Prediction: Beal will sign in Boston in 2022

[Moranis]

Unlikely.  Just better to trade for him now.  Especially since to sign him you basically can't have Smart, Thompson, Fournier, Williams, Williams, Horford, and maybe Langford.

Much better to just acquire him centered on a package of Smart, Thompson, Langford, R. Williams, and future picks.  Then you get to save Horford,, Fournier, and G. Williams to actually build a real team.  You also can then give Beal more years and more money making it far less likely that he would actually leave.

Except that Langford, Nesmith and Robert Williams are the guys that matter for the long term. Horford, Fournier and G Williams do not. Keeping Fournier and obtaining Beal (or anyone other than a center or point guard that starts) effectively deletes any future on the team for Langford and/or Nesmith.

Robert Williams is either a top 10 center, or a dead weight. I have to believe there is a way to save him and find that out.

I think going for Beal is a mistake, but it is better to consolidate around youth and picks than it is to trade for him. I'd rather have Beal and Langford and Nesmith than Beal and Fournier.

In order to sign Beal outright, Robert Williams almost certainly would not be on the team and it is quite possible that Langford would also need to be gone.  There just isn't an easy way to make the room for Beal, with both Brown and Tatum on the team, without basically gutting the roster.  So, if you are basically gutting the team to sign him outright, Boston is just much better off trading for him this summer when it can use expiring contracts of Smart and Thompson as the money, a young player or two, and future draft picks.  Not only do you ensure you land Beal, you get him for an extra year of his prime, and you can save way more of the depth of the team to acquire him.  If by some chance he leaves next summer, well then you have basically max room to sign a different free agent if you let Horford go, but I suspect Beal would end up signing a 5 year max, taking him through his prime and hopefully encouraging both Tatum and Brown to stay past their existing contracts.

Beal, Fournier, Brown, Tatum, Horford is a superb starting 5 and there is some quality young players and depth on the bench in Pritchard, Langford or Nesmith, G. Williams, Parker, Brown, Edwards and then possibly Ojeleye and Kornet.  Even if you bring back the latter two, there are still 2 open roster spots to land some veteran minimum type players.  Maybe Love if he gets bought out (as an example). 

You don't put off till tomorrow what you can do today. 

[bogg]

In order to sign Beal outright, Robert Williams almost certainly would not be on the team and it is quite possible that Langford would also need to be gone.  There just isn't an easy way to make the room for Beal, with both Brown and Tatum on the team, without basically gutting the roster.  So, if you are basically gutting the team to sign him outright, Boston is just much better off trading for him this summer when it can use expiring contracts of Smart and Thompson as the money, a young player or two, and future draft picks.  Not only do you ensure you land Beal, you get him for an extra year of his prime, and you can save way more of the depth of the team to acquire him.  If by some chance he leaves next summer, well then you have basically max room to sign a different free agent if you let Horford go, but I suspect Beal would end up signing a 5 year max, taking him through his prime and hopefully encouraging both Tatum and Brown to stay past their existing contracts.

Beal, Fournier, Brown, Tatum, Horford is a superb starting 5 and there is some quality young players and depth on the bench in Pritchard, Langford or Nesmith, G. Williams, Parker, Brown, Edwards and then possibly Ojeleye and Kornet.  Even if you bring back the latter two, there are still 2 open roster spots to land some veteran minimum type players.  Maybe Love if he gets bought out (as an example). 

You don't put off till tomorrow what you can do today.

I think there's an argument to be made for building that trade around Horford and/or a Fournier S&T, but in general I agree here.

[ETNCeltics]

Is there going to be an issue with Beal, just as there was with Kyrie, and perhaps a bit with Kemba, that this isn't his team?  Kyrie couldn't handle being 2nd fiddle to someone much younger and inexperienced, I wonder if Beal will be able to adjust.

Ultimately, the Celtics are in the talent collection business, so getting a guy like Beal if you can without selling the farm is a no-brainer.

[td450]

Except that Langford, Nesmith and Robert Williams are the guys that matter for the long term. Horford, Fournier and G Williams do not. Keeping Fournier and obtaining Beal (or anyone other than a center or point guard that starts) effectively deletes any future on the team for Langford and/or Nesmith.

Robert Williams is either a top 10 center, or a dead weight. I have to believe there is a way to save him and find that out.

I think going for Beal is a mistake, but it is better to consolidate around youth and picks than it is to trade for him. I'd rather have Beal and Langford and Nesmith than Beal and Fournier.

Eh, Beal's 29 next summer. If you're going out and getting an almost-30 scoring guard you're doing everything you can to win a title in the following 3 years, and Nesmith/Langford will never be starters on a Jays/Beal iteration of the Cs. I definitely see the argument that Nesmith/Langford are more affordable bench help than Sixth Man Fournier would be, but not that they become foundational pieces.

The big thing a trade would do is allow you to keep one or two of the Smart/Fournier/Horford group of supporting veterans, all of whom would have a clear role on this theoretical contender.

I'm pretty certain Nesmith is going to be a quality starter somewhere, and Langford will be too if he can stay healthy. I don't see how tossing away that much talent in addition to what we include for a trade is an intelligent decision. Four years from now, Fournier will exiting his prime and Langford and Nesmith will be a year or two from even reaching theirs. Fournier isn't worth the difference.

[PAOBoston]

Except that Langford, Nesmith and Robert Williams are the guys that matter for the long term. Horford, Fournier and G Williams do not. Keeping Fournier and obtaining Beal (or anyone other than a center or point guard that starts) effectively deletes any future on the team for Langford and/or Nesmith.

Robert Williams is either a top 10 center, or a dead weight. I have to believe there is a way to save him and find that out.

I think going for Beal is a mistake, but it is better to consolidate around youth and picks than it is to trade for him. I'd rather have Beal and Langford and Nesmith than Beal and Fournier.

Eh, Beal's 29 next summer. If you're going out and getting an almost-30 scoring guard you're doing everything you can to win a title in the following 3 years, and Nesmith/Langford will never be starters on a Jays/Beal iteration of the Cs. I definitely see the argument that Nesmith/Langford are more affordable bench help than Sixth Man Fournier would be, but not that they become foundational pieces.

The big thing a trade would do is allow you to keep one or two of the Smart/Fournier/Horford group of supporting veterans, all of whom would have a clear role on this theoretical contender.

I'm pretty certain Nesmith is going to be a quality starter somewhere, and Langford will be too if he can stay healthy. I don't see how tossing away that much talent in addition to what we include for a trade is an intelligent decision. Four years from now, Fournier will exiting his prime and Langford and Nesmith will be a year or two from even reaching theirs. Fournier isn't worth the difference.

4 years from now might not matter since both JB and JT might be gone. Neither of these guys right now project to be starters on championship teams, especially Langford. Langford is literally closer to being out of the league than he is to being a full time starter on a championship team.

Both those guys might be solid role players at some point but Cs can’t wait around for these guys to develop. They are on the clock with JB/JT and need to cash in. I don’t understand why people just assume JB and JT will be here their entire careers. It’s incredibly unlikely to happen.

[bogg]

I'm pretty certain Nesmith is going to be a quality starter somewhere, and Langford will be too if he can stay healthy. I don't see how tossing away that much talent in addition to what we include for a trade is an intelligent decision. Four years from now, Fournier will exiting his prime and Langford and Nesmith will be a year or two from even reaching theirs. Fournier isn't worth the difference.

If you're building for four years from now you don't have any business tearing the roster down to sign an almost-30 Brad Beal in the first place. If you can keep Nesmith around as bench help then great, but you don't structure your entire three-year-plan around your backup shooting guard.


EDIT: Also, boiling this down to Fournier vs. Romeo/Nesmith isn't accurate. There are a ton of other team-building factors involved with the cap space route. You're also talking about punting on a year of Brown/Tatum, you're limited to expiring contracts in a TT trade, can only target guys who'll take a one-year contract in free agency this year, you have to renounce all your trade exceptions going under the cap, etc.

It's really "one or two of Horford/Smart/Fournier, possibly Rob, and two or three other veteran targets you could have otherwise had as well vs. some mix of Nesmith/Langford/picks". Trading for Beal leaves you much more able to fill out the roster around him and the Jays.

[td450]

Except that Langford, Nesmith and Robert Williams are the guys that matter for the long term. Horford, Fournier and G Williams do not. Keeping Fournier and obtaining Beal (or anyone other than a center or point guard that starts) effectively deletes any future on the team for Langford and/or Nesmith.

Robert Williams is either a top 10 center, or a dead weight. I have to believe there is a way to save him and find that out.

I think going for Beal is a mistake, but it is better to consolidate around youth and picks than it is to trade for him. I'd rather have Beal and Langford and Nesmith than Beal and Fournier.

Eh, Beal's 29 next summer. If you're going out and getting an almost-30 scoring guard you're doing everything you can to win a title in the following 3 years, and Nesmith/Langford will never be starters on a Jays/Beal iteration of the Cs. I definitely see the argument that Nesmith/Langford are more affordable bench help than Sixth Man Fournier would be, but not that they become foundational pieces.

The big thing a trade would do is allow you to keep one or two of the Smart/Fournier/Horford group of supporting veterans, all of whom would have a clear role on this theoretical contender.

I'm pretty certain Nesmith is going to be a quality starter somewhere, and Langford will be too if he can stay healthy. I don't see how tossing away that much talent in addition to what we include for a trade is an intelligent decision. Four years from now, Fournier will exiting his prime and Langford and Nesmith will be a year or two from even reaching theirs. Fournier isn't worth the difference.

4 years from now might not matter since both JB and JT might be gone. Neither of these guys right now project to be starters on championship teams, especially Langford. Langford is literally closer to being out of the league than he is to being a full time starter on a championship team.

Both those guys might be solid role players at some point but Cs can’t wait around for these guys to develop. They are on the clock with JB/JT and need to cash in. I don’t understand why people just assume JB and JT will be here their entire careers. It’s incredibly unlikely to happen.

Brown and Tatum will make their decisions when they go on the market. For Jaylen, that is 2024, for Tatum 2025. I'm not worried about either guy throwing a fit and demanding an early trade. Maybe you are.

We are talking quite specifically about whether it is better to roll through that with Fournier, or Nesmith and Langford and any assets we can push ahead by not trading for Beal, but rather signing him a year later. You are overstating your case. This is just about what will create the best outcome later, when it matters.

We don't actually know which would make more sense. A lot depends on how certain players develop, and what we could do by shedding Smart and Fournier now. What the caps are after next year. Could we nab a quality pick in the draft? These are all guesses.

My guess is that we can do better by not signing Fournier, and using Smart and less of those assets to get a possible quality starter in this draft, then try the free agent market next year. To me that is the most likely way to create the best situation possible in 2024 and 2025. If we have to shed a contract then, we will know more about the young guys and will know if its a good idea. We will know more about what we have then, and can make a better decision.

[PAOBoston]

Except that Langford, Nesmith and Robert Williams are the guys that matter for the long term. Horford, Fournier and G Williams do not. Keeping Fournier and obtaining Beal (or anyone other than a center or point guard that starts) effectively deletes any future on the team for Langford and/or Nesmith.

Robert Williams is either a top 10 center, or a dead weight. I have to believe there is a way to save him and find that out.

I think going for Beal is a mistake, but it is better to consolidate around youth and picks than it is to trade for him. I'd rather have Beal and Langford and Nesmith than Beal and Fournier.

Eh, Beal's 29 next summer. If you're going out and getting an almost-30 scoring guard you're doing everything you can to win a title in the following 3 years, and Nesmith/Langford will never be starters on a Jays/Beal iteration of the Cs. I definitely see the argument that Nesmith/Langford are more affordable bench help than Sixth Man Fournier would be, but not that they become foundational pieces.

The big thing a trade would do is allow you to keep one or two of the Smart/Fournier/Horford group of supporting veterans, all of whom would have a clear role on this theoretical contender.

I'm pretty certain Nesmith is going to be a quality starter somewhere, and Langford will be too if he can stay healthy. I don't see how tossing away that much talent in addition to what we include for a trade is an intelligent decision. Four years from now, Fournier will exiting his prime and Langford and Nesmith will be a year or two from even reaching theirs. Fournier isn't worth the difference.

4 years from now might not matter since both JB and JT might be gone. Neither of these guys right now project to be starters on championship teams, especially Langford. Langford is literally closer to being out of the league than he is to being a full time starter on a championship team.

Both those guys might be solid role players at some point but Cs can’t wait around for these guys to develop. They are on the clock with JB/JT and need to cash in. I don’t understand why people just assume JB and JT will be here their entire careers. It’s incredibly unlikely to happen.

Brown and Tatum will make their decisions when they go on the market. For Jaylen, that is 2024, for Tatum 2025. I'm not worried about either guy throwing a fit and demanding an early trade. Maybe you are.

We are talking quite specifically about whether it is better to roll through that with Fournier, or Nesmith and Langford and any assets we can push ahead by not trading for Beal, but rather signing him a year later. You are overstating your case. This is just about what will create the best outcome later, when it matters.

We don't actually know which would make more sense. A lot depends on how certain players develop, and what we could do by shedding Smart and Fournier now. What the caps are after next year. Could we nab a quality pick in the draft? These are all guesses.

My guess is that we can do better by not signing Fournier, and using Smart and less of those assets to get a possible quality starter in this draft, then try the free agent market next year. To me that is the most likely way to create the best situation possible in 2024 and 2025. If we have to shed a contract then, we will know more about the young guys and will know if its a good idea. We will know more about what we have then, and can make a better decision.

You should be worried about them leaving or forcing their way out. It’s happening everywhere in the NBA. Boston isn’t exactly a premier destination for players.

Right now, they know they have those guys under contract. Waiting/wasting a year of their contracts to me seems like you are playing with fire. They did the hard part draft/groom into All Stars/extend. Now they need to add pieces around them to keep them happy.

[bogg]

We are talking quite specifically about whether it is better to roll through that with Fournier, or Nesmith and Langford and any assets we can push ahead by not trading for Beal, but rather signing him a year later. You are overstating your case. This is just about what will create the best outcome later, when it matters.

Again, it's not just that discussion though. There are ways to structure a potential trade where Boston retains Smart or Horford instead of Fournier, or Smart AND Fournier, or Horford AND Smart. You're also talking a significant amount of flexibility to put veterans around Beal and the Jays lost when you go the free agency route. Not to mention burning a year of Brown/Tatum when you didn't have to.

Most importantly, if Washington's willing to move Beal and Boston passes, you can just about guarantee the Wizards trade Beal somewhere else. Get beat to the punch by Philly/Golden State/Dallas/etc and the C's are likely left empty-handed because they just couldn't bear to part with Romeo Langford and a pair of #28 picks.

[td450]

Except that Langford, Nesmith and Robert Williams are the guys that matter for the long term. Horford, Fournier and G Williams do not. Keeping Fournier and obtaining Beal (or anyone other than a center or point guard that starts) effectively deletes any future on the team for Langford and/or Nesmith.

Robert Williams is either a top 10 center, or a dead weight. I have to believe there is a way to save him and find that out.

I think going for Beal is a mistake, but it is better to consolidate around youth and picks than it is to trade for him. I'd rather have Beal and Langford and Nesmith than Beal and Fournier.

