CelticsStrong
Around the League => Transaction Ideas and Rumors => Topic started by: Roy H. on November 21, 2017, 10:33:51 PM
-
Rozier + Nader + #2 for J.J. Barea
Is that enough for a tanking Dallas team?
I totally stole this idea from KG’s Knee, btw.
-
I like it!
Honestly not as high on Rozier as most here (solid off the bench but can be WILD and just inefficient many games) and Barea would definitely HELP with the bench scoring.
This move ALSO would open up 2 roster spots I believe, so we'd still be able to add someone (or 2 players) via Vet. Min exceptions if bought out (Okafor? Monroe?)
-
Not quite what I suggested, but yes of course I would do this.
Just look at Barea's per 36 numbers and it's all you need to know.
Also, he has Boston roots, having played at Northeastern.
-
Not quite what I suggested, but yes of course I would do this.
Just look at Barea's per 36 numbers and it's all you need to know.
Also, he has Boston roots, having played at Northeastern.
My current school! 8)
-
I know former NU classmates of barea. They say he’s like 3-4 inches shorter in person than his listed height. Thought that was crazy cuz his listed height is short already
-
Also, if you're on the fence, just google "JJ Barea Ray Allen".
-
Rozier + Nader + #2 for J.J. Barea
Is that enough for a tanking Dallas team?
I totally stole this idea from KG’s Knee, btw.
Rozier? you are out of your mind..
-
I love Barea, but I think the Celtics are too committed to their switching defense to swap Rozier for a guy as small as JJ. Even when Rozier isn't hitting shots, he's still skying for rebounds and playing solid defense with an ability to guard the 2, which allows Brad to use the three guard lineup - going small without sacrificing defense. You can have Rozier and Larkin on the court at the same time. You can't do that with Larkin and Barea. Teams can already look to post up Larkin on a switch, they'd eat us alive being able to go one-on-one against both him and JJ... we'd have to switch less, which would mess with the success of our defense and the versatility of our lineups.
Love JJ, but I don't think adding him to this roster would fit with Brad's schemes.
-
I love Barea, but I think the Celtics are too committed to their switching defense to swap Rozier for a guy as small as JJ. Even when Rozier isn't hitting shots, he's still skying for rebounds and playing solid defense with an ability to guard the 2, which allows Brad to use the three guard lineup - going small without sacrificing defense. You can have Rozier and Larkin on the court at the same time. You can't do that with Larkin and Barea. Teams can already look to post up Larkin on a switch, they'd eat us alive being able to go one-on-one against both him and JJ... we'd have to switch less, which would mess with the success of our defense and the versatility of our lineups.
Love JJ, but I don't think adding him to this roster would fit with Brad's schemes.
But Barea is so good he makes Larkin expendable so you wouldn't need them on the court at the same time. I like the trade. Nader isn't an NBA player. We have a ton of first rounders coming our way, we don't need a second rounder. And sorry but Rozier can't shoot or score. And since Smart can't either and the team seems set on keeping and playing him, then a good offensive presence on the second team like Barea would be perfect. And Barea has shown to be clutch in the playoffs and is an NBA champion. And a Huskie!!!! Go get him.
-
Never happening. Danny loves Rozier and he has way more upside.
-
I'm down. Barea gives the second unit badly needed scoring. But I wonder if the Mavericks will just waive him a few months from now so Danny could use the DPE for him.
-
Celtics riding a 16 game winning streak - We need J.J. Barea on our team!
(while giving up assets)
I heard that some teams are desperate for length,
but I never heard of fans desperate for shortness. :D
-
He's 33 though. If we need scoring then I'd rather go after Lou Williams (he's 2 years younger).
-
If we need a scoring point guard why are we trading for one? we have an open roster spot that we can use.
Highly likely thought that this is not a priority for us and the length of Rozier is worth more to Brad than the scoring... but I guess these threads are going to come thick and fast at the moment..
-
Rozier + Nader + #2 for J.J. Barea
Is that enough for a tanking Dallas team?
If a team is tanking, Nader would help in that regard.
-
If we need a scoring point guard why are we trading for one? we have an open roster spot that we can use.
Highly likely thought that this is not a priority for us and the length of Rozier is worth more to Brad than the scoring... but I guess these threads are going to come thick and fast at the moment..
I don't necessarliy think they need a scoring PG. They just need a gaurd that can create offense/score. I think someone like a Marco Belinelli or Lou Williams type. Basically someone you who can score off the bench when the starters arent in so they do not continue to have an anemic scoring bench.
-
If we need a scoring point guard why are we trading for one? we have an open roster spot that we can use.
Highly likely thought that this is not a priority for us and the length of Rozier is worth more to Brad than the scoring... but I guess these threads are going to come thick and fast at the moment..
Because Barea is a really good player on a really good contract. He’s certainly better than Rozier.
