Author Topic: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?  (Read 2612 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #30 on: November 20, 2018, 04:16:04 PM »

Online Chris22

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5029
  • Tommy Points: 456
Irving, Beal, Brown, Tatum, and Horford looks pretty good to me.

Or Irving, Beal, Hayward, Tatum, and Horford.

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #31 on: November 20, 2018, 04:24:21 PM »

Offline smokeablount

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2313
  • Tommy Points: 171
  • When my account was born, Mark Blount was our C :(
Irving, Beal, Brown, Tatum, and Horford looks pretty good to me.

Or Irving, Beal, Hayward, Tatum, and Horford.

Yup. Either.

#1 keeps us younger and extends our timeline well past the warriors, and #2 is the trade that probably actually has to happen, and should leave us with the more versatile player.

I agree with whoever said Beal could make 5 all star teams. I see 3-5 at current pace.
Give us this pick, Almighty Red
And forgive us our tanking
As we forgive those who tanked against us
And lead us not into the lottery
But deliver us from losing

-Sexyscottish

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #32 on: November 20, 2018, 04:31:37 PM »

Offline Birdman

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4530
  • Tommy Points: 69
we be last team Washington deal with
C/PF-Horford, Baynes, Noel, Theis, Morris,
SF/SG- Tatum, Brown, Hayward, Smart, Semi, Clark
PG- Irving, Rozier, Larkin

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #33 on: November 20, 2018, 05:03:45 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5881
  • Tommy Points: 634
They'd have to trade too many pieces to be worth it.

Smart, Brown, Mook, Rozier ... that's almost half the rotation.

I'm going back to this because I think it's true.

I like Beal a lot. He really showed me something in that 2nd round series two years ago. But if you're not trading Kyrie or Horford (I wouldn't) and you're not traading Hayward (which would feel cruel to me and I don't know that anyone wants him right now anyway) then I just don't know how you make up the salaries and it still be worth it.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #34 on: November 20, 2018, 05:51:06 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • Larry Bird
  • *****************************
  • Posts: 29425
  • Tommy Points: 2238
brown smart and draft picks

I like this too, but Smart is the heart of this team. Brown, Rozier and picks would work too.

They want to move Wall so Ainge would have to help them do that.

Kyrie and Beal backcourt would be deadly. I'm sure Tatum would love to get his STL buddy.

Smart is my fav player ....but Celtics need another knock down shooter soooooooooooooooo bad .


I have other thought but they d be hugely unpopular to say.

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #35 on: November 20, 2018, 06:19:48 PM »

Online gouki88

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8935
  • Tommy Points: 380

Make no mistake - a healthy Beal is better than a healthy Hayward. I think (hope im wrong) Hayward will join the ranks of guys like Jamal Magloire and Tom Gugliotta in a few years as a guy people say - "he made an all star team once?!" A lot of Celtics are disillusioned about the type of player Hayward was even before we got him - a career 15/4 guy who isn't really elite at anything on the court.


I'm not going to argue over whether healthy Beal is better than healthy Hayward, but I think you're severely underrating Hayward here.

Last healthy season for Hayward:


21.9 pts, 5.4 reb, 3.5 ast, 1.0 stl

53.6% EFG ... 39.8% 3P (5.1 attempts) ... 84.4% FT on 5.9 attempts

.199 WS per game, 10.4 WS total


That wasn't a total fluke season, either.  Hayward was really, really good for three straight years before signing with Boston and getting hurt. 

Hayward also played 72, 66, 72, 77, 76, 80, 73 games to start his career before missing all of last season (except for a few minutes).  Availability is a valuable trait, as well.
Yeah, thatís also in addition to improving every single season (bar this one, for obvious reasons), and having almost a 250 game stretch (including playoffs, where he lifted his game further as the focal piece) of averaging 20/5/4.

To say heís a career 15/4 guy with no elite skill is pretty hilarious

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #36 on: November 20, 2018, 06:33:54 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5881
  • Tommy Points: 634

Make no mistake - a healthy Beal is better than a healthy Hayward. I think (hope im wrong) Hayward will join the ranks of guys like Jamal Magloire and Tom Gugliotta in a few years as a guy people say - "he made an all star team once?!" A lot of Celtics are disillusioned about the type of player Hayward was even before we got him - a career 15/4 guy who isn't really elite at anything on the court.


I'm not going to argue over whether healthy Beal is better than healthy Hayward, but I think you're severely underrating Hayward here.

Last healthy season for Hayward:


21.9 pts, 5.4 reb, 3.5 ast, 1.0 stl

53.6% EFG ... 39.8% 3P (5.1 attempts) ... 84.4% FT on 5.9 attempts

.199 WS per game, 10.4 WS total


That wasn't a total fluke season, either.  Hayward was really, really good for three straight years before signing with Boston and getting hurt. 

Hayward also played 72, 66, 72, 77, 76, 80, 73 games to start his career before missing all of last season (except for a few minutes).  Availability is a valuable trait, as well.
Yeah, thatís also in addition to improving every single season (bar this one, for obvious reasons), and having almost a 250 game stretch (including playoffs, where he lifted his game further as the focal piece) of averaging 20/5/4.

To say heís a career 15/4 guy with no elite skill is pretty hilarious

I think I land somewhere in the middle with Hayward. I was excited to sign him but while 20/5/4 are good numbers, they're not superstar numbers. They're certainly not Best Player On A Champion numbers. And when you look at the #3 guy on some recent champions (Klay Thompson, Kevin Love, Chris Bosh, Lamar Odom, Ray Allen) and take into account he was doing that as the #1 option on a mediocre team, they might not even be 2nd Best Player On A Champion numbers.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #37 on: November 20, 2018, 06:41:37 PM »

Online gouki88

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8935
  • Tommy Points: 380

Make no mistake - a healthy Beal is better than a healthy Hayward. I think (hope im wrong) Hayward will join the ranks of guys like Jamal Magloire and Tom Gugliotta in a few years as a guy people say - "he made an all star team once?!" A lot of Celtics are disillusioned about the type of player Hayward was even before we got him - a career 15/4 guy who isn't really elite at anything on the court.


I'm not going to argue over whether healthy Beal is better than healthy Hayward, but I think you're severely underrating Hayward here.

Last healthy season for Hayward:


21.9 pts, 5.4 reb, 3.5 ast, 1.0 stl

53.6% EFG ... 39.8% 3P (5.1 attempts) ... 84.4% FT on 5.9 attempts

.199 WS per game, 10.4 WS total


That wasn't a total fluke season, either.  Hayward was really, really good for three straight years before signing with Boston and getting hurt. 

Hayward also played 72, 66, 72, 77, 76, 80, 73 games to start his career before missing all of last season (except for a few minutes).  Availability is a valuable trait, as well.
Yeah, thatís also in addition to improving every single season (bar this one, for obvious reasons), and having almost a 250 game stretch (including playoffs, where he lifted his game further as the focal piece) of averaging 20/5/4.

To say heís a career 15/4 guy with no elite skill is pretty hilarious

I think I land somewhere in the middle with Hayward. I was excited to sign him but while 20/5/4 are good numbers, they're not superstar numbers. They're certainly not Best Player On A Champion numbers. And when you look at the #3 guy on some recent champions (Klay Thompson, Kevin Love, Chris Bosh, Lamar Odom, Ray Allen) and take into account he was doing that as the #1 option on a mediocre team, they might not even be 2nd Best Player On A Champion numbers.
I think you gotta take into account the snails pace with which Utah played with Hayward.

Per100 possessions he averaged 30.5/7.7/5.7. Compare that to All-Star PG13, who hovers around 32/9/5, or All-Star Jimmy Butler (29/7.5/6/2.5) and I think you have a better insight into Haywards game.

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #38 on: November 20, 2018, 06:42:48 PM »

Offline byennie

  • Webmaster
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2257
  • Tommy Points: 2964
The salaries make this difficult, but this is at least plausible from a roster standpoint?

Smart, Morris + filler (Yabusele, Bird, Ojeleye)
<=>
Beal, Jeff Green

Irving/ Beal/ Hayward/ Tatum/ Horford
Wanamaker/ Rozier/ Brown/ Theis/ Baynes
Green/ Williams

+ 3 roster spots.


Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #39 on: November 20, 2018, 06:45:13 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5881
  • Tommy Points: 634

Make no mistake - a healthy Beal is better than a healthy Hayward. I think (hope im wrong) Hayward will join the ranks of guys like Jamal Magloire and Tom Gugliotta in a few years as a guy people say - "he made an all star team once?!" A lot of Celtics are disillusioned about the type of player Hayward was even before we got him - a career 15/4 guy who isn't really elite at anything on the court.


I'm not going to argue over whether healthy Beal is better than healthy Hayward, but I think you're severely underrating Hayward here.

Last healthy season for Hayward:


21.9 pts, 5.4 reb, 3.5 ast, 1.0 stl

53.6% EFG ... 39.8% 3P (5.1 attempts) ... 84.4% FT on 5.9 attempts

.199 WS per game, 10.4 WS total


That wasn't a total fluke season, either.  Hayward was really, really good for three straight years before signing with Boston and getting hurt. 

Hayward also played 72, 66, 72, 77, 76, 80, 73 games to start his career before missing all of last season (except for a few minutes).  Availability is a valuable trait, as well.
Yeah, that’s also in addition to improving every single season (bar this one, for obvious reasons), and having almost a 250 game stretch (including playoffs, where he lifted his game further as the focal piece) of averaging 20/5/4.

To say he’s a career 15/4 guy with no elite skill is pretty hilarious

I think I land somewhere in the middle with Hayward. I was excited to sign him but while 20/5/4 are good numbers, they're not superstar numbers. They're certainly not Best Player On A Champion numbers. And when you look at the #3 guy on some recent champions (Klay Thompson, Kevin Love, Chris Bosh, Lamar Odom, Ray Allen) and take into account he was doing that as the #1 option on a mediocre team, they might not even be 2nd Best Player On A Champion numbers.
I think you gotta take into account the snails pace with which Utah played with Hayward.

Per100 possessions he averaged 30.5/7.7/5.7. Compare that to All-Star PG13, who hovers around 32/9/5, or All-Star Jimmy Butler (29/7.5/6/2.5) and I think you have a better insight into Haywards game.

I don't necessarily like manipulating the numbers that way. It assumes that changing Hayward's pace wouldn't have changed any other aspect of his game. Would he have shot as well if he were playing faster? Would his decisions have been as good? There's no way to know.

I'd rather look at what he actually produced and what he actually produced, puts him more in line with #3 guys on championship teams and nowhere near the likes of Durant, Curry, Lebron, Dirk, etc.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #40 on: November 20, 2018, 06:46:02 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5881
  • Tommy Points: 634
The salaries make this difficult, but this is at least plausible from a roster standpoint?

Smart, Morris + filler (Yabusele, Bird, Ojeleye)
<=>
Beal, Jeff Green

Irving/ Beal/ Hayward/ Tatum/ Horford
Wanamaker/ Rozier/ Brown/ Theis/ Baynes
Green/ Williams

+ 3 roster spots.

TP for having the balls to suggest they bring back Jeff Green.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #41 on: November 20, 2018, 06:48:21 PM »

Online gouki88

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8935
  • Tommy Points: 380
The salaries make this difficult, but this is at least plausible from a roster standpoint?

Smart, Morris + filler (Yabusele, Bird, Ojeleye)
<=>
Beal, Jeff Green

Irving/ Beal/ Hayward/ Tatum/ Horford
Wanamaker/ Rozier/ Brown/ Theis/ Baynes
Green/ Williams

+ 3 roster spots.

TP for having the balls to suggest they bring back Jeff Green.
He won't be able to kill us in the playoffs again!

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #42 on: November 20, 2018, 06:50:47 PM »

Online gouki88

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8935
  • Tommy Points: 380

Make no mistake - a healthy Beal is better than a healthy Hayward. I think (hope im wrong) Hayward will join the ranks of guys like Jamal Magloire and Tom Gugliotta in a few years as a guy people say - "he made an all star team once?!" A lot of Celtics are disillusioned about the type of player Hayward was even before we got him - a career 15/4 guy who isn't really elite at anything on the court.


I'm not going to argue over whether healthy Beal is better than healthy Hayward, but I think you're severely underrating Hayward here.

