Is that definite? What if they offered all of the Brooklyn picks? KG retires, Pierce leaves...DrewDawg said:
You're not getting Love and keeping the lottery pick.
Is that definite? What if they offered all of the Brooklyn picks? KG retires, Pierce leaves...DrewDawg said:
You're not getting Love and keeping the lottery pick.
moondog80 said:Is that definite? What if they offered all of the Brooklyn picks? KG retires, Pierce leaves...
Exactly. I know you guys don't really see it as such but a lot of Wolves' fans see this past season as pretty successful. The mindset was that they would be able to draft/sign a few solid bench players and maybe sneak into the playoffs next year in the hopes that it would be enough for them to sign Love.DrewDawg said:
Minnesota is going to have to sell this to their fans as getting a top 5 pick in this deep draft.
DrewDawg said:
Minnesota is going to have to sell this to their fans as getting a top 5 pick in this deep draft.
MakMan44 said:it's just a really shitty situation that Love has forced them into.
jon abbey said:To me GS is the obvious fit here, with the Lee/Harrison Barnes package mentioned above, maybe adding a bit more than that.
Yeah, that's completely true. My quoted was meant as more from a fan's perspective. The narrative of the offseason was upgrading to make the playoffs, letting Love help pick the coach and praying that it was enough to get him to stay. To be fair, I'm not really surprised this is the way it's turning out but I really did have a lot of fun watching them play this year when they were playing well and it sucks that next season is very likely fucked because of this.jon abbey said:
A bit of a quibble, but they brought it on themselves by not signing him for the additional year in his last deal and saving that for Rubio. It was obvious from that moment that he would leave as soon as he could.
Again, you guys know the NBA better than I do but, if they do keep him, couldn't they look to sign and trade him? From what I understand, the Wolves still would be able to sign him to the biggest contract next season, unless they trade him now. Why would keeping him through next season automatically mean they get nothing?Rudy Pemberton said:They could keep him, hope to make the playoffs, and then deal with the fall out of losing him for nothing. Obviously, you'd like to get something for him- but losing him for nothing and bottoming out isn't the worst idea in the world if you don't get what you are looking for (and you do get the extra year of Love).
It depends. Lee can replace a decent amount of Love's production. He is a bad defender and doesn't have Love's shooting range. However he is very good around the basket and rebounds decently too.BigSoxFan said:David Lee is 31 and offers very little to a rebuilding team like Minny. Barnes' star has dimmed a bit the past 12 months but there's still some upside there. I think this would have to be a 3 team deal where Lee is flipped to a 3rd team and more young players/picks go to Minnesota.
Barnes struggled this season but it was his second year in the NBA. There are plenty of star players who also took a few seasons before making the leap and he has some of the skills to do the same. Sullinger is better than him but Barnes has way more upside than Olynyk imho.moondog80 said:
Harrison Barnes has a pretty poor resume after two years in a place where everyone puts up good numbers. Is he worth more that Sullinger or Olynyk?
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:Barnes struggled this season but it was his second year in the NBA. There are plenty of star players who also took a few seasons before making the leap and he has some of the skills to do the same. Sullinger is better than him but Barnes has way more upside than Olynyk imho.
You mean average PER. Its his average. I dont love PER but if you want to use it, Joe Johnson had an average PER of 11.7 his first two seasons too. He turned out to be pretty good.moondog80 said:
Not get off track too much, but I doubt there are very many stars who had as bad a two year start as Barnes. If any. His combined PER is 10.4. Which is to say, I don't think he helps the GS offer much, if at all. He's a throw-in, like Gerald Green in the Garnett deal.
Grin&MartyBarret said:Seems to me that people are underestimating the cost of Love, particularly in regards to the Golden State possibility. Given that they don't have a first round pick they can deal until 2020, I think they're looking at Thompson, Barnes, and Lee for Love, with some body like Buddinger or Martin going to Golden State as well. The bloom's off Barnes enough that he's not going to bring back Love on his own, and I don't think David Lee is enough of a selling point to offset that.
TheRooster said:If the C's offer the #4 pick this year, their 1st rounder in 2016 (leaving them with the Nets pick that year) and Minny's choice of Sullinger or KO, no other team can touch that, right? That still leaves the re-signing issue, but at least Boston would be in the driver's seat in terms of getting the Wolves' attention.
the1andonly3003 said:According to the trade machine, Sully, Wallace, Chris Johnson and draft picks will work under the cap:
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=n7g9bze
Chicago can straight up trade picks and Boozer to make salaries match:
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=l958d93
Let's go Trader Danny, make this happen (if we fall out of the top 5)!
