Why wouldn't LeBron want to come to Boston?

[ScoobyDoo]

The two common thoughts on where LeBron will be after 2010 are that he'll stay in Cleveland or he'll be in New Jersey. Then another poster said the other day that his brother or cousin is convinced LeBron will be in Boston and I thought to myself, "you know what, why wouldn't he come to Boston?". What are his options?

1. Stays in Cleveland? Zadrunas is coming off the books, is injury prone and getting older so they don't really have a long term center. LeBron is only 24. You can't win without a center. They also have issues at off guard. The chances of winning a ring with this team before Big Z gets too old and before the Celts start slipping are slim to me. I hope he doesn't prove me wrong this spring... 

2. Go to the Nets? Why, to rebuild for another 4 years with Devin Harris and Brook Lopez?

3. Go to Orlando? No, they've cast their lot with Howard, Lewis and Turkoglu

4. Go to the Lakers? No, they've already cast their lot with basically three max contracts in Gasol, Bynum and Kobe as well.

Here comes our boy Danny, with only KG, Pierce, Perk and Rondo on book at the end of the 2009-2010 season...

Why might he want to come to Boston? Why would this be his ulitmate destination? Guys like LeBron want to become legendary. The best way to become legendary is to win championships, multiple ones.

1. At the end of next season and going into the "summer of LeBron", PP and KG will be 33 and 32 resepctively. Barring any major injuries both will be playing just fine for another 2-3 years. Perk and Rondo? 26 and 24?

2. LeBron comes in and with the lineup of Perkins, Garnett, Pierce, LeBron and Rondo, easily can win a couple of rings with this group, maybe three if they stay healthy.

3. Best part? When PP and KG fade, Ainge has perhpas the two most critical elements of a championship team in place and young with Perkins and Rondo. Ainge also has developed by then, Walker, Pruitt, Baby, POB and Giddens. With LeBron between Perk and Rondo and with all those bench players, all you need to do is add one other free agent and you're good to go again for anther 5-6+ years.

4. What's even better? With the Lakers on the rise in the West, LeBron is on the biggest stage in the NBA every year...Lakers/Celtics, Kobe/LeBron, vintage NBA.

If we added the right piece as Pierce and KG are fading out, LeBron might have a shot at 6-7 rings+ by the time he's done.

That's how you become a legend, that's why maybe the other poster's brother or cousin might be onto something.

If it were me, I wouldn't want to waste my time on the fringe. I'd want to be in the big show, asap, where I had the best chance to leave the biggest mark. That place would be in Boston and by winning your first 2-3 rings with:

Perkins / Vet min / POB
Garnett / Baby / Powe
Pierce / Walker /  Scal
LeBron / Ray Allen(MLE) / TAllen
Rondo / Pruitt / House

Then, ramp up for another extended title run with:

Perkins / Vet Min / POB
Max contract PF / Baby / Powe
LeBron / Walker
Giddens / TAllen
Rondo / Pruitt     

From a standpoint of wanting to be on the big stage, wanting to win championships and with Orlando, Cleveland and the Lakers not really being the tickets......

Whay wouldn't he come to Boston?

     

[Cman]

cuz we can't spell too good?

just kidding.  i would love to have LeBron here, and he would probably like it as well... I think the biggest problem is we just don't have the cap space to sign him.

[TatteredOnMySleeve]

The supporting cast in cleveland will be better than the one here in Boston by the time that comes around
And please, Lebron is the enemy, I dont really feel like talking about him in green when im enjoying the team we have now, cause its never gonna happen...yeah im sure he'd be chomping at the bit to be playing with Rondo/Perkins/Giddens and PP and KG literally on thier last legs

[housecall]

Sounds like by 2010 he will figure if i can't beat'em might as well join'em.

[Donoghus]

$$$$

Other teams are going to be able to offer more.

[twinbree]

I don't think Boston can offer him enough money. He won't get to be a billionaire by taking pay cuts  . Which makes me very happy.  

[Roy Hobbs]

Whay wouldn't he come to Boston?

Money.  Cleveland can offer him the most, and they're already a legit contender.  In terms of free agency, the Celtics aren't going to be able to clear enough cap room to give Lebron a max contract.

We answered this question in the FAQs stickied at the top of the forum.  Here's the excerpt:

13) Looking at the above chart, it looks like the Celtics only have around $49 million in salaries committed for 2010.  If the cap goes up to around $65 million, does that mean they can spend $16 million on free agents?  Could they then resign Ray Allen with their Bird rights?

