Kyrie Irving traded to Celtics for IT, Crowder, Zizic, BKN 1st, 2020 2nd

[radsoxfan]

I feel bad for IT. Not only did he get blindsided by the trade, but clearly he has a bad hip and it's going to affect his next contract significantly. I'm sure this stuff would have gotten out at the end of the year either way, so it's not as if this trade specifically is what is screwing him (teams would know enough to ask for his MRIs even if he bounces back this year), but still a tough turn of events. Way underpaid on his last deal, and now he's got a bum hip and is past his prime for his next one.

As for the injury itself, I haven't read through the whole thread so maybe more has been reported than I'm aware of. But my suspicion is that IT has more than just a labral tear and chronic impingement. Tons of NBA players have that, way more than even realize it. Sometimes players need offseason surgery and sometimes it can progress to significant arthritis, but something else seems to be up with IT.

Not only was he declared out for the playoffs 1 game into the ECF with what's mostly a chronic condition, but Cleveland is considering failing his physical even though they are on the hook for only 1 year of his contract and knew he had a bum hip before agreeing to the trade.

I'm honestly not sure what he has.... maybe just much more severe arthritis than has reported, maybe he has a fracture below his thinning cartilage, maybe he has avascular necrosis (ala Mike Napoli). I dunno.

I suppose maybe it's as reported but the Clev docs would have recommended surgery and now they've waited longer into the offseason than they would prefer. It's just odd the way the injury was handled during the playoffs if that's the case. A giant percentage of NBA players have labral tearing and it doesn't lead to the team declaring them out for the season early inthe ECF.

This is obviously total speculation of course... I'd love to get my hands on that MRI though . Stupid HIPAA.

 

[mcpickl]

F5 for a Woj bomb. This is like the July 4 with Hayward again.

Is Cleveland's play to wait right before the deadline to void and drop some ultimatum on Boston?

Don't see how that would help them, the deadline means nothing.

If they wait til right before the deadline to void because they want to renegotiate, Boston just tells them to go ahead and void and they can negotiate afterwards.

Voiding the deal doesn't mean they can't negotiate a new deal a week later if they want. Not like it's the trade deadline and you have to make the deal now, or never.

 

[Big John]

That's right in theory but if Cleveland calls the deal off, I can't imagine that either team will want to renegotiate, especially if the waffling is the result of disagreement in the Cavs front office. Both teams have a plan B and will move on.

 

[RedOctober3829]

100% agree. This trade is about the future of the franchise not IT's hurt feelings. If the Cs decide to include more it should be because they value Irving that highly not because they are terrified by the prospect of having to face an angered IT. So can we stop the handwringing about how "impossible" the situation will be if this falls apart?
IT (and Crowder, for that matter) is a professional and he is about to go into the most important year of his career. He will suck it up and play hard because it's his future on the line if he doesn't. Either way, Ainge's focus needs to be 100% on what is best for the future of the franchise not how this might affect the one year chemistry of a team with a zero percent chance of winning a title.

He can play as hard as he wants to. All that matters is whether he puts up a year like last year. If he doesn't, teams will use the hip problem against him. Hell, they probably will anyways in terms of offering max deal. I'll go back to this: is Danny letting him walk out the door regardless? If he is(and this trade suggests he would) then this trade is necessary. Irving will cost less than IT would for next 2 years and gives them an opportunity to go over the cap for a long term deal for a star-level player. This would answer your question as to what is best for the long-term. It's not a chemistry issue. It's a financial decision that is best for the team.

 

[mcpickl]

That's right in theory but if Cleveland calls the deal off, I can't imagine that either team will want to renegotiate, especially if the waffling is the result of disagreement in the Cavs front office. Both teams have a plan B and will move on.

Also can't imagine Boston will want to renegotiate if Cleveland intentionally delays to wait right until the deadline before asking for a better return.

 

[JakeRae]

He can play as hard as he wants to. All that matters is whether he puts up a year like last year. If he doesn't, teams will use the hip problem against him. Hell, they probably will anyways in terms of offering max deal. I'll go back to this: is Danny letting him walk out the door regardless? If he is(and this trade suggests he would) then this trade is necessary. Irving will cost less than IT would for next 2 years and gives them an opportunity to go over the cap for a long term deal for a star-level player. This would answer your question as to what is best for the long-term. It's not a chemistry issue. It's a financial decision that is best for the team.

Teams don't use medical conditions against players. Contract negotiations for free agents aren't adversarial. Teams will factor his health into their valuation of him, but you make it sound like there is a grand conspiracy to pay him as little as possible. There isn't.

Also, Irving over the next 2 years categorically costs more than IT unless that cap balloons and IT is a max player. Kyrie will make $39 million over the next 2 years. IT will make a max of around $37 million. ($6 million this year plus a $31 million max level next year.)

