Why did we make the Vuc trade?

[Moranis]

I think the primary reason was to save money

to clarify I think the decision to trade Simons was made mostly for financial reasons, but the Vucevic option on the trade was likely more for basketball reasons. 

[ozgod]

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.

Yes, Mike Felger on Felger and Mazz has been beating this drum the past week, saying it was purely for money, the owner is cheap, etc. Decisions are rarely made for a singular reason as you alluded to, but I don't think they would have done it if they didn't think Vuc would add value. They had the KP TPE that Vuc fit into perfectly and his skill set also fit into the Cs offensive scheme pretty seamlessly. He's a stretch big that rebounds and spaces the floor, a KP lite from an offensive standpoint, that gives them a different look to the players they already have and Joe is huge on different lineups that create different challenges for the opposition to guard. I'm sure they knew of his defensive issues and already know how to incorporate the appropriate defensive schemes to try and mitigate as much of it as they can.  And the money worked out, and he is an expiring where they have the chance to extend him for less money and play the Horford role, so all in all a win.

[Goldstar88]

In 26 mins of play, Vooch had 19pts/11rebs/3ast/2blk/1stl. He was 7-12 from the field, 4-5 from 3pt. A +26, which was the highest of any player in the game. Not bad for his 3rd game.   

[keevsnick]

I think the primary reason was money, but in the sense that "primary" means like 55% of the reason not 90%.

55% Money
40% Center depth/ better fit
5% Future flexibility (option to re-sign him, creates a new TPE)

Something like that.

[vjcsmoke]

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.

Vucevic just had his best game as a Celtic against the Bulls. 19 points, 11 rebounds, 3 assists, and 4-5 from 3 point land.
He's exactly what the Celtics need from a BIG.
He grabs boards and he's a floor spacer.
He has also replaced most of the points that Simons would give us.

I feel like having another starting caliber big to keep Queta fresh was exactly the right move for the roster. He has been a win for Brad Stevens so far.
Was saving tax money also a motivation? Yes of course it was. But so far we are getting our cake and eating it too. We got a good player and we ducked under those harsh salary cap tax penalties the NBA imposes now.

[Kernewek]

The poll needs an 'equal' option, to be honest.

If he was the best player available that satisfied the tax-saving criteria, it's a mistake to presume that it was significantly one or the other.

[Roy H.]

The poll needs an 'equal' option, to be honest.

If he was the best player available that satisfied the tax-saving criteria, it's a mistake to presume that it was significantly one or the other.

If the deal was made to get the best player available to get us below the tax, I would say that deal was primarily dependent upon saving money.  It's that condition that drives the trade.

Whereas if they were trying to improve the team and Vuc's contract was also a factor, the primary goal was adding to the team.

[jambr380]

The absolute main goal this deadline was to get out of the tax.

But since this team was actually good, they also wanted to balance the roster with another productive Center. We gave up a very good 27 year old guard and an excellent 2nd round pick for a 35 year old Center who spreads the floor and rebounds. In a vacuum, Vucevic is not more valuable than Simons, but his contract and his position were more valuable to the Celtics.

I understand that if it was just about getting under the tax, they could have saved a couple million more dollars and traded for a borderline useless player in Zach Collins instead. By going for Vucevic, they gave up a pretty good asset and improved the team.

[radiohead]

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.

Vucevic just had his best game as a Celtic against the Bulls. 19 points, 11 rebounds, 3 assists, and 4-5 from 3 point land.
He's exactly what the Celtics need from a BIG.
He grabs boards and he's a floor spacer.
He has also replaced most of the points that Simons would give us.

I feel like having another starting caliber big to keep Queta fresh was exactly the right move for the roster. He has been a win for Brad Stevens so far.
Was saving tax money also a motivation? Yes of course it was. But so far we are getting our cake and eating it too. We got a good player and we ducked under those harsh salary cap tax penalties the NBA imposes now.

Brad definitely wanted to save tax but still made sure we stayed competitive. Besides that, Vuc makes the team more balanced, specially if JT comes back. Can we say Vuc is our KP replacement? He can hit the three, get some boards, block shots, and score at the post. He?s a much better passer than KP too. If Brad can sign him for cheap beyond this season then that would be excellent.

[slamtheking]

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.

Yes, Mike Felger on Felger and Mazz has been beating this drum the past week, saying it was purely for money, the owner is cheap, etc. Decisions are rarely made for a singular reason as you alluded to, but I don't think they would have done it if they didn't think Vuc would add value. They had the KP TPE that Vuc fit into perfectly and his skill set also fit into the Cs offensive scheme pretty seamlessly. He's a stretch big that rebounds and spaces the floor, a KP lite from an offensive standpoint, that gives them a different look to the players they already have and Joe is huge on different lineups that create different challenges for the opposition to guard. I'm sure they knew of his defensive issues and already know how to incorporate the appropriate defensive schemes to try and mitigate as much of it as they can.  And the money worked out, and he is an expiring where they have the chance to extend him for less money and play the Horford role, so all in all a win.

Felger's a loudmouth idiot in general, has limited knowledge about basketball since it's not a sport he's really into and doesn't like the Celtics in general.  anything he says about the Celtics should be viewed through a hater's lens.

all of the transactions since the end of last season have the goal of getting under the tax and Brad's done an exceptional job in  cutting salaries without gutting the young core or giving up a lot of draft picks to do so and he's put together a pretty competive team in the process.  Felger getting p---y about the team getting under the tax to try to reset the repeater penalties while staying competitive is complaining for the sake of complaining - especially when Tatum was projected to miss the whole season this year.  If the C's forgo opportunities to improve in the offseason to become serious contenders just to stay under the tax, then owner cheapness may be worth looking into but not this season.

[Donoghus]

If you're turning to Felger & Mazz for anything Celtics/NBA related, then I'd recommend getting your head checked.  Those two are generally clueless and only troll their audience. 

Seriously, don't rely on them for anything basketball related.  They suck.