IT Complaints: Fallout & Future (merged IT kvetching threads)

[Ilikesports17]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

The problem with this whole line of thinking is that start-for-star trades are very hard to make happen and very rare.

Trades of any kind involving star players are rare as it is.  The few that occur tend to be star-for-assets type trades as one side decides to rebuild.   Star-for-star trades happen something like once every few decades.    For that sort of deal to occur, you need to have two teams at the same time needing or wanting to trade away a star player AND wanting to replace them with the type of star player the other team is trying to move.   That's just plain going to be a rare kismet.  On top of that, you now have to factor in all the usual logistical difficulties involved with making trades.

So forget any notion of trading IT for a 'star'.  A more common way that stars get traded is for assets:  Picks, young players, tradable contracts.  You might get a 'good player', but that usually happens as a surprise bonus from a package of assets.  For example, Jae Crowder emerging as a really, really good player out of the Rondo liquidation package.

Further, Danny is almost certainly not going to suddenly be trying to trade Thomas just because Thomas spoke a couple of truths-best-kept-in-the-lockerroom during post-loss frustration moments with microphones shoved in his face.

I challenge anyone to propose a viable IT trade that wouldn't make us all puke.

I'd love to see one as well.

I get trading IT if you could get something resembling equal value but I don't see that happening at all.

[nickagneta]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

I agree with this, AB should be cheaper than IT to re-sign . we need smart and AB to defend aagainst these great guards in the league.

Smart     Fultz
AB.           Jaylen
Hayward.  Jaylen
Crowder     Yabu
Horford.     Zicic

Brk 18 pick , plus whatever we get back for IT

So basically step back into the lottery. This team has no rebounding and zero experience on the bench. Teams like this struggle to win 35 games.

[nickagneta]

As for the two comments after losses, players get aggravated and mad and don't always say what they should. Many Celtic stars have said stuff they wished they hadn't after games and many said a lot worse than IT. I just don't see the big deal.

Also, I hate to break the reality of the situation to you guys, but IT is here to stay, he will sign a max contract and if we draft a guard, that guard will be coming off the bench for probably 2 years. You are all going to have to live with those situations.

[CoachBo]

As for thetwo comments after losses, players get aggravated and mad and don't always say what they should. Many Celtic star have saidstuff they wished they haven't after games and many saida lot worse than IT. I just don't see the big deal.

Also, I hate to break the reality of the situation to you guys but IT is here to stay, he will sign a max contract and if we draft a guard that guard will be coming off the bench for probably 2 years. Youare all going to have to live with those situations.

Preach!

Completely agree. And that's how it should be.

TP.

[Ilikesports17]

As for thetwo comments after losses, players get aggravated and mad and don't always say what they should. Many Celtic star have saidstuff they wished they haven't after games and many saida lot worse than IT. I just don't see the big deal.

Also, I hate to break the reality of the situation to you guys but IT is here to stay, he will sign a max contract and if we draft a guard that guard will be coming off the bench for probably 2 years. Youare all going to have to live with those situations.

do you think he gets extended this summer or not until his contract expires?

[nickagneta]

As for thetwo comments after losses, players get aggravated and mad and don't always say what they should. Many Celtic star have saidstuff they wished they haven't after games and many saida lot worse than IT. I just don't see the big deal.

Also, I hate to break the reality of the situation to you guys but IT is here to stay, he will sign a max contract and if we draft a guard that guard will be coming off the bench for probably 2 years. Youare all going to have to live with those situations.

do you think he gets extended this summer or not until his contract expires?

He will sign it when its in the best interest of the Celtics to sign it.

[wdleehi]

IT's future may very well be connected to this upcoming draft pick.


If the Celtics trade it for a true star, IT is likely getting an extension.


If the Celtics use the pick and IT and that player work great together, IT is likely getting an extension.


If the pick and IT do not work together well enough, depending on how the draft pick plays, IT could be traded down the road to find a top player who fits better with the pick.

[colincb]

It's OK to blame everyone for a loss, but it's not to single out anyone but oneself.

[jambr380]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

The problem with this whole line of thinking is that start-for-star trades are very hard to make happen and very rare.

Trades of any kind involving star players are rare as it is.  The few that occur tend to be star-for-assets type trades as one side decides to rebuild.   Star-for-star trades happen something like once every few decades.    For that sort of deal to occur, you need to have two teams at the same time needing or wanting to trade away a star player AND wanting to replace them with the type of star player the other team is trying to move.   That's just plain going to be a rare kismet.  On top of that, you now have to factor in all the usual logistical difficulties involved with making trades.

So forget any notion of trading IT for a 'star'.  A more common way that stars get traded is for assets:  Picks, young players, tradable contracts.  You might get a 'good player', but that usually happens as a surprise bonus from a package of assets.  For example, Jae Crowder emerging as a really, really good player out of the Rondo liquidation package.

Further, Danny is almost certainly not going to suddenly be trying to trade Thomas just because Thomas spoke a couple of truths-best-kept-in-the-lockerroom during post-loss frustration moments with microphones shoved in his face.

I challenge anyone to propose a viable IT trade that wouldn't make us all puke.

I'd love to see one as well.

I get trading IT if you could get something resembling equal value but I don't see that happening at all.

What?! Don't you guys even read the thread in which you are posting I just mentioned Myles Turner and Jokic as players I think would work out quite well in a trade. I understand that Denver appears to be all-in on Jokic, but Paul George was quoted as being excited to see IT play during All-Star weekend.

With Bird having some decisions to make on the future of Indy (next year is George's last before FA), this could be a match made in heaven for both teams.

Note: I am not the originator of this idea, but the same threads pop up around here every few days so I figured I would rehash this one since it has apparently been totally forgotten.

[mobilija]

As for the two comments after losses, players get aggravated and mad and don't always say what they should. Many Celtic stars have said stuff they wished they hadn't after games and many said a lot worse than IT. I just don't see the big deal.

Also, I hate to break the reality of the situation to you guys, but IT is here to stay, he will sign a max contract and if we draft a guard, that guard will be coming off the bench for probably 2 years. You are all going to have to live with those situations.

What?? That would leave us with a fantastic player and a young potential star to back him up and learn from him! What a horrible unimaginable scenario...

[oldtype]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

The problem with this whole line of thinking is that start-for-star trades are very hard to make happen and very rare.

Trades of any kind involving star players are rare as it is.  The few that occur tend to be star-for-assets type trades as one side decides to rebuild.   Star-for-star trades happen something like once every few decades.    For that sort of deal to occur, you need to have two teams at the same time needing or wanting to trade away a star player AND wanting to replace them with the type of star player the other team is trying to move.   That's just plain going to be a rare kismet.  On top of that, you now have to factor in all the usual logistical difficulties involved with making trades.

So forget any notion of trading IT for a 'star'.  A more common way that stars get traded is for assets:  Picks, young players, tradable contracts.  You might get a 'good player', but that usually happens as a surprise bonus from a package of assets.  For example, Jae Crowder emerging as a really, really good player out of the Rondo liquidation package.

Further, Danny is almost certainly not going to suddenly be trying to trade Thomas just because Thomas spoke a couple of truths-best-kept-in-the-lockerroom during post-loss frustration moments with microphones shoved in his face.

I challenge anyone to propose a viable IT trade that wouldn't make us all puke.

I'd love to see one as well.

I get trading IT if you could get something resembling equal value but I don't see that happening at all.

What?! Don't you guys even read the thread in which you are posting I just mentioned Myles Turner and Jokic as players I think would work out quite well in a trade. I understand that Denver appears to be all-in on Jokic, but Paul George was quoted as being excited to see IT play during All-Star weekend.

With Bird having some decisions to make on the future of Indy (next year is George's last before FA), this could be a match made in heaven for both teams.

Note: I am not the originator of this idea, but the same threads pop up around here every few days so I figured I would rehash this one since it has apparently been totally forgotten.

IT for Jokic is unrealistic. IT for Turner makes me puke (and is somehow probably unrealistic at the same time)

[Geo123]

You don't preemptively trade away players playing at IT's level just because you're afraid their next contract might not be great. That might make sense from a value-maximization standpoint but it makes no sense when you consider that you're dealing with a team of actual human beings. Think of what kind of message that sends to the other players.

Besides, who would give up anything of value for him? I doubt we'd be able to get ourselves anything better than a pick that's just barely in the top 10, if that. Is an extra middling asset really worth ruining team chemistry?

Ainge isn't as dumb as the legion of Thomas-bashers on this board.

+1

[Tr1boy]

At this rate who is going to want whinny IT4

It almost becomes like the Rondo situation again

[nickagneta]

Thanks RondoHondo and Slam for your time to explain. TP for both.

I've backed this way of action since I started to post, and more people are joining it lately. Trade IT in the summer for a good player, draft Fultz/Ball, sign Hayward (or try as hell) and bring Zizic. Then extend Bradley and Smart.

The problem with this whole line of thinking is that start-for-star trades are very hard to make happen and very rare.

Trades of any kind involving star players are rare as it is.  The few that occur tend to be star-for-assets type trades as one side decides to rebuild.   Star-for-star trades happen something like once every few decades.    For that sort of deal to occur, you need to have two teams at the same time needing or wanting to trade away a star player AND wanting to replace them with the type of star player the other team is trying to move.   That's just plain going to be a rare kismet.  On top of that, you now have to factor in all the usual logistical difficulties involved with making trades.

So forget any notion of trading IT for a 'star'.  A more common way that stars get traded is for assets:  Picks, young players, tradable contracts.  You might get a 'good player', but that usually happens as a surprise bonus from a package of assets.  For example, Jae Crowder emerging as a really, really good player out of the Rondo liquidation package.

Further, Danny is almost certainly not going to suddenly be trying to trade Thomas just because Thomas spoke a couple of truths-best-kept-in-the-lockerroom during post-loss frustration moments with microphones shoved in his face.

I challenge anyone to propose a viable IT trade that wouldn't make us all puke.

I'd love to see one as well.

I get trading IT if you could get something resembling equal value but I don't see that happening at all.

What?! Don't you guys even read the thread in which you are posting I just mentioned Myles Turner and Jokic as players I think would work out quite well in a trade. I understand that Denver appears to be all-in on Jokic, but Paul George was quoted as being excited to see IT play during All-Star weekend.

With Bird having some decisions to make on the future of Indy (next year is George's last before FA), this could be a match made in heaven for both teams.

Note: I am not the originator of this idea, but the same threads pop up around here every few days so I figured I would rehash this one since it has apparently been totally forgotten.

IT for Jokic is unrealistic. IT for Turner makes me puke.

IT for Turner is not close to equal value. Its just another trade to bring in another 20 year old with some potential because people feel that somehow having a team filled with players ranging from 19 to 22 is going to win something. News flash, those types of teams lose...and lose a lot.

[mmmmm]

As for thetwo comments after losses, players get aggravated and mad and don't always say what they should. Many Celtic star have saidstuff they wished they haven't after games and many saida lot worse than IT. I just don't see the big deal.

Also, I hate to break the reality of the situation to you guys but IT is here to stay, he will sign a max contract and if we draft a guard that guard will be coming off the bench for probably 2 years. Youare all going to have to live with those situations.

do you think he gets extended this summer or not until his contract expires?

That depends on how the FA & trade markets play out for Danny this summer.

Danny's first goal will be to add another big stud, possibly via draft-night trade or possibly via free agency (which might involve a sign-&-trade in order to implement).  I.E, he will likely try to go after Gordon Hayward or Blake Griffin.

If he succeeds, then he may then try to get IT4 (and possibly AB and/or Marcus) to sign extensions right away in order to moderate their long-term cap / tax implications.

If he doesn't land a stud this summer then he will likely wait until ITs contract expires.  Danny will re-sign short-term contracts again (like the ones he's had with Amir, Jonas and Zeller) to roll his cap space over to the summer of 2018.  That will allow him one more try at landing another big stud.  At that point, he would then sign IT4 (and possibly AB and/or MS) using Bird Rights.

A LOT of variables have to play out between now and then, though.  The plan can and likely will shift around.