If you deal those picks for Kawhi, and he turns out to be a rental, you lose the ammo you need when a non-rental star becomes available. The opportunity cost is quite high.
Jurassic World 3: Where the Dinosaurs have Quad Injuries and Hate Their Shoe Deals
- Thread starter Sox Puppet
- Start date
Yeah, I can see this perspective too. I'm mighty happy the pacers jumped the gun and we didn't give up Tatum for PG13 before Tatum became awesome.
Except we have no idea what's been offered or discussed. According to Ramona Shelburne the Lakers and Spurs haven't even talked trade specifics yet and that the Spurs want Ingram and Lakers haven't offered him.
There's another added benefit to having top 5-10 picks in your back pocket. Even if you don't get to spend them on a star, you're in position to select exactly the player you want, and move up or down slightly. If the Celtics had the 8-10 pick this year, there would've been a decent chance to package it with Rozier to Orlando and move up for Bamba. That's just one example, but being in spitting distance of the top 5 has a lot of value.
The link also said that he’s not happy with his shoe deal and needs to play in a larger market. It specifically said he’d be open to playing in Boston or NY.
That's really interesting--it gives a plausible reason for why he might have been letting this injury go on, which might remove or lower that piece of uncertainty.
Tatum is probably the most untouchable young player in the league, so that's not happening. Still leaves a lot of other options open for a deal.
For cap reasons, I do very much like the idea of swapping Kyrie instead of JB.
You have to include more in a Kyrie-centered deal though, because the Spurs will definitely see him as a flight risk. Jaylen would be a centerpiece asset on his own. I suppose the Spurs could immediately start shopping Kyrie for a decent return though, and Ainge would bring that up in any discussions I'm sure.
Absolutely...though you still have a cap crunch after next season, which is why I think it has to be Kyrie+
I want Kyrie here. I'd be disappointed if he was dealt. I think point guard is still important in today's NBA.
I’m concerned that Kyrie wants NYC. In the event of a Kawhi/Kyrie trade, I wonder who between Hayward and Brown gets bumped to the Manu 6th man role. Guessing Hayward since it would allow him to ease his way back and he’d be able to get tons of shots on the 2nd unit. Not sure if he’d be cool with that though.
I'd just make Hayward the point forward. He's the one with the most experience in that system as a ball handler.
This is a weird report in my eyes. What's the use in telling other teams that you prefer Jayson Tatum, when they don't have Jayson Tatum and it's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain that the team which does is not putting him on the table?
The issue is they likely cannot afford both Kyrie and Kawhi after next year. With Brown, they can probably extend the five all-star roster into 2020.
The Spurs were on Kyrie's short list of preferred trade destinations last summer, but I don't know if that calculus would change on a Kawhi-less version of the team.
Okay. But i was responding to post that asked how we know Spurs didn’t like “what was offered”—for purposes of my response I was assuming they had received offer. Generally speaking if they had offer they liked they’d take it.
My calculator says 1 year of Kawhi is not worth giving up 8 years (whatever) of Brown.
A KI/Kawhi is more defensible in terms of flight risk and future cap hit.
But I see no reason to bail out the Spurs or break-up the Celts for KL.
A KI/Kawhi is more defensible in terms of flight risk and future cap hit.
But I see no reason to bail out the Spurs or break-up the Celts for KL.
Because that's the bar they're setting for other teams. "We want a cost controlled rookie of the year candidate with top 5 player potential".
Nobody can or will give them that, but it's starting the bidding high.
Anyway, most of these "leaks" feel like spin to me. SA tells teams they want a haul and that Boston is in the mix (team with best assets). LA counters they provided a godfather offer (were trying to get him, fans!) Kawhis agent leaks that he hasn't confirmed a future if he goes to Boston...all of this is posturing. SA is leveraging Boston, LA is trying to spin the public, and Kawhis agent is doing his best to steer this to LA.
This all ends with Kawhi in LA. The question is, what's the cost?
Right, but it's the "a player of Tatum's caliber is obviously not on the table" part that makes it sound kind of foolish as a negotiating point. But, sure, aim high I guess
Yeah, I get it, but there is just as much likelihood that those picks are a #11 and a #14.
Kawhi Leonard is REALLY good. Like, Celts are the favorite with him — and I take my chances on him playing on this team, in this city, with this coach, and that he thinks strongly about signing an extension here.
