Win it all next year vs. economic suicide

[zerophase]

well right now, posey is paid just a little more than scal and if you want to look at salary vs production... posey may not be a starter but scal is a solid dnp. look around the league, brown got traded for gasol but because of salary, but what has he really done in the nba?

however this does prove a point. teams offer these players outrages contracts, players that should have never deserved them. i'm willing to give posey the full mle, but not for 5 years.

[winsomme]

I agree, nick, and more and more fans are coming around.  There's still a strong contingent of "keep Posey at any costs" posters, but I'm confident that Danny is in the fiscally prudent camp.

i'm not sure people are "coming around", but doing their darndest to convince themselves that we will be fine with or without Posey now that there are rumblings that Posey may not be back.

the drop off from Posey to the players now being proposed to take his spot is massive.....

you simply cannot put a stat on performing well at the right time in big games, and if people are truly honest with themselves, they will continue to acknowledge what Posey did for this team all season long and on through the playoffs.

i mean, offering the the MLE max to a guy like Pietrus is totally insane. this is a guy that his own TEAMMATES called soft...

and then NOT wanting to offer the same to guy that we KNOW performs well in the biggest of games....??

IMO people who are warming to the idea of not having Posey next year have either been knocked on the head and forgotten what happened last season or are just trying to rationalize in the face of the possibility that there may be nothing that we can do at this point..

[dark_lord]

I just finished reading Jeff's excellent article on the front page talking about where Posey and Maggette might make their decisions to play next year and for years to come. Something in the article got me to thinking:

The Boston Celtics may have tipped their hand too early with James Posey, when news of contact with Corey Maggette surfaced, Posey's camp got on the offensive opening talks with a number of interested teams including the Lakers. Sources close to the situation say if Boston does not come with a full boat (5-year) deal at the Mid Level, James has that from other teams.

http://celticsblog.com/

James Posey already has a 5-year full MLE from other teams and is expecting the same thing from the Celtics in order to sign here?

Big Game James is the man and proved that all year. But during the playoffs guarding some quicker, faster, younger men, Big Game James proved he was a 31 year old man who may already reached the peak of his abilities and may have skills on the decline.

Posey was getting abused at times by LeBron and Josh Smith because their first step was so quick and they already had their position established before Posey could react. He performed better against Kobe but he was really the third option on guarding Kobe whereas he was a first or second option on LeBron and Smith.

This is a situation and ability that does not get better when you go from 31 to 32.

And yet James Posey is telling Danny Ainge that he wants a 5 year, $27.6 million contract that at the age of 37 will be paying a player, who will never have started for this team other than in emergency situation, $8.8 million for possibly being at that time the 3rd or 4th player off the bench?

Is retaining James Posey and what many appear the best chance of repreating worth having another aging overpaid player. We have Pierce and KG locked up into their mid 30's at near max money.

Are we assuring another 20 year drought by being fiscally foolish now because we are sentimentally attched to the 2008 Boston Celtics players?

My opinion is that I love James Posey but I would not lock him in at max MLE cash for anything more than 3 years. If he wants more, focus on Mickael Pietrus with the full MLE. He's as good a defender as Posey, plays the same position, can shoot, has 3 point range though it's not a huge part of his game, and he's only 28 years old.

That of course is if Corey Maggette doesn't sign for the full MLE. He's 29, a starter on every other team in the league and can be here as well if Doc ever wanted to start a small, stop-me-if-you-can, scoring team of KG, Maggette, Pierce, Allen and Rondo(that's a scary thought to 29 other head coaches across the league), if tremendously more talented than Posey and could bridge a gap to future long term success.

Maggette and Pietrus are fiscally smart investments toward longer term success for the club. Posey, to me isn't. I think it is incumbant upon Danny to not make the mistake of becoming so sentimentally attached to 2008 that it will hurt 2011-2015. We may care more about 2009. I personally think we can win in 2009 without James Posey because we have that much talent. others I am sure are less positive.

But I am not willing to put an albatross of a contract around the necks of ownership simply because I want to maintain a core that was special for one year. Posey was important. He wasn't that important to be the 4th highest paid player on this team for the next 5 years while slowly becoming th 6th and then 7th and then 8th and then 9th best player on the team.

i agree with you nick.  great post!  TP for u

[cordobes]

I agree, nick, and more and more fans are coming around.  There's still a strong contingent of "keep Posey at any costs" posters, but I'm confident that Danny is in the fiscally prudent camp.

i'm not sure people are "coming around", but doing their darndest to convince themselves that we will be fine with or without Posey now that there are rumblings that Posey may not be back.

the drop off from Posey to the players now being proposed to take his spot is massive.....

you simply cannot put a stat on performing well at the right time in big games, and if people are truly honest with themselves, they will continue to acknowledge what Posey did for this team all season long and on through the playoffs.

i mean, offering the the MLE max to a guy like Pietrus is totally insane. this is a guy that his own TEAMMATES called soft...

and then NOT wanting to offer the same to guy that we KNOW performs well in the biggest of games....??

