Kawhi update thread 2.0

[Tai]

For those who are advocating a Kyrie for Kawhi swap I haven't seen these points addressed:

1. You downgrade far more at PG than you upgrade on the wing.

2. Why in the world does Boston need Kawhi, Hayward, Brown and Tatum on the wing? I understand Tatum will play the 4 plenty, but those 4 can't play together. There is no PG in that group and no big.

If the Celtics are getting Kawhi, they are sending Brown and stuff to get him. I'm almost positive of it. Nothing else makes sense enough for it to be reasonable for Boston as far as constructing a team.

In what is now a position-less NBA, Gordon Hayward can absolutely run point (I actually wouldn't even be opposed to this even if we keep Kyrie). As far as there being no big? You can say that about a whole lot of teams in the league nowadays. "Bigs" are dying out. You have guys like P.J. Tucker playing the 4.

Regardless, Kyrie isn't getting traded for Kawhi, so this is a moot discussion.

Not to go off topic, Tucker at 4 is very doable; his only weakness is his height, but he's like 5 pounds lighter than Love yet at the same time plays tougher D than him, and can shoot the corner 3. Honestly, I think he's been a unheralded factor to the Rockets' success this season. But yea, I don't see Tucker as a huggeee exception to the rule.

Hayward at point is definitely a bigger stretch to me.

[Smitty731]

Sixers didn’t execute down the stretch in 3 of those losses. It’s not like Boston was superior in talent to sixers 4-1. Like a normal 4-1 series where the superior team with better talent wins. Say Houston 4-1 over Minnesota. Or Golden state 4-1 over New Orleans. Sixers simply blew those playoff games. Vs New Orleans and Minnesota were not even competive in their 4-1 series.

Anyways. Sixers don’t have a gm. And wont over pay for Leonard either especially with Colangelo being gone. Especially with Leonard being a one year rental without a commitment and not showing he’s fully healthy.

I don’t think ainge with overpay for Leonard. He’s gonna to offer as little as he can.

Than it becomes a situation like kyrie getting traded with Cleveland. Cleveland couldn’t trade kyrie to other teams and with disgruntled kyrie. They felt they had to do something and took Boston offer. Which I thought was a bad offer knowing full well IT was injuried and nets pick being unknown for 2018.

Same situation with Sacramento pick. Boston fans think it’s worth a lot. Maybe. Maybe not. It likely ends up being 5-10 Range for 2019. Unless that pick is guarantee to be top 3. It frankly isn’t worth a lot. Similar to how Boston fans are laughing that the nets 2018 pick ended up being 8th. And 2019 draft is considered weak. So a Sacramento pick say even at 5 slot isn’t great with a weak 2019 class. Big drop off in talent after top 2-3 players as usual.

"Like a normal 4-1 series where the superior team wins." Lmfao.

Dawg, if you lose in five games, you're the clearly inferior team; I don't care how you lost the games. The 76ers are not even remotely close to the Celtics right now. They could add Kawhi Leonard and they would still likely be a bit worse.

I wouldn’t call 3 games being decided in the final 30 seconds in which Boston won all 3 being not remotely close in competition. Sixers simply didn’t execute. And Boston did. It wasn’t a normal 4-1 series.

Sixers adding Leonard would put them over the top. Cause their main problem was having JJ reddick/Bellini getting exposed on defense. Leonard is two Time all defense player of the year.

Celtics big problem long term is they don’t have true center. Embiid as he continues to improve becomes a bigger problem for the Celtics. True Celtics fans know they don’t have an answer for embiid. They just hope he gets tired or makes dumb mistakes. But that strategy doesn’t work long term as he has full conditioning and more game experience.

Better get a shooter in there somewhere, or plan to win a lot of games 80-75.

And I'm not exactly sure how/when Embiid is going to magically get "full conditioning". He's always going to be treated with kid gloves, as he should be due to his importance to the team.

[darrendaye]

For those who are advocating a Kyrie for Kawhi swap I haven't seen these points addressed:

1. You downgrade far more at PG than you upgrade on the wing.

2. Why in the world does Boston need Kawhi, Hayward, Brown and Tatum on the wing? I understand Tatum will play the 4 plenty, but those 4 can't play together. There is no PG in that group and no big.

If the Celtics are getting Kawhi, they are sending Brown and stuff to get him. I'm almost positive of it. Nothing else makes sense enough for it to be reasonable for Boston as far as constructing a team.

In what is now a position-less NBA, Gordon Hayward can absolutely run point (I actually wouldn't even be opposed to this even if we keep Kyrie). As far as there being no big? You can say that about a whole lot of teams in the league nowadays. "Bigs" are dying out. You have guys like P.J. Tucker playing the 4.

Regardless, Kyrie isn't getting traded for Kawhi, so this is a moot discussion.

NBA position is about who you guard. I love those four guys, but none of them are chasing around PGs.

Beyond that, Tucker plays the 4. You can get away with 4 smalls. You can't get away with 5. No team plays 5 smalls for any reasonable stretch. The Celtics without Horford or Baynes in the game were destroyed at the rim. That team would get killed on defense, simply because they would have no big back there. It's also not a good rebounding group either.

There is no reason Boston would need all four of Tatum, Hayward, Brown and Kawhi. None at all. Someone would end up pissed off about minutes. Stevens is good, but he's not that good.

Is Kyrie really more equipped to chase around small guards than Brown? And with Brown you still have the luxury of him being young and still proving himself and, likely, much more willing to still defer scoring chances and do the little things until it's his turn.

The lone issue with Kyrie IS his defense. You consider this trade for that precise reason. As Valid stated, the Celts have guys like Hayward and Horford who can create for others at about the same level as Kyrie, from a statistical standpoint. [Edited to add: And Kawhi had 4.7 assists to 2.2 turnovers in the 2016-17 playoffs when Pop experimented with him in a point forward role].

Even if LeBron leaves the conference, the other rising teams have tall, attacking, playmakers. As we saw Rozier get targeted, at times, for mismatches. Kyrie will be subject to the same. Teams are now starting to attack Curry more in this vein as they try to find the soft spot in Golden State's armor. Now, like Curry, Kyrie has the scoring skill to help offset, but the guy still needs to show he will dedicate, consistently, to that end of the floor too.

[Smitty731]

In what is now a position-less NBA, Gordon Hayward can absolutely run point (I actually wouldn't even be opposed to this even if we keep Kyrie). As far as there being no big? You can say that about a whole lot of teams in the league nowadays. "Bigs" are dying out. You have guys like P.J. Tucker playing the 4.

Regardless, Kyrie isn't getting traded for Kawhi, so this is a moot discussion.

NBA position is about who you guard. I love those four guys, but none of them are chasing around PGs.

Beyond that, Tucker plays the 4. You can get away with 4 smalls. You can't get away with 5. No team plays 5 smalls for any reasonable stretch. The Celtics without Horford or Baynes in the game were destroyed at the rim. That team would get killed on defense, simply because they would have no big back there. It's also not a good rebounding group either.

There is no reason Boston would need all four of Tatum, Hayward, Brown and Kawhi. None at all. Someone would end up pissed off about minutes. Stevens is good, but he's not that good.

Is Kyrie really more equipped to chase around small guards than Brown? And with Brown you still have the luxury of him being young and still proving himself and, likely, much more willing to still defer scoring chances and do the little things until it's his turn.

The lone issue with Kyrie IS his defense. You consider this trade for that precise reason. As Valid stated, the Celts have guys like Hayward and Horford who can create for others at about the same level as Kyrie, from a statistical standpoint.

Even if LeBron leaves the conference, the other rising teams have tall, attacking, playmakers. As we saw Rozier get targeted, at times, for mismatches. Kyrie will be subject to the same. Teams are now starting to attack Curry more in this vein as they try to find the soft spot in Golden State's armor. Now, like Curry, Kyrie has the scoring skill to help offset, but the guy still needs to show he will dedicate, consistently, to that end of the floor too.

We have no idea if Brown can defend PGs as a full time defender, but the small evidence we have says no. When he had to cover McConnell at times in the Philly series, he got cooked. He also struggled in switches when he had to pick up George Hill. Brown is a good defender, but one of his weaknesses is getting low and pivoting his hips to stay in front of very quick guys. Most PGs are considerably quicker than wings.

It's just not sustainable that you could play 25-30 minutes a night with Brown, Hayward, Leonard, Tatum and say Horford as your main crew. Downsize and add a PG, and you have no rim protector. Stay big and send one of the four wings to bench and you're going to end up with a very unhappy player.

[darrendaye]

NBA position is about who you guard. I love those four guys, but none of them are chasing around PGs.

Beyond that, Tucker plays the 4. You can get away with 4 smalls. You can't get away with 5. No team plays 5 smalls for any reasonable stretch. The Celtics without Horford or Baynes in the game were destroyed at the rim. That team would get killed on defense, simply because they would have no big back there. It's also not a good rebounding group either.

There is no reason Boston would need all four of Tatum, Hayward, Brown and Kawhi. None at all. Someone would end up pissed off about minutes. Stevens is good, but he's not that good.

Is Kyrie really more equipped to chase around small guards than Brown? And with Brown you still have the luxury of him being young and still proving himself and, likely, much more willing to still defer scoring chances and do the little things until it's his turn.

The lone issue with Kyrie IS his defense. You consider this trade for that precise reason. As Valid stated, the Celts have guys like Hayward and Horford who can create for others at about the same level as Kyrie, from a statistical standpoint.

Even if LeBron leaves the conference, the other rising teams have tall, attacking, playmakers. As we saw Rozier get targeted, at times, for mismatches. Kyrie will be subject to the same. Teams are now starting to attack Curry more in this vein as they try to find the soft spot in Golden State's armor. Now, like Curry, Kyrie has the scoring skill to help offset, but the guy still needs to show he will dedicate, consistently, to that end of the floor too.

We have no idea if Brown can defend PGs as a full time defender, but the small evidence we have says no. When he had to cover McConnell at times in the Philly series, he got cooked. He also struggled in switches when he had to pick up George Hill. Brown is a good defender, but one of his weaknesses is getting low and pivoting his hips to stay in front of very quick guys. Most PGs are considerably quicker than wings.

It's just not sustainable that you could play 25-30 minutes a night with Brown, Hayward, Leonard, Tatum and say Horford as your main crew. Downsize and add a PG, and you have no rim protector. Stay big and send one of the four wings to bench and you're going to end up with a very unhappy player.

Fair on Brown. But the question was also, does Kyrie do it better?

[Tai]

In what is now a position-less NBA, Gordon Hayward can absolutely run point (I actually wouldn't even be opposed to this even if we keep Kyrie). As far as there being no big? You can say that about a whole lot of teams in the league nowadays. "Bigs" are dying out. You have guys like P.J. Tucker playing the 4.

Regardless, Kyrie isn't getting traded for Kawhi, so this is a moot discussion.

NBA position is about who you guard. I love those four guys, but none of them are chasing around PGs.

Beyond that, Tucker plays the 4. You can get away with 4 smalls. You can't get away with 5. No team plays 5 smalls for any reasonable stretch. The Celtics without Horford or Baynes in the game were destroyed at the rim. That team would get killed on defense, simply because they would have no big back there. It's also not a good rebounding group either.

There is no reason Boston would need all four of Tatum, Hayward, Brown and Kawhi. None at all. Someone would end up pissed off about minutes. Stevens is good, but he's not that good.

Is Kyrie really more equipped to chase around small guards than Brown? And with Brown you still have the luxury of him being young and still proving himself and, likely, much more willing to still defer scoring chances and do the little things until it's his turn.

The lone issue with Kyrie IS his defense. You consider this trade for that precise reason. As Valid stated, the Celts have guys like Hayward and Horford who can create for others at about the same level as Kyrie, from a statistical standpoint.

Even if LeBron leaves the conference, the other rising teams have tall, attacking, playmakers. As we saw Rozier get targeted, at times, for mismatches. Kyrie will be subject to the same. Teams are now starting to attack Curry more in this vein as they try to find the soft spot in Golden State's armor. Now, like Curry, Kyrie has the scoring skill to help offset, but the guy still needs to show he will dedicate, consistently, to that end of the floor too.

Kyrie TIED his career best defensive rating his 1st year with the Celtics (also had 106 the Cavs' championship year in the regular season, and 107 for that playoffs). And thanks for noting that Rozier isn't all that better a defender either.

Kyrie isn't getting traded for something we already knew about coming in, especially when he's played as good a defense as he ever had for his career here.

[Marvel]

I dunno about y'all but a Kawhi, Bron, PG Laker team would be a threat to beat GS in the West. The thought makes me sick.

[Smitty731]

Is Kyrie really more equipped to chase around small guards than Brown? And with Brown you still have the luxury of him being young and still proving himself and, likely, much more willing to still defer scoring chances and do the little things until it's his turn.

The lone issue with Kyrie IS his defense. You consider this trade for that precise reason. As Valid stated, the Celts have guys like Hayward and Horford who can create for others at about the same level as Kyrie, from a statistical standpoint.

Even if LeBron leaves the conference, the other rising teams have tall, attacking, playmakers. As we saw Rozier get targeted, at times, for mismatches. Kyrie will be subject to the same. Teams are now starting to attack Curry more in this vein as they try to find the soft spot in Golden State's armor. Now, like Curry, Kyrie has the scoring skill to help offset, but the guy still needs to show he will dedicate, consistently, to that end of the floor too.

We have no idea if Brown can defend PGs as a full time defender, but the small evidence we have says no. When he had to cover McConnell at times in the Philly series, he got cooked. He also struggled in switches when he had to pick up George Hill. Brown is a good defender, but one of his weaknesses is getting low and pivoting his hips to stay in front of very quick guys. Most PGs are considerably quicker than wings.

It's just not sustainable that you could play 25-30 minutes a night with Brown, Hayward, Leonard, Tatum and say Horford as your main crew. Downsize and add a PG, and you have no rim protector. Stay big and send one of the four wings to bench and you're going to end up with a very unhappy player.

Fair on Brown. But the question was also, does Kyrie do it better?

I actually think he does. I'm not advocating that he's a better overall defender than Brown. He isn't. But I think he's better on PGs. He did quite well for large portions of last year. When he he fell off, it was right before he started missing time. I think that was more related to his knee than anything else.

I'm also not sold that the non-Kyrie group has someone you can throw the ball to with 10 seconds left and say "Get a bucket." Kyrie can and does do that.

[Smitty731]

I dunno about y'all but a Kawhi, Bron, PG Laker team would be a threat to beat GS in the West. The thought makes me sick.

It depends on how they flesh out the rest of that roster. They still need more offense to keep up with the Warriors.

[Infinite Llamas]

The Irving trade stuff just boggles my mind the last few weeks. It's as if the media and half of Celtics fans are trying to run him out of town for reasons I can't explain. If healthy he is one of the elite scorers and proven finals performers in the entire league. I absolutely am dead set on losing Irving for many reasons and not just being a fan of his, it makes no logical sense to me unless he himself wanted to leave.

Simply put, if you make a deal for Kawhi; you need a healthy motivated Leonard AND Irving to have a shot to beat Golden State in a 7 game series. Both would be motivated in contract years. And I said "a shot". You need stars to beat the Warriors. Multiple. You need to bank on Tatum too becoming this great star fans believe he is on his way to becoming. He would need a second year jump. You need Gordon to become the old Gordon sometime this season or at least 85% of the old Gordon.

You would need Kawhi, Kyrie, Tatum, Hayward healthy, a motivated Horford and then a few others to step up to try and steal a series vs. Golden State with preferably home court. If you could add in Kawhi and keep all those guys then Danny is a genius.

GS is no joke and is one of the top teams of all time and might even be better next season, hell nothing anyone might come up with in Boston or LA or Philly may even be able to win a title until that team declines since GS is still a young enough team if they stay healthy and together.

Sometimes I wonder if risking more roster shuffling is even worth it, roster continuity for Brad will eventually become important. Team chemistry IS important. If anything with Kawhi happens you also have to hope he gets along with the current group and doesn't pull anything here too.

I think you would have to trade Hayward to make this happen though. The only reason I say that is because of the cap situation. You simply wouldnt be able to afford a team with Kyrie/Kawhi/Hayward/Horford after next season. Now if you can get clear of Hayward's contract then I think you can make it work, with Horford's deal coming off the books the same time Brown is up for extension. But there would just be no way to resign Kyrie and Kawhi next summer if Hayward's contract is still on the books.

I am going to sound like a mega jerk, but sometimes I wonder if the Celtics sign Gordon Hayward if they had known how good Tatum/Brown would become this past season.

I mean I do like Hayward a lot but sometimes I do wonder if we have always been kinda stuck with him due to his past relationship with Brad?

Then again why feel bad for talking like this about Hayward when real gm, the media and most out there take a dump on a proven champion like Kyrie Irving on a daily basis?

Both Hayward/Horford make A TON of money from the Celtics but they get this big pass. But Kyrie doesn't since he is the weirdo who never says what people want to hear and he apparently has this mythical desire to play and star for the Knicks or Spurs or Suns or the Flat Earth basketball team.

I also keep hearing Kyrie got hurt last year when actually he didn't get hurt. He got the hardware removed from a previous surgery. Sure he could get hurt again but who can't?

Klay even mentioned how it as easier not having Kyrie around this finals. But yeah lets go dump him and hope Rozier or Smart can score 30+ a game vs. the Splash Brothers when they can't even handle a game 7 at home vs. a bad Cavs team.

Kyrie kinda gets the Kobe treatment at times by fans/media. The love or hate relationship. It's kinda odd in general.

It's not that a lot of people hate Kyrie (I certainly don't) but I just can't see how Kyrie/Kawhi/Hayward/Horford financially makes any sense. You'd be over the cap with about 3 players. Miami won championships with Mario Chalmers as the starting point guard. Rozier or Smart could easily pass as a starting point guard on a championship team pending they play good defense, don't turn the ball over and move the ball to the wing players. Horford, Hayward and Kawhi can all make plays for themselves or others so the point guard position may be somewhat superfluous in the long haul.

I do feel hayward's contract has become a bit of a millstone around the team's neck. He's better than Tatum and Brown now but he might be somewhat redundant on this team. Referring to him as a millstone might seem harsh, but his connection to Stevens and his question marks post injury mean we are pretty much stuck with him for now...but that could be a good thing.

[jfs1000d]

I just feel that bringing in Kawhi and losing Kyrie doesn’t make us that much stronger or closer to Golden State tbh. Now having both of them along with Hayward,Horford and Tatum.. god damn.

Yo. Let’s win nba titles and worry about affording people later In. Serious. Go for the gold.

A Kyrie, hayward, Leonard, tatum, Horford lineup is an all-nba team.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[ConstableGeneva]

Team Stand Pat, where you at?? Your voices need to be heard. Start a new thread or derail this one or something.

[ConstableGeneva]

Shoe guy chimes in...

Read on Twitter

[darrendaye]

Team Stand Pat, where you at?? Your voices need to be heard. Start a new thread or derail this one or something.

I'm definitely weighted on this side of the argument. I am throwing out my thoughts if Ainge is heck-bent on acquiring him.

[Cyclical]

Watch on YouTube

[KGboss]

I'm in this camp. I'd rather stay with this team another year and see what they can do fully healthy

Team Stand Pat, where you at?? Your voices need to be heard. Start a new thread or derail this one or something.

I'm definitely weighted on this side of the argument. I am throwing out my thoughts if Ainge is heck-bent on acquiring him.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[darrendaye]

Spoiler:

NBA position is about who you guard. I love those four guys, but none of them are chasing around PGs.

