The Athletic: Poll on hypothetical, proposed trade for John Collins

Would you make this trade?

  • Yes, Celtics get Collins

    Votes: 25 29.4%
  • No, the price is too high/would prefer someone else

    Votes: 56 65.9%
  • No, Larry Bird is walking through that door

    Votes: 4 4.7%

  • Total voters
    85

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,642
Here's the Athletic's idea on a proposed deal:

Celtics get: John Collins
Atlanta gets: Payton Pritchard, Carsten Edwards, 1st round pick (unprotected) 2021, 1st round pick (unprotected) 2023, "Vanishing first" in 2025 which means top 25 protected, becomes 2 2nd rounders if it does not convey
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
43,905
I'm not sure I love the player and there are durability concerns, but the price is fair for a 20-10 big who can shoot threes and is under team control. Don't think that's enough on our end though. My thoughts on such a deal are contingent on follow up deals with the TPE and current bigs on good contracts.
 

Lazy vs Crazy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,714
Two or three firsts plus our only decent backup point guard for a rental (he's getting maxed and the Celtics aren't matching) seems real bad. It ties up nearly every pick we have so the TPE becomes almost unusable.

No way Danny does this.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
24,867
DA only does that if he can get Collins to sign to a reasonable extension, which is not happening, so it would never happen. John Collins is not going to change the trajectory of the Cs this season and then what do you do next season with no avenues by which to improve?
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
3,243
Saint Paul, MN
I don't think anyone is gooing to throw a max offer at Collins. And if you think that is the case, and you expect to match with his restricted rights, then I don't think that deal is all that outrageous and I would consider it
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
40,554
If the Celtics make a trade like this, they are almost surely matching any RFA offer for Collins so that part doesn't bother me. And giving up PP/Edwards isn't a real problem either. So, it just comes down to the picks. I would cap my interest at 2021 unprotected and 2023 unprotected. And I don't really care about the TPE impact if Collins is brought in. He would be that 3rd impact guy that we're hoping the TPE helps to acquire. Real problem would be Kemba/Smart. It wouldn't be easy to unload Kemba and Smart would be a goner after next year with the Jay's and Collins taking up that much salary. Danny would have to be REALLY certain that Collins is the missing piece. I'm less sure on that front but I do admire his talent.
 

CreightonGubanich

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 13, 2006
1,198
north shore, MA
Yeah, you only do that deal if you're willing to max Collins. That probably means attaching another asset to get off the Kemba contract. All of a sudden, you're all in on Tatum, Brown, Collins, Smart, and roster filler, with no way to add another piece beyond the MLE for the foreseeable future.

I like Collins as a player in the abstract, but not at the contract he's going to get. I also don't love him as a third option alongside Brown and Tatum, because I don't love the non-scoring parts of his game.

Long term, I think the need for the Celtics is less about getting a "third star" and more about getting the right complementary players around Tatum and Brown.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,183
Collins put up good numbers last season on a very bad team. He was also sharing the floor with a very good PG who set him up for a bunch of easy baskets. The Hawks are a bit better this year and his stats are down. His shooting numbers are good, but he also doesn't play good defense, and I'm not sure you could credibly run him out there as a small-ball 5 for a playoff team.

The picks to me are too much, especially because he might be a rental this year and I really don't want to be the person paying Collins $100 million or more. I think you could get a similarly productive player for cheaper value.

Also, not sure the Hawks would have much interest in two small PGs when they already have one that will play 38 mpg.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,343
Two or three firsts plus our only decent backup point guard for a rental (he's getting maxed and the Celtics aren't matching) seems real bad. It ties up nearly every pick we have so the TPE becomes almost unusable.

No way Danny does this.
The Celtics would obviously match him, you trade for Collins because you are willing to max him if needed.

overall I don't love it.
Pritchard is already getting massively overrated here, but 3 1sts is a bit steep given the contract situation.

If it were 2 I do it.

Leaves you with a roster of:
C- Collins
PF- Theis
SF- Tatum
SG- Brown
PG- Kemba

Bench:
TL
Smart
Nesmith
Thompson (we you likely trade for a similarly priced wing or guard)

That allows you to take on a lower cost player or two in the offseason into the TPE.... yeah it's a pretty good core even if you let Theis walk.

