Barnes and Boston

#62
OMG, YES!!!!

From RealGM's Boston Trade Thread:

Post#44 » by SmartWentCrazy » Today 5:26 pm

Jackie Mac speculating that Barnes will cost PP and a pick. Im good with that price.

PP > Nesmith/Langford/Williams. Not even close. Dude becomes the Kings third guard behind Fox and Hali.

PP = a Young Bobby J

Also, Kings could send Boston Cojo (assuming Salaries work). They keep Cojo and cut Teague. If yhall think Cojo has been bad, Teague has been levels worse.
 
#63
OMG, YES!!!!

From RealGM's Boston Trade Thread:

Post#44 » by SmartWentCrazy » Today 5:26 pm

Jackie Mac speculating that Barnes will cost PP and a pick. Im good with that price.

PP > Nesmith/Langford/Williams. Not even close. Dude becomes the Kings third guard behind Fox and Hali.

PP = a Young Bobby J

Also, Kings could send Boston Cojo (assuming Salaries work). They keep Cojo and cut Teague. If yhall think Cojo has been bad, Teague has been levels worse.
I would rather have Langford or Nesmith but will take PP and a pick.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#68
I really like Pritchard. Dude's a gamer with a certain amount of toughness that will help this team. Reminds me a lot of Bobby J.
I like Pritchard a lot, and I obviously like Nesmith, who was a player I had considered for the Kings 12 pick. So I would like both those players and a 1st rd pick. I want no part of Langford. I'm not a big fan of Williams. Didn't like him in college and still not overwhelmed by him.

Pritchard is a tough hardnosed player who is a very good defender and who can shoot the three. Unlike Joseph, he actually has PG skills and doesn't just pound the ball with no planned outcome.
 
#71
Why does he have to start? He would be a solid backup off the bench, which is what his eventual role would be with the Celtics.
Right. It just limits his potential impact with the Kings. Whereas someone like NeSmith could be a starting wing for us down the line if he develops.
 
#72
I like Pritchard a lot, and I obviously like Nesmith, who was a player I had considered for the Kings 12 pick. So I would like both those players and a 1st rd pick. I want no part of Langford. I'm not a big fan of Williams. Didn't like him in college and still not overwhelmed by him.
This is where I'm at. And I still think there's no guarantee we "win" that deal, but it at least gives us a chance to have made a successful long term play so that Boston can up their shot today. That's win-win on paper. Something tells me Ainge might be too stubborn. Which is a shame as Celtics are my second favorite team and watching him stockpile assets and do nothing reminds me of the team before the big 3 came to town.
 
#73
OMG, YES!!!!

From RealGM's Boston Trade Thread:

Post#44 » by SmartWentCrazy » Today 5:26 pm

Jackie Mac speculating that Barnes will cost PP and a pick. Im good with that price.

PP > Nesmith/Langford/Williams. Not even close. Dude becomes the Kings third guard behind Fox and Hali.

PP = a Young Bobby J

Also, Kings could send Boston Cojo (assuming Salaries work). They keep Cojo and cut Teague. If yhall think Cojo has been bad, Teague has been levels worse.
Well then I'm guessing Ainge is saying no way to moving Nesmith. A 23 year old 6' combo guard even though solid in some showings and a late first probably isn't something you write home about. If you are moving for young pieces you want potential.
 
#74
Well then I'm guessing Ainge is saying no way to moving Nesmith. A 23 year old 6' combo guard even though solid in some showings and a late first probably isn't something you write home about. If you are moving for young pieces you want potential.
Pritchard > Nesmith.
 
#75
If I were the Kings I would rather roll the dice with Langford or Nesmith over PP. I like PP and he’s a nice player right now, his ceiling is just low
Nesmith just hasn’t looked good when he’s played. I’m kinda over the injury, lack of playing time excuse for a player (see our rapping power 4ward). Value production and a lower longer term ceiling (see Haliburton). Betting that the ceiling will be higher than most assume. Pritchard would be a perfect compliment to Fox and Hali.
 
#77
Pritchard > Nesmith.
Pritchard looks like he's going to be a decent player but he's 2 years older and you're basing this off of 30 or so games. Capture their last 10 games or so and they are playing fairly equally. Small sample size but Nesmith has been improving as of late.

Either way the Kings need to improve if they're going to trade Barnes. Getting back an inferior player to Barnes and salary relief doesn't do a thing for this franchise since they won't be able to do much with the salary relief anyway.
 
#78
Pritchard looks like he's going to be a decent player but he's 2 years older and you're basing this off of 30 or so games. Capture their last 10 games or so and they are playing fairly equally. Small sample size but Nesmith has been improving as of late.

Either way the Kings need to improve if they're going to trade Barnes. Getting back an inferior player to Barnes and salary relief doesn't do a thing for this franchise since they won't be able to do much with the salary relief anyway.
Yep. One thing I truly hope improves under McNair. No GM has gotten this right in the last 15 years and I think has been a major reason we've stayed bad for so long. Kings have to learn to get good value back for their good players.
 
#79
Pritchard looks like he's going to be a decent player but he's 2 years older and you're basing this off of 30 or so games. Capture their last 10 games or so and they are playing fairly equally. Small sample size but Nesmith has been improving as of late.