Grin&MartyBarret said:
There are teams that can come close. Phoenix can offer Dragic or Bledsoe, one of the Morris twins, Frye and 2 picks this year. Houston can offer Parsons, Asik, Terrance Jones and picks. The Lakers, if they land in the top 3, can offer that pick.
The picks replace Sullinger, Boozer replaces Wallace, and is a much better player as well as a 15M expiring.jsinger121 said:
I'd rather Sullinger than Boozer if I am Minnesota.
Love is a very good player, but some of his raw stats are misleading because of how the team is built and the sheer number of minutes he plays a game.ivanvamp said:I do not profess to be any sort of expert, especially in advanced metrics. But it's no secret that I like Kevin Love. Here's why:
1. The man is a big, big, big time rebounder. 12.5 per game this year. 12.2 for his career. 13.7 per game over the past four seasons. Elite rebounder. And you can never have too much rebounding.
2. Can hit the three. He's not Ray Allen or Stephen Curry, but for a big man he's pretty darned good. He's a career 36.2% three point shooter. He shoots 81.5% from the line for his career. Excellent shooter and scorer.
3. Very good passer. 4.4 assists per game this past year with not much around him. And not just the assist stat - he's just a very good passer, period.
4. #8 in the NBA in offensive rating, per basketball-reference.com.
5. #3 in win shares in the NBA per basketball-reference.com.
6. #3 in the NBA in PER, per basketball-reference.com.
What I don't like is that he is a liability on the defensive end of the floor. But of the guys coming up in the draft, how many will turn out to be 26 point, 13 rebound, 4 assist, good-shooting, good-passing players who are top 5 in the NBA in PER? Um….most likely zero. Maybe one. Maybe.
I know he's not the perfect player. Slow, can't jump, not a good defender. But other than LeBron and Durant, everyone has a hole in his game.
Good luck getting Minnesota, or anyone, to take Wallace.the1andonly3003 said:According to the trade machine, Sully, Wallace, Chris Johnson and draft picks will work under the cap:
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=n7g9bze
Chicago can straight up trade picks and Boozer to make salaries match:
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=l958d93
Let's go Trader Danny, make this happen (if we fall out of the top 5)!
No way I am including Wallace at the cost of those Nets picks. You don't need the cap space next year and after 2014-2015 he becomes an expiring.Devizier said:Minnesota might take Wallace if he comes attached to the Pierce/Garnett picks from Brooklyn. For a team that recognizes that its immediate window is closed, those picks are probably worth a lot. Again, I don't think the Celtics will have a hard time putting together a "winning" package for Love; they have tons of assets and can build any number of packages with them. The problem, as HRB mentioned earlier, is convincing Love to say (I think he says no).
Option #1 is the only realistic option here(and Minnesota likely isn't taking that offer)ALiveH said:My basic assumptions: K-Love is a great player in this league and can win a championship if pairing him with a couple other great players and correctly constructing the roster around him - if that means rim protector at the 5, so be it. Getting the stars to come here at the same time is the hard part. Filling in the roster around them is the easy part. As an aside, I don't think the Wolves underperformed at all this year, they were basically a .500 team in a brutal Western conference, and looking at the rest of the roster, I think they would have been right there with the Celtics record-wise without him.
I look at this deal 2 ways - with & without the assurance K-Love will sign an extension here.
1) if there's no assurance, then bringing K-Love here immediately starts the clock ticking for 1 year to bring other star(s) here so he will sign an extension. But, that option to get back to contention is worth something. So, I'd give up Sullinger / Olynyk (duplicate his skills & will never be as good as him) + a 1st (unless it's top-3), and whatever salaries to match. That leaves us with Rondo + Love (open question whether Rondo is still a star or whether he's just an average starting point at this point) and lots of extra 1sts and we have one year to get it together to bring in other star(s) and get them to sign extensions. Worst case: we gave up a couple assets for a K-Love rental, but still have lots of assets & extra 1sts.
2) if he would sign an extension here, then he's worth a lot more b/c don't have as much urgency to bring in other stars. I'd be willing to give up any 3 assets (or a top-3 pick straight up for him). We'd still have Rondo + plenty of other assets to try to bring in other good players, and with just K-Love as (potentially) our only above-average NBA starter, we might still be in the lottery in 2015.
