Boston Celtics 2014 Offseason Thread

Not much to talk about of late but now that the dust is settling on the Love dream, Boston could be looking to trade some of their veteran players including Rondo. I'm guessing the list of likely partners (based on PG openings and/or rumors) includes NY, Phoenix, Houston, Indiana and Sacramento. Personally, I don't think Houston and Indiana have much to offer (unless Hibbert is available in the latter case). NY doesn't have much other than some largely redundant swing men (Hardaway, Shumpert and, even, Early) and the potential to take some serious salary off the Cs hands by sending back Amar'e and/or Bargnani.

The team that intrigues me the most (though I question just how interested they'd be given all of the PGs they already have or could have) is Phoenix. I'm not sure how interested I'd be in Bledsoe, to be honest. Largely bc by making this move you are making the decision to hand the future of this team over to Marcus Smart. Further, in order to include him Phoenix would have to sign him and, unless he just takes the QO (and I'm sure THAT would limit their ability to trade him right away) we'd have to accept a VERY highly paid player in Bledsoe.

However, they do have some other assets that would intrigue me. First, they do have the Lakers Top 3 Protected Pick. That would be my number 1 goal. Also, Alex Len could be included as a raw talent that COULD someday turn into our rim protector (admittedly, I've never seen him play and am only going off of pre-draft scouting reports). I'd also note that they have yet to sign Tyler Ennis who could be included as an upgrade to Phil Pressey and/or be a trade asset down the road. Other players COULD be included but wouldn't have to for salary purposes as Phoenix is well under the cap. They've also shown interest in Brandon Bass so maybe he could be part of the deal. I'm just speculating, of course. But looking at the candidates (and, again, I'm including Phoenix only based on those 3-way rumors with Indy), that's who I think could offer the best package.

BTW Phoenix could then try and do a Bledsoe/Monroe swap perhaps.

Thoughts?

I haven't thought about it much, but I'd do a Rondo for Bledsoe (on something like a 4/$56m deal) and that Lakers pick in a heartbeat. Smart, Bledsoe, and Bradley would be a nightmare guard trio for opposing ball handlers, though one that is light on shooting (but the same would be true with Rondo in there). I'm a huge, huge fan of Bledsoe and think getting his peak (age 25-28) years for something in the $14m range would be a steal, especially considering the rapidly increasing salary cap. He reportedly wants the mini-max (4/$63m), but I think the above offer is close enough that he'd take it (and I might even consider going up to the full $63m).

All that said, I'm not sure Phoenix would want to include that pick, and I'm much less willing to do the deal without it. Maybe I'd still do it if they took back some contracts (Wallace would obviously be nice, but I'd settle for Bass) and gave up another asset or two (Ennis, Len, Goodwin, their own 2015 pick). But a Rondo-for-Bledsoe framework is probably the most realistic Rondo trade I've seen recently that still definitely entices me. I'd be much less interested in a deal centered around the Lakers pick.

If anything, the Suns might not even want to do Bledsoe for Rondo. I don't think Rondo would want to commit to Phoenix, and that front office would (rightfully) be leery of having to commit to a 5/$100m-ish contract if that's what it'd take to re-sign him.

Isn't bass in the last year of his deal? Why are we looking to dump is deal in a salary savings? He's an expiring contract we want. If you can flip him for an asset great, but the contracts to deal are Wallace and Green. I am semi confident that Green will opt out unless he had an awful year. He's got to look at Bradley's deal and salivate a bit. Plus, even if he's only going to get the same AAV, he can add years to that by opting out so it makes all the sense in the world for him to do.

Bledsoe doesn't interest me that much. He turned down 4/48 from Phoenix and they haven't been able to close the gap. He's not a max player and with Smart in tow I don't see the point in paying longterm for another point guard.

Dramatic much? They haven't "desperately" true do move Bass. They've explored it like anyone else but if they wanted to dump him they could easily do so. I'm guessing the reasons they haven't are because Danny doesn't want yo take back another longer contract and what he could've gotten so far isn't much and he feels it's possible to get more at the deadline and if not he's willing to just keg it expire.

Regarding Bledsoe, he may be worth that money on a team ready to win with other pieces in place, but he's more a third or fourth guy on a top roster not the first or second. You and I seem to disagree on how to put the pieces together, but with the salary cap the way it is, the order in which you add things is important. Equally as important as who you add.

Bass is a useful player on a reasonable contract with only a year left. There is zero chance Danny has desperately tried to trade him to get rid of his salary and free up playing time and hasn't been able to. None. Zero.

Bledsoe put up 19 pts/5 rbs/6 asts per 36 minutes with elite defense last year, which is really impressive. His 19.6 PER (not the greatest stat, but useful enough for quick-and-dirty comparisons) ranked 8th amongst point guards, outpacing guys like John Wall and Tony Parker and Damian Lillard. But it also was Bledsoe's first time averaging 30+ minutes per game, and I think he still has considerable upside left. Because he got so few minutes playing behind Chris Paul in LA, he's still a fairly raw point guard, and he should further improve his court vision and turnover rate as he gets more reps and experience. I think he could absolutely be the second-best player on a title contender.

That makes him by far the best asset I can reasonably imagine getting back in a Rondo trade. That combination of present production and future upside far outpaces what you could reasonably expect to get from a mid-lottery pick or salary relief + spare parts (the most likely alternative returns). Hell, even most early lottery picks never become All-Star-caliber guys. I just see no appeal in tanking a year for a small chance to draft someone who might, in three or four years, be as good as Bledsoe is now. The better option is to lock up an All-Star-caliber guy on a cheapish long-term deal that runs through his prime and then see whether Danny can use that pile of assets he's collected to swing a trade for a second or third guy.

I disagree, it's too early to try and do what you're talking about, regardless how how I feel about Bledsoe. This team still needs to clear salary and acquire and develop young talent. I guess I want to create a championship level team more than I want a strong competitive team that might make a finals in a weak conference if they get really lucky before getting smoked. Like the AI sixes or Kidd Nets don't interest me. You can't build rashly in the NBA just because it's the best deal you may be bake to get at the time.

Letting a Rondo walk for nothing is better than the wrong trade.

He's been trying hard to find the best deals for EVERYONE with any value. Wallace has none so he's not trying to deal him. That's obvious. That's what you do in this situation.

Thankfully, he's got high standards and patience and isn't doing something rash.

I would only just say that the beauty of acquiring other teams potential lottery tickets is that you don't worry about having to lose to get better. That's why I'm hoping those Nets picks become something.

My only concern with Bledsoe is that he could make you good enough to wallow in mediocrity. A trade that focuses on a draft pick (especially one from LAL, who should be lottery bound again) allows you to strive to put the best team together while still giving yourself a chance to draft that next star(s).

Of course, that's hard to come by and why we all hope those Nets picks end up special and why we all would love that LAL pick (with the separation being what each of us would want to go with it).

I understand this concern, but it's not like they wouldn't be able to make further moves. Even if it looks like the ceiling of a Bledsoe-led team is a second-round out and they can't attract another star, Bledsoe on a $14-16m contract is eminently movable. The so-called mediocrity treadmill only exists if you choose to stay on it, and this front office/ownership is smart enough to not get stuck there, so I think it's just about getting the best possible return.

I'm just not sure how adding Bledsoe hurts the clearing out or development objectives. Smart will still get plenty of playing time, since Bledsoe is more than capable of playing off the ball.

Is it just that you want to bottom out in order to grab a high draft pick? Because I don't think that's going to happen either way-- there's just too much talent on the roster (and Stevens is too good a coach) to out-tank Philadelphia or Milwaukee or Utah or Orlando. And even if you do, odds are that you won't get to draft a player as good as Bledsoe is now.

My objection isn't moral-- it's purely pragmatic. I just don't think tanking gets you closer to winning the title than just making good trades, collecting assets, incrementally improving the team, and putting yourself in a situation where all you need is a little luck to win the title (the five percent theory). In other words, rather than following the Thunder model (which requires a great deal of luck to succeed), they should follow the Rockets model.