The C's had ZERO leverage in trades for Bradley. That's 100% Danny's fault.

[hwangjini_1]

For all we know, Gordon Hayward was willing to take 300k less to keep Bradley but danny wanted to clear more to keep rozier, bring yabusele over and balance the team position wise.  If that was the case he wasn't really under the gun (bc he had an out) but preferred to deal Bradley anyway.  Well probably never know.

i am just curious, but since what you state seems to be total conjecture and without any sources (if you do have them, please share them with us) the assumptions above are not strong.

we would have to assume that ainge did not think about asking for hayward to take less. we would need to assume that ainge doesnt see the value of bradley and preferred to deal him.

perhaps, but i am not seeing it.

[KG Living Legend]

 Wrong, Wrong, and also Wrong.

 What did this team more than anything? Besides a go to score? BTW we got two of those Hayward, Tatum.

 The answer is a big tough Power forward. Guess what? We are bringing in Over 500 pounds and 13 feet of PFs in Morris and now Yabu.

 We already took one of Philly's best assets Laker pick, And got our guy Tatum the Real #1 pick in this class.

 We got a Three point shooting beast in Morris from Detroit, and we stole Hayward from the Jazz, and your complaining?

[Roy H.]

Imagine the reaction if we traded AB and then Hayward signed in Utah.

For all we know, Danny had some trades lined up that teams wouldn't wait on.

[BringToughnessBack]

Can you imagine this board if we had traded Bradley at draft time and did not sign Hayward or get George...this place would have erupted with "Fire Ainge. Ainge is incompetent. How could Ainge trade Bradley without knowing for sure he would get Hayward?...etc....." LOL...you cannot win in this situation. He did the only thing he could do in this situation. All things considered, Tatum, Hayward and Morris, Yabu, Zizic, Lakers pick are being added and we lose Bradley. It feels to me more size and rebounding and end of game scoring you can count on vs loss of a great player like bradley who did a bit of everything. Feels like a winning situation to me

No competent GM would have risked trading Bradley prior to a signed Free Agent.....thank God we have one that knows what he is doing.

[max215]

Hindsight is 20/20.   

We already knew that one of Bradley-Smart-IT had to be traded cause we couldn't just resign all 3 of them. What's the point in delaying the inevitable? Worst case scenario, Danny should have pulled the trigger on draft night. Common sense says the more you postpone the decision the less valuable the return becomes.



@ Darío SpanishFan, Moranis

Saric was just an example. I bet there would have been plenty of teams willing to trade for AB at the deadline. My point is that if Danny had planned ahead, we would have gotten a far better return than Morris.

This isn't even true, though. We didn't know we'd have to move one of these guys until the cap figure came in. Ainge has only known he'd have to trade one of Bradley/Crowder/Smart for a short amount of time.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

Can you imagine this board if we had traded Bradley at draft time and did not sign Hayward or get George...this place would have erupted with "Fire Ainge. Ainge is incompetent. How could Ainge trade Bradley without knowing for sure he would get Hayward?...etc....." LOL...you cannot win in this situation. He did the only thing he could do in this situation. All things considered, Tatum, Hayward and Morris, Yabu, Zizic, Lakers pick are being added and we lose Bradley. It feels to me more size and rebounding and end of game scoring you can count on vs loss of a great player like bradley who did a bit of everything. Feels like a winning situation to me

No competent GM would have risked trading Bradley prior to a signed Free Agent.....thank God we have one that knows what he is doing.

this board is bi-polar LOL

[Bobshot]

Good enough deal. He had no cap money to sign him next year, and he had a cap need right now which was filled with the trade. He got a guy he always liked in return.

I would have preferred shaving those big contracts to Hayward and Horford to address the cap, but maybe that didn't work. The stars have got to realize that max money is hard to achieve on a team with several max players trying to win a Championship. Something has to give., IT will find that out next year.

How many $30M stars can you fill in a $99M cap space? The answer is 2, and if you  want to go 3,  you have to go over the cap. Wyc will probably have to do that next year to sign IT.

[Cman]

Danny Ainge has built a contender without blowing up the budget, and has retained some youth together with experience. We still have multiple future draft picks from other teams, including potentially two lottery picks.

For this, Danny Ainge gets blasted, arguably for having to throw in a 2nd rounder in a trade.

