Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat)

Moderators: Texas Chuck, BullyKing, Andre Roberstan, loserX, Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, MoneyTalks41890, HartfordWhalers

Grade the Boston offseason

A+
21
17%
A
31
25%
A-
20
16%
B+
23
18%
B
9
7%
B-
4
3%
C+
9
7%
C
3
2%
D
1
1%
F
5
4%
 
Total votes: 126

patman52
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,712
And1: 848
Joined: Jan 03, 2016
 

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#201 » by patman52 » Fri Aug 4, 2017 10:55 am

nykballa2k4 wrote:
patman52 wrote:
bondom34 wrote:All of this.


Again, it is not competing for this Ring this year. It is taking incremental steps towards that goal.


The window for all of the Nets and Celtics picks to reach a peak likely begins in 2020. Did the deals that were done this summer greatly improve that season?

Right now I see Bradley moved, Smart due for an extension. Thomas due for an extension, Horford getting older and becoming a man without a position since he performs poorly against other C's. Moving down from #1 to #3 plus an extra pick could be great, it could also be one of the biggest mistakes of all time (if Fultz or Ball becomes a superstar). I just don't see any way that this off-season can be an A.


No the deals done this season were done to improve the team this year but not take anything way from the goal of being able to compete in in 18-19. Horford will be playing more PF min than in the past with the addition of Baynes and Zizic. Yes we will have Thomas locked up for ages 28,29, 30, 31 and 32.

A 53 win team added the best FA out there, a #3 pick, a future lottery pick, and improved the center and forward positions Zeller/Jerebko to Baynes/Morris but lost a superior #2 close to all star level player in Bradley. And brought over two 1st rd stashes this offseason.
Golabki
General Manager
Posts: 8,397
And1: 1,110
Joined: Jan 31, 2005

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#202 » by Golabki » Fri Aug 4, 2017 11:31 am

HartfordWhalers wrote:
Golabki wrote:Also... what exactly was their path to adding a starting caliber center? why should we believe they could have added a much better center than Baynes?

As a said, Baynes is a good fit as a 15-20 mpg player in the regular season who's going to get a lot of DNP coaches decisions in the playoffs.


So thats the problem. They have 1 playoff big, and then wings. That is not flexible at all.

As for the path, I might make another topic on that in a bit so it can separate a bit out of here. But having just Horford and wings come playoff time strikes me as a short term hitch.

They can play big with Horford/Baynes, they can play small with Morris/Horford, or they can play super small with Crowder/Morris. Seems flexible.

The depth isn't great at the big spots... but the depth is awesome at forward, which is much more important for flexability in the playoffs. Against the warriors the Cavs would really have liked play LBJ at center more but they couldn't because they lacked wing depth. Against the Cavs last year the Celtics had more depth with Johnson and olykynk, but they couldn't keep those guys on the floor.
SmartWentCrazy
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 20,749
And1: 34,848
Joined: Dec 29, 2014

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#203 » by SmartWentCrazy » Fri Aug 4, 2017 11:37 am

nykballa2k4 wrote:
SmartWentCrazy wrote:
nykballa2k4 wrote:Horford getting older and becoming a man without a position since he performs poorly against other C's.


You've said this twice, and it's just wrong. He destroyed the Bulls and Wizards in the playoffs. Like 140 ORTG good.

Thompson always kills him, sure. But he's not really a center.

Thompson or Horford?
I was able to watch only some of the playoff games due to my schedule. I watched Robin Lopez look like Brook Lopez in the first two games and then I saw Gortat look like an all-star the next series. The games I saw all showed Al Horford being badly outplayed in the first quarter. As the game went on, perhaps he fared better when hidden against small-ball line ups (Wiz were without Mahinmi so their back up center was Jason Smith). If you watched all of the Celtics playoff games, then you likely saw the same thing I did.


Horford was easily their best player this post season. There are many things about Horford you could complain about, but last year's playoff performance is firmly at the bottom.

Round 1:
Robin Lopez-12.7-7.2 on around a 68 TS%
Al Horford- 15.3-8.5-6.5 on 63/54/85 shooting splits

Round 2:
Marcin Gortat- 9.4-11.3 on around a 53 TS%
Al Horford- 16.7-6.6-5.4 on 68/61/70 shooting splits

Both Gortat and Lopez also became unplayable defensively, as the IT-Horford PnR absolutely shredded them.

