Kemba Walker + 2021 First Round Pick to OKC for Al Horford, Moses Brown

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,526
You need to re read the question. I'd take SImmons over McCollum in any situation.
Lol, mixed the two posts.
I'd take Simmons over Beal here, Beal over Simmons with JAGs, Simmons on an essentially empty team. Simmons of me is limited, but younger, cheaper, and if you surround him with shooters he could be great. Beal is older, paid more and I think has a lower ceiling, but if you have no #1 option he can really score, which is what a team of JAGs needs.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,493
Lol, mixed the two posts.
I'd take Simmons over Beal here, Beal over Simmons with JAGs, Simmons on an essentially empty team. Simmons of me is limited, but younger, cheaper, and if you surround him with shooters he could be great. Beal is older, paid more and I think has a lower ceiling, but if you have no #1 option he can really score, which is what a team of JAGs needs.
I think if Portland had the choice, they'd trade CJ for Ben over Beal. I think any team that has 2 alpha scorers or at least an alpha scorer (Dame) and a really good one (Powell) would be a great fit for Simmons. A team with only one would prefer Beal. I think that's most teams in the NBA but I'd have to look. 76ers would be way better with Beal instead of Ben, imo.

I think Portland would be very interested in Marcus Smart too, I'm just not sure they'd prefer him to Ben Simmons. In the above deal I mentioned, they'd just take Simmons. Regarding CJ McCollum though, meh. Is he really that much better than Marcus Smart re: overall value? There are just so many players out there than can do 90% of what CJ does at a fraction of the cost. Maybe I'm underselling CJ. He just seems like a healthy Kemba.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,526
I think if Portland had the choice, they'd trade CJ for Ben over Beal. I think any team that has 2 alpha scorers or at least an alpha scorer (Dame) and a really good one (Powell) would be a great fit for Simmons. A team with only one would prefer Beal. I think that's most teams in the NBA but I'd have to look. 76ers would be way better with Beal instead of Ben, imo.

I think Portland would be very interested in Marcus Smart too, I'm just not sure they'd prefer him to Ben Simmons. In the above deal I mentioned, they'd just take Simmons. Regarding CJ McCollum though, meh. Is he really that much better than Marcus Smart re: overall value? There are just so many players out there than can do 90% of what CJ does at a fraction of the cost. Maybe I'm underselling CJ. He just seems like a healthy Kemba.
Yeah, I'm the wrong person to ask, I think McCollum is really overrated, he's a good but not elite scorer to me, who doesn't defend.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,493
Yeah, I'm the wrong person to ask, I think McCollum is really overrated, he's a good but not elite scorer to me, who doesn't defend.
He's like the Jaylen Brown of shooting guards. By that, I mean they are both in like tier 2 or 3 of their position. Neither are elite and neither are clear number 2s. It's possible Jaylen gets there but this is probably his last real off season of anything more than marginal growth.

Of course, the Jaylen Brown of the wing position has way more value than the Jaylen Brown of the shooting guard position. A year ago, I think most of us would have traded Jaylen for Simmons. I don't think anyone would now. That makes me think the only way Simmons is traded is like (I think) you said, Embiid demands it. I think for the 76ers, McCollum works better than Smart/TT but I don't think value wise it's far off.

I just go down the list and see so few teams Simmons actually makes sense for. Would Vuc and Embiid work together? If Sexton is that big of a problem in Cleveland, would they be interested in Simmons for Kevin Love and Sexton?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,526
He's like the Jaylen Brown of shooting guards. By that, I mean they are both in like tier 2 or 3 of their position. Neither are elite and neither are clear number 2s. It's possible Jaylen gets there but this is probably his last real off season of anything more than marginal growth.

Of course, the Jaylen Brown of the wing position has way more value than the Jaylen Brown of the shooting guard position. A year ago, I think most of us would have traded Jaylen for Simmons. I don't think anyone would now. That makes me think the only way Simmons is traded is like (I think) you said, Embiid demands it. I think for the 76ers, McCollum works better than Smart/TT but I don't think value wise it's far off.

