Brad Stevens the Politician

[Roy H.]

I agree with the OP.  It’s negligent.

Remember when the Grizzlies traded a top-1 protected pick six years in the future for Otis Thorpe?  It turned into the #2 pick in one of the best drafts in history.

[todd_days_41]

It's a swap... being made more a big deal than it actually is. You assume Brad won't be here in 6 years? Could be. I think he'll be here for a quite a bit.

Chances are the Spurs will be worse than us that year still.

Also... we still have the pick to trade if we want. After all we still own the pick, the right to swap is what was traded.

White also is on a long contract, so this isn't really a short term patch-work.

I get that people value that swap, but I think it's going to the extreme at this point and underselling what we gained in return.

Wrong. You — like every human being on earth — have no idea if it’s a big deal or not. Which is why deals like the White deal have rarely ever been made before. Because it may be literally nothing… or it could set the franchise back by an entire generation.

Will it be a big deal if the Cs give up the right to draft Kevin Durant for the right to draft Alando Tucker? Yep. And does it matter that the Cs only got a role player in such a deal, while also giving up a good player and our most valuable pick, as well? It certainly does.

It’s an overpay. So let’s keep our fingers crossed the result of White’s presence exceeds what the player brings to the table on paper. Otherwise Stevens got fleeced by one of the best front offices in basketball.

[td450]

My number one complaint about this team was its unwillingness to do deals exactly like this. This is a team with two very talented players, but they will require complementary teammates or we aren't winning anything.

Overpaying for specific marginal improvements is the most viable path to a title.

We needed two and possibly three very specific types of players. White fits in as one. If Nesmith can develop as a quality rotation scorer, we are one player away, another plus starter big that fits the defensive scheme and can score when needed. A star is not required if the fit is very good.

I would argue that assets also deteriorate when not used, and we have wasted several times as much as this "overpay" through inaction. Any team with a chance has to maintain a bias towards aggressive improvement.

[nebist]

The protection is we can be a better team than the Spurs in 2028.

[Roy H.]

The protection is we can be a better team than the Spurs in 2028.

What happens if one of the Jays leaves in free agency?  Or, one gets injured and misses most of the season?

“Be better” isn’t much protection.

[nickagneta]

Don't care.

50% of the outcomes, the pick doesn't convey.

If the swap happens because the picks are outside the top 5 but within 3-4 picks of each other or if the picks are greater than 4-5 picks of each other but in the 20's it's not a big deal and that's probably another 30% of the outcomes.

Then there is that humungous 1% of outcomes, Boston trades the pick and it doesn't even affect the team.

Given where both teams are currently and who could or could not be in charge of said franchises, the chance the pick conveys and it's some sort of gigantic advantage for San Antonio is very small.

This is being made into such a big deal by some, and simply put, it just isn't when you look at the possibility of outcomes and total likelihood it's a major negative for Boston.

[SHAQATTACK]

I tend to view the trade in opposite light .  To me it looks more like a graduation present to Ime and Brad from Pop and Spurs .   An expensive one , but a necessity to keep Tatum /Brown happy and the fans …..and I’m glade .  I watch TOOOOoooooooo many years of cheapskate Danny do nothing deadline after dead line …..then he throws a billion dollars at a one leg guard .
It’s the cost of untangling The previous administration .
Good Danny was fired .

[BudweiserCeltic]

I agree with the OP.  It’s negligent.

Remember when the Grizzlies traded a top-1 protected pick six years in the future for Otis Thorpe?  It turned into the #2 pick in one of the best drafts in history.

Again, we traded a swap. Not a pick. There's a distinction there. The pick, though less enticing now to use in a trade, is still an asset that can be traded.

And it turned out to be Darko you mean.

Another distinction to be made is that Memphis was a terrible team. We are not, we are contending (to some level, sure), but it's the way we're headed.

[Roy H.]

I agree with the OP.  It’s negligent.

Remember when the Grizzlies traded a top-1 protected pick six years in the future for Otis Thorpe?  It turned into the #2 pick in one of the best drafts in history.

Again, we traded a swap. Not a pick. There's a distinction there. The pick, though less enticing now to use in a trade, is still an asset that can be traded.

And it turned out to be Darko you mean.

It could have been Wade, Bosh or Carmelo.  The fact is it turned into the #2 pick.

The swap matters, in that we didn’t completely give up an asset.  The risk of a “one of the worst trades in history” outcome is still there, though, even if small.

[jambr380]

My goodness people are making a big deal out of the swap. EVERYBODY is talking about it.

Anyway, who cares.  Six and a half years from now we’ll deal with it, but it’s the cost of doing business.

What I MOST like about this trade is that brad identified a guy he wanted (that may or may not been on the martlet), and he went after him and got him.

but that's the point, it shouldn't have been.  Spurs got paid well with JRich, Romeo and that top-4 protected first which is going to convey.  that in itself was an overpay.  White is not an allstar.

It's just so tough to gauge. Would Cs fans be happy if we had just traded Smart for JRich, Langford, a mid-late 1st, and a pick swap (from a team with two young All-Stars)? It is unusual for Cs fans that our new GM doesn't value 1sts - and it remains to be seen how that will turn out - but I think the value is fine. I mean, TOR just traded a 1st for an expiring nearly 34 y/o in Thad Young - that is much crazier than what we just did with White.

Note that I am not happy about the pick swap, but that was the apparent cost of doing business here. And this was seemingly a guy that BOS really wanted, not one who the Spurs were just trying to get rid of. We just weren't in a position of control in these negotiations.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I agree with the OP.  It’s negligent.

Remember when the Grizzlies traded a top-1 protected pick six years in the future for Otis Thorpe?  It turned into the #2 pick in one of the best drafts in history.

Again, we traded a swap. Not a pick. There's a distinction there. The pick, though less enticing now to use in a trade, is still an asset that can be traded.

And it turned out to be Darko you mean.

It could have been Wade, Bosh or Carmelo.  The fact is it turned into the #2 pick.

The swap matters, in that we didn’t completely give up an asset.  The risk of a “one of the worst trades in history” outcome is still there, though, even if small.

It could have been anything of those sure, but that's what NBA Draft is all about right? Promise and a lot of busts as well.

Darko, although unknown, it was viewed by experts to be far away the better choice than anyone else in that draft except LeBron. That happens on every draft. It's a risk no matter what path you take. But the value of the swap is being overblown, which is my point above all.

[CelticsWhat35]

I agree with the OP.  It’s negligent.

Remember when the Grizzlies traded a top-1 protected pick six years in the future for Otis Thorpe?  It turned into the #2 pick in one of the best drafts in history.

Again, we traded a swap. Not a pick. There's a distinction there. The pick, though less enticing now to use in a trade, is still an asset that can be traded.

And it turned out to be Darko you mean.

It could have been Wade, Bosh or Carmelo.  The fact is it turned into the #2 pick.

The swap matters, in that we didn’t completely give up an asset.  The risk of a “one of the worst trades in history” outcome is still there, though, even if small.

Yes, and for every one of those scenarios, there’s plenty of scenarios where the swaps never convey or have minimal impact.  Ainge always got roasted for refusing to make trades unless he thought he would be able to “fleece” the other team.  Brad made a trade that he felt would make the team better.  To me, it comes down to whether you think the trade without the swap was good.  If you do, then I don’t see how you can be bent out of shape about the swap, when all the permutations of possibilities leave a very small chance of it having much impact.  You don’t kill a trade because of that

[Roy H.]

To me, it comes down to whether you think the trade without the swap was good.  If you do, then I don’t see how you can be bent out of shape about the swap, when all the permutations of possibilities leave a very small chance of it having much impact.

I don’t constitute it as a “very small chance”.  Not, seemingly, do most NBA GMs, because trading top-1 protected picks six years into the future for role players is almost unheard of. 

I don’t understand your philosophy.  If a deal is fair, then there should be no objection adding more assets that could turn that trade into a disaster for your franchise?

[CelticsWhat35]

To me, it comes down to whether you think the trade without the swap was good.  If you do, then I don’t see how you can be bent out of shape about the swap, when all the permutations of possibilities leave a very small chance of it having much impact.

I don’t constitute it as a “very small chance”.  Not, seemingly, do most NBA GMs, because trading top-1 protected picks six years into the future for role players is almost unheard of. 

I don’t understand your philosophy.  If a deal is fair, then there should be no objection adding more assets that could turn that trade into a disaster for your franchise?

Right, and if Derrick White ends up just being a small piece that doesn’t really push them further to their ultimate goal, it was probably an unnecessary risk, regardless of how small.  I’m not going to pretend that I’ve studied White’s game a lot.  When I first saw the reported trade, it was without the swap and I wasn’t crazy about it.  I’ve been happy with J Rich’s play, would’ve preferred Nesmith to be included instead of Romeo, and would’ve preferred still having the 1st rounder to be included in another package.  Brad and Ime seem to really think that White will help the Jays thrive.  If they’re right, then I think it was worth the risk. 

[nickagneta]

To me, it comes down to whether you think the trade without the swap was good.  If you do, then I don’t see how you can be bent out of shape about the swap, when all the permutations of possibilities leave a very small chance of it having much impact.

I don’t constitute it as a “very small chance”.  Not, seemingly, do most NBA GMs, because trading top-1 protected picks six years into the future for role players is almost unheard of. 

I don’t understand your philosophy.  If a deal is fair, then there should be no objection adding more assets that could turn that trade into a disaster for your franchise?

Mathematically it's a small chance it's anything major or catastrophic. There is simply no getting around that.