Author Topic: #1 for Paul George  (Read 13498 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #45 on: May 28, 2017, 09:28:30 AM »

Offline CsBanner18

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 358
  • Tommy Points: 21
We're not trading #1 for PG13 or Butler.. Wake up people!

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #46 on: May 28, 2017, 10:27:27 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
Crowder, Zeller, and Jerebko, and the number 1 pick for Paul George, the #16, and Indiana's draft pick in 2020.

Who says no?

Ainge because he wants to play in the NBA.  Indy because that is a crappy offer.   I think our fanbase values Crowder higher than the rest of the NBA.

I am not one of the guys who think Crowder is a glue guy.  His leadership was lacking the CAVS and WASH series.   He is not a top ten SF as some have suggested.   I think Crowder is expendable and I wager Ainge does too.   

His value went down the moment he saw himself as an elite scorer and started chucking bad shots more.   While his three improved.   He can't finish if anyone is on him that well because of lack of lift and inability to get past his man.   This was obvious at times during the playoffs.   I liked his D, and when he takes less shots as his playoff shooting when other teams started defending during the playoffs was not good and regressed.

His FG % dropped from  .463% to .435%
His 2 P shooting dropped from  .398% to .352%
His 3 P shooting dropped  from .54%  to .50%
His eFG dropped dropped from .57% to  .513%
His FT shooting went up from .811% to .833% impressive.
His FTA dropped from 3 to 2.7 per game

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/crowdja01.html

He is a regular season workhouse, lunch pail kind of guy who plays a position full of elite scorers and he is not one.  I applaud his work ethic on improving his shot but a star in the making he is not.   29TH in scoring.  He was 13th in 3P% though.  56th in FG%.   37th in 2P%.  18th in eFG%.   41st in rebounds too.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&year_min=2017&year_max=2017&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&force%3Apos_is=1&c6mult=1.0&order_by=ws

Not having IT to draw the D, really hurt his game.  But my point is Indy is not going to think that he is stud in this deal.   He is a top 20 SF perhaps. 

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #47 on: May 28, 2017, 10:53:48 AM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
Crowder, Zeller, and Jerebko, and the number 1 pick for Paul George, the #16, and Indiana's draft pick in 2020.

Who says no?

No.

I wouldnt trade the #1 straight for PG, let alone do the trade you propose. Do that, and the chances are that after a couple of years you ll be banging your head against the wall.

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #48 on: May 28, 2017, 11:17:42 AM »

Offline jaketwice

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1384
  • Tommy Points: 102
George plays a position susceptible to upgrade. We have 4 PGs on the roster.

George has proven he can play in the NBA. Fultz is far from a certainty.

IT is our best player. Whatever anyone says, we can't keep all these guards.

George - in addition to playing a position we can upgrade, is a scorer who could take the load off IT. He is also a good defender.

Obviously he signs an extension before we do it - or we don't do it. That's baked into the idea.  Come on.


Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #49 on: May 28, 2017, 11:43:59 AM »

Offline hodgy03038

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3701
  • Tommy Points: 440
  • Marcus Smart #1 Fan
What I find kind of funny is that we were all waiting for the lotto balls and praying we get the #1 and we did! As soon as we get it people are looking to trade it for a player or trade down. If we got the #3 pick we would all be p---ed and trying to figure out who or what we can package to get the #1. WE GOT THE #1 PICK. Let's enjoy it.

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #50 on: May 28, 2017, 12:06:38 PM »

Offline konkmv

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1518
  • Tommy Points: 104
Keep fultz smart brown zizic and the 2018 nets pick...  That's our future...  Thank you

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #51 on: May 28, 2017, 12:27:33 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
I wouldn't include Brown but I would trade 1 for George after Hayward or Griffin was signed as a free agent because in that scenario I don't think George leaves in free agency


It would be ridiculous to trade for the Lake-loving George by thinking he won't leave in free agency.
You mean like Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Demarr DeRozan, and countless other players that were supposed to go to LA.  Winning matters.  More dollars matter.  George has said numerous times he wants to win and that is the most important thing to him.  He isn't going to leave a contender to go to a dumpster fire.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #52 on: May 28, 2017, 12:33:55 PM »

