Why Boston Should Pass On Vucevic

[tazzmaniac]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

He clearly improved last year, I am not sure that is debatable. He increased his shooting percentages the last three years:

FG%
2017: 46.8%
2018: 47.5%
2019: 51.8%

2 point %
2017: 48.1%
2018: 52.7%
2019: 54.9%

3 point %
2017: 30.7%
2018: 31.4%
2019: 36.4%

TS%
2017: 49.8%
2018: 53.3%
2019: 57.3%

So he shot better each of the last three years. All while shooting more and more each year:

FGA
2017: 13.7
2018: 14.7
2019: 16.9

This has increased his per minute scoring every year:

Per36 PPG
2017: 18.2
2018: 20.1
2019: 23.9

And his passing has gotten better:

Per36 APG
2017: 3.5
2018: 4.1
2019: 4.4

Assist %
2017: 16.9%
2018: 19.9%
2019: 21.9%

That's all steady growth for 2 straight years with other stats showing similar growth during that time. And his advanced defensive numbers took a big jump forward last year

I am sorry but I just don't see how someone can say he didn't improve not only last year, but the year before. His game could grow once again. It's not uncommon for big men to continue to develop even in their low 30's. It takes longer for those guys.

The 2017 and 2018 numbers aren't significantly different and the 2017 numbers were down from his previous 2 seasons.  His 36% 3pt shooting in 2019 could easily be an aberration and revert back to 31%. 

[SHAQATTACK]

Always thought he was a great CBS Celtics fit and still do.

He is going to be expensive for a reason , he does the right things .

[keevsnick]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

He clearly improved last year, I am not sure that is debatable. He increased his shooting percentages the last three years:

FG%
2017: 46.8%
2018: 47.5%
2019: 51.8%

2 point %
2017: 48.1%
2018: 52.7%
2019: 54.9%

3 point %
2017: 30.7%
2018: 31.4%
2019: 36.4%

TS%
2017: 49.8%
2018: 53.3%
2019: 57.3%

So he shot better each of the last three years. All while shooting more and more each year:

FGA
2017: 13.7
2018: 14.7
2019: 16.9

This has increased his per minute scoring every year:

Per36 PPG
2017: 18.2
2018: 20.1
2019: 23.9

And his passing has gotten better:

Per36 APG
2017: 3.5
2018: 4.1
2019: 4.4

Assist %
2017: 16.9%
2018: 19.9%
2019: 21.9%

That's all steady growth for 2 straight years with other stats showing similar growth during that time. And his advanced defensive numbers took a big jump forward last year

I am sorry but I just don't see how someone can say he didn't improve not only last year, but the year before. His game could grow once again. It's not uncommon for big men to continue to develop even in their low 30's. It takes longer for those guys.

Are you really trying to make the point the point that getting better for TWO consecutive years is a trend we should trust? There's just no statistical significance to that trend man. It could mean improvement, it could just easily be noise. Not only that but players typically improve more age 20-28 then they do 29-32. In fact just generally you are more likely to enter a decline phase then keep improving. So even if we do assume he's been improving. Odds are against it continuing.

[Silky]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

He clearly improved last year, I am not sure that is debatable. He increased his shooting percentages the last three years:

FG%
2017: 46.8%
2018: 47.5%
2019: 51.8%

2 point %
2017: 48.1%
2018: 52.7%
2019: 54.9%

3 point %
2017: 30.7%
2018: 31.4%
2019: 36.4%

TS%
2017: 49.8%
2018: 53.3%
2019: 57.3%

So he shot better each of the last three years. All while shooting more and more each year:

FGA
2017: 13.7
2018: 14.7
2019: 16.9

This has increased his per minute scoring every year:

Per36 PPG
2017: 18.2
2018: 20.1
2019: 23.9

And his passing has gotten better:

Per36 APG
2017: 3.5
2018: 4.1
2019: 4.4

Assist %
2017: 16.9%
2018: 19.9%
2019: 21.9%

That's all steady growth for 2 straight years with other stats showing similar growth during that time. And his advanced defensive numbers took a big jump forward last year

I am sorry but I just don't see how someone can say he didn't improve not only last year, but the year before. His game could grow once again. It's not uncommon for big men to continue to develop even in their low 30's. It takes longer for those guys.

Are you really trying to make the point the point that getting better for TWO consecutive years is a trend we should trust? There's just no statistical significance to that trend man. It could mean improvement, it could just easily be noise. Not only that but players typically improve more age 20-28 then they do 29-32. In fact just generally you are more likely to enter a decline phase then keep improving. So even if we do assume he's been improving. Odds are against it continuing.

