Kyrie Trade Discussion Continued

[SKR]

That's a bad deal for Boston, and leaves them without a PG.

--Mags

Take out the shump smart swap for a frye Morris swap? Or just take it out and add a non brk pick?

None of that helps Boston with the aforementioned PG problem after your Trade.

--Mags

Smart is a Pg though - and if he is not included, there is no problem?

[CelticsLV]

Cavs absolutely should be speaking with Boston. ITs next contract is a problem, but it's a problem u live with, imo.

Crowder/Isaiah/brown/smart for kyrie/shump is a deal I think both teams should consider. Leaves the Celtics with Tatum and all their picks beside a core of kyrie and Hayward.

Gives the cavs the type of guys they need to go against gsw. And brown, while I'm not too high on him, has potential to be strong 2 way guy.

This trade is purely to help Cavs become better while Boston gains absolutely nothing, if anything, Boston gets worse.

[magnumt]

Take out the shump smart swap for a frye Morris swap? Or just take it out and add a non brk pick?

None of that helps Boston with the aforementioned PG problem after your Trade.

--Mags

Smart is a Pg though - and if he is not included, there is no problem?

Neither Smart or Kyrie are fulltime PGs.

--Mags

[Stillwater]

Boston won't give up 4 players for 1. a 3rd team would be absolutely necessary where Cavs get back less players and more quality as well.
I.T. coming off injury and entering the final year of his contract is not that appealing, Crowder is not at all appealing, & without 1 of Tatum or Brown as the real centerpiece no way would the Cav's be interested despite Boston having the future picks provided they would include them, but it makes no sense to empower the one team that could challenge you for the east title the 2nd best player on your roster who is arguably better than any player on the other teams roster (that they would give up anyway). The Cavs will not deal with Boston under most circumstances.

[SKR]

None of that helps Boston with the aforementioned PG problem after your Trade.

--Mags

Smart is a Pg though - and if he is not included, there is no problem?

Neither Smart or Kyrie are fulltime PGs.

--Mags

Not meaning to poke, but just for knowledge - why couldn't Smart be fulltime PG though?
For me he seems to be suited to run a team full time... Not the cream of the crop but around an average PG at least ?

[magnumt]

Smart is a Pg though - and if he is not included, there is no problem?

Neither Smart or Kyrie are fulltime PGs.

--Mags

Not meaning to poke, but just for knowledge - why couldn't Smart be fulltime PG though?
For me he seems to be suited to run a team full time... Not the cream of the crop but around an average PG at least ?

Because you're going from Isaiah Thomas to Marcus Smart as your starting PG.

None of the 3 are ideal PGs who prioritize passing over scoring, but it's fair to say it'll be a downgrade BOTH in team depth AND PG quality to move Thomas for Irving and try to rely on Smart or Irving to run those duties fulltime.

Also, why is anything else needed for Irving? Thomas should be MORE than enough.

--Mags

[magnumt]

Boston won't give up 4 players for 1. a 3rd team would be absolutely necessary where Cavs get back less players and more quality as well.
I.T. coming off injury and entering the final year of his contract is not that appealing, Crowder is not at all appealing, & without 1 of Tatum or Brown as the real centerpiece no way would the Cav's be interested despite Boston having the future picks provided they would include them, but it makes no sense to empower the one team that could challenge you for the east title the 2nd best player on your roster who is arguably better than any player on the other teams roster (that they would give up anyway). The Cavs will not deal with Boston under most circumstances.

You're trading for Kyrie Irving NOT Steph Curry.

Boston would not mind at all to not do such a trade.

--Mags

[mademan]

Neither Smart or Kyrie are fulltime PGs.

--Mags

Not meaning to poke, but just for knowledge - why couldn't Smart be fulltime PG though?
For me he seems to be suited to run a team full time... Not the cream of the crop but around an average PG at least ?

Because you're going from Isaiah Thomas to Marcus Smart as your starting PG.

None of the 3 are ideal PGs who prioritize passing over scoring, but it's fair to say it'll be a downgrade BOTH in team depth AND PG quality to move Thomas for Irving and try to rely on Smart or Irving to run those duties fulltime.

Also, why is anything else needed for Irving? Thomas should be MORE than enough.

