If the Celts are going to make a blockbuster...

[Fierce1]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

Ok I didn’t say we were better without Hayward, the point is we can obviously survive without him. He’s been in and out the lineup since he’s been in Boston whereas everyone else has been pretty consistent.  When I think of the Celtics I don’t think of Hayward much because he’s always gone. We need a big more than we need Hayward and I know Hayward is arguably  the best player on our team when heathy, but we can get so much back if he’s the one who is traded.

Doesn't matter.

Most probably Ainge will not trade both Hayward and Smart.

What I'm saying is if and only if Ainge decides to trade for a big man, I think Smart is the one who will get traded.

[Somebody]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

[Fierce1]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

[Fierce1]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

[Somebody]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

[Somebody]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

Being old doesn't mean you're bad, KG was a strong contender for DPOY in 2011 and wasn't much worse in 2012. And Horford is a star big man if you take your eyes off the box score for once to watch the games lol, or maybe even just look at a different family of stats (impact metrics!).

It absolutely befuddles me that you consider Parish to be a "tier 1" big man but not an old KG (who imo was miles better than prime Parish, especially for more talented teams) or late prime Horford.

[Jvalin]

Marcus Smart is not our best shooter, scorer, rebounder, passer....he IS our best defender, IMO.

(...)

Oh man, I remember the final seconds of that game against the Rockets as if they were yesterday! What a performance that night by Smart!

Just out of curiosity, who do you think is our best passer? Cause imo Smart is our best defender and our passer.

[arctic 3.0]

this Years blockbuster is the team on the floor.
Love it or leave it.

[Fierce1]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

How is Drummond a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter?

Drummond is a 2-time All-Star, an All-NBA 3rd teamer in 2016, and led the league in rebounding in 2016, 2018, and 2019.

Right now Drummond is once again leading the NBA in rebounds with 17.0 rebounds per game.

There's just no way Drummond is just a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter.

[arctic 3.0]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

^ this^

[Fierce1]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

You can check the history of the Celtics.

Celtics never won a championship when they didn't have a tier 1 big man or tier 1 big men.

In the 1990s, the Celts won ZERO championships when their big men were Radja, Potapenko, and Battie.

Even in the 2010s, Celts have no championships to show for.

That's two decades now that the Celts have failed to win a championship.

Out west the Lakers kept winning championships because they would always end up with a star big man.

Celts got an MVP big man in KG and the Celts won a championship and went to the Finals twice.

I think it's very obvious why there's a need for the Celts to get that tier 1 big man.

If your definition of tier 1 big man is an MVP candidate I'll tell you that the 80s Celtics never had an MVP tier big in their three title runs, and when they did (McHale's peak year in '87) they failed to win it all (although they were definitely good enough to win the title imo).

Tier 1 means star big man.

McHale and Parish are both Hall of Famers.

You don't become a Hall of Famer if you're not a star in the NBA.

Guys like Joe Kleine don't make it to the Hall of Fame.

Then your statement about the 2010s is just weird. We had an All-NBA calibre big man in Garnett at the start of the decade, and an All-Star big in Horford at the end of the decade. Also I never said that McHale and Parish weren't stars, I was saying that Parish never had an MVP peak while McHale only barely touched MVP status in his best year.

KG was already old during the 2010s.

Horford is not a star big man, he's a tier 2 PF playing Center.

The Atlanta Hawks never made it to the east finals with Horford.

Horford is no Dave Cowens.

Being old doesn't mean you're bad, KG was a strong contender for DPOY in 2011 and wasn't much worse in 2012. And Horford is a star big man if you take your eyes off the box score for once to watch the games lol, or maybe even just look at a different family of stats (impact metrics!).

It absolutely befuddles me that you consider Parish to be a "tier 1" big man but not an old KG (who imo was miles better than prime Parish, especially for more talented teams) or late prime Horford.

Horford can't even average 8 rebounds per game with the Celtics.

Maybe if the Celts got Horford when he was 28 years old.
But Horford was on the decline when the Celts got him.

Celts paid Horford 28m per year and he can't even average 8 rebounds per game.

Here's the thing, I don't think the Celts will trade Smart or Hayward.
I'm only saying that if and only if the Celts will make a trade for a big man, it will be Smart who will get traded.

[mrceltics2013]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

Ok I didn’t say we were better without Hayward, the point is we can obviously survive without him. He’s been in and out the lineup since he’s been in Boston whereas everyone else has been pretty consistent.  When I think of the Celtics I don’t think of Hayward much because he’s always gone. We need a big more than we need Hayward and I know Hayward is arguably  the best player on our team when heathy, but we can get so much back if he’s the one who is traded.

Doesn't matter.

Most probably Ainge will not trade both Hayward and Smart.

What I'm saying is if and only if Ainge decides to trade for a big man, I think Smart is the one who will get traded.

I never said anything about Ainge trading both as that wouldn’t make much sense. I do however see TEAMS wanting Hayward over Smart which would open deals for better players as Hayward is better than smart. Hayward unlocks players whom we wouldn’t think are even available because of how well he plays and HIS SALARY! Langford + Hayward + Mem pick can get you further than Smart + Langford + Mem pick.

