The Celtics and Building a Contender - Roster Crunch.

I basically agree with your point. The NBA shouldn't be a copycat league. There are no perfect players, even the greats have weaknesses. Blake may not provide 3-point range or rim protection but he does a lot of other things really well, like passing. By the way, Blake would pair really well with Amir Johnson on the court from this perspective if / when Amir gets back closer to his historic 3FG%.

Anyway, the Cs should be thinking about how we match up with Cleveland and Toronto before we can start worrying about GS.

Yeah, the idea that Blake Griffin has overnight become an "awkward fit" does not pass the smell test in any way. I'm fairly certain a competent GM could build a contender around Blake Griffin. In fact, such a team already exists.

HomeRunBaker said:

Who are those talking about trading Blake though? I've only seen these click bait guys feeding off this recent incident. The Clippers finally have a winning team, a legit core all 30 and under.....and people can't wait to create ideas about them wanting to break it up. It's silly really.

Click to expand...

You asked this question after a link to an article about this in the Washington Post, Zach Lowe's written about it, and reports leaked today that they've discussed deals with Denver.

It definitely feels like an overreaction to this particular incident, but I can see the thought process in blowing things up in LAC. This core hasn't been the the Western Conference finals, is clearly behind San Antonio and Golden State in the west, and could easily lose in a series to OKC, as well. I just don't think Griffin's the piece you deal.

Grin&MartyBarret said:

See, but this is where I get tripped up. In general, when people refer to "today's NBA" they're basically saying "you can't beat the Warriors small ball lineup with Blake at the 4 or 5." And that's basically true. But you can't really matchup against the Warriors small ball lineup with Jordan at the 5 either, and you can't really play him crunch time minutes because of his free throw shooting.

Meanwhile, while Jordan provides rim protection, he still can't matchup against Draymond at the 5. Last year everybody went crazy clamoring about how Cleveland couldn't compete because they didn't have a rim protector next to Love, and then they went and got one in Mozgov, and 6 months later he's obsolete and they've got a roster full of useless bigs that don't fit "today's NBA."

Today's NBA means the Warriors. it's really, really, really difficult to beat the Warriors. Draymond is an insanely unique piece, and he's flanked by two of the best shooters in the world, if not the two best. Which brings me to the greater point: should everybody in the league be building rosters to compete with Golden State? Is that really today's NBA? Or is Golden State an aberration that's basically impossible to match up against? Put it this way: if Draymond Green tears his ACL tomorrow, what does "today's NBA mean" in the context of Blake Griffin's fit as a 4? Is Blake Griffin an awkward fit against the second best team in the league (San Antonio)? Is he an awkward fit against the Cavs?

Click to expand...

lexrageorge said:

Yeah, the idea that Blake Griffin has overnight become an "awkward fit" does not pass the smell test in any way. I'm fairly certain a competent GM could build a contender around Blake Griffin. In fact, such a team already exists.

Click to expand...

To clarify, I am not saying either of those things.

The issue I am trying (but apparently failing) to identify with Blake and the Clippers is not unique "today's NBA" or a match up with Warriors. While that issue is very real for some other players/teams in the context of a seven game playoff series because match ups will make some guys unplayable, it does not plague the Clips. The challenge the Clips face is spacing on offense - a problem which exists all the time but becomes more acute in the playoffs and at the end of games. Perhaps a more innovative coach then Doc could make it work, but I assume he's not going anywhere.

As to building a contender: 1.) The Clips do not have a competent GM. 2) I am not sure they are a contender. 3) I agree with you can build a contender around Blake.

However, I think he just adds a degree of difficulty. In that regard he is not unique (Love and Dirk need to play alongside a fleet footed rim protector; Rondo needs to be surrounded by volume scorers etc.) In an optimal situation, Blake has a 5 who can protect the rim and stretch the floor. The Clips do not have, and do not appear likely to be able to acquire, such a player. So for me the question is, if they could get a wing who could replace all of Blake's 20+ points and most of his 8ish rebounds a game, would they be a better offensive team particularly in late games/playoffs? I think the answer is yes. Reasonable minds can differ.

mikeot said:

Today's WaPost discusses Clippers trading Blake Griffin, with C's listed as a potential option:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2016/02/03/if-the-clippers-choose-to-trade-blake-griffin-where-could-he-go/?tid=pm_sports_pop_b

Click to expand...

