Byerie Irving? Do you want Kyrie back?

What are your thoughts on Kyrie?

  • I want him back on max deal no matter what

    Votes: 62 20.7%
  • I want him back on max deal ONLY if AD is also coming

    Votes: 85 28.4%
  • I’m done with him and don’t want him back under any circumstances

    Votes: 99 33.1%
  • Not sure - I want to see how the playoffs go first

    Votes: 53 17.7%

  • Total voters
    299

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,302
If Kyrie is leaving for NY or BKN, it makes perfect sense that he would string the Celtics along and not signal to Ainge that he's made up his mind. Why help a Division rival plan for next year?

Maybe he's waiting to see if the Celtics get Davis before making up his mind, but in that case you'd think he would be up front in private with Ainge about that. Reading between the lines from Danny's press conference the other day, I'm guessing that isn't the case.

Feels to me like Kyrie has his mind made up and is gone. But who really knows. Danny seems like a pretty good poker player too...
If Kyrie had given Ainge that conditional assurance ("I'll return if you get Davis"), then it's in Ainge's best interest to keep those assurances under wraps. Otherwise, the Pelicans would know they would have Ainge over a barrel.

Ainge had every reason to lie in that press conference. For all we know, Kyrie hasn't even returned Ainge's calls. Again, that's not something Ainge would want to make public.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,057
Unless someone has a source close to Irving or the Celtics front-office, they likely have very little information about what will transpire with Kyrie.

As with anything these days, media pieces and social postings are likely to be combination of posturing/positioning/spin and wish-casting. As HRB and others like to say, we are rapidly approaching "silly season" where part of the game is to obfuscate things for the purpose of gaining some sort of edge.

I mean, if someone has hard information to the contrary, more power to them. But claiming to know what someone like Irving's intentions are from biased-sources in the media and via IG posts (which we know are highly fact based and almost never stylized, idealized or filtered for a specific look/feel) seems like a bit of a leap.

Also, Kyrie Irving is a really odd person. I am not even sure he truly knows what he will do going forward.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
1,431
Is Kyle Lowry better than KI? Consistently better RPM, better distributor, better defender.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,057
Is Kyle Lowry better than KI? Consistently better RPM, better distributor, better defender.
Different roles. Lowry is so perfectly suited for this Raptors line-up where he doesn't need to be the lead scorer (or be the guy when the lead scorer isn't playing well like it was with DeRozan). He is a very good defender. Irving's value is offense and he is an elite player in that regard. Lowry simply is not.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
449
Brooklyn by way of Orono
Different roles. Lowry is so perfectly suited for this Raptors line-up where he doesn't need to be the lead scorer (or be the guy when the lead scorer isn't playing well like it was with DeRozan). He is a very good defender. Irving's value is offense and he is an elite player in that regard. Lowry simply is not.
Agree about the roles, it’s a horses for courses question. I think KI’s skill set is more special (in the lead for best handle ever for example) but he only plays pick and roll basketball and can’t be counted on defensively. The Celtics, with the other offensive talent and the pace and space approach, may well have been better off with with Lowry’s contribution this season.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
Boogie didn't exactly have a bunch of offers last season and he's not that much more desirable this offseason. He recovered from the Achilles, but didn't exactly look like his old self when he returned, promptly got hurt again and has looked fairly mediocre since. He probably needs another make-good contract to re-establish his value and show that he can stay healthy. Why not do that with the Warriors again?
I’ll go on record to say all you guys discussing Cousins and an MLE are completely insane. :)
Doug McDermott is a player who can’t be marketed while getting a >MLE deal last year and there wasn’t nearly as much cap space as there will be this summer

FA money will be thrown around like its 2017 and as we should know by now teams WILL spend their cap space rather than roll any over. I mean, Evan Turner got his $18m per for this very reason. Boogie is going to do what he does best.......put up big numbers on a lottery team while being paid quite handsomely for it by a cellar dweller looking to sell a future to their fan base.


Boogie didn't exactly have a bunch of offers last season and he's not that much more desirable this offseason. He recovered from the Achilles, but didn't exactly look like his old self when he returned, promptly got hurt again and has looked fairly mediocre since. He probably needs another make-good contract to re-establish his value and show that he can stay healthy. Why not do that with the Warriors again?
Of course he wasn’t going to receive offers last year......he was injured and unable to play for at least half this season. In addition the FA money wasn’t out there. I expect there will be plenty of teams that miss on other options and that he gets a large AAV deal (maybe not 4 years but large AAV) from someone.
 
Last edited:

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
1,431
Agree about the roles, it’s a horses for courses question. I think KI’s skill set is more special (in the lead for best handle ever for example) but he only plays pick and roll basketball and can’t be counted on defensively. The Celtics, with the other offensive talent and the pace and space approach, may well have been better off with with Lowry’s contribution this season.
That was my thought as well.

So if we re-sign Kyrie it'd be for the super max, right? And that would be something like $40M a year? I sure wouldn't give Lowry that, so why would I give Irving that? I guess because we can, because that's the way the system is set up.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,932
Lisbon, PT
That was my thought as well.

So if we re-sign Kyrie it'd be for the super max, right? And that would be something like $40M a year? I sure wouldn't give Lowry that, so why would I give Irving that? I guess because we can, because that's the way the system is set up.
Kyrie won a championship, as the 2nd best player, against one of the best 5 teams of all time. He’s entering his prime. Find a new angle.

Of course you wouldn’t give Kyle Lowry that—he’s old and his body is breaking down. Would you give 28 year old Lowry that money? Hell yeah.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
That was my thought as well.

So if we re-sign Kyrie it'd be for the super max, right? And that would be something like $40M a year? I sure wouldn't give Lowry that, so why would I give Irving that? I guess because we can, because that's the way the system is set up.
Irving isn't with the Cavs anymore, so he's not eligible for a 35% max deal until the summer of '21. This basically means that if he's looking to get to 35% at his earliest possible time he's going to sign a three year deal with an ETO. But it also means that Boston's financial advantage is basically neutralized as the salary difference over two years is under $2 million.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
449
Brooklyn by way of Orono
Kyrie won a championship, as the 2nd best player, against one of the best 5 teams of all time. He’s entering his prime. Find a new angle.

Of course you wouldn’t give Kyle Lowry that—he’s old and his body is breaking down. Would you give 28 year old Lowry that money? Hell yeah.
For my piece, I'm not saying KL > KI, in fact kind of the opposite, but I am not dismissing that KL instead of KI may well have taken this Celtics team further and be better suited for a non-AD team next year as well.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,668
Santa Monica, CA
If Kyrie had given Ainge that conditional assurance ("I'll return if you get Davis"), then it's in Ainge's best interest to keep those assurances under wraps. Otherwise, the Pelicans would know they would have Ainge over a barrel.

Ainge had every reason to lie in that press conference. For all we know, Kyrie hasn't even returned Ainge's calls. Again, that's not something Ainge would want to make public.
That's my point about Danny being a good poker player. Trying to read Danny in that press conference, my read is that he has no assurances at all from Kyrie. But as we're both saying...who really knows.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,932
Lisbon, PT
For my piece, I'm not saying KL > KI, in fact kind of the opposite, but I am not dismissing that KL instead of KI may well have taken this Celtics team further and be better suited for a non-AD team next year as well.
Ah ok, I see your point. I don’t really agree though, in that a Celtics team with the current versionKL would have even less shot creation than it already did, and that was their biggest problem.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
449
Brooklyn by way of Orono
Ah ok, I see your point. I don’t really agree though, in that a Celtics team with the current versionKL would have even less shot creation than it already did, and that was their biggest problem.
Fair enough, and no question that in a vacuum only a handful have Kyrie's ability to create their shot. In my hypothetical KL world, shot creation is addressed by actually running Steven's offense with the existing roster...which could certainly be a faulty assumption but seemed to work the last couple years. Also, in their four straight playoff losses to Milwaukee the Celtics had no answer for the Greek and gave up 123, 123, 113 and 116 so I'm not 100% convinced shot creation was their biggest problem.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
Yeah, not trading for Kawhi Leonard was the biggest problem. Holding out for Davis was probably the biggest misstep of Ainge's regime considering the relative cost. In Boston terms Leonard was traded for the equivalent of Hayward, Rozier, and the #22 pick this year. Now the Spurs wanted more from Boston (allegedly Brown), but swap out Brown for Leonard and it's probably Boston ending the Warriors run.
 

