Carry on my Hayward Son: Gordon to Charlotte for 4 years, $120M

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,090
I think we overrate how much Championship teams rely on "veteran rotation players".

The Lakers had Kuzma and Caruso in their top 8 for minutes, Raptors had Anunoby and Terrence Davis in their top 7,

The Celtics will likely be more than fine with the current bench, and certainly will be fine for most of the regular season. If all of the young guys look bad they can go get someone in the buyout market or in a trade mid-season.

There is no compelling reason to go get someone now unless they are a probable major contributor, and those guys already moved.

Edit- this is to me a better and deeper team than the one that we saw in most of the playoffs (with Hayward out), and it doesn't need to sacrifice flexibility to bring in a new 8th man. We have tons of the kinds of players who on most teams would be clear rotation pieces to see what they have, we have been lucky enough to not need them, but at some point you're ill served not letting the kids play some regular season basketball, and in this year in particular the regular season is not as important, seeding isn't going to matter much.
 
Last edited:

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
3,512
Do you think it's likely that two of them will become a reliable every night rotation guy this year?

Because they were a wing short last year, and they are minus one from last years rotation.

There will still be plenty of playing time available for these young guys to develop even if they bring in a "middling retread"

Smart/Tatum/Brown aren't going to play every game this year.
I think the Celtics will get at least 18 quality mpg from Nesmith. Grant should be counted on for more than the 15 mph he put in his rookie year.

Although he’s not well liked on this board, Semi is trusted by Steven’s to play at least a dozen minutes a night. His offense is frustrating, but he was a plus shooter from three last season . Romeo is injury prone, but if he can get on the court he could take a second year leap.

I don’t see anyone available who fits into their salary structure and is good enough to move the needle much. I’m ok with playing these young guys, and adding a ring chaser at the deadline if needed.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
35,080
I think we overrate how much Championship teams rely on "veteran rotation players".

The Lakers had Kuzma and Caruso in their top 8 for minutes, Raptors had Anunoby and Terrence Davis in their top 7,

The Celtics will likely be more than fine with the current bench, and certainly will be fine for most of the regular season. If all of the young guys look bad they can go get someone in the buyout market or in a trade mid-season.

There is no compelling reason to go get someone now unless they are a probable major contributor, and those guys already moved.
I don't think anyone overrates anything. We have a difference of opinion about the value of experience. My view is that C's could have used another experienced rotation wing/guard with some offensive skills and, at least, the ability to play team defense this past playoff run - in addition to Hayward. IMO they still need that player if they really want to compete. Others here think this team is set.

That said, Kuzma and Caruso were, effectively, veterans this past season. Kuzma averaged ~33 MPG in the '18-19 season and Caruso, had played in 52 games averaging ~18 MPG in his two seasons prior. Contrast that with Romeo who played in only 32 games last season averaging ~11 MPG. In short, the Lakers already kind of knew what they had in those two - Langford is clearly a big question mark and hanging your hat on him coming off his recovery to assume regular NBA rotation minutes is a lot to ask.

Also, while you are correct that the Raptors played Terence Davis a fair bit this last season (likely the last NBA he will ever see unless Toronto retains him after allegedly beating on his partner) it was out of necessity and, imo, Boston shouldn't be thin just because the Raptors did it and got away with it until the playoffs. That seems like a recipe for a suboptimal outcome.

They certainly should see what they have and its entirely possible they roll with what they've got. But there is a reason most of the players getting regular playoff minutes had some experience.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,951
Santa Monica
The Celtics will likely be more than fine with the current bench, and certainly will be fine for most of the regular season. If all of the young guys look bad they can go get someone in the buyout market or in a trade mid-season.

There is no compelling reason to go get someone now unless they are a probable major contributor, and those guys already moved.
Agreed, pickings are slim at the moment. See which teams underperform and turn into sellers by the trade deadline. I'm not entirely sure how much Harden is bought into playing hard for Tilman Fertitta. I see tire fire smoke out of Houston.

I expect Brad to be fine handing regular-season minutes to deep bench options like Semi & TL, considering they saw time in the playoffs.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,090
I don't think anyone overrates anything. We have a difference of opinion about the value of experience. My view is that C's could have used another experienced rotation wing/guard with some offensive skills and, at least, the ability to play team defense this past playoff run - in addition to Hayward. IMO they still need that player if they really want to compete. Others here think this team is set.

That said, Kuzma and Caruso were, effectively, veterans this past season. Kuzma averaged ~33 MPG in the '18-19 season and Caruso, had played in 52 games averaging ~18 MPG in his two seasons prior. Contrast that with Romeo who played in only 32 games last season averaging ~11 MPG. In short, the Lakers already kind of knew what they had in those two - Langford is clearly a big question mark and hanging your hat on him coming off his recovery to assume regular NBA rotation minutes is a lot to ask.

Also, while you are correct that the Raptors played Terence Davis a fair bit this last season (likely the last NBA he will ever see unless Toronto retains him after allegedly beating on his partner) it was out of necessity and, imo, Boston shouldn't be thin just because the Raptors did it and got away with it until the playoffs. That seems like a recipe for a suboptimal outcome.

They certainly should see what they have and its entirely possible they roll with what they've got. But there is a reason most of the players getting regular playoff minutes had some experience.
I mean, sure Kuzma played a lot the year before, because the team was horrible, if he'd been on the Celtics he'd have been in Maine. At some point the Celtics need to see what they have in the young guys, players don't develop if you don't play them, and wasting firsts by burying them behind league average or worse players for multiple years during the regular season is bad roster management. We're talking generally limited roles in low-leverage situations. You can add later in the year if you need to, but the Celtics aren't "thin", they are inexperienced. That's what happens when you have tons of 1sts and use them, you end up with a young high upside bench. In order for them to reach that upside they need reps.

I think that's the key difference. The Celtics actually have a ton of talent depth. I mean you're a good 12 deep on 1st round talents, most teams don't have that type of talent on the bench, now they may have experienced vets, but experience is generally overrated. And deep bench is definitely overrated given that rotations in the games that matter tighten up to 8 or 9. The Celtics top 7 is set, you have 1-2 playoff spots with a ton of talent fighting for it. It makes a lot of sense to use at least the first half of the season to see what you have, if you really need a change then... you can make it, but until then you're burning assets that might be much more valuable later, and hindering your youth progression at the same time.
 
Last edited:

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,513
I think we overrate how much Championship teams rely on "veteran rotation players".

The Lakers had Kuzma and Caruso in their top 8 for minutes, Raptors had Anunoby and Terrence Davis in their top 7,

The Celtics will likely be more than fine with the current bench, and certainly will be fine for most of the regular season. If all of the young guys look bad they can go get someone in the buyout market or in a trade mid-season.

There is no compelling reason to go get someone now unless they are a probable major contributor, and those guys already moved.

Edit- this is to me a better and deeper team than the one that we saw in most of the playoffs (with Hayward out), and it doesn't need to sacrifice flexibility to bring in a new 8th man. We have tons of the kinds of players who on most teams would be clear rotation pieces to see what they have, we have been lucky enough to not need them, but at some point you're ill served not letting the kids play some regular season basketball, and in this year in particular the regular season is not as important, seeding isn't going to matter much.
I think we actually overrate how much Championship teams rely on "rookie and second year players".

Guys, really, I think the Celtics can afford to move on from Javonte Green and add one proven veteran on the wing so they don't have to count on 100% unproven players to play those bench minutes. Again, the kids will still have plenty of opportunity if one guy is added.

Being deeper than last years playoff team without Hayward isn't saying much. They had to play their starters into the ground, then they coincidentally collapsed late in a bunch of playoff games.

Agreed, pickings are slim at the moment. See which teams underperform and turn into sellers by the trade deadline. I'm not entirely sure how much Harden is bought into playing hard for Tilman Fertitta. I see tire fire smoke out of Houston.

I expect Brad to be fine handing regular-season minutes to deep bench options like Semi & TL, considering they saw time in the playoffs.
How does this connect to Boston using a possible TPE now or not?
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,951
Santa Monica
I think we actually overrate how much Championship teams rely on "rookie and second year players".

Guys, really, I think the Celtics can afford to move on from Javonte Green and add one proven veteran on the wing so they don't have to count on 100% unproven players to play those bench minutes. Again, the kids will still have plenty of opportunity if one guy is added.

Being deeper than last years playoff team without Hayward isn't saying much. They had to play their starters into the ground, then they coincidentally collapsed late in a bunch of playoff games.



How does this connect to Boston using a possible TPE now or not?
Houston could quickly turn into sellers. I'd give it a couple of months (trade deadline) to see what's available. Some good team will get hit with injuries to a key player or two (ie GSW) and then move their role-playing vets

Roster isn't complete, Danny will need to tinker at some point. Maybe Danny gets that TPE and has something lined up?
 
Last edited:

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,456
around the way
This may be a dumb question but how does using/not using the TPE before/during this season affect a "reset". If we're trying to escape bigtime repeater penalties, then this is the year to do it, right? If that's true, wouldn't the plan be to pass on using the TPE unless THAT GUY is available? Like that guy who can legitimately be perceived as a significant difference-maker? Because if it's wing depth only, and that wing depth costs us a chance to reset the repeater clock, then that's where I think that the long view points to a dice roll that 1-2 of these kids is the shit and is actually better than that random wing anyway.

Apologies if this misreads the current financial situation.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,090
I think we actually overrate how much Championship teams rely on "rookie and second year players".

Guys, really, I think the Celtics can afford to move on from Javonte Green and add one proven veteran on the wing so they don't have to count on 100% unproven players to play those bench minutes. Again, the kids will still have plenty of opportunity if one guy is added.

Being deeper than last years playoff team without Hayward isn't saying much. They had to play their starters into the ground, then they coincidentally collapsed late in a bunch of playoff games.
I don't think anyone is saying we can't afford to move on from Green. The question is....is there a pressing need to move assets right now to do it? I would say, not only is there not, there are real incentives to not make a move right now:
1. The market is thin, most players who were going to move for reasonable prices have done so already.
2. The early season is a good time to see what we have in the young guys, and what if anything we need in a vet
3. There is reason to think that there will be more players available as we approach the deadline.
4. We likely want to stay below the tax if we can.

