Anthony Davis: No Loyalty

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
2,910
New York City
Well sure. But will they? Think you are way underselling Tatum here, FYI
Agreed. Factoring in things like contract, age, etc., Tatum is the best individual player realistically on the table in a potential Davis trade. So the question becomes whether NO wants to get the best individual player (and, potentially, Marcus Smart, who I think is much better than a "roleplayer" and who could also theoretically be flipped by NO for an additional piece or draft pick) or prefers a "quantity over quality" approach. Much depends, I think, on how much they value the Lakers' #4 pick - on the one hand, having that pick allows NO to pick their own preferred player, but on the other hand, what are the chances that player becomes as good as or better than Tatum?
 

BigMike

Dope
Dope
Sep 26, 2000
21,383
You are forgetting the MEM pick
Nice lottery ticket, but has roughly 10% chance of being Number one pick in 2021, and 60-70% chance of being 5th pick or lower (either in 2020, or 2021)

Yes, but they are getting Tatum. He is the prize and a somewhat down sophomore season doesn't change his outlook all that much
I guess, not sure he is the basket I want to put all my eggs into if I'm NO. I think tatum is going to be a very good player, and will almost certainly make the all star team at some point, likely more than one. I do think he is the best individual player who will be available in a deal to NO, But at the same time, I just don't see a guy who ever is going to be a top 15 guy in the league.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
Agreed. Factoring in things like contract, age, etc., Tatum is the best individual player realistically on the table in a potential Davis trade. So the question becomes whether NO wants to get the best individual player (and, potentially, Marcus Smart, who I think is much better than a "roleplayer" and who could also theoretically be flipped by NO for an additional piece or draft pick) or prefers a "quantity over quality" approach. Much depends, I think, on how much they value the Lakers' #4 pick - on the one hand, having that pick allows NO to pick their own preferred player, but on the other hand, what are the chances that player becomes as good as or better than Tatum?
My feeling is that the Knicks have the inside track here with #3. I honestly have Barrett #2 on my draft board, though I well understand Memphis taking Morant. Assuming that Barrett makes it to #3 the Knicks can probably fashion a package with Barrett, Knox, Robinson, and future picks that puts them in the drivers seat.

Even if Griffin isn't enthralled with Knox (because he's more of a modern 4, like Zion), there are a lot of teams that could use him that they could recoup value for. Or the Knicks could probably get a second lottery pick this year so that New Orleans can gamble on someone like Porter (because if you have Williamson and Barrett, no one will remember that third lottery pick if he washes out).

LA's only real chance is if the rumours of Chicago and Phoenix kicking the tires on Ball are true. Because their young players are not terribly inspiring and they'd absolutely need #4 and a mid lottery pick to make it work (because Griffin could make a safe pick at 4 and gamble later, or gamble on Culver at 4 and hope that Hunter floats to them later).
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,169
Is there a compelling reason the CBA doesn't allow a team and a player to sign an extension early? If Kyrie meant what he said in October, what would have been the harm in allowing him to sign a contract back then that would kick in this July 1? Or if we traded for AD, let him sign an extension now that would kick in after next season?

