NBA 2017: Fleecing the East

[sperry]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I get that, but this is just another example of Ainge making a bad move over the last year or so. 

 

I don't think it is a bad move though. They had to clear space to add Hayward. Considering they didn't want to trade their guys to a contender who could use a one year rental on Avery Bradley, getting a useful rotation player is not a bad outcome at all.

[DanteGabriel]

One or the other of Bradley or Smart was going to go. I think Bradley is a better player, but Smart is still developing and seems to come up with a handful of plays that only a suicidal asshole who totally commits his body could pull off every game. Of course, he has made some really bad plays too, but I think he's doing less of that. Now, though, I'm seeing rumors that they might be shopping Smart to New York, which makes me wonder which guards besides Isaiah they actually want to keep.

I like that they got depth at power forward. Hopefully they can get something for Crowder too.

[Relic]

Meanwhile the Knicks inked an offer sheet for Tim Hardaway Jr to the une of 71 million dollars for 4 years. WHAT THE FUUUUUUUCK?? Will our suffering never end??

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, sperry said:

 

I don't think it is a bad move though. They had to clear space to add Hayward. Considering they didn't want to trade their guys to a contender who could use a one year rental on Avery Bradley, getting a useful rotation player is not a bad outcome at all.

There were other less important players they could have moved for a salary dump, and Bradley should have been used in a deal to get Butler or George. Overall it was a less than ideal move, And Ainge has been racking those up over the last year. The Horford deal was terrible, Hayward isn't a max player, the draft trade makes no sense since they'll lose IT now and have a ton of wings, etc. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

46 minutes ago, Relic said:

Meanwhile the Knicks inked an offer sheet for Tim Hardaway Jr to the une of 71 million dollars for 4 years. WHAT THE FUUUUUUUCK?? Will our suffering never end??

There's only one way to break the curse. 

[Rhom]

Have yet to see any discussion here on the cluster going on in Cleveland.  Reports are that ownership low balled Billyps for the GM job by maybe as much as half the going rate.  

They are doing almost everything they can to run LeBron off again aren't they?

 

[Jaime L]

1 hour ago, Relic said:

Meanwhile the Knicks inked an offer sheet for Tim Hardaway Jr to the une of 71 million dollars for 4 years. WHAT THE FUUUUUUUCK?? Will our suffering never end??

 

https://twitter.com/sxric/status/883168382799028224

[Relic]

7 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

 

https://twitter.com/sxric/status/883168382799028224

Want to know what makes this shit worse? Two seasons ago the Knicks had close to the worst record in the league. With one game to go we had a 25 percent chance of getting the number one pick,  and therefor Karl Anthony Towns.

So what happens?

Knicks play Atlanta in the last game of the season. And fucking Tim Hardaway fucking Junior hits the game winning three at the buzzer for the Knicks. We dropped out of running for best odds on the number 1 pick,  and drafted 4th  overall. The most Knicks thing ever. 

[Rhom]

Trust the process Relic... trust the process.

[Jaime L]

15 minutes ago, Relic said:

Want to know what makes this shit worse? Two seasons ago the Knicks had close to the worst record in the league. With one game to go we had a 25 percent chance of getting the number one pick,  and therefor Karl Anthony Towns.

So what happens?

Knicks play Atlanta in the last game of the season. And fucking Tim Hardaway fucking Junior hits the game winning three at the buzzer for the Knicks. We dropped out of running for best odds on the number 1 pick,  and drafted 4th  overall. The most Knicks thing ever. 

Holy shit. I guess that heroic display is the reason the Knicks were willing to pay anything to bring him back. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Quit your lecherous leering at KAT!

[Maithanet]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

There were other less important players they could have moved for a salary dump, and Bradley should have been used in a deal to get Butler or George. Overall it was a less than ideal move, And Ainge has been racking those up over the last year. The Horford deal was terrible, Hayward isn't a max player, the draft trade makes no sense since they'll lose IT now and have a ton of wings, etc. 

I don't think that in isolation that the Bradley deal is a bad one.  Morris can play, even if he isn't as good as Bradley.  Someone had to go, and Hayward + Morris is better than Bradley + whatever wing free agent could have been signed for $18 million (I don't even know who that would be...)

Hayward is a max player.  He is solid on offense and defense.  He is approximately the 25th best player in the league, and that is definitely worthy of a max deal.

Obviously Horford was a really bad deal because of it's length.  If Horford had been signed so a deal like Paul Millsap's this offseason (3 years, $90 million), then Horford would help Boston.  But to have a declining player on the roster for so long at top dollar prices really limits things. 

The other big mistake Ainge made, as I see it, is sticking with Thomas at point.  I have always been down on Thomas, and seeing him put up the herculean effort to beat the Wizards in the semifinals didn't change that opinion.  Thomas looks to me like a classic player that can look great on a bad team, look good on a good team, and yet cannot be a key part of a championship squad.  His defensive limitations cannot be ignored, and the Cavs loved having him on the court in the ECF.  If the Celtics make it to play GSW in the finals at any point, Curry and Thompson (and hell, Livingston) are going to have a field day.  Can his offense make up for it?  I honestly don't see how.  He's great offensively, but if you put more playmakers on Boston, his offensive impact is going to be reduced, while his defensive problems don't change.  And in addition, while he is still a pretty young guy, I don't see his game aging well, since he takes a lot of hard hits, and his defense will only erode as his legs wear out. 

So in conclusion, I think if someone needs to be shipped out to maintain salary cap flexibility, I would have planned on dumping Thomas, rather than Bradley.  It would make the Celtics worse in the short term since there's no way Fultz or whoever is going to provide what Thomas does.  But in the long term, I think they'd come out stronger.

[Rhom]

4 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

So in conclusion, I think if someone needs to be shipped out to maintain salary cap flexibility, I would have planned on dumping Thomas, rather than Bradley.  It would make the Celtics worse in the short term since there's no way Fultz or whoever is going to provide what Thomas does.  But in the long term, I think they'd come out stronger.

That's the thing... I think Ainge is trying to pull off the near impossible feat of growing for the future while still being pretty good right now.

I don't know how well that typically plays out though.

[briantw]

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Bradley was arguably their second best player at the end of the season. Also, it appears they had to kick in a second round pick, and they're getting a Morris brother back too. 

I think he was their best player.  I know people will say Thomas, but Thomas is absolute dog shit defensively, whereas Bradley is elite, or at least borderline elite, on that end.  Thomas, to me, isn't a guy who can win in the playoffs.  He's too easy to game plan for when you have a week off before the series and a day between every game.  Bradley is the type of guy who helps you win playoff games.

[DanteGabriel]

2 hours ago, Relic said:

Meanwhile the Knicks inked an offer sheet for Tim Hardaway Jr to the une of 71 million dollars for 4 years. WHAT THE FUUUUUUUCK?? Will our suffering never end??

"Take THAT, Phil Jackson!"

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

48 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I don't think that in isolation that the Bradley deal is a bad one.  Morris can play, even if he isn't as good as Bradley.  Someone had to go, and Hayward + Morris is better than Bradley + whatever wing free agent could have been signed for $18 million (I don't even know who that would be...)

But here's the thing, Boston has more playable wings then just about every other team, including the last two number three overall picks. I'd support the move more if they had kept the pick and taken Fultz, but as of now it doesn't make a ton of sense and their roster is constructed in a very odd way.

49 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Hayward is a max player.  He is solid on offense and defense.  He is approximately the 25th best player in the league, and that is definitely worthy of a max deal.

He's worth a max deal if your goal is to be competitive. He's not if your goal is to be the champion. 

53 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Obviously Horford was a really bad deal because of it's length.  If Horford had been signed so a deal like Paul Millsap's this offseason (3 years, $90 million), then Horford would help Boston.  But to have a declining player on the roster for so long at top dollar prices really limits things. 

Agreed, and I think the Celtics should have accumulated as much young talent as possible and waited both LeBron and that awful contract out. 

