Kyrie Irving, Isaiah Thomas, alternate timelines and the impossibility of grading the trade

https://sports.yahoo.com/kyrie-irving-isaiah-thomas-alternate-timelines-impossibility-grading-trade-175801194.html



Kyrie Irving, Isaiah Thomas, alternate timelines and the impossibility of grading the trade


Ben Rohrbach, Ball Don't Lie


Aug 23, 2017, 10:55 AM



Isaiah Thomas and Kyrie Irving in an alternate universe. (AP)



In the aftermath of a trade like Tuesday’s blockbuster between the Boston Celtics and Cleveland Cavaliers, in which the two Eastern Conference finalists swapped All-Star point guards Isaiah Thomas and Kyrie Irving, along with several other pieces, there’s a propensity to rush to judgment on the deal.

How could the Celtics give up their Brooklyn Nets pick, Jae Crowder and Ante Zizic in addition to Thomas? Why would the Cavs trade a 25-year-old who is already one of the game’s premier scorers and clutch performers for a 5-foot-9 guy with a bad hip who will demand $30 million next summer?

Somebody has to win the trade, and somebody has to lose. That’s the nature of a high-profile NBA trade, because otherwise we couldn’t fill air time on debate shows or word counts for a report card. Nobody wants to discuss a deal where both sides came out even, right? The problem with most trades — especially this one — is that we won’t actually know who won or lost the trade for some time.


In the case of this particular trade, we’ll probably have to wait until at least the 2018 Eastern Conference finals, when the two sides will likely meet again, or 2019, when Irving can opt out of his contract, or 2024, when we’ll know for sure what the Nets pick and Zizic have become, or 2029, when Irving is putting the finishing touches on a Hall of Fame career. But who wants to wait until then?

Instead, I’ve laid out five alternate timelines that illustrate just how ridiculous it is to make any determination on this deal in the present, how disparate the results could be when all is said and done and none of them include the possibility that the Celtics could turn around and trade Irving with another pick for someone like Anthony Davis down the line and rule the East for a decade.


TIMELINE 1: The Cavaliers win the 2018 NBA title

There’s a real chance the Cavs improved on Tuesday. Thomas submitted one of the 10 most efficient high-volume scoring seasons in NBA history, averaging more points at a higher true shooting clip than Irving in 2016-17. If there are no residual effects from an offseason spent rehabbing an injured hip, it wouldn’t be out of the question for Thomas to either match or exceed Irving’s production again.

On top of that, Cleveland added Crowder, a vital component of Boston’s success the past two-plus seasons. His 13.9 points per game on 39.8 percent shooting from distance, along with 5.8 rebounds and 2.2 assists a night, compared favorably to the production that just earned Otto Porter Jr. a max contract from the Washington Wizards, only Crowder makes just $22 million over the next three years.

In 2015-16, Crowder earned enough All-Defensive votes to make the Third Team if there was one. His defense dipped this past season, but he could return to form as a well above-average two-way player alongside James. Crowder won’t have nearly the offensive responsibility he did in Boston, and at the very least he gives the Cavs another able body to defend two through four — even if Golden State Warriors forward Andre Iguodala doesn’t believe Crowder can even attempt to guard Kevin Durant.

Still, Thomas and Crowder don’t represent enough of an upgrade to close the gap on Golden State. However, the Cavs also acquired two potential trade chips in the Brooklyn Nets’ unprotected 2018 pick and promising Croatian 7-footer Ante Zizic, should they decide to go all in on the 2017-18 campaign. The Nets pick alone, along with contract filler, is enough to join the conversation for any star who enters the trade market, whether it’s DeMarcus Cousins, Marc Gasol or another run at Paul George.

Meanwhile, whispers are growing louder that the Chicago Bulls will eventually buy out Dwyane Wade, who would then join the Cavaliers this season. You’re telling me a rotation of James, Thomas, Love, All-Star X, Wade, Crowder, J.R. Smith, Derrick Rose, Kyle Korver and Jeff Green isn’t enough to at least challenge Golden State, especially if the Warriors aren’t as healthy as they’ve been the last few years?

If the Cavs do challenge the Warriors, maybe that’s enough to convince LeBron to re-sign next summer. And maybe that’s enough to ensure Boston will continue playing second fiddle in the East.


TIMELINE 2: The Celtics win the East in 2018

On the other hand, that’s a lot to ask from the Cavs. There’s an alternative timeline where Thomas can’t replicate his top-five MVP campaign this past season, or worse — the hip injury limits his ability to reach his mere All-Star level of play two seasons ago. His usage rate and fourth-quarter solo performances will no doubt wane playing with James. And who’s to say Cleveland coach Tyronn Lue will be as effective at finding ways to maximize Thomas’ production as Brad Stevens was in Boston?

LeBron and Thomas will be motivated by the slights of Irving wanting out of Cleveland and the Celtics wanting him in Boston. Still, even if the Cavs acquire Wade, there’s no guarantee the personalities of James, Thomas, Wade, Rose and Smith will blend seamlessly — or even at all. Thomas is gunning for a max contract, Rose is looking to resurrect his career, and Smith is Smith. If the chemistry crumbles, and LeBron steps one foot out the door in free agency, the Cavaliers could very well crumble, too.

The uncertainty of LeBron’s future in Cleveland could prevent the Cavs from dangling the Brooklyn pick at the deadline, because that’s their only insurance policy against James leaving town. Then, they would be banking on Thomas and an improved bench making up for the loss of Irving in 2017-18.

If that’s the case, any combination of regression from Thomas, improvement by Irving under Stevens and/or Boston’s additions of Gordon Hayward, Jayson Tatum, Marcus Morris and Aron Baynes could be enough to close the gap in a conference finals that would have gone six games if not for Irving eviscerating the Celtics in Game 4 a year ago. Depending on the respective progress of Tatum and Jaylen Brown in Years 1 and 2 in Boston, Cleveland could be even closer to losing its grip on the East.

Then what? Then maybe LeBron leaves town, Thomas follows, and the Cavaliers enter full-on rebuild mode, while the Celtics and their young core are set to rule the conference for the next half-decade.


TIMELINE 3: The Cavs get the No. 1 pick in 2018

Regardless of who wins the East this season, the Brooklyn pick could result in Cleveland’s fifth No. 1 pick since 2003 — a possibility made even more remarkable by the fact that the first of those top picks is still playing at an MVP level 15 years later and working on a string of seven straight Finals showings.

There are two elite prospects in the 2018 draft — Michael Porter Jr. and Marvin Bagley III, who are respectively earning Kevin Durant and Anthony Davis comparisons — and possibly a third in Bahamian behemoth DeAndre Ayton. Any one of them has the potential to set the Cavaliers up for another decade of contention, regardless of whether or not James remains in Cleveland. That Zizic could develop into a bona fide blue-chip talent alongside one of them is merely icing on the cake.

Just imagine if James and Thomas lead the Cavaliers to the Finals, they both stay in Cleveland, and Porter develops into Durant 2.0 under LeBron’s guidance. The Cavs could be a monster in the East for the rest of Irving’s career, and the Celtics would have created it. This is Boston’s worst-case scenario.


TIMELINE 4: Irving becomes a perennial MVP candidate

Conversely, Irving may flourish under Stevens and beside unselfish All-Star teammates Hayward and Al Horford. He is 25 years old with four All-Star appearances, an NBA title and an Olympic gold medal to his name, and only MVPs have put forth the sort of scoring performances he’s put on in the Finals.

As he develops, so too will recent No. 3 overall picks Tatum and Brown, and there’s always the chance Boston’s own likely lottery pick — a top-one-protected asset from the Los Angeles Lakers —  could become Bagley. How Irving emerges as the leader of that group will be fascinating to watch, because they could become the supporting cast to a scorer who makes Thomas’ 2016-17 season look routine.

Should James and Thomas depart in free agency, Crowder stay stagnant, Zizic never emerge, and the Brooklyn pick fall somewhere in the 6-to-10 range, where busts are more likely, the Cavs could be home watching the lottery in 2019 and beyond as their former Finals hero leads Boston back to glory and continues stitching together a Hall of Fame career in Celtics green. This is Cleveland’s worst-case scenario.


