What is the reason for the relative lack of interest in coming to the Celtics?

[Roy H.]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

You're leaving out the repercussions of our cap space, the limited window we've had with it... the first time in history at that as it is.

Doing trades that would hamper your cap space on players with limited years in their contract, while giving away assets, it's not an efficient way of going about things, particularly when the offers reported already have you overpaying as it is.

Once cap space is used up, and all the bargain contracts we have are gone (Crowder, Isaiah, Bradley), turning assets into legit players would become a higher priority. Trading before cap space is used limits your buying power.

We wouldn't have had to use any cap space to acquire George. It's still the July moratorium.

It's not about acquiring George, it's about our buying power afterwards.

It wouldn't have changed our buying power. We would have used our cap space, then traded for George. This happens all the time in the NBA. Teams routinely hold off on finalizing deals until cap matters can be worked out.  Indiana wasn't insisting on us completing the deal. Rather, they were asking for a commitment.

It would've because the rumor was we were extending him as well. Yes, the commitment to do so is not "final". but you're compromising a lot of assets you may not want to trade away or get rid-off if all you're getting out this is Paul George with no one to follow-up with, which then compromises your cap space for next season as well.

That's why I said specifically once all our bargain contracts go away (which is next season most probably really, with Thomas slated for a big contract). It's not always about "current season" math.

There wasn't a recent rumor, or a reliable one, about extending George. It would have been essentially impossible to sign Hayward, trade for George, and extend him.

[kraidstar]

6) All the other typical reasons: cold weather/state tax/racist history.

that's you biggest reason right there.

and while horford doesn't move the needle on the excitement factor for other players, I know for a fact that other players respect the hell outta IT. so I don't think it's the players here that no one wants to play with.

but I will say this the "racist history" that did happen here and players today clearly are aware of it. I find it such a weak reason/excuse for players to not want to come here and reinforces my opinion that todays players are weak minded, soft and pretty much idiots. because while they acknowledge that past they completely overlook that THIS ORGANIZATION was the 1st organization to look past color - Red wanted players.

so I can't respect most of these guys when they pick n' choose what history they choose to acknowledge. the "racist history" is a selective excuse, it's players trying to make themselves look like they care. when the real reason is the money and the location.

I agree the "racist" narrative is bizarre. I dunno if actual players believe this or if it's the media pushing it.

Every city in the US has a racist history, and judging by some of the accounts I've heard from Celtics players, back in the day things were worse on the road, where the black players often weren't even allowed in the same restaurants etc as the white ones.

I know the Tom Yawkey stuff with the Red Sox contributes to this, but that the whole city shouldn't be judged by one racist owner - especially considering the great things Auerbach and the Celtics organization did.

And LOL at any player who signs in Texas because Boston is too racist.

I hope you enjoy seeing the Stars and Bars plastered on the back of every other pickup truck, boys!

I bet a lot of this comes from the Magic vs Bird rivalry in the 80's. Like some perceive Boston as some sort of stalwart haven of white basketball. A lot of the folks who are in the media now grew up in that era and can't let go.

And, ironically, the city of the Lakers team which was perceived as "blacker", gets a pass, despite the horrible racist history of Los Angeles; before Magic even retired we witnessed the Rodney King/LAPD/race riot stuff. That was just a culmination of things that had been going on for a long time.

And yet you don't hear about LA's racist history when free agents are figuring out where to sign.

[JSD]

Baseball's Adam Jones and Red Sox ownership, in 2 separate instances within a week, lied about racism be touted at Fenway recently. Bet that didn't help.

[kraidstar]

I'm not gonna feel too sorry for the Celtics when they landed the #2 free agent last year, nearly bagged #1(KD) last year, and are a top-3 contender to get Hayward, the only real free agent star this year.

Are people not seeing the forest through the trees here? We're doing pretty well.

I'm not too worried about a washed-up Carmelo's last-ditch efforts at ring-chasing.

[mmmmm]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

I don't see any evidence that Danny was unwilling to trade role players for a superstar.  In fact the rumor was that he was willing to send Crowder plus one other _starter_ plus non-lottery pick(s) for George.   

But he wasn't willing to do so before he first finished his business with Hayward.  And that makes perfect sense because he can't do anything but cap-neutral moves until he knows whether he's going to sign Hayward.

It seems to me that some fans are confusing Danny needing to do things in a particular order (in order to manage his cap space) with "hesitation".

Perhaps some are, but we're not.  Boston been clamoring for years to land top tier talent.  When one becomes available, you do all you can to facilitate it -- ensure a contingency plan with Chi/Indy for post-hypothetical Hayward signing; related, be willing to modestly overpay (both returns were underwhelming); have evidence for Chi/Indy that Hayward is likely to sign with a Butler/PG addition in place, etc.  Point is that hesitation may/may not have been a contributing factor, but it shouldn't have been.

Uh?  You have no way of knowing what offers were proposed.  For all you know Danny _did_ make an 'overpay' offer contingent on IND waiting for Hayward to make his decision.    Whether he did or didn't seems irrelevant because the offer they impatiently jumped on makes even the most modest offer Danny was rumored to put out there seem like an overpay by comparison.

It seems very clear that IND simply wasn't willing to wait in order to get a better return.

[Roy H.]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

I don't see any evidence that Danny was unwilling to trade role players for a superstar.  In fact the rumor was that he was willing to send Crowder plus one other _starter_ plus non-lottery pick(s) for George.   

But he wasn't willing to do so before he first finished his business with Hayward.  And that makes perfect sense because he can't do anything but cap-neutral moves until he knows whether he's going to sign Hayward.

It seems to me that some fans are confusing Danny needing to do things in a particular order (in order to manage his cap space) with "hesitation".

Perhaps some are, but we're not.  Boston been clamoring for years to land top tier talent.  When one becomes available, you do all you can to facilitate it -- ensure a contingency plan with Chi/Indy for post-hypothetical Hayward signing; related, be willing to modestly overpay (both returns were underwhelming); have evidence for Chi/Indy that Hayward is likely to sign with a Butler/PG addition in place, etc.  Point is that hesitation may/may not have been a contributing factor, but it shouldn't have been.

Uh?  You have no way of knowing what offers were proposed.  For all you know Danny _did_ make an 'overpay' offer contingent on IND waiting for Hayward to make his decision.    Whether he did or didn't seems irrelevant because the offer they impatiently jumped on makes even the most modest offer Danny was rumored to put out there seem like an overpay by comparison.

It seems very clear that IND simply wasn't willing to wait in order to get a better return.

They were willing to wait, so long as they had a commitment. They're waiting right now.

And, yes, we do know within reasonable parameters what the offers were. Woj, Lowe and others have made it clear that the cost was pretty minimal (Crowder, Smart, non-lottery picks).

[kraidstar]

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

I don't see any evidence that Danny was unwilling to trade role players for a superstar.  In fact the rumor was that he was willing to send Crowder plus one other _starter_ plus non-lottery pick(s) for George.   

But he wasn't willing to do so before he first finished his business with Hayward.  And that makes perfect sense because he can't do anything but cap-neutral moves until he knows whether he's going to sign Hayward.

It seems to me that some fans are confusing Danny needing to do things in a particular order (in order to manage his cap space) with "hesitation".

TP - Thank you! I feel like people just do not understand this concept and it seems like they just keep glossing over it to keep bringing up Danny's incompetence.

For all we know, Danny may have been convinced to include the LAL/Sac pick in a trade for George (or Butler), but needed to make sure he signed Hayward first. If people are afraid of George busting out of here to LAL after the season with Hayward, imagine how they would feel if we didn't sign him (and therefore were not as competitive).

Fans "do not understand this concept" because it's not true. Indiana asked for a commitment, not for a trade to be submitted to the league office. The OKC trade hasn't even been finalized yet.

Is this really true? That we would not be willing to "commit" two starters (Crowder and Bradley) plus non-lottery 1sts before finding the outcome with Hayward? 

So does this mean that Ainge was only interested in George if he also knew he could get Hayward? Or that he wanted to have roster flexibility to work with, assuming the Hayward signing occurred?  I'd like to know which it was.

