|Posted by shawn cassidy on March 1, 2013 at 12:15 AM|
It's a week past the deadline,but Danny is still fielding questions on why he didn't move KG and Pierce.
Why not move a guy like KG and move a guy like Paul Pierce, guys who are in their 30s, for a guy in his mid-20s? Why not take these assets now and cash them in for younger assets? “First of all, if I felt like there was a player that was in their mid-20s that was a piece to build around and wasn’t just a rotation player for an example but was actually a building block — a future star or All-Star or one of those pieces — then we probably would do that. But they are far and few between, and I don’t see anybody giving those players away for aging veterans.”
If you could get a deal for Paul Pierce, would Kevin have softened his stance on the no-trade? “I don’t know the answer to that and we never got to that point, so it doesn’t even matter. KG has earned the right to dictate his destination and we never got close enough to a deal for either one of them to even have those conversations.”
To be honest I'm growing tired of the trade talk. The deadline is over. Let's think of some better questions for Ainge. First of all, how the hell is Danny going to know if KG would soften his stance if Paul was traded? My thought on it would be yes, KG would okay a deal that would send him out of Boston if Pierce was traded. But how would any of us know. We also knew Danny wouldn't get any young All-Stars for KG and Pierce. Again look at the rumors. Jordan, and Bledsoe from the Clippers, and the Nets deal for Pierce is laughable as well.
I think it's safe to say that Danny will keep these guys in green. After hearing Wyc this week saying he wants to retire KG, and Pierce's jersey means that Wyc wants no part in any deal. So Danny won't pull the trigger on that deal. Wyc had his hands dirty in the Perk trade, and he think it's good business for the Celtics to keep KG, and Pierce in Green.