Re: Report: David Lee Traded By GSW TO BOSTON CELTICS

by **bobheckler** Tue Jul 07, 2015 6:39 pm

Ok, now that I have a few moments, let's see what we have here.

David Lee is a 2x All-Star, 2010 and 2013. So, his last all-star appearance was only 2 years ago. Wallace is a 1x All-Star back in 2010. My conclusion? Lee's good times are more recent than Crash's.

David Lee is a World Champion. While I have nothing but good things to say about Gerald Wallace's maturity and leadership, David Lee has a very, very special kind of experience he can impart to the young'uns. My conclusion? It's a toss-up.

Lee is 31. Wallace is 33. My conclusion? Pretty much a toss-up. Wallace's physical skills are, and have been, in definite decline while Lee never relied upon his athleticism.

Lee is a career 53.3% fg% shooter. Wallace is a career 46.9% fg% shooter. My conclusion? Lee is an upgrade on a team whose fg% last year stunk and badly needed an upgrade.

Lee is a career 77.7% ft% shooter. Wallace is a career 71% ft% shooter but shot 40% last year. My conclusion? I'm just fine with David Lee being in the game at the end if it's clutch time. No way with Wallace.

Lee is an average defender, up from a crappy defender. Wallace is a good defender for short periods, down from an elite defender. My conclusion? Wallace's defense became very specific and short-lived. Valuable but not even for rotation minutes in a single game. Lee's a good help defender, not that great a man-to-man defender.

Lee is a good rebounder. Wallace is good for his size. My conclusion? Lee is an upgrade.

PUSHES: We still don't have that "defensive presence in the middle".

I'm sorry to see Wallace go, I have nothing but good thoughts about him. This is shocking to say considering the trauma his contract put me through back when he was traded here and I typically have trouble with professional basketball players who cannot hit their fritos. Having said that, this is a good trade for both teams. James Young, Evan Turner and RJ Hunter have less competition for minutes. We have some experience at PF now, with Johnson and Lee, and Lee will put the ball in the basket from both mid-range and in close. He played some center in the playoffs against Mozgov (more than Bogut). Wallace gets onto a more veteran team that might let him play. Lee will get a shot at minutes. Both are good locker room guys and silent soldiers. Neither of them bitched publicly about their demotions last year.

I'm now expecting either Sully or Kelly to be gone. If I had to guess, I'd say it's Sully. He's the one with the conditioning issues. He's the one whose contract expires next year and, this year at least, he's the one whose specific skill sets (mid-range shooting, rebounding and scoring underneath) have been most fully replaced by David Lee.

Sully + draft picks for WCS? Sully + Bradley + Young + picks for Cousins? With 3 centers, the imbalance on their roster is there (not to mention the imbalance between their star player and their coach). Will Danny take a step back by giving up Sully for Lee if it gets him either of those two? If we get either of those players Danny/Brad will want to keep Kelly to spread the floor for the new center. Also, Kelly is playing politics better. He's in SLC, working out with the summer league team even though he isn't playing. Where's the fat guy with the conditioning problem?

bob
P.S. It will be interesting to see whether it is Pressey or Babb who goes with Wallace. Babb's contract is almost certainly going to be terminated, either way. Pressey's is guaranteed on 7/14.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/leeda02.html

Danny never sleeps. I still don't think it's over.

.

by **dboss** Tue Jul 07, 2015 6:48 pm

Lee is still a damn good scorer and rebounder.

I thought he was a factor in the GS championship.

Dboss

by **Shamrock1000** Tue Jul 07, 2015 6:48 pm

BobH - nice breakdown. Only place where I might disagree is regarding defense - Wallace is a better defender. Overall though, it is clear Lee can help the C's more than Wallace. Like you, I have much admiration for what a good soldier Crash turned out to be - I hope he can contribute with GSW.

Agree that Sully is more likely to be traded, but would ad that Sully seems to have slightly better buzz around the league (some think he is an allstar if he slims down (good luck with that btw...), and thus could bring a better return, especially when paired with one of our up and coming guards.

I had been posting earlier that Ainge had not yet committed to making the team better, and thus was still in the "collect assets" mode, but this trade has me thinking I might have been wrong...

by **rambone** Tue Jul 07, 2015 6:56 pm

I think we still need Sully. He's our strongest player by far. Nobody else even qualifies as decidedly strong.

If Sully does get traded, I think we'd have to acquire another big body, or select matchups will really exploit our combo-guard/power forward roster.

by **Shamrock1000** Tue Jul 07, 2015 7:03 pm

rambone wrote:I think we still need Sully. He's our strongest player by far. Nobody else even qualifies as decidedly strong.

If Sully does get traded, I think we'd have to acquire another big body, or select matchups will really exploit our combo-guard/power forward roster.

I agree, and also still think Sully has considerable potential. As a consquence of this potential though, he probably has more trade value tham KO - gotta give something to get something.

by **RosalieTCeltics** Tue Jul 07, 2015 7:15 pm

I have always wanted to see Lee in Greeen, He is a tough player and one who can play Celtics basketball, but is this just the beginning of more to come?

by **rambone** Tue Jul 07, 2015 7:19 pm

Shamrock1000 wrote:
rambone wrote:I think we still need Sully. He's our strongest player by far. Nobody else even qualifies as decidedly strong.

If Sully does get traded, I think we'd have to acquire another big body, or select matchups will really exploit our combo-guard/power forward roster.

I agree, and also still think Sully has considerable potential. As a consquence of this potential though, he probably has more trade value tham KO - gotta give something to get something.

KO has huge huge potential.

by **Shamrock1000** Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:15 pm

rambone wrote:
Shamrock1000 wrote:
rambone wrote:I think we still need Sully. He's our strongest player by far. Nobody else even qualifies as decidedly strong.

If Sully does get traded, I think we'd have to acquire another big body, or select matchups will really exploit our combo-guard/power forward roster.

I agree, and also still think Sully has considerable potential. As a consquence of this potential though, he probably has more trade value tham KO - gotta give something to get something.

KO has huge huge potential.

May be so, just saying that the "buzz" I get (i.e. what I read), is that Sully is considered more promising if he can get his wait under control.

by **Sam** Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:53 pm

Either Pressey's or Babb's salary works to complete the deal.

Sam

by **cowens/oldschool** Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:56 pm

kdp59 wrote:Lee, Amir Johnson, Sully, Mickey are all power forwards.

back to the future I guess.

what is Dannys' master plan?

I sure have no idea.

hes gotta plan, don't draft or acquire any 7 footers that can play.....

by **Sam** Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:58 pm

Bob, I don't "get" comparing Lee with Wallace. Lee won't be replacing Wallace on the depth chart. David's role will be to upgrade the up-front depth and the offense. No so with Wallace. Basically, Danny sheds the large contract of a player who was pretty much dead weight recently in return for a large contract of a player who should be able to contribute in a very necessary way.

Sam

by **gyso** Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:59 pm

sam wrote:Either Pressey's or Babb's salary works to complete the deal.

Sam

Whoever's option comes up sooner should be included in the trade. The one whose option (or guarantee date) is later should be saved for a trade later on.

Pressey's guarantee date is the 15th of this month. I don't know about Babb's.

gyso

by **cowens/oldschool** Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:01 pm

rambone wrote:I would have much rather traded for Roy Hibbert, but Lee should definitely help us out.

ditto, I'm not particularly fond of Hibbert, but for most of you with this win now mentality, Hibbert is a better fit for our severe weakness and shortcomings in the paint than Lee, another skilled PF with alligator arms that has never been able to defend.

by **Sam** Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:04 pm

Last season, David Lee cornered more rebounds per minute of play than any Celtic except Shav Randolph. Obviously, Lee's not going to be the needed defensive stud, but he should add toughness and fluidity to the offense.

Sam

by **cowens/oldschool** Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:05 pm

NYCelt wrote:No centers available?

Load up on power forwards.

Another good sized wing would be a nice addition next. I wonder if Danny's looking around for a small forward now?

get with the program, he's looking for SG's that can't shoot and PG's with no vision or can't defend and can't shoot

by **Sam** Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:10 pm

With Lee and Johnson playing most of the PF minutes and perhaps Mickey peeking in from time to time. We may be seeing a trend away from small ball. That could also mean greater likelihood that Turner could be traded with Crowder getting more of his SF minutes.

Notable players whom it's not difficult for me to see on the trading block would include Sully, Kelly, Turner and Bradley. (Probably not all of them, but at least some of them.) I believe Danny's far from finished in his summer player acquisitions.

Sam

by **rambone** Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:14 pm

Found this comment on the web:

Warriors Analyst
Starter
Posts: 2,181
And1: 246
Re: Celtics To Trade For David Lee
Post#85 » Yesterday 8:18 pm

Posted this on the Celtics board, figured this might start some conversation over here.

I'm a Warriors fan who used to be pretty anti-Lee but I grew to really appreciate him in the last year or two as a player. He can still be an extremely valuable and productive player, IF used in the right situations.

The old stereotype about David Lee is that he's an awful, awful, awful defender. This is true to some extent, but is also something that can be negated and even turned into a net neutral on the court, if surrounded by the right players. At this point in Lee's career, he probably is not a 25-30+ minutes a game player after a series of abdominal and hamstring injuries. His jumpshot was once a staple of the Warriors offense with Curry pick/pops but it seems to have abandoned him in the last few years.

That said, I think Celtics fans will be pleasantly surprised with Lee if he's played primarily at the 5. Most of people's complaints about David Lee on defense revolve around him getting burned in pick and roll coverage and being a mediocre rim-protector. If you put him at the 5, he doesn't have to nearly as much work running around guarding 4's that can dribble or shoot. Lee is no shot blocker by any means, but in single coverage in the post, he's done a decent job in the past defending some brutish types. I assume lots of fans will recoil in horror at the idea of David Lee playing the 5, but if he's put next to someone like Amir Johnson who is a good defender and capable shotblocker, Lee's defensive problems will neutralized.If the Celtics utilize lineups with good swarming defenses that focus on snuffing out pick and rolls and keeping the ball out of the paint, Lee at the 5 will not be a problem whatsoever. In Mark Jackson's last year, the Warriors took the Clippers to 7 games with the Draymond Green/David Lee frontline and may well have won the series if Mark Jackson had pulled his head out of his ass earlier and stopped playing David Lee/Jermaine O'Neal frontlines with terrible spacing. During most of the regular season, the Curry/Klay/Igoudala/Green/Lee lineup had something around a +30 net rating with a defensive net rating somewhere either in the low 90's or high 80's. Not gonna go back and find those numbers, but I've seen them tossed around in many places. If you want to read an incredibly optimistic view of David Lee, I would recommend checking out feltbot.com. This guy is a Warriors blogger that has long been aboard the Lee at the 5 campaign and he's cited the numbers many a time.

As a Warriors fan, I am of course thrilled with how the season went, but the whole season I felt like Steve Kerr was completely misusing Lee on offense. Mo Speights is no low post threat and he isn't a high level passer like Lee was so Kerr ran him mostly through pick and rolls and pops at the 5. Festus Ezeli still is learning how to play the post and isn't a good passer at this point in his career, so Kerr used him mostly in pick and roll situations. Lee on the other hand has a reputation as a low-post player and a great passer so Kerr had an affinity for sticking him in the high post for handoffs and in the pinch post in sets that were triangle mutations. At this point in Lee's career, he is only really effective posting up against bigger and slower players. Athletic players will eat his sh-t in the low block if they have time to prepare for him. THAT SAID, Lee is still a monster in the pick and roll, especially if he's playing the 5 with a spaced floor. My biggest fear as a Warriors fan all season was that the Warriors bench wouldn't be able to score in the playoffs and that this would bite them in the ass. This did indeed become a huge problem in the Finals and Kerr finally used Lee at the 5 running picking and rolls with Livingston and Curry in Game 4 and 5 and he saved the Warriors ass in a huge way.

