Author Topic: If David Lee has a Monster year  (Read 10132 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #30 on: September 01, 2015, 01:34:49 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9658
  • Tommy Points: 323
Some folks on CB have stated their belief that this year's Celtics team will win 50+ games. I have some doubts about that, but if it happens, I can easily imagine Lee (along with IT) being a huge reason for that. Both are somewhat of a liability on defense but excellent offensively, and I can see them becoming a potent 1-2 punch, especially in the pick-and-roll. If that happens, and the Cs end up winning 50+, I can totally see Ainge cashing in some assets (at last!) for a third all-star-level player and going for it—particularly if, by that point, it's become clear that Sully and/or KO just isn't cutting it and is no longer in the team's long-term plans.

Not saying all this WILL happen, but that it could if the dominoes fall just so during the season.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #31 on: September 01, 2015, 01:36:07 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33431
  • Tommy Points: 1532
Are we really expecting to be a top 4 team in the East though (beyond just wanting it to be so, which I can safely assume we all do).
People on here sure do think 50 wins is possible.  50 wins is very likely a top 4 team in the East (I mean the 50 win Bulls were the 3 seed last year and the Raptors were 4 with 49 wins).

I agree that a 50 win team is very likely to be top 4.

I'm not sure I'm onboard with the idea that our team is a 50 win squad right now.


On average, what seed would 45 wins get you in the East over the last 5 years?  42-45 seems like a more realistic high end win total, to me.
10/11 - 5th seed
11/12  - 8th seed (shortened season but win %)
12/13 - 5th seed
13/14 - 4th seed
14/15 - 6th seed

So aside from the strike shortened season you would average out at the 5th seed. 

If Boston is looking like the 5th seed, I think Ainge would be more inclined to go for it by trading assets then dumping players for minimal value.  I mean why else would Ainge be hoarding assets if not to use them when the team has a chance to make some noise.

Well, I'm optimistic that Ainge won't leverage a bunch of assets just for the short-term benefit of maybe getting the 4th seed and winning a first round playoff series, but who knows.

I think that'd have to be a pretty huge upgrade, anyway.  There's a good space between making the playoffs as a middle seed and having what it takes to win playoffs games and get beyond the first round.  Just ask the Raptors.
I don't necessarily think it would be only a short term benefit though unless you are just talking about middling assets (I mean how many more middle to late 1st round picks does Boston actually need).  If the big pieces are on the table it is in a big move, like say Cousins, but a mid 1st for a player that will help a team that is clearly making the playoffs, makes a whole lot of sense.   
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #32 on: September 01, 2015, 02:00:19 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
If the big pieces are on the table it is in a big move, like say Cousins, but a mid 1st for a player that will help a team that is clearly making the playoffs, makes a whole lot of sense.   

I don't care how many middling 1sts the team has, trading a 1st round pick just for a shot at winning a playoff game is nonsense.  Trading a 1st to pick up an expiring vet like Luol Deng, for example, is dumb even if it makes the team a little bit better in April.



If it's more than just a half season rental, it could be alright, but even then I'd be concerned about doubling down on existing in the middle (e.g. trading for Pekovic and Martin, or Wilson Chandler and Kenneth Faried, or something like that).


Until this team has something resembling a long term blueprint in place, trading future value for present gain is just going to seem fool-hardy to me.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2015, 02:15:02 PM by PhoSita »
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #33 on: September 01, 2015, 02:41:33 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33431
  • Tommy Points: 1532
If the big pieces are on the table it is in a big move, like say Cousins, but a mid 1st for a player that will help a team that is clearly making the playoffs, makes a whole lot of sense.   

I don't care how many middling 1sts the team has, trading a 1st round pick just for a shot at winning a playoff game is nonsense.  Trading a 1st to pick up an expiring vet like Luol Deng, for example, is dumb even if it makes the team a little bit better in April.



If it's more than just a half season rental, it could be alright, but even then I'd be concerned about doubling down on existing in the middle (e.g. trading for Pekovic and Martin, or Wilson Chandler and Kenneth Faried, or something like that).


Until this team has something resembling a long term blueprint in place, trading future value for present gain is just going to seem fool-hardy to me.
But Boston is already in the middle.  The only way it is going to move out of the middle is if a first from another team hits the lottery or it cashes in on a star using high value assets or in free agency.  A mid 1st is not going to achieve either of those goals, so Boston might as well use them to get better since it is already in the middle and doesn't need any more mid 1st round picks on the roster.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #34 on: September 01, 2015, 02:48:31 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
A mid 1st is not going to achieve either of those goals, so Boston might as well use them to get better since it is already in the middle and doesn't need any more mid 1st round picks on the roster.


Yeah, but I'd rather keep it as ammo to potentially move up in the draft, or just use the pick, clear out a guy who has hit his ceiling (we've got plenty at the moment), and hope that the pick yields a diamond in the rough.

The only way out of the middle, as you say, is to trade for a star or for one of these picks to pan out in a big way.  Probably a combination of the two, to be honest.

I have zero percent interest in giving up value just to get a little bit better in a season where the best case scenario is winning a playoff game instead of getting swept.  Not interested at all.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #35 on: September 01, 2015, 03:02:05 PM »

Offline Granath

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2154
  • Tommy Points: 567
If the big pieces are on the table it is in a big move, like say Cousins, but a mid 1st for a player that will help a team that is clearly making the playoffs, makes a whole lot of sense.   

I don't care how many middling 1sts the team has, trading a 1st round pick just for a shot at winning a playoff game is nonsense.  Trading a 1st to pick up an expiring vet like Luol Deng, for example, is dumb even if it makes the team a little bit better in April.



If it's more than just a half season rental, it could be alright, but even then I'd be concerned about doubling down on existing in the middle (e.g. trading for Pekovic and Martin, or Wilson Chandler and Kenneth Faried, or something like that).


Until this team has something resembling a long term blueprint in place, trading future value for present gain is just going to seem fool-hardy to me.
But Boston is already in the middle.  The only way it is going to move out of the middle is if a first from another team hits the lottery or it cashes in on a star using high value assets or in free agency.  A mid 1st is not going to achieve either of those goals, so Boston might as well use them to get better since it is already in the middle and doesn't need any more mid 1st round picks on the roster.

I'm going to agree with PhoSita here. That doesn't happen very often.

It's all a matter of whether the team needs short-term gains or long-term development. The Cs are clearly still in the latter stage.

A mid-first is still a valuable asset. It's highly mobile and highly desired (unless you're Mike Jordan who is an awful GM). It won't get you a star by itself, but it can be part of a package to get you a star.

An expiring vet like Deng offers nothing beyond this year and the Celtics aren't winning it all this year. So it's a very small, very short term gain that does nothing for the team in the long run. It's an entirely different scenario if it's the Cavs, who are operating in their "win now" window. But the Cs aren't in a win now mode and thus slight incremental improvements at the expense of long-term gain is a quick way to stay in mediocrity and to ultimately fail the rebuilding process.
Jaylen Brown will be an All Star in the next 5 years.

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #36 on: September 01, 2015, 03:33:31 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.


I think we'll be looking to acquire someone regardless of how we do this year - the 2016 offseason seems like the dropdead date for at least moderate roster consolidation, otherwise we'll have like 18-20 roster-worthy players to sort out.  So we'll almost certainly be looking for moves, though of course it's a lot easier to look than to find.

The trouble is that quantity-for-quality is the hardest type of trade to find in the NBA.  If you're consolidating, it's a heck of a lot easier to trade role players for expiring contracts and lesser picks, but the Celts have probably already reached the point of diminished returns on lesser picks, and Danny has never been inclined to trade guys just to clear space.

Not to mention, consolidating has a tendency to undermine the one noteworthy strength this team has, which is depth.

Eventually, all of these picks and young guys have to turn into a smaller number of more exciting pieces, or else the team will have to take a significant step back by virtue of making roster room for all of these rookie contract players.

I'm having trouble parsing this post - the first part sounds like it's mostly disagreeing with consolidation, but the last paragraph is pretty much identical to what I said, and seems like the opposite of the sentiment in the second paragraph. 

Are you thinking of "consolidation" as just clearing roster space for the sake of clearing roster space?  Because what I meant by it is exactly what you're describing in your conclusion - the significance of Lee is just that big expiring contracts are often a key piece in that kind of move.

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #37 on: September 01, 2015, 04:07:59 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15720
  • Tommy Points: 1386
Again, my question -- who is going to trade us value for half a season of David Lee? 

What team out there is going to think "trading for David Lee and starting him at power forward could take us to another level right away"?

It would require something weird happening. However, lets say Blake Griffin gets injured and is out for the season. If the Clippers are cruising towards a high seed I could definitely see Doc thinking a team of Paul, Pierce, Stephenson, Reddick, Lee, Jordan, and Josh Smith could still contend with Lee being critical to replacing Some of Blake's offense (and having jordan and paul help cover his defensive short comings). This is a long shot, but under the premise of monster year not impossible.

Another scenario, say the Jazz are really building off their momentum from last season and on their way to 50 wins. Maybe their owner gives up an asset they view as middling (Burks or Hood) and trade them for Lee (and perhaps one of our least valuable picks) to give them a shot at making the second round or a little bit of noise (My perception is that team could really use inside scoring with Gobert being very raw and Favors taking very many long 2's).

Another scenario the rockets are incorporating Lawson in nicely, Harden and Howard are doing their thing but Jones is injured again and Montiejunas is playing quite as well as last year (while they really miss josh smith). They maybe give up one of their embarassment of high upside young players (capella) to push them over the top with some additional post offense.

Mavericks? Matthews, Parsons and Williams really exceeding expectations. However, they have absolutely zero low post offense in Zaza and Dalembert. Bring in Lee to spell dirk and provide some low post offense. Danny likes Justin Anderson or some other young player on their team.

None of these are super likely, but could see them happening if things strike right and Lee is playing like a monster. 

 

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #38 on: September 01, 2015, 04:19:25 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33431
  • Tommy Points: 1532
A mid 1st is not going to achieve either of those goals, so Boston might as well use them to get better since it is already in the middle and doesn't need any more mid 1st round picks on the roster.


Yeah, but I'd rather keep it as ammo to potentially move up in the draft, or just use the pick, clear out a guy who has hit his ceiling (we've got plenty at the moment), and hope that the pick yields a diamond in the rough.

The only way out of the middle, as you say, is to trade for a star or for one of these picks to pan out in a big way.  Probably a combination of the two, to be honest.

I have zero percent interest in giving up value just to get a little bit better in a season where the best case scenario is winning a playoff game instead of getting swept.  Not interested at all.
I'd say the best case scenario is winning playoff series until running into the Cavs.  If acquiring a guy like Deng is the difference between Boston losing in the 1st round or losing in the ECF, a mid 1st is absolutely worth that.  Hey and who knows, maybe Deng stays and/or maybe that playoff run is what gets Boston interest from top level free agents. 

And for the record, I'm not suggesting making that sort of trade tomorrow, but if Boston is looking like a mid 40 win team at the 2 to 3 month or later mark, I'd say it is far more likely that Ainge trades Boston's 1st to get better rather than Ainge trading off guys like Lee just to pick up something of future value.  At that point of the season, I just don't see the point in keeping a pick around 20, which has limited value in trades (during the off season) and simply just adds to the list of meh young players on the team. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #39 on: September 01, 2015, 04:25:21 PM »

Offline Rosco917

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6108
  • Tommy Points: 559
David Lee is a rental for the year, he's 32, always had suspect defense. We need to give younger upside players a chance to develop. First chance he gets DA should trade Lee for picks or a young player.
I would rather loose with Mickey and Sully playing PF, than win with Lee getting heavy minutes.

Honestly, I don't think he'll get the minutes to have a monster year anyway.   

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #40 on: September 01, 2015, 04:32:46 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182

None of these are super likely, but could see them happening if things strike right and Lee is playing like a monster.

Thing is, if Lee is playing like a monster, I think Ainge would prefer to keep him unless a really nice package is offered.  None of the teams you mentioned have the assets to make such an offer, since they are contenders.

Kind of a catch-22. 

The only way I see Lee getting traded is if the team needs his big contract to make salary work in a blockbuster.  In that situation, the fact that Lee is playing well would help grease the wheels, but it would not be a deciding factor.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #41 on: September 01, 2015, 05:23:03 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15720
  • Tommy Points: 1386

None of these are super likely, but could see them happening if things strike right and Lee is playing like a monster.

Thing is, if Lee is playing like a monster, I think Ainge would prefer to keep him unless a really nice package is offered.  None of the teams you mentioned have the assets to make such an offer, since they are contenders.

Kind of a catch-22. 

The only way I see Lee getting traded is if the team needs his big contract to make salary work in a blockbuster.  In that situation, the fact that Lee is playing well would help grease the wheels, but it would not be a deciding factor.

What is wrong with any of the plausible scenarios i proposed? Are those not reasonable enough deals?

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #42 on: September 01, 2015, 05:29:10 PM »

Offline GreenWarrior

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3275
  • Tommy Points: 228
if every player on this team plays like Jordan we might be better.

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #43 on: September 01, 2015, 06:07:04 PM »

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17833
  • Tommy Points: 2661
  • bammokja
if every player on this team plays like Jordan we might be better.
jordan as in michael jordan of long ago? or jordan as in michael jordan the GM?  ;D
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: If David Lee has a Monster year
« Reply #44 on: September 01, 2015, 06:42:26 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182

What is wrong with any of the plausible scenarios i proposed? Are those not reasonable enough deals?

None of the teams you mentioned seem likely to me to be prepared to offer a significant package for David Lee.  Provided that David Lee is playing really well, I don't think Ainge would trade him for a late 1st or an OK prospect.  Yet since he is an expiring contract, that's all he's likely to be worth on the trade market.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain