Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Not Hitting Reset: The Celtics offseason thread


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
868 replies to this topic

#1 dolomite133


  • everything I write, think and feel is stupid


  • 5920 posts

Posted 22 March 2012 - 06:11 PM

Some of you might say this is too early. But I'm already thinking about the draft, free agency and next season's trade deadline. A couple of major questions pertaining to the offseason.

(1) Can Danny draft a rotation player or two (or perhaps even a future all-star)? Will we stand pat with our picks or package one or both of them in a trade? Should we target specific positions or just take the best player available? Given our current projected draft picks what players would you target?

(2) Can Danny successfully lure meaningful free agents to Boston this offseason? Will he even bother trying if it means offering multiyear contracts? Will players come to Boston to play with Rondo, or does he simply lack pull? Will KG and/or Ray come back, do we want them back, and if they continue playing will they chase the money and go elsewhere?

(3) Does Paul Pierce finish his career in Boston? Do we amnesty him for cap flexibility? Will he still have trade value next season, given his age and contract, and if so what should we reasonably expect in return?

(4) If we are in a similar positin (hovering arond the last playoff seed) at next year's trade deadline, do we blow it up then, or do we stay the course with the understanding that Rondo's prime years could be wasted on middling teams? What teams are potential trade partners for a Rondo deal?

(5) Can the Celtics take advantage of any other teams cap problems and potentially get something for nothing (or very little)? If so, what are some obvious situations we could exploit?

(6) What are the best and worst case scenarios, in your opinion?

#2 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5478 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 10:07 AM

Some of you might say this is too early. But I'm already thinking about the draft, free agency and next season's trade deadline. A couple of major questions pertaining to the offseason.


I dont think its too early, this is a huge offseason for the Celts, either we reload [probably not likely] or start rebuilding.

(1) Can Danny draft a rotation player or two (or perhaps even a future all-star)? Will we stand pat with our picks or package one or both of them in a trade? Should we target specific positions or just take the best player available? Given our current projected draft picks what players would you target?


If we make the playoffs, our 1st round pick will be in the 20s somewhere and the chances of finding a starter at that point is pretty slim. Perhaps someone slips and we luck out if we use the Clips pick, but that is still top 10 protected. As for moving up, even packaging those 2 picks wont get us that further up like maybe 3 or 4 spots up from the Clips pick, so I would prefer he take 2 rolls of the dice with the picks instead. IMO, best player available because this team needs to be completely rebuilt. And if a PG is the best player available thats fine because either he or Rondo could be traded.


(2) Can Danny successfully lure meaningful free agents to Boston this offseason? Will he even bother trying if it means offering multiyear contracts? Will players come to Boston to play with Rondo, or does he simply lack pull? Will KG and/or Ray come back, do we want them back, and if they continue playing will they chase the money and go elsewhere?


I dont think we have signed a real meaningful FA in the last 20 years, so I dont think that is changing this offseason. And for some reason, it doesnt seem as though soon to be FAs are itching to play with Rondo. Howard for example wanted to play with Paul or Williams, but you never heard him say anything about Rondo, and I cant think of one FA who has ever mentioned that they would like to play with Rondo.

As for KG and Ray, I guess it depends on if we reload or rebuild. If somehow Danny can do some reloading and get a significant FA to come here, then resigning Ray and KG might make some sense. If we are going to rebuild, start developing young guys to be assets for future trade, then resigning Ray and KG is foolish because they will just delay player development. Not that they cant help young guys develop, but every minute they play will be a minute taken away from a young player.

(3) Does Paul Pierce finish his career in Boston? Do we amnesty him for cap flexibility? Will he still have trade value next season, given his age and contract, and if so what should we reasonably expect in return?


This is going to be a very interesting issue to watch this offseason. I know Wyc loves Pierce, IIRC he asked Danny to rebuild around Pierce and not trade him when Danny was thinking of moving him to draft Paul. I'd say its 50/50 that Pierce ends his career here, considering Danny also didnt break up the BIg3 this year. This offseason I think he might have some trade value, especially if we used some of our cap space to take on a bad deal in the return package. As for his value, I think Danny would be looking for a 1st rounder and probably a young player similar to what he was looking for with Ray, but I think that will be tough to get. As a result the amnesty might actually make the most sense.

