Celtics as a FA destination (broken from trade rumors)

ElcaballitoMVP · May 13, 2016

I know that Windhorst and others have mentioned state taxes, but that had to be like #85 on Bron's list of reasons to leave Cleveland. Does it help? Sure does. But #1 on his list was to go to a place to win titles. Not one. Not two. Not three.... If MIA doesn't have Wade, do they get LeBron and Bosh? I don't know.

Bosh himself said, "“It was difficult to leave, but I couldn’t stay there,” he said. “I knew I had to go because I knew nobody was gonna come up there. I wanted to win a championship. That was it. I wanted to win and win big.”

Papelbon's Poutine · May 13, 2016

jon abbey said:
From the Windhorst post-mortem in 2010:

"In addition to the weather and the city's attractions for young, rich athletes, Riley knew the lack of a state income tax in Florida could help him sell it."

http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2010/07/inside_the_decision_miamis_cou.html

So no cite of any of them talking about it, just Riley saying he including it in the pitch and writers speculating about how much it helped. Gotcha.

Grin&MartyBarret · May 13, 2016

HomeRunBaker said:
The evidence is in simple common sense. If you have two job offers where all else was equal and the only mitigating factor was that one job would put an additional 2-3% of your salary in your pocket which one would you take? There is absolute 100% certainly that no sane person is saying.....well all else is equal so I'm willingly going to take less money. If someone takes less money than it isn't because all else is equal and other factors are in play.

How much of a factor it plays is another question which we are not privy to the discussions between player and agent. Discounting this completely as a factor is akin to feeling that a player would never instruct his agent to find him the most lucrative deal. I'm confident that occurs at a minimum of fairly often.

And how often is money the only mitigating factor in the NBA?

HomeRunBaker · May 13, 2016

JakeRae said:
The home tax rate is the differential we are calculating. It's irrelevant that some road games don't have income tax because every team plays some road games that involve no income tax. If you want to make a more nuanced argument that certain teams end up with more favorable road tax rates, that's almost certainly true, but I'm operating under the assumption of rough equality because I really can't be bothered to do that detailed a calculation. They don't change the fundamental fact that what we're discussing is, about $500k per year.

I'm not sure what you are debating. I stated in my post a player would leave up to a couple of million on the table which you are agreeing with.

I continue to find it fascinating that the impact of state tax rates, in your world view, is crippling to Boston as a FA destination but doesn't hurt California and New York teams. Because, if 5.3% has a catastrophic impact on the ability to attract top-tier talent, surely rates of 12-13% in California and NYC would make it impossible to sign any free agents, let alone good ones. But, of course, that narrative doesn't work. Or maybe it's because these same income-conscious players are just really excited about how cheap it is to live in NYC/LA and that balances out the high tax rate?

Please stop putting words in my mouth. I've never said taxes crippled the Celtics as a destination. I have listed it as one of several areas where we lose in luring a big name FA to certain cities. For other players where taxes aren't as much (or none) of a factor we lose to LA and NY as well. For all the debates about individual topics that we lose on can you names one where we win? Whenever this is questioned everyone runs to Brad Stevens as the lure. If that is all we are hanging our heads on well.......

I want to be clear that I am not trying to argue that tax rate is irrelevant, although parts of this post may read that way. I think tax rate is a factor that some players certainly consider and that it is a weight on the scales.[/QUOTE]
Well geez then......what are we debating? I agree with this and tax, along with weather, along with relationships with veteran players, along with being a legitimate championship contender, along with their wife/family desires, prior relationship with the city......these are all small factors that are taken into account. Right now we lack on all of them (except family as we don't know how this affects most decisions). You need something to present and sell to these guys......ours consists of "Come play with Isaiah and be coached by Brad." That's all good but it isn't going to cut it under current circumstances.

So no cite of any of them talking about it, just Riley saying he including it in the pitch and writers speculating about how much it helped. Gotcha.

Click to expand...

That is correct as you will never hear players openly discussing their personal income taxes to the media. So your angle is that millions of dollars are irrelevant due to no players citing this on the record, correct? Gotcha.

HomeRunBaker · May 13, 2016

Grin&MartyBarret said:
And how often is money the only mitigating factor in the NBA?

I listed multiple factors not only money. We either lose or push on each of them. We don't have a win to present to a highly desired player although I'd love to hear a presentation that doesn't include "Look at our coach he's awesome!" (relax guys, it's hyperbole)

Yes, everyone can take any ONE factor and rip it apart. Taxes, Money, Weather, Contending, etc etc but when you put it all together I'd like to hear what a winning presentation would look like to one of these FA that overcomes any of the factors that other teams CAN offer.

