Nic Batum

[moiso]

Batum has been very productive and I didn’t realize he had this much left in the tank but the guy he was guarding seemed to score at will for the entire fourth quarter last night.  It seemed like he was really being targeted.

[todd_days_41]

Batum has been very productive and I didn’t realize he had this much left in the tank but the guy he was guarding seemed to score at will for the entire fourth quarter last night.  It seemed like he was really being targeted.

It's fair to question his defense, as well as his durability. But not every guy has to be Smart.

I'd love to see the Cs with more guys that can truly stretch the floor for Brown, Tatum, and Walker.

[Vermont Green]

I think it would have been a very bad move to take back Batum and his $27M contract in the S&T for Hayward.  Charlotte would have been thrilled to do that.  For the Celtics, it would have foolhardy.

If the Celtics wanted to take back contracts, they could have taken back Turner and McDermott (or so it has been reported / speculated) which is way better than Batum.  Some consider that Turner and Batum was a missed opportunity, others feel even that wasn't sufficient value to warrant the contracts.  But I don't think anyone would try to argue they would rather have Batum.

[PhoSita]

I love when it's this clear how big a difference situation and effort / focus make in whether a player looks really good or totally washed up.

[NKY fan]

I think it would have been a very bad move to take back Batum and his $27M contract in the S&T for Hayward.  Charlotte would have been thrilled to do that.  For the Celtics, it would have foolhardy.

If the Celtics wanted to take back contracts, they could have taken back Turner and McDermott (or so it has been reported / speculated) which is way better than Batum.  Some consider that Turner and Batum was a missed opportunity, others feel even that wasn't sufficient value to warrant the contracts.  But I don't think anyone would try to argue they would rather have Batum.

I think people that advocate for taking Batum stipulated that appropriate draft compensation should have been added to his expiring deal to be worth it for the Celtics. We might end up wasting the tpe plus draft picks.

[NKY fan]

I love when it's this clear how big a difference situation and effort / focus make in whether a player looks really good or totally washed up.

Makes you think what Horford could be for us this year 😬

[todd_days_41]

I think it would have been a very bad move to take back Batum and his $27M contract in the S&T for Hayward.  Charlotte would have been thrilled to do that. 

Yes, they would have. So much so that they would have given us assets to do it, instead of taking them (which they did).

If the Celtics wanted to take back contracts, they could have taken back Turner and McDermott (or so it has been reported / speculated) which is way better than Batum. 

Missing the point. What the Cs got back was a tradable asset for this year -- a TPE. Batum is also a tradable asset for this year -- an expiring contract. Each has their advantages as an asset, but that they're each trade assets (and of fairly equal value to the would-be 2021 trade partner) is fact.
 
Turner has 3 years left on deal, which Ainge didn't want to (or more to the point, couldn't afford to) pay. So the two situations are not comparable.

[Vermont Green]

I think it would have been a very bad move to take back Batum and his $27M contract in the S&T for Hayward.  Charlotte would have been thrilled to do that. 

Yes, they would have. So much so that they would have given us assets to do it, instead of taking them (which they did).

If the Celtics wanted to take back contracts, they could have taken back Turner and McDermott (or so it has been reported / speculated) which is way better than Batum. 

Missing the point. What the Cs got back was a tradable asset for this year -- a TPE. Batum is also a tradable asset for this year -- an expiring contract. Each has their advantages as an asset, but that they're each trade assets (and of fairly equal value to the would-be 2021 trade partner) is fact.
 
Turner has 3 years left on deal, which Ainge didn't want to (or more to the point, couldn't afford to) pay. So the two situations are not comparable.

OK, so it is the Mary Poppins approach (a spoonful of sugar...). I get it, I just don't think this would really work the way you are describing.  Charlotte decided they could eat the contract after trying to trade it.  It is pure speculation that they would be willing to send back enough "assets" to make the deal favorable to the Celtics or anyone else.  If that was the case, someone like the Knicks or OK City would have done it.  It wasn't like this deal could only be offered to the Celtics.  It did not go down that way so it means that whatever they were offering wasn't enough for anyone.   

I suspect that Charlotte was not offering that much.  They had a mechanism where they could just eat the contract.  Why would sending out first round picks be better for them?  It makes no sense in the hypothetical and the validation is that they were not able to get it done with any team.

[Vermont Green]

I love when it's this clear how big a difference situation and effort / focus make in whether a player looks really good or totally washed up.

Makes you think what Horford could be for us this year 😬

It makes me think that Horford was pretty bad on Philly last season too on a really big contract.

[todd_days_41]

I think it would have been a very bad move to take back Batum and his $27M contract in the S&T for Hayward.  Charlotte would have been thrilled to do that. 

