POLL: What do with the Celtics' Cap-Space?

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I don't think it's love so much as realism, if the Nets are shooting for Durant/Irving/DAJ then they can't match an opening bell offer to Russell. I think everyone agrees that Brogdon is better in the abstract, but the Bucks are 100% certain to match, meaning a sign & trade would be their only shot at landing him. Russell? If they match they can't just trade him wherever for value, it wrecks their summer plans. And as a first max it's always tradeable down the line when they get an upgrade.

I don't "love" Russell and people are correct to point out his negatives.

That said, he has only played four seasons in the NBA, the first two of which were in a suboptimal situation for a young player, and is just 23. Recent data suggests he is improving at least a bit.

More to the point, his flaws make him potentially attainable for Boston and his relative youth suggests that there could be some upside, especially in the right system. Atkinson got something out of him last year and I think Stevens may be able to build upon that.

Russell isn't a Kyrie replacement but he has some potential to give a team scoring while his physical skills, at least, suggest he could be a better defender.

If Boston weren't cap constrained, I would expect them to look elsewhere but Russell may offer some upside at a discounted price.

 

[benhogan]

https://sportando.basketball/en/rumors-celtics-to-target-kemba-walker/

 

[benhogan]

Yeah, if Myles Turner is actually available, I'm calling.

There were Turner for #4 pick rumors, according to these Indy guys.

Go to 10:30 for commentary about Sabonis/Turner...they even discuss Sabonis(& more) to Boston for Hayward at 15:05

https://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/kevins-corner/podcast/should-pacers-trade-domas-sabonis-or-myles-turner

 

[NomarsFool]

It seems like there are so many teams with cap space or trying to get cap space, and at the end of the day there really aren't that many truly elite free agents, I have a feeling we could see something similar to 2016 with a lot of bad contracts handed out by the teams that miss out on the really big names.

 

[Cellar-Door]

It seems like there are so many teams with cap space or trying to get cap space, and at the end of the day there really aren't that many truly elite free agents, I have a feeling we could see something similar to 2016 with a lot of bad contracts handed out by the teams that miss out on the really big names.

there are also an insane number of FAs this year though(40% of the league), so at the back end I think a lot of teams are going to get bargains even if just short term deals given only 14 teams have cap space

 

[cheech13]

It seems like there are so many teams with cap space or trying to get cap space, and at the end of the day there really aren't that many truly elite free agents, I have a feeling we could see something similar to 2016 with a lot of bad contracts handed out by the teams that miss out on the really big names.

It's the most money available since the 2016 offseason. Total cap space this offseason is more than the last two seasons comined, per the numbers cited in Kevin O'Connor's column for the Ringer. There will definitely be some contracts given out this offseason that will leave people scratching their heads.

Teams will enter the summer with a projected total of $474 million in salary cap space, which is more money than the past two offseasons combined—$176 million in 2018 and $154 million in 2017—according to data provided by salary cap guru Keith Smith.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2019/6/25/18741081/summer-2019-free-agency-2016-free-agency-giannis-antetokounmpo-devin-booker

 

[nighthob]

I don't "love" Russell and people are correct to point out his negatives.

That said, he has only played four seasons in the NBA, the first two of which were in a suboptimal situation for a young player, and is just 23. Recent data suggests he is improving at least a bit.

More to the point, his flaws make him potentially attainable for Boston and his relative youth suggests that there could be some upside, especially in the right system. Atkinson got something out of him last year and I think Stevens may be able to build upon that.

Russell isn't a Kyrie replacement but he has some potential to give a team scoring while his physical skills, at least, suggest he could be a better defender.

If Boston weren't cap constrained, I would expect them to look elsewhere but Russell may offer some upside at a discounted price.

I think that this is what most of us see, he costs only money, and by signing him you constrain the Nets (preventing them from pursuing a sign & trade with another team to add depth to their roster). In a vacuum Walker and Brogdon are better, but there's going to be a ton of competition for Walker and you need to clean house to get him. There are definite minuses to Russell, but the first max salary makes him tradable unless he's a complete washout.

And if that Memphis first turns into someone like Cole Anthony, Theo Maledon, or Cade Cunningham you can always just trade Russell after a year and collect some more capital.

 

[bowiac]

I think that this is what most of us see, he costs only money, and by signing him you constrain the Nets (preventing them from pursuing a sign & trade with another team to add depth to their roster). In a vacuum Walker and Brogdon are better, but there's going to be a ton of competition for Walker and you need to clean house to get him. There are definite minuses to Russell, but the first max salary makes him tradable unless he's a complete washout.

I've seen the bolded mentioned a few times, and I'm not quite following. We've seen a fair number of "first max" guys in recent years have their contracts turn underwater pretty quickly (Wiggins, Steven Adams, LaVine, Drummond, Whiteside).

If Russell is good, then he'll be worth it, and an asset on that contract. If he's not good, then you'll be wondering why you're paying Allen Crabbe $25M/year for three more years. Maybe he's good, maybe he's not (I'm a skeptic), but I don't see anything magical to it being his first max contract. Am I missing something?

And of course, in the meantime, there's an opportunity cost, as it's unclear when the Celtics will have cap space again even if they manage to dump Russell in the future.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

According to Marc Stein, the Celtics are pursuing Kemba.

It feels to me like they aren't likely to land Kemba, but if they did, they would suddenly have no cap room and no bigs. So there would likely be another shoe to drop, no?

 

[bowiac]

If Boston weren't cap constrained, I would expect them to look elsewhere but Russell may offer some upside at a discounted price.

Does this mean if it takes a max deal to sign Russell, you'd rather look elsewhere?

 

[bowiac]

It feels to me like they aren't likely to land Kemba, but if they did, they would suddenly have no cap room and no bigs. So there would likely be another shoe to drop, no?

There doesn't need to be another shoe per se. They would have the room exception available still, which they could use to sign like Khem Birch or one of the half dozen other energy bigs who isn't actually very good, but doesn't hurt you much either.

That's not a path to contention this year, but it's probably fine as a short-term fix. Having a stiff at center doesn't cripple a team the same way that having a stiff at like point guard does, so I wouldn't be surprised to them go that route if they can convince Kemba to leave.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Does this mean if it takes a max deal to sign Russell, you'd rather look elsewhere?

It means I think the Celtics would (i.e. that is why we are getting some of the Kemba talk). In short, I agree that Russell on a max deal isn't all that enticing.

However I think they idea that the Celtics are going to go all in right now by renouncing everyone seems crazy given the players who are available, including Walker. I am not sure that you arrive in a different spot, results-wise, over the next year or two by going all in on one player (not named Leonard or Durant) vs trying to keep a few guys and adding at the margins.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

There doesn't need to be another shoe per se. They would have the room exception available still, which they could use to sign like Khem Birch or one of the half dozen other energy bigs who isn't actually very good, but doesn't hurt you much either.

That's not a path to contention this year, but it's probably fine as a short-term fix. Having a stiff at center doesn't cripple a team the same way that having a stiff at like point guard does, so I wouldn't be surprised to them go that route if they can convince Kemba to leave.

It just seems like they need more than one room exception guy.

 

[Lazy vs Crazy]

It just seems like they need more than one room exception guy.

Picking up the Yabu option sure feels like a killer now.

 

[Cellar-Door]

There doesn't need to be another shoe per se. They would have the room exception available still, which they could use to sign like Khem Birch or one of the half dozen other energy bigs who isn't actually very good, but doesn't hurt you much either.

That's not a path to contention this year, but it's probably fine as a short-term fix. Having a stiff at center doesn't cripple a team the same way that having a stiff at like point guard does, so I wouldn't be surprised to them go that route if they can convince Kemba to leave.

Honestly they could get an actually solid big with the room exception. There are a LOT of bigs out there, and given how many teams only play 1 real big in most lineups, somebody is going to be left standing when the music stops and will see the room exception as a decent landing spot. Davis, Lopez, Holmes, Zeller, Poirier, Williams, Vonleh, Diallo somebody will be available for that price, maybe 1 of those guys even can be had at the minimum.

 

[lexrageorge]

They don't necessarily have to fill all their roster holes this offseason if they sign Walker. There is still the possibility of trade deadline deals, and Danny would likely have the full MLE and biannual exceptions available next offseason.

I still think it's likely Walker's agent using the Celtics and Mavs to try to get Charlotte to offer Kemba something between the max and super-max to stay in Charlotte. As I highly doubt Kemba is going to get the full $221M super-max.

 

[nighthob]

I've seen the bolded mentioned a few times, and I'm not quite following. We've seen a fair number of "first max" guys in recent years have their contracts turn underwater pretty quickly (Wiggins, Steven Adams, LaVine, Drummond, Whiteside).

If Russell is good, then he'll be worth it, and an asset on that contract. If he's not good, then you'll be wondering why you're paying Allen Crabbe $25M/year for three more years. Maybe he's good, maybe he's not (I'm a skeptic), but I don't see anything magical to it being his first max contract. Am I missing something?

