Would you be happy if we only added Butler + Horford (but no KD) this summer?

[ThePaintedArea]

Let's say the Butler trade is Crowder, JJ, Rozier, and number 3 for something like Butler and Dunleavy. And let's also say that Durant signs a 1+1 in OKC. Would you be happy with the following lineup, and how far could we go with this lineup?

PG: IT, Smart
SG: Bradley, Dunleavy
SF: Butler, Turner (resigned)
PF: Amir, Mickey
C: Horfore, KO

Does this team challenge Cleveland in the East with improved scoring and defense?

Better to give up another pick than Crowder. And the Celtics keeping Jerebko is not a deal-breaker.

By the same token, why Dunleavy?  Starts next season at age 36, breaking down, and they presumably won't need to match salaries.

Maybe the differences are irreconcilable with Hoiberg, but it would otherwise make no sense for them to trade Butler; he's their future. Sending him to the lottery looked like a signal, after the ambiguous comments made by Gar Forman, that he's their guy. I'd bet he's going nowhere; but if he's available, Boston is very nicely situated, and he's a perfect fit.

Horford sounds content in Atlanta, but again a perfect fit.

Other than that, I love what you came up with: a wing closer and a rim protector who are pluses on both sides of the ball - exactly what Boston needs the most.

[GratefulCs]

I'm convinced we should just work through the draft and wait out the warriors and cavs instead of getting thirtyish year olds

[trickybilly]

I'm convinced we should just work through the draft and wait out the warriors and cavs instead of getting thirtyish year olds

TP.

[A Future of Stevens]

I'm convinced we should just work through the draft and wait out the warriors and cavs instead of getting thirtyish year olds

Preaching to the choir.

[Irish Stew]

I like the idea but I think you switch out Smart for Crowder in the trade. In this scenario I think you also let Amir walk.
So Smart, Rozier and #3 for Butler
The only think lacking in this scenario is our outside shooter. At this point we trade the Mavs pick for Dano

IT/Hunter
Butler/Bradley
Crowder
Gallinari/Mickey
Horford/KO

While I generally like your acquisition plan, I'm not sure that your trades are realistic. I don't think that Chicago wants two poor shooting guards from us, in spite of their excellent defense. Only the Celtics try to corner the market in poor shooting smalls. As painful as it may be, try #3, Brooklyn 2018, and Bradley. Denver has three 1st round picks already. That's probably enough for them. It's hard to come up with a good offer for Gallo, so I'll just suggest Smart for Gallo if they want to improve their perimeter defense.

[pearljammer10]

I can't support a Butler trade that involves Crowder.

I don't believe Butler would either since he is best friends with Crowder. I'd imagine they would want to be on the best team.

This.

I see Butler as a straight SG.

Butler for Bradley, Amir, Number 3, two non Brooklyn future firsts and as many seconds as desired.

Sign Horford to a near max.

Re-sign Turner and pick up Jonas. Great starting five with a decent yet improvable bench.

IT/Rozier
Butler/Smart
Crowder/Turner
KO/Jerebko
Horford/Mickey

[ThePaintedArea]

I'm convinced we should just work through the draft and wait out the warriors and cavs instead of getting thirtyish year olds

I'm not, but you raise an important issue.  (Incidentally I assume that you're not including Jimmy Butler in this, since he's 26.)

The Celtics are in the enviable position of having a young, growing playoff team that also has excellent draft assets.  But they're not rebuilding anymore; they have a core group of guys who are early in their careers, one that will get better even if you do nothing else, simply by improving their individual skills and by developing a team chemistry to maximize them.  More than any team in league history, the Celtics have always valued continuity; and I think that you're pointing to the value of that. 

There's a chance in Boston to build a perennial contender, and I think that the daily proposals here to trade Crowder and others often do not take account of the continuity asset that's being built (his value is also underappreciated, which is not beside the point).

By the same token, as Red Auerbach once said, "You've gotta have the horses."  Garnett came over because Pierce and Allen were already on board.  I'll give you another one:  Heinsohn said that the early Celtics succeeded because of a mix of youngs and vets; there was a 'push/pull' - vets pulling, youngs pushing.  Or, in other words, leadership and experience meets energy and drive.

[ThePaintedArea]

I can't support a Butler trade that involves Crowder.

I don't believe Butler would either since he is best friends with Crowder. I'd imagine they would want to be on the best team.

I see Butler as a straight SG.

Primarily that's where he played this year; but he can certainly guard small forwards, which he did a lot more of with Thibodeau.  On the Celtics, you could then surround him with four good 3pt shooters in IT, Bradley, Crowder as a small-ball 4, and Olynyk (or, perhaps Jordan Mickey, getting ahead of ourselves!).

[jpotter33]

Only added Jimmy Butler + Horford?

We're talking two of the top 25 players in the league. That would be awesome.

Haha! I was waiting for someone to say that. The reason I put it that way is because the opinion of these two guys isn't that high on this board.

[__ramonezy__]

Jimmy Butler is a good player, but doesn't fit the mold of what we're looking for. He's not a good shooter and needs the ball in his hands to be effective. His defense is outstanding, but that isn't exactly a weakness for us... so selling the farm for Butler would be a huge mistake... especially given the fact that he is a marginal upgrade from Bradley.

I would love to Horford here... but he may not be a long term play given his age. But if he's available we won't be losing future flexibility if we sign him to a decent deal.... not MAX

[Dedalus]

Yes.

[ThePaintedArea]

Jimmy Butler is a good player, but doesn't fit the mold of what we're looking for. He's not a good shooter and needs the ball in his hands to be effective. His defense is outstanding, but that isn't exactly a weakness for us... so selling the farm for Butler would be a huge mistake... especially given the fact that he is a marginal upgrade from Bradley.

1) Good shooter?  It's a little complicated, but I think there's more good news than bad.  First of all, he gets to the front of the rim, a lot, and finishes.  Not unrelated, he draws fouls at a healthy rate, and he's an A-plus FT shooter.  As a jump shooter: he did not have a good year; the year before he shot .378 from the arc, which is excellent, but he's been up and down throughout his career, and his midrange %s were nothing to write home about.

3% is notoriously volatile; he got more defensive attention last year; and we're pretty clear that he wasn't a happy camper, complaining about his coach not coaching them "hard enough".  You have to like the toughness that that shows, though throwing his coach under the bus is not too cool.

He's a high assist, low turnover player who demands double teams; he gets shots for the whole team, is unselfish, takes care of the ball.  I think that if you've got guys who can shoot around him he'll flourish.

2) "...selling the farm for him would be a mistake."  I agree.

3) "...marginal upgrade from Bradley" - more than marginal, I think, but my main quibble here is that their games are different.  Bradley is not a closer; Butler is - he makes things happen and gets you points by creating offense (Bradley gets most of his in the flow of the offense), gets you in the penalty.  As a defender, Butler can guard bigger players.

Bradley is a good fit with Butler, I think.

[__ramonezy__]

Jimmy Butler is a good player, but doesn't fit the mold of what we're looking for. He's not a good shooter and needs the ball in his hands to be effective. His defense is outstanding, but that isn't exactly a weakness for us... so selling the farm for Butler would be a huge mistake... especially given the fact that he is a marginal upgrade from Bradley.

1) Good shooter?  It's a little complicated, but I think there's more good news than bad.  First of all, he gets to the front of the rim, a lot, and finishes.  Not unrelated, he draws fouls at a healthy rate, and he's an A-plus FT shooter.  As a jump shooter: he did not have a good year; the year before he shot .378 from the arc, which is excellent, but he's been up and down throughout his career, and his midrange %s were nothing to write home about.

3% is notoriously volatile; he got more defensive attention last year; and we're pretty clear that he wasn't a happy camper, complaining about his coach not coaching them "hard enough".  You have to like the toughness that that shows, though throwing his coach under the bus is not too cool.

He's a high assist, low turnover player who demands double teams; he gets shots for the whole team, is unselfish, takes care of the ball.  I think that if you've got guys who can shoot around him he'll flourish.

2) "...selling the farm for him would be a mistake."  I agree.

3) "...marginal upgrade from Bradley" - more than marginal, I think, but my main quibble here is that their games are different.  Bradley is not a closer; Butler is - he makes things happen and gets you points by creating offense (Bradley gets most of his in the flow of the offense), gets you in the penalty.  As a defender, Butler can guard bigger players.

Bradley is a good fit with Butler, I think.

If we're going to add max players I would prefer it to fill a need than simply getting an "All-Star". Adding Ryan Anderson to the existing team would make a bigger difference than Butler. If shooting is our biggest problem, especially 3P shooting, then we need to get knock down shooters. If we spend max money to get Butler we're going to have to tailor the system to his strengths which is a lot of slashing, but our current system already gets us the most uncontested 3s in the NBA adding Butler doesn't make us better in that department.

Point taken on him being a closer though... but we have arguably the best closer in the game... Brad Stevens! We just need the specific skills to execute

[Scintan]

"Would you be happy if we only added Butler + Horford (but no KD) this summer?"


The answer seems pretty clearly to be a variable that will depend on what moves were made to get to that position, and what the position is for the next year.

[mctyson]

I think getting Butler alone is enough to clear this team to 50+ wins, which in my view make them a "contender."  The question is the cost. 

Is the Chicago asking price worth a player who couldn't get a team with Gasol, Rose, Gibson, Mirotic, McDermott, etc into the playoffs in the East?  I don't think so.