RT @SamAmicoFSO: Celtics, Timberwolves among those expressing interest in former No. 2 overall draft pick Evan Turner (Sixers/Pacers).
2014 Celtics Offseason: Rebuilding Plans
- Thread starter Curtis Pride
- Start date
Celtics finishing deal for FA Evan Turner, sources tell Herald. He will get a portion of their mid-level exception.
— Steve Bulpett (@SteveBHoop) July 21, 2014
— Steve Bulpett (@SteveBHoop) July 21, 2014
WTF? He is like Jeff Green with less 3pt shooting, more rebounding and less upside. I'm befuddled.
Grin&MartyBarret said:
Sure, but they're in the luxury tax, and I think most assume they'll want to be under that line. You know, since they suck and all.
Bogan's money can be taken off the books at like anytime right? So I think they have some wiggle room. And I think the luxury tax is going up a bit too
According to Coon & CBAFAQ the luxury tax is $76M, so they have plenty of space.
According to Coon & CBAFAQ the luxury tax is $76M, so they have plenty of space.
Turner is a complete zero as a basketball player. Total filler guy. Plays no defense and is not exactly well-liked around the league by all accounts. He can go to the rim a decent bit and is okay shooting the corner 3, but he doesn't do it enough to make him valuable. He could be a solid 3-and-D guy if he ever wanted to be, but he doesn't.
wutang112878 said:
Well, he's cheap and young. Nothing is going to move the needle for this team in '14-'15 anyway, so might as well take a shot on a buy-low opportunity. Not that Turner is who I would have chosen, but I guess if it helps keep Wallace off the court...
MainerInExile said:
The Celtics are above the salary cap, but not close to the luxury tax level ($77M).
Right now the Celtics are around $64M for committed salaries for next season. The reports say that Turned received a "portion" of the MLE so even if we give him a generous $4M, the Celtics are still about $9M under the luxury tax threshold.
This about sums it up I suppose. Veteran bench filler to shuffle the deck and add some depth to play competitively. He's this years version of Humphries......one lost his playoff minutes to Reggie Evans corpse prior to landing here and the other to Rasual Butler's.Jed Zeppelin said:
Funny stat.....of the 74 NBA players who have played 8,000+ minutes over the past 4 seasons Turner ranks 74th in PER.
Jed Zeppelin said:
I think thats the biggest thing for me, I just dont see any upside with him because I didnt see him doing a single thing at an above average level.
Turner is this year's Jordan Crawford. Maybe Stevens can "coach him up" and we can get some assets for him at the deadline since he has a reasonable contract.
Besides, if I had to have Turner at, say $3M as opposed to Johnson or Babb at just under 1, I think I'd rather have Turner. Unless I'm not trying to win any games.
Where are you getting that from? According to Shamsports, they currently have 18 players under contract and $78M in salary commitments.
However the point still stands that they aren't going to pay the luxury tax - as the $78M includes Bogans ($5.3M) and Johnson, Babb, and Pressey (total approximately $2.6M).
Besides, if I had to have Turner at, say $3M as opposed to Johnson or Babb at just under 1, I think I'd rather have Turner. Unless I'm not trying to win any games.
Statman said:
Where are you getting that from? According to Shamsports, they currently have 18 players under contract and $78M in salary commitments.
However the point still stands that they aren't going to pay the luxury tax - as the $78M includes Bogans ($5.3M) and Johnson, Babb, and Pressey (total approximately $2.6M).
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
I was using the team salary page from Hoopshype.com which I just now noticed did not include Avery Bradley's new deal at roughly $7.1M a year.
In any event, we aren't close to hitting the luxury tax threshold because I am guessing that we'll dump Bogans, Johnson and Babb soon.
Fyi, Pressey's $816k is now guaranteed since we didn't waive him by the deadline last week. We have 15 players under contract but still plenty of time to continue reshuffling the deck (of the Titantic).wade boggs chicken dinner said:
I expect at least one move to occur that would keep Johnson around.
well, since Rondo is DEFINITELY getting traded, Celts don't actually have to worry about the luxury tax...this move definitely spells the end of Rondo here...just like drafting Marcus Smart was, just like re-upping Bradley, just like trading for Thornton
in all seriousness, hopefully Celts can stash Young and Smart up in Maine, while the likes of Bass, Green and Wallace can play up their value to be traded before the end of December
in all seriousness, hopefully Celts can stash Young and Smart up in Maine, while the likes of Bass, Green and Wallace can play up their value to be traded before the end of December
Rondo is definitely getting traded?
I agree this is the end of the Rondo era, but there seems to be a good chance the Celtics can't get a return for him at all, and just keep him rather than take what Danny thinks is a subpar return.
I agree this is the end of the Rondo era, but there seems to be a good chance the Celtics can't get a return for him at all, and just keep him rather than take what Danny thinks is a subpar return.
I think there is trouble finding a trading partner that wants him either on a one-year deal or at a new max deal. Ainge may find himself stuck with a lame duck PG knowing he's out the door which could make for a difficult situation for Stevens in coaching the team.bowiac said:
If Ainge really does want Stevens as his leader long-term he better do something so he isn't still coaching a sub-30 win team the day Coach K retires. This isn't Doc who was only coaching the Celtics on a long-term deal......Stevens will have some very attractive options in the next year or two.
First off, I dont think Stevens is that kind of guy. Look at the loyalty he had to Butler, which probably wasnt paying the top dollar he could have got at other college jobs and was a difficult place to recruit. Plus you dont typically walk away from NBA contracts because legally you cant just break them like you can in college, and the guys who have gotten out of NBA deals to go back to college are usually guys like Tim Floyd who the team basically wanted to fire anyway so it was really a blessing for the team that he was leaving.
Stevens signed a 6 year deal which is absolutely unheard of for a first time NBA coach. He knew the challenge he was going to have coming in, and he signed up for it anyway. If he really wanted a better NBA situation, he is smart enough to realize the better path would have been to to upgrade schools for 3-4 years to a bigger school to draw more attention and then make his NBA move, but he didnt. The guy is the 2nd coming of Red with Red's loyalty so he isnt going anywhere. Ok, my man-crush got the best of me on that last part, but I dont think he is going anywhere
Stevens signed a 6 year deal which is absolutely unheard of for a first time NBA coach. He knew the challenge he was going to have coming in, and he signed up for it anyway. If he really wanted a better NBA situation, he is smart enough to realize the better path would have been to to upgrade schools for 3-4 years to a bigger school to draw more attention and then make his NBA move, but he didnt. The guy is the 2nd coming of Red with Red's loyalty so he isnt going anywhere. Ok, my man-crush got the best of me on that last part, but I dont think he is going anywhere
Well he was already that kind of guy just 3 years after signing a 12-year extension with Butler when he stated, "First and foremost, I'm loyal to Butler." Last I checked, 12-year extensions were unheard of as well.wutang112878 said:
There is no such thing as loyalty in this business and the "challenge" Stevens accepted came with a 300%+ raise. Let's see the spin should Coach K have any health issues again this season.
In the end it really doesn't matter......I imagine Stevens role is fungible and Ainge can fill it pretty easily. The real issue is the players on our roster.
Lets put the loyalty aside. Can you come up with an example of an NBA coach that the team didnt want to fire who bolted for college in the last 10 years? I cant, so I think the point is moot.
On his role being fungible, what are you implying: That head coaches in general are fungible? Stevens is just an average head coach, hence he is fungible because those are easy to find? Or while your roster sucks your head coach doesnt matter? Or something else. Because I would disagree with all 3 of those points.
Just some evidence on Stevens ability, I'd remind folks of the quote Popovich, who is certainly one of the best in the game, had regarding Stevens:
On his role being fungible, what are you implying: That head coaches in general are fungible? Stevens is just an average head coach, hence he is fungible because those are easy to find? Or while your roster sucks your head coach doesnt matter? Or something else. Because I would disagree with all 3 of those points.
Just some evidence on Stevens ability, I'd remind folks of the quote Popovich, who is certainly one of the best in the game, had regarding Stevens:
There are a number of great college coaches who failed in the NBA for a number of reasons. It's well known that Stevens takes his losses home with him rather than leaving it at the arena which is a big red flag. We haven't ever seen an NBA coach have a college offer on the table that dwarfed his NBA salary......that doesn't mean it can't/won't occur in the future.
Finally yes.....with rare exceptions an NBA coach is as fungible as the teams 7th/8th man and with NBA players more and more being individual entities with their own trainers/team of advisors it is far different than coaching is at any other level. Very little control.
Finally yes.....with rare exceptions an NBA coach is as fungible as the teams 7th/8th man and with NBA players more and more being individual entities with their own trainers/team of advisors it is far different than coaching is at any other level. Very little control.
HomeRunBaker said:
right forgot about Pressey, txs. Personally I would have cut him and tried to resign him - don't see that there's a huge market for him - but the Cs love him so good for him.
With today's 15-man rosters and Pressey's performance last year he'd be scooped up in a heartbeat. Let's not forget this is a league where Ish Smith is still hanging around and Russ Smith is signing a guaranteed deal.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
wutang112878 said:
As HRB said, Stevens takes losing very hard. I can't find it right now, but I thought there was a report where the Cs front office acknowledged that if they don't get Stevens a better team soon they might lose him because he doesn't handle the losing very well.
Hope that's wrong.
I'd say the veteran coaches don't as they understand the importance of life balance, that it's 1 game of 82, and the NBA is a business.Rudy Pemberton said:
Doc had flown directly to one of his sons college games following losses while the rest of his team is on a different flight home on several occasions during his time here.
HomeRunBaker said:
What you cited specifically though is NBA coaches who get out of existing contracts and leave for college. My contention is that this is pretty rare, unless their team wants to fire them which the Celtics do not want to do with Stevens.
Now for mediocre teams the coach isnt that important, although I'd argue that Stevens really helps put his players, even the crappy ones he has, in a position to succeed. However, for good teams that are actually going for a title I think the head coach is more important than you are suggesting. Its pretty rare that teams can come close to making a run without a good coach or tremendous talent (ie OKC). I wouldnt want to lose Stevens because with the logic of 'he is easy to replace'. Take a look at some recent hirings and cite some examples where more often than not teams can go hire a difference maker, I think those coaches are pretty difficult to find. If you cant then I think we can conclude difference makers coaches are tough to find which is why I want to keep Stevens.
Miami and OKC have had tremendous success despite having mediocre at best head coaches.....they did so because the star players affect the results much more than the coach does at the NBA level. Difference makers are once in a generation coaches, Larry Brown and Popovich are two......it's precisely why I couldn't care less if Stevens stays or goes. As long as Ainge puts out a 28-win product we will remain a 28-win team with or without Stevens.wutang112878 said:
I think there are a handful 'difference making coaches' in the NBA at any given time, although they do it in different ways: Pop is X&O whereas Doc is a 'bond players together' type of coach. I also think Stevens has a chance to be in that category although we wont see it if we have a crappy team. So agree to disagree on that.
Using OKC and Miami with 2 of the best players on the planet, as an example of why coaches dont matter seems a little silly.
Using OKC and Miami with 2 of the best players on the planet, as an example of why coaches dont matter seems a little silly.
Which part? That a coach isnt that important for mediocre teams, or that Stevens puts his players in a position to succeed?
I think Stevens coached a bottom 3 roster into the 6th pick last year. Not sure what that means going forward but there was a bunch of shit misfitting parts and he squeezed a decent run out of them for a bit.