Nobody is saying we should turn down a great deal no matter what, but I haven't seen a single example of a player we would add into the TPE who would make a difference and is available, and jumping on a mediocre vet just to say you have a "proven" guy is being impatient and a poor use of assets.

This may be a dumb question but how does using/not using the TPE before/during this season affect a "reset". If we're trying to escape bigtime repeater penalties, then this is the year to do it, right? If that's true, wouldn't the plan be to pass on using the TPE unless THAT GUY is available? Like that guy who can legitimately be perceived as a significant difference-maker? Because if it's wing depth only, and that wing depth costs us a chance to reset the repeater clock, then that's where I think that the long view points to a dice roll that 1-2 of these kids is the shit and is actually better than that random wing anyway.

Apologies if this misreads the current financial situation.
Yes this is a correct read.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,513
This may be a dumb question but how does using/not using the TPE before/during this season affect a "reset". If we're trying to escape bigtime repeater penalties, then this is the year to do it, right? If that's true, wouldn't the plan be to pass on using the TPE unless THAT GUY is available? Like that guy who can legitimately be perceived as a significant difference-maker? Because if it's wing depth only, and that wing depth costs us a chance to reset the repeater clock, then that's where I think that the long view points to a dice roll that 1-2 of these kids is the shit and is actually better than that random wing anyway.

Apologies if this misreads the current financial situation.
Depending upon if Teague signed for the BAE or minimum, they are somewhere around 17-18M below the tax right now. I believe, as you do, they'll want to stay under the tax this year. But I also think they would be more likely to use the TPE to add a role player this year, rather than wait to see if THAT GUY is available, because I think THAT GUY would likely be more than 18M and would just be a rental because there is no realistic way to add another huge salary to Tatum/Kemba/Brown next offseason. Even for the folks thinking Kemba will get moved, he'd bring back a different big salary, or if you dumped him into someones cap space, a 2nd TPE so you wouldn't need the first one.

I don't think anyone is saying we can't afford to move on from Green. The question is....is there a pressing need to move assets right now to do it? I would say, not only is there not, there are real incentives to not make a move right now:
1. The market is thin, most players who were going to move for reasonable prices have done so already.
2. The early season is a good time to see what we have in the young guys, and what if anything we need in a vet
3. There is reason to think that there will be more players available as we approach the deadline.
4. We likely want to stay below the tax if we can.

Nobody is saying we should turn down a great deal no matter what, but I haven't seen a single example of a player we would add into the TPE who would make a difference and is available, and jumping on a mediocre vet just to say you have a "proven" guy is being impatient and a poor use of assets.
I also don't think there is a pressing need to move assets, real ones anyway, and I'm not arguing that.

I suspect there will be higher priced vets on teams that are contenders right now, like a Trevor Ariza, that would be available for little to no assets just to take their salary off another teams books, much like Golden State just took Kelly Oubre off of OKC for just a top 20 protected 1st and a second.

I also dont agree more players will be available near the deadline. I think the bulk of moves happen before the season, and come the deadline it turns into a sellers market where you can't even pry a Davis Bertans loose because those teams are now thinking even if they can't sign them, they'll keep their Bird rights and sign and trade them in the summer.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
35,080
One other thought about waiting is that the play in aspect means that teams who are potential marginal sellers may not be as aggressive at the deadline. It would suck to realize you are thin in-season and the only wing help you can get is, say, in the form of a premium priced (in terms of what the Cavs are asking) Dante Exum.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,090
Depending upon if Teague signed for the BAE or minimum, they are somewhere around 17-18M below the tax right now. I believe, as you do, they'll want to stay under the tax this year. But I also think they would be more likely to use the TPE to add a role player this year, rather than wait to see if THAT GUY is available, because I think THAT GUY would likely be more than 18M and would just be a rental because there is no realistic way to add another huge salary to Tatum/Kemba/Brown next offseason. Even for the folks thinking Kemba will get moved, he'd bring back a different big salary, or if you dumped him into someones cap space, a 2nd TPE so you wouldn't need the first one.



I also don't think there is a pressing need to move assets, real ones anyway, and I'm not arguing that.

I suspect there will be higher priced vets on teams that are contenders right now, like a Trevor Ariza, that would be available for little to no assets just to take their salary off another teams books, much like Golden State just took Kelly Oubre off of OKC for just a top 20 protected 1st and a second.

I also dont agree more players will be available near the deadline. I think the bulk of moves happen before the season, and come the deadline it turns into a sellers market where you can't even pry a Davis Bertans loose because those teams are now thinking even if they can't sign them, they'll keep their Bird rights and sign and trade them in the summer.
Ok, see this is where we really differ.... I think Trevor Ariza does nothing to improve your title chances and that's just straight up wasting the TPE. I'd rather play the offseason market and chance it expiring than burn it right now to take on a 35 year old player whose ceiling is 9th man on an ECF team.

