***2021-2022 NBA Season Thread***

[Dr. Do Itch Big]

Lot of speculation in that article. 

[daveakl]

16 minutes ago, Dr. Do Itch Big said:

Lot of speculation in that article. 

Yup, although history is not kind to guards with his injury at all.

 

Makes me wonder if Luck doesn't have the exact same injury in his shoulder. 

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I still think everyone is viewing the Kyrie trade from the wrong side of the table. The Celtics entered the season with a 5'9 guard who is approaching 30 and entering the final year of his contract and was also coming off a pretty terrifying injury. They didn't want to sign him to a long-term deal, but he was the most popular player on the team in years, and his leaving would cripple their offense.

 

So, from that perspective, Kryie is an amazing haul.

 

Everyone is looking at this from the Cavs' point of view though.

[Predicto]

Agreed.   Even putting aside the injury, IT was going to demand a max contract, and Ainge wasn't going to give it to him because of his age and lack of defense, and so he was going to walk at the end of the year.  Anything you got for him in trade was a bonus.   

 

Ainge might have given up a bit too much in the trade, but part of that is because peoples' perspective on trade value has been warped by the weird Jimmy Butler to Minnesota thing.   The Butler trade was not the new normal.  That was just straight incompetence by the Bulls FO.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

 

[Going Commando]

4 hours ago, Predicto said:

Ainge might have given up a bit too much in the trade, but part of that is because peoples' perspective on trade value has been warped by the weird Jimmy Butler to Minnesota thing.   The Butler trade was not the new normal.  That was just straight incompetence by the Bulls FO.

 

What?  

1 - Jimmy Butler.  

2 - Paul George.  

3 - DeMarcus Cousins.

4 - Chris Paul.

 

All traded for a song.  And that's just the last 6 months.  Cleveland was in a horrible spot coming into this offseason.  LeBron is an expiring who everyone thinks is gone next summer.  Irving was disgruntled and asked to be traded.  No draft picks.  Hemorrhaging money on payroll the last two seasons (they operated at a loss of 90 million somehow) and no cap flexibilty whatsoever.

 

Boston saved them.  Ainge got butt****ed in the trade and he has horribly bungled the past two offseasons.  He had the best opportunity to rebuild that just about anyone has ever had because the breathtaking stupidity of the Nets and the Clippers and the flexibility he obtained from the amazingly shrewd Jae Crowder, Avery Bradley, and Isaiah Thomas deals.  And his grand achievement was to turn all of those resources into Kyrie Irving, Gordon Hayward, and Al Horford .  He absolutely could have had Jimmy Butler and/or Paul George.  He could have had Cousins.  Instead he paid so much more for less.

 

Ainge low-key sucks.

[Going Commando]

Better "big three"?

 

Kyrie Irving + Gordon Hayward + Al Horford

 

Or

 

Alex English + Fat Lever + Calvin Natt

[Bozo the kKklown]

Kyrie>Butler and George, as offensive playoff performers.

 

Steve, you have to take the homer shades off. Boston's team is damn good. It was a great trade for them.

[Going Commando]

59 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Kyrie>Butler and George, as offensive playoff performers.

 

Steve, you have to take the homer shades off. Boston's team is damn good. It was a great trade for them.

 

That's severely couching the comparison.  Both of those guys are way better players than him.  Kyrie Irving led teams don't even sniff the playoffs.

 

It was a bad trade that capped off a poorly executed rebuild.  If Ainge was planning to move on from IT all along, he should have drafted Fultz and then used the 2018 pick to get the other foundation piece in the draft.  He could have rebuilt around two young stars with a team with enough support to win immediately and avoid the endless tank churn that stunts the growth of young stars.  He wasted this opportunity to build a shallow team around three low upside stars, none of whom are even top 15 players.

[Skin'emAlive]

Fultz doesn't put you in win now mode ( and getting to the conference finals means that's where you are now). ALso, Horford doesn't have 2 years to wait until Fultz is ready. Additionally, Irving is much better than Thomas, just as Hayward with Stevens is light years better than Crowder. And they still have Brown coming into year two, and Tatum. Hell, if they wanted to, they could watch the regression of Al, and make a move for Cousins by the break. Cleveland won the trade, because they got a ridiculous haul for a guy who was leaving. But that doesn't mean Boston was fleeced. They are better than last year, and still have young potential and fire power to make another move if needed. 

