PDA

View Full Version : Celtics Noise-What is fair value for players?



robdog_5
07-13-2016, 01:32 PM
Celtics fan here and I've been reading the twitter hints that Danny Ainge is working on a BIG DEAL. First off these are so frustrating because DA reputation of making big deals, and all the assets Boston has gives fire to anybody wanting to start rumors. But I legit think their trying to make a deal it's just will the right price come. Having said that it seems that Celtics fans asking for deals don't want to give up much and other fans claim they have to give up all their assets so I was thinking I want to list the assets and list players, and get a feel for what other teams feel like fair value is for Russ, Griffin and Cousins.

Here is Boston's assets....
2017 ability to swap picks with Brooklyn (on paper looks like a sure fire top 5 pick in deep draft)
2018 Brooklyn Pick
2018 Boston Celtics Pick
2016 draftee F Jaylen Brown
SG Avery Bradley (PER 13.20, PPG 15.2, defensive minded player......2 years left on deal 8.3 and 8.8 million)
SF Jae Crowder (PER 15.8, PPG 14.2, also a defensive first player....4 years left on deal 6.3, 6.8, 7.3 and 7.8 mil)
SG/PG Marcus Smart (PER 11.3, PPG 9.1, defensive first player....1 year at 3.6, 1 club option in 18 at 4.5 and RFA in 2019)
C/PF Kelly Olynk (PER 16.3, PPG 10.0, shooter-pick n pop 7 footer...1 year at 3.0 mil, 2017 Qualifying at 4.2 mil RFA)
C Amir Johnson (16.2 PER, 7 PPG, more of defensive versatile Big-Glue Guy....1 year at 12 mil)
Host of young serviceable end of bench players (F/C Jordan Mickey, SG RJ Hunter, PG Rozier)


IMO the 2017 pick is the biggest asset and the one I'd least like to give away, then followed by Crowder as his deal is a steal for his production and what he brings to the team.

Just curious peoples thoughts on what fair value listed above would help land Westbrook, Griffin or Cousins (Fair as in both teams would be satisfied with deal) One classifier for Westbrook and Griffin is your basically getting a guy who could leave after 1 year which IMO lowers their value some.

BoSox47
07-13-2016, 02:06 PM
Celtics fan here and I've been reading the twitter hints that Danny Ainge is working on a BIG DEAL. First off these are so frustrating because DA reputation of making big deals, and all the assets Boston has gives fire to anybody wanting to start rumors. But I legit think their trying to make a deal it's just will the right price come. Having said that it seems that Celtics fans asking for deals don't want to give up much and other fans claim they have to give up all their assets so I was thinking I want to list the assets and list players, and get a feel for what other teams feel like fair value is for Russ, Griffin and Cousins.

Here is Boston's assets....
2017 ability to swap picks with Brooklyn (on paper looks like a sure fire top 5 pick in deep draft)
2018 Brooklyn Pick
2018 Boston Celtics Pick
2016 draftee F Jaylen Brown
SG Avery Bradley (PER 13.20, PPG 15.2, defensive minded player......2 years left on deal 8.3 and 8.8 million)
SF Jae Crowder (PER 15.8, PPG 14.2, also a defensive first player....4 years left on deal 6.3, 6.8, 7.3 and 7.8 mil)
SG/PG Marcus Smart (PER 11.3, PPG 9.1, defensive first player....1 year at 3.6, 1 club option in 18 at 4.5 and RFA in 2019)
C/PF Kelly Olynk (PER 16.3, PPG 10.0, shooter-pick n pop 7 footer...1 year at 3.0 mil, 2017 Qualifying at 4.2 mil RFA)
C Amir Johnson (16.2 PER, 7 PPG, more of defensive versatile Big-Glue Guy....1 year at 12 mil)
Host of young serviceable end of bench players (F/C Jordan Mickey, SG RJ Hunter, PG Rozier)


IMO the 2017 pick is the biggest asset and the one I'd least like to give away, then followed by Crowder as his deal is a steal for his production and what he brings to the team.

Just curious peoples thoughts on what fair value listed above would help land Westbrook, Griffin or Cousins (Fair as in both teams would be satisfied with deal) One classifier for Westbrook and Griffin is your basically getting a guy who could leave after 1 year which IMO lowers their value some.

You forgot our best player Isaiah Thomas...

BoSox47
07-13-2016, 02:08 PM
Also celtics will be at the top of any trade rumors for star players because of our assets alone. I wouldnt look to much into these rumors. Any trade for Cousins, Butler, Griffin or Westbrook will take out half of our assets minimum.

IndyRealist
07-13-2016, 02:18 PM
Salary matching is going to be tough for those 3.

A BOS pick, the BKN swap, and Thomas would probably net Westbrook, though I'm not sure I've give that much. But that's probably what it would take.

hugepatsfan
07-13-2016, 02:31 PM
Salary matching is going to be tough for those 3.

A BOS pick, the BKN swap, and Thomas would probably net Westbrook, though I'm not sure I've give that much. But that's probably what it would take.

If the Celtics renounce their remaining FAs (eventually we will) then we're going to have about $10M of cap space to absorb extra money in deals. Amir/Jerebko are $16M between them.

Crowder - $6+M
Bradley - $8+M
IT - $6+M
Olynyk - $3M
Smart - $3.6M
Brown - $4M

Brown technically doesn't count as outgoing money until 30 days after he signs but his cap hold comes off the books and adds another $4M of excess salary we can take back.

Just sending the expiring deal of Amir alone gives the Celtics enough room to take on anyone being discussed. Salary wise they could make it work getting back 2 of these guys. That's not an issue.

numba1CHANGsta
07-13-2016, 02:35 PM
They have enough to land 2 superstars but why would they risk all of those assets for Westbrook and BG if they can both possibly leave after one season? Neither one will agree on an extension, maybe they can trade for Cousins since he has 2 years left.

Chronz
07-13-2016, 02:41 PM
Clips would need Crowder+Bradley+Olynyk to even get the wheel moving

R. Johnson#3
07-13-2016, 02:51 PM
2017 Nets pick + 1 of Bradley or Smart + Jaylen Brown to even get a talk going. More picks on top of that too I'd imagine especially if it's Westbrook. If OKC is dealing away Westbrook then that team is completely gutted and looking to start right over. I don't imagine the C's moving Crowder or Thomas considering they are looking to win now. Bradley and Smart both have value and one of them is definitely expendable considering who's coming over. Hell, I'd even give both if I had to. It's absurd how many young players and good picks the C's have. Whenever they do make a move it's going to be huge.

BoSox47
07-13-2016, 02:55 PM
2017 Nets pick + 1 of Bradley or Smart + Jaylen Brown to even get a talk going. More picks on top of that too I'd imagine especially if it's Westbrook. If OKC is dealing away Westbrook then that team is completely gutted and looking to start right over. I don't imagine the C's moving Crowder or Thomas considering they are looking to win now. Bradley and Smart both have value and one of them is definitely expendable considering who's coming over. Hell, I'd even give both if I had to. It's absurd how many young players and good picks the C's have. Whenever they do make a move it's going to be huge.

I think Westbrook could be had for 2 players and a brooklyn pick. He already said he will leave OKC next year so the Thunder might as well get as much as they can for him.

Also Westbrook is a threat to leave at the end of the year, traded or not so why would a team mortgage their future for one year of westbrook?

I could see Johnson/Brown/Bradley/nets 2017 but not more than that. They likely wont get a better offer from anyone else besides the Lakers, unless another team plans on moving their superstar for Westbrook. Dont see any more than that being sent off.

Green_Monster
07-13-2016, 02:56 PM
Clips would need Crowder+Bradley+Olynyk to even get the wheel moving

For the Celtics it doesn't make sense if those three only "get the wheel moving" when Griffin can leave next year.

It's very unlikely they trade Bradley and Crowder in the same deal. They'll want to keep one of their wings in any deal. A trade like above, if Griffin leaves, sets them back a lot. He's injury prone too.

europagnpilgrim
07-13-2016, 02:56 PM
That's the thing about having assets and wanting to trade for a superstar style player, it will gut your team of its depth/key rotational guys and then you will be back to square one

they should wait until trade deadline where it will be more likely to see top level players like DCousins/Westbrook and couple others may walk and leave and that will require OKC/Sac to take the best deal offered and wont be near as much as what it would take right now as far as gutting the team

and those picks become more valuable to a OKC/Sac more so than quality of players later on during/post season, which the Celtics have in abundance and can still keep some key players in the pantry

if I was the Celtics I would gladly hand over those draft picks and a player or two, one being key rotational and the other a expiring type deal player, other than that I wouldn't gut the team for a soon to be free agent who I can go after with all my firepower in the pantry

Forever35
07-13-2016, 03:01 PM
The 3 players I don't see the C's parting with are Thomas, Crowder and KO...

As for value of the remaining players/picks... Hopefully pretty high... :D

TheDish87
07-13-2016, 03:26 PM
I think Westbrook could be had for 2 players and a brooklyn pick. He already said he will leave OKC next year so the Thunder might as well get as much as they can for him.

Also Westbrook is a threat to leave at the end of the year, traded or not so why would a team mortgage their future for one year of westbrook?

I could see Johnson/Brown/Bradley/nets 2017 but not more than that. They likely wont get a better offer from anyone else besides the Lakers, unless another team plans on moving their superstar for Westbrook. Dont see any more than that being sent off.

when did RW say he was leaving OKC?

C-ross12
07-13-2016, 03:34 PM
As a Celtics fan I just assume proceeding as we have been. I'd love to have Westbrook or Griffin but they are both on one year deals. It would take quite a bit to pry them away, and with the way FA is now I just don't see the benefits in giving up that many assets when a guy has a chance to bolt after the year. Jimmy Bulter is a guy I wouldn't have hated to give some good assets for. But that ship has apparently sailed.

Chronz
07-13-2016, 03:43 PM
For the Celtics it doesn't make sense if those three only "get the wheel moving" when Griffin can leave next year.

It's very unlikely they trade Bradley and Crowder in the same deal. They'll want to keep one of their wings in any deal. A trade like above, if Griffin leaves, sets them back a lot. He's injury prone too.
Clips ain't looking to rebuild and are giving up the best player. It's Doc but even he wouldn't let Boston get away with robbing Blake. You want a star? Take a risk he doesn't come back because y'all ain't landing one unless he tries it there.

Chronz
07-13-2016, 03:44 PM
As a Celtics fan I just assume proceeding as we have been. I'd love to have Westbrook or Griffin but they are both on one year deals. It would take quite a bit to pry them away, and with the way FA is now I just don't see the benefits in giving up that many assets when a guy has a chance to bolt after the year. Jimmy Bulter is a guy I wouldn't have hated to give some good assets for. But that ship has apparently sailed.

If they had more years they wouldn't be on the market imo

tp13baby
07-13-2016, 04:00 PM
when did RW say he was leaving OKC?

He himself hasn't publicly said it, but articles after Durant signing said Westbrook wasn't coming back no matter what.

I think Boston will pull off 1 deal, and to me it makes sense for Blake Griffin. A young developing back court. Blake and LA seem off. Smart/Crowder/first rounder. Fills some future needs for LA.

HandsOnTheWheel
07-13-2016, 04:06 PM
Boston players being grossly overrated here. The picks will be worth a lot but that's about it. Thomas isn't getting traded and the rest of the guys are more or less mediocre or an unproven prospect, yet considered "untouchable" by some fans.

Either way a Westy/IT backcourt probably fails and there's no promise that Westbrook will re-up. Clips and Sac aren't trading Griffin or Cousins.

hugepatsfan
07-13-2016, 04:14 PM
Clips ain't looking to rebuild and are giving up the best player. It's Doc but even he wouldn't let Boston get away with robbing Blake. You want a star? Take a risk he doesn't come back because y'all ain't landing one unless he tries it there.

But if we unload the treasure chest for a star then how do we build around him? Trading for Blake/Westy would take us out of the running for being able to offer a max contract again. We wouldn't have tradable assets left since we emptied them out to get the first star.

I'd rather just stay the course and try to build through the draft. What good does a star do if it prevents you from ever being able to compete? Sure the deal would look good by itself but in the grand scheme of things it caps you as a not good enough to win team. Especially with the way GS just raised the bar for the next 5 or so years. Realistically, BOS could never put together a team to compete with them so I'd prefer to just draft and then have guys that in 4-5 years are in place to compete. I think that's the approach most teams should take TBH. No Davids are beating that Goliath IMO.

But if we do want to try our luck with GS, we need to try and get a centerpiece player. We need a trump card. That type of prospect where it trumps everything else other teams are offering. Then you can get a star without unloading everything you have. The '17 BRK pick can be that IMO if we're patient and let the dust settle in the lottery. The class is deep enough supposedly where it doesn't even need to be #1 to have huge value. If we don't luck out with that then I think we're going to have to let IT/Bradley and maybe Smart go, trade Horford and start rebuilding again. It's the only way of ever being able to compete rather than just get a star to say you have one.

Green_Monster
07-13-2016, 04:24 PM
Clips ain't looking to rebuild and are giving up the best player. It's Doc but even he wouldn't let Boston get away with robbing Blake. You want a star? Take a risk he doesn't come back because y'all ain't landing one unless he tries it there.

Robbing Blake? What?

Taking that risk would be idiotic. We don't have to trade for a star who's expiring. The fact is, because he's expiring, you won't get as much as you want to unless he agrees to an extension. That isn't new news, it happens across all sports.

Knick_Fever
07-13-2016, 04:29 PM
They also have assets in the form of expiring contracts totaling $20 mil. That team is loaded with assets, something that usually relates to bad teams but the Celtics are really good!

Green_Monster
07-13-2016, 04:29 PM
Boston players being grossly overrated here. The picks will be worth a lot but that's about it. Thomas isn't getting traded and the rest of the guys are more or less mediocre or an unproven prospect, yet considered "untouchable" by some fans.

Either way a Westy/IT backcourt probably fails and there's no promise that Westbrook will re-up. Clips and Sac aren't trading Griffin or Cousins.

Or, you're off on their value. When you have an extremely young team, players will obviously be "unproven" (Smart, Brown, Rozier, etc). Bradley is a first team all defense player who can shoot. Crowder does a little bit of everything and is also a very good defender. They're both still decently young and on great contracts. Anyone who calls that mediocre shouldn't be calling out people for rating players wrong.

tp13baby
07-13-2016, 04:32 PM
Clips ain't looking to rebuild and are giving up the best player. It's Doc but even he wouldn't let Boston get away with robbing Blake. You want a star? Take a risk he doesn't come back because y'all ain't landing one unless he tries it there.

I don't think they are going to have a choice. Paul has an early termination option so I see him walking. LA played better without Griffin last year. Why not prepare by trading Blake for a future I think looks really shaky...

Vee-Rex
07-13-2016, 04:35 PM
Thunder will want the world for Westbrook, and Doc just seems like the super stubborn type that needs to win over the trade 10x before giving up one of his pieces. If he trades Blake I imagine he'll want both 1st rounds (2017/18) and 2 young players.

Idk, guess we'll find out soon enough if there's a fire in all this smoke.

AntiG
07-13-2016, 04:38 PM
The 3 players I don't see the C's parting with are Thomas, Crowder and KO...

As for value of the remaining players/picks... Hopefully pretty high... :D

Crowder/KO easily get traded if Griffin or Cousins are on the table... Thomas is definitely a consideration if Westbrook is coming in exchange.

Chronz
07-13-2016, 04:44 PM
But if we unload the treasure chest for a star then how do we build around him? Trading for Blake/Westy would take us out of the running for being able to offer a max contract again. We wouldn't have tradable assets left since we emptied them out to get the first star.

I'd rather just stay the course and try to build through the draft. What good does a star do if it prevents you from ever being able to compete? Sure the deal would look good by itself but in the grand scheme of things it caps you as a not good enough to win team. Especially with the way GS just raised the bar for the next 5 or so years. Realistically, BOS could never put together a team to compete with them so I'd prefer to just draft and then have guys that in 4-5 years are in place to compete. I think that's the approach most teams should take TBH. No Davids are beating that Goliath IMO.

But if we do want to try our luck with GS, we need to try and get a centerpiece player. We need a trump card. That type of prospect where it trumps everything else other teams are offering. Then you can get a star without unloading everything you have. The '17 BRK pick can be that IMO if we're patient and let the dust settle in the lottery. The class is deep enough supposedly where it doesn't even need to be #1 to have huge value. If we don't luck out with that then I think we're going to have to let IT/Bradley and maybe Smart go, trade Horford and start rebuilding again. It's the only way of ever being able to compete rather than just get a star to say you have one.

How do you compete without 1 or 2? There is no Mutually beneficial trade here, you guys have to bend over for the star aka the best player in the trade

ciaban
07-13-2016, 04:48 PM
They have enough to land 2 superstars but why would they risk all of those assets for Westbrook and BG if they can both possibly leave after one season? Neither one will agree on an extension, maybe they can trade for Cousins since he has 2 years left.

Well, they would have their bird rights, so they could offer both the most money. It makes keeping them a whole hell of a lot easier, especially with neither New yolk team being very good, the Lakers still rebuilding and the Clippers would be taking a step back. If they're playing together in Boston then that and the most money plus Horford is probably attractive enough to stay.

Forever35
07-13-2016, 04:54 PM
Crowder/KO easily get traded if Griffin or Cousins are on the table... Thomas is definitely a consideration if Westbrook is coming in exchange.

Definitely disagree... AB is a goner... Smart is goner... Brown is a goner... Every other player (not IT, KO and Crowder) are fillers... The prizes are the 2 BK picks...

Vinylman
07-13-2016, 04:58 PM
both westie and BG can be had for the following deal:

2017 brooklyn swap rights
2018 brooklyn pick
either crowder or Bradley

Go look what presti got for Harden and he did that deal on the lowdown before anyone in the public knew they were moving him... the above deal is WAY better... you are pretty much guaranteed 2 top 5 picks the next two years.

The Clippers know there is a real chance that they can lose BG next year so they can't really ask for the farm although i doubt they move him before the season but still possibly at the deadline.