57 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

The other big mistake Ainge made, as I see it, is sticking with Thomas at point.  I have always been down on Thomas, and seeing him put up the herculean effort to beat the Wizards in the semifinals didn't change that opinion.  Thomas looks to me like a classic player that can look great on a bad team, look good on a good team, and yet cannot be a key part of a championship squad.  His defensive limitations cannot be ignored, and the Cavs loved having him on the court in the ECF.  If the Celtics make it to play GSW in the finals at any point, Curry and Thompson (and hell, Livingston) are going to have a field day.  Can his offense make up for it?  I honestly don't see how.  He's great offensively, but if you put more playmakers on Boston, his offensive impact is going to be reduced, while his defensive problems don't change.  And in addition, while he is still a pretty young guy, I don't see his game aging well, since he takes a lot of hard hits, and his defense will only erode as his legs wear out. 

So in conclusion, I think if someone needs to be shipped out to maintain salary cap flexibility, I would have planned on dumping Thomas, rather than Bradley.  It would make the Celtics worse in the short term since there's no way Fultz or whoever is going to provide what Thomas does.  But in the long term, I think they'd come out stronger.

Spot on!

The one thing I'll say that's in the Celtics favor is that they still have a lot of assets. If I was Ainge, I'd be trying to temp the Bucks to ship Giannis at the end of next season if the situation continues to deteriorate in Milwaukee. 

35 minutes ago, briantw said:

I think he was their best player.  I know people will say Thomas, but Thomas is absolute dog shit defensively, whereas Bradley is elite, or at least borderline elite, on that end.  Thomas, to me, isn't a guy who can win in the playoffs.  He's too easy to game plan for when you have a week off before the series and a day between every game.  Bradley is the type of guy who helps you win playoff games.

IDK if he was better than Thomas, but he was certainly more valuable. Thomas can be a great sixth man on a championship team, but he can't lead a team through the playoffs, and if you want to win a championship, he probably can't even be your third best player. Which again goes back to my second comment, you can't max out guys who are not elite superstars. There are probably less than 10 guys in the league that I would personally offer the max to. 

[sperry]

Giannis is locked in for 4 more years. Zero chance he's available. in 2 years, sure maybe you're looking to trade him then. But not now.

[briantw]

31 minutes ago, sperry said:

Giannis is locked in for 4 more years. Zero chance he's available. in 2 years, sure maybe you're looking to trade him then. But not now.

Even then, there's a chance he's eligible for the super max when his current deal is up, and he's not turning that down if Milwaukee is willing to offer it.

46 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

IDK if he was better than Thomas, but he was certainly more valuable. Thomas can be a great sixth man on a championship team, but he can't lead a team through the playoffs, and if you want to win a championship, he probably can't even be your third best player. Which again goes back to my second comment, you can't max out guys who are not elite superstars. There are probably less than 10 guys in the league that I would personally offer the max to. 

Yeah, Thomas may be better offensively, but I think Bradley's defense makes him the more valuable overall player.  And, as you said, Thomas just can't be the best player on a team that wants to win anything.  You can't have your best player be a 5'7" score-first point guard who can't play defense.  It just doesn't work.  The Cavs easily took Thomas out of the game to the point where the team was actually much better without him.  With Thomas, the Cavs were just steamrolling.  Without him, they actually had to try, although to be fair that may be more because they had to completely change their offensive and defensive game plan mid-series than anything else.  

[sperry]

I don't think you can have Thomas as anything more than a 6th man on a good team. He's the Enes Kanter of guards, IMO. If Donovan wanted to, he could feature Kanter in the offense and he'd get 25 and 12 every game. Except they'd get destroyed by the league's good teams.

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, sperry said:

I don't think you can have Thomas as anything more than a 6th man on a good team.

Let's not go nuts.  The Celtics were undeniably a good team.  Even if they were weaker than most conference finalists, they were the second best team in the East, and at worst the 5th best team in the league (after GSW, CLE, SA and HOU).