The Green Kornet

[nickagneta]

No, but I did say he’d be perfectly capable of stepping into the rotation when Gallo went down, which is what has happened, while others wanted to trade for Rudy Gay.

I still want to trade for Rudy Gay. The team needs a minutes-eater for the dead of winter. Tatum and Brown are playing 36-38 minutes a night which isn't ideal over a full season, guys are going to get banged up over time, and Gay is big enough to cameo as a big in a small-ball lineup a la Grant.

He fits into the Juancho TPE and being able to aggregate Gay and Gallo this summer lets Brad do the same "matching salary + this seasons' first" trade that's netted the C's Horford, White, and Brogdon in three consecutive league years while leaving the future firsts balance sheet essentially clean.

I just don't think that Ainge is going to be eager to salary-dump Gay anymore, because somehow Utah's in sole possession of first place in the West the week of Thanksgiving.

Rudy Gay has been awful this year.  Horrendous shooting, as many turnovers as assists.  The only reason Ainge would keep Gay is if he still wanted to try to tank.

Eh, disagree. Utah's below the luxury tax line by a chunk, so there isn't much motivation to do a "Gay plus seconds into cap space/TPE" deal on Ainge's part as there might have been if they were in full tear-down/clear-the-books mode. Rudy can just be a veteran on a winning team's bench. I was hoping that Boston could pick up some minor draft capital and add a swingman version of Blake in the process. Would still do it for future aggregation purposes and a more reliable Justin Jackson alternative.

I wouldn't specifically target Gay, but if the options came down to "keep Jackson and let the TPE expire" or "trade for Gay", I'd be fine with that.  As you mention, having salaries to aggregate in the off-season would be helpful.  Gallo + Gay + Kornet could bring back $19.2 million in salary.  Add Pritchard, and it's up to $24.76 million.

I’d rather keep Jackson.  Gay was reportedly not helpful in the Jazz locker room last year, and we don’t need someone like him getting upset because he isn’t seeing the floor.  Jackson is a negative when he’s on the court, but at least he isn’t a negative when he’s off.  Gay might prove to be both.

If Gay were bought out/released, and signed up in Boston as a free agent knowing his role, then sure, I’d take him over Jackson.  But otherwise I’d let the TPE expire before using it on him.

Gay has been considered a very good teammate his entire career, hasn't he? I have no idea what happened in Utah last season, but if the locker room was broken I'd say it had more to do with Mitchell and Gobert.

But, Wyc isn't going to spend the luxury tax to bring in a guy who helps marginally -- if at all -- who would be a useful trade piece next summer.

Has he?

He was traded out of Memphis because he didn't fit in with the rest of the players and wouldn't play defense. They instantly got better. Toronto dumped him because he didn't fit in with the rest of the players and wouldn't play defense. Toronto got better. He then signed and stayed in one of the most dysfunctional teams with one of the worst locker rooms in Sacramento for 3 1-2 years. He seems to have been a good soldier in San Antonio, but was there during their bad downturn.  Now there's rumors he doesn't fit in Utah.

It appears he has problems fitting everywhere he has been and seemed to thrive on bad teams. Is that a playing style fit? A locker room fit? A mental attitude fit? I'm not sure, but there's enough smoke there for me to be worried about trading for him and him fitting in here.

Links?

Look em up yourself. They're out there. Heck, I remember talking about this in CB Draft threads when people drafted Gay. It's not like I'm saying something that isn't fairly common knowledge.

I've never heard that he's a bad teammate in the locker room.  He wasn't necessarily a good fit for a high-volume role.

I mean, Pops loved him, and he was nominated for Teammate of the Year a couple of years back.  Chemistry isn't a giant risk with him.

I never said he was a bad locker room guy. I said he didn't fit with players and didn't want to play defense. I said he decided to stay with a dysfunctional team in a dysfunctional locker room. I questioned whether it was a play style, locker room or mental attitude problem. I said there were rumors of him having issues in Utah. Because of the history, I question whether he would fit here because, except for San Antonio, he has either not fit with good teams, for whatever reasons, or thrived on bad ones. Given the downturn in his game, there's no need to take the chance in figuring out why his history is what it is.

And you provided all of that is response to me saying that he's been a good teammate.  The concern is his fit in the locker room, not whether he's going to mesh with JB and JT on the court.  His role would be so small that would be irrelevant.

Much like with the $17 million TPE, it's better to use the TPE on something, rather than nothing.  Getting Gay solely to be a veteran mentor, a "break in case of emergency" 14th man who wouldn't even suit up, and as a $6 million expiring to aggregate next season would be better than doing nothing.  Just like trading the $17 TPE for a large expiring contract would have been better than nothing.

I said all that because, yeah, there could be issues with him in locker rooms. Fit isn't just with playing style. It could be because he isn't great in the locker room. He could have personality issues. He might be a stat hanging guy.

Fact is, lots of guys aren't great locker room guys and don't fit with teams because of it and fans never hear a peep about it. We hear about the most egregious locker room problem children, but there are tons more that cause issues you never hear about because players and coaches tend to be very tight lipped about such things.

I just think there's enough smoke to question whether to bring him in. This team has tried locker room problem children like Kyrie, Schroder and Thompson and it didn't work out. Why chance it?

There's lots of guys available for the $7 million TPE. No need to force Gay into it just to have salary next year with the possibility Gay could be an issue.

[Goldstar88]

I wouldn’t mind adding Rudy Gay for some depth at the 3/4. Seems to have a pretty good rep around the league.

Few years ago he was a finalist for the Teammate of the Year Award, which “recognizes a player who displays commitment and dedication to a team on and off the court and is a role model and a mentor to other NBA players.”

Played on the spurs for 4 seasons.

Per Pop:

“He’s the kind of guy that we look for,” Popovich said. “He’s easy to deal with. He’s intelligent; he enjoys people. He’s got a great sense of humor. All those things make people be attracted to him.”

Quincy Pondexter, who was also teammates with Gay for two seasons in Memphis, described Gay as the same guy he met over 10 years ago while on a recruiting trip at the University of Connecticut.

“Someone that will always be there for you not just on the floor, but off the floor,” Pondexter, said. “He’s just really a genuinely good person.”

Lonnie Walker on Rudy Gay:

Walker said Gay has kept him “level-headed” and taught him how to be mentally prepared for the grind of a long NBA season.

“Rudy is definitely one of them dudes,” Walker said. “He’s probably one of the perfect guys to have around for a rookie. His energy, his positivity continues to spread no matter how good he has played, no matter how bad he has played. He’s always had this consistent level of humbleness.”

[bogg]

I'm still after Kenrich Williams.  He seems like a better fit for depth.  Similar salary for next summer for trading purposes (although not expiring).  Barely above the minimum this year -- even fits into the Bol Bol TPE.

The problem with someone like Kenrich Williams is that you're in an entirely different tier of cost. OKC has no reason to move him unless you're offering a first, and Boston currently can't offer a first before 2025. Doing that takes you out of the running for any star/pseudostar player that winds up available over the next few years unless you're giving up core guys. 

"I like Kenrich Williams more than Rudy Gay" is very different than saying "I want to give up a future first for Kenrich Williams instead of picking up a second-rounder or two to let someone salary-dump a veteran".

[Vermont Green]

Not sure how this became a thread about Rudy Gay but I don't see the point of bringing him in either at his current salary or if released and available as a min contract.  I just don't think he is that good anymore.  He would probably play about as much as Griffin has been playing.

And the idea of bringing in a player with negative trade value, just so you have some matching contract for some future trade never has made sense to me.  I get the idea in principle but you have to figure that if you are going to send out say Gay and Gallinari (two likely negative contracts) you have to add picks to that to get anything of value back.  I know for example some like Harrison Barnes.  But would SAC really make a trade like that for a pick?  For Pritchard and a Pick?  Seems unnecessary.  And what if we aren't able to "dump" Gay?  Then what have the Celtics accomplished?

I think the reality is that the trade value of Gay and Gallinari is so low that we wouldn't get anything back to actually help the team unless we included say a first plus Pritchard or maybe a pick and a pick swap or something.  People were outraged that we gave up a pick and a swap for White.  This is just not a sure thing.  We may still do something like this, I feel like the team is exploring all options.  Waiting for the right deal.  And I am OK with that.

[Roy H.]

Not sure how this became a thread about Rudy Gay but I don't see the point of bringing him in either at his current salary or if released and available as a min contract.  I just don't think he is that good anymore.  He would probably play about as much as Griffin has been playing.

And the idea of bringing in a player with negative trade value, just so you have some matching contract for some future trade never has made sense to me.  I get the idea in principle but you have to figure that if you are going to send out say Gay and Gallinari (two likely negative contracts) you have to add picks to that to get anything of value back.  I know for example some like Harrison Barnes.  But would SAC really make a trade like that for a pick?  For Pritchard and a Pick?  Seems unnecessary.  And what if we aren't able to "dump" Gay?  Then what have the Celtics accomplished?

I think the reality is that the trade value of Gay and Gallinari is so low that we wouldn't get anything back to actually help the team unless we included say a first plus Pritchard or maybe a pick and a pick swap or something.  People were outraged that we gave up a pick and a swap for White.  This is just not a sure thing.  We may still do something like this, I feel like the team is exploring all options.  Waiting for the right deal.  And I am OK with that.

I mean, we turned garbage expiring contracts + a negative contract (Theis) + a late #1 + Nesmith into Brogdon.  Is it a bad thing to have the pieces to try something like that again?

[Silas]

I started this thread to see how everyone felt about Kornet's recent play.  It's been overtaken by a Gay old time!

[bogg]

I think the reality is that the trade value of Gay and Gallinari is so low that we wouldn't get anything back to actually help the team unless we included say a first plus Pritchard or maybe a pick and a pick swap or something.

That's the whole point. Doing that exact thing is how Stevens rebuilt a significant portion of the bench over the last year and a half.

[Big333223]

I started this thread to see how everyone felt about Kornet's recent play.  It's been overtaken by a Gay old time!

Kornet mentioned a couple of times on the Lowe Post when the Celtics have come up. The national guys are giving him some attention.

[mobilija]

I started this thread to see how everyone felt about Kornet's recent play.  It's been overtaken by a Gay old time!

Kornet mentioned a couple of times on the Lowe Post when the Celtics have come up. The national guys are giving him some attention.

What are they saying?

[SHAQATTACK]

Who is Kato ?

[gouki88]

He’s been alright for a 3rd stringer as of late (still would rather Favors). His rebounding could be better, but his passing and interruptive defence is solid.

[jmen788]

Kornet has been a revelation. I see no reason to trade for Poetl or another big when this guy is playing so well, it makes no sense. He is getting his first real run and he is producing. Points... boards... blocks... and even 3s! Until he plays badly, keep giving him run. He has earned to keep playing.

[RockinRyA]

He’s been alright for a 3rd stringer as of late (still would rather Favors). His rebounding could be better, but his passing and interruptive defence is solid.

We still could get Favors, crossing my fingers

[Celtics4ever]

His defense got a little since the start of the season.   Especially the holding his line against a defender which has helped his ability to block shots

[bogg]

It's nice that Stevens threw a team option for next year on Kornet's contract. Having an adequate known quantity for the minimum is a nice little bonus when it comes to rounding out the bench for next year for a tax team.