I know the NBA loves off-season drama, but it hurts the on-court product.
You can sign an extension, but only at the maximum 8% raises allowed. So in Kyrie's case it's better to get to free agency because he can re-base with a max salary that is 30% of the current cap, rather than just a standard raise off his old deal that was signed at a much lower cap figure. As for why you can't just given them the raise they'd be entitled to as a free agent, I think the answer is two-fold. First, they don't want it be used as salary-cap circumvention (e.g. sign a guy to a max extension, but then trade him before the higher contract values kick in) and second, they don't want players to leverage future extensions into their trade demands (a la Carmelo wanting to get dealt to New York before free agency to sign a more favorable extension deal). They've probably gone too far the other way on this though and I'd expect changes in the next CBA.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,169
In Irving’s case it was a money thing, he signed his max pre-cap jump and extensions are always based on the value of the current contract. New Orleans doing an extend & trade of Davis would (theoretically) ameliorate the money factor because the 15% trade kicker would make up most of the difference in earnings in a three year window. But I agree he wouldn’t do it with Boston as it’s not on his list of preferred teams.
Anthony Davis is eligible for a Super Max extension. If he signed it he wouldn't be eligible to be traded for one year. Any other extension wouldn't make financial sense. He'd be better off waiting until free agency to sign a new deal.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
We're discussing an extend & trade, not a DVPE contract. The Pelicans can sign Davis to an extension as part of a trade. Like all such extensions it's based on the value of the current deal, but as an extend & trade it would only come with 5% raises. He would also need to pick up his '21 option, as you can't do extend & trades in the final year of a deal (or potential final year) to make the deal work.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,169
We're discussing an extend & trade, not a DVPE contract. The Pelicans can sign Davis to an extension as part of a trade. Like all such extensions it's based on the value of the current deal, but as an extend & trade it would only come with 5% raises. He would also need to pick up his '21 option, as you can't do extend & trades in the final year of a deal (or potential final year) to make the deal work.
I understand the mechanism of an extend-and-trade but I have no earthly idea why he would do that. Why would he willingly take less money and lock himself up long-term to a team that he's shown no desire to sign with? If he gets traded to a team he wants he can wink-wink and wait for free agency to sign a new max deal anyway. There's just no scenario where an extension makes sense given where we are with all the involved parties.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,084
Just thinking out loud here:

Let’s say BOS or NYK trades for AD and it’s another Kyrie situation and they are looking to recoup some of their costs in Jan-Feb.

What could 2-3 months of AD reasonably fetch?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,302
Davis would already be losing money by forgoing the supermax. He is not going to lose even more money by doing an extend-and-trade; there is zero reason for him to agree to that. And I'm of the opinion that there is zero validity to any report of his "preferred" set of teams.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
I understand the mechanism of an extend-and-trade but I have no earthly idea why he would do that. Why would he willingly take less money and lock himself up long-term to a team that he's shown no desire to sign with? If he gets traded to a team he wants he can wink-wink and wait for free agency to sign a new max deal anyway. There's just no scenario where an extension makes sense given where we are with all the involved parties.
I've said that I don't see him doing it with Boston and I completely agree that he's unlikely to remain here if they trade for him, especially considering who his agent is. Which is why I stepped off the Anthony Davis bandwagon the minute Klutch showed the lengths they were willing to go to to team their client up with their owner last winter.

However, over a three year window, given the trade kicker, the money he makes signing a new deal with another team next summer and what he gets via an extend & trade this summer is negligible. So, for example, if the Knicks won the bidding war and requested the extend & trade, presuming that Davis meant it when he said he wanted to play there, he loses only a couple of million in guaranteeing the Knicks three years to build a winner.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
Just thinking out loud here:

Let’s say BOS or NYK trades for AD and it’s another Kyrie situation and they are looking to recoup some of their costs in Jan-Feb.

What could 2-3 months of AD reasonably fetch?
Well, luckily for Danny God invented the Dolan family. So maybe they can get Barrett and filler?

Davis would already be losing money by forgoing the supermax. He is not going to lose even more money by doing an extend-and-trade; there is zero reason for him to agree to that.
The trade kicker means the amount is a couple of million over a three year window. It's not like we're discussing the Warrior fans dreams that Cousins will turn down a large deal to play for the room exception for two more years so that he can sign a long term deal there. If the Lakers, for example, demanded it, I'm sure he'd happily sign on the dotted line. I do agree that Boston wouldn't be able to get him to, though. But it won't be about the money.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,668
Santa Monica, CA
Agreed. Factoring in things like contract, age, etc., Tatum is the best individual player realistically on the table in a potential Davis trade. So the question becomes whether NO wants to get the best individual player (and, potentially, Marcus Smart, who I think is much better than a "roleplayer" and who could also theoretically be flipped by NO for an additional piece or draft pick) or prefers a "quantity over quality" approach. Much depends, I think, on how much they value the Lakers' #4 pick - on the one hand, having that pick allows NO to pick their own preferred player, but on the other hand, what are the chances that player becomes as good as or better than Tatum?
Marcus Smart is exactly a role player.

I still maintain that Tatum plus Smart and some mid-lottery picks is not going to beat the offers some other teams can put on the table. If the Celtics want Davis, it's going to start with Tatum and Brown.
 

BigMike

Dope
Dope
Sep 26, 2000
21,383
Just thinking out loud here:

Let’s say BOS or NYK trades for AD and it’s another Kyrie situation and they are looking to recoup some of their costs in Jan-Feb.

What could 2-3 months of AD reasonably fetch?
I suspect a lot less than the first few months of Davis next year would.

Davis costs you Tatum, and 3 lesser pieces.

You deal Davis at the deadline, maybe you get the equivalent of the 3 lesser pieces back. Sure one of the lesser pieces might turn out to be a lottery ticket pick that turns out to hit the jackpot in 4 years.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,302
Marcus Smart is exactly a role player.

I still maintain that Tatum plus Smart and some mid-lottery picks is not going to beat the offers some other teams can put on the table. If the Celtics want Davis, it's going to start with Tatum and Brown.
A lot of times these deals are judged by the talent of the best player coming back. Tatum is likely the best player the Pelicans can get in return for Davis. The draft picks are nice; sometimes they work out really well. But they often result in a player less than Tatum. A bunch of Lonzo Ball's doesn't equate to one Jayson Tatum.

Ainge isn't trading Tatum+Brown for Davis.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Sep 27, 2016
7,552
I don't get the Pelicans as a destination for Smart but Griffin may be looking to flip him if he is part of the return. I also simply don't ever want Marcus Smart playing for another team. I know thats irrational but I will go to the grave with that sentiment. He is my favorite Celtic of the past 25 years after Pierce and KG.
I'm with you, there's got to be another piece Griffin could want that he values roughly equal to Smart and we value way below him. Maybe it's just trying to get the salaries to line up, in which case we know there are lots of options including S&Ts. I'd much rather throw in one, maybe two first rounders (if one were our own in a future year) than include Smart here.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,096
I understand the mechanism of an extend-and-trade but I have no earthly idea why he would do that. Why would he willingly take less money and lock himself up long-term to a team that he's shown no desire to sign with? If he gets traded to a team he wants he can wink-wink and wait for free agency to sign a new max deal anyway. There's just no scenario where an extension makes sense given where we are with all the involved parties.
Since ADs salary is already enormous, he wouldn't have to wait until free agency to agree to a max deal. If he's traded to somewhere he wants to be, he can sign an extension at the max salary six months after being traded.

I've suggested a happy medium would be for him to agree to opt in to the second year on his current deal before being traded.(assuming he's happy with where he's being traded) As long as the acquiring team can match salaries to get him his 15% trade kicker, his second year would be around 33.6M. Unless the cap goes way up, that'll be at, or very close, to his max. Then six months after a trade he could extend 3 more years at the max.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,057
I'm with you, there's got to be another piece Griffin could want that he values roughly equal to Smart and we value way below him. Maybe it's just trying to get the salaries to line up, in which case we know there are lots of options including S&Ts. I'd much rather throw in one, maybe two first rounders (if one were our own in a future year) than include Smart here.
See I think (and clearly I am biased to hope this way) that Ainge/Zarren balking on Smart wouldn't kill a deal at all. Smart has a lot of value but its really more for a team built to contend over the next few seasons. The Pelicans, with a Holiday, Tatum and Williamson core may well be fun but they aren't likely to contend over the next few seasons. As we have discussed, Smart has secondary market value to other teams so maybe Griffin already has a potential deal lined up. However his fit on the Celtics next to Irving is ideal and the team values him. I agree with others that as an add-on to Tatum, he may be a bit too much to surrender with Davis still a flight risk.

That said, Ainge seems to have coveted Davis for a long time now. He may be willing to pay far more than we think, flight risk be damned...
 

128

lurker
May 4, 2019
28
Marcus Smart is exactly a role player.

I still maintain that Tatum plus Smart and some mid-lottery picks is not going to beat the offers some other teams can put on the table. If the Celtics want Davis, it's going to start with Tatum and Brown.
Marcus Smart is an All-NBA defender and the C's best passer (or at least tied with Hayward in that area). He's also the team's inspirational leader.

Add that up, and you get a hell of a lot more than a role player.
 

CreedBratton

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2009
3,036
In Irving’s case it was a money thing, he signed his max pre-cap jump and extensions are always based on the value of the current contract. New Orleans doing an extend & trade of Davis would (theoretically) ameliorate the money factor because the 15% trade kicker would make up most of the difference in earnings in a three year window. But I agree he wouldn’t do it with Boston as it’s not on his list of preferred teams.
Where’s this list? His father? Just like the raps were on Kawhi list or the Thunder on PG13. Get the guy first then figure the rest out.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,057
Marcus Smart is an All-NBA defender and the C's best passer (or at least tied with Hayward in that area). He's also the team's inspirational leader.

Add that up, and you get a hell of a lot more than a role player.
Yes and Smart was also the Celtics third best player in terms of RPM and in the top 50 in the NBA overall (#46 to be exact). All NBA defender and top 50 RPM isn't really what I would refer to as "role player".
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
Where’s this list? His father? Just like the raps were on Kawhi list or the Thunder on PG13. Get the guy first then figure the rest out.
Unfortunately this situation is a little different than Kawhi’s. From Boston’s perspective Davis’ agent has a conflict of interest, though Davis obviously doesn’t see it that way. (Which is the actual problem given the lengths the agency has already gone to to poison the Boston clubhouse.)
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,930
Lisbon, PT
See I think (and clearly I am biased to hope this way) that Ainge/Zarren balking on Smart wouldn't kill a deal at all. Smart has a lot of value but its really more for a team built to contend over the next few seasons. The Pelicans, with a Holiday, Tatum and Williamson core may well be fun but they aren't likely to contend over the next few seasons. As we have discussed, Smart has secondary market value to other teams so maybe Griffin already has a potential deal lined up. However his fit on the Celtics next to Irving is ideal and the team values him. I agree with others that as an add-on to Tatum, he may be a bit too much to surrender with Davis still a flight risk.

That said, Ainge seems to have coveted Davis for a long time now. He may be willing to pay far more than we think, flight risk be damned...
Smart makes a ton of sense for NO if Griffin wants to a) roll with his core as opposed to tanking and b) set the culture with that new young core.

In addition, in a post-SuperWarriors world, a lot of teams are going to be a lot fewer breaks/leaps away from contending.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,712
around the way
Smart makes a ton of sense for NO if Griffin wants to a) roll with his core as opposed to tanking and b) set the culture with that new young core.

In addition, in a post-SuperWarriors world, a lot of teams are going to be a lot fewer breaks/leaps away from contending.
I agree that people need to keep an open mind about what NOP might want. Clearly butts in the seats and being able to raise ticket prices is important. Building up some buzz around the brand.

A lot of folks, myself included, were harsh on Indiana for their take on the PG trade, with rumors about draft pick heavy packages being turned down. Why would anyone want be be battling for the eighth seed indefinitely, rather than a burn it down rebuild. Well, of course, Oladipo and Sabonis overperformed. But the main point is that Indiana management really really didn't want a tank rebuild. Some here knew that.

Maybe New Orleans doesn't want one either. Who the fuck knows. If not, Smart does make sense.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,930
Lisbon, PT
I agree that people need to keep an open mind about what NOP might want. Clearly butts in the seats and being able to raise ticket prices is important. Building up some buzz around the brand.

A lot of folks, myself included, were harsh on Indiana for their take on the PG trade, with rumors about draft pick heavy packages being turned down. Why would anyone want be be battling for the eighth seed indefinitely, rather than a burn it down rebuild. Well, of course, Oladipo and Sabonis overperformed. But the main point is that Indiana management really really didn't want a tank rebuild. Some here knew that.

