Celtics 16/17 Roster and Assets

sox311

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 30, 2004
1,753
That's what she said.
One would think renouncing of the QO is a nice guy move by Danny for Sully. Teams don't like the RFA title and don't want to tie up money. This has probably hurt his chances at getting an offer from another team.

He is more likely to get teams to begin negotiations without he QO and Boston having the right to match.

And the C's need open roster spots to either add pieces or sign the draft picks.

Good luck Sully!
 
Last edited:

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,970
I don't get what's going on with this move.
The move clears a roster spot, which gives them flexibility to make a picks for player or 2 for 1 type trade. Okafor? Butler?

I'm hoping Danny has something up his sleeve, rather than deciding to be a nice guy to fat Sully.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
This is great stuff. Thanks for sharing.

Bradley @ .1 really?

Where did some of the top drafted players grade out (ie Bender, Hield, Murray, Dunn)?
I don't do much draft stuff, so I don't have projections on prospects. Right now I'm scoring all rookies as replacement level. I will replace this eventually with actual projections once I find a source for them that I trust.

Bradley's score will increase. I am working on some tweaks between offensive/defensive splits. I've checked, and these will bump Bradley's score (although the effect may close to zero-sum for the Celtics overall).

Losing Sullinger will hurt.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,518
Sullinger move is interesting, seems like it might have simply been a decision that they didn't want him signing the QO. Could mean they''ve seen enough of Yabusele to decide that if they don't get a better frontcourt player in trade or FA they'd rather have him on the roster than Sully.

Edit- Brian Robb says they had to do it to make the Horford Signing:
Interesting that they renounced Sullinger over Zeller.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,090
On mobile so cant link but NBA transcation wire has the Cs pulling the QO to Sully and renouncing him.

Didnt see that one coming.

It means we relinquished our rights to match an offer by another team. We essentially release Sullinger from being a hostage to us holding his rights to match a long-term deal which we were never going to do anyway. We "could" still sign him to a 1+1 if Sully doesn't get an offer he likes as a UFA however we'd have to make other moves to do so as we now couldn't go over the cap to sign him. It isn't likely as Ainge has never seemed endeared by him last year however from a technical view we could do so.

Sully knew about this days ago when he tweeted "Change" or something of the like.
 
Last edited:

CreedBratton

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2009
3,863
Good riddance. Will not miss him getting 6 centimetres off the ground on every play and being winded crossing half court every game.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,738
All in all, a successful pick but not a guy I'd want on more than a 1 year deal. Really pleased that we were able to upgrade his spot this offseason.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
6,520
And who do you imagine is getting rebounds on this Cs team? Or muscling/harassing other bigs down low?
Yeah, I'm a bit bummed to be losing him. He blew in the playoffs but was much improved defensively. He's a much better piece than a lot of C's fans realize.

Was thinking that Humphries might fit well as a stretch who can also rebound, but his percentages were worse than I remembered. Still, might not be a bad option. Last year was his first shooting 3s and he managed to do so better than 30% on 2 a game- maybe that'll improve.
 

CreedBratton

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2009
3,863
And who do you imagine is getting rebounds on this Cs team? Or muscling/harassing other bigs down low?
Literally anyone who is in shape and doesn't shoot 28% from three when they shouldn't ever leave the key to begin with.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,518
Thing about replacing Sullinger is that his minutes have already been replaced by Horford.
So really it's the Zeller/Lee minutes that might need replacing.
For Big men who might sign 1 year deals for limited minutes who fit the rebounding mold:
Jordan Hill
Thomas Robinson
Willie Reed (RFA)
Meyers Leonard(RFA)
Gustavo Ayon (was in Europe not sure if interested in coming back)
Jason Thompson
Christian Wood
Ioannis Bourousis (Euro vet, Spurs reportedly after him)
Jan Vesely (yep the former top 10 pick, has opt outs. He was actually not as terrible as people remember in the NBA, he just couldn't shoot. Still can't shoot free throws at all, but as a bench guy? Doubt he'd do it, seems wary of NBA, also big minutes and money in Turkey).