I really don’t want to move Kyrie — I want to see his assassin impression in the postseason on this team. And, again, I’m not sure why everyone is so worried about him leaving — he cannot even consider an extension with this team, has to wait to be unrestricted, but playing for this team and city and coach — it is hard for me to fathom him wanting to start over somewhere else on a worse team purely for “brand” reasons or whatever. He above all of these guys will be the face of the franchise because of his personality and style of game.
I think it's actually highly likely. The supermax extension is 5 years / $219 million, and he'd be taking a lot less to go elsewhere. I'm not terribly excited about that kind of outlay for a guy who basically just missed a season to a leg injury.
I'm surprised it took this long for me to see a reply in favor of keeping Irving.
You think that there is as much a likelihood that SAC picks 11th or worse as there is that they pick 5-10?
And Memphis picking 14 would mean that that roster had nearly made the playoffs in 2018-19, in the West.
I get that the future picks have no guarantees, but it's important to value these assets accurately.
Well, we have a similar outlay for Hayward who just missed a season with a leg injury. And Kawhi is a top 5 player if and when he is healthy.
If he plays for the Celtics, they win a championship, he is a top 10 player in the NBA again — then it seems like a great deal. Either way, the Celtics will have a choice to make — I just don’t think this kind of opportunity comes along very well — and if they can get a player like Kawhi for fodder and draft picks, you do it every time. This is the exact kind of GFIN move that Ainge should be making with these picks with the core that they have built.
Of course nobody knows — but between the lower benefits of being a lottery team and what is expected to be not a super deep draft, do you really NOT make a deal for Kawhi because you are banking on another top 5 pick? Kyrie for the Brooklyn pick was kind of the example here — no? Would anyone here want a re-do on the Kyrie trade at this point?
I get that it is a very valuable asset — my point is that where the Celtics are in the championship-building cycle coupled with the assets that they have accumulated — I think an overpay is okay here if you can get a shot at a Kawhi type player.
A small update on where things stand with the Lakers and trade talks. A league source tells me that so far the Lakers haven't offered Brandon Ingram in any deals.
Fresh intel: Don't count #Heat out in @kawhileonard sweepstakes. I personally believe #Sixers are the favorites, but I never underestimate Pat Riley. If he can get Kawhi, then guess who he can go after on July 6?
What could the Heat possibly trade? Is Justise Winslow — one year from free agency — really a big trade asset?
In addition to iffy talent for trade purposes, the amount of money they would have to unload makes me HIGHLY skeptical that what Sheridan suggests is even possible. There aren’t even enough teams out there with the cap space to absorb $20 mil, for example, without sending money back. And they’d need to shed way more than that.
I’ve been trying to listen to Magic’s voice in my head all day: “You see Gregg, here’s the thing. We really need Kawhi by Friday. What can we do?”
Don't read too much into it. It's not like everyone is rushing to say deal him. I want him too.
He would, if San Antonio wants a guy making max money for two more years that Miami played 15 MPG in the playoffs.
Yeah, seriously. Whiteside is dead weight at this point. No way Spurs would be interested.
If the Lakers are firm on not moving Ingram, then the Spurs will have to decide between Philly's Saric, Covington, the Miami pick, and possibly another #1, and Boston, with Brown, Morris, Rozier, Semi, Yabusele, Nader and a pick, or Kyrie.
Would these trades including a S+T player pass muster? Brown and S+T Smart plus filler and a pick, or S+T Smart, Morris, Yabusele, Nader and two picks, or Rozier, S and T Baynes, Morris, Yabu, Nader, Semi and two picks.
Would these trades including a S+T player pass muster? Brown and S+T Smart plus filler and a pick, or S+T Smart, Morris, Yabusele, Nader and two picks, or Rozier, S and T Baynes, Morris, Yabu, Nader, Semi and two picks.
Is Ingram that much of a difference maker? RPM +/- says he's nothing special, what advanced metrics tell me he is good?
I'm still standing by my April offer. Kyrie + Morris for Kawhi+. Otherwise, I'll pass on sending Brown and go with what we have.
Seems wild to me to send out a superstar in Kyrie, who seems to buy into the culture and our organization, for a guy who got sick of the best organization in the NBA. All things equal, I agree Kawhi is a better player, but the other stuff matters a lot imo.
Kyrie is also making some noises about not being sure he'll re-sign, and he previously got sick of playing on a team that had made 3 straight NBA finals because they weren't featuring him enough or something.
I'd jump on a Kyrie for Kawhi trade if Kawhi indicated any sort of openness to staying.