I see us as a team at the start of a good length window with Tatum and Brown, and I think we should work like we want to win as much as possible in that window, and I think part of that is long-term thinking. this TPE is one of the few chances we'll have to add a big $ player without moving a starter. Burning that for a near retirement bench wing doesn't do much for me. Ariza isn't changing this team's ceiling, and he barely moves the floor either. He's a waste of an asset simply by using the TPE. You did nothing to your chances this year, and decreased your chances of putting up good teams from 2021-2023.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Add me to the crowd believing that a TPE would be best used mid-season.
In my view, there are two reasons for this:
  1. It allows management to see what this year’s team needs by the time the playoffs roll around. Yes, it may be a wing, but maybe that wing needs to be more D than 3. Or maybe more 3/4 than 2/3. Or maybe it needs to be a 1/2 because Teague is a bust or Kemba’s knee crapped out.
  2. It gives more minutes now to all the unproven guys in the 7-12 part of the roster.
    I think many of us are forgetting that Brad tends to play 10-12 guys most nights during the regular season. And between injuries and scheduled rest, that really means seeing 12-15 guys at some point (and more like all 17). Brad doesn’t need a known quantity vet in December, he needs minutes to figure out who, if anyone from 7-17 can make the leap into the playoff rotation the way Grant did last year.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,513
Ok, see this is where we really differ.... I think Trevor Ariza does nothing to improve your title chances and that's just straight up wasting the TPE. I'd rather play the offseason market and chance it expiring than burn it right now to take on a 35 year old player whose ceiling is 9th man on an ECF team.

I see us as a team at the start of a good length window with Tatum and Brown, and I think we should work like we want to win as much as possible in that window, and I think part of that is long-term thinking. this TPE is one of the few chances we'll have to add a big $ player without moving a starter. Burning that for a near retirement bench wing doesn't do much for me. Ariza isn't changing this team's ceiling, and he barely moves the floor either. He's a waste of an asset simply by using the TPE. You did nothing to your chances this year, and decreased your chances of putting up good teams from 2021-2023.
I mean, he'd be the 6th or 7th man on this current Celtics team, so I guess I like their chances of being an ECF team in the present much more than you do.

And again, I think people are aiming way too pie in the sky thinking they're going to bring in another longterm big salary guy. I just see no way that happens.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,090
I mean, he'd be the 6th or 7th man on this current Celtics team, so I guess I like their chances of being an ECF team in the present much more than you do.

And again, I think people are aiming way too pie in the sky thinking they're going to bring in another longterm big salary guy. I just see no way that happens.
I think he'd be at best the 8th man, but I can see others being higher on him even if he's well into his decline phase.

I don't think it has to be "big salary" but i think there are good players who aren't about to retire on multi-year deals who will be available midseason or in the early offseason, guys in that 10-15M a year range.

I think I'm also particularly reticent to make a move early in a shortened weird season that is going to be disjointed already.

if the right player comes along.... sure, but I think a number of people here are way too willing to just add a mediocre bench guy for a year for fear of a downside that seems unlikely. Also... if all out draft picks end up as garbage the team is in trouble either way, a low ceiling vet doesn't change that, we need at least one of our bench players to be legitimately good to have any real chance at beating the Lakers for example.

Now if the opportunity to say:
Steal Caris LeVert for picks in a 3 way Nets deal.... or
Memphis decides Valanciunas doesn't fit their timeline..... or
Kemba looks like he's going to miss half the season and you want to grab George Hill.

I can see that, I just don't think those (other than Hill) are reasonably available.
In particular I'd be watching BKN and HOU though, that's a place where there may be value to be had.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,513
I think he'd be at best the 8th man, but I can see others being higher on him even if he's well into his decline phase.

I don't think it has to be "big salary" but i think there are good players who aren't about to retire on multi-year deals who will be available midseason or in the early offseason, guys in that 10-15M a year range.

I think I'm also particularly reticent to make a move early in a shortened weird season that is going to be disjointed already.

if the right player comes along.... sure, but I think a number of people here are way too willing to just add a mediocre bench guy for a year for fear of a downside that seems unlikely. Also... if all out draft picks end up as garbage the team is in trouble either way, a low ceiling vet doesn't change that, we need at least one of our bench players to be legitimately good to have any real chance at beating the Lakers for example.

Now if the opportunity to say:
Steal Caris LeVert for picks in a 3 way Nets deal.... or
Memphis decides Valanciunas doesn't fit their timeline..... or
Kemba looks like he's going to miss half the season and you want to grab George Hill.

I can see that, I just don't think those (other than Hill) are reasonably available.
In particular I'd be watching BKN and HOU though, that's a place where there may be value to be had.
Well, now I understand why you don't want to use a TPE to get a veteran role player.

If you think there is any shot at someone like Caris Levert for just picks and a TPE, I'd save the TPE too. That feels like a zero percenter to me.

Valanciunas isn't a guy I'd give up anything for, he's probably properly paid, and George Hill is just a point guard version of Trevor Ariza. I'm not waiting around hoping he's available later.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,090
Well, now I understand why you don't want to use a TPE to get a veteran role player.

If you think there is any shot at someone like Caris Levert for just picks and a TPE, I'd save the TPE too. That feels like a zero percenter to me.

Valanciunas isn't a guy I'd give up anything for, he's probably properly paid, and George Hill is just a point guard version of Trevor Ariza. I'm not waiting around hoping he's available later.
I agree on Hill, I was more saying that if I know Kemba is going to miss most of the season that becomes a pressing need.

I see Valanciunas as a better player than Ariza by a good stretch and on a fair contract for multiple years so a lot more value there.

And Levert or similar is unlikely, but that's the only type of deal I'd be jumping on right now, is getting into a big deal and fishing out value by taking on a player with the TPE for picks.

I think an Ariza type deal is unnecessary now, and reduces flexibility (and the ability to react to something like a major injury that necessitates a particular type of replacement).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,090
View: https://twitter.com/AdamMKaufman/status/1331784729935351808


Indy GM calling anybody and everybody who covers the team to say it's not his fault.

Of course in the process he just confirms that nobody around the league wanted Turner.... if anybody did I think Danny would be quite happy with a 1st and a TPE out of it, and given all the teams with space who were shuffling 3 and 4 way deals, if they couldn't make that work it tells me no team wanted to be the one with Turner at the end. Have to say, I thought he wasn't great, but I was definitely wrong in that I thought you could shift him. Sounds like he's a pay someone to take him contract already.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,513
I agree on Hill, I was more saying that if I know Kemba is going to miss most of the season that becomes a pressing need.

I see Valanciunas as a better player than Ariza by a good stretch and on a fair contract for multiple years so a lot more value there.

And Levert or similar is unlikely, but that's the only type of deal I'd be jumping on right now, is getting into a big deal and fishing out value by taking on a player with the TPE for picks.

I think an Ariza type deal is unnecessary now, and reduces flexibility (and the ability to react to something like a major injury that necessitates a particular type of replacement).
I see Valanciunas as a better player than Ariza as well, but can only play the 5, at a position I'm already stocked at, and Memphis is not going to give him away for cheap, as I think and Ariza would be.

Also, I really don't think an Ariza deal reduces flexibility drastically. If the Celtics do indeed wish to stay under the tax, they can only take on about 18M at the absolute max. If a player that's so much better than Ariza comes along, I could just go ahead and trade Trevor Ariza for him instead of using the TPE, since Ariza is expiring and could bring back up to 17.8M by himself.

I guess there is like a 100-1 shot a team would be looking to dump a big salary to duck the tax at the deadline, but very unlikely. Teams don't seem to cut it that close. They're usually much closer so they can get under by moving a smaller salary, especially since the cheapo owners would rather dump that big salary earlier so they spend less actual cash on the salary and save the tax.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
3,512
View: https://twitter.com/AdamMKaufman/status/1331784729935351808


Indy GM calling anybody and everybody who covers the team to say it's not his fault.

Of course in the process he just confirms that nobody around the league wanted Turner.... if anybody did I think Danny would be quite happy with a 1st and a TPE out of it, and given all the teams with space who were shuffling 3 and 4 way deals, if they couldn't make that work it tells me no team wanted to be the one with Turner at the end. Have to say, I thought he wasn't great, but I was definitely wrong in that I thought you could shift him. Sounds like he's a pay someone to take him contract already.
This report puts Ainge in a more favorable light. He’d rather get zero directly for GH than Turner and a first as a sweetener. Ainge knew he had the MLE in his back pocket, as well as a possible trade exception with the Hornets.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,753
View: https://twitter.com/AdamMKaufman/status/1331784729935351808


Indy GM calling anybody and everybody who covers the team to say it's not his fault.

Of course in the process he just confirms that nobody around the league wanted Turner.... if anybody did I think Danny would be quite happy with a 1st and a TPE out of it, and given all the teams with space who were shuffling 3 and 4 way deals, if they couldn't make that work it tells me no team wanted to be the one with Turner at the end. Have to say, I thought he wasn't great, but I was definitely wrong in that I thought you could shift him. Sounds like he's a pay someone to take him contract already.
To me it’s a big miss for Pritchard because there just aren’t that many upper tier guys who want to go play there. This was a chance at one, and a true local to boot. He needed the deal more than anyone else.

No idea who was realistic/unreasonable but Pritchard is the biggest loser in it.

As an aside, “a 1st” can mean pretty different things value wise depending on the conditions
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
20,105
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
To me it’s a big miss for Pritchard because there just aren’t that many upper tier guys who want to go play there. This was a chance at one, and a true local to boot. He needed the deal more than anyone else.

No idea who was realistic/unreasonable but Pritchard is the biggest loser in it.

As an aside, “a 1st” can mean pretty different things value wise depending on the conditions
Agree Home town hero wants to come home. Get the guy home.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
7,332
Kiev, Ukraine
To me it’s a big miss for Pritchard because there just aren’t that many upper tier guys who want to go play there. This was a chance at one, and a true local to boot. He needed the deal more than anyone else.

No idea who was realistic/unreasonable but Pritchard is the biggest loser in it.

As an aside, “a 1st” can mean pretty different things value wise depending on the conditions
What would you have offered in his spot? Oladipo (preserve Celtics salary slot) and draft compensation?

I think that still would have left the Celtics over the tax (have to check numbers), so that still probably isn’t as good as the TPE, although Oladipo would give wing depth (maybe with chemistry issues).

