Is this a given, that one precedes the other? Has the Brow indicated in any way that this is how it must play out? There are other options. (i.e. possible deal with Kemba Walker, or even Rozier staying) to replace Kyrie. So many variables with FAs, draft picks (as indicated throughout this thread) for DA to work with.If Kyrie walks, hence AD isn't coming ...
.
If the Knicks sign Kyrie then some of their PG army is getting traded. As Morant would have the most value, it would be him.The East is in my opinion much better than it’s been in years going forward especially if Kahwi and Butler stay where they are. Milwaukee, Toronto, Philly would clearly be better and Indiana with Oladipo is better. What if the Knicks add Kyrie, Durant, keep Knox and not trade him for AD and get Zion or Morant? They’d be better. Then you’ll be thrown in a group with Orlando, Brooklyn, and Detroit. That’s 40-45 win territory and in purgatory. I was a bit hyperbolic with 40 max.
There is no way for Boston to replace Irving with Walker. They’d still be capped out without Irving, so max guys are out of their range. Even if Ainge talks 24/7 into leaving via sign & trade for air they TPE is only going to be approximately $20.1 million.Is this a given, that one precedes the other? Has the Brow indicated in any way that this is how it must play out? There are other options. (i.e. possible deal with Kemba Walker, or even Rozier staying) to replace Kyrie. So many variables with FAs, draft picks (as indicated throughout this thread) for DA to work with.
OK then, no Walker. But what about AD sans Kyrie?There is no way for Boston to replace Irving with Walker. They’d still be capped out without Irving, so max guys are out of their range. Even if Ainge talks 24/7 into leaving via sign & trade for air they TPE is only going to be approximately $20.1 million.
If it’s Kyrie/AD with others traded/leaving in FA I think chemistry would be better. Filling spots with players who know their roles coming in would make for a better locker room.Do you really fancy another season like last year? Only without hope as they'd have to gut the team to land Davis, pretty much ensuring that he walks at year's end.
Yea, being at the mercy of Klutch (and Lebron to some extent) while watching Tatum make his 1st All-Star team for the Pels would be unbearable.Do you really fancy another season like last year? Only without hope as they'd have to gut the team to land Davis, pretty much ensuring that he walks at year's end.
Why exactly are we gutting the team to land Davis? As has been shown over and over, players with one year left on their deals go for much less than fans think. And I know you think you are some sort of nostradamus, but many of us remain unconvinced that all your seeings are going to happenOnly without hope as they'd have to gut the team to land Davis, pretty much ensuring that he walks at year's end.
What's more curious to me is why NH hates AD so much. I get some hesitation with superagency representation, like some teams fear(ed) signing Boras/Rosenhaus/Tellem clients over the years, but it's A fucking D. Guys like that don't grow on trees.Why exactly are we gutting the team to land Davis? As has been shown over and over, players with one year left on their deals go for much less than fans think. And I know you think you are some sort of nostradamus, but many of us remain unconvinced that all your seeings are going to happen
He doesn’t hate AD. He was leading the AD charge for last couple of years. But the Klutch situation changes the calculus for some people. Kyrie going to LA would make things even riskier than they already are.What's more curious to me is why NH hates AD so much. I get some hesitation with superagency representation, like some teams fear(ed) signing Boras/Rosenhaus/Tellem clients over the years, but it's A fucking D. Guys like that don't grow on trees.
I would think part of Plan B would be to sit down with Horford and tell him that we love him, but if he wants a chance at a championship, he's better off opting out. Plan B should be a minimum 2-3 year retooling and a 33 year old doesn't really fit.Yea, being at the mercy of Klutch (and Lebron to some extent) while watching Tatum make his 1st All-Star team for the Pels would be unbearable.
Anyone else have some other players they'd like to see here for Plan B:
5.5MM MLE? 3.5MM Bi-Annual?
Unrestricted FAs that have some offensive skill (may come cheap):
Lamb, Collison, Ross, Matthews, Bullock, Tyreke Evans, JaMychel Green, Hood, Ellington, Joseph, Seth Curry,IT,Jeff Green
That wasn't the question I was asked and the ship's sailed on Kyrie. However, to play your game, do you really see Irving trusting the next five years of his professional career to the Klutch Killer Klown Kar Show? That's a recipe for Irving signing the minimum possible deal to reach his 35% max and thus two more years of listening to the Clash's Should I Stay or Should I Go? on Repeat1.If it’s Kyrie/AD with others traded/leaving in FA I think chemistry would be better. Filling spots with players who know their roles coming in would make for a better locker room.
Because the conditional that was in the question I was asked was Irving being gone. So losing Irving, and then Tatum plus whatever is going to leave you with praying that Hayward can get all the way back (and while I'm generally bullish on his future, we do have to own that given his age there's a very real chance that he might only ever get back 80%-90% of that athleticism and need to grow his game in order to be effective), that Horford's decline can be managed so that he remains a top 30 player, and that Brown hits his most aggressive development projection.Why exactly are we gutting the team to land Davis? As has been shown over and over, players with one year left on their deals go for much less than fans think. And I know you think you are some sort of nostradamus, but many of us remain unconvinced that all your seeings are going to happen
Go back and review, I was all for trading Tatum for Davis until Klutch's performance starting around the trade deadline. I have nothing against the player. His agents, on the other hand, suck like a Malaysian ladyboy looking to make a C note the hard way. It appears that they've been singing Davis a siren's song of movie stardom paired up with LeBron in LA. And that he's bought into it.What's more curious to me is why NH hates AD so much. I get some hesitation with superagency representation, like some teams fear(ed) signing Boras/Rosenhaus/Tellem clients over the years, but it's A fucking D. Guys like that don't grow on trees.
Plan B should really be a full rebuild. Pretty much everyone on the roster should be made available (note not given away but that should include Tatum and Brown as well as Smart). I don't want this but if the C's are going scrappy again, they should reload on draft assets and expirings.I would think part of Plan B would be to sit down with Horford and tell him that we love him, but if he wants a chance at a championship, he's better off opting out. Plan B should be a minimum 2-3 year retooling and a 33 year old doesn't really fit.
I mean I'm sure that they'll keep their eyes open for deals, but they wouldn't (and shouldn't) be going full rebuild. They'll be back to looking to poach undervalued guys (like Lil' Zeke) and remaining competitive while waiting for Hayward to leave in free agency.Plan B should really be a full rebuild. Pretty much everyone on the roster should be made available (note not given away but that should include Tatum and Brown as well as Smart). I don't want this but if the C's are going scrappy again, they should reload on draft assets and expirings.
To me a 40-45 win season, an eighth seed and a quick out does nothing for this franchise. But hey, people won't have to endure the agony of watching Kyrie Irving anymore so...
The Celtics should re-up Irving and acquire Davis. Failing that, they need to look at a major reset.I mean I'm sure that they'll keep their eyes open for deals, but they wouldn't (and shouldn't) be going full rebuild. They'll be back to looking to poach undervalued guys (like Lil' Zeke) and remaining competitive while waiting for Hayward to leave in free agency.
One of the real benefits to Horford and Smart is that it helps set the proper culture for the guys they add, and they'll want at least Marcus around for whomever they pick with the Memphis pick (I'm hoping for 2021 since I think it's an even better draft than 2020 (which will be good, but a little dicey outside the top 5) even before you factor in it being open to HS players again. Right now I've been grooving to video of Jalen Johnson.)
I said last February that it looked like Irving had already made that decision for them. Someone up thread mentioned that he had a source at 24/7 that indicated that Irving was not in favor of returning.The Celtics should re-up Irving and acquire Davis.
I think most of us were expecting Hayward to return to form more quickly. And Boston force-feeding Gordo's usage rate this year came at a real cost to players that are also drive guys that found themselves reduced to spot shooting to accommodate Hayward.One of the things we collectively failed to account for is the improvement across the EC this year. As wbcd and HRB have pointed out multiple times of late is that Toronto, Milwaukee and the 76ers all saw improvement both from players on the roster as well as from additions. If Toronto loses Leonard, they will likely take a step back but they still have a very talented roster. The Bucks are loaded for the foreseeable future. The 76ers are going to be decent if they can keep Butler and add some more shooting. The Pacers should see improvement if Oladipo comes back in a reasonable amount of time.
Neither player is actually tradeable in any meaningful sense. Both Horford and Smart are really only useful for contenders, and contenders don't actually have anything to trade but low first round picks. You're always better off with guys like that setting the culture than trading them for the chance to draft Josh Okogie.As for Smart, his contract and skill set makes him very attractive (it pains me to say this as he is one of my favorite Celtics ever) and the C's have no need for Horford under this scenario either. They are both great for the culture but neither guy is likely going to have an imprint on the next Celtic contender.
