Trading Chips and Keepers

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,998
Haiku
Is there anybody on the 2013-14 Celtics who will be around in two years?
 
Kevin Stevens' contract is for six years, so I would put the Celtics on a 4-year plan. My initial assumption is that everybody over 22 is on the block, leaving only Bradley, Olynyk, Pressey and Sullinger as presumptive keepers -- and if any trading partner wants them enough to overpay, they're probably available too. Certainly Bradley has the talent as a backcourt stopper to make him an asset to a playoff team.
 
Olynyk has moves and length, but needs seasoning and time for him to adjust to the speed of the pro game. He'll probably be around for at least one year. Sullinger has the skills and the bulk to be a keeper, but there are plenty of ifs -- back injuries, and possibly character as well.
 
Perhaps Vitor Faverani is a keeper. Every team, no matter how bad, needs inside presence, and Faverani appears to have it, with 9 blocks and 21 rebounds in two games. It's not immediately apparent how he does it, since he doesn't have conspicuous jumping ability, but he is 6'11 and 250 pounds. On the other hand, he is already 25 so his developmental ceiling might be low, and again, a playoff team might need an inside presence.
 
Rondo is a genuine star, but too old for this team. When he's healthy, he is on permanent audition. Green, Bass, Lee, Humphries, Wallace, Crawford and Brooks are all veterans with identifiable skills. They'll be gone within a year, either by the trading deadline, or during the offseason. Talking points for the trading negotiations:
 
Bass, Humphries and Wallace may have hefty contracts, but they are not signed for the long term. Ainge needs to clear some playing time at power forward, preferably by trading one or more of Bass, Humphries and Wallace ASAP. Bass has added a left-handed dribble-drive over the last two years, making him more than just a mid-range jump-shooter -- he seems to be the first up for audition. Crawford and Brooks are gunners, and occasionally contending teams need instant offense. Lee is an athletic shooting guard who could be a gunner if he absolutely had too.
 
This week's keeper is next week's market special.
 

Blacken

Robespierre in a Cape
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2007
12,152
Wallace is signed for another three years, $30 million. He is signed long-term and is going to be tougher to move.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,864
Somewhere
I was wondering if Brad was a nickname, like "Doc".
 
But along those lines, no one on this team should get comfortable, except maybe Gerald Wallace. I think we'll see two or three trades before the season's done.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,962
Vitor Faverani will be around in 2 years unless the C's draft a very capable center, which is unlikely.  And Wallace will most likely be around because of his undesirable contract, not because he is a keeper.   Beyond that, nobody is a keeper.  They are all poker chips to be shoved onto the table.  This team is not constructed as a real roster, only as a stockpile.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
I see Olynyk here for a few more years.  If he learns to score he will probably be a keeper, if he doesnt I would imagine they give him more time to learn because if you can find a 4 with his skillset who can score they are very valuable.  And for some reason I think Danny really likes him, but beyond a gut feel I dont have anything to back that up.
 
Everyone else is probably a goner.  It looks like Wallace might look decent enough to be traded even if his value is just a salary slot.  Sully is an interesting case because if they can work out a reasonable deal I could see him staying.  Rondo is gone either via trade or in free agency.  We dont have any 2s you would really want to keep.  Favs another interesting case but I would imagine a cheap, complimentary 5 would have more valuable on the trade market than trying to help this roster.  Overall the cupboard is filled with mac&cheese, white rice and pasta, just nothing remarkable to get excited about.
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
First, I think Humphries, Brooks, Crawford and Bogans (only 1 guaranteed year) will simply be allowed to walk. They are not trade chips, because shedding these agreements will put the C's in position to sign a decent free agent. In fact, if they also renounce or trade Bradley (without taking comparable salary back), Ainge could put a competitive offer sheet on the table for a player like Greg Monroe.

I see three potential keepers: Olynick, Sullinger and Faverani. But I'd move any of them if the right offer came along. I like Olynick, but I would have drafted Adetokunbo.

