Bill Simmons Says Jeff Green for Omer Asik Trade is Good for Both Teams

Bill Simmons is a die-hard Celtic fan but he's letting his frustrations show a bit much.  First, he's practically guaranteeing Rondo will be traded.  Now, he wants to move Jeff Green.

I understand some of his point, we need another center and Asik has NBA experience, while Jeff Green has had a very underwhelming pre-season, but he's really, really being aggressive with his roster moves.  He's making Trader Danny look like a slug.



Now that the Houston Rockets have Dwight Howard, Omer Asik is superfluous. With or without Asik, the Rockets figure to be a favorite for the Western Conference finals. The only difference is whether the Rockets are paying Asik to sit on the bench at the end of games.

Diehard Celtics fan Bill Simmons has a solution to the Rockets’ problem, sort of. In his NBA preview video with Jalen Rose on Thursday, Simmons suggests the Celtics and Rockets make a straight-up swap.

“And then Houston fans can be as frustrated with Jeff Green as I am,” Simmons says.

The Asik-for-Ryan Anderson trade Simmons suggested in an earlier preview video actually makes more sense, since Anderson’s 3-point shooting is a better fit with Howard, the Pelicans could use a defensive-minded center alongside Anthony Davis and Celtics president of basketball operations Danny Ainge might not be keen on adding a 27-year-old center who makes $16 million over the next two seasons.

But, hey, nobody ever said trade rumors had to make sense to be fun to talk about.

Scroll to the 6:30 mark in the video below to hear Simmons’ prediction.





bob



.

Hi,
With all due respect but BS started to look like some of the regulars on BDC: he comes with a trade idea every 5 minutes. Some of those trade ideas are totally off the reservation.
I wonder if he'd be better off writing books and articles about basketball rather than playing armchair GM...

AK

This trade would help both teams in many ways but where would Boston get the bulk of their scoring from this season without Green?

I think Boston needs to stress to Jeff how they want him to be the #1 scorer on the team and that he can shoot the ball as often as he wants.

Here's a novel idea. Cut the entire roster and sign d-league players and some guys from the draft. Why half-ass the rebuild anyhow?


KJ

I guess I'm the exception to the rule.  (Why is it that this has never happened to me before?  LOL.)

• Asik has never missed a regular season game.

• Asik is a banger who averaged 10.1 points and 11.7 regounds per game in 30 MPG last season.

• Asik's one of the best defensive centers in the league.

• Asik changes the complexion of the club, making it more balanced and thereby making it easier for younger guys to fit in under more normal circumstances.

• Why not make Wallace a greater part of the Celtics' rotation?  He averaged 30 MPG last season; he's the most multii-talented player on the team; he can spark the transition game (off Asik's rebounds); and he's a natural born leader on and off the court.  They have to pay him for three years anyway.

• It's rare that a team has an opportunity to obtain a legitimate center for a smaller player, and it's much easier to find or develop another satisfactory SF than another (really good) center.  Hey, maybe Babb gets a chance to show his stuff, which appears to have substantial potential at both ends.

• I like and admire Jeff Green, but his consistency remains in question, and the Celtics are not currently constructed to take full advantage of his greatest strengths (transition ball and being set up in the halfcourt)  It does not appear that he'll ever become a feared rebounder, which Asik immediately gives the team.

All things considered, with the Celtics building for the future, I believe it would behoove them to add a bona fide center with all-star potential rather than to pin their hopes on an athletic "3" with consistency questions.

Sam

The problem with commentators is that they're impatient.

I think it's too soon. Let's see what Green can do this year without playing behind Pierce. If he doesn't step up as he needs to, then trading him is certainly viable. But I don't like the idea of just making a trade before things play out a bit more.



KJ

This is a tough one. I voted yes.

I think Green has a higher ceiling than Asik, but I don't think Green is suited to be the number one option in the offense, and his low rebounding numbers have always worried me. Asik is a center, which is obviously a position of dire need, he fills the basic role of a center -- defense, rebounding, some scoring -- well, and he's been durable so far. Good centers are harder to come by than good small forwards.

This would be a really tough call.

By making this trade, you certainly fulfill one need at the expense of another.

Asik is certainly one of the best centers in the league, and he would help this team immensely. But you would also be losing an explosive wing player that can score. Yes, Gerald Wallace is the other 3 and a very good player, but he's on the wrong side of 30 (31) and will soon have to play a more limited role due to his age, whereas Green is 27. I also believe that Green possesses more pure talent and can become that scoring threat this team needs. But as we all know, potential does not always mean results.

I won't argue with the notion that a center is a more valuable piece than a small forward, but this trade is not without its perils.

I think it would be beneficial to add another scorer to compliment Green. He's a lot more dangerous that way.


KJ

I voted no.  Do we not want to see Green play this year with Rondo and Bradley?  We have to determine if what he showed us in the second half of last season and especially in the playoffs is what he can bring to the table consistently.  We have to do that. Right?

Asik is obviously a good center but he is not a transformative player.  Green has a chance to be that player this year.  The SF Spot particularly in the East is critical.  While I like Wallace,  Green is the guy that I look to who can take some of the luster off the likes of James and Anthony, Paul George and Rudy Gay.  

The key to the Celtics rebuild is to keep their good young talent like Rondo, Bradley and Green unless you are getting s star.   When we traded a really good Al Jefferson as the main piece to get KG we got a superstar.  Asik just does not bring that to the table.

If however Green does not live up to expectations the Celtics will be in the market for a top of the line SM.  He would have to be playing pretty bad to trade him mid-season unless we are getting a star.

I think a Bass for Asik would be more logical even if we had to throw something in to sweeten the deal.  

The other thing to consider is that we are 2 deep at the 3.  If Green was traded we would need another SF now.  We are overstocked at the 4 so we need to look at how we can move some of the players we got from NJ first.  What about Hump and a pick?  Expiring contracts are valuable especially around the trading deadline

As you can see there are a lot of other viable moves that allows us to keep Green, Rondo and Bradley.

dboss

Even though I like these guys, Hump, Bass, Lee would be the likely ones on the trading block. I'm sure Ainge would cram in Crawford, Brooks, or Bogans if that trade were to happen.

The key to these trades is keeping Sullinger and Bradley.

KJ

sam wrote:I guess I'm the exception to the rule.  (Why is it that this has never happened to me before?  LOL.)

• Asik has never missed a regular season game.

• Aski is a banger who averaged 10.1 points and 11.7 regounds per game in 30 MPG last season.

• Aski's one of the best defensive centers in the league.

• Asik changes the complexion of the club, making it more balanced and thereby making it easier for younger guys to fit in under more normal circumstances.

• Why not make Wallace a greater part of the Celtics' rotation?  He averaged 30 MPG last season; he's the most multii-talented player on the team; he can spark the transition game (off Asik's rebounds); and he's a natural born leader on and off the court.  They have to pay him for three years anyway.

• It's rare that a team has an opportunity to obtain a legitimate center for a smaller player, and it's much easier to find or develop another satisfactory SF than another (really good) center.  Hey, maybe Babb gets a chance to show his stuff, which appears to have substantial potential at both ends.

• I like and admire Jeff Green, but his consistency remains in question, and the Celtics are not currently constructed to take full advantage of his greatest strengths (transition ball and being set up in the halfcourt)  It does not appear that he'll ever become a feared rebounder, which Asik immediately gives the team.

All things considered, with the Celtics building for the future, I believe it would behoove them to add a bona fide center with all-star potential rather than to pin their hopes on an athletic "3" with consistency questions.

Sam

Minor correction Sam:  Asik averaged 10.1 points in 30 minutes last year, not 1.1.  Obviously a typo.

Couple of things.

#1 - This pre season has been a totally disjointed affair - with Brad Stevens trying to get himself acclimated to the NBA game and trying out different combinations, the offensive flow has been AWFUL and the spacing has been worse. Assuming that Stevens settles on a 9-10 man rotation, I believe he will start to add some more plays and better spread out the offense - giving Green his beat chance to take his man off the dribble, with some room to actually maneuver. Green will get better with time and space.

