Kemba Walker + 2021 First Round Pick to OKC for Al Horford, Moses Brown

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
once TT is gone Brad will have undone Danny's bad work the last 2 off-seasons
I will never understand the TT hate around here. Guy was as advertised and did about all that can be expected at that price. While some can be accused of inconsistent effort Tristan Thompson is a pro that goes at. The 20-21 Celtics lacked toughness to an alarming degree and Sosh shit all over the one of maybe 2 legit tough players on the roster. That he, as the bigs usually do (it wasn't Book Lopez' fault KD was rolling down the lane with a head of steam) was left holding the bag for defensive breakdowns, was given to him. 'Why did idiot TT switch? (Yeah he wanted guard to Westbrook, that was his plan) Or that Kemba, Smart, Tatum, Brown were out extended periods of time and the team was playing poorly, it was TT's fault. Every game thread was like he was Obama and the posters were fox news.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
I will never understand the TT hate around here. Guy was as advertised and did about all that can be expected at that price. While some can be accused of inconsistent effort Tristan Thompson is a pro that goes at. The 20-21 Celtics lacked toughness to an alarming degree and Sosh shit all over the one of maybe 2 legit tough players on the roster. That he, as the bigs usually do (it wasn't Book Lopez' fault KD was rolling down the lane with a head of steam) was left holding the bag for defensive breakdowns, was given to him. 'Why did idiot TT switch? (Yeah he wanted guard to Westbrook, that was his plan) Or that Kemba, Smart, Tatum, Brown were out extended periods of time and the team was playing poorly, it was TT's fault. Every game thread was like he was Obama and the posters were fox news.
No one is going to deny he played hard and was thrown into a tough situation Day 1 with the double BIG lineup.

Much like Kemba, Tristen is an intelligent, respected vet. But is a bad fit for this roster. His production/role can be replaced by a cheaper alternative.

I don't want to disparage TT too much more since you clearly see the Center you want on this team. I see a square peg for a round hole and expect him to be dealt
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
I see what he is and was this year, a good backup forward. He wasn't signed to starter money. He was signed to do what he did, take care of business on the boards, and as a team guy who would step back if TL took over, which he did, until Tl inevitably got hurt again. . You need to be careful for what you wish for. a Pick and pop guy may be soft, and do nothing in the paint on O. And we saw with Kornet that with Fournier, Brown, Tatum all toeing the 3pt line, somebody has to get out of the way.

I am really curious what the round peg is since I can't figure out what the Cs were trying to do, at either end. I expect your round peg is simply a better more expensive player. There is also going to be another coach, so the shapes of pegs may change. One thing I hope for is more fire out of the Celtics, and TT may fit that type of plan. That Romeo ( I know he had that one shift that presages a HOF career!) Nesmith, did not become one solid rotational player between the two of them was, and is, a much bigger problem than a vet backup forward getting vet backup money not being a plus starter.

I see Moses Brown as being able to do a lot of what TT did, as more of a possibility than TT being a terrible player, etc.

I am nervous about Al, TL, Brown as the forward group since two are injury risks/ minutes limited and one is a kid.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
Now that Brad made it clear that the plan is to build around the Jays, bigs need to set solid picks, swing the ball on the perimeter , and rim run with good vertical spacing. On defense, in a switching heavy scheme, they need to get low, move their feel, and not get kantered by wings and PGs, Besides being only adequate at rim running, TT does everything else ok. I like his toughness and high level experience.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
I see what he is and was this year, a good backup forward. He wasn't signed to starter money. He was signed to do what he did, take care of business on the boards, and as a team guy who would step back if TL took over, which he did, until Tl inevitably got hurt again. . You need to be careful for what you wish for. a Pick and pop guy may be soft, and do nothing in the paint on O. And we saw with Kornet that with Fournier, Brown, Tatum all toeing the 3pt line, somebody has to get out of the way.

I am really curious what the round peg is since I can't figure out what the Cs were trying to do, at either end. I expect your round peg is simply a better more expensive player. There is also going to be another coach, so the shapes of pegs may change. One thing I hope for is more fire out of the Celtics, and TT may fit that type of plan. That Romeo ( I know he had that one shift that presages a HOF career!) Nesmith, did not become one solid rotational player between the two of them was, and is, a much bigger problem than a vet backup forward getting vet backup money not being a plus starter.

I see Moses Brown as being able to do a lot of what TT did, as more of a possibility than TT being a terrible player, etc.

I am nervous about Al, TL, Brown as the forward group since two are injury risks/ minutes limited and one is a kid.
If you think TT was inked to play Forward then we don't have much to discuss.

We'll see how it goes down, if he's here next season I'll offer up my mea culpa
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Now that Brad made it clear that the plan is to build around the Jays, bigs need to set solid picks, swing the ball on the perimeter , and rim run with good vertical spacing. On defense, in a switching heavy scheme, they need to get low, move their feel, and not get kantered by wings and PGs, Besides being only adequate at rim running, TT does everything else ok. I like his toughness and high level experience.
This is where I'm at too. No beef with TTs performance honestly. The vertical spacing thing that TL provides is a clear advantage over TT, as is his passing. But the other stuff that we like in bigs, TT does pretty well. And he adds toughness and can stay on the court.

I'd like to see Brad prune the big pool a little, but I don't see any reason to do so hastily.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
Not to speak for reggie, but I think that he's grouping centers in with forwards here, i.e. not guards.
I do agree with these 2 comments by reggie:

I see Moses Brown as being able to do a lot of what TT did, as more of a possibility than TT being a terrible player, etc.

I am nervous about Al, TL, Brown as the forward group since two are injury risks/ minutes limited and one is a kid.
and believe TL, Horford, Moses, Kornet, Grant and a Center in the G-League would, at worse, get us to the trade deadline. There will be plenty of Centers at the trade deadline & post-deadline if needed.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
This is where I'm at too. No beef with TTs performance honestly. The vertical spacing thing that TL provides is a clear advantage over TT, as is his passing. But the other stuff that we like in bigs, TT does pretty well. And he adds toughness and can stay on the court.

I'd like to see Brad prune the big pool a little, but I don't see any reason to do so hastily.
I’m not sure about this. He is a not insignificant negative on offense and it’s an open question if his defense makes up for it. He’s a really good rebounder and a reasonably good positional defender but he doesn’t generate turnovers and he commits too many on the other end. He also doesn’t alter shots. The stats back up that he’s, at best, fine. LEBRON thinks he’s average and has consistently been average, but pretty much every other advanced metric shows a guy that doesn’t carry his weight on either end, but especially offensively.

I think there’s no question he’s the third best 5 on the roster. He also was last year until Theis was traded and I assume that if dumping Thompson had been an option instead that’s the direction we would’ve gone. It’s also worth noting that, recognizing sample size and role issues, the advanced metrics all think Kornet is a better player. I’m not buying that position, but I do think there’s a good chance a mix of Grant/Kornet/Moses would provide better on court performance backing up the 5 than Tristan does if deployed in a matchup sensitive way. The thing that would scare me about that option is what if both Horford and Timelord are hurt at the same time, but it’s hard to build a roster that is secure against that level of injury impact.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
I’m not sure about this. He is a not insignificant negative on offense and it’s an open question if his defense makes up for it. He’s a really good rebounder and a reasonably good positional defender but he doesn’t generate turnovers and he commits too many on the other end. He also doesn’t alter shots. The stats back up that he’s, at best, fine. LEBRON thinks he’s average and has consistently been average, but pretty much every other advanced metric shows a guy that doesn’t carry his weight on either end, but especially offensively.

I think there’s no question he’s the third best 5 on the roster. He also was last year until Theis was traded and I assume that if dumping Thompson had been an option instead that’s the direction we would’ve gone. It’s also worth noting that, recognizing sample size and role issues, the advanced metrics all think Kornet is a better player. I’m not buying that position, but I do think there’s a good chance a mix of Grant/Kornet/Moses would provide better on court performance backing up the 5 than Tristan does if deployed in a matchup sensitive way. The thing that would scare me about that option is what if both Horford and Timelord are hurt at the same time, but it’s hard to build a roster that is secure against that level of injury impact.
Like you said, he's fine. On the other hand, Grant is too short for a big, and TL can't stay healthy.

If your position is that we can free up Thompson's salary and run with Kornet and Moses instead, that's perfectly fine. But were back where we were last summer, heading into a season with a faberge egg at starting center. This is also fine if we get something valuable for TT, but I'm lost as to motive to hustle him out of town.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,465
Somewhere
Big difference between this and last season is that Al Horford is available to backstop and represents an upgrade on Theis.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
If you think my posts are rough on TT you may want to avoid the Port Cellar after he gets dealt :eek:
I am laughing at you assuming that I didn't know what position TT was more likley than me using Forward to as generic term for bigs. I am not attached to TT is he is bench vet those get traded since the salary works or is needed to make it work. That many people erroneously shit on him won't convince they are right.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
I am laughing at you assuming that I didn't know what position TT was more likley than me using Forward to as generic term for bigs. I am not attached to TT is he is bench vet those get traded since the salary works or is needed to make it work. That many people erroneously shit on him won't convince they are right.
Not sure why you'd label a beef Center/BIG/5 a Forward numerous times, but knock yourself out.

If Moses can basically do what TT does, why you would spend $9MM on a 3rd string Center instead of trading him for a wing/ballhandler? That's not shitting on him, that's basic math.

I'll just stay with the basic premise, replacing TT's production can be done by a low-cost 5. There are a plethora of them available (and why dealing TT may be trickier than believed). If Moses fills out just a little more he could provide TT-esque production.

TT's $9MM needs to be spent on a wing or ballhandler
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Not sure why you'd label a beef Center/BIG/5 a Forward numerous times, but knock yourself out.
fucking christ, I have tried to be patient.
So this is the fight you want? That I don't know the basics of hoops?
Basically you play one big, and people call them forwards. Because there really are not centers anymore, (in the nba a little), but most places you have wings guard, bigs (forwards). Sure Jokic is called a center but he dribbling the ball, facing up almost all the time. From program to program different coaches use different terms, but forward is pretty standard for big. The nba has stuck with names for positions that don't exist anymore. KD is power forward, but basically he is wing, even guard, same with Tatum.

Tristan Thompson does not post up much other than in transition, he is not very good at it. He is not a shot blocker. He is far more an old school 4 than a five. At any rate forward, big etc.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
fucking christ, I have tried to be patient.
So this is the fight you want? That I don't know the basics of hoops?
Basically you play one big, and people call them forwards. Because there really are not centers anymore, (in the nba a little), but most places you have wings guard, bigs (forwards). Sure Jokic is called a center but he dribbling the ball, facing up almost all the time. From program to program different coaches use different terms, but forward is pretty standard for big. The nba has stuck with names for positions that don't exist anymore. KD is power forward, but basically he is wing, even guard, same with Tatum.

Tristan Thompson does not post up much other than in transition, he is not very good at it. He is not a shot blocker. He is far more an old school 4 than a five. At any rate forward, big etc.
Your prior post was confusing, that's all.

Nothing to get worked up about. Grab another Blue
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Tristan Thompson does not post up much other than in transition, he is not very good at it. He is not a shot blocker. He is far more an old school 4 than a five. At any rate forward, big etc.
As an aside, getting into basketball in the 80s as a Celtics fan confused me for years about what a power forward was supposed to do on offense. I mean, obviously, Kevin McHale was the best PF of all time and his back to the basket game set the standard for the position, right?
 

jasail

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,189
Boston
Generally, I like the trade. I like Kemba, but his contract is bad and his knees are worse. At this point, he's unlikely to provide much value on the court over the duration of his deal while clogging up finances. If you can trade that type of contract, you do. In return the C's get back a better contract and a player who may be able to contribute. Al is older and is not the player he was when he was last here, and he also comes with his own injury issues. However, he can probably provide solid minutes in a big man rotation, as he can play at both ends of the court in the C's system. His passing from the big spot has been missed since he left. The balance of cost for this contractual upgrade was exchanging a 1st round pick for Brown. Giving up the 16th is not great, but it is somewhat mitigated by the depth the C's have of young, cost controlled players trying to break into the rotation. Brown is an intriguing player who can come in and be a 3rd or 4th big on a good roster. He also makes TT and his contract a fungible asset.

Given the likely construct of this roster, if you can move TT's contract (with an asset) for a rotational ball handler or wing, it's negligent not to. This team needs a veteran player who can handle the ball and shoot the 3. Trading TT for such a player would be ideal. Yes, it leaves the C's with less big man depth and that is a with Horford and Timelord, but back of the rotation bigs can be had on the cheap during the season. At this point in time, I'm much more worried about ball handling and scoring.

Two other things I like about bringing in Al. First, I think it's more likely that they keep Marcus. He fits in well with a big who can shoot and facilitate. This let's them improve their D and keeps them from trading another ball handler, which is current an area where they lack depth. I'm all for trading Marcus in the right deal, but I'm also fine with them using him as the starting ball handler if the right deal doesn't exist. This gives them more flexibility to do this. Second, Al's contract is imminently tradable, particularly going into next season. This gives some salary to work with if they are bundling assets for that 3rd star.

All in all, it's a good first deal for Brad the GM. Still a ways to go though, financial flexibility doesn't actually win you games.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Generally, I like the trade. I like Kemba, but his contract is bad and his knees are worse. At this point, he's unlikely to provide much value on the court over the duration of his deal while clogging up finances. If you can trade that type of contract, you do. In return the C's get back a better contract and a player who may be able to contribute. Al is older and is not the player he was when he was last here, and he also comes with his own injury issues. However, he can probably provide solid minutes in a big man rotation, as he can play at both ends of the court in the C's system. His passing from the big spot has been missed since he left. The balance of cost for this contractual upgrade was exchanging a 1st round pick for Brown. Giving up the 16th is not great, but it is somewhat mitigated by the depth the C's have of young, cost controlled players trying to break into the rotation. Brown is an intriguing player who can come in and be a 3rd or 4th big on a good roster. He also makes TT and his contract a fungible asset.

Given the likely construct of this roster, if you can move TT's contract (with an asset) for a rotational ball handler or wing, it's negligent not to. This team needs a veteran player who can handle the ball and shoot the 3. Trading TT for such a player would be ideal. Yes, it leaves the C's with less big man depth and that is a with Horford and Timelord, but back of the rotation bigs can be had on the cheap during the season. At this point in time, I'm much more worried about ball handling and scoring.

Two other things I like about bringing in Al. First, I think it's more likely that they keep Marcus. He fits in well with a big who can shoot and facilitate. This let's them improve their D and keeps them from trading another ball handler, which is current an area where they lack depth. I'm all for trading Marcus in the right deal, but I'm also fine with them using him as the starting ball handler if the right deal doesn't exist. This gives them more flexibility to do this. Second, Al's contract is imminently tradable, particularly going into next season. This gives some salary to work with if they are bundling assets for that 3rd star.

All in all, it's a good first deal for Brad the GM. Still a ways to go though, financial flexibility doesn't actually win you games.
I basically agree with almost all of this. (And will add that I am a big Smart fan and hope he stays).