Everyone else should be on the block. They are stuck with Wallace until the 2015 trade deadline (at the earliest), but you never know.

Rondo is obviously their biggest asset. The upcoming draft has good pgs and forwards, but no centers. Depending on how the ping pong balls fall, I could see Ainge drafting a pg and then trading Rondo on draft night for a big man.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
Humphries is a chip, not a big one but a chip.  Say you are a contending team at the deadline and you need a 4 to either come off the bench or compliment a decent starting lineup, Humphries could step into a situation like that an rebound and provide some scoring.  Considering he has an expiring deal so its really just a rental and suddenly he has some value.  Maybe a team with a pick project in the 20s would be willing to give that up, or maybe we could get an intriguing but somewhat flawed young player.
 
I dont see Danny renouncing Bradley.  Allegedly the Celts were talking with him about a 4 year deal, so Danny must like him somewhat.  He is going to be an RFA, so Danny would have the option to resign him if the price isnt too high, or he can sign and trade him.  Chances are a Bradly S&T + moderate FA signing would bring more value than a larger FA signing.  If I had my choice, I would send Bradley packing yesterday.
 
I predict Wallace will be traded next offseason or in season, I have a feeling he is going to look somewhat useful again.
 
One last prediction, Jeff Green will probably be here unfortunately.  I dont think he is movable, and in 14/15 he has a player option for ~$9M which I think he is going to find preferable than free agency
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,298
New York, NY
The Celtics medium term cap picture is enough of a mess that it might make sense to trade our this year's expiring deals for guys with an extra year of commitment if that brings real value back. Ainge isn't going to be able to make any moves that make this team good next offseason with the limited flexibility he will have. On the other hand, if things break right with Green and Wallace, there is some chance of getting out of all substantial commitments by the end of 2015 offseason. If they can do that, and have done well in the draft, they could be in a scenario where they can effectuate a rapid turn around by adding experienced talent to a young roster with players with impact potential. 
 
The problem with this plan is that it requires ownership to commit a pretty substantial amount of money to buying assets that probably aren't really worth much. Ownership could very rightly prefer to shed payroll in the short term while their revenues will be down because the team is awful. Is a late first round pick, for example, really worth taking on an extra $10-15 million in 2014/15?
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
Humphries is a chip, not a big one but a chip.  Say you are a contending team at the deadline and you need a 4 to either come off the bench or compliment a decent starting lineup, Humphries could step into a situation like that an rebound and provide some scoring.  Considering he has an expiring deal so its really just a rental and suddenly he has some value.  Maybe a team with a pick project in the 20s would be willing to give that up, or maybe we could get an intriguing but somewhat flawed young player.
The problem with trading Humphries is that the C's would have to take 8 million in salary back. Unless the 8M was also expiring (unlikely), that leaves them with only their MLE for free agents this Summer and takes them out of the running for a player like Monroe or Hayward. It's not worth it. Besides, Humphries' trade value is going down with each DNP-CD.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
The cap was $59M last year, the Celts have $59M in guaranteed salaries next year on the books, I dont see how we are getting significantly under the cap.  And if Hayward costs anything more than the MLE I dont want anything to do with him anyway.  As for Monroe he would be intriguing but Dumars loves, loves to overpay for guys (Smith, cancer patient, Gordon, Stuckey) so I wouldnt be surprised if he is staying there anyway
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
The cap was $59M last year, the Celts have $59M in guaranteed salaries next year on the books, I dont see how we are getting significantly under the cap.  And if Hayward costs anything more than the MLE I dont want anything to do with him anyway.  As for Monroe he would be intriguing but Dumars loves, loves to overpay for guys (Smith, cancer patient, Gordon, Stuckey) so I wouldnt be surprised if he is staying there anyway
Not according to Hoopshype: http://hoopshype.com/salaries/boston.htm

If you put Faverani's $2M back in (which may or may not be guaranteed), they're at $50M.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
Ah, I see the problem, bb-ref has the Bogans contract listed as if its guaranteed but its not.  If bb-ref took out Brooks and his $2M, they are both basically at around $50-51M, plus a few mill in cap holds for empty roster spots and you are at ~$54M, basically just under and you might as well go over and use the MLE.  They would need some serious maneuvering to get significant cap room.  There best chance is probably to hope that the cap goes up but then everyone else will have some cash to burn too.  At the end of the day, I just dont see them as big players in the free agent market with this situation
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
Ah, I see the problem, bb-ref has the Bogans contract listed as if its guaranteed but its not.  If bb-ref took out Brooks and his $2M, they are both basically at around $50-51M, plus a few mill in cap holds for empty roster spots and you are at ~$54M, basically just under and you might as well go over and use the MLE.  They would need some serious maneuvering to get significant cap room.  There best chance is probably to hope that the cap goes up but then everyone else will have some cash to burn too.  At the end of the day, I just dont see them as big players in the free agent market with this situation
It depends on what they want to do with Bradley. You are also assuming that Ainge will be unable to shed additional salary between now and the end of the year.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
64,893
Rotten Apple
This is a franchise that has hit the Reset button and everybody knows it. Therefore, everybody and anything is on the table so long as it provides a long term improvement.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
Yes, I am assuming he cant shed anything.  I cant envision us trading Wallace or Green for an expiring at the moment.  I dont know who wants to pay the $10M Lee has coming after this year, and Bass is on the books for $7M next year as well which I dont see as particularly attractive either.  I cant envision Danny giving up assets to unload any of these guys, and I dont see how any of these guys look like assets to anyone else.  I would be pleasantly surprised but also shocked if he found a way to shed anyone from this group
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
IMHO Bass will look almost as attractive as Humphries to a contender looking for a bench power forward at the deadline, especially since it looks like Humphries will be spending the year rotting on the bench.
And Ainge can always shed Rondo, even if he can't move anyone else.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
Bass unfortunately has the Jeff Green rebounding disease and Humphries doesnt.  So if we try to find Hump a home as a complimentary player his ability to rebound can help that other team.  Bass's ability to hit some open jumpers isnt all that useful because if you are trading for his jumpers your team is really, really bad.
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
Bass unfortunately has the Jeff Green rebounding disease and Humphries doesnt.  So if we try to find Hump a home as a complimentary player his ability to rebound can help that other team.  Bass's ability to hit some open jumpers isnt all that useful because if you are trading for his jumpers your team is really, really bad.
Depends on the hypothetical contender. Maybe they have lost a scorer off the bench to injury and need to replace that. Frankly a team would have to be stupid or desperate to have interest in either Humphries or Bass.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,119
Row 14
Brickowski said:
Depends on the hypothetical contender. Maybe they have lost a scorer off the bench to injury and need to replace that. Frankly a team would have to be stupid or desperate to have interest in either Humphries or Bass.
 
I can see Houston having some interest in Bass for Asik
 

cumicon

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2007
86
Brickowski said:
The upcoming draft has good pgs and forwards, but no centers.
 
Joel Embiid is a really nice prospect at center.  He could potentially go #1.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
5,981
TomRicardo said:
 
I can see Houston having some interest in Bass for Asik
Is this a joke? If the Rockets decide to move Asik (and all Morey has said is that they have no interest in doing so), they'd certainly be able to get a whole lot more than Brandon Bass. If I had to guess, the Rockets would probably want Rondo (which clearly would not interest the Celtics), but I'm fairly certain they hang up laughing if the first name out of Ainge's mouth is Bass.
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
Well, Asik is scheduled to make a shitload of money in 2014-15 (his salary jumps from 5.2M this year to 14.9M next year) so I can see why Houston would want to trade him, especially now that they have Howard. Morey is just posturing when he says he has no interest in trading Asik and everybody knows it. The question is, would Ainge want him at that price-- even for Bass?
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,564
wutang112878 said:
Humphries is a chip, not a big one but a chip.  Say you are a contending team at the deadline and you need a 4 to either come off the bench or compliment a decent starting lineup, Humphries could step into a situation like that an rebound and provide some scoring.  Considering he has an expiring deal so its really just a rental and suddenly he has some value.  Maybe a team with a pick project in the 20s would be willing to give that up, or maybe we could get an intriguing but somewhat flawed young player.
 
I dont see Danny renouncing Bradley.  Allegedly the Celts were talking with him about a 4 year deal, so Danny must like him somewhat.  He is going to be an RFA, so Danny would have the option to resign him if the price isnt too high, or he can sign and trade him.  Chances are a Bradly S&T + moderate FA signing would bring more value than a larger FA signing.  If I had my choice, I would send Bradley packing yesterday.
 
I predict Wallace will be traded next offseason or in season, I have a feeling he is going to look somewhat useful again.
 
One last prediction, Jeff Green will probably be here unfortunately.  I dont think he is movable, and in 14/15 he has a player option for ~$9M which I think he is going to find preferable than free agency
You think Humphries is a chip at 1yr/12M, but you're worried about Jeff Green picking up his 9.2M option for 15-16?
 
Unless Green has major injury issues between then and now, he'd be a much better chip than Humphries is now. I'd bet if he's not injured, he turns down that option and gets a longterm deal for similar yearly salary.
 
I'm surprised a lot of people are still so down on Green. He's never going to be a star, but he can be a starter on a winning team which is a lot more than can be said about the vast majority of the Celtics current assets.
 
I wouldn't worry about Greens rebounding much either. Stevens looks to be using him in a role best suiting his skills(and lack thereof in rebounding) as a 2 guard. He's been used as a 3/4 just  because of his height but I think his skills make him much more of a 2/3.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
5,981
Brickowski said:
Well, Asik is scheduled to make a shitload of money in 2014-15 (his salary jumps from 5.2M this year to 14.9M next year) so I can see why Houston would want to trade him, especially now that they have Howard. Morey is just posturing when he says he has no interest in trading Asik and everybody knows it. The question is, would Ainge want him at that price-- even for Bass?
This doesn't make any sense. Big men are always at a premium. Asik is one of the best interior defenders in the NBA, and one of the best rebounders. He sucks offensively, but then again, if he had a better offensive game he'd be a max salary player. If Asik were to be made available, then I'd imagine at least half the teams in the NBA would inquire about him given the shortage of competent bigs...and Omer Asik is a more than competent. Additionally, while his salary may jump next year, his cap hit does not, which is all that most of the teams that would be going after him would care about anyway. Brandon Bass is a player most people this offseason were chalking up as a total loss, and a guy the Celtics would be lucky to be able to move for anything of value this offseason. The idea that the Rockets would give up Omer Asik for him is simply absurd, with the only thing more absurd being the contention that somehow Danny Ainge would hesitate for even a split second before making that deal if Daryl Morey were to temporarily lose his mind and offer it.
 
Simply put, if you were to go to any other board and say "what do you guys think about a Brandon Bass for Omer Asik trade", I'm not sure you'd find a single person who'd agree the Rockets would make that trade.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,119
Row 14
Scoops Bolling said:
This doesn't make any sense. Big men are always at a premium. Asik is one of the best interior defenders in the NBA, and one of the best rebounders. He sucks offensively, but then again, if he had a better offensive game he'd be a max salary player. If Asik were to be made available, then I'd imagine at least half the teams in the NBA would inquire about him given the shortage of competent bigs...and Omer Asik is a more than competent. Additionally, while his salary may jump next year, his cap hit does not, which is all that most of the teams that would be going after him would care about anyway. Brandon Bass is a player most people this offseason were chalking up as a total loss, and a guy the Celtics would be lucky to be able to move for anything of value this offseason. The idea that the Rockets would give up Omer Asik for him is simply absurd, with the only thing more absurd being the contention that somehow Danny Ainge would hesitate for even a split second before making that deal if Daryl Morey were to temporarily lose his mind and offer it.
 