To speak specifics the one scenario I can envision now is what's going on in Atlanta. If the Hawks allow Horford to test the market by not offering him the max (roughly $140m) then I can see us outbidding others at the max we can offer (roughly $110m) while he may be disenchanted to return to Atlanta at that point even if they offer slightly more. Unfortunately I feel it plays out that Atlanta moves Teague at the draft, promotes Schroder to the first unit while using those savings to retain Horford which makes the most sense to them.

RedOctober3829 · May 13, 2016

I think this discussion is a moot point now because there won't be a franchise-type player available on the open market this offseason. I think Kevin Durant is going to stay in Oklahoma City more now than ever.

Grin&MartyBarret · May 13, 2016

HomeRunBaker said:
I listed multiple factors not only money. We either lose or push on each of them. We don't have a win to present to a highly desired player although I'd love to hear a presentation that doesn't include "Look at our coach he's awesome!" (relax guys, it's hyperbole)

Yes, everyone can take any ONE factor and rip it apart. Taxes, Money, Weather, Contending, etc etc but when you put it all together I'd like to hear what a winning presentation would look like to one of these FA that overcomes any of the factors that other teams CAN offer.

To speak specifics the one scenario I can envision now is what's going on in Atlanta. If the Hawks allow Horford to test the market by not offering him the max (roughly $140m) then I can see us outbidding others at the max we can offer (roughly $110m) while he may be disenchanted to return to Atlanta at that point even if they offer slightly more. Unfortunately I feel it plays out that Atlanta moves Teague at the draft, promotes Schroder to the first unit while using those savings to retain Horford which makes the most sense to them.

Here's the presentation:

Come join a franchise that's won more championships than anybody in the league, has an almost unprecedented trove of assets and cap flexibility to put together a contender, and an excellent young coach that players love playing for.

It's not that complicated. Do I think that guarantees a top level free agent? No. But it's made Boston part of the conversation.

ALiveH · May 13, 2016

I think that's the right presentation and it's not a very strong one. The franchise has a cool long-term history but only one championship in the living memory of anybody we try to recruit. The assets & cap flexibility is not particularly compelling by the time the max FAs hit market b/c they don't want to wait for a bunch of lottery picks to develop - and that scenario is a very real risk. The coach stuff is true & we have that going for us.

The conversation completely changes if we turn some of those assets & flexibility via trade into another great player that makes the team much better today. At that point, a FA could rightly decide it's a great situation where his addition would vault the team into the very small number of contenders. [this was the Ray Allen + KG playbook]

Grin&MartyBarret · May 13, 2016

ALiveH said:
I think that's the right presentation and it's not a very strong one. The franchise has a cool long-term history but only one championship in the living memory of anybody we try to recruit. The assets & cap flexibility is not particularly compelling by the time the max FAs hit market b/c they don't want to wait for a bunch of lottery picks to develop - and that scenario is a very real risk. The coach stuff is true & we have that going for us.

The conversation completely changes if we turn some of those assets & flexibility via trade into another great player that makes the team much better today. At that point, a FA could rightly decide it's a great situation where his addition would vault the team into the very small number of contenders. [this was the Ray Allen + KG playbook]

This front office has a championship to their name. There's the Lakers, the Spurs, the Mavs, Golden State, and the Heat. What other front office has a championship to point to? You don't think NBA players are influenced by an organization's track record of success?

As for the lottery pick thing, I specifically referred to them as assets that could be used to build a contender. That doesn't mean the picks need to be made, or developed. You get a max star, and you can turn those assets into complimentary players easily.

zenter · May 13, 2016

Four factors matter more than any other to players - aversion to change (status quo bias), title contention, money, and team culture.

On one of those podcasts someone (I think Jared Dudley) said, in no uncertain terms that players don't look at "other" assets because they don't "impact me right now".

In other words, assets are good for fans and front offices, but unless they translate into title contention (Ray Allen), culture (IT acquisition), or money (C's facilitating LeBron to CLE), they're probably not relevant in a single given offseason.

Team culture is definitely informed by championships, but the Lakers are evidence of rich milk gone sour - the banners don't make up for the rest of the toxic culture created by the Buss's.

ALiveH · May 13, 2016

Grin&MartyBarret said:
This front office has a championship to their name. There's the Lakers, the Spurs, the Mavs, Golden State, and the Heat. What other front office has a championship to point to? You don't think NBA players are influenced by an organization's track record of success?

As for the lottery pick thing, I specifically referred to them as assets that could be used to build a contender. That doesn't mean the picks need to be made, or developed. You get a max star, and you can turn those assets into complimentary players easily.

Your original presentation was "more championships than anyone in the league" so i was responding to that. If you are now saying that "has a championship to their name" is a better pitch, I can agree with that. But, players who care about winning, care more about the prospects of winning now than whether the management team won a championship 8 years ago so it still doesn't strike me as particularly compelling.

I also don't think a free agent would find lottery pick assets & flexibility as particularly compelling if they want to win now, because there is a very real risk that there will be no trade to be made (just like there wasn't the last couple years) and they'll be stuck playing with a bunch of talented 20-23 year olds & be past prime by the time the kids are really good (if they're ever good).

My bigger point is that Boston would be a much more compelling & less risky FA destination for the all star who wants to win, if they first consummate a big trade (like they did with Allen & KG).

In my lifetime · May 14, 2016

These discussions regarding cities as free agent destinations don't happen often in other sports and the reason is obvious.
Maybe this isn't the place for the discussion, but the NBA reminds me of certain government policy, where the unintended consequences are not recognized. By installing a maximum contract, teams in less than optimal circumstances can't provide the financial incentive for a player to sign with them. It makes free agency a very poor equalizer. The system is also set up for player collusion, example -- Miami Heat of several years ago. Players just arranging with friends and other stars to play for a team to win a championship (not that this would be stopped if a player wants to take a lot less money to win a championship, which is their prerogative). You would think that certain teams that have trouble attracting free agents would start to push for eliminating the max deal and replacing it with a harder cap. It would also provide for a more competitively balanced league, when teams would be hard pressed to fit 2 stars never mind 3 stars into their cap.

AMS25 · May 14, 2016

In my lifetime said:
By installing a maximum contract, teams in less than optimal circumstances can't provide the financial incentive for a player to sign with them. It makes free agency a very poor equalizer.

Eh, for a team in less than optimal circumstances, the team still has two paths to greatness: the draft and trades. Player development -- that's also very important. Acquiring players through free agency is overrated.

HomeRunBaker · May 14, 2016

In my lifetime said:
You would think that certain teams that have trouble attracting free agents would start to push for eliminating the max deal and replacing it with a harder cap. It would also provide for a more competitively balanced league, when teams would be hard pressed to fit 2 stars never mind 3 stars into their cap.

It would also assure us that the lockout this would cause in the next CBA negotiations would result in nobody playing or watching basketball for a long time. The union would never agree to a hard cap. It simply isn't happening.

ishmael · May 14, 2016

In my lifetime said:
These discussions regarding cities as free agent destinations don't happen often in other sports and the reason is obvious.
Maybe this isn't the place for the discussion, but the NBA reminds me of certain government policy, where the unintended consequences are not recognized. By installing a maximum contract, teams in less than optimal circumstances can't provide the financial incentive for a player to sign with them. It makes free agency a very poor equalizer. The system is also set up for player collusion, example -- Miami Heat of several years ago. Players just arranging with friends and other stars to play for a team to win a championship (not that this would be stopped if a player wants to take a lot less money to win a championship, which is their prerogative). You would think that certain teams that have trouble attracting free agents would start to push for eliminating the max deal and replacing it with a harder cap. It would also provide for a more competitively balanced league, when teams would be hard pressed to fit 2 stars never mind 3 stars into their cap.

Sure the max plays a role, but it is more the nature of basketball. There are only 5 guys on the court and in the playoffs, your best guys play 85-90% of the minutes. If there was no max, then LAL or NYK would just clear the decks and bid $50M for LeBron and Curry. Sure, they couldn't get both at the same time, but there would be no more parity and the best players could still dictate where they want to play (and with who) as long as they take less money...

zenter · May 14, 2016

AMS25 said:
Eh, for a team in less than optimal circumstances, the team still has two paths to greatness: the draft and trades. Player development -- that's also very important. Acquiring players through free agency is overrated.

... In the NBA.

Which is sort of the point / problem. I don't buy the "city as draw" theory very much, but there's a reason non-sport reasons are cited so often. Between and among 1. the impact draft picks have, 2. the player-movement-unfriendly contract rules, 3. the restrictive salary requirements put on teams (that impact players), 4. collision-like NBA / NCAA player restrictions, and 5. age of draftees, you end up with benefits going to non-movers.