One thing that is nice about bringing Al back is that, with Rob, it gives the Celtics 2 centers who can pass the ball. They are still quite different players, obviously, but having 2 centers who can pass the ball will mean they can rely more on some offensive sets where the offensive runs through the center. Evidently, Rob is a big fan of Al and will be happy to have him back, and there is a lot Rob can learn from Al, so that part is good too.

The only bad thing about Al and Rob at C is that one is 35 and the other has been injury prone. Which means that TT may not be as fungible as he appears. But at the same time, TT would be miserable as 3rd string C on the Celtics and bringing back double big lineups would also be bad. I kind of think they need to move TT but also find a third string C who can handle 1st/2nd string minutes if needed. Moses Brown is probably not there. I think Grant or Parker (if he is here) can handle minutes at smallball 5 but there will be times when a real C is needed.

If the Celtics want to run it back with Smart at PG, the don't need to do much else. I'd say they need to 1) sign or replace Fournier, 2) move TT, 3) bring in a couple of aging vets for 3rd string C and PG. I think that would work and potentially be an upgrade over last year.

On the other hand, there is some potential for a move that shakes the team up. Marcus Smart makes $14.3M next year, Tristan Thompson makes $9.7M. That's $24M for salary matching purposes. Of course if Smart goes out a PG needs to be added.

Here's my question: How badly has Ben Simmons damaged his value after Philly's recent ignominious exit? Has he become a buy low option? Could the Celtics put together a package to add him to the Jays? Smart+Thompson almost makes the money work. He's be a far better fit on a team without a post-up C. Can you add some package of Rob, Nesmith, Langford, first round picks that would make that happen? I assume this is all a pipe dream and that the Celtics can't compete on value with other suitors unless they offer Jaylen which I wouldn't do.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
A nice little piece on Horford in the Atlantic, some excerpts:

Even in the wake of trading Daniel Theis in March, Stevens used the opportunity to lavish high praise onto Horford. Before Theis, Stevens said the best two defensive communicators and directors he had ever coached were Horford and Aron Baynes. While playing with those guys, Stevens said, Theis and Robert Williams had no choice but to follow suit.

“When you talk about leadership, you talk about things that people see on the outside, or think they see on the outside,” Stevens said. “That’s real leadership. That’s corporate knowledge that’s been passed down. Doing your job in a pivotal role for all five guys on the court. And I think that’s why those guys are who they are, that’s why we appreciated them so much.”

Stevens made the trade partly for financial reasons, but also believes Horford should help the players around him. Any way he can ease the burden on Tatum and Brown should help, especially since losing Walker will put even more of a burden on them. Horford has always been useful as a pressure valve.

“His impact on others and his ability to lift others is one of his great strengths,” Stevens said.

The Celtics finished 27th in assist percentage last season. Horford should spice up the ball movement whenever he’s on the court. Between him and Williams, the Celtics now have two centers who can really facilitate. Horford does it while rarely committing turnovers. His sure-handedness should help a team that was too mistake-prone.

The extra dose of playmaking Horford provides should be useful when opponents sell out to double-team Tatum. It’s not always wise to give such a talented playmaker an easy 4-on-3 advantage

“Al can move the needle,” Stevens said. “Al had a good year in Oklahoma City. Obviously didn’t play a ton of games … but statistically had a year that obviously applies across the board. Again, I think that sometimes the ability to space, pass, play in different ways and play in different coverages at the other end, be able to play with other bigs or as the lone 5 I think is something that (should help). He just has a wealth of experience.”


https://theathletic.com/2667707/2021/06/23/al-can-move-the-needle-how-al-horford-can-make-a-difference-for-the-celtics/?source=dailyemail
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
As an aside, getting into basketball in the 80s as a Celtics fan confused me for years about what a power forward was supposed to do on offense. I mean, obviously, Kevin McHale was the best PF of all time and his back to the basket game set the standard for the position, right?
I started in the mid 80s and it confused me for years what to expect from a 6th man. Him and the Bucks version of Ricky Pierce.
 

jasail

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,189
Boston
The only bad thing about Al and Rob at C is that one is 35 and the other has been injury prone. Which means that TT may not be as fungible as he appears. But at the same time, TT would be miserable as 3rd string C on the Celtics and bringing back double big lineups would also be bad. I kind of think they need to move TT but also find a third string C who can handle 1st/2nd string minutes if needed. Moses Brown is probably not there. I think Grant or Parker (if he is here) can handle minutes at smallball 5 but there will be times when a real C is needed.
I agree the C's probably need to find another big man to add to their rotation given injury concerns regarding Al and TL. I just don't think this make's TT any less fungible. TT is fungible because of his contract. They can and should bring someone in to give them a facsimile of what TT can do for a fraction of the price.

On the other hand, there is some potential for a move that shakes the team up. Marcus Smart makes $14.3M next year, Tristan Thompson makes $9.7M. That's $24M for salary matching purposes. Of course if Smart goes out a PG needs to be added.

Here's my question: How badly has Ben Simmons damaged his value after Philly's recent ignominious exit? Has he become a buy low option? Could the Celtics put together a package to add him to the Jays? Smart+Thompson almost makes the money work. He's be a far better fit on a team without a post-up C. Can you add some package of Rob, Nesmith, Langford, first round picks that would make that happen? I assume this is all a pipe dream and that the Celtics can't compete on value with other suitors unless they offer Jaylen which I wouldn't do.
I'm fine with the idea of packaging Smart and TT with assets to bring in that 3rd player. That 3rd player is not Ben Simmons. The contract, the game, the personality are not something I want near this C's team. Very hard no.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
As an aside, getting into basketball in the 80s as a Celtics fan confused me for years about what a power forward was supposed to do on offense. I mean, obviously, Kevin McHale was the best PF of all time and his back to the basket game set the standard for the position, right?
Super biased answer. In an era when PF was critical he was the best. I think he is goat PF because he was unstoppable. He alwats guarded the best 3 or 4 and Larry took the weaker player. Larry gaurded Ivaroni, Rodman, etc.

The 80s saw lots of double low sets so teams, if they had the talent ran twin towers and that was a great option into the 90s. But the onus was on bulk, power strength, so you had everything from 7'4 Ralph Sampson to 6'3 Barkely playing 4.
Into the 90s the 4 had to shoot and Horace Grant was a prototype, physical, block shots
into the 200s the game started changing where forwards like today (4, 5) stay almost exclusively in the width of the ky, all the way out to the 3 and beyond. The corner (forwards were called "cornermen" back in the day) becam exclusive home of 3pt shooters. Many a big gets yelled at for being "in the way" in what was once there territory. I mean if Jerry Lucas was put in a time machines from 1965 to today and saw the 4 man get chewed out for being in the corner he would accurately comprae it to the a SS getting chewed out for being on the left side of 2nd base) If you notice the big guys that make 3s, Lopez, Al H, etc, almost always shoot from the top. Lopez getting the ball in the corner in the botched blob vs philly, and not shooting the 3 is understandable, since it was not place he spends much time.
Today the power forward is guys more skilled than the 3s of not that long ago, even the 2s. DJ is a saint, but was he more skilled than Tatum? Than Kd? But the power forward of today has to be able rebound, and contest shots. I love Bird and thnk he is MVP if young today, but he is not going to change shots like Tatum and KD are able to change shots. They don't really do forwardy things like post up, set screens, in fact the screens are set for them. Generally coaches call them wings.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Super biased answer. In an era when PF was critical he was the best. I think he is goat PF because he was unstoppable. He alwats guarded the best 3 or 4 and Larry took the weaker player. Larry gaurded Ivaroni, Rodman, etc.

The 80s saw lots of double low sets so teams, if they had the talent ran twin towers and that was a great option into the 90s. But the onus was on bulk, power strength, so you had everything from 7'4 Ralph Sampson to 6'3 Barkely playing 4.
Into the 90s the 4 had to shoot and Horace Grant was a prototype, physical, block shots
into the 200s the game started changing where forwards like today (4, 5) stay almost exclusively in the width of the ky, all the way out to the 3 and beyond. The corner (forwards were called "cornermen" back in the day) becam exclusive home of 3pt shooters. Many a big gets yelled at for being "in the way" in what was once there territory. I mean if Jerry Lucas was put in a time machines from 1965 to today and saw the 4 man get chewed out for being in the corner he would accurately comprae it to the a SS getting chewed out for being on the left side of 2nd base) If you notice the big guys that make 3s, Lopez, Al H, etc, almost always shoot from the top. Lopez getting the ball in the corner in the botched blob vs philly, and not shooting the 3 is understandable, since it was not place he spends much time.
Today the power forward is guys more skilled than the 3s of not that long ago, even the 2s. DJ is a saint, but was he more skilled than Tatum? Than Kd? But the power forward of today has to be able rebound, and contest shots. I love Bird and thnk he is MVP if young today, but he is not going to change shots like Tatum and KD are able to change shots. They don't really do forwardy things like post up, set screens, in fact the screens are set for them. Generally coaches call them wings.
Love this post.

One of the great aspects of getting old (there aren't many) is watching how these games change over time.

One thought I had reading your post is wondering if Ty Cobb would be surprised to see the SS on the right side of second base.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Super biased answer. In an era when PF was critical he was the best. I think he is goat PF because he was unstoppable. He alwats guarded the best 3 or 4 and Larry took the weaker player. Larry gaurded Ivaroni, Rodman, etc.

The 80s saw lots of double low sets so teams, if they had the talent ran twin towers and that was a great option into the 90s. But the onus was on bulk, power strength, so you had everything from 7'4 Ralph Sampson to 6'3 Barkely playing 4.
Into the 90s the 4 had to shoot and Horace Grant was a prototype, physical, block shots
into the 200s the game started changing where forwards like today (4, 5) stay almost exclusively in the width of the ky, all the way out to the 3 and beyond. The corner (forwards were called "cornermen" back in the day) becam exclusive home of 3pt shooters. Many a big gets yelled at for being "in the way" in what was once there territory. I mean if Jerry Lucas was put in a time machines from 1965 to today and saw the 4 man get chewed out for being in the corner he would accurately comprae it to the a SS getting chewed out for being on the left side of 2nd base) If you notice the big guys that make 3s, Lopez, Al H, etc, almost always shoot from the top. Lopez getting the ball in the corner in the botched blob vs philly, and not shooting the 3 is understandable, since it was not place he spends much time.
Today the power forward is guys more skilled than the 3s of not that long ago, even the 2s. DJ is a saint, but was he more skilled than Tatum? Than Kd? But the power forward of today has to be able rebound, and contest shots. I love Bird and thnk he is MVP if young today, but he is not going to change shots like Tatum and KD are able to change shots. They don't really do forwardy things like post up, set screens, in fact the screens are set for them. Generally coaches call them wings.
Kevin Garnett changed the game a lot more than people think. He always wanted to be called 6'13 so that he wouldn't be typecast into a role. While he didn't shoot the 3, his range was much bigger that what was normally seen from the 4 spot. Giannis, Jokic, Bam etc have Garnett to thank. There was Bird before Garnett too but Garnett was a different type of beast.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I'm fine with the idea of packaging Smart and TT with assets to bring in that 3rd player. That 3rd player is not Ben Simmons. The contract, the game, the personality are not something I want near this C's team. Very hard no.
I'd drive both to the airport. If the market for Ben Simmons is really that low, the C's should be all over that trade. Simmons fits in with the Jays perfectly.

In another month or two, Simmons value is going to rebound. I think a lot of people are overreacting to one series. Yeah, he has warts but his game is also a terrible fit in Philly. It's like watching Brandon Ingram play alongside LeBron or Victor Oladipo playing alongside Westbrook.

Acquire Simmons, trade TL/stuff for a Stretch 5 and win titles.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
I'd drive both to the airport. If the market for Ben Simmons is really that low, the C's should be all over that trade. Simmons fits in with the Jays perfectly.

In another month or two, Simmons value is going to rebound. I think a lot of people are overreacting to one series. Yeah, he has warts but his game is also a terrible fit in Philly. It's like watching Brandon Ingram play alongside LeBron or Victor Oladipo playing alongside Westbrook.

Acquire Simmons, trade TL/stuff for a Stretch 5 and win titles.
I think if we were getting Simmons TL would be in the deal, both to make up the value, and because Simmons needs a stretch 5. Something like Smart/TT/TL picks is probably a reasonable deal. You then play Horford/Tatum/Brown/Fournier/Simmons, and Horford's stretch ability and the shooting of the rest lets Simmons play more of an inside game without hurting you, 3 guys there can create their own shot in crunch time too. Bench would be thin, but you'd have Romeo, Nesmith, PP, Grant, Brown, 2nd, probably bring back Parker. You probably use the TPE and MLE to bring in another stretch big and another ballhandler who can shoot a bit. Then you look for ring chasers and guys who can be cut for buyouts at the deadline.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
I think if we were getting Simmons TL would be in the deal, both to make up the value, and because Simmons needs a stretch 5. Something like Smart/TT/TL picks is probably a reasonable deal. You then play Horford/Tatum/Brown/Fournier/Simmons, and Horford's stretch ability and the shooting of the rest lets Simmons play more of an inside game without hurting you, 3 guys there can create their own shot in crunch time too. Bench would be thin, but you'd have Romeo, Nesmith, PP, Grant, Brown, 2nd, probably bring back Parker. You probably use the TPE and MLE to bring in another stretch big and another ballhandler who can shoot a bit. Then you look for ring chasers and guys who can be cut for buyouts at the deadline.
I want to take this post to a drive-in movie and snuggle under a comforter with it.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I think if we were getting Simmons TL would be in the deal, both to make up the value, and because Simmons needs a stretch 5. Something like Smart/TT/TL picks is probably a reasonable deal. You then play Horford/Tatum/Brown/Fournier/Simmons, and Horford's stretch ability and the shooting of the rest lets Simmons play more of an inside game without hurting you, 3 guys there can create their own shot in crunch time too. Bench would be thin, but you'd have Romeo, Nesmith, PP, Grant, Brown, 2nd, probably bring back Parker. You probably use the TPE and MLE to bring in another stretch big and another ballhandler who can shoot a bit. Then you look for ring chasers and guys who can be cut for buyouts at the deadline.
Simmons would be doing a bunch of the things TL does anyway. Not all. In that lineup, ball movement would be phenomenal and the spacing would be more than adequate. It would also cause teams fits on the other end of the court, tho the C's would still struggle against the Embiid's of the world.

I'd hope most people would to Smart, TT and TL for Simmons, never mind for just Smart and TT. The team could then get by playing Simmons at the 5 when Al is on the bench and have someone like PP at the 1. Ideally, they would add a stretch big. One that can play the 4 and 5 but any stretch 5 would do. They could probably get by without one though.

I'd love Simmons paired up with the Jays. It offers so many options offensively and defensively. You can go with a stretch 5 and Ben at the 1, or Ben at the 5 and a shooter at the 1. Defensively, you could do literally whatever you want. The C's would be adding $6 mil in salary for 21/22 though. Not huge, not minor.

Ben Simmons isn't even 25 yet, and while he's probably close to being a finished product... that product is really good. He's just not plug and play. You have to read the manual and make sure you have the required accessories. Philly is a SNES console and Ben Simmons is a Genesis game. The The Celtics can emulate any console and run any game.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,491
Let me preface this by saying I would love to have Simmons on the Cs but if he did join, it would be a challenge for the new coach as the Jays are so ball dominant, it's not a natural move to bring in another ball dominant player but one who is a non-shooter. I would imagine they could work it out but there would certainly be growing pains and there is some likelihood it would implode dramatically.

The defense would be absurd though.
 

Lazy vs Crazy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
6,410
Simmons makes a ton of money - the idea of trading for him really went out the window when Kemba got traded. The only way it could get done now is as 3 teamer with Al going to that 3rd team because we know the 6ers don't want him back.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
I think if we were getting Simmons TL would be in the deal, both to make up the value, and because Simmons needs a stretch 5. Something like Smart/TT/TL picks is probably a reasonable deal. You then play Horford/Tatum/Brown/Fournier/Simmons, and Horford's stretch ability and the shooting of the rest lets Simmons play more of an inside game without hurting you, 3 guys there can create their own shot in crunch time too. Bench would be thin, but you'd have Romeo, Nesmith, PP, Grant, Brown, 2nd, probably bring back Parker. You probably use the TPE and MLE to bring in another stretch big and another ballhandler who can shoot a bit. Then you look for ring chasers and guys who can be cut for buyouts at the deadline.
I agree Simmons could fit well here, but it's a moot point because there is no chance in hell that the Sixers would trade Simmons here if that was the offer. If it became known that Simmons was on the market they could surely get better deals - either a better headline player (like CJ McCollum) or a better set of picks - and as moops says they don't really need anymore big men. To really entice the Sixers you'd have to include Jaylen in the mix, which the Celtics rightly would not do. (Maybe if the Celtics re-signed Fournier and if the Simmons fit was still an issue into next season, the Sixers could be interested in something like Smart+Fournier for Simmons - that's about the only even semi-realistic path to getting Simmons I can see and even that package could be pretty easily be trumped by other teams' deadline offers and would then present the Celtics with something similar to the conundrum the Sixers are facing where the Cs would have a bunch of guys that can't shoot - Simmons, TL, TT (if he isn't traded), Moses, etc.)
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Simmons would be doing a bunch of the things TL does anyway. Not all. In that lineup, ball movement would be phenomenal and the spacing would be more than adequate. It would also cause teams fits on the other end of the court, tho the C's would still struggle against the Embiid's of the world.

I'd hope most people would to Smart, TT and TL for Simmons, never mind for just Smart and TT. The team could then get by playing Simmons at the 5 when Al is on the bench and have someone like PP at the 1. Ideally, they would add a stretch big. One that can play the 4 and 5 but any stretch 5 would do. They could probably get by without one though.

I'd love Simmons paired up with the Jays. It offers so many options offensively and defensively. You can go with a stretch 5 and Ben at the 1, or Ben at the 5 and a shooter at the 1. Defensively, you could do literally whatever you want. The C's would be adding $6 mil in salary for 21/22 though. Not huge, not minor.

Ben Simmons isn't even 25 yet, and while he's probably close to being a finished product... that product is really good. He's just not plug and play. You have to read the manual and make sure you have the required accessories. Philly is a SNES console and Ben Simmons is a Genesis game. The The Celtics can emulate any console and run any game.
I think just about everything you have said about Simmons is right, unfortunately including the rebound in value.
Let me preface this by saying I would love to have Simmons on the Cs but if he did join, it would be a challenge for the new coach as the Jays are so ball dominant, it's not a natural move to bring in another ball dominant player but one who is a non-shooter. I would imagine they could work it out but there would certainly be growing pains and there is some likelihood it would implode dramatically.

The defense would be absurd though.
I don’t think this would be an issue, since if anything the Jays will wind up getting more shots out of the deal.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,189
I just can't imagine that's what Philly wants, or that it will be the best offer unfortunately. If we threw in a couple picks maybe---but that's quite a risk. It does have the benefit for Philly as having real year-one impact for them. But don't imagine it is enough.

My guess is it's a guy like McCollum who Morey seeks in return...someone who you can hope is a true second star and fits better with Embiid. Ideally it's a Harden profile (when he was acquired in Houston): someone who is good, but who has upside Philly can tap. Pascal Siakam kinda fits that, could imagine Toronto wants to move on (but also for reasons that Morey may not want him as much).
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I agree that Simmons is way under-valued now, but woudl Philly be interested in TT or TL? One, maybe, but not both. It seems to me that they would insist on Nesmith, as they need guys who can hit outside jumpers. They might also want PP.

Smart, TT, PP, and AN for Simmons works, as per the Trade Machine. It's +5 wins for Boston and -4 for Philly per Hollinger.
 

fairlee76

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2005
3,631
jp
Kevin Garnett changed the game a lot more than people think. He always wanted to be called 6'13 so that he wouldn't be typecast into a role. While he didn't shoot the 3, his range was much bigger that what was normally seen from the 4 spot. Giannis, Jokic, Bam etc have Garnett to thank. There was Bird before Garnett too but Garnett was a different type of beast.
Giannis would be the best player in the league by a wide margin if he had KG's 5 - 20 foot game.

https://www.nba.com/stats/player/203507/shooting/?Season=2020-21&SeasonType=Regular Season

https://www.nba.com/stats/player/708/shooting/?Season=2003-04&SeasonType=Regular Season
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I agree that Simmons is way under-valued now, but woudl Philly be interested in TT or TL? One, maybe, but not both. It seems to me that they would insist on Nesmith, as they need guys who can hit outside jumpers. They might also want PP.

Smart, TT, PP, and AN for Simmons works, as per the Trade Machine. It's +5 wins for Boston and -4 for Philly per Hollinger.
They wouldn't be. Someone said they wouldn't trade Smart and TT for Simmons and I thought that was a piping hot take. A 3rd team would have to be involved that would want TT and/or TL and could ship something Philly wants back to them.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
TT is just salary filler, he's a 9.7M expiring that they can flip somewhere else or just buy out.

Simmons' value is an interesting question because:
1. PHI likely isn't trading him for just picks, it doesn't fit their timeline, and the reason to trade Simmons is you want to maximize Embiid's window (which given his health history might be shorter than most stars).
2. A lot of teams are probably looking at Simmons as a poor fit. If one of your stars isn't a top shooter, or is a post player... does Simmons fit you any better than he fits PHI?

I thought this quick overview (based on odds because he works for Action now) by Matt Moore was interesting:
https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/ben-simmons-trade-odds-76ers-nba-league-intel?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mattmoore

Particularly his survey of execs, who all said... "people are over-blowing this and Simmons isn't a negative value" (he definitely isn't) but also "our team wouldn't trade for him for fit or $ reasons".
Simmons is a tough player to value, he's a guy with a massive flaw who is getting max $. I think IF they traded him they'd go for the POR deal, but POR has to agree, and Lillard and Simmons/Klutch have to be on board for it to work... the options are surprisingly limited for teams who have:
1. A need and desire to pay max money to a guy who can't shoot
2. Return pieces to help PHI compete now

My guess is he stays put another year unless Embiid really pushes for him to be moved.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
I agree that Simmons is way under-valued now, but woudl Philly be interested in TT or TL? One, maybe, but not both. It seems to me that they would insist on Nesmith, as they need guys who can hit outside jumpers. They might also want PP.

Smart, TT, PP, and AN for Simmons works, as per the Trade Machine. It's +5 wins for Boston and -4 for Philly per Hollinger.
It would probably need to include TL rather than PP for talent reasons, as well as a draft pick or picks.

But I 99% agree that it just isn’t happening. It would give the Celtics their three stars in an arrangement that would work.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
C's get Ben Simmons
Philly gets CJ McCollum, stuff
Portland gets Smart, TT, stuff

I'm sure if someone fudged around with it, there's a deal to be made that makes sense for all 3 teams. It might involve RL and/or some picks.

Ultimately, if Ben Simmons is traded, Philly can do better than anything the C's offer. And I don't see Ben Simmons demanding a trade to Boston.

Who would people rather have on the C's? Simmons or Beal? Who would people rather have on a generic team?

The first question is a tough decision for me (I'd reluctantly take Simmons and probably regret it later) but the 2nd one is an easy one (Beal). It's possible that impacts just how much Simmons would get in a return.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,840
C's get Ben Simmons
Philly gets CJ McCollum, stuff
Portland gets Smart, TT, stuff

I'm sure if someone fudged around with it, there's a deal to be made that makes sense for all 3 teams. It might involve RL and/or some picks.
With just the players you mentioned, it works in the trade machine.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
C's get Ben Simmons
Philly gets CJ McCollum, stuff
Portland gets Smart, TT, stuff

I'm sure if someone fudged around with it, there's a deal to be made that makes sense for all 3 teams. It might involve RL and/or some picks.

Ultimately, if Ben Simmons is traded, Philly can do better than anything the C's offer. And I don't see Ben Simmons demanding a trade to Boston.

Who would people rather have on the C's? Simmons or Beal? Who would people rather have on a generic team?

The first question is a tough decision for me (I'd reluctantly take Simmons and probably regret it later) but the 2nd one is an easy one (Beal). It's possible that impacts just how much Simmons would get in a return.
I'd rather have Simmons for us, a generic team depends on what that means. An empty roster I choose Simmons, a team with a bunch of JAGs I might take CJ, but probably take Simmons anyway because I can trade him for CJ+.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I'd rather have Simmons for us, a generic team depends on what that means. An empty roster I choose Simmons, a team with a bunch of JAGs I might take CJ, but probably take Simmons anyway because I can trade him for CJ+.
You need to re read the question. I'd take SImmons over McCollum in any situation. Starting from scratch, I'd probably go with Beal because I'd be less limited with what I could add. I could see wanting to build around Simmons on an empty slate too though.