Beyond that, Tucker plays the 4. You can get away with 4 smalls. You can't get away with 5. No team plays 5 smalls for any reasonable stretch. The Celtics without Horford or Baynes in the game were destroyed at the rim. That team would get killed on defense, simply because they would have no big back there. It's also not a good rebounding group either.

There is no reason Boston would need all four of Tatum, Hayward, Brown and Kawhi. None at all. Someone would end up pissed off about minutes. Stevens is good, but he's not that good.

Is Kyrie really more equipped to chase around small guards than Brown? And with Brown you still have the luxury of him being young and still proving himself and, likely, much more willing to still defer scoring chances and do the little things until it's his turn.

The lone issue with Kyrie IS his defense. You consider this trade for that precise reason. As Valid stated, the Celts have guys like Hayward and Horford who can create for others at about the same level as Kyrie, from a statistical standpoint.

Even if LeBron leaves the conference, the other rising teams have tall, attacking, playmakers. As we saw Rozier get targeted, at times, for mismatches. Kyrie will be subject to the same. Teams are now starting to attack Curry more in this vein as they try to find the soft spot in Golden State's armor. Now, like Curry, Kyrie has the scoring skill to help offset, but the guy still needs to show he will dedicate, consistently, to that end of the floor too.

Kyrie TIED his career best defensive rating his 1st year with the Celtics (also had 106 the Cavs' championship year in the regular season, and 107 for that playoffs). And thanks for noting that Rozier isn't all that better a defender either.

Kyrie isn't getting traded for something we already knew about coming in, especially when he's played as good a defense as he ever had for his career here.

I'm not making a judgement. I agree Kyrie appeared to give good effort for a good part of last year and the wane was likely due to his knee. I don't really know any of these players to the degree that I know what they are about. If the Kyrie we saw in the honeymoon season is the same one we see next year and after (and assuming) he signs a new deal, he'll silence much of the criticism there.

[NotALongIslandr]

For those who are advocating a Kyrie for Kawhi swap I haven't seen these points addressed:

1. You downgrade far more at PG than you upgrade on the wing.

2. Why in the world does Boston need Kawhi, Hayward, Brown and Tatum on the wing? I understand Tatum will play the 4 plenty, but those 4 can't play together. There is no PG in that group and no big.

If the Celtics are getting Kawhi, they are sending Brown and stuff to get him. I'm almost positive of it. Nothing else makes sense enough for it to be reasonable for Boston as far as constructing a team.

In what is now a position-less NBA, Gordon Hayward can absolutely run point (I actually wouldn't even be opposed to this even if we keep Kyrie). As far as there being no big? You can say that about a whole lot of teams in the league nowadays. "Bigs" are dying out. You have guys like P.J. Tucker playing the 4.

Regardless, Kyrie isn't getting traded for Kawhi, so this is a moot discussion.

NBA position is about who you guard. I love those four guys, but none of them are chasing around PGs.

Beyond that, Tucker plays the 4. You can get away with 4 smalls. You can't get away with 5. No team plays 5 smalls for any reasonable stretch. The Celtics without Horford or Baynes in the game were destroyed at the rim. That team would get killed on defense, simply because they would have no big back there. It's also not a good rebounding group either.

There is no reason Boston would need all four of Tatum, Hayward, Brown and Kawhi. None at all. Someone would end up pissed off about minutes. Stevens is good, but he's not that good.

Kyrie 32-36/Rozier 12-16
Hayward 32-36/Brown 12-16
Leonard 32-36/Brown 12-16
Tatum 32-36/Horford 12-16
Horford~20/Baynes & Theis whatever's left

The guy it makes no sense to keep in a Kawhi deal is Smart. KL is better both defensively and offensively. Smart becomes totally superfluous.

[Froob]

I love the idea of having Kawhi, Hayward, Tatum and Brown. That’s four really good two way Wings. That’s Golden State’s nightmare. Two way wings are the most valuable commodity in today’s league in my opinion.

[ConstableGeneva]

It has to be said and it has to be said every now and then...

**** the Lakers.