#2 - If the rumor mill is to be believed, even a little - Asik was upset with the Rockets bringing in Howard - and said so in very direct terms. He has since tried to back away, but in reality - he believes he is a starter in the NBA and he is probably right. So Houston has a potentially volatile situation on their hands - one that very well necessitate them moving Omer. S

So why give up a front line player like Green NOW - when the Rockets are still in the drivers seat? If I am DA, I mention I like Asik and leave it at that. As their team chemistry starts to disintegrate, Houston will find renewed interest in moving him - at a MUCH lower cost to whatever team gets him. Patience.

Thanks for catching the typo, Steve. I've corrected it (above).

Sam

For those who would prefer to keep Green than to trade him for Aski (obviously hypothetically), suppose Green were to maximize his skills and Asik were to maximize his skills.  Which would be more valuable to the Celtics over time?  I'm definitely not trying to be contentious because, as Outside said, it's a really close call.  I'm just wondering what emphasis is placed upon potential that can be found in many small forwards rather than on proven performance to a degree displayed by most of today's centers.

For those who would prefer to trade Bass for Asik, they'd also have to include a couple million more in salaries in order to make the trade work and stay under the luxury tax threshhold. Crawford would do the job financially, and I'm sure many people on this board would not miss him.

Sam

Sam,
I agree about Asik's quality and that he can be a starting 5.
OTOH, general consensus (currently) is that JG is the core player at 3. So, if they give up 3 for 5 they still have to find a star-level 3.
Obviously, if DA can swindle Asik for BB+JC and/or CL I'd really happy.

AK

In today's professional basketball world, if you can trade a core 3 (which Green has not yet proven he can be) for a core 5 (which there's plenty of evidence that Asik can be), you do it.  Finding another core 3 is much, much, much easier than finding a true core 5 (as the Celtics have proven repeatedly in recent years). My feeling is that Wallace (who appears to be going nowhere because of his contract) at the 3 can buy the Celtics at least a year in the quest for a really good 3. Moreover, high-level 5s tend to go before most high-level 3s in the draft, offering the Celtics more of an opportunity to draft a high-level 3 than a high-level, TRUE 5.

Sam

I'm 100% with you on this one Sam. Didn't the Celts once trade a 6'4" forward named Cliff Hagan for a center. How did that work out?

I think if McHale will do this for us, we should jump on it, the draft is loaded with high flying, smooth stroking wings, Asik is a legit 5, a defensive and rebounding force all contending teams need. Green would give that team alot of firepower at the 3/4, playing off that talent, he'd sparkle as a dunking machine.

Asik is a solid center but even at his ceiling, I'd still take Green, assuming both reached their full potential in that hypothetical situation. Why? Because I don't foresee Asik as an elite center, but I do see Green as a potential top 5 SF.

I'd trade some of the PFs instead of Green; you have Bass, Humphries and his expiring contract. Also, there's a few SGs in Lee, Brooks, and Crawford. Not to mention all of the draft picks. Keep in mind that after Green there is only 1 SF. They aren't deep enough at the 3 spot for that kind of move right now. I will reiterate Wallace's age, too. They should build upon their youth instead.

And if Green is traded, where is his replacement scoring going to come from? Asik will probably only score 60% of what Green will probably do this year.

And again, let's see how this year plays out.



KJ

Worcester, good analogy.

KJ, I'm not sure it's more important to have a scoring 3 this season than an intimidating 5 this season and for the future. But, just to respond to your question, I believe the answer is Wallace. From what I've seen of Gerald, he can do just about everything Green can do on offense (take it to the hole, get out and finish in transition, hit perimeter shots, can do it no worse than Jeff, and can do it with more consistent aggressiveness than Jeff (a great example for the kids). Gerald's defense is better than Jeff's as well. As I've said several times, I'm much less concerned about getting a good 3 in the future than in getting a good 5 in the future (by trade on in the draft).

Sam

I think a lot of you who may not have seen much of him are going to be surprised at how good a two-way player Gerald Wallace is. I strongly believe his poor performance last season was an aberration. He's only 31 and he's healthy and motivated. I watched him a lot when he played for Charlotte and Portland and he was as tough as they come. He will go mano-a-mano with Lebron too on defense. Paul Pierce did all he could in that matchup but Wallace is a bit more physical as a defender.

