Should Ainge Have Traded a Massive Package for Anthony Davis?

[Roy H.]

As soon as Kyrie was out and there was no replacement plan, it was clear that Danny couldn’t make the deal.

[Mahk E Mahk]

I dont want anyone who doesnt want to play in Boston

TP, was planning on stating the exact same sentiment. call me a homer but it’s a privilege to be a celtic.

furthermore, trading most of the team’s assets for a one year rental is suicide. one reason kyrie and AD are friends is they both suffer from terrell owens syndrome (“i love me some me”). AD would have bolted for LA after one year, regardless of the success he experienced in boston.

[ozgod]

With the knowledge that we have now:

• Kyrie Irving leaving for sure now as he's unhappy
• Al Horford leaving, because we're not a contender anymore
• 3 draft picks being used on Langford, Williams and Edwards

In hindsight, should the Celtics have tried to beat the Lakers offer for Davis?

The Lakers gave up:

Lonzo Ball, Brandon Ingram, Josh Hart + #4 pick + '21/'22 pick + pick swap in '23 + '24/'25 pick (= 3 players + 3/4 picks)

The Celtics could have easily beaten that with:

Jayson Tatum, Marcus Smart, Robert Williams + #14 + #20 + '20/'21 Memphis pick + pick swap in '23

Would you have done that with what you know now? Explain why yes or why not.

No. Our circumstances are different to theirs. All the signals indicated that he was going to hit free agency and re-sign with the Lakers in 2020 no matter where he was initially traded. The risk of losing a massive package for a year was too great. People are slitting their wrists about our franchise now, imagine how much worse it would have been if we got Davis for a year, lost Kyrie anyway, and gave up Tatum, Smart, Williams, #14, #20, 21 Memphis and pick swap and he left next year. (note that none of the young guys that Kyrie allegedly didn't get on with are in your deal so they would still be on the team, but even if you swapped in Brown for Tatum I still wouldn't have done it for a year rental).

Lakers have 3 more years of LeBum, they aren't in the running for any free agent, their team outside LeBum sucks balls and they know Davis wants to re-sign. The risk is low. Even so they gave up a lot for a player they most likely get next year in FA anyway. That's the pressure to win now that LeBum exerts, given he's not getting any younger.

As for the Pels, I'm sure they would have taken our package over LA's. Griffin would have considered himself a genius if he had managed to convince Danny to pull the trigger on that deal.

[Sketch5]

No Davis didnt want to play here plus his father didnt want him to play here.  Besides I really like the direction of the team and hoping to get Randle and Bryant and that would put the starters around the same age.

Randle + Bryant would be a fantastic solution, I agree. But if we can't solve the 'puzzle' this summer, I'm not sure we'll get another chance. After Brown (and Tatum) have signed extensions it will be much harder to clear as much cap space as we have now, so our options will diminish.

Randle doesn’t work with Hayward,Tatum and Brown. Those guys plus Smart are the building blocks. And if Hayward is back to form,Randle isn’t going to want to come off the bench.

and no, you don’t trade Hayward right now just to sign Randle. Plus you still need a pg.

[Emmette Bryant]

no I don't think so what do I know it's just my opinion

[ObjectivityOverBias]

I dont want anyone who doesnt want to play in Boston

You may wanna gut [dang] near your entire team than..

I guarantee when contact time rolls around for Brown and Tatum, they will follow Kyrie's lead. Example, Terry Rozier.

 KG all but stated he didn't want to come to Boston, he only came because it was a situation were he could get a quick title.

[Ogaju]

no

[dreamgreen]

no

+1

[bellerephon]

I dont want anyone who doesnt want to play in Boston

You may wanna gut [dang] near your entire team than..

I guarantee when contact time rolls around for Brown and Tatum, they will follow Kyrie's lead. Example, Terry Rozier.

 KG all but stated he didn't want to come to Boston, he only came because it was a situation were he could get a quick title.

I expect that if the team is good and it looks like they are moving in the right direction the Celts will have a excellent chance of retaining both of them.

[RodyTur10]

No Davis didnt want to play here plus his father didnt want him to play here.  Besides I really like the direction of the team and hoping to get Randle and Bryant and that would put the starters around the same age.

Randle + Bryant would be a fantastic solution, I agree. But if we can't solve the 'puzzle' this summer, I'm not sure we'll get another chance. After Brown (and Tatum) have signed extensions it will be much harder to clear as much cap space as we have now, so our options will diminish.