Eh, Beal's 29 next summer. If you're going out and getting an almost-30 scoring guard you're doing everything you can to win a title in the following 3 years, and Nesmith/Langford will never be starters on a Jays/Beal iteration of the Cs. I definitely see the argument that Nesmith/Langford are more affordable bench help than Sixth Man Fournier would be, but not that they become foundational pieces.

The big thing a trade would do is allow you to keep one or two of the Smart/Fournier/Horford group of supporting veterans, all of whom would have a clear role on this theoretical contender.

I'm pretty certain Nesmith is going to be a quality starter somewhere, and Langford will be too if he can stay healthy. I don't see how tossing away that much talent in addition to what we include for a trade is an intelligent decision. Four years from now, Fournier will exiting his prime and Langford and Nesmith will be a year or two from even reaching theirs. Fournier isn't worth the difference.

4 years from now might not matter since both JB and JT might be gone. Neither of these guys right now project to be starters on championship teams, especially Langford. Langford is literally closer to being out of the league than he is to being a full time starter on a championship team.

Both those guys might be solid role players at some point but Cs can’t wait around for these guys to develop. They are on the clock with JB/JT and need to cash in. I don’t understand why people just assume JB and JT will be here their entire careers. It’s incredibly unlikely to happen.

Brown and Tatum will make their decisions when they go on the market. For Jaylen, that is 2024, for Tatum 2025. I'm not worried about either guy throwing a fit and demanding an early trade. Maybe you are.

We are talking quite specifically about whether it is better to roll through that with Fournier, or Nesmith and Langford and any assets we can push ahead by not trading for Beal, but rather signing him a year later. You are overstating your case. This is just about what will create the best outcome later, when it matters.

We don't actually know which would make more sense. A lot depends on how certain players develop, and what we could do by shedding Smart and Fournier now. What the caps are after next year. Could we nab a quality pick in the draft? These are all guesses.

My guess is that we can do better by not signing Fournier, and using Smart and less of those assets to get a possible quality starter in this draft, then try the free agent market next year. To me that is the most likely way to create the best situation possible in 2024 and 2025. If we have to shed a contract then, we will know more about the young guys and will know if its a good idea. We will know more about what we have then, and can make a better decision.

You should be worried about them leaving or forcing their way out. It’s happening everywhere in the NBA. Boston isn’t exactly a premier destination for players.

Right now, they know they have those guys under contract. Waiting/wasting a year of their contracts to me seems like you are playing with fire. They did the hard part draft/groom into All Stars/extend. Now they need to add pieces around them to keep them happy.

It is absolutely not happening everywhere. Its happening with a few guys, and its not that hard to tell who would be inclined to do it.

[td450]

We are talking quite specifically about whether it is better to roll through that with Fournier, or Nesmith and Langford and any assets we can push ahead by not trading for Beal, but rather signing him a year later. You are overstating your case. This is just about what will create the best outcome later, when it matters.

Again, it's not just that discussion though. There are ways to structure a potential trade where Boston retains Smart or Horford instead of Fournier, or Smart AND Fournier, or Horford AND Smart. You're also talking a significant amount of flexibility to put veterans around Beal and the Jays lost when you go the free agency route. Not to mention burning a year of Brown/Tatum when you didn't have to.

Most importantly, if Washington's willing to move Beal and Boston passes, you can just about guarantee the Wizards trade Beal somewhere else. Get beat to the punch by Philly/Golden State/Dallas/etc and the C's are likely left empty-handed because they just couldn't bear to part with Romeo Langford and a pair of #28 picks.

I don't think any of those vet combinations are much of an improvement, and Beal isn't bound to any trade past next year. The argument is that he's strongly inclined to want to play with Tatum. Getting into a bidding war now for Beal makes me like it even less. If Golden State wants to win that war, they will, because Wiggins, Wiseman and their picks are assets we can't match.

[Csfan1984]

We are talking quite specifically about whether it is better to roll through that with Fournier, or Nesmith and Langford and any assets we can push ahead by not trading for Beal, but rather signing him a year later. You are overstating your case. This is just about what will create the best outcome later, when it matters.

Again, it's not just that discussion though. There are ways to structure a potential trade where Boston retains Smart or Horford instead of Fournier, or Smart AND Fournier, or Horford AND Smart. You're also talking a significant amount of flexibility to put veterans around Beal and the Jays lost when you go the free agency route. Not to mention burning a year of Brown/Tatum when you didn't have to.

Most importantly, if Washington's willing to move Beal and Boston passes, you can just about guarantee the Wizards trade Beal somewhere else. Get beat to the punch by Philly/Golden State/Dallas/etc and the C's are likely left empty-handed because they just couldn't bear to part with Romeo Langford and a pair of #28 picks.

The price needs to be a bargain to trade now. If things are bumpy and someone offers him a better situation he could walk and you lost assets for a rental. Makes no sense to give up a ton right now.
Irving, Horford, and Hayward all left. Waiting to sign him isn't a bad idea. Now if it's Langford, Grant, TT, a 1st and Fournier fine. Not throwing a bunch of 1st in.

[slamtheking]

Unlikely.  Just better to trade for him now.  Especially since to sign him you basically can't have Smart, Thompson, Fournier, Williams, Williams, Horford, and maybe Langford.

Much better to just acquire him centered on a package of Smart, Thompson, Langford, R. Williams, and future picks.  Then you get to save Horford,, Fournier, and G. Williams to actually build a real team.  You also can then give Beal more years and more money making it far less likely that he would actually leave.

Except that Langford, Nesmith and Robert Williams are the guys that matter for the long term. Horford, Fournier and G Williams do not. Keeping Fournier and obtaining Beal (or anyone other than a center or point guard that starts) effectively deletes any future on the team for Langford and/or Nesmith.

Robert Williams is either a top 10 center, or a dead weight. I have to believe there is a way to save him and find that out.

I think going for Beal is a mistake, but it is better to consolidate around youth and picks than it is to trade for him. I'd rather have Beal and Langford and Nesmith than Beal and Fournier.

In order to sign Beal outright, Robert Williams almost certainly would not be on the team and it is quite possible that Langford would also need to be gone.  There just isn't an easy way to make the room for Beal, with both Brown and Tatum on the team, without basically gutting the roster.  So, if you are basically gutting the team to sign him outright, Boston is just much better off trading for him this summer when it can use expiring contracts of Smart and Thompson as the money, a young player or two, and future draft picks.  Not only do you ensure you land Beal, you get him for an extra year of his prime, and you can save way more of the depth of the team to acquire him.  If by some chance he leaves next summer, well then you have basically max room to sign a different free agent if you let Horford go, but I suspect Beal would end up signing a 5 year max, taking him through his prime and hopefully encouraging both Tatum and Brown to stay past their existing contracts.

Beal, Fournier, Brown, Tatum, Horford is a superb starting 5 and there is some quality young players and depth on the bench in Pritchard, Langford or Nesmith, G. Williams, Parker, Brown, Edwards and then possibly Ojeleye and Kornet.  Even if you bring back the latter two, there are still 2 open roster spots to land some veteran minimum type players.  Maybe Love if he gets bought out (as an example). 

You don't put off till tomorrow what you can do today.

probably  your best argument yet for this type of deal.  I was on the fence leaning towards the No side but I have to admit, I find it hard to argue with your reasoning (which I usually do on most things).  If this happened, for one prospect, not two (unless the second is Edwards), I could get behind it.  actually, if this deal went through, I'd insist on them taking Edwards as well.

one thing I do disagree on is counting on GWill, Parker, Moses, Edwards, Semi or Kornet to be part of a productive bench. 

TP to you

[bogg]

...Beal isn't bound to any trade past next year. The argument is that he's strongly inclined to want to play with Tatum.

Your argument is that he's only willing to play with Tatum, and he's happy to burn a year of his remaining prime to do it if it saves Boston draft picks in 2023 and 2025. If he asks out and Boston publicly says Thanks But No Thanks, it's a near certainty he expands his "list".

These kind of guys remember when you tell them you don't think they're good enough to spend assets on.

[Moranis]

Except that Langford, Nesmith and Robert Williams are the guys that matter for the long term. Horford, Fournier and G Williams do not. Keeping Fournier and obtaining Beal (or anyone other than a center or point guard that starts) effectively deletes any future on the team for Langford and/or Nesmith.

Robert Williams is either a top 10 center, or a dead weight. I have to believe there is a way to save him and find that out.

I think going for Beal is a mistake, but it is better to consolidate around youth and picks than it is to trade for him. I'd rather have Beal and Langford and Nesmith than Beal and Fournier.

Eh, Beal's 29 next summer. If you're going out and getting an almost-30 scoring guard you're doing everything you can to win a title in the following 3 years, and Nesmith/Langford will never be starters on a Jays/Beal iteration of the Cs. I definitely see the argument that Nesmith/Langford are more affordable bench help than Sixth Man Fournier would be, but not that they become foundational pieces.

The big thing a trade would do is allow you to keep one or two of the Smart/Fournier/Horford group of supporting veterans, all of whom would have a clear role on this theoretical contender.

I'm pretty certain Nesmith is going to be a quality starter somewhere, and Langford will be too if he can stay healthy. I don't see how tossing away that much talent in addition to what we include for a trade is an intelligent decision. Four years from now, Fournier will exiting his prime and Langford and Nesmith will be a year or two from even reaching theirs. Fournier isn't worth the difference.

4 years from now might not matter since both JB and JT might be gone. Neither of these guys right now project to be starters on championship teams, especially Langford. Langford is literally closer to being out of the league than he is to being a full time starter on a championship team.

Both those guys might be solid role players at some point but Cs can’t wait around for these guys to develop. They are on the clock with JB/JT and need to cash in. I don’t understand why people just assume JB and JT will be here their entire careers. It’s incredibly unlikely to happen.

Brown and Tatum will make their decisions when they go on the market. For Jaylen, that is 2024, for Tatum 2025. I'm not worried about either guy throwing a fit and demanding an early trade. Maybe you are.

We are talking quite specifically about whether it is better to roll through that with Fournier, or Nesmith and Langford and any assets we can push ahead by not trading for Beal, but rather signing him a year later. You are overstating your case. This is just about what will create the best outcome later, when it matters.

We don't actually know which would make more sense. A lot depends on how certain players develop, and what we could do by shedding Smart and Fournier now. What the caps are after next year. Could we nab a quality pick in the draft? These are all guesses.

My guess is that we can do better by not signing Fournier, and using Smart and less of those assets to get a possible quality starter in this draft, then try the free agent market next year. To me that is the most likely way to create the best situation possible in 2024 and 2025. If we have to shed a contract then, we will know more about the young guys and will know if its a good idea. We will know more about what we have then, and can make a better decision.

You should be worried about them leaving or forcing their way out. It’s happening everywhere in the NBA. Boston isn’t exactly a premier destination for players.

Right now, they know they have those guys under contract. Waiting/wasting a year of their contracts to me seems like you are playing with fire. They did the hard part draft/groom into All Stars/extend. Now they need to add pieces around them to keep them happy.

It is absolutely not happening everywhere. Its happening with a few guys, and its not that hard to tell who would be inclined to do it.

Giannis and Curry are pretty much the only franchise players where there haven't at least been overtures of movement over the last 5 to 10 years.  And you are starting to hear people talking about targeting Curry when is contract is up in a couple of years.