Celtics Plan, Summer 2021

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
The idea would be that you save money and also make TT moveable (possibly as part of Smart+TT package for a wing upgrade). You'd be expecting Horford to play ~15-20 mins/game in this scenario, and I think he's a significant upgrade on TT, even at his age, since he's been in shrinkwrap awhile and could be managed ultra-conservatively going forward.

The problem with the "Kemba is a good player" line of reasoning, in terms of keeping him on the Celtics, is that he brings down the defense while not adding as much offensive upside as you'd want, because of Tatum/Brown already being there as primary scorers. We've already seen with Fournier how much value the team gets from a true off-ball threat, as opposed to a small guard masquerading as one. Adding another guy like that would have a huge compounding effect on offense.

However, if Orlando/NYK/NOP are in the market for Kemba, then I absolutely do that. OKC is a backup plan. I'm skeptical he'll have that kind of market, but his knee does seem to have been fairly healthy in a way that makes his final 2 years less risky.
Exactly. Additional flexibility to immediately build, now that Rob Williams has gone Gobert every shekel counts

Plus if Horford and Kemba both blow out and you're on the hook in 2022-23 (when TL's contract kicks in). Just can't ignore the downside with 6" PG with a degenerative knee issue that relies on quickness

Kemba gtd $37.6MM
Horford gtd $14.5MM
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Exactly. Additional flexibility to immediately build, now that Rob Williams has gone Gobert every shekel counts

Plus if Horford and Kemba both blow out and you're on the hook in 2022-23 (when TL's contract kicks in). Just can't ignore the downside with 6" PG with a degenerative knee issue that relies on quickness

Kemba gtd $37.6MM
Horford gtd $14.5MM
Does OKC have any playable guard/wing pieces who could be depth throw-ins? I just don't follow them at all currently.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,518
Maine
Kemba for a Draft Pick to OKC! (I ked I ked....though they do have a zillion picks).
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Does OKC have any playable guard/wing pieces who could be depth throw-ins? I just don't follow them at all currently.
They traded a guy no one was interested in besides me in Hamidou Daillo. Detroit said they saw him as part of his core and he's been lighting it up since he got to Detroit. Incredibly athletic 22 year old guard putting up numbers traded for a 2nd round pick and Svia.

OKC has a bunch of guards/wings who could be throw ins but they are all young with upside.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Here's an interesting fit, if the rumors that Clifford wants Kemba are true....
Garry Harris and Fultz for Kemba works under the cap.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,152
San Francisco
Here's an interesting fit, if the rumors that Clifford wants Kemba are true....
Garry Harris and Fultz for Kemba works under the cap.
Is Orlando doing that to get out from one or two years of Fultz's contract? Seems like a big time sell low for them, I am not sure I see the logic for Orlando.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,103
Is Orlando doing that to get out from one or two years of Fultz's contract? Seems like a big time sell low for them, I am not sure I see the logic for Orlando.
Especially since they just signed him to an extension in December, I doubt they’re looking to move him. And I’m especially dubious they’d take on the older, declining player in Kemba rather than the younger player with potential upside in Fultz, given how they just blew up their roster at the deadline. Maybe Clifford just wants a familiar veteran presence to set the tone for the rebuild, but I’d be shocked to see that deal.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Is Orlando doing that to get out from one or two years of Fultz's contract? Seems like a big time sell low for them, I am not sure I see the logic for Orlando.
I'm putting it out there on the back of rumors Clifford wanted Kemba at the deadline but the Celtics wouldn't move him. I do wonder if that changes with Vuc gone, maybe that is their... full rebuild move and they're less interested in Kemba.. but on the other hand, if they were full rebuild I really don't get the Harris move.

Especially since they just signed him to an extension in December, I doubt they’re looking to move him. And I’m especially dubious they’d take on the older, declining player in Kemba rather than the younger player with potential upside in Fultz, given how they just blew up their roster at the deadline. Maybe Clifford just wants a familiar veteran presence to set the tone for the rebuild, but I’d be shocked to see that deal.
Fultz extension was about locking him up fairly cheap, and remember was before he blew out his knee. Maybe I'm off on how they value him though,,, on the one hand he can't shoot at all, on the other he's only 22.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,085
I'm putting it out there on the back of rumors Clifford wanted Kemba at the deadline but the Celtics wouldn't move him. I do wonder if that changes with Vuc gone, maybe that is their... full rebuild move and they're less interested in Kemba.. but on the other hand, if they were full rebuild I really don't get the Harris move.


Fultz extension was about locking him up fairly cheap, and remember was before he blew out his knee. Maybe I'm off on how they value him though,,, on the one hand he can't shoot at all, on the other he's only 22.
They also need better long range shooting from their guards. Fultz, Hampton, Carter-Williams, and Anthony are all currently sub-par 3 point shooters and likely will be next year as well. Kemba's percentages are a little down this year but he'd still be their best shooter by a decent margin.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
However, if Orlando/NYK/NOP are in the market for Kemba, then I absolutely do that. OKC is a backup plan. I'm skeptical he'll have that kind of market, but his knee does seem to have been fairly healthy in a way that makes his final 2 years less risky.
I'm skeptical that the Pelicants or the Tragic would be in the market for Kemba. New York or Chicago, on the other hand, I can absolutely see as management in those places need to start showing postseason progress. If Boston could move Kemba into their cap space, I'd be amenable to using the TPE to relieve OKC of Horford for a draft pick.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
701
Here's an interesting fit, if the rumors that Clifford wants Kemba are true....
Garry Harris and Fultz for Kemba works under the cap.
What about Harris and Ross? It works and would seem more palatable for Orlando, and a better fit for the Celtics.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
What about Harris and Ross? It works and would seem more palatable for Orlando, and a better fit for the Celtics.
Maybe? I don't think it's a great fit. If you're trading Kemba I think you need a 1 back, in part because I don't think Smart/PP can be your rotation at the 1.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Maybe? I don't think it's a great fit. If you're trading Kemba I think you need a 1 back, in part because I don't think Smart/PP can be your rotation at the 1.
So is Fultz the back up PG in your scenario or the starting PG? Fultz is also 23 in May. I hate being that guy because the difference between 22 and 23 seems meh but it's huge.

I don't know what to think of Fultz but I'd be all over that trade just to get rid of Kemba. I'd then be looking to dump Harris on some team. I'd probably hang out to Fultz and see if he can re-develop his 3 point shot. There's a player there. I'm just not sure I want him starting games for the Celtics or playing alongside Marcus Smart for any real minutes. Hell, I wouldn't want to play any of Harris, Smart or Fultz together.

No clue what happened to Harris either. He went from Sniper to chucker over night.
3 seasons from 2016-2018: 368/946, .389 from 3. (.354, .420, .396)
Last 3 seasons: 176/527, .334 from 3 (.339, .330, .320)
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
So is Fultz the back up PG in your scenario or the starting PG? Fultz is also 23 in May. I hate being that guy because the difference between 22 and 23 seems meh but it's huge.

I don't know what to think of Fultz but I'd be all over that trade just to get rid of Kemba. I'd then be looking to dump Harris on some team. I'd probably hang out to Fultz and see if he can re-develop his 3 point shot. There's a player there. I'm just not sure I want him starting games for the Celtics or playing alongside Marcus Smart for any real minutes. Hell, I wouldn't want to play any of Harris, Smart or Fultz together.

No clue what happened to Harris either. He went from Sniper to chucker over night.
3 seasons from 2016-2018: 368/946, .389 from 3. (.354, .420, .396)
Last 3 seasons: 176/527, .334 from 3 (.339, .330, .320)
Yeah, the thing with Fultz is you need to figure out how to use him offset from Smart. I think you start him honestly... he's the best passer of the PGs by a good stretch. That lets Marcus and PP play together.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Yeah, the thing with Fultz is you need to figure out how to use him offset from Smart. I think you start him honestly... he's the best passer of the PGs by a good stretch. That lets Marcus and PP play together.
With Fultz and Harris on board, it's possible Smart would be shipped out of town anyway. Though that's less likely given Kemba was traded away. If they re-sign Fournier, they'd have a rotation of TL/JT/JB/Fournier/Fultz with a bench of TT, Smart, Harris and some combo of PP, RL and AN.

I think here would have to be a follow up trade because it's too guard heavy. Granted all the guards are 6'3 or 6'4 but it's still a lot of guards. Ideally it would be Harris but Smart would draw more interest and get a bigger return. Moving Smart would also leave a hole at the PG position unless people are comfortable with PP as the back up and signing a Wanamaker/Teague type for the 3rd spot. Both Harris and Smart are FA at the end of 21/22 so Harris's contract shouldn't be that hard to move.

If that trade happened, and I were the C's GM, I'd first look into acquiring a star using a combination of TT, Smart, Fultz and Harris as matching salary. If that didn't work, I'd look into trading Smart for an athletic wing with size than can also play the 5. If that didn't work, I'd might look into dumping Harris if it didn't cost any/much assets to do so.

A Kemba for Fultz/Harris trade opens up so many possibilities for the C's. Fultz is also an incredibly interesting piece if he comes back 100%. It's also possible he's a bum and the C's are stuck with his salary on the books until 23/24. That's the only reason I think Orlando would make this trade is if they wanted to free themselves from the Fultz contract. I'm pretty sure Orlando is really high on Fultz though.

Like the other poster said, Ross and Harris makes more sense from Orlando's perspective. Smart would be the starting PG and the team would have Ross, Harris, TT and some combo of PP/RL/AN off the bench. With Fultz + Harris, the team is probably looking for some firepower off the bench. With Ross/Harris, the team is looking for a back up PG depending on your opinion of PP. Fultz fits in with the Jay's timeline much better and is signed for a year longer. Ross is still signed for 2 more years after this season though, and at cheap money. $12.5 and $11.5. With Ross, you also know what you are getting. There's no gamble on potential.

I'd be all over both trades. There aren't many Kemba trades I'd say no to, though.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
With Fultz and Harris on board, it's possible Smart would be shipped out of town anyway. Though that's less likely given Kemba was traded away. If they re-sign Fournier, they'd have a rotation of TL/JT/JB/Fournier/Fultz with a bench of TT, Smart, Harris and some combo of PP, RL and AN.

I think here would have to be a follow up trade because it's too guard heavy. Granted all the guards are 6'3 or 6'4 but it's still a lot of guards. Ideally it would be Harris but Smart would draw more interest and get a bigger return. Moving Smart would also leave a hole at the PG position unless people are comfortable with PP as the back up and signing a Wanamaker/Teague type for the 3rd spot. Both Harris and Smart are FA at the end of 21/22 so Harris's contract shouldn't be that hard to move.

If that trade happened, and I were the C's GM, I'd first look into acquiring a star using a combination of TT, Smart, Fultz and Harris as matching salary. If that didn't work, I'd look into trading Smart for an athletic wing with size than can also play the 5. If that didn't work, I'd might look into dumping Harris if it didn't cost any/much assets to do so.

A Kemba for Fultz/Harris trade opens up so many possibilities for the C's. Fultz is also an incredibly interesting piece if he comes back 100%. It's also possible he's a bum and the C's are stuck with his salary on the books until 23/24. That's the only reason I think Orlando would make this trade is if they wanted to free themselves from the Fultz contract. I'm pretty sure Orlando is really high on Fultz though.

Like the other poster said, Ross and Harris makes more sense from Orlando's perspective. Smart would be the starting PG and the team would have Ross, Harris, TT and some combo of PP/RL/AN off the bench. With Fultz + Harris, the team is probably looking for some firepower off the bench. With Ross/Harris, the team is looking for a back up PG depending on your opinion of PP. Fultz fits in with the Jay's timeline much better and is signed for a year longer. Ross is still signed for 2 more years after this season though, and at cheap money. $12.5 and $11.5. With Ross, you also know what you are getting. There's no gamble on potential.

I'd be all over both trades. There aren't many Kemba trades I'd say no to, though.
The general principle of turning Kemba into more bite-sized contracts that can be serviceable role players or flipped for a good player is exactly correct imo.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Yeah, turning Kemba into Harris and another contract is a positive because it's a lot easier to deal Harris as an expiring or to package him with picks and prospects for a real upgrade on the wing.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
If Bradley Beal would kindly force his way out of Washington

Boston gets Beal
Orlando gets Kemba (and probably a Boston #1)
Washington gets Fultz, Ross, Nesmith or Langford, MCW (as salary filler) two number ones and two pick swaps from Boston

Hopefully Kemba can look good in the playoffs to make him an attractive bridge piece as Orlando tries to rebuild.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If Bradley Beal would kindly force his way out of Washington

Boston gets Beal
Orlando gets Kemba (and probably a Boston #1)
Washington gets Fultz, Ross, Nesmith or Langford, MCW (as salary filler) two number ones and two pick swaps from Boston

Hopefully Kemba can look good in the playoffs to make him an attractive bridge piece as Orlando tries to rebuild.
It's interesting. I'd think Washington could do better though. It requires having a high opinion of Fultz and one of Nesmith/Langford.

It also requires Beal opting in. For whatever reason, Beal's extension was only 1+1. So it's very likely he does demand a trade because he can just leave at the end of 21/22 and Washington gets nothing. That probably limits just how much they will get for him too. So if he really does want to play hardball and picks Boston, that would lower the price considerably. Kemba can also opt out after next season. If he's playing well, he most likely will.

I could see a scenario unfolding where Kemba is in Boston and Beal is in Washington for 21/22, both opting out and Beal coming here for nothing. In either scenario for 21/22, they can't afford to bring Evan Fournier back. You'd be going to war with TL/JT/JB/BB/MS and have a bench of TT, PP, one of RL/AN and a bunch of crap, 1 roster spot to fill (to get to 12, never mind 15+2), no picks, and only $6-7 million away from the Luxury Tax thresh hold.

This team is really screwed for 21/22 unless they find a way to dump most of Kemba's contract. There are other ways to keep Fournier but it involves moving Smart and or TT. If you want to move TT and Smart for a max guy, that also means good bye to Evan Fournier... unless you can move Kemba Walker.

There are things they can do but they need to move considerable salary just to keep Evan Fournier for next season.

Fast Forward if they do nothing this offseason, let Fournier walk, and Kemba opts out. The C's have 2 players guaranteed under contract, are $58 million under the cap and $83 million under the luxury tax thresh hold with options on Romeo Langford, Grant Williams, AN, PP, and Carsen Edwards and all their picks. And matching rights on TL. And the ability to retain Smart.

With Beal on board, the team would have 3 players locked in and be $27 million under the cap, $52 million under the thresh hold, with matching rights on TL, the ability to retain Smart, and options on one of Nesmith/Langford, Grant Williams, AN, PP, and Carsen Edwards with no draft picks.


Carrying 3 max guys is really hard to do in the NBA without completely gutting your team in the process. The C's could choose to gut it in 21/22 via trade or 22/23 via max contracts if Kemba opts out. The only difference would be having picks and AN or RL back vs not having picks and one of AN/RL.

I sometimes wonder if at some point 2 is better than 1. If the team could have added Bradley Beal or Evan Fournier and Aaron Gordon. The answer is probably Bradley Beal but I doubt it's as obvious as most people would think.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
It’s a lot easy to be an effective player when Tatum, Brown, and Beal are on the court. It’s not difficult to find vet ring chasers to play for the minimum on teams with lots of talent at the top (Lakers, Nets)

Get three superstars, retain a fully developed TL, keep either Smart or Fournier, and hope your rookie contract guys can be a quality bench when mixed with a couple of ring chasers.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,837
Well, I was going to post this in the Langford thread, where there a bunch of Horford vs. Kemba talk, but it fits better here:

NBA contracts, salaries, and provisions are way over my head, so I'll ask a dumb question: If Kemba cannot be traded, can they do that stretch thing with his contract? Or would that not give enough relief to even worry about it?

If I understand it right, after this season he'll have 2 seasons at $73M left--so $36.5/year. Stretch doubles the length, plus 1, so that's $73M over 5, or $14.6M/year. Is that right? But not sure where that would put us with all the other big deals we have or might have soon.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Well, I was going to post this in the Langford thread, where there a bunch of Horford vs. Kemba talk, but it fits better here:

NBA contracts, salaries, and provisions are way over my head, so I'll ask a dumb question: If Kemba cannot be traded, can they do that stretch thing with his contract? Or would that not give enough relief to even worry about it?
There would be no reason to stretch him.

Kemba will either be traded or he'll be on the team.

Overall though, man people are really overexaggerating Kemba as an issue. He's not worth the money he's owed, but he's also still a solid NBA player.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
There would be no reason to stretch him.

Kemba will either be traded or he'll be on the team.

Overall though, man people are really overexaggerating Kemba as an issue. He's not worth the money he's owed, but he's also still a solid NBA player.
I am fine keeping Kemba one more year if:
1. ownership is willing to pay a decent amount of tax for one year
2. Kemba is willing to move to the bench

If he's not willing to be a bench smarkplug, the Cs defense is going to get murdered. He gets relentlessly hunted over and over, in ways that really lower the defensive ceiling.

Covering for Kemba takes a lot of mental effort and forces rotations. That goes away somewhat if he's willing to flip with Fournier and play 20-25 mins/night off the bench.

If the response to this is "omg the Celtics can never bench an All-Star FA signing", then that's an argument for trading him.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Overall though, man people are really overexaggerating Kemba as an issue. He's not worth the money he's owed, but he's also still a solid NBA player.
Do you think he can be moved without giving up assets?

I think he can be moved rather easily, I'm just not sure Danny wants to pay the price unless there's another deal in place for someone like Beal.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
I am fine keeping Kemba one more year if:
1. ownership is willing to pay a decent amount of tax for one year
2. Kemba is willing to move to the bench

If he's not willing to be a bench smarkplug, the Cs defense is going to get murdered. He gets relentlessly hunted over and over, in ways that really lower the defensive ceiling.

Covering for Kemba takes a lot of mental effort and forces rotations. That goes away somewhat if he's willing to flip with Fournier and play 20-25 mins/night off the bench.

If the response to this is "omg the Celtics can never bench an All-Star FA signing", then that's an argument for trading him.
The issue isn’t the first four minutes of the game. It’s the last four.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Do you think he can be moved without giving up assets?

I think he can be moved rather easily, I'm just not sure Danny wants to pay the price unless there's another deal in place for someone like Beal.
Yes I do.
I think he can be moved without attaching picks if you're willing to take back 2 overpaid bench players.

I think more likely though is he gets thrown into some bigger multi-team deal with assets to get back something for value. Or they just keep him for another year.

It wil depend on how he finishes the year and how FA plays out.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
701
Got any in mind? I'm curious what a deal like this would look like.
The one most frequently discussed here is Orlando. Gary Harris and Terrence Ross work salary wise.

If ownership is willing to pay the tax next year, that is the only kind of deal I see making sense. It is going to take real assets to move him into space. And I have not seen a cogent explanation of what benefit the Celtics get (other than Wyc's bank account) by moving him as a pure salary dump this summer.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,518
Maine
And would we rather have 2 overpaid bench players or 1 REALLY overpaid "bench" player?

Honest Question.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
And would we rather have 2 overpaid bench players or 1 REALLY overpaid "bench" player?

Honest Question.

All day. They are much easier to move and Ross is probably an asset. I'd actually hold on to him and try to dump Harris but Harris is a FA after next season so it's fine either way.

Ross is signed for another 2 years on a declining contract (12.5 and 11.5) and would look great as our bench scorer.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
And would we rather have 2 overpaid bench players or 1 REALLY overpaid "bench" player?

Honest Question.
It depends on what they're being overpaid to do. I'd rather have two overpaid wings who could shoot a bit or a backup center like Horford who requires minutes management than Kemba, yes.
EDIT: I will just stop posting and let Cesar speak for me.

The issue isn’t the first four minutes of the game. It’s the last four.
I understand the sentiment, but I don't agree at all. You play the first 4 minutes against starters, and Kemba has been getting the shit exposed out of him defensively against starters.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
Well, I was going to post this in the Langford thread, where there a bunch of Horford vs. Kemba talk, but it fits better here:

NBA contracts, salaries, and provisions are way over my head, so I'll ask a dumb question: If Kemba cannot be traded, can they do that stretch thing with his contract? Or would that not give enough relief to even worry about it?

If I understand it right, after this season he'll have 2 seasons at $73M left--so $36.5/year. Stretch doubles the length, plus 1, so that's $73M over 5, or $14.6M/year. Is that right? But not sure where that would put us with all the other big deals we have or might have soon.
I believe they have to waive him to stretch the contract. https://www.slamonline.com/nba/cba-explained-the-stretch-provision/
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,152
San Francisco
I am fine keeping Kemba one more year if:
1. ownership is willing to pay a decent amount of tax for one year
2. Kemba is willing to move to the bench

If he's not willing to be a bench smarkplug, the Cs defense is going to get murdered. He gets relentlessly hunted over and over, in ways that really lower the defensive ceiling.
I struggle to square this with the Celtics defense being really really good last year both in the regular season and the playoffs. His knee has definitely sapped his offensive contribution, but I don't see Kemba getting attacked any more on defense than he was last year.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I struggle to square this with the Celtics defense being really really good last year both in the regular season and the playoffs. His knee has definitely sapped his offensive contribution, but I don't see Kemba getting attacked any more on defense than he was last year.
I don’t see this occuring any more than last year either but it is the regular season where teams aren’t really game planning to attack one individual defender. It’s mostly all teams simply “running their stuff” which does of course include a ton of action designed to switch the opposing 1 onto a wing in iso later in the shot clock. In a playoff series however I’d expect a ton of stuff run at him to generate mismatches as halfcoirt possessions are valued much more in the postseason.

The other thing is that without looking at the numbers it doesn’t seem like this Celtics team turns into the healthy Sixers when Kemba is not in the game so I question how much of a (reg season) liability he really is on that end.

Edit: We actually are 0.6 pts/100 BETTER defensively this year with Kemba on the floor so yeah, not the problem.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,152
San Francisco
I don’t see this occuring any more than last year either but it is the regular season where teams aren’t really game planning to attack one individual defender. It’s mostly all teams simply “running their stuff” which does of course include a ton of action designed to switch the opposing 1 onto a wing in iso later in the shot clock. In a playoff series however I’d expect a ton of stuff run at him to generate mismatches as halfcoirt possessions are valued much more in the postseason.

The other thing is that without looking at the numbers it doesn’t seem like this Celtics team turns into the healthy Sixers when Kemba is not in the game so I question how much of a (reg season) liability he really is on that end.

Edit: We actually are 0.6 pts/100 BETTER defensively this year with Kemba on the floor so yeah, not the problem.
For the record the team's defensive rating in last year's playoffs was 106 (which is really effing good).
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,304
I don’t see this occuring any more than last year either but it is the regular season where teams aren’t really game planning to attack one individual defender. It’s mostly all teams simply “running their stuff” which does of course include a ton of action designed to switch the opposing 1 onto a wing in iso later in the shot clock. In a playoff series however I’d expect a ton of stuff run at him to generate mismatches as halfcoirt possessions are valued much more in the postseason.

The other thing is that without looking at the numbers it doesn’t seem like this Celtics team turns into the healthy Sixers when Kemba is not in the game so I question how much of a (reg season) liability he really is on that end.

Edit: We actually are 0.6 pts/100 BETTER defensively this year with Kemba on the floor so yeah, not the problem.
that doesn't fit the kemba sucks this season narrative though so it must be dismissed
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
The Celtics won by 30. We should hope that more teams attack Kemba like Charlotte did
Rozier attacked Kemba relentlessly over the first 5 minutes

then Marcus said that's enough and shut Scary Terry down

Charlotte was playing without Ball, Hayward and Monk. I wouldn't take much from that win.

Kemba getting attacked on D isn't some sort of 1-game recall, it's NBA Basketball 101
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
Kemba getting attacked on D isn't some sort of 1-game recall, it's NBA Basketball 101
Oh I know. Teams always attack the weakest defender, I was just making a broader point that it isn't always successful. Nearly every team has a sub par defender in their starting unit that teams will attack. It is not particular to Kemba
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
I think I know the answer to this because it's never been discussed but......does the NBA have to option to trade a player and pay part of his salary like MLB a la David Price?
No. The entire salary of any player received in a trade becomes the responsibility of the acquiring team, and is used for calculating the cap and tax implications.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Yeah, I know. Was more wondering the mechanics and the savings it would generate, and in his current state it's not really an option, because overpaid or not, he can still contribute. I was thinking out loud while bored at work.
It would be a $15/year dead money hit for 5 years, if my calculations are correct (2 years and $75M owed on the deal). Not going to happen imo.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
701
Yeah, I know. Was more wondering the mechanics and the savings it would generate, and in his current state it's not really an option, because overpaid or not, he can still contribute. I was thinking out loud while bored at work.
Using the stretch provision is a horrible idea for a guy making real dollars. Unless the corresponding move is making you a surefire finals team its GM malpractice. Even the worst salary can eventually be traded. It may cost, but you can move it. Once you stretch a guy - that number is on your cap and there is nothing you can do about it.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,951
Isle of Plum
No. The entire salary of any player received in a trade becomes the responsibility of the acquiring team, and is used for calculating the cap and tax implications.
Which is always made it funny for me when there are cash considerations in these trades.

I’m sure on some level each player is recognized as an asset via some Black Scholes-ish equation that has an expected value over time, so front offices “quant“-ify things differently, and they have actual budgets, but still.

It feels like billionaires handing over couch change or something.