TIMELINE 5: Irving does not re-sign with Boston in 2019

Irving could be great for Boston and still punctuate Tuesday’s trade with a gut punch. He owns a player option worth $21.3 million for the 2019-20 season — a price tag that will almost certainly be below market value for a 27-year-old All-Star point guard two years from now. And while Irving is reportedly “thrilled” to be joining the Celtics and could sign an extension at any point between now and his 2019 free agency, a lot can change in a few years. Just ask Irving, James and the Cavaliers.

Should Irving walk in 2019, Boston will regret giving up Thomas (who likely would have re-signed with the Celtics were they to meet his asking price), a top pick in a loaded draft, Crowder’s immensely valuable contract and a 7-foot prospect under their control through 2021. Because that’s potentially two franchise cornerstones and a pair of foundational building blocks for a two-year Irving rental.

That said, the Celtics may have convinced themselves Thomas wasn’t worth the max contract he was likely to demand, that the Brooklyn pick will drop in the draft, that Crowder was going to lose minutes behind Hayward, and that Zizic isn’t anything special. In that case, the package would be well worth gambling on Irving to make magic with Hayward, Horford and company, whether or not he leaves in two years.

Beyond that, we’ll just have to wait to see what becomes of Thomas, next year’s pick and Zizic. In the meantime, any number of scenarios could make today’s report card grades and talk show debates seem ludicrous. It’s all just a crapshoot, really, and that’s what makes these blockbuster trades so fun.

– – – – – – –


bob



.

Speculation will run wild for the next year on this trade - so many, many ifs - based on future potential on both sides and all compounded by a cranky Thomas hip and a possible James free agency desertion. Sure did break the summer doldrums. I'll sit this one out - too much guess work for my crystal ball.

swish

No crystal balls needed.

Celtics got Uncle Drew.

It's a no-brainer.

Only way this trade doesn't favor the Celtics is if Kyrie suffers a major injury.

Put me down for no brains

swish

I think part of the reason why Ainge did the trade is he's hesitant to "backup the Brink's truck".

Thomas kept talking about that "Brink's truck".

This article is pretty much exactly what I said last night.

Celtics can lose the trade if Kyrie walks in 2019 w/o winning a title or gets hurt like other PG's did around age 27-28 (like Tim Hardaway and Kevin Johnson) to return at 60-70% of his current self while the Nets pick lands top 3 and scores a unicorn type star in Bagley or Porter who becomes a Giannis or Kawhi type player in Cleve for a decade.

The Cavs or Celtics winning the east in '18 really will not determine who wins or loses this trade. Only the Nets pick and Kyrie's performance after 2019 (as a Celtic) will do that.

BleedGreen wrote:This article is pretty much exactly what I said last night.

Celtics can lose the trade if Kyrie walks in 2019 w/o winning a title or gets hurt like other PG's did around age 27-28 (like Tim Hardaway and Kevin Johnson) to return at 60-70% of his current self while the Nets pick lands top 3 and scores a unicorn type star in Bagley or Porter who becomes a Giannis or Kawhi type player in Cleve for a decade.

The Cavs or Celtics winning the east in '18 really will not determine who wins or loses this trade. Only the Nets pick and Kyrie's performance after 2019 (as a Celtic) will do that.

That's just your opinion.

I mean your opinion cannot be the universal standard.

fierce wrote:

BleedGreen wrote:This article is pretty much exactly what I said last night.

Celtics can lose the trade if Kyrie walks in 2019 w/o winning a title or gets hurt like other PG's did around age 27-28 (like Tim Hardaway and Kevin Johnson) to return at 60-70% of his current self while the Nets pick lands top 3 and scores a unicorn type star in Bagley or Porter who becomes a Giannis or Kawhi type player in Cleve for a decade.

The Cavs or Celtics winning the east in '18 really will not determine who wins or loses this trade. Only the Nets pick and Kyrie's performance after 2019 (as a Celtic) will do that.

That's just your opinion.

I mean your opinion cannot be the universal standard.

Explain to me how someone can have the opinion that Kyrie playing 2 seasons here, winning zero titles and walking away with no compensation while the Nets pick simultaneously turns into a generational unicorn player on par with Giannis or Kawhi would result in the Celtics not losing this trade?

