16 Days in January—Determining Trade Deadline Activity

RSN Diaspora

molests goats for comedy
SoSH Member
Jul 29, 2005
8,666
Washington, DC
In the midst of a three-game losing streak that feels more like a ten-game streak after that Minneapolis monstrosity, we have the Suns tomorrow and then sixteen games in January to figure out whether we stand pat and try to limp into a play-in game, buy, or sell. In particular, the consecutive home-and-home series with the Knicks and Pacers seems a four-game stretch where they need to go on a winning streak to have any kind of hope. Trade deadline is 2/10.

It’s hard not to be in the sell camp right now, but nothing looks good: if I see one more hypothetical Jaylen for Ben Simmons trade, my head might explode (and it isn’t even really a true sell move). If the C’s decide to sell a vet for draft picks, is there anyone who would trade anything of value that didn’t include at least one of the Jays?If we assume not, and that either a buy or sell move would be either a complete non-starter (include Jays) or involve players that represent marginal change, then standing pat looks like the likeliest scenario. Maybe that leads to a late season run, but it’s hard to anticipate that over a nine or ten seed play-in game.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
58,245
So did you mean ‘games’, not ‘days’, in the subject line?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
14,068
Unless the Celtics go on some sort of run, standing pat would be GM malpractice. They would at least need to trade Schroeder, as the return should be a low 1st.

Big retool would probably need to wait until the offseason.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
507
Unless the Celtics go on some sort of run, standing pat would be GM malpractice. They would at least need to trade Schroeder, as the return should be a low 1st.

Big retool would probably need to wait until the offseason.
As has been hashed in other threads, a first for Schroder is a very optimistic return.

The likelihood that he is gone at the end of the year, does not automatically equal trade him. Two considerations to balance relative to value of the asset coming back 1) what does selling Shroder for a future second do to the team's relationship with Brown/Tatum and/or the rest of their season and 2) Schroder's value in a playoff series/play in game. He is a high variance player capable. He can easily go for 30 and swing a couples games or a series.

That being said, if at the deadline they are well out of even the play-in, then everyone should be on the table and you take what you can get for Shroder.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
37,266
As has been hashed in other threads, a first for Schroder is a very optimistic return.

The likelihood that he is gone at the end of the year, does not automatically equal trade him. Two considerations to balance relative to value of the asset coming back 1) what does selling Shroder for a future second do to the team's relationship with Brown/Tatum and/or the rest of their season and 2) Schroder's value in a playoff series/play in game. He is a high variance player capable. He can easily go for 30 and swing a couples games or a series.

That being said, if at the deadline they are well out of even the play-in, then everyone should be on the table and you take what you can get for Shroder.
My concern is what you highlighted.

You can trade DS for picks so that fans can get angry at Brad for not selecting their binky in two or three years but what happens in the interim? It seems like the value of a second rounder (or maybe two) is fairly light versus effectively telling your star players that they have to do even more with even less. They have already been doing that for a few seasons.

If I had to guess at moves, Brad will try to get more cheap playmaking and scoring. And if one of the star names becomes available, maybe they look at a bigger move involving Brown however the bar for that seems high.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
As has been hashed in other threads, a first for Schroder is a very optimistic return.

The likelihood that he is gone at the end of the year, does not automatically equal trade him. Two considerations to balance relative to value of the asset coming back 1) what does selling Shroder for a future second do to the team's relationship with Brown/Tatum and/or the rest of their season and 2) Schroder's value in a playoff series/play in game. He is a high variance player capable. He can easily go for 30 and swing a couples games or a series.

That being said, if at the deadline they are well out of even the play-in, then everyone should be on the table and you take what you can get for Shroder.
This is where I've been at as well.

I'm not trading Schroder for whatever pick(s) they'd get back. On the high end say a late protected first with some dead salary back, on the low end a 2nd with no salary back.

I don't understand the need to trade an NBA rotation player, which we had a dearth of last season, just because they're not a title contender and he leaves after the season. The Celtics basically traded 4 second round picks for Evan Fournier and Josh Richardson since the beginning of last season and no one batted an eye. Those guys weren't the difference between being a contender or not either. They just help your team be more respectable.

Even as poorly as things have gone this year, they're still in a play in spot right now, and a hot streak away from being in 6th. As long as Tatum is reasonably healthy, their worst case scenario is they're fighting to stay in a play in spot come spring time. I'm choosing to compete as best I can now over hitting a long shot on a late draft pick.

If they can find a trade involving Schroder that brings you back a player on the Fournier/Richardson level that you might be able to keep after this season? Absolutely. If they're just trading him for weak pick(s), absolutely not.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,559
I would trade DS for almost any player under the age of 25 with years left on his 1st round rookie deal at the deadline barring us having wildly turned it around. DS is what he is, you aren't keeping him after this year and he's only valuable this year if the team is a strong playoff team.

If trading a late off-season mini-MLE signing who won't be back is going to change your relationship with Tatum and Brown, then they are just delusional about how the league works, are looking for reasons to justify leaving and you might as well start planning for the post-Jays era, because, if you can't trade flotsom without them being upset then they're going to be constantly upset.

I doubt it matters, this team is rolling towards a decision on what it is, and Brad has to make the call, does he make a major move (most likely including Smart) that re-shapes a lot of the roster, or does he roll out through another mediocre year and try again next offseason.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,743
I think two seconds is his floor (Cleveland has two high seconds and could certainly use him) and a late first is his ceiling. This team is going nowhere and needs to pool some assets together to get better in the off-season. DS is one of those assets. I’d also probably prefer to see more of Nesmith and Pritchard and Langford for the rest of this season.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
14,068
I would trade DS for almost any player under the age of 25 with years left on his 1st round rookie deal at the deadline barring us having wildly turned it around. DS is what he is, you aren't keeping him after this year and he's only valuable this year if the team is a strong playoff team.

If trading a late off-season mini-MLE signing who won't be back is going to change your relationship with Tatum and Brown, then they are just delusional about how the league works, are looking for reasons to justify leaving and you might as well start planning for the post-Jays era, because, if you can't trade flotsom without them being upset then they're going to be constantly upset.

I doubt it matters, this team is rolling towards a decision on what it is, and Brad has to make the call, does he make a major move (most likely including Smart) that re-shapes a lot of the roster, or does he roll out through another mediocre year and try again next offseason.
Bingo. Honestly have no idea why there is so much push back to trading Dennis Fucking Schroeder if the team is looking up at the ass end of the play-in seeding.

Currently, the Celtics are 10th in the ECF. On the plus side, that's good enough for the play-in, and they are only 3 games out of the loss column for finishing 6th. On the minus side, Toronto has 4 games in hand while the Hawks have 1, and the Celtics are closer to 12th than 6th.

Schroeder, with his current contract, has value only to a team that is a serious playoff contender. If the Celtics are sitting in or around the 6/7 range, then Schroeder stays unless Stevens gets the proverbial offer he cannot refuse (seems unlikely), or he is moved as part of a bigger deal (also unlikely).

If the Celtics are sitting 12th, I see no reason to keep Schroeder. His presence alone is not going to turn a 12th seed into a team that is going to go deep in the playoffs. The asset they get back, even if it is a 2nd rounder, could be helpful in the inevitable retool/restructure/rebuild of the team that Stevens will have to do in the offseason. And anyone that thinks Stevens cannot get a 2nd rounder for DS is delusional on the negative side.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,453
Santa Monica
I think two seconds is his floor (Cleveland has two high seconds and could certainly use him) and a late first is his ceiling. This team is going nowhere and needs to pool some assets together to get better in the off-season. DS is one of those assets. I’d also probably prefer to see more of Nesmith and Pritchard and Langford for the rest of this season.
I'm not sure what his trade ceiling is, depends on injuries between now and Feb 10

Every contender can bid for him since his salary is so easy to match
The same could not be said of Evan Fournier last year, which is thrown around as a comp. That is a huge deal since every contender can use a ballhandler that averages 16ppg from the bench.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
Bingo. Honestly have no idea why there is so much push back to trading Dennis Fucking Schroeder if the team is looking up at the ass end of the play-in seeding.

