What's the big deal?

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
I don't see McCollum as a fit in Boston or in Philly. With Horford gone, what will the Sixers do in their frontcourt when Embiid is injured? I view Embiid missing a substantial number of games as almost inevitable. And McCollum is a bad fit for the Celtics for exactly the reason that lovegtm said.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Bringing in McCollum doesn’t really make sense for the Celtics if they are interested in developing the Js, does it?
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Bringing in McCollum doesn’t really make sense for the Celtics if they are interested in developing the Js, does it?
He’s pretty complementary.

Edit: to elaborate, this team has shown they can build a high-level offense based around having 2+ scorers on the floor at all times, without much redundancy. They leverage the multiple scorers by running actions on both sides, and letting the big read which side to execute the DHO with, or by running staggered screens that can spring the initial ball-handler or rotate back to the first screener and let him attack.

I don't think replacing Hayward with McCollum would change this formula much--I just don't see much offensive benefit, and probably some defensive downgrade. If they're somewhat uncertain about Hayward's foot and Portland is willing to take that risk, obviously that changes the calculus a lot, and I'd do the deal. I don't have access to that medical info obviously
 
Last edited:

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
Word around here (I am in the Twin Cities) is that MN will not make KAT available. That goes against the national reporting though. https://sports.yahoo.com/the-trade-rumor-mill-is-spinning-around-minnesota-timberwolves-star-karl-anthony-towns-201323007.html

Would be fascinating to see what could be had for 24 year old Towns who is averaging 27/12/4 and shooting 42% from three on 8.5 attempts per game.

One rumor is D'Angelo Russel and 3 first round picks (one this year would be a top 5 pick).

If he is moved this year, Tatum + Smart would need to be involved to make money work. Jaylen could be if it happens in the offseason.

Tatum + Smart + filler + picks?

Jaylen + filler + MEM pick + other pick?
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Word around here (I am in the Twin Cities) is that MN will not make KAT available. That goes against the national reporting though. https://sports.yahoo.com/the-trade-rumor-mill-is-spinning-around-minnesota-timberwolves-star-karl-anthony-towns-201323007.html

Would be fascinating to see what could be had for 24 year old Towns who is averaging 27/12/4 and shooting 42% from three on 8.5 attempts per game.

One rumor is D'Angelo Russel and 3 first round picks (one this year would be a top 5 pick).

If he is moved this year, Tatum + Smart would need to be involved to make money work. Jaylen could be if it happens in the offseason.

Tatum + Smart + filler + picks?

Jaylen + filler + MEM pick + other pick?
I don't think Minny does this--NO waited until the supermax wasn't getting signed, and still got a massive haul (Ingram+Ball+picks that are valuable if LBJ declines is looking even better than it did at the time).

If he somehow was on the market, you do Tatum+Smart+MEM+low picks and don't really think twice. The extra team control makes him more valuable than AD imo, and I'd be optimistic about the Celtics system bringing a lot out of him defensively.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
He’s pretty complementary.

Edit: to elaborate, this team has shown they can build a high-level offense based around having 2+ scorers on the floor at all times, without much redundancy. They leverage the multiple scorers by running actions on both sides, and letting the big read which side to execute the DHO with, or by running staggered screens that can spring the initial ball-handler or rotate back to the first screener and let him attack.

I don't think replacing Hayward with McCollum would change this formula much--I just don't see much offensive benefit, and probably some defensive downgrade. If they're somewhat uncertain about Hayward's foot and Portland is willing to take that risk, obviously that changes the calculus a lot, and I'd do the deal. I don't have access to that medical info obviously
But it shifts the focus from developing Brown and Tatum as future stars to having them take a back seat to the established stars. It seems like a step back towards the 2018-19 version of the Celtics and a real commitment to not thinking a Brown/Tatum centric team will work, now or ever.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
But it shifts the focus from developing Brown and Tatum as future stars to having them take a back seat to the established stars. It seems like a step back towards the 2018-19 version of the Celtics and a real commitment to not thinking a Brown/Tatum centric team will work, now or ever.
Do you feel the same way about having Hayward on the team?

McCollum is getting paid for the next 5 years--there would be zero contract issues or worries about getting shots up. We've seen with Kemba that getting a vet with lots of gravity who doesn't need shots, but tilts the defense, can have big benefits.

