Kyrie Irving traded to Celtics for IT, Crowder, Zizic, BKN 1st, 2020 2nd

sox311 · Aug 26, 2017

Stupid Cleveland. How has this not been posted yet?

This is a very polarizing injury. A friend of mine is an ultra runner, close to elite level, and took one long jarring stride and not long after he couldn't run six miles without hurting.

They thought he had a torn labrum, just like IT4 supposedly has. He went under the knife after considering many options, including rest and rehab. And they ended up finding out that it wasn't a labrum tear but his femoral bone was protruding and causing the pain they thought. So they shaved it. He slowly rehabbed it, didn't run or other impact exercises for eight months. He has slowly eased into running again and just recently got back up to 20+ miles and feels great on the way back to ultras.

So, It is very easy to believe that different doctors can have different opinions from what they see and have been told. Many baseball players are starting to see this injury, like Arod, Mike Lowell, Chase Utley. It is a bad and unclear injury.

If the Cavs doctors have more concern now it is understandable. But Ainge seems to have been very clear and talking with very good faith. It Altman or Gilbert are trying to put the player back on the auction block after some second thoughts then fuck them and they need to be punished. (But no way that can be proved with such a polarizing injury.)

EvilEmpire · Aug 26, 2017

PedroKsBambino said:
Then, how can you say there's no way Celtics could win a grievance if you have no idea what was said or shared between the teams? it's silly.

Because I'm not talking about the medical information shared, I'm talking about a prognosis going forward. I have to think there is some subjectivity involved.

We've had doctors posting on this site for a long time about various injuries and how hard it can be for 100% accurate assessments of recovery/recovery times, especially when that recovery is for an elite athletes performing at very high level. I don't see how a grievance would fly if it comes down to varying assessments from different doctors. Doesn't sound likely to me at all.

Differences of opinion on medicals can happen even with good faith bargaining of all parties involved.

benhogan · Aug 26, 2017

jon abbey said:
Actually 5th, for the record.

http://official.nba.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2017/06/2016-17-Kia-NBA-Most-Valuable-Player-of-the-Year-Award.pdf

yep... 3rd in scoring, 5th in MVP

But my point stands. There was zero indication from anybody that he was cooked for the season, like EE was implying.

LondonSox · Aug 26, 2017

snowmanny said:
We knew he was hurt.
Scared of pr? lol

How hurt. JFC

benhogan said:
Come on, you're joking, right? IT4 finished #3 in MVP vote, he is getting paid $6.2MM this year. He'd be the 8th highest paid player on the Cavs roster next season. That's an absolute steal if he plays half the season. He was clearly considered a positive asset in this deal by both the Cavs and Celtics.

Danny said this a few days ago in the presser:
There's gonna be probably a little bit of a delay for Isaiah as he starts the season this year, but I think that Isaiah should be fine and healthy as the season goes along," Ainge said.

Then Brad said this right before the trade.

Brad Stevens recently said that he didn't know whether Thomas would be ready for the start of training camp, and that he would be re-evaluated in early September.

I doubt both Brad and Danny would coordinate lies and mislead everyone, both have impeccable reputations.

Cleveland is posturing and looking for more talent.

These quotes say he'll be fine but might miss a bit at the front of the season.
If the Cavs doctors think he's done for the year that's a difference.
I think the Cavs do it if he needs rehab.

If he needs surgery and misses the year then he goes from a short term replacement to they need a pg and have nothing to get one.

Man it's hard being neutral here.

DJnVa · Aug 26, 2017

PedroKsBambino said:
Then, how can you say there's no way Celtics could win a grievance if you have no idea what was said or shared between the teams? it's silly.

Actually, I don't think it is. The NBA process allows the team receiving the player to conduct physical and void trade if they don't like what they see once they actually look. I don't really think it matters what Ainge told them.

The physical holds sway, not Ainge saying he was 100% forthcoming.

Now, the court of public opinion is something else, but I don't think a grievance would work here. Rules say they can look themselves and decide.