(4) If we are in a similar positin (hovering arond the last playoff seed) at next year's trade deadline, do we blow it up then, or do we stay the course with the understanding that Rondo's prime years could be wasted on middling teams? What teams are potential trade partners for a Rondo deal?


If we trade Rondo, I see us doing it during the draft and trading it to a team with a top pick so Danny could find a franchise player, because I am pretty sure he and Doc realize Rondo isnt a franchise player.

(5) Can the Celtics take advantage of any other teams cap problems and potentially get something for nothing (or very little)? If so, what are some obvious situations we could exploit?


I cant think of many deals where this has happened. Every once in a while we see a team with cap space take on a contract/player for just a 2nd round pick but I cant think of a real significant player who has been moved like this off the top of my head, Corey Maggette is the last one I can think of and a player of that caliber with that contract isnt really changing the fortunes of the franchise.

(6) What are the best and worst case scenarios, in your opinion?


Best case scenario which is a pipe dream is that Danny trades Rondo to move up in the draft, somehow convinces Deron Williams to sign here and somehow works some other magic to find another significant player to play alongside those 2.

Worst case scenario, we start over with a lot of cap room, Danny spends wisely and only on young developing players, and gasp.... we start the process of developing young players again which will probably be a good 3 year process at least. Fortunately the worst case scenario isnt that bad because Danny has very rarely signed players to awful deals that really hurt the franchise long-term, so that probably isnt happening. And I also believe Danny realize he cant just get this band back together and try again next year, he probably realizes the window has essentially closed, hence his whole 'If I were presented with good deals for our aging veterans' comment.

#3 KevinRiley28

  • 287 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 10:14 AM

Who cares if Rondo is your franchise player!?

He has a very team friendly contract. At that money he doesn't need to be a franchise player.

It'd have to be a hell of a package for Rondo considering there's really only about 6-8 players I'd give him up for in a trade straight up.

And bottom line, how many players are more entertaining than Rondo? I could live happily watching him play fast break basketball with young athletic players around him.

#4 the1andonly3003

  • 974 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 10:18 AM

Chances of drafting Austin Rivers?

Reports are that he is declaring and signing with an agent.

#5 irishtap03

  • 87 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 10:46 AM

(3) Does Paul Pierce finish his career in Boston? Do we amnesty him for cap flexibility? Will he still have trade value next season, given his age and contract, and if so what should we reasonably expect in return?



I'm not sure if Pierce finishes his career with the C's but there should be no reason to amnesty him. He still has value and should bring you back some sort of chip if you decided to move on. Team has more than enough flexibility moving forward unless Danny pulls a Pitino and signs a Travis Ford like contract.

#6 Brickowski

  • 3615 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 10:51 AM

I think you meant Travis Knight.

#7 Grin&MartyBarret

  • 3335 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 10:58 AM

(3) Does Paul Pierce finish his career in Boston? Do we amnesty him for cap flexibility? Will he still have trade value next season, given his age and contract, and if so what should we reasonably expect in return?


Ultimately, I don't think the Celtics amnesty Pierce for the same reason Washington hasn't amnestied Rashard Lewis. Without Pierce's contract on the books, they'd be well below the salary floor. So unless there's somebody on the roster/in free agency that they'd prefer that money go to, I think they'll just keep paying Pierce.

#8 the1andonly3003

  • 974 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 11:05 AM

Ultimately, I don't think the Celtics amnesty Pierce for the same reason Washington hasn't amnestied Rashard Lewis. Without Pierce's contract on the books, they'd be well below the salary floor. So unless there's somebody on the roster/in free agency that they'd prefer that money go to, I think they'll just keep paying Pierce.


Isn't there only 1 year left on Pierce's deal? How much longer does he want to play? Any chance KG and Ray re-sign for one more year and all three retire all at once, given a weak FA pool this offseason?

#9 dolomite133


  • everything I write, think and feel is stupid


  • 5920 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 11:39 AM

Isn't there only 1 year left on Pierce's deal? How much longer does he want to play? Any chance KG and Ray re-sign for one more year and all three retire all at once, given a weak FA pool this offseason?


Nope, Pierce has two years left at $16.7 and $15.3 million.

#10 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5478 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 12:29 PM

Ultimately, I don't think the Celtics amnesty Pierce for the same reason Washington hasn't amnestied Rashard Lewis. Without Pierce's contract on the books, they'd be well below the salary floor. So unless there's somebody on the roster/in free agency that they'd prefer that money go to, I think they'll just keep paying Pierce.


The floor is what $49Mish? They are at $34Mish with Pierce and would be at about $17Mish without him, so with him they have to add $15M, without him they have to add another $17M. In either scenario they have to add some major free agents, unless they use a different strategy.

I havent seen an NBA team do this yet, but hear me out because it seems like it could work. The Celts most likely arent signing an elite FA, but they have to spend some money. Why not sign some guys to very bloated 1 year deals? Basically go ML Carr and try to sign the 2nd tier of aging FAs just to get the floor, with the idea that you would most likely trade them at the deadline for more assets. While the FAs might not enjoy being traded during the season, the 1 year bloated deal could be enough of an incentive to get them to sign. So, for example, say we did the amnesty with Pierce and had to spend like $30M, give 1 year $10M deals to Nash, Brook Lopez, maybe Ray or Nick Young, etc basically non-elite FAs who probably are not getting more money than that elsewhere. When it becomes trade deadline time they might actually have enough trade value to get you some additional assets in return. Or worst case scenario, you let the contract expire. Just my opinion, but this seems much better to me than just signing some FA to a long term deal to add salary to get to the floor.

#11 dolomite133


  • everything I write, think and feel is stupid


  • 5920 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 12:43 PM

The floor is what $49Mish? They are at $34Mish with Pierce and would be at about $17Mish without him, so with him they have to add $15M, without him they have to add another $17M. In either scenario they have to add some major free agents, unless they use a different strategy.

I havent seen an NBA team do this yet, but hear me out because it seems like it could work. The Celts most likely arent signing an elite FA, but they have to spend some money. Why not sign some guys to very bloated 1 year deals? Basically go ML Carr and try to sign the 2nd tier of aging FAs just to get the floor, with the idea that you would most likely trade them at the deadline for more assets. While the FAs might not enjoy being traded during the season, the 1 year bloated deal could be enough of an incentive to get them to sign. So, for example, say we did the amnesty with Pierce and had to spend like $30M, give 1 year $10M deals to Nash, Brook Lopez, maybe Ray or Nick Young, etc basically non-elite FAs who probably are not getting more money than that elsewhere. When it becomes trade deadline time they might actually have enough trade value to get you some additional assets in return. Or worst case scenario, you let the contract expire. Just my opinion, but this seems much better to me than just signing some FA to a long term deal to add salary to get to the floor.


Or go the Collison route and front load a contract so they get $15M in year one and then $2M per year for the remainder. Would be a nice way of slotting in a complementary player for a set number of years while creating cap space for a major free agent signing down the road.

#12 the1andonly3003

  • 974 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 01:10 PM

Time to go and FINALLY get Tim Duncan

#13 Brickowski

  • 3615 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 01:17 PM

I don't think it's possible to discuss the off season intelligently until we know what has happened on draft night. Assuming that there are no draft night trades and the Celtics make their two picks, I would expect them to use their cap space to go after a decent RFA like Hibbert. Failing that, I would expect them to do their best to resign Garnett for less money plus a few bits and pieces.

If I were Ainge I would blow it up and go with Rondo+youth. If I couldn't get something for Pierce I'd amnesty him. But for all his talk I don't think Ainge has the balls, and even if he did, Grousbeck wouldn't let him.

#14 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5478 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 01:23 PM

Or go the Collison route and front load a contract so they get $15M in year one and then $2M per year for the remainder. Would be a nice way of slotting in a complementary player for a set number of years while creating cap space for a major free agent signing down the road.


