Anthony Davis: No Loyalty

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
So you are aware of this but Ainge isn't? Or are you, like BSF, arguing that Ainge will take the risk regardless?

The latter is plausible but I cannot see Ainge being duped here. My guess is that if he pulls the trigger he will have a very good idea about his ability to retain Davis.

And yes, mc, that was a horrible attempt at sarcasm. I think Ainge is one of the shrewdest GMs in sports. He isn't perfect but he has the track record and latitude to explore deals that few others in his role have across different sports.
In the last few years, the Celtics added Al Horford, Kyrie Irving, and Gordon Hayward, plus two productive top-3 picks plus possibly two more top 10 picks this year and at least a smattering of useful first rounders. Seems to know his ass from his elbow.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
Think he’s just piling on with the agreement.
Sorry yes.

At the barest of minimums Ainge may make some bad bets, but it won't be due to catastrophic stupidity or being fooled by agent speak. And clearly he and Stevens connect enough with players to make this a desirable place to choose for many.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,213
Sorry yes.

At the barest of minimums Ainge may make some bad bets, but it won't be due to catastrophic stupidity or being fooled by agent speak. And clearly he and Stevens connect enough with players to make this a desirable place to choose for many.
Agreed.

I mean, before those deals he also got Ray Allen and KG which resulted in a championship and then he used KG and Pierce to bust the process, so to speak.

To be clear, I don't think nighthob thinks Ainge is easily fooled - I am just trying to understand how he sees the C's trading one of the highest ceiling players, whom they have control over for a good period, for just a one year rental.

Like BSF and many others here, I believe Ainge has been coveting Davis for years. However, given Danny's history, I simply don't see him getting so attached to any one player that he goes completely all-in on them. He hasn't really done so to date (Winslow never happened so he gets credit for that too).
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
It does need to be said that LAL is kind of a shit show right now. Good chance it remains so for the next year which may have an effect on Davis thinking
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
It does need to be said that LAL is kind of a shit show right now. Good chance it remains so for the next year which may have an effect on Davis thinking
Yup, and the assets they would use to add other talent alongside AD/LeBron have been devalued due to injury uncertainty (Ingram, Ball), playing next to LeBron (Ball), and being drama queens who don’t want to play outside of LA/Phoenix (Ball).
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Agreed.

I mean, before those deals he also got Ray Allen and KG which resulted in a championship and then he used KG and Pierce to bust the process, so to speak.

To be clear, I don't think nighthob thinks Ainge is easily fooled - I am just trying to understand how he sees the C's trading one of the highest ceiling players, whom they have control over for a good period, for just a one year rental.

Like BSF and many others here, I believe Ainge has been coveting Davis for years. However, given Danny's history, I simply don't see him getting so attached to any one player that he goes completely all-in on them. He hasn't really done so to date (Winslow never happened so he gets credit for that too).
Like you, I have immense faith in Ainge. I just think that you don’t pass on Anthony Davis if you can get him, especially if Kyrie is on board. Losing Tatum is a huge risk but I’m taking the chance on a top 3-4 guy smack dab in his prime. Lots can happen in a year.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Ainge's due diligence with Anthony Davis will go well beyond just asking AD if he wants to come to Boston. Ainge realizes that it will be hard to take Davis at his word, given that if Davis openly states "Sorry Danny, nothing against you or the city, but LA is where I really want to be", there's an excellent chance that Davis remains a Pelican for one final season.

There will be a little bit of gambling going on. It's likely that Ainge will have to guess at Davis intentions and Ainge's own ability to convince Davis to stick around. However, if Ainge is convinced that Davis will leave for the Clippers or Lakers no matter what, he will not make the trade. Or, if he does decide to roll the dice, the bid price will be way less than some of the packages being spouted by the media folks.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
I was watching a documentary of the 2008 Celtics recently, and in that documentary Ainge was talking about an analysis that was done by some folks at MIT (can't recall if that was in cooperation with the Celtics, or they just read it). Anyway, the conclusion of that analysis was that if you look back at all the NBA champions, a very high percentage of them had one of the greatest players of all time on their roster, in addition to two other All-Star caliber supporting players. If I recall correctly, I believe Ainge said it was a player in the top 50 all-time.

This belief led him to pursue the 2008 big 3 strategy, i.e. it wasn't enough to have 2 good players, or even 3 or 4 or 5 good players. A key ingredient in an NBA championship, according to this analysis, is having one of the truly great players (KG in this example).