Jeff Van GULLY

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
3,298
Yeah, not trading for Kawhi Leonard was the biggest problem. Holding out for Davis was probably the biggest misstep of Ainge's regime considering the relative cost. In Boston terms Leonard was traded for the equivalent of Hayward, Rozier, and the #22 pick this year. Now the Spurs wanted more from Boston (allegedly Brown), but swap out Brown for Leonard and it's probably Boston ending the Warriors run.
And conceivably would still have the ammo for Davis (Tatum+) this year.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,252
deep inside Guido territory
Yeah, not trading for Kawhi Leonard was the biggest problem. Holding out for Davis was probably the biggest misstep of Ainge's regime considering the relative cost. In Boston terms Leonard was traded for the equivalent of Hayward, Rozier, and the #22 pick this year. Now the Spurs wanted more from Boston (allegedly Brown), but swap out Brown for Leonard and it's probably Boston ending the Warriors run.
It’s easy to sit back now and say that not trading for Kahwi was a mistake. If it didn’t work, you’d have Kyrie and him walking out the door.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,932
Lisbon, PT
It’s easy to sit back now and say that not trading for Kahwi was a mistake. If it didn’t work, you’d have Kyrie and him walking out the door.
Yeah, the Kawhi situation has been hashed and rehashed to death. Basically it's as simple as: Kawhi's health was a HUGE uncertainty, and the Celtics didn't want to push in a piece as valuable as Brown given that uncertainty. I honestly don't think that Masai would have traded Brown for Kawhi under those circumstances. It's also worth noting that Toronto has a great medical staff, and it's not at all a given that Boston could have gotten Kawhi back to full strength in the same way they did.

Not trading for Kawhi was 100% a mistake in hindsight, but it's pretty similar to saying that not drafting Giannis, or Gobert, or Siakam were Ainge's biggest missteps.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
It’s easy to sit back now and say that not trading for Kahwi was a mistake. If it didn’t work, you’d have Kyrie and him walking out the door.
And now we have people clamoring for Boston to send everything to New Orleans for a player who has publicly expressed a desire to play for the Lakers and whose agent works for a member of the Lakers (and, in keeping with the interests of his employer spent the winter waging a war of media rumors to derail Boston’s clubhouse).

So, yes, sure, both guys could have walked out after winning the title and Horford with them. Which would have left Boston with most of their assets in tact and tens of millions in cap space to find replacements.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,084
Not trading for Kawhi was 100% a mistake in hindsight, but it's pretty similar to saying that not drafting Giannis, or Gobert, or Siakam were Ainge's biggest missteps.
I really don’t see the similarities between not taking a shot on Kawhi at bargain price and not drafting a raw international player who blossomed into a star.

None of us saw this season playing out the way it did and clearly Ainge didn’t either. At the end of the day, he played it safe. He had a team that nearly made the Finals and was getting Kyrie and Hayward back. I’m sure he was banking on the return of those guys and continued development from the young guys. What he failed to foresee was the potential chemistry issues. People like HRB were sounding the alarm on Rozier/Morris early on.

We have no idea what the Spurs were asking from Danny but it sounds like Jaylen would have been the centerpiece. Maybe Kyrie and Kawhi would have clashed. Maybe Kawhi would have hated Boston. Maybe Kawhi would have gotten hurt. We’ll never know. But what we do know is that Ainge let a direct competitor get Kawhi/Green for a very reasonable price. That was a miscalculation and hindsight wasn’t needed to predict the potential downside there.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,057
Is someone able to provide a definitive account of what the Spurs asked of the Celtics for Kawhi? Because aside from hearsay and "sources close to..." I haven't seen anything concrete. I find it incredibly difficult to assess deals made or missed if we don't know what the actual pieces involved were at the time.

