2017 NBA Offseason Thread

[molson]

Originally Posted by law90026

Then you don't go after George and go after Butler instead? Just sounds like wanting to get someone on the cheap tbh.

The reported offers the Celtics made for those guys, and the reported demands those teams made on Boston, don't mesh up with what the players are actually being traded for.

Either Ainge is a real goober to deal with, the reports are wrong, or teams are dealing with Celtics as if they have a million assets and want a ton of them back and feel they have that leverage that the Celtics "have" to do something.

https://theringer.com/nba-kevin-prit...e-eac571cec6c9

[Arles]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I think part of the problem is Ainge does not want to give up Brown or the Nets pick for 1 year of a player.

But I think that's a legit gamble. Trade Brown/Tatum + salary filler + lower first (ie, protected Grizzles pick) and you get George. Pair him up with this team and they are an easy 2nd seed in the East (even without other FAs). You think he will leave a team where he makes the conference finals to go to a Lakers team with Ball, Ingram and crap?

I think that's a fairly safe gamble and even if George decides to walk (which I doubt he would), you still have either Tatum or Brown plus the Brooklyn pick and the Lakers/Kings pick. I just think it is silly to not trade Jaylen Brown to get Paul George for this gamble. It makes me think Danny is so terrified of "losing" a trade he won't pull the trigger unless it is a massive heist for him. That's just not how most trades work in the NBA.

[Arles]

Everything is clear now. All the patience and waiting in Boston was to setup the acquisition of German forward Daniel Theis

German forward Daniel Theis has agreed to a two-year deal with the Boston Celtics, league sources tell ESPN. https://t.co/zZ46znJVYy

— Adrian Wojnarowski (@wojespn) July 1, 2017

[MrBug708]

I think the notion that George coming to the Lakers is a real threat. This isn't a marquee name coming to play for a big market, this is a guy who wants to play in his hometown and childhood team.

[Arles]

I still think you force him to leave a top 3 seed in the East who can offer a 5th year (with Bird rights) for a Lakers team that's not even a playoff team (and can only offer 4 years). I'd put it 70-30 that George stays in Boston - more money, better chance at a title and similar market/history.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I think the notion that George coming to the Lakers is a real threat. This isn't a marquee name coming to play for a big market, this is a guy who wants to play in his hometown and childhood team.

I'd add in the possibility that he's realized that -- at least for the life of his next contract -- the odds of him reaching Finals, much less winning a Title, simply aren't very good at this point. At some point you might start taking lesser goals (hometown, childhood team, etc) as a higher priority.

[nol]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I think part of the problem is Ainge does not want to give up Brown or the Nets pick for 1 year of a player.

Jaylen Brown didn't even make 1st team all rookie in what was maybe the least productive season for rookies in NBA history. On top of that the Celtics just drafted a someone who plays the same position and who Boston apparently feels is as good as Markelle Fultz. If Brown ever becomes a good player, it will not be while he's on his rookie contract, and if the Celtics are so concerned about that time period rather than the present, they should have traded Thomas when he still had value and abstained from signing Horford to the 5-year max.

I don't think the Nets pick will be that great either. It's very possible Brooklyn ends up with another decent player like Caldwell-Pope by offering huge contracts to restricted free agents. If Jeremy Lin is healthy for the entire season (or if Lin is traded for a similarly decent player who doesn't overlap as much with Russell), that's essentially one more genuine NBA player they added from last season. It would be hard for me to say Brooklyn has less talent than Chicago or Indiana at this point, and the Nets have no added incentive to lose.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'd add in the possibility that he's realized that -- at least for the life of his next contract -- the odds of him reaching Finals, much less winning a Title, simply aren't very good at this point. At some point you might start taking lesser goals (hometown, childhood team, etc) as a higher priority.

He could always sign a one year deal with a team but he just strikes me as a different guy. If Ball ends up being a savior, George will be a good 3rd option in a few years. Who knows at this point. Kevin Love was going to leave for the Lakers, his childhood team, but hasn't worked out the same for the Lakers, though I'm not sure how big of a deal that has turned out to be

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

The weird thing is that it was already pretty much out there that the Lakers were offering Clarkson and Randle and a couple firsts (protected), which on its surface, seems to be a better deal than Dipo and Bonis 2.

