It's not the "current" NBA, but the most pertinent example of a firesale coming from a team in this situation is Chicago, 2001.
Fast forward to legitimate title contention...
- Thread starter RetractableRoof
- Start date
Nope. I'm saying that Beverley and Gordon, combined, give you more than AB does and cost less. You know how you know I'm saying that? Because that's what I said.
And you replied to argue with something I didn't say, just like you did when you were wrong about what Bird Rights are.
I don't think Gordon is a better defender than AB, but I think Gordon is a fine defensive player (your impression of him as awful is wrong, too) and I think Beverley is a very, very good defensive player. Which is why I don't think Houston gives up a first round pick for a third non-Harden guard who is going to cost more than their other two combined and solves a problem they don't have.
Patrick Beverly is a very underrated player. But isn't at least part of the reason for moving Bradley to clear out the logjam at the guard position (assuming Fultz is drafted)? Philly is rumored to be looking for a defensive-minded guard to pair with Simmons. The Celtics could certainly use a player like Robert Covington or Richaun Holmes-- not to mention Saric, if Ainge can pry him loose. And the Sixers can absorb Bradley's salary without having to match.
Of course, the first time Bradley returns to the Garden and torches the Celtics, everyone will say it was a terrible trade.
Of course, the first time Bradley returns to the Garden and torches the Celtics, everyone will say it was a terrible trade.
I'm with G&MB here, and I think Derrick Favors is being heavily undervalued based on a sub-par 2016-17 season. This was a 16/8 PF for his age 23 & 24 seasons. If the Celtics draft Fultz (which seems like the most likely scenario), then I absolutely agree that a season of Favors is worth more to Boston than a season of Bradley (or moving him and just getting back a late 1st round pick from a contender). IT, Fultz, Smart, Bradley and Brown (when he plays the 2) is more than enough back court depth.
The way I see it, Boston has a pretty defined ceiling when Amir, Olynyk and Crowder are getting the PF minutes. Favors is a definite upgrade on those guys, and if he's back to his prior form (and at 25 I don't think he's done), then at least they're more competitive against Cleveland (and the other teams in the league with size). Sure, we hope Zizic and/or Yabu help, but we have no idea if either are ready to contribute; we know Favors is just a season removed from being a 16/8 guy. I wouldn't tie up long-term cap dollars on Favors, but they don't have to. He can be a 1 year bridge gap to Zizic, Yabu or a 2018 Plan B option.
The way I see it, Boston has a pretty defined ceiling when Amir, Olynyk and Crowder are getting the PF minutes. Favors is a definite upgrade on those guys, and if he's back to his prior form (and at 25 I don't think he's done), then at least they're more competitive against Cleveland (and the other teams in the league with size). Sure, we hope Zizic and/or Yabu help, but we have no idea if either are ready to contribute; we know Favors is just a season removed from being a 16/8 guy. I wouldn't tie up long-term cap dollars on Favors, but they don't have to. He can be a 1 year bridge gap to Zizic, Yabu or a 2018 Plan B option.
Last edited:
Favors' balky knee would give me seriously concern in a potential trade. He battled injuries all last year, including a lower back issue. It might just be a one year thing (and Bradley certainly hasn't been Cal Ripken) but I could see this being another Amir Johnson situation where he's a decent player during the season but breaks down before the playoffs when we need him most.
From a pure value standpoint, a Favors/Bradley deal is in the ballpark of what I'd expect but I wouldn't make that deal unless I was absolutely sure that I couldn't get a future first from someone, even if it's protected for a little while like the Memphis pick. I want the most future assets as possible in the event a white whale surfaces.
From a pure value standpoint, a Favors/Bradley deal is in the ballpark of what I'd expect but I wouldn't make that deal unless I was absolutely sure that I couldn't get a future first from someone, even if it's protected for a little while like the Memphis pick. I want the most future assets as possible in the event a white whale surfaces.
Grin, are you planning on pulling the goalie, and playing 6 on 5?
I'd rather have Avery than can play O and D not just one.
I'd rather have Avery than can play O and D not just one.
These decisions don't take place in a vacuum.
Houston would have to give up an asset to acquire Bradley, and then pay to keep Bradley, for what would be -- at best -- a minimal upgrade. They have two guards who are both well-suited to play alongside Harden. One is the likely 6th man of the year this season, stretches the floor very well, and despite your impression of him, had a decent year from a DRPM standpoint. He's far from an elite defender, but he's also not the sort of guy who you can't afford to have on the floor against bigger two guards. The other guard is an elite defensive point guard. Arguably better than Bradley via the eye test, and unquestionably better based on the numbers. And offensively, he shot 38% from 3. Those two guards combined make less money than Bradley's likely going to be seeking in free agency, and give you much more flexibility, better shooting, and a defensive answer for big and small guards alike.
Morey sending a pick for Bradley seems like a poor use of assets to me. Particularly given that they have cap space to use, and their biggest need is a capable 3 & D wing now that Ariza is slowing down.
I don't see Favors as a fit for the Celtics.
I think it's clear Stevens likes to have two of his three rotation bigs to have the ability to shoot from the perimeter. Even before he had Horford this year and had two bigs that could shoot, he still played that way and had Sullinger shoot it poorly from the perimeter.
Unless they think Zizic isn't going to be in the rotation next year, the third big should be an Olynyk type, if not Olynyk himself.
Having Favors would relegate Zizic to something like Tyler Zellers current role. That could be the case, but I'd suspect they think he could take on Amir Johnsons role.
I think it's clear Stevens likes to have two of his three rotation bigs to have the ability to shoot from the perimeter. Even before he had Horford this year and had two bigs that could shoot, he still played that way and had Sullinger shoot it poorly from the perimeter.
Unless they think Zizic isn't going to be in the rotation next year, the third big should be an Olynyk type, if not Olynyk himself.
Having Favors would relegate Zizic to something like Tyler Zellers current role. That could be the case, but I'd suspect they think he could take on Amir Johnsons role.
1) If we are clearing cap space to make a move for Hayward, Griffin or Millsap then dealing Bradley for a pick makes more sense than taking back $12 million in salary on Favors or any other power forward.
2) And if we don't make a move for one of those guys we have no real shot at taking on the Cavs, so dealing Bradley for a pick makes more sense than trading for a veteran who won't help us win a title now or in the future.
Amir Johnson's career stats: .585 eFG%, 9.1 rebounds/36, 1.9 assists/36, 1.7 blocks/36
Derrick Favors' career stats: .510 eFG%, 7.1 rebounds/36, 1.1 assists/36, 1.3 blocks/36
But even if we assume that Favors is an upgrade on Amir, it makes no sense to take on his $12m salary if $18m could land us a legitimate star.
This keeps being repeated but simply isn't true. His per36 numbers this year have been right at his career avg and he actually played the most minutes of the season during the month of March while his per36 numbers throughout the season were consistent. Amir's problem is that he simply isn't very good and is exposed against elite players. He was horrible in the playoffs due to being in terrible matchups against quicker players not to being broken down.
My Favors suggestion was premised on the notion that Hayward isn't coming. I've made that clear a couple of times.
We disagree on the value of the pick you'd get from Bradley, Millsap/Griffin, and basically all of point 2 and there's no real need to rehash any of that. Just wanted to point out that there's nobody here that's a proponent of taking on Favors salary before making a push for Hayward.
You're right about the Pels pick. Got my years mixed up.
Holmes would be a good get, and Philly supposedly loves Bradley, so maybe that's on the table. I can see the on-court fit in Philly with Simmons running the point and Bradley basically a PG in name only off the ball. It would allow him to guard 1s exclusively, which is ideal. Feel like a lot will be dictated by who they end up drafting. Fox or Ball throws a bit of a wrench into that. I'm also not 100% convinced they're willing to start dealing away young, cost-controlled guys like Holmes for veterans. Hard to move with much certainty in Philly with Embiid's health, but nothing there would really surprise me since the Colangelo's took over.
As for the Bucks, the big issue is just money. They're already over the cap next season, and somebody will max out Jabari in UFA. Paying big money for AB guard means big luxury tax payments.
How can you say he was horrible but it wasn't because his ankles were injured?
He wasn't ever on an injury report for an ankle injury since prior to having the flu when he missed a couple games toward the end of the season. He missed one game due to the injury, returned, dealt with the flu, then returned after the illness and put up a 16/5 game (I guess he wasn't injured that day) along with a few other decent games prior to the playoffs beginning. Following those productive games the Celtics had several days off to prepare for the playoffs and Amir was exposed once playoff intensity ramped up. All season long people have been saying how his ankles are shot yet he was never on an injury report for it.
When has Amir ever been more productive on a winning team than he was this season? This is who he is.
Last edited:
I wouldn't be so sure of that. After this latest knee injury Parker's days as a SF are probably done, so they have to hope he can be an effective small ball PF full time now. He might be able to do it, he might not. But it's not 100% certain that Milwaukee would make that bet now given the sheer number of knee injuries that Parker's had.
How long will this warriors team be together and effective? 3-4 years? Beating Cleveland is one thing but beating GSW is another.
It's funny, I have no idea what Cleveland can add next year that would matter vs the warriors. Their window is the same length or shorter than GSW. I suspect you'll see cavs take off most of next season, too
It's funny, I have no idea what Cleveland can add next year that would matter vs the warriors. Their window is the same length or shorter than GSW. I suspect you'll see cavs take off most of next season, too
Yup. They are basically capped out and trading one of Irving/Love/Thompson seems counterproductive. Don't think anyone is taking JR Smith off their hands.
If the top seed in the east is basically admitting they are playing for 2021 how do the 25 teams below them feel?
We are headed for a regular season where top teams guys play 50-60 games and 30 mins a night. 15-20 teams have nothing to play for.
Zzzzzzzz
We are headed for a regular season where top teams guys play 50-60 games and 30 mins a night. 15-20 teams have nothing to play for.
Zzzzzzzz
To be honest, it's the only thing that gives me pause about some of the trade deals that have been bandied about. If you don't think that adding one superstar is going to be enough, then a reasonable goal should be to acquire multiple high level assets in hopes you end up with multiple stars. If you could really move #1 for #3+Saric+LAL 2018, with Nets 2018 there as well, you probably hurt your chances of ending up with 1 superstar, but increase you chances of ending up with 2. But it's definitely a boom-or-bust option, and it seems crazy that entertaining that should be necessary for a team that won 50+ and made it to the ECF.
Well, the C's should be a team aging superstars might want to sign with in a couple years, especially if Fultz is a stud and guys want to play with himOn the bright side, perhaps the series convinces James to come to Boston.
I started paying attention to the NBA in the 1979-1980 season. Since then, here's how the championships have gone, by team (37 seasons, not counting this year):
- Lakers: 10 titles
- Bulls: 6 titles
- Spurs: 5 titles
- Celtics: 4 titles
- Pistons: 3 titles
- Heat: 3 titles
- Rockets: 2 titles
- 76ers: 1 title
- Mavericks: 1 title
- Warriors: 1 title
- Cavaliers: 1 title
Over those 37 seasons...
- 4 franchises won 67.6% of the championships. Just 6 franchises won 83.8% of the championships.
- 11 of those championships were repeat champions (some of those were actually on their 3rd).
- We've seen three 3-peats.
- From 1990-91 through 1997-98, the Bulls won 6 titles. The Rockets won two, but those two years were only when Jordan was out playing baseball.
- LeBron has been to 7 straight finals.
I think the point is that the NBA has, as far as I can remember, been dominated by a few teams. Eventually those teams change, but ultimately it's just a few teams ruling the league and everyone else is picking up the scraps. GS may not win next year - or even this year. Injuries change things. Kawhi's injury was enormous to start the SA-GS series. If Durant gets hurt Cleveland could win this thing. I know you're not loving counting on that, but the NBA, during Jordan's peak years, could only sit helplessly as the Bulls crushed everyone in their path year after year after year, only derailed by his two-season (one and a half really) absence. Once he came back, they went right on crushing everyone.
We can think back to the glory days of Celtics-Lakers and think what a wonderful time it was when both teams seemed to be on equal footing, playing three championships against each other. But Cavs-Warriors are also at peak levels, playing three in a row against each other. As the rosters change a little, the advantage tilts one way or the other. Maybe Cleveland finds a way to add another star instead of playing a JR Smith or whatever. Who knows.
The NBA to everyone not named Cleveland or San Antonio or Golden State must feel like what everyone not named Boston or Los Angeles or Philadelphia felt like in the early-mid-80s.
As great as Golden State is today, history would tell us that it's very unlikely that they win the next three or four championships. There could be an injury or a premature decline from one their core players. Someone could get unhappy and request a trade. The next Tom Thibodeau could come along and develop a defensive scheme that nullifies pace and space. A young superstar takes a mega-leap and his team becomes unstoppable. You just have to build the best team you can and not worry about the Warriors and Cavs.
The peak showtime Lakers won 3/4. Jordan's Bulls won 6/8, losing only in the two years (actually 1.5) Jordan was playing baseball. The Warriors probably will not win all four of the next championships, but they will probably win 3 with the Cavs picking up the other one.
I do not want the Celtics to be the Stockton-Malone Jazz to the Warriors' Bulls. The players and coaching staff should compete hard for the next four seasons. But if they trade the Brooklyn picks to go all in now then they are simply fools.