No and no.  Surprising to many, free agents continue to count against a team's salary cap until they're either signed or renounced.  This is called a "cap hold".  Free agents essentially count against the cap at a figure greater than their previous salary.

The amount of these cap holds varies significantly; for actual percentages, see here.  For purposes of the Celtics, Ray Allen would have a cap hold in excess of $20 million.  While the team could renounce Ray, if they did so they would only be able to pay him the minimum salary.

Of even more significance is the cap hold of Rajon Rondo.  As a restricted free agent, he carries a cap hold of 300% of his previous salary, or approximately $6.3 million.  Thus, under the above scenario, the Celtics actual cap room would be approximately $10 million, rather than the $16 million anticipated.  Further, there would be additional salary slots or cap holds for any other players on the roster.  For instance, teams must have 12 players on their roster; for every player less than 12, the team is charged a "cap charge" equal to the rookie minimum salary ($457,588 in 2010).  That's equal to $3,660,704.  That means our cap space is reduced to approximately $6.4 million, or an amount roughly equal to the MLE.  That's assuming we renounce *all* of our free agents.  Long story short, unless we're starting over with ten or more new players, we don't have significant cap room in 2010-11, even if we renounce Ray.

Even worse than that, its looking more and more like a $65 million cap number was overly generous; it's likely to be below that, meaning that essentially the Celtics will be stuck using the MLE to add free agents.

The only way we could have significant cap room in 2010 is if Pierce opted out, and the team decided to renounce both Pierce and Ray.  Under that situation, we could have enough room to sign Lebron.  However, our roster would be KG, Perk, Rondo, Giddens, Walker, and a bunch of minimum salary players.  I'm not sure that that scenario would be very appealing for Lebron.

(And no, I don't see Pierce and/or Ray agreeing to take minimum salary deals just to facilitate Lebron joining the team.)

[BballTim]

Whay wouldn't he come to Boston?

Money.  Cleveland can offer him the most, and they're already a legit contender.  In terms of free agency, the Celtics aren't going to be able to clear enough cap room to give Lebron a max contract.

We answered this question in the FAQs stickied at the top of the forum.  Here's the excerpt:

13) Looking at the above chart, it looks like the Celtics only have around $49 million in salaries committed for 2010.  If the cap goes up to around $65 million, does that mean they can spend $16 million on free agents?  Could they then resign Ray Allen with their Bird rights?

No and no.  Surprising to many, free agents continue to count against a team's salary cap until they're either signed or renounced.  This is called a "cap hold".  Free agents essentially count against the cap at a figure greater than their previous salary.

The amount of these cap holds varies significantly; for actual percentages, see here.  For purposes of the Celtics, Ray Allen would have a cap hold in excess of $20 million.  While the team could renounce Ray, if they did so they would only be able to pay him the minimum salary.

Of even more significance is the cap hold of Rajon Rondo.  As a restricted free agent, he carries a cap hold of 300% of his previous salary, or approximately $6.3 million.  Thus, under the above scenario, the Celtics actual cap room would be approximately $10 million, rather than the $16 million anticipated.  Further, there would be additional salary slots or cap holds for any other players on the roster.  For instance, teams must have 12 players on their roster; for every player less than 12, the team is charged a "cap charge" equal to the rookie minimum salary ($457,588 in 2010).  That's equal to $3,660,704.  That means our cap space is reduced to approximately $6.4 million, or an amount roughly equal to the MLE.  That's assuming we renounce *all* of our free agents.  Long story short, unless we're starting over with ten or more new players, we don't have significant cap room in 2010-11, even if we renounce Ray.

Even worse than that, its looking more and more like a $65 million cap number was overly generous; it's likely to be below that, meaning that essentially the Celtics will be stuck using the MLE to add free agents.

The only way we could have significant cap room in 2010 is if Pierce opted out, and the team decided to renounce both Pierce and Ray.  Under that situation, we could have enough room to sign Lebron.  However, our roster would be KG, Perk, Rondo, Giddens, Walker, and a bunch of minimum salary players.  I'm not sure that that scenario would be very appealing for Lebron.

(And no, I don't see Pierce and/or Ray agreeing to take minimum salary deals just to facilitate Lebron joining the team.)

  It would have to be a sign and trade, not that Cleveland would be interested.

  Asto the lineup, I'd make LeBron the SF and Pierce the SG, not the other way around...

[ManUp]

Whay wouldn't he come to Boston?

Money.  Cleveland can offer him the most, and they're already a legit contender.  In terms of free agency, the Celtics aren't going to be able to clear enough cap room to give Lebron a max contract.

We answered this question in the FAQs stickied at the top of the forum.  Here's the excerpt:

13) Looking at the above chart, it looks like the Celtics only have around $49 million in salaries committed for 2010.  If the cap goes up to around $65 million, does that mean they can spend $16 million on free agents?  Could they then resign Ray Allen with their Bird rights?

No and no.  Surprising to many, free agents continue to count against a team's salary cap until they're either signed or renounced.  This is called a "cap hold".  Free agents essentially count against the cap at a figure greater than their previous salary.

The amount of these cap holds varies significantly; for actual percentages, see here.  For purposes of the Celtics, Ray Allen would have a cap hold in excess of $20 million.  While the team could renounce Ray, if they did so they would only be able to pay him the minimum salary.

Of even more significance is the cap hold of Rajon Rondo.  As a restricted free agent, he carries a cap hold of 300% of his previous salary, or approximately $6.3 million.  Thus, under the above scenario, the Celtics actual cap room would be approximately $10 million, rather than the $16 million anticipated.  Further, there would be additional salary slots or cap holds for any other players on the roster.  For instance, teams must have 12 players on their roster; for every player less than 12, the team is charged a "cap charge" equal to the rookie minimum salary ($457,588 in 2010).  That's equal to $3,660,704.  That means our cap space is reduced to approximately $6.4 million, or an amount roughly equal to the MLE.  That's assuming we renounce *all* of our free agents.  Long story short, unless we're starting over with ten or more new players, we don't have significant cap room in 2010-11, even if we renounce Ray.

Even worse than that, its looking more and more like a $65 million cap number was overly generous; it's likely to be below that, meaning that essentially the Celtics will be stuck using the MLE to add free agents.

The only way we could have significant cap room in 2010 is if Pierce opted out, and the team decided to renounce both Pierce and Ray.  Under that situation, we could have enough room to sign Lebron.  However, our roster would be KG, Perk, Rondo, Giddens, Walker, and a bunch of minimum salary players.  I'm not sure that that scenario would be very appealing for Lebron.

(And no, I don't see Pierce and/or Ray agreeing to take minimum salary deals just to facilitate Lebron joining the team.)

Since it's not an option in 2010, Will we be able to spend the max in 2011? Assuming we resign Ray to say a midlevel type deal. If not in 2011 when?

[bostonfan23]

Because he can't transcend the franchise. He wants to go somewhere where he can be bigger than the franchise and it's history, trust me. That won't happen in Boston.

[ThreadCrasher]

Whay wouldn't he come to Boston?

Money.  Cleveland can offer him the most, and they're already a legit contender.  In terms of free agency, the Celtics aren't going to be able to clear enough cap room to give Lebron a max contract.

We answered this question in the FAQs stickied at the top of the forum.  Here's the excerpt:

13) Looking at the above chart, it looks like the Celtics only have around $49 million in salaries committed for 2010.  If the cap goes up to around $65 million, does that mean they can spend $16 million on free agents?  Could they then resign Ray Allen with their Bird rights?

No and no.  Surprising to many, free agents continue to count against a team's salary cap until they're either signed or renounced.  This is called a "cap hold".  Free agents essentially count against the cap at a figure greater than their previous salary.

The amount of these cap holds varies significantly; for actual percentages, see here.  For purposes of the Celtics, Ray Allen would have a cap hold in excess of $20 million.  While the team could renounce Ray, if they did so they would only be able to pay him the minimum salary.

Of even more significance is the cap hold of Rajon Rondo.  As a restricted free agent, he carries a cap hold of 300% of his previous salary, or approximately $6.3 million.  Thus, under the above scenario, the Celtics actual cap room would be approximately $10 million, rather than the $16 million anticipated.  Further, there would be additional salary slots or cap holds for any other players on the roster.  For instance, teams must have 12 players on their roster; for every player less than 12, the team is charged a "cap charge" equal to the rookie minimum salary ($457,588 in 2010).  That's equal to $3,660,704.  That means our cap space is reduced to approximately $6.4 million, or an amount roughly equal to the MLE.  That's assuming we renounce *all* of our free agents.  Long story short, unless we're starting over with ten or more new players, we don't have significant cap room in 2010-11, even if we renounce Ray.

Even worse than that, its looking more and more like a $65 million cap number was overly generous; it's likely to be below that, meaning that essentially the Celtics will be stuck using the MLE to add free agents.

The only way we could have significant cap room in 2010 is if Pierce opted out, and the team decided to renounce both Pierce and Ray.  Under that situation, we could have enough room to sign Lebron.  However, our roster would be KG, Perk, Rondo, Giddens, Walker, and a bunch of minimum salary players.  I'm not sure that that scenario would be very appealing for Lebron.

(And no, I don't see Pierce and/or Ray agreeing to take minimum salary deals just to facilitate Lebron joining the team.)

All good stuff...although to play devil's advocate.

1.  For a player like Lebron, Boston can create cap space if they need to.  Pierce could opt out and resign a team friendly deal like KG did, saving the team appr. $6-8 million (which I expect anyway).  If the Celtics had the ability to sign LeBron, Rondo and/Perkins would be moved in a heart beat to fill out a roster boasting Lebron, Pierce and KG.  All long shots, but possible.

2.  LeBron is going to be less concerned about his actual contract value and more concerned about being able to win multiple championships.  If he wants to transcend the sport and become a global icon billionaire, ala Tiger Woods, he needs to win.  Period.  That is his main focus and he knows it.  That said, his legacy is best served winning in Cleveland...but if he has any questions about his ability to do so he will move.

That said, it is not going to happen! 

[greg683x]

Because he can't transcend the franchise. He wants to go somewhere where he can be bigger than the franchise and it's history, trust me. That won't happen in Boston.

Tommy Point.  I was gonna post something similar to this before I read your post.  The Celtics are about family, every man is just as equal as the other if I may quote the complete history DVD, and thats the way this team is currently built right now.  Even if we had 25 million dollars to throw at a guy like Lebron, I just dont think this philosophy appeals to guy whos goal is to become a Global Icon.

....and on top of all that.  Lebron has a big ego and is a very competative guy, I just feel like for him leaving Cleveland and coming to Boston, it would be like, 'I Cant beat Boston, taking less money and desperately going to them is the only way I can win.'

I dont think its too far fetched to think that Lebrons mindset is somewhat similar to Kobes mindset when he chased Shaq out of LA.  I want to do it myself, and I dont want anyone to have an excuse as to why I was able to pull it off other than my greatness.

[greg683x]

Whay wouldn't he come to Boston?

Money.  Cleveland can offer him the most, and they're already a legit contender.  In terms of free agency, the Celtics aren't going to be able to clear enough cap room to give Lebron a max contract.

We answered this question in the FAQs stickied at the top of the forum.  Here's the excerpt:

13) Looking at the above chart, it looks like the Celtics only have around $49 million in salaries committed for 2010.  If the cap goes up to around $65 million, does that mean they can spend $16 million on free agents?  Could they then resign Ray Allen with their Bird rights?

No and no.  Surprising to many, free agents continue to count against a team's salary cap until they're either signed or renounced.  This is called a "cap hold".  Free agents essentially count against the cap at a figure greater than their previous salary.

The amount of these cap holds varies significantly; for actual percentages, see here.  For purposes of the Celtics, Ray Allen would have a cap hold in excess of $20 million.  While the team could renounce Ray, if they did so they would only be able to pay him the minimum salary.

Of even more significance is the cap hold of Rajon Rondo.  As a restricted free agent, he carries a cap hold of 300% of his previous salary, or approximately $6.3 million.  Thus, under the above scenario, the Celtics actual cap room would be approximately $10 million, rather than the $16 million anticipated.  Further, there would be additional salary slots or cap holds for any other players on the roster.  For instance, teams must have 12 players on their roster; for every player less than 12, the team is charged a "cap charge" equal to the rookie minimum salary ($457,588 in 2010).  That's equal to $3,660,704.  That means our cap space is reduced to approximately $6.4 million, or an amount roughly equal to the MLE.  That's assuming we renounce *all* of our free agents.  Long story short, unless we're starting over with ten or more new players, we don't have significant cap room in 2010-11, even if we renounce Ray.

Even worse than that, its looking more and more like a $65 million cap number was overly generous; it's likely to be below that, meaning that essentially the Celtics will be stuck using the MLE to add free agents.

The only way we could have significant cap room in 2010 is if Pierce opted out, and the team decided to renounce both Pierce and Ray.  Under that situation, we could have enough room to sign Lebron.  However, our roster would be KG, Perk, Rondo, Giddens, Walker, and a bunch of minimum salary players.  I'm not sure that that scenario would be very appealing for Lebron.

(And no, I don't see Pierce and/or Ray agreeing to take minimum salary deals just to facilitate Lebron joining the team.)

All good stuff...although to play devil's advocate.

1.  For a player like Lebron, Boston can create cap space if they need to.  Pierce could opt out and resign a team friendly deal like KG did, saving the team appr. $6-8 million (which I expect anyway).  If the Celtics had the ability to sign LeBron, Rondo and/Perkins would be moved in a heart beat to fill out a roster boasting Lebron, Pierce and KG.  All long shots, but possible.

2.  LeBron is going to be less concerned about his actual contract value and more concerned about being able to win multiple championships.  If he wants to transcend the sport and become a global icon billionaire, ala Tiger Woods, he needs to win.  Period.  That is his main focus and he knows it.  That said, his legacy is best served winning in Cleveland...but if he has any questions about his ability to do so he will move.

That said, it is not going to happen! 

I think that would insulting to Paul Pierce.  Pierce has already been such a great team player over the past year, and has worked so hard, but now were gonna ask him to opt, take a HUGE paycut, and on top of that for a player that is almost his rival to replace him.  I mean seriously why dont we just as him to leave while were at it.  Sorry Paul we found someone better, but you can hang around if you want, but itll cost you.

Im sorry but Paul is my favorite player, Ive watched him come full circle his entire career.  Lebron may be the best on the planet, but Ill always take Paul first

....and Lebron wont become a Global Icon on the Celtics.  Youre right about winning titles to do it, but Tiger Woods doesnt have teammates, its him only him.  Lebron would be sharing the spotlight with at least two other players on this team.  People would start asking if he would have ever won a title if he didnt leave Cleveland and join other stars in Boston.  Doesnt work that way for guys with goals like Lebron

....as for the OP's comments.  Jordan won a title without and legit center, and Im sure Lebron thinks he'll be much better than Jordan, if he doesnt already.

[wdleehi]

Celtics only chance at LeBron is a sign and trade.


I don't see Cleveland doing that.

[bdm860]

Because he can't transcend the franchise. He wants to go somewhere where he can be bigger than the franchise and it's history, trust me. That won't happen in Boston.

Tommy Point.  I was gonna post something similar to this before I read your post.  The Celtics are about family, every man is just as equal as the other if I may quote the complete history DVD, and thats the way this team is currently built right now.  Even if we had 25 million dollars to throw at a guy like Lebron, I just dont think this philosophy appeals to guy whos goal is to become a Global Icon.

I think I disagree with this one.  Playing for one of the most historic franchises with one of the deepest fan bases would be better for the LeBron brand, not worse. 

Right now I would say Larry is probably the face of the franchise, the average person thinks of the Celtics and thinks of Larry, before that is was probably John Havlicek, before that Russell.  Same thing with the Lakers - Kobe or (Kobe/Shaq) is probably what the average person thinks of when they think of the Lakers, before that Magic, before that probably Jerry West.  The super, elitce franchises seem to pass the torch (although there can often be big gaps between torch bearers).

Do you think if Larry Bird won 3 championships in say Milwaukee or Cleveland he would be as popular?

Or to switch sports, do you think Derek Jeter would be as popular if he won those championships with Florida or Tampa Bay?

Celtics, Lakers, and Knicks (and maybe Da Bulls) are the only teams that can really offer that true elite-ness that comes from carrying one of the elite franchises.

Just think of the history of the major sports.  Now think of the all-time best players.  For the NBA, most of the players that come to mind probably played for one of those elite franchises. Do you think that's a coincidence or do you think it has something to do with those franchises being able to elevate superstars to that highest level of elite-ness.  Just look at Oscar Robertson, I'd say the average person isn't too knowledgeable about him.  Most basketball fans don't mention him in the top 5 all-time.  Dude has rings, personal accomplishments and the sickest stat lines ever outside of Wilt.  Don't you think if he played in Boston, LA, or NY people would constantly be arguing him as the greatest ever instead of a being more of an afterthought?

Or back to baseball, what about Derek Jeter?  He's probably the biggest baseball star out there right now and has been for years, although he's far from the most talented.  Have him switch to some other city (except for Boston or LA) and most casual baseball fans might have never heard of him.

Playing for Boston (or NY or LA) will make LeBron more prominent in the history books (in Cleveland he would get a paragraph, in Boston he would get a whole freakin' chapter) and in marketability (and we all know that's really what it's all about, cha-ching).  He can stay in Cleveland and be a superstar, or he can switch to an elite franchise and become a god.