C's , Cavs, Pelican 3 team deal in works?(Rumor) UPDATES on pg 1

[Csfan1984]

I can see the three way trade being
Cavs get :AB, Crowder and Anderson
Pelicans get: Sully and trade exemption.
C's get: Love
No picks involved.

Pelicans save money and get a young soon to be RFA. Also Sully is a post scorer they thought Asik would be. (Word is they want AD more outside or off P&R not beat up do low so much).
Cavs get their more complementary cast.
C's get a singular talent upgrade. C's can pitch IT, Smart, and Love along with the Nets pick to have a FA join.

PG- IT/Rozier
SG-Smart/Hunter
SF-Turner/JJ/Young
PF-Love/KO/Mikey
C-Zeller/AJ
And still have a ton of picks along with AJ and JJ's contract to trade on draft night.

Ainge won't even consider Crowder for Love straight up. We know this because Ainge is on record the last two days saying two things:

1. He values some individual Celtics more than the Nets pick.
(1a. There's no way Crowder would not be among that "some".)

2. He values the Nets pick more than Love.

Therefore:

3. He values Crowder alone much more than Love.

(Caveat: Ainge could be lying.)

"We know", is more like we assume.

[libermaniac]

This reminds me of draft day. Sam Amico reported we have been going hard after Love but they are not interested. In other words we don't have what they want. I'm starting to get worried the only way we will obtain a star is through the draft. And please do not tell me signing Horford would be considered signing a star. He is not a star. He is like a third banana on a championship team. I'm really hoping Ainge gets love because I don't see anyone else available in the near future. Love is only 27. I really don't get the hate on this board. I mean who else is out there potentially? Crazy Cousins?

Love is not a star.

Everyone on this board said he was when he was on the timberwolves. What changed? And what is your solution? To draft another Marcus Smart and get manhandled by LeBron every year? Man I would get it if the Nets pick would be top 2, but the suns will take the nets place, leaving Brooklyn at 4 so again, what is the genius plan for people against love?

There's this thing called the lottery.  Even at 4 we have a 25% chance at a top 2 pick.  31% if we're at 3. 

I agree with you about Love though.  The whole he is/isn't a star thing is ridiculous.  He makes us better.  That's worth spending assets on.

If he is a 'star', he's definitely second tier.  And, he doesn't play defense.  So, he's the wrong 'star' for this team.  I don't think anyone would object to getting him for a pick other than the Brooklyn pick, but he's not worth that pick since his lack of defense doesn't fit in with our team's identity. 

[Csfan1984]

This reminds me of draft day. Sam Amico reported we have been going hard after Love but they are not interested. In other words we don't have what they want. I'm starting to get worried the only way we will obtain a star is through the draft. And please do not tell me signing Horford would be considered signing a star. He is not a star. He is like a third banana on a championship team. I'm really hoping Ainge gets love because I don't see anyone else available in the near future. Love is only 27. I really don't get the hate on this board. I mean who else is out there potentially? Crazy Cousins?

Love is not a star.

Everyone on this board said he was when he was on the timberwolves. What changed? And what is your solution? To draft another Marcus Smart and get manhandled by LeBron every year? Man I would get it if the Nets pick would be top 2, but the suns will take the nets place, leaving Brooklyn at 4 so again, what is the genius plan for people against love?

There's this thing called the lottery.  Even at 4 we have a 25% chance at a top 2 pick.  31% if we're at 3. 

I agree with you about Love though.  The whole he is/isn't a star thing is ridiculous.  He makes us better.  That's worth spending assets on.

If he is a 'star', he's definitely second tier.  And, he doesn't play defense.  So, he's the wrong 'star' for this team.  I don't think anyone would object to getting him for a pick other than the Brooklyn pick, but he's not worth that pick since his lack of defense doesn't fit in with our team's identity.

I agree not worth the Nets pick. But his Defense is equal if not better in relation to IT and IT fits our team.

[Dino Pitino]

I can see the three way trade being
Cavs get :AB, Crowder and Anderson
Pelicans get: Sully and trade exemption.
C's get: Love
No picks involved.

Pelicans save money and get a young soon to be RFA. Also Sully is a post scorer they thought Asik would be. (Word is they want AD more outside or off P&R not beat up do low so much).
Cavs get their more complementary cast.
C's get a singular talent upgrade. C's can pitch IT, Smart, and Love along with the Nets pick to have a FA join.

PG- IT/Rozier
SG-Smart/Hunter
SF-Turner/JJ/Young
PF-Love/KO/Mikey
C-Zeller/AJ
And still have a ton of picks along with AJ and JJ's contract to trade on draft night.

Ainge won't even consider Crowder for Love straight up. We know this because Ainge is on record the last two days saying two things:

1. He values some individual Celtics more than the Nets pick.
(1a. There's no way Crowder would not be among that "some".)

2. He values the Nets pick more than Love.

Therefore:

3. He values Crowder alone much more than Love.

(Caveat: Ainge could be lying.)

"We know", is more like we assume.

No, it's literally as close to "we know" as it gets re: NBA trade news. Take the Globe interview with Himmelsbach and take Bulpett's report in the Herald, do a little simple math, and voila.

Crowder > Pick.  Pick > Love.  Crowder >> Love.

What is the "assumption"? How could that be wrong?
Like, is Crowder not one of the "some"?

[Csfan1984]

I can see the three way trade being
Cavs get :AB, Crowder and Anderson
Pelicans get: Sully and trade exemption.
C's get: Love
No picks involved.

Pelicans save money and get a young soon to be RFA. Also Sully is a post scorer they thought Asik would be. (Word is they want AD more outside or off P&R not beat up do low so much).
Cavs get their more complementary cast.
C's get a singular talent upgrade. C's can pitch IT, Smart, and Love along with the Nets pick to have a FA join.

PG- IT/Rozier
SG-Smart/Hunter
SF-Turner/JJ/Young
PF-Love/KO/Mikey
C-Zeller/AJ
And still have a ton of picks along with AJ and JJ's contract to trade on draft night.

Ainge won't even consider Crowder for Love straight up. We know this because Ainge is on record the last two days saying two things:

1. He values some individual Celtics more than the Nets pick.
(1a. There's no way Crowder would not be among that "some".)

2. He values the Nets pick more than Love.

Therefore:

3. He values Crowder alone much more than Love.

(Caveat: Ainge could be lying.)

"We know", is more like we assume.

No, it's literally as close to "we know" as it gets re: NBA trade news. Take the Globe interview with Himmelsbach and a Bulpett's report in the Herald, do a little simple math, and voila.

Crowder > Pick.  Pick > Love.  Crowder >> Love.

What is the "assumption"? How could that be wrong?
Like, is Crowder not be one of the "some"?

Assumption is Crowder. Plenty of people would very much disagree that Crowder is equal in value or better than the Nets 2016 pick. Now Nets 2018 sure. We truly do not know if DA meant Crowder was one of the guys. It's pure assumption.

[Dino Pitino]

I can see the three way trade being
Cavs get :AB, Crowder and Anderson
Pelicans get: Sully and trade exemption.
C's get: Love
No picks involved.

Pelicans save money and get a young soon to be RFA. Also Sully is a post scorer they thought Asik would be. (Word is they want AD more outside or off P&R not beat up do low so much).
Cavs get their more complementary cast.
C's get a singular talent upgrade. C's can pitch IT, Smart, and Love along with the Nets pick to have a FA join.

PG- IT/Rozier
SG-Smart/Hunter
SF-Turner/JJ/Young
PF-Love/KO/Mikey
C-Zeller/AJ
And still have a ton of picks along with AJ and JJ's contract to trade on draft night.

Ainge won't even consider Crowder for Love straight up. We know this because Ainge is on record the last two days saying two things:

1. He values some individual Celtics more than the Nets pick.
(1a. There's no way Crowder would not be among that "some".)

2. He values the Nets pick more than Love.

Therefore:

3. He values Crowder alone much more than Love.

(Caveat: Ainge could be lying.)

"We know", is more like we assume.

No, it's literally as close to "we know" as it gets re: NBA trade news. Take the Globe interview with Himmelsbach and a Bulpett's report in the Herald, do a little simple math, and voila.

Crowder > Pick.  Pick > Love.  Crowder >> Love.

What is the "assumption"? How could that be wrong?
Like, is Crowder not be one of the "some"?

Assumption is Crowder. Plenty of people would very much disagree that Crowder is equal in value or better than the Nets 2016 pick. Now Nets 2018 sure. We truly do not know if DA meant Crowder was one of the guys. It's pure assumption.

"Pure assumption"? Eh. It's not pure knowledge. You and I are not Danny Ainge himself. But it's a minimal, completely reasonable deduction. Who do you think Ainge meant by "some"? He meant at least two players, but "some" typically refers to more than two. Which three Celtics do you think Ainge values more than Crowder? One can make a case that Isaiah and Marcus are equally valuable, perhaps one slightly more than the other two. But I do not see a reasonable case for Kelly or Avery being as valuable as Crowder to Ainge, let alone more valuable. It's not a mathematical proof, but as far as common sense goes, it's QED. Crowder > Pick > Love.

[mgent]

Call me crazy, but I'd rather have AB and Anderson than Love.

[Csfan1984]

I can see the three way trade being
Cavs get :AB, Crowder and Anderson
Pelicans get: Sully and trade exemption.
C's get: Love
No picks involved.

Pelicans save money and get a young soon to be RFA. Also Sully is a post scorer they thought Asik would be. (Word is they want AD more outside or off P&R not beat up do low so much).
Cavs get their more complementary cast.
C's get a singular talent upgrade. C's can pitch IT, Smart, and Love along with the Nets pick to have a FA join.

PG- IT/Rozier
SG-Smart/Hunter
SF-Turner/JJ/Young
PF-Love/KO/Mikey
C-Zeller/AJ
And still have a ton of picks along with AJ and JJ's contract to trade on draft night.

Ainge won't even consider Crowder for Love straight up. We know this because Ainge is on record the last two days saying two things:

1. He values some individual Celtics more than the Nets pick.
(1a. There's no way Crowder would not be among that "some".)

2. He values the Nets pick more than Love.

Therefore:

3. He values Crowder alone much more than Love.

(Caveat: Ainge could be lying.)

"We know", is more like we assume.

No, it's literally as close to "we know" as it gets re: NBA trade news. Take the Globe interview with Himmelsbach and a Bulpett's report in the Herald, do a little simple math, and voila.

Crowder > Pick.  Pick > Love.  Crowder >> Love.

What is the "assumption"? How could that be wrong?
Like, is Crowder not be one of the "some"?

Assumption is Crowder. Plenty of people would very much disagree that Crowder is equal in value or better than the Nets 2016 pick. Now Nets 2018 sure. We truly do not know if DA meant Crowder was one of the guys. It's pure assumption.

"Pure assumption"? Eh. It's not pure knowledge. You and I are not Danny Ainge himself. But it's a minimal, completely reasonable deduction. Who do you think Ainge meant by "some"? He meant at least two players, but "some" typically refers to more than two. Which three Celtics do you think Ainge values more than Crowder? One can make a case that Isaiah and Marcus are equally valuable, perhaps one slightly more than the other two. But I do not see a reasonable case for Kelly or Avery being as valuable as Crowder to Ainge, let alone more valuable. It's not a mathematical proof, but as far as common sense goes, it's QED. Crowder > Pick > Love.

Lol keep wearing those green shades. No way Crowder is equal to the pick. Nor could be that is who DA meant unless he is spinning the term value. As in value to the team, "for this year" not long term or prospect wise. Just look at the potential of any of the top 5 picks in mocks. All of them have much great potential than Crowder.

[Dino Pitino]

I can see the three way trade being
Cavs get :AB, Crowder and Anderson
Pelicans get: Sully and trade exemption.
C's get: Love
No picks involved.

Pelicans save money and get a young soon to be RFA. Also Sully is a post scorer they thought Asik would be. (Word is they want AD more outside or off P&R not beat up do low so much).
Cavs get their more complementary cast.
C's get a singular talent upgrade. C's can pitch IT, Smart, and Love along with the Nets pick to have a FA join.

PG- IT/Rozier
SG-Smart/Hunter
SF-Turner/JJ/Young
PF-Love/KO/Mikey
C-Zeller/AJ
And still have a ton of picks along with AJ and JJ's contract to trade on draft night.

Ainge won't even consider Crowder for Love straight up. We know this because Ainge is on record the last two days saying two things:

1. He values some individual Celtics more than the Nets pick.
(1a. There's no way Crowder would not be among that "some".)

2. He values the Nets pick more than Love.

Therefore:

3. He values Crowder alone much more than Love.

(Caveat: Ainge could be lying.)

"We know", is more like we assume.

No, it's literally as close to "we know" as it gets re: NBA trade news. Take the Globe interview with Himmelsbach and a Bulpett's report in the Herald, do a little simple math, and voila.

Crowder > Pick.  Pick > Love.  Crowder >> Love.

What is the "assumption"? How could that be wrong?
Like, is Crowder not be one of the "some"?

Assumption is Crowder. Plenty of people would very much disagree that Crowder is equal in value or better than the Nets 2016 pick. Now Nets 2018 sure. We truly do not know if DA meant Crowder was one of the guys. It's pure assumption.

"Pure assumption"? Eh. It's not pure knowledge. You and I are not Danny Ainge himself. But it's a minimal, completely reasonable deduction. Who do you think Ainge meant by "some"? He meant at least two players, but "some" typically refers to more than two. Which three Celtics do you think Ainge values more than Crowder? One can make a case that Isaiah and Marcus are equally valuable, perhaps one slightly more than the other two. But I do not see a reasonable case for Kelly or Avery being as valuable as Crowder to Ainge, let alone more valuable. It's not a mathematical proof, but as far as common sense goes, it's QED. Crowder > Pick > Love.

Lol keep wearing those green shades. No way Crowder is equal to the pick. Nor could be that is who DA meant unless he is spinning the term value. As in value to the team, "for this year" not long term or prospect wise. Just look at the potential of any of the top 5 picks in mocks. All of them have much great potential than Crowder.

My green shades are off. I am simply describing and simply computing Ainge's own judgments, and relaying them to you. I myself can barely believe that Ainge would value any Celtic more than the Nets pick. I pestered Himmelsbach directly because I didn't believe it. Now I do. Look at the ESPN Contract Value top 50 list. Is ESPN a Celtics homer to list Crowder as a more valuable asset than Love & some other players frequently mentioned as being worth trading that Nets pick for?

[Csfan1984]

I can see the three way trade being
Cavs get :AB, Crowder and Anderson
Pelicans get: Sully and trade exemption.
C's get: Love
No picks involved.

Pelicans save money and get a young soon to be RFA. Also Sully is a post scorer they thought Asik would be. (Word is they want AD more outside or off P&R not beat up do low so much).
Cavs get their more complementary cast.
C's get a singular talent upgrade. C's can pitch IT, Smart, and Love along with the Nets pick to have a FA join.

PG- IT/Rozier
SG-Smart/Hunter
SF-Turner/JJ/Young
PF-Love/KO/Mikey
C-Zeller/AJ
And still have a ton of picks along with AJ and JJ's contract to trade on draft night.

Ainge won't even consider Crowder for Love straight up. We know this because Ainge is on record the last two days saying two things:

1. He values some individual Celtics more than the Nets pick.
(1a. There's no way Crowder would not be among that "some".)

2. He values the Nets pick more than Love.

Therefore:

3. He values Crowder alone much more than Love.

(Caveat: Ainge could be lying.)

"We know", is more like we assume.

No, it's literally as close to "we know" as it gets re: NBA trade news. Take the Globe interview with Himmelsbach and a Bulpett's report in the Herald, do a little simple math, and voila.

Crowder > Pick.  Pick > Love.  Crowder >> Love.

What is the "assumption"? How could that be wrong?
Like, is Crowder not be one of the "some"?

Assumption is Crowder. Plenty of people would very much disagree that Crowder is equal in value or better than the Nets 2016 pick. Now Nets 2018 sure. We truly do not know if DA meant Crowder was one of the guys. It's pure assumption.

"Pure assumption"? Eh. It's not pure knowledge. You and I are not Danny Ainge himself. But it's a minimal, completely reasonable deduction. Who do you think Ainge meant by "some"? He meant at least two players, but "some" typically refers to more than two. Which three Celtics do you think Ainge values more than Crowder? One can make a case that Isaiah and Marcus are equally valuable, perhaps one slightly more than the other two. But I do not see a reasonable case for Kelly or Avery being as valuable as Crowder to Ainge, let alone more valuable. It's not a mathematical proof, but as far as common sense goes, it's QED. Crowder > Pick > Love.

Lol keep wearing those green shades. No way Crowder is equal to the pick. Nor could be that is who DA meant unless he is spinning the term value. As in value to the team, "for this year" not long term or prospect wise. Just look at the potential of any of the top 5 picks in mocks. All of them have much great potential than Crowder.

My green shades are off. I am simply describing and simply computing Ainge's own judgments, and relaying them to you. I myself can barely believe that Ainge would value any Celtic more than the Nets pick. I pestered Himmelsbach directly because I didn't believe it. Now I do. Look at the ESPN Contract Value top 50 list. Is ESPN a Celtics homer to list Crowder as a more valuable asset than Love & some other players frequently mentioned as being worth trading that Nets pick for?

There is a lot of problems with the list and it has its own ideas of value. And the list didn't rank picks vs players so again we are assuming Crowder to be the one DA is talking about.

[Dino Pitino]

There is a lot of problems with the list and it has its own ideas of value. And the list didn't rank picks vs players so again we are assuming Crowder to be the one DA is talking about.

Not "the one", but one of the "some". It's an utterly reasonable deduction. I've thoroughly explained why. You just seem to have no interest in considering anything that conflicts with your assumptions. No point in continuing with this. Have a good day.

[Csfan1984]

There is a lot of problems with the list and it has its own ideas of value. And the list didn't rank picks vs players so again we are assuming Crowder to be the one DA is talking about.

Not "the one", but one of the "some". It's an utterly reasonable deduction. I've thoroughly explained why. You just seem to have no interest in considering anything that conflicts with your assumptions. No point in continuing with this. Have a good day.

Some doesn't say Crowder. Some just means some. Go about your green colored way.

[mainevent]

Does this open the door for a Love trade?

RealGM ‏@RealGM  6m6 minutes ago
Cavs Trade Anderson Varejao To Blazers In Deal With Magic For Channing Frye: http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/240879/Cavs-Trade-Anderson-Varejao-In-Deal-For-Channing-Frye …