Author Topic: What about Brad?  (Read 13955 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #15 on: February 16, 2022, 04:38:04 PM »

Offline seancally

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1097
  • Tommy Points: 119
I like Brad's moves, but they've come at a price.

Horford for Kemba is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Richardson for White is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Schroder was fine, but honestly flipping him for an overpaid but fine player in Theis isn't some amazing move to me. Brining in kanter at all was questionable.

So his moves have been good, but they've bene more like singles or doubles so far

Yeah, I was just thinking Ainge got to the point where he was sitting on pitches waiting for a home run. Stevens is hitting singles and taking walks. That's fine if you believe we have the talent to knock in those runs. Ainge didn't. He wanted another big bat in the lineup. /analogy

I think that's a pretty good way of putting it. These are fine moves if you believe in a Tatum/Brown core as being enough and just need the right guys around it. But nothing he's done so far gets you much closer to a third star, at least not directly.

Now you can argue maybe that these moves give you more contract flexibility to pursue a third star. Having Theis as your backup C maybe makes Horford more expendable as salary matching. Having both White and Smart makes one or the other more expendable in a star trade. And maybe being below the tax this year makes ownership more likely to spend in future years.

Anyway the moves have been fine, but there's been no Ainge level homerun and quite frankly continually moving first round picks could come back and bite you.

I agree with both sides of this to an extent but also think we’re missing another point — Brad believes in a Spurs-style team building, where you do need top-end talent but it’s more important that the team plays fluid, beautiful ball. We’re so accustomed to the Big 3, superstar-driven era that it’s easy forget there’s another way to do it.

Before everyone points out the HoF roster in those Spurs teams, I would just point out that the 2014 title winner that defeated Miami was not a team of superstars. Duncan was old. Kawhi was young. Man to man I don’t know if any one of them were, in that series, better than Tatum is right now. That team was beautiful to watch. They could’ve won in 2013 too.

I think Brad wants to win on the strength of “good enough” talent that has excellent chemistry, dominates on defense, and plays a beautiful game. We’re not there yet but I truly believe that’s his philosophy. He doesn’t care about superstars.
"The game honors toughness." - President Stevens

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #16 on: February 16, 2022, 04:50:09 PM »

Offline Phantom255x

  • Larry Bird
  • *****************************
  • Posts: 29510
  • Tommy Points: 2923
  • On To Banner 18!
What about him?

 :laugh:
"Tough times never last, but tough people do." - Robert H. Schuller

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #17 on: February 16, 2022, 05:01:36 PM »

Offline Celtics2021

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7145
  • Tommy Points: 979
I like Brad's moves, but they've come at a price.

Horford for Kemba is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Richardson for White is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Schroder was fine, but honestly flipping him for an overpaid but fine player in Theis isn't some amazing move to me. Brining in kanter at all was questionable.

So his moves have been good, but they've bene more like singles or doubles so far

Yeah, I was just thinking Ainge got to the point where he was sitting on pitches waiting for a home run. Stevens is hitting singles and taking walks. That's fine if you believe we have the talent to knock in those runs. Ainge didn't. He wanted another big bat in the lineup. /analogy

I think that's a pretty good way of putting it. These are fine moves if you believe in a Tatum/Brown core as being enough and just need the right guys around it. But nothing he's done so far gets you much closer to a third star, at least not directly.

Now you can argue maybe that these moves give you more contract flexibility to pursue a third star. Having Theis as your backup C maybe makes Horford more expendable as salary matching. Having both White and Smart makes one or the other more expendable in a star trade. And maybe being below the tax this year makes ownership more likely to spend in future years.

Anyway the moves have been fine, but there's been no Ainge level homerun and quite frankly continually moving first round picks could come back and bite you.

I do wonder if Stevens is looking at non-lottery first round picks with the eyes of a coach, who rarely saw value come from so many of the team's picks during his tenure. A typical GM might value those assets more highly than a coach who only sees the immediate improvements that are available. Like benching your rookie and putting in a vet is easy. But is it a better long term move to play the rookie? I don't know if that's in play in Stevens' decisions thus far, but I find it interesting.