He is 29 now.

So his improvement fit your completely arbitrary timeset.

[keevsnick]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

He clearly improved last year, I am not sure that is debatable. He increased his shooting percentages the last three years:

FG%
2017: 46.8%
2018: 47.5%
2019: 51.8%

2 point %
2017: 48.1%
2018: 52.7%
2019: 54.9%

3 point %
2017: 30.7%
2018: 31.4%
2019: 36.4%

TS%
2017: 49.8%
2018: 53.3%
2019: 57.3%

So he shot better each of the last three years. All while shooting more and more each year:

FGA
2017: 13.7
2018: 14.7
2019: 16.9

This has increased his per minute scoring every year:

Per36 PPG
2017: 18.2
2018: 20.1
2019: 23.9

And his passing has gotten better:

Per36 APG
2017: 3.5
2018: 4.1
2019: 4.4

Assist %
2017: 16.9%
2018: 19.9%
2019: 21.9%

That's all steady growth for 2 straight years with other stats showing similar growth during that time. And his advanced defensive numbers took a big jump forward last year

I am sorry but I just don't see how someone can say he didn't improve not only last year, but the year before. His game could grow once again. It's not uncommon for big men to continue to develop even in their low 30's. It takes longer for those guys.

Are you really trying to make the point the point that getting better for TWO consecutive years is a trend we should trust? There's just no statistical significance to that trend man. It could mean improvement, it could just easily be noise. Not only that but players typically improve more age 20-28 then they do 29-32. In fact just generally you are more likely to enter a decline phase then keep improving. So even if we do assume he's been improving. Odds are against it continuing.

He is 29 now.

So his improvement fit your completely arbitrary timeset.

I'm not sure what the above comment is trying to say. My point is three fold.

A) I dont think you can say getting better two consecutive years is a clear trend line of improvement, especially when he had similar level years earlier in his career.

B) even if you could say that hes entering an age when improvement year to year becomes less likely, and decline is even plausible if not likely.

C) even if he did improve he may not be worth the max, and he certainly isnt now.

Now to be fair I'm not gonna be devastated if we sign Vuc. He would make us  better, I just dont think it's the best play towards winning banner 18.

[GetLucky]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

The Celtics won't have any cap space next year, regardless. Hayward opting in and Brown's extension will make sure of that.

Read my post. I'm not talking about next year. Next year is a garbage free agency year.

(We won’t have max cap space the year after, either because of Tatum’s rookie extension.)

[wdleehi]

I don't like the idea of a four year max offer to a C that is only "good".  With the current NBA, a C had to be a true game changer to get that type of offer. 

[keevsnick]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

The Celtics won't have any cap space next year, regardless. Hayward opting in and Brown's extension will make sure of that.

Read my post. I'm not talking about next year. Next year is a garbage free agency year.

(We won’t have max cap space the year after, either because of Tatum’s rookie extension.)

Even if we sign both brown and Tatum to 25% max extensions that will pay around 30 million a year each that year with a 120 million cap we could get to max space if we wipe everyone but smart from the books. Or much simpler dimp smarts last year.

[BitterJim]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

The Celtics won't have any cap space next year, regardless. Hayward opting in and Brown's extension will make sure of that.

Read my post. I'm not talking about next year. Next year is a garbage free agency year.

(We won’t have max cap space the year after, either because of Tatum’s rookie extension.)

But we actually will, if we hold of on an extension and just have his cap hold on the books.

If Tatum is looking at a max extension, we'll be giving him a maximum qualifying offer, which will increase his cap hold to the max

[GetLucky]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

The Celtics won't have any cap space next year, regardless. Hayward opting in and Brown's extension will make sure of that.

Read my post. I'm not talking about next year. Next year is a garbage free agency year.

(We won’t have max cap space the year after, either because of Tatum’s rookie extension.)

Even if we sign both brown and Tatum to 25% max extensions that will pay around 30 million a year each that year with a 120 million cap we could get to max space if we wipe everyone but smart from the books. Or much simpler dimp smarts last year.

So you’re proposing the Celtics don’t sign Vucevic (a 20/12/4 big man who is 29 years old) because he won’t be a difference maker when it comes to winning a championship. And the plan to build a more competitive team that naturally follows is having two players on the roster going into free agency two years from now? I don’t think that’s a recipe for success. (If, on the other hand, we continue drafting and signing players to build the team, we won’t have max space.)

[liam]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

The Celtics won't have any cap space next year, regardless. Hayward opting in and Brown's extension will make sure of that.