You're making a real bizarre criticism right now, to be honest.
HartfordWhalers
Senior Mod - 76ers and NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - 76ers and NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 47,322
And1: 20,917
Joined: Apr 07, 2010
 

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#204 » by HartfordWhalers » Fri Aug 4, 2017 1:36 pm

When Gortat was on the court and Horford was as well, Washington outscored the Celtics with a +6.6 net rating
During that time, Gortat put up 9.2 points and 12.8 rebound per 36 minutes
Horford did 14.5/6.5per 36 in the same time, on much higher shooting efficiency.


I'm double posting, because I wanted to separate the small sample w/e happened last year from highlighting the rebounding gap which is there in large samples. If Baynes is solving it, then Horford is playing the 4 and Boston has a below average center on the court. If Baynes is not solving it, this does exist and rebounds can matter.
Golabki
General Manager
Posts: 8,397
And1: 1,110
Joined: Jan 31, 2005

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#205 » by Golabki » Fri Aug 4, 2017 2:05 pm

HartfordWhalers wrote:
When Gortat was on the court and Horford was as well, Washington outscored the Celtics with a +6.6 net rating
During that time, Gortat put up 9.2 points and 12.8 rebound per 36 minutes
Horford did 14.5/6.5per 36 in the same time, on much higher shooting efficiency.


I'm double posting, because I wanted to separate the small sample w/e happened last year from highlighting the rebounding gap which is there in large samples. If Baynes is solving it, then Horford is playing the 4 and Boston has a below average center on the court. If Baynes is not solving it, this does exist and rebounds can matter.

Celtics weren't a great rebounding team last year.

Part of that is that was that Horford is not a great rebounder, part of that was a lack of size at the 3 and the 4 for a lot of the game, part of that was that Olynyk was a terrible rebounder and Johnson wasn't great either, part of that was scheme. Now they have Baynes, who's a better rebounder than anyone on the roster last year, they got depth at forward, which allows them to avoid using their back up PG as also their backup SF... but they are still going to play small and also IT/Horford pick and rolls to chew up opposing Ds.
Mystical Apples
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,393
And1: 1,349
Joined: Jul 06, 2015
 

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#206 » by Mystical Apples » Fri Aug 4, 2017 4:03 pm

Cody Zeller fits Boston. Perhaps a Zeller-Crowder framework but not sure either team bites until February, if ever. Dwight Howard isn't exactly reliable and guessing Boston prefers Crowder over rushing their young wings.
geometry
User avatar
JojoSlimbiid
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,317
And1: 2,239
Joined: Dec 03, 2016
   

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#207 » by JojoSlimbiid » Fri Aug 4, 2017 4:04 pm

Gave em a B

They traded away the best player in the draft IMO so that kind of puts a bit of a damper. Not to mention by doing this trade unless they draft a guard next year you're looking at 100+ million for I.T at 29 years old which is almost enough reason to not make the trade even if you don't really like Fultz.

The biggest issue which wouldn't have been solved even if they kept the pick is I still hate their big rotation and I don't think they're rebounding and size issues got fixed this off-season. Looking at their assets combined with what the Blazers and Mavericks paid to get quality young bigs like Nurkic and Noel you really got to wonder how they weren't able to get one of those type of guys. I don't believe in Zizic,Yabusele,etc as legitimate positive big men in the NBA.

Having said all that they did get better in a lot of the ways they were already good at. They seemingly upgraded at the wing spots both now and into the future so even though this post may seem negative they're still in a good spot.
cl2117
General Manager
Posts: 9,007
And1: 7,634
Joined: Jun 14, 2013
 

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#208 » by cl2117 » Fri Aug 4, 2017 4:44 pm

A little late to the party, but here's mine:

cl2117
(Swap your name in here)

Key Losses:
Avery Bradley
Kelly Olynyk
Amir Johnson

They'll be missed in that order. The loss of Bradley will definitely be mitigated by Hayward's arrival, but his defensive versatility and consistent shooting would have actually been outstanding compliments to Gordon's game if they had gotten the chance to play together. Looking at it as a 1 for 1 swap, the Celtics are better off, but Stevens will absolutely miss having Bradley as an option to guard opposing PGs or run dribble hand-off/curls for easy buckets to kickstart a stagnant offense. His defensive numbers were slipping, but along with Smart was part of the C's defensive identity and I think his loss in that respect will be felt.

Olynyk will similarly be missed for his versatility. Offensively he allowed Stevens to run some interesting sets and his range opened things for others. Despite being maddeningly hesitant at times, Olynyk really was an excellent role player. Despite his limitations on the other side of the floor he will still be sorely missed purely for the fact that he was tall. In that same vein so will Amir. Both of those big men were often abused by significantly better players, but on a team starved for size, merely being able to match up with an opposing team's 7 footer was enough to warrant playing time.

Losses:
Beyond the aforementioned players there isn't much else lost out from last year. Young, Jackson and Mickey never actually contributed, however they are lost "assets" that never panned out for the team.

Jerebko is the next closest thing to a loss, however in the grand scheme of things it's not very impactful. His role should be absorbed by the young guns eventually just like Gerald Green and Tyler Zeller.

Draft:
I'm on board with the Tatum pick. I don't believe that Ainge would have taken Tatum at #1. That's just spin. I do believe that Ainge didn't think the gap between Fultz and Ball/Tatum/Jackson was significant enough to warrant drafting a PG behind IT, when he could draft a better fit with similar upside and pick up an additional asset. And if that's how he felt, then I applaud him for doing so.

I had originally had them ranked Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Isaac, Tatum mostly based off of upside. However I eventually came around to Tatum pre-draft (assuming Fultz/Ball are off the board) purely because he can shoot the ball consistently. I feel like Jackson and Brown have too much overlap as developing talents (with similar upsides). Isaac I felt like was much too risky despite his more unique physical attributes, given that Ainge traded from #1 for a guy mocked as far back as #8.

I think at #3 Tatum is a totally adequate pick.

The real bright spot, as so many others have highlighted, is Semi Ojeleye. He had a first round grade from most scouts, he's got a body that is built for where the NBA is heading and he's got a skillset that I think gives him a solid floor in the NBA. After Ainge drafted and traded Deyonta Davis last year, who similarly fell into the 2nd round despite having a first round grade, I'm very pleased to see Semi end up on the roster. If there is a major trade during the season I expect him to get a chance at a significant role.

Trades:
Let's start with the obvious. #1 for #3 and LAL/SAC pick. I think the value at this stage is solid, but falls short of what you'd expect in giving up the #1. The only real problem I have with the trade is the execution. The fact that they made the trade so far in advance of the draft I think hurt Ainge's bargaining power as things continued to shake out. I'm assuming that it was done with the expectation of a potentially larger deal also prior to the draft, but the fact that no such deal ever took place is what makes me look at this trade and think that the execution was particularly poor.

Had Ainge waited and held onto the #1 until draft night I think he would have been better placed to squeeze an extra asset out of Philly (nothing significant, but maybe just the OKC 2020 pick), which would have helped the optics of the deal. In a more pipe-dream scenario maybe with #1 he could have actually made waves with a KP deal.

Jury is still out on the trade as far as a grade goes (I'd currently put it at a B+), but I think we are far enough away now that we can fairly criticize the timing and execution.

The Bradley for Morris trade was definitely a loss in terms of value. It was a necessary evil to consummate the Hayward signing and Bradley's impending FA, helps soften the blow, but still certainly a loss overall. I think the fact that it looked as if Boston was going to make an even worse trade also helped make this all look a bit rosier.

That being said I think it's an ok deal. Morris will help win now and is on a very team-friendly deal, which lasts an extra year to AB's, thereby allowing them to potential move him and get some sort of value (ideally draft asset) down the line.

Free Agency:
FINALLY Boston gets their "star" player. Really cannot complain about how this worked out, they got their #1 target and didn't have to do too much maneuvering to make it happen (despite the cap not helping them out). Hayward is a perfect fit for Stevens, but more-so than anything he is a perfect fit for the win-now/win-later time line. Gordon can be the star now, but also works as a #2 down the line if Boston were able to get someone from that next tier of NBA talents (AD/Durant type guys).

Baynes is a really nice signing. His veteran presence mixed with the incredibly raw Zizic coming over should be enough to replicate at least what Amir/Zeller/Olynyk gave the C's as far as size up-front. He's no more than a band-aid, but a cheap well-fitting one nonetheless. Realistically he might not be as good as Amir Johnson, but at a certain point Amir himself was just a hustle 7 footer, which is what Baynes' floor is.

Current Depth Chart: (taken from bbinsiders)
I would roll out:

IT/Rozier
Smart/Brown
Hayward/Tatum/Ojeyele/Nader
Crowder/Morris/Yabusele
Horford/Baynes/Zizic/Theis

Your 3's and 4's will largely be interchangeable (Hayward/Tatum/Crowder/Morris) so I think it matters little who is where, but just look for the best matchup. Similarly I think Brown/Hayward/Ojeyele/Smart could all switch at the 2/3. Lastly I expect to see a number of lineups with Baynes starting at C and Horford at PF, which would allow the C's to play with more size.

Needs:
Rebounding
Rim protection
Combo guard to backup PG/SG
A top 10 player

Rebounding was their biggest problem last year and I think they are arguably even worse this year having lost Olynyk and Johnson, but also Bradley who was at times our best rebounder despite being in the backcourt. Baynes, Zizic and Tatum should help mitigate that some, but even then you're just getting back to sub-par rather than G-league level. I don't see this team beating the Cavs until they've resolved those rebounding problems (Love and TT will be too dominant even if Kyrie goes elsewhere for peanuts).

On that same note, they still severely lack rim protection, which is nothing new but again they are arguably worse than last year. Zizic could potentially be big in plugging these frontcourt holes, but he looks to be at least months (if not years) away from contributing in a meaningful way.

I think it's pretty clear from the depth chart that they are in need of some depth in the back-court. Particularly at the 2 guard spot, but also at the point, especially in light of IT's playoff injury. A combo guard who can sufficiently be a placeholder in both spots would be ideal.

Lastly they need a SUPERstar. Gordon is a star, but whoever said he is more Horford than Durant, is spot on. I think he gives them a puncher's chance in any game, but in order to be a real threat and not just potential Cinderella they'll need a Durant level talent. Hayward may be the first step on the road towards that, but the main point is that he is NOT that.

Additional Thoughts:
What a year to be a Celtics fan!

This team will basically experience the full-spectrum of the NBA fan experience this year: competing for a championship, landing a top free agent, being an underdog, rooting for a tank (thanks Brooklyn), watching a top draft pick develop and almost everything in between. It's been a lot of fun and as we start to reach the precipice of this rebuild I think it's important to bask in the unique experience that the C's have been in for that last couple years and at least one more until the BKN gravy train runs out.

If you had told me at the deadline last year that the C's would win the lottery, land Gordon Hayward and not trade the 2018 BKN pick in the process, I'd be ecstatic. Ainge not pulling the trigger for a star and pulling the trigger on trading #1 has jaded me a bit, but there is really nothing to complain about given where we started and where we are now.

Projected Win/Loss: 54-28
I expect struggles at the start of the season and I expect a mid-season shake-up that will also have teething issues. Their front-court I feel like was a major limiting factor last year and I don't see much changing there. Furthermore I think playing SF from 2-4 might work out in the end, but it's going to take a while to develop so it's going to be tough to find that groove. My homer heart says 60, but I could realistically see them with a record that falls below last year's if injuries occur.

I expect an ECF appearance though

Off-Season Grade: A-

If you had told me that this was the roster we'd end up with at the end of the offseason at any point last year I would have classed that as an A+.

The main reason I'm downgrading it is because of some of the missed opportunities to elevate this team even more at an incredibly reasonable cost. Particularly with what PG went for and his recent comments about potentially not being LA or bust, I think you look at that and say that maybe they missed an opportunity.

That brings it down to an A for me. And then because I think it's pretty clear Ainge blew the timing of the #1 for #3 trade and lost the AB for Morris trade (despite it being a necessity), brings them down another notch to A-.

From an entertainment perspective I give them an A+ though. It's been entertaining start to finish and I'm really excited for the season to kick-off.
UHar_Vinnie wrote:If you don't lean forward while hugging a dude, you are gonna have a wiener touching incident. You know this.
SmartWentCrazy
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 20,749
And1: 34,848
Joined: Dec 29, 2014

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#209 » by SmartWentCrazy » Fri Aug 4, 2017 5:00 pm

HartfordWhalers wrote:
When Gortat was on the court and Horford was as well, Washington outscored the Celtics with a +6.6 net rating
During that time, Gortat put up 9.2 points and 12.8 rebound per 36 minutes
Horford did 14.5/6.5per 36 in the same time, on much higher shooting efficiency.


I'm double posting, because I wanted to separate the small sample w/e happened last year from highlighting the rebounding gap which is there in large samples. If Baynes is solving it, then Horford is playing the 4 and Boston has a below average center on the court. If Baynes is not solving it, this does exist and rebounds can matter.


Correlation =/= causation. They were outscored because Washington had a better starting lineup than Boston did. This doesn't mean that Gortat outplayed Horford, though. I think it's pretty clear that the opposite happened in the series.
nykballa2k4
RealGM
Posts: 31,074
And1: 7,443
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: Kurt Rhombus is managing the defense...
       

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#210 » by nykballa2k4 » Sat Aug 5, 2017 12:11 am

patman52 wrote:
nykballa2k4 wrote:
patman52 wrote:
Again, it is not competing for this Ring this year. It is taking incremental steps towards that goal.


The window for all of the Nets and Celtics picks to reach a peak likely begins in 2020. Did the deals that were done this summer greatly improve that season?

Right now I see Bradley moved, Smart due for an extension. Thomas due for an extension, Horford getting older and becoming a man without a position since he performs poorly against other C's. Moving down from #1 to #3 plus an extra pick could be great, it could also be one of the biggest mistakes of all time (if Fultz or Ball becomes a superstar). I just don't see any way that this off-season can be an A.


No the deals done this season were done to improve the team this year but not take anything way from the goal of being able to compete in in 18-19. Horford will be playing more PF min than in the past with the addition of Baynes and Zizic. Yes we will have Thomas locked up for ages 28,29, 30, 31 and 32.

A 53 win team added the best FA out there, a #3 pick, a future lottery pick, and improved the center and forward positions Zeller/Jerebko to Baynes/Morris but lost a superior #2 close to all star level player in Bradley. And brought over two 1st rd stashes this offseason.

You didn't "add" a #3, you dropped down to #3. Would you give the Lakers an A for having the #2? My grade factors in what I estimate that trade value to be. Yours may vary. It's all just opinion after all.
I see a #1 seed that can't compete against the Cavs add an expensive FA who won't ultimately help them topple said Cavs team so long as LeBron is there. Right now there is a bit of a glass ceiling.
If the Warriors last off-season added Al Horford (for example) instead of Durant, I likely would have given them a B+ being that Horford had not looked overmatched before and center was an area of weakness, but ultimately I don't think that would have been a huge difference maker over Barnes (still departing) against the Cavs and Spurs (likely rivals). Durant was an obvious A since his addition made the team look like a complete juggernaut.

If the Celtics want an "A" off season they have to add a super star, a top 10 player, a match up problem for LeBron. If the Celtics were a #3 seed or had lost in the earlier rounds like it looked like they were gonna, my grade would be different because ECF is certainly better than ECSF or first round exit.

side note: Hayward was not a consensus top FA. Griffin and Paul were out there as FA's. IMO Blake Griffin may have been a better compliment.
Numbers don't lie, people who use them do
Stand up to all hate
Stand up to Jewish hate
nykballa2k4
RealGM
Posts: 31,074
And1: 7,443
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: Kurt Rhombus is managing the defense...
       

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#211 » by nykballa2k4 » Sat Aug 5, 2017 12:19 am

SmartWentCrazy wrote:
nykballa2k4 wrote:
SmartWentCrazy wrote:
You've said this twice, and it's just wrong. He destroyed the Bulls and Wizards in the playoffs. Like 140 ORTG good.

Thompson always kills him, sure. But he's not really a center.

Thompson or Horford?
I was able to watch only some of the playoff games due to my schedule. I watched Robin Lopez look like Brook Lopez in the first two games and then I saw Gortat look like an all-star the next series. The games I saw all showed Al Horford being badly outplayed in the first quarter. As the game went on, perhaps he fared better when hidden against small-ball line ups (Wiz were without Mahinmi so their back up center was Jason Smith). If you watched all of the Celtics playoff games, then you likely saw the same thing I did.


Horford was easily their best player this post season. There are many things about Horford you could complain about, but last year's playoff performance is firmly at the bottom.

Round 1:
Robin Lopez-12.7-7.2 on around a 68 TS%
Al Horford- 15.3-8.5-6.5 on 63/54/85 shooting splits

Round 2:
Marcin Gortat- 9.4-11.3 on around a 53 TS%
Al Horford- 16.7-6.6-5.4 on 68/61/70 shooting splits

Both Gortat and Lopez also became unplayable defensively, as the IT-Horford PnR absolutely shredded them.

You're making a real bizarre criticism right now, to be honest.


Did you watch any of the games? Those stats are not head to head, so it really does nothing for the argument. The fact that Robin Lopez scored 12.7ppg at that clip should have made you rethink your argument. Robin is the defense one, Brook is the offense one.
Gortat played well in the home games and played well when matched up with Horford. In game 1, Horford was pulled early and Amir Johnson matched up with Gortat. If you want to dig up some stats (which I don't, because I know what I saw) I would gladly eat my crow with a side of sriracha (if you'd be so kind) should you be able to provide stats when the two were matched up.
Numbers don't lie, people who use them do
Stand up to all hate
Stand up to Jewish hate
patman52
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,712
And1: 848
Joined: Jan 03, 2016
 

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#212 » by patman52 » Sat Aug 5, 2017 12:40 am

nykballa2k4 wrote:
patman52 wrote:
nykballa2k4 wrote:
The window for all of the Nets and Celtics picks to reach a peak likely begins in 2020. Did the deals that were done this summer greatly improve that season?

Right now I see Bradley moved, Smart due for an extension. Thomas due for an extension, Horford getting older and becoming a man without a position since he performs poorly against other C's. Moving down from #1 to #3 plus an extra pick could be great, it could also be one of the biggest mistakes of all time (if Fultz or Ball becomes a superstar). I just don't see any way that this off-season can be an A.


No the deals done this season were done to improve the team this year but not take anything way from the goal of being able to compete in in 18-19. Horford will be playing more PF min than in the past with the addition of Baynes and Zizic. Yes we will have Thomas locked up for ages 28,29, 30, 31 and 32.

A 53 win team added the best FA out there, a #3 pick, a future lottery pick, and improved the center and forward positions Zeller/Jerebko to Baynes/Morris but lost a superior #2 close to all star level player in Bradley. And brought over two 1st rd stashes this offseason.

You didn't "add" a #3, you dropped down to #3. Would you give the Lakers an A for having the #2? My grade factors in what I estimate that trade value to be. Yours may vary. It's all just opinion after all.
I see a #1 seed that can't compete against the Cavs add an expensive FA who won't ultimately help them topple said Cavs team so long as LeBron is there. Right now there is a bit of a glass ceiling.
If the Warriors last off-season added Al Horford (for example) instead of Durant, I likely would have given them a B+ being that Horford had not looked overmatched before and center was an area of weakness, but ultimately I don't think that would have been a huge difference maker over Barnes (still departing) against the Cavs and Spurs (likely rivals). Durant was an obvious A since his addition made the team look like a complete juggernaut.

If the Celtics want an "A" off season they have to add a super star, a top 10 player, a match up problem for LeBron. If the Celtics were a #3 seed or had lost in the earlier rounds like it looked like they were gonna, my grade would be different because ECF is certainly better than ECSF or first round exit.

side note: Hayward was not a consensus top FA. Griffin and Paul were out there as FA's. IMO Blake Griffin may have been a better compliment.


Yeah, I would give a grade of A for adding Ball, but they did not add a player like Hayward either. They are not bringing over any stashes either. They didn't do anything bad so they get a A for Ball but a C for the rest of the offseason. So a B for a final.
nykballa2k4
RealGM
Posts: 31,074
And1: 7,443
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: Kurt Rhombus is managing the defense...
       

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#213 » by nykballa2k4 » Sat Aug 5, 2017 12:48 am

patman52 wrote:
nykballa2k4 wrote:
patman52 wrote:
No the deals done this season were done to improve the team this year but not take anything way from the goal of being able to compete in in 18-19. Horford will be playing more PF min than in the past with the addition of Baynes and Zizic. Yes we will have Thomas locked up for ages 28,29, 30, 31 and 32.

A 53 win team added the best FA out there, a #3 pick, a future lottery pick, and improved the center and forward positions Zeller/Jerebko to Baynes/Morris but lost a superior #2 close to all star level player in Bradley. And brought over two 1st rd stashes this offseason.

You didn't "add" a #3, you dropped down to #3. Would you give the Lakers an A for having the #2? My grade factors in what I estimate that trade value to be. Yours may vary. It's all just opinion after all.
I see a #1 seed that can't compete against the Cavs add an expensive FA who won't ultimately help them topple said Cavs team so long as LeBron is there. Right now there is a bit of a glass ceiling.
If the Warriors last off-season added Al Horford (for example) instead of Durant, I likely would have given them a B+ being that Horford had not looked overmatched before and center was an area of weakness, but ultimately I don't think that would have been a huge difference maker over Barnes (still departing) against the Cavs and Spurs (likely rivals). Durant was an obvious A since his addition made the team look like a complete juggernaut.

If the Celtics want an "A" off season they have to add a super star, a top 10 player, a match up problem for LeBron. If the Celtics were a #3 seed or had lost in the earlier rounds like it looked like they were gonna, my grade would be different because ECF is certainly better than ECSF or first round exit.

side note: Hayward was not a consensus top FA. Griffin and Paul were out there as FA's. IMO Blake Griffin may have been a better compliment.


Yeah, I would give a grade of A for adding Ball, but they did not add a player like Hayward either. They are not bringing over any stashes either. They didn't do anything bad so they get a A for Ball but a C for the rest of the offseason. So a B for a final.


I think I gave the Lakers an A- earlier since I liked what they did aside from the draft. I think just picking in your selection does not warrant a high grade, if you appear to reach, I would penalize (Kings with Thomas Robinson a few years back, Anthony Bennett going #1). I like the Lopez and cap space for DAR and Moz for both sides. Lopez will be a solid vet for the team and a possible re-sale guy while that cap space opened up can be an opportunity for Paul George or another superstar in the following year. DAR needed to go and the Lakers made it profitable.
Numbers don't lie, people who use them do
Stand up to all hate
Stand up to Jewish hate
SmartWentCrazy
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 20,749
And1: 34,848
Joined: Dec 29, 2014

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#214 » by SmartWentCrazy » Sat Aug 5, 2017 12:58 am

nykballa2k4 wrote:
SmartWentCrazy wrote:
nykballa2k4 wrote:Thompson or Horford?
I was able to watch only some of the playoff games due to my schedule. I watched Robin Lopez look like Brook Lopez in the first two games and then I saw Gortat look like an all-star the next series. The games I saw all showed Al Horford being badly outplayed in the first quarter. As the game went on, perhaps he fared better when hidden against small-ball line ups (Wiz were without Mahinmi so their back up center was Jason Smith). If you watched all of the Celtics playoff games, then you likely saw the same thing I did.


Horford was easily their best player this post season. There are many things about Horford you could complain about, but last year's playoff performance is firmly at the bottom.

Round 1:
Robin Lopez-12.7-7.2 on around a 68 TS%
Al Horford- 15.3-8.5-6.5 on 63/54/85 shooting splits

Round 2:
Marcin Gortat- 9.4-11.3 on around a 53 TS%
Al Horford- 16.7-6.6-5.4 on 68/61/70 shooting splits

Both Gortat and Lopez also became unplayable defensively, as the IT-Horford PnR absolutely shredded them.

You're making a real bizarre criticism right now, to be honest.


Did you watch any of the games? Those stats are not head to head, so it really does nothing for the argument. The fact that Robin Lopez scored 12.7ppg at that clip should have made you rethink your argument. Robin is the defense one, Brook is the offense one.
Gortat played well in the home games and played well when matched up with Horford. In game 1, Horford was pulled early and Amir Johnson matched up with Gortat. If you want to dig up some stats (which I don't, because I know what I saw) I would gladly eat my crow with a side of sriracha (if you'd be so kind) should you be able to provide stats when the two were matched up.


FYI, usually you have to actually watch the games if you're gunna play the "did you watch the games". It's okay to admit you may be wrong on something.
nykballa2k4
RealGM
Posts: 31,074
And1: 7,443
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: Kurt Rhombus is managing the defense...
       

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#215 » by nykballa2k4 » Sat Aug 5, 2017 1:07 am

SmartWentCrazy wrote:
nykballa2k4 wrote:
SmartWentCrazy wrote:
Horford was easily their best player this post season. There are many things about Horford you could complain about, but last year's playoff performance is firmly at the bottom.

Round 1:
Robin Lopez-12.7-7.2 on around a 68 TS%
Al Horford- 15.3-8.5-6.5 on 63/54/85 shooting splits

Round 2:
Marcin Gortat- 9.4-11.3 on around a 53 TS%
Al Horford- 16.7-6.6-5.4 on 68/61/70 shooting splits

Both Gortat and Lopez also became unplayable defensively, as the IT-Horford PnR absolutely shredded them.

You're making a real bizarre criticism right now, to be honest.


Did you watch any of the games? Those stats are not head to head, so it really does nothing for the argument. The fact that Robin Lopez scored 12.7ppg at that clip should have made you rethink your argument. Robin is the defense one, Brook is the offense one.
Gortat played well in the home games and played well when matched up with Horford. In game 1, Horford was pulled early and Amir Johnson matched up with Gortat. If you want to dig up some stats (which I don't, because I know what I saw) I would gladly eat my crow with a side of sriracha (if you'd be so kind) should you be able to provide stats when the two were matched up.


FYI, usually you have to actually watch the games if you're gunna play the "did you watch the games". It's okay to admit you may be wrong on something.


Hey, I am an honest man! I have to admit when I only was able to watch some of the games.
Numbers don't lie, people who use them do
Stand up to all hate
Stand up to Jewish hate
User avatar
Tai
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,369
And1: 3,245
Joined: Dec 03, 2009
       

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#216 » by Tai » Sun Aug 6, 2017 2:38 am

JojoSlimbiid wrote:Gave em a B

They traded away the best player in the draft IMO so that kind of puts a bit of a damper. Not to mention by doing this trade unless they draft a guard next year you're looking at 100+ million for I.T at 29 years old which is almost enough reason to not make the trade even if you don't really like Fultz.

The biggest issue which wouldn't have been solved even if they kept the pick is I still hate their big rotation and I don't think they're rebounding and size issues got fixed this off-season. Looking at their assets combined with what the Blazers and Mavericks paid to get quality young bigs like Nurkic and Noel you really got to wonder how they weren't able to get one of those type of guys. I don't believe in Zizic,Yabusele,etc as legitimate positive big men in the NBA.

Having said all that they did get better in a lot of the ways they were already good at. They seemingly upgraded at the wing spots both now and into the future so even though this post may seem negative they're still in a good spot.