Maybe New Orleans doesn't want one either. Who the fuck knows. If not, Smart does make sense.
Totally. Also, keep in mind that most GMs in the league would take Zion, Tatum, Jrue and Smarf over Indy’s core, even accounting for Oladipo’s leap. If Zion gets good fast and Tatum makes the leap, that’s a really fucking good core. That’s a couple big ifs, but not THAT many in the scheme of NBA team-building.

Honestly just thinking about it makes me want to see that team in action, Celtics considerations aside.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,712
around the way
Totally. Also, keep in mind that most GMs in the league would take Zion, Tatum, Jrue and Smarf over Indy’s core, even accounting for Oladipo’s leap. If Zion gets good fast and Tatum makes the leap, that’s a really fucking good core. That’s a couple big ifs, but not THAT many in the scheme of NBA team-building.

Honestly just thinking about it makes me want to see that team in action, Celtics considerations aside.
Agreed. They'll still lose a lot of games to smarter veteran teams, but they'll win a lot too. And they would be fun as hell to watch.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,930
Lisbon, PT
Agreed. They'll still lose a lot of games to smarter veteran teams, but they'll win a lot too. And they would be fun as hell to watch.
Right, so Griffin's thinking could easily be: "hell, if they actually do make the playoffs at that age, we're close to legitimate contention. If they don't, I still get 2 more years of Smart and a lottery pick (with the new odds)."

Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I can see why Griffin would push for Smart to be in the deal.
 

The Mort Report

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 5, 2007
1,372
Winter Hill
I don’t know why people are even discussing Smart. He’s part of the deal if it happens. It’s not about Smart the player, it’s about the contract. Unless Gordon is involved, which is absolutely not happening, Smart has to be involved for salary purposes. I even tried the trade machine with every player who could be traded outside of Smart and Gordon and it doesn’t work. Yes sign and trade blah blah but it’s not realistic.

It doesn’t matter what NO thinks of him, they know they are getting him regardless. He’s not going to be the deal breaker talent wise if this deal happens or not.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,096
I don’t know why people are even discussing Smart. He’s part of the deal if it happens. It’s not about Smart the player, it’s about the contract. Unless Gordon is involved, which is absolutely not happening, Smart has to be involved for salary purposes. I even tried the trade machine with every player who could be traded outside of Smart and Gordon and it doesn’t work. Yes sign and trade blah blah but it’s not realistic.

It doesn’t matter what NO thinks of him, they know they are getting him regardless. He’s not going to be the deal breaker talent wise if this deal happens or not.
Why wouldn't a blah blah Rozier sign and trade be realistic?

Rozier is looking for a starting spot where there aren't may spots available, he'd start for New Orleans, and he'd probably be overpaid to make the deal happen.

For New Orleans, he's basically be a free add on in a package. So, instead of Tatum+Smart and whatever ancillary pieces are needed to complete the dea;. they'd get Tatum, the same ancillary pieces, whatever the extra pieces Boston would have to add to remove Smart(probably a first rounder or two), and Rozier.

For a rebuilding team is Smart alone that much more valuable than Rozier+ first round pick(s)

Maybe yes or no depending upon the team, but it's probably at least in the ballpark.

Unless New Orleans is just dead set against Rozier, I don't see why that would be unrealistic.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
1,839
Don't sleep on Julius Randle, if he stays. Randle just put up 21.4 ppg with an eFG of 55.5% for under $9 million. I don't know if the pieces will mesh well, but Randle, Tatum, Zion, Jrue, Smart would be a lineup with a lot of firepower and heart.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
I mean neither guy is what you think of when you say point guard. They’re both combo guards, so you can play them together.
 

Smokey Joe

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2001
442
I don’t know why people are even discussing Smart. He’s part of the deal if it happens. It’s not about Smart the player, it’s about the contract. Unless Gordon is involved, which is absolutely not happening, Smart has to be involved for salary purposes. I even tried the trade machine with every player who could be traded outside of Smart and Gordon and it doesn’t work. Yes sign and trade blah blah but it’s not realistic.

