Herald on Danny playing hardball

[BitterJim]

Tom Moore
24m24 minutes ago
Tom Moore ‏@tmoore76ers
"One source heard Celts supposedly wanted Noel & Lakers pick for No. 3"

Take it for what you will, but that's certainly a pretty big haul to demand for the number three pick in a two-man draft, depending upon how bad you think the Lakers will be next year. That'd be Danny basically demanding Noel and the Lakers pick for a 22 year old rookie in Dunn. I'm pretty high on Noel and less on Dunn, but for players the same age with one having two years of NBA experience vs. 0 with the other, that's a pretty big haul to demand, even with the contract situation.

The Lakers will be late lottery next year, and the pick is top 3 protected.  A late lottery pick and a year of Noel would have been a good deal, but #3 for a year of Noel (and some crappy picks) would be a bad deal

[beantownboy171]

The value Danny set for the #3 pick will naturally reflect how highly he thought of the player he would select with the #3 pick.

If Danny believes in Jaylen Brown and sees a star there. Why trade the pick for Noel & small parts if you like Jaylen Brown better than Noel as a prospect?

We're already in a good position without more trades. If the picks DA made work out, that shows that Ainge can cash in on his assets without the need for a trade partner. That creates leverage in trade negotiations.

So long as the Celtics have a large number of assets, there will be teams and GMs who want those assets. They'll take DA call.

[mmmmm]

Did he fleece Memphis for their super protected future Clippers pick? Was he trying to fleece Charlotte offering 4 picks for Justice Winslow last year?

Maybe its more the case that most GMs value their assets much more than other GMs do, and it ends up being hard to make any deal get done.

This^

Complaints about Danny over-valuing his assets or trying too hard to "win every deal big" are coming from:

a) anonymous other GMs who mysteriously aren't being criticized for perhaps overvaluing their OWN assets or wanting to win the deal big from their side and

b) fans who wanted a deal to happen but, in reality, have no clue what was actually ever on the table.

One thing that drives me nuts in the way these narratives get discussed is mis-quoting.   For example, in a MassLive piece today on rumors about the Butler deal (http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2016/06/boston_celtics_trade_rumors_20_209.html#incart_river_index) Jay King (who is normally pretty good about not doing this sort of thing) writes:

Meshing with that claim, the Boston Herald's Steve Bulpett reported that Boston was "looking for a clear kill, rather than simply a deal that would be good for both sides."

But that isn't what Bulpett reported.  Bulpett reported that other, anonymous teams were accusing Ainge of that.   That's a subtle, but very different thing.

[elcotte]

"But from talking to people around the league, the feeling is that Ainge’s inner drive may have cost him. To be fair, this is obviously coming from execs who were unable to get something done with the Celtics president of basketball operations, but some think he may have overplayed his hand.

We’re told that, beyond just being prepared and having strong comebacks to different versions of trades, Ainge would move the finish line while one area was being explored. It was said he was looking for a clear kill, rather than simply a deal that would be good for both sides.

“It makes you wary of doing business with Boston, because you get the feeling they’re always trying to put one over on you,” said one source. “I’m sure that’s not always the case, but it can make things hard.”

We repeat that such comments are coming from a few veteran NBA people who are also quite competitive in their own right. Their statements should thus be viewed in that perspective.

And without knowing the specifics on how certain negotiations proceeded (you’re almost always going to get different accounts from the two parties), it’s impossible to judge who’s correct -- or closer to it.

What’s apparent is that Danny Ainge didn’t find an available trade that he liked, and he decided that the possibility of other moves this summer and next year outweighed what was on the table."

Freaking TP to you for this find, man. That's what some of us have been arguing on here for the last year or so, or at least since the trade deadline.

Wilbon was even talking about it on PTI today. You don't have to fleece the opposing team on every trade. There's a difference between losing a trade and making a good deal for both sides, and further there's a difference between making a good deal for both sides and fleecing another team. Danny ALWAYS expects to fleece another team. His expectations are way too high to pan out on every single trade.

