RealGM

iggymcfrack wrote:

durden_tyler wrote:Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

Honestly, Ball, Ingram, and the #4 pick are probably each more valuable than the entire trade package Toronto gave up combined. And they got a good starter in Danny Green plus Kawhi. If you’re going to try to actually beat out that Lakers package for a rental, you better be REALLY close to a title. The only team close enough to a title with enough assets for that to even be an option is Philly if they throw in Simmons and they don’t seem to have interest in going that wild on a trade package.

Again, comparing the Kawhi deal to a potential AD deal isn't a good comparison because the situations are just so different.

NBAFan93 wrote:

Spens1 wrote:Would the Celtics really give up Tatum for what could be a rental (essentially that's what it is because the lakers are giving up Ingram and that 4th which is more valuable than any celtic asset otherwise).

Ainge doesn't make desperate moves and this would reek of a desperate move. Also even if Davis is happy in Boston (and i have no doubt he may end up being happy). Rich Paul alone will make the celtics life a misery for the next year and they just going through half a season of Kyrie's nonsense (and he seems like he's going to Brooklyn or at least anywhere that isn't the celtics).

The Knicks i would get because they're trying to be attractive to F.A's, the Celtics on the other hand, unless they ditch Horford and Hayward aren't at the free agency races and even with Davis would be still behind Toronto (provided Leonard stays) and probably Philly and Millwauke.

Lakers would give up those players even if they knew AD was a rental is the difference between them and the Celtics (them knowing he’d resign makes it even more of a no brainer). Lakers know those players aren’t anything cause they haven’t been able to win squat with them yet and probably don’t want to pay Ingram in the summer regardless (they’d probably rather have the cap space).

Because of the 2018 playoffs the Celtics probably believe their two guys are their future, but the Lakers don’t feel the same about what they are offering. Ainge needs to look hard at those two guys and make certain he really thinks they are worth it in the sense that he would pay them serious money if they were RFAs or not.

Other than Tatum (and even that seems to be somewhat questionable after his terrible performances throughout the year), what can the celtics offer really, Jaylen Brown and Marcus Smart and some mid firsts.

Ingram 4 and 6 is more valuable then that and if we really need to up it, Ingram, Kuzma, 4 and 6.

DusterBuster wrote:

iggymcfrack wrote:

durden_tyler wrote:Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

Honestly, Ball, Ingram, and the #4 pick are probably each more valuable than the entire trade package Toronto gave up combined. And they got a good starter in Danny Green plus Kawhi. If you’re going to try to actually beat out that Lakers package for a rental, you better be REALLY close to a title. The only team close enough to a title with enough assets for that to even be an option is Philly if they throw in Simmons and they don’t seem to have interest in going that wild on a trade package.

Again, comparing the Kawhi deal to a potential AD deal isn't a good comparison because the situations are just so different.

Probably. But can we at least say that if Lakers or Celtics acquire AD, they'd be insta-legit contenders?

durden_tyler wrote:

DusterBuster wrote:

iggymcfrack wrote:
Honestly, Ball, Ingram, and the #4 pick are probably each more valuable than the entire trade package Toronto gave up combined. And they got a good starter in Danny Green plus Kawhi. If you’re going to try to actually beat out that Lakers package for a rental, you better be REALLY close to a title. The only team close enough to a title with enough assets for that to even be an option is Philly if they throw in Simmons and they don’t seem to have interest in going that wild on a trade package.

Again, comparing the Kawhi deal to a potential AD deal isn't a good comparison because the situations are just so different.

Probably. But can we at least say that if Lakers or Celtics acquire AD, they'd be insta-legit contenders?

Lakers absolutely. Celtics are pretty iffy if they give up Tatum. You’re counting on a lot from Stevens.

iggymcfrack wrote:

durden_tyler wrote:

DusterBuster wrote:
Again, comparing the Kawhi deal to a potential AD deal isn't a good comparison because the situations are just so different.

Probably. But can we at least say that if Lakers or Celtics acquire AD, they'd be insta-legit contenders?

Lakers absolutely. Celtics are pretty iffy if they give up Tatum. You’re counting on a lot from Stevens.

Yeah, LeBron + any star is pretty much a given. i guess who ends up staying with the Celtics is the key,.

reload141 wrote:

LipSkinMatter wrote:

reload141 wrote:
SO much this. But, he wants to go home so really nothing more we could do.

Nobody in their right mind wants to play with a max'd Gordon Heyward and Al Horford. Sorry, your boy Ainge dropped the ball.

Sorry but you really have NO idea what you're talking about.

