Yeah, I’ll believe a Smart trade when I see it. There just aren’t many landing spots where the Celtics can get equal or better value.
16 Days in January—Determining Trade Deadline Activity
- Thread starter RSN Diaspora
- Start date
Jared Weiss of the Athletic had a longer portion of the quote from Smart which is more of a rallying cry than a goodbye, for whatever that is worth
https://theathletic.com/3087909/2022/01/23/celtics-jayson-tatum-breaks-drought-with-another-50-point-spectacle-after-pep-talk-from-marcus-smart/
I agree, but in the situation where a deal has been pretty much finalized, I could imagine the Celtics telling Smart, someone who's been with the organization for a long time, that he'll be traded on Tuesday. I think that would be a fair way to treat a player who has been with the team a long time and just signed an extension. But, completely agree, you wouldn't tell them they are being shopped.
In any situation where the deal is pretty much finalized, Marcus Smart doesn't play yesterday.
I'd guess Stevens has told his agent that he's heavily shopping Marcus Smart and the agent relied it to him. Whether a deal is struck or not is another matter. Plus Marcus Smart isn't exactly new to being on the trade block or in trade rumors. He's probably going through the motions at this point.
Yes, I was about to say the same thing about Marcus not playing if a deal was essentially done. Stevens doesn’t even need to communicate this with how close the agent/GM relationships are throughout the league. Word leaks quickly. Then there are the times an agent is looking to move his guy and actively involved in the process although that seems to mostly occur in the summer with sign-n-trades to secure the client the best contract.
I get that Marcus has a legion of haters who want him gone - even if the return is a mid second round pick and a couple of bad contracts. The Smart part of this thread is an exercise in wishful thinking by that group.
This cannot be correct. We have a pretty detailed description of a despondent Smart who is resigned to being gone because his agent knows the team is deep in trade talks. Its here in black and white. Jared Weiss has to be carrying water for someone.
Yeah, these kinds of hyperbolic posts add nothing to the discussion so curious why we keep going down this path on this board.
"At all costs" is a figure of speech.
There are likely posters here who would view a dump of Smart into someone's salary cap space as addition by subtraction.
Nobody would view a trade of Smart for John Wall as a good thing.
There are definitely wide variances here in what people would accept as fair value for Smart. For example, I think the Duncan Robinson rumors are horrifying, but some might like that trade.
Name one poster willing to dump Marcus Smart for a mid 2nd rounder and some bad contracts. Hell, name one poster willing to dump him for a mid 2nd and no contracts coming back.
edit: I'm sure you could find a bunch willing to trade him for a 1st and a 2nd or 3rd year player who was once promising. I guess maybe Duncan Robinson is the "bad contract" but most (everyone maybe) said no to that.
I don't keep lists of who loves whom. Marcus gets more shit here than anyone except Ime. Plenty view him as an overrated small wing, poorly cast as a point guard, who's too lose with the ball, who brings as much damage with his launching as the good he brings with defense. If I felt that way about someone, I'd be happy to lose him for nothing. If that's connecting dots that aren't there, apologies for the tangent.
Geez guys. Are you really serious? Where are these posts and posters?
This is spot on imo. The trade proposals that come up from time to time strongly suggest that there are people here who feel like Smart is vastly overvalued not just by others but by the metrics. Why are we dancing around it?
Why does it matter which posters want to trade Marcus Smart, and the specific return those posters have in mind? The rules of this forum let us share our opinions on the team and specific players. Last I checked, Brad Stevens doesn't poll this forum prior to making trades.
I personally do not want to see Smart gone at any cost, and do think trading him for Duncan Robinson would be a bad mistake. I do think the "run it back with Smart and the Jays" strategy is getting stale and has not worked, and would like to see a new strategy for next season. That probably means Smart is the one to go, probably as part of a package of deal. But there are issues with trading Smart, in that it causes holes in other parts fo the roster, and I do think most posters agree with that.
I personally do not want to see Smart gone at any cost, and do think trading him for Duncan Robinson would be a bad mistake. I do think the "run it back with Smart and the Jays" strategy is getting stale and has not worked, and would like to see a new strategy for next season. That probably means Smart is the one to go, probably as part of a package of deal. But there are issues with trading Smart, in that it causes holes in other parts fo the roster, and I do think most posters agree with that.