Ah, thats right I forgot about that approach too. If we were to sign a role player though we would probably have to think of him as trade bait instead of a long-term role player, because for any FA older than 25 by the time we are contending again he will probably be close to the end of his prime. But this would also be a great way to create trade value for players. If we signed 2 youngish players like a Lopez, who are just entering their prime, amnestied Pierce and took the majority of the cap hit this year, we could either have a great cap situation and decent talent in 2013 or have a few young assets with very reasonable contracts to trade.

Either we are really onto something and NBA GMs are pretty stupid, or there is some reason this strategy doesnt work in the NBA.

#15 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28121 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 02:39 PM

If I were Ainge I would blow it up and go with Rondo+youth.


What do you mean by "youth" ? I'm assuming Rondo, Bradley, Johnson, Moore, and whoever the C's draft?

Just so I'm clear, folks are advocating signing guys to deals with the intent of trading them a few months later? Why wouldn't the teams who are going to want these guys in March be the ones signing them?

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 23 March 2012 - 02:40 PM.


#16 mcpickl

  • 2082 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 02:39 PM

Or go the Collison route and front load a contract so they get $15M in year one and then $2M per year for the remainder. Would be a nice way of slotting in a complementary player for a set number of years while creating cap space for a major free agent signing down the road.


Collison was a weird scenario. They didn't front load a contract paying him a big salary in year one then tiny salaries thereafter. He was already under contract and they used what was left of their salary cap space to raise his salary by 6.5M in the final year of the deal. Then signed him to a 4 year 11 million dollar extension.

In a new contract, the salary can't increase or decrease more than 10.5% from the first year salary for your own guy, or 8% for a FA signed from another team.

#17 mcpickl

  • 2082 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 02:47 PM

The floor is what $49Mish? They are at $34Mish with Pierce and would be at about $17Mish without him, so with him they have to add $15M, without him they have to add another $17M. In either scenario they have to add some major free agents, unless they use a different strategy.

I havent seen an NBA team do this yet, but hear me out because it seems like it could work. The Celts most likely arent signing an elite FA, but they have to spend some money. Why not sign some guys to very bloated 1 year deals? Basically go ML Carr and try to sign the 2nd tier of aging FAs just to get the floor, with the idea that you would most likely trade them at the deadline for more assets. While the FAs might not enjoy being traded during the season, the 1 year bloated deal could be enough of an incentive to get them to sign. So, for example, say we did the amnesty with Pierce and had to spend like $30M, give 1 year $10M deals to Nash, Brook Lopez, maybe Ray or Nick Young, etc basically non-elite FAs who probably are not getting more money than that elsewhere. When it becomes trade deadline time they might actually have enough trade value to get you some additional assets in return. Or worst case scenario, you let the contract expire. Just my opinion, but this seems much better to me than just signing some FA to a long term deal to add salary to get to the floor.


Why in the world would you amnesty Pierce, then sign guys to bloated one year deals to get to the salary floor? Why wouldn't you just keep Pierce?

I don't understand peoples' fascination with amnestying Pierce, he's worth his contract. He's still a very good player. And almost every person pumping this idea also says we aren't going to get any good FAs to come here with our cap space, so let's amnesty Pierce. Why? To create even more cap space which is supposedly overrated anyway? I don't get it.

#18 Brickowski

  • 3615 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 03:21 PM

What do you mean by "youth" ? I'm assuming Rondo, Bradley, Johnson, Moore, and whoever the C's draft?


Yes, plus Stiemsma and maybe a couple of younger guys signed as free agents. I'd be looking at guys like Ilyasova, Dragic, Jeremy Lin, Hickson, Amundson, Hawes, Asik, Oden. I would have no objection to bringing back Bass, Pietrus and/or Green, but only if the price is right.

Edited by Brickowski, 23 March 2012 - 03:21 PM.


#19 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28121 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 03:42 PM

I don't understand peoples' fascination with amnestying Pierce, he's worth his contract. He's still a very good player. And almost every person pumping this idea also says we aren't going to get any good FAs to come here with our cap space, so let's amnesty Pierce. Why? To create even more cap space which is supposedly overrated anyway? I don't get it.


thank you.

#20 Brickowski

  • 3615 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 03:55 PM

I don't want Pierce taking away minutes from the younger guys, and I want to stink for a couple of years. Pierce is too good for a rebuilding team that's looking to get into the high lottery. I'd do my best to trade him to a contender, but if I could not, I'd amnesty him and let him pick where he wants to play.

#21 collings94

  • PipPip
  • 1182 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 04:07 PM

I don't want Pierce taking away minutes from the younger guys, and I want to stink for a couple of years. Pierce is too good for a rebuilding team that's looking to get into the high lottery. I'd do my best to trade him to a contender, but if I could not, I'd amnesty him and let him pick where he wants to play.


Paul Pierce would pick to play in Boston. I would really hate to see Paul Pierce leave because he has been the face of the franchise for the past decade and like mcpickl said, there are not really any benefits to trading or amnestying Pierce.

#22 Brickowski

  • 3615 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 04:15 PM

I just told you what the benefits are. So what if he is the "face of the franchise?" He won't be its face for much longer, regardless of whether or not they keep him, trade him or amnesty him.

Sentimentality is a killer when you're trying to rebuild.

#23 wutang112878


  • SoSH Member


  • 5478 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 08:19 PM

Why in the world would you amnesty Pierce, then sign guys to bloated one year deals to get to the salary floor? Why wouldn't you just keep Pierce?

I don't understand peoples' fascination with amnestying Pierce, he's worth his contract. He's still a very good player. And almost every person pumping this idea also says we aren't going to get any good FAs to come here with our cap space, so let's amnesty Pierce. Why? To create even more cap space which is supposedly overrated anyway? I don't get it.


This is a great question, and there are 2 issues that I see. 1 - Pierce may have value, but his salary the next 2 years is between $16 and 17M, its very difficult to trade a player making that much without taking a bad long-term contract on in return. 2 - Unfortunately Pierce is not going to contribute in any way to the next championship the Celts win. Now, if we could trade him for something of value and not take on bad contracts, sure I am all for it. But if we put emotion aside for a second, I would rather amnesty Pierce, use the cap space to sign a young player and take the cap hit next year thus lowering his cap numbers in the following years, to either provide us with a young player with a good contract or a tradeable asset. And thats why using the amnesty with Pierce makes sense IMO anyway.

If Danny could have somehow 'reloaded' and traded Rondo for Paul, and then got Howard to sign here, then maybe hanging onto Pierce would make sense. But if we have to rebuild from the ground up and develop young assets, I dont see what role he is going to have on the team. Sure he could help young players develop [but thats also what we have coaches for], but beyond that he is taking cap space away and is taking developmental minutes away from young players as well.

The way I see it Danny set things up so he could basically start over after this year with very few long-term deals, and that was obviously intentional because he knew he had to start over. Now with the new CBA he has another option he could use and wipe the slate clean a little more, which is why in a way this kind of makes sense. It would really suck to do, but lets remember Danny also traded Antoine away and at the time Antoine was thought to be a very significant piece while he was a Celtic.

#24 ishmael

  • 407 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 07:33 AM

Something to keep in mind with Pierce is that the amnesty possibility is a "real" option. Much like an option on a stock, there is value to hanging on to that amnesty in the future. Specifically, I can see the following possibilities:
1. Pierce plays well the first half of next year, Celtics are playing .400 ball, and a contender is willing to give up an asset at that point in a trade.
2. Pierce plays out next season, Celtics miss the playoffs, and he decides to retire. The contract still comes off the books, but unlike the amnesty, Wyc does not have to pay out the cash in the final year.
3. If you don't amnesty Pierce in 2012, it still leaves you the option to use it later. That could be on Pierce in 2013. Or it could be a bad signing down the road. Remember, the amnesty can only be used on one contract during the life of this CBA. Pulling the trigger too quickly (cough, Billups, cough, Knicks) can definitely hamstring you in the future...

#25 Greenwell982

  • 133 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 08:23 AM

3. If you don't amnesty Pierce in 2012, it still leaves you the option to use it later. That could be on Pierce in 2013. Or it could be a bad signing down the road. Remember, the amnesty can only be used on one contract during the life of this CBA. Pulling the trigger too quickly (cough, Billups, cough, Knicks) can definitely hamstring you in the future...


The only issue there is you have to use the amnesty on someone who is on your books at the start of said CBA- so PP, Rondo, Bradley are really the only options going forward. It doesn't work for future signings.

#26 ishmael

  • 407 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 03:02 PM

The only issue there is you have to use the amnesty on someone who is on your books at the start of said CBA- so PP, Rondo, Bradley are really the only options going forward. It doesn't work for future signings.

OK, got it. Thanks!

#27 dolomite133


  • everything I write, think and feel is stupid


  • 5920 posts

Posted 25 March 2012 - 02:08 PM

Here are a couple of references for analyzing the Celtics offseason at this point in time (obviously subject to change).

The following are "projected" Celtics draft picks (taken from various mock drafts which, as you can see, were updated at different times).

Draftexpress.com (updated 3/23): 18. Terrence Ross, SF, Washington; 21. Tony Wroten, PG/SG, Washington (huh, just like Purdue last year?)
NBADraft.net (updated 3/23): 17. Tyler Zeller, PF/C, UNC; 24. Andrew Nicholson, PF, St. Bonnie
Mynbadraft.com (updated 3/19): 17. Kendall Marshall, PG, UNC; 24. Moe Harkless, SF, St. John's
Hoopshype (updated 3/23): 17. Tyler Zeller, PF, UNC; 24. Andrew Nicholson, PF, St. Bonnie
Thehoopsreport.com (updated 3/15): 18. Kendall Marshall, PG, UNC; 24: Myck Kabongo, PG, Texas (this is perhaps the stupidest mock draft yet)
Hoopsworld 1 (updated 3/25): 16. Meyers Leonard, C. Illinois; 21. Terrence Ross, SG/SF, Wash. (note, the thought of Fab Melo to Miami, as he suggests, could be worrisome to the rest of the league)
Hoopsworld 2 (updated 3/24): 15. Jeremy Lamb, SG, UConn; 20. Arnett Moultrie, PF/C, Miss. St.
hoopsaddict.com (updated 3/24): No teams, but projects what slot players will be picked at.

Here are 2012 free agent listings: hoopsworld and espn.

And here's the current Celtics salary breakdown.

And finally, an article on team cap space this offseason. It closes with an interesting comment: "It will be very interesting to see how teams spend their money this summer since the talent pool doesn’t seem to have the same depth as the total possible cap space available."

Edited by dolomite133, 25 March 2012 - 02:13 PM.


#28 swingin val

  • 984 posts

Posted 25 March 2012 - 03:55 PM

I thought an amnestied contract still can count against the salary floor?

#29 dolomite133


  • everything I write, think and feel is stupid


  • 5920 posts

Posted 25 March 2012 - 04:50 PM

I thought an amnestied contract still can count against the salary floor?


I believe it's the amnestied contract minus that player's contract with another team. Can anyone confirm if that's the case?

#30 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28121 posts

Posted 25 March 2012 - 08:27 PM

If the thought of Fab Melo ending up with the Heat was worrisome to the rest of the league, why wouldn't one of those worried teams draft him earlier? I think he would be a pretty massive project, and seems unlikely to make a big impact especially immediately. He's raw and had a lot of potential, but he's not that young, had no offensive game, questionable work ethic, and put up, what, 7 and 5 this past year?


#31 TFisNEXT


  • SoSH Member


  • 5396 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 10:22 PM

I don't want Pierce taking away minutes from the younger guys, and I want to stink for a couple of years. Pierce is too good for a rebuilding team that's looking to get into the high lottery. I'd do my best to trade him to a contender, but if I could not, I'd amnesty him and let him pick where he wants to play.


So instead we amnesty Pierce and then let guys with 1 year bloated contracts to get above salary floor take minutes away from the "youth"? I don't get it. Either way, they are going to have at least a couple highly paid players taking minutes from younger guys. It might as well be Pierce as he is still a pretty damned good player rather than some adequate veteran they sign who has no connection to this franchise.

