Author Topic: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?  (Read 4046 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #15 on: November 23, 2014, 05:32:55 PM »

Offline Rondo9

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5379
  • Tommy Points: 277
Look how badly the Pacers screwed up by adding the wrong player(s) to their system.  They were a playoff contender until the trade, that on paper made them better, but in reality made them a worse team.

I would say no as well but for a different reason -- transforming the team's identity would take longer than half a season and if they lose Rondo in the offseason, it would all have been a waste of time and assets. If Rondo promised to extend his contract, I think they would do it.

I disagree with you slightly on one point. The Suns have a "good thing" but that good thing may never reach championship fruition. Though a Rondo/Hibbert implementation would be risky, its reward is likely greater than the ceiling of this current Suns team. I think Rondo/Hibbert combined at this point in their careers is more enticing than Shaq was at that point in his career.

As for cashing in.  I don't really see anybody good that is 'on the block' right now.  We missed out on Kevin Love.  Who else is 'available' who would actually improve the team?

I don't think the trade is what made the Pacers a worse team.

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #16 on: November 23, 2014, 05:35:02 PM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950

Obviously the best answer is, whatever is of best value and helps our team the most. Dig a little deeper. Would you find yourself happier if Ainge gave up one more first rounder than he should for Larry Sanders or Josh Smith than if he sold Rondo and Jeff Green for one less first rounder than he should?

Ainge should give up zero first rounders for Josh Smith, so he gets Detroit to give up a pick?  Even then, I am not enthusiastic about Smith.

I think that Plan A should be acquiring a star next summer to play next to Rondo and the stash of picks should be used (or not used) in a way that maximizes the chances of that happening.
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #17 on: November 23, 2014, 05:48:57 PM »

Offline TheFlex

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2791
  • Tommy Points: 367
It's only been one year and they were missing one of their key players for nearly half of it; there's really not enough to look at to say that the system can't be successful.  And even from the limited sample size we have, it's already shown to be much more effective than the systems they were running from 2010 to 2013.  I think they ride this experiment out for at least another year.

And the issue wasn't simply that they had an older Shaq, but that he killed their running game.  Hibbert might be younger than Shaq on the Suns was, but he's still a plodding, immobile center.  If you look at the Suns' bigs, they're all active, athletic guys who can move up and down the court.

Curious as to what you think: who's the better player right now, Rondo or Dragic?

Sure, no disagreement there regarding Hibbert's inability to fit into a high-tempo system.

Look how badly the Pacers screwed up by adding the wrong player(s) to their system.  They were a playoff contender until the trade, that on paper made them better, but in reality made them a worse team.

I would say no as well but for a different reason -- transforming the team's identity would take longer than half a season and if they lose Rondo in the offseason, it would all have been a waste of time and assets. If Rondo promised to extend his contract, I think they would do it.

I disagree with you slightly on one point. The Suns have a "good thing" but that good thing may never reach championship fruition. Though a Rondo/Hibbert implementation would be risky, its reward is likely greater than the ceiling of this current Suns team. I think Rondo/Hibbert combined at this point in their careers is more enticing than Shaq was at that point in his career.

As for cashing in.  I don't really see anybody good that is 'on the block' right now.  We missed out on Kevin Love.  Who else is 'available' who would actually improve the team?

I agree that working in Rondo/Hibbert would be difficult and would likely require Hornacek to adapt his style. The rewards could be plentiful, however.

I think the argument is to go for proven vets like Arron Afflalo and Al Horford and in turn it will be easier to convince a game-changing talent to join Rondo and the cast. Plenty of those types of guys available at a certain price (one that we can afford, and I say that as someone who is unsure about this method of team-building).


Draft: 8 first rounders in next 5 years.

Cap space: $24 mil.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague/

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #18 on: November 23, 2014, 05:59:52 PM »

Offline Endless Paradise

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2853
  • Tommy Points: 182
Right now? Probably Rondo.  It's not like a huge gap or anything, though.

And the Pacers were imploding long before they acquired Turner.  Turner didn't make them a bad team, they were already trending that way.  That's the entire reason why they traded for him in the first place.

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #19 on: November 23, 2014, 06:14:57 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 36776
  • Tommy Points: 2961
Big asset yet to come ......

When a deal,is done that sends Rondo to Cavs

We wind up dealing Irving for a 1-3 lottery pick

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #20 on: November 23, 2014, 08:30:28 PM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
Cash in.

It's my money, and I want it now.

In the form of wins.
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #21 on: November 23, 2014, 08:32:42 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
A for effort, however given the false choice I'd keep collecting

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #22 on: November 23, 2014, 09:17:58 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Cashing in when there is a player available worth cashing for. 

Players like Sanders are not worth it.

So for now, wait.
yup, pretty much this.

the basic principle is to
- keep the vets worth keeping because they give you an advantage over the competition (basically Rondo)
- trade/release the vets that can be replaced (basically of the other vets on our roster)
- keep the young players that look to become quality starters or bench players (Sully, KO, Smart, Young)
- move/release the young players that figure to just be ok rotation players (Zeller, Fav,  AB)
- use draft picks to either add good young talent or to facilitate trades for better players

I agree with this, but that's not the point of the question. I've found a lot of posters clamoring for Ainge to stop being stingy with our draft pick stockpile to get proven players and a lot of posters clamoring to dump Rondo/Green even if we sell low so we can move forward and collect more assets. So the question is, would you rather have Ainge give up one more draft pick than he should for a proven player or sell Rondo/Green for one less draft pick than he should for the sake of collecting any value he can as insurance in case they leave?
2 things.

first, it's not a lot of posters clamoring for trades of Rondo and Green, just a very vocal minority.  Usually these are the people trying to make the team worse to improve the odds in the lottery.

second, you're asking people to pick from only 2 options when there are several in play.  it's a loaded question because I think you'll find the majority of posters want Danny make only smart moves.  overpaying in a trade for a good player is not a good move.  giving away more than you have to leaves less assets in the bank for more trades and that's what a bad GM does. 

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #23 on: November 23, 2014, 09:26:08 PM »

Offline TheFlex

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2791
  • Tommy Points: 367
Cashing in when there is a player available worth cashing for. 

Players like Sanders are not worth it.

So for now, wait.
yup, pretty much this.

the basic principle is to
- keep the vets worth keeping because they give you an advantage over the competition (basically Rondo)
- trade/release the vets that can be replaced (basically of the other vets on our roster)
- keep the young players that look to become quality starters or bench players (Sully, KO, Smart, Young)
- move/release the young players that figure to just be ok rotation players (Zeller, Fav,  AB)
- use draft picks to either add good young talent or to facilitate trades for better players

I agree with this, but that's not the point of the question. I've found a lot of posters clamoring for Ainge to stop being stingy with our draft pick stockpile to get proven players and a lot of posters clamoring to dump Rondo/Green even if we sell low so we can move forward and collect more assets. So the question is, would you rather have Ainge give up one more draft pick than he should for a proven player or sell Rondo/Green for one less draft pick than he should for the sake of collecting any value he can as insurance in case they leave?
2 things.

first, it's not a lot of posters clamoring for trades of Rondo and Green, just a very vocal minority.  Usually these are the people trying to make the team worse to improve the odds in the lottery.

second, you're asking people to pick from only 2 options when there are several in play.  it's a loaded question because I think you'll find the majority of posters want Danny make only smart moves.  overpaying in a trade for a good player is not a good move.  giving away more than you have to leaves less assets in the bank for more trades and that's what a bad GM does.

Valid points. I guess what I'm trying to discern is the direction people want to see the Celtics go. Let me put it this way: do you find yourself pouring over Al Horford's game logs more or less than you find yourself pouring over highlight tapes of Karl Towns?


Draft: 8 first rounders in next 5 years.

Cap space: $24 mil.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague/

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #24 on: November 23, 2014, 10:17:47 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
We are not one piece away from winning.   We need a perimeter scorer at SG, Bradley is not cutting it offensively but did a nice job on D today.

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #25 on: November 23, 2014, 10:23:07 PM »

Offline Chris22

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5081
  • Tommy Points: 460
We are not one piece away from winning.   We need a perimeter scorer at SG, Bradley is not cutting it offensively but did a nice job on D today.

Bradley was a plus five.
Olynyk was a minus 15, and Thornton was a minus 11.

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #26 on: November 23, 2014, 10:26:32 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Cashing in when there is a player available worth cashing for. 

Players like Sanders are not worth it.

So for now, wait.
yup, pretty much this.

the basic principle is to
- keep the vets worth keeping because they give you an advantage over the competition (basically Rondo)
- trade/release the vets that can be replaced (basically of the other vets on our roster)
- keep the young players that look to become quality starters or bench players (Sully, KO, Smart, Young)
- move/release the young players that figure to just be ok rotation players (Zeller, Fav,  AB)
- use draft picks to either add good young talent or to facilitate trades for better players

I agree with this, but that's not the point of the question. I've found a lot of posters clamoring for Ainge to stop being stingy with our draft pick stockpile to get proven players and a lot of posters clamoring to dump Rondo/Green even if we sell low so we can move forward and collect more assets. So the question is, would you rather have Ainge give up one more draft pick than he should for a proven player or sell Rondo/Green for one less draft pick than he should for the sake of collecting any value he can as insurance in case they leave?
2 things.

first, it's not a lot of posters clamoring for trades of Rondo and Green, just a very vocal minority.  Usually these are the people trying to make the team worse to improve the odds in the lottery.

second, you're asking people to pick from only 2 options when there are several in play.  it's a loaded question because I think you'll find the majority of posters want Danny make only smart moves.  overpaying in a trade for a good player is not a good move.  giving away more than you have to leaves less assets in the bank for more trades and that's what a bad GM does.

Valid points. I guess what I'm trying to discern is the direction people want to see the Celtics go. Let me put it this way: do you find yourself pouring over Al Horford's game logs more or less than you find yourself pouring over highlight tapes of Karl Towns?
I get you.  TBH, I'm not doing either one.  the draft is still 8 months away so too early to get really excited about who might be coming out.   I'm a big Horford fan but really think he'd be best as a PF.  Ideally, I like to see Danny get both of them (or Okafor instead of Towns) next offseason.   use Sully or KO as the centerpiece to get Horford if the C's have a center lined up in the draft. 
thing is, we're adding someone Rondo's age and a rookie so we'd still have issues doing anything more than making the playoffs the following year.  we'd have to make another move for a very good vet -- preferably a better SG than AB

Re: On our assets: cash in? Or keep collecting?
« Reply #27 on: November 23, 2014, 11:24:32 PM »

Offline aingeforthree

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2013
  • Tommy Points: 134
Stay patient. That's all it boils down to. Our GM has set us up nicely with some great assets. A treasure chest loaded full of assets.

Keep developing our youth, & strike via trade when that game changer becomes available.