Report: Dennis Schröder in negotiations with Celtics

[Surferdad]

Do you guys think we’d still go after Schroder if Dunn isn’t traded?

Assuming we offer Schroder the non-taxpayer MLE, we'd have to dump about $3.9 million in order to stay below the apron. Can't keep everybody. Here are the numbers:

As things stand right now, our payroll is $137,324,558. This is including Jabari's team option and Kanter's minimum salary (although we haven't finalized his signing yet). The apron is $143,002,000, hence we are sitting $5,677,442 below the apron. The non-taxpayer MLE starts at $9,536,000. Long story short, we'd have to somehow dump at least $3,858,558 in order to finalize the Schroder acquisition. Dunn is the obvious choice. His salary is $5,005,350.

Ah, good to know.  I'm relieved that's settled.

[mr. dee]

I'd rather keep Jabari, tbh. We need depth at the swing position and it is our most lacking right now.

[Vermont Green]

Why would anyone want Schroder over Smart? Makes no sense to me. Frankly, he's not that good. Sure cheap one year pickup he is definitely better than Carsen Edwards. I can't understand why everyone is go excited about this possibility. How did he do for the Lakers last year. Obviously they aren't going to miss him. This is like a flea market sale. Let's face it there's not much left and we are looking for the scrap heap pickups.

I feel the discussion is more Schroder + [what we get for Smart in a trade] vs. Smart.  If we are able to get Schroder on a 1 year $5.8M deal where he is playing for a big contract (big IF in my mind), then I see Schroder as the starting PG and Smart gets traded, maybe for say Bagley or something.  Even if we start the season with both (not ideal in my opinion), one or the other would likely be traded along the way.

With the extension reported to have been offered to Smart, I am not sure if this makes him more or less likely to be traded.  It is actually a pretty routine offer for a max extension.  Smart has had durability issues to some extent (nothing major, just lots of nicks and things) so a big FA contract is no guarantee for him.  If he takes the extension, Smart becomes a long term deal, not a rental.  debate this as you it may, this probably gives him more trade value, not less.

[RJD1974]

Why would anyone want Schroder over Smart? Makes no sense to me. Frankly, he's not that good. Sure cheap one year pickup he is definitely better than Carsen Edwards. I can't understand why everyone is go excited about this possibility. How did he do for the Lakers last year. Obviously they aren't going to miss him. This is like a flea market sale. Let's face it there's not much left and we are looking for the scrap heap pickups.

I feel the discussion is more Schroder + [what we get for Smart in a trade] vs. Smart.  If we are able to get Schroder on a 1 year $5.8M deal where he is playing for a big contract (big IF in my mind), then I see Schroder as the starting PG and Smart gets traded, maybe for say Bagley or something.  Even if we start the season with both (not ideal in my opinion), one or the other would likely be traded along the way.

With the extension reported to have been offered to Smart, I am not sure if this makes him more or less likely to be traded.  It is actually a pretty routine offer for a max extension.  Smart has had durability issues to some extent (nothing major, just lots of nicks and things) so a big FA contract is no guarantee for him.  If he takes the extension, Smart becomes a long term deal, not a rental.  debate this as you it may, this probably gives him more trade value, not less.

I'd love to see a Schröder/Smart backcourt. It'd be, without a doubt, the most annoying backcourt in the league to play against. The sniping alone would be glorious!

[td450]

Schroder - Smart - Richardson - Dunn - Pritchard - Edwards

What?!

They're all gonna get 11 minutes per game!

Ok, good defensive group, but, Pritchard is the only shooter and how is he getting any minutes?

One of these players is "out" and the board seems to think it's Dunn.

The team has two forwards who won't play much and Kanter, but don't worry...we got 6 point guards!

On the bright side? Killer defense. Turn those guys loose on the Nets and throw in Nesmith. Kyrie will call in sick.

Richardson is a 2 who can defend 1-3, as is Smart. Dunn can defend multiple positions, Pritchard has the ability to play off the ball and so does Schroder. Not as limited a group as you may think

Dunn and Edwards would play spot minutes.  A four man guard rotation is reasonable.

Except we also have Langford and Nesmith, and those guys need minutes at the two spot too.

The current situation without Shroder already creates a minutes crunch. It is just plain stupid not to play Langford, Nesmith and Pritchard regular, significant minutes, and if you play someone like Richardson or Shroder instead, that's just not intelligent roster management. They may be a little better in the short term, but they aren't getting you anywhere.

[jambr380]

Why would anyone want Schroder over Smart? Makes no sense to me. Frankly, he's not that good. Sure cheap one year pickup he is definitely better than Carsen Edwards. I can't understand why everyone is go excited about this possibility. How did he do for the Lakers last year. Obviously they aren't going to miss him. This is like a flea market sale. Let's face it there's not much left and we are looking for the scrap heap pickups.

I feel the discussion is more Schroder + [what we get for Smart in a trade] vs. Smart.  If we are able to get Schroder on a 1 year $5.8M deal where he is playing for a big contract (big IF in my mind), then I see Schroder as the starting PG and Smart gets traded, maybe for say Bagley or something.  Even if we start the season with both (not ideal in my opinion), one or the other would likely be traded along the way.

With the extension reported to have been offered to Smart, I am not sure if this makes him more or less likely to be traded.  It is actually a pretty routine offer for a max extension.  Smart has had durability issues to some extent (nothing major, just lots of nicks and things) so a big FA contract is no guarantee for him.  If he takes the extension, Smart becomes a long term deal, not a rental.  debate this as you it may, this probably gives him more trade value, not less.

This is more what I was expecting with Fournier - meaning we would have signed Fournier to the same 3yr deal he got with NYK and then traded Smart for picks (or whatever) to maximize the value of our roster. If we are somehow able to open up enough space to give Schroder the full MLE with a possible team option in the 2nd year, I would prefer that to the money Fournier got, and the option to trade Smart would still be on the table. Like, would people be terribly upset if we signed Schroder to a 1-1 deal and traded Smart for Kyle Anderson and a 1st over just keeping Smart and doing nothing else?

[knuckleballer]

Why would anyone want Schroder over Smart? Makes no sense to me. Frankly, he's not that good. Sure cheap one year pickup he is definitely better than Carsen Edwards. I can't understand why everyone is go excited about this possibility. How did he do for the Lakers last year. Obviously they aren't going to miss him. This is like a flea market sale. Let's face it there's not much left and we are looking for the scrap heap pickups.

I feel the discussion is more Schroder + [what we get for Smart in a trade] vs. Smart.  If we are able to get Schroder on a 1 year $5.8M deal where he is playing for a big contract (big IF in my mind), then I see Schroder as the starting PG and Smart gets traded, maybe for say Bagley or something.  Even if we start the season with both (not ideal in my opinion), one or the other would likely be traded along the way.

With the extension reported to have been offered to Smart, I am not sure if this makes him more or less likely to be traded.  It is actually a pretty routine offer for a max extension.  Smart has had durability issues to some extent (nothing major, just lots of nicks and things) so a big FA contract is no guarantee for him.  If he takes the extension, Smart becomes a long term deal, not a rental.  debate this as you it may, this probably gives him more trade value, not less.

I'd love to see a Schröder/Smart backcourt. It'd be, without a doubt, the most annoying backcourt in the league to play against. The sniping alone would be glorious!

It would be glorious… for other teams’ fans.   

Our back court shooting would look something like…

[bogg]

Except we also have Langford and Nesmith, and those guys need minutes at the two spot too.

The current situation without Shroder already creates a minutes crunch. It is just plain stupid not to play Langford, Nesmith and Pritchard regular, significant minutes, and if you play someone like Richardson or Shroder instead, that's just not intelligent roster management. They may be a little better in the short term, but they aren't getting you anywhere.

With where Tatum and Brown are at as players, I can't see passing on useful veterans in order to guarantee Langford 20 minutes a night he wouldn't otherwise earn.

[td450]

Except we also have Langford and Nesmith, and those guys need minutes at the two spot too.

The current situation without Shroder already creates a minutes crunch. It is just plain stupid not to play Langford, Nesmith and Pritchard regular, significant minutes, and if you play someone like Richardson or Shroder instead, that's just not intelligent roster management. They may be a little better in the short term, but they aren't getting you anywhere.

With where Tatum and Brown are at as players, I can't see passing on useful veterans in order to guarantee Langford 20 minutes a night he wouldn't otherwise earn.

I guess you can just assert without argument that these veterans are "useful" and that Langford wouldn't "earn" his minutes. Langford and Nesmith are both 21. They have both shown significant promise but need minutes.

They both have the potential to be better than Richardson ever was. They might not be. But it is stupid to not provide the resources to find out. No NBA team can afford to toss aside two consecutive #14 choices because they feel compelled to play vets they find on the trash heap instead.

In the NBA, there isn't some high school like practice regime where someone can earn minutes behind the scenes. Game minutes are the only way players develop. Richardson is fully baked, a borderline starter or rotation player. If Langford and or Nesmith develop to their full potential, that could completely change the team's future.

What if Nesmith became an 18 ppg scorer who shot 3's over 40%? Is that so crazy? He's already looking like he'll be a plus defender. That would change the team. I want to find out. I don't need to know that Richardson can score 13 ppg and shoot 36% from 3. I know that is who he is.

We need to develop talent. We can't just swap for it and expect to make the finals.

[Moranis]

Except we also have Langford and Nesmith, and those guys need minutes at the two spot too.

The current situation without Shroder already creates a minutes crunch. It is just plain stupid not to play Langford, Nesmith and Pritchard regular, significant minutes, and if you play someone like Richardson or Shroder instead, that's just not intelligent roster management. They may be a little better in the short term, but they aren't getting you anywhere.

With where Tatum and Brown are at as players, I can't see passing on useful veterans in order to guarantee Langford 20 minutes a night he wouldn't otherwise earn.

I guess you can just assert without argument that these veterans are "useful" and that Langford wouldn't "earn" his minutes. Langford and Nesmith are both 21. They have both shown significant promise but need minutes.

They both have the potential to be better than Richardson ever was. They might not be. But it is stupid to not provide the resources to find out. No NBA team can afford to toss aside two consecutive #14 choices because they feel compelled to play vets they find on the trash heap instead.

In the NBA, there isn't some high school like practice regime where someone can earn minutes behind the scenes. Game minutes are the only way players develop. Richardson is fully baked, a borderline starter or rotation player. If Langford and or Nesmith develop to their full potential, that could completely change the team's future.

What if Nesmith became an 18 ppg scorer who shot 3's over 40%? Is that so crazy? He's already looking like he'll be a plus defender. That would change the team. I want to find out. I don't need to know that Richardson can score 13 ppg and shoot 36% from 3. I know that is who he is.

We need to develop talent. We can't just swap for it and expect to make the finals.

Langford hasn't shown anything that tells me he could be a good player, and I don't think Richardson is going to take Nesmith's minutes at all. 

[wiley]

Except we also have Langford and Nesmith, and those guys need minutes at the two spot too.

The current situation without Shroder already creates a minutes crunch. It is just plain stupid not to play Langford, Nesmith and Pritchard regular, significant minutes, and if you play someone like Richardson or Shroder instead, that's just not intelligent roster management. They may be a little better in the short term, but they aren't getting you anywhere.

With where Tatum and Brown are at as players, I can't see passing on useful veterans in order to guarantee Langford 20 minutes a night he wouldn't otherwise earn.

I guess you can just assert without argument that these veterans are "useful" and that Langford wouldn't "earn" his minutes. Langford and Nesmith are both 21. They have both shown significant promise but need minutes.

They both have the potential to be better than Richardson ever was. They might not be. But it is stupid to not provide the resources to find out. No NBA team can afford to toss aside two consecutive #14 choices because they feel compelled to play vets they find on the trash heap instead.

In the NBA, there isn't some high school like practice regime where someone can earn minutes behind the scenes. Game minutes are the only way players develop. Richardson is fully baked, a borderline starter or rotation player. If Langford and or Nesmith develop to their full potential, that could completely change the team's future.

What if Nesmith became an 18 ppg scorer who shot 3's over 40%? Is that so crazy? He's already looking like he'll be a plus defender. That would change the team. I want to find out. I don't need to know that Richardson can score 13 ppg and shoot 36% from 3. I know that is who he is.

We need to develop talent. We can't just swap for it and expect to make the finals.

Langford hasn't shown anything that tells me he could be a good player, and I don't think Richardson is going to take Nesmith's minutes at all.

Do you mean he hasn't shown he can be a star? 

Or you really see nothing positive?  I see good defense and good rebounding...with possible scoring as well.

[td450]

Except we also have Langford and Nesmith, and those guys need minutes at the two spot too.

The current situation without Shroder already creates a minutes crunch. It is just plain stupid not to play Langford, Nesmith and Pritchard regular, significant minutes, and if you play someone like Richardson or Shroder instead, that's just not intelligent roster management. They may be a little better in the short term, but they aren't getting you anywhere.

With where Tatum and Brown are at as players, I can't see passing on useful veterans in order to guarantee Langford 20 minutes a night he wouldn't otherwise earn.

I guess you can just assert without argument that these veterans are "useful" and that Langford wouldn't "earn" his minutes. Langford and Nesmith are both 21. They have both shown significant promise but need minutes.

They both have the potential to be better than Richardson ever was. They might not be. But it is stupid to not provide the resources to find out. No NBA team can afford to toss aside two consecutive #14 choices because they feel compelled to play vets they find on the trash heap instead.

In the NBA, there isn't some high school like practice regime where someone can earn minutes behind the scenes. Game minutes are the only way players develop. Richardson is fully baked, a borderline starter or rotation player. If Langford and or Nesmith develop to their full potential, that could completely change the team's future.

What if Nesmith became an 18 ppg scorer who shot 3's over 40%? Is that so crazy? He's already looking like he'll be a plus defender. That would change the team. I want to find out. I don't need to know that Richardson can score 13 ppg and shoot 36% from 3. I know that is who he is.

We need to develop talent. We can't just swap for it and expect to make the finals.

Langford hasn't shown anything that tells me he could be a good player, and I don't think Richardson is going to take Nesmith's minutes at all.

Langford hasn't shown anything that tells you he can't be a good player either. It is fair to be worried about the strange string of circumstances that has prevented him from playing so far, but none of that is necessarily chronic. We have him, and we should invest enough minutes to find out what he is. We have not been able to do so thus far, and playing Richardson 10-15 less minutes for 15-20 games seems to me to be well worth it.

I want to see what we have with both #14's, not just one, and Josh Richardson can wait until we find out.

[Roy H.]

Langford hasn't shown anything that tells you he can't be a good player either.

Lack of shooting and/or scoring?

I know that last year was weird and perhaps it is not fair to judge him, but his scoring rate was last on the team (outside of Mo Wagner).  Per possession, he was significantly worse than anybody else.  He also had the lowest 2PT% of any player, and the worst three point percentage of any guard or wing.

[Tr1boy]

Langford hasn't shown anything that tells you he can't be a good player either.

Lack of shooting and/or scoring?

I know that last year was weird and perhaps it is not fair to judge him, but his scoring rate was last on the team (outside of Mo Wagner).  Per possession, he was significantly worse than anybody else.  He also had the lowest 2PT% of any player, and the worst three point percentage of any guard or wing.

17pts vs Nets game 5.  Give him a longer look
https://youtu.be/NkZZ3aFyk2g

[bogg]

Except we also have Langford and Nesmith, and those guys need minutes at the two spot too.

The current situation without Shroder already creates a minutes crunch. It is just plain stupid not to play Langford, Nesmith and Pritchard regular, significant minutes, and if you play someone like Richardson or Shroder instead, that's just not intelligent roster management. They may be a little better in the short term, but they aren't getting you anywhere.

With where Tatum and Brown are at as players, I can't see passing on useful veterans in order to guarantee Langford 20 minutes a night he wouldn't otherwise earn.

I guess you can just assert without argument that these veterans are "useful" and that Langford wouldn't "earn" his minutes. Langford and Nesmith are both 21. They have both shown significant promise but need minutes.

If the argument is that Boston should pass on Schroeder or shouldn't have traded for Richardson because they're going to take the minutes that Landlord and Nesmith "should" be playing, the yes - Langford isn't earning his minutes in that theoretical. Go get useful vets - the bench has been a major weakness since the exodus after the last Kyrie year, and Richardson/Schroeder are both late-20s starters from playoff teams. If that means Nesmith and Langford are beefing up the bench options that Ime has instead of being part of the perpetual churn in the starting lineup looking for a viable fifth starter, I couldn't be happier about it.

If either Nesmith or Langford are really that good, they'll seize a bench role and hold onto it.