I know Danny values flexibility and the possible other moves we might make, but possibilities and flexibility is what we've had for three years now and we're still without a game-changing star.

Can't imagine who would have been arguing that. LOL.

Ego is an ugly thing.

Especially when it's unjustified.

What about the Philly egos in this case?
They want Dunn for Noel....who is in his last year and who can be signed as a free agent next year. How valuable is that to the Celtics? In effect you want the Celtics to trade Jaylen Brown for a one year rental of Noel. Why?
The pick next year is top three protected....so, the Celtics are giving up #3 this year for at best a lower pick next year.
Ainge ego problem? I don't see it.

[CoachBo]

Easy answer:

Jaylen Brown has a multitude of flaws - shooting, defense, turnovers, ball handling. At best, he is a long term project.

And that's all we ended up with for a supposedly valuable asset.

It isn't the worst pick Ainge could have made at 3. That would have been the Euromistake.

But drafting Dunn and swapping him to Philly was CLEARLY a better play for the long-term future of the Celtics. Zero question in my mind about it. Noel is a New Englander, and given that the Durant-to-Boston things are a figment of Green Team imaginations, signing him long-term isn't a reach at all.

Ainge definitely has a reputation around the league of "I fleece you or I don't deal" and it's hurting the franchise. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a deal that improves both clubs, and he needs to get that through his thick head.

But as this board evidences, there's still a majority who buy the perpetual "Wait until next year" you're being fed. I doubt anything will change until the credibility of that canard erodes further. In the meantime, there are going to be an awful lot of next years. Clark should save his front page post and just repost it right before July 4 for the next several years.

[Celtics18]

Did he fleece Memphis for their super protected future Clippers pick? Was he trying to fleece Charlotte offering 4 picks for Justice Winslow last year?

Maybe its more the case that most GMs value their assets much more than other GMs do, and it ends up being hard to make any deal get done.

This^

Complaints about Danny over-valuing his assets or trying too hard to "win every deal big" are coming from:

a) anonymous other GMs who mysteriously aren't being criticized for perhaps overvaluing their OWN assets or wanting to win the deal big from their side and

b) fans who wanted a deal to happen but, in reality, have no clue what was actually ever on the table.

One thing that drives me nuts in the way these narratives get discussed is mis-quoting.   For example, in a MassLive piece today on rumors about the Butler deal (http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2016/06/boston_celtics_trade_rumors_20_209.html#incart_river_index) Jay King (who is normally pretty good about not doing this sort of thing) writes:

Meshing with that claim, the Boston Herald's Steve Bulpett reported that Boston was "looking for a clear kill, rather than simply a deal that would be good for both sides."

But that isn't what Bulpett reported.  Bulpett reported that other, anonymous teams were accusing Ainge of that.   That's a subtle, but very different thing.

Thank you and TP.  It is really frustrating, and what's even more frustrating is that people buy this kind of "reporting" as reality.

[dannyboy35]

I think it's pretty funny that people didn't like the Allen deal if it was only allen( me bring one of them) yet everyone wants to sign treadmill guys so we can win one freaking round. PAu Gasol? Noah?? Makes no sense. What changed in Danny and in the fans to be ok with this?

[Fafnir]

I mean if you want to criticize Danny for not making a move I get it.

But to bring up the sour grapes from other GMs is proof, well is Masai Ujiri a bad GM for repeatedly making great deals with the Knicks?

I'm fine with demanding the Lakers pick along with Noel for number 3. Noel is approaching his payday and is a high level role player, the third pick of the draft and the chance to take a swing at a star should be valued highly. Noel isn't a star and isn't on track to become one.

[TA9]

Obviously the GM's are being very careful about what they offer Danny in trade discussions given the humility that he brought upon Dallas, Brooklyn and Phoenix

[Fafnir]

Easy answer:
But drafting Dunn and swapping him to Philly was CLEARLY a better play for the long-term future of the Celtics. Zero question in my mind about it. Noel is a New Englander, and given that the Durant-to-Boston things are a figment of Green Team imaginations, signing him long-term isn't a reach at all.

I mean if you can swap the 3rd pick for the 5th pick after his rookie contract is 3/4th up and he showed little progress in his second year of being on the court you have to do it right?

Signing Noel isn't a problem, its the fact that you must then commit the cap space to sign him. A lot of cap space given the premium big men always command.

[Fafnir]

Obviously the GM's are being very careful about what they offer Danny in trade discussions given the humility that he brought upon Dallas, Brooklyn and Phoenix

Ainge has been notorious for years working the phones constantly about everyone on his roster and everyone else's roster. I think GMs honestly get annoyed at having to talk to him so much.

Hence a wave of "Danny being unrealistic" stories, every freaking trade season. (of which there are two every year)

[GratefulCs]

So everyone who was worried that other gm's wouldn't deal with Danny should relax


Deals were on the table that he didn't like


But deals were still there


No one is shutting him out

[TheSundanceKid]

There's a lot of ridiculousness here today.  A lot.

1) It's been said for awhile that we need to start consolidating assets.  And yet, the supposed offer that has many riled up is one in which we were getting four things for one thing.  If we were giving away just a single thing, and it was a fair trade, then that means our one thing was the best asset.  And that would have been the opposite of consolidation, and therefore the opposite of what the majority of this forum has been demanding for months.

2) If our pick was the best asset, then maybe Noel isn't quite the hot stuff some here think he is.  Another rumored offer was Teague for Noel.  That didn't happen either -- instead Teague went for pick #12.  The Teague-for-Noel rumor also was accompanied by sub-rumors that Atlanta needed something extra in the deal.  In that case, since Teague ended up going for #12, we can determine that Atlanta values Noel at less than the #12 pick.

3) Intransigence is a 2-way street.  This article suggests that Danny was asking for too much.  However, Philly didn't make a trade last night either.  They still have their three bigs who can't play together, and they just drafted a fourth who might not be able to play with any of them either.  In addition to the Teague rumors, and the Celtics rumors, there were also rumors that they'd been calling most of the league to make a trade.  And again, none was made.  Is Danny tough to trade with? Sure.  But based on their lack of success, it seems like Philly was also having a tough time finding common ground.

4) Would you rather have Danny Ainge, who's tough to deal with, or Billy King, who gets deals done?  GMs who are easy to trade with are easy for a reason.  Billy King was easy.  I don't want Billy King.

TP. It's a 2 way street and on this occasion I don't think anyone was serious about letting go of their assets. I don't think I saw a single trade proposed that made sense for us. We aren't in a rush, DA knows that. Our best assets are still in our future and teams like Philly still need to sort their logjams, if the right trade comes up DA will make it

[colincb]

Next season, Noel is a free agent subject to offers of as much as $27.5 million to sign him (an increase of $10MM over 2015-16). No one knows what the real number might be, but it's going to be a lot higher than most armchair GMs would want to offer. Throw in a bench player and two late firsts for one of the top picks in an 8 player draft on a contract of $4.7 million and it's bad deal. Don't like that answer? Use a number you think you can get Noel to come back for assuming he's not leaving any money on the table. Just remember that if he's taking a much lower number, he isn't that good.

[Fafnir]

Next season, Noel is a free agent subject to offers of as much as $27.5 million to sign him (an increase of $10MM over 2015-16). No one knows what the real number might be, but it's going to be a lot higher than most armchair GMs would want to offer. Throw in a bench player and two late firsts for one of the top picks in an 8 player draft on a contract of $4.7 million and it's bad deal. Don't like that answer? Use a number you think you can get Noel to come back for assuming he's not leaving any money on the table. Just remember that if he's taking a much lower number, he isn't that good.

He'd certainly demand a max deal in RFA, its unknown if he'd get it from the C's.

He'd certainly be likely to sign an offer sheet for max money given the number of teams with cap space to burn if that's the route he wanted to go.