It also gives you a very long window with Collins/Tatum/Brown all under longterm deals despite being early 20s.

Yeah, you only do that deal if you're willing to max Collins. That probably means attaching another asset to get off the Kemba contract. All of a sudden, you're all in on Tatum, Brown, Collins, Smart, and roster filler, with no way to add another piece beyond the MLE for the foreseeable future.

I like Collins as a player in the abstract, but not at the contract he's going to get. I also don't love him as a third option alongside Brown and Tatum, because I don't love the non-scoring parts of his game.

Long term, I think the need for the Celtics is less about getting a "third star" and more about getting the right complementary players around Tatum and Brown.
This isn't really true, you have a huge TPE that you can pick guys up into as long as Wyc will pay the tax. You have Nesmith, THompson and TL to either play or trade. All you're really losing out on are a couple late firsts (PP, 2021, 2023) given the players you're discounting as roster filler are those same types of picks, the likelihood of the 3 combining to be Collins' level of impact are probably low.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,439
around the way
I'd do it. Not the biggest Collins fan, but we need to start consolidating resources. This is a step in that direction that still allows a reset this year.
 

dano7594

lurker
Jul 15, 2005
94
I would do it now, we hold onto the TPE, and we will have half a season with Collins to see if it works out chemistry wise. My only hesitation is giving up Pritchard.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,560
I would do it now, we hold onto the TPE, and we will have half a season with Collins to see if it works out chemistry wise. My only hesitation is giving up Pritchard.
No way they give up all that for a couple month rental. If you trade for Collins, you lock him up.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
22,882
Atlanta would probably get a better offer at the deadline and if they didn’t I’d imagine they would hold on to Collins for a greater return in a Sign-n-Trade over the summer. Based on this we’d have close to zero percent of acquiring him with the posted offer.

Collins is getting the max. There isn’t much will he or won’t he. Aside from possibly Jrue Holiday, he’ll be the most highly sought after FA among the non-contenders (Paul and Kawhi player options will extremely narrow list notwithstanding).

Having said all that.....Danny is known to “play a hand” and with this team/roster in disarray I’m looking for him to make some aggressive moves either at the deadline or over the summer. Collins is good, really good......and only 23. He has the athleticism of a higher ceiling once his mental game catches up as he enters his mid to late 20’s. I’d be all for adding him to our core, adding a couple more 30-yr old veterans to add to our second unit and make a run these next couple years. Doing nothing guarantees being in NBA no-mans land which isn’t where a franchise like Boston wants to be. More importantly for future moves.....it isn’t where Wyc accepts to be. Lots of changes coming.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
35,860
I like Collins a lot, but if I told folks that 2021 1st rounder unprotected is a top 5 pick, would folks reconsider? Because the way things are going right now, I feel like there is a better chance that it's a top 5 pick than it is a pick outside the top 12 or so....
 

CreightonGubanich

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 13, 2006
1,198
north shore, MA
This isn't really true, you have a huge TPE that you can pick guys up into as long as Wyc will pay the tax. You have Nesmith, THompson and TL to either play or trade. All you're really losing out on are a couple late firsts (PP, 2021, 2023) given the players you're discounting as roster filler are those same types of picks, the likelihood of the 3 combining to be Collins' level of impact are probably low.
The TPE allows you to absorb salary, but it's not an asset that another team values. In order to receive something back other than a bad contract, they need to send assets the other way. I doubt Ainge is willing to pay max money to Brown, Tatum, Collins and Kemba. That means using another asset to get off Kemba's money, which doesn't leave much to pair with the TPE to acquire a real asset. Smart might also be a roster casualty of the deal if Wyc isn't willing to pay the tax money for his next deal.

I don't think the price is too high for Collins, but I do question his fit on this roster. If the core of the team is Tatum, Collins and Brown with role players filling in on rookie contracts, vet min deals, and the MLE, that's an expensive team that I'm not sure is a championship contender.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
37,190
Is the Athletic reporting that this trade is actually being discussed or is it just some person saying this would be a good idea?
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,642
As mentioned upthread, this trade does preserve the TPE, but the Celtics then have very few resources to use the TPE. I doubt the 2027 1st round pick has much value. Or, are they allowed to trade away their 2022 and 2024 picks, they just can't trade back to back picks in the same trade?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,560
As mentioned upthread, this trade does preserve the TPE, but the Celtics then have very few resources to use the TPE. I doubt the 2027 1st round pick has much value. Or, are they allowed to trade away their 2022 and 2024 picks, they just can't trade back to back picks in the same trade?
Can't. They could trade their 2022 pick after the 2021 draft though.

I think they could also trade their 1st round picks if they acquired other 1st round picks.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,642
I like Collins a lot, but if I told folks that 2021 1st rounder unprotected is a top 5 pick, would folks reconsider? Because the way things are going right now, I feel like there is a better chance that it's a top 5 pick than it is a pick outside the top 12 or so....
I know things look terrible right now, but barring some other injury (which of course is always possible), when Smart comes back I think there is no chance this team misses the playoffs.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
35,860
I know things look terrible right now, but barring some other injury (which of course is always possible), when Smart comes back I think there is no chance this team misses the playoffs.
From your lips to the basketball God's ears, but I certainly wouldn't be giving up a potential high lottery pick on the hope this team turns it around, in return for a rental (and I personally don't think I would pay Collins the max). If they just start at least beating the teams that are behind them in the standings, I'd feel a lot more comfortable. The reality is they should be easily beating these teams, but I don't think Marcus is the difference between losing to Atlanta by 20 (before garbage time) and beating them. I'll be happy to be wrong though.....
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,343
The TPE allows you to absorb salary, but it's not an asset that another team values. In order to receive something back other than a bad contract, they need to send assets the other way. I doubt Ainge is willing to pay max money to Brown, Tatum, Collins and Kemba. That means using another asset to get off Kemba's money, which doesn't leave much to pair with the TPE to acquire a real asset. Smart might also be a roster casualty of the deal if Wyc isn't willing to pay the tax money for his next deal.

I don't think the price is too high for Collins, but I do question his fit on this roster. If the core of the team is Tatum, Collins and Brown with role players filling in on rookie contracts, vet min deals, and the MLE, that's an expensive team that I'm not sure is a championship contender.
Sure, but to me the question is... what's the player better than Collins you get with the TPE?
As for getting off Kemba... it shouldn't factor in at all, it's an independent case whether 1. you need to, 2. you should.

I look at the situation and see this....

We could trade assets to use the TPE, and get a player likely worse (and older) than Collins, or....

You get Collins via trade, now you have your top 5-6 in place generally, that means you can use the TPE one of two ways:
1. Take on a salary to recoup assets (Perhaps to trade Kemba)
2. More likely, split up the TPE and use it to get one or more middling salary players that can fill out the back of the rotation for 2nds or the like to help a team clear space for their FA signings (names that come to mind are: Rondo, Covington, Thad Young, Satoransky, ) Or to facilitate the salaries in a trade by snagging one of the vets that has to go our for salary, but the sell off team doesn't want.

Now the cost is a question no doubt, but the idea behind trading for a player on a lower expiring salary with RFA rights and preserving the TPE is a strong one. It lets you do a lot more things.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
15,618
Somewhere
1 and 2.

I would prefer someone else, but this is about as good a player that the Celtics could reasonably obtain right now. I guess they could hold out for KAT in a year or two, but there’s no reason why Collins couldn’t headline such a package (assuming health).
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
26,667
It's just a hypothetical, what would a fair offer trade look like?
It's a hypothetical among beat writers, so not even reflecting expertise of analysts or former front office types.

For me, Collins fits a strong need in a couple ways---adding a better "third" player; adding a creator; adding quality size. But he's also well away from the ideal fit, given defensive issues in particular and also my sense that (to date) while not at all a bad teammate also not a huge positive as a teammate either. His contract keeps us under tax this year, which is (at the margin) a plus and I think also fits the Kanter exception, doesn't it?

