Author Topic: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens  (Read 15548 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #60 on: October 30, 2022, 09:14:21 PM »

Offline bogg

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 817
  • Tommy Points: 51
Huh?

Favors is a free agent.  We could sign him with the vet minimum, and that would be true if we had Wood.

The team has been monitoring Timelord's progress since his first surgery.  They obviously knew a second surgery was a possibility, if not a likelihood.

And, under what circumstances would Wood be a third string center?

The C's can sign Favors now, and he hasn't signed with the team. There's very little reason to believe he'd take a minimum deal to be a deep-bench big on a Boston team with less need for him than currently.

Same situation with Bruce Brown - he reportedly had at least one above-TMLE offer and signed with Denver because of the fit and opportunity for minutes. I can pretty confidently say that Boston never could have signed him.

As far as Wood goes, during the window of time when they were working with the TPE he would've been either 3a or 3b at the center position behind Rob and, when Rob wasn't in, Horford. He's also an expiring contract and would have very likely to leave for more minutes elsewhere. This isn't 2K, guys want guaranteed minutes - it's the exact reason Harrell wouldn't sign here.

I was a proponent of using the TPE for a depth big that could have been had cheaply in terms of assets (ironically, Favors was high on my list because he'd have been basically free), but tying up a 2025 first for a third-stringer would have been bad business.

As it is, they've got a pair of smaller TPEs, Pritchard, and some salaries to work with. I expect things will look different come February, so I just can't get too worked up over roster spots 12-15 in October.

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #61 on: October 30, 2022, 09:21:20 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
If the C's got Wood, there would have been no need for Gallo and a three man big lineup of Horford/TL/Wood would have kept all parties happy I am sure.

I do agree that Bruce Brown was never coming here, especially given Brad targeting Brogdon. I also agree that with a TL/Horford/Wood grouping, Favors would never sign here. Heck, Favors could get huge minutes here right now and isn't signing. If he's not signing now, no way he signs if the team has those three bigs I already mentioned.

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #62 on: October 30, 2022, 09:25:06 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58539
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Huh?

Favors is a free agent.  We could sign him with the vet minimum, and that would be true if we had Wood.

The team has been monitoring Timelord's progress since his first surgery.  They obviously knew a second surgery was a possibility, if not a likelihood.

And, under what circumstances would Wood be a third string center?

The C's can sign Favors now, and he hasn't signed with the team. There's very little reason to believe he'd take a minimum deal to be a deep-bench big on a Boston team with less need for him than currently.

Same situation with Bruce Brown - he reportedly had at least one above-TMLE offer and signed with Denver because of the fit and opportunity for minutes. I can pretty confidently say that Boston never could have signed him.

As far as Wood goes, during the window of time when they were working with the TPE he would've been either 3a or 3b at the center position behind Rob and, when Rob wasn't in, Horford. He's also an expiring contract and would have very likely to leave for more minutes elsewhere. This isn't 2K, guys want guaranteed minutes - it's the exact reason Harrell wouldn't sign here.

I was a proponent of using the TPE for a depth big that could have been had cheaply in terms of assets (ironically, Favors was high on my list because he'd have been basically free), but tying up a 2025 first for a third-stringer would have been bad business.

As it is, they've got a pair of smaller TPEs, Pritchard, and some salaries to work with. I expect things will look different come February, so I just can't get too worked up over roster spots 12-15 in October.

Wood, even if everybody was healthy, would be a top-3 big man on this team.  As nick mentioned, the ideal scenario would have been for him to backup Timelord this year (meaning he'd be playing right now), and to then take over for Horford next season.

I find it shocking how many people start from a position of "Brad was right", instead of taking a rational view.  At every single point this off-season, Christian Wood would have been worth the TPE and a first. 


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #63 on: October 30, 2022, 09:32:46 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Huh?

Favors is a free agent.  We could sign him with the vet minimum, and that would be true if we had Wood.

The team has been monitoring Timelord's progress since his first surgery.  They obviously knew a second surgery was a possibility, if not a likelihood.

And, under what circumstances would Wood be a third string center?

The C's can sign Favors now, and he hasn't signed with the team. There's very little reason to believe he'd take a minimum deal to be a deep-bench big on a Boston team with less need for him than currently.

