Idea - Thomas traded to Lakers but only after talking to the Kings

[Celtics978Fan]

I know this sounds a bit crazy but more just a different thought on what the Celtics should.  I'm a believer Thomas isn't going to win us a title and we should build for the future, because our window isn't now.  From what I've heard on ESPN Ball had his workout with the Lakers and some are saying it wasn't anything special.  So what if the Lakers are wanting a star now and to have for George if he goes there next year. 

Lakers Trade
#2 Pick
Timothy Mozgov

Celtics Trade
Isaiah Thomas
Tyler Zeller
Celtics 2018 1st

The Lakers get rid of a contract they want to, gain a pick next year and get an all-star in Thomas.  The Celtics pick up the #2 Pick and Mozgov.  This trade only happens if we've already contacted the Kings who are looking to trade up from 5 and 10 to the top 3.  I repeat I only do the Thomas deal if you know the Kings are willing to take back a contract with moving up. 

Celtics Trade
#2 Pick
Celtics 2019 1st
Timothy Mozgov
Jordan Mickey

Kings Trade
#5 Pick
#10 Pick
Willie Cauley-stein

Like I said I'm thinking long term for the Celtics and this trade I had fun with but also does what I'd like them to do.  The team would look something like this without a free agent, but enough money to still sign Hayward.

Center - Cauley-stein
Power Forward - Horford
Small Forward - Crowder
Shooting Guard - Bradley
Point Guard - Smart

Point Guard - Fultz (#1 Pick)
Small Forward/Shooting Guard - Brown
Small Forward - Tatum (#5 Pick)
Point Guard - Rozier
Center - Jarrett Allen (#10 Pick)
Power Forward/Small Forward - Yabusele
Center - Zizic (Keep in Europe)

Now just imagine if we can get Hayward to sign here.  We become a contender in the East still now, plus in the future we're loaded and still able to keep Brooklyn's pick next year.  I'll say it again this was just a fun trade idea that could actually work either as is or with minor changes. 

[Roy H.]

Why would Hayward sign here? We'd be the Twolves, with less pure talent.

Trading IT plus two #1s for a mediocre center, Tatum, and a hit-or-miss big man prospect isn't the path to future contention.

[chilidawg]

Why would Hayward sign here? We'd be the Twolves, with less pure talent.

Trading IT plus two #1s for a mediocre center, Tatum, and a hit-or-miss big man prospect isn't the path to future contention.

Letting him go for nothing because you can't afford to resign him isn't either.  Tough choices for DA.  I'm not a fan of trading IT, but something has to give.

[CelticsElite]

And instantly ruin relationships with any free agents in the next 5 years

[Roy H.]

Why would Hayward sign here? We'd be the Twolves, with less pure talent.

Trading IT plus two #1s for a mediocre center, Tatum, and a hit-or-miss big man prospect isn't the path to future contention.

Letting him go for nothing because you can't afford to resign him isn't either.  Tough choices for DA.  I'm not a fan of trading IT, but something has to give.

We can afford to resign him.

[Celtics978Fan]

Why would Hayward sign here? We'd be the Twolves, with less pure talent.
 
Trading IT plus two #1s for a mediocre center, Tatum, and a hit-or-miss big man prospect isn't the path to future contention.

Like I said it was just a thought that was different, plus . Like I said looking at the future.  As for why Hayward would sign is he's looking at the future and wanting to play for Stevens and be the star in Boston.  Plus he'd play beside Horford, Bradley, Smart, Crowder all veterans and a young core of rookies.  But even if we don't get Hayward we'd still be interesting in the future.

That's a good return on Thomas if you break it down.  Considering both of our picks would be in the late picks, Thomas is going to want a big deal and we'd be able to keep younger players that play better overall, being able to keep Bradley and Smart.

Lets Fultz be our future, Tatum has potential to be a good scorer and starter.  Willie cauley-stein feels the need we have for a real center, and someone that can defend multiple positions. So yes he might not be a grade-a talent Center but he would be a great fill for us right now and future.  At the #10 Pick you can take who you want or trade, I just said Allen because I liked his game and potential.

[hodgy03038]

I am getting so tired of all the "trade IT" posts on here. He is not being traded (this year anyway) and he is the one that got us here. Let's give the "Little Guy" some respect.

[Roy H.]

That's a good return on Thomas if you break it down.  Considering both of our picks would be in the late picks, Thomas is going to want a big deal and we'd be able to keep younger players that play better overall, being able to keep Bradley and Smart

How late would those picks be without IT?

Also, how do Smart and AB "play better overall"?  IT was voted a top-4 guard last year, behind three contenders for MVP (Harden, Westbrook, Curry).

[Celtics978Fan]

I am getting so tired of all the "trade IT" posts on here. He is not being traded (this year anyway) and he is the one that got us here. Let's give the "Little Guy" some respect.

It's not about respect, it's about what can ultimately win the Celtics a title.  I respect Thomas and his game, but as a fan of the Celtics, I want to be good now the future and contend for titles.  I personally don't believe with an old Horford being over paid, a soon to be 29 year old undersized point guard  who doesn't defend as your two highest players is a way to win titles.  Especially with teams going young, stretching the floor and needing to all be two way players almost. 

[Celtics978Fan]

That's a good return on Thomas if you break it down.  Considering both of our picks would be in the late picks, Thomas is going to want a big deal and we'd be able to keep younger players that play better overall, being able to keep Bradley and Smart

How late would those picks be without IT?

Also, how do Smart and AB "play better overall"?  IT was voted a top-4 guard last year, behind three contenders for MVP (Harden, Westbrook, Curry).

Those picks would be later then #5 and #10 for sure and that's what matters.  Smart and Bradley played a lot better team basketball.  Thomas is a shorter version of Carmelo Anthony, he's a great score, but he hurts the team because he can't play defense. Plus also having him on the team will hurt Fultz developed in being a star.  Where you can have Smart and him split equal time.  Thomas was ranked that high because he was playing a lot of one on one ball, Harden and Westbrook.

[hodgy03038]

We made it to the conference finals and lost but we got there. I don't want to blow it up and go "all young" for years and years and be like the Sixers. Eventually you need to actually try to win it. They were close this year. Add a #1 and add a high profile free agent and with a little luck maybe they can win the eastern conference.

[Darío SpanishFan]

Why would Hayward sign here? We'd be the Twolves, with less pure talent.

Trading IT plus two #1s for a mediocre center, Tatum, and a hit-or-miss big man prospect isn't the path to future contention.

Letting him go for nothing because you can't afford to resign him isn't either.  Tough choices for DA.  I'm not a fan of trading IT, but something has to give.

We can afford to resign him.

Are we convinced he can be the starting PG of a championship team? That's the question.

I like the OP creativity to go ahead with a future 10-year contention plan. TP.

[ThaPreacher]

That's a good return on Thomas if you break it down.  Considering both of our picks would be in the late picks, Thomas is going to want a big deal and we'd be able to keep younger players that play better overall, being able to keep Bradley and Smart

How late would those picks be without IT?

Also, how do Smart and AB "play better overall"?  IT was voted a top-4 guard last year, behind three contenders for MVP (Harden, Westbrook, Curry).

Well certainly, AB has to be in the discussion for playing better overall: offense+defense=overall.
But Smart is a role player. IT is an all-star.
I think Ainge wants to keep IT and AB. However, with Danny Ainge- no one is untradeable.

[Roy H.]

Why would Hayward sign here? We'd be the Twolves, with less pure talent.

Trading IT plus two #1s for a mediocre center, Tatum, and a hit-or-miss big man prospect isn't the path to future contention.

Letting him go for nothing because you can't afford to resign him isn't either.  Tough choices for DA.  I'm not a fan of trading IT, but something has to give.

We can afford to resign him.

Are we convinced he can be the starting PG of a championship team? That's the question.

I like the OP creativity to go ahead with a future 10-year contention plan. TP.

To reiterate your argument from another thread, how is a poorly performing second year Rondo good enough to start on a title team, but IT isn't?

[Erik]

Why would the lakers trade their #2 pick to get a guy with a 4 year window on a team that currently has a 10 year window. This trade is nonsense, but for the lakers. If ainge got this deal done, hed be immortalized.