You may think that is an opinion b/c you were wrong to not consider it a possibility. But however unlikely it is of happening it would be a fact that Boston loses this trade if it does. Because it is unlikely I lean towards thinking this is a good trade. But even Danny hinted at the risk he is running here of that happening and he knows if it does he loses this trade.

BleedGreen wrote:

fierce wrote:

BleedGreen wrote:This article is pretty much exactly what I said last night.

Celtics can lose the trade if Kyrie walks in 2019 w/o winning a title or gets hurt like other PG's did around age 27-28 (like Tim Hardaway and Kevin Johnson) to return at 60-70% of his current self while the Nets pick lands top 3 and scores a unicorn type star in Bagley or Porter who becomes a Giannis or Kawhi type player in Cleve for a decade.

The Cavs or Celtics winning the east in '18 really will not determine who wins or loses this trade. Only the Nets pick and Kyrie's performance after 2019 (as a Celtic) will do that.

That's just your opinion.

I mean your opinion cannot be the universal standard.

Explain to me how someone can have the opinion that Kyrie playing 2 seasons here, winning zero titles and walking away with no compensation while the Nets pick simultaneously turns into a generational unicorn player on par with Giannis or Kawhi would result in the Celtics not losing this trade?

You may think that is an opinion b/c you were wrong to not consider it a possibility. But however unlikely it is of happening it would be a fact that Boston loses this trade if it does. Because it is unlikely I lean towards thinking this is a good trade. But even Danny hinted at the risk he is running here of that happening and he knows if it does he loses this trade.

Like I said and what people like GYSO here said, we can agree to disagree.

You don't have to agree with what I say and I don't have to agree with what you say.

That's your opinion, that's your standard.
I don't have to believe it or agree with it.

My standard is Kyrie is better than IT so the Celts won in this trade.
You don't have to agree with me and I'm not forcing you to agree with me.

Forcing your standards unto others is an indication of someone needing to learn humility.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I too feel that the Celtics had to make this risky and emotional deal b/c they got the best player. But as the article states the trade is impossible to grade out with a winner at this time. Most are.

You stated that there was only one way the Celtics lose this trade. Even though right now you are trying to say they won b/c Kyrie is currently the best player in the trade end of story (very obtuse and 'I know I'm wrong but I'm going to just dig my heels in further' of you)

Your opinion you put down as fact failed to mention the possibility that Irving leave as a free agent with 0 titles in '19 AND the Nets pick becomes a crazy unicorn type superstar. Were that to happen the Celtics lose this trade. That is not an opinion.

BleedGreen wrote:Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I too feel that the Celtics had to make this risky and emotional deal b/c they got the best player. But as the article states the trade is impossible to grade out with a winner at this time. Most are.

You stated that there was only one way the Celtics lose this trade. Even though right now you are trying to say they won b/c Kyrie is currently the best player in the trade end of story (very obtuse and 'I know I'm wrong but I'm going to just dig my heels in further' of you)

Your opinion you put down as fact failed to mention the possibility that Irving leave as a free agent with 0 titles in '19 AND the Nets pick becomes a crazy unicorn type superstar. Were that to happen the Celtics lose this trade. That is not an opinion.

It's simple.

Numerous articles are out there, you can google it, Ainge said he's confident Kyrie will re-sign with the Celts.

Another fact to reinforce my claim is Kyrie waived his 15% trade kicker because he's thrilled to be with the Celts.

If Kyrie didn't waive his trade kicker, IT, Crowder, and Zizic wouldn't have been enough to make salaries match.
Ainge would've had to add another player to make the trade work.

fierce wrote:

BleedGreen wrote:Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I too feel that the Celtics had to make this risky and emotional deal b/c they got the best player. But as the article states the trade is impossible to grade out with a winner at this time. Most are.

You stated that there was only one way the Celtics lose this trade. Even though right now you are trying to say they won b/c Kyrie is currently the best player in the trade end of story (very obtuse and 'I know I'm wrong but I'm going to just dig my heels in further' of you)

Your opinion you put down as fact failed to mention the possibility that Irving leave as a free agent with 0 titles in '19 AND the Nets pick becomes a crazy unicorn type superstar. Were that to happen the Celtics lose this trade. That is not an opinion.

It's simple.

Numerous articles are out there, you can google it, Ainge said he's confident Kyrie will re-sign with the Celts.

Another fact to reinforce my claim is Kyrie waived his 15% trade kicker because he's thrilled to be with the Celts.

If Kyrie didn't waive his trade kicker, IT, Crowder, and Zizic wouldn't have been enough to make salaries match.
Ainge would've had to add another player to make the trade work.

Now you're just back peddling like crazy b/c you can't admit you are wrong and this possibility would mean the C's lost the trade.

I said it was very unlikely and I am leaning towards thinking they won it at this time, but were the above scenario to happen they would have lost the trade. That is fact. You called it an opinion. Incorrect.

And I'm sure 2 years before their free agency the Thunder, Heat, Pacers and Jazz were "confident" Durant, LeBron, George and Hayward would re-sign with them too.

BleedGreen wrote:

fierce wrote:

BleedGreen wrote:Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I too feel that the Celtics had to make this risky and emotional deal b/c they got the best player. But as the article states the trade is impossible to grade out with a winner at this time. Most are.

You stated that there was only one way the Celtics lose this trade. Even though right now you are trying to say they won b/c Kyrie is currently the best player in the trade end of story (very obtuse and 'I know I'm wrong but I'm going to just dig my heels in further' of you)

Your opinion you put down as fact failed to mention the possibility that Irving leave as a free agent with 0 titles in '19 AND the Nets pick becomes a crazy unicorn type superstar. Were that to happen the Celtics lose this trade. That is not an opinion.

It's simple.

Numerous articles are out there, you can google it, Ainge said he's confident Kyrie will re-sign with the Celts.

Another fact to reinforce my claim is Kyrie waived his 15% trade kicker because he's thrilled to be with the Celts.

If Kyrie didn't waive his trade kicker, IT, Crowder, and Zizic wouldn't have been enough to make salaries match.
Ainge would've had to add another player to make the trade work.

Now you're just back peddling like crazy b/c you can't admit you are wrong and this possibility would mean the C's lost the trade.

I said it was very unlikely and I am leaning towards thinking they won it at this time, but were the above scenario to happen they would have lost the trade. That is fact. You called it an opinion. Incorrect.

And I'm sure 2 years before their free agency the Thunder, Heat, Pacers and Jazz were "confident" Durant, LeBron, George and Hayward would re-sign with them too.

I would ONLY be wrong if Kyrie leaves in 2019, which I don't think will happen.

So you'd have to wait until 2019 to say if I'm right or wrong.

Right now it's looking like the Celts won in this trade because they got the best player in the trade.

fierce wrote:

BleedGreen wrote:

fierce wrote:

BleedGreen wrote:Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I too feel that the Celtics had to make this risky and emotional deal b/c they got the best player. But as the article states the trade is impossible to grade out with a winner at this time. Most are.

You stated that there was only one way the Celtics lose this trade. Even though right now you are trying to say they won b/c Kyrie is currently the best player in the trade end of story (very obtuse and 'I know I'm wrong but I'm going to just dig my heels in further' of you)

Your opinion you put down as fact failed to mention the possibility that Irving leave as a free agent with 0 titles in '19 AND the Nets pick becomes a crazy unicorn type superstar. Were that to happen the Celtics lose this trade. That is not an opinion.

It's simple.

Numerous articles are out there, you can google it, Ainge said he's confident Kyrie will re-sign with the Celts.

Another fact to reinforce my claim is Kyrie waived his 15% trade kicker because he's thrilled to be with the Celts.

If Kyrie didn't waive his trade kicker, IT, Crowder, and Zizic wouldn't have been enough to make salaries match.
Ainge would've had to add another player to make the trade work.

Now you're just back peddling like crazy b/c you can't admit you are wrong and this possibility would mean the C's lost the trade.

I said it was very unlikely and I am leaning towards thinking they won it at this time, but were the above scenario to happen they would have lost the trade. That is fact. You called it an opinion. Incorrect.

And I'm sure 2 years before their free agency the Thunder, Heat, Pacers and Jazz were "confident" Durant, LeBron, George and Hayward would re-sign with them too.

