OT: Celtics / Cavs megadeal

[tykurez]

GH is a better player

 

[Jerry1714]

"Oh projects the Cavs' win total will stay the same at 54.2. Boston, meanwhile, jumps from 53.7 to 54.9 projected wins.

The big impact comes in the teams' chances to win the East. Boston's goes from a 33 percent chance to a 39.3 percent chance. The Cavs' chances in the East fall from 43.1 percent to 39.7 percent, though they remain the slight favorites in the East, according to the updated projections."

NBA News: How the reported Irving-Thomas deal affects the projected standings - SportsLine.com

Is an increase in wins and a significant increase in chances to win the East a good thing for a team or a bad thing?

 

[PAHusky]

"Oh projects the Cavs' win total will stay the same at 54.2. Boston, meanwhile, jumps from 53.7 to 54.9 projected wins.

The big impact comes in the teams' chances to win the East. Boston's goes from a 33 percent chance to a 39.3 percent chance. The Cavs' chances in the East fall from 43.1 percent to 39.7 percent, though they remain the slight favorites in the East, according to the updated projections."

NBA News: How the reported Irving-Thomas deal affects the projected standings - SportsLine.com

Is an increase in wins and a significant increase in chances to win the East a good thing for a team or a bad thing?

A good thing - in a vacuum. But put another way, is barely moving the needle in win totals and increasing your chances of winning the east by 6% worth giving up the pick you included? That's the real debate. The argument isn't just whether these teams are better only next year, so that article isn't really helping any argument.

 

[dogfan96]

Did everyone just forget that they picked up Hayward? I don't think either Tatum or Brown are in the starting lineup.
I'm guessing here, but I think Ainge saw enough from Marcus Smart last season when IT got hurt, to want to find him minutes. Rozier has shown he can play. I think they will expect Smart to cover some of Irving's defensive weaknesses.
Brown is a pretty good defender on the wing as well, and his shooting should be improved. It's a very versatile team, which is what Steven's wants.

My main concern is rebounding and interior defense. Ainge is going to need to add someone else.

Hayward is a very good player but he's not the difference in them beating Cleveland. Getting Hayward but sacrificing Bradley, Crowder (their 2 best defenders) and Olynk almost makes it a wash to me. Hayward will give you more scoring but your perimeter D takes a big hit. Smart can defend but he's undersized and he can't shoot.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

Kyrie played 3 years without LeBron and won rookie of the year and went to 2 AS games.

What has IT done without Stevens?

and how many playoff games did he win??

 

[Jerry1714]

and how many playoff games did he win??

How many other AS were on those Cleveland teams?

My point is the idea that LeBron makes Kyrie great is dumb and unsupported by anything

 

[the Q]

Hayward is a very good player but he's not the difference in them beating Cleveland. Getting Hayward but sacrificing Bradley, Crowder (their 2 best defenders) and Olynk almost makes it a wash to me. Hayward will give you more scoring but your perimeter D takes a big hit. Smart can defend but he's undersized and he can't shoot.

Hayward is the best player on the team.

That might be where this discussion goes off the rails.

Some people actually thinking Kyrie is the better player.

 

[Jerry1714]

A good thing - in a vacuum. But put another way, is barely moving the needle in win totals and increasing your chances of winning the east by 6% worth giving up the pick you included? That's the real debate. The argument isn't just whether these teams are better only next year, so that article isn't really helping any argument.

First, 6% is a lot.

Second, that pick has a higher probability to be Anthony Bennett then it does David Robinson.

With Horford and Hawayard they are not building for 5 years for now, they are building to win now. This trade improves those chances. Period.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

How many other AS were on those Cleveland teams?

My point is the idea that LeBron makes Kyrie great is dumb and unsupported by anything

........WHAT? So, missing the playoffs to three straight Finals....proves nothing to you? Really? DAMN!!

 

[Jerry1714]

...WHAT? So, missing the playoffs to three straight Finals....proves nothing to you? Really? DAMN!!

If that is how you interrupted that post you are not bright.

 

[auror]

Do The Celtics Have Enough Star Power To Win a Title? Not Yet.

This trade barely moves the needle and costs them 2 major assets.

This is exactly why I disagree. Their timeline isn't the next 2 years. It's years 3-4 from now. When the Warriors are getting olders and the role players more expensive and and not contributing as much.

Danny made this move basically going all in.

With Horford and Hawayard they are not building for 5 years for now, they are building to win now. This trade improves those chances. Period.

Adding Hayward wins now and helps to still win 3-4 years down the line (but he'll be post-peak). Adding Kyrie helps win in both timeframes. That's why Kyrie is so much more valuable than IT. That 538 article only talks about this year and doesn't mention that the Kyrie deal extends their window. The pick MAY have done that, but it's a crapshoot, especially if it doesn't fall top 3. A star at age 25 is exactly the type of player you want to build around both for right now and for the future.

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

This is an excellent trade for Boston. Anyone who disagrees seems to forget that IT is nearly 30 and has a potentially costly hip issue (which can be even more disastrous for a 5'9" PG who relies on speed and acceleration).
Kyrie Irving will be a superstar PG in this league for the next 7 years.

Oh yeah, and the Celtics have Hayward and Horford, and still managed to keep Brown, Tatum, Smart and next year's Lakers pick. The future is very bright for the Cs.

 

[JSM1970]

I agree, like the deal a lot. Think they will sign Kyrie long term.

Now have 2 elite scorers and surrounding them with other versatile players.

Tatum, Brown, Rozier and Smart will play major minutes this year.

This is an excellent trade for Boston. Anyone who disagrees seems to forget that IT is nearly 30 and has a potentially costly hip issue (which can be even more disastrous for a 5'9" PG who relies on speed and acceleration).
Kyrie Irving will be a superstar PG in this league for the next 7 years.

Oh yeah, and the Celtics have Hayward and Horford, and still managed to keep Brown, Tatum, Smart and next year's Lakers pick. The future is very bright for the Cs.

 

[dogfan96]

Hayward is the best player on the team.

That might be where this discussion goes off the rails.

Some people actually thinking Kyrie is the better player.

It's debatable but either way, if Hayward is the best player on your team (or 2nd best), you're not beating a team with LeBron. You're just not.

This is an excellent trade for Boston. Anyone who disagrees seems to forget that IT is nearly 30 and has a potentially costly hip issue (which can be even more disastrous for a 5'9" PG who relies on speed and acceleration).
Kyrie Irving will be a superstar PG in this league for the next 7 years.

Oh yeah, and the Celtics have Hayward and Horford, and still managed to keep Brown, Tatum, Smart and next year's Lakers pick. The future is very bright for the Cs.

Horford is nearly done. I wouldn't count on him for much, at least against the teams they'll need to beat.

 

[the Q]

It's debatable but either way, if Hayward is the best player on your team (or 2nd best), you're not beating a team with LeBron. You're just not.


Horford is nearly done. I wouldn't count on him for much, at least against the teams they'll need to beat.

I agree with you for the most part.

But disagree, he could be your 2nd best player. Historically teams have won with a guy on GH's level as their 2nd best player (the 538 article I posted shows his).

 

[MilliniumPrince]

If that is how you interrupted that post you are not bright.

LOL

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

It's debatable but either way, if Hayward is the best player on your team (or 2nd best), you're not beating a team with LeBron. You're just not.


Horford is nearly done. I wouldn't count on him for much, at least against the teams they'll need to beat.

I mean he looked pretty good last year. He's not going to take over a game but he's a perfect stretch-big-role player. Plus his leadership and experience in the league is valuable and balances out the young team. He's got a few solid years left for sure, if healthy.

 

[Jerry1714]

LOL

Of course LeBron makes Kyrie better but LeBron makes everyone better.

The point which somehow you missed was Kyrie proved he was an All Star without Lebron therefore the idea that Lebron makes Kyrie who he is is not supported by anything. Just like Wade and Bosh were All Stars and great players before LeBron arrived. Very simple point.

 

[HuskyHawk]

It's debatable but either way, if Hayward is the best player on your team (or 2nd best), you're not beating a team with LeBron. You're just not.


Horford is nearly done. I wouldn't count on him for much, at least against the teams they'll need to beat.

This is ridiculous. Lebron alone can't do much. He's winning now because he has enough other pieces around him. The early Cleveland Lebron teams were very beatable and didn't win squat.

The Celtics have plenty of depth, and much will depend on how much they get out of Brown and Tatum, and how quickly. But the hole right now is at center. Horford can still play in my opinion, and the league has very few impressive big men at this moment in time. But rebounding is a glaring weakness for this team.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

Of course LeBron makes Kyrie better but LeBron makes everyone better.

The point which somehow you missed was Kyrie proved he was an All Star without Lebron therefore the idea that Lebron makes Kyrie who he is is not supported by anything. Just like Wade and Bosh were All Stars and great players before LeBron arrived. Very simple point.

I am not sure how anyone was supposed to get that from your original post. I am guessing you realized that upon review. No harm. We are just fans on a message board, it isn't that serious. But as you say, I am not very bright.

He was a number one overall pick. Making a couple of All-star games is a almost assumed. I think the Celts are hoping he is more than just an all-star.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

This is ridiculous. Lebron alone can't do much. He's winning now because he has enough other pieces around him. The early Cleveland Lebron teams were very beatable and didn't win squat.

The Celtics have plenty of depth, and much will depend on how much they get out of Brown and Tatum, and how quickly. But the hole right now is at center. Horford can still play in my opinion, and the league has very few impressive big men at this moment in time. But rebounding is a glaring weakness for this team.