A random one, who has the most upside of the bunch:
Larry Sanders. He's supposedly working out and considering an NBA return.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,564
Sullinger move is interesting, seems like it might have simply been a decision that they didn't want him signing the QO. Could mean they''ve seen enough of Yabusele to decide that if they don't get a better frontcourt player in trade or FA they'd rather have him on the roster than Sully.

Edit- Brian Robb says they had to do it to make the Horford Signing:
Interesting that they renounced Sullinger over Zeller.
I think it might be the reverse(though a couple days ago I thought he was unsigned waiting on a trade, so what do I know).

I think they'd have taken him for a one year deal and let Zeller walk instead, which they still could do anyway.

Don't think they want either guy signed past this season and taking up cap space next summer. For Sullinger, I'd imagine he'd want to lock in multiple years this summer. If he has to take a one year deal and hit the market again next year, he's likely better doing that somewhere else with more playing time available.

The Celtics have max 96 minutes available for bigs per game, really less than that with some small lineups. Amir and Olynyk combined for 43 minutes a game last year, figure Horford for around the 32 he played in Atlanta last year. That leaves 21 minutes a game total left for Sullinger, Mickey, Yabusele if he stays, and the minutes Jerebko/Jae would play as a small ball 4. Sullinger would have to look at that and expect no more than 15 minutes at the absolute most as long as the team is healthy. It's probably closer to Zellers 12 minutes and some DNP-CDs mixed in.

I think the Celtics would like to keep Zeller on a one year deal as injury insurance if he's willing to take it.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
31,710
Jan Vesely (yep the former top 10 pick, has opt outs. He was actually not as terrible as people remember in the NBA, he just couldn't shoot. Still can't shoot free throws at all, but as a bench guy? Doubt he'd do it, seems wary of NBA, also big minutes and money in Turkey).
Not a huge deal but Vesely just signed a 3-year deal with his Turkisk team - http://www.sportando.com/en/europe/turkey/205632/fenerbahce-signs-jan-vesely-to-a-three-year-contract-extension.html - so I would imagine he's off the market this season.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,355
Melrose, MA
The Celtics have max 96 minutes available for bigs per game, really less than that with some small lineups. Amir and Olynyk combined for 43 minutes a game last year, figure Horford for around the 32 he played in Atlanta last year. That leaves 21 minutes a game total left for Sullinger, Mickey, Yabusele if he stays, and the minutes Jerebko/Jae would play as a small ball 4. Sullinger would have to look at that and expect no more than 15 minutes at the absolute most as long as the team is healthy. It's probably closer to Zellers 12 minutes and some DNP-CDs mixed in.

I think the Celtics would like to keep Zeller on a one year deal as injury insurance if he's willing to take it.
It's hard to envision the Celtics playing significant minutes with both Amir and Horford on the bench. So one big spot, and 48 minutes, goes to them, probably 32/16.

The other big slot would be minutes divided between Amir, Olynyk, Jerebko, Jae (small lineups).

It's hard to see where anyone else (Mickey, Yabusele, Zeller) gets regular minutes. At the same time, they could use a depth center, their frontcourt looks awfully small now.
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,663
South Park
So Dan Lifshatz from 98.5 the sports hub had this last night. He was the one who reported it was down to Golden State and the Celtics were the final 2 for Durant. Sorry for formatting, but I have no idea how to embed tweets. So these are what his 4 tweets say below. People are speculating that it's Blake Griffin.

"Want some more? Celtics are working the trade market for a deal and have made significant progress on a star player. Danny could trike again"

"No I cannot tell you who the player is...don't even bother asking. Sorry folks"

"But its a player I believe every Celtics fan will be quite happy with!"

Can't give you any hints, but its a player you WILL like"
 

NavaHo

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 29, 2010
394
That would be a pretty wildly incoherent thing for GM Doc Rivers to do, re-signing his entire bench at big money and then trading a superstar. You think there would have been a choice made a little while ago between either keeping the squad around or focusing on acquiring assets and rookie contracts. But then again, it's GM Doc Rivers.

Though to be fair, I don't necessarily see it from the C's perspective either. Griffin's got a year left on his deal before he has a player option he'll certainly decline. Would Ainge give up major assets for a year of Griffin?
 

zenter

indian sweet
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2005
5,641
Astoria, NY
That would be a pretty wildly incoherent thing for GM Doc Rivers to do, re-signing his entire bench at big money and then trading a superstar. You think there would have been a choice made a little while ago between either keeping the squad around or focusing on acquiring assets and rookie contracts. But then again, it's GM Doc Rivers.
I wouldn't be surprised if Doc's on blast from Ballmer. This Clips team went backwards by treading water, aged a year, and needs to start thinking forward a little. Besides, Griffin is a bit of a clubhouse cancer for the Clippers - assaulting people and all. Addition by subtraction.

Though to be fair, I don't necessarily see it from the C's perspective either. Griffin's got a year left on his deal before he has a player option he'll certainly decline. Would Ainge give up major assets for a year of Griffin?
You don't mean on the court, right? Blake & Horford make a complementary big core. Griffin can replace Sully's rebounding and offer fast-break offense.

Off the court, Griffin plus Horford comprise a great pitch to all the 2017 free agents, and you have the bonus of Griffin's Bird rights. I know some here think Bird rights are meaningless in the new cap environment, but this offseason tells me that teams are likely to fall back into habits of valuing Bird rights more than they did this summer. I'm assuming Griffin can also resuscitate his image in the upbeat high-effort Cs locker room.
 

gammoseditor

also had a stroke
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,308
Somerville, MA
Considering the contracts and expected trade price, I'd rather see them trade for Nikola Vucevic than Blake. At the trade deadline they could try and pick up Rudy Gay cheap when Sacramento will care about next year's draft position.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,518
Interesting tidbit. Only 2 guys left who were on the roster 3 years ago when Brad was hired.
 

NavaHo

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 29, 2010
394
You don't mean on the court, right? Blake & Horford make a complementary big core. Griffin can replace Sully's rebounding and offer fast-break offense.

Off the court, Griffin plus Horford comprise a great pitch to all the 2017 free agents, and you have the bonus of Griffin's Bird rights. I know some here think Bird rights are meaningless in the new cap environment, but this offseason tells me that teams are likely to fall back into habits of valuing Bird rights more than they did this summer. I'm assuming Griffin can also resuscitate his image in the upbeat high-effort Cs locker room.
I sure as heck don't mean on the court. All I'm concerned about is that Griffin's in a contract year, and I'm spooked at the prospect of giving up valuable assets for someone who could be gone before this roster's championship window cracks open.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Considering the contracts and expected trade price, I'd rather see them trade for Nikola Vucevic than Blake. At the trade deadline they could try and pick up Rudy Gay cheap when Sacramento will care about next year's draft position.
If they wanted another league-averagish big without upside, they can just keep Sullinger. Vucevic is a defensive anchor.

Blake is problematic in all sorts of ways too, but I'd be interested in seeing what Stevens can do with him.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
45,711
Here
I think the "people would be happy with him" rules out Kevin Love. Of course, this guy is likely FoS, but we are playing make-believe here.

I would guess Boogie as well.
 

zenter

indian sweet
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2005
5,641
Astoria, NY
Does it have to be Blake? How about Boogie or Kevin Love?
Boogie might work too. Kevin Love isn't one of those "everyone will love this" deals. which is why (I think) nobody is thinking it's him. I'd like it, but I'm not as down on him as everyone else.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
I don't see much chance of Boogie being moved until he has a chance to fight Joerger.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,872
Somewhere
Since those tweets don't mention the player's position, Russell Westbrook is a possibility; similar flight risk as Griffin.

I don't think it's Cousins, his dicey reputation nullifies the "everyone will love!" aspect of the tweet.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,090
I've never bought Boogie being on the trade block for one and for two Divac would want picks and we can't value the Nets pick properly at this point prior to the lottery so I don't have it as him.

To me it points directly to Love for several reasons. Ainge has always adored this player, the Cavs can now easily move him without taking heat for it as they won a title with him, it corresponds with renouncing Sully for a player at his position, and the one nobody is mentioning......his play on words, "a player we will LOVE!"