 

[RedOctober3829]

Teams don't use medical conditions against players. Contract negotiations for free agents aren't adversarial. Teams will factor his health into their valuation of him, but you make it sound like there is a grand conspiracy to pay him as little as possible. There isn't.

Also, Irving over the next 2 years categorically costs more than IT unless that cap balloons and IT is a max player. Kyrie will make $39 million over the next 2 years. IT will make a max of around $37 million. ($6 million this year plus a $31 million max level next year.)

Im sorry I meant after this year and even that may not be true after Kyrie's player option is declined.

Who's saying there's some conspiracy against IT? It's a fact that if he isn't the same player this year his value goes down. Nothing about it is adversarial or a conspiracy theory. IT's age, playing style, and health make a long term deal very risky for any team. Having Irving in the fold removes a lot of that risk and makes long term financial sense in terms of signing a star to a LTD.

 

[kazuneko]

He can play as hard as he wants to. All that matters is whether he puts up a year like last year. If he doesn't, teams will use the hip problem against him. Hell, they probably will anyways in terms of offering max deal. I'll go back to this: is Danny letting him walk out the door regardless? If he is(and this trade suggests he would) then this trade is necessary. Irving will cost less than IT would for next 2 years and gives them an opportunity to go over the cap for a long term deal for a star-level player. This would answer your question as to what is best for the long-term. It's not a chemistry issue. It's a financial decision that is best for the team.

My point was in reaction to the chemistry concerns that others have addressed, and some have suggested could force the Celtics hand on this trade. I'm simply saying that those concerns are way overstated. Ainge should have one concern : what's best for this franchise longterm. IT and Crowder will be either okay or with it or not, but either way we aren't going to be hanging any new championship banners this season.
I agree that Ainge clearly has no interest in signing Thomas longterm but disagree that this makes trading for Kyrie a necessity. You trade for Kyrie if you think he has the type of superstar potential that could carry this team to a championship, not to fill a hole at PG. If he doesn't have that potential, you keep your assets and either cash them in for someone who does or keep them and hope that you end up with two top five picks in a draft that is seen as being five deep with potential superstars. I know everyone would like to see this team competing for a championship sooner than that, but I just don't see this team - even with Kyrie - as having that potential. And cashing in future chances at title contention for a chance at being a top five team (but nothing more) sooner just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[RedOctober3829]

My point was in reaction to the chemistry concerns that others have addressed, and some have suggested could force the Celtics hand on this trade. I'm simply saying that those concerns are way overstated. Ainge should have one concern : what's best for this franchise longterm. IT and Crowder will be either okay or with it or not, but either way we aren't going to be hanging any new championship banners this season.
I agree that Ainge clearly has no interest in signing Thomas longterm but disagree that this makes trading for Kyrie a necessity. You trade for Kyrie if you think he has the type of superstar potential that could carry this team to a championship, not to fill a hole at PG. If he doesn't have that potential, you keep your assets and either cash them in for someone who does or keep them and hope that you end up with two top five picks in a draft that is seen as being five deep with potential superstars. I know everyone would like to see this team competing for a championship sooner than that, but I just don't see this team - even with Kyrie - as having that potential. And cashing in future chances at title contention for a chance at being a top five team (but nothing more) sooner just doesn't make sense to me.

I'd rather have a proven star like Kyrie in one hand and still have a chance at a top 5 pick in the other. The top 5 player you want to cash assets in for might not ever come available though. With Kyrie/Hayward/Horford and a young core of Smart/Brown/Tatum I think that's got a good shot at being the best team in the East for the future. If they get a top 5 pick to add to that then it's even better. Would two top 5 picks be great? Sure. In any other situation, it'd be prudent to keep both picks. However, taking Kyrie who is a young proven star with championship experience while holding onto a top 5 pick chance is the way to go. It would take a few years for those players to develop into those stars(if they do in fact become stars). You're wasting Horford's and Hayward's prime years. Why did Danny bring them in if he doesn't want to win right away while building a young core at the same time? He's doing both and getting Kyrie is part of it.

 

[The Mort Report]

Is that just Jae wearing Cleveland gear or is he actually working out at the team facility with Cleveland staff? Because if he is couldn't Boston use that as leverage in that since Cleveland is treating Jae as a member of the organization they already accepted the trade? I think a smart organization that was that concerned with IT's hip wouldn't even let Jae near their facility in case anything happened. Then again "smart" might not apply to Cleveland in this instance

Edit: yes I am now seeing the sandals shut up

 

[InstaFace]

I'd rather have a proven star like Kyrie in one hand and still have a chance at a top 5 pick in the other. The top 5 player you want to cash assets in for might not ever come available though. With Kyrie/Hayward/Horford and a young core of Smart/Brown/Tatum I think that's got a good shot at being the best team in the East for the future. If they get a top 5 pick to add to that then it's even better. Would two top 5 picks be great? Sure. In any other situation, it'd be prudent to keep both picks. However, taking Kyrie who is a young proven star with championship experience while holding onto a top 5 pick chance is the way to go...

before you get your pants fully off, I should at least caution that the odds that the LAL pick ends up exactly in the bounds of #s 2-5 is probably lower than most people here think it is. Far more likely, in my view, that that pick becomes the SAC 2019.

 

[Van Everyman]

Gasper with a column saying the C's shouldn't drop this deal if they can assuage CLE's concerns with a lottery-protected first round pick:

It’s understandable why the Celtics would balk at adding to the deal, but if it takes a lottery protected 2019 first-round pick to placate the Cavaliers so be it. Barring a catastrophe, the Celtics sweetener pick would be 25 or later. Don’t let the next R.J. Hunter, Fab Melo, JaJuan Johnson or J.R. Giddens stand in the way of consummating this deal. The Green still have a collection of other move valuable picks in 2018 and 2019.

A late first-round pick for a contending team often is more desirable in theory than in practice. This is the problem for the Celtics. They do such a good job of hard-selling us on the inflated value of their players and picks in theory that when they trade them away Celtics supporters experience separation anxiety. They can’t escape the reality distortion field the team has constructed to see the player for who or what he really is — expendable.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2017/08/28/gasper/ZG48nwwJEuR3UM8ReneIrK/story.html

It's not the worst point. I know we all love the idea that a face-saving second rounder should be where Danny draws the line. But if that doesn't get it done, is there really *that* much of a difference if they give up a late first rounder?

 

[jose melendez]

Jose, you are like the eighth poster to pull this theory out of your ass. I'm not sure why everyone seems to feel it's necessary to concoct this scenario where LBJ is this horrible controlling crybaby stomping his foot after Gilbert completed this trade without consulting him.

Occam's Razor is far more likely here: Cleveland believed Boston's portrayal of Thomas' hip matched up with the medicals they saw but not with the physical they gave him and they're now worried he may miss a significant portion of the season or re-injure himself.

I get that Cleveland may be overreaching a bit here but the idea that Lebron has turned into Joffrey Lannister is a bit tough to take.

I don't think its pulled out of my ass at all. LeBron has been the de facto GM of the Cavs since his return. He's orchestrated trades, orchestrated signings, orchestrated a coach hiring (and possibly firing). Maybe he objected to the dismissal of a "GM." But there is plenty of evidence that LeBron has called the shots in Cleveland, and it seems perfectly reasonable that that is the case here. It may no be the most likely scenario, but it's a likely scenario.

I mean, look at this sentence "concoct this scenario where LBJ is this horrible controlling crybaby stomping his foot after Gilbert completed this trade without consulting him."

We have 15 years of evidence that LBJ is in face a horrible controlling crybaby.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Gasper with a column saying the C's shouldn't drop this deal if they can assuage CLE's concerns with a lottery-protected first round pick:


http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2017/08/28/gasper/ZG48nwwJEuR3UM8ReneIrK/story.html

It's not the worst point. I know we all love the idea that a face-saving second rounder should be where Danny draws the line. But if that doesn't get it done, is there really *that* much of a difference if they give up a late first rounder?

Agreed. If you like the deal and believe it makes the Cs materially better, then trading their own late round 1 is no big deal. Sure, some players chosen at the end of the first round become stars. But it's not all that common and the difference between a 2 and a late 1 isn't huge.

My take was that the signaling that they will only give up a 2 might have been code for if really pushed, they would give up their own 1.

I realize that Gasper is being even more generous than that.

 

[Van Everyman]

I don't think its pulled out of my ass at all. LeBron has been the de facto GM of the Cavs since his return. He's orchestrated trades, orchestrated signings, orchestrated a coach hiring (and possibly firing). Maybe he objected to the dismissal of a "GM." But there is plenty of evidence that LeBron has called the shots in Cleveland, and it seems perfectly reasonable that that is the case here. It may no be the most likely scenario, but it's a likely scenario.

I mean, look at this sentence "concoct this scenario where LBJ is this horrible controlling crybaby stomping his foot after Gilbert completed this trade without consulting him."

We have 15 years of evidence that LBJ is in face a horrible controlling crybaby.

It's not just that everyone here is assuming that he's throwing a fit – but also that CLE went ahead with this Kyrie deal without consulting him in the first place. I know they apparently canned the "GM" without him knowing but Kyrie has been demanding s trade for months now. There was a ton of reporting that this trade was in the works. And suddenly LBJ is supposed to be surprised and now demanding they back out of the trade?

I just don't buy it. The very first thing we heard after they fired the GM was that LBJ wasn't consulted and that there was a split growing between him and Gilbert. Notwithstanding the lamentations of the SoSHers, we haven't heard anything to that effect in the media yet.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Gasper with a column saying the C's shouldn't drop this deal if they can assuage CLE's concerns with a lottery-protected first round pick:


http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2017/08/28/gasper/ZG48nwwJEuR3UM8ReneIrK/story.html

It's not the worst point. I know we all love the idea that a face-saving second rounder should be where Danny draws the line. But if that doesn't get it done, is there really *that* much of a difference if they give up a late first rounder?

What's fun is that Washburn also has an article today, arguing the opposite viewpoint.

 

[splendid splinter]

It's not just that everyone here is assuming that he's throwing a fit – but also that CLE went ahead with this Kyrie deal without consulting him in the first place. I know they apparently canned the "GM" without him knowing but Kyrie has been demanding s trade for months now. There was a ton of reporting that this trade was in the works. And suddenly LBJ is supposed to be surprised and now demanding they back out of the trade?

I just don't buy it. The very first thing we heard after they fired the GM was that LBJ wasn't consulted and that there was a split growing between him and Gilbert. Notwithstanding the lamentations of the SoSHers, we haven't heard anything to that effect in the media yet.

I don't think it's likely they negotiated the deal without LeBron's input, but I think it's definitely possible that the person in the organization most upset at the possibility that IT won't be much of a factor this season is LeBron, and he's the driving force behind any effort to extract a Brown or Tatum, even at the risk of submarining the deal. Everything he's done the past few years - the short-term deals with opt-outs, the public carping for help mid-season no matter what the cost - has been to force the Cavs to plan for now, and not later. He wants rings, and if that means they keep Kyrie and lose out on a cornerstone player for the next 10 years, that's fine with him. Continuity of success isn't his concern.

 

[Van Everyman]

What's fun is that Washburn also has an article today, arguing the opposite viewpoint.

The headline suggests as much but he's making the same point as Gasper actually:

But in no way should they offer anything more than a future first-round pick (their own or one from the Clippers or Grizzlies) or throw in a second-rounder to complete the deal. Cleveland does not want to relinquish Brooklyn’s 2018 first-rounder that could reap a potential franchise cornerstone.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2017/08/28/celtics-have-every-right-annoyed-with-trade-holdup/B4ZRj16eSEtolQkxxPG5wM/story.html?p1=Article_Recirculation_Pos1

 

[Time to Mo Vaughn]

Anyone know what time the deadline is today?

 

[Koufax]

Wednesday evening.

 

[DJnVa]

Is that just Jae wearing Cleveland gear or is he actually working out at the team facility with Cleveland staff? Because if he is couldn't Boston use that as leverage in that since Cleveland is treating Jae as a member of the organization they already accepted the trade? I think a smart organization that was that concerned with IT's hip wouldn't even let Jae near their facility in case anything happened. Then again "smart" might not apply to Cleveland in this instance

Edit: yes I am now seeing the sandals shut up

Not sure what the sandals have to do with it. Jae was working out in Cavs gear but not with team. Apparently he was at Ga Tech.

Also, technically he is a member of the Cavs organization.

 

[DJnVa]

Per some paraphrasing of Woj this morning on twitter, apparently the Cavs issue is when IT will be ready to play.

With the way the Cavs treat the regular season, I find that a bit funny.

 

[soxfan121]

With the way the Cavs treat the regular season, I find that a bit funny.

I don't. If LeBron is in any way pissed about this deal, and IT's injury, it's that he will have to play more in the regular season - which we know he could not care less about - in order to secure playoff positioning. I don't see LBJ being happy about 4th in the conference (or worse, fifth and ceding home court throughout).

The appeal of IT for Cleveland was his probable All-Star level play on a random night in January. Having a guy who can carry the team while LeBron coasts through (or sits) to save himself for the "real season" would be very appealing to LBJ. If Thomas cannot play in the regular season, or will miss a large chunk of it, then his value to the Cavs is lessened.

I don't see how a draft pick - a protected first or couple 2nds - fixes Cleveland's concerns.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I don't. If LeBron is in any way pissed about this deal, and IT's injury, it's that he will have to play more in the regular season - which we know he could not care less about - in order to secure playoff positioning. I don't see LBJ being happy about 4th in the conference (or worse, fifth and ceding home court throughout).

The appeal of IT for Cleveland was his probable All-Star level play on a random night in January. Having a guy who can carry the team while LeBron coasts through (or sits) to save himself for the "real season" would be very appealing to LBJ. If Thomas cannot play in the regular season, or will miss a large chunk of it, then his value to the Cavs is lessened.

I don't see how a draft pick - a protected first or couple 2nds - fixes Cleveland's concerns.

You may be right but if this take is correct, neither Brown nor Tatum will fix these concerns as well. While they provide depth and good young cheap talent, neither will give LeBron cover to coast or rest much.

 

[Stitch01]

Danny isnt going to add Brown or Tatum, but Id expect Brown/Tatum to be flipped for help this year if he did.

