|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 1, 2017 16:58:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 1, 2017 17:04:45 GMT -5
Per Chad Ford, Collins is now projected to go top-10, otherwise I'd say if we could move Bradley for Detroit's pick this year and either a pick swap next year or maybe a protected pick that will roll over for a couple of years before becoming unprotected then I'd do it in a second. I think Collins is a very good player and a perfect fit here. Maybe that'll pan out on draft night. Guys like Leaf and Markkanen would be nice ways to replace kelly on the cheap with maybe some upside as well in Markkanen's case (he doesn't have t-rex arms like Kelly and I could see him developing into a better defender if he can add some muscle), but I'd be hoping for more than a late lottery pick for avery the way he played this postseason.
In terms of dealing bradley or smart, I've thought Bradley was the logical choice there for some time. He's going to be more expensive, is more expensive now, and is also a more valuable player in the short run. I also think that if you're assuming we also pick up Hayward and Fultz in this scenario, we actually might be looking at our best/closeout lineup outside of the 2 being thomas-hayward-crowder-horford. If you add smart to that, his lack of shooting doesn't present as much of an issue because everyone else on the floor ranges from competent to deadly if left open. Maybe if you add a more conventional center, say Dedmon for the sake of argument, your starting lineup becomes thomas-fultz-hayward-horford-Dedmon- I don't mind that at all personally, especially because it gives us the flexibility to play 4 out around dedmon or 5 out with horford and still keep something of a traditional big on the floor, while also hopefully giving us the ability to match up with bigger frontcourts/teams like Chicago/Washington or even Cleveland.
I can see the appeal of using Fultz as a backup point to get him more reps on the ball initially, but in this scenario I think you'd see him playing a bunch of minutes with combo type guys like rozier and smart, where he could take stints as the primary ball handler and you still get to keep his length and shooting on the floor. If we can find a way to turn bradley into Collins, so much the better- he actually has something of a jump shot as well, and I've been forgetting about Zizic. Basically, I don't think you lose a ton if you flip bradley and are able to plug another roster hole- we're pretty well equipped to handle losing a guard, but we still have a dearth of quality bigs
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 1, 2017 17:36:07 GMT -5
Texas I can see how you think what you think based off that, but that sure doesn't read for sure Yabu will be a Celtic next year. It's Austin Ainge saying we expect he'll be here next year. Yea we expect he'll be here unless we can get a max free agent to sign. It's certainly not Danny Ainge saying Yabu will be a Celtic next year and not playing overseas. There's also the fact if he pushes his way on team we can pay him 80% of slot and not the typical 120%. NO max free agent and I expect he'll be a Celtic next year. I'm still not convinced it's 100% written in stone, done deal. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 1, 2017 17:51:21 GMT -5
CT you think you can get the #12 pick in a loaded draft and another first or a pick swap? That just sounds like a too good to be true type return.
Like I said I love the idea of getting a pick this year for Bradley. It just seems like a long-shot. It requires them to move Bradley before they know anything else. That seems anti Ainge with the way he has done business recently. It's more like keep all options available as long as he can. No max free agent and you could trade Bradley for more salary or package him in a bigger deal.
I just love the draft idea. A guy like Bam is a great fit in my opinion. He's raw, but his size and athletic ability is like the Clips Jordan. He is just a force in the paint. The type of player that would make Irving and LeBron think twice about getting easy bucketts at the rim.
