Trade ideas with tanking teams to get better this year and long term.

[td450]

Get DeJounte Murray. It is OK to overpay. We should move on from the triumvirate of Smart, Schroder and Richardson. They are all admirable players, but they don't quite get us there in terms of creating the right offensive flow and they aren't plus shooters either. Murray is better than any of them.

He doesn't bring better shooting, but he doesn't make it worse. What it does give you is even better defense, plus a big boost in transition pace and passing, which we desperately need. He can score well enough to be a quality 3rd option. He's used to coaching discipline. He's probably capable of getting a little better too. Hopefully we get the same sort of effect Chicago got with Lonzo Ball.

Any assets left can focus on getting a power forward or another passer or shooter. Maybe get a pick in the next draft. Any young guys still here can play.

[Moranis]

I think Al gives you more than Val.

Thems some Beer Goggles you're looking at Horford with!

Lemme read you a quote from yesterday's Boston Globe:

In 97 minutes together, Tatum, Smart, Horford, Robert Williams and Schroder have been outscored by 19.6 points per 100 possessions. This group's most obvious and glaring weakness is its lack of offense -- specifically, outside shooting.

The unit has a cringe-worthy 91.3 offensive rating. To put that figure in perspective, that's nearly 10 points worse than the Thunder's offense, which ranks last in the NBA. While sharing the floor, this Celtics group has connect on just 25.3 percent of its 3 pointers.

Interestingly, when Josh Richardson simply replaces Horford, this same grouping has been dominant, outscoring opponents by 45.5 points per 100 possessions in the seven games they've played together.

Himmelsbach acknowledges that the sample size is small, I should point out. But the above raises a couple of already obvious points.

1) Horford is not the player he was when he played in Boston first time around. He cannot be sharing the floor with another big. He's a back-up Center in the NBA -- simple as that.
2) Horford's shooting is way down. At this point in his career he has to rely on stretching the floor -- and its a weakness, not a strength.

I like and admire Al, but Boston didn't overpay him in the summer of 2019 for a reason. Dude is on the 17th hole of his career. Valanciunas is clearly upgrade at this point.

The the net rating issue is a Schroder issue not Al. Replace Schroder with Jaylen and you get this:
A. Horford, .M. Smart, .J. Brown, .J. Tatum, .R. Williams III   BOS   7   75   108.6   87.1   21.5

Schroder is a net negative player as a starter.  He's best suited as a 6th man.

What is it with Schroder, Smart, Brown, Tatum, and then Horford or Rob?  So the 2 J's, 1 Big, 1 guard, and Schroder.

It isn't fair to say it is a Schroder problem when you replace him with the 2nd best player on the team.

[todd_days_41]

I believe all these guys are realistic targets and we have the assets to get the job done. Worst case scenario, we'd have to add more pick(s). Feel free to do so if you think we don't surrender enough assets.

(click on images to enlarge)

Don't like the Satoransky trade. Richardson is simply a better player.

I don't don't like the Wood trade because I would want both Timelord and Wood as bigs on this team long term.

The other two are good trades though I think Detroit and Toronto could probably do better elsewhere than what we could offer.

Agree with every word of this. I just don't any point in acquiring either Siukum or Grant.

[Csfan1984]

I believe all these guys are realistic targets and we have the assets to get the job done. Worst case scenario, we'd have to add more pick(s). Feel free to do so if you think we don't surrender enough assets.

(click on images to enlarge)

Don't like the Satoransky trade. Richardson is simply a better player.

I don't don't like the Wood trade because I would want both Timelord and Wood as bigs on this team long term.

The other two are good trades though I think Detroit and Toronto could probably do better elsewhere than what we could offer.

Agree with every word of this. I just don't any point in acquiring either Siukum or Grant.

I agree on Sieckam but Grant I feel could be available.

[todd_days_41]

I believe all these guys are realistic targets and we have the assets to get the job done. Worst case scenario, we'd have to add more pick(s). Feel free to do so if you think we don't surrender enough assets.

(click on images to enlarge)

Don't like the Satoransky trade. Richardson is simply a better player.

I don't don't like the Wood trade because I would want both Timelord and Wood as bigs on this team long term.

The other two are good trades though I think Detroit and Toronto could probably do better elsewhere than what we could offer.

Agree with every word of this. I just don't any point in acquiring either Siukum or Grant.

I agree on Sieckam but Grant I feel could be available.

I meant more: I don't see Grant or Pascal as a compelling fit on this team. We have long wings with iso tendencies and iffy shooting.

I'd rather not acquire another 'star' who fits that bill.

[Csfan1984]

I believe all these guys are realistic targets and we have the assets to get the job done. Worst case scenario, we'd have to add more pick(s). Feel free to do so if you think we don't surrender enough assets.

(click on images to enlarge)

Don't like the Satoransky trade. Richardson is simply a better player.

I don't don't like the Wood trade because I would want both Timelord and Wood as bigs on this team long term.

The other two are good trades though I think Detroit and Toronto could probably do better elsewhere than what we could offer.

Agree with every word of this. I just don't any point in acquiring either Siukum or Grant.

I agree on Sieckam but Grant I feel could be available.

I meant more: I don't see Grant or Pascal as a compelling fit on this team. We have long wings with iso tendencies and iffy shooting.

I'd rather not acquire another 'star' who fits that bill.

Normally I'd agree but Grant and Pascell have a record of playing off of stars. They know already how to get in good positions and were at those points good defenders. Maybe they could hybrid their games.

[todd_days_41]

I believe all these guys are realistic targets and we have the assets to get the job done. Worst case scenario, we'd have to add more pick(s). Feel free to do so if you think we don't surrender enough assets.

(click on images to enlarge)

Don't like the Satoransky trade. Richardson is simply a better player.

I don't don't like the Wood trade because I would want both Timelord and Wood as bigs on this team long term.

The other two are good trades though I think Detroit and Toronto could probably do better elsewhere than what we could offer.

Agree with every word of this. I just don't any point in acquiring either Siukum or Grant.

I agree on Sieckam but Grant I feel could be available.

I meant more: I don't see Grant or Pascal as a compelling fit on this team. We have long wings with iso tendencies and iffy shooting.

I'd rather not acquire another 'star' who fits that bill.

Normally I'd agree but Grant and Pascell have a record of playing off of stars. They know already how to get in good positions and were at those points good defenders. Maybe they could hybrid their games.

Well, I also don't like Siakum's inconsistency, and I think he's overpaid a bit. My point: I'd prefer to trade elsewhere. I feel like those guys could be a false start not worth making as it pertains to our window with Tatum.

[Wretch]

I think Al gives you more than Val.

Thems some Beer Goggles you're looking at Horford with!

Lemme read you a quote from yesterday's Boston Globe:

In 97 minutes together, Tatum, Smart, Horford, Robert Williams and Schroder have been outscored by 19.6 points per 100 possessions. This group's most obvious and glaring weakness is its lack of offense -- specifically, outside shooting.

The unit has a cringe-worthy 91.3 offensive rating. To put that figure in perspective, that's nearly 10 points worse than the Thunder's offense, which ranks last in the NBA. While sharing the floor, this Celtics group has connect on just 25.3 percent of its 3 pointers.

Interestingly, when Josh Richardson simply replaces Horford, this same grouping has been dominant, outscoring opponents by 45.5 points per 100 possessions in the seven games they've played together.

Himmelsbach acknowledges that the sample size is small, I should point out. But the above raises a couple of already obvious points.

1) Horford is not the player he was when he played in Boston first time around. He cannot be sharing the floor with another big. He's a back-up Center in the NBA -- simple as that.
2) Horford's shooting is way down. At this point in his career he has to rely on stretching the floor -- and its a weakness, not a strength.

I like and admire Al, but Boston didn't overpay him in the summer of 2019 for a reason. Dude is on the 17th hole of his career. Valanciunas is clearly upgrade at this point.

The the net rating issue is a Schroder issue not Al. Replace Schroder with Jaylen and you get this:
A. Horford, .M. Smart, .J. Brown, .J. Tatum, .R. Williams III   BOS   7   75   108.6   87.1   21.5

Schroder is a net negative player as a starter.  He's best suited as a 6th man.

What is it with Schroder, Smart, Brown, Tatum, and then Horford or Rob?  So the 2 J's, 1 Big, 1 guard, and Schroder.

It isn't fair to say it is a Schroder problem when you replace him with the 2nd best player on the team.

D. Schroder, .M. Smart, .J. Brown, .J. Tatum, .R. Williams III   BOS   6   52   106.0   98.2   7.8
D. Schroder, .M. Smart, .J. Tatum, .R. Williams III, .G. Williams   BOS   10   43   111.7   111.2   0.5

When you replace Al with the obvious choices their net rating is a lot worse.

[Csfan1984]

I believe all these guys are realistic targets and we have the assets to get the job done. Worst case scenario, we'd have to add more pick(s). Feel free to do so if you think we don't surrender enough assets.

(click on images to enlarge)

Don't like the Satoransky trade. Richardson is simply a better player.

I don't don't like the Wood trade because I would want both Timelord and Wood as bigs on this team long term.

The other two are good trades though I think Detroit and Toronto could probably do better elsewhere than what we could offer.

Agree with every word of this. I just don't any point in acquiring either Siukum or Grant.

I agree on Sieckam but Grant I feel could be available.

