|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 11, 2016 13:56:24 GMT -5
Looks like Sully is going to Toronto on a 1-year deal (Wojo). Arguably, that's the best spot for him. Clear starting position where he can improve his value and try again next year.
Unrelated but some guy that works for 98.5 says that Boston has made "significant progress on a star player". Says it's someone "every Celtics fan will be happy with". Won't say who but says it's not Okafor.
In terms of being a source, this guy is not a "somebody" (not intended to be an insult, he's jut not one that breaks news) so . . . he's either trolling C's fans (and I fell for it) or he's on to something. Stay tuned.
|
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Jul 11, 2016 14:35:07 GMT -5
Ok but saying he's not a good defender because he doesn't try is a real red flag for me. He got into 2-3 separate altercations in the first month of his first NBA season, has a track record of not trying, and looks like a guy who's never bothered to get himself in peak shape because he didn't need to. That's not a guy I want on my team, especially if he's not going to fill a real need. I mean compare him to Cousins (setting aside production, cause thats obviously not fair): there are people that don't want Cousins because of low effort and character concerns, but he's never been the subject of a police investigation since entering the league, and he's dealt with far more dysfunction than Okafor has while at least occasionally actually demonstrating the ability to play good D and adding range and consistency to his jumper. I would be relatively confident that Cousins would get into a winning culture with a good coach and play hard, because he actually did that for Mike Malone before the Kings fired him because he didn't play an exciting enough system. Okafor has a pretty unimpressive track record in terms of character and effort.
It's also striking to me that Okafor comes from Duke with these issues: say what you will about Duke, as easy to hate as they are, it's rare you see someone come out of there with effort problems at least, even if attitude problems aren't unheard of. Sure, he'd be worth taking a flier on if he can be gotten dirt cheap, but if we're shopping for another big man I'd rather he were a rim protector and good defender now, or someone who can stretch the floor, because those are the two deficiencies on this roster as I see them.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jul 11, 2016 14:49:54 GMT -5
Can someone explain to me why the C's just let Sully walk? 4.4 million, I dont see a downside to that, at the very least would've been tradeable.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,851
|
Post by wcp3 on Jul 11, 2016 15:10:34 GMT -5
Feels like a very mutual parting, but they approached it in a way that would keep both sides out of the headlines.
Pretty shocking that Sullinger couldn't land more than that in this market, but there has to be a reason for that.
|
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jul 11, 2016 15:30:00 GMT -5
Has to be another move coming. I didn't want to sign Sullinger long-term, but to let him go on a one year deal doesn't make any sense unless they needed the cap room.
|
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Jul 11, 2016 15:37:46 GMT -5
Has to be another move coming. I didn't want to sign Sullinger long-term, but to let him go on a one year deal doesn't make any sense unless they needed the cap room. Agreed, Spotrac has them at almost $16m under the cap with cap holds for Zeller and others. 1 yr $6m wouldn't have made sense for them not to bring him back without having something else in the pipeline |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 11, 2016 16:08:39 GMT -5
They apparently needed the cap room to sign Horford while keeping Johnson/Jerebko. They could have released Zeller's cap hold instead, but they presumably think there's a better chance at re-signing him at a lower number.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jul 11, 2016 16:52:41 GMT -5
Huh. From where I'm sitting it looks like the C's have plenty of cap room - is there something im missing?
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 11, 2016 16:57:31 GMT -5
Are you counting holds for picks and free agents (now just Zeller and Datome)?
You can probably remove Zizic though since Boston confirmed hell be overseas. Yabusele still on books though.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 11, 2016 17:10:54 GMT -5
Not a mainstream source but a guy who has broken news before at Real GM is saying LAC/BOS/SAC are discussing a trade involving Gay (to LAC), Crowder (to Sac) and Griffin (to BOS). Other pieces would be involved (most likely FROM Boston TO Los Angeles).
