OT: Trade Idea (not involving Blazers)

I was just in New Orleans and was talking to some of the guys who write for the True Hoops "Hornets/Pelicans" Blog, and we started kicking around some Eric Gordon trade ideas.

The guys thought that Eric Gordon for Danny Granger made sense, putting both guys back in their hometowns, but as much sense as that made for the Pelicans, I didn't see how Gordon would fit in Indiana, so I sort of tweaked it.

I figured that Boston is looking to "rebuild," David West might be asking for more than he's worth in free agency, and Kevin Garnett would probably like to play for a team that's closer to contending for a title.

So how does this sound?

New Orleans Sends: Eric Gordon
New Orleans Receives: Danny Granger

Indiana Sends: Danny Granger
Indiana Receives: Kevin Garnett and (insert player here... Bradley, Sullinger, picks, etc.)

Boston Sends: Kevin Garnett and (insert player/picks)
Boston Receives: Eric Gordon

 

Gordon is a waste of money. I don't think NO will be able to offload his huge contract. They should never have matched in the first place.

 

I can understand why Garnett would want to play for LAC, but it's still a lot easier to get to the Finals in the East than the West, and with George and Hibbert developing, Indiana has something special going on right now.

I threw out Bradley or picks just because I don't think Indiana should want to part with Granger for just Garnett, unless they know something about his injuries that we don't know. They'd probably look for more compensation, even if the picks come from NOLA.

I also think Boston would be a great place for Gordon. When he's healthy and actually gives a damn, Gordon's still one of the best young talents in the game. A Rondo/Gordon backcourt is a great nucleus moving forward.

Thanks for replying, btw... I know everyone always tries to throw their crazy ideas on the board... I just figured that if was interesting enough to talk to these True Hoop guys about this for an hour or so while we were watching the Finals, it might be an interesting idea to throw out to other people... (although maybe the beers played a part in why we thought this was such a good idea at the time)...

 

It's not like Granger and Garnett are marketable assets at this point either though.

I think that Gordon still has high-level All-Star potential if he goes to a contender that can make him their go-to scoring option (ie: Boston). Aside from the injury, he essentially played this season on a team that he could give two shits less about, a team that he begged to trade him all season long.

He's still only 24 years old... and I have a hard time believing he couldn't have put up better numbers than he did when he was 22 years old and posting 22.3/2.9/4.4 for the Clippers. I just get the impression that his heart wasn't in it.

 

He's ridiculously injury prone. Has he ever had a healthy season?

 

Yeah, he's injury prone, but Garnett's might not have anything at all left in the tank, and Granger's just as big of an injury risk as Gordon is.

I just see that as a way for three teams to exchange damaged goods for each other's benefit. Otherwise, these teams might have to give away these guys for next-to-nothing.

Also, I don't really think Gordon was very "injured" this season. It sounds like his "injury" was more a contractual holdout than a real injury.

BTW - Thanks again for the feedback. Didn't think I'd get any thoughtful responses to the thread haha...

 

Why would he be holding out? He got his max deal last summer.

In his five years in the league he's played:

78/82
62/82
56/82
09/66
42/82

247/394 = 62%

Do you want to pay a guy a max contract who has played less and less games since he came into the league? He's only played in 62% of the games in his five year career. Not very healthy.

Indy and NO should exchange their injury prone bloated contracts.



That's Kevin Martin-esque

 

I really don't think you should include the previous two seasons for Gordon in that formula. From what I've heard out of NOLA, Gordon probably would have come back to close out the season from the "original" injury, if he were still in LA, and he probably could have given at least a 90+% season this season for the Pelicans if he gave a damn.

I'm in the camp that believes, knowing what my people in NOLA are telling me, that Gordon is good-to-go and at 24, could be a legitimate team's go-to-player, if he has a purpose to play for.

His contract is long, but I don't think that if the Celtics freed up cap room in free agency, they'd find a better scoring option. A Rondo/Gordon/Pierce perimeter would not only be able to contend in the East from the jump, but they'd have a future.

Also, like I said earlier, Garnett and Granger (albeit on shorter contracts) are not exactly easy sells for most teams....

 

Until he proves he can play a full season, I will be unconvinced. It's a huge gamble to invest a max deal in a guy who has yet to play a full 82 games in his five years in the league.

 

I completely understand where you're coming from... I'm just looking at the Celtics right now, and not only the way they seem to want to cling to the '08 title but how they also want to try to rebuild without going through the "rebuilding process," makes them seem like they're very susceptible to making a trade for a high scoring, "win-now" player like Eric Gordon, especially given the current FA/draft field.

 

But let's be realistic. How good are the Celtics with Eric Gordon? Honestly, I think Rajon Rondo has been extremely overrated. Yes, I think he's a good point guard, but without three HOFers next to him I still think he's going to look very ordinary. As the "Big Three" aged, the Celtics began to look worse and worse. Plus, they lost much of the bench that got them a championship. Adding Gordon and subtracting Garnett doesn't make them a contender. I am very curious to see how they will fare as the rest of the "Big Three" move on, as Allen already has.