Nets hinting at trading Deron and JJ ? (rumor)

[TheFlex]

I would also make the following move with Brooklyn.

Isaiah Thomas, Evan Turner and Wallace for
Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack.

I feel Smart could learn a lot from a guy like Jack who's a better player than Isaiah (IMO).

Jack is most certainly not a better player than IT. This is giving up way too much. Johnson would only be signed for 1 year. Why give up a perennial 6th man of the year who plays the game's most dominant position and is signed to one of the best deals in the entire league for a worse PG and an aging fringe All-Star whose biggest attraction is arguably the massive expiring contract he brings with him?

[gpap]

I would also make the following move with Brooklyn.

Isaiah Thomas, Evan Turner and Wallace for
Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack.

I feel Smart could learn a lot from a guy like Jack who's a better player than Isaiah (IMO).

Jack is most certainly not a better player than IT. This is giving up way too much. Johnson would only be signed for 1 year. Why give up a perennial 6th man of the year who plays the game's most dominant position and is signed to one of the best deals in the entire league for a worse PG and an aging fringe All-Star whose biggest attraction is arguably the massive expiring contract he brings with him?

He is? Is that fact or opinion because IT looked REALLY REALLY bad in the playoffs.

[get_banners]

I'm sure they'd love to trade those two albatross contracts, but nobody in their right mind would take them w/o taking a bit of talent in return (to say nothing about the challenge of matching up salaries).

[JohnBoy65]

I would also make the following move with Brooklyn.

Isaiah Thomas, Evan Turner and Wallace for
Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack.

I feel Smart could learn a lot from a guy like Jack who's a better player than Isaiah (IMO).

Jack is most certainly not a better player than IT. This is giving up way too much. Johnson would only be signed for 1 year. Why give up a perennial 6th man of the year who plays the game's most dominant position and is signed to one of the best deals in the entire league for a worse PG and an aging fringe All-Star whose biggest attraction is arguably the massive expiring contract he brings with him?

He is? Is that fact or opinion because IT looked REALLY REALLY bad in the playoffs.

So you're using that 4 game sample size against one of the best teams in the league as your argument?

[hwangjini_1]

not that this will settle any debate nor change anyone's mind (god forbid.):

last season:

jack = 31 yo
thomas = 26 yo

(below are ONLY boston stats for IT since that is where he will be next year, we hope.)

minutes/game
jack = 28
thomas = 26

pts/game
jack = 12
thomas = 19

assts/game
jack = 4.7
thomas = 7.5

3pt%
jack = 26.7
thomas =34.5

2pt%
jack = 47.7
thomas = 47.3

rebs/game
jack = 3.1
thomas = 2.9

ok, now keep now talking. 

[TheFlex]

I would also make the following move with Brooklyn.

Isaiah Thomas, Evan Turner and Wallace for
Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack.

I feel Smart could learn a lot from a guy like Jack who's a better player than Isaiah (IMO).

Jack is most certainly not a better player than IT. This is giving up way too much. Johnson would only be signed for 1 year. Why give up a perennial 6th man of the year who plays the game's most dominant position and is signed to one of the best deals in the entire league for a worse PG and an aging fringe All-Star whose biggest attraction is arguably the massive expiring contract he brings with him?

He is? Is that fact or opinion because IT looked REALLY REALLY bad in the playoffs.

Ignoring the absurdity of weighing 4 games - regardless of their increased vigor - over 2 straight seasons of superior work, or the lack of accounting for the variability between the Celtics' and Nets' opponents' strengths, I wonder how Jack would look against a playoff defense without anywhere from 2-4 superior scorers on the floor alongside him, as this is the situation IT was put in.

[Monkhouse]

20.3 PPG, 6.3 APG, 1.3 SPG, 2.9 RPG?

Those are his 2013-2014 numbers in SAC, and its crazy to believe had Isaiah Thomas been on any team other than SAC, like the Knicks or Lakers for example; how much they would consider him a 'superstar,' and definitely might've been a potential Allstar. ESPN has a tendency to hype up Melo, and Kobe plays, so I would assume IT would for sure get some attention.

Give Jarret Jack some credit though, especially considering his close proximity of obtaining the sixth man of the year.

But IT is barely reaching his prime, and Jack is nearing the end of his.

Like many other players, Thomas’ defense also takes a hit the more he is used on the offensive end. In the 4th quarter of games when Thomas’ usage rate jumps to 36.7%, his defensive rating also increases to 115.0. This is not of great concern to the Celtics late in games, as Thomas has a ridiculous 117.4 offensive rating in 4th quarters while in Boston, but it does provide some indication that if the Cs require him to carry the offensive load, especially against team’s starting units, Thomas’ defense will suffer.

Taken from Redsarmy, it shows how dominant IT is on the pick and roll.

Thomas ranks in the 93rd percentile in the NBA as a pick and roll ball handler, according to NBA.com, a rank that is unrivaled by anyone else on the Celtics roster. Kevin O’Connor from CelticsBlog aptly covered how Thomas’ pick and roll ability would greatly benefit the Celtics offense following the trade, and he has undoubtedly been proven correct. The pick and roll is such a critical play in today’s NBA game, and even more critical in an offense predicated on pace and space. As Kevin notes, Thomas gives the Celtics the elite pick and roll scorer the team desperately needed.

A part of Thomas’ offensive game that is recognized, yet understated, is his ability to get to the free throw line. Free throws don’t receive the same hype among the analytics crowd that 3-pointers do, and fans view a player, like James Harden, who excels at getting to the free throw line as boring. However, for even an average free throw shooter (which Thomas is not) a possession ending in free throws, as opposed to a 2-point shot or 3-point shot, is the most efficient type of possession in basketball. As an example, look at Isaiah Thomas, whose shooting splits with the Celtics are 42%/34%/86%. This means that the expected value of a Celtics possession ending in a Thomas 2-point shot is .84 points. For a 3-point shot, it’s 1.02 points. For a Celtics possession ending in a pair of IT free throws, the expected value is 1.72 points.

Player    Usage % (top 5 among PGs)    TS%    TS Rank among PGs
Russell Westbrook    38.0    .531    T-24th
Isaiah Thomas    32.0    .581    T-4th
Derrick Rose    30.6    .494    55th
Reggie Jackson    30.3    .512    T-41st
Stephen Curry    28.5    .637    1st

 

Can anyone SERIOUSLY believe we got him for a late first round pick, and an expiring?

I'm just amazed. Danny made a genius move, and thanks in part to Luck, and the friendship between him and Ryan, was his coup d'état for last year.

[celticsfan8591]

Just to think outside the box here....

If Boston looks like they'll strike out this offseason with the restricted free agents like Harris/MIddleton and the unrestricted power players like Love, Monroe, Aldridge, etc...

There is SOME logic to trading for Joe Johnson.

Gerald Wallace (10.1 mil - 1 year) for Joe Johnson (24.8 mil - 1 year)

WHy for Brooklyn:  Even after shedding 15 mil in salary, they are still over the cap next year (assuming they bring back Thad and Brook).  But maybe saving 15 million dollars next year helps in their efforts to sell the team.  Has that happened yet? 

Why for Boston:  I'll break it into 3 reasons.

#1 - We have something like 23 mil.  This eats 15 mil of that.  Again, if we fail at signing a top star, what difference does it make?   We'd still have 8 mil in cap space to add someone like Asik or Biyombo.  If the team dumps Bradley's salary (or a combo of players like Turner and Zeller), you might even have enough to still add a max contract deal.  Trading Wallace for Johnson, perhaps, makes Boston more attractive to Kevin Love, right?

