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

Status
Not open for further replies.

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,638
Also, to piggy-back on my previous post, Woj is the most egregious abuser of mixing news with opinion and not stressing where one ends and the other begins. He is also far outside Lebron's camp, as well as Boston's FO when it comes to sources, so you're talking about a story (the Kyrie trade) where he's commenting publicly but is bereft of his normal connections and somewhat antagonistic to the major players involved.

This doesn't diminish #wojbomb or how hard he works at breaking stories, but there is too much emphasis being placed on what he did or didn't say and what it actually means with regards to this specific trade.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,056
I think this situation is unique, because the Pelicans are such a unique combination of dysfunction, small market, capped-out, and no assets. They fucked up the AD situation almost beyond belief, to the point where I think it's hard to find good prior comps.
Abdul-Jabbar requested a trade out of Milwaukee to either NY or LA after his 6th season because he didn't want to be in Milwaukee any longer.

I mean we saw George do this to Indiana and maybe would have done so earlier if Magic was there two years ago. Regardless of comps or what not, if Anthony Davis no longer wants to remain in New Orleans he isn't going to stay with the Pelicans and there isn't a team in the league with more assets that would be attractive to them. I don't know why people feel Davis would want to remain in that situation for an additional two seasons when he essentially controls his destination.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,313
Abdul-Jabbar requested a trade out of Milwaukee to either NY or LA after his 6th season because he didn't want to be in Milwaukee any longer.

I mean we saw George do this to Indiana and maybe would have done so earlier if Magic was there two years ago. Regardless of comps or what not, if Anthony Davis no longer wants to remain in New Orleans he isn't going to stay with the Pelicans and there isn't a team in the league with more assets that would be attractive to them. I don't know why people feel Davis would want to remain in that situation for an additional two seasons when he essentially controls his destination.
We're in violent agreement. I was referring to people saying that AD wouldn't demand a trade with 3+ years left simply because no one else had recently.
 

allstonite

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 27, 2010
2,518
I think I'm missing why people are pissed at Woj. He reported that the Cavs were trying to get significant compensation, in the form of Tatum/Brown. That part seems to be factually true.

I don't remember him saying that they *should* get it, or that it would actually happen (but I certainly may have missed that). All his reporting did was bring to light more forcefully how dysfunctional Cleveland is.
I don't think anyone is pissed at him for this. It just looks like he was used as a tool by someone on the Cavs to try to pry something from the Celtics. As I said earlier, I think he's slowly losing some of his credibility. He had tons to spare relative to other NBA beat guys but he's had a rough summer since going to the World Wide Leader
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
31,567
I seem to recall that if we took Fultz, we'd have to make more room for signing Hayward as opposed to trading down and taking Tatum at a smaller cap number. Was trading Bradley for Morris earlier than when we traded him going to make enough room to sign Hayward as well, assuming all the moves subsequent were the same?
Trading Bradley for Morris saves $3.8+MM of salary cap so yes we would have room to draft Fultz and sign Hayward.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,864
Honolulu HI
Not getting all the gloating about this trade. Cleveland may be dysfunctional, but this trade is not a great example of that (despite the last second silliness). It's actually pretty incredible what they were able to get for Kyrie considering the situation he put them in. If IT is healthy, Cleveland is a far, far better team (a healthy IT is about as similar a player as you can get to Kyrie, and Crowder and Zizic add much needed depth) . Add to that the fact that they picked up Rose and now have the 18' Nets pick as a trade asset if they want to pick up an extra piece and this team has set itself up to make a serious run at Golden State. IT's health is the biggest concern but the fact that the Cavaliers have no reason to rush him back should allow him plenty of rest to make sure he's available in the playoffs.

One interesting situation to follow will be the emerging concerns about Russell Westbrook in OKC. Thus far RW has declined to pick up the massive 207 million dollar/ 5year extension that has been made available to him. The longer he waits, the more questions this situation prompts. And while he still has until October to make a final decision, if he eventually declines the extension OKC would be wise to consider trade options for both him and George (who almost certainly won't stay around if Westbrook leaves).
Why is this interesting in a discussion about Cleveland? If/when that were to happen the Cavs could be in a great position to offer the most value in a trade, for either one or both of OKCs stars. Shumpert, Frye, Crowder, Zizic, Net's 18' pick is good value (and a salary cap match) for a half-season rental of RW. Shumpert/Crowder/Nets 18' works in exchange for Paul George. If you can convince OKC to be interested in Kevin Love (or spin Love to a third team in exchange for extra assets to send to OKC) you could actually put together a trade that nets you both stars.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,448
Why is this interesting in a discussion about Cleveland? If/when that were to happen the Cavs could be in a great position to offer the most value in a trade, for either one or both of OKCs stars. Shumpert, Frye, Crowder, Zizic, Net's 18' pick is good value (and a salary cap match) for a half-season rental of RW. Shumpert/Crowder/Nets 18' works in exchange for Paul George.
They'd have less depth than the Wizards if they made those trades.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,029
This is far from the worst we've seen from Woj. Let's not forget all the times he held water for Kobe, needlessly needled or slammed Lebron, or heaped praise on a terrible GM like Joe Dumars because he wanted to keep sources happy. He's the best in the world at breaking news, but that comes at a cost, and his reporting will always be somewhat colored by the sources that feed him information.

