I think you underrate what Boston receives here--Wallace is 5 years younger than Pierce (that's pretty significant), and Matthews was included to replace Allen, whose contract expires at the end of this year. Matthews' long-term salary commitment ($20M over 3 years) is much less than Pierce's $32 over 2. So they basically get two starters for the price of one, with virtually no impact on their cap figure for this summer--unless Wallace opts out, which would give them an additional $10M.
I recall seeing and reading how he really dogged it (didn't set screens, dive for balls...) until they got Allen and KG and was a prototypical lazy star player. My thinking is that he'd come here and basically play out the string. I have no interest in him.
I realize it was aaaages ago but I remember him wanting to be traded, and it seemed like there was a lot of bad press about him at the time. Then you guys traded for KG and Allen. After that everything was kosher.
He was frustrated with the rebuilding effort. I don't think that makes him a headcase. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-pierce062507 I thought you were going to cite the Jamaal Tinsley incident from 2005.
Anyway, it looks like Rondo will end up traded, and I don't think they will trade both him and Pierce.
Obviously I don't follow the Celtics very closely, I just remember some crap about him being unhappy before the trades.
No, I recall reading it and it seemed like common knowledge he was a lazy player collecting a large salary. When Allen & KG came along he started busting his chops as he knew they had a real team for a change. But he used to just mail it in. Why wouldn't he do that in Portland?
Yeah, it was him. There was lots of chatter among the national sports people about PP and what was "wrong" and what to do; trade him or convince him to wait for the youngins to mature, etc. Statistically is was an off year for him too, substantiating the claim that he was not giving his full effort.
You could be right, I don't pay much attention to those idiots speculating from afar. I know most of the fans were just as frustrated as him, though. The team was tanking for draft position, they traded away all their veteran talent and the young kids they had weren't panning out.
It really depends on what would come back in return. Based on his actual (realistic) trade value, I would say they wouldn't consider it.
No, thanks. He's past his prime. Nash, though 38, is still playing at the top of his game. Pierce is not.