It remains a puzzle as to why Indiana had to draw the time deadline with Ainge on this, knowing that they were far more likely to get better value for George from Boston. It makes me suspect that the Celtics would not want to have pursued George if Hayward did not sign up. Or Houston was OKC was threatening to pull its offer. But that was such a bad offer...

Yes, it's true. For the life of me I can't understand why we wouldn't want George even if Hayward signs elsewhere. Sure, there's a risk we lose Jae, Smart and garbage picks for a rental. Butt, are we so scared as a franchise that we don't think we can convince PG to re-up? He'd be joining the #1 seed, and would be leaving money on the table if he joined LA.

If you take away Jae and Smart and add George, do we beat Cleveland?  If we kept those guys and added George, maybe.  Replace them with George?  No way.  And if he resigns a max deal, we have no space to add any significant free agents and still have to pay IT and Bradley, which likely puts us over the luxury tax.

So, your dream is to turn Boston into a capped out, taxpaying team that can't win a title?  Maybe you should aim a little higher.

Mike

TP

and

Durant>George
Curry>IT
Draymond>Horford
Klay>whoever

This is the cold hard truth. The only way we get better than the Warriors is if our younger players turn into stars. And by the time that happens Horford/IT etc would likely be on their last legs anyways.

LB33 was pretty much right when he said the Warriors checkmated the whole league.

Unless they suffer multiple major injuries, they are gonna be very tough to beat.

Waiting them out and rolling with a younger core is not a bad idea at all, though it does involve some delaying of gratification.

[mmmmm]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

You're leaving out the repercussions of our cap space, the limited window we've had with it... the first time in history at that as it is.

Doing trades that would hamper your cap space on players with limited years in their contract, while giving away assets, it's not an efficient way of going about things, particularly when the offers reported already have you overpaying as it is.

Once cap space is used up, and all the bargain contracts we have are gone (Crowder, Isaiah, Bradley), turning assets into legit players would become a higher priority. Trading before cap space is used limits your buying power.

We wouldn't have had to use any cap space to acquire George. It's still the July moratorium.

It's not about acquiring George, it's about our buying power afterwards.

It wouldn't have changed our buying power. We would have used our cap space, then traded for George. This happens all the time in the NBA. Teams routinely hold off on finalizing deals until cap matters can be worked out.  Indiana wasn't insisting on us completing the deal. Rather, they were asking for a commitment.

It would've because the rumor was we were extending him as well. Yes, the commitment to do so is not "final". but you're compromising a lot of assets you may not want to trade away or get rid-off if all you're getting out this is Paul George with no one to follow-up with, which then compromises your cap space for next season as well.

That's why I said specifically once all our bargain contracts go away (which is next season most probably really, with Thomas slated for a big contract). It's not always about "current season" math.

There wasn't a recent rumor, or a reliable one, about extending George. It would have been essentially impossible to sign Hayward, trade for George, and extend him.

That's not technically true.  An extension would definitely have been possible.  An extension could have been done either right before or after a trade of George or as part of the transaction.

However, an extension would likely not be in George's financial interest and thus completely unlikely.

A renegotiation, which would be necessary in order to actually change his base pay and give him a raise is what was essentially impossible.  Because that (a) could only happen after a trade (so could only be done by BOS, not IND) and (b) requires cap space (something we would not have in the event of a Hayward signing).

[saltlover]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

I don't see any evidence that Danny was unwilling to trade role players for a superstar.  In fact the rumor was that he was willing to send Crowder plus one other _starter_ plus non-lottery pick(s) for George.   

But he wasn't willing to do so before he first finished his business with Hayward.  And that makes perfect sense because he can't do anything but cap-neutral moves until he knows whether he's going to sign Hayward.

It seems to me that some fans are confusing Danny needing to do things in a particular order (in order to manage his cap space) with "hesitation".