I posted this earlier but, combined with all of the times he has gone after LeBron, I would bet a lot of money that Woj's main source on everything he reported about this trade was Dan Gilbert.
I'm not mad or pissed at Woj but he definitely came off looking like an amateur during all of this versus the seasoned "WOJBOMB" professional everyone expects. He was basically Gilbert's mouth piece.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
12,532
I don't think anyone is pissed at him for this. It just looks like he was used as a tool by someone on the Cavs to try to pry something from the Celtics. As I said earlier, I think he's slowly losing some of his credibility. He had tons to spare relative to other NBA beat guys but he's had a rough summer since going to the World Wide Leader
Sure, but what was incorrect about it? That's what Cleveland was trying to do, and reporting it just made them look silly.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
49,718
I know we are all flushed by the post trade glow but it's a bit much to predict the decline of the Cavs just yet. And suggesting that Woj, who was essentially part of the fabric of this trade, got hurt here is a stretch. I suspect his new employers are actually very pleased that their prized new NBA insider had control of this story, if not all the facts, during late August when the baseball playoff race is heating up and the NFL season is about to start.

If anything, he upped his stock from a week ago when a Shams-bomb looked like it had overtaken the Woj variety.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,804
deep inside Guido territory
Not getting all the gloating about this trade. Cleveland may be dysfunctional, but this trade is not a great example of that (despite the last second silliness). It's actually pretty incredible what they were able to get for Kyrie considering the situation he put them in. If IT is healthy, Cleveland is a far, far better team (a healthy IT is about as similar a player as you can get to Kyrie, and Crowder and Zizic add much needed depth) . Add to that the fact that they picked up Rose and now have the 18' Nets pick as a trade asset if they want to pick up an extra piece and this team has set itself up to make a serious run at Golden State. IT's health is the biggest concern but the fact that the Cavaliers have no reason to rush him back should allow him plenty of rest to make sure he's available in the playoffs.

One interesting situation to follow will be the emerging concerns about Russell Westbrook in OKC. Thus far RW has declined to pick up the massive 207 million dollar/ 5year extension that has been made available to him. The longer he waits, the more questions this situation prompts. And while he still has until October to make a final decision, if he eventually declines the extension OKC would be wise to consider trade options for both him and George (who almost certainly won't stay around if Westbrook leaves).
Why is this interesting in a discussion about Cleveland? If/when that were to happen the Cavs could be in a great position to offer the most value in a trade, for either one or both of OKCs stars. Shumpert, Frye, Crowder, Zizic, Net's 18' pick is good value (and a salary cap match) for a half-season rental of RW. Shumpert/Crowder/Nets 18' works in exchange for Paul George. If you can convince OKC to be interested in Kevin Love (or spin Love to a third team in exchange for extra assets to send to OKC) you could actually put together a trade that nets you both stars.
Why would Cleveland even consider trading the Nets pick for a half season rental of anybody? That's ridiculous unless LeBron tells Gilbert he's staying. People think Gilbert looks bad now imagine if he trades the Nets pick for Westbrook or George who then walk out the door with LeBron and IT. Gilbert is left holding his you know what in his hand. There is no way they trade that pick. They aren't blowing that pick for a 1-year run at a title.

I also can't seem to understand why you think a healthy IT, Crowder, and Zizic make Cleveland a far, far better team. I think they improve, but the gap between the Celtics and the Cavs has closed even if there is a healthy IT. I'm in no way saying that the Celtics are a better team than Cleveland but it will be a legitimate hard fought series. Any team that has LeBron has the upper hand on any other team other than GS. The improvements the Celtics have made are more than the Cavs but the gap was much bigger at the end of the ECF.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,908
NYC
If IT is healthy, Cleveland is a far, far better team.
"Far, far better" than they were last year? I find that unlikely. Kyrie was normal-sized for his position, and had a really nice offensive synergy with LeBron, JR and Love that had developed organically over three years. You're replacing him with a mighty-mite who blossomed in a very specific situation under Stevens, and is now being thrust into a totally different (read: worse) system in which he's no longer the focal point of the offense. You're also taking a team that was already slightly undersized and defensively inept, lopping off six inches of height and adding possibly the biggest defensive liability in the league. Defensively, the Celtics were 9 points per 100 possessions worse last season with IT on the floor, and had a -50 net rating with him on the floor v. the Warriors (tiny sample, but still!)

I also get the sense that hip issues like IT's tend to be chronic and worsen, so even if he's officially "healthy," I think he's unlikely to be quite the same player physically he was last season.

Meanwhile, LeBron, JR Smith, Frye and Green are well on the wrong side of 30; and Korver and Calderon are ancient. They have no rotation players in the age range where you might expect a natural, marginal improvement — the only guy who really fit that bill was Kyrie. As a team, they're oldish, slowish, and smallish, which is a bad combo. (Osman, Felder and Zizic remain lottery tickets till proven otherwise).

As for Rose: he's a losing basketball player, imo. A 6'-3" ballhog who can't shoot or defend is the last thing the Cavs need (or really, any team needs). I consider him pretty much subtraction by addition, especially on a team built around an ultra-ball-dominant player like LeBron who's best when surrounded by lights-out shooters. And that's without even getting to the ego/chemistry/uncertainty issues that are likely to ensue when IT comes off the DL and takes most of Rose's minutes.

On the plus side: Crowder is a fantastic addition for them in terms of his versatility and D, as well as the fact that he allows LeBron to slide more often to PF, which should be his natural position going forward. Only problem with that is that the Cavs' second-best player (Love) happens to play PF, and isn't versatile enough to play any other position. So in crunch time they're stuck with either Love at C which kills them defensively, or Love on the bench, which kills them offensively.

And they have precious little time to work all these things out, with an uncreative coach at the helm, and LeBron's imminent departure casting a pall over everything.

And now [they] have the 18' Nets pick as a trade asset if they want to pick up an extra piece and this team has set itself up to make a serious run at Golden State.
I think they're highly unlikely to move that pick with some assurance from LeBron that he's interested in staying; and I kinda doubt that assurance is forthcoming. But if they are able to move the pick for a player, it better be someone of the caliber of Paul George or Anthony Davis if they want to make a "serious run" at GS, who's significantly longer, faster, younger, deeper, more talented, more cohesive, better coached, and light years better defensively.
 
Last edited:

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
1,290
Herndon, VA
On the plus side: Crowder is a fantastic addition for them in terms of his versatility and, as well as the fact that he allows LeBron to slide more often to PF, which should be his natural position going forward. Only problem with that is that the Cavs' second-best player (Love) happens to play PF, and isn't versatile enough to play any other position. So they're stuck with either Love at C which kills them defensively, or Love on the bench, which kills them offensively.
I'm in pretty much agreement with most of what you say here, but this particular section? I could picture LeBron playing PG, which pushes IT4 to SG. Then from there you can go SF: Crowder PF: Love C: Tristan Thompson... and it could probably roll out in the fourth quarter. (Then again, I dunno how creative Lue is...)

I just can't picture that particular configuration outside the fourth because IT4's defensive liabilities means the best time to use him would be when you could swap in and out defensively during that period when you use timeouts like crazy to do a offense/defense swap. And again, I dunno if Lue is that creative.

Also, the Celtics beat the Wizards because the Wizards' bench was pretty crappy. I feel like Cleveland's is going to age-out poorly and they have done relatively little on that end except replace the corpse of Deron Williams with Derrick Rose.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
21,499
Beating Cleveland this year and running LeBron out of town again would be a beautifully symmetrical thing :beatit:

After hating this trade initially, the hype has taken over.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,908
NYC
I could picture LeBron playing PG, which pushes IT4 to SG. Then from there you can go SF: Crowder PF: Love C: Tristan Thompson... and it could probably roll out in the fourth quarter. (Then again, I dunno how creative Lue is...)
Yeah, good point about LeBron at the 1. Their best overall lineup (O+D) might actually be LeBron-Smith-Crowder-Love-Thompson, which is pretty hilarious given that their roster currently features not one but four defensively inept "true PGs" in Felder, IT, Rose and Calderon (though I think we can assume Felder may be shipped off soon).
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,638
Unless IT is healthy and playing at a very high level you'd have to assume that the crunch time line-up is Lebron/Smith/Crowder/Love/Thompson. I can't see them playing Rose or Calderon more than a handful of minutes now or in the playoffs. Lebron is going to spend the bulk of his minutes playing the point this year.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,771
Because Cousins would never fetch 4 high lottery picks in return and another dysfunctional year may persuade Davis to ask to be moved. This is how we ended up able to trade for Kyrie as nobody dreamed he'd be available with 2 more cost controlled years on his deal.
If Anthony Davis demands a trade before his DVPE contract his agent will probably murder him.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,908
NYC
Unless IT is healthy and playing at a very high level you'd have to assume that the crunch time line-up is Lebron/Smith/Crowder/Love/Thompson.
I like that lineup for them (as I noted above), with a few caveats:

• No one over 6'-8" in bare feet; lack of rim protection
• Mediocre (at best) perimeter D
• No one who can handle the ball full-time without turning it over 5-6 times a game
• No real secondary creator on offense (Love flashed those skills at one point in his career, but I don't think Lue is creative enough to utilize them)

But overall, a nice mix of efficient scoring, toughness, size, skill, switchability and beastly rebounding. If they could install something resembling a Stevens/Popovich/Kerr-style motion offense with that group, they could be tough to handle.
 
Last edited:

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 22, 2008
36,349
BTW, can we please take a minute and appreciate DA for what he has done this offseason? If he didn't trade Fultz, he probably wouldn't have made the deal for Irving (since he wouldn't have had the Lakers pick as a backstop plus Fultz and Irving are kind of redundant) so the Cs roster probably would have been:

Gordon Hayward
Al Horford
Markelle Fultz
Jae Crowder
Isaiah Thomas
Morris
Jaylen Brown
Marcus Smart
Room Exception
Terry Rozier
(filler)
plus BRK 2018 pick.

I have that lineup at roughly $98.3MM so we would have issues trying to deal with Yabu and Zizac coming over and signing Ojeleye and Nader.

Instead, we have:

Gordon Hayward
Al Horford
Irving
Tatum
Morris
Jaylen Brown
Marcus Smart
Room Exception - Baynes
Terry Rozier
Yabu
(filler)
plus LAL 2018 / SAC 2019 pick

I'd rather have the second roster and I think most of us would as well.
The devil's advocate argument is that the track record of consensus #1 picks (which is what Fultz was) is pretty awesome. The whole reason you deploy the kind of strategy that Danny did is to get the chance to draft a guy like Fultz.

I'm not saying Danny was wrong -- just pointing out that at its core, everything Danny has done this summer (except the Hayward signing, which would've happened either way) is a huge bet against Fultz. If he doesn't become a star, Danny is a genius. If he does, then that's going to be the 1st thing people mention when discussing his legacy, even ahead of the KG trade.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 22, 2008
36,349
After hating this trade initially, the hype has taken over.
It's not the hype; it's the realization that IT was gone after next season regardless, because either (a) he's going to be a shell of his former self, or (b) he's going to look great and command more money than Danny would ever give him.

Hard to hate the deal once you let that sink in.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
16,009
Yes if Fultz>>Edit TATUM sorry or
BKN18>>Thomas & LAL18

and no title Ainge screwed up.
 
Last edited:

Marbleheader

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2004
11,843
The devil's advocate argument is that the track record of consensus #1 picks (which is what Fultz was) is pretty awesome. The whole reason you deploy the kind of strategy that Danny did is to get the chance to draft a guy like Fultz.

I'm not saying Danny was wrong -- just pointing out that at its core, everything Danny has done this summer (except the Hayward signing, which would've happened either way) is a huge bet against Fultz. If he doesn't become a star, Danny is a genius. If he does, then that's going to be the 1st thing people mention when discussing his legacy, even ahead of the KG trade.
Fultz can be really good and Danny can still come out smelling like roses.

1. If the Celtics win a title with this group
2. If the difference between Fultz and Tatum isn't pronounced.
3. If Fultz is a tier above Tatum but the Laker pick turns out to be well worth the difference.

He took some big risks this summer and I agree that the result will define his legacy one way or another.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,627
The devil's advocate argument is that the track record of consensus #1 picks (which is what Fultz was) is pretty awesome. The whole reason you deploy the kind of strategy that Danny did is to get the chance to draft a guy like Fultz.