Currently, the Celtics are 10th in the ECF. On the plus side, that's good enough for the play-in, and they are only 3 games out of the loss column for finishing 6th. On the minus side, Toronto has 4 games in hand while the Hawks have 1, and the Celtics are closer to 12th than 6th.

Schroeder, with his current contract, has value only to a team that is a serious playoff contender. If the Celtics are sitting in or around the 6/7 range, then Schroeder stays unless Stevens gets the proverbial offer he cannot refuse (seems unlikely), or he is moved as part of a bigger deal (also unlikely).

If the Celtics are sitting 12th, I see no reason to keep Schroeder. His presence alone is not going to turn a 12th seed into a team that is going to go deep in the playoffs. The asset they get back, even if it is a 2nd rounder, could be helpful in the inevitable retool/restructure/rebuild of the team that Stevens will have to do in the offseason. And anyone that thinks Stevens cannot get a 2nd rounder for DS is delusional on the negative side.
It's because Dennis Fucking Schroeder is an actual NBA rotation player and I'm old enough to remember all the way back to last year when the Celtics would've killed to have an actual NBA rotation player coming off their bench.

If they were sitting 12th right now, they'd be a half game out of the play in. Brad Stevens would have to be clairvoyant to know on trade deadline day, when the Celtics still have 26 games left, to know they were going to miss the playoffs.

And, who was arguing that the Celtics couldn't get a 2nd for Schroder?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
14,068
It's because Dennis Fucking Schroeder is an actual NBA rotation player and I'm old enough to remember all the way back to last year when the Celtics would've killed to have an actual NBA rotation player coming off their bench.

If they were sitting 12th right now, they'd be a half game out of the play in. Brad Stevens would have to be clairvoyant to know on trade deadline day, when the Celtics still have 26 games left, to know they were going to miss the playoffs.

And, who was arguing that the Celtics couldn't get a 2nd for Schroder?
Likely by the time the trade deadline comes around, the 12th seed will be more than half game out of the play-in.

The problem is that if the Celtics are sitting 12th on deadline day, then what value is Schroder to them beyond being a rotation player in a lost season? Because the 10th seed in the ECF is not getting past the first round, Schroder or no Schroder. Schroder is gone next season no matter what due to the way the salary cap works; doubtful that even a sign-and-trade could work. His walking for nothing means one less asset the team has. And if the team does finish the season as the 10th seed, I'm going to say Stevens needs to do a hell of a lot more this offseason than the tired "run it back with Smart and the Jays" strategy. And the extra asset that Schroder nets in a trade could be helpful.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
Likely by the time the trade deadline comes around, the 12th seed will be more than half game out of the play-in.

The problem is that if the Celtics are sitting 12th on deadline day, then what value is Schroder to them beyond being a rotation player in a lost season? Because the 10th seed in the ECF is not getting past the first round, Schroder or no Schroder. Schroder is gone next season no matter what due to the way the salary cap works; doubtful that even a sign-and-trade could work. His walking for nothing means one less asset the team has. And if the team does finish the season as the 10th seed, I'm going to say Stevens needs to do a hell of a lot more this offseason than the tired "run it back with Smart and the Jays" strategy. And the extra asset that Schroder nets in a trade could be helpful.
Because there's 26 games left, and there's a near zero chance they would be sure they aren't making the playoffs as long as Tatum is healthy.

Making the playoffs doesn't equal a lost season. Playoff games are fun. Fans like watching them. Players like playing in them. Only one team gets to win the title every year. If the plan is to just pitch out your rotation players that aren't going to be staying long term unless you're a title contender, you're going to end up with lots of late 1sts/2nds and a bummed out Jayson Tatum when you're selling off parts for picks every February.

Like, say you get two 2nds for Schroder. Is that exciting? What second rounder has made the biggest impact on the Celtics recently? Semi Ojeleye?

You probably have to go all the way back to Big Baby to find a bigger impact. I'm totally fine missing out on a couple Ojeleyes and letting Schroder play it out if that's the return.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,743
Making the playoffs doesn't equal a lost season. Playoff games are fun. Fans like watching them. Players like playing in them.
I didn't find watching the playoffs super fun last year. Nor did I enjoy watching the second round exit vs. the Bucks in Kyrie's last year. 2020? Yes, that was fun - although I felt pretty frustrated that I feel like they lost to a less talented Miami team. But, overall, that was fun. Unfortunately, if your team isn't really competitive with the top teams, the playoffs aren't that much fun - and I wouldn't think the players really enjoy getting blown out, either.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
2,725
We all agree DS is a good player.

Brad should get his GM license revoked if he settles for one or two 2nds
But, why? The precedent of trades of similar players suggests that’s all that is likely to be out there. A half season of Schroder just isn’t that valuable.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
But, why? The precedent of trades of similar players suggests that’s all that is likely to be out there. A half season of Schroder just isn’t that valuable.
Yep. Trading DS will be more of a dump to play the young players than getting assets back.

I'd move him for a few seconds too.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,743
What I'm a bit concerned about is that the Celtics have a very easy schedule coming up with playing a bunch of teams with losing records. If they muddle through that going 3-3 or 4-2 or whatever, the front office might think the team actually has a chance. A chance that will quickly evaporate once they start playing good teams again (after the deadline).
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,453
Santa Monica
But, why? The precedent of trades of similar players suggests that’s all that is likely to be out there. A half season of Schroder just isn’t that valuable.
If PBS can't get a young player with potential or a late 1st (to be used in a bigger deal by the Summer) then just play it out. 2nds can actually be purchased on draft day, they have no value other than putting more/less $$$ in Wyc's pocket. That's where I draw the line.

Where is the precedence of getting the player of Schroders' age/skill, at such a low salary match?
Orlando had exactly one buyer (Celtics large TPE) to dump 4mths of Fournier at his salary, yet they received (2) 2nds.
Schroder's market could easily be 8 buyers. Every contender could use him and ALL have crap to match. You have to be a complete pessimist to suggest DS would only get a 2nd.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
14,068
If PBS can't get a young player with potential or a late 1st (to be used in a bigger deal by the Summer) then just play it out. 2nds can actually be purchased on draft day, they have no value other than putting more/less $$$ in Wyc's pocket. That's where I draw the line.

Where is the precedence of getting the player of Schroders' age/skill, at such a low salary match?
Orlando had exactly one buyer (Celtics large TPE) to dump 4mths of Fournier at his salary, yet they received (2) 2nds.
Schroder's market could easily be 8 buyers. Every contender could use him and ALL have crap to match. You have to be a complete pessimist to suggest DS would only get a 2nd.
I do wonder if Wyc is going to push Stevens to get under the tax line,. We may not agree, but that's not a Stevens decision, much like it wasn't Ainge's last year.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
34,333
Melrose, MA
You can trade DS for picks so that fans can get angry at Brad for not selecting their binky in two or three years but what happens in the interim? It seems like the value of a second rounder (or maybe two) is fairly light versus effectively telling your star players that they have to do even more with even less. They have already been doing that for a few seasons.
I find it hard to believe that Brown, Tatum, and their agents are going to view the situation in the same way that a talk radio caller would. Building a foundation on a guy whose contributions this year have been limited and who is a virtual certainty to be gone next year is a questionable decision. I think it would be a strange hill for player agents to fight on.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
If PBS can't get a young player with potential or a late 1st (to be used in a bigger deal by the Summer) then just play it out. 2nds can actually be purchased on draft day, they have no value other than putting more/less $$$ in Wyc's pocket. That's where I draw the line.