He's looked disengaged for months now. I entertained hopes that he could talk Durant into teaming up here, but that suddenly doesn't look terribly likely. I'm sure Boston will try to sell Kyrie on best case scenarios, I just don't expect it to work. The people over at 24/7 are going to be the ones with the best information, and apparently they don't think he's returning here either.I know where you stand regarding Irving and we don't need to keep the debate going. Nobody - not a guy at 24/7 Sports, or SAS or someone's cousin who was at Baskin Robbins - outside of Irving's circle really knows what he wants to do. My guess is that they don't have a firm idea yet either. To be clear, I don't doubt that Irving may be strongly entertaining going elsewhere but I am reasonably sure that nobody on this board knows.
I don't disagree with this per se. They certainly wouldn't be ready to compete as centerpieces, and Brown probably never. I like Brown, but I tend to see him as the elite roleplayer version of Jimmy Butler. A really valuable player to have as a contender, but not one that takes you there.I buy your culture argument but the reality is that a Tatum/Brown core doesn't look ready yet to compete. Perhaps they will each continue to improve but Ainge has to balance a fine line between allowing these guys to find their next level and making sure he doesn't hold on to potential stars awaiting their leap only to find that they failed to launch. I am not suggesting he actively market them but he should certainly listen harder if the Irving/Davis plan doesn't come to pass.
Boston has a mid to high lottery pick in their pocket. They don't need to tank for more picks. I don't think that Giannis' game is going to age well, so Boston is really in a not bad spot to keep building and seeing what Tatum does as he matures physically.That said, even if Tatum and Brown improve next season, a roster of them, Horford, Smart and Hayward are likely looking at a mid 40 win total and, if they make the playoffs, an early dismissal. That just sucks because Hoford is going to decline further at some point, Smart's talents are wasted on a squad like that and even if Hayward returns to his former self, that isn't enough to make up for the talent gap between Boston and the true contenders.
In short, my preference would be to avoid the mid-tier purgatory because at the end of the day, it nets no banners and with Giannis taking over LeBron's role most talented player in the East, teams looking to contend will have to be bolder than just trying to be scrappy. I know some people are pinning for the scrappy version because its more fun but again, I would argue that its less fun after you've tasted a shot at playing deep into the playoffs.
If the Celtics don't/can't keep Marcus Morris, I'd try to grab his brother if his value has fallen far enough to accept the MLE.Yea, being at the mercy of Klutch (and Lebron to some extent) while watching Tatum make his 1st All-Star team for the Pels would be unbearable.
Anyone else have some other players they'd like to see here for Plan B:
5.5MM MLE? 3.5MM Bi-Annual?
Unrestricted FAs that have some offensive skill (may come cheap):
Lamb, Collison, Ross, Matthews, Bullock, Tyreke Evans, JaMychel Green, Hood, Ellington, Joseph, Seth Curry,IT,Jeff Green
Kyrie played 60 games in 2017-2018, BOS was 41-19 with him, 14-8 without him. I know you mean the playoffs but you have to get there first and teams without a superstar tend to be exposed over the long haul.I don't agree that Boston sans Kyrie is a 40-45 win team and a first round exit. They were not that team in 2017-18, and that was without what Hayward could contribute (if anything).
If you tank, you're hoping to get top-5 picks that have as much upside potential and track record at age 21 and 22 as Tatum and Brown do. Outside of generational players like AD, LeBron and KD, even future elite players take time to develop. Tanking for picks is probably higher risk than seeing whether Tatum or Brown develop into stars, even if that's not the most likely outcome.I know where you stand regarding Irving and we don't need to keep the debate going. Nobody - not a guy at 24/7 Sports, or SAS or someone's cousin who was at Baskin Robbins - outside of Irving's circle really knows what he wants to do. My guess is that they don't have a firm idea yet either. To be clear, I don't doubt that Irving may be strongly entertaining going elsewhere but I am reasonably sure that nobody on this board knows.
I buy your culture argument but the reality is that a Tatum/Brown core doesn't look ready yet to compete. Perhaps they will each continue to improve but Ainge has to balance a fine line between allowing these guys to find their next level and making sure he doesn't hold on to potential stars awaiting their leap only to find that they failed to launch. I am not suggesting he actively market them but he should certainly listen harder if the Irving/Davis plan doesn't come to pass.