When was the last time a Lebron led team failed to reach the conference finals? Hell, he carried the early team of bums to the Finals early in his career. The Cavs averaged almost 60 wins per year during the end of his first run there. I would say he does what he does regardless of who is around him.

 

[polycom]

This is ridiculous. Lebron alone can't do much. He's winning now because he has enough other pieces around him. The early Cleveland Lebron teams were very beatable and didn't win squat.

The Celtics have plenty of depth, and much will depend on how much they get out of Brown and Tatum, and how quickly. But the hole right now is at center. Horford can still play in my opinion, and the league has very few impressive big men at this moment in time. But rebounding is a glaring weakness for this team.

The first bold part is factually incorrect. Early Lebron teams when Lebron was a rookie or a second year player?

 

[Jerry1714]

I am not sure how anyone was supposed to get that from your original post. I am guessing you realized that upon review. No harm. We are just fans on a message board, it isn't that serious. But as you say, I am not very bright.

He was a number one overall pick. Making a couple of All-star games is a almost assumed. I think the Celts are hoping he is more than just an all-star.

Not including Fultz, 5 of the last 11 #1 picks have made an All Start team and only 1 (Blake Griffin) has made more than Kyrie.

 

[HuskyHawk]

When was the last time a Lebron led team failed to reach the conference finals? Hell, he carried the early team of bums to the Finals early in his career. The Cavs averaged almost 60 wins per year during the end of his first run there. I would say he does what he does regardless of who is around him.

Oh he can carry any team to certain number of wins. He's amazing. But the original post said you can't beat any Lebron team unless you have a player better than Hayward or Irving, and that's hogwash. Those guys are plenty good enough to beat a Lebron led team. If Cleveland loses Love to injury (again) or Thomas doesn't recover from the hip, the Celtics have to be the favorite in the east.

 

[champs99and04]

We've discussed this before, but scoring ability 1 on 1 is infinitely more valuable on a contending team than any other type of team, because team defense gets better in the playoffs with guys more committed and more rested.



Would you want to be on a team with Lebron? If you could instead be on a different winning team? I mean honestly. It's great to be on a winning team and he guarantees that, but his machinations and drama and media leaks and front office manipulation have to be grating. Especially since it's clear he's holding the Cavs hostage to contend now, leave the cupboard bare, and then bolt LA. I don't blame Kyrie for getting out in front. Plus Kyrie got his Lebron-aided ring already.




They could still draft one of those guys if the Lakers pick conveys 2-5, which I'd say is more likely than not (and if not they get better of Phily/Sac pick in 2019, top 1 protected, which is A-okay)..

So yeah, they could be the Clippers if the Clippers also drafted in the top 5 for 3 straight years and owned 3 other additional first rounders aside from their own during their run. Clippers biggest problem was always depth, but Celtics won't have that problem with talented players on rookie scale deals.

1. I agree with you 100% on this one. That's Kyrie's defining trait and it is probably the most important one in the sport. There is zero doubt that he elevates his game in the postseason and I also don't think there is much question that it translates better to the postseason than somebody like Isaiah's. Ainge clearly saw this and, even I don't agree with his method of addressing it, I can the logic in this part of the equation.

2. It's a fair question, but the thing is, he didn't know he was going to be traded to a contending team, and to the extent that the Celtics are now a contender is subjective. Considering he already took more shots per minute than just about any player in the NBA, the trade request strikes me as dubious. This doesn't appear to be a case of a great player being limited by his slot in the pecking order. This seems to be Kyrie being a brat. I have no doubts LeBron is a manipulative, self-serving at time. I also have no doubts he loved Kyrie, wanted the best for him, and was willing to assert a tough love that he thought would be better in the long run. Given Kyrie's history of poor transition defense, lackadaisical off-ball defense, and propensity to die on screens, and it's hard not to take LeBron's side here. I don't care how good Kyrie is or how ready he felt for his own team. He's not good enough to disrespect one of the best players ever.

3. You're right that the Celtics have more depth than the Clippers did, but the Clippers big three - Paul, Griffin, and Jordan - was also a healthy deal better than the one the Celtics have now. Perhaps some of my skepticism here is colored by me not being sold on Brown or Tatum, but that's another component of the debate: I think people underestimate how hard it is to grow into a player that really makes a difference in this league. How many different prospects circled through Oklahoma City in the post Harden era without making a dent? And they were playing with a foundation that dwarfs what exists in Boston. Brown and Tatum aren't proven commodities and Boston fans act as if they're made money. Since 2011, you're looking at about a 25% hit rate with top five picks becoming legitimate blue chips, and most of them were more highly regarded than those two. I think Celtics fans - not necessarily you - are too close to this one whereas it's easier for an NBA atheist like myself to take an aerial view here and question the strategy. JMO.