Trade Ideas Thread

[Floody100]

Trade Idea: Carsen Edwards, Vincent Poirier, and the 2020 MIL pick should demand a trade to another team.

Bjleca ?

[100proof]

At this point it is 1 of three things.

Massive tax bills
Trade hayward if he does opt out
Trade kemba if hayward doesnt opt out.

This team as constructed will not win a championship imo therefore it is not worth paying big tax bills for.

Totally disagree with you. I think this team has 6 of the rotation pieces locked in out of the 8 we realistically need to win it all:

Kemba / Smart
Brown
Hayward / ???
Tatum
??? / Theis

The question marks are 1) a legitimate wing off the bench and 2) a center with size to guard the bigger matchups.

Between all of the young players, picks and free agent exceptions we have it's extremely plausible to me we can fill those two spots. Langford/Williams could feasibly develop into them. We have all of our firsts to trade. Getting a bench wing with the MLE is extremely plausible.

The luxury tax bills don't have to be huge. It just takes some trade off next year. I've posted numerous plans where we can get under the tax. If they're willing to make a 1 year sacrifice on the bench to do it then it works. And then in '21-22 and '22-23 you can go all out with MLE before Kemba and an extended Hayward walk after that, allowing us to sign a new younger max player for the future.

Trading away the core pieces here shouldn't be a consideration unless the Hayward financials don't work.

The Hayward financials dont work. And that was peior the global pandemic and now the absolute TANKING of nba ratings. Not to mention the possible impact on Chinese influx of cash in the near future. If America continues its stance against China then looking at more reduced income.

Kemba-25 mill
Brown-27 mill
Tatum - 30 mill next year

Hayward 35 mill.

Thats 117 million in 4 players.

Makes no sense. Hayward will either walk or get shopped for a big and wing depth. Something like turner plus salary, or aaron gordon plus salary.

[djFan71]

I didn't come up with this one on my own.
https://www.si.com/nba/knicks/news/knicks-celtics-marcus-smart-trade

He proposes this only if the Knicks don't move up from 6. Which means, they probably fall a spot or 2 to 7-8.

Knicks receive: Marcus Smart, the Memphis Grizzlies' 2020 first round pick, and the Milwaukee Bucks' 2020 first round pick

Celtics receive: the New York Knicks' 2020 first round pick, the Charlotte Hornets' 2020 second round pick, and the Dallas Mavericks' 2021 first round pick (protected for selections 1-4; if not conveyed in 2021, Boston then receives Dallas' 2023 top-10 protected first round pick)

DAL 2021 pick is unprotected to them, and they have their own with a pick swap option with LAC. So, I'd say we get the other pick next year if DAL is somehow top 4. Rather than the 2023 (which turns to 2nds at some point).

With that and a Hayward extension at lower $ next year, you're probably under the tax and get the full MLE.
Get a young big like Okongwu/Toppin.
Have 26 and 2 seconds this year.
Extra 2021 first. Though likely in the 20s.

I really doubt it happens, and it would suck to see Marcus as a Knick, but... these start to be the choices of having 4 max/near max guys.

[MagicBagley18]

Well I think it's kind of "bury your head in the sand" to just say that the finances will work themselves out. It's a legitimate numbers crunch. Before COVID reports were we wanted to keep Hayward. And with minor moves this offseason we would have been able to keep him on his option and stay under the tax for another year, therefore avoiding any repeater tax down the line. Barring any extreme changes to the CBA in response to COVID, that equation has drastically changed. Keeping Gordon Hayward long term without paying repeater tax down the line is impossible with serious cost consciousness this offseason. That just is what it is. Wyc is either willing to pay the repeater taxes down the line or he's not. If he is, great. If he's not, then there is no "work itself out". Hayward has to go after next season if that's the case.

So if that's the situation, you definitely have to consider trades. Maybe the deal returns a lesser player, but fits into a multi-year window. If keeping Hayward long-term isn't feasible you have to weigh that against just keeping Hayward for a year. So it's a balancing act with multiple considerations. But Hayward is a great piece so even if a guy could stick around for multiple years you have to weight if it's worth giving up even just 1 year of Hayward.

There will be small ancillary moves to get under not drastic Moves like losing Hayward for a **** salad in return. They will keep Hayward at all costs. The biggest threat to Hayward leaving is him opting out and some team gives him a 4 year max and it’s too good to pass up.

Like I said it will work itself out.

Again, you're burying your head in the sand. We are at close to $150M in guaranteed salary next year. The tax line in the most optimistic projections is expected to be be held flat to this year at about $132M. Shedding $18M will not be ancillary moves.It's going to take moving Kanter, Poirier and others. Moving $10M of salary for none in return will cost picks to do. It's also going to take Hayward opting out and re-signing for less money next year, which means he would need to be overpaid in the future to compensate.

If the plan is to keep Hayward long term but get under the tax next year is required to do so then ancillary/minor moves won't do the trick. That's just not taking into account what the numbers actually are.

No I’m not. I’m not worrying ab something that will always work itself out by people way smarter than you or I and def not on your crazy trades. Poirer blows, kanter is replaceable, the bucks pick and both players are a small piece to pay to keep a player like Hayward and remain highly competitive at least by ownerships standards.

You keep saying the plan the plan the plan, you have no idea what the plan is. Hayward baring him getting a max from some team desperate to make the playoffs will be on the team- if that takes losing jags like poirer and **** picks like the bucks 1st it’ll get done. Zarren and co are I’m sure will handle it and again it’ll work itself out.

They didn’t sign kemba Walker last summer to stay competitive to just give up on Hayward for your little trades.

[GoGreen]

I didn't come up with this one on my own.
https://www.si.com/nba/knicks/news/knicks-celtics-marcus-smart-trade

He proposes this only if the Knicks don't move up from 6. Which means, they probably fall a spot or 2 to 7-8.

Knicks receive: Marcus Smart, the Memphis Grizzlies' 2020 first round pick, and the Milwaukee Bucks' 2020 first round pick

Celtics receive: the New York Knicks' 2020 first round pick, the Charlotte Hornets' 2020 second round pick, and the Dallas Mavericks' 2021 first round pick (protected for selections 1-4; if not conveyed in 2021, Boston then receives Dallas' 2023 top-10 protected first round pick)

DAL 2021 pick is unprotected to them, and they have their own with a pick swap option with LAC. So, I'd say we get the other pick next year if DAL is somehow top 4. Rather than the 2023 (which turns to 2nds at some point).

With that and a Hayward extension at lower $ next year, you're probably under the tax and get the full MLE.
Get a young big like Okongwu/Toppin.
Have 26 and 2 seconds this year.
Extra 2021 first. Though likely in the 20s.

I really doubt it happens, and it would suck to see Marcus as a Knick, but... these start to be the choices of having 4 max/near max guys.

I would make that trade on a heartbeat, but i don't think there's a shot in hell NY accepts it

[100proof]

I didn't come up with this one on my own.
https://www.si.com/nba/knicks/news/knicks-celtics-marcus-smart-trade

He proposes this only if the Knicks don't move up from 6. Which means, they probably fall a spot or 2 to 7-8.

Knicks receive: Marcus Smart, the Memphis Grizzlies' 2020 first round pick, and the Milwaukee Bucks' 2020 first round pick

Celtics receive: the New York Knicks' 2020 first round pick, the Charlotte Hornets' 2020 second round pick, and the Dallas Mavericks' 2021 first round pick (protected for selections 1-4; if not conveyed in 2021, Boston then receives Dallas' 2023 top-10 protected first round pick)

DAL 2021 pick is unprotected to them, and they have their own with a pick swap option with LAC. So, I'd say we get the other pick next year if DAL is somehow top 4. Rather than the 2023 (which turns to 2nds at some point).

With that and a Hayward extension at lower $ next year, you're probably under the tax and get the full MLE.
Get a young big like Okongwu/Toppin.
Have 26 and 2 seconds this year.
Extra 2021 first. Though likely in the 20s.

I really doubt it happens, and it would suck to see Marcus as a Knick, but... these start to be the choices of having 4 max/near max guys.

Makes more sense to not bring back hayward.
Or trade kemba.

I would trade kemba and was firmly on the "we dont really need kemba" bandwagon prior the season.

And kemba would snatch a great pick in the draft or at the least a huge front court and depth improvement.

[100proof]

If Wiseman is on the board.

Kemba to Minny for James Johnson, and Wiseman.

Minny gets a vet star to pair with their young duo, Boston gets an expiring bench toughguy vet and a franchise center. Celtics now have a 5 man core of:

PG: Smart
SG: Brown
SF: Tatum
PF: Hayward
C: Wiseman

Primary depth after assuming all possible contracts are left to expire, etc:

pg: Edwards, Waters
sg: Langford
sf: James Johnson
pf: Grant Williams
C: Theis, Poirier, Timelord

Picks and MLE to fill out depth.

[MagicBagley18]

I didn't come up with this one on my own.
https://www.si.com/nba/knicks/news/knicks-celtics-marcus-smart-trade

He proposes this only if the Knicks don't move up from 6. Which means, they probably fall a spot or 2 to 7-8.

Knicks receive: Marcus Smart, the Memphis Grizzlies' 2020 first round pick, and the Milwaukee Bucks' 2020 first round pick

Celtics receive: the New York Knicks' 2020 first round pick, the Charlotte Hornets' 2020 second round pick, and the Dallas Mavericks' 2021 first round pick (protected for selections 1-4; if not conveyed in 2021, Boston then receives Dallas' 2023 top-10 protected first round pick)

DAL 2021 pick is unprotected to them, and they have their own with a pick swap option with LAC. So, I'd say we get the other pick next year if DAL is somehow top 4. Rather than the 2023 (which turns to 2nds at some point).

With that and a Hayward extension at lower $ next year, you're probably under the tax and get the full MLE.
Get a young big like Okongwu/Toppin.
Have 26 and 2 seconds this year.
Extra 2021 first. Though likely in the 20s.

I really doubt it happens, and it would suck to see Marcus as a Knick, but... these start to be the choices of having 4 max/near max guys.

Makes more sense to not bring back hayward.
Or trade kemba.

I would trade kemba and was firmly on the "we dont really need kemba" bandwagon prior the season.

And kemba would snatch a great pick in the draft or at the least a huge front court and depth improvement.

And you’ll never get a top free agent again

[Feed Your Head]

I didn’t think we needed Kemba, and I think the team would be comparable even without him going forward. That said, him signing here helped the team recover from a disastrous few months, he loves being here, and he is an awesome leader for the Jays.

Trading him would be an absolutely horrible look.

[100proof]

I didn't come up with this one on my own.
https://www.si.com/nba/knicks/news/knicks-celtics-marcus-smart-trade

He proposes this only if the Knicks don't move up from 6. Which means, they probably fall a spot or 2 to 7-8.

DAL 2021 pick is unprotected to them, and they have their own with a pick swap option with LAC. So, I'd say we get the other pick next year if DAL is somehow top 4. Rather than the 2023 (which turns to 2nds at some point).

With that and a Hayward extension at lower $ next year, you're probably under the tax and get the full MLE.
Get a young big like Okongwu/Toppin.
Have 26 and 2 seconds this year.
Extra 2021 first. Though likely in the 20s.

I really doubt it happens, and it would suck to see Marcus as a Knick, but... these start to be the choices of having 4 max/near max guys.

Makes more sense to not bring back hayward.
Or trade kemba.

I would trade kemba and was firmly on the "we dont really need kemba" bandwagon prior the season.

And kemba would snatch a great pick in the draft or at the least a huge front court and depth improvement.

And you’ll never get a top free agent again

That's a nonsense statement based on no evidence at all.

Have a team that wins, offer a player a lot of money and you will have them, its as simple as that.

[GoCeltics123]

Makes more sense to not bring back hayward.
Or trade kemba.

I would trade kemba and was firmly on the "we dont really need kemba" bandwagon prior the season.

And kemba would snatch a great pick in the draft or at the least a huge front court and depth improvement.

And you’ll never get a top free agent again

That's a nonsense statement based on no evidence at all.

Have a team that wins, offer a player a lot of money and you will have them, its as simple as that.

What max free agent will sign with you knowing he can be dumped to **** ass Minnesota at any point

[big-shot-ROB]

If Wiseman is on the board.

Kemba to Minny for James Johnson, and Wiseman.

Minny gets a vet star to pair with their young duo, Boston gets an expiring bench toughguy vet and a franchise center. Celtics now have a 5 man core of:

PG: Smart
SG: Brown
SF: Tatum
PF: Hayward
C: Wiseman

Primary depth after assuming all possible contracts are left to expire, etc:

pg: Edwards, Waters
sg: Langford
sf: James Johnson
pf: Grant Williams
C: Theis, Poirier, Timelord

Picks and MLE to fill out depth.

I have yet to see any kind of comment from you that is not borderline trolling. So you went from **** all over Hayward during all season to now suggesting trading Walker for an unproven limited big and keeping Hayward.

[hugepatsfan]

I didn’t think we needed Kemba, and I think the team would be comparable even without him going forward. That said, him signing here helped the team recover from a disastrous few months, he loves being here, and he is an awesome leader for the Jays.

Trading him would be an absolutely horrible look.

Exactly. It's not just basketball. This team was an absolute ****show this time last year. We were a total mess. Kyrie had been mentally checked out for months. Horford was signing to our division rival. Rozier was taking shots at people on the way out before FA even started. Tatum and Brown each had regressed significantly. Hayward was damaged goods.

Let's call it like it is. We were a beaten, abandoned, stray puppy and Kemba adopted us. You can't quantify the intangible impact of how a max FA choosing to sign here helped reinvigorate the team and give them something to look forward to rather than dwell on how it all fell apart the year before. It totally shifted the narrative around this team from lamenting the year before to anticipation on how we'd recover.

Maybe all of that stuff sorts itself out without Kemba. Tatum and Brown could be motivated to improve anyway. Hayward would physically have been better irregardless of anything else. But signing Kemba was a crucial step in getting past all of last year's bad ju-ju.

[hugepatsfan]

At this point it is 1 of three things.

Massive tax bills
Trade hayward if he does opt out
Trade kemba if hayward doesnt opt out.

This team as constructed will not win a championship imo therefore it is not worth paying big tax bills for.

Totally disagree with you. I think this team has 6 of the rotation pieces locked in out of the 8 we realistically need to win it all:

Kemba / Smart
Brown
Hayward / ???
Tatum
??? / Theis

The question marks are 1) a legitimate wing off the bench and 2) a center with size to guard the bigger matchups.

Between all of the young players, picks and free agent exceptions we have it's extremely plausible to me we can fill those two spots. Langford/Williams could feasibly develop into them. We have all of our firsts to trade. Getting a bench wing with the MLE is extremely plausible.

The luxury tax bills don't have to be huge. It just takes some trade off next year. I've posted numerous plans where we can get under the tax. If they're willing to make a 1 year sacrifice on the bench to do it then it works. And then in '21-22 and '22-23 you can go all out with MLE before Kemba and an extended Hayward walk after that, allowing us to sign a new younger max player for the future.

Trading away the core pieces here shouldn't be a consideration unless the Hayward financials don't work.

The Hayward financials dont work. And that was peior the global pandemic and now the absolute TANKING of nba ratings. Not to mention the possible impact on Chinese influx of cash in the near future. If America continues its stance against China then looking at more reduced income.

Kemba-25 mill
Brown-27 mill
Tatum - 30 mill next year

Hayward 35 mill.

Thats 117 million in 4 players.

Makes no sense. Hayward will either walk or get shopped for a big and wing depth. Something like turner plus salary, or aaron gordon plus salary.

Yes, we will be in the tax once we extend Tatum if we keep Hayward. But that doesn't kick in next year, it kicks in the year after. Even if we agree this upcoming offseason the new money doesn't kick in until '21-22, not '20-21.

We were not a a tax team this past year in '19-20. If we get below the tax line in '20-21, then we can go over again in '21-22 and '22-23 without having to pay repeater rates. Those would kick in for '23-24, except Kemba's deal would expire after '22-23 so we'd be off the hook.

If the team can make the right cost cutting moves and extend Hayward now via opting out and signing a new deal (thus lowering his salary next year) then we can keep all of our guys without ever having to pay luxury tax. Heck, time it up right by giving Hayward a new 3 year deal and you can even have max cap space in a few years to chase the Emiid/Jokic/Beal FA class.

That would require "overpaying" Hayward over the life of the deal to limit him to 3 years and opt out now. But it makes the most sense in the long term future of the franchise.

[hugepatsfan]

There will be small ancillary moves to get under not drastic Moves like losing Hayward for a **** salad in return. They will keep Hayward at all costs. The biggest threat to Hayward leaving is him opting out and some team gives him a 4 year max and it’s too good to pass up.

Like I said it will work itself out.

Again, you're burying your head in the sand. We are at close to $150M in guaranteed salary next year. The tax line in the most optimistic projections is expected to be be held flat to this year at about $132M. Shedding $18M will not be ancillary moves.It's going to take moving Kanter, Poirier and others. Moving $10M of salary for none in return will cost picks to do. It's also going to take Hayward opting out and re-signing for less money next year, which means he would need to be overpaid in the future to compensate.

If the plan is to keep Hayward long term but get under the tax next year is required to do so then ancillary/minor moves won't do the trick. That's just not taking into account what the numbers actually are.

No I’m not. I’m not worrying ab something that will always work itself out by people way smarter than you or I and def not on your crazy trades. Poirer blows, kanter is replaceable, the bucks pick and both players are a small piece to pay to keep a player like Hayward and remain highly competitive at least by ownerships standards.

You keep saying the plan the plan the plan, you have no idea what the plan is. Hayward baring him getting a max from some team desperate to make the playoffs will be on the team- if that takes losing jags like poirer and **** picks like the bucks 1st it’ll get done. Zarren and co are I’m sure will handle it and again it’ll work itself out.

They didn’t sign kemba Walker last summer to stay competitive to just give up on Hayward for your little trades.

Well I agree with you that they will move on from guys like Poirier/Kanter/late 1sts if that's what it takes to keep Hayward. I've proposed numerous such ideas. I guess we agree on definitions. I don't consider that things "working themselves out". If they downgrade some of their bench talent (even marginally) and give up 1st round picks (even late ones) to dump salary I consider that a fairly aggressive cost cutting plan.

I agree they didn't sign Kemba to give up on Hayward. Reports were teams wanted to buy low on Gordon this time last year and we said no. Reports were we wouldn't include him at the deadline. So I agree he's a huge asset in their minds. I just recognize that the COVID situation ad its impact on the salary cap/luxury tax has probably added close to $100M to the cost of keeping Hayward prior to what it was before unless they make what I consider fairly focused and significant cost-cutting moves this offseason to compensate.

I'd be thrilled if Wyc just said **** it but with his revenues reduced I'm just extremely skeptical that paying that much extra money in luxury tax won't come without any significant sacrifice or even mitigation by staying under the tax this year. Being over vs not being over the tax next year has MASSIVE ramifications for us over the next 3 years and it's now a tougher equation post-COVID. I personaly think it's naive to think that won't have some effect on our outlook these next few years.

[djFan71]

I didn’t think we needed Kemba, and I think the team would be comparable even without him going forward. That said, him signing here helped the team recover from a disastrous few months, he loves being here, and he is an awesome leader for the Jays.

Trading him would be an absolutely horrible look.

Exactly. It's not just basketball. This team was an absolute ****show this time last year. We were a total mess. Kyrie had been mentally checked out for months. Horford was signing to our division rival. Rozier was taking shots at people on the way out before FA even started. Tatum and Brown each had regressed significantly. Hayward was damaged goods.

Let's call it like it is. We were a beaten, abandoned, stray puppy and Kemba adopted us. You can't quantify the intangible impact of how a max FA choosing to sign here helped reinvigorate the team and give them something to look forward to rather than dwell on how it all fell apart the year before. It totally shifted the narrative around this team from lamenting the year before to anticipation on how we'd recover.

Maybe all of that stuff sorts itself out without Kemba. Tatum and Brown could be motivated to improve anyway. Hayward would physically have been better irregardless of anything else. But signing Kemba was a crucial step in getting past all of last year's bad ju-ju.

I don't think we can trade him as you/others have laid out, but I think some of the morale stuff is overrated. I tend to lean more towards your last paragraph than the first 2. After a summer off, and no Kyrie/Mook guys would have been invigorated with the opportunity to shoulder the load. Kemba's been great, no doubt, but I think he was almost an overreaction to last year by Danny (due to the money).

I actually think we would have been fine even if we brought Terry back. Not at the $ CHA gave him, though, lol. But, clearing Kyrie was 97% of it, Mook the other 3%. Al was probably neutral. Keeping Baynes would've been awesome.

[StojkoVrankovic]

Makes more sense to not bring back hayward.
Or trade kemba.

I would trade kemba and was firmly on the "we dont really need kemba" bandwagon prior the season.

And kemba would snatch a great pick in the draft or at the least a huge front court and depth improvement.

And you’ll never get a top free agent again

That's a nonsense statement based on no evidence at all.

Have a team that wins, offer a player a lot of money and you will have them, its as simple as that.

That's a nonsense statement based on no evidence at all

[Captain_Caveman]

1) a 4 year max is a ton of guaranteed money
2) he’d have a much bigger role
3) It takes him closer to SD, where Robyn used to live.

Maybe my read on him is off. It's a possibility. I just don't get the feeling he craves that bigger role. At least not more than family comfort. He's gonna leave the bubble to see the birth of his 4th kid. Robyn's kinda outnumbered when he goes on the road with 4 young precocious kids and she's kinda doin it by herself. I think maybe he feels that. Being closer to family in Indy might help lighten the load. If Robyn's family is indeed in SD and that would make it easier for them to come down and help, I might can get behind that idea. But I still wonder if being closer to his family in Indy would win out. I think he'd like to get paid and he'd like to win. But I just don't think he cares about increased responsibility. In fact, I think he'd rather do his job, play a few video games, hang out with his family and have fewer team responsibilities, not more.

To correct my mistype— they used to live there. I believe Robyn would stay during the season in SD for extended stretches as well when they were in Utah. FWIW, they did move here full time, but I’d more than understand the desire to move back lol.

The Hayward sold their San Diego home.
https://news.yahoo.com/celtics-gordon-hayward-sheds-rancho-171220328.html

[Captain_Caveman]

The problem with trading any of our top guys is that it would be hard to do so in a way that actually improves the team. We'd be lucky to get equal value for Hayward, Kemba, or Smart, and are not going to get a better player trading Tatum or Jaylen. Maybe if one of these non-Nets picks had panned out, but alas.

We may be forced to dump someone out of tax concerns depending on how the league handles this massive loss of revenue, but obviously that's not as fun a thread to have, is it?

[SmartWentCrazy]

Maybe my read on him is off. It's a possibility. I just don't get the feeling he craves that bigger role. At least not more than family comfort. He's gonna leave the bubble to see the birth of his 4th kid. Robyn's kinda outnumbered when he goes on the road with 4 young precocious kids and she's kinda doin it by herself. I think maybe he feels that. Being closer to family in Indy might help lighten the load. If Robyn's family is indeed in SD and that would make it easier for them to come down and help, I might can get behind that idea. But I still wonder if being closer to his family in Indy would win out. I think he'd like to get paid and he'd like to win. But I just don't think he cares about increased responsibility. In fact, I think he'd rather do his job, play a few video games, hang out with his family and have fewer team responsibilities, not more.

To correct my mistype— they used to live there. I believe Robyn would stay during the season in SD for extended stretches as well when they were in Utah. FWIW, they did move here full time, but I’d more than understand the desire to move back lol.

The Hayward sold their San Diego home.
https://news.yahoo.com/celtics-gordon-hayward-sheds-rancho-171220328.html

You used to live in SD— would you prefer move back or live in New England if you were worth 9 figures.

Again, its not likely, but I could see this happening— not gonna get caught flat footed on the opt out when logic said Al would stay too