And yes I have seen something like Jaylen Brown and a pick however those aren't facts. Its more conjecture.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
4,747
Part of the problem the Cs would have had last year trading for Kawhi (or any other star) was that they didn't really have salaries to match. Brown and picks for Leonard wouldn't have been possible, and the Cs really had no middling salaries to throw in unless the Spurs waited until December when Smart or Baynes could have been dealt. They would have had to deal something like Brown, Morris, Rozier Yabu, Semi, Theis, and maybe Williams.

Unless the Spurs were willing to take and the Cs were willing to give up either Hayward or Horford, which doesn't seem too likely either way.

Edit: they could have done it if smart or baynes was willing to be S+T'ed to the spurs at a salary the spurs wanted too.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,647
Waltham, MA
Is someone able to provide a definitive account of what the Spurs asked of the Celtics for Kawhi? Because aside from hearsay and "sources close to..." I haven't seen anything concrete. I find it incredibly difficult to assess deals made or missed if we don't know what the actual pieces involved were at the time.

And yes I have seen something like Jaylen Brown and a pick however those aren't facts. Its more conjecture.
Isn't that pretty much what we get for all trade proposals that don't happen?

Yeah, it might have been a trade centered around Jaylen, or it might not have been. But that's all we have to go on.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,096
That was my thought as well.

So if we re-sign Kyrie it'd be for the super max, right? And that would be something like $40M a year? I sure wouldn't give Lowry that, so why would I give Irving that? I guess because we can, because that's the way the system is set up.
Kyrie isn't eligible for the super max.

If cap comes in where it's expected, his max would start at a bit under 33M. Wouldn't get as high as 40M until year four of a deal if paid at the max with max raises.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,057
Isn't that pretty much what we get for all trade proposals that don't happen?

Yeah, it might have been a trade centered around Jaylen, or it might not have been. But that's all we have to go on.
Oh I agree but then how can people say the Celtics made a mistake not making a trade when we don't really have the faintest idea what actual pieces were involved?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
Part of the problem the Cs would have had last year trading for Kawhi (or any other star) was that they didn't really have salaries to match. Brown and picks for Leonard wouldn't have been possible, and the Cs really had no middling salaries to throw in unless the Spurs waited until December when Smart or Baynes could have been dealt. They would have had to deal something like Brown, Morris, Rozier Yabu, Semi, Theis, and maybe Williams.

Unless the Spurs were willing to take and the Cs were willing to give up either Hayward or Horford, which doesn't seem too likely either way.

Edit: they could have done it if smart or baynes was willing to be S+T'ed to the spurs at a salary the spurs wanted too.
I mean the Spurs did take on a salary dump in DeRozan, so Hayward, Brown, and a couple of picks would have topped what they actually got. (I know, the DeRozan argument’s going to start again, let’s start by granting that in 1999 he would have been a top 10 player, two decades later, though, he’s fool’s gold).
 
May 14, 2015
113
But that’s what you think and it’s at odds with what the Spurs and Pop think. They value the midrange game unlike any other current team. It’s probably a bad idea, but it’s still the way they think nonetheless.

And Hayward coming off a traumatic ankle injury has significantly less value than Derozan, particularly since his contract runs longer. It’s not clear that the package you’re suggesting is better from the Spurs POV.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
And yet they’re already looking to dump him. So, yes, he was a salary dump. If LA can’t complete a Davis deal, he’s one of the guys I suspect that they’ll kick the tires on as a one year rental.
 
May 14, 2015
113
Right, they’re looking to dump him this year after having him on their team for a season. And that has nothing to do with their estimation of him last offseason.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,364
Dude, this is some pretty disingenuous sleight-of-hand. Do we know with 90% certainty what the pieces discussed were, or exactly what the packages were? No. To call that “not the faintest idea” is another thing entirely.

Lowe’s sources on this are generally good, and they were backed up by other solid reporters. It seems at least 50%+ likely that the Spurs wanted Jaylen Brown as the centerpiece, and the Celtics didn’t want to include him.

