Trade Idea: Trade Fernando for Bagley (Using TPE)

[Vermont Green]

It is pure cap trade, relieving SAC of money while adding more to our tax bill.  We absorb Bagley into part of our Fournier TPE (still about $6M left after trade), SAC saves money and gets a decent TPE (about $9.5M).  We only give up Fernando (who many want to just dump) and get Bagley but also incur the opportunity cost of losing a big share of the TPE.

I suspect the responses will range from SAC would never give away a promising player for essentially nothing, to Bagley has negative value and the Celtics shouldn't waste the TPE on him.

Bagley is an enigma of a player.  He has had decent production through 3 seasons and is only 22.  If he figures it out, and resolves his durability issues, he could be a perfect modern athletic big to play with Tatum and Brown.  His contract is expiring if we want it to be or we get him as a RFA (but with a high QO, $14.8M).  Is he worth a shot?

I tend to think that there is risk that we won't do anything with the TPE anyway, and worst case, we get Bagley for another season at the QO or sign and trade him, even just for another TPE.  He has produced more and been no less durable than Robert Williams, who just got 4 years at $13.5M so to me, a $14.8M QO is not an outrageous contract.  Best case?   I see a lot of potential upside to be the perfect PF to complete our young team.

[Celtics2021]

I think the deal makes no sense because SAC was just involved with us in a trade in which we received Bruno Fernando and couldn’t find someone else to take him.  Seems unlikely they’d be interested in this deal two weeks later.

[Vermont Green]

I think the deal makes no sense because SAC was just involved with us in a trade in which we received Bruno Fernando and couldn’t find someone else to take him.  Seems unlikely they’d be interested in this deal two weeks later.

I am not sure we had the Fournier TPE then, but do you prefer to send them Grant Williams or Parker?  They had Parker so probably don't want him back.  And if the reason for SAC not doing the trade is they think Fernando just baggage, we can send them a second round pick and just cut Fernando.  I think the risk is that SAC wouldn't do the trade for Fernando because they would want more value back, that they wouldn't do this for just a salary dump.  As a salary dump is what makes it work for us though.

[Celtics2021]

I think the deal makes no sense because SAC was just involved with us in a trade in which we received Bruno Fernando and couldn’t find someone else to take him.  Seems unlikely they’d be interested in this deal two weeks later.

I am not sure we had the Fournier TPE then, but do you prefer to send them Grant Williams or Parker?  They had Parker so probably don't want him back.  And if the reason for SAC not doing the trade is they think Fernando just baggage, we can send them a second round pick and just cut Fernando.  I think the risk is that SAC wouldn't do the trade for Fernando because they would want more value back, that they wouldn't do this for just a salary dump.  As a salary dump is what makes it work for us though.

Wouldn’t have needed the Fournier TPE — we could have just matched Tristan Thompson’s outgoing salary and not gotten a TPE for him instead.

I’m fine with taking a flyer on Bagley.  I’m just saying that they aren’t interested in Fernando (because they could have had him for free already, and likely wouldn’t want Grant either (Parker is an obvious no).  They picked Bagley #2, and want to get some value for him.

[nickagneta]

Are the Kings in the luxury tax(I do not think they are)? If not, why exactly are they salary dumping a former #2 pick who is just 23 years old?

I am not a fan of Bagley, but if they are just going to give him to us for next to nothing and Wyc is okay paying a bunch more luxury tax, then yeah, get him.

I just don't see why Sactown does this unless they are in the tax and don't want to be.

[ETNCeltics]

It is pure cap trade, relieving SAC of money while adding more to our tax bill.  We absorb Bagley into part of our Fournier TPE (still about $6M left after trade), SAC saves money and gets a decent TPE (about $9.5M).  We only give up Fernando (who many want to just dump) and get Bagley but also incur the opportunity cost of losing a big share of the TPE.

I suspect the responses will range from SAC would never give away a promising player for essentially nothing, to Bagley has negative value and the Celtics shouldn't waste the TPE on him.

Bagley is an enigma of a player.  He has had decent production through 3 seasons and is only 22.  If he figures it out, and resolves his durability issues, he could be a perfect modern athletic big to play with Tatum and Brown.  His contract is expiring if we want it to be or we get him as a RFA (but with a high QO, $14.8M).  Is he worth a shot?

I tend to think that there is risk that we won't do anything with the TPE anyway, and worst case, we get Bagley for another season at the QO or sign and trade him, even just for another TPE.  He has produced more and been no less durable than Robert Williams, who just got 4 years at $13.5M so to me, a $14.8M QO is not an outrageous contract.  Best case?   I see a lot of potential upside to be the perfect PF to complete our young team.

They aren't in the tax, and are well below the apron, why would they do this?

[KG Living Legend]

 I've read the Kings Sub, and they absolutely can't stand the guy. The fans think he has negative value.  Who knows what the F.O. thinks though 🤔

[Moranis]

Something like Dunn, Langford, G. Williams for Bagley makes some level of sense for both teams, assuming of course that Sacto is looking to move on from Bagley.  Of course, there may be some team worth paying more.  That would also clean up the roster log jam some for Boston.  I'd probably throw in a lotto protected 1st if need be.  Bagley hasn't been able to stay healthy, but he has produced when he has played and I'd absolutely take a flyer on that talent.

