Official Offseason Rumors Thread

[RandyForRubio]

Is he better than Shelvin Mack though?

In some ways.

And Mack can't play the 2, Rivers can.

I'd probably take Rivers over Mack.

 

[NAOS]

I'd kick up our end a bit...Hayward + Burke + 2016 1st + 2016 2nd + take on a ****ty contract, for Ingram.

does Boston have a ****ty contract?

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

In some ways.

And Mack can't play the 2, Rivers can.

I'd probably take Rivers over Mack.

They are nearly the exact same size according to DX besides head height. They both shoot about the same (but Rivers has a much uglier shot IMO).

 

[mellow]

does Boston have a ****ty contract?

No, Ainge rules on all fronts.

 

[green]

Not if the team was fully healthy.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

I'd buy that excuse if we weren't 8 million under the cap.

 

[cowhide]

I'd kick up our end a bit...Hayward + Burke + 2016 1st + 2016 2nd + take on a ****ty contract, for Ingram.

Seriously, this is a horrible trade. How do you even know if Ingram is going to be better than Hayward. I wasn't blow away with Ingram's performance in the NCAA. Celtics don't need Burke. I don't get the "trade hayward" ideas. Trading Hayward better bring back something better than a potential young guy or the Jazz are going to be worse.

Jazz need to get a better bench and get everyone healthy. They can go after a stud FA guy once they have proven they are a solid playoff team. Lateral moves do not make us better and gambling on "potential" will keep us in the lottery for years.

 

[Miggs]

I'd buy that excuse if we weren't 8 million under the cap.

True, then we could've ruined our cap flexibility by signing someone to a 4 year, 32M deal. Or maybe no one wanted to sign here.

 

[RandyForRubio]

They are nearly the exact same size according to DX besides head height. They both shoot about the same (but Rivers has a much uglier shot IMO).

Just more of a skill set thing IMO. I think Rivers plays the 2 a lot better than Mack.

 

[Carbon13]

I have a hard time getting on the Rivers bandwagon. Ill have to watch more of his games. Has he improved? What would he bring the Jazz?

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I have a hard time getting on the Rivers bandwagon. Ill have to watch more of his games. Has he improved? What would he bring the Jazz?

Nothing that we don't already have IMO.

He is an undersized SG who can play some point. He can't finish at the rim vs size, he can't shoot FT's, he can't really shoot that well at all. He has some nice 1-on-1 moves that he gets himself open with, but not a good finisher or shooter. He has become a pretty good guard defender against 1's and 2's, but I wouldn't call it great.

 

[Carbon13]

Nothing that we don't already have IMO.

He is an undersized SG who can play some point. He can't finish at the rim vs size, he can't shoot FT's, he can't really shoot that well at all. He has some nice 1-on-1 moves that he gets himself open with, but not a good finisher or shooter. He has become a pretty good guard defender against 1's and 2's, but I wouldn't call it great.

Thanks Cy. Thats exactly how i would have described based on my limited observations. No thanks on Rivers on my opinion. I think we could do better by going a lot of other ways.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Thanks Cy. Thats exactly how i would have described based on my limited observations. No thanks on Rivers on my opinion. I think we could do better by going a lot of other ways.

I mean, I wouldn't be mad at signing him. To me he is a 4th wing (at best)/Emergency 3rd PG. I do admire his toughness playing with the swollen eye, so he is pretty cool.