I'm not saying Danny was wrong -- just pointing out that at its core, everything Danny has done this summer (except the Hayward signing, which would've happened either way) is a huge bet against Fultz. If he doesn't become a star, Danny is a genius. If he does, then that's going to be the 1st thing people mention when discussing his legacy, even ahead of the KG trade.
I think this is kind of harsh. Nobody will give 2 shits about Markelle Fultz in 10 years if Jayson Tatum also turns into an all-star. And by then we'll know what happened with the LA/SAC pick. Ainge didn't bet against Fultz, he bet that Tatum plus another high lotto pick will be more valuable to the franchise than Fultz would have been. And I'm glad he made that bet because I think they will be.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,319
The devil's advocate argument is that the track record of consensus #1 picks (which is what Fultz was) is pretty awesome. The whole reason you deploy the kind of strategy that Danny did is to get the chance to draft a guy like Fultz.

I'm not saying Danny was wrong -- just pointing out that at its core, everything Danny has done this summer (except the Hayward signing, which would've happened either way) is a huge bet against Fultz. If he doesn't become a star, Danny is a genius. If he does, then that's going to be the 1st thing people mention when discussing his legacy, even ahead of the KG trade.
I don't think that's a reasonable take on the moves, actually. I have no problem with people disliking the Fultz trade, but it's pretty tough to say the rest of the moves are all dependent on that being right.

First, he made pretty clear he had Tatum over Fultz. That's a bet on Tatum, not against Fultz. I get your draft board was different, but that doesn't change what he did and why.

Second, he traded for a number one overall pick, one with a lot less risk than Fultz. You might like him less (and you might be right, especially since he's cost-controlled for many fewer years) but your central thesis about apex talents and the moves is disproven by, you know, the moves.

Third, in addition to getting Tatum he has another bite at the apple of a high pick left. So that's a shot to 'win' the transaction too.

There's plenty of ways for Fultz to be an excellent player and this summer to still work out for Celts.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,864
Honolulu HI
I think if Lonzo Ball ends up a much better player than Tatum, people will really fault Ainge's that he let a star go to the Lakers.
Danny took some huge risks this offseason. It would have been really easy to just have kept the number 1 pick and picked Fultz. Not only would it be choosing the consensus choice it would have prevented his second controversial move: the Irving trade. With Fultz in the wings, the Cs would have been in a position to let IT go after the season with a star-potential player ready take over. If Ainge had gone that direction that pick and the Hayward signing would have had writers around the league grading his offseason an "A+", inoculating him against any second guessing down the road if Fultz ended up a disappointment.
Instead he's bet big on two players, Tatum and Irving, that he apparently rates a lot higher than most basketball people. He's now in a position where if either Fultz or Bell ends up becoming a superstar and Tatum doesn't and/or if Irving ends up proving to be nothing more than the hero-balling defensive liability many fear he is, Ainge looks truly horrible and his legacy takes a huge hit. It's a remarkable turn considering how easy it would have been for him to "win" the offseason by going with the seemingly slam dunk move of picking Fultz.
 
Last edited:

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
49,718
Here is an interesting piece by Howard Beck piece on Irving going to the Celtics.

Some salient quotes:
As a scorer, Irving is certifiably elite—strong, quick, shifty, with an uncanny ability to create (and convert) any shot, anywhere, from all sorts of ridiculous angles.

“Probably the best one-on-one player in the league,” says one veteran scout.

Yet the evidence suggests Irving is a flawed star—flaky on defense, indifferent to passing and consumed with a desire to score. (And on his worst days: moody, non-communicative and passive-aggressive.)
And Irving is positively awful defensively, according to just about every available defensive metric—“a train wreck,” in the words of one Cavs official. He ranked 28th among starting point guards last season, per one team’s proprietary metrics. (The only point guards worse? Thomas and his new Cavs teammate, Derrick Rose.)

The most damning stat is the most basic: The Cavaliers went 4-23 over the last three seasons when James didn’t play.
“He’s evolved more the last three years than anyone else on our team,” says one Cavs official, who declared himself “really bullish” on Irving’s future in Boston. “He’s just scratching the surface of who he can be, and he’s not going to find out playing with [James].”
 

The Mort Report

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 5, 2007
7,400
Concord
There are a couple things that people seem to be riding DA about that don't seem fair or even with factual basis.

