Woj: Boston has interest in Irving, no formal offer made yet. Cavs like Tatum

[The One]

Not comfortable throwing Cleveland a lifeline...just let them implode.

[GreenEnvy]

I'm not a proponent of replacing IT with him, but if we could move him for someone else, I'd do it.

He may not be the greatest or fill a need, but he's definitely a star. He's on a good contract and we would definitely be able to use other assets to get a PF/C for the future.

But I really don't see how we can make salaries work and not overpay.

[SHAQATTACK]

LOL...CAVS DREAM ON .....about Tatum ......thats CBS ....pride and joy prize .....the gift from the Nets that will destroy their dreams for the next 10 years.

Hayward and Tatum got a locker if nobody else does.

[SHAQATTACK]

Not just no, but HELLLLLLL no!

correct answer ..tp

[Bobshot]

I suspect any Celtics interest in Irving would be connected with their ability to sign IT long term to a max. Or their inability, I should say. They will have a tough time adding a 3rd star to a max contract. Irving has a friendlier contract. What is it? $18-20M per for the next 2 or 3 years.They would have an easier time fitting Irving under or near the cap than IT.

As for Tatum, I don't know what Ainge would think about that. They have to match salaries, and IT plus Crowder fits. IT plus Tatum would probably come close, too. Tatum has more protected years, but he's more of an unknown than Crowder, though he may have greater offensive upside. It depends on what Ainge and Stevens think.

Keep in mind they may well lose IT after next year if they don't deal him--if he insists on a max contract.

[green_bballers13]

Boston might have the best package, but CLE doesn't want to help Boston get better. Mostly b/c they will play each other in the ECF. If Lebron loses to Boston in the playoffs, he might be more likely to change locales (though I do think Lebron will retire as a Cav).

I think Denver is a good spot for Kyrie. Any type of combo including Garry Harris/Mudiay/Jamal Murray/Faried/Barton/Hernangomez/Trey Lyles + picks could get this done. Cleveland improves their bench and overall roster, and won't have to spend a ton, allowing them to somehow pull of a trade/signing for another top player willing to play in CLE with Lebron.

I think Dallas makes sense. Dennis Smith and non-Dirk change. Cuban clearly doesn't want to lose games and bottom out.

Sacramento, Minnesota, SAS, and LAC all seem like good fits for Kyrie.

They are also all in the West. If I was running CLE, I wouldn't trade Irving to the East, b/c I don't think we have seen his top gear yet. Hate to see the guy get to the next level against you in the playoffs.

[Moranis]

I've been saying since his demand broke that Thomas, Crowder, Rozier, and Boston's 1st for Irving makes a lot of sense for both teams.  I doubt it happens but would be reasonable

[saltlover]

Boston might have the best package, but CLE doesn't want to help Boston get better. Mostly b/c they will play each other in the ECF. If Lebron loses to Boston in the playoffs, he might be more likely to change locales (though I do think Lebron will retire as a Cab.)

I think Denver is a good spot for Kyrie. Any type of combo including Garry Harris/Mudiay/Jamal Murray/Faried/Barton/Hernangomez/Trey Lyles + picks could get this done. Cleveland improves their bench and overall roster, and won't have to spend a ton, allowing them to somehow pull of a trade/signing for another top player willing to play in CLE with Lebron.

I think Dallas makes sense. Dennis Smith and non-Dirk change. Cuban clearly doesn't want to lose games and bottom out.

Sacramento, Minnesota, SAS, and LAC all seem like good fits for Kyrie.

They are also all in the West. If I was running CLE, I wouldn't trade Irving to the East, b/c I don't think we have seen his top gear yet. Hate to see the guy get to the next level against you in the playoffs.

The whole point of the rumor is that the Cavs aren't going to make a trade with keeping LeBron in mind.  If LeBron told the Cavs, "yeah, I'm in if you make X move", then that would be the trade that gets made.  But LeBron wants to keep his options open, reportedly.  That's perfectly reasonable for him, but accordingly the Cavs are going to make the trade they feel gives them the most value long-term, since LeBron might leave no matter what.  If that's with the Celtics, so be it.  Their goal is to not have a complete teardown like the last time LeBron left, but to continue to field a competive team, hopefully infused with some younger talent.

Now, as many have said, ultimately a deal with the Celtics doesn't seem to make much sense.  Even if one concedes that Irving is an upgrade over IT (which is a highly debatable point), he's not much of an upgrade.  Adding in a recent top 3 pick like Brown or Tatum is a huge addition in price.  And even adding one of those with IT still isn't enough in outgoing salary, so you'd need to add in still another player, who would either be a rotation-level vet or an additional prospect on a rookie deal (or even two such players, depending how much said players make and whether or not Kyrie waived his trade kicker).  The alternative is pairing IT and Kyrie, but that's a gamble in its own right.

If a deal between the Celtics and Cavs doesn't happen, I doubt it will be because the teams are afraid to trade with one another.  It will be due to the fact that the Celtics can't match Kyrie's salary in a way that gives the Cavs what they're looking for without being a massive overpay.

[Tr1boy]

If it cane down to it... Who would you rather give up. Brown or tatum?

[Celts Fan 508]

If it cane down to it... Who would you rather give up. Brown or tatum?

Brown, but most likely I wouldn't unload either of them.

[mmmmm]

Woj doesn't have any good Celtics sources, that has been evident in the past. Whatever he's hearing is from other teams. My guess is Cleveland is putting out this rumor to try to get Phoenix to give up Jackson along with Bledsoe

This^

The only sensible way it makes any sense for Danny to be involved in an Irving trade is possibly as a 3rd-party facilitator -- which is something he likes to do.

But no direct trade scenario makes any sense.   This smells very much like spin put out by CLE to try to bump the price.

[Roy H.]

I've been saying since his demand broke that Thomas, Crowder, Rozier, and Boston's 1st for Irving makes a lot of sense for both teams.  I doubt it happens but would be reasonable

I'd do that, even though it might hurt this year.

The idea of moving both IT and Tatum is a non-starter though.

[Granath]

I've been saying since his demand broke that Thomas, Crowder, Rozier, and Boston's 1st for Irving makes a lot of sense for both teams.  I doubt it happens but would be reasonable

That's because you're Moranis. Others would prefer to not have a brain dead, locker room cancer loser on the team.

[mmmmm]

I suspect any Celtics interest in Irving would be connected with their ability to sign IT long term to a max. Or their inability, I should say. They will have a tough time adding a 3rd star to a max contract. Irving has a friendlier contract. What is it? $18-20M per for the next 2 or 3 years.They would have an easier time fitting Irving under or near the cap than IT.

Let's be clear, even if we give IT an absolute max-value, full 5-year contract, Irving will cost more over the next 6 years.

In fact, he will cost more in 5 of the 6 years.   And he will cost more in total just to cover the next two years.

Irving would be only be cheaper in year 2 from now (the year IT would be in the first year of his new contract).   Because after that, then Irving would jump back up above him in cost with his _own_ new max contract.

So can we please stop with the "friendlier contract" mythology?   Irving's contract doesn't present any real-world advantage over Thomas'.   In either case, we will be over the cap from now on.  In either case we will go over the tax in year 2.   The only difference is that we'd be over by a lesser amount in year 2 but then over by a lot more in subsequent years.

[kozlodoev]

I've been saying since his demand broke that Thomas, Crowder, Rozier, and Boston's 1st for Irving makes a lot of sense for both teams.  I doubt it happens but would be reasonable

I'd do that, even though it might hurt this year.

The idea of moving both IT and Tatum is a non-starter though.

Talent-wise, we're on top in this deal. Will be a tough sell though.

However, I don't think we can put a credible starting lineup with Thomas, Irving AND Hayward. Someone has to play defense.