It might be to a degree.  I do think Brad did not like having four to five rookies at a time while also trying to win with a young team.  Essentially it was serving two masters — you can’t develop all those young players without sacrificing winning, which is an important thing for the high-end young talent in Brown and Tatum.  The Js are still young, but entering their primes, and it is time to put the best team around them you can.  It would have been awesome if Romeo could have been one of those players, but he wasn’t, and they gave him a lot of time.  Rob Williams did become such a player, but it took him until year 3 to get there.  Same thing with Grant, although he played well enough in his rookie season to be of situational use.  And maybe someone drafted at 20-something would become such a player in 2-3 years, but Derrick White is ready to be that player now AND has three years after this left on his deal.  The odds that whomever we drafted would be more valuable than White three years from now is pretty low, much less the res of the season and the following two seasons.

I do think we’ll start making some picks again in a year or so, so that those guys can be ready when some contracts expire.  We have our entire rotation under contract next year tho — there’s no need for a 1st rounder in 2022.  The C’s can develop Begarin.

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #18 on: February 16, 2022, 05:25:01 PM »

Offline Goldstar88

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10683
  • Tommy Points: 1416
I like Brad's moves, but they've come at a price.

Horford for Kemba is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Richardson for White is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Schroder was fine, but honestly flipping him for an overpaid but fine player in Theis isn't some amazing move to me. Brining in kanter at all was questionable.

So his moves have been good, but they've bene more like singles or doubles so far

Sure, but upgrading the roster and getting out of Kemba’s horrible contract was always going to come at a cost. Also, with the draft being such a crapshoot, I’d rather have a sure thing like White instead of a lottery ticket. I think a lot of us overvalue these mid to late first round picks.
Quoting Nick from the now locked Ime thread:
Quote
At some point you have to blame the performance on the court on the players on the court. Every loss is not the coach's fault and every win isn't because of the players.

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #19 on: February 16, 2022, 05:31:43 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11226
  • Tommy Points: 860
I like Brad's moves, but they've come at a price.

Horford for Kemba is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Richardson for White is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Schroder was fine, but honestly flipping him for an overpaid but fine player in Theis isn't some amazing move to me. Brining in kanter at all was questionable.

So his moves have been good, but they've bene more like singles or doubles so far

Yeah, I was just thinking Ainge got to the point where he was sitting on pitches waiting for a home run. Stevens is hitting singles and taking walks. That's fine if you believe we have the talent to knock in those runs. Ainge didn't. He wanted another big bat in the lineup. /analogy

I think that's a pretty good way of putting it. These are fine moves if you believe in a Tatum/Brown core as being enough and just need the right guys around it. But nothing he's done so far gets you much closer to a third star, at least not directly.

Now you can argue maybe that these moves give you more contract flexibility to pursue a third star. Having Theis as your backup C maybe makes Horford more expendable as salary matching. Having both White and Smart makes one or the other more expendable in a star trade. And maybe being below the tax this year makes ownership more likely to spend in future years.

Anyway the moves have been fine, but there's been no Ainge level homerun and quite frankly continually moving first round picks could come back and bite you.

I do wonder if Stevens is looking at non-lottery first round picks with the eyes of a coach, who rarely saw value come from so many of the team's picks during his tenure. A typical GM might value those assets more highly than a coach who only sees the immediate improvements that are available. Like benching your rookie and putting in a vet is easy. But is it a better long term move to play the rookie? I don't know if that's in play in Stevens' decisions thus far, but I find it interesting.

It might be to a degree.  I do think Brad did not like having four to five rookies at a time while also trying to win with a young team.  Essentially it was serving two masters — you can’t develop all those young players without sacrificing winning, which is an important thing for the high-end young talent in Brown and Tatum.  The Js are still young, but entering their primes, and it is time to put the best team around them you can.  It would have been awesome if Romeo could have been one of those players, but he wasn’t, and they gave him a lot of time.  Rob Williams did become such a player, but it took him until year 3 to get there.  Same thing with Grant, although he played well enough in his rookie season to be of situational use.  And maybe someone drafted at 20-something would become such a player in 2-3 years, but Derrick White is ready to be that player now AND has three years after this left on his deal.  The odds that whomever we drafted would be more valuable than White three years from now is pretty low, much less the res of the season and the following two seasons.