Tatum and Brown can both be really good players while also needing a 1a scorer on the floor to really unlock them. Either of them could develop into a primary on-ball scorer (Brown by improving his passing reads, Tatum by honing his stepback 3), but we're not there yet, the league is wide-open, and Kemba isn't getting any younger.

I don't think it's crazy to make a move (whether it's re-signing Hayward or trading for CJ) to add scoring for the next 3-4 years, while also hoping that in that time one of Brown or Tatum can become that guy you build an offense around. If you look at similarish guys like Butler, George, and Kawhi, it took all of them awhile to really be primary scorers, but the latter two were in position to contend for championships prior to that.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,187
I have no problem swapping Hayward for an elite scorer chemistry-wise. I do wonder if skill-wise his passing, defense, size are a better fit for this roster, though. I also don't think Portland would have interest in that swap absent significant assets being added for them, which (given above) Celtics have no real incentive to agree to.

KAT is a far more interesting guy to wishcast around. Tatum is almost surely the best asset they could get for him, and this is likely the last year the Celts hvae meaningful pick equity to include. But I don't really see Minny wanting to do a deal unless KAT simply refuses to play for them anymore, it's a huge step back for them to deal KAT even if the return is strong. So, ball is really in his court seems to me.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Well, we know Hayward is a fit on the current team, we can only speculate about other guys.

The Celtics also become a much physically smaller team if that move is made, as they would be adding another 6’3” guy in place of a 6’8” guy. That’s going to have a ripple effect that results in a lot of very small lineups or increased reliance on weaker but taller players. Right now, there are scenarios where Ainge can contemplate running his best five players out together. Replace Hayward with McCollum and that would be unworkable.

And you are adding a guy who is taking 19.4 shots per game (and hasn’t averaged fewer than 17.8 in the past 5 years) in place of one who has never taken more than 15.8.

This kind of deal only makes sense if the Celtics believe that the current setup won’t work and that 2 of Smart, Brown, and Tatum need to be moved in order for the Celtics to build a championship team.

Edit: There’s a version of bring McConnell in for Hayward that would have made sense, but in that version the Celtics re-sign Al Horford instead of signing Kemba Walker.
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
I really don't get any of these rumors. First Love, then McCollum, now Drummond...

If Danny & Co listens to a GM does that register as interest?

Can anyone concoct a reason why Drummond to the C's makes sense?

The only thing I can gather from these rumors is maybe there is more to the Gordon Hayward situation then we're aware of...
1. How degenerative is Gordon's ankle/foot? and do the C's want to recommit to him long term?
2. How Gordon feels about staying in Boston?
3. What Gordon's agent is saying to Danny?
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
I really don't get any of these rumors. First Love, then McCollum, now Drummond...

If Danny & Co listens to a GM does that register as interest?

Can anyone concoct a reason why Drummond to the C's makes sense?

The only thing I can gather from these rumors is maybe there is more to the Gordon Hayward situation then we're aware of...
1. How degenerative is Gordon's ankle/foot? and do the C's want to recommit to him long term?
2. How Gordon feels about staying in Boston?
3. What Gordon's agent is saying to Danny?
PG: Walker
SG: McCollum
SF: Brown
PF: Tatum
C: Drummond

Gone: Hayward, Smart, Kanter, Poirier, some salary ballast coming back with McCollum, and draft picks.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
PG: Walker
SG: McCollum
SF: Brown
PF: Tatum
C: Drummond

Gone: Hayward, Smart, Kanter, Poirier, some salary ballast coming back with McCollum, and draft picks.
That team would likely score well and defend down low. It would probably torched everywhere else on defense though.

McCollum doesn't seem like an upgrade for this team and its not clear what Drummond's impact overall would be either. But losing Hayward and Smart to get you those pieces is a clear downgrade in playmaking and defense.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
PG: Walker
SG: McCollum
SF: Brown
PF: Tatum
C: Drummond

Gone: Hayward, Smart, Kanter, Poirier, some salary ballast coming back with McCollum, and draft picks.
And, of course, Drummond next June. Yeah, no thanks.

