IT Complaints: Fallout & Future (merged IT kvetching threads)

[CoachBo]

You don't preemptively trade away players playing at IT's level just because you're afraid their next contract might not be great. That might make sense from a value-maximization standpoint but it makes no sense when you consider that you're dealing with a team of actual human beings. Think of what kind of message that sends to the other players.

Besides, who would give up anything of value for him? I doubt we'd be able to get ourselves anything better than a pick that's just barely in the top 10, if that. Is an extra middling asset really worth ruining team chemistry?

Ainge isn't as dumb as the legion of Thomas-bashers on this board.

[Tr1boy]

“For the most part I try to let [Brad Stevens] coach,” Thomas said. “He’s a very smart dude and he does a good job on the substitution patterns. But, like, tonight I didn’t say nothing to him. Maybe I should have, but it is what it is. We’ll figure it out.”

I guess IT4 thinks he is like Lebron to Blatt/Lue...

[PhoSita]

Nah.

[rollie mass]

i got a question did the celts manage their timeouts against the suns properly
-if we had a timeout it  possibly would have been a different result-

[CoachBo]

Stevens has been getting kind of cute with these all-deep-bench lineups.

That said, neither IT nor Stevens is responsible for the lack of frontcourt depth on the team.  Zeller has regressed since two years ago; Amir Johnson is significantly diminished from just last year, let alone what he was a few years ago, and he can only give you twenty minutes a night.  Kelly Olynyk is as inconsistent as he's ever been.  Horford is the only reliable guy on both ends, but he's not going to do all the heavy lifting for you.  Without Horford, this team has nothing up front.

This. TP.

[CelticGuardian]

I don't believe his intentions were to cause any rifts because quite clearly, Stevens, like a lot of coaches in the NBA, can do everything right up to a point and then out of no-where decide to get cute and make a costly decision because of pride, inclusion, or an ill-advised idea that James Young will prove useful. I am literally asking myself if Stevens is aware that the trade deadline has passed and James Young's services will no longer be required here in Boston.

IT knows this is his team and it's a player's league. He's the talent here, we NEED him. He'll get away with this slew of criticisms based on the fact. You can feel the frustration as there is a lot of pressure and faith in him from top down in the organization and they want him to earn his money.

LOL. TP.

Regarding IT, my suspicion is that he may be starting to see—as Ray Allen once did—that he is, in one sense, just a single cog in the complex machine that is Danny's Master Plan (hereafter referred to as the DMP).

This isn't to say that Danny doesn't genuinely care about IT, or Ray, or any other of his players; I think he does.

But individual players ultimately play second fiddle to the DMP, because Danny's goal—in fact, his job description—is to win titles, which necessitates making the team as good as possible for as long as possible in each era. The New Big Three era is over, and now he's building the next era. He pulled off a great move getting Stevens as coach, and a big heist in getting IT on the cheap, and I think the quicker-than-expected success over the last couple of seasons presented an opportunity to get even better even quicker, so he signed Horford, then tried like heck to complete the nearly overnight makeover with a KD signing but came up just short.

So for now, he's fallen back on "keep the team good, competitive, and improving" until he can make his next big strike. It didn't happen at this year's trade deadline, but it could happen on draft night, or over the summer; either way, Danny's main concern is maintaining the team's upward trajectory while maintaining roster flexibility so he can strike at the right time and in the right way—that is, making the right moves to ensure as large a title window as possible, certainly longer than the title window of the New Big Three era.

I'm sure that, in Danny's ideal world, that window would align perfectly with IT's rise to stardom (and even the remainder of Horford's prime), but if it doesn't, his sentiment is probably, "Oh well." He's building something, which means that from his point of view, it doesn't matter if Player X is part of the building's foundation, part of its support structure, or the capstone—what matters is the overall building and how that turns out.

That can rub players (and fans) the wrong way, but that's the way it is with Danny. In the DMP, no player is bigger than the team or long-term success.

If I were Isaiah Thomas and I'm having an insane MVP-caliber season, I would feel slighted by Ainge and the Celtics for not recognizing the specialness of this scoring onslaught and cashing in those assets to get the necessary help on the believe that I am THE GUY. 

What if IT walks because he didn't believe Ainge did enough to help him even with all the big-time assets the C's hold?

Then the winning will stop, or at least we'll take a giant step back. Smart is not the player IT is, he's not scoring 30 a game, Lonzo Ball is not scoring 30 a game, Fultz might. Then you can kiss the FA meetings good bye as the team will lose relevancy. I think Ainge should prioritize Isaiah and his happiness in Boston. We have to secure our most important piece, the other dominoes will fall when they need to but right now our current best player is airing the dirty laundry, has been overwhelming underpaid, and can become a distraction...

[Jvalin]

Never liked him as a player. No matter what he does on offense, his defense is horrible. In all honesty, he may be the worst defender in the league.