Simply put, if you were to go to any other board and say "what do you guys think about a Brandon Bass for Omer Asik trade", I'm not sure you'd find a single person who'd agree the Rockets would make that trade.
 
Asik is killing his value right now.  The Rockets are in win it now mode and need a PF who can play away from the hoop and can help defend wings.  Brandon Bass is an immediate fit.  Not a lot of teams would be willing to give a PF who can play in their rotation right now to take 8.9 million dollars of Asik. 
 
Rondo is worth a lot more than an 27 YO Asik at this point. 
 
I think you could start with Something like Bass / Lee for Asik.
 

Brickowski

Banned
Feb 15, 2011
3,755
Forget about basketball value. We all agree that Asik has more value than Bass. The question is, how much luxury tax are the Rockets willing to pay to keep Asik?
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
5,981
Brickowski said:
Forget about basketball value. We all agree that Asik has more value than Bass. The question is, how much luxury tax are the Rockets willing to pay to keep Asik?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the cap hit, not the actual salary, that gets figured into the luxury tax? Assuming I'm correct in my recollection that that is the case, then Asik's luxury tax is fairly negligible in the grand scheme of things.
 
As for Asik's value decline...he looks like exactly the same guy he always was, just with a little bit of bad luck in shooting thus far (in a total of 3 games). I don't think Asik's value has shifted at all, and certainly not enough to make Morey deal pennies on the dollar for Bass. If Morey wants Bass, he can get him for a pick and one of the flier prospects they still have, he's not going to waste an asset like Asik when he can spend less.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,426
TomRicardo said:
 
Asik is killing his value right now.  The Rockets are in win it now mode and need a PF who can play away from the hoop and can help defend wings.  Brandon Bass is an immediate fit.  Not a lot of teams would be willing to give a PF who can play in their rotation right now to take 8.9 million dollars of Asik. 
 
Rondo is worth a lot more than an 27 YO Asik at this point. 
 
I think you could start with Something like Bass / Lee for Asik.
 
That is not a realistic trade offer.
 

brohirrum

New Member
Apr 3, 2013
18
There is zero chance bass goes to Huston for Asik. 
 
If we are lucky enough to trade him it will be because injuries start to stack up for a team desperate for the playoffs.
 
If Lee keeps playing decently i can see the Celtics moving him easier. athletic wing who can *sometimes* shoot.  
 
Memphis seems like a potential spot for Green or Lee. 
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
mcpickl said:
You think Humphries is a chip at 1yr/12M, but you're worried about Jeff Green picking up his 9.2M option for 15-16?
 
Unless Green has major injury issues between then and now, he'd be a much better chip than Humphries is now. I'd bet if he's not injured, he turns down that option and gets a longterm deal for similar yearly salary.
 
I'm surprised a lot of people are still so down on Green. He's never going to be a star, but he can be a starter on a winning team which is a lot more than can be said about the vast majority of the Celtics current assets.
 
I wouldn't worry about Greens rebounding much either. Stevens looks to be using him in a role best suiting his skills(and lack thereof in rebounding) as a 2 guard. He's been used as a 3/4 just  because of his height but I think his skills make him much more of a 2/3.
 
First, in full disclosure, my hatred of Jeff Green affects my rational thinking towards him.  Assuming they had equal talent, I think 4s who actually play like 4s are more valuable than wings and thats probably the category Green fits in.  That said Humphries isnt playing, so I guess he might not have any value whatsoever.  However, with Green I will point out that $9M who are supposed to lead your team offensively generally shouldnt be getting benched for the 4th quarter and only play 20 min in a game. 
 
Thats kind of what sums up Green to me, he is kind of bipolar.  Sometimes he looks great, sometimes you barely notice he is on the court and it looks like he doesnt belong.  You are probably right, he probably gets another $9M contract, but I simply cant understand why.
 