And of course, in the meantime, there's an opportunity cost, as it's unclear when the Celtics will have cap space again even if they manage to dump Russell in the future.

I don’t think that Russell is great, I also don’t think he’s a washout. He’s still not a good defender, his three point shooting still needs work, still takes too many mid range shots, and he doesn’t rack up enough free throws. On the other hand there are rational reasons for optimism; his defense has improved from horrific to merely bad and he’s cut back on the long 2s. So it’s not all gloom and doom. And if he can continue to build on his post-tire fire performance he actually should be pretty movable down the line.

 

[OurF'ingCity]

Honestly they could get an actually solid big with the room exception. There are a LOT of bigs out there, and given how many teams only play 1 real big in most lineups, somebody is going to be left standing when the music stops and will see the room exception as a decent landing spot. Davis, Lopez, Holmes, Zeller, Poirier, Williams, Vonleh, Diallo somebody will be available for that price, maybe 1 of those guys even can be had at the minimum.

Yeah, the "room" exception is supposed to be, what, $4.7 million or so? That's more than they signed Baynes for in 2017. Granted, that was two years ago and salaries have inflated since then, and more teams will have money to burn this offseason, but they should still be able to get a serviceable starting-caliber "big" with that money if that's what they choose to spend it on.

 

[bowiac]

However I think they idea that the Celtics are going to go all in right now by renouncing everyone seems crazy given the players who are available, including Walker. I am not sure that you arrive in a different spot, results-wise, over the next year or two by going all in on one player (not named Leonard or Durant) vs trying to keep a few guys and adding at the margins.

I think you're probably right they're arriving at around the same place. Sign Kemba, and you're still down one Al Horford relative to last year. You hope that the better chemistry, and improvements from Tatum, Brown, and Hayward are bigger than the loss of Horford, but it's probably roughly the same quality team. That said, bring back Rozier and add a guy for like $16M and you're probably still not taking a step forward.

The Celtics path to contention remains some combination of improvement from Tatum, Brown, and Hayward, and hitting on a draft pick or two in a big way. There's no "out" here via purely free agency. At best they're treading water.

 

[Cellar-Door]

It means I think the Celtics would (i.e. that is why we are getting some of the Kemba talk). In short, I agree that Russell on a max deal isn't all that enticing.

However I think they idea that the Celtics are going to go all in right now by renouncing everyone seems crazy given the players who are available, including Walker. I am not sure that you arrive in a different spot, results-wise, over the next year or two by going all in on one player (not named Leonard or Durant) vs trying to keep a few guys and adding at the margins.

Generally I don't get the "going all in" verbage. The Celtics are really not renouncing much to sign Kemba.... Irving and Horford are gone., so you're likely letting go... Morris (who probably wouldn't want to be back with a non-contending team) Rozier (Kemba is better than Terry is ever likely to be), and 2 guys making close to the minimum in Theis and Wanamaker. In return, you make yourself a team that can make a real run at the 4/5 seedand hasn't lost anything in the process.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Generally I don't get the "going all in" verbage. The Celtics are really not renouncing much to sign Kemba.... Irving and Horford are gone., so you're likely letting go... Morris (who probably wouldn't want to be back with a non-contending team) Rozier (Kemba is better than Terry is ever likely to be), and 2 guys making close to the minimum in Theis and Wanamaker. In return, you make yourself a team that can make a real run at the 4/5 seedand hasn't lost anything in the process.

That is fair except the run at the 4/5 seed. With or without Kemba or the other guys, this team's most likely ceiling is the sixth to eighth seed and they may not get there.

For sake of argument, lets do the EC next year with some assumptions:

1. Milwaukee (assuming they bring back their key guys)
2. Toronto (even without Leonard, they are likely a top four team)
3. Philadelphia
4. Brooklyn
5. Indiana

The next three slots are likely to be some combination of Boston, Atlanta, Miami, Orlando (depending on what they do with Vucevic), Detroit, Charlotte (depending on what they do with Walker) and maybe a surprise improvement by either Cleveland or Chicago.

I know others have the Celtics doing much better but they are likely to struggle offensively for stretches with no real shot creator/lead scorer. A Walker or Russell changes that but I am not sure that either scenario (Walker but without the guys they renounce vs Russell plus some combo of Rozier, Morris etc etc) results in a significantly higher win total.

 

[Cellar-Door]

That is fair except the run at the 4/5 seed. With or without Kemba or the other guys, this team's most likely ceiling is the sixth to eighth seed and they may not get there.

For sake of argument, lets do the EC next year with some assumptions:

1. Milwaukee (assuming they bring back their key guys)
2. Toronto (even without Leonard, they are likely a top four team)
3. Philadelphia
4. Brooklyn
5. Indiana

The next three slots are likely to be some combination of Boston, Atlanta, Miami, Orlando (depending on what they do with Vucevic), Detroit, Charlotte (depending on what they do with Walker) and maybe a surprise improvement by either Cleveland or Chicago.

I know others have the Celtics doing much better but they are likely to struggle offensively for stretches with no real shot creator/lead scorer. A Walker or Russell changes that but I am not sure that either scenario (Walker but without the guys they renounce vs Russell plus some combo of Rozier, Morris etc etc) results in a significantly higher win total.

I think you underrate the potential of Kemba and the potential growth from Hayward, and overestimate Kyrie and Indy without Oladipo until mid-season.

 

[Big John]

Kemba's a good player but is he the answer?

The first huge domino to fall is Kawhi. If he stays in Toronto you go the youth route most likely. If Kawhi stays, Gasol probably stays as well. If Kawhi leaves for the Clippers, then maybe you take a shot at the EC finals.

OKC is $14M over the luxury tax line. I think you could get Adams for very little, and Schroeder for even less. I may be the only one who likes Schroeder-- he probably comes out near the bottom when you start applying advanced stats--but he's an instigator, like Smart, and I like instigators. I guess I'd rather pay Schroeder or Rubio $15M than pay Kemba $30M.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I think you underrate the potential of Kemba and the potential growth from Hayward, and overestimate Kyrie and Indy without Oladipo until mid-season.

Fair enough - I like Kemba but the cupboard is pretty bare beyond him, Tatum, Brown, Smart, Hayward and the kids. That bench is likely to be a tire fire of sorts.

I think people are way too optimistic about Hayward too. He seems to have lost some athleticism with his injury and while its not beyond the pale to expect some improvement/reversion for him, he is 29 and as much as it pains me to admit it, HRB may be on to something with his last year in Utah being an outlier rather than the norm for him.

 

[Captaincoop]

I am not buying the notion that the Kemba/Brown/Tatum/Hayward/Poirier/Smart/Williams Celtics can't compete with the Pacers or Nets.

We just saw how much of a sure thing Irving is to carry a team, and Durant isn't walking through that door until 2020 at the earliest.

 

[scottyno]

It's nearly impossible to win a title in nba history without at least one top 5-10 player, the Cs don't have anyone even close right now, and even in the most optimistic timeline there's a good chance neither Tatum or Brown ever becomes one. If you've got a chance to lock one in long term, whether that's Kemba (maybe not top 10, but very close), or gambling on Durant (probably a pipedream) I think you have to go for it. There's no one in next years class I'd be happy to have on a max deal unless AD to the Lakers blows up and he leaves, and who knows if they have any shot at any of the 2021 superstars that could become available.

If elite guy ends up being the next tier down who get overpaid because teams missed out on the actual superstars then hopefully Cs stay far far away and try to get creative.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I am not buying the notion that the Kemba/Brown/Tatum/Hayward/Poirier/Smart/Williams Celtics can't compete with the Pacers or Nets.

We just saw how much of a sure thing Irving is to carry a team, and Durant isn't walking through that door until 2020 at the earliest.

You can assume that Walker and Irving are a wash (I don't agree but no need to debate) but the loss of Horford plus Morris and Rozier's ability to score, even with their well documented warts, is going to make this team significantly worse than last season.

I know you and others (the "hey,Tatum-Brown-Smart-Rozier led us to the ECF in 2018" crowd) may not agree so let's table that discussion as a debate about predictions is kind of silly at this point especially since there are other shoes to drop.

Once again, its not that the Celtics can't compete with a few moves by Ainge. However with Irving & Horford all but gone as well as the cap situation, the Celtics front-office is going to have to make some very difficult choices and then get incredibly lucky. That isn't an optimal strategy...

 

[JakeRae]

Here's an article with some info regarding Russell's improvement. FWIW, when talking about where he might go if Nets sign Kyrie, the article does not mention Boston.





There's also some talk in the article about what he doesn't do.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27037915/kyrie-dangelo-how-brooklyn-handle-difficult-decision

The idea that Russell improved by focusing on midrange and floaters where he shoots 46% is terrifying. Mid range shots are inefficient even if you are really good at them and lack the FT or spacing benefits of getting to the rim or shooting threes. Moreover, he didn’t improve his 2 point efficiency. If anything, once you account for decreased FT attempts, he got marginally worse.

I don't think it's love so much as realism, if the Nets are shooting for Durant/Irving/DAJ then they can't match an opening bell offer to Russell. I think everyone agrees that Brogdon is better in the abstract, but the Bucks are 100% certain to match, meaning a sign & trade would be their only shot at landing him. Russell? If they match they can't just trade him wherever for value, it wrecks their summer plans. And as a first max it's always tradeable down the line when they get an upgrade.

A roughly $30 million a year contract for an ok starter isn’t a tradeable asset. If Russell is what I think he is, he’s worth about half to a third of that deal. And, if his shooting regresses next year, the idea he might be trending toward someday being worth it will be shot too. Signing mediocre players to big money deals is literally the worst thing an NBA team can do in FA. It hamstrings you and forces you to later trade assets to unload those contracts. Far better to just sign 1 year deals with the money and see if anyone worth paying is available the next year, repeating as necessary until someone is or trades or internal development takes away your cap space anyway.

 

[nighthob]

It's nearly impossible to win a title in nba history without at least one top 5-10 player, the Cs don't have anyone even close right now, and even in the most optimistic timeline there's a good chance neither Tatum or Brown ever becomes one. If you've got a chance to lock one in long term, whether that's Kemba (maybe not top 10, but very close), or gambling on Durant (probably a pipedream) I think you have to go for it. There's no one in next years class I'd be happy to have on a max deal unless AD to the Lakers blows up and he leaves, and who knows if they have any shot at any of the 2021 superstars that could become available.

If elite guy ends up being the next tier down who get overpaid because teams missed out on the actual superstars then hopefully Cs stay far far away and try to get creative.

Kemba is not a top ten player and I think you’re missing the point. The idea is to help Tatum and Brown get over the hump and to keep getting them playoff minutes. Walker gets Boston into the postseason and a puncher’s chance. Tatum and Brown either sink or swim and they wait on the Memphis pick to shake out (I’m hoping for ‘21 and either Cade Cunningham or Jalen Johnson).

 

[JakeRae]

Kemba is absolutely worth a max contract. If he would sign here, you do that in a heartbeat and figure out the big issue after. He’s basically the only clear max player who we don’t know we have no shot at, so it makes sense to pursue him even though landing him is unlikely.

 

[nighthob]

A roughly $30 million a year contract for an ok starter isn’t a tradeable asset. If Russell is what I think he is, he’s worth about half to a third of that deal. And, if his shooting regresses next year, the idea he might be trending toward someday being worth it will be shot too. Signing mediocre players to big money deals is literally the worst thing an NBA team can do in FA. It hamstrings you and forces you to later trade assets to unload those contracts. Far better to just sign 1 year deals with the money and see if anyone worth paying is available the next year, repeating as necessary until someone is or trades or internal development takes away your cap space anyway.

Boston is faced with nothing but bad choices this summer. And the whole “Just sign one year deals” thing only really works if LeBron comes along to save you. Because aside from that the Lakers have been a long term tire fire. I can see the argument for tanking ahead of a good draft for free talent, but I’d prefer that Tatum keep playing games that matter. Because his development is vital to their long term plans.

 

[benhogan]

You can assume that Walker and Irving are a wash (I don't agree but no need to debate) but the loss of Horford plus Morris and Rozier's ability to score, even with their well documented warts, is going to make this team significantly worse than last season.

I know you and others (the "hey,Tatum-Brown-Smart-Rozier led us to the ECF in 2018" crowd) may not agree so let's table that discussion as a debate about predictions is kind of silly at this point especially since there are other shoes to drop.

Once again, its not that the Celtics can't compete with a few moves by Ainge. However with Irving & Horford all but gone as well as the cap situation, the Celtics front-office is going to have to make some very difficult choices and then get incredibly lucky. That isn't an optimal strategy...

MaMo/Rozier are very replaceable. Kyrie stings. I debated you earlier this offseason on this, but you'll get no argument from me now. Al Horford (& Baynes) leaving has me concerned

You're right, a #6- 8 EC seed is in play, Danny needs to do a ton of work. We'll probably end up being a scrappy Brad Stevens team that outperforms, which many of us will enjoy after the embarrassment of last season.

So, I'm leaning towards avoiding Vucevic(age), Kemba (age) and Russell (defense). And hoping Danny makes an attempt on Brogdon, maybe the Bucks go cheap. Otherwise, go the value route with the CAP SPACE on short/cheap deals for Tyus Jones or Pat Beverly, Dedmon or Aminu. Keep maximum flexibility.
Put Danny, Brad, Larry Bird and Pritchard in a room and the Celts don't leave without either Turner or Sabonis.

 

[mcpickl]

I didn't have time to watch a ton of regular season games, but what progress did Brown make last year? His stats are almost identical it seems. He hasn't really developed as a passer, shooter, finisher, etc... The turnovers have gotten a bit better, and that's about it? I get he started cold, and finished hot, but at the end of the day, his age 22 season looks an awful lot like his other seasons.

I'm not sure Sabonis is who I'd be targeting, but I'd be very open to trading Brown in the abstract. He seems like a guy who is less than the sum of his physical gifts (the prototypical player without much "feel for the game", except smart and coachable enough not to be a total trainwreck like Wiggins).

I think Jaylen finished on the fast break better this year, but that's about it. I do think in such a weird season for him, he may have just been struggling to keep his head above water and staying about the same while not great, is OK.

Offensively I don't think he'll ever be much of a passer, especially once he starts to drive he has blinders on. I said before last year that I'd want him to work on is scoring in the post and free throws. He's almost always going to be guarded be someone smaller/weaker than he is. If he could just add some post scoring ability I think he'd get a lot of easy buckets and foul shots. He'd have to get that free throw percentage up to be effective though.

 

[lexrageorge]

If you think Kemba's game is a better fit for the team than Kyrie's, then it's not a given that the team is worse relative to the competition. Tatum is a candidate for improvement, and maybe Brown fits better with everyone now that MaMo is gone. Rozier's loss is an overall positive, and they can probably get Wannamaker back for the vet min anyway. Horford's loss is a problem. The team would still be counting on improvement from Hayward, but I think that would be the case regardless.

Tatum/Brown/Hayward/Kemba plus random room exception big is not a bad team, and it is one with upside. The bench minutes will see a lot of Semi, TL, and the draft picks, but there's still probably some moves that can be made. They would be a candidate to make some noise at the trade deadline, and they'll have the MLE to use the following season.

It's not a championship contender, but really doesn't strike me as an 8 seed team either. Kemba would have a much, much, much better supporting cast than he had his last season at Charlotte, who just missed being an 8 seed.

 

[luckiestman]

If Klay is not offered the max by GSW to we go after him? I would but I am nuts about Klay. Dont think he is an East coast guy.

 

[bsj]

Kemba + Cauley Stein would be a perfect way to round out this roster, and i think could be had from a financial standpoint

 

[DJnVa]

Kemba + Cauley Stein would be a perfect way to round out this roster, and i think could be had from a financial standpoint

Cauly-Stein plays really bad defense and blocked about as many shots per game as Kyrie did.

Seriously.

 

[mauf]

You can assume that Walker and Irving are a wash (I don't agree but no need to debate) but the loss of Horford plus Morris and Rozier's ability to score, even with their well documented warts, is going to make this team significantly worse than last season.

Rozier and MaMo were the two worst members of the C’s rotation. Whoever Danny plugs in those spots probably won’t be a significant downgrade.

The problem is that Al, while not the C’s best player the past two seasons, was their most indispensable player. While there are probably metrics that show a path to offsetting Al’s loss by signing someone with the room exception and counting on organic improvements from the young guys currently on the roster, I just don’t think that’s going to hang together in real life.

 

[RedOctober3829]

If they get Kemba and a serviceable big man, I don't think a repeat of last season's record is out of the question. I would think Kemba would equal or surpass Kyrie's production because he's both as good of an offensive player and more durable(missed 5 games combined in last 4 seasons). Tatum and Brown should see an uptick in their play. I would also investigate trying to sign Jared Dudley as a MaMo replacement. He's expressed a desire to play in Boston.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Rozier and MaMo were the two worst members of the C’s rotation. Whoever Danny plugs in those spots probably won’t be a significant downgrade.

The problem is that Al, while not the C’s best player the past two seasons, was their most indispensable player. While there are probably metrics that show a path to offsetting Al’s loss by signing someone with the room exception and counting on organic improvements from the young guys currently on the roster, I just don’t think that’s going to hang together in real life.

To be clear I don't love Rozier or Morris and I am not sorry to see them go.