I do think we’ll start making some picks again in a year or so, so that those guys can be ready when some contracts expire.  We have our entire rotation under contract next year tho — there’s no need for a 1st rounder in 2022.  The C’s can develop Begarin.

This is a good point.  We have everyone back next season if we want them (excluding Kornet who is a UFA), and even the season after that, everyone is either signed, a team option, or a RFA.

A big question of course is what to do with Horford who has been an impactful member of the core rotation.  We are looking at a pretty big team salary if we keep Horford and being over the cap will mean no sign and trades.  Even if we release Horford and pay his guarantee, it is a lot of dead money.  I guess we could stretch it to create some room?

If we do release Horford, we are going to need another starting level big.  I doubt the long term starter is Theis.  Likely that player will have to come via a trade and fit the Fournier TPE.

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2022, 05:44:02 PM »

Offline coco

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2682
  • Tommy Points: 146
I agree with Brad about trading the picks.   
You have 2 young wings which means you can barely play whos behind them (Nessi)
You have 2 young/mid-career backourts, which means you can barely play whos behind them (Payton)
...and then you add the young pleasant surprise Grant Williams has become...a killer non-trade.

The only place you can bring a young guy to break him in is at the Big....and you have Timelord there.

Now we can argue about when it would be time to move on from Hofford and/or Theis.   But then, you don't want to go into the playoffs with young inexperienced bigs against Giannis or Embid or Adebayo or Jokic,
...heck, even Chicago's center is a handful (forgot his name  ;D )

...and most of all, Brads comes from the school of thought that team Chemestry and "fit" is what makes a team overachieve.   And I appreciate that as well.

Job well done Brad.  Keep it up.....and please ignore the pressure of bringing Beal.  I don't think he fits in the culture we are currently creating; but that is a discussion for another day.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2022, 05:51:11 PM by coco »

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2022, 06:18:27 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23320
  • Tommy Points: 2509
I like the flexibility the C's have moving forward.  Before the White and Theis trades I was unsure how the C's could upgrade to a 3rd star (or borderline star) with the assets and contracts they had.  They now have contracts that can make non-Jay trades work and assets that might compete with other teams vying for a desired player -- without leaving a new hole to fill (exception - Rob would leave a hole).   Smart/White, Grant, Rob, Theis, Horford,... maybe some value for PP, SH, and/or AN if they emerge a bit with some pt in the last 23 games.  Plus they have all their 1st round picks after this year -- one as a swap but that's just as valuable as any of the picks over the next few years -- assumption being they'll all be mid-20's picks (thereabout). 

They absolutely can put together a solid package for star #3, or maybe Brad has done so well that they won't need to.  I think the White deal was not an overpay but I accept that the jury's out on that.  Looking forward to who Brad will pull in from buyouts.

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2022, 06:57:52 PM »

Offline dannyboy35

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1939
  • Tommy Points: 104
Yes, Brad, not Bob. Feel like he’s not getting any love for the team that he has put together and the success that they’re having.

Bringing In Horford and moving on from Kemba. Al has been a really solid contributor all year on both ends and Kemba isn’t really doing much of anything for NY.

Hiring a defensive minded coach and creating a roster that is switchable on D, that can’t be bullied due to lack of size.

Trading for Richardson and signing Schroder in the off-season. No one thought Boston would be an option for Dennis, but Brad was able to sign him. Extending Richardson who was the most consistent bench player for the C’s was solid move as well.

Getting rid of the mini guards: Kemba, Edwards, Waters.

Using the pieces acquired in the off-season with other assets to trade for White and Theis at the deadline.

I know some are critical of Brad for perhaps overpaying to bring in pieces that he thinks will fit, but at the end of the day, this shows that Stevens is trying to win now. I think he’s done an incredible job as GM so far.

   I didn’t read any replies yet so hopefully not repeating. I think you COULD be correct but I dint buy that Brad is making the moves. ( please understand I know I could be wrong).
   I believe Horford  was a move Danny had already put in place and was understood by both parties. All the moves good or bad I think it’s somebody else higher making the calls. Maybe Zarren? I dunno. I just think Brad’s deal was a way to not just eat his whole salary and while they probably trust he’s a good hoop mind, even if they thought he was the greatest I dint see giving him the power. In my mind he’s gone as soon as his deal is up. Back to coaching. I hope they wouldn’t give a very shoddy term gm that power.

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #23 on: February 16, 2022, 07:31:03 PM »

Online rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9672
  • Tommy Points: 325
I like Brad's moves, but they've come at a price.

Horford for Kemba is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Richardson for White is an upgrade, but it cost you a first.

Schroder was fine, but honestly flipping him for an overpaid but fine player in Theis isn't some amazing move to me. Brining in kanter at all was questionable.

So his moves have been good, but they've bene more like singles or doubles so far

Yeah, I was just thinking Ainge got to the point where he was sitting on pitches waiting for a home run. Stevens is hitting singles and taking walks. That's fine if you believe we have the talent to knock in those runs. Ainge didn't. He wanted another big bat in the lineup. /analogy

I think that's a pretty good way of putting it. These are fine moves if you believe in a Tatum/Brown core as being enough and just need the right guys around it. But nothing he's done so far gets you much closer to a third star, at least not directly.

Now you can argue maybe that these moves give you more contract flexibility to pursue a third star. Having Theis as your backup C maybe makes Horford more expendable as salary matching. Having both White and Smart makes one or the other more expendable in a star trade. And maybe being below the tax this year makes ownership more likely to spend in future years.

Anyway the moves have been fine, but there's been no Ainge level homerun and quite frankly continually moving first round picks could come back and bite you.

I agree with both sides of this to an extent but also think we’re missing another point — Brad believes in a Spurs-style team building, where you do need top-end talent but it’s more important that the team plays fluid, beautiful ball. We’re so accustomed to the Big 3, superstar-driven era that it’s easy forget there’s another way to do it.

Before everyone points out the HoF roster in those Spurs teams, I would just point out that the 2014 title winner that defeated Miami was not a team of superstars. Duncan was old. Kawhi was young. Man to man I don’t know if any one of them were, in that series, better than Tatum is right now. That team was beautiful to watch. They could’ve won in 2013 too.

I think Brad wants to win on the strength of “good enough” talent that has excellent chemistry, dominates on defense, and plays a beautiful game. We’re not there yet but I truly believe that’s his philosophy. He doesn’t care about superstars.

And just look at all of the "superstar" nonsense that other teams are having to deal with—Harden forcing his way from one team to another, Simmons forcing his way out of Philly, LeBron jumping all over the place, AD forcing his way to the Lakers, Durant jumping ship in OKC, Westbrook bouncing around. I'm not saying, "Don't go for superstars"—in fact, I'd love for Boston to land a superstar as long as that guy is a good fit—but most superstars are divas who cause a lot of headaches, oftentimes without even getting their teams into the conference finals, much less leading them to titles.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #24 on: February 16, 2022, 08:38:04 PM »

Online tenn_smoothie

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6147
  • Tommy Points: 722
This obsession with a 3d star is what has gotten the Lakers where they are at - an aging, mismatched roster with almost no flexibility.

I am still not sold on the Tatum/Brown duo being capable of winning titles and I hope I am proved wrong. But I am completely against forcing a 3d star on this team to fit some imagined ideal - especially another ball-dominant, score-first point guard.

I would be more inclined to let Rob Williams continue to develop and possibly trade either Tatum or Brown for an all-nba level power forward, then add a playmaking point guard and shooters, shooters and more shooters.
The Four Celtic Generals:
Russell - Cowens - Bird - Garnett

The Four Celtic Lieutenants:
Cousy - Havlicek - McHale - Pierce

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #25 on: February 16, 2022, 08:44:36 PM »

Offline Ogaju

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19479
  • Tommy Points: 1871
Yes, Brad, not Bob. Feel like he’s not getting any love for the team that he has put together and the success they’re having.

Bringing In Horford and moving on from Kemba. Al has been a really solid contributor all year on both ends and Kemba isn’t really doing much of anything for NY.