This debate about Green for Asik and Wallace assuming Green's role touches on a broader issue, and one that we should not lose sight of.

Whatever the Celtics' record turns out to be this season (and arguably next season as well), it's almost a sure thing that the team will slowly turn in whatever stylistic direction it will be assuming for the next few years.  I believe and hope that a very effective transition game will be one element of that style.  But I also believe and hope that they will have to be stronger and tougher than they've been in recent years.  They'll need to pound the boards, especially if they're going to mount any kind of transition game.  They'll have to become more intimidating in the defensive lane.  In short, they're going to need a higher ratio of toughness to finesse.
I don't expect guys like Humphries and Wallace to be around when they head in earnest toward contention.  But Wallace and Humphries can help move them in the direction of becoming a more physical team.  So could Asik, who might also become a "keeper" long-term.  And, if the Heat are any indicator, I also expect opponents to become increasingly tough.

I don't see Jeff Green being part of a physical scenario despite his obvious agility and hops..

This is one of those times when it may be possible to learn from the past.  I recall a time when the Celtics were primarily a finesse team that had a marvelous ball distributor and very good shooting (for those times).  But they were never tough enough to contend for the crown.  That is, until they traded away one of their key finesse players for someone who (while not all that rough a player) immediately became a true intimidator at the hoop and a vacuum cleaner on the boards.  And what followed was a reign of terror, the likes of which would satiate everyone on this board (except TJ, who might have to go on suicide watch) for a lifetime.

Now I'm not trying to equate Omar Asik with Bill Russell or Ed MacAuley with Jeff Green; and certainly other players (Heinsohn, Loscutoff, etc.) were involved in the earlier move toward toughness and were soon supplemented by others in that same mold (Sanders, Conley, Lovellette).  But what I'm talking about is what I feel is a necessary trend; and I believe Gerald Wallace can be more instrumental than Jeff Green could in [b initiating[/b] the team's movement in the direction of greater toughness.  And Omar Asik could easily become the leader of their defensive wolf pack.  So I would look at a Green for Asik trade as really being the equivalent of a trade of Green for Asik and Wallace in terms of the net implications of the trade.

As to who would take up the scoring slack for Green, I believe it's not a matter of who but how.  Without Jeff but with greater toughness, I'd expect more offensive putbacks, more fast break points (fueled by better defensive rebounding), more points in the paint, and a reduction of opponents' points.

There's always a context, and I believe it's now appropriate to keep an eye on the evolution of this team rather than simply wondering who will fill what role on this year's edition.

Sam

Sam,

They have Vitor on the cheap. All they need to do is continue to nurture his progress. I'm sure that if he can stay out of foul trouble, he can be every bit as effective as Asik.

While in the immediate time, Asik is better, they have a good player for the future. I just don't believe this is a worthwhile trade, unless Green shows himself to not be a dependable core player this year.

As for Wallace, I like him as a player, but why can't they have both Green and Wallace? What's the point in having to go out and find another 3 when you have 2 really good ones? That seems counter-productive to me. I think this team would be better served to keep Green and Wallace while shedding the extra PFs. The logjam at the 4 is this team's problem, not the only 2 SFs.

Also, when you have guys like Lebron, Pierce, and Paul George in the 3 spot in the East, having a really good 3 is increasingly more important. I will not ever say that a SF is more important than a C, but in this league I think you really need a great 3 to compete. Jeff isn't great yet, but he can be, and I'm thinking he will be. I want to see what he can do without playing behind Pierce, and I want to be able to base my judgments on something much more substantial than preseason.



KJ

kj

I hope your right, Asik has done it for a few seasons already, I don't know how you can predict Vitors growth level after a few preseason games....we know what we have in Green and thats still unknown after 5 seasons in the league. We all agree he has the athletic ability, does he have Pierce's toughness and consistency?

cow

cowens/oldschool,

If this were about someone like a Roy Hibbert, that'd be one thing, but it isn't, which is why I'm more on the side of keeping Green. Unless you're getting an exceptional C, I don't like it.



KJ