Poll: Stevens worst move so far?

[Birdman]

I would had kept Moses Brown but it’s too early right now to criticize Brad..see how this team work out plus these players now are Ainge picks

i thought the same thing on brown....but then again, in dallas this year he has played in 2 games, averages 6 minutes per game, and averages 2 points and 2 rebounds a game. it is still early, but i might have been wrong on brown.

Dalllas has a lot of bigs is why Moses not getting any minutes..they got Unicorn, Cauley Stein, Powell & Kleber

[PAOBoston]

Torn on my decision. I think letting Fournier walk was bad but compounding it by giving extension to Smart was a travesty. The Smart extension is the worst of the offseason.

[seancally]

Torn on my decision. I think letting Fournier walk was bad but compounding it by giving extension to Smart was a travesty. The Smart extension is the worst of the offseason.

I’m in favor of trading Smart for the right deal and his contract makes that much easier. I also think it’s good optics to extend him.

[Birdman]

If we had Schroeder before, then I think Fournier would still be here & Smart be gone..but we didn’t have a PG & didn’t know Schroeder would be here

[JSD]

Torn on my decision. I think letting Fournier walk was bad but compounding it by giving extension to Smart was a travesty. The Smart extension is the worst of the offseason.

I’m in favor of trading Smart for the right deal and his contract makes that much easier. I also think it’s good optics to extend him.

Fair point on the optics

[Big333223]

Not resigning Fournier is really the only option in the poll. Not because it was so bad but because the rest of the options aren't real options.

1. "Extending Smart and Richardson eliminating all max cap space possibilities." The Celtics could never have had max cap space and wouldn't have had anyone to spend it on. But by extending Richardson they've now got contracts to trade for a max guy if a deal comes up. Smart is one of the best defenders in the NBA making half of the max. That deal was a no brainer.

2. "Trading ultra low on Kemba Walker." OKC had to buy Kemba out because they couldn't find anyone else who would trade for him. Hoford has outplayed Kemba so far this season by a wide margin.

3. "Hiring Ime Udoka." This is just dumb. 6 games in and hiring him was a mistake? Give me a break.

[nickagneta]

Not sure why the Kemba/Horford trade is there given what we have seen out of Horford and Kemba's defacto replacement, Schroder.

Horford is looking like a player 5-6 years younger than his age. 13+ points, 10+ rebounds, 3+ assists, 3+ blocks is exactly the type big this team needed given Timelord's penchant for missing games.

Also, Schroder at $6 million a year is giving this team as much as Kemba did, or could have, this season ~15 points, ~ 7 assists, ~ 4 rebounds, ~ 1.5 steals.

Yes, the shooting numbers for both aren't great but I expect both will regress to their means as the sample size gets bigger.

If I am Brad, I do that trade again and again.

[Birdman]

Like to see DeMarcus Cousin here for cheap.. I know he not same player but can be serviceable

[GreenShooter]

It sucks that I can't pick more than one option.

[Roy H.]

Not sure why the Kemba/Horford trade is there given what we have seen out of Horford and Kemba's defacto replacement, Schroder.

Horford is looking like a player 5-6 years younger than his age. 13+ points, 10+ rebounds, 3+ assists, 3+ blocks is exactly the type big this team needed given Timelord's penchant for missing games.

Also, Schroder at $6 million a year is giving this team as much as Kemba did, or could have, this season ~15 points, ~ 7 assists, ~ 4 rebounds, ~ 1.5 steals.

Yes, the shooting numbers for both aren't great but I expect both will regress to their means as the sample size gets bigger.

If I am Brad, I do that trade again and again.

I would do the trade again as well, but there’s another perspective that is equally valid.  If this season is a “punt”, and Horford isn’t a long-term asset, what good did the trade do us?  We didn’t use the cap savings to sign Fournier or to clear cap space.  Schroder will only be here one season most likely.  It’s valid to think that we shuffled deck chairs, while giving up a decent #1.

Alternative off-season:

Trade for Plumlee while picking up an extra draft pick;

Sign Fournier

Don’t make the Horford or Richardson deals

Keep the #16, or trade it for two future #1s.  Or, trade the pick for two #1s on draft night, then do the Kemba/Horford deal with one of those first rounders.  We get the same assets, along with an additional #1.

The net is:

Horford, Fournier, Plumlee, #37 last year, future #1, Moses Brown, second rounders traded for Fournier exception

or

Horford, Richardson, Fournier trade exception


Did I forget something?  There’s room for criticism if this is just a treading water season.

[Csfan1984]

Not sure why the Kemba/Horford trade is there given what we have seen out of Horford and Kemba's defacto replacement, Schroder.

Horford is looking like a player 5-6 years younger than his age. 13+ points, 10+ rebounds, 3+ assists, 3+ blocks is exactly the type big this team needed given Timelord's penchant for missing games.

Also, Schroder at $6 million a year is giving this team as much as Kemba did, or could have, this season ~15 points, ~ 7 assists, ~ 4 rebounds, ~ 1.5 steals.

Yes, the shooting numbers for both aren't great but I expect both will regress to their means as the sample size gets bigger.

If I am Brad, I do that trade again and again.

I would do the trade again as well, but there’s another perspective that is equally valid.  If this season is a “punt”, and Horford isn’t a long-term asset, what good did the trade do us?  We didn’t use the cap savings to sign Fournier or to clear cap space.  Schroder will only be here one season most likely.  It’s valid to think that we shuffled deck chairs, while giving up a decent #1.

Alternative off-season:

Trade for Plumlee while picking up an extra draft pick;

Sign Fournier

Don’t make the Horford or Richardson deals

Keep the #16, or trade it for two future #1s.  Or, trade the pick for two #1s on draft night, then do the Kemba/Horford deal with one of those first rounders.  We get the same assets, along with an additional #1.

The net is:

Horford, Fournier, Plumlee, #37 last year, future #1, Moses Brown, second rounders traded for Fournier exception

or

Horford, Richardson, Fournier trade exception


Did I forget something?  There’s room for criticism if this is just a treading water season.

That's why I picked the Kemba deal. There seems to have been a much better return possible or future options. I see moves as a domino effect. In that moves were not ideal because they were made because of the preceding deals. Kemba was the first domino it got my vote.

Maybe BS needed more patience. As a first time GM I think he was just caught in the flow

[nickagneta]

Not sure why the Kemba/Horford trade is there given what we have seen out of Horford and Kemba's defacto replacement, Schroder.

Horford is looking like a player 5-6 years younger than his age. 13+ points, 10+ rebounds, 3+ assists, 3+ blocks is exactly the type big this team needed given Timelord's penchant for missing games.

Also, Schroder at $6 million a year is giving this team as much as Kemba did, or could have, this season ~15 points, ~ 7 assists, ~ 4 rebounds, ~ 1.5 steals.

Yes, the shooting numbers for both aren't great but I expect both will regress to their means as the sample size gets bigger.

If I am Brad, I do that trade again and again.

I would do the trade again as well, but there’s another perspective that is equally valid.  If this season is a “punt”, and Horford isn’t a long-term asset, what good did the trade do us?  We didn’t use the cap savings to sign Fournier or to clear cap space.  Schroder will only be here one season most likely.  It’s valid to think that we shuffled deck chairs, while giving up a decent #1.

Alternative off-season:

Trade for Plumlee while picking up an extra draft pick;

Sign Fournier

Don’t make the Horford or Richardson deals

Keep the #16, or trade it for two future #1s.  Or, trade the pick for two #1s on draft night, then do the Kemba/Horford deal with one of those first rounders.  We get the same assets, along with an additional #1.

The net is:

Horford, Fournier, Plumlee, #37 last year, future #1, Moses Brown, second rounders traded for Fournier exception

or

Horford, Richardson, Fournier trade exception


Did I forget something?  There’s room for criticism if this is just a treading water season.

You may have forgotten the fact that Celtic management may not have wanted to bring Fournier back and/or Fournier may not have wanted to come back.

Also, Kemba HAD to get traded by Boston. Everyone in the league knew that. The price was always going to be a 1st rounder, minimum, but the later the trade got done the higher the price to move Kemba most likely gets. Perhaps that price rises from 1 first to 2 firsts so you don't get that extra pick you are talking about.

Finally,  just because other teams negotiated trades for players/picks doesn't mean those deals could have been done with Boston. Some teams and front offices may not have good working relationships with others and assuming deals can get done is faulty, IMHO. Theoretically those deals were out there but that doesn't mean they could have been closed by Brad.

You're making a ton of assumptions on what MIGHT POSSIBLY could have happened but that's all conjecture. What we know is what did happen and judging on that, the Kemba/Horford trade was a good trade, especially if Schroder was being brought in as Kemba's replacement because Kemba had to go.

I just don't see that move as a candidate for worst move when such glaring ones like the Richardson extension, the Smart extension and the Udoka hiring are there.

[SparzWizard]

Hiring Ime Udoka is a mistake.

And also, extending Marcus "overpaid I can't shoot" Smart.

[Roy H.]

Not sure why the Kemba/Horford trade is there given what we have seen out of Horford and Kemba's defacto replacement, Schroder.

Horford is looking like a player 5-6 years younger than his age. 13+ points, 10+ rebounds, 3+ assists, 3+ blocks is exactly the type big this team needed given Timelord's penchant for missing games.

Also, Schroder at $6 million a year is giving this team as much as Kemba did, or could have, this season ~15 points, ~ 7 assists, ~ 4 rebounds, ~ 1.5 steals.

Yes, the shooting numbers for both aren't great but I expect both will regress to their means as the sample size gets bigger.

If I am Brad, I do that trade again and again.

I would do the trade again as well, but there’s another perspective that is equally valid.  If this season is a “punt”, and Horford isn’t a long-term asset, what good did the trade do us?  We didn’t use the cap savings to sign Fournier or to clear cap space.  Schroder will only be here one season most likely.  It’s valid to think that we shuffled deck chairs, while giving up a decent #1.

Alternative off-season:

Trade for Plumlee while picking up an extra draft pick;

Sign Fournier

Don’t make the Horford or Richardson deals

Keep the #16, or trade it for two future #1s.  Or, trade the pick for two #1s on draft night, then do the Kemba/Horford deal with one of those first rounders.  We get the same assets, along with an additional #1.

The net is:

Horford, Fournier, Plumlee, #37 last year, future #1, Moses Brown, second rounders traded for Fournier exception

or

Horford, Richardson, Fournier trade exception


Did I forget something?  There’s room for criticism if this is just a treading water season.

You may have forgotten the fact that Celtic management may not have wanted to bring Fournier back and/or Fournier may not have wanted to come back.

Also, Kemba HAD to get traded by Boston. Everyone in the league knew that. The price was always going to be a 1st rounder, minimum, but the later the trade got done the higher the price to move Kemba most likely gets. Perhaps that price rises from 1 first to 2 firsts so you don't get that extra pick you are talking about.

Finally,  just because other teams negotiated trades for players/picks doesn't mean those deals could have been done with Boston. Some teams and front offices may not have good working relationships with others and assuming deals can get done is faulty, IMHO. Theoretically those deals were out there but that doesn't mean they could have been closed by Brad.

You're making a ton of assumptions on what MIGHT POSSIBLY could have happened but that's all conjecture. What we know is what did happen and judging on that, the Kemba/Horford trade was a good trade, especially if Schroder was being brought in as Kemba's replacement because Kemba had to go.

I just don't see that move as a candidate for worst move when such glaring ones like the Richardson extension, the Smart extension and the Udoka hiring are there.

I don’t think it’s the worst move, or necessarily even a bad move.  But, there’s another way things could have played out.  Heck, there’s a legit take that signing nobody, giving our young guys OTJT, and just letting Kemba expire was the best move.  My guess is that in two years most fans will wish for that outcome.

[nickagneta]

Not sure why the Kemba/Horford trade is there given what we have seen out of Horford and Kemba's defacto replacement, Schroder.

Horford is looking like a player 5-6 years younger than his age. 13+ points, 10+ rebounds, 3+ assists, 3+ blocks is exactly the type big this team needed given Timelord's penchant for missing games.

Also, Schroder at $6 million a year is giving this team as much as Kemba did, or could have, this season ~15 points, ~ 7 assists, ~ 4 rebounds, ~ 1.5 steals.

Yes, the shooting numbers for both aren't great but I expect both will regress to their means as the sample size gets bigger.

If I am Brad, I do that trade again and again.

I would do the trade again as well, but there’s another perspective that is equally valid.  If this season is a “punt”, and Horford isn’t a long-term asset, what good did the trade do us?  We didn’t use the cap savings to sign Fournier or to clear cap space.  Schroder will only be here one season most likely.  It’s valid to think that we shuffled deck chairs, while giving up a decent #1.

Alternative off-season:

Trade for Plumlee while picking up an extra draft pick;

Sign Fournier

Don’t make the Horford or Richardson deals

Keep the #16, or trade it for two future #1s.  Or, trade the pick for two #1s on draft night, then do the Kemba/Horford deal with one of those first rounders.  We get the same assets, along with an additional #1.

The net is:

Horford, Fournier, Plumlee, #37 last year, future #1, Moses Brown, second rounders traded for Fournier exception

or

Horford, Richardson, Fournier trade exception


Did I forget something?  There’s room for criticism if this is just a treading water season.

You may have forgotten the fact that Celtic management may not have wanted to bring Fournier back and/or Fournier may not have wanted to come back.

Also, Kemba HAD to get traded by Boston. Everyone in the league knew that. The price was always going to be a 1st rounder, minimum, but the later the trade got done the higher the price to move Kemba most likely gets. Perhaps that price rises from 1 first to 2 firsts so you don't get that extra pick you are talking about.

Finally,  just because other teams negotiated trades for players/picks doesn't mean those deals could have been done with Boston. Some teams and front offices may not have good working relationships with others and assuming deals can get done is faulty, IMHO. Theoretically those deals were out there but that doesn't mean they could have been closed by Brad.

You're making a ton of assumptions on what MIGHT POSSIBLY could have happened but that's all conjecture. What we know is what did happen and judging on that, the Kemba/Horford trade was a good trade, especially if Schroder was being brought in as Kemba's replacement because Kemba had to go.

I just don't see that move as a candidate for worst move when such glaring ones like the Richardson extension, the Smart extension and the Udoka hiring are there.

I don’t think it’s the worst move, or necessarily even a bad move.  But, there’s another way things could have played out.  Heck, there’s a legit take that signing nobody, giving our young guys OTJT, and just letting Kemba expire was the best move.  My guess is that in two years most fans will wish for that outcome.

I agree that doing very little and keeping Kemba might have been the best option allowing the team to open up max cap space sometime in the future. Just not sure that was a realistic option. From some reports, Kemba HAD to go, maybe due to poor relationships he had with people in the organization that would be staying long term. Not sure how accurate those reports were though.