We NEED to resign Powe and Baby...

[the_Bird]

I know that we have the right to match any offer that BBD receives, but we can't have Bird rights on a player who's only been in the league two years.  Remember Arenas leaving Golden State?  Same deal, on (obviously) a much smaller level; he only signed as a rook on a two-year deal, which meant that GS could only match Washington's contract IF they had cap space or an exemption to fit the contract into.

That's why Danny has signed almost all of his second rounders to three year deals - so that not only do we have them tied up for that time, but so that we've got Bird rights when the DO hit free agency.

Exactly, BBD cannot receive a FA offer larger than the MLE though. This was to avoid the situation GS found itself in with Arenas.

What do you mean by that?  He's not GOING to, but what would keep a team with cap space from offering him say, $8M a year?  Is there a limit on the amount of a raise he can receive that I'm not aware of?  They didn't change the rules, did they?

[rondo987]

Future Team
Pg-Rondo-Pruitt
SG-Bill Walker-Tony?
Sf-FA future draft pick
Pf-Davis-Powe
C-Perk-Powe

I really think big baby is going to be a big time player

The only thing I see that team winning is the draft lottery

agreed.
that was kinda my point in my earlier post

[Change]

I still don't know what Powe brings to this team? He's great ONE game and disappears the next 10. Are the Celtics willing to pay Powe big money for that ONE game. Everyone is afraid of Powe leaving because his low post scoring, but hello we have Garnett & Perkins who dominates opponents inside. I'm not going to say that BBD is polished But he has all the tools to be a very effective player. I would love to see what BBD incorporates to his game next season, sorta like rondo improves every season.

[Fafnir]

I know that we have the right to match any offer that BBD receives, but we can't have Bird rights on a player who's only been in the league two years.  Remember Arenas leaving Golden State?  Same deal, on (obviously) a much smaller level; he only signed as a rook on a two-year deal, which meant that GS could only match Washington's contract IF they had cap space or an exemption to fit the contract into.

That's why Danny has signed almost all of his second rounders to three year deals - so that not only do we have them tied up for that time, but so that we've got Bird rights when the DO hit free agency.

Exactly, BBD cannot receive a FA offer larger than the MLE though. This was to avoid the situation GS found itself in with Arenas.

What do you mean by that?  He's not GOING to, but what would keep a team with cap space from offering him say, $8M a year?  Is there a limit on the amount of a raise he can receive that I'm not aware of?  They didn't change the rules, did they?

The changed the rules. If you're a player with less than 3 years of service on your rookie deal you can't receive more than the MLE. So a team can't lose a 2nd round pick who has blown up like GS did with Arenas, without at least having a chance to match the offer.

This was instituted a few years ago.

[celticswillwin43]

Future Team
Pg-Rondo-Pruitt
SG-Bill Walker-Tony?
Sf-FA future draft pick
Pf-Davis-Powe
C-Perk-Powe

I really think big baby is going to be a big time player

The only thing I see that team winning is the draft lottery

Ha, with a small forward that can put up points and play d, i dont think so

[the_Bird]

Looks like they can resign BBD using Early Bird rights, regardless...

EARLY BIRD EXCEPTION -- This is a weaker form of the Larry Bird exception, and is also a component of the Veteran Free Agent exception. Players who qualify for this exception are called "Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agents" in the CBA. A player qualifies for this exception after playing two seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. Using this exception, a team may re-sign its own free agent for 175% of his salary the previous season or the average player salary, whichever is greater (see question number 24 for the definition of "average salary." Also note that for 2005-06 they used a defined figure of $5 million). Early Bird contracts must be for at least two seasons (which limits this exception's usefulness -- it's often better to take a lower salary for one more season and then have the full Bird exception available the next season) and no longer than five seasons. A player can receive raises up to 10.5% of the salary in the first season of the contract using this exception.

If the player was a first round draft pick and just completed the second year of his rookie scale contract, but his team did not exercise their option to extend the contract for the third season (see question number 38), then this exception cannot be used to give him a salary greater than he would have received had the team exercised their third year option. In other words, teams can't decline the option in order to get around the salary scale and give the player more money.

If the player is a restricted free agent with two years of service and receives an offer sheet from a new team, the player's prior team may use the Early Bird exception to match the offer sheet (see question number 36 for restricted free agency).

I gotta learn to shut up before consulting with Mr. Coon....

[Birdbrain]

I keep reading these Sheed comments.  Do people think he's going to sign for the MLE?  I have to believe someone will overpay for him.  It wouldn't break my heart in the least.  I would rather keep both they compliment each other and I like the Perk/BBD KG/Powe combination.

