Stop hoarding TP(E) - the what should the Celtics do with the TPE thread

What should the Celtics do with their TPE

  • Use it before the current season starts

    Votes: 6 4.6%
  • See what is available around the NBA trade deadline and level up for the playoffs

    Votes: 55 42.3%
  • Save it for next summer's free agent bonanza

    Votes: 69 53.1%

  • Total voters
    130

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Collins, Fournier to Boston
Smart, Gordon to Atlanta
Bogdan and picks/young players to Orlando

Fournier is a FA after this season. Acquiring someone who is paid beyond this season with John Collins makes zero sense because you have to pay John Collins the max. They can't do that when they are also paying Bogdan.

I don't know what else goes to Orlando to make it work, but I would guess this is far more likely than Bogdan + Collins to C's. I think Atlanta would say yes to Collins + Bogdan for Smart and Gordon but I could be wrong. Atlanta is in a position where they are trying to win now so trading Collins for picks/young guys might not be preferable. They could see Bogdan as a sunk cost, which would also lower the return.

According to what Orlando is asking for, they would need 2 decent 1st round picks and a young player. I'd be all on board but I'm not sure Orlando would consider the C's picks good. I'd offer this years pick, 2023's and the rights to swap in 22, 24. I'd gladly throw in any of the young guys too, especially since they wouldn't want Time Lord. Maybe that's a bit much because we'd also be including Smart, but they'd also have to eat 3 years of Bogdan. Though if Bogdan returns to form, they'd might be able to get something for him too. I think the swaps wouldn't be used.

So 2 1st and Marcus Smart for John Collins, essentially. A few months of Fournier wouldn't hurt either but he would clearly not be in the long term picture. I know people on here love Marcus Smart though so I'm not sure if most members on here would sign off on that trade.
 
Last edited:

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I'm not pumped about Barnes either, but I'm shocked at the Gordon love. Yeah, he'd be an upgrade on some of the dreck that we're rolling out there. I wouldn't put any stock in his nice little run of 3pt shooting, when he's a career .325 shooter and has actually dropped in FT% to 62.5 this year. He's an expensive swiss army knife, and his defense is pretty poor.
Yeah it’s not like I go to sleep dreaming of Harrison Barnes in green every night. It’s just that it is imo our best REALISTIC option with the few assets we have to acquire talent. I mean I suppose I could post and dream about how wicked awesome it would be to get Lillard and Jokic but that doesn’t accomplish much. It’s like how people will complain about someone like Evan Fournier.....but he’s legit realistic outcome from the deadline for what we have to offer. Sitting on hands is the last thing Ainge should be doing even if it is only shuffling the deck or adding a couple JAG rotation guys to replace out dregs.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Yeah it’s not like I go to sleep dreaming of Harrison Barnes in green every night. It’s just that it is imo our best REALISTIC option with the few assets we have to acquire talent. I mean I suppose I could post and dream about how wicked awesome it would be to get Lillard and Jokic but that doesn’t accomplish much. It’s like how people will complain about someone like Evan Fournier.....but he’s legit realistic outcome from the deadline for what we have to offer. Sitting on hands is the last thing Ainge should be doing even if it is only shuffling the deck or adding a couple JAG rotation guys to replace out dregs.
The problem with Evan Fournier is he's a FA after this year. Wasting the TPE on a potential rental seems extremely foolish. I think he'd be a nice get for the C's otherwise. Orlando may get 2 1st for Gordon or maybe even a 1st for Ross, but Gordon has 1 year left and Ross has 2. I'm not sure Fournier is all that worse a player than Barnes or Gordon either.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
The problem with Evan Fournier is he's a FA after this year. Wasting the TPE on a potential rental seems extremely foolish. I think he'd be a nice get for the C's otherwise. Orlando may get 2 1st for Gordon or maybe even a 1st for Ross, but Gordon has 1 year left and Ross has 2. I'm not sure Fournier is all that worse a player than Barnes or Gordon either.
Fournier can’t step into our lineup at the 4 so he’s a much worse fit than Barnes or even Gordon. I’m not a buyer of his game either my point was that this is the talent level of players available that we should be expected to acquire. One must recognize that “league average” can still be a significant upgrade when you are not currently playing league average players at the position. An upgrade is an upgrade......Kevin Garnett is not walking through that door folks!
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Collins, Fournier to Boston
Smart, Gordon to Atlanta
Bogdan and picks/young players to Orlando

Fournier is a FA after this season. Acquiring someone who is paid beyond this season with John Collins makes zero sense because you have to pay John Collins the max. They can't do that when they are also paying Bogdan.

