DeMarcus Cousins is elite, but he’s not a perfect fit for Celtics

I'm with you, Clyde.  I read all this stuff about the Celtics needing stars, but that term doesn't quite do it for me.  So-called "stars" may possess enough "glamor skills" to make all-star teams without possessing the ability to play a consistently potent role in the lineup.

What I feel the Celtics need are impact players.  Players who dependably exert their will on the competition.  To some extent, Isaiah Thomas may have fit that criterion this season because he has multiple ways in which he can make offensive impact, although I need more convincing on his "impact dependability" over a variety of conditions.

I believe Cousins should be a significant impact player for a long time, and I believe he could be significant in just the area the Celtics most need real impact.  I'm not bullish in their ability to get him, but I wouldn't mind if he overpaid to get Demarcus. Then let just one impact free agent succumb to the allure of playing for Brad on a rising, energetic team with at least one (and possibly two) impact players, and see what personnel assets might start to fall in place for the Celts.

Sam

Sam,

What would you think would be "over-paying" for a guy like Cousins?

I see very little value in most of the draft picks that the Cs already have stacked up for the next 4 drafts so I would include a bunch of them to make this acquisition. Very few of them (the picks) will ever don a green Boston jersey and most will not make any kind of a major contribution so using some, many or even most of them now for young veteran players who will continue the team's improvement may be their best use when looking at a Cs team that is likely to draft in rounds 22-30 for the next few years.

Clyde,

I like to think I have some ability when it comes to evaluating what I see on the floor, but I don't claim that ability extends to matters of compensation (whether that compensation is for players or in a trade or whatever).

The reason I mentioned not minding if they overpay was because my focus is on how much we need a guy; and I don't believe the degree of need fluctuates by what he costs.  You establish the need, and then you determine what you're willing to pay.  Two separate considerations.  Similarly, making $2 million more or less doesn't change the ability level of a player.

So I mentioned possibly over-paying mainly to deflect possible responses that Cousins has a lot of attributes, but only at a given level of compensation.

However, to try to answer your question, you largely answered it yourself.  I'm more impressed with the number of draft picks the Celtics have over time than with the quality of those draft picks.  Basically, I figure the Nets' picks might be worth something, but I view a lot of the other picks as deal sweeteners rather than the foundations of deals.

But, even with these caveats, I'm not sure it is realistically possible to overpay with the picks the Celtics have.  I don't believe it's so possible for the Celtics to overpay in terms of human assets, because (this past season) the whole was definitely more than the sum of the parts.  They have some players with potential, and I think Crowder comes close to being a perfect role player for the team.  Thomas may or may not be a dependable catalyst off the bench (I lost a little confidence late in the season), but I don't see him as a game-long impact player.

So, the way I see it, the Celtics have acquisition assets (including undeniable cap space), but primarily middle-of-the road ones.  Between picks and players, I feel the picks may be more attractive than Celtics' personnel in trade activity.  So I guess it would be most possible to overpay in terms of picks.  As I've said before, I find it difficult to get excited about Danny sitting there and watching a pile of draft pick chits piling up on his desk; and I can't imagine a draft pick chit being a rim protector.  So it wouldn't kill me if he used up a lot of his upcoming picks this summer in stocking up to reach the next level in terms of team development.

Furthermore, I believe the element of timing is going to be one of the main determinants of how the summer goes.  Without compelling trade ammunition, it will behoove Danny to move sooner rather than waiting for the list of possibilities to fade.

We'll obviously see.

Sam

wide clyde wrote:We have all read of Cousins having troubles in Sacramento, but I disagree that he might not just be THE perfect fit for the Celtics.

This guy has off the wall talent, is only 24 years old, has five years experience playing in the better western conference, is a true center, has not been injured so not carrying a knee or whatever injury in to the equation, is signed for three more years at less than max level money, etc, etc.

Now that he is not a teenager any longer he has to be looking for better place to ply his basketball talents.  He has to know that he could easily be in his thirties before Sacramento is ready to compete in the west never mind in the total league.  He knows that Sacramento has had lottery picks for the last eight years and still can only average 26 wins per season.  He knows that the center play in the east is not as strong as out west so his stats will likely increase. He knows that the constant turnover of head coaches in Sacramento is is likely to continue, With the Cs, he would be in the playoffs immediately, even from the other coast he knows that Stevens is a good/excellent coach (with a great staff) who has at least four more years on his contract, he knows the history of the Boston franchise, he knows that the basketball 'culture' in Boston has been changed by Stevens and the players etc, etc, etc.

He SHOULD be asking/begging to be traded to Boston immediately!  

If weather and climate are important to this guy we cannot tell him that Boston is South Beach, but Sacramento is not South Beach either.

If he wants to win, he knows that it is not happening in Sacramento as fast as it will in Boston.  He knows that he is good enough to be the hub of a fast growing, successful team.

Now, even without a college degree he knows all of this stuff as well as we do, but the question will be what he does about it.  Also, what does he do to build a better base from which to launch his career as far as being a better citizen?  He has already shown that he has grow up to some degree from his days as a 19 year old kid so I think that
he has found his way somewhat already and could be very ready to blossom out into the full fledged star that his talents indicate that he can be.

If trading up to get Cauley-Stein is a gamble (which it is), I would rather trade up a little higher (some more of the MANY draft pics Ainge has) to gamble on a much more established player.

Yes, still a gamble but this guy may just be perfect for the Celtics.

Nice take - in particular I like the comparison to trading up in the draft to get WCS, which everyone seems to think is a good idea; as you suggest, this is actually a bigger risk than trading for an estabished player like Cousins.

The biggest worry I have with getting Cousins is how he handles the Boston Media. Undoubtably, he will have a bad game, or get a stupid tech. What will he do when writers like Dan "turd in the punch bowl" Shaughnessy start saying he is a loser, etc, etc. Let's face it, even though sports writers claim they tire of cliche remarks from atheletes, the truth is the get all bent out of shape if players say anything other than cliches.

Shamrock,

I'm not a fan of the sports media in general.  But, on a relative basis, I believe the Boston media beat writers covering the Celtics on a regular basis are fairly bland.  Only very occasionally do Shaughnessey and Jackie MacMullan actually appear in the local press with inflammatory stories on the Celtics.  Dan's much more likely to go after the Red Sox (particularly this season), and Jackie is much more routinely in the position of protecting Celtics players than excoriating them.

Of the Celtics beat writers, only Steve Bulpett has achieved much notoriety, and he's generally very even-handed in his treatment of players.  Otherwise, Forsberg, Blakeley, D'Amico, Robb, Washburn, King, Sousa, Murphy and Doyle are not wave-makers.  Moreover, the conduct of Wyc and the organization tends to discourage confrontational situations.

So, while there would certainly be elements of risk in acquiring Cousins, I think media conflict would be pretty low on the list.

Sam

Sam, all fair points. Most of the writers who cover the Celtics regularly are fairly team friendly. I was thinking more of the general vibe of the sports culture in Boston (including talk radio), which can be pretty intense compared to other cities. Some players thrive here, and manage to completely charm writers/fans (eg Tom Brady, Larry Bird), whereas others let it get to them. I have a feeling Cousins is neither thick-skinned or media-savvy smooth. That being said, I would still love to see him in Green!

You would know better than me, but Russell's relationship with the media was a bit strained wasn't it (although things obviously worked out for him and the Celtics!)?

Shamrock,
 
Since you mentioned it, Russell's situation was somewhat more complex.  He was rather insular where nearly everyone was concerned.  While I don't recall the media getting "on" him, as he rather quickly proved to be exactly what the Celtics needed, there was certainly an all-too-strong racist undercurrent among the public in Boston and other cities that fanned the flames of hurt and rebellion inside Russ.  But, as far as the media were concerned, I'm trying to think of any Celtic who had the kind of feud against the media that, for example, Ted Williams had.  And that ongoing situation was primarily instigated by one critical scribe, Dave "The Colonel" Egan.
 
For the first few years, the Celtics hardly mattered enough for the media (or the fans) to be bothered with them.  Then, although it took crowds a long time to warm up to Boston basketball even after all the winning began, the Celtics enjoyed a protracted honeymoon with Boston media because they won every year.  On the few occasions (I have difficulty recollecting any) when there might have been friction between a team member and a media member, it was fairly easy for a "family" with only 12 members and a very assertive, controlling coach to circle the wagons and band together against any adversary.
 
While it was relatively easy for a lot of New Englanders to ignore the Celtics in those days, one would have looked pretty foolish messing around with such a successful institution.  But that wasn't true outside Boston, where envying and hating the Celtics caught on pretty quickly and was so pervasive that many national media members and fans everywhere still regard detesting and dissing the Celtics as a rite of passage.
 
The franchise's detractors ultimately realized that one way to get back at the Celtics franchise was to turn Celtics devotees against one another by inventing the "best ever" era-to-era bullcrap.  They even extended the strategy to conjecturing as to which individual Russell team was better than the rest, thereby trying to circumvent the reality that the Russell Celtics as a 13-year entity were better in their time than any other franchise was in its time before or since.
 
I have lived through all of that—through all the arguments with all the taxi drivers and even clients on all the business trips to NBA cities...through all the challenges and doubts raised by new generations of national media and Celtics fans themselves...through the inflammatory strategies employed by talk shows, opposing media and competing fan bases that proliferated in the 70s and beyond.  All with a similar objective in mind—to distort history and demean the past in hopes of diminishing the fact that the Russell Celtics forged a happening that would forever be unmatchable.
 
This may seem rambling, but there’s a definite connection known as denial between the kinds of tensions to which Bill Russell was subjected long ago and the later aspersions on the unique phenomenon of which he was a principal architect.
 
Sam

Sam - not rambling at all. It was an interesting era, and I enjoy the insight you provide.

Shamrock,

I obviously agree that it was interesting—and given (in my opinion) far too little credit for ushering the NBA into the modern basketball era.  One can only imagine what stature the era might now retain had it been the beneficiary of the plethora of media coverage, metrics, and other information sources of today.  Having a few guys like myself trying to assume the mantle of the Johnny Appleseeds of Russelldom is sort of like spitting in the wind.  But it's absolutely no reason not to leave all our efforts on the court.  Even in our creaky years, we still owe that era vastly more than we could ever repay.

I realize many people feel I'm too determined in my efforts on the Russell Celtics' behalf.  Ironically, it was that era that infused in me the concept of elevated determination.  If the Russellian form of absolutely non-negotiable determination existed in today's game, we'd be congratulating the World Champion Cleveland Cavaliers.  And yes, I believe Lebron and mates were determined.  I'm talking about a matter of degree that is an elusive concept today.

Sam

I also do not believe Cousins will be traded.


18 mins ago  -  via Twitter stevekylerNBA

Steve Kyler: Continue to be told Kings have no interest in Cousins trades, want to give situation a full season under George Karl

TJ,

I don't know who Steve Kyler is, but his comment makes sense at face value.  But things can change, and one of the catalysts for change could be the results of the draft and related player shuffling.

I was going to sit down and make a list of every player about whom I've seen rumors concerning the Celtics in this off-season.  But it would have taken 40 years, and I doubt I have more than 30 in me.  LOL (in case it isn't obvious).

Sam

sam wrote:TJ,

I don't know who Steve Kyler is, but his comment makes sense at face value.  But things can change, and one of the catalysts for change could be the results of the draft and related player shuffling.

I was going to sit down and make a list of every player about whom I've seen rumors concerning the Celtics in this off-season.  But it would have taken 40 years, and I doubt I have more than 30 in me.  LOL (in case it isn't obvious).

Sam

Sam,

I have heard that 78 is the new 58, so I have no doubt that we will be discussing basketball together over the next 25-30 years...

tjmakz wrote:I also do not believe Cousins will be traded.


18 mins ago  -  via Twitter stevekylerNBA

Steve Kyler: Continue to be told Kings have no interest in Cousins trades, want to give situation a full season under George Karl

watch them trade thier first for T. Lawson from denver also. Karl wants to win now and has coached ( and Likes ) Lawson. They aslo need an upgarde at PG over Collison.

Cousins, Gay and Lawson could amke some noise in thw West wirth Karl as HC (and yes making the playoffs is making noise for Sacramento).

TJ,

Funny (ironic, not ha ha) that, just as I was reading your post about the future, my cardiologist called to discuss whether I'm high enough on the "risk of death" list to qualify for less invasive treatment on my impending aortic valve replacement.  So here I am, feeling pretty good with half a dozen trips planned by January, and trying to prove I'm close enough to death to qualify for the procedure, but not close enough to be a realistic concern.

Life is just plain nuts sometimes.

Sam