Who Won the Kyrie Irving Trade?

[Lipoli390]

Who do you believe won the Kyrie Irving trade, Boston or Cleveland?

[Lipoli390]

Most pundits seem to believe that the Cavs got the best of the deal. My initial thought was that it's a win-win for both teams. That's still my take, but if I had to pick a single winning in this deal, I'd say it was the Celtics. The conventional wisdom is that the team ending up with the best player in a deal is generally the one that wins the deal after the dust settles. In my view there should be no doubt that the Celtics got the best player in this deal - Kyrie Irving.

If IT will never be the same player he was because of his hip injury, then the deal looks even better for the Celtics. My guess is that IT will, in fact, never be the same player he's been. I think he chose to forego surgery because it would have likely forced him to miss most if not all of the last season of his contract. As a result, he's left with an injury that apparently doesn't heal on its own. So he's been relying on rest and rehab -- not to heal the injury -- but to physically cope with it. I'm not a medical expert, but my gut tells me that Thomas cannot cope enough as an undersized PG to get back to being anything close to player he was last season. I think the Cavs suspected as much and became even more convinced that IT would likely never return to his old form after their own medical staff personally examined IT. Hence, the Cavs last minute hesitancy.

The deal went through with no significant change in the original terms. That tells me the Cavs didn't have a leg to stand on and they knew it. It also confirms that the real prize on which the Cavs had their eyes was the Nets unprotected pick. That's precisely what David Aldridge reported yesterday.

[Monster]

It's hard to trust a player talking about their injury but IT told ESPN that no doctor has told him this injury will be an issue and other pro athletes with a worse year have gone on to have productive careers and surgery was never an option. We will see. I don't know if there is anything definitive yet about his injury long term. Most people are rightly so going to be pessimistic. For Cleveland he just needs to be pretty good this year for them to win the trade. After that...it probably doesn't matter.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

When a star player forces a deal (cough, cough...Kevin Love) and his team gets back a nice haul, my default conclusion is that the deal was a draw. If IT is truly damaged, my opinion would clearly tip to the Celtics, but right now I say it was relatively even.

[Coolbreeze44]

As Lip says most trades tilt to the team who receives the best player. But not in this case. Cleveland wins the trade because Kyrie is overrated. He looked pretty good playing beside Lebron, but do you remember him before Lebron came back to Cleveland?

[Monster]

As Lip says most trades tilt to the team who receives the best player. But not in this case. Cleveland wins the trade because Kyrie is overrated. He looked pretty good playing beside Lebron, but do you remember him before Lebron came back to Cleveland?

I also think Kyrie is overrated to some extent. How do you think he fits with the Celtics going forward?

[Monster]

I think. Path teams won the trade considering the circumstances for each franchise.

Another way to look at the Kyrie deal for the Celtics.

Out:

#1 2017 (Markell Fultz)
Isaiah Thomas
Jae Crowder
Ante Zizic
Future Miami 2nd round pick

In

Kyrie Irving
#3 (Jason Tatum)
Future Kings/Lakers pick

Considering many ripple thought the Celtics probably needed to figure out what to do with a thomas as he was getting older was 1 year away from getting paid these moves look pretty interesting to me when considered together. They basically added Kyrie a guy that Fultz was often compared to. While adding young assets.

The Cavs have plenty of ways they can win this trade too. It will be a fun talker for a while. If IT can be 80% of what he was this could even help them keep Lebron with a possible good young player coming in 2018. I wouldn't hold my breath though.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Win - Win?

Obviously, the Celtics felt they had to move beyond I. Thomas. His size + impending contract were always going to be issues. So they got a younger, bigger version of him, probably with more long-term potential.

As noted above, that makes the Celtics the winners by getting the "best player" in the trade. But it's not a loss for Cleveland. It's a big win considering Irving's demands were so public. Look at what Indiana got for Paul George. Or, Chicago got for Butler.

Thomas should be healthy enough to give the Cavs one more run at a Finals appearance this season. And then... he's gone. James is gone. Crowder should offer great trade value for a decent young guy or pick with his contract. And they have the Brooklyn pick moving forward. The team is going to be among the dregs of the league for the foreseeable future. This trade just let them have one more run before it happens... AND... have an extra piece or two during the long rebuild.

[AbeVigodaLive]

As Lip says most trades tilt to the team who receives the best player. But not in this case. Cleveland wins the trade because Kyrie is overrated. He looked pretty good playing beside Lebron, but do you remember him before Lebron came back to Cleveland?

I've seen this elsewhere... but I'm surprised to see it from you.

There are significant similarities with Wiggins and Irving before James arrived.

- Both had 3 years of experience.
- Both were promising scorers on bad to mediocre teams.
- Neither was known for defense.
- Both were only 21.

A major difference, however, is how much better Irving fared in those first three seasons in advanced stats vs. Wiggins. It's sorta startling:

- 21 PER vs. 16 PER
- 4.6 OBPM vs. 0.0 OBPM
- (-)1.4 DBPM vs. (-)2.4 DBPM
- 2.7 VORP vs. (-)0.8 VORP
- .126 Win Shares vs. .056 Win Shares

[Coolbreeze44]

As Lip says most trades tilt to the team who receives the best player. But not in this case. Cleveland wins the trade because Kyrie is overrated. He looked pretty good playing beside Lebron, but do you remember him before Lebron came back to Cleveland?

I've seen this elsewhere... but I'm surprised to see it from you.

There are significant similarities with Wiggins and Irving before James arrived.

- Both had 3 years of experience.
- Both were promising scorers on bad to mediocre teams.
- Neither was known for defense.
- Both were only 21.

A major difference, however, is how much better Irving fared in those first three seasons in advanced stats vs. Wiggins. It's sorta startling:

- 21 PER vs. 16 PER
- 4.6 OBPM vs. 0.0 OBPM
- (-)1.4 DBPM vs. (-)2.4 DBPM
- 2.7 VORP vs. (-)0.8 VORP
- .126 Win Shares vs. .056 Win Shares

To be fair, during a thread last season I said Irving was one of 10 players I would trade Wiggins for straight up.