Poll: Would you make this trade For Beal

[KG Living Legend]

 
Horford
Tatum
Brown
Beal
Prichard

 Would need a second year Rondo like performance from Peyton to win a chip. I think the kid is up to the challenge

[86MaxwellSmart]

 
Horford
Tatum
Brown
Beal
Prichard

 Would need a second year Rondo like performance from Peyton to win a chip. I think the kid is up to the challenge

This will happen....but it relies on YAM having a great summer league haha.

[Csfan1984]

So give up three first and Nesmith or wait one year and sign Beal out right by let those guys expire and stretching Horford. I'd wait the year.

[boscel33]

So give up three first and Nesmith or wait one year and sign Beal out right by let those guys expire and stretching Horford. I'd wait the year.

I'm with you, make sure we have some space next year, sign Beal outright.  Hoopshype has us at about 86M next year, should be able to sign, maybe not a max, but then again, Beal will have made about 180M at the end of next season.  Maybe he takes a Chris Bosh type contract with Miami to play with Tatum and Brown.

[Birdman]

Romeo instead of Nesmith & 2 firsts, then it’s a deal

[td450]

Alternative: what if you subtract Nesmith, and we instead make trades for picks to select Davion Mitchell and Jalen Johnson or Franz Wagner (unfortunately, Scotty Barnes looks too pricey at this point) instead of Beal.

Which would be the better trade?

I'd rather have two quality complementary starters than one additional superstar. Especially at point. It also seems to me that getting a point guard that can score, but isn't score first, that can create, that can really defend, and that is physical, and that is a real competitor is pretty rare. Davion Mitchell checks a lot of boxes.

[nebist]

I would trade pretty much anything to pair an all-NBA talent like Beal or Lillard with Tatum and Brown. As long as you’re not giving up Brown, you do it and figure out the rest of the roster later.

[footey]

Am I alone in thinking that a team with Tatum, Beal and Brown sharing one basketball won't work?  This will marginalize Brown back to standing in the corner. 

It's okay to obsess about getting 3 stars, I guess, but at least try to have them positionally complementary.

[jambr380]

Am I alone in thinking that a team with Tatum, Beal and Brown sharing one basketball won't work?  This will marginalize Brown back to standing in the corner. 

It's okay to obsess about getting 3 stars, I guess, but at least try to have them positionally complementary.

Don't worry, after making such a trade, we would then be talking constantly about Brown for Bam or Brown for KAT.

[Moranis]

Am I alone in thinking that a team with Tatum, Beal and Brown sharing one basketball won't work?  This will marginalize Brown back to standing in the corner. 

It's okay to obsess about getting 3 stars, I guess, but at least try to have them positionally complementary.

Brown should be standing in the corner in that group as he is the worst offensive player of those 3.  Any star is going to provide that same dilemma because you aren't really a star unless you are at least a good, if not great, offensive player (a few rare exceptions). 

If you can acquire Beal while keeping Brown and Tatum, you pretty much have to do it.  That opens Boston's window next year and elevates the floor of the team significantly. 

PG - Beal, Pritchard, Edwards
SG - Fournier, Langford
SF - Brown, Ojeleye
PF - Tatum, Parker, G. Williams
C - Horford, Brown, Kornet

Now that looks like a potential contender with 2 open roster spots for veterans (and room for them to play).

[Roy H.]

If you can acquire Beal while keeping Brown and Tatum, you pretty much have to do it.

That’s probably true, although I think we’re paying a premium in that proposed deal, and we’d still have some deficits.

[td450]

Am I alone in thinking that a team with Tatum, Beal and Brown sharing one basketball won't work?  This will marginalize Brown back to standing in the corner. 

It's okay to obsess about getting 3 stars, I guess, but at least try to have them positionally complementary.

Brown should be standing in the corner in that group as he is the worst offensive player of those 3.  Any star is going to provide that same dilemma because you aren't really a star unless you are at least a good, if not great, offensive player (a few rare exceptions). 

If you can acquire Beal while keeping Brown and Tatum, you pretty much have to do it.  That opens Boston's window next year and elevates the floor of the team significantly. 

PG - Beal, Pritchard, Edwards
SG - Fournier, Langford
SF - Brown, Ojeleye
PF - Tatum, Parker, G. Williams
C - Horford, Brown, Kornet

Now that looks like a potential contender with 2 open roster spots for veterans (and room for them to play).

I'll say it again. It would be better for this team to solve for quality at two starter spots: point guard and a bigger starter than it would be to obtain a third major star. For example, if we had found a way to get Aaron Gordon and we traded up to get Davion Mitchell, that would have been a better future than one with Beal instead.

There are options in this draft that can start long term, and there are players in this league that are good but not great that can do the same. A third star creates too many issues with our talent base and our existing stars, unless we get very lucky and they fit perfectly, like Pierce/Garnett/Allen did. Bradley Beal does not do that well enough.

[Roy H.]

Am I alone in thinking that a team with Tatum, Beal and Brown sharing one basketball won't work?  This will marginalize Brown back to standing in the corner. 

It's okay to obsess about getting 3 stars, I guess, but at least try to have them positionally complementary.

Brown should be standing in the corner in that group as he is the worst offensive player of those 3.  Any star is going to provide that same dilemma because you aren't really a star unless you are at least a good, if not great, offensive player (a few rare exceptions). 

If you can acquire Beal while keeping Brown and Tatum, you pretty much have to do it.  That opens Boston's window next year and elevates the floor of the team significantly. 

PG - Beal, Pritchard, Edwards
SG - Fournier, Langford
SF - Brown, Ojeleye
PF - Tatum, Parker, G. Williams
C - Horford, Brown, Kornet

Now that looks like a potential contender with 2 open roster spots for veterans (and room for them to play).

I'll say it again. It would be better for this team to solve for quality at two starter spots: point guard and a bigger starter than it would be to obtain a third major star. For example, if we had found a way to get Aaron Gordon and we traded up to get Davion Mitchell, that would have been a better future than one with Beal instead.

There are options in this draft that can start long term, and there are players in this league that are good but not great that can do the same. A third star creates too many issues with our talent base and our existing stars, unless we get very lucky and they fit perfectly, like Pierce/Garnett/Allen did. Bradley Beal does not do that well enough.

How many times has the “quantity over quality” approach worked in NBA deals?

[Moranis]

Am I alone in thinking that a team with Tatum, Beal and Brown sharing one basketball won't work?  This will marginalize Brown back to standing in the corner. 

It's okay to obsess about getting 3 stars, I guess, but at least try to have them positionally complementary.

Brown should be standing in the corner in that group as he is the worst offensive player of those 3.  Any star is going to provide that same dilemma because you aren't really a star unless you are at least a good, if not great, offensive player (a few rare exceptions). 

If you can acquire Beal while keeping Brown and Tatum, you pretty much have to do it.  That opens Boston's window next year and elevates the floor of the team significantly. 

PG - Beal, Pritchard, Edwards
SG - Fournier, Langford
SF - Brown, Ojeleye
PF - Tatum, Parker, G. Williams
C - Horford, Brown, Kornet

Now that looks like a potential contender with 2 open roster spots for veterans (and room for them to play).

I'll say it again. It would be better for this team to solve for quality at two starter spots: point guard and a bigger starter than it would be to obtain a third major star. For example, if we had found a way to get Aaron Gordon and we traded up to get Davion Mitchell, that would have been a better future than one with Beal instead.

There are options in this draft that can start long term, and there are players in this league that are good but not great that can do the same. A third star creates too many issues with our talent base and our existing stars, unless we get very lucky and they fit perfectly, like Pierce/Garnett/Allen did. Bradley Beal does not do that well enough.

How many times has the “quantity over quality” approach worked in NBA deals?

Or really been successful at achieving the ultimate end goal.  You get the talent at the top and then worry about building the team around them. 

[slamtheking]

voted no for 2 reasons:
1. I'm with those that would prefer to sign him as a free agent.  keep the assets and just sign him when we have the cap room. 
2. If he's being traded it's because he wants out to a better franchise and in that situation, that trade package is too rich and leaves us with Pritchard as our one natural PG.  Also not giving up our 2 best prospects and 3 first rounders with a DPOY guard and solid big man. 

This is all predicated on Beal being open to playing in Boston.  No way we should be paying for a one year Beal rental if he wants to play elsewhere which he could by opting out of his last year.  Considering he'd likely get a better offer for more than he makes that year, I'd think it's most likely he would bolt.  If he likes the idea of playing in Boston, wait until next offseason when we have the money to sign him outright to play him with Tatum, Brown and the improved youth movement we have.