Trade Post-Mortem 2017: Eight is Enough

[165bows]

Some reason I keep coming back to a Marcus Smart/LaMarcus Aldridge trade. I don't know if I even like that trade that much but it has a certain symmetry to it.

Spurs clear some more space and sign a point guard, Lowry maybe, and Smart plays the 3rd guard role like he does here.

Celtics could do something like sign and trade Olynyk and parts for Hayward, then trade for Aldridge. They'd have their win-now team without giving up any of the BRK picks.

It would probably end up a steal for the Spurs, but hell, everything is a steal for them.

IT/Hayward/LMA/Horford is a pretty shoddy defensive group. And a lot of diminishing returns with IT/Hayward/LMA in terms of scoring the ball. LMA in particular has seen a massive drop in productivity in a system that gives most of the iso workload to Kawhi.

If we bring in Hayward, we need to be targeting a dynamite defensive presence at the 3/4 or the 4/5, not an iso high post scorer.

I don't disagree with the last at all, just hard to figure who that is that is also a good player. Main need is another good starter that also is not a guard. Most of those that seem available are either extremely expensive to acquire, old, or stink on defense to some degree.

The offense in that group would be fine IMO. The bigs could each play some five with a small ball four, or play together and mitigate their toughness/rebounding a bit with pure size. It definitely needs a tough, big combo forward though. Some Al-Farouq Aminu type.

That's the problem with this team in general though, it needs Smart to be a 3/4/5, not a 1/2/3.

[Slartibartfast]

Some reason I keep coming back to a Marcus Smart/LaMarcus Aldridge trade. I don't know if I even like that trade that much but it has a certain symmetry to it.

Spurs clear some more space and sign a point guard, Lowry maybe, and Smart plays the 3rd guard role like he does here.

Celtics could do something like sign and trade Olynyk and parts for Hayward, then trade for Aldridge. They'd have their win-now team without giving up any of the BRK picks.

It would probably end up a steal for the Spurs, but hell, everything is a steal for them.

IT/Hayward/LMA/Horford is a pretty shoddy defensive group. And a lot of diminishing returns with IT/Hayward/LMA in terms of scoring the ball. LMA in particular has seen a massive drop in productivity in a system that gives most of the iso workload to Kawhi.

If we bring in Hayward, we need to be targeting a dynamite defensive presence at the 3/4 or the 4/5, not an iso high post scorer.

I don't disagree with the last at all, just hard to figure who that is that is also a good player. Main need is another good starter that also is not a guard. Most of those that seem available are either extremely expensive to acquire, old, or stink on defense to some degree.

The offense in that group would be fine IMO. The bigs could each play some five with a small ball four, or play together and mitigate their toughness/rebounding a bit with pure size. It definitely needs a tough, big combo forward though. Some Al-Farouq Aminu type.

That's the problem with this team in general though, it needs Smart to be a 3/4/5, not a 1/2/3.

The offense would be more than fine, but diminishing returns would prevent it from being truly great. Aldridge as a 3rd option just isn't gonna give you all that much more than we already have, and he's more likely to chafe in that role than Horford. Indeed, he might crowd Horford out of the offense.

Not likely to work all that much better but I'd go Dwight. Provides a completely different look on both ends, while likely being even cheaper asset-wise. Potentially damaging to our offense but I kind of like the idea of Brad working in a paint beast into the offense instead of going doubling down even further on high PNR actions. Dwight would undoubtedly chafe as a 3rd/4th option too, but I wouldn't mind throwing him some post-ups if it gets him more motivated defensively.

[Banks2Pierce]

TT's contract seemed ridiculous then he proved himself as a 2-way smallball 5 (dynamite offensive rebounder on one end, excellent pick and roll defender on the other) and the cap jumped so high he became a fair value.

A max for IT is less palatable because I don't think the cap has another huge jump in it and he's not a 2-way player. So he's hard to fit both from an expense standpoint and a skill-balance standpoint.

We are getting DESTROYED defensively this playoffs (obviously by Washington but even by Chicago pre-Rondo injury) and IT is the biggest reason for that. Not just his own defensive issues but the way the roster is constructed around his strengths (lightweight skilled bigs to space the floor) so that they can't defend with him and they can't score without him so they can't bench him when the exploitation is too bad.

Obviously we're struggling with that 5th starter role with Amir imploding and everyone else too green or too Green (see what I did there) but the Green/Amir yo-yo is pretty illustrative of the IT-as-superstar dilemma. Do you go super small to get the most out of IT offensively, or do you play a non-scoring big to mitigate how small/weak we already are to maximize IT offensively? Or do you add enough defensively competent shot creators that you can afford to bench IT, put some rebounding on the floor and still function offensively?

I didn't do a good job making the TT point that I wanted to make. It's more that he was making ~20% of the cap, but that you can still manage that if you already have the rest of the big contract guys in place and are willing to pay the tax. Obviously looks much better now with the cap jump, but it's more about before the jump.

IT is clearly a major issue on Defense. The rebounding might be as big of an issue. I get what you are saying as far as the skilled bigs not likely to be good rebounders either. Stretchy bigs help IT, but even one non stretcher and he's shown he can still run an elite offense. Doesn't help when your 2 and 3 can't really create offense, but that would clearly be a guy not on the roster yet or maybe Jaylen. We are a few possessions off from DESTROYING their defense as much as they are wrecking ours. It's the EC Semis. Good area to be in considering everything.

It's a decision that doesn't have to be made until 2018 FA. Can't trade him now. Dependent on what we do between now and then. Brooklyn pick being as good as it is made the decision on which direction to go much harder as I see it.

[GoCeltics123]

The offense would be more than fine, but diminishing returns would prevent it from being truly great. Aldridge as a 3rd option just isn't gonna give you all that much more than we already have, and he's more likely to chafe in that role than Horford. Indeed, he might crowd Horford out of the offense.

Not likely to work all that much better but I'd go Dwight. Provides a completely different look on both ends, while likely being even cheaper asset-wise. Potentially damaging to our offense but I kind of like the idea of Brad working in a paint beast into the offense instead of going doubling down even further on high PNR actions. Dwight would undoubtedly chafe as a 3rd/4th option too, but I wouldn't mind throwing him some post-ups if it gets him more motivated defensively.

You're not serious right? Dwight is a locker room issue to any team he goes to

[m haynes]

Thinking more on IT - most they should offer is a four year max deal on the regular max for his year's played.

That will still beat out any other team financially, plus avoids the likely overpaid back end.

That's the ceiling to start from.

I know my post will come across as negative but I like to be a truth teller.

IT is probably the best under 6ft scorer I have seen play basketball in my life since I never saw Archibald at his best but unfortunately his height makes in impossible for Boston to let's say beat Cleveland (if healthy) in a series. On offense and certainly not defense, I do give IT the edge over Iverson since he is simply the superior shooter from 3 and the free throw line and that makes up for Iverson's advantages as an athlete.

Let's just look at things logically, Lebron aggressively doubled, all things considered may be the 2nd best passer in NBA history in those situations only behind Magic. IT probably average. That is just a tremendous edge to Cavs. And then playoff Lebron is one of the best defenders in the entire NBA and IT one of the worst.

Now its obviously totally unfair to compare any player to Lebron and ridicule him for not being close but if the Celtics want to win a championship and have IT at a high enough usage to justify even a 20 million dollar salary that is what Boston is up against.

And let's face it, the only way that a huge salary for an aging IT can even begin to be justified is he is the teams leading scorer and getting 25+ PPG.

Problem is Cleveland plays the same sort of game as Boston in trying to spread the floor and they have Lebron as the person to score and pass while Boston has IT. I believe that is just a losing formula in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022. Even when Lebron is 40 that may be a losing formula.

I believe its time to be honest with what it takes to beat Golden State and the Cavs.

Celtics are very unlikely to ever do it paying IT big money and playing him big minutes. IT in all honesty fits a little bit better against Golden State than he does against Cavs because at least against Golden State (in theory) in a bench role he could be used a bit to try to wear out Curry/Klay. Curry is less likely to post up IT as well or attack the rim.

And the game doesn't become a 1 on 1 contest between IT with 4 shooters constantly doubled vs Lebron with a bunch of shooters needing to be doubled.

But the basic problem is IT just lowers even with Steven's Boston's potential on the defensive end way too much and the C's have to get past two historically great offenses.

How does Boston ever in a 7 game series out score Lebron/Irving/Love/<bunch of 3 point shooters/ring chasers> et cetera? I see it as virtually impossible.
And Warriors are even better.

Ainge paying IT the max is pulling a fraud over the Celtics fans unless he has the honesty of an ML Carr when Carr signed Dana Barros. When Carr signed Dana Barros and a player like Wilkins, he made it clear that the C's had no chance and they were just entertainment signings since the Celtics were *******.

Ainge has spent the last 4 years gathering assets and I'd much rather see him go with something that has a chance to win. It may mean starting over and trying to peak/look promising when Anthony Davis/Leonard may be free agents but that seems a better plan than betting on IT as the Celtics leading scorer to beat Cavs/GS.

In a draft of all NBA players, I take Curry, KD, Klay and Green all before IT.

Great post, except going after Big FA. They will never come here, no way unless they have no other choice. Yes they signed Hortford however we all know he not considered a big fish when you talk about FA. Anthony Davis, No way. Griffin might because he a name but he not worth the money. Celt will over pay and waste time and assets.

[Slartibartfast]

TT's contract seemed ridiculous then he proved himself as a 2-way smallball 5 (dynamite offensive rebounder on one end, excellent pick and roll defender on the other) and the cap jumped so high he became a fair value.

A max for IT is less palatable because I don't think the cap has another huge jump in it and he's not a 2-way player. So he's hard to fit both from an expense standpoint and a skill-balance standpoint.

We are getting DESTROYED defensively this playoffs (obviously by Washington but even by Chicago pre-Rondo injury) and IT is the biggest reason for that. Not just his own defensive issues but the way the roster is constructed around his strengths (lightweight skilled bigs to space the floor) so that they can't defend with him and they can't score without him so they can't bench him when the exploitation is too bad.

Obviously we're struggling with that 5th starter role with Amir imploding and everyone else too green or too Green (see what I did there) but the Green/Amir yo-yo is pretty illustrative of the IT-as-superstar dilemma. Do you go super small to get the most out of IT offensively, or do you play a non-scoring big to mitigate how small/weak we already are to maximize IT offensively? Or do you add enough defensively competent shot creators that you can afford to bench IT, put some rebounding on the floor and still function offensively?

I didn't do a good job making the TT point that I wanted to make. It's more that he was making ~20% of the cap, but that you can still manage that if you already have the rest of the big contract guys in place and are willing to pay the tax. Obviously looks much better now with the cap jump, but it's more about before the jump.

IT is clearly a major issue on Defense. The rebounding might be as big of an issue. I get what you are saying as far as the skilled bigs not likely to be good rebounders either. Stretchy bigs help IT, but even one non stretcher and he's shown he can still run an elite offense. Doesn't help when your 2 and 3 can't really create offense, but that would clearly be a guy not on the roster yet or maybe Jaylen. We are a few possessions off from DESTROYING their defense as much as they are wrecking ours. It's the EC Semis. Good area to be in considering everything.

It's a decision that doesn't have to be made until 2018 FA. Can't trade him now. Dependent on what we do between now and then. Brooklyn pick being as good as it is made the decision on which direction to go much harder as I see it.

Destroying the Wizards defense is easy. They are a crappy defensive team, borderline horrific after adding Bogey to their main rotation. Wall is a lazy defender who hasn't really kicked it up much in the playoffs, Beal is a poor off-ball defender, Porter's got length, but little else going for him defensively and Gortat is a dinosaur in the PNR. Only Morris is an above average defensive player and that's mitigated by his weakness on the defensive glass.

We are supposed to be much better defensively. AB is ace on-ball, Smart and Jae are among the best defenders at their positions, Horford is still pretty good. Amir collapsing is a big problem, but even with him out of the picture we'd be a pretty good defensive team with an average defender/rebounder in place of IT. Instead we're getting destroyed.

Credit IT for basically outscoring them single-handedly in Game 2 but even then we were a Beal jumper away from losing the game.

Just about everything is pointing to this team being closer to mediocre than great. The MOV of a 48 win team with poor showings against good teams. A near collapse against the 14th best team in the league in the first round, averted mainly by a lucky break. And now a statistically improbable tie against the 9th best team that is trending in the wrong direction.

I just don't see the big opportunity cost of trading IT now - bigger opportunity cost not to. Hayward's primary appeal to me is a replacement for IT as future #2 option on a contender, not an IT sidekick. The frontcourt FA options generally suck (Millsap too old and small, Ibaka too marginal an upgrade, Griffin unrealistic, expensive, a non-defender and a walking injury. The win-now trade guys are set to cost a fortune and none of them are bigs (our biggest need, especially if IT stays on).

Meanwhile, as much as the contract year puts a dent in his trade value, guys who can win playoff games scoring 50+ points tend to command nice returns in trade.

[Asian Celtic]

IT/Hayward/LMA/Horford is a pretty shoddy defensive group. And a lot of diminishing returns with IT/Hayward/LMA in terms of scoring the ball. LMA in particular has seen a massive drop in productivity in a system that gives most of the iso workload to Kawhi.

If we bring in Hayward, we need to be targeting a dynamite defensive presence at the 3/4 or the 4/5, not an iso high post scorer.

I don't disagree with the last at all, just hard to figure who that is that is also a good player. Main need is another good starter that also is not a guard. Most of those that seem available are either extremely expensive to acquire, old, or stink on defense to some degree.

The offense in that group would be fine IMO. The bigs could each play some five with a small ball four, or play together and mitigate their toughness/rebounding a bit with pure size. It definitely needs a tough, big combo forward though. Some Al-Farouq Aminu type.

That's the problem with this team in general though, it needs Smart to be a 3/4/5, not a 1/2/3.

The offense would be more than fine, but diminishing returns would prevent it from being truly great. Aldridge as a 3rd option just isn't gonna give you all that much more than we already have, and he's more likely to chafe in that role than Horford. Indeed, he might crowd Horford out of the offense.

Not likely to work all that much better but I'd go Dwight. Provides a completely different look on both ends, while likely being even cheaper asset-wise. Potentially damaging to our offense but I kind of like the idea of Brad working in a paint beast into the offense instead of going doubling down even further on high PNR actions. Dwight would undoubtedly chafe as a 3rd/4th option too, but I wouldn't mind throwing him some post-ups if it gets him more motivated defensively.

If dwight is an option as a 3rd / 4th, then wouldn't Bismack Biyombo be a better target? Cheaper salary, better interior defense and rebounding today IMO. Isn't a locker room issue.

[ddb]

I would go to Bulls one more time this summer and offer Bradley + Smart + BK17 (add also Mickey and Jackson) for Bulter. Then let Olynyk go and offer max to Griffin. In addition we avoid overpaying Smart, Olynyk and Bradley.

Thomas/Rozier/
Butler/Brown/
Crowder/Nader/
Griffin/Yabusele/
Horford/Zizič/

Butler is locked on a very team friendly deal and is perfect 1st/2nd option + secondary playmaker we need. Crowder now can do what he's supposed to do - only defend, hustle and shoot threes. We also upgrade front court with a perfect fit for Stevens system and next to Horford.

We still have 8,4 million MLE + 3,3 million BAE to bolster our bench with some cheap, undervalued players and veterans (Tucker, Korver, Carter, Randolph, Dedmon, Speights, Jerebko etc.)

No more huge lux tax issues even if we resign Thomas. Tons of young talent on the bench with one more Nets pick to come + other picks.

No thanks. Griffin would be a great fit but he is often injured. Butler is really good too, but I feel like that ship as sailed. I'm not dealing BK17 for him. Nope.
Make this Paul George and G Hayward and I'm down. Or Anthony Davis and G Hayward.





Sent from my SM-G930T using RealGM mobile app

[ddb]

Let's not trade the pick. Davis, with two years left on his deal, will be available next offseason if Boogie bolts. Let's hoard our assets for the best offer when that time comes.

Amen.

Sent from my SM-G930T using RealGM mobile app

[reload141]

I would go to Bulls one more time this summer and offer Bradley + Smart + BK17 (add also Mickey and Jackson) for Bulter. Then let Olynyk go and offer max to Griffin. In addition we avoid overpaying Smart, Olynyk and Bradley.

Thomas/Rozier/
Butler/Brown/
Crowder/Nader/
Griffin/Yabusele/
Horford/Zizič/

Butler is locked on a very team friendly deal and is perfect 1st/2nd option + secondary playmaker we need. Crowder now can do what he's supposed to do - only defend, hustle and shoot threes. We also upgrade front court with a perfect fit for Stevens system and next to Horford.

We still have 8,4 million MLE + 3,3 million BAE to bolster our bench with some cheap, undervalued players and veterans (Tucker, Korver, Carter, Randolph, Dedmon, Speights, Jerebko etc.)

No more huge lux tax issues even if we resign Thomas. Tons of young talent on the bench with one more Nets pick to come + other picks.

No thanks. Griffin would be a great fit but he is often injured. Butler is really good too, but I feel like that ship as sailed. I'm not dealing BK17 for him. Nope.
Make this Paul George and G Hayward and I'm down. Or Anthony Davis and G Hayward.





Sent from my SM-G930T using RealGM mobile app

What do we do with the center spot then? I'm assuming Bradley/Crowder are gone (for salary purposes)
IT
George
Hayward
Horford
???

[CelticsLV]

I would go to Bulls one more time this summer and offer Bradley + Smart + BK17 (add also Mickey and Jackson) for Bulter. Then let Olynyk go and offer max to Griffin. In addition we avoid overpaying Smart, Olynyk and Bradley.

Thomas/Rozier/
Butler/Brown/
Crowder/Nader/
Griffin/Yabusele/
Horford/Zizič/

Butler is locked on a very team friendly deal and is perfect 1st/2nd option + secondary playmaker we need. Crowder now can do what he's supposed to do - only defend, hustle and shoot threes. We also upgrade front court with a perfect fit for Stevens system and next to Horford.

We still have 8,4 million MLE + 3,3 million BAE to bolster our bench with some cheap, undervalued players and veterans (Tucker, Korver, Carter, Randolph, Dedmon, Speights, Jerebko etc.)

No more huge lux tax issues even if we resign Thomas. Tons of young talent on the bench with one more Nets pick to come + other picks.

No thanks. Griffin would be a great fit but he is often injured. Butler is really good too, but I feel like that ship as sailed. I'm not dealing BK17 for him. Nope.
Make this Paul George and G Hayward and I'm down. Or Anthony Davis and G Hayward.





Sent from my SM-G930T using RealGM mobile app

I'm posting realistic options not pipe dreams.

[liveod]

IT
?
Gordon/Jaylen
Horford
Anthony Davis

Lesssss get itttt

[reload141]

Most of the Jazz board seem they are 50/50 on Hayward coming back (in that they want him to come back but a lot of people aren't 100% positive he will)
Will be very interesting how the next couple of weeks pan out...

[jmr07019]

Would Jazz trade us Gobert after we signed Hayward? I kinda doubt it but why do you need a defensive center making 25% of the cap when you are looking to rebuild? Wouldn't Jackson, Ball or Tatum be a better starting piece? If you sent Brooklyn 17 with a resigned KO (salary purposes) to them for Gobert we would have

IT - Bradley - Hayward - Horford - Gobert
Rozier - Smart - Crowder - Brown - Yabu - Zizic

[reload141]

Would Jazz trade us Gobert after we signed Hayward? I kinda doubt it but why do you need a defensive center making 25% of the cap when you are looking to rebuild? Wouldn't Jackson, Ball or Tatum be a better starting piece? If you sent Brooklyn 17 with a resigned KO (salary purposes) to them for Gobert we would have

IT - Bradley - Hayward - Horford - Gobert
Rozier - Smart - Crowder - Brown - Yabu - Zizic

I think Jazz block our number if we somehow get Hayward for at least 5-10 years.

[jmr07019]

Would Jazz trade us Gobert after we signed Hayward? I kinda doubt it but why do you need a defensive center making 25% of the cap when you are looking to rebuild? Wouldn't Jackson, Ball or Tatum be a better starting piece? If you sent Brooklyn 17 with a resigned KO (salary purposes) to them for Gobert we would have

IT - Bradley - Hayward - Horford - Gobert
Rozier - Smart - Crowder - Brown - Yabu - Zizic

I think Jazz block our number if we somehow get Hayward for at least 5-10 years.

me too. The trade makes sense from their perspective but they would hate us too much to do that deal

[FlatearthZorro]

Would Jazz trade us Gobert after we signed Hayward? I kinda doubt it but why do you need a defensive center making 25% of the cap when you are looking to rebuild? Wouldn't Jackson, Ball or Tatum be a better starting piece? If you sent Brooklyn 17 with a resigned KO (salary purposes) to them for Gobert we would have

IT - Bradley - Hayward - Horford - Gobert
Rozier - Smart - Crowder - Brown - Yabu - Zizic

I think Jazz block our number if we somehow get Hayward for at least 5-10 years.

me too. The trade makes sense from their perspective but they would hate us too much to do that deal

They wont trade Gobert, but I think Hayward is very likely as his final interview int he locker room sounded literally like he was out: "I'm happy the fans were behind me, I did a lots of growing here"... etc... I mean they got swept and they don't have much room for improvement.

[165bows]

I think Jazz block our number if we somehow get Hayward for at least 5-10 years.

me too. The trade makes sense from their perspective but they would hate us too much to do that deal

They wont trade Gobert, but I think Hayward is very likely as his final interview int he locker room sounded literally like he was out: "I'm happy the fans were behind me, I did a lots of growing here"... etc... I mean they got swept and they don't have much room for improvement.

That interview screamed "I'm out of here" to me. Unless a guy says "I am absolutely not leaving, I would hate to have to leave and play somewhere else" he is pretty much on the table.

[FlatearthZorro]

me too. The trade makes sense from their perspective but they would hate us too much to do that deal

They wont trade Gobert, but I think Hayward is very likely as his final interview int he locker room sounded literally like he was out: "I'm happy the fans were behind me, I did a lots of growing here"... etc... I mean they got swept and they don't have much room for improvement.

That interview screamed "I'm out of here" to me. Unless a guy says "I am absolutely not leaving, I would hate to have to leave and play somewhere else" he is pretty much on the table.

Him and Brad sound so buddy- buddy. It's giving me hope. I've rarely heard Brad joke around about players and he does that nearly every time they ask him about Hayward. Plus I think us with Hayward > Utah with Hayward and that Warriors team ain't going nowhere anytime soon.

[Homerclease]

So, you guys think Wyc and DA read this forum?