Poll: If Kyrie walks, was the trade worth it

[Roy H.]

Absolutely. IT knew he needed surgery, he tried to conn the Celtic organization into signing him BEFORE he went under the knife. While being a fun player and a great one on one scoring threat, IT was a useless defender. We all had fun watching him that special year, but that's history.

Even in his prime, he was made to be the 6th man.

Oh boy. The IT fans are gonna come for your head.

As they should. Prime IT was a legit All-Star and MVP candidate.

you're just still ticked they traded IT.

trade was worth it at the time and still worth it even if Kyrie walks, especially considering IT is a shell of himself and Crowder is hardly missed.

No, I just object to saying that a guy who averaged 28.9 points / 5.9 assists / .625 TS% was better suited to being a sixth man.  The guy was All-NBA second team, and carried us in the playoffs while playing through a severe injury.

He's never recovered from his injury, so the trade obviously made all kinds of sense.  There's no need to downplay his contributions, though.  The guy was a starter, and an extremely good one.

[trickybilly]

So, real quick, are we now definitely paying the luxury tax this year?

[nickagneta]

Absolutely. IT knew he needed surgery, he tried to conn the Celtic organization into signing him BEFORE he went under the knife. While being a fun player and a great one on one scoring threat, IT was a useless defender. We all had fun watching him that special year, but that's history.

Even in his prime, he was made to be the 6th man.

Oh boy. The IT fans are gonna come for your head.

As they should. Prime IT was a legit All-Star and MVP candidate.

you're just still ticked they traded IT.

trade was worth it at the time and still worth it even if Kyrie walks, especially considering IT is a shell of himself and Crowder is hardly missed.

No, I just object to saying that a guy who averaged 28.9 points / 5.9 assists / .625 TS% was better suited to being a sixth man.  The guy was All-NBA second team, and carried us in the playoffs while playing through a severe injury.

He's never recovered from his injury, so the trade obviously made all kinds of sense.  There's no need to downplay his contributions, though.  The guy was a starter, and an extremely good one.

I can't believe, in restrospect, that so many people still, to this day, feel that IT, at his best, was best suited as a sixth man on the bench.

He was exceltiobal as a starter in Boston garnering 2 All-Star births. His last year here he put up one of the best offensive seasons a Celtic ever put up.

Except for possibly his first partial season here, IT always played like a starter and a star.

At his WORST Thomas was a sixth man. But for his last two years in Boston, he was a star/superstar who deserved his starting role and flourished in it.

[Erik]

Who in the world is writing no on this? You realize there is a good chance we are paying IT 15 million a  year right now if we don't do the trade? We have a chance of winning the championship this year and just beat one of the best teams in the east on their home floor. How can we not be happy?

Sure, you have the fact that we could win the title this year, but Vegas odds have that unlikely.

Post says no other context, which to me means use all current facts and assume nothing else.

We would not be paying IT anything. We would have let him walk, because in this timeline he’s injured, drafted Sexton, and Rozier would be running the point.

I actually am shocked how so many people voted yes. It’s a clear miss if Kyrie walks.

The question isn’t asking if you would do it differently. It’s retrospectively evaluating a trade... and in such a manner which is the absolute worst case scenario being realized.

It’s like asking if you flip a coin, call heads, and it lands tail if that was a good outcome. Not whether or not you should have called heads.

[e001]

Considering we would have had enough to move up in the draft with the possibility of drafting either JJJ, Doncic or WCJ, I would say no.

[IDreamCeltics]

Kyrie is a phenomenal individual talent who is a bit of a drama queen and hasn't figured out how to make his teammates better with any consistency.

I think people will be shocked when he doesn't resign with the Celtics and equally shocked when the Celtics are able to replace him without missing a beat. I mean we got identical production from his predecessor who we got for a late first rounder.  The truth is any scoring guard would light it up on this team of floor spreading wings and bigs.

The trade was a lateral move. I think for what the Celtics gave up it was fine.

[seancally]

I know this is Titletown and all, but if we put that aside for a second, I think there's no question we win more games over this time period in our current incarnation than if we'd kept IT. Not to mention, regardless of how last season shook out, we did make the ECF and came within a few minutes of the Finals. It's easy to forget now but Kyrie gave this team such a swagger in the first half of last season that I feel helped those young guys mesh and grow. If Kyrie walks we still have a really great group of players that could entice a free agent or compete on their own. And if Kyrie walks I really think players and the league overall will be saying, "what's the deal with Kyrie?" NOT "what's the deal with Boston?" I.e., his leaving will not prevent future signings or success.