IMO people who are warming to the idea of not having Posey next year have either been knocked on the head and forgotten what happened last season or are just trying to rationalize in the face of the possibility that there may be nothing that we can do at this point..

You are absolutely right:

doing their darndest to convince themselves that we will be fine with or without Posey now that there are rumblings that Posey may not be back.

And yeah, the Pietrus love is the finest example of this.

[TripleOT]

I don't think teams head into 20 year droughts because they gave a $5m Sixth Man type one or two extra years on a contract.  It is important for Ainge to balance long term financial obligations with the need for a strong 2009 roster. 

He did an amazing job putting the Big Three together in a way that allowed for long term success, with an expiring contract in three consecutive years.  Ideally, Ainge will be able to line up all his ducks perfectly for 09 and beyond, but spending a few bucks in four years isn't going to hamstring the team too badly.  I'd trade another championship for two years of overpaying Posey by 40% four and five years from now. 

If the choice is Posey and Maggette both at the entire five years at the MLE, I'd probably take Maggs.  If Maggs goes in a different direction, and the choice is to pay Posey for five years instead of three, or let him go to a rival, I'd pay him. 

I think you are wrong and this is why.

The cap for the next 5 years or so will be increasing from it's present level to around $66 million in 5 years, maybe. That's an assumption based on regular increases. With the players already under contract the position that signing Posey long term to full MLE tremondously hampers this team.

Look here:

http://www.sportstwo.com/NBA/TeamSalaries/BOSTON

For the 2009-2010 season we are already projected to be nearly $5 million over the cap and have only 5 players signed. Posey would put us at the luxury tax limit with only 6 players signed.

In 2010-2011 when Allens' contract goes off the books this team would at present time have only 5 players signed and be nearly at the cap. Allen's salary does not mean we have that money to sign someone to replace him. It may at that time not even get us to a position of being under the cap.

Danny needs to use his MLEs over the next few years to bridge the talent gap into the next decade to keep this team competitive. The MLEs will have to be used on players who's skills and ability will need to be on the increase, not on the decrease, as James Posey's skills already are. The MLE over the next 5 years will be the only enticement we have to lure high quality players here. If we are going to clog up the payroll, let it be with younger players on the rise and not older players on the downside of their careers.

Otherwise come 2012 this team will be in the luxury tax paying a 36 year old James Posey $8 million to be injured or a bench fixture and another $8 million to the league. I'd rather be paying that to a player in their late 20s to early 30's who would still be a contributing member of this team.

The 2 extra years to a James Posey that will be useless for those two years could cost us players that will help us greatly.

Look at it this way. We pay Posey the cash but because of declining skills we don't win another title and because of the luxury tax, ownership decides they aren't spending anymore because it's just good money going after bad money. Suddenly the Celtics go into let's try to get under the cap to sign guys mode. That mode is very tough to get past for another title. Because Danny isn't signing someone with the MLE that could be a starter after the Big Three tail off this team could be doomed because ownership might pull the financial plug due to lack of being able to get another championship.

There's a chance of it happening.

We need players to grow getting the MLE full boat not guys that might help to repeat and then grow old doing nothing for this team for the final few years on their contract.

The Cs are over the cap next year with their top six contracts in 09, just like they were in 08.  So what? In two years, KG's salary decreases by over $8 million.  The Cs can use the MLE in the summer of 09, along with Posey getting his $5m and be in a better payroll situation than they are now, due to the KG salary reduction.  The following year, Ray comes off the books,which will allow another MLE singing that year. 

If ownership wants, they can sign a MLE guy every single year, regardless of whether Posey is making $5m in three, four or five years from now.  You're argument makes almost no sense.  Ownership has decided that they can handle paying luxtax, and as long at the team goes deep into the playoffs, there will be extra revenue to cover for it. 

The only thing where you do make sense is the thing about Posey possibly declining in skill.  A good comp is Bruce Bowen, who is already older than Pose will be at the end of a new five year deal, and he has two more year on the books at $4m per.  I don't have a crystal ball to know if Posey is going to fall off in three to five years.  He might, and the odds are that he will, but if the Cs can grab one or two more titles, it's money well spent.   

[winsomme]

I agree, nick, and more and more fans are coming around.  There's still a strong contingent of "keep Posey at any costs" posters, but I'm confident that Danny is in the fiscally prudent camp.

i'm not sure people are "coming around", but doing their darndest to convince themselves that we will be fine with or without Posey now that there are rumblings that Posey may not be back.

the drop off from Posey to the players now being proposed to take his spot is massive.....

you simply cannot put a stat on performing well at the right time in big games, and if people are truly honest with themselves, they will continue to acknowledge what Posey did for this team all season long and on through the playoffs.

i mean, offering the the MLE max to a guy like Pietrus is totally insane. this is a guy that his own TEAMMATES called soft...

and then NOT wanting to offer the same to guy that we KNOW performs well in the biggest of games....??

IMO people who are warming to the idea of not having Posey next year have either been knocked on the head and forgotten what happened last season or are just trying to rationalize in the face of the possibility that there may be nothing that we can do at this point..

You are absolutely right:

doing their darndest to convince themselves that we will be fine with or without Posey now that there are rumblings that Posey may not be back.

And yeah, the Pietrus love is the finest example of this.

yeah, i have a friend who is a huge Warriors fan and he was really upset when Pietrus took so long to come back from injury as the team's playoff chances dwindled...

i can see why on paper he could look like a good replacement for Posey, but the things that Posey does in the course of a game are VERY hard to put a number on.....

he makes great coverage decisions and rotations in our defensive schemes and makes shots at crucial times.

[timepiece33]

The only thing where you do make sense is the thing about Posey possibly declining in skill.  A good comp is Bruce Bowen, who is already older than Pose will be at the end of a new five year deal, and he has two more year on the books at $4m per.  I don't have a crystal ball to know if Posey is going to fall off in three to five years.  He might, and the odds are that he will, but if the Cs can grab one or two more titles, it's money well spent.   

I agree with the age argument and potential for decline.  There needs to be some level of financial prudence, but then he starts talking about how bad Posey was against Smith and James despite having no statistical component to back it up ... it kind of loses some level of realism. 

Do people realize that Posey finished in the top 5 for Defensive Rating?   He was the only wing in the top 10.  He also put up solid defensive win share numbers.   There is nothing that suggests he is in the decline being suggested especially after the Lakers series. 

His success in the playoffs was a microcosm for his season.  I've stated where I believe we should make an offer, but a lot of the arguments seem like rationalization to me.

[CoachBo]

No question my preference is for Posey.

But five years at the MLE? Nah. Can't do it. Don't see any way you get value at the end of that deal. Four makes me squirm but I'd think about it. Three would be fine.

As for Pietrus, he's pillow-soft. The idea that he's a viable replacement for Posey is badly misguided in my view.

[Reyquila]

Another TP for you Dark Lord, but only because of that handsome face. lol

[winsomme]

No question my preference is for Posey.

But five years at the MLE? Nah. Can't do it. Don't see any way you get value at the end of that deal. Four makes me squirm but I'd think about it. Three would be fine.

As for Pietrus, he's pillow-soft. The idea that he's a viable replacement for Posey makes me squirm.

in deciding about 5 years for Posey, doesn't it matter to you who the replacement would be?

i mean, who do you have slotted as possibilities if you are saying "No" to 5 years to Posey?

this trio of stars does not come around all that often.....

personally, i think the most fiscally irresponsible thing to do is to weaken this team because of one year too many to Posey. to me, that is insane.

if there is a reasonable alternative to Posey that actually really helps financially down the road, then i am open to it.

but i want to know EXACTLY how offering Posey a 5 year deal would hurt us and how the replacement would fill the void left by Posey...

[CoachBo]

Easy answer:

Posey is HIGHLY unlikely to be defending at a $7 million skill level at 37. He's a good bet for the next three years; beyond that the odds are overwhelming that his skills will erode.

It's highly unrealistic, also, to try to forecast who would replace Posey in three to five years. I love Posey's game, and I'd give him the MLE for three years without blinking. But it's just not likely that the club is going to get value in the fifth, and quite possibly the fourth, year of a five-year deal.

[winsomme]

Easy answer:

Posey is HIGHLY unlikely to be defending at a $7 million skill level at 37. He's a good bet for the next three years; beyond that the odds are overwhelming that his skills will erode.

It's highly unrealistic, also, to try to forecast who would replace Posey in three to five years. I love Posey's game, and I'd give him the MLE for three years without blinking. But it's just not likely that the club is going to get value in the fifth, and quite possibly the fourth, year of a five-year deal.

"getting value" is such a deceptive term. if we got someone in here for the Veteran minimum and he did a decent job, but we didn't win a Title....you could argue that based on what we paid the player we "got value", but "getting value" would be a pretty unsatisfactory way to make me feel better about not winning a Title.

how about "getting value" out of the Big Three by putting the best team on the court to win a Title now that we have them here?

i mean, seriously, who would you be okay with taking Posey's minutes NEXT season.....you are so worried about 4 years from now. how about worrying about next year...?

as for who might fill his role 4 years from now if his play did fall like you are saying...how about our two draft choices Walker and/or Giddens?

[Steve Weinman]

Easy answer:

Posey is HIGHLY unlikely to be defending at a $7 million skill level at 37. He's a good bet for the next three years; beyond that the odds are overwhelming that his skills will erode.

It's highly unrealistic, also, to try to forecast who would replace Posey in three to five years. I love Posey's game, and I'd give him the MLE for three years without blinking. But it's just not likely that the club is going to get value in the fifth, and quite possibly the fourth, year of a five-year deal.

Sadly enough, in today's NBA, there always seems to be some value for a guy in the last year of an overpaid deal -- the expiring contract factor.  Which makes me wonder if we should really be looking at this as a "What can Pose do for us for four years" type of question?

In the meantime, I'm likely to be counted in with the comments made by winsomme and cordobes at this point.  When there is a chance to get a younger replacement who seems to even approach the value Posey gives this team -- particularly on the defensive end (thus the problem with Maggette) -- I'll be more willing to pay a bit more mind to the long-term financial issues. 

I've written before that Maggette intrigues me, but Posey still seems to be the better fit for this team because of his defense, outside shooting and "little things" ability (getting 50-50 balls, bringing an added layer of toughness to this team, calmness in big moments).  Pietrus is another player whom I've enjoyed monitoring across the league, but cases have been made against him by members on both sides of the "Should we be willing to gave Posey five years?" fence here, and while I think he certainly has the youth and athletic ability to be an impact player, the abounding question about his head make me hesitant -- as well as CoachBo's commentary on his softness.

All that being said, given the manner in which this team is currently constructed, it seems that the first priority virtually has to be winning now with keeping an eye on the future almost a luxury that would be nice to attain -- but not at the cost of having a shot to repeat over the next couple of seasons.  If Posey has the ability to be an integral part (as he was this year) of pushing our boys to number 18 (and perhaps even beyond???) over those first couple of seasons of his contract, I'll be more than willing to live with the consequences of having year four and year five on his contract.  That's what this is all about anyway -- winning championships.

Thus it seems we've reached a point at which there are two intertwined debates occurring here.  The first is whether this team is good enough with Maggette (or Pietrus or fill in attainable younger player X of your choice) instead of Posey.  For the people who say "no" on the first, the second issues becomes whether having Posey to help win a title(s) over the next couple of seasons is of greater priority than not being burdened by his contract as he ages.

For my part, I'll put in an "I'm unconvinced" for the first question and a definitive yes for the second.  Thus, signing Posey long-term (if that's what is truly necessary) works for me.

Yes, I want to look to the future as much as possible.  No, I don't want to turn into the Heat (who look like they could be recovering rather quickly in their own right, by the way).  But on a team with three 30-plus stars, those priorities shouldn't come at the cost of winning.  We've spent much of the last decade playing for the future so that one day we would have the pieces to enjoy the present.  That present is now.

While I clearly haven't been in agreement with everyone on the board, I will say that I think this has been one of the most well-discussed threads we've had lately -- on both sides of the fence.  I've thoroughly enjoyed reading the responses so far, and I look forward to the thoughts here that will follow mine.  Thanks for getting it started, Nick and the same to all who have contributed so far.

-sw

[Jon]

First and foremost, winning championship #18 is worth any cost.  Danny can be as fiscally responsible as he wants and there's no guarantee he'll ever sniff a title again let alone win the multiple championships that giving up a title next year would cost.  Think about all the great teams that never won a title (the Jazz, Suns, Blazers, and Knicks of the '90s all come to mind).  Just because he starts planning for a future after the Big Three doesn't mean it'll work.  In fact, chances are that it won't work out.  So I'd win as much as we can now.  Even the best laid plans in the NBA usually don't work out.  Only 1 out of 30 teams win every year. 

Moreover, even if Posey gets 5 years, which isn't a guarantee, it doesn't mean he can't be traded the last year of his contract. 

I don't hate the Maggette idea; however, it does seem like we're sacrificing defense for offense, which I don't like.  That's why the Lakers lost to the Celtics this year.  Furthermore, I like Posey's shooting better than Maggette's, which is key to spreading the floor for the Big Three. 

[CoachBo]

TP Steve.

Very legitmate points behind a very good case to resign Posey. Color me conflicted about the last year, for sure, but a five-year deal isn't going to upset me.

You don't break up this team for the next two years, for certain, out of some fear that we're not young enough - or worse, out of an incessant need to tinker. The goal is two titles, and I am 100 percent opposed to throwing one or two of the next two years away worrying about five years down the road..

I wish - perhaps a futile wish - that Posey would sign on for a lesser term, but I cannot fault him for wanting security. Despite the vaccuous attempts on this board and others to diminish his contributions this season, we do not win the title without him.

I'd prefer less than five years, but I'm definitely not interested in swapping a Posey walkaway for a scorer.