Read my post. I'm not talking about next year. Next year is a garbage free agency year.

(We won’t have max cap space the year after, either because of Tatum’s rookie extension.)

Even if we sign both brown and Tatum to 25% max extensions that will pay around 30 million a year each that year with a 120 million cap we could get to max space if we wipe everyone but smart from the books. Or much simpler dimp smarts last year.

So you’re proposing the Celtics don’t sign Vucevic (a 20/12/4 big man who is 29 years old) because he won’t be a difference maker when it comes to winning a championship. And the plan to build a more competitive team that naturally follows is having two players on the roster going into free agency two years from now? I don’t think that’s a recipe for success. (If, on the other hand, we continue drafting and signing players to build the team, we won’t have max space.)

I think it depends on the size and length of the contract.

[GreenFaith1819]

Two years ago I would've wanted NO PART of Vucevic...but now? Sure, bring either him or Steve Adams in here..

My knock on Nic was his defense and toughness, but dude hurt none other than Marcus Smart by simply bumping into him, lol.......

Plus he made his first ASG...he is peaking and still has room to grow...

He will undoubtedly get even better in Brad's system. He is already skilled down low - even moreso than Steve.

Sure, bring him in if he wants to come to BOS...either he or Steve. Nic preferably.

[nickagneta]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

He clearly improved last year, I am not sure that is debatable. He increased his shooting percentages the last three years:

FG%
2017: 46.8%
2018: 47.5%
2019: 51.8%

2 point %
2017: 48.1%
2018: 52.7%
2019: 54.9%

3 point %
2017: 30.7%
2018: 31.4%
2019: 36.4%

TS%
2017: 49.8%
2018: 53.3%
2019: 57.3%

So he shot better each of the last three years. All while shooting more and more each year:

FGA
2017: 13.7
2018: 14.7
2019: 16.9

This has increased his per minute scoring every year:

Per36 PPG
2017: 18.2
2018: 20.1
2019: 23.9

And his passing has gotten better:

Per36 APG
2017: 3.5
2018: 4.1
2019: 4.4

Assist %
2017: 16.9%
2018: 19.9%
2019: 21.9%

That's all steady growth for 2 straight years with other stats showing similar growth during that time. And his advanced defensive numbers took a big jump forward last year

I am sorry but I just don't see how someone can say he didn't improve not only last year, but the year before. His game could grow once again. It's not uncommon for big men to continue to develop even in their low 30's. It takes longer for those guys.

Are you really trying to make the point the point that getting better for TWO consecutive years is a trend we should trust? There's just no statistical significance to that trend man. It could mean improvement, it could just easily be noise. Not only that but players typically improve more age 20-28 then they do 29-32. In fact just generally you are more likely to enter a decline phase then keep improving. So even if we do assume he's been improving. Odds are against it continuing.

He is 29 now.

So his improvement fit your completely arbitrary timeset.

He actually isn't 29 until late October. So his improvements the last two years fit into the arbitrary age keevsnick gave as being the likely ages where players get better, except for Vucevic who's growth shouldn't be trusted because: God if anyone can explain it to me. Watching the guy, he looks much better in just about every way than he looked in 2016 or 2017. The stats back it up. He made an All-Star game this year.

Listen, I agree that Vucevic isn't the person I would add for several reasons. I just wholeheartedly disagree that his age should have anything to do with it because he isn't old, has still been improving and the team should expect to still be getting excellent value out of Vucevic even in his last year.

I would prefer getting Steven Adams from OKC and grab a down the line 1st rounder for absorbing his salary. Maybe OKC blows it up and that future 1st becomes valuable. Adam's is also a great back line defender and elite rebounder, something a starting unit that includes Hayward at PF, Tatum at SF and Brown at SG could desperately use.

Adams'  contract also runs out with Hayward's contract in Giannis' free agent year. So there is that.

But if Danny goes with Vucevic, I don't think it a bad move, just not the move I would make.

[keevsnick]

People really need to stop with the whole "not on our timeline" stuff. Teams need veterans and great players can be found at any age and added to a team long term. Vucevic is just 28 and our young core is

Brown 22
Tatum 21
Rozier 25
Smart 25
Hayward 29.

Vucevic showed at 28 years old he is still improving. His years here would be in his prime from 29 to 32. He would be a great addition. He doesn't have to be 23 years old to be a key component of this young team.

I will grant you that not being the same age as the rest of our guys isnt itself a reason not to sign Vuc. It's more that the age factor, in conjunction with everything else is the problem. He did not show he is still improving by having a big year in a contract year on a team that really needed him. He has has average between 13-20 point ever year since his rookie one, but there no real trend line to indicate last year wasn't an aberration. You aren't paying for a guaranteed 20ppg. And if you aren't competing during the first two years of the contract, and the last two years prevent you from acquiring a superior player then it's probably a bad idea.

