Author Topic: George: Going to LA talk is "overstated"  (Read 3467 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: George: Going to LA talk is "overstated"
« Reply #60 on: July 13, 2017, 04:18:13 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16998
  • Tommy Points: 807
It wasnt Danny fault that Pritchard couldn't and wouldn't wait..Pacers are determined to send him out West so nothing Danny can do about it...Danny I believe would have given up the Laker pick and or Smart. Really AB Crowder Smart and or the Laker pick arr just really that much better than what they got from OKC.
Sure it was.  Ainge wouldn't commit.  A commitment doesn't mean an immediate trade.  The trade with OKC wasn't finalized for a week.

Why would Ainge commit without Hayward? If Hayward doesnt come you have just traded your 3 best defenders or maybe 2 best defenders for him. If you are trying to go all in the plan would have to be Hayward and George. Indy wanted the deal they saw before them and took it. Im not sure how one can blame Danny for wanting to hold the space open for Hayward and then getting Hayward.
You should always trade Crowder, Smart, and a non-premium pick for Paul George.  It should never be a question.  Ainge totally blew the negotiations and Paul George should be a Celtic.  Boston still could have acquired Hayward by just waiting to make it official.  All Ainge had to say was, we have a deal no matter what, just let me use my cap space first before we make it official.  Thomas, Hayward, George, and Horford is absolutely a contender even with vet minimum types surrounding them (but they would have still have Tatum and Brown).  That team would not only push Cleveland, but might actually be favored against them and would be a real threat to Golden State (though GS would still be the favorite).  Ainge blew this summer by not acquiring George for what the rumored price was.  If Hayward didn't sign, then you end up with a nice solid 4 some of Thomas, Bradley, George, and Horford, which is better than the current 4 some anyway.  Paul George would be by far the best player on the Celtics.  He is a 2 way star.  A legit top 10 player in the league.  A guy that can not only guard the James', Durant's, and Leonard's of the world, but also forces those guys to play defense.


I havent read past the 1st sentence because what you wrote is not possible and still get Hayward. You would have to trade AB, Smart, and Crowder to make the money work.
Not if you don't sign Hayward.  To sign Hayward you had to trade 1 of them anyway, so trading all 3 isn't a big deal if you land George and Hayward (and you didn't have to trade Bradley to Indy, he could have gone to another team for a draft pick or something).


You would have to trade all 3 in order to maintain the option of signing Hayward. Its not a matter of signing him. Im talking about even having the option to sign him would be gone if you just trade Smart and Crowder. Or fine you could trade Crowder, Smart, Brown, Rozier, and Jackson. That would work but you will still trade AB to make room for Hayward.
You didn't have to trade Bradley to Indiana though.  Indiana wanted Smart, Crowder, and a non-premium 1st (say Boston's 2018 1st).  Boston would have had to trade Bradley in the same trade, but that could have been to a 3rd team that wanted Bradley.  So maybe Boston calls up Philly (pre-Redick) and tries to get a pick out of them or the rights to someone.  So Boston trades Bradley, Crowder, Smart, and its 2018 1st for George and a PHI 2nd (or something like that).  Boston then waives Mickey and Jackson and trades Rozier to acquire Hayward.  If however, Hayward decided to stay in Utah, then Boston can just trade Crowder, Smart, and the 2018 1st for George and absorb the rest of George's salary into the left over cap space and thus wouldn't have had to trade Bradley and would have been able to keep Olynyk (if it wanted to). 

The point is for what Indy wanted for George there was absolutely no reason for Ainge to not make the commitment to acquire him.  You figure the other stuff out later.

So again the net result is exactly what I said. In the deal you have to trade Bradley, Smart and Crowder to keep open a spot for Hayward. You are changing your story from they could have kept Bradley to they could have just traded him to a 3rd team. Also that deal doesnt work cap wise.
No.  Indy wanted Smart, Crowder, and a 1st.  That is all you had to commit to give up.  Bradley only has to be included if Boston lands Hayward (because it had the cap space to absorb George without signing Hayward and doing things like waiving Zeller and giving up the Amir and JJ cap holds).  It then finds a trade for Bradley with no salary coming back, but only does that if Hayward commits.  If Hayward doesn't commit you don't trade Bradley.

You are moving the goal post. What you are saying is correct if George was traded after Hayward made a decision. That wasnt the case. The trade was made before so in the real world contect you have to trade AB in the deal to keep the slot open. You are trying to play both sides of the argument by saying well you would only have to trade AB after if you got George after Hayward committed.

