So? There's a first time for everything, and no one wants a selfish player like Carmello anyway.Carmelo is a CAA client who represents around 70 NBA players and I don't believe that Ainge has ever signed or negotiated a trade for a CAA client.
So? There's a first time for everything, and no one wants a selfish player like Carmello anyway.Carmelo is a CAA client who represents around 70 NBA players and I don't believe that Ainge has ever signed or negotiated a trade for a CAA client.
Read the thread. There are are multiple paths to having the cap space necessary to making that happen next summer. The C's could have as much as 30 million dollars in space. The cap will be 70-71 million dollars. Who will be taking up that space? Why is it impossible to add a second star after Love? Show your math.moly99 said:
Love on his own does nothing for us. We need two stars, and while we have a ton of draft picks in the next several years, the only ones likely to yield a top 30 player are our own . . . if we stay bad. Trading the sixth pick and more for Love still leaves us short one star player with no likely means of adding one.
I'm done with this discussion. These same points have been made over and over again.
Grin&MartyBarret said:Read the thread. There are are multiple paths to having the cap space necessary to making that happen next summer. The C's could have as much as 30 million dollars in space. The cap will be 70-71 million dollars. Who will be taking up that space? Why is it impossible to add a second star after Love? Show your math.
So instead you sit around waiting to hit on one through the lottery? Why is that a better plan?moly99 said:
It is possible that a legit all star comes to Boston through free agency, but I have no desire to bet the next half decade on Melo, Lebron or Chris Bosh signing here. That's the route the Knicks took, and when it fails you either end up overpaying for a second or third tier guy (Lance Stephenson, Luol Deng or the twilight years of Pau Gasol) or stuck in mediocrity with one star.
Are you saying the Celtics could trade for Love now, and still have up to 30M in cap space next summer?Grin&MartyBarret said:Read the thread. There are are multiple paths to having the cap space necessary to making that happen next summer. The C's could have as much as 30 million dollars in space. The cap will be 70-71 million dollars. Who will be taking up that space? Why is it impossible to add a second star after Love? Show your math.
The cap that year is 71 million. The first round pick gets you to 51. You renounce Bass because, of course. And more often than not guys in Green's position decline the option in favor of more guaranteed money, like Iguodala did last year. If Green opts in, you're at 59. But again, I don't know that he will, and if you want to move him he's expiring and it's not the hardest thing to do. Also, I don't know why you're re-signing Bradley. Ditto the mid-level guy. The entire notion of signing a guy just to make the team slightly more competitive in year one seems misguided to me. But I also don't really feel like going down the "will he re-sign road again," either.mcpickl said:Are you saying the Celtics could trade for Love now, and still have up to 30M in cap space next summer?
While I guess technically possible, seems extremely unlikely.
If they trade for Love, they're going to have to put some pieces around him right away. Both to convince him to sign next summer, and be competitive next season.
So I'd be stunned in that scenario if they didn't sign Avery Bradley longterm, add a good veteran to a midlevel deal, probably re-sign Rondo next summer.
I'll say the Celtics traded Sullinger, #6, #17 Bogans and Anthony for Love as a guess.
Leaving this for summer of 2015 on books.
Love/Rondo conservatively 30Mish
Bradley 5Mish
midlevel 5M
Olynyk 2M
Wallace 10M, as low as 3.3M stretched
You're already at 45Mish for 5 guys, and you'd need to add 7 minimum cap holds that'll put you around 49M.
And to even get that low you'd have to have all these things happen as well.
Jeff Green opts out of his contract, and you renounce his Bird rights.
Renounce Brandon Bass Bird rights
Choose nobody in the first round of the draft this year or next.
Add/keep no other players on more than a one year deal this season.
Seems unlikely they'd have enough cap space to add even one big ticket guy, unless you're just picking a different guy than Rondo and letting Rondo just walk away.
MakMan44 said:So instead you sit around waiting to hit on one through the lottery? Why is that a better plan?
Grin&MartyBarret said:One thing we all can agree on though, is that if Love wants to win immediately, he doesn't come to Boston. The ONLY way he agrees to come here is if he's bought in long-term.
Oh I agree with you that we need two......before you get the second you need to acquire the first. In this case, Love would be the first. He's the Pierce......not the Garnett.moly99 said:
Love on his own does nothing for us. We need two stars, and while we have a ton of draft picks in the next several years, the only ones likely to yield a top 30 player are our own . . . if we stay bad. Trading the sixth pick and more for Love still leaves us short one star player with no likely means of adding one.