If you use Lee at the 5 with a lineup full of shooters, he will be a threat for 10-15+ points a game off the bench in 20-25 minutes. Lee is an incredibly smart player who is equally adept with both hands. He doesn't always set real picks and prefers to slip screens, but if he does this above the three point line with a point guard that is a shooting threat (Steph Curry or in this case, Isaiah Thomas), Lee will get tons of opportunities to get the ball at the free throw line, and assuming he is playing the 5, won't have to deal with Bogut or Jermaine O'Neal clogging the paint and dragging their man into the lane and making Lee susceptible to getting his shot blocked. During the Jackson tenure, the Warriors offense was highly uncreative, but Green/Lee lineups were incredibly solid defensively and absolute terrors on offense. With the floor properly spaced, Lee gets a chance to get the ball at the free throw line on pick and rolls, make a read and either drive to the hoop or kick the ball out to open shooters. He may be getting older and he probably won't be nearly as athletic or capable of playing big minutes as he was in his youth, but he's still a wizard in the pick and roll and makes great reads about when to drive and when to kick.

I didn't watch the Celtics outside of their games with the Warriors, but I did get the sense that Stevens was a brilliant tactician who adapts his game plan to his players. I would hope that Stevens uses Lee paired up with Amir Johnson at the 4 where his defensive problems will be covered by Amir, or in super small ball lineups with Jae Crowder at the 4 where the offensive firepower will blow most bench units out of the water.

I know that Lee was superfluous in the Warriors scheme given his huge salary and Kerr's insistence on using Lee in the post, but I for one am going to miss him a lot. I had my gripes about Lee in the past, but as I grew older and understood tactics and gameplans more and more, I grew to really appreciate Lee on the court and really did feel that even on the Warriors, he got put in some situations where he wasn't used to his true potential. He's a true professional who gave out his hamstring and his abdominal muscles in the his first two playoffs and probably sacrificed some milage in the long term. He cares deeply about winning and I think the Celtics will actually put him to good use and make this trade look like a steal for them long term.

Hope this raises some hopes of some pessimistic Celtics fans.

by **Sam** Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:18 pm

Tj, I can see where Brad would like to see what happens when an experienced, legit, power forward mans that position rather than having to default so much to small ball. That could very well help determine the future direction of the team. It's not always just the specific skills of an individual player that determine his value. Sometimes, it's the modification he can make in the system and the effects that modification can have on other players.

Sam

by **tjmakz** Tue Jul 07, 2015 10:40 pm

sam wrote:Tj, I can see where Brad would like to see what happens when an experienced, legit, power forward mans that position rather than having to default so much to small ball. That could very well help determine the future direction of the team. It's not always just the specific skills of an individual player that determine his value. Sometimes, it's the modification he can make in the system and the effects that modification can have on other players.

Sam

Sam,

I do agree with you.

Lee is a skilled, professional player who will perform well in any role that a coach puts him in.
He should still be a starting PF but GS has so many skilled players that Lee mostly fell out of the rotation.
Lee is an upgrade of course over Wallace, but is he going to take time from Sullinger or Olynyk?
I would also agree with the others who expect Sullinger or Olynyk to be traded.
I just don't think it can happen soon because their value seems to be pretty low right now.
Sullingers continued poor conditioning has really limited his value.

by **Sam** Tue Jul 07, 2015 11:23 pm

TJ,

I guess we agree pretty much across the board, including the possibility of trading Sully and Kelly.. I view Sullinger and Olnyk as players with rotation potential and, in Sully's case, some interesting special skills. But, in contrast to how I felt about Sully a couple of years ago, I don't see either of them being high-impact players on a contending team. I believe Sully's perceived value may have slipped somewhat while Kelly's may have improved at least slightly. Consequently, they could be on pretty equal footing a far as trade value goes. For either of them to be used in a trade for a defensive center, I could see the necessity to include another player (Bradley?) plus multiple picks. And, for those who might feel this would be overpaying, I wouldn't care.

Sam

by **cowens/oldschool** Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:24 am

David Lee's game has always been about finesse and he has legit shooting and passing skills. Being he started his career in NY, I've heard alot about him as most of you already know I'm in that vicinity. I have a friend Arthur, a Knicks season ticket holder who I used to go to games with, who loved Lee. Then when we would banter back and forth, he really annoyed me by saying after Lee had like an 18 rebound game that I should like him because....he put him in the same sentence with Dave Cowens. Well if anyone here who knows me on this board, and met me at least a few times in person, you can imagine how I went off on my poor friend.

So yeah I know enough about David Lee to not be compelled or excited about this deal.

by **bobheckler** Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:38 am

We gave up a player that never played with an expiring contract and got a player that can play with an expiring contract.

How can anybody not see this as a plus? What do you think Gerald Wallace and his contract are worth that you should expect a young high quality player for him? A shot blocker? For fading 33 year old Gerald Wallace? Wakey, wakey, it's morning and time to get up sleepy head.

Lee played some solid defense against Mozgov and generated some offense while Bogut sat.

bob

.

by **sinus007** Wed Jul 08, 2015 8:25 am

Hi,
Any rumors on who else, along GW, goes for Lee? Or, we'll find it tomorrow.

AK

by **Sam** Wed Jul 08, 2015 8:45 am

As I recall, the insertion of Lee at opportune times might have been the second most important adjustment Kerr made during the playoffs.

Lee seems to be right in the mold of players Danny is getting since the draft: Experienced; smart; complementary team player; well-defined skill set that meets a specific Celtics need.

And, for those who have been worried about roster space, by trading two for one, Danny has opened up one more spot in the roster.

Sam

by **bobheckler** Wed Jul 08, 2015 10:01 am

sam wrote:Bob, I don't "get" comparing Lee with Wallace. Lee won't be replacing Wallace on the depth chart. David's role will be to upgrade the up-front depth and the offense. No so with Wallace. Basically, Danny sheds the large contract of a player who was pretty much dead weight recently in return for a large contract of a player who should be able to contribute in a very necessary way.

Sam

sam,

It might not have been the most cogent approach to the trade. I was trying to compare abilities, what each brings to the table, as opposed to who he's ahead of or behind on the depth chart. For example, if we're getting killed on the boards does he help us there? While we have a specific need for a defensive presence in the middle, and this trade does not solve that, it is an upgrade in other areas of need.

We do need rebounding help and Lee is better at that than Wallace. So, now Brad can go bigger. We're not getting killed on the boards specifically at the SG/SF position, just in general, so Lee is an upgrade in that area of need.

We do need better shooting at the 4/5 slot (Zeller is the weak link). Lee is better for the offense and he is a much better shooter than Wallace. In fact, we need to up our fg%, period, and Lee will do that over Wallace. If that means a lineup where Crowder is playing 2 because we want to squeeze another shooting big in there, like Lee, we can do it.

Lee can play in crunch time because he hits his fritos. Injuries/foul problems at the 4/5 spot will force Lee to play minutes (even if Brad and everybody else doesn't want him to). Imagine Wallace in crunch time with the league embracing Hack-a-Player defenses. So, in terms of having players on the roster who can hit big shots, including fritos, in crunch time (and Danny has specifically stated that's an area he is focusing on) then Lee is an upgrade in that area of need.

Maybe we are overloaded at 4/5 again, but we've eliminated a player that only played 286 minutes last year total. If Wallace only played that many minutes the whole year then his value to the team is very, very low. Lee will get those many minutes by game 15-20 or so, not because he's entitled but because he will earn and deserve them. And when he's in he'll get more rebounds, hit more fritos and shots from the field and set more picks than Wallace when he was in, and that's no knock on Wallace nor a reflection on the differing positions.
If Danny hadn't re-signed Crowder my eyes would be spinning like slot machines now, but he did.

Not a great analysis, comparing them straight up without regard to their positions, but there are some things that transcend positions like ft% and fg%.

Regarding a question you posed on later in this thread, about which player will go west with Wallace, my bet is that it will either be Babb or Pressey since they both have non-guaranteed contracts and this is a salary dump by GSW. We have 14 guaranteed contracts. Moving Babb or Pressey doesn't change that. Lee's contract, because it was signed under the old CBA, cannot be stretched. Wallace's can.

bob

.

by Sponsored content