Ed Hillel · Aug 26, 2017

DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
As for Boston, they will get back Zizic and the pick which is great. However they will have to re-trade Crowder given the bad blood and aren't like to get equal value back. Assuming Thomas can still play, he has an incentive to get minutes wherever he can but it can't be Boston. He went from being the face of the franchise and someone who was involved in recruiting Gordon Hayward to being unceremoniously dumped for a younger, cheaper model.

IT was probably not coming back next season, even if heathy. They were not going to pay him near max money for his 30-33 or 34 seasons and he was going to leave because his feelings were hurt. This trade changes very little in that regard.

DrewDawg said:
Actually, I don't think it is. The NBA process allows the team receiving the player to conduct physical and void trade if they don't like what they see once they actually look. I don't really think it matters what Ainge told them.

The physical holds sway, not Ainge saying he was 100% forthcoming.

Now, the court of public opinion is something else, but I don't think a grievance would work here. Rules say they can look themselves and decide.

If what they see is exactly what Danny told them, I would guess Danny has a case of some sort. No way of knowing if it matches at this point in time, however.

rymflaherty · Aug 26, 2017

As a neutral observer, I hope the Celtics tell the Cavs to F' off.
The media concensus already is that the Cavs won the trade and got a better deal than most anticipated for Irving. It takes balls to then ask for more due to an injury that seemed to be common knowledge amongst everyone (even fans).
The only way this isn't completely insulting if your the Celtics is if it is in fact a situation where Thomas is out for the season, then it makes sense, but until I hear that is the reality, I'm sticking with "F' Cleveland".

snowmanny · Aug 26, 2017

LondonSox said:
Man it's hard being neutral here.

In some cases it seems impossible.

dabombdig · Aug 26, 2017

My guess on this whole thing is Boston relayed everything on IT's health to the Cavs and all was good. The physical happened and fucking Gilbert said "no one told me it was this bad!" Everyone within the Cavs front office tried to reassure the idiot (Gilbert) that yes we were told by the Celtics the extent of the injury and yet Gilbert remained defiant and here we are...

snowmanny · Aug 26, 2017

We knew Thomas had an acute exacerbation of a chronic and possibly progressive hip problem that was likely to cause him to miss the beginning of the season. We believed that with time and rehab he would play this season. We know that if he does play there is a strong possibility, due to his age and chronic condition, that he might have a drop in performance. We also know from experience that all of the above would be enough for some team physicians to fail his physical, depending on the parameters they are given.

Right now we have no new information that adds anything to our previous knowledge on this subject.

It's possible that the Cleveland doctors found something more significant to indicate, for example, that his career is over or he is out for the season. That would be new information. In that case 1) they should void the deal and 2) it really doesn't matter that it will be hard for him to return to Boston because he's done anyway.

Manramsclan · Aug 26, 2017

Danny shouldn't blink. I think this would be worse for the Cavs if they veto the deal. If IT4 is out for the season that would be tough, but he only has one year left on his deal and it's easier to manage an unhappy player who isn't on the active roster than one who is.

Kyrie wanted out and this may be the best the Cavs get. According to many sources this was a much bigger and more diverse set of assets than any other team offered for Irving. Let them live with an unhappy Kyrie if they don't like the deal. In my opinion, they are much worse off vetoing the deal than the Celtics, one badly soured relationship aside.

Ed Hillel · Aug 26, 2017

Manramsclan said:
Danny shouldn't blink. I think this would be worse for the Cavs if they veto the deal. If IT4 is out for the season that would be tough, but he only has one year left on his deal and it's easier to manage an unhappy player who isn't on the active roster than one who is.

Beyond that, there's a good chance this is the last year in Cleveland's window for decades. Boston has plenty of time. There is far more pressure on Cleveland than Boston.

Jimbodandy · Aug 27, 2017

Ed Hillel said:
Beyond that, there's a good chance this is the last year in Cleveland's window for decades. Boston has plenty of time. There is far more pressure on Cleveland than Boston.

