Terry Coming Up Rozes

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,158
Saint Paul, MN
I’m granting you Crowder so I’m not sure why you’re even arguing me on him anymore. I think he’s exactly what you’re talking about, but I also think he and Turner are really the only examples of it and even Crowder was in a shitty situation in Cleveland and played much closer to how he did in Boston once he got to Utah.
He shot 31.6% from three in UTA, compared to 32.8% in CLE. His 2P% and FT% was also worse in UTA than CLE. He didn't really come anywhere near playing how well he did in BOS. His lousy shooting and overall play just sort of got looked over because UTA was such an excellent team with great defense.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,060
Then you didn’t pay attention much. There was tons of talk about the NBA after the new TV deal and whether they would put the cap increase in all at once or space it out. When they put in such a big rise at once, there was plenty of speculation about the middle class getting overpaid and there’s been plenty of talk since about the correction afterwards. If you go pull a quote from someone sayin the Turner deal was a good move by Portland I’ll go pull quotes for you. Deal? I’m not using hindsight.
First, you are right - I don't "pay attention much". Its my cross to bear so I appreciate you being patient with me as someone who doesn't follow the NBA as closely as you.

That said, nobody is arguing against the idea that the abrupt cap raise was going to create a potential situation where the middle tier would get large contracts though I am not sure even those paying attention were all over the fact that it was going to be so one off. However to be clear, I certainly don't disagree with the fact that the cap raise was going to have an effect on the FA market nor did I at the time.

You said Turner's contract was widely considered a "joke". While its clear that it surprised people, I did a cursory search and I didn't find anyone referring to it as a joke. There are lots of articles including an ESPN one that questions Turner's fit with Portland's roster but it doesn't refer to it as a "joke". And none of the pieces I read forecasted him to fall off to the degree he did.

At this point, we can agree to disagree - I still think that the performance of guys like Turner, Crowder, Bradley after leaving Boston might give other teams pause at throwing money at a Boston FA whereas you do not. In the end, its hard to prove either position until, perhaps, next summer when Rozier is a FA. I will try to pay more attention then too.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,629
Portsmouth, NH
You said Turner's contract was widely considered a "joke". While its clear that it surprised people, I did a cursory search and I didn't find anyone referring to it as a joke. There are lots of articles including an ESPN one that questions Turner's fit with Portland's roster but it doesn't refer to it as a "joke". And none of the pieces I read forecasted him to fall off to the degree he did.
Are you literally trying to pin me on specifically using the word "joke"? As if you don't know what I meant and trying to get technicality points? Google "worst NBA free agent contracts 2016". Click on the ones before the season started. Quite literally any one you find will have Turner near or at the top of the list. Here's few:

https://www.si.com/nba/2016/07/09/nba-free-agency-worst-deals-lakers-knicks-mavericks-trail-blazers

http://thesportsquotient.com/nba/2016/8/8/top-10-worst-2016-nba-free-agent-contracts


https://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/07/nba-free-agency-contracts-craziest-evan-turner-mozgov-list

This isn't hindsight. These were written before the season started. Again, pretty much everyone except Olshey thought that contract was terrible before the ink was dry. The reasons you cite - fit - helped contribute to that, but it's not a creation of him being a system player. If GMs try to fit a square peg into a round hole or hand $70M to a role player, thinking at 27 he's finally living up to his draft position and will continue to grow their game, they have bigger issues than to blame Celtic magic.

Look, I just don't think it's something to worry about, nor a "thing". I also don't think Rozier is the guy we got so excited about for a stretch there, I think it was an extended hot streak, so it wouldn't shock me if he got good money he didn't end up living up to it. I don't think Crowder was ever as good as we made him out to be either, but he played better in Utah after he left Cleveland's toxic situation.

But yes, we can agree to disagree. Let's enjoy the season.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,713
around the way
I think that almost everyone who had a track record before Boston improved here under Stevens and most tailed off after they left. That doesn't mean that they were junk before or after Boston, nor does it mean that Boston's "system" made them.

Largely I think that it means that Steven's is elite at putting guys in positions to succeed, but there's also some selection bias in play. Danny tends to bring in guys that will fit Brad's style, and they then perform better.

Turner, Crowder, and IT are examples. IT's post-Celtic injury drop off shouldn't make people forget the leap that he made here.

I don't think that there's a large scale perception of Boston's ex players tailing off, although some writers and perhaps FOs may think that there's something to it. Brad got the best out of Turner because he asked him to do things that he could handle. Shouldn't be a surprise that he isn't an alpha. He never has been.

NBA GMs can be dumb, but they're not stupid.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
21,053
Melrose, MA
We haven't seen a guy like Rozier depart, though - a guy who hasn't yet reached his prime. Most of the guys who have moved on have been mid-career or towards the end of their careers.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
I think that almost everyone who had a track record before Boston improved here under Stevens and most tailed off after they left. That doesn't mean that they were junk before or after Boston, nor does it mean that Boston's "system" made them.

Largely I think that it means that Steven's is elite at putting guys in positions to succeed, but there's also some selection bias in play. Danny tends to bring in guys that will fit Brad's style, and they then perform better.

Turner, Crowder, and IT are examples. IT's post-Celtic injury drop off shouldn't make people forget the leap that he made here.

I don't think that there's a large scale perception of Boston's ex players tailing off, although some writers and perhaps FOs may think that there's something to it. Brad got the best out of Turner because he asked him to do things that he could handle. Shouldn't be a surprise that he isn't an alpha. He never has been.

NBA GMs can be dumb, but they're not stupid.
Could it be that Ainge is acquiring these players after they have been around the league long enough to understand the game while approaching their prime of their mid-20's while letting them move on once they get soft from getting paid like Turner, get fat from being Sully, reached their apex and have leveled out in Crowder, or chewed them up and spit them out when they had nothing more to give like Isaiah? It seems to me like Ainge isn't receiving nearly the amount of credit that he should for bringing these players to Boston at a time in their careers when they could help the Celtics......then once they could no longer help them simply led them out the door. Is that the coach or the GM's player evaluation?

For every player who had their best years in Boston for whatever the reasons listed above there are more who were who we thought they were #dennisgreen......Olynyk, Jordan Crawford, Amir, Jerebko, Zeller, Jeff Green, Rondo, Horford, Morris, Monroe, Baynes, etc etc.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,713
around the way
Could it be that Ainge is acquiring these players after they have been around the league long enough to understand the game while approaching their prime of their mid-20's while letting them move on once they get soft from getting paid like Turner, get fat from being Sully, reached their apex and have leveled out in Crowder, or chewed them up and spit them out when they had nothing more to give like Isaiah? It seems to me like Ainge isn't receiving nearly the amount of credit that he should for bringing these players to Boston at a time in their careers when they could help the Celtics......then once they could no longer help them simply led them out the door. Is that the coach or the GM's player evaluation?

For every player who had their best years in Boston for whatever the reasons listed above there are more who were who we thought they were #dennisgreen......Olynyk, Jordan Crawford, Amir, Jerebko, Zeller, Jeff Green, Rondo, Horford, Morris, Monroe, Baynes, etc etc.
Yeah that's a fantastic point.

I do believe in some selection bias and Brad's smart usage, but the timing is also important. IT is a perfect example.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
10 games better? That would put them at near .500 with current over/unders. That seems highly improbable
Elie Okobu is their starting PG backed up by 2nd round pick DeAnthony Melton and journeyman Isaiah Cannon. 10 games is reasonable to me as the team doesn't even have a proven 2nd unit PG much less a starter.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,158
Saint Paul, MN
Elie Okobu is their starting PG backed up by 2nd round pick DeAnthony Melton and journeyman Isaiah Cannon. 10 games is reasonable to me as the team doesn't even have a proven 2nd unit PG much less a starter.
Still seems a bit ridiculous. Booker will have the ball in his hands a lot, so they don't really need a traditional PG anyway (not thatRozier is all that traditional though). If instead of Rozier, say PHO had an even better PG, say Conley or someone similar, they would be a borderline playoff team? Their whole team is pretty terrible. Having a competent PG would certainly elevate their play, but no chance Terry Rozier is worth 10 wins. None
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,557
10 games better? That would put them at near .500 with current over/unders. That seems highly improbable
The writer was likely referring to realistic numbers from last year, when they won 21 games. And having Rozier from day one actually probably does make a huge difference given Booker's likely struggles coming back from hand surgery (in his shooting hand). So it's not as outrageous as you think.

As is they're probably a 25-28 win team that's going to struggle to score for long stretches given their lack of shot creation. It's not unreasonable to think that Rozier could help them get to 35+ wins by providing them with consistent scoring and competent playmaking from the one spot.
 