That said, they both can create their own offense - as painful as that can be sometimes, there is value to it. Finding guys who have that skill set is difficult on a tight budget, especially guys who can shoot from deep. If the C's sign Walker to a max deal and renounce those two players, they aren't going to replace their contributions easily if at all.

Regarding your point about Horford, the team also won't be able to replace his contributions including all the little things that aren't measured with traditional or even available advanced statistics.

In general, I think people underestimate how much of an impact that elite players like Irving and Horford have on their teammates. They both contribute in different ways to the spacing that guys like Tatum, Brown and Hayward got over the past two years.

Finally, regarding those three players, its reasonable to expect some improvement from each - more maturity in the case of the Js and better health in the case of Hayward. However neither Brown nor Tatum has shown any sign that they are ready to be a lead scorer yet if at all. And Hayward was never that guy.

When I plan, I try to be realistic in my projections and I would assume roughly the same production next year from all three. There will be variance, of course, from the aforementioned loss of spacing as well as from any sort of leaps these guys make. But hoping for that the latter isn't really a great strategy.

As such, my base case is that the C's whether with Walker, Vucevic or Russell, will be a tough regular season team that plays hard every night but struggles to get buckets when they need them. Six through eight seed sounds about right to me as a result.

I hope everyone else forecasting a much higher seed and a team that fights its way into the ECF or beyond is right and that I am very, very wrong.

 

[Tony C]

If Klay is not offered the max by GSW to we go after him? I would but I am nuts about Klay. Dont think he is an East coast guy.

Yeah...my understanding is GS or the 2 L.A. teams are all he'd consider.

 

[TripleOT]

What does Kemba do well? He's not a very good shooter (lower career eFG, 2FG%, and 3FG% than Jaylen Brown). He a decent assist guy, but nothing special. He's small, and not much of a defender.

What is he besides a guy who puts up 20 points on 17 shots on a nowhere team?

 

[lovegtm]

...

Finally, regarding those three players, its reasonable to expect some improvement from each - more maturity in the case of the Js and better health in the case of Hayward. However neither Brown nor Tatum has shown any sign that they are ready to be a lead scorer yet if at all. And Hayward was never that guy.

When I plan, I try to be realistic in my projections and I would assume roughly the same production next year from all three. There will be variance, of course, from the aforementioned loss of spacing as well as from any sort of leaps these guys make. But hoping for that the latter isn't really a great strategy.

...

The expected outcome for any promising young guy is to not become a star, and the expected outcome for any team is to not win a championship. But when you have a couple young guys with upside, and no other clear path to a star, hoping for leaps is actually a really rational strategy, because you have no other direct route to upside, and the 10-20% chance that Tatum or Brown becomes a star has very little opportunity cost. If you don't get the leaps, you go ahead and tear things down and go to the lottery or other means of generating upside.

I'm not disagreeing with your expected value assessments at all: I fully expect that the Celtics will regress next year, and I also expect that Brown and Tatum won't make huge leaps. But there's enough of a chance that they do that the team needs to keep nailing the moves around them, keeping the timelines on track, and not panicking. The biggest mistake you can make now is to pull an Orlando and trade an Oladipo for an Ibaka.

 

[bowiac]

I think lovegtm has the right perspective here. There's a really good chance the Celtics are headed straight into NBA purgatory right now, winning between 45-55 games for like a decade, but never being a credible contender. That both sucks, and is also just life in the NBA. The Celtics had three max guys in Hayward, Horford, and Kyrie, and have effectively lost all three. It's tough to come up with a strategy for contention after that which doesn't look a bit uninspiring by comparison.

They can sign a max guy, and fill around the edges, and it looks like a 48-52 win team to me. They can bring back Morris, Rozier, and sign a $15M FA, and you have what looks to be a 46-50 win team to me. Opinions can differ, but they're all just nibbling around the edges. The Celtics path to contention is around Brown and/or Tatum having major growth, and for some of their remaining draft assets (including Langford/Williams) exceeding expectations and turning into high level players. That's obviously unlikely, but there just doesn't seem to be a better plan.

There is a timeline issue here, where if the Celtics don't use this cap space now, they're going to lose like $12M of it next year due to Brown's cap hold. So if you don't love the FA options available now, there's a case for trading Brown for someone with longer to go on their rookie deal to get them another year to kick around ideas. This would be something like dealing Brown for Wendell Carter Jr or Lonzo Ball. I sort of like that idea, but that's because I'm pretty down on Brown, and in particular down on his upside. If you believe in Brown as an upside play, then even that doesn't make sense to me.

