2010/11 MLE options

[WeMadeIt17]

Another guys we could get that is out there if we need a good shooter I believe Rausal Butler is a FA. He would be a perfect fit here.

[moneyinthebank]

What about JJ Redick at the MLE?  He is restricted but I think he would be a great long term replacement for Ray.  His game has improved every year, he is an excellent 3pt shooter and FT shooter, he works hard on defense (not the most physical or athletic guy), working on creating his own shot off of ball fakes, he is willing to come off the bench, he cares about winning and playing team basketball.  I just think Redick would fit nice with screens from Perk and kick out passes from Rondo driving.  Of course, this wouldnt help with rebounding or toughness inside, but Ray cant play forever and is going to be like 36 next year.   

[fairweatherfan06]

I think we'll draft big at 19 (Whiteside, Alabi).  Is there a way we can get Ty Thomas through the Sheed retirement scenario?  At MLE if Nate does not return (somewhat likely) could we split it between like Luke Ridnour (good backup PG former teammate of Ray would definitely come if he is still here ) and Butler or Outlaw definitely someone to spread the floor, that and resigning TA sounds like a strong bench rotation.  Also intrigued by Kyrylo Fesenko at the minimum as an extra big off the bench at the minimum.  That seems like a decent roster to me.

Rondo/Ridnour (or Nate
Ray/TA/ Damien Wilkins?
Pierce/Outlaw or Butler or Mike Miller
KG/Baby (maybe Ty Thomas
Perk/Fesenko/ Alabi or Whiteside

[Who]

 Also intrigued by Kyrylo Fesenko at the minimum as an extra big off the bench at the minimum.  

Fesenko is a restricted free agent. Utah won't let him leave for a minimum contract offer. But a $2 million offer would be tempting and a $3 million offer would certainly get it done.

So Fesenko would take a small part of the MLE and perhaps as much as half of it ... but I agree, he is a very interesting project. If the C's spent $4 million of the MLE on one player and had a little under $2 million leftover with no rotation player in sight, I'd be interested in seeing them take a chance on Fesenko.

[More Banners]

Anybody have any info/links related to whether the current teams want to keep these FA's, or whether they want to stay with their teams?  We are assuming all of these guys are available...  If I were Washington, I'd keep Mike Miller for the MLE since he's a solid, versatile vet and the rest of the team is so young (except Arenas), and the Clips just traded for Outlaw this year, I think they want to keep him.

And, by the way, I wouldn't be surprised if LA used their MLE to sign Ridnour at PG, or even Miller to improve their wing depth behind Kobe and Artest...we're not the only team looking to get better. 

Our prospects for next year depend quite a bit on improving the bench with the MLE, but it's no sure thing that we'll get what we need, and if we do, we'll have to sign someone for at least 1-2 years beyond KG's contract.  It needs to be worth that.  Mike Miller at 30, 31, and 32 might be worth the full MLE, but I'm not sure about 33 and 34, and don't want to take up cap space in 2012 with him.  Ditto for a guy like Al Harrington, but he might be someone who would take a 2-year full MLE deal (I'm not sure what better offers he'd get).

But I still think we're seeing the first signs of a need for a true go-to scorer, which our current stars simply are no longer, and that won't likely be filled with the MLE.

[Who]

Rather have Ty Thomas and Damion James

Just thinking about the idea of those two on this Celtics team is exciting.

A major influx of defensive ability + rebounding + speed and quickness (Tyrus) + toughness (James).

A bench unit of Nate, Tony, James, Tyrus, BBD and Sheed alongside their starters. Six legitimate rotation players who all provide a different type of skill set and several of whom (Tony/James/Tyrus) who can play multiple positions and give you a huge number of lineup choices. A coach's dream. Probably the best bench in the league.

My only problem with that is it is really missing shooting.  I think it really hurt the C's not having a wing off the bench who could shoot AND defend.  So unless James learns to shoot, I can't get too excited about that group.