I honestly don’t get your angle here. Most people on this board, and in the NBA in general, thought Jaylen was too high a price to pay for injured flight-risk Kawhi. I don’t think anyone was really second-guessing Ainge at the time. From SA’s perspective, I highly doubt they would have turned down a Brown+salary package in favor of a DeRozan one, since Brown was 21-22 and coming off a playoffs in which he was probably already better than DeRozan.
We've been through this before. The problem with trying to analyze what SA would have taken is that the rumored/reported demands of SA w.r.t. Boston and LA were so out of proportion to what they actually got. The reports were that they were asking for Brown/Ingram plus multiple first round picks. And then they settled for DMR and Poetl?

The only explanation I can think of is that it was personal for Popp and he wanted to exile KL to the worst situation possible and didn't care as much for what was coming back. It's still incredible to me that Popp didn't get any of TOR's young players. He wasn't getting Siakam but he couldn't get Powell or Anunoby?
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,932
Lisbon, PT
We've been through this before. The problem with trying to analyze what SA would have taken is that the rumored/reported demands of SA w.r.t. Boston and LA were so out of proportion to what they actually got. The reports were that they were asking for Brown/Ingram plus multiple first round picks. And then they settled for DMR and Poetl?

The only explanation I can think of is that it was personal for Popp and he wanted to exile KL to the worst situation possible and didn't care as much for what was coming back. It's still incredible to me that Popp didn't get any of TOR's young players. He wasn't getting Siakam but he couldn't get Powell or Anunoby?
That's fair, I'll delete my reply so as not to relitigate this.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
But that’s what you think and it’s at odds with what the Spurs and Pop think. They value the midrange game unlike any other current team. It’s probably a bad idea, but it’s still the way they think nonetheless.

And Hayward coming off a traumatic ankle injury has significantly less value than Derozan, particularly since his contract runs longer. It’s not clear that the package you’re suggesting is better from the Spurs POV.
I’m not sure the Spurs value the midrange game as much as they value elite midrange players who are under appreciated. It isn’t like they are running Big Baby and Evan Turner our there. They surrounded their two primary offense options with excellent 3-point shooters and led the league in 3-pt%. Buford and Pop may have some idea about what they are doing even if it makes some people’s heads spin.
 
May 14, 2015
113
That’s exactly my point, though. They didn’t see Derozan’s reliance on long 2s as a negative, so they clearly didn’t think they were taking on bad salary as Nighthob has suggested. They may feel differently this offseason, but they wouldn’t have done the trade if they didn’t value Derozan and Poetl.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,057
That's fair, I'll delete my reply so as not to relitigate this.
You are assessing a transaction that never occurred based on incomplete information and an ultimate price that was, as wbcd points out, completely at odds with what you believe to be solid reports from people who were not directly involved in any trade talks.

Its clear that some people think that is a perfect basis for conducting analysis. I don't understand how those who are skeptical about that approach are being "disingenuous" or using "sleight of hand" - on the contrary, I was trying to be very straightforward.

In my experience, price is information. Anecdotes, which are inherently biased, have far less informational value.

Also, to be clear and respond to your original post, I have no angle here. I think Ainge deserves some criticism after how last season played out as the team clearly screwed up assessing the chemistry of the roster. I simply think we don't have enough actual data to judge the Celtics for not getting Leonard. YRMV.
 
Last edited:

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,932
Lisbon, PT
In my experience, price is information. Anecdotes, which are inherently biased, have far less informational value.

Also, to be clear and respond to your original post, I have no angle here. I think Ainge deserves some criticism after how last season played out as the team clearly screwed up assessing the chemistry of the roster. I simply think we don't have enough actual data to judge the Celtics for not getting Leonard. YRMV.
Ah ok, I think we just had a miscommunication.

I totally agree with you that price is information, and Kawhi went for the price he went for. I think Ainge was mainly unlucky that, given what we now know was the ask from San Antonio, he didn't have anything that fit that ask (a meh scorer whom he was ready to move on from). I also think that it's pretty likely that Brown WOULD have topped that, just because he fits exactly the type that San Antonio likes, and had proven himself as a scorer.

