2014 Celtics Offseason: Rebuilding Plans
- Thread starter Curtis Pride
- Start date
I dont know shit about NBA salaries. But why does it seem that the Lakers, Knicks, and other elite teams seem to be in play for the biggest free agents while we are not considering they have a lot more high priced talent? A LOT more. Why arent we in on anyone significant?
Other than Melo to the Knicks, to my knowledge, nobody thinks either the Lakers nor the Knicks are really in play for any of the top free agents.bsj said:
The Lakers are making a lot of noise about it, but that's largely because apart from Kobe, they don't have a team. The Celtics do not actually have much cap room, as they're paying Rondo, Wallace, Bass, and Green almost $40M this year. They have six more guys on guaranteed deals as well. The Lakers have Kobe, Nash, Sacre, and Randle. That's it. They have more cap room and more roster spots to fill. Plus they don't want a slow rebuild because they have to carry Kobe's corpse around.
bowiac said:
I would think we would want to trade Rondo before we signed Thomas, and in that scenario I agree Thomas makes a lot of sense. But I havent heard any rumors about Rondo being moved so I have to imagine nothing is imminent there and I would think Thomas might sign in the next week or so. I know Danny loves to have a ton of options on the table but after the draft I just figured we would most likely be keeping Rondo until the deadline.
Maybe Ainge sees Thomas as an energizer off the bench, like Nate Robinson or Eddie House, and not as a Rondo replacement. If Ainge does move Rondo, I hope it's for someone a little taller than 5-9.
Thomas already has an offer for 3/$24 on the table from Detroit, apparently. If the Celtics end up beating that offer, that's a pretty expensive 6th man.
On a contender he'd have value as a scorer on the 2nd unit. On this team, assuming Rondo traded and Bradley signing w Philly, he and Smart will be your starting backcourt. Quite a different role but adds much needed firepower to our offense.Brickowski said:
Kevin Pelton gives his top 30 Free Agent rankings, projecting straight value over the next 3 seasons. Greg Monroe ranks highest of guys vaguely associated with the Celtics. I really dislike Monroe, as he strikes me as a very pointless kind of player who is just good enough to grade out okay, but doesn't fit with any kind of good team I can imagine, as he provides neither defense nor spacing and neither efficient nor volume scoring. I can't tell if this is a stylistic thing, or something substantive however. I can see the same critique of Chandler Parsons, who is neither a great shooter, nor a great defender, and may be pointless while largely resembling a very good player. I much prefer Parsons of the two however.
Greg Monroe reminds me of what Jeff Green would be if Green were a 5.bowiac said:
He can fit in physically to matchup and provide some production in spurts but leaves you wondering why there isn't much more to the package.
Thomas would be a mistake, IMO.
There are a lot of short point guards out there. We can get that guy with a late draft pick or find one in the d-league without having to pay him top dollar. It doesn't make a lot of sense to invest heavily in a backup point guard.
I agree, with the caveat that this is largely a product of the modern NBA. Moose would have been a useful player in the 80's. Big men who don't either spread the floor or contribute on defense don't have a place in the current game.
There are a lot of short point guards out there. We can get that guy with a late draft pick or find one in the d-league without having to pay him top dollar. It doesn't make a lot of sense to invest heavily in a backup point guard.
bowiac said:
I agree, with the caveat that this is largely a product of the modern NBA. Moose would have been a useful player in the 80's. Big men who don't either spread the floor or contribute on defense don't have a place in the current game.
I think Thomas is better than a backup, and much better than someone we can find with a late draft pick or from the d-league, but that's the rub really. If you think he's just a backup on a good team, then look elsewhere. I think he's a much better player than someone like Nate Robinson or something, and can be a starter on a good team.moly99 said:
If Rondo is going I like Thomas (depends on price and what we get for Rondo of course), we look like we plan to re-sign Bradley, and with Smart and Bradley, we need at least 1 scoring guard to be in the 3 guard rotation. Thomas can score, though not much of a defender when you always have him out with one of the two really strong defenders you can hide him.
I hate the idea of Monroe. We already have 2 PF/C who can't really defend, Monroe is more of the same. He's probably better than both Sully and Olynyk, but at the price he'll command I don't think you can invest that in a good offensive PF who has no room to grow and can't defend.
I hate the idea of Monroe. We already have 2 PF/C who can't really defend, Monroe is more of the same. He's probably better than both Sully and Olynyk, but at the price he'll command I don't think you can invest that in a good offensive PF who has no room to grow and can't defend.
I agree with all this. With the Smart drafting you don't want him chasing PGs all over the floor as his greatest strength is defending in iso which is best utilized against a scorer who will have the ball as shot clock is winding down. Paired with Lil Zeke he can defend off the PG plus have a scorer in the backcourt with him.Devizier said:
Is it ideal? Hell no.....this is not a very good NBA backcourt today. The thing is that each of these players can define their role and what their usage will be in 2-3 years while we lose again this season.
I'm guessing that Patty Mills would give you 90-95% of what Thomas does for less money. Maybe Mills is a lock to resign with SA, but maybe not.
Devizier said:
I know Thomas is better than a d league player. I'm saying that Thomas is ideally a backup point guard and scorer off the bench, and that role can be filled with a d league player or a second round pick. (Thomas himself was the 60th pick in 2011.) He can be a starter and top scoring option for a bad team, but that's obviously not what we are shooting for.
HomeRunBaker said:
Wouldn't it be much simpler to find a shooting guard to pair with Smart?
Thomas can be a starter and top scoring option on a bad team. I hate to break this to you.....but the Celtics right now are a bad team. Should this change over the next couple years he can easily be shifted to that "Microwave" role.moly99 said:
The best scoring guard available in a reasonable pay range is Thomas. That's what he does. The pure SG market is not a particularly strong one around the league which is why you see more and more two-PG lineups and scoring PGs playing the 2.
different players. Patty Mills took 69% of his shots from outside 16 feet. He also had a much much lower AST%.Brickowski said:
Patty Mills was a guy who brought the ball up, then mostly waited to take an open 3. Thomas initiated the offense to a much greater extent.
Manu Ginobili was the 58th pick. Lets split the difference and draft that guy instead. Deal?moly99 said:
What makes Thomas good isn't that he's a scorer off the bench, but rather that he's very good and efficient at it.
I'm the guy who thinks Tiago Splitter is actually great and isn't just a product of the Spurs system, but even I'd be wary of buying into Patty Mills based on seeing him succeed on the best run team in American sports.
Sure they're different players but they play the same position. Mills defends very well, plus he's bigger than Thomas. You always worry about 5-9 players being posted up.
Sure, but so do Greg Monroe and Andre Drummond. They do totally different things on the floor. They are looking at Thomas because they could use a scoring PG who can create offense. Mills is a classic bench player, or PG for a team like the Heat where someone else (Lebron) creates the offense and his job is to stand around waiting to take a 3.Brickowski said:
HomeRunBaker said:
Making a bad team marginally better is not an advantage, though. If we can't find a couple of star players in free agency or trades we need to tank. Signing decent players to large contracts in an attempt to reach for the 8th seed is the worst case scenario for this offseason.
Yes, $8M is too much if that's in fact what Detroit is offering. The Pistons are also rumored to have a 3 year deal in place with Jodie Meeks for $19-20M. If SVG wants to play that kind of money for that backcourt, with Drummond's max deal just around the corner and the Josh Smith albatross around his neck, then by all means let him do it.
It isn't necessarily only the guards. This is a pick-n-roll league to exploit mismatches. When a 5-9 guy is in the starting lineup teams can gameplan to isolate Mills to switch onto bigs that would naturally force double teams. That's a lot of pressure to place on the other players and your defense with a starting unit. This is why it's so crucial to be able to matchup physically on the floor if you're on the first unit.Devizier said:
moly99 said:
I understand the logic that goes into this kind of thinking. But you have to remember that the Celtics need to put an actual product on the floor. We can play armchair general manager all we want, but there's a real consequence to putting crap on the floor year after year while accumulating lottery picks. In other words, basketball is not poker. You can't play "aggressive tight" and wait for your chance to score, because the chances take a year to materialize and there's gate and television revenue to consider in the interim. That's without considering the fact that some of us (and probably the owners and players) don't like watching (participating in, owning) a team that sucks.
Grin&MartyBarret said:
Grizzlies didn't make Davis a QO so he's a free agent. He'd be a great fit for the Heat, so hopefully he's not a big enough name for Riley to think about.
Isn't that a red flag that the Grizz didn't want any part of him? This sounds like a guy people have seen do a few good things against their team in limited minutes vs the second team. Does Davis get minutes over any of our bigs? I mean I guess he'd be ok in Faverani's role but that isn't anything to get excited about from what I've seen from him.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
Good post. It isn't like Lil Zeke is going to catapult us to the playoffs on his own. He'd also have a nice trade-friendly salary slot for future flexibility as well.Devizier said:
I think they didn't want to take the chance on him accepting the QO for $4.5M for 1 year. He probably isn't worth that as a bench player for them.HomeRunBaker said:
HomeRunBaker said:
I'm not saying that Ed Davis is currently a good basketball player. But he is big, he is athletic, and he has certain skills that are hard to find. For example, statistics say that he is one of the top rim protectors in the league - http://www.grizzlybearblues.com/2014/5/20/5730576/grading-the-2013-2014-memphis-grizzlies-ed-davis-pf - statistically better than Ibaka and Hibbert. So while I don't think he gets minutes over any of our bigs, he should get minutes simply because he does different things than KO or Sullinger (etc.).
It may be for him - and for Vesely (who has a really good steal rate), to a much lesser degree, or some other big that is languishing on a bench somewhere - that Davis could become contributing members of a basketball team if they are given regular minutes. Given where the Cs figure to land next, and how hard it is to find even serviceable bigs, it seems prudent to give one or another a chance.
Besides, what's the downside? If Davis or whomever the Cs audition really does suck, that just means they lose more games, right?
No I agree with all this and his skillset is a much better fit than Kardashian who played below the rim which was redundant with Sully, Bass and Olynyk. It's hard for me to get excited about him though which is my cross to bare because you are right that he's a good fit.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
Now I did see A LOT of Vesely and am extremely confident that he isn't an NBA player. Completely clueless defensively, offensively and I've seen him shoot two airballs from the line in one game.
He's a good rim defender, but it also a case of pretty small sample sizes. He only faced 3 FGA/G, Ibaka faced 9.5, Hibbert 9.8. Considering that he played a lot of minutes as the other guy next to Marc Gasol (therefore taking the lesser interior threats), I would guess it isn't a great indicator of his ability to do so on another team, especially at C.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
I'd say he's a nice guy if you can get him cheap, but I wouldn't expect him to be a defensive anchor playing big minutes.
I'd like to see him for something in the range of 3-4M a year tops.
"log-jam" in backcourt grows (4 good players at least)
CelticsBlog @celticsblog 9m
Boston Celtics Re-Sign Avery Bradley per Boston Herald: http://sbnation.com/e/5628056
CelticsBlog @celticsblog 9m
Boston Celtics Re-Sign Avery Bradley per Boston Herald: http://sbnation.com/e/5628056
Oooof. I really hope I'm wrong about Bradley. I just don't think he's nearly as good defensively as advertised, at least not when he's guarding 2s. I guess he can play with Smart, with Smart guarding SGs, and Bradley guarding the PG, but that seems like an a waste.
Yes, otherwise resigning Bradley for that number makes no sense (unless the deal is the first step in a sign-and-trade).
Is it really a log-jam?gmogmo said:
We have Rondo a PG
Smart a rookie who can play either guard
Bradley a 2 guard (undersized)
and Young a rookie who can play 2, but also 3.
That seems like a pretty normal guard rotation rather than a logjam.
We need to start hoping we can win some playoff games 70-69 or something if that's the starting back court.bowiac said:
There just has to be another move.
Absolutely hate spending that kind of money on players who aren't difference makers in any way. I guess they have to roster somebody, but all I see is a decent defender who doesn't score particularly well making the kind of money rumored to be going to Isaiah Thomas (who at least can score well at the NBA level).
I feel like this is a fungible player we're now tying cap space up for.
I feel like this is a fungible player we're now tying cap space up for.
There will be a ton more moves before we have to worry about winning playoff games. This is asset accumulation mode not competing for championships so the roster balance doesn't have to be ideal at this stage.Dan to Theo to Ben said:
Not a logjam yet, but if you add Thomas it certainly starts looking like that.
Would have loved Avery back here at about half the money. Have to trust Ainge and coach on this, but wowzers.
Would have loved Avery back here at about half the money. Have to trust Ainge and coach on this, but wowzers.
I freaking hate this. He isnt improving in general and especially his shooting ever. I dont know about Danny but I like "shooting" guards who can shoot. And the dude cant cover 2s and cant play the point, so he doesnt have a natural position on the floor. And Smart is sort of like that too until he can prove he can play the point. So for a variety of reasons I freaking hate this. And I didnt even get to the fact that at $8M he is basically market value for the production we are going to get and thats IF he stays healthy which he also hasnt been able to do. I cant think of a single thing I like about it
This seems to only make sense in the long term if Smart can handle 2-guards defensively and can play the point.