[gift]

Something like Dunn, Langford, G. Williams for Bagley makes some level of sense for both teams, assuming of course that Sacto is looking to move on from Bagley.  Of course, there may be some team worth paying more.  That would also clean up the roster log jam some for Boston.  I'd probably throw in a lotto protected 1st if need be.  Bagley hasn't been able to stay healthy, but he has produced when he has played and I'd absolutely take a flyer on that talent.

I agree with that, without the lottery protected pick.

[Vermont Green]

The Kings are not at the tax level, that is correct.  They have 15 players under contract and 2 more with QOs.  I don't think any deal is likely, I put this out as an idea more out of curiosity as to how everyone views Bagley's value relative to his contract, but I don't think SAC is going to do a trade where they end up with more players that they just have to cut.  We aren't going to be able to "clean up our roster" by sending them players we don't want/need.  An offer of a first round pick, even protected, and no players, may be of the most value to them.

Bagley makes around $11M and next year is a RFA at about $14M QO.  This is right in the contract range of Robert Williams.  Bagley is a year and a half younger.  Both have shown promise, both have shown durability issues.  Both have 3 seasons; Bagley has played 118 games, 52 starts, and 3,013 total minutes.  Williams, 113 games, 13 starts, 1,656 total minutes.

I don't know if SAC has given up on Bagley.  Williams, a comparable player at best, just got an extension.  Bagley, on paper, should have more value based on his production, albeit on a fairly bad team (they were not that much worse than the Celtics last season though).  If it is true that SAC is looking to move on, I would be interested in Bagley for a season, a season that is pretty much a bridge season anyway.

[Moranis]

The Kings are not at the tax level, that is correct.  They have 15 players under contract and 2 more with QOs.  I don't think any deal is likely, I put this out as an idea more out of curiosity as to how everyone views Bagley's value relative to his contract, but I don't think SAC is going to do a trade where they end up with more players that they just have to cut.  We aren't going to be able to "clean up our roster" by sending them players we don't want/need.  An offer of a first round pick, even protected, and no players, may be of the most value to them.

Bagley makes around $11M and next year is a RFA at about $14M QO.  This is right in the contract range of Robert Williams.  Bagley is a year and a half younger.  Both have shown promise, both have shown durability issues.  Both have 3 seasons; Bagley has played 118 games, 52 starts, and 3,013 total minutes.  Williams, 113 games, 13 starts, 1,656 total minutes.

I don't know if SAC has given up on Bagley.  Williams, a comparable player at best, just got an extension.  Bagley, on paper, should have more value based on his production, albeit on a fairly bad team (they were not that much worse than the Celtics last season though).  If it is true that SAC is looking to move on, I would be interested in Bagley for a season, a season that is pretty much a bridge season anyway.

I can't see them dumping Bagley for a late 1st round pick though, which is basically what you are suggesting.  That doesn't make sense.  You give them a couple of young players and a late 1st and then the value starts to come around.  They can send a player (or maybe even 2 depending on which players) back to Boston as well so they wouldn't need to cut someone.  Throw in some cash if needed.

[Vermont Green]

The Kings are not at the tax level, that is correct.  They have 15 players under contract and 2 more with QOs.  I don't think any deal is likely, I put this out as an idea more out of curiosity as to how everyone views Bagley's value relative to his contract, but I don't think SAC is going to do a trade where they end up with more players that they just have to cut.  We aren't going to be able to "clean up our roster" by sending them players we don't want/need.  An offer of a first round pick, even protected, and no players, may be of the most value to them.

Bagley makes around $11M and next year is a RFA at about $14M QO.  This is right in the contract range of Robert Williams.  Bagley is a year and a half younger.  Both have shown promise, both have shown durability issues.  Both have 3 seasons; Bagley has played 118 games, 52 starts, and 3,013 total minutes.  Williams, 113 games, 13 starts, 1,656 total minutes.

I don't know if SAC has given up on Bagley.  Williams, a comparable player at best, just got an extension.  Bagley, on paper, should have more value based on his production, albeit on a fairly bad team (they were not that much worse than the Celtics last season though).  If it is true that SAC is looking to move on, I would be interested in Bagley for a season, a season that is pretty much a bridge season anyway.

I can't see them dumping Bagley for a late 1st round pick though, which is basically what you are suggesting.  That doesn't make sense.  You give them a couple of young players and a late 1st and then the value starts to come around.  They can send a player (or maybe even 2 depending on which players) back to Boston as well so they wouldn't need to cut someone.  Throw in some cash if needed.

OK, sure, so we send them a pick and maybe Langford and Fernando and they send back Bagley and maybe some young player or players they don't want or need.  I agree, that is a reasonable structure for a trade.  I would do that, depending of course on what we send out but so long as it isn't Nesmith or RWilliams or Pritchard, it works.

[GreenlyGreeny]

Bagley is a great young prospect who could just need a new setting to prosper and stay healthy. Would love to somehow land him for a couple of picks and scrubs, so we can move Tatum/Brown to the 3/2.

Big Al would be the perfect mentor for Marvin. This would literally be a dream scenario for him…

[bogg]

Given his defensive limitations and his apparent desire for a featured role somewhere, I'm not sure there'd be a ton of playing time available for him in Boston. They need guys who can defend without having help sent their way so the Jays can focus on offense and not get worn out. Bagley seems the opposite of that - a guy with no real defensive position who you're hoping turns into a scorer. I don't think that's worth making life harder for Tatum and Brown.