I agree. It will suck badly to have to bring back an unhappy IT and Crowder, but it would be worse to add more value to a trade that a lot of us thought was too much already. The Celtics shouldn't have to subsidize a shitshow Cleveland front office.

TheoShmeo · Aug 27, 2017

Jimbodandy said:
I agree. It will suck badly to have to bring back an unhappy IT and Crowder, but it would be worse to add more value to a trade that a lot of us thought was too much already. The Celtics shouldn't have to subsidize a shitshow Cleveland front office.

I'm not so sure. What I mean is that it depends. If the Cavs need something relatively minor -- such as the Cs own first rounder next year -- to make this trade work, I would not let the fact that the Cs have already paid a lot get in the way. I would balk at including a core asset or the Lakers pick. But the whole "winning the trade" type mentality means little to me, I still love the idea of Kyrie in Boston and having Thomas and Crowder on the team seems like a giant bowl of awkward.

DeJesus Built My Hotrod · Aug 27, 2017

Ed Hillel said:
IT was probably not coming back next season, even if heathy. They were not going to pay him near max money for his 30-33 or 34 seasons and he was going to leave because his feelings were hurt. This trade changes very little in that regard.

But - and many posters here have stressed this - not completing this deal and having IT walk puts them in a bad situation vis-a-vis the cap. So actually quite a bit changes for the Celtics and not for the better. And Cleveland now has to reauction Kyrie with one less suitor which every other team bidding on him will be fully aware of so that is a bad outcome for the Cavs.

Make no mistake here - nobody really has leverage from trying to undo a deal that involves actual people, egos, team make-up and salary cap ramifications. Ainge and Altman/Gilbert should be actively trying to figure out a solution and avoiding an unwind. That will result in a total shitshow for both sides.

Papelbon's Poutine · Aug 27, 2017

RedOctober3829 said:
That works if you have Pierce/KG/Allen, Kobe and Shaq, or LeBron/Wade/Bosh. Celtics wouldn't exactly have that kind of star power to surround either of them.

Exactly, and while I worded my responses poorly (mea culpa), they can add both a PG and a third cog in one move. My sloppy language got me there, if Smart was on any of those teams, yes, he blows my statement out of the water. But we don't have that team and there's no way to get it right now.

kazuneko · Aug 27, 2017

I'm not sure how an extra draft pick would protect them if IT goes down. If they want to switch out Rozier for Zizic that's fine, but there is no way Ainge should provide them extra assets.

wade boggs chicken dinner · Aug 27, 2017

kazuneko said:
I'm not sure how an extra draft pick would protect them if IT goes down. If they want to switch out Rozier for Zizic that's fine, but there is no way Ainge should provide them extra assets.

DA is not going to send Rozier over. Do you realize how important he is to this team, particularly if the starting PG (whoever he is) can't play?

mauf · Aug 27, 2017

DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
But - and many posters here have stressed this - not completing this deal and having IT walk puts them in a bad situation vis-a-vis the cap. So actually quite a bit changes for the Celtics and not for the better. And Cleveland now has to reauction Kyrie with one less suitor which every other team bidding on him will be fully aware of so that is a bad outcome for the Cavs.

Make no mistake here - nobody really has leverage from trying to undo a deal that involves actual people, egos, team make-up and salary cap ramifications. Ainge and Altman/Gilbert should be actively trying to figure out a solution and avoiding an unwind. That will result in a total shitshow for both sides.

This is where I'm at. Danny isn't going to add a major asset (the potential lottery picks, Tatum, Brown, or anyone expected to play a key role on this year's team), but short of that, he's better off sweetening the pot than letting the deal fall apart.

PedroKsBambino · Aug 27, 2017

EvilEmpire said:
Because I'm not talking about the medical information shared, I'm talking about a prognosis going forward. I have to think there is some subjectivity involved.

We've had doctors posting on this site for a long time about various injuries and how hard it can be for 100% accurate assessments of recovery/recovery times, especially when that recovery is for an elite athletes performing at very high level. I don't see how a grievance would fly if it comes down to varying assessments from different doctors. Doesn't sound likely to me at all.

