Fournier, Celtics "far apart" (Fournier signs with Knicks)

[GreenlyGreeny]

Think about it this way: If Beal demanded a trade to Boston, stating unequivocally that he will not sign anywhere else in order to play with Tatum, we can make a trade for him by moving Fournier (@$20 million/year), Richardson, GWill and picks. We’re then set with a Big 3 AND a respectable supporting cast.

Without having Fournier on the books at $15-20 million/year, we are severely constrained when a superstar becomes available, whether it’s Beal or someone else. We do not want to gut our supporting cast to get a third piece, right?

Isn’t the goal to add a third piece to Tatum/Brown while still having a respectable supporting cast, so we can compete for titles? There’s no way to achieve that without either being in the tax NOW with Fournier, or being incredibly lucky with a future draft pick which means a long wait and incredibly poor odds if we’re drafting outside the lottery (the third way would be to be incredibly lucky to somehow trade for a future all-star while he is still on his rookie contract, and SGA is probably the only possibility on that front with no guarantee of his foot being 100% again).

Ownership should not be saying they are going to die trying, but are unwilling to pay the tax. If they cannot afford the tax, sell the team to someone who can and will.

[gouki88]

Think about it this way: If Beal demanded a trade to Boston, stating unequivocally that he will not sign anywhere else in order to play with Tatum, we can make a trade for him by moving Fournier (@$20 million/year), Richardson, GWill and picks. We’re then set with a Big 3 AND a respectable supporting cast.

Without having Fournier on the books at $15-20 million/year, we are severely constrained when a superstar becomes available, whether it’s Beal or someone else. We do not want to gut our supporting cast to get a third piece, right?

Isn’t the goal to add a third piece to Tatum/Brown while still having a respectable supporting cast, so we can compete for titles? There’s no way to achieve that without either being in the tax NOW with Fournier, or being incredibly lucky with a future draft pick which means a long wait and incredibly poor odds if we’re drafting outside the lottery (the third way would be to be incredibly lucky to somehow trade for a future all-star while he is still on his rookie contract, and SGA is probably the only possibility on that front with no guarantee of his foot being 100% again).

Ownership should not be saying they are going to die trying, but are unwilling to pay the tax. If they cannot afford the tax, sell the team to someone who can and will.

It's certainly possible, but it's predicated on a couple of things.

1) Washington being okay with committing to long-term salary in Fournier. I don't know how realistic that is. Maybe Washington prefer the cap space, or maybe another team outbids us with expiring deals to go all-in on a one year tilt with Beal.

2) Beal actually has to demand the trade to only Boston. No indication he'll do so

[GreenlyGreeny]

Think about it this way: If Beal demanded a trade to Boston, stating unequivocally that he will not sign anywhere else in order to play with Tatum, we can make a trade for him by moving Fournier (@$20 million/year), Richardson, GWill and picks. We’re then set with a Big 3 AND a respectable supporting cast.

Without having Fournier on the books at $15-20 million/year, we are severely constrained when a superstar becomes available, whether it’s Beal or someone else. We do not want to gut our supporting cast to get a third piece, right?

Isn’t the goal to add a third piece to Tatum/Brown while still having a respectable supporting cast, so we can compete for titles? There’s no way to achieve that without either being in the tax NOW with Fournier, or being incredibly lucky with a future draft pick which means a long wait and incredibly poor odds if we’re drafting outside the lottery (the third way would be to be incredibly lucky to somehow trade for a future all-star while he is still on his rookie contract, and SGA is probably the only possibility on that front with no guarantee of his foot being 100% again).

Ownership should not be saying they are going to die trying, but are unwilling to pay the tax. If they cannot afford the tax, sell the team to someone who can and will.

It's certainly possible, but it's predicated on a couple of things.

1) Washington being okay with committing to long-term salary in Fournier. I don't know how realistic that is. Maybe Washington prefer the cap space, or maybe another team outbids us with expiring deals to go all-in on a one year tilt with Beal.

