WOJ : Boston in pursuit to engage trade talks about Butler and George

[nickagneta]

If Ainge makes a trade this year it will be to enhance the current, on pace to win over 50 games this year, team. There is absolutely zero chance Ainge rips apart the core of this team while giving up massive amounts of future assets and bench players to add Melo and Butler. That is simply not happening. Ainge could add one star while giving up 2018 Nets, maybe Yab, Zizic, or Nader, expiring contracts and one starter quality player, but thats all thst will happen in season this year.

why is there zero chance?  If Ainge doesn't think this team can win a title, but thinks making a move this year would better set Boston up for that, then Ainge would absolutely make that move even if it hurts the core.  Chemistry only matters if you have a team capable of winning a title.  Boston is not a team capable of winning the title, so chemistry makes no real difference at all in that regard.

There is zero chance because Ainge is an intelligent person that doesn't deal in the absolutes that you are discussing. He also is a manager of people and doesn't treat people like objects like you seem to be doing here. This team has a human dynamic and the best way to kill the positive locker room and team chemistry as well as the relationship between the players and coaches and management is to blow apart a team mid season like you are calling for. This isn't fantasy basketball. There are more things to consider than just "Oh we can't win it all so lets gut a 50 win, young team to add some stars that may help in later years and completely undo everything we have been building for years".

Sorry, your idea isn't happening. Ainge might trade for one star but it will be at a minimal price and will be to add to and enhance the current team.

The two trades were giving up Crowder, Brown, Johnson, Jerekbo, Zeller, and Young.  That isn't exactly gutting the core.  It is trading 3 main rotation players, an occasional player (JJ), and two guys that barely play.  You are acting like I was proposing trading the entire starting lineup.  And here's the thing the last 4 of those guys likely will not be on the Celtics next year, so you are basically giving up two long term players, for two stars and some deep bench rotation players for a team that is far more likely to compete for a championship.  Ainge would absolutely make those types of moves if possible.

I think you are wrong. No way he does what you propose mid season.No way he undoes everything Stevens has done with this team. Not midseason. I will leave it at that.

[Boris Badenov]

If Ainge makes a trade this year it will be to enhance the current, on pace to win over 50 games this year, team. There is absolutely zero chance Ainge rips apart the core of this team while giving up massive amounts of future assets and bench players to add Melo and Butler. That is simply not happening. Ainge could add one star while giving up 2018 Nets, maybe Yab, Zizic, or Nader, expiring contracts and one starter quality player, but thats all thst will happen in season this year.

why is there zero chance?  If Ainge doesn't think this team can win a title, but thinks making a move this year would better set Boston up for that, then Ainge would absolutely make that move even if it hurts the core.  Chemistry only matters if you have a team capable of winning a title.  Boston is not a team capable of winning the title, so chemistry makes no real difference at all in that regard.

There is zero chance because Ainge is an intelligent person that doesn't deal in the absolutes that you are discussing. He also is a manager of people and doesn't treat people like objects like you seem to be doing here. This team has a human dynamic and the best way to kill the positive locker room and team chemistry as well as the relationship between the players and coaches and management is to blow apart a team mid season like you are calling for.

You do remember what happened at the deadline in 2011, right?

[saltlover]

If Ainge makes a trade this year it will be to enhance the current, on pace to win over 50 games this year, team. There is absolutely zero chance Ainge rips apart the core of this team while giving up massive amounts of future assets and bench players to add Melo and Butler. That is simply not happening. Ainge could add one star while giving up 2018 Nets, maybe Yab, Zizic, or Nader, expiring contracts and one starter quality player, but thats all thst will happen in season this year.

why is there zero chance?  If Ainge doesn't think this team can win a title, but thinks making a move this year would better set Boston up for that, then Ainge would absolutely make that move even if it hurts the core.  Chemistry only matters if you have a team capable of winning a title.  Boston is not a team capable of winning the title, so chemistry makes no real difference at all in that regard.

There is zero chance because Ainge is an intelligent person that doesn't deal in the absolutes that you are discussing. He also is a manager of people and doesn't treat people like objects like you seem to be doing here. This team has a human dynamic and the best way to kill the positive locker room and team chemistry as well as the relationship between the players and coaches and management is to blow apart a team mid season like you are calling for.

You do remember what happened at the deadline in 2011, right?

1) That worked out questionably.
2) Trading six players who've combined for 37% of the team's minutes is different than trading 4 players who combined for about 15% of the team's minutes (excluding Daniels because he had a very severe injury and wasn't going to be able to travel with the team, much less play, for the rest of the season.)
3) Only one of those players had been with the team for a full season.  Nate Robinson was the second-longest tenured having been acquired in the middle of the prior year.  5 of the 6 players in the proposal are in at least their second full season with the team.  As big of a locker room shock as 2011 was, this would dwarf it.

[nickagneta]

If Ainge makes a trade this year it will be to enhance the current, on pace to win over 50 games this year, team. There is absolutely zero chance Ainge rips apart the core of this team while giving up massive amounts of future assets and bench players to add Melo and Butler. That is simply not happening. Ainge could add one star while giving up 2018 Nets, maybe Yab, Zizic, or Nader, expiring contracts and one starter quality player, but thats all thst will happen in season this year.

why is there zero chance?  If Ainge doesn't think this team can win a title, but thinks making a move this year would better set Boston up for that, then Ainge would absolutely make that move even if it hurts the core.  Chemistry only matters if you have a team capable of winning a title.  Boston is not a team capable of winning the title, so chemistry makes no real difference at all in that regard.

There is zero chance because Ainge is an intelligent person that doesn't deal in the absolutes that you are discussing. He also is a manager of people and doesn't treat people like objects like you seem to be doing here. This team has a human dynamic and the best way to kill the positive locker room and team chemistry as well as the relationship between the players and coaches and management is to blow apart a team mid season like you are calling for.

You do remember what happened at the deadline in 2011, right?

You mean when Ainge one trade and tried to just enhance the team? You mean when he didn't take team chemistry into effect and hurt his team overall because he didn't?

[Phantom255x]

To be fair, yesterday's game proved why we shouldn't do it.

This team still has MULTIPLE HOLES. Yes, west coast trips are never easy, and it was probably a rare stinker that every team has, but adding either PG13 or Butler for the prices they will command still doesn't make us better than CLE/GSW, and that probably hurts us long term (PG13 EXPIRES after next season, and a deal for either definitely requires any random combo of BKN Picks and Brown/Smart/Bradley)

[CoachBo]

Our team has holes so don't move any of the pieces that comprise those holes to improve?

I could not disagree with this extremely convoluted logic more vehemently.

[Phantom255x]

Our team has holes so don't move any of the pieces that comprise those holes to improve?

I could not disagree with this extremely convoluted logic more vehemently.

You fill the #2 scorer "need", but what about rebounding?

Are Butler or PG13 solving that problem? PG13 might a little but that's it.

Plus you likely deal away Bradley + 1-2 Nets Picks + more for either player.

Might end up being more of a lateral move.

[Irish Stew]

Not sure if Butler is worth it without an additional move for a big. George on the other hand can at least theoretically play the small ball 4.

I just think that the value of trading very good players and speculative draft assets for elite players is independent from the next move we need to construct a perfectly configured team. Getting the stars is the "heavy lifting". We can fill in the holes later, even if it doesn't happen until the summer.

[Moranis]

Our team has holes so don't move any of the pieces that comprise those holes to improve?

I could not disagree with this extremely convoluted logic more vehemently.

You fill the #2 scorer "need", but what about rebounding?

Are Butler or PG13 solving that problem? PG13 might a little but that's it.

Plus you likely deal away Bradley + 1-2 Nets Picks + more for either player.

Might end up being more of a lateral move.

Paul George would be Boston's best and most complete player (Thomas is obviously a better offensive player than George, but George is the complete package on both ends of the Court making him a better overall player).  The guy that can be the best player on a title team is the hardest thing to acquire.  George could be that guy, especially when you surround him with Thomas, Horford, Bradley, Smart, etc. (assume you give up Crowder, Brown, and BKN 17 for George).  You don't fail to acquire that type of player because you are worried about the chemistry of a team that can't win the title anyway.  You improve your team long term when you add a player better than anyone on your team. 

[Darío SpanishFan]

I'm not so sure that "Thomas is obviously a better offensively than Paul George". Apart from their  entire career and not only the last 15 months comparison, give George absolutely every offensive play in the fourth like we do with IT.

IT is usually a miracle when the fourth quarter comes, but he also commits turnovers and forces many plays, apart from his defensive flaws. This playoff is a turning point regarding what we will do with him - extend or use him to get a big.

And no, I'm no hater. I love IT. But I love the Celtics winning #18 above IT.

[oldtype]

I'm not so sure that "Thomas is obviously a better offensively than Paul George". Apart from their  entire career and not only the last 15 months comparison, give George absolutely every offensive play in the fourth like we do with IT.

IT is usually a miracle when the fourth quarter comes, but he also commits turnovers and forces many plays, apart from his defensive flaws. This playoff is a turning point regarding what we will do with him - extend or use him to get a big.

And no, I'm no hater. I love IT. But I love the Celtics winning #18 above IT.

Paul George's turnover rate is 12.9%.  Isaiah Thomas's is 9.9%.

Paul George's assist % is 16%.  Isaiah Thomas's is 34.1%.

Paul George's true shooting % is 57.5%.  Isaiah Thomas's is 62.6%.

This "IT is a chucker who forces plays" narrative is patently ridiculous.  He's one of the most efficient offensive superstars in the entire game.

[nickagneta]

You don't fail to acquire that type of player because you are worried about the chemistry of a team that can't win the title anyway.  You improve your team long term when you add a player better than anyone on your team.

This I agree with but you don't then go make a subsequent trade to bring in a similar though lesser player while giving up even more of your team and future assets mid season and then destroy your team you built for that  season, which was what you proposed. Making one trade for a star to enhance this team is the right and best move.

[CoachBo]

Our team has holes so don't move any of the pieces that comprise those holes to improve?

I could not disagree with this extremely convoluted logic more vehemently.

You fill the #2 scorer "need", but what about rebounding?

Are Butler or PG13 solving that problem? PG13 might a little but that's it.

Plus you likely deal away Bradley + 1-2 Nets Picks + more for either player.

Might end up being more of a lateral move.

Paul George would be Boston's best and most complete player (Thomas is obviously a better offensive player than George, but George is the complete package on both ends of the Court making him a better overall player).  The guy that can be the best player on a title team is the hardest thing to acquire.  George could be that guy, especially when you surround him with Thomas, Horford, Bradley, Smart, etc. (assume you give up Crowder, Brown, and BKN 17 for George).  You don't fail to acquire that type of player because you are worried about the chemistry of a team that can't win the title anyway.  You improve your team long term when you add a player better than anyone on your team.

Completely agree with Moranis.

But you're dealing with a guy who's trying to saturate the board with his fear of improving the roster, ostensibly, I suppose, because the cost might be some of the beloved youth and draft picks - none which have won squat for this franchise, let alone delivered anything close to the hyperbole that surrounds them on this board. See Zizic for one easy example.

Ainge is a FAR better trader than he is a drafter - a fact that has now made it into the national narrative. It is time - past time - to take the leap and improve this roster. The signal that Ainge and Wyc aren't going to be satisfied playing the perpetual rebuild game some of you cherish so deeply came when they signed Horford.

[bogg]

I don't see why Anthony would necessarily preclude George or Butler. 

I mean if you can get Anthony for something Amir, Zeller, Young, plus some future 1st (like Boston 2019).  You could then acquire George or Butler with Crowder, Brown, Jerekbo, and one of the BKN picks (and other 1st's as required).  Other players in both tradess added in coming to Boston to help fill out the roster

So trade with Indy for George
Crowder, Brown, Jerekbo, BOS 17, BOS 18 for George, Seraphin

So trade with NY for Anthony
Johnson, Zeller, Young, BOS 19 for Anthony, Plumlee, Vujacic

So post-trades (1 open roster spot and still having BKN 18, MEM, LAC picks)

PG - Thomas, Rozier, Jackson
SG - Bradley, Smart, Vujacic
SF - George, Green
PF - Anthony, Olynyk, Mickey
C - Horford, Seraphin, Plumlee

We wouldn't ever be able to get a rebound, but man we could score the ball. Also with adding George we would be even deadlier defensively.

I just think we would need a 1st big off the bench that is great at rebounding so that we can slide him in for Anthony when other teams start to feast on us.

offense is not the problem for the celtics. they rank in the top 6 to 7 teams in terms of offensive efficiency. anthony does not address a real problem should either butler or george be on the team.

Worth mentioning that that offensive efficiency has been acheived on the back of a superhuman effort by Isaiah, a guy whose offensive efficiency has historically fallen in the playoffs when teams can gameplan a defense for him.  We're still less than a year removed from Boston relying heavily on Evan Turner in a first-round loss because he was the only other guy on the roster who could consistently create shots for himself and others.

[Granath]

"perpetual rebuild"

Let's look are quick rebuilds. Here are the teams in the last 10 years who won 25 or fewer games in one season and two years later won 48 or more and the primary reason for the quick rebound:

Celtics (06-08): KG, Ray Allen trade
OKC (07-09): Durant, Westbrook (both top 5 picks)
Toronto (11-13): Two top 11 picks
Golden State (11-13): 4 top 11 picks
Cleveland (12-14): LeBron, Irving, #1 for Love (two #1 overall picks)
Boston (13-15): One top 11 pick

Notice anything? The Cs resurgence (it ain't a rebuild any more) is quite remarkable. First of all it was exceptionally fast. That's 6 teams in 10 years. So this isn't something that happens often. Furthermore, the way it happened is almost unique. Theirs and Toronto's are the only rebuilds where the teams didn't get multiple cracks at top 10 picks. So that's two teams (and three times) in the last decade who have been able to spin it around quickly without building through the draft.

The team is on pace for 52 wins, #2 or #3 seed in the Conference and still has very likely two more top 5 picks to go along with Brown (who is already proving you wrong). Perpetual rebuild? That couldn't be further from the truth. It's an ever-increasing refinement of an already very good team with the assets that "rebuilding" teams only wish they had.