Same situation with Bruce Brown - he reportedly had at least one above-TMLE offer and signed with Denver because of the fit and opportunity for minutes. I can pretty confidently say that Boston never could have signed him.

As far as Wood goes, during the window of time when they were working with the TPE he would've been either 3a or 3b at the center position behind Rob and, when Rob wasn't in, Horford. He's also an expiring contract and would have very likely to leave for more minutes elsewhere. This isn't 2K, guys want guaranteed minutes - it's the exact reason Harrell wouldn't sign here.

I was a proponent of using the TPE for a depth big that could have been had cheaply in terms of assets (ironically, Favors was high on my list because he'd have been basically free), but tying up a 2025 first for a third-stringer would have been bad business.

As it is, they've got a pair of smaller TPEs, Pritchard, and some salaries to work with. I expect things will look different come February, so I just can't get too worked up over roster spots 12-15 in October.

Wood, even if everybody was healthy, would be a top-3 big man on this team.  As nick mentioned, the ideal scenario would have been for him to backup Timelord this year (meaning he'd be playing right now), and to then take over for Horford next season.

I find it shocking how many people start from a position of "Brad was right", instead of taking a rational view.  At every single point this off-season, Christian Wood would have been worth the TPE and a first.
I was a big proponent of Wood, but I do think the timing when he got traded was detrimental from the sense that Boston could not have traded a 1st in the last draft for him, and that is what Houston got.  Now it wasn't a great first so I think on some level, Boston could have topped it, but I think it would have taken more than just a future 1st and the TPE.  Probably would have taken at least Pritchard and the future 1st.  Still worth doing, but the draft day trade made it less likely for Boston.

That said, I got a lot of flack for saying Boston made a mistake and wasn't acting like a contender for not using the big TPE, and the tides have definitely turned in that direction.  Very few people were gung ho on using it before it expired and now it seems like a lot on here are questioning the decision not to use it.

Assuming they couldn't have gotten Wood, I'd have probably gotten a draft pick or two from Miami and taken Duncan Robinson.  Huge contract.  Overpaid.  But still a solid shooter and a guy you could trust to be the back-up SF and start in a pinch.  And you get some future draft picks, that can be used in other trades. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #64 on: October 30, 2022, 09:36:17 PM »

Offline bogg

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 817
  • Tommy Points: 51
Wood, even if everybody was healthy, would be a top-3 big man on this team.  As nick mentioned, the ideal scenario would have been for him to backup Timelord this year (meaning he'd be playing right now), and to then take over for Horford next season.

I find it shocking how many people start from a position of "Brad was right", instead of taking a rational view.  At every single point this off-season, Christian Wood would have been worth the TPE and a first.

It's nothing to do with Brad being right or wrong, it's that Rob and Horford were/are the top two bigs on the roster, Gallo was in-house as a 40% shooting big from 3, and Grant was also going to be getting plenty of minutes at the 4.

Given that Wood would have cost somewhere between $60-70 million to platoon off the bench for a year before hitting unrestricted free agency, it didn't make sense to take yourself out of the running for any secondary stars that hit the trade market over the next few years for a rental. 

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #65 on: October 30, 2022, 09:39:12 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58539
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Huh?

Favors is a free agent.  We could sign him with the vet minimum, and that would be true if we had Wood.

The team has been monitoring Timelord's progress since his first surgery.  They obviously knew a second surgery was a possibility, if not a likelihood.

And, under what circumstances would Wood be a third string center?

The C's can sign Favors now, and he hasn't signed with the team. There's very little reason to believe he'd take a minimum deal to be a deep-bench big on a Boston team with less need for him than currently.

Same situation with Bruce Brown - he reportedly had at least one above-TMLE offer and signed with Denver because of the fit and opportunity for minutes. I can pretty confidently say that Boston never could have signed him.

As far as Wood goes, during the window of time when they were working with the TPE he would've been either 3a or 3b at the center position behind Rob and, when Rob wasn't in, Horford. He's also an expiring contract and would have very likely to leave for more minutes elsewhere. This isn't 2K, guys want guaranteed minutes - it's the exact reason Harrell wouldn't sign here.

I was a proponent of using the TPE for a depth big that could have been had cheaply in terms of assets (ironically, Favors was high on my list because he'd have been basically free), but tying up a 2025 first for a third-stringer would have been bad business.