Last healthy season for Hayward:


21.9 pts, 5.4 reb, 3.5 ast, 1.0 stl

53.6% EFG ... 39.8% 3P (5.1 attempts) ... 84.4% FT on 5.9 attempts

.199 WS per game, 10.4 WS total


That wasn't a total fluke season, either.  Hayward was really, really good for three straight years before signing with Boston and getting hurt. 

Hayward also played 72, 66, 72, 77, 76, 80, 73 games to start his career before missing all of last season (except for a few minutes).  Availability is a valuable trait, as well.
Yeah, thatís also in addition to improving every single season (bar this one, for obvious reasons), and having almost a 250 game stretch (including playoffs, where he lifted his game further as the focal piece) of averaging 20/5/4.

To say heís a career 15/4 guy with no elite skill is pretty hilarious

I think I land somewhere in the middle with Hayward. I was excited to sign him but while 20/5/4 are good numbers, they're not superstar numbers. They're certainly not Best Player On A Champion numbers. And when you look at the #3 guy on some recent champions (Klay Thompson, Kevin Love, Chris Bosh, Lamar Odom, Ray Allen) and take into account he was doing that as the #1 option on a mediocre team, they might not even be 2nd Best Player On A Champion numbers.
I think you gotta take into account the snails pace with which Utah played with Hayward.

Per100 possessions he averaged 30.5/7.7/5.7. Compare that to All-Star PG13, who hovers around 32/9/5, or All-Star Jimmy Butler (29/7.5/6/2.5) and I think you have a better insight into Haywards game.

I don't necessarily like manipulating the numbers that way. It assumes that changing Hayward's pace wouldn't have changed any other aspect of his game. Would he have shot as well if he were playing faster? Would his decisions have been as good? There's no way to know.

I'd rather look at what he actually produced and what he actually produced, puts him more in line with #3 guys on championship teams and nowhere near the likes of Durant, Curry, Lebron, Dirk, etc.
I don't think it's manipulating the numbers. It's just the most suitable way to account for pace, because of the considerably lesser amount of possessions Hayward got.

They don't really put him in line of those superstars either. I mean, LeBron has had multiple per100 possession seasons of 40/10/10

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #43 on: November 20, 2018, 06:53:44 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5881
  • Tommy Points: 634

Make no mistake - a healthy Beal is better than a healthy Hayward. I think (hope im wrong) Hayward will join the ranks of guys like Jamal Magloire and Tom Gugliotta in a few years as a guy people say - "he made an all star team once?!" A lot of Celtics are disillusioned about the type of player Hayward was even before we got him - a career 15/4 guy who isn't really elite at anything on the court.


I'm not going to argue over whether healthy Beal is better than healthy Hayward, but I think you're severely underrating Hayward here.

Last healthy season for Hayward:


21.9 pts, 5.4 reb, 3.5 ast, 1.0 stl

53.6% EFG ... 39.8% 3P (5.1 attempts) ... 84.4% FT on 5.9 attempts

.199 WS per game, 10.4 WS total


That wasn't a total fluke season, either.  Hayward was really, really good for three straight years before signing with Boston and getting hurt. 

Hayward also played 72, 66, 72, 77, 76, 80, 73 games to start his career before missing all of last season (except for a few minutes).  Availability is a valuable trait, as well.
Yeah, thatís also in addition to improving every single season (bar this one, for obvious reasons), and having almost a 250 game stretch (including playoffs, where he lifted his game further as the focal piece) of averaging 20/5/4.

To say heís a career 15/4 guy with no elite skill is pretty hilarious

I think I land somewhere in the middle with Hayward. I was excited to sign him but while 20/5/4 are good numbers, they're not superstar numbers. They're certainly not Best Player On A Champion numbers. And when you look at the #3 guy on some recent champions (Klay Thompson, Kevin Love, Chris Bosh, Lamar Odom, Ray Allen) and take into account he was doing that as the #1 option on a mediocre team, they might not even be 2nd Best Player On A Champion numbers.
I think you gotta take into account the snails pace with which Utah played with Hayward.

Per100 possessions he averaged 30.5/7.7/5.7. Compare that to All-Star PG13, who hovers around 32/9/5, or All-Star Jimmy Butler (29/7.5/6/2.5) and I think you have a better insight into Haywards game.