Boston's other picks and contracts are nice but nothing special other than the pick swap in 2019

HandsOnTheWheel
07-13-2016, 05:01 PM
Or, you're off on their value. When you have an extremely young team, players will obviously be "unproven" (Smart, Brown, Rozier, etc). Bradley is a first team all defense player who can shoot. Crowder does a little bit of everything and is also a very good defender. They're both still decently young and on great contracts. Anyone who calls that mediocre shouldn't be calling out people for rating players wrong.
Doesn't make them untouchable. Bradley's going to get maxed in 2 years and there's no way in hell Boston keeps him around for that long.

numba1CHANGsta
07-13-2016, 05:34 PM
Well, they would have their bird rights, so they could offer both the most money. It makes keeping them a whole hell of a lot easier, especially with neither New yolk team being very good, the Lakers still rebuilding and the Clippers would be taking a step back. If they're playing together in Boston then that and the most money plus Horford is probably attractive enough to stay.

Maybe so, but people need to stop overrating Horford, he's 30 years old and last time I checked his team got swept in the playoffs. If Horford was so great then why didn't KD sign with them?

C-ross12
07-13-2016, 05:45 PM
If they had more years they wouldn't be on the market imo

Probably not. But that doesn't change the fact they they are indeed on one year deals. It would be hard to persuade me that 3 or 4 of our good assets would be worth 1 year of Blake or Westbrook. I would understand if a team, like Chicago, had little motivation to deal a player like Butler. But that doesn't mean we should panic and give up a lot for 1 year of a good player.

Green_Monster
07-13-2016, 05:56 PM
Doesn't make them untouchable. Bradley's going to get maxed in 2 years and there's no way in hell Boston keeps him around for that long.

No one said those players are untouchable though. You called them mediocre, which is hilariously wrong. I'm not sure what you're trying to do here.

Green_Monster
07-13-2016, 06:04 PM
Maybe so, but people need to stop overrating Horford, he's 30 years old and last time I checked his team got swept in the playoffs. If Horford was so great then why didn't KD sign with them?

KD had a chance to sign with a team that made the finals for two straight years without him. That's why.

KD signing with GS doesn't take anything away from Horford, come on now.

Alayla
07-13-2016, 08:23 PM
The realilty is a deal is going to cost alot more than i think the majority of Celtics fans feel comfortable giving and Danny Angie seems to have the same problem.
When you are trading for a guy like Westbrook or Griffin you are not looking for (Value!) you are looking to get a guy you can build around for the foreseeable future.
I feel like for alot of people managing to sign Horford justified what DA is doing but the reality of the situation is Horford alone is not really changing your situation you are still no where near contending without someone like Westbrook or DMC.
The Celtics are a very interesting young pretender right now with the assets to become a contender longer term but they will need to gut what theve got now to do it problem is the willingness to make that happen is not apparently there. We will see who is right in the end but no matter what there contracts look like you are not getting a foundation player for 50 cents on the dollar imo need to put your expectionations to around 75-80.

For Westbrook - IT Brooklyn 2017 and 2018 with Bradley or Kelly
For DMC IT BK 2018 celtics 2018 Jaylen
For Griffin Bradley Kelly Crowder C's 2018 Rozier and mabye a couple 2nds
For someone like Okafor or Noel like BK 2018+Bradley
That is the reality of the situation
Honestly as a fan of Philly to get rid of Oka id sell lower than what i think it would actually take personally maybe some other fans would as well.
But frankly you want honesty there it is i know alot of celtics fans don't want to hear that but guys like that are not cheap.

Alayla
07-13-2016, 08:29 PM
Honestly if Celtics fans are not willing to deal with the prices of these players they shouldn't be expecting a move at all. Stop thinking you will rip someone off because its DA that's nearly impossible to do with established stars.
It's like the groups of heat fans that think they will sign every good FA because of Pat Riley that just is not how it works.

Green_Monster
07-13-2016, 08:43 PM
The realilty is a deal is going to cost alot more than i think the majority of Celtics fans feel comfortable giving and Danny Angie seems to have the same problem.
When you are trading for a guy like Westbrook or Griffin you are not looking for (Value!) you are looking to get a guy you can build around for the foreseeable future.
I feel like for alot of people managing to sign Horford justified what DA is doing but the reality of the situation is Horford alone is not really changing your situation you are still no where near contending without someone like Westbrook or DMC.
The Celtics are a very interesting young pretender right now with the assets to become a contender longer term but they will need to gut what theve got now to do it problem is the willingness to make that happen is not apparently there. We will see who is right in the end but no matter what there contracts look like you are not getting a foundation player for 50 cents on the dollar imo need to put your expectionations to around 75-80.

For Westbrook - IT Brooklyn 2017 and 2018 with Bradley or Kelly
For DMC IT BK 2018 celtics 2018 Jaylen
For Griffin Bradley Kelly Crowder C's 2018 Rozier and mabye a couple 2nds
For someone like Okafor or Noel like BK 2018+Bradley
That is the reality of the situation
Honestly as a fan of Philly to get rid of Oka id sell lower than what i think it would actually take personally maybe some other fans would as well.
But frankly you want honesty there it is i know alot of celtics fans don't want to hear that but guys like that are not cheap.

How are you Sixers fans still going on with those offers? :laugh2: The Celtics weren't even willing to do it when it was only the #3 pick and the Sixers were trading like four pieces on draft night.

Give it up already, really. Since you want to lecture people on how valuable their assets are, I'll throw it back at you. Okafor and Noel aren't as valuable as you think they are.

Alayla
07-13-2016, 08:53 PM
How are you Sixers fans still going on with those offers? :laugh2: The Celtics weren't even willing to do it when it was only the #3 pick and the Sixers were trading like four pieces on draft night.

Give it up already, really. Since you want to lecture people on how valuable their assets are, I'll throw it back at you. Okafor and Noel aren't as valuable as you think they are.

BC outright said that wasn't true what is alot more likely is that is what DA was asking and if that was offer BC should be fired for it because that would be a panic move and just because one guy panicked does not mean they are worth that.
Frankly there is not any assets the Celtics have that i personally as a fan would ideally want but as i said in the Sixers forum i would literally do Okafor for Bradley straight up just to get Okafor out the door and for the team to start moving on but a deal like that would never happen.
I am really not the right person to aruge with about this as in terms of personal viewpoints i simply don't care i am willing to basically THROW Okafor out the door for almost nothing just to rebalance the team but that is again not how the NBA works
Your assets (as well as ours) our only worth what others are willing to pay for them Hinkie did not to Okafor for 3+ according to reports and Danny did not do Noel + for 3 according to reports the truth likely sits somewhere in the middle.

Rather than assuming i am a Sixers fan trying to FORCE something out of you (hint i am not particularly interested in anything you guys have)
Look at my viewpoint more from someone who is judging this on the history of deals of this nature that have been finished.
Trust me when i say if Noel 24 Covington and 26 was offered by BC and turned down for 3 alone Angie made a mistake and that type of mistake would only prove my point on him dramatically overvaluing what his pieces are worth.

Let me make one more thing clear to the bolded what i put up was not an offer personally to me Noel is the 2nd to last assest to EVER trade on this team the last being Simmons i would be pissed with a return of 2018 and Bradley for Noel personally becuase of Okafor's far worse fit for the team and honestly less senseable skillset for the position
Like you feel about your assests overall trading Noel would have to be a total trade rape for me to like it.

5ass
07-13-2016, 08:56 PM
No need to fight guys. The magic will come in and grab Blake for Ibaka, Fournier (if midseason, if not then mario), and Vucevic (third team for a SF). :D

Green_Monster
07-13-2016, 09:03 PM
BC outright said that wasn't true what is alot more likely is that is what DA was asking and if that was offer BC should be fired for it because that would be a panic move and just because one guy panicked does not mean they are worth that.
Frankly there is not any assets the Celtics have that i personally as a fan would ideally want but as i said in the Sixers forum i would literally do Okafor for Bradley straight up just to get Okafor out the door and for the team to start moving on but a deal like that would never happen.
I am really not the right person to aruge with about this as in terms of personal viewpoints i simply don't care i am willing to basically THROW Okafor out the door for almost nothing just to rebalance the team but that is again not how the NBA works
Your assets (as well as ours) our only worth what others are willing to pay for them Hinkie did not to Okafor for 3+ according to reports and Danny did not do Noel + for 3 according to reports the truth likely sits somewhere in the middle.

That really says all we need to know, though.


Rather than assuming i am a Sixers fan trying to FORCE something out of you (hint i am not particularly interested in anything you guys have)
Look at my viewpoint more from someone who is judging this on the history of deals of this nature that have been finished.
Trust me when i say if Noel 24 Covington and 26 was offered by BC and turned down for 3 alone Angie made a mistake and that type of mistake would only prove my point on him dramatically overvaluing what his pieces are worth.

Let me make one more thing clear to the bolded what i put up was not an offer personally to me Noel is the 2nd to last assest to EVER trade on this team the last being Simmons i would be pissed with a return of 2018 and Bradley for Noel personally becuase of Okafor's far worse fit for the team and honestly less senseable skillset for the position
Like you feel about your assests overall trading Noel would have to be a total trade rape for me to like it.

There it is again. Everyone across the NBA from coaches, GM's, players and media people realize the amount of assets the Celtics have, both in quality and quantity. It's all people talk about when it comes to the Celtics. But you aren't really interested in them. I don't know if you just dislike the Celtics/Ainge with a burning passion or what, but man, that's truly incredible.

Much like when I was told there was no way the Sixers would offer more than Noel/Oakfor for #3. There's nothing anyone can do once that's drilled into your mind, so I'll bow out to save us both time.

tp13baby
07-13-2016, 09:26 PM
Well put this into account. LA offered Denver Blake for Gallo, Faried, Jokic, and Barton. A lot of talent is going to be sent back LA or even OKC way to get them.

Cracka2HI!
07-14-2016, 12:52 AM
I think the main reason nothing is getting done for Boston is because they keep refusing to overpay. To get a star that's what they'll have to do. Otherwise they'll give up an asset or 2 for a guy like Rudy Gay and keep coming up short. For the Clippers I think it's the right time to trade Blake Griffin. The Celtics seem like a great fit. I realize the Celtics need to keep a lot of their core together for it to make sense. They don't need to keep the draft picks. The Clippers will want to stay competitive. A deal I might take if I was the Clippers and give up if were Boston would be; Crowder, Johnson(salary), Olynk, Smart and the 2 Brooklyn picks. Normally I'd need that plus Bradley but in a contract year I'd probably settle for that. You can't think of it as being one and done for Boston. You hope that Blake, Thomas, Horford and Bradley and the other 7-10 high draft picks they have on their team or in their system is enough to make a deep playoff run and for Blake to want to stay.

FraziersKnicks
07-14-2016, 04:23 AM
If I'm OKC I'm asking for the '17 and '18 BK pick and Jaylen Brown for Westbrook. Get into a true rebuild.

You're then gonna have at least TWO top 8 picks in the next two drafts.

That's 5 top 8 picks across 3 years with (Jaylen Brown, '17 Nets/Thunder pick, '18 Nets/Thunder pick), three more young lottery picks (Adams/Sabonis/Payne) and two former #3 picks who are both still under 25 (Kanter and Oladipo if they re-sign him).

That team's only 2nd to the baby Wolves in terms of young talent.

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 08:20 AM
The realilty is a deal is going to cost alot more than i think the majority of Celtics fans feel comfortable giving and Danny Angie seems to have the same problem.
When you are trading for a guy like Westbrook or Griffin you are not looking for (Value!) you are looking to get a guy you can build around for the foreseeable future.
I feel like for alot of people managing to sign Horford justified what DA is doing but the reality of the situation is Horford alone is not really changing your situation you are still no where near contending without someone like Westbrook or DMC.
The Celtics are a very interesting young pretender right now with the assets to become a contender longer term but they will need to gut what theve got now to do it problem is the willingness to make that happen is not apparently there. We will see who is right in the end but no matter what there contracts look like you are not getting a foundation player for 50 cents on the dollar imo need to put your expectionations to around 75-80.

For Westbrook - IT Brooklyn 2017 and 2018 with Bradley or Kelly
For DMC IT BK 2018 celtics 2018 Jaylen
For Griffin Bradley Kelly Crowder C's 2018 Rozier and mabye a couple 2nds
For someone like Okafor or Noel like BK 2018+Bradley
That is the reality of the situation
Honestly as a fan of Philly to get rid of Oka id sell lower than what i think it would actually take personally maybe some other fans would as well.
But frankly you want honesty there it is i know alot of celtics fans don't want to hear that but guys like that are not cheap.

It's not about winning deals. You need stars to win but that's plural - starS. What BOS has right now is a terrific 3-10 really. They need the #1 and the #2. But if to get the #1 or #2 they have to give up #4-6 AND the means to replace them AND the means to add the other #1/2 player they need then what's the point? You won't be good enough to compete.

Because BOS is pretty solid people have this perspective that we're in "win now" mode. We're still rebuilding/retooling. We just happen to be pretty solid while we do it and have another team tanking for us to get the high picks. We're not in position to cash in unless it's a great deal. That simple really.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 08:50 AM
I think the main reason nothing is getting done for Boston is because they keep refusing to overpay. To get a star that's what they'll have to do. Otherwise they'll give up an asset or 2 for a guy like Rudy Gay and keep coming up short. For the Clippers I think it's the right time to trade Blake Griffin. The Celtics seem like a great fit. I realize the Celtics need to keep a lot of their core together for it to make sense. They don't need to keep the draft picks. The Clippers will want to stay competitive. A deal I might take if I was the Clippers and give up if were Boston would be; Crowder, Johnson(salary), Olynk, Smart and the 2 Brooklyn picks. Normally I'd need that plus Bradley but in a contract year I'd probably settle for that. You can't think of it as being one and done for Boston. You hope that Blake, Thomas, Horford and Bradley and the other 7-10 high draft picks they have on their team or in their system is enough to make a deep playoff run and for Blake to want to stay.

Ainge doesn't make that trade. You don't give up both Brooklyn picks and Crowder+Smart+Olynyk for a chance to sign Griffin long term.

warfelg
07-14-2016, 09:06 AM
Clips ain't looking to rebuild and are giving up the best player. It's Doc but even he wouldn't let Boston get away with robbing Blake. You want a star? Take a risk he doesn't come back because y'all ain't landing one unless he tries it there.

Kinda the way I feel when I hear "Boston interested in 'Player X'".

They have a lot of nice parts, but most the players/teams they are linked to aren't likely to take on all those parts.

Clips - They are contenders. They aren't looking to take a step back, so it would take almost all of Boston's "win now" players to get the Clips to even listen.
Thunder - Sure, they could be looking to rebuild, but it would take all to most of Boston's future assets to get the Thunder to even listen.
Sixers - We are looking to take on quality not quantity. Besides, with Saric coming today or tomorrow, we will officially have 16 players under contract and have to make a 2 for 1 or 3 for 2 or Player for Pick type deal.

So the 3 teams they have been most linked with and not much of a reason to make a deal without a bunch of parts moving.

nycericanguy
07-14-2016, 09:51 AM
BOS's best assets for the nets pick, though now they have used 1 of those picks this year.

Bradley and Crowder are nice young role players on good contracts, but they dont really have star upside which is what teams generally want when trading a superstar.

and its a bit of a cone drum because if BOS trades all their role players for a star, then what does that leave them with?

BoSox47
07-14-2016, 10:10 AM
when did RW say he was leaving OKC?

This is what aldridge said and you can also check it out on google if you want, theres a few articles on it.

@daldridgetnt
Told emphatically by league source there's no chance Russell Westbrook will do a renegotiation/extension of his contract (one yr remaining).

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 10:14 AM
Kinda the way I feel when I hear "Boston interested in 'Player X'".

They have a lot of nice parts, but most the players/teams they are linked to aren't likely to take on all those parts.

Clips - They are contenders. They aren't looking to take a step back, so it would take almost all of Boston's "win now" players to get the Clips to even listen.
Thunder - Sure, they could be looking to rebuild, but it would take all to most of Boston's future assets to get the Thunder to even listen.
Sixers - We are looking to take on quality not quantity. Besides, with Saric coming today or tomorrow, we will officially have 16 players under contract and have to make a 2 for 1 or 3 for 2 or Player for Pick type deal.

So the 3 teams they have been most linked with and not much of a reason to make a deal without a bunch of parts moving.

The Celtics wouldn't be sending the Sixers multiple pieces if anything happened anyway. That ship has sailed. The value of Okafor/Noel to the Celtics was overstated. The Celtics would be the ones getting more pieces, if the draft day rumors were true.

warfelg
07-14-2016, 10:19 AM
This is what aldridge said and you can also check it out on google if you want, theres a few articles on it.

@daldridgetnt
Told emphatically by league source there's no chance Russell Westbrook will do a renegotiation/extension of his contract (one yr remaining).

And Aldridge is right.

Partially because the NBA extension rules are stupid.

If he signed this year it would be a new 4 year deal starting now at $118 mil. If he waits until FA and signs back with the team that has his rights, it's a 5 year $158 mil deal.

warfelg
07-14-2016, 10:20 AM
The Celtics wouldn't be sending the Sixers multiple pieces if anything happened anyway. That ship has sailed. The value of Okafor/Noel to the Celtics was overstated. The Celtics would be the ones getting more pieces, if the draft day rumors were true.

They weren't true.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 10:27 AM
They weren't true.

Says who? Your GM? He has nothing to gain from denying the rumors right?

Also, I recall people in the 76'ers forum saying you were there on draft night. They also said that you said everyone on the floor was shocked that Ainge didn't take the offer and they were laughing at him. What happened to that?

TheDish87
07-14-2016, 10:37 AM
This is what aldridge said and you can also check it out on google if you want, theres a few articles on it.

@daldridgetnt
Told emphatically by league source there's no chance Russell Westbrook will do a renegotiation/extension of his contract (one yr remaining).

that doesnt mean hes leaving. he stands to make more money by waiting til next season

warfelg
07-14-2016, 10:42 AM
Says who? Your GM? He has nothing to gain from denying the rumors right?

