Greened Illusion: Lebron to the Celtics

GreyisGone

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,283
Pop would take about 3 seconds to throat punch Magic Johnson if this offer came to his desk. Wall for Ingram/Deng would be even worse, a horrid abomination of a trade. Maybe if you throw in Ball to either of them, though.

The problem is then the roster depth is nil, and they likely wouldn’t overcome Golden State, maybe not even Houston.
I would trade Wall for Ingram/Deng in a second. That contract is going to kill the Wizards for years and they already have no flexibility and a team with no chance at the title.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,612
The Lakers have had this mystique for years and not landed anyone.
They have sort of turned the corner maybe but I don't know man. Why go to an eh team in the west?

If PG is as done to the Lakers as people assume that starts it I guess. If he doesn't go they got nothing.
Wasn't the rumor that LeBron wanted to start getting into the movies..a production company or something? Start to work on his post NBA career?

Interested in your take on Simmons though LondonSox. I didn't watch a lot of the Sixers this year..but what happens if more teams play Simmons like the Celts did? Stay off of him and force him to shoot instead of letting him drive to the basket? Is his shot correctable? Maybe most teams can't play him that way, but it seemed that he really became a bit limited when he wasn't allowed to drive and people stayed in the passing lanes. I realize I'm undervaluing him, but I also wonder if teams will start playing him differently if he doesn't improve his outside shooting. Not trying to be combative, just interested in how you see his game developing.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
At what cost? I really like the young core Danny has built here.. the C's could be good for the better part of a decade. LeBron's best years (even though he was still very good this year) are behind him and wouldn't you be worried about his regression over the next couple of years? What players remain if you've traded to get Bron?
If LeBron tells the Cavs that he’s leaving and it’s the Celtics, the Cavs won’t have much leverage. Tatum and Brown would remain, as would 2 of the Horford/Hayward/Kyrie group. And you’d be replacing the one who goes with LeBron. Ainge would probably have to toss in one of the Sac/Mem picks and maybe a lesser pick like Clips or Boston but that’s absolutely something you do if you’re getting LeBron. He has a game that’s going to age very well.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
Kyrie was asked about staying in Boston a few days ago and basically wouldn’t address it. The guy is a fuckin’ weirdo, and I wouldn’t hesitate to trade him for another star willing to stay beyond even one year. I won’t be heartbroken if Kyrie leaves anyway. They can afford another max and should be able to draw some starpower with Stevens and the rest of the core.
I would trade Wall for Ingram/Deng in a second. That contract is going to kill the Wizards for years and they already have no flexibility and a team with no chance at the title.
Holy crap, I forgot he signed that massive deal. Yeah, getting out of that wouldn’t be the worst thing, though he’s at least a legit star. I don’t see Ingram and Deng helping much in the near term, and Wall’s deal might be just fine if the cap rises over the next 5 years. If they do want to do it, it would be this year. Next year, it becomes nearly untradeable. Not sure the Lakers want that, though.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,532
Kyrie was asked about staying in Boston a few days ago and basically wouldn’t address it. The guy is a fuckin’ weirdo, and I wouldn’t hesitate to trade him for another star willing to stay beyond even one year. I won’t be heartbroken if Kyrie leaves anyway. They can afford another max and should be able to draw some starpower with Stevens and the rest of the core.

Holy crap, I forgot he signed that massive deal. Yeah, getting out of that wouldn’t be the worst thing, though he’s at least a legit star. I don’t see Ingram and Deng helping much in the near term, and Wall’s deal might be just fine if the cap rises over the next 5 years. If they do want to do it, it would be this year. Next year, it becomes nearly untradeable. Not sure the Lakers want that, though.
Would we really have room for a max if Kyrie walks? I thought we were kinda locked into this core due to the cap restrictions.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
Would we really have room for a max if Kyrie walks? I thought we were kinda locked into this core due to the cap restrictions.
Assuming Kyrie opts out and Rozier is gone, the Celtics have about 77 million committed to 2019-2020 right now. The cap should be 105ish, I think. It would be close. Al could help out by opting out and signing on for a few extra years at a lower salary. I think there’s a strong likelihood it could be done.

However, the possibility Kyrie opts out is a strong deterrent to signing Smart long-term. If they shell out 10+ million a year for him and Kyrie leaves, they are relatively screwed. Danny should try to iron out a deal with Kyrie now and, if he can’t, explore who he might be able to get for Kyrie. Might be nothing worth it, but maybe Kyrie wants to play long term in San Antonio for whatever reason. You never know.
 
Last edited:

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
Oh, I think LeBron is a strong favorite to go to LA for both personal and professional reasons. Magic will try to replicate what Riley did in MiamI: trade a chunk of his young talent (Ball, Kuzma, Ingram, Hart) to the Spurs for Kawhi, then sign Paul George and LeBron as free agents. He's got the cap space to do it if he can convince each of the three stars to take a little less. If he can't get Kawhi, he could try to unload Deng in a bundle with some of his young talent, and then go after Cousins or Chris Paul.
 

Lazy vs Crazy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
6,410
Assuming Kyrie opts out and Rozier is gone, the Celtics have about 77 million committed to 2019-2020 right now. The cap should be 105ish, I think. It would be close. Al could help out by opting out and signing on for a few extra years at a lower salary. I think there’s a strong likelihood it could be done.

However, the possibility Kyrie opts out is a strong deterrent to signing Smart long-term. If they shell out 10+ million a year for him and Kyrie leaves, they are relatively screwed. Danny should try to iron out a deal with Kyrie now and, if he can’t, explore who he might be able to get for Kyrie. Might be nothing worth it, but maybe Kyrie wants to play long term in San Antonio for whatever reason. You never know.
Can't really extend Kyrie now. If he signs an extension now he'll make about $9 million less per year than if he signs next year. He's not passing that up.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,612
Kyrie was asked about staying in Boston a few days ago and basically wouldn’t address it. The guy is a fuckin’ weirdo, and I wouldn’t hesitate to trade him for another star willing to stay beyond even one year. I won’t be heartbroken if Kyrie leaves anyway. They can afford another max and should be able to draw some starpower with Stevens and the rest of the core.

Holy crap, I forgot he signed that massive deal. Yeah, getting out of that wouldn’t be the worst thing, though he’s at least a legit star. I don’t see Ingram and Deng helping much in the near term, and Wall’s deal might be just fine if the cap rises over the next 5 years. If they do want to do it, it would be this year. Next year, it becomes nearly untradeable. Not sure the Lakers want that, though.
I feel like this post forgets just how good Kyrie is...and how well he fits with Hayward and Horford. He may be a little different than the average NBA player, but count me as one of the people that actually doesn't mind a player that doesn't have canned responses for everything. I want to see at least one year with they core they have in tact if that's at all possible.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Can't really extend Kyrie now. If he signs an extension now he'll make about $9 million less per year than if he signs next year. He's not passing that up.
I keep saying this every time these stories pop up, extensions cost guys millions, especially in this case where the salary cap spiked after Irving signed his first free agent deal. His next max is at the 30% level, which would start at close to $31 million per year. He is absolutely going to go the free agency route.

Unless you have a rational reason for fearing the Knicks assembling a legit title contender in the next 12 months, you should relax. He’s not leaving his present super team to go sign with a lesser one.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
Unless you have a rational reason for fearing the Knicks assembling a legit title contender in the next 12 months, you should relax. He’s not leaving his present super team to go sign with a lesser one.
The same dude who left LeBron and didn’t really care where he ended up? If Tatum takes a leap to superstar, Kyrie might get upset he’s not option one or whatever and want out. Who knows with him. He’d need Danny’s help to move and get his money, though, so Boston at least has to be the favorite. It’s just pretty weird for him to not say he wants to stay when asked.
I feel like this post forgets just how good Kyrie is...and how well he fits with Hayward and Horford. He may be a little different than the average NBA player, but count me as one of the people that actually doesn't mind a player that doesn't have canned responses for everything. I want to see at least one year with they core they have in tact if that's at all possible.
I want to sign Kyrie to a max extension, I know how good he is. I just think the Celtics would be just fine with 20+ other players in the league replacing him.
Can't really extend Kyrie now. If he signs an extension now he'll make about $9 million less per year than if he signs next year. He's not passing that up.
That’s right. It’s a pretty weird rule, you’d figure they could find a way around it. Like you agree to a “max extension” moving forward and fill in the numbers when the new cap comes out.
 
