OT: Celtics / Cavs megadeal

[NielsisGood]

Here are my original thoughts on Kyrie:

Irving plays no defense, he's a chucker, and Cleveland has been a disaster whenever Irving has had to play without James. Teams have long had concerns about his night life. He does not profile as the best player on a championship team.

That said, Irving has a chance to become a foundational offensive superstar. He can hit pull-up 3s off the pick-and-roll, and Brad Stevens would encourage him to shoot more of them; he launched "just" 3.5 of those suckers per game last season, a hair below Mike Conley and Chris Paul. That number should be higher, even though Irving's accuracy on those shots -- the toughest shots in basketball -- has fluctuated wildly year-to-year.

Those shots draw double teams, and those double teams unlock everything else. If Irving trades in two or three shots like this every night for 3s and kickout passes, he immediately becomes a different player.

KOC and Lowe (as well as others I'm sure) have also pointed out that the Kyrie without LeBron numbers could just be throwaway because of the lack of any real offensive system on this Cavs team and instead just relying on LeBron with the ball in his hands. I'm a homer but that line of thinking due to the obvious lack of structure in that organization (kind of imparting some knowledge from KD's recent pods with Simmons here) does seem plausible. Steph Curry did take a massive leap forward once he had a better system and franchise leadership around him.

 

[Walker11]

KOC and Lowe (as well as others I'm sure) have also pointed out that the Kyrie without LeBron numbers could just be throwaway because of the lack of any real offensive system on this Cavs team and instead just relying on LeBron with the ball in his hands. I'm a homer but that line of thinking due to the obvious lack of structure in that organization (kind of imparting some knowledge from KD's recent pods with Simmons here) does seem plausible. Steph Curry did take a massive leap forward once he had a better system and franchise leadership around him.

I buy it. We will see a better than ever KI next year and he will leap a level in prestige. Extremely excited to see him and Stevens pair up. From the press conference, he truly seems to very it.

I just hope he realizes that to be Kobe #2, which 100% seems to be the case, he needs to be a 2 way player. Who knows if he will, Harden' rep is just fine, piss poor D and all.

 

[tzznandrew]

The people who talk about IT being similar to Irving need to consider the difference in IT before and after Stevens, and then ask themselves why a similar transition wouldn't take place.

 

[the Q]

The people who talk about IT being similar to Irving need to consider the difference in IT before and after Stevens, and then ask themselves why a similar transition wouldn't take place.

It may happen, but I'm not paying the pricing like it's a certainty, which is what Danny did.

At best the offer should've been the players and the clippers pick.

Brooklyn never should've been on the table

 

[tzznandrew]

It may happen, but I'm not paying the pricing like it's a certainty, which is what Danny did.

At best the offer should've been the players and the clippers pick.

Brooklyn never should've been on the table

Meh. We disagree. I didn't love the inclusion of the pick, but since:

1) IT may never be the same and he couldn't be signed for what he wanted,
2) the pick is unlikely to be #1 (statistically speaking),
3) even if it were #1, the #1 pick in the last 10 drafts has averaged 0.074 Win Shares per game, and Irving has averaged .106, so it is likely he'll be a better value (if he stays healthy), and
4) regardless, the Celtics have a good chance of having a Top 5 pick even without that pick (though it is the this pick that I wish they sent...the Clippers pick is a dream. Come on, the Cavs would be dumb to trade Kyrie for a hobbled IT, Crowder, and a non-lottery pick)

Frankly, there's a chance the Nets have a better record than the Lakers given the relative strengths of conferences.

That said, I understand your point, I just disagree and don't really want to do much arguing, since pretty much every opinion has already been explored in this thread.

 

[auror]

Meh. We disagree. I didn't love the inclusion of the pick, but since:

1) IT may never be the same and he couldn't be signed for what he wanted,
2) the pick is unlikely to be #1 (statistically speaking),
3) even if it were #1, the #1 pick in the last 10 drafts has averaged 0.074 Win Shares per game, and Irving has averaged .106, so it is likely he'll be a better value (if he stays healthy), and
4) regardless, the Celtics have a good chance of having a Top 5 pick even without that pick (though it is the this pick that I wish they sent...the Clippers pick is a dream. Come on, the Cavs would be dumb to trade Kyrie for a hobbled IT, Crowder, and a non-lottery pick)

Frankly, there's a chance the Nets have a better record than the Lakers given the relative strengths of conferences.