Swedgin said:No way I am including Wallace at the cost of those Nets picks. You don't need the cap space next year and after 2014-2015 he becomes an expiring.
I agree the challenge is not building an attractive package for Minny, but rather making Boston a preferred destination for Love. Melo could actually be helpful on that front. If Houston thinks they can get Melo, Morey will need cap space and Asik would be on the move. That trade exception would be key. Rondo, Bradley, Green, Love and Asik, with one of Sullinger and Olynk off the bench, along with Wallace and whomever you sign with the mid-level is a playoff team in the East. Wallace and Green's contracts also means you will have cap space to add another piece in the near future. Plus you have all of those Nets picks to add talent.
ivanvamp said:All things considered - offense, defense, rebounding, etc. - what is the likelihood that a player the Celtics take in the first round of the draft, *even if it's the #1 pick*, turns out to be as good a player as Kevin Love - a perennial all-star and not just the we-like-him-so-we're-voting-for-him-even-though-he's-crappy kind of all-star?
25%? 50? 75%?
But that's not the question. The question is, would you rather have Sullinger and Embid (or Parker or Wiggins) plus capspace, or Love and bupkis? Love doesn't just cost you the pick. He costs you at least one more decent young player plus cap flexibility going forward. Also, if you trade for Love, you are pretty much committed to paying Rondo. Otherwise, what's the point?I'll go with well below 25%.
Hard to say, almost everyone in this class will be better defensively, with the chance to be much, much better. Offensively probably no-one in this class will be as good. Rebounding there could be some guys as good.ivanvamp said:All things considered - offense, defense, rebounding, etc. - what is the likelihood that a player the Celtics take in the first round of the draft, *even if it's the #1 pick*, turns out to be as good a player as Kevin Love - a perennial all-star and not just the we-like-him-so-we're-voting-for-him-even-though-he's-crappy kind of all-star?
25%? 50? 75%?
Brickowski said:But that's not the question. The question is, would you rather have Sullinger and Embid (or Parker or Wiggins) plus capspace, or Love and bupkis? Love doesn't just cost you the pick. He costs you at least one more decent young player plus cap flexibility going forward. Also, if you trade for Love, you are pretty much committed to paying Rondo. Otherwise, what's the point?
Efforts to build Rome in a day usually fail.
Cellar-Door said:Hard to say, almost everyone in this class will be better defensively, with the chance to be much, much better. Offensively probably no-one in this class will be as good. Rebounding there could be some guys as good.
However as Brick correctly notes, it's more than just comparing Love to the pick, Sullinger is part of it, and $20M a year in cap space.
So the real question is can you make a better team with Sullinger, whoever you pick and a max free agent in 2015? I'd say yes.
Kevin Love is as noted above and in other threads a tough guy to quantify, he's an All-Star, but he is an entirely one side of the court player, and he depends on volume to put up a lot of his numbers. I'd rather have a player who got less points and rebounds but did so more efficiently and played defense, which I think you can get out of several guys in the top 5.
I'd certainly not trade a top 3 pick for him with Sullinger, I think even if they don't end up putting up the raw numbers he does (though Parker might, he's got Melo 2.0 written all over him) all 3 should bring a lot to the table and for so much less money.
Cellar-Door said:So the real question is can you make a better team with Sullinger, whoever you pick and a max free agent in 2015? I'd say yes.
Brickowski said:But that's not the question. The question is, would you rather have Sullinger and Embid (or Parker or Wiggins) plus capspace, or Love and bupkis? Love doesn't just cost you the pick. He costs you at least one more decent young player plus cap flexibility going forward. Also, if you trade for Love, you are pretty much committed to paying Rondo. Otherwise, what's the point?
Efforts to build Rome in a day usually fail.
TheRooster said:If the C's offer the #4 pick this year, their 1st rounder in 2016 (leaving them with the Nets pick that year) and Minny's choice of Sullinger or KO, no other team can touch that, right? That still leaves the re-signing issue, but at least Boston would be in the driver's seat in terms of getting the Wolves' attention.
