Beal to Celtics trade (not involving Brown or picks)

[Tr1boy]

Tempting.  We'd then be able to keep Richardson, and have Horford plus picks as an expiring contract to trade for another excellent player.  It depends on whether we could talk Schroder being underpaid another year.

(Trade Acquisition)
Tatum
Brown
Beal
Schroder

If we were guaranteed that team, I'd probably pull the trigger.

I don't think we would want Schroder if Beal was here. Too many ball happy shot happy players. Better with lower usage role players. Guys who are happy playing supporting roles.

Schroder is a wannabe star. He doesn't take the backseat. He is gonna call his number and play hero regardless of there being 3 better players than him on the team.

I disagree

Schroder assist/TO ratio is fine.  His FG and 3pt shooting percentage are pretty solid for a PG.   He attempted 12FGA and nearly 6 assists per game last season  (low FGA numbers and career high level APG)

He is not an irresponsible player from what I remember

[ETNCeltics]

Gutting their roster for one star didn't work out for the Nets last year. No certainty it would for us either.

No way I'm giving up all that for a guy who will be an FA in a year. Personally speaking, as much as I like Beal and his game, I don't think he's a good fit with Tatum and Brown. 

[RJ87]

What’s the point? Just wait 10 months and sign him without losing any assets. If the C’s gut their roster to add Beal, they are still losing to the Nets and Bucks.

We'd have to gut the roster to sign him.

[Tr1boy]

Gutting their roster for one star didn't work out for the Nets last year. No certainty it would for us either.

No way I'm giving up all that for a guy who will be an FA in a year. Personally speaking, as much as I like Beal and his game, I don't think he's a good fit with Tatum and Brown.

It did work for the Nets.... its just Irving got injured at the worst possible moment and Harden was out of shape

KD wore the wrong shoes/size too big

Dinwiddie was injured

The three pieces they lost.... Allen, Levert (not healthy), Prince.... not sure if they would have made that much a difference.   Brown, Green,  Harris,  Shamet were solid off the bench

[Roy H.]

Gutting their roster for one star didn't work out for the Nets last year. No certainty it would for us either.

I think it worked out great for the Nets.  They just had some bad luck with injuries.  Even then, they lost in seven games to the eventual champions.

[BoulderMike]

Voted yes if there is an extension agreement in place. Beal is All NBA caliber. We can't buy into summer league.

Edit add = Other than PP and Nesmith all those guys would be moved to sign Beal next year so you can look at deal as, "Is Nesmith and PP for extra year of Beal a good deal?"

This is an excellent point and why “this is too much” is false. To sign Beal as FA next summer, we would need to:
Not resign Schoeder
Not resign JRich
Buy out Hordford ($13M is guaranteed)
No extension for smart or timelord

So, this would be a great deal for us, but I think Washington says no.

[Birdman]

Really it’s 6 players for 1…really like Nesmith & Pritchard

[BudweiserCeltic]

If we're giving up that much, I'd rather sign him in free-agency.

That will be tricky to satisfy the dollar amount he wants vs Celtics able to keep vets like Horford or Schroder

I'm not worried about missing out. I'd be more worried about gutting the roster and him then deciding to play elsewhere next year. I don't think the risk warrants it.

The idea of trading for him, an expiring contract that with all probability will leave Washington next year, is that we don't have to gut the roster in the process. But if we're doing that, I'd rather take my chances in free-agency where, if signed, there'll be a guaranteed of him being around at least a few years.

I have no problem with trading for him, but we shouldn't get enamored and throw everything now for him... particularly as I'm not convinced that Beal by himself brings more to the table than what we're giving up. As it is, I'm not convinced that using cap space for him in particular will be that good of an idea (though I'd be fine if it happens).

S&T during the off season or trade within season, without gutting the roster, would be the two directions we should take. If we miss out on him, we miss out on him. We look for opportunities elsewhere.

[wiley]

no thank you.  Not if Nesmith is a sharpshooter.  We need guys who get open and hit threes, not another guy to hold the ball prior to scoring....

[Moranis]

If we're giving up that much, I'd rather sign him in free-agency.

