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

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
Why would Danny need to ship out assets to get back two worse contracts in Wall and Gordon?
?

I pushed back on sending Kemba for Wall.

I'm saying Danny's priority is dealing Kemba (w/assets) to get a younger, ascending player(s) that timeline with JayCrew. Those ascending player(s) don't even have to be all that great, just improving, and fit around the Jays.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
?

I pushed back on sending Kemba for Wall.

I'm saying Danny's priority is dealing Kemba (w/assets) to get a younger, ascending player(s) that timeline with JayCrew. Those ascending player(s) don't even have to be all that great, just improving, and fit around the Jays.
Ahhm when you said "above" I thought you were referring to the initial post about trading backcourt for backcourt
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
I don't know why people keep focusing on how we can't get another "All Star" or a top ten player. Seems a bit like a straw man argument. The Celtics don't necessarily need another All-Star and they certainly aren't getting a top 10 player. They need another strong player. You could call that an "All Star caliber" player, or someone who has a shot at being an All Star in a given year. But, to me, that's not the same thing as an All Star player. So, we're talking about somebody that's in the top 30-40 range of NBA players, maybe 30-50. I don't know the exact threshold - but somebody who is clearly good enough to be a starter in the league (whether they start for the Celtics is a totally different question).

Why would a contending team not trade for that player themselves? Well, because that player may not be a good fit for them. The contenders should be thinking about how to optimize their top 8-9 players for the playoffs and also what their closing 5 would be. I imagine there is somebody out there for whom Marcus Smart would be a good fit in either of those buckets. Same for Daniel Theis (although likely not the 'closing 5' probably more top 8-9).
Here we have a case in point for people desperate to get rid of Smart at any cost. Most contending teams don’t have three all stars, so fitting a third star in isn’t a big deal. And yes, a team like Denver, given the choice between an “all star caliber player” and a high end roleplayer is going for that third star to add to Jokic/Murray. Even the Lakers would shoot for a third star to make it easier for LeBron to cruise the regular season.

Marcus isn’t getting maxed by anyone because those contracts pretty much always go sour from day one and it’s the quickest way to getting fired if you’re the GM of a team with max cap space. Or essentially replaced by a GM that won’t make that mistake (see the 76ers, for a recent example, and they were, in theory, buying more production). Honestly, with a full offseason this year I’m still expecting an extension as guys like Marcus live one injury away from their next contract being at Taxpayer MLE money.

But, again, you want to know Marcus’ trade value? The Clippers would love him. But that means Patrick Beverly and a late first. Dallas? They’d love him too. But it’s James Johnson and some far future firsts as they still owe two to New York.

The irony is that people desperate to replace Marcus with Lonzo out of terror for Smart’s next contract is that Ball’s next deal is going to look a lot like Jaylen’s because while he’s been a relative bust (in terms of production against draft position) there’s still enough production and enough perception of untapped upside that the GM of a rebuilding team with cap space will toss some of it Lonz’s way. And, to be brutally frank, I’m not sure he’s worth it.

Anyway, you want a third star to slot in next to the Jays (assuming that Walker’s a rapidly descending player due to age/injury)? You need to look at the recent drafts for guys that just haven’t panned out. And hope that you find gold amongst the iron pyrite.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,016
I would take a gamble on Bjelica. Would only take a couple 2nds I would think. He hasn't played in the past 14 games.
Me, too, especially given the C's track record with picks late in the second round.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
Here we have a case in point for people desperate to get rid of Smart at any cost. Most contending teams don’t have three all stars, so fitting a third star in isn’t a big deal. And yes, a team like Denver, given the choice between an “all star caliber player” and a high end roleplayer is going for that third star to add to Jokic/Murray. Even the Lakers would shoot for a third star to make it easier for LeBron to cruise the regular season.

Marcus isn’t getting maxed by anyone because those contracts pretty much always go sour from day one and it’s the quickest way to getting fired if you’re the GM of a team with max cap space. Or essentially replaced by a GM that won’t make that mistake (see the 76ers, for a recent example, and they were, in theory, buying more production). Honestly, with a full offseason this year I’m still expecting an extension as guys like Marcus live one injury away from their next contract being at Taxpayer MLE money.

