Let's say the Nets pick ends up #5. What package is better, Butler or Irving

[byennie]

I will say that some of the snarkyness is just mental exhaustion from reading comments about the trade, which I think is a very fair trade... I didn't think the Sac trade was terrible, either.

Can you think of any team that will trade their 10th pick for IT? I can't. Who's going to give away a lotto pick for either a rental who is injured with a follow up of a max contract?

I would have paid him max money, but like I said, you go into it knowing half of that contract will be   bad. So it's a risk of a headache... giving away a lotto pick on top of that makes it a bad deal, IMO.

Cleveland would have traded a #10 pick in a heartbeat, if they had it. Any team with hope/desire of re-signing him would, really.

Anyway I get your frustration, but that's pretty overboard.

[Erik]

I don't know where you get off saying that, when there was a legit discussion on this board for the last few months on whether or not we should let IT walk or pay him the money. As I said, I was in the camp "give him the money and hold your nose for the final 2 years of the deal." You'd want to throw away a lotto pick on top of that to inherit that dilemma?

IT is not worth a 10th pick. Jae Crowder is more likely to get a 10th pick. Neither of them are in the ballpark for Buddy Hield (rookie with a lot of upside). A 10th pick can still yield a Paul Pierce. We all know what Jae Crowder and IT are. The former has reached his peak and is a starter at best, Allstar never. The latter is a soon to be 30 year old 5'9" NBA player with hip problems that will want max money. Sorry, I love the guy, but business is business.

The only part of this deal that I can't justify is Jae Crowder for Tyreke Evans. Jae Crowder's trade value is off the charts. If you close your eyes and forget that Jae Crowder was in the deal (did we even need him long term anyways?), this trade is very similar to the "fleecing" that the Pelicans gave Divac.

BTW, I also leave my investments to professionals

[CelticsElite]

Butler is trash so what does it matter? I like who we have. Danny basically said he wasn't interested in butler when asked about him. He says he didn't even make an offer this summer

[jambr380]

I agree with you KGLL - the Minny package was decent and more what Chicago wanted. Remember, they were very high on Dunn last year, so he wasn't  just some throw-in.

But we don't really need to compare what we gave up for Kyrie. If we had traded for Butler, we would have needed to trade AB, Crowder, and a BKN pick at a minimum. In terms of trade value, AB is probably comparable to IT so it really isn't a whole lot different than what we gave up (minus Zizic). Kyrie is also a couple of years younger and we were able to sign Hayward.

[guava_wrench]

It doesn't matter where the Nets pick actually ends up. What matters is that it is an unprotected pick for a bad team.

What I have found most silly during the post-trade discussions is those people who say the Cavs had no leverage in our trade talks. That is just not true. Multiple teams were talking trade. They had options.

For me, it boils down to the fact that I don't think we gave up much in IT because we did not want to re-sign him.  That meant trying to get value for him, even though he has hip issues. Cleveland was a great trade partner because they need a player to help in Lebron's final year and a pick for post Lebron. I'm also hoping we land an underpaid vet FA looking to get into the finals.

[greece66]

Erik no.

What the Celtics gave for Kyrie far exceeds what NOP gave for DMC, esp. if the Brooklyn pick ends up at #5.

Care to elaborate? What is your definition of "far exceeds?" Generally you'll want to provide some information before getting to the conclusion, especially if you are directly disagreeing with someone else.

Specifically, which bullet did I mess up?

The only player of value Sac got was Buddy Hield and I'm not sure he is better than Crowder, let alone IT.

Ah, I see. We solved the problem. You either speak in hyperbole or you're an unabashed homer.

Since we're going to skip right over facts and head into opinion, my opinion is that if Vlade contacts me and says that he'll trade Hield OR their #10 pick 1:1 for either Crowder or IT, I would first check the calendar to make sure it's not April fools day and then agree as fast as possible.

I'm just thankful that Danny is our GM and not people like you who struggle to understand that a player's trade value has components within it that are separate than their current NBA 2K rating. I'd recommend that you leave your investments to professionals.

For what it's worth, Crowder has more trade value than IT. Try to figure that head-scratcher out.

lol what are you even talking about? Anyway, thanks for the laughs.

[max215]

Irving, and it's not close. I think Butler's a better player, but you could definitely make the argument that Kyrie is more valuable as an asset.

[CelticsElite]

Erik no.

What the Celtics gave for Kyrie far exceeds what NOP gave for DMC, esp. if the Brooklyn pick ends up at #5.

Care to elaborate? What is your definition of "far exceeds?" Generally you'll want to provide some information before getting to the conclusion, especially if you are directly disagreeing with someone else.

Specifically, which bullet did I mess up?

The only player of value Sac got was Buddy Hield and I'm not sure he is better than Crowder, let alone IT.

Ah, I see. We solved the problem. You either speak in hyperbole or you're an unabashed homer.

Since we're going to skip right over facts and head into opinion, my opinion is that if Vlade contacts me and says that he'll trade Hield OR their #10 pick 1:1 for either Crowder or IT, I would first check the calendar to make sure it's not April fools day and then agree as fast as possible.

I'm just thankful that Danny is our GM and not people like you who struggle to understand that a player's trade value has components within it that are separate than their current NBA 2K rating. I'd recommend that you leave your investments to professionals.

For what it's worth, Crowder has more trade value than IT. Try to figure that head-scratcher out.

lol what are you even talking about? Anyway, thanks for the laughs.

he's saying no team will trade for a headcase except a desperate pelicans team

[Somebody]

Definitely the Wolves package. Value wise it's Boston but in terms of what the teams actually get to keep long term the Bulls win, LaVine and the pick already trumps the Brooklyn pick at 5 even if there's Bamba, Dunn is icing on the cake.

[Bucketgetter]

Butler is trash so what does it matter? I like who we have. Danny basically said he wasn't interested in butler when asked about him. He says he didn't even make an offer this summer

Lol, please stop posting here.

[GreenEnvy]

Definitely the Wolves package. Value wise it's Boston but in terms of what the teams actually get to keep long term the Bulls win, LaVine and the pick already trumps the Brooklyn pick at 5 even if there's Bamba, Dunn is icing on the cake.

So back in June, you would've traded the rights to that Brooklyn pick for Lavine and #7? Yikes.

The package for Irving was inarguably the biggest we've seen in quite some time.

They got:
A 29ppg 2nd-team All-NBA PG.
A cost-controlled, All-Defense-caliber starter.
A legit center prospect, lottery-level talent.
AND a sure lottery, perhaps top pick.

Quite the haul if you ask me. I haven't heard many Cavs fan complaining. I've heard plenty of Bulls fans upset with their trade.

[Bucketgetter]

Definitely the Wolves package. Value wise it's Boston but in terms of what the teams actually get to keep long term the Bulls win, LaVine and the pick already trumps the Brooklyn pick at 5 even if there's Bamba, Dunn is icing on the cake.

Lol, I died reading that. “Wolves package was better, but Boston’s had more value”. What?? Better package = More value.

[greece66]

Erik no.

What the Celtics gave for Kyrie far exceeds what NOP gave for DMC, esp. if the Brooklyn pick ends up at #5.

Care to elaborate? What is your definition of "far exceeds?" Generally you'll want to provide some information before getting to the conclusion, especially if you are directly disagreeing with someone else.

Specifically, which bullet did I mess up?

The only player of value Sac got was Buddy Hield and I'm not sure he is better than Crowder, let alone IT.

Ah, I see. We solved the problem. You either speak in hyperbole or you're an unabashed homer.

Since we're going to skip right over facts and head into opinion, my opinion is that if Vlade contacts me and says that he'll trade Hield OR their #10 pick 1:1 for either Crowder or IT, I would first check the calendar to make sure it's not April fools day and then agree as fast as possible.

I'm just thankful that Danny is our GM and not people like you who struggle to understand that a player's trade value has components within it that are separate than their current NBA 2K rating. I'd recommend that you leave your investments to professionals.

For what it's worth, Crowder has more trade value than IT. Try to figure that head-scratcher out.

lol what are you even talking about? Anyway, thanks for the laughs.

he's saying no team will trade for a headcase except a desperate pelicans team

Many things were said in the convo above, but this was not among them. Anyway, I'm done commenting in this thread.

[Erik]

I'll take it one step further (if the nets pick ends up #5)

Cousins and Omri Casspi to the Pelicans for Buddy Hield (2016 #6), Tyreke Evans, Langston Galloway and its 2017 first-round (2017 #10) and second-round pick to Sacramento.

Basically Cousins for 2016 #6, 2017 #10 and Tyreke Evans
Our trade was Kyrie for 2018 #5, IT, and Jae Crowder

I will start off by saying that Kyrie ~= Cousins, so what Pelicans and Celtics got is fairly equal in value. NBARank had them #15 and #13 respectively.

1) Next, if the BRK18 pick is #5, it's debatable that it is fairly equal in value to 2016 #6. (imitating whiny voice: "Yeah but but but Bamba is going to be so much better") -- you don't know that. Hield played a great rookie season and bigs are hit or miss.

2) Jae Crowder > Tyreke Evans -- no question there. Not even going to attempt to compare these two. This was the part that hurt the most, TBH.

3) Is Isaiah Thomas on an expiring deal worth the #10 pick? Probably. But there isn't a single team in the NBA that would have given up their 10th pick for him. And with Kyrie, we don't even need him anymore. Kyrie is flat out an upgrade over the next 5 years.

4) Not even going to talk about Zizic. It's a filler, plain and simple, and anyone that says otherwise is a monumental homer.


If you break out the pieces, it seems like the Kings/Pelicans deal isn't that far off from our deal. What is the biggest difference?

"KILL Divac"
"Celtics got fleeced"

Anyone still think that IT in his current situation Is worth a 10th pick ?

I don't really know how to approach this. I think I'd rather have people realize that the kings trade wasn't as bad as you think and less "Celtics fleeced the Cavs)