HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2016-2017 Boston Celtics/NBA Thread II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-18-2017, 03:02 PM
  #951
Fenway
Global Moderator
Bruins Historian
 
Fenway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston-Cambridge MA
Country: United States
Posts: 21,706
vCash: 4000000
Fred Roggin is a well know sports anchor in LA is saying the Lakers want nothing to do with the Ball entourage and most likely will take Jackson.

Fenway is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 03:03 PM
  #952
N o o d l e s
Registered User
 
N o o d l e s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSCII View Post
It has nothing to do with the players. It has everything to do with not getting enough to move down. Hell, the Lakers rumored offer was more than what he's getting from the Sixers. If they had made the move down and gotten Saric, that would have been better than some nebulous pick in the next year or two.
If Randle and the #2 was a legit offer I agree with you it's better. Was that definitely on the table? I never saw any indication beyond the rumor.

N o o d l e s is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 03:04 PM
  #953
Gator Mike
 
Gator Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Woburn, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSCII View Post
Nah, I'd rather that they trade down if they got the player they still wanted later, but added another young guy. Picks in a year or two, that have protections are a joke to me.
So, you would have rather seen them trade #1 for #3 and maybe a guy like Dario Saric?

There are cap implications to such a move, though. Would make things even tougher to bring in a max salary player.

Gator Mike is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 03:19 PM
  #954
Gator Mike
 
Gator Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Woburn, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenway View Post
Fred Roggin is a well know sports anchor in LA is saying the Lakers want nothing to do with the Ball entourage and most likely will take Jackson.
I would happily take Jayson Tatum.


Gator Mike is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 03:26 PM
  #955
BMC
PerJohan Axelsson
 
BMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Northeastern CT
Country: United States
Posts: 29,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenway View Post
Fred Roggin is a well know sports anchor in LA is saying the Lakers want nothing to do with the Ball entourage and most likely will take Jackson.
You can hardly blame them. Not with the father from hell running his son's show. If Ball was a no brainer #1 pick future hall of famer for sure then LA would grab him and take their chances. He isn't so they won't. Someone else will though.

BMC is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 03:35 PM
  #956
KrejciMVP
Registered User
 
KrejciMVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Worst trade in Celtics history. We were so close to the nations leading scorer and we got nothing in return but excuses.

KrejciMVP is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 03:36 PM
  #957
LSCII
Dark Cloud
 
LSCII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Central MA
Country: United States
Posts: 35,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by N o o d l e s View Post
If Randle and the #2 was a legit offer I agree with you it's better. Was that definitely on the table? I never saw any indication beyond the rumor.
No clue, but that was the rumor. So to me, this is a letdown after hearing that. Same thing with Saric or hell, even Okafor.

LSCII is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 03:38 PM
  #958
LSCII
Dark Cloud
 
LSCII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Central MA
Country: United States
Posts: 35,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gator Mike View Post
So, you would have rather seen them trade #1 for #3 and maybe a guy like Dario Saric?

There are cap implications to such a move, though. Would make things even tougher to bring in a max salary player.
The cap space would have easily been mitigated by them walking away from the last year and $8 mill they owe Zeller. It's a team option, and they're absolutely going to exercise it. I'd also try to move Crowder and or Rozier.

LSCII is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 03:54 PM
  #959
Lord Ahriman
Registered User
 
Lord Ahriman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrejciMVP View Post
Worst trade in Celtics history. We were so close to the nations leading scorer and we got nothing in return but excuses.
It keeps getting worse:


Lord Ahriman is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 04:03 PM
  #960
LSCII
Dark Cloud
 
LSCII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Central MA
Country: United States
Posts: 35,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Ahriman View Post
It keeps getting worse:

Woj has it that it's not both. It's one or the other. It's the Lakers pick next year if it falls between 2-5, and the Kings pick the following year if it doesn't.

LSCII is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 04:12 PM
  #961
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 15,692
vCash: 500
It seems more likely that the SAC protections favor Boston than Philly--e.g., if it isn't top 10, they get an extra future PHI first or multiple seconds.

Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 04:48 PM
  #962
EverettMike
Registered User
 
EverettMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Everett, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,241
vCash: 500
I like it. Good move.

EverettMike is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:01 PM
  #963
Lord Ahriman
Registered User
 
Lord Ahriman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSCII View Post
Woj has it that it's not both. It's one or the other. It's the Lakers pick next year if it falls between 2-5, and the Kings pick the following year if it doesn't.
Woj said that yesterday; today news are stating both picks are protected. Well, we don't know for sure the whole deal, but for me it's a very bad trade.

