Kemba, Smart and additional pieces/picks for Harden and maybe PJ Tucker back? Have to do some trade machine work tonight.
The money works without adding anything to Walker. So no Smart needed. Walker to New York for picks with Langford and Nesmith to Houston might work.Gotta figure it involves Kemba to the Knicks and Smart to Houston to make the money work.
Is new management in NY dumb enough to take Kemba?
Why would NY give up picks for Kemba’s carcass?The money works without adding anything to Walker. So no Smart needed. Walker to New York for picks with Langford and Nesmith to Houston might work.
If Walker looks good after his return to action. Because the Knicks have to be getting desperate by now. But obviously he has to recover before the trade deadline.Why would NY give up picks for Kemba’s carcass?
Fair. Although it seems like Houston is highly motivated to deal him sooner rather than later. Of course, they want the best possible return so they may have to wait.If Walker looks good after his return to action. Because the Knicks have to be getting desperate by now. But obviously he has to recover before the trade deadline.
Finally, is Semi actually sort of an ok player now? This is sort of the opposite of green-tinted glasses: if I hadn't seen his 3 years of suckitude, and saw him on another team for the first time this year, I'd think he was a perfectly ok role-playing wing who can hit some 3s and be competent on defense.
The shot looks compact and repeatable now, and he gets it off reasonably well under pressure. He also seems to not be completely lost when he attacks closeouts this year. I'm pretty inclined to give him a lot of playing time at this point.If he can hit 3s at volume, yes. His problem never was defense. If he hits 3s at volume, he's a fringe starter. A 3 point shot changes everything.
He started hitting 3s last year, but the big thing to me beyond continuing it this year is he looks far more comfortable when he gets the ball to do something other than take the 3. He's doing a competent job of driving the closeout and making a pass when needed. That is big for him. He looks like he knows what he's doing, and what he shouldn't do, which is big for a bench playerThere are going to be a lot of ups and downs along the way, but last night I think we saw a clear view of what the Celtics Jays future looks like.
- Keep things spaced out, with one lunchpail big (or more, if TL pans out).
- Can play a smaller scoring guard, or 2 guards, because of the length at 3-5. This helps for resource allocation and opens up development/acquisition options.
- Fill in the other positions with limited role-players who can hit 3s.
In terms of the roster so far, it looks like PP and TL are already playing their way into bigger roles, which is huge. If one of Grant, Romeo or Nesmith takes similar steps, this team suddenly has depth.
Finally, is Semi actually sort of an ok player now? This is sort of the opposite of green-tinted glasses: if I hadn't seen his 3 years of suckitude, and saw him on another team for the first time this year, I'd think he was a perfectly ok role-playing wing who can hit some 3s and be competent on defense.
Agree. Honestly, if he were on another team right now and I had just watched the past few games, I'd be clamoring for Danny to go after him for wing depth.He started hitting 3s last year, but the big thing to me beyond continuing it this year is he looks far more comfortable when he gets the ball to do something other than take the 3. He's doing a competent job of driving the closeout and making a pass when needed. That is big for him. He looks like he knows what he's doing, and what he shouldn't do, which is big for a bench player
Hmmmm...if he played 25-30 mins/game this year, and hit like 38% on 4-5 3s a game, I think he'd get paid $7-10M per somewhere. A lot of ifs, and unlikely to hit them all. I'll feel a lot differently about him for better or worse once the season is over, which is when the decision has to be made.And to think a lot (probably all) of us would have been fine if Semi was cut this preseason.
I wonder how much he gets in the off season if he keeps playing this way. I don't see him getting paid even with a good season so maybe there's a potential bargain there.
I'm still pretty iffy on whether he keeps it up but he definitely deserves a chance with the current lineup.
If the Cavs cut bait on a guy they invested in, and had flashed at a position of need and was generally seen as a piece off their future at times, I think his issues must be really serious. He was a guy with serious red flags coming in who had to be on the straight and narrow. Not whatever this is. Talent is still king in the NBA, but I’d be somewhat surprised if we see him again soon. Maybe he can get his head right and grind his way back.A bunch of reports Cavs have had it with Kevin Porter Jr.
He's an interesting gamble for a roster with more discipline and leadership like the Celtics. He's not a perfect roster fit, but it is a 'buy low' chance and feels like they can survive the distraction. Anyone have interest, or is he too much of a head case to be worth it?
Needless to say, given the Cavs excess of big men you also could try to get in on Nance in a package for a better pick...
No question. I think what you wonder is whether a different coach and some more mature infrastructure might help. Not certain its a worthwhile gamble for Celts, but a question to ask.If the Cavs cut bait on a guy they invested in, and had flashed at a position of need and was generally seen as a piece off their future at times, I think his issues must be really serious. He was a guy with serious red flags coming in who had to be on the straight and narrow. Not whatever this is. Talent is still king in the NBA, but I’d be somewhat surprised if we see him again soon. Maybe he can get his head right and grind his way back.
Yeah, I liked him as a prospect, and in the lead up to the draft I think I argued that he’d need precisely such a situation, so I probably shouldn’t write it off now. Cavs wasn’t it, though credit to Altman for trying to establish a culture. I’d be fine with him on Waters’s two-way, or Edwards’s spot, but I don’t know if that’s a message the FO would want to send to the rest of the team.No question. I think what you wonder is whether a different coach and some more mature infrastructure might help. Not certain its a worthwhile gamble for Celts, but a question to ask.
A team like the Lakers is the most natural one to take the shot (just as the Patriots were sometimes willing to try these kinds of guys...helps to have the ultimate alpha on the roster)
I didn't care for KPJ as a prospect. 2018 HS #40 ranked prospect (according to ESPN). Did nothing at USC except cause nonsense with the coach. Sounds like his antics are flaring up with Koby Altman.Yeah, I liked him as a prospect, and in the lead up to the draft I think I argued that he’d need precisely such a situation, so I probably shouldn’t write it off now. Cavs wasn’t it, though credit to Altman for trying to establish a culture. I’d be fine with him on Waters’s two-way, or Edwards’s spot, but I don’t know if that’s a message the FO would want to send to the rest of the team.
Great article. Thanks for posting. And I agree with you about Zarren. The Celtic version of Pink Stripes.Didn't know where else to put this and pretty sure it's not worth it's own thread but fun read about what it's like to discuss trades with Danny, from perspective of opposing ex-execs: https://www.celticsblog.com/2021/1/19/22237956/what-is-it-really-like-to-talk-trades-with-danny-ainge-boston-celtics
Over the years, because of Ainge’s propensity to do well in deals, a narrative has emerged that he feels he must “win” every trade. In an attempt to decipher the truth, CelticsBlog interviewed 16 current and former front office executives from around the NBA about what it’s really like to talk trades with Ainge and the Celtics. All 16 individuals (ranging from final decision-makers to front office assistants) were asked the same set of questions:My biggest takeaway from the article is that Zarren is really valuable to the franchise.
- What’s it like to talk trades with Danny Ainge and the Celtics?
- Does Danny Ainge drive as hard of a bargain as is often portrayed in the media?
- How often do you think Boston has really been “close” to trading for a star player?
- Do you think Danny Ainge has actually “won” most of his trades?
- Do you enjoy talking trades with Boston?
I highly doubt that a 2nd year knucklehead fighting for scrap minutes would disrupt and distract the whole team. And if there is even a hint of that, he is gone. Now, I am not advocating for him in Boston, just saying that I don't think there is too much to worry aboutSeems like a huge downside risk (disrupts and distracts the whole team) for a limited upside risk. Even if everything goes right and he gets his head straight, his ceiling isn’t that high, right?
I’m with you. I have zero interest in bringing him in. I wouldn’t take a talent like Kyrie for free let alone a much less talented malcontent like Porter Jr. Let a team like the Pistons or something deal with that.I don't get why anyone would want KPJ. He's not good at playing basketball and he's such a pain in the ass that USC was glad to see him gone and a non-playoff team is looking to dump him for nothing.
This is awesome. Thank you for posting. I would be mortified if this were my team: An Eastern Conference Executive: “Nope. Not at all. I feel worried that they know things I don’t know, especially at the draft. Maybe I’m just paranoid, because they’ve always been honest with me. But I start wondering what they see in a player that I don’t see.”Didn't know where else to put this and pretty sure it's not worth it's own thread but fun read about what it's like to discuss trades with Danny, from perspective of opposing ex-execs: https://www.celticsblog.com/2021/1/19/22237956/what-is-it-really-like-to-talk-trades-with-danny-ainge-boston-celtics
The flip side of this is that it seems some teams' execs aren't as up on the cap math and rules as they should be. We saw that this offseason with the Bucs messing up the Pat Connaughton contract and needing to give him another guaranteed year to make the signing work as an Early Bird deal. When you need Zarren to correct you while on a call discussing a trade, that's probably a bad sign for your overall front office competence.Great article. Thanks for posting. And I agree with you about Zarren. The Celtic version of Pink Stripes.
I read that an immediately thought they are missing easy to use databases and tools. Maybe they have them and the front office doesn't have a supporting process for handling the conversations. As a name comes up (even if you don't want to integrate with the voice solution) they could type in (auto-complete) and pull up contract status. They could/should build out (and track) scenarios (proposed and transacted)... the information should be at everyones fingertips.The flip side of this is that it seems some teams' execs aren't as up on the cap math and rules as they should be. We saw that this offseason with the Bucs messing up the Pat Connaughton contract and needing to give him another guaranteed year to make the signing work as an Early Bird deal. When you need Zarren to correct you while on a call discussing a trade, that's probably a bad sign for your overall front office competence.
