AD will not sign extension and has requested a trade.

[CitySushi]

Maybe. That's why I said someone may still take a chance. But the only way to have a chance at depressing the market would be to be adamant about it.

As I said, with PG and Kawhi, their agents put out the message that they "preferred LA, but would consider other destinations".

Rich Paul needs to make it clear that AD won't consider any other destinations. That would likely also carry more weight coming from him.

But again, I agree that there's a good chance that someone will decide that 1 year of AD is better than never having him.

Well the Pelicans still hold the cards because AD's contract is very manage-able in the 25M range for the next year. On top of that he's a piece that can put a contending team over the top. At worst they can trade him next season to a potential contender.

Even if AD says he'll only re-sign with the Lakers, if a team who can acquire him can get a championship in that window while he's still with their team, I think it makes it a risk worth taking. IMO.

 

[thunderc]

The problem is this only matters if he really wont consider other options. AD might be open to other destinations crazy as you might think that sounds.

So someone just might be open to playing for a team besides the Lakers? Shocker!

 

[CitySushi]

So someone just might be open to playing for a team besides the Lakers? Shocker!

Paul George confirmed to the Lakers. Oh wait...

 

[shopson67]

I completely disagree with you on this point. Smart isn't "the key" in any potential trade, but he is a good additional piece and would be an asset on a rebuilding team.

His contract is very reasonable... that's not even an issue. Just as important, though, is his competitive attitude that is unlikely to flag even in a rebuilding scenario. He could assume a role as team leader in terms of toughness.

It's notable that you criticize me for being a homer... and then go full homer on your take of hometown players.

If I've fallen for anything re: Lonzo... I'm not the only one.

Regarding Zubac... the guy might have been a nice piece to develop and get into 10 or 20 years ago. But no one should be excited about having him on the team in 2019. He might give you some pt's and rebounds on certain nights... but he is a big defensive liability and that's never, ever going to change. Ever.

The plus athleticism of Williams III makes him a much better developmental prospect. I have no doubt in my mind that if Williams was on the Lakers this season swatting shots and catching lobs from LeBron, you would be singing a very different tune.

For a rebuilding team like the Pel's would be... it isn't necessarily fatal that (in worst case scenarios) some of these picks might defer. Gathering picks is valuable to a rebuilding team willy nilly.

The Memphis pick is the real gem of the bunch. It's tough to put a negative spin on that one... it's a very good piece.

I won't argue the point re: Kuzma and Ingram. Even if I grant, for the sake of argument, that they are maybe slightly better than Brown... neither is significantly so... and Kuzma has the lowest ceiling of the 3.

This aspect of the debate just doesn't seem like deal breaker type stuff to me.

Williams may be athletic, but cannot spread the floor, so is really not much different from Zubac. Zubac is more limited athletically, but has improved footwork and a post game. Williams is more of an athlete than a polished player right now. We're also talking 6'9 vs 7'1.

Re: Lonzo: You aren't the only one. Casual observers obsess over points.

Smart may be a good additional piece, but only if the Pels want to carry his salary. They could use that cap space elsewhere, and in such a case KCP's expiring contract would be much more enticing.

The only negative about the Memphis pick is that it may not happen until 2021, by which the current GM and coach could be long gone (and Memphis may improve by then, dropping that pick down the first round a bit).

I didn't mean to imply that deferring picks would be fatal (other than in the case of the Clippers pick, which eventually becomes a 2nd rounder if the they stay in the lottery this year and next). That uncertainty (especially with the Celtics unable to deal them until after they have been made due to the Kyrie limitations) does hurt a bit though.

 

[Gman]

Team control for the next 8 years or so, or a guy who could potentially leave in another year? Especially when you don't have a championship window any time soon...this makes it a no-brainer with who I'm choosing.

Honestly, AD is a beast but I wouldn't give up Luka. That's just me

After reading opinions like ^this^ about Luka.... I find the following interesting:

If I suggest that the Celtics shouldn't necessarily throw Tatum into a trade package for AD... many folks in here treat me like I'm either crazy, a homer, or both.

But if it's suggested that Luka be used to go after AD... that's a reasonable take, apparently.

Are the two situations really that different?

Teams want to keep team up their stars... not trade one for the other.

 

[CitySushi]

After reading opinions like ^this^ about Luka.... I find the following interesting:

If I suggest that the Celtics shouldn't necessarily throw Tatum into a trade package for AD... many folks in here treat me like I'm either crazy, a homer, or both.