And now "rumors"
“@BillSimmons: Hmmmmmm. RT @Mitch_Lawrence: The Clippers have talked to the Nuggets about trading Blake Griffin to Denver, per NBA sources.”

Strike that

“@DanWoikeSports: Sources: Denver reached out and asked about Blake Griffin but Clippers weren’t interested. Not much discussion”

I doubt LAC trade Griffin, but I think for most teams he's a legit elite player probably top 10. He'd be a great fit for Boston next to a Amir/Olynyk center rotation.

Cellar-Door said:

I doubt LAC trade Griffin, but I think for most teams he's a legit elite player probably top 10. He'd be a great fit for Boston next to a Amir/Olynyk center rotation.

Click to expand...

Griffin and Olynyk together might be the worst defensive front court in history.

“@latbbolch: Multiple teams have inquired with Clippers about Blake Griffin offering various packages but team has no active interest in deal, per source”

GreyisGone said:

Griffin and Olynyk together might be the worst defensive front court in history.

Click to expand...

Olynyk is an excellent defender.

Cellar-Door said:

Olynyk is an excellent defender.

Click to expand...

He fouls too much though. If he could stay on the floor he could really be a piece. He seems like he gets in better shape every game

I'm not a good enough observer of the game to understand what he's doing right, but Olynyk's plus/minus defensive numbers have always been very strong. Part of it is visible in the box score (his dBPM is +1, which is solid), but RPM thinks he's way better than that even (+3), so there are team-defense elements that aren't showing in the box that he's doing very well too (or it's just a weird fluke).

I haven't watched enough games to be sure, but from what I see, he's denying passing lanes with his long arms, rotating very well on pick and rolls, and just altering shots by being 7 feet tall.

I think his experience as a point guard has him anticipating the passing lanes better than most big men do, causing deflections that end up in others' hands.

bowiac said:

I'm not a good enough observer of the game to understand what he's doing right, but Olynyk's plus/minus defensive numbers have always been very strong. Part of it is visible in the box score (his dBPM is +1, which is solid), but RPM thinks he's way better than that even (+3), so there are team-defense elements that aren't showing in the box that he's doing very well too (or it's just a weird fluke).

Click to expand...

I would say the same about myself since I never played more than cyo. I try to pay attention to KOs D since the stats are kind to him and the only thing I can observe is that he stays in front of his guy and doesn't make obvious mistakes. When he makes mistakes it is normally a foul, not letting the guy beat him.

bowiac said:

I'm not a good enough observer of the game to understand what he's doing right, but Olynyk's plus/minus defensive numbers have always been very strong. Part of it is visible in the box score (his dBPM is +1, which is solid), but RPM thinks he's way better than that even (+3), so there are team-defense elements that aren't showing in the box that he's doing very well too (or it's just a weird fluke).

Click to expand...

KO has pretty good anticipation and while I don't catch a lot of the games, from what I've seen his biggest defensive strength is an ability to anticipate where a play is going and getting in the right spot. I think there have been some breakdowns on C's site that show a bit of this.

While KO doesn't have great hops, he seems to have a good idea of where people want to go (on both sides of the floor) and pretty quick feet. That helps.

From what I see Olynyk's lateral agility is surprising. He denies driving lanes well, and he stays in front of wings better than most big men on the switch. He has quick hands which with the positioning creates steals. He rarely blows switches or rotations. He also rarely goes for blocks by leaving his feet.
He fouls too much, but last I saw he was doing a nice job of limiting and 1s.
He can still get bullied by skill players with size, but luckily those guys are not that common.

I'm not so sophisticated either but it seems clear to me that he's gotten smarter, more efficient on defense. He's not a star on the defensive end, but he's not the liability he was last year.

Cellar-Door said:

From what I see Olynyk's lateral agility is surprising. He denies driving lanes well, and he stays in front of wings better than most big men on the switch. He has quick hands which with the positioning creates steals. He rarely blows switches or rotations. He also rarely goes for blocks by leaving his feet.
He fouls too much, but last I saw he was doing a nice job of limiting and 1s.
He can still get bullied by skill players with size, but luckily those guys are not that common.

Click to expand...

agree with all of this and maybe he gets a lot of minutes with the other teams back-up big men which helps on both ends of the court

DavidTai said:

I haven't watched enough games to be sure, but from what I see, he's denying passing lanes with his long arms, rotating very well on pick and rolls, and just altering shots by being 7 feet tall.

I think his experience as a point guard has him anticipating the passing lanes better than most big men do, causing deflections that end up in others' hands.

Click to expand...

I agree that Olynyk is a good positional defender however his measurements at the combine showed that there wasn't a 4/5 there with shorter wingspan leading him to be nicknamed "Alligator Arms Olynyk" on here or CelticsNuts. There were many guards in that class with a longer wingspan including 6-2 Victor Oladipo.

Brad uses him perfectly rarely exposing him to long high scoring starters while pairing him on one of the strongest 2nd units in the league which help his +/-. Brad isn't perfect nor is Olynyk but he's found ways to maximize Kelly's skillset.

bowiac said:

I'm probably less optimistic about the Bucks than you, but I agree that they're not moving Middleton unless someone blows them away.

I have no particular insights into Middleton. He's a good player, worth the max. My concern is more that I think Smart can be almost as good in the short term because of how good defensively he is, and better in the long term. I think he's also a better fit with the current roster, precisely because trading him will make Evan Turner the backup PG, which is a fate too terrible for me to contemplate. I've only just barely made my peace with Evan Turner being on this team at all (though I still pray for season-ending injury).

The cap issues barely matter. It's more age/upside/fit.

Click to expand...

Its not exactly fair to pose this question after Turner gets a season high last night, but is ET, as a back-up guard, as bad as you make him out to be? As long as he doesn't shoot from 3 he seems to add a lot of value to the 2nd unit. He's seen a fair share of important minutes in crunch time also.

General question: do the Celts re-sign him in the off season, whats' his expected price tag?

benhogan said:

Its not exactly fair to pose this question after Turner gets a season high last night, but is ET, as a back-up guard, as bad as you make him out to be? As long as he doesn't shoot from 3 he seems to add a lot of value to the 2nd unit. He's seen a fair share of important minutes in crunch time also.

General question: do the Celts re-sign him in the off season, whats' his expected price tag?

Click to expand...

Turner is fine; but the question we should be asking is, which spots on the roster can be improved the most? If the Celtics bring in a veteran wing, Turner is going to be the guy getting the bump. He will probably be too expensive for true bench minutes.

benhogan said:

Its not exactly fair to pose this question after Turner gets a season high last night, but is ET, as a back-up guard, as bad as you make him out to be? As long as he doesn't shoot from 3 he seems to add a lot of value to the 2nd unit. He's seen a fair share of important minutes in crunch time also.

Click to expand...

As mentioned earlier in the thread, the fact that he doesn't shoot from three is a problem, and really impacts his value. It's not impossible to be a good guard who can't shoot from outside, but it does screw with the spacing for the rest of your team when teams don't need to guard you on the perimeter. He's been shooting well from mid-range lately, so he hasn't been as much of a disaster on offense as he normally is, but I remain skeptical that he's actually become a plus mid-range guy. He turns the ball over a lot, and while some of that is due to his role, he's not generating very many assists to make up for it. And while he's a versatile defender, pretty much no metric thinks he's actually good. He's just an average-ish guy at many positions. Being average defensively at many positions has value, but the spacing cost you incur by playing him really cuts into that.

If I believed he'd actually become an efficient scorer from 2, I might want to keep him around in spite of his limitations, but a month of decent shooting isn't really enough to convince me there's been a talent change. If someone with a better scouting eye wants to tell me there's been a change in his shooting stroke or something though, I'd listen. I'm not sophisticated enough to see if there's been a change in approach.

I would prefer to move on assuming they could find anyone plausible (i.e., if Rozier can become a poor-man's Beverley).

bowiac said:

As mentioned earlier in the thread, the fact that he doesn't shoot from three is a problem, and really impacts his value. It's not impossible to be a good guard who can't shoot from outside, but it does screw with the spacing for the rest of your team when teams don't need to guard you on the perimeter. He's been shooting well from mid-range lately, so he hasn't been as much of a disaster on offense as he normally is, but I remain skeptical that he's actually become a plus mid-range guy. He turns the ball over a lot, and while some of that is due to his role, he's not generating very many assists to make up for it. And while he's a versatile defender, pretty much no metric thinks he's actually good. He's just an average-ish guy at many positions. Being average defensively at many positions has value, but the spacing cost you incur by playing him really cuts into that.

If I believed he'd actually become an efficient scorer from 2, I might want to keep him around in spite of his limitations, but a month of decent shooting isn't really enough to convince me there's been a talent change. If someone with a better scouting eye wants to tell me there's been a change in his shooting stroke or something though, I'd listen. I'm not sophisticated enough to see if there's been a change in approach.

I would prefer to move on assuming they could find anyone plausible (i.e., if Rozier can become a poor-man's Beverley).

Click to expand...

So has Evan gone from the worst player in the league getting consistent to average or even slightly below average? That seems like a big leap for him to have made.

It's hard to see how you *improve* this team beyond adding an elite talent (tho I admit I have no idea who that would be). To be sure, none of the guys are irreplaceable – I mean, Marcus Smart is likely the closest thing to an untouchable rising talent on this team but in the right deal, you almost have to move him. Whereas replacing a guy like Turner, who has flaws but can be dynamic, for some theoretical wing scorer seems like a zero sum game. It almost has to be for a big I would think.

Van Everyman said:

It's hard to see how you *improve* this team beyond adding an elite talent (tho I admit I have no idea who that would be). To be sure, none of the guys are irreplaceable – I mean, Marcus Smart is likely the closest thing to an untouchable rising talent on this team but in the right deal, you almost have to move him. Whereas replacing a guy like Turner, who has flaws but can be dynamic, for some theoretical wing scorer seems like a zero sum game. It almost has to be for a big I would think.

Click to expand...

Not sure I get this, unless you're upgrading the wing position in another move. We're deep at the big positions, and thinnest at SF. Removing Turner for a big makes us even thinner there.

This is one of the most balanced rosters 1-9 I've seen, which means we can upgrade almost anywhere. Adding elite talent is now the challenge.

luckiestman said:

So has Evan gone from the worst player in the league getting consistent to average or even slightly below average? That seems like a big leap for him to have made.

Click to expand...

By RPM there's now 25 players playing 25 minutes or more worse than ET. Last year it was 34. So not much better by the numbers. Watching the games makes me think he's better than that.

luckiestman said:

So has Evan gone from the worst player in the league getting consistent to average or even slightly below average? That seems like a big leap for him to have made.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I was unclear - I meant he's average-ish on defense. I think he still projects as a pretty terrible player overall once you factor in his offensive impact.

bowiac said:

Sorry, I was unclear - I meant he's average-ish on defense. I think he still projects as a pretty terrible player overall once you factor in his offensive impact.

Click to expand...

I agree his inability to shoot a 3-pointer is a big problem and the three is an integral part of the Celts offense. If he doesn't agree to a team friendly contract (much less then Jae Crowder's deal) in the off-season then we should let him walk.

If Milwaukee goes to blow-up mode, Kris Middleton is the guy I'd like them to target in the off-season. 24 yr-old, 6'8" SG, that hits over 41% of 3s and 88% FTs. Nice to have that size with IT and Avery on the roster...

Maybe kick the tires on Evan Fournier.

Sprowl said:

Backup playmaker is Evan Turner's primary role on this team, and there are lots of players in the draft and on the market who could perform that role as well or better. There are even some players on the team who could grow into that role, Rozier being the most obvious candidate because of his ballhandling skills. The Celtics signed Turner on the cheap, but he has grown back into the middle class, and will probably be signed away by an also-ran team like the Knicks.

Click to expand...

I'd agree with this, mostly. I think Rozier gets the back up point guard minutes next year that Turner is getting now. Turner's minutes at the 3 need to come from somewhere else. If they trade for or sign a wing, that would cover it. That player would also probably pick up a decent chunk of Jerebko's minutes (maybe with Crowder playing a small ball 4 or maybe with our new wing doing it). If we get lucky in the lottery and draft Brown or Simmons, the the backup 3 minutes are coming from that player. One of our later firsts could also net us someone who can step in immediately as a bench 3. If not, and if we strike out on Durant and DeRozan, I expect us to easily sign someone in the Barnes/Batum/Bazemore/Parsons grouping of FA, all of whom are better than Turner. There are 2's other than DeRozan who could be good fits here as Turner replacements, but I think a 3 fits better. DeRozan is one of the only 2's that I see as having the size to slide into a small ball 3 role, which is something I would look for if adding another guard to the Thomas/Bradley/Smart/Rozier rotation.

All that said, I'm secretly hoping we work out something with Durant and the Kings whereby we trade multiple Brooklyn picks for Cousins (so that the Kings can't say no) and Durant agrees to sign here. Adding Durant and Cousins to our current roster (minus Amir and Jerebko) would instantly make us the team to beat in the East. The roster would look like:

5: Cousins, Zeller
4: Olynyk, Sullinger, Mickey
3: Durant, Crowder, Young (only because we are stuck with him)
2: Bradley, Smart
1: Thomas, Rozier

There's room in there to fit in our draft picks. I don't see Young or Mickey playing much on that team. I do see it being very flexible, able to both play big and small. And, I really think that team would be the favorites in the East out of the gate. The basic idea is that, if we can entice the Kings to trade Cousins, and our collection of picks should be enough to do that, we easily offer Durant the best non-Warriors opportunity to win a title. Great coach, very good young roster that is deep and is just missing stars, and a strong front office that would still have a solid stable of draft picks to maintain its current depth. It's a dream, and it's not the most likely option, but I don't think it's crazy. (There are other bigs who could fill the Cousins role in this dream, either via trade or, even more ideally, via FA, but I think Cousins is the best in the game right now and I'd easily overpay in future draft picks for Cousins if it convinced Durant to come here.)

If we could have that lineup, I would be happy to give all of our draft picks, including our own, for the next 3-4 years. But I think the likelihood of getting them both is close to zero, isn't it? If we could get one of them without completely mortgaging our future pick scenario and/or losing the team identity we have built since losing Rondo I would consider the "rebuild" stage complete and we would officially be in GFIN mode again.

If you're bringing in Cousins you're not going to be able to re-sign Sullinger and still afford a max deal for Durant. You're better off just starting Durant and Crowder at the forward spots anyways.

With so many teams having a ton of money to spend and a limited number of tier one and tier two FA on the market there is no better time for Turner to be hitting the market. He's probably looking in the 4/$40m range or so which is nearly double Crowder's deal and not one I see Ainge paying. There's no team friendly deals to be had here imo. Bargain basement bench guys are the easiest to find in the league once you have stability in your rotation which we finally have.

nighthob said:

If you're bringing in Cousins you're not going to be able to re-sign Sullinger and still afford a max deal for Durant. You're better off just starting Durant and Crowder at the forward spots anyways.

Click to expand...

That's not true, his cap hold before signing is just his RFA number. Counting all salary except Jerebko and Amir, they have about $40 million committed. Add cousins for $16 million and Durant at $30 million, and you're still under the cap. That easily fits their first round picks if we assume the Nets pick was traded.

Except that he's one of those guys that's going to get an instant offer from some team scuffling into free agency. And if they could land Cousins, why in the name of god would you be desperate to pay his backup market rate for starters? Because with the new cap it's a foregone conclusion that one of the third tier teams with cap room is going to throw Greg Monroe money at him.

nighthob said:

Except that he's one of those guys that's going to get an instant offer from some team scuffling into free agency. And if they could land Cousins, why in the name of god would you be desperate to pay his backup market rate for starters? Because with the new cap it's a foregone conclusion that one of the third tier teams with cap room is going to throw Greg Monroe money at him.

Click to expand...

You're shifting goal posts. It might very well be that keeping Sullinger makes little sense, particularly in the event of a Cousins trade or some other high profile center acquisition. That's different from whether it could be done.

Unless Sullinger agrees to sign nothing until Boston reshifts its roster the original point stands. The fact that it makes zero sense within the context of a theoretical Cousins trade is a separate matter. As is the question of why you would want to sign Jared Sandoval.

moved to new Clarke thread

Each team is allowed 20 interviews at the Combine. Here is the Celtics full list including my 2nd rounder sleeper Siakam. Some other interesting names on this list.

Kay Felder
Diamond Stone
Jaylen Brown
Wade Baldwin
Pascal Siakam
Deyonta Davis
Jamal Murray
Zhou Qi
Buddy Hield
Brandon Ingram
Malachi Richardson
Patrick McCaw
Chinanu Onuaku
Damian Jones
Malik Newman
Cat Barber
Cheick Diallo
Thon Maker
Nigel Hayes
Jakob Poeltl

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2016/05/12/here-are-potential-draft-picks-celtics-are-interviewing/jzLCsewxLof7t4N10XFOAL/story.html

HomeRunBaker said:

Each team is allowed 20 interviews at the Combine. Here is the Celtics full list including my 2nd rounder sleeper Siakam. Some other interesting names on this list.

Kay Felder
Diamond Stone
Jaylen Brown
Wade Baldwin
Pascal Siakam
Deyonta Davis
Jamal Murray
Zhou Qi
Buddy Hield
Brandon Ingram
Malachi Richardson
Patrick McCaw
Chinanu Onuaku
Damian Jones
Malik Newman
Cat Barber
Cheick Diallo
Thon Maker
Nigel Hayes
Jakob Poeltl

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2016/05/12/here-are-potential-draft-picks-celtics-are-interviewing/jzLCsewxLof7t4N10XFOAL/story.html

Click to expand...

Ooh, didn't know you were a Siakam guy too, good to know. I would love to get him with a second. Draft Express doesn't even have him drafted at all in their mock, but maybe that'll change after his 7'3 wingspan measurement yesterday. Very glad to see the Celtics have interest.

How much of this is "guys the C's are interested in" versus "public disinformation".

Shouldn't there be an exception to the 20 interview limit if a team has nearly 20 draft picks?

Pat McCaw has all the attributes of a guy Danny would target. He's basically a Avery Bradley clone.

DannyDarwinism said:

Ooh, didn't know you were a Siakam guy too, good to know. I would love to get him with a second. Draft Express doesn't even have him drafted at all in their mock, but maybe that'll change after his 7'3 wingspan measurement yesterday. Very glad to see the Celtics have interest.

Click to expand...

Yes I've been intrigued by him all winter. There are a few others in the 2nd like Onuaku and Felder that I'll write up about as the draft approaches as each of these guys, while having flaws in their overall game, have some elite NBA translatable skills.

HomeRunBaker said:

Yes I've been intrigued by him all winter. There are a few others in the 2nd like Onuaku and Felder that I'll write up about as the draft approaches as each of these guys, while having flaws in their overall game, have some elite NBA translatable skills.

Click to expand...

Apparently Felder schooled Trimble and Payton today. After his 44' vertical yesterday, he's having a very nice combine. I wonder if an NBA team has ever had two sub 5'10 guys on the same roster?

DannyDarwinism said:

Apparently Felder schooled Trimble and Payton today. After his 44' vertical yesterday, he's having a very nice combine. I wonder if an NBA team has ever had two sub 5'10 guys on the same roster?

Click to expand...

I was really turned off by Trimble this year. He seemed to have lived off his reputation leading up to this season. I do know that Muggsy had a few different guys backing him up in Charlotte who were either 6-feet or 5-11 but none who were actual electric impact guys like I feel Felder will be. I also wouldn't be surprised if he leaped up into the first round.

Edit: Quick research. Charlotte actually had 5-3 Muggsy Bogues and 5-7 Greg Grant on their roster and they both played on opening night one year versus the Celtics. (Grant played 3 minutes of garbage time)

Eddie Jurak said:

How much of this is "guys the C's are interested in" versus "public disinformation".

Click to expand...

I was going to ask the same thing. Interesting no Simmons on the list.

Mloaf71 said:

I was going to ask the same thing. Interesting no Simmons on the list.

Click to expand...

Nobody had access to Simmons this week as he wasn't attending the Combine and only working out/interviewing with select teams after this week.

The better tells will be in who we invite and who accepts workouts from the Celtics. If there is a player in Boston in the coming weeks for the 6-man workout sessions that Ainge runs who was also on this list of 20 you can be certain that there is interest by Ainge. The workouts aren't the end-all however as Ainge already has a very good idea of his board today. Last summer is a great example of this when RJ Hunter cancelled his Celtics workout when his schedule had him fatigued......yet Ainge still selected him. Many times a kid already has his slot solidified with a particular team and can only screw things up for himself.

Keep an eye of Sabonis and Dejounte Murray who did not attend the Combine. If they shun all team workouts you can almost assure that they have a draft promise from a team in the Celtics #16 range in exchange for shutting down for other teams. I am a huge Murray guy but Sabonis just smells like an Ainge-type pick.

Gotta love the Danny quotes out of Chicago:

“I thought Brooklyn was going to be good,” Ainge said. “I thought that maybe the 2018 pick might have a chance to be a decent pick, but I really didn’t believe that 2016 pick would be where it is. I thought they had a chance to be a good team — like, a really good team.”

Click to expand...

Yeah we all loved their chances this year. LOL!!!!!

Am I crazy for thinking about trading Thomas? He's 27 and relies on elite athleticism, which won't be there much longer (nor will his contract remain a bargain). I think he could bring back something of value.

I just don't think he is one of those players who will age well. Once he loses his ability to get into the paint, it's over.

I'm totally with you on IT. It might upset the team chemistry but he might not be good enough when they are ready to contend. They could draft Murray to play point too.