jcsunsfan wrote:I think Ainge did just fine in this trade. I think this season was IT's best both now and in the future. Kyrie can be a better defender. IT can't.
Ainge added Kyrie and Hayward this offseason. Semi looks pretty good too. I think the Celtics are just fine.
I would view it that way in isolation, but not as a whole. The thing with Ainge and the Celtics is they were given an incredibly fortunate blessing in dealing with an awful GM and a new owner from a different country who thought he could simply spend his way to contention in Brooklyn. Thus, he was gifted an incredibly lopsided trade that stood to make them relevant for about a decade if played correctly.
The problem with Ainge is that he has punted repeatedly until he was backed into a corner, is a horrendous drafter, and has missed out on a ton of stars due to being strongheaded. I think when you look at it as adding Hayward and Kyrie, okay, that isn't bad, but when you look at the opportunity cost in their past 1.5 seasons it is awful. Here's why.
With IT breaking out and on a budget contract, and without being hampered by other horrible contracts (sans maybe Horford), they had a unique window to add multiple star players before IT hit extension under the cap, and they had the picks to facilitate adding guys via trade if not FA.
So, from that point, they had the opportunity to trade for Ibaka but refused to include Terry freaking Rozier and thus ended up signing Horford, who is 6 years older and costs $10 mil more per year going forward and $20 mil more before this season, but Horford was a star in Atlanta. His play has started to drop off, but that was probably expected at age 33. I won't knock the signing though even though I probably would have gone younger at that point with my star selection given he eats up $30 mil in cap space. I think they are pretty clearly better off with Ibaka right now than Horford though given age and contract.
Hayward was a guy they had targeted for years and were uniquely qualified to get given his relationship with Stevens. Also, Boston is probably a better place for a young multi-millionaire to live than Utah, so he was a realistic part of their plans. Given that, they could trade for a star even with Horford's huge deal on the books and sign Hayward, then go over the cap and sign IT. IT's cap hold being $9 mil next offseason is a big deal here.
They had the opportunity to trade for Cousins, Butler, and George, all while keeping IT. They passed on all due to insane negotiation tactics. They refused to include any of their picks, Smart, probably Rozier given the history, and Brown. It is one thing if you consistently nail the draft, but when you consistently bomb it like Ainge has, this is pure insanity. Yes, other teams are asking a lot for their stars, but Boston has the ability to overpay and still feel good about it if it improves their team in the long run. They chose to do that with Kyrie, but inexplicably refused to do it for Butler and George, who are better players than Kyrie and a better fit for the team overall since IT and Kyrie are basically the same player today, and these other trades allow you to keep IT. Basically, what happened here is Ainge was dumbfoundingly stubborn on the true value of player X when it came to Butler and George and Cousins, and lost out on all 3 as a result, so he finally relented when it came to Kyrie.
Then there is the talking yourself out of Markelle Fultz debacle. Time will tell if that is the right move, but, as historically shown, Ainge hasn't been a good drafter in a decade.
Boston should be looking at a team that could actually maybe give GS a run. IT, Butler, Hayward, ____, Horford; or IT, Hayward, George, ____, Horford; or, if they don't sign Horford-- sub out him for Cousins in either of these scenarios. Those are all better options going forward imo than what they have today, in both the short and long runs.