Perhaps some are, but we're not.  Boston been clamoring for years to land top tier talent.  When one becomes available, you do all you can to facilitate it -- ensure a contingency plan with Chi/Indy for post-hypothetical Hayward signing; related, be willing to modestly overpay (both returns were underwhelming); have evidence for Chi/Indy that Hayward is likely to sign with a Butler/PG addition in place, etc.  Point is that hesitation may/may not have been a contributing factor, but it shouldn't have been.

Uh?  You have no way of knowing what offers were proposed.  For all you know Danny _did_ make an 'overpay' offer contingent on IND waiting for Hayward to make his decision.    Whether he did or didn't seems irrelevant because the offer they impatiently jumped on makes even the most modest offer Danny was rumored to put out there seem like an overpay by comparison.

It seems very clear that IND simply wasn't willing to wait in order to get a better return.

They were willing to wait, so long as they had a commitment. They're waiting right now.

And, yes, we do know within reasonable parameters what the offers were. Woj, Lowe and others have made it clear that the cost was pretty minimal (Crowder, Smart, non-lottery picks).

You keep harping on this Crowder-Smart deal, but that deal doesn't work for the salary cap after a Hayward signing.  So it wasn't really an option, unless Ainge was going to send along Bradley or Brown anyway just because the salaries have to match.

[Roy H.]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

I don't see any evidence that Danny was unwilling to trade role players for a superstar.  In fact the rumor was that he was willing to send Crowder plus one other _starter_ plus non-lottery pick(s) for George.   

But he wasn't willing to do so before he first finished his business with Hayward.  And that makes perfect sense because he can't do anything but cap-neutral moves until he knows whether he's going to sign Hayward.

It seems to me that some fans are confusing Danny needing to do things in a particular order (in order to manage his cap space) with "hesitation".

Perhaps some are, but we're not.  Boston been clamoring for years to land top tier talent.  When one becomes available, you do all you can to facilitate it -- ensure a contingency plan with Chi/Indy for post-hypothetical Hayward signing; related, be willing to modestly overpay (both returns were underwhelming); have evidence for Chi/Indy that Hayward is likely to sign with a Butler/PG addition in place, etc.  Point is that hesitation may/may not have been a contributing factor, but it shouldn't have been.

Uh?  You have no way of knowing what offers were proposed.  For all you know Danny _did_ make an 'overpay' offer contingent on IND waiting for Hayward to make his decision.    Whether he did or didn't seems irrelevant because the offer they impatiently jumped on makes even the most modest offer Danny was rumored to put out there seem like an overpay by comparison.

It seems very clear that IND simply wasn't willing to wait in order to get a better return.

They were willing to wait, so long as they had a commitment. They're waiting right now.

And, yes, we do know within reasonable parameters what the offers were. Woj, Lowe and others have made it clear that the cost was pretty minimal (Crowder, Smart, non-lottery picks).

You keep harping on this Crowder-Smart deal, but that deal doesn't work for the salary cap after a Hayward signing.  So it wasn't really an option, unless Ainge was going to send along Bradley or Brown anyway just because the salaries have to match.

Yes, I expect there was a concurrent side deal to bring it into cap compliance.

Or, Woj, Lowe and others were completely wrong.

[kraidstar]

Baseball's Adam Jones and Red Sox ownership, in 2 separate instances within a week, lied about racism be touted at Fenway recently. Bet that didn't help.

The sad thing is if that same incident happens in Arlington or Florida, no-one bats an eye.

Though I suppose the odds of encountering racist fans in Florida is low because the stadiums are usually empty 

And Boston's fanbase is very "vocal," shall we say. And passionate. So not only are there more of them, but the worst of them are going to be a lot drunker and a lot louder than most. A lot like Euro soccer fans.

Boston fans are conspicuous, which makes it easier for our enemies to slap labels on us.

[MBunge]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

I don't see any evidence that Danny was unwilling to trade role players for a superstar.  In fact the rumor was that he was willing to send Crowder plus one other _starter_ plus non-lottery pick(s) for George.   

But he wasn't willing to do so before he first finished his business with Hayward.  And that makes perfect sense because he can't do anything but cap-neutral moves until he knows whether he's going to sign Hayward.

It seems to me that some fans are confusing Danny needing to do things in a particular order (in order to manage his cap space) with "hesitation".

Perhaps some are, but we're not.  Boston been clamoring for years to land top tier talent.  When one becomes available, you do all you can to facilitate it -- ensure a contingency plan with Chi/Indy for post-hypothetical Hayward signing; related, be willing to modestly overpay (both returns were underwhelming); have evidence for Chi/Indy that Hayward is likely to sign with a Butler/PG addition in place, etc.  Point is that hesitation may/may not have been a contributing factor, but it shouldn't have been.

Uh?  You have no way of knowing what offers were proposed.  For all you know Danny _did_ make an 'overpay' offer contingent on IND waiting for Hayward to make his decision.    Whether he did or didn't seems irrelevant because the offer they impatiently jumped on makes even the most modest offer Danny was rumored to put out there seem like an overpay by comparison.

It seems very clear that IND simply wasn't willing to wait in order to get a better return.

They were willing to wait, so long as they had a commitment. They're waiting right now.

And, yes, we do know within reasonable parameters what the offers were. Woj, Lowe and others have made it clear that the cost was pretty minimal (Crowder, Smart, non-lottery picks).

You keep harping on this Crowder-Smart deal, but that deal doesn't work for the salary cap after a Hayward signing.  So it wasn't really an option, unless Ainge was going to send along Bradley or Brown anyway just because the salaries have to match.

Yes, I expect there was a concurrent side deal to bring it into cap compliance.

Or, Woj, Lowe and others were completely wrong.

So stop saying it was just Crowder and Smart if you KNOW it had to be more than that.

Mike

[mmmmm]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

I don't see any evidence that Danny was unwilling to trade role players for a superstar.  In fact the rumor was that he was willing to send Crowder plus one other _starter_ plus non-lottery pick(s) for George.   

But he wasn't willing to do so before he first finished his business with Hayward.  And that makes perfect sense because he can't do anything but cap-neutral moves until he knows whether he's going to sign Hayward.

It seems to me that some fans are confusing Danny needing to do things in a particular order (in order to manage his cap space) with "hesitation".

Perhaps some are, but we're not.  Boston been clamoring for years to land top tier talent.  When one becomes available, you do all you can to facilitate it -- ensure a contingency plan with Chi/Indy for post-hypothetical Hayward signing; related, be willing to modestly overpay (both returns were underwhelming); have evidence for Chi/Indy that Hayward is likely to sign with a Butler/PG addition in place, etc.  Point is that hesitation may/may not have been a contributing factor, but it shouldn't have been.

Uh?  You have no way of knowing what offers were proposed.  For all you know Danny _did_ make an 'overpay' offer contingent on IND waiting for Hayward to make his decision.    Whether he did or didn't seems irrelevant because the offer they impatiently jumped on makes even the most modest offer Danny was rumored to put out there seem like an overpay by comparison.

It seems very clear that IND simply wasn't willing to wait in order to get a better return.

They were willing to wait, so long as they had a commitment. They're waiting right now.

And, yes, we do know within reasonable parameters what the offers were. Woj, Lowe and others have made it clear that the cost was pretty minimal (Crowder, Smart, non-lottery picks).

You keep harping on this Crowder-Smart deal, but that deal doesn't work for the salary cap after a Hayward signing.  So it wasn't really an option, unless Ainge was going to send along Bradley or Brown anyway just because the salaries have to match.

Yes, I expect there was a concurrent side deal to bring it into cap compliance.

Or, Woj, Lowe and others were completely wrong.

Well.  Most of the time, they are.   Even the 'best' of these sports journalist strike out most of the time with these rumors.

[Roy H.]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

That's the thing: it's incredibly unlikely that any of our young core / draft picks ever become as good as Paul George. It's virtually a certainty that none of Smart, Crowder and late firsts reach that level.

Championships are so rare that you have to take small / moderate risks. I get not wanting to deal a top-5 pick. I don't understand not being willing to trade role players for a superstar.

I don't see any evidence that Danny was unwilling to trade role players for a superstar.  In fact the rumor was that he was willing to send Crowder plus one other _starter_ plus non-lottery pick(s) for George.   

But he wasn't willing to do so before he first finished his business with Hayward.  And that makes perfect sense because he can't do anything but cap-neutral moves until he knows whether he's going to sign Hayward.

It seems to me that some fans are confusing Danny needing to do things in a particular order (in order to manage his cap space) with "hesitation".

Perhaps some are, but we're not.  Boston been clamoring for years to land top tier talent.  When one becomes available, you do all you can to facilitate it -- ensure a contingency plan with Chi/Indy for post-hypothetical Hayward signing; related, be willing to modestly overpay (both returns were underwhelming); have evidence for Chi/Indy that Hayward is likely to sign with a Butler/PG addition in place, etc.  Point is that hesitation may/may not have been a contributing factor, but it shouldn't have been.

Uh?  You have no way of knowing what offers were proposed.  For all you know Danny _did_ make an 'overpay' offer contingent on IND waiting for Hayward to make his decision.    Whether he did or didn't seems irrelevant because the offer they impatiently jumped on makes even the most modest offer Danny was rumored to put out there seem like an overpay by comparison.

It seems very clear that IND simply wasn't willing to wait in order to get a better return.

They were willing to wait, so long as they had a commitment. They're waiting right now.

And, yes, we do know within reasonable parameters what the offers were. Woj, Lowe and others have made it clear that the cost was pretty minimal (Crowder, Smart, non-lottery picks).

You keep harping on this Crowder-Smart deal, but that deal doesn't work for the salary cap after a Hayward signing.  So it wasn't really an option, unless Ainge was going to send along Bradley or Brown anyway just because the salaries have to match.

Yes, I expect there was a concurrent side deal to bring it into cap compliance.

Or, Woj, Lowe and others were completely wrong.

Well.  Most of the time, they are.   Even the 'best' of these sports journalist strike out most of the time with these rumors.

Not really. When Woj reports something factual, he's almost always right.

[cousytoheinsohn]

Roy's not happy with Ainge right now.  If we miss on Hayward, the forum may be shut down for a day or two...

And all things considered, I agree.  If I'm understanding correctly, Boston chose not to trade #3 for Butler; Smart, Crowder, and multiple non-lotto firsts for George.  If true, that's pretty reckless.

is there any proof that is exactly what we offered? suppose PG bailed?

this is the part that blows my mind...


why are so many people ok with a rental of pg?

if he walks then we're left without smart crowder and probably the memphis pick(underrated pick)

i'm SO FREAKING GLAD danny is our gm

You act like I'm stating a desire for an impulsive, win-now move.  It's clear to any one with a brain that you don't make the move without PG signing an extension, or a strong guarantee that he'd re-sign.  Clearly there are moving parts.  But if a concerted effort wasn't made to snag PG/Butler, or a reasonable offer was turned down, then that very well could've been a mistake.  It's also entirely possible that four straight top-5 picks could not result in a player of their caliber.

Great back and forth, as always, leaving no salient issue unexamined, and with feeling, as is the grand tradition around here.

There's still so much to the present multiple scenarios we have no way of knowing about [or divining].

Enjoy the rest of the ride, if that's possible at this point, I guess. A resolution, if not all the answers, is coming soon. And, regardless, there will always be certain unanswerables at any given point in time.

Just for starters, for instance, we do wonder to what extent Brad is/has been influencing this most recent part of "the process."

What might he know about Paul George from his sources and time spent in Indiana that makes him and Danny apparently less than ecstatic regarding bringing Paul to Boston?

And, how much of management's overall cautiousness, if that's what it is, has to do with believing in the ultimate worth and wisdom of implementing the essentially underdog, home-brewed "Butler paradigm" with the Celts; i.e., through world-class, state-of-the-art coaching allied with the right kind of high-character, multi-skilled player, plus an assumed hefty bunch of old-fashioned upstart pluck, great things can and will happen.

It's an irresistible story, for sure. It works regularly in the movies and occasionally in real life. Maybe it'll work here. It seems to be working so far. It's fascinating to watch. And discuss, of course.

tarheelsxiii's last sentence here could very well loom really large over all the proceedings moving forward and for quite a while.