That will be tricky to satisfy the dollar amount he wants vs Celtics able to keep vets like Horford or Schroder

I'm not worried about missing out. I'd be more worried about gutting the roster and him then deciding to play elsewhere next year. I don't think the risk warrants it.

The idea of trading for him, an expiring contract that with all probability will leave Washington next year, is that we don't have to gut the roster in the process. But if we're doing that, I'd rather take my chances in free-agency where, if signed, there'll be a guaranteed of him being around at least a few years.

I have no problem with trading for him, but we shouldn't get enamored and throw everything now for him... particularly as I'm not convinced that Beal by himself brings more to the table than what we're giving up. As it is, I'm not convinced that using cap space for him in particular will be that good of an idea (though I'd be fine if it happens).

S&T during the off season or trade within season, without gutting the roster, would be the two directions we should take. If we miss out on him, we miss out on him. We look for opportunities elsewhere.

But we'd have to gut the roster to sign him as a free agent.  Waive and stretch Horford, let Smart, R. Williams, Richardson, and Schroder go, and even that isn't enough for a full max contract, so we'd probably have to send off Langford and probably 1 other player to Washington (or somewhere else) anyway.  The only thing the team would really save is some draft picks, and that isn't worth losing all of the depth you could have if you just traded for him.  The team would then have his Bird rights and could sign him to a longer (and more dollars for him) contract. 

[BudweiserCeltic]

If we're giving up that much, I'd rather sign him in free-agency.

That will be tricky to satisfy the dollar amount he wants vs Celtics able to keep vets like Horford or Schroder

I'm not worried about missing out. I'd be more worried about gutting the roster and him then deciding to play elsewhere next year. I don't think the risk warrants it.

The idea of trading for him, an expiring contract that with all probability will leave Washington next year, is that we don't have to gut the roster in the process. But if we're doing that, I'd rather take my chances in free-agency where, if signed, there'll be a guaranteed of him being around at least a few years.

I have no problem with trading for him, but we shouldn't get enamored and throw everything now for him... particularly as I'm not convinced that Beal by himself brings more to the table than what we're giving up. As it is, I'm not convinced that using cap space for him in particular will be that good of an idea (though I'd be fine if it happens).

S&T during the off season or trade within season, without gutting the roster, would be the two directions we should take. If we miss out on him, we miss out on him. We look for opportunities elsewhere.

But we'd have to gut the roster to sign him as a free agent.  Waive and stretch Horford, let Smart, R. Williams, Richardson, and Schroder go, and even that isn't enough for a full max contract, so we'd probably have to send off Langford and probably 1 other player to Washington (or somewhere else) anyway.  The only thing the team would really save is some draft picks, and that isn't worth losing all of the depth you could have if you just traded for him.  The team would then have his Bird rights and could sign him to a longer (and more dollars for him) contract.

My posts have already addressed all that... you're not telling me anything new. Signing him with cap space is not what I want, I can understand doing it, but it's not what I'd want. BUT if we're going to gut the roster, then I rather doing that with an assurance that the player we're acquiring will remain beyond 1 season, even if it means we take some more time to build the rest of the roster.

The other part is that I doubt that's the market for a Beal trade, unless we start a bidding war with some other desperate team and I'd want no part in that.

[SparzWizard]

Win the SL championship and things will be interesting.

[gouki88]

I'm probably Pritchard's biggest fan (and would want to send a 1st instead of him), but I'd probably do this.

Not only do we get Beal, but Gafford is a legit awesome bench big. Good rebounding, great defence, super efficient.

[LilRip]

This is a no brainer for me. Absolutely you say yes to this.

Beal is a perennial all-star and legit all-NBA talent. And all we need to do is trade away an all-defensive talent in Smart + a bunch of decent role players who would never make an allstar team? The Nets don’t regret trading Levert+Allen+Kurucs+Prince for Harden. Maybe the picks they’ll one day regret but this deal didn’t mention us losing any picks. I don’t think we’ll regret doing this

That said, I don’t see why Washington would do this lol

[Cman]

I vote no.
I prefer the options below:
1) mid-season trade, involving some of our expiring contracts and picks
2) try to sign Beal in the offseason