First, Crowder had to be part of this deal for salary purposes. While he is a great rotational player they aren't the ones that win championships. Are they useful? Absolutely but the Cs aren't going to live and die by Jae. Those players compliment the 2-3 stars it takes to win. People keep talking about his value, he's really only worth a late first. This isn't on his ability, but the only teams that will sacrifice a pick for him will be the team's that need that extra complimentary piece chasing a title. Not lotto team looks at Jae as the guy that's going to put them over the top. If Jae alone got a top 20 pick in trade I'd call that a huge win

People also need to stop comparing IT to Irving. As much as I love IT and am going to miss the little spark plug, Irving is head and shoulders(no pun intended) better. While IT might fit Clevelands team a bit better in that he is leathal open on the outside, Irving without Lebron should thrive. Put it this way: IT was a top 5 MVP candidate in Stevens system, Irving was an all star without a system catering to Lebron. Now a he's going to be in a system built around his strengths by Stevens? Yes please. And that doesn't even get into the defensive side

Finally you can't lump Fultz in with Irving. The fultz deal was done without any regard to Irving being available. People have to stop lumping these deals together since they had nothing to do with each other. DA viewed Tatum as the superior player. There is a reason why he wouldn't part with him in the Irving trade. They are two deals done with the best interest of the team, and I think Danny nailed it
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
52,045
Danny took some huge risks this offseason. It would have been really easy to just have kept the number 1 pick and picked Fultz. Not only would it be choosing the consensus choice it would have prevented his second controversial move: the Irving trade. With Fultz in the wings, the Cs would have been in a position to let IT go after the season with a star-potential player ready take over. If Ainge had gone that direction that pick and the Hayward signing would have had writers around the league grading his offseason an "A+", inoculating him against any second guessing down the road if Fultz ended up a disappointment.
Instead he's bet big on two players, Tatum and Irving, that he apparently rates a lot higher than most basketball people. He's now in a position where if either Fultz or Bell ends up becoming a superstar and Tatum doesn't and/or if Irving ends up proving to be nothing more than the hero-balling defensive liability many fear he is, Ainge looks truly horrible and his legacy takes a huge hit. It's a remarkable turn considering how easy it would have been for him to "win" the offseason by going with the seemingly slam dunk move of picking Fultz.
I could go on and on about the awesome moves that never would have happened if Ainge cared about playing it safe or worried about what some schmoes on TV thought about him.

And let's not pretend there's no risk in riding it out as expected. You get Fultz and Hayward. IT walks with his salary slot unable to be replaced. Maybe you have to let Smart go next summer because the team still isn't really good enough at the top to go overboard and we're starting to skew very young anyway. Then we're resting more hopes on an '18 draftee being a difference maker asap while figuring out how to win now.

This route was actually pretty safe I think. He made the team better at the top and maintained flexibility while removing any temptation to give an ill-fated extension to Thomas.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,516
St. Louis, MO
I could go on and on about the awesome moves that never would have happened if Ainge cared about playing it safe or worried about what some schmoes on TV thought about him.

And let's not pretend there's no risk in riding it out as expected. You get Fultz and Hayward. IT walks with his salary slot unable to be replaced. Maybe you have to let Smart go next summer because the team still isn't really good enough at the top to go overboard and we're starting to skew very young anyway. Then we're resting more hopes on an '18 draftee being a difference maker asap while figuring out how to win now.

This route was actually pretty safe I think. He made the team better at the top and maintained flexibility while removing any temptation to give an ill-fated extension to Thomas.
And he still, after everything, has the assets to acquire Davis if he becomes available. And has likely extended this team's window beyond Golden State's. Pretty masterful.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,864
Honolulu HI
I could go on and on about the awesome moves that never would have happened if Ainge cared about playing it safe or worried about what some schmoes on TV thought about him. And let's not pretend there's no risk in riding it out as expected. ..This route was actually pretty safe I think. He made the team better at the top and maintained flexibility while removing any temptation to give an ill-fated extension to Thomas..
None of the moves that Ainge has made in the past were even close to as risky (or controversial) as the two big moves he pulled the trigger on this offseason. He potentially is giving away two number overall picks in one offseason, and the 17' pick was seen as the type of "consensus number 1" that almost never gets traded. I'm not saying that going conventional is always the best move, but let's not pretend this is "standard Ainge". This is Ainge's two boldest moves ever, back to back. As great has he's been throughout his career he will be remembered - for better or worse- for how these moves play out.
 