Yes, they would have. So much so that they would have given us assets to do it, instead of taking them (which they did).

If the Celtics wanted to take back contracts, they could have taken back Turner and McDermott (or so it has been reported / speculated) which is way better than Batum. 

Missing the point. What the Cs got back was a tradable asset for this year -- a TPE. Batum is also a tradable asset for this year -- an expiring contract. Each has their advantages as an asset, but that they're each trade assets (and of fairly equal value to the would-be 2021 trade partner) is fact.
 
Turner has 3 years left on deal, which Ainge didn't want to (or more to the point, couldn't afford to) pay. So the two situations are not comparable.

OK, so it is the Mary Poppins approach (a spoonful of sugar...). I get it, I just don't think this would really work the way you are describing.  Charlotte decided they could eat the contract after trying to trade it.  It is pure speculation that they would be willing to send back enough "assets" to make the deal favorable to the Celtics or anyone else.  If that was the case, someone like the Knicks or OK City would have done it.  It wasn't like this deal could only be offered to the Celtics.  It did not go down that way so it means that whatever they were offering wasn't enough for anyone.   

I suspect that Charlotte was not offering that much.  They had a mechanism where they could just eat the contract.  Why would sending out first round picks be better for them?  It makes no sense in the hypothetical and the validation is that they were not able to get it done with any team.

Charlotte's a small market team. You don't think they'd have given us a pick or two to save them $27MM? I do.

And / or do you think they would have insisted on getting 2 second round picks back in a S&T of Hayward for Batum? Seems unlikely.

And since no other team had Hayward's rights to sign-and-trade, nor $27MM in cap space at the time, your "someone else would have done it" argument isn't really practical.

[NKY fan]

I think it would have been a very bad move to take back Batum and his $27M contract in the S&T for Hayward.  Charlotte would have been thrilled to do that. 

Yes, they would have. So much so that they would have given us assets to do it, instead of taking them (which they did).

If the Celtics wanted to take back contracts, they could have taken back Turner and McDermott (or so it has been reported / speculated) which is way better than Batum. 

Missing the point. What the Cs got back was a tradable asset for this year -- a TPE. Batum is also a tradable asset for this year -- an expiring contract. Each has their advantages as an asset, but that they're each trade assets (and of fairly equal value to the would-be 2021 trade partner) is fact.
 
Turner has 3 years left on deal, which Ainge didn't want to (or more to the point, couldn't afford to) pay. So the two situations are not comparable.

OK, so it is the Mary Poppins approach (a spoonful of sugar...). I get it, I just don't think this would really work the way you are describing.  Charlotte decided they could eat the contract after trying to trade it.  It is pure speculation that they would be willing to send back enough "assets" to make the deal favorable to the Celtics or anyone else.  If that was the case, someone like the Knicks or OK City would have done it.  It wasn't like this deal could only be offered to the Celtics.  It did not go down that way so it means that whatever they were offering wasn't enough for anyone.   

I suspect that Charlotte was not offering that much.  They had a mechanism where they could just eat the contract.  Why would sending out first round picks be better for them?  It makes no sense in the hypothetical and the validation is that they were not able to get it done with any team.

Charlotte's a small market team. You don't think they'd have given us a pick or two to save them $27MM? I do.

And / or do you think they would have insisted on getting 2 second round picks back in a S&T of Hayward for Batum? Seems unlikely.

And since no other team had Hayward's rights to sign-and-trade, nor $27MM in cap space at the time, your "someone else would have done it" argument isn't really practical.

It would have made a ton of sense to Charlotte to not waste $27M plus and to open another $13-15 mill of cap space this coming off-season ... it was kind of a waste for them but they just wanted Hayward and not really thinking cap space in 2021 when they could have added another max player. That option is not on the table for them now because $9M of the stretched batums salary count against the cap in 2021 no matter what.

[Vermont Green]

I think it would have been a very bad move to take back Batum and his $27M contract in the S&T for Hayward.  Charlotte would have been thrilled to do that. 

Yes, they would have. So much so that they would have given us assets to do it, instead of taking them (which they did).

If the Celtics wanted to take back contracts, they could have taken back Turner and McDermott (or so it has been reported / speculated) which is way better than Batum. 

Missing the point. What the Cs got back was a tradable asset for this year -- a TPE. Batum is also a tradable asset for this year -- an expiring contract. Each has their advantages as an asset, but that they're each trade assets (and of fairly equal value to the would-be 2021 trade partner) is fact.
 
Turner has 3 years left on deal, which Ainge didn't want to (or more to the point, couldn't afford to) pay. So the two situations are not comparable.