[daveakl]

5 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

Cleveland won the trade, because they got a ridiculous haul for a guy who was leaving.

When was he leaving? He's under contract this year and next.

 

The whole notion of Cleveland winning the trade is based off the pick from Brooklyn being #1-3. What happens if it's #5, the big man rookie doesn't pan out, and IT barely plays this year?

[Going Commando]

25 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

Fultz doesn't put you in win now mode ( and getting to the conference finals means that's where you are now). ALso, Horford doesn't have 2 years to wait until Fultz is ready. Additionally, Irving is much better than Thomas, just as Hayward with Stevens is light years better than Crowder. And they still have Brown coming into year two, and Tatum. Hell, if they wanted to, they could watch the regression of Al, and make a move for Cousins by the break. Cleveland won the trade, because they got a ridiculous haul for a guy who was leaving. But that doesn't mean Boston was fleeced. They are better than last year, and still have young potential and fire power to make another move if needed. 

 

- Thomas was much better than Irving was last season, do you really expect Kyrie Irving to be much better than that this year?

- Gordon Hayward isn't pushing anyone into contention.  He's expensive and Crowder was one of the best contracts in the league.

- Who cares if Fultz is on the same window as Horford?  Horford's a role player.  You don't schedule your rebuild around him.  That would have been like the Wizards punting on drafting Beal so they could win with Nene.

- How are they dumping Al Horford if he continues to decline?

- How are they getting Cousins?  How are they keeping him?

 

This is who they are.  Jaylen Brown = Kelly Oubre.  His future ceiling is quality role player.  Jayson Tatum is their only lottery ticket.

 

Cleveland won not just because they got a big haul for an overrated, disgruntled player.  But also because they went from being way over the apron and having no assets to having the trade assets and financial flexibility to either rebuild quickly or bring in another star to keep LeBron in Cleveland.

 

I think people are talking themselves into Irving and Hayward being way better than they actually are in order to justify Boston's offseason.

[Going Commando]

34 minutes ago, daveakl said:

When was he leaving? He's under contract this year and next.

 

The whole notion of Cleveland winning the trade is based off the pick from Brooklyn being #1-3. What happens if it's #5, the big man rookie doesn't pan out, and IT barely plays this year?

 

He requested a trade.  He was leaving after next season.  They dealt him a year early and got a huge haul for it.

 

Take a look at Brooklyn's roster.  It's the worst in the NBA by some distance.  When Jeremy Lin and Allen Crabbe are your stars, you're going to finish with a top three pick.

 

But Cleveland can also flip the pick and/or LeBron himself if they wanted to.

 

Cleveland is going to win the conference again whether or not IT plays.

[daveakl]

LeBron has a no trade clause. He isn't getting flipped.

 

Clevelands best shot is to trade love, the pick from Brooklyn, and other stuff for Davis and pray IT is healthy. And that's if NO is even willing to trade him.

 

Even then Celtics can offer Horford and a boat load of picks for Davis and trump Clevelands offer.

[Bozo the kKklown]

2 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

That's severely couching the comparison.  Both of those guys are way better players than him.  Kyrie Irving led teams don't even sniff the playoffs.

 

It was a bad trade that capped off a poorly executed rebuild.  If Ainge was planning to move on from IT all along, he should have drafted Fultz and then used the 2018 pick to get the other foundation piece in the draft.  He could have rebuilt around two young stars with a team with enough support to win immediately and avoid the endless tank churn that stunts the growth of young stars.  He wasted this opportunity to build a shallow team around three low upside stars, none of whom are even top 15 players.

are they? and will they be? Check Butler and George numbers at 24 and check Kyrie's.

 

You are talking from a strictly homer standpoint. Kyrie is genuinely one of the best playoff performers in the league. He has been better than George and Butler during the postseason.

 

Boston still has the a few top picks as well. The 2019 first from Sacramento/Philly, and may eventually have an unprotected pick from Memphis at the moment when they get really bad. I say that because they could still move a pick or two to get an Anthony Davis or so forth. You say its nonsense? Who thought the Celtics would get Kyrie when Kyrie initially asked for the trade?

 

The Celtics traded for a guy who is a great playoff performer and added another scorer, which they didn't have last year. 

 

I have gotten on Ainge a lot over the years, and think he has been overrated for his hoarding of assets but this is was a great move for the Celtics. And it is a great move for the Cavs.

 

 

Also, why would anyone take Fultz over Kyrie? This makes zero sense.

 

the thought of LOLing at the Celtics for improving on Thomas and Crowder with Hayward and Kyrie.

Edited September 8, 2017 by BenningRoadSkin

[Skin'emAlive]

Every good player is expensive unless you are trading your soul to piggy back off The splash brothers. Hayward is better than Crowder, and provides them with not 1 but two go-to threats to close out the game. Combined with Horford's illegal screens and Smart's scrapping ability, they have a legit shot. And they still have Brown, Tatum, and Rozier in the pipeline. We have Oubre and maybe Satoransky? 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Again, I don't think anyone is really looking at this from Ainge's point of view.

 

I suspect that Ainge was completely stunned with his team's performance last year and can only assume that Brad Stevens is a magician. Because the talent level on that team was not #1 seed caliber. And it showed during the playoffs when they struggled with Washington and were run out of the gym by Cleveland.

 

There's a reason that they turned over 75 percent of the roster. And I think that he thinks that IT's season was a total aberration. He's a good player, but that was insane. So, he was selling very high on a very flawed asset.

 

Finally, I think Ainge was getting tired of coming in second on these types of deals. Eventually you have to .....you know...or get off the pot.

 

Now, he has two years for Kyrie, Hayward, and Stevens to either fall in love with each other or look for plan B.

 

Everyone is a disgruntled and uncoachable player right up to the moment they aren't. (Apparently I was the only one who watched the Lakers-Celtics documentary and saw all the hate that Magic got when he ran Westhead out of town). I'm not sure Kyrie has ever really been coached. He was at Duke, but he never played there. He came in as a rookie into chaos in Cleveland. He's spent the past three years basically being coached by Lebron.

 

It's possible he may find nirvana with Stevens.

 

The 2004 Pistons are everyone's platonic ideal of a team being better than the sum of its parts. But look at the malcontents on that team. That roster was filled with coach killers, sociopaths, and Darkos all the way down. For whatever reason, they all agreed to be coached by Larry Brown.

 

I tend to think that's what happens in the NBA. The coaching matters if the players agree to be coached. I don't think Steve Kerr is any kind of coaching genius. But for whatever reason, that team has agreed to do what he wants. And I'm totally going to be proven right in three years when Draymond Green is somewhere else on a 40 win team and punches a coach during a game. Come on, you know that's happening.

 

 

[Going Commando]

49 minutes ago, daveakl said:

LeBron has a no trade clause. He isn't getting flipped.

 

Clevelands best shot is to trade love, the pick from Brooklyn, and other stuff for Davis and pray IT is healthy. And that's if NO is even willing to trade him.

 

Even then Celtics can offer Horford and a boat load of picks for Davis and trump Clevelands offer.

 

The NTC isn't what would hold up a LeBron trade.  It's the team control.  And the fact that Cleveland would be the one who wants to build a team around the banana boat crew.

 

Boston can't come close to matching Love + the Brookyn pick.  But Cleveland's best move is to use the Brooklyn pick to get Chris Paul.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

58 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

 

 

 

Also, why would anyone take Fultz over Kyrie? This makes zero sense.

 

 

I never understand this logic: Instead of trading for Player X, you should draft Player Y who if all the planets align will be almost as good as Player X in three years.

 

This was the same logic involved when the Cavs originally made the deal for Love. "They should keep Wiggins. He could be Scottie Pippen in three years....."

 

Well, he's not Scottie Pippen. He's not even Toni Kukoc. I don't think he's even Ron Harper.

 

Out of all sports, in the NBA, the known quantity is almost always better than the unknown quantity.

[Going Commando]

15 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

I never understand this logic: Instead of trading for Player X, you should draft Player Y who if all the planets align will be almost as good as Player X in three years.

 

 

I want to revisit this in five or six years when Philly is a powerhouse and Boston is rebuilding after a modest run as a top three seed for a few seasons with maybe a 4 game loss to the Warriors in there.

 

Fultz's upside is James Harden, not a slightly lesser version of Kyrie (which would be what, Kemba  Walker?)

 

Fultz also has the distinct advantage of hitting his prime long after the end of Golden State's run.

 

I need people to define how good they think Kyrie Irving actually is.  Because I think he is one of the most overrated players in the league.   Amazing what riding LeBron's coattails and making some novel Nike commercials can do for you.

 

Difference between this situation and the Wiggins-Love situation is that Boston doesn't have Prime LeBron.