Last edited:

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
None of the moves that Ainge has made in the past were even close to as risky (or controversial) as the two big moves he pulled the trigger on this offseason. He potentially is giving away two number overall picks in one offseason, and the 17' pick was seen as the type of "consensus number 1" that almost never gets traded. I'm not saying that going conventional is always the best move, but let's not pretend this is "standard Ainge". This is Ainge's two boldest moves ever, back to back. As great has he's been throughout his career he will be remembered - for better or worse- for how these moves play out.
Oh god, his career will be remembered for hanging another banner and then rebuilding on the fly to be a contender with a completely different roster a few years later when he should have been in the doldrums that most teams are in that situation. 'Consensus number 1' means shit in a year that a LeBron or Duncan isn't there. The difference between Fultz and Tatum has about 2% chance of defining his career and the Irving trade has a good chance to work out in his favor when you consider all the factors involved. Even if it doesn't, he's going to be around as long as he likes and still has plenty of moves to make up for it. All GMs make trades that don't work out, there's a bigger body of work to look at and even if Fultz becomes Derrick Rose 2.0 and Tatum turns into Ron Mercer it's not exactly making him Isaiah Thomas (the Pistons version as a GM, for clarity).
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,864
Honolulu HI
Oh god, his career will be remembered for hanging another banner and then rebuilding on the fly to be a contender with a completely different roster a few years later when he should have been in the doldrums that most teams are in that situation. 'Consensus number 1' means shit in a year that a LeBron or Duncan isn't there. The difference between Fultz and Tatum has about 2% chance of defining his career and the Irving trade has a good chance to work out in his favor when you consider all the factors involved. Even if it doesn't, he's going to be around as long as he likes and still has plenty of moves to make up for it. All GMs make trades that don't work out, there's a bigger body of work to look at and even if Fultz becomes Derrick Rose 2.0 and Tatum turns into Ron Mercer it's not exactly making him Isaiah Thomas (the Pistons version as a GM, for clarity).
Nothing will make him Isaiah Thomas and your right, even if these trades flop, he will always get credit for the Garnett teams and the quick rebuild in the last few years. That said, these trades are big enough and controversial enough that they will be a big part of how he is remembered, and that's either going to significantly bolster or downgrade his legacy . If Tatum ends up a superstar - or at least better than Fultz and Ball - or if somehow Irving is the type of franchise player that you can build a championship team around Ainge will be seen as an unparalleled genius. If instead the general consensus is actually true and neither reach that potential it will most definitely significantly tarnish his image.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
12,413
Not getting all the gloating about this trade. Cleveland may be dysfunctional, but this trade is not a great example of that (despite the last second silliness). It's actually pretty incredible what they were able to get for Kyrie considering the situation he put them in. If IT is healthy, Cleveland is a far, far better team (a healthy IT is about as similar a player as you can get to Kyrie, and Crowder and Zizic add much needed depth) . Add to that the fact that they picked up Rose and now have the 18' Nets pick as a trade asset if they want to pick up an extra piece and this team has set itself up to make a serious run at Golden State. IT's health is the biggest concern but the fact that the Cavaliers have no reason to rush him back should allow him plenty of rest to make sure he's available in the playoffs.

One interesting situation to follow will be the emerging concerns about Russell Westbrook in OKC. Thus far RW has declined to pick up the massive 207 million dollar/ 5year extension that has been made available to him. The longer he waits, the more questions this situation prompts. And while he still has until October to make a final decision, if he eventually declines the extension OKC would be wise to consider trade options for both him and George (who almost certainly won't stay around if Westbrook leaves).
Why is this interesting in a discussion about Cleveland? If/when that were to happen the Cavs could be in a great position to offer the most value in a trade, for either one or both of OKCs stars. Shumpert, Frye, Crowder, Zizic, Net's 18' pick is good value (and a salary cap match) for a half-season rental of RW. Shumpert/Crowder/Nets 18' works in exchange for Paul George. If you can convince OKC to be interested in Kevin Love (or spin Love to a third team in exchange for extra assets to send to OKC) you could actually put together a trade that nets you both stars.
That's a HUGE if.. and even so.. you keep saying this, but have you shown how Cleveland is a far, far better team with Kyrie and Hayward now on the Celts? You're obviously enamored with Cleveland, but what makes them a far superior team? Do they have a PG right now? And what proof is there that IT will be back before the playoffs? or even then?

edit: and if Rose is in your answer.. the guy hasn't had two good knees in years. he was a shell of himself before he left Chicago... let alone NYC.
 
Last edited:

Kid T

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
793
San Francisco
Everyone should read this quote from David Griffin that was posted on Amico Hoops:

“When you go through these deals, you share all the information you have, you share all the images you have. If the most recent images of Isaiah were as far back as the playoffs, a new set of images now will create the ability to compare and contrast, and see how things have improved.