|
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 2, 2017 13:15:54 GMT -5
CT you think you can get the #12 pick in a loaded draft and another first or a pick swap? That just sounds like a too good to be true type return. Like I said I love the idea of getting a pick this year for Bradley. It just seems like a long-shot. It requires them to move Bradley before they know anything else. That seems anti Ainge with the way he has done business recently. It's more like keep all options available as long as he can. No max free agent and you could trade Bradley for more salary or package him in a bigger deal. I just love the draft idea. A guy like Bam is a great fit in my opinion. He's raw, but his size and athletic ability is like the Clips Jordan. He is just a force in the paint. The type of player that would make Irving and LeBron think twice about getting easy bucketts at the rim. I don't know if that would be on the table, but if it were I would do it. I think the way Bradley showed up in the playoffs really helped his stock and I'm sure Detroit would love to add a guy like him. I also think that they likely would make a real run at the playoffs with Avery on board so either we'd be looking at a mid-late 1st with the 2nd pick or we could structure protections on it so it only conveys if it falls between, say 14-20, and otherwise it rolls over. It's really tough to know what bradleys value on the trade market would be though- I suspect that if he leaves Boston after next year he'd probably get 4 years for $100m, and I don't know what another team would give up for a year of that player at $8m and the inside track on retaining him after. That's a deal I would do if it were out there though, and I don't think it's beyond the realm of sanity I agree that dealing bradley before the big chip(s) fall in free agency would not be Ainge-like, but given that we have a viable group of guards to basically replace his production, and that if he has to deal Avery to clear cap for a Hayward he might get squeezed on the return, I think he might pull the trigger early. At least if he got the right offer I think he'd jump on it- I don't know what that deal would look like for him though |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 2, 2017 14:47:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 2, 2017 14:59:15 GMT -5
We have the Jeff Teague trade from last year to go by. The Hawks got the #12 pick for him. He had one year remaining on deal, just like Bradley. Considering this years draft is stronger at the top than last year, the #12 pick seems like fair value. Now I would for sure jump on a trade if they included another 1st. Only thing I don't think I've ever seen protection on a pick like what your thinking 14-20 is only way it conveys. It would be more like lottery protected or top 20 protected. I wouldn't mind getting Henry Ellenson either. He hardly played last year, but he could replace KO as a stretch big. Though the #12 pick and Ellenson is cutting the money really tight.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 2, 2017 15:07:22 GMT -5
The one interesting thing for me is he has Yabu not coming over next year. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 2, 2017 15:24:26 GMT -5
Same guy who I referenced yesterday.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 2, 2017 17:15:13 GMT -5
I think Minnesota makes the most sense to trade for Bradley. They have a ton of young players, need defense and need to start making progress. Bradley might be a perfect veteran to teach the young guys. I know it's a deep draft but adding a guy like Isaac might not be the best play. Bradley is still young enough to grow with that team.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 2, 2017 20:16:28 GMT -5
I hope you're right, the #7 pick would be awesome. I just wouldn't worry about winning, when your core of KAT, Wiggins, LaVine, and Dunn are 21, 21, 21, and 22. Bradley makes a ton of sense for them, but the #7 pick in a loaded draft class seems like way too much. Nevermind they have no clue if he resigns. Does Bradley want to stick around why they build?
Look at it from there perspective. If you were a Wolves fan, no way would you want the team to make that trade. Turn down a chance at an all star, for Bradley for maybe only one year.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 3, 2017 14:15:18 GMT -5
Marcus Smart and Avery Bradley 3rd year comparisons:   |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 3, 2017 18:36:07 GMT -5
Is there a point to that post?
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 3, 2017 19:38:49 GMT -5
It's for information only. You can read what you want or don't want but I found it interesting. They were very comparable shooters at that point in their careers. Maybe there is hope for Marcus to become a much better shooter. I think we all assume it's most likely either Marcus or Avery getting moved so it was worth seeing.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 3, 2017 23:35:01 GMT -5
Rip the full stats up to that point tell a very different story. For example Bradley shot 37.5% in college from deep and 40.9 % his second year in NBA after almost not playing as a rookie.
Smart never was above 30% in college. His high mark in NBA is 33.5% as a rookie and he hasn't come close to that since. You basically have 3 years of Bradley playing at that point. In two of them he was shooting it well from deep. You have 5 years of Smart being a bad shooter. So yea if you want to just look at the 3rd year and compare there shooting it seems close. Looking at college and there first 3 years in NBA and it's quite clear Bradley and Smart aren't even close.
Could Smart improve? Sure, crazier things have happened. I just wouldn't count on it happening. We have 5 years of data at this point and it all says the same thing. Smart just isn't a good shooter. My hope for Smart isn't to get to Bradley's level, but just get back to his rookie year level of like 33-34%. That would be a massive improvement.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 4, 2017 12:51:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 4, 2017 18:54:00 GMT -5
I love Smart but now that Fultz is coming I think I like the idea of Fultz and Bradley together - I think what I like most about Bradley is his ability to be a role model for the young players.
