Mike1989

True, if the top four are Ayton, Doncic, Bagley and Porter it leaves Dallas a choice between Bamba and Jackson. So if they go Bamba, we'll probably draft Jackson and vice versa. Unless we truly want Trae Young. Porter does fill a need for Memphis. They already have their point guard (Conley) and center (Gasol) pencilled into their starting line up next season. They've not really had a 20 a night guy and Porter could potentially be that guy. So could Bagley if he's available. Both project to be potential go to scorers. Jackson doesn't project to a 20 a night guy. He can space the floor, grab rebounds and block shots. So he'll help them continue to play tough defensive basketball but won't necessarily help them fill the scoring void. It comes down to what they want. A better defensive talent that should be able to space the floor, or the better offensive talent.

Is your point if we draft Trae Young or Wendell Carter we'll be in the lottery again? If so, I'm not convinced players like Bamba or Jackson that fit the athletic and lengthy criteria that our front office look for could help us avoid the lottery next season. They'll bring defense but we'd need significant growth from other players and further additions in order to make the play offs. Or is it merely a question of who I like? If so, I haven't seen any of next year's potential class to comment because I don't follow the high school game. However, based off recruiting classes and reports it seems likely to be a good forward class with a couple of shooting guards to watch out for.

Currys' measurements, lack of ideal athleticism and quickness, and defense were all critiques of his coming into the league however he's made the jump and become a star. If we think Trae can become a star we shouldn't pass on him because someone measures better because great measurements don't always equal success, like lackluster ones don't always equal failure. Agreed on Carter. At 6 he could be an ideal selection. He offers a high floor and decent enough ceiling to make his selection decent value. It would also complete our front court.

Another really good and somewhat underrated player.

Chris Paul? 6ft at best. Also, even if he never becomes a superstar it doesn’t mean he can’t become a very good player. Isaiah Thomas is a former all star and was important for the Celtics before injuries got him. If we could get this kind of production from Trae we would have a 20 a night guy with 6 assists and we can work with that.

I’m not sure JJJ will fall to us unless the workouts and combine makes someone rise. It would need five from Ayton, Doncic, Bagley, Porter, Bamba and Young to go above us for JJJ to be available. I’ve not seen a mock in which that has happened for us yet. Personally I prefer Young at six, but if we get Bamba or JJJ it completes a lengthy and athletic front court.

NBAdraft.net most up to date mock has Young going to us at 6, Carter to the Bulls at 7, and Bamba to the Cavaliers at 8. So it must have been amended since the nba.com article... As for passing on Bamba, we tend to do that in mocks in favour of Young. I don’t see that as a bad thing. It’s a tough decision our front office will have on our hands if it comes down to Bamba or Young. If we want to build around length and defense, Bamba is the pick. If we want a more nba ready prospect that can boost our play making, scoring and shooting then Young should be the pick. I don’t envy their choice but I would go for Young over Bamba.

Via NBA.com ESPN, Jonathan Givony - 1. Ayton, 2. Doncic, 3. Bagley, 4. Jackson, 5. Bamba, 6. Young, 7. Carter, 8. Porter, 9. Sexton, 10. Mikal Bridges Ringer - 1. Doncic, 2. Ayton, 3. Jackson, 4. Bamba, 5. Porter, 6. Bagley, 7. Miles Bridges, 8. Mikal Bridges, 9.Young, 10. Carter NBAdraft.net - 1. Ayton, 2. Doncic, 3. Bagley, 4. Jackson, 5. Porter, 6. Carter, 7. Young, 8. Bamba, 9. Mikal Bridges, 10. Sexton SI.com, Jeremy Woo - 1. Ayton, 2. Doncic, 3. Jackson, 4. Bagley, 5. Bamba, 6. Carter, 7. Porter, 8. Young, 9. Mikal Bridges, 10. Miles Bridges USA Today - 1. Ayton, 2. Doncic, 3. Bagley, 4. Jackson, 5. Bamba, 6. Porter, 7. Young, 8. Carter, 9. Sexton, 10. Mikal Bridges SB Nation - 1. Doncic, 2. Ayton, 3. Jackson, 4. Bagley, 5. Porter, 6. Young, 7. Bamba, 8. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, 9. Carter, 10. Mikal Bridges Bleacher Report, Jonathan Wasserman - 1. Doncic, 2. Ayton, 3. Bagley, 4. Jackson, 5. Bamba, 6. Young, 7. Mikal Bridges, 8. Porter, 9. Miles Bridges, 10. Lonnie Walker Net Scouts, Carl Berman - 1. Ayton, 2. Doncic, 3. Bagley, 4. Jackson, 5. Bamba, 6. Carter, 7. Porter, 8. Young, 9. Sexton, 10. Miles Bridges CBS Sports, Gary Parrish - 1. Ayton, 2. Doncic, 3. Bagley, 4. Porter, 5. Jackson, 6. Young, 7. Bamba, 8. Sexton, 9. Carter, 10. Mikal Bridges Basketball Insiders, Steve Kyler - 1. Ayton, 2. Doncic, 3. Bagley, 4. Porter, 5. Jackson, 6. Young, 7. Bamba, 8. Mikal Bridges, 9. Carter, 10. Miles Bridges Most mocked player: Trae Young, 5 times out of 10 mocks Most passed on player: Mohamed Bamba, 4 times out of 10 mocks / runner up was Michael Porter, 3 times out of 10 mocks I think a lot of people are now starting to think we are going to take Trae Young with the sixth pick and that does make sense. It gives us our new starting point guard that can shoot, score and make plays. I would be very happy to see us come away from the draft with him. The Ringer's mock would pose an interesting choice for us if Bagley is there at six. He is not really an ideal fit for a starting center, nor is Isaac or Gordon. So that will leave us with a decision to make at some point in the future over which one we would build around alongside Bagley, unless of course we do play Bagley at center and he can make the transition to the league playing there. Otherwise it will either be Isaac and Bagley, or Gordon and Bagley, we build around. I suppose one benefit of this mock is that we could potentially try to package Gordon (or alternatively Isaac if we really want Gordon long term) to try and get the answer at point guard in return.

Fair enough, but my point remains that the hype is tied to his measurables. He can work hard, but some players have it, others simply give everything they've got but aren't really needle movers. If we go for Bamba, I won't criticize the decision and will back the team all the way as usual, but I would be lying if I said that Bamba is the guy I want a six because I'm not buying into the hype because he's got freakish measurements.

My point is very simple. People get excited over wingspan and measurements because they think that equals a "can't miss" kinda prospect. How many times have we seen teams draft players based on measurements and they never live up to those high expectations? Hasheem Thabeet measured well. The Grizzlies took him second overall in 2009 and passed on James Harden, Tyreke Evans (etc). The guy is no longer in the NBA and is plying his trade in Japan whereas James Harden is one of the best guards in the league, Tyreke Evans career got derailed by injuries but he's still a pretty good player, DeMar DeRozan is an all star, and Ricky Rubio has become a solid starting point guard. Another example is a guy we have on our roster right now, Bismack Biyombo, he is only 6 ft 9 but boasted a 7ft 7 wingspan. Teams got excited by him and he ended up getting picked 7th overall ahead of Brandon Knight, Kemba Walker, Klay Thompson, Kawhi Leonard (etc) based on athleticism and measurements. Biyombo is a decent impact player but he's nothing more than that. There are good players in this league right now that got overlooked because they didn't measure well. CJ McCollum is undersized for a shooting guard but he's emerged as starter on a play off team averaging over 20 points a night. Gordon Hayward's wingspan is actually shorter than his listed height in shoes and only an inch longer than his height without shoes. There is a guy that made the all star game in 2017 and made the Celtics pay out a $128 million contract. Then there is that guy that plies his trade for Golden State, two time league MVP, five time all star, two time All-NBA first team, two time All-NBA second team, scoring champion, steals leader, and two time NBA Champion - Stephen Curry. The guy is 6ft 3 with a nearly identical wingspan, lacks athleticism, and isn't particularly known for being a top defensive talent, yet there is a guy that most people would put on their dream team from current NBA players. So sometimes those "freakish" wingspan and measurements don't translate to success on an NBA court, but other prospects that didn't measurement well or meet ideal criteria end up having success on an NBA court. That's my point when it comes to Bamba. People love the guy because he's got a freakish wingspan, but that doesn't mean he is going to be the next great big in the league. When I say take away that wingspan and give him an average one for his height, I am merely pointing out that if that was the case he would not be being tipped as a potential top five pick, he would be a late lottery pick like Robert Williams. His wingspan gives him a chance of being special and that's what people are falling in love with, but that perceived ceiling may end up being unattainable and unrealistic, and we need to be careful to ensure we aren't sold a prospect based purely on a freakish wingspan and ignore the guy that could be special because doesn't measure as well, or doesn't have ideal athleticism for his size (etc). We need to be smart because this pick is important for our direction going forwards. Get it right and we can turn this around quickly. Get it wrong and we'll be stuck at the bottom end for years to come.

