What now?

[darrendaye]

But how do you take the next step then? Empty the pantry for Cousins and we're still not on Golden State's level and we still face the problem of IT/AB getting to the end of their bargain deals and Horford exiting his prime.

To me the 2 year window that we have with cheap talent + prime Horford has been shut by KD's Saruman move.

Unless we can get great deals like we did in 2007 (can you imagine getting prime KG for what we paid now? Or even Ray?) or Houston did with Harden, I'm not seeing a convincing path to a 2017 or 2018 championship.

True. However, if Danny dials it back now he'll basically be admitting his plan was wrong and we'll need to trade all these vets and go with a youth movement and get STUDS primarily thru the draft. If he does that, he'll concede that he wasted the 1st 3-4 years of this rebuild foolishly thinking he could either sign a true STUD in free agency or trade for one without giving up too much so that he could still build a contending roster around whomever we acquire. He won't do that.........he's too stubborn and Wyc is too busy sniffing his jock to fire him or realize it.

I think Danny could rationalize a shift to a youth movement without doing a perp walk.

He could say he made a good run at it, put the team in good position to land KD and become a true contender and it was worth it to take the shot. Plus with the value he could get for IT and Horford, maybe he gets back whatever he forsook by not tanking earlier.

Think about it - there will be some hungry teams out there, angry that the Warriors are so loaded and itching to load up themselves.

Some of the guys that we missed out on with our tank failure in 14/15 - Myles Turner, Winslow, Porzingis - belong to teams that might fit that profile.

Take Indy for example - Bird is hyper competitive and wants to win now. He's got a top 10 player in George, a new and improved vet supporting cast and a 20-year-old center that has a great long-term outlook but isn't ready to be the lynchpin of a contender. Al Horford would provide them with the All-Star grade floor-spacing and team D they need right now.

I don't disagree with the sentiment, however I don't see why you would do this before next off-season. If Brown blows up and/or if they land a top pick next year there may be avenues to getting it done with IT/Horford.

[165bows]

Cousins is the guy to get.

Yes. He's almost as good as Durant IMO in terms of he's a true STUD you can build around and he's still in his prime. I know we'll have to unload the farm for him(ie Nets 2017, Nets 2018 plus either Crowder, Smart or Brown at minimum) but he's gotta be the #1 target. He will pair real nicely with Horford giving us a real nice front line.

But how do you take the next step then? Empty the pantry for Cousins and we're still not on Golden State's level and we still face the problem of IT/AB getting to the end of their bargain deals and Horford exiting his prime.

To me the 2 year window that we have with cheap talent + prime Horford has been shut by KD's Saruman move.

Unless we can get great deals like we did in 2007 (can you imagine getting prime KG for what we paid now? Or even Ray?) or Houston did with Harden, I'm not seeing a convincing path to a 2017 or 2018 championship.

Realistically it's got to be a FA/trade combo to me. I don't know jack about what motivates Westbrook but maybe he really wants to win one on his own before he retires. It's got a lot of risk but signing Westbrook and then trading for Cousins puts together a lineup that has the physicality and athleticism that would be necessary to challenge GS' weaknesses.

But again I'd only want to do it if the total trade costs are relatively low. Dumping all of the youth/picks for both those guys sounds like a recipe for a huge flameout.

The other thing to me is looking way ahead, do they want to line up to try to acquire Anthony Davis. It's still a long ways out (four years until his FA to be precise), but Davis' FA lines up nicely with the Al Horford contract dropping off.

To me, this next set of big FA chases have a lot higher opportunity cost than Horford. They needed someone like Horford to facilitate signing number two, and his deal is going to be a lot cheaper than whatever is out there next summer. Those are much bigger decisions and bigger risks as well as bigger rewards than Horford is this summer. To me they just turned one of the very few stashes of cap space in the league into a big asset this summer with that signing, so it was pretty much a no-brainer. he is valuable no matter which way they go.

[Slartibartfast]

I don't disagree with the sentiment, however I don't see why you would do this before next off-season. If Brown blows up and/or if they land a top pick next year there may be avenues to getting it done with IT/Horford.

I think the deck is stacked against getting it done with IT/Horford. We are just too far behind. We added Horford to a 48 win team. The Warriors added Durant to a 73 win team.

Further, with so many of the top players clustered into super teams, is it even possible to add people to bridge the gaps? I'm sympathetic to Westbrook arguments on pure talent, but he'd cost a mint, is a huge flight risk, and the consensus is that even he's not enough.

If Brown blows up and/or we land the top pick next year, I'm going to value those players more than the shrinking IT/Horford window.

[Slartibartfast]

Yes. He's almost as good as Durant IMO in terms of he's a true STUD you can build around and he's still in his prime. I know we'll have to unload the farm for him(ie Nets 2017, Nets 2018 plus either Crowder, Smart or Brown at minimum) but he's gotta be the #1 target. He will pair real nicely with Horford giving us a real nice front line.

But how do you take the next step then? Empty the pantry for Cousins and we're still not on Golden State's level and we still face the problem of IT/AB getting to the end of their bargain deals and Horford exiting his prime.

To me the 2 year window that we have with cheap talent + prime Horford has been shut by KD's Saruman move.

Unless we can get great deals like we did in 2007 (can you imagine getting prime KG for what we paid now? Or even Ray?) or Houston did with Harden, I'm not seeing a convincing path to a 2017 or 2018 championship.

Realistically it's got to be a FA/trade combo to me. I don't know jack about what motivates Westbrook but maybe he really wants to win one on his own before he retires. It's got a lot of risk but signing Westbrook and then trading for Cousins puts together a lineup that has the physicality and athleticism that would be necessary to challenge GS' weaknesses.

But again I'd only want to do it if the total trade costs are relatively low. Dumping all of the youth/picks for both those guys sounds like a recipe for a huge flameout.

The other thing to me is looking way ahead, do they want to line up to try to acquire Anthony Davis. It's still a long ways out (four years until his FA to be precise), but Davis' FA lines up nicely with the Al Horford contract dropping off.

To me, this next set of big FA chases have a lot higher opportunity cost than Horford. They needed someone like Horford to facilitate signing number two, and his deal is going to be a lot cheaper than whatever is out there next summer. Those are much bigger decisions and bigger risks as well as bigger rewards than Horford is this summer. To me they just turned one of the very few stashes of cap space in the league into a big asset this summer with that signing, so it was pretty much a no-brainer. he is valuable no matter which way they go.

I like Horford as a trade asset if we're willing to deploy him as such early in his deal. I'd hate it if he was a 4 year punt to Anthony Davis.

I don't think the chances of him being worth much in year 3 and 4 of this deal are all that great. Undersized 5s who rely on athleticism to compete defensively don't have the greatest aging track record - Noah, Amare, Big Ben, Kemp. Admittedly very different players and some injuries/head cases in there. But Horford is already starting to age into old KG offensively without KG's length defensively.

[165bows]

I don't disagree with the sentiment, however I don't see why you would do this before next off-season. If Brown blows up and/or if they land a top pick next year there may be avenues to getting it done with IT/Horford.

I think the deck is stacked against getting it done with IT/Horford. We are just too far behind. We added Horford to a 48 win team. The Warriors added Durant to a 73 win team.

Further, with so many of the top players clustered into super teams, is it even possible to add people to bridge the gaps? I'm sympathetic to Westbrook arguments on pure talent, but he'd cost a mint, is a huge flight risk, and the consensus is that even he's not enough.

If Brown blows up and/or we land the top pick next year, I'm going to value those players more than the shrinking IT/Horford window.

The issue there to me is how do they get the players, FA vs. trade. Signing a big name next summer and then trading a modest amount of assets is totally ok in that they can legitimately do whatever they want with the AB/IT group and still be a very good team for a decade (transition from current group to Smart/Brown/17/18/19 picks), if they don't go and blow up most of those future draft assets in huge trades.

That's why I say they are ok going as is, playing a hard line on the trade market (ie, no so far to Butler) but getting a bit more free with the cap space (spending for a good but not great 30 year old). The major issue in that for me is balancing who they sign now with who they could sign later.

The whole point (competitively at least, vs marketing/financial) of maintaining the 50ish win conference finals type team, is it keeps them in the mix for the next big guys on the move. So do they take the bird in the hand (Horford, whoever 2017 brings) vs. potentially better ones in the bush later.

Edit - I guess my point is if we assume it's all a punt for the next four years, punting with Al Horford is just as good as punting any other way. It's the five year, $180M dollar deal after trading for a guy next summer that is a risky punt strategy.

[Disinformation]

What we should do next is continue to pursue a legit and smart big move or step back, fill out the roster with 1 year guys as needed and keep our flexibility.

As for what I think is legit and smart, well who are the big targets out there? I've seen the following mentioned here and in the media:

Cousins - Yes. I know there's concern about his attitude and the fact that he's never really won. I think both are legitimate concerns, but I also think being stuck in Sacramento with their bad front office (don't forget the Maloof's owned the Kings before Vivek "The Meddler" Ranadivé took over) and unstable coaching (he's on his 6th coach going in to his 7th year) situations could explain a large part of both. Unless the price was ridiciculously over the top, I think this is the guy to target. A Horford + Cousins front court would almost be like playing 6-on-5 compared to what we had last year (or maybe last year was like playing 4-on-5).

Westbrook - No. I said my piece on this in the Westbrook thread so short version: No thanks because I think he bolts to LA the first chance he gets.

Love - No. That ship has sailed in so many ways. Cleveland has no need to dump him after winning the title so if they do move him, it'll be expensive. I was never a huge fan of his anyway (as I've said several times, I like my bigs to play defense) but after two years in Cleveland with injuries and mixed results on the court, I'm really not interested in acquiring him.

Butler - Not right now. I was all for bringing him in as the 3rd guy on a Durant/Horford-led team. Since that's not going to happen, I say hold off until a) we do get a #1 guy or b) the price for him comes way down.

Griffin - Maybe. I'm not sure he's even on the block at this point and he's another guy like Westbrook who is a free agent next year. But unlike Westbrook, I don't think he's as big a risk to bolt after one season in Boston. Depending on the price, I'd consider him...but I'd be nervous until his signature was on a new contract.

Have I missed anyone? Please don't bring up Anthony Davis because he's not going anywhere (obviously I would love to have him if he was). Or guys like Monroe, Middleton, etc... who aren't going to move the needle very much.

[Slartibartfast]

I don't disagree with the sentiment, however I don't see why you would do this before next off-season. If Brown blows up and/or if they land a top pick next year there may be avenues to getting it done with IT/Horford.

I think the deck is stacked against getting it done with IT/Horford. We are just too far behind. We added Horford to a 48 win team. The Warriors added Durant to a 73 win team.

Further, with so many of the top players clustered into super teams, is it even possible to add people to bridge the gaps? I'm sympathetic to Westbrook arguments on pure talent, but he'd cost a mint, is a huge flight risk, and the consensus is that even he's not enough.

If Brown blows up and/or we land the top pick next year, I'm going to value those players more than the shrinking IT/Horford window.

The issue there to me is how do they get the players, FA vs. trade. Signing a big name next summer and then trading a modest amount of assets is totally ok in that they can legitimately do whatever they want with the AB/IT group and still be a very good team for a decade (transition from current group to Smart/Brown/17/18/19 picks), if they don't go and blow up most of those future draft assets in huge trades.

That's why I say they are ok going as is, playing a hard line on the trade market (ie, no so far to Butler) but getting a bit more free with the cap space (spending for a good but not great 30 year old). The major issue in that for me is balancing who they sign now with who they could sign later.

The whole point (competitively at least, vs marketing/financial) of maintaining the 50ish win conference finals type team, is it keeps them in the mix for the next big guys on the move. So do they take the bird in the hand (Horford, whoever 2017 brings) vs. potentially better ones in the bush later.

Edit - I guess my point is if we assume it's all a punt for the next four years, punting with Al Horford is just as good as punting any other way. It's the five year, $180M dollar deal after trading for a guy next summer that is a risky punt strategy.

Three really hard things for us to do in the current environment - contend now against a historic super-team, complete hardball trades for stars and attract superstars in free agency when our competitors offer superstar team-up opportunities. We're facing steep uphill climbs in each of those directions.

And punting to keep those low-probability scenarios comes with severe opportunity costs.

Running an outsource tank in BK and a high-end treadmill at home sounds nice in theory, but it has broken down thus far in practice. We don't value the young assets enough to give them prominent roles and responsibility, and we don't value the high-end treadmillers (glorified ham-and-eggers in BO parlance) enough to sacrifice the young assets to give them a bump.

Playing longball in the draft (Brown), hardball in trade and high roller in free agency is organizational schizophrenia. Trying to bake the cake, have it and eat it too.

[sam_I_am]

It's not enough to get a Butler. We need to add two stud assets. That means we need to strike gold with 2017 pick and get a top 10 player in free agency. If we can trade for Westbrook or Cousins without giving up Nets picks - go for it. But Nets picks can't be given up now.

IT, Bradley, Smart, Jae on bargain deals fo 2 years was great if we added Durant. But given zero chance to win a title with them, we should be willing to trade them all to get a blue chipper even if it makes us less competitive. Why not gamble on Westbrook with those guys because they are all going to get overpaid like ET in 2 yrs.

[BannersOnly]

I think the deck is stacked against getting it done with IT/Horford. We are just too far behind. We added Horford to a 48 win team. The Warriors added Durant to a 73 win team.

Further, with so many of the top players clustered into super teams, is it even possible to add people to bridge the gaps? I'm sympathetic to Westbrook arguments on pure talent, but he'd cost a mint, is a huge flight risk, and the consensus is that even he's not enough.

If Brown blows up and/or we land the top pick next year, I'm going to value those players more than the shrinking IT/Horford window.

The issue there to me is how do they get the players, FA vs. trade. Signing a big name next summer and then trading a modest amount of assets is totally ok in that they can legitimately do whatever they want with the AB/IT group and still be a very good team for a decade (transition from current group to Smart/Brown/17/18/19 picks), if they don't go and blow up most of those future draft assets in huge trades.

That's why I say they are ok going as is, playing a hard line on the trade market (ie, no so far to Butler) but getting a bit more free with the cap space (spending for a good but not great 30 year old). The major issue in that for me is balancing who they sign now with who they could sign later.

The whole point (competitively at least, vs marketing/financial) of maintaining the 50ish win conference finals type team, is it keeps them in the mix for the next big guys on the move. So do they take the bird in the hand (Horford, whoever 2017 brings) vs. potentially better ones in the bush later.

Edit - I guess my point is if we assume it's all a punt for the next four years, punting with Al Horford is just as good as punting any other way. It's the five year, $180M dollar deal after trading for a guy next summer that is a risky punt strategy.

Three really hard things for us to do in the current environment - contend now against a historic super-team, complete hardball trades for stars and attract superstars in free agency when our competitors offer superstar team-up opportunities. We're facing steep uphill climbs in each of those directions.

And punting to keep those low-probability scenarios comes with severe opportunity costs.

Running an outsource tank in BK and a high-end treadmill at home sounds nice in theory, but it has broken down thus far in practice. We don't value the young assets enough to give them prominent roles and responsibility, and we don't value the high-end treadmillers (glorified ham-and-eggers in BO parlance) enough to sacrifice the young assets to give them a bump.

Playing longball in the draft (Brown), hardball in trade and high roller in free agency is organizational schizophrenia. Trying to bake the cake, have it and eat it too.

This post should be framed and put in the RealGM Hall of Fame. Nailed it. Best post I've read in long time.

[claycarver]

Unless we make a big trade and "win" the trade handily, I'd prefer to run this year with the current roster and a few 1-year deals. Keep our assets, hope to land a guy like Josh Jackson with the '17 BKN pick and go after guys like Hayward, Griffin & Westbrook next year as free agents.

This exactly. I'd love to see Smart, Brown, and a Jackson-ish '17 pick coached by Brad Stevens, growing out of a Horford, IT, Avery, Jae, Griffin/Hayward team.

That looks like a great way forward.

[Marvel]

But how do you take the next step then? Empty the pantry for Cousins and we're still not on Golden State's level and we still face the problem of IT/AB getting to the end of their bargain deals and Horford exiting his prime.

To me the 2 year window that we have with cheap talent + prime Horford has been shut by KD's Saruman move.

Unless we can get great deals like we did in 2007 (can you imagine getting prime KG for what we paid now? Or even Ray?) or Houston did with Harden, I'm not seeing a convincing path to a 2017 or 2018 championship.

I'm in the opinion that if the following lineup gels well, and Cousins totally buys into Brad, is a true contender:

IT/Smart
Bradley/Smart
Crowder/Brown (in my give them all the picks, but keep the players dream scenario)
Horford/Crowder
Cousins/Olynyk/Horford

We keep all our great perimeter defenders that have given GSW so much trouble. Cousins/Horford will eat Pachulia/Green alive as far as front court matchups go. There's more than enough scoring, tons of space for IT to work since everyone in that rotation can hits 3s except Brown and Smart (who I think will be vastly improved from 3 this year). I think matching up with the Cavs would be tougher tbh. Our team last year with a trash front court probably matched up with GSW better than any other team in the league, a double OT loss at home, and a win on the road to end their undefeated streak. Cousins with proper coaching and direction is a scary, scary player man.

I like that roster. That's easily a Top 5 NBA roster and certainly a true contender in the East. Plus, if we can somehow keep Brown out of the Cousins trade and he reaches his "ceiling" in 3 years than we have a real good team for the final 2 years of Horford's contract. Let's face it, NOBODY and I mean NOBODY is building a roster as good or better than Golden State the next 3-4 years. However, if you get a roster that can at least compete legitemately than you never know. We either need to go ALL IN for Cousins or we need to blow it up after this season if the Nets pick doesn't land us an absolute, no questions asked young STUD a la Lebron, Durant, Towns, Davis, etc....

I would love for this to happen but Vlade isn't that dumb to not ask for Jaylen in a package for Boogie. The deal would be centered around youth(with upside) Jaylen, draft picks(BKN 17-18), and 1 of Smart, Rozier, Hunter.

[Curmudgeon]

Except for Horford, Ainge has pretty much struck out so far in free agency. BTW the Lakers are reportedly interested in Zeller, so I doubt if he's playing for the QO next year.

[Homerclease]

Except for Horford, Ainge has pretty much struck out so far in free agency. BTW the Lakers are reportedly interested in Zeller, so I doubt if he's playing for the QO next year.

They have no roster space anyway, might as well just play out the year with Amir and Jerebko

[Curmudgeon]

I'm sure that roster space could be created if necessary. . Would the world end if they traded JamesYong or RJ Hunter for a second round pick? Or just waived them?

[165bows]

The issue there to me is how do they get the players, FA vs. trade. Signing a big name next summer and then trading a modest amount of assets is totally ok in that they can legitimately do whatever they want with the AB/IT group and still be a very good team for a decade (transition from current group to Smart/Brown/17/18/19 picks), if they don't go and blow up most of those future draft assets in huge trades.

That's why I say they are ok going as is, playing a hard line on the trade market (ie, no so far to Butler) but getting a bit more free with the cap space (spending for a good but not great 30 year old). The major issue in that for me is balancing who they sign now with who they could sign later.

The whole point (competitively at least, vs marketing/financial) of maintaining the 50ish win conference finals type team, is it keeps them in the mix for the next big guys on the move. So do they take the bird in the hand (Horford, whoever 2017 brings) vs. potentially better ones in the bush later.

Edit - I guess my point is if we assume it's all a punt for the next four years, punting with Al Horford is just as good as punting any other way. It's the five year, $180M dollar deal after trading for a guy next summer that is a risky punt strategy.

Three really hard things for us to do in the current environment - contend now against a historic super-team, complete hardball trades for stars and attract superstars in free agency when our competitors offer superstar team-up opportunities. We're facing steep uphill climbs in each of those directions.

And punting to keep those low-probability scenarios comes with severe opportunity costs.

Running an outsource tank in BK and a high-end treadmill at home sounds nice in theory, but it has broken down thus far in practice. We don't value the young assets enough to give them prominent roles and responsibility, and we don't value the high-end treadmillers (glorified ham-and-eggers in BO parlance) enough to sacrifice the young assets to give them a bump.

Playing longball in the draft (Brown), hardball in trade and high roller in free agency is organizational schizophrenia. Trying to bake the cake, have it and eat it too.

This post should be framed and put in the RealGM Hall of Fame. Nailed it. Best post I've read in long time.

Actually disagree, there are 25 teams who would love to be doing the same thing.

[BannersOnly]

Except for Horford, Ainge has pretty much struck out so far in free agency. BTW the Lakers are reportedly interested in Zeller, so I doubt if he's playing for the QO next year.

Zeller is a stiff......let the Lakers have him.

[cellar-door]

Except for Horford, Ainge has pretty much struck out so far in free agency. BTW the Lakers are reportedly interested in Zeller, so I doubt if he's playing for the QO next year.

There were probably only 2 free agents that were significant upgrades for this team and made sense financially. One of them signed in GS and the other is our new starting center. Not signing a bad deal on a mediocre talent to play on our bench is Ainge's second best move after signing Horford.

[Homerclease]

I'm sure that roster space could be created if necessary. . Would the world end if they traded JamesYong or RJ Hunter for a second round pick? Or just waived them?

Why would you trade a guy you just took in the first round last year for a 2nd round pick? Young you could make the case for as he hasn't developed as we'd like even though he's only 20 years old, but no need to give up on Hunter so soon just to blow cap space on a guy the Celtics don't really need.

[Curmudgeon]

Why? To make roster space available for someone more valuable than Young or Hunter. If you had Anthony Bennnett, wouldn't you trade him for a second round pick?

What have Young or Hunter shown to deserve minutes on this team?

[cellar-door]

Why? To make roster space available for someone more valuable than Young or Hunter. If you had Anthony Bennnett, wouldn't you trade him for a second round pick?

What have Young or Hunter shown to deserve minutes on this team?

Nobody outside the top 10 guys plays significant minutes anyway. Why trade cheap bench guys with potential to clear room for more expensive guys who won't play?
There are very few if any Free Agents left who would crack our rotation for significant minutes. Keeping young guys in those spots costs us nothing really on the floor and helps us for possible trades and keeping cap flexibility next year.