Royal Reader

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2005
1,727
UK
LeBron is worth about fifteen. I'd be surprised if Terry was half of that. The Suns may be fifteen better with Ayton, vet signings and Rosier. Doubt he's more than four of that, though.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
Still seems a bit ridiculous. Booker will have the ball in his hands a lot, so they don't really need a traditional PG anyway (not thatRozier is all that traditional though). If instead of Rozier, say PHO had an even better PG, say Conley or someone similar, they would be a borderline playoff team? Their whole team is pretty terrible. Having a competent PG would certainly elevate their play, but no chance Terry Rozier is worth 10 wins. None
10 wins relative to his replacement which is currently a player who may not even be a viable backup in this league. The Suns are essentially beginning the season playing 4 on 5 with one rookie and a second year player comprising 2 of those 4 positions. Any competent starting PG would be a 5-10 game improvement over any combination of Okobu/Melton/Cannon......this is a Suns thing, not a "Rozier is awesome" thing. He was an obvious attraction for the Suns but they don't really have anything we desire and naturally wouldn't want to be giving up future assets when they can simply make him a starting PG-like offer next summer.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,557
They can, but since luxury taxes are calculated by finishing payroll there's a 100% chance that Boston matches the offer and then trades him later.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,158
Saint Paul, MN
10 wins relative to his replacement which is currently a player who may not even be a viable backup in this league. The Suns are essentially beginning the season playing 4 on 5 with one rookie and a second year player comprising 2 of those 4 positions. Any competent starting PG would be a 5-10 game improvement over any combination of Okobu/Melton/Cannon......this is a Suns thing, not a "Rozier is awesome" thing..
Devin Booker is likely to start at PG. It is looking like Booker, Jackson, Ariza, Anderson, Ayton. Sure, Rozier would likely start if he was on that team. but I am unsure how significant the difference is - and am highly skeptical that replacing your backup PG would result in anywhere near a 10 win improvement
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,557
Devin Booker is likely to start at PG. It is looking like Booker, Jackson, Ariza, Anderson, Ayton. Sure, Rozier would likely start if he was on that team. but I am unsure how significant the difference is - and am highly skeptical that replacing your backup PG would result in anywhere near a 10 win improvement
Moving a ruinously bad defender like Anderson to the bench sure does improve the starting five. And getting Booker, who is a shitty on the ball defender, off the point of attack also improves the Suns defensively.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
Devin Booker is likely to start at PG. It is looking like Booker, Jackson, Ariza, Anderson, Ayton. Sure, Rozier would likely start if he was on that team. but I am unsure how significant the difference is - and am highly skeptical that replacing your backup PG would result in anywhere near a 10 win improvement
You're assuming Booker is equally as effective at the 1 as he would be at the 2. This would be an awful decision on both ends of the floor if they took their best scorer and changed his role into one that he's never played before to also expose his flaws. This would be a ridiculous decision. This team is a trainwreck without a lead guard especially in this day and age.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
3,785
You're assuming Booker is equally as effective at the 1 as he would be at the 2. This would be an awful decision on both ends of the floor if they took their best scorer and changed his role into one that he's never played before to also expose his flaws. This would be a ridiculous decision. This team is a trainwreck without a lead guard especially in this day and age.
I can't believe in 2018 you're still talking about 1s and 2s as if these are completely different skill sets; it sounds like Booker is going to play the James Harden role, and he seems like a phenomenal fit for that given his skillset. If I'm the Suns I want Booker handling the ball damn near every possession, pick and rolling opponents to death. He can drive, he can hit the outside shot, and he can dish it. That's just what you want for a 2018 primary ball handler. That doesn't mean Rozier wouldn't be a good fit; Terry's ability to play off ball and act as a secondary ball handler could do for the Suns what adding CP3 did for Harden (obviously not up to the same caliber, but in general). But to act like Booker can't play the role of a primary ball handler in today's NBA, and to act like there are still sacrosanct roles for a #1 versus a #2 in 2018 is just absurd.

EDIT: The defensive side of things is really were the concern is, as it has always been with Booker, but then again, that's the exact same situation with Harden too. He shouldn't be guarding the opposing team's primary ball handler, but in the modern defensive era, there's no reason your primary ball handler has to defend the other team's equivalent. The Suns have Jackson to handle that...they can afford to hide Booker on a lesser option, just as the Rockets do with Harden.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,096
They can, but since luxury taxes are calculated by finishing payroll there's a 100% chance that Boston matches the offer and then trades him later.
I think it's much less than 100% if he gets a whopping offer.

Not super easy to just trade him later. Unless a team is well under the cap you'd have to take back significant salary, most likely all of it will be over the luxury tax. Plus it would have to be a team of Roziers' choosing, after you've just blocked him from his preferred option, as he couldn't be traded without his consent for a year.

I think the least likely scenario is the Celtics matching an offer on Rozier then trading him later. I think a trade before it gets to that point, or just not matching a huge offer, are more likely.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
I can't believe in 2018 you're still talking about 1s and 2s as if these are completely different skill sets; it sounds like Booker is going to play the James Harden role, and he seems like a phenomenal fit for that given his skillset. If I'm the Suns I want Booker handling the ball damn near every possession, pick and rolling opponents to death. He can drive, he can hit the outside shot, and he can dish it. That's just what you want for a 2018 primary ball handler. That doesn't mean Rozier wouldn't be a good fit; Terry's ability to play off ball and act as a secondary ball handler could do for the Suns what adding CP3 did for Harden (obviously not up to the same caliber, but in general). But to act like Booker can't play the role of a primary ball handler in today's NBA, and to act like there are still sacrosanct roles for a #1 versus a #2 in 2018 is just absurd.

EDIT: The defensive side of things is really were the concern is, as it has always been with Booker, but then again, that's the exact same situation with Harden too. He shouldn't be guarding the opposing team's primary ball handler, but in the modern defensive era, there's no reason your primary ball handler has to defend the other team's equivalent. The Suns have Jackson to handle that...they can afford to hide Booker on a lesser option, just as the Rockets do with Harden.
1's can easily slide to the 2 in todays game but not all 2's can perform the necessary functions of a 1. They are different skillsets however it works when you have personnel who can function in either role which many guards in todays game can do...….it is just that Booker is not that guy on the defensive end of the floor (at all) and if he is forced into that role offensively you're taking away his off-the-ball catch and shoots. Booker is not similar to James Harden and his skillset is not that of a player who can effectively distribute in an offense that isn't iso-centric like Houston's without affecting his greatest offensive weapon, scoring the ball.

Then you edit your post to include that Booker shouldn't ever be defending the other teams primary ballhandler.....while ignoring the fact that the Suns don't have another player in your presumed starting lineup who should ever be doing so either. Hence, the 5-10 game improvement with a competent starting point guard for that unit.

You're confusing an individual players skillset with the required skillsets of a teams primary ballhandler/defender of opponents primary ballhandler. Not all guards have the requisite skills to perform both roles at a high level but depending on their teammates may be able to perform in a variety of roles on the floor. The problem with Booker leading that starting unit from the 1 is that he doesn't have the necessary help from his other guard or wing to where they can function in all the roles needed on the floor.
 
Last edited:

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
3,785
1's can easily slide to the 2 in todays game but not all 2's can perform the necessary functions of a 1. They are different skillsets however it works when you have personnel who can function in either role which many guards in todays game can do...….it is just that Booker is not that guy on the defensive end of the floor (at all) and if he is forced into that role offensively you're taking away his off-the-ball catch and shoots. Booker is not similar to James Harden and his skillset is not that of a player who can effectively distribute in an offense that isn't iso-centric like Houston's without affecting his greatest offensive weapon, scoring the ball.

Then you edit your post to include that Booker shouldn't ever be defending the other teams primary ballhandler.....while ignoring the fact that the Suns don't have another player in your presumed starting lineup who should ever be doing so either. Hence, the 5-10 game improvement with a competent starting point guard for that unit.

You're confusing an individual players skillset with the required skillsets of a teams primary ballhandler/defender of opponents primary ballhandler. Not all guards have the requisite skills to perform both roles at a high level but depending on their teammates may be able to perform in a variety of roles on the floor. The problem with Booker leading that starting unit from the 1 is that he doesn't have the necessary help from his other guard or wing to where they can function in all the roles needed on the floor.
HRB, to be clear, are you arguing that a team's primary ball handler must defend the opponents primary ball handler? Or would you agree that those are two separate functions, and that those two have increasingly been split apart in the modern NBA? Is your argument then that, simply because Booker is a guard, if he is going to fill one of the two that he must of necessity fill the other? Or would you agree that Booker could handle the offensive function, with another player taking the defensive one? I would argue that is exactly the case. The Suns don't need a traditional PG; they do need someone who can guard the opposing team's primary ball handler. The two are not equivalent, and the latter can be addressed with a lesser player (example: Avery Bradley).