The fact is George was traded before FA started hence you couldnt do any of what you are talking about unless you trade AB in the deal or trade Brown and other parts as I have outlined. Ainge could not force them to wait on a deal. Nor did Ainge want to commit to a deal that restructed the team when he had the option of adding a player of similar talent.
Committing to make a deal and making a deal are not the same thing.  the trade to OKC wasn't finalized for a week (you know after the moratorium ended).  Boston did not have to give up Bradley until it had a commitment from Hayward.  It didn't need to move Bradley first to get a commitment from Hayward.  We know this is true, because this is exactly what happened.  All Ainge had to say to Pritchard was, we have a deal no matter what happens with Hayward, but just give me a week to chase that down and/or otherwise use some of the cap space.

Ugh ok fine. Lets do some math. PG makes 19,508,958. Crowder and Smart combined make 11,334,137 for a difference of 8,174,821. Lets put AB at a simple 8.8 million. What we know is that if they renounced everyone they were short 3 million which meant they couldnt just trade Rozier (who makes 2 million) to get to that number. The key is they are 3 millions short.

Now if you add AB to the George trade you are taking in about 625,000 less that you sent out. Great. Now you dump Rozier for cash or a pick. You cant trade him for a player. Now you have gotten rid of Rozier who makes 2 million. You are still short 375,000. NOT A MAX SLOT.

So the only players you have left on the team are IT, Horford, Brown and Tatum and you are trading one of them to free up more money or Hayward takes the small cut. You are hard capped and cant bring over Yabu. You cant sign any of 2nd guys this year unless they go on the 2 way contract. So you have 6 maybe 7 guys depending on Zizic, one room exemption guy and a bunch of vet minimums.

The only way the Smart and Crowder for PG works and Hayward gets the max and you still have the ability to sign players is if you renounced everyone. Then traded AB for Morris. Then signed Tatum, Zizic, and Yabu. Used the room exemption. Then made the PG trade. Indy didnt want to wait for that. Boston didnt want to deal all of that for a player that might leave.

I dont know why there is a need to bang on Ainge for not getting George.
Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey left the team 300k short, you save 700k in the trade.  The math isn't that hard.  It was a no brainer to make the commitment and worry about waiving some fringe NBA players and trading the current 3rd string point guard.  George + Hayward is worth not having Smart, Crowder, Bradley, and Rozier.  It is a clear upgrade.  The team then fills in the roster with the room exception (Baynes), vet and rookie minimums.  At the end of the day a 4 some of Thomas, Hayward, George, and Horford is a real threat to the Cavs and makes Boston a real and legit contender.  Thomas, Hayward, Horford and Smart is not on that same level even with some other quality bench level players like Morris, Crowder, and Rozier.


No I guess the math is too hard. YOu are using the current numbers situation to the Pre FA situation. These numbers are not the same. I laid out the numbers above. But its really whatever. if you are upset that the deal didnt get done thats totally your perrogative. I can only run through the numbers as I see them and the cap experts have laid out.
No I'm not at all.  The reason Bradley, Smart, or Crowder had to be traded was because just eliminating Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey, left Boston 300k short of the max.  Bradley, Smart, and Crowder make 700k or so more than George does.  Thus you remove those 6 players and you have room for both Hayward and George.  But you don't have to get rid of the first 3 or Bradley if Hayward didn't sign because Indiana didn't want them and you had the cap room to absorb the rest of George. 
Ohio State 2014/15 National Champions.

Re: George: Going to LA talk is "overstated"
« Reply #61 on: July 13, 2017, 06:44:09 PM »

Offline Phantom255x

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6214
  • Tommy Points: 468
  • On To Banner 18!
I'm fine with not trading for RENTAL George.

Can you imagine if we gave up 2018 LAL Pick to Indiana in the package, then that pick lands #2 (which IND then gets, we don't), AND George went to Lakers a year later..  :o :o :o

We'd be the laughingstock of the league... oh and people would call for Ainge's head.

Just because he says "OKC feels like home" and what not shouldn't just guarantee he's not leaving in a year lol. Too risky.

Re: George: Going to LA talk is "overstated"
« Reply #62 on: July 13, 2017, 09:58:51 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16998
  • Tommy Points: 807
I'm fine with not trading for RENTAL George.

Can you imagine if we gave up 2018 LAL Pick to Indiana in the package, then that pick lands #2 (which IND then gets, we don't), AND George went to Lakers a year later..  :o :o :o

We'd be the laughingstock of the league... oh and people would call for Ainge's head.

Just because he says "OKC feels like home" and what not shouldn't just guarantee he's not leaving in a year lol. Too risky.
Indiana didn't require the LAL pick.  They wanted Crowder, Smart, and non-premium picks (you know things like Boston's 2018 1st). 
Ohio State 2014/15 National Champions.

Re: George: Going to LA talk is "overstated"
« Reply #63 on: July 13, 2017, 10:12:49 PM »

Offline Bobshot

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1400
  • Tommy Points: 83
George (or his agent) really screwed his tradeability when he implied he wanted to sign with the Lakers as a FA.  That was predictably hyped up in media (as is anything Lakers).

You know that Magic is going to be aggressive with FAs next summer. He'll be after George and James.

It isn't clear where Ainge stood with George. I suspect he thought he couldn't fit George and Hayward under the cap and make other needed improvements up front. And he knew he had Hayward, was drafting another scorer in Tatum, and wanted to improve his rebounding and D. He also figured that Magic would make a serious run at George next summer.

I think he opted for more depth vs adding another star.

Re: George: Going to LA talk is "overstated"
« Reply #64 on: July 14, 2017, 09:20:46 AM »

Offline clevelandceltic

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 550
  • Tommy Points: 28
It wasnt Danny fault that Pritchard couldn't and wouldn't wait..Pacers are determined to send him out West so nothing Danny can do about it...Danny I believe would have given up the Laker pick and or Smart. Really AB Crowder Smart and or the Laker pick arr just really that much better than what they got from OKC.
Sure it was.  Ainge wouldn't commit.  A commitment doesn't mean an immediate trade.  The trade with OKC wasn't finalized for a week.

Why would Ainge commit without Hayward? If Hayward doesnt come you have just traded your 3 best defenders or maybe 2 best defenders for him. If you are trying to go all in the plan would have to be Hayward and George. Indy wanted the deal they saw before them and took it. Im not sure how one can blame Danny for wanting to hold the space open for Hayward and then getting Hayward.
You should always trade Crowder, Smart, and a non-premium pick for Paul George.  It should never be a question.  Ainge totally blew the negotiations and Paul George should be a Celtic.  Boston still could have acquired Hayward by just waiting to make it official.  All Ainge had to say was, we have a deal no matter what, just let me use my cap space first before we make it official.  Thomas, Hayward, George, and Horford is absolutely a contender even with vet minimum types surrounding them (but they would have still have Tatum and Brown).  That team would not only push Cleveland, but might actually be favored against them and would be a real threat to Golden State (though GS would still be the favorite).  Ainge blew this summer by not acquiring George for what the rumored price was.  If Hayward didn't sign, then you end up with a nice solid 4 some of Thomas, Bradley, George, and Horford, which is better than the current 4 some anyway.  Paul George would be by far the best player on the Celtics.  He is a 2 way star.  A legit top 10 player in the league.  A guy that can not only guard the James', Durant's, and Leonard's of the world, but also forces those guys to play defense.


I havent read past the 1st sentence because what you wrote is not possible and still get Hayward. You would have to trade AB, Smart, and Crowder to make the money work.
Not if you don't sign Hayward.  To sign Hayward you had to trade 1 of them anyway, so trading all 3 isn't a big deal if you land George and Hayward (and you didn't have to trade Bradley to Indy, he could have gone to another team for a draft pick or something).


You would have to trade all 3 in order to maintain the option of signing Hayward. Its not a matter of signing him. Im talking about even having the option to sign him would be gone if you just trade Smart and Crowder. Or fine you could trade Crowder, Smart, Brown, Rozier, and Jackson. That would work but you will still trade AB to make room for Hayward.
You didn't have to trade Bradley to Indiana though.  Indiana wanted Smart, Crowder, and a non-premium 1st (say Boston's 2018 1st).  Boston would have had to trade Bradley in the same trade, but that could have been to a 3rd team that wanted Bradley.  So maybe Boston calls up Philly (pre-Redick) and tries to get a pick out of them or the rights to someone.  So Boston trades Bradley, Crowder, Smart, and its 2018 1st for George and a PHI 2nd (or something like that).  Boston then waives Mickey and Jackson and trades Rozier to acquire Hayward.  If however, Hayward decided to stay in Utah, then Boston can just trade Crowder, Smart, and the 2018 1st for George and absorb the rest of George's salary into the left over cap space and thus wouldn't have had to trade Bradley and would have been able to keep Olynyk (if it wanted to). 

