Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 130
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    nobody is arguing 4.... 1 would have been nice out of KL/Harden/AD etc... When it comes down to it he wont make a trade unless he thinks he can win it 90-10 period. He is nutless.

    fournier...
    The only 1 of the 4 that has a legitimate gripe is Kawhi. He was a 1 year rental but won a championship. The rest would have been a complete waste of assets as theyíd have been a short term solution that wouldnít deliver the goods.

    29 other teams missed the boat on Kawhi. So I guess Toronto has the only worthwhile aggressive GM.

    City of Champions

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    So trading Brown for a half season rental of Kawhi (he was always going to LA) is cool but giving him up as the centerpiece for Harden (whoís got a few more years on his contract) is something you didnít want? Have fun sniffing the butt of the team that Ainge fleeced all those years ago after he wasted what he fleeced. Itís funny that the Nets got back to the Finals before Boston did (assuming they all get healthy this year).
    Boston and Brooklyn are not the same situation for Harden.

    1. Harden publicly stated he wanted to play in Brooklyn. He gave a list of other teams - guess who wasnít on it - yep Boston.

    2. Weíve seen the effort Harden puts in when heís unhappy. So how can you assume heíd be happy in Boston when they werenít on his shortlist of trade destinations

    3. Boston doesnít have talent matching KD and Kyrie (Tatum and Brown are great, but not on their level)

    4. Brooklyn had a much deeper team. Which allowed them to trade for Harden WITHOUT giving up a top 2 player. Harden would have cost Boston Jaylen Brown. So assuming Harden accepted the trade to Boston (thatís a big assumption IMO) and gave his best effort (sulked in Houston vs. happy in Brooklyn where he wanted to be) is Harden/Tatum/Kemba going to beat KD/Kyrie Nets with a DEEP bench or Giannis/Jru/Middleton bucks who have a deeper bench? or Embiid/Simmons Sixsers with a deeper bench? Highly doubtful.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    nobody is arguing 4.... 1 would have been nice out of KL/Harden/AD etc... When it comes down to it he wont make a trade unless he thinks he can win it 90-10 period. He is nutless.

    fournier...
    Iím not arguing for all 4... Iím stating he DID acquire 4 (Horford, Kyrie, Hayward, Kemba). The only nice piece of the 4 you speak of is Kawhi.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    No, it's really not. Drafting 4 guys per draft is the most conservative thing a GM can do over a 7 year span.

    Signing mid tier free agents from small markets is cool, it's more than some teams/GMs can boast but losing them for nothing makes the first part irrelevant. Losing 5 key rotation pieces for nothing but an old overpaid dude with degenerative knees is one of the most horrible conservative approaches in sports.
    So no other GM in that time span acquired 4 All Stars but Danny is still considered conservative... hahahaha ok bud.

    The number of draft picks is irrelevant. Itís not like heís taking 4 top draft picks a year. He made 3 top 6 picks in Tatum/Brown/Smart... the rest have been middle/late firsts and second round picks. I donít see what that has to do with being conservative. How many teams around the league trade draft picks like cards and get nowhere. Half the league is barron on picks and arenít anywhere near title contention. Itís just not a measure of success or aggressiveness by any standard.

    Unless great non conservative GM work is selling your franchise for 3 declining 35+ year olds to make the first round of the playoffs - and then rebuild 2 years later. Just ask Brooklynís GM how that worked out - only thing thatís going to get Danny is a fast pass to the unemployment line.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    LI-NY
    Posts
    37,626
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    Those are not aggressive moves. Signing guys into cap space isn't aggressive, that is literally the GM's job.

    Now, I applaud him for being able to bring in guys, but it is far from aggressive.

    Drafting 27 guys in the past 7 drafts isn't aggressive. That is drafting almost 4 guys per draft, consolidate assets. Take a chance and trade for a couple of Kawhi, Butler, Davis, Harden, Paul George.

    In 2018-19 they had Kyrie, Hayward, Horford, Rozier, Marcus Morris, Smart, Tatum, and Brown. Just imagine how much better that unit could be going forward if they don't lose 5 of their rotation pieces for basically nothing.

    The fact of the matter is after that title in 2008, Danny got comfortable. After fleecing the Nets, he got even more comfortable, and never capitalized on the assets he had at his disposal.
    Pretty much this. How do you dismantle that core of vets and end up with nothing but meh rookies around Tatum and Brown?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by D-Leethal View Post
    Pretty much this. How do you dismantle that core of vets and end up with nothing but meh rookies around Tatum and Brown?
    Kyrie was hurt in his last season leading up to the deadline. Team was on a playoff run. 4th place in the East. Didnít want to resign after the season.

    Horford has been awful since leaving. If we resigned him we donít have money to sign Kemba. Both equally awful since that offseason. But Iíll take Kemba over Horford.

    Hayward hurt most of his tenure here. Got healthy after the trade deadline his final season here. Chose to leave. - didnít want to be a 3rd/4th option behind Tatum and Brown.

    Rozier left because he didnít want to play behind Kyrie.

    Please ... someone... tell me what should have been done in these situations. Instead of just listing player names and said oh they never should have been let go.
    Last edited by Oakmont_4; 04-01-2021 at 09:35 AM.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    16,868
    Rozier would sure come in handy and solve a lot of the cap problems over Kemba right now for sure.

    And having Turner over Thompson would look like a huge win as well.

    Rozier, Smart, Brown, Tatum, Turner. Really nice and younger lineup.
    Last edited by beasted86; 04-01-2021 at 01:04 PM.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by beasted86 View Post
    Rozier would sure come in handy and solve a lot of the cap problems over Kemba right now for sure.

    And having Turner over Thompson would look like a huge win as well.

    Rozier, Smart, Brown, Tatum, Turner. Really nice and younger lineup.
    Rozier we had the choice of dealing Kyrie or resigning Rozier. Or keeping Kyrie for 1 more year and trying to resign him and letting Rozier walk. Rozier wasnít going to accept anything less than a starting PG spot. I get why management chose what they chose but in hindsight it looks bad. I was very vocal at the time about going forward with Rozier over Kyrie. But admittedly it was less about Rozier and more about my disdain for Kyrie.

    Turner is obviously better than Thompson. But the only way we could get Turner is with the help of Hayward. And by all accounts that deal was already in the works when Hayward chose to sign with Charlotte over Indiana. So I mean, canít lay that on Danny. Hayward is the one who blew that up, and Indy not matching Charlottes offer for Hayward.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    16,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Oakmont_4 View Post
    Rozier we had the choice of dealing Kyrie or resigning Rozier. Or keeping Kyrie for 1 more year and trying to resign him and letting Rozier walk. Rozier wasnít going to accept anything less than a starting PG spot. I get why management chose what they chose but in hindsight it looks bad. I was very vocal at the time about going forward with Rozier over Kyrie. But admittedly it was less about Rozier and more about my disdain for Kyrie.

    Turner is obviously better than Thompson. But the only way we could get Turner is with the help of Hayward. And by all accounts that deal was already in the works when Hayward chose to sign with Charlotte over Indiana. So I mean, canít lay that on Danny. Hayward is the one who blew that up, and Indy not matching Charlottes offer for Hayward.
    Your explanations sounds like apologies instead of following the facts.

    You keep mentioning Irving when he has nothing to do with the equation. Even more, Rozier was a RFA. If in the summer before 2019-20 Boston wanted to retain him over chasing Kemba they could have easily done so by matching any contract.

    You also know that in 2020-21 numerous trusted media outlets said Ainge turned down Turner/McDermott because he wanted Turner/Warren or Oladipo/Warren instead. Classic case of Ainge refusing to not completely own in a trade.

    I'm just following facts here. There were definitely missed opportunities here to manage the payroll better while having a better team.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by beasted86 View Post
    Your explanations sounds like apologies instead of following the facts.

    You keep mentioning Irving when he has nothing to do with the equation. Even more, Rozier was a RFA. If in the summer before 2019-20 Boston wanted to retain him over chasing Kemba they could have easily done so by matching any contract.

    You also know that in 2020-21 numerous trusted media outlets said Ainge turned down Turner/McDermott because he wanted Turner/Warren or Oladipo/Warren instead. Classic case of Ainge refusing to not completely own in a trade.

    I'm just following facts here. There were definitely missed opportunities here to manage the payroll better while having a better team.
    Even if the reports on the Celtics/Pacers trade were true - it didnít matter if Hayward chose Charlotte over Indiana. Even if Ainge said yes to Turner/Hayward straight up - if Hayward signs with Charlotte (which he did) then it literally does not matter if Ainge did or did not turn down that reported deal. If your following the facts, youíre not following them well.