Also, I haven't seen anyone with Boston contacts reporting Drummond interest and the McCollum story started as a Twitter troll. So the whole thing is just so much hot air.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
And, of course, Drummond next June. Yeah, no thanks.

Also, I haven't seen anyone with Boston contacts reporting Drummond interest and the McCollum story started as a Twitter troll. So the whole thing is just so much hot air.
Hopefully.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
McCollum isn't going anywhere. And you can't really add two awful perimeter defenders to the roster and expect to play good defense. McCollum can't score enough to make up for it.

He'd be a natural next to Simmons in Philly, only the Sixers let that ship sail with their commitment to drafting their title winner (I said at the time that they should have dealt the third pick for McCollum, had they gone in that direction they might have won a title by now).
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
And, of course, Drummond next June. Yeah, no thanks.

Also, I haven't seen anyone with Boston contacts reporting Drummond interest and the McCollum story started as a Twitter troll. So the whole thing is just so much hot air.
With the dearth of free agents, what do you estimate someone pays Drummond this summer?
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,289
I really don't get any of these rumors. First Love, then McCollum, now Drummond...

If Danny & Co listens to a GM does that register as interest?

Can anyone concoct a reason why Drummond to the C's makes sense?

The only thing I can gather from these rumors is maybe there is more to the Gordon Hayward situation then we're aware of...
1. How degenerative is Gordon's ankle/foot? and do the C's want to recommit to him long term?
2. How Gordon feels about staying in Boston?
3. What Gordon's agent is saying to Danny?
Most rumors are just agents trying to find a good home for their client.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
I have no problem swapping Hayward for an elite scorer chemistry-wise. I do wonder if skill-wise his passing, defense, size are a better fit for this roster, though. I also don't think Portland would have interest in that swap absent significant assets being added for them, which (given above) Celtics have no real incentive to agree to.

KAT is a far more interesting guy to wishcast around. Tatum is almost surely the best asset they could get for him, and this is likely the last year the Celts hvae meaningful pick equity to include. But I don't really see Minny wanting to do a deal unless KAT simply refuses to play for them anymore, it's a huge step back for them to deal KAT even if the return is strong. So, ball is really in his court seems to me.
I would much prefer to bet on Tatum’s continued offensive development and already elite defense to Towns excellent offense and complete absence of defense. Sure, there’s a chance coaching can fix Towns, but that seems less likely than Tatum adding the strength to finish through contact or having his step back fully click or both. I would not trade Tatum for Towns straight up let alone add Smart or other assets to a deal.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
Unless he's toast physically, Gordon Hayward is way better than CJ McCollum, imo. Foremost, he's way bigger, on a team that's undersized to begin with. CJ's basically an older, smaller, right-handed D'Angelo Russell, only without the passing skills (which is probably DLo's best quality). And as others have noted, a minuscule backcourt of Walker and CJ would get roasted defensively.

If you're angling to dump Hayward, I suggest finding him nice home in the Bay Area, where he'd slot in beautifully between Splash Bros and Draymond, and grab a boatload of young assets and picks from Minnesota or New York for DLo. Or heck, just keep DLo, who as noted is a bigger, better, younger version of CJ who could grow into his prime with the Jays as Kemba ages.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Unless he's toast physically, Gordon Hayward is way better than CJ McCollum, imo. Foremost, he's way bigger, on a team that's undersized to begin with. CJ's basically an older, smaller, right-handed D'Angelo Russell, only without the passing skills (which is probably DLo's best quality). And as others have noted, a minuscule backcourt of Walker and CJ would get roasted defensively.

If you're angling to dump Hayward, find him nice home in the Bay Area, where he'd slot in beautifully between Splash Bros and Draymond$, and grab a boatload of young assets and picks from Minnesota or New York for DLo. Or heck, just keep DLo, who as noted is a bigger, better, younger version of CJ who could grow into his prime with the Jays as Kemba ages.
D Lo would drive this forum crazy. He is a better scorer than Smart but he currently has worse shot selection (partly by design for this Warriors team). I like him but at present he is a volume scorer who seems to have contempt for any and all forms of defense.