Every player gets shit on here. No one is suggesting to dump Tatum for nothing (well one poster is suggesting to totally rebuild). No one is suggesting to dump Brown for nothing (many are suggesting to shop him for a different 2nd star). I don't like Marcus Smart and never have. I'd love for the C's to trade him, but not for nothing. Whenever Marcus's name does come up in trade rumors, usually Nighthob or someone else is there to shoot down the trade saying it's too much and that Smart's return would be a 1st round pick and/or a 2nd year player who had a bad 1st year. Just the opposite of "dump."
It's almost like a person can think he's overrated and poorly cast as a PG but still have value in a trade, or that the C's are better off with him than letting him go for 0 assets. To suggest anyone here is fine with dumping him for a mid 2nd round pick and another team's bad contract is just bad faith posting. We are allowed to have less than rosy opinions of players on the Celtics while acknowledging they have value.
There is a discussion here speculating about the imminent trade of a player because he came back from injury/Covid and said supportive things to his teammates after a pair of bad losses. Maybe he should have called a players-only meeting instead.
Agree with all of this too. I'd talk myself into Duncan Robinson if they did make that trade, but I'd hope for a better return. Whatever they do, I hope they don't half ass it at the trade deadline by acquiring Duncan Robinson for Marcus Smart and then trading JRich for a 1st rounder.
It's HRB.
edit: And RM. I agree Smart's comments don't really mean anything even if he ends up traded. It fits his personality and everything we know about him. Still, that doesn't suggest they want them dumped. Just that he may be traded.
I concede that I may have put words into people's mouths here (and that this tangent is already gettimg boring), but that's exactly what you just did too.
Talking about bad faith posting by responding to a scenario that nobody posted (taking on bad contracts for Marcus) is bizarre. Unless I missed that scenario here...which is possible.
In my mind the overall objectives between today and opening day 2022-2023 in November (ish) include:
1. Add a distributor - likely a PG but in theory someone else
2. Ensure at least one additional creator (which could be a bench scorer, e.g. a Bogdanovich even Gallo type, or ideally a Hayward-type legit starter). Ideally this is a single player for 1 and 2, but to get that you need to somehow get a star PG which seems unlikely
3. Support continued development of Jays offensively - which may be about system, coaching them to engage differently, adding a distributor, etc.
4. Build on overall good defensive momentum (note that Horford moving is a likely path to achieve 1-2 above, and 5 below and will impact this one)
5. Maintain some level of asset flexibility as the above likely doesn't make Celts a 2022-2023 contender and more will likely be needed
I personally would argue that "confirm Ime is the guy" as a sixth though that is a bit different and has its own thread
1. Add a distributor - likely a PG but in theory someone else
2. Ensure at least one additional creator (which could be a bench scorer, e.g. a Bogdanovich even Gallo type, or ideally a Hayward-type legit starter). Ideally this is a single player for 1 and 2, but to get that you need to somehow get a star PG which seems unlikely
3. Support continued development of Jays offensively - which may be about system, coaching them to engage differently, adding a distributor, etc.
4. Build on overall good defensive momentum (note that Horford moving is a likely path to achieve 1-2 above, and 5 below and will impact this one)
5. Maintain some level of asset flexibility as the above likely doesn't make Celts a 2022-2023 contender and more will likely be needed
I personally would argue that "confirm Ime is the guy" as a sixth though that is a bit different and has its own thread
You missed that scenario. HIs post is 100% bad faith posting. Is it not? He's right about the part that it's wishful thinking to take Smart's comments as him being traded. If a trade were imminent, he wouldn't be playing.
Originally, I thought Ime would get 2 years unless the team finishes like 30-52. I still believe that.
I also assumed if 21/22 plays out the way it has so far, and 22/23 is more of the same... Ime would be fired.
What I realized just know is if Ime does get fired after year 2... there's a good chance Stevens actually goes with him.
22/23 is going to confirm one way or the other whether PBS and CIU are the guys going forward. Do people envision a scenario where Stevens is in place to pick another head coach after just 2 seasons? He lives or dies with Ime.
My post was in response to the interpretation that Smart knew he was getting traded based on his words and to the idea that he already knew. It was posted under the assumption this is what occurred not that this was what occurred.
Every time I see Gallo’s name involved in a trade here all I can think of is how an immobile Raef and Wally looked when they were here. Hard pass please.
I suggested trading Smart for a 1st, youth and expiring contracts. I then suggested trading JRich for a 1st and expiring's. Then using one of those picks to dump Horford in order to sign a max guy. Apparently, even that doesn't get us far enough under the cap to sign Beal though. Not sure what other possible max players are available in FA this off season, and if any of them would fit into the C's budget sans Smart, Rich and Horford.
JB/JT/TL/Max/??