Randle doesn’t work with Hayward,Tatum and Brown. Those guys plus Smart are the building blocks. And if Hayward is back to form,Randle isn’t going to want to come off the bench.

and no, you don’t trade Hayward right now just to sign Randle. Plus you still need a pg.

Hayward is the 6th man. Even if he gets back to 90% of his peak-Utah level I find that a good role for him. Like Ginobili he can lead the 2nd unit.

Randle is a starter who provides physicality. He excels in getting to the rim and the free throw line. Also a great rebounder and a good passer. Those are qualities he adds to a starting line-up with Smart-Brown-Tatum. Then we just need a center who's a good rim protector, post defender and screener.

[Hoopvortex]

With the knowledge that we have now:

• Kyrie Irving leaving for sure now as he's unhappy
• Al Horford leaving, because we're not a contender anymore
• 3 draft picks being used on Langford, Williams and Edwards

In hindsight, should the Celtics have tried to beat the Lakers offer for Davis?

The Lakers gave up:

Lonzo Ball, Brandon Ingram, Josh Hart + #4 pick + '21/'22 pick + pick swap in '23 + '24/'25 pick (= 3 players + 3/4 picks)

The Celtics could have easily beaten that with:

Jayson Tatum, Marcus Smart, Robert Williams + #14 + #20 + '20/'21 Memphis pick + pick swap in '23

Would you have done that with what you know now? Explain why yes or why not.

 Yes, I guess. But – it sounds like the Davis group told Boston they wouldn’t re-sign in a year.  So, it was better to hang on to the assets.

Toronto fans are giddy right now, and you hear frequently that  winning a championship was worth a one-year rental of Kawhi.  I get that - they had never won a championship before.

But this is the Boston Celtics we’re talking about.

[rondofan1255]

in hindsight, absolutely not

[colincb]

Grandma once told me to never bet the farm on a risky proposition.

[jambr380]

With the knowledge that we have now:

• Kyrie Irving leaving for sure now as he's unhappy
• Al Horford leaving, because we're not a contender anymore
• 3 draft picks being used on Langford, Williams and Edwards

In hindsight, should the Celtics have tried to beat the Lakers offer for Davis?

The Lakers gave up:

Lonzo Ball, Brandon Ingram, Josh Hart + #4 pick + '21/'22 pick + pick swap in '23 + '24/'25 pick (= 3 players + 3/4 picks)

The Celtics could have easily beaten that with:

Jayson Tatum, Marcus Smart, Robert Williams + #14 + #20 + '20/'21 Memphis pick + pick swap in '23

Would you have done that with what you know now? Explain why yes or why not.

 Yes, I guess. But – it sounds like the Davis group told Boston they wouldn’t re-sign in a year.  So, it was better to hang on to the assets.

Toronto fans are giddy right now, and you hear frequently that  winning a championship was worth a one-year rental of Kawhi.  I get that - they had never won a championship before.

But this is the Boston Celtics we’re talking about.

If we could see into the future and we were guaranteed to win a championship, but AD and the rest of the roster was leaving, I would absolutely have made the deal. The thing is, you can't guarantee a championship. Toronto got extremely lucky with the (un)health of the Warriors.

As for the original question, I would say yes, but only if we were sure Kyrie was re-signing a 5-year max. Even if AD left, we would still have our best asset and best player. Knowing Kyrie and Horford are gone, it's an obvious no.

[alt]

Absolutely and it was a very grave mistake to not do so.

Obviously, after trading for Davis, Horford wouldn't leave. I would still trade for Davis with Irving gone - in a team with Davis/Horford, Irving wouldn't be that essential. Even without Irving, Tatum and even one of Brown/Smart, the team would still be a contender next season. Now it's uncertain the team would ever be a contender even in the next decade.

Anthony Davis has a good chance of being the best player in the NBA for the next few years.

Ainge has been an unmitigated disaster at properly using the "assets" he had available by constantly overvaluing them. I'm old enough to remember when the Sacramento pick was so precious that it was unthinkable to trade it for Paul George or Jimmy Butler. Same for all the picks that were wasted by drafting guys that never had any playing time available. Out of all the picks Ainge had available to trade, how many did he actually trade for veterans? The Sexton one?

Not sure why people think Davis would be sure to leave for the Lakers next off-season. Would the Lakers really waste another year of LeBron's prime by not signing high-level FAs this off-season? They'd probably miss the playoffs again. LeBron will be 35 year sold by the end of next season. Would Davis really leave a lot of money on the table to go join a 35 years old LeBron that had missed the POs two years in a row? I find that extremely unlikely. In any case, definitely worth the risk IMO.