Last edited:

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
I love how people keep adding "and Kuzma" to the appeal of the Lakers. He's an inefficient scorer who does nothing else well and was a 22yo rookie.

Bet the over on how many times future Lebron barks at Kuzma during timeouts for missing defensive rotations. If Lebron is talking to Magic and his braintrust right now, those conversations are all about how LA can add two other veteran all-stars to that team. And "more dudes who don't play defense" is not high on his wish list.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
Kuzma was first team All-Rookie and would definitely go top 10 in a redraft of last year. His age is a real concern and of course he's overrated because of the LA factor, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't be an asset in a trade.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,426
He’s really not.
Simmons and a draft pick feels to me like the best possible outcome for a malcontent with injury concerns. If Kawhi is healthy, hes a guy you can build a championship team around. If you're forced to trade a top 10 player, you'll almost never get back fair compensation. Jesus, people thought Cleveland won the Irving trade.

Getting a top 30ish player - who's a rookie - at least ensures you end up with a probable top 15 player on your team to replace the superstar you lost. You also get to do so on the cheap, which allows you to stagger contracts and build towards a potential contender to go all in when the time is right like Boston and GS did.

Why do you feel like a package built around Simmons isnt one of their best possible options if forced to trade Kawhi?
 

Marbleheader

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2004
11,726
Kuzma was first team All-Rookie and would definitely go top 10 in a redraft of last year. His age is a real concern and of course he's overrated because of the LA factor, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't be an asset in a trade.
So was Jeff Green, none of those things really matter a whole lot when it comes to valuing an asset.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
Simmons is what ... a top 15 player in the league? Top 20? Plus he's 21 and still on his rookie contract? San Antonio would be doing backflips if Philly offered him up in a trade. There's no way they'd get a better return than that.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
So was Jeff Green, none of those things really matter a whole lot when it comes to valuing an asset.
Jeff Green snagged Ray Allen in a trade, then Kendrick Perkins, then a first round pick and then a first round pick again. Jeff Green flamed out four different times before he lost value as an asset. That's not exactly a great example.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
So was Jeff Green, none of those things really matter a whole lot when it comes to valuing an asset.
Yep. I'm not saying that he doesn't have value. Nice guy to have coming off the bench to provide second unit scoring. But he just won the only award that he's going to win in this league.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Simmons is what ... a top 15 player in the league? Top 20? Plus he's 21 and still on his rookie contract? San Antonio would be doing backflips if Philly offered him up in a trade. There's no way they'd get a better return than that.
This is exactly correct......when there are multiple teams coming after a Kawhi the one way to beat all the other offers is to put one together that is the best return.

It isn't relevant where Simmons tanks on any "Top whatever" chart when his role and impact would be very different if he was with LeBron. The Sixers goal would be to assemble the best possible team over the next 3-4-5 years while LeBron is still LeBron.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
Assuming Kyrie opts out and Rozier is gone, the Celtics have about 77 million committed to 2019-2020 right now. The cap should be 105ish, I think. It would be close. Al could help out by opting out and signing on for a few extra years at a lower salary. I think there’s a strong likelihood it could be done.

However, the possibility Kyrie opts out is a strong deterrent to signing Smart long-term. If they shell out 10+ million a year for him and Kyrie leaves, they are relatively screwed. Danny should try to iron out a deal with Kyrie now and, if he can’t, explore who he might be able to get for Kyrie. Might be nothing worth it, but maybe Kyrie wants to play long term in San Antonio for whatever reason. You never know.
That $77 million figure isn't a reasonable number to use. The Celtics will have this year's first round pick, next year's first, and the King's pick as commitments. Those guys take that number to over $85 million. That also assumes they don't keep Ojeleye, Smart, Yabusele, or Rozier and don't sign anyone with the MLE this year. Realistically, the team is capped out going forward.

Part of Ainge's job this summer is to figure out Kyrie's plans, but the reality is if his heart is set on ending up in NY, the Knicks more or less have the cap room next summer (they might need to clear $10 million or so, but all their bad contracts will be expiring the next year and teams will have cap space next summer so someone will be willing to buy a pick from them. If we're shopping him, other teams have to be worried and the Knicks don't have a strong incentive to make a move for him a year early.

The good news is, if we keep Smart and Kyrie walks, we have the budget to also extend Rozier. That's a step down, but the team would still have more than enough talent to remain a contender as our young talent continues to develop. The worst case scenario of Kyrie walking is bad, but not catastrophic.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
This is exactly correct......when there are multiple teams coming after a Kawhi the one way to beat all the other offers is to put one together that is the best return.

It isn't relevant where Simmons tanks on any "Top whatever" chart when his role and impact would be very different if he was with LeBron. The Sixers goal would be to assemble the best possible team over the next 3-4-5 years while LeBron is still LeBron.
Yup. Spurs would accept Simmons for Kawhi in a heartbeat given what has transpired and his injury concerns. Sixers would only do it if it were part of a LeBron play.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Kuzma was first team All-Rookie and would definitely go top 10 in a redraft of last year. His age is a real concern and of course he's overrated because of the LA factor, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't be an asset in a trade.
How is his age a real concern? It may mean you don't get a couple years of him at the end of his career. But it also means you probably get to his peak years quicker. If he's good, you take him and don't worry too much about it, I wouldn't think.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Wasn't the rumor that LeBron wanted to start getting into the movies..a production company or something? Start to work on his post NBA career?

Interested in your take on Simmons though LondonSox. I didn't watch a lot of the Sixers this year..but what happens if more teams play Simmons like the Celts did? Stay off of him and force him to shoot instead of letting him drive to the basket? Is his shot correctable? Maybe most teams can't play him that way, but it seemed that he really became a bit limited when he wasn't allowed to drive and people stayed in the passing lanes. I realize I'm undervaluing him, but I also wonder if teams will start playing him differently if he doesn't improve his outside shooting. Not trying to be combative, just interested in how you see his game developing.
It was less that they sagged off him but they sagged and then collapsed on him while staying with all the shooters.
Not something that many teams can do.

All year teams sagged off Simmons daring him to shoot and he just used the space to drive to the rim if the help was pulled away and if not he spread the ball to shooters or cutters.

The Celtics did something no one else had been able to do, but of course playoff series are different.

I think it is clearly something he needs to address, but let's be honest we knew he needed a shot anyway, most people expected moments like this without it.

So I think it is more of a playoff/ good team issue for a start. Ie bad teams can't do what's needed, you need a certain talent. But I hope it gave him a kick up the ass

To be honest his shot improved in practice through the year it was disappointing not to see him shoot more. It should be his offseason focus, we shall see.

I don't think without switching hands or starting over with his shot he can be good, but he needs to be willing. We shall see.
I am optimistic he can get a shot to a place where if he's just left alone he can shoot it well enough to make it a problem. I'd rather he changed hands and started over but I'm not the expert.

I am glad the sixers are working with good people and looking for more shot coaches etc. It's obviously a huge deal for the team overall.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
How is his age a real concern? It may mean you don't get a couple years of him at the end of his career. But it also means you probably get to his peak years quicker. If he's good, you take him and don't worry too much about it, I wouldn't think.
The age is a concern for me as his defense is SOOOOOOO bad
He can play, he was a steal but one way players in this league can't play in the late stage playoffs.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
The age is a concern for me as his defense is SOOOOOOO bad
He can play, he was a steal but one way players in this league can't play in the late stage playoffs.
Then your concern is his bad defense, not his age. Unless you think his advanced age (remember, he's still a very young man, and for most of the NBA's history, guys came into the league at his age) means he can't improve.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
How is his age a real concern? It may mean you don't get a couple years of him at the end of his career. But it also means you probably get to his peak years quicker. If he's good, you take him and don't worry too much about it, I wouldn't think.
Concern in the sense that if you're trying to evaluate his rookie season then you have to factor that he was old for a first year player and thus much more advanced physically. The upside is far less than had he accomplished what he did at age 19 or 20. I don't think it's a huge issue but it has to factor into how you project him going forward.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Concern in the sense that if you're trying to evaluate his rookie season then you have to factor that he was old for a first year player and thus much more advanced physically. The upside is far less than had he accomplished what he did at age 19 or 20. I don't think it's a huge issue but it has to factor into how you project him going forward.
Understood. But I wouldn't take a worse player who is 19 over a better player who is 21, unless they're REALLY close.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
Understood. But I wouldn't take a worse player who is 19 over a better player who is 21, unless they're REALLY close.
You wouldn't take Ntilikina over Kennard?

Or, backing things up a few years to illustrate this in retrospect, you would've taken Jared Sullinger in the 2014 off-season over Giannis?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
How is his age a real concern? It may mean you don't get a couple years of him at the end of his career. But it also means you probably get to his peak years quicker. If he's good, you take him and don't worry too much about it, I wouldn't think.
It’s a concern because as a 22 year old there isn’t much upside in his game. He’s almost certainly a finished product and the finished product just isn’t terribly impactful.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
It’s a concern because as a 22 year old there isn’t much upside in his game. He’s almost certainly a finished product and the finished product just isn’t terribly impactful.
Right. So the concern is that he isn't very good, not that he's 22. Understood.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
Right. So the concern is that he isn't very good, not that he's 22. Understood.
It's both. A 19 year old who did what Kuzma did this season would project as on offensive force. A 22 year old doing it projects as a potential useful 8th man. You can't divorce age from performance when evaluating the future of young players.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
You wouldn't take Ntilikina over Kennard?

Or, backing things up a few years to illustrate this in retrospect, you would've taken Jared Sullinger in the 2014 off-season over Giannis?
It's not fair picking a superstar now compared to an also-ran from 4 years ago, with the ability to have 20-20 hindsight. Moreover, they're SUCH different players. And let's not forget...Giannis was picked 15th. Two picks behind Kelly Olynyk. Let's use a current, more relevant example.

Kevin Knox, Kentucky, Freshman: 15.6 points, 5.4 rebounds, 44.5% FG, 34.1% 3ptFG, 77.4% FT
Mikal Bridges, Villanova, Junior: 17.7 points, 5.3 rebounds, 51.4% FG, 43.5% 3ptFG, 85.1% FT

Who do you prefer? Bridges' stats are better. Better shooter at every range. But he's two years older than Knox. Theoretically, going by age, Knox has better upside. But if you were a GM, which one would you pick?

It's both. A 19 year old who did what Kuzma did this season would project as on offensive force. A 22 year old doing it projects as a potential useful 8th man. You can't divorce age from performance when evaluating the future of young players.
Yes I get that and don't disagree. It's part of the equation. But a guy being 22 wouldn't scare me off if he was good and could improve. Kevin McHale entered the NBA after his senior year and averaged 10 points and 4.4 rebounds as a 23-year old.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,841
It's not fair picking a superstar now compared to an also-ran from 4 years ago, with the ability to have 20-20 hindsight. Moreover, they're SUCH different players. And let's not forget...Giannis was picked 15th. Two picks behind Kelly Olynyk. Let's use a current, more relevant example.

Kevin Knox, Kentucky, Freshman: 15.6 points, 5.4 rebounds, 44.5% FG, 34.1% 3ptFG, 77.4% FT
Mikal Bridges, Villanova, Junior: 17.7 points, 5.3 rebounds, 51.4% FG, 43.5% 3ptFG, 85.1% FT

Who do you prefer? Bridges' stats are better. Better shooter at every range. But he's two years older than Knox. Theoretically, going by age, Knox has better upside. But if you were a GM, which one would you pick?



Yes I get that and don't disagree. It's part of the equation. But a guy being 22 wouldn't scare me off if he was good and could improve. Kevin McHale entered the NBA after his senior year and averaged 10 points and 4.4 rebounds as a 23-year old.
Do you get the difference between someone like Tatum doing what he did in postseason and someone 3 years older? It’s meaningful.

Based on what Tatum did we’re suddenly projecting superstardom. That’s a function of more than being a rookie. It’s a function of his age as a rookie as well.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Right. So the concern is that he isn't very good, not that he's 22. Understood.
No, the concern is that due to age there isn’t a lot of projection left. If he were three years younger there’d be some projection and you’d worry less about the holes in the game.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
I’ve got it!

1. Boston sends Tatum, Morris, Rozier, Yabu, Nader, Clippers pick, and next 3 firsts to New Orleans for Anthony Davis.

2. Boston sends Al Horford, Sac pick, and Memphis pick to Cleveland for LeBron James. LeBron holds the cards and asks Gilbert to just take the picks and be happy.

3. Kyrie and LBJ hug it out.

4. Brad Stevens trots out a starting lineup of LBJ, Davis, Kyrie, Brown, and Hayward on opening night.

5. Green not 18, not 19, not 20...
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Concern in the sense that if you're trying to evaluate his rookie season then you have to factor that he was old for a first year player and thus much more advanced physically. The upside is far less than had he accomplished what he did at age 19 or 20. I don't think it's a huge issue but it has to factor into how you project him going forward.
Do you get the difference between someone like Tatum doing what he did in postseason and someone 3 years older? It’s meaningful.

Based on what Tatum did we’re suddenly projecting superstardom. That’s a function of more than being a rookie. It’s a function of his age as a rookie as well.
I look at physical development/athletic ability more than age when you're talking about the difference in a 19-22 year old when projecting them in 3-5 years. One of the most impressive things about Tatum is that his frame still has a lot of strength that will be added during this time. Someone like a Zion Williamson doesn't have a stronger body to improve his game during that window so unless he improves his ball skills greatly his floor is like a Harold Miner who faced similar circumstances. I don't care if Zion is 19, 15 or 22.....he isn't going to reap the benefits of his body growing like Tatum will. It isn't "only" about age in determining upside......I look at the body and athleticism.

In Kuzma's case his upside is limited because he is 22 AND physically developed. Same with guys like Malcolm Brogdan from the prior years draft.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,031
I’ve got it!

1. Boston sends Tatum, Morris, Rozier, Yabu, Nader, Clippers pick, and next 3 firsts to New Orleans for Anthony Davis.

2. Boston sends Al Horford, Sac pick, and Memphis pick to Cleveland for LeBron James. LeBron holds the cards and asks Gilbert to just take the picks and be happy.

3. Kyrie and LBJ hug it out.

4. Brad Stevens trots out a starting lineup of LBJ, Davis, Kyrie, Brown, and Hayward on opening night.

5. Green not 18, not 19, not 20...
I've been trying to figure out if you've just been trolling these threads for awhile now.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Do you get the difference between someone like Tatum doing what he did in postseason and someone 3 years older? It’s meaningful.

Based on what Tatum did we’re suddenly projecting superstardom. That’s a function of more than being a rookie. It’s a function of his age as a rookie as well.
Tatum is sort of a special case. I lean towards the pro-youth side of the argument, but there are also guys like Marcus Smart - granted, he came in older by a year, but his development curve has been largely flat.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I look at physical development/athletic ability more than age when you're talking about the difference in a 19-22 year old when projecting them in 3-5 years. One of the most impressive things about Tatum is that his frame still has a lot of strength that will be added during this time. Someone like a Zion Williamson doesn't have a stronger body to improve his game during that window so unless he improves his ball skills greatly his floor is like a Harold Miner who faced similar circumstances. I don't care if Zion is 19, 15 or 22.....he isn't going to reap the benefits of his body growing like Tatum will. It isn't "only" about age in determining upside......I look at the body and athleticism.

In Kuzma's case his upside is limited because he is 22 AND physically developed. Same with guys like Malcolm Brogdan from the prior years draft.
Agreed. Boys are still developing into men at that point, and at vastly different rates. I have two sons, separated by two years. Both now in their early 20s. The younger one hit puberty first, had facial hair first, grew taller first. It has only been in the past couple of years that the older one has caught up and passed him. Weird, but it happens.

We all know kids who were built like men at age 16, complete with duo beards, while other kids the same age looked more like middle schoolers in terms of build and facial hair etc.

Anyway I don't disagree with the concept of projectability, but I lean more towards your way of thinking, HRB.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
22,774
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
If LeBron is sticking to $36 million, then its LA and see what happens. Even with LeBron and another max FA, the Lakers are not going to be better than a WC semi level team. Houston and GS still better.

His other easy max option seems to be Cleveland. And again, IMO, that still positions him as one of maybe 2 stars on the 3rd best team in the conf next year.

He really does need to make a choice. Max out $ or make the best choice to win. And its not about greed, 99% of players choose the money and I get that. I think he has a clear path to Houston if he's willing to come off that 36 number.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Tatum is sort of a special case. I lean towards the pro-youth side of the argument, but there are also guys like Marcus Smart - granted, he came in older by a year, but his development curve has been largely flat.
Smart is a perfect example of the type of younger, physically developed player I'm referring to who didn't have a high ceiling due to already having the physical/strength aspect when he entered the league. All of his improvement was going to come from his ball skills growth only.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
If LeBron is sticking to $36 million, then its LA and see what happens. Even with LeBron and another max FA, the Lakers are not going to be better than a WC semi level team. Houston and GS still better.

His other easy max option seems to be Cleveland. And again, IMO, that still positions him as one of maybe 2 stars on the 3rd best team in the conf next year.

He really does need to make a choice. Max out $ or make the best choice to win. And its not about greed, 99% of players choose the money and I get that. I think he has a clear path to Houston if he's willing to come off that 36 number.
He could make $36 million pretty much anywhere he wants to go via trade, with the possible exception of Houston, whose cap situation and roster construction makes it difficult. Philly could likely get there for a clean sign as well at 36 million. I have a feeling this is going to be a long, drawn-out process. If he does it via the Players Tribune, he might break the internet.

I've been trying to figure out if you've just been trolling these threads for awhile now.
No, this one was a joke, but I’m deadly serious about Boston being his best non-Golden State option to win and not understanding why “he’s not coming to Boston” has just been an acceptable answer. I’ve convinced myself we are near the top of his list because I think he’s going to want to creat a massive superteam to take down Golden State. This is likely his last act.

I also think LBJ is going to be asking GMs to get super creative and something like “can you unload the farm for Anthony Davis and leave me with another star” is the kind of thing he’d ask Danny. LeBron imo is either going to stay in Cleveland or build a complete powerhouse that would be favored over even these Warriors. I’ve waffled on LA, but I don’t think he could create a team good enough to justify shifting his legacy by leaving Cleveland.

I think Houston is in the mix as well. They nearly beat GS without LeBron. I’m sure LeBron feels that he would put them over the top. Their owners would have to commit to spending some real coin though.
Houston would seriously force Gilbert to just take one on the chin for LeBron, and I don’t think the guy who traded Kyrie for the future (oops) is going to play along. Horford/Sac pick/Memphis pick is a far better option than anything Houston could put together. Gilbert is better off letting LeBron walk than facilitating a sign and trade with Houston. Maybe they’ll offer the Brooklyn pickfest, but even then pretty much any other LeBron contender can offer significantly better.

Houston would also be very hard pressed to stay under the tax, as you suggest. Capella’s market this offseason should be quite interesting.
Holy crap, Ed just quoted a post that came after his!! He can see the future. Just tell us where Lebron is going already.
It’s too risky. Interspacial time plane continuum stuff. Please don’t ask for more details.
 
Last edited:

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
I think Houston is in the mix as well. They nearly beat GS without LeBron. I’m sure LeBron feels that he would put them over the top. Their owners would have to commit to spending some real coin though.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,841
Holy crap, Ed just quoted a post that came after his!! He can see the future. Just tell us where Lebron is going already.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I think Houston is in the mix as well. They nearly beat GS without LeBron. I’m sure LeBron feels that he would put them over the top. Their owners would have to commit to spending some real coin though.
I agree this would be LeBron's preferred destination but how does Houston dump Anderson? I mentioned this the other day and nobody found him a landing spot without many assets to tie to him. They don't have a "pick fest" as those picks from a LeBron/Harden-led team aren't worth much. It would have to occur via FA and Paul can't take a discount as Players Union President.

If they can dump Gordon (not hard), Nene and Anderson (how?) then they have a shot.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
I agree this would be LeBron's preferred destination but how does Houston dump Anderson? I mentioned this the other day and nobody found him a landing spot without many assets to tie to him. They don't have a "pick fest" as those picks from a LeBron/Harden-led team aren't worth much. It would have to occur via FA and Paul can't take a discount as Players Union President.

If they can dump Gordon (not hard), Nene and Anderson (how?) then they have a shot.
The Anderson contract is definitely a complicating factor. It would have to be tied to Houston’s 2019/2021/2023 picks completely unprotected and a pick swap in 2022 or something like that. The 2019 pick would obviously lack value but certainly possible that the latter 2 picks could yield some value. Who knows how long LeBron would plan to stick around.