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 11, 2016 17:16:32 GMT -5
There has to be another move for a big in the works. You don't just let Sullinger leave for nothing when you could have had him for one year on a cheap contract!
Rip was right on with Sullinger, we could have had him for QO if best he got was one year 6 million on open market. Some of those early deals look awful bad compared to Sully getting 1 year 6 million.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 11, 2016 17:18:35 GMT -5
Huh. From where I'm sitting it looks like the C's have plenty of cap room - is there something im missing? Per Spotrac, after the Sullinger renouncement and the Horford signing, they're only under the cap by less than $300K: www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/Looks like they either needed to renounce Sullinger or Zeller (or make other trades) to make the Horford signing fit (renouncing Datome alone wouldn't have done it). If you could only keep RFA rights for one of them, it's not crazy to keep Zeller's. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 11, 2016 17:24:22 GMT -5
Huh. From where I'm sitting it looks like the C's have plenty of cap room - is there something im missing? Per Spotrac, after the Sullinger renouncement and the Horford signing, they're only under the cap by less than $300K: www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/Looks like they either needed to renounce Sullinger or Zeller (or make other trades) to make the Horford signing fit (renouncing Datome alone wouldn't have done it). If you could only keep RFA rights for one of them, it's not crazy to keep Zeller's. In my opinion it is crazy to keep Zeller over Sullinger. Zeller barely played last year and doesn't have even one great skill. Sullinger for all his faults is a great rebounder on a team that needs rebounding still. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 11, 2016 17:29:51 GMT -5
It's not a choice between re-signing Zeller or re-signing Sullinger for the qualifying offer. It's a choice between whose RFA rights you keep on the books. There was just about zero chance that Sullinger re-signed in Boston for $4m. There is a slightly higher chance that Zeller does so. That's enough to be worth keeping Zeller's rights over Sullinger's rights.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jul 11, 2016 17:38:02 GMT -5
Thanks for the explanation jmei - Its a bit complicated stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 11, 2016 17:38:45 GMT -5
It's not a choice between re-signing Zeller or re-signing Sullinger for the qualifying offer. It's a choice between whose RFA rights you keep on the books. There was just about zero chance that Sullinger re-signed in Boston for $4m. There is a slightly higher chance that Zeller does so. That's enough to be worth keeping Zeller's rights over Sullinger's rights. So assume Raptors gave Sully 1 year 6 million offer sheet, you match that. Sully for 1 year 6 million is way better than Zeller for 1 year and 4 million. Also if Sully didn't get an offer, he would have been left with no option but to accept the QO. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 11, 2016 17:40:33 GMT -5
Don't offer sheets have to be 3 years or am I thinking of something else?
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 11, 2016 17:46:44 GMT -5
It's not a choice between re-signing Zeller or re-signing Sullinger for the qualifying offer. It's a choice between whose RFA rights you keep on the books. There was just about zero chance that Sullinger re-signed in Boston for $4m. There is a slightly higher chance that Zeller does so. That's enough to be worth keeping Zeller's rights over Sullinger's rights. So assume Raptors gave Sully 1 year 6 million offer sheet, you match that. Sully for 1 year 6 million is way better than Zeller for 1 year and 4 million. Also if Sully didn't get an offer, he would have been left with no option but to accept the QO. RFA offer sheets must be for at least two seasons: www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q44Sullinger is too good to sail through free agency without an offer sheet, and not good enough that the Celtics would match that offer sheet. Zeller, on the other hand, has a better chance of getting through free agency without an offer and end up accepting the QO (ADD: or re-sign with Boston on any sort of contract the parties want to agree to). That's the calculus. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 11, 2016 18:23:15 GMT -5
So assume Raptors gave Sully 1 year 6 million offer sheet, you match that. Sully for 1 year 6 million is way better than Zeller for 1 year and 4 million. Also if Sully didn't get an offer, he would have been left with no option but to accept the QO. RFA offer sheets must be for at least two seasons: www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q44Sullinger is too good to sail through free agency without an offer sheet, and not good enough that the Celtics would match that offer sheet. Zeller, on the other hand, has a better chance of getting through free agency without an offer and end up accepting the QO (ADD: or re-sign with Boston on any sort of contract the parties want to agree to). That's the calculus. OK that makes sense when looking at it that way. As recently as a few days ago I would have totally agreed with you that Sully would get a multi year offer sheet, most likely 3-4 years. As of today I'm not sure he would have. Not when he only got 1 year 6 million on open market. It blows my mind that a team like Nets wouldn't throw a good long term deal at him or like a one year 15 million deal. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 11, 2016 18:28:48 GMT -5
Not a mainstream source but a guy who has broken news before at Real GM is saying LAC/BOS/SAC are discussing a trade involving Gay (to LAC), Crowder (to Sac) and Griffin (to BOS). Other pieces would be involved (most likely FROM Boston TO Los Angeles). Am I the only one that would be shocked if Clippers deal Griffin and get back Gay and not Crowder? Kings would need to add some more to that deal in my opinion, as I think Crowder's trade value has to be double that of Gay. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 11, 2016 18:34:34 GMT -5
RFA offer sheets must be for at least two seasons: www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q44Sullinger is too good to sail through free agency without an offer sheet, and not good enough that the Celtics would match that offer sheet. Zeller, on the other hand, has a better chance of getting through free agency without an offer and end up accepting the QO (ADD: or re-sign with Boston on any sort of contract the parties want to agree to). That's the calculus. OK that makes sense when looking at it that way. As recently as a few days ago I would have totally agreed with you that Sully would get a multi year offer sheet, most likely 3-4 years. As of today I'm not sure he would have. Not when he only got 1 year 6 million on open market. It blows my mind that a team like Nets wouldn't throw a good long term deal at him or like a one year 15 million deal. To be fair, I think he signed in Toronto for a below-market deal because they were a contender willing to guarantee him minutes. I think he could have gotten more from Phoenix or Philly or one of the other bad teams with cap space if he waited it out, but the Toronto deal sets him up to cash in next year if he plays well. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 11, 2016 19:26:05 GMT -5
Not a mainstream source but a guy who has broken news before at Real GM is saying LAC/BOS/SAC are discussing a trade involving Gay (to LAC), Crowder (to Sac) and Griffin (to BOS). Other pieces would be involved (most likely FROM Boston TO Los Angeles). Am I the only one that would be shocked if Clippers deal Griffin and get back Gay and not Crowder? Kings would need to add some more to that deal in my opinion, as I think Crowder's trade value has to be double that of Gay. They seemed to want Gay at the trade deadline. Still, I imagine they'd be getting more pieces from Boston. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 11, 2016 21:56:57 GMT -5
Am I the only one that would be shocked if Clippers deal Griffin and get back Gay and not Crowder? Kings would need to add some more to that deal in my opinion, as I think Crowder's trade value has to be double that of Gay. They seemed to want Gay at the trade deadline. Still, I imagine they'd be getting more pieces from Boston. Oh yea Boston would for sure be sending more to Clippers. Just saying I'd imagine Kings would be send something else to Boston or more likely the Clippers. |
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jul 12, 2016 7:12:18 GMT -5
That 2017 Nets pick has to be untouchable at this point though.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 12, 2016 7:13:25 GMT -5
I hope these trade rumors aren't true. First of all, I don't particularly like Griffin as a player and secondly he's hurt a lot. He can't shoot and relies on his athleticism which is great but will greatly diminish as he ages and as the injuries pile up.
Beyond that, why are you going to give up one of the best long term contracts in the league for him and other things? They will likely have to also trade a guy like Johnson or a bunch of younger players because the salaries need to come close to
Matching since we are no longer under the cap to absorb it.
I'd beg for not Griffin but I did that with Brown and they drafted him. Trading Crowder for Griffin would be a disaster.
|
|