PP
GW
RL
AN
2 1st
Whatever youth you got back for Smart
If Max was a point guard, GW could slide into the ?? role.
I'm not really a cap guy though and @mcpickl said the team couldn't even afford Beal on Max if they stripped the team of everyone but JT/JB/TL. I believe the max for Beal next year is a shade under $36.5 million.
I might be missing one, but out of all the possible max players, the only one I'd be interested in outside of Beal is Zach Lavine... as far as I can tell the max for him next year would be 33.6 million.
So my plan isn't really a possibility.
JB/JT/TL/Max/??
PP
GW
RL
AN
2 1st
Whatever youth you got back for Smart
If Max was a point guard, GW could slide into the ?? role.
I'm not really a cap guy though and @mcpickl said the team couldn't even afford Beal on Max if they stripped the team of everyone but JT/JB/TL. I believe the max for Beal next year is a shade under $36.5 million.
I might be missing one, but out of all the possible max players, the only one I'd be interested in outside of Beal is Zach Lavine... as far as I can tell the max for him next year would be 33.6 million.
So my plan isn't really a possibility.
Yeah. Huerter, Hunter or bust. Though if there was a chance for the latter, it probably passed.
So there is a case for the Celtics as buyers, which is that they are the 8 seed now, and nobody has run away in the East so they could easily be top 4 pretty quickly.
Now, if they are buyers, we've all pointed to playmakers/shooting as their needs.
I do think they would be better off even if going for it to swap out Schroder for a more disciplined offense running PG who can stretch.
However... I also think they need a big. We've complained all year about how starting 2 bigs means that Horford gets tired and we lose the no big or Enes minutes more than not, sometimes by a lot.
Now, this has led to a call to breakup the 2 bigs. However.......
Among 5 man units with 100+ minutes played this year (there are 53 of them), the Celtics' starting 5 is the best defensive unit in the league and 4th in Net rating. So MAYBE, the answer is that we need to target a stretch 4/5 who can stagger in to give Horford and TL longer/more breathers, and not get obliterated like Enes.
So who is available and won't cost a starter (so no Collins, Valanciunas, Turner, Grant etc.)
Mike Muscala- 3.5M with a team option for the same, probably takes a 2nd? Maybe you give up a couple 2nds and get OKC to eat some salary.
Olynyk- harder salary match at $12M (we have a TPE but I doubt Wyc is paying tax for Kelly)
Covington- like Olynyk 13M
I think it's the thought behind the Jalen Green rumors too.
Two bigs has worked pretty well when it's on the floor, it's the domino effect of those minutes that is the bigger issue. They need to add a more flexible big than Enes if they want to play that way.
Now, if they are buyers, we've all pointed to playmakers/shooting as their needs.
I do think they would be better off even if going for it to swap out Schroder for a more disciplined offense running PG who can stretch.
However... I also think they need a big. We've complained all year about how starting 2 bigs means that Horford gets tired and we lose the no big or Enes minutes more than not, sometimes by a lot.
Now, this has led to a call to breakup the 2 bigs. However.......
Among 5 man units with 100+ minutes played this year (there are 53 of them), the Celtics' starting 5 is the best defensive unit in the league and 4th in Net rating. So MAYBE, the answer is that we need to target a stretch 4/5 who can stagger in to give Horford and TL longer/more breathers, and not get obliterated like Enes.
So who is available and won't cost a starter (so no Collins, Valanciunas, Turner, Grant etc.)
Mike Muscala- 3.5M with a team option for the same, probably takes a 2nd? Maybe you give up a couple 2nds and get OKC to eat some salary.
Olynyk- harder salary match at $12M (we have a TPE but I doubt Wyc is paying tax for Kelly)
Covington- like Olynyk 13M
I think it's the thought behind the Jalen Green rumors too.
Two bigs has worked pretty well when it's on the floor, it's the domino effect of those minutes that is the bigger issue. They need to add a more flexible big than Enes if they want to play that way.
The other thing about getting a big who can stretch the floor a bit is that is a player they likely need next year anyway, as I don't believe Horford will be on the team all of next year (though I acknowledge there's uncertainty there).
The theory on Hernangomez I expect was that he could be that big---but in practice, was not.
Grant can, in some matchups, be the other big but I believe they need one more legit-sized big in the rotation by start of next year and if they can get that now, all the better.
As CellarDoor says, I am of the view they like two bigs more than many here and they get there for a good reason---it tends to be better defensively much as people don't like the aesthetics. That is what the data has shown for a while, and also to some degree with other teams.
The theory on Hernangomez I expect was that he could be that big---but in practice, was not.
