Rate the trade: Irving for Thomas/Crowder/Zizic Nets 18' pick
- Thread starter kazuneko
- Start date
Ok.
You can see how atrocious (historically bad, btw) he is defending the ball one-on-one here:
http://stats.nba.com/players/isolation/#!?Season=2016-17&SeasonType=Regular Season&sort=FG&dir=-1&PerMode=Totals&CF=FG*GE*50:Poss*GE*50&OD=defensive
and here:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=2000&c2stat=usg_pct&c2comp=gt&c2val=30&c3stat=dws&c3comp=lt&c3val=1.6&order_by=dws
No TT behind him in Boston so expect his negative effect on the Boston defense to be even worse than it was on Cleveland's.
He is most efficient at offense when taking an astounding 7 or more dribbles (he also takes more shots after 7 dribbles than 3-6 or almost as many as 2 or fewer bounces), which runs very counter to the direction I think some of us thought Boston would be moving in after IT (given their recent acquisitions of Gordo and Horford).
http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/202681/shots-dash/
His extremely high ISO percentage has been covered by other posters in this thread but here you can see how reluctant he is to pass once he commits to driving (4th lowest among all NBA PGs)
http://stats.nba.com/players/drives/#!?sort=DRIVE_PASSES_PCT&dir=-1&CF=DRIVES*GE*5:GP*GE*50&Season=2016-17&SeasonType=Regular Season&PlayerPosition=G
He has been playing with the greatest player in the world but as you can see here his Assist/TO ratio is hardly elite or even very good. He ranked 35th in the NBA this past year.
http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/assists/sort/assistTurnoverRatio
Here, you can see that Irving who has the ball in his hands a lot, ranked 40th in assist % this year.
http://stats.nba.com/players/advanced/#!?sort=AST_PCT&dir=-1
The Celtics traded a half dollar, two quarters and a dime for a dollar. The Celtics found out in embarrassing fashion last year that it's only the money in the billfold that matters in the end. I'm cool with this deal, even if it hurts a little.
I think some of these are concerning (though every NBA player has flaws so it's to be expected), some I don't find concerning at all, and some I disagree with the assumptions or conclusions you drew.Ok.
You can see how atrocious (historically bad, btw) he is defending the ball one-on-one here:
http://stats.nba.com/players/isolation/#!?Season=2016-17&SeasonType=Regular Season&sort=FG&dir=-1&PerMode=Totals&CF=FG*GE*50oss*GE*50&OD=defensive
and here:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=2000&c2stat=usg_pct&c2comp=gt&c2val=30&c3stat=dws&c3comp=lt&c3val=1.6&order_by=dws
No TT behind him in Boston so expect his negative effect on the Boston defense to be even worse than it was on Cleveland's.
He is most efficient at offense when taking an astounding 7 or more dribbles (he also takes more shots after 7 dribbles than 3-6 or almost as many as 2 or fewer bounces), which runs very counter to the direction I think some of us thought Boston would be moving in after IT (given their recent acquisitions of Gordo and Horford).
http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/202681/shots-dash/
His extremely high ISO percentage has been covered by other posters in this thread but here you can see how reluctant he is to pass once he commits to driving (4th lowest among all NBA PGs)
http://stats.nba.com/players/drives/#!?sort=DRIVE_PASSES_PCT&dir=-1&CF=DRIVES*GE*5:GP*GE*50&Season=2016-17&SeasonType=Regular Season&PlayerPosition=G
He has been playing with the greatest player in the world but as you can see here his Assist/TO ratio is hardly elite or even very good. He ranked 35th in the NBA this past year.
http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/assists/sort/assistTurnoverRatio
Here, you can see that Irving who has the ball in his hands a lot, ranked 40th in assist % this year.
http://stats.nba.com/players/advanced/#!?sort=AST_PCT&dir=-1
1. Defense- this is the biggest concern, he's not a good defender. However... I have no idea what those links were supposed to share, nor do I think he's "historically bad" he's one of the bottom 10 or so non-bigs in the league in ISO scoring allowed. That's not great, but also.... not particularly useful as a stat, he faced a grand total of 53 ISO attempts in 72 games. PGs rarely face straight ISO's it's all about PnR defense, help etc. Nobody's value is or should be judged on 2 possessions every 3 games.
The better stat to prove your point would be that he's one of the 10-15 worst high volume defenders of the PnR ballhandler. Interestingly he defends off screens exceptionally well (though the sample is small, exact same as ISO).
The second link for D is even more weird, there are only 41 seasons in the history of the NBA by a guard with 2000 minutes and a usage over 30, why would you limit it to that? Of those there have been 21 this decade by a total of 10 players (Rose, Wade, Westbrook, Harden, Curry, Wall, DeRozan, Thomas, Irving, Lillard) that he had 2 of the 4 worst defensive season among elite offensive seasons isn't much of a stat. I have no idea why you would base your analysis of his defense on how his super-high workload seasons compared to other super-high workload seasons.
Also... I don't know that Thompson instead of the Celtics would in any way help him. The Cavs were not a good defensive team around him, their help D and contain was garbage. The Celtics next year is hard to predict bc of turnover, but last year, even without a rim protector they were a much better help D team on PnR than CLE.
2. Number of dribbles.... hard to say if this should be concerning. The Cavs ran an ISO heavy offense, LeBron had similar ISO rates (though he was considerably less effective on them than Kyrie). I also don't think the 3-6 range is something you want. 7+ is usually either ISO, or fast breaks, 0-2 is handoffs, catch and shoots, cuts, driving closeouts etc. Those are what Stevens tends to want. 3-6 range could be driving a closeout at 3, but the rest tent to be situations as bad or worse than the 7+ range, they're not quick drives to the hoop, they're not coast to coast, they aren't running down the clock. Overall, I think Kyrie ISOs too much, but he was also in a system built for ISO and he was incredibly good at it. We won't know until we see him in the Celtics system how much of the ISO is just his game, and how much is just how the Cavs were coached.
3. Pass% on drives... a bit low, I'd like to see it more in the low 30s than the high 20s. However I do think it's overblown as a concern. That number is similar to the previous 2 years (14-15 and 15-16) and both of those years one of his most comparable players in terms of pass % on drives was...... Steph Curry. You can be great at that pass level. My other thought is this... he's really good at scoring on drives. It comes across in the points%. He ranked 3rd/11th/7th over the last 3 in points% on drives. So others are making passes that don't lead to points (many times because the drive is cut off and there isn't a good shot to kick to) while Kyrie is either scoring or passing to an easy bucket.
4. AST/TO playing with LeBron isn't going to help his AST/TO numbers, if anything it should hurt them. LeBron isn't some knockdown shooter that you'd expect a big bump in ASTs. Additionally LeBron takes a lot of the playmaking role out of the PGs hands, which will depress the easy AST numbers. Kyrie is more a scorer than the point on that team.
Beyond that though... only 1 player in the league had a higher usage than Kyrie and a better AST/TO ratio, John Wall.
His AST% is a bit low, and could be a concern, again though, I'd like to see him in a less ISO heavy system, and without LeBron who took over a lot of offense running before i say it's a major flaw. He was really being played more like a combo guard in CLE, and his assist percentage is pretty good for that role.
Overall, I think defense is the biggest concern, and anything beyond that is going to be a question of how he adapts to Steven's system (which may take time) but there are actually some really good signs buried in there in terms of his general driving effectiveness and his very low turnover rates w/ high usage.
Great post, thanks for unpacking.
One other thing. The CW is that the Cavs have gotten better with this trade. Is that really true? While Crowder certainly brings some skills that they lacked (and that Jeff Green was also brought in to address) but their biggest issues was that they couldn't guard people. Crowder helps but IT makes it worse.
But to me, their real problem is going to be when LBJ goes out. As mentioned above, Kyrie can score pretty much on anyone when he's on. IT just isn't as gifted because of his lack of size. I guess CLE will be running out some combination of IT (when he's healthy) and Love and three of Derrick Rose / Shumpert / JR Smith / Korver / Crowder / Jeff Green / Jefferson. This group isn't inspiring on either end.
Regular season Cavs are going to have a few clunkers. I doubt they will be motivated to take the top seed this year.
The Cavs were 0-8 when James was out and Irving was playing last year. They aren't going to be worse with LeBron out next year.
Last edited:
Unless what they did was trade two half dollars, a quarter, and dime for a half dollar with a better looking obverse.
I think that they traded two half dollars, a quarter and a dime for a dollar.
Edit: awkward
They traded a $20 bill for a $10 dollar bill, a $5 dollar bill, some change, and a Mega Millions ticket with three correct numbers showing but an incorrect Match Ball.
True, and that's why I acknowledged that we should wait and see how they play under Stevens.
Plus, looking only at current Betas and Gammas and their championship count isn't the best way to gauge the importance of those types of players throughout history, because of bunch of them haven't even reached their primes. Some may end up winning championships or moving into the Alpha tier (Davis, KAT, Giannis).
First and foremost, I meant when LBJ is sitting on the bench and particularly in the playoffs. No one cares what the Cavs do during the regular season.
But as for your statement, it's simply wrong. The Cavs were 0-8 when LBJ was out last year. If you bothered to go through the game logs, you would see that Irving sat for 5 of them (2016-12-14; 2017-03-04; 2017-03-18; 2017-04-10; and 2017-04-12). Of the remaining three games, Kevin Love was out for one of them (2017-02-25). Thus, the only games that Irving played with a full squad other than LBJ was the November 16, 2016, game - the 11th game of the season - and December 26, 2016, which was the back-to-back after Christmas and which Irving and Love played under 29 minutes (Love only played 26).
The Cavs record without LBJ last year doesn't show anything except the Cavs didn't care to win every game during the regular season.
One thing that seems pretty clear to me is that other NBA players have a much higher opinion of Kyrie Irving than I do (and than most people on this site seem to). Kevin Durant has called him the most skilled player he's ever seen ("better than Iverson"); and in his most recent bull session with Bill Simmons surmised that one of the reasons he might have wanted out of Cleveland is that (paraphrasing) he cares to much about honing his craft to want to deal with the daily distractions the King's presence brings.
Also, for what little it's worth, loony Skip Bayless loves the deal for Boston and rates Kyrie the 5th best player in the NBA (after KD, Kawhi, LeBron and maybe Steph, in that order). Of course, he likely got that ranking from his maltese puppy Hazel, so caveat emptor.
"Kyrie is just a pure basketball player," Durant started. "He crafted his skill since he was like eight, nine years old. You can just tell, the way he plays, nobody plays like him ... he probably played playground ball, his pops probably took him to the roughest neighborhoods and threw him out there on the basketball court, told him to just go play. So he built up the love for the game.
"When you’re around LeBron James, there’s so much that comes with that -- outside distractions and conversations and just noise that just comes around from being around LeBron James. And Kyrie was at the point, like, 'All right, we lost the championship, this whole season’s gonna be about if LeBron’s gonna leave or not. I’m ready for a new challenge.'
"When you’re around LeBron James, there’s so much that comes with that -- outside distractions and conversations and just noise that just comes around from being around LeBron James. And Kyrie was at the point, like, 'All right, we lost the championship, this whole season’s gonna be about if LeBron’s gonna leave or not. I’m ready for a new challenge.'
Also, for what little it's worth, loony Skip Bayless loves the deal for Boston and rates Kyrie the 5th best player in the NBA (after KD, Kawhi, LeBron and maybe Steph, in that order). Of course, he likely got that ranking from his maltese puppy Hazel, so caveat emptor.
From a pure 'value of the pick' standpoint, sure, but it's also quite possible the pick ends up in the top 5 but the player drafted with it turns out to be not that good. Or, if the trade wasn't made and it ended up in the top 5, perhaps the right player is not available in trade and we couldn't even have gotten someone as good as Kyrie (plus we'd no longer have Isaiah's salary to include).
If the Lakers pick lands in the unprotected zone, it's likely one of the picks would almost have to be moved anyway, as developing two one and done bigs while trying to win would be pretty rough.
I haven't heard it explained this way yet but this is a perfect analogy. There is the potential that they got a $20 bill in exchange for more. There is also the potential they traded a $20 bill for a good deal less. It's all dependent on Thomas's health and the 2018 lottery/
I'm glad that you understood that one. I was about to ask him for a cup of hot fat and the Beatles white album.
Whether you prefer CARMELO, Bowiac's system, or something else: we know right now, within reasonable error bars, where the Nets are likely to end up at the end of the season. We can do out all the possibilities for both their performance, the lottery balls, and even the outcome distributions of next year's draft prospects. The odds of theirs being a top-5 pick are somewhere between 70-80%, and scouts are crowing over Ayton, Bamba et al. This isn't a deal that we'll need to evaluate only in retrospect, it's a deal we can evaluate right now.
Plays in poker are either good plays or bad plays at the time that they're made, regardless of what actual cards end up flipping in subsequent rounds. If you were 80% to win and got your money in, it doesn't matter if the 20% downside hits, because you want to be making 80% positive plays, and over time that +EV will accrue to your favor. Conversely, if you get your money in with 20% odds to take the pot, and you get lucky and happen to take it, it doesn't make it a good play. Over the course of time, your -EV will become obvious. What matters is your accuracy in evaluating your odds before making or not making a play.
This is either a good trade or a bad trade right now. Trying to say we have to wait a year to know the pick, or 3-4 to see how they develop, misses the point entirely. It's like saying that if you're deciding between taking the late-evening flight that has a 20% chance of getting cancelled and making you miss your meeting, or driving all night and maybe being a bit late but with lower variance, that we won't know what the good decision is until the flight either departs or gets cancelled. Anyone with the slightest comfort with probability can make a judgment as to how essential attending or being on time for the meeting is for them, and can accept or hedge their risks accordingly.
Danny Ainge sold his upside for a certain return now. He played Deal or No Deal, and took the banker's lowball offer. The one thing I'll say is that it's certainly not because the stress got to him, or he doesn't understand future value and discounting or something. We have to credit his intellect here. He just decided that lowering his variance was the best championship-equity-maximizing move right now. Some here agree, others disagree, but it's a far less valid argument to say "I don't know, and nobody can know yet, we have to wait and see!".
I think that what I've noticed is that NBA players and NBA sabermetricians seem to have a much higher opinion of Irving than NBA fans and outside sabermetricians (by which I mean guys like Kevin Pelton).
In the sabermetrics part of the debate I assume it's because they're looking at different data sets, since I suspect the guys working for NBA teams are drilling heavily into the Synergy data to produce very play specific/lineup specific evaluations. And that may be why they like him more, they can see the holes but how a team can work around them.
In any event, as much as I love Lil' Zeke (who definitely would have played a key role on a title winner in 2012 had the team with only one PG on the roster fucking drafted him), Boston wasn't a contender last year. And the odds of a post-injury Thomas leading Boston anywhere were slim, so a deal had to be made to add another all star to Hayward and Horford.
Boston now has three top 25 guys to act as shielding for Tatum, Brown, their 2018 lottery pick as the latter three develop, and the sort of high intensity roleplayers needed to help the top three out (Smart, Morris, Baynes, and Ojeleye is going to surprise a lot of people here, I can't tell you how happy I was with that pick as I had him #22 on my board).
As far as I'm concerned the rebuilding project has been a success. Would have I been happier had Pritchard showed a little more patience and Boston been rolling out Horford, Hayward, and George as their three stars? Of course. But George and Butler were off the market, so Ainge pushed his chips in on the next star available (and probably the last for a while) and moved the Celtics into the Golden State/Cleveland stratosphere. Good for us.
But suppose the Brooklyn pick falls in the top 5 but the Laker pick doesn't? That's the worst case. Imagine LeBron deciding to stay, with the Cavs adding Porter, Bagley or Ayton on top of what they already have.
Obviously no draft pick is ever "can't miss," if only because of the injury risk, but in the 2018 draft there are 5 studs with a high likelihood of NBA success, and then a fairly significant drop off in talent after that.
I wouldn't care, because that's a scenario where Lebron is sitting around getting old waiting for them to be good players.
Yeah, I can't really imagine such a scenario with Lebron staying and Cleveland not moving a top five pick for a "win now" piece. I suppose Gilbert could fuck it up, but in the unlikely event that Lebron stays, that pick is going to be used in a deal to make one last push at a championship.
I think the odds of LeBron remaining with Gilbert get more remote by the day. I joke about where he'll be next year on a regular basis, but I can see him teaming up with Griffin in LA next season. Or, frankly, even this season, with DAJ and Lou Williams providing the salary ballast and Dekker, Harrell, and draft picks the selling points for Cavs fans (the Clippers would need to acquire a pick to make that work, but I suspect Boston would gladly help them out with their superfluous 2018 pick).
You make a good point overall but I don't think he was lowering his variance. He traded future talent for talent now. Brad and GH want to win a championship. And despite all of the hype of all of the prospects, the only guy who's likely to be able to impact a playoff series is Donecic and we don't know how his lack of athleticism is going to impact him in the NBA.
Sure, DA could have stayed pat, drafted Fultz, and likely not gone any further this year than last year. Then he could have let IT walk and stayed pat and probably not picked up anyone else other than the two draft picks, and the most likely scenario is that the Cs would have been real contenders in 2020-21, although by that time Horford is gone, the Cs have to pay JB, have to figure out to pay Tatum and Smart and fill out a roster.
Instead, DA split the 1st pick into two assets with value, and traded one of them for a perennial All-Star. Remember, rumours have it that teams like CHI and IND were looking of at least two of DA's best assets (JB, Tatum, BRK, and LAL).
He got Irving for basically one real asset. He made the team better, he gave himself some flexibility for the future; and he still has three very good, very tradeable assets if thing need arises plus Kyrie.
Unless someone like Ayton turns out to be a good player right away, like Anthony Davis.
They Traded a 1000 Won Bill (Isaiah), a dime (Crowder), A wheat penny (Zizac) and a Possible 2 dollar winning Scratch ticket for a dollar.
Isaiah is a 1000 Won coin. We dont know how much value he will have in the future. But Right now it looks to be Less then a strong American greenback, due to injury and his height. 1000 Won will probably never equal a dollar again. The US economy simply has too many advantages over the South Korean Economy. Plus in the event something catastrophic happens it might be essentially worthless. At the very least there is a tremendous of uncertainty around its present and future value.
Crowder is ok value. He is a dime. Technically worth 10 Cents, but people (other teams) just dont value it much anymore.
Zizac is a wheat penny. He might be valuable if hes a rare Denver 1912 Wheat penny. OR he might be a common 1955 Philly wheat penny. Basically he is a penny until proven otherwise and unless something extremely rare happens he will best case only ever be worth a nickel.
The 2 Dollar Scratch is the draft pick. Yea it might be worth 2 Bucks. But we need to run it through the machine to determine if its a winner and for how much then the Cavs need to not lose it. (IE actually get a high pick and make a good decision).
I know the whole "2 quarters" thing has become a joke. But You really need to consider that Isaiah is on a spectrum (ranging from a useless washer to worth almost as much as he was this past fall). With the probability high that its trending surely toward the washer end. If not this year....then soon. ( i am taking Salary, injury, stature and age into account).
The draft pick might be GREAT! or it might be a "Smart" level player.
Crowder is what he is but doesnt make you feel any richer and probably isnt the deciding factor in buying that fidget spinner.
Zizac too is on a spectrum. I see him listed as a "Dime" by some. How can any of us possible even consider that? Whats Brown then? A half dollar? Whats Tatum? Yabu? Zizac MIGHT be something valuable SOMEDAY. But we sure cant tell looking at him today. Its just as likely he is as worthless as a penny.
Isaiah is a 1000 Won coin. We dont know how much value he will have in the future. But Right now it looks to be Less then a strong American greenback, due to injury and his height. 1000 Won will probably never equal a dollar again. The US economy simply has too many advantages over the South Korean Economy. Plus in the event something catastrophic happens it might be essentially worthless. At the very least there is a tremendous of uncertainty around its present and future value.
Crowder is ok value. He is a dime. Technically worth 10 Cents, but people (other teams) just dont value it much anymore.
Zizac is a wheat penny. He might be valuable if hes a rare Denver 1912 Wheat penny. OR he might be a common 1955 Philly wheat penny. Basically he is a penny until proven otherwise and unless something extremely rare happens he will best case only ever be worth a nickel.
The 2 Dollar Scratch is the draft pick. Yea it might be worth 2 Bucks. But we need to run it through the machine to determine if its a winner and for how much then the Cavs need to not lose it. (IE actually get a high pick and make a good decision).
I know the whole "2 quarters" thing has become a joke. But You really need to consider that Isaiah is on a spectrum (ranging from a useless washer to worth almost as much as he was this past fall). With the probability high that its trending surely toward the washer end. If not this year....then soon. ( i am taking Salary, injury, stature and age into account).
The draft pick might be GREAT! or it might be a "Smart" level player.
Crowder is what he is but doesnt make you feel any richer and probably isnt the deciding factor in buying that fidget spinner.
Zizac too is on a spectrum. I see him listed as a "Dime" by some. How can any of us possible even consider that? Whats Brown then? A half dollar? Whats Tatum? Yabu? Zizac MIGHT be something valuable SOMEDAY. But we sure cant tell looking at him today. Its just as likely he is as worthless as a penny.
Kyrie also sat out 5 of the games Lebron missed.
Pretty tough to blame him for losses when he was wearing a suit.
In this analogy, which of the two assets the Celtics gave up as half dollars are equal value to Kyrie Irving as a half dollar?
I assume he means the pick and IT. Of course it's not correct.
Kyrie has the most value of anything in that trade. The Nets pick COULD be more valuable, but it's most likely outcome is a player that is never as good as Kyrie. IT's value is significantly less than Kyrie's, he hasn't shown himself to be consistently as good as Kyrie, he's older, his contract is worse and he's injured.
If we must do a money analogy...
Kyrie is a dollar
Crowder is a dime
Zizic is a coin pulled randomly from a 40 pound bucket that is 85% pennies 12% nickles, 2.99% dimes with two quarters mixed in.
IT is a 50 cent piece
the pick is the Zizic bucket, except with quarters in place of pennies, 50c in place of nickels, same dimes, but 5-10 dollar coins and a single half eagle.
There is no way that a top-5 pick in a loaded draft has only a 3% chance to be as good as Irving, CD. Let's review the top 10 of some recent drafts far enough back to evaluate the present haul:
2012: Davis (1), Beal (3), Lillard (6), Drummond (9)
2011: Irving (1), K. Walker (9), plus Klay Thompson at 11 and Kawhi at 15, not to mention Mr Irrelevant
2010: Wall (1), Cousins (5), Hayward (9), Paul George (10)
2009: Griffin (1), Harden (3), Curry (7), DeRozan (9)
2008: Rose (1), Westbrook (4), Love (5), B. Lopez (10)
2007: Durant (2), Horford (3), Conley (4), Noah (9)
From that list, and let's call it 30 total top-5 picks, you have 3 of the league's 6 "alpha" players, good enough to be the best player on a championship team (Harden, Westbrook and Durant). You have 3 of the league's 12 "beta" players good enough to be the 2nd-best player on a typical championship team (Davis, Cousins, Griffin), and 5 "gamma" players good enough to be 3rd on a title winner (Beal, Irving, Wall, Love, Conley), of which 538 reckons 17 in the NBA. Plus a few other former-allstar players in Lopez, Rose, Noah et al. All told, from picks 1-5, that's 10% alpha, 10% beta, 17% gamma, 10% periodic all-star, ~50% starter/role-player/bust.
In picks # 6-10, you have 1 alpha player (Curry), 1 beta player (Hayward), and 4 gamma players (Lillard, George, Walker, DeRozan), so that's 3%, 3%, and 13%. Not terrible, but not nearly the same sort of odds.
If we take as given that the top of the 2018 draft is as loaded as the average of those 6 drafts, then 40% chance of a significant impact player, possibly an MVP candidate, is a damned good asset.
Multiply that through by the odds of the Nets' finish and the odds of the lottery balls, but let's not understate the value of that Nets pick if it ends up top-5.
If he's thinking of the Celtics version of Irving in the Alpha rank (which he could be under Stevens), then 3 percent for a top 10 pick -is- pretty accurate for being 'as good' as Irving.
A lot of this is pretty much projection anyway, and it's probably better to use a 'blue chip stock vs IPO stock' comparison for this, I think, instead of a flat dollar vs coin analogy, since the assets in this case case has room for growth -and- for depreciation.
Irving isn't Apple or Google stock, but he's somewhere close. General Electric, perhaps. The pick here, on the other hand, is an IPO that people are HIGH on very early depending on what is being offered and the reputation behind it, but it's also a lot more volatile and the value could crater if something else occurs, etc.
At this point, I think, the Celtics are looking to diversify their portfolio and go with a high-end performer than put all their eggs into too many IPOs (which at this point, Tatum and Brown are).
A lot of this is pretty much projection anyway, and it's probably better to use a 'blue chip stock vs IPO stock' comparison for this, I think, instead of a flat dollar vs coin analogy, since the assets in this case case has room for growth -and- for depreciation.
Irving isn't Apple or Google stock, but he's somewhere close. General Electric, perhaps. The pick here, on the other hand, is an IPO that people are HIGH on very early depending on what is being offered and the reputation behind it, but it's also a lot more volatile and the value could crater if something else occurs, etc.
At this point, I think, the Celtics are looking to diversify their portfolio and go with a high-end performer than put all their eggs into too many IPOs (which at this point, Tatum and Brown are).
This is almost true--there are only two factors missing in your analysis.
1. Bowiac's system and CARMELO, as far as I know, don't take into account tanking incentives. When teams are close in wins, and some have massive incentives to lose, and some have none, the latter will probably end up just edging out the former group much more often than you'd expect.