-
I'd honestly rather have Rozier than Barea long term. Barea is obviously a better offensive player, but Rozier is a better defender and rebounder. I just see Rozier's peak at a good deal higher than Barea's current play level.
-
This thread is nothing but baiting.
In no universe is Barea worth giving up assets for.
-
This thread is nothing but baiting.
In no universe is Barea worth giving up assets for.
I don't necessarily agree with this. Barea is a solid backup guard who can run the offense and keep his team getting good shots.
But I wouldn't give Rozier up for him.
-
This thread is nothing but baiting.
In no universe is Barea worth giving up assets for.
I don't necessarily agree with this. Barea is a solid backup guard who can run the offense and keep his team getting good shots.
But I wouldn't give Rozier up for him.
Exactly... in no universe is Rozier + picks getting traded for Barea no matter how the last 10 games have gone.
Just a bait thread.
-
It's a good trade idea.... but I wouldn't be any rush to do it. It's a win now type move, the team is currently already winning. But maybe as the playoffs get closer and a different player could put us in the finals... it's a good trade. Price seems sorta high currently for a journeyman, but could see that price being lower later in the season.
Danny's best move right now is patience.
Fan's best move right now, enjoy the ride and who is on it now.
-
It's a good trade idea.... but I wouldn't be any rush to do it. It's a win now type move, the team is currently already winning. But maybe as the playoffs get closer and a different player could put us in the finals... it's a good trade. Price seems sorta high currently for a journeyman, but could see that price being lower later in the season.
Danny's best move right now is patience.
Fan's best move right now, enjoy the ride and who is on it now.
I'm not sure what you think a fair price for one of the best backup PG's in the league is, but my guess is Dallas wouldn't even accept the offer anyway. They have zero need for Rozier.
I agree Danny likely won't be trading any assets, as I doubt he sees the team as worthy of spending assets on.
For fans, it's all a matter of perspective. Some fans are content with whatever the roster is, some fans like to discuss ways to improve areas of weakness. Backup guard is absolutely a weakness in this team righting now. We have no one on the bench who can come in and reliably get their own shot or create offense for others.
-
Fan of Barea, but no.
-
I don't get this one. Barea is a surprisingly good bench player (for his size) and is better offensively than Rozier but we would give up a lot defensively and in terms of rebounds.
I would just stick with Rozier. No need to rearrange deck chairs right now.
-
Who would Brad Stevens rather have on his squad?
Thats how you know this trade is a bad idea. There is no way Brad is giving up Terry who can switch 1-3, takes care of the ball at an elite level and we've spent 3 years of development into.
For a 33 year old short point guard that does not play defense.
It's a ludicrous idea after you peel back one layer.
-
This thread is nothing but baiting.
In no universe is Barea worth giving up assets for.
I don't necessarily agree with this. Barea is a solid backup guard who can run the offense and keep his team getting good shots.
But I wouldn't give Rozier up for him.
And we already have Shane Larkin on the team to do just what Barea does.
-
There are better ways to improve our offense.
And Dallas doesn't need any further help in tanking, as long as they keep Dirk in starting lineup. Which they will.
-
He'd be better than Larkin, for sure. I've always really liked Barea.
-
If we need a scoring point guard why are we trading for one? we have an open roster spot that we can use.
Highly likely thought that this is not a priority for us and the length of Rozier is worth more to Brad than the scoring... but I guess these threads are going to come thick and fast at the moment..
Because Barea is a really good player on a really good contract. He’s certainly better than Rozier.
Is he? In both wins shares and box score plus/minus, Rozier beats Barea. His defense measures as a bigger asset than Barea's offense.
These stats are to be taken with a grain of salt, especially this early in this season, but they do suggest that Barea > Rozier isn't a slam dunk at all.
-
If we need a scoring point guard why are we trading for one? we have an open roster spot that we can use.
Highly likely thought that this is not a priority for us and the length of Rozier is worth more to Brad than the scoring... but I guess these threads are going to come thick and fast at the moment..
Because Barea is a really good player on a really good contract. He’s certainly better than Rozier.
Is he? In both wins shares and box score plus/minus, Rozier beats Barea. His defense measures as a bigger asset than Barea's offense.
These stats are to be taken with a grain of salt, especially this early in this season, but they do suggest that Barea > Rozier isn't a slam dunk at all.
Win shares are based upon wins. The Mavs have three of them, the Celts have 16.
-
I've happily moved away from undersized PGs, no need to return to it with the way our defense has been playing.
-
I've happily moved away from undersized PGs, no need to return to it with the way our defense has been playing.
TP. :D
-
If we need a scoring point guard why are we trading for one? we have an open roster spot that we can use.
Highly likely thought that this is not a priority for us and the length of Rozier is worth more to Brad than the scoring... but I guess these threads are going to come thick and fast at the moment..
Because Barea is a really good player on a really good contract. He’s certainly better than Rozier.
Is he? In both wins shares and box score plus/minus, Rozier beats Barea. His defense measures as a bigger asset than Barea's offense.
These stats are to be taken with a grain of salt, especially this early in this season, but they do suggest that Barea > Rozier isn't a slam dunk at all.
Win shares are based upon wins. The Mavs have three of them, the Celts have 16.
That was true for baseball, but basketball win shares are a bit different. The sum of win shares for a team is a good appproximation for the number of wins on a team, but that’s an after-the-fact test, not an a priori as in the baseball version.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html (https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html)
-
It's a good trade idea.... but I wouldn't be any rush to do it. It's a win now type move, the team is currently already winning. But maybe as the playoffs get closer and a different player could put us in the finals... it's a good trade. Price seems sorta high currently for a journeyman, but could see that price being lower later in the season.
Danny's best move right now is patience.
Fan's best move right now, enjoy the ride and who is on it now.
I'm not sure what you think a fair price for one of the best backup PG's in the league is, but my guess is Dallas wouldn't even accept the offer anyway. They have zero need for Rozier.
I agree Danny likely won't be trading any assets, as I doubt he sees the team as worthy of spending assets on.
For fans, it's all a matter of perspective. Some fans are content with whatever the roster is, some fans like to discuss ways to improve areas of weakness. Backup guard is absolutely a weakness in this team righting now. We have no one on the bench who can come in and reliably get their own shot or create offense for others.
The price is whatever the market bears out.... The Mavs appear to be on the fast track for the lottery. Not sure what value one of the best back up pint point guards in the league has for them. A 2nd rounder and some middling prospects? Sure. I guess the bigger question is how much do you value Rozier. I think that is the real impetus to starting this thread. The OP and others would like to move on from Rozier.
And I have no problem w arm chair GMing. It's fun to read the ideas. Admittedly I have no skill or greater NBA knowledge for the intricacies. I'm sure Danny isn't sitting on his laurels and is still evaluating trade ideas, so fans should have fun doing the same. It just seems like so many Boston fans are never happy enough. There is always something or someone to complain about. I try not to work to hard to be happier than happy. A league best winning streak makes me happy!
-
I've happily moved away from undersized PGs, no need to return to it with the way our defense has been playing.
This. You can get away with a couple of rotation guys under 6-6/6-7, but for the most you need length, and lots of it.
-
I doubt Dallas would deal with us after the Rondo trade.
-
Barea has had a nice season for him but I'm not sure I want to give up young assets for a 33 year old career backup on one of the worst teams in the league. Is he really the best option out there for some bench scoring? And is his scoring that much better than Rozier's that it makes up for Rozier's superior defense and rebounding?
-
I would say no as well. Barea 4-5 years ago, maybe??. Today? No.
-
All these people bringing up defense, and yet just ignore the true problem. BENCH SCORING.
If the price is cheap, SIGN ME UP!
-
Is Barea even that much better than Larkin at this point?
-
Is Barea even that much better than Larkin at this point?
?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_hint=Shane+Larkin&player_id1_select=Shane+Larkin&y1=2018&player_id1=larkish01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=J.J.+Barea&player_id2_select=J.J.+Barea&y2=2018&player_id2=bareajo01&idx=players
Larkin is shooting 25% from the field.
-
Is Barea even that much better than Larkin at this point?
(https://i.giphy.com/media/HwmB7t7krGnao/giphy.webp)
-
Is Barea even that much better than Larkin at this point?
Unequivocally yes
-
If we need a scoring point guard why are we trading for one? we have an open roster spot that we can use.
Highly likely thought that this is not a priority for us and the length of Rozier is worth more to Brad than the scoring... but I guess these threads are going to come thick and fast at the moment..
Because Barea is a really good player on a really good contract. He’s certainly better than Rozier.
Is he? In both wins shares and box score plus/minus, Rozier beats Barea. His defense measures as a bigger asset than Barea's offense.
These stats are to be taken with a grain of salt, especially this early in this season, but they do suggest that Barea > Rozier isn't a slam dunk at all.
Win shares are based upon wins. The Mavs have three of them, the Celts have 16.
That was true for baseball, but basketball win shares are a bit different. The sum of win shares for a team is a good appproximation for the number of wins on a team, but that’s an after-the-fact test, not an a priori as in the baseball version.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html (https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html)
it isn't exactly equal but as they say if a team has 50 wins the WS from the players will be approximately 50 and if you look at the Mavs and C's thus far this year, you can see that is approximately the case.
-
Is Barea even that much better than Larkin at this point?
?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_hint=Shane+Larkin&player_id1_select=Shane+Larkin&y1=2018&player_id1=larkish01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=J.J.+Barea&player_id2_select=J.J.+Barea&y2=2018&player_id2=bareajo01&idx=players
Larkin is shooting 25% from the field.
But, Larkin has him beat at the FT line:-))
Smitty77