Moderators: bisme37, Parliament10, shackles10, snowman, Froob, Darthlukey, canman1971, Shak_Celts
sully00 wrote:Think about as Monopoly, nobody is going to give up Boardwalk for face value it goes to the person you can throw some railroads or utilities on top.
jirrit wrote:Can anyone update me on what we're actually getting or is there no update?
KamikazeK wrote:jirrit wrote:Can anyone update me on what we're actually getting or is there no update?
A ham sandwich and a 2025 2nd-round pick, most likely.
SMTBSI wrote:sully00 wrote:Think about as Monopoly, nobody is going to give up Boardwalk for face value it goes to the person you can throw some railroads or utilities on top.
In a game of Monopoly, if you find yourself auctioning off Boardwalk for a package where utilities and railroads are a meaningful component, then you've already lost.
I think what Sully00 meant was you can't get Boardwalk (400) for New York(200) and Kentucky (220). You have to give up New York, Kentucky along with a couple railroads and the waterworks and the buyer probably needs Ny and Kentucky to fill out the threesomes. KamikazeK wrote:GreenMachine wrote:KamikazeK wrote:Get off your high horse, pal. You can support a team without support every idiotic move the GM makes. You aren't the king of Boston.
I have absolutely no problem with people criticizing and critiquing the moves... I do have a problem with people making idiotic statements and/or making up false information to support their complaints. For example: 'Why did we trade Rondo for Wright' - that is not critiquing the move, or even factually correct... that is just being dumb or a troll, or both.
People with more information than you have actually considered Wright the best player in that deal, so no, saying we traded rondo for him is not nearly as ridiculous as you claim.
jirrit wrote:Can anyone update me on what we're actually getting or is there no update?
SMTBSI wrote:sully00 wrote:Think about as Monopoly, nobody is going to give up Boardwalk for face value it goes to the person you can throw some railroads or utilities on top.
In a game of Monopoly, if you find yourself auctioning off Boardwalk for a package where utilities and railroads are a meaningful component, then you've already lost.
brackdan70 wrote:I think what Sully00 meant was you can't get Boardwalk (400) for New York(200) and Kentucky (220). You have to give up New York, Kentucky along with a couple railroads and the waterworks and the buyer probably needs Ny and Kentucky to fill out the threesomes.
brackdan70 wrote:The was no Boardwalk involved in this transaction, not even a Marvin Gardens. Green was / is maybe a St. James Place
SMTBSI wrote:brackdan70 wrote:I think what Sully00 meant was you can't get Boardwalk (400) for New York(200) and Kentucky (220). You have to give up New York, Kentucky along with a couple railroads and the waterworks and the buyer probably needs Ny and Kentucky to fill out the threesomes.
Exactly. If you're giving up Boardwalk to let another player complete the strongest monopoly in the game, your return starts and ends with tiles that let you complete several mid-tier monopolies, so you can get into the development arms race. At this phase in the game, utilities and RRs should be long forgotten.brackdan70 wrote:The was no Boardwalk involved in this transaction, not even a Marvin Gardens. Green was / is maybe a St. James Place
What's Green got to do with it? We're talking Monopoly.
sully00 wrote:I am not really sure what you point is.
brackdan70 wrote:maybe Settlers of Catan would be a better analogy
KamikazeK wrote:Now i want to play monopoly.. thanks a lot guys
sully00 wrote:Edug27 wrote:Celts17Pride wrote:The point no one brings up is that Rondo, Wright and Jeff Green are all free agents at the end of the season. No team is going to give max value for a player that may leave in 4-5 months. Ainge made a decision that those players are not part of the future and is getting the most that he can given the market for those players. Ainge is talking to every team.
Sorry if the actual value for each player doesn't match the hypotical value the are in RealGM posters minds.
Right but I think the debatable question is whether Danny made those decisions too late.
I don't think Ainge has had a better concrete offer on the table for Green or Rondo than the deals he took. I know everyone thinks Ainge could have traded Rondo while he was out with the knee but I don't think that is realistic. Maybe he could have pulled the deal with DET, Knight and a DET 1st likely available in '16 other than that from what I can tell of the rumored trade packages that we heard for Rondo that everyone thought were so awful, that was Ainge's asking price and everyone thought it was too high.
I agree it would have been better for the team to be at this point last season but you need someone willing to make the trade. I think AInge dropped the price on Rondo and Green's value increased enough for someone to bite. He came away with 3 firsts or two firsts and two seconds and a couple of TPEs. There is no high end talent in the mix but I don't think there was really any high end talent going out.
sam_I_am wrote:sully00 wrote:Edug27 wrote:
Right but I think the debatable question is whether Danny made those decisions too late.
I don't think Ainge has had a better concrete offer on the table for Green or Rondo than the deals he took. I know everyone thinks Ainge could have traded Rondo while he was out with the knee but I don't think that is realistic. Maybe he could have pulled the deal with DET, Knight and a DET 1st likely available in '16 other than that from what I can tell of the rumored trade packages that we heard for Rondo that everyone thought were so awful, that was Ainge's asking price and everyone thought it was too high.
I agree it would have been better for the team to be at this point last season but you need someone willing to make the trade. I think AInge dropped the price on Rondo and Green's value increased enough for someone to bite. He came away with 3 firsts or two firsts and two seconds and a couple of TPEs. There is no high end talent in the mix but I don't think there was really any high end talent going out.
I think an underrated aspect of these trades is that a value is being set on late round and second round picks. Danny has accumulated so many and teams looking to rebuild in 2015-2017 are going to have to live with the market that has been set. Danny can expect to get Rondo/Green caliber veterans back for these picks when he has his core in place.
Another point: the energy and production and impact of production from Jae Crowder at a much lower cost than Green is not a surprise. For all his talent and at time flash, Green doesn't impact the game very much. If you think of trade as Green straight up for Crowder that is a huge win (younger, cheaper, higher energy, equally effective) Rondo for a bunch of expirings plus Dallas #1, Minnesota 2016 #1 or 2 second rounders, Dallas second rounder and Memphis first round in 2019 (could be a very nice pick) and 2 nice trade exceptions - looks a lot better even if the accounting is dubious.