NBA Draft - Trades - Free Agents

[IllegalContact]

The moment you put Horford = Tatum and Richards < Hayward, you'd gone into "hope, not analysis" territory.

And the idea that it's even across the board is insane.

No it’s not......amazing the degree to which you dredge your baseless POV

 

[IllegalContact]

He outweighs Green by what 5-10lbs? They’re the exact same height and Greens wingspan is 7’1’’ to Williams 6’9’’. Added to that is Greens superior vertical. I hope Williams proves me wrong but I just don’t see him doing anything close to what Draymond does defensively.

Not even the warriors saw what green could become, if they did they would’ve taken him in r1 instead of Barnes.

Draft combine results:

Standing reach:
Green : 8’10”
Williams : 8’8.5”

Standing vertical:
Green : 28”
Williams : 26”

Max vertical:
Green : 33”
Williams : 31.5”

Bench press:
Green : 9
Williams : 20

Final college year, Williams(jr) was a much better scorer in the paint, and was an equal to green (sr) in most other categories and much higher effect fg pct.

Green lost 20lb pre combine and recently lost weight that improved his athleticism, but his numbers suffered mightily.

The jury is definitely out

 

[Hyped]

The moment you put Horford = Tatum and Richards < Hayward, you'd gone into "hope, not analysis" territory.

And the idea that it's even across the board is insane.

You wouldn't take Tatum over Horford? I would build a team around Tatum before Horford for sure. As of right now, I'd prefer Horford at the 4 vs. Tatum when it comes to rebounding/defense/setting screens/stretching out the other team's bigs...but that's about it. And Al cannot even defend Tatum on the perimeter and would be in trouble with a smaller player off a screen too. Like I said...apples and oranges.

And Hayward > Richards every day of the week and twice on Sundays...even the Hayward of 2018-2019.

I think you are massively underrating Tatum/Brown/Hayward as I expect all 3 to be one of our top 4 scorers/mpg guys along with Walker. Last year, we force fed Hayward before moving him to the bench and also had to bench Brown so he wouldn't be playing with Kyrie. Then there was Tatum settling for mid range J's. Kyrie really affected this team more than people think he did, IMO. Irving is massively talented, but the offense flowed through him first and foremost.

 

[IcyPatriot]

 

[Deus Irae]

You wouldn't take Tatum over Horford? I would build a team around Tatum before Horford for sure. As of right now, I'd prefer Horford at the 4 vs. Tatum when it comes to rebounding/defense/setting screens/stretching out the other team's bigs...but that's about it. And Al cannot even defend Tatum on the perimeter and would be in trouble with a smaller player off a screen too. Like I said...apples and oranges.

It's not apples and oranges. Horford was better than Tatum last year. It's fine to hope that Tatum is better this year, but there's a difference between hope and analysis.

And Hayward > Richards every day of the week and twice on Sundays...even the Hayward of 2018-2019.

See, when you find yourself writing something like that, you need to realize that you've lost your analysis. Hayward was mostly dogshit last year.

I think you are massively underrating Tatum/Brown/Hayward as I expect all 3 to be one of our top 4 scorers/mpg guys along with Walker. Last year, we force fed Hayward before moving him to the bench and also had to bench Brown so he wouldn't be playing with Kyrie. Then there was Tatum settling for mid range J's. Kyrie really affected this team more than people think he did, IMO. Irving is massively talented, but the offense flowed through him first and foremost.

And I think I'm rating them just where they were last year, save possible small adjustments based upon a reasonable likelihood, and should be considered until proven otherwise. That's analysis. Minor comments like "Tatum had a down year last year, and we should be able to expect at least some bounce back this year" are sensible analysis. Comments like "Tatum is going to be better than Horford, as a PF, because Horford's changed from 32yo to 33yo!" aren't. And "IF" goes both ways:

IF Embiid keeps getting better
IF Al plays more freely now that he's back at the 4
IF Simmons shoots just a little bit better
IF Tatum doesn't improve more than marginally
IF Hayward doesn't bounce all the way back
IF the Celtics center position sucks as much as it might
IF the Celtics power forward position sucks as much as it might
etc....

v.

IF Hayward b0unces back to being the old Hayward
IF Tatum takes a big leap forward
IF Brown keeps showing improvement
IF having Walker becomes a matter of fit being better than talent
IF Tacko doesn't fail
IF the Celtics center position doesn't suck
IF the Celtics power forward position actually is a net positive
IF the Celtics can find a way to hold its own on the boards
IF Stevens can modify his system enough for the new group of players to function at a high level
IF Embiid breaks down
IF Philly doesn't round out its depth
IF Simmons still can't hit a shot from beyond 5-6 feet
etc...

 

[IllegalContact]

It's not apples and oranges. Horford was better than Tatum last year. It's fine to hope that Tatum is better this year, but there's a difference between hope and analysis.

See, when you find yourself writing something like that, you need to realize that you've lost your analysis. Hayward was mostly dogshit last year.

And I think I'm rating them just where they were last year, and should be considered until proven otherwise. That's analysis. Minor comments like "Tatum had a down year last year, and we should be able to expect at least some bounce back this year" are sensible analysis. Comments like "Tatum is going to be better than Horford, as a PF, because Horford's changed from 32yo to 33yo!" aren't. And "IF" goes both ways:

IF Embiid keeps getting better
IF Al plays more freely now that he's back at the 4
IF Simmons shoots just a little bit better
IF Tatum doesn't improve more than marginally
IF Hayward doesn't bounce all the way back
IF the Celtics center position sucks as much as it might
IF the Celtics power forward position sucks as much as it might
....

Can’t get any more one dimensional.....completely dismissing reasonable expectation of younger players improving....

Al Horford was never a PF

 

[Hyped]

It's not apples and oranges. Horford was better than Tatum last year. It's fine to hope that Tatum is better this year, but there's a difference between hope and analysis.

Horford and Tatum are two completely different players. I am not even sure who the Sixers will have Horford (while paired with Embiid) defend when the Celts put Walker/Hayward/Brown/Tatum/Kanter on the court. Hell, we could see Simmons or Harris on Tatum/Brown more. Horford helped the Celts' defense..he was a great help defender and improved his three point shooting last year, but I would take Tatum vs. Horford ISO every day and twice on Sundays. Likewise, I would also post up Horford vs. Tatum every chance I got. Again apples and oranges therefore a wash.

See, when you find yourself writing something like that, you need to realize that you've lost your analysis. Hayward was mostly dogshit last year.

Hayward in two seasons with the Celts:

11.3 ppg
3.3 apg
4.4 rpg
.527 eFG%
25.6 mpg (started 19 of 73 games)

Josh Richards' best season in 2018-9 w/ Miami:

16.6 ppg
4.1 apg
3.6 rpg
.492 eFG%
34.8 mpg (also started 73 of 73 games)

Difference: +5.3 ppg, +.8apg, -.8rpg, -.035eFG%, and +8.8mpg when comparing Richards' best season vs. Hayward's crappy 2017-2019 seasons.

And I think I'm rating them just where they were last year, save possible small adjustments based upon a reasonable likelihood, and should be considered until proven otherwise. That's analysis. Minor comments like "Tatum had a down year last year, and we should be able to expect at least some bounce back this year" are sensible analysis. Comments like "Tatum is going to be better than Horford, as a PF, because Horford's changed from 32yo to 33yo!" aren't. And "IF" goes both ways:

IF Embiid keeps getting better
IF Al plays more freely now that he's back at the 4
IF Simmons shoots just a little bit better
IF Tatum doesn't improve more than marginally
IF Hayward doesn't bounce all the way back
IF the Celtics center position sucks as much as it might
IF the Celtics power forward position sucks as much as it might
etc....

v.

IF Hayward b0unces back to being the old Hayward
IF Tatum takes a big leap forward
IF Brown keeps showing improvement
IF having Walker becomes a matter of fit being better than talent
IF Tacko doesn't fail
IF the Celtics center position doesn't suck
IF the Celtics power forward position actually is a net positive
IF the Celtics can find a way to hold its own on the boards
IF Stevens can modify his system enough for the new group of players to function at a high level
IF Embiid breaks down
IF Philly doesn't round out its depth
IF Simmons still can't hit a shot from beyond 5-6 feet
etc...

Reasonable likehood? I think it is VERY reasonable to expect:

- Tatum to get better as his issue was shot selection and/or lack of aggression...two very fixable things.

- Brown to see his numbers rise with more minutes. This is a natural expectation.

- Walker to be Walker....I am even expecting a drop in his numbers across the board as he was the top dawg in Charlotte.

- Hayward to bounce back to All Star form...we could see Hayward showing signs of that late in the season and during the playoffs before the team collapsed against the Bucks.

- I don't think it is reasonable to expect us to replace what Horford did here by committee. Horford was integral to our team the last three years. However, I expect us to adjust by doing things differently (e.g. better rebounding and inside scoring w/ Kanter). Ditto for Kyrie being replaced by committee.

Overall, it is reasonable to expect the Celtics to outperform last year's team due to better chemistry and letting our young guys lead the way. In addition, Philly took a step back offensively with the departures of Butler and Redick..but got stronger defensively with a stretch big man in Horford who can cover for Embiid. Both teams were separated by TWO games last year with the last match up being won by Philly 118-115 after both Kyrie/Morris missed two shots and Butler hit a 9 footer. That was basically the difference last year.

 

[aluminum seats]

Boston, Let's Do This | By Kemba Walker

Great example of how to leave one team and join a new one. Hard not to like this guy. Fingers crossed.

 

[Bourne Again Christian]

Boston, Let's Do This | By Kemba Walker

Great example of how to leave one team and join a new one. Hard not to like this guy. Fingers crossed.

Love this dude he's whats right about professional sports.
For every 5 Tyreek Hills there is one Kemba Walkers.

 

[Deus Irae]

Overall, it is reasonable to expect the Celtics to outperform last year's team due to better chemistry and letting our young guys lead the way. In addition, Philly took a step back offensively with the departures of Butler and Redick..but got stronger defensively with a stretch big man in Horford who can cover for Embiid. Both teams were separated by TWO games last year with the last match up being won by Philly 118-115 after both Kyrie/Morris missed two shots and Butler hit a 9 footer. That was basically the difference last year.

It's not reasonable to think that chemistry and leadership by young people is going to be enough to overcome the loss of 3 starters and an important backup at what's now at least seemingly a very much weakened position (Irving, Horford, Baynes and Morris). Boston has downgraded at center (starting and depth), point guard, and power forward. Arguing potential upgrades at maturity and chemistry is not a rational argument for improving despite actual and significant losses, but an emotional one.

Furthermore, you're confusing a particular team matchup with overall talent and, beyond that, you're ignoring the reality that a big part of why Boston was able to beat Philly in games over the past couple of years is that Horford was able to limit Embiid. Another reason is that the Celtics were able to limit the less athletic Reddick's ability to play effectively (20/58 a/k/a 34% shooting overall, 14/37 a/k/a 38% from 3 point range). Another reason is that the Celtics were able to use a combination of defenses with their bigs in order to keep Simmons from getting to the rim more. Two of those three things are now irrelevant (Horford won't be defending Embiid and Reddick won't be playing for Philly), and the third is now likely to be much more difficult with the likes of Kanter at the center position. This year, regardless of whether you feel the 76ers got better or just stayed about the same, the Celtics got worse, and that's what's got to be overcome.

Celtics fans as a whole are considered the biggest honks in Boston. They've pivoted from "We need to get the likes of Kyrie and AD, because talent is more important then chemistry" to "Screw Kyrie! Chemistry is what matters" faster than a quick center can pivot in the post.

 

[Deus Irae]

Once guard Avery Bradley clears waivers today, he plans to sign a two-year, $9.7M deal with the Los Angeles Lakers, his agent Bill Duffy of @BDA_Sports tells ESPN. Bradley will have a player option on the second season.

 

[Deus Irae]

Oklahoma City Is trading F Jerami Grant to Denver for a 2020 first-round pick, league sources tell ESPN. Deal brings OKC it’s sixth future first in past week and saves Thunder $39M in salary and luxury tax.

 

[Deus Irae]

Free agent forward JaMychal Green is finalizing a two-year, $10M deal to return to the Los Angeles Clippers, with a second-year player option, league sources tell @TheAthleticNBA.

 

[Deus Irae]

Sources: Jabari Parker is signing a two-year, $13M deal with the Hawks, with a player option in year two.

 

[IllegalContact]

It's not reasonable to think that chemistry and leadership by young people is going to be enough to overcome the loss of 3 starters and an important backup at what's now at least seemingly a very much weakened position (Irving, Horford, Baynes and Morris). Boston has downgraded at center (starting and depth), point guard, and power forward. Arguing potential upgrades at maturity and chemistry is not a rational argument for improving despite actual and significant losses, but an emotional one.

Furthermore, you're confusing a particular team matchup with overall talent and, beyond that, you're ignoring the reality that a big part of why Boston was able to beat Philly in games over the past couple of years is that Horford was able to limit Embiid. Another reason is that the Celtics were able to limit the less athletic Reddick's ability to play effectively (20/58 a/k/a 34% shooting overall, 14/37 a/k/a 38% from 3 point range). Another reason is that the Celtics were able to use a combination of defenses with their bigs in order to keep Simmons from getting to the rim more. Two of those three things are now irrelevant (Horford won't be defending Embiid and Reddick won't be playing for Philly), and the third is now likely to be much more difficult with the likes of Kanter at the center position. This year, regardless of whether you feel the 76ers got better or just stayed about the same, the Celtics got worse, and that's what's got to be overcome.

Celtics fans as a whole are considered the biggest honks in Boston. They've pivoted from "We need to get the likes of Kyrie and AD, because talent is more important then chemistry" to "Screw Kyrie! Chemistry is what matters" faster than a quick center can pivot in the post.

lol.......the celts went further and played better and had better chemistry without irving and hayward. from a team that went to game 7 of the ECF, they lost horford, morris, baynes, and rozier and added hayward, walker, kanter, and a bunch of youth.....so yeah, screw kyrie......chemistry does matter

I think you're the biggest honk in boston

 

[lancerman]

lol.......the celts went further and played better and had better chemistry without irving and hayward. from a team that went to game 7 of the ECF, they lost horford, morris, baynes, and rozier and added hayward, walker, kanter, and a bunch of youth.....so yeah, screw kyrie......chemistry does matter

I think you're the biggest honk in boston

He has pretty bad takes, but he’s right here. The Celtics overperformed in every aspect a year ago and took a team that didn’t stand a chance in the finals to a game 7. The Celtics would have been dropped just as bad by the Warriors. The East was also trash that year as well.

The Celtics downgraded or outright lost too much to assume that chemistry will outweighs what they subtracted in

 

[ViperGTS]

lol.......the celts went further and played better and had better chemistry without irving and hayward. from a team that went to game 7 of the ECF, they lost horford, morris, baynes, and rozier and added hayward, walker, kanter, and a bunch of youth.....so yeah, screw kyrie......chemistry does matter

I think you're the biggest honk in boston

I agree. I guess the Cs just have a bad team with no hope of getting better or even really, really good. Can’t figure Deus out. He is very wrong on this subject and I am pretty sure that the Cs will turn done heads very early on. The only net loss is Horford, but that can be mitigated. Did you see Kanter pumping up Taco? Yeah the team is gonna have much better chemistry and that will let the massive talent shine through.