That said, I understand your point, I just disagree and don't really want to do much arguing, since pretty much every opinion has already been explored in this thread.

 

[intlzncster]

2) the pick is unlikely to be #1 (statistically speaking),
3) even if it were #1, the #1 pick in the last 10 drafts has averaged 0.074 Win Shares per game, and Irving has averaged .106, so it is likely he'll be a better value (if he stays healthy), and

How good is win shares as a stat in basketball? Is it as beneficial as something like WAR in baseball? I mean, people are a little too evangelical about these things in my opinion. And that's coming from a guy with a background in applied statistics.

And the pick will be #1, because Celtics. But, I don't know how much difference there is between the 1-4 talent in next year's draft. I suppose we'll find out in this year's MCBB season.

 

[tzznandrew]

How good is win shares as a stat in basketball? Is it as beneficial as something like WAR in baseball? I mean, people are a little too evangelical about these things in my opinion. And that's coming from a guy with a background in applied statistics.

And the pick will be #1, because Celtics. But, I don't know how much difference there is between the 1-4 talent in next year's draft. I suppose we'll find out in this year's MCBB season.

None of the basketball stats are as good as the baseball ones because basketball doesn't lend itself to isolation in the same way.

Yet Win Shares is a good go-to because when you look at the top 10 all time in WS, you get:

1. Abdul-Jabbar
2. Chamberlain
3. Malone
4. Jordan
5. Stockton
6. Duncan
7. James
8. Nowitzki
9. Garnett
10. D. Robinson

and it's pretty easy to pick out the compilers. When given WS/48 min the list is:

1. Jordan
2. Mikan
3. James
4. Leonard
5. Paul
6. Magic
7. West
8. Chamberlain
9. D. Robinson
10. Curry

Now, neither of those are a perfect list, but using and parsing WS gets you a list of the most dominant players in most generations. And the players like Leonard/Paul/Curry will drop as they move out of their prime.

Not perfect, but a pretty solid one. No duds are showing up on either list. All these guys are HOFers, and all are among the best to ever play their positions.

FYI: Irving is 18 all time on WS/48.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Meh. We disagree. I didn't love the inclusion of the pick, but since:

1) IT may never be the same and he couldn't be signed for what he wanted,
2) the pick is unlikely to be #1 (statistically speaking),
3) even if it were #1, the #1 pick in the last 10 drafts has averaged 0.074 Win Shares per game, and Irving has averaged .106, so it is likely he'll be a better value (if he stays healthy), and
4) regardless, the Celtics have a good chance of having a Top 5 pick even without that pick (though it is the this pick that I wish they sent...the Clippers pick is a dream. Come on, the Cavs would be dumb to trade Kyrie for a hobbled IT, Crowder, and a non-lottery pick)

Frankly, there's a chance the Nets have a better record than the Lakers given the relative strengths of conferences.

That said, I understand your point, I just disagree and don't really want to do much arguing, since pretty much every opinion has already been explored in this thread.

We essentially have contra-Celtics fans versus pro-Celtics viewpoints and that makes the disagreement unresolvable until they start playing. But we've had opinions against the trade, yet not necessarily saying the Cavs will be better this year or that this makes them legit contenders for the title. I guess if the trade was bad for the Celtics its not necessarily great or even good for the Cavaliers.

Will the Celtics gave up too much folks now be rooting for the Cavaliers to do well - be a better regular season team than last year? Or does that become a root for them to rebuild efficiently with the draft pick (are those folks now rooting against Kyrie/Celtics and against the Nets so their trade opinion is right!?).

For me from a Celtics & NBA fan standpoint:
1. I am going to root for the Cavs b/c I really like Isaiah and I'm happy to root for LeBron when I can (the Ray Allen on his team theorem).
2. Then of course I want Irving to flourish and though it likely will take the Celtics 2 years to gel, I really want to see a Cavs-Celtics playoff matchup b/c the rivalries would be incredible. I say that playoff series gets to decide the trade with a kicker that if the Cavs lose but the pick is 1-3 then its a win-win trade.

 

[Huskyforlife]

What is Brad Stevens going to do exactly to make Kyrie better? We all know what he's best at, ISO scoring, and that will likely be his role in Boston. I doubt kyrie is going to take a monumental leap to being a Kobe esq. player, so I'm doubting they can beat Lebron in the east.

Sure will be fun to watch though.

 

[auror]

What is Brad Stevens going to do exactly to make Kyrie better? We all know what he's best at, ISO scoring, and that will likely be his role in Boston. I doubt kyrie is going to take a monumental leap to being a Kobe esq. player, so I'm doubting they can beat Lebron in the east.

Sure will be fun to watch though.

Kyrie is similar to IT in a lot of ways. Both get to the rim a lot, but Kyrie is an even better shooter.

Brad Stevens’ style created star in Isaiah Thomas

TLR Celtics actually run plays and set screens off the ball.

 

[the Q]

What is Brad Stevens going to do exactly to make Kyrie better? We all know what he's best at, ISO scoring, and that will likely be his role in Boston. I doubt kyrie is going to take a monumental leap to being a Kobe esq. player, so I'm doubting they can beat Lebron in the east.

Sure will be fun to watch though.

The question is, after losing arguably their 3 of their top 4 defenders...will they defend anyone?

 

[auror]

The question is, after losing arguably their 3 of their top 4 defenders...will they defend anyone?

I assume the 3 are Bradley, Crowder, and Amir. Some combination of more Smart and Rozier for Bradley, Hayward for Crowder, and Morris pushing Horford to 5 for Amir minutes seems pretty even defensively to me. Statistically Hayward killed Crowder on defense last year, but I'm sure he got a boost from the good defensive team around him. Swapping Irving for IT and Tatum for Olynyk minutes again seems pretty even on defense. If Jaylen at the 2-4 spots takes a leap defensively, they could be even better.

That's on a macro level, though. They will probably need Rozier to become lockdown on quicker guards, as although Smart is a + defender, he's a much different player than Bradley. Maybe that's what Shane Larkin is for.

 

[Dogdeacon]

LINK - this is exactly why I'll root for the Cavs and Isaiah, if playoff series was tomorrow after reading this I'd be rooting for Cavs over the new Celtics I hardly know.
This Is for Boston | By Isaiah Thomas

Long article some good excerpts:
"James, my oldest — I guess he really is his father’s son, because he asked the same first question I did. “To where?”
“Cleveland. They traded me for Kyrie.” And I’m pretty sure you know what came next.
“LEBRON! LEBRON JAMES! Dad — Dad. You get to play with LeBron James!”
Jaiden, though, he’s my little guy, maybe a little more sensitive — and he loves Boston more than anyone. So I knew the news was potentially going to be more hurtful for him. And just looking at his reaction, when he heard, I could tell I was right. He seemed kind of heartbroken.
I said, “Jaiden, are you happy or are you sad?”
“Sad.”
But the truth is — those first two reactions I got, from my sons? That was all I needed. All those takes, all the rumors, all the expert analysis going around … and, man, my sons got it more right in a couple of minutes over FaceTime. Everything about that trade, everything that I was feeling in my heart in those moments — they got it down to the only two things that mattered."
-----

--------
"The whole arena was right there with me. Honestly, it felt like the whole city of Boston was with me.
And at that point, you know, I think it just kind of hit me, like — of course I’ve gotta play. First of all, I’m going to do it for Chyna, and for my family. But then I’m also going to do it for my city. ’Cause what they’re showing me right now, is all I needed tonight: to know I’m not alone. They’re showing me that they’re going through the same thing I’m going through right now. They’re showing me that I’m one of them, and that we’re in this together."
------------
I like to imagine that sometime not long from now, somewhere in Boston, someone is going to be a parent, talking basketball to their kid. And their kid is going to ask them, point-blank like kids do, you know, “Yo — why you become a Celtics fan?”
And then they’re going to smile, and tell the truth.
“I saw Isaiah Thomas play.”
That would make me very happy. For me, I think, that’d be enough."
--------------

 

[Excalibur]

LINK - this is exactly why I'll root for the Cavs and Isaiah, if playoff series was tomorrow after reading this I'd be rooting for Cavs over the new Celtics I hardly know.

Meh. I don't think anyone doubted IT's class. What, pray tell, do you think the Celtics/Danny did wrong from a moral standpoint? The rules weren't going to allow them to keep the team as it was constituted last year, and that couldn't win the East as constituted anyway. Come 2018-19 season, last year's group was going to be taken apart. Ainge accelerated the process to give them the best shot possible in 2018-19.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Meh. I don't think anyone doubted IT's class. What, pray tell, do you think the Celtics/Danny did wrong from a moral standpoint? The rules weren't going to allow them to keep the team as it was constituted last year, and that couldn't win the East as constituted anyway. Come 2018-19 season, last year's group was going to be taken apart. Ainge accelerated the process to give them the best shot possible in 2018-19.

I didn't say Ainge or Celtics did anything wrong. I'm generally in favor of the trade. In a perfect world where Isaiah is healthy and the same age as Kyrie then I don't like the trade, but as-is, I and in fact Isaiah himself from a business strategic standpoint understand and accept it.
What sucks is the guy gave us one of the all-time greatest seasons I've every witnessed and did it thru personal injury and personal tragedy and at a bargain price. Then he gets dealt, so he gave much more than he got. I think that's undeniably true. It ends up being a great deal for the Celtics. As someone who watched and learned to like/love the guy I feel for him and will miss watching and rooting for him up close. Especially b/c he gave more than he got I will root harder for him to continue to succeed.

 

[NielsisGood]

I didn't say Ainge or Celtics did anything wrong. I'm generally in favor of the trade. In a perfect world where Isaiah is healthy and the same age as Kyrie then I don't like the trade, but as-is, I and in fact Isaiah himself from a business strategic standpoint understand and accept it.
What sucks is the guy gave us one of the all-time greatest seasons I've every witnessed and did it thru personal injury and personal tragedy and at a bargain price. Then he gets dealt, so he gave much more than he got. I think that's undeniably true. It ends up being a great deal for the Celtics. As someone who watched and learned to like/love the guy I feel for him and will miss watching and rooting for him up close. Especially b/c he gave more than he got I will root harder for him to continue to succeed.

At the same time though Stevens and the system did undeniably help to transform IT from a "good little player" into a potential max deal guy. He hasn't been paid big yet, but come next year he will, and his time in Boston is going to end up making IT a ton of money.

 

[intlzncster]

Not sure it's been mentioned, but fwiw

Isaiah Thomas' injury is potentially far more serious than you know

For better or worse, LeBron James and Isaiah Thomas are now joined at Thomas' fragile hip

 

[the Q]

We essentially have contra-Celtics fans versus pro-Celtics viewpoints and that makes the disagreement unresolvable until they start playing. But we've had opinions against the trade, yet not necessarily saying the Cavs will be better this year or that this makes them legit contenders for the title. I guess if the trade was bad for the Celtics its not necessarily great or even good for the Cavaliers.

Will the Celtics gave up too much folks now be rooting for the Cavaliers to do well - be a better regular season team than last year? Or does that become a root for them to rebuild efficiently with the draft pick (are those folks now rooting against Kyrie/Celtics and against the Nets so their trade opinion is right!?).

For me from a Celtics & NBA fan standpoint:
1. I am going to root for the Cavs b/c I really like Isaiah and I'm happy to root for LeBron when I can (the Ray Allen on his team theorem).
2. Then of course I want Irving to flourish and though it likely will take the Celtics 2 years to gel, I really want to see a Cavs-Celtics playoff matchup b/c the rivalries would be incredible. I say that playoff series gets to decide the trade with a kicker that if the Cavs lose but the pick is 1-3 then its a win-win trade.

I'll be rooting for the Bucks to somehow make the big jump.

Good process should be rewarded.

Bad process (like overpaying for Irving), even if it is my celtics, should not.

Trading up for Olynyk over Greek Freak was terrible at the time, now it's just an abomination.

 

[Dogdeacon]

I'll be rooting for the Bucks to somehow make the big jump.

Good process should be rewarded.

Bad process (like overpaying for Irving), even if it is my celtics, should not.

Trading up for Olynyk over Greek Freak was terrible at the time, now it's just an abomination.

Those things you mentioned aren't process or a system, they are decisions. Process is building over time via acquiring undervalued players, using a draft strategy (timed) , maybe with respect to decisions selecting types or players that fit your system or style of play vs best available. And if the Celtics 'process/system' is built to peak in 2018+ when their draft picks mature, then they can't overpay & be hamstrung when they get there = that's exactly why they traded both Avery Bradley and Isaiah when they did.

On the negative side, definitely the Celtics process has taken a step back with the massive team turnover. It takes time for players to learn to play together and the Celtics have absolutely burnt down a lot of what was built over last 2 seasons. Teams need a lot of time to build and its likely the Celtics will have a worse 17-18 regular season despite upgrading talent.

But their analysis told them Isaiah might never be the same and even if he was, its only 1yr before a big payday (& they shouldn't pay him for 4yrs thru a likely decline), that the Net's pick was most likely going to be 6+ and that Kyrie fits into their system is younger and could do what Isaiah does only better in the playoffs. Its pretty undeniable that to this point Ainge has done one of the most remarkable rebuild jobs ever in a very short time (compare the Celtics to Sixers who are lauded poster-child of process but still haven't won dick) so I think we gotta trust him a bit on his process & decision making.

Incidentally its both sides of your mouth for criticizing Olynyk over Greek Freek - Ainge is clearly not perfect at drafting and its admittedly by all an inexact science. You cannot pin all your hopes on getting lucky in lottery (Net's 18 pick), picking right and getting lucky with your selections.

 

[the Q]

Those things you mentioned aren't process or a system, they are decisions. Process is building over time via acquiring undervalued players, using a draft strategy (timed) , maybe with respect to decisions selecting types or players that fit your system or style of play vs best available. And if the Celtics 'process/system' is built to peak in 2018+ when their draft picks mature, then they can't overpay & be hamstrung when they get there = that's exactly why they traded both Avery Bradley and Isaiah when they did.

On the negative side, definitely the Celtics process has taken a step back with the massive team turnover. It takes time for players to learn to play together and the Celtics have absolutely burnt down a lot of what was built over last 2 seasons. Teams need a lot of time to build and its likely the Celtics will have a worse 17-18 regular season despite upgrading talent.

But their analysis told them Isaiah might never be the same and even if he was, its only 1yr before a big payday (& they shouldn't pay him for 4yrs thru a likely decline), that the Net's pick was most likely going to be 6+ and that Kyrie fits into their system is younger and could do what Isaiah does only better in the playoffs. Its pretty undeniable that to this point Ainge has done one of the most remarkable rebuild jobs ever in a very short time (compare the Celtics to Sixers who are lauded poster-child of process but still haven't won dick) so I think we gotta trust him a bit on his process & decision making.

Incidentally its both sides of your mouth for criticizing Olynyk over Greek Freek - Ainge is clearly not perfect at drafting and its admittedly by all an inexact science. You cannot pin all your hopes on getting lucky in lottery (Net's 18 pick), picking right and getting lucky with your selections.

To me they needed to try and OKC this thing.

Irving isn't the transcendent star that just gets you to the finals.

I'm ok moving Bradley for Hayward. That was the salary cap not going up as much as expected. It happens. Plus they weren't going to pay him 20+m next summer and needed a PF anyway. Danny did the best he could there.

Overpaying for 2 years of Kyrie when your timeline is probably years 3-5 from now is a bad move. And just assuming Kyrie will resign is just the flat out wrong way to evaluate this trade. You HAVE to evaluate it as 2 years of Kyrie for 3 of Crowder, 1 of IT and 4 from the first round pick.