I don't necessarily like manipulating the numbers that way. It assumes that changing Hayward's pace wouldn't have changed any other aspect of his game. Would he have shot as well if he were playing faster? Would his decisions have been as good? There's no way to know.

I'd rather look at what he actually produced and what he actually produced, puts him more in line with #3 guys on championship teams and nowhere near the likes of Durant, Curry, Lebron, Dirk, etc.
I don't think it's manipulating the numbers. It's just the most suitable way to account for pace, because of the considerably lesser amount of possessions Hayward got.

They don't really put him in line of those superstars either. I mean, LeBron has had multiple per100 possession seasons of 40/10/10

I mean, you're literally taking the raw numbers and manipulating them to account for pace.

I just don't like accounting for pace when we're not accounting for anything else, like how a slower or faster pace affects someone's decision making or playing style, etc.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008

Re: Bradley Beal on the block. Should Celts make an offer?
« Reply #44 on: November 20, 2018, 07:10:08 PM »

Online gouki88

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8935
  • Tommy Points: 380

Make no mistake - a healthy Beal is better than a healthy Hayward. I think (hope im wrong) Hayward will join the ranks of guys like Jamal Magloire and Tom Gugliotta in a few years as a guy people say - "he made an all star team once?!" A lot of Celtics are disillusioned about the type of player Hayward was even before we got him - a career 15/4 guy who isn't really elite at anything on the court.


I'm not going to argue over whether healthy Beal is better than healthy Hayward, but I think you're severely underrating Hayward here.

Last healthy season for Hayward:


21.9 pts, 5.4 reb, 3.5 ast, 1.0 stl

53.6% EFG ... 39.8% 3P (5.1 attempts) ... 84.4% FT on 5.9 attempts

.199 WS per game, 10.4 WS total


That wasn't a total fluke season, either.  Hayward was really, really good for three straight years before signing with Boston and getting hurt. 

Hayward also played 72, 66, 72, 77, 76, 80, 73 games to start his career before missing all of last season (except for a few minutes).  Availability is a valuable trait, as well.
Yeah, thatís also in addition to improving every single season (bar this one, for obvious reasons), and having almost a 250 game stretch (including playoffs, where he lifted his game further as the focal piece) of averaging 20/5/4.

To say heís a career 15/4 guy with no elite skill is pretty hilarious

I think I land somewhere in the middle with Hayward. I was excited to sign him but while 20/5/4 are good numbers, they're not superstar numbers. They're certainly not Best Player On A Champion numbers. And when you look at the #3 guy on some recent champions (Klay Thompson, Kevin Love, Chris Bosh, Lamar Odom, Ray Allen) and take into account he was doing that as the #1 option on a mediocre team, they might not even be 2nd Best Player On A Champion numbers.
I think you gotta take into account the snails pace with which Utah played with Hayward.

Per100 possessions he averaged 30.5/7.7/5.7. Compare that to All-Star PG13, who hovers around 32/9/5, or All-Star Jimmy Butler (29/7.5/6/2.5) and I think you have a better insight into Haywards game.

I don't necessarily like manipulating the numbers that way. It assumes that changing Hayward's pace wouldn't have changed any other aspect of his game. Would he have shot as well if he were playing faster? Would his decisions have been as good? There's no way to know.

I'd rather look at what he actually produced and what he actually produced, puts him more in line with #3 guys on championship teams and nowhere near the likes of Durant, Curry, Lebron, Dirk, etc.
I don't think it's manipulating the numbers. It's just the most suitable way to account for pace, because of the considerably lesser amount of possessions Hayward got.

They don't really put him in line of those superstars either. I mean, LeBron has had multiple per100 possession seasons of 40/10/10

I mean, you're literally taking the raw numbers and manipulating them to account for pace.

I just don't like accounting for pace when we're not accounting for anything else, like how a slower or faster pace affects someone's decision making or playing style, etc.
I get all that, but when you're referring to his numbers maybe not being up to par I just think there's a pretty solid reason as to why.

We've seen him play at a higher pace, like during the last playoff run in Utah, and his numbers speak for themselves.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required