So Basically: IT4, Crowder, Zizic, 2020 2nd and Cousins For Kyrie

[Rosco917]

This is getting laughable, and sad at the same time.

"daddy said no, now please just stop!"

[hodgy03038]

While I'm not sure about specifics, I think one of the disappointments in the Kyrie trade is that we didn't add a star. Rather, we replaced one. We still have the same "two stars and a quasi-star" that we had after Hayward signed, except now we have less trade flexibility to add to the core.

We now have 2 stars and a quasi star.  Before this trade we had a star and two quasi stars. Isaiah has been a star for this year - not enough for me to declare him a legit star - and I say one bc stars don't get stopped like Isaiah did in playoffs against the hawks.  Isaiah did get stopped far too often this playoffs too but with his hip and sisters death I'm willing to assume he made the adjustments not to get stopped except for those external issues.  With potential lingering hip issues I don't think it's fair to put Isaiah as anything but a quasi star currently.

That said I do agree with you that this was an upgrade only - not a pure addition of a star like Hayward was.

^This

About the statement that we "still have the same 2 stars" and a quasi star. So who were the same 2 stars last year? IT and who else were stars last year? We added Hayward as a free agent so he didn't replace anyone. So we have 2 stars now (Kyrie & Gordon) and a quasi star (Horford). Who was the "same" star we had last year alongside IT?

[Roy H.]

While I'm not sure about specifics, I think one of the disappointments in the Kyrie trade is that we didn't add a star. Rather, we replaced one. We still have the same "two stars and a quasi-star" that we had after Hayward signed, except now we have less trade flexibility to add to the core.

We now have 2 stars and a quasi star.  Before this trade we had a star and two quasi stars. Isaiah has been a star for this year - not enough for me to declare him a legit star - and I say one bc stars don't get stopped like Isaiah did in playoffs against the hawks.  Isaiah did get stopped far too often this playoffs too but with his hip and sisters death I'm willing to assume he made the adjustments not to get stopped except for those external issues.  With potential lingering hip issues I don't think it's fair to put Isaiah as anything but a quasi star currently.

That said I do agree with you that this was an upgrade only - not a pure addition of a star like Hayward was.

^This

About the statement that we "still have the same 2 stars" and a quasi star. So who were the same 2 stars last year? IT and who else were stars last year? We added Hayward as a free agent so he didn't replace anyone. So we have 2 stars now (Kyrie & Gordon) and a quasi star (Horford). Who was the "same" star we had last year alongside IT?

You might want to try reading that again.

[hodgy03038]

While I'm not sure about specifics, I think one of the disappointments in the Kyrie trade is that we didn't add a star. Rather, we replaced one. We still have the same "two stars and a quasi-star" that we had after Hayward signed, except now we have less trade flexibility to add to the core.

We now have 2 stars and a quasi star.  Before this trade we had a star and two quasi stars. Isaiah has been a star for this year - not enough for me to declare him a legit star - and I say one bc stars don't get stopped like Isaiah did in playoffs against the hawks.  Isaiah did get stopped far too often this playoffs too but with his hip and sisters death I'm willing to assume he made the adjustments not to get stopped except for those external issues.  With potential lingering hip issues I don't think it's fair to put Isaiah as anything but a quasi star currently.

That said I do agree with you that this was an upgrade only - not a pure addition of a star like Hayward was.

^This

About the statement that we "still have the same 2 stars" and a quasi star. So who were the same 2 stars last year? IT and who else were stars last year? We added Hayward as a free agent so he didn't replace anyone. So we have 2 stars now (Kyrie & Gordon) and a quasi star (Horford). Who was the "same" star we had last year alongside IT?

You might want to try reading that again.

Okay I reread the statement and I misread it the first time. Thanks.

[Phantom255x]

This is getting laughable, and sad at the same time.

"daddy said no, now please just stop!"

Just because you may love the trade doesn't suddenly mean those who don't like it are wrong or being sad crybabies...

[Phantom255x]

Bumping this up, only because now we've heard the rumor of Shumpert + BKN Pick for Cousins.

Doubt Cousins is traded now as Pelicans want to see if it will work but it's possible they make a deal at the deadline of it doesn't work for Pelicans.

[trickybilly]

Bumping this up, only because now we've heard the rumor of Shumpert + BKN Pick for Cousins.

Doubt Cousins is traded now as Pelicans want to see if it will work but it's possible they make a deal at the deadline of it doesn't work for Pelicans.

Alright.... fine. A tommy point for you sir.

[Phantom255x]

Bumping this up, only because now we've heard the rumor of Shumpert + BKN Pick for Cousins.

Doubt Cousins is traded now as Pelicans want to see if it will work but it's possible they make a deal at the deadline of it doesn't work for Pelicans.

Alright.... fine. A tommy point for you sir.

And here's one for you, good sir.

Btw what did you think of the trade? Like it or not?

[footey]

While I'm not sure about specifics, I think one of the disappointments in the Kyrie trade is that we didn't add a star. Rather, we replaced one. We still have the same "two stars and a quasi-star" that we had after Hayward signed, except now we have less trade flexibility to add to the core.

The "replaced" star was injured, significantly shorter, under a year less control, and 3 years older.

I believe the age factor was the deciding one for Danny. Kyrie represents a "quarterback" who can compete for the next 3 years with a nucleus of Hayward and Horford, and also quarterback a team for the next several years beyond that 3 year threshold with a nucleus of Tatum, Brown and 2018/19 Laker/Kings/Sixer pick (or what that pick returns in a trade). 

Thomas' age, size and injury status (but particularly his age) would not enable us to bridge the two gaps.

[incoherent]

I want to get an honest answers from both Phantom / Roy  who have been extremely negative on this trade.  Both of you just cut the crap and get to the heart of the matter on why you hate the trade.



Would you rather sign 29 year old IT to max or a 27 year old Kyrie to max?

Is it OK if we use 1 of the 4 Nets picks in a trade for an all-star talent? 

Do you wish we still had Crowder on this roster? Do you think Tatum would have been able to develop with both Hayward (allstar) and Crowder (starter quality player) ahead of him in the depth chart?

Does having the LA pick make the Nets pick any easier to part with? Under normal circumstances trading your number 1 pick is tough because you generally don't have another one. 

Does IT being more injured and not being ready for the start of the season going into his brinks trucks year make the trade any better for you?


Thanks, I think if you guys can honestly answer these questions I'll have a better understanding where your coming from and what exactly you don't like.

[rollie mass]

From celticsHub.com-just read an article titled"The Challenge of Fitting the New Look Celtics Together"  a in depth statistical report using shooting charts  and really showing the puzzle in detail-it challenged alot of my thinking as to Marcus Morris and the importance of  the 3 point shooting of Crowder,Kelly and Jerebko-this was the most technical breakdown i have seen yet-
Don't expect smooth sailing

[CelticsQuestFor18]

From celticsHub.com-just read an article titled"The Challenge of Fitting the New Look Celtics Together"  a in depth statistical report using shooting charts  and really showing the puzzle in detail-it challenged alot of my thinking as to Marcus Morris and the importance of  the 3 point shooting of Crowder,Kelly and Jerebko-this was the most technical breakdown i have seen yet-
Don't expect smooth sailing

Definitely won't be. I expect a bit of a shaky start. Not saying it will be horrible but it won't be the greatest either, and will cause for lots of doubts and angry posters here LOL.

I do think C's will get hot in the 2nd half and will probably finish 51-53 wins this year, but CLE may take a small step back record-wise too with Isaiah injured and Rose injury prone as it is.

[Vermont Green]

Let them mortgage their post-LeBron future on Cousins. All the more dysfunction to screw up their chemistry with.

As far as "basically" iterations of the trade go, I prefer thinking of them this way, helps me visualize the values better:

Kyrie for Fultz

Tatum and Lakers/Kings pick for Isaiah, Crowder, Zizic, and the Brooklyn pick

I would make each of those trades a hundred out of one hundred times. But as they really were seems riskier, more even and uncertain. This way I am certain I want Kyrie over Fultz, if that had been the deal, straight up, and I'm almost just as certain I would easily then trade Isaiah, Crowder, Zizic for Tatum, #1 overall on the C's board. The Brooklyn and Lakers picks are kind of a pick 'em value-wise, a wash.

