Poll: Would you make this trade For Beal

[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.

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.

The talent at the top needs to get it done, and that means you have to either have a dominant player like a LeBron or you have to have a really good fit. Beal does not enhance the value of Tatum and Brown. He would just cut into it.

Does Beal do what Harden tried to do? Does Tatum or Brown do that? Seems like a fantasy league idea to me where you just pick three guys who score a lot and think you've won.

If the 3rd guy is a big or a playmaking (as in not primarily a scorer) point guard, then I agree. If its just another volume scorer, I disagree.

Who were the big threes that won? Notice anything? They had complementary games. They could play roles that made the other two better. They weren't all the same type of player. KD/Curry/Thompson. LeBron/Wade/Bosh.

[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.

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?

How often does putting together three wings who expect to score 25 plus per game ever work?

[KG Living Legend]

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.

The talent at the top needs to get it done, and that means you have to either have a dominant player like a LeBron or you have to have a really good fit. Beal does not enhance the value of Tatum and Brown. He would just cut into it.

Does Beal do what Harden tried to do? Does Tatum or Brown do that? Seems like a fantasy league idea to me where you just pick three guys who score a lot and think you've won.

If the 3rd guy is a big or a playmaking (as in not primarily a scorer) point guard, then I agree. If its just another volume scorer, I disagree.

Who were the big threes that won? Notice anything? They had complementary games. They could play roles that made the other two better. They weren't all the same type of player. KD/Curry/Thompson. LeBron/Wade/Bosh.

 Your overthinking this.  Does Beal make us better than the package going out. Yes.

 It's the new NBA.  Unstoppable offense wins titles. The ONLY reason that the Nets didn't win it was health.

 If those three guys played. They win it all going away. Celtics are a top 3 team in the league with Beal with a good chance at a title for the next four years.

[Vermont Green]

So if we got Beal, we would be kind of like the Nets but not as good and not as big.

Beal  ----  Kyrie
Brown --- Harden
Tatum --- Durant

To me the big difference is that Kevin Durant is 6'-10" vs Tatum at 6'-8" so better suited to play as the PF.  And at this point, we don't know what the Nets can do if healthy.  It sure looked like they were going to waltz to the finals based on how they played against us (without Brown) but who knows.

If we were going to trade for Beal, and I don't think WAS takes this deal, but if it did somehow happen, I think we would then need to trade Brown for a top end big.  Maybe Sabonis or Towns.  Then Beal makes sense.  But adding Beal to Brown and Tatum does not make sense to me.  And to me, I would rather at the really good big to Brown and Tatum.

[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?

How often does putting together three wings who expect to score 25 plus per game ever work?

why does it matter if they are wings?  They play 3 different positions and a bunch of teams have had 3 former 25 ppg (or near 25 ppg scorers) on their team with great success.  The Warriors and Cavs fairly recent have won titles with that.  The Heat won 2 titles.  The Celtics last title as well.  The Shaq/Kobe Lakers had Glen Rice as well who was a mega scorer in Charlotte before ending up in LA.  All 3 will need to sacrifice some for it to work, but I don't see why they wouldn't if the goal is to win.

[nickagneta]

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.

You seem to have an awful lot of faith in draft picks being able to contribute in a positive way their first year or three in the league to a team trying to contend for a title.

For me the option is clear, you get the superstar and let someone else see if those teenagers and 20 year olds actually can become the complimentary starters you seem to think they will be right away

[nickagneta]

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 too like that lineup. Maybe see if you can trade a draft pick and Grant or Parker for an upgrade by trading the player into the $11 million TPE(Kyle Anderson, Larry Nance, Jae Crowder come to mind quickly).

Then you have the MLE and a vet min to fill out the lineup. It's gonna cost Wyc a ton, but I think that team competes as a real title contender next year.

[nickagneta]

Regarding 2 or three stars, with two stars, coaches will strive to have both of them off the court very little to no minutes and might have just one star on the court a bunch.

But with three stars, you can pretty much set a rotation where you have two stars on the court at all times. That is what will make the team better and keep all three stars happy. There is no reason why, with this roster:

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

That Brown, Tatum and Beal could all get 18-19 shots a game and be 22-23 PPG(or more) players and also have Fournier giving you 14-16 PPG.

That many great to excellent offensive players on the floor is going to mean a lot of wide open looks and high scoring efficiency, especially if Brown and Tatum can actually start having fouls called for them and put them at the line 6-8 times a game.

A lot would depend on Ime's offensive system. If it's based on San Antonio's and not Stevens' system, I think those three stars and Fournier could be lethal

[Celtics4ever]

You can have a poll for all you want in this regard.  WASHINGTON WOULD NEVER EVER DO IT for that offer.

The only way it would work if Beal demanded to come here and not play for anyone else even then it would be dicey for them to accept it.

[BruceBanner18]

You can have a poll for all you want in this regard.  WASHINGTON WOULD NEVER EVER DO IT for that offer.

The only way it would work if Beal demanded to come here and not play for anyone else even then it would be dicey for them to accept it.

It is that potential discount (based on his close relationship with Tatum) that makes Beal attractive and why many here (myself included) would look past any concern of short term fit.

[KG Living Legend]

So if we got Beal, we would be kind of like the Nets but not as good and not as big.

Beal  ----  Kyrie
Brown --- Harden
Tatum --- Durant

To me the big difference is that Kevin Durant is 6'-10" vs Tatum at 6'-8" so better suited to play as the PF.  And at this point, we don't know what the Nets can do if healthy.  It sure looked like they were going to waltz to the finals based on how they played against us (without Brown) but who knows.

If we were going to trade for Beal, and I don't think WAS takes this deal, but if it did somehow happen, I think we would then need to trade Brown for a top end big.  Maybe Sabonis or Towns.  Then Beal makes sense.  But adding Beal to Brown and Tatum does not make sense to me.  And to me, I would rather at the really good big to Brown and Tatum.

 Durant is clearly longer than Tatum.  7'5" wingspan compared to 6'11"

 However both Brown and Beal have size and length advantages over Kyrie and Harden.

 So Size wise. Celtics would have the slight edge.

[td450]

If we are after a 3rd star, I'd be more in favor of shedding Smart, Thompson and Fournier and putting less chips down on getting a starter quality player in this draft(Mitchell/Barnes/Jalen Johnson), then shop the free agent market after next year.

[Roy H.]

You can have a poll for all you want in this regard.  WASHINGTON WOULD NEVER EVER DO IT for that offer.

The only way it would work if Beal demanded to come here and not play for anyone else even then it would be dicey for them to accept it.

I'm not sure I agree.  A good player, an expiring contract of a respected veteran, three #1s, an intriguing young big man and a lottery prospect like Nesmith is a better package than Houston got for Harden, for instance.  It's a better package than almost any expiring star brings back.  If anything, it's an overpay.

[nickagneta]

You can have a poll for all you want in this regard.  WASHINGTON WOULD NEVER EVER DO IT for that offer.

The only way it would work if Beal demanded to come here and not play for anyone else even then it would be dicey for them to accept it.

I'm not sure I agree.  A good player, an expiring contract of a respected veteran, three #1s, an intriguing young big man and a lottery prospect like Nesmith is a better package than Houston got for Harden, for instance.  It's a better package than almost any expiring star brings back.  If anything, it's an overpay.

I would think either Timelord or Nesmith has to stay and Edwards has to go to make that package right. This is assuming Beal outright demands to be traded to Boston, meaning the Celtics price is deflated.

If the Cs have to compete with other teams, I don't think the Celtics have the assets to be the best offer out there.

[Roy H.]

You can have a poll for all you want in this regard.  WASHINGTON WOULD NEVER EVER DO IT for that offer.

The only way it would work if Beal demanded to come here and not play for anyone else even then it would be dicey for them to accept it.

I'm not sure I agree.  A good player, an expiring contract of a respected veteran, three #1s, an intriguing young big man and a lottery prospect like Nesmith is a better package than Houston got for Harden, for instance.  It's a better package than almost any expiring star brings back.  If anything, it's an overpay.

I would think either Timelord or Nesmith has to stay and Edwards has to go to make that package right. This is assuming Beal outright demands to be traded to Boston, meaning the Celtics price is deflated.

If the Cs have to compete with other teams, I don't think the Celtics have the assets to be the best offer out there.

The reality will probably be somewhere in between:  only a handful of teams will be told that Beal would re-sign there, meaning that there are only a handful of contenders that will submit offers.

Philly and Portland are going to want to be in on any big star.  Would Washington want Simmons or McCollum in an trade?  Would Beal be interested in either franchise?  If so, it's fairly easy to build a trade from there.