I also agree regarding the limited market for Smart though I think Horford would have much bigger potential set of bidders.
That said, even if Tatum and Brown improve next season, a roster of them, Horford, Smart and Hayward are likely looking at a mid 40 win total and, if they make the playoffs, an early dismissal. That just sucks because Hoford is going to decline further at some point, Smart's talents are wasted on a squad like that and even if Hayward returns to his former self, that isn't enough to make up for the talent gap between Boston and the true contenders.
In short, my preference would be to avoid the mid-tier purgatory because at the end of the day, it nets no banners and with Giannis taking over LeBron's role most talented player in the East, teams looking to contend will have to be bolder than just trying to be scrappy. I know some people are pinning for the scrappy version because its more fun but again, I would argue that its less fun after you've tasted a shot at playing deep into the playoffs.
They probably aren't adding players in the offseason who are "more effective than Morris or Rozier". Anyone they are likely to add are going to be around the same or less effective given their cap constraints. You cannot extrapolate what this squad did when the team next year is likely to be considerably different and far less talented overall.Well, 14-8 translates into 47 wins. And that is without Hayward or players they might add in the offseason who are more effective than Morris or Rozier, including veteran FAs and their multiple first round draft choices.
This is fair - I would just argue that if the Celtics are looking at a middling season and, perhaps, sneaking into the playoffs, nobody on the roster should be off limits. I don't think anyone is now either but the bar for trading a Tatum, at present, is a far higher than it might be were Irving to bounce and the C's are looking at three to five year timetable before they have a shot at contending again.If you tank, you're hoping to get top-5 picks that have as much upside potential and track record at age 21 and 22 as Tatum and Brown do. Outside of generational players like AD, LeBron and KD, even future elite players take time to develop. Tanking for picks is probably higher risk than seeing whether Tatum or Brown develop into stars, even if that's not the most likely outcome.
If you wait 2 years and they're still not stars, that's when you blow it up. The exception is if you have some internal evaluation that the rest of the league isn't privy to that indicates to you that their odds are much lower than is commonly assumed. Failing that, you simply won't get reasonable value on the market, given the opportunity cost.
The NBA's system of awarding top picks to shitty teams means that every team has a free option to tank at any point, so there's not a ton of cost to waiting slightly longer if it looks like another route could work. Tatum+Brown+a couple low lotto/mid first draft picks is a route worth giving a shot before any blowup.
14-8 translates to .630 basketball. If you’re playing .630 ball you’re probably a top 4 seed (as that translates to roughly 52 wins). Even when Irving walks Boston will survive.Kyrie played 60 games in 2017-2018, BOS was 41-19 with him, 14-8 without him. I know you mean the playoffs but you have to get there first and teams without a superstar tend to be exposed over the long haul.
You are probably correct that such a team wins 45-ish games and gets bounced by Giannis or Embiid or KL (if he is still in TOR) but there is a non-zero % chance that JB and/or JT make enough of a leap sans KI that they are actually contenders. After all, both of them have certain skills that are hard to find.I stand by my view that a team built around Tatum, Brown, Horford and Smart would likely win somewhere in the mid 40s games unless Ainge/Zarren pull something creative off. And once again, we need to account for other teams in the East who will have improved either via acquisition or organically.
Exactly. Survive and potentially thrive for many years.I’m not saying that Boston would be better off without him (I’ve maintained the opposite, in fact). I’m just saying that he’s looked for a while now like he’d rather be anywhere but here and that he’s likely gone. But Boston will survive, never fear.
Again, 14-8 in a much weaker Eastern Conference.Well, 14-8 translates into 47 wins. And that is without Hayward or players they might add in the offseason who are more effective than Morris or Rozier, including veteran FAs and their multiple first round draft choices.
What you just described is this year's team.You are probably correct that such a team wins 45-ish games and gets bounced by Giannis or Embiid or KL (if he is still in TOR) .
No one has any idea in April 2019 if the EC will be better a year from now. It could be worse or the same.Again, 14-8 in a much weaker Eastern Conference.
It certainly will be better than 17-18.No one has any idea in April 2019 if the EC will be better a year from now. It could be worse or the same.
