Hayward to Boston...Really, We Mean It

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
How quickly things change. At this time last year, the Celtics never signed free agents because of the weather and taxes.

Now it's assumed they'll get the top guy (actually) on the market.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
Haewort cures many ills on this team, if not all (I agree about the rebounding problem - but that's there with Crowder on the court, too/instead). He only costs money, so the Celts have to be interested. And who wouldn't want to see what beautiful music Brad could conduct on offense with Gordon Lightfoot and Fultz added to the mix?
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
To be fair, people have been dreaming about Hayward because of the Stevens connection going back three years.

Now, if we were talking about KD coming here for real again :banana:
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,841
Some of you folks are acting like SoSH is the only place where "Hayward to Boston" is talked about.

The Celtics have a legitimate opportunity to add the best free agent AND the best rookie to a 53 win team. It's not a pipe dream.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
There's no chance the Celtics, if they want him, won't have the cap space available. None.
Yep. They can clear salary easily by moving AB or Crowder for a pick and if Hayward is coming here, the 2 of them are mostly redundant.

I also don't think Hayward solves the rebounding problem but that he might be part of the solution. He doesn't look like he's that much better of a rebounder than Crowder but he plays on a team with Rudy Gobert. His standing reach is also 8'7 while Crowder's is 8'3. Interestingly enough, Hayward's wing span sucks and is only 6'7.75 while Crowder's is 6'9.25.

Hayward is also a much better passer and with Al Horford already on the team, that would be some impressive ball movement. Although Blake Griffin and Milsap are great passers for their position too.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Yep. They can clear salary easily by moving AB or Crowder for a pick and if Hayward is coming here, the 2 of them are mostly redundant.

I also don't think Hayward solves the rebounding problem but that he might be part of the solution. He doesn't look like he's that much better of a rebounder than Crowder but he plays on a team with Rudy Gobert. His standing reach is also 8'7 while Crowder's is 8'3. Interestingly enough, Hayward's wing span sucks and is only 6'7.75 while Crowder's is 6'9.25.

Hayward is also a much better passer and with Al Horford already on the team, that would be some impressive ball movement. Although Blake Griffin and Milsap are great passers for their position too.
Yep. He solves the problem of not enough shot creators. Rebounding will require a different solution.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
How quickly things change. At this time last year, the Celtics never signed free agents because of the weather and taxes.

Now it's assumed they'll get the top guy (actually) on the market.
In fairness some of us always ridiculed the "No premium free agent will evah sign with the Celtics!!!" horsepuckey.
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
Guys, I really just don't think Ainge and Stevens have near the same concern about the "rebounding problem" that you all do. Not a single move they have made in the last 3 years indicates they have an interest in prioritizing that skill.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Guys, I really just don't think Ainge and Stevens have near the same concern about the "rebounding problem" that you all do. Not a single move they have made in the last 3 years indicates they have an interest in prioritizing that skill.
I don't think they should necessarily prioritize it but they should address it somehow. In certain match ups, the rebounding is too much to overcome so having a guy like Alan Williams on the bench would be nice. It's very possible Zizic or Yabu can provide the rebounding we need though.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
I don't think they should necessarily prioritize it but they should address it somehow. In certain match ups, the rebounding is too much to overcome so having a guy like Alan Williams on the bench would be nice. It's very possible Zizic or Yabu can provide the rebounding we need though.
Floor spacing and transition defense are far more important and focusing on those aspects of the game will hurt traditional rebounding numbers. That's not to say rebounding isn't an important skill but it's being talked about way too much as a team deficiency. Look at the rebounding numbers across the league this year and you'll see very little correlation between rebounding and team success.
 

Kid T

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
793
San Francisco
If they don’t bring back any of their free agents, the Celtics would have about $30M in cap space, which would be fortunate since Hayward’s max is expected to be about $30M. This would mean saying goodbye to the cap holds for restricted free agent Kelly Olynyk and unrestricted free agents like Amir Johnson, Jonas Jerebko and Gerald Green.
He also mentions trading AB to keep Olynyk as an alternative.

link: http://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/132076/sorting-the-real-and-fake-news-in-nba-free-agency-rumors
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,104
Assuming Highwaylord is ready to sign, I wonder what the order of operations is for Ainge. There's gotta be some prisoners dilemma play with Avery and Isaiah: whoever agrees to a team friendly extension definitely doesn't get traded; whoever doesn't agree gets traded for pick(s) to free up space for Harrywood where we take back zero salary (if neither sign then whoever brings back the best pick(s)). The complication is trying to figure out how KO fits into that equation (it would be nice to keep him on reasonable money but wouldn't be a disaster if he was gone), but nevertheless it doesn't seem like the best play is to keep both IT and Avery on a roster with 5 guards that all merit minutes, and then at the end of the season 1-2 of them walk away for nothing.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,275
Let's say the Celtics are able to sign Hayward and draft Fultz at 1. Would Bradley, Crowder, Yabu, and both 2018 #1 picks for Porzingis and the 8th pick be something the Knicks/Phil consider?
On first blush it doesn't seem like enough but Phil seems arrogant/stupid enough to try it (he has talked about how much he regrets not getting Crowder). Both Bradley and Crowder have reasonable contracts and fit in the triangle
With the 8th pick, you take either Zach Collins or Jonathan Isaac to add to the future core of the team. C's would have a 25 and under nucleus of Fultz, Smart, Brown, Porzingis, Zizic, Collins/Isaac, Rozier, and Abdul Nader as a 3 and D guy. That's a ton of talent
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
6,808
The back of your computer
Let's say the Celtics are able to sign Hayward and draft Fultz at 1. Would Bradley, Crowder, Yabu, and both 2018 #1 picks for Porzingis and the 8th pick be something the Knicks/Phil consider?
On first blush it doesn't seem like enough but Phil seems arrogant/stupid enough to try it (he has talked about how much he regrets not getting Crowder). Both Bradley and Crowder have reasonable contracts and fit in the triangle
With the 8th pick, you take either Zach Collins or Jonathan Isaac to add to the future core of the team. C's would have a 25 and under nucleus of Fultz, Smart, Brown, Porzingis, Zizic, Collins/Isaac, Rozier, and Abdul Nader as a 3 and D guy. That's a ton of talent
Don't think Phil is giving up Porzingis, and he's certainly not giving up Porzingis and #8 without getting #1 back.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
Don't think Phil is giving up Porzingis, and he's certainly not giving up Porzingis and #8 without getting #1 back.
Yeah. Package for Porzingis would have to start with both Brooklyn picks and likely consist of some combination of Brown, Smart, Bradley, and Crowder. He's about as untouchable as it gets. Although it's fun to dream.
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,104
Porzingis is trapped in NY. There's zero incentive for Jackson to trade him. He's a sure thing superstar and controlled for the next 4 years. Those are the guys you hold onto and PJax has plenty of time to try to figure out how to add talent around him.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,275
Don't think Phil is giving up Porzingis, and he's certainly not giving up Porzingis and #8 without getting #1 back.
That's fair and it did seem a little too good to be true. I guess the question is what could Bradley and Crowder fetch? I would think the target would be a stretch 4/5. What ones are conceivably available that are worth Bradley and Crowder?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
That's fair and it did seem a little too good to be true. I guess the question is what could Bradley and Crowder fetch? I would think the target would be a stretch 4/5. What ones are conceivably available that are worth Bradley and Crowder?
There really aren't any. That's why most people say "trade AB/Crowder for an upgrade at 4" instead of actually naming a player. If you look around the league at teams who would need AB or Crowder, they don't have a stretch 4 to give up.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
There really aren't any. That's why most people say "trade AB/Crowder for an upgrade at 4" instead of actually naming a player. If you look around the league at teams who would need AB or Crowder, they don't have a stretch 4 to give up.
My solution is somehow getting back into the 2nd half of the lotto to get Isaac, especially if he slips a little. Probably would have to be a 3 team trade because I doubt Bradley/Crowder would interest those teams. And additional non-Brooklyn picks would be needed. Wonder if Minnesota would be interested in some quality vets. Worth a shot at least.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,275
My solution is somehow getting back into the 2nd half of the lotto to get Isaac, especially if he slips a little. Probably would have to be a 3 team trade because I doubt Bradley/Crowder would interest those teams. And additional non-Brooklyn picks would be needed. Wonder if Minnesota would be interested in some quality vets. Worth a shot at least.
I had the same thought but I think you have to hold onto Crowder in this case just because the contract is so valuable. My thoughts were something like Bradley and the Boston 2018 #1 to either MIN for the #7 pick or NYK for the #8. Maybe include a third team so they can unload Rubio and get value back for him.

Basically I think you want to get back up into 7-11 range to take either Zach Collins or Jonathan Isaac (maybe OG Anunoby if his medical looks good)
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,883
My solution is somehow getting back into the 2nd half of the lotto to get Isaac, especially if he slips a little. Probably would have to be a 3 team trade because I doubt Bradley/Crowder would interest those teams. And additional non-Brooklyn picks would be needed. Wonder if Minnesota would be interested in some quality vets. Worth a shot at least.
I think they'd be more interested in Isaac. He seems like a great fit on that roster, and Thibs gets a versatile defensive piece to work with.
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
I had the same thought but I think you have to hold onto Crowder in this case just because the contract is so valuable. My thoughts were something like Bradley and the Boston 2018 #1 to either MIN for the #7 pick or NYK for the #8. Maybe include a third team so they can unload Rubio and get value back for him.

Basically I think you want to get back up into 7-11 range to take either Zach Collins or Jonathan Isaac (maybe OG Anunoby if his medical looks good)
I don't think you're getting a lottery pick for a year of Bradley before he enters UFA. I'm not sure Bradley even really remedies any of NYK/MIN's issues. He's not a true 1. If you're the Knicks, why not just take Smith/Monk/Ntiilikina there? Or even just best available?
 
Last edited:

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
I think they'd be more interested in Isaac. He seems like a great fit on that roster, and Thibs gets a versatile defensive piece to work with.
Way to kill my dream, man. But I agree. There just aren't any realistic options out there for us so I'm very interested to see what Ainge does.
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
Just addressing some recent posts:

You can't sign either Thomas or Bradley (or really anyone) and still sign Hayward. Even if you renounce literally everyone and get Yabu to agree to stay in China, you will not have enough space for Hayward and another $20+ million player (unless you think team friendly is like $12 million and then ok, but it's not happening with those guys). This is also why they aren't going to be keeping Olynyk if they go after Hayward. To re-sign the rotation players you need their Bird rights to kick in. To sign Hayward, you have to trade Bradley (for a lower salary) or Rozier (for no salary) and renounce everyone. Then after you sign Hayward you can use the exemption to add one decent guy (probably bring Amir back - I don't think you can use the exemption on an RFA (Olynyk)) and after that vet minimum guys.

You aren't getting a top 10, and probably not a lottery pick, for a year of Bradley. Who's close enough that could use him for just next year? Remember that you also need his salary cleared, so if you trade him it needs to be to a team under the cap, or you are also getting back a player with a salary you then need to clear. This gets pretty complicated, and I'm not sure anyone who has space is going to want to use it for Avery Bradley before FA really even begins (which needs to happen in order to properly clear the room for Hayward).