As it is, they've got a pair of smaller TPEs, Pritchard, and some salaries to work with. I expect things will look different come February, so I just can't get too worked up over roster spots 12-15 in October.

Wood, even if everybody was healthy, would be a top-3 big man on this team.  As nick mentioned, the ideal scenario would have been for him to backup Timelord this year (meaning he'd be playing right now), and to then take over for Horford next season.

I find it shocking how many people start from a position of "Brad was right", instead of taking a rational view.  At every single point this off-season, Christian Wood would have been worth the TPE and a first.
I was a big proponent of Wood, but I do think the timing when he got traded was detrimental from the sense that Boston could not have traded a 1st in the last draft for him, and that is what Houston got.  Now it wasn't a great first so I think on some level, Boston could have topped it, but I think it would have taken more than just a future 1st and the TPE.  Probably would have taken at least Pritchard and the future 1st.  Still worth doing, but the draft day trade made it less likely for Boston.

That said, I got a lot of flack for saying Boston made a mistake and wasn't acting like a contender for not using the big TPE, and the tides have definitely turned in that direction.  Very few people were gung ho on using it before it expired and now it seems like a lot on here are questioning the decision not to use it.

Assuming they couldn't have gotten Wood, I'd have probably gotten a draft pick or two from Miami and taken Duncan Robinson.  Huge contract.  Overpaid.  But still a solid shooter and a guy you could trust to be the back-up SF and start in a pinch.  And you get some future draft picks, that can be used in other trades.

I think the question with the TPE has always been, do the Celtics have an unlimited budget?  I didn't believe Wyc when he said it originally, so I understood Brad's decision, but used the caveat that if Wyc was being truthful then it was unacceptable not to use it.

But, subsequently, Wyc has talked time and time again -- as recently as last week -- about how there are no budget restrictions.  If that's the case, then it is mind-boggling that Brad would let a giant asset just expire.

As for Wood, he was traded for what, the 27th pick?  Something like that.  I think a future pick would have gotten the deal done just fine.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #66 on: October 30, 2022, 09:42:12 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58539
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Wood, even if everybody was healthy, would be a top-3 big man on this team.  As nick mentioned, the ideal scenario would have been for him to backup Timelord this year (meaning he'd be playing right now), and to then take over for Horford next season.

I find it shocking how many people start from a position of "Brad was right", instead of taking a rational view.  At every single point this off-season, Christian Wood would have been worth the TPE and a first.

It's nothing to do with Brad being right or wrong, it's that Rob and Horford were/are the top two bigs on the roster, Gallo was in-house as a 40% shooting big from 3, and Grant was also going to be getting plenty of minutes at the 4.

Given that Wood would have cost somewhere between $60-70 million to platoon off the bench for a year before hitting unrestricted free agency, it didn't make sense to take yourself out of the running for any secondary stars that hit the trade market over the next few years for a rental.

You're just talking nonsense.  The Wood trade was before Gallo was signed, Timelord was already hurt, and Horford was already old.  And, he wouldn't have been a rental.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #67 on: October 30, 2022, 09:45:54 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Huh?

Favors is a free agent.  We could sign him with the vet minimum, and that would be true if we had Wood.

The team has been monitoring Timelord's progress since his first surgery.  They obviously knew a second surgery was a possibility, if not a likelihood.

And, under what circumstances would Wood be a third string center?

The C's can sign Favors now, and he hasn't signed with the team. There's very little reason to believe he'd take a minimum deal to be a deep-bench big on a Boston team with less need for him than currently.

Same situation with Bruce Brown - he reportedly had at least one above-TMLE offer and signed with Denver because of the fit and opportunity for minutes. I can pretty confidently say that Boston never could have signed him.

As far as Wood goes, during the window of time when they were working with the TPE he would've been either 3a or 3b at the center position behind Rob and, when Rob wasn't in, Horford. He's also an expiring contract and would have very likely to leave for more minutes elsewhere. This isn't 2K, guys want guaranteed minutes - it's the exact reason Harrell wouldn't sign here.

I was a proponent of using the TPE for a depth big that could have been had cheaply in terms of assets (ironically, Favors was high on my list because he'd have been basically free), but tying up a 2025 first for a third-stringer would have been bad business.

As it is, they've got a pair of smaller TPEs, Pritchard, and some salaries to work with. I expect things will look different come February, so I just can't get too worked up over roster spots 12-15 in October.

Wood, even if everybody was healthy, would be a top-3 big man on this team.  As nick mentioned, the ideal scenario would have been for him to backup Timelord this year (meaning he'd be playing right now), and to then take over for Horford next season.

I find it shocking how many people start from a position of "Brad was right", instead of taking a rational view.  At every single point this off-season, Christian Wood would have been worth the TPE and a first.
I was a big proponent of Wood, but I do think the timing when he got traded was detrimental from the sense that Boston could not have traded a 1st in the last draft for him, and that is what Houston got.  Now it wasn't a great first so I think on some level, Boston could have topped it, but I think it would have taken more than just a future 1st and the TPE.  Probably would have taken at least Pritchard and the future 1st.  Still worth doing, but the draft day trade made it less likely for Boston.

That said, I got a lot of flack for saying Boston made a mistake and wasn't acting like a contender for not using the big TPE, and the tides have definitely turned in that direction.  Very few people were gung ho on using it before it expired and now it seems like a lot on here are questioning the decision not to use it.

Assuming they couldn't have gotten Wood, I'd have probably gotten a draft pick or two from Miami and taken Duncan Robinson.  Huge contract.  Overpaid.  But still a solid shooter and a guy you could trust to be the back-up SF and start in a pinch.  And you get some future draft picks, that can be used in other trades.

I think the question with the TPE has always been, do the Celtics have an unlimited budget?  I didn't believe Wyc when he said it originally, so I understood Brad's decision, but used the caveat that if Wyc was being truthful then it was unacceptable not to use it.

But, subsequently, Wyc has talked time and time again -- as recently as last week -- about how there are no budget restrictions.  If that's the case, then it is mind-boggling that Brad would let a giant asset just expire.

As for Wood, he was traded for what, the 27th pick?  Something like that.  I think a future pick would have gotten the deal done just fine.
I ran through the trade the other day, it was a bit complicated, because they immediately traded back and then traded almost everyone they got in the trade in a later salary dump. 

They traded Wood for:

Sterling Brown
Marquese Chriss
Boban Marjanovic
Trey Burke
26 (Wendell Moore Jr.)

The Rockets then immediately moved the Moore pick for 29 (TyTy Washington), 2025 2nd, 2027 2nd.

In September they traded Brown, Chriss, Burke, and Nwaba to the Thunder for Favors, Jerome, Maledon, Harkless, 2026 2nd, and cash


The real question is of course, how much do they value Washington (and to a lesser extent Boban who is actually playing for them)?  If they really liked Washington, then I'm not sure a random future 1st would have been enough.  Pritchard + 53 + a random future 1st, almost certainly would have been though, and that is something you have to do if you are Boston. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #68 on: October 30, 2022, 09:50:25 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58539
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Huh?

Favors is a free agent.  We could sign him with the vet minimum, and that would be true if we had Wood.

The team has been monitoring Timelord's progress since his first surgery.  They obviously knew a second surgery was a possibility, if not a likelihood.

And, under what circumstances would Wood be a third string center?

The C's can sign Favors now, and he hasn't signed with the team. There's very little reason to believe he'd take a minimum deal to be a deep-bench big on a Boston team with less need for him than currently.

Same situation with Bruce Brown - he reportedly had at least one above-TMLE offer and signed with Denver because of the fit and opportunity for minutes. I can pretty confidently say that Boston never could have signed him.

As far as Wood goes, during the window of time when they were working with the TPE he would've been either 3a or 3b at the center position behind Rob and, when Rob wasn't in, Horford. He's also an expiring contract and would have very likely to leave for more minutes elsewhere. This isn't 2K, guys want guaranteed minutes - it's the exact reason Harrell wouldn't sign here.

I was a proponent of using the TPE for a depth big that could have been had cheaply in terms of assets (ironically, Favors was high on my list because he'd have been basically free), but tying up a 2025 first for a third-stringer would have been bad business.

As it is, they've got a pair of smaller TPEs, Pritchard, and some salaries to work with. I expect things will look different come February, so I just can't get too worked up over roster spots 12-15 in October.

