Celtics Plan, Summer 2021
- Thread starter lovegtm
- Start date
Are people that anti-offense? I'd be all over Ingram; it's unfortunate that he didn't get a player option on the 5th year, so there are still 4 years left there. Maybe if he and Zion are just too bad defensively together?
I see the benefit of Tatum+Brown as being the ability to play limited offensive or defensive players. You can play a Romeo type at guard and still score enough points, or a weak defensive scoring guard and put up more than you give up. Ingram would fit fine/great in that imo.
Things get a lot more open if he's playing with Brown/Tatum/Horford and a good-shooting guard. It's pretty easy to maximize a variety of limitations around the Jays.
He was a locker room issue this past year as well. They had to bench him as punishment.
https://www.tsn.ca/talent/raptors-send-strong-message-to-siakam-with-benching-1.1571242
I don't want any part of that contract between the on-court and off-court issues. Along with Simmons, he is someone that maybe a Kemba swap would have worked for, but there's no deal with the current roster.
New Orleans is interesting--I tend to think the "Zion is unhappy" stuff is not baseless, and they are going to their third coach in three years. Griffin certainly is feeling the heat to mix things up/improve.
I guess the net is that Zion's view of Ingram is almost totally unknown and critical to determining whether they'd be willing to move him. After sending Holiday away, I tend to think they want to build around those two.
I guess the net is that Zion's view of Ingram is almost totally unknown and critical to determining whether they'd be willing to move him. After sending Holiday away, I tend to think they want to build around those two.
His shooting is weird. He has 2 seasons shooting decently from 3 while upping his volume significantly and then last year drops off a cliff, meanwhile steadily improving his FT% to 83% last year. Which version do we believe going forward? I have to think the general offensive dysfunction in Toronto last year impacted his shooting quite a bit. He could be a buy low opportunity but at the same time what is in it for Toronto to sell him at his nadir of trade value?
People have slowly come around on Ingram but he was pretty hated for awhile. He's not even a finished product himself. Plus I think he has the tools to play defense. Maybe playing alongside Tatum would motivate him to play D.
Anytime Boston plays NO, it's clear as day Tatum and Ingram are amped up. Like you said though, he's signed for awhile. Tatum seems to have quite a few friends around the league. Players want to play with him. That should benefit the C's. It'll be interesting to see what they do. I hope they keep room for a max guy at the end of 22/23 if they can't acquire that player via trade prior to then.
I was not a fan at all in his first few years, but I think that his inefficiency and shoddy defense was a product of a pretty dysfunctional environment at least in part. The Ingram of the last two years is a baller who involves his teammates.
he's improved a ton (esp shooting wise) and agree that in the right situation he could play better D as he fills out. Would love him as the 3rd star
Hated him when he was drafted. Still hate him now.
Is there legit SLO-Mo Anderson talk or was that one-time Hoops Hype clickbait? If Memphis really wants to move on from him this would be a nice landing spot and adding one of the highest IQ guys in the league in his prime.
Where I am today has Felger and Mazz on. I’m being forced to listen to them go to one of their clowns behind the glass who said the Celtics would have to trade Jaylen Brown AND FIVE 1st round picks to Washington to get Bradley Beal. This shit is torture.
A lot of it is youth. He was getting exposed as a 19 and 20 year old 30 minutes a game. People hated on Booker his first few years too.
Young players producing is a good sign, even if it's inefficient production.
Yeah Booker is a great example, also a suboptimal environment for a young guy. I gave him slack for having to be the #1, and the inherent inefficiency that comes with being that guy as a young guy. But he wildly exceeded my expectations 2 years ago and is a legit lead dog now.
Is there Kyle Anderson talk?
That would be surprising, he played a lot of key minutes for Memphis this season. Ime is really familiar with Kyle, maybe KA's a Celtic target now?
I'm a big fan of Slo-Mo, he was part of my off-season wish list
shortlist of teams that potentially could use a veteran 5 (like TT): Sacramento, Charlotte, Memphis, San Antonio, Bulls
Brad would need to move quick, the 5's musical chair music doesn't last long in the off-season.
Maybe with Ainge gone. C's don't really match with Indiana though. I think it's going to be Smart. Maybe see if TT can be traded for Delon Wright or something.
I'd be looking at more back up targets rather than a starter.
Probably too young, but would De'Anthony Melton be available? They have Ja.
Would they have interest in TT? Melton's a bit further along than Killian, anyway.
Would they have interest in TT? Melton's a bit further along than Killian, anyway.
I was listening to the podcast Winning Plays (hosted by Brian Robb and Ryan Bernardoni) after the Kemba trade and Bernardoni mentioned that there were trade talks during last season centered around Smart for SloMo. Robb agreed and said he heard the same things.
Obviously that time has passed but it does seem like the Celtics as an organization like SloMo
If that is the case I’d imagine this would result in a larger multi-player deal. Tyus Jones is surely wanting out and he would fill a major need on this team especially without Smart here. So maybe something like Smart, Nesmith, Thompson for SLO-Mo and Jones? Those numbers should work and if they don’t fillers could be added. Pags would be so happy that Brad got him another Dukie!
https://theathletic.com/2667978/2021/06/23/coaching-search-the-focus-on-neil-olsheys-offseason-cj-mccollum-on-the-trade-block-blazers-mailbag/
Jason Quick at The Athletic suggests Smart for McCollum may be in the cards. That would have to work out to something like Smart, TT, and Nesmith, plus a pick I'm guessing. Could CJ run point? If so, the offense suddenly becomes very good.
Jason Quick at The Athletic suggests Smart for McCollum may be in the cards. That would have to work out to something like Smart, TT, and Nesmith, plus a pick I'm guessing. Could CJ run point? If so, the offense suddenly becomes very good.
Kemba, Kyrie, and IT weren't pure points, either, so CJ could probably handle it. It would be good for the offense, but the defense, not so much - it would just eb bringiong back the same problem that has haunted the Celtics throughout the IT-Kyrie-Kemba era.
I would be surprised if the Celtics went in this direction, especially with Stevens and Udoka, who are both reputedly defense-first, at the helm. CJ is elite offensively but almost, but not quite as bad defensively (the metrics for defense being as bad as they are). Were they to acquire McCollum for Smart, I suspect Fournier would be on the way out too - its hard to see those two sharing the floor. It would be a layup line for the opposing team as soon as they got the switch.
I like McCollum but I think he would drive a lot of people in this forum crazy. Setting aside the fact that he had some concerning injuries (back) for a 30 year old bucket getter, he disappears for stretches and I also wonder how he might adjust to a much more intense market like Boston.
Finally, McCollum has shown that he can take on a bit more playmaking, especially over the past few seasons but you really want him off the ball to take advantage of his full skill set.
I am not sure I see that from Portland's perspective, though the upgrade defensively is part of what they need and I suppose that is the rationale....you add in Smart, lean more offensively on Powell and Simons, and add TT to (again) upgrade Kanter's defensive minutes against bigger teams like Lakers out west.
Also makes a soft Celtics team even softer.
Also makes a soft Celtics team even softer.
I don't expect it to happen, but I also think the team would be fine on D if CJ is their worst defender in the starting unit. Until this season they were OK with that 3some you mentioned, and they are all at least as bad.
CJ is definitely better than Smart overall, but I'm not sure he is so much better that you want to pay 3 years, 100M for his age 30-32 seasons. Smart on 1/14M has to have more value around the league than the CJ deal.
Agreed.
Tyus Jones, with Ja/Melton/ Brooks/Allen doing more ball-handling in the playoffs, needs to be moved, much like TT should be moved. You could swap those two. Not a splashy move but helps both teams
I'm hoping Marcus might thrive under Ime's defense-first approach
I can see the argument Memphis can/should move Allen.
The question on my side is would Memphis really want TT? He'd be a bench player there, maybe 12-15 min a night. And given his age and experience he be expected to provide veteran leadership for a very young team. Is that really something he would thrive doing?
Yep, Augustin was the guy that stood out to me when I was looking at potential targets a few days ago. That’s basically the caliber of guy they can expect, anyway.
No thanks on Grayson Allen, money works with Tyus.
Memphis is a fringy playoff team now.
Those teams lap up vets with playoff experience like a dog goes back to its vomit.
His teammates hate him because he shoots too much and never passes the ball. I'd worry about fit but he might come at a discount.
Uninformed cap question- Is there a scenario where if we don’t spend on middling players this season we are more able to add a star next season? Or are we stuck if middling land for a while?
I only ask because I don’t see many of any of the names being bandied about for the short term seemingly moving the needle. If it’s all we can do so be it but if NOT adding these guys now would give us more flexibility soon I wonder if it’s worth it
I only ask because I don’t see many of any of the names being bandied about for the short term seemingly moving the needle. If it’s all we can do so be it but if NOT adding these guys now would give us more flexibility soon I wonder if it’s worth it
The problem with keeping a pile of open cap space is that you empty out the back half of the roster and the players you can get in free agency are older. Unless you have a line on a guy like Lebron it's a hard game to play. Of course you can sign a second tier guy and hope it works out and/or trade him for the younger player you really want, but that takes some finessing.
Colin Sexton seems like a guy that is going to bounce around and then emerge later as a sixth man providing offense to a pseudo contender. Cleveland is trying to sell high based on his good stats, bad team profile.
Hypothetically yes.
Realistically no.
They'd have to let Fournier walk, let Smart and TL walk, not pick up a bunch of guys' options (Langford, Williams, maybe Nesmith) cut Horford, cut Brown likely... and even then they wouldn't have a 10 year max slot.
It would not be a good way to operate. If a star wanted to come here working out a S&T would likely make more sense, and that way you aren't wasting 2021-22 or chancing wasting the rest of Brown's extension. It's a pretty high risk move for not a huge upside.
This doesn't really answer your question but here is a short article describing the Cs cap space right now: https://www.masslive.com/celtics/2021/06/examining-celtics-trade-and-free-agency-options-for-offseason-after-kemba-walker-deal.html
There are a couple of ways of getting a "star" in the NBA. The most common are clearing cap space or trading for one. As mentioned above, for this year, clearing cap space isn't realistic because the Cs would have nothing to put around the Jays, which I'm sure wouldn't make them happy. As such, the more realistic path to a third star is to trade for one on a "buy low" scenario - or, as mentioned multiple times in multiple threads - if a star forces his way to BOS.
However, since the KW trade, the Cs could potentially have cap flexibility next year since only a portion of Al's contract is guaranteed and might have additional flexibility the year after that, depending on how Brad plays this year. One of the big issue will be if the Cs sign Fournier to a multi-year contract.
Just to put some numbers behind it:
If the Celtics were to let everyone play out their contracts and then let all their free agents walk, they would have only Tatum, Brown, and Horford's contracts on the books. Based on Spotrac's projections of a $112M salary cap, that only gives them $30.6M in space, not nearly enough for a max contract veteran. If they cut Horford, they gain $12.5M, bringing them to roughly $43M. But then they would have an incomplete roster charge for 8 players that would take up about $7.5M of that space, and a cap allocation for their 1st and 2nd round draft picks which I think would eat up another $7M or so, so they are back down to $30M or so.
If Stevens were to really go nuclear, they could trade Horford and their first round draft pick during the upcoming season for an expiring, whom they then renounce once the season ends. In that case, the only remaining players would be Tatum and Brown. That gives them a total of $57.5M, less $9.5M for 10 roster spots, given them $48M to work with, more than enough for a max contract. Of course, Stevens would have to essentially gut the roster in the hope that a unicorn free agent signs here, and then hope that he can find enough ring chasers and castoffs to make up a balanced roster.
Thanks for articulating this so clearly.
It’s been discussed as an option here, often caveated by stating it’s not a likely outcome, but from my understanding unless there is a preexisting agreement with a top 10ish player (and maybe even if so?) the risk of renouncing effectively the entire roster and abandoning all prior investment in the draft makes it nigh unto impossible.
Is there a cap allocation for 1sts if you don't have a 1st round pick?
I'm not in favor of gutting for a guy that doesn’t exist, but just curious.
I'm not in favor of gutting for a guy that doesn’t exist, but just curious.
If you don't have a 1st you don't have a hold for it, though it would be more accurate to say there is no hold for draft picks until you make the pick, FA is after the draft, so you either have a player you drafted and a cap hold for him based on what pick, or you have no hold because you didn't draft anyone. Just the normal empty roster spot hold if you have an empty roster spot (equivalent to a 2nd rounder).
Thanks. Makes sense.
Do the empty roster holds only go up to 13 men or the full 15? My memory is that it's the former.
Exactly. It's one thing for a tanking team in a big market to align the stars so that they can convince LeBron come over and waste a year while they plan to bring in Anthony Davis the next. Hell, even the Lakers plan didn't work out perfectly at the beginning; they had enough space to bring in a 3rd star (at slightly below the max IIRC) and were hoping that they could use that space to bring Kawhi over. Turned out that while Kawhi was happy to go to LA, he wanted to go under the condition that he be the alpha.
The Celtics payroll flexibility next offseason can still come in handy in a trade (either S&T or an old fashioned trade of players under contract). It will be on Stevens to figure it out, but there should be enough players available that he should be able to make it work.