I would ONLY be wrong if Kyrie leaves in 2019, which I don't think will happen.

So you'd have to wait until 2019 to say if I'm right or wrong.

Right now it's looking like the Celts won in this trade because they got the best player in the trade.

Finally. You are getting closer to a normal human reaction to someone politely and convivially trying to point out to you that there is another very unlikely scenario in which the Cavs could lose IT and James AND the Celtics still lose this trade that does not involve Irving getting hurt.

You did not think of that scenario b/c it is unlikely and you feel in 2017 the day after it happened that he will stay AND the Nets pick will not be top 5.

I agree with you on that.

Yet there was no need to fly off a ledge calling that fact just my opinion or suggesting that even if Irving left and the Nets picks was a superstar the C's would have somehow still won this trade. It was all very bizarre.

Can't you two give it a rest? I can't even see what there is to argue about.

Berlin-T

C'mon guys!!!!

Berlin-T wrote:Can't you two give it a rest? I can't even see what there is to argue about.

Berlin-T

Agree

getting a bit ridiculous.

beat

Hi,
I can offer one more Timeline/Scenario. This one is really crazy but whatever just to get Fierce and Bleedgreen away from their much-ado-about-nothing war of words.
So. Danny had a secret agreement with IT that he plays in Cle for 1 year then DA gets him in free agency back thus creating a firepower comparable to GSW's.
Of course, I need Gyso's blessing on cap space because to have 4 stars does require a lot of $$$$. But think about it for a moment. We have Big-4 and 2 upcoming stars all very hungry, on the other side/coast we have older and very tired to defend the top of the hill Warriors. Outcome is clear - Celtics get #18, #19, etc.
Now try to argue about this!

AK

sinus007 wrote:Hi,
I can offer one more Timeline/Scenario. This one is really crazy but whatever just to get Fierce and Bleedgreen away from their much-ado-about-nothing war of words.
So. Danny had a secret agreement with IT that he plays in Cle for 1 year then DA gets him in free agency back thus creating a firepower comparable to GSW's.
Of course, I need Gyso's blessing on cap space because to have 4 stars does require a lot of $$$$. But think about it for a moment. We have Big-4 and 2 upcoming stars all very hungry, on the other side/coast we have older and very tired to defend the top of the hill Warriors. Outcome is clear - Celtics get #18, #19, etc.
Now try to argue about this!

AK

C's are gonna need a "Go Fund Me" page !!
You'll need to create one !!

beat

sinus007 wrote:Hi,
I can offer one more Timeline/Scenario. This one is really crazy but whatever just to get Fierce and Bleedgreen away from their much-ado-about-nothing war of words.
So. Danny had a secret agreement with IT that he plays in Cle for 1 year then DA gets him in free agency back thus creating a firepower comparable to GSW's.
Of course, I need Gyso's blessing on cap space because to have 4 stars does require a lot of $$$$. But think about it for a moment. We have Big-4 and 2 upcoming stars all very hungry, on the other side/coast we have older and very tired to defend the top of the hill Warriors. Outcome is clear - Celtics get #18, #19, etc.
Now try to argue about this!

AK

Celtics will not have the cap space to sign Thomas in 2018.

So I have a different take on 'losing' the trade.

Irving was a former #1 pick whose play has made him a borderline superstar, and probably would be considered one if he wasn't shaded by LeBron in the spotlight. Trading a chance at a high pick, and the probability that the player drafted turns out to be as good in 4-5 years as Irving is today is a chance a good GM will take everyday. Figure that even if the Nets have the worst record again next year, there is only a 25ish% chance that becomes the #1 pick. And that pick could become Greg Oden or Darko as well as it could become KG or LeBron. You take the star today over the potential star later.

Irving's health can't be predicted. I don't (without looking it up) remember him having chronic injury problems. Saying we'd lose if he gets injured is asking Ainge to predict the future, especially since the primary guy we traded him for is already fighting a serious injury.

Timing also has to be considered. Ainge is trying to contend this season. Not 3-4 years from now. He felt the current core had taken the team as far as it could go. An opportunity to upgrade presented itself now and he took it. So even if the Nets pick does become the 2nd coming of Christ, have we lost if the 2018 team goes to the finals? The current core wouldn't still be around when the Nets pick was ready to make a significant contribution.