Lord Ahriman is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:08 PM
  #964
Over the volcano
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watertown
Posts: 22,869
vCash: 500
IT is a cornerstone - picking up a first for moving down two spots and getting the guy you want is a good move IMO.

Over the volcano is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:10 PM
  #965
LSCII
Dark Cloud
 
LSCII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Central MA
Country: United States
Posts: 35,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Ahriman View Post
Woj said that yesterday; today news are stating both picks are protected. Well, we don't know for sure the whole deal, but for me it's a very bad trade.
ESPN has it as one or the other too. Obviously it will have to be a wait and see, but this deal screams panic move, IMO. If they didn't like Fulz, that's fine, but it seems like they were in a rush to get this done for some strange reason. Why not wait it out and force another team to really overpay if they wanted him as it got closer to draft day?

LSCII is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:13 PM
  #966
LSCII
Dark Cloud
 
LSCII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Central MA
Country: United States
Posts: 35,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Over the volcano View Post
IT is a cornerstone - picking up a first for moving down two spots and getting the guy you want is a good move IMO.
Yeah, no. He's a great complimentary player, but he is not a guy you build a championship team around. If he's your 2 or 3, you're in good shape. But he's not a foundational player at all. Just look at this year's playoffs. What kind of player do you need to add to that team just to get them within spitting distance of the Cavs? You need to add a legit first team all star type of stud, which means IT is not a cornerstone by default. He'd be the 1A (and I'm being generous with that), not the 1.

LSCII is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:15 PM
  #967
Lord Ahriman
Registered User
 
Lord Ahriman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSCII View Post
ESPN has it as one or the other too. Obviously it will have to be a wait and see, but this deal screams panic move, IMO. If they didn't like Fulz, that's fine, but it seems like they were in a rush to get this done for some strange reason. Why not wait it out and force another team to really overpay if they wanted him as it got closer to draft day?
Yeah, couldn't agree more.

Lord Ahriman is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:15 PM
  #968
Fenway
Global Moderator
Bruins Historian
 
Fenway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston-Cambridge MA
Country: United States
Posts: 21,706
vCash: 4000000
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMC View Post
You can hardly blame them. Not with the father from hell running his son's show. If Ball was a no brainer #1 pick future hall of famer for sure then LA would grab him and take their chances. He isn't so they won't. Someone else will though.
Throw in that Ball is from SoCal.

The Lakers are not going to tip their hand especially to Boston.

Fenway is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:28 PM
  #969
Hazi
Registered User
 
Hazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 5,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenway View Post
Fred Roggin is a well know sports anchor in LA is saying the Lakers want nothing to do with the Ball entourage and most likely will take Jackson.
Very interesting especially since there are some reports out there that Jackson's work out for the Lakers went horribly:
Hazi is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:43 PM
  #970
Beesfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,563
vCash: 500
This trade makes no sense unless there are two players Boston has rated higher than or equal to Faultz. One is obviously Jackson but who is the other? Making a trade based on an assumption that LA will pick Ball is stupid.

Beesfan is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:47 PM
  #971
Fenway
Global Moderator
Bruins Historian
 
Fenway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston-Cambridge MA
Country: United States
Posts: 21,706
vCash: 4000000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beesfan View Post
This trade makes no sense unless there are two players Boston has rated higher than or equal to Faultz. One is obviously Jackson but who is the other? Making a trade based on an assumption that LA will pick Ball is stupid.
My only concern is why the rush?

Celtics obviously have concerns about Faultz but why?

Fenway is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:51 PM
  #972
CDJ
Registered User
 
CDJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cape Cod
Country: United States
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Never gets old seeing the overreaction of Celtics fans


i sometimes go back to this thread at the deadline and read while casually sipping coffee

CDJ is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 05:58 PM
  #973
LSCII
Dark Cloud
 
LSCII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Central MA
Country: United States
Posts: 35,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDJ View Post
Never gets old seeing the overreaction of Celtics fans


i sometimes go back to this thread at the deadline and read while casually sipping coffee
So why do you feel this is a good deal? I'd love to hear the logic behind your thinking. I've provided mine several times, and it has nothing to do with passing on Fultz.

LSCII is offline  
Old
06-18-2017, 06:09 PM
  #974
Fenway
Global Moderator
Bruins Historian
 
Fenway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston-Cambridge MA
Country: United States
Posts: 21,706
vCash: 4000000
Please continue here

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=2358663

Fenway is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:00 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.