Hiring a defensive minded coach and creating a roster that is switchable on D, that can’t be bullied due to lack of size.

Trading for Richardson and signing Schroder in the off-season. No one thought Boston would be an option for Dennis, but Brad was able to sign him. Extending Richardson who was the most consistent bench player for the C’s was solid move as well.

Getting rid of the mini guards: Kemba, Edwards, Waters.

Using the pieces acquired in the off-season with other assets to trade for White and Theis at the deadline.

I know some are critical of Brad for perhaps overpaying to bring in pieces that he thinks will fit, but at the end of the day, this shows that Stevens is trying to win now. I think he’s done an incredible job as GM so far.
the critiquing of overpayments is valid though.  if you keep overpaying, the assets you may need to make the deal to put the team in clear contention may no longer be at your disposal.  White's been a fine addition but to be clear on him:
- we were already on a solid winning streak before he got here
- he's not producing at a level that equates to Richardson + Romeo + a first rounder + a possible 1st round swap.  he's just not.  most recent to oldest game logs
--> against Philly, 11 pts, 4-9 shooting, 0-3 from 3, 1 rb, 2 asst, 1 block, 1 steal, 1 TO, 4 fouls.
--> against Hawks, 14 pts, 4-14 shooting, 2-10 from 3, 3 rbs, 5 asst, 1 block, 2 steal, 1 TO, 2 fouls
--> against Denver, 15 pts, 6-12 shooting, 3-7 from 3, 6 rbs, 2 asst, 0 block, 1 steal, 2 TO, 4 fouls.

he started off with a good game and has been diminished returns.  the +/- isn't something I put a lot of stock in but I look at what's being produced and I'm not seeing a player that should have cost what Brad paid.  Maybe he can dial it up a notch if Smart misses time but that remains to be seen.  He looks like a good player to have but that was more than I would have paid. 

same can be said of the Schroder, Freedom deal.  seems like more could have been had in terms of another second rounder.  if schroder's getting waived to join another team, makes me wonder why we didn't deal directly with the team he ends up with.

Sure, questioning overpayments is valid, but there is zero evidence that Stevens overpaid for White.  Former front-office types like Bobby Marks and John Hollinger came out with trade grades that showed the Celtics doing better than the Spurs.  While noting the risk of the pick swap, they didn’t say the price was wrong.

Further, there are a bunch of analytics out there that have White as a Top 25-50 player, about on par with McCollum in terms of in-court value.  McCollum was traded for a first that is likely to be better than what the Celtics sent out, a prospect of similar quality to Romeo, a rotational player of similar quality to Richardson, and a lot of dead salary.  McCollum has a distinctly worse contract, making over $30 million a year the next few seasons.  White makes far less, is younger, and has an extra year remaining.  In that market, the Celtics did fine.  The price wasn’t cheap, but perhaps it shouldn’t have been.

If all that matters to you in evaluating a player is traditional box score stats, then yeah, you aren’t likely to appreciate White.  I hope you move beyond that, because you’re missing someone worth watching.

TP for the bolded part.

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #26 on: February 16, 2022, 08:53:35 PM »

Offline mef730

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4422
  • Tommy Points: 907
This obsession with a 3d star is what has gotten the Lakers where they are at - an aging, mismatched roster with almost no flexibility.

I am still not sold on the Tatum/Brown duo being capable of winning titles and I hope I am proved wrong. But I am completely against forcing a 3d star on this team to fit some imagined ideal - especially another ball-dominant, score-first point guard.

I would be more inclined to let Rob Williams continue to develop and possibly trade either Tatum or Brown for an all-nba level power forward, then add a playmaking point guard and shooters, shooters and more shooters.

Bingo. The Lakers have become the Yankees of the NBA.

I’m happy for Brad. Between the Hayward injury, Kemba injury and Kyrie turning out to be insane, he had more than his fair share of bad luck with our stars.

Mike

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #27 on: February 16, 2022, 08:58:10 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Yes, Brad, not Bob. Feel like he’s not getting any love for the team that he has put together and the success they’re having.

Bringing In Horford and moving on from Kemba. Al has been a really solid contributor all year on both ends and Kemba isn’t really doing much of anything for NY.