Where is the precedence of getting the player of Schroders' age/skill, at such a low salary match?
Orlando had exactly one buyer (Celtics large TPE) to dump 4mths of Fournier at his salary, yet they received (2) 2nds.
Schroder's market could easily be 8 buyers. Every contender could use him and ALL have crap to match. You have to be a complete pessimist to suggest DS would only get a 2nd.
Name the 8 buyers. You have to squint to find one. Schroder is not valuable.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
2,725
The only players traded for first rounders at the deadline in the past five years are: (and most of these are obviously

2021: Aaron Gordon, Vucevic, Oladipo
2020: Russell
2019: Fultz
2018: Frye/IT - Clarkson/Nance
2017: Lou Williams, Noel

It’s possible that a bidding war could develop for DS, but it seems like that’s a pretty rare deadline occurrence for a player of his caliber. What’s the best comp here, Lou Williams for Corey Brewer and a late first which turned into Tony Bradley? Which seems like a stretch considering Lou was a much more highly regarded player at that time.

Schroder isn’t that good, it’s why he was available to the C’s for so little, no?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
If DS could re-sign with the Celtics, would you want him back? And at what amount?

People will point out the Lakers offer but DS is worth less now than he was then. It would have been a bad contract. Who wants to pay DS 4/80? Anyone? 4/60? What does he actually get on the open market this offseason? I doubt it's close to the Lakers offer.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
37,266
I find it hard to believe that Brown, Tatum, and their agents are going to view the situation in the same way that a talk radio caller would. Building a foundation on a guy whose contributions this year have been limited and who is a virtual certainty to be gone next year is a questionable decision. I think it would be a strange hill for player agents to fight on.
If Tatum and/or Brown are ok with a deal and the team explicitly punting on the season, fine. My concern is that a shedding of NBA experience combined with continued middling results are simply going to increase the odds that one/both demand out.

Second round picks are fun to dream on but even if the Cs were assured of getting a league average player from the draft for next season out of a trade (and we know this is impossible), I am not sure I would deal Schroder. Again, it would hinge on how Tatum and Brown perceive the move and the franchise overall.

Some here keep focusing on ways to add talent to the roster but at some point in the not so distant future we may be confronted with one or both of Tatum/Brown demanding a trade. That's a bad place and should be avoided at all costs imo.
 

RSN Diaspora

molests goats for comedy
SoSH Member
Jul 29, 2005
8,666
Washington, DC
Name the 8 buyers. You have to squint to find one. Schroder is not valuable.
I think “not valuable” is overstating matters a bit, but he’s almost certainly not valuable enough to command a return that would satisfy those content to ride him out for the rest of the season. If we accept that this isn’t even close to the Celtics’ year and that come February we’re in a roughly similar spot as now, I really don’t see the downside to taking whatever is available for a player sure to be gone after the season.
 

GB5

lurker
Aug 26, 2013
187
Empty the tank. I know they will be pissed but for approximately the last 1.5 years Jason and Jaylen have shown nothing to suggest that if you add around the fringes that you have a deep playoff run in you. Schroeder goes, if it is 2nd round pick, so be it. He is a professional, but see what Al's value is, he has a good contract number next year and it is only partially guaranteed. Grant Williams has been sensational shooting threes from the corner. Does some contender who can drive and kick (Lakers) want him for a 2nd? Richardson...not sure what his value is, but send him. Most importantly, Pritchard, Nesmith and Romeo get 25 minutes a night. You need to figure now if they are worth rotation spots starting next year. If overhauling the roster like this causes you 4-5 losses, so be it, it may help your drafting position.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Grant Williams for a 2nd rounder is an awful deal. You do know how old Grant Williams is right?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,453
Santa Monica
Name the 8 buyers. You have to squint to find one. Schroder is not valuable.
Having a ballhandler that can come in off the bench and score 20pts helps. I mean he's averaged over 17ppg/5 apg over the last 5 seasons. Peruse the top NBA teams record-wise, pick any 8 that don't have that bench piece

