Are we setting up for 2010??

[Roy Hobbs]

Speaking of 2010 and big contracts freeing up, I wonder if KG at all regrets for demanding such a huge contract. I know he did that in case Boston flunked out with the BIg 3 expirement, but now that he sees the possibilities of a dynasty, could he feel regret for tying up so much cap space for Boston's future. whether we have 28 mil free or not, it would be even better to have say 35 million instead. Then we could end up with possibly more than 1 big name, possibly 2 or a big name with alot of 2 tier star free agents.

KG actually took a big paycut.  He dropped from $24 million+ this coming season to $16 million in 2009-10.  He'll be the third-highest paid player on the team in '09-10. I don't think you can ask for much more than that.

[timepiece33]

We have a better chance of trading Ray Allen after this year for an extended contract.  Maybe Danny has someone specifically in mind AND believes he will have to take a bad contract as well to get that player?

Who knows?  IMO, 2 years is about flexibility.  I seriously doubt that the offer isn't up to 3 years by now.

[TrueGreen]

As of right now, the only Celtics players under contract for that offseason are Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, Kendrick Perkins, and probably Rondo. That adds up to about $44M, that leaves about 28 million available. With the O'Bryant signing for two years, he will be gone by 2010. And they are saying that we are only offering Posey 2 years. IMO I think that we are setting up for the 2010 offseason to possibly land Dwyane Wade, LeBron James, Chris Bosh, or Amare Stoudemire. Just imagine our future if we land one of those players. In the future we could have Perkins, Rondo, probably Powe, Walker, Giddens, and Pruitt as well. And add one of them players to the mix, we have an excellent future. Danny just might be setting up for this...

I doubt this is what is going on. Adding one of those guys to who will be left doesn't make for a championship contender. Our window of that opportunity is NOW. Losing Posey would hurt that opportunity now as there isn't a player like him in the league. He just does all the little things at the right moments. Realistically we need to maximize our chances now and then understand that we're probably going to go back to a long drought.

[TrueGreen]

We have a better chance of trading Ray Allen after this year for an extended contract.  Maybe Danny has someone specifically in mind AND believes he will have to take a bad contract as well to get that player?

Who knows?  IMO, 2 years is about flexibility.  I seriously doubt that the offer isn't up to 3 years by now.

I think Ray Allen should be here as long as PP and KG are. I don't get why so many people are interested in trading him. Without him there is no Championship. People overestimate the age problem. Ray is probably in the best shape as anyone on this team. He's Havlicek-like. We are so tuned into salary and luxury taxes and big contracts that we forget it's about the players. The big contract is a tool if it will end soon and the player isn't worth it. Ray is of too much value to use in this way.

[SShoreFan 2.0]

I have thought from the moment the Celts added Allen and Garnett that they had a salary cap plan in mind. 

If indeed that's the case and they stick with the plan I believe it's a very smart business decision designed not only about righting the ship in the short term (which they have obviously done) but then to keep the ship righted and on course for the long haul which strong cap management will allow them to do.

[wdleehi]

I was looking, Celtics are setting themselves up to have two big trade slots.



Ray Allen's 18+ million


and (if Posey signs for 2 years)


Posey and Scali for 9+ million



With teams trying to get under, Celtics could find a pretty good player at that point.


Or, if Cleveland or Miami figure they are going to lose James/Wade in FA anyways, they trade them to the Celtics with one year left (Celtics would send back some draft picks and young players)  Cleveland or Miami can tank early and start rebuilding. 

[PRIDE]

I think we should give Posey his 3 year deal and set up for 2011. Ray Allen should resign for a cheaper deal and we'll extend Rondo in the 2010 offseason. The following year Pierces contract is up and it should give us enough room to sign a big time FA.

I dont like the idea of trading Ray Allen. Even if he becomes a shooter off the bench in his old age.

[Jon]

If Ainge is focusing on the future, he's got to be very careful about not neglecting the present.  I know we're all spoiled as Boston fans.  We've seen the Celtics win 17 titles and in the new millennium we've been lucky enough to see 3 Super Bowls, 2 World Series, and 1 NBA Championship victories.  But in the real world (which we will someday return to) championships are rare things. 

In every era there are bad teams, mediocre teams, good teams, and great teams.  Even to be a good team is tough.  Even more important to note, the NBA has been a league of dynasties.  Most of the great teams of an era win multiple times.  The Celtics certainly proved that in the '50s and '60s, in the '80s we saw the Lakers and Celtics dominate, with the Pistons winning two on the way to the Bulls winning 6, only interrupted by the Rockets winning two.  Recently, we've seen the Lakers and Spurs dominate most of the new millennium with only the freak-accident Pistons winning, the Heat, and the Celtics.  My point?  Generally speaking, to win a title in the NBA requires you to be truly dominant, because the best team usually wins.  This isn't the NFL or the NCAA tournament where one bad game can cost you. 

That's why I worry about focusing on the future too much.  The Celtics truly are a dominant team right now.  Yes, the window of opportunity is small, but it's there.  I just worry that Ainge's concern for the future will start to hurt the present, and it's just not worth it.  Look at the late '90s Bulls.  Their long reign comes to an end and the Jerrys essentially do the right thing.  They gather young talent (landing guys like Curry and Chandler) and free up a ton of cap space in the year that guys like Duncan, McGrady, and Grant Hill will be free agents...and they end up with Ron Mercer as their big free agent pickup.  That doesn't work out so they start building up more talent getting guys like Deng, Hinrich, Gordon, etc.  They free up more money, sign a nice vet like Ben Wallace.  He turns out to be a bust and all of the sudden they're going nowhere. 

Overall, while Danny does need to look to the future to some extent, he needs to make sure that every effort is put into winning now.  He cannot assume that he can ever get the team as good as it is now in the future.  Simple probability will tell us that it's very unlikely it will happen.  He needs to win as much now as possible and worry about the future as a very distant second. 

[amenhotep04]

If Ainge is focusing on the future, he's got to be very careful about not neglecting the present.  I know we're all spoiled as Boston fans.  We've seen the Celtics win 17 titles and in the new millennium we've been lucky enough to see 3 Super Bowls, 2 World Series, and 1 NBA Championship victories.  But in the real world (which we will someday return to) championships are rare things. 

In every era there are bad teams, mediocre teams, good teams, and great teams.  Even to be a good team is tough.  Even more important to note, the NBA has been a league of dynasties.  Most of the great teams of an era win multiple times.  The Celtics certainly proved that in the '50s and '60s, in the '80s we saw the Lakers and Celtics dominate, with the Pistons winning two on the way to the Bulls winning 6, only interrupted by the Rockets winning two.  Recently, we've seen the Lakers and Spurs dominate most of the new millennium with only the freak-accident Pistons winning, the Heat, and the Celtics.  My point?  Generally speaking, to win a title in the NBA requires you to be truly dominant, because the best team usually wins.  This isn't the NFL or the NCAA tournament where one bad game can cost you. 

That's why I worry about focusing on the future too much.  The Celtics truly are a dominant team right now.  Yes, the window of opportunity is small, but it's there.  I just worry that Ainge's concern for the future will start to hurt the present, and it's just not worth it.  Look at the late '90s Bulls.  Their long reign comes to an end and the Jerrys essentially do the right thing.  They gather young talent (landing guys like Curry and Chandler) and free up a ton of cap space in the year that guys like Duncan, McGrady, and Grant Hill will be free agents...and they end up with Ron Mercer as their big free agent pickup.  That doesn't work out so they start building up more talent getting guys like Deng, Hinrich, Gordon, etc.  They free up more money, sign a nice vet like Ben Wallace.  He turns out to be a bust and all of the sudden they're going nowhere. 

Overall, while Danny does need to look to the future to some extent, he needs to make sure that every effort is put into winning now.  He cannot assume that he can ever get the team as good as it is now in the future.  Simple probability will tell us that it's very unlikely it will happen.  He needs to win as much now as possible and worry about the future as a very distant second. 

You're comparing eras when the salary structures were not the same.  With the exception of the Spurs who got it the old fashioned way of winning through the draft, the teams today were put together through trades and/or free agent signings.  Portland also should be similar to the Spurs in that regard.  Nevertheless, teams are put together to have their run.  For teams to dominate more than a couple or three years, GMs have to continually go out and get players via free agency and trades.  The draft in and of itself doesn't provide a lot because players are too raw when they arrive in the league.  To be truly dominant, Danny would have to continue to collect 'chips' as he calls them, and make moves here and there to keep the team competitive or dominant.  If he doesn't, what he would be left with is the Miami scenario. 

No one wants that.

[Jon]

If Ainge is focusing on the future, he's got to be very careful about not neglecting the present.  I know we're all spoiled as Boston fans.  We've seen the Celtics win 17 titles and in the new millennium we've been lucky enough to see 3 Super Bowls, 2 World Series, and 1 NBA Championship victories.  But in the real world (which we will someday return to) championships are rare things. 

In every era there are bad teams, mediocre teams, good teams, and great teams.  Even to be a good team is tough.  Even more important to note, the NBA has been a league of dynasties.  Most of the great teams of an era win multiple times.  The Celtics certainly proved that in the '50s and '60s, in the '80s we saw the Lakers and Celtics dominate, with the Pistons winning two on the way to the Bulls winning 6, only interrupted by the Rockets winning two.  Recently, we've seen the Lakers and Spurs dominate most of the new millennium with only the freak-accident Pistons winning, the Heat, and the Celtics.  My point?  Generally speaking, to win a title in the NBA requires you to be truly dominant, because the best team usually wins.  This isn't the NFL or the NCAA tournament where one bad game can cost you. 

That's why I worry about focusing on the future too much.  The Celtics truly are a dominant team right now.  Yes, the window of opportunity is small, but it's there.  I just worry that Ainge's concern for the future will start to hurt the present, and it's just not worth it.  Look at the late '90s Bulls.  Their long reign comes to an end and the Jerrys essentially do the right thing.  They gather young talent (landing guys like Curry and Chandler) and free up a ton of cap space in the year that guys like Duncan, McGrady, and Grant Hill will be free agents...and they end up with Ron Mercer as their big free agent pickup.  That doesn't work out so they start building up more talent getting guys like Deng, Hinrich, Gordon, etc.  They free up more money, sign a nice vet like Ben Wallace.  He turns out to be a bust and all of the sudden they're going nowhere. 

Overall, while Danny does need to look to the future to some extent, he needs to make sure that every effort is put into winning now.  He cannot assume that he can ever get the team as good as it is now in the future.  Simple probability will tell us that it's very unlikely it will happen.  He needs to win as much now as possible and worry about the future as a very distant second. 

You're comparing eras when the salary structures were not the same.  With the exception of the Spurs who got it the old fashioned way of winning through the draft, the teams today were put together through trades and/or free agent signings.  Portland also should be similar to the Spurs in that regard.  Nevertheless, teams are put together to have their run.  For teams to dominate more than a couple or three years, GMs have to continually go out and get players via free agency and trades.  The draft in and of itself doesn't provide a lot because players are too raw when they arrive in the league.  To be truly dominant, Danny would have to continue to collect 'chips' as he calls them, and make moves here and there to keep the team competitive or dominant.  If he doesn't, what he would be left with is the Miami scenario. 

No one wants that.

So what exactly are you suggesting?  On one hand you're telling me not to expect more than a couple more years of dominance (which I agree with) on the other hand you're telling me that Ainge can extend the dominance (which I don't agree with entirely). 

It's a rare thing to be this good.  After this run is over, to expect we'll be this good again anytime soon is like expecting to win the lottery.  I think people forget how "perfect storm-like" this championship run was.  Sure, he made some good trades, but in most other years those options wouldn't have been there.  It just so happened that two franchises were looking to trade their franchise players for prospects.  And it just so happened that both players were old enough to be desperate for a title, but young enough to still be effective.  And it also just so happened that all three players had games that meshed.  I give Danny a lot of credit, but that scenario couldn't have happened most other offseasons. 

I just hope he doesn't jeopardize any success the C's could have now by thinking about what could be in the future.  Hopefully he can do both. 

[paintitgreen]

First, we're not getting a top-tier young opt-out star in 2010. Not Wade, not James, not Amare, not Bosh. People have pointed to the poor return teams got for guys like KG, Kidd, J O'Neal, Jefferson, Gasol, Iverson. The four guys mentioned above are entirely different. Kidd is really old. O'Neal has major injury issues. KG and Iverson aren't "old" but they're in their 30s. Lebron, Wade et al. will be in their mid-20s and entering or in their primes. Jefferson and Gasol aren't at nearly the same level of those other guys. KG also cost a 21 year old proven 18-8 guy, something we don't have to throw in a trade. Also, all of those guys and their respective teams wanted a trade to unload salary and get out of losing situations. That's not the case with the 2010 guys. IF those teams are offering those stars up in trades leading up to 09-10, they're not going to accept a simple expiring contract + second-tier young player + bad first round picks. They're going to want very talented players.

I agree, though, the idea may be to make a deal where we send out Allen, Scalabrine, maybe Posey if he is on a 2 year deal, to a team looking to cut salary to make a run at one of those guys. That's the likeliest scenario Ainge is looking at. But I honestly have no idea who's gonna be doing that and whether it's worth it. The Knicks? I don't want anything they have - Ray is better than all of them. The Nets? I don't want Vince Carter. I liked the Dallas suggestion a little, but Dirk plays the same position as KG. And they already have $30 million for that season invested in Terry, Dampier and Diop, and $41 million if they exercise their option on Howard. Who's gonna go to Dallas to play with an aged JET and Dampier, and a backup center, when Dirk is gone?

One possibility I do see - maybe Chicago decides to make a run at one of those guys. Hinrich is on the hook for $9 mil in 2010-11 (and $8 mil in 2011-12). I think Chicago will stick with Rose, Hinrich and Gordon this season as their guard rotation, but maybe we can pick up a package like Hinrich, Deng and one of their young bigs (Noah, Thomas) for Allen and some cheap, quality pieces (I think they'd love to get Powe or Davis to provide some cheap inside scoring) so Chicago can make a run at Lebron or Wade to team up with D Rose. Wouldn't necessarily like that deal, but depending on how Allen is doing the next two years, maybe hitting the reset button with guys like that is a nice move to make.

Another possibility - maybe Houston decides to go for one of those guys to team up with Yao. But they won't want to let T-Mac (who also expires in 2010) go for nothing, so they offer up T-Mac for Allen and some cheap young pieces to put around Yao and the new star - of course they'd probably want Rondo but maybe something else we have will develop and be as desirable (i.e., Davis, Giddens, Walker - who, by the way, I think has more potential than any other young player on our roster except Rondo). I'd take a chance on T-Mac's last couple of seasons - he'll be 31 at that time, a couple years younger than Pierce and KG, but in the same sort of generation (meaning they will likely mesh well) and hungry to win.

Dark horse candidate: Portland - going into the summer of 2010, Oden, Fernandez and Bayless will still be on rookie contracts, and Roy, Aldridge and Rodriguez will be RFAs. The only other guys they'll probably want to resign before that are maybe Webster, Outlaw and Diogu. Depending on Bayless' development, maybe Portland would be willing to let Roy or Aldridge, and one of the Spaniards, go if a team takes on Przybilla's last option year. Oden would be a big attraction for a star player like Bosh or Amare to head to the Northwest. Oden with Amare would be lethal. Of course, that would be a big gamble for the Blazers, and would we really want Aldridge, another power forward? I do like both Spaniards a lot though. Although after LA, I'm not sure we need Europeans.

I don't necessarily think it's what we should do, but trying to get a good trade based on other teams clearing cap space is far likelier to me than trying to trade for one of the guys who might opt out, especially considering a guy like Lebron will opt out and go to Brooklyn whether he's on the Cavs or Celtics, and I don't believe any of the other major stars are going anywhere.

[Jon]

First, we're not getting a top-tier young opt-out star in 2010. Not Wade, not James, not Amare, not Bosh. People have pointed to the poor return teams got for guys like KG, Kidd, J O'Neal, Jefferson, Gasol, Iverson. The four guys mentioned above are entirely different. Kidd is really old. O'Neal has major injury issues. KG and Iverson aren't "old" but they're in their 30s. Lebron, Wade et al. will be in their mid-20s and entering or in their primes. Jefferson and Gasol aren't at nearly the same level of those other guys. KG also cost a 21 year old proven 18-8 guy, something we don't have to throw in a trade. Also, all of those guys and their respective teams wanted a trade to unload salary and get out of losing situations. That's not the case with the 2010 guys. IF those teams are offering those stars up in trades leading up to 09-10, they're not going to accept a simple expiring contract + second-tier young player + bad first round picks. They're going to want very talented players.

I agree, though, the idea may be to make a deal where we send out Allen, Scalabrine, maybe Posey if he is on a 2 year deal, to a team looking to cut salary to make a run at one of those guys. That's the likeliest scenario Ainge is looking at. But I honestly have no idea who's gonna be doing that and whether it's worth it. The Knicks? I don't want anything they have - Ray is better than all of them. The Nets? I don't want Vince Carter. I liked the Dallas suggestion a little, but Dirk plays the same position as KG. And they already have $30 million for that season invested in Terry, Dampier and Diop, and $41 million if they exercise their option on Howard. Who's gonna go to Dallas to play with an aged JET and Dampier, and a backup center, when Dirk is gone?

