Grading Danny's offseason moves

[aingeforthree]

Of course it's an A. Probably A++

You upgraded 4 spots with HUGE additions. Far better players.

Irving > Thomas
Hayward > Bradley
Morris > Crowder
Baynes > every Center on team

Huge upgrades all around. Really isn't even close to being debatable. Maybe you could debate Morris/Crowder. Maybe.

Now add Tatum. LOL. Seriously, anybody giving something other than an A is strictly watching WWE & doesn't watch basketball.

[Fan from VT]

Of course it's an A. Probably A++

You upgraded 4 spots with HUGE additions. Far better players.

Irving > Thomas
Hayward > Bradley
Morris > Crowder
Baynes > every Center on team

Huge upgrades all around. Really isn't even close to being debatable. Maybe you could debate Morris/Crowder. Maybe.

Now add Tatum. LOL. Seriously, anybody giving something other than an A is strictly watching WWE & doesn't watch basketball.

I think it's ok to grade other than an A. Maybe an A or A+ would include having a better center and/or being able to keep some minimal protection (top 1-2) on the Nets pick, keeping Zizic, etc.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Irving is not clearly better than Thomas; Morris isn't clearly better than Crowder.

Tarheels are the great team ever.  LOL.  Seriously, idiots!

[aingeforthree]

Irving is not clearly better than Thomas; Morris isn't clearly better than Crowder.

Tarheels are the great team ever.  LOL.  Seriously, idiots!

Morris/Crowder debatable.

Every GM in the league takes Irving over Thomas. It isn't even close !!

Random fans on message boards with Thomas jerseys take Thomas over Irving.

[max215]

Fultz Trade: D+

Fultz was the clear #1 to me. I really like Tatum, but Fultz is special, and the value of the Lakers pick did not offset that gap.

Hayward Signing: A

Awesome player, excellent fit. It's an A instead of A+ to leave room for the signing of a Durant-type megastar, which would undoubtedly be a next-level success.

Bradley Trade: B+

I've never been high on Bradley, we avoided paying him, and picked up a good player on a great deal. Given Danny's lack of leverage at the time, this was a really solid move.

Kyrie Trade: F-

An unmitigated disaster.

Overall: D-

Of the three big moves, Hayward helps to offset the disastrous trades, but all that does is save the offseason from being a straight F.

[CelticsElite]

Fultz Trade: D+

Fultz was the clear #1 to me. I really like Tatum, but Fultz is special, and the value of the Lakers pick did not offset that gap.

Hayward Signing: A

Awesome player, excellent fit. It's an A instead of A+ to leave room for the signing of a Durant-type megastar, which would undoubtedly be a next-level success.

Bradley Trade: B+

I've never been high on Bradley, we avoided paying him, and picked up a good player on a great deal. Given Danny's lack of leverage at the time, this was a really solid move.

Kyrie Trade: F-

An unmitigated disaster.

Overall: D-

Of the three big moves, Hayward helps to offset the disastrous trades, but all that does is save the offseason from being a straight F.

why is the kyrie trade a disaster? We got a younger better version of IT on a cost controlled contract. Kyrie is a superstar ENTERING his prime. Were you in love with Crowder? He isn't making or breaking any team. The pick is a gamble at the end of the day, whereas kyrie is the sure thing. With brown, Ingram, and the Lakers pick, we still have a lot of gambles left. Kyrie wanted to play in boston. We got him. How often do superstars become available for trade?

[Csfan1984]

Well I'm changing my C- to a B-. DA took a guy that was hurt and on his last year of contract along with some asset and turned it into a top 10 player.

Now if we could swing Horford, Brown, Rozier, C's 1st and LA pick for Davis and Asik to make this an A+.

[max215]

Fultz Trade: D+

Fultz was the clear #1 to me. I really like Tatum, but Fultz is special, and the value of the Lakers pick did not offset that gap.

Hayward Signing: A

Awesome player, excellent fit. It's an A instead of A+ to leave room for the signing of a Durant-type megastar, which would undoubtedly be a next-level success.

Bradley Trade: B+

I've never been high on Bradley, we avoided paying him, and picked up a good player on a great deal. Given Danny's lack of leverage at the time, this was a really solid move.

Kyrie Trade: F-

An unmitigated disaster.

Overall: D-

Of the three big moves, Hayward helps to offset the disastrous trades, but all that does is save the offseason from being a straight F.

why is the kyrie trade a disaster? We got a younger better version of IT on a cost controlled contract. Kyrie is a superstar ENTERING his prime. Were you in love with Crowder? He isn't making or breaking any team. The pick is a gamble at the end of the day, whereas kyrie is the sure thing. With brown, Ingram, and the Lakers pick, we still have a lot of gambles left. Kyrie wanted to play in boston. We got him. How often do superstars become available for trade?

I don't believe Kyrie is better than Isaiah, and I don't believe he's a superstar. I've seen the pick and Crowder dismissed as unimportant by a few people, which is just insane. Top-5 picks are gambles in the sense that they're not sure things, but nothing is, and they are the most proven way to acquire high-end talent. That pick is pure gold, and it should have been untouchable for anyone short of a top-5-10 player. When it comes to Crowder, I'm honestly not sure if it's rationalization, a symptom of the weird Crowder backlash, or a lack of understanding of how valuable a 40% 3PT shooter who plays (at worst) average defense on a 3/21 deal is, but he's tremendously valuable. No, he's not "making or breaking a team," but role players are extremely important, and Crowder is a [dang] great one. All of these things taken together yield an unmitigated disaster.

Edit: And I didn't even remember Ante Zizic.

[CoachBo]

It rose from a B+ to an A last night.

What a weird feeling it is, praising Danny Ainge, but he really elevated his GM game this summer.