#32 Brickowski

  • 3615 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 11:00 PM

No, I want to play the youngsters. I've never advocated signing guys with one-year bloated contracts.

#33 the1andonly3003

  • 974 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:27 AM

Maybe both KG and Ray decide they want to come back for one more year. Celts can technically offer them the most money. Is there another team under the cap who can offer as much money as the Celts?

Ray could probably come for 1 year, $8 million. KG 1 year, $12 million. Who else would you bring in for $20 million next season? Celts can still keep that cap space for the next season...

#34 Koufax

  • 1890 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 11:42 AM

I suspect that KG will be a priority signing for the Celtics. Ray not so much. Young players defending him don't seem to have as much trouble keeping up with him as they used to, and his defense is nothing special. I could see the Celts offering him $6M to come off of the bench.

#35 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 16029 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 11:58 AM

I suspect that KG will be a priority signing for the Celtics. Ray not so much. Young players defending him don't seem to have as much trouble keeping up with him as they used to, and his defense is nothing special. I could see the Celts offering him $6M to come off of the bench.


Who starts? Do they draft Austin Rivers to take his place?

#36 Derek's Friend

  • 206 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:17 PM

Here are a couple of references for analyzing the Celtics offseason at this point in time (obviously subject to change).

The following are "projected" Celtics draft picks (taken from various mock drafts which, as you can see, were updated at different times).

Draftexpress.com (updated 3/23): 18. Terrence Ross, SF, Washington; 21. Tony Wroten, PG/SG, Washington (huh, just like Purdue last year?)
NBADraft.net (updated 3/23): 17. Tyler Zeller, PF/C, UNC; 24. Andrew Nicholson, PF, St. Bonnie
Mynbadraft.com (updated 3/19): 17. Kendall Marshall, PG, UNC; 24. Moe Harkless, SF, St. John's
Hoopshype (updated 3/23): 17. Tyler Zeller, PF, UNC; 24. Andrew Nicholson, PF, St. Bonnie
Thehoopsreport.com (updated 3/15): 18. Kendall Marshall, PG, UNC; 24: Myck Kabongo, PG, Texas (this is perhaps the stupidest mock draft yet)
Hoopsworld 1 (updated 3/25): 16. Meyers Leonard, C. Illinois; 21. Terrence Ross, SG/SF, Wash. (note, the thought of Fab Melo to Miami, as he suggests, could be worrisome to the rest of the league)
Hoopsworld 2 (updated 3/24): 15. Jeremy Lamb, SG, UConn; 20. Arnett Moultrie, PF/C, Miss. St.
hoopsaddict.com (updated 3/24): No teams, but projects what slot players will be picked at.

Here are 2012 free agent listings: hoopsworld and espn.

And here's the current Celtics salary breakdown.

And finally, an article on team cap space this offseason. It closes with an interesting comment: "It will be very interesting to see how teams spend their money this summer since the talent pool doesn’t seem to have the same depth as the total possible cap space available."


Would they have the money to go out and sign Josh Smith for PF, Spencer Hawes at Center (check the numbers he's underrated and won't be resigned) and resign Jeff Green if they were to let KG and Ray walk? To me, along with Paul and Rondo that seems like a pretty damn good team with a good amount of younger players. If I'm wrong shoot me but I like this idea.

Edited by Derek's Friend, 27 March 2012 - 12:18 PM.


#37 Grin&MartyBarret

  • 3335 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:19 PM

Would they have the money to go out and sign Josh Smith for PF, Spencer Hawes (check the underrated numbers) and resign Jeff Green if they were to let KG and Ray walk? To me, along with Paul and Rondo that seems like a pretty damn good team with a good amount of younger players. If I'm wrong shoot me but I like this idea.


Josh Smith isn't a free agent.

#38 Koufax

  • 1890 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:22 PM

They could start Avery Bradley at the 2. He has a lot to offer, and he is cheap. In games where they need more height, Sasha(?)

#39 Derek's Friend

  • 206 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:23 PM

Josh Smith isn't a free agent.

Really? I saw him on a list on Hoopsrumors.com yesterday. They must have been mistaken. How about a flier on Kris Humphries then? Would be even Cheaper and apparently is willing to sign one year deals every year.

