The (Where Ainges Fear to) Trade Thread, 2016-17 (1.0)

[OFWGKTA]

If the Kings are not willing to trade Cousins, then that must mean that WCS must be available. Either that or Divac is trying to form a team that sends out three or four centers to start a game.

What makes Sacramento a terrible trade partner is that you probably have to send a player to Sacramento. I mean we got some good nice kids on this team, and if Danny has any feelings whatsoever, then there is no way that he could send a player like Rozier or Hunter to Sacramento.

I would trade the Clippers pick for WCS, maybe even add a Boston pick protected.

It's alright man they have a good coach now. It will take some time but Joeger will get the players on the right path....i think.

Idk George Karl won a lot of games with a really bad Nuggets team. Cousins/management screwed up that tenure pretty quickly. I would rate him as one of maybe 5 coaches in the NBA that is an actual difference maker. Not enough to make a difference in Sactown. Not sure they go .500 even after several years of Pops.

George Karl did not give a single **** while coaching in Sac from the very beginning. Maybe he was once good, but those days are long in the past.

[SmartWentCrazy]

I'm gonna continue to be very okay with not giving up that third pick for Noel unless they threw in the Lakers pick. Noel to me is a C+, B- prospect. I'd have thrown in another pick or other filler to get LA's pick but that would have been my breaking point in negotiations with Philly as well.

Noel came into the league as damaged goods, only has one year before you have to worry about extensions and/or qualifiting offers and that Lakers pick is still protected next year, so there's a chance we wouldn't see it until 2018.

I don't think the offer of Noel, Covington and the the two picks was a bad one at all. Definitely shows they were serious about getting the third pick but I also see an overvaluing of Noel. If he has showed as offensive potential, I'd be all over it but it's not there. The two picks also weren't a fit for needs.

But, can't wait to see what shakes loose after free agency. Hopefully we can revisit Butler at least. Would of been nice to have a carrot to dangle at Durant but better late than never, I guess if we found some middle ground there.

With all due respect, but Noel + LAL '17 pick is crazy. That pick alone is probably worth more than Kris Dunn, Jaylen Brown or whoever Philadelphia would have chosen. I would rather have a shot at Jayson Tatum/Harry Giles/Mark Fultz/Dennis Smith jr/De'Aaron Fox/Jarrett Allen/Josh Jackson/Frank Ntilika/etc. than the prospects available at 3 this year.

I've watched at least 70% of Noel's games the past two years and he's a (defensive) stud. You guys would absolutely love his attitude and work ethic on the defensive end, plus he's from Boston. Philadelphia was really really poor the last two years, but the defense was quite decent a years ago when he played as a center full time. On the offensive end he's completely reliable from lobs and dishes, but he has some underestimated passing skills and vision.

Also, don't forget Noel was the consensus number one pick in the draft, an injury made him slip to 6. Kentucky absolutely collapsed when Nerlens Noel tore his ACL.

Noel + LAL17 is too high, but Noel + filler is too low. Many experts have reported/deduced that Noel had the trade value of a late lottery pick (including Tom Moore recently), and the problem is that Philly has no good asset to make up the difference.

Just as Celtics fans know all too well, a bunch of nickels do not equal a quarter. RoCo and the two late firsts really don't move the needle one way or the other for us.

I love Noel, and he's a great piece, but he's never going to be a top 3 (or even 4) guy on a championship contending team. The Celtics simply cannot afford to trade a potential top 3 piece for a complimentary player and change given the current talent on their roster.

[Kolkmania]

I'm gonna continue to be very okay with not giving up that third pick for Noel unless they threw in the Lakers pick. Noel to me is a C+, B- prospect. I'd have thrown in another pick or other filler to get LA's pick but that would have been my breaking point in negotiations with Philly as well.

Noel came into the league as damaged goods, only has one year before you have to worry about extensions and/or qualifiting offers and that Lakers pick is still protected next year, so there's a chance we wouldn't see it until 2018.

I don't think the offer of Noel, Covington and the the two picks was a bad one at all. Definitely shows they were serious about getting the third pick but I also see an overvaluing of Noel. If he has showed as offensive potential, I'd be all over it but it's not there. The two picks also weren't a fit for needs.

But, can't wait to see what shakes loose after free agency. Hopefully we can revisit Butler at least. Would of been nice to have a carrot to dangle at Durant but better late than never, I guess if we found some middle ground there.

With all due respect, but Noel + LAL '17 pick is crazy. That pick alone is probably worth more than Kris Dunn, Jaylen Brown or whoever Philadelphia would have chosen. I would rather have a shot at Jayson Tatum/Harry Giles/Mark Fultz/Dennis Smith jr/De'Aaron Fox/Jarrett Allen/Josh Jackson/Frank Ntilika/etc. than the prospects available at 3 this year.

I've watched at least 70% of Noel's games the past two years and he's a (defensive) stud. You guys would absolutely love his attitude and work ethic on the defensive end, plus he's from Boston. Philadelphia was really really poor the last two years, but the defense was quite decent a years ago when he played as a center full time. On the offensive end he's completely reliable from lobs and dishes, but he has some underestimated passing skills and vision.

Also, don't forget Noel was the consensus number one pick in the draft, an injury made him slip to 6. Kentucky absolutely collapsed when Nerlens Noel tore his ACL.

Noel + LAL17 is too high, but Noel + filler is too low. Many experts have reported/deduced that Noel had the trade value of a late lottery pick (including Tom Moore recently), and the problem is that Philly has no good asset to make up the difference.

Just as Celtics fans know all too well, a bunch of nickels do not equal a quarter. RoCo and the two late firsts really don't move the needle one way or the other for us.

I love Noel, and he's a great piece, but he's never going to be a top 3 (or even 4) guy on a championship contending team. The Celtics simply cannot afford to trade a potential top 3 piece for a complimentary player and change given the current talent on their roster.

I agree about Noel's actual value, that's probably the reason why he is still in Philadelphia. Overvaluing your own prospects is a common thing. But I do think that Noel could be a contributor to a championship contending team, what would Cleveland be without Tristan Thompson's ability to switch the P&R for example. Apart from Thompson's offensive rebounding skills Noel is already on the same level as him.

[Kolkmania]

Bulls:
Out: Jimmy Butler
In: Jahlil Okafor, Robert Covington, Terry Rozier

Celtics
Out: Nets '17 pick, Terry Rozier
In: Jimmy Butler

76ers
Out: Jahlil Okafor, Robert Covington
In: Nets '17 pick

Could this be something to start with? Nets '17 and Rozier for Jimmy Butler seems like a fair return and fits the Celtics time scheme better than waiting for a prospect to develop from the Nets pick.

[Curmudgeon]

I'm not passing on a chance at Harry Giles or Jason Tatum for Jimmy Butler. Butler is a nice player but he's no superstar. I'm not shure why folks around here treat him like one.

[ConstableGeneva]

I'm not passing on a chance at Harry Giles or Jason Tatum for Jimmy Butler. Butler is a nice player but he's no superstar. I'm not shure why folks around here treat him like one.

Kolk might be a Sixers fan IINM. I like Jimmy but not for the 2017 Nets pick. That would be an overpay. If reports are to believed, Ainge had no intention of including that pick for Butler. Good for him.

[eitanr]

I think Danny waits for a caver. He almost got one in Cleveland if they lost title. Love would've been on the market quickly and Griffin would've wanted a swift resolve. I think by being a tad patient now and waiting for free agency to take more shape Butler and Millsaps value will decrease. If Horford/Gasol/Noah leave their respective teams in FA those teams really need to consider getting younger and Danny holds the most assets right now

Meanwhile he csn wait a tad longer for Griffin and Cousins. If the season starts and the Kings and clippers are off to an underwhelming start you have to figure those 2 also will be on the market.

[Kolkmania]

I'm not passing on a chance at Harry Giles or Jason Tatum for Jimmy Butler. Butler is a nice player but he's no superstar. I'm not shure why folks around here treat him like one.

Kolk might be a Sixers fan IINM. I like Jimmy but not for the 2017 Nets pick. That would be an overpay. If reports are to believed, Ainge had no intention of including that pick for Butler. Good for him.

Can't classify myself as a huge Sixers fan (live in Europe) but I do follow them with more than average interest. If I was the GM of the Celtics, the Nets pick was (nearly) untouchable as well, so I get your reaction. Was just curious since I've seen some Celtics posters that aren't patient enough to wait for another prospect to develop.

[Edug27]

With Teague gone... If Horford leaves and they strike out on Dwight... Do the Hawks run it back with the given squad... or look to start over behind a young PG?

[DarkAzcura]

No way. Would be 2nd in the East. Seems pretty clear that people don't realize how good Middleton or Rubio are.

I realize how good they are, but that team is definitely missing the playoffs in the East. We made the playoffs on the backs of IT, Bradley, and Crowder..getting rid of two of them for Rubio and Middleton doesn't really do anything. It's a much worse team, IMO.

You lose a good chunk of scoring shifting down from IT to Middleton and AB to Rubio, but that's mitigated by a big jump in playmaking (Rubio a great passer/facilitator and Middleton a major upgrade on AB) and defense.

And thinking long-term, Rubio and Middleton are easier to work with. Younger than IT/AB respectively. Both have an extra year on their deals. Both are less dependent on prime quickness for effectiveness given their well-above average size for their positions. Both are more complete 2-way players (can make an argument w/ Rubio, but he's a better offensive player than IT is a defensive one).

I could actually buy them being a better fit if we added Durant and Horford. I actually think that would be pretty amazing from a balance standpoint, though I still question whether Middleton is dynamic enough a scorer to take over in times where Durant is cold or being double teamed. I have complete and utter faith that IT would be great in that role, but Rubio and Middleton would be interesting to see on a Durant and Horford squad. As is, though? I would rather keep IT and AB everyday..or at least IT.

[Slartibartfast]

I realize how good they are, but that team is definitely missing the playoffs in the East. We made the playoffs on the backs of IT, Bradley, and Crowder..getting rid of two of them for Rubio and Middleton doesn't really do anything. It's a much worse team, IMO. Middleton is good, but he's not anywhere close to being as dynamic a scorer as IT, and Rubio doesn't really have anyone to pass to except Middleton. Defense would probably fall to top 10 at best, and the offense would fall into the bottom 10.

Middleton is just as good offensively as IT and also plays D. Rubio is the defender Bradley is without the rep and, though he can't shoot, a good offensive player regardless. We'd be better than last season and with an offensive star that should be able to sustain for longer than Thomas. More years tied under the guys as well.

Thread kinda getting sidetracked, though. Sorry.

Middleton averages 18 per game per 36. IT averages 25. It would take a huge leap of faith from the Celtics' organization to expect Middleton to be able to up his production to IT's level while maintaining efficiency. I like Middleton a lot, but he's not anywhere close to the level of IT on offense (or at least he hasn't proven it yet). Middleton has a lot of potential as a two way player, and I believe he could be a 20-5-5 guy in a different situation, but he just isn't dynamic enough to be the singular focus on offense. Remember IT is the guy who has been averaging about 27 PPG and 8 APG per 100 possessions since his second year in the league. Middleton only just hit 26 PPG and 5 APG per 100 possessions this past season.

But yeah, if this isn't the thread for it then so be it.

You are absolutely right that IT is the better volume scorer - one of the best in the league. But Middleton is the better shooter and an emerging #2/#3 option shot-creator. I think there's a compelling argument to be made that Middleton is a better secondary option than IT is a primary option and that IT isn't all that great as a secondary option because he can't scale up any other part of his game when you scale down his offensive usage.

We're going to need a better primary option than IT (not necessarily a better scorer. Could be someone who can score at comparable volume AND contribute at a high level in other ways) if we want to contend. Middleton on the other hand would be just fine as the 2nd/3rd banana.

[Darth Celtic]

Bulls:
Out: Jimmy Butler
In: Jahlil Okafor, Robert Covington, Terry Rozier

Celtics
Out: Nets '17 pick, Terry Rozier
In: Jimmy Butler

76ers
Out: Jahlil Okafor, Robert Covington
In: Nets '17 pick

Could this be something to start with? Nets '17 and Rozier for Jimmy Butler seems like a fair return and fits the Celtics time scheme better than waiting for a prospect to develop from the Nets pick.

we'd have to give up more, and i don't think okafor is worth the 2017 nets pick, but butler is.

We could send future picks and a player like rozier for okafor, and send him to bulls along with the nets pick and bradley, and you might have a deal.

[DarkAzcura]

Middleton is just as good offensively as IT and also plays D. Rubio is the defender Bradley is without the rep and, though he can't shoot, a good offensive player regardless. We'd be better than last season and with an offensive star that should be able to sustain for longer than Thomas. More years tied under the guys as well.

Thread kinda getting sidetracked, though. Sorry.

Middleton averages 18 per game per 36. IT averages 25. It would take a huge leap of faith from the Celtics' organization to expect Middleton to be able to up his production to IT's level while maintaining efficiency. I like Middleton a lot, but he's not anywhere close to the level of IT on offense (or at least he hasn't proven it yet). Middleton has a lot of potential as a two way player, and I believe he could be a 20-5-5 guy in a different situation, but he just isn't dynamic enough to be the singular focus on offense. Remember IT is the guy who has been averaging about 27 PPG and 8 APG per 100 possessions since his second year in the league. Middleton only just hit 26 PPG and 5 APG per 100 possessions this past season.

But yeah, if this isn't the thread for it then so be it.

You are absolutely right that IT is the better volume scorer - one of the best in the league. But Middleton is the better shooter and an emerging #2/#3 option shot-creator. I think there's a compelling argument to be made that Middleton is a better secondary option than IT is a primary option and that IT isn't all that great as a secondary option because he can't scale up any other part of his game when you scale down his offensive usage.

We're going to need a better primary option than IT (not necessarily a better scorer. Could be someone who can score at comparable volume AND contribute at a high level in other ways) if we want to contend. Middleton on the other hand would be just fine as the 2nd/3rd banana.

I replied to a message above, haha. I could buy into that reasoning if Durant or George or someone were on this team..even then I'm just a little hesitant, though. Seeing Kyrie go off because they were doubling Lebron while watching Curry completely struggle because Klay and Draymond really aren't dynamic enough to score on their own..really started to seal this belief for me. Maybe Middleton is better in isolation than I give him credit for. I could buy into that if the reasoning is still to add a top tier scorer to this team. IT + AB for Middleton + Rubio in a vacuum essentially with no real idea how the first tier scorer is coming in? Eh. My worry is that basically..we make a deal like that..don't get a first tier scorer right away..and then slip into the 38-43 win territory which I think would definitely happen. We become way less attractive in FA even if the fit may theoretically be better for a superstar to jump onto. You know what I mean?

[Slartibartfast]

I realize how good they are, but that team is definitely missing the playoffs in the East. We made the playoffs on the backs of IT, Bradley, and Crowder..getting rid of two of them for Rubio and Middleton doesn't really do anything. It's a much worse team, IMO.

You lose a good chunk of scoring shifting down from IT to Middleton and AB to Rubio, but that's mitigated by a big jump in playmaking (Rubio a great passer/facilitator and Middleton a major upgrade on AB) and defense.

And thinking long-term, Rubio and Middleton are easier to work with. Younger than IT/AB respectively. Both have an extra year on their deals. Both are less dependent on prime quickness for effectiveness given their well-above average size for their positions. Both are more complete 2-way players (can make an argument w/ Rubio, but he's a better offensive player than IT is a defensive one).

I could actually buy them being a better fit if we added Durant and Horford. I actually think that would be pretty amazing from a balance standpoint, though I still question whether Middleton is dynamic enough a scorer to take over in times where Durant is cold or being double teamed. I have complete and utter faith that IT would be great in that role, but Rubio and Middleton would be interesting to see on a Durant and Horford squad. As is, though? I would rather keep IT and AB everyday..or at least IT.

You'd want to add a good bench combo guard for sure. But the league is stuffed to the gills with poor man's ITs. We've got 2 guys with that type of skillset already in Rozier and Jackson.

I think the contract/age/style angles are really important to factor in as well. 3 year window over 2, an extra year of prime in each case, and better games/bodies/approaches for aging.

[Edug27]

Bulls:
Out: Jimmy Butler
In: Jahlil Okafor, Robert Covington, Terry Rozier

Celtics
Out: Nets '17 pick, Terry Rozier
In: Jimmy Butler

76ers
Out: Jahlil Okafor, Robert Covington
In: Nets '17 pick

Could this be something to start with? Nets '17 and Rozier for Jimmy Butler seems like a fair return and fits the Celtics time scheme better than waiting for a prospect to develop from the Nets pick.

If the Bulls wanted Okafor, I think this trade would have already been done on draft night.

[DarkAzcura]

You lose a good chunk of scoring shifting down from IT to Middleton and AB to Rubio, but that's mitigated by a big jump in playmaking (Rubio a great passer/facilitator and Middleton a major upgrade on AB) and defense.

And thinking long-term, Rubio and Middleton are easier to work with. Younger than IT/AB respectively. Both have an extra year on their deals. Both are less dependent on prime quickness for effectiveness given their well-above average size for their positions. Both are more complete 2-way players (can make an argument w/ Rubio, but he's a better offensive player than IT is a defensive one).

I could actually buy them being a better fit if we added Durant and Horford. I actually think that would be pretty amazing from a balance standpoint, though I still question whether Middleton is dynamic enough a scorer to take over in times where Durant is cold or being double teamed. I have complete and utter faith that IT would be great in that role, but Rubio and Middleton would be interesting to see on a Durant and Horford squad. As is, though? I would rather keep IT and AB everyday..or at least IT.

You'd want to add a good bench combo guard for sure. But the league is stuffed to the gills with poor man's ITs. We've got 2 guys with that type of skillset already in Rozier and Jackson.

I think the contract/age/style angles are really important to factor in as well. 3 year window over 2, an extra year of prime in each case, and better games/bodies/approaches for aging.

We are one post out of sync in the trade off so I'll copy and paste my last post with some additional..

I could buy into that reasoning if Durant or George or someone were on this team..even then I'm just a little hesitant, though. Seeing Kyrie go off because they were doubling Lebron while watching Curry completely struggle because Klay and Draymond really aren't dynamic enough to score on their own..really started to seal this belief for me. Maybe Middleton is better in isolation than I give him credit for. I could buy into that if the reasoning is still to add a top tier scorer to this team. IT + AB for Middleton + Rubio in a vacuum essentially with no real idea how the first tier scorer is coming in? Eh. My worry is that basically..we make a deal like that..don't get a first tier scorer right away..and then slip into the 38-43 win territory which I think would definitely happen. We become way less attractive in FA even if the fit may theoretically be better for a superstar to jump onto. You know what I mean?

Essentially, the way I see it is..we currently are a ~50 win club with one all star and another first team all defender. I know people have doubts on selling this roster to big FAs, but considering we have a meeting with some of the best free agents available currently, I think players are paying attention. As long as we have these guys, we have a solid sell to FAs in 2016 and 2017. Bring Middleton and Rubio in before you bring in the top tier guy, and the Celtics would be really risking their message in FA if they fall apart (~40 wins) next season. Now you have no all stars and no first team defenders (maybe Crowder but unlikely if we are at around 40 wins..). That's my main worry.

Something like a Middleton and Rubio move seems like more of a shakeup move after you realize your core isn't going to work (i.e. IT/Bradley/Durant not meshing offensively).

[Slartibartfast]

I could buy into that reasoning if Durant or George or someone were on this team..even then I'm just a little hesitant, though. Seeing Kyrie go off because they were doubling Lebron while watching Curry completely struggle because Klay and Draymond really aren't dynamic enough to score on their own..really started to seal this belief for me. Maybe Middleton is better in isolation than I give him credit for. I could buy into that if the reasoning is still to add a top tier scorer to this team. IT + AB for Middleton + Rubio in a vacuum essentially with no real idea how the first tier scorer is coming in? Eh. My worry is that basically..we make a deal like that..don't get a first tier scorer right away..and then slip into the 38-43 win territory which I think would definitely happen. We become way less attractive in FA even if the fit may theoretically be better for a superstar to jump onto. You know what I mean?

Essentially, the way I see it is..we currently are a ~50 win club with one all star and another first team all defender. I know people have doubts on selling this roster to big FAs, but considering we have a meeting with some of the best free agents available currently, I think players are paying attention. As long as we have these guys, we have a solid sell to FAs in 2016 and 2017. Bring Middleton and Rubio in before you bring in the top tier guy, and the Celtics would be really risking their message in FA if they fall apart (~40 wins) next season. Now you have no all stars and no first team defenders (maybe Crowder but unlikely if we are at around 40 wins..). That's my main worry.

Something like a Middleton and Rubio move seems like more of a shakeup move after you realize your core isn't going to work (i.e. IT/Bradley/Durant not meshing offensively).

I'm all for leveraging IT/AB's high profile to try and land Durant. I'm just pessimistic on that front and don't really see the point of maintaining a holding pattern around those two guys for a whole year so they can try again in 2017 if we strike out this year.

Don't really see the risk of trading them if/after Durant goes elsewhere.

Your certainty that we'd slip into 38-43 wins is based on what exactly? The scoring drop? That's pretty easy to band-aid fix. We have one of the worst scoring frontcourts in basketball expiring. Swap out Sully for a one-year Pau extravaganza and boom, you go from a .48 TS% 10/8.2 guy as your 2nd/3rd option to a .53 TS% 17/11/4 guy.

And we could play KO and other offensive bigs more minutes because our defensive guard rotation would be upgraded massively. AB and IT had the worst raw defensive plus-minuses on the team last year of anyone in the regular rotation. Only James Young was worse on the deep bench.

[DarkAzcura]

I could buy into that reasoning if Durant or George or someone were on this team..even then I'm just a little hesitant, though. Seeing Kyrie go off because they were doubling Lebron while watching Curry completely struggle because Klay and Draymond really aren't dynamic enough to score on their own..really started to seal this belief for me. Maybe Middleton is better in isolation than I give him credit for. I could buy into that if the reasoning is still to add a top tier scorer to this team. IT + AB for Middleton + Rubio in a vacuum essentially with no real idea how the first tier scorer is coming in? Eh. My worry is that basically..we make a deal like that..don't get a first tier scorer right away..and then slip into the 38-43 win territory which I think would definitely happen. We become way less attractive in FA even if the fit may theoretically be better for a superstar to jump onto. You know what I mean?

Essentially, the way I see it is..we currently are a ~50 win club with one all star and another first team all defender. I know people have doubts on selling this roster to big FAs, but considering we have a meeting with some of the best free agents available currently, I think players are paying attention. As long as we have these guys, we have a solid sell to FAs in 2016 and 2017. Bring Middleton and Rubio in before you bring in the top tier guy, and the Celtics would be really risking their message in FA if they fall apart (~40 wins) next season. Now you have no all stars and no first team defenders (maybe Crowder but unlikely if we are at around 40 wins..). That's my main worry.

Something like a Middleton and Rubio move seems like more of a shakeup move after you realize your core isn't going to work (i.e. IT/Bradley/Durant not meshing offensively).

I'm all for leveraging IT/AB's high profile to try and land Durant. I'm just pessimistic on that front and don't really see the point of maintaining a holding pattern around those two guys for a whole year so they can try again in 2017 if we strike out this year.

Don't really see the risk of trading them if/after Durant goes elsewhere.

Your certainty that we'd slip into 38-43 wins is based on what exactly? The scoring drop? That's pretty easy to band-aid fix. We have one of the worst scoring frontcourts in basketball expiring. Swap out Sully for a one-year Pau extravaganza and boom, you go from a .48 TS% 10/8.2 guy as your 2nd/3rd option to a .53 TS% 17/11/4 guy.

And we could play KO and other offensive bigs more minutes because our defensive guard rotation would be upgraded massively. AB and IT had the worst raw defensive plus-minuses on the team last year of anyone in the regular rotation. Only James Young was worse on the deep bench.

It's not just a scoring drop. I just have really significant doubts that Middleton could handle being the singular force on offense like IT has proven capable of. If he can't draw the same attention at similar levels of success, everyone else's job will become even harder than it was with IT on the team. It's the domino effect. To do what IT was able to do (bring this incredibly offensively challenged core to a top 12 offense) is not easy. I saw this team sitting in the bottom 10 of offenses with guys like Rondo, Pierce, and KG on this team. Believe it or not, but our offense was the best it has been in almost 6-7 years. That's scary for me, and it points out how difficult it is to really maintain a quality offense in general. That's why I am so high on IT in general. What he has done for this team is incredibly impressive on the offensive side of the ball, and it's more than just scoring.

While I do think Middleton could be a 20-5-5 guy on this team, I think our offense falls to the bottom 10 unless he actually shows the ability to handle double teams and the constant attention of being the only legitimate option. Now the question is..what happens to the defense? It is top 5 currently. Does Rubio and Middleton make it better or make it worse? It may remain the same.

But yes, maybe Pau could mitigate the loss more and keep the offense sitting in the top 12..if he doesn't decline. Overall, it's a gamble, and a gamble I'm not sure I would be willing to take over the next year without adding a top tier scoring option from the get go.

So on one end, you have a guarantee of sorts of having a top 10 offense and defense, while the other situation is probably a top 10 defense and bottom 10 offense. If you don't think the offense would fall to the bottom 10, that's cool and I respect that. I just can't see it, and the extra moves to bring us back up to that level (signing Pau or maybe a Horford) don't feel totally worth it long term. Heck maybe Stevens is even a better coach than I think, and he could make it work and maintain. I don't know.

By the way I really wish we got Valentine.

[Slartibartfast]

It's not just a scoring drop. I just have really significant doubts that Middleton could handle being the singular force on offense like IT has proven capable of. If he can't draw the same attention at similar levels of success, everyone else's job will become even harder than it was with IT on the team. It's the domino effect. To do what IT was able to do (bring this incredibly offensively challenged core to a top 12 offense) is not easy. I saw this team sitting in the bottom 10 of offenses with guys like Rondo, Pierce, and KG on this team. Believe it or not, but our offense was the best it has been in almost 6-7 years. That's scary for me, and it points out how difficult it is to really maintain a quality offense in general. That's why I am so high on IT in general. What he has done for this team is incredibly impressive on the offensive side of the ball, and it's more than just scoring.

While I do think Middleton could be a 20-5-5 guy on this team, I think our offense falls to the bottom 10 unless he actually shows the ability to handle double teams and the constant attention of being the only legitimate option. Now the question is..what happens to the defense? It is top 5 currently. Does Rubio and Middleton make it better or make it worse? It may remain the same.

But yes, maybe Pau could mitigate the loss more and keep the offense sitting in the top 12..if he doesn't decline. Overall, it's a gamble, and a gamble I'm not sure I would be willing to take over the next year without adding a top tier scoring option from the get go.