Differences of opinion on medicals can happen even with good faith bargaining of all parties involved.

Your comment was in fact about the grievance outcome. Your assumption that it can only be a subjective medical comparison is baseless--as has been noted, any number of things could have been said, committed to, or exchanged during the negotiation. Those things may commit Cleveland, and they may demonstrate their is not any 'new' subjectivity post-trade exam. We just don't know.

One report, from a Cleveland writer, is that Cavs knew full extent of injury and deal reflected the risk.

At best, you're vastly over generalizing.

PedroKsBambino · Aug 27, 2017

DrewDawg said:
Actually, I don't think it is. The NBA process allows the team receiving the player to conduct physical and void trade if they don't like what they see once they actually look. I don't really think it matters what Ainge told them.

The physical holds sway, not Ainge saying he was 100% forthcoming.

Now, the court of public opinion is something else, but I don't think a grievance would work here. Rules say they can look themselves and decide.

It matters whether parties agreed in how to handle IT's health, though...if this was all out there and they agreed IT is traded "as-is" then you can't fail him on the exam. At least, that's how I've seen rule explained and it is also what would make sense given the risks involved.

No idea if that is what happened, but that's why I keep saying we need the facts to come out.

Jimbodandy · Aug 27, 2017

PedroKsBambino said:
It matters whether parties agreed in how to handle IT's health, though...if this was all out there and they agreed IT is traded "as-is" then you can't fail him on the exam. At least, that's how I've seen rule explained and it is also what would make sense given the risks involved.

No idea if that is what happened, but that's why I keep saying we need the facts to come out.

Of course we don't know for certain what happened. Only the orgs know.

However, any speculation that the Cavs found something "new" on the physical assumes that Ainge was willing to risk publicly trading IT and JC and having them be sent back after the physical. It is simply inconceivable that he would do that. The only logical conclusion is that either 1) someone in the Cleveland organization changed their mind on direction, or 2) they're shaking him down.

It should never be about "winning the trade". It's about value. Brown, Tatum, or another first round pick should be a show-stopper. The deal is already rich enough.

Lose Remerswaal · Aug 27, 2017

Give them a couple unprotected second round picks so they can save face and let's move on.

smastroyin · Aug 27, 2017

People really think Thomas and Crowder are gonna pout and play like shit or just not play at all if this trade falls through?

These guys are professionals and professionals get to be that by not only having the highest skill levels, but having a singlemindedness about playing the game. They aren't going to coast or derail their entire future career because they feel like pouting. Sure, this can be a concern with the superstars, in the abstract - the 20ish guys that are so good that 29 teams can watch them sulk their way to sabotaging a team and still offer them a max contract. In practice though, this doesn't really happen either. These guys show up every day to ball. I can't believe some of you have such low opinions of them.

Jimbodandy · Aug 27, 2017

smastroyin said:
People really think Thomas and Crowder are gonna pout and play like shit or just not play at all if this trade falls through?

These guys are professionals and professionals get to be that by not only having the highest skill levels, but having a singlemindedness about playing the game. They aren't going to coast or derail their entire future career because they feel like pouting. Sure, this can be a concern with the superstars, in the abstract - the 20ish guys that are so good that 29 teams can watch them sulk their way to sabotaging a team and still offer them a max contract. In practice though, this doesn't really happen either. These guys show up every day to ball. I can't believe some of you have such low opinions of them.

I agree completely. It's a bad situation, but not unworkable. If shit happens, those guys will be professional. And Stevens will play the hand that he is dealt, probably as well as it can be played.

Montana Fan · Aug 27, 2017

This deal is not going to fall through. At worst for C's fans, a minor asset will either be given up voluntarily or through league arbitration. Irving is a Celtic.

I am praying that it doesn't go to arbitration. The SoSH analysis during the buildup to the decision would be painful to read.

snowmanny · Aug 27, 2017

Montana Fan said:
This deal is not going to fall through. At worst for C's fans, a minor asset will either be given up voluntarily or through league arbitration. Irving is a Celtic.

