I don't think he makes the 3rd All-NBA team, which is much better for the Celtics.
Hard to get excited for this guy, after you just said that man.
Why was anyone excited about Gordon Hayward? Gobert is the train that drives that team.
He's improving and he's arguably a top 20 player now.
It's not that he's a superstar, I think the main attraction is that we can sign him with cap space rather than sending out Brooklyn picks or assets.
I guess a way to look at it is like this:
-have Jimmy Butler and lose a Brooklyn pick (maybe Fultz?)
-have Gordon Hayward and keep Fultz (or whoever) and whoever.
How do you know we couldn't:
1) Acquire Butler for 2018 Brooklyn 1st + Bradley + Smart + Jerebko
2) Draft Fultz on draft day using the 2017 Brooklyn 1st
3) Trade Crowder to the Pelicans for a pick and cap relief (they will have cap space and will be desperate for impact players to add to that Cousins / Davis core)
4) Sign Hayward in free agency
Then you have Thomas, and Butler, and Hayward, and Fultz.
But you lose that chance if you don't make the move for Butler now, because once we draft Fultz the Bulls will be smart enough to refuse any deals that don't include him - just like the Timberwolves refused any Cleveland offers unless they included Wiggins. If you are the Bulls that's a no brainer.
Then you are losing Bradley, Smart and the option of Ayton/Doncic/whoever.
Who cares though!?!
Don't you guys get it?
You can't play Thomas, and Bradley, and Smart, and Fultz/Ball, and Hayward, and Crowder, and Brown. We can't find playing time for all of those guys, it's not feasible!!!!
And who cares about giving up one of the Brooklyn picks? We have the second best record in the East. We are one (at the most, two) players away from being able to beat Cleveland in a 7 game series and play in the NBA finals.
We have a #3 pick (Jaylen Brown, 20 years old). We'd have a top 2 pick (Fultz / Ball, 19 years old). We have Zizic and Yabusele (both 20 years old). How many prospects do you guys need to feel secure about this team's future?
We don't need 8 perimeter players. We can't play 8 perimeter players. We don't need 5 prospects - but it would be nice to have two or three who can develop and carry the torch once Horford and Thomas start to slow down. We already would have 3 or 4 guys in that position.
You're not making ANY significant sacrifices here. You're giving up one high lottery pick that we wouldn't need. You're giving up two guards that we wouldn't need. You're getting back an All-Star...arguably a superstar. Who cares if you give up a couple of decent players and a good pick to get it?
The problem here that I'm seeing is that the Celtics fans, like Ainge, have gotten too [dang] greedy. They see we have all these assets, and they want to hold on to them forever. They want to just add start after star without having to give up anything.
But trying to be too greedy can blow up in your face. What if the pick slides to #3 or #4 and drops in value significantly. What if Hayward, Millsap and Griffin re-sign with their existing teams. What if the Nets sign a quality free agent who boots their win column JUST enough to pus them up out of the bottom 5, causing the value of the 2018 pick to plummet.
Suddenly everybody will be looking back saying "far out, I'm so cut we didn't pull a trade when we had the chance".
But if you do trade for Butler with the deal I just suggested earlier, then what is the worst case? All the free agents sign elsewhere, ok. We still have a starting lineup with Thomas, Butler, Crowder, and Horford with about $25M in cap space to add another solid player (like Ibaka, etc) who could solidify the team - or we can hold that cap space until 2018 and go after somebody like Cousins - who will not be more likely to sign with the team now that we have two and a half All Stars on the team (Thomas, Butler and Horford).
In fact, another point guys might be missing. If we add Butler, we now have a core of Thomas, Butler and Horford. How much more appealing does that make Boston as a free agent destination? Suddenly we are one star SF of big away from being good enough to battle the Warriors in a 7 game series. Maybe that's enough to sway a guy like Hayward or Griffin to come here in this free agency.
But if we don't make a move, and we go into free agency with just Thomas, Bradley, Crowder and Horford...maybe a guy like Griffin or Hayward looks at that roster and says "hmm...they have potential, but I don't feel like joining that team will be enough to put us on the level of the Cavs or Warriors..."
Maybe that's all the difference it takes for one of those guys to sign elsewhere, rather then coming here.
You have to look at the big picture, man.
Jimmy Butler is only making $17M a year. He's locked in to that deal for the next four years. That contract lines up perfectly with Horford's. That is at least two quality players that we would have locked up for the next four years. Now thrown in Thomas - he's only locked up for two years, but he's the face of this franchise right now. He'll return as long as the franchise is willing to bring him back.
So free agents will look at the Celtics and say:
"Hey - they have three really good players as the core of that team. They have at least 2 or three promising young prospects. They have nowhere to go but up...I want to be a part of this."
Take away Butler from that scenario, and the entire perception changes. Suddenly they are looking at the Celtics as a team that has two really good players, and a lot of young prospects / picks. They say:
"That's a pretty good team with a bright future, but they won't be contenders until their prospects develop...that could take years."