I'd be playing tucker over JJ and brown in the playoffs, especially against the Cavs but maybe that's me.
Celtics Trade Deadline Game Thread
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
Meh, I probably wouldn't. I think he's strictly a 3, and they've been playing JJ almost exclusively at 4 and Brown a lot at the 2. I get that he can be useful in very particular situations, but I don't see any impact he'd have this year that makes it worth trading anything real for him.
It's an awesome draft, and the worst they are getting is the 4 pick. If worst case is Josh Jackson, they're in great shape.
1 thing I've always liked about Ainge is his ability to work more than 1 deal at a time. It's not unlike Belichick that's he able to keep things fluid and pick up extra picks and small stuff while working the phones for the bigger fish too.
Bird didn't do anything besides hold a reluctant PG sale. So this trade season, he kept his best player, didn't do anything to build a better team around him, and now will be another 1/2 season closer to losing him which probably ensures that PG's value will be reduced this offseason. Weird plan.
Bird didn't do anything besides hold a reluctant PG sale. So this trade season, he kept his best player, didn't do anything to build a better team around him, and now will be another 1/2 season closer to losing him which probably ensures that PG's value will be reduced this offseason. Weird plan.
Yup this. Raps now better than Celts, which I wouldn't have said a week ago
Bogut would be a nice pickup in that he would bring some toughness in games and in practice. There's not much need for an enforcer in today's NBA, but it's also not a bad card to be able to play.
Denver has Mudiay and Harris they could trade too. A George deal would have made a lot of sense for them. They need to do a 2 for 1 or 3 for 1 deal.
Noel was the one I thought would be a good fit. Bos 2018, Zeller and Young might have been similar to the Dallas offer.
Not sure why this is a lol
If Paul George was on the Celtics and Danny traded him away for much less than that this place would go ballistic
He says he's going to the Lakers in a year and a half. If I was a Pacers fan and hypothetically they could have gotten Jaylen and the 2017 Nets pick I would want them to take it.
Probably not? I guess it depends how teams value Payne v. Rozier. Lauvernge is an interesting big man, and they are cheap, I don't see a similar package from Boston, maybe picks, but it doesn't seem like that's what CHI wanted back.
ALSO OKC ate a ton of salary this year. Something BOS couldn't do.
Nuggets were told George wouldn't sign a long term contract with them.
https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2017/02/pacers-declined-nuggets-monster-offer-for-paul-george.html
I'm fine with standing pat, the team has flaws but the only name available worth cashing in chips for IMO was Cousins and it's pretty clear they felt he's too much of a headcase. This summer is the time to consolidate assets once you know if you can pick up Hayward for just cash.
I understand the frustration, but it seems like Danny had the right approach if you don't think you're beating GSW, SAS, or CLE with this team - either significantly improve or keep the assets hoarded for that type of trade later.
Because you'd be trading three effective, cost-controlled players under the age of 27 - plus the probable #1 pick in the draft - for a guy who broke his leg in half less than two years ago and probably wants to end up in LA anyways.
Yeah, that probably gets it done, but I think especially with the new CBA making his cap hold huge the Celtics weren't that interested in him because they didn't want to re-sign him.
Could we trade our own 2018 and still swap in 2017 with the nets? Isn't that swap a trade? If so and we traded 2018 wouldn't it restrict the swap because we'd be trading two years in a row?
What's troubling is we have gotten to the point where Celts have so many assets teams are asking more from them then any other team and that's not good to get a deal done
I'm relieved that the C's stood pat. Trading one or both BKN picks for a second-tier guy like Butler or (especially) George would've been a mistake, and I wouldn't want to give up an asset with even marginal value beyond this season to pick up a spare part like Tucker for this year's run.
This C's should win a playoff series, and they figure to have no worse than a 50/50 chance of taking 4-of-7 from Toronto or Washington. Absent an opportunity to acquire one of the league's biggest stars, I'm happy to enjoy their run this spring, then look forward to the lottery. It's a good time to be a fan.
This C's should win a playoff series, and they figure to have no worse than a 50/50 chance of taking 4-of-7 from Toronto or Washington. Absent an opportunity to acquire one of the league's biggest stars, I'm happy to enjoy their run this spring, then look forward to the lottery. It's a good time to be a fan.
Here we go assets, here we go <clap, clap, clap>.
As a side note, time to start a thread on buyout season.
As a side note, time to start a thread on buyout season.
That PG deal is essentially 4 starters for one. They'd have built a team around Myles Turner by simply trading George away. That team is probably better than the team they have now.
I just wish this wasn't a guard heavy draft. They're going to end up replacing IT with Fultz or Ball. Hayward isn't good enough to put them over the top if that's who they're really after. I'm not sure about what the direction truly is and whether or not Danny has held on to the assets a little too long.
I get the philosophy, but it's not as though that strategy doesn't have its own risks. Finding a trading partner that has the player(s) you want isn't a sure things, and neither are draft picks. And, at some stage, this little-engine-that-could team approach might break down.
Particularly this season, the Celtics seemed primed to be in a spot to make a run for a 1.5-year rental. They spent half the season getting into position, and adding that special piece could have made this a year to get to The Finals. Now, it's as though they've conceded that they know they're too far away from contending for the title; and the message to the players is that this season isn't going to be one that gets them over the hump
Unless teams are taking worse offers from other teams to spite the Celtics, it doesn't matter they are asking for more. It's the best offer or it isn't.
I'm just happy to be in the mix for buyouts and space cadets returning to the league after a long hiatus again.
Forget 18 for a second. Isn't the swap a draft day trade where we don't make our own 17 pick? If we don't make our own 17 pick aren't we required to keep our 18 pick?
I'm pleased that Jaylen Brown wasn't thrown in for George or Butler, because there's a pretty good chance that in two years he's better than either of them. This isn't the year to go all-in, although it's a pity that Ainge couldn't turn Bradley into something useful. Smart, Brown and Rozier have all improved notably with Bradley's playing time.
As long as you have a pick none of that matters. They can trade 17 and it doesn't affect 18 since they have two picks. Or they can make the 17 pick, then trade it and it doesn't count as a Stepien Rule thing at all.
I'm not convinced that's true. We just didn't have the assets to match up with anyone unless we were willing to overpay, which I'm relieved we didn't do.
As an example, what would an offer for Boogie have looked like? Maybe the Kings like JB better than Hield (most of the league does), and therefore would have done JB plus a pick in the mid-teens for Boogie. That's nice -- except we don't have a pick in the mid-teens. We sure as hell weren't giving them one of the BKN picks, and the Kings weren't going to wait around to see where Memphis's 2019 pick lands. Our assets simply didn't match SAC's needs. Likewise, we weren't getting Noel because our 2nd rounders are worth less than DAL's, and we certainly weren't going to give up a 1st rounder (even our own 2018 pick) for a rental.
Some are thinking that if they stand pat and just draft the Nets picks that it's the "safest" route. First, who knows what slot they'll get in the draft this year it could be 1-4 and the '18 pick could be worse than that depending on what the Nets do this offseason. Then, the pick could be either a star, role player, or worse. Both approaches bring significant risk. I would have been in favor of cashing in one of the picks plus a couple young players to get an established star. Then I'd be confident enough that he'd re-sign because I can offer the most money in FA due to Bird rights. I guess I'll just pray that the ping pong balls actually fall our way this year unlike any other year.
Pretty much. It takes a real go-getter like Billy King to tip the scales in these situations.
Better to move AB during the summer -- it avoids giving Rozier heavy playoff minutes this spring (he's not ready for that, imo), plus Danny will know who we're drafting, whether we're signing a FA and whether KO is coming back.
You know who was a real "go-getter" in trade maneuvers? The guy who built the Celtics into a power
If PG was traded to the Celtics, he couldn't get the super max and would just go sign for whatever team he wanted. Like DeMarcus Cousins. Isn't that the loophole in these trades for superstar deals? That the team they are being traded to really cant offer them that much more money? They are all rentals.
Reports were that it would have taken 3 good players plus the 2017 pick for Paul George and that he wants to go to LA in a year and a half. You would have done that trade?
I think that Ainge looked at the current roster and thought that adding a PG or JB would still make the Celts a finals loser at best. At every position, the C's would be a "poor man's Golden State." Curry>IT, Thompson>Bradley/Smart, Durant>PG or Butler, Green>Crowder, with center a wash at best. And that doesn't take into account the real drop off with players traded to get PG or JB.
I wonder how much the uncertainty of the exact place of the '17 pick hurts its value - it has to be pretty big. I'd imagine it's a lot easier for a fan base to swallow losing a star player if they know they're getting back the #1 pick in the draft. If Ainge is fine with whomever is available at the #4 pick, then trading that pick now would be selling low.
I wonder how much the uncertainty of the exact place of the '17 pick hurts its value - it has to be pretty big. I'd imagine it's a lot easier for a fan base to swallow losing a star player if they know they're getting back the #1 pick in the draft. If Ainge is fine with whomever is available at the #4 pick, then trading that pick now would be selling low.