Zach Lowe: C's low-balled cavs for Love at the deadline

[MBunge]

Can you even fathom Marcus Smart having 7 straight games with 20+ points? 

When he's 25 and just about to enter his prime?  And if he was playing for a terrible team that was going to finish the season 24-58, like Boston did in TA's third season?

Sure.  Who would have ever imagined Avery would be this good after his horrible rookie season?

Now, TA turned out to be as good a role player as you ever find in the NBA and it's valid to question if Marcus will ever approach that.

Rookie Marcus was a vastly better ball handler and passer than rookie TA, probably about equal rebounding and I don't know who you'd give the edge defensively.  He was a slightly worse scorer but Marcus was also being asked to play a much larger offensive role.

Mike

[RockinRyA]

Mannix said on Toucher and Rich that the Celtics are the king of the low ball offers. That they'll try to get a star by offering Lee and Jerebko.

Id trade Zeller for Lee

[PhoSita]

Do we want to really commit to paying him 75 million over the next 3 seasons right now for what he is producing?

It'd be better than paying Sullinger $60 million over four years, or something similarly insane.

if the only two choices in the entire universe were these, you might have a point. but more choices are available.

What are they, hm?  Chances are, the Celtics are going to head into next year prepared to pay somebody a lot of money for the next few years to play at one of the big positions.

Even if Love's value has declined from where it was a couple years ago, paying him 20 million a year or so is probably one of the better options out there, given that your typical starting caliber player is probably going to expect $14-15 million annually.

[hpantazo]

Do we want to really commit to paying him 75 million over the next 3 seasons right now for what he is producing?

It'd be better than paying Sullinger $60 million over four years, or something similarly insane.

if the only two choices in the entire universe were these, you might have a point. but more choices are available.

What are they, hm?  Chances are, the Celtics are going to head into next year prepared to pay somebody a lot of money for the next few years to play at one of the big positions.

Even if Love's value has declined from where it was a couple years ago, paying him 20 million a year or so is probably one of the better options out there, given that your typical starting caliber player is probably going to expect $14-15 million annually.

They could instead sign Horford who is an unrestricted free agent , much more talented than Sullinger, and won't cost assets to obtain.

[PhoSita]

Do we want to really commit to paying him 75 million over the next 3 seasons right now for what he is producing?

It'd be better than paying Sullinger $60 million over four years, or something similarly insane.

if the only two choices in the entire universe were these, you might have a point. but more choices are available.

What are they, hm?  Chances are, the Celtics are going to head into next year prepared to pay somebody a lot of money for the next few years to play at one of the big positions.

Even if Love's value has declined from where it was a couple years ago, paying him 20 million a year or so is probably one of the better options out there, given that your typical starting caliber player is probably going to expect $14-15 million annually.

They could instead sign Horford who is an unrestricted free agent , much more talented than Sullinger, and won't cost assets to obtain.

Signing Horford away from the Hawks -- who, surprise! are having a better season than the Celts -- will likely require a maximum offer.

How does signing Horford for $25-30 million a year for four years (at the end of which he'll be almost 34) compare to paying Kevin Love (28 at start of next season) $20 million or so over the same span?


Trading for Okafor is another option, maybe, but in that case I think the Celts would either re-sign Sullinger to play next to him, or find a veteran who complements Okafor's skillset better.

Then there's the small chance of trading for DMC, who's a great deal at $16 million, but would only have 2 years left on his deal and carries a lot of locker room risks.  Not to mention that his impending free agency would become a major deal after a single season.  Better hope next year goes really well.



My point is, there aren't going to be any options for filling out the frontcourt long term that are no-brainer, no-risk.  The Celts could do a lot worse than Kevin Love.

[Lucky17]

Trade for Love, use cap space on Horford.

I think a starting five of Thomas, Bradley, Crowder, Love, and Horford challenges for annual ECF appearances over the next four years.

[PhoSita]

Trade for Love, use cap space on Horford.

I think a starting five of Thomas, Bradley, Crowder, Love, and Horford challenges for annual ECF appearances over the next four years.

I think I'd like a bigger, more aggressive shot-maker at the 2 in that lineup (Hield?) but overall I like that lineup a lot.  Would need a quality supporting cast, but they would be competitive and fun to watch for a while.

A lot hinges on Thomas not declining too rapidly and Love / Horford putting their injury issues behind them, though.

[Lucky17]

Trade for Love, use cap space on Horford.

I think a starting five of Thomas, Bradley, Crowder, Love, and Horford challenges for annual ECF appearances over the next four years.

I think I'd like a bigger, more aggressive shot-maker at the 2 in that lineup (Hield?) but overall I like that lineup a lot.  Would need a quality supporting cast, but they would be competitive and fun to watch for a while.

A lot hinges on Thomas not declining too rapidly and Love / Horford putting their injury issues behind them, though.

I think Ainge would still have pieces/assets to field a quality bench. Over those four years, Boston would have picks and MLE to add around the core. In the short term, it'd depend on what it took to acquire Love (I'm assuming Amir and Jerebko as filler, and some collection of draft picks). Sullinger as a 6th man, or a trade chip. A resigned Turner? Would Smart be part of the Love trade, part of a later trade, or the 1st guard off the bench?

But that starting five has a good collection of offense and defense, passing, spacing, and shooting. I think Brad Stevens could do a lot with that unit.

Edit: I take your point about the 2. I'm less imaginative than others around here about hypothetical trades: is there a chance to also add Jimmy Butler at the 2, instead of Bradley?

[aingeforthree]

Trade for Love, use cap space on Horford.

I think a starting five of Thomas, Bradley, Crowder, Love, and Horford challenges for annual ECF appearances over the next four years.

I think I'd like a bigger, more aggressive shot-maker at the 2 in that lineup (Hield?) but overall I like that lineup a lot.  Would need a quality supporting cast, but they would be competitive and fun to watch for a while.

A lot hinges on Thomas not declining too rapidly and Love / Horford putting their injury issues behind them, though.

I think Ainge would still have pieces/assets to field a quality bench. Over those four years, Boston would have picks and MLE to add around the core. In the short term, it'd depend on what it took to acquire Love (I'm assuming Amir and Jerebko as filler, and some collection of draft picks). Sullinger as a 6th man, or a trade chip. A resigned Turner? Would Smart be part of the Love trade, part of a later trade, or the 1st guard off the bench?

But that starting five has a good collection of offense and defense, passing, spacing, and shooting. I think Brad Stevens could do a lot with that unit.

Edit: I take your point about the 2. I'm less imaginative than others around here about hypothetical trades: is there a chance to also add Jimmy Butler at the 2, instead of Bradley?

I agree,  & those pieces he has remaining for a quality bench have great value.  It's not chump change.  He'd still have big time ammo.

Also, what happens if he hits with his late round picks ?  I mean, watch out.  That team would be incredible.

He's really set this franchise up perfectly.

[celticsclay]

Do we want to really commit to paying him 75 million over the next 3 seasons right now for what he is producing?

It'd be better than paying Sullinger $60 million over four years, or something similarly insane.

if the only two choices in the entire universe were these, you might have a point. but more choices are available.

What are they, hm?  Chances are, the Celtics are going to head into next year prepared to pay somebody a lot of money for the next few years to play at one of the big positions.

Even if Love's value has declined from where it was a couple years ago, paying him 20 million a year or so is probably one of the better options out there, given that your typical starting caliber player is probably going to expect $14-15 million annually.

They could instead sign Horford who is an unrestricted free agent , much more talented than Sullinger, and won't cost assets to obtain.

Signing Horford away from the Hawks -- who, surprise! are having a better season than the Celts -- will likely require a maximum offer.

How does signing Horford for $25-30 million a year for four years (at the end of which he'll be almost 34) compare to paying Kevin Love (28 at start of next season) $20 million or so over the same span?


Trading for Okafor is another option, maybe, but in that case I think the Celts would either re-sign Sullinger to play next to him, or find a veteran who complements Okafor's skillset better.

Then there's the small chance of trading for DMC, who's a great deal at $16 million, but would only have 2 years left on his deal and carries a lot of locker room risks.  Not to mention that his impending free agency would become a major deal after a single season.  Better hope next year goes really well.



My point is, there aren't going to be any options for filling out the frontcourt long term that are no-brainer, no-risk.  The Celts could do a lot worse than Kevin Love.

I wouldn't really say the Hawks are having a better season than the Celtics. Yes they are 1.5 games up on us at the moment, but we led them for a lot of the year until arguably our second best player got hurt for an extended stretch in crowder. Aside from that, they are going to finish the season with a significantly worse record than last season while we are going to end our season with a significantly better record.

You throw in the fact that their key players are much older than ours, and aside from Schroeder they don't seem to have a lot of high upside prospects and their season probably is not "better" than ours. Looking forward things would appear less promising.

[PhoSita]

The Hawks are probably going to have home court advantage in the playoffs; the Celts probably aren't.  Chances are, the Hawks are gonna go farther in the playoffs after winning more games in the regular season.

It's hard not to characterize that as a "better" season. 

You're right that the Hawks are in a bit more precarious situation moving forward, but they also have more track record of success.

Bottom line, I think it's entirely plausible that the Celts could sign Horford away from the Hawks.  I just think it'll take a max offer, both in terms of annual value and years, to do it.

[Evantime34]

The Hawks are probably going to have home court advantage in the playoffs; the Celts probably aren't.  Chances are, the Hawks are gonna go farther in the playoffs after winning more games in the regular season.

It's hard not to characterize that as a "better" season. 

You're right that the Hawks are in a bit more precarious situation moving forward, but they also have more track record of success.

Bottom line, I think it's entirely plausible that the Celts could sign Horford away from the Hawks.  I just think it'll take a max offer, both in terms of annual value and years, to do it.

The problem is Atlanta can offer Horford more years than Boston. So if the Hawks want Horford for 5 years I think he stays.

[celticsclay]

The Hawks are probably going to have home court advantage in the playoffs; the Celts probably aren't.  Chances are, the Hawks are gonna go farther in the playoffs after winning more games in the regular season.

It's hard not to characterize that as a "better" season. 

You're right that the Hawks are in a bit more precarious situation moving forward, but they also have more track record of success.

Bottom line, I think it's entirely plausible that the Celts could sign Horford away from the Hawks.  I just think it'll take a max offer, both in terms of annual value and years, to do it.

i am not really sure why you are characterizing the Hawks currently having one less loss than us as a sure sign they are going to finish the regular season with a better record with us. Especially when it appears we will get Crowder back soon and we were a much better team with him.

I realize we have a few really tough games left (and pretty much an automatic loss against golden state)

However, you realize Atlanta plays toronto twice, cleveland twice, us once and at Washington on the final day of the season when the Wizards may be trying like heck to make the playoffs?
They only have one game against a sure lottery team.

I would definitely prefer our schedule that includes games against the imploding Lakers, the shut down pelicans, a Bucks team experimenting with lineups and Charlotte and Miami at home (with the two west coast road games being tough to impossible). I think our game in Atlanta could very well decide who finishes with a better record and we will only be slight underdogs in that assuming Crowder is healthy. You still want to declare their season better than ours?

[PhoSita]

You still want to declare their season better than ours?

The Hawks are 1.5 games up with 7 games remaining, and they're 9-1 over the last 10.  They have the 2nd best defense in the league.  Their point differential is 4.0 compared to 3.4 for the Celts.

The Hawks also have more experience and a better track record of success in the playoffs (i.e. they've actually won playoff games with this group).

So yeah, I'm pretty confident that at the end of the day, the Hawks will have had an objectively "better" season than the Celts.

It's possible it goes the other way, but it seems to me that it's more likely for the Hawks.  The point being, that it's not a simple conclusion to reach that Horford would look at Boston as such a vastly superior situation to the one he's already in. 

If the Hawks offer 5 years at the max, I wouldn't be surprised to see Horford take that offer before seriously considering anybody else.  If they balk at offering him quite that much, given his age and potential for decline, the Celts will have a pretty good shot at signing him, but I stand by my conviction that it'll require offering him 4 years at the max to make it happen, since plenty of other teams will be chasing him as well.

[nickagneta]

You still want to declare their season better than ours?

The Hawks are 1.5 games up with 7 games remaining, and they're 9-1 over the last 10.  They have the 2nd best defense in the league.  Their point differential is 4.0 compared to 3.4 for the Celts.

The Hawks also have more experience and a better track record of success in the playoffs (i.e. they've actually won playoff games with this group).

So yeah, I'm pretty confident that at the end of the day, the Hawks will have had an objectively "better" season than the Celts.

It's possible it goes the other way, but it seems to me that it's more likely for the Hawks.  The point being, that it's not a simple conclusion to reach that Horford would look at Boston as such a vastly superior situation to the one he's already in. 

If the Hawks offer 5 years at the max, I wouldn't be surprised to see Horford take that offer before seriously considering anybody else.  If they balk at offering him quite that much, given his age and potential for decline, the Celts will have a pretty good shot at signing him, but I stand by my conviction that it'll require offering him 4 years at the max to make it happen, since plenty of other teams will be chasing him as well.

A lot of the stats you are basing this Hawks better season on have occurred in the last ten games. Before the Hawks went on their hot ten game streak while the Celtics have stagnated due to injury, the Celtics were the better team, though not by a lot. The Hawks got hot and the C's cooled so the Hawks are now the statistically better team, though not by a lot. To be honest, regardless of who has the better record, which I don't see being different by more than a game or so, I think it's pretty easy to say that both teams probably had equally good seasons.