The point is for what Indy wanted for George there was absolutely no reason for Ainge to not make the commitment to acquire him.  You figure the other stuff out later.

So again the net result is exactly what I said. In the deal you have to trade Bradley, Smart and Crowder to keep open a spot for Hayward. You are changing your story from they could have kept Bradley to they could have just traded him to a 3rd team. Also that deal doesnt work cap wise.
No.  Indy wanted Smart, Crowder, and a 1st.  That is all you had to commit to give up.  Bradley only has to be included if Boston lands Hayward (because it had the cap space to absorb George without signing Hayward and doing things like waiving Zeller and giving up the Amir and JJ cap holds).  It then finds a trade for Bradley with no salary coming back, but only does that if Hayward commits.  If Hayward doesn't commit you don't trade Bradley.

You are moving the goal post. What you are saying is correct if George was traded after Hayward made a decision. That wasnt the case. The trade was made before so in the real world contect you have to trade AB in the deal to keep the slot open. You are trying to play both sides of the argument by saying well you would only have to trade AB after if you got George after Hayward committed.

The fact is George was traded before FA started hence you couldnt do any of what you are talking about unless you trade AB in the deal or trade Brown and other parts as I have outlined. Ainge could not force them to wait on a deal. Nor did Ainge want to commit to a deal that restructed the team when he had the option of adding a player of similar talent.
Committing to make a deal and making a deal are not the same thing.  the trade to OKC wasn't finalized for a week (you know after the moratorium ended).  Boston did not have to give up Bradley until it had a commitment from Hayward.  It didn't need to move Bradley first to get a commitment from Hayward.  We know this is true, because this is exactly what happened.  All Ainge had to say to Pritchard was, we have a deal no matter what happens with Hayward, but just give me a week to chase that down and/or otherwise use some of the cap space.

Ugh ok fine. Lets do some math. PG makes 19,508,958. Crowder and Smart combined make 11,334,137 for a difference of 8,174,821. Lets put AB at a simple 8.8 million. What we know is that if they renounced everyone they were short 3 million which meant they couldnt just trade Rozier (who makes 2 million) to get to that number. The key is they are 3 millions short.

Now if you add AB to the George trade you are taking in about 625,000 less that you sent out. Great. Now you dump Rozier for cash or a pick. You cant trade him for a player. Now you have gotten rid of Rozier who makes 2 million. You are still short 375,000. NOT A MAX SLOT.

So the only players you have left on the team are IT, Horford, Brown and Tatum and you are trading one of them to free up more money or Hayward takes the small cut. You are hard capped and cant bring over Yabu. You cant sign any of 2nd guys this year unless they go on the 2 way contract. So you have 6 maybe 7 guys depending on Zizic, one room exemption guy and a bunch of vet minimums.

The only way the Smart and Crowder for PG works and Hayward gets the max and you still have the ability to sign players is if you renounced everyone. Then traded AB for Morris. Then signed Tatum, Zizic, and Yabu. Used the room exemption. Then made the PG trade. Indy didnt want to wait for that. Boston didnt want to deal all of that for a player that might leave.

I dont know why there is a need to bang on Ainge for not getting George.
Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey left the team 300k short, you save 700k in the trade.  The math isn't that hard.  It was a no brainer to make the commitment and worry about waiving some fringe NBA players and trading the current 3rd string point guard.  George + Hayward is worth not having Smart, Crowder, Bradley, and Rozier.  It is a clear upgrade.  The team then fills in the roster with the room exception (Baynes), vet and rookie minimums.  At the end of the day a 4 some of Thomas, Hayward, George, and Horford is a real threat to the Cavs and makes Boston a real and legit contender.  Thomas, Hayward, Horford and Smart is not on that same level even with some other quality bench level players like Morris, Crowder, and Rozier.


No I guess the math is too hard. YOu are using the current numbers situation to the Pre FA situation. These numbers are not the same. I laid out the numbers above. But its really whatever. if you are upset that the deal didnt get done thats totally your perrogative. I can only run through the numbers as I see them and the cap experts have laid out.
No I'm not at all.  The reason Bradley, Smart, or Crowder had to be traded was because just eliminating Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey, left Boston 300k short of the max.  Bradley, Smart, and Crowder make 700k or so more than George does.  Thus you remove those 6 players and you have room for both Hayward and George.  But you don't have to get rid of the first 3 or Bradley if Hayward didn't sign because Indiana didn't want them and you had the cap room to absorb the rest of George.

At this point Im not sure what the argument is here so lets just go with your narrative that Danny is a screw up and should have made the deal.