I place him and Jaren Jackson in the same category. They have a lot of upside, measure well, and are intriguing prospects. In regards to their floor they both should be able to become solid players because of what they should be able to contribute to on defense (i.e. rebounding, shot blocking etc). However, the offensive end is where both players could struggle and if that side of the game doesn't come along then they will be potentially stuck at that DeAndre Jordan kinda level. Now that's not a nail in the coffin because you can still win with that type of player, but that type of player is naturally a good team's 4th option (i.e. the Clippers at their best had Griffin, Paul, and Redick before him). In our situation can we afford to take a risk on that type of player? I see no reason why not with our current pick, however if I was a team picking in the top few I would not go for them because they measure well. You have to look at the bigger picture and from what I've seen I would rank Ayton, Bagley, Doncic, and Porter (if healthy) ahead of them. I might even rank Trae Young ahead of them because I think he will become a good player at the next level. With that said, if one of them is available when we are on the clock we should take them because even if we only get a DeAndre Jordan like player we will have a piece to the puzzle. I would take Young and Bridges but only if the latter is Mikal Bridges, if it's Miles Bridges then I would look at a different option. I am not totally sold on Bamba. I think he is one of those prospects that people fall in love with because of their measurements. Take away that flashy wing span and give him an average wing span and there would be significantly less interest. I would not sit here and complain if we take him sixth overall because I can understand the reasons behind picking him, however he wouldn't be my choice. If we land Trae Young and get the #12 pick and the draft falls as it does on NBAdraft.net (Ayton, Doncic, Bagley, JJJ, Porter, Young, Carter, Bamba, Sexton, Mikal, Knox) then I would be very tempted at drafting Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. He could be an ideal partner for Trae in the back court because he brings to the table a long frame, defense, and a pretty well rounded skill set. As a shooter he is still a work in progress but showed positive signs of being able to knock down three pointers. He is capable of handling the ball and attacking the hoop. So he can make up for some of Trae's shortcomings on the defensive end and potentially give us our back court of the future. I would be pretty happy going into next year with Trae Young, Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Jonathan Isaac, Aaron Gordon, and whomever we decide to go with at center. In today's NBA you don't need an elite center to win and compete for championships. What you need is someone that can do the basics and defend well.

I currently have Ayton/Doncic going 1st and 2nd to the Suns and Kings, Jackson going third to the Hawks, Bagley going fourth to the Grizzlies, and either Bamba/Porter to the Mavericks. If that happens it leaves us with a choice between Bamba, Porter, and Young from the usual top seven mocked prospects to choose from. Of those players I'd take Trae Young because of his scoring, shooting and play making ability. Could we look outside the usual top seven? I think we could. Mikal Bridges projects to be a very good 3 and D player, and if he improves offensively there's all star potential there. Wendell Carter is a solid all round player often compared to Al Horford. Some do like Collin Sexton, but I'm not convinced we should take another point guard that needs to develop as a shooter otherwise we could have Payton II. Of this trio I prefer Carter because he should complete our front court with Gordon and Isaac.

The chance is small this year, but if they get lucky and the Lakers move up to 2 or 3 that's another premier talent heading their way, and if it doesn't convey this year, they'll get the more favorable of the Kings or 76ers first round pick next year. Also the Grizzlies top eight pick as well to look forward too. The Celtics are going to be stacked with talent and have assets to acquire more. Green with envy ....

If you take Mack's per 36 stats he would have averaged 7 per game to DJ's 6 per game. So had they swapped roles and minutes I suspect Mack could have averaged 6 per like Payton was doing before the trade.

Part of the decision on JJJ and Ayton would depend on what our aim for next season is. If we want to compete and start to win games, then I think Ayton is the better pick because he should be able to impact the game more as a rookie than JJJ. However, if we are going to be patient with our team's development and perhaps tank for another top pick, then I think JJJ might be the better pick because of that defensive potential and if he develops offensively he can be special in his own right. Either way I think both players can be really good at the next level, however I would draft Ayton over JJJ because of his polish and my concerns over JJJ being another raw player like Isaac. With that said, I do agree with you about Doncic. If we land the top pick it might make sense to draft him over anyone else because he does have tremendous upside and looks fairly polished and ready to make an impact from the get go. As for trading back that might be avenue to consider. If the Clippers stay at 12 and 13, NBAdraft.net has them taking Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Kevin Knox, though Lonnie Walker (SG, Miami), Mitchell Robinson (C), Robert Williams (PF/C Texas A&M), Zhaire Smith (SG) and co are all available at that point in the draft. I think if we could come away from the first round with SGA and Walker I'd be pretty happy with that outcome. Though if Collin Sexton is available then I would take him and Walker. I really like the potential and upside of some of the just outside the top ten picks. It certainly will be a fun place if we do land the top pick and it would be a pleasant change to be able to have our pick of the litter rather than seeing the guy we really want go the pick before and having to select from what's left.

That is one issue I have with the interview process in any line of work. I've been on both ends of it as the interviewed and the interviewer. Sometimes you'll get a really confident and enthusiastic person with an infectious personality that can sell themselves in an interview, but put them in the job and they don't always end up being the best person for the job. Sometimes you need to look past the interview and look at a candidates track record and what they bring to the table. If the person ticks the boxes but doesn't wow you in the interview, don't discount them based on a lackluster interview because maybe their strength isn't selling themselves in an interview, but put them on the practise court and they'll develop players, and put them on the sidelines and they'll get a team winning. At the end of the day if a candidate fits what you want and has a good track record, I wouldn't discount them on an interview because sometimes you need to look at the bigger picture to get the right person for the job.

First thing to consider here is the difference Kevin Love made in the Toronto series. In four games he scored 7, 31, 21, and 23 points which is an average of 20.5 per game. In the series against Indiana he scored 9 (L), 15 (W), 19 (L), 5 (W), 11 (W), 7 (L), 14 (W) which is an average of 11.4 per game. He scored 82 points in four games against Toronto compared to 80 points in seven games against Indiana. Now perhaps that backs your point up that the Toronto Raptors were pathetic in this series, however the flip side of that argument is that Kevin Love was not very good against Indiana and perhaps the Pacers were better suited to shutting him down. Had Kevin Love turned up against Indiana then I don't think the series would have gone to seven games, the Cavaliers would arguably have won it in less. Second thing to consider here is that the Cavaliers are still led by two all star caliber players, one of whom is still playing like the best player in the league. People call the guy but LeBron is still the best in the league as far as I'm concerned. LeBron averaged 34 per game against the Raptors. You can see what Love scored above, add LeBron's 26, 43, 38, and 29 points, and that means those two players put up 33, 74, 59, and 52 points combined in that series against Toronto. That duo would cause problems for the majority of teams in this league. The only reason the Warriors would probably sweep them or win in five games is because they have Curry, Thompson, Durrant, and Green in their line up. The Cavaliers don't have that quartet they have a star duo. The other thing to consider here is that I don't think anyone would legitimately take Lowry and DeRozan over LeBron and Love. With that said this is still a talented Cavaliers team. Kyle Korver and JR Smith are knocking down over 40% of their three point attempts. George Hill and Jeff Green are playing decent all round basketball for them, much to the chagrin of Kings and Magic supporters after witnessing what those two did for them. Their bench unit has some athleticism and energy when they come onto the court via Larry Nance Jr, Tristan Thompson, Rodney Hood and Jordan Clarkson. Now I won't dispute they are weaker after losing Kyrie Irving, but he's realistically the only loss from this year's team from previous years. Who else have they lost that would make them stronger? No one really. Iman Shumpert (average bench player), Deron Williams (past it), Richard Jefferson (past it), Derrick Williams (never really had it), and James Jones (barely played and picked a salary due to being close to LeBron). I suppose an argument could be made about Channing Frye because he was a useful stretch four off the bench, but if his subtraction makes this the worst Cavaliers team in years then boy did they underplay him! Now perhaps you meant that this is the worst Cavaliers team because they finished fourth in the eastern standings, but here's something to remember they have only finished top of the eastern conference in one of their four seasons (15-16 when they won the title). In 14-15 and 16-17 they finished second. This year they finished fourth. You might argue that makes them the weakest Cavaliers team yet, but they have faced more competition in this year's eastern conference than in previous years because the 76ers have arrived on the scene, the Celtics have played brilliantly without Hayward and Irving leading the way, and the Raptors to their credit played really well in the regular season. So call the Cavaliers out if you want to, but the Cavaliers are still a very good basketball team that managed to reinvent themselves mid season and now look on course for a fourth finals appearance unless the Cetlics/76ers can stop them. So it really doesn't matter how well they compare to previous Cavaliers teams because they are still a very good team led by one of the greatest players of all time still playing like the best player in the league, supported by a proven all star in Kevin Love. Again, I'd say there's no shame in losing to the Cavaliers because no one would take the Raptors team on paper over the Cavaliers team. Sure you can be angry and embarrassed that you didn't take a game off them, but they nearly did in game one and three that they lost at the death. Had they won those games the series could have looked very different. They didn't and they got swept. Fine. It happens. However, I would caution them blowing that team up in pursuit of building something better because if you aren't lucky you get stuck like we have and the Kings have in the lottery for many, many years, with no sight of the light at the end of the tunnel. Sometimes it is better to appreciate what you have and enjoy it, then blow it up in the pursuit of a fantasy that doesn't happen for the majority of teams. I wish we could turn back the clock to before the Dwight Howard trade happened. Granted that split was for different reasons but had they been able to patch things up and move forwards together, I would happily take more seasons of competing in the east even if we didn't win a title over starting a rebuild in the pursuit of building something better on a whim. Now I guess you don't know unless you try, but if rebuilding was easy we would have done it by now, instead we haven't and we are arguably looking at a reboot this off season (we are now 6 seasons without play off basketball). Other teams haven't managed to rebuild successfully either, so there is no easy way to do it, and most of time it takes a bit of luck. If you aren't lucky, you end up stuck. So if the Raptors blow it up and decide to gamble, that's up to them, but there is no guarantee that they will rebuild successfully or rebuild anything better.

I'd have to disagree with blowing up the Raptors... First, they have been eliminated by LeBron James' Cavs team, no shame in that. The guy is one of the best of all time and his supporting cast has generally been pretty decent. Had they been beaten three times in the play offs by also fans, fair enough blow it up, but they have been beaten twice by the eventual finals team. Second, if LeBron heads west that does change the outlook in the east and opens things up. I think he stays in Cleveland, but if he does go to the Lakers it leaves the east open for the taking. Third, blowing it up brings no guarantee they will rebuild successfully. They could end up being stuck at the bottom like us or Sacramento (what's it been, a decade or more since they last made the play offs?). Even if they do rebuild and make it back to the play offs, there's no guarantee they'll be any better off. What if they get swept again by another title contender, blow it up and try again? The thing that the Raptors have going right now is that they are one of the best teams in the east making the play offs on a yearly basis. They will be there again next year. There's nothing wrong with being a perennial play off team. Sure you play to win and want that title but they've been beaten by the Cavs three times. That's like being in the western conference with the Warriors, they've beaten the Blazers, Rockets and Spurs twice within the last few seasons. They could end up beating the Rockets three times. What do those teams do, blow it up and start again because they can't beat the Warriors? I doubt it. They'll stick with what they've got, qualify for the play offs, and try again next year just like the Raptors. Teams don't generally blow up teams like the Raptors.

Or they don't think AG is a franchise changing talent and all star, instead they view him as another Tobias Harris caliber player. We traded him away at 23 years old, so it wouldn't be a surprise if we did the same to AG if we don't want to pay him a max and think he's more Harris than future all star. It all comes down to how you evaluate and view AG. As for the no room for a 22 year old, there might be a case for that if the team goes for Jaren Jackson or Bamba. Both players are likely to take a few seasons to develop like AG did, and we have Isaac who will probably take another couple of seasons before putting it all together. If we plan to pair them and tank to add another piece next year and perhaps the year after if we are really starting from the ground up, will we want a 22 year old heading into his prime years on an expensive contract who will want to win rather than tank? AG has already said before he wants to win games and compete. If our front office think we need to tank next year and maybe another year, AG and other veterans might need to be traded in order to bottom out. However if we intend to compete keeping AG is a must.

My point is that if we draft Bagley or Porter, one of them can pair with Isaac at the forward spots and we can then look at a sign and trade with Gordon. Try and acquire another pick or talent at another position, for example see what Sacramento are willing to offer because they've got no reason to be bad next year (they owe their 1st to Philly). The issue with drafting a forward and extending Gordon is that none of that trio (Isaac, Gordon, Bagley/Porter) are ideal fits to play center other than short spells in small ball line ups. As such it means playing Isaac or the rookie off the bench. Not a major issue, but if we can fill another need by moving Gordon that might be beneficial. Also if we plan to tank having two rookies and sending away one of our better players could help. However if we plan to compete keeping Gordon is better. With that said, I do think we'll extend him and draft either a big or a guard.

I think a lot will depend on how the draft falls. If we stay at five and let's say Ayton, Jackson, Doncic, Bamba/Young are taken in the top four. It could be argued that the best player available is Michael Porter or Marvin Bagley. At that point it leaves with a choice: 1. Draft Porter or Bagley to pair with Isaac, then look to sign and trade Gordon 2. Draft Bamba or Young and match any offer Gordon receives It all depends on whether our front office think Gordon can get better and be a franchise cornerstone. If they don't, in this scenario it makes sense to add someone on a timeline like Isaac because that can allow us another season to tank. If they do, then it makes sense to draft a PG or C to help Gordon and this team make strides towards the play offs, since I doubt Gordon will be on board with another season of tanking and wasting his prime years.

Good appointment by the Knicks. He was harshly fired by the Grizzlies last season. I think he'll do a good job for them if they are patient.

I'm not motivated enough to go through win-loss records with a fine toothcomb, but during Miami's run if memory serves the West had a strong OKC and Spurs teams, then the likes of the Clippers, Grizzlies, Rockets, Mavericks and Trail Blazers that were play off teams, and the Warriors were starting to put it together. Win loss wise I'd venture a guess that last title for Miami would likely have seen more wins west than east, but does that matter if the team that wins is in the east? Not really. Most would seem to suggest that the Rockets and Warriors is the true final if it happens, but what if the 76ers win the finals against a so-called stronger opponent from a stronger conference? At the end of the day it doesn't matter that the West had ten winning records to the east's eight if the team that wins comes from the east. This isn't the English Premier League or Spanish La Liga where champions are crowned on total points gained from wins and draws. It's a league that has two conferences, which run separate play off tournaments, resulting in a winner takes all best of seven series. Sure we can sit here and analyse how many wins the West has compared to the east, but what really matters is which team wins the final. If the champ is from east, all those extra regular season wins for the West are irrelevant. The 76ers have started to put it together and if Simmons, Embiid and co stay healthy and develop they'll be a force for many years. The Celtics are competing without their best two players (Irving and Hayward). They've seen substantial growth from Jaylen Brown this season and Jayson Tatum has been impressive. There two new kids on the block with three all stars. One of them could represent the east. Both of these teams are future title contenders when fully healthy. That's discarding a talented underachieving Wizards team, an improving Bucks team, and two hard working culture driven teams in Miami and Indiana. Maybe we'll see at least one of the rebuilding teams make it. By no means is the east perfect, and frankly the all star snubs out west would likely be all stars in the east, but teams are improving and developing in the east so closing the gap in the future is possible.

In the past decade the east have won four titles to the wests six titles. The East have won 26 games in those finals to the West's 30 wins. That's hardly domination in the finals. Sure there have probably been more stronger teams out west than east, but in a sense that doesn't matter because what ultimately matters is who wins the NBA title. If you take it back to the new millennium, then that does show that the West have won twelve titles to the east's six titles, but these sorts of runs happen in most decades. The 1990s saw seven titles go east compared to three titles going West. The 1980s saw five titles go both ways. The 1970s was six to the east, four to the west. So since 1970 that's 24 eastern champions to 24 western champions. This year will see one side go ahead, it wouldn't surprise me if it's a team from the West, but we've seen the power swap conferences before and there's no reason why it can't or won't happen again.

I can see the appeal of putting together a deal for Kawhi Leonard as long as he committed to signing for them long term. They would have a quartet of all star caliber players in Irving, Hayward, Leonard and Horford. They certainly have the assets to do a deal because they own three first round picks next year as well as their own, they'll be getting one from the Clippers, Grizzlies, 76ers or Kings. As long as they don't have to give up too much in the trade in terms of future picks and young talent, it could make sense for them to do a deal. Plus their main players would still only be 26 years old (Irving), 26 years old (Leonard), 28 years old (Hayward) and 31 years old (Horford). So they feasibly have a good window of opportunity to work with as long as those players stay healthy. However, they would need to strongly consider how wise it is to build a team around two stars that have never played a full season in their career to date and seem prone to injuries in Irving and Leonard. There's no doubting their talent and capability to make them perennial contenders, but they would need to be confident that they can stay healthy and lead them to titles otherwise they will be in a situation like they are now but without that young talent to rely on and carry them because they'll be gone. In some ways it might be wiser for them to stick with their young core talent. Jaylen Brown has made significant strides from his rookie season this year. He's averaging 14.5 points per game and hitting nearly 40% of his three point shots. He's a good defensive player as well and fits nicely in that shooting guard role. Jayson Tatum has had a decent rookie season and is averaging 17 points per game in the play offs. His three point shooting percentage has dipped in the play offs, but in regular season he was hitting over 40% of his attempts from distance. So these are two young players with a lot of upside and have all star potential that fit nicely alongside Irving, Hayward and Horford. There's no need for them to make a trade this off season and give up those two talents and future picks. I'd say hold onto those players and keep those picks. Realistically the Grizzlies and Kings pick should convey to the Celtics next season, and the Kings pick could be very valuable if they are terrible. The Clippers need to make the play offs for the pick to head to Boston, so that might be more difficult to attain if the Clippers decide to go into rebuild mode. So if I was the GM in Boston I wouldn't be panicking over trying to trade Rozier because he is a fine backup point guard. He has proven he can step in and start when Irving misses games, and based on Irving's career to date he has missed a fair number of games through injury. For them keeping hold of a good backup and decent enough starter is arguably more valuable to them right now than what they might get in return for Rozier. However, if a team was willing to send them a future first round pick for him and perhaps someone in exchange that adds to their bench depth, then that might appeal to the Celtics because it adds to their stockpile of picks.