NBA trade rumors/FA signings 2021

[RJ87]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

Exactly.

We're making cost cutting moves, but it feels like we're tidying things up for ownership as opposed to creating max room to go all out. This franchise is too lucrative to be operating the way it currently is. Fournier's market was always going to be in the $18m-20m range, the idea that we're acting like it's a shock is a joke. Brad is shuffling the decks, but we're not improving the talent level on this team. We went into last season with vets who were who they were but hoping the youth would show up to give the Jays a boost. We now have a roster with vets who are who they are and hoping the youth shows up. Its more of the same, but with different names.

We just can't expect this team to be a top 4 seed if ownership doesn't want to fund a top 4 seed roster. And its becoming more and more apparent that ownership doesn't want to spend.

[Roy H.]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

Exactly.

We're making cost cutting moves, but it feels like we're tidying things up for ownership as opposed to creating max room to go all out. This franchise is too lucrative to be operating the way it currently is. Fournier's market was always going to be in the $18m-20m range, the idea that we're acting like it's a shock is a joke. Brad is shuffling the decks, but we're not improving the talent level on this team. We went into last season with vets who were who they were but hoping the youth would show up to give the Jays a boost. We now have a roster with vets who are who they are and hoping the youth shows up. Its more of the same, but with different names.

We just can't expect this team to be a top 4 seed if ownership doesn't want to fund a top 4 seed roster. And its becoming more and more apparent that ownership doesn't want to spend.

They should just cash out.  $2 billion has got to be tempting, right?

[td450]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

Exactly.

We're making cost cutting moves, but it feels like we're tidying things up for ownership as opposed to creating max room to go all out. This franchise is too lucrative to be operating the way it currently is. Fournier's market was always going to be in the $18m-20m range, the idea that we're acting like it's a shock is a joke. Brad is shuffling the decks, but we're not improving the talent level on this team. We went into last season with vets who were who they were but hoping the youth would show up to give the Jays a boost. We now have a roster with vets who are who they are and hoping the youth shows up. Its more of the same, but with different names.

We just can't expect this team to be a top 4 seed if ownership doesn't want to fund a top 4 seed roster. And its becoming more and more apparent that ownership doesn't want to spend.

They should just cash out.  $2 billion has got to be tempting, right?

The logic is not there, sorry.

The Lakers just added an absurdly expensive player to their roster. Nothing is baked in for the C's, just because one of many possibilities might not be there, just like a lot of teams who somehow still make major moves. They just changed who is in charge. Give it a month before deciding they aren't willing to spend the money.

[Jvalin]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

It's doable, but we'd have to gut our team in the process. What did you expect? We already have one max contract (Tatum) and one close-to-max contract (Brown). Of course we'd have to clear the books. That's usually the price you have to pay for a legit big 3. I mean, the Lakers have just 4 guaranteed contracts right now: their big 3 + Gasol. They did it via trade, but they gutted their team anyway. At least we'd still have all our future draft picks, plus 1 or 2 promising young players.

Btw, Westbrook is a terrible fit on the Lakers! I absolutely loved that trade from a Celtics perspective!

[Roy H.]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

Exactly.

We're making cost cutting moves, but it feels like we're tidying things up for ownership as opposed to creating max room to go all out. This franchise is too lucrative to be operating the way it currently is. Fournier's market was always going to be in the $18m-20m range, the idea that we're acting like it's a shock is a joke. Brad is shuffling the decks, but we're not improving the talent level on this team. We went into last season with vets who were who they were but hoping the youth would show up to give the Jays a boost. We now have a roster with vets who are who they are and hoping the youth shows up. Its more of the same, but with different names.

We just can't expect this team to be a top 4 seed if ownership doesn't want to fund a top 4 seed roster. And its becoming more and more apparent that ownership doesn't want to spend.

They should just cash out.  $2 billion has got to be tempting, right?

The logic is not there, sorry.

The Lakers just added an absurdly expensive player to their roster. Nothing is baked in for the C's, just because one of many possibilities might not be there, just like a lot of teams who somehow still make major moves. They just changed who is in charge. Give it a month before deciding they aren't willing to spend the money.

Yes, the Lakers always spend money.  So does Brooklyn.  And, the Celtics generally don't, despite making way more profit than the vast majority of teams.  We're already hearing that the team is walking away from Fournier, and we just dumped a young center prospect to save less than $2 million.

[Roy H.]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

It's doable, but we'd have to gut our team in the process. What did you expect? We already have one max contract (Tatum) and one close-to max contract (Brown). Of course we'd have to clear the books. That's usually the price you have to pay for a legit big 3. I mean, the Lakers have just 4 guaranteed contracts right now: their big 3 + Gasol. They did it via trade, but they gutted their team anyway.

Btw, Westbrook is a terrible fit on the Lakers! I absolutely loved that trade from a Celtics perspective!

To add Beal, our team would be:

Room exception / Vet min / Vet min
Tatum / Vet min / Vet min
Brown / Nesmith / Vet min
Beal / Vet min / Vet min
Pritchard / Vet min / Vet min

That team isn't contending for a long, long time. 

It seems more sensible to actually build a competitive team around players that other teams might actually want in trade.

[Who]

To add Beal, our team would be:

Room exception / Vet min / Vet min
Tatum / Vet min / Vet min
Brown / Nesmith / Vet min
Beal / Vet min / Vet min
Pritchard / Vet min / Vet min

That team isn't contending for a long, long time. 

It seems more sensible to actually build a competitive team around players that other teams might actually want in trade.

I'd say it takes about a year based on previous teams who have gutted their rosters. That first year you lack the depth you need to win a title but by that second year you are right there.

You have that room exception MLE type thing, an actual MLE the next year, the LLE, another draft pick and a bunch of veteran minimum contract players looking to latch onto a contender.

So I'd say by year two we should expect a title contender after gutting our team to sign Beal.

[Jvalin]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

It's doable, but we'd have to gut our team in the process. What did you expect? We already have one max contract (Tatum) and one close-to max contract (Brown). Of course we'd have to clear the books. That's usually the price you have to pay for a legit big 3. I mean, the Lakers have just 4 guaranteed contracts right now: their big 3 + Gasol. They did it via trade, but they gutted their team anyway.

Btw, Westbrook is a terrible fit on the Lakers! I absolutely loved that trade from a Celtics perspective!

To add Beal, our team would be:

Room exception / Vet min / Vet min
Tatum / Vet min / Vet min
Brown / Nesmith / Vet min
Beal / Vet min / Vet min
Pritchard / Vet min / Vet min

That team isn't contending for a long, long time. 

It seems more sensible to actually build a competitive team around players that other teams might actually want in trade.

Imo, we'd be legit contenders from year one. Having Tatum, Brown and Beal/Kawhi would allow us to attract reliable role players either via free agency of via the buyout market. We'd also have all our future picks intact.

I get why you don't like it, but that doesn't mean that ''it's not really in the cards''.

[Goldstar88]

According to a league source, negotiations between the Celtics and Evan Fournier are close to stalling, with the team unwilling to meet the valuable wing player’s asking price of $80 million over four years.  https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/amp/

When the C’s traded for Fournier, wasn’t it understood that he was going to command between 15-$20M/year? He’s 28, so a 4 year deal would ensure that you get him through his prime. It’s going to really suck if he goes to the Knicks For 4/$80M...

It may suck for us, but I find it perfectly reasonable that Fournier demands 80/4.
I expect he will get that elsewhere if the Celtics won't compromise.

I agree, He’s definitely worth $20m/year. C’s shouldn’t have traded for him if they weren’t willing to pay him up to that amount.

[footey]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

Read that Wiz trying to create cap space to sign DeRosen, a buddy of Beal. Guess he can have more than one friend.

[footey]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

It's doable, but we'd have to gut our team in the process. What did you expect? We already have one max contract (Tatum) and one close-to max contract (Brown). Of course we'd have to clear the books. That's usually the price you have to pay for a legit big 3. I mean, the Lakers have just 4 guaranteed contracts right now: their big 3 + Gasol. They did it via trade, but they gutted their team anyway.

Btw, Westbrook is a terrible fit on the Lakers! I absolutely loved that trade from a Celtics perspective!

To add Beal, our team would be:

Room exception / Vet min / Vet min
Tatum / Vet min / Vet min
Brown / Nesmith / Vet min
Beal / Vet min / Vet min
Pritchard / Vet min / Vet min

That team isn't contending for a long, long time. 

It seems more sensible to actually build a competitive team around players that other teams might actually want in trade.

Imo, we'd be legit contenders from year one. Having Tatum, Brown and Beal/Kawhi would allow us to attract reliable role players either via free agency of via the buyout market. We'd also have all our future picks intact.

I get why you don't like it, but that doesn't mean that ''it's not really in the cards''.

3 wings none of whom has point guard skills. Not a recipe for a championship IMO.

[Jvalin]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

It's doable, but we'd have to gut our team in the process. What did you expect? We already have one max contract (Tatum) and one close-to max contract (Brown). Of course we'd have to clear the books. That's usually the price you have to pay for a legit big 3. I mean, the Lakers have just 4 guaranteed contracts right now: their big 3 + Gasol. They did it via trade, but they gutted their team anyway.

Btw, Westbrook is a terrible fit on the Lakers! I absolutely loved that trade from a Celtics perspective!

To add Beal, our team would be:

Room exception / Vet min / Vet min
Tatum / Vet min / Vet min
Brown / Nesmith / Vet min
Beal / Vet min / Vet min
Pritchard / Vet min / Vet min

That team isn't contending for a long, long time. 

It seems more sensible to actually build a competitive team around players that other teams might actually want in trade.

Imo, we'd be legit contenders from year one. Having Tatum, Brown and Beal/Kawhi would allow us to attract reliable role players either via free agency of via the buyout market. We'd also have all our future picks intact.

I get why you don't like it, but that doesn't mean that ''it's not really in the cards''.

3 wings none of whom has point guard skills. Not a recipe for a championship IMO.

Both Beal and Tatum have guard skills. Tatum is already our primary ball handler in the half court. Kemba/Smart/Pritchard were bringing the ball up the court, but we were running pretty much everything through Tatum. Our offense is built around Tatum's ability to run the PnR as a 6'8" ball handler.

[Who]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

It's doable, but we'd have to gut our team in the process. What did you expect? We already have one max contract (Tatum) and one close-to max contract (Brown). Of course we'd have to clear the books. That's usually the price you have to pay for a legit big 3. I mean, the Lakers have just 4 guaranteed contracts right now: their big 3 + Gasol. They did it via trade, but they gutted their team anyway.

Btw, Westbrook is a terrible fit on the Lakers! I absolutely loved that trade from a Celtics perspective!

To add Beal, our team would be:

Room exception / Vet min / Vet min
Tatum / Vet min / Vet min
Brown / Nesmith / Vet min
Beal / Vet min / Vet min
Pritchard / Vet min / Vet min

That team isn't contending for a long, long time. 

It seems more sensible to actually build a competitive team around players that other teams might actually want in trade.

Imo, we'd be legit contenders from year one. Having Tatum, Brown and Beal/Kawhi would allow us to attract reliable role players either via free agency of via the buyout market. We'd also have all our future picks intact.

I get why you don't like it, but that doesn't mean that ''it's not really in the cards''.

3 wings none of whom has point guard skills. Not a recipe for a championship IMO.

Both Beal and Tatum have guard skills. Tatum is already our primary ball handler in the half court. Kemba/Smart/Pritchard were bringing the ball up the court, but we were running pretty much everything through Tatum. Our offense is built around Tatum's ability to run the PnR as a 6'8" ball handler.

Beal's ball-handling and passing skills are massively under-valued on this board. He is very good in this areas. It is a major plus of his game to have a two guard who can assist the offense in these ways.

[hpantazo]

According to a league source, negotiations between the Celtics and Evan Fournier are close to stalling, with the team unwilling to meet the valuable wing player’s asking price of $80 million over four years.  https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/amp/

When the C’s traded for Fournier, wasn’t it understood that he was going to command between 15-$20M/year? He’s 28, so a 4 year deal would ensure that you get him through his prime. It’s going to really suck if he goes to the Knicks For 4/$80M...

It may suck for us, but I find it perfectly reasonable that Fournier demands 80/4.
I expect he will get that elsewhere if the Celtics won't compromise.