Also, I recall people in the 76'ers forum saying you were there on draft night. They also said that you said everyone on the floor was shocked that Ainge didn't take the offer and they were laughing at him. What happened to that?

I was getting information on that from writers. I went to my source, who talked to other GM's that knew about the talks and said it never got that big.

Basically Ainge only wanted to give up 3. Colangelo wanted more than just 3 back for anything more than just one of his bigs. They could never agree on even value. So it fizzled out fast.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 10:57 AM
The Celtics wouldn't be sending the Sixers multiple pieces if anything happened anyway. That ship has sailed. The value of Okafor/Noel to the Celtics was overstated. The Celtics would be the ones getting more pieces, if the draft day rumors were true.

Considering the Sixers GM stated they where not its up in the air as I said if something like that was on the table you should be more angry at your GM for not doing it frankly.

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 11:00 AM
I was getting information on that from writers. I went to my source, who talked to other GM's that knew about the talks and said it never got that big.

Basically Ainge only wanted to give up 3. Colangelo wanted more than just 3 back for anything more than just one of his bigs. They could never agree on even value. So it fizzled out fast.

Sounds like the details might have been misreported but the general gist of JC offering up extra to get Dunn is true. He said a big for #3 and Ainge said no. So JC said OK I'll add to it but I also want more from you too. If I'm correct on that it seems to imply that what PHI was adding would be more than what BOS was adding. But JC wanted what he was adding to be offset to some extent by BOS including some more.

Is that an accurate read of things according to your source?

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 11:02 AM
Considering the Sixers GM stated they where not its up in the air as I said if something like that was on the table you should be more angry at your GM for not doing it frankly.

The Sixers GM saying they're not true doesn't mean they're not true. He has nothing to gain by admitting he offered up that much. In fact, it would be incredibly stupid for him to admit that.

I'm fine with Ainge not taking it. The two 1sts were late and Covington is nothing special. If Ainge sees greatness in Brown, then it's easy to see why he wouldn't do that trade.

warfelg
07-14-2016, 11:03 AM
Considering the Sixers GM stated they where not its up in the air as I said if something like that was on the table you should be more angry at your GM for not doing it frankly.

It was explained to me that we should know they were bad rumors for the following reasons:
1) Colangelo would have been a fool to negotiate something like that and let it get that far.
2) Ainge has been hot on one of the Sixers bigs. If he wanted them that bad, he would not have let adding more to pick #3 deter him.
3) When it's one that people snicker at, then you know it's not balanced.

It happens. On draft night I got lead to believe it was close than what it was from what people around me were saying. But in reality it didn't really get all that close.

TrAv=MaGiCfReAk
07-14-2016, 11:04 AM
that doesnt mean hes leaving. he stands to make more money by waiting til next season

And there is no chance okc takes that chance and waits to find out to be left with nothing after just losing KD.

He will be traded its just a matter of when and maybe they roll the dice and keep him cause the offers are so low for a possible rental. I think there is no chance he stays tho.

That's not being a hater either I love okc its just this new NBA is winning only and his chances to win on the current thunder team is slim oladipo is a FA next off season also

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 11:05 AM
Considering the Sixers GM stated they where not its up in the air as I said if something like that was on the table you should be more angry at your GM for not doing it frankly.

The Noel + Covington + #24 + #26 rumors... I would have definitely done that but it's not as slam dunk as you'd think IMO. BOS has a roster full of role players. We need top of the roster talent. That PHI package includes none of that. It's a great offer that I would have taken but if they really like Brown's upside to be top of the roster caliber then I'd take the chance on it. It's just tough for me to say because I don't pretend to really have a clue.

Noel is a favorite of mine but he's just too offensively limited to be top of the roster talent. He'd be another rotation guy on a team full of them and a significant hindrance to financial flexibility in adding a star with his contract up after the year. Covington is a nice player but just your run of the mill rotation shooter IMO. His value is that he's so cheap but for a BOS team with a full roster that isn't as valuable. #24/#26 are crap shoot throw-ins like all later picks.

I would have done the deal because I generally have little faith in prospects that aren't Simmons caliber but NBA teams obviously have more faith in their evaluations. So even though I think that's a TERRIFIC offer I think it's smart to pass up if you have legitimate belief in the upside of a player on the board. At least when you're in the position Boston is of needed top of the roster talent.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 11:06 AM
That really says all we need to know, though.



There it is again. Everyone across the NBA from coaches, GM's, players and media people realize the amount of assets the Celtics have, both in quality and quantity. It's all people talk about when it comes to the Celtics. But you aren't really interested in them. I don't know if you just dislike the Celtics/Ainge with a burning passion or what, but man, that's truly incredible.

Much like when I was told there was no way the Sixers would offer more than Noel/Oakfor for #3. There's nothing anyone can do once that's drilled into your mind, so I'll bow out to save us both time.

Having assets does not mean they will be desirable to everyone 3 on draft night was desirable for me because Kris Dunn was desirable outside of that nothing really pops for us or our situation.
Not even the 2017 Brooklyn swap as it marginalizes our Sac swap TBH I simply don't see a deal between our teams getting done that's what I mean when I'm saying that.

warfelg
07-14-2016, 11:08 AM
Sounds like the details might have been misreported but the general gist of JC offering up extra to get Dunn is true. He said a big for #3 and Ainge said no. So JC said OK I'll add to it but I also want more from you too. If I'm correct on that it seems to imply that what PHI was adding would be more than what BOS was adding. But JC wanted what he was adding to be offset to some extent by BOS including some more.

Is that an accurate read of things according to your source?

Basically the minute that Boston took Brown and not Dunn the talks were over.

And it was Ainge asking Colangelo to add some to it. At times the reported parts were part of a potential deal, but they weren't offered as a complete package from what I'm told. And there was more than just 3 coming back our way. But they couldn't agree on the basis of what balanced out the deal.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-14-2016, 11:08 AM
Also celtics will be at the top of any trade rumors for star players because of our assets alone. I wouldnt look to much into these rumors. Any trade for Cousins, Butler, Griffin or Westbrook will take out half of our assets minimum.

Kings and Celtics look like good trade partners. The Celtics could use someone of Cousins ability (then move Horford to PF where he belongs) and the Kings need to begin another rebuild. That 2017 draft pick is a good start.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 11:10 AM
It's not about winning deals. You need stars to win but that's plural - starS. What BOS has right now is a terrific 3-10 really. They need the #1 and the #2. But if to get the #1 or #2 they have to give up #4-6 AND the means to replace them AND the means to add the other #1/2 player they need then what's the point? You won't be good enough to compete.

Because BOS is pretty solid people have this perspective that we're in "win now" mode. We're still rebuilding/retooling. We just happen to be pretty solid while we do it and have another team tanking for us to get the high picks. We're not in position to cash in unless it's a great deal. That simple really.

Everything you said literally just agreed with me honestly the reason nothing gets done for the Celtics is because they don't feel willing to put themselves in position to get things done it really is that simple they want to get a star without giving up a star haul understandable from there perspective but highly unlikely to ever happen.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 11:12 AM
I think the main reason nothing is getting done for Boston is because they keep refusing to overpay. To get a star that's what they'll have to do. Otherwise they'll give up an asset or 2 for a guy like Rudy Gay and keep coming up short. For the Clippers I think it's the right time to trade Blake Griffin. The Celtics seem like a great fit. I realize the Celtics need to keep a lot of their core together for it to make sense. They don't need to keep the draft picks. The Clippers will want to stay competitive. A deal I might take if I was the Clippers and give up if were Boston would be; Crowder, Johnson(salary), Olynk, Smart and the 2 Brooklyn picks. Normally I'd need that plus Bradley but in a contract year I'd probably settle for that. You can't think of it as being one and done for Boston. You hope that Blake, Thomas, Horford and Bradley and the other 7-10 high draft picks they have on their team or in their system is enough to make a deep playoff run and for Blake to want to stay.

Bingo having the assets wont get you a trade if you are not willing to trade the assets.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 11:19 AM
Having assets does not mean they will be desirable to everyone 3 on draft night was desirable for me because Kris Dunn was desirable outside of that nothing really pops for us or our situation.
Not even the 2017 Brooklyn swap as it marginalizes our Sac swap TBH I simply don't see a deal between our teams getting done that's what I mean when I'm saying that.

You're being beyond ridiculous, man. The Nets picks are some of the best assets in the NBA.

I'm stunned at this point. I didn't think even the biggest Celtics hater could deny the value of that pick. I was wrong.

xxplayerxx23
07-14-2016, 11:26 AM
Can they trade swap rights ? 017 swap rights +Bradley is pretty fair value

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 11:31 AM
Can they trade swap rights ? 017 swap rights +Bradley is pretty fair value

Yeah, they can trade it.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-14-2016, 11:31 AM
You're being beyond ridiculous, man. The Nets picks are some of the best assets in the NBA.

I'm stunned at this point. I didn't think even the biggest Celtics hater could deny the value of that pick. I was wrong.