OK, so it is the Mary Poppins approach (a spoonful of sugar...). I get it, I just don't think this would really work the way you are describing.  Charlotte decided they could eat the contract after trying to trade it.  It is pure speculation that they would be willing to send back enough "assets" to make the deal favorable to the Celtics or anyone else.  If that was the case, someone like the Knicks or OK City would have done it.  It wasn't like this deal could only be offered to the Celtics.  It did not go down that way so it means that whatever they were offering wasn't enough for anyone.   

I suspect that Charlotte was not offering that much.  They had a mechanism where they could just eat the contract.  Why would sending out first round picks be better for them?  It makes no sense in the hypothetical and the validation is that they were not able to get it done with any team.

Charlotte's a small market team. You don't think they'd have given us a pick or two to save them $27MM? I do.

And / or do you think they would have insisted on getting 2 second round picks back in a S&T of Hayward for Batum? Seems unlikely.

And since no other team had Hayward's rights to sign-and-trade, nor $27MM in cap space at the time, your "someone else would have done it" argument isn't really practical.

There were teams that had the cap space and/or TPE to take back Batum so yes, there other options, at least that is what Adrian Wojnarowski reported:

Adrian Wojnarowski: Sources: Boston and Charlotte have worked on a sign-and-trade for Gordon Hayward that would land Celtics a trade exception, but Hornets have first been trying to find a third team for Nic Batum’s $27M contract to see if there’s a way to avoid waiving-and-stretching his money.

They looked and determined that whatever it would have taken to trade him away was worth more to them than simply stretching the contract.  So they stretched him.

I don't know what it would have taken to get Ainge to take back Batum.  What is being suggested, 2 first round picks?  Why would Charlotte do that?  What ever they were offering and Boston refused, they then tried to sell to a third team and there were no takers, so they waived him.  And remember, the contract was "stretched" over 3 years.  The hit was $9M per year.  Yes, $27M total but $9M per year is not enough to start offering anything all that valuable.

[Moranis]

I said at the time I thought Boston should try to get Zeller back for Hayward and I still maintain that would have been the correct play.  Zeller's health is a concern (and was at the time), but I thought he would instantly be Boston's best big if he was healthy.  Boston also still would have had a pretty nice TPE and in that scenario Charlotte wouldn't have had to waive Batum so they wouldn't have the future cap hit.  Boston could have then used the MLE for a veteran wing.  I have no idea if Charlotte would have done that, but it would have saved them money so who knows. 

[todd_days_41]

There were teams that had the cap space and/or TPE to take back Batum so yes, there other options, at least that is what Adrian Wojnarowski reported:

Adrian Wojnarowski: Sources: Boston and Charlotte have worked on a sign-and-trade for Gordon Hayward that would land Celtics a trade exception, but Hornets have first been trying to find a third team for Nic Batum’s $27M contract to see if there’s a way to avoid waiving-and-stretching his money.

They looked and determined that whatever it would have taken to trade him away was worth more to them than simply stretching the contract.  So they stretched him.

I don't know what it would have taken to get Ainge to take back Batum.  What is being suggested, 2 first round picks?  Why would Charlotte do that?  What ever they were offering and Boston refused, they then tried to sell to a third team and there were no takers, so they waived him.  And remember, the contract was "stretched" over 3 years.  The hit was $9M per year.  Yes, $27M total but $9M per year is not enough to start offering anything all that valuable.

We're getting a little too far in the weeds here, but these would be my points:

1) by the time the Cs traded Hayward to CHA, I don't believe any teams had the pure cap space to take Batum without shipping anyone back. and if they did, perhaps they had no interest in Batum the player, or didn't think the pick presumably offered to them to take his salary was worth the $27M they'd have to go 'out of pocket'. We'll never know. But:
 

• None of those hypothetical teams was about to LOSE two second round picks to CHA in such a trade
• Batum the player actually made some sense for Boston. He's proved as much this season

2) the stretch cap hit is beside the point, though of course still relevant. The Hornets still have to pay Batum $27MM for nothing. Like, the actual money. That's a lot. That's a lot to have him show up in a Clippers uniform and play against you.

So I think you're incorrect.... to most teams, especially small market ones, that's absolutely worth giving up something valuable. Not to mention that giving up picks (or players) to dump salary is pretty normal course of business for NBA GMs.

Even if Charlotte would only have given up, say, one 2nd round pick in such a deal (which I seriously doubt) -- it still speaks to my original point of questioning "why not?" on the subject of taking back Batum:

Would you rather have Batum -- the player, and the expiring contract -- and three (3) second round picks? Or Tristin Thompson and a TPE? I'd rather have the former.... again, presuming Wyc would have been OK to pay Batum's salary.

[RodyTur10]

It's an interesting discussion. In hindsight there are pros and cons, but I don't think anybody would have thought it would be a good idea to take on Batum's contract two months ago.