Either way the Kings need to improve if they're going to trade Barnes. Getting back an inferior player to Barnes and salary relief doesn't do a thing for this franchise since they won't be able to do much with the salary relief anyway.
I actually think the Celtics would want to keep Pritchard over one of their wings because he actually contributes to winning right now. He's a better fit off their ball-dominant wings.
 
#81
Pritchard looks like he's going to be a decent player but he's 2 years older and you're basing this off of 30 or so games. Capture their last 10 games or so and they are playing fairly equally. Small sample size but Nesmith has been improving as of late.

Either way the Kings need to improve if they're going to trade Barnes. Getting back an inferior player to Barnes and salary relief doesn't do a thing for this franchise since they won't be able to do much with the salary relief anyway.
And the fact is none of them should have the kind of value to be withheld in a trade for a player with the size and abilities of a Harrison Barnes in a league where players like that matter. It's the Kings fault for not playing him more at PF which is where Boston would play him and where his true value is.
 
#82
Two of those guys and a pick and maybe we get a player in 2-3 years as good as Barnes is now. We're not the desperate team here. Barnes is locked up at a fair price for some time to come.
I think multiple considerations come into play. The question is really who will be better in 2-3 years when Fox and Haliburton come into their prime. Also Boston isn’t desperate either. It’s not like Barnes is a perennial all-star. Remember we got him from Dallas for a retiring ZBo and Justin Jackson.

Nesmith and a 1st is actually quite a good profit on Barnes.
 
#83
Pritchard looks like he's going to be a decent player but he's 2 years older and you're basing this off of 30 or so games. Capture their last 10 games or so and they are playing fairly equally. Small sample size but Nesmith has been improving as of late.

Either way the Kings need to improve if they're going to trade Barnes. Getting back an inferior player to Barnes and salary relief doesn't do a thing for this franchise since they won't be able to do much with the salary relief anyway.
Im not sure I agree. The potential of Nesmith and a pick plus the likely hood of more balls likely makes you a better team in 3-4 years than keeping Barnes. The key is what makes you better in 3-4 years. If you are really lucky and get high enough to get a Mobley or Cunningham the whole direction of your franchise could change.

watching Mobley now. That kid is a team changer.
 
#84
I think multiple considerations come into play. The question is really who will be better in 2-3 years when Fox and Haliburton come into their prime. Also Boston isn’t desperate either. It’s not like Barnes is a perennial all-star. Remember we got him from Dallas for a retiring ZBo and Justin Jackson.

Nesmith and a 1st is actually quite a good profit on Barnes.
9 times out of 10 the team getting the best player wins the trade. I'm just saying we should make sure we get 3 rolls of the die instead of 2. The question of "right now" is far and away in Boston's favor. The fact they are thinking too hard about this shows Ainge isn't who he thinks he is.
 
#85
Yep. One thing I truly hope improves under McNair. No GM has gotten this right in the last 15 years and I think has been a major reason we've stayed bad for so long. Kings have to learn to get good value back for their good players.
kings fans are like investors who stock is up 60% and claim they are holding until it’s up 80%.

Barnes was worth an expiring and JJ not that long ago. If you get Nesmith, Williams and a first for Barnes and Bjelicia you take it and run.
 
#86
9 times out of 10 the team getting the best player wins the trade. I'm just saying we should make sure we get 3 rolls of the die instead of 2. The question of "right now" is far and away in Boston's favor. The fact they are thinking too hard about this shows Ainge isn't who he thinks he is.
or that McNair is like some fans on this board and is asking too much. Probably some of both.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
#87
It’s not like Barnes is a perennial all-star. Remember we got him from Dallas for a retiring ZBo and Justin Jackson.

Nesmith and a 1st is actually quite a good profit on Barnes.
The contract status (expiring vs. 2.5 years on a declining deal) is a major factor in favor of Barnes now vs. Barnes then. Is Nesmith and a first the best offer we're going to get for Barnes? Perhaps. Is it worth taking? Or are we better off just keeping Barnes in that case? When you're talking about a first in the 20+ range, there's a solid argument that two more years of Barnes is actually the best side of the deal. We can't come into this as if we HAVE to trade him just because another team wants him. Keeping him may well be the best move.
 
#88
The contract status (expiring vs. 2.5 years on a declining deal) is a major factor in favor of Barnes now vs. Barnes then. Is Nesmith and a first the best offer we're going to get for Barnes? Perhaps. Is it worth taking? Or are we better off just keeping Barnes in that case? When you're talking about a first in the 20+ range, there's a solid argument that two more years of Barnes is actually the best side of the deal. We can't come into this as if we HAVE to trade him just because another team wants him. Keeping him may well be the best move.
This, plus I would have to think we could arguably get a better return if we dealt him next year for a 2022 first. Obviously that carries a small amount of risk, but if playing before fans makes teams more excited to make good deals at the deadline, if the 2022 draft is indeed the one with no one and dones, it should be the deepest draft in memory.
 
#90
Potential of Nesmith > Pritchard.
I'm with Baja on this one...
I like Pritchard a lot, and I obviously like Nesmith, who was a player I had considered for the Kings 12 pick. So I would like both those players and a 1st rd pick.
I'll take both and a 1st rd, otherwise, I'm keeping Barnes. The Celtics are more desperate to trade for Barnes, it's time we get a little more advantage in a deal.

(EDIT: Plus neither of those guys might even be serviceable enough assuming that Celtics get back into form and seriously contend in the east)