But, again, you want to know Marcus’ trade value? The Clippers would love him. But that means Patrick Beverly and a late first. Dallas? They’d love him too. But it’s James Johnson and some far future firsts as they still owe two to New York.

The irony is that people desperate to replace Marcus with Lonzo out of terror for Smart’s next contract is that Ball’s next deal is going to look a lot like Jaylen’s because while he’s been a relative bust (in terms of production against draft position) there’s still enough production and enough perception of untapped upside that the GM of a rebuilding team with cap space will toss some of it Lonz’s way. And, to be brutally frank, I’m not sure he’s worth it.

Anyway, you want a third star to slot in next to the Jays (assuming that Walker’s a rapidly descending player due to age/injury)? You need to look at the recent drafts for guys that just haven’t panned out. And hope that you find gold amongst the iron pyrite.
Good point. Part of the problem for the Celtics in regards to Ball is Klutch.

Bron has given Rich Paul carte blanche to: tell owners where LT signed players get dealt (AD), walk away from verbally agreed upon deals (Spurs/MaMo), or get owners to overpay for lesser clients (KCP 2019).

I have no interest in dealing Marcus, but should we be concerned with Smart going Rozier next season?

I would take a gamble on Bjelica. Would only take a couple 2nds I would think. He hasn't played in the past 14 games.
Bjelica is an interesting option. Guess he replaces Grant/Semi minutes

If Rose went for DSJ and a 2nd. Bjelica really shouldn't cost more than a 2nd or Carsen
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I don’t see how Bjelica fits on this team (and I like his shooting). He isn’t mobile enough to play the 4–you’d be right back to the problems when Theis is there, but worse most likely.

I guess you could put him at the 5 in specific matchups? The defensive dropoff there from Theis/TT will be awful though.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
I don't know why people keep focusing on how we can't get another "All Star" or a top ten player. Seems a bit like a straw man argument. The Celtics don't necessarily need another All-Star and they certainly aren't getting a top 10 player. They need another strong player. You could call that an "All Star caliber" player, or someone who has a shot at being an All Star in a given year. But, to me, that's not the same thing as an All Star player. So, we're talking about somebody that's in the top 30-40 range of NBA players, maybe 30-50. I don't know the exact threshold - but somebody who is clearly good enough to be a starter in the league (whether they start for the Celtics is a totally different question).

Why would a contending team not trade for that player themselves? Well, because that player may not be a good fit for them. The contenders should be thinking about how to optimize their top 8-9 players for the playoffs and also what their closing 5 would be. I imagine there is somebody out there for whom Marcus Smart would be a good fit in either of those buckets. Same for Daniel Theis (although likely not the 'closing 5' probably more top 8-9).
The thing is, Smart fits all of the above buckets except the one about having a shot at making an All Star game. He’s a top 30-50 player in the league (at the outside top 60), he’s a starting quality player. And because his value is weighted toward defense, he’s underpaid too. Trading Marcus Smart for a similar value player likely just hurts chemistry, generates a worse fit (Smart is an ideal complementary player because his value isn’t tied up in scoring), and costs more money (because defense is undervalued in player contracts). It’s really hard to see how the Celtics can improve by trading Smart because it’s really hard to see how you get a better player back. Moreover, Smart has a demonstrated history of stepping up in big spots, which is hard to quantify but should be considered by anyone thinking about trading him, especially since his ability to drill down and make incredible defensive plays does seem to be repeatable based on the eye test and there is a logical reason why that might be the case.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
I don’t see how Bjelica fits on this team (and I like his shooting). He isn’t mobile enough to play the 4–you’d be right back to the problems when Theis is there, but worse most likely.