One possibility I do see - maybe Chicago decides to make a run at one of those guys. Hinrich is on the hook for $9 mil in 2010-11 (and $8 mil in 2011-12). I think Chicago will stick with Rose, Hinrich and Gordon this season as their guard rotation, but maybe we can pick up a package like Hinrich, Deng and one of their young bigs (Noah, Thomas) for Allen and some cheap, quality pieces (I think they'd love to get Powe or Davis to provide some cheap inside scoring) so Chicago can make a run at Lebron or Wade to team up with D Rose. Wouldn't necessarily like that deal, but depending on how Allen is doing the next two years, maybe hitting the reset button with guys like that is a nice move to make.

Another possibility - maybe Houston decides to go for one of those guys to team up with Yao. But they won't want to let T-Mac (who also expires in 2010) go for nothing, so they offer up T-Mac for Allen and some cheap young pieces to put around Yao and the new star - of course they'd probably want Rondo but maybe something else we have will develop and be as desirable (i.e., Davis, Giddens, Walker - who, by the way, I think has more potential than any other young player on our roster except Rondo). I'd take a chance on T-Mac's last couple of seasons - he'll be 31 at that time, a couple years younger than Pierce and KG, but in the same sort of generation (meaning they will likely mesh well) and hungry to win.

Dark horse candidate: Portland - going into the summer of 2010, Oden, Fernandez and Bayless will still be on rookie contracts, and Roy, Aldridge and Rodriguez will be RFAs. The only other guys they'll probably want to resign before that are maybe Webster, Outlaw and Diogu. Depending on Bayless' development, maybe Portland would be willing to let Roy or Aldridge, and one of the Spaniards, go if a team takes on Przybilla's last option year. Oden would be a big attraction for a star player like Bosh or Amare to head to the Northwest. Oden with Amare would be lethal. Of course, that would be a big gamble for the Blazers, and would we really want Aldridge, another power forward? I do like both Spaniards a lot though. Although after LA, I'm not sure we need Europeans.

I don't necessarily think it's what we should do, but trying to get a good trade based on other teams clearing cap space is far likelier to me than trying to trade for one of the guys who might opt out, especially considering a guy like Lebron will opt out and go to Brooklyn whether he's on the Cavs or Celtics, and I don't believe any of the other major stars are going anywhere.

Agreed.  Unless Danny gets lucky again, the "setting up for 2010" will most likely be underwhelming to most Celtic fans. 

[hwangjini_1]

I was looking, Celtics are setting themselves up to have two big trade slots.



Ray Allen's 18+ million


and (if Posey signs for 2 years)


Posey and Scali for 9+ million



With teams trying to get under, Celtics could find a pretty good player at that point.


Or, if Cleveland or Miami figure they are going to lose James/Wade in FA anyways, they trade them to the Celtics with one year left (Celtics would send back some draft picks and young players)  Cleveland or Miami can tank early and start rebuilding. 

this is NOT how the cleveland fans would read such a trade. having lifed too long near cleveland, i can assure you that the fans there will demand the owners pay virtually anything for james.

for years the team was truely bad. the fans know that without james, they are truely bad again.... and probably would be for a long time since nothing the celtics give them would match james.

so the management of cleveland would have to be willing to take a real pounding from the fan base, and greatly reduced attendance.

[wdleehi]

I was looking, Celtics are setting themselves up to have two big trade slots.



Ray Allen's 18+ million


and (if Posey signs for 2 years)


Posey and Scali for 9+ million



With teams trying to get under, Celtics could find a pretty good player at that point.


Or, if Cleveland or Miami figure they are going to lose James/Wade in FA anyways, they trade them to the Celtics with one year left (Celtics would send back some draft picks and young players)  Cleveland or Miami can tank early and start rebuilding. 

this is NOT how the cleveland fans would read such a trade. having lifed too long near cleveland, i can assure you that the fans there will demand the owners pay virtually anything for james.

for years the team was truely bad. the fans know that without james, they are truely bad again.... and probably would be for a long time since nothing the celtics give them would match james.

so the management of cleveland would have to be willing to take a real pounding from the fan base, and greatly reduced attendance.

I am talking in the case the Lebron states before he is a FA that he will not resign with Cleveland. 



My favorite idea would be to trade Posey and Scali to a team that want cap room for Lebron for a decent to good player and a 1st (you know teams will offer them to get cap room)

Then, if lebron makes such an announcement, trade Ray, Celtics 1st and the 1st of the team that has just left their team devoid of winning talent to Cleveland. 



Good to dream.

[Bankshot]

2010?  What about 2009?