The reason I am down on the guy is really mentality related.  We have no offensively talented players, Green has basically been asked to lead this team offensively.  I want him to have the 05/06 and 06/07 Paul Pierce attitude "ok, this team sucks, but I am going to shoot 20 times a game and try to carry them offensively".  I have a feeling that mentality just isnt inside him, and I dont think his game suits that either.  I look at Green and know he will crumble as your best offensively player but his role is best suited to be a slightly greater than complimentary player on a good team, so I just cant stand watching the square peg try to fit in the round hole when I also hate his game.  Again, thats my irrational hatred.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,510
Brickowski said:
Forget about basketball value. We all agree that Asik has more value than Bass. The question is, how much luxury tax are the Rockets willing to pay to keep Asik?
Scoops correctly noted above that for tax purposes Asik costs 8.3 Million for either the Rockets or any other teams trading for him.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,773
Brickowski said:
First, I think Humphries, Brooks, Crawford and Bogans (only 1 guaranteed year) will simply be allowed to walk. They are not trade chips, because shedding these agreements will put the C's in position to sign a decent free agent. In fact, if they also renounce or trade Bradley (without taking comparable salary back), Ainge could put a competitive offer sheet on the table for a player like Greg Monroe.
 
In order to Detroit to blink on Monroe, you're going to have to go to max, and I'd really rather not see Boston paying 4/60 to a 6'10" center who tops out at above average. That's how you build yourself a first round playoff casualty (especially as you would be sacrificing your perimeter defense to build around an undersized center whose defense is average on a good day).
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,773
cumicon said:
 
Joel Embiid is a really nice prospect at center.  He could potentially go #1.
 
God I hope so, because that takes him off Boston's board and puts them in line for an NBA all star.
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
nighthob said:
 
In order to Detroit to blink on Monroe, you're going to have to go to max, and I'd really rather not see Boston paying 4/60 to a 6'10" center who tops out at above average. That's how you build yourself a first round playoff casualty (especially as you would be sacrificing your perimeter defense to build around an undersized center whose defense is average on a good day).
 
Agreed. Detroit could also counter a 4/60 offer with a 5 year offer at a lower annual salary. The new CBA makes it a lot easier for teams to keep their RFAs, except when they were second round picks. Detroit--or anybody else for that matter--has no reason to let an RFA walk away for nothing. If the C's wanted Monroe, the conversation begins with Rondo and requires finding a team to take on Jennings.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,773
Grin&MartyBarret said:
 
Agreed. Detroit could also counter a 4/60 offer with a 5 year offer at a lower annual salary. The new CBA makes it a lot easier for teams to keep their RFAs, except when they were second round picks. Detroit--or anybody else for that matter--has no reason to let an RFA walk away for nothing. If the C's wanted Monroe, the conversation begins with Rondo and requires finding a team to take on Jennings.
 
Now that I could see as a realistic option, if a third team could be found for Jennings to throw picks into a deal then Rondo/Green to Detroit for Monroe/Stuckey/picks probably works for both teams (I wonder if Rich Cho has given up on MKG and could be talked into sending him and Detroit's #1 to Boston in exchange for Jennings?)
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
mcpickl said:
You think Humphries is a chip at 1yr/12M, but you're worried about Jeff Green picking up his 9.2M option for 15-16?
 
Unless Green has major injury issues between then and now, he'd be a much better chip than Humphries is now. I'd bet if he's not injured, he turns down that option and gets a longterm deal for similar yearly salary.
 
I'm surprised a lot of people are still so down on Green. He's never going to be a star, but he can be a starter on a winning team which is a lot more than can be said about the vast majority of the Celtics current assets.
 
I wouldn't worry about Greens rebounding much either. Stevens looks to be using him in a role best suiting his skills(and lack thereof in rebounding) as a 2 guard. He's been used as a 3/4 just  because of his height but I think his skills make him much more of a 2/3.
 
Humphries does have some value on the trade market, precisely because he's an expiring deal. Depending how the season plays out, there may well be teams who are angling for cap space this offseason. If the C's were willing to eat a bad contract in exchange for Humphries, they might be able to get something in return in the same way that Utah did this offseason when they took on Biedrins and Jefferson. 
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
nighthob said:
 
Now that I could see as a realistic option, if a third team could be found for Jennings to throw picks into a deal then Rondo/Green to Detroit for Monroe/Stuckey/picks probably works for both teams (I wonder if Rich Cho has given up on MKG and could be talked into sending him and Detroit's #1 to Boston in exchange for Jennings?)
 
I don't think the #1 from Detroit would carry enough value to convince them to take on Jennings. Wouldn't he just be an expensive backup to Walker, who they have to pay next year?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,773
Grin&MartyBarret said:
 
Humphries does have some value on the trade market, precisely because he's an expiring deal. Depending how the season plays out, there may well be teams who are angling for cap space this offseason. If the C's were willing to eat a bad contract in exchange for Humphries, they might be able to get something in return in the same way that Utah did this offseason when they took on Biedrins and Jefferson. 
 
Yeah, LA is already looking around for landing spots for Steve Nash to clear the books for the summer signing season, so if they could swap Brooklyn's pick for LA's in a Nash/Humphries swap it's give Ainge two shots in the top half of the draft (and help them in convincing NCAA guys to declare).
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,773
Grin&MartyBarret said:
 
I don't think the #1 from Detroit would carry enough value to convince them to take on Jennings. Wouldn't he just be an expensive backup to Walker, who they have to pay next year?
 
No, the Bobnets already have Detroit's 2014 #1, while Kemba Walker looks every bit a backup G and MKG seems to have turned into Gerald Wallace Jr. So Jennings is a real upgrade for them (over Kemba Walker), and allows them to consider two spots on the roster set going into the 2014 draft with two picks in the top half, plus Detroit's #1. So the deal for them would be Detroit's newly depreciated #1 and a draft failure for Jennings (and to me it wouldn't matter which, I'd be just as happy with Walker, at least he can dribble the ball over the half court line in under eight seconds).
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
nighthob said:
 
Now that I could see as a realistic option, if a third team could be found for Jennings to throw picks into a deal then Rondo/Green to Detroit for Monroe/Stuckey/picks probably works for both teams (I wonder if Rich Cho has given up on MKG and could be talked into sending him and Detroit's #1 to Boston in exchange for Jennings?)
 
How about:
 
Boston gets: 
Greg Monroe
Jameer Nelson
 
Detroit gets:
Rajon Rondo
 
Orlando gets:
Brandon Jennings
 
Not sure exactly how the picks would work out, but Jennings actually makes less money than Nelson over this year and the next, and his deal only extends a year beyond that.
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
nighthob said:
 
No, the Bobnets already have Detroit's 2014 #1, while Kemba Walker looks every bit a backup G and MKG seems to have turned into Gerald Wallace Jr. So Jennings is a real upgrade for them (over Kemba Walker), and allows them to consider two spots on the roster set going into the 2014 draft with two picks in the top half, plus Detroit's #1. So the deal for them would be Detroit's newly depreciated #1 and a draft failure for Jennings (and to me it wouldn't matter which, I'd be just as happy with Walker, at least he can dribble the ball over the half court line in under eight seconds).
 
I'm just not sure I see how Jennings is a clear upgrade over Walker. Stats from last year (per 36):
 
Walker -- 18.3 points, .517 ts%, 18.8 PER, .322% from 3, 3.6 trb, 5.9 ast.
Jennings -- 17.4 points, .510 ts%, 16.1 PER, .375% from 3, 3.1 trb, 6.5 ast.
 
