Thought Experiment: Trading top 6 players for 1 star.

[alldaboston]

a lot of you guys are bashing LarBrd unnecessarily for this thread. I'll admit, I'm one of those guys that doesnt agree with him a lot. but as he has said numerous times in replies here, its not a trade idea, its merely an experiment. He made the thread presumably to speak to the depth we have. never was a serious trade thread.

[Greyman]

I think if you take IT, Sully and AB out of the team ...

That's the point.  Three guys who are arguably back-ups.  This roster is 16 deep in back-ups.  With the exception of some of the young guys like Rozier, Hunter, Mickey and Young, all the players on this team seem like they are decent basketball players.  None stand out.  What I'm suggesting is that there's so much parity on this roster that you could probably lose half of them in a freak zombie outbreak, and still putter along as a .500 team... especially if you swapped out half the roster for a legitimate star.

I don't agree that we can put a .500 team out without those three with our present roster. Add a star and sure, that changes things. I just don't agree that all the players we currently have are so similar in ability that losing three (or more) of our best isn't a deficit.

[Who]

The team has a problem with guard depth (short term, at least). Once you past Smart, Bradley and Isaiah ... it's nothing but kids who haven't proven squat in this league. I don't think J.Young or T.Rozier are ready to play productive minutes. I think RJ Hunter probably could although preferably as a bench player for now.

So when you make that 6-for-1 trade, you end up with guys who not only do not help your team but actively make you worse. That is a big drawback to the new look Celtics team post trade. Throw in the problem at SF (Jerebko more of a PF). Evan Turner the only proven vet perimeter player left over. Turner and RJ Hunter the only probably productive perimeter players on the team.

Those are huge negatives for the team to overcome. Even with a guy like Cousins on board.

Edit: Sorry, just to clarify how much I think that would hurt the team. I think the Cousins team would be a 30 win caliber team post-trade. I think they are around a 45 win team as currently constituted. Of course, you can comfortably replace those role player guards next summer in free agency. So it's only an immediate hit. Plus I like Rozier long term so as he develops he fills a spot too. Less convinced by J.Young.

[Who]

The team can trade big man depth. They have 6 legit rotation big men and probably a 7th in Mickey. They can easily trade 2-3 of those guys and still have a quality big man rotation.

The perimeter positions (PG, SG, SF) have much less depth behind first choice rotation. Start taking guys away from there and major problems will be created.

[CelticPride2016]

You didn't get it. 

It's not a trade idea.  It's a conversation about our roster parity and the importance of individual players on this team.  You could remove the top 6 players, swap them out with a legitimate star, and probably be fine, because there's 6 other mediocre players that can fill in.

You're overthinking it, my friend.

No one has a crystal ball for predicting trades and free agents.

You can't gut a team like that in mid-season. It would have to be LeBron or something insane for one to gut their team that much.

Players we cannot lose (the core):

Smart, Bradley, Hunter, Olynyk, Pressey (oops - on philly), Rozier, Jordan Mickey (the future)

Players we might not want to trade, but might as well (for immediate competing):

Amir, Lee, Crowder, Zeller, Turner, Isaiah Thomas (needs to be more efficient on offense)

Don't let the door hit you on the way out:

Young, Sullinger, Jerebko

I think that's all 15.

[CelticPride2016]

The team can trade big man depth. They have 6 legit rotation big men and probably a 7th in Mickey. They can easily trade 2-3 of those guys and still have a quality big man rotation.

The perimeter positions (PG, SG, SF) have much less depth behind first choice rotation. Start taking guys away from there and major problems will be created.

David Lee is basically this year's Kris Humphries' on a one year Boston visit. Johnson also looks like a shell of his former self.

They are extremely non-essential if a stupid GM wants them. We only have Lee because he was an upgrade on Wallace. Danny needs to trim some of the fat and balance the roster.

I still think a guy like Pressey was perfect. He would sit and not complain. He was starting to improve. We could use him right now with Smart injured. Yet, Rozier has more long-term potential.

