Should we pick up Emeka Okafor in the off-season?

[Lucky17]

The obvious question: what's the price tag going to be?

Beat me to it.

7.5 per year, one year (prove it) deal with a team option for a second year.  I think that would be a fine gamble on a once productive veteran coming off a injury season.   Might be able to get him for closer to 5 million, bit I think to get him to come to a crappy team like the Celtics -- albeit a team with a glaring hole at his primary position -- the Celtics will have to overpay.

I don't think the Celtics would have the cap space to sign him to that contract.  If it were, the contract would be more likely $3-4m per year with a player option for the second year or $7m per year with the second year partially guaranteed.

There are very few players who are making significantly more than the minimum and are not on rookie scale contracts who have team options as part of their contracts.

It might be feasible via a sign and trade with Phoenix, where Boston sends back nonguaranteed contracts or uses the TE (sending back a 2nd rounder or some such).

If Meka costs $7.5 mil, and Asik costs $8.5 against next year's cap, I think I'd still rather spend the extra million on the younger player (by four years) who is less removed from his career-best averages and without a recent injury history.

[Birdman]

Okafor age and injuries isn't worth it

[gpap]

Sure.

[LooseCannon]

The obvious question: what's the price tag going to be?

Beat me to it.

7.5 per year, one year (prove it) deal with a team option for a second year.  I think that would be a fine gamble on a once productive veteran coming off a injury season.   Might be able to get him for closer to 5 million, bit I think to get him to come to a crappy team like the Celtics -- albeit a team with a glaring hole at his primary position -- the Celtics will have to overpay.

I don't think the Celtics would have the cap space to sign him to that contract.  If it were, the contract would be more likely $3-4m per year with a player option for the second year or $7m per year with the second year partially guaranteed.

There are very few players who are making significantly more than the minimum and are not on rookie scale contracts who have team options as part of their contracts.

It might be feasible via a sign and trade with Phoenix, where Boston sends back nonguaranteed contracts or uses the TE (sending back a 2nd rounder or some such).

If Meka costs $7.5 mil, and Asik costs $8.5 against next year's cap, I think I'd still rather spend the extra million on the younger player (by four years) who is less removed from his career-best averages and without a recent injury history.

Well, a sign-and-trade requires signing him for at least three years.  Only the first year has to be guaranteed, but I doubt he will accept that if he is interested in a sign-and-trade.  Only guaranteeing the first year is what you do to guys being used as filler, not the principal player in the deal.

[Lucky17]

The obvious question: what's the price tag going to be?

Beat me to it.

7.5 per year, one year (prove it) deal with a team option for a second year.  I think that would be a fine gamble on a once productive veteran coming off a injury season.   Might be able to get him for closer to 5 million, bit I think to get him to come to a crappy team like the Celtics -- albeit a team with a glaring hole at his primary position -- the Celtics will have to overpay.

I don't think the Celtics would have the cap space to sign him to that contract.  If it were, the contract would be more likely $3-4m per year with a player option for the second year or $7m per year with the second year partially guaranteed.

There are very few players who are making significantly more than the minimum and are not on rookie scale contracts who have team options as part of their contracts.

It might be feasible via a sign and trade with Phoenix, where Boston sends back nonguaranteed contracts or uses the TE (sending back a 2nd rounder or some such).

If Meka costs $7.5 mil, and Asik costs $8.5 against next year's cap, I think I'd still rather spend the extra million on the younger player (by four years) who is less removed from his career-best averages and without a recent injury history.

Well, a sign-and-trade requires signing him for at least three years.  Only the first year has to be guaranteed, but I doubt he will accept that if he is interested in a sign-and-trade.  Only guaranteeing the first year is what you do to guys being used as filler, not the principal player in the deal.

That's true about the three years.

In which case, you could potentially structure that contract to be partially guaranteed for the second year. That could be one way to "overbid" for Okafor's services.