ESPN: Kyrie no longer wants to play w/ Lebron = reason for request. trade soon?

[gouki88]

But he is way better than IT4 ? What's wrong with just saying it ? That's why everyone on here would take him over IT4 all darn day.

Also, he's a big time bargain which is huge right now.

Obviously not everyone thinks he's "way better". Many of us think they are pretty darn similar, and thus would rather stick with the hometown guy. As far as I'm concerned, Irving is the DeMarcus Cousins of point guards - crazy talented but clearly not making the most of it or carrying a team.

Nobody thinks they are similar defensively, or when it comes to rebounding. They think their similar offensively, but yet Kyrie has got him there as well.

Everyone takes Irving over IT4......this isn't a revelation or anything. It's a given because Irving is the superior player. He's 'way' better because of the size, defense, & his rebounding from that position.

Show me any actual data to back those claims up.

IT4 was better last year offensively, period. He scored more points at a higher efficiency, and it wasn't close. He had a higher assist rate, too. He was better offensively the year before that, too.

IT4 grabbed 2.7 rebounds in 34 minutes. Kyrie had 3.2 in 35 minutes. The year before they both averaged 3.0. Not exactly a big difference.

IT4 was a bottom-5 defender at PG. Kyrie was what, bottom-10?

IT4 had the better RPM, VORP, Win Shares, TS%, and his team won more games.

IT4 has played 10 more games per season for the last 6 years.

And yet, all I'm saying is that Irving isn't 'much' better. Rebounding: false. Height: yeah, he's taller, so what if it he still can't rebound, block shots, or defend a shoe? Defense? Marginal improvement by every available metric, completely canceled out on the other end. Winner? Never won more than 33 games w/o LeBron, and is quitting on a team where he won a title. Health? Missed more games by far.

Those aren't accurate stats at all.

One is five inches taller. Helps defensively and rebounding. So nothing false about that. It's 5 inches and a game called basketball (catered toward height). That's significant.

Also, can take the playoff hits better than Thomas.  He's proven it, while Thomas had one GREAT offensive year (ended in injury). Kyrie has been unstoppable since the beginning, and still is cheaper and 2-3 years younger.

Everyone including their mom takes Irving over Thomas on the basketball floor. Every single GM and coach in this league take Irving over Thomas if the choice is there.

Tough to debate that, isn't it ?

... Seriously?

His height advantage has been proven to both not help him in the rebounding department, and barely help him be a better defender than IT. Not sure how you can just disregard that because you don't like it, or it doesn't suit the agenda you're pushing.

"Can take the playoff hits better", what? IT had an injury from the regular season that he played through during the playoffs, whereas Kyrie has had multiple knee injuries in one playoff run alone and avoids contact far more than IT does.

Almost all of your points are based on your own opinion, and don't actual have any factual basis, nor are they verifiable.

[aingeforthree]

@aingeforthree

If we are talking just for this upcoming year, I think you are wrong. IT has more than proven he is as good or better than Irving when he is at his best. For a team like Cleveland, who may only have one more shot at a title, acquiring IT, Crowder, and a pick (not a good one) or Rozier for a very disgruntled Irving probably gives them a better chance at competing this year than they otherwise would have.

Now, if you are talking strictly about the future with age and contract, then you have a point. That definitely gives Irving the edge, but a package of IT and Crowder might actually be really attractive to Cleveland given the Lebron situation.

Isn't it about the future though ? The money you save is over two years.

Basketball wise:

Irving > Thomas

Crowder is meaningless because you have a bunch of talent at his position, and guys like Brown & Tatum need floor time (far better talents). Morris gets some run there as well because he's a better player than Crowder.

Is the pick Brooklyn or LAL ?

For the money to work, is Rozier included or Yabusele ?

I'd need a lot of this ironed out but if I'm talking Kyrie vs IT alone, it isn't close IMO. I'd rather give a max contract to a 25 yr old as opposed to a 29 yr old

[tonydelk]

There really isn't a trade where the C's win.  IT for Kyrie from a talent standpoint is even IMO.  I believe IT is a better facilitator and is just as bad on D that Kyrie is.  The difference is IT tries his hardest to defend where Kyrie really doesn't care.  Offensively IT is as good as Kyrie and Kyrie had Lebron and Love.  THat opened up a lot for Kyrie.  I think IT's offensive game will go to another level next year with the addition of Hayward.  He will be more efficient and is more of a willing passer then Kyrie.  Depending on the contract IT gets next year he's the better fit for the C's and outside of a package of Crowder, AB (before the AB trade), Zeller (before his release) and the Lakers/Sac pick that's all I'd give up.  With the moves this is not possible  but from a talent standpoint it is fair.  Giving up IT in a deal for Kyrie is close and adding Crowder, a pick, Yabu is way too much IMO.

[LilRip]

Giving up a 2018 lottery pick wouldn't be wise. But giving up IT-Crowder-filler would be a good deal for the C's (chemistry issues aside).

There seem to be 3 schools of thought in this thread:
1. Kyrie > IT
2. Kyrie > IT, but marginally so throwing in Crowder makes this trade a net loss
3. IT > Kyrie

Im in camp #1, but I can understand why people would think #2. However, those in #3 need to take off the green tinted glasses, IMO. IT is amazing, yes, and what he did with this squad was awesome. But he is hands down, the worst defender in the league. That might not be so glaring in the season but it really sticks out in the playoffs.

Even Avery Bradley said Kyrie is the hardest player to guard. Not steph, not IT, not Westbrook.

As for those saying Kyrie couldn't win before Lebron arrived, well, it begs the question: how young was Kyrie then? Is it not possible that MAYBE he's improved in the past 2 years? The dude hasn't even hit his prime yet and he's been a 4x all star in the past 6 years.

[bellerephon]

Giving up a 2018 lottery pick wouldn't be wise. But giving up IT-Crowder-filler would be a good deal for the C's (chemistry issues aside).

There seem to be 3 schools of thought in this thread:
1. Kyrie > IT
2. Kyrie > IT, but marginally so throwing in Crowder makes this trade a net loss
3. IT > Kyrie

Im in camp #1, but I can understand why people would think #2. However, those in #3 need to take off the green tinted glasses, IMO. IT is amazing, yes, and what he did with this squad was awesome. But he is hands down, the worst defender in the league. That might not be so glaring in the season but it really sticks out in the playoffs.

Even Avery Bradley said Kyrie is the hardest player to guard. Not steph, not IT, not Westbrook.

As for those saying Kyrie couldn't win before Lebron arrived, well, it begs the question: how young was Kyrie then? Is it not possible that MAYBE he's improved in the past 2 years? The dude hasn't even hit his prime yet and he's been a 4x all star in the past 6 years.

I'm in camp 2, but I think you make some good points. I will disagree with the statement that IT is hands down the worst defender in the league. That is a serious exaggeration. With respect to rotations and team defense he tries and does okay. He is also not bad about staying in front of his man, although he struggles with elite guards (who doesn't). His main liability is his size. Big guards can shoot over him or post him up. I'm not saying he's a good defender, he is a liability, but he's not the worst in the league.

[aingeforthree]

But he is way better than IT4 ? What's wrong with just saying it ? That's why everyone on here would take him over IT4 all darn day.

Also, he's a big time bargain which is huge right now.

Obviously not everyone thinks he's "way better". Many of us think they are pretty darn similar, and thus would rather stick with the hometown guy. As far as I'm concerned, Irving is the DeMarcus Cousins of point guards - crazy talented but clearly not making the most of it or carrying a team.

Nobody thinks they are similar defensively, or when it comes to rebounding. They think their similar offensively, but yet Kyrie has got him there as well.

Everyone takes Irving over IT4......this isn't a revelation or anything. It's a given because Irving is the superior player. He's 'way' better because of the size, defense, & his rebounding from that position.

Show me any actual data to back those claims up.

IT4 was better last year offensively, period. He scored more points at a higher efficiency, and it wasn't close. He had a higher assist rate, too. He was better offensively the year before that, too.

IT4 grabbed 2.7 rebounds in 34 minutes. Kyrie had 3.2 in 35 minutes. The year before they both averaged 3.0. Not exactly a big difference.

IT4 was a bottom-5 defender at PG. Kyrie was what, bottom-10?

IT4 had the better RPM, VORP, Win Shares, TS%, and his team won more games.

IT4 has played 10 more games per season for the last 6 years.

And yet, all I'm saying is that Irving isn't 'much' better. Rebounding: false. Height: yeah, he's taller, so what if it he still can't rebound, block shots, or defend a shoe? Defense? Marginal improvement by every available metric, completely canceled out on the other end. Winner? Never won more than 33 games w/o LeBron, and is quitting on a team where he won a title. Health? Missed more games by far.

Those aren't accurate stats at all.

One is five inches taller. Helps defensively and rebounding. So nothing false about that. It's 5 inches and a game called basketball (catered toward height). That's significant.

Also, can take the playoff hits better than Thomas.  He's proven it, while Thomas had one GREAT offensive year (ended in injury). Kyrie has been unstoppable since the beginning, and still is cheaper and 2-3 years younger.

Everyone including their mom takes Irving over Thomas on the basketball floor. Every single GM and coach in this league take Irving over Thomas if the choice is there.

Tough to debate that, isn't it ?

... Seriously?

His height advantage has been proven to both not help him in the rebounding department, and barely help him be a better defender than IT. Not sure how you can just disregard that because you don't like it, or it doesn't suit the agenda you're pushing.

"Can take the playoff hits better", what? IT had an injury from the regular season that he played through during the playoffs, whereas Kyrie has had multiple knee injuries in one playoff run alone and avoids contact far more than IT does.

Almost all of your points are based on your own opinion, and don't actual have any factual basis, nor are they verifiable.

He's 5 inches taller, better offensively, better defensively, and a better rebounder.

And consistently has proven that since he's been in the league by the way, not just a year like the stats you rave about.

What other stats do you need ? 5 inches, 25 yrs old, and only what, 18 & 20 M for the next two(Evan Turner type easy money)?

Not much left to be said, because those stats (verify them if needed) tell it all.

[DarkAzcura]

But he is way better than IT4 ? What's wrong with just saying it ? That's why everyone on here would take him over IT4 all darn day.

Also, he's a big time bargain which is huge right now.

Obviously not everyone thinks he's "way better". Many of us think they are pretty darn similar, and thus would rather stick with the hometown guy. As far as I'm concerned, Irving is the DeMarcus Cousins of point guards - crazy talented but clearly not making the most of it or carrying a team.

Nobody thinks they are similar defensively, or when it comes to rebounding. They think their similar offensively, but yet Kyrie has got him there as well.

Everyone takes Irving over IT4......this isn't a revelation or anything. It's a given because Irving is the superior player. He's 'way' better because of the size, defense, & his rebounding from that position.

Show me any actual data to back those claims up.

IT4 was better last year offensively, period. He scored more points at a higher efficiency, and it wasn't close. He had a higher assist rate, too. He was better offensively the year before that, too.

IT4 grabbed 2.7 rebounds in 34 minutes. Kyrie had 3.2 in 35 minutes. The year before they both averaged 3.0. Not exactly a big difference.

IT4 was a bottom-5 defender at PG. Kyrie was what, bottom-10?

IT4 had the better RPM, VORP, Win Shares, TS%, and his team won more games.

IT4 has played 10 more games per season for the last 6 years.

And yet, all I'm saying is that Irving isn't 'much' better. Rebounding: false. Height: yeah, he's taller, so what if it he still can't rebound, block shots, or defend a shoe? Defense? Marginal improvement by every available metric, completely canceled out on the other end. Winner? Never won more than 33 games w/o LeBron, and is quitting on a team where he won a title. Health? Missed more games by far.

Those aren't accurate stats at all.

One is five inches taller. Helps defensively and rebounding. So nothing false about that. It's 5 inches and a game called basketball (catered toward height). That's significant.

Also, can take the playoff hits better than Thomas.  He's proven it, while Thomas had one GREAT offensive year (ended in injury). Kyrie has been unstoppable since the beginning, and still is cheaper and 2-3 years younger.

Everyone including their mom takes Irving over Thomas on the basketball floor. Every single GM and coach in this league take Irving over Thomas if the choice is there.

Tough to debate that, isn't it ?

... Seriously?

His height advantage has been proven to both not help him in the rebounding department, and barely help him be a better defender than IT. Not sure how you can just disregard that because you don't like it, or it doesn't suit the agenda you're pushing.

"Can take the playoff hits better", what? IT had an injury from the regular season that he played through during the playoffs, whereas Kyrie has had multiple knee injuries in one playoff run alone and avoids contact far more than IT does.

Almost all of your points are based on your own opinion, and don't actual have any factual basis, nor are they verifiable.

He's 5 inches taller, better offensively, better defensively, and a better rebounder.

And consistently has proven that since he's been in the league by the way, not just a year like the stats you rave about.

What other stats do you need ? 5 inches, 25 yrs old, and only what, 18 & 20 M for the next two(Evan Turner type easy money)?

Not much left to be said, because those stats (verify them if needed) tell it all.

Kyrie is worse offensively from a team offense standpoint. Better defensively, but most of the time, he doesn't try, and he plays as poorly on defense because of that. Are better tools worth anything if you don't use them? He's a worse passer. Kyrie is also more injury prone.

But yeah, he is taller and plays better isolation basketball.

So the pros for Irving are height, contract, isolation basketball.

The cons are worse team offensive player, worse passer, more injury prone.

I'll stick with the guy who Horford and Hayward chose to play with. The difference isn't big enough between the players to risk ruining the team offense and chemistry.

Statistically IT has been better for 3 or more seasons now so I don't know why you are saying it is just one year. This was the one year where IT was head and shoulders better offensively, but he's still been on par or better for years now.

Irving is a very nice player, but his hype from the media is not anywhere close to his actual ability.

[BitterJim]

Giving up a 2018 lottery pick wouldn't be wise. But giving up IT-Crowder-filler would be a good deal for the C's (chemistry issues aside).

There seem to be 3 schools of thought in this thread:
1. Kyrie > IT
2. Kyrie > IT, but marginally so throwing in Crowder makes this trade a net loss
3. IT > Kyrie

Im in camp #1, but I can understand why people would think #2. However, those in #3 need to take off the green tinted glasses, IMO. IT is amazing, yes, and what he did with this squad was awesome. But he is hands down, the worst defender in the league. That might not be so glaring in the season but it really sticks out in the playoffs.

Even Avery Bradley said Kyrie is the hardest player to guard. Not steph, not IT, not Westbrook.

As for those saying Kyrie couldn't win before Lebron arrived, well, it begs the question: how young was Kyrie then? Is it not possible that MAYBE he's improved in the past 2 years? The dude hasn't even hit his prime yet and he's been a 4x all star in the past 6 years.

Being the toughest to guard doesn't make you a better player, though (not even a better offensive player).  It probably means that you're the better isolation player (and there's no doubt that Kyrie is one of the best iso players in the NBA), but Kyrie's ability to create for others shouldn't scare anybody.  IT is light years ahead of him in that regard.

As for defense, you can't call IT a defensive liability without acknowledging that Kyrie is as well.  The myth that Kyrie can become a passable defender when engaged just isn't true.  He can be a better defender than IT when engaged, but it's still far from passable defense.  Kyrie gets slight favor on that end of the court, but not enough to make up for his glaring inability to create for others.

Truth be told, no one here knows if Kyrie could bring a team to the playoffs by himself (and I agree that basing things off of his first couple of seasons is useless, as it is for all young players).  What I do know, though, is that IT has never missed the playoffs while acting as the #1 option for his team, and brought us to the ECF last year.  Not many other players can say that.  Yes, his defense is atrocious, but he's one of the best in the NBA on offense and has a net positive effect when he's on the court.

So would Kyrie be an upgrade? Maybe.  Maybe having a strong coach like Brad would focus him on defense and get him creating more on offense.  I might even trade IT+Crowder for him (although I think even a straight IT/Irving swap would lead to a worse team this year).  But there is absolutely no way I would even consider including a Brooklyn pick.

[Rosco917]

Keep this in mind when you discuss IT and his offensive output. He had a green light almost 100% of the time on a team that has no other option for shot creation. Irving had several options on offense, including Kevin Love, and LeBron.

Even a healthy IT will not average 29 ppg with other offensive options on the Celtics.

On defense, it's not that IT is a bad defender, he certainly tries, but by nature of his size he's one of the least valuable defenders in the NBA. In an under 6' league he'd be fine. But in a league where the average guard is 5-7" taller than him he can't compete. The game simply goes over his head much of the time, and he is certainly picked on as a path to the opposition scoring. And especially in the playoffs.

Kyrie on defense at least has average size to better compete. He can defend the passing lane over his head. He can be left to defend his assignment and have a reasonable chance to succeed.

Honestly it's not gonna happen anyways, not with the health of IT being a concern.

[LilRip]

Giving up a 2018 lottery pick wouldn't be wise. But giving up IT-Crowder-filler would be a good deal for the C's (chemistry issues aside).

There seem to be 3 schools of thought in this thread:
1. Kyrie > IT
2. Kyrie > IT, but marginally so throwing in Crowder makes this trade a net loss
3. IT > Kyrie

Im in camp #1, but I can understand why people would think #2. However, those in #3 need to take off the green tinted glasses, IMO. IT is amazing, yes, and what he did with this squad was awesome. But he is hands down, the worst defender in the league. That might not be so glaring in the season but it really sticks out in the playoffs.

Even Avery Bradley said Kyrie is the hardest player to guard. Not steph, not IT, not Westbrook.

As for those saying Kyrie couldn't win before Lebron arrived, well, it begs the question: how young was Kyrie then? Is it not possible that MAYBE he's improved in the past 2 years? The dude hasn't even hit his prime yet and he's been a 4x all star in the past 6 years.

Being the toughest to guard doesn't make you a better player, though (not even a better offensive player).  It probably means that you're the better isolation player (and there's no doubt that Kyrie is one of the best iso players in the NBA), but Kyrie's ability to create for others shouldn't scare anybody.  IT is light years ahead of him in that regard.

As for defense, you can't call IT a defensive liability without acknowledging that Kyrie is as well.  The myth that Kyrie can become a passable defender when engaged just isn't true.  He can be a better defender than IT when engaged, but it's still far from passable defense.  Kyrie gets slight favor on that end of the court, but not enough to make up for his glaring inability to create for others.

Truth be told, no one here knows if Kyrie could bring a team to the playoffs by himself (and I agree that basing things off of his first couple of seasons is useless, as it is for all young players).  What I do know, though, is that IT has never missed the playoffs while acting as the #1 option for his team, and brought us to the ECF last year.  Not many other players can say that.  Yes, his defense is atrocious, but he's one of the best in the NBA on offense and has a net positive effect when he's on the court.

So would Kyrie be an upgrade? Maybe.  Maybe having a strong coach like Brad would focus him on defense and get him creating more on offense.  I might even trade IT+Crowder for him (although I think even a straight IT/Irving swap would lead to a worse team this year).  But there is absolutely no way I would even consider including a Brooklyn pick.

Agreed on not including a BKN pick (or a LAL/SAC pick imo).

That said, AB's statement stands out to me because it means if you need a bucket, this guy can get you a bucket, which is huge come playoff time. I bring up offense (particularly 'getting buckets') because that is IT's trump card. It's what makes him worth a max contract.

I'm not entirely sure where this Kyrie can't create for others notion is coming from though. If I'm not mistaken, Lebron handled the lion's share of the playmaking duties in Cleveland. Kyrie's "role" was to score (granted, he's definitely got a score-first, pass-later mentality). But for example, Kevin Love is a great passer for a big but you probably wouldn't guess it based on his low assist numbers in Cleveland. There's a difference between someone who "can't do it", and someone who doesn't do it (presumably by design).

Regarding defense though, I've never seen any player as abused as IT in the playoffs. Kyrie isn't a great defender, but teams aren't able to exploit him the way they do IT.

As for playoff success, I really feel like it's an unfair argument because it's tricky business attributing team success to one guy (especially in our situation where we apparently have a mastermind of a coach and a deep roster of talented role players in need of a star). Sure, IT hasn't missed the playoffs, meanwhile a guy like Anthony Davis has, but that doesn't mean I'm declining an IT-Crowder for Anthony Davis trade.

[ETNCeltics]

I'm not trying to make the case for trading for Irving, but the defensive argument is overblown. There are very few players who are truly elite on both ends of the floor. Players like Kawhi Leonard are few and far between.

Players only have so much energy, and a guy like KI has a 100+ game season when you consider they're in the finals every year. To a degree, same with IT, because he had to carry our offense at times.

I would think we'd see some improvement in KI's defense if he were playing under CBS. As others have pointed out, IT is so limited defensively because of his size, he'll never be able to defend great offensive players. But at 6'3, it's not beyond the realm of possibility to think that KI could at least become a passable crunch time defender.

The notion that he couldn't do anything as the top player on his team pre-Lebron is a red herring, too. A 19 or 20 yr old kid is going to carry an NBA team? 20 year old players in NBA history who could carry their team deep into the playoffs is a pretty short list.

In any event, we're all just blowing smoke. It's not gonna happen. The Cavs aren't trading him for our veterans and salary relief, and Ainge isn't giving them Tatum or a high draft pick.

[byennie]

He's 5 inches taller, better offensively, better defensively, and a better rebounder.

And consistently has proven that since he's been in the league by the way, not just a year like the stats you rave about.

What other stats do you need ? 5 inches, 25 yrs old, and only what, 18 & 20 M for the next two(Evan Turner type easy money)?

Not much left to be said, because those stats (verify them if needed) tell it all.

No, he's not better offensively or a better rebounder. How many times do we need to post the stats? IT4 is a more efficient, better offensive player and has been for years. Not just last year. For his career. Kyrie had a career year last year too, like a lot of guards.

I don't even know why you keep repeating the rebounding thing- Kyrie is a crap rebounder, who grabs about as IT4 despite the 5 inch advantage.

[byennie]

I'm not trying to make the case for trading for Irving, but the defensive argument is overblown. There are very few players who are truly elite on both ends of the floor. Players like Kawhi Leonard are few and far between.

Players only have so much energy, and a guy like KI has a 100+ game season when you consider they're in the finals every year. To a degree, same with IT, because he had to carry our offense at times.

I would think we'd see some improvement in KI's defense if he were playing under CBS. As others have pointed out, IT is so limited defensively because of his size, he'll never be able to defend great offensive players. But at 6'3, it's not beyond the realm of possibility to think that KI could at least become a passable crunch time defender.

The notion that he couldn't do anything as the top player on his team pre-Lebron is a red herring, too. A 19 or 20 yr old kid is going to carry an NBA team? 20 year old players in NBA history who could carry their team deep into the playoffs is a pretty short list.

In any event, we're all just blowing smoke. It's not gonna happen. The Cavs aren't trading him for our veterans and salary relief, and Ainge isn't giving them Tatum or a high draft pick.

It's theoretically possible that KI would improve his defense, but it's also unlikely. It's hard to imagine a guy caring less about defense than one who:

1) Hasn't played defense his whole career (6 years), even with championships on the line

2) Cares so little about winning, he's quitting a Finals team with LeBron on it with only 2 years left on his contract

3) Doesn't rebound or block shots, even a little

[mutineer33]

It is hard to understand why people can't  get behind bringing Kyrie Irving over.  I rate IT and Kyrie about even in terms of productivity right now.  Looking ahead, i think Kyrie would be a clear winner.

First is the contract. IT is a bargain this year but becomes a UFA who will be looking to command something close to Max $$$ starting next year.  Kyrie has two years left on his deal plus will be an RFA in the 3rd year meaning Boston can control his destiny for at least 3 years.

IT (As great as he has been for us) is undersized and 28  compared to Kyrie who is 4 to 6 inches taller and only 25.

IT might have a couple years of peak basketball left but this is a risky assumption. If you look at the career arc of PGs 6'1" and under, the results are pretty bleak in terms of rapid decline. Smaller PGs tend to peak at age 26 then rapidly decline.  Larger PGs peak at age 30. Great article here: Scroll half way downhttp://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19525455/kevin-pelton-weekly-mailbag-including-point-guard-career-arcs.

Also Kyrie still has room to grow .... getting out from LBJs smothering control of the team and coming to play under one of the best coaches in the game.

I think Kyrie could be had without giving up either our LAL or BKLN picks.

Salaries need to match:

IT + CROWDER + SMART works
IT + CROWDER+ROZIER works

Put the Memphis or Clippers picks in if needed.

I am not sure Cleveland will do much better .  Phoenix may or may not be offering a combo of Bledsoe/Jackson or Bledsoe/Len. Not to many other teams have the space and right players to deal.

Is it an over pay for the Celtics?  Maybe. But there will always be an overpay when consolidating a roster with a 3 for 1 deal.  Crowder is a nice player, but fully redundant now on our roster.  Smart is one of my favorite Celtics but will be an RFA at the end of the year and could possibly command 20 million dollars plus (equal to Kyrie) for the Celtics to keep him.

Thus the losses in terms of what we pay out are not nearly as harsh as they seem.

There is a lot of room here to put together pieces for a trade.

[ETNCeltics]

I'm not trying to make the case for trading for Irving, but the defensive argument is overblown. There are very few players who are truly elite on both ends of the floor. Players like Kawhi Leonard are few and far between.

Players only have so much energy, and a guy like KI has a 100+ game season when you consider they're in the finals every year. To a degree, same with IT, because he had to carry our offense at times.

I would think we'd see some improvement in KI's defense if he were playing under CBS. As others have pointed out, IT is so limited defensively because of his size, he'll never be able to defend great offensive players. But at 6'3, it's not beyond the realm of possibility to think that KI could at least become a passable crunch time defender.

The notion that he couldn't do anything as the top player on his team pre-Lebron is a red herring, too. A 19 or 20 yr old kid is going to carry an NBA team? 20 year old players in NBA history who could carry their team deep into the playoffs is a pretty short list.

In any event, we're all just blowing smoke. It's not gonna happen. The Cavs aren't trading him for our veterans and salary relief, and Ainge isn't giving them Tatum or a high draft pick.

It's theoretically possible that KI would improve his defense, but it's also unlikely. It's hard to imagine a guy caring less about defense than one who:

1) Hasn't played defense his whole career (6 years), even with championships on the line

2) Cares so little about winning, he's quitting a Finals team with LeBron on it with only 2 years left on his contract

3) Doesn't rebound or block shots, even a little

1) Players often respond to their environment. He hasn't exactly had sound coaching in recent years.
2) Quitting? He knows Lebron is leaving a year from now. Trying to set himself up in a better situation long term is not "quitting".
3) No, he's doesn't contribute a much of either, but neither does IT.