I don't judge Ainge at all for not getting Kawhi. I think it was a tough situation, he didn't really have the types of pieces that SA wanted, and the piece he did have (Brown) that would have fit the bill (again, based on seeing the ultimate price Kawhi went for), was simply too much to pay for Kawhi's uncertainty.

If it at all seemed like I'm judging Ainge for not trading for Kawhi, I apologize. I think he did fine there based on available information, and agree that his biggest fault was not managing the roster logjam, in a way that created real chemistry issues and hurt the value of some of his assets.
 

BJBossman

lurker
Dec 6, 2016
180
Yeah, not trading for Kawhi Leonard was the biggest problem. Holding out for Davis was probably the biggest misstep of Ainge's regime considering the relative cost. In Boston terms Leonard was traded for the equivalent of Hayward, Rozier, and the #22 pick this year. Now the Spurs wanted more from Boston (allegedly Brown), but swap out Brown for Leonard and it's probably Boston ending the Warriors run.
i'd say the Kyrie trade.

It destroyed the locker room and prevented them from getting davis.

the brooklyn pick never should've been involved.

This team could easily have had Brow and Kahwi on it for the playoffs without that misstep.
 

BJBossman

lurker
Dec 6, 2016
180
If Kyrie is leaving for NY or BKN, it makes perfect sense that he would string the Celtics along and not signal to Ainge that he's made up his mind. Why help a Division rival plan for next year?

Maybe he's waiting to see if the Celtics get Davis before making up his mind, but in that case you'd think he would be up front in private with Ainge about that. Reading between the lines from Danny's press conference the other day, I'm guessing that isn't the case.

Feels to me like Kyrie has his mind made up and is gone. But who really knows. Danny seems like a pretty good poker player too...
Danny's situation is simple. You lay it out for Kyrie.

1) you get the max
2) we trade for brow
3) we jettison the young guys you clearly don't have any interest in playing with anyway as part of #2.

are you in?

If he even hesitates you really can't make a brow trade, and he's probably gone. Then danny can plan on him not being there as part of his draft work.

This has probably already occurred anyway.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,084
i'd say the Kyrie trade.

It destroyed the locker room and prevented them from getting davis.

the brooklyn pick never should've been involved.

This team could easily have had Brow and Kahwi on it for the playoffs without that misstep.
There was zero indication that either the Brow or Kawhi would become available in the summer of 2017.

You don’t pass up talents like Kyrie if you can reasonably acquire them. It just didn’t work out, largely because of one fluke play in October 2017.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,573
Somewhere
Any Kyrie-less situation undoubtably means IT4 stays with the team which is a nice sentimental choice but given how quickly his body has degenerated since then I think the team made the right play.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,932
Lisbon, PT
There was zero indication that either the Brow or Kawhi would become available in the summer of 2017.

You don’t pass up talents like Kyrie if you can reasonably acquire them. It just didn’t work out, largely because of one fluke play in October 2017.
Yeah, it really can't be stated enough how shitty a fluke this was in terms of age of the player, timing, severity, and length of the recovery. It's nearly unprecedented (outside of truly tragic situations).

If it doesn't happen, there's quite a good chance that the Celtics make the finals both this year and last, and Danny looks like a genius who's now holding all the cards going into this summer.
 

BJBossman

lurker
Dec 6, 2016
180
There was zero indication that either the Brow or Kawhi would become available in the summer of 2017.

You don’t pass up talents like Kyrie if you can reasonably acquire them. It just didn’t work out, largely because of one fluke play in October 2017.
Yeah, it really can't be stated enough how shitty a fluke this was in terms of age of the player, timing, severity, and length of the recovery. It's nearly unprecedented (outside of truly tragic situations).

If it doesn't happen, there's quite a good chance that the Celtics make the finals both this year and last, and Danny looks like a genius who's now holding all the cards going into this summer.
These are fine. Nothing I inherently disagree with. But that also wasn't the question. The question wasn't what could danny have forseen.