Offline hodgy03038

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3701
  • Tommy Points: 440
  • Marcus Smart #1 Fan
I wouldn't include Brown but I would trade 1 for George after Hayward or Griffin was signed as a free agent because in that scenario I don't think George leaves in free agency


It would be ridiculous to trade for the Lake-loving George by thinking he won't leave in free agency.
You mean like Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Demarr DeRozan, and countless other players that were supposed to go to LA.  Winning matters.  More dollars matter.  George has said numerous times he wants to win and that is the most important thing to him.  He isn't going to leave a contender to go to a dumpster fire.

Not without an extension up front. I wouldn't trust him just like DeAndre Jordan dumped Dallas. Not worth the risk.

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #53 on: May 28, 2017, 02:07:38 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
I wouldn't include Brown but I would trade 1 for George after Hayward or Griffin was signed as a free agent because in that scenario I don't think George leaves in free agency


It would be ridiculous to trade for the Lake-loving George by thinking he won't leave in free agency.
You mean like Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Demarr DeRozan, and countless other players that were supposed to go to LA.  Winning matters.  More dollars matter.  George has said numerous times he wants to win and that is the most important thing to him.  He isn't going to leave a contender to go to a dumpster fire.

Not without an extension up front. I wouldn't trust him just like DeAndre Jordan dumped Dallas. Not worth the risk.
then you don't make the trade because he can't sign an extension up front without leaving a ton of money on the table.  It is a wholly unreasonable request.  Love told Cleveland he would re-up and that is why Cleveland made the trade.  Love re-upped because you know winning matters (so does all that extra money you get by re-signing rather than leaving). 

If you guys don't want to win just say it rather than making up reasons not to trade a pick that you hope someday might be half the player Paul George is.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #54 on: May 28, 2017, 02:16:20 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 36776
  • Tommy Points: 2961
i want George mor than Hayward ,  but no way you can trade Fultz away for him.   Keep Fultz .....

find a way to add George with the other pick and an extension deal is a MUST

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #55 on: May 28, 2017, 02:53:59 PM »

Offline Granath

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2154
  • Tommy Points: 567
I wouldn't include Brown but I would trade 1 for George after Hayward or Griffin was signed as a free agent because in that scenario I don't think George leaves in free agency


It would be ridiculous to trade for the Lake-loving George by thinking he won't leave in free agency.
You mean like Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Demarr DeRozan, and countless other players that were supposed to go to LA.  Winning matters.  More dollars matter.  George has said numerous times he wants to win and that is the most important thing to him.  He isn't going to leave a contender to go to a dumpster fire.

Not without an extension up front. I wouldn't trust him just like DeAndre Jordan dumped Dallas. Not worth the risk.
then you don't make the trade because he can't sign an extension up front without leaving a ton of money on the table.  It is a wholly unreasonable request.  Love told Cleveland he would re-up and that is why Cleveland made the trade.  Love re-upped because you know winning matters (so does all that extra money you get by re-signing rather than leaving). 

If you guys don't want to win just say it rather than making up reasons not to trade a pick that you hope someday might be half the player Paul George is.

That's some really poor logic, Moronis. I'm a fan of PG13 but there's no way that most anyone would trade the #1 overall pick in a strong draft for anyone who might be a one year rental.

#1 - Doing so entirely blows cap flexibility. Once you get him that's it - you're set with that team. Is it good enough to beat Cleveland and GS in the next 2-3 years before Horford is too old? Do you really think that going all in right now is the right move?

#2 - You have no idea if PG13 wants to resign with the Celtics. For all we know, the Lakers win 40 games next year and become a more attractive FA destination. Or the Clippers (there are two teams in LA you know) remain relevant enough to attract him. The contract duration HAS to be taken into account and you can't waive your hand and say this isn't a factor and still be taken seriously.

#3 - If you think that the #1 overall pick will only be "half the player" that PG13 is then you're in the extreme minority. Nice job trying to downplay it but most experts are in agreement that Fultz on the low side is a 20+ ppg scorer and on the high side potentially one of the best in the NBA. Neither of those is just half of PG13.

#4 - We just drafted a player #3 last year that plays the exact same position. It would be much more logical to move Jaylen Brown + something else to get PG13 than it would Fultz.

It has nothing to do with "not wanting to win". It has everything to do with building a dynasty, cap management and timing. Treating the game like it's NBA 2K17 might work on your PS4 but it's not a great way to build a team in the real world.
Jaylen Brown will be an All Star in the next 5 years.

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #56 on: May 28, 2017, 03:13:54 PM »

Offline CelticSince83

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 542
  • Tommy Points: 42
I wouldn't include Brown but I would trade 1 for George after Hayward or Griffin was signed as a free agent because in that scenario I don't think George leaves in free agency


It would be ridiculous to trade for the Lake-loving George by thinking he won't leave in free agency.
You mean like Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Demarr DeRozan, and countless other players that were supposed to go to LA.  Winning matters.  More dollars matter.  George has said numerous times he wants to win and that is the most important thing to him.  He isn't going to leave a contender to go to a dumpster fire.

Not without an extension up front. I wouldn't trust him just like DeAndre Jordan dumped Dallas. Not worth the risk.
then you don't make the trade because he can't sign an extension up front without leaving a ton of money on the table.  It is a wholly unreasonable request.  Love told Cleveland he would re-up and that is why Cleveland made the trade.  Love re-upped because you know winning matters (so does all that extra money you get by re-signing rather than leaving). 

If you guys don't want to win just say it rather than making up reasons not to trade a pick that you hope someday might be half the player Paul George is.

That's some really poor logic, Moronis. I'm a fan of PG13 but there's no way that most anyone would trade the #1 overall pick in a strong draft for anyone who might be a one year rental.

#1 - Doing so entirely blows cap flexibility. Once you get him that's it - you're set with that team. Is it good enough to beat Cleveland and GS in the next 2-3 years before Horford is too old? Do you really think that going all in right now is the right move?

#2 - You have no idea if PG13 wants to resign with the Celtics. For all we know, the Lakers win 40 games next year and become a more attractive FA destination. Or the Clippers (there are two teams in LA you know) remain relevant enough to attract him. The contract duration HAS to be taken into account and you can't waive your hand and say this isn't a factor and still be taken seriously.

#3 - If you think that the #1 overall pick will only be "half the player" that PG13 is then you're in the extreme minority. Nice job trying to downplay it but most experts are in agreement that Fultz on the low side is a 20+ ppg scorer and on the high side potentially one of the best in the NBA. Neither of those is just half of PG13.

#4 - We just drafted a player #3 last year that plays the exact same position. It would be much more logical to move Jaylen Brown + something else to get PG13 than it would Fultz.

It has nothing to do with "not wanting to win". It has everything to do with building a dynasty, cap management and timing. Treating the game like it's NBA 2K17 might work on your PS4 but it's not a great way to build a team in the real world.

What is half of Paul George anyway?  Terrence Ross?  CJ Miles?  Yeah, we were all super hyped to win the lottery with the hopes it might produce 0.5 Paul George. 

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #57 on: May 28, 2017, 05:07:13 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
I wouldn't include Brown but I would trade 1 for George after Hayward or Griffin was signed as a free agent because in that scenario I don't think George leaves in free agency


It would be ridiculous to trade for the Lake-loving George by thinking he won't leave in free agency.
You mean like Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Demarr DeRozan, and countless other players that were supposed to go to LA.  Winning matters.  More dollars matter.  George has said numerous times he wants to win and that is the most important thing to him.  He isn't going to leave a contender to go to a dumpster fire.

Not without an extension up front. I wouldn't trust him just like DeAndre Jordan dumped Dallas. Not worth the risk.
then you don't make the trade because he can't sign an extension up front without leaving a ton of money on the table.  It is a wholly unreasonable request.  Love told Cleveland he would re-up and that is why Cleveland made the trade.  Love re-upped because you know winning matters (so does all that extra money you get by re-signing rather than leaving). 

If you guys don't want to win just say it rather than making up reasons not to trade a pick that you hope someday might be half the player Paul George is.

That's some really poor logic, Moronis. I'm a fan of PG13 but there's no way that most anyone would trade the #1 overall pick in a strong draft for anyone who might be a one year rental.

#1 - Doing so entirely blows cap flexibility. Once you get him that's it - you're set with that team. Is it good enough to beat Cleveland and GS in the next 2-3 years before Horford is too old? Do you really think that going all in right now is the right move?

#2 - You have no idea if PG13 wants to resign with the Celtics. For all we know, the Lakers win 40 games next year and become a more attractive FA destination. Or the Clippers (there are two teams in LA you know) remain relevant enough to attract him. The contract duration HAS to be taken into account and you can't waive your hand and say this isn't a factor and still be taken seriously.

#3 - If you think that the #1 overall pick will only be "half the player" that PG13 is then you're in the extreme minority. Nice job trying to downplay it but most experts are in agreement that Fultz on the low side is a 20+ ppg scorer and on the high side potentially one of the best in the NBA. Neither of those is just half of PG13.

#4 - We just drafted a player #3 last year that plays the exact same position. It would be much more logical to move Jaylen Brown + something else to get PG13 than it would Fultz.

It has nothing to do with "not wanting to win". It has everything to do with building a dynasty, cap management and timing. Treating the game like it's NBA 2K17 might work on your PS4 but it's not a great way to build a team in the real world.
If you want to build a dynasty around Fultz then you dont sign Hayward in free agency and you trade Thomas so Fultz and Brown have free reign.  I'm perfectly fine with that course of action but if Ainge signs Hayward or Griffin it isn't to wait on a rookie it is to won now and that means Ainge is going to make moves using the young assets to increase the win now odds.

Boston can't just keep floating along trying to win and trying to build for the future.  They require different things to fully maximize either course of action.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #58 on: May 28, 2017, 05:15:55 PM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7640
  • Tommy Points: 441
I wouldn't include Brown but I would trade 1 for George after Hayward or Griffin was signed as a free agent because in that scenario I don't think George leaves in free agency


It would be ridiculous to trade for the Lake-loving George by thinking he won't leave in free agency.
You mean like Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Demarr DeRozan, and countless other players that were supposed to go to LA.  Winning matters.  More dollars matter.  George has said numerous times he wants to win and that is the most important thing to him.  He isn't going to leave a contender to go to a dumpster fire.

Not without an extension up front. I wouldn't trust him just like DeAndre Jordan dumped Dallas. Not worth the risk.
then you don't make the trade because he can't sign an extension up front without leaving a ton of money on the table.  It is a wholly unreasonable request.  Love told Cleveland he would re-up and that is why Cleveland made the trade.  Love re-upped because you know winning matters (so does all that extra money you get by re-signing rather than leaving). 

If you guys don't want to win just say it rather than making up reasons not to trade a pick that you hope someday might be half the player Paul George is.

That's some really poor logic, Moronis. I'm a fan of PG13 but there's no way that most anyone would trade the #1 overall pick in a strong draft for anyone who might be a one year rental.

#1 - Doing so entirely blows cap flexibility. Once you get him that's it - you're set with that team. Is it good enough to beat Cleveland and GS in the next 2-3 years before Horford is too old? Do you really think that going all in right now is the right move?

#2 - You have no idea if PG13 wants to resign with the Celtics. For all we know, the Lakers win 40 games next year and become a more attractive FA destination. Or the Clippers (there are two teams in LA you know) remain relevant enough to attract him. The contract duration HAS to be taken into account and you can't waive your hand and say this isn't a factor and still be taken seriously.

#3 - If you think that the #1 overall pick will only be "half the player" that PG13 is then you're in the extreme minority. Nice job trying to downplay it but most experts are in agreement that Fultz on the low side is a 20+ ppg scorer and on the high side potentially one of the best in the NBA. Neither of those is just half of PG13.

