Author Topic: If we have to trade AB, how about to Chicago for Portis and/or #16?  (Read 3024 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47947
  • Tommy Points: 2906
Don't get me wrong, I love AB. He has some flaws in his weaker BBIQ and lack of passing and ball handling abilities, but he's a very ideal fit for the modern NBA at the wing.

All that being said, he seems to be the obvious fall guy for our upcoming cap issues and the addition of Fultz. So if we trade him this offseason to make room for a max contract, why not Chicago? Reading some of their beat writers' articles, they seem to think the Bulls would want him due to being an ideal fit between Rondo and Butler, assuming Wade opts out or they trade him. We also know just how much that team likes to "reload" rather than "rebuild," so a trade for a vet like AB would be right up their alley.

So would something like Portis and/or their number 16 pick this year work for you? I'm not sure we could get both for Bradley (using Teague for the number 12 pick last year as a gauge), but I think either one would be really beneficial for the C's off the bench next year. Portis would GREATLY help our rebounding issue, and I still think he has a ton of potential - Z-Bo like potential. On the other hand, with the 16th pick we could take a chance on Giles, who woukd be a high risk/high reward type of scenario for us.

Either one of them would still work with trading AB for a max contract free agent signing, but both of them would probably require an additional trade or someone added to this trade. So what about something like AB, Rozier (who Chicago has long coveted), and one of our 2nds this year for Portis, 16, and a future protected pick (like top-10 or so)?

I think I'd do it. Rozier will lose most of his playing time with the additions of Fultz/Hayward and Brown playing more at the 2 anyways, and both Portis and Giles could actually help us both now and in the future. The alternative would be to trade AB for some future draft consideration, which I don't think we'll get this kind of value on. I would prefer just an AB trade for one of Portis or the 16 pick (and other assets as needed), though, but I'm not sure what else would need to be added to that deal on Chicago's part.

Offline Smokeeye123

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2374
  • Tommy Points: 156
If we are trading a guard it's going to be for frontcourt help. Amir/Olynyk/Jerebko are all but gone and we are desperate for help there.

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
The ONLY reason to trade AB is to make room for a max free agent. Doing so requires the Celtics to take back zero in salary (even then it still probably isn't enough room).  It should be for draft picks in 2018 or beyond.

Otherwise you keep Bradley.  It's okay if he walks next year, guys.  If you think it isn't, then you should never complain about Ainge not trading picks and prospects for expirings, because letting him walk is essentially the other side of the same coin.

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7640
  • Tommy Points: 441
The Giles part of the deal would be a little intriguing.   I'd hope to get someone better than Portis though.  I don't think he's very good.

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47947
  • Tommy Points: 2906
The ONLY reason to trade AB is to make room for a max free agent. Doing so requires the Celtics to take back zero in salary (even then it still probably isn't enough room).  It should be for draft picks in 2018 or beyond.

Otherwise you keep Bradley.  It's okay if he walks next year, guys.  If you think it isn't, then you should never complain about Ainge not trading picks and prospects for expirings, because letting him walk is essentially the other side of the same coin.

Sure, but I don't think Danny would see it that way, especially with someone like Bradley who might bring back a valuable piece or draft compensation. I seriously doubt that he lets him just walk. It's not like this is Sully or KO we're talking about here.

Further, you're assuming that trading Bradley means keeping KO I suspect. I wasn't assuming as much in this scenario, because I think KO prices himself out of our comfortability range no matter if we have space for him or not. So not including KO in our space, then you can bring back some salary, especially the $1.5 M or so (per RealGM) that Portis will be making next year or the draft pick compensation for pick 16.

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
I'd rather do, say, Rozier and Demetrius Jackson for 16 and 38, but idt that that would be enough for Chicago, and as far as Giles, I have nothing against the guy, but the best place for him would be Phoenix, imo, as putting someone with such a documented injury history in the hands of our "medical staff" would be a recipe for disaster, imo.  Actually, putting anyone in the hands of this team's "doctors" would be bad enough, really :-\, which makes absolutely zero sense when you consider that Boston has many of the best hospitals and research centers in the country. Ugh.

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8113
  • Tommy Points: 549
The ONLY reason to trade AB is to make room for a max free agent. Doing so requires the Celtics to take back zero in salary (even then it still probably isn't enough room).  It should be for draft picks in 2018 or beyond.

Otherwise you keep Bradley.  It's okay if he walks next year, guys.  If you think it isn't, then you should never complain about Ainge not trading picks and prospects for expirings, because letting him walk is essentially the other side of the same coin.

Sure, but I don't think Danny would see it that way, especially with someone like Bradley who might bring back a valuable piece or draft compensation. I seriously doubt that he lets him just walk. It's not like this is Sully or KO we're talking about here.

Further, you're assuming that trading Bradley means keeping KO I suspect. I wasn't assuming as much in this scenario, because I think KO prices himself out of our comfortability range no matter if we have space for him or not. So not including KO in our space, then you can bring back some salary, especially the $1.5 M or so (per RealGM) that Portis will be making next year or the draft pick compensation for pick 16.
Assuming Bradley is not going to be resigned, I'd agree with trading him for the #16.  Indiana for the #18 and Bucks for the #17 (assuming Monroe opts out) would seem possible too.  There will be a lot of big men to choose from with one of those picks. 

If we're going to pickup Hayward in free agency, we could also move Crowder.  It would be great if we could trade them both to jump into the top 10 (Knicks?, Twolves?).   

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 43397
  • Tommy Points: 3150
I ran this trade in trade machine and it works but I'm not sure how I feel about it and it adds salary: Bradley, Zeller, Crowder for Melo and Willy Hernangomez. Melo can play power forward and at this point it's probably where he'd play best. Hernangomez is a young big that can play. If we can't sign anyone this could be a good trade to try and move forward against The Cavs next year. Melo would only wave that trade clause if he really wants a shot at a title. Maybe New York has to send us a 2nd rounder or something as well.

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2493
  • Tommy Points: 199
The ONLY reason to trade AB is to make room for a max free agent. Doing so requires the Celtics to take back zero in salary (even then it still probably isn't enough room).  It should be for draft picks in 2018 or beyond.

Otherwise you keep Bradley.  It's okay if he walks next year, guys.  If you think it isn't, then you should never complain about Ainge not trading picks and prospects for expirings, because letting him walk is essentially the other side of the same coin.

Sure, but I don't think Danny would see it that way, especially with someone like Bradley who might bring back a valuable piece or draft compensation. I seriously doubt that he lets him just walk. It's not like this is Sully or KO we're talking about here.

Further, you're assuming that trading Bradley means keeping KO I suspect. I wasn't assuming as much in this scenario, because I think KO prices himself out of our comfortability range no matter if we have space for him or not. So not including KO in our space, then you can bring back some salary, especially the $1.5 M or so (per RealGM) that Portis will be making next year or the draft pick compensation for pick 16.
If you're allowing yourself leeway with returning salary then you can definitely get more than Portis and #16. You could probably look at using him in a sign and trade for Griffin.

Offline Darío SpanishFan

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 981
  • Tommy Points: 141
The ONLY reason to trade AB is to make room for a max free agent. Doing so requires the Celtics to take back zero in salary (even then it still probably isn't enough room).  It should be for draft picks in 2018 or beyond.

Otherwise you keep Bradley.  It's okay if he walks next year, guys.  If you think it isn't, then you should never complain about Ainge not trading picks and prospects for expirings, because letting him walk is essentially the other side of the same coin.

Sure, but I don't think Danny would see it that way, especially with someone like Bradley who might bring back a valuable piece or draft compensation. I seriously doubt that he lets him just walk. It's not like this is Sully or KO we're talking about here.

I think (and hope) Danny sees Bradley as essential for the future success of this team. He's grown as a player in Boston, with all this culture, has improved every year since he was a rookie and hopefully won't command as much as IT in 2018.

The odd man out may be tinier than him.

Re: If we have to trade AB, how about to Chicago for Portis and/or #16?
« Reply #10 on: May 25, 2017, 05:04:07 AM »

Offline Jvalin

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3737
  • Tommy Points: 737
Portis + #16 would be nice. If we had to choose between Portis and the pick, I'd rather trade with the Sixers for Saric. Having said that, I don't want us to trade Bradley.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2017, 05:34:48 AM by Jvalin »

Re: If we have to trade AB, how about to Chicago for Portis and/or #16?
« Reply #11 on: May 25, 2017, 05:10:20 AM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3141
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
I ran this trade in trade machine and it works but I'm not sure how I feel about it and it adds salary: Bradley, Zeller, Crowder for Melo and Willy Hernangomez. Melo can play power forward and at this point it's probably where he'd play best. Hernangomez is a young big that can play. If we can't sign anyone this could be a good trade to try and move forward against The Cavs next year. Melo would only wave that trade clause if he really wants a shot at a title. Maybe New York has to send us a 2nd rounder or something as well.
Doesn't Melo have a no trade clause? Would he allow this one through?
Pretty sure him and his wife love the New York lifestyle. Also has a pretty nasty contract.
'23 Historical Draft: Orlando Magic.

PG: Terry Porter (90-91) / Steve Francis (00-01)
SG: Joe Dumars (92-93) / Jeff Hornacek (91-92) / Jerry Stackhouse (00-01)
SF: Brandon Roy (08-09) / Walter Davis (78-79)
PF: Terry Cummings (84-85) / Paul Millsap (15-16)
C: Chris Webber (00-01) / Ralph Sampson (83-84) / Andrew Bogut (09-10)

Re: If we have to trade AB, how about to Chicago for Portis and/or #16?
« Reply #12 on: May 25, 2017, 06:51:47 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
So would something like Portis and/or their number 16 pick this year work for you? I'm not sure we could get both for Bradley (using Teague for the number 12 pick last year as a gauge), but I think either one would be really beneficial for the C's off the bench next year. Portis would GREATLY help our rebounding issue, and I still think he has a ton of potential - Z-Bo like potential. On the other hand, with the 16th pick we could take a chance on Giles, who woukd be a high risk/high reward type of scenario for us.

I think anytime your giving up the best player in a trade, you are losing the trade.

AB is a better player than Portis and most likely better than the 16 pick.  I don't know why folks think he is expendable.   He is an elite defender and his offense has improved every year.  He is not the reason we are losing games although he shot poorly in the first half of the last game.

Re: If we have to trade AB, how about to Chicago for Portis and/or #16?
« Reply #13 on: May 25, 2017, 07:34:45 AM »

Offline PAOBoston

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8098
  • Tommy Points: 533
Quote
So would something like Portis and/or their number 16 pick this year work for you? I'm not sure we could get both for Bradley (using Teague for the number 12 pick last year as a gauge), but I think either one would be really beneficial for the C's off the bench next year. Portis would GREATLY help our rebounding issue, and I still think he has a ton of potential - Z-Bo like potential. On the other hand, with the 16th pick we could take a chance on Giles, who woukd be a high risk/high reward type of scenario for us.

I think anytime your giving up the best player in a trade, you are losing the trade.

AB is a better player than Portis and most likely better than the 16 pick.  I don't know why folks think he is expendable.   He is an elite defender and his offense has improved every year.  He is not the reason we are losing games although he shot poorly in the first half of the last game.
I don't think anyone ever said that he was the reason they were losing games or wasn't a good great defender. It's the fear of what he will command for his next contract and the likelihood the C's can keep him or risk losing him for nothing.

Next offseason is going to have a lot of very difficult decisions for Ainge as of right now (Smart, IT, Bradley). Realistically, they cannot keep everyone, especially if they sign a max guy this summer.

But with Ainge, who really knows? He might legit let IT walk and re-sign Bradley and Smart. Or just let all of them walk.

Re: If we have to trade AB, how about to Chicago for Portis and/or #16?
« Reply #14 on: May 25, 2017, 07:50:55 AM »

Offline Surferdad

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14456
  • Tommy Points: 972
  • "He fiddles...and diddles..."
The Giles part of the deal would be a little intriguing.   I'd hope to get someone better than Portis though.  I don't think he's very good.
Agreed.  He was thoroughly unimpressive in that 1st round series.  Yeah, made a few shots, so what.