It's a combination of an easy contract to match + a rotational player for the playoffs that drives his value

Grant Williams has been sensational shooting threes from the corner. Does some contender who can drive and kick (Lakers) want him for a 2nd? Richardson...not sure what his value is, but send him. Most importantly, Pritchard, Nesmith and Romeo get 25 minutes a night. You need to figure now if they are worth rotation spots starting next year. If overhauling the roster like this causes you 4-5 losses, so be it, it may help your drafting position.
That really doesn't work. To the Lakers? I'm assuming that's some sort of joke. The Cellar is salty right now so humor can be lost by some of us

Grant Williams addresses one of the Celtic's biggest weaknesses: efficient 3pt shooting

2nds are meh
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
507
I find it hard to believe that Brown, Tatum, and their agents are going to view the situation in the same way that a talk radio caller would. Building a foundation on a guy whose contributions this year have been limited and who is a virtual certainty to be gone next year is a questionable decision. I think it would be a strange hill for player agents to fight on.
This is not an agent thing, it's a player thing. As long as the Celtics are in the playoff hunt, if PBS trades Schroder for a second or a couple of seconds, the message to Brown and Tatum = we are punting this season > we don't believe this team can make a playoff run > we don't believe that this core can make a run > we don't believe in you. Even if this board and PBS believe all those things, that does not mean it is a good idea to communicate that to Brown/Tatum. You don't a become Tatum or Brown without having immense amount of confidence and self-belief.

NBA contracts are short now. Tatum's five year deal has a player option on the end. So it is really a four year deal, which means it's really a three year deal - because come the 2024 off-season (or even sooner) he can inform the team privately or publicly than he won't be picking up that option and wants out, so they should trade him now while they can get something.

That is not to say that keeping Schroder guarantees Tatum stays put, just that moving Schroder for something that does not improve this team this year and is unlikely to improve it in the near future, makes a trade demand somewhat more likely. To me a second is not worth that.

Obviously trading DS for a player is a different calculus entirely.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Having a ballhandler that can come in off the bench and score 20pts helps. I mean he's averaged over 17ppg/5 apg over the last 5 seasons. Peruse the top NBA teams record-wise, pick any 8 that don't have that bench piece

It's a combination of an easy contract to match + a rotational player for the playoffs that drives his value
You sidestepped my question. Name 8 teams. There aren't.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
34,333
Melrose, MA
This is not an agent thing, it's a player thing. As long as the Celtics are in the playoff hunt, if PBS trades Schroder for a second or a couple of seconds, the message to Brown and Tatum = we are punting this season > we don't believe this team can make a playoff run > we don't believe that this core can make a run > we don't believe in you. Even if this board and PBS believe all those things, that does not mean it is a good idea to communicate that to Brown/Tatum. You don't a become Tatum or Brown without having immense amount of confidence and self-belief.
First of all, it is a player AND agent thing because players exercise their leverage through their agents.

Second, we are talking about Denis Schroder here. The way he is written about in this thread makes him sound like a first ballot HoFer. To my eye, and looking at his numbers, his net impact on this team has been, and likely will be, 0.0 wins.

I think Brad can move a net zero guy without losing the team. Not that he can take it for granted, he needs to maintain the relationships, but moving Acroder isn’t a white flag deal.
 

RSN Diaspora

molests goats for comedy
SoSH Member
Jul 29, 2005
8,666
Washington, DC
Games like today’s remind me that this team is capable of making a run if they ever get it all together. The next six games are against bad-to-mediocre teams—if they have a spark in them, it’s probably now or never.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
14,068
The Celtics currently have 16 games in January and 20 remaining until the trade deadline.

The magic numbers are 7 and 9. Exceed those win totals in the 16 and 20 games, then it's likely that Schroder stays or gets dealt as part of a buying move. Fall below, and it's hard to see Stevens worrying about the impact of trading a one-and-done player will be on the psyches of Tatum and Brown, especially with Wyc breathing down his neck about the luxury tax. If they meet those win totals exactly, it becomes a coin flip.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
I didn't find watching the playoffs super fun last year. Nor did I enjoy watching the second round exit vs. the Bucks in Kyrie's last year. 2020? Yes, that was fun - although I felt pretty frustrated that I feel like they lost to a less talented Miami team. But, overall, that was fun. Unfortunately, if your team isn't really competitive with the top teams, the playoffs aren't that much fun - and I wouldn't think the players really enjoy getting blown out, either.
I enjoy all playoff games. I also enjoy late regular season games fighting to get into the playoffs and/or seeding.

I'd bet you enjoy those things too in the moment, but when you look back and they lost you think that sucked. Live in the moment.

Like, you didn't enjoy Tatum dropping 50 on Washington to win the play in game last yeat? Then dropped another 50 on Brooklyn in a playoff win? Then followed it up with 40-7-5 and 32-9-5 in the next two games. You didn't enjoy that? Really? I enjoyed the hell out of that.

I do wonder if Wyc is going to push Stevens to get under the tax line,. We may not agree, but that's not a Stevens decision, much like it wasn't Ainge's last year.
My guess is this is exactly what's going to happen. My only hope is that if Wyc does push for that, they're able to dump Juancho off on someone rather than someone who gets minutes.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,519
around the way
You sidestepped my question. Name 8 teams. There aren't.
Every playoff team has a guy on their roster who is worse than Schroeder, and an extra guy that can handle the ball is never a bad thing.

Admittedly there are a couple of teams with foolish depth of ballhandlers, so they wouldn't be very interested. But I think that you're underestimating other teams' depth. We have seen plenty of playoff series swing because a couple of injuries that led to non-NBA bodies getting real minutes. I remember Shamet getting ballhandler minutes on the Clips a couple of years ago. It'd be embarrassing for a GM with real shitbums as bench PGs to pass on Schroeder at his salary.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Every playoff team has a guy on their roster who is worse than Schroeder, and an extra guy that can handle the ball is never a bad thing.

Admittedly there are a couple of teams with foolish depth of ballhandlers, so they wouldn't be very interested. But I think that you're underestimating other teams' depth. We have seen plenty of playoff series swing because a couple of injuries that led to non-NBA bodies getting real minutes. I remember Shamet getting ballhandler minutes on the Clips a couple of years ago. It'd be embarrassing for a GM with real shitbums as bench PGs to pass on Schroeder at his salary.
Then why is it so hard to name a few teams that would want Schroder at the price of a 1st round pick? Chicago can't find time for Coby White, so they are going to trade for DS? Memphis is worried about being able to pay Tyus Jones after this season... so they are going to trade for DS?

Name a few teams and what they would actually give us. Phoenix? GS? Milwaukee? Miami? Cleveland? Philly? Dallas? Washington? Who is trading for DS?

"Pick a team, every playoff team has a guy worse." So name a landing place.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,453
Santa Monica
Then why is it so hard to name a few teams that would want Schroder at the price of a 1st round pick? Chicago can't find time for Coby White, so they are going to trade for DS? Memphis is worried about being able to pay Tyus Jones after this season... so they are going to trade for DS?

Name a few teams and what they would actually give us. Phoenix? GS? Milwaukee? Miami? Cleveland? Philly? Dallas? Washington? Who is trading for DS?

"Pick a team, every playoff team has a guy worse." So name a landing place.
Nets, Cavs, GS, Miami, Bucks, Memphis, 76ers, Clippers to start
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
There will be better players bought out than DS. It's TT all over. That ended up working out somehow, though.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,559
Name the 8 buyers. You have to squint to find one. Schroder is not valuable.
Ignoring your goalpost move of "for a 1st" here are the teams that will likely be interested in Schroder if he's made available:
BKN, CHI, MIL, MIA, CLE, PHI, CHA, GS, PHX, UTA, LAL, LAC, MEM, DAL minimum. He is cheap and he'd make most team's rotation come playoff time, especially with injuries/COVID.
All those teams and probably more kick the tires, now if they would give us enough that Brad makes the deal, that may be a different question.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,453
Santa Monica
Yeah, none of those teams are giving us a 1st for DS and the Cavs just acquired Rondo.

Keep dreaming the dream, though.
I'm not terribly bothered or dreaming on the numerous assets that Schroder brings Brad. BUT we probably win 2 of those 3 recent losses if he played.

He's the Celtics 3rd best scorer and has been the 3rd best scorer on several playoff teams
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,519
around the way
Ignoring your goalpost move of "for a 1st" here are the teams that will likely be interested in Schroder if he's made available:
BKN, CHI, MIL, MIA, CLE, PHI, CHA, GS, PHX, UTA, LAL, LAC, MEM, DAL minimum. He is cheap and he'd make most team's rotation come playoff time, especially with injuries/COVID.
All those teams and probably more kick the tires, now if they would give us enough that Brad makes the deal, that may be a different question.
Exactly. DS might not be moved. Maybe nobody wants to bother to send a 1st, so maybe Brad holds onto him. Or maybe Brad would be fine with a couple of seconds, or maybe he gets an underperforming or young guy who's blocked at a different position. None of these would be all that surprising.

But the "who would be interested in DS" take is weird imo.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
2,105
Exactly. DS might not be moved. Maybe nobody wants to bother to send a 1st, so maybe Brad holds onto him. Or maybe Brad would be fine with a couple of seconds, or maybe he gets an underperforming or young guy who's blocked at a different position. None of these would be all that surprising.

But the "who would be interested in DS" take is weird imo.
Honestly the whole discourse is weird. Moving Schroeder is not going to be something that makes the Jays want to leave. It’s a small thing and small things can add up but I refuse to believe that in the post mortem there will be a line like “well it was all going great but then Brad Stevens traded Dennis Schroeder in a season where we already sucked and then I knew I had to get out because Boston wasn’t serious!!”

The guy is just not that good or that much of a needle mover. He also has a reputation of being a pretty bad teammate and not that well liked (which was one of the reasons a lot of people were shocked that Horford gave him a strong recommendation).

If they can get a 1st for him I understand moving him and endorse it. He’s not a great fit on the team, despite his ability to get to the hole, because of his ball stopping and mediocre shooting. I don’t think an extra 2nd or two is worth it at this point but in a week or two I might change my mind
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,559
Honestly the whole discourse is weird. Moving Schroeder is not going to be something that makes the Jays want to leave. It’s a small thing and small things can add up but I refuse to believe that in the post mortem there will be a line like “well it was all going great but then Brad Stevens traded Dennis Schroeder in a season where we already sucked and then I knew I had to get out because Boston wasn’t serious!!”

The guy is just not that good or that much of a needle mover. He also has a reputation of being a pretty bad teammate and not that well liked (which was one of the reasons a lot of people were shocked that Horford gave him a strong recommendation).

If they can get a 1st for him I understand moving him and endorse it. He’s not a great fit on the team, despite his ability to get to the hole, because of his ball stopping and mediocre shooting. I don’t think an extra 2nd or two is worth it at this point but in a week or two I might change my mind
I think the most likely thing is the team gets a bit better and we keep him because we're in the non-play-in spot hunt
If we fall out, I think the two most likely returns on Schroder are... heavily protected 1st, or past 1st who hasn't put it together yet and a couple 2nds.