Author Topic: Celtics/Magic Trade  (Read 2220 times)

Celtics2021 and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Celtics/Magic Trade
« Reply #30 on: Today at 08:10:28 AM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8539
  • Tommy Points: 1099
My assumption is the guys the Magic will try to deal are Suggs and Isaac. Suggs because he's making 32m, can't shoot, and can be replaced by Anthony Black. Isaac because he's not in their future plans anymore (someone may take a flier on him because only 8m of his 14.5m is guaranteed). Or, the Magic could just cut Isaac to help get under the tax.

They're not ready to give up on Banchero, Wagner, and Bane. Carter Jr. is their starting C, so why would they trade him unless they're getting someone better? Suggs should be able to get them a more offensively-inclined guard who can shoot.

Isaac is almost certainly just going to be waived and stretched.  I cannot imagine anyway giving up an asset for him, and his cap hit of $8 million can be stretched across seven seasons, so just over $1.1 million per year, if he is waived by June 28th.

Re: Celtics/Magic Trade
« Reply #31 on: Today at 09:03:58 AM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 54284
  • Tommy Points: 2602
My assumption is the guys the Magic will try to deal are Suggs and Isaac. Suggs because he's making 32m, can't shoot, and can be replaced by Anthony Black. Isaac because he's not in their future plans anymore (someone may take a flier on him because only 8m of his 14.5m is guaranteed). Or, the Magic could just cut Isaac to help get under the tax.

They're not ready to give up on Banchero, Wagner, and Bane. Carter Jr. is their starting C, so why would they trade him unless they're getting someone better? Suggs should be able to get them a more offensively-inclined guard who can shoot.

Suggs' shooting has been disappointing. He shot 39.7% on 5 threes per game during his 3rd year when he got that contract. He looked like a Marcus Smart who could shoot. Since then, 31.4% and 33.9% on 6.9 threes and 6.3 threes respectively. Shame.

I think they need to move on from Anthony Black. He is the guy I would replace. He can't shoot. At least with Suggs you have a starter who is one of the premier guard defenders in the league and has one season where he showed some shooting prowess.

It would take a lot for me to move on from Suggs. He has such a large impact on defense. Even with his below average offense, he is still a guy that has considerable impact out there. It would take a Darius Garland level player for me to consider moving on from Suggs. Even then, I'm not sure I would do it.

--------------

I am thinking of PG alternatives to Suggs.

You have the top 10 or so guys who you can't get = Cade, Luka, SGA, Steph, Brunson, D Mitchell / J Harden, J Murray, LaMelo, D Fox, T Maxey. Edit: Forgot the injured Haliburton & Kyrie.

Plus you have the two young guys in San Antonio in S Castle and Dylan Harper. They are pretty much untouchable as well. After that it is D White, Jrue, T Herro, Keyonte George, Ja Morant, D Garland, Suggs, NAW / McCollum. So that is the middle 10 in the PG rankings.

Once you go below those guys, you are making your team worse talent wise. Quickley, R Rollins, Tre Jones, Reed Sheppard, F VanVleet, Davion Mitchell. You have non-PGs like Grayson Allen. Pritchard is not only in this group but he is near the top of it. Him and Quickley. This is why I don't like the "Pritchard can't be a starter" tag. The guy is around the 20th best PG in the league.

You have some of those combo guard guys like Coby White, A Simons, C Sexton and so forth. Some bench guards like C Gillispie. D Schroder. Defensive guards like Cason Wallace & Alex Caruso.

I don't think any of those guys from the 20-30 range or bench guys are upgrades on Suggs. Suggs can't get one of those top 10 guys. A couple of the guys ahead of him in the 10-20 range are too old (D White, Jrue), also can't shoot (Morant), or are offense only players (T Herro, D Garland, McCollum). And it is the offense only guys that make the most sense but even then I am not sure any one of them actually makes Orlando better. 
« Last Edit: Today at 09:11:45 AM by Who »