Why did we make the Vuc trade?

[Roy H.]

I've seen several comments online that the Vucevic trade was primarily about saving money, rather than winning.  And, there's no denying that making the trade allowed the Celts to make further moves to get under the tax.

I think that the tax savings were an important, but secondary, consideration.  I think Vuc is a very good fit for Joe's system, and a big part of this trade is hoping to resign him in the off-season at a reduced cost.  We needed another center, and trading Simons now means we at least have a chance of retaining an asset going forward.

[Jiri Welsch]

I think it's both. But as you say, the "1A" is likely the fit and the "1B" is likely the savings.

I am skeptical of the fit, but am happy to be proven wrong. Garza has developed immensely, hopefully Vucevic can do the same on defense.

[Donoghus]

Primary emphasis was to improve the team. They clearly needed some frontcourt depth/upgrade.  The added bonus and secondary emphasis was tax savings. 

[Goldstar88]

I think it's both. But as you say, the "1A" is likely the fit and the "1B" is likely the savings.

I am skeptical of the fit, but am happy to be proven wrong. Garza has developed immensely, hopefully Vucevic can do the same on defense.

Garza is not a good defender. Teams seem to feast in the paint when he?s in the game. Not saying Vooch is a great defender, but he does a lot of other things at a high level. His passing, especially. Also a better rebounder, better scorer. Garza is fine as a 3rd string C, but the Celtics needed an upgrade at that position and I?m glad they made the move.

[Who]

To Win

[Moranis]

I think the primary reason was to save money

[slamtheking]

primary reason to was to get a useful big man and balance out the roster.  the savings was secondary but a required part of the deal.  The trades to move Boucher, Tillman and Minott were the ones really made to get under the tax.

[aefgogreen]

I think it's both. But as you say, the "1A" is likely the fit and the "1B" is likely the savings.

I am skeptical of the fit, but am happy to be proven wrong. Garza has developed immensely, hopefully Vucevic can do the same on defense.

I think it would be a big help if Garza could defend the 4. Then the double big lineup would be more effective.

[Celtics4ever]

Money and getting a big who allows us to change tactics.  Next year, we are under the tax and have flexibility to a larger degree.

[boscel33]

I can't vote because I think it was C:  All of the above.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I think it's more about money than anything. I just don't think Vucevic is a winning basketball player.

We probably will see this off-season. If Stevens agrees, then he lowballs him with a contract that makes him a bench big, and uses the assets we have to get a starter.

If not, then we offer him a good chunk of money.

[Jiri Welsch]

I think it's both. But as you say, the "1A" is likely the fit and the "1B" is likely the savings.

I am skeptical of the fit, but am happy to be proven wrong. Garza has developed immensely, hopefully Vucevic can do the same on defense.

Garza is not a good defender. Teams seem to feast in the paint when he?s in the game. Not saying Vooch is a great defender, but he does a lot of other things at a high level. His passing, especially. Also a better rebounder, better scorer. Garza is fine as a 3rd string C, but the Celtics needed an upgrade at that position and I?m glad they made the move.

I agree. I brought up Garza as an example of another defensively-limited guy who has shown some moderate improvement. I am hoping Vucevic can also show some moderate improvement.

Personally I worry Vuc could be like the Evan Fournier acquisition years ago. A talented offensive guy in his own right, but limited in ways that ultimately make him not worth keeping considering the cost.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I think it's both. But as you say, the "1A" is likely the fit and the "1B" is likely the savings.

I am skeptical of the fit, but am happy to be proven wrong. Garza has developed immensely, hopefully Vucevic can do the same on defense.

Garza is not a good defender. Teams seem to feast in the paint when he?s in the game. Not saying Vooch is a great defender, but he does a lot of other things at a high level. His passing, especially. Also a better rebounder, better scorer. Garza is fine as a 3rd string C, but the Celtics needed an upgrade at that position and I?m glad they made the move.

I agree. I brought up Garza as an example of another defensively-limited guy who has shown some moderate improvement. I am hoping Vucevic can also show some moderate improvement.

Personally I worry Vuc could be like the Evan Fournier acquisition years ago. A talented offensive guy in his own right, but limited in ways that ultimately make him not worth keeping considering the cost.

I agree with this.

[Goldstar88]

I think it's both. But as you say, the "1A" is likely the fit and the "1B" is likely the savings.

I am skeptical of the fit, but am happy to be proven wrong. Garza has developed immensely, hopefully Vucevic can do the same on defense.

Garza is not a good defender. Teams seem to feast in the paint when he?s in the game. Not saying Vooch is a great defender, but he does a lot of other things at a high level. His passing, especially. Also a better rebounder, better scorer. Garza is fine as a 3rd string C, but the Celtics needed an upgrade at that position and I?m glad they made the move.

I agree. I brought up Garza as an example of another defensively-limited guy who has shown some moderate improvement. I am hoping Vucevic can also show some moderate improvement.

Personally I worry Vuc could be like the Evan Fournier acquisition years ago. A talented offensive guy in his own right, but limited in ways that ultimately make him not worth keeping considering the cost.

I agree with this.

Well, they made it work with Simons who also isn?t a great defender. Not sure why they can?t do the same with Vooch. I would stick with Queta as the starter, though. Need Nikolas offense off the bench.

[wdleehi]

I think it is 1.   They were looking for a big man who could be more playable in the playoffs.   I think the rest of the cap moves only happened after they got so close.



I think the real secondary reason was getting under the 1st apron and having a tradable TPE for the offseason to put together a team that can compete for a title next year with a healthy Tatum.    Give the front office more tools and a wider range of tools to use in the offseason.   


The Celtics do miss the Simons offense some nights for now.   I think that issue will greatly be minimized one Tatum is back fully.