Trade Post-Mortem 2017: Eight is Enough

[bucknersrevenge]

We could swerve, trade IT and Bradley for rookie scale guys or picks, draft Fultz, max Hayward, and go after Kyle Lowry or George Hill. Just think it's unlikely and even wrong - IT is a guy free agents will want to play with, and he can carry tons of offensive responsibility. He and Hayward would both love the chance to take a play off once in awhile.

Sure he is. IT's a likable dude. And his story is phenomenal. Hard not to want to play with a guy with heart like his. But we have to talk about effectiveness. In the regular season and early playoffs he is dominant. But we are witnessing chinks appearing in the armor here in the later rounds. Trapping IT is not like trapping any other ball handler. When you trap a 5'9 PG with bigger defenders you basically put him in a box. He literally can't see over or around it to hit his outlet or worse, he can't see the defender lurking in the weeds waiting. At the other end it's concerning enough but if he's gonna start having injury problems...

People would enjoy playing with IT but people would enjoy winning in general too.

[chrisab123]

We could swerve, trade IT and Bradley for rookie scale guys or picks, draft Fultz, max Hayward, and go after Kyle Lowry or George Hill. Just think it's unlikely and even wrong - IT is a guy free agents will want to play with, and he can carry tons of offensive responsibility. He and Hayward would both love the chance to take a play off once in awhile.

Sure he is. IT's a likable dude. And his story is phenomenal. Hard not to want to play with a guy with heart like his. But we have to talk about effectiveness. In the regular season and early playoffs he is dominant. But we are witnessing chinks appearing in the armor here in the later rounds. Trapping IT is not like trapping any other ball handler. When you trap a 5'9 PG with bigger defenders you basically put him in a box. He literally can't see over or around it to hit his outlet or worse, he can't see the defender lurking in the weeds waiting. At the other end it's concerning enough but if he's gonna start having injury problems...

People would enjoy playing with IT but people would enjoy winning in general too.

But would the trapping be as effective if they brought in Hayward or PG13 or both? The answer to this question really can't be given until another offensive player plays next to him. That's also the reason why I'm hesitant to deal IT right now. If we knew the answer then it would be a no brainer to cash out.

[bucknersrevenge]

We could swerve, trade IT and Bradley for rookie scale guys or picks, draft Fultz, max Hayward, and go after Kyle Lowry or George Hill. Just think it's unlikely and even wrong - IT is a guy free agents will want to play with, and he can carry tons of offensive responsibility. He and Hayward would both love the chance to take a play off once in awhile.

Sure he is. IT's a likable dude. And his story is phenomenal. Hard not to want to play with a guy with heart like his. But we have to talk about effectiveness. In the regular season and early playoffs he is dominant. But we are witnessing chinks appearing in the armor here in the later rounds. Trapping IT is not like trapping any other ball handler. When you trap a 5'9 PG with bigger defenders you basically put him in a box. He literally can't see over or around it to hit his outlet or worse, he can't see the defender lurking in the weeds waiting. At the other end it's concerning enough but if he's gonna start having injury problems...

People would enjoy playing with IT but people would enjoy winning in general too.

But would the trapping be as effective if they brought in Hayward or PG13 or both? The answer to this question really can't be given until another offensive player plays next to him. That's also the reason why I'm hesitant to deal IT right now. If we knew the answer then it would be a no brainer to cash out.

Yes it still would because if IT can't see Hayward, it doesn't matter if he's Gordon Hayward or Gordon Gekko. He's not getting the ball. Furthermore, it was just announced that IT is in fact out for the rest of the series and this is why:

http://www.ortho.wustl.edu/content/Patient-Care/3495/Services/Hip-Knee/The-Center-for-Adolescent-and-Young-Adult-Hip-Disorders/Hip-Labral-Tear-FAQs.aspx

This what he has now. At 28, given how he plays the game, there's no way he's gonna be as effective as he was this season again. He will have to be managed. You cannot invest in him past this contract. It's too risky.

[Andrew McCeltic]

I get the caution, but what's the benefit of moving on now? He's barely dented the cap, he's going into a walk year, and you may be underestimating his longevity. What's the deal that makes us better than keeping him? IT/Bradley for Wall?

