|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 30, 2017 19:03:40 GMT -5
I was talking about Nurkic... their salaries were a match so I just used him as an example of someone the Celtics could look to go after in an asset relocation. Guard for bigman type thing - not arguing their values were equal
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Mar 30, 2017 21:55:41 GMT -5
Put the game on TNT and see how Nurkic would be the perfect guy for this team!
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Mar 30, 2017 22:08:35 GMT -5
The Cavaliers look terrible!
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 6:02:46 GMT -5
The Nurkic trade doesn't appear like a "sold to the highest bidder" deal though. They used Nurkic and a pick to get Plumlee. We don't have a guy like that to trade (the last thing Denver needed was more guards).
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Mar 31, 2017 11:44:23 GMT -5
I mean, you had DMC, Noel and Nurkic being traded for peanuts. Not saying Danny could have been in all of those trades, but it's disingenuous to think he never had the chance to pull the trigger in at least one of those without having to overpay massively. It is what it is, but the team absolutely needs another good big guy and there's not a single one where we're drafting this year.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 31, 2017 12:09:25 GMT -5
I don't think you can say Cousins was traded for peanuts. It was a lot less than I thought he would go for, but Brown and Nets pick this year isn't peanuts. The technical foul issue is huge. I can see you in a battle with Cavs and him missing 1-2 games because of it. I still might have made deal, but I can see why Danny passed.
I don't see how we could have got Nurkic. We didn't have a Plumlee to trade them or even a mid to late first to trade for him.
Noel truly went for peanuts, but do Sixers trade him to us for what Dallas paid? Even if they would your most likely talking about Rozier and let's say two second round picks this year. I just think the Sixers would have wanted a lot more from us than they got from a team in another conference. I'm sure they didn't want to see him develop and have to play against them for year's. Same thing with us sending them Rozier. That being said, if Danny didn't offer a late first for him he missed the boat. I don't see the downside one bit.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 12:24:44 GMT -5
1. DMC - Already discussed that the owner LOVES Hield. Does Danny have a player that Randive would think is comparable to the next Steph Curry (bc that's what he thinks of Buddy)? On a rookie deal? Nope! If we take that at face value then what WE think is a comparable deal is probably lower (how much, IDK) than what Danny was asked for.
2. Noel - Would it be the first time that a team placed a higher price tag on a player for a division rival (especially one who is is building towards a future just like you - albeit with unexpected current results that significantly outweigh yours)? I really wanted Noel btw.
3. Nurkic - again, you may not like Plumlee but this trade isn't a salary dump (if Denver was SO desperate to just get away from JN, they could've just eaten his 3Mn next year). Was it a poor evaluation on Denver's part (that MP is worth both JN AND a 1st)? Sure. But we didn't have a guy like Plumlee (a big that could fit into the rotation of a team hoping to make the playoffs) to offer so we just didn't have a match (something I said very early on in the thread when Nurkic was first mentioned - though I thought he'd be part of a bigger deal).
It's just SO easy to evaluate the return using stats or even the eye test. What is impossible to evaluate are the other circumstances that are outside of what we can see/analyze. Just assuming Danny can match every offer ignores the fact that we rarely know what Danny IS offering (and what is being demanded of him).
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 12:26:52 GMT -5
I don't think you can say Cousins was traded for peanuts. It was a lot less than I thought he would go for, but Brown and Nets pick this year isn't peanuts. The technical foul issue is huge. I can see you in a battle with Cavs and him missing 1-2 games because of it. I still might have made deal, but I can see why Danny passed. I don't see how we could have got Nurkic. We didn't have a Plumlee to trade them or even a mid to late first to trade for him. Noel truly went for peanuts, but do Sixers trade him to us for what Dallas paid? Even if they would your most likely talking about Rozier and let's say two second round picks this year. I just think the Sixers would have wanted a lot more from us than they got from a team in another conference. I'm sure they didn't want to see him develop and have to play against them for year's. Same thing with us sending them Rozier. That being said, if Danny didn't offer a late first for him he missed the boat. I don't see the downside one bit. You type faster than I do.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Mar 31, 2017 13:23:38 GMT -5
1. DMC - Already discussed that the owner LOVES Hield. Does Danny have a player that Randive would think is comparable to the next Steph Curry (bc that's what he thinks of Buddy)? On a rookie deal? Nope! If we take that at face value then what WE think is a comparable deal is probably lower (how much, IDK) than what Danny was asked for. 2. Noel - Would it be the first time that a team placed a higher price tag on a player for a division rival (especially one who is is building towards a future just like you - albeit with unexpected current results that significantly outweigh yours)? I really wanted Noel btw. 3. Nurkic - again, you may not like Plumlee but this trade isn't a salary dump (if Denver was SO desperate to just get away from JN, they could've just eaten his 3Mn next year). Was it a poor evaluation on Denver's part (that MP is worth both JN AND a 1st)? Sure. But we didn't have a guy like Plumlee (a big that could fit into the rotation of a team hoping to make the playoffs) to offer so we just didn't have a match (something I said very early on in the thread when Nurkic was first mentioned - though I thought he'd be part of a bigger deal). It's just SO easy to evaluate the return using stats or even the eye test. What is impossible to evaluate are the other circumstances that are outside of what we can see/analyze. Just assuming Danny can match every offer ignores the fact that we rarely know what Danny IS offering (and what is being demanded of him). All of this. Trade evaluation isn't really associative enough in a league like the NBA. There are so many different aspects that teams are looking at. My first reaction to the Noel deal was that I wished the C's could have pulled that off (still young and a local kid), but I really don't think they could have easily matched up with the sixers for that deal.
