IT4 For Hood & Hill: who says no?

[gift]

Utah wants to retain Gordon heyward in free agency. Acquiring an all star to set them up for a playoff run is the step in the right direction if they want to do that.  Boston get some much-needed shooting  in return for a guy they will probably be hesitant to sign to a max contract anyways. We also take George Hill off their hands Who may be too expensive for them in the off-season if they want to sign Gordon Hayward to a max contract. Who says no to this deal

wow. i hope you were just trying to prove a point.

[LGC88]

I'm very curious to see how Utah will handle their situation. Unless they want to be in luxury taxe several years, they have to let go or trade someone at some point.

[celticsclay]

As the OP I must say - this seems a pretty foolish proposition now. IT4 has proved he's up there with the best in the world.

Perk's a beast. Thanks the bored is a better place when people can kind of chuckle at something that turns out to be way off. I have done the same and even thought the Lakers had a shot at making the playoffs once they were 10-10 or whatever (when it now seems clear they will finish with the second worst record). What's funny is there are still another poster trying to argue the idea is still fair value now 

[green_bballers13]

ummmm I say no. Do George Hill and Hood have the potential to lead the league in 4th quarter scoring?

I don't think they do.

[mmmmm]

Utah says no. Boston probably says yes.

Yep.  Taking contracts out of it, I don't even know if Utah would trade Hill straight up for Thomas given he is a vastly superior defensive player and a more efficient offensive player (though with lesser volume).

Moranis, the way you devalue C's players is numbing. You must be stunned we're currently the #2 seed. So by your rationale, the C's swapping Hill for Thomas would yield a similar record, right? Not sure if you realize this or not, but the reason why the Pacers wanted to move Hill is because he lacks anything reminiscent of playmaking skills. He's basically a better version of Chalmers, where he can play off a facilitator on offense (George in Indy, Hayward now) and cover opposing 1's on D.

In small fairness to Moranis, this is a necro'd thread from six weeks ago -- towards the beginning of IT hitting a new level.

There was never a point this season aside from after the first or second game that Thomas was averaging less than 25 points. He was an all-star last year and was always projected as one this year. It was an insane devaluing of our star player then and it looks even more foolish now.

Notice how I said "small fairness."

Thanks.  Obviously Thomas has gone to another level since then and since Hill returned from his injury hasn't been as good as he was early on (but Hill is still shooting 40% from three and is still a much better defender than Thomas), but Hill and Hood is still good value for Thomas.  With the contract situation and the fact that Boston doesn't need 2 guards for 1 guard you don't make that trade if you are Boston, but in a vacuum I think that trade is pretty fair.

'Still hanging on to the glowing embers of Hill's hot start this season, aren't you?

The truth is, Hill is shooting a modest 34% from beyond the arc since his hot month of November ended.

Hill has returned to being the same good-but-not-great sidekick guard that he always has been prior to his super-hot shooting start to this season.   He is trending straight toward his career averages in all his stats.

That proposed trade idea was and is stupid, with or without thinking about the contracts.   It was not "good value" then and it is not now.

Please.  Put a stake through the heart of this one now.  The dead need not rise again.

[tankcity!]

Utah says no. Boston probably says yes.

Yep.  Taking contracts out of it, I don't even know if Utah would trade Hill straight up for Thomas given he is a vastly superior defensive player and a more efficient offensive player (though with lesser volume).

Moranis, the way you devalue C's players is numbing. You must be stunned we're currently the #2 seed. So by your rationale, the C's swapping Hill for Thomas would yield a similar record, right? Not sure if you realize this or not, but the reason why the Pacers wanted to move Hill is because he lacks anything reminiscent of playmaking skills. He's basically a better version of Chalmers, where he can play off a facilitator on offense (George in Indy, Hayward now) and cover opposing 1's on D.

In small fairness to Moranis, this is a necro'd thread from six weeks ago -- towards the beginning of IT hitting a new level.

There was never a point this season aside from after the first or second game that Thomas was averaging less than 25 points. He was an all-star last year and was always projected as one this year. It was an insane devaluing of our star player then and it looks even more foolish now.

Notice how I said "small fairness."

Thanks.  Obviously Thomas has gone to another level since then and since Hill returned from his injury hasn't been as good as he was early on (but Hill is still shooting 40% from three and is still a much better defender than Thomas), but Hill and Hood is still good value for Thomas.  With the contract situation and the fact that Boston doesn't need 2 guards for 1 guard you don't make that trade if you are Boston, but in a vacuum I think that trade is pretty fair.

'Still hanging on to the glowing embers of Hill's hot start this season, aren't you?

The truth is, Hill is shooting a modest 34% from beyond the arc since his hot month of November ended.

Hill has returned to being the same good-but-not-great sidekick guard that he always has been prior to his super-hot shooting start to this season.   He is trending straight toward his career averages in all his stats.

That proposed trade idea was and is stupid, with or without thinking about the contracts.   It was not "good value" then and it is not now.

Please.  Put a stake through the heart of this one now.  The dead need not rise again.

TP. It's getting absurd on these forums. I have even bashed IT, but I would have never taken that deal. I think it's utterly ridiculous to trade a play-maker for basically two 3 and D guys.

[CelticGuardian]

Ridiculous.

[celticsclay]

Utah says no. Boston probably says yes.

Yep.  Taking contracts out of it, I don't even know if Utah would trade Hill straight up for Thomas given he is a vastly superior defensive player and a more efficient offensive player (though with lesser volume).

Moranis, the way you devalue C's players is numbing. You must be stunned we're currently the #2 seed. So by your rationale, the C's swapping Hill for Thomas would yield a similar record, right? Not sure if you realize this or not, but the reason why the Pacers wanted to move Hill is because he lacks anything reminiscent of playmaking skills. He's basically a better version of Chalmers, where he can play off a facilitator on offense (George in Indy, Hayward now) and cover opposing 1's on D.

In small fairness to Moranis, this is a necro'd thread from six weeks ago -- towards the beginning of IT hitting a new level.

There was never a point this season aside from after the first or second game that Thomas was averaging less than 25 points. He was an all-star last year and was always projected as one this year. It was an insane devaluing of our star player then and it looks even more foolish now.

Notice how I said "small fairness."

Thanks.  Obviously Thomas has gone to another level since then and since Hill returned from his injury hasn't been as good as he was early on (but Hill is still shooting 40% from three and is still a much better defender than Thomas), but Hill and Hood is still good value for Thomas.  With the contract situation and the fact that Boston doesn't need 2 guards for 1 guard you don't make that trade if you are Boston, but in a vacuum I think that trade is pretty fair.

'Still hanging on to the glowing embers of Hill's hot start this season, aren't you?

The truth is, Hill is shooting a modest 34% from beyond the arc since his hot month of November ended.

Hill has returned to being the same good-but-not-great sidekick guard that he always has been prior to his super-hot shooting start to this season.   He is trending straight toward his career averages in all his stats.

That proposed trade idea was and is stupid, with or without thinking about the contracts.   It was not "good value" then and it is not now.

Please.  Put a stake through the heart of this one now.  The dead need not rise again.

TP. It's getting absurd on these forums. I have even bashed IT, but I would have never taken that deal. I think it's utterly ridiculous to trade a play-maker for basically two 3 and D guys.

Agreed and great point about George Hill returning to his career averages after an unsustainable start. Want to once again give the OP prop though for recognizing this and being cool about it (tps will keep being on the way). Moranis on the other hand seems interested in doubling down with the Celtics are trash everything else is treasure routine we frequently see.

[tankcity!]

Utah says no. Boston probably says yes.

Yep.  Taking contracts out of it, I don't even know if Utah would trade Hill straight up for Thomas given he is a vastly superior defensive player and a more efficient offensive player (though with lesser volume).

