Author Topic: Regarding the Deadline: A Theory  (Read 990 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Regarding the Deadline: A Theory
« on: February 25, 2017, 01:17:53 AM »

Offline Atzar

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9092
  • Tommy Points: 1642
Long post forthcoming.

The deadline came and went with a lot of sizzle but no steak.  I know many people are upset that we didn't make moves to shore up our weaknesses.  It especially hurts because we lost tonight, due in part to the efforts of two players that some Celtics fans believe we should have targeted/landed, Serge Ibaka and PJ Tucker.  Fans see both of these guys moved at affordable prices and wonder why we couldn't do the same.  This is my theory:  we couldn't do the same.  We were not offered that opportunity.

I believe teams are worried about the Celtics, and I believe GMs are worried about Danny Ainge.  First of all, several of his most recent trades have been heists.  He traded a few burnt-out stars for future assets in what may turn out to be one of the most lopsided trades in NBA history.  The Rondo deal looks squarely like a win for Boston now, though that wasn't so clear at the time - we didn't know Crowder would become what he is, and we didn't know Rondo would fall so far so fast (or maybe Danny did... I don't know for sure).  The IT deal is one the Suns GM has publicly stated that he regrets.  GMs have a vested interested in not becoming the next fool.

Second, I'm beginning to believe that it's not as simple as "package A is better than package B, therefore accept package A".  The rumor is that the Celtics made a brief overture to the Kings, only to learn that the asking price for Cousins was laughable.  As a result, talks never really started.  Cousins ended up being traded for a package that was still laughable, but for the opposite reason.  We could have beaten that package without even giving up anything of great importance.  Why didn't we?  I believe it is because such a package wasn’t an option for us.  Opposing GMs are just as interested in hurting the Celtics as they are in helping themselves, specifically because we are a threat.

Every franchise in the NBA wants the same thing:  to win a title.  Winning a title requires being better than every other team in the NBA, so it logically follows that GMs don’t want to create a monster in another city.  A team building to win now doesn’t make a trade that makes another team better at winning now than they are; similarly, a team building for the future doesn’t help another team build an even better future.  And I think that’s the issue Ainge is facing.  We have current talent, future talent, affordable contracts, cap flexibility, and premium draft picks.  We’re one or two moves away from contending at the highest level right now; we’re zero moves away from potentially contending at the highest level in 3-5 years. 

Back to the Cousins idea.  We as fans are wondering why the Celtics didn’t want to make a deal with the Kings for Cousins.  I think it’s possible that we’re looking at this from the wrong angle:  I think the issue is that the Kings didn’t want to make a deal with us for Cousins; not for any reasonable price.  They would only commit to a deal if it would shift the win-later needle from our side to theirs, and that was a discussion we weren’t willing to have for such a risky player.  Regarding Paul George:  Larry Bird was reportedly asking for everything.  He’s not stupid; I’m sure he knows that the reported price of ’17 BKN + 3 premium young players was unrealistic.  He wasn’t trying to be realistic.  He was offering us a deal that would move the win-later needle from our side to theirs.  If we got Paul George, he wanted it to hurt enough that he could expect to beat us in the future, when he’s ready to win again. 

Think about it like a Monopoly game.  If Joe Shmoe approaches you about your yellow property because it would give him control over an entire side of the board, you either demand an outrageous price or you refuse to even consider the proposal.  The goal isn’t just to win an individual trade; the goal is to win the game.  And you can absolutely find yourself in a position where the trade benefits you in a vacuum, but hurts you within the context of the game because you just gift-wrapped the win for your opponent.  I believe that describes the reason Ainge is having such difficulty finding fair deals.  NBA trades aren't made in a vacuum.  It’s not that he’s over-valuing his pieces; it’s not that he’s being passive; it’s that other teams don’t want to make a monster in Boston.

Re: Regarding the Deadline: A Theory
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2017, 01:37:38 AM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47760
  • Tommy Points: 2904
Quote
Fans see both of these guys moved at affordable prices and wonder why we couldn't do the same.  This is my theory:  we couldn't do the same.  We were not offered that opportunity.

Perhaps that is true with the star players, but it's certainly not true with Ibaka, and I'd assume Tucker, as well.

It was widely reported that Rozier was the hang up with Ibaka that Danny didn't want to include, and the overall package was something like Zeller, Rozier, and the Clips pick. That's a price that Danny should've paid.

As for Tucker, I honestly don't think he even tried to get him, because he'd just take away playing time from the likes of Smart and Brown. Seems like Danny is really focused on developing those guys and keeping the Brooklyn picks, even at the expense of making us more competitive now, so that seems to be the logical explanation for Tucker.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2017, 01:52:37 AM by jpotter33 »

Re: Regarding the Deadline: A Theory
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2017, 02:03:24 AM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12749
  • Tommy Points: 1544
Quote
Fans see both of these guys moved at affordable prices and wonder why we couldn't do the same.  This is my theory:  we couldn't do the same.  We were not offered that opportunity.