Still. Easy to say something wasn't "worth it" in hindsight, but really, you just need to build assets and put your team in a position to succeed. If it falls short, so be it, as long as you've given yourself a shot. In Boston that means competing for a title. Wasn't ever going to happen with IT at the helm (sorry to say) so we had to take a shot.

[Sophomore]

Kyrie is a phenomenal individual talent who is a bit of a drama queen and hasn't figured out how to make his teammates better with any consistency.

I think people will be shocked when he doesn't resign with the Celtics and equally shocked when the Celtics are able to replace him without missing a beat. I mean we got identical production from his predecessor who we got for a late first rounder.  The truth is any scoring guard would light it up on this team of floor spreading wings and bigs.

The trade was a lateral move. I think for what the Celtics gave up it was fine.

Yeah. Kyrie has a track record, telling us what he was before he came to Boston. He's (clearly) not just any old guard. And since he's come here, (1) the team's scoring differential is a ridiculous 9 points better when he plays than when he sits; (2) there is nobody else on the Celtics - nobody - who comes close as a player I would count on to score or create a basket for a teammate at the end of the game.

I remember the ECF game 7 last year. I don't believe we would have lost that game if Kyrie was playing the point instead of Rozier.

Leaving all that aside is the simple joy of watching Kyrie play the game. He does things with a basketball that nobody else can do. And his game has grown - he's decided to go get assists on top of his buckets and started putting up games with 10 assists and 5 boards to go with his expected 20+ points. I think some people just don't care for his personality; they think he's too aloof or something. Personally I go for it. I love Marcus, a team-first, fiery guy. And I also love that Kyrie is kind of like a jazz musician who sometimes hears his own music. But that's about personal taste. On a basketball level, Ainge has it right - there's just no case that Kyrie doesn't make the team the best it can be.

[Fafnir]

Yes, we got two years of Kyrie in his prime for the team at the cost of in the end only the 8th pick and Crowder still have enduring value. Given that the C's were drafting better wings (and targeting one in FA) Crowder wasn't really in the team's future plans either.

Worthwhile risk, the main loss is the opportunity cost to pursue other plans. But that was always going to be the case going after any star. You don't trade for guys who are locked in on new 4 or 5 year deals after all.

[Donoghus]

I was fine with it then and I'm still fine with it. Obviously, it'd be nice for him to stay but I think the alternate universe where the trade doesn't occur, is a darker place.

[fairweatherfan]

Well, we'd've had a lost season with IT basically out, we probably wouldn't've resigned him, Crowder was made redundant by Hayward+Tatum additions, Zizic had like zero value, so it's really just down to the #8 pick.  I don't think there's a team in the league that wouldn't trade that pick for 2 years of Kyrie.

Also the whole thing where trades need to be evaluated on conditions at the time when they were made etc etc. But even still, yeah it's a good deal.

[Rosco917]

Absolutely. IT knew he needed surgery, he tried to conn the Celtic organization into signing him BEFORE he went under the knife. While being a fun player and a great one on one scoring threat, IT was a useless defender. We all had fun watching him that special year, but that's history.

Even in his prime, he was made to be the 6th man.

Oh boy. The IT fans are gonna come for your head.

As they should. Prime IT was a legit All-Star and MVP candidate.

you're just still ticked they traded IT.

trade was worth it at the time and still worth it even if Kyrie walks, especially considering IT is a shell of himself and Crowder is hardly missed.

No, I just object to saying that a guy who averaged 28.9 points / 5.9 assists / .625 TS% was better suited to being a sixth man.  The guy was All-NBA second team, and carried us in the playoffs while playing through a severe injury.

He's never recovered from his injury, so the trade obviously made all kinds of sense.  There's no need to downplay his contributions, though.  The guy was a starter, and an extremely good one.

I can't believe, in restrospect, that so many people still, to this day, feel that IT, at his best, was best suited as a sixth man on the bench.

He was exceltiobal as a starter in Boston garnering 2 All-Star births. His last year here he put up one of the best offensive seasons a Celtic ever put up.

Except for possibly his first partial season here, IT always played like a starter and a star.

At his WORST Thomas was a sixth man. But for his last two years in Boston, he was a star/superstar who deserved his starting role and flourished in it.

I'm sorry I'm not talking about all-star appearances or scoring averages, I'm talking about winning a championship. In reference to that... IT was a source of attack. He was the first place ALL opponents directed their attack. Even when he tried to defend, the game literally flew over his head. The other four defenders needed to protect him continually. It's difficult enough winning a ring in the NBA, never mind with that type of player as your main go-to guy.

As a 6th man, he could be hidden from having to defend front line players, while doing his damage. When the opposition makes adjustments to take advantage of him, hide him on the bench again. 

[nickagneta]

Absolutely. IT knew he needed surgery, he tried to conn the Celtic organization into signing him BEFORE he went under the knife. While being a fun player and a great one on one scoring threat, IT was a useless defender. We all had fun watching him that special year, but that's history.

Even in his prime, he was made to be the 6th man.

Oh boy. The IT fans are gonna come for your head.

As they should. Prime IT was a legit All-Star and MVP candidate.

you're just still ticked they traded IT.

trade was worth it at the time and still worth it even if Kyrie walks, especially considering IT is a shell of himself and Crowder is hardly missed.

No, I just object to saying that a guy who averaged 28.9 points / 5.9 assists / .625 TS% was better suited to being a sixth man.  The guy was All-NBA second team, and carried us in the playoffs while playing through a severe injury.

He's never recovered from his injury, so the trade obviously made all kinds of sense.  There's no need to downplay his contributions, though.  The guy was a starter, and an extremely good one.

I can't believe, in restrospect, that so many people still, to this day, feel that IT, at his best, was best suited as a sixth man on the bench.

He was exceltiobal as a starter in Boston garnering 2 All-Star births. His last year here he put up one of the best offensive seasons a Celtic ever put up.

Except for possibly his first partial season here, IT always played like a starter and a star.

At his WORST Thomas was a sixth man. But for his last two years in Boston, he was a star/superstar who deserved his starting role and flourished in it.

I'm sorry I'm not talking about all-star appearances or scoring averages, I'm talking about winning a championship. In reference to that... IT was a source of attack. He was the first place ALL opponents directed their attack. Even when he tried to defend, the game literally flew over his head. The other four defenders needed to protect him continually. It's difficult enough winning a ring in the NBA, never mind with that type of player as your main go-to guy.

As a 6th man, he could be hidden from having to defend front line players, while doing his damage. When the opposition makes adjustments to take advantage of him, hide him on the bench again.

You don't hide 29 PPG scorers. You don't bench your most clutch player because he isn't a good defender. You don't bench your best playmaker because you are hoping the other team only plays bench players against him.

Kyrie was one of the league's best, most prolific, most efficient and most clutch scorers here. You do not bench players of that caliber because he can be picked on defensively.

[Big333223]

I hate this idea that Hayward wouldn't have gotten if not for the trade. Maybe that's true but there's no reason to think another Celtic wouldn't have thrown the same kind of pass or that Hayward wouldn't have gotten injured anyways on a different play. There is nothing inherent to Kyrie that caused the injury.

[Rosco917]

Absolutely. IT knew he needed surgery, he tried to conn the Celtic organization into signing him BEFORE he went under the knife. While being a fun player and a great one on one scoring threat, IT was a useless defender. We all had fun watching him that special year, but that's history.

Even in his prime, he was made to be the 6th man.

Oh boy. The IT fans are gonna come for your head.

As they should. Prime IT was a legit All-Star and MVP candidate.

you're just still ticked they traded IT.

trade was worth it at the time and still worth it even if Kyrie walks, especially considering IT is a shell of himself and Crowder is hardly missed.

No, I just object to saying that a guy who averaged 28.9 points / 5.9 assists / .625 TS% was better suited to being a sixth man.  The guy was All-NBA second team, and carried us in the playoffs while playing through a severe injury.

He's never recovered from his injury, so the trade obviously made all kinds of sense.  There's no need to downplay his contributions, though.  The guy was a starter, and an extremely good one.

I can't believe, in restrospect, that so many people still, to this day, feel that IT, at his best, was best suited as a sixth man on the bench.

He was exceltiobal as a starter in Boston garnering 2 All-Star births. His last year here he put up one of the best offensive seasons a Celtic ever put up.

Except for possibly his first partial season here, IT always played like a starter and a star.

At his WORST Thomas was a sixth man. But for his last two years in Boston, he was a star/superstar who deserved his starting role and flourished in it.

I'm sorry I'm not talking about all-star appearances or scoring averages, I'm talking about winning a championship. In reference to that... IT was a source of attack. He was the first place ALL opponents directed their attack. Even when he tried to defend, the game literally flew over his head. The other four defenders needed to protect him continually. It's difficult enough winning a ring in the NBA, never mind with that type of player as your main go-to guy.

As a 6th man, he could be hidden from having to defend front line players, while doing his damage. When the opposition makes adjustments to take advantage of him, hide him on the bench again.

You don't hide 29 PPG scorers. You don't bench your most clutch player because he isn't a good defender. You don't bench your best playmaker because you are hoping the other team only plays bench players against him.

Kyrie was one of the league's best, most prolific, most efficient and most clutch scorers here. You do not bench players of that caliber because he can be picked on defensively.

No you're right, you just look for a more balanced piece to the puzzle.