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 30, 2017 18:27:58 GMT -5
I guess i just don't understand loving Horford, but worrying about Griffin. As of right now there is no signs of decline, I sure don't see him becoming a pumkin in 4 years. Horford on the other hand was already in decline and that continued last year. Griffin is a more dynamic scorer that gets to the line at an elite level. Something this team really needs. He also plays team ball as he's a great passer, seems like a great fit. Sure you would want a rim protector, but not at the cost of getting a talent like Griffin. Our cap space is gone after this year, so it's not like we can wait till next year to target a better player.
If no Hayward, your options are Griffin, then players like Green, Dedmon or trading for a Chandler. I'm only moving onto a player like Chandler if you can't get an elite free agent. Getting a Favors isn't a slam dunk if you can't trade Chrowder and the Jazz don't have the need.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 30, 2017 18:33:15 GMT -5
I honestly can talk myself into understanding almost any signing or route they go as long as it doesn't include trading Brown, Fultz or the 2018 Nets pick. Those are the longterm key to the franchise and to me the wild cards that could give the team a chance in the shorter (2-3 years) term.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 30, 2017 19:55:24 GMT -5
I guess i just don't understand loving Horford, but worrying about Griffin. As of right now there is no signs of decline, I sure don't see him becoming a pumkin in 4 years. Horford on the other hand was already in decline and that continued last year. Griffin is a more dynamic scorer that gets to the line at an elite level. Something this team really needs. He also plays team ball as he's a great passer, seems like a great fit. Sure you would want a rim protector, but not at the cost of getting a talent like Griffin. Our cap space is gone after this year, so it's not like we can wait till next year to target a better player. If no Hayward, your options are Griffin, then players like Green, Dedmon or trading for a Chandler. I'm only moving onto a player like Chandler if you can't get an elite free agent. Getting a Favors isn't a slam dunk if you can't trade Chrowder and the Jazz don't have the need. The list of injuries for Blake scares me but, outside of the knee while at OK, are any of them chronic? Still, I pause. May be moot bc I actually think he's more likely to return to LAC then Hayward is to return to Utah (though my money is on both to stay put). |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 30, 2017 20:49:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on May 30, 2017 21:53:35 GMT -5
I guess i just don't understand loving Horford, but worrying about Griffin. As of right now there is no signs of decline, I sure don't see him becoming a pumkin in 4 years. Horford on the other hand was already in decline and that continued last year. Griffin is a more dynamic scorer that gets to the line at an elite level. Something this team really needs. He also plays team ball as he's a great passer, seems like a great fit. Sure you would want a rim protector, but not at the cost of getting a talent like Griffin. Our cap space is gone after this year, so it's not like we can wait till next year to target a better player. If no Hayward, your options are Griffin, then players like Green, Dedmon or trading for a Chandler. I'm only moving onto a player like Chandler if you can't get an elite free agent. Getting a Favors isn't a slam dunk if you can't trade Chrowder and the Jazz don't have the need. Two reasons: we're already locked into Hereford, and even if you think the cap space is gone after this year, adding another guy at a ~$30m a year clip that's a clunky roster fit with the team we have in place doesn't make sense to me because it's not impossible that we could stand pat this offseason and try to clear space to sign George or someone else as a free agent next year before using bird rights to retain Thomas/Bradley/whoever. Flexibility is always useful- Griffin takes away from that and I'm not sure he'd do anything close to putting us over the top in the East. I think if you strike out on Hayward this offseason and you don't swing a deal for a different star, the goal should be maintaining as much flexibility as possible going forward, filling out the bench with solid vets, and maybe doing some bargain hunting for big guys who can block shots and rebound. It's not in the end that I think Griffin would be bad or wouldn't help the team, and if we hadn't already signed Horford I would be very much in favor of going after Blake. As is, I don't think it would make sense to deal Horford, and because I don't think Griffin fits next to him well at all I don't think we should go after him, particularly because we'd have to give up solid players in order to get him. I think our best case if we signed Griffin would be 57-60 wins, maybe the one seed again, but I don't think we'd give Cleveland many problems when it comes down to it, particularly given that we'd be playing with a somewhat stripped down bench |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 30, 2017 23:32:33 GMT -5
I guess i just don't understand loving Horford, but worrying about Griffin. As of right now there is no signs of decline, I sure don't see him becoming a pumkin in 4 years. Horford on the other hand was already in decline and that continued last year. Griffin is a more dynamic scorer that gets to the line at an elite level. Something this team really needs. He also plays team ball as he's a great passer, seems like a great fit. Sure you would want a rim protector, but not at the cost of getting a talent like Griffin. Our cap space is gone after this year, so it's not like we can wait till next year to target a better player. If no Hayward, your options are Griffin, then players like Green, Dedmon or trading for a Chandler. I'm only moving onto a player like Chandler if you can't get an elite free agent. Getting a Favors isn't a slam dunk if you can't trade Chrowder and the Jazz don't have the need. Two reasons: we're already locked into Hereford, and even if you think the cap space is gone after this year, adding another guy at a ~$30m a year clip that's a clunky roster fit with the team we have in place doesn't make sense to me because it's not impossible that we could stand pat this offseason and try to clear space to sign George or someone else as a free agent next year before using bird rights to retain Thomas/Bradley/whoever. Flexibility is always useful- Griffin takes away from that and I'm not sure he'd do anything close to putting us over the top in the East. I think if you strike out on Hayward this offseason and you don't swing a deal for a different star, the goal should be maintaining as much flexibility as possible going forward, filling out the bench with solid vets, and maybe doing some bargain hunting for big guys who can block shots and rebound. It's not in the end that I think Griffin would be bad or wouldn't help the team, and if we hadn't already signed Horford I would be very much in favor of going after Blake. As is, I don't think it would make sense to deal Horford, and because I don't think Griffin fits next to him well at all I don't think we should go after him, particularly because we'd have to give up solid players in order to get him. I think our best case if we signed Griffin would be 57-60 wins, maybe the one seed again, but I don't think we'd give Cleveland many problems when it comes down to it, particularly given that we'd be playing with a somewhat stripped down bench I'm no cap expert by any means, but what you're saying just isn't possible. How do you get max cap space next year? How do you do that and not gut the bench this year, like your worried getting Griffin does? . Let's say you let KO walk, resign Johnson and Jerebko to 1 year deals. Maybe get another vet on 1 year deal, maybe bring back Green. You still just lost arguably your best bench player and can't get any real upgrades because they would take long-term deals. You bring over Zizic and Yabu. Even then you won't have max cap space next year. Cap holds are larger than a players salary. So Bradley and Thomas cap holds are going to be north of 10 million each. The rookies deals increase in salary, plus you need to add the salary of a likely top 5 pick. Nevermind our own #1 or Horford increase in salary. I'm not even sure if you renounced your rights to Bradley if you could get Max money. I would have to study the numbers more and try and find Bradley and Thomas exact cap hold numbers. Is having a shot at PG13 really worth getting worse next year? Losing KO? Losing Bradley? Not being able to add a single player to longer than a one year deal? Then most likely having to make another trade or two to clear more payroll? That's why if no Hayward and Griffin will sign you get him. You won't have to gut bench, actually you could have a better bench. You can give out long-term deals and make trades for players with long-term deals. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 31, 2017 6:04:23 GMT -5
Edit: according to sports trac they have Bradley at 13.2 and Thomas at 9.3 and Smart at 11.3 for 2018 cap holds. I'm not sure how they come up with those numbers for Thomas and Bradley. Then again I don't have the most recent CBA info...
Why is it so hard to find the new terms of the CBA
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 31, 2017 6:11:02 GMT -5
So the point is this is the last year to spend money and Danny will spend it even if it's just to have salary to use in trades down the line. This franchise will be in the luxury tax threshold after this season.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 31, 2017 6:21:58 GMT -5
Wouldn't the Celtics be better off signing a Nerlens Noel rather than say a Blake Griffin if they somehow don't sign Hayward?
He is everything the Celtics need really. He is from Massachusetts, he's still really young, he's big and has plenty of potential and room to grow. Blake Griffin has reached his potential and is older.
Plus having Noel, Fultz, Smart, and Brown (with next year's high lottery pick) will give the team a good young strong core to build with if they can't land a superstar per say. The Celtics best hopes would be that Fultz/Brown/Noel develops into superstars.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 31, 2017 7:14:18 GMT -5
Sure but he's restricted and the expectation is that Dallas will match any offer (reports are saying multiple teams will offer the max btw)
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 31, 2017 7:23:45 GMT -5
Edit: according to sports trac they have Bradley at 13.2 and Thomas at 9.3 and Smart at 11.3 for 2018 cap holds. I'm not sure how they come up with those numbers for Thomas and Bradley. Then again I don't have the most recent CBA info... Why is it so hard to find the new terms of the CBA Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ. Smart is 250% of his previous salary (for Larry Bird rights after 4th year of rookie scale) Thomas and Bradley are 150% |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 31, 2017 7:26:28 GMT -5
Sure but he's restricted and the expectation is that Dallas will match any offer (reports are saying multiple teams will offer the max btw) Forgot he was unrestricted. That stinks. It has to be Hayward then I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 31, 2017 11:29:46 GMT -5
Edit: according to sports trac they have Bradley at 13.2 and Thomas at 9.3 and Smart at 11.3 for 2018 cap holds. I'm not sure how they come up with those numbers for Thomas and Bradley. Then again I don't have the most recent CBA info... Why is it so hard to find the new terms of the CBA Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ. Smart is 250% of his previous salary (for Larry Bird rights after 4th year of rookie scale) Thomas and Bradley are 150% Why is Jerebko's cap hold 9.5 million, after having a 5 million salary, but Thomas is at 9.3 after having a salary of like 6.6 million? It just makes no sense. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 31, 2017 11:35:34 GMT -5
Per the FAQ, there is an additional component based on whether the previous salary was below the avg salary (estimated at 6.1Mn).
Since JJ was, his hold is 190% of his salary instead of 150%
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 31, 2017 11:37:08 GMT -5
If Danny really wanted Noel he would have traded for him. I want to see the teams that give him max money. He can get what 25% of cap with raises, thats over 100 million. Wow. There also aren't a ton of teams that can get 25 million in cap space.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 31, 2017 11:46:35 GMT -5
I agree. Very possible the "multiple sources" are his agent(s) trying to drive up his market.
|
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on May 31, 2017 11:49:51 GMT -5
Umass, didn't want to quote the last post cause the length was getting excessive, but yea, i don't think you throw money at griffin cause I basically think that we'd be entirely stagnant. You're going to have to make a bunch of decisions on guys in the next two years anyway- projecting exactly what the cap situation will look like is a fools errand, and it's even more dicey trying to project what they could do in order to create cap space down the road. I don't think we'd even really get worse this year- I think if we could add dedmon, for example, I'd be much more interested in small ball lineups with crowder at the 4 and brown at the 3 than a similar lineup with olynyk on the floor. Besides which, there really is no guarantee that we keep Thomas beyond next season, even if I favor doing so.
To make my point in the simplest possible terms, don't sacrifice flexibility, both in terms or actual lineups you can put on the court and in terms of roster construction/cap space unless you're going to get a guy who clearly addresses major needs. Suggesting that we should sign griffin this offseason still means losing olynyk, and likely dealing one of our young guards (who may become much more important depending on what happens to Bradley and Thomas). You lose depth for a guy who I personally don't believe even gets you to game 6 with Cleveland, so what's the point?
Last piece of this: even if you keep one eye on next summer/george, you can re-sign olynyk if the price is right. In fact, you can be aggressive across the board in free agency as long as you're confident you're not overpaying and the contracts you sign are tradeable, which probably means on the lower end of the scale salary wise. If you sign griffin, you've basically made your move, and there's no context in which I can see Blake griffin elevating this team to a title contender and I kindof doubt I'm alone in that
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 31, 2017 11:52:44 GMT -5
Edit: according to sports trac they have Bradley at 13.2 and Thomas at 9.3 and Smart at 11.3 for 2018 cap holds. I'm not sure how they come up with those numbers for Thomas and Bradley. Then again I don't have the most recent CBA info... Why is it so hard to find the new terms of the CBA Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ. Smart is 250% of his previous salary (for Larry Bird rights after 4th year of rookie scale) Thomas and Bradley are 150% That's the 2011-2016 CBA tho |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 31, 2017 11:56:01 GMT -5
Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ. Smart is 250% of his previous salary (for Larry Bird rights after 4th year of rookie scale) Thomas and Bradley are 150% Why is Jerebko's cap hold 9.5 million, after having a 5 million salary, but Thomas is at 9.3 after having a salary of like 6.6 million? It just makes no sense. Well we don't know the actual table but it has to do with numbers of years with a team (bird rights etc) and above or below the average NBA player salary. So it can vary greatly. Basically they traded for Isaiahs rights so they extend back further than Jerebko plus Jerebko is below the average salary so it costs more to keep his rights. It is set up to make it easier to retain guy's you've had longer than guys who you've had less time. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 31, 2017 12:07:08 GMT -5
I'm sorry but I don't want Danny extending KO under almost any realistic scenario. If you need to keep him around next year one a one year restricted deal then fine because you struck out in free agency. But the guy is going to get way over paid and he's basically unplayable a third of the time just because he can't show up for some odd reason. Had one great epic performance this post season and that was nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 31, 2017 12:10:20 GMT -5
Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ. Smart is 250% of his previous salary (for Larry Bird rights after 4th year of rookie scale) Thomas and Bradley are 150% That's the 2011-2016 CBA tho That's what sportrac is using right now, the numbers match. A large amount of the CBA never changes from one to the other. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 31, 2017 12:25:33 GMT -5
Umass, didn't want to quote the last post cause the length was getting excessive, but yea, i don't think you throw money at griffin cause I basically think that we'd be entirely stagnant. You're going to have to make a bunch of decisions on guys in the next two years anyway- projecting exactly what the cap situation will look like is a fools errand, and it's even more dicey trying to project what they could do in order to create cap space down the road. I don't think we'd even really get worse this year- I think if we could add dedmon, for example, I'd be much more interested in small ball lineups with crowder at the 4 and brown at the 3 than a similar lineup with olynyk on the floor. Besides which, there really is no guarantee that we keep Thomas beyond next season, even if I favor doing so. To make my point in the simplest possible terms, don't sacrifice flexibility, both in terms or actual lineups you can put on the court and in terms of roster construction/cap space unless you're going to get a guy who clearly addresses major needs. Suggesting that we should sign griffin this offseason still means losing olynyk, and likely dealing one of our young guards (who may become much more important depending on what happens to Bradley and Thomas). You lose depth for a guy who I personally don't believe even gets you to game 6 with Cleveland, so what's the point? Last piece of this: even if you keep one eye on next summer/george, you can re-sign olynyk if the price is right. In fact, you can be aggressive across the board in free agency as long as you're confident you're not overpaying and the contracts you sign are tradeable, which probably means on the lower end of the scale salary wise. If you sign griffin, you've basically made your move, and there's no context in which I can see Blake griffin elevating this team to a title contender and I kindof doubt I'm alone in that Fultz, Griffin and a good free agent could certainly mean we can compete with Cleveland in my opinion. You just fixed two major weak spots on this team in go to scorers and rebounding. You have to move a guard no matter what. There is no way we have minutes for Bradley, Thomas, Smart, Rozier and Fultz. Fultz needs to play 25 minutes a night in my opinion. Please explain how that works? Who do you think whould be easier to trade Dedmon, KO, and a Mid level free agent or Griffin? That's easy it's Griffin. You won't have teams with cap space jumping to trade for Dedmon at like 12 million a year or KO at 15-20 million a year. Even if Griffin has a down year I can see a team like the Nets wanting him if tge cost is low. Not that it matters we can't get max cap space next year. If you don't like Griffin ok, just say that and stick with that. Your idea about getting max space next year is a pipe dream. It just can't happen and it's impossible when you start adding free agents like Dedmon. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 31, 2017 12:28:36 GMT -5
Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ. Smart is 250% of his previous salary (for Larry Bird rights after 4th year of rookie scale) Thomas and Bradley are 150% That's the 2011-2016 CBA tho Don't think those formulas changed though. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 31, 2017 12:35:23 GMT -5
Some comments:
1. While you COULD get Max money in '18, it won't happen without trading AB, MS and IT for nothing but picks (and even then, other things need to happen). So it's just easier to say it's not going to happen.
2. George is going to LAL. Not sure any other FA would be worth it.
3. I don't believe Fultz and Griffin make you a legit contender to defeat CLE but that's okay. That shouldn't be your goal this offseason. The goal is to be a favorite for #2 and have the bullets to pull off a deal should the opportunity arise (CLE slips or a truly great player becomes available).
4. My only comment on the "Griffin is easier to trade" statement is that IF you're looking to trade him it's likely bc something has happened (like an injury) that would actually make it harder than one might expect (maybe not harder between the 2 choices, but not easy either)
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 31, 2017 12:58:05 GMT -5
When i say can't, I meant without gutting core of team. Sure you could get cap space for two max free agents next year, if you had a fire sale. Let's try and be realistic is my point.
I never said to defeat Cleveland, just compete. In regards to the comment on getting to a game 6. I think that team could win two games for sure.
Also I wouldn't trade Griffin, its all about ct comments that you can easily trade Dedmon if you wanted to and that it wouldn't be easy to trade Griffin. If they both stay healthy next year, Griffin is easier to trade. Even if he got injured, some team that wants star power would gamble on him if you gave him away. Unless Dedmon has the best season of his career, your most likely having to send out a first round pick to have a team take him.
|
|
|