 

[Saints Rest]

I don't think its pulled out of my ass at all. LeBron has been the de facto GM of the Cavs since his return. He's orchestrated trades, orchestrated signings, orchestrated a coach hiring (and possibly firing). Maybe he objected to the dismissal of a "GM." But there is plenty of evidence that LeBron has called the shots in Cleveland, and it seems perfectly reasonable that that is the case here. It may no be the most likely scenario, but it's a likely scenario.

I mean, look at this sentence "concoct this scenario where LBJ is this horrible controlling crybaby stomping his foot after Gilbert completed this trade without consulting him."

We have 15 years of evidence that LBJ is in face a horrible controlling crybaby.

When it comes to LBJ, I like to play a game. I think about what I think could be his worst reasons for doing something. Then I think if those motivation explain all his actions. </LittleFinger>

 

[soxfan121]

You may be right but if this take is correct, neither Brown nor Tatum will fix these concerns as well. While they provide depth and good young cheap talent, neither will give LeBron cover to coast or rest much.

Right. Which would explain the multiple reports that Cleveland has not (yet) "engaged" Boston on talks about remedying the trade.

The timeline that (IMO) explains this situation:

- Wyc and Dan Gilbert meet up in Italy, discuss the broad parameters of a deal (i.e. "Sure, we'd trade Irving - if we can get help this year and one of your prime draft picks" ... "OK, I think that will work, let's have Danny and your guy work out the details")

- Ainge and Altman work out the deal (Irving for IT, Crowder, Zizic & BRK pick)

- Gilbert tells LeBron "we solved the Kyrie problem" and LBJ says "uh, what? how does that help us win this year?"

- Cleveland's medical team checks out IT's hip and says "yeah, it's as bad as they said - he might be unable to play much this season if it gets worse, and you kinda need a hip to play basketball"

- Gilbert meets with LBJ, who says something like: "how does this help us win this year? It IT can't play, how are we going to get homecourt advantage? (Because I am NOT trying hard in December and January when all that matters to me is titles)"

- Gilbert goes to Altman and says "fix this. If IT can't play early and often, we need more from Boston in return"

- Altman calls Ainge, tells him that Gilbert is worried about IT's hip and if he can play all season

- Ainge replies "ok, you knew all about the hip before we agreed and now you want more? No. Either rescind the deal or accept it as is."

- Altman tells Gilbert that Ainge won't alter the deal; Gilbert tells LBJ; LBJ tells Gilbert "well, figure out another deal"

- The Cavs stall. And stall. And because Gilbert wants the BRK pick for when LBJ leaves after the season, he's basically playing chicken with "his" superstar while the Celtics (and the other players) sit in limbo.

At this point, Gilbert either has to tell LeBron, "no this is the deal, I don't care if you're happy" OR he has to direct Altman to scuttle the deal because LeBron wants help THIS YEAR and IT's hip is going to force LeBron to play more than he wants in the regular season.

If this is true, then the implications are clear: if Gilbert tells LeBron no, then LBJ is absolutely leaving at the end of the season AND it's likely LBJ decides "fuck it, I'm not hurting myself or my chances at another ring somewhere else" and coasts through the season and exits the playoffs early because, fuck Gilbert.

If Gilbert gives in to LeBron, then the trade is rescinded and Irving holds out until Altman can trade him for something that is not nearly as good as the Celtics deal. (Like Bledsoe and a protected 1st). And Ainge has to call IT and say "how's the hip?" and hope IT doesn't decide he'd rather be 100% healthy instead of chasing the Brinks truck.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I don't think its pulled out of my ass at all. LeBron has been the de facto GM of the Cavs since his return. He's orchestrated trades, orchestrated signings, orchestrated a coach hiring (and possibly firing). Maybe he objected to the dismissal of a "GM." But there is plenty of evidence that LeBron has called the shots in Cleveland, and it seems perfectly reasonable that that is the case here. It may no be the most likely scenario, but it's a likely scenario.

I mean, look at this sentence "concoct this scenario where LBJ is this horrible controlling crybaby stomping his foot after Gilbert completed this trade without consulting him."

We have 15 years of evidence that LBJ is in face a horrible controlling crybaby.

Sure, LeBron ran the show under Griffin but things changed when he had yet another falling out with Gilbert after he refused to commit long term to Cleveland. When Gilbert replaced LeBron's man as GM (probably out of spite) it signaled the end of his "GM-era" and began latest version of the swinging dick power struggle between Gilbert and LeBron.

Danny isnt going to add Brown or Tatum, but Id expect Brown/Tatum to be flipped for help this year if he did.

I don't foresee this occurring at all. The new CBA places tremendous value on a players rookie-contract contribution on the floor and Ainge has always placed a premium on the value he squeezes out of his second unit and role players with these players while they are cheap. He did it with Posey, Perkins, Big Baby, etc and recognizes that multi-faceted second unit guys like Rozier, Jaylen, and Tatum's ability to outproduce their contracts fit into his M.O.

