Ainge On Trading 2018 Nets Pick: "Owed It To Horford And Hayward"

[johnnygreen]

He's a great GM, and always has been a complete tool.

What purpose does this comment serve?  Seems very insulting to IT.  Maybe he was a locker room problem that a rabid fanbase wasn't aware of.  Or, perhaps Danny is feeling insecure about mixed reactions to the trade. 

Presumably, it was Ainge's decision to make -- we can't know.  But he made this comment, and undoubtedly, many would argue that IT was very influential in landing 2 top FAs.  Then he replaced IT with a younger and very talented (but limited) cupcake that's also insecure about his IQ and loves to hear himself talk.  Are we in Boston, or LA?

Kyrie is one talented cupcake though. Something that often gets overlooked between the 2 of them is that IT shot effectively twice as many free throws as Kyrie during the regular season last year. (8.5 FTA on .909 shooting to 4.6 FTA on .905 shooting) Not trying to bash a legendary Celtic season too much but that is an unsustainable free throw rate to expect the refs to continue to reward season after season and it takes a real hit in the playoffs when the refs are more apt to swallow their whistles.

In the 2017 the playoffs Isaiah averages dropped from 7.4 FTA   on .820 shooting while Kyrie remained a model of consistency at 4.7 FTA on .905 shooting.

Once playoff time rolled around IT was complaining to officials for not rewarding the contact he'd often create like they had during the regular season while Kyrie was draining shots from all over the court with defenders draped all around him.

That's not even mentioning that Hoiberg drew attention to Isaiah's blatant carries and Coach Nick from BBall breakdown confirmed it with a video ( https://youtu.be/UpRZUazIurw ). Isaiah's free throws also drew scrutiny for the step he takes into the lane after shooting it ( www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2017/05/04/yes-celtics-isaiah-thomas-always-commits-free-throw-violations-that-arent-called/ ). Meanwhile Kyrie is widely recognized as having one of the tightest handles in league history.

Question Kyrie's public persona all you like but I'll take the guy who scores his points from the field and not the charity stripe every time. Never comfortable with guys (*cough*Marcus Smart*cough*) putting game in the hands of the refs at crucial moments in the game.

I believe the referees are supposed to cut down on foul calls this season, where the offensive player initiates the contact and then either flops or flays to sell the call. James Harden and Isaiah were the poster children for these calls, which greatly helped their scoring averages.

[Big333223]

IT + Crowder + Zizic + BRK pick would have been better for Hayward and Horford. Heck, trading Tatum or Brown would probably be better for Horford and Hayward.

Danny is just talking out of both sides of his mouth. First it was that Kyrie fit our timeline better, with Tatum, Brown, etc. Now it's because Danny "owed it" to Horford and Hayward (two players IT recruited).

Injured IT, young Zizic, and a BRK pick that won't be ready to contribute until 2020-21 would not have been better for Hayward and Horford. And Crowder plays Hayward's position.

Kyrie is bother younger than IT (better fits the timeline of the young guys) and in his prime (still fits the timeline of Hayward and Horford) and the most talented player moved in the deal (debate this if you like but Ainge clearly believes this and I think this is basically consensus). Ainge isn't "talking out of both sides of his mouth," it's that both things are true.

[Roy H.]

IT + Crowder + Zizic + BRK pick would have been better for Hayward and Horford. Heck, trading Tatum or Brown would probably be better for Horford and Hayward.

Danny is just talking out of both sides of his mouth. First it was that Kyrie fit our timeline better, with Tatum, Brown, etc. Now it's because Danny "owed it" to Horford and Hayward (two players IT recruited).

Injured IT, young Zizic, and a BRK pick that won't be ready to contribute until 2020-21 would not have been better for Hayward and Horford. And Crowder plays Hayward's position.

Kyrie is bother younger than IT (better fits the timeline of the young guys) and in his prime (still fits the timeline of Hayward and Horford) and the most talented player moved in the deal (debate this if you like but Ainge clearly believes this and I think this is basically consensus). Ainge isn't "talking out of both sides of his mouth," it's that both things are true.

They're not both true.

Hayward signed to play with IT. Horford signed to play with IT. Suggesting that he traded IT + a good starter + a coveted trade asset that could have been used to bring in a fourth star out of a sense of obligation to Horford and Hayward is laughable.

[jpotter33]

I think I read on CB just in the last couple days that the Celtics talent evaluators, as a whole, believe that the BKN pick will end up somewhere in the 5-9 range, which is one of the main reasons Danny was okay with trading the pick. If it indeed ends up in that range, the odds of landing a cornerstone go way down. So, I think Danny's final thinking regarding the IT-Kyrie trade can be summarized in the following equation:

Lower BKN pick + IT's hip + IT's age + IT's Brinks talk = better get Kyrie while the getting's good

I think this is pretty much spot on. It was a combination of things, not just one thing:

1) A significant uptick in tanking teams, especially in the East, made the Brooklyn pick much less of a sure thing.

2) IT's injury, age, contract status, and defensive mismatch capabilities made him a prime candidate to be moved at this time.

3) Kyrie being similarly skilled at this point, while also being younger and potentially still having a higher ceiling to reach, made this gamble worth it to Ainge allowing us to compete both now and in the future.

Would we have made this type of trade if IT was healthy? Doubtful. Would we have necessarily trade IT in a similar situation if Kyrie wasn't available? Unlikely. I think this was just a perfect storm of occurrences that led to this trade and Danny finally giving up that pick.

But let's get one thing straight: due to IT's injury, age, and size, it is very, very unlikely that he would've ever led us to a title as the best or second best player on our team.

While it's no certainty that Kyrie will lead us to a title, his age/timeline, yet-to-be-reached ceiling, and better overall size gives him a much higher likelihood of leading us to a title than IT. I don't think this is arguable at all.

So when considering that fact and the context of IT's injury, contract status, and the much greater uncertainty of the Brooklyn pick, I think Ainge was clearly justified in making this gamble of trading the Brooklyn pick.

[Big333223]

IT + Crowder + Zizic + BRK pick would have been better for Hayward and Horford. Heck, trading Tatum or Brown would probably be better for Horford and Hayward.

Danny is just talking out of both sides of his mouth. First it was that Kyrie fit our timeline better, with Tatum, Brown, etc. Now it's because Danny "owed it" to Horford and Hayward (two players IT recruited).

Injured IT, young Zizic, and a BRK pick that won't be ready to contribute until 2020-21 would not have been better for Hayward and Horford. And Crowder plays Hayward's position.

Kyrie is both younger than IT (better fits the timeline of the young guys) and in his prime (still fits the timeline of Hayward and Horford) and the most talented player moved in the deal (debate this if you like but Ainge clearly believes this and I think this is basically consensus). Ainge isn't "talking out of both sides of his mouth," it's that both things are true.

They're not both true.

Hayward signed to play with IT. Horford signed to play with IT. Suggesting that he traded IT + a good starter + a coveted trade asset that could have been used to bring in a fourth star out of a sense of obligation to Horford and Hayward is laughable.

If those assets were traded for a player that makes it more likely Hayward and Horford win a title (as Ainge obviously does believe) then not only is it not laughable, it makes perfect sense.

[CelticsQuestFor18]

He's a great GM, and always has been a complete tool.

What purpose does this comment serve?  Seems very insulting to IT.  Maybe he was a locker room problem that a rabid fanbase wasn't aware of.  Or, perhaps Danny is feeling insecure about mixed reactions to the trade. 

Presumably, it was Ainge's decision to make -- we can't know.  But he made this comment, and undoubtedly, many would argue that IT was very influential in landing 2 top FAs.  Then he replaced IT with a younger and very talented (but limited) cupcake that's also insecure about his IQ and loves to hear himself talk.  Are we in Boston, or LA?

Makes you really think Ainge never envisioned Isaiah (even if he was healthy) into our long term plans. That's how I looked at it.

[footey]

IT + Crowder + Zizic + BRK pick would have been better for Hayward and Horford. Heck, trading Tatum or Brown would probably be better for Horford and Hayward.

Danny is just talking out of both sides of his mouth. First it was that Kyrie fit our timeline better, with Tatum, Brown, etc. Now it's because Danny "owed it" to Horford and Hayward (two players IT recruited).

Disagree.  IT hurt, out until at least January. Who knows what happens then.  Much too much risk.  Healthy Kyrie a huge upgrade over hurt IT.  Crowder as you know is not that big a deal, especially given depth at his position (Morris, Brown and Tatum). And Zizic is not worth discussing, as far as helping Horford and Hayward now.

[footey]

IT + Crowder + Zizic + BRK pick would have been better for Hayward and Horford. Heck, trading Tatum or Brown would probably be better for Horford and Hayward.

Danny is just talking out of both sides of his mouth. First it was that Kyrie fit our timeline better, with Tatum, Brown, etc. Now it's because Danny "owed it" to Horford and Hayward (two players IT recruited).

Injured IT, young Zizic, and a BRK pick that won't be ready to contribute until 2020-21 would not have been better for Hayward and Horford. And Crowder plays Hayward's position.

Kyrie is bother younger than IT (better fits the timeline of the young guys) and in his prime (still fits the timeline of Hayward and Horford) and the most talented player moved in the deal (debate this if you like but Ainge clearly believes this and I think this is basically consensus). Ainge isn't "talking out of both sides of his mouth," it's that both things are true.

They're not both true.

Hayward signed to play with IT. Horford signed to play with IT. Suggesting that he traded IT + a good starter + a coveted trade asset that could have been used to bring in a fourth star out of a sense of obligation to Horford and Hayward is laughable.

They signed to play with healthy IT.  He no longer exists. Need to move on.  Obviously if IT was healthy, Ainge would not have offered the BKLN pick, or at least would have built in some protection (1-6).

[Tr1boy]

But not for IT4...

[jambr380]

They signed to play with healthy IT.  He no longer exists. Need to move on.  Obviously if IT was healthy, Ainge would not have offered the BKLN pick, or at least would have built in some protection (1-6).

I actually think Ainge makes this deal regardless of whether or not IT is healthy and I doubt that protections would have been added. Cleveland made this deal for the BKN pick, not so they could build a long-term team around IT. It's possible IT's injury allows them to sign him to a bargain-basement contract, but they are likely getting out of him what they need to; which is one solid playoff run playing the 'Kyrie' role, before Lebron moves on to another team. Then it is back to square one, except they are starting out with a killer asset in the BKN pick.

Trading IT also allows us to keep Smart. I really think his name should be added to Kyrie's when comparing the trade pieces.

If you believe Danny was not interested in signing IT to a big, long-term contract, then you should be [mostly] happy with this deal, and so should Horford and Hayward.

[Donoghus]

A combination of two events led to this;  IT's injury & Kyrie becoming available.   I think this was Danny adapting on the fly to those two events happening.  In his eyes, it lined up perfectly and also removed, what I think was a tough future decision, regarding IT's next contract negotiations which I think were shaping up to be quite contentious. 

If neither of those events happen, you're still looking at IT4 & BKN '18 on this roster today.  However, it wouldn't have surprised me if one or both were out of her by Summer '18. 

As I mentioned in another thread, I don't think the timeline got altered that much.  It's just that certain events lining up led to changes in personnel.

[SHAQATTACK]

A combination of two events led to this;  IT's injury & Kyrie becoming available.   I think this was Danny adapting on the fly to those two events happening.  In his eyes, it lined up perfectly and also removed, what I think was a tough future decision, regarding IT's next contract negotiations which I think were shaping up to be quite contentious. 

If neither of those events happen, you're still looking at IT4 & BKN '18 on this roster today.  However, it wouldn't have surprised me if one or both were out of her by Summer '18. 

As I mentioned in another thread, I don't think the timeline got altered that much.  It's just that certain events lining up led to changes in personnel.

well done!

[mainevent]

IT + Crowder + Zizic + BRK pick would have been better for Hayward and Horford. Heck, trading Tatum or Brown would probably be better for Horford and Hayward.

Danny is just talking out of both sides of his mouth. First it was that Kyrie fit our timeline better, with Tatum, Brown, etc. Now it's because Danny "owed it" to Horford and Hayward (two players IT recruited).

Tell me how YOU know this to be factual? I'm really curious how an injured IT, a rookie who hasn't played a second of NBA ball and who looked like he was moving in mud during SL ball, and a pick that has no plausible value at this time could coherently be better for anyone?  Your statement makes ZERO sense!

[GratefulCs]

But not for IT4...

he owes it to the big name free agents that agreed to sign here more than the player he rescued from the desert

IMO

[blink]

Maybe DA is alluding to the difference between a player you signed in free agency to a longer term deal and a player that was sent to you in a trade?  I am not sure there is a lot of difference, but a little bit.  We signed Horford and Hayward as free agents to come here and compete and they were given longer contracts with the assumption that they were here to compete for rings.

For IT, Crowder they were part of trades, and traded here before there was this expectation of seriously competing.  Again, I am not sure how big the difference is, but it seems like the undercurrent of the comment.