How good is James' shooting? He took about more than a fifth of his shots from behind the arc last season and hit 38%. The year before he was only shooting 22% in a similar number attempts and they year before that he was at 41%, again in a similar number of attempts. I would expect him to be a solid shooter in the NBA next season. Not a marksman but solid. Is there any reason to think that expectation is too high?

An interesting note on draftexpress

•Damion James looks solid, but unspectacular across the board. At 1.0 PPP overall and drawing fouls on 10.2% of his shots, James is a solid offensive player, but considering his lack of ball handling ability, he’ll need to improve on his 42.9% shooting on unguarded jumpers if he wants to see consistent minutes at the three on the next level. The hustle numbers are there (1.25 finishing PPP, 2 Pos from offensive rebounds, 2.3 Pos from cuts), but James is a questionable one-on-one player (0.672) and may need to be more than serviceable in spot-up situations to be successful in the long-term.

Described as a serviceable spot up shooter

[Who]

But I still think we're seeing the first signs of a need for a true go-to scorer, which our current stars simply are no longer, and that won't likely be filled with the MLE.

Yeah, the C's just can't fill that gap. Not without parting ways with Rajon Rondo and maybe not even then. Unfortunately, due to the lack of opportunity, it is not even worth talking about because there is no chance of it happening.

The only choice left to make is whether to (1) begin rebuilding, or, (2) improve supporting cast to maximize whatever window the squad has left.

[Who]

Anybody have any info/links related to whether the current teams want to keep these FA's, or whether they want to stay with their teams?  We are assuming all of these guys are available...  If I were Washington, I'd keep Mike Miller for the MLE since he's a solid, versatile vet and the rest of the team is so young (except Arenas), and the Clips just traded for Outlaw this year, I think they want to keep him.

Mike Miller + Washington

Miller is one of the few players of his experience and talent who is content to play for a losing ball club. Sure, he'd rather play for a winning team but he is happy enough staying with Washington. So he would strongly consider a Wizards offer especially if the Wizards offered more than the MLE.

As for Washington, I think it's unlikely that they pursue Miller. Washington has $20 million in cap space and are expected to make a run at a major free agent, likely a second tier one such as Amare Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer, David Lee and/or Rudy Gay. Of their free agents, they seem to be most interested in Josh Howard and would likely have to offer him a deal worth slightly more than the MLE. So a star + Howard is the first preference. I imagine they have some interest in Miller but because he's a fallback rather than a first option he is very much there for the taking.

Travis Outlaw + Clippers

The Clippers have to renounce all their free agents in order to free up enough cap space to sign a max contract free agent. That is their game plan. (Clippers already have a lot of money tied up in Baron, Kaman, Griffin, Gordon, 2010 pick = no wiggle room with their own free agents)

Travis Outlaw is fully available and highly unlikely to play for the Clippers next season.

Our prospects for next year depend quite a bit on improving the bench with the MLE, but it's no sure thing that we'll get what we need, and if we do, we'll have to sign someone for at least 1-2 years beyond KG's contract.  It needs to be worth that. 

Mike Miller at 30, 31, and 32 might be worth the full MLE, but I'm not sure about 33 and 34, and don't want to take up cap space in 2012 with him.  Ditto for a guy like Al Harrington, but he might be someone who would take a 2-year full MLE deal (I'm not sure what better offers he'd get).

Agreed -- no interest in hurting the 2012's cap flexibility for a player that doesn't fit into the club's long term future.

That is one of the reasons why I am so interested in Tyrus Thomas because I think he can play a big role in the long term. I love the idea of Thomas and Perkins together defensively for the next 6-8 years.

I think Thomas' quickness and Perk's brute force are an excellent defensive combination and a great foundation to build around ... especially with Rondo's defense and playmaking on the other end of the floor.

[More Banners]

Anybody have any info/links related to whether the current teams want to keep these FA's, or whether they want to stay with their teams?  We are assuming all of these guys are available...  If I were Washington, I'd keep Mike Miller for the MLE since he's a solid, versatile vet and the rest of the team is so young (except Arenas), and the Clips just traded for Outlaw this year, I think they want to keep him.

Mike Miller + Washington

Miller is one of the few players of his experience and talent who is content to play for a losing ball club