He clearly improved last year, I am not sure that is debatable. He increased his shooting percentages the last three years:

FG%
2017: 46.8%
2018: 47.5%
2019: 51.8%

2 point %
2017: 48.1%
2018: 52.7%
2019: 54.9%

3 point %
2017: 30.7%
2018: 31.4%
2019: 36.4%

TS%
2017: 49.8%
2018: 53.3%
2019: 57.3%

So he shot better each of the last three years. All while shooting more and more each year:

FGA
2017: 13.7
2018: 14.7
2019: 16.9

This has increased his per minute scoring every year:

Per36 PPG
2017: 18.2
2018: 20.1
2019: 23.9

And his passing has gotten better:

Per36 APG
2017: 3.5
2018: 4.1
2019: 4.4

Assist %
2017: 16.9%
2018: 19.9%
2019: 21.9%

That's all steady growth for 2 straight years with other stats showing similar growth during that time. And his advanced defensive numbers took a big jump forward last year

I am sorry but I just don't see how someone can say he didn't improve not only last year, but the year before. His game could grow once again. It's not uncommon for big men to continue to develop even in their low 30's. It takes longer for those guys.

Are you really trying to make the point the point that getting better for TWO consecutive years is a trend we should trust? There's just no statistical significance to that trend man. It could mean improvement, it could just easily be noise. Not only that but players typically improve more age 20-28 then they do 29-32. In fact just generally you are more likely to enter a decline phase then keep improving. So even if we do assume he's been improving. Odds are against it continuing.

He is 29 now.

So his improvement fit your completely arbitrary timeset.

He actually isn't 29 until late October. So his improvements the last two years fit into the arbitrary age keevsnick gave as being the likely ages where players get better, except for Vucevic who's growth shouldn't be trusted because: God if anyone can explain it to me. Watching the guy, he looks much better in just about every way than he looked in 2016 or 2017. The stats back it up. He made an All-Star game this year.

Listen, I agree that Vucevic isn't the person I would add for several reasons. I just wholeheartedly disagree that his age should have anything to do with it because he isn't old, has still been improving and the team should expect to still be getting excellent value out of Vucevic even in his last year.

I would prefer getting Steven Adams from OKC and grab a down the line 1st rounder for absorbing his salary. Maybe OKC blows it up and that future 1st becomes valuable. Adam's is also a great back line defender and elite rebounder, something a starting unit that includes Hayward at PF, Tatum at SF and Brown at SG could desperately use.

Adams'  contract also runs out with Hayward's contract in Giannis' free agent year. So there is that.

But if Danny goes with Vucevic, I don't think it a bad move, just not the move I would make.

It's pretty funny we are having this argument when I think we pretty much agree. I wouldnt hate vucevic. He makes us better, and I like watching better teams. It's just not the move I would make.

Where I think we are having a problem is just how much, if at all, vucevic is likely to improve. My point was you shouldn't expect a player to improve ages 29-32 just because they improve 21-28. it you are having a problem with the arbitrary nature of those ages then think of it this way, vucevic is at the back end of his prime to post prime during this upcoming contract. By definition his rate of improvement slows or stops at that point. On top of that I dont think you can reliably say his season last year was improvement at all, could if just as easily been random variation. Paying a guy the max based on his last, best season is how bad contracts get signed.


To put it more bluntly, I wouldnt pay him the max based on the best we've seen him play, and that best us not likely to get better in my opinion.

[alt]

I just wholeheartedly disagree that his age should have anything to do with it because he isn't old, has still been improving and the team should expect to still be getting excellent value out of Vucevic even in his last year.

Age doesn't need to be an overriding factor to say no to Vucevic to still be an important factor and even the tipping one.

I think Vucevic has become a good player (after his defensive improvement over the last 2-3 seasons and the offensive improvement last season).

I wouldn't sign him for a max contract or close though.

If he were 25 or 26, I would.

But he'll play next season as a 29 years old and the downside is too large. The risk of debilitating injuries and decline is much larger for players older than 30.

If Vucevic was 26, the possibility of last season being his career year would be negligible.

But he's 28 and 3/4s, so that possibility is pretty high.

And he isn't good enough to withstand decline. All it'd take would be h is game to decline to his 2017/2018 level and he'll become an albatross.

Not worth the risk, especially considering signing Vucevic won't open any sort of championship window.