I agree, He’s definitely worth $20m/year. C’s shouldn’t have traded for him if they weren’t willing to pay him up to that amount.

Stevens wasn't the one who traded for him though. It's his show now, he shouldn't make decisions based on what Ainge did or did not want.

[Jvalin]

Fournier is not coming back based off the latest and greatest. Just awful.

https://twitter.com/murf56/status/1421538433042898946?s=21

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/07/31/0731-bh-s-fournier/

Yep.  Funny how Boston and NY are both in active negotiations despite the anti-tampering period.

$20 mil a year is a lot but wouldn't the C's still have to do that deal rather than let him walk for nothing?

Not necessarily. Part of what the Cs have been doing with all these moves is get rid of players who are too expensive and create financial flexibility going forward (Dunn and Richardson have expiring contracts).

Flexibilty is great but the team is worse this year.

At this point, we should just trade Smart for a matching expiring contract and a future 1st. If we are going to let him go anyway, it would be nice to add a future pick. It’s not like we are trying to climb the standings next season.

If that's true it's just another wasted years off Brown and Tatum's prime. 

Brown and Tatum are still 2 years or so from entering their prime, at a minimum.

Heck, it can be argued that Giannis Antetokounmpo still hasn't reached his prime at 26 years old. Most consider NBA stars in their prime between the ages of 27 and 32.

But we should be trying to be competitive though, no? Another season of
.500 ball because the pieces around them are not very good just makes me queasy.

The team should at least be making a case as to why they should spend their primes in Boston. So far the message is ownership is willing to build around them, but not if it means they have to spend money.

Yeah this is the kind of risk adverse mentality that may convince Tatum and Brown to look elsewhere.

If the Celtics land Beal in free agency, the Jays are not going to care one bit that management decided to go all in for a title in 2022-23 rather than 2021-22.

If for all we know, Beal probably wants to stay in Washington. The Wizards did well getting out of Westbrook's contract.

If the numbers in the other thread are correct, we'd have to clear every single player from our books other than Brown, Tatum, Pritchard and Nesmith, and stash our #1 pick, and we *still* wouldn't have quite enough for a max contract for Beal.

So, it sounds like it's not really in the cards.  All the talk about flexibility, etc., is really about getting the folks to stay invested in the team while Wyc refuses to fund a competitive team.

It's doable, but we'd have to gut our team in the process. What did you expect? We already have one max contract (Tatum) and one close-to max contract (Brown). Of course we'd have to clear the books. That's usually the price you have to pay for a legit big 3. I mean, the Lakers have just 4 guaranteed contracts right now: their big 3 + Gasol. They did it via trade, but they gutted their team anyway.

Btw, Westbrook is a terrible fit on the Lakers! I absolutely loved that trade from a Celtics perspective!

To add Beal, our team would be:

Room exception / Vet min / Vet min
Tatum / Vet min / Vet min
Brown / Nesmith / Vet min
Beal / Vet min / Vet min
Pritchard / Vet min / Vet min

That team isn't contending for a long, long time. 

It seems more sensible to actually build a competitive team around players that other teams might actually want in trade.

Imo, we'd be legit contenders from year one. Having Tatum, Brown and Beal/Kawhi would allow us to attract reliable role players either via free agency of via the buyout market. We'd also have all our future picks intact.

I get why you don't like it, but that doesn't mean that ''it's not really in the cards''.

3 wings none of whom has point guard skills. Not a recipe for a championship IMO.

Both Beal and Tatum have guard skills. Tatum is already our primary ball handler in the half court. Kemba/Smart/Pritchard were bringing the ball up the court, but we were running pretty much everything through Tatum. Our offense is built around Tatum's ability to run the PnR as a 6'8" ball handler.

Beal's ball-handling and passing skills are massively under-valued on this board. He is very good in this areas. It is a major plus of his game to have a two guard who can assist the offense in these ways.

Tatum's guard skills are massively underrated as well. He's an elite PnR ball handler for his size. The only guys at 6'8" or taller I'd take over Tatum to run the PnR are LeBron and Cade Cunningham. PnR is quite possibly the most unstoppable move in today's NBA.