Prediction: C's go after Ty Lawson on Draft night

[gpap]

Zero interest on Ty Lawson. By far prefer to have Isaiah Thomas' cost controlled contract, who is also younger, as an off the bench player than having Ty Lawson as a starter for us.

Easy choice.

Not really. Isaiah Thomas was exposed pretty badly in games 3 and 4 in the Cavs series.

[walker834]

Why do we need Lawson when we have Smart and Thomas?

Lawson adds more creating than Bradley.  With Isaiah and Smart here might be tough for Lawson though.  Would you take Lawson or Bradley? I think i might still stick with bradley and hope he gets better.  Isiah and Lawson in the game at the same time would be interesting but smart and bradley would be relegated to the bench.  I can sort of see it.  We could use creators but seems like we might be spreading ourselves thin.  Would this work?

I think with Isiah and Smart we dont need him.  Let Smart play pg.

[crimson_stallion]

Honestly, I think our guard rotation is one of the strongest parts of this team right now.  Statistically both Smart and Thomas are 'plus' guys (they both have a positive Real-Plus-Minus) and Bradley is basically a neutral RPM, so overall our three guard rotation is outplaying their opponents. 

All three guys are also locked under affordable long term contracts, so for that reason I don't really feel that it's worth upgrading at the guard spots unless we get one of those "offer you can't refuse" type opportunities - for example, if you can get a guy with future superstar potential (like Wall, Irving, Beal or Lillard).

I think our next strongest rotation is at PF, with Olynyk and Sully (from memory) both having positive RPM's and I think Bass' is also not too bad.  The only reason I'd look to upgrade at PF is because of the contact situation - Sully and Bass are both going to be expiring soon (and Sully will likely command a large number) so if you get a chance to sign somebody who is a modest upgrade (e.g. Monroe) you may as well do it.

Ultimately I think out biggest weaknesses are clearly the SF spot and C spot.  Turner is a Turnover machine (ironically) and from the stats I've seen I think Zeller is actually the worst defensive guy in our rotation (allowing a per of 22 to opposing centers) so those are the areas I would focus hard on upgrading if we can't score a legit star from somewhere.

I'd have no hesitation going after Lawson if he was a bigger PG - at least around 6'2" at a minimum - but his size hurts him on defense in much the same way as it does for Isaiah Thomas.

[chambers]

Lawson is a better overall player than any of our guards.
He can create, he can shoot and he can defend, and he's only $4 million more than Bradley.
He'll be on $13 million when the cap hits $108 million too.

This guy is a 5th pick who's played like it and wants out of that crappy situation in Denver.
Just plays hard on both ends and wants to play for a team/coach that wants him.

Ainge loves him, he's also Durant's close friend since high school.

Again, he's a better all round player than any of our guards.

[LooseCannon]

he's also Durant's close friend since high school.

I feel like this is a really stupid argument to use in support of trying to acquire Lawson.

[Snakehead]

We were looking at Lawson instead of Thomas.  Now that we have Thomas, no way.  You think Ainge wants two PGs (and his two best players) under 6 feet and at the same position?

Lawson is a better overall player than any of our guards.
He can create, he can shoot and he can defend, and he's only $4 million more than Bradley.
He'll be on $13 million when the cap hits $108 million too.

This guy is a 5th pick who's played like it and wants out of that crappy situation in Denver.
Just plays hard on both ends and wants to play for a team/coach that wants him.

Ainge loves him, he's also Durant's close friend since high school.

Again, he's a better all round player than any of our guards.

I like Lawson but I like Thomas just as much (if not more, because of his scoring instincts) and Thomas is on a better deal.

[chambers]

he's also Durant's close friend since high school.

I feel like this is a really stupid argument to use in support of trying to acquire Lawson.

I think it's really stupid to call it an 'argument' for acquiring Lawson- it's a simple fact.
Most would say it's a nice cherry on top.

[chambers]

We were looking at Lawson instead of Thomas.  Now that we have Thomas, no way.  You think Ainge wants two PGs (and his two best players) under 6 feet and at the same position?

Lawson is a better overall player than any of our guards.
He can create, he can shoot and he can defend, and he's only $4 million more than Bradley.
He'll be on $13 million when the cap hits $108 million too.

This guy is a 5th pick who's played like it and wants out of that crappy situation in Denver.
Just plays hard on both ends and wants to play for a team/coach that wants him.

Ainge loves him, he's also Durant's close friend since high school.

Again, he's a better all round player than any of our guards.

I like Lawson but I like Thomas just as much (if not more, because of his scoring instincts) and Thomas is on a better deal.

That's a fair point, but I don't think it really matters that we have IT.
Why? Just my opinion, but Ainge is looking for value. The same reason he grabbed IT is the same reason he would grab Lawson (who is better than Thomas). He's undervalued and coming to the Celtics situation would probably improve his value. The catch is that Lawson could actually be our long term solution at point guard. We know Ainge has always loved Lawson and it's fair to say that Lawson would be the better long term solution at PG because he's a better player on the defensive end.

I don't see Thomas as part of our long term plans and if Lawson came here he'd be the starting point guard without doubt, with IT coming in to rest him and Smart.

Actually if Ainge was going to avoid Lawson, it would be because he doesn't think Smart can be our long term solution at shooting guard.

Ultimately if we got Lawson we'd be hoping that Smart becomes a combo shooting guard hybrid and we'd move Bradley or Thomas to thin that guard rotation.

So we'd get Lawson as a long term solution at point guard next to Smart (while increasing his trade value anyway), whereas as the main reason we have IT is because he was good value, not because we love his overall game and see him as part of our next championship run.
But hey, as you said, he's so darn cheap that he'd be an excellent 6th man off the bench for a championship team. Will he happily accept that role for the rest of his career? Not so sure!

[Beat LA]

Lawson is a better overall player than any of our guards.
He can create, he can shoot and he can defend, and he's only $4 million more than Bradley.
He'll be on $13 million when the cap hits $108 million too.

This guy is a 5th pick who's played like it and wants out of that crappy situation in Denver.
Just plays hard on both ends and wants to play for a team/coach that wants him.

Ainge loves him, he's also Durant's close friend since high school.

Again, he's a better all round player than any of our guards.

But dude, if we draft him, how would Stevens ever find playing time for Wright, lol ? Why should we be interested in Lawson, anyway, other than to lure Durant here .

[TheFlex]

Zero interest on Ty Lawson. By far prefer to have Isaiah Thomas' cost controlled contract, who is also younger, as an off the bench player than having Ty Lawson as a starter for us.

Easy choice.

Not really. Isaiah Thomas was exposed pretty badly in games 3 and 4 in the Cavs series.

Exposed as not being able to be the #1 scoring option for more than 30 minutes a game against The King's team? That's not exactly being exposed, that's what we thought would happen.

Isaiah is what he is. He's one of the best scorers in the game for 25-30 minutes. He's someone you probably have to hide on defense, but such a negative is lessened by the fact that he plays against reserves more than your typical dynamic scorer.

Make Jamal Crawford the go-to guy on an offensively depleted team vs. LeBron in the playoffs and the same thing would happen. It doesn't mean Jamal Crawford can't be a crucial piece to a title contender, or more specifically, it doesn't mean he's worse than Ty Lawson (who I like).

[chambers]

Lawson is a better overall player than any of our guards.
He can create, he can shoot and he can defend, and he's only $4 million more than Bradley.
He'll be on $13 million when the cap hits $108 million too.

This guy is a 5th pick who's played like it and wants out of that crappy situation in Denver.
Just plays hard on both ends and wants to play for a team/coach that wants him.

Ainge loves him, he's also Durant's close friend since high school.

Again, he's a better all round player than any of our guards.

But dude, if we draft him, how would Stevens ever find playing time for Wright, lol ? Why should we be interested in Lawson, anyway, other than to lure Durant here .

We're gonna need someone to run the point while Wright adjusts to the NBA!
Wright could actually play SG in the NBA I reckon. Long and tall.

[Celtics4ever]

I seem to have read that Ainge was happy with our guards, thus I think the prediction is a reach at best.  You can't win with an all guard lineup.   Bigs are a more pressing concern, Ainge said a big and a wing.   I don't think it is a smoke screen in this case.

[chambers]

I seem to have read that Ainge was happy with our guards, thus I think the prediction is a reach at best.

Would Danny ever say anything negative about our guards? Or would he say 'we're very happy with our guard rotation' regardless of what was happening? lol

There were rumors around the deadline this season that the Celtics were in discussions with the Nuggets about Lawson so that's probably a good counter point I guess?

[Celtics4ever]

I would point out to you that he recently said some things that he was not happy with Sullingers conditioning which hurts his value if we move him.  So yes, he is not perfect at keeping a lid on stuff and is human.

If the cavs series showed us anything, it should be that you can's rely on small ball all the time.   IT could not get around or shoot over the Cavs length.   We lost the size battle in most positions and it felt like they were toying with us.

This is possible, Ainge has always liked Lawson but I still don't think it is likely.

[chambers]

I would point out to you that he recently said some things that he was not happy with Sullingers conditioning which hurts his value if we move him.  So yes, he is not perfect at keeping a lid on stuff and is human.

If the cavs series showed us anything, it should be that you can's rely on small ball all the time.   IT could not get around or shoot over the Cavs length.   We lost the size battle in most positions and it felt like they were toying with us.

This is possible, Ainge has always liked Lawson but I still don't think it is likely.

Good point about big baby, but I think that's an example of where him lying is an obvious lie, so say the thing that an honest person would also say to gain credit down the road.
Either way, you're right, a move like this is possible but unlikely.