C's in win-now mode. Dead-end in sight?

[Big333223]

Can we stop putting so much weight on next years brooklyn pick.  We just had two straight #3 picks.  If one of those guys isn't going to be a star (and I'm not saying they aren't) then what makes people think next years unknown Brooklyn pick is going to be that star.  We don't even know what place they're going to end up in or how good those high school guys will be.

Man, it is only going to get worse, too. If the BKN pick lands at, say, #4, and a player taken at or after #4 becomes a bigger star than Kyrie, then we are all going to hear about what a mistake Danny made...for years (see: Giannis).

People will totally dismiss the players taken in that range that are average (or busts) that we very well could have taken instead. They will also dismiss the fact that Kyrie, while still young himself, is ready to compete NOW, rather than waiting several years for said star to develop.

The only way this doesn't become a miss for Danny is if we a win a championship with Kyrie as the main guy. Any other scenario will lead to people [continuing to] call for his head...even though he is the one that orchestrated the brilliant BKN trade that brought back James Young (bleh), Jaylen Brown, Jason Tatum, Kyrie Irving, and the LAL/Sac pick for 1 year of PP and 1 1/2 yrs of KG.

If the Nets pick turns out better than Kyrie, Danny *should* be criticized.

Um, no he shouldn't.  If the nets end up with a record in the 5-7 range then his gamble paid off regardless of the outcome.  So if say, the nets get the top pick anyway or if the seventh pick in the draft becomes a superstar you can't blame Danny for that.

Sorry, but no. If Danny trades an asset that turns into a superior player, then he should be blamed for incorrectly valuing that asset.

If the trade is IT + Crowder + MVP candidate for Kyrie, how can you call that a success?

Problem with this logic us that unless there are a #1 and #2 consensus picks and the Nets pick ends up being #1 or #2 then you can't really judge because we'd never know who Ainge would have taken with that pick.

Seems unfair unless Nets go #1 and that pick is an NBA superstar.
Also, at age 25 it would be fair to assume Kyrie is going to improve in a Brad Stevens offense/learning situation considering his previous NBA coaches.

If we can criticize Ainge for trading away a top 3 NBA player for Irving then at what point can we praise/celebrate him for making the trade?

The problem with evaluating these draft picks is that there are too many little gambles along the way. If the pick is #1, people will say it was a bad trade and if the pick is #9 maybe they'll say it was a good trade. But what if the top pick in the draft is a bust and #9 turns out the be Dirk Nowitzki, then that could just as easily flip.

But who gets drafted can be contingent on the GM doing the drafting. If the Nets pick winds up top 3 but the Cavs pick the wrong guy and he becomes a bust, does that mean Ainge was right to make the trade? How does the value of the draft pick change simply by being in control of the Celtics or the Cavs?

Flashing forward and judging the trade once we know the answers to questions we can't know the answers to yet is an unfair way to judge it. It's reminiscent of the Pau Gasol to the Lakers trade where some people now want to claim that it was a good deal because Memphis got a multiple all-star and DPOY with the #48 pick in the draft.

If the Cavs get a great player from the Nets pick, I still think it's a gamble worth taking. Other might not but we should be judging Ainge based on the gambe not on the result.

[Androslav]

Even thought GSW, as constituted, is set to win the next 3 championships. Due to incredible talent, chemistry and depth, I just think that it is too hard to win it 4 times (play 7 finals) in a row. Of all their players, Curry and Iggy are the most injury-prone and it is hard to just keep racking these huge game totals, season after season. I also think that we are pretty safe bet to participate in 2019 and 2020 finals. I voted yes, putting the most chance on our 2020 season

[Greyman]

Since the rebuild began Celtics fans have wondered how many all stars the team was away from being championship ready. That number probably grew as GSW got better. Danny's assets couldn't be held in reserve forever, if the Celtics still had the last Nets pick going into that draft it means the franchise was still looking to the future. Some would say, why not? Brown and Tatum seem to have bright enough futures, Hayward should be around for a while.

While that might be a plan, when Irving became available everything changed. There is a chance to be competitive now. Can the Celtics now beat the Cavs in a conference final? They have to be a lot closer. I think a lot depends on Brown and Tatum. I also think DA weighed up how quickly he thinks they improve/adapt and thought it was a gamble he was willing to take. If not 2018 then 19 or 20 are more probable.