At the cost of 2.5 1sts plus PP I don't think I'd buy though I'd certainly consider. I also agree someone else will likely pay more.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,927
I know things look terrible right now, but barring some other injury (which of course is always possible), when Smart comes back I think there is no chance this team misses the playoffs.
The question is how long it takes Marcus to take the floor effectively. Given radsoxfan's comments on the injury that might be a while. And it might be too late by then.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
26,667
1 and 2.

I would prefer someone else, but this is about as good a player that the Celtics could reasonably obtain right now. I guess they could hold out for KAT in a year or two, but there’s no reason why Collins couldn’t headline such a package (assuming health).
I think the other way to think about it is that you might be able to use the TPE to acquire someone who is not today as good as Collins, but who you believe in. Imagine Jimmy Butler early in his career. That is I think the most likely way you get someone better in the end than Collins is today---but it is far from a high-probability scenario
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
22,882
I think the other way to think about it is that you might be able to use the TPE to acquire someone who is not today as good as Collins, but who you believe in. Imagine Jimmy Butler early in his career. That is I think the most likely way you get someone better in the end than Collins is today---but it is far from a high-probability scenario
Collins is only 23 and hasn’t had the best surroundings to improve as a player. The Collins we see at 26-27 has the potential to also be much better than the Collins we see today. I don’t have any intel into his commitment level, etc and so much will be determined by this......Ainge will have this intel so yeah, In Danny We Trust.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,642
I think the other way to think about it is that you might be able to use the TPE to acquire someone who is not today as good as Collins, but who you believe in. Imagine Jimmy Butler early in his career. That is I think the most likely way you get someone better in the end than Collins is today---but it is far from a high-probability scenario
A player is who less good than Collins is today (and I assume younger or at least not significantly older than Collins), wouldn't need to fit into the TPE. Collins is only making $4.1 million this year.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,560
I know things look terrible right now, but barring some other injury (which of course is always possible), when Smart comes back I think there is no chance this team misses the playoffs.
Especially if they added Collins to the mix without really moving anyone off the roster besides PP. I like PP but I'm not sure he'll ever be more than a backup. We can all hope he develops into FVV but I'm not holding my breathe and nor would I let that slim chance stop me from trading for John Collins.

I've come around on Carsen Edwards and think he could be a decent scorer of the bench in the right situation. Boston is not that, with a bunch of other small guards on the team. He's not of any use to the C's really and he has no real value in trades. I'm pretty sure if he got cut, another team would pick him up though.

The pick this year would end up in the 20s and the pick in 2023 would end up in the 20s too. The pick in 2025 may not even convey.

The only real issue is if the C's can afford to lock him up long term and what they do about 2021/22 with Kemba. They could pay the tax for that year and hope Kemba opts out in 22/23. Moving all those assets for Collins means it's less likely they could attach assets to "dump" Kemba. I'd rather they keep him for 21/22 as I think Kemba will opt out. I also think if he finishes this year strong, it's possible they could offload him in the season for a 2nd rounder. I think people are seriously overstating just how unmovable Kemba is at 1+1 left. Collins would also most likely mean the end of Theis and Semi.

After 21/22, they'd have Collins, Tatum and Brown making like $85 mil and they'd have to make decisions on Marcus Smart, TT and Robert Williams. They'd still have RL, AN and GW under contract and whoever they drafted in the 2nd round in this year's draft. So 7 players under contract at roughly $100 mil. They'd also be adding a 1st round and 2 round pick to the roster, so that bumps it to 9/105.

I'm not sure they could keep both Smart and TL, but it's possible. I just think both would require 4 year commitments which may give the C's pause. Given the roster construct, I'm not sure who they'd prefer as they'd lack a center and lack a PG. With Smart, they'd be at 9/120. With TL, lets say 9/115. This assumes TL develops into a 25-30 minute player. Otherwise, Smart is the obvious choice. With both, they'd be at 10/130. They would be either 10, 20 or 25 mil below the luxury tax thresh hold at that point. They'd have an obvious big 3, and either Smart or Williams. Then out of RL, AN and GW, you'd hope or 1 or 2 are solid rotational players. That gives you 5 or 6 players you are confident with, 2 rookies, 1 2nd year player and maybe even Yam Madar to add 1 additional roster spot on the cheap.