I just go down the list and see so few teams Simmons actually makes sense for. Would Vuc and Embiid work together? If Sexton is that big of a problem in Cleveland, would they be interested in Simmons for Kevin Love and Sexton?
The rumors on a Bulls deal are that it would center on LaVine. Which is interesting, but I also wonder... do Vuc and Simmons work? And, do the Bulls want to pay that much for Simmons when they have a year of LaVine at 19M and can extend him?
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
4,231
He's like the Jaylen Brown of shooting guards. By that, I mean they are both in like tier 2 or 3 of their position. Neither are elite and neither are clear number 2s. It's possible Jaylen gets there but this is probably his last real off season of anything more than marginal growth.

Of course, the Jaylen Brown of the wing position has way more value than the Jaylen Brown of the shooting guard position. A year ago, I think most of us would have traded Jaylen for Simmons. I don't think anyone would now. That makes me think the only way Simmons is traded is like (I think) you said, Embiid demands it. I think for the 76ers, McCollum works better than Smart/TT but I don't think value wise it's far off.

I just go down the list and see so few teams Simmons actually makes sense for. Would Vuc and Embiid work together? If Sexton is that big of a problem in Cleveland, would they be interested in Simmons for Kevin Love and Sexton?
I don’t really see the similarity between McCollum and Brown, even in talking about tiers.

Jaylen was kind of a mess defensively last year but he has the capability to be a plus plus defender (we’ve seen it here at times) and has shown a lot of improvement throughout his career. He also is a fit on pretty much any roster due to his size and adaptability. I think almost anyone would rate Brown as a top 25-30 trade asset

McCollum is, at best, a bad defender and is an undersized 2 guard. He’s older (29 to 24) and has been basically the same player for the last 3-4 years. Because of his size he really needs a specific type of roster to thrive (ironically Simmons would be a great fit playing next to him). I don’t think McCollum is a top 30 asset and I don’t think many would include him there either
 

jasail

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,146
Boston
I'd drive both to the airport. If the market for Ben Simmons is really that low, the C's should be all over that trade. Simmons fits in with the Jays perfectly.

In another month or two, Simmons value is going to rebound. I think a lot of people are overreacting to one series. Yeah, he has warts but his game is also a terrible fit in Philly. It's like watching Brandon Ingram play alongside LeBron or Victor Oladipo playing alongside Westbrook.

Acquire Simmons, trade TL/stuff for a Stretch 5 and win titles.
I agree with your point that Simmons value is likely going to rebound. How can it not? The taste he left in our mouths was that fourth quarter that ultimately saw him not closing the game because he was such an offensive liability. Eventually, someone will look at the body of work, the positive skills, and the potential and convince themselves a change of scenery will help him figure out how to shoot well enough.

I also agree that Simmons is a good player. He's a good scorer and play maker in the paint and he's a good defender 2-4. You say he has warts, I'd also agree. I just think those warts are more the genital herpes type than say the common plantar wart. I don't like his game in the context of the current NBA that relies on 3pt shooting, spacing, and creating from the perimeter. He provides none of that. I also don't buy the idea that he can play out of 5. He gets bullied by bigger players and has shown no ability to play out of the post on offense. Then there comes the issue of heart and I'll take Jimmy Butler's word for it.

I get why folks would like the idea of Simmons on the C's, it's just not for me. And thankfully for me, the C's probably don't have the pieces to get it done anyway. That's not say he's washed up, I just don't want him. I can see his game fitting in much better in GS with Curry/Green/Thompson (Wiggins and the 7th) or in Portland if they could swing it without giving up McCollum (they can't).

I'd much rather the C's target someone like Beal if they're going after that 3rd player this offseason or settle for rolling with the Jays and JAGs and going after that next piece in 2022/2023. I'm just not a Simmons fan and have never been.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,493
I don’t really see the similarity between McCollum and Brown, even in talking about tiers.

Jaylen was kind of a mess defensively last year but he has the capability to be a plus plus defender (we’ve seen it here at times) and has shown a lot of improvement throughout his career. He also is a fit on pretty much any roster due to his size and adaptability. I think almost anyone would rate Brown as a top 25-30 trade asset

McCollum is, at best, a bad defender and is an undersized 2 guard. He’s older (29 to 24) and has been basically the same player for the last 3-4 years. Because of his size he really needs a specific type of roster to thrive (ironically Simmons would be a great fit playing next to him). I don’t think McCollum is a top 30 asset and I don’t think many would include him there either
Wings fit on pretty much every team, that's why they are far more valuable than shooting guards. Shooting guard is a dying position slowly being replace by the wing position. The game is evolving into 3 positions. Most players like CJ are burdens on defense even if they play with effort. There are exceptions.