If the Celtics sign Hayward, the most likely scenario is that one of Bradley, Thomas, and Smart is allowed to go for nothing, and another is traded for not as much as people expect. This doesn't have to happen for a year, but it will have to happen.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
How about Bradley to Houston (or similar) for a first, with another team (under the cap) picking up a second or two to eat salary?
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
Just addressing some recent posts:

You can't sign either Thomas or Bradley (or really anyone) and still sign Hayward. Even if you renounce literally everyone and get Yabu to agree to stay in China, you will not have enough space for Hayward and another $20+ million player (unless you think team friendly is like $12 million and then ok, but it's not happening with those guys). This is also why they aren't going to be keeping Olynyk if they go after Hayward. To re-sign the rotation players you need their Bird rights to kick in. To sign Hayward, you have to trade Bradley (for a lower salary) or Rozier (for no salary) and renounce everyone. Then after you sign Hayward you can use the exemption to add one decent guy (probably bring Amir back - I don't think you can use the exemption on an RFA (Olynyk)) and after that vet minimum guys.

You aren't getting a top 10, and probably not a lottery pick, for a year of Bradley. Who's close enough that could use him for just next year? Remember that you also need his salary cleared, so if you trade him it needs to be to a team under the cap, or you are also getting back a player with a salary you then need to clear. This gets pretty complicated, and I'm not sure anyone who has space is going to want to use it for Avery Bradley before FA really even begins (which needs to happen in order to properly clear the room for Hayward).

If the Celtics sign Hayward, the most likely scenario is that one of Bradley, Thomas, and Smart is allowed to go for nothing, and another is traded for not as much as people expect. This doesn't have to happen for a year, but it will have to happen.
Apologies if this is a stupid question, but trying to understand. If it doesn't have to happen for a year, why would it have to happen at all? Because luxury tax?
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,275
Looking at the 1st round this year it seems like the best fit would be Milwaukee, who has the 17th pick. Bradley fits in perfectly with their roster and per Sportrac assuming Hawes and/or Greg Monroe decline their player options (dont think its a stretch to expect one to do so) they have the cap room to absorb Avery's salary.
I think you could probably get another 2nd rounder or a heavily protected 1st along with 17. If they can somehow trade up to 10 or 11, that's Zach Collins range. If not, that's the range for 4/5s like Jarrett Allen, Ike Anigbogu, Justin Patton, and Bam Adebayo who could all help
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,275
Apologies if this is a stupid question, but trying to understand. If it doesn't have to happen for a year, why would it have to happen at all? Because luxury tax?
I believe he's saying it doesn't have to happen for a year if they don't sign Hayward or another max FA. If they do, Bradley pretty much has to go
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
Apologies if this is a stupid question, but trying to understand. If it doesn't have to happen for a year, why would it have to happen at all? Because luxury tax?
Because luxury tax, yes. The NBA luxury tax is really intended as the hard cap, even though the players wouldn't allow it. The penalties are pretty large, and signing those guys (with Horford and Hayward already signed) mean you are going to be 2-3 years in a row of being over the tax limit, which will mean repeat offender charge in at least one year. It's probably an extra $40-$50 million that it would cost. (back of napkin guess, it might be much more)

Maybe if they get Hayward to sign a 3+1 and are willing to pay tax through the roof for 2020 it could happen. Then they will lose Hayward and Horford and still be near the cap so it's a big gamble on the kids being ready. (and of course if Hayward exercises his option you are going to pay again in 2021)
 
Last edited:

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
Looking at the 1st round this year it seems like the best fit would be Milwaukee, who has the 17th pick. Bradley fits in perfectly with their roster and per Sportrac assuming Hawes and/or Greg Monroe decline their player options (dont think its a stretch to expect one to do so) they have the cap room to absorb Avery's salary.
I think you could probably get another 2nd rounder or a heavily protected 1st along with 17. If they can somehow trade up to 10 or 11, that's Zach Collins range. If not, that's the range for 4/5s like Jarrett Allen, Ike Anigbogu, Justin Patton, and Bam Adebayo who could all help
Bradley doesn't seem like he fits with the Bucks at all. Their entire roster is filled with really long athletic guys that can defend and switch across multiple positions. Bradley is talented but he's basically the inverse of that style of player since he's undersized and has more success playing down a position.
 

finnVT

superspreadsheeter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2002
2,153
Indiana seems like they'd be a great fit for an AB trade: they have a bunch of dreck alongside Teague at SG, a pretty good pick target at #18 (or a future first, which could well be a lottery pick in a couple years), and potentially a desire to make a push in an effort to convince George to stay. But it's hard to make the salary work, and even if you do, getting salary back kills one of the main reasons to move AB.
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
Indiana should be well under the cap, so they don't need to send salary. The big question is whether they try to push to convince George to stay, or go into a rebuild.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
With Beverly/Harden/Gordon/Williams their backcourt is well set for next year.
And within there structure, I'm not even sure Bradley is an upgrade over Beverly. Certainly not at his price a year from now.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
Bradley doesn't seem like he fits with the Bucks at all. Their entire roster is filled with really long athletic guys that can defend and switch across multiple positions. Bradley is talented but he's basically the inverse of that style of player since he's undersized and has more success playing down a position.

There is some irony in us giving up Bradley and drafting the perfect complementary player for Bradley. Fultz can handle the ball and guard 2s, Bradley can crush opposing ball handlers and play off the ball.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,275
Bradley doesn't seem like he fits with the Bucks at all. Their entire roster is filled with really long athletic guys that can defend and switch across multiple positions. Bradley is talented but he's basically the inverse of that style of player since he's undersized and has more success playing down a position.
Bradley would replace Brogdan/Dellavedova as the "PG" when/if Jabari is healthy. With Jabari injured he can replace Snell or Brogdan in the starting line-up dependent on match up Basically, any team that has or wants to have a point forward (Milwaukee with Giannis, Philly with Ben Simmons) Bradley is a really good fit. He's a lockdown perimeter defender, doesn't have to have the ball in his hands, is a good secondary ball handler, and is a good jump shooter
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
Bradley would replace Brogdan/Dellavedova as the "PG" when/if Jabari is healthy. With Jabari injured he can replace Snell or Brogdan in the starting line-up dependent on match up Basically, any team that has or wants to have a point forward (Milwaukee with Giannis, Philly with Ben Simmons) Bradley is a really good fit. He's a lockdown perimeter defender, doesn't have to have the ball in his hands, is a good secondary ball handler, and is a good jump shooter

Mostly true but I don't think he is a good secondary ball handler. He might be the 6th best ball handler on the Celtics
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
I think Bradley would be a good fit on the Spurs if they think that Murray is able to handle a larger workload next year. Kawhi initiated the offense a decent amount this year as well. They obviously need some Curry defense help and Bradley would be a good guy to roll out there. No idea what would come back though.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Bradley doesn't seem like he fits with the Bucks at all. Their entire roster is filled with really long athletic guys that can defend and switch across multiple positions. Bradley is talented but he's basically the inverse of that style of player since he's undersized and has more success playing down a position.
He's perfect for their roster as their current PG defender has a history of foot problems and they run the offense through a forward. In Milwaukee Bradley can do what he's best at, terrorize opposing PGs defensively and shoot wide open treys.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
Porzingis is trapped in NY. There's zero incentive for Jackson to trade him. He's a sure thing superstar and controlled for the next 4 years. Those are the guys you hold onto and PJax has plenty of time to try to figure out how to add talent around him.
I know he should be untradeable, but we are talking Knicks. And Phil has thus far proven to be an egotistical maniac of a President, fitting in nicely.

The reason: Kristaps Porzingis' relationship with the organization--specifically team president Phil Jackson is worsening.

Weeks after Porzingis skipped an exit meeting due to frustration with the franchise and insistence from the front office to play within the confines of the triangle offense, the team let go of Josh Longstaff--an assistant coach closest to the second-year big man.

According to Frank Isola of the Daily News, Porzingis and the Knicks are 'on the rocks' now.

Phil Jackson sent Kristaps Porzingis the basketball equivalent of a Sicilian message by declining to retain assistant coach Josh Longstaff, who was Porzingis' workout guy and confidant.

Apparently, Phil can't get to Porzingis so he hurt someone close to him. That isn't Zen. That's Tony Soprano.

It's also a very risky game Jackson is playing with Porzingis, the future of the club. The relationship between the second-year forward and the Knicks is on the rocks. This makes things worse, not better.
Perhaps Phil sees a package like two BKN 1sts + Bradley and Yabusele as > the Unicorn due to Kristaps' reluctance to play in his preferred scheme?
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
If the Celtics were looking to trade Bradley for a minimal return like a non-lottery 1st round pick to make cap space to sign Hayward, they'd be better off offering him to Utah in a sign and trade to allow them to retain Olynyk and their exceptions. Utah would have to take probably Amir signed to a Bogans like deal, along with Zellers' fake deal, to facilitate.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,494
Looking at the 1st round this year it seems like the best fit would be Milwaukee, who has the 17th pick. Bradley fits in perfectly with their roster and per Sportrac assuming Hawes and/or Greg Monroe decline their player options (dont think its a stretch to expect one to do so) they have the cap room to absorb Avery's salary.
I think you could probably get another 2nd rounder or a heavily protected 1st along with 17. If they can somehow trade up to 10 or 11, that's Zach Collins range. If not, that's the range for 4/5s like Jarrett Allen, Ike Anigbogu, Justin Patton, and Bam Adebayo who could all help
Indiana seems like they'd be a great fit for an AB trade: they have a bunch of dreck alongside Teague at SG, a pretty good pick target at #18 (or a future first, which could well be a lottery pick in a couple years), and potentially a desire to make a push in an effort to convince George to stay. But it's hard to make the salary work, and even if you do, getting salary back kills one of the main reasons to move AB.
Neither team is going to give up a first for one year of AB when they can just sign him (assuming they have cap room) next year. No one, well not since Billy King lost his job.

Trade proposals that make a lot of sense for the Cs tend not to make any sense for the other teams. But I guess this is why none of us are running NBA teams.

Does CLE have its first round pick this year? Maybe they'd do it but I suspect even they wouldn't..
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
Neither team is going to give up a first for one year of AB when they can just sign him (assuming they have cap room) next year. No one, well not since Billy King lost his job.

Trade proposals that make a lot of sense for the Cs tend not to make any sense for the other teams. But I guess this is why none of us are running NBA teams.

Does CLE have its first round pick this year? Maybe they'd do it but I suspect even they wouldn't..
You don't think any team would give up any first round pick for Avery Bradley for one year?

I think they'd easily get that. I don't think they should take it, non-lottery first rounders aren't that valuable.

Cleveland gave up their first to rent Kyle Korver for half a season.
Toronto gave up their first and Terrence Ross to rent Serge Ibaka, after Orlando gave up Victor Oladipo, Ersan Ilyasova and the 11th pick to rent Ibaka first.

If you're a playoff team and can get a starter for a year that you might want to keep going forward, and his Bird rights, for a weak first round pick? You'd do it every time.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,494
You don't think any team would give up any first round pick for Avery Bradley for one year?

I think they'd easily get that. I don't think they should take it, non-lottery first rounders aren't that valuable.

Cleveland gave up their first to rent Kyle Korver for half a season.
Toronto gave up their first and Terrence Ross to rent Serge Ibaka, after Orlando gave up Victor Oladipo, Ersan Ilyasova and the 11th pick to rent Ibaka first.

If you're a playoff team and can get a starter for a year that you might want to keep going forward, and his Bird rights, for a weak first round pick? You'd do it every time.
I didn't say any team. I said neither IND or MIL. Sure CLE would do it. Maybe SA or Utah (they'd offer 30 but maybe they give up 24 but that would depend on Beyward resigning). I doubt OKC would do it for 21. But I think that's about it.