    Youíre right. But my assertion that Ainge chose Kyrie over Rozier isnít false. Ainge was trying to resign Kyrie up until Kyrie told him he was leaving. And Rozier was insulted and chose to leave for Charlotte which guaranteed him a starting job. At that point Danny turned to Kemba

    Kemba is a better player than Rozier. I mean thatís just a fact. Yes Rozier is younger. But at the time Kemba was a far superior player. I donít get what your factual argument here is? On one hand you say Ainge didnít do enough. On the other your saying he should have resigned Rozier who wasnít as good as Kemba. Which is it? Your factual arguments donít add up.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    40,738
    The fact is the Celtics have made 11 1st round draft picks in the past 5 years. They've been in discussions to trade for Butler, Paul George, AD, Kawhi, and Harden. It'd be very difficult to convince me it was better to not trade for a single one of those players.

    Boston had enough assets, they could have traded for any one of those players. I just don't buy anyone who looks at the current Celtics and goes "yeah, we did everything right the last 5 years to get here".

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    30,629
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    This is a big part of it, Boston is a cautionary tale of being too conservative at the GM level.
    Yeah that over hyped warchest. Ainge pretty much only does the accept trades when teams are desperate. Like when the Suns needed to dump IT. I forgot what are easy no brainer traded he accepted to be over rated GM. IT was a few. But the IT put him over the top with a healthy IT. But Stevens is best to be used for a youth movement only. Old vets like Irving,Horford and what not all wanted out right away.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    7,816
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    The fact is the Celtics have made 11 1st round draft picks in the past 5 years. They've been in discussions to trade for Butler, Paul George, AD, Kawhi, and Harden. It'd be very difficult to convince me it was better to not trade for a single one of those players.

    Boston had enough assets, they could have traded for any one of those players. I just don't buy anyone who looks at the current Celtics and goes "yeah, we did everything right the last 5 years to get here".
    Yeah, but Oakmont has an excuse for EVERYTHING. Iím starting to think that heís Ainge himself. Itís just so funny to me that he ripped the Nets off so hard yet 10ish years later and the Nets are way past the Celtics (even Oakmont admits the Celtics top guys arenít on Brooklynís level even before Harden showed up and the Nets bench is better even after Boston had that many first rounders).

    We kept hearing how great Ainge is/was up until about a few months ago. Now, itís just excuse after excuse.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    30,629
    Not to pick on the Celtics. But when players leave as free agents like Irving and Horford. That does take a huge blow. That takes time to recover from. Or Ainge could of fired Stevens, if Stevens was losing the team to the old players. Steven's is excellent for the young players. But seemed like writing was on the wall Irving and Durant were talking that one game of a team up.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    16,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Oakmont_4 View Post
    Even if the reports on the Celtics/Pacers trade were true - it didnít matter if Hayward chose Charlotte over Indiana. Even if Ainge said yes to Turner/Hayward straight up - if Hayward signs with Charlotte (which he did) then it literally does not matter if Ainge did or did not turn down that reported deal. If your following the facts, youíre not following them well.
    Absolutely true. However... it's also clearly been reported that 1 of 4 things were true:
    1) Charlotte upped the bid once they knew Indy was in play
    2) Hayward did not think Boston would be able to come up with a REALISTIC trade package and didn't want Charlotte's offer to disappear
    3) Indy was used as leverage
    4) Some combination of the previous 3

    My comments were based on bullet 2. I do thoroughly believe they said forget it because of such an outlandish trade rebuttal request by Ainge. Too far apart and a closing window forced Hayward's hand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oakmont_4 View Post
    Youíre right. But my assertion that Ainge chose Kyrie over Rozier isnít false. Ainge was trying to resign Kyrie up until Kyrie told him he was leaving. And Rozier was insulted and chose to leave for Charlotte which guaranteed him a starting job. At that point Danny turned to Kemba

    Kemba is a better player than Rozier. I mean thatís just a fact. Yes Rozier is younger. But at the time Kemba was a far superior player. I donít get what your factual argument here is? On one hand you say Ainge didnít do enough. On the other your saying he should have resigned Rozier who wasnít as good as Kemba. Which is it? Your factual arguments donít add up.
    Again, it's true that Kemba is just plain better than Rozier when 100% healthy. These two are also true:
    1)Kemba is not 100% healthy and his injury seems to be debilitating with no chance to improve. Could this have been exasperated by Ainge pushing thru a deal not wanted to get left empty handed?
    2)Kemba is paid nearly DOUBLE the price of Rozier ($34.4M vs. $18.9M). That's almost the cost of both Rozier + Turner. Although some will call this hindsight, given the age and injury history of all players discussed, I believe we can almost call it fact that the Celtics would be better from a wins & cap management both right now & future if they could exchange Thompson & Walker for Turner & Rozier? Can we at least agree on as much?

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •