Moderators: bisme37, Darthlukey, canman1971, Shak_Celts, Parliament10, shackles10, snowman, Froob
hugepatsfan wrote:Why wouldn't POR just keep Ingram for the same reasons you guys want to trade Brown for Ingram?
UHar_Vinnie wrote:If you don't lean forward while hugging a dude, you are gonna have a wiener touching incident. You know this.
cl2117 wrote:My 5 team, way too moving parts, but I still like it offseason carousel:
BOS in: #3 (Miller), Simons, DFS, Boucher, Mills
BOS out: Brown, Brogdon, Pritchard, Gallo, #35
Why: Big shake up, take a swing on Miller, shore up frontcourt with DFS/Boucher, Simons/Mills backfill for Brogdon/Pritchard. Save lots of long-term money, potentially increase team's ceiling.
POR in: Brown
POR out: #3, Simons
Why: Grab running mate for Dame/Jerami.
BKN in: #13, #35, Beasley
BKN out: DFS, #22, Mills
Why: Sell high(ish) on DFS to consolidate and move up in the draft from #22. Or alternatively look at it as moving back from #22 to #35 to warrant #13 for Beasley.
TOR in: #17, #22, Pritchard, Gallo
TOR out: #13, Boucher
Why: Move back from #13 to pick up 2nd draft pick in early 20's. Move from surplus of PF's to add PG who can shoot and take flyer on Gallo's health.
LAL in: Brogdon
LAL out: #17, Beasley
Why: Add firepower for LeBron/AD.
Would be more than happy to swing Boucher/Mills to Portland for #23 if they wanted immediate depth. C's save even more money, makes it even easier to bring back Grant and let a couple young guys fill those spots (#23/Davison).
cl2117 wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:Why wouldn't POR just keep Ingram for the same reasons you guys want to trade Brown for Ingram?
They 100% would if they liked him better. I've got Brown>Ingram by a relatively slim margin, but Ingram comes with the extra year on his deal so he's probably more appealing to Blazers in case things blow up in their face and they want to blow it up after only 1 year.
Larry_Russell wrote:cl2117 wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:Why wouldn't POR just keep Ingram for the same reasons you guys want to trade Brown for Ingram?
They 100% would if they liked him better. I've got Brown>Ingram by a relatively slim margin, but Ingram comes with the extra year on his deal so he's probably more appealing to Blazers in case things blow up in their face and they want to blow it up after only 1 year.
But I am not sure Pelicans offer ingram for the #3 and Simons.
I feel like they would want more...Brown is the more gettable piece and it is up to Boston to add more value to get to Ingram
rown and Pritch to Portland
Brogdon, Gallo and Kornet to the Lakers
#3, #17, Boston future 1st (protected) and Beasley to Pelicans
Ingram, Vanderbilt and Simons to Boston
Simons/Smart
Ingram/White
Tatum
Vanderbilt/Grant
Timelord/Horford
UHar_Vinnie wrote:If you don't lean forward while hugging a dude, you are gonna have a wiener touching incident. You know this.
hugepatsfan wrote:I'd do Brown/Smart for Ingram. You get Smart's playmaking and Brown's scoring wrapped up into one player.
White/Ingram/Tatum/Horford/RWilliams
Ideally then you try to use Brogdon's salary and picks for a starting PF to replace Horford. Then you're cooking with gas.
watsonthedragon wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:I'd do Brown/Smart for Ingram. You get Smart's playmaking and Brown's scoring wrapped up into one player.
White/Ingram/Tatum/Horford/RWilliams
Ideally then you try to use Brogdon's salary and picks for a starting PF to replace Horford. Then you're cooking with gas.
Love BI but you may overrating him slightly...
GoCeltics123 wrote:watsonthedragon wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:I'd do Brown/Smart for Ingram. You get Smart's playmaking and Brown's scoring wrapped up into one player.
White/Ingram/Tatum/Horford/RWilliams
Ideally then you try to use Brogdon's salary and picks for a starting PF to replace Horford. Then you're cooking with gas.
Love BI but you may overrating him slightly...
Yeah BI is really good but he's not that much better than Jaylen, to the point that you'd trade Smart for him as well
cl2117 wrote:Larry_Russell wrote:cl2117 wrote:They 100% would if they liked him better. I've got Brown>Ingram by a relatively slim margin, but Ingram comes with the extra year on his deal so he's probably more appealing to Blazers in case things blow up in their face and they want to blow it up after only 1 year.
But I am not sure Pelicans offer ingram for the #3 and Simons.
I feel like they would want more...Brown is the more gettable piece and it is up to Boston to add more value to get to Ingram
rown and Pritch to Portland
Brogdon, Gallo and Kornet to the Lakers
#3, #17, Boston future 1st (protected) and Beasley to Pelicans
Ingram, Vanderbilt and Simons to Boston
Simons/Smart
Ingram/White
Tatum
Vanderbilt/Grant
Timelord/Horford
The rumor is that they want to get up to #2 or #3 for Scoot. They can't do that without Ingram or Zion. C's wouldn't have to add anything it'd just come down to who would the Blazers rather have between Ingram/Brown. if they'd rather Ingram, C's are sh*t out of luck.
Brown and Ingram are comparable players, it wouldn't make sense to add significant value to turn one into the other anyway. Swap them? Sure, if you thought the fit was better, but that's about it.
hugepatsfan wrote:I'd do Brown/Smart for Ingram. You get Smart's playmaking and Brown's scoring wrapped up into one player.
White/Ingram/Tatum/Horford/RWilliams
Ideally then you try to use Brogdon's salary and picks for a starting PF to replace Horford. Then you're cooking with gas.
Larry_Russell wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:I'd do Brown/Smart for Ingram. You get Smart's playmaking and Brown's scoring wrapped up into one player.
White/Ingram/Tatum/Horford/RWilliams
Ideally then you try to use Brogdon's salary and picks for a starting PF to replace Horford. Then you're cooking with gas.
IMO, Overpay for Ingram, and I really like ingram.
They need to at least include Murphy3
They have
Smart
mcCollum
Brown
Zion
Jonas
We have
White
Ingram
Tatum
Murphy
Timelord
hugepatsfan wrote:Larry_Russell wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:I'd do Brown/Smart for Ingram. You get Smart's playmaking and Brown's scoring wrapped up into one player.
White/Ingram/Tatum/Horford/RWilliams
Ideally then you try to use Brogdon's salary and picks for a starting PF to replace Horford. Then you're cooking with gas.
IMO, Overpay for Ingram, and I really like ingram.
They need to at least include Murphy3
They have
Smart
mcCollum
Brown
Zion
Jonas
We have
White
Ingram
Tatum
Murphy
Timelord
Dude, an all NBA player, and a DOPY level player. Ingram is not worth all that even if he has a contract 1 year longer.
Brown and Ingram are as close to equal as it gets with 1 being better at 3 or 4 things and worse at 3 or 4 things.
Don't think they owe Murphy at all. Ingram is a better player than Brown IMO, and signed for an extra year. Smart covers that value owed.
Larry_Russell wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:Larry_Russell wrote:
IMO, Overpay for Ingram, and I really like ingram.
They need to at least include Murphy3
They have
Smart
mcCollum
Brown
Zion
Jonas
We have
White
Ingram
Tatum
Murphy
Timelord
Dude, an all NBA player, and a DOPY level player. Ingram is not worth all that even if he has a contract 1 year longer.
Brown and Ingram are as close to equal as it gets with 1 being better at 3 or 4 things and worse at 3 or 4 things.
You wouldn't be able to trade Smart for Murphy straight up so using that make up a value gap we owe for Brown/Ingram (which you acknowledge we do) is silly.
Don't think they owe Murphy at all. Ingram is a better player than Brown IMO, and signed for an extra year. Smart covers that value owed.
165bows wrote:It's like the Celtics have been a clear-cut top-3 team in the league for the past two years but have done it somehow with players that aren't very good.
Larry_Russell wrote:Brown and Kornet to Portland ( Dame/Sharpe/Brown/grant/Nurkic)
#14, #23, Boston 1st 2024, Simons, Gallo, Muscala to Minny (Simons/Ant/SloMo/McDaniels/Gobert
KAT and #3 to Pelicans (Scoot/McCollum/Murphy/Zion/Kat)
Ingram, JonasV to Boston?
Smart/Pritchard/Davidson
White/Brogdon/Begarin
Ingram/...../Hasuer
Tatum/Horford/.....
Timelord/JonasV/Kabengele
MLE on a decent backup SF
Vet min on Depth at PF (Griffin?)