What's more valuable... having a couple of top draft picks or having a young superstar entering his prime? Those picks could easily bust as we've seen in years past. It's not like the next Lebron is going to be available in this upcoming draft. If he was we'd be hearing about him by now. The Celtics just had the #3 pick and took a guy who likely won't be as good as any of the type of superstars we are talking about them trading for. Are those Brooklyn picks guaranteed to land the #1 pick. No. Are these picks guaranteed to land them impact players? No.

A proven superstar is probably worth about two top draft picks. The bust rate is just too high in the draft for those picks to be worth as much as you and others try to make them out to be. For a team like Boston who is built to them more, I'd like to think a proven star is worth more to them.

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 11:35 AM
Bingo having the assets wont get you a trade if you are not willing to trade the assets.

I think they're willing it just hasn't made sense for them yet. If it made sense Ainge would give up anything IMO. If Durant said he'd sign here if we got Butler then he'd have given up Bradley/Smart/Crowder/both BRK picks if that's what it took. It would have made sense in that scenario.

The reasons why teams trade stars is that they come to the conclusion that they don't have the ability to effectively build around them. Trading for that star make no sense if it just puts you in that position. Right now that's kind of where BOS is because they lack a centerpiece. They need Brown to flash huge potential or one of the BRK picks to go high. It's like when CLE gave up Wiggins plus nothing really for Love. Or when BOS gave up Al Jeff plus fodder for KG. Those were "trump cards". Assets so valuable that they put you in the driver seat of any deal even if you don't give up everything else you have.

If Ainge had gotten #2 or especially #1 this year then we wouldn't be talking about the type of packages we have been. Ingram/Simmons would be such valuable assets that it wouldn't take all the added pieces to make a deal work. The 2017 pick seems to have great potential to be that type of piece with BRK being so bad on paper and the class being so supposedly good. A little patience can go a long way. We tore our roster to the bones just 2 and a half years ago. It's still relatively early in the process. If the moves are out there then great but they don't have to be made right away.

Right now BOS would be in a spot like when NY traded for Melo. They had no centerpiece so they gave up everything and have faced an uphill battle to build around him.

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 11:38 AM
You're being beyond ridiculous, man. The Nets picks are some of the best assets in the NBA.

I'm stunned at this point. I didn't think even the biggest Celtics hater could deny the value of that pick. I was wrong.

They're in a unique spot. They themselves already figure to be pretty bad. They also have the rights to swap with Sac who figure to be bad. If we give them the right to swap they can only make one of those picks. They already have the chance to pick at two spots that figure to be pretty high. Marginal returns - that third chance is less valuable than the second which is less valuable than the first.

If it was a straight up pick like 2018 then that would be of huge value to them. But the further away a draft is the more risk with a pick so having that straight pick in 2018 is less value than if it were in 2017.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-14-2016, 11:40 AM
Having assets does not mean they will be desirable to everyone 3 on draft night was desirable for me because Kris Dunn was desirable outside of that nothing really pops for us or our situation.
Not even the 2017 Brooklyn swap as it marginalizes our Sac swap TBH I simply don't see a deal between our teams getting done that's what I mean when I'm saying that.

What a bad trade for Sac that was. That swap trade was nonsense. The Kings need to start rebuilding like Minnesota did a few years ago. They need to trade Cousins for a top draft pick or two while his value is still at it's peak. The time to trade him is now, but because of that damn pick swap with Philly, we wouldn't even be benefitting from our own draft pick as much. I'm sure Philly will still suck all things considered, so we'll still have an early pick, but this basically kills any chance of getting at top 3 pick.

They needed to trade Cousins, get a top pick, and also have the benefit of their own top picks they would be getting from sucking so bad for a couple of years. Right now they are a 35 win team and they aren't going to build a winning team with the #8 pick year after year. Time to trade Cousins before his contract is up, but that damn swap trade puts a wrench in everything.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 11:41 AM
What's more valuable... having a couple of top draft picks or having a young superstar entering his prime? Those picks could easily bust as we've seen in years past. It's not like the next Lebron is going to be available in this upcoming draft. If he was we'd be hearing about him by now. The Celtics just had the #3 pick and took a guy who likely won't be as good as any of the type of superstars we are talking about them trading for. Are those Brooklyn picks guaranteed to land the #1 pick. No. Are these picks guaranteed to land them impact players? No.

A proven superstar is probably worth about two top draft picks. The bust rate is just too high in the draft for those picks to be worth as much as you and others try to make them out to be. For a team like Boston who is built to them more, I'd like to think a proven star is worth more to them.

I wasn't comparing the picks to a superstar. Neither was he. Read back.

He said he wasn't interested in Boston's assets. I said that's ridiculous because they're very valuable.

warfelg
07-14-2016, 11:47 AM
I think they're willing it just hasn't made sense for them yet. If it made sense Ainge would give up anything IMO. If Durant said he'd sign here if we got Butler then he'd have given up Bradley/Smart/Crowder/both BRK picks if that's what it took. It would have made sense in that scenario.

The reasons why teams trade stars is that they come to the conclusion that they don't have the ability to effectively build around them. Trading for that star make no sense if it just puts you in that position. Right now that's kind of where BOS is because they lack a centerpiece. They need Brown to flash huge potential or one of the BRK picks to go high. It's like when CLE gave up Wiggins plus nothing really for Love. Or when BOS gave up Al Jeff plus fodder for KG. Those were "trump cards". Assets so valuable that they put you in the driver seat of any deal even if you don't give up everything else you have.

If Ainge had gotten #2 or especially #1 this year then we wouldn't be talking about the type of packages we have been. Ingram/Simmons would be such valuable assets that it wouldn't take all the added pieces to make a deal work. The 2017 pick seems to have great potential to be that type of piece with BRK being so bad on paper and the class being so supposedly good. A little patience can go a long way. We tore our roster to the bones just 2 and a half years ago. It's still relatively early in the process. If the moves are out there then great but they don't have to be made right away.

Right now BOS would be in a spot like when NY traded for Melo. They had no centerpiece so they gave up everything and have faced an uphill battle to build around him.

Well said.

And it's what (IMO) makes that Boston situation a tough one. Usually a GM sending out a star wants one or two young studs that he can point to as the guys to build around. And picks are far from a forgone conclusion so it's hard to hang on that for being a great trade.

And just to be objective for a minute -
Brown. Sure he's young but there's tons of questions there.
IT. Could you agree last year was his best case? Sure he might be that for 4-6 years, but I doubt he ends up much more.
Crowder, Rozier, Smart, Sully. All nice parts but nothing to build a team around.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 11:48 AM
They're in a unique spot. They themselves already figure to be pretty bad. They also have the rights to swap with Sac who figure to be bad. If we give them the right to swap they can only make one of those picks. They already have the chance to pick at two spots that figure to be pretty high. Marginal returns - that third chance is less valuable than the second which is less valuable than the first.

If it was a straight up pick like 2018 then that would be of huge value to them. But the further away a draft is the more risk with a pick so having that straight pick in 2018 is less value than if it were in 2017.

No? They'd get the better of the Nets/Celtics pick. Unless you mean something different. It pretty much is a straight pick in their view. They basically get the Nets pick.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 11:51 AM
Well said.

And it's what (IMO) makes that Boston situation a tough one. Usually a GM sending out a star wants one or two young studs that he can point to as the guys to build around. And picks are far from a forgone conclusion so it's hard to hang on that for being a great trade.

And just to be objective for a minute -
Brown. Sure he's young but there's tons of questions there.
IT. Could you agree last year was his best case? Sure he might be that for 4-6 years, but I doubt he ends up much more.
Crowder, Rozier, Smart, Sully. All nice parts but nothing to build a team around.

Sullinger signed with the Raptors.

FOXHOUND
07-14-2016, 11:54 AM
What BOS has right now is a terrific 3-10 really. They need the #1 and the #2. But if to get the #1 or #2 they have to give up #4-6 AND the means to replace them AND the means to add the other #1/2 player they need then what's the point?

That's just it, though. That's why these Boston assets are overrated. It's because really they'e just a group of players who are the 4-6 type guys and no realistic shot of ever becoming a top 3 guy. It's unrealistic to think that any team is going to trade a #1 or #2 guy, who are by far the hardest to acquire in the NBA, for those types of players.

You look back at the Melo trade, look at those players. Young players like Danilo Gallinari and Wilson Chandler who at the time looked like they could develop into All-Star caliber players. Plus players like Raymond Felton and Timofey Mozgov, plus 2 1st round picks.

Why do you do trades like that? You do it to get that ultra rare #1/#2 player to build around, instead of just having a team of role players that aren't going anywhere. You get a Blake Griffin and it becomes much easier to find 3 and D guys like Jae Crowder or whoever. Blake Griffin is 27, Jae Crowder is 26. That type of swap is a no brainer, and honestly that's why it's not nearly enough.

nycericanguy
07-14-2016, 12:06 PM
A young star is worth more than a top 5 pick... look at Butler on the market, teams were offering the #3 and #5 picks but that was just the START of the convo. MIN I believe offered the #5, Lavine & Dieng?

BOS doesn't have that young upside player to attach to the pick.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-14-2016, 12:09 PM
When we are talking about swap picks, does the swap occur before or after the lottery draw?

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-14-2016, 12:10 PM
Would BOS give up the 2017 and 2018 Brooklyn picks straight up for Cousins?