As for GF v Kelly, when you're a rebuilding team, you need to be taking high upside guys, especially in that late lottery and beyond slot. You don't take a low upside college senior. Even at the time of the draft, they were saying on air that teams thought GF had the highest upside in the entire draft.

 

[Dogdeacon]

To me they needed to try and OKC this thing.
Overpaying for 2 years of Kyrie when your timeline is probably years 3-5 from now is a bad move. And just assuming Kyrie will resign is just the flat out wrong way to evaluate this trade. You HAVE to evaluate it as 2 years of Kyrie for 3 of Crowder, 1 of IT and 4 from the first round pick.
As for GF v Kelly, when you're a rebuilding team, you need to be taking high upside guys, especially in that late lottery and beyond slot. You don't take a low upside college senior. Even at the time of the draft, they were saying on air that teams thought GF had the highest upside in the entire draft.

I get what you are saying, although its 0.75yrs of Isaiah and the draft pick doesn't timeline well with your other core assets (whether its the 1yr of Isaiah or the yrs of Horford, Brown, Tatum, etc..). And exacerbating that problem was in 17-18 they couldn't get over Cleveland or GState as constituted and were arguably equal or inferior to Eastern competitors Washington & Toronto (esp w/diminished Isaiah). The downside of Isaiah not being healthy became riskier than betting on Kyrie to grow & resign.
I would have preferred they make a title run with the previous core (Isaiah, Hayward, Horford, Tatum) intact and trying to land Anthony Davis or some other 3rd star, but that being successful was contingent on Isaiah remaining a Celtic star for multiple years (health+ payout) and they obviously thought its more likely that doesn't happen. For example it could simply be when Isaiah opted out of surgery they thought he'll recover into 17-18, get a big payout and then the hip diminishes his value or needs surgery over that contract = they decided now that they wouldn't do that contract so trade him before value gets to 0.

 

[intlzncster]

I get what you are saying, although its 0.75yrs of Isaiah and the draft pick doesn't timeline well with your other core assets (whether its the 1yr of Isaiah or the yrs of Horford, Brown, Tatum, etc..). And exacerbating that problem was in 17-18 they couldn't get over Cleveland or GState as constituted and were arguably equal or inferior to Eastern competitors Washington & Toronto (esp w/diminished Isaiah). The downside of Isaiah not being healthy became riskier than betting on Kyrie to grow & resign.
I would have preferred they make a title run with the previous core (Isaiah, Hayward, Horford, Tatum) intact and trying to land Anthony Davis or some other 3rd star, but that being successful was contingent on Isaiah remaining a Celtic star for multiple years (health+ payout) and they obviously thought its more likely that doesn't happen. For example it could simply be when Isaiah opted out of surgery they thought he'll recover into 17-18, get a big payout and then the hip diminishes his value or needs surgery over that contract = they decided now that they wouldn't do that contract so trade him before value gets to 0.

While I agree with much of that, listening to all this analysis, and thinking about it myself, the C's had absolutely no choice to move on from Isaiah. Way, way too many headwinds there. And I love the guy.

• Size of next contract for what he is
• Advanced age under next contract
• Especially for a guy who relies so much on athleticism to score
• Odds of recovering form that type of injury at that age
• Defensive weakness on top of everything else
• Add in the height thing

I mean, there was no choice. The only choice is HOW they moved on.

 

[auror]

Overpaying for 2 years of Kyrie when your timeline is probably years 3-5 from now is a bad move. And just assuming Kyrie will resign is just the flat out wrong way to evaluate this trade. You HAVE to evaluate it as 2 years of Kyrie for 3 of Crowder, 1 of IT and 4 from the first round pick.

You have to include Bird rights in there for Kyrie. You're right to mostly consider it 2 years, but you have to also include the inherent advantages the Celtics will possess.

 

[the Q]

You have to include Bird rights in there for Kyrie. You're right to mostly consider it 2 years, but you have to also include the inherent advantages the Celtics will possess.

True. But I'm unsure how you quantify that. It also assumes you want to pay him more than a superior player in Hayward