No one is arguing that Terry Rozier wouldn't substantially improve the team. What I am arguing is that your rigid orthodoxy about positional roles is outdated, and that the Suns options are much more flexible than you are representing.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
HRB, to be clear, are you arguing that a team's primary ball handler must defend the opponents primary ball handler? Or would you agree that those are two separate functions, and that those two have increasingly been split apart in the modern NBA?
They have been separate functions for many years and of course matchups can be used. The problem with Booker at the 1 is that the Suns don't have anyone else to protect Booker from those awful matchups for him. He was used at the 1 during some in-game adjustments last season that allowed it.....using him as a full-time 1 takes away his greatest strengths offensively and the team has no other options but to expose him at the 1 defensively unless they choose to expose someone else defensively.

Is your argument then that, simply because Booker is a guard, if he is going to fill one of the two that he must of necessity fill the other? Or would you agree that Booker could handle the offensive function, with another player taking the defensive one? I would argue that is exactly the case. The Suns don't need a traditional PG; they do need someone who can guard the opposing team's primary ball handler. The two are not equivalent, and the latter can be addressed with a lesser player (example: Avery Bradley).
The Suns need someone to defend the opponents primary ballhandler and one of their one so Booker can function in his most effective role. That role is not with the ball in his hands bringing it upcourt against pressure and initiating an offense. You think he's a baby James Harden.....I do not feel that is the best usage of his skillset. Sure, Avery Bradley would help.....so would Rozier which was my only point.

How do you feel the Celtics would function without Kyrie, Rozier or Smart in the lineup? In your hypothetical of every guard being a combo would you be comfortable with a starting 5 of Horford, Tatum, Baynes, Jaylen and Hayward? Asking Jaylen or Hayward to play the 1 is equivalent to asking it of Booker imo.

No one is arguing that Terry Rozier wouldn't substantially improve the team. What I am arguing is that your rigid orthodoxy about positional roles is outdated, and that the Suns options are much more flexible than you are representing.
Yes, that is precisely what you are arguing or you wouldn't have disputed that the Suns with a competent starting PG would be 5-10 wins better which was my only point. Sure, other options would be better than what they currently have but it is far from ideal from where I sit. Their best bet would be to acquire a legitimate starting PG to put their best scorers in positions to score.....not in positions to defend out of position or to bring up the ball while initiating an offense.
 
Last edited:

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,822
Palo Alto
LeBron is worth about fifteen. I'd be surprised if Terry was half of that. The Suns may be fifteen better with Ayton, vet signings and Rosier. Doubt he's more than four of that, though.
I'm not sure how you're computing these numbers but it all depends on where you set zero. But anyways these platonic notions of player value as wins are irrelevant to the point here since were not talking Terry Rozier against average player but Terry Rozier against the current Suns Pgs who don't belong in the NBA.

As has already been explained in the thread.
 

Royal Reader

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2005
1,727
UK
I'm not sure how you're computing these numbers but it all depends on where you set zero. But anyways these platonic notions of player value as wins are irrelevant to the point here since were not talking Terry Rozier against average player but Terry Rozier against the current Suns Pgs who don't belong in the NBA.

As has already been explained in the thread.
Career average win shares, plus the change in win totals on Miami and Cleveland both times he moved between the two.

Ten win shares puts you in the top fifteen players in the NBA last season. Nine puts you in the top twenty (Steph Curry was 19th with 9.1 and Jimmy Butler 20th with 8.9). No-one in the league was lower than -0.9 (Frankie Smokes).

So even if you're assuming that Rozier's minutes come entirely from taking time off of two players who between them would accumulate a full -1.5 win shares in their combined playing time, he'd need to be roughly as good as Kemba or Oladipo for that to be true. It's possible that his ceiling is that high. It seems outlandish to think he'd do that on a bad team straight after being traded.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
http://www2.philly.com/philly/sports/sixers/tj-mcconnell-trade-sixers-suns-offer-point-guard-rumors-nba-20181016.html

The Phoenix Suns approached the Sixers in recent weeks about acquiring McConnell in a trade, according to several league sources. The Suns offered a second-round pick and the Sixers declined the offer.

In desperate need of a point guard, Phoenix reportedly also expressed interest in Patrick Beverly of the Los Angeles Clippers, Cory Joseph of the Indiana Pacers and Spencer Dinwiddie of the Brooklyn Nets.