#2 - Theoretically, losing Joe Johnson hurts the Nets... which subsequently helps the Celtics since we own their draft pick next year.  He's still one of the most talented players on that team and could definitely start for us at SF.  ...  If you ignore his contract and look at Joe Johnson the player, he's a got talent and can be a consistent scorer that we need.  He made the all-star team in 2014 and can shoot.  Wouldn't he fit well with Stevens pace-and-space system?  Is there any chance that adding Joe Johnson to the Celtics hurts their team?  Is there any chance that losing Joe Johnson helps the Nets next year?  I'd guess no on both.

#3 - There should be no long-term negative impact towards it.  He's a free agent at the end of the year.  If you want to re-sign him you can do it for much less.  The cap jumps 20 mil next offseason anyways. 

The only reason not to do it would be if you are trying hard to free up cap space to sign two max contract players this summer... or Boston thinks adding Johnson stunts the development of young guys on the roster.

TP for the creativity.
If nothing better at FA or trade show up, I would be ok with this plan C.

Some fair points, but my concerns (in response to the questions) are:

1) It's spending money for the sake of spending money.  It eats up cap space which hurts our flexibility during the season.  If a trade opportunity for a star comes up mid season, or some team waives a disgruntled star, then it's typically the teams with cap space to burn who end up with getting guys like that.  For this reason I don't really like throwing away cap space just like that unless it's a move that's going to really help us a lot either short or long term.

2) Joe Johnson isn't the guy he once was.  Last season he averaged only 14.4 points (on nearly 13 attempts) to go with 4.8 rebounds and 3.7 assists in a not insubstantial 35 minutes.   That's not very good production at all, and his offensive production has shown significant decline every year for the past 4 years.  There's a strong possibility that next season he drops off to a 12-13 PPG guy.  His scoring efficiency has also dropped (1.1 points per FGA) which indicates he's either not making as many threes, not getting to the line as much or shooting a lower percentage form the field - in this case it's all three.  His defense is also sketchy. This guy has maybe one or two years left in him at this rate before he's out of the league. The nets should be paying us to take him off their hands with a contract like that - problem is they have nothing to pay us with.   

3) No long term impact in theory, but if we miss out on a key mid-season trade or signing as a result of the cap space we have absorbed by him, then that could impact us long term.

I can get the appeal of this if we were talking about Joe Johnson from 3 years ago, but at this point he's just fallen off way too far to make this worthwhile - we're likely gain nothing from this trade, as this probably doesn't make us any better han if we're starting Turner or Crowder.

On the other hand, if a star becomes available, Johnson might be a useful piece in a trade as a big expiring contract.  It's true that if we are under the cap we could just send out less salary than we take on, but I think a deal would still be workable with Johnson in the fold.  I think I like this idea; the sure value we get by weakening the Nets in a season in which we have their draft pick outweighs the minor chance that we cost ourselves a chance at a mid-season trade for a star in my book.

[Hemingway]

The only problem is that JJ makes so much. It would still be a lot to swallow for a lot of teams even for just a year. It would also be to big to use in a lot of trades.

I like the logic of LryBrd's idea- we could flip Wallace for a bigger expiring if we can't spend the money better elsewhere. But my problem with the whole thing is I think Crowder might be better than JJ next season.

How about this for an idea, consider trading Wallace for JJ at the deadline if we can't get anything better. That way we don't shoot ourselves in the foot on the off chance DMC or someone is on the block and somehow having JJ-and not the room- takes us out of the running. 

[colincb]

http://bkref.com/tiny/zdL4k

Jack vs Thomas Stat matchup

Thomas wins comfortably, but not overwhelmingly.  Jack is a good back-up. Thomas is NBA 6th man level.  Jack's defensive +/- is only a bit better than Thomas, but offensively Thomas's edge over Jack is as a 3FG% shooter which results in a decent TotalShooting%  edge of 3+%.  Thomas wins the advanced stats battle pretty much across the board and the edge is big enough and consistent enough to take Thomas over Jack.