SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Boston Celtics 2016-17 Season Discussion
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Feb 27, 2017 13:39:34 GMT -5
Here's my issue with Hayward - he's in line to make $15 million more per year than Crowder, but is he really three times the player? With Jaylen and Crowder locked up long-term, isn't that money better spent on other (bigger) needs? And what's your starting lineup with Hayward on the roster?
I love Hayward's game, and I'm not completely opposed to the Celtics signing him if he's willing to take less than he'd get in Utah. I just don't think those above questions should be overlooked.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 13:39:41 GMT -5
I'd give Gordon a max contract as long as I am not going to hear them talk about not signing any of their future guy's because of tax money. In other words, if they are willing to pay tax penalties to resign Thomas and Bradley (or whoever they trade him for - see above), Smart and or whoever else they need to then I don't really care if they over pay Hayward buy a few million a year. They really really could use his scoring.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Feb 27, 2017 13:43:54 GMT -5
I'd give Gordon a max contract as long as I am not going to hear them talk about not signing any of their future guy's because of tax money. In other words, if they are willing to pay tax penalties to resign Thomas and Bradley (or whoever they trade him for - see above), Smart and or whoever else they need to then I don't really care if they over pay Hayward buy a few million a year. They really really could use his scoring. The Celtics are top 10 in nearly offensive statistical category, so I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion. I do think Hayward is a perfect offensive fit because of his shooting and versatility. Those two traits make him a perfect complement to Isaiah down the stretch, which is something the Celtics really need. But I'm not okay with overpaying him just because they have the money to spend. I think they have bigger needs elsewhere that need to be addressed.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 13:44:03 GMT -5
Here's my issue with Hayward - he's in line to make $15 million more per year than Crowder, but is he really three times the player? With Jaylen and Crowder locked up long-term, isn't that money better spent on other (bigger) needs? And what's your starting lineup with Hayward on the roster? I love Hayward's game, and I'm not completely opposed to the Celtics signing him if he's willing to take less than he'd get in Utah. I just don't think those above questions should be overlooked. I'd say in an ideal word, I'd rather Hayward than Bradley. So if you can draw things out how you want, I'd trade Bradley for that bigger need down low who can rebound and play defense. Starting lineup could be any number of things. The more I watch Crowder, the more I feel that he is better served on a second unit unless he really starts playing great defense again or starts rebounding.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 13:46:14 GMT -5
I'd give Gordon a max contract as long as I am not going to hear them talk about not signing any of their future guy's because of tax money. In other words, if they are willing to pay tax penalties to resign Thomas and Bradley (or whoever they trade him for - see above), Smart and or whoever else they need to then I don't really care if they over pay Hayward buy a few million a year. They really really could use his scoring. The Celtics are top 10 in nearly offensive statistical category, so I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion. I do think Hayward is a perfect offensive fit because of his shooting and versatility. Those two traits make him a perfect complement to Isaiah down the stretch, which is something the Celtics really need. But I'm not okay with overpaying him just because they have the money to spend. I think they have bigger needs elsewhere that need to be addressed. I'd argue that they rank like that because of how they NBA is during the regular season with much lower defensive intensity and lack of game planning game to game. Put them in a playoff series and they are going to struggle. Look at the fourth quarters already; teams now swarm Thomas because no one else can really hurt them consistently.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Feb 27, 2017 13:54:45 GMT -5
Correct, and it's why I think he's a great fit for the Celtics. Just not a big enough upgrade to warrant overpaying for.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 27, 2017 13:56:06 GMT -5
Here's my issue with Hayward - he's in line to make $15 million more per year than Crowder, but is he really three times the player? With Jaylen and Crowder locked up long-term, isn't that money better spent on other (bigger) needs? And what's your starting lineup with Hayward on the roster? I love Hayward's game, and I'm not completely opposed to the Celtics signing him if he's willing to take less than he'd get in Utah. I just don't think those above questions should be overlooked. I'd say in an ideal word, I'd rather Hayward than Bradley. So if you can draw things out how you want, I'd trade Bradley for that bigger need down low who can rebound and play defense. Starting lineup could be any number of things. The more I watch Crowder, the more I feel that he is better served on a second unit unless he really starts playing great defense again or starts rebounding. Like who? If Bradley is traded, it will be this offseason. Your past trade target was Koufos, which is not something I do. For me if you trade Bradley, it has to be something very good. I would trade him for a mid first round pick in this draft. It has soooooo many good bigs in that area. I hate to add more rookies, but that would be better long-term than Koufos.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 27, 2017 14:05:14 GMT -5
Correct, and it's why I think he's a great fit for the Celtics. Just not a big enough upgrade to warrant overpaying for. It's a huge upgrade and not an overpay. He just keeps getting better and fills major needs. A second go to scorer and another guy that gets to line.
The thing is can you sign him? I just don't see it.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 14:06:26 GMT -5
Yea it might not but there is something to be said for the fact that if they don't use the open cap room this year then they will use it resigning their own guys. As long as they are willing to go over to resign their guys then I want them to use cap room this year some way some how.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 14:30:06 GMT -5
I'd say in an ideal word, I'd rather Hayward than Bradley. So if you can draw things out how you want, I'd trade Bradley for that bigger need down low who can rebound and play defense. Starting lineup could be any number of things. The more I watch Crowder, the more I feel that he is better served on a second unit unless he really starts playing great defense again or starts rebounding. Like who? If Bradley is traded, it will be this offseason. Your past trade target was Koufos, which is not something I do. For me if you trade Bradley, it has to be something very good. I would trade him for a mid first round pick in this draft. It has soooooo many good bigs in that area. I hate to add more rookies, but that would be better long-term than Koufos. I don't know who. That's a fools errand. It's more the process of moving on from Bradley and rolling his salary into someone else at a position of greater need. I love Bradley and think he's a quality player but I think it's a mistake to invest in him so I want to take his salary slot and roll it into a different player.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 27, 2017 15:08:20 GMT -5
Like who? If Bradley is traded, it will be this offseason. Your past trade target was Koufos, which is not something I do. For me if you trade Bradley, it has to be something very good. I would trade him for a mid first round pick in this draft. It has soooooo many good bigs in that area. I hate to add more rookies, but that would be better long-term than Koufos. I don't know who. That's a fools errand. It's more the process of moving on from Bradley and rolling his salary into someone else at a position of greater need. I love Bradley and think he's a quality player but I think it's a mistake to invest in him so I want to take his salary slot and roll it into a different player. No it's not, there are very few players that match up salary wise to Bradley that are bigs that could help us. You can't keep saying let's trade Bradley if there's nothing out there to trade him for. That's why you brought up Koufos because he's one of the few bigs in Bradley's salary range. Thing is he's not nearly the player Bradley is. That's why if Bradley is traded, it most likely is for draft picks. A team like the Pacer could really use him for example. I just hate all this talk of flipping him for a big, when those guys in his salary range are almost non existent. Johnson makes 12 million, heck Zeller makes 8 million. I also think Danny's idea of a big to fit next to Horford is different than what we think. All he talked about at deadline was not hurting offense, while adding D and rebounding. So while in my opinion a Chandler type player is perfect for this team, I don't think Danny is thinking that way. If he did he could have traded for Noel. They could play Mickey, but they don't. They have cut Johnson minutes, even though team plays very well when he's on court. Last game he had best point differential on team, yet didn't get a ton of minutes at end of game and they almost lost. Danny and Stevens are all about offense right now, which sure seems to be a result of last year's Playoffs. This draft has players like Leaf in the middle of the first round. A great rebounder, but also a great shooter. A Kevin Love type player. We all know how much Danny wanted Love.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 15:17:46 GMT -5
You'd be right if that were true during the off season. You don't necessarily have to move him for same salary but a lot depends on other moving parts. Sure if they sign a guy who takes all their cap room then they need to match up salaries, but if not then they don't.
Im not anti the idea of trading him for draft a pick. It's not really taking a step back since he's out of the lineup so much anyways.
For me anything that moves him for something that can be useful to their future is a net gain. I've given up on him being part of any type of winning squad they can put together. First he's hurt too much and second I think him and Thomas aren't good fits.
Edit: and even if we did use all the cap space we can trade him to a team with cap space so we can take a lessor salary back.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Feb 27, 2017 15:20:29 GMT -5
A guy like Favors will be available - he's entering the last year in his real too, so that's an example of the type of swap you can make (especially with Amir, Zeller, and Jerebko likely gone).
Ultimately I don't think Bradley gets traded, but he has value for playoff-caliber teams even with just one year left on his deal.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 27, 2017 16:16:53 GMT -5
You'd be right if that were true during the off season. You don't necessarily have to move him for same salary but a lot depends on other moving parts. Sure if they sign a guy who takes all their cap room then they need to match up salaries, but if not then they don't. Im not anti the idea of trading him for draft a pick. It's not really taking a step back since he's out of the lineup so much anyways. For me anything that moves him for something that can be useful to their future is a net gain. I've given up on him being part of any type of winning squad they can put together. First he's hurt too much and second I think him and Thomas aren't good fits. Edit: and even if we did use all the cap space we can trade him to a team with cap space so we can take a lessor salary back. Well Danny values his cap space, so I have to think he wants to use it. Clearing Bradley's salary allows you to keep a bunch of guys and still get max money. Taking back more salary doesn't allow you to get max money. Your getting way too down on Bradley, he fits this team well. I can see them trading him, but not because he can't be part of a winning team. You seem to have missed Bradley playing 70 plus games the last two years before the playoff injury. You seem convinced that Bradley will continue to have injuries and that's just not a given. He might be a little fragile but he's not missing whole years with career threatening injuries either. Players like him get injured, look at Chris Paul, doesn't mean you just get rid of them. Not many teams have cap space and those that do, are not teams that want Bradley. It's amazing how many teams blew all there cap space last year.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 16:33:23 GMT -5
We can agree to disagree on Bradley. If you're cool committing big money to a guy who's literally never had a full healthy season then that's you're prerogative. I'm not especially with this teams construction.
Btw I said I don't like him and Thomas together not "he can't be part of a winning team" massive difference.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 27, 2017 16:34:00 GMT -5
Here's my issue with Hayward - he's in line to make $15 million more per year than Crowder, but is he really three times the player? With Jaylen and Crowder locked up long-term, isn't that money better spent on other (bigger) needs? And what's your starting lineup with Hayward on the roster? I love Hayward's game, and I'm not completely opposed to the Celtics signing him if he's willing to take less than he'd get in Utah. I just don't think those above questions should be overlooked. Crowder is wildly underpaid and not really a useful comparison for Hayward. The operative question is whether the cap space they'd use on Hayward would be better spent elsewhere (by signing other free agents, by extending/re-signing their own free agents or by using the cap space to absorb other teams' contracts). I'm not really sure there really is a better use for their cap space this offseason. The new CBA has made salaries explode, and just like last offseason, you're going to have to re-calibrate expectations. I'd rather have Hayward at the max ($31M in year one, total 4/$133M) than, say, Noel (who stands a good chance of getting maxed out-- roughly $26M in year one, total 4/$110M or so) and a little extra space. Even guys a tier or two below like Taj Gibson or PJ Tucker are going to get $10M+ per year. In future years, it's a fair point that Hayward trades off somewhat with guys like Thomas and Bradley and Olynyk, but Hayward might be a better investment than some or all of those guys.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 16:52:23 GMT -5
I can't see Noel getting maxed out... or maybe I just don't want to. That would be complete lunacy
Add: he's played the following games:
Ur1: 0 Yr2: 75 Yr3: 67 Yr4: 55 ( if he plays rest of the games)
Whoever gives him a max contract deserves to suck.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 27, 2017 16:56:14 GMT -5
Maybe he doesn't get the full max, but I think he gets a four-year deal at $20M+ per year, especially if he plays well down the stretch with Dallas.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 17:06:55 GMT -5
Maybe he doesn't get the full max, but I think he gets a four-year deal at $20M+ per year, especially if he plays well down the stretch with Dallas. Considering there are dumb teams out there you are probably right. See Mozgov and Noah contracts
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Feb 27, 2017 17:09:08 GMT -5
I like Hayward and all but is he really what the C's need? With Brown and Crowder on the team at great values which one are you going to move? Maybe Brown is a hybrid 2/3 but isn't guard already crowded especially with the draft coming? I think the C's need to keep the flexibility to add a really good big and spending the money on Hayward could inhibit that. I know Stevens might have an affinity for Hayward and if the C's get him he will be a good asset but I think a greater need is in the frontcourt. As for Crowder and Brown: Between Crowders contract and defense he has a lot of value whether as a starter, coming off the bench and giving you 25 minutes or if he is traded. I guess the later could work with Hayward. In Brown I am starting to think he could be a true star. That being said watch the C's sign him. How about they sign him Noel and draft Fultz, that would be 3 nice additions to the roster. Along with say ZIZic, Stevens would have a problem deciding who gets minutes but it would be a great team for a year.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 27, 2017 17:13:58 GMT -5
You can play Brown, Crowder and Hayward together without a problem.
Unless I'm missing something, you're flexibility is gone after this off season unless your moving on from both Thomas and Bradley. That's why I think they need to use cap space this year. Then make trades.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Feb 27, 2017 17:19:56 GMT -5
Noel at 20 per seems a bit high but I guess this is a new NBA world we are living in with the cap soaring. He hasn't earned it at all and it makes me wonder what Smart will get the following year. I guess the thing is, just like in baseball, you cant look at the salaries you have to look at the money available.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Feb 27, 2017 17:25:37 GMT -5
In a ideal world, the Celtics get a real max contract guy like a Gordon Heyward or Kevin Durant and they pick Fultz with the first pick of the draft.
Knowing the Celtics "luck," the exact opposite will happen.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Feb 27, 2017 17:30:54 GMT -5
You can play Brown, Crowder and Hayward together without a problem. Unless I'm missing something, you're flexibility is gone after this off season unless your moving on from both Thomas and Bradley. That's why I think they need to use cap space this year. Then make trades. Yes they could play all 3 without a problem but for how many minutes a game? The problem is rebounding and that would be a small lineup. And as I said about Brown playing the 2, how many guards are there now. With IT, Bradley, Smart, Rozier and a rookie does that leave minutes for Brown? Don't get me wrong, I like Brown at the 2 but that creates one hell of a logjam. Who goes? Somebody has to go one way or another. Too many 1/2s and not enough 3/4s, there needs to be a trade this summer either way. Add Hayward and it only heightens the need to make deal, which they can then do for a big.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,832
|
Post by wcp3 on Feb 27, 2017 17:50:52 GMT -5
I'm actually not that worried about getting minutes for everyone - injuries happen frequently enough throughout the NBA season that it likely won't be a problem, and there are already a handful of minutes to go around. Plus, signing Hayward makes it much easier to absorb the (likely) loss of Bradley after next season, assuming they keep him around.
The money is a bigger issue for me. If they can swing a deal for relatively fair value (factoring in the inflated cap), then I'm all for it. Hayward makes them unquestionably better now without having to trade away any of your future in the process.
But all this debate will likely be moot if/when he re-ups with Utah.
|
|
|