As for Boston, fits the pattern. Probably low balled Indy because Ainge is a hoarder and now they get nothing.

Originally Posted by rjolley

If Boston comes out of this with no Butler, no George, and no Hayward, it's got to be a failure. They should've had 2 of those three with no problem. The assets they've gathered are good, but at some point, you've got to cash them in for proven needed pieces.

Originally Posted by molson

The reported offers the Celtics made for those guys, and the reported demands those teams made on Boston, don't mesh up with what the players are actually being traded for.

Either Ainge is a real goober to deal with, the reports are wrong, or teams are dealing with Celtics as if they have a million assets and want a ton of them back and feel they have that leverage that the Celtics "have" to do something.

https://theringer.com/nba-kevin-prit...e-eac571cec6c9

What Molson said. Plus timing was such that trading for George or Butler before signing Hayward would've either precluded signing Hayward or forced us to trade ALL of our proven depth. I was already skeptical about the rumored demands (i.e. I'd include a Brown/Nets pick/LakersKings pick, possibly 2 of 3 if GH was in the fold, but certainly not all 3) but if Indiana felt *that* offer was too good to pass up & needed to be jumped on before waiting two weeks, idk what to say. Forget Boston, I think they could've gotten an equally good offer from 3 other teams a month from now or at next year's trade deadline.

Just like how Chicago has been obsessed with Kris Dunn for a year+. Between him,
MCW, Rondo, Grant & Cam Payne I'm starting to suspect their PG evaluations aren't that great...

Originally Posted by law90026

Even if they come out with just Hayward, and I'm not convinced they will after they missed on Butler and George, that's still a failure. This is their last real chance to go for it coz of IT's sweetheart deal, similar to Curry's deal last season. Next season this chance is gone.

Think Boston ends up as the big loser overall because Ainge doesn't want to deal with others.

I'll be ecstatic if we "just" come away with Hayward, though I think it is still the same 50/50 he comes. I hate what we did with the #1, and we need to trade one of Bradley/Jae/Marcus, but gutting the team for a possible rental in George (and cap wise we would've had to) really didn't make sense once you got into the minutiae.

I think every Boston fan is also as big a fan of Jaylen as Nate Duncan is, and the idea he won't possibly be a good player until his 2nd contract is laughable. He was already absurdly good at 1v1 defense for a rookie, improved immensely over the course of the season, shot better than anyone thought, & was only on 2nd team because he played on a competent team and had to earn minutes (just like Jamal Murray, who I'd also take over all non-Embiid 1st-teamers). I value him more as an asset than either the Nets or Lakers/King pick, which I don't think will be as high as people are expecting. (Or were worth trading Fultz for.) Though there's always hope in the lottery that Nets pick will be #1 again!

[BishopMVP]

Who said the East is bad? JJ Redick just got PAID by Philly (on a perfect deal for both sides.) Playoff team.

[Brian Swartz]

Never know what's true and what isn't, but lots of reports out there today that the OKC offer for George wasn't the best one by a long shot.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Arles

If Hayward stays in Utah, why even have an Eastern Conference next season?

I understand the sentiment, but I don't see any of the Top 4 in the East getting worse as things currently stand. Competition in the West is better, but it's probably still Golden State coming out so while the overall gap definitely grows, in the grand scheme it doesn't really change a whole lot.

Interesting that there appears to be silence on the LMA front. I wonder what's really going on there.

[nol]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I think every Boston fan is also as big a fan of Jaylen as Nate Duncan is, and the idea he won't possibly be a good player until his 2nd contract is laughable. He was already absurdly good at 1v1 defense for a rookie, improved immensely over the course of the season, shot better than anyone thought, & was only on 2nd team because he played on a competent teamand had to earn minutes (just like Jamal Murray, who I'd also take over all non-Embiid 1st-teamers). I value him more as an asset than either the Nets or Lakers/King pick, which I don't think will be as high as people are expecting. (Or were worth trading Fultz for.) Though there's always hope in the lottery that Nets pick will be #1 again!