#4 - We just drafted a player #3 last year that plays the exact same position. It would be much more logical to move Jaylen Brown + something else to get PG13 than it would Fultz.

It has nothing to do with "not wanting to win". It has everything to do with building a dynasty, cap management and timing. Treating the game like it's NBA 2K17 might work on your PS4 but it's not a great way to build a team in the real world.
If you want to build a dynasty around Fultz then you dont sign Hayward in free agency and you trade Thomas so Fultz and Brown have free reign.  I'm perfectly fine with that course of action but if Ainge signs Hayward or Griffin it isn't to wait on a rookie it is to won now and that means Ainge is going to make moves using the young assets to increase the win now odds.

Boston can't just keep floating along trying to win and trying to build for the future.  They require different things to fully maximize either course of action.
There you go again with the "all the players have to be the same age" routine.  It's ridiculous.

Re: #1 for Paul George
« Reply #59 on: May 28, 2017, 05:21:00 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
I wouldn't include Brown but I would trade 1 for George after Hayward or Griffin was signed as a free agent because in that scenario I don't think George leaves in free agency


It would be ridiculous to trade for the Lake-loving George by thinking he won't leave in free agency.
You mean like Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook, Demarr DeRozan, and countless other players that were supposed to go to LA.  Winning matters.  More dollars matter.  George has said numerous times he wants to win and that is the most important thing to him.  He isn't going to leave a contender to go to a dumpster fire.

Not without an extension up front. I wouldn't trust him just like DeAndre Jordan dumped Dallas. Not worth the risk.
then you don't make the trade because he can't sign an extension up front without leaving a ton of money on the table.  It is a wholly unreasonable request.  Love told Cleveland he would re-up and that is why Cleveland made the trade.  Love re-upped because you know winning matters (so does all that extra money you get by re-signing rather than leaving). 

If you guys don't want to win just say it rather than making up reasons not to trade a pick that you hope someday might be half the player Paul George is.

That's some really poor logic, Moronis. I'm a fan of PG13 but there's no way that most anyone would trade the #1 overall pick in a strong draft for anyone who might be a one year rental.

#1 - Doing so entirely blows cap flexibility. Once you get him that's it - you're set with that team. Is it good enough to beat Cleveland and GS in the next 2-3 years before Horford is too old? Do you really think that going all in right now is the right move?

#2 - You have no idea if PG13 wants to resign with the Celtics. For all we know, the Lakers win 40 games next year and become a more attractive FA destination. Or the Clippers (there are two teams in LA you know) remain relevant enough to attract him. The contract duration HAS to be taken into account and you can't waive your hand and say this isn't a factor and still be taken seriously.

#3 - If you think that the #1 overall pick will only be "half the player" that PG13 is then you're in the extreme minority. Nice job trying to downplay it but most experts are in agreement that Fultz on the low side is a 20+ ppg scorer and on the high side potentially one of the best in the NBA. Neither of those is just half of PG13.

#4 - We just drafted a player #3 last year that plays the exact same position. It would be much more logical to move Jaylen Brown + something else to get PG13 than it would Fultz.

It has nothing to do with "not wanting to win". It has everything to do with building a dynasty, cap management and timing. Treating the game like it's NBA 2K17 might work on your PS4 but it's not a great way to build a team in the real world.
If you want to build a dynasty around Fultz then you dont sign Hayward in free agency and you trade Thomas so Fultz and Brown have free reign.  I'm perfectly fine with that course of action but if Ainge signs Hayward or Griffin it isn't to wait on a rookie it is to won now and that means Ainge is going to make moves using the young assets to increase the win now odds.

Boston can't just keep floating along trying to win and trying to build for the future.  They require different things to fully maximize either course of action.
There you go again with the "all the players have to be the same age" routine.  It's ridiculous.
Also, players can develop as bench players until they are good enough to dislodge a player in front of them. You don't have to turn over the team to a bunch of rookies to develop them. Complete fallacy that is.