NBA Chatter Thread

[Deuce]

So, we're all in agreement that the Sixers got the best of this trade with the Celtics, right?

Good.

If Ainge and I are right and Jackson/Tatum are on the same level as Fultz, than no.

 

[1bigfan13]

I think the Love for PG thing isn't as much of an improvement as people think.

Yes, they'll have another guy who can score and creates a defensive matchup problem for the opponent. But while Love may not have been this superstar player, he was a very good and productive player for them. He may have his weaknesses, but he was a double-double guy for them and they would miss both his rebounding and his ability to stretch the opposing PF out.

Would I rather have George than Love if I were a Cavs fan? Yes, but while the Cavs would be gaining some things, they'll also be losing others. In order to catch GS, the Cavs needs to be getting stronger while not losing anything, but that wouldn't be the case here. They would need a lot more than George to even have a chance to beat GS in a 7 game series.

So if this trade actually happens, they'll need George and someone else to compensate for what they'd lose by trading away Love PLUS something else.

They aren't all that close to GS, IMO.

San Antonio I think is actually the biggest threat and even they won't beat GS.

I agree a 1 for 1 (Love for George) swap creates holes in other areas but if we're strictly looking at a matchup vs the Warriors, I still think it would be the right move to make.

I want someone who can stay in front of Durant and make him work hard for his shot on one end, and on the other end make Durant expend tons of energy on defense.

PG13 and Wiggins are those types of players.

I'll take my chances sticking a JAG PF on Draymond Green. Hell, maybe Lebron draws that assignment and plays the 4 in games vs the Warriors. Green's offense skills are limited so I doubt LBJ would get burned out guarding Draymond.

 

[NoDak]

If Ainge and I are right and Jackson/Tatum are on the same level as Fultz, than no.

Oops. Let me rephrase that...

So, all of us that aren't delusional enough to think Jackson/Tatum are on the same level as Fultz are in agreement that the Sixers got the best of this trade with the Celtics, right?

Good.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Oops. Let me rephrase that...

So, all of us that aren't delusional enough to think Jackson/Tatum are on the same level as Fultz are in agreement that the Sixers got the best of this trade with the Celtics, right?

Good.

So many unknown factors. And what if the Celtics get the second pick in the draft next year as a result?

But for the Sixers, it must be nice to finally get a legit back court scorer. Seems like all they ever draft are big men. I think the trade could be great for both teams. But a lot of that will depend on just how good Fultz is. The NBA is about superstars. You don't win with a bunch of good players.

 

[Deuce]

Oops. Let me rephrase that...

So, all of us that aren't delusional enough to think Jackson/Tatum are on the same level as Fultz are in agreement that the Sixers got the best of this trade with the Celtics, right?

Good.

Oh, please enlighten me as to what you see that I don't? What is it about a 23ppg scorer on an 8 win team that makes me feel like the Celtics are missing out? What is it that Tatum and Jackson don't bring that would make Fultz a better fit for the Celtics?

 

[Deuce]

So many unknown factors. And what if the Celtics get the second pick in the draft next year as a result?

But for the Sixers, it must be nice to finally get a legit back court scorer. Seems like all they ever draft are big men. I think the trade could be great for both teams. But a lot of that will depend on just how good Fultz is. The NBA is about superstars. You don't win with a bunch of good players.

And there are going to be 2 especially talented 7 footers in next years draft, so the odds are good the Celtics will land one.

 

[Smitty]

Celtics are just gonna trade those pics for Butler.

 

[Simpleton]

I don't think there is that much difference between Fultz and the rest of the top 5 guys, not just Jackson/Tatum. Stylistically Fultz is the best prospect because of his size/athleticism/ball handling/shooting, but there's just something off with him.

He's nowhere near a transcendent type of talent, guys like that don't win 8 games in college no matter who their teammates are, and what's more, he played in the prestigious WCAC in high school and in the championship game his senior year he was basically treated like a small child by 5-11 Anthony Cowan.

Long story short, I don't think Fultz is some can't miss, uber prospect and if I was betting on who would be better, him or the top 5 field, I'd take the field for sure.

 

[NoDak]

Oh, please enlighten me as to what you see that I don't? What is it about a 23ppg scorer on an 8 win team that makes me feel like the Celtics are missing out? What is it that Tatum and Jackson don't bring that would make Fultz a better fit for the Celtics?

Jesus. Relax, I was just playin'. So seeryus.

 

[Simpleton]

I think Jonathan Isaac might be the best pick for the Celtics, especially if they plan on keeping the pick, not trading for Butler, signing Hayward and presumably keeping Bradley at the 2.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I think Jonathan Isaac might be the best pick for the Celtics, especially if they plan on keeping the pick, not trading for Butler, signing Hayward and presumably keeping Bradley at the 2.

You don't think Jayson Tatum would be perfect for them?

 

[Simpleton]

You don't think Jayson Tatum would be perfect for them?

Depends on their long term plans but I think Isaac has a higher ceiling than Tatum, although Tatum's floor is higher.

Isaac is a prototypical stretch 4 who could solve their big man problems after about 2 years of development, but of course that goes back to how much are the Celtics going all in to win now and how much are they building for the future?

Tatum, Isaac, and Jackson won't be ready to start on a title contender until about Year 3, and at that point Thomas will be like 31 and Horford will be basically done.

 

[Deuce]

Depends on their long term plans but I think Isaac has a higher ceiling than Tatum, although Tatum's floor is higher.

Isaac is a prototypical stretch 4 who could solve their big man problems after about 2 years of development, but of course that goes back to how much are the Celtics going all in to win now and how much are they building for the future?

Tatum, Isaac, and Jackson won't be ready to start on a title contender until about Year 3, and at that point Thomas will be like 31 and Horford will be basically done.

I saw Isaac play a handful of times this year and he just looks like someone who should be better than he is. Lots of potential, but I don't know if he gets there. Just looked too passive on the court.

I'd rather use the pick to trade for Butler or Porzingis that draft him.

 

[Simpleton]

I saw Isaac play a handful of times this year and he just looks like someone who should be better than he is. Lots of potential, but I don't know if he gets there. Just looked too passive on the court.

I'd rather use the pick to trade for Butler or Porzingis that draft him.

I could see that and of course you would, that's why I said it depends on what their long term plans are and if they really plan on using the pick. It's why I've been saying for months now they need to start cashing in assets.

As an aside, this whole Cavs trying to get Butler through a team like the Suns thing is interesting. I'd 100% take number 4, Chriss and filler over number 3 and either Brooklyn or Lakers 2018 pick. If the Suns want Love, for God knows what reason, Chriss is redundant and in that case I think asking for him on top of number 4 is reasonable.

The Bulls would be blatant idiots to turn down a deal like that if on the table, but of course I've been pretty obvious with my disdain for how they're ran.

 

[Carp]

I think the Love for PG thing isn't as much of an improvement as people think.

Yes, they'll have another guy who can score and creates a defensive matchup problem for the opponent. But while Love may not have been this superstar player, he was a very good and productive player for them. He may have his weaknesses, but he was a double-double guy for them and they would miss both his rebounding and his ability to stretch the opposing PF out.

Would I rather have George than Love if I were a Cavs fan? Yes, but while the Cavs would be gaining some things, they'll also be losing others. In order to catch GS, the Cavs needs to be getting stronger while not losing anything, but that wouldn't be the case here. They would need a lot more than George to even have a chance to beat GS in a 7 game series.

So if this trade actually happens, they'll need George and someone else to compensate for what they'd lose by trading away Love PLUS something else.

They aren't all that close to GS, IMO.

San Antonio I think is actually the biggest threat and even they won't beat GS.

I think they are a much better team with George without adding anyone. I would just insert him and allow Lebron to cover the PF. Love has always been a favorite of mine, but stretch 4s are becoming antiquated ideas. You need to have athleticism to really be an effective stretch 4. If they are not athletic, they are comingboff the bench.

 

[Carp]

Look at the Warriors minutes per game...for the most part they rolled Green, Durant, Thompson, Iggy, and Curry.

No idea why Thompson, LBJ, George, Smith, and Irving is not viable.

 

[1bigfan13]

I actually think Gilbert firing David Griffin could be his way of waving the white flag.

I think it's his way of nudging Lebron out the door.

I think he assessed the NBA landscape and the enormous amount of player salaries he's on the hook for......not to mention the added cost that he would absorb by bringing on another star player like Jimmy Butler or Paul George....I think he looked at all that and figured it wasn't worth the cost since they'd still probably be heavy underdogs against the Warriors.

So I think this is his way of initiating the end of the Lebron era in Cleveland.

 

[Deuce]

Lakers send Russell and Mozgof to the Nets for Brooks Lopez and the 27th pick. Pretty much locks them in on Ball.

Ball, Lopez and (hopefully) George is enough to get them over the hump and out of next years top 5.

Hello, Sacramento pick!

 

[1bigfan13]

Lakers send Russell and Mozgof to the Nets for Brooks Lopez and the 27th pick. Pretty much locks them in on Ball.

Ball, Lopez and (hopefully) George is enough to get them over the jump and out of next years top 5.

Hello, Sacramento pick!

Don't forget Swaggy P.

 

[Simpleton]

If LeBron is indeed leaving Cleveland this time next year I think the Bulls might be better off keeping Butler unless they get a monster offer, and then have him try to lure his buddy Kyrie who has been rumored to want out of Cleveland if LeBron leaves.

Without LeBron the East would be wide open and a Kyrie+Butler pairing could realistically be a Finals favorite if they had a few decent pieces around them. Obviously they'd get their asses beaten once there but nothing you can do about that.

Of course the primary stumbling block here is the completely and irrevocably incompetent Bulls front office, same as it ever was.