The (Quadruple) Trade Thread, 2017 (Part 4.0)

[Celts17Pride]

Ainge is never trading Bradley for Noel. Never!

All these ridiculous trade proposals in the trade thread point out how undervalued Avery Bradley is in this Celtics forum compared to how real NBA GM's feel about Avery Bradley. Bradley has tremendous value throughout the league.

That doesn't mean Ainge won't trade Bradley. It just means Ainge won't trade Bradley unless it's part of a package for an all-star.

Noel is not an all-star type player

[Homerclease]

Ainge is never trading Bradley for Noel. Never!

You've made your feelings on that abundantly clear.

[Edug27]

Ainge is never trading Bradley for Noel. Never!

Agree. But I also don't see Danny paying Avery market value... so the question becomes, trade him or let him walk.

[Asian Celtic]

FWIW A Sherrod Blakely said last night on Celtics Postgame Plus that the Magic have interest in Smart and Rozier

I'd make rozier available. But who do we need from the magic aside from vuc? They both failed their audition from the c's. Amir made him his b1tch. I'd never take that call. Now let's see sanders get signed and we can gamble. Or get noel/holmes for any combination of rozier, amir, zeller, jackson, minor picks.

[DK-All Day]

I would trade Avery for Noel and the LAL Pick.

[aim2please]

From Stein

But sources say Boston's talks with Orlando to date on the Vucevic front haven't progressed past the exploratory stage ...

Like I wrote earlier, it really seems like Orlando is the one making the calls and shopping him rather than Boston wanting him. This is the same as Wolves leaking about Jackson - Rubio swap hoping to create a market for him.

Both players can play, in vacuum, but unfortunately for them, their skill set doesn't help you win games in 2017. If your PG can't shot and/or your center can't defend pick and rolls / protect the paint, you're in trouble.

For all of you thinking that Vuc would be a good addition, show me a team with a starting center like him that's winning games. *crickets*

He's in a Kanter, B.Lopez, Monroe, Jefferson, Okafor mold. Putting up stats on a losing team, or gets relegated to a bench role.

[Homerclease]

I would trade Avery for Noel and the LAL Pick.

That laker pick is in the top 3 right now, no way bradley is worth that much. If they were to include their own pick though it makes it more fair IMO. Noel and a lottery pick for Bradley is plenty of return for a guy who very well may walk. We can slide any of Jaylen Brown or Ball/Fultz right into his spot in the starting lineup

[Smog]

I think Bradley for Noel is the right deal. Not sure if philly would be interested but with their recent play and the odds of them coming in the bottom half of the lottery what if they went another direction.

Bradley, Jackson, Mickey for Noel, Holmes and phillys 2017 first round pick top 8 protected. Pick should come in the 10-14 range IMO and both Noel and Holmes would help this front court.

Can we now and forever ban all trade proposals built around Bradley for Noel? Or that don't take contract length into account as a factor?

The Cs would be trading about 120 games of Bradley for about 38 of Noel (not including playoffs). Given that Bradley is currently far more productive than Noel, on what planet does that make sense?

Noel may eventually prove to be a terrific player. Possibly even a difference-maker. But the Cs aren't capped out and don't need to trade for his Bird rights to get that future payoff. They can sign him for money only this summer and retain Bradley.

If they trade Bradley for him now, you're surely worsening the team this year. If they are trading for his future - why? Just sign him a few months from now.

Meanwhile Philly would never trade that pick for Bradley.

Trading Bradley is not a bad idea. If the choice is between paying him or trading him, trading isn't the worst option. But they need to get back a controllable asset. It makes zero sense to trade Bradley in the short term if you're not getting someone back who is better than he is.

[SmartWentCrazy]

I think Bradley for Noel is the right deal. Not sure if philly would be interested but with their recent play and the odds of them coming in the bottom half of the lottery what if they went another direction.

Bradley, Jackson, Mickey for Noel, Holmes and phillys 2017 first round pick top 8 protected. Pick should come in the 10-14 range IMO and both Noel and Holmes would help this front court.

Can we now and forever ban all trade proposals built around Bradley for Noel? Or that don't take contract length into account as a factor?

The Cs would be trading about 120 games of Bradley for about 38 of Noel (not including playoffs). Given that Bradley is currently far more productive than Noel, on what planet does that make sense?

Noel may eventually prove to be a terrific player. Possibly even a difference-maker. But the Cs aren't capped out and don't need to trade for his Bird rights to get that future payoff. They can sign him for money only this summer and retain Bradley.

If they trade Bradley for him now, you're surely worsening the team this year. If they are trading for his future - why? Just sign him a few months from now.

Meanwhile Philly would never trade that pick for Bradley.