So on one end, you have a guarantee of sorts of having a top 10 offense and defense, while the other situation is probably a top 10 defense and bottom 10 offense. If you don't think the offense would fall to the bottom 10, that's cool and I respect that. I just can't see it, and the extra moves to bring us back up to that level (signing Pau or maybe a Horford) don't feel totally worth it long term. Heck maybe Stevens is even a better coach than I think, and he could make it work and maintain. I don't know.

By the way I really wish we got Valentine.

Look at what Chicago did in 14/15. Rose was utter garbage and missed half the year. Kirk Hinrich or Tony Snell started for half the year. Joakim Noah (outrageously, hideously bad on offense that year) was a fixture in their starting line-up.

Jimmy Butler put up a practically identical per 36 line to Middleton with 19/5/3.

Bottom 10 offense right?

Try 11th overall. How did they manage that? Why, with a Pau Gasol band-aid at the 5 and a garbage heap scoring 6th man grab in Aaron Brooks.

Now I'm not especially keen on imitating the 14/15 50 win Chicago Bulls, but with good coaching, good defensive pieces and a front office with a decent eye for role players, 45-50 wins isn't all that hard to reach in the East.

[DarkAzcura]

It's not just a scoring drop. I just have really significant doubts that Middleton could handle being the singular force on offense like IT has proven capable of. If he can't draw the same attention at similar levels of success, everyone else's job will become even harder than it was with IT on the team. It's the domino effect. To do what IT was able to do (bring this incredibly offensively challenged core to a top 12 offense) is not easy. I saw this team sitting in the bottom 10 of offenses with guys like Rondo, Pierce, and KG on this team. Believe it or not, but our offense was the best it has been in almost 6-7 years. That's scary for me, and it points out how difficult it is to really maintain a quality offense in general. That's why I am so high on IT in general. What he has done for this team is incredibly impressive on the offensive side of the ball, and it's more than just scoring.

While I do think Middleton could be a 20-5-5 guy on this team, I think our offense falls to the bottom 10 unless he actually shows the ability to handle double teams and the constant attention of being the only legitimate option. Now the question is..what happens to the defense? It is top 5 currently. Does Rubio and Middleton make it better or make it worse? It may remain the same.

But yes, maybe Pau could mitigate the loss more and keep the offense sitting in the top 12..if he doesn't decline. Overall, it's a gamble, and a gamble I'm not sure I would be willing to take over the next year without adding a top tier scoring option from the get go.

So on one end, you have a guarantee of sorts of having a top 10 offense and defense, while the other situation is probably a top 10 defense and bottom 10 offense. If you don't think the offense would fall to the bottom 10, that's cool and I respect that. I just can't see it, and the extra moves to bring us back up to that level (signing Pau or maybe a Horford) don't feel totally worth it long term. Heck maybe Stevens is even a better coach than I think, and he could make it work and maintain. I don't know.

By the way I really wish we got Valentine.

Look at what Chicago did in 14/15. Rose was utter garbage and missed half the year. Kirk Hinrich or Tony Snell started for half the year. Joakim Noah (outrageously, hideously bad on offense that year) was a fixture in their starting line-up.

Jimmy Butler put up a practically identical per 36 line to Middleton with 19/5/3.

Bottom 10 offense right?

Try 11th overall. How did they manage that? Why, with a Pau Gasol band-aid at the 5 and a garbage heap scoring 6th man grab in Aaron Brooks.

Now I'm not especially keen on imitating the 14/15 50 win Chicago Bulls, but with good coaching, good defensive pieces and a front office with a decent eye for role players, 45-50 wins isn't all that hard to reach in the East.

The East is way better now though. You are right about that Bulls roster, I would not want to imitate them, and they were more a product of a weak conference than anything else. Plus Gasol is going to be two years older now. He could hit a sudden decline at any moment. I just don't see the point in general. We are admitting that it is a sideways move at best in the short term. I understand your long term view, but I'm not sure it's worth the risk in the short term when we are trying to lure free agents this summer and next. You think differently than I do, that's all there really is to it. You think it is worth the risk, and I don't.