David Stern saved the NBA by essentially stripping players of negotiating leverage when the league was in dire straits. Every subsequent CBA has created new restrictions on players to the benefit of the league. Players exercise what little leverage they have to control their own fates.

moly99 · May 15, 2016

zenter said:
Semi-aside: is weather really a major consideration? Do Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, Toronto, Minneapolis, New York/Brooklyn, and Portland get this knock against them too?

A lot of this depends on the player. What matters to a 25 year old player and what matters to a 30 year old player with two kids chasing a last chance at a ring are different.

I think it's pretty much a given that if Durant leaves he will be looking for a team that gives him the best chance at a ring or his hometown in DC rather than the best party city.

Nick Kaufman · May 16, 2016

ishmael said:
Sure the max plays a role, but it is more the nature of basketball. There are only 5 guys on the court and in the playoffs, your best guys play 85-90% of the minutes. If there was no max, then LAL or NYK would just clear the decks and bid $50M for LeBron and Curry. Sure, they couldn't get both at the same time, but there would be no more parity and the best players could still dictate where they want to play (and with who) as long as they take less money...

Max deal plus hard cap allows you to take Lebron, but very tough to get a good surrounding cast. I completely agree with the suggestion.

Devizier · May 16, 2016

AMS25 said:
Eh, for a team in less than optimal circumstances, the team still has two paths to greatness: the draft and trades. Player development -- that's also very important. Acquiring players through free agency is overrated.

Since the salary caps and free agency restrictions went in effect after the lockout, this has been true (i.e. no more Shaq contracts). But there have been some exceptions: Billups in Detroit and Nash in Phoenix. Another thing to consider is that in the previous iteration of free agency rules, sign-and-trades predominated. And those are effectively free agency signings for all intents and purposes.

HomeRunBaker · May 19, 2016

One guy who is flying under the radar and will get paid by someone is Larry Sanders. With two of our greatest needs being rim protection and perimeter shooting he'd provide a solution to one of those areas.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/qa-larry-sanders-explains-break-from-nba/

Devizier · May 20, 2016

HomeRunBaker said:
One guy who is flying under the radar and will get paid by someone is Larry Sanders. With two of our greatest needs being rim protection and perimeter shooting he'd provide a solution to one of those areas.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/qa-larry-sanders-explains-break-from-nba/

Sanders is coming back? Good for him. It's worth a flyer if the Celtics are willing to go there.

HomeRunBaker · May 20, 2016

Devizier said:
Sanders is coming back? Good for him. It's worth a flyer if the Celtics are willing to go there.

I think he will have a market though. Not sure how cheap of a flyer it will be but he's intriguing for sure.

DannyDarwinism · May 20, 2016

Devizier said:
Sanders is coming back? Good for him. It's worth a flyer if the Celtics are willing to go there.

Gotta get some more guys for our sub-30 vertical frontcourt

He was actually the most interesting guy on that list because it shows it's at least possible for a guy to provide elite rim protection without a decent vertical. As long as he has great timing, instincts and standing reach. FWIW, Bender's standing reach measured last year was an inch shorter than Sander's, measured when he was 22.

DJnVa · May 20, 2016

DannyDarwinism said:
Gotta get some more guys for our sub-30 vertical frontcourt

Man, I've seen some highlights where it certainly looks like Sanders can get off the floor. This doesn't exactly look like Olynyk.

nighthob · May 20, 2016

Put me on board with a Sanders signing. The Celtics clubhouse is strong enough that even if he goes off the deep end it wouldn't be much of a distraction, and it would definitely address the rim protection problem cheaply allowing them to focus financial resources elsewhere. I think I might rather have Sanders on a two year deal than Horford on a max one.

wutang112878 · May 20, 2016

HomeRunBaker said:
One guy who is flying under the radar and will get paid by someone is Larry Sanders. With two of our greatest needs being rim protection and perimeter shooting he'd provide a solution to one of those areas.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/qa-larry-sanders-explains-break-from-nba/

I dont think rim protection is that high on the list of needs. Last year we were 4th in defensive rating, 8th in eFG% and 11th in opponents 2pt FG% and we really didnt have a dominant rim protector / mistake fixer.

These would be my priorities:

To me shooting is the #1 need, we were 28th in 3pt FG% which was horribly exploited in the playoffs once we lost Bradley and Olynyk which really arent amazing stars to begin with. I think the inability to shoot the 3 was a big contributing factor to us being 19th in 2pt FG% and 24th in eFG% Yet amazingly, and I think this is in large part due to Stevens, we were 10th in Off Rtg
Defensive rebounding, we were 26th in Def RB%.
Offensive player who can actually create on his own to take some of the heat off of Isaiah.
Rim protector

Eddie Jurak · May 21, 2016

HomeRunBaker said:
One guy who is flying under the radar and will get paid by someone is Larry Sanders. With two of our greatest needs being rim protection and perimeter shooting

For a moment there I thought you'd lost it completely...

HomeRunBaker said:
he'd provide a solution to one of those areas.

... but I was wrong.

Is he going to be a fit on the team?

Speaking of other difficult personalities, what kind of offer is Lance looking at in free agency and should the C's consider him as a cheap ET replacement?

nighthob · May 21, 2016

I mean they're not likely to bring back Sullinger, Zeller is similarly free to go, the rest of their PF/C rotation at the moment includes Olynyk, Amir Johnson, and Jordan Mickey. We're not exactly talking the '86 Celtics there. I think they could find playing time for Larry Sanders. Unlike those Bucks squads he played on, Boston has a pretty strong clubhouse culture.

ALiveH · May 22, 2016

are the 76ers disenchanted enough with Noel to trade him for the 16 pick? Provides rim protection like Sanders, not as good a player he was but he has the potential to be much better down the road.

BigSoxFan · May 22, 2016

ALiveH said:
are the 76ers disenchanted enough with Noel to trade him for the 16 pick? Provides rim protection like Sanders, not as good a player he was but he has the potential to be much better down the road.

Not a chance. This is not a team that needs more draft picks and #16 in a mediocre draft doesn't get you anywhere near Noel unless he is a crack dealer in his spare time.

nighthob · May 22, 2016

I think they're more likely to trade Noel for Wade Baldwin than Okafor for Dunn at this point.

RedOctober3829 · May 31, 2016

With Kevin Durant’s season ending Monday night courtesy of the defending champion Warriors’ Game 7 win over the Thunder in the Western Conference finals, the speculation about Durant’s future is set to take off.

There have been rumors that the Celtics will make a push at the pending free agent. If Boston is to land Durant, president of basketball operations Danny Ainge might have to start by looking into acquiring some auxiliary pieces first.

According to Butch Stearns, during an appearance as a guest host on WEEI Monday morning, Durant’s people have informed the C’s who those additional players are.

“I have this on pretty good authority: The Celtics have sat with his agent and other representatives of Durant. The Celtics do know — I don’t know who it is — but they do know who he would prefer to be brought here in a LeBron [James]-Chris Bosh-Dwyane Wade-like way. Because that’s how it works in the NBA. You need to know who the guy or guys that that guy wants, which would be a factor,” Stearns said.

“Now, I don’t know if Durant’s told them that. But the Celtics know. They know. They’ve been told what group of guys he would want to come here.”

Considering Durant could make more money with Oklahoma City — around $30 million per season — than anywhere else, he would need more incentive to leave. Perhaps an easier path to the NBA Finals would be one such appeal.

Said Stearns: “Why would he come here? If I were him? Because I don’t have to deal with the West anymore. I only have to beat LeBron [and the Cavaliers].”

http://greenstreet.weei.com/sports/boston/basketball/celtics/2016/05/31/butch-stearns-on-dc-kevin-durants-representatives-have-let-celtics-know-which-players-he-wants-prospective-teams-to-acquire/

Cellar-Door · May 31, 2016

RedOctober3829 said:
With Kevin Durant’s season ending Monday night courtesy of the defending champion Warriors’ Game 7 win over the Thunder in the Western Conference finals, the speculation about Durant’s future is set to take off.

There have been rumors that the Celtics will make a push at the pending free agent. If Boston is to land Durant, president of basketball operations Danny Ainge might have to start by looking into acquiring some auxiliary pieces first.

According to Butch Stearns, during an appearance as a guest host on WEEI Monday morning, Durant’s people have informed the C’s who those additional players are.

“I have this on pretty good authority: The Celtics have sat with his agent and other representatives of Durant. The Celtics do know — I don’t know who it is — but they do know who he would prefer to be brought here in a LeBron [James]-Chris Bosh-Dwyane Wade-like way. Because that’s how it works in the NBA. You need to know who the guy or guys that that guy wants, which would be a factor,” Stearns said.

“Now, I don’t know if Durant’s told them that. But the Celtics know. They know. They’ve been told what group of guys he would want to come here.”

Considering Durant could make more money with Oklahoma City — around $30 million per season — than anywhere else, he would need more incentive to leave. Perhaps an easier path to the NBA Finals would be one such appeal.

Said Stearns: “Why would he come here? If I were him? Because I don’t have to deal with the West anymore. I only have to beat LeBron [and the Cavaliers].”

http://greenstreet.weei.com/sports/boston/basketball/celtics/2016/05/31/butch-stearns-on-dc-kevin-durants-representatives-have-let-celtics-know-which-players-he-wants-prospective-teams-to-acquire/

Good lord is that poor writing/editing. It's not $30M per season. It's $37M overall, but most of that is the 5th year, only about an average of 1.1M a year over the 4 year before a re-signing. The big difference would be if he signs a 1+1 then another max.

TheoShmeo · May 31, 2016

Cellar-Door said:
Good lord is that poor writing/editing. It's not $30M per season. It's $37M overall, but most of that is the 5th year, only about an average of 1.1M a year over the 4 year before a re-signing. The big difference would be if he signs a 1+1 then another max.

If Durant is about maxing his money (not that there's anything wrong with that), he'll go the 1 and 1/another max route.

If he is more moved by other factors, then we might see something different.

I'm expecting the former and hoping for the latter.

If he signs a long term deal this off season outside of OKC, I assume it will be driven by some level of worry about getting hurt next season, wanting to put an end to the endless discussion and possible distraction relating to where he plays and, with my super green glasses on, the desire to be part of the next great Cs team (especially and perhaps only if they secure players along the lines of Stearns' comments). And, of course, you can apply a different biased perspective to the other teams in the hunt.

Cellar-Door · May 31, 2016

TheoShmeo said:
If Durant is about maxing his money (not that there's anything wrong with that), he'll go the 1 and 1/another max route.

If he is more moved by other factors, then we might see something different.

I'm expecting the former and hoping for the latter.

If he signs a long term deal this off season outside of OKC, I assume it will be driven by some level of worry about getting hurt next season, wanting to put an end to the endless discussion and possible distraction relating to where he plays and, with my super green glasses on, the desire to be part of the next great Cs team (especially and perhaps only if they secure players along the lines of Stearns' comments). And, of course, you can apply a different biased perspective to the other teams in the hunt.

One thing that Nate Jones brought up, is that players might have some concerns about a lockout clawing back $$ from the players, which might encourage getting your guaranteed contract now.

DJnVa · May 31, 2016

Check out Durant buddy and long-time Celtics fan Terrance Knighton's tweet last night when the OKC-GS game ended.

pic.twitter.com/W6bjrJshy2

nighthob · May 31, 2016

Cellar-Door said:
One thing that Nate Jones brought up, is that players might have some concerns about a lockout clawing back $$ from the players, which might encourage getting your guaranteed contract now.

That thought will certainly impact the decision making of the sub-max guys, but as free agent contracts go up from the previous base, it won't impact the thinking of the max guys at all, they're going to sign their one and ones and re-sign for, at a minimum, 105% of that total next summer. I also don't think that the NBA is at all like the NFL and have any interest in pissing off the goose laying the golden eggs by canceling the current CBA to stage a lockout.

Devizier · May 31, 2016

RedOctober3829 said:
“I have this on pretty good authority: The Celtics have sat with his agent and other representatives of Durant. The Celtics do know — I don’t know who it is — but they do know who he would prefer to be brought here in a LeBron [James]-Chris Bosh-Dwyane Wade-like way. Because that’s how it works in the NBA. You need to know who the guy or guys that that guy wants, which would be a factor,” Stearns said.

“Now, I don’t know if Durant’s told them that. But the Celtics know. They know. They’ve been told what group of guys he would want to come here.”

So, who are these guys? Is Durant hoping for an exact replica of the Heat rebuild, where the Celtics clear out the books almost completely to squeeze three near-max contracts onto the roster? That's certainly achievable, since the Celtics have no negative value guys on the roster, but I'm not sure it's wise. That version of the "Heat" would be something like Durant-Derozan-Horford (with Thomas sticking around) in the absolute best iteration, and that's not exactly James-Bosh-Wade.