I'm done with this discussion. These same points have been made over and over again.
Grin&MartyBarret said:One thing we all can agree on though, is that if Love wants to win immediately, he doesn't come to Boston. The ONLY way he agrees to come here is if he's bought in long-term.
Except that Boston isn't the only place he'd re-sign, and if one of them offers a high pick, he'll be going there instead and extending there for more money.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
If Love has bought into Boston long-term, his people should be getting that message to DA's people because in this case it would be in HIS best interest for the C's to make the #6 pick. It's currently the Cs best chance to get a cost-controlled contributing player.
Holy shit. What's so complicated about this? The Celtics, right now, are bad. Agree? So why would Kevin Love, if he wants to win now, come to Boston?moly99 said:
Because it doesn't stop us from signing somebody in free agency, and doesn't put a timer on the rebuild.
I have no objection to signing Love when he hits free agency in 2014/2015. If we have our draft pick at #6, another top 10 pick next year and Love then we have a real chance of competing. I similarly have no objection to signing Melo this offseason and pairing him up with somebody like Dante Exum.
If your first move in rebuilding the team is to make a trade, then you have a set period of time to flesh out the roster. (The length of the contract of the star you traded for.) This means that 1) if you fail to find another star in that time you are screwed, and 2) you hand a ton of leverage to the star you've just traded for. Conversely look at what happened with Portland after rolling snake eyes on Greg Oden and Brandon Roy. It sucked, but they were able to continue building through the draft and recover surprisingly quickly.
I just don't see why he would believe that, though, without any other blue chips guys on the roster and quite a few bad contracts still around. You proposal is that Love would sign a long term extension in the absence of a good supporting cast here. Why would he want to do that?
Okay, so my estimates are off by about 3 mil. Replace the number 30 with 27. Same principles apply.Brickowski said:The latest cap projection for the 2014-15 season is $63.2M.
No he isn't. He's the Garnett in that he is the player you get by giving up a significant chunk of your assets.HomeRunBaker said:Oh I agree with you that we need two......before you get the second you need to acquire the first. In this case, Love would be the first. He's the Pierce......not the Garnett.
Love isn't hitting FA. Minny knows he's gone and they will earn a decent return for him. Wherever he approves a trade to he's gonna be 95% to remain there to maximize his earning power. Still not sure why people aren't understanding this.
We sold out our final pieces for KG.....we wouldn't nearly be doing the same for Love. Once a deal was theoretically done we'd still have all those pieces in place to move for the KG.Cellar-Door said:No he isn't. He's the Garnett in that he is the player you get by giving up a significant chunk of your assets.
Either Rondo is the Pierce or there isn't one.
That is the undersold part of the Big 3 (and Miami's as well). They were built with moves to get 2 All-Stars next to an All-Star already on the roster.
Now it is possible Rondo is your 2nd, the other option is 2 more trades or a trade and a FA signing.
However if you are looking at past methods of Roster construction Love is the Garnett piece.
Edit- As to the above conversation. I don't for a minute think if they trade for Love they get rid of Rondo. Love may be willing to sign with Boston, but he isn't doing it for a long rebuild, he would be doing it with the assumption they keep Rondo and trade more future pieces to win now. He's been clear he doesn't want to be stuck in a Minnesota situation again, and rebuilding for half his contract is something he's not signing on for.
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
If Love has bought into Boston long-term, his people should be getting that message to DA's people because in this case it would be in HIS best interest for the C's to make the #6 pick. It's currently the Cs best chance to get a cost-controlled contributing player.
I'm about 101% certain that Minny has given Schwartz the go ahead to find them a deal. Tampering in cases like this as a non-starter when it's cleared and everyone is looking for the same result.Devizier said:
Except for the fact where Minnesota still controls his rights, that sounds like a fine plan. Also, this sounds an awful lot like tampering.
Nobody is saying we are going to be contenders overnight. We do need to establish younger building blocks then utilize our future assets with the 10 first rounders over the next 5 years to add to the cast. You have to begin somewhere and in the NBA, and in such a singular sport like basketball in general, you can start with one excellent player.Jed Zeppelin said:I don't know, emptying the barrel for KG still left them with Rondo, Perkins, and TA to fill important roles on cheap contracts. That doesn't kill a potential Love-led Celtics team or anything but it does make me nervous that the path to filling out the starting lineup is so unclear (not logistically, literally just that they need a lot of players and I don't know who they are). The Rondo situation adds some extra intrigue there as well. It would help if Ainge could immediately pick up a Sanders or somebody like that without giving up more than an asset or two.
BigSoxFan said:We now have people saying they'd prefer Gorgui Dieng to Kevin Love. This thread has officially jumped the shark.
Jumped it.... Climbed back over....and jumped it again. Seriously wtfBigSoxFan said:We now have people saying they'd prefer Gorgui Dieng to Kevin Love. This thread has officially jumped the shark.
I won't comment about Dieng as to me that's an absurd debate and not anything to do with Love.The Mort Report said:My issue with acquiring Love is not only do you have to give up a player(Sully) and probably at least 2 high picks, you then have to acquire a guy like Asik, surrendering more assets. Love will get a max deal, Rondo will get a raise after next year and Asik isn't cheap. I don't even want to talk about Green's salary. The rest of the roster will have to be filled with mostly minimum salary guys. This is obviously working in Miami, but Rondo/Love/Asik are not the big 3 in South Beach.
I'm not saying Love wont make them better, and I dont balk at the cost to acquire. We aren't all aiming for the Celts to make the playoffs and get knocked out in round 2 every year. With how the roster is currently constructed, and with what we have to add, I just dont see Love pushing the team to title contender. I mean is Rondo/Love/Asik really that much better than Rubio/Love/Pek? I'm sure a little, but that core couldn't get them out of the first round.
And again why is everyone thinking its nuts that I think Dieng is a better value and use the saved assets else where? Instead of calling it crazy, how about you explain your reasoning why you don't agree or are we turning into the comments section on espn.com?
HomeRunBaker said:Comcast reporting Love to be at DelFrisco's tonight with 2 buddies and then Sox game on Sunday.
Sounds like the parameters of a deal firmly in place.
BigSoxFan said:We now have people saying they'd prefer Gorgui Dieng to Kevin Love. This thread has officially jumped the shark.
HomeRunBaker said:This is the same Dieng who was stapled to the bench until the final 6 weeks of the season when there were nO other healthy options, correct?
Hey I'm not with the team but I'd suspect a 24-year old rookie if he had showed any ability would have had his number called over Turiaf and Dante Cunningham. I want to say I recall a Wolves game where they went small with a Love, Cunningham and Robbie Hummel frontcourt while Dieng was on the bench.
This is really key for all the moving pieces. Asik probably costs them the TPE and a future protected 1st/unprotected 2nd (the Jordan Crawford package). While he has a big salary number next season, he requires no 2015 commitment. That leaves DA flexibility to get Love re-signed for the max and then pick and choose which of Rondo, Green, Asik have value moving forward (and cap space plus future picks if you need to replace those positions).HomeRunBaker said:2. Asik will cost very little. The primary "asset" he would cost is the TPE that will expire if not utilized thus no longer rendering it an asset. He has no role in Houston and they are motivated to move him.
The Celtics had a bench forward guy named Brandon Hunter who had a great 5-10 games until opponents got a line on him and made the necessary adjustments. I take those numbers with a grain of salt.BigMike said:
And as a starter he played 15 games where he averages 12.2 pts, 12 rebs, 1.7 blocks, and 0.9 steals.
If I were the Timberwolves it absolutely would cost a someone a mid first round pick at least to get Dieng at this point.
On the other hand I am not sure if i were the Celtics I would give up an extra #1 to get him included in the deal
IT was, he said he wanted Dieng in the deal, but he realized it was unlikely. Then he said that for the cost, he'd almost prefer to spend a lot less to get Dieng on a cheap salary for 4 years than Love at a higher cost and a max extension. It wasn't crazy at all.Devizier said:
I read it originally as pushing for Dieng to be included in the deal, but that's probably just one of those tricks that the brain plays on you when it thinks something is obviously not real.
He said Dieng was the better value and asking for a debate as to why Love has more value in a trade then Dieng. It was a Dieng rather than Love debate he was posing.Cellar-Door said:IT was, he said he wanted Dieng in the deal, but he realized it was unlikely. Then he said that for the cost, he'd almost prefer to spend a lot less to get Dieng on a cheap salary for 4 years than Love at a higher cost and a max extension. It wasn't crazy at all.
HRB jumped on it but it wasn't TMR saying Dieng was better than Love, or even a major building block, but rather he was an interesting player who is locked up and might be interesting to trade for if the price was right.
Yeah he was at The Greatest Bar last night having his pic taken and plastered all over social media. He leaked it out that he'd be at Del Frisco's tonight and the Sox game on Sunday.Cellar-Door said:For what it is worth there will be a Globe story tomorrow that Kevin Love has been in Boston this weekend. Obviously he declined to speak to reporters.
HomeRunBaker said:I won't comment about Dieng as to me that's an absurd debate and not anything to do with Love.
I will however state my opinions.....
1. The "salary cap" has absolutely zero bearing on this trade or any future moves with the Celtics. If repeating this 9,000 times isn't enough I'll repeat it 9,001. We would NOT have to fill the roster will min-salary players as we have the existing salary slots of Bass, Green, Bogans hold of $4.5, etc), Wallace, and Rondo. The luxury tax "could" be in play for next season however Wyc has exhibited the willingness to pay the tax for a contender.....and it will be increasing over the next 2 years. Ainge will have tremendous flexibility moving forward based on how he has staggered these salary slots to expire each year.
2. Asik will cost very little. The primary "asset" he would cost is the TPE that will expire if not utilized thus no longer rendering it an asset. He has no role in Houston and they are motivated to move him.
3. Acquiring Love is making it clear that this is his team and the eventual trade of Rondo will follow shortly so you're not looking at a Love/Asik/Rondo Big Three. Asik is a limited player but an ideal fit next to Love while filling a MAJOR hole we had last year.
HomeRunBaker said:He said Dieng was the better value and asking for a debate as to why Love has more value in a trade then Dieng. It was a Dieng rather than Love debate he was posing.
Cellar-Door said:IT was, he said he wanted Dieng in the deal, but he realized it was unlikely. Then he said that for the cost, he'd almost prefer to spend a lot less to get Dieng on a cheap salary for 4 years than Love at a higher cost and a max extension. It wasn't crazy at all.
HRB jumped on it but it wasn't TMR saying Dieng was better than Love, or even a major building block, but rather he was an interesting player who is locked up and might be interesting to trade for if the price was right.
Agree and disagree. The only impact comes for signing a major FA. They will probably be limited to trades or exceptions until 2016-17.The Mort Report said:
Ok you are insane to think that giving a guy a max contract (that you also have to give up assets for) has no impact on the salary cap unless he is the only guy on the roster. Just rounding, the cap will be 60 million. Love gets 20, Rondo just this year 13, Asik 10. Then Green at 9, Bass 7, Wallace 10. That is 69 mil right there, before Rondo's raise. Max 74 million. So Anthony's 3.8 and Bradley's QO of 3.5, tell me where they have money. And this all includes none of the Sully's, Olynyks salaries. if you can show me a salary structure that works Id really like to see it
The Mort Report said:
For 4 years of control of a guy that CAN be a rim protector at say a 1/4 of the cost of Love, who is going to be a max salary player? That is harder to find than a scoring PF. If thats what you think the Celts need then we should just draft Randle
Cellar-Door said:Agree and disagree. The only impact comes for signing a major FA. They will probably be limited to trades or exceptions until 2016-17.
Also in your counting you have at least 1 player who will have to go out in trade match for Love. (Probably Bass).
They are fine for staying under the tax line though, at least for this season, even with a trade for Asik.
It's going to be both. They need to salary match.The Mort Report said:
Its more likely to be Sully than Bass. And we are talking about 8 of 15 on the roster
Euclis20 said:
Yeah, anytime you can get a 24 year old averaging 5 ppg and 5 rpg instead of a 25 year old averaging 26 ppg and 13 rpg, you've gotta take it. If you want a scoring PF who averages 25+ with shooting percentages of .46/.38/.82, you can just find one in the draft. Because they grow on trees. Not like a rim protector who has a grand total of 50 blocks in his NBA career. Those guys are hard to find.
The Mort Report said:
Again you are arguing without taking into account cost to acquire. And look at Dieng's averages when he got minutes the last 20 games or so(I cant seem to find the data). Love has had 50 blocks in one season, and since then never topped out at 35.
This thread just keeps on jumping back and forth over that shark.The Mort Report said:
Kevin Love... Julius Randle