Kyrie Irving isn't good enough ...

[Kuberski33]

I honestly think the chance to get a superstar just entering his prime was too much to resist for Ainge.  Those chances just don't come along very often. 

Irving isn't quite there yet, but I think its reasonable to expect that he can make that jump with Brad coaching him.  One thing Brad does as well or better than anyone is put players in the best positions to succeed.

It may or may not work but Ainge put his cards on the table finally. Personally I love IT, but I'd have made the deal.  If it works the Celtics will be in a position to pay Irving more than anyone else at a time when he's at the apex of his career.  If it doesn't he'll still have Brown and eventually Tatum to pay.

I like this option vs overpaying a 5-7" guy in his mid 30's the last two years 5 year deal when his performance level likely drops a bit due to the physical toll that's been taken on him due to the way he plays.

I'd have still paid IT but given the choice of those options - Irving's the safer bet - my opinion anyway.

[Jon]

I think one thing being largely overlooked is that Ainge clearly had no intention of giving IT the max next summer. So, sure, maybe the difference between Kyrie and IT might not be Crowder, Ante, and the pick at this exact moment in time, but I think Danny was looking beyond the here and now when he pulled the trigger.

I have been a broken record saying the same thing, basically that the trade is in two parts:

Kyrie for IT, Crowder, and Zizic for 17-18
Kyrie for Crowder, Zizic, and BKN pick for 18-19 and beyond

It is also driving me crazy that people think we could have gotten a player like Butler for less. Chicago surely wanted the BKN pick, along with AB and Crowder. We would then be stuck with IT/Butler/Horford (no BKN pick) for the future, rather than Kyrie/Hayward/Horford - it seems like a no-brainer to me.

For these reasons, along with age and contract concerns, I do not think Kyrie has to elevate his game to a 'transcendent' level. I think he should improve slightly now that he is out of Lebron's shadow, but I am perfectly happy switching out IT and Butler for Kyrie and Hayward.

Well, I get the argument we overpaid given Cleveland's precarious position with Irving wanting out, but I think people don't fully realize Danny was in one too. If he had no intention of resigning IT, he had now and the deadline to still try to get value for him, and it would be harder to pull off a trade of this magnitude between two top teams in the middle of the season.

I also think that Hayward and Horford signings made it a lot harder for him to wait and hope the Brooklyn pick was a star. First, the pick may end up being a bust and even if the pick was great, when would that player come into his own? There's a lot of pressure to win now.

Also, a minor ancillary benefit of this trade is that it's going to be very hard for Brown and/or Tatum to put up the kind of numbers to get a huge contract after their rookie deals with Irving and Hayward here, and that could solve a lot of questions about what to do with extensions and the cap and luxury tax.

[littleteapot]

I think one thing being largely overlooked is that Ainge clearly had no intention of giving IT the max next summer. So, sure, maybe the difference between Kyrie and IT might not be Crowder, Ante, and the pick at this exact moment in time, but I think Danny was looking beyond the here and now when he pulled the trigger.

I have been a broken record saying the same thing, basically that the trade is in two parts:

Kyrie for IT, Crowder, and Zizic for 17-18
Kyrie for Crowder, Zizic, and BKN pick for 18-19 and beyond

It is also driving me crazy that people think we could have gotten a player like Butler for less. Chicago surely wanted the BKN pick, along with AB and Crowder. We would then be stuck with IT/Butler/Horford (no BKN pick) for the future, rather than Kyrie/Hayward/Horford - it seems like a no-brainer to me.

For these reasons, along with age and contract concerns, I do not think Kyrie has to elevate his game to a 'transcendent' level. I think he should improve slightly now that he is out of Lebron's shadow, but I am perfectly happy switching out IT and Butler for Kyrie and Hayward.

But all you're guaranteed is 2 years of Irving, so it's really 1 year of Thomas for Irving, 1 year of pick for Irving, and then x years of pick for nothing.

[Jon]

I think one thing being largely overlooked is that Ainge clearly had no intention of giving IT the max next summer. So, sure, maybe the difference between Kyrie and IT might not be Crowder, Ante, and the pick at this exact moment in time, but I think Danny was looking beyond the here and now when he pulled the trigger.

I have been a broken record saying the same thing, basically that the trade is in two parts:

Kyrie for IT, Crowder, and Zizic for 17-18
Kyrie for Crowder, Zizic, and BKN pick for 18-19 and beyond

It is also driving me crazy that people think we could have gotten a player like Butler for less. Chicago surely wanted the BKN pick, along with AB and Crowder. We would then be stuck with IT/Butler/Horford (no BKN pick) for the future, rather than Kyrie/Hayward/Horford - it seems like a no-brainer to me.

For these reasons, along with age and contract concerns, I do not think Kyrie has to elevate his game to a 'transcendent' level. I think he should improve slightly now that he is out of Lebron's shadow, but I am perfectly happy switching out IT and Butler for Kyrie and Hayward.

But all you're guaranteed is 2 years of Irving, so it's really 1 year of Thomas for Irving, 1 year of pick for Irving, and then x years of pick for nothing.

But I think people are overlooking the fact that Irving has been jockeying to be dealt to either Boston or San Antonio the whole time, and that's a huge difference from trading for Paul George who has all but said he's going West.

[littleteapot]

But I think people are overlooking the fact that Irving has been jockeying to be dealt to either Boston or San Antonio the whole time, and that's a huge difference from trading for Paul George who has all but said he's going West.

According to sbnation, Irving's short list didn't include Boston: https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2017/8/22/16187230/kyrie-irving-trade-celtics-extension-isaiah-thomas

He did express excitement after the fact, but I don't think that really means anything. He's obviously not going to immediately force his way out of Boston.

[jpotter33]

But I think people are overlooking the fact that Irving has been jockeying to be dealt to either Boston or San Antonio the whole time, and that's a huge difference from trading for Paul George who has all but said he's going West.

According to sbnation, Irving's short list didn't include Boston: https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2017/8/22/16187230/kyrie-irving-trade-celtics-extension-isaiah-thomas

He did express excitement after the fact, but I don't think that really means anything. He's obviously not going to immediately force his way out of Boston.

According to David Griffin, Stevens was on his list of coaches he wanted to play for, so he surely had Boston on his list in some capacity.

[Moranis]

But I think people are overlooking the fact that Irving has been jockeying to be dealt to either Boston or San Antonio the whole time, and that's a huge difference from trading for Paul George who has all but said he's going West.

According to sbnation, Irving's short list didn't include Boston: https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2017/8/22/16187230/kyrie-irving-trade-celtics-extension-isaiah-thomas

He did express excitement after the fact, but I don't think that really means anything. He's obviously not going to immediately force his way out of Boston.

It was reported that he had two lists of teams or that the 4 released names weren't the only teams on his list.  Remember, Irving didn't leak that list so there easily could have been an agenda from whomever did.

[Fafnir]

There is zero chance Ainge didn't clear this with Kyrie's agent before making the deal. Its a two year tryout for both sides, just like any other team that would have traded for Kyrie on his list.

[Jon]

But I think people are overlooking the fact that Irving has been jockeying to be dealt to either Boston or San Antonio the whole time, and that's a huge difference from trading for Paul George who has all but said he's going West.

According to sbnation, Irving's short list didn't include Boston: https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2017/8/22/16187230/kyrie-irving-trade-celtics-extension-isaiah-thomas

He did express excitement after the fact, but I don't think that really means anything. He's obviously not going to immediately force his way out of Boston.

It was reported that he had two lists of teams or that the 4 released names weren't the only teams on his list.  Remember, Irving didn't leak that list so there easily could have been an agenda from whomever did.

Regardless, given his current contract and his at least somewhat desire to play here, he was a better gamble than Paul George. I think he's also on another level from Butler and clearly much saner (and less toxic) than Cousins.

[littleteapot]

Regardless, given his current contract and his at least somewhat desire to play here, he was a better gamble than Paul George. I think he's also on another level from Butler and clearly much saner (and less toxic) than Cousins.

He's definitely more likely to stick around the PG (because the likelihood isn't 0%).

However I personally don't think the way he acted with this situation bodes well for any team wanting to retain him, and we still have no idea if he's going to stick around. I don't think it's possible for both what Griffin and the other report said to be true - the other report had him wanting teams with bad coaches. I really have no idea which one is more agenda driven though.

I personally think Butler is better than him and Cousins is MUCH better than him, so I'd have made this gamble with them if possible. Given that wasn't possible (or that we weren't willing to do it with Cousins), I would have demanded top 3 protection in a trade with Kyrie. If that kills the deal, that's fine by me - I'll just bank on my assets.

[KGs Knee]

But I think people are overlooking the fact that Irving has been jockeying to be dealt to either Boston or San Antonio the whole time, and that's a huge difference from trading for Paul George who has all but said he's going West.

According to sbnation, Irving's short list didn't include Boston: https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2017/8/22/16187230/kyrie-irving-trade-celtics-extension-isaiah-thomas

He did express excitement after the fact, but I don't think that really means anything. He's obviously not going to immediately force his way out of Boston.

According to David Griffin, Stevens was on his list of coaches he wanted to play for, so he surely had Boston on his list in some capacity.

