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.
2017 Celtics offseason
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 28, 2017 8:03:45 GMT -5
You say it's our biggest need, but I don't agree with that. A guy like Tristian Thompson works do well on the Cavs because there are 3 go to scorers and other shooters. Wouldn't work as well on the Celtics because the only reason their offense puts up numbers is Stevens and his ridiculous offensive sets. It takes 5 guys all working together which is why it's both hard for defenses to defend and frustratingly streaky. It's why Lue said the Celtics are harder to prep for than the Warriors. He wasn't saying our offense is better just that its way more complex. Ergo you can't just slide a rebounding shot blocking big in there and make it all better without first adding the offensive pieces. Maybe I missed something but I have not seen how you clear space for Hayward THEN trade for Favors. We need to trade one or Smart, Bradley and Crowder for the Hayward space. Then the deal for Favors had Smart and Crowder... what am I missing here? I'm so confused by your way of thinking. We have Johnson who is just a lesser older version of Thompson on team and he puts up great plus minus numbers. The offense is built on ball movement. Hence your rebounding defensive big just needs to be able to move ball and play team ball. How soon you seem to forget that Stevens builds his teams around what players he has. Last year with Sullinger we were built around D, this year with Horford the team was built around offense. That's why Stevens is such a great coach, he's like Bill as he adjusts to his players and the teams strengths. He's not Phil Jackson saying we are running a triangle offense, even if we don't have the players to play that way. The team this year was streaky because they built offense around 3 point shooting. When they went in we were great, when they didn't we struggled. Also we lacked playmakers, guys that could get other players easy shots. Thomas could do that, but he would only do it in spurts. If you replace Smart with Fultz that's a massive upgrade offensively even in year one. If you add Hayward, that's another huge upgrade offensively. At the same time it's going to decrease our defense. It's a well known fact that a defensive rebounding big is our biggest need. Not sure how you can watch this team and not notice that. We get out rebounded all the time by big numbers and just allow easy layup after easy layup. As to Favors it was made crystal clear. Trade Smart, get Hayward, then trade Crowder and Jackson for Favors. You act like it's hard, it's not, it's easy and very simple. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 28, 2017 8:09:37 GMT -5
Oh and we aren building a team this offseason to "compete" with the Cavs and Warriors and if we try to they are going to F up the franchise. They should be upgrading the talent on the roster and looking at 2018 and 2019 as the years if it all comes together maybe they can. That's Brown year 3, Fultz, Yabu and Zizic year 2 and 2018 nets pick (that big you want?) as a rookie. Next year's team with Hayward and some lower priced veteran additions can still make and ECF and push the Cavs harder than they did this year. How do you think that? Getting Hayward, Favors, Fultz, and a free agent big does that in my opinion and doesn't do anything to our future. Its the best of both worlds. Explain how that destroys our future? |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 28, 2017 13:40:53 GMT -5
If those numbers work which is an educated guess right now since no one can seem to find the CBA rules on that then you really need to extend favors to make it worth while. One year of Favors with no cap room to replace him is not worth 3 years of Crowder. So then you'd be looking at extending Favors, Bradley and Thomas to make it the best of both worlds. Which I would be on board with.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 28, 2017 14:47:24 GMT -5
So if you can swing those moves then the starting 5 is:
Thomas
Bradley
Hayward
Horford
Favors
Bench
Fultz
Rozier
Brown
Yabusele
Zizic
Nader
FA midlevel
Vet min
Vet min
Vet min
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 28, 2017 14:48:50 GMT -5
That's why I mentioned the Jazz sending us back a future first also to help balance the trade. Favors had a down year due to injuries and not fitting well with Gobert. Before this year he sure looked like he was about to become one of the best two way pfs in league. He seems like a perfect fit next to Horford. It would cost a ton to resign everyone, but if I was owner of Celtics I would do it in a second. Horford contract runs out just when Brown would need another one. Fultz would need a new contract when Bradley, Favors and Thomas have one year left. It could get real expensive if Zizic and Yabu become good players, but only for a year. I have faith that our owner would easily open his wallet as long as we are legit title contenders.
Another interesting development is the Spurs maybe taking a run at Chris Paul. If Paul leaves Clippers, I have to think Griffin is way more willing to leave also. If no Hayward, Griffin isn't a bad fallback plan. He adds scoring and rebounding. It's just those injuries, can he stay healthy for a title run? If I was Paul I would leave, it gives him a better shot at a title. While Doc is a great coach, he's not a great GM. He didn't learn anything from Danny it seems.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 28, 2017 15:00:04 GMT -5
Paul would look good back in New Orleans too but that would be tough to make work money wise. It's doable tho. Griffin is a guy I would take a chance on. I do think his rebounding is better than it looks next to Jordan. He's not an interior defender tho so there's still that issue.
I don't know why, I just feel it's inevitable Hayward comes here and I never feel that way about anything. It's odd and I get the reasons why it's not necessarily going to happen; just feels right.
|
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on May 29, 2017 6:29:17 GMT -5
What is the goal. Celtics would like to win the title. They want to at least be playing in the finals of the conference long term not just one yr. The Celtics are not going to win with what they have now. They need a big who can rebound and be physical. Their size at guard hurts them defensively on the pick and roll. They have several young players and lots of good quality draft picks. They have the cards to make the goal happen. There are several players in the next 2 drafts that can help them. Do not trade for one yr players or high price vets with injury issues. Select carefully before you use the capital. So, I keep fultz and trade Thomas, while he is at his high point in value and look at a big and another shooter in return. Fultz has size, passes the ball well, can guard multi positions, and can still score. Very hard to find 6' 4" point guards who can do all of that. 6' 3" to 6'9" guys who can run shoot 3's and play multi positions is the name of the game today. Favors and Hayward might be the options but there are LOTS of others. If the clips lose paul do they take Thomas for Jordan and some of the young redundant players on the roster. Is there something you can do with the 76'ers? Maybe one of their bigs or simmons? Obviously cap room plays a role as well. Maybe the lakers will trade Russell? Good time to be a Celtic's fan.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 29, 2017 6:37:29 GMT -5
If there's one thing I can guarantee, it's that Ben Simmons won't be traded from Philadelphia this off-season.
Can't wait until July 15th. That's when we should know exactly what the team looks like by then. The whole roster won't be filled out by that point, but we will know the answers to the draft and Hayward by then. We will also know who's the one traded (if the Celtics get Hayward) by that point.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,860
|
Post by wcp3 on May 29, 2017 7:07:58 GMT -5
Paul would look good back in New Orleans too but that would be tough to make work money wise. It's doable tho. Griffin is a guy I would take a chance on. I do think his rebounding is better than it looks next to Jordan. He's not an interior defender tho so there's still that issue. I don't know why, I just feel it's inevitable Hayward comes here and I never feel that way about anything. It's odd and I get the reasons why it's not necessarily going to happen; just feels right. It's very far from inevitable, and I'd put the odds at less than 50/50. With that said, it's far more likely than Durant coming here, and I think the Celtics have a legit chance at making it happen. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 29, 2017 9:54:48 GMT -5
I'm at the point where's as long as they end the offseason with Brown, Fultz and fair return for any other asset, I'll be okay with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 29, 2017 11:43:53 GMT -5
Chris Paul going back to New Orleans is a good story, it just makes no sense. That roster is just horrible. They have like 3 good players in Davis, Cousins, and Holiday. Holiday is a free agent. Our old friend Moore is like one of there top 5 players and that's a joke. He's a decent player, but he should be like top 10 on a good team. They have no good young players. They brought in free agents after the Cousins trade and they were starting and getting 30 mins a night. They need depth, they need like 5 players like Green, solid Vets to fill out bench. If I was them I would also buy or trade for a ton of second round picks. Paul is only going to leave Clips for a better team.
I wouldn't worry about Fultz or Brown being traded, I just don't see that happening.
Like I said before I think getting Hayward is like 25%. Thing is just like the lottery I'm not going to be negative. Danny has gone out of his way to make sure we can have max cap space. So be has to like his chances. Even if we don't get a Hayward or Griffin, we can keep assets like Zeller to make a trade. You could trade Zeller and a late first for Favors still for example or get a Chandler. Even if we don't get a max free agent we should be a better team next year. We can now make trades to take on salary.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 29, 2017 13:05:55 GMT -5
Paul would look good back in New Orleans too but that would be tough to make work money wise. It's doable tho. Griffin is a guy I would take a chance on. I do think his rebounding is better than it looks next to Jordan. He's not an interior defender tho so there's still that issue. I don't know why, I just feel it's inevitable Hayward comes here and I never feel that way about anything. It's odd and I get the reasons why it's not necessarily going to happen; just feels right. It's very far from inevitable, and I'd put the odds at less than 50/50. With that said, it's far more likely than Durant coming here, and I think the Celtics have a legit chance at making it happen. Oh I know this. |
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on May 29, 2017 14:44:17 GMT -5
Don't really get the love for signing griffin- he's consistently injured (or has been for several years now) and his game is very dependent on athleticism to be an elite player. If you think about what Blake would be if he couldn't/when he can't jump out of the gym, it will probably look a lot like horford- excellent passer for a big, smart player who's roughly average size for his position, isn't a defensive liability but isn't a difference maker either on that end. By the end of a max deal for him I think we'd have serious buyers remorse even if he stays largely healthy. I can't think of a lot of guys his size with his kind of skill set that aged well. He's not a good enough shooter or defensive player to move his game further out or cover a drop in scoring/efficiency by doing more defensively.
Beyond this, and I don't think it's a huge issue but it's not nothing, there are legit concerns about his effect on team chemistry. Breaking his hand on a staffers face was an idiotic thing to do, and there have been reports for years that he couldn't get along with chris paul. I wouldn't honesty care about the latter point if it didn't seem like it had actually leaked on to the court at times- those clipper teams from like 2011-2014 felt like underachievers to me in the playoffs and I can't help but think that those issues played a role. There are way too many questions for me beyond the questionable fit to throw a ton of money at him- I'd much rather stand pat in free agency that go after griffin just cause we strike out on Hayward
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 29, 2017 15:41:52 GMT -5
I have my worries about Griffin. Which are mainly health related. Thing is those injuries have yet to affect his play. He's still an elite player, at our biggest weakness. I certainly understand your worries, I've thought the same thing. Thing is I would much rather pay Griffin than KO. Only thing that has decreased over the years is rebounds, but that's mainly because Jordan has become maybe the best rebounder in league.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 30, 2017 6:32:16 GMT -5
Was just watching more Markell Fultz tape and the guy is a beast. I can't wait to have him. Only college guard in 25 years to average 20 points, 5 board, 5 assists and shoot 40% from 3. Love that he's not a Prima Donna kid that had everything handed to him. So far other than Washington being a team that only won 9
Games I cannot find one negative about him. And that Washington team was terrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 30, 2017 7:06:11 GMT -5
If the Celtics fail to sign Hayward, the offseason changes dramatically... obviously.
We probably still need to trade Smart, Bradley or Isaiah to free up playing time for Fultz but now it's not in a salary move to make room for Hayward. That makes the targets a lot different.
Free agent targets also change or maybe open up is the better word. A couple guys that might look nice on this team and could really compliment each other and the lineup would be:
JaMychale Green and Dewayne Dedmon
Green is kind of a bigger 3 and D guy who can rebound well.
Desmond has a smaller track record but looks like a beast on the boards and defensively protecting the rim. The Spurs don't have bird rights and no cap room so it's pretty easy to out spend them without going crazy. Would 12m a year be too much for a guy like him? I would rather give him that than trade for Chandler...
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on May 30, 2017 11:25:47 GMT -5
I have my worries about Griffin. Which are mainly health related. Thing is those injuries have yet to affect his play. He's still an elite player, at our biggest weakness. I certainly understand your worries, I've thought the same thing. Thing is I would much rather pay Griffin than KO. Only thing that has decreased over the years is rebounds, but that's mainly because Jordan has become maybe the best rebounder in league. I get you. Griffin's body last year reminded me of Sullinger in the sense that it didn't look like a basketball player should. I think his body will give up on him over his next contract and I hope the Celtics are not the ones to get burned. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 30, 2017 11:54:18 GMT -5
And Dedmon has officially opted out per Shams Charania.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 30, 2017 12:04:28 GMT -5
Injuries are certainly a big concern with Griffin, and he's older than you'd think (28 already).
But I think he's still a really, really good player when healthy. He's not just a lob-finisher-- he's also a really good post player and a great passer, and he has untapped three-point potential (he's been solid on long twos (in the low 40s) and shot decently (33.6%) from three last season on a career-high number of attempts (2.0 per 36; more than doubled his previous high)). He'd also fit in well with this roster as a dynamic pick-and-roll player with Thomas and a sweet high-low combo with Horford.
If they can get comfortable with his medicals, I'd be comfortable extending him a max contract. That's a big if, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 30, 2017 12:34:27 GMT -5
Call me confused, but reports said Spurs might take run at Chris Paul. How can they do that if they have no cap space? I guess sign and trade but Clips would be fools to do that.
Dedmon would certainly help, but he sure seems like a Johnson type player that can only play 15-20 minutes a night. Also if you keep everyone because no elite free agent how much cap space can we get?
Green seems like a better target in my opinion, but I would be very careful in how much I pay him.
The thing about Chandler, while he's older, you also can get him on a shorter contract. I like Dedmon and Green on mid level money deals for no longer than 3 years. More money or more years not so much. They seem like good role players, the type of guys we need. I just don't see good starters on a good team for next 3-4 years. Let's not forget they are both players other teams have let go for little cost.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 30, 2017 12:40:36 GMT -5
While not a perfect fit by any means, Zach Randolph would be a nice Vet to get for our bench.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 30, 2017 12:40:43 GMT -5
I think it would have to involve cutting ties with all FAs, Parker retiring (not exactly sure what cap ramifications that would lead to) and maybe trading Danny Green.
EDIT: Oh and Pau Gasol would have to opt out.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 30, 2017 13:00:59 GMT -5
Yea the Paul to the Spurs stuff is basically him choosing not to make much money and or the Spurs working miracles.
Dedmon would have to be paid a little over the midlevel to make sure the Spurs can't match you but paying him in the 11m range isn't bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 30, 2017 13:33:50 GMT -5
Yea Spurs only will have about 10 million in cap space if Lee declines player option. So Gasol and Green would be enough. I just wonder how good the Spurs could be with Paul. The roster isn't what it used to be and Alridge doesn't seem like a great fit for there system. Losing Green, Dedmon, Gasol and Manu while getting Paul isn't a clear upgrade. He's a great player, but there depth would be really bad.
If no Hayward, I wouldn't mind taking Alridge so they can clear space.
|
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on May 30, 2017 16:18:21 GMT -5
Injuries are certainly a big concern with Griffin, and he's older than you'd think (28 already). But I think he's still a really, really good player when healthy. He's not just a lob-finisher-- he's also a really good post player and a great passer, and he has untapped three-point potential (he's been solid on long twos (in the low 40s) and shot decently (33.6%) from three last season on a career-high number of attempts (2.0 per 36; more than doubled his previous high)). He'd also fit in well with this roster as a dynamic pick-and-roll player with Thomas and a sweet high-low combo with Horford. If they can get comfortable with his medicals, I'd be comfortable extending him a max contract. That's a big if, though. I think in the NBA of 5 years ago I'd be pumped about the idea of pairing griffin wth horford but the league has changed and I think essentially aside from athleticism and rebounding, which in griffins case are closely linked and things I wouldn't want to rely on long term, horford is better at all of the other aspects of griffins game that you mentioned. Perhaps they're equal as passers, and griffin might be a better post player at least for now, but I think horford is savvier in the post and a much better shooter with a much longer track record. He came into the league as a guy with a knockdown 15-18 footer and has become a legit threat on solid volume from 3. If we're adding a big next to horford in my view it should be someone who covers for his deficiencies, not replicates his skill set, and to me, a legit rim protector might be more important than a high level rebounder who doesn't also play quality defense, which is how I see Blake |
|
|