Hiring a defensive minded coach and creating a roster that is switchable on D, that can’t be bullied due to lack of size.

Trading for Richardson and signing Schroder in the off-season. No one thought Boston would be an option for Dennis, but Brad was able to sign him. Extending Richardson who was the most consistent bench player for the C’s was solid move as well.

Getting rid of the mini guards: Kemba, Edwards, Waters.

Using the pieces acquired in the off-season with other assets to trade for White and Theis at the deadline.

I know some are critical of Brad for perhaps overpaying to bring in pieces that he thinks will fit, but at the end of the day, this shows that Stevens is trying to win now. I think he’s done an incredible job as GM so far.
the critiquing of overpayments is valid though.  if you keep overpaying, the assets you may need to make the deal to put the team in clear contention may no longer be at your disposal.  White's been a fine addition but to be clear on him:
- we were already on a solid winning streak before he got here
- he's not producing at a level that equates to Richardson + Romeo + a first rounder + a possible 1st round swap.  he's just not.  most recent to oldest game logs
--> against Philly, 11 pts, 4-9 shooting, 0-3 from 3, 1 rb, 2 asst, 1 block, 1 steal, 1 TO, 4 fouls.
--> against Hawks, 14 pts, 4-14 shooting, 2-10 from 3, 3 rbs, 5 asst, 1 block, 2 steal, 1 TO, 2 fouls
--> against Denver, 15 pts, 6-12 shooting, 3-7 from 3, 6 rbs, 2 asst, 0 block, 1 steal, 2 TO, 4 fouls.

he started off with a good game and has been diminished returns.  the +/- isn't something I put a lot of stock in but I look at what's being produced and I'm not seeing a player that should have cost what Brad paid.  Maybe he can dial it up a notch if Smart misses time but that remains to be seen.  He looks like a good player to have but that was more than I would have paid. 

same can be said of the Schroder, Freedom deal.  seems like more could have been had in terms of another second rounder.  if schroder's getting waived to join another team, makes me wonder why we didn't deal directly with the team he ends up with.

Sure, questioning overpayments is valid, but there is zero evidence that Stevens overpaid for White.  Former front-office types like Bobby Marks and John Hollinger came out with trade grades that showed the Celtics doing better than the Spurs.  While noting the risk of the pick swap, they didn’t say the price was wrong.

Further, there are a bunch of analytics out there that have White as a Top 25-50 player, about on par with McCollum in terms of in-court value.  McCollum was traded for a first that is likely to be better than what the Celtics sent out, a prospect of similar quality to Romeo, a rotational player of similar quality to Richardson, and a lot of dead salary.  McCollum has a distinctly worse contract, making over $30 million a year the next few seasons.  White makes far less, is younger, and has an extra year remaining.  In that market, the Celtics did fine.  The price wasn’t cheap, but perhaps it shouldn’t have been.

If all that matters to you in evaluating a player is traditional box score stats, then yeah, you aren’t likely to appreciate White.  I hope you move beyond that, because you’re missing someone worth watching.

TP for the bolded part.
not a box score guy -- I watch the games and evaluate based on eye test.  box score offers context for the decreasing return on what he's providing.  He's looked like a solid player so far, but not worth the price we paid.

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #28 on: February 16, 2022, 09:26:45 PM »

Offline pokeKingCurtis

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3733
  • Tommy Points: 280
And is brother Wanamaker

Re: What about Brad?
« Reply #29 on: February 16, 2022, 10:01:47 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3141
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
This obsession with a 3d star is what has gotten the Lakers where they are at - an aging, mismatched roster with almost no flexibility.
It also got Milwaukee a championship by acquiring Holiday
'23 Historical Draft: Orlando Magic.

PG: Terry Porter (90-91) / Steve Francis (00-01)
SG: Joe Dumars (92-93) / Jeff Hornacek (91-92) / Jerry Stackhouse (00-01)
SF: Brandon Roy (08-09) / Walter Davis (78-79)
PF: Terry Cummings (84-85) / Paul Millsap (15-16)
C: Chris Webber (00-01) / Ralph Sampson (83-84) / Andrew Bogut (09-10)