to face a tough call from a public relations perspective: exercising that team option on Pierce’s final year. They would owe him only $5 million of his projected $15.3 million salary in 2013-14. How would that have looked? Not good. In the cold calculus of rebuilding, they also knew that if they traded Pierce after letting Rivers go to the Clippers, the chances that KG would retire increased dramatically. He made that point quite clearly last week in China. No Paul, no Kevin = BIG savings.

So the top priority the last week of June was to dump the franchise player before they had to make that ugly choice and get the most they could. The Nets helped them out of a public relations mess. The Celtics got their picks and maybe some talent in Brooks. But they also agreed to pay two declining 30-something players $35.4 million over three years and agreed to postpone any other rebuilding moves by hard-capping themselves this season. Pundits seem to forget all that when assessing the trade.

I don’t view the trade as one-sided.

The Celtics got assets and (eventual) cap relief.

The Nets acquired championship pedigree.

It’s a win-win.

This season was going to be a lost year no matter what Ainge did.

The rest of the links:

ESPN Boston – Get past mad

Like this Article? Share it!

  • forever_green

    Probably should just let Humphies contract expire.

    The hard part is moving Wallace.

    Either way the C’s would have gotten (eventual) cap relief. Plus I dont believe it would have been a lost season if they stayed.

  • Tommy_Heinsohn

    Trade Gerald Wallace to China for a bag of rice noodles. F’ that guy, he wants nothing to do with Boston and we want nothing to do with him.

  • KGino

    I woulda been so pumped if we got Gerald Wallace like 3 years ago… He used to be a stud for fantasy

  • Celticsfanatic

    I completely agree that the trade was NOT one sided, far from it really. Just a Nets fan who is warming up defensive talking points for when they blow in three years and owe all their future to us.

  • Jason Whetzell

    Not a smart synopsis by the Nets bloggers.

  • RedsLoveChild

    The Nets blogger is correct…this was a one-sided trade…for BOSTON!

    When you get eliminated in the 1st round by the Bulls {playing without Derrick Rose}…you are “light years” away from winning a ring!

    For them to think that two once-great players {who are now 36 and 37} will defy the odds again by staying healthy—let alone put them over the top for a championship—is beyond moronic.

    Meanwhile, Boston now owns the Nets` 1st round picks in 3 of the next 5 years.

    • adam

      Not saying the Nets will win but Boston did have a horrible year and didn’t even make the play offs in 2007. Then they won it in 2008… Just saying.

      yeah I know they aren’t the Paul Pierce and KG of 2008 either.

      • RedsLoveChild

        Agree on both points

  • adam

    Do the Celtics still have an amnesty clause they can use?