It's trending to be much better after the leap the conference took in narrowing the talent gap this year. Included in those 14 wins were Chicago, Atlanta (2), New York, and a couple west coast tanking teams in Sacramento and Phoenix. The other thing to factor is that we had Rozier in place of Kyrie playing at a very high level which as much as his detractors here hate to admit he's done as a starter both last year AND this season.It certainly will be better than 17-18.
agreed, starter Rozier > bench Rozier.It's trending to be much better after the leap the conference took in narrowing the talent gap this year. Included in those 14 wins were Chicago, Atlanta (2), New York, and a couple west coast tanking teams in Sacramento and Phoenix. The other thing to factor is that we had Rozier in place of Kyrie playing at a very high level which as much as his detractors here hate to admit he's done as a starter both last year AND this season.
Are you really not worried about having Smart as your starting PG? He may be better than Rozier, but that's not saying all that much.agreed, starter Rozier > bench Rozier.
I'd count myself as a Rozier detractor.
Unfortunately, Terry's a 2nd or 3rd string PG for a playoff level team. He was nothing more than Kyrie season-ending injury insurance. Terry wasn't a very good player this season. He won't be getting that massive $16-20MM/yr multi-year contract to start for another NBA team as you and others have predicted. Not happening.
Marcus Smart PG > bench or starter Rozier. So I would rather not have the team spend big money for an unhappy, unproductive bench piece who considers himself "a top PG in the NBA". His production or lack of production off the bench is easy to replace. Signing Beverly to the MLE, drafting White early or Thybulle late in the first round are some interesting potential options for the Celtics.
Smart will be playing the 2 spot next year. People need to get past these old fashioned designations. The offense runs through Irving because he’s the best offensive player. If Irving leaves it will run through Hayward or Horford. To be brutally frank Rozier would be fine at the 1 if he would stop trying to be a point guard and focus on defense and shooting. Horford, Hayward, and Smart are much better playmakers.Are you really not worried about having Smart as your starting PG? He may be better than Rozier, but that's not saying all that much.
This wouldn't worry me at all. I think Smart is miles better than Rozier as a player. I think Smart is closer to Kyrie in value as a player than he is to Rozier.Are you really not worried about having Smart as your starting PG? He may be better than Rozier, but that's not saying all that much.
No, not worried about Marcus at the 1 or 2 or whatever you want to label it in the least.Are you really not worried about having Smart as your starting PG? He may be better than Rozier, but that's not saying all that much.
Sure we'll need another ball handler or two.I do fear that if Marcus is playing most of his minutes at the 1, we are going to have a tough time defending other team's 1s. I'm not saying at all that Kyrie is a great defender, I think he was better than he often gets credit for, but while Marcus is a great defensive player - I don't think he's great at smaller, quicker guards. So, like it or not, the Celtics will likely have someone playing some significant minutes at the 1 that isn't Smart next year.
Hayward gets my vote as the team's best passer, though Smart is damn good, too.Smart is the team's best passer. I'm not concerned about starting him at the point.
I'm going to guess that there were a number of issues. None of them by themselves fatal, but when combined, it led to the disappointment that was this past season.https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2019/05/11/brad-stevens-needs-make-some-changes-his-approach/82LNh1GhYrEBIHwnOdP08O/story.html
Apparently a lot of the issue was due to the coaching staff not being able to handle players. Last year Walter McCarty was huge int his aren and he wasn't replaced with a former player. Washburn suggests that another ex-player is needed to fill our open coaching position.
The Celtics had a #3 and #1 pick already during this cycle, and they ended up with Brown and Tatum. You're suggesting that they give up on those two guys after 3 years and 2 years, respectively, and try to...what, get another couple of top five picks down the road (if they're lucky) and hope to do better?They probably aren't adding players in the offseason who are "more effective than Morris or Rozier". Anyone they are likely to add are going to be around the same or less effective given their cap constraints. You cannot extrapolate what this squad did when the team next year is likely to be considerably different and far less talented overall.
I get that you deeply dislike Kyrie Irving's game but you may need to question not just your evaluation of him but the Celtics roster overall. I would also add that you are on record as suggesting the C's need to do whatever they can to move on from Hayward too. Were they to follow your suggestions, they would likely get far less value in return simply because we can all agree that Hayward is, at present, overpaid for his production.
I stand by my view that a team built around Tatum, Brown, Horford and Smart would likely win somewhere in the mid 40s games unless Ainge/Zarren pull something creative off. And once again, we need to account for other teams in the East who will have improved either via acquisition or organically.