This sounds like HartfordWhalers giving Danny Ainge a bad grade cause he didn't trade for Cousins, even though it was reported the Celtics didn't want Cousins. More enough fair criticism has been poured on Fultz, I dunno how not drafting him already puts a damper, especially when the guy they did get did well in SL; obviously not close to actual regular season play, but it's a good start.
smartyz456 wrote:oh i am a laker fan for life

i'm just gonna be a warrior fan until lebron leaves the lakers

true laker fans don't root for lebron


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1728641
User avatar
Tai
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,369
And1: 3,245
Joined: Dec 03, 2009
       

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#217 » by Tai » Sun Aug 6, 2017 3:21 am

And while we're on Fultz, cause I didn't really see this addressed in the topic (unless I missed it)
bondom34 wrote:
The Philly trade was another that I didn't love but didn't hate. I'll say this first: I don't buy Ainge would have taken Tatum first overall. Not for a second. And he did pick up an extra asset, but one that may be a bit less valuable after the Lakers got a couple guys where they might not be quite bad enough to get that pick (though I do think they'll still be pretty bad and bottom 5 seems rather possible too). If I'm being honest I'd have just taken Fultz, but that will be seen in the future.


So here was you from 2016 on the draft:

I'm going to be honest, I didn't love the draft. I think Brown was a worse prospect than at least Dunn, and they should have either taken and kept Dunn or traded him. Also, they're getting to a point where they're just having to take guys with the sole purpose of stashing them. Yabusele looked good in summer league, other than that I don't know if there's a difference maker anywhere here and they had to trade 2 picks for a future pick just to get rid of one


So you feel just the year before Danny reached on Brown instead of taking Dunn (as did most of the panel) but don't believe he would reach the next season? I'm curious how you came to that conclusion. There's been enough pushback on whether Fultz should have been a consensus #1 pick, and as we all know, the league is brimming with players who can score 25 points and not win a damn thing. :nod:
smartyz456 wrote:oh i am a laker fan for life

i'm just gonna be a warrior fan until lebron leaves the lakers

true laker fans don't root for lebron


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1728641
brackdan70
RealGM
Posts: 18,309
And1: 13,143
Joined: Jul 15, 2013
Location: Ogden, UT
   

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#218 » by brackdan70 » Sun Aug 6, 2017 3:36 am

Mystical Apples wrote:Cody Zeller fits Boston. Perhaps a Zeller-Crowder framework but not sure either team bites until February, if ever. Dwight Howard isn't exactly reliable and guessing Boston prefers Crowder over rushing their young wings.


seems like they like Crowder. why would they trade him for a lesser player?
Jordan Walsh > Lonnie Walker and Charles Bassey
jpengland
General Manager
Posts: 7,614
And1: 6,944
Joined: Jan 22, 2014
   

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#219 » by jpengland » Sun Aug 6, 2017 4:11 pm

C+

Hayward is a big get. But Bradley loss nearly negates that.

Throw in the Fultz mistake and the fact that neither rebounding or rim protection has been addressed (the actual weaknesses) and I think it's a failure of an offseason given the level.of assets Boston own.

Not committed either to now, or the future. Just deferred yet again.
User avatar
Tai
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,369
And1: 3,245
Joined: Dec 03, 2009
       

Re: Boston Early Offseason in Review (HW/Slava/bondom34/Mamba4goat) 

Post#220 » by Tai » Sun Aug 6, 2017 5:26 pm

jpengland wrote:C+

Hayward is a big get. But Bradley loss nearly negates that.

Throw in the Fultz mistake and the fact that neither rebounding or rim protection has been addressed (the actual weaknesses) and I think it's a failure of an offseason given the level.of assets Boston own.

Not committed either to now, or the future. Just deferred yet again.


Like I said to Jojoslimbiid, you're downgrading them for not getting a player they didn't want in Fultz, even though they got an extra pick along with picking Tatum. I'm not saying Fultz sucks, but a "mistake" not to draft him before the season starts?

Even on Bradley, I'm glad he's appreciated outside of Boston (tho it didn't feel that way around this board when he went down in last year's playoffs), but he kinda had to be traded to make room for Hayward; are you suggesting the Celtics not get Hayward at all? Well ok, but Bradley is probably gonna get paid by another team in the offseason anyway, so it was either trade him soon or let him walk for nothing. All that considered, I think Morris was a good get.
smartyz456 wrote:oh i am a laker fan for life

i'm just gonna be a warrior fan until lebron leaves the lakers

true laker fans don't root for lebron


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1728641

Return to Trades and Transactions