Should Celtics offer 1 or 2 year max deals to RFA?

[byennie]

Take Jimmy Butler for example. He stands to make a lot more money by signing another contract in 2 years while he's still in his prime. Instead of making him the "max" offer in both years and dollars, what happens if we offer him a 2 year max deal?

Chicago can still match, but will they, knowing that they could lose him in 2 years, and will have to spend much more to keep him longer than that? And that they can't pay him any more than us for those 2 years?

Same for any other RFA. What happens if we go on blast with 2 year deals to Butler, Leonard, Green, etc, and that's the exact deal the players really want?

[Hemingway]

I asked this yesterday. We can't offer 1 year deals. And I think the problem with your idea of offering everyone a 2 year deal is that the money gets tied up when you sign a RFA to an offer sheet. So a team like Chicago could an probably would wait to match it. Its like us with Crowder. We can go over the cap to sign him so why not do it last?