Andrew McCeltic wrote:Glad we passed on Kawhi, it was too big a risk - but we were overconfident about the returning group.
Are we really sure Celtics "passed on Kawhi"?
When I look at what Spurs got, we don't have anyone comparable to DeRozan in terms of being a #1 or #2 on a team that still wants to compete in the playoffs. It was either give up Kyrie (not gonna happen) or a healthy Hayward (he was coming off surgery). They probably didn't want Horford due to age and overlap with LMA. Brown wasn't ready to take on that role even after coming off a good playoff run.
I can't remember if the trade was before Murray's injury.. I'd guess that the Spurs would have retooled around Brown, tried him out in a scoring role (he's five times better as a "prospect" than Poeltl, and he's been compared to Derozan as a player without fluid offensive instincts who will have to develop that part of his game gradually), maybe made other moves. They would have kept Danny Green, and we'd have matched Kawhi's 17 million with something like Jaylen, Morris, Rozier.. That would have been a better deal, probably, than the one they got.
We would've had way too much risk going into the summer, and chemistry issues this year with Hayward's injury recovery. Kyrie/Smart/healthy Hayward/Kawhi/Horford could be a contender, or Tatum starts in place of Smart or Hayward, but.. if you think one mercurial star player is tough to read..