Skip to content

Celtics not talking Rondo trades; however Wallace and Humphries are a different story

Nov 19, 2013, 2:58 PM EDT

O.J. Mayo, Gerald Wallace AP

We’ve written it here before and we’ll write it again — don’t bet on the Boston Celtics trading Rajon Rondo. Danny Ainge thinks Rondo is a potential franchise cornerstone and he’s not moving Rondo for anything other than another cornerstone.

However, the Celtics are willing to deal other high-priced veterans on their roster to gain a little roster and cap flexibility, reports the Boston Herald.

We’ve written here before that despite the lack of interest in trading Rondo — unless they get the proverbial offer they can’t refuse — the Celtics are still active in the market. Sources continue to say they’d love to move some veteran contracts (think Kris Humphries, Gerald Wallace) to put them in a better position vis-a-vis the salary cap.

“I think that we don’t have much flexibility, as much as we would like,” said Ainge. “I wouldn’t say it’s a priority, but we are having conversations.”

Kris Humphries maybe could be moved, he is in the final year of a deal paying him $12 million, plus he can provide rebounding and depth on the front line — he’s played fairly well (shooting 53.3 percent, PER of 15.3) in Boston, he’s just not part of the plan there. I could see a team grabbing him for the last half of the season.

Gerald Wallace… that’s going to be harder. He is owed $21.2 million after this season (at age 31) and other teams will be reluctant to take that on unless Boston wants to throw in a sweetener (or he is part of a larger deal). Wallace brings defense and energy, but he isn’t a guy who creates offense for himself or others. It would need to be the right fit, and there aren’t many places like that.

Expect Boston to make moves this season, with Humphries on the top of this list. Just don’t expect a Rondo deal.

  1. bougin89 - Nov 19, 2013 at 3:24 PM

    Gerald Wallace is moveable but at what price to the Celtics? They aren’t going to be giving up either of their 1st round picks in 2014. Next year they will have much more flexibility with Bass and Rondo on expiring contracts. It would be much easier to tank with Wallace now and move him then.

    • bougin89 - Nov 19, 2013 at 3:25 PM

      Also they have a $10.2 million dollar trade exception they can still use next off season.

  2. jcmeyer10 - Nov 19, 2013 at 4:35 PM

    Humphries should be easy. May not get a ton back but who cares, he’s walking next year anyway. I’d take a low pick and/or a young guy who they might have their eye on.

    Wallace, we are stuck with.

    • siege102 - Nov 20, 2013 at 11:38 AM

      Good luck getting a pick and a young guy’s salaries to match up with Humphries’s bloated 12 mil.

      • jcmeyer10 - Nov 20, 2013 at 12:19 PM

        You good sir have a point!

      • Kevin S. - Nov 20, 2013 at 12:50 PM

        Charlotte has convinced itself it wants to win now, could use the rebounding, has Ben Gordon as salary ballast and has a number of young players that fall into the “interesting, half-way decent” mold of player that Hump might bring back. Washington is another team that wants to contend, needs rebounding and has the expiring ballast/okay young player combo to make a Hump deal work. The last team that could make a desperation play is New York, but since none of their ballast contracts are expiring, they’d have to include more than just an okay young player. Hardaway might have worked with an expiring contract, but C’s taking extra year of salary means Lee/Wallace has to come to NY or Shumpert has to be involved, and I do think the Knicks can get better value for him than a partial year of Humphries and some salary relief that won’t give them extra flexibility next season.

  3. Kevin S. - Nov 19, 2013 at 8:13 PM

    I’m actually not sure there’s any real need to move Gerald Wallace. Having extra cap space always presents the option of renting it out to teams looking to clear salary, but the individual restrictions mean there are fewer truly albatross contracts, and teams have become less willing to throw in picks just to dump salary. Barring that, the Celtics really have no need to clear out cap space. This season they probably only need to drop a million or so to duck under the tax line, and their rebuild will probably continue through at least the next two seasons after that. They have to spend 90% of the salary cap anyway, so why rush to dump salary you’ll just have to add back? Short of a desperate team doing a bad-contract swap that doesn’t need an asset coming back, there’s really no reason to move Crash’s contract.

    • wolfpacka42 - Nov 20, 2013 at 9:04 AM

      To Kevin S
      I agree with you that this season is a throw away year to try to get the top picks. Also the Celtics as is right now is just below the tax line. They probably will be able to dump Kris Humphries at the trading deadlne or before because he doesn’t fit into the long term picture at all. The Celtics are only playing him spot minutes now so that he doesn’t get hurt. As for Gerald Wallace the Celtics are stuck with him for now due to his contract. He does play hard but for some reason he doesn’t score in the same rate he used to. They might be able to move him next year but I would not give up any of those picks to do that. The future picks are much more important than Kris Humphires or Gerald Wallace.

  4. randolphinthepost - Nov 20, 2013 at 11:40 AM

    They have to trade Rondo in order to tank successfully. Do it now for a couple first round picks + an upcoming player whose currently injured so he doesnt make them better than they need to be i.e bennett, noel, burke

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 NBA Player Searches
  1. D. Rose (2724)
  2. K. Irving (2138)
  3. A. Davis (1783)
  4. L. James (1781)
  5. K. Bryant (1699)