Ainge: "Groundwork has been laid" for possible summer deals

[BleedGreen1989]

Lots of people assuming he was talking about an asik type deal.  Just as likely the groundwork was laid for a rondo trade.  Who knows.

I think the lottery will determine Rondo's fate and our future. If we land a top 3 pick, I expect Rondo to be traded on draft night and we go with a young core. If we end up with the 4th, 5th, or 6th pick range, then I expect Ainge to trade the pick and other assets to build a vet core immediately around Rondo.

He may have laid the groundwork for all of these scenarios already and has a good feel for what he can get in either direction.

Something just seems counterintuitive about trying to get competitive only if you get a lower pick (and therefore a worse asset).

I think HP is seeing it in the same way the 2007 draft played out.

If we ended up with a top-two pick there, it's possible / probable we would have built around that pick and traded Pierce.

Falling back in the draft led to us to scrapping the "build through the draft" plan, and cashing in our assets to win immediately.

I could see trading Rondo if we drafted Embiid, but I think Wiggins and Parker could certainly contribute to a playoff team next year if that's the route Ainge wants to go.

[CoachBo]

I am not at all convinced Ainge can get anything of value for Rondo unless he's used as a chip in a Minnesota deal - at which point Ainge is going to need to get a PG back.

[Chief Macho]

I look at this season as a success. our goals were to acquire assets, be flexible enough to make moves for the off season or build through the draft, develop the young guys, & get Brad Stevens acclimated to the NBA. we did all of this.

I am completely shocked we weren't able to move bass, more shocked no playoff team wouldn't jump at taking him as he could have helped a playoff team needing PF depth. i'm wondering if the clippers would have if they could trade with us instead of going after big baby.

if we aren't able to make some moves this summer then i'll start to worry a little. though I think we'll be in better position next yr. with more expiring contracts.

Apparently you didn't have to pay for the NBA package.    I get what you're saying,  it is the current state of the NBA.   But to call this dung pile of an NBA season a success for the Celtics when you have to pay to watch this crap is pretty sad.   The NBA should be ashamed that this is how its league runs.

[D.o.s.]

I look at this season as a success. our goals were to acquire assets, be flexible enough to make moves for the off season or build through the draft, develop the young guys, & get Brad Stevens acclimated to the NBA. we did all of this.

I am completely shocked we weren't able to move bass, more shocked no playoff team wouldn't jump at taking him as he could have helped a playoff team needing PF depth. i'm wondering if the clippers would have if they could trade with us instead of going after big baby.

if we aren't able to make some moves this summer then i'll start to worry a little. though I think we'll be in better position next yr. with more expiring contracts.

Apparently you didn't have to pay for the NBA package.    I get what you're saying,  it is the current state of the NBA.   But to call this dung pile of an NBA season a success for the Celtics when you have to pay to watch this crap is pretty sad.   The NBA should be ashamed that this is how its league runs.

There will always be bad teams -- it's the nature of sports.

[CoachBo]

I look at this season as a success. our goals were to acquire assets, be flexible enough to make moves for the off season or build through the draft, develop the young guys, & get Brad Stevens acclimated to the NBA. we did all of this.

I am completely shocked we weren't able to move bass, more shocked no playoff team wouldn't jump at taking him as he could have helped a playoff team needing PF depth. i'm wondering if the clippers would have if they could trade with us instead of going after big baby.

if we aren't able to make some moves this summer then i'll start to worry a little. though I think we'll be in better position next yr. with more expiring contracts.

Apparently you didn't have to pay for the NBA package.    I get what you're saying,  it is the current state of the NBA.   But to call this dung pile of an NBA season a success for the Celtics when you have to pay to watch this crap is pretty sad.   The NBA should be ashamed that this is how its league runs.

Agreed. Seeing an expansion team in green is a very difficult thing to tolerate. Funny how the Spurs never seem to need to bottom out like we do.

[Cman]

Lots of people assuming he was talking about an asik type deal.  Just as likely the groundwork was laid for a rondo trade.  Who knows.

I think the lottery will determine Rondo's fate and our future. If we land a top 3 pick, I expect Rondo to be traded on draft night and we go with a young core. If we end up with the 4th, 5th, or 6th pick range, then I expect Ainge to trade the pick and other assets to build a vet core immediately around Rondo.

He may have laid the groundwork for all of these scenarios already and has a good feel for what he can get in either direction.

Something just seems counterintuitive about trying to get competitive only if you get a lower pick (and therefore a worse asset).

I think HP is seeing it in the same way the 2007 draft played out.

If we ended up with a top-two pick there, it's possible / probable we would have built around that pick and traded Pierce.

Falling back in the draft led to us to scrapping the "build through the draft" plan, and cashing in our assets to win immediately.

I could see trading Rondo if we drafted Embiid, but I think Wiggins and Parker could certainly contribute to a playoff team next year if that's the route Ainge wants to go.

I don't think it is necessarily either/or. I think Ainge has shown in the past that he is willing to be patient and see what happens.

Based on what Ainge has done in the past, I wouldn't be shocked with any of the following:
(1) Celtics get a top 3 pick, keep it, draft BPA, make no trades.
(2) Celtics get a top 3 pick, trade it for a franchise player.
(3) Celtics pick 5-8 range, keep it, draft BPA, make no trades.
(4) Celtics pick 5-8 range, trade it for an "asset" even though that asset isn't necessarily a franchise player....

I could go on with other possibilities.  The point is that the Celtics have *options*. That's all that DA cares about at this point (correctly, in my opinion).

[aingeforthree]

I was right there with those that were questioning why Bass wasn't moved.  Was he worth more as a Celtic than what was being offered ?

I thought his play warranted a playoff team looking at him for bench help, & thought a playoff team would pull the trigger on a trade for his services.

In my personal opinion, I think 'groundwork' was laid out by Danny to know the exact value he has in Bass and specifically the value a package of Bass + a first round pick has going forward.  I can see this package landing that specific rim protector everybody is looking for.

[Fred Roberts]

Hopefully trading Bass , Wallace, Anthony

And others.....

If we do acquire a big name (more than just Asik), I have to assume one of Sully or Olynyk will be gone. If that's the case, I absolutely want to hold on to Bass. On our team this past year, he held almost no value on the court (but was a great locker room guy), but on a playoff team, I would love to have him as the first big off the bench.

I'm with this . .. .Asik doesn't do it for me if he's going to cost a lot in a trade. I wonder if Emeka Okafor's neck injury will heal and allow him to come on board cheap as a nice veteran C with solid defense? Pau Gasol would be another veteran stopgap player we might be able to pursue in FA for a short term (2yr) contract.

I question who is going to bid on Avery Bradley as a restricted FA. I'm not sure there's going to be a huge market for him. The C's can put out the qualifying offer and see what happens. Hopefully, we're able to resign him for Tony Allen money.

Beyond that, it all comes down to nailing the draft picks and letting the expensive vets go. Hump's deal is a huge expiring. Bogans too. Wallace will be the only really undesirable contract left. Bass is expensive but he's valuable. Wallace actually has some on court value too if we're looking to make a playoff push next year.

I think the table is very set for moves to be made this summer and next. Danny has a good deal of chips to work with which is exactly what he wanted. It's pretty exciting to contemplate some of the possibilities.

[nickagneta]

You know people, there really is a simple answer to why Rondo, Bass, Green, Wallace and others that people wanted off the team are still here. Its really this simple.

Danny Ainge wins trades, or at least tries to. He does not give valuable assets away.

Most trade scenarios I saw here were just giving away our assets or were not taking into any kind of consideration to what the other teams wants and/or needs were. Danny Ainge is not a fantasy basketball manager. He's a professional businessman that manages the Celtics and is an expert on the product involved that he must manage.

Ainge didn't give in to Morey for Asik not because he wanted the team to lose more, that's absurd. He did it because Morey's asking price was too high. Plain and simple. But it probably laid the ground for what Ainge feels would be a fair deal this summer where both teams now might have different needs and desires and so Morey most likely will see he needs to take less than he was demanding.

That's more how these things work and not the "tanker/non-tanker" fantasy basketball ways of doing things that so many on this site seem to think Ainge/Grousbeck/Stevens are using to run the Celtics.

[LooseCannon]

I was right there with those that were questioning why Bass wasn't moved.  Was he worth more as a Celtic than what was being offered ?

It's possible that Ainge is thinking ahead o the summer of 2015 and values having Bass an expiring contract to clear cap space, so he won't trade Bass unless he gets some sort of trade asset that can be used in a deal a year from now.

[obnoxiousmime]

I understand that we have a need, but it bothers me that picking up Asik would be like taking on a better team's leftovers. The Rockets picked him up as a FA and it didn't cost them any assets. Now they have someone better and they want to unload their backup. That doesn't mean anything to us because it's in the past and we have our own situation to think of, but it just gives me a tinge of embarrassment. Can't we do some great scouting and sign the next undervalued FA like Asik instead of having to deal for one? Are poison pill contracts impossible under the new CBA? We actually have some cap space this summer, though it's not a lot.

Also, Asik only has one year remaining on his deal and could be gone after one season. If it doesn't cost that much than so be it, but it's hard for me to get excited about acquiring someone the Rockets felt they needed to upgrade.

It reminds me of when a crappy NL team overpays for the mediocre starting pitcher the good teams don't bother with because they already have better guys in their rotation. The weak team figures "well we can't get those elite guys anyway, so let's spend some of this revenue sharing money on a guy that's OK and will keep us from being truly horrible."

[BleedGreen1989]

I understand that we have a need, but it bothers me that picking up Asik would be like taking on a better team's leftovers. The Rockets picked him up as a FA and it didn't cost them any assets. Now they have someone better and they want to unload their backup. That doesn't mean anything to us because it's in the past and we have our own situation to think of, but it just gives me a tinge of embarrassment. Can't we do some great scouting and sign the next undervalued FA like Asik instead of having to deal for one? Are poison pill contracts impossible under the new CBA? We actually have some cap space this summer, though it's not a lot.

Also, Asik only has one year remaining on his deal and could be gone after one season. If it doesn't cost that much than so be it, but it's hard for me to get excited about acquiring someone the Rockets felt they needed to upgrade.

It reminds me of when a crappy NL team overpays for the mediocre starting pitcher the good teams don't bother with because they already have better guys in their rotation. The weak team figures "well we can't get those elite guys anyway, so let's spend some of this revenue sharing money on a guy that's OK and will keep us from being truly horrible."

I'm not arguing Asik is better than Dwight, but when you look at the defensive rating for the Rockets last year (when Asik started 82 games) and this year (when Dwight started most games), Dwight barely moved the needle.

Everybody would take Dwight over Asik but its not like Asik is some scraps leftover.

[hpantazo]

I understand that we have a need, but it bothers me that picking up Asik would be like taking on a better team's leftovers. The Rockets picked him up as a FA and it didn't cost them any assets. Now they have someone better and they want to unload their backup. That doesn't mean anything to us because it's in the past and we have our own situation to think of, but it just gives me a tinge of embarrassment. Can't we do some great scouting and sign the next undervalued FA like Asik instead of having to deal for one? Are poison pill contracts impossible under the new CBA? We actually have some cap space this summer, though it's not a lot.

Also, Asik only has one year remaining on his deal and could be gone after one season. If it doesn't cost that much than so be it, but it's hard for me to get excited about acquiring someone the Rockets felt they needed to upgrade.

It reminds me of when a crappy NL team overpays for the mediocre starting pitcher the good teams don't bother with because they already have better guys in their rotation. The weak team figures "well we can't get those elite guys anyway, so let's spend some of this revenue sharing money on a guy that's OK and will keep us from being truly horrible."

Well that's the wrong way of looking at it. No one, especially Ainge, is looking at Asik as an alternative to a top tier player, and we would never overpay, as you suggest, to get him. He is a cheap option to fill a large need on this team, that's it. There is no team in recent NBA history that trots out 5 all-stars as their starting 5. We are not going to get 5 superstars, so having guys like Asik fill out the starting 5 in addition to 2-3 all-stars is ideal. No one ever said our center has to be a top level scorer. We just need a center that can protect the rim, and there are not many of them out there. We would maintain most of our top assets to get some top level vets to add to Rondo if we were to get Asik. It would be more like adding Kevin Love and a solid SG to Asik and Rondo, not adding Asik instead of Love for example.

Ainge will not overpay for Asik, and the Rockets cannot ask much for him. He clearly wants out, and will leave after next season if they don't trade him. He is also not even close to being considered a star, and even star players asking to leave on an expiring deal don't net much in return.

[LooseCannon]

I understand that we have a need, but it bothers me that picking up Asik would be like taking on a better team's leftovers.

You have to understand that the Rockets didn't sign Howard because they thought Asik was bad.  They thought he was a good enough player that he could play out-of-position as a PF next to Howard and, if not, they could trade him.

If you believe the rumors that Chris Paul was the only guy who Ainge was serious about trading Rondo for, then think of Howard as the Chris Paul analogy and Asik as the Rondo.  If Ainge was seriously pursuing Paul, that wouldn't have made Rondo some sort of leftover scraps.

[aingeforthree]

I understand that we have a need, but it bothers me that picking up Asik would be like taking on a better team's leftovers. The Rockets picked him up as a FA and it didn't cost them any assets. Now they have someone better and they want to unload their backup. That doesn't mean anything to us because it's in the past and we have our own situation to think of, but it just gives me a tinge of embarrassment. Can't we do some great scouting and sign the next undervalued FA like Asik instead of having to deal for one? Are poison pill contracts impossible under the new CBA? We actually have some cap space this summer, though it's not a lot.

Also, Asik only has one year remaining on his deal and could be gone after one season. If it doesn't cost that much than so be it, but it's hard for me to get excited about acquiring someone the Rockets felt they needed to upgrade.

It reminds me of when a crappy NL team overpays for the mediocre starting pitcher the good teams don't bother with because they already have better guys in their rotation. The weak team figures "well we can't get those elite guys anyway, so let's spend some of this revenue sharing money on a guy that's OK and will keep us from being truly horrible."

I'm not arguing Asik is better than Dwight, but when you look at the defensive rating for the Rockets last year (when Asik started 82 games) and this year (when Dwight started most games), Dwight barely moved the needle.

Everybody would take Dwight over Asik but its not like Asik is some scraps leftover.

If scraps left over means a guy who can defend any big in the league and be a top rebounder, than I'll take that scrap.

That's who he is.  Good big defender, and a top rebounder.  Any team could use that.