2) Beal actually has to demand the trade to only Boston. No indication he'll do so

How do we trade for a superstar, any superstar, and maintain a respectable supporting cast without being over the tax line?

[keevsnick]

I'd consider $20 million on a 3 year deal, but not for 4 years. If we want to maintain cap flexibility for next year, then the contract we sign him to needs to be easily tradable. If Fournier balls out then 3/60 would absolutely be tradable next year, but if he doesn't then it could be a problem (much more than a 2 year deal would be).

I don't want to see him walk for nothing, but I just think he's asking for too much. 3/$60 or 4/$72 is as high as I'd want to go.

4/72 would also be my highest offer and that is very close to what he's asking. You just have to pursuade Evan how great his role is going to be on a soon to be contender. His shooting ability and overall game is exactly what we need. I'm done with chasing dreams and shadows (Durant, Leonard, Beal). We don't need a third star. The time is now.
Build around Brown and Tatum.

I agree with this. Looking at the top free agents available next year, I doubt we will get any of them. Beal is probably the most likely to want to come here, I don't think the rest have the slightest interest in being a third wheel to the Jays. I think we'll see pigs flying over the Charles before the likes of KD, Harden or Steph come here. Maybe in NBA2k 



The challenge is finding a decent third option who is happy to be a third option. Really good players usually don't like being third options to younger players, as was made evident by Hayward leaving. Kemba was probably an exception in being a veteran star who was willing to subordinate his game to two younger players, but you don't find players with that attitude and willingness to play a smaller role just anywhere.

Who said they'd be ''a third wheel to the Jays''? For instance, if we sign Beal/Kawhi/Butler/LaVine, I'm pretty sure that our 3rd option would be Brown. All these players (+Tatum) are way more versatile shot creators than Brown. I bet we'd be mostly using Brown as a 3+D wing in the half court, although he'd still be our best player in the open court (or 2nd best if we sign LaVine).

I also think that we'd have a decent chance to acquire one of Beal, Kawhi, Butler, LaVine or Randle. Personally speaking, I'd only be interested in Kawhi and Beal.

Herein lies this ‘Brown’ problem the Celtics have. He is continually paired with Tatum as if they are equals - they are not. Tatum owns this team, Brown intentionally or not is hindering this reality. He needs to come out and acknowledge Tatum as the Alpha on this team. By the way, Kemba did not subordinate his game to the Jays. Not one bit.

This is utter nonsense. Brown is nearly as good a player. It was a legitimate debate here last year before Brown had knee soreness as to who was better player.

The level of play we saw from Tatum from April onward is why that debate ended

Tatum for sure excelled toward the end of season. I believe Brown regressed due to a nagging knee, and of course at season's end when he hurt his hand. It was pretty obvious to us that he just didn't have the same lift or explosiveness.  Before the knee issue, it was a lively debate. Don't think the end of the season ended the debate, for these reasons.

I just don't think Brown has Tatum's ability to carry an offence. He can easily put up 30+, we saw that quite a few times. But Tatum put up four 50-point games in the space of, what, 6 weeks? That's simply next level

It doesn't even really matter who's better, by how much, ect. We are gonna need both of them to win anything, because NOBODY in this league wins alone. Its a team sport, they are on the same team.

I REALLY don't think anything about the Celtics future hinges on Jaylen holding a press conference to say he thinks Tatum is better than him, if anything he should just internalize it and use it as motivation to be even better next season.

[gouki88]

Think about it this way: If Beal demanded a trade to Boston, stating unequivocally that he will not sign anywhere else in order to play with Tatum, we can make a trade for him by moving Fournier (@$20 million/year), Richardson, GWill and picks. We’re then set with a Big 3 AND a respectable supporting cast.

Without having Fournier on the books at $15-20 million/year, we are severely constrained when a superstar becomes available, whether it’s Beal or someone else. We do not want to gut our supporting cast to get a third piece, right?

Isn’t the goal to add a third piece to Tatum/Brown while still having a respectable supporting cast, so we can compete for titles? There’s no way to achieve that without either being in the tax NOW with Fournier, or being incredibly lucky with a future draft pick which means a long wait and incredibly poor odds if we’re drafting outside the lottery (the third way would be to be incredibly lucky to somehow trade for a future all-star while he is still on his rookie contract, and SGA is probably the only possibility on that front with no guarantee of his foot being 100% again).

Ownership should not be saying they are going to die trying, but are unwilling to pay the tax. If they cannot afford the tax, sell the team to someone who can and will.

It's certainly possible, but it's predicated on a couple of things.

1) Washington being okay with committing to long-term salary in Fournier. I don't know how realistic that is. Maybe Washington prefer the cap space, or maybe another team outbids us with expiring deals to go all-in on a one year tilt with Beal.

2) Beal actually has to demand the trade to only Boston. No indication he'll do so

How do we trade for a superstar, any superstar, and maintain a respectable supporting cast without being over the tax line?

You don't. Ownership has to suck it up. Unless you've got a Doncic-like superstar who is a borderline MVP on a rookie deal

[flybono]

Thank god

[Kuberski33]

He is a dime a dozen role player.  He is an ok all around player, but does nothing at an even great level, let alone elite.

What percentile would you define “great” as?

19.7 points (in Orlando), .576 eFG%, 41.3% 3PT% on 6.7 attempts,  .598 TS%

All are very good numbers.  Most rank him in the 25th - 35th range in the NBA, so in about the top 6% of players.

Top-6% isn’t “dime a dozen”.  The dude shot 46.3% 3PT% in Boston despite starting 0-for-7 from deep.  After those two games, he shot 50% from distance.

A shooter on a team with too many guys who can't shoot. I hope they can find a way to keep him but totally understand why they can't overpay.  He probably has an offer in hand already and the C's only option for keeping him is to pay well above his value.

[Ogaju]

Why pay above?

[Kuberski33]

Why pay above?

If he already has an offer in hand from say the Knicks.  There's supposed to be no tampering but that's a joke.

[footey]

I'd consider $20 million on a 3 year deal, but not for 4 years. If we want to maintain cap flexibility for next year, then the contract we sign him to needs to be easily tradable. If Fournier balls out then 3/60 would absolutely be tradable next year, but if he doesn't then it could be a problem (much more than a 2 year deal would be).

I don't want to see him walk for nothing, but I just think he's asking for too much. 3/$60 or 4/$72 is as high as I'd want to go.

4/72 would also be my highest offer and that is very close to what he's asking. You just have to pursuade Evan how great his role is going to be on a soon to be contender. His shooting ability and overall game is exactly what we need. I'm done with chasing dreams and shadows (Durant, Leonard, Beal). We don't need a third star. The time is now.
Build around Brown and Tatum.

I agree with this. Looking at the top free agents available next year, I doubt we will get any of them. Beal is probably the most likely to want to come here, I don't think the rest have the slightest interest in being a third wheel to the Jays. I think we'll see pigs flying over the Charles before the likes of KD, Harden or Steph come here. Maybe in NBA2k 



The challenge is finding a decent third option who is happy to be a third option. Really good players usually don't like being third options to younger players, as was made evident by Hayward leaving. Kemba was probably an exception in being a veteran star who was willing to subordinate his game to two younger players, but you don't find players with that attitude and willingness to play a smaller role just anywhere.

Who said they'd be ''a third wheel to the Jays''? For instance, if we sign Beal/Kawhi/Butler/LaVine, I'm pretty sure that our 3rd option would be Brown. All these players (+Tatum) are way more versatile shot creators than Brown. I bet we'd be mostly using Brown as a 3+D wing in the half court, although he'd still be our best player in the open court (or 2nd best if we sign LaVine).

I also think that we'd have a decent chance to acquire one of Beal, Kawhi, Butler, LaVine or Randle. Personally speaking, I'd only be interested in Kawhi and Beal.

Herein lies this ‘Brown’ problem the Celtics have. He is continually paired with Tatum as if they are equals - they are not. Tatum owns this team, Brown intentionally or not is hindering this reality. He needs to come out and acknowledge Tatum as the Alpha on this team. By the way, Kemba did not subordinate his game to the Jays. Not one bit.

This is utter nonsense. Brown is nearly as good a player. It was a legitimate debate here last year before Brown had knee soreness as to who was better player.

The level of play we saw from Tatum from April onward is why that debate ended

Tatum for sure excelled toward the end of season. I believe Brown regressed due to a nagging knee, and of course at season's end when he hurt his hand. It was pretty obvious to us that he just didn't have the same lift or explosiveness.  Before the knee issue, it was a lively debate. Don't think the end of the season ended the debate, for these reasons.

I just don't think Brown has Tatum's ability to carry an offence. He can easily put up 30+, we saw that quite a few times. But Tatum put up four 50-point games in the space of, what, 6 weeks? That's simply next level

It doesn't even really matter who's better, by how much, ect. We are gonna need both of them to win anything, because NOBODY in this league wins alone. Its a team sport, they are on the same team.

I REALLY don't think anything about the Celtics future hinges on Jaylen holding a press conference to say he thinks Tatum is better than him, if anything he should just internalize it and use it as motivation to be even better next season.

Tatum and Brown. Lennon and McCartney.

Beautiful music together.

[liam]

If Fournier is in such demand then signing him to a larger contract and trading him later for a TPE and a pick or two is the way to go. Just letting players walk with no return isn't a good business model.

[PhoSita]

If Fournier is in such demand then signing him to a larger contract and trading him later for a TPE and a pick or two is the way to go. Just letting players walk with no return isn't a good business model.

The thing is unless Fournier would be a trade chip with Washington at whatever his price is going to be, it doesn't make sense to sign him just to trade him later.

It will be very hard to trade Fournier at his likely price point if you don't want to take back salary, even if teams view him as an asset.

[Who]

It's interesting to see some similar players like the two Bogdanovics (Utah & Atlanta) be successful & well regarded (as players & trade assets) with similar contracts as to what Fournier is asking for.

[GreenEnvy]

He’s the type of guy you overpay to keep with bird rights but not the type to waste cap space on. I know it’s going to be a pretty weak FA class, but still. He’s a good role player but he’s not a star by any means.

If we keep him to eventually flip, great. If he signs elsewhere for a big contract, fine.

[Who]

The Golden State Warriors and Stephen Curry will agree to a four-year, $215 million contract extension as the offseason begins.

Wow, $215mil for just 4 years. Contracts sure have skyrocketed.

yeah, that is just mind blowing.  he will be making 53+mil a year, a $9 million raiser per year over what he was making.

does 18 mil for EF seem that horrible in comparison?  IE Curry will make more than 35 million a year MORE than EF.

how much tax are GS willing to pay?  Their payroll was $161,808,101 in 21/22

This is from a different thread - the official FA signings thread - but I thought it better belonged over here if we started talking about Fournier.

Yes, this is the same thing I have been wondering about. The salaries have gone up so much that I am still coming to terms with what the new numbers are and what is okay and what is not.

I was thinking about the MLE being around $5million a decade ago and now it is $10 million. So $10mil back is say $20mil now. Helps give me some form of a reference point because I paid more attention to the CBA and salary stuff back then (but gave up maintaining that interest due to frequent changes to the CBA).

So if $20mil today is equivalent to $10mil a decade ago, is Fournier equivalent to a $10mil a decade ago? He probably is. That was the type of money you'd expect to see from a player in the 10-15 range at their respective position. The 10th to 15th best player. It is not unreasonable to put Fournier in that 10-15 bracket at SG or SF.

Fair argument that Fournier is worth $20mil in today's marketplace. That this is not a bad contract but instead a reasonable contract that we should thus expect to be able to move if needed next summer if an opportunity to sign Beal (or someone else) came up.

Looks doable to me.

I am changing my mind on this Fournier contract. I started the offseason (ever since the trade really) as being skeptical / hesitant to pay him what he would command in the market but I am changing my mind. I believe this pay level is more reasonable and workable than I initially thought.