Exactly. If he played for the Magic nobody would have noticed his scant contributions whereas with the Celtics any brief flashes of good play are met with "OMG he's the 3rd pick contributing to a winning team!" Caris LeVert, Patrick McCaw, and Taurean Prince all played better but didn't have the notoriety of being drafted high. As far as defense, the last time Jaylen Brown was in an NBA game his team was using Al Horford to guard LeBron more than the absurdly good one-on-one defender who actually plays LeBron's position.

Brown was 50th among rookies in BPM, and there wasn't a single player drafted in 2016 who looked to be a good bet to ever become an All-Star based on what people thought of them before the draft and how they played this year. If the Celtics were to get Hayward, either Brown or Tatum will be on the outside of the rotation looking in. After that, it's one more season until he's eligible for his extension.

Once again, Boston just hoards assets without realizing that they don't exist independently from one another. If Brown and Tatum are these future stars (even though their games overlap with one another as SFs who are not particularly good at setting up teammates or shooting from the NBA three-point line) at least one of the future picks is worthless enough to trade for George because there won't be enough money/PT to go around. If there was a 10 percent chance of Boston convincing Paul George to stay, that's a higher chance than either Tatum or Brown have at becoming as good as George, who is also much closer in age to the Boston players who are actually good.

[Groundhog]

Had to chuckle at this from Bill Simmons...

[tarcone]

I dont see what the big deal is with the Celts not getting George. Its not like anyone besides the Warriors is going to win a championship, barring a catastrophe, in the next 4 or 5 years.
Why waste your assets on a one year rental? That will not help you any more then the guys you have?

[law90026]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I dont see what the big deal is with the Celts not getting George. Its not like anyone besides the Warriors is going to win a championship, barring a catastrophe, in the next 4 or 5 years.
Why waste your assets on a one year rental? That will not help you any more then the guys you have?

Think it's a case of wasted opportunity. The Celtics had the chance to "easily" pick up 2 more All-Stars this year and this year only before IT's contract had to be renewed. 4 All-Stars gives you a shot and you never know what happens over the course of a season.

Think Ainge has to realise that people aren't going to deal with him the same way because they know what assets he has stockpiled. No one wants to be judged as the guy who got fleeced by Ainge. I think of it like Soccer transfers where English clubs have to pay more for players because non-English clubs know they have more money to spend.

[Atocep]

Supposedly the Pacers took a lesser offer because they were intent on getting George out of the East so I think Ainge gets a pass on this one. From what I read Boston had a better offer and the Pacers didn't contact them before agreeing to the deal with OKC. But even though it doesn't appear he could have done anything to get George it makes the failure to land Butler that much worse.

[Groundhog]

If that's true, I don't understand a team shooting themselves in the foot by taking a worse offer just so you don't help another team in your conference out, when your team is not going to be competing for a championship anytime soon anyway. Who cares if George drops 40 on you every time you play for the next 3 seasons?

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by law90026

Think it's a case of wasted opportunity. The Celtics had the chance to "easily" pick up 2 more All-Stars this year and this year only before IT's contract had to be renewed. 4 All-Stars gives you a shot and you never know what happens over the course of a season.

Think Ainge has to realise that people aren't going to deal with him the same way because they know what assets he has stockpiled. No one wants to be judged as the guy who got fleeced by Ainge. I think of it like Soccer transfers where English clubs have to pay more for players because non-English clubs know they have more money to spend.

LOL at "easily". And I like Horford/love IT for what he's grown into, but they're not all-stars on the GS/LeBron level & we all know it. I thought we should pivot to the future so take my thoughts with a pinch of salt, but unless you think the Celtics + Butler/George would have a real chance vs the Warriors idk why people felt we were obligated to push chips in.

Ainge also just traded the Fultz pick for what I & every neutral observer thought was too little... I don't get his eval's at times, but I don't think he drives a bargain to the point our final offer couldn't objectively beat LaVine/Dunn or Oladipo/Sabonis. Could certainly see us low balling them early, but if we did, they got this offers ,& jumped on them before coming back to us good riddance.

Originally Posted by Groundhog

If that's true, I don't understand a team shooting themselves in the foot by taking a worse offer just so you don't help another team in your conference out, when your team is not going to be competing for a championship anytime soon anyway. Who cares if George drops 40 on you every time you play for the next 3 seasons?

+1

The only narrative I can come up with is that Indiana thinks Oladipo can bring fans in even during rebuilding years, in which case you should just fold the franchise.

[law90026]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

LOL at "easily". And I like Horford/love IT for what he's grown into, but they're not all-stars on the GS/LeBron level & we all know it. I thought we should pivot to the future so take my thoughts with a pinch of salt, but unless you think the Celtics + Butler/George would have a real chance vs the Warriors idk why people felt we were obligated to push chips in.

Ainge also just traded the Fultz pick for what I & every neutral observer thought was too little... I don't get his eval's at times, but I don't think he drives a bargain to the point our final offer couldn't objectively beat LaVine/Dunn or Oladipo/Sabonis. Could certainly see us low balling them early, but if we did, they got this offers ,& jumped on them before coming back to us good riddance.

Isn't the issue though that the assets are starting to dwindle? Those picks are beginning to dry up (Nets next year, maybe a Lakers pick or else it's a Sac pick in 2 years time) and so are the tradeable assets. If IT, Bradley, Smart and whoever else need to be paid next year, suddenly there's a lot less to play with.

By the time Brown and Tatum are good to go, iT and Horford are going to be past it. It's just a really odd mix if you ask me.

Maybe he really does think he has the inside track on Anthony David or Boogie for some reason.

[tarcone]

But with the multiple 1sts, couldnt Boston trade up? And add those guys to Tatum and Brown for a future run when the big dogs are past their prime?
And Thomas, surely would still be around. Even though he will be in his 30s, he will still be valuable.

I dont have a problem with this team standing pat at this juncture. No one is beating the Warriors, unles their is a plane crash.

Grow your youth. In 5 years, Boston will be in the running for championships.

[nol]

Originally Posted by tarcone

But with the multiple 1sts, couldnt Boston trade up? And add those guys to Tatum and Brown for a future run when the big dogs are past their prime?
And Thomas, surely would still be around. Even though he will be in his 30s, he will still be valuable.

I dont have a problem with this team standing pat at this juncture. No one is beating the Warriors, unles their is a plane crash.

Grow your youth. In 5 years, Boston will be in the running for championships.

The youth here is about 2 years younger than players like Giannis or Porzingis who are better than all of them combined. The Celtics downgraded from Fultz to Tatum in order to better attract veteran free agents and appear to have whiffed on it.

It's pretty difficult to trade up in the draft. Philadelphia only was able to do so because Boston hoarded backcourt players for so long and ended up in a position where neither of the clear-cut best players fit their team. If Boston gets a pick from the Nets or the Lakers in a position where the best player on the board is another guard or wing, they once again have little leverage because other teams can just dare them to stand pat and draft yet another player who will have trouble getting playing time.

[Arles]

It's really frustrating that everyone is basically like "well, we can't beat Golden State so why even try?" Steph has a history of bad ankles and Durant has missed significant time as well. I think Houston has the right idea - try to get the most talent you can and see what happens. If Boston traded for George/Butler and then added a FA like Hayward or even Milsap, they could have a great shot at beating Cleveland. Then, if Lebron goes west, they could own the East for a while. At that point, maybe you luck into a Durant situation with another star.

Just hoarding picks and taking young players rarely works. At some point, you need to turn those assets into legit top players. Picks are mostly 19 year olds who take years to develop. Boston is close enough to make moves but Ainge is terrified of not winning a deal so he holds pat.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Arles

It's really frustrating that everyone is basically like "well, we can't beat Golden State so why even try?" Steph has a history of bad ankles and Durant has missed significant time as well. I think Houston has the right idea - try to get the most talent you can and see what happens. If Boston traded for George/Butler and then added a FA like Hayward or even Milsap, they could have a great shot at beating Cleveland. Then, if Lebron goes west, they could own the East for a while. At that point, maybe you luck into a Durant situation with another star.

Just hoarding picks and taking young players rarely works. At some point, you need to turn those assets into legit top players. Picks are mostly 19 year olds who take years to develop. Boston is close enough to make moves but Ainge is terrified of not winning a deal so he holds pat.

I think Tarcone is the only one giving Golden State the next 3-4 years of Championships. In a 7 game series with a player like Lebron James or Westbrook playing and talent levels that arent totally disproportionate strange things can happen and even more so(like you said) over the course of an 82 game season.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think Tarcone is the only one giving Golden State the next 3-4 years of Championships. In a 7 game series with a player like Lebron James or Westbrook playing and talent levels that arent totally disproportionate strange things can happen and even more so(like you said) over the course of an 82 game season.

Yeah, I'm a huge GSW fan and even I don't have them chalked up to win the next few. 2016 is still way too fresh.

[tarcone]

Tatum is going to be a super star. Bok it.

[tarcone]

2016 = No KD

I believe KD is the best player in the league.

[sovereignstar v2]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Tatum is going to be a super star. Bok it.

Dude, we already know that anyone that plays at Iowa or is from St. Louis is going to be a star.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by tarcone

2016 = No KD

I believe KD is the best player in the league.

Hes not. Lebron is. Warriors have top 5 players at 4 different positions which make them potent.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by tarcone

2016 = No KD

I believe KD is the best player in the league.

Assume for the sake of argument your second sentence is right. Curry also wasn't healthy in '16, and that's where this 'Golden State is invincible' stuff goes off the rails IMO. Injuries happen every year to major stars. It's not out of the question that the Warriors could lose anyway(they're great but not unbeatable), but if any of their stars esp. Curry or Durant are hurt it's a totally different beast. A perfect storm isn't required to beat them then, just a really good team.

[Groundhog]

Durant is probably the best scorer in the NBA. He's not the best player though.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

It's not out of the question that the Warriors could lose anyway(they're great but not unbeatable)...A perfect storm isn't required to beat them then, just a really good team.

As much as I am not going to chalk the Warriors up for multiple championships, if we take the injury bug out of the equation I am much more likely to think they are well-nigh unbeatable.

It is going to take far more than 'just a really good team' to beat a fully healthy Warriors squad in a 7-game series. You are going to need an exceptional team having absolutely exceptional games, over and over again. Games 3 and 4 of this year's finals were perfect examples. James and Irving played out of their minds in game 3 and they still lost. It took literally the best quarter in the history of the NBA for the Warriors to lose a game; even so, the Warriors were one run away from being right in that game, and were only outscored by 5 after the historic quarter.

If the Warriors stay healthy, it is going to take an awful lot to beat them.

[law90026]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

If the Warriors stay healthy, it is going to take an awful lot to beat them.

Don't think anyone disputes this. However, injuries do occur. When KD went down earlier this year, there was real concern that the Warriors were going to struggle and they dodged a bullet because the injury wasn't as bad as feared. I would hazard to guess that a KD-less Warriors might very well have lost to the Cavs, considering how amazing LeBron was.

But if everyone just puts their hands up and gives up, that just makes it that much easier for the Warriors to win even if they have stars that get hurt.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Milsap to Denver, 3yrs/$90m with the last year being team option.
So sayeth ESPN anyway.


Sure seems like that 60-win team in Atlanta was a long time ago.

[stevew]

Paul Millsap has had a fascinating career. Undrafted, I believe. He's continued to improve all aspects of his game well into his early 30s. And now he's probably exiting his prime making 30M and has increased his pay rate basically every season of his career.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by stevew

And now he's probably exiting his prime making 30M and has increased his pay rate basically every season of his career.

It's pretty much become a monopoly money league at this point (similar to baseball).

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by law90026

Isn't the issue though that the assets are starting to dwindle? Those picks are beginning to dry up (Nets next year, maybe a Lakers pick or else it's a Sac pick in 2 years time) and so are the tradeable assets. If IT, Bradley, Smart and whoever else need to be paid next year, suddenly there's a lot less to play with.

By the time Brown and Tatum are good to go, iT and Horford are going to be past it. It's just a really odd mix if you ask me.

IT & Horford are approaching their downside, which is why I was fine with drafting Fultz & moving on from IT next summer if Fultz lived up to the hype. But those other assets don't just dry up, they turn into real players. Maybe Jaylen Brown (or Ante Zizic) is as good as I think & improves his perceived value. Maybe Jayson Tatum is as good as Ainge thinks. Maybe the Nets pick miraculously turns into the #1 again, just like last year where I would've put the odds on that around 10% before the season started. The rotation players like Bradley, Smart, Crowder will stop being underpaid soon, but they're still good players, and after years of a low salary table the Celtics owners will have no problem paying the luxury tax if necessary.

Originally Posted by nol

The youth here is about 2 years younger than players like Giannis or Porzingis who are better than all of them combined. The Celtics downgraded from Fultz to Tatum in order to better attract veteran free agents and appear to have whiffed on it.

It's pretty difficult to trade up in the draft. Philadelphia only was able to do so because Boston hoarded backcourt players for so long and ended up in a position where neither of the clear-cut best players fit their team.

You can keep saying things like this all you want but it won't make it any more true. Ainge traded down because he thought Jayson Tatum is better than Markelle Fultz (and I guess Josh Jackson too). We both disagree with that assessment, but positional fit had little to nothing to do with it.

Boston's been targeting one free agent since KD turned us down last summer & he decides in the next 24 hours. (Blake Griffin may have been plan B, but I think once LAC traded Paul & committed to the 5 year max it's not even worth talking.) Jimmy Butler & Paul George didn't pick their destinations. But the idea that we chose another 19 year old SF & held on to our other 19 year old SF to increase our chances of signing SF Hayward is laughable.

Originally Posted by nol

Walker has been healthy for the past 2 full seasons, and when you play the 'what if their best player gets hurt?' game, the answer for the Hornets is the same as it would be for just about every other team.

Apparently it flew under the radar, but Kemba missed the last few games of the season to have his 3rd left knee surgery in the last 2.5 years. Yes, it was allegedly "routine" & "minor", but that many knee surgeries scares me for little PG's who rely on quickness, just like IT's hip surgery scares me until we see him back at 100%.

Originally Posted by law90026

Don't think anyone disputes this. However, injuries do occur. When KD went down earlier this year, there was real concern that the Warriors were going to struggle and they dodged a bullet because the injury wasn't as bad as feared.

That was the real media concern. Then GS won 13 in a row & Steph Curry kind of regained the swagger he'd been missing when they were working hard to integrate KD. (And to KD's credit he was able to make a seamless transition back in.) An injury to Steph or KD would make the Warriors beatable, but they'd still be the favorites.

[nol]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Boston's been targeting one free agent since KD turned us down last summer & he decides in the next 24 hours. (Blake Griffin may have been plan B, but I think once LAC traded Paul & committed to the 5 year max it's not even worth talking.) Jimmy Butler & Paul George didn't pick their destinations. But the idea that we chose another 19 year old SF & held on to our other 19 year old SF to increase our chances of signing SF Hayward is laughable.

And that one free agent saw Boston stagger through the first two rounds, only winning due to homecourt advantage and injury luck, before getting the shit kicked out of them by the Cavs and realized that he alone wouldn't be giving them a fighting chance. The trade was to create more cap space for a 2nd star and break the number one pick down into multiple worse picks (because Fultz straight up for Jimmy Butler would have been too much to give and also because assets). The idea that Brown or Tatum are in any way a threat to Gordon Hayward's (or Jae Crowder's, for that matter) playing time would be more laughable, especially in a league where 4 of the 5 best players on what is by far the best team are wings.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Milsap to Denver, 3yrs/$90m with the last year being team option.
So sayeth ESPN anyway.


Sure seems like that 60-win team in Atlanta was a long time ago.

Saw this earlier.

What happened to the 60-win Hawks? Starters left for $342 million.

Whatever happened to the 60-win Atlanta Hawks?

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by nol

And that one free agent saw Boston stagger through the first two rounds, only winning due to homecourt advantage and injury luck, before getting the shit kicked out of them by the Cavs and realized that he alone wouldn't be giving them a fighting chance. The trade was to create more cap space for a 2nd star and break the number one pick down into multiple worse picks (because Fultz straight up for Jimmy Butler would have been too much to give and also because assets). The idea that Brown or Tatum are in any way a threat to Gordon Hayward's (or Jae Crowder's, for that matter) playing time would be more laughable, especially in a league where 4 of the 5 best players on what is by far the best team are wings.

That explains why Gordon Hayward turned down our meeting ... Oh wait, no, he still came & we still have the same chance we did before the draft. (30-40% imo), plus he also met with a team who didn't even make the playoffs and clearly wouldn't be a contender next season. Idk what his exact motivations are, and lining up George or Butler probably would've increased those chances, but like you so aptly point out we almost certainly could have had Jimmy Butler for Fultz's rights etc, but instead Ainge chose to target Tatum when selling low on the pick. (Or the Bulls didn't want to wait until July 7 or like Kris Dunn more than Markelle Fultz.)

And, no, that trade didn't even get us to the point we can offer a full max yet, meaning we'd still have to trade another piece if Hayward chooses Boston. That 2nd star was always going to be through trade after we used our available cap space, so creating space wouldn't matter & it's all about matching salaries, since Hayward would basically put us at the limit.

Clearly Brown & Tatum aren't threats to Hayward's playing time, but they're assets that could be used to improve other parts of the team that would share the floor with Hayward. And instead Ainge chose to target Tatum. Why idk, even in a league where wings are King (and I think even if that was his guy he sold low,) but the idea that he traded Fultz for Tatum & a future pick to increase our chances at signing Hayward remains laughable.

[stevew]

Seems like all the Kevin Love destinations are drying up. I really would prefer to flip him and bring in Melo. I wonder if there's some sort of 4 teamer out there involving Utah/Denver/NYK/Cleveland. Hoping the Cavs could move 2/3 of JR/Shump/Frye and Love and get back something like Faried /a wing/Melo. Maybe pieces like Gary Harris and Favors go to the Knicks and Utah sends appropriate capital to the Nuggets. I suppose all of this hinges on Heyward.

[tarcone]

Tom Haberstroh's NBA superteam rankings - Warriors, Cavaliers, Timberwolves and more

[Brian Swartz]

The Millsap signing surprised me. On the East vs. West thing, interesting article on 538 suggesting that this could be the most imbalanced year ever:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...espn:frontpage

[nol]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

That explains why Gordon Hayward turned down our meeting ... Oh wait, no, he still came & we still have the same chance we did before the draft. (30-40% imo)

Getting a meeting with a player and not signing him is worth about as much as having the best 10th-11th man in the league when those players aren't good enough to see the floor in a competitive playoff game. Even if Boston signs Hayward and then re-signs Smart, Bradley, and Thomas that's going to be a Warriors-level payroll the next few years for a team that isn't even one of the top 5 teams in the league.

And, no, that trade didn't even get us to the point we can offer a full max yet, meaning we'd still have to trade another piece if Hayward chooses Boston. That 2nd star was always going to be through trade after we used our available cap space, so creating space wouldn't matter & it's all about matching salaries, since Hayward would basically put us at the limit.

Duh, it would have taken additional moves such as trading Crowder and/or Bradley and renouncing Olynyk to make it work. Obviously every little bit would help because it makes zero sense for a team that's accomplished as little as the Celtics to expect star players to take a massive discount to play for them.

Clearly Brown & Tatum aren't threats to Hayward's playing time, but they're assets that could be used to improve other parts of the team that would share the floor with Hayward.