It doesn’t matter what NO thinks of him, they know they are getting him regardless. He’s not going to be the deal breaker talent wise if this deal happens or not.
Danny Ainge has been a pretty good GM for a while now. If you asked him, I bet he could tell you 6 ways to trade Tatum to NO for AD without including MS or GH off the top of his head. This is a situation with a lot fluidity. All of the moving parts do not have to come from the Pelicans and the Celtics. The Celtics have lots of trade bait and lots of teams would be happy to get involved in a trade like this.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,227
Santa Monica
The Lakers probably get AD with their young talent, draft picks and Klutch sternly warning all "AD is a 2019-20 rental to any team, ex-Lakers". Bron/Klutch would like nothing better than to tell the rest of the league to F--k off, they are in charge, and AD is playing in LA. It was a rough year 1 in Laker Land, Bron & Co will want to flex their offseason muscles.

I'm with Nighthob on this. If Kyrie doesn't re-up, pass on AD and just build around Tatum/Brown/Horford/Hayward/Smart with an eye towards 2021 & beyond. I'd rather avoid the "will AD/won't AD sign drama" w/Klutch holding Danny hostage all next season while losing several young assets.

If Ky/MaMo/Rozier exit, the C's will lose a lot of scoring. BUT we'll see a defensive uptick, more ball movement, improved team chemistry & our coach back in charge. They will be fine next season.
 
Last edited:

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,647
Waltham, MA
The Lakers probably get AD with their young talent, draft picks and Klutch sternly warning all "AD is a 2019-20 rental to any team, ex-Lakers". Bron/Klutch would like nothing better than to tell the rest of the league to F--k off, they are in charge, and AD is playing in LA. It was a rough year 1 in Laker Land, Bron & Co will want to flex their offseason muscles.

I'm with Nighthob on this. If Kyrie doesn't re-up, pass on AD and just build around Tatum/Brown/Horford/Hayward/Smart with an eye towards 2021 & beyond. I'd rather avoid the "will AD/won't AD sign drama" w/Klutch holding Danny hostage all next season while losing several young assets.

If Ky/MaMo/Rozier exit, the C's will lose a lot of scoring. BUT we'll see a defensive uptick, more ball movement, improved team chemistry & our coach back in charge. They will be fine next season.
Is anyone really suggesting we go after AD in the event that Kyrie doesn't re-sign? I assumed there was consensus around here that that option was a non-starter. The likelihood of losing AD after year 1 approaches 100% and now half your future assets are playing for the Pelicans.

Edit: I'm assuming Danny doesn't magically spin Kyrie into another superstar to pair with AD via sign and trade. If he manages to pull off something like that, I'd obviously reevaluate.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,930
Lisbon, PT
The Lakers probably get AD with their young talent, draft picks and Klutch sternly warning all "AD is a 2019-20 rental to any team, ex-Lakers". Bron/Klutch would like nothing better than to tell the rest of the league to F--k off, they are in charge, and AD is playing in LA. It was a rough year 1 in Laker Land, Bron & Co will want to flex their offseason muscles.

I'm with Nighthob on this. If Kyrie doesn't re-up, pass on AD and just build around Tatum/Brown/Horford/Hayward/Smart with an eye towards 2021 & beyond. I'd rather avoid the "will AD/won't AD sign drama" w/Klutch holding Danny hostage all next season while losing several young assets.

If Ky/MaMo/Rozier exit, the C's will lose a lot of scoring. BUT we'll see a defensive uptick, more ball movement, improved team chemistry & our coach back in charge. They will be fine next season.
What young talent? It’s pretty well-established at this point that the rest of the league thinks Ball/Ingram/Kuzma is a pupu platter. The Lakers definitely WANT to flex their muscles, but they need to hit the gym harder first, or it’s going to look sad.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,227
Santa Monica
What young talent? It’s pretty well-established at this point that the rest of the league thinks Ball/Ingram/Kuzma is a pupu platter. The Lakers definitely WANT to flex their muscles, but they need to hit the gym harder first, or it’s going to look sad.
Maybe Ball could be spun for a PHX/CHI 2019 first rounder? I've been told Kuzma has elite offensive skills? Ingram has his supporters?

Agreed, all question marks. I'm not a fan and think Tatum or Brown tops them all, Celtic bias aside ;)

By far the biggest issue is Klutch/Bron. They can single-handedly tank AD's trade value while making it cheaper for the Lakers. From the group that brought you "The Decision", "AD's 2018 trade demand" and find themselves immersed in the Hollywood landscape, they live for this stuff. It's part of Klutch's narrative/branding: "player decides their fate". Griffin has been worked over by this group before (Tristen Thompson, JR Smith bad contracts).
 
Last edited:

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,158
Saint Paul, MN
Is anyone really suggesting we go after AD in the event that Kyrie doesn't re-sign? I assumed there was consensus around here that that option was a non-starter.
If Ainge feels confident thayt AD would resign, I would 100% be in favor of trading for him if Kyrie walks. And if that % chance of him resigning was down to 50%, I would still be tempted.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
Marcus Smart is an All-NBA defender and the C's best passer (or at least tied with Hayward in that area). He's also the team's inspirational leader.

Add that up, and you get a hell of a lot more than a role player.
Inspirational leader, defender and good passer.......is the very definition of a role player. He isn’t a 1, 2 or even 3 offensive option and as you say has specific roles other than being one of your lead scorers. He’s an excellent role player but for how the term is typically defined this is exactly what Smart is which isn’t a slight to him at all.
 

128

lurker
May 4, 2019
28
Inspirational leader, defender and good passer.......is the very definition of a role player. He isn’t a 1, 2 or even 3 offensive option and as you say has specific roles other than being one of your lead scorers. He’s an excellent role player but for how the term is typically defined this is exactly what Smart is which isn’t a slight to him at all.
When I think of role player, I think of Eddie House or James Posey or Leon Powe. IMO, Smart is at a whole different level. Name another "role player" who drives his team's culture.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,573
Somewhere
When I think of role player, I think of Eddie House or James Posey or Leon Powe. IMO, Smart is at a whole different level. Name another "role player" who drives his team's culture.
Nate McMillan is my Smart comp and he even fits the culture aspect
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
When I think of role player, I think of Eddie House or James Posey or Leon Powe. IMO, Smart is at a whole different level. Name another "role player" who drives his team's culture.
I don't know what "driving a culture" means in the NBA. Does he perform these acts as a primary offensive option? For all the Net people out there he had among the worst net ratings of our rotation players each of the last two seasons...….does he only drive the culture when he's on the bench?

I'm not saying Smart isn't an asset or a solid piece to a winning team......but the skills you're describing define those of a role player who complements the teams primary offensive options by providing other necessary skills such as the ones you mention.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,302
The definition of role player obviously depends upon who you ask.

As HRB correctly points out, Smart is never going to be one of your primary weapons offensively. He's not going to counted on to take over a game when the team's #1 star player is having an off night. However, he's good enough to be a starter or #6 man for most teams in the NBA, and can be expected on to be one of the 5 players on the floor at the end of most games. And his contract makes him pretty valuable as a trade piece.

Pair Smart with a Tatum or Brown and you easily top whatever the Lakers can offer in exchange for Davis, and it's not particularly close, no matter what the Ingram/Kuzma defenders claim. I do agree, however, Ainge does not make that trade if Davis is going to be a rental while Kyrie is suiting it up for Brooklyn.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
1,431
If Ainge feels confident thayt AD would resign, I would 100% be in favor of trading for him if Kyrie walks. And if that % chance of him resigning was down to 50%, I would still be tempted.
I'm in this camp too. The whole point of Kyrie being key to keeping AD is that you're a contender, but I think we're a contender without him as well. The biggest challenge will be filling the pg role, assuming Smart is gone as part of the AD trade. Resign Rozier, but you still need someone like Rubio.