Trading Bradley is not a bad idea. If the choice is between paying him or trading him, trading isn't the worst option. But they need to get back a controllable asset. It makes zero sense to trade Bradley in the short term if you're not getting someone back who is better than he is.

The cool thing about RFA is that Noel can't leave after 36 games unless we want him to go. The uncool thing about that is that we cannot outright sign him unless Philly wants to lose him for nothing (hint: they don't and won't).

If we trade for Noel, we absolutely have control over him in the long run if we want it.

[Banks2Pierce]

For all of you thinking that Vuc would be a good addition, show me a team with a starting center like him that's winning games. *crickets*

Cleveland with Tristan, Spurs with Lee or Gasol, Toronto with Valanciunas.

Would we even want him to start anyways?

[Edug27]

For all of you thinking that Vuc would be a good addition, show me a team with a starting center like him that's winning games. *crickets*

Cleveland with Tristan, Spurs with Lee or Gasol, Toronto with Valanciunas.

Would we even want him to start anyways?

Celtics with Amir. Except Amir is much worse all around.

[darrendaye]

From Stein

But sources say Boston's talks with Orlando to date on the Vucevic front haven't progressed past the exploratory stage ...

Like I wrote earlier, it really seems like Orlando is the one making the calls and shopping him rather than Boston wanting him. This is the same as Wolves leaking about Jackson - Rubio swap hoping to create a market for him.

Both players can play, in vacuum, but unfortunately for them, their skill set doesn't help you win games in 2017. If your PG can't shot and/or your center can't defend pick and rolls / protect the paint, you're in trouble.

For all of you thinking that Vuc would be a good addition, show me a team with a starting center like him that's winning games. *crickets*

He's in a Kanter, B.Lopez, Monroe, Jefferson, Okafor mold. Putting up stats on a losing team, or gets relegated to a bench role.

Yes. I wrote in another thread, I'd prefer to use the same assets to get back Nurkic rather than Vucevic (and this is assuming both are being talked about as discounted value trades as reported by some). The appeal for Vucevic is the contract. While Nurkic can't stay on the court for more than 20 minutes at this point due to foul issues, he can competitively defend and has taken a jump in his scoring efficiency so far this year. I'm also not discounting the cavern of difference between the two as passers/ball protectors, it's opposite ends of the spectrum in Vucevic's favor, but Horford and Olynyk's presence makes it less important in the grand scheme of things.

[DarkAzcura]

Well the Celtics are in a tough position really. The top of the draft is full of guards and since you always go BPA, there is a high chance we walk out of this draft with a guard. A trade has to happen at that point between IT, Bradley, Smart, Rozier, and whichever guard we get in the draft. IMO, Fultz and Ball would actually fit with IT pretty well so you have to decide between Smart and/or Bradley.

Thing is if you have all of these players on your roster at once, teams will call our bluff and offer us complete junk because they know we have to make a move. Right now, while it's not 100% clear whether we are actually drafting a guard or not, may be the best time to actually get value for Bradley or Smart. IMO, this really sucks because I like both players a lot, but I'd hate to be forced to get nothing of value for them if we have to make roster space 5 months from now.

It makes sense to get ahead of the game and make a deal..that's why I'd be OK with Bradley for Noel (and another pick). I think Smart is a perfect fit as a combo guard/6th man off the bench. The Celtics have to have some foresight here.

[darrendaye]

Well the Celtics are in a tough position really. The top of the draft is full of guards and since you always go BPA, there is a high chance we walk out of this draft with a guard. A trade has to happen at that point between IT, Bradley, Smart, Rozier, and whichever guard we get in the draft. IMO, Fultz and Ball would actually fit with IT pretty well so you have to decide between Smart and/or Bradley.

Thing is if you have all of these players on your roster at once, teams will call our bluff and offer us complete junk because they know we have to make a move. Right now, while it's not 100% clear whether we are actually drafting a guard or not, may be the best time to actually get value for Bradley or Smart. IMO, this really sucks because I like both players a lot, but I'd hate to be forced to get nothing of value for them if we have to make roster space 5 months from now.

It makes sense to get ahead of the game and make a deal..that's why I'd be OK with Bradley for Noel (and another pick). I think Smart is a perfect fit as a combo guard/6th man off the bench. The Celtics have to have some foresight here.

I put Smart in a different category as I have no issue with him defending SFs for stretches. But for the other 3 plus 1 likely on the way, I agree, at least 1 needs to go.

[aim2please]

For all of you thinking that Vuc would be a good addition, show me a team with a starting center like him that's winning games. *crickets*

Cleveland with Tristan, Spurs with Lee or Gasol, Toronto with Valanciunas.

Would we even want him to start anyways?

Celtics with Amir. Except Amir is much worse all around.

Tristan and Amir are defensive bigs. I don't understand why do you guys compare them to Vuc, Okafor or Monroe? Tristan's ability to switch onto Curry was huge for Cavs in the finals.

Pau is the only good example, but he's a broken version of an old time great. And, it's not like he makes Spurs better. They are almost 5 points per 100 poss better when he sits.

[Smog]

I think Bradley for Noel is the right deal. Not sure if philly would be interested but with their recent play and the odds of them coming in the bottom half of the lottery what if they went another direction.

Bradley, Jackson, Mickey for Noel, Holmes and phillys 2017 first round pick top 8 protected. Pick should come in the 10-14 range IMO and both Noel and Holmes would help this front court.

Can we now and forever ban all trade proposals built around Bradley for Noel? Or that don't take contract length into account as a factor?

The Cs would be trading about 120 games of Bradley for about 38 of Noel (not including playoffs). Given that Bradley is currently far more productive than Noel, on what planet does that make sense?

Noel may eventually prove to be a terrific player. Possibly even a difference-maker. But the Cs aren't capped out and don't need to trade for his Bird rights to get that future payoff. They can sign him for money only this summer and retain Bradley.

If they trade Bradley for him now, you're surely worsening the team this year. If they are trading for his future - why? Just sign him a few months from now.

Meanwhile Philly would never trade that pick for Bradley.

Trading Bradley is not a bad idea. If the choice is between paying him or trading him, trading isn't the worst option. But they need to get back a controllable asset. It makes zero sense to trade Bradley in the short term if you're not getting someone back who is better than he is.

The cool thing about RFA is that Noel can't leave after 36 games unless we want him to go. The uncool thing about that is that we cannot outright sign him unless Philly wants to lose him for nothing (hint: they don't and won't).

If we trade for Noel, we absolutely have control over him in the long run if we want it.

Oh, please. Really? You'd be giving up Bradley for Noel, which makes us worse this year, just for the chance to have right of refusal for one year. One year!

Ultimately Noel is going to sign where he wants, for the amount of money he wants. If we don't want to make him a max player, then there's no sense trading for him now because some idiot team probably will do it this summer, and we won't match, and therefore we lose him and Bradley for nothing.

If we do want to make him a max player, or close to it, then we might as well just do so this summer. I think that would be stupid, but if you want to bet on him for huge money, that's the way to go.

You don't give up a cheap, high-quality starter AND a gazillion dollars for Nerlens Noel, when you can have him just for money, and particularly if he's not helping you get better in the short term.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Oh, please. Really? You'd be giving up Bradley for Noel, which makes us worse this year, just for the chance to have right of refusal for one year. One year!

Ultimately Noel is going to sign where he wants, for the amount of money he wants. If we don't want to make him a max player, then there's no sense trading for him now because some idiot team probably will do it this summer, and we won't match, and therefore we lose him and Bradley for nothing.

If we do want to make him a max player, or close to it, then we might as well just do so this summer. I think that would be stupid, but if you want to bet on him for huge money, that's the way to go.

You don't give up a cheap, high-quality starter AND a gazillion dollars for Nerlens Noel, when you can have him just for money, and particularly if he's not helping you get better in the short term.

Yes, I would. I actually think that trading Bradley for Noel makes us better this year and going forward.

Our biggest weakness is rebounding and defense from our big men. It's not defense at the guard position or scoring at the guard position. Trading for Noel solves that in one fell swoop.

We also have a gigantic roster crunch coming. Our window for trading Bradley is now through the trade deadline. Once the offseason hits, we'll have too many guards and Bradley will be a rental. We won't get back anything for him, and will be forced to offer him even more money than Noel will make, or lose him for nothing.

We're not going to be able to sign Noel to a max deal this summer-- Philly will 100% match it, and flip him for an asset once they can trade him. Elite defensive bigs will always have value in this league, especially when they are quick enough to switch from a 5 to a 1.

As I just mentioned, the money argument is ridiculously stupid. Next year, Bradley will be asking for a 5 year, 150mm+ extension. Noel on a 4 year 90-100mm deal will be MUCH better value. Sure, for one year Bradley will be cheap, but in the long run his salary will dwarf Noel's.

[Edug27]

Cleveland with Tristan, Spurs with Lee or Gasol, Toronto with Valanciunas.

Would we even want him to start anyways?

Celtics with Amir. Except Amir is much worse all around.

Tristan and Amir are defensive bigs. I don't understand why do you guys compare them to Vuc, Okafor or Monroe? Tristan's ability to switch onto Curry was huge for Cavs in the finals.

Pau is the only good example, but he's a broken version of an old time great. And, it's not like he makes Spurs better. They are almost 5 points per 100 poss better when he sits.

Amir is a defensive big?!??

[darrendaye]

Oh, please. Really? You'd be giving up Bradley for Noel, which makes us worse this year, just for the chance to have right of refusal for one year. One year!

Ultimately Noel is going to sign where he wants, for the amount of money he wants. If we don't want to make him a max player, then there's no sense trading for him now because some idiot team probably will do it this summer, and we won't match, and therefore we lose him and Bradley for nothing.

If we do want to make him a max player, or close to it, then we might as well just do so this summer. I think that would be stupid, but if you want to bet on him for huge money, that's the way to go.

You don't give up a cheap, high-quality starter AND a gazillion dollars for Nerlens Noel, when you can have him just for money, and particularly if he's not helping you get better in the short term.

Yes, I would. I actually think that trading Bradley for Noel makes us better this year and going forward.

Our biggest weakness is rebounding and defense from our big men. It's not defense at the guard position or scoring at the guard position. Trading for Noel solves that in one fell swoop.

We also have a gigantic roster crunch coming. Our window for trading Bradley is now through the trade deadline. Once the offseason hits, we'll have too many guards and Bradley will be a rental. We won't get back anything for him, and will be forced to offer him even more money than Noel will make, or lose him for nothing.

We're not going to be able to sign Noel to a max deal this summer-- Philly will 100% match it, and flip him for an asset once they can trade him. Elite defensive bigs will always have value in this league, especially when they are quick enough to switch from a 5 to a 1.

As I just mentioned, the money argument is ridiculously stupid. Next year, Bradley will be asking for a 5 year, 150mm+ extension. Noel on a 4 year 90-100mm deal will be MUCH better value. Sure, for one year Bradley will be cheap, but in the long run his salary will dwarf Noel's.

I side with Smog on this one, particularly at this time. IMO, if Sixers are inclined to accept the terms now, why wouldn't they in the off-season? If the C's keep Zeller's contract past the deadline, is there a strong argument the Sixers would just as likely take a sign and trade of Noel for AB+Zeller? Unless recent changes in the CBA make this an issue.

EDITED to ADD: Personally, I'd wait to see if Mavs buyout Bogut to fill the role this year. If not, I'm less worried about this year than I am next in light of building this thing in the intermediate term with focus on contending.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Oh, please. Really? You'd be giving up Bradley for Noel, which makes us worse this year, just for the chance to have right of refusal for one year. One year!

Ultimately Noel is going to sign where he wants, for the amount of money he wants. If we don't want to make him a max player, then there's no sense trading for him now because some idiot team probably will do it this summer, and we won't match, and therefore we lose him and Bradley for nothing.

If we do want to make him a max player, or close to it, then we might as well just do so this summer. I think that would be stupid, but if you want to bet on him for huge money, that's the way to go.

You don't give up a cheap, high-quality starter AND a gazillion dollars for Nerlens Noel, when you can have him just for money, and particularly if he's not helping you get better in the short term.

Yes, I would. I actually think that trading Bradley for Noel makes us better this year and going forward.

Our biggest weakness is rebounding and defense from our big men. It's not defense at the guard position or scoring at the guard position. Trading for Noel solves that in one fell swoop.

We also have a gigantic roster crunch coming. Our window for trading Bradley is now through the trade deadline. Once the offseason hits, we'll have too many guards and Bradley will be a rental. We won't get back anything for him, and will be forced to offer him even more money than Noel will make, or lose him for nothing.

We're not going to be able to sign Noel to a max deal this summer-- Philly will 100% match it, and flip him for an asset once they can trade him. Elite defensive bigs will always have value in this league, especially when they are quick enough to switch from a 5 to a 1.

As I just mentioned, the money argument is ridiculously stupid. Next year, Bradley will be asking for a 5 year, 150mm+ extension. Noel on a 4 year 90-100mm deal will be MUCH better value. Sure, for one year Bradley will be cheap, but in the long run his salary will dwarf Noel's.

I side with Smog on this one, particularly at this time. IMO, if Sixers are inclined to accept the terms now, why wouldn't they in the off-season? If the C's keep Zeller's contract past the deadline, is there a strong argument the Sixers would just as likely take a sign and trade of Noel for AB+Zeller? Unless recent changes in the CBA make this an issue.

EDITED to ADD: Personally, I'd wait to see if Mavs buyout Bogut to fill the role this year. If not, I'm less worried about this year than I am next in light of building this thing in the intermediate term with focus on contending.

If we draft Fultz/Ball, our guards will be: IT/AB/BKN17/Smart/Rozier. Philly wouldn't be to keen to help us out of our crunch, especially with IT/AB/Smart staring down contract extensions. They'd be just as eager to taunt 'leverage' at us as they were during the draft, when they thought we wanted Dunn (per comments from Wyc).

I don't know if they'd be interested in that trade this offseason, personally.