I feel like the combo of Tatum and Brown can replace what Hayward could give you individually. On the other hand no one can replace what Smart brings on and off the court.

[Fierce1]

If and only if Ainge decides to really make a blockbuster trade, I think it should be for a tier 1 big man.

KAT is not available.

But the next best thing could be Andre Drummond.

Celts will have to give up Smart, Kanter, Langford, Poirier, and a draft pick.

I consider Marcus Smart as the early season MVP of the Celts.
But once the Celts have everybody back and healthy, the Celts' best 5 will be Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

So what I'm trying to point out is replacing Smart and his great defense with a true tier 1 big man like Drummond.

Drummond, Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, and Brown is like a team of 5 All-Stars.

That's like GSW's Curry, KD, Klay, Draymond, and Cousins.

And Drummond is also only 26 years old.

What you guys think?

can always count on you posting on it.

^ this^

You remember the feeling after the Celts got beat by the Bucks last season in the 2nd round?

If the Celts don't find a way to address the big man problem, it will be the same 2nd round exit and the same feeling from last season.

The only difference is Kyrie will not be the goat this time around.

[Somebody]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

He's also the ceiling raising piece we need to raise our offence to true contender status imo. Our team will be fine without a ceiling raiser like Hayward because of our solid top 5, but he's our final piece to the puzzle if we want to start rolling teams over with our offence to be a real threat to win the title (I don't think our defence is elite enough to win playoff games all by itself, we need a really good offence that can roll over any team when we're clicking).

I think the Celts can be a great regular season team with Tatum, Kemba, Hayward, Brown, and Smart.

But in the playoffs, if the Celts put that 5 on the court, the opposing team will be able to exploit the Celts' lack of size.

It's all about adjustments in the playoffs.

We might shock a team like the Sixers in Game 1, but in Game 2, the opposing coach will make adjustments to counter what the Celts did in Game 1.

A more balanced Celtics team will get to the Finals.

If it's always small ball every time, opposing teams will figure it out sooner or later.

We don't have to play small all the time though. Kanter is playable against Philly and Theis is a proper centre against a more modern team like Milwaukee (yes they're big, but they're not big enough to throw Theis around like a rag doll).

Yes, but if Kanter or Theis is playing, it's going to be Smart sitting.

What good will it do if Smart is sitting on the bench and not playing.

In the last 5 minutes of the game, if you have Kanter or Theis with Kemba, Tatum, Hayward, and Brown, that means Smart is sitting.

As an option to play big? Having Smart on the bench as an option in crunch time is better than trading Smart for a big man who's only marginally better than our current options. It's KAT or bust, going for a marginal upgrade at the cost of our core 5/picks and prospects is just madness.

How is Drummond a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter?

Drummond is a 2-time All-Star, an All-NBA 3rd teamer in 2016, and led the league in rebounding in 2016, 2018, and 2019.

Right now Drummond is once again leading the NBA in rebounds with 17.0 rebounds per game.

There's just no way Drummond is just a marginal upgrade over Theis and Kanter.

He's a marginal upgrade for what we need out of our centres at the moment. We need a centre who can protect the rim while being able to defend in space and have decent passing to keep our offence humming if his offence isn't top tier to make us build the offence around him. Drummond is a solid rim protector and isn't horrible defending in space, but Theis has been defending in a whole stratosphere above him so far this season. As for passing, Drummond isn't too shabby but he's not really much (if any) better than Theis.

[Fierce1]

i honestly am not sure who will be traded but I strongly feel like;

Smart
Walker
Brown
Tatum

Are completely untouchable due to chemistry. I strongly WANT to throw Hayward on this list, but he’s been out the lineup so much it’s just hard for me to ignore that we win a lot of games without him.

Not true.

Celts only lost 1 game when Hayward was healthy.

When Hayward was out, Celts lost 4 games.

Ok I didn’t say we were better without Hayward, the point is we can obviously survive without him. He’s been in and out the lineup since he’s been in Boston whereas everyone else has been pretty consistent.  When I think of the Celtics I don’t think of Hayward much because he’s always gone. We need a big more than we need Hayward and I know Hayward is arguably  the best player on our team when heathy, but we can get so much back if he’s the one who is traded.

Doesn't matter.

Most probably Ainge will not trade both Hayward and Smart.

What I'm saying is if and only if Ainge decides to trade for a big man, I think Smart is the one who will get traded.

I never said anything about Ainge trading both as that wouldn’t make much sense. I do however see TEAMS wanting Hayward over Smart which would open deals for better players as Hayward is better than smart. Hayward unlocks players whom we wouldn’t think are even available because of how well he plays and HIS SALARY! Langford + Hayward + Mem pick can get you further than Smart + Langford + Mem pick.

I feel like the combo of Tatum and Brown can replace what Hayward could give you individually. On the other hand no one can replace what Smart brings on and off the court.

I didn't say trade both Hayward and Smart.

So what you're saying is Hayward is the one who gets traded.

I can live that.

Drummond for Hayward and a draft pick?