CelticsStrong

Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: footey on August 23, 2017, 12:30:08 PM

Title: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: footey on August 23, 2017, 12:30:08 PM
Danny believes that the NBA rules favor super athletic, fast, talented PG's.  Look at his drafting history (e.g., Rozier), his fascination with IT. His earlier fascination with AI (pre KG trade). His prior fascination with Chris Paul (two times, once when we tried to trade Pierce to Portland, and more recently when he was leaving NO).

I agree with him. 

IT was definitely our engine the last couple of seasons.  He made us click.

But Danny also has to project out a couple of things: When will GSW be vulnerable?  And when will our top picks (Brown, Smart, Tatum, Rozier, Yabusele) be developed enough to really compete? 

The answer to both questions is: not this coming season; maybe the season after. That's when things get real interesting for us.

IT just doesn't fit into that window. He is peaking now, turning 29 soon, and will be 33/34 when his max contract (which he will get) expires.  Danny wanted to trade up for a younger player (Irving) who is likely more durable, has his best seasons ahead of him, whose peak will coincide with the above time table of our maximum competitive value as a team; i.e., starting with the 2018/19 season, and continuing for the next 5-7 years afterward. 

The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason. But I feel that the best way to judge this trade is not wait for this coming season, but wait to see what happens for the next 5-7 years.  I really think we have built an incredible nucleus.  I would have loved to have gotten another top pick next draft, but we are so close now to competing, that it was worth cashing it in for the upgrade in youth and talent we are getting at the most important position in today's NBA.

Timing is everything.

Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: the TRUTH on August 23, 2017, 12:36:49 PM
Danny believes that the NBA rules favor super athletic, fast, talented PG's.  Look at his drafting history (e.g., Rozier), his fascination with IT. His earlier fascination with AI (pre KG trade). His prior fascination with Chris Paul (two times, once when we tried to trade Pierce to Portland, and more recently when he was leaving NO).

I agree with him. 

IT was definitely our engine the last couple of seasons.  He made us click.

But Danny also has to project out a couple of things: When will GSW be vulnerable?  And when will our top picks (Brown, Smart, Tatum, Rozier, Yabusele) be developed enough to really compete? 

The answer to both questions is: not this coming season; maybe the season after. That's when things get real interesting for us.

IT just doesn't fit into that window. He is peaking now, turning 29 soon, and will be 33/34 when his max contract (which he will get) expires.  Danny wanted to trade up for a younger player (Irving) who is likely more durable, has his best seasons ahead of him, whose peak will coincide with the above time table of our maximum competitive value as a team; i.e., starting with the 2018/19 season, and continuing for the next 5-7 years afterward. 

The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason. But I feel that the best way to judge this trade is not wait for this coming season, but wait to see what happens for the next 5-7 years.  I really think we have built an incredible nucleus.  I would have loved to have gotten another top pick next draft, but we are so close now to competing, that it was worth cashing it in for the upgrade in youth and talent we are getting at the most important position in today's NBA.

Timing is everything.

Great points here regarding timing and youth. Irving certainly fits our window more than IT did.

If Brown and Tatum both turn into stars, then we have a legitimate dynasty on our hands - it's only a matter of time (this assumes that Irving re-signs with us when his deal is up). So much of our future is riding on the development of Brown and Tatum now, whereas we had more margin for error if we'd retained the Nets pick.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: CoachBo on August 23, 2017, 12:43:15 PM
Danny believes that the NBA rules favor super athletic, fast, talented PG's.  Look at his drafting history (e.g., Rozier), his fascination with IT. His earlier fascination with AI (pre KG trade). His prior fascination with Chris Paul (two times, once when we tried to trade Pierce to Portland, and more recently when he was leaving NO).

I agree with him. 

IT was definitely our engine the last couple of seasons.  He made us click.

But Danny also has to project out a couple of things: When will GSW be vulnerable?  And when will our top picks (Brown, Smart, Tatum, Rozier, Yabusele) be developed enough to really compete? 

The answer to both questions is: not this coming season; maybe the season after. That's when things get real interesting for us.

IT just doesn't fit into that window. He is peaking now, turning 29 soon, and will be 33/34 when his max contract (which he will get) expires.  Danny wanted to trade up for a younger player (Irving) who is likely more durable, has his best seasons ahead of him, whose peak will coincide with the above time table of our maximum competitive value as a team; i.e., starting with the 2018/19 season, and continuing for the next 5-7 years afterward. 

The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason. But I feel that the best way to judge this trade is not wait for this coming season, but wait to see what happens for the next 5-7 years.  I really think we have built an incredible nucleus.  I would have loved to have gotten another top pick next draft, but we are so close now to competing, that it was worth cashing it in for the upgrade in youth and talent we are getting at the most important position in today's NBA.

Timing is everything.

Your best post that I have read. TP.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: littleteapot on August 23, 2017, 12:45:16 PM
The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason.
But other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: JBcat on August 23, 2017, 01:24:23 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.

Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: mef730 on August 23, 2017, 01:29:34 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.

We would happily flip Horford, but who's going to give up a young star for a 31-32 year old player making 30m per year?

Mike
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: jambr380 on August 23, 2017, 01:36:52 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.

The Zizic throw-in is one of the biggest things being overlooked in this deal. Not only did we give up our only young big, but we also gave up 4 years of a very cheap contract (and 9 years of control). The Cs must have been very disappointed with what they have seen from Zizic. IT, Crowder, and [of course] the BKN pick were the main pieces - it seems like including one of our many 2nd rounders wouldn't have been a deal breaker.

As for Horford, he will probably age well, but Danny clearly has a plan to upgrade his max contract spots to no-doubt max-level players. Irving and Hayward seem to fit the bill both in terms of age and ability; I am not sure what the future holds for Horford or if there would even be any interest in him. Luckily, he is the ultimate team player and is super-consistent.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: incoherent on August 23, 2017, 01:38:11 PM
How this trade isnt a blatant win to some people is beyond me.

I heartily laugh in the face of anyone saying we lost this trade.  They need to check their emotions at the door. 
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: incoherent on August 23, 2017, 01:39:00 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.



You are worried how we will replace Horford in 4 seasons from now when he's gone?

We will be in the NBA finals at least 2 times by then, so lets focus on that first.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: incoherent on August 23, 2017, 01:39:35 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.

The Zizic throw-in is one of the biggest things being overlooked in this deal. Not only did we give up our only young big, but we also gave up 4 years of a very cheap contract (and 9 years of control). The Cs must have been very disappointed with what they have seen from Zizic. IT, Crowder, and [of course] the BKN pick were the main pieces - it seems like including one of our many 2nd rounders wouldn't have been a deal breaker.

As for Horford, he will probably age well, but Danny clearly has a plan to upgrade his max contract spots to no-doubt max-level players. Irving and Hayward seem to fit the bill both in terms of age and ability; I am not sure what the future holds for Horford or if there would even be any interest in him. Luckily, he is the ultimate team player and is super-consistent.

Zizic showed us in summer league he is no where near ready for nightly NBA competition.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: bknova on August 23, 2017, 01:47:07 PM
Danny believes that the NBA rules favor super athletic, fast, talented PG's.  Look at his drafting history (e.g., Rozier), his fascination with IT. His earlier fascination with AI (pre KG trade). His prior fascination with Chris Paul (two times, once when we tried to trade Pierce to Portland, and more recently when he was leaving NO).

I agree with him. 

IT was definitely our engine the last couple of seasons.  He made us click.

But Danny also has to project out a couple of things: When will GSW be vulnerable?  And when will our top picks (Brown, Smart, Tatum, Rozier, Yabusele) be developed enough to really compete? 

The answer to both questions is: not this coming season; maybe the season after. That's when things get real interesting for us.

IT just doesn't fit into that window. He is peaking now, turning 29 soon, and will be 33/34 when his max contract (which he will get) expires.  Danny wanted to trade up for a younger player (Irving) who is likely more durable, has his best seasons ahead of him, whose peak will coincide with the above time table of our maximum competitive value as a team; i.e., starting with the 2018/19 season, and continuing for the next 5-7 years afterward. 

The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason. But I feel that the best way to judge this trade is not wait for this coming season, but wait to see what happens for the next 5-7 years.  I really think we have built an incredible nucleus. I would have loved to have gotten another top pick next draft, but we are so close now to competing, that it was worth cashing it in for the upgrade in youth and talent we are getting at the most important position in today's NBA.

Timing is everything.


Who says we won't.  That Laker pick could be top 5 and we retained.  The chances of the BK pick being as high as it was this year are lower because Chicago and Indiana are in full blown tank mode. 

Yes, I would've preferred number 1 pick protection on the BK pick, but if you think about it, Danny traded Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Jason Terry for James Young, Jaylen Brown, Jayson Tatum, Kyrie Irving entering his prime, and what will likely be a top 5 pick in one of the next two drafts.  Thats highway robbery, man.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: EJPLAYA on August 23, 2017, 01:48:05 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.

The Zizic throw-in is one of the biggest things being overlooked in this deal. Not only did we give up our only young big, but we also gave up 4 years of a very cheap contract (and 9 years of control). The Cs must have been very disappointed with what they have seen from Zizic. IT, Crowder, and [of course] the BKN pick were the main pieces - it seems like including one of our many 2nd rounders wouldn't have been a deal breaker.

As for Horford, he will probably age well, but Danny clearly has a plan to upgrade his max contract spots to no-doubt max-level players. Irving and Hayward seem to fit the bill both in terms of age and ability; I am not sure what the future holds for Horford or if there would even be any interest in him. Luckily, he is the ultimate team player and is super-consistent.

Got news for you guys. Zizic has absolutely no chance of being a legitimate center on a contender. We saw everything we needed to see in the summer league. He is a slow center with no vertical. That in itself dramatically reduces his upside. He will only get slower as he ages, his vertical will only get worse. At his ceiling he is a solid rotation guy on a decent team or a starter on a bad team that has no other options. He's not a terrible player and should improve some, just not a key piece in this at all. Crowder and the Nets pick are worth debating, not this guy who will never matter.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: ImShakHeIsShaq on August 23, 2017, 01:49:43 PM
I want to say one thing that I haven't seen probably because of all the pages and threads. When has Danny ever made a decision this big without consulting his best players? This means that Hayward and Horford probably signed off on this or at the least didn't give enough indication that they would be upset about the move! No matter how you slice it, if Hayward says it would be an issue I believe that Danny would not have done this because Hayward is a major piece of what we are trying to do.



I didn't know where to post this.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: liam on August 23, 2017, 02:03:55 PM
Look what the Bucks offered:
 "According to Gambadoro, Milwaukee offered guard Malcolm Brogdon, wing Khris Middleton and a first-round pick in exchange for Irving."
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: EJPLAYA on August 23, 2017, 02:14:46 PM
Look what the Bucks offered:
 "According to Gambadoro, Milwaukee offered guard Malcolm Brogdon, wing Khris Middleton and a first-round pick in exchange for Irving."

And look how far that package got them...
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: JBcat on August 23, 2017, 02:18:56 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.



You are worried how we will replace Horford in 4 seasons from now when he's gone?

We will be in the NBA finals at least 2 times by then, so lets focus on that first.

You are missing my point. The OP was focusing on how beneficial this is for us long term 5 to 7 years out.  We only have a short term window as of now IMO because there is lots of uncertainty with our big men long term.  That is because of Horford's age and contract.

Big men all star types aren't easily attainable, and we won't have max cap space for a very long time. We are thin up front.

So in my eyes until further changes it's still a short window unless someone like Yabu magically turns into Draymond Green, and we just need an average center.

That's all I was getting at.

Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: Granath on August 23, 2017, 02:26:31 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.



You are worried how we will replace Horford in 4 seasons from now when he's gone?

We will be in the NBA finals at least 2 times by then, so lets focus on that first.

You are missing my point. The OP was focusing on how beneficial this is for us long term 5 to 7 years out.  We only have a short term window as of now IMO because there is lots of uncertainty with our big men long term.  That is because of Horford's age and contract.

Big men all star types aren't easily attainable, and we won't have max cap space for a very long time. We are thin up front.

So in my eyes until further changes it's still a short window unless someone like Yabu magically turns into Draymond Green, and we just need an average center.

That's all I was getting at.

Then you misunderstood the post. He said the window goes from 2018/2019 and goes for 5-7 years.

In reality, the window doesn't change for now. It extends it out.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: biggs on August 23, 2017, 02:37:10 PM
Danny believes that the NBA rules favor super athletic, fast, talented PG's.  Look at his drafting history (e.g., Rozier), his fascination with IT. His earlier fascination with AI (pre KG trade). His prior fascination with Chris Paul (two times, once when we tried to trade Pierce to Portland, and more recently when he was leaving NO).

I agree with him. 

IT was definitely our engine the last couple of seasons.  He made us click.

But Danny also has to project out a couple of things: When will GSW be vulnerable?  And when will our top picks (Brown, Smart, Tatum, Rozier, Yabusele) be developed enough to really compete? 

The answer to both questions is: not this coming season; maybe the season after. That's when things get real interesting for us.

IT just doesn't fit into that window. He is peaking now, turning 29 soon, and will be 33/34 when his max contract (which he will get) expires.  Danny wanted to trade up for a younger player (Irving) who is likely more durable, has his best seasons ahead of him, whose peak will coincide with the above time table of our maximum competitive value as a team; i.e., starting with the 2018/19 season, and continuing for the next 5-7 years afterward. 

The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason. But I feel that the best way to judge this trade is not wait for this coming season, but wait to see what happens for the next 5-7 years.  I really think we have built an incredible nucleus.  I would have loved to have gotten another top pick next draft, but we are so close now to competing, that it was worth cashing it in for the upgrade in youth and talent we are getting at the most important position in today's NBA.

Timing is everything.

Horford is 31, how does he fit into this 5-7 year window?
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: guava_wrench on August 23, 2017, 02:39:44 PM
I think most pundits are saying that both teams are better off from this trade.

Looking at trades as if one team has to win is naive. The Celtics needed to get value for IT or get stuck paying more for them than they wanted to. That is why they were willing to give up the Brooklyn pick. They couldn't waste an opportunity to get value for IT.

I understand that some people value IT more than Ainge and considered this an overpay. But that is ignoring the reality that it is very likely that (1) Ainge would have let IT walk rather than pay more than he felt he was worth and (2) IT most likely would not have repeated the same success, especially with hip issue. The hip issue likely also contributed to the need to include the Brooklyn pick as Cleveland really needs IT to contribute this season.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: liam on August 23, 2017, 02:40:15 PM
Look what the Bucks offered:
 "According to Gambadoro, Milwaukee offered guard Malcolm Brogdon, wing Khris Middleton and a first-round pick in exchange for Irving."

And look how far that package got them...

I agree. That was a decent package Milwaukee offered. They were going to send two starters and a pick. I think we topped that. What The Bucks were offering was better than what teams got for Butler and George.... I think Kyrie is viewed as a better player than either of this guys...
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: Endless Paradise on August 23, 2017, 02:44:40 PM
Danny believes that the NBA rules favor super athletic, fast, talented PG's.  Look at his drafting history (e.g., Rozier), his fascination with IT. His earlier fascination with AI (pre KG trade). His prior fascination with Chris Paul (two times, once when we tried to trade Pierce to Portland, and more recently when he was leaving NO).

I agree with him. 

IT was definitely our engine the last couple of seasons.  He made us click.

But Danny also has to project out a couple of things: When will GSW be vulnerable?  And when will our top picks (Brown, Smart, Tatum, Rozier, Yabusele) be developed enough to really compete? 

The answer to both questions is: not this coming season; maybe the season after. That's when things get real interesting for us.

IT just doesn't fit into that window. He is peaking now, turning 29 soon, and will be 33/34 when his max contract (which he will get) expires.  Danny wanted to trade up for a younger player (Irving) who is likely more durable, has his best seasons ahead of him, whose peak will coincide with the above time table of our maximum competitive value as a team; i.e., starting with the 2018/19 season, and continuing for the next 5-7 years afterward. 

The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason. But I feel that the best way to judge this trade is not wait for this coming season, but wait to see what happens for the next 5-7 years.  I really think we have built an incredible nucleus.  I would have loved to have gotten another top pick next draft, but we are so close now to competing, that it was worth cashing it in for the upgrade in youth and talent we are getting at the most important position in today's NBA.

Timing is everything.

Horford is 31, how does he fit into this 5-7 year window?

He doesn't, but it's a lot easier to move an expiring Isaiah Thomas who's not even making double figures than it is to trade an even-older, maxed-out-for-three-more-seasons Al Horford.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: jacigar on August 23, 2017, 03:20:15 PM
Its all about the money. IT would get max after 17/18 at 28 years old. 5 years 28-32. Irving gets max in 18/19 at 27 years old 5 years 27-31 .Plus 17-19 at 19m per. You get Irving from age 25 thru 31 . IT from 28 thru 32. Also we still have LAL 2-6 in 2018 or Phil/Sac 2019 2-30hould get . This pick should get us future pick to replace Ah. Future lineup of Irving-Smart-Hayward-Morris-Ah with bench of Rozier-Brown Tatum-(big),looks pretty good. Hope for 1 of Theus, etc to develop.We  also have a flock of 2019 rnd 1s  to play with.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: Moranis on August 23, 2017, 03:28:50 PM
Look what the Bucks offered:
 "According to Gambadoro, Milwaukee offered guard Malcolm Brogdon, wing Khris Middleton and a first-round pick in exchange for Irving."

And look how far that package got them...

I agree. That was a decent package Milwaukee offered. They were going to send two starters and a pick. I think we topped that. What The Bucks were offering was better than what teams got for Butler and George.... I think Kyrie is viewed as a better player than either of this guys...
That is no where near better than what Chicago got for Butler.  I'd probably give you it is better than what Indiana got, but that really depends on what you think of Oladipo vs. Middleton. 
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: JBcat on August 23, 2017, 03:47:59 PM
All very good points but one worry of mine still exists when you talk about a 5-7 year window.

That is our big man situation.  Horford has 3 years left on his contract already in his 30s.

So if you project further out like you are trying to do we still need to solve the long term big man question. Our 1 lone project big in Zizic is gone now.

Can we flip Horford within a year or 2 for a younger star big similar to what we just did with Thomas.  The easy names to put out there are Davis, Cousins, and Porzingas.  Maybe there will be another name or 2 that will surprise us.



You are worried how we will replace Horford in 4 seasons from now when he's gone?

We will be in the NBA finals at least 2 times by then, so lets focus on that first.

You are missing my point. The OP was focusing on how beneficial this is for us long term 5 to 7 years out.  We only have a short term window as of now IMO because there is lots of uncertainty with our big men long term.  That is because of Horford's age and contract.

Big men all star types aren't easily attainable, and we won't have max cap space for a very long time. We are thin up front.

So in my eyes until further changes it's still a short window unless someone like Yabu magically turns into Draymond Green, and we just need an average center.

That's all I was getting at.

Then you misunderstood the post. He said the window goes from 2018/2019 and goes for 5-7 years.

In reality, the window doesn't change for now. It extends it out.

Well I agree we are in better shape now than yesterday for a longer window, but not sure I agree it goes 5-7 years out at this very moment.  We have a big question mark with our bigs if you look that far out. 

Ainge still has assets to do some other things though.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: NorCalJack on August 23, 2017, 07:04:58 PM
Well this is why this trade makes sense to me.

With regard to the Nets pick, I think it is the least valuable of Brown, Tatum, Lakers/Sac picks.  Brown and Tatum are know commodities and the Celtics like both very much.  Danny values the Lakers/Sac pick higher than the Nets pick.  If Brooklyn played out the next season in the West and the Eastern Conference, they would have a worst record playing in the West.  So I think Danny feels the Lakers will have a more difficult time winning games this year than the Nets.  Also people over value the impact that Ball will have on the Lakers win total for this year.  No rookie that has only played one year of CBB has lead a team to the playoffs.  If you look at A. Davis, as good as he is, he can not lead NO to the playoffs.  Not sure why people think Ball will lead the Lakers to a good record this year.  Also teams will be gunning for Ball and the Lakers in a tough Western Conference.  So I would rank these assets as follows.

1.)  Tatum
2.)  Brown
3.)  Lakers/Sac pick
4.)  Nets 2018 pick

Also I look at this trade as a straight up trade of Irving for the Nets pick.  IT, Jae and Zizic are just added to the trade to make salaries work.  IT is damaged goods and we were not going to sign him anyway.  Jae is a role player, with a good contract.  Zizic is a bit of a mystery to me, but I am sure the FO has seen enough to not flinch in putting him into the trade.

So I would trade our 4th best asset in the Nets pick for Kyrie straight up all day long.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: 2short on August 23, 2017, 07:22:27 PM
Danny believes that the NBA rules favor super athletic, fast, talented PG's.  Look at his drafting history (e.g., Rozier), his fascination with IT. His earlier fascination with AI (pre KG trade). His prior fascination with Chris Paul (two times, once when we tried to trade Pierce to Portland, and more recently when he was leaving NO).

I agree with him. 

IT was definitely our engine the last couple of seasons.  He made us click.

But Danny also has to project out a couple of things: When will GSW be vulnerable?  And when will our top picks (Brown, Smart, Tatum, Rozier, Yabusele) be developed enough to really compete? 

The answer to both questions is: not this coming season; maybe the season after. That's when things get real interesting for us.

IT just doesn't fit into that window. He is peaking now, turning 29 soon, and will be 33/34 when his max contract (which he will get) expires.  Danny wanted to trade up for a younger player (Irving) who is likely more durable, has his best seasons ahead of him, whose peak will coincide with the above time table of our maximum competitive value as a team; i.e., starting with the 2018/19 season, and continuing for the next 5-7 years afterward. 

The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason. But I feel that the best way to judge this trade is not wait for this coming season, but wait to see what happens for the next 5-7 years.  I really think we have built an incredible nucleus.  I would have loved to have gotten another top pick next draft, but we are so close now to competing, that it was worth cashing it in for the upgrade in youth and talent we are getting at the most important position in today's NBA.

Timing is everything.

Horford is 31, how does he fit into this 5-7 year window?
horford in mini tim duncan, his game will age quite nicely
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: crimson_stallion on August 23, 2017, 07:44:39 PM
Danny believes that the NBA rules favor super athletic, fast, talented PG's.  Look at his drafting history (e.g., Rozier), his fascination with IT. His earlier fascination with AI (pre KG trade). His prior fascination with Chris Paul (two times, once when we tried to trade Pierce to Portland, and more recently when he was leaving NO).

I agree with him. 

IT was definitely our engine the last couple of seasons.  He made us click.

But Danny also has to project out a couple of things: When will GSW be vulnerable?  And when will our top picks (Brown, Smart, Tatum, Rozier, Yabusele) be developed enough to really compete? 

The answer to both questions is: not this coming season; maybe the season after. That's when things get real interesting for us.

IT just doesn't fit into that window. He is peaking now, turning 29 soon, and will be 33/34 when his max contract (which he will get) expires.  Danny wanted to trade up for a younger player (Irving) who is likely more durable, has his best seasons ahead of him, whose peak will coincide with the above time table of our maximum competitive value as a team; i.e., starting with the 2018/19 season, and continuing for the next 5-7 years afterward. 

The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason. But I feel that the best way to judge this trade is not wait for this coming season, but wait to see what happens for the next 5-7 years.  I really think we have built an incredible nucleus.  I would have loved to have gotten another top pick next draft, but we are so close now to competing, that it was worth cashing it in for the upgrade in youth and talent we are getting at the most important position in today's NBA.

Timing is everything.

Horford is 31, how does he fit into this 5-7 year window?
horford in mini tim duncan, his game will age quite nicely

It doesn't fit in to the 5-7 year window at all.

And Horford is nothing like Tim Duncan.  Like, not even remotely close. 

One is was a 7'0" / 260 lbs guy who was an elite defender, elite rebounder and an elite post player who rarely ever shot threes, had a deadly midrange game, and was always deadly efficient on offense. 

The other is a 6'10" / 250 lbs guy who is a pretty good defender, a poor rebounder, and average post player who spends 80% of his offense jacking up jump shots.

The only similarities is that they both have games based around fundametals, they are both good midrange shooters, and they are both quality passers.  That's really the only similarities between those two players...

Horford is more like a watered down Draymond Green minus the **** personality.

And Horford's game clearly will not age nicely, since he's only 31 years old right now and has already been showing signs of decline for three straight years now. 

Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: SHAQATTACK on August 23, 2017, 07:50:14 PM
IT was always a stop gap .....unless he wanted to lead a bench .  It is just hard to,start a guy that short and overcome the defensive liabilities. 

IT , Turner , AB , Crowder took Boston as far as they could .

To beat GS and Team Lebron Celtics needed a higher level of talent .

They are getting there now. 
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: crimson_stallion on August 23, 2017, 08:06:28 PM
With regard to the Nets pick, I think it is the least valuable of Brown, Tatum, Lakers/Sac picks.  Brown and Tatum are know commodities and the Celtics like both very much.  Danny values the Lakers/Sac pick higher than the Nets pick.  If Brooklyn played out the next season in the West and the Eastern Conference, they would have a worst record playing in the West.

That's all good and well if the NBA draft odds were determined based on where you finish within your conference...but they aren't...they are based on overall record.

So it doesn't really matter (that much) how strong the rest of the teams in the West are.  The Lakers gave a much stronger team then the Nets.  If the Nets only win 10 games all season long (remember they DID loose Brook Lopez) then the Lakers are talented enough that they'd struggle to reach that number even if they tried.  And there is no point in them trying since we have their pick, so they have zero incentive to want to lose games. 
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: Chris22 on August 23, 2017, 08:10:28 PM
The price of that upgrade was the Brooklyn pick.  It was expensive, for sure, and most pundits are saying that CLE won the trade for that reason.
But other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?

We still have the Lakers pick.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: moiso on August 23, 2017, 08:10:29 PM
Well this is why this trade makes sense to me.

With regard to the Nets pick, I think it is the least valuable of Brown, Tatum, Lakers/Sac picks.  Brown and Tatum are know commodities and the Celtics like both very much.  Danny values the Lakers/Sac pick higher than the Nets pick.  If Brooklyn played out the next season in the West and the Eastern Conference, they would have a worst record playing in the West.  So I think Danny feels the Lakers will have a more difficult time winning games this year than the Nets.  Also people over value the impact that Ball will have on the Lakers win total for this year.  No rookie that has only played one year of CBB has lead a team to the playoffs.  If you look at A. Davis, as good as he is, he can not lead NO to the playoffs.  Not sure why people think Ball will lead the Lakers to a good record this year.  Also teams will be gunning for Ball and the Lakers in a tough Western Conference.  So I would rank these assets as follows.

1.)  Tatum
2.)  Brown
3.)  Lakers/Sac pick
4.)  Nets 2018 pick

Also I look at this trade as a straight up trade of Irving for the Nets pick.  IT, Jae and Zizic are just added to the trade to make salaries work.  IT is damaged goods and we were not going to sign him anyway.  Jae is a role player, with a good contract.  Zizic is a bit of a mystery to me, but I am sure the FO has seen enough to not flinch in putting him into the trade.

So I would trade our 4th best asset in the Nets pick for Kyrie straight up all day long.
Not everyone ranks those assets in the same order that you do.  I would go 1- Tatum, 2- Nets pick, with Brown and the Lakers/sac pick about equal. 

I think the Lakers will be quite a bit better than they were last year.  Not just because of Ball like you claim people think is the main reason.  Lopez is a much better player than D'Angelo Russell currently, and I expect Ingram to improve a lot from year one to year two.  Add in the dose of unselfishness that Ball brings, and the team looks much better than last years version.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: crimson_stallion on August 23, 2017, 08:36:38 PM
Well this is why this trade makes sense to me.

With regard to the Nets pick, I think it is the least valuable of Brown, Tatum, Lakers/Sac picks.  Brown and Tatum are know commodities and the Celtics like both very much.  Danny values the Lakers/Sac pick higher than the Nets pick.  If Brooklyn played out the next season in the West and the Eastern Conference, they would have a worst record playing in the West.  So I think Danny feels the Lakers will have a more difficult time winning games this year than the Nets.  Also people over value the impact that Ball will have on the Lakers win total for this year.  No rookie that has only played one year of CBB has lead a team to the playoffs.  If you look at A. Davis, as good as he is, he can not lead NO to the playoffs.  Not sure why people think Ball will lead the Lakers to a good record this year.  Also teams will be gunning for Ball and the Lakers in a tough Western Conference.  So I would rank these assets as follows.

1.)  Tatum
2.)  Brown
3.)  Lakers/Sac pick
4.)  Nets 2018 pick

Also I look at this trade as a straight up trade of Irving for the Nets pick.  IT, Jae and Zizic are just added to the trade to make salaries work.  IT is damaged goods and we were not going to sign him anyway.  Jae is a role player, with a good contract.  Zizic is a bit of a mystery to me, but I am sure the FO has seen enough to not flinch in putting him into the trade.

So I would trade our 4th best asset in the Nets pick for Kyrie straight up all day long.
Not everyone ranks those assets in the same order that you do.  I would go 1- Tatum, 2- Nets pick, with Brown and the Lakers/sac pick about equal. 

I think the Lakers will be quite a bit better than they were last year.  Not just because of Ball like you claim people think is the main reason.  Lopez is a much better player than D'Angelo Russell currently, and I expect Ingram to improve a lot from year one to year two.  Add in the dose of unselfishness that Ball brings, and the team looks much better than last years version.

Personally, I would probably rate them as follows:

1. Tatum
2. Brooklyn 1st
3. Brown
4. Lakers Pick

Main reason being that, as you said, the Lakers look much improved this year.  They aren't going to make the playoffs, but they could be good enough to finish 6th , 7th or 8th last in which case the value of that Lakers pick drops off a cliff.

To make matters worse if they DO go in the other direction and finish bottom two, then I believe we wouldn't even get the pick...

So for that pick to have any value we need to be pretty darn lucky and hope that the Lakers finish somewehre in the bottom 5 - and even then the lottery could kill it's value if the ping pong balls don't fall the right way.

The Brooklyn pick is so much more valuable since there are no protections at all on that pick, so matter where it falls the owner keeps it.  And looking at Brooklyn right now, I can't see how they could possible finish any better then 3rd last.   I mean honestly, DeMarre Carroll may well be LEGITIMATELY the best player on that Nets roster right now...and that's shocking.  Even on the Bulls last (who finished with the 8h seed in the weak east) he'd have been the 3rd or 4th best player, so if he is your best player you really have no hope.   

Lakers on the other hand could be better then people think.  The Nets, Magic, Hawks, Pacers, Bulls and Kings should all be utterly garbage this year.  The Lakers could very easily be better then all of those teams, and if so that puts them to the 7th last spot.   The Jazz could potentially be pretty bad after losing Hayward, so that could push them to 8th.  The Pelicans struggled even with the Davis/Cousins pairing last season, so if those guys fail to click they could well prove to be crap again, potentially pushing the Lakers to 9th last.  The Knicks seem to struggle no matter how much talent they have, and they just lost Derrick Rose...meaning their entire hopes now rest on Melo and Porzingis -neither of whom seem to genuinely want to be there.   If they come out really bad, that could push the Lakers to 10th last.  Now suddenly that Lakers pick is falling late lottery and has minimal value.

One thing we do know is that the Lakers pick cannot possible fall to us any higher then 3rd overall, because if it does we lose it...so the highest value that pick can possibly have is 3rd - whereas the Brooklyn pick could be as high as #1. 

So I agree with you completely - there is no way that Lakers pick has as much value to other teams as the Nets one.  In fact the Nets pick may well be more valuable to other teams then even Tatum.   

Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: OldSchoolDude on August 23, 2017, 11:43:28 PM
Well this is why this trade makes sense to me.

With regard to the Nets pick, I think it is the least valuable of Brown, Tatum, Lakers/Sac picks.  Brown and Tatum are know commodities and the Celtics like both very much.  Danny values the Lakers/Sac pick higher than the Nets pick.  If Brooklyn played out the next season in the West and the Eastern Conference, they would have a worst record playing in the West.  So I think Danny feels the Lakers will have a more difficult time winning games this year than the Nets.  Also people over value the impact that Ball will have on the Lakers win total for this year.  No rookie that has only played one year of CBB has lead a team to the playoffs.  If you look at A. Davis, as good as he is, he can not lead NO to the playoffs.  Not sure why people think Ball will lead the Lakers to a good record this year.  Also teams will be gunning for Ball and the Lakers in a tough Western Conference.  So I would rank these assets as follows.

1.)  Tatum
2.)  Brown
3.)  Lakers/Sac pick
4.)  Nets 2018 pick

Also I look at this trade as a straight up trade of Irving for the Nets pick.  IT, Jae and Zizic are just added to the trade to make salaries work.  IT is damaged goods and we were not going to sign him anyway.  Jae is a role player, with a good contract.  Zizic is a bit of a mystery to me, but I am sure the FO has seen enough to not flinch in putting him into the trade.

So I would trade our 4th best asset in the Nets pick for Kyrie straight up all day long.

YES!
This is exactly how I see it.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: OldSchoolDude on August 23, 2017, 11:54:33 PM
I do think the Lakers are better than they were last year but so is like every other team in the West. The only team I think the Lakers are actually better than in the west are the Kings so the Lakers will be pretty much playing better teams in them every game in the west is only one team that they have a chance to be and that's the Kings and even then the Kings have a chance to beat them too.  For the Lakers may have more Talent than some of the teams in the East because these less town of the teams will be playing lots of games against other less than all the teams in the East they have a better chance of finishing with more wins than the Lakers.  That's why I believe that Brooklyn will end up with a better record than Los Angeles.  I used to think that the Lakers pick wasn't as good as the Brooklyn pick but then when the traders made I thought why would they do the Brooklyn if Cleveland would have been willing to take the Lakers pick and then I looked at the teams and looked at the rosters and I realize that the Lakers pick probably better than the Brooklyn pick.
Title: Re: Why the Irving Trade Makes Sense to me
Post by: azzenfrost on August 23, 2017, 11:56:24 PM
I think people are still too hung up on what-could've-been-with-PG/JB. That didn't happen. Let it go. This trade did happen. Cavs did good. But the C's didn't lose either.