The point was that the move, while it made some sense (the brooklyn pick was too much for the gap between KI and IT at the time, KI became a much better player under Brad than he ever was in CLE), but it's also fact that it cost you Brow because of the restrictions in place. And Danny had been eyeing Brow ever before the KI trade, that had been reported before. That's why he was saving his treasure trove of picks and not using them for Jimmy Butler or Paul George. He was already eyeing Brow.

The dominos that fell went against Danny, and while I am not saying he could've forseen all of them, the reality is that's why the move hurt them.

(although I think they probably make the finals simply if Hayward doesn't get hurt either).

Slightly off topic, but I will say the alarming amount of perceived bad faith by both teams (CLE knew Kyrie's knee wasn't good because of the threat he made to them; Danny and IT's hip) is just incredible for one trade. Very unusual.

Having that pick that CLE used for Sexton last year would've been a good piece to have for a Kawhi deal when he was already on the block.

I am REALLY curious to see what Danny does. Does he go all-in at some point?
 
May 14, 2015
113
The Nets pick didn’t end up being a valuable pick. It was extremely cunning of Danny to use it for Kyrie, as you would trade the 8th pick in any draft for a player of his caliber. The only player drafted in that area who you could second guess would be SGA, and that’s way more risky than trading for Kyrie.

Beyond that, as has been discussed several times above, who’s to say that the Spurs wanted a draft pick? That 8th pick may not have been attractive to them since they clearly wanted mature talent for Kawhi.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,302
I have trouble believing people keep blaming the Celtics for IT4's injury, or for Ainge not disclosing the nature of it. The seriousness of it was known to everyone by Cleveland's GM.

Anyway, it's hindsight to blame Ainge for the Kyrie trade. Even the knee injury was difficult to predict, which is part of the reason the Celtics got him so cheaply. A #8 pick and some flotsam and jetsam.
 

BJBossman

lurker
Dec 6, 2016
180
The Nets pick didn’t end up being a valuable pick. It was extremely cunning of Danny to use it for Kyrie, as you would trade the 8th pick in any draft for a player of his caliber. The only player drafted in that area who you could second guess would be SGA, and that’s way more risky than trading for Kyrie.

Beyond that, as has been discussed several times above, who’s to say that the Spurs wanted a draft pick? That 8th pick may not have been attractive to them since they clearly wanted mature talent for Kawhi.
they took a young C (Poetl) and a protected late first. They were taking young talent in the deal.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,364
they took a young C (Poetl) and a protected late first. They were taking young talent in the deal.
By all reports, SA turned down BOS's offer of several picks. Poetl is not what one would call "talent," particularly since SAS may have been able to get Ingram or Brown - without picks - and didn't get Siakam, OG, Powell, or any of the TOR's real young talent.

Again, since we've been through this so many times lately, SAS was demanding Brown/Ingram plus multiple picks for KL. If they were just shopping for the best offer, it makes no sense that they ended up with DMR and Poetl unless it was more than just player evaluation. Maybe SAS felt like they had to get some kind of "All-Star" back for PR purposes (although SAS turned down Kevin Love, which would have been a better trade). Maybe Pop wanted to exile KL as far away from LA as he could. Maybe Pop realized how much better TOR would be and wanted to give KL a chance to win a ring. Who knows?
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
1,839
If Kyrie leaves as a FA, the net cost was basically Sexton. In hindsight, it was still worth it to acquire a second team all NBA player in his 20s, especially considering IT falling off a cliff.

Ainge should never not try to get top tier talent.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,554
Isn't the entire point of emptying the cupboard for Davis to get Irving to sign a five year deal? If it's a 1+1 you find yourself on the far side of that with the cupboard bare and having lost both guys to free agency.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
34,087
Isn't the entire point of emptying the cupboard for Davis to get Irving to sign a five year deal? If it's a 1+1 you find yourself on the far side of that with the cupboard bare and having lost both guys to free agency.
Well, this depends on if Ainge would still pursue AD if Irving is leaving. But losing Kyrie now for nothing, or losing him in a year for nothing after having a season to run with AD....

I don't know, just thinking out loud.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,158
Saint Paul, MN
Kyrie doesn't want a 1+1 anyway, right? He would be looking to be a FA in the summer of 2021 when he is eligible for 10 year player contract.