Brown is a top 25-30 player in the league. Some might have McCollum in the top 50-60. It's more a commentary on today's game and how little value certain positions have nowadays. SG isn't exactly C but it's taken a hit over the years. Of course, the PF and SF spots are already relics.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,493
I agree with your point that Simmons value is likely going to rebound. How can it not? The taste he left in our mouths was that fourth quarter that ultimately saw him not closing the game because he was such an offensive liability. Eventually, someone will look at the body of work, the positive skills, and the potential and convince themselves a change of scenery will help him figure out how to shoot well enough.

I also agree that Simmons is a good player. He's a good scorer and play maker in the paint and he's a good defender 2-4. You say he has warts, I'd also agree. I just think those warts are more the genital herpes type than say the common plantar wart. I don't like his game in the context of the current NBA that relies on 3pt shooting, spacing, and creating from the perimeter. He provides none of that. I also don't buy the idea that he can play out of 5. He gets bullied by bigger players and has shown no ability to play out of the post on offense. Then there comes the issue of heart and I'll take Jimmy Butler's word for it.

I get why folks would like the idea of Simmons on the C's, it's just not for me. And thankfully for me, the C's probably don't have the pieces to get it done anyway. That's not say he's washed up, I just don't want him. I can see his game fitting in much better in GS with Curry/Green/Thompson (Wiggins and the 7th) or in Portland if they could swing it without giving up McCollum (they can't).

I'd much rather the C's target someone like Beal if they're going after that 3rd player this offseason or settle for rolling with the Jays and JAGs and going after that next piece in 2022/2023. I'm just not a Simmons fan and have never been.
I'd just worry with Beal there wouldn't be enough shots to go around. Beal also causes problems defensively. I could be wrong, but I think it's far easier to hide a player's offensive shortcomings than his defensive one. You can't really control what other teams are doing on offense but you can control what you are doing on offense.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
7,264
New York City
I'd just worry with Beal there wouldn't be enough shots to go around. Beal also causes problems defensively. I could be wrong, but I think it's far easier to hide a player's offensive shortcomings than his defensive one. You can't really control what other teams are doing on offense but you can control what you are doing on offense.
I wouldn't be worried about the former - with injuries, rotations, etc. players are going to get their shots/points. Plus, if Beal made his way here, it would be specifically to play with Tatum, so he'd know that he'd be coming into a situation where he doesn't always have to be "the guy."

The defensive issues, though, are very real. Beal seems to be regarded as anywhere from bad to extremely bad on defense. On the other hand, so were Kemba, Kyrie, and IT - guards who are both prolific scorers and decent on defense are guys that probably never become available via trade at all.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
6,602
C's get Ben Simmons
Philly gets CJ McCollum, stuff
Portland gets Smart, TT, stuff

I'm sure if someone fudged around with it, there's a deal to be made that makes sense for all 3 teams. It might involve RL and/or some picks.

Ultimately, if Ben Simmons is traded, Philly can do better than anything the C's offer. And I don't see Ben Simmons demanding a trade to Boston.

Who would people rather have on the C's? Simmons or Beal? Who would people rather have on a generic team?

The first question is a tough decision for me (I'd reluctantly take Simmons and probably regret it later) but the 2nd one is an easy one (Beal). It's possible that impacts just how much Simmons would get in a return.

I usually think "don't trade a star player within a division/conference" is the logic of losing teams. But in this case, I think it would make sense for Philly to take a little less to not give Boston a 3rd all star under 25. Maybe more than a little less.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
37,891
Melrose, MA
C's get Ben Simmons
Philly gets CJ McCollum, stuff
Portland gets Smart, TT, stuff

I'm sure if someone fudged around with it, there's a deal to be made that makes sense for all 3 teams. It might involve RL and/or some picks.

Ultimately, if Ben Simmons is traded, Philly can do better than anything the C's offer. And I don't see Ben Simmons demanding a trade to Boston.

Who would people rather have on the C's? Simmons or Beal? Who would people rather have on a generic team?

The first question is a tough decision for me (I'd reluctantly take Simmons and probably regret it later) but the 2nd one is an easy one (Beal). It's possible that impacts just how much Simmons would get in a return.
For THIS Celtic team I'd rather have Simmons. If you had Tatum, Beal, and Brown would you just end up forcing Brown into a lesser role because Tatum and Beal are better scorers? Simmons won't fit everywhere (he's not a good fit alongside Embiid) but on a team with 2 star wings who can shoot and score? Simmons essentially arrived in the NBA as a very good player and has since stagnated, and he has no shot. Not every team is going to be a fit, but the Celtics are one of the few that may be.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
7,264
New York City
I usually think "don't trade a star player within a division/conference" is the logic of losing teams. But in this case, I think it would make sense for Philly to take a little less to not give Boston a 3rd all star under 25. Maybe more than a little less.
In the scenario discussed, though, there would be nothing preventing Portland from flipping Simmons for the Celtics guys anyway, though. Not that I think that would happen as I don't think Portland would trade McCollum for Smart/TT/picks, unless they think Smart can make that much of a defensive difference that it makes up for the drop off in scoring. (I know some here aren't that high on McCollum but I'm trying to view it from Portland's perspective.)
 

Rustjive

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2009
1,033
The defensive issues, though, are very real. Beal seems to be regarded as anywhere from bad to extremely bad on defense. On the other hand, so were Kemba, Kyrie, and IT - guards who are both prolific scorers and decent on defense are guys that probably never become available via trade at all.
They aren't that real - his defense is simply a function of effort/team/coaching, how much he has to do on the offensive end, and perception/bias. In 2016-2017, by DRPM, he was slightly above average (.18), then in 2017-2018 he was the 18th best defender in the league, 5th among qualified guards, by DRPM (2.63). 2018-2019 he was negative (-.83), in 2019-2020 he was absolutely dreadful (-4.79, essentially tied with IT for 2nd/3rd worst), and last year he was just merely negative again (-.86). His dropoff basically coincides with Washington being non-competitive - Wall only played half the 2018-2019 season, which meant the Wizards were lottery bound.

The perception/bias thing has to do with fans consistently attaching the 'undersized' label to him - which he isn't. He's not big by any stretch, but at the same time he was still 6'3" with no shoes after the NBA-mandated re-measurement. Kemba and IT he is not. He's taller and a better scorer and better on defense than Donovan Mitchell, and no one ever stresses about how Mitchell's defense would play if the dream scenario of Mitchell/Jaylen/Jayson would come to pass.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,493
They aren't that real - his defense is simply a function of effort/team/coaching, how much he has to do on the offensive end, and perception/bias. In 2016-2017, by DRPM, he was slightly above average (.18), then in 2017-2018 he was the 18th best defender in the league, 5th among qualified guards, by DRPM (2.63). 2018-2019 he was negative (-.83), in 2019-2020 he was absolutely dreadful (-4.79, essentially tied with IT for 2nd/3rd worst), and last year he was just merely negative again (-.86). His dropoff basically coincides with Washington being non-competitive - Wall only played half the 2018-2019 season, which meant the Wizards were lottery bound.

The perception/bias thing has to do with fans consistently attaching the 'undersized' label to him - which he isn't. He's not big by any stretch, but at the same time he was still 6'3" with no shoes after the NBA-mandated re-measurement. Kemba and IT he is not. He's taller and a better scorer and better on defense than Donovan Mitchell, and no one ever stresses about how Mitchell's defense would play if the dream scenario of Mitchell/Jaylen/Jayson would come to pass.
The vast majority of us would be doing cartwheels if we could acquire any of Beal, Simmons or Mitchell in a trade that didn't require Tatum and Jaylen. You can still have a preference towards one over the other. I don't think anyone is really stressing adding Beal to the roster, just talking about possible issues that would arise if he was here.