#40 Derek's Friend

  • 206 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:28 PM

They could start Avery Bradley at the 2. He has a lot to offer, and he is cheap. In games where they need more height, Sasha(?)

Bradley has really started to come around this year. He was a complete embarrassment earlier in the year even. Sash I pray to god is not what the future looks like for our back up 2.

#41 the1andonly3003

  • 974 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 04:03 PM

Bradley has really started to come around this year. He was a complete embarrassment earlier in the year even. Sash I pray to god is not what the future looks like for our back up 2.


This after 2 games...

Defenders are putting huge pressure on Avery as he is bringing the ball up the court

#42 Statman

  • 591 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 04:11 PM

Defenders are putting huge pressure on Avery as he is bringing the ball up the court


I hear what you are saying, but I think it is conventional wisdom that PG is the position that takes longest to develop in the NBA. Bradley's development handling the ball and avoiding silly mistakes has probably been slowed because his athleticism can compensate for a lot of deficiencies, but I see him improving his handle provided that he continues to see playing time.

While I don't know if he'll ever become a full-time PG his defense alone will make him far more effective than someone like Dooling who astounds me by continuing to see minutes.

Edited by Statman, 27 March 2012 - 04:20 PM.


#43 Brickowski

  • 3615 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 04:17 PM

IMHO point guards are born, not made. If a guy doesn't have pg skills when he comes into the NBA, he'll never be one. I'm not talking about dribbling, I'm talking about court vision and "feel" for the game. I don't know if Bradley has those instinctive skills or not--time will tell-- but I don't think improving his handle is the critical factor.

#44 Marbleheader


  • SoSH Member


  • 7087 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 04:51 PM

Chauncey Billups certainly took some time to develop.

#45 Koufax

  • 1890 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 05:00 PM

I was talking about Bradley as the 2, not the 1 and considering the possibility that Ray could come off of the bench as the 6th man. That takes care of the "bring the ball up" issue, which would be left primarily to Rondo. although Bradley could back him up some. The biggest issue with Bradley at the 2 is that there are players who are too tall for him at that position. Sasha (or some new person) could take minutes away from Bradley in those circumstances.

I am simply suggesting a low-cost way to deal with the 2-spot. Offer Ray a middling amount of money, saving it to bring on a 4 or a 5 with some talent.

Maybe it makes no sense to develop Bradley as a combo guard, but that seems to be what he is.

Finally, I believe that the Celts are something like 10-0 in games this year when Ray does not play. That tells me something.

#46 jmcc5400

  • 1828 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:20 PM

I think it was Mark that aptly characterized Bradley earlier this year as looking like the overwhelmed JV kid getting a run with the varsity. I fully concurred and thought this was a wasted pick, but the kid has really shown something in the last two months. His defense is outstanding. He's developing a grear rapport with Garnett on cuts to the rim (where he is finishing) and all and all playing with a ton of confidence. Last 30 games he's shot almost 55% from the field (71-130) and 86% from the line. He just turned 21. I'm convinced he is going to be a quality rotation guy for a contender for a long time. I'm glad Danny didn't dump him at the deadline in the search for a serviceable big,

#47 JohnnyTheBone

  • 4045 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 10:05 PM

I'm glad Danny didn't dump him at the deadline in the search for a serviceable big,

Here here! :bravo:

#48 Koufax

  • 1890 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 10:42 PM

Dumping Bradley for a big was never a possibility. If they needed to create a roster spot, there were plenty of other possibilities, starting with Marquise Daniels.

#49 Jed Zeppelin


  • SoSH Member


  • 15308 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 10:45 PM

Dumping him wasn't a possibility, but including him in a dumb trade for someone like Kaman probably was.

Edited by Jed Zeppelin, 27 March 2012 - 10:45 PM.


#50 Brickowski

  • 3615 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 10:48 PM

Chauncey Billups certainly took some time to develop.


Yes, and he's not the only one. Steve Nash was a backup early in his career. So was K.C. Jones. And they were both 4 year college players before entering the NBA.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users