[Fencer reregistered]

Will it really be IT and Fultz in the back court next season?

I’ll tell you this: before the draft last year, Danny [Ainge] was trying to get two picks, not just Jaylen Brown. He had two people. He was trying to get two picks. He was on the phone with everybody from coast to coast and he was offering everyone, and that includes Marcus Smart and Isaiah Thomas and anything they needed to get where he wanted to go. There were no untouchables on that team last year. The only untouchable now I’d say is Al Horford.

Report: Danny Ainge offered Isaiah Thomas for a lottery pick last year

http://www.celticsblog.com/2017/5/19/15667388/danny-ainge-offered-isaiah-thomas-for-a-lottery-pick-last-year-celtics-nba-draft-trade-picks-boston

This is typical Jackie hyperbole. She might have heard that Ainge was trying to get another lottery pick and everyone was available. OK, but that doesn't mean he would have traded him for the #5 pick or #10. Maybe, he would have but this is total speculation on her part and given the timing, it is suspect as well. Also, Ainge would trade anyone if it made the team better. Holy smoke, what a shock.

Agreed. I presume she was a competent reporter once, because I don't have many actually memories of her reporting good OR bad from when that was her main job.

But since she focused on feature writing -- at which she excels -- her occasional forays into reporting or reporting-based analysis have not been pretty.

[bucknersrevenge]

I get the caution, but what's the benefit of moving on now? He's barely dented the cap, he's going into a walk year, and you may be underestimating his longevity. What's the deal that makes us better than keeping him? IT/Bradley for Wall?

If there was a SINGULAR deal that made us better than keeping him I suspect we would've already heard about it. It would have to be multiple deals, maybe some free agent signings and some internal development. Keep in mind, there may not be a deal for him period. Especially now. With that labral tear, possibly surgery and potentially 6+ months of rehab, he's not going anywhere now.

[Fencer reregistered]

Actually pretty psyched this is a potential option. I've been wanting to take a stab at that math for awhile.

This type of thing is far and away my first option for the off-season as IMO it maximizes the current team while still keeping max assets for the future.

My bad on the hard cap. Brain fart, lol.

Good math, I'm down.

I finally found it on Smitty's worksheets, was having a hard time finding that definitive number too.

Here's my best take on the outgoing salary:

For Hayward - Utah gets Olynyk at $19.3M (descending 4 year contract), Mickey $1.5M (can be waived), Nader $1.1M, signed #36 pick $.82M, then Young to Utah or another team at $2.85M.

For Griffin - LAC gets Bradley at $8.8M, then either to LA or another team is Zeller at $8M, plus also Amir and Jerebko need to combine to around $8M again to LAC or elsewhere. A Melo trade to LA may make this easier for their rotation, or harder to stay under the hard cap. They may have to pay off teams to take some of those guys as well.

Other part I'd have to check is that would trigger hard caps for both Utah and LAC, so that would have to work on their end. LAC is pretty much hard capped every year and Utah probably doesn't spend over that anyways. So as long as the numbers fit it's workable.

Other pieces could of course get added in to make it easier, LAC/Mem picks, Yabs, Rozier/Smart, and future seconds or Celtics picks.

So again it's really tight but the more I look at the numbers the more it looks like an outside possibility.

Thanks for pointing me at this.

So you're assuming that Zeller isn't waived, and that we can benefit from S&T for several of our FAs who in other scenarios would be renounced. Hmm.

Have you checked when newly-signed rookies can be traded by? That would seem to be one flaw.

Fortunately, we don't need our FAs to go to Utah or LAC for the trades to work from our end. And whatevers team our FAs go to could be bribed into the S&T alternative by some level of draft pick generosity. Further, our own outgoing players would have no reason not to cooperate.

Less clear to me is why LAC and Utah would cooperate easily. The traditional bribes for a guy's previous team to get a S&T done are pretty hefty, if I recall correctly. E.g., I think Detroit got 2 picks and some prospects for Grant Hill, and one of the prospects turned out to be Ben Wallace. But perhaps I'm misremembering.

[165bows]

My bad on the hard cap. Brain fart, lol.

Good math, I'm down.

I finally found it on Smitty's worksheets, was having a hard time finding that definitive number too.

Here's my best take on the outgoing salary:

For Hayward - Utah gets Olynyk at $19.3M (descending 4 year contract), Mickey $1.5M (can be waived), Nader $1.1M, signed #36 pick $.82M, then Young to Utah or another team at $2.85M.

For Griffin - LAC gets Bradley at $8.8M, then either to LA or another team is Zeller at $8M, plus also Amir and Jerebko need to combine to around $8M again to LAC or elsewhere. A Melo trade to LA may make this easier for their rotation, or harder to stay under the hard cap. They may have to pay off teams to take some of those guys as well.

Other part I'd have to check is that would trigger hard caps for both Utah and LAC, so that would have to work on their end. LAC is pretty much hard capped every year and Utah probably doesn't spend over that anyways. So as long as the numbers fit it's workable.

Other pieces could of course get added in to make it easier, LAC/Mem picks, Yabs, Rozier/Smart, and future seconds or Celtics picks.

So again it's really tight but the more I look at the numbers the more it looks like an outside possibility.

Thanks for pointing me at this.

So you're assuming that Zeller isn't waived, and that we can benefit from S&T for several of our FAs who in other scenarios would be renounced. Hmm.

Have you checked when newly-signed rookies can be traded by? That would seem to be one flaw.

Fortunately, we don't need our FAs to go to Utah or LAC for the trades to work from our end. And whatevers team our FAs go to could be bribed into the S&T alternative by some level of draft pick generosity. Further, our own outgoing players would have no reason not to cooperate.

Less clear to me is why LAC and Utah would cooperate easily. The traditional bribes for a guy's previous team to get a S&T done are pretty hefty, if I recall correctly. E.g., I think Detroit got 2 picks and some prospects for Grant Hill, and one of the prospects turned out to be Ben Wallace. But perhaps I'm misremembering.

That was my best suggestion, but there are other ways, especially if they move more core pieces like Crowder/Smart/Rozier, or add Yabs. There is a 30 day wait for trades of draft picks, so they would have to take that into consideration even though I only utilized this year's #36.

As for why other teams cooperate, I would get the agreement with Hayward first, contingent on letting Olynyk go and having a trade in place to move one of their guards to clear salary. At that point, I don't think Utah can turn down bringing some assets back.

LAC it depends, really on if they want a five year deal for Blake or would prefer not to make that commitment and would rather something like Bradley/Melo/Amir or JJ instead with something like Jackson and the pick back.

[31to6]

I get the caution, but what's the benefit of moving on now? He's barely dented the cap, he's going into a walk year, and you may be underestimating his longevity. What's the deal that makes us better than keeping him? IT/Bradley for Wall?

If there was a SINGULAR deal that made us better than keeping him I suspect we would've already heard about it. It would have to be multiple deals, maybe some free agent signings and some internal development. Keep in mind, there may not be a deal for him period. Especially now. With that labral tear, possibly surgery and potentially 6+ months of rehab, he's not going anywhere now.

It's mind-boggling if, just like that, we're looking at our roster differently for the fall. Leaving IT completely out of it, because I have no idea what to think, now:

Fultz-AB-Jae-Griffin-Horford
Roz-Smart-Jaylen-Yabs-Zizic

would be my ideal, with
2018 pick = young big (Ayton/Bamba/Carter) incoming

[bucknersrevenge]

I get the caution, but what's the benefit of moving on now? He's barely dented the cap, he's going into a walk year, and you may be underestimating his longevity. What's the deal that makes us better than keeping him? IT/Bradley for Wall?

If there was a SINGULAR deal that made us better than keeping him I suspect we would've already heard about it. It would have to be multiple deals, maybe some free agent signings and some internal development. Keep in mind, there may not be a deal for him period. Especially now. With that labral tear, possibly surgery and potentially 6+ months of rehab, he's not going anywhere now.

It's mind-boggling if, just like that, we're looking at our roster differently for the fall. Leaving IT completely out of it, because I have no idea what to think, now:

Fultz-AB-Jae-Griffin-Horford
Roz-Smart-Jaylen-Yabs-Zizic

would be my ideal, with
2018 pick = young big (Ayton/Bamba/Carter) incoming

Not bad. I still think we end up with Hayward (you KNOW he's watching this team right now). I think IT at the least starts next season injured. I trade Jae for a big. I give him to the Knicks for O'Quinn personally. Maybe Terry for a future pick. So I have it like this:

Smart-AB-Hayward-Al-O'Quinn
Fultz-Nader-Jaylen-Yabusele-Zizic

[Wes-J]

Recalculating all trade formulas...

[Smog]

If there was a SINGULAR deal that made us better than keeping him I suspect we would've already heard about it. It would have to be multiple deals, maybe some free agent signings and some internal development. Keep in mind, there may not be a deal for him period. Especially now. With that labral tear, possibly surgery and potentially 6+ months of rehab, he's not going anywhere now.

It's mind-boggling if, just like that, we're looking at our roster differently for the fall. Leaving IT completely out of it, because I have no idea what to think, now:

Fultz-AB-Jae-Griffin-Horford
Roz-Smart-Jaylen-Yabs-Zizic

would be my ideal, with
2018 pick = young big (Ayton/Bamba/Carter) incoming

Not bad. I still think we end up with Hayward (you KNOW he's watching this team right now). I think IT at the least starts next season injured. I trade Jae for a big. I give him to the Knicks for O'Quinn personally. Maybe Terry for a future pick. So I have it like this:

Smart-AB-Hayward-Al-O'Quinn
Fultz-Nader-Jaylen-Yabusele-Zizic

Crowder is worth a lot more than O'Quinn. Jae has one of the best contracts in the NBA. It'd be crazy to trade him unless they absolutely had to -- any team that they might put together to contend is going to need at least one high-quality rotation player on a good contract. Right now he's the only long-term rotation player on a good deal. Everyone else is going to want big money.

If they sign Hayward and Jae becomes disgruntled, maybe you think about trading him, but not before then.

[TheOGJabroni]

It's mind-boggling if, just like that, we're looking at our roster differently for the fall. Leaving IT completely out of it, because I have no idea what to think, now:

Fultz-AB-Jae-Griffin-Horford
Roz-Smart-Jaylen-Yabs-Zizic

would be my ideal, with
2018 pick = young big (Ayton/Bamba/Carter) incoming

Not bad. I still think we end up with Hayward (you KNOW he's watching this team right now). I think IT at the least starts next season injured. I trade Jae for a big. I give him to the Knicks for O'Quinn personally. Maybe Terry for a future pick. So I have it like this:

Smart-AB-Hayward-Al-O'Quinn
Fultz-Nader-Jaylen-Yabusele-Zizic

Crowder is worth a lot more than O'Quinn. Jae has one of the best contracts in the NBA. It'd be crazy to trade him unless they absolutely had to -- any team that they might put together to contend is going to need at least one high-quality rotation player on a good contract. Right now he's the only long-term rotation player on a good deal. Everyone else is going to want big money.

If they sign Hayward and Jae becomes disgruntled, maybe you think about trading him, but not before then.

Crowder is definitely worth more than O'Quinn, I agree. From what I've seen Phil really likes Jae. I wonder if we could offer Crowder & Rozier for O'Quinn and the right to swap our 2018 pick for their 2018 pick (maybe a small protection on it).

[reload141]

I get the caution, but what's the benefit of moving on now? He's barely dented the cap, he's going into a walk year, and you may be underestimating his longevity. What's the deal that makes us better than keeping him? IT/Bradley for Wall?

If there was a SINGULAR deal that made us better than keeping him I suspect we would've already heard about it. It would have to be multiple deals, maybe some free agent signings and some internal development. Keep in mind, there may not be a deal for him period. Especially now. With that labral tear, possibly surgery and potentially 6+ months of rehab, he's not going anywhere now.

It's mind-boggling if, just like that, we're looking at our roster differently for the fall. Leaving IT completely out of it, because I have no idea what to think, now:

Fultz-AB-Jae-Griffin-Horford
Roz-Smart-Jaylen-Yabs-Zizic

would be my ideal, with
2018 pick = young big (Ayton/Bamba/Carter) incoming

[aaron_gray]

Would any of you guys do Tarik Black for pick #53

[3D Chess]

Would any of you guys do Tarik Black for pick #53

On a $7m contract with a 10% trade kicker? Nah, we good.

[aaron_gray]

On a $7m contract with a 10% trade kicker? Nah, we good.

That's actually about what he's worth given that he generated 2.4 win shares last season...

Tarik's biggest problem right now is that he fouls too much. Beyond that, his production has always been there as he averages a double double per 36 for his career. His block% has noticeably risen since his rookie year and overall, he's a solid rotation player that can act as your 5th starter in a pinch.

That's a whole lot more than what the #53 pick is actually worth. In fact, even trading him for both the #53 and #56 picks would favor Boston by a significant margin. Statistically speaking, chances are that the players selected in that range will never play in an NBA game. If they do manage to secure a roster spot on an NBA team, they'll most likely be an end of the bench player that teams are taking a wait and see approach on. A more fair trade would be Tarik for your #37 pick.

The main reason I proposed this trade in the first place is because the Laker's big man rotation is a complete cluster ****. As the Lakers try to move towards smaller lineups, Deng and probably Brewer will see a lot of minutes at the 4 while Randle will split time between 4 and 5. Nance needs minutes at the 4, Zubac needs playing time at C and the franchise needs Mozgov to do something once in a while to try and drum up some semblance of trade interest (they'll still need to give up a significant amount of assets to dump him, but showcasing him could reduce that amount by just a little). Ceterus Paribus I'd keep Tarik but combine all that and there's just no minutes left for him. I'd rather take some fliers on shooters in the late 2nd to see if we can rebalance the roster. This is really an opportunity for Boston to take advantage of - essentially, Tarik is worth less to the Lakers than to other teams.

You guys are losing Amir this year and he was getting paid a whole lot more than Tarik to put up similar per 36 numbers. You'll need to get more rebounding somewhere. Worst case scenario, you've just flipped two late seconds for a 7 mil expiring that might net you something more interesting.

[Jingles]

On a $7m contract with a 10% trade kicker? Nah, we good.

That's actually about what he's worth given that he generated 2.4 win shares last season...

Tarik's biggest problem right now is that he fouls too much. Beyond that, his production has always been there as he averages a double double per 36 for his career. His block% has noticeably risen since his rookie year and overall, he's a solid rotation player that can act as your 5th starter in a pinch.

That's a whole lot more than what the #53 pick is actually worth. In fact, even trading him for both the #53 and #56 picks would favor Boston by a significant margin. Statistically speaking, chances are that the players selected in that range will never play in an NBA game. If they do manage to secure a roster spot on an NBA team, they'll most likely be an end of the bench player that teams are taking a wait and see approach on. A more fair trade would be Tarik for your #37 pick.

The main reason I proposed this trade in the first place is because the Laker's big man rotation is a complete cluster ****. As the Lakers try to move towards smaller lineups, Deng and probably Brewer will see a lot of minutes at the 4 while Randle will split time between 4 and 5. Nance needs minutes at the 4, Zubac needs playing time at C and the franchise needs Mozgov to do something once in a while to try and drum up some semblance of trade interest (they'll still need to give up a significant amount of assets to dump him, but showcasing him could reduce that amount by just a little). Ceterus Paribus I'd keep Tarik but combine all that and there's just no minutes left for him. I'd rather take some fliers on shooters in the late 2nd to see if we can rebalance the roster. This is really an opportunity for Boston to take advantage of - essentially, Tarik is worth less to the Lakers than to other teams.

You guys are losing Amir this year and he was getting paid a whole lot more than Tarik to put up similar per 36 numbers. You'll need to get more rebounding somewhere. Worst case scenario, you've just flipped two late seconds for a 7 mil expiring that might net you something more interesting.

His production is not the issue. Cutting into Boston's max cap space for a role player is.

[Banks2Pierce]

Would any of you guys do Tarik Black for pick #53

Yes, probably. Guarantee date is a bit later than Zeller and he's a better fit/player than Zeller in case something goes tits up in FA. Would have to be after we know a move requiring Zeller's salary is not in the works.

[3D Chess]

I appreciate the sell a_g, but Jingles nailed it above.

Could be a last resort option if we strike out in FA to replace a placeholder like Zeller, but the draft happens first, and we might need that type of contract in a more important deal.