--Mags

Kyries 5 years younger, signed for a year later and isnt going to command (whats likely) a bad contract next summer. As a fan of neither team, I truly think Boston should do a trade like IT/Jae/Brown for Kyrie. Kyries young enough to grow with Tatum/BRK pick/LA pick and he's got the clout to recruit others if they move Horford (like getting Cousins). It would be a forward thinking move for Boston, imo, but only if they have confidence that they can keep him long term, which David Griffin alluded to yesterday being a yes

[Takingbaconback]

I wouldn't give up Jaylen Brown for Irving, he's got all star talent and a great skillset. I would give up IT/Crowder/one of the BRK or LAL picks/2nd round pick.

[Dupp]

I wouldn't give up Jaylen Brown for Irving, he's got all star talent and a great skillset. I would give up IT/Crowder/one of the BRK or LAL picks/2nd round pick.

I agree and I'd accept that as a cavs fan

[Benedict_Boozer]

Cavs will wait till the deadline IMHO. Every year there are a handful of stars who want out. For example if mideason OKC or NOP are struggling, could see them looking to make a move for Kyrie as at minimum he is locked up for multiple years.

[LivingLegend]

I wouldn't give up Jaylen Brown for Irving, he's got all star talent and a great skillset. I would give up IT/Crowder/one of the BRK or LAL picks/2nd round pick.

I agree and I'd accept that as a cavs fan

hahaha again small markets man. "I wont give up this decent player whose a role player on a championship team for Kyrie who is a 4x all star because one day in 5 years, Jaylen Brown stands a 20% chance at becoming an All-Star"

[NatiboyB]

I promise you stuff like this statement irks me so much we won't give up this 21 year old ball of potential for this 25 year old potential superstar...The odds are more likely that Jaylen Brown will not reach the leve of Kyrie...

This wreaks of not trading JJ Hickson for Amare Stoudamire.

I wouldn't give up Jaylen Brown for Irving, he's got all star talent and a great skillset. I would give up IT/Crowder/one of the BRK or LAL picks/2nd round pick.

I agree and I'd accept that as a cavs fan

hahaha again small markets man. "I wont give up this decent player whose a role player on a championship team for Kyrie who is a 4x all star because one day in 5 years, Jaylen Brown stands a 20% chance at becoming an All-Star"

[magnumt]

Not meaning to poke, but just for knowledge - why couldn't Smart be fulltime PG though?
For me he seems to be suited to run a team full time... Not the cream of the crop but around an average PG at least ?

Because you're going from Isaiah Thomas to Marcus Smart as your starting PG.

None of the 3 are ideal PGs who prioritize passing over scoring, but it's fair to say it'll be a downgrade BOTH in team depth AND PG quality to move Thomas for Irving and try to rely on Smart or Irving to run those duties fulltime.

Also, why is anything else needed for Irving? Thomas should be MORE than enough.

--Mags

Kyries 5 years younger, signed for a year later and isnt going to command (whats likely) a bad contract next summer. As a fan of neither team, I truly think Boston should do a trade like IT/Jae/Brown for Kyrie. Kyries young enough to grow with Tatum/BRK pick/LA pick and he's got the clout to recruit others if they move Horford (like getting Cousins). It would be a forward thinking move for Boston, imo, but only if they have confidence that they can keep him long term, which David Griffin alluded to yesterday being a yes

You're a Cavs/Lebron fan who's been proposing said Irving trades (including on the Trade Board). So the bolded part is untrue.

Boston doesn't need MORE youth. They can just keep Thomas, their depth, and picks and not do the Cavs any favors.

Again, Kyrie isn't like a Curry caliber asset, he's NOT commanding a package like that from the Celtics of all teams, who didn't pony up that much for Butler or George.

Griffin is no longer in the know for Cleveland and he wouldn't know Ainge's mindset or Kyrie's.

--Mags

[NBAFan93]

All these proposed Boston trade scenarios for Kyrie sound great - I think both teams would benefit and could potentially be a lot better (or at least not get worse).

The major issue is that they'd be trading a critical player to the team they will face in the playoffs and that could be a disaster from a narrative perspective - imagine Kyrie shooting a dagger 3 on LeBron to eliminate the Cavs in a series? IT scoring 53 points to eliminate Boston in the ECF? Those things would be so bad I don't think either team would risk it - like they could potentially be setting their fans up for the worst playoff moment ever in the history of their franchise.

[suns91fan]

Not meaning to poke, but just for knowledge - why couldn't Smart be fulltime PG though?
For me he seems to be suited to run a team full time... Not the cream of the crop but around an average PG at least ?

Because you're going from Isaiah Thomas to Marcus Smart as your starting PG.

None of the 3 are ideal PGs who prioritize passing over scoring, but it's fair to say it'll be a downgrade BOTH in team depth AND PG quality to move Thomas for Irving and try to rely on Smart or Irving to run those duties fulltime.

Also, why is anything else needed for Irving? Thomas should be MORE than enough.

--Mags

Kyries 5 years younger, signed for a year later and isnt going to command (whats likely) a bad contract next summer. As a fan of neither team, I truly think Boston should do a trade like IT/Jae/Brown for Kyrie. Kyries young enough to grow with Tatum/BRK pick/LA pick and he's got the clout to recruit others if they move Horford (like getting Cousins). It would be a forward thinking move for Boston, imo, but only if they have confidence that they can keep him long term, which David Griffin alluded to yesterday being a yes

Kyrie is three years younger, not five. They both have roughly similar amount of minutes played so far in their careers, so Kyrie doesn't even have the longevity card going for him. He is also far more injury prone than IT (20% vs 7% total games missed). They are both getting max eventually. I'd rather keep IT.

[mademan]

Because you're going from Isaiah Thomas to Marcus Smart as your starting PG.

None of the 3 are ideal PGs who prioritize passing over scoring, but it's fair to say it'll be a downgrade BOTH in team depth AND PG quality to move Thomas for Irving and try to rely on Smart or Irving to run those duties fulltime.

Also, why is anything else needed for Irving? Thomas should be MORE than enough.

--Mags

Kyries 5 years younger, signed for a year later and isnt going to command (whats likely) a bad contract next summer. As a fan of neither team, I truly think Boston should do a trade like IT/Jae/Brown for Kyrie. Kyries young enough to grow with Tatum/BRK pick/LA pick and he's got the clout to recruit others if they move Horford (like getting Cousins). It would be a forward thinking move for Boston, imo, but only if they have confidence that they can keep him long term, which David Griffin alluded to yesterday being a yes

You're a Cavs/Lebron fan who's been proposing said Irving trades (including on the Trade Board). So the bolded part is untrue.

Boston doesn't need MORE youth. They can just keep Thomas, their depth, and picks and not do the Cavs any favors.

Again, Kyrie isn't like a Curry caliber asset, he's NOT commanding a package like that from the Celtics of all teams, who didn't pony up that much for Butler or George.

Griffin is no longer in the know for Cleveland and he wouldn't know Ainge's mindset or Kyrie's.

--Mags

Im a Lebron appreciator, not a fan. And I've been posting those trades because its really the only thing thats interesting right now; and if youve actually read those threads, more Cavs fans are upset with those deals than the other teams. And I both think and hope that Lebron is going to LA next year, so I really have no bias to give Cleveland some over the top deal.

I dont Kyrie is Curry. He is, however, one of the most marketable guys in the league, just entering his prime, as good/better than IT and signed for an extra year at whats gonna be half the cost. Beyond all that, he's a much better piece to use to recruit top end guys, like Cousins or PG. I dont think that highly of Brown, so he can be removed for another piece that works (though Cavs fans will likely revolt), but I really dont see this as a bad deal

[TommyPoints]

None of these trade proposals make sense for Boston. Kyrie is a great player, but I don't think he is worth what it would likely cost and Boston certainly doesn't have interest in making Cleveland better. I prefer Kyrie over IT because of age and height, but not enough to lose other assets I'd rather hold on to. Of course trade proposals on here are usually way more than what the players actually get dealt for.

[Dante80]

How would it matter for the Cavs if Boston is in the same conference? Lebron is gone next year, and they will be out of the race. For years..

[Stillwater]

Boston won't give up 4 players for 1. a 3rd team would be absolutely necessary where Cavs get back less players and more quality as well.
I.T. coming off injury and entering the final year of his contract is not that appealing, Crowder is not at all appealing, & without 1 of Tatum or Brown as the real centerpiece no way would the Cav's be interested despite Boston having the future picks provided they would include them, but it makes no sense to empower the one team that could challenge you for the east title the 2nd best player on your roster who is arguably better than any player on the other teams roster (that they would give up anyway). The Cavs will not deal with Boston under most circumstances.

You're trading for Kyrie Irving NOT Steph Curry.

Boston would not mind at all to not do such a trade.

--Mags

What is your point? I said Cavs would not want 4 players back and that's what it would take for salaries to match not for the Cavs to pull the trigger for Boston to get Irving without Crowder or Horford in the deal,neither of which would I think the Cavs want. So the odds of trading with Boston are minimal without another team involved.
Not to mention the strengthening of Boston getting Irving who is no less a scorer than Curry, is not something Cleveland is interested in doing.