 

[mauf]

What does Kemba do well? He's not a very good shooter (lower career eFG, 2FG%, and 3FG% than Jaylen Brown). He a decent assist guy, but nothing special. He's small, and not much of a defender.

What is he besides a guy who puts up 20 points on 17 shots on a nowhere team?

Kemba’s first four seasons drag down his career averages; he has been a much better shooter (and player) the past four seasons. And while I’m not as bullish on Kemba as others here, it seems reasonable to expect him to become a tick more efficient if he joins a team with more offensive talent than the Hornets (which is a very low bar to clear).

 

[lovegtm]

I think lovegtm has the right perspective here. There's a really good chance the Celtics are headed straight into NBA purgatory right now, winning between 45-55 games for like a decade, but never being a credible contender. That both sucks, and is also just life in the NBA. The Celtics had three max guys in Hayward, Horford, and Kyrie, and have effectively lost all three. It's tough to come up with a strategy for contention after that which doesn't look a bit uninspiring by comparison.

They can sign a max guy, and fill around the edges, and it looks like a 48-52 win team to me. They can bring back Morris, Rozier, and sign a $15M FA, and you have what looks to be a 46-50 win team to me. Opinions can differ, but they're all just nibbling around the edges. The Celtics path to contention is around Brown and/or Tatum having major growth, and for some of their remaining draft assets (including Langford/Williams) exceeding expectations and turning into high level players. That's obviously unlikely, but there just doesn't seem to be a better plan.

There is a timeline issue here, where if the Celtics don't use this cap space now, they're going to lose like $12M of it next year due to Brown's cap hold. So if you don't love the FA options available now, there's a case for trading Brown for someone with longer to go on their rookie deal to get them another year to kick around ideas. This would be something like dealing Brown for Wendell Carter Jr or Lonzo Ball. I sort of like that idea, but that's because I'm pretty down on Brown, and in particular down on his upside. If you believe in Brown as an upside play, then even that doesn't make sense to me.

When you put it this way, I think the way to use cap space is clear: you sign a guy like Brogdon or Vucevic, who is unlikely to have major upside, but would fit perfectly on a team where Brown or Tatum takes a leap. If you end up having to blow things up, they’re very tradeable.

As far as trading Brown: I’m totally fine in theory with the idea of trading him now for a guy the team thinks has more upside. I’m just uninspired by the names mentioned so far (Sabonis, Ball, etc) as options. Reasonable minds can differ here—I just feel that what he did as a 21 year-old in the playoffs is hard to fake, and last year’s team was bizarre, even by NBA standards.

 

[HowBoutDemSox]

Johnathan Tjarks of the Ringer makes the case for Vucevic over Walker as a free agent target. His premise is similar to what we’ve discussed on here recently about how the Celtics’ clearest path to resembling contention is further development from Tatum and Brown:

Boston doesn’t need a point guard who will take away opportunities from Tatum and Brown. It needs a center who will allow them to do more with the opportunities they receive. Horford was a bigger factor than Kyrie in Tatum’s and Brown’s development. They don’t necessarily need to play with a great point guard; they can already create their own shots. What they need is a center who can space the floor and make plays for them.

 

[Captaincoop]

I'm not sure I agree with the logic there.

They were both at their best (so far) in the 2018 playoffs, when Rozier was playing the role of ball dominant, scoring guard. He took more shots than either of the J's, and they each averaged 18 ppg.

Now you've added Hayward, but lost Horford and Morris (who was a gunner in his own right).

I don't see how they don't need another scoring guard, frankly. And finally, I don't agree that Brown is best at creating his own shot, although Tatum is.

 

[Cellar-Door]

What does Kemba do well? He's not a very good shooter (lower career eFG, 2FG%, and 3FG% than Jaylen Brown). He a decent assist guy, but nothing special. He's small, and not much of a defender.

What is he besides a guy who puts up 20 points on 17 shots on a nowhere team?

Last 4 years he's shot 38% from 3 on 7.5 3PA a game, his turnover rate for his usage is insane, draws FTs at a good rate and converts them, he's a really good player, stuck on a really bad team.

 

[DJnVa]

What is he besides a guy who puts up 20 points on 17 shots on a nowhere team?

Tough to quantify, but on a team with better players around him, perhaps he can put up a few more points on a fewer shots. He was the focus of the Charlotte offense and therefore the opposing team's defense. He *should* get some better looks playing with a team like Boston, without the (I assume) ego of Kyrie. And I mean that as basketball ego.