Yep, its the good old Celticsblog!

[Roy H.]

For all we know, Gordon Hayward was willing to take 300k less to keep Bradley but danny wanted to clear more to keep rozier, bring yabusele over and balance the team position wise.  If that was the case he wasn't really under the gun (bc he had an out) but preferred to deal Bradley anyway.  Well probably never know.

i am just curious, but since what you state seems to be total conjecture and without any sources (if you do have them, please share them with us) the assumptions above are not strong.

we would have to assume that ainge did not think about asking for hayward to take less. we would need to assume that ainge doesnt see the value of bradley and preferred to deal him.

perhaps, but i am not seeing it.

I read the same thing, maybe from Steve Kyler? Hayward taking a little less was an option, but we still would have lost Jackson and Rozier, and would have had to keep Yabu abroad (something Danny didn't want to do).

Steve Kyler @stevekylerNBA
·
Jul 7

It was an option if Celtics wanted it, they wanted to make a trade to shore up front court and depth chart

Dan Silletti @Dan_Silletti
Replying to @stevekylerNBA
Why hasn't anyone brought up Hayward taking less than the max to keep Bradley?

[j804]

For all we know, Gordon Hayward was willing to take 300k less to keep Bradley but danny wanted to clear more to keep rozier, bring yabusele over and balance the team position wise.  If that was the case he wasn't really under the gun (bc he had an out) but preferred to deal Bradley anyway.  Well probably never know.

i am just curious, but since what you state seems to be total conjecture and without any sources (if you do have them, please share them with us) the assumptions above are not strong.

we would have to assume that ainge did not think about asking for hayward to take less. we would need to assume that ainge doesnt see the value of bradley and preferred to deal him.

perhaps, but i am not seeing it.

I doubt he asked offering a max in negotiations then asking him to take less after the fact just seems like bad business

[RockinRyA]

Hindsight is 20/20.   

We already knew that one of Bradley-Smart-IT had to be traded cause we couldn't just resign all 3 of them. What's the point in delaying the inevitable? Worst case scenario, Danny should have pulled the trigger on draft night. Common sense says the more you postpone the decision the less valuable the return becomes.



@ Darío SpanishFan, Moranis

Saric was just an example. I bet there would have been plenty of teams willing to trade for AB at the deadline. My point is that if Danny had planned ahead, we would have gotten a far better return than Morris.

Common sense also tells you that if we traded Bradley at the deadline, we wouldnt make the ECF, which means no Hayward.

Trading Bradley before we got Hayward is another dumb move. If Hayward doesnt sign, you are left with with no Bradley and no Hayward. The teams that needed Bradley have no real assets to give up for a rental (bradley is a rental, so how did the Pistons win the trade again?).

Also another factor that you did not consider was the cap being below expectations. If the cap was at the expected amount, Bradley wouldnt have to be traded to match salaries.

Its easy being a GM in 2k or in your armchair. But its really hard in real life. You say without a single thought that Bradley should be traded, but you dont know what the offers are, and how it will affect the team.

[footey]

I think the trade is a net upgrade position wise and salary wise. Don't understand all the complaining other than losing a great guy like Avery a year early. Move on.

[Smartacus]

If you think Danny Ainge -one of the most creative and well prepared GM's in the league- lost Bradley because he didn't plan well enough, it's hard to figure out where to start discussing. Do you think we just lucked into a top 3 team with a top 3 future outlook in the league? DA has been incredible in the post KG/Pierce era and his best accomplishments are probably the deals he rejected.

As for the present it remains to be seen if we'd be better or worse with Avery but it's not like we can't fill the void left by him with Smart/Brown/Tatum. Parts of Bradley's game are irreplaceable(All world PG defense, consistent 3 point barrage) but parts of Bradley were holding us back(lack of size to defend wings on switches, difficulty creating separation and finishing at the rim). Bradley was an excellent fit for his time here but we've got younger guys ready to step in and a top 25 player in Hayward who'll need all the touches we can give him.

Add on to that Marcus Morris and I just have trouble seeing how people think this summer has been anything other than a masterpiece. In DA I trust.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Meh.

[Boris Badenov]

The option Danny pursued looks pretty unappealing until you compare it to the other options.