You can also add all-star players with picks in the top 6. I simply don't think that Love is the right player to help them get to the promised land-- and I don't think Rondo is either. For starters, Love has never appeared in an NBA playoff game.I honestly don't understand this, particularly coming from you. You preach every year at the draft about how teams can find All-Star caliber players late in the first round and in the second round, and now suddenly the Celtics would have Love, Rondo and nothing else. They have 6 first round picks in the next 3 years--with an outside shot at having 7. They are loaded with assets. The idea that Ainge is going to acquire Love, pay Rondo, and then stop building simply isn't true.
Brickowski said:I'd rather rebuild the way that OKC or Indiana have done it than via the big splash, the way Houston has tried to do it (and has failed miserably).
Think Ibaka, Serge.Huh? You realize that OKC was incredibly fortunate to hit it out of the park with their #2 (Durant), #4 (Westbrook) and #3 (Harden) picks in three straight drafts?
OKC is the exact opposite of your argument that you can build a team through late first round and early second round picks.
If they re-sign Rondo as well, that's not all that unattractive for a max guy, even if Green picks up his option they're only at about 23M, add in the two rookies from this year and you are at about 29 or so that leaves a projected 37M so Rondo and a second max whether by signing or trade fits easily.Grin&MartyBarret said:
Who is the max free agent who is coming here to play with Jared Sullinger and a 2nd year player? Maybe you can convince somebody, who knows.
But it's not like trading for Kevin Love paralyzes the Celtics flexibility. Again, the Celtics have a ton of assets in the form of first round picks. In the past year alone first round picks have been traded for Kyle Lowry. Loul Deng, Martin Gortat, Jrue Holiday, and the cap space that allowed Golden State to sign Andre Iguodala. Why people think acquiring Kevin Love is going to cripple a franchise that owns 6 first round picks in the next 3 years is beyond me.
Most players go where the money is, they don't need as good a player as Love to break even.Tony C said:
Well, there's the rub. In the abstract you're surely right. Love alone is obviously not as good as Sullinger, the pick, and a max free agent who is Love's equivalent. But who would that max free agent be? They're not just floating around to be snatched. The Celtics have a certain sexiness to them because of history, but they're also a bottom rung team in a cold weather city, a city that fairly or not doesn't have a great rep among African Americans -- in other words, maybe Miami or the Lakers or possibly even the Knicks (some years) can say we're not going to trade assets we'll just wait to sign whomever we want for no compensation, but the Celtics can't assume they'll attract anyone...and, if not, then you turn into Detroit throwing money at mid-level guys.
edit: or, in other words, like GMB said...too slow on the trigger! I'll just add that it comes down to whether you think Kevin Love is a guy who truly deserves a max contract or if you think him closer to Josh Smith. To me it's crystal clear he's much closer to elite status and well worthy of a max contract. Much as I think criticisms of LeBron or CP3 or whomever for not having carried a team to a championship are lame as hell, Love not even getting his teams into the playoffs does cause hesitation, I will admit. But I'd still move beyond that hesitation - by all metrics he's an elite player, top 5-7 in the league.
The Wolves have been a catastrophe without Love on the floor this season. When he plays, they outscore opponents by nearly six points per 100 possessions and explode on offense, per NBA.com. When he sits, the offense dies, and they have a worse point differential than the Bucks.
I think they're closer defensively than you think, given their positions. It's easier to cover up for a bad shooting guard defensively than it is for a bad big man.Tony C said:In re top 5...well, he's certainly top 10. And, for example, I'd take Love over Harden in a heartbeat. (Don't even bring up defense, there!)
Well, I certainly agree you won't see Kevin Love roll over on D in the playoffs. I tried to watch a T-Wolves playoff game, but I just couldn't find it.radsoxfan said:I'm not sure where I would slot in on the "statistically inclined posters list", but I think I'd take Love over Harden. I may be biased by recently seeing Harden roll over on D in the playoffs, but he really is a huge liability out there.
Houston has Asik/Howard and Harden's defense was such a big issue they had home court advantage in the first round in the hardest conference in memory.I understand the logic of preferring a bad defensive guard to a bad defensive big man, but Houston had Howard/Asik, and Harden's D was still a major issue. I know Love stinks on D too, but I'll take Love and his extra rebounding over Harden if I had to pick.
As I said, Ainge needed to acquire a HOFer in Ray Allen on convince KG to come to Boston and sign the extension. He initially refused.Rudy Pemberton said:Garnett wasn't a free agent, but he had to agree to come here, and he did. I don't really bit the argument that a top FA will never come to boston. NBA free agency hasnt been around that long, and how often have the C's had significant cap room? And hell, what about Shaq?