The only way I see this as a loss is if the significant turnover and loss of two team leaders in IT and Crowder disrupt the team chemistry to the point where the Celtics don't contend in 2018. I would see that as being on the GM, who made the choice to hand the coach a totally new roster when we made it to the conference finals the year before.

BaronV wrote:So I have a different take on 'losing' the trade.  

Irving was a former #1 pick whose play has made him a borderline superstar, and probably would be considered one if he wasn't shaded by LeBron in the spotlight.  Trading a chance at a high pick, and the probability that the player drafted turns out to be as good in 4-5 years as Irving is today is a chance a good GM will take everyday.  Figure that even if the Nets have the worst record again next year, there is only a 25ish% chance that becomes the #1 pick.  And that pick could become Greg Oden or Darko as well as it could become KG or LeBron.  You take the star today over the potential star later.  

Irving's health can't be predicted.  I don't (without looking it up) remember him having chronic injury problems.  Saying we'd lose if he gets injured is asking Ainge to predict the future, especially since the primary guy we traded him for is already fighting a serious injury.  

Timing also has to be considered.  Ainge is trying to contend this season.  Not 3-4 years from now.  He felt the current core had taken the team as far as it could go.  An opportunity to upgrade presented itself now and he took it.  So even if the Nets pick does become the 2nd coming of Christ, have we lost if the 2018 team goes to the finals?  The current core wouldn't still be around when the Nets pick was ready to make a significant contribution.  

The only way I see this as a loss is if the significant turnover and loss of two team leaders in IT and Crowder disrupt the team chemistry to the point where the Celtics don't contend in 2018.  I would see that as being on the GM, who made the choice to hand the coach a totally new roster when we made it to the conference finals the year before.  

Just like Ainge broke up the Toine-Pierce tandem in 2003 when Toine and Pierce led the Celts to the east finals in 2002.

Sure the Celts made the east finals last season with Thomas, but it was very unlikely the Celts were going to beat Cleveland.
And there was no way the Celts of Thomas, Bradley, and Crowder were going to beat GSW.

BaronV wrote:So I have a different take on 'losing' the trade.  

Irving was a former #1 pick whose play has made him a borderline superstar, and probably would be considered one if he wasn't shaded by LeBron in the spotlight.  Trading a chance at a high pick, and the probability that the player drafted turns out to be as good in 4-5 years as Irving is today is a chance a good GM will take everyday.  Figure that even if the Nets have the worst record again next year, there is only a 25ish% chance that becomes the #1 pick.  And that pick could become Greg Oden or Darko as well as it could become KG or LeBron.  You take the star today over the potential star later.  

Irving's health can't be predicted.  I don't (without looking it up) remember him having chronic injury problems.  Saying we'd lose if he gets injured is asking Ainge to predict the future, especially since the primary guy we traded him for is already fighting a serious injury.  

Timing also has to be considered.  Ainge is trying to contend this season.  Not 3-4 years from now.  He felt the current core had taken the team as far as it could go.  An opportunity to upgrade presented itself now and he took it.  So even if the Nets pick does become the 2nd coming of Christ, have we lost if the 2018 team goes to the finals?  The current core wouldn't still be around when the Nets pick was ready to make a significant contribution.  

The only way I see this as a loss is if the significant turnover and loss of two team leaders in IT and Crowder disrupt the team chemistry to the point where the Celtics don't contend in 2018.  I would see that as being on the GM, who made the choice to hand the coach a totally new roster when we made it to the conference finals the year before.  

Actually there are a few ways the trade could be viewed as a loss down the road, and not contending in 2018 is not really even up there on the list. I assume you mean worst case scenario is the team has a chaotic season chemistry wise where all the new faces don't really gel, the young kids don't produce big quite yet and the C's get like the 4-5 seed instead of 1-2 and lose in the 2nd rd? Can't see them possibly doing worse than that unless one of Irving, Horford or Hayward goes out for the season with an injury (knock on wood).

Even then I can't see how that would discourage Danny from feeling it would all come together in 2018-19 with a few tweaks, Tatum and Brown really set to blow up, LBJ no longer on the Cavs (more likely then not) and Kyrie desperate to prove he can make it work without LeBron in his contract year. If the C's failed then and Kyrie left as a free agent AND the Nets pick ended up being star, that is a legit way this trade can be a loss. The other two main ways it could be a loss are Kyrie signing a huge cap crippling extension and then promptly getting hurt and the chance of LeBron and IT staying in Cleveland+ another star coming using the pick in a trade (or just using the pick to add a major weapon/youth to the current roster). Those are the 3 major ways it could be s loss in the future.

BaronV wrote:So I have a different take on 'losing' the trade.  

Irving was a former #1 pick whose play has made him a borderline superstar, and probably would be considered one if he wasn't shaded by LeBron in the spotlight.  Trading a chance at a high pick, and the probability that the player drafted turns out to be as good in 4-5 years as Irving is today is a chance a good GM will take everyday.  Figure that even if the Nets have the worst record again next year, there is only a 25ish% chance that becomes the #1 pick.  And that pick could become Greg Oden or Darko as well as it could become KG or LeBron.  You take the star today over the potential star later.  

Irving's health can't be predicted.  I don't (without looking it up) remember him having chronic injury problems.  Saying we'd lose if he gets injured is asking Ainge to predict the future, especially since the primary guy we traded him for is already fighting a serious injury.  

Timing also has to be considered.  Ainge is trying to contend this season.  Not 3-4 years from now.  He felt the current core had taken the team as far as it could go.  An opportunity to upgrade presented itself now and he took it.  So even if the Nets pick does become the 2nd coming of Christ, have we lost if the 2018 team goes to the finals?  The current core wouldn't still be around when the Nets pick was ready to make a significant contribution.  

The only way I see this as a loss is if the significant turnover and loss of two team leaders in IT and Crowder disrupt the team chemistry to the point where the Celtics don't contend in 2018.  I would see that as being on the GM, who made the choice to hand the coach a totally new roster when we made it to the conference finals the year before.  

I'm definitely down with what you are saying in the first half of this post, but then things fall apart in the second.

Ainge is trying to set the table to REALLY compete in 2019-23. Not so much this year. This will probably be an 'everybody figure out their roles and grow together while another loss in the ECF is acceptable' kind of year. Then they gel, improve and hope LBJ goes west and Curry/Durant lose a step.

But the Nets pick would still have fit that timeline.

Whoever they drafted top 10 in '18 would be expected to grow into a star along with Brown, Tatum and the final lotto pick the C's still own in '18/19. These four would take over for IT, Horford and Crowder as they aged, but all 3 would have remained useful rotation players those years. Horford would be 32-35 with low mileage on his body and a high IQ game that will translate well to NBA old age. KG was that age from 2009-2012 with twice the miles on him and suffering a major knee injury, but still an effective borderline all-star on contenders. Parish was that age from '86-'89 putting up a 17/10. IT will be 30-33 and probably a spark plug 6th man. That's how old Vinnie Johnson was on the '87-'90 Pistons or Jason Terry on the '08-'11 Mavs. Smart will be fully in his prime while Jae and Gordon ages 29-32 at the back end of theirs.

The Nets pick would be expected to be a major contributor by 2020-21. Assuming IT, Horford, Jae, Smart and Hayward were all extended then the core guys you were referring to that were here before the Irving trade would still have been around and all good to very good players 2019-23.

Ainge just took a risk. He's thinking Irving will be better those years and have a larger impact on winning a title than IT, Jae and the Nets pick would/will. We shall see if he is right. It could go either way or even be a win win for both teams.

This does what fierce said in terms of dumping an Antoine type of star from a team that maxed out as a weak ECF club to hopefully taking a bigger leap and winning a title 2-3 years from now when IT was unlikely to be the player he is now and Irving likely will be.

Of course, it took Ainge 4 years last time and Antoine was traded for garbage, not a younger/better player. The C's also had to bottom out as the worst club in the NBA in '07 for it all to happen. It is a completely different rebuild this time around than 2003 even if Ainge likely was thinking the same thing about IT that he was about a similarly aged just about to rapidly decline Antoine Walker at the time he traded him.