If Ainge believes that AD would belong in that super elite category, and he believes that Kyrie does not (and more fits in that All-Star supportive role category) I could certainly see him going very hard after AD (unless he sees other players as potentially available that fit the same category).
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
I was watching a documentary of the 2008 Celtics recently, and in that documentary Ainge was talking about an analysis that was done by some folks at MIT (can't recall if that was in cooperation with the Celtics, or they just read it). Anyway, the conclusion of that analysis was that if you look back at all the NBA champions, a very high percentage of them had one of the greatest players of all time on their roster, in addition to two other All-Star caliber supporting players. If I recall correctly, I believe Ainge said it was a player in the top 50 all-time.

This belief led him to pursue the 2008 big 3 strategy, i.e. it wasn't enough to have 2 good players, or even 3 or 4 or 5 good players. A key ingredient in an NBA championship, according to this analysis, is having one of the truly great players (KG in this example).

If Ainge believes that AD would belong in that super elite category, and he believes that Kyrie does not (and more fits in that All-Star supportive role category) I could certainly see him going very hard after AD (unless he sees other players as potentially available that fit the same category).

He didn't need an analysis from MIT. He could have just read one of my posts from back in the day, or just scrolled through Basketball-Reference.com. Since 1980, the only champion that didn't have an all time great was the 2004 Pistons. Assuming they won't have two HOFers from that roster, and assuming Robert Horry doesn't get in (low bar for the basketball HOF), the 2004 Pistons and the first Hakeem Rockets championship team will be the only two teams since 1980 that didn't have at least two HOFers.

Assuming Curry, LBJ, Kobe, KG, Duncan, Hakeem, and Dirk sneak onto the next Top 50 list, a solid assumption, (Ainge was referring to the Top 50 list at age 50 list, which was from 1996), every single champ since 1980 besides the 2004 Pistons had at least one Top 50 player.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Kyrie Irving is a top 50 player once people look back at his career :ducks:
I know this is tongue-in-cheek, but if he could somehow find a way to start doing the Dame/Harden 3-pointer optimizations/launch-from-anywhere stuff, he could really take his game to another level. He's way too good a pure shooter to not be jacking 10+ 3s per 36, even if he is elite in the midrange.

I honestly thought that Brad would take him that direction, based on how he used IT, but they really haven't done enough to unlock that part of Kyrie's game. Even the screens on offense are generally set a bit too low in that regard--it's clearly schematic.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
It's actually not really tongue in cheek. 20 PPG, 5 APG, while shooting > 39% from three. Curry and Kyrie stand alone. And yes, that is an arbritrary cutoff, but even if you extend it down to 35% from three, there just ain't that many guys
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
It's actually not really tongue in cheek. 20 PPG, 5 APG, while shooting > 39% from three. Curry and Kyrie stand alone. And yes, that is an arbritrary cutoff, but even if you extend it down to 35% from three, there just ain't that many guys
Yeah, I mean, he's really, really good at basketball. Top 50 all-time is a crazy-high standard, however. I want to see him do it in the playoffs as his team's #1 option before crowning his ass. If he is the best offensive player on the floor when playing against Giannis and then Kawhi, I'd drastically up my evaluation of him (which is already high).

I don't really count regular season NBA basketball, just because the playoffs are a qualitatively different thing (as opposed to other sports, where the game doesn't change much, and heightened postseason performance is generally an artifact of randomness). The closest analogy is probably tennis: we care about winning majors because everyone shows up for them, and everyone is trying his/her hardest. Draymond's 16 game/82 game dichotomy is the best way to sum this up.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
Probably has an outside shot to make the list of top 50 post-1973 players though (that's as far back as VORP goes).

My biggest surprises from that list:

48 - Kirilenko
41 - Horace Grant
30 - Shawn Marion
Those three examples tell you how useful VORP is.

Perhaps a conversation about top 50 ever Kyrie should start with a case of why he's a even a top 10 player now. I'd love to be convinced of the latter, because I'm not sure that he's a top 10 player remaining in the playoffs.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
Those three examples tell you how useful VORP is.

Perhaps a conversation about top 50 ever Kyrie should start with a case of why he's a even a top 10 player now. I'd love to be convinced of the latter, because I'm not sure that he's a top 10 player remaining in the playoffs.
Durant, Harden, GF, Curry, Kawhi, Kyrie, Dame, Embiid, Klay, Joker
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Those three examples tell you how useful VORP is.

Perhaps a conversation about top 50 ever Kyrie should start with a case of why he's a even a top 10 player now. I'd love to be convinced of the latter, because I'm not sure that he's a top 10 player remaining in the playoffs.
Out of players left, whom would you put clearly ahead of him? My list (not in order):
Harden
Giannis
Curry
KD
Kawhi

Same tier as Kyrie:
CP3
Jokic
Embiid
Dame
Butler

I think he's pretty clearly a top-10 player left. We see his good and his bad games, so I think we forget just how special he is, particularly on offense. When you factor in that his defense is ok when he tries, he's really good.