 

Wiggins was also a sketchier prospect than Fultz.  His season at Kansas wasn't great. And regardless, draft picks are valuable in the NBA.  NBA fans have this misconception that they aren't because there are so many bad front offices that **** them up.  Most of the good teams in the league were built with the draft.

[Bozo the kKklown]

8 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Wiggins was also a sketchier prospect than Fultz.  His season at Kansas wasn't great. And regardless, draft picks are valuable in the NBA.  NBA fans have this misconception that they aren't because there are so many bad front offices that **** them up.  Most of the good teams in the league were built with the draft.

Wiggins was not a sketchier prospect than Fultz. That's just not a true statement. Wiggins was anointed as the next great NBA wing at like 16. His season at Kansas actually wasn't bad at all an his team made the tournament and he lead them in scoring. 

 

Also no no one is downplaying how good Fultz could be, but you are downplaying how great Kyrie is and could become. (He just turned 25 a few weeks ago)

 

I actually think Philly could become a powerhouse but that's because of Embiid being the transcendent talent at the five, and not because of Simmons and Fultz.

 

But you are being a homer with the Kyrie slander.

 

Edited September 8, 2017 by BenningRoadSkin

[Skin'emAlive]

24 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I want to revisit this in five or six years when Philly is a powerhouse and Boston is rebuilding after a modest run as a top three seed for a few seasons with maybe a 4 game loss to the Warriors in there.

 

Fultz's upside is James Harden, not a slightly lesser version of Kyrie (which would be what, Kemba  Walker?)

 

Fultz also has the distinct advantage of hitting his prime long after the end of Golden State's run.

 

I need people to define how good they think Kyrie Irving actually is.  Because I think he is one of the most overrated players in the league.   Amazing what riding LeBron's coattails and making some novel Nike commercials can do for you.

 

Difference between this situation and the Wiggins-Love situation is that Boston doesn't have Prime LeBron.

 

Wiggins was also a sketchier prospect than Fultz.  His season at Kansas wasn't great. And regardless, draft picks are valuable in the NBA.  NBA fans have this misconception that they aren't because there are so many bad front offices that **** them up.  Most of the good teams in the league were built with the draft.

 

Boston is in the best possible scenario outside of golden state. They had and still have multiple quality picks, a top tier coach, a strong fan base, and are coming off a top seeded season out of nowhere. They were in a position to trade assets for contention now while still having the possibility at a restart years from now with the other acquired 1sts. Irving isn't a world beater... But he has proven he can step up in crunch time, and plays a little more defense. It's not like IT was passing the ball or anything either...

[daveakl]

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

The NTC isn't what would hold up a LeBron trade.  It's the team control.  And the fact that Cleveland would be the one who wants to build a team around the banana boat crew.

 

Boston can't come close to matching Love + the Brookyn pick.  But Cleveland's best move is to use the Brooklyn pick to get Chris Paul.

Your scenarios are all out of wack.

 

Cleveland isn't giving up Love + the Brooklyn pick to get Paul and Houston isn't trading Paul for the Brooklyn pick and a poo poo platter.

 

No NBA team is trading the farm for LeBron when 1) he isn't going to resign there and 2) he's going to veto it anyway.

 

You would rather have Love + the Brooklyn pick vs. Horford + 4 1st round picks?

[Going Commando]

14 minutes ago, daveakl said:

You would rather have Love + the Brooklyn pick vs. Horford + 4 1st round picks?

 

Absolutely.  That's not even a debate.  The Brooklyn pick alone is worth more than all of those late first round picks combined.  Remember how ****ing terrible Brooklyn is?

 

Kevin Love is an All Star.  Al Horford is a max contract role player in decline.  He's going to have negative trade value soon.

 

If I'm Houston, the only reason I don't say Hell yes to a Chris Paul for Kevin Love swap is if I am planning on going after LeBron himself.  And if that's the case, I offer Harden for LeBron and the Brooklyn pick.

 

If I can't get a long term commitment from CP3, then I probably say yes to CP3 for the Brooklyn pick and ballast too.  Either way, I've traded up from a paperclip to a house by moving the likes of Patrick Beverly and Lou Williams for a premium asset.  Might even be able to get Love and the Brooklyn pick for CP3, depending on how motivated Cleveland is to keep LeBron.

 

The reason I do it if I'm Cleveland is because getting CP3 probably gets both him and LeBron to stay.

Edited September 8, 2017 by stevemcqueen1