RealGM

Homerclease wrote:Next offseason when the cap jumps again and the talent around him has gotten better is when i expect IT to be moved. He will still have 2 years left on his deal for dirt cheap and will have more value in a year than he does now

CollegeToPros wrote:You can't commit to Isaiah and Smart. Ainge loves Isaiah. So unless Marcus becomes a SG w/ Avery traded, there's no way Smart isn't dealt at some point.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

amory87 wrote:And now that he's had a taste of life as "the guy" I'm not sure how willing he'd be to take a step back, at least while he's in his prime.

SparringPartner wrote:

CollegeToPros wrote:You can't commit to Isaiah and Smart. Ainge loves Isaiah. So unless Marcus becomes a SG w/ Avery traded, there's no way Smart isn't dealt at some point.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

So Ainge doesn't love Smart. Are you aware of how loyal and sensitive NBA GM's are to there draft picks? I guess because Smart has had two rough years at 20 & 21 years old Ainge and Stevens are done with him.

I don't do this often, but I would guarantee you that Ainge has much more of an affinity to Marcus Smart then he does Isaiah Thomas. That will just have to play itself out.

Another Captain In The Moment, moment.

Heinsohn Truth wrote:I can't get behind trading him, at all. The dude loves being a Celtic. That means something, to me at least.

He's popular around the league and can hopefully be a real help with recruiting. I can't trade a guy who is both a really good player and a really good player who loves being a Celtic as much as he does. I know that makes me a bad GM, but I don't care.

I think trading him sends that message people feared with Danny before when he traded walker; no loyalty, etc. ripple effects.

IT stays.

OFWGKTA wrote:

SparringPartner wrote:

OFWGKTA wrote:The stupidity on this board is mind boggling this time of the year.

A little harsh don't you think? Probably 98% of the US population would think we're all pretty stupid for spending time this board, so I guess it's all relative.

OFWGKTA wrote:You trade IT for a non star and you might as well trade Bradley and Crowder for picks too.

Depends on the deal and how it all fits together with all the other possible scenario's. Only Ainge & company know this. We're just posting on a fan message board.

OFWGKTA wrote:Let's just press the reset button again so we can have our nice little hopes and dreams that whatever pick can even become as good as IT so we can then trade him for the next one.

Sure. If we don't land Durant, let's just assume we don't, Cleveland has this conference for the next 3 years. Atlanta won 60 games, then 48 games only to get beat up by the Cavs each year. They seem perfectly happy with that, but their *ucking Hawks fans. Here's the great thing, we don't have to tank, BRK is doing that for us. With that being said, it doesn't mean we can't take a slight step back to take 5 steps forward.

OFWGKTA wrote:Also, we can't sign Horford for 5 years.

Nice catch. 4 years. I think you got my point however.

OFWGKTA wrote:The Nuggets won 57 or 58 a games a couple short years ago with a worse team and coach in a harder conference at the time.

Who the f cares. We're not Nuggets fans. Were god damn Boston Celtics fans. Championship plans or bust!

OFWGKTA wrote:edit: And it's not remotely optimistic at all, imagine David Lee never existed, you don't think adding Horford and Middleton to this team couldn't add 5-7 wins at the very least?

I DON'T care about 5-7 wins. I care about winning chips and we only have 1 in 30 year, so if getting Horford and Middleton lead to #18 then so be it. Not sure that's the case without KD.

-A little harsh yes

-The point is, unless you're trading IT for a star, it makes little sense to hold on to two high end support players in Bradley and Crowder when Bradley's contract expires at the same time as IT and Crowder would be lining up to be a FA by the time the team is ready to go in this scenario.

-My original point was there are moves that can be made without getting a superstar that can vastly improve this team and continue to have the same flexibility to improve further. I'm not in favor of Horford at the max generally.

-Again, that was to prove your notion of my proposed team approaching 60 wins being absurd wrong. You also just proved it wrong again by mentioning the Hawks.

-It's not about the 5-7 wins. When you have players at such steals of contracts such as IT, Crowder, and AB you should be trying to add to that, not subtract them. If they were free agents this year, they probably all get about 15 mil per year. You won't get players as good as them at a price close to what we're paying now for a long time with the new salary caps raise, not including rookie deals obviously. This is not the year to abandon the current trajectory we're on. We have the 17 BRK pick which will undoubtedly be top 5 in a stronger draft, and a much more potent free agency pool next year. Let's just go along with my scenario and say the Kings suck yet again next year, I think they'd be about ready to trade Cousins by the deadline. Add Cousins to my imaginary Celtics and that team is without a doubt a contender. Punting on our key guys now just gives us less avenues towards becoming champs again, not more.

reload141 wrote:Would need to see improvement from Smart before deciding anything, but right now he is far and away our best player, and you don't just trade your best player UNLESS you are getting a better player in the deal. Plain and simple.

SparringPartner wrote:

reload141 wrote:Would need to see improvement from Smart before deciding anything, but right now he is far and away our best player, and you don't just trade your best player UNLESS you are getting a better player in the deal. Plain and simple.

You could argue that IT has (Please Use More Appropriate Word) Smarts growth at the expense of a few extra wins a year and the same 1st round exits. I would love a lineup of;

PG - Smart
SG - Bradley
SF - Crowder
PF - Amir
C - Olynyk

6th - IT
7th - ET
8th - Sullinger
9th - Jonas

That's a 9 man lineup with balance. The starting unit knocks the opposing teams starting 5 off their game and that lingers for them throughout the game. A punch in the mouth if you will. Are we scoring 30 pts that first quarter, no, but who the f cares if its a better formula for long-term winning.