Assuming they let one of Smart or TL walk, they would have $20-25 to add 5 more players. Preferably 1 would be a solid PG or big (depending on TL/MS) in the $12-15 mil range to play 20-30 minutes a night and the other 4 would be vet mins/euro signs/undrafted players. That would give the C's 6-7 rotational players that would be getting 25+ minutes on any team. If they kept TL, they'd still need a back up big. If they kept Smart, they'd need to get 2... unless they acquired Collins to play at the 5. In the scenario they kept both Smart and TL, they wouldn't need to acquire anyone else of real note and it would most likely be at the same price point but for more years.

This scenario relies heavily on one of AN, GW or RL to be a 25-30 minute rotational player, if not 2. It also requires Kemba to opt out. It also causes problems after 22/23 when the team has to make a decision on RL and in 23/24 when it has to make a choice on AN. That's pretty far in the future though and if one of the 2 are really worth re-signing, they can probably move Smart and TL for value.

I'm not sure how the team would look in 21/22. I'm guessing much like the 20/21 team but with John Collins replacing Semi and Theis. 11 players are under contract for next year. The others that would be gone are Teague, Waters, Fall, Green. Nothing of value.

It actually could work. Building around Collins/Tatum/Brown doesn't require you to be all that creative either. Get a PG and either a C or another wing and you're good to go.




So if the C's did acquire Collins though, is it to play him at the 5?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,343
It's a hypothetical among beat writers, so not even reflecting expertise of analysts or former front office types.

For me, Collins fits a strong need in a couple ways---adding a better "third" player; adding a creator; adding quality size. But he's also well away from the ideal fit, given defensive issues in particular and also my sense that (to date) while not at all a bad teammate also not a huge positive as a teammate either. His contract keeps us under tax this year, which is (at the margin) a plus and I think also fits the Kanter exception, doesn't it?

At the cost of 2.5 1sts plus PP I don't think I'd buy though I'd certainly consider. I also agree someone else will likely pay more.
Most metrics don't grade him out as a particularly poor defender, despite being a on a poor defending team. RAPTOR likes his defense, I think DARKO has him as decent, DRPM likes him a lot.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,560
I think the other way to think about it is that you might be able to use the TPE to acquire someone who is not today as good as Collins, but who you believe in. Imagine Jimmy Butler early in his career. That is I think the most likely way you get someone better in the end than Collins is today---but it is far from a high-probability scenario
Who are those players? Any of those players would be on their rookie deals and probably not available.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,343
I think the other way to think about it is that you might be able to use the TPE to acquire someone who is not today as good as Collins, but who you believe in. Imagine Jimmy Butler early in his career. That is I think the most likely way you get someone better in the end than Collins is today---but it is far from a high-probability scenario
Yeah this is just unreasonable.

I can see an argument that this is too much to give up for Collins, but the odds of getting a player who will be better than Collins is very very low, what team is giving up a young guy with potential for a lower draft pick?

Edit- to be more clear... the reason a player as young as Collins with his potential (much of which he has reached) is available is because he's about to get paid. A player with more potential would cost far more unless he was also about to get paid, and banking on just "higher ceiling" on a guy who has run most of his rookie deal is a fool's errand, late breakouts are very rare (even the example used isn't really accurate Butler was starting for a playoff team by the end of year 2).
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,642
Especially if they added Collins to the mix without really moving anyone off the roster besides PP. I like PP but I'm not sure he'll ever be more than a backup. We can all hope he develops into FVV but I'm not holding my breathe and nor would I let that slim chance stop me from trading for John Collins.
I like PP, too, but I think his likely ceiling/usefulness is back-up point guard (and I mean back-up in the sense of playing 18-25 minutes a night - so a definite rotational player) who is salary controlled for the next few years. Valuable, certainly - but I don't think he is very likely to be a real impact player.

His role on the team is something that wouldn't be impossible to replace if they make the right decision. At the end of the day, I think the Celtics have to give up something to get something.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,560
Some of the young players I'd love to acquire that could possibly end up better than John Collins if you squint your eyes really hard. At age 25, most players are what they are, so these are the players you can still dream on.

Malik Monk: Last 12 games: 27.0 mpg, .452/.474/.864, 15.7 points, 3.8 rebounds, 1.8 assists. Will always be poor and limited on D due to measurements, gets about as many steals and blocks as Semi. He can score though and just 23 this month.

Lauri Markkanen: Huge size, currently injured. He's a very unique player offensively and would fit in great on that side of the court along the Jays. Flawed defensively and lacks strength. Will struggle to be even average on D.

Lonzo Ball: I'd give him the best chance. The sample size from 3 over the last 2 years is looking more and more like the true Lonzo and he's also made strides at the FT line (though it's all small sample sizes) and getting to the line more. He has good size and is a very well rounded player. Fits a lot of what the C's need. The only thing that stops him from being a perfect fit is if both Jays are on the bench. He can't carry an offense like Collins.

Are there others that are actually available?

Collins is currently way better than the other 3. I'm being very generous with youth. Thing is, Collins is just as young as these 3, so he could continue to improve as well.

I could see the argument that Collins will cost about as much yearly as Ball + Monk or Lauri + Monk. Maybe going 2 instead of 1 would be wise, but I don't see the C's getting a better player at a cheaper cost than Collins assuming the asking cost was just PP, Carsen and 2 or 3 last 1st round picks.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
37,190
These hypotheticals flood my feeds (weird how I get a lot of NBA content...). My two general observations is that fans should not spend any time worrying about the non core players going out in a deal. That isn't a view on their respective NBA career prospects as much as an acknowledgement that they aren't at the level yet where they can help Boston compete. As such, there is no way a Pritchard, Nesmith or either Williams should be a hold up in the deal.

Also, Boston seems like a poor fit as a trade partner for Atlanta in terms of actual bodies. The Hawks don't really need Pritchard or even Nesmith, even assuming both will be good rotation guys going forward. This is not to say they wouldn't do the deal but there seem like other teams that can easily beat any Celtics offer.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,560
To approach this from the other side...I can't see the Hawks agreeing to a deal with the Celtics that doesn't include Smart, which I can't imagine most of you would approve anyway. So this is all a lot of sound and fury that signifies absolutely nothing.
I dunno. I was looking to expand the deal and came up with this

C's Trade:
Smart
TT
PP
Edwards
2021+2023 first unprotected
2025 1st protected top 25.

Atlanta trades
John Collins
Clint Capela
 

begranter

Couldn't get into a real school
SoSH Member
Jul 9, 2007
2,264
I don't see the Celtics as competitors this year. Brown and Tatum aren't there yet IMO. They look like the 24 and 22 year olds they are on the court against most teams. If there are any trades this year, I think they're more along the lines of moving pieces to contenders with an eye to future years than bringing pieces in to contend right now. Hence the "Larry Bird" vote, as it's the closest of the options to saying they should be sellers more than buyers.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,343
To approach this from the other side...I can't see the Hawks agreeing to a deal with the Celtics that doesn't include Smart, which I can't imagine most of you would approve anyway. So this is all a lot of sound and fury that signifies absolutely nothing.
I can, in fact if I'm the Hawks it's far more likely I ask the Celtics to eat a contract for next year with the TPE (say Rondo) than want Marcus Smart back. I want picks and the chance to sign one more young FA before I have to pay Trae Young's extension.

Right now if the cap is 112M, next year, they would come out of the proposed trade in the OP about 12M under the cap. If they send Rondo back it's now 19.5M. I think they'd rather have the cap room than Marcus given their timeline.

If I were building out a full trade, I'd probably add Rondo and Bruno Fernando to ATL's side, and Teague (and/or Green) and a 2nd to the Celtics side.

Lets them shave off close to $10M next year and add a real piece in FA. Build around that core plus the picks.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,929
Maine
Seeing as this is (currently) fantasy.