I meant more: I don't see Grant or Pascal as a compelling fit on this team. We have long wings with iso tendencies and iffy shooting.

I'd rather not acquire another 'star' who fits that bill.

Normally I'd agree but Grant and Pascell have a record of playing off of stars. They know already how to get in good positions and were at those points good defenders. Maybe they could hybrid their games.

Well, I also don't like Siakum's inconsistency, and I think he's overpaid a bit. My point: I'd prefer to trade elsewhere. I feel like those guys could be a false start not worth making as it pertains to our window with Tatum.

Understood. I think if you land a third near allstar level player without giving up Jays you do it. If it doesn't work you can probably flip that player later.

[todd_days_41]

I have to go back to a Houston trade idea I had. Houston should be tanking. They have a few older guys that don't make sense being on that roster.

Wall, Gordon, Theis and to a lesser degree Wood aren't on the Houston timeline. For a tanking team, their payroll is kinda high.

So does this make sense:

The large TPE and a 2nd rounder

For

Wood

while simultaneously trading

Horford, Richardson and Hernangomez plus cash

For

Wall

I know, I know Wall's contract is awful and it puts the team in a rough place financially and he might be another "looking for his points" type guy, but he would be by far the best PG on this team and a real third scoring threat. Trading for Wall and relieving the Rox of that contract also means you don't have to add 1st round picks to get Wood. It also makes Schröder more easy to move on from because you know we can't re-sign him for next year and kinda have to move him. But now you have a good replacement for him.

Or should Brad be looking to get Gordon and/or Theis and/Wood rather than Wall.

Why not drop Wall and find a trade that still fits?

BOS trades: Smart, Schroder
BOS receives: Wood, Looney (or Knox)

HOU trades: Wood
HOU receives: Moody, Looney (or Knox), 2022 1st from GSW, 2023 1st from NYK

GSW trades: Moody, Looney, 2022 1st
GSW receives: Smart

NYK trades: Knox, 2023 1st (likely from Dallas, tho they have a few options)
NYK receives: Schroder

Cs cash out on DS, and finally move Smart to a team that's had interest in him before (and a good one at that... always good reputationally with other players). They give up no picks.

Knicks should have the money to sign Schroder in the offseason. Thibs impatiently trades for a good guard now only giving up a guy stuck to his bench and one of his many 1sts, which he has no patience to wait for anyway.

GSW goes all in this year. HOU gets a good prospect, a decent young player (in either Knox or Looney), and two first round picks for Wood.

[Csfan1984]

It's not a tank team but what about improving fit with two underperforming teams?

Smart and GW
for
A.Gordon

Schro/PP
JB/Josh/Langford
JT/Nesmith
AG/Parker
Al/TL

After guys recover for nuggets they look like
Murray/Monte
Smart/ Rivers
Barton, Green
Porter/Grant 
Joker/Green/Bol

[Jvalin]

I believe all these guys are realistic targets and we have the assets to get the job done. Worst case scenario, we'd have to add more pick(s). Feel free to do so if you think we don't surrender enough assets.

(click on images to enlarge)

1. Don't like the Satoransky trade. Richardson is simply a better player.

2. I don't don't like the Wood trade because I would want both Timelord and Wood as bigs on this team long term.

3. The other two are good trades though I think Detroit and Toronto could probably do better elsewhere than what we could offer.

1. In a vacuum, JRich > Satoransky. Thing is, the C's desperately need better ball movement. We could have a use for a low-usage, pass-first ball handler. Ideally, an oversized guard, cause we run a switch-heavy defensive scheme. Satoransky fits the bill. On the C's, Satoransky > JRich. Not to mention, his contract comes off the books this summer. Chances are we'd re-sign him on a considerably cheaper contract compared to JRich. Another similar idea would be to go after Delon Wright. Didn't mention him before cause the Hawks aren't a tanking team. Both Satoransky and Delon Wright are underperforming this season. I believe we can have either one of them on the cheap. I'd rather have Satoransky cause he's a superior shooter, hence he's better suited to play off the ball.

2. Wood can play at PF, but imo he's at his best when playing at Center. If we go after Wood, I'd be inclined to include at least one of Timelord/Horford in the deal. No need to have 3 starting-caliber Centers on the roster.

3. We have all our future firsts intact. I'm pretty confident we can outbid most potential suitors. Feel free to add more pick(s) if you deem it necessary.

[nickagneta]

I have to go back to a Houston trade idea I had. Houston should be tanking. They have a few older guys that don't make sense being on that roster.

Wall, Gordon, Theis and to a lesser degree Wood aren't on the Houston timeline. For a tanking team, their payroll is kinda high.