No commentator of note has made the Celtics conference or title favourites. I honestly believe that only the addition of an Anthony Davis could do that. The present squad should make things a lot more exciting though. If Brown and/or Tatum come along faster than expected, who knows? A championship could be just around the corner.

[IDreamCeltics]

Before the trade when we still had Isaiah we needed Tatum and brown to both become all stars to have a chance against GS.  That doesn't change after the trade either. 

The trade does give us a more predictable PG of the future however.  It stabilizes two positions for us for the next 5ish years.  Without this move we needed both brown and Tatum to evolve and IT to remain consistent for the next 3-4 years.  This trade extends our window IMO

I'm sure the Cavs felt pretty confidant they had their point guard position secured for the foreseeable future too...

After all, the Cavs drafted Irving #1 overall after he missed all but 15 games of his college career, they resigned him to a max contract after a grand total of 78 wins and no playoff appearances in three seasons (from 2011-2013), they brought in the best player in the world AND Kevin Love to play with him and subsequently made the finals three years in a row(2014-2017). He repaid the Cavs  commitment to him... by threatening to hold out and forcing a trade with three years remaining on his contract.

I'm not sure this guy is the lock to play out his prime in Boston that everyone thinks he is.

[cman88]

Before the trade when we still had Isaiah we needed Tatum and brown to both become all stars to have a chance against GS.  That doesn't change after the trade either. 

The trade does give us a more predictable PG of the future however.  It stabilizes two positions for us for the next 5ish years.  Without this move we needed both brown and Tatum to evolve and IT to remain consistent for the next 3-4 years.  This trade extends our window IMO

I'm sure the Cavs felt pretty confidant they had their point guard position secured for the foreseeable future too...

After all, the Cavs drafted Irving #1 overall after he missed all but 15 games of his college career, they resigned him to a max contract after a grand total of 78 wins and no playoff appearances in three seasons (from 2011-2013), they brought in the best player in the world AND Kevin Love to play with him and subsequently made the finals three years in a row(2014-2017). He repaid the Cavs  commitment to him... by threatening to hold out and forcing a trade with three years remaining on his contract.

I'm not sure this guy is the lock to play out his prime in Boston that everyone thinks he is.

Lebron is leaving next year after bleeding the Cavs dry. and Irving would be left with a team full of overpaid veterans and no future. Of COURSE he wanted to leave. This was pre-emptive for him instead of letting Lebron leave him in the dust like he did wade and the heat

Lebron essentially holds teams hostage, dictates their FA moves and once they cant make any more moves leaves them with the mess for better pastures. Not to mention Lebron gets all the credit when they win, and none of the blame when they lose.

its completely understandable looking at what is going to happen to the Cavs why Irving would want to leave. Unless he should look forward to leading a team with JR smith and kyle korver as  in his prime years. while lebron sets off to whatever team gives him the best chance to win....

[mctyson]

I do not think they are betting GSW as currently constructed but getting to the Final is really the main goal.  Anything can happen once you get there (see CLE 2 years ago).

[Dino Pitino]

Since the rebuild began Celtics fans have wondered how many all stars the team was away from being championship ready. That number probably grew as GSW got better. Danny's assets couldn't be held in reserve forever, if the Celtics still had the last Nets pick going into that draft it means the franchise was still looking to the future. Some would say, why not? Brown and Tatum seem to have bright enough futures, Hayward should be around for a while.

While that might be a plan, when Irving became available everything changed. There is a chance to be competitive now. Can the Celtics now beat the Cavs in a conference final? They have to be a lot closer. I think a lot depends on Brown and Tatum. I also think DA weighed up how quickly he thinks they improve/adapt and thought it was a gamble he was willing to take. If not 2018 then 19 or 20 are more probable.

No commentator of note has made the Celtics conference or title favourites. I honestly believe that only the addition of an Anthony Davis could do that. The present squad should make things a lot more exciting though. If Brown and/or Tatum come along faster than expected, who knows? A championship could be just around the corner.

TP.

[IDreamCeltics]

Before the trade when we still had Isaiah we needed Tatum and brown to both become all stars to have a chance against GS.  That doesn't change after the trade either. 

The trade does give us a more predictable PG of the future however.  It stabilizes two positions for us for the next 5ish years.  Without this move we needed both brown and Tatum to evolve and IT to remain consistent for the next 3-4 years.  This trade extends our window IMO

I'm sure the Cavs felt pretty confidant they had their point guard position secured for the foreseeable future too...

After all, the Cavs drafted Irving #1 overall after he missed all but 15 games of his college career, they resigned him to a max contract after a grand total of 78 wins and no playoff appearances in three seasons (from 2011-2013), they brought in the best player in the world AND Kevin Love to play with him and subsequently made the finals three years in a row(2014-2017). He repaid the Cavs  commitment to him... by threatening to hold out and forcing a trade with three years remaining on his contract.

I'm not sure this guy is the lock to play out his prime in Boston that everyone thinks he is.

Lebron is leaving next year after bleeding the Cavs dry. and Irving would be left with a team full of overpaid veterans and no future. Of COURSE he wanted to leave. This was pre-emptive for him instead of letting Lebron leave him in the dust like he did wade and the heat

Lebron essentially holds teams hostage, dictates their FA moves and once they cant make any more moves leaves them with the mess for better pastures. Not to mention Lebron gets all the credit when they win, and none of the blame when they lose.

its completely understandable looking at what is going to happen to the Cavs why Irving would want to leave. Unless he should look forward to leading a team with JR smith and kyle korver as  in his prime years. while lebron sets off to whatever team gives him the best chance to win....

Not sure I follow you... If making the finals three years in a row and winning a championship is bleeding the Cavs dry I really wish some player would come bleed the Celtics dry.  Considering the fact that there has literally never been a relevant Cavs team without Lebron, it's really hard for me to hear the argument that Lebron has somehow negatively impacted the Cavaliers and keep a straight face.

Let's not forget how closely the Cleveland situation mirrors what happened to the last "GREAT" Celtics team.  They were contenders for three years, won 1 Championship and are widely considered a team worth not being in contention for a full decade for.

[droopdog7]

Can we stop putting so much weight on next years brooklyn pick.  We just had two straight #3 picks.  If one of those guys isn't going to be a star (and I'm not saying they aren't) then what makes people think next years unknown Brooklyn pick is going to be that star.  We don't even know what place they're going to end up in or how good those high school guys will be.

Man, it is only going to get worse, too. If the BKN pick lands at, say, #4, and a player taken at or after #4 becomes a bigger star than Kyrie, then we are all going to hear about what a mistake Danny made...for years (see: Giannis).

People will totally dismiss the players taken in that range that are average (or busts) that we very well could have taken instead. They will also dismiss the fact that Kyrie, while still young himself, is ready to compete NOW, rather than waiting several years for said star to develop.

The only way this doesn't become a miss for Danny is if we a win a championship with Kyrie as the main guy. Any other scenario will lead to people [continuing to] call for his head...even though he is the one that orchestrated the brilliant BKN trade that brought back James Young (bleh), Jaylen Brown, Jason Tatum, Kyrie Irving, and the LAL/Sac pick for 1 year of PP and 1 1/2 yrs of KG.

If the Nets pick turns out better than Kyrie, Danny *should* be criticized.

Um, no he shouldn't.  If the nets end up with a record in the 5-7 range then his gamble paid off regardless of the outcome.  So if say, the nets get the top pick anyway or if the seventh pick in the draft becomes a superstar you can't blame Danny for that.

Sorry, but no. If Danny trades an asset that turns into a superior player, then he should be blamed for incorrectly valuing that asset.

If the trade is IT + Crowder + MVP candidate for Kyrie, how can you call that a success?

Problem with this logic us that unless there are a #1 and #2 consensus picks and the Nets pick ends up being #1 or #2 then you can't really judge because we'd never know who Ainge would have taken with that pick.

Seems unfair unless Nets go #1 and that pick is an NBA superstar.
Also, at age 25 it would be fair to assume Kyrie is going to improve in a Brad Stevens offense/learning situation considering his previous NBA coaches.

If we can criticize Ainge for trading away a top 3 NBA player for Irving then at what point can we praise/celebrate him for making the trade?

The problem with evaluating these draft picks is that there are too many little gambles along the. If the pick is #1, people will say it was a bad trade and if the pick is #9 maybe they'll say it was a good trade. But what if the top pick in the draft is a bust and #9 turns out the be Dirk Nowitzki, then that could just as easily flip.

But who gets drafted can be contingent on the GM doing the drafting. If the Nets pick winds up top 3 but the Cavs pick the wrong guy and he becomes a bust, does that mean Ainge was right to make the trade? How does the value of the draft pick change simply by being in control of the Celtics or the Cavs?

Flashing forward and judging the trade once we know the answers to questions we can't know the answers to yet is an unfair way to judge it. It's reminiscent of the Pau Gasol to the Lakers trade where some people now want to claim that it was a good deal because Memphis got a multiple all-star and DPOY with the #48 pick in the draft.

If the Cavs get a great player from the Nets pick, I still think it's a gamble worth taking. Other might not but we should be judging Ainge based on the gambe not on the result.

Yeah, that's the thing.  That Brooklyn pick is a complete wildcard.  That's what makes it not so valuable in the first place.  Of course, celtics fans envision the #1 pick in the draft (no better than 25%) and a franchise player (even smaller odds) and want to call the trade crazy.  More likely, we would have ended up with a decent pick and a decent player.  We already have jaylen and Tatum and the lakers/kings pick, yet people are convinced that the ONE pick we traded away is the one that will come back to haunt us.

And I'll put it right out there.  I had HUGE reservations about paying IT long term.  I can bet that other teams feel the same way.  So he wasn't the asset people make him out to be.  Kyrie's value isn't just a little more than IT.  It's basically night and day.  So basically, i think trad was more or less fair.  How it turns out nobody knows but I'm perfectly okay with the sure thing. 

[jambr380]

Lebron is leaving next year after bleeding the Cavs dry. and Irving would be left with a team full of overpaid veterans and no future. Of COURSE he wanted to leave. This was pre-emptive for him instead of letting Lebron leave him in the dust like he did wade and the heat

Lebron essentially holds teams hostage, dictates their FA moves and once they cant make any more moves leaves them with the mess for better pastures. Not to mention Lebron gets all the credit when they win, and none of the blame when they lose.

its completely understandable looking at what is going to happen to the Cavs why Irving would want to leave. Unless he should look forward to leading a team with JR smith and kyle korver as  in his prime years. while lebron sets off to whatever team gives him the best chance to win....

Not sure I follow you... If making the finals three years in a row and winning a championship is bleeding the Cavs dry I really wish some player would come bleed the Celtics dry.  Considering the fact that there has literally never been a relevant Cavs team without Lebron, it's really hard for me to hear the argument that Lebron has somehow negatively impacted the Cavaliers and keep a straight face.

Let's not forget how closely the Cleveland situation mirrors what happened to the last "GREAT" Celtics team.  They were contenders for three years, won 1 Championship and are widely considered a team worth not being in contention for a full decade for.

You aren't wrong, but I think it requires you to sell your soul to the devil if you bring on Lebron and allow him to make all the decisions. Getting that championship was enormous for Cleveland and they wouldn't trade it for the world, but even now Lebron is being immature. Unless he actually does re-sign in Cleveland - and all reports seem to point to that not happening - then he should have been willing to waive his no-trade clause (at least to a select group of teams) so that the Cavs could fast forward their rebuild and get a haul in return. It isn't some insignificant franchise; it's the city where he grew up.

I suppose he thinks his best chance to win a championship is in Cleveland and he wants one more go at it, but it's almost as though it will tarnish his legacy if he gets traded to another team, only to leave again a year later. I realize he is that important to whatever franchise he is playing for, it just gives up the wrong feeling. "You can't trade me, but I am leaving."

[hwangjini_1]

Before the trade when we still had Isaiah we needed Tatum and brown to both become all stars to have a chance against GS.  That doesn't change after the trade either. 

The trade does give us a more predictable PG of the future however.  It stabilizes two positions for us for the next 5ish years.  Without this move we needed both brown and Tatum to evolve and IT to remain consistent for the next 3-4 years.  This trade extends our window IMO

I'm sure the Cavs felt pretty confidant they had their point guard position secured for the foreseeable future too...

After all, the Cavs drafted Irving #1 overall after he missed all but 15 games of his college career, they resigned him to a max contract after a grand total of 78 wins and no playoff appearances in three seasons (from 2011-2013), they brought in the best player in the world AND Kevin Love to play with him and subsequently made the finals three years in a row(2014-2017). He repaid the Cavs  commitment to him... by threatening to hold out and forcing a trade with three years remaining on his contract.

I'm not sure this guy is the lock to play out his prime in Boston that everyone thinks he is.

Lebron is leaving next year after bleeding the Cavs dry. and Irving would be left with a team full of overpaid veterans and no future. Of COURSE he wanted to leave. This was pre-emptive for him instead of letting Lebron leave him in the dust like he did wade and the heat

Lebron essentially holds has held TWO teams hostage and delivered a championship to both of them, dictates their FA moves and once they cant make any more moves leaves them with the mess for better pastures. Not to mention Lebron gets all the credit when they win, and none of the blame when they lose.

its completely understandable looking at what is going to happen to the Cavs why Irving would want to leave. Unless he should look forward to leading a team with JR smith and kyle korver as  in his prime years. while lebron sets off to whatever team gives him the best chance to win....

i dont like lebron, but let's keep in mind that he did deliver on a championship on both of the teams he was one. do either one regret having signed him and suffered through his behavior? i find it doubtful.

[ETNCeltics]

I was stoked about that pick. For that reason alone, I wouldn't have done the trade. The possibility of adding Bagley or Porter to an already good roster was thrilling.

But we aren't fully in "win now mode". If we trade Brown Tatum and LAL pick for Anthony Davis, then we'd be in win now mode.

Unless we make a deal like that, we've got a lot of space to improve and grow. Jaylen Brown is just scratching the surface. He's still very green, only 2 years out of high school, and already had himself worked into a rotation spot on a fairly deep playoff team. Same for Tatum, and he is well ahead of where Brown was a year ago, and IMO, has a much higher ceiling than Brown.

Further, Kyrie is only 25. He may very well get better. In fact, he'll almost certainly get better. Most players don't peak at 25, and for the first time as a pro, Kyrie will be tutored by an elite coach. He's a perennial all-star and borderline all-nba, and he's going to get better. I agree you have to have some concern about his attitude, but an nba career is short, and if he felt stifled playing with Lebron, can you blame him for wanting out? He's only got a decade or so left to play. As Bill Parcells once said, "Life's too short to deal with jerks." I think some of us may be a bit too judgy with Kyrie. 

And we still have that LAL pick. We still have a shot at Bagley/Porter or one of the 7 footers. If not, we're still going to have a premium addition, if not next year, then the following. Plus, I like the track Memphis is on to make their pick valuable.

We're still set up better than just about any team in the league for the future, outside of Philly, and we have much better veteran players than they do. Plus, the GSW will face a salary cliff in 2 years, and it's very likely they'll break that band up. When Lebron bolts west, the Eastern conference will be wide open for us, and when GSW breaks up, we could be in better position than anyone.

Cheer up, Celts fans. We're still in great shape.

[nickagneta]

Can we stop putting so much weight on next years brooklyn pick.  We just had two straight #3 picks.  If one of those guys isn't going to be a star (and I'm not saying they aren't) then what makes people think next years unknown Brooklyn pick is going to be that star.  We don't even know what place they're going to end up in or how good those high school guys will be.

Man, it is only going to get worse, too. If the BKN pick lands at, say, #4, and a player taken at or after #4 becomes a bigger star than Kyrie, then we are all going to hear about what a mistake Danny made...for years (see: Giannis).

People will totally dismiss the players taken in that range that are average (or busts) that we very well could have taken instead. They will also dismiss the fact that Kyrie, while still young himself, is ready to compete NOW, rather than waiting several years for said star to develop.

The only way this doesn't become a miss for Danny is if we a win a championship with Kyrie as the main guy. Any other scenario will lead to people [continuing to] call for his head...even though he is the one that orchestrated the brilliant BKN trade that brought back James Young (bleh), Jaylen Brown, Jason Tatum, Kyrie Irving, and the LAL/Sac pick for 1 year of PP and 1 1/2 yrs of KG.

If the Nets pick turns out better than Kyrie, Danny *should* be criticized.

Um, no he shouldn't.  If the nets end up with a record in the 5-7 range then his gamble paid off regardless of the outcome.  So if say, the nets get the top pick anyway or if the seventh pick in the draft becomes a superstar you can't blame Danny for that.

Sorry, but no. If Danny trades an asset that turns into a superior player, then he should be blamed for incorrectly valuing that asset.

If the trade is IT + Crowder + MVP candidate for Kyrie, how can you call that a success?

Playing devil's advocate if the trade ends up IT who takes 3/4 of the season off due to health and is never the same again + Crowder + a bust for Kyrie, how can you not call that a success? At this point both outcomes are as likely to happen as the other.

[Roy H.]

Can we stop putting so much weight on next years brooklyn pick.  We just had two straight #3 picks.  If one of those guys isn't going to be a star (and I'm not saying they aren't) then what makes people think next years unknown Brooklyn pick is going to be that star.  We don't even know what place they're going to end up in or how good those high school guys will be.

Man, it is only going to get worse, too. If the BKN pick lands at, say, #4, and a player taken at or after #4 becomes a bigger star than Kyrie, then we are all going to hear about what a mistake Danny made...for years (see: Giannis).

People will totally dismiss the players taken in that range that are average (or busts) that we very well could have taken instead. They will also dismiss the fact that Kyrie, while still young himself, is ready to compete NOW, rather than waiting several years for said star to develop.

The only way this doesn't become a miss for Danny is if we a win a championship with Kyrie as the main guy. Any other scenario will lead to people [continuing to] call for his head...even though he is the one that orchestrated the brilliant BKN trade that brought back James Young (bleh), Jaylen Brown, Jason Tatum, Kyrie Irving, and the LAL/Sac pick for 1 year of PP and 1 1/2 yrs of KG.

If the Nets pick turns out better than Kyrie, Danny *should* be criticized.

Um, no he shouldn't.  If the nets end up with a record in the 5-7 range then his gamble paid off regardless of the outcome.  So if say, the nets get the top pick anyway or if the seventh pick in the draft becomes a superstar you can't blame Danny for that.

Sorry, but no. If Danny trades an asset that turns into a superior player, then he should be blamed for incorrectly valuing that asset.

If the trade is IT + Crowder + MVP candidate for Kyrie, how can you call that a success?

Playing devil's advocate if the trade ends up IT who takes 3/4 of the season off due to health and is never the same again + Crowder + a bust for Kyrie, how can you not call that a success? At this point both outcomes are as likely to happen as the other.

I don't think the two outcomes are equally likely, but yes, if IT turns into an average player and the Nets pick stinks, it's a win for us.

[jambr380]

Can we stop putting so much weight on next years brooklyn pick.  We just had two straight #3 picks.  If one of those guys isn't going to be a star (and I'm not saying they aren't) then what makes people think next years unknown Brooklyn pick is going to be that star.  We don't even know what place they're going to end up in or how good those high school guys will be.

Man, it is only going to get worse, too. If the BKN pick lands at, say, #4, and a player taken at or after #4 becomes a bigger star than Kyrie, then we are all going to hear about what a mistake Danny made...for years (see: Giannis).

People will totally dismiss the players taken in that range that are average (or busts) that we very well could have taken instead. They will also dismiss the fact that Kyrie, while still young himself, is ready to compete NOW, rather than waiting several years for said star to develop.

The only way this doesn't become a miss for Danny is if we a win a championship with Kyrie as the main guy. Any other scenario will lead to people [continuing to] call for his head...even though he is the one that orchestrated the brilliant BKN trade that brought back James Young (bleh), Jaylen Brown, Jason Tatum, Kyrie Irving, and the LAL/Sac pick for 1 year of PP and 1 1/2 yrs of KG.

If the Nets pick turns out better than Kyrie, Danny *should* be criticized.

Um, no he shouldn't.  If the nets end up with a record in the 5-7 range then his gamble paid off regardless of the outcome.  So if say, the nets get the top pick anyway or if the seventh pick in the draft becomes a superstar you can't blame Danny for that.

Sorry, but no. If Danny trades an asset that turns into a superior player, then he should be blamed for incorrectly valuing that asset.

If the trade is IT + Crowder + MVP candidate for Kyrie, how can you call that a success?

Playing devil's advocate if the trade ends up IT who takes 3/4 of the season off due to health and is never the same again + Crowder + a bust for Kyrie, how can you not call that a success? At this point both outcomes are as likely to happen as the other.

I don't think the two outcomes are equally likely, but yes, if IT turns into an average player and the Nets pick stinks, it's a win for us.

Since Danny apparently didn't seem interested in signing IT long term, it is probably best to compare Kyrie to the production of IT/Crowder this year and then Crowder/BKN 18 after that. If the pick ends up at about the same level as Kyrie (or even a little better), then it can still be seen as a success.

Al and Hayward would probably be a little annoyed if we let IT walk next offseason (but kept Smart) and Danny said to them, "Well, just do the best you can." Adding Kyrie gives us a perennial all-star to [legitimately] compete now and for the future.

And, while we still have very young players in Brown and Tatum, they are still able to work themselves into the framework of the ECF Cs team rather than hoping for the best from this [what people seem to think is a] guarantee at Porter/Bagley and selling off Hayward/Al.