They compliment each other? since when.

If anything they are one of our worst player combos.

It's like they each do better when the other isn't playing.

Really? I have read that around here a few times and I'm not sure where it originated from but, I disagree with the premise.  One is suited to play along the perimeter and the other never leaves the block.  I think the notion that they don't play well together comes out of some need to compare and decide which one we should keep.  Their games couldn't be anymore different but, they both are considered undersized so maybe that's why people think we can only keep one?  

I hope DA doesn’t let one go to sign someone for one year.  That seems fool hearted to me.

[Fafnir]

Neither is much of a shot blocker. Both are undersized for either the 4/5. So playing the two of them together isn't ideal.

[indeedproceed]

Future Team
Pg-Rondo-Pruitt
SG-Bill Walker-Tony?
Sf-FA future draft pick
Pf-Davis-Powe
C-Perk-Powe

I really think big baby is going to be a big time player

The only thing I see that team winning is the draft lottery

+1

I don't think that the weakness will be Walker, not that I think he'll be a star, but its too much uncertantity. But Baby and Powe being our #1 and #2 options = low seed in the playoffs/lottery

[wdleehi]

I disagree.


If anything, how well they play when the other one is out looks to me a sign that only one should be kept and the other one replaced with a true backup C. 


As for which one to keep, sort of depends on the C.  A shooting C, keep Powe.  A low post C, keep Baby. 

[wdleehi]

or, more likely, the one that will sign for less is the one they sign.

[KCattheStripe]

I disagree.


If anything, how well they play when the other one is out looks to me a sign that only one should be kept and the other one replaced with a true backup C. 


As for which one to keep, sort of depends on the C.  A shooting C, keep Powe.  A low post C, keep Baby. 

But what if we can't sign a back up C who is better than Leon down low or isn't better than Baby at shooting.

[wdleehi]

I disagree.


If anything, how well they play when the other one is out looks to me a sign that only one should be kept and the other one replaced with a true backup C. 


As for which one to keep, sort of depends on the C.  A shooting C, keep Powe.  A low post C, keep Baby. 

But what if we can't sign a back up C who is better than Leon down low or isn't better than Baby at shooting.

They don't have to be better then the player, they just need to fit better with the player that remains.  Powe and Davis as a tandem doesn't work as well as they do with other players. 

As long as the backup C is a better player the Mikki Moore, they should work next year.

[Chris]

I disagree.


If anything, how well they play when the other one is out looks to me a sign that only one should be kept and the other one replaced with a true backup C. 


As for which one to keep, sort of depends on the C.  A shooting C, keep Powe.  A low post C, keep Baby. 

I definitely agree with this.  Although I would be looking more at offensive vs. defensive game of the center, since I think Davis' value is much more in his defense than his shooting.  Ideally we could find one that is a plus on both ends of the court, but since there aren't a ton of guys like that available for the kind of money the C's have, I would be thinking, offensive center, keep Davis, defensive center, keep Powe.

Of course in reality, you'll be looking at everything to try to find the best fit. 

[Neurotic Guy]

Like many of us, I really like both players.  Unlikely that both will be signed by the C's next year especially if, as we all hope, both continue to play well throughout the playoffs.  Both are raising their value each time they play lately and its beginning to feel like they both may be in the running for close to MLE money in the off-season.  

The MLE does offer both players the option of signing with any team regardless of cap space, however, I am wondering if it would be to a team's benefit to agree to a sign and trade with the C's rather than spend their MLE.  Sign and trade will allow a team to benefit from Powe or Baby and also perhaps to carve down their payroll in anticipation of the 2010 FA class.  Here is an example that only works if Baby benefits financially with this proposed scenario as opposed to signing outright with a better team:

LA Clippers send Chris Kaman to the C's for Baby and Scalabrine (+ other compensation if needed).  This provides the Clips with Kamam's 11+ million and Scals' 3+ million off the books after 2009-10.  So they add Baby and a 5 million/yr contract while trimming almost $15 million.  They'll be a lottery pick this year and will be terrible next year, but set themselves up to be players in free agency after next season.   Similar trade could be done with Camby though the cap benefits are far less for LA.  

Anyway, even if you don't like the example above, just wondering what folks thought of the feasibility of an S&T for Powe or Baby capitalizing on improved value for both based on current play and capitalizing on other teams' desire to trim salaries for post-2010.  Also thoughts on what would convince Powe or Baby to accept an S&T over an FA contract.