They getting swept by the Cavs if they even make it to ECF. They will be worse than last year. I see why they made the trade to Better position themselves in the future. I just don't think Kyrie is good at all. He's rated as one of the worst defenders in the league and he doesn't pass. Sure he can score but he doesn't impact games. Cavs were 0-8 without Lebron. Celtics traded the only two guys who even had a shot at guarding Lebron away. Lebron with extra Kyrie motivation may score 60 and average a triple double against he Celtics. What is their starting lineup? Kyrie Hayward Horford.. Smart? Tatum? Morris? Brown.. They lost all their depth and you can argue right now IT4 is a better player than Kyrie. 3rd in scoring, 1st in 4th quarter scoring, 5th in MVP voting. I feel like Cavs can actually compete with Warriors now and they saved 29 million in luxury tax.
again plz let vegas know. you're obviously want to make yourself believe that you have logical data (opinion) to say boston will suck lol i mean sure you can say boston still might not be the best team but to say they'll actually just suck is pretty dumb
Also I firmly believe if the Celtics were in the West they wouldn't even make the playoffs. Warriors Spurs Rockets Thunder Clippers Nuggets Blazers Wolves Maybe even the Pelicans I think are all better than Boston. They have Hayward and Horford making more money than Durant... They have no shot.
Wade and Bosh were both SUPERSTARS when LeBron made The Decision. Sure, maybe after 4 years both were on the decline when LeBron left, but you make it sound like they were trash the whole time. Also, Ray Allen singlehandedly won LeBron his second ring: Lastly, I'm not judging LeBron's legacy as good or bad, but trying at the very least to acknowledge the contributions of other superstars and the sheer amount of luck involved in landing 3 first overall picks in 4 years for which the odds are ASTRONOMICAL. Without those picks, can you honestly say LeBron comes back to Cleveland?
Ray Allen made 1 shot and he singlehandedly won Lebron a swing ring? By that logic Derek Fisher and Robert Horry won Shaq and Kobe all their rings. Horry and Elie won Hakeem all his rings. I agree there is no way Lebron goes back without all those picks, but it also shows how good he was to carry that crappy team to finals year before. I don't discount Wade, in his prime and healthy I think he's one of the best ever. He was just on the decline every year with Lebron. I just think all the other ones are highly overrated. Bosh could barely lead his own team to playoffs in east. Love couldn't even sniff the playoffs. Neither could Kyrie.
It takes stars to win. Kyrie and Hayward are bigger stars than IT and anyone else they lost. I doubt they will be worse than last year with the addition of Tatum, plus an additional year of experience for Brown and Smart. IT is NOT a better player than Kyrie, regardless of the flukey stats he put up last year. He's had the ball in his hands for basically his entire career on awful teams (Sac, Phx)... good luck getting that same performance out of him with his touches drastically reduced. What's with the LeBron nut-hugging? Weird.
Its just Boston overrating. Marcus Smart has been one of the worst offensive players and worst shooters in the league for 2 straight years. Jayden Brown seems like an interesting young player, but at this point is just that. Jayson Tatum looked great in summer league. Done Greene scored 40 points in the summer league once and the Rockets traded him for Ron Artest and Greene sucked for his 3 year NBA career (maybe 4). I suspect Tatum will be pretty good, really, but slow your roll. Terry Rozier played 17 mpg, scored 5 ppg and had a 10 PER. Meanwhile Jae Crowder is a guy whose team always performs much better with him on the court. Last year the Celtics net point differential with him on the court as equivalent of a 60 win team, vs. a 24 win team pace net differential when he was off the court. So yes, on paper, when I look and see: Wall > Kyrie last year Beal > whoever the Celtics fill in at SG by a long shot Porter < Hayward Markieff > whomever the Celtics fill in at PF, obviously so if its his brother Gortat < Horford Celtics have upside because they have more younger players that could be something, noted. Similar argument is made for the Raptors, where Lowry, Derozan, Ibaka are on par or better than Kyrie, Hawyard, Horford. I feel like I live in some bizarro world today where people are ranking Kyrie Irving way higher than he was mostly ranked when the regular season ended. I mean everyone has different lists, but take these end of season rankings from well known sports sites: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...end-of-regular-season-edition-ranking-top-100 http://hoopshype.com/2017/04/28/we-have-ranked-all-the-players-in-the-nba-this-season/ This one ranks Kyrie higher at #19, but still behind Derozan, Lowry, Wall.... https://hoopshabit.com/2017/04/14/nba-player-power-rankings-final-mvp-rankings-2016-17/ But even if I said you know what, individually, as individual one on one players Kyrie, Hayward and Hereford's collective or average ranking is slightly above that of the Wizards big 3 or the Raptors.. Brad Stevens has a BIG job on his hands. He only has 4 players returning from a team where his his teams have overachieved because of buying into his culture, because of defense, because of tenacity, etc. The team just lost A LOT of that in losing Bradley and Crowder. My current rankings are: Lebrons/Cavs Wizards Raptors Celtics
He was a 20 ppg scorer his third year in the league, at 24?? He's a 19.1 career ppg scorer compared to Kyrie's 21 ppg. He's basically been an around 20 pp. scorer every year since that 3rd year, absent a brief stretch in Phoenix where they had 700 guards. Not a huge difference, especially when you consider its all about volume. IT has a better career TS%. Their apg averages are eerily similar. Their steals per game averages are eerily similar. I definitely get it. I'm not sold on IT repeating his peak 2016/2017 year again. And he is 3 years older. But I'm well past discounting this dude.
IT was a better player than Kyrie last year. That's just factual. We can certainly discount that as peak IT not likely to be repeated. But I don't see the argument for his touches being dramatically reduced. Kyrie had a ton of touches next to Lebron. In fact I think I saw a stat that showed the Cavs were liked 6th in the league in ISO plays compared to the Celtics somewhere in like the 20s. Kyrie took 28 FGA per 100 possessions last year. IT took 28 FGA per 100 possessions last year. ITs stats may go down, but if they do it won't necessarily mean its a bad thing for him or the Cavs. They could go down and he can just be a great fit. Cats also added other pieces that will take shots - Rose, Crowder, Green, etc. IT hasn't really had the ball in his hands any more than any other great offensive player. Probably less actually. He's had to prove himself form day 1, wasn't given the ball and a 28.7% usage rate - Kyrie's rookie year usage. IT's usage didn't top that # until his 5th year in the league. ITs also had three years with VORP above 3, compared to Kyrie's 2. He has a higher career ORtg (though higher DRtg as well). IT was peak IT last year because every year as he's proven more and more that he belongs, and as he became the unquestioned offensive leader of the Celtics, he took more three more three pointers a game over the prior year, with a slight increase in %, resulting in 3.6 more ppg on threes. Then he increased his FT/game by 2, so 5.6 ppt more on more threes and FTs... and that's basically it. I'm not saying you don't trade IT for Kyrie if your Boston. Obviously you do. Kyrie is younger, taller (lol) and locked in for 2 years. I do question the overall makeup of the celtics this year and how it will all shake out, relative to last year. But to this comment, point is just that IT was the real deal last year, and has been the real deal for a while. The kid is an absolute offensive monster, and the only real concern about that changing for the Cavs should be his hip.
Well you are right partly. Irving isn't a perennial all-star caliber player that wins you games...but Boston is more than him aren't they? Heyward and Horford on the team as well. Along with one of the best coaches in the nba... but the Celtics do not lose this trade at all since they were not going to pay IT and in return got a really good young PG who may never be batman but a provable championship robin.
You make some good points, but all I know is that as a Cleveland hater, I definitely feel good about the trade. As opposed to if they managed to get Bledsoe, Jackson, and a pick.
Sure. But you'd feel good about the trade as opposed to them getting AD or PG. Josh Jackson was never on the table.
They were never getting AD. And I don't even know how good of a fit PG would have been. I just think that they were more formidable before, with Kyrie, than they will be with IT (and Crowder). Lateral move at best, with a strong possibility to make them worse. I'll take it. If they manage to turn the Brooklyn pick into another star, then we can revisit.
I agree with this post, if anything I think Boston mortgaged their future to better their lineup now. Honestly I don't understand posters who keep saying this move is supposed to help Boston in the future. I mean, really? Losing the most likely top 1 pick is supposed to help you in the future? What Boston jist did is upgrade from IT to Irving, they are probably betting Irving will be Harden 2.0 and blossom if he becomes the heart and soul of the team. It's a win now move that doesn't hurt their future because they are overflowing with SF young studs and Irving himself is still young. The only old guy they have is Horford, who I bet is really regretting he didn't sign with Houston now. Instead of getting ECF beatdowns for the next 2-3 years he could've been playing with Cp3 and Harden and battling GSW for the championship.
I agree that they did well in the trade if they HAD to trade, but I think they could have expected better by having Kyrie and LeBron mend fences. Unless LeBron really hooked up with his girl or something like that, I can't imagine a man-to-man sit-down wouldn't have resolved the issues.
Not sure why you think like this. Cleveland was in salary cap hell before the trade. They were maxed out and couldn't get another player. As constructed they were never gonna win. Now they actually have some flexibility and can compete. Not to mention they finally have assets. They will still be best in East next year and you never know who will ask for a trade later in the season and the Cavs now have Brooklyn pick and other assists to offer. And they saved 30 million. Sure right now they maybe the same or little worse, but I really like Crowder they were missing a player like him last year. They now have someone to defend opposing wings and take pressure off Lebron. If IT4 can play close to what he did last year I think they are better.
