Kevin Love (or Carmello) Makes No Sense

[nickagneta]

I think the whole "let's just stink and gather draft picks for years so we are good in the future" strategy tends to lead to being the Sacramentos, Minnesotas, Charlottes, Clevelands, and Washingtons of the world.

Washington finally after a decade look like they might have a back court that might lead to some future title consideration. Cleveland was only good because they drafted the best player since Duncan, then returned right back to obscurity.

The OKC model of drafting great for 3-4 years and instantly becoming a contender is an anomaly, not the norm.

[fairweatherfan]

I think the whole "let's just stink and gather draft picks for years so we are good in the future" strategy tends to lead to being the Sacramentos, Minnesotas, Charlottes, Clevelands, and Washingtons of the world.

Washington finally after a decade look like they might have a back court that might lead to some future title consideration. Cleveland was only good because they drafted the best player since Duncan, then returned right back to obscurity.

The OKC model of drafting great for 3-4 years and instantly becoming a contender is an anomaly, not the norm.

Becoming a contender is ALWAYS an anomaly, since contenders are always outnumbered by non-contenders.  So success stories via any approach are always going to be a short list.  We could easily say trying to go the Miami route of acquiring stars is more likely to make us this year's Nets or last year's Lakers - stuck in the middle with a huge tax bill.  The real question is whether specific moves are likely to help or hurt our chances of contending.  That's where I get hung up on the Love idea - not that keeping the picks guarantees success, just that getting Love requires giving up a lot of flexibility in drafting, trading, and signing more pieces, when it's difficult to determine whether we move enough towards contention to offset it.

BTW this is a tangent but it just occurred to me that OKC's route to contention isn't very different than how the 80s Celtics teams were created - nail a few picks (Bird/McHale/Ainge, I suppose Maxwell if you go back a bit), and make a couple savvy trades to fill out the team.  Main difference is that our trades went a lot better than OKC's, probably because it was easier to fleece poorly run teams in that era.

[nickagneta]

I think the whole "let's just stink and gather draft picks for years so we are good in the future" strategy tends to lead to being the Sacramentos, Minnesotas, Charlottes, Clevelands, and Washingtons of the world.

Washington finally after a decade look like they might have a back court that might lead to some future title consideration. Cleveland was only good because they drafted the best player since Duncan, then returned right back to obscurity.

The OKC model of drafting great for 3-4 years and instantly becoming a contender is an anomaly, not the norm.

Becoming a contender is ALWAYS an anomaly, since contenders are always outnumbered by non-contenders.  So success stories via any approach are always going to be a short list.  We could easily say trying to go the Miami route of acquiring stars is more likely to make us this year's Nets or last year's Lakers - stuck in the middle with a huge tax bill.  The real question is whether specific moves are likely to help or hurt our chances of contending.  That's where I get hung up on the Love idea - not that keeping the picks guarantees success, just that getting Love requires giving up a lot of flexibility in drafting, trading, and signing more pieces, when it's difficult to determine whether we move enough towards contention to offset it.

BTW this is a tangent but it just occurred to me that OKC's route to contention isn't very different than how the 80s Celtics teams were created - nail a few picks (Bird/McHale/Ainge), and make a couple savvy trades to fill out the team.  Main difference is that our trades went a lot better than OKC's, probably because it was easier to fleece poorly run teams in that era.

I would contend that becoming a contender isn't an anomaly so much as its not as frequent an occurrence as being a non-contender.

But in today's game and with today's CBA and draft lottery, drafting almost perfectly over 3-4 years and in that time having those drafted players be the main core of a contending team all while they are less than 24 years old is a massive anomaly.

[celtsfanforlife]

OK, I am done here.  I got a little bit of support, but almost everyone disagreed with me.  If the Celts trade for Love, trust me, I'll be cheering this team on as much as any of you, and hoping Ainge can pull off another really big piece.  We'll need it.

And let me add this.  Depending on the price tag, I could support a trade for Love.  But I am getting scared to death of the speculation of the 6th pick, Sully, and 3 more #1s.  That's essentially 5 number one picks (including Sully) for perhaps a one year rental.

I'll be back here saying "I told you so" when Rondo and Love leave, and we've blown half of our assets.  Minnesota will have pulled off a heist and we'll be the laughing stock.  The Twolves will be on their way to contention while we'll be mocked all over the league.

But I'll always be a Celtics fan, no matter what happens.  My loyalty won't change.  I'll just be mad as he**.

[mmmmm]

OK, I am done here.  I got a little bit of support, but almost everyone disagreed with me.  If the Celts trade for Love, trust me, I'll be cheering this team on as much as any of you, and hoping Ainge can pull off another really big piece.  We'll need it.

And let me add this.  Depending on the price tag, I could support a trade for Love.  But I am getting scared to death of the speculation of the 6th pick, Sully, and 3 more #1s.  That's essentially 5 number one picks (including Sully) for perhaps a one year rental.

I'll be back here saying "I told you so" when Rondo and Love leave, and we've blown half of our assets.  Minnesota will have pulled off a heist and we'll be the laughing stock.  The Twolves will be on their way to contention while we'll be mocked all over the league.

But I'll always be a Celtics fan, no matter what happens.  My loyalty won't change.  I'll just be mad as he**.

But that just establishes that it is all a matter of price.

Your position isn't that trading for Love makes no sense.

Your position is that trading for Love makes no sense at the price of Sully plus the #6 pick plus 3 other 1st round picks with no extension.

If you had stated it that way, you might have gotten a fair bit more support.

I don't think most advocates of trading for Love are 'all in' for just giving away every asset.

Sure, some folks will want him at any price. Everything you listed and more if necessary.

Others will be only willing to give up one tired old 2nd round pick from 2018 and a couple of stale doughnuts.

The vast majority of folks will be somewhere in the middle.

[celtsfanforlife]

Bill Simmons has suggested 4 #1s and Sully.  This is insanity and it's becoming the conventional wisdom. We hosed the Nets big time and now we're prepared to return the favor to Minny.  Wonderful. 

But thanks for the nice post.  I generally agree.

[bknova]

Bill Simmons has suggested 4 #1s and Sully.  This is insanity and it's becoming the conventional wisdom. We hosed the Nets big time and now we're prepared to return the favor to Minny.  Wonderful. 

But thanks for the nice post.  I generally agree.

ummm....we gave the Nets two future hall of fames literally at the end of their careers.  We'd be giving up picks for a double double machine who is probably already one of the top 3 power forwards in the league and a top 10 player in the league already, who is only 25 years old and has yet to enter his prime.  While I agree 4 picks is too much, its hardly the same thing.

[celtsfanforlife]

Bill Simmons has suggested 4 #1s and Sully.  This is insanity and it's becoming the conventional wisdom. We hosed the Nets big time and now we're prepared to return the favor to Minny.  Wonderful. 

But thanks for the nice post.  I generally agree.

ummm....we gave the Nets two future hall of fames literally at the end of their careers.  We'd be giving up picks for a double double machine who is probably already one of the top 3 power forwards in the league and a top 10 player in the league already, who is only 25 years old and has yet to enter his prime.  While I agree 4 picks is too much, its hardly the same thing.

All trades are different.  But overpaying is overpaying.  Not thrilled with overpaying when it provides little to no chance of taking out a dynasty (Heat) anytime soon.  If we draft well and maintain and grow cap space we'll be better off in 2-3 years when the next KL comes along and LBJ will be past his prime.

[BleedGreen1989]

I think the whole "let's just stink and gather draft picks for years so we are good in the future" strategy tends to lead to being the Sacramentos, Minnesotas, Charlottes, Clevelands, and Washingtons of the world.

Preach.

Far too passive approach for me as well. Never any urgency to win. Always "developing players" or "gathering assets".

I want to root for a big ass "W" on the board and I think Love helps that at the end of the day. If Love is a real possibility for this Boston team, hard to find a deal I'd say "no" to.

[Lucky17]

Bill Simmons has suggested 4 #1s and Sully.  This is insanity and it's becoming the conventional wisdom.

Really? I've not heard anyone here argue for much more beyond #6, #17, Sullinger, and filler. Maybe the most ardent of Lovers want to add a future pick, or Olynyk.

But four? Come on.

[fairweatherfan]

Is it weird that I feel worse about giving up the #17 than the 6?  The 6 is pretty much a necessary part of the deal, but there's going to be some real value at 17.  If Danny can get a Kawhi Leonard-level hit there it would be a huge boost toward contention.

[nickagneta]

Is it weird that I feel worse about giving up the #17 than the 6?  The 6 is pretty much a necessary part of the deal, but there's going to be some real value at 17.  If Danny can get a Kawhi Leonard-level hit there it would be a huge boost toward contention.

Not really fwf. While the 6th pick sounds great in this very deep draft I am not sure there will be a huge difference in the quality of player chosen in those positions. I would much rather give up a top ten protected 2015 1st rounder than that pick at 17 this year.

[bknova]

Bill Simmons has suggested 4 #1s and Sully.  This is insanity and it's becoming the conventional wisdom. We hosed the Nets big time and now we're prepared to return the favor to Minny.  Wonderful. 

But thanks for the nice post.  I generally agree.

ummm....we gave the Nets two future hall of fames literally at the end of their careers.  We'd be giving up picks for a double double machine who is probably already one of the top 3 power forwards in the league and a top 10 player in the league already, who is only 25 years old and has yet to enter his prime.  While I agree 4 picks is too much, its hardly the same thing.

All trades are different.  But overpaying is overpaying.  Not thrilled with overpaying when it provides little to no chance of taking out a dynasty (Heat) anytime soon.  If we draft well and maintain and grow cap space we'll be better off in 2-3 years when the next KL comes along and LBJ will be past his prime.

I suppose if you believe that Lebron and the aging Heat are going to dominate the league for years to come ala Jordan, then you make a valid point.  I really don't.  I see that other than the Celtics, he's had really no competition in the East and the younger wave of players are starting to mature into team players and the path isn't going to be so easy. That said, a team of Rondo, Love, and Jeff Green is already top 5 in the East.  Another piece here or there, its anybody's ball game. 

That said, if I'm going to move 6, 17, and a future 1st, I'd rather jump up to get Embiid because we so desperately need size and have two good young power forwards on the roster, but I ain't get gonna say no to a player of Love's caliber next to Rondo, before his prime!

[BASS_THUMPER]

Bring Scalabrine
         Pierce
         Powe
         Walker
       
back for that final end of B Ball career season and the world would watch

i would be *sippin*

win or lose enjoying ever minute

i see no pick for years to come or any other player in the nba will make us contenders tomorrow

[LooseCannon]

Bill Simmons has suggested 4 #1s and Sully.  This is insanity and it's becoming the conventional wisdom.

Really? I've not heard anyone here argue for much more beyond #6, #17, Sullinger, and filler. Maybe the most ardent of Lovers want to add a future pick, or Olynyk.

But four? Come on.

I've argued the possibility of four #1s plus their choice of Sullinger or Olynyk, but my idea was to offer #17, the Clippers pick, a Nets pick, and another future first while keeping #6.