Perhaps that is true with the star players, but it's certainly not true with Ibaka, and I'd assume Tucker, as well.

It was widely reported that Rozier was the hang up with Ibaka that Danny didn't want to include, and the overall package was something like Zeller, Rozier, and either the Memphis or Clips pick. That's a price that Danny should've paid.

As for Tucker, I honestly don't think he even tried to get him, because he'd just take away playing time from the likes of Smart and Brown. Seems like Danny is really focused on developing those guys and keeping the Brooklyn picks, even at the expense of making us more competitive now, so that seems to be the logical explanation for Tucker.

Yeah, I think it would have been worth it to at least see how Horford and Ibaka fit together for the price Orlando was asking.

Even if it didn't work out, Ainge would still have an enormous cache of assets to work with, and he wouldn't have lost any of his best assets, probably not even any of his top 5 assets (completely excluding IT/Horford).  But if it had worked out fantastically, then you can reconsider negotiating with him in the summer.

I'm not terribly bothered Tucker wasn't pursued.  He'd have helped, no doubt, but I'm okay with letting Brown get the experience, he's worth the investment, even if he ends up being trade bait.

Re: Regarding the Deadline: A Theory
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2017, 02:08:03 AM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47760
  • Tommy Points: 2904
Quote
Fans see both of these guys moved at affordable prices and wonder why we couldn't do the same.  This is my theory:  we couldn't do the same.  We were not offered that opportunity.

Perhaps that is true with the star players, but it's certainly not true with Ibaka, and I'd assume Tucker, as well.

It was widely reported that Rozier was the hang up with Ibaka that Danny didn't want to include, and the overall package was something like Zeller, Rozier, and either the Memphis or Clips pick. That's a price that Danny should've paid.

As for Tucker, I honestly don't think he even tried to get him, because he'd just take away playing time from the likes of Smart and Brown. Seems like Danny is really focused on developing those guys and keeping the Brooklyn picks, even at the expense of making us more competitive now, so that seems to be the logical explanation for Tucker.

Yeah, I think it would have been worth it to at least see how Horford and Ibaka fit together for the price Orlando was asking.

Even if it didn't work out, Ainge would still have an enormous cache of assets to work with, and he wouldn't have lost any of his best assets, probably not even any of his top 5 assets (completely excluding IT/Horford).  But if it had worked out fantastically, then you can reconsider negotiating with him in the summer.

I'm not terribly bothered Tucker wasn't pursued.  He'd have helped, no doubt, but I'm okay with letting Brown get the experience, he's worth the investment, even if he ends up being trade bait.

Yep. This is exactly where I'm at. I would've liked Tucker, especially at that price, but I'm okay with not getting him, especially if it means much more playing time for Brown. We need a more traditional big anyways. Tucker is ultimately just a bigger, less well-rounded version of Smart.

I've become increasingly agitated about the whole Ibaka deal, though, especially after our bigs failed us once again tonight.

Re: Regarding the Deadline: A Theory
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2017, 02:27:04 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
Quote
Fans see both of these guys moved at affordable prices and wonder why we couldn't do the same.  This is my theory:  we couldn't do the same.  We were not offered that opportunity.

Perhaps that is true with the star players, but it's certainly not true with Ibaka, and I'd assume Tucker, as well.

It was widely reported that Rozier was the hang up with Ibaka that Danny didn't want to include, and the overall package was something like Zeller, Rozier, and either the Memphis or Clips pick. That's a price that Danny should've paid.

As for Tucker, I honestly don't think he even tried to get him, because he'd just take away playing time from the likes of Smart and Brown. Seems like Danny is really focused on developing those guys and keeping the Brooklyn picks, even at the expense of making us more competitive now, so that seems to be the logical explanation for Tucker.

Yeah, I think it would have been worth it to at least see how Horford and Ibaka fit together for the price Orlando was asking.

Even if it didn't work out, Ainge would still have an enormous cache of assets to work with, and he wouldn't have lost any of his best assets, probably not even any of his top 5 assets (completely excluding IT/Horford).  But if it had worked out fantastically, then you can reconsider negotiating with him in the summer.

I'm not terribly bothered Tucker wasn't pursued.  He'd have helped, no doubt, but I'm okay with letting Brown get the experience, he's worth the investment, even if he ends up being trade bait.

Yep. This is exactly where I'm at. I would've liked Tucker, especially at that price, but I'm okay with not getting him, especially if it means much more playing time for Brown. We need a more traditional big anyways. Tucker is ultimately just a bigger, less well-rounded version of Smart.

I've become increasingly agitated about the whole Ibaka deal, though, especially after our bigs failed us once again tonight.
I'm not sure but I'm guessing Ainge wants to pick up terrence Jones, who should shore up our frontcourt very well without giving up any assets,  so imo we should wait a bit till Ainge doesn't even pick a guy up from waivers. Then we can grill him
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA

Re: Regarding the Deadline: A Theory
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2017, 02:33:27 AM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47760
  • Tommy Points: 2904
Quote
Fans see both of these guys moved at affordable prices and wonder why we couldn't do the same.  This is my theory:  we couldn't do the same.  We were not offered that opportunity.