So does this make sense:

The large TPE and a 2nd rounder

For

Wood

while simultaneously trading

Horford, Richardson and Hernangomez plus cash

For

Wall

I know, I know Wall's contract is awful and it puts the team in a rough place financially and he might be another "looking for his points" type guy, but he would be by far the best PG on this team and a real third scoring threat. Trading for Wall and relieving the Rox of that contract also means you don't have to add 1st round picks to get Wood. It also makes Schröder more easy to move on from because you know we can't re-sign him for next year and kinda have to move him. But now you have a good replacement for him.

Or should Brad be looking to get Gordon and/or Theis and/Wood rather than Wall.

Why not drop Wall and find a trade that still fits?

BOS trades: Smart, Schroder
BOS receives: Wood, Looney (or Knox)

HOU trades: Wood
HOU receives: Moody, Looney (or Knox), 2022 1st from GSW, 2023 1st from NYK

GSW trades: Moody, Looney, 2022 1st
GSW receives: Smart

NYK trades: Knox, 2023 1st (likely from Dallas, tho they have a few options)
NYK receives: Schroder

Cs cash out on DS, and finally move Smart to a team that's had interest in him before (and a good one at that... always good reputationally with other players). They give up no picks.

Knicks should have the money to sign Schroder in the offseason. Thibs impatiently trades for a good guard now only giving up a guy stuck to his bench and one of his many 1sts, which he has no patience to wait for anyway.

GSW goes all in this year. HOU gets a good prospect, a decent young player (in either Knox or Looney), and two first round picks for Wood.

Well, first off, I was trying to keep things simple. 3 and 4 team trades are much easier to pull off in the off-season than they are in season. Second, I wanted to keep Smart and have Wall be a PG that Smart can play alongside of and make up for his less than great defensive capabilities. Third, I was trying to keep a point guard on this team. Whether you realized it or not, your trade proposal leaves this team with Pritchard as it's only PG. I think that's a very bad idea for that reason.

[nickagneta]

I believe all these guys are realistic targets and we have the assets to get the job done. Worst case scenario, we'd have to add more pick(s). Feel free to do so if you think we don't surrender enough assets.

(click on images to enlarge)

1. Don't like the Satoransky trade. Richardson is simply a better player.

2. I don't don't like the Wood trade because I would want both Timelord and Wood as bigs on this team long term.

3. The other two are good trades though I think Detroit and Toronto could probably do better elsewhere than what we could offer.

1. In a vacuum, JRich > Satoransky. Thing is, the C's desperately need better ball movement. We could have a use for a low-usage, pass-first ball handler. Ideally, an oversized guard, cause we run a switch-heavy defensive scheme. Satoransky fits the bill. On the C's, Satoransky > JRich. Not to mention, his contract comes off the books this summer. Chances are we'd re-sign him on a considerably cheaper contract compared to JRich. Another similar idea would be to go after Delon Wright. Didn't mention him before cause the Hawks aren't a tanking team. Both Satoransky and Delon Wright are underperforming this season. I believe we can have either one of them on the cheap. I'd rather have Satoransky cause he's a superior shooter, hence he's better suited to play off the ball.

2. Wood can play at PF, but imo he's at his best when playing at Center. If we go after Wood, I'd be inclined to include at least one of Timelord/Horford in the deal. No need to have 3 starting-caliber Centers on the roster.

3. We have all our future firsts intact. I'm pretty confident we can outbid most potential suitors. Feel free to add more pick(s) if you deem it necessary.

1. I get the philosphy of that trade but not a huge Satoransky fan. I do like your Delon Wright idea much better and would definitely do a JRich for Wright deal.

2. I would move Horford rather than RWilliams. How's this

TPE, Horford, Nesmith, the rights to Yam and Begarin and a couple 1sts

For

Eric Gordon, DJ Augustin and Christian Wood.

Wood fits into the TPE so the numbers should work. Houston clears both long and short term money and older guys. Get the rights to 3 young prospects and 2 picks for Wood.

3. A similar player that I think might be easier to get, and that I would prefer, would be Harrison Barnes. But, yeah, if we were to throw enough 1st rounders for any of those three to get them, I would be down with that.

[nickagneta]

It's not a tank team but what about improving fit with two underperforming teams?

Smart and GW
for
A.Gordon

Schro/PP
JB/Josh/Langford
JT/Nesmith
AG/Parker
Al/TL

After guys recover for nuggets they look like
Murray/Monte
Smart/ Rivers
Barton, Green
Porter/Grant 
Joker/Green/Bol

Never been a fan of Gordon's game. Orlando is my local team so saw a lot of him and he is just a larger version of Smart but not as good a passer. Also, I hate the idea of making Jabari Parker a top 10 rotation guy on this team. With this team's luck Gordon would get hurt and suddenly the C's would be dependent upon Parker to play big minutes. Yuck.