No, I'm familiar with the situation, but I just think that passing up talent like Caris Levert and Pascal Siakam at 16 and 23, respectively, is a mistake and should not have been done so just because of guys like Turner, Sully, Amir, Zeller, and Jerebko being free agents, who Levert and Siakam could have more than adequately replaced, imo, and for significantly less money, even though I don't really care about that last part.
You'd rather give up 2 roster spots to guys who were *both* projected as 2nd round picks, completely messing up our offseason ability to sign anyone, instead of two euro stashes who were likely underrated because other teams don't have the flexibility to leave them in Europe? Obviously #16 was a bit of a surprise, but your alternative sounds awful. Zizic was almost universally rated higher than both of those guys, anyway, and actually fills a need.
And LaVert at #16? I know he's some people's binkie, but we're going to use a mid-1st rounder on a senior shooting guard with a serious injury history, who just had foot surgery a month ago, and we don't even have playing time for him if he gets healthy? Ugh.
Yes, because at a time when everyone wants 'a sure thing', the only thing that qualifies as such, imo, is having the chance to acquire talent via the draft that can help you now and down the road. Quite frankly, I don't understand the logic of passing up available talent just to have room for two max contracts when 1). No one is coming here, as we saw last year, and 2). When that doesn't happen, you're left with two guys who can't even contribute to your team because they're overseas . Passing on talent to save money for free agency is monumentally stupid, imo. Say in a couple years both Levert and Siakam, or someone else who was available at those spots, become players while we're left with no major free agent signees nor said talent - what will you think, then? That's my point, and I could care less about 3 first round contracts going on the payroll. Last time I checked, the sum of those deals don't come close to that of a max contract. Effin' cheap owners .
This has nothing to do with the owners being cheap. Boston ownership has proven time and again they are willing to go over the cap and pay penalties for winning. But winning is the priority here and adding tons of young, unproven talent and getting rid of good, veteran, proven talent doesnt equate to a winning formula. Minnesota added two ROYs in a row and still finished with the 5th worst record in the league.
Stashing Yabusele and Zizic, and trading away picks 31 and 35 was about roster space, not money. Ainge felt Yabusele and Zizic were excellent talent value for where they were selected and they also happen to be players that can develop overseas for a year or more. Therefore, they dont take up valuable roster spots cor a team that is trying to win and is doing so by courting Kevin Durant. Durant wont want a team filled with rookies. He will want tough veteran players to play with. Just about any top free agent will wabt the same thing.
Adding 5-6 rookies to a team with 5 players with two or less years of NBA experience equates to losing and telling every free agent out there that you are okay with losing.
Yeah, like the time that they re-signed James Posey. Wait...
.
I just think that hoping for Durant is setting ourselves up for failure, and when that happens and we passed on guys who could have helped us, with or without Durant, we've effectively killed two birds with one stone and only set us back further, imo. What we should be doing, imo, is gathering as many young two way players as possible, like Dunn, Levert, Siakam, Brogdon, Jackson, GP II, Daniel Ochefu, Sheldon McClellan, Taurean Prince, etc. and build our team through the draft. At that point, if a free agent decides to come here, great, but if not, we're not left at the altar and will continue to build on our success. What's wrong with that approach? Is that not how Red built his teams - mainly through the draft? Of course, he actually knew talent, so...
. Lol, we're doomed
.
Btw, the guys who they'd be replacing in Zeller, Turner, and Sully, for example, aren't better than the guys I've mentioned, in my view, anyway, especially on defense, so it's not like we'd be throwing 5 James Young's out there, haha
. A starting lineup of Dunn, Brogdon, Levert, Siakam, and Ochefu, for example, is far better defensively than anything we have right now because we would have two guys who can shoot, in Levert and Brogdon, two guys who can create their own shot in Dunn and Levert, everyone can pass, Siakam and Ochefu are superior rebounders and shot blockers to anyone we had last season, and their ability to play on the block, along with Brogdon and Dunn, gives us better options coming down the stretch in terms of taking high percentage shots, as opposed to IT or AB chucking some dumb 3, lol
. Additionally, Siakam beats everyone down the floor, giving us an added dimension to our transition game. What's not to like? Obviously, I'd rather have Poeltl as our starting center, who can also outrun his matchup, but I'm just going by who we could have gotten with our own picks.