Does it move the needle if PP gets removed from the proposal and Edwards is sub'd in?
Or if Langford is sub'd in?
Or Both?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,560
I like PP, too, but I think his likely ceiling/usefulness is back-up point guard (and I mean back-up in the sense of playing 18-25 minutes a night - so a definite rotational player) who is salary controlled for the next few years. Valuable, certainly - but I don't think he is very likely to be a real impact player.

His role on the team is something that wouldn't be impossible to replace if they make the right decision. At the end of the day, I think the Celtics have to give up something to get something.
Yeah. Even if he does turn into FVV, I'm not sure how huge an impact that makes. He's not the 3rd guy to add to the Jays. The 3rd piece should be a 6'4+ PG or a wing (preferably 6'9+). Regardless of whether it's a PG/wing, they should both be able to shoot the 3 at an above average clip/volume, be able to defend, and move the ball. Huge, huge bonus points if they can create their own offense but it's not needed if they can add a Clarkson type for the bench.

The 2 players on the team that could end up making a real impact are RL and AN. The C's should try to hold on to those 2 unless they are getting an impact player in return. PP too, for the reasons you mentioned. Having a competent back up PG on a rookie deal for 3 1/2 more seasons is great value.

Still, if you can trade a back up for a legit starter who is only 4 months older, you do it.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,560
Seeing as this is (currently) fantasy.

Does it move the needle if PP gets removed from the proposal and Edwards is sub'd in?
Or if Langford is sub'd in?
Or Both?
Edwards is already in the proposal, and no. He's just a throw in to make the salaries work.
Replacing Langford with PP, who knows? I'd rather the C's keep Langford even if he's more of a lottery ticket but I'd be fine with either.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,310
Santa Monica
If it's legit, Danny should do this trade in a heartbeat. RFA is tricky and has a tendency to dampen value, JC getting a MAX is no guarantee (but still shouldn't stop the Celtics). They'd still have the assets to unload Kemba this Summer. Zero in on RFA to find a S&T candidate for the TPE.

Tatum, Brown, Collins, Smart(C), TimeLord would be timelined, balanced on both sides of the floor and ascending over the next 4 seasons (& likely beyond).

Last season, Collins was clearly the No. 2 option behind Trae Young. This season, it’s been all over the place with his offensive role changing to more of a perimeter-oriented player because of Capela’s presence and Hunter’s emergence. Collins was a pick-and-roll beast last season, averaging the third most pick-and-rolls per game with 5.1; that’s dropped to 2.9 this season on worse efficiency, as the paint is just more crowded because Capela is anchored there.

The deeper stats tell the full story of Collins’ impact with the Hawks. The team is eight points better with him on the floor this season, per Cleaning The Glass. Collins has also had this narrative around him of being a poor defender, but he’s significantly improved on that end of the floor this season, particularly as a help-side defender. He’s been locked in on that end and has simply been a good defender, which is where the biggest question was coming into the season.

There’s still room for him to improve in handling the ball and playmaking for himself and others; that’s an area he continues to say he wants to get better in to make himself more well-rounded.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/collijo01.html
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,343
If it's legit, Danny should do this trade in a heartbeat. RFA is tricky and has a tendency to dampen value, JC getting a MAX is no guarantee (but still shouldn't stop the Celtics). They'd still have the assets to unload Kemba this Summer. Zero in on RFA to find a S&T candidate for the TPE.

Tatum, Brown, Collins, Smart(C), TimeLord would be timelined, balanced on both sides of the floor and ascending over the next 4 seasons (& likely beyond).

Last season, Collins was clearly the No. 2 option behind Trae Young. This season, it’s been all over the place with his offensive role changing to more of a perimeter-oriented player because of Capela’s presence and Hunter’s emergence. Collins was a pick-and-roll beast last season, averaging the third most pick-and-rolls per game with 5.1; that’s dropped to 2.9 this season on worse efficiency, as the paint is just more crowded because Capela is anchored there.

The deeper stats tell the full story of Collins’ impact with the Hawks. The team is eight points better with him on the floor this season, per Cleaning The Glass. Collins has also had this narrative around him of being a poor defender, but he’s significantly improved on that end of the floor this season, particularly as a help-side defender. He’s been locked in on that end and has simply been a good defender, which is where the biggest question was coming into the season.

There’s still room for him to improve in handling the ball and playmaking for himself and others; that’s an area he continues to say he wants to get better in to make himself more well-rounded.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/collijo01.html
I agree on most, but I think the RFA S&T would be real tough. Even if you dump Kemba it's unlikely to be for $0 in return, and you're looking at a real problem with the hard cap.

Right now the Celtics would project $5M under the hard cap just on salaries. This trade cuts out about $4M. So you're at $9M under the hard cap for 9 players. Let's say you dump Kemba and only take back $10M or so that makes him and Collins on a sub-max deal basically a wash....
Now you have 6 spots to fill with $9M, maybe you turn Thompson into 2 cheaper players. You're still nowhere near the range of a S&T for an RFA.

A S&T for an RFA is hard as is, if you trade for Collins it is essentially impossible. If they trade for Collins, then they're not doing a S&T, which is fine, there are a lot of ways to use the TPE and go over the apron.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
26,667
Yeah this is just unreasonable.

I can see an argument that this is too much to give up for Collins, but the odds of getting a player who will be better than Collins is very very low, what team is giving up a young guy with potential for a lower draft pick?

Edit- to be more clear... the reason a player as young as Collins with his potential (much of which he has reached) is available is because he's about to get paid. A player with more potential would cost far more unless he was also about to get paid, and banking on just "higher ceiling" on a guy who has run most of his rookie deal is a fool's errand, late breakouts are very rare (even the example used isn't really accurate Butler was starting for a playoff team by the end of year 2).
It's not unreasonable at all, though (as I said quite clearly) it is unlikely. You imagine that everyone has the same evaluation of the upside of a player---that is not how the real world works. It is certainly possible that you assess a player's upside differently than other teams do---we saw this with Jeremi Grant just last offseason. There was speculation on this board that Malik Monk fit this profile earlier this year.

Jimmy Butler was widely thought to be available his first two years, and he has proven far more valuable than was then assessed. There is no one arguing this is a likely path, but it's simply wrong to suggest teams cannot evaluate an individual player's potential better than others. I have not gone through the exercise for pre-FA guys right now but I am pretty confident having done so in the past and off the top of my head cited multiple examples that we could identify a few guys who are possible fits. Of course, they probably won't both be available and actually achieve the upside but that is why it is unlikely (and why we shouldn't say it is impossible).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,343
It's not unreasonable at all, though (as I said quite clearly) it is unlikely. You imagine that everyone has the same evaluation of the upside of a player---that is not how the real world works. It is certainly possible that you assess a player's upside differently than other teams do---we saw this with Jeremi Grant just last offseason. There was speculation on this board that Malik Monk fit this profile earlier this year.

Jimmy Butler was widely thought to be available his first two years, and he has proven far more valuable than was then assessed. There is no one arguing this is a likely path, but it's simply wrong to suggest teams cannot evaluate an individual player's potential better than others. I have not gone through the exercise for pre-FA guys right now but I am pretty confident having done so in the past and off the top of my head cited multiple examples that we could identify a few guys who are possible fits. Of course, they probably won't both be available and actually achieve the upside but that is why it is unlikely (and why we shouldn't say it is impossible).
I didn't say it was impossible, I said it was unreasonable. Taking an extreme edge case and arguing that it is the best use of an asset that will be expiring shortly.
As you note it's highly unlikely that there is a player that will be available who meets the criteria. And even then it's a generally terrible idea to pass on a trade that gets you a very good 23 year old AND leaves you the TPE, so that you can in your words:
"use the TPE to acquire someone who is not today as good as Collins, but who you believe in."
You are:
1. Obtaining a player who is admittedly worse than another option
2. Using the TPE to do it, instead of getting a borderline All-Star AND having the TPE to use
3. Doing so because you think that your valuation of the player is significantly different than the player's current team and the rest of the league.

It's an incredibly high risk move, and the upside is arguable. You're putting a lot of eggs in the development basket for no good reason. I mean... Jerami Grant is pretty good... John Collins is considerably better and considerably younger. If we passed on John Collins for the next Jerami Grant it would not be a good thing.