Dame too.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
5,183
Imaginationland
obviously, Philly would never go for it

Portland (CJ) in a 3-way would never go for it also
Yeah. Flawed as he is, Simmons is still a 24 year old 3x all-star signed longterm. Other than Tatum or Brown, the Celtics don't have the assets to fetch a player like that (not right now).
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,534
Brown is a top 25-30 player in the league. Some might have McCollum in the top 50-60. It's more a commentary on today's game and how little value certain positions have nowadays. SG isn't exactly C but it's taken a hit over the years. Of course, the PF and SF spots are already relics.
Simmons and Russillo did their top 40 players on a podcast last week and both had McCollum in the 30-40 range, so saying some might have him 50-60 is way underselling him.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
1,885
Simmons and Russillo did their top 40 players on a podcast last week and both had McCollum in the 30-40 range, so saying some might have him 50-60 is way underselling him.
That was referring to current skills for this season. He could both be in the top 30-40 for this season & be top 50-60 in terms of a trade value asset.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
9,246
Toscana via Kyiv
I agree with your point that Simmons value is likely going to rebound. How can it not? The taste he left in our mouths was that fourth quarter that ultimately saw him not closing the game because he was such an offensive liability. Eventually, someone will look at the body of work, the positive skills, and the potential and convince themselves a change of scenery will help him figure out how to shoot well enough.

I also agree that Simmons is a good player. He's a good scorer and play maker in the paint and he's a good defender 2-4. You say he has warts, I'd also agree. I just think those warts are more the genital herpes type than say the common plantar wart. I don't like his game in the context of the current NBA that relies on 3pt shooting, spacing, and creating from the perimeter. He provides none of that. I also don't buy the idea that he can play out of 5. He gets bullied by bigger players and has shown no ability to play out of the post on offense. Then there comes the issue of heart and I'll take Jimmy Butler's word for it.

I get why folks would like the idea of Simmons on the C's, it's just not for me. And thankfully for me, the C's probably don't have the pieces to get it done anyway. That's not say he's washed up, I just don't want him. I can see his game fitting in much better in GS with Curry/Green/Thompson (Wiggins and the 7th) or in Portland if they could swing it without giving up McCollum (they can't).

I'd much rather the C's target someone like Beal if they're going after that 3rd player this offseason or settle for rolling with the Jays and JAGs and going after that next piece in 2022/2023. I'm just not a Simmons fan and have never been.
Hmmmm, so I'm a Simmons fan, but I think he's shown enough issues in the playoffs now that teams are going to tread carefully. In the right situation he could be really, really good, but you have to be very convinced as a GM that you can create that situation. To me, he's moved out of the "acquire the talent and let it sort itself out" category and into the "better make sure you don't hamstring your franchise for 3-4 years if he doesn't quite fit" category.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
8,048
around the way
Hmmmm, so I'm a Simmons fan, but I think he's shown enough issues in the playoffs now that teams are going to tread carefully. In the right situation he could be really, really good, but you have to be very convinced as a GM that you can create that situation. To me, he's moved out of the "acquire the talent and let it sort itself out" category and into the "better make sure you don't hamstring your franchise for 3-4 years if he doesn't quite fit" category.
Apologies for the ditto here, but that is really well stated.

To add, we have seen that his floor, in the playoffs, with the wrong kind of team around him, is lower than previously thought. That's what makes the contract an albatross, not Simmons' skills or contributions--on the wrong team. On the right team, he's likely still a stud.
 

jasail

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,146
Boston
Hmmmm, so I'm a Simmons fan, but I think he's shown enough issues in the playoffs now that teams are going to tread carefully. In the right situation he could be really, really good, but you have to be very convinced as a GM that you can create that situation. To me, he's moved out of the "acquire the talent and let it sort itself out" category and into the "better make sure you don't hamstring your franchise for 3-4 years if he doesn't quite fit" category.
I'm not sure we are saying entirely different things here. Perhaps I didn't phrase what I'm saying as well as a I could have. My view is that his value eventually bounces back from where it was at the end of G7. I don't know how it couldn't. At that point his value was that of an unplayable bust, owed ~ $130M plus through 2025, and loathed by his current team and city. His situation is not going to be a contract dump. Eventually, water will find its level and Philly will get a reasonable return for him. At the same time, the veneer is off and a team isn't going to pay a King's ransom for a guy who generously put has warts in his game.

As I stated up thread, I see GS as a great landing spot for him. They have the pieces (Wiggins +), his contract keeps him through their remaining Curry/Thompson/Green window, and they're a good fit. They have sharp shooters all over the place who can stretch a defense, he can find the open shooter, he doesn't have to be a top scoring option and can pick his spots, and he'll blend in with their switching defense.

I just don't like his game or want to see him in green. Reasonable minds will disagree.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,526
As I stated up thread, I see GS as a great landing spot for him. They have the pieces (Wiggins +), his contract keeps him through their remaining Curry/Thompson/Green window, and they're a good fit. They have sharp shooters all over the place who can stretch a defense, he can find the open shooter, he doesn't have to be a top scoring option and can pick his spots, and he'll blend in with their switching defense.

I just don't like his game or want to see him in green. Reasonable minds will disagree.
I don't really see this. I don't think Wiggins has value, and what is the plus... draft picks or Wiseman? Not sure PHI is looking for that return. I also see no way you can play Green and Simmons together, neither wants to take a shot. I mean Draymond straight up doesn't even try to shoot anymore, he put up 9 FGA per 100 possessions last year... 15th on the team and 230th of 237 qualifiers.

I think if you're looking at Simmons to the Warriors, it's a 3 way deal with Draymond and picks/Wiseman going to a 3rd team.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
23,160
Newton
I spent some time today reading the hottakes in the Horford to Sixers thread from two years ago. Posters arguing that it signaled the beginning of a rebuild, that we were now the East Coast T-Wolves, that he was leaving for a team that could actually compete.

That is some funny stuff.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
9,246
Toscana via Kyiv
I don't really see this. I don't think Wiggins has value, and what is the plus... draft picks or Wiseman? Not sure PHI is looking for that return. I also see no way you can play Green and Simmons together, neither wants to take a shot. I mean Draymond straight up doesn't even try to shoot anymore, he put up 9 FGA per 100 possessions last year... 15th on the team and 230th of 237 qualifiers.

I think if you're looking at Simmons to the Warriors, it's a 3 way deal with Draymond and picks/Wiseman going to a 3rd team.
3-teamer seems to be the only way it works. The Warriors have the fit for Simmons and the assets to the 3rd team to make it make sense though.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,349
Santa Monica
It's interesting that Horford's ineptitude from behind the arc doesn't get more discussion. He's really fallen off a cliff this season. Career .356, this season .284. It's even more stunning because I would hazard a guess that every single attempt would be considered "wide open".

Unfortunately, with Williams and Horford on the floor there is just no spacing because teams do not cover them at all near the 3 point line.
+1
Taking this over here (couldn't find a Horford thread? which is kind of ironic that a starter shooting 28% from 3 hasn't yielded one complaint BUT if Smart shoots a 3 in the 2nd quarter the Board explodes. I smell bias)

Horford is one of our/NBAs sacred cows. He truly is one of the "great guys" in the NBA and extremely well respected by his peers. None shall say an ill word on Horford or risk being labeled a Merloni/hot take bot

I imagine telling Al that he is strictly a Center and needs to be a backup 5 would be tough for a Rookie Head Coach/Rookie President. Not only would it be ego-bruising for Al BUT crushes his value, potentially costing him millions on his team option next season and future seasons. Being a Wing pays, being a backup 5 not so much. Horford is VERY cognizant of $$$ (as every player is) and what it says. This team can't afford to lose Al's leadership, and maybe that's the fear (I don't agree, but what has been speculated)

It's compounded by the fact that Celtics have one of the Top5 Corner3 shooting sWings(4) that would help spread the floor BUT the Celtics' are very committed to Horford starting with Rob. The adv metrics say that the starting 5s +/- over 130 minutes is very good so until one of Horford or Rob is out for the season (which will happen) expect the lane to be congested. The upside is it gives Tatum/Brown practice going 1 on 4 which will only make them more skilled rim runners in future seasons.
 

Senator Donut

post-Domer
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2010
4,881
02148
It’s not only that Horford is a bit of a sacred cow, but it’s also easier to blame Ime for poor usage. Horford no longer having any gravity to pull out a defender is a bigger liability when playing with Time Lord than it is in single-big lineups.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
6,507
The rightful (IMO) criticism of Ime is the continued usage of RW and AH together. Yes, it's Horford's fault that he can't seem to hit threes anymore. But, at some point, it's the coach's job to put his players in a position to succeed. If Horford can't hit threes, it's also Ime's fault to continue to ask him to.

Given RW's injury history, it boggles me that they don't just go to a straight platoon and have RW play 24-30 miinutes a night and AH play 18-24 minutes a night. I think Horford still has a lot of value, and can be a good player. I just don't think he's as good a player when asked to play 30 minutes a night anymore.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,349
Santa Monica
It’s not only that Horford is a bit of a sacred cow, but it’s also easier to blame Ime for poor usage. Horford no longer having any gravity to pull out a defender is a bigger liability when playing with Time Lord than it is in single-big lineups.
The rightful (IMO) criticism of Ime is the continued usage of RW and AH together. Yes, it's Horford's fault that he can't seem to hit threes anymore. But, at some point, it's the coach's job to put his players in a position to succeed. If Horford can't hit threes, it's also Ime's fault to continue to ask him to.

Given RW's injury history, it boggles me that they don't just go to a straight platoon and have RW play 24-30 miinutes a night and AH play 18-24 minutes a night. I think Horford still has a lot of value, and can be a good player. I just don't think he's as good a player when asked to play 30 minutes a night anymore.
Agree with both of your takes

@Cesar Crespo made a good point yesterday about Brad Stevens escaping any criticism (I gave PBS an "A" for his offseason/summer moves) this year

Brad probably has some say with how players are used/rotations/starters, so he should share more of the criticism on the teams' underperformance. IME is a rookie HC and there is a learning curve for everyone, hopefully, he improves as we move along this season.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,493
Just remember one of PBS's moves this offseason was hiring Ime. Maybe the biggest move.

Not sure how one can give Brad an A unless they really like the Ime hire, unless they are looking at roster moves only.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
25,105
Indeed, and I loved the signing at the time. New voice, player accountability, stars wanted him, etc

Not so much now. Breaking in a rookie HC isn't easy in the NBA
I still have Brad in the honeymoon period and I liked the offseason personnel moves he made on short notice as a first year GM. Having said that I’m not giving him a pass on having the break in a rookie head coach bc this was his decision to do so……he wasn’t required to hire a head coach without experience in the role. I’m not saying he should or shouldn’t have only that this was his choice and he should be graded as such rather than using the rookie head coach as an excuse.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,526
So I would guess on factor in the decision to keep Al in the starting lineup, beyond that it has been generally a significantly positive lineup is likely this:

The Celtics have very few natural offense runners, and their shot creation stinks. Horford is maybe the best natural passer of the ball on the roster, and i think he understands the right pass/play considerably more than our PGs. He lets you run the system Ime want to of lots of quick passes much better than Grant would.

I don't think Ime should be as married to Al the starter as he is, BUT... I don't think Grant starting particularly solves many of our problems.

I think Al hitting more of his shots makes him a clearly better player than Grant, and given the other things he brings I understand why Ime is hoping he finds it (much like Tatum). I think if you want to fix this team by moving Al to the bench it really only works if you upgrade the passing/offense running at guard.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,349
Santa Monica
I still have Brad in the honeymoon period and I liked the offseason personnel moves he made on short notice as a first year GM. Having said that I’m not giving him a pass on having the break in a rookie head coach bc this was his decision to do so……he wasn’t required to hire a head coach without experience in the role. I’m not saying he should or shouldn’t have only that this was his choice and he should be graded as such rather than using the rookie head coach as an excuse.
Yep, not loving my "A" grade at the moment. I still like his player moves and think he may have an edge on other GMs there.

Feb. 10 and Summer moves are going to be really important as the JAYs start entering their peak seasons
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,349
Santa Monica
Yes. This play was great for the C’s during Al’s first run here because he was hitting those wide open shots.
Plus he had the option to pass to Kyrie, MaMo, Tatum, Hayward, Rozier, Brown for 3s.

A fresh, rested Al as the only 5 would allow this team to drive, draw, collapse the D & kick, which leads to more step in 3s. Swinging the ball around the top and not getting paint touches leads to inefficient 3pt attempts. Hoops 101
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
25,105
Yep, not loving my "A" grade at the moment. I still like his player moves and think he may have an edge on other GMs there.

Feb. 10 and Summer moves are going to be really important as the JAYs start entering their peak seasons
I’ll take him from an Incomplete to having a grade for him by the end of summer.