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 12:12 PM
When we are talking about swap picks, does the swap occur before or after the lottery draw?

I'd imagine after. For the Celtics and Nets that likely won't matter though.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 12:14 PM
Would BOS give up the 2017 and 2018 Brooklyn picks straight up for Cousins?

I doubt it. Ainge is reluctant to trade either, let alone both. It's not often you can have two top 5 picks (this year having a great shot at #1) and be in the playoffs.

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 12:24 PM
Well said.

And it's what (IMO) makes that Boston situation a tough one. Usually a GM sending out a star wants one or two young studs that he can point to as the guys to build around. And picks are far from a forgone conclusion so it's hard to hang on that for being a great trade.

And just to be objective for a minute -
Brown. Sure he's young but there's tons of questions there.
IT. Could you agree last year was his best case? Sure he might be that for 4-6 years, but I doubt he ends up much more.
Crowder, Rozier, Smart, Sully. All nice parts but nothing to build a team around.

I think BOS is in a unique position of flexibility where they have high picks from BRK, cap space because of cheap deals and many tradable assets. I think generally teams with their roster would be stuck in that dreaded middle ground but they've uniquely avoided it with those factors. But in a couple of seasons those cheap deals will be expired and the BRK picks will be done so if things don't break our way we're going to have tear it back down. We're not "stuck" but in a couple of years we could be. So the clock is somewhat ticking. I think next offseason is "judgement day" of sorts. That's where, IMO, they have to really make the decision to keep moving forward or take a step back. We'll have what should be a very high pick in a good class and max salary cap space. Next year is when they should be able to make moves into contender status. If it doesn't materialize then I think you trade IT/Bradley/Crowder and start again.

warfelg
07-14-2016, 12:28 PM
When we are talking about swap picks, does the swap occur before or after the lottery draw?

After. And it would be worded "the higher of the Brooklyn or Boston pick". Because technically Boston can't trade Brooklyns pick.

So they would send the rights, swap, then the high pick would officially become whoever owns the right.

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 12:36 PM
When we are talking about swap picks, does the swap occur before or after the lottery draw?

After


Would BOS give up the 2017 and 2018 Brooklyn picks straight up for Cousins?

IDK if Ainge would but Hugepatsfan sure as **** would! lol

warfelg
07-14-2016, 12:37 PM
I think BOS is in a unique position of flexibility where they have high picks from BRK, cap space because of cheap deals and many tradable assets. I think generally teams with their roster would be stuck in that dreaded middle ground but they've uniquely avoided it with those factors. But in a couple of seasons those cheap deals will be expired and the BRK picks will be done so if things don't break our way we're going to have tear it back down. We're not "stuck" but in a couple of years we could be. So the clock is somewhat ticking. I think next offseason is "judgement day" of sorts. That's where, IMO, they have to really make the decision to keep moving forward or take a step back. We'll have what should be a very high pick in a good class and max salary cap space. Next year is when they should be able to make moves into contender status. If it doesn't materialize then I think you trade IT/Bradley/Crowder and start again.

Yea. Stuck isn't the right term. But they are in that strange middle spot where trading for a star weakens their team a little too much right now, but sitting still might not push them up and over the top.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 12:47 PM
You're being beyond ridiculous, man. The Nets picks are some of the best assets in the NBA.

I'm stunned at this point. I didn't think even the biggest Celtics hater could deny the value of that pick. I was wrong.

1. I do not "hate" any NBA team hell at one point a relative of mine played on the Celtics
2. I am not denying the value of the pic I am saying for the Sixers it does not make sense because then the Sac Swap becomes a less useful asset
3. My entire stance is different assets have different value to different people it is not linear.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 12:59 PM
No? They'd get the better of the Nets/Celtics pick. Unless you mean something different. It pretty much is a straight pick in their view. They basically get the Nets pick.

I'm fairly certain you would be trading the right to swap not the pick itself. Brooklyn would still get some asset in return it would have to that was the way the deal was made so I am fairly sure you would just be trading swap rights and in our situation that is not at all useful.

FOXHOUND
07-14-2016, 01:06 PM
Another reason why Boston should do it, if they can, is the growing cap next year. They shouldn't fret about having to include more players/more salary, because they can trade for Blake and still have about $40M of cap space next year if the cap is at $105M.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 01:13 PM
1. I do not "hate" any NBA team hell at one point a relative of mine played on the Celtics
2. I am not denying the value of the pic I am saying for the Sixers it does not make sense because then the Sac Swap becomes a less useful asset
3. My entire stance is different assets have different value to different people it is not linear.

You've explained yourself clearly a couple of times. You're not a fan of potential top 3 picks. They don't interest you. I get it. Here are your direct quotes:

1. "Frankly there is not any assets the Celtics have that i personally as a fan would ideally want."
2. "Hint i am not particularly interested in anything you guys have."
3. "Outside of that nothing really pops for us or our situation. Not even the 2017 Brooklyn swap as it marginalizes our Sac swap."

I don't know why you keep going on with the Brooklyn pick making the Sacramento pick less useful. That doesn't make sense. You would get both the Sacramento and Brooklyn picks. Sacramento would get your pick if it's better, and Brooklyn would get the Boston pick. This isn't rocket science.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 01:14 PM
I'm fairly certain you would be trading the right to swap not the pick itself. Brooklyn would still get some asset in return it would have to that was the way the deal was made so I am fairly sure you would just be trading swap rights and in our situation that is not at all useful.

Yes, Brooklyn would still get the Celtics pick. The 76'ers would pretty much get the Nets pick barring a miracle.

How the **** is that not useful?

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 01:29 PM
I would offer up to the following to SAC for Cousins:

1) either Smart or Rozier
2) either Bradley or Crowder
3) 2017 and 2018 BRK picks
4) 2019 MEM 1st rounder
5) A future BOS pick

That works salary wise for BOS if we renounce Tyler Zeller. And it gives us max cap space next year to sign hopefully one of Blake/Westbrook/Hayward - trade Horford if you get Blake.

I don't think SAC would do that deal right now unfortunately but I think it's something to revisit in the offseason when Cousins will be a year away from FA and the 2017 BRK pick is probably solidified.

Vee-Rex
07-14-2016, 01:45 PM
I would offer up to the following to SAC for Cousins:

1) either Smart or Rozier
2) either Bradley or Crowder
3) 2017 and 2018 BRK picks
4) 2019 MEM 1st rounder
5) A future BOS pick

That works salary wise for BOS if we renounce Tyler Zeller. And it gives us max cap space next year to sign hopefully one of Blake/Westbrook/Hayward - trade Horford if you get Blake.

I don't think SAC would do that deal right now unfortunately but I think it's something to revisit in the offseason when Cousins will be a year away from FA and the 2017 BRK pick is probably solidified.

Idk, man. That seems like a ton to give up for Cousins. The only way I would think about giving that up is if it's for a Westbrook + extension.

The pressure is gonna be on both the Clippers and Thunder prior to the trade deadline. As for right now, I would offer Smart/Rozier + Bradley/Crowder + ONE BRK pick + a future BOS pick for Blake or Cousins.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 01:52 PM
Yes, Brooklyn would still get the Celtics pick. The 76'ers would pretty much get the Nets pick barring a miracle.

How the **** is that not useful?

If that's the case its fine
Even still though you seem like a very aggressive person from your posts and seem way to emotionally invested in your team.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 02:06 PM
If that's the case its fine
Even still though you seem like a very aggressive person from your posts and seem way to emotionally invested in your team.

You seem like a person who doesn't understand NBA value and thinks only your own teams players are good.

I like how you didn't respond to my other post. Here's what you said about the Celtics assets, who basically everyone across the NBA believes they're loaded with them.

1. "Frankly there is not any assets the Celtics have that i personally as a fan would ideally want."
2. "Hint i am not particularly interested in anything you guys have."
3. "Outside of that nothing really pops for us or our situation. Not even the 2017 Brooklyn swap as it marginalizes our Sac swap."

That shows that you either don't understand value, you dislike anything involving the Celtics, or you're incredibly biased.

JLynn943
07-14-2016, 02:30 PM
I would offer up to the following to SAC for Cousins:

1) either Smart or Rozier
2) either Bradley or Crowder
3) 2017 and 2018 BRK picks
4) 2019 MEM 1st rounder
5) A future BOS pick

That works salary wise for BOS if we renounce Tyler Zeller. And it gives us max cap space next year to sign hopefully one of Blake/Westbrook/Hayward - trade Horford if you get Blake.

I don't think SAC would do that deal right now unfortunately but I think it's something to revisit in the offseason when Cousins will be a year away from FA and the 2017 BRK pick is probably solidified.

As a Kings fan, I'd do it, but yeah, next offseason seems more likely. Vlade is going to want to wait and see how Cousins works with Joerger, and there's a lot of pressure from ownership to put out the best team possible this year with the new arena opening.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 03:23 PM
You seem like a person who doesn't understand NBA value and thinks only your own teams players are good.

I like how you didn't respond to my other post. Here's what you said about the Celtics assets, who basically everyone across the NBA believes they're loaded with them.

