Lot's of perspectives on all sides of this, mostly focusing on the Porzingis part. I guess people don't see the Beal part as very likely where getting Porzingis for Walker is more likely.
Porzingis and Walker are actually have many similarities even through they are very different players. One is undersized for even for the smallest position on the court and the other is really big. Also one is young. Neither is a player that can single-handedly take your team over the top but both have been all star level players in the league. Both have serious injury/durability questions. Both have unattractive contracts. The risks and potential rewards are actually quite similar. You could get an all star putting up 20+ or you could get a contract albatross.
In Dallas, Porzingis was brought in to be their 1 (top star) and then they got Luka and it became being a 1B. On the Celtics, we would be asking him to be the #3 with Tatum and Brown as the 1 and 2, a much more realistic ask. I think that all fits together nicely. To me it is more worth the risk for the Celtics with Porzingis for what he could be for us more than the risk/reward with Kemba. So I make the trade if Dallas would (which I doubt they would).
For the Beal trade, I think the issue isn’t that it’s not realistic. Rather, it’s that people don’t want Beal if we’re subtracting Brown.
Regarding the second bolded point, do you think KP would be happy as a third option? And, long-term, doesn’t it make more sense to try to use Kemba’s contract to return a healthier player, or at least a player without a third year on his contract?
Walker and Porzingas took a nearly identical number of shots and free throw attempts per game last year. He's no 1B in Dallas like Jaylen is here. Dallas is just as likely to go to Jalen Brunson or Hardaway in the clutch as Porzingas. Doesn't seem like it would be any adjustment at all for him.
As for the long term implications, the extra contract year is a significant negative. But there are a bunch of factors to weigh. What are the odds that the Celtics will be able to convert Kemba and his contract into productive options for the franchise? That's really hard to say. But C's management must estimate that.
I'm having a hard time seeing how we continue to get anything near equivalent production from that salary as Kemba ages and eventually is moved or not signed. Are we really going to convert Kemba into another quality 3rd option? I doubt it
To me, the one factor that matters the most is evaluating Porzingas medically, and determining if he has more risks physically than we see as fans. If his health is relatively free of new red flags, I think we'd likely be a much much better team with Porzingas than with Kemba.
Power forwards are very tough to get. He can stretch the floor and be a rim presence. Porzingas is a soft, disappointing player if you look at him as a cornerstone, but he is still productive, and he fills a huge gaping need. 20 ppg and 9 rebounds and size at power forward is a better use of money than what Kemba does. Point guards are much easier to get.
If the inside info is acceptable, its probably a good option.
I didn’t make the point about KP being happy particularly clear. What I meant is that he sucks and complains about his shots in Dallas. Wouldn’t he do the same here? With Porzingis, I think a huge part of his game depends on his energy and buy-in.
The second concern, as you noted, is health. Can he still play PF effectively? His defense has slipped significantly, and he seems to have trouble exploiting smaller guys, even small-ball fours.
All that aside, I’d trade him for Kemba if the contracts lined up. The upside would be worth it. But, the extra $36 million is a deal breaker to me.
he is cheaper over the next two years though. that 4-5 million each of the next two might be the difference between keeping Fournier and letting him walk. I also think you could do a bigger trade and drop even more money over the next 2 years with something like Walker/Thompson for Porzingis/Burke. That puts Boston around 10 million cheaper over the next 2 seasons and that might actually avoid the tax depending on what Fournier re-signs for (and Burke is at least respectable as a stop gap PG). That to me has more value to the team than adding in an extra year of the Zinger down the line that probably won't be used anyway. Also, the Zinger is better than Walker (or at least better for this team). He fits a position of need and performs as well or better than Walker.
Sorry, but no. Paying $36 million in 2024 isn’t better than paying an extra $10 million combined in 2022 and 2023. Not even close. You’re advocating spending 1/3 of the cap on a guy who is one injury away from retirement. It’s like taking on Raef Lafrentz all over again.
But if that 10 million is all tax and perhaps well into the tax, it might mean 25 million a year being paid each of the next two, vs. that 36 million in year 3 which probably isn't in the tax. That 10 million off the books next year also makes it far more likely that Founier is re-signed and Smart isn't traded. That makes the team the better next year. As does the Zinger who is slightly better than Walker and plays more of a position of need for the team.
I'd honestly rather have
PG - Smart, Burke, Pritchard, Edwards
SG - Brown, Fournier, Langford
SF - Tatum, Nesmith
PF - Porzingis, G. Williams, Ojeleye
C - R. Williams, Kornet
Then
PG - Walker, Pritchard, Edwards
SG - Smart or Fournier, Langford
SF - Brown, Nesmith
PF - Tatum, G. Williams, Ojeleye
C - R. Williams, Thompson, Kornet
The first team is significantly better and I absolutely believe dropping 10 million will make the difference between having both Fournier and Smart or just 1 of them.
There is basically no way that Boston is going 20+ million into the luxury tax to bring back essentially the same team. It just isn't going to happen.
Topic: Two trades and we are there... (Read 7262 times)