Kyrie also passes the "put him with one other top-10 player and you have a championship contender" test. (Yes, the test is poorly named).
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,472
Somewhere
Those three examples tell you how useful VORP is.
I don't know, the top of that list is fairly credible. You're always going to have surprises with some sort of catch-all/automated ranking.

But the general point stands -- top fifty of all time is a very high bar to clear. Kyrie needs to have a 15+ year career at this rate.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
Looking at the NBA 50 at 50, assuming he puts in 3-4 more years at the same level, Kyrie is at least as deserving to be on the list as Dave Bing, Dave DeBusschere, Hal Greer, Clyde Frazier, Sam Jones, Jerry Lucas, Earl Monroe, Lenny Wilkins, James Worthy.

Is there an NBA 50 at 70 list?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
I don't know, the top of that list is fairly credible. You're always going to have surprises with some sort of catch-all/automated ranking.

But the general point stands -- top fifty of all time is a very high bar to clear. Kyrie needs to have a 15+ year career at this rate.
Kyrie is at a 25 VORP today through 508 career games. At that rate, barring any major injury, he should hit 40 or in 4 or 5 more seasons, which gets him into the Top 50 conversation.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
Looking at the NBA 50 at 50, assuming he puts in 3-4 more years at the same level, Kyrie is at least as deserving to be on the list as Dave Bing, Dave DeBusschere, Hal Greer, Clyde Frazier, Sam Jones, Jerry Lucas, Earl Monroe, Lenny Wilkins, James Worthy.
There are probably 20 + players on that list who woudld now be replaced by players who came after them
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
How far do the Celtics have to go this playoffs before you back off your enthusiasm for adding Davis?

Does a Finals appearance do it for you? A tough series against the Warriors or Rockets? A banner?

This team, the way it has played in the postseason, could have a championship future if Danny and Kyrie let it play out that way. I doubt they'll pass on a chance at Davis no matter what happens, but if this team makes the Finals I would feel conflicted about that direction myself.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,300
deep inside Guido territory
How far do the Celtics have to go this playoffs before you back off your enthusiasm for adding Davis?

Does a Finals appearance do it for you? A tough series against the Warriors or Rockets? A banner?

This team, the way it has played in the postseason, could have a championship future if Danny and Kyrie let it play out that way. I doubt they'll pass on a chance at Davis no matter what happens, but if this team makes the Finals I would feel conflicted about that direction myself.
I wouldn't. This is a superstar league and if you have a chance at getting 2 superstars in their primes together you do it. They'll still have enough depth left over to have a solid 3 through 9 as well between the guys they'll keep and vet min ring chasers.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
I would still chase him even if Celts won a title.

That said, my walkaway point would probably be different if they won it all this year AND Kyrie made clear he's re-signing regardless of Davis.

Which is to say, not holding my breath....
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
9,058
If the realistic only change to our lineup is swapping Tatum for Davis that's still a huge win. We shouldn't complicate it beyond that.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
I'm not seeing the actual tweet/story from David Aldridge, but I am seeing it said elsewhere that he said his sources said AD would not rule out resigning with the Celtics even if Kyrie is not on the team.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,743

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
"I’ve heard that Davis wouldn’t completely rule out staying with the Celtics without Irving, but the odds of him re-upping in that scenario are significantly lower."
Thanks.

Of course that means he seems amenable to staying if Kyrie returns though.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
Looking at the NBA 50 at 50, assuming he puts in 3-4 more years at the same level, Kyrie is at least as deserving to be on the list as Dave Bing, Dave DeBusschere, Hal Greer, Clyde Frazier, Sam Jones, Jerry Lucas, Earl Monroe, Lenny Wilkins, James Worthy.

Is there an NBA 50 at 70 list?
No, but there will be an NBA 75 at 75 list in a few years.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
Initially I thought this result means AD is not getting traded, but after sitting on it some more - I think it is highly likely that he is. He doesn't want to be there, and NOL doesn't really want him. One of the most important things for that franchise, I believe, was getting Zion. Having Zion means that they have a story to tell their fans that they have the most exciting player coming out of the draft this year, and it's a reason to watch/attend their games.

They were in a bit of a pickle, because that scenario severely limited who they could trade with. If NY had ended up with the #1, that would have severely limited NOL's hand. But now, THEY have Zion. All the pressure is really off. They can basically go out and trade AD to anyone who gives them the best package. As I think about it some more, I think the pendulum really swung towards Boston on this. Compare two scenarios:

BOS offers - Tatum (established NBA player) + Memphis pick
NYK offers - RJ Barret (non-established NBA player) + future NYK pick (with the risk that Kyrie and KD go to NY and they immediately become a non-lottery team)

Personally, I think the Boston offer is much better. Of course, we are not yet talking about the other salaries involved. But, first blush I think BOS has a better offer.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
9,058
Celtics don’t need to offer Memphis pick. Tatum is already a better asset than RJ Barrett or anything the Lakers can put together.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,300
deep inside Guido territory
Initially I thought this result means AD is not getting traded, but after sitting on it some more - I think it is highly likely that he is. He doesn't want to be there, and NOL doesn't really want him. One of the most important things for that franchise, I believe, was getting Zion. Having Zion means that they have a story to tell their fans that they have the most exciting player coming out of the draft this year, and it's a reason to watch/attend their games.