|
|
|
Post by digit on Mar 31, 2017 13:57:12 GMT -5
My first reaction to the Noel deal was that I wished the C's could have pulled that off (still young and a local kid), but I really don't think they could have easily matched up with the sixers for that deal. I think they might have, but the impression I got over this offseason was that the Celtics didn't want to let go of any assets for anyone they viewed as a 'rental', or someone who they wouldn't be able to extend. Because the Sixers took far, far, too long to dilly-dally over wanting to give up Okafor instead of Noel, by the time they finally let go of Noel, his value to the Celtics was far, far less because he'd become a free agent at a time when the Celtics wanted to sign a max guy. (And whatever Noel commanded would would have made the salary cap much trickier to juggle.) Don't think the draft assets the Celtics could've offered was the problem; it was how much money Noel would've commanded at a time the Celtics needed all the money to have a chance at offering the max.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Mar 31, 2017 14:14:36 GMT -5
Alright, those are okay reasons why we didn't get any of those deals, but I think Danny had assets to theoretically trade for them anyway without mortgaging the future. Noel was traded for basically nothing, if you bait them with the Memphis pick or with our own for next year and a guy like Rozier that's probably enough to do the "higher price tag" it would probably take. Again, Noel was traded for nothing.
The Nuggets gave up a first to trade for Plumlee, but the idea was getting another big that could play with Jokic and getting rid of Nurkic who was pissed off. Olynyk is a reasonably comparable player to Plumlee, if we gave them a first instead of taking one doesn't that offset the difference in the packages? Also, the Nuggets traded him to a divisional rival, shouldn't that alone make the cost for us smaller than what it was for Portland?
DMC I'm not even going to try because of the perception about him being a problem and the owner being crazy. My point isn't specific about any of those trades, but rather about the market. The value for big guys in the trade market was pretty small and the Celtics have a pretty clear hole in that position. So I'm not upset Danny didn't get any of those guys specifically (although the Noel trade offends me a bit), but I certainly wish he would have and I do believe he could have gotten one of them. I'm not super pissed off or anything, but I think the C's had the assets to comfortably do a trade for a better big than Amir's rotting corpse and yet Danny didn't do it. The hole remains and we keep hoarding assets.
And there were other bigs who weren't traded, like Vucevic and Tyson Chandler.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 14:24:30 GMT -5
I'm a big KO fan (for what he is) but I would in no way think he and Plumlee are comparable. I don't have ALL the stats in front of me but MP has almost 2x the WAR that KO does. MP protects the rim (which is needed as that is not a strength for Jokic) and KO doesn't.
Your ideas aren't unreasonable to be sure. But assuming that the players and picks we have fit nicely as replacements to those included in trades is a big leap (granted, everyone does it). Style of play, specific skills that they bring, etc all factor into how a GM is going to compare players. I'd also add that Denver is more familiar with Plumlee having seen him more times in person. That could easily add to his perceived value being higher than KO's.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 14:38:34 GMT -5
For full disclosure, I'm in the camp of "none of those other bigs would've moved the needle enough to warrant giving up assets/space for next year".
The 3 that were moved would be guys I would've liked to varying degrees but I definitely could understand why Danny passed (either on the player, specifically, or on a demand that was higher than the trade that was actually made).
|
|
|
Post by digit on Mar 31, 2017 14:47:36 GMT -5
To be honest, I don't want to offer up the Memphis pick for reason of that it might be much, much higher than any draft pick the Celtics have of their own for a while.
The Celtics -were- in talks for Nurkic, so I think this may just have been a case where Plumlee matched up better for the needs of Denver than anything the Celtics had.
Also, Vucevic and Chandler would've been contracts that would have made sure the Celtics COULDN'T offer max to anyone.
I think the Celtics are perfectly fine waiting on Zizic, though, and saving up assets for other moves.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 31, 2017 14:48:15 GMT -5
Put the game on TNT and see how Nurkic would be the perfect guy for this team! The guy quit on his team. Being mad at your role isn't an excuse for that. He didn't even try on the court. That's the type of guy you want to bring into a young team? Give me a break. Thank you no thank you. Guy could win 3 MVPs and I wouldn't fault Danny for not getting him.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 31, 2017 14:50:45 GMT -5
Regarding Noel the Sixers liked Justin Anderson a lot. It's like when we traded for Crowder Danny liked him a lot other people didn't think he was worth much
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 15:06:40 GMT -5
Not saying you're wrong but I don't recall seeing anything concrete (and, by that, I mean the loose definition) indicating Boston was in on him. A lot about how they SHOULD be in on him but I don't recall any legitimate (yeah, I know) rumors.
|
|
|
Post by digit on Mar 31, 2017 15:23:42 GMT -5
Now that you mention it, I think you're right, I don't remember anything that wasn't speculative.
God, rumors really are hard to sort through all that. I just remember primarily discussion that Boston apparently didn't want to take on any contracts that would mess with their chances of offering someone the max, which sounded like they were hoping to take a run again.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 15:27:12 GMT -5
That was definitely being said after the Ibaka trade (DA himself said it on his weekly Toucher and Rich call).
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Mar 31, 2017 15:42:36 GMT -5
For full disclosure, I'm in the camp of "none of those other bigs would've moved the needle enough to warrant giving up assets/space for next year". The 3 that were moved would be guys I would've liked to varying degrees but I definitely could understand why Danny passed (either on the player, specifically, or on a demand that was higher than the trade that was actually made). I kind of agree with that and I do understand why Danny didn't make any move. I'm not criticizing him too much, more like pointing out that maybe something could have been done to bring the team closer to true contention. Noel particularly would have been such a ridiculously good addition to the team. The thing is I can't shake the feeling that maybe he missed a trade in this deadline, like he missed a chance to make a smart trade to plug the biggest hole in this roster and maybe he overvalued his "peripheral assets" (like the non-Nets picks).
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 15:51:28 GMT -5
I hear ya. I do wonder if we're being lulled into this "vulnerability of the Cavs" idea bc they are playing without ANY passion right now.
But, I just feel they can and will turn it on when it matters. Meanwhile, we are in the same place we were before the deadline (or better if the #1 seed is tangibly significant in this case).
It's going to be one hell of an offseason though. There WILL be a move (FIREWORKS?!?!). Just don't see how the can go into next season with Thomas, Bradley, Smart, Rozier, Crowder, Brown and a top 4 pick (right now either a PG or a SF) on this roster next year. Moving anyone of those pieces would seem significant.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 31, 2017 16:05:56 GMT -5
I think KO and Plumlee are closer than people think. Very different players, but there WS/48 is close. I think KO would be better fit for Denver than Plumlee. They don't have a stretch big and Plumlee doesn't even start for them
The thing about Nurkic is he wanted to start and I don't see him just walking in and starting like he did on Blazers. It would also be a complete shift in how the team plays.
That being said I would have made that deal, KO for Nurkic. Allowing Denver to keep it's pick offsets the difference between Plumlee and KO in my opinion. It would have balanced our team and given Jerebko a role as our stretch big off the bench.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 31, 2017 16:20:14 GMT -5
The Sixers had to say they loved Anderson, otherwise they just gave away Noel. The thing is he looks like nothing more than a guy that's good at D. He wasn't Crowder in College. Crowder was big east POY, it's not a shock he's a good player. Anderson had one good season of shooting the 3 ball and everyone thought he was a good 3 and D player. Forgetting his first two years when he was bad. Even then he wasn't close to a special player in College. In my opinion Rozier has a much higher upside.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 16:35:14 GMT -5
They've been using Danilo as the 4. Chandler some too. Not ideal if you're trying to win a championship but shoukd have been sufficient to make the playoffs (right or wrong, that appears to be the goal).
I do think this is a case where the raw stats say one thing but the specific skill sets say another. They have almost no rim protection without him. WAR. Win Share. They don't highlight that.
And that's really the point. We try and find comparable trades by looking at those stats (I do it too, btw). But it's why it's a fairly ludicrous exercise given how much of the story they miss.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Mar 31, 2017 16:38:07 GMT -5
The Sixers had to say they loved Anderson, otherwise they just gave away Noel. The thing is he looks like nothing more than a guy that's good at D. He wasn't Crowder in College. Crowder was big east POY, it's not a shock he's a good player. Anderson had one good season of shooting the 3 ball and everyone thought he was a good 3 and D player. Forgetting his first two years when he was bad. Even then he wasn't close to a special player in College. In my opinion Rozier has a much higher upside. There's the rub. Our opinion doesn't really matter if we are trying to wrap our heads around why team X didn't trade for player y. Teams evaluate players differently from each other (and, i would assume in many cases, different from us).
|
|