- Gilbert meets with LBJ, who says something like: "how does this help us win this year? It IT can't play, how are we going to get homecourt advantage? (Because I am NOT trying hard in December and January when all that matters to me is titles)"

This is the part that I question occurred since it is widely known that Gilbert and LeBron don't speak to each other and Gilbert just fired LeBron's handpicked GM last month.

 

[Stitch01]

You misread my post or Im misreading yours. My post has zero to do with what Ainge is going to do with Brown and Tatum.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

When it comes to LBJ, I like to play a game. I think about what I think could be his worst reasons for doing something. Then I think if those motivation explain all his actions. </LittleFinger>

[emoji106]

 

[HomeRunBaker]

You misread my post or Im misreading yours. My post has zero to do with what Ainge is going to do with Brown and Tatum.

Ah, you were referring to Cleveland flipping them. Got it. My bad.

 

[Bernie Carbohydrate]

I don't think it's likely they negotiated the deal without LeBron's input, but I think it's definitely possible that the person in the organization most upset at the possibility that IT won't be much of a factor this season is LeBron, and he's the driving force behind any effort to extract a Brown or Tatum, even at the risk of submarining the deal. (Snip) .

But why would LeBron want Brown/Tatum? Brown might (just might) be a factor this year, but he's still developing. Tatum has never played an NBA game. Aren't those guys akin to Wiggins circa 2014? LeBron needs NBA vets, not youngsters or draft picks.

Unless The King is playing three dimensional chess and will flip Tatum for Melo, cap be damned....

 

[splendid splinter]

But why would LeBron want Brown/Tatum? Brown might (just might) be a factor this year, but he's still developing. Tatum has never played an NBA game. Aren't those guys akin to Wiggins circa 2014? LeBron needs NBA vets, not youngsters or draft picks.

Unless The King is playing three dimensional chess and will flip Tatum for Melo, cap be damned....

Maybe he's less willing than management to assume the risk that IT's hip brings and wants something as a hedge against the downside there, in case IT is hobbled? Or maybe it's his way of trying to kill the deal?

Edit: Or maybe he thinks Tatum plus something from the current Cavs roster can be flipped for some help. Not a Melo, but something.

Or you may be right and this is all coming from the FO. God only knows what's going on here.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

Right. Which would explain the multiple reports that Cleveland has not (yet) "engaged" Boston on talks about remedying the trade.

The timeline that (IMO) explains this situation:

- Wyc and Dan Gilbert meet up in Italy, discuss the broad parameters of a deal (i.e. "Sure, we'd trade Irving - if we can get help this year and one of your prime draft picks" ... "OK, I think that will work, let's have Danny and your guy work out the details")

- Ainge and Altman work out the deal (Irving for IT, Crowder, Zizic & BRK pick)

- Gilbert tells LeBron "we solved the Kyrie problem" and LBJ says "uh, what? how does that help us win this year?"

- Cleveland's medical team checks out IT's hip and says "yeah, it's as bad as they said - he might be unable to play much this season if it gets worse, and you kinda need a hip to play basketball"

- Gilbert meets with LBJ, who says something like: "how does this help us win this year? It IT can't play, how are we going to get homecourt advantage? (Because I am NOT trying hard in December and January when all that matters to me is titles)"

- Gilbert goes to Altman and says "fix this. If IT can't play early and often, we need more from Boston in return"

- Altman calls Ainge, tells him that Gilbert is worried about IT's hip and if he can play all season

- Ainge replies "ok, you knew all about the hip before we agreed and now you want more? No. Either rescind the deal or accept it as is."

- Altman tells Gilbert that Ainge won't alter the deal; Gilbert tells LBJ; LBJ tells Gilbert "well, figure out another deal"

- The Cavs stall. And stall. And because Gilbert wants the BRK pick for when LBJ leaves after the season, he's basically playing chicken with "his" superstar while the Celtics (and the other players) sit in limbo.

At this point, Gilbert either has to tell LeBron, "no this is the deal, I don't care if you're happy" OR he has to direct Altman to scuttle the deal because LeBron wants help THIS YEAR and IT's hip is going to force LeBron to play more than he wants in the regular season.

If this is true, then the implications are clear: if Gilbert tells LeBron no, then LBJ is absolutely leaving at the end of the season AND it's likely LBJ decides "fuck it, I'm not hurting myself or my chances at another ring somewhere else" and coasts through the season and exits the playoffs early because, fuck Gilbert.

If Gilbert gives in to LeBron, then the trade is rescinded and Irving holds out until Altman can trade him for something that is not nearly as good as the Celtics deal. (Like Bledsoe and a protected 1st). And Ainge has to call IT and say "how's the hip?" and hope IT doesn't decide he'd rather be 100% healthy instead of chasing the Brinks truck.

Great post - this theory sounds spot on to me.

 

[soxfan121]

This is the part that I question occurred since it is widely known that Gilbert and LeBron don't speak to each other and Gilbert just fired LeBron's handpicked GM last month.

You think they haven't spoken at all? I have no doubt the relationship is, ummm, strained? But no contact at all sounds implausible to me.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Here's my theory:

The Celtics and Cavs medical teams disagree on the state of IT's hip and his status for the season.

Not as fun as blaming this on a LeBron/Gilbert standoff, I know. But sometimes the most obvious answer is the most likely answer.

 

[nighthob]

Per some paraphrasing of Woj this morning on twitter, apparently the Cavs issue is when IT will be ready to play.

With the way the Cavs treat the regular season, I find that a bit funny.

Bulpett said on Chris Mannix's podcast that there was nothing in the Thomas physical that caught the Cavs off guard. So I suspect that all the LBJ whinging here is just so much white noise.

If I had to make a guess, based on what's been said publicly by everyone involved going back to last spring, and with the caveat that I didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, the problem may be nothing more than the Cavs' doctors telling management that eventual surgery is unavoidable, meaning that they will get nothing but this one season out of Thomas.

This is based on Boston's admission that the problem was a chronic one and Thomas saying last spring when the issue first became public that doctors told him that he had extra bone in the hip joint. That's correctable surgically, but it means a year away from the league. And if reshaping the joint is the only solution you really can't sign Thomas to a long term deal, because you're accepting the loss of a productive year on a player nearing his expiration date.

From Cleveland's standpoint this would also mean that one of their anticipated side benefits, an entertainingly scrappy team for the post-LeBron era, is likely unachievable. So they may be taking extra time to evaluate the benefits of making one last title run (by trading Irving for Middleton or Bledsoe) versus preparing for life post LeBron.

But we should probably let the kids continue with LeBron conspiracy theories. Did you know that he was actually behind the DNC leaks that cost Hillary the election?

 

[DavidTai]

I dunno, G&MB, if that were the answer, then the simplest answer is to cancel iit and move on. They're not going to agree on compensation when it seems like Boston already overpaid basically -because- of the hip.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I dunno, G&MB, if that were the answer, then the simplest answer is to cancel iit and move on. They're not going to agree on compensation when it seems like Boston already overpaid basically -because- of the hip.

Both sides have too much to lose to NOT agree on compensation. The Cavs won't ever get a high lottery pick and a player who likely would have been a low-lottery pick in Zizic, plus a serviceable LeBron replacement in Crowder during the rebuild years. This is a great start on a rebuild that can only be added to with Tristan and JR trades in the coming 12 months once LeBron bolts.

 

[DJnVa]

http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2017/08/kyrie_irving_trade_cavaliers_f.html

"My read is actually from the Cleveland side, and what I hear from there is that nothing they've found is anything different than what was conveyed to the Cavaliers in the trade discussions, and certainly in the medical information that was passed forward," Bulpett told Mannix.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

I dunno, G&MB, if that were the answer, then the simplest answer is to cancel iit and move on. They're not going to agree on compensation when it seems like Boston already overpaid basically -because- of the hip.

I'm not sure I accept the idea that Boston overpaid because of the hip. I'm not sure I even accept the idea that Boston overpaid.

In fact, I'm not sure anybody here accepts that idea anymore though admitedly it's tough to keep up with prevailing opinions here. Once the trade went down, it suddenly became the popular opinion here that the Nets pick wasn't likely to be top 3 and could be mid lottery and that Zizic was just another guy and that Crowder was a nice role player but nothing more.

So if the deal as structured was an overpay, what do you think the right cost would be assuming a healthy IT?

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Just a brief logical interlude: Folks pretending they know what is in the medicals is exactly as factually grounded as folks pretending they know what Lebron or Gilbert did or said during this period. We're all speculating, so those copping attitude about their preferred flavor of speculation is a little silly...

(general comment not specific to anyone, so took out quote)

 

[Stitch01]

Bulpett said on Chris Mannix's podcast that there was nothing in the Thomas physical that caught the Cavs off guard. So I suspect that all the LBJ whinging here is just so much white noise.

If I had to make a guess, based on what's been said publicly by everyone involved going back to last spring, and with the caveat that I didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, the problem may be nothing more than the Cavs' doctors telling management that eventual surgery is unavoidable, meaning that they will get nothing but this one season out of Thomas.

This is based on Boston's admission that the problem was a chronic one and Thomas saying last spring when the issue first became public that doctors told him that he had extra bone in the hip joint. That's correctable surgically, but it means a year away from the league. And if reshaping the joint is the only solution you really can't sign Thomas to a long term deal, because you're accepting the loss of a productive year on a player nearing his expiration date.

From Cleveland's standpoint this would also mean that one of their anticipated side benefits, an entertainingly scrappy team for the post-LeBron era, is likely unachievable. So they may be taking extra time to evaluate the benefits of making one last title run (by trading Irving for Middleton or Bledsoe) versus preparing for life post LeBron.

But we should probably let the kids continue with LeBron conspiracy theories. Did you know that he was actually behind the DNC leaks that cost Hillary the election?

I mean, with the obvious caveat we dont know whats happening here, it doesnt take a Lebron "conspiracy theory" to explain what could be happening here.

"Hey Lebron, we are trading IT. Kyrie wants out and this is good for our franchise long-term but we're getting back IT, Crowder, and Zizic so you/we can still compete this year. IT is still recovering from his injury, but the Celtics doctors think he'll be ready to go by December"
"OK, I can live with that"
"Hey Lebron, our doctors looked at IT's hip. They arent as certain as the Celtics doctors that IT will play this year
"Thats a problem. I want to compete this year"

Seems pretty plausible to me without nefarious intent from anyone involved, but who knows.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

I mean, with the obvious caveat we dont know whats happening here, it doesnt take a Lebron "conspiracy theory" to see what could be happening here.

"Hey Lebron, we are trading IT. Kyrie wants out and this is good for our franchise long-term but we're getting back IT, Crowder, and Zizic so you/we can still compete this year. IT is still recovering from his injury, but the Celtics doctors think he'll be ready to go by December"
"OK, I can live with that"
"Hey Lebron, our doctors looked at IT's hip. They arent as certain as the Celtics doctors that IT will play this year
"Thats a problem. I want to compete this year"

Seems pretty plausible to me without nefarious intent from anyone involved, but who knows.

No, it doesn't take a LeBron conspiracy theory. But it does require you to assume that LeBron is the only member of the Cavs organization interested in competing for a championship this year. Which seems odd to me.

The Cavs recognize that they may have a single season left with one of the best players of all time. Their best bet at keeping him beyond next season is winning immediately. It's much harder for LeBron to leave if he's defending a championship. The Cavs thought this deal struck a great balance between competing this season and the future; that that might not be the case isn't merely important to LeBron, which is why the attempts to pin this on him seem so forced.

 

[DavidTai]

See, I don't believe the Cavs doctors found anything different than what they originally were told. I think the draft was offered up -to- compensate for the IT4 hip, and that's about that - and while we can -hope- the Nets pick is worth less in the long run, it matters that from the public point of view (or at least, the media) the Celtics overpaid. The injured IT4 PLUS the nets pick is what makes it worthwhile for Boston - an healthy IT4 plus the nets pick would make it a clear overpay.

If the Cavs doctors found that to be a concern big enough to threaten to pull out, the trade should be over and done. Finis. That is, if IT4 was really that big a key to the deal. Taking the injured IT4 was what basically drew in the Nets pick.

 

[Light-Tower-Power]

If Bulpett's report is true then this is starting to get strange. I'm not sure what Cleveland is trying to accomplish here.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

See, I don't believe the Cavs doctors found anything different than what they originally were told. I think the draft was offered up -to- compensate for the IT4 hip, and that's about that - and while we can -hope- the Nets pick is worth less in the long run, it matters that from the public point of view (or at least, the media) the Celtics overpaid. The injured IT4 PLUS the nets pick is what makes it worthwhile for Boston - an healthy IT4 plus the nets pick would make it a clear overpay.

So you think the price for Kyrie Irving would have been a healthy IT (who is about to be 30 and a free agent) Zizic, and Crowder?

 

[Stitch01]

Sure, just using LBJ int he example because he's probably the person who matters in the Cavs organization who puts the most relative weight on this season.

My broader point (and I dont think we disagree much) is that even though IT isnt the asset driving this trade and even though both sides have a strong incentive to complete the trade, if the Cavs arent comfortable with IT's hip Im not sure there's a way to salvage it given the weight LBJ/Cavs place on the upcoming season.

 

[DavidTai]

The Cavs recognize that they may have a single season left with one of the best players of all time. Their best bet at keeping him beyond next season is winning immediately. It's much harder for LeBron to leave if he's defending a championship. The Cavs thought this deal struck a great balance between competing this season and the future; that that might not be the case isn't merely important to LeBron, which is why the attempts to pin this on him seem so forced.

Then they should have already voided the trade and moved on.

They can surely get better 'win now' pieces and forget the future draft picks.

They haven't, and indications are they want that draft pick enough that they haven't walked away. The problem is, if they want to win now, what -possible- piece could they get from Boston that would make this trade go through? Because if that were the case, getting another draft pick thrown in isn't gonna be enough to 'win now'. It would need to be a high enough pick to trade away to get another piece elsewhere. But that should not be Boston's problem. That's Cleveland's problem.

 

[DavidTai]

So you think the price for Kyrie Irving would have been a healthy IT (who is about to be 30 and a free agent) Zizic, and Crowder?

No. I think in that scenario, Cleveland would have sat on him because Boston would not be offering a high enough draft pick - the closest anyone would get to a high draft pick to go with that would have been Phoenix, and Phoenix would have been using MIami's draft pick.