They were in a bit of a pickle, because that scenario severely limited who they could trade with. If NY had ended up with the #1, that would have severely limited NOL's hand. But now, THEY have Zion. All the pressure is really off. They can basically go out and trade AD to anyone who gives them the best package. As I think about it some more, I think the pendulum really swung towards Boston on this. Compare two scenarios:

BOS offers - Tatum (established NBA player) + Memphis pick
NYK offers - RJ Barret (non-established NBA player) + future NYK pick (with the risk that Kyrie and KD go to NY and they immediately become a non-lottery team)

Personally, I think the Boston offer is much better. Of course, we are not yet talking about the other salaries involved. But, first blush I think BOS has a better offer.
Lakers best offer would be Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, and #4 pick. That doesn't touch Tatum, Smart, Memphis pick, and #14 pick. Celtics are in a really good position to add Davis.
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
Lakers best offer would be Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, and #4 pick. That doesn't touch Tatum, Smart, Memphis pick, and #14 pick. Celtics are in a really good position to add Davis.
Yep, if that's what Ainge offers.

So we played "will he stay or will he go?" all of this year with Kyrie, and we get to play the same game next year with AD.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
Lakers best offer would be Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, and #4 pick. That doesn't touch Tatum, Smart, Memphis pick, and #14 pick. Celtics are in a really good position to add Davis.
I hope that isn’t the offer, because if it is the ‘21 Celtics are screwed.

BOS offers - Tatum (established NBA player) + Memphis pick
NYK offers - RJ Barret (non-established NBA player) + future NYK pick (with the risk that Kyrie and KD go to NY and they immediately become a non-lottery team)

Personally, I think the Boston offer is much better. Of course, we are not yet talking about the other salaries involved. But, first blush I think BOS has a better offer.
Sure, if the Knicks lowball the offer. But they aren’t offering Barrett and a future first, it’s going to be Barrett, Knox, DSJ, and future firsts. I don’t want Boston topping that offer.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,300
deep inside Guido territory
I hope that isn’t the offer, because if it is the ‘21 Celtics are screwed.



Sure, if the Knicks lowball the offer. But they aren’t offering Barrett and a future first, it’s going to be Barrett, Knox, DSJ, and future firsts. I don’t want Boston topping that offer.
The Celtics offer I put would be something they could be pushed to(best and final).
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Lakers best offer would be Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, and #4 pick. That doesn't touch Tatum, Smart, Memphis pick, and #14 pick. Celtics are in a really good position to add Davis.
It doesn't touch it because it's an overpay. They aren't getting all those assets.

EDIT: See you post now.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
He is getting traded. I think there is close to zero option for him to stay.

If they win the lottery, I think BOS is in even a better position to get him - if only because nobody else has that #1 pick to trade - which may result in even a lesser package being needed
BINGO
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,300
deep inside Guido territory
It doesn't touch it because it's an overpay. They aren't getting all those assets.

EDIT: See you post now.
They have to match salaries with NO for Davis. I'm not sure how you can do a trade without including Smart's money. Tatum would be the prize of the trade they'd look for. I wish Brown would get it done instead but I have a feeling they want the potential of Tatum more.

A trade of Brown/Smart/Baynes would work in the trade machine however.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
They have to match salaries with NO for Davis. I'm not sure how you can do a trade without including Smart's money.
They have potential S&T pieces in Rozier and Morris. While NO may not be interested in them, other teams may be.

I just don't think we trade Smart and potentially lose Kyrie and Rozier as well.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
How would Davis’ trade kicker impact the salary needed for the trade?
I don't think it factors in, but I could be wrong. It's simply a bonus that NOP would have to pay, although AD can waive it.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
I don't think it factors in, but I could be wrong. It's simply a bonus that NOP would have to pay, although AD can waive it.
The trade kicker is added to his salary, for all years left on his contract.

If he doesn't waive it, you'd have to match up to what his salary is after the trade kicker is added.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
The trade kicker is added to his salary, for all years left on his contract.

If he doesn't waive it, you'd have to match up to what his salary is after the trade kicker is added.
Gotcha. You'd think things like the NBA Trade Machine would be updated to that--I'm not sure it is.