[MBunge]

This thought experiment is pretty easily answered by looking at all the teams who either have stars or supposedly more talent than Boston, yet still suck.

Mike

[LarBrd33]

You didn't get it. 

It's not a trade idea.  It's a conversation about our roster parity and the importance of individual players on this team.  You could remove the top 6 players, swap them out with a legitimate star, and probably be fine, because there's 6 other mediocre players that can fill in.

You're overthinking it, my friend.

No one has a crystal ball for predicting trades and free agents.

You can't gut a team like that in mid-season. It would have to be LeBron or something insane for one to gut their team that much.

Players we cannot lose (the core):

Smart, Bradley, Hunter, Olynyk, Pressey (oops - on philly), Rozier, Jordan Mickey (the future)

Players we might not want to trade, but might as well (for immediate competing):

Amir, Lee, Crowder, Zeller, Turner, Isaiah Thomas (needs to be more efficient on offense)

Don't let the door hit you on the way out:

Young, Sullinger, Jerebko

I think that's all 15.

yeah I don't agree we can't afford to lose Smart, Bradley, Hunter, Olynyk, Rozier, Jordan Mickey. 

I mean of those players, the only one that's really making an impact right now is Bradley.  I don't believe Bradley is irreplaceable... though I admit he's having a darn fine season... especially when he came off the bench.

[DarkAzcura]

The depth on this team is overstated in terms of talent gap between players. No doubt the Celtics have 11 NBA caliber players, but IT, AB, Sully, Smart, and Crowder are far and away our best players. Too often, people only focus on offensive talent. Of the five players I listed, three of them have an argument to make the all defensive team. There is a huge drop off in defensive talent after those three. They hold this team's defensive identity together. Finding a defensive trio as talented as the three we have is no easy feat. There is a whole other side of the floor, and our whole perimeter except IT plays it better than any other perimeter in be league. In a league that is shifting towards small ball, it cannot be understated how valuable that is to have. A 6 for 1 trade would destroy this team, at least in the short term.

No other player on this team can average 20 PPG like IT. No other player on this team shoots as well as AB. No other players on this team can defend like Smart, Bradley, and Crowder. They are currently the soul of a top 3 or 5 defense. The talent on this team has been underrated for quite some time now. We have one all star level talent and three all defensive level talents. That's 4 high impact players. Without them, this team circles the drain. No superstar, but this team definitely has talent that has separated itself from the pack.

So yeah, trading Smart, Thomas, Bradley, Sullinger, Amir, and Crowder for one guy who has never won more than 30 games would significantly hurt this team. You would be banking on Rozier and Hunter to develop and replace Thomas, Smart, and Bradley which may never happen. No proper replacement for Crowder either in that trade. Cousins isn't good enough to make up for the lost impact of those 6 guys.

The Celtics would go from having one of the better overall perimeters in the league with a capable front court and a team deeply entrenched in its defensive indentity to a team with a junk perimeter and the best center in the league who has questionable defensive motivation.. Doesn't sound great to me.

The Harden example is even worse to me because we are literally taking away every good defensive player from this team and replacing them with a guy who literally plays no defense and completely dominates the ball. If you want success with Harden, you need to surround him with 3 and D players and have the best offense in the league to make up for his terrible defense. That isn't happening with that hypothetical line up. You are basically taking every impact player off this team and replacing them with only one guy who is pretty much IT x 1.5. Probably looking at 30 wins with that team.

Look we need a superstar to compete for a title, but I'm starting to think people are overrating a superstar's impact while underrating what a collection of above average starters with one low tier all star can achieve. No superstar can make for that much of a talent loss except maybe Lebron. Most of these 'true' stars have significant flaws themselves, and they are not a heal all elixir capable of replacing the impact of those 6. We don't want to make the same mistake NY made when trading for Melo.

There simply isn't as much parity on this roster as you think there is. IT and AB are far and away our best offensive players. No other player on this team touches them there. After that there is some offensive parity; however, the difference in defensive quality is vast. This team isn't a top 3 defense if you are running JJ, Lee, Turner, and Zeller out there in replacement of Smart, AB, Sully, and Crowder. Offensive parity sure. Overall parity? Absolutely not.

[obnoxiousmime]

It would be a short term hit, no doubt. I don't think our depth is THAT impressive that we could lose 6 top players and just add one star and be OK. Like other people have said, as much as I believe that guys like Thomas, Smart, Bradley, and Crowder have flaws that prevent them from being stars, they have still separated themselves from the bench players on this team, although that's partially due to some of our so-called "depth" being very young/rookies.

It would probably help if the "thought experiment" didn't use Cousins as an example. He's such a divisive player and carries baggage in the locker room. He's amazingly talented but some people have already made up their minds that he could never be the best player/leader on a top playoff team regardless of what numbers he puts up.

[CelticsFanFromNYC]

I feel at the end of the day any player on our team is tradable in the right package. Noone has FRANCHISE CORNERSTONE written in their genes here. So yes,  these 6 for jordan? Durant? Lebron? Davis & Holiday? get two in return? Why not?. At that point people will want to play for us for short change.

Really wish the Knicks thought their game plan through when they traded the farm for Melo assuming Amare was gon have some years left in those Patrick Ewing knees. They were just feening for that MSG supertar. So i get where the post is coming from.

[PhoSita]

Our 7-12 plus a star isn't winning much of anything, regardless of our depth.

If our top 6 is Thomas, Smart, Sullinger, Amir, Crowder, and Bradley, you'd end up with a primary unit of Evan Turner, Jonas Jerebko, David Lee, Kelly Olynyk, and a star.  That would be a bad team, especially since the bench would be a bunch of first and second year players with zero meaningful NBA experience.

[DarkAzcura]

Our 7-12 plus a star isn't winning much of anything, regardless of our depth.

If our top 6 is Thomas, Smart, Sullinger, Amir, Crowder, and Bradley, you'd end up with a primary unit of Evan Turner, Jonas Jerebko, David Lee, Kelly Olynyk, and a star.  That would be a bad team, especially since the bench would be a bunch of first and second year players with zero meaningful NBA experience.

You said it far more simply and eloquently than I did, but this.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Our 7-12 plus a star isn't winning much of anything, regardless of our depth.

If our top 6 is Thomas, Smart, Sullinger, Amir, Crowder, and Bradley, you'd end up with a primary unit of Evan Turner, Jonas Jerebko, David Lee, Kelly Olynyk, and a star.  That would be a bad team, especially since the bench would be a bunch of first and second year players with zero meaningful NBA experience.

Sobering reality to consider how many teams there are out there with multiple stars. Sad, but true. Future looks bright with coach, BKN picks, and a crop to choose from for a core, though. Here's to figuring it out (and getting lucky along the way)!

[DarkAzcura]

Our 7-12 plus a star isn't winning much of anything, regardless of our depth.

If our top 6 is Thomas, Smart, Sullinger, Amir, Crowder, and Bradley, you'd end up with a primary unit of Evan Turner, Jonas Jerebko, David Lee, Kelly Olynyk, and a star.  That would be a bad team, especially since the bench would be a bunch of first and second year players with zero meaningful NBA experience.

Sobering reality to consider how many teams there are out there with multiple stars. Sad, but true. Future looks bright with coach, BKN picks, and a crop to choose from for a core, though. Here's to figuring it out (and getting lucky along the way)!

Some of the teams with multiple stars are starting to look not so hot because of poor systems, roster balance, and coaching. Houston, Clippers, and Washington off the top of my head. It goes a long way in showing that you can no longer throw stars together and hope for success like you may have been able to years ago. Teams know how to scheme way better nowadays. GSW would have likely fell victim to this if they had kept Mark Jackson as coach, and guys like Green and Klay would likely not have anywhere near the rep they have right now if Kerr didn't flip their system on its side.