I'm guessing he has a long stretch of Euroleague, China, and Gleagueball in front of him. Although it wouldn't totally shock me if Milwaukee took a chance on him.If the Cavs cut bait on a guy they invested in, and had flashed at a position of need and was generally seen as a piece off their future at times, I think his issues must be really serious. He was a guy with serious red flags coming in who had to be on the straight and narrow. Not whatever this is. Talent is still king in the NBA, but I’d be somewhat surprised if we see him again soon. Maybe he can get his head right and grind his way back.
Once, at the draft, they told us ‘You better be talking picks, because we don’t want any of your players’.
Haha great story. But this is why, to be honest, it's worth "losing" a trade once in a while, so that when you pick up the phone to make a deal, the other guys don't automatically shy away because they think they're about to get screwed.“An Eastern Conference GM: “I hate talking trades with Danny because I feel like I’m gonna lose on something. One time, he called me about a guy who wasn’t in our rotation. This guy had played like five games in two months. I immediately panicked and called my team and our scouts and asked them ‘What are we missing? Why does Boston want him?’. That’s the sort of stuff you second-guess when talking trades with Danny.”
No, it isn't. GM is ever going to say "I think I should try to lose this trade" just to pacify some petty personalities. Ainge arguably lost the Kendrick Perkins trade, and there have been other mistakes made. And how knows what happens in an alternate universe where the Kyrie trade is never made.Haha great story. But this is why, to be honest, it's worth "losing" a trade once in a while, so that when you pick up the phone to make a deal, the other guys don't automatically shy away because they think they're about to get screwed.
It's not about pacifying petty personalities. It's about helping potential trade partners being comfortable dealing with you. Nurturing relationships to foster better business relationships. If you think every time GM X calls you, you believe you're gonna get hosed, you're less likely to deal with him. It's human nature.No, it isn't. GM is ever going to say "I think I should try to lose this trade" just to pacify some petty personalities. Ainge arguably lost the Kendrick Perkins trade, and there have been other mistakes made. And how knows what happens in an alternate universe where the Kyrie trade is never made.
The GM who was scared to trade with Danny Ainge should be fired. GMs should already be comfortable enough to trade with Ainge based on their own merit.It's not about pacifying petty personalities. It's about helping potential trade partners being comfortable dealing with you. Nurturing relationships to foster better business relationships. If you think every time GM X calls you, you believe you're gonna get hosed, you're less likely to deal with him. It's human nature.
Fair enough. Human nature, though, is what it is. If a guy has a rep of screwing guys over, he's not breeding a sense of trust among potential trade partners. That is going to naturally make others shy away from dealing with you. Should it be that way? Maybe not. But it happens in all kinds of businesses, not just sports.The GM who was scared to trade with Danny Ainge should be fired. GMs should already be comfortable enough to trade with Ainge based on their own merit.
I will offer some counter examples, direct from the article:It's not about pacifying petty personalities. It's about helping potential trade partners being comfortable dealing with you. Nurturing relationships to foster better business relationships. If you think every time GM X calls you, you believe you're gonna get hosed, you're less likely to deal with him. It's human nature.
Sounds like a no BS operation that I myself would very much appreciate negotiating with.A Western Conference Assistant GM: “Easiest conversations we have, because they don’t mess around. You ask about a guy and they don’t want to talk about him, they’ll tell you right away that you are wasting your time. Danny and Mike are also up front if you call and they don’t want anything from your roster. Once, at the draft, they told us ‘You better be talking picks, because we don’t want any of your players’. That may sound harsh, but draft day is so crazy and time is so short, that you appreciate the honesty.”
OK, another good trait to exhibit during negotiations.In-season is the best. Things are calmer. You can bat around ideas for a while. They are good partners in just talking through things. And because they’ve made so many deals, Boston is good about pulling in third teams they trust. There is a comfort there.”
Neither seem emotional takes. Seems like both rival execs would be more than willing to deal with Ainge again.An Eastern Conference Executive: “Absolutely. We’ve walked away from deals with Boston because they push too hard for an extra piece. Sometimes it’s a player, sometimes it’s a pick. Once, it was draft rights for a guy we didn’t think would amount to anything, but we stuck to our principles. Damn sure if that player didn’t end up coming over and having a nice career. Sadly, we traded him for less than Ainge was willing to give for him.”
A Western Conference Executive: “I don’t think Ainge is tougher than anyone else. We all push hard. But he’s not unreasonable. We did a deal once that took roughly a month to come together. We’d talk, walk away and come back every four or five days. It was never contentious or ugly. Eventually, we gave a little, they gave a little and we got there. That’s usually how it works. Another time, at the trade deadline, we tried to do a deal and couldn’t make it work. There just wasn’t the right match. It wasn’t about Danny pushing too hard.”
Similar quotes from others. Guess what? Ainge ain't perfect when it comes to making trades.A Western Conference GM: “I think Danny has nailed the big trades he’s made. The smaller ones are a little rougher. They tried to fill out that bench around KG (Kevin Garnett), (Paul) Pierce and Ray (Allen) for so many years and he never hit the right mix.
So, no Ainge doesn't need to change his tactics. If you have a reputation for brutal honestly during negotiations, people will actually want to work with you.Do you enjoy talking trades with Boston?
· An Eastern Conference GM: “Yes. They are easy to deal with. Danny tells you when he’s not interested, switches to something he is interested in right away or walks away. My team loves Mike Zarren because he’s not arrogant. He might tell them something doesn’t work cap-wise or something, but he’s not a dick about it. And Boston is great about finding a third team for deals if you need one.
Oh, and they are up front if they plan on flipping the guy you trade them. I personally don’t care what you do after our deal. He’s not my player anymore. But some of my peers hate it. I think they worry about ‘Could I have gotten that deal?’. It’s not something I worry about, but Boston does tell you if that is their plan.”
- An Eastern Conference Executive: “Nope. Not at all. I feel worried that they know things I don’t know, especially at the draft. Maybe I’m just paranoid, because they’ve always been honest with me. But I start wondering what they see in a player that I don’t see.”
· An Eastern Conference GM: “I do. There’s no (expletive) with Boston. Get in, get out. It might take a bunch of conversations, but they aren’t wasting your time. And you get brutal honesty. Once we asked them what they thought of one of our players and the response was ‘You’re asking because he can’t play. Why would we want him if you don’t?’. And they were right. He couldn’t play.
Mostly, I appreciate guys who want to work with you. Need something they don’t have? They’ll get a third team. Want in as a third team? They’re happy to listen. When they call you, they get to what they want right away. If you tell them a guy is off limits, they might push a bit, but not too much. They’ll circle back to see if anything has changed, but not every couple of days like some others do. They respect you when you tell them no, because that’s what they expect in return.
Look at this year. Charlotte didn’t have to do Gordon Hayward as a sign and trade. They weren’t dumping salary and still had to eat (Nicolas) Batum’s salary. But they did it because the year before, Boston helped them get Terry Rozier in the double sign and trade with Kemba Walker. That’s how you build equity and good relationships.
I will forever defend that Perkins deal as he was damaged goods in the final year of his contract rendering him useless on the court that season and we had no intention on paying him $10m/yr on a long-term deal.No, it isn't. GM is ever going to say "I think I should try to lose this trade" just to pacify some petty personalities. Ainge arguably lost the Kendrick Perkins trade, and there have been other mistakes made. And how knows what happens in an alternate universe where the Kyrie trade is never made.
Yeah, Perkins didn’t play that year and Boston ended up getting a C that could stay on the court a bit and a little use out of Green. Of course the return they got for dealing Green was as inspiring as Green himself (essentially Jabari Bird, Carsen Edwards, and Aaron Nesmith). At least there’s still hope for NesmithI will forever defend that Perkins deal as he was damaged goods in the final year of his contract rendering him useless on the court that season and we had no intention on paying him $10m/yr on a long-term deal.
The Perkins deal was a steal, they got Jeff Green when they needed another wing to match up with Miami (and would have been a really useful bench piece to have in 2011-12 if not for his heart condition), Krstic who was better than Perkins at the time anyway, and a 1st (yeah it became Fab Melo, but that's irrelevant to the trade itself). And Perkins was absolutely terrible for the rest of his career, and his extension led to OKC eventually trading Harden, so that went well for them too.I will forever defend that Perkins deal as he was damaged goods in the final year of his contract rendering him useless on the court that season and we had no intention on paying him $10m/yr on a long-term deal.
People also act like it was obvious Jeff Green wouldn't become good, and it wasn't at all. Hell, we got multiple picks over the years from teams thinking he might be good, and he's still trucking along playing real minutes on a title contender.I will forever defend that Perkins deal as he was damaged goods in the final year of his contract rendering him useless on the court that season and we had no intention on paying him $10m/yr on a long-term deal.
In the quotes, they're not complaining he screwed them over. They're worried that his talent evaluation is better.Fair enough. Human nature, though, is what it is. If a guy has a rep of screwing guys over, he's not breeding a sense of trust among potential trade partners. That is going to naturally make others shy away from dealing with you. Should it be that way? Maybe not. But it happens in all kinds of businesses, not just sports.
Yeah, it's hard for me to take the risk of moving a real asset for him if he might be cooked. If the price is a middling 2nd rounder, I'd take the chance.With two seemingly over-the-hill vets already on the roster in Thompson and Teague, I'd be wary of adding a third, though perhaps Redick's poor numbers this season are an aberration.