 

[Hyped]

It's not reasonable to think that chemistry and leadership by young people is going to be enough to overcome the loss of 3 starters and an important backup at what's now at least seemingly a very much weakened position (Irving, Horford, Baynes and Morris). Boston has downgraded at center (starting and depth), point guard, and power forward. Arguing potential upgrades at maturity and chemistry is not a rational argument for improving despite actual and significant losses, but an emotional one.

Furthermore, you're confusing a particular team matchup with overall talent and, beyond that, you're ignoring the reality that a big part of why Boston was able to beat Philly in games over the past couple of years is that Horford was able to limit Embiid. Another reason is that the Celtics were able to limit the less athletic Reddick's ability to play effectively (20/58 a/k/a 34% shooting overall, 14/37 a/k/a 38% from 3 point range). Another reason is that the Celtics were able to use a combination of defenses with their bigs in order to keep Simmons from getting to the rim more. Two of those three things are now irrelevant (Horford won't be defending Embiid and Reddick won't be playing for Philly), and the third is now likely to be much more difficult with the likes of Kanter at the center position. This year, regardless of whether you feel the 76ers got better or just stayed about the same, the Celtics got worse, and that's what's got to be overcome.

Celtics fans as a whole are considered the biggest honks in Boston. They've pivoted from "We need to get the likes of Kyrie and AD, because talent is more important then chemistry" to "Screw Kyrie! Chemistry is what matters" faster than a quick center can pivot in the post.

It is obvious that we disagree on how much Kyrie affected the team's development in 2018-2019, how much better Hayward/Tatum/Brown will be in 2019-2020, how Philly still has depth issues and lost some scorers they could count on, and etc... It will be an interesting match up in 2019-2020 because I don't know how either team will defend one another when the Celts go "small ball" vs. Philly's big line up.

My "emotional" expectations aren't very unreasonable. I feel that right now...talent wise...they are up there with the Bucks/Sixers and it is more than reasonable to expect the Celts to win 47+ games and make the post-season.

I am willing to make a friendly wager of 52 wins or better during the 2019-2020 season. You game? Of course, I'd require certain conditions (e.g. None of Tatum/Brown/Hayward/Walker misses more than 20 games).

 

[Deus Irae]

I agree. I guess the Cs just have a bad team with no hope of getting better or even really, really good. Can’t figure Deus out. He is very wrong on this subject and I am pretty sure that the Cs will turn done heads very early on. The only net loss is Horford, but that can be mitigated. Did you see Kanter pumping up Taco? Yeah the team is gonna have much better chemistry and that will let the massive talent shine through.

You could figure me out on this, very easily, if you'd just do two things:

1. Stop mischaracterizing my positions.
2. Start thinking analytically instead of like a Celtics honk.

 

[Deus Irae]

It is obvious that we disagree on how much Kyrie affected the team's development in 2018-2019, how much better Hayward/Tatum/Brown will be in 2019-2020, how Philly still has depth issues and lost some scorers they could count on, and etc... It will be an interesting match up in 2019-2020 because I don't know how either team will defend one another when the Celts go "small ball" vs. Philly's big line up.

My "emotional" expectations aren't very unreasonable. I feel that right now...talent wise...they are up there with the Bucks/Sixers and it is more than reasonable to expect the Celts to win 47+ games and make the post-season.

I am willing to make a friendly wager of 52 wins or better during the 2019-2020 season. You game? Of course, I'd require certain conditions (e.g. None of Tatum/Brown/Hayward/Walker misses more than 20 games).

Again, it's fine to have hope. But that's not analysis. That's hope and emotion. Boston lost 2 of its 3 best players from last year (Irving, Horford), and Morris would slot in at either #4 or #5. In return, they brought in lesser players across the board. Somehow, you have that translating into a talent gain. From a rational standpoint, that's nonsensical.

Now, if you want to change your position to just being something like "Even though Boston obviously seems to have taken a step back, I'm hopeful that they can overcome that by.....", rather than insisting that hope = logic and/or making claims like Tatum > Horford (as Viper did) when such was clearly not the case, I'll be 100% on board with that.