It is a slight upgrade to Jennings, I suppose, but a big enough one to give up a 1st round pick? I don't see it.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,773
Grin&MartyBarret said:
 
I'm just not sure I see how Jennings is a clear upgrade over Walker. Stats from last year (per 36):
 
Walker -- 18.3 points, .517 ts%, 18.8 PER, .322% from 3, 3.6 trb, 5.9 ast.
Jennings -- 17.4 points, .510 ts%, 16.1 PER, .375% from 3, 3.1 trb, 6.5 ast.
 
It is a slight upgrade to Jennings, I suppose, but a big enough one to give up a 1st round pick? I don't see it.
 
A late first? Because the resulting Detroit squad would be in the 48-52 range and the pick we're discussing would be bottom 10.
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
nighthob said:
 
A late first? Because the resulting Detroit squad would be in the 48-52 range and the pick we're discussing would be bottom 10.
 
A late first and giving up on Kidd-Glichrest. For a really, really slight upgrade at PG. First round picks are more valuable in this CBA than they ever have been before.
 
The question is basically who has more value to the Bobcats: Kemba Walker, Michael Kidd Gilchrist, and a pick likely in the 20-25 range or Brandon Jennings. Given that Walker and Jennings are basically a wash, I just don't see how Cho concludes that that's a reasonable price for Jennings. I'm not even sure he does it if you remove kidd-Gilchrest from the equation altogether.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,298
New York, NY
nighthob said:
 
Yeah, LA is already looking around for landing spots for Steve Nash to clear the books for the summer signing season, so if they could swap Brooklyn's pick for LA's in a Nash/Humphries swap it's give Ainge two shots in the top half of the draft (and help them in convincing NCAA guys to declare).
 
This makes sense if you think Celtics ownership is willing to spend $10 million to get that pick upgrade. That's a lot of money to pay for what is likely not all that significant a move up in the draft.
 

wutang112878

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2007
6,066
JakeRae said:
 
This makes sense if you think Celtics ownership is willing to spend $10 million to get that pick upgrade. That's a lot of money to pay for what is likely not all that significant a move up in the draft.
 
I wouldnt completely put it past Danny.  He rolled the dice and traded Antoine for Raef who had about twice the money and years left on his deal, and the 'assets' beyond Raef were Jiri Welsch and a 1st rounder.  He also took on $30M in Wallace's salary to get the Nets 3 first rounders, granted PP&KG had value so its not $10M per pick, but its some significant dollars.  Trader Danny is crazy, which is highly entertaining, so Anything's Possible!!!
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,773
JakeRae said:
 
This makes sense if you think Celtics ownership is willing to spend $10 million to get that pick upgrade. That's a lot of money to pay for what is likely not all that significant a move up in the draft.
 
Well, it's a move from 20-25 to 13-15 because I think the Lakers are going to end up 9th in the West. So ten spots is pretty significant. Plus the salary difference isn't ten million, it's $7 million (Nash 2/19, Humphries 1/12), and the deal reduces salary for this season (which given how hard they're bumping the luxury isn't a bad thing) and addresses the biggest hole on the roster at the moment. If they buy Nash out it probably reduces the salary differential further. So the question is would they pay $4-$5 million to move up ten spots so that their other first isn't choosing from leftovers?
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,962
Well having Steve Nash playing PG for the Celtics would be a hell of a lot more entertaining than having Humphries warming the bench.  The roster is so poorly constructed right now (too many 2s and 4s, not enough of any other position) that a trade like this would really help make the team bearable to watch. 
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,998
Haiku
Koufax said:
Well having Steve Nash playing PG for the Celtics would be a hell of a lot more entertaining than having Humphries warming the bench.  The roster is so poorly constructed right now (too many 2s and 4s, not enough of any other position) that a trade like this would really help make the team bearable to watch.
Having a true point guard would probably help the development of the Celtics' young players and possible keepers on offense. It's hard to blame Sullinger, Bradley and Olynyk for stagnating on offense when nobody can get the ball to the right man in the right place at the right tempo.