Poll: which player would help the C's more

[Roy H.]

I really like Collins.  I think he's an elite floor spacer who can score from anywhere on the floor, and he's an excellent rebounder.  He also is a very quick decision maker and doesn't hold the ball.

But, he's not the only guy that I would target.  Harrison Barnes is a guy I'd be happy with.  I'm sure there are others, but those are my top two that could be available.  I'm not a huge fan of Julius Randle.  He's very talented, but would be a poor fit, I think.  He holds the ball too much.

I generally agree with this. And I think Collins is as close as we're going to get to a "star", without trading Tatum, Brown, or Timelord.

FWIW, I think the notion that we can trade for any star player this summer without dealing one of Tatum, Brown, RWIII or Smart is totally out the window. I do think Barnes will be available for draft capital, though it will concern me if Stevens continues to hand out 1sts like candy.

I have no problem with Brad moving lots of picks. They are generally a crapshoot and you have to be willing to sacrifice 2, 3 or even 4 roster spots to players on rookie contracts and given where Boston will be picking, hope they develop into at least rotational role players.

The time for developing talent is over. It's time to surround our stars with others stars and/or great veteran complimentary pieces. Using draft capital for that is great.

Besides, it appears the team has two great prospects developing overseas they could bring in as replacements for traded away picks. So at least some influx of youth is still possible over the next couple of years with them.

If Barnes is available for just the Fournier exception and a #1, then yeah, you do it.  Multiple #1s I'd be more hesitant.

Btw, are our overseas prospects really "great"?  I haven't been following, but would they be likely to go in the first if there was a redraft?

[perks-a-beast]

I like the idea of John Collins a lot for this team. He's like a rich mans Marcus Morris, and would fit in to the offense in a similar fashion.

[Vermont Green]

I think this is a pretty easy one.  I just look at the starting 5.  If we replace Smart with LeVert or McCollum, I am not sure we even get better.  Replace Horford with Collins and we upgrade at our weakest position.

I am not sure how good Collins is or if there are underlying issues with him.  He always just looks good but not great when you watch him.  Probably better than good, but still not quite great.  I think he would fit beautifully next to RWilliams though.  I would be very happy with a very good but not quite great natural PF.  To me, it is exactly what we need.

He is an efficient scorer on a team with a ball dominant PG and a productive rebounder on a team that has a C that gobbles up most of the rebounds.  That is exactly what we need in a PF.  An efficient shooter/scorer who can spread the floor, decent rebounding and good enough team and individual defense.  we don't need him to be a top 3 PF in the league.  I think you get all of that with Collins.  I don't see how we get him though.

Trading Horford for Collins would require a lot of draft capital. While we would be a signficant upgrade offensively, unclear of his fit with Rob Williams. And whether he fits the defensive identity that is clearly becoming the hallmark of this team.

The question of the poll is "Which player would help the C's more?".  To me that is Collins in a slam dunk but the question isn't "which player can we realistically get?", or "Which player would be the best deal based on what we would have to give up?".  If we have to give up Smart to get Collins (for example) that is a very different consideration.  Or whatever we have to give up has to be a consideration.  Collins would help us a lot, I am convinced, but that would have to be balanced against what we have to give up, which would probably be substantial.

[nickagneta]

I really like Collins.  I think he's an elite floor spacer who can score from anywhere on the floor, and he's an excellent rebounder.  He also is a very quick decision maker and doesn't hold the ball.

But, he's not the only guy that I would target.  Harrison Barnes is a guy I'd be happy with.  I'm sure there are others, but those are my top two that could be available.  I'm not a huge fan of Julius Randle.  He's very talented, but would be a poor fit, I think.  He holds the ball too much.

I generally agree with this. And I think Collins is as close as we're going to get to a "star", without trading Tatum, Brown, or Timelord.

FWIW, I think the notion that we can trade for any star player this summer without dealing one of Tatum, Brown, RWIII or Smart is totally out the window. I do think Barnes will be available for draft capital, though it will concern me if Stevens continues to hand out 1sts like candy.

I have no problem with Brad moving lots of picks. They are generally a crapshoot and you have to be willing to sacrifice 2, 3 or even 4 roster spots to players on rookie contracts and given where Boston will be picking, hope they develop into at least rotational role players.

The time for developing talent is over. It's time to surround our stars with others stars and/or great veteran complimentary pieces. Using draft capital for that is great.

Besides, it appears the team has two great prospects developing overseas they could bring in as replacements for traded away picks. So at least some influx of youth is still possible over the next couple of years with them.

If Barnes is available for just the Fournier exception and a #1, then yeah, you do it.  Multiple #1s I'd be more hesitant.

Btw, are our overseas prospects really "great"?  I haven't been following, but would they be likely to go in the first if there was a redraft?

They have potential. As much as any late 1st round pick. Maybe great was overselling them. It's tough to tell with young kids playing full grown men in those Euro leagues.

Also, Thad Young just cost Toronto a first. If that is the going rate for players of his quality at PF, guys like Barnes and Collins are going to cost two #1s if those picks are going to be in the 20s, unless you send some quality back.

Like in your Collins/Bogs for Smart/Horford maybe you send one protected first. But in your Barnes into a TPE for picks, it probably takes two picks, one possibly lottery protected.

[Vermont Green]

I really like Collins.  I think he's an elite floor spacer who can score from anywhere on the floor, and he's an excellent rebounder.  He also is a very quick decision maker and doesn't hold the ball.

But, he's not the only guy that I would target.  Harrison Barnes is a guy I'd be happy with.  I'm sure there are others, but those are my top two that could be available.  I'm not a huge fan of Julius Randle.  He's very talented, but would be a poor fit, I think.  He holds the ball too much.

I generally agree with this. And I think Collins is as close as we're going to get to a "star", without trading Tatum, Brown, or Timelord.

FWIW, I think the notion that we can trade for any star player this summer without dealing one of Tatum, Brown, RWIII or Smart is totally out the window. I do think Barnes will be available for draft capital, though it will concern me if Stevens continues to hand out 1sts like candy.

I have no problem with Brad moving lots of picks. They are generally a crapshoot and you have to be willing to sacrifice 2, 3 or even 4 roster spots to players on rookie contracts and given where Boston will be picking, hope they develop into at least rotational role players.

The time for developing talent is over. It's time to surround our stars with others stars and/or great veteran complimentary pieces. Using draft capital for that is great.

Besides, it appears the team has two great prospects developing overseas they could bring in as replacements for traded away picks. So at least some influx of youth is still possible over the next couple of years with them.

If Barnes is available for just the Fournier exception and a #1, then yeah, you do it.  Multiple #1s I'd be more hesitant.

Btw, are our overseas prospects really "great"?  I haven't been following, but would they be likely to go in the first if there was a redraft?

Barnes would not fit the Fournier TPE ($17.1M), his salary next season is $18.3M.  As you look at Barnes vs. Collins, I like Collins as the better player, more of a true PF vs. a Swing, but a deal for Barnes might end up being better for the Celtics based on what we would have to give up.

To that end though, I don't see SAC just dumping Barnes.  Their trade was not a fire sale, they brought in a very good player in Sabonis.  They had surplus at PG (they are moving ahead with Fox) and a need at PF/C (they had clearly come to the conclusion that Bagley was not the answer).  Barnes is now a good fit for them as their big wing or SF.

[todd_days_41]

I really like Collins.  I think he's an elite floor spacer who can score from anywhere on the floor, and he's an excellent rebounder.  He also is a very quick decision maker and doesn't hold the ball.

But, he's not the only guy that I would target.  Harrison Barnes is a guy I'd be happy with.  I'm sure there are others, but those are my top two that could be available.  I'm not a huge fan of Julius Randle.  He's very talented, but would be a poor fit, I think.  He holds the ball too much.

I generally agree with this. And I think Collins is as close as we're going to get to a "star", without trading Tatum, Brown, or Timelord.

FWIW, I think the notion that we can trade for any star player this summer without dealing one of Tatum, Brown, RWIII or Smart is totally out the window. I do think Barnes will be available for draft capital, though it will concern me if Stevens continues to hand out 1sts like candy.

I have no problem with Brad moving lots of picks. They are generally a crapshoot and you have to be willing to sacrifice 2, 3 or even 4 roster spots to players on rookie contracts and given where Boston will be picking, hope they develop into at least rotational role players.

The time for developing talent is over. It's time to surround our stars with others stars and/or great veteran complimentary pieces. Using draft capital for that is great.

Besides, it appears the team has two great prospects developing overseas they could bring in as replacements for traded away picks. So at least some influx of youth is still possible over the next couple of years with them.

Disagree pretty vehemently with this. Frankly, I think it's nonsense. The NBAs top teams virtually all have balanced talent development with player acquisition to achieve success. True of this years teams, for sure.... GSW, MEM, PHX, MIA, PHI, CLE, MIL. All of them have used picks in the Cs recent and likely future draft range to build their rosters around their stars, and / or produce budding ones. That Cs fans are numb to this doesn't remove it from reality.

The Cs player assets are spent at this point. Nesmith and Pritchard don't have positive value, and I disagree about the "greatness" of our international punts. They may have positive value, but it's minimal.

One of the only ways the Cs will be able to push to championship level is through smart draft picks.

Now, the counter argument is that the Cs are poor drafters. Draft picks are not a crapshoot in the hands of the right organization -- quite the contrary -- despite this boards obsession with rationalizing the Cs sorry draft record by stating so.

But.... RC Buford isn't walking through that door, so trade the picks if need be considering we'll likely waste them, BUT: do it for better players than White please. We can't get away with any more of those.

[PhoSita]

With Smart and White on the roster, I think the answer is obviously Collins.

[nickagneta]

I really like Collins.  I think he's an elite floor spacer who can score from anywhere on the floor, and he's an excellent rebounder.  He also is a very quick decision maker and doesn't hold the ball.

But, he's not the only guy that I would target.  Harrison Barnes is a guy I'd be happy with.  I'm sure there are others, but those are my top two that could be available.  I'm not a huge fan of Julius Randle.  He's very talented, but would be a poor fit, I think.  He holds the ball too much.

I generally agree with this. And I think Collins is as close as we're going to get to a "star", without trading Tatum, Brown, or Timelord.

FWIW, I think the notion that we can trade for any star player this summer without dealing one of Tatum, Brown, RWIII or Smart is totally out the window. I do think Barnes will be available for draft capital, though it will concern me if Stevens continues to hand out 1sts like candy.

I have no problem with Brad moving lots of picks. They are generally a crapshoot and you have to be willing to sacrifice 2, 3 or even 4 roster spots to players on rookie contracts and given where Boston will be picking, hope they develop into at least rotational role players.

The time for developing talent is over. It's time to surround our stars with others stars and/or great veteran complimentary pieces. Using draft capital for that is great.

Besides, it appears the team has two great prospects developing overseas they could bring in as replacements for traded away picks. So at least some influx of youth is still possible over the next couple of years with them.

Disagree pretty vehemently with this. Frankly, I think it's nonsense. The NBAs top teams virtually all have balanced talent development with player acquisition to get there they are. True of this years teams, for sure.... GSW, MEM, PHX, MIA, PHI, CLE, MIL. All of them have used picks in the Cs recent and likely future draft range to build their rosters around their stars, and / or produce budding ones. That Cs fans are numb to this doesn't remove it from reality.

The Cs player assets are spent at this point. Nesmith and Pritchard don't have positive value, and I disagree about the "greatness" of our international punts. They may have positive value, but it's minimal.

One of the only ways the Cs will be able to push to championship level is through smart draft picks.

Now, the counter argument is that the Cs are poor drafters. Draft picks are not a crapshoot in the hands of the right organization -- quite the contrary -- despite this boards obsession with rationalizing the Cs sorry draft record by stating so.

But.... RC Buford isn't walking through that door, so trade the picks if need be considering we'll likely waste them, BUT: do it for better players than White please. We can't get away with any more of those.

If you want to believe that most of those teams you mentioned, once they drafted their stars, didn't use draft assets or cap space to surround their stars with other stars or vet role players, go ahead and live in your delusion.

Milwaukee hasn't used a first round pick in 3-4 years. Phoenix used exactly one pick since taking Ayton and they just traded that player away. Exactly how many picks did Philly keep since drafting Embiid? They have what, two guys on their team that are draft picks since then. Miami, other than Adebayo and Herro, who are their picks still on their team team?

And on it goes?

Fact is, once you get a superstar in the draft, trades and free agency to surround that superstar is the normal way of building a title winning team.

Milwaukee, LA, Cleveland, Miami, Dallas. All teams that used draft capital extensively in trades to win titles.

Drafting superstars, great way to build a title winner. Once you get that superstar, use free agency and trades to finish the building. And yes, that means trading picks. It's been a proven way to build teams for quite a while.

[Vermont Green]

I don't agree with the premise that the Celtics have been bad drafters.  Of our 5 starters, the 4 best were draft picks who we retained and developed.  I doubt too many teams have their top 4 starters as draft picks.  And our starting 5 has one of the best plus/minus ratings and Net Ratings of any starting 5.  So those draft picks are doing pretty well.  Grant Williams and Payton Pritchard are currently in the top 8 rotation so that is 6 out of 8.  Yes, Nesmith, Langford and some others are disappointments, people want to focus on what could have been with those picks, I understand.

Juhann Begarin and Yam Madar can be replacements for picks we might trade.  For example, Begarin could be the equivalent of pick 20 in 2022, or at least fairly close, if he does come over.  I am sure that is part of the consideration for trading future picks.

I don't mind trading picks for players that help now, so long as the players we get are not just rentals.  We should be looking for those types of deals.  Derrick White fits that.  I feel we did overpay some for him but to the 2022 pick specifically, I am fine with including that in this case.  White appears as though he will be a plus this season and then we have him for 3 more seasons.  We can bring in Begarin or Madar if we want (and one of them is ready) to replace the pick.

If we trade a pick for one season of Barnes for example, that is a little different.  Maybe at some point it will make sense to trade for a rental at the deadline but not right now.

[todd_days_41]

I really like Collins.  I think he's an elite floor spacer who can score from anywhere on the floor, and he's an excellent rebounder.  He also is a very quick decision maker and doesn't hold the ball.

But, he's not the only guy that I would target.  Harrison Barnes is a guy I'd be happy with.  I'm sure there are others, but those are my top two that could be available.  I'm not a huge fan of Julius Randle.  He's very talented, but would be a poor fit, I think.  He holds the ball too much.

I generally agree with this. And I think Collins is as close as we're going to get to a "star", without trading Tatum, Brown, or Timelord.

FWIW, I think the notion that we can trade for any star player this summer without dealing one of Tatum, Brown, RWIII or Smart is totally out the window. I do think Barnes will be available for draft capital, though it will concern me if Stevens continues to hand out 1sts like candy.

I have no problem with Brad moving lots of picks. They are generally a crapshoot and you have to be willing to sacrifice 2, 3 or even 4 roster spots to players on rookie contracts and given where Boston will be picking, hope they develop into at least rotational role players.

The time for developing talent is over. It's time to surround our stars with others stars and/or great veteran complimentary pieces. Using draft capital for that is great.

Besides, it appears the team has two great prospects developing overseas they could bring in as replacements for traded away picks. So at least some influx of youth is still possible over the next couple of years with them.

Disagree pretty vehemently with this. Frankly, I think it's nonsense. The NBAs top teams virtually all have balanced talent development with player acquisition to get where they are. True of this years teams, for sure.... GSW, MEM, PHX, MIA, PHI, CLE, MIL. All of them have used picks in the Cs recent and likely future draft range to build their rosters around their stars, and / or produce budding ones. That Cs fans are numb to this doesn't remove it from reality.

The Cs player assets are spent at this point. Nesmith and Pritchard don't have positive value, and I disagree about the "greatness" of our international punts. They may have positive value, but it's minimal.

One of the only ways the Cs will be able to push to championship level is through smart draft picks.

Now, the counter argument is that the Cs are poor drafters. Draft picks are not a crapshoot in the hands of the right organization -- quite the contrary -- despite this boards obsession with rationalizing the Cs sorry draft record by stating so.

But.... RC Buford isn't walking through that door, so trade the picks if need be considering we'll likely waste them, BUT: do it for better players than White please. We can't get away with any more of those.

If you want to believe that most of those teams you mentioned, once they drafted their stars, didn't use draft assets or cap space to surround their stars with other stars or vet role players, go ahead and live in your delusion.

Milwaukee hasn't used a first round pick in 3-4 years. Phoenix used exactly one pick since taking Ayton and they just traded that player away. Exactly how many picks did Philly keep since drafting Embiid? They have what, two guys on their team that are draft picks since then. Miami, other than Adebayo and Herro, who are their picks still on their team team?

And on it goes?

Fact is, once you get a superstar in the draft, trades and free agency to surround that superstar is the normal way of building a title winning team.

Milwaukee, LA, Cleveland, Miami, Dallas. All teams that used draft capital extensively in trades to win titles.

Drafting superstars, great way to build a title winner. Once you get that superstar, use free agency and trades to finish the building. And yes, that means trading picks. It's been a proven way to build teams for quite a while.

You're just ignoring my point to make your own. I didn't said such teams haven't traded picks to acquire talent -- said they've balanced the two approaches. Those teams all have young players taken in the teens or after who are rotation players on rookie deals.

Should Stevens trade picks to acquire talent? I see two sides to this:

1) In 9 months on the job, so far we have Horford and White to show his two in-year 1sts and a reckless pick swap. Not exactly Jrue Holiday or Chris Paul or Jimmy Butler. Has he made any trades to compile picks to use in future deals? No.

I don't think it's a sound philosophy to trade pick after pick in middling deals -- in part because you lose the ability to package picks to get a player who actually moves the needle, in part because cap management becomes and major problem, and in part because you lose the ability to acquire talent overall. Good organizations uncover talent in the draft that would be very challenging to get in the FA market. That's a serious rarity in Boston.

2) On the other hand, the Cs have been dreadful at uncovering a Clarke or Maxey or Herro or Johnson or Bane or Bridges or Moody or Brooks or Adabayo or Thybuille or Robinson or Poole or Nwora or (keep filling in blanks) in the draft. if not for RWIII, their recent draft record would be a laughing stock. So is that part of Stevens POV on trades? He saw rthe mistakes he and Ainge made, and isn't willing to take that risk?

OK fine -- but again, he needs to find a way to make impact trades with those picks. Not deck chairs stuff.... otherwise, he should take the proper swings in the draft that may ACTUALLY result in upside needed to move the needle.



 

[Roy H.]

On the other hand, the Cs have been dreadful at uncovering a Clarke or Maxey or Herro or Johnson or Bane or Bridges or Moody or Brooks or Adabayo or Thybuille or Robinson or Poole or Nwora or (keep filling in blanks) in the draft.

Grant Williams is as good as some of those guys.  And of course, as you mentioned, Timelord.

The big misses were obviously Langford and Nesmith, at least to date.  It sucks that Sacramento decided to have its one mediocre season in a decade the year we had their draft pick.  Same thing with Memphis:  high-lottery, high-lottery, #13.  If Memphis loses a couple more games, we have Haliburton.  If we didn't come in third place in the "coin flip" between Sacramento, Charlotte and Miami, we have Herro or P.J. Washington.

In our alternative universe, we've got this team:

Timelord
Tatum / Williams
Brown
Smart
Haliburton / Herro

And who knows?  With Haliburton, Smart and Herro on the roster, maybe we draft Bane instead of Pritchard.  Or maybe Jaden McDaniels in place of Pritchard, and we decide to take Bane at #30.

There's been some poor drafting, but there's been some bad luck, too.  I really, really want to take a trip through the Multiverse to watch this Celtics team come together.

[Atzar]

There's been some poor drafting, but there's been some bad luck, too.  I really, really want to take a trip through the Multiverse to watch this Celtics team come together.

There are a lot of alternate universes out there with luckier Celtics franchises and happier Celtics fans, I suspect.  A lot of the stuff that has gone wrong for us has been due to misfortune rather than front office misplay, dating back to the IT injury. 

[Roy H.]

There's been some poor drafting, but there's been some bad luck, too.  I really, really want to take a trip through the Multiverse to watch this Celtics team come together.

There are a lot of alternate universes out there with luckier Celtics franchises and happier Celtics fans, I suspect.  A lot of the stuff that has gone wrong for us has been due to misfortune rather than front office misplay, dating back to the IT injury.

Yeah, I keep meaning to start a thread on this.  We have been one of the unluckier franchises.  I assume it's because we keep running over Lucky several times per game, and he's sick of being stepped on.

[Celtics2021]

There's been some poor drafting, but there's been some bad luck, too.  I really, really want to take a trip through the Multiverse to watch this Celtics team come together.

There are a lot of alternate universes out there with luckier Celtics franchises and happier Celtics fans, I suspect.  A lot of the stuff that has gone wrong for us has been due to misfortune rather than front office misplay, dating back to the IT injury.

Yeah, I keep meaning to start a thread on this.  We have been one of the unluckier franchises.  I assume it's because we keep running over Lucky several times per game, and he's sick of being stepped on.

Let’s save that thread until after the season.  Things are going well right now — no need to conjure up anything negative.

[todd_days_41]

On the other hand, the Cs have been dreadful at uncovering a Clarke or Maxey or Herro or Johnson or Bane or Bridges or Moody or Brooks or Adabayo or Thybuille or Robinson or Poole or Nwora or (keep filling in blanks) in the draft.

Grant Williams is as good as some of those guys.  And of course, as you mentioned, Timelord.

The big misses were obviously Langford and Nesmith, at least to date.  It sucks that Sacramento decided to have its one mediocre season in a decade the year we had their draft pick.  Same thing with Memphis:  high-lottery, high-lottery, #13.  If Memphis loses a couple more games, we have Haliburton.  If we didn't come in third place in the "coin flip" between Sacramento, Charlotte and Miami, we have Herro or P.J. Washington.

In our alternative universe, we've got this team:

Timelord
Tatum / Williams
Brown
Smart
Haliburton / Herro

And who knows?  With Haliburton, Smart and Herro on the roster, maybe we draft Bane instead of Pritchard.  Or maybe Jaden McDaniels in place of Pritchard, and we decide to take Bane at #30.

There's been some poor drafting, but there's been some bad luck, too.  I really, really want to take a trip through the Multiverse to watch this Celtics team come together.

True — I left Grant off, which was an oversight. More evidence that we shouldn’t let go of picks in the teens or twenties lightly.

I’m not sure I follow the Bad Luck argument. The Cs have had plenty of good-to-very-good player drafted soon after their slots in recent years, and have also punted on players they’ve had in the building in lieu of holding out hope on those mis-picks.