I am praying that it doesn't go to arbitration. The SoSH analysis during the buildup to the decision would be painful to read.

I don't recall of a trade failing due to physical and then being brought to arbitration for a third party to reconstruct the trade in any sport. Is that a thing? I only recall them being mutually reconstructed or called off.

ed:

e.g. Sean Elliott(failed) for Robert Horry
http://articles.latimes.com/1994-02-07/sports/sp-20042_1_physical-elliott
Tyson Chandler(failed) for Joe Smith
http://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=3917505
Pistons-Rockets-Sixers three-way in 2016 (Motiejunas failed)
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/14825052/detroit-pistons-void-trade-houston-rockets-returning-donatas-motiejunas-marcus-thornton-joel-anthony-original-teams

Chandler failed his physical in 2009 with OKC and has played 500 games with no particular overall drop in performance so it shows you how each team has it's own parameters for determining what constitutes failure. Thomas failing doesn't necessarily mean Cleveland found something new.
The problem with Chandler was a long-standing toe injury:

Chandler, 26, was baffled by Yates' ruling in part because Yates performed surgery on Chandler's big left toe in April of 2007 when the Hornets were playing in Oklahoma City. Chandler played 79 games the following season and while he's missed 19 games this season, none has been because of his toe.

"He said he doesn't know how long I'll last," Chandler said in reference to Yates. "He told me, 'I have no doubt you can play on it. I'm just saying it could take a turn for the worse if you come down on somebody's foot or hyperextend it or something.'"
/QUOTE]

DJnVa · Aug 27, 2017

It's gonna be a draft choice--anything from the Clippers to second rounder. There's no way the Cavs can risk it. If they void, why wouldn't the Suns lower their offer since everything we hear is Kyrie must be dealt?

bosockboy · Aug 27, 2017

I could see the deal being expanded where we give up the LAC pick and maybe also take Shumpert back. He's a great fit as a defensive wing reserve.

mauf · Aug 27, 2017

Montana Fan said:
This deal is not going to fall through. At worst for C's fans, a minor asset will either be given up voluntarily or through league arbitration. Irving is a Celtic.

I am praying that it doesn't go to arbitration. The SoSH analysis during the buildup to the decision would be painful to read.

Selig had the power to compel LL and Ricketts to submit their dispute to arbitration. I don't think Silver has comparable power here, and I can't see Danny voluntarily agreeing to arbitrate, because of the risk of an outlier outcome (e.g., making him add the LAL/SAC pick to the trade). So unless there's a provision in the NBA rules that I'm not aware of, either the clubs will work it out themselves or they'll call off the deal.

wade boggs chicken dinner · Aug 27, 2017

bosockboy said:
I could see the deal being expanded where we give up the LAC pick and maybe also take Shumpert back. He's a great fit as a defensive wing reserve.

money doesn't work - on many different levels

Gash Prex · Aug 27, 2017

According to Woj, disagreement centers on different opinions as to when Thomas can play - disagree with Bos assessment.

DJnVa · Aug 27, 2017

Gash Prex said:
According to Woj, disagreement centers on different opinions as to when Thomas can play - disagree with Bos assessment.

Is, say, a month REALLY worth more than like a 2nd round pick? Is 2 months?

wade boggs chicken dinner · Aug 27, 2017

smastroyin said:
People really think Thomas and Crowder are gonna pout and play like shit or just not play at all if this trade falls through?

These guys are professionals and professionals get to be that by not only having the highest skill levels, but having a singlemindedness about playing the game. They aren't going to coast or derail their entire future career because they feel like pouting. Sure, this can be a concern with the superstars, in the abstract - the 20ish guys that are so good that 29 teams can watch them sulk their way to sabotaging a team and still offer them a max contract. In practice though, this doesn't really happen either. These guys show up every day to ball. I can't believe some of you have such low opinions of them.

Agrees, especially with IT. Apparently, people haven't heard it enough. IT is either going to play his ass off for a max contract or he's going to get surgery and then wait one more year. Dogging it at all is going to cost him millions.

And I really don't get people thinking the Cs are worse off if the trade goes through. If the trade fails, and whether or not IT tries to play through it, the Cs are probably not winning the championship this year but they have two lottery picks to use for themselves or try to acquire another great player. Whether or not the trade goes through, DA will continue to try to make the team better and will have the assets to do it.

DJnVa · Aug 27, 2017

Yeah...no matter which side of this deal you fall on, one of the following is your WORST CASE:

1--Two potential lottery picks added to Hayward/Horford/Smart

or

2--One potential lottery pick added to Irving/Hayward/Horford/Smart

vicirus · Aug 27, 2017

bosockboy said:
I could see the deal being expanded where we give up the LAC pick and maybe also take Shumpert back. He's a great fit as a defensive wing reserve.

That is probably an overpay on its own, but wouldn't even be possible. They'd need to trade Morris and Rozier plus the pick to make the salaries work. If they want a defensive wing reserve they can sign Tony Allen for the minimum and get 80% of what Shump provides.

I think this is a bit of gamesman ship from the Cavs as it would seem they would have the leverage if this trade doesn't happen. The C's would likely have to trade IT (his agent would force it) and it would sink the team for next year. Long term there would be definite question marks as to how to get another star on the team.

That said, even if IT weren't able to play a single game this year, that's still a good haul for Cleveland in a worse case scenario. Best case, he doesn't miss any time and they come out ahead on the trade. With the pick being unprotected, it accounts for that uncertainty. I'd give them the future Miami or Clippers 2nd to make this go away, but no firsts.

Unfortunately, I don't believe there's any way to tie the compensation to games played by IT, as there is in football. That would make resolving this very easy.

Big John · Aug 27, 2017

I was going to say that this ploy by the Cavs has Pat Riley written all over it, but maybe the person whispering in Dan Gilbert's ear is LeBron.

If Ainge adds significant additional compensation to complete the deal (1) it becomes more difficult for Ainge to use his remaining trade assets to add another good player, and (2) Ainge will never win another trade so long as he is an NBA GM, because the league will know that he can be pushed around when he becomes fixated on a player. The same thing happened with Justice Winslow (if the rumored offers were accurate).

TheoShmeo · Aug 27, 2017

smastroyin said:
People really think Thomas and Crowder are gonna pout and play like shit or just not play at all if this trade falls through?

These guys are professionals and professionals get to be that by not only having the highest skill levels, but having a singlemindedness about playing the game. They aren't going to coast or derail their entire future career because they feel like pouting. Sure, this can be a concern with the superstars, in the abstract - the 20ish guys that are so good that 29 teams can watch them sulk their way to sabotaging a team and still offer them a max contract. In practice though, this doesn't really happen either. These guys show up every day to ball. I can't believe some of you have such low opinions of them.

I don't think it's binary.

These guys are professionals but they are also humans.

I think it's naive to think that Thomas and Crowder would play on as if nothing happened. Being rejected and essentially told the Cs needed an upgrade from them, especially in Thomas' case after all he went through (his sister, his dental procedures and his other worldly season), has to take some kind of toll. In an emotional sport, can they give as much of themselves to an organization that chose to upgrade? Perhaps. But I don't think they can just flip a switch or we expect them to be the same as if this never happened.

And to be clear, that does not reflect a dim view of them. That reflects a view that they are human beings with normal human emotions.

I don't see it as necessarily debilitating. But it could be awkward and difficult. It probably will be if they remain Cs.

My hope is that Danny is able to keep the deal intact and give Cleveland something extra that is non-core if need be. To me, that Crowder and Thomas are pros and could soldier on does not negate the fact that having to do so would be less than ideal...and critically, less ideal than if Kyrie Irving is a Celtic when the dust clears.

the moops · Aug 27, 2017

wade boggs chicken dinner said:
DA is not going to send Rozier over. Do you realize how important he is to this team, particularly if the starting PG (whoever he is) can't play?

He is important to this team if the deal is voided and IT can't play. He is far less important if Kyrie is coming here.

axx · Aug 27, 2017

Big John said:
If Ainge adds significant additional compensation to complete the deal (1) it becomes more difficult for Ainge to use his remaining trade assets to add another good player, and (2) Ainge will never win another trade so long as he is an NBA GM, because the league will know that he can be pushed around when he becomes fixated on a player. The same thing happened with Justice Winslow (if the rumored offers were accurate).

I think the whole point of the trade was to get something for IT.

DJnVa · Aug 27, 2017

vicirus said:
I think this is a bit of gamesman ship from the Cavs as it would seem they would have the leverage if this trade doesn't happen.

Disagree. This started because of Kyrie's demand. It would seem there were 2 real places he could go--Boston or Phoenix. Why would Phoenix offer the same thing now?

smastroyin · Aug 27, 2017

I agree that they are human and will have emotions and they deserve respect and I trust Stevens and the rest of the staff to have long talks with them about whatever they want to talk about. But everyone knows this is a business and everyone's going to get over it. Why? Because beyond the fact that they are competitors at the highest level, it is in their own best interest to compete at the highest level, because neither one of them is on their last contract.

I don't really agree that their level of play will be affected. Even if I did agree that level of play *could* be affected, I would not assign enough risk to that scenario to have it affect the subsequent negotiation.

You guys are coming from a point of "The Celtics need to get this done because those guys aren't gonna want to be Celtics any more after this and it will sabotage the season." I put that in quotes but it's an amalgam of a couple dozen pearl clutching posts from yesterday. I couldn't possibly disagree more with this stance. If the trade fails the Celtics will move on to the next thing and Thomas and Crowder (And Zizic) will continue their off-seasons to get ready to come to camp. The only difference is that they are going to have to listen to questions at every opportunity from idiot media members about if they feel disrespected.

snowmanny · Aug 27, 2017

It may not be "ideal" but it probably has zero effect on how far this team goes in the playoffs.

Eddie Jurak · Aug 27, 2017

Gash Prex said:
According to Woj, disagreement centers on different opinions as to when Thomas can play - disagree with Bos assessment.

It sounds like the remedy here is a conditional pick.

TheoShmeo · Aug 27, 2017

smastroyin said:
I agree that they are human and will have emotions and they deserve respect and I trust Stevens and the rest of the staff to have long talks with them about whatever they want to talk about. But everyone knows this is a business and everyone's going to get over it. Why? Because beyond the fact that they are competitors at the highest level, it is in their own best interest to compete at the highest level, because neither one of them is on their last contract.

I don't really agree that their level of play will be affected. Even if I did agree that level of play *could* be affected, I would not assign enough risk to that scenario to have it affect the subsequent negotiation.

You guys are coming from a point of "The Celtics need to get this done because those guys aren't gonna want to be Celtics any more after this and it will sabotage the season." I put that in quotes but it's an amalgam of a couple dozen pearl clutching posts from yesterday. I couldn't possibly disagree more with this stance. If the trade fails the Celtics will move on to the next thing and Thomas and Crowder (And Zizic) will continue their off-seasons to get ready to come to camp. The only difference is that they are going to have to listen to questions at every opportunity from idiot media members about if they feel disrespected.

You're incorrect as to my emphasis.

The number one and overriding reason why I think Danny needs to make this happen is that I think the Cs are better with Irving than with the assets they gave up. I love the deal. I was concerned about Thomas' injury before the deal was made. I share none of the angst that I have seen expressed in many places about Danny overpaying.

In addition, and secondarily, I assign some possibility that having been traded with affect their play. I'm not going to rehash further other than to say that we disagree on this point. I accept your point about it being in their enlightened self interest to play well and I just think there will be more residual affect than you suspect.

But make no mistake, this is not at all what drives me to post on this. I want the deal (even if Danny has to sweeten it with non-core assets) and I want it for mostly the reason I was ecstatic when I first heard about it. The other stuff is just ancillary.

JakeRae · Aug 27, 2017

smastroyin said:
I agree that they are human and will have emotions and they deserve respect and I trust Stevens and the rest of the staff to have long talks with them about whatever they want to talk about. But everyone knows this is a business and everyone's going to get over it. Why? Because beyond the fact that they are competitors at the highest level, it is in their own best interest to compete at the highest level, because neither one of them is on their last contract.

I don't really agree that their level of play will be affected. Even if I did agree that level of play *could* be affected, I would not assign enough risk to that scenario to have it affect the subsequent negotiation.

You guys are coming from a point of "The Celtics need to get this done because those guys aren't gonna want to be Celtics any more after this and it will sabotage the season." I put that in quotes but it's an amalgam of a couple dozen pearl clutching posts from yesterday. I couldn't possibly disagree more with this stance. If the trade fails the Celtics will move on to the next thing and Thomas and Crowder (And Zizic) will continue their off-seasons to get ready to come to camp. The only difference is that they are going to have to listen to questions at every opportunity from idiot media members about if they feel disrespected.

Players are part of trade discussions all the time and know about it. The idea that actually getting traded is materially different is nonsense.

That said, I think IT could try to demand a trade because he thinks he is a super star and they get to do that when they are unhappy. If he has a competent agent, that agent will inform him how destructive that could be to his long term value and that if he wants his Brinks truck, the way to get it is to show up, play great, and earn it. His revenge on Boston is walking away after he proves last year wasn't a fluke, not forcing his way out this year.

vicirus · Aug 27, 2017

DrewDawg said:
Disagree. This started because of Kyrie's demand. It would seem there were 2 real places he could go--Boston or Phoenix. Why would Phoenix offer the same thing now?

Phoenix may or may not have known what the final offer from Boston was prior to the deal being executed. Even if the Cavs went back and told PHX, "we have this offer on the table, can you beat it", they may have thought they were bluffing. If PHX had known for certain, maybe they extend themselves a bit and offer Bender and Chriss. Knowing what it actually takes to get Kyrie is a very important piece of information that teams now have. I could see more bidders jumping in now, not less, and PHX having lost out once on him, might be more aggressive in getting him.

Take the Butler and George deals. If Ainge knew for certain what it would have taken for those players, and the deals fell through because of a failed physical, do you think he would up his offer to match it (thereby guaranteeing you get the player) or drop it and risk losing the players again?

DJnVa · Aug 27, 2017

Eddie Jurak said:
It sounds like the remedy here is a conditional pick.

Do they have them in NBA?

Or do you mean protected?

Eddie Jurak · Aug 27, 2017

DrewDawg said:
Do they have them in NBA?

Or do you mean protected?

I read somewhere that the commissioner could authorize a conditional pick. I'm not sure if that is true.

Jed Zeppelin · Aug 27, 2017

Eddie Jurak said:
I read somewhere that the commissioner could authorize a conditional pick. I'm not sure if that is true.

Feels like this scenario leaves open a lot of room for shenanigans by the Cavs if the language is something like Cavs get an extra pick if Thomas doesn't play his first game until on or after December 1.

Kyrie Irving traded to Celtics for IT, Crowder, Zizic, BKN 1st, 2020 2nd

Member

paying for his sins

Granite Truther

Robert the Deuce

Dorito Dawg

Wants to be startin somethin

Member

Member

New Member

Member

Member

Wants to be startin somethin

Member

Skrub's sympathy case

Well-Known Member

Homeland Security

Member

Member

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Experiencing Furry Panic

simpering whimperer

Member

Member

Member

Dorito Dawg

Member

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers

Member

Member

Dorito Dawg

Member

Dorito Dawg

New Member

New Member

Skrub's sympathy case

Member

Member

Dorito Dawg

simpering whimperer

Member

canderson-lite

Skrub's sympathy case

Member

New Member

Dorito Dawg

canderson-lite

Member