Superstar Trades-Salary matching for max contract stars like AD is an issue

[Roy H.]

Suprised to see that most people think that the answer is to trade Horford.

Just wondering how would that reflect on Boston? Trading a max free agent 1 and a half seasons into his contract.

Obviously if AD is avaible you do it, just wonder if agents and potential free agents might get down on Danny for doing that.

It's extraordinarily unlikely they'd trade Davis at the deadline. They'd probably fire Gentry first. So, assume this is next summer. Horford will have played half his contract. I don't think free agents really care about that.

And, what's with the notion that trading for Davis would be a "complete win now" move? Davis will be 25 next summer. Horford will be 32. You don't make roster moves based upon what is better for Horford's window.

Because there's no way you could trade for Davis without giving up a ton of future assets.  At that point, your choices are to either go all in or try to build around AD without any good future picks (and likely without one of Jayson/Jaylen

So?  We'd still have a core of Davis / Hayward / IT / Brown that would be sustainable well into the future. Danny could build around that core without the burden of four max contracts.

[BitterJim]

Suprised to see that most people think that the answer is to trade Horford.

Just wondering how would that reflect on Boston? Trading a max free agent 1 and a half seasons into his contract.

Obviously if AD is avaible you do it, just wonder if agents and potential free agents might get down on Danny for doing that.

It's extraordinarily unlikely they'd trade Davis at the deadline. They'd probably fire Gentry first. So, assume this is next summer. Horford will have played half his contract. I don't think free agents really care about that.

And, what's with the notion that trading for Davis would be a "complete win now" move? Davis will be 25 next summer. Horford will be 32. You don't make roster moves based upon what is better for Horford's window.

Because there's no way you could trade for Davis without giving up a ton of future assets.  At that point, your choices are to either go all in or try to build around AD without any good future picks (and likely without one of Jayson/Jaylen

So?  We'd still have a core of Davis / Hayward / IT / Brown that would be sustainable well into the future. Danny could build around that core without the burden of four max contracts.

Build around it with what? We'd be over the cap without any major assets.  Unless that core is good enough to win now (which I have my doubts about), you would need Brown to grow enough to replace IT's eventual dropoff in order to even stay at the same level.  Having 3 max contracts vs. 4 doesn't really gain you any flexibility

[Roy H.]

Suprised to see that most people think that the answer is to trade Horford.

Just wondering how would that reflect on Boston? Trading a max free agent 1 and a half seasons into his contract.

Obviously if AD is avaible you do it, just wonder if agents and potential free agents might get down on Danny for doing that.

It's extraordinarily unlikely they'd trade Davis at the deadline. They'd probably fire Gentry first. So, assume this is next summer. Horford will have played half his contract. I don't think free agents really care about that.

And, what's with the notion that trading for Davis would be a "complete win now" move? Davis will be 25 next summer. Horford will be 32. You don't make roster moves based upon what is better for Horford's window.

Because there's no way you could trade for Davis without giving up a ton of future assets.  At that point, your choices are to either go all in or try to build around AD without any good future picks (and likely without one of Jayson/Jaylen

So?  We'd still have a core of Davis / Hayward / IT / Brown that would be sustainable well into the future. Danny could build around that core without the burden of four max contracts.

Build around it with what? We'd be over the cap without any major assets.  Unless that core is good enough to win now (which I have my doubts about), you would need Brown to grow enough to replace IT's eventual dropoff in order to even stay at the same level.  Having 3 max contracts vs. 4 doesn't really gain you any flexibility

How does any playoff team improve? Under your analysis, it seems hopeless.

[BitterJim]

Suprised to see that most people think that the answer is to trade Horford.

Just wondering how would that reflect on Boston? Trading a max free agent 1 and a half seasons into his contract.

Obviously if AD is avaible you do it, just wonder if agents and potential free agents might get down on Danny for doing that.

It's extraordinarily unlikely they'd trade Davis at the deadline. They'd probably fire Gentry first. So, assume this is next summer. Horford will have played half his contract. I don't think free agents really care about that.

And, what's with the notion that trading for Davis would be a "complete win now" move? Davis will be 25 next summer. Horford will be 32. You don't make roster moves based upon what is better for Horford's window.

Because there's no way you could trade for Davis without giving up a ton of future assets.  At that point, your choices are to either go all in or try to build around AD without any good future picks (and likely without one of Jayson/Jaylen

So?  We'd still have a core of Davis / Hayward / IT / Brown that would be sustainable well into the future. Danny could build around that core without the burden of four max contracts.

Build around it with what? We'd be over the cap without any major assets.  Unless that core is good enough to win now (which I have my doubts about), you would need Brown to grow enough to replace IT's eventual dropoff in order to even stay at the same level.  Having 3 max contracts vs. 4 doesn't really gain you any flexibility

How does any playoff team improve? Under your analysis, it seems hopeless.

By having flexibility (ie not 3 max contracts), or doing it slowly (and by not trading away players at Al's level).  But with IT getting toward the wrong side of 30 and with the injury he just had, growing slowly likely isn't a good option.

I just don't see how it makes any sense to trade away Horford (along with other assets/picks) rather than Morris+Crowder(+Baynes?). Either way you'd be trading away a guy like Tatum and at least one of the Nets/LAL picks.  Horford would do a lot more for a team trying to win a championship than mid-tier starters like Morris and Crowder.

Look at it this way: would you trade Morris+Crowder(+maybe a late first) for Horford?

[saltlover]

I must say I'm glad we have a new trade target that fans can get mad at Ainge for not acquiring.

[mef730]

I must say I'm glad we have a new trade target that fans can get mad at Ainge for not acquiring.

Well, what do you expect me to do with my time? Work? Yeah, right. Conjecture and innuendo are way more entertaining.

Besides, it's a moot point. Danny wouldn't give up the BKN picks, anyway.

Mike

[LGC88]

I must say I'm glad we have a new trade target that fans can get mad at Ainge for not acquiring.

That's a good one, TP.

[Androslav]

Ha!
And we thought we would never long for Gerald Wallace and David Lee.

[Irish Stew]

While I agree that Horford's skill set , professionalism, and general maturity might complement Cousins nicely, I'm not sure that other teams view Horford's contract as anything other than bloated given his individual productivity. He may be harder to move than people think.

[vjcsmoke]

A Davis trade is workable but we'd have to give up at least 4 players.

For example:
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yd4ozszm

Crowder, Smart, Brown, and Morris for Davis works in the trade checker.  At least 3 1st round picks would probably also be added to that list if this ever became a real thing.  Right now it's just fantasy GMing.

[Rida]

A Davis trade is workable but we'd have to give up at least 4 players.

For example:
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yd4ozszm

Crowder, Smart, Brown, and Morris for Davis works in the trade checker.  At least 3 1st round picks would probably also be added to that list if this ever became a real thing.  Right now it's just fantasy GMing.

Yeah, the point is not really exclusive for Davis, it's any "superstar" that has a max contract.

Crowder, Smart, Brown and Morris plus draft picks could probably get you most superstars if/when they become availble.

It's a lot to give up, but there is a reason Danny has been stocking up on wings

[JohnBoy65]

A Davis trade is workable but we'd have to give up at least 4 players.

For example:
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yd4ozszm

Crowder, Smart, Brown, and Morris for Davis works in the trade checker.  At least 3 1st round picks would probably also be added to that list if this ever became a real thing.  Right now it's just fantasy GMing.

Yeah, the point is not really exclusive for Davis, it's any "superstar" that has a max contract.

Crowder, Smart, Brown and Morris plus draft picks could probably get you most superstars if/when they become availble.

It's a lot to give up, but there is a reason Danny has been stocking up on wings

I think one thing overlooked is the Celtics aren't really in a position to trade for an all-star anymore without giving up some really core pieces like Brown, Smart, or Tatum. Last 2 years when we were conserving cap space we had bloated contracts like Amir and Zeller, even Jerebko to an extent. With our cap space maxed out now we'd have to combine smaller contracts to key contributors like vjcsmoke points out.

[RodyTur10]

A Davis trade is workable but we'd have to give up at least 4 players.

For example:
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yd4ozszm

Crowder, Smart, Brown, and Morris for Davis works in the trade checker.  At least 3 1st round picks would probably also be added to that list if this ever became a real thing.  Right now it's just fantasy GMing.

Yeah, the point is not really exclusive for Davis, it's any "superstar" that has a max contract.

Crowder, Smart, Brown and Morris plus draft picks could probably get you most superstars if/when they become availble.

It's a lot to give up, but there is a reason Danny has been stocking up on wings

I think one thing overlooked is the Celtics aren't really in a position to trade for an all-star anymore without giving up some really core pieces like Brown, Smart, or Tatum. Last 2 years when we were conserving cap space we had bloated contracts like Amir and Zeller, even Jerebko to an extent. With our cap space maxed out now we'd have to combine smaller contracts to key contributors like vjcsmoke points out.

That's why a lot of basketball followers wonder when the Celtics will go all-in, while in fact we already have. Just not in the way that's really impressing considering the amount of assets we had and have. The benefit from these (lack of) moves is that we can still hope that the future is even brighter with a good development of Rozier, Smart, Brown, Tatum, Zizic and the Nets '18 + Lakers '18 pick.

Nonetheless, the Celtics were one of the teams that looked to be in a position to have an opportunity to become very dangerous fast. That ship has sailed. Probably to the disappointment of general fans, who don't understand why they let that chance slip.

Myself, I'm perfectly fine with not going into that direction of making a huge trade that could backfire because you gave up too many assets. What I don't like is that we didn't fully commit to the future instead. By giving max contracts to non-superstars and stop hoarding assets by letting useful role players walk we're decreasing our ability to make a move for a superstar in the near future.