Wood, even if everybody was healthy, would be a top-3 big man on this team.  As nick mentioned, the ideal scenario would have been for him to backup Timelord this year (meaning he'd be playing right now), and to then take over for Horford next season.

I find it shocking how many people start from a position of "Brad was right", instead of taking a rational view.  At every single point this off-season, Christian Wood would have been worth the TPE and a first.
I was a big proponent of Wood, but I do think the timing when he got traded was detrimental from the sense that Boston could not have traded a 1st in the last draft for him, and that is what Houston got.  Now it wasn't a great first so I think on some level, Boston could have topped it, but I think it would have taken more than just a future 1st and the TPE.  Probably would have taken at least Pritchard and the future 1st.  Still worth doing, but the draft day trade made it less likely for Boston.

That said, I got a lot of flack for saying Boston made a mistake and wasn't acting like a contender for not using the big TPE, and the tides have definitely turned in that direction.  Very few people were gung ho on using it before it expired and now it seems like a lot on here are questioning the decision not to use it.

Assuming they couldn't have gotten Wood, I'd have probably gotten a draft pick or two from Miami and taken Duncan Robinson.  Huge contract.  Overpaid.  But still a solid shooter and a guy you could trust to be the back-up SF and start in a pinch.  And you get some future draft picks, that can be used in other trades.

I think the question with the TPE has always been, do the Celtics have an unlimited budget?  I didn't believe Wyc when he said it originally, so I understood Brad's decision, but used the caveat that if Wyc was being truthful then it was unacceptable not to use it.

But, subsequently, Wyc has talked time and time again -- as recently as last week -- about how there are no budget restrictions.  If that's the case, then it is mind-boggling that Brad would let a giant asset just expire.

As for Wood, he was traded for what, the 27th pick?  Something like that.  I think a future pick would have gotten the deal done just fine.
I ran through the trade the other day, it was a bit complicated, because they immediately traded back and then traded almost everyone they got in the trade in a later salary dump. 

They traded Wood for:

Sterling Brown
Marquese Chriss
Boban Marjanovic
Trey Burke
26 (Wendell Moore Jr.)

The Rockets then immediately moved the Moore pick for 29 (TyTy Washington), 2025 2nd, 2027 2nd.

In September they traded Brown, Chriss, Burke, and Nwaba to the Thunder for Favors, Jerome, Maledon, Harkless, 2026 2nd, and cash


The real question is of course, how much do they value Washington (and to a lesser extent Boban who is actually playing for them)?  If they really liked Washington, then I'm not sure a random future 1st would have been enough.  Pritchard + 53 + a random future 1st, almost certainly would have been though, and that is something you have to do if you are Boston.

Not that I would have minded trading Pritchard, but I've got to think that if we had traded the Rockets a 2023 or 2025 #1, they could have pretty easily moved that for the 29th pick.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #69 on: October 30, 2022, 09:53:16 PM »

Offline bogg

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 817
  • Tommy Points: 51
You're just talking nonsense.  The Wood trade was before Gallo was signed, Timelord was already hurt, and Horford was already old.  And, he wouldn't have been a rental.

I don't believe any of the timelines around NBA free agency are honest, and that most deals are done well in advance of when things get finalized in early July. If that's the way we're framing it though, then they made the decision to prioritize Brogdon on a three-year deal over Wood on an expiring contract with their next available first-round pick. I get that.

Also, Rob wasn't "already hurt", he was expected to be ready for the start of the season and his September(?) surgery was a setback that's created a good deal of the current mess. Fair to expect him to be a part-time player in general though. I wanted a discount veteran a la Olynyk, Noel, or Favors for that reason.

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #70 on: October 31, 2022, 09:03:04 AM »

Online Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
Wood would have been a nice player to add.  The need was not quite the same before Gallinari got hurt and RWill had his follow up surgery.  At that point we expected to start the season with Horford, RWill, Gallinari, and Grant. 

As to the trade for Wood, I don't know if we could have beat the offer or not (without having an immediate pick to offer).  I don't see the issue being the salary, I see the issue being what you have to give up (picks, players) to get a 1 year rental of what at the time projected to be a bench player.

I can understand the debate, but to call this non-trade indefensible seems hyperbolic, especially when no one knows what we may have offered or considered.  Now with the Gallinari injury and the RWill follow up surgery, it would definitely be nice to have Wood.  But you can't really judge not doing a deal then based on what is known now.

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #71 on: October 31, 2022, 09:23:19 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Wood would have been a nice player to add.  The need was not quite the same before Gallinari got hurt and RWill had his follow up surgery.  At that point we expected to start the season with Horford, RWill, Gallinari, and Grant. 

As to the trade for Wood, I don't know if we could have beat the offer or not (without having an immediate pick to offer).  I don't see the issue being the salary, I see the issue being what you have to give up (picks, players) to get a 1 year rental of what at the time projected to be a bench player.

I can understand the debate, but to call this non-trade indefensible seems hyperbolic, especially when no one knows what we may have offered or considered.  Now with the Gallinari injury and the RWill follow up surgery, it would definitely be nice to have Wood.  But you can't really judge not doing a deal then based on what is known now.
Your points about Wood are fine, but not about not using the big TPE.

What we all knew in June/July

1.  Horford
a. is old
b. has missed at least 12 games every season over the last several seasons
c. wasn't going to play back-to-backs and otherwise was going to have minutes scaled back significantly

2. Rob
a. was recovering from surgery and not yet able to do basketball activities
b. has missed significant time due to injury every season

3. Gallo
a. is old
b. hasn't had a season where he didn't miss at least 10 games since his 2nd year in the league and often misses at least 20

4. Grant
a. is too undersized to play PF/C for long stretches
b. isn't a good option to even spot start


So knowing all of that, it is absolutely indefensible to enter the season with Vonleh, Kornet, and Jackson taking up roster spots, especially when you give two spots to Hauser and Griffin.  And that is made worse by having a 17 million dollar asset that you got nothing from.  That is all further compounded by the fact that the big acquisition this summer is fairly redundant from a roster standpoint.  Brogdon is obviously a clear talent, but going into the offseason, I think pretty much everyone would have had combo guard way down the wish list.  You don't pass up the opportunity to add talent and the value was excellent, but with Smart and White already on the roster, not to mention Brown, Pritchard, and Tatum, finding another player in the ilk wasn't exactly a priority. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #72 on: October 31, 2022, 09:28:08 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58539
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Wood would have been a nice player to add.  The need was not quite the same before Gallinari got hurt and RWill had his follow up surgery.  At that point we expected to start the season with Horford, RWill, Gallinari, and Grant. 

As to the trade for Wood, I don't know if we could have beat the offer or not (without having an immediate pick to offer).  I don't see the issue being the salary, I see the issue being what you have to give up (picks, players) to get a 1 year rental of what at the time projected to be a bench player.

I can understand the debate, but to call this non-trade indefensible seems hyperbolic, especially when no one knows what we may have offered or considered.  Now with the Gallinari injury and the RWill follow up surgery, it would definitely be nice to have Wood.  But you can't really judge not doing a deal then based on what is known now.

As mentioned previously, Wood was acquired before Gallinari was signed.  He was in fact traded before Gallinari was even bought out, making him a free agent.

And, I'm not sure anybody called not doing this particular trade indefensible.  However, not using the TPE in some capacity -- if there was no budget in place -- was indefensible.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #73 on: October 31, 2022, 09:46:15 AM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7142
  • Tommy Points: 979
Wood would have been a nice player to add.  The need was not quite the same before Gallinari got hurt and RWill had his follow up surgery.  At that point we expected to start the season with Horford, RWill, Gallinari, and Grant. 

As to the trade for Wood, I don't know if we could have beat the offer or not (without having an immediate pick to offer).  I don't see the issue being the salary, I see the issue being what you have to give up (picks, players) to get a 1 year rental of what at the time projected to be a bench player.

I can understand the debate, but to call this non-trade indefensible seems hyperbolic, especially when no one knows what we may have offered or considered.  Now with the Gallinari injury and the RWill follow up surgery, it would definitely be nice to have Wood.  But you can't really judge not doing a deal then based on what is known now.

As mentioned previously, Wood was acquired before Gallinari was signed.  He was in fact traded before Gallinari was even bought out, making him a free agent.

And, I'm not sure anybody called not doing this particular trade indefensible.  However, not using the TPE in some capacity -- if there was no budget in place -- was indefensible.

This is true, but when Wood was traded, we had not yet acquired Brogdon.  Reporting has indicated that the Brogdon trade came together pretty quickly, around June 29th or June 30th.  This means that we a) would have wanted to hold onto the TPE for our primary off-season need, which was an additional scorer, and b) still had Daniel Theis at the time Wood was traded.  Yes, Wood is better than Theis, but we had coverage for a potential Rob injury when that trade went down.

Re: Indefensible Decisions By Brad Stevens
« Reply #74 on: October 31, 2022, 10:17:18 AM »

Online Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
Wood would have been a nice player to add.  The need was not quite the same before Gallinari got hurt and RWill had his follow up surgery.  At that point we expected to start the season with Horford, RWill, Gallinari, and Grant. 

As to the trade for Wood, I don't know if we could have beat the offer or not (without having an immediate pick to offer).  I don't see the issue being the salary, I see the issue being what you have to give up (picks, players) to get a 1 year rental of what at the time projected to be a bench player.

I can understand the debate, but to call this non-trade indefensible seems hyperbolic, especially when no one knows what we may have offered or considered.  Now with the Gallinari injury and the RWill follow up surgery, it would definitely be nice to have Wood.  But you can't really judge not doing a deal then based on what is known now.
Your points about Wood are fine, but not about not using the big TPE.

What we all knew in June/July

1.  Horford
a. is old
b. has missed at least 12 games every season over the last several seasons
c. wasn't going to play back-to-backs and otherwise was going to have minutes scaled back significantly

2. Rob
a. was recovering from surgery and not yet able to do basketball activities
b. has missed significant time due to injury every season

3. Gallo
a. is old
b. hasn't had a season where he didn't miss at least 10 games since his 2nd year in the league and often misses at least 20

4. Grant
a. is too undersized to play PF/C for long stretches
b. isn't a good option to even spot start


So knowing all of that, it is absolutely indefensible to enter the season with Vonleh, Kornet, and Jackson taking up roster spots, especially when you give two spots to Hauser and Griffin.  And that is made worse by having a 17 million dollar asset that you got nothing from.  That is all further compounded by the fact that the big acquisition this summer is fairly redundant from a roster standpoint.  Brogdon is obviously a clear talent, but going into the offseason, I think pretty much everyone would have had combo guard way down the wish list.  You don't pass up the opportunity to add talent and the value was excellent, but with Smart and White already on the roster, not to mention Brown, Pritchard, and Tatum, finding another player in the ilk wasn't exactly a priority.

Yeah, OK, but this Wood possible deal is about the only realistic TPE scenario that I have seen where we could have used the TPE.  For example, for a period, there was outrage over why we didn't use the TPE on Nerlens Noel or Kelly Olynyk.  In all these cases, you have to give up something or what you get back for the TPE isn't of any value to help the team.  A team is not going to just give away a useful player like Wood.  You still have to give up something.  Of all the TPE hypothetical talk, the Wood possible deal is the only one where I have said, hmm, yeah, that might have been a good deal to help the team.  I find passing on Noel or Olynyk very defensible.  It is all speculation anyway.  You are being critical of the team for not making a deal when you don't even know what deal was on the table.  Doing a deal just for the sake of doing a deal usually ends up being a bad deal.

As to Brogdon, I think that was a great deal.  Yes, we now have a surplus at Combo guard, I don't care.  We are better for the deal by a wide margin.  And when we had Brogdon and Gallinari, I was thrilled with the off season.  Stevens was in line for executive of the year.  With the way things stand, we have options to get another big via a trade.  We could trade some combination of White, Pritchard, Gallinari, even Smart and get a someone much better than Noel or Olynyk.  We are fine, our record is 4-2.  We are still monitoring RWill.  Gallinari is shooting 3s.  Instant gratification is not always the best path forward.  It will all depend on what they do in the end but I am fine to let this play out some.  I find that plenty defensible.

And I would also add to not give up on Blake Griffin just yet.  If he can give us circa 2020-21 Daniel Theis level of play come the end of the season/playoffs, that is going to make a big difference.  I see that as a reasonable expectation for Griffin based on what I have seen on the court.  This also requires some patience but is part of what needs to "play out" in order to accurately assess exactly what the team needs and now much they should be willing to give up to address the need.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2022, 10:27:38 AM by Vermont Green »