But if it's suggested that Luka be used to go after AD... that's a reasonable take, apparently.

Are the two situations really that different?

Teams want to keep team up their stars... not trade one for the other.

Tatum, IMO, is more flexible to get rid of because the drop off between say him and Jaylen Brown is not significantly different. The Celtics have so many capable wings that you have to view Tatum separately than you would Luka.

It's not the talent that separates Luka and Tatum's availability, it's 1) The competitive windows of the teams 2) surrounding talent and 3) replacement level talent for playing being traded.

Luka and Tatum are two entirely separate situations.

 

[bksballer89]

Bucks teaming AD up with Giannis for a year and half would be dope

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

Bucks teaming AD up with Giannis for a year and half would be dope

Raptors get him for Siakam/OG/JV. Win title. Re-sign Kawhi. Sign Boogie. Win next title. Brow re-signs. Win next 4 titles. Lebron retires after missing playoffs for three years in a row.

 

[Gman]

Williams may be athletic, but cannot spread the floor, so is really not much different from Zubac. Zubac is more limited athletically, but has improved footwork and a post game. Williams is more of an athlete than a polished player right now. We're also talking 6'9 vs 7'1.

"Really not much different"? That's crazy talk. Zubac and Williams are completely different 5's.

The key difference is defense... Williams projects as very strong defensive potential, Zubac is a defensive liability with no hope of any different in the future.

Re: height... Williams' wingspan makes up for his lack of traditional height.

Re: Lonzo: You aren't the only one. Casual observers obsess over points.

Fine with agreeing to disagree on Lonzo. It's hard to believe any franchise would be super motivated to grab him when considering his entire package: shooting %'s on the court and baggage off the court.

Smart may be a good additional piece, but only if the Pels want to carry his salary. They could use that cap space elsewhere, and in such a case KCP's expiring contract would be much more enticing.

I don't follow you on these salary points at all... N.O. would be in full rebuilding mode... that are not a serious contender to get elite players any time soon... therefore, clearing salary cap space in the near team by gaining an expiring contract is simply not a huge consideration.

The only negative about the Memphis pick is that it may not happen until 2021, by which the current GM and coach could be long gone (and Memphis may improve by then, dropping that pick down the first round a bit).

I didn't mean to imply that deferring picks would be fatal (other than in the case of the Clippers pick, which eventually becomes a 2nd rounder if the they stay in the lottery this year and next). That uncertainty (especially with the Celtics unable to deal them until after they have been made due to the Kyrie limitations) does hurt a bit though.

These are considerations... sure... but they are not huge ones, IMO.

Why? Because New Orleans would be in full, long term rebuilding mode. Having the 3 or 4 1st round picks that Boston could easily spare is valuable to a rebuilding team regardless of anything else... the fact that the Memphis pick will in all likelihood be a strong one gives the package quality in addition to quantity.

 

[Gman]

Bucks teaming AD up with Giannis for a year and half would be dope

lol... No doubt Milwaukee would love that...

... what do they got to offer, though? DiVincenzo, Thon Maker and a late 1st?... . Not gonna get it done.

 

[Shanemansj13]

After reading opinions like ^this^ about Luka.... I find the following interesting:

If I suggest that the Celtics shouldn't necessarily throw Tatum into a trade package for AD... many folks in here treat me like I'm either crazy, a homer, or both.

But if it's suggested that Luka be used to go after AD... that's a reasonable take, apparently.

Are the two situations really that different?

Teams want to keep team up their stars... not trade one for the other.

After reading Sushi's post I agree. Two totally different situations. Luka is Dallas, he is the franchise. Boston can work around Tatum, although Ainge seems set on keeping him, which could obviously change. It isn't that Luka is that much better, more potential, etc. it's just two really different situations imo.

 

[Gman]

Tatum, IMO, is more flexible to get rid of because the drop off between say him and Jaylen Brown is not significantly different. The Celtics have so many capable wings that you have to view Tatum separately than you would Luka.

It's not the talent that separates Luka and Tatum's availability, it's 1) The competitive windows of the teams 2) surrounding talent and 3) replacement level talent for playing being traded.

Luka and Tatum are two entirely separate situations.

Fair enough.

Frankly, though: some of what you are saying comes across as all too typical chatter with regards to how Boston should havigate every trade possibility...

[paraphrase] "The C's have so much it terms of talent and assets... they shouldn't be so stingy!... Danny Ainge is a miser!... they should give up more than their fair share in any proposed deal." [/paraphrase]

Last year a lot of mainstream voices and otherwise reasonable posters suggested the C's should trade Tatum for Jimmy Butler... except the Celtics should add a bunch of picks and maybe an additional player or two as well. Gosh, that would have been terrible.

 

[Shanemansj13]

lol... No doubt Milwaukee would love that...

... what do they got to offer, though? DiVincenzo, Thon Maker and a late 1st?... . Not gonna get it done.

I agree.

Middleton or Bledsoe, Divincenzo, Maker and a 1st. That isn't better than the Lakers or the C's considering they would have to pay Middleton and the young core isn't as good. The Bucks make zero sense imo

 

[CitySushi]

Bucks teaming AD up with Giannis for a year and half would be dope

That's what I'm saying. Even if AD doesn't take an extension, a 2 year potential championship window is closer than most franchise will get in a 2 decade span. You have to take the opportunity.

Plus what if you actually win one with him or get to the finals with him? That makes it that much more enticing to think about staying. Shit everyone thought PG leaving was a foregone conclusion. Players can change their minds in a heartbeat.

 

[Gman]

After reading Sushi's post I agree. Two totally different situations. Luka is Dallas, he is the franchise. Boston can work around Tatum, although Ainge seems set on keeping him, which could obviously change. It isn't that Luka is that much better, more potential, etc. it's just two really different situations imo.

IMO... from a high stakes poker mentality point-of-view... the fact that the C's can better afford to give up more isn't necessarily a compelling reason to argue they should.

 

[msgkings322]

Those guys aren't close to AD. Simmons has big holes in his game as good as he is and Tatum isn't there yet. AD has no weaknesses.

So Luka > Simmons and Tatum?

 

[CitySushi]

Fair enough.

Frankly, though: some of what you are saying comes across as all too typical chatter with regards to how they should trade...

[paraphrase] "The C's have so much it terms of talent and assets... they shouldn't be so stingy!... Danny Ainge is a miser!... they should give up more than their fair share in any proposed deal." [/paraphrase]

Last year a lot of mainstream voices and otherwise reasonable posters suggested the C's should trade Tatum for Jimmy Butler... except the Celtics should add a bunch of picks and maybe an additional player or two as well. Gosh, that would have been terrible.

It's not about stingy, but it's about actually using the assets you have to get better. AD is a significant upgrade whereas an example you used in Butler would be more of a lateral move.

AD is a top 5 player in the NBA, hands down. This is why you've acquired so many assets, to go for a guy like him. Butler at no point was a top 10 player. But if you have the chance to acquire a top 10, let alone a top 5 guy, you do that all day, IMO.

At some point you're going to have to just roll with your team one way or another. I don't see a scenario where you can have it both ways in trying to acquire top tier talent and not give any in return.

 

[CitySushi]

So Luka > Simmons and Tatum?

Gun to my head...Yes.

 

[CitySushi]

I agree.

Middleton or Bledsoe, Divincenzo, Maker and a 1st. That isn't better than the Lakers or the C's considering they would have to pay Middleton and the young core isn't as good. The Bucks make zero sense imo

I think it'd have to be a 3 team deal with Bledsoe going somewhere else for assets to give back to the Pelicans. Middleton would have to agree to a contract extension first though if I'm the Pelicans.

 

[Gman]

It's not about stingy, but it's about actually using the assets you have to get better. AD is a significant upgrade whereas an example you used in Butler would be more of a lateral move.

AD is a top 5 player in the NBA, hands down. This is why you've acquired so many assets, to go for a guy like him. Butler at no point was a top 10 player. But if you have the chance to acquire a top 10, let alone a top 5 guy, you do that all day, IMO.

At some point you're going to have to just roll with your team one way or another. I don't see a scenario where you can have it both ways in trying to acquire top tier talent and not give any in return.

I don't necessarily disagree with any of this... not necessarily... we seem to be talking past each other to some extent, though.

With regards to your final point... again, how often does a trade go down where one star is traded for another? My point to everyone would be: there's a reason for that. Teams aren't looking to swap stars... they are looking to team them up.

Most every time, "top tier talent" isn't received back when a team is forced to move a guy like AD.