Pritchard screwed himself by not dumping Turner last year when he had higher value.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,601
To me it’s a big miss for Pritchard because there just aren’t that many upper tier guys who want to go play there. This was a chance at one, and a true local to boot. He needed the deal more than anyone else.

No idea who was realistic/unreasonable but Pritchard is the biggest loser in it.

As an aside, “a 1st” can mean pretty different things value wise depending on the conditions
A late first probably the price to move Turner’s contract, so Pritchard wanted Boston to do him a favor for free. But, frankly, I don’t believe the bit about Pritchard offering a first for a second. This is him doing damage control after fucking the poodle.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
19,268
I think we overrate how much Championship teams rely on "veteran rotation players".

The Lakers had Kuzma and Caruso in their top 8 for minutes, Raptors had Anunoby and Terrence Davis in their top 7,
The Lakers also had LeBron and Davis controlling the ball while the Raptors had Kawhi. It’s much easier for younger role players to limit their deficiencies when they are asked to provide a very specific skill set. As good as Tatum is he isn’t anywhere near that level of controlling a game or his team. Those players you listed wouldn’t have the same role in Boston as they had on those championship teams when they were passable.
 

SteveF

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
138
A late first probably the price to move Turner’s contract
This is the biggest takeaway for me from all this. Collectively, the NBA GMs have a much lower opinion of Myles Turner than the NBA internet. NBA GMs tend to have a better track record (though likely not to the degree the NBA owners would like given the pay discrepancy.)
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,634
Last season it seemed like all the rumored trades for mid-season help seemed incredibly expensive. Remember all those rumors of back-up / marginal 5s requiring multiple 1st rounders? Maybe if it is really "the piece" that puts you over the top you deal a 1st for a role player, but aside from that - it seems like an expensive price for a bench guy.

It's interesting, as last year I felt like the regular season meant a lot to try and secure home court advantage for the playoffs. Then, we had Covid and the bubble and there was no true home court at all (although the "home"/"away" record was quite different by chance - I'd say).

This year, I feel like the regular season is somewhat immaterial. My most important goals are to keep everyone healthy and rested and develop the younger guys.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
7,332
Kiev, Ukraine
Last season it seemed like all the rumored trades for mid-season help seemed incredibly expensive. Remember all those rumors of back-up / marginal 5s requiring multiple 1st rounders? Maybe if it is really "the piece" that puts you over the top you deal a 1st for a role player, but aside from that - it seems like an expensive price for a bench guy.

It's interesting, as last year I felt like the regular season meant a lot to try and secure home court advantage for the playoffs. Then, we had Covid and the bubble and there was no true home court at all (although the "home"/"away" record was quite different by chance - I'd say).

This year, I feel like the regular season is somewhat immaterial. My most important goals are to keep everyone healthy and rested and develop the younger guys.
Yeah, I think savvy teams will downplay the regular season after seeing homecourt become meaningless in a less intense environment last year.

Seeding is a factor, but not worth making a rushed move over imo.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
I still think there has to be an economic reckoning triggered by the pandemic. By next summer, there will be teams looking to move salary. Doesn’t mean someone is just going to hand us a star player, but a big TPE might be more valuable than it ordinarily is.

The part I don’t understand is why Charlotte would give up an asset to avoid the waive-and-stretch on Batum. A sunk cost is a sunk cost, right?
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
7,332
Kiev, Ukraine
I still think there has to be an economic reckoning triggered by the pandemic. By next summer, there will be teams looking to move salary. Doesn’t mean someone is just going to hand us a star player, but a big TPE might be more valuable than it ordinarily is.

The part I don’t understand is why Charlotte would give up an asset to avoid the waive-and-stretch on Batum. A sunk cost is a sunk cost, right?
If they get rid of said sunk cost this year, they can avoid $9M of unmovable money clogging the books for the next 3 years, in the uncertain economic/cap environment you describe.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
If they get rid of said sunk cost this year, they can avoid $9M of unmovable money clogging the books for the next 3 years, in the uncertain economic/cap environment you describe.
Short of giving up a possible lottery pick, they’re eating most of that $27 million. And I’m skeptical that the stretch will hurt them much in 2021-22 and 2022-23 — after next season, they’ll have more cap space than they can realistically spend, as Hayward and Rozier will be their only material commitments.

Obviously, it makes sense for MJ to take a couple days and see what the Knicks might be willing to do, but I think the cost of avoiding the waive-and-stretch will be prohibitively high.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
13,687
Somewhere
What blows my mind about the Batum “sweepstakes” is that this would be the prime opportunity for a franchise like the Knicks to try and swipe some free assets, right? Or Sacramento, or some other idiot has been franchise.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,753
Last season it seemed like all the rumored trades for mid-season help seemed incredibly expensive. Remember all those rumors of back-up / marginal 5s requiring multiple 1st rounders? Maybe if it is really "the piece" that puts you over the top you deal a 1st for a role player, but aside from that - it seems like an expensive price for a bench guy.

It's interesting, as last year I felt like the regular season meant a lot to try and secure home court advantage for the playoffs. Then, we had Covid and the bubble and there was no true home court at all (although the "home"/"away" record was quite different by chance - I'd say).

This year, I feel like the regular season is somewhat immaterial. My most important goals are to keep everyone healthy and rested and develop the younger guys.
This is why several of us would jettison Green for a vet now. The market isn’t perfectly fluid during the year—it’s constrained. You can add depth now for free that is hard to acquire later as guys sign with other teams, in other leagues etc.

Teams in fact have similar number of guys signed relative to last year per season—there aren’t that many empty spots.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,303
I still think there has to be an economic reckoning triggered by the pandemic. By next summer, there will be teams looking to move salary. Doesn’t mean someone is just going to hand us a star player, but a big TPE might be more valuable than it ordinarily is.

The part I don’t understand is why Charlotte would give up an asset to avoid the waive-and-stretch on Batum. A sunk cost is a sunk cost, right?
I agree. It’s bad cap management to waive Batum but it’s not damaging from a cost perspective. He was getting $27 million to not play for the Hornets anyways so whether it’s one or three years is kind of irrelevant, especially if the team isn’t expecting to have meaningful cap space over that time period anyways. This isn’t a team that should be giving up meaningful assets for the opportunity to sign Hayward. Right now it’s just money.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,891
What blows my mind about the Batum “sweepstakes” is that this would be the prime opportunity for a franchise like the Knicks to try and swipe some free assets, right? Or Sacramento, or some other idiot has been franchise.
That could still happen.

And the S&T shouldn't be contingent on them finding taker for Batum right? I know they'd like it, but even with no taker Charlotte can still grab asset for S&T.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
That could still happen.

And the S&T shouldn't be contingent on them finding taker for Batum right? I know they'd like it, but even with no taker Charlotte can still grab asset for S&T.
If I’m MJ, I wouldn’t do anything for a C’s 2nd-round pick, as the odds of a player drafted in the 50s becoming a contributor is virtually nil, and accepting negligible value here makes it harder for MJ to negotiate better value in a future situation.

Does Danny value the TPE more than a highly protected 1st? Because I think that’s what it takes to get it done. I think Danny should still do it, but reasonable opinion can differ. (Or maybe taking back Zeller’s expiring deal, but with TT on board Zeller would be little more than salary ballast.)
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
19,090
What blows my mind about the Batum “sweepstakes” is that this would be the prime opportunity for a franchise like the Knicks to try and swipe some free assets, right? Or Sacramento, or some other idiot has been franchise.
Well not Sacramento they don't have space.
OKC is the obvious choice, they can take Batum into a TPE, and they project not only to have cap room, but they might end up close to the floor.
Knicks CAN do it, but it's more complicated for them in terms of ordering and such.


If I’m MJ, I wouldn’t do anything for a C’s 2nd-round pick, as the odds of a player drafted in the 50s becoming a contributor is virtually nil, and accepting negligible value here makes it harder for MJ to negotiate better value in a future situation.

Does Danny value the TPE more than a highly protected 1st? Because I think that’s what it takes to get it done. I think Danny should still do it, but reasonable opinion can differ. (Or maybe taking back Zeller’s expiring deal, but with TT on board Zeller would be little more than salary ballast.)
I can't imagine any situation where it is a first. Teams give each other TPEs essentially for free all the time (see the Hawks, who gave OKC one for Gallo for nothing a top 55 protected 2nd). I would guess it ends up being two 2nds, one of which isn't ours, and then CHA pays OKC one of those or their own 2nd to take Batum. There isn't some future value loss, TPEs don't usually cost more than a 2nd. If anything Kupchak (Jordan is not involved in this, he calls players to close deals he doesn't know how the cap works, he's already back to golfing) wants to do this fairly cheap the same reason most teams do, there is a unspoken etiquitte, and if you become the asshole who won't do a S&T unless you get excessive value, then down the line when you are the one on the other side of the deal suddenly your call doesn't get answered.

Edit- I think the reason it's taking so long is Batum's deal. Normally, the Hornets would just do a S&T where we sent them our 2nd and Hayward, they send back a never convey 2nd. In this case though, they didn't actually have the cap space, they had to make it by stretching Batum, so they would like to see if they can move Batum, but moving a bad contract DOES take assets, so they want to figure out who can take him, what they pay, what we pay etc. If they can't find a good deal (or get us to agree to pay part), then they'll have to stretch Batum, and probably take something from us to make a S&T anyway because something is always better than nothing, if only to move to another team in a future deal, 2nds tend to get passed around a lot.
 
Last edited:

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,456
around the way
A late first probably the price to move Turner’s contract, so Pritchard wanted Boston to do him a favor for free. But, frankly, I don’t believe the bit about Pritchard offering a first for a second. This is him doing damage control after fucking the poodle.
I agree with all of this. Additionally, "fucking the poodle" will slide next to "screwing the pooch" in the lexicon. Thanks for that.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,891
Hope they get this done before training camp. Could be awkward.

(I kid, I kid)
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
19,726
where I was last at
What I don't understand is that if Batum is dog-crap who pays him $27MM if all they're getting back is two 2s? .

Here's how I understand or misunderstand a 3-way transaction

1-Celts sends GH (valued at $30M) to Charlotte in a S&T

2-Charlotte sends Batum and his $27MM to TEAM TBD and maybe a #2

3-Celts sends TEAM TBD a #2 (In the other thread I set it up as a lottery protected 1-probably a bottom 10 pick-but was told it was an overpay)

Does TEAM TBD send Celts a player and salary to clear their books?

4-Celts get a TPE of $30M or less the salary of the TBD guy sent back to them.

I don't get the value that TEAM TBD derives from getting 2-2s and the right to pay Batum $27M.

Professional courtesy is one thing, but footing a $27MM tab for a stiff seems excessive.

what did i fuck up?
 
Last edited:

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
6,692
Team TBD has either cap space or a TPE so they can take Batum’s salary without sending out any salary back to match. They’re basically buying the draft picks they receive in the deal by eating Batum’s salary. The question of whether a couple 2nd round picks is sufficient compensation for eating that much salary is presumably the holdup in getting the deal done; team TBD, which is most likely OKC, is probably trying to negotiate for a 1st, and Charlotte needs to decide if it’s worth that price to not keep Batum’s stretched salary on the books for another two years.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,951
Santa Monica
What I don't understand is that if Batum is dog-crap who pays him $27MM if all they're getting back is two 2s? .

Here's how I understand or misunderstand a 3-way transaction

1-Celts sends GH (valued at $30M) to Charlotte in a S&T

2-Charlotte sends Batum and his $27MM to TEAM TBD and maybe a #2

3-Celts sends TEAM TBD a #2 (In the other thread I set it up as a lottery protected 1-probably a bottom 10 pick-but was told it was an overpay)

Does TEAM TBD send Celts a player and salary to clear their books?

4-Celts get a TPE of $30M or less the salary of the TBD guy sent back to them.

I don't get the value that TEAM TBD derives from getting 2-2s and the right to pay Batum $27M.

Professional courtesy is one thing, but footing a $27MM tab for a stiff seems excessive.

what did i fuck up?
You didn't fu@k up.

Getting rid of Batum's contract is going to cost Charlotte at least a protected 1st

That cost has little to do with what the Celtics will pay for a S&T
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
13,235
What I don't understand is that if Batum is dog-crap who pays him $27MM if all they're getting back is two 2s? .

Here's how I understand or misunderstand a 3-way transaction

1-Celts sends GH (valued at $30M) to Charlotte in a S&T

2-Charlotte sends Batum and his $27MM to TEAM TBD and maybe a #2

3-Celts sends TEAM TBD a #2 (In the other thread I set it up as a lottery protected 1-probably a bottom 10 pick-but was told it was an overpay)

Does TEAM TBD send Celts a player and salary to clear their books?

4-Celts get a TPE of $30M or less the salary of the TBD guy sent back to them.

I don't get the value that TEAM TBD derives from getting 2-2s and the right to pay Batum $27M.

Professional courtesy is one thing, but footing a $27MM tab for a stiff seems excessive.

what did i fuck up?
I don't think you did. We'll see.

I think someone bought a 2nd round pick this year for like $4.5 million though.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
13,235
OKC also has like 400 1st round picks over the next 6 years so what are they going to do with 2 2nd rounders?
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,513
What I don't understand is that if Batum is dog-crap who pays him $27MM if all they're getting back is two 2s? .

Here's how I understand or misunderstand a 3-way transaction

1-Celts sends GH (valued at $30M) to Charlotte in a S&T

2-Charlotte sends Batum and his $27MM to TEAM TBD and maybe a #2

3-Celts sends TEAM TBD a #2 (In the other thread I set it up as a lottery protected 1-probably a bottom 10 pick-but was told it was an overpay)

Does TEAM TBD send Celts a player and salary to clear their books?

4-Celts get a TPE of $30M or less the salary of the TBD guy sent back to them.

I don't get the value that TEAM TBD derives from getting 2-2s and the right to pay Batum $27M.

Professional courtesy is one thing, but footing a $27MM tab for a stiff seems excessive.

what did i fuck up?
It doesn't have to be Batum.

If they move Rozier or Zeller, they have the space to fit Hayward and they can eat the full Batum cap hit this year.

I think the delay is finding a home for Rozier or Zeller, not Batum.

Edit: I should say It's very possible a deal is already done. These things just take time because of all the deals that aren't official yet. Like, Al Horford is still a 76er even though that deal leaked nine days ago.
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,951
Santa Monica
Formally announcing the S&T doesn't hurt the C's at the moment, they could be talking to teams.

Just delays the 1yr TPE expiry clock from starting which isn't the worst thing.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,644
New York, NY
.

Pritchard leaking this does nothing for Indy, but probably make Myles Turner less than thrilled to return.
The leak doesn’t make sense. Turner and a first doesn’t send out enough salary. Indy had to be including another player, which gets us back to what the sticking point was. The deal would’ve needed to be Turner, McDermott, and a first, but I don’t think Ainge had any interest in McDermott, so to get the deal to Turner and a first they’d need a team willing to take McDermott into cap room, which probably involves another first round pick from Indy or changing McDermott for a player Boston actually wanted. And that’s where we know the deal broke down.