1. "Frankly there is not any assets the Celtics have that i personally as a fan would ideally want."
2. "Hint i am not particularly interested in anything you guys have."
3. "Outside of that nothing really pops for us or our situation. Not even the 2017 Brooklyn swap as it marginalizes our Sac swap."

That shows that you either don't understand value, you dislike anything involving the Celtics, or you're incredibly biased.

You seem to struggle with reading comprehension. I never said the Celtics assets are not valuable i said i don't want them there are plenty of reasons outside of homerism not to care for certain assets. I also love how you ignored that on many separate situations i have stated i have no issue with the Celtics and even have family ties there.
I am not emotionally invested in any basketball team not even my own to that type of degree.
More than even that you entirely ignored my other value examples that don't pertain to the sixers at this point you are more or less baiting just stop ^~^.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 03:32 PM
You've explained yourself clearly a couple of times. You're not a fan of potential top 3 picks. They don't interest you. I get it. Here are your direct quotes:

1. "Frankly there is not any assets the Celtics have that i personally as a fan would ideally want."
2. "Hint i am not particularly interested in anything you guys have."
3. "Outside of that nothing really pops for us or our situation. Not even the 2017 Brooklyn swap as it marginalizes our Sac swap."

I don't know why you keep going on with the Brooklyn pick making the Sacramento pick less useful. That doesn't make sense. You would get both the Sacramento and Brooklyn picks. Sacramento would get your pick if it's better, and Brooklyn would get the Boston pick. This isn't rocket science.

I understood it as acquiring the right to swap from the trade hell a fan of your team did as well and again you are clearly to emotionally invested right now stay away from basketball for a few days and clear your head.

Green_Monster
07-14-2016, 03:44 PM
I understood it as acquiring the right to swap from the trade hell a fan of your team did as well and again you are clearly to emotionally invested right now stay away from basketball for a few days and clear your head.

I understand you don't ideally want two chances at a top 3 pick, a first team all defender, or the guy who was just drafted third overall.

That's all anyone really needs to know. Your direct quotes are above. It's just going in circles now, so I'm done. Good riddance, I never thought I'd see the day where the Nets picks didn't particularly interest someone.

Alayla
07-14-2016, 03:51 PM
I understand you don't ideally want two chances at a top 3 pick, a first team all defender, or the guy who was just drafted third overall.

That's all anyone really needs to know. Your direct quotes are above. It's just going in circles now, so I'm done. Good riddance, I never thought I'd see the day where the Nets picks didn't particularly interest someone.

I tried to go high road but fine i will level with you
#1 not at what it would cost Philly does not need to take another step backward at this stage
#2 Again not at the cost it would require although Bradley is the most interesting thing you have
#3 Major reach pick and you know it.

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 04:04 PM
I tried to go high road but fine i will level with you
#1 not at what it would cost Philly does not need to take another step backward at this stage
#2 Again not at the cost it would require although Bradley is the most interesting thing you have
#3 Major reach pick and you know it.

#1 - Can't say I agree that PHI shouldn't be interested in the pick and I don't think it would exactly be a step backwards considering how crowded the front court is. Obvioulsy trading talent for a pick makes you worse but with your rotation shaping up the way it is I don't view it as overly significant. And it's a very good piece to add.

#2 - I think Bradley for Noel or Okafor would be a step forward for you guys. He's a better player than them and he balances out the roster. His contract is more favorable than Noel's and only one less year than Okafor (at more money but not really significant with your cap situation).

#3 - "#3-#8 are internchangable" is all anyone said about the draft. Brown was one of the players in that group. I think he's probably more raw and doesn't have the foreign player intrigue that Bender did so most had him towards the bottom (probably 7/8 with Chriss) but I don't think it really was a major reach. Most people put him in the tier it just wasn't expected so people were shocked still. Most of the teams figured to need shooting so all the mocks had the shooters going higher.

warfelg
07-14-2016, 04:25 PM
#1 - Can't say I agree that PHI shouldn't be interested in the pick and I don't think it would exactly be a step backwards considering how crowded the front court is. Obvioulsy trading talent for a pick makes you worse but with your rotation shaping up the way it is I don't view it as overly significant. And it's a very good piece to add.

#2 - I think Bradley for Noel or Okafor would be a step forward for you guys. He's a better player than them and he balances out the roster. His contract is more favorable than Noel's and only one less year than Okafor (at more money but not really significant with your cap situation).

#3 - "#3-#8 are internchangable" is all anyone said about the draft. Brown was one of the players in that group. I think he's probably more raw and doesn't have the foreign player intrigue that Bender did so most had him towards the bottom (probably 7/8 with Chriss) but I don't think it really was a major reach. Most people put him in the tier it just wasn't expected so people were shocked still. Most of the teams figured to need shooting so all the mocks had the shooters going higher.

I'll only comment on point #1:
In the last three years we have made 6 1st round picks in Embiid, Saric, Okafor, Simmons, Luwawu-Cabberret, Korkmaz.

In the next 3 years we have 5 1st round picks in LAL 1st, Our/Sacs 2017 (pick swap), our 2018, Sacs 2019, Our 2019.

That's 11 possible picks in a 6 year span that could feasibly end up on the team.

Add another pick to that?

For me that doesn't make sense. Puts us in either a spot where we have to draft for need/fit at some point. Or it really cramps out ability to sign FAs with that many roster spots already accounted for.

I guess I'll go onto point #2:
Yes Bradly is arguably better than what we have. But our 2-guard is quietly become very muddled like Center is. We got Henderson, Thompson, Stauskis, Luwawu, and right to Korkmaz. Reason Jae Crowder interests us is our SF spot is more open with RoCo and Grant.

Ok I'll go onto #3:
To me pick three held more value before you took Brown. From our perspective, when the pick hadn't been made, we could have taken who we wanted. Likely Dunn. But now it means we have to have Brown, who we are less interested in than Dunn. So therefore our desire for that "pick" (now player) has lessened.

EDIT:
I hope that clears up our thinking a little.

hugepatsfan
07-14-2016, 05:12 PM
When we are talking about swap picks, does the swap occur before or after the lottery draw?


I'll only comment on point #1:
In the last three years we have made 6 1st round picks in Embiid, Saric, Okafor, Simmons, Luwawu-Cabberret, Korkmaz.

In the next 3 years we have 5 1st round picks in LAL 1st, Our/Sacs 2017 (pick swap), our 2018, Sacs 2019, Our 2019.

That's 11 possible picks in a 6 year span that could feasibly end up on the team.

Add another pick to that?

For me that doesn't make sense. Puts us in either a spot where we have to draft for need/fit at some point. Or it really cramps out ability to sign FAs with that many roster spots already accounted for.

I guess I'll go onto point #2:
Yes Bradly is arguably better than what we have. But our 2-guard is quietly become very muddled like Center is. We got Henderson, Thompson, Stauskis, Luwawu, and right to Korkmaz. Reason Jae Crowder interests us is our SF spot is more open with RoCo and Grant.

Ok I'll go onto #3:
To me pick three held more value before you took Brown. From our perspective, when the pick hadn't been made, we could have taken who we wanted. Likely Dunn. But now it means we have to have Brown, who we are less interested in than Dunn. So therefore our desire for that "pick" (now player) has lessened.

EDIT:
I hope that clears up our thinking a little.

#1 - Well you would be sending back some of those picks you mentioned in the deal so it's not "adding" it's redistributing. I'd argue that clearing the log jam in the front court makes you less dependent on drafting for need. Right now you have 5 guys for 4 spots with the need to play Simmons/Saric out of position at the 3 to accommodate. So I don't think one of Okafor/Noel for next year's BRK pick is a huge step back for you guys since guys will be in less than ideal spots and playing less than ideal minutes.

Moot point though because if BOS wanted one of Noel/Okafor bad enough to give up 2017 BRK pick then they'd have given up this year's pick for him. I think those talks are dead. PHI isn't overly interested in the available assets BOS has left and BOS doesn't covet those bigs the way it has been reported. Seems it was more a media match than one rooted in reality.

#2 - Stauskis is roster fodder to me but overall a fair point. Makes sense that you guys would be more interested in Crowder. I view Crowder/Bradley as comparable and which fits better depends on team need (though Crowder's deal is also better by virtue of being longer).

#3 - I definitely agree. But that's kind of a different topic. My point was that #3-#8 were repeatedly stated throughout the pre-draft process as a "tier" of prospects. Teams definitely have a preference within that tier. PHI definitely was Dunn. BOS's it turns out was Brown. PHX probably takes Dragic ahead of either. I think Brown was more of an upside guy (like Chriss) so I think people had him at the back of that tier in mock drafts and then freaked out. The trade rumors of Dunn for Butler or Okafor/Noel also built hype. If you read our forum a lot of us were high on Brown and preferred him if a trade couldn't be reached. I just think the hype surrounding that pick got so out of hand that anything other than a trade for a star would be a letdown. If they kept Dunn, he didn't fit with so many guards. People were going to freak out over anything. If they got Okafor/Noel it would be no Jimmy Butler. I preferred Dunn myself but I think how big a reach that was has been overstated. Brown is the rawest but out of those #3-8 guys I think he has most upside.