Well we know for a fact AD and Kyrie don't, so he's more right than you are.

iggymcfrack wrote:

durden_tyler wrote:

DusterBuster wrote:
Again, comparing the Kawhi deal to a potential AD deal isn't a good comparison because the situations are just so different.

Probably. But can we at least say that if Lakers or Celtics acquire AD, they'd be insta-legit contenders?

Lakers absolutely. Celtics are pretty iffy if they give up Tatum. You’re counting on a lot from Stevens.

I know you are rooting badly for LeBron getting help, but AD by hmself won't make them a contender. They will fight for the playoffs again.

So lonzo should be getting “injured” within days right?

nickgammon wrote:

DusterBuster wrote:

durden_tyler wrote:Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

Each situation is different though. The Raptors got an insanely good deal for Kawhi because he was somewhat unknown/damaged goods when the Spurs were forced to move him. That deal was basically a "star for a star" trade. The Spurs weren't asking for half of another teams roster for Kawhi, in fact, they were the ones to add in additional value to the deal instead of the other way around when they included Green into the deal.

The Pelicans meanwhile are asking for half of a teams roster for a rental, which ends up putting the team renting him at a much more severe disadvantage to be able to contend for that upcoming year.

That said, you're right overall that teams should be less concerned about rentals nowadays. With NBA contracts only ever being 4-5 years anymore, it's increased the level of player movement dramatically every summer than what it was when teams could hand out 6 year deals.

The Raptors had nothing to lose on that one. They dumped DeRozan’s bad contract and traded away a bench big. Also, Kawhi’s situation was a bit different. His agent never publicly came out and said if he gets traded to the Raptors “it’s a 1-year rental.” It kinda makes you think AD is going to half-ass it and probably fake a lot of injuries. If he cared about winning, he’d be happy to go to the Celtics and would do anything in his power to avoid be trading to the Lakers or Knicks. The guy wants the limelight.

I’m still very high on Tatum and Brown, so I don’t think it’s worth the risk. I’d rather see Ainge go for guys like Beal or Aaron Gordon if he becomes available.

How many championships has Boston won in the last 30 years???

Gooner wrote:

iggymcfrack wrote:

durden_tyler wrote:
Probably. But can we at least say that if Lakers or Celtics acquire AD, they'd be insta-legit contenders?

Lakers absolutely. Celtics are pretty iffy if they give up Tatum. You’re counting on a lot from Stevens.

I know you are rooting badly for LeBron getting help, but AD by hmself won't make them a contender. They will fight for the playoffs again.

Well, not that I’m high on Kyrie, but I think Lakers are a decent favorite to get him too. If he still goes to Brooklyn, the Lakers probably sign a Tobias Harris type if they trade for AD. It won’t just be AD and LeBron. They’ll find a third star to fill things out. Also, while I do like LeBron and I’d like to see him get help, I don’t root for him anywhere near as much as say Jokic or Lowry. I was actually going for the Warriors for 3 of those 4 Finals.

celtics can and have to give more. They need him the worst because they can look at it as getting AD and Kyrie

What happened to the Knicks and their offer lol? I read it was weak compared to the rest, so I guess they would not go all in. I'm surprised the Celtics are in it according to Woj. They usually chicken out and do not GO ALL IN!!! ALREADY, THEY ARE BACKTRACKING AND NOT INCLUDING JAYSON TATUM WHEN THEY SAID THEY WOULD. DIDN'T THE RAPTORS GO ALL IN ON KAWHI WHEN THE CELTICS WERE IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT???!!!???!!! I can't even come up with their best deal.

Knicks Best Offer would be:

Knicks Get:
Anthony Davis

Pelicans Get:
Kevin Knox
Mitchell Robinson
Third Pick in 2019 NBA Draft
Dallas Mavericks 2021 First Round Pick
Dallas Mavericks 2023 First Round Pick

It's based around future assets than the best potential Lakers offer. I read they were including DSJ tho. No future FRPs. If the Knicks are willing to include both first round picks they got in the Porzingis trade, then the Pels would be bowled over. Brandon Ingram may be perceived by Griffin as the better player than Knox and Robinson, the potential future draft picks in this deal should seal the deal. Not only the Pels get the third pick in this year's draft, but also two future first round picks. WOW!!!

Right now, I think the Lakers are in the driver's seat if David Griffin can force them to give up their BEST OFFER:

Lakers Best Offer (Reportedly when Magic was GM + #4 pick in 2019 NBA Draft)

Lakers Get:
Anthony Davis

Pelicans Get:
Kyle Kuzma
Brandon Ingram
Lonzo Ball
Josh Hart
Fourth Pick in 2019 NBA Draft

I HOPE I AM WRONG. I RATHER SEE AD IN THE EAST!!!

celtics really are jus tryin to drive up the bargain against the lakers which to me is a really sick move bc their goal isnt to get the actual trade down but instead tryin to pull other teams leg. we all know boston aint serious about tradin for davis bc irving is gone, AD is highly likely to hit free agent leavin bos with nothing going forward.

Lakers IMO should offer up BI and lonzo and filler whoever they want and give the choice of either kuzma or 4th pick. too greedy if they want both and if and only if lakers have to give in then offer both but leave lonzo out of the deal.

how stupid of a wish list is it for the pels to want back an all star and + for another all star it just makes no sense and aint no team with ALL STAR would trade theirs for another. not saying this trade shouldnt involve another team jus sayin dont use lakers assets to demand a deal bc its not the lakers wanting to involve the 3rd team in the deal.

MyBoyBlu wrote:

reload141 wrote:

LipSkinMatter wrote:
Nobody in their right mind wants to play with a max'd Gordon Heyward and Al Horford. Sorry, your boy Ainge dropped the ball.

Sorry but you really have NO idea what you're talking about.

Well we know for a fact AD and Kyrie don't, so he's more right than you are.

You’ve been wrecked numerous times on our board, just leave it.

Run along.

Dupp wrote:So lonzo should be getting “injured” within days right?

He’ll punch a fire extinguisher or fall over a glass table.

I honestly like the lakers to keep the pick jus bc it makes watching summer league more fun as a lakers fan but if the trade has to go down why not dangle couple more future picks to keep kuzma. i love the skill of garland and i do see potential 3pt specialist in him and future all star but hey if it means getting AD its worth it but surely not both 4th and kuzma should be one or the other

Doesn’t look like Ainge is offering up Tatum or the deal would be done.

I'm trying to get a handle on the Celtics situation. If Kyrie really is gonna leave, then what do the Celtics do? Will they keep Al Horford? I am assuming he opts in for his last year. He should go for a longer contract for less money. Instead, go for AD and build around him and ? Celtics would need to get a PG. If Kyrie leaves, then it appears the Celtics are a hot mess.

jason bourne wrote:I'm trying to get a handle on the Celtics situation. If Kyrie really is gonna leave, then what do the Celtics do? Will they keep Al Horford? I am assuming he opts in for his last year. He should go for a longer contract for less money. Instead, go for AD and build around him and ? Celtics would need to get a PG. If Kyrie leaves, then it appears the Celtics are a hot mess.

we're a hot mess with Kyrie, if he gone we good.

DusterBuster wrote:

nickgammon wrote:

DusterBuster wrote:
Each situation is different though. The Raptors got an insanely good deal for Kawhi because he was somewhat unknown/damaged goods when the Spurs were forced to move him. That deal was basically a "star for a star" trade. The Spurs weren't asking for half of another teams roster for Kawhi, in fact, they were the ones to add in additional value to the deal instead of the other way around when they included Green into the deal.

The Pelicans meanwhile are asking for half of a teams roster for a rental, which ends up putting the team renting him at a much more severe disadvantage to be able to contend for that upcoming year.

That said, you're right overall that teams should be less concerned about rentals nowadays. With NBA contracts only ever being 4-5 years anymore, it's increased the level of player movement dramatically every summer than what it was when teams could hand out 6 year deals.

The Raptors had nothing to lose on that one. They dumped DeRozan’s bad contract and traded away a bench big. Also, Kawhi’s situation was a bit different. His agent never publicly came out and said if he gets traded to the Raptors “it’s a 1-year rental.” It kinda makes you think AD is going to half-ass it and probably fake a lot of injuries. If he cared about winning, he’d be happy to go to the Celtics and would do anything in his power to avoid be trading to the Lakers or Knicks. The guy wants the limelight.

I’m still very high on Tatum and Brown, so I don’t think it’s worth the risk. I’d rather see Ainge go for guys like Beal or Aaron Gordon if he becomes available.

He didn't say it as openly and explicitly as Paul has, but it was made pretty clear that he was going to be a 1-year rental for anyone that's not a LA team. That is still the overwhelming likelihood right now, the only saving grace keeping the Raptors as a player here is the fact they've been so good with him and are on the cusp of a title.

If AD cared about winning, there's plenty of teams he'd be happy to goto - not just the Celtics can offer him a winning franchise. His whole "I only care about winning" line is a pile of horse-s when the only two teams you're willing to goto have been perpetual losers for 5-10 years now. He and his agent only care about going to a big market.

Boston is a huge market.

No idea what is wrong with these guys.
Kyrie resigns in Boston. AD to Boston. Really that simple. Championships and money and game and glory follow.

It really is that close for Kyrie, and he wants to go to Brooklyn? To each his own, but this is a bad career move basketball wise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk