Zach Lowe’s opinion of Fournier

[wiley]

I would say to Zach:  no one looks good in the playoffs when their team is so so and expected to lose first round.

He's basically saying Evan is not a star.  Fine...

Fournier would be dynamite on a contending team....a bit like late career Ray Allen....(who missed a ton of 3's in playoff Celtic Bball after title year)

The C's are not quite contending enough to give him the money...especially when they have better defenders ready to take his minutes, Romeo and Nesmith, with the former possibly being a more well rounded scorer (though more situational and with less three point shooting) and the latter possibly equaling Fournier in hitting threes. 

I agree with not signing him at that price.  Time for Romeo and Nesmith to play.

[Roy H.]

Fournier missed his first seven 3PT shots with us.  He then shot 50% the rest of the season.  He then shot 43.3% in the playoffs, even with Jaylen, Kemba and Timelord injured.

[gouki88]

Fournier was solid for us in the playoffs. Of course he looked bad in the playoffs in Orlando - he was the #2 option, a role he should not have been in!

[Walker Wiggle]

He’s a good player, and perhaps worth the contract he just signed. But that doesn’t mean it would have been the right move for the Celtics to sign him.

First, the team would have gone into the tax this year. The problem with that is the threat of the repeater tax in future years, which has been so burdensome that even the most generous owners have had to dismantle teams as a result.

Second, the team has the threat of cap space right now. This is useful because it can either sign a max free agent without giving up any assets, or it can dangle its cap space coupled with a free agent’s intention to sign with the Celtics as an inducement to the player’s current team to execute a sign-and-trade, thereby allowing the Celtics to retain Smart and/or R Williams.

Right now it looks bad, but luckily for us the Celtics’ front office aren’t making decisions with right now in mind. Neither are they worried about whether or not they’ll be better than the Bulls or Knicks in 2021-22. Their goal is to build a multi-year contender in the class of Brooklyn, Milwaukee, etc. For those reasons I’m content with how they’ve gone about this.

[Moranis]

I just don't think you can pay at absolute best the 4th best player on a contender 20 million a year (and he is probably more suited as the 5th best player on a contender), especially when you aren't a contender.  That is how you end up perpetually in mediocrity. 

And it is easy to say you can move that contract now, but there is absolutely no guarantee you can move that contract.  40 million with 2 years left is still a lot of money for a role player.  The teams that would take that contract (without a 1st or something like that) often don't have the pieces available to move to do so.

Fournier is not going to raise the ceiling of Boston this year and he could harm the team's ability to really improve next summer, so there was absolutely no reason to sign him.

[Jiri Welsch]

I just don't think you can pay at absolute best the 4th best player on a contender 20 million a year (and he is probably more suited as the 5th best player on a contender), especially when you aren't a contender.  That is how you end up perpetually in mediocrity. 

And it is easy to say you can move that contract now, but there is absolutely no guarantee you can move that contract.  40 million with 2 years left is still a lot of money for a role player.  The teams that would take that contract (without a 1st or something like that) often don't have the pieces available to move to do so.

Fournier is not going to raise the ceiling of Boston this year and he could harm the team's ability to really improve next summer, so there was absolutely no reason to sign him.

I totally agree. Fans are more concerned with taking a half step forward next year at the expense of two steps forward the following year.

And who knows, maybe a young guy actually will step up and fill 80% of Fournier's play and become a valuable trade piece.

[Moranis]

I just don't think you can pay at absolute best the 4th best player on a contender 20 million a year (and he is probably more suited as the 5th best player on a contender), especially when you aren't a contender.  That is how you end up perpetually in mediocrity. 

And it is easy to say you can move that contract now, but there is absolutely no guarantee you can move that contract.  40 million with 2 years left is still a lot of money for a role player.  The teams that would take that contract (without a 1st or something like that) often don't have the pieces available to move to do so.

Fournier is not going to raise the ceiling of Boston this year and he could harm the team's ability to really improve next summer, so there was absolutely no reason to sign him.

I totally agree. Fans are more concerned with taking a half step forward next year at the expense of two steps forward the following year.

And who knows, maybe a young guy actually will step up and fill 80% of Fournier's play and become a valuable trade piece.

Richardson is probably 80% of the player Fournier is offensively and is probably like 300% the player Fournier is defensively.  And while theoretically the team could have both, there just aren't minutes available for both so that was never a realistic option.

[Somebody]

I see Fournier much the same way. I still would've kept him though because (1) he is better than what we have (2) his contract was moveable. Signing him did not take future opportunities in FA off the table. It would only do that if his contract was not tradeable.

By letting him leave, we just hurt our team for no good reason.

His contract with the Knicks is definitely not moveable lol.

[Somebody]

Zach Lowe’s thoughts of Fournier and his deal, via ‘The Lowe Post’ podcast;

“I am just not an Evan Fournier guy.

I know what the numbers say, the numbers say he shoots it pretty well, he’s an okay passer.

He’s just one of those guys, when I watch him play for the Orlando Magic all these years, I just never feel he is impacting winning as much as the numbers say he should be…given his threat as a shooter.

Number one, I don’t think he’s a very good playmaker, I think he is a so so playmaker, he’s looking for his own shot before everything else. He takes a lot of midrange shots I don’t love.

Defensively he’s just blah and got destroyed in the playoffs by Brooklyn last season.

His playoff number, I’ve seen the Evan Fournier movie in the playoffs four times. I’ve seen Evan Fournier Pt 1, Evan Fournier Pt 2…all the way to Evan Fournier electric boogaloo Pt 4. He stinks in the playoffs every single time he gets into the playoffs he gets exposed and in over his head, in what ever role he’s in during the playoffs.

I don’t love this deal, but he is a good basketball player, I’ve said all that, but he is good, he’s decent, he brings things the Knicks need.”

LOL I pretty much said the same things and got a bunch of crap from posters here when the trade was made

[BudweiserCeltic]

I just don't think you can pay at absolute best the 4th best player on a contender 20 million a year (and he is probably more suited as the 5th best player on a contender), especially when you aren't a contender.  That is how you end up perpetually in mediocrity. 

And it is easy to say you can move that contract now, but there is absolutely no guarantee you can move that contract.  40 million with 2 years left is still a lot of money for a role player.  The teams that would take that contract (without a 1st or something like that) often don't have the pieces available to move to do so.

Fournier is not going to raise the ceiling of Boston this year and he could harm the team's ability to really improve next summer, so there was absolutely no reason to sign him.

That's only true if it's not a movable contract or you're using cap space to get said player. Otherwise it's merely a matter of ownership's willingness to spend for the most part.

[Somebody]

Fournier was solid for us in the playoffs. Of course he looked bad in the playoffs in Orlando - he was the #2 option, a role he should not have been in!

Not true - he was pushed back to being their third/fourth option in those playoff runs because of how bad he was (and still sucked after those adjustments).

[Vermont Green]

I just don't think you can pay at absolute best the 4th best player on a contender 20 million a year (and he is probably more suited as the 5th best player on a contender), especially when you aren't a contender.  That is how you end up perpetually in mediocrity. 

And it is easy to say you can move that contract now, but there is absolutely no guarantee you can move that contract.  40 million with 2 years left is still a lot of money for a role player.  The teams that would take that contract (without a 1st or something like that) often don't have the pieces available to move to do so.

Fournier is not going to raise the ceiling of Boston this year and he could harm the team's ability to really improve next summer, so there was absolutely no reason to sign him.

I totally agree. Fans are more concerned with taking a half step forward next year at the expense of two steps forward the following year.

And who knows, maybe a young guy actually will step up and fill 80% of Fournier's play and become a valuable trade piece.

Richards is probably 80% of the player Fournier is offensively and is probably like 300% the player Fournier is defensively.  And while theoretically the team could have both, there just aren't minutes available for both so that was never a realistic option.

Yeah, we don't need Langford or Nesmith to replace Fournier, we got Richardson at the cost of Moses Brown.  If it is true that Richardson will provide 80% of the shooting/scoring/playmaking and is a better defender, isn't that type of player a better fit on a team that already has two top scorers?  It is not like Richardson is scoring deficient like Smart or Tony Allen, he is a decent scorer/shooter who defenses will have to respect.  I am not that worried that we lost Fournier.  I predict Richardson will be a nice fit in the role that Fournier would have had.

[Moranis]

I just don't think you can pay at absolute best the 4th best player on a contender 20 million a year (and he is probably more suited as the 5th best player on a contender), especially when you aren't a contender.  That is how you end up perpetually in mediocrity. 

And it is easy to say you can move that contract now, but there is absolutely no guarantee you can move that contract.  40 million with 2 years left is still a lot of money for a role player.  The teams that would take that contract (without a 1st or something like that) often don't have the pieces available to move to do so.

Fournier is not going to raise the ceiling of Boston this year and he could harm the team's ability to really improve next summer, so there was absolutely no reason to sign him.

That's only true if it's not a movable contract or you're using cap space to get said player. Otherwise it's merely a matter of ownership's willingness to spend for the most part.

Boston is using cap space to get him though.  Not this year, but next year.  And as I said, I wouldn't just bet that the contract is movable, at least without including other assets.

[Atzar]

Fournier was solid for us in the playoffs. Of course he looked bad in the playoffs in Orlando - he was the #2 option, a role he should not have been in!

I don't know if I'd say he was solid in the playoffs.  He scored okay-ish (15.4 points per game as the de facto #2) mostly because he was hitting his threes, but he wasn't getting other guys involved and his defense was nearly unplayable.  Better than his previous playoff runs with Orlando, but still not exactly career highlight reel material. 

[footey]

My hunch:

Ime allluded to the Nets focusing on attacking weak defenders/ matchups during playoffs vs Celtics.  Fournier really struggled on that side of the ball, as per Lowe comments above.  Ime and Brad are about defensive identity being re-established.  Not going to pay $20 mm per to a guy who is not a top defender, with few exceptions.

I like him as a player and think his contract was actually pretty reasonable.