Yeah, this is what is important to me. The fact Stevens is one of the coaches Kyrie wants to play for bodes well.

[mmmmm]

His lack of all-round game makes it impossible for him to positively effect the outcome of a game when he isn't scoring.

Once you accept that IT and Kyrie are at least equivalent in productivity, but that Kyrie is 4 years younger than IT, under contract longer and at a more reasonable price, you see why they had to give up more than just IT to get him (that doesn't include the fact that they had to add Crowder just for salary matching).  And for the team, that means that the production will not drop that dramatically, even if Kyrie is worse under Stevens and without Lebron.

I swear, it seems like Isaiah is getting older and shorter with every CelticsBlog thread.

Isaiah is 3 years and 38 days older than Kyrie Irving.  They are not 4 years apart.

FWIW, they came into the NBA in the same season and they have almost the same number of minutes of wear and tear.    Thomas has a little bit more minutes from college, whereas Irving has a little bit more minutes from the playoffs.

Kyrie is under contract control for one more year than Thomas.   Whether it is at a "more reasonable price" is debatable.  He will cost about 13M more this year and possibly about 10M less in the following year.  After that, he will almost certainly cost more.

The trade premium was, indeed for the opportunity to sign Irving long term with a next contract starting at 27, as opposed to Isaiah's which would have started at age 29.

So if we all accept that near term, Irving and Isaiah are roughly equivalent in productivity, then we gave up Jae Crowder, Ante Zizic and the BKN18 pick for the difference between 2 years of prime Irving and 2 years of just-past prime Thomas.

Whether that will be worth it remains to be seen.

[Dino Pitino]

I have been a broken record saying the same thing, basically that the trade is in two parts:

Kyrie for IT, Crowder, and Zizic for 17-18
Kyrie for Crowder, Zizic, and BKN pick for 18-19 and beyond

Great way of looking at it!

Celtics obviously win the first part, given the hip.
Second part won't know until the lottery.

[Vermont Green]

One of the arguments is why Kyrie and not Cousins, Butler, or George.  I am fine with Kyrie out of this group.  Cousins is, well Cousins so no thanks, George would be a very high risk to be just a rental, and Butler is probably not better than Irving.  I am fine that it is Kyrie that we ended up with out of this group.

Another argument is that we overpaid for him (probably the best argument against the trade).  I feel Danny explained this.  I think what he is saying is that he didn't want to miss out.  Kind of like when you buy a house in a hot market.  You probably have to feel like you are overpaying if you don't want to lose the house.  Danny was not bargain hunting like he sometimes does.  This was a different kind of deal.

The question of the thread is whether Kyrie is good enough, not whether we overpaid or if there was another deal that might have been a better value.  So it is like when Love was traded for Wiggins or Harden for Lamb plus a bunch of picks.  Cleveland may end up with a Wiggins level prospect, someone who ends up being a good player in 3 or 4 years.  In the meantime, Irving will be a key player for us.  Yes, we probably did overpay like Houston for Harden and Cleveland for Love but I fine with it.

[Celtics4ever]

I'm arguing that the difference between IT and Kyrie isn't worth Crowder, Zizic and the Brooklyn pick. Kyrie is a great scorer, but he has the same deficiencies in his game that IT had, plus a few more intangible concerns.

I really don't think you should use Zizic as a point here.  His inclusion does not strengthen it.

Crowder has peaked, mark my words.   Ainge basically said this is about timeline.   That means he believes we don't have a chance to compete right now with the top two teams.   He is hoping Tatum or Brown blossoms into the star we need to couple with Hayward and Irving.   Horford is a complimentary player but a good one but his game is in decline.

We added Hayward who is better than Crowder.   We added Irving who is even with IT or slightly better or worse depending on who you ask.   I am more worried about losing AB than Crowder or IT because I don't think that Smart or Rozier may not be up to task replacing him.  I have mixed feelings on Crowder because I thought at times he acted like the was the man and took ill advised shots at the end of games.   Sometimes they worked sometimes they did not.   He played hard and improved every year.   I wish non of these players ill and I have Jae in my thoughts because of the death of his mother.

So that leaves the Brooklyn pick which it stinks to lose.  Picks are risky, too.   And I think Ainge found out that when you have a ton of picks people want them all in trades.   We still have a few left, BTW.

Only four players from last year, really active off season.  I am optimistic because I think Tatum is going to be a special player and I did not think that prior to the draft, I wanted Jackson.   But I am a believer now.   Crowder basically was going to take minutes from Brown and Tatum.   Brown scares me a bit because he is all over the place in terms of consistency but he is exciting and I love it when he comes into the game because of his athleticism.

So I get some are hurt and don't like the trade that is your prerogative and I respect that.   But I don't agree with it.