Moranis, the way you devalue C's players is numbing. You must be stunned we're currently the #2 seed. So by your rationale, the C's swapping Hill for Thomas would yield a similar record, right? Not sure if you realize this or not, but the reason why the Pacers wanted to move Hill is because he lacks anything reminiscent of playmaking skills. He's basically a better version of Chalmers, where he can play off a facilitator on offense (George in Indy, Hayward now) and cover opposing 1's on D.

In small fairness to Moranis, this is a necro'd thread from six weeks ago -- towards the beginning of IT hitting a new level.

There was never a point this season aside from after the first or second game that Thomas was averaging less than 25 points. He was an all-star last year and was always projected as one this year. It was an insane devaluing of our star player then and it looks even more foolish now.

Notice how I said "small fairness."

Thanks.  Obviously Thomas has gone to another level since then and since Hill returned from his injury hasn't been as good as he was early on (but Hill is still shooting 40% from three and is still a much better defender than Thomas), but Hill and Hood is still good value for Thomas.  With the contract situation and the fact that Boston doesn't need 2 guards for 1 guard you don't make that trade if you are Boston, but in a vacuum I think that trade is pretty fair.

'Still hanging on to the glowing embers of Hill's hot start this season, aren't you?

The truth is, Hill is shooting a modest 34% from beyond the arc since his hot month of November ended.

Hill has returned to being the same good-but-not-great sidekick guard that he always has been prior to his super-hot shooting start to this season.   He is trending straight toward his career averages in all his stats.

That proposed trade idea was and is stupid, with or without thinking about the contracts.   It was not "good value" then and it is not now.

Please.  Put a stake through the heart of this one now.  The dead need not rise again.

TP. It's getting absurd on these forums. I have even bashed IT, but I would have never taken that deal. I think it's utterly ridiculous to trade a play-maker for basically two 3 and D guys.

Agreed and great point about George Hill returning to his career averages after an unsustainable start. Want to once again give the OP prop though for recognizing this and being cool about it (tps will keep being on the way). Moranis on the other hand seems interested in doubling down with the Celtics are trash everything else is treasure routine we frequently see.

Classic Tony Mazz tactic. Is that you Tony?

[KG Living Legend]

 Omg I hate this idea. Shame on you.

 Has anyone been watching IT lately? The little guy is just incredible. Everything he throws up goes in.

 How many people in the world have worked on their craft more than Thomas.

 I would guess less than five people on the planet have worked, practiced, and perfected their game like Thomas has.

 I'm not trading a guy like that. I'll give him 25 million per all day every day. He deserves it.

[Irish Stew]

Does anyone who wants to trade Thomas ever ask himself how a team with such wretched rebounding and interior defense is 31-18?

[danglertx]

You don't get ahead in the NBA by trading a dime for two nickles.

[wiley]

I like Hood and Hill, but what happens to our SG/SF rotation.

Smart/Hill/Rozier
Bradley/Hood/Brown
Crowder/Hood/Green

Looks like Brown is out of a job almost.   

This trade complicates the roster without dealing with our biggest weakness, a center to protect the rim and intimidate.  It also robs us of a 4th quarter magician. 

The thread that tried to condemn Isaiah's defense was not enlightening.  There are many PG stars in history who have not been good on defense.  The issue goes away (or becomes moot) with the right big man.   

[Real World]

The Celtics absolutely say no.  As someone else said, they don't need quantity, and IT4 is clearly the best player involved. 

[wiley]

As the OP I must say - this seems a pretty foolish proposition now. IT4 has proved he's up there with the best in the world.

Perk's a beast. Thanks the bored is a better place when people can kind of chuckle at something that turns out to be way off. I have done the same and even thought the Lakers had a shot at making the playoffs once they were 10-10 or whatever (when it now seems clear they will finish with the second worst record). What's funny is there are still another poster trying to argue the idea is still fair value now 

Anyway, a trade thread that goes 4 pages is a major success!  Timing is everything.