Why the Fascination in trading AB?

[PhoSita]

I see a lot of people dying to trade AB. There was a rumor we could get pick 12 for him, or even 12 and Hood for him. Others are saying we should use him with pick 16 to move up to 8 or 9.... Why the fascination in trading him? I personally don't like him that much, but how is that worth it? If we trade him for #12, who will our 2 be.. James Young? It's too soon to judge Young but he could be a bust and last year showed he's nowhere near being ready to start, and I'm AGAINST starting IT because then he loses his value as a bench sparkplug. Why the fascination in trading him when the 2 is so hard to fill?

Bradley is a good role player, but there are a lot of limitations to his offensive game, and though he's still a good defender, he's less good at it now that he's expending more energy on offense.

As for who our 2-guard would be, that would be Smart—a.k.a. the guy whom many have pegged as our "point guard of the future" but who really is no such thing. He's only a point guard insofar as some people call him a point guard and are trying to make him into a point guard. Remember when the Cs tried to make Bradley a point guard? I see the Smart situation as being similar to that. Smart might be better than Bradley at dribbling and passing, but that's not saying much.

agreed 110%

I find the discussion about Smart's position kind of silly at this point.

Smart looks to me like he may be good enough to secure a spot in our backcourt long term.

I can't say the same for Bradley.

Smart could work well next to a playmaking shooting guard.  He could also work well next to a score first point guard with some playmaking ability.

Either way, what will matter most is who the Celtics can find to put next to Smart, not what box score position Smart is playing.

[Ilikesports17]

I dont think hes a guy you have to trade, nor necessarily upgrade. However, his skill-set, age, and contract make him a very attractive piece to teams who feel they are close to contention.

In this way AB has more value to teams who feel they have completed their youth movement/talent farming mission.

Because of this AB is mentioned in potential trades because he makes a lot of sense for teams who are looking to make the jump rather than roll the dice again in the draft.

For us adding a 10-14 pick without sacrificing 16 gives us a lot more trade power and flexibility.

Now we are a G wallace dump away from 2 max contracts and we have the trade ammo to either move into the top 10 or to move a mid first for an established player like Taj Gibson or Kenneth Faried (pulled directly from my ass) and still be able to take a shot on a high potential guy like Oubre or Turner.


I dont think its out of the realm of possiblity that Bradley cant grow to be more effective than Danny Green,  JR Smith, or Kyle Korver. 3 guys who started on championship contenders.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

I see a lot of people dying to trade AB. There was a rumor we could get pick 12 for him, or even 12 and Hood for him. Others are saying we should use him with pick 16 to move up to 8 or 9.... Why the fascination in trading him? I personally don't like him that much, but how is that worth it? If we trade him for #12, who will our 2 be.. James Young? It's too soon to judge Young but he could be a bust and last year showed he's nowhere near being ready to start, and I'm AGAINST starting IT because then he loses his value as a bench sparkplug. Why the fascination in trading him when the 2 is so hard to fill?

Bradley is a good role player, but there are a lot of limitations to his offensive game, and though he's still a good defender, he's less good at it now that he's expending more energy on offense.

As for who our 2-guard would be, that would be Smart—a.k.a. the guy whom many have pegged as our "point guard of the future" but who really is no such thing. He's only a point guard insofar as some people call him a point guard and are trying to make him into a point guard. Remember when the Cs tried to make Bradley a point guard? I see the Smart situation as being similar to that. Smart might be better than Bradley at dribbling and passing, but that's not saying much.

agreed 110%

I find the discussion about Smart's position kind of silly at this point.

Smart looks to me like he may be good enough to secure a spot in our backcourt long term.

I can't say the same for Bradley.

Smart could work well next to a playmaking shooting guard.  He could also work well next to a score first point guard with some playmaking ability.

Either way, what will matter most is who the Celtics can find to put next to Smart, not what box score position Smart is playing.

I don't think it's silly. Trying to shoehorn a guy into a position he's not really suited for is a big deal in sports. I get what you're saying about whom they put him next to in the backcourt, and that's certainly relevant, but I think there are people who want Smart to be "the point guard," period, regardless of who's next to him, and I just don't see that working.

[LGC88]

I dont think hes a guy you have to trade, nor necessarily upgrade. However, his skill-set, age, and contract make him a very attractive piece to teams who feel they are close to contention.

In this way AB has more value to teams who feel they have completed their youth movement/talent farming mission.

Because of this AB is mentioned in potential trades because he makes a lot of sense for teams who are looking to make the jump rather than roll the dice again in the draft.

For us adding a 10-14 pick without sacrificing 16 gives us a lot more trade power and flexibility.

Now we are a G wallace dump away from 2 max contracts and we have the trade ammo to either move into the top 10 or to move a mid first for an established player like Taj Gibson or Kenneth Faried (pulled directly from my ass) and still be able to take a shot on a high potential guy like Oubre or Turner.


I dont think its out of the realm of possiblity that Bradley cant grow to be more effective than Danny Green,  JR Smith, or Kyle Korver. 3 guys who started on championship contenders.

Exactly AB have more value for team in contention. That's why we need to keep AB, because CELTICS will be in contention next year or the year after. AB off the bench can shut down almost any PG when we need to get stops while being a 3pts threat if you have bigger offensive threat in place already. Everybody sees AB against Cavs when we ask him to do the impossible (being the first offensive threat). Remember AB and his 3s when we had the big 3. A total different story.

[PhoSita]

I think there are people who want Smart to be "the point guard," period, regardless of who's next to him, and I just don't see that working.

I agree with you there, but I think the two guard spots are more interchangeable than ever, especially in the system Brad Stevens runs. 

Marcus Smart will never be a point guard in the mold of Chris Paul, Mike Conley, Jeff Teague etc.  But he can fill a role similar to George Hill or Patrick Beverley, maybe with a dash of Brandon Knight or Kyle Lowry if he can find a way to translate some more of what he did in college to the NBA.


Smart's never going to be the primary ball-handler, star point guard for the team.  But he can be one of the leaders of the defense and a playmaker on both ends.  He will, however, need to have a talented running mate.  More talented than Bradley or Evan Turner.

[td450]

I'm surprised AB gets such a negative reaction on this site. Take a look at the statistical rankings for the one and two guards in the league this year to get some perspective. AB is about average in the NBA for a starter at either position on offense. Lots of guys with big offensive reputations didn't have better numbers. He can't carry a team, but he is a pretty useful offensive player.

Combine that with his defense, and his attitude, and that makes him a valuable guy.

[BornReady]

He's a good productive young player
On a affordable contract

Teams clearly like him
So he would be worth at most a mid first round to have him

[D.o.s.]

I see a lot of people dying to trade AB. There was a rumor we could get pick 12 for him, or even 12 and Hood for him. Others are saying we should use him with pick 16 to move up to 8 or 9.... Why the fascination in trading him? I personally don't like him that much, but how is that worth it? If we trade him for #12, who will our 2 be.. James Young? It's too soon to judge Young but he could be a bust and last year showed he's nowhere near being ready to start, and I'm AGAINST starting IT because then he loses his value as a bench sparkplug. Why the fascination in trading him when the 2 is so hard to fill?

Bradley is a good role player, but there are a lot of limitations to his offensive game, and though he's still a good defender, he's less good at it now that he's expending more energy on offense.

As for who our 2-guard would be, that would be Smart—a.k.a. the guy whom many have pegged as our "point guard of the future" but who really is no such thing. He's only a point guard insofar as some people call him a point guard and are trying to make him into a point guard. Remember when the Cs tried to make Bradley a point guard? I see the Smart situation as being similar to that. Smart might be better than Bradley at dribbling and passing, but that's not saying much.

agreed 110%

I find the discussion about Smart's position kind of silly at this point.

Smart looks to me like he may be good enough to secure a spot in our backcourt long term.

I can't say the same for Bradley.

Smart could work well next to a playmaking shooting guard.  He could also work well next to a score first point guard with some playmaking ability.

Either way, what will matter most is who the Celtics can find to put next to Smart, not what box score position Smart is playing.

Yeah I think the differences between a "playmaking shooting guard" and a "score first point guard" are basically academic (and probably have something to do with height).

[2short]

For me we have no one on our team that isn't a trade asset.  Our best players aren't that good so if we can improve I'd trade anyone.  Bradley is good, works hard and has improved every year.
He cannot play point guard giant period.  underline it even
he is a short sg who if his shot isn't falling really doesn't offer us anything on offense
his defense is still solid but NOWHERE near what it used to be, side by side smart is far far better than bradley
so i wouldn't trade him (or any celtic) just to trade him, but if we package sully, bradley and a draft pick or two that should get us a pretty good player

[Future Celtics Owner]

Because he's an undersized 2 that has value around the league and could net us a player like Myles Turner in the draft. Also getting rid of him would allow Marcus to guard point gaurds.
He's not what we need right now. We need to take chances at high talent.

Also James Young is going to rip up summer league imo and establish a role for himself on this team.

[2short]

Now we are a G wallace dump away from 2 max contracts and we have the trade ammo to either move into the top 10 or to move a mid first for an established player like Taj Gibson or Kenneth Faried (pulled directly from my ass) and still be able to take a shot on a high potential guy like Oubre or Turner.

that is worth a tp right there! 

[Greyman]

I can see why people see the value in AB as a trade asset. As many have said, he is a good player but not a 'great' player.

If we can improve the roster without trading him, I would like to see how he develops and contributes in a stronger team of Celtics. Maybe he doesn't have that much development left him in but I also know he won't be getting worse and if you trade AB he could hurt the C's in games.

I don't agree he isn't good enough to hold onto or that he will lose value in the future. Great or not he has a lot ahead of him in the NBA.

[PhoSita]

Yeah I think the differences between a "playmaking shooting guard" and a "score first point guard" are basically academic (and probably have something to do with height).

I think it probably comes down to a combination of shooting ability and defensive position.

I.e. Reggie Jackson is a score first point guard because he's a 1 defensively and he can't shoot threes.

[SHAQATTACK]

I see a lot of people dying to trade AB. There was a rumor we could get pick 12 for him, or even 12 and Hood for him. Others are saying we should use him with pick 16 to move up to 8 or 9.... Why the fascination in trading him? I personally don't like him that much, but how is that worth it? If we trade him for #12, who will our 2 be.. James Young? It's too soon to judge Young but he could be a bust and last year showed he's nowhere near being ready to start, and I'm AGAINST starting IT because then he loses his value as a bench sparkplug. Why the fascination in trading him when the 2 is so hard to fill?

I think we re bored ....

[gpap]

I see a lot of people dying to trade AB. There was a rumor we could get pick 12 for him, or even 12 and Hood for him. Others are saying we should use him with pick 16 to move up to 8 or 9.... Why the fascination in trading him? I personally don't like him that much, but how is that worth it? If we trade him for #12, who will our 2 be.. James Young? It's too soon to judge Young but he could be a bust and last year showed he's nowhere near being ready to start, and I'm AGAINST starting IT because then he loses his value as a bench sparkplug. Why the fascination in trading him when the 2 is so hard to fill?

The fact that he sucked like a leaf blower in the playoffs might have something to do with it.