“So I don’t think it’s a situation where anybody was caught off guard. It was just a case of getting perhaps more information. Obviously, Isaiah is in this league because he has heart and soul that is almost unparalleled, and I believe him when he says he’s gonna be back to 100 percent.”

This basically explains everything and it doesn't indicate anything nefarious is going on. Teams get more information, opinions change, etc.

Sure, a second round pick doesn't necessarily qualify as compensation for the change in IT's condition, but it allows both parties to save face. Cleveland can't pull out of the deal because they aren't going to beat the Nets pick and Crowder and Boston can't just bring IT back after he's been dragged through the mud for a week. Throwing in a cheap asset at the end acknowledges that both parties looked at this fairly and didn't spend the last week taunting each other.
You keep claiming/intimating that Cleveland found something in IT's physical that either wasn't disclosed or changed. I don't think I have read anything from a reputable source that supports or confirms that (though there have been several that refute that). The far more likely scenario is that two sets of doctors can look at the same injury and one can opine that surgery is needed while the other suggests that rest and physical therapy is sufficient. It seems clear that if surgery were necessary (as Cleveland's medical opinion implies) then IT would indeed miss a good chunk of the season. But has been outlined in the Ringer piece, this trade was really about the future (and the assumption that LBJ wouldn't be a Cavalier after this season). That's why the unprotected Brooklyn pick and the cap friendly Crowder contract were the two primary pieces of the trade for Cleveland. This is not to say that IT was a throw-in, but he was framed as the piece (along with Crowder) to appease the internal constituency from worrying that they would not be competing this year.

Contrary to your characterization that the "cheap asset" was acknowledgement that both parties looked at this fairly, it was a cheap piece because it represented nothing more than a face saving measure for Cleveland. If there really was some sort of misrepresentation of value/health, the compensation would have been commensurate and more significant.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
31,567
Finally you can't lump Fultz in with Irving. The fultz deal was done without any regard to Irving being available. People have to stop lumping these deals together since they had nothing to do with each other. DA viewed Tatum as the superior player. There is a reason why he wouldn't part with him in the Irving trade. They are two deals done with the best interest of the team, and I think Danny nailed it
Well, yes and no. One of the biggest reasons DA made the deal was to split the value of the #1 pick into two assets so that he would have more flexibility in making trades. If DA doesn't get the LAL pick, I'm not sure he makes the Irving trade even if he drafts Tatum at #1. And he sure doesn't make the Irving trade if he drafts Fultz at #1.

Very very smart.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
12,001
around the way
None of the moves that Ainge has made in the past were even close to as risky (or controversial) as the two big moves he pulled the trigger on this offseason. He potentially is giving away two number overall picks in one offseason, and the 17' pick was seen as the type of "consensus number 1" that almost never gets traded. I'm not saying that going conventional is always the best move, but let's not pretend this is "standard Ainge". This is Ainge's two boldest moves ever, back to back. As great has he's been throughout his career he will be remembered - for better or worse- for how these moves play out.
The Chris Webber and Joe Barry Carroll trades worked out for those teams. Sometimes the consensus #1 isn't the right guy.

I wouldn't have done it with Fultz. But I admire his courage.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,056
None of the moves that Ainge has made in the past were even close to as risky (or controversial) as the two big moves he pulled the trigger on this offseason. He potentially is giving away two number overall picks in one offseason, and the 17' pick was seen as the type of "consensus number 1" that almost never gets traded. I'm not saying that going conventional is always the best move, but let's not pretend this is "standard Ainge". This is Ainge's two boldest moves ever, back to back. As great has he's been throughout his career he will be remembered - for better or worse- for how these moves play out.
Sure, Fultz was the consensus but to me it was a lazy consensus as he doesn't project out as a LeBron/Brow-type of dominant player. To me he's a safe pick with a Monta Ellis in his prime floor with a ceiling of an All-Star. He does lack the type of explosiveness to be a truly dominant player. I have no problem grouping Fultz in with others as the top players in this draft without anointing him as the prize of the class. I just don't see that at all in this player.

For everyone who points to W-L records when Kyrie was on his own without LeBron with a supporting cast assembled to complement LeBron........you should go watch some U. of Washington games when they were 2-11 in conference before Fultz shut it down due to an injury that may or may not have been very serious. It's like how Carmelo was slammed for being a loser as soon as he arrived in NY and couldn't lift a cast of donkeys to the playoffs.......just after he already did so in Denver. Unless you are Superman like few NBA players have ever been you are going to lose a ton of games when your supporting cast sucks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.