You posted this somewhere else as well.  I think I would break it down even further:

Fultz for Irving:  Major win for Celtics, established star for unproven rookie with potential whose ceiling is to be as good as Irving but the probability is that he won't.

BKN pick for Lakers pick:  This is pretty much even Steven (no Brad pun intended) so you can pull this out (kind of a least common denominator thing).

That leaves you with IT, Crowder, and Zizic for Tatum which I don't know what to do with.

I like the Tatum trade big time and I understand the Irving trade.  It may seem like we overpaid for Irving but that is what you need to do to get that caliber of player.  And I have no interest in Cousins at this point.

[Irish Stew]

I want to get an honest answers from both Phantom / Roy  who have been extremely negative on this trade.  Both of you just cut the crap and get to the heart of the matter on why you hate the trade.



Would you rather sign 29 year old IT to max or a 27 year old Kyrie to max?

Is it OK if we use 1 of the 4 Nets picks in a trade for an all-star talent? 

Do you wish we still had Crowder on this roster? Do you think Tatum would have been able to develop with both Hayward (allstar) and Crowder (starter quality player) ahead of him in the depth chart?

Does having the LA pick make the Nets pick any easier to part with? Under normal circumstances trading your number 1 pick is tough because you generally don't have another one. 

Does IT being more injured and not being ready for the start of the season going into his brinks trucks year make the trade any better for you?


Thanks, I think if you guys can honestly answer these questions I'll have a better understanding where your coming from and what exactly you don't like.

This (except for the rude "cut the crap" part). TP. I love the way that this team has started to concentrate its talent with two stars rather than continue to build depth. Depth wins regular season games, stars win playoff games. This process needs to continue to get one more star.

[crimson_stallion]

Let them mortgage their post-LeBron future on Cousins. All the more dysfunction to screw up their chemistry with.

As far as "basically" iterations of the trade go, I prefer thinking of them this way, helps me visualize the values better:

Kyrie for Fultz

Tatum and Lakers/Kings pick for Isaiah, Crowder, Zizic, and the Brooklyn pick

I would make each of those trades a hundred out of one hundred times. But as they really were seems riskier, more even and uncertain. This way I am certain I want Kyrie over Fultz, if that had been the deal, straight up, and I'm almost just as certain I would easily then trade Isaiah, Crowder, Zizic for Tatum, #1 overall on the C's board. The Brooklyn and Lakers picks are kind of a pick 'em value-wise, a wash.

You posted this somewhere else as well.  I think I would break it down even further:

Fultz for Irving:  Major win for Celtics, established star for unproven rookie with potential whose ceiling is to be as good as Irving but the probability is that he won't.

BKN pick for Lakers pick:  This is pretty much even Steven (no Brad pun intended) so you can pull this out (kind of a least common denominator thing).

That leaves you with IT, Crowder, and Zizic for Tatum which I don't know what to do with.

I like the Tatum trade big time and I understand the Irving trade.  It may seem like we overpaid for Irving but that is what you need to do to get that caliber of player.  And I have no interest in Cousins at this point.

Lakers pick for Brooklyn pick is not even at all. 

The Lakers pick needs to fall within a specific range (I think it's 2-5) for us to even get it.  If it doesn't, then we get the 76ers pick or Kings pick.  The 76ers could easily be a borderline playoff team in this garbage eastern conference - Sacramento will be bad, but whether they will fall bottom 3 is another question.

The Brooklyn pick is 100% unprotected, and looking at their roster I cannot fathom how they could possibly finish any better then bottom 3.  The only teams I can see who could possibly compete with them for the wooden spoon are Atlanta and Orlando.  Even the Kings (who have De'Aaron Fox, George Hill, Buddy Hield, Zach Randolph, Willie Cauley Stein) have infinitely more potential then Brooklyn does. 

Basically the only way Brooklyn could possibly fail to fall bottom 3 is if D'Angelo Russell suddenly breaks out into a Damian Lillard calibre superstar and carries the team better then Brook Lopez could, which I seriously doubt will happen.

Otherwise that Brooklyn pick (which has potential to be as high as #1) is easily more valuable then a highly protected Lakers pick in the same draft.