I could get on board with moving on from Isaiah and building around a Smart - Fultz and Bradley back court but I'd rather be even more competitive and there just isn't room for everyone so Smart is the guy to go if it were up to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 4, 2017 19:26:21 GMT -5
What if we're debating between Bradley and Smart and the answer is both (are gone)?
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 4, 2017 19:37:15 GMT -5
What if we're debating between Bradley and Smart and the answer is both (are gone)? Then I'd have to know who's coming back |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 4, 2017 19:47:06 GMT -5
More just conceptually speaking that if:
1. Danny sees the real build is further away
2. Both are bench players in that future.
3. But both will command close to if not more than 20 Mn per
4. Thomas' current play plus contract status plus injury makes it nearly impossible to get the right value in a trade . . .
5. . . . so Thomas, Fultz, Brown, Rozier, Hayward and Crowder use up all the ball handler and wing minutes
Would he try to get value now? Don't know if that's the road I'd take but it wouldn't shock me as I see each of the above 5 points being possible. And if they are true, trading both (in deals that improve your rebounding and get you cap space).
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 4, 2017 20:10:09 GMT -5
More just conceptually speaking that if: 1. Danny sees the real build is further away 2. Both are bench players in that future. 3. But both will command close to if not more than 20 Mn per 4. Thomas' current play plus contract status plus injury makes it nearly impossible to get the right value in a trade . . . 5. . . . so Thomas, Fultz, Brown, Rozier, Hayward and Crowder use up all the ball handler and wing minutes Would he try to get value now? Don't know if that's the road I'd take but it wouldn't shock me as I see each of the above 5 points being possible. And if they are true, trading both (in deals that improve your rebounding and get you cap space). A couple quick thoughts I don't think Bradley goes to the bench, in a couple years, it's Thomas but it's kind of irrelevant because the 3 guards would get a lot of time. Thomas is the perfect bench scorer though. There's no cap space and getting a rebounder to be had by trading Bradley either. I'm not against trading Avery for the right price that's for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 5, 2017 5:35:36 GMT -5
By the way, if Danny thought going for it next year was a good option I think that has changed after watching the Warriors just dominate the Cavs. The Warriors team is unstoppable right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 5, 2017 6:28:40 GMT -5
I think it's great that Ball is now going to work out with Philly. First, I feel bad that I take pleasure in the Lakers passing on a kid who by all accounts is a great kid and teammate and who's father is a jackass. I coach kids and do everything possible to separate parents from the kids but this guy is on another level of bafoonary and ultimately Lonzo getting out of LA is probably the best thing that could ever happen to him.
Second, I think him and Simmons will continue the Sixers stockpiling of high picks that don't fit well together at all. Simmons strength is as a point forward and Ball has to have the rock in his hands because his strength is as a playmaker for others. Both have similar weaknesses with regards to offense. Can Simmons shoot? Can Ball go to his right? Have any midrange game at all and get off his shot that is slow and sits on his left shoulder against NBA players? He doesn't have an explosive first step so they don't need to sag off of him... you combine that with Embiid, Noel (already gone for little), Okafor and Saric and you have a very clunky team of lottery picks.
The brings me to a final point. Drafting best player available obviously needs to be weighed but as BB would say, "you need to build a team that can win and however you go about doing that doesn't matter".
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 5, 2017 6:58:32 GMT -5
Responses:
1. If you'd prefer to say $20Mn for a complimentary player vs $20Mn for a bench player, I think the story is still the same.
2. IF you're getting Hayward and IF you believe Brown is a future starter to star (somewhere in between) then something has to give.
3. So you don't think they could trade Bradley and Smart (most likely in separate deals) and get a rebounder and cap space??? Or did I misunderstand your post?
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 5, 2017 7:03:01 GMT -5
Regardless of what people think of Chad Ford, the tiering system that he refers to is one I've heard (from other experts) that is used by NBA teams.
It's the best combination of BPA and drafting for need.
Assuming Jackson and Ball are in the same tier, JJ always seemed to make more sense. He can play wing opposite Ingram (or George???). They could start either Russell or Clarkson (with the other being traded for George???)
|
|