We already have Smart to run the point. No need for Fultz/Ball to have a significant impact from day one.

[incoherent]

Well one thing for sure, IT is being 100% completely honest with his feelings.  You cant fault him for that.... but, I would almost prefer he just lie to the media and talk to Brad behind closed doors to discuss his substitution patterns.

I personally feel IT has the right to talk to Brad about the sub patterns.  Just do it then, dont complain to the media after a loss about it.

The next time IT drops 15 in the 4th and we get a win, I want to hear him say "Coach had great rotations tonight".  Because you cant take all the credit when we win, and dish out blame when we lose.

[adam.jones614]

Oh well. Players complain to the media after tough losses all the time. I'm always more concerned when players aren't like this after a loss. Those losses are supposed to hurt. If a player doesn't take them personally then get him off my team. Brad was in the wrong and props to IT for calling it out.

The crowder thing seems to me to be misunderstood. At least the way I took it it sounded more like he was scolding himself for not looking and giving up the 3.

[Tr1boy]

Oh well. Players complain to the media after tough losses all the time. I'm always more concerned when players aren't like this after a loss. Those losses are supposed to hurt. If a player doesn't take them personally then get him off my team. Brad was in the wrong and props to IT for calling it out.

The crowder thing seems to me to be misunderstood. At least the way I took it it sounded more like he was scolding himself for not looking and giving up the 3.

What??

[mmmmm]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

The problem with this whole line of thinking is that start-for-star trades are very hard to make happen and very rare.

Trades of any kind involving star players are rare as it is.  The few that occur tend to be star-for-assets type trades as one side decides to rebuild.   Star-for-star trades happen something like once every few decades.    For that sort of deal to occur, you need to have two teams at the same time needing or wanting to trade away a star player AND wanting to replace them with the type of star player the other team is trying to move.   That's just plain going to be a rare kismet.  On top of that, you now have to factor in all the usual logistical difficulties involved with making trades.

So forget any notion of trading IT for a 'star'.  A more common way that stars get traded is for assets:  Picks, young players, tradable contracts.  You might get a 'good player', but that usually happens as a surprise bonus from a package of assets.  For example, Jae Crowder emerging as a really, really good player out of the Rondo liquidation package.

Further, Danny is almost certainly not going to suddenly be trying to trade Thomas just because Thomas spoke a couple of truths-best-kept-in-the-lockerroom during post-loss frustration moments with microphones shoved in his face.

[mmmmm]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

I agree with this, AB should be cheaper than IT to re-sign . we need smart and AB to defend aagainst these great guards in the league.

Smart     Fultz
AB.           Jaylen
Hayward.  Jaylen
Crowder     Yabu
Horford.     Zicic

Brk 18 pick , plus whatever we get back for IT

If Boston trades IT, then they will have to defend against him as well.

[mef730]

IT will apologize within the next 24 hours, we'll chalk it up to his competitive spirit and then move on to whatever the next thing to complain about is.

Mike

[oldtype]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

The problem with this whole line of thinking is that start-for-star trades are very hard to make happen and very rare.

Trades of any kind involving star players are rare as it is.  The few that occur tend to be star-for-assets type trades as one side decides to rebuild.   Star-for-star trades happen something like once every few decades.    For that sort of deal to occur, you need to have two teams at the same time needing or wanting to trade away a star player AND wanting to replace them with the type of star player the other team is trying to move.   That's just plain going to be a rare kismet.  On top of that, you now have to factor in all the usual logistical difficulties involved with making trades.

So forget any notion of trading IT for a 'star'.  A more common way that stars get traded is for assets:  Picks, young players, tradable contracts.  You might get a 'good player', but that usually happens as a surprise bonus from a package of assets.  For example, Jae Crowder emerging as a really, really good player out of the Rondo liquidation package.

Further, Danny is almost certainly not going to suddenly be trying to trade Thomas just because Thomas spoke a couple of truths-best-kept-in-the-lockerroom during post-loss frustration moments with microphones shoved in his face.

I challenge anyone to propose a viable IT trade that wouldn't make us all puke.

[Darío SpanishFan]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

I agree with this, AB should be cheaper than IT to re-sign . we need smart and AB to defend aagainst these great guards in the league.

Smart     Fultz
AB.           Jaylen
Hayward.  Jaylen
Crowder     Yabu
Horford.     Zicic

Brk 18 pick , plus whatever we get back for IT

If Boston trades IT, then they will have to defend against him as well.

And he will defend our guards, don't forget. Imagine Smart in the low post with him.

About your other reasonings, I don't think we can get "a star" for IT in a trade, but for a player who may be out of place and can flourish with us. Crowder, as you say, would be a good example, maybe a rising project such as one of the Hernangómez brothers or simply a fine role player (Aaron Gordon's level) that complements our system and a pick for future trades.