With the Celtics' slate of draft picks, building by trade would make a lot more sense and I hope that's what Durant (and his agent) would be pushing for, in the 1% likelihood that he comes to Boston.

nighthob · May 31, 2016

Boston also has the ability to work a sign & trade for Durant to conserve cap space if it's necessary. And, to be brutally frank, even if they had to clear the roster, their slate of draft picks would be a real advantage because this draft is very deep in terms of available roleplayers.

zenter · May 31, 2016

Cellar-Door said:
One thing that Nate Jones brought up, is that players might have some concerns about a lockout clawing back $$ from the players, which might encourage getting your guaranteed contract now.

I don't know if that's likely.

NBA cried poverty when they forced the current CBA on the NBPA. They can't even attempt to try that now. Michelle Roberts has been pretty clear she's going to be taking a more Marvin Miller/Donald Fehr approach to the negotiations, even implying the same "billionaires crying poverty in this day and age is absurd" argument. Adam Silver is no idiot and probably knows fans will side with Durant before they side with Ballmer.

A question for big names like Durant is how to switch teams with maximum salary flexibility on both sides. Signing (or S&T @nighthob) with an SA or GS or BOS requires no less than 3 years for the receiving team to have full Bird rights (different reasons, same outcome). That means he can only sign 1+1 with OKC and still get a guaranteed max contract afterward.

moly99 · May 31, 2016

wutang112878 said:
I dont think rim protection is that high on the list of needs. Last year we were 4th in defensive rating, 8th in eFG% and 11th in opponents 2pt FG% and we really didnt have a dominant rim protector / mistake fixer.

He isn't a dominant rim protector, but I think they clearly liked Amir Johnson in part because he could at least do a passable job of filling that role.

In my mind, this is the easiest role on the team to upgrade. The rewards would be higher for finding a superstar center or SF, but every team in the league is looking for those guys. If they can find a big man to protect the rim, set screens and run the pick and roll with our guards then it saves our capital for the task of acquiring a star player.

zenter said:
NBA cried poverty when they forced the current CBA on the NBPA. They can't even attempt to try that now. Michelle Roberts has been pretty clear she's going to be taking a more Marvin Miller/Donald Fehr approach to the negotiations, even implying the same "billionaires crying poverty in this day and age is absurd" argument. Adam Silver is no idiot and probably knows fans will side with Durant before they side with Ballmer.

This assumes that the outcome of a labor disagreement is based on what's fair, though. In reality it is based on leverage, and we all know that the billionaires can hold out longer in a lockout than the millionaires who usually go bankrupt soon after they leave the league. (Last I checked 72% of NBA players are bankrupt within five years of retirement.)

It shouldn't matter to a player like Durant, though. Even if the NBA and the union both go crazy and call off a season he still has his endorsement money. It's a bigger issue for the role players living month to month on a mere two or three million a year.

HomeRunBaker · May 31, 2016

RedOctober3829 said:
With Kevin Durant’s season ending Monday night courtesy of the defending champion Warriors’ Game 7 win over the Thunder in the Western Conference finals, the speculation about Durant’s future is set to take off.

There have been rumors that the Celtics will make a push at the pending free agent. If Boston is to land Durant, president of basketball operations Danny Ainge might have to start by looking into acquiring some auxiliary pieces first.

According to Butch Stearns, during an appearance as a guest host on WEEI Monday morning, Durant’s people have informed the C’s who those additional players are.

“I have this on pretty good authority: The Celtics have sat with his agent and other representatives of Durant. The Celtics do know — I don’t know who it is — but they do know who he would prefer to be brought here in a LeBron [James]-Chris Bosh-Dwyane Wade-like way. Because that’s how it works in the NBA. You need to know who the guy or guys that that guy wants, which would be a factor,” Stearns said.

“Now, I don’t know if Durant’s told them that. But the Celtics know. They know. They’ve been told what group of guys he would want to come here.”

Considering Durant could make more money with Oklahoma City — around $30 million per season — than anywhere else, he would need more incentive to leave. Perhaps an easier path to the NBA Finals would be one such appeal.

Said Stearns: “Why would he come here? If I were him? Because I don’t have to deal with the West anymore. I only have to beat LeBron [and the Cavaliers].”

http://greenstreet.weei.com/sports/boston/basketball/celtics/2016/05/31/butch-stearns-on-dc-kevin-durants-representatives-have-let-celtics-know-which-players-he-wants-prospective-teams-to-acquire/

You know who else knows?

The Thunder
The Warriors
The Spurs
The Knicks
The Bulls
The Lakers
etc
etc

It's Durant's representation earning their commission by doing their job. I suppose this Durant to Boston silliness isn't over yet afterall. Good lord wake me when it ends.

HomeRunBaker · May 31, 2016

TheoShmeo said:
If Durant is about maxing his money (not that there's anything wrong with that), he'll go the 1 and 1/another max route.

If he is more moved by other factors, then we might see something different.

I'm expecting the former and hoping for the latter.

If he signs a long term deal this off season outside of OKC, I assume it will be driven by some level of worry about getting hurt next season, wanting to put an end to the endless discussion and possible distraction relating to where he plays and, with my super green glasses on, the desire to be part of the next great Cs team (especially and perhaps only if they secure players along the lines of Stearns' comments). And, of course, you can apply a different biased perspective to the other teams in the hunt.

Those other factors causing Durant to sign a long-term deal as opposed to the imo 99% 1+1 with OKC would have to make up for roughly $90m of lost revenue as he'll be a Tier 3 Max player once he has 10 years tenure next summer. It's the difference between around 4/$115m and 5/$205m by holding off one year. Spending winters in Boston is great and all however it will cost Durant nearly half of his entire contract next summer to sign here (or anywhere else) next month.

nighthob · May 31, 2016

He'll make most of it by signing a 1+1 anywhere, and then re-upping for two years the following summer.

Cellar-Door · Jun 1, 2016

nighthob said:
He'll make most of it by signing a 1+1 anywhere, and then re-upping for two years the following summer.

He'd still get more in OKC though, because he'd have Bird rights, so 5 years w/ 7.5% raises. If he went to a new team he'd be limited to 4 years at 4.5% raises.

How big it ends up being would at least partially depend on what kind of deal he can get at 32, but it would be turning down a 46M+ 5th year, so it would have to be a hell of a contract.

HomeRunBaker · Jun 1, 2016

nighthob said:
He'll make most of it by signing a 1+1 anywhere, and then re-upping for two years the following summer.

That could get tricky without having his Bird Rights with the new team who presumably will be utilizing their existing cap space to field a contender. This is why I feel he's a lock to remain where he is to get to Tier 3 status. That......combined with his BR would assure he is maximizing his earnings. I can see Durant delaying the big contact for a year since there is such a jump by waiting until next summer however with his foot injury history I don't think he is going to do a LeBron and continue on short term deals......I would imagine he's going to want to lock in for a long-term max as soon as that big leap comes next summer.

jon abbey · Jun 1, 2016

Durant has a shoe contract with Nike that is in the range of 10 years/$300 million, on top of his salary and whatever other endorsement money he has. I don't think that the difference in potential contracts will be much of a factor, I think he will make his decision based on basketball and other non-financial reasons.

That being said, I think like most people, he will re-sign with OKC for a two year deal with an optout after next season, and both he and Westbrook will go elsewhere (almost definitely separately) in summer 2017 assuming they don't win a title next year.

nighthob · Jun 1, 2016

Cellar-Door said:
He'd still get more in OKC though, because he'd have Bird rights, so 5 years w/ 7.5% raises. If he went to a new team he'd be limited to 4 years at 4.5% raises.

How big it ends up being would at least partially depend on what kind of deal he can get at 32, but it would be turning down a 46M+ 5th year, so it would have to be a hell of a contract.

Regardless of who he plays for in 2017, he will be signing a contract the summer of '17 starting at around 1/3 of the cap. HRB was comparing a four year FA deal signed this year with a five year deal signed with OKC next summer, which is the wrong comparison, since he's signing a 1 + 1 this summer regardless.

The big difference in the deals will be the fifth year, but that may or may not be a consideration for him, because he can sign a 1+1 this summer, a 2+1 next summer and still get most of what he would get with OKC.

HomeRunBaker said:
That could get tricky without having his Bird Rights with the new team who presumably will be utilizing their existing cap space to field a contender.

Wouldn't that be an argument in favor of the team with $75 million in cap space next summer?

Celtics as a FA destination (broken from trade rumors)

Member

Homeland Security

Member

bet squelcher

bet squelcher

Member

Member

Member

Member

indian sweet

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

bet squelcher

Member

indian sweet

Member

protector of human kind from spoilers

Member

bet squelcher

Member

bet squelcher

Member

Member

Dorito Dawg

Member

Member

Member

canderson-lite

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Skrub's sympathy case

Member

Dorito Dawg

Member

Member

Member

indian sweet

Member

bet squelcher

bet squelcher

Member

Member

bet squelcher

Shanghai Warrior

Member