Trading Hayward for him seems very unlike Ainge too. At least at this point in the Cs cycle.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
D Lo would drive this forum crazy. He is a better scorer than Smart but he currently has worse shot selection (partly by design for this Warriors team). I like him but at present he is a volume scorer who seems to have contempt for any and all forms of defense.
Basically agreed, but all those things also describe McCollum — with DLo's saving graces being that he's 4.5 years younger than CJ (i.e. an age where shot selection tends to improve) and has four added inches of wingspan and much better court vision / passing ability. So far this season he's putting up 26.6 pts per 36 on .557 true shooting, which is better than any CJ season by volume, and better than all of them except one (three years ago) by efficiency.

Anyway, I wan't really suggesting you should want DLo; I was more making a point about how much you shouldn't want CJ McCollum.

Is there anyone you would want off the Knicks or Wolves in a three-way involving DLo and Hayward? Let's assume KAT and Barrett are untouchable. Say, Mitchell Robinson, future picks, and some expiring salary ballast? Or Covington, Okogie and a boatload of picks? Or Wiggins...?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
I mean it works as part of a three way deal, but that's about it. You could ship him to Minnesota for Dieng as salary ballast and then whatever else. But it would need to be a lot of something else to make up for $24 million worth of bench filler. New York would be a safer bet, except for the fact that Boston would get a second dose of contract year MaMo. I suppose if they took Russell on spec and then traded him to one of Minnesota or New York next summer. Still not very inspiring.

EDIT: Covington, Okogie, and picks would be good, however it doesn't meet the salary requirements. But Covington would look good playing the big wing spot in Boston.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
I mean it works as part of a three way deal, but that's about it. You could ship him to Minnesota for Dieng as salary ballast and then whatever else. But it would need to be a lot of something else to make up for $24 million worth of bench filler. New York would be a safer bet, except for the fact that Boston would get a second dose of contract year MaMo. I suppose if they took Russell on spec and then traded him to one of Minnesota or New York next summer. Still not very inspiring.

EDIT: Covington, Okogie, and picks would be good, however it doesn't meet the salary requirements. But Covington would look good playing the big wing spot in Boston.
Yeah: a core of Covington, Tatum, Brown, Smart would be an absolute monster on defense.

As far as salary-matching, you could take either Teague's expiring deal if you did the deal now, or one extra season's worth of Dieng (who's not an awful player at all).
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Basically agreed, but all those things also describe McCollum — with DLo's saving graces being that he's 4.5 years younger than CJ (i.e. an age where shot selection tends to improve) and has four added inches of wingspan and much better court vision / passing ability. So far this season he's putting up 26.6 pts per 36 on .557 true shooting, which is better than any CJ season by volume, and better than all of them except one (three years ago) by efficiency.

Anyway, I wan't really suggesting you should want DLo; I was more making a point about how much you shouldn't want CJ McCollum.

Is there anyone you would want off the Knicks or Wolves in a three-way involving DLo and Hayward? Let's assume KAT and Barrett are untouchable. Say, Mitchell Robinson, future picks, and some expiring salary ballast? Or Covington, Okogie and a boatload of picks? Or Wiggins...?
We are on the same page. I like CJ McCollum but he is NOT a fit on this Celtics team.

I know Hayward has the opt-out this year but I am at a loss to explain why some posters are so quick to trade him away and downgrade the team's chances this year. If Hayward plus other assets net you an upgrade fine. But trading him for McCollum, Drummond or D Lo is not that.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
I keep repeating, but no one seems to listen to me, he isn’t going anywhere until this summer because he’s looking for his last big payday and the salary mechanics just don’t work for Boston.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Everyone is focused on Hayward, and he may well get moved or S&T'd in the summer, just because of salary structure and age.

Leaving him aside, I think people are sleeping on a Smart trade. He was untradeable for awhile on that value contract, Tatum's defensive ascent in particular is making him somewhat of a luxury imo. Then you factor in that he'll be a UFA in 2.5 years, with most of that next contract overlapping with Tatum's presumed max.

Smart would have a strong value to teams with worse wing defense than Boston. I'm not sure what deal is out there, but his salary greases the skids for a lot of possible ones, while not being the serious 2-way downgrade that trading Hayward would be.

I love Smart, but I think he's the guy whose value takes the biggest hit for the Celtics with the rise of the Jays and the fact that the team's most promising young players are also wings.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
It’s just that they have Walker on a 30% max, Hayward’s due his 35% max, Jaylen is slightly less than max, but Tatum’s getting the full five year, 30% max out of the gate. That puts them into luxury tax territory for their top 4. Smart could well get traded, but it would be for draft picks and not a roleplayer level guy that will end up costing max money (when you factor in the luxury taxes).
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
What can be had at his salary that's an upgrade from Marcus?

Count me out on a Smart trade. I actually think he compliments the Jay's and the Big4 well (when he isn't hoisting w/15 secs on shot clock). He distributes, switchy on defense, team leader/vet for the rookies, etc.

The Theis/Kanter pairing at the 5 is fine, we don't need to slap them to Smart as ballast to add another expensive player.

If there is any truth (which I don't believe) to the Celtics kicking the tires on Max players it has to be something behind the scenes with Gordon's health, contract, optionality issue
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
It’s just that they have Walker on a 30% max, Hayward’s due his 35% max, Jaylen is slightly less than max, but Tatum’s getting the full five year, 30% max out of the gate. That puts them into luxury tax territory for their top 4. Smart could well get traded, but it would be for draft picks and not a roleplayer level guy that will end up costing max money (when you factor in the luxury taxes).
Yeah, this is really the question—what can you turn Hayward into that’s more in the 20M range, or alternatively trade Hayward for assets and turn Smart into some kind of upgrade/fit in that 20-25 range.

I don’t think you can just sit tight with both Hayward and Smart indefinitely, especially if Hayward re-ups.
 

dhellers

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2005
4,203
Silver Spring, Maryland
What can be had at his salary that's an upgrade from Marcus?

Count me out on a Smart trade. I actually think he compliments the Jay's and the Big4 well (when he isn't hoisting w/15 secs on shot clock). He distributes, switchy on defense, team leader/vet for the rookies, etc.

The Theis/Kanter pairing at the 5 is fine, we don't need to slap them to Smart as ballast to add another expensive player.

If there is any truth (which I don't believe) to the Celtics kicking the tires on Max players it has to be something behind the scenes with Gordon's health, contract, optionality issue
Agreed. The J's are great, but I don't see them digging in to lock down a monster during crunch time. At his salary, MB is exactly what you want. In the sense of "if you get rid of him,
you will spend 3 years looking for a replacement".

GH's long term health HAS to be a big concern. Do you gamble on a 90% GH for two years, or trade him for quarters on the dollar?
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I guess the way I think of it is: say that Tatum makes a huge leap next year, and is a bonafide #1 option. Do you feel like favorites in the East with him+Brown+Smart+Kemba+Hayward?

To me just feels a little off and a little redundant. And if you don’t feel like that team with a leaped Tatum is a huge favorite, then some kind of move has to be made, because there’s no way you should have two offensive stars and that kind of salary structure and not be prohibitive conference favorites.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
I think that we may be overthinking it here, since Smart was gone for so long and is reintegrating over the last couple of games. If I missed the "what to do with Marcus long-term" talk earlier in the year, I apologize.

Smart is the spiritual team leader. More importantly, he's not only another wing. He's also a primary ballhandler and facilitator. I don't see the benefit of moving a guy who does what he does and makes what he makes, unless it's part of a deal that brings back someone special.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I think that we may be overthinking it here, since Smart was gone for so long and is reintegrating over the last couple of games. If I missed the "what to do with Marcus long-term" talk earlier in the year, I apologize.

Smart is the spiritual team leader. More importantly, he's not only another wing. He's also a primary ballhandler and facilitator. I don't see the benefit of moving a guy who does what he does and makes what he makes, unless it's part of a deal that brings back someone special.
The difference is that the team looked fine (imo) with him out, in a way they didn’t with Hayward’s scoring gone.

It’s not a “Marcus is bad what do you do with Marcus” thing. It’s about allocation of resources and painful decisions.

Before the season, there was Jay uncertainty. Now that the Jays are on about as good a trajectory as reasonably could have been hoped for, the team needs to maximize two eras imo: the Kemba era of the next 2-4 years, and then hopefully the one where the Jays are primary scoring options.

If Smart+everyone maximizes this upcoming era, that’s fine. It just doesn’t feel quite right to me, given that it’s unclear he’s an upgrade on Theis or GWill in a closing lineup. Again, I think he’s a good player.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
The difference is that the team looked fine (imo) with him out, in a way they didn’t with Hayward’s scoring gone.

It’s not a “Marcus is bad what do you do with Marcus” thing. It’s about allocation of resources and painful decisions.

Before the season, there was Jay uncertainty. Now that the Jays are on about as good a trajectory as reasonably could have been hoped for, the team needs to maximize two eras imo: the Kemba era of the next 2-4 years, and then hopefully the one where the Jays are primary scoring options.

If Smart+everyone maximizes this upcoming era, that’s fine. It just doesn’t feel quite right to me, given that it’s unclear he’s an upgrade on Theis or GWill in a closing lineup. Again, I think he’s a good player.
I hear what you're saying, and I don't want to sound like I'm dead against trading Marcus. Just not in the same place as you, I guess, about it not feeling right.

Fwiw, I think that we'll know more when the playoffs come. I love Brad's long rotations in the 82, and Marcus's flexibility helps with that a lot. We'll see what happens when rotations shrink.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I hear what you're saying, and I don't want to sound like I'm dead against trading Marcus. Just not in the same place as you, I guess, about it not feeling right.

Fwiw, I think that we'll know more when the playoffs come. I love Brad's long rotations in the 82, and Marcus's flexibility helps with that a lot. We'll see what happens when rotations shrink.
Right...the first question is whether to make a move before said playoffs, when they shrink :)

The playoff rotation issue is two-fold:
1. The Big 4 provide enough scoring and ball-handling for 48 minutes. If you want a 12-min ballhandler, you use Wanamaker, who probably spaces the floor better than Smart and defends PGs well. Smart is super-redundant offensively in a playoff setting imo, and possibly even a slight negative.

2. I’m not sure that Smart is better than one of Theis/Kanter/GWill in a closing lineup, so I’d prefer someone who’s clearly better than those guys.

The problem is that I don’t know that there’s a move that works this year. The logical
one is something based around Smart+minor assets for Myles Turner, but that will never happen because of same conference and the GMs hating each other.

If there’s no move out there, I’m fine keeping Marcus through the playoffs—for nothing else, it could make a big difference if a key guy misses a few games to injury then. And who knows: maybe Smart at center and Brown on Lopez works as a closing lineup against Milwaukee—I just don’t feel awesome about it the way you should when you have 4 guys getting paid or about to be paid the max.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
I guess the way I think of it is: say that Tatum makes a huge leap next year, and is a bonafide #1 option. Do you feel like favorites in the East with him+Brown+Smart+Kemba+Hayward?

To me just feels a little off and a little redundant. And if you don’t feel like that team with a leaped Tatum is a huge favorite, then some kind of move has to be made, because there’s no way you should have two offensive stars and that kind of salary structure and not be prohibitive conference favorites.
I honestly think they'll sit tight and let the Jays continue to leap/improve. I don't see Tatum's offense that much greater then JBs' to make him the sole #1. I see them being 1A/1B with Kemba fine being the 1C, the new BIG3 by next season

Expect Danny & Co will get in front of the Hayward situation this summer so they don't end up empty-handed (ie Al/Ky).

I'm guessing the C's will do some sort of 3-team trade this summer, based around a S&T with Gordon, GSW & a team that appreciates DLo. Celtics get a good complimentary player/expiring contract/picks to pair with their BIG3. If they could find a big body, defense-first 4 or 5 and a lights out 3pt shooter this offseason, great. I wouldn't be shocked if they bring Kanter back at 2 or 3yrs at $6-7MM.

Its a coin toss something small on the edges gets done in the next month (trade deadline) like a cheap experienced big from a non-playoff team. Don't see a huge move in-season for the C's. If they get a bit of injury luck they could find themselves in the Finals this season, then anything can happen.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I honestly think they'll sit tight and let the Jays continue to leap/improve. I don't see Tatum's offense that much greater then JBs' to make him the sole #1. I see them being 1A/1B with Kemba fine being the 1C, the new BIG3 by next season

Expect Danny & Co will get in front of the Hayward situation this summer so they don't end up empty-handed (ie Al/Ky).

I'm guessing the C's will do some sort of 3-team trade this summer, based around a S&T with Gordon, GSW & a team that appreciates DLo. Celtics get a good complimentary player/expiring contract/picks to pair with their BIG3. If they could find a big body, defense-first 4 or 5 and a lights out 3pt shooter this offseason, great. I wouldn't be shocked if they bring Kanter back at 2 or 3yrs at $6-7MM.

Its a coin toss something small on the edges gets done in the next month (trade deadline) like a cheap experienced big from a non-playoff team. Don't see a huge move in-season for the C's. If they get a bit of injury luck they could find themselves in the Finals this season, then anything can happen.
Yeah, I’d expect to see Kanter back at those numbers as well, they seem comfortable with his offensive fit and their ability to find defensive minutes for him.

The demise of GSW really changed the league in terms of who is barely playable and who barely isn’t.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
I would much prefer to bet on Tatum’s continued offensive development and already elite defense to Towns excellent offense and complete absence of defense. Sure, there’s a chance coaching can fix Towns, but that seems less likely than Tatum adding the strength to finish through contact or having his step back fully click or both. I would not trade Tatum for Towns straight up let alone add Smart or other assets to a deal.
Besides AD, Towns is the other incredible fitting big that this team needs to truly be a contender, IMO. While it is true that his defense is subpar, he has held Embiid to 22/9 in the 6 games they have faced. And I am still skeptical of Tatum's elite defensive rating. He has improved, no doubt, but I think Stevens has as much if not more to do with it than Tatum.

KAT is putting up such ridiculous shooting numbers, that I salivate thinking what he could do with a Kemba or Hayward pick n roll.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
I am sure there are some scenarios where Marcus Smart nets the Celtics some actual value via trade but its hard to see them. I assume that only a contender would want him and, if so, you are likely getting back some combo of a low rotation players along with low draft picks. Is that worth it?

Also, I wonder if a trade is further limited by Smarf's style of play and the teams who would have interest. For example, does anyone see Ainge trading him to the Lakers - and he would be a very good fit for them at present given that they are rumored to be looking at Darren Collison? I can't see that sort of deal happening but I may be alone there. Does anyone see the Celtics trading him to other contenders in the East? I think every team would love to have him but his fit seems very specific.

If Boston moves Smart, its likely part of a larger package given his unique skill set and his salary.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I am sure there are some scenarios where Marcus Smart nets the Celtics some actual value via trade but its hard to see them. I assume that only a contender would want him and, if so, you are likely getting back some combo of a low rotation players along with low draft picks. Is that worth it?

Also, I wonder if a trade is further limited by Smarf's style of play and the teams who would have interest. For example, does anyone see Ainge trading him to the Lakers - and he would be a very good fit for them at present given that they are rumored to be looking at Darren Collison? I can't see that sort of deal happening but I may be alone there. Does anyone see the Celtics trading him to other contenders in the East? I think every team would love to have him but his fit seems very specific.

If Boston moves Smart, its likely part of a larger package given his unique skill set and his salary.
Yeah, so he fits on a ton of contenders (the Celtics are fairly unique in terms of high-end wing depth), but the piece you get back is unclear. I could actually see Danny making a Laker deal and betting on the top of the West being brutal, the problem is that the Lakers emptied the cupboard hard on the AD deal and don’t have anything worthwhile to offer.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Besides AD, Towns is the other incredible fitting big that this team needs to truly be a contender, IMO. While it is true that his defense is subpar, he has held Embiid to 22/9 in the 6 games they have faced. And I am still skeptical of Tatum's elite defensive rating. He has improved, no doubt, but I think Stevens has as much if not more to do with it than Tatum.

KAT is putting up such ridiculous shooting numbers, that I salivate thinking what he could do with a Kemba or Hayward pick n roll.
I’m high on Tatum’s defense, but you do KAT for Tatum+ in a heartbeat. Problem is that teams basically never trade guys like KAT before 1-2 years left on deal, and for good reason.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,084
Towns isn’t getting dealt for Tatum+ but it would be such a great move for the NBA. Imagine a Towns/Embiid Boston/Philly rivalry for next 5 years.