Perhaps that is true with the star players, but it's certainly not true with Ibaka, and I'd assume Tucker, as well.

It was widely reported that Rozier was the hang up with Ibaka that Danny didn't want to include, and the overall package was something like Zeller, Rozier, and either the Memphis or Clips pick. That's a price that Danny should've paid.

As for Tucker, I honestly don't think he even tried to get him, because he'd just take away playing time from the likes of Smart and Brown. Seems like Danny is really focused on developing those guys and keeping the Brooklyn picks, even at the expense of making us more competitive now, so that seems to be the logical explanation for Tucker.

Yeah, I think it would have been worth it to at least see how Horford and Ibaka fit together for the price Orlando was asking.

Even if it didn't work out, Ainge would still have an enormous cache of assets to work with, and he wouldn't have lost any of his best assets, probably not even any of his top 5 assets (completely excluding IT/Horford).  But if it had worked out fantastically, then you can reconsider negotiating with him in the summer.

I'm not terribly bothered Tucker wasn't pursued.  He'd have helped, no doubt, but I'm okay with letting Brown get the experience, he's worth the investment, even if he ends up being trade bait.

Yep. This is exactly where I'm at. I would've liked Tucker, especially at that price, but I'm okay with not getting him, especially if it means much more playing time for Brown. We need a more traditional big anyways. Tucker is ultimately just a bigger, less well-rounded version of Smart.

I've become increasingly agitated about the whole Ibaka deal, though, especially after our bigs failed us once again tonight.
I'm not sure but I'm guessing Ainge wants to pick up terrence Jones, who should shore up our frontcourt very well without giving up any assets,  so imo we should wait a bit till Ainge doesn't even pick a guy up from waivers. Then we can grill him

When do we know for sure if others have claimed him or not and if we can land him? I'm not up to speed on all of the waiver wire stuff. I'd love Jones here, and I think he'd actually fit well here. He'd pretty much take JJ's rotation spot since he's been pretty terrible lately due to his whole nose issue.

Re: Regarding the Deadline: A Theory
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2017, 03:14:21 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
Quote
Fans see both of these guys moved at affordable prices and wonder why we couldn't do the same.  This is my theory:  we couldn't do the same.  We were not offered that opportunity.

Perhaps that is true with the star players, but it's certainly not true with Ibaka, and I'd assume Tucker, as well.

It was widely reported that Rozier was the hang up with Ibaka that Danny didn't want to include, and the overall package was something like Zeller, Rozier, and either the Memphis or Clips pick. That's a price that Danny should've paid.

As for Tucker, I honestly don't think he even tried to get him, because he'd just take away playing time from the likes of Smart and Brown. Seems like Danny is really focused on developing those guys and keeping the Brooklyn picks, even at the expense of making us more competitive now, so that seems to be the logical explanation for Tucker.

Yeah, I think it would have been worth it to at least see how Horford and Ibaka fit together for the price Orlando was asking.

Even if it didn't work out, Ainge would still have an enormous cache of assets to work with, and he wouldn't have lost any of his best assets, probably not even any of his top 5 assets (completely excluding IT/Horford).  But if it had worked out fantastically, then you can reconsider negotiating with him in the summer.

I'm not terribly bothered Tucker wasn't pursued.  He'd have helped, no doubt, but I'm okay with letting Brown get the experience, he's worth the investment, even if he ends up being trade bait.

Yep. This is exactly where I'm at. I would've liked Tucker, especially at that price, but I'm okay with not getting him, especially if it means much more playing time for Brown. We need a more traditional big anyways. Tucker is ultimately just a bigger, less well-rounded version of Smart.

I've become increasingly agitated about the whole Ibaka deal, though, especially after our bigs failed us once again tonight.
I'm not sure but I'm guessing Ainge wants to pick up terrence Jones, who should shore up our frontcourt very well without giving up any assets,  so imo we should wait a bit till Ainge doesn't even pick a guy up from waivers. Then we can grill him

When do we know for sure if others have claimed him or not and if we can land him? I'm not up to speed on all of the waiver wire stuff. I'd love Jones here, and I think he'd actually fit well here. He'd pretty much take JJ's rotation spot since he's been pretty terrible lately due to his whole nose issue.
He'll be on waivers for 48 hours from the minute he's released, and teams can pick him up for the remaining salary he's owed. If no team picks him up he'll then be an FA. I certainly hope the C's waive a guy like Mickey and pick him up off waivers (he's making the vet minimum), he fills a need and can make horford a lot better with what he provides. Also, he's interested in joining the C's. Not bad to sign a guy that fills your needs and actually wants to be here
« Last Edit: February 25, 2017, 03:21:27 AM by Somebody »
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA