Poll: Love or hate Bradley trade

[More Banners]

I am not in the camp that 2 years of Morris is better than 1 year of Avery. 

I thought he would give a sizeable discount to play with Boston his whole career, and even if not, I believe AB playing out his current contract, with no return would have been preferable to this trade return.  Our title chances this year, while small, took a hit with this trade.  With Avery, we gave GS fits.  Why not just keep him, and let him go get his money next year? 

I was hoping Crowder was the one traded, contract notwithstanding.   He regressed last year.

I agree mostly. I could see Smart replacing Bradley as he had Tony Allen before. I like Bradley best.

But Morris is the type of guy to do the dirty work on a team of stars. I'm hoping Brown starts with Morris, et al. If Brown looks good, we could be sneaky good. He's not quite a quick decision maker though. But ooh, we could have the makings of something if we get contributions from Brown, Tatum, and Rozier (for Brad's 4-guard offense).  And a Smart/Crowder/Morris lineup might need bail after the game.  That's physical defense.

[Jvalin]

Don't necessarily hate it, but I certainly don't like it.

- Didn't want us to trade Bradley
- M. Morris and Horford may be the worst rebounding duo (PF-C) in the league
- It's higly likely KCP ends up in Brooklyn which hurts our Brooklyn 2018 pick (perhaps the most valuable asset we have right now)
- I know it's not a big deal, but why on earth did we give the Pistons a second rounder? I mean, Bradley for M. Morris straight up would have been bad enough.


I think it's pretty safe to say we 've lost the trade. For what it's worth, most Pistons fans believe we got fleeced.

https://www.detroitbadboys.com/2017/7/7/15934354/2017-nba-trade-rumors-celtics-avery-bradley-pistons-marcus-morris

As I've said these last days, after signing Hayward with no cap space, we had ZERO leverage in trades. People held the opposite, but it was clear we had to make a deal soon and that's why the Jazz wanted to receive Crowder with no assets in compensation.

So we had to make the first "just bad" trade around there.

- We all knew the C's wanted to sign Hayward and they needed max cap space to do so.
- We all knew IT, AB and Smart are entering the final year of their contract.
- We all knew the C's couldn't just resign all 3 of them.

Danny should have planned ahead. Apparently he did not, therefore we ended up having absolutely no leverage in trades. That's Danny's fault. Worst case scenario, we should have traded one of Smart-AB on draft night (by then we knew that the cap projection had been reduced to $99 million). I bet we would have gotten a far better return than Morris.

Depends on the future pick. Morris is a win now option on a rookie scale-like contract. I don't think teams were lined up to give us a lottery pick for an expiring AB.

I also hope Tatum (and Brown) get lots of playing time...but I want them to earn it. There is so much promise between them.

A year ago, George Hill got traded for #12. Ibaka got traded for #11 (Sabonis) + two other assets. Both Hill and Ibaka were expirings. Again, if Danny had planned ahead, I bet we would have gotten a far better return than Morris.

I thought someone reported that Boston was trying to gauge interest in Bradley and Crowder during the draft. I can't find a link tho.

Gauging interest means nothing. Danny should have pulled the trigger. Worst case scenario keep Crowder (cause Hayward wasn't a done deal at the time) and trade one of AB/Smart for a draft pick. Common sense says the more you postpone the decision the less valuable the return becomes.

[Forza Juventus]

Don't necessarily hate it, but I certainly don't like it.

- Didn't want us to trade Bradley
- M. Morris and Horford may be the worst rebounding duo (PF-C) in the league
- It's higly likely KCP ends up in Brooklyn which hurts our Brooklyn 2018 pick (perhaps the most valuable asset we have right now)
- I know it's not a big deal, but why on earth did we give the Pistons a second rounder? I mean, Bradley for M. Morris straight up would have been bad enough.


I think it's pretty safe to say we 've lost the trade. For what it's worth, most Pistons fans believe we got fleeced.

https://www.detroitbadboys.com/2017/7/7/15934354/2017-nba-trade-rumors-celtics-avery-bradley-pistons-marcus-morris

As I've said these last days, after signing Hayward with no cap space, we had ZERO leverage in trades. People held the opposite, but it was clear we had to make a deal soon and that's why the Jazz wanted to receive Crowder with no assets in compensation.

So we had to make the first "just bad" trade around there.

- We all knew the C's wanted to sign Hayward and they needed max cap space to do so.
- We all knew IT, AB and Smart are entering the final year of their contract.
- We all knew the C's couldn't just resign all 3 of them.

Danny should have planned ahead. Apparently he did not, therefore we ended up having absolutely no leverage in trades. That's Danny's fault. Worst case scenario, we should have traded one of Smart-AB on draft night (by then we knew that the cap projection had been reduced to $99 million). I bet we would have gotten a far better return than Morris.

Depends on the future pick. Morris is a win now option on a rookie scale-like contract. I don't think teams were lined up to give us a lottery pick for an expiring AB.

I also hope Tatum (and Brown) get lots of playing time...but I want them to earn it. There is so much promise between them.

A year ago, George Hill got traded for #12. Ibaka got traded for #11 (Sabonis) + two other assets. Both Hill and Ibaka were expirings. Again, if Danny had planned ahead, I bet we would have gotten a far better return than Morris.

I thought someone reported that Boston was trying to gauge interest in Bradley and Crowder during the draft. I can't find a link tho.

Gauging interest means nothing. Danny should have pulled the trigger. Worst case scenario keep Crowder (cause Hayward wasn't a done deal at the time) and trade one of AB/Smart for a draft pick. Common sense says the more you postpone the decision the less valuable the return becomes.

I don't disagree but an attractive offer might have not been on the table. Anything later than a lottery pick is probably not better than Marcus Morris anyway.

[LilRip]

Not a huge fan but I don't hate it so I voted Mixed.

MM looks like he could replace KO maybe? And we needed the cap space. Personally, I would've preferred to see Crowder go but this may have been a financial reason more than anything. Crowder is signed on longer. That allows the cap to rise a bit more. If DA trades Crowder, there still would've been a decent risk he'd lose AB next year to the highest bidder. Then he'd be out two of his (former) starters.

[CelticsFanFromNYC]

I feel like people are forgetting that  we were trying to get PG13 and Hayward wasnt ever a for sure thing. What if we got none and traded AB prior?I think we played the hands as best as we could. We won the top prize and AB became a sacrifice that will lead to success. This imperfection move was much needed and wisely orchestrated with the hand which was dealt

[Vermont Green]

We essentially have traded Avery Bradley so we can sign Hayward.  This deal got us a badly needed PF and allowed not to have to give away Rozier to Utah.  I don't get why people are upset about this.

The same people who are upset that we have traded Avery Bradley for cap space to sign Hayward are also screaming that we some how blew it with the Paul George trade.  The George trade would have included Bradley plus other starters and draft picks.  Tons more.

This trade is the collateral damage of getting Hayward.  The damage would have been far worse if we had traded for George.  I don't understand the angst.  You wanted Hayward.  You got him.  This is part of the cost.

[Jvalin]

I feel like people are forgetting that  we were trying to get PG13 and Hayward wasnt ever a for sure thing. What if we got none and traded AB prior?I think we played the hands as best as we could. We won the top prize and AB became a sacrifice that will lead to success. This imperfection move was much needed and wisely orchestrated with the hand which was dealt

We had to trade one of AB-Smart-IT anyway cause we couldn't just resign all 3 of them. Judging by results, our #1 target was Hayward. We were willing to wait for him to announce his decision, even at the cost of losing both George and Butler. If we really wanted to trade for PG/Butler/Boogie we would have done it by now. Ainge didn't want to sacrifice the Brooklyn/LA-Sac picks (and for what it's worth I'm perfectly fine with it).

Don't necessarily hate it, but I certainly don't like it.

- Didn't want us to trade Bradley
- M. Morris and Horford may be the worst rebounding duo (PF-C) in the league
- It's higly likely KCP ends up in Brooklyn which hurts our Brooklyn 2018 pick (perhaps the most valuable asset we have right now)
- I know it's not a big deal, but why on earth did we give the Pistons a second rounder? I mean, Bradley for M. Morris straight up would have been bad enough.


I think it's pretty safe to say we 've lost the trade. For what it's worth, most Pistons fans believe we got fleeced.

https://www.detroitbadboys.com/2017/7/7/15934354/2017-nba-trade-rumors-celtics-avery-bradley-pistons-marcus-morris

As I've said these last days, after signing Hayward with no cap space, we had ZERO leverage in trades. People held the opposite, but it was clear we had to make a deal soon and that's why the Jazz wanted to receive Crowder with no assets in compensation.

So we had to make the first "just bad" trade around there.

- We all knew the C's wanted to sign Hayward and they needed max cap space to do so.
- We all knew IT, AB and Smart are entering the final year of their contract.
- We all knew the C's couldn't just resign all 3 of them.

Danny should have planned ahead. Apparently he did not, therefore we ended up having absolutely no leverage in trades. That's Danny's fault. Worst case scenario, we should have traded one of Smart-AB on draft night (by then we knew that the cap projection had been reduced to $99 million). I bet we would have gotten a far better return than Morris.

Depends on the future pick. Morris is a win now option on a rookie scale-like contract. I don't think teams were lined up to give us a lottery pick for an expiring AB.

I also hope Tatum (and Brown) get lots of playing time...but I want them to earn it. There is so much promise between them.

A year ago, George Hill got traded for #12. Ibaka got traded for #11 (Sabonis) + two other assets. Both Hill and Ibaka were expirings. Again, if Danny had planned ahead, I bet we would have gotten a far better return than Morris.

I thought someone reported that Boston was trying to gauge interest in Bradley and Crowder during the draft. I can't find a link tho.

Gauging interest means nothing. Danny should have pulled the trigger. Worst case scenario keep Crowder (cause Hayward wasn't a done deal at the time) and trade one of AB/Smart for a draft pick. Common sense says the more you postpone the decision the less valuable the return becomes.

I don't disagree but an attractive offer might have not been on the table. Anything later than a lottery pick is probably not better than Marcus Morris anyway.

Then make the Pistons trade on draft night. What's the point in delaying the inevitable? At the very least, I bet we wouldn't have had to include a second rounder to make the job done.

[KJ33]

Can't assess this trade in a vacuum during this current offseason.  Hearing Detroit fans say we got fleeced makes me laugh.  We had to do something in order to create the cap room to sign Hayward, so the question comes down to this, is Hayward/Morris an upgrade over Bradley/Olynyk?

To me the clear answer is yes, so by that standard I like the trade.  I didn't want to lose Bradley, as it stands alone, but I am in favor of the roster makeover that DA has begun with acquiring Tatum, Hayward and Morris and saying goodbye to Amir, Olynyk and Bradley. 

The roster as it stands is upgraded from last year, and DA is probably not done.

Ironically, I am assigned Bradley in my profile, will I get Morris now?  Lol.

[RockinRyA]

I hate it just for the fact that I have an emotional attachment on him.

Good thing I already prepared for him to leave since early last season.

[RockinRyA]

Can't assess this trade in a vacuum during this current offseason.  Hearing Detroit fans say we got fleeced makes me laugh.  We had to do something in order to create the cap room to sign Hayward, so the question comes down to this, is Hayward/Morris an upgrade over Bradley/Olynyk?

To me the clear answer is yes, so by that standard I like the trade.  I didn't want to lose Bradley, as it stands alone, but I am in favor of the roster makeover that DA has begun with acquiring Tatum, Hayward and Morris and saying goodbye to Amir, Olynyk and Bradley. 

The roster as it stands is upgraded from last year, and DA is probably not done.

Ironically, I am assigned Bradley in my profile, will I get Morris now?  Lol.

If anyone got fleeced it was them. Bradley is a rental, esp since they might not make the playoffs. There's no way Bradley is going to re-sign with them.

[Surferdad]

Can't assess this trade in a vacuum during this current offseason.  Hearing Detroit fans say we got fleeced makes me laugh.  We had to do something in order to create the cap room to sign Hayward, so the question comes down to this, is Hayward/Morris an upgrade over Bradley/Olynyk?

To me the clear answer is yes, so by that standard I like the trade.  I didn't want to lose Bradley, as it stands alone, but I am in favor of the roster makeover that DA has begun with acquiring Tatum, Hayward and Morris and saying goodbye to Amir, Olynyk and Bradley. 

The roster as it stands is upgraded from last year, and DA is probably not done.

Ironically, I am assigned Bradley in my profile, will I get Morris now?  Lol.

If anyone got fleeced it was them. Bradley is a rental, esp since they might not make the playoffs. There's no way Bradley is going to re-sign with them.

Detroit "won" the trade based on talent and overall return, IMO.  Bradley is better than Morris plus they got a 2nd round pick.  This kind of thing happens all the time, witness the Paul George trade or the DeMarcus Cousins trade.  But talent is not the only reason to make a trade.  Let Detroit fans think whatever they want.

[KJ33]

Can't assess this trade in a vacuum during this current offseason.  Hearing Detroit fans say we got fleeced makes me laugh.  We had to do something in order to create the cap room to sign Hayward, so the question comes down to this, is Hayward/Morris an upgrade over Bradley/Olynyk?

To me the clear answer is yes, so by that standard I like the trade.  I didn't want to lose Bradley, as it stands alone, but I am in favor of the roster makeover that DA has begun with acquiring Tatum, Hayward and Morris and saying goodbye to Amir, Olynyk and Bradley. 

The roster as it stands is upgraded from last year, and DA is probably not done.

Ironically, I am assigned Bradley in my profile, will I get Morris now?  Lol.

If anyone got fleeced it was them. Bradley is a rental, esp since they might not make the playoffs. There's no way Bradley is going to re-sign with them.

Detroit "won" the trade based on talent and overall return, IMO.  Bradley is better than Morris plus they got a 2nd round pick.  This kind of thing happens all the time, witness the Paul George trade or the DeMarcus Cousins trade.  But talent is not the only reason to make a trade.  Let Detroit fans think whatever they want.

Detroit may have "won" this particular trade, although even that is debatable, but so what?  The entire point of my post was to say it is irrelevant to judge who won this trade.  This was but one of a series of transactions that Danny is engaging in this offseason.  The better evaluation is whether or not the C's are better after the aggregate of moves.  It seems obvious to me the answer is yes.  I did see a headline on a video I saw on ESPN, that I did not bother to watch, where the topic was did the C's get worse after draft, Hayward, Bradley, etc.  Frankly, it strains credibility to suggest they got worse.  Bradley, Olynyk, Amir and Zeller all did good things for the team in the last few years.  But the roster needed an upgrade of talent, and adding Hayward, and to a lesser extent Tatum and Morris, most certainly did that. 

[Surferdad]

Can't assess this trade in a vacuum during this current offseason.  Hearing Detroit fans say we got fleeced makes me laugh.  We had to do something in order to create the cap room to sign Hayward, so the question comes down to this, is Hayward/Morris an upgrade over Bradley/Olynyk?

To me the clear answer is yes, so by that standard I like the trade.  I didn't want to lose Bradley, as it stands alone, but I am in favor of the roster makeover that DA has begun with acquiring Tatum, Hayward and Morris and saying goodbye to Amir, Olynyk and Bradley. 

The roster as it stands is upgraded from last year, and DA is probably not done.

Ironically, I am assigned Bradley in my profile, will I get Morris now?  Lol.

If anyone got fleeced it was them. Bradley is a rental, esp since they might not make the playoffs. There's no way Bradley is going to re-sign with them.

Detroit "won" the trade based on talent and overall return, IMO.  Bradley is better than Morris plus they got a 2nd round pick.  This kind of thing happens all the time, witness the Paul George trade or the DeMarcus Cousins trade.  But talent is not the only reason to make a trade.  Let Detroit fans think whatever they want.

Detroit may have "won" this particular trade, although even that is debatable, but so what?  The entire point of my post was to say it is irrelevant to judge who won this trade.  This was but one of a series of transactions that Danny is engaging in this offseason.  The better evaluation is whether or not the C's are better after the aggregate of moves. It seems obvious to me the answer is yes.  I did see a headline on a video I saw on ESPN, that I did not bother to watch, where the topic was did the C's get worse after draft, Hayward, Bradley, etc.  Frankly, it strains credibility to suggest they got worse.  Bradley, Olynyk, Amir and Zeller all did good things for the team in the last few years.  But the roster needed an upgrade of talent, and adding Hayward, and to a lesser extent Tatum and Morris, most certainly did that.

Agreed, TP for that.  However, I don't think they are done yet.  The trade helps balance the roster, but I still see some imbalance.  I'm not counting on any of the rookies, other than Tatum.  Think about that.  Need another big man off the bench.

[SHAQATTACK]

don't love it .  Haywood is on board now,  something had to give.   Danny could not have traded pieces until he has Gordons commitment.  Then the rest of the league know they got you over a barrell and got got to drop assets.  AB was set for,his career payday , he has it comming , Celtics can't compete and give it to him. He was facing leaving most likely anyway.

Given the timing and difficult situation the trade solved the Hayward problem.  AB is part of the assets lost to obntain Hayward.  Which overall seems acceptable in a sad way.

[Surferdad]

don't love it .  Haywood is on board now,  something had to give.   Danny could not have traded pieces until he has Gordons commitment.  Then the rest of the league know they got you over a barrell and got got to drop assets.  AB was set for,his career payday , he has it comming , Celtics can't compete and give it to him. He was facing leaving most likely anyway.

Given the timing and difficult situation the trade solved the Hayward problem.  AB is part of the assets lost to obntain Hayward.  Which overall seems acceptable in a sad way.

Put more simply, would you have done this trade?

Bradley and a 2nd rounder for Hayward and Morris

All day.