I guess you could put him at the 5 in specific matchups? The defensive dropoff there from Theis/TT will be awful though.
He would be the 9th or 10th guy. He is better than Nesmith or Edwards. He is a guy who can give you 15 minutes or 20 if need be and not kill you out there. Yes, he isn't mobile enough to cover some 4's, like Theis, but he spaces the floor on offense more than Theis
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,458
He would be the 9th or 10th guy. He is better than Nesmith or Edwards. He is a guy who can give you 15 minutes or 20 if need be and not kill you out there. Yes, he isn't mobile enough to cover some 4's, like Theis, but he spaces the floor on offense more than Theis
He's better than them at what? I mean, you don't sign Bjelica to play Edwards' minutes, they play totally different positions and roles. Nesmith also, though he doesn't even play.
The question with Bjelica is what does he provide that you don't have, and who does he replace in the rotation. The answer to the latter is someone from: TT, TL, GW and I'm not sure his skillset brings anything to make those swaps a good idea.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
He's better than them at what? I mean, you don't sign Bjelica to play Edwards' minutes, they play totally different positions and roles. Nesmith also, though he doesn't even play.
The question with Bjelica is what does he provide that you don't have, and who does he replace in the rotation. The answer to the latter is someone from: TT, TL, GW and I'm not sure his skillset brings anything to make those swaps a good idea.
If you want to replace Edwards/Green minutes, and want a microwave off the bench, you look at Wayne Ellington.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/ellinwa01.html
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I’m impressed that it has only taken one game for some people to forget the defensive limitations of the 2-big lineup.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
He's better than them at what? I mean, you don't sign Bjelica to play Edwards' minutes, they play totally different positions and roles. Nesmith also, though he doesn't even play.
The question with Bjelica is what does he provide that you don't have, and who does he replace in the rotation. The answer to the latter is someone from: TT, TL, GW and I'm not sure his skillset brings anything to make those swaps a good idea.
Players get hurt. Others get covid. Brad has been playing some really small lineups out of necessity. It is never a bad thing to deepen your bench especially at what is likely to be such a minimal cost.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,157
The thing is, Smart fits all of the above buckets except the one about having a shot at making an All Star game. He’s a top 30-50 player in the league (at the outside top 60), he’s a starting quality player. And because his value is weighted toward defense, he’s underpaid too. Trading Marcus Smart for a similar value player likely just hurts chemistry, generates a worse fit (Smart is an ideal complementary player because his value isn’t tied up in scoring), and costs more money (because defense is undervalued in player contracts). It’s really hard to see how the Celtics can improve by trading Smart because it’s really hard to see how you get a better player back. Moreover, Smart has a demonstrated history of stepping up in big spots, which is hard to quantify but should be considered by anyone thinking about trading him, especially since his ability to drill down and make incredible defensive plays does seem to be repeatable based on the eye test and there is a logical reason why that might be the case.
I agree trading Smart this season makes less sense than it did last season, because last season we had Gordon Hayward as another starting quality wing. Last year we had a problem because our best 5 players couldn't really close the game (I know sometimes they didn't play a big to close - but that's probably not a great strategy). This year we have a bigger problem at PG, and still the same problem at big. So, unfortunately, this season trading Smart likely doesn't work because you create another hole to be filled.

Whether the C's have enough arrows to come up with someone who can close out the game at 5 AND address the PG situation is something I imagine Ainge is struggling to assess. They do have some assets - I think GW has played himself into at least a somewhat valuable prospect. Robert Williams has some value, and of course PP does as well. At this point, I can't imagine Romeo has much value - would seem to be selling really low on him. Similar for Nesmith.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
What will it take to get John Collins? “Sources say the Hawks have shown a willingness to listen to offers for Collins,” according to the Athletic.

I don’t know if the Hawks will squander their playoff dreams for some late round 1sts + Nesmith/Romeo, etc.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
The C's should be keeping PP at this point unless they are getting someone like Zach LaVine back. I wouldn't be including him in deals for Barnes, that's for sure.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
What will it take to get John Collins? “Sources say the Hawks have shown a willingness to listen to offers for Collins,” according to the Athletic.

I don’t know if the Hawks will squander their playoff dreams for some late round 1sts + Nesmith/Romeo, etc.
The Hawks are low on Collins because he might be an empty numbers guy. They’d like a decent haul for him, though. A year ago a trade would have been doable (for the Memphis pick). Not sure about now, though.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,085
Feel like the Spurs could use Collins. They need a big to replace Aldridge long-term and have a glut of young, tradeable wing assets. Problem, of course, is that Atlanta doesn't need wings. I honestly don't really know what Atlanta would be looking for since they're pretty well-stocked at every position. Maybe they would just want a heavy pick package, which we could offer, but which obviously wouldn't be overly valuable given where we project to finish with 2 young stars.

Pritchard would probably be pretty effective in Atlanta so maybe they would take him as part of a package and move Rondo elsewhere.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
Players get hurt. Others get covid. Brad has been playing some really small lineups out of necessity. It is never a bad thing to deepen your bench especially at what is likely to be such a minimal cost.
If we're lengthening the bench, which isn't a bad idea I'd rather have Danny use the Kanter or VP TPEs.

Taking the Hayward TPE down from $28.5MM to 21MM for Bjelica has a cost to it

The Hawks are low on Collins because he might be an empty numbers guy. They’d like a decent haul for him, though. A year ago a trade would have been doable (for the Memphis pick). Not sure about now, though.
I'm a JC believer (my Catholic mother approves).

He wouldn't trip the repeater but Danny will need to clean out Kemba's locker this Summer.

Celtics win twice!
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
The C's should be keeping PP at this point unless they are getting someone like Zach LaVine back. I wouldn't be including him in deals for Barnes, that's for sure.
My view is that if the C's are serious about improving the team to take advantage of the leap Brown is making, everyone not named Tatum or Brown should be available - Smart also has a high hurdle rate but you absolutely move him in the right deal too.

This team is very close to being a contender with the right additions, regular season record aside. It feels like the Celtics front office sees this as well given all the chatter about them being active on the market but getting deal done is probably tricky for a variety of reasons. As such, I wouldn't be surprised if they swing a much bigger deal than people are expecting or do nothing at all if they can't get the right fit.

The point is, don't get too attached to your favorite rotation players. They may be toiling for another employer in a few weeks.

Edit: To be clearer, I suspect any trade negotiations will feature Pritchard's name prominently. Trading partners want value as well and a competent back-up ball-handler/shooter on a rookie deal is great value.

Edit 2: clarity
 
Last edited:

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,085
My view is that if the C's are serious about improving the team to take advantage of the leap Brown is making, everyone not named Tatum should be available - Smart also has a high hurdle rate but you absolutely move him in the right deal too.

This team is very close to being a contender with the right additions, regular season record aside. It feels like the Celtics front office sees this as well given all the chatter about them being active on the market but getting deal done is probably tricky for a variety of reasons. As such, I wouldn't be surprised if they swing a much bigger deal than people are expecting or do nothing at all if they can't get the right fit.

The point is, don't get too attached to your favorite rotation players. They may be toiling for another employer in a few weeks.

Edit: To be clearer, I suspect any trade negotiations will feature Pritchard's name prominently. Trading partners want value as well and a competent back-up ball-handler/shooter on a rookie deal is great value.
Curious why you think Jaylen should be available? I don't see how the Celtics could ever get equal value for him in a trade. Agree that PP is probably the guy people are asking for first followed by Nesmith and Time Lord. Can't imagine Romeo has too much trade value right now.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
Curious why you think Jaylen should be available? I don't see how the Celtics could ever get equal value for him in a trade. Agree that PP is probably the guy people are asking for first followed by Nesmith and Time Lord. Can't imagine Romeo has too much trade value right now.
I read his post as saying that with Brown's leap, he's implying that anyone outside the J's should be considered a possible trade chit.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,085
I read his post as saying that with Brown's leap, he's implying that anyone outside the J's should be considered a possible trade chit.
Ah, perhaps I read too literally. I would agree then. Nobody is off limits for me, even our new binky PP. Problem is everyone but the Jay's probably doesn't get you that impact guy, for a variety of reasons.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
To further expand, my guess is that Boston may be able to land an impact player with the right trade but the biggest impediment is how much the team wants to spend in terms of assets, depth, payroll flexibility and, ultimately Boston Basketball Partners money (and as others have pointed out in this forum, this may the single biggest driver of how the team proceeds to build around Tatum and Brown).

Put another way, I find it hard to believe that the Celtics front-office would not be very active building around Tatum and Brown right now if money wasn't an issue. And I am not talking marginal upgrades to the rotation either.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
The best thing Ainge has going for himself right now is that it should be easy to improve the roster.

If you close your eyes and pick a random fringe starter/6-7th man wing from another team, the Celtics likely get better. That may not cost much.

The bigger question is... how much does he want to make a big move for a potential difference maker this season? Does he really think this team is 1 player away from contending for a title? Is that player available? Those questions are much harder.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
Put another way, I find it hard to believe that the Celtics front-office would not be very active building around Tatum and Brown right now if money wasn't an issue. And I am not talking marginal upgrades to the rotation either.
With what assets? The run of Nets / Kings / Grizzlies picks is over, and our own draft positions won’t be promising.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,085
I think Ainge and Co. are highly motivated buyers. I just don't think the dance partners have shown up to the ball yet. I still expect a semi-major deal to occur before the deadline, something like a Barnes-level talent.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
With what assets? The run of Nets / Kings / Grizzlies picks is over, and our own draft positions won’t be promising.
This is the reality. The cost to upgrade this roster now meaningfully is going to be in the form of money. That isn't to say that they would do a deal right now if ownership were totally onboard but the next big move they make is likely to have a larger financial considerations attached to it than some of the moves Ainge has made over the past few seasons.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
This is the reality. The cost to upgrade this roster now meaningfully is going to be in the form of money. That isn't to say that they would do a deal right now if ownership were totally onboard but the next big move they make is likely to have a larger financial considerations attached to it than some of the moves Ainge has made over the past few seasons.
This team is already capped out before Tatum’s max deal kicks in next season. I don’t see the financial advantage that this ownership could leverage if willing.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,016
I realize this is irrational, but the possibility of moving Pritchard pains me. Danny finally hits big on a pick outside the top-6, and I want him to stick around He appears to be an excellent complement to the Jays.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
This team is already capped out before Tatum’s max deal kicks in next season. I don’t see the financial advantage that this ownership could leverage if willing.
Well, that's where the Collins trade could make sense if ATL is willing to play ball with middling assets. Kanter TPE + Collins' Bird rights...
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,016
I'm hoping the C's don't stand pat and let Philly add another shooter for a second-round pick or two:

• Nemanja Bjelica who has been out of Walton’s rotation since Jan. 9 and appears likely to be on the move. The Sixers, who have long been tied to Hield in terms of interest, are known to be among the teams who are considering the 32-year-old forward who has shot 39 percent from three-point range in his six seasons.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
Well, that's where the Collins trade could make sense if ATL is willing to play ball with middling assets. Kanter TPE + Collins' Bird rights...
Why on Earth would they trade a 23 year old big averaging 18.5 ppg and 7.8 rpg for “middling assets?”
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
This team is already capped out before Tatum’s max deal kicks in next season. I don’t see the financial advantage that this ownership could leverage if willing.
There is no financial advantage to leverage - you are spot on there. There are no more high end draft assets to deal. If this team wants a seat at the adults table, they are going to have pay up and its going to hurt in terms of money and talent. That likely means stapling a wealth of young talent and picks to one/more of their non Tatum/Brown veterans. And that still may not be enough.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
Why on Earth would they trade a 23 year old big averaging 18.5 ppg and 7.8 rpg for “middling assets?”
Because they'll get less than that in a S&T and their willingness to listen to offers on him indicates that they aren't willing to pay what it takes to keep him.

I suppose other teams will have more appealing packages to offer than the Cs. But perhaps there is some large combination of 1st rounders or pick swaps that would make ATL willing to play ball given the relatively low trade value of guys like Williams(x2)/Nesmith/Langford.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
There is no financial advantage to leverage - you are spot on there. There are no more high end draft assets to deal. If this team wants a seat at the adults table, they are going to have pay up and its going to hurt in terms of money and talent. That likely means stapling a wealth of young talent and picks to one/more of their non Tatum/Brown veterans. And that still may not be enough.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by “a wealth of young talent and picks?” We lack either unless you are suggesting a Jrue Holiday kind of swap.

Because they'll get less than that in a S&T and their willingness to listen to offers on him indicates that they aren't willing to pay what it takes to keep him.

I suppose other teams will have more appealing packages to offer than the Cs. But perhaps there is some large combination of 1st rounders or pick swaps that would make ATL willing to play ball given the relatively low trade value of guys like Williams(x2)/Nesmith/Langford.
I have no doubt that they are listening to offers. I have no confidence that we can beat other teams’ packages with “the relatively low trading value” of our “middling assets” unless, again, you are proposing a Jrue Holiday kind of bundle (which I wouldn’t consider “middling assets”).
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
I think Pritchard and Timelord have low to moderate value, though certainly not a ton. Timelord is already year 3 unfortunately so you have to pay him pretty soon if he develops.

Grant, Nesmith, and Romeo all probably have less value than a generic mid to late 1st round draft pick sadly.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
This team is already capped out before Tatum’s max deal kicks in next season. I don’t see the financial advantage that this ownership could leverage if willing.
Danny could improve the team around the edges in-season by using the Kanter/VP TPEs.

Then could go Golden State Oubre wild in the Summer with the $28.5MM TPE.

So they do have spending leverage other teams don't.

I have no idea if Wyc & Co have the stomach for tax hell or want to win that badly
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
Danny could improve the team around the edges in-season by using the Kanter/VP TPEs.

Then could go Golden State Oubre wild in the Summer with the $28.5MM TPE.

So they do have spending leverage other teams don't.

I have no idea if Wyc & Co have the stomach for tax hell or want to win that badly
An Oubre type doesn’t move the needle or get close to the “meaningful upgrade” that people are discussing here.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Can you elaborate on what you mean by “a wealth of young talent and picks?” We lack either unless you are suggesting a Jrue Holiday kind of swap.
To clarify, its my view that they will have to attach some combination of a fair number of pick based compensation to another combo of Pritchard, either of or perhaps both of the Williamses, Nesmith, Langford etc to go along with whatever bigger contract would be sent out.

I think both Williams would be valued higher than mid firsts simply because they have proven that they can credibly share the floor with actual NBA players. However that distinction isn't likely all that important and they could effectively be worth less.

I am not saying this is how Boston will play the market. But given where they are with Tatum and Brown, my sense is that their time starts right now with the right compliments around them. Even with a big move, they are still chasing the LA teams and maybe the Jazz and 76ers. But Tatum and '21 Brown
plus another star position player - a two way big for example - makes it much closer imo.

Edit: I will add that incremental improvements seem inefficient at this point. If you don't think Harrison Barnes is a true difference maker - and there is ample evidence he is not - what is the objective?
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
An Oubre type doesn’t move the needle or get close to the “meaningful upgrade” that people are discussing here.
I don't mean "Oubre talent", I mean "Oubre expense to ownership". I know $28.5MM doesn't buy many bitcoins but you can find a good NBA player there. The C's do have financial leverage this Summer

Golden State will absorb Oubre and his $14.4 million expiring contract into a trade exception -- costing the franchise a staggering $66 million additional luxury tax. Golden State has a historic luxury bill on the horizon -- $134 million based on the team's current payroll

Why on Earth would they trade a 23 year old big averaging 18.5 ppg and 7.8 rpg for “middling assets?”
Atlanta already said they don't want to MAX Collins, sounds like contentious negotiations. JC and Trea had a food fight earlier this season about shots. So what does Atlanta get if another team offers a max deal in RFA? Maybe a middling 1st and 2nd (Brogdon's price)?

They should move him now if they want extract the most assets and have no plans on MAXing him. I agree with you, he'll go for a lot more then "middling assets"
 
Last edited:

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
TE="pjheff, post: 4296877, member: 1489"]
An Oubre type doesn’t move the needle or get close to the “meaningful upgrade” that people are discussing here.
[/QUOTE]
I disagree. Oubre himself has struggled shooting but an Oubre type would be getting close to 30 minutes a night on this team.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,187
He's better than them at what? I mean, you don't sign Bjelica to play Edwards' minutes, they play totally different positions and roles. Nesmith also, though he doesn't even play.
The question with Bjelica is what does he provide that you don't have, and who does he replace in the rotation. The answer to the latter is someone from: TT, TL, GW and I'm not sure his skillset brings anything to make those swaps a good idea.
He’s a pretty significant upgrade on Grant. He’s also better than their current options for a 2 big lineup, so whenever one is out there he’d be an upgrade as the 4

I am not sure I’d want to use the TPE space for him, but it is certainly not because they have better options available right now.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
To clarify, its my view that they will have to attach some combination of a fair number of pick based compensation to another combo of Pritchard, either of or perhaps both of the Williamses, Nesmith, Langford etc to go along with whatever bigger contract would be sent out.

I think both Williams would be valued higher than mid firsts simply because they have proven that they can credibly share the floor with actual NBA players. However that distinction isn't likely all that important and they could effectively be worth less.

I am not saying this is how Boston will play the market. But given where they are with Tatum and Brown, my sense is that their time starts right now with the right compliments around them. Even with a big move, they are still chasing the LA teams and maybe the Jazz and 76ers. But Tatum and '21 Brown
plus another star position player - a two way big for example - makes it much closer imo.

Edit: I will add that incremental improvements seem inefficient at this point. If you don't think Harrison Barnes is a true difference maker - and there is ample evidence he is not - what is the objective?
I don’t think other teams’ valuation of the Williams boys will be as high as you envision, particularly given their years of control.

I don't mean "Oubre talent", I mean "Oubre expense to ownership". I know $28.5MM doesn't buy many bitcoins but you can find a good NBA player there. The C's do have financial leverage this Summer

Golden State will absorb Oubre and his $14.4 million expiring contract into a trade exception -- costing the franchise a staggering $66 million additional luxury tax. Golden State has a historic luxury bill on the horizon -- $134 million based on the team's current payroll


Atlanta already said they don't want to MAX Collins, sounds like contentious negotiations. JC and Trea had a food fight earlier this season about shots. So what does Atlanta get if another team offers a max deal in RFA? Maybe a middling 1st and 2nd (Brogdon's price)?

They should move him now if they want extract the most assets and have no plans on MAXing him. I agree with you, he'll go for a lot more then "middling assets"
The Celtics have the PTE to accept a salaried player. What assets do the C’s have to convince another team to trade a difference-maker into that exception?

I disagree. Oubre himself has struggled shooting but an Oubre type would be getting close to 30 minutes a night on this team.
I actually like Oubre, but I don’t think he’s the type of difference maker who is going to change the trajectory of this franchise. If he were on this team, he’d be a rotation player, but not a top 3-4 guy.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
The Celtics have the PTE to accept a salaried player. What assets do the C’s have to convince another team to trade a difference-maker into that exception?
1. draft picks for the next 6 seasons
2. every player not named Jay
3. The ability to overpay
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
This team is already capped out before Tatum’s max deal kicks in next season. I don’t see the financial advantage that this ownership could leverage if willing.
The financial advantage they have is a whopping TPE that they could wield to take on a good player, who is likely overpaid, and not have to send any money back to the other team. That can be a pretty handy advantage, especially in a time where owners aren't making the gobs of money they usually do. It just depends how far Wyc is willing to go into the tax next season, since they can't go far this season because they're hard capped.

You keep pointing out the Celtics don't have any high first round picks to trade, but most of their competitors for players are in the same boat. It's going to be mostly teams picking in the 20s who are looking to add, and many of those teams don't even have their picks in the 20s available to trade.

Among hopeful contenders Brooklyn, both LA teams, Milwaukee, Utah, Miami, Phoenix, Portland, Dallas can't trade their first round picks this year, and some of them can't trade any future firsts either.

A seller can say, eh Boston first rounders aren't going to be that high, so we don't want them. But, when a lot of the other alternatives can't even offer that, Boston might be able to snag a guy.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
1. draft picks for the next 6 seasons
2. every player not named Jay
3. The ability to overpay
That bullet is one that you get to fire once in the period of Brown and Tatum’s salary control. Whom do you propose Ainge acquire in that capacity?
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,296
The financial advantage they have is a whopping TPE that they could wield to take on a good player, who is likely overpaid, and not have to send any money back to the other team. That can be a pretty handy advantage, especially in a time where owners aren't making the gobs of money they usually do. It just depends how far Wyc is willing to go into the tax next season, since they can't go far this season because they're hard capped.

You keep pointing out the Celtics don't have any high first round picks to trade, but most of their competitors for players are in the same boat. It's going to be mostly teams picking in the 20s who are looking to add, and many of those teams don't even have their picks in the 20s available to trade.

Among hopeful contenders Brooklyn, both LA teams, Milwaukee, Utah, Miami, Phoenix, Portland, Dallas can't trade their first round picks this year, and some of them can't trade any future firsts either.

A seller can say, eh Boston first rounders aren't going to be that high, so we don't want them. But, when a lot of the other alternatives can't even offer that, Boston might be able to snag a guy.
The TPE is merely the portal into which to acquire a player. The C’s will need to have assets in order to convince another team to trade a difference-maker into that portal.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Kelly Oubre is not a difference maker, at least in terms of basketball value. He is roughly a league average defender, a below average offensive player and he may be one of the most fundamentally unsound rotation players in the league. I think GS would gladly trade him to anyone for something. Boston should want no part of him imo.