That's a really bad way to go about it considering that unless you get a superstar worth more than the max contract, a draft pick is constantly losing value over time, even moreso when you're talking about trading it to a team that wasn't making the pick in the first place. There certainly wouldn't have been too many other teams that would've considered Brown or Tatum top-3 players in the draft. You also underestimate how difficult it is to improve the Celtics at this point, as all their rotation players are already decent to good and with Thomas as the star player, anyone who isn't well above average defensively would give the Celtics an even more easily exploited lineup.

[law90026]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

IT & Horford are approaching their downside, which is why I was fine with drafting Fultz & moving on from IT next summer if Fultz lived up to the hype. But those other assets don't just dry up, they turn into real players. Maybe Jaylen Brown (or Ante Zizic) is as good as I think & improves his perceived value. Maybe Jayson Tatum is as good as Ainge thinks. Maybe the Nets pick miraculously turns into the #1 again, just like last year where I would've put the odds on that around 10% before the season started. The rotation players like Bradley, Smart, Crowder will stop being underpaid soon, but they're still good players, and after years of a low salary table the Celtics owners will have no problem paying the luxury tax if necessary.

That was the real media concern. Then GS won 13 in a row & Steph Curry kind of regained the swagger he'd been missing when they were working hard to integrate KD. (And to KD's credit he was able to make a seamless transition back in.) An injury to Steph or KD would make the Warriors beatable, but they'd still be the favorites.

The issue is that this ideal window, which may never come again is going to fade away shortly. This was THE window to try and load up. Breaking the luxury tax for Bradley, Smart and Crowder seems to be a terrible idea considering they're not going to push Boston over the top.

There's really no guarantee as well that the picks they have pan out because it's a bet that (i) they are going to be high picks (and with the East being so devastated, who knows how well the Nets do next year) and (ii) the Celtics are able to pick the right players.

And for the Warriors thing, it again boils down to the idea that teams should just give up. Of course they're favourites but if everyone just kinda goes "meh", it just enshrines them as champions.

Ultimately what's disappointing is the feeling that Boston could have really gone for it this time around and built a 4 All-star team as well but now that chance seems to be gone based on how things have panned out.

[Groundhog]

It's Only Summer League*, but nice start to Tatum's career with a game winner and solid overall showing.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Seeing this story now ... Hawks may end up with J-Craw AND a late 1st pick is a double sign & trade that sends Milsap to Denver and Gallinari to the Clippers.

Danilo Gallinari Likely To Join Clippers In Sign-And-Trade With Nuggets, Hawks - RealGM Wiretap

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Seeing this story now ... Hawks may end up with J-Craw AND a late 1st pick is a double sign & trade that sends Milsap to Denver and Gallinari to the Clippers.

Danilo Gallinari Likely To Join Clippers In Sign-And-Trade With Nuggets, Hawks - RealGM Wiretap

If the Hawks are rebuilding, it's a smart move. Wish the Bulls were taking on bad contracts for assets.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

If the Hawks are rebuilding, it's a smart move. Wish the Bulls were taking on bad contracts for assets.

Seems that Atlanta will waive Crawford but, honestly, since Milsap was gone then getting a 1st round pick -- any 1st round pick -- is more value than could have been reasonably expected.

Gon' be some uuuuuuuugly basketball in Atlanta next year (and probably well beyond that) but that's at least something.

[nol]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

It's Only Summer League*, but nice start to Tatum's career with a game winner and solid overall showing.

Fultz having 4 fewer points than Tatum in 11 fewer minutes was pretty nice as well.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Seeing this story now ... Hawks may end up with J-Craw AND a late 1st pick is a double sign & trade that sends Milsap to Denver and Gallinari to the Clippers.

Danilo Gallinari Likely To Join Clippers In Sign-And-Trade With Nuggets, Hawks - RealGM Wiretap

Not really an 'AND' thing here. Crawford is the price Atlanta must pay to get a 1st-round pick and will probably get bought out so the Hawks will have the cap room to do another such deal during the season. Although I suppose if the Hawks are serious about getting the number 1 pick, playing Crawford heavy minutes would be one of the more entertaining ways to get there.