The problem is that the Suns were only shopping second-round picks for the point guards.
Assuming the Suns made that same offer for Rozier this may well have been one of Ainge's shortest phone calls.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,554
What's wrong with Okobo or Melton? The Suns' offense will consist of one pass and then a shot by Booker or Ayton no matter who is playing the point.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,086
I get why the Suns don’t want to offer up any future assets but a 2nd round pick? Like Philly is going to accept that when they have a complete unknown in Fultz starting.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,303
Given what was going on last night, I'm thinking some posters here can be excused for missing Rozier's outright rejection of an Embiid shot attempt. Would have been worth some Tommy Points had he been broadcasting.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,713
around the way
I get the Booker love, but asking him to be a primary ballhandler would basically take away the one thing that he actually does well.

I also get why Phoenix doesn't want to shoot the moon for a guy with one year left, since they will still suck this year.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,086
What would it take for Danny to trade Rozier this year (I don't want him to but interested in seeing what people would want in return)? It would really weaken a team that could win 60+ games this year.

If Phoenix breaks and offers up a protected 1st similar to Memphis' protections for next 3 years, do you do it? Do you want an unprotected 1st (clearly not happening)? A young player akin to a Mikal Bridges?

I don't think there is a realistic option out there that would get me to be willing to trade Rozier off this loaded team.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,832
Booker improved his playmaking a lot last year, with his assist rate jumping from 16.3% to 24.4%. I'd actually like to see him play the 1. I think people forget that Devin Booker is younger than Jaylen Brown because it seems like he's been in the league forever, but he's still 21 for another 13 days. He's still improving.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,554
If Phoenix breaks and offers up a protected 1st similar to Memphis' protections for next 3 years, do you do it? Do you want an unprotected 1st (clearly not happening)? A young player akin to a Mikal Bridges?
There's too much risk that trading Rozier will cost a championship, so even an unprotected first might not induce me to part with him at this point.

The Clippers have a guard surplus and could afford to give up Theodosic, but the rumor is that the Suns are after Jamal Crawford, so who knows?
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,832
Yeah, I'm not trading any of the top 9 players. This is a championship caliber team and the deep bench could be the difference maker come the playoffs, not to mention keep our starters well rested during the regular season.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,934
Lisbon, PT
I get the Booker love, but asking him to be a primary ballhandler would basically take away the one thing that he actually does well.

I also get why Phoenix doesn't want to shoot the moon for a guy with one year left, since they will still suck this year.
You'd control Rozier fully in RFA.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,557
Control, in the sense that you reserve the right to match any offer, even ridiculous ones. Not cost control.
Except that in this case it would be cost control as they're the team most likely to overpay Rozier just to get the upgrade. If they had Rozier, he wouldn't get anything like max money, but to pry him from Boston as an RFA, they almost certainly have to do exactly that.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
34,149
Rotten Apple
Interesting to hear Simmons say on his podcast today that there are serious chemistry problems with the Celtics this season and predicted that Rozier would be moved within 10 days. Predictably, going from 30 pts and 36 minutes a game in the playoffs down to 22 mins and 7 pts a game was bound to have a negative impact.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,367
Interesting to hear Simmons say on his podcast today that there are serious chemistry problems with the Celtics this season and predicted that Rozier would be moved within 10 days. Predictably, going from 30 pts and 36 minutes a game in the playoffs down to 22 mins and 7 pts a game was bound to have a negative impact.
I'd like to place a bet that Rozier does not get moved in the next 10 days.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
9,503
Interesting to hear Simmons say on his podcast today that there are serious chemistry problems with the Celtics this season and predicted that Rozier would be moved within 10 days. Predictably, going from 30 pts and 36 minutes a game in the playoffs down to 22 mins and 7 pts a game was bound to have a negative impact.
Within 10 days seems extremely aggressive. Has there even been a legit trade rumor with him this season?
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,667
Interesting to hear Simmons say on his podcast today that there are serious chemistry problems with the Celtics this season and predicted that Rozier would be moved within 10 days.
Well, the Pelicans have lost 6 straight and do have 5 games within the next 10 days in which to fire Demps and retool with Rozier, Jaylen and Tatum. It will be nice to welcome back old friend E'Twaun Moore too. ;)
 

The Social Chair

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 17, 2010
2,642
Interesting to hear Simmons say on his podcast today that there are serious chemistry problems with the Celtics this season and predicted that Rozier would be moved within 10 days. Predictably, going from 30 pts and 36 minutes a game in the playoffs down to 22 mins and 7 pts a game was bound to have a negative impact.
Simmons has been pushing the narrative that Hayward is the worst rotation player on the team and hurting chemistry as well. He hasn't mentioned his binky Tatum's struggles though.

I would take his commentary with a grain of salt.