If you think there's a ton of uncertainty beforehand you can price it in with conditionals. But conditionalizing after the fact is strange--everyone involved knows you can't see the future, if the C's said that he'd likely be back in a month they're also inherently pricing in some risk that it could be longer. If you're going to price in a penalty for that, then you need to reduce the up-front cost or you're taking 2 bites at the same apple.
To some extent, it would be. But one could reframe this in a slightly different way: how much extra are the Celtics willing to pay the Cavs to not play Thomas this year? In this specific case, a healthy Thomas not playing games would work to the Celtics' benefit. There might be some mutually beneficial language that could be agreed to that would not be overly affected by shenanigans.
I don't recall anyone saying that Thomas or Crowder would play differently or openly pout (let's assume Zizic is fine wherever he winds up given this is his first season). I fully agree these guys are professionals and that they will do what is needed of them on the court.
My position on the C's doing the deal regardless is for a couple reasons other than them being pissed if they come back. If IT's hip is this bad then Danny for sure isn't re-signing him. There isn't a way to replace his production through FA as they're up against the cap so getting this done has short and long term ramifications. With Kyrie in the fold, they can go over the cap to sign him long term. The chances of a player of Irving's age and ability being available in trade are very rare so they need to get this done. It's especially important given ITs hip problem. It would also hurt Cleveland this year in that if IT doesn't return to last year's form that they don't have a 3rd star to put with LBJ/Love without cashing in the Nets pick. If LeBron is truly leaving, I can't see Gilbert trading that pick for this year. There's a path both to the Finals this year and being the best in the East going forward with this deal going through. Just my two cents.
Mine boils down to feeling that for whatever reason, Ainge shouldn't add more IF he represented Thomas quite clearly and the results matched his projections.
Has anyone outside of Cleveland fans on twitter really said the Cavs want Tatum? I know some writers threw that out as clickbait, but I don't think there's really been anyone saying that's Cleveland's target.
It matters little what Ainge's projections are......what matters are what Cleveland's is and if they deem surgery necessary than there is a problem. Two medical teams can have a difference of opinion in how to address an injury......in this instance what the Celtics doctors opine isn't relevant as the only ones that matter are the Cavs medical team.
I think what matters is what they agreed to, though, right?
But becomes far more important if for any reason Kyrie gets hurt. Rozier is an important piece for the Cs to keep and they just aren't going to throw him into a deal.
The part that makes little sense in that scenario is - obviously if the Celtics had any reason to believe that the Cleveland medical assessment was important to the deal, Ainge and the C's would have been holding their breath and waiting for that exam.
Ordinarily I would agree, but based on how strongly the Celtics announced the trade, and the surprise they're reporting at Cleveland's response to the medical, it seems more likely than not that IT's condition was discussed with the strong possibility he wouldn't play this year.
You could say this about any third-stringer, which Rozier is at point guard.
I agree with this, and it makes the trade hard to amend.
Exactly. This is a kid who just turned 23 and was playing crunch time playoff minutes for us in his second season. Part of the reason it was so easy to move Avery was due to Rozier stepping into a role larger than his 17 mpg of last season.
What was agreed upon prior to Cleveland having their medical people look at Isaiah? Of course the answer is, "We don't know" however I feel it's reasonable to believe one of two things (or both)......one, that there would be nothing to agree to until the Cavaliers were able to formulate an opinion on a timetable for Isaiah's return.....or two, that Cleveland would have their medical people recommend surgery to be able to go back and ask for more assets as they know he's pretty much finished.
That's crazy. If the Nets pick falls out of the top 5 and the Lakers doesn't that swap could become extremely valuable. If you are the Cs' you'd much rather throw in one of your own late 1st round draft picks..
This is a nothing article. He's just transcribing what Woj said. It's much different when you hear it.
Completely agree - there's no real downside. The team which needs this trade to happen is Cleveland, not Boston. Don't even negotiate, just say "no" to every suggestion (and I do mean 1-word answers). By Thursday the desperation will be palpable.
My guess (which is consistent with what was reported by a Cleveland beat writer last night as well) is Celtics described IT's problems and prognosis and shared medical info and Cleveland asked for the Nets pick to make up for the risk IT wouldn't be next year what he was last year. So from the Celtics perspective, IT's risk was 'baked in' Otherwise, isn't the Nets pick a clear overpay?