So if the Nets and Bulls are both projected to win X games, you'd expect the Bulls to find a way to finish just worse than the Nets, if they are at all close late in the season.
Note that this does NOT require the Celtics to have some superduper perfect model they think is better than the rest of the league's.
2. The Celtics likely are evaluating Kyrie's game on a fairly granular level, and probably have a better idea than we do of whether he's being properly utilized. That doesn't mean we have to throw our hands in the air, but we should assume that they think there's a realistic way to get significantly more out of him. We know that because Danny doesn't just randomly pull the trigger on trades, and it takes a fair amount for him to want to do one.
tldr; lowering variance is far from the only explanation for what's going on here, and even if it is, the premium being paid for lowering that variance is likely lower than what you're assessing it as.
Seriously? You do realize that the Celtics have won 17 titles with some great ensembles? Among them (1) Bird, McHale, Parrish, Walton, (2) Russell, Havlicek, Heinsohn, Jones, (3) Garnett, Pierce, Allen.
Sorry, my basketball-watching lifetime
The 2008 Big 3 had a lot of things going for it, but that group was a lot more elite defensively than offensively. I'm excited for the Celtics to finally have a lot of elite scoring talent to work with; it's just going to be fun as a fan, and it's more fun to be watching it unfolding live.
What a sports night! Edelman hurt, Nunez hurt, Sox lose, Celtics' blockbuster trade reversed...I assume some Bruin was crippled in a skimobile accident this afternoon.
It's probably a bit of a stretch on my part *it should probably be more in the 7-9 % range), but.... you also have to calculate the odds of where the pick lands. Currently most people project that based on projections of where the Nets finish mixed with lottery odds, the most likely position is 5. There are a lot of players you listed that nobody at 5 ever had a shot at.
That's why just looking at top 5s or top 7s and assuming an even chance of getting anyone drafted there is incorrect. The most likely position is 5th, and 1 is by far the least likely. So your analysis of 6-10 is closer to the likelihood than the 1-5.
Without taking a position on the actual probability distributions, I just wanted to say I really enjoyed the original extended bucket of coins analogy.
Please carry on.
So, with the lottery last night and Cavs getting the #8 pick, having seen Kyrie play up close, seeing IT and Crowder this year, I think Danny did ok.
The crazy thing is, the Cavs actually got a bit lucky with the pick, in that Lin immediately went out for the season. That pick could easily have been worse than 8, and that's probably how the Celtics internally projected it.
Undefeated did an article on the trade yesterday but I don't have a subscription so I have to settle about this meta-article, which apparently includes this gem:
In a column published Wednesday, Jason Lloyd of The Athletic recalled a particularly amusing quip that a frustrated an anonymous Cavs player delivered in the aftermath of a loss this winter.
"Danny Ainge is a f------ thief," he said.
and this gem:"Danny Ainge is a f------ thief," he said.
Whenever any of those three [Clarkson, Hood, Nance] have been on the floor in these playoffs, the Cavs have been outscored by 164 points. Making matters worse, Irving ended last year's postseason a plus-124. That's a 288-point differential in the postseason between Irving and the three key figures the Cavs have left to show for him.
Ty Lue was also quoted as saying: "Ty Lue said today of Danny Ainge: 'You want him on your side. He always gets the best deals. He always makes the right moves.'"
How many GMs have had worse performance to praise ratios than Koby Altman?
His tenure has primarily consisted of two trades, both of which he was widely lauded for: The Kyrie trade, and the deadline blowup.
His return:
1. an 8 pick and Jae Crowder for Kyrie Irving (in his prime with two more seasons under contract)
2. Rodney Hood and George Hill for Jae Crowder
3. Jordan Clarkson (unplayable) and Larry Nance Jr. (almost unplayable) for a late first rounder
That's really brutal, especially considering the public victory laps the Cavs were taking for those trades.
His tenure has primarily consisted of two trades, both of which he was widely lauded for: The Kyrie trade, and the deadline blowup.
His return:
1. an 8 pick and Jae Crowder for Kyrie Irving (in his prime with two more seasons under contract)
2. Rodney Hood and George Hill for Jae Crowder
3. Jordan Clarkson (unplayable) and Larry Nance Jr. (almost unplayable) for a late first rounder
That's really brutal, especially considering the public victory laps the Cavs were taking for those trades.
For all the hand wringing that went on when this trade happened it’s pretty obvious Danny crushed this trade.