I don't know what else goes to Orlando to make it work, but I would guess this is far more likely than Bogdan + Collins to C's. I think Atlanta would say yes to Collins + Bogdan for Smart and Gordon but I could be wrong. Atlanta is in a position where they are trying to win now so trading Collins for picks/young guys might not be preferable. They could see Bogdan as a sunk cost, which would also lower the return.

According to what Orlando is asking for, they would need 2 decent 1st round picks and a young player. I'd be all on board but I'm not sure Orlando would consider the C's picks good. I'd offer this years pick, 2023's and the rights to swap in 22, 24. I'd gladly throw in any of the young guys too, especially since they wouldn't want Time Lord. Maybe that's a bit much because we'd also be including Smart, but they'd also have to eat 3 years of Bogdan. Though if Bogdan returns to form, they'd might be able to get something for him too. I think the swaps wouldn't be used.

So 2 1st and Marcus Smart for John Collins, essentially. A few months of Fournier wouldn't hurt either but he would clearly not be in the long term picture. I know people on here love Marcus Smart though so I'm not sure if most members on here would sign off on that trade.
If Atlanta values Marcus Smart as a significant plus, I think you make that deal.

Locking in to Collins+Jaylen+Tatum (and presumably dealing Kemba over the summer) gives you a chance to get improvement from all of them, while paying for positions of scarcity. At that point, you're left filling out your roster for the next 5 years with the cheapest/easiest to find pieces: 1s, 5s, and limited wings.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Fournier can’t step into our lineup at the 4 so he’s a much worse fit than Barnes or even Gordon. I’m not a buyer of his game either my point was that this is the talent level of players available that we should be expected to acquire. One must recognize that “league average” can still be a significant upgrade when you are not currently playing league average players at the position. An upgrade is an upgrade......Kevin Garnett is not walking through that door folks!
Yeah. I'd still wait until the summer because you never know who will be made available. 30 minutes of Evan Fournier means 10 minutes of Semi and Grant instead of 40. The trickle down effect in the NBA is something to behold.

We are all seeing in this year, except the player we lost wasn't average. The C's didn't replace Gordon Hayward with anyone. They replaced Kanter and Wanamaker.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,506
I'm not pumped about Barnes either, but I'm shocked at the Gordon love. Yeah, he'd be an upgrade on some of the dreck that we're rolling out there. I wouldn't put any stock in his nice little run of 3pt shooting, when he's a career .325 shooter and has actually dropped in FT% to 62.5 this year. He's an expensive swiss army knife, and his defense is pretty poor.
If he can't play defense then I agree there's no need for Gordon. But Gordon certainly has the athleticism - and he used to have the reputation; no idea whether that is true or not as I don't watch any non-Celtic Magic games - to be a top-flight defender.

Gordon is young and seems like a buy-low candidate. Also the Cs could use someone bigger to guards the LBJs and Durants and Kawhi's of the league. He's also young; hasn't been put in the greatest positions to succeed. I have no idea if he has a reputation as a gym rat but he's certainly tried to improve his shot (his form is much different than when he came into the league).

Barnes seems like a buy-high candidate.

I think Gordon could be a real asset if he is put into situations where he could succeed, which has always been Brad's strength as a coach. But I admit it would be a gamble.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
Fournier can’t step into our lineup at the 4 so he’s a much worse fit than Barnes or even Gordon. I’m not a buyer of his game either my point was that this is the talent level of players available that we should be expected to acquire. One must recognize that “league average” can still be a significant upgrade when you are not currently playing league average players at the position. An upgrade is an upgrade......Kevin Garnett is not walking through that door folks!
No problem with any of this. Main point was that as underwhelmed as I am at the thought of dealing away multiple firsts for Barnes, I'd jump on that idea with glee compared to Gordon. Neither is a stud, but we're not likely landing studs.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If Atlanta values Marcus Smart as a significant plus, I think you make that deal.

Locking in to Collins+Jaylen+Tatum (and presumably dealing Kemba over the summer) gives you a chance to get improvement from all of them, while paying for positions of scarcity. At that point, you're left filling out your roster for the next 5 years with the cheapest/easiest to find pieces: 1s, 5s, and limited wings.

I've read they like Marcus Smart. They'd might be able to get a better package of picks and young players, but if they are trying to win, I doubt they'd do better than Smart and Gordon, while also unloading Bogdan's contract if they view that as a negative. I would, they may be more patient.

Capela/Gordon/Hunter/Smart/Young with Huerter, Reddish and Gallo off the bench and as possible trade chips. They'd still have plenty of offense but would be much improved defensively. Smart and Capela are very good fits with Trae Young. I would guess Gordon would be as well, and the hope would be Hunter turns into a legit 2nd option.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
I think Gordon could be a real asset if he is put into situations where he could succeed, which has always been Brad's strength as a coach. But I admit it would be a gamble.
I get this POV, since it was mine last offseason on Turner. Maybe a better situation brings out the beast within. But that trade didn't involve us sending out multiple draft picks, just shuffling out a guy who was leaving anyway and losing a TPE that we might not ever use.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If he can't play defense then I agree there's no need for Gordon. But Gordon certainly has the athleticism - and he used to have the reputation; no idea whether that is true or not as I don't watch any non-Celtic Magic games - to be a top-flight defender.
He doesn't really have the measurements. For a player his size, his wingspan and standing reach are average to underwhelming for an NBA player. 6'7, 6'11 and 8'9.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
He doesn't really have the measurements. For a player his size, his wingspan and standing reach are average to underwhelming for an NBA player. 6'7, 6'11 and 8'9.
Yeah, just for reference, that's Grant (obviously with a ton more athleticism).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
If he can't play defense then I agree there's no need for Gordon. But Gordon certainly has the athleticism - and he used to have the reputation; no idea whether that is true or not as I don't watch any non-Celtic Magic games - to be a top-flight defender.
I don't know if he's top-flight, but he generally grades out as a plus defender, even on a team where he often has to play down a spot on D because they have too many bigs and Fournier can't defend anyone.

Edit- I will note, a number of NBA writers think he is a top flight defender already, but I don't watch enough Magic games on a regular basis to tell if that's true.

He doesn't really have the measurements. For a player his size, his wingspan and standing reach are average to underwhelming for an NBA player. 6'7, 6'11 and 8'9.
His measurements are fine, you rounded down... he's 6'7.5" without shoes, 6'11.75" wingspan, 8'9" standing, it's not amazing, but it's solid (for example, it's a bit under 2 inches taller and 2 inches better wingspan than Grant Williams).

and as WBCD points out, he's an elite athlete, he grades out with the same type of lateral agility as Marcus Smart, so he's Marcus' level of agility, a bit more leaping, 5.5-6 inches in height and reach, and 3 inches of wingspan. He definitely has the tools to go from solid defender to excellent.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I don't know if he's top-flight, but he generally grades out as a plus defender, even on a team where he often has to play down a spot on D because they have too many bigs and Fournier can't defend anyone.


His measurements are fine, you rounded down... he's 6'7.5" without shoes, 6'11.75" wingspan, 8'9" standing, it's not amazing, but it's solid (for example, it's a bit under 2 inches taller and 2 inches better wingspan than Grant Williams).

and as WBCD points out, he's an elite athlete, he grades out with the same type of lateral agility as Marcus Smart, so he's Marcus' level of agility, a bit more leaping, 5.5-6 inches in height and reach, and 3 inches of wingspan. He definitely has the tools to go from solid defender to excellent.
average to underwhelming. He's not going to be a top flight defender anytime soon because he doesn't have the measurements.

That doesn't mean he can't be a positive on defense. He's arguably already positive on D. I'm not sure him playing 30 minutes a night at center is ideal for a team lacking size though. He is a well built dude so that may help. I get it from the offensive side of things. He's an underrated passer and could become a passable 3 point shooter. If the plan is to play him maybe 10 minutes a night at C so you don't have to carry a 3rd big, ok.

We don't disagree.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
average to underwhelming. He's not going to be a top flight defender anytime soon because he doesn't have the measurements.

That doesn't mean he can't be a positive on defense. He's arguably already positive on D. I'm not sure him playing 30 minutes a night at center is ideal for a team lacking size though. He is a well built dude so that may help. I get it from the offensive side of things. He's an underrated passer and could become a passable 3 point shooter. If the plan is to play him maybe 10 minutes a night at C so you don't have to carry a 3rd big, ok.

We don't disagree.
I guess I missed the thought of playing him 30 minutes at the 5. I don't think anyone plans to do that. However... I think he easily has the measurements to be a top defender at the 4, and play 10-14 MPG in small lineups at the 5 in the PJ Tucker, Draymond mold as he has a similar profile physically with more athleticism. Gordon has the tools to be an elite 3/4 defenders who can play solid minutes at the 5 in a smallball lineup.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I guess I missed the thought of playing him 30 minutes at the 5. I don't think anyone plans to do that. However... I think he easily has the measurements to be a top defender at the 4, and play 10-14 MPG in small lineups at the 5 in the PJ Tucker, Draymond mold as he has a similar profile physically with more athleticism. Gordon has the tools to be an elite 3/4 defenders who can play solid minutes at the 5 in a smallball lineup.
How many minutes can they play a Gordon/Tatum/Brown/Smart/Walker lineup? What does the lineup look like when he's the 4? Is there enough shooting for a Big/Gordon/JT/JL/Smart lineup to work? Big/Gordon/JT/JL/Kemba probably does.

Even 15 mpg a night at C seems like it might be a lot for a team already undersized.

He's a career .325 3 point shooter so unless you think he has vastly improved, I'm not sure how he fits in at the 4 either.

I keep flipping on wanting Gordon or not. He fits, but he doesn't.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
Quick dive-in/dive-out:

Assuming the Cetics are not going to really challenge the top teams this season regardless of any in season trade they might pull off -

I haven't come across much discussion in this thread about Option 3 (the leading vote-getter) and what that could mean for the long term buildup of a championship Celtics team. I'm one of those guys who doesn't understand the finances behind NBA rules, so - assuming they sit in the TPE until summer - who are their targets? Holiday (not a sure FA)...Lowry?

(I'll go back to sleep now).
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
How many minutes can they play a Gordon/Tatum/Brown/Smart/Walker lineup? What does the lineup look like when he's the 4? Is there enough shooting for a Big/Gordon/JT/JL/Smart lineup to work? Big/Gordon/JT/JL/Kemba probably does.

Even 15 mpg a night at C seems like it might be a lot for a team already undersized.

He's a career .325 3 point shooter so unless you think he has vastly improved, I'm not sure how he fits in at the 4 either.

I keep flipping on wanting Gordon or not. He fits, but he doesn't.
I think he fits well with Theis in the starting lineup.

The problem is always going to be.... unless we get one of the top 5s in the league, this team is going to be at it's best in small ball.

Also.... Marcus maybe shouldn't start in an ideal world?

I do think you can close against most teams with the Gordon/Tatum/Brown/Smart/Walker group, only exception might be PHI and MIA, possibly LAL, but we struggle to match up there anyway, might be a case that you take the size mismatch to get better players on the court.

I like Gordon, but I agree the real question is.... what are you getting out of him as a shooter? Last 4 years he's a 34% shooter from 3. Last year was his worst in a while, if you take it as an off year he's a 35% shooter, which I think is fine, especially since last I saw he had a big catch&Shoot/ off dribble split. If he can hit 35-37% from 3, play good switchy defense, pass, score at times... that's a real asset. I don't know if it's better than Barnes, BUT... there is a higher ceiling there. May come down to cost.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
average to underwhelming. He's not going to be a top flight defender anytime soon because he doesn't have the measurements.
He absolutely has sufficient size/length/athleticism to be a top flight defender and has been a really good one in the past. Now he can't be a full time starting C, but standing reach is not a be all and end all. Brandon Clarke manages to be an above average defender despite an 8'6" standing reach. Marcus regularly defends much bigger players with an 8'3" standing reach.

Boston wouldn't be looking at Gordon as a full time C, he would be slotting as the big wing in the three wing offense (the 4 spot). You would only be using him at C in the death time lineups. Much like Golden State uses Dray Green and his 8'9" standing reach.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
One thing to think about is that I think there is a not too unlikely future where Rob Williams is part of our closing 5. So, if you had asked me at the start of the season I would have put a big value on having the C's "New Wing" be able to play a smallball 5 to close out games. Now, I'm not as sure. That doesn't necessarily means Barnes is a better choice than Gordon - just that having Barnes doesn't mean Theis/Thompson has to be on the floor at the end of games. Particularly Thompson - given his FT shooting problems and Theis' propensity to foul (although it does seem like that has been better the last dozen games or so).
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,506
How many minutes can they play a Gordon/Tatum/Brown/Smart/Walker lineup? What does the lineup look like when he's the 4? Is there enough shooting for a Big/Gordon/JT/JL/Smart lineup to work? Big/Gordon/JT/JL/Kemba probably does.

Even 15 mpg a night at C seems like it might be a lot for a team already undersized.

He's a career .325 3 point shooter so unless you think he has vastly improved, I'm not sure how he fits in at the 4 either.

I keep flipping on wanting Gordon or not. He fits, but he doesn't.
Seems to me that Aaron Gordon is a better defender than Theis (leaving out shot blocking) so you could play Gordon/Tatum/Brown/Smart/Walker for a good portion of the game. Cs suck at rim protection this year so maybe having a better perimeter defender would help.

As for Gordon's potential, the last time I really watched him he played credible defense against Kawhi in the Magic/Raptors series.

One thing about Gordon - he's always been given the other team's best player to defend so at least he's used to it. Also, no one questions his effort.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
But their assets are not all that valuable. I guess they could throw in like 4 first round picks and that would pique the interest of a lot of teams, but if they are looking to send out a couple late firsts and some underwhelming young players, I am not sure what you can expect besides a league average player.
You are correct - the assets themselves aren't really valuable but they are finite. Its a struggle because this roster clearly needs, at the very least, more league average players. The problem is if you spend a couple of firsts just to round out the rotation so that you can squeeze out a few more regular season wins, you run the risk of not having enough for a larger deal down the road.

Given the market and their assets, it makes sense that the Celtics will simply add a rotation piece or two. However it strikes me that ideally you would prefer to shop for your luxury items first and then fill in the staples with your remaining budget.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
One thing to think about is that I think there is a not too unlikely future where Rob Williams is part of our closing 5. So, if you had asked me at the start of the season I would have put a big value on having the C's "New Wing" be able to play a smallball 5 to close out games. Now, I'm not as sure. That doesn't necessarily means Barnes is a better choice than Gordon - just that having Barnes doesn't mean Theis/Thompson has to be on the floor at the end of games. Particularly Thompson - given his FT shooting problems and Theis' propensity to foul (although it does seem like that has been better the last dozen games or so).
I think Rob Williams is as likely to go out in a trade as be our closing 5 long term.
He could be sure... but on the other hand he's close to getting paid and he's the most likely of our young guys to have value.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I think Rob Williams is as likely to go out in a trade as be our closing 5 long term.
He could be sure... but on the other hand he's close to getting paid and he's the most likely of our young guys to have value.
This is a good point. We also should recognize Ainge’s history with paying 5’s which is the polar opposite of say a Cuban (Dampier, Hayward, Chandler, etc). He got the cheap years out of Perkins and Olynyk before they got paid elsewhere, signed Zeller to start one year, using up Theis’ cheap years, etc. It seems like the only bigs Ainge has paid are the established ones (KG and Horford) and not those who he feels will be overpaid on their next deal.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Seems to be a lot of smoke here. Get it done, Danny. Gordon is a solid player.

Guessing Nesmith/2021 and 2023 lotto protected firsts is the core of the offer.
 

Light-Tower-Power

ask me about My Pillow
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2013
15,968
Nashua, NH
So is Brad going to be hamstrung by having to play offense/defense at the end of games with Kemba and Smart/Gordon or is Kemba on the move somehow as well?
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
No way can you put Smart in - he's better than Gordon already. It would have to be a much larger deal with more coming back for that to work.
Could it be Kemba? If both Fournier and Gordon are involved pretty much one of Kemba or Smart has to be in the trade in order to stay under the tax...Clifford is a huge Kemba fan...
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
Could it be Kemba? If both Fournier and Gordon are involved pretty much one of Kemba or Smart has to be in the trade in order to stay under the tax...Clifford is a huge Kemba fan...
Doubt it.
I assume it would be going into the tax and sending back TT and 1-2 young guys.

Honestly I don't get the Gordon AND Fournier idea, the salaries are too high and Fournier is pretty washed so losing anyone high in the rotation to rent him seems crazy.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
Seems to be a lot of smoke here. Get it done, Danny. Gordon is a solid player.

Guessing Nesmith/2021 and 2023 lotto protected firsts is the core of the offer.
If they’re importing Aaron Gordon I don’t think they can afford to send out even potential shooting. I’d guess Langford and Pritchard plus picks.

Doubt it.
I assume it would be going into the tax and sending back TT and 1-2 young guys.

Honestly I don't get the Gordon AND Fournier idea, the salaries are too high and Fournier is pretty washed so losing anyone high in the rotation to rent him seems crazy.
I think think the Fournier thing might be Orlando looking to drop salary. I agree with you that Walker’s destined for someone’s open cap space next summer.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
If they’re importing Aaron Gordon I don’t think they can afford to send out even potential shooting. I’d guess Langford and Pritchard plus picks.



I think think the Fournier thing might be Orlando looking to drop salary. I agree with you that Walker’s destined for someone’s open cap space next summer.
You can make Gordon and Fournier work if the Celtics send out Thompson, Nesmith/Langford, and Green. It matches salary for Fournier, Gordon goes into the TPE and keeps us under the hard cap. You can mix and match on the two young players added to Thompson, the point is just that the math isn’t that complicated.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Doubt it.
I assume it would be going into the tax and sending back TT and 1-2 young guys.

Honestly I don't get the Gordon AND Fournier idea, the salaries are too high and Fournier is pretty washed so losing anyone high in the rotation to rent him seems crazy.
Orlando is looking to dump Fournier’s salary as they wouldn’t get more than a mid-2nd in return if that so he’s a possible negative value that Ainge can use to retain Smart and anything else of value.

The more I think of how Gordon’s defense will help especially if/when we move on from Kemba the more I’m warming up to him. Especially since the options to make moves are limited.....and this team needs a shakeup in the worst way. Dump some of our crappy young players, add TT’s salary and a couple protected picks and close the deal Danny!!!
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
You can make Gordon and Fournier work if the Celtics send out Thompson, Nesmith/Langford, and Green. It matches salary for Fournier, Gordon goes into the TPE and keeps us under the hard cap. You can mix and match on the two young players added to Thompson, the point is just that the math isn’t that complicated.
I know. I was only indicating that Fournier being involved might be more Orlando’s idea than Boston’s. They are clearly looking to tank hard and save some cash in the process.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
I know. I was only indicating that Fournier being involved might be more Orlando’s idea than Boston’s. They are clearly looking to tank hard and save some cash in the process.
Yep, I’d assume they’d want to try to spin Thompson into something if possible too.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
Honestly I don't get the Gordon AND Fournier idea, the salaries are too high and Fournier is pretty washed so losing anyone high in the rotation to rent him seems crazy.
If Fournier is washed, bathe me in what he is having. Career year in TS%, decent RPM, good LEBRON. He isn't going to scare anyone on D but adding him to Gordon is a decent roster upgrade. Hell his assist % would even get RR's heart beating faster.

This potential deal is interesting as it sort of fixes a few issues at once.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
If Fournier is washed, bathe me in what he is having. Career year in TS%, decent RPM, good LEBRON. He isn't going to scare anyone on D but adding him to Gordon is a decent roster upgrade. Hell his assist % would even get RR's heart beating faster.

This potential deal is interesting as it sort of fixes a few issues at once.
I think any trade for him is likely a bad one, because with his salary you almost have to trade Marcus, who is much better.
Trading a player pn a very good long-term deal for a worse player on a rental is just bad work. If that's the price of getting Gordon, you walk away. Picks and young guys... sure. A player who is arguably better than Gordon, and definitely better than Fournier?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I'm not convinced Smart is better than Gordon. Smart is incredibly overrated around these parts.

Especially this year's version.
 

boca

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
509
I'm not convinced Smart is better than Gordon. Smart is incredibly overrated around these parts.

Especially this year's version.
The question isn't whether Smart is better than Gordon. He's not getting traded straight up for him.

You're sending draft picks out with Smart to get Gordon so the question is whether Gordon is worth Smart plus two firsts?
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I think any trade for him is likely a bad one, because with his salary you almost have to trade Marcus, who is much better.
Trading a player pn a very good long-term deal for a worse player on a rental is just bad work. If that's the price of getting Gordon, you walk away. Picks and young guys... sure. A player who is arguably better than Gordon, and definitely better than Fournier?
Oh yeah it defeats the purpose of acquiring Gordon if you’re moving Smart to get him but I don’t think that is Danny’s plan. If we take Fournier’s contract off Orlando’s books in a deal it is going to be by using the TPE so we won’t have to give up a player like Smart in return to acquire Gordon. The Fournier inclusion is a benefit to us in what we’d have to give up for Gordon.....not a player where we’d have to up assets to acquire aside from the TPE to make the numbers work.