Grant can, in some matchups, be the other big but I believe they need one more legit-sized big in the rotation by start of next year and if they can get that now, all the better.
As CellarDoor says, I am of the view they like two bigs more than many here and they get there for a good reason---it tends to be better defensively much as people don't like the aesthetics. That is what the data has shown for a while, and also to some degree with other teams.
I agree. I was saying that would be the earliest point to worry about it, as a couple people were already worried about him walking away.
I wouldn't worry til he was going into the last year of his deal.
Beal will hit ten years of experience this summer.
His max will be a bit over 41.5M if the cap projections stay where they are
They are 5.5 games back of 4th with 34 to go. Unless the 4 teams in front of them completely collapse, they aren't going to be in the top 4 anytime soon. They are 2.5 behind Charlotte, 4 behind Philly, 4.5 behind Cleveland and 5.5 behind the Bucks.
I'm going to guess the 4 seed will require 50 wins. To finish with 50 wins, the C's would have to go 26-8. Even if all those teams go .500 or 1 game below .500 the rest of the way, the 4 seed would require 47 wins. That would mean the C's need to go 23-11 over their next 34. It's not impossible but it's going to be a grind. If they go on a 9-10 game winning streak, that would make things easier.
I don't know if they should buy or sell, tbh. It depends on the deals being offered, and we will probably never get that information either. I just hope they do something, and I'll trust their judgement unless it's proven wrong.
And when I say do something, I don't mean for the sake of doing something. If there are really no deals out there that could possible improve the C's for this year or next (or both), then do nothing.
Agreed on the major points in this post, in addition to the success they've had with the two big starting lineup defensively, hasn't Ime said that part of the rationale is to avoid putting Tatum and Brown on bigger players? I think there's a wear and tear consideration here, or perhaps a player preference that we're not privy to (like AD playing the 5) as well.
I've been curious about Muscala's perceived trade value, as he would improve their rotation and their shooting without compromising their ability to get under the tax line this season. And has that flexibility for next year as well. Feels like exactly the kind of move they should be looking to make.
How often are their bigger players? Last night Ime went with 2 bigs when the Wiz had 0. In certain situations, 2 bigs definitely makes sense. Like vs Indiana.
I think the Celts are a hair over the luxury tax right now. With teams getting upwards of 10 million if they are under, I think you will see nearly every team that is close ducking under. So look for small deals like sending Dozier into someone's space or Schroder for a lottery ticket and a 2nd.
I think they play the year out with what they got for the most part and sort it out in the offseason.
I think they play the year out with what they got for the most part and sort it out in the offseason.
"Wyc is cheap" discussion notwithstanding, maybe the moneyball play here is to improve our roster and stay over the cap, taking advantage of other teams' desire for the 10M and getting under.
Do you think this is because of the 2 big lineup? I think it's because Horford is getting to play with the 4 best players on the team. Similar to when the Kenrick Perkins lineups were always great when he started with their 4 best players.
The Celtics have similarly awesome net ratings this season with the best 4 guys, and any of Schroder, Grant or Richardson instead of Horford. (They've absolutely mashed with Richardson, but it's only been for 23 minutes since they're running two bigs so often)
I agree they should be buyers, but I wouldn't be buying any rentals. I'd be trying to strike now to add guys with term that the Celtics can keep going forward. And I think now is the time, rather than the summer, since the Celtics can trade this years draft pick and many of the actual contenders can't. Also, I'd be trying to move Horford now while he matches as his full 27M salary going out, rather than the summer where his new team would have to guarantee more money to get him to count as higher than his current 14.5M guarantee for next year.
I'm assuming Beal is the Celtics #1 target. I'd try to have someone (Hi Jayson) get through to him that if he actually did want to come here, the best time to do that is now. As a sign and trade this summer, would be tough to fit him in under the hard cap and field the best team they can around him. If he made it clear to Washington he wanted to come here and threatened to walk this summer, could he be had for a bunch of picks?
I came up with a wild idea to take advantage of notorious cheapskate Tillman Fertita. Would Fertita give up a few of those Brooklyn/Milwaukee picks he has to save a bunch of money?
I came up with this as a core of an offer
Boston gets Beal
Washington gets Wall
Houston gets Horford and Thomas Bryants expiring deal.
Washington would also get whatever picks/kids Houston would give up to save 30+ million bucks on this deal, plus a pile of picks from Boston. There would have to be some fake seconds going to and fro to make deal legal, and probably a bit more salary this season headed to Houston for Washington/Boston to duck the tax.
If Beal doesn't want to come, or Washington/Houston were a no on this deal, I'd still be chasing other deals.
My second stop would be Detroit asking how many picks/kids do I need to give to get Grant and Olynyk with Horford as the matching salary?
I'm going to light up phone lines like Daryl Morey trying to take advantage of Horfords full salary as ballast now.
(Yes I'm vacation, and I have way too much time on my hands. Is it obvious?)
Last edited:
1st, why would Washington trade Beal and Bryant for Wall? I'm sure they could do way better for Beal, and I'm guessing they may want to keep Bryant around. On top of that, they already did the John Wall experience. Maybe that's why you think they would have interest in Wall though?
2nd, the bolded part is confusing. Is Washington getting kids and picks? That would make far more sense.
In more "Is Wyc cheap" news, Hollinger has some salary cap info on the Athletic:
https://theathletic.com/3088800/2022/01/24/what-blazers-sudden-surge-means-scouting-bulls-rookie-ayo-dosunmu-memphis-jalen-duren-hollingers-week-that-was/
https://theathletic.com/3088800/2022/01/24/what-blazers-sudden-surge-means-scouting-bulls-rookie-ayo-dosunmu-memphis-jalen-duren-hollingers-week-that-was/
Jaylen has a $500k bonus for playing 65 games so he can only miss 3 more games without losing out on that. His all star bonus of $1.5 million only kicks in if he also plays those 65 games. I think it is 50/50 that he makes the all-star team currently. There are plenty of injuries and he's an obvious choice as a replacement player. The Cs won't know for sure about the incentives until well after the deadline. So is ownership going to gamble the luxury tax on Jaylen not being healthy, or are they going to push hard to cut salary and leave the team understaffed in case he hits his incentives?
You stopped reading right there I guess?
Only needed to read one more line.
Yes. the Beal, Bryant, Wall is the salary matching.
They'd get a passel of picks from Boston for Beal, and from Houston to take on the Wall contract
Yes I wrote Houston where I meant to write Washington. Fixed. Thanks for catching that.
Last edited:
I think some of it is that, though also I think Al is good in that role, and you can't really compare the bench units given playing starters should hypothetically depress the numbers.
I also think it doesn't matter. That lineup is crushing against opposing starters, you don't really need to parse why it does so long as it does. It's easier to fix the bench than role the dice on a new starting 5.
Now, if they could get something of real long-term value for Al they should, that's just smart. However if they can't, it makes some sense to acknowledge that the current starting 5 is actually very good, and look for affordable ways to win (or at least get closer) in the other minutes.
It's tough to get good value for roleplayers outside exceptional circumstances (i.e. a star demands a trade to a specific team) unless you're discussing high end 3&D guys. Guys like Marcus or Dray Green always end up being more valuable to their existing teams than they would be on teams in general. The exception, as always, is contenders that need those sorts of guys to fill out their roster, but they never do have a lot to trade aside from salary filler and discounted firsts.
The whole "culture setter" thing is nonsense. Stars don't take cues from roleplayers. Good vet roleplayers can be a positive influence on young kids in terms of helping them past the deer-in-the-headlights stage. But mostly they help by being effective roster filler around your young stars.
I agree with you about his value. I just think most people are asking for the moon rather than looking to dump. The "culture setter" thing is a misnomer anyway because if you go from playing guys not named Marcus Smart 30 minutes a game to playing Marcus Smart 30 minutes a game... it's going to impact the play on the court. If one wants to call that "changing the culture" I guess. Acquiring any starter/removing players is going to have an impact on the court.
Just responding to Hollinger, there is absolutely zero chance the Celtics would sit JB to save on incentives. That would be such an incredibly stupid move, not just for their relationship with Brown but just their rep around the league.
The Beal situation is really unclear but there are a lot of reports that Grant is available with lots of rumored suitors. However, as you/others have pointed out, few teams in position to contend have anything other than extremely long-settle draft capital. Its certainly a question whether near-term Boston picks will be more or less valuable than, say late 2020s slots from a better team but the C's might be able to use the situation to add more talent without having to send out many NBA bodies. Jerami Grant wouldn't be a perfect fit for this roster but he would definitely be an upgrade assuming no complications from his injury.
Is less than zero a thing? If it is, that is the chance of this occuring. Wyc, Pags, Brad…..none of them have shown any indication of acting in such an unethical manner.
Which is also what Hollinger said. He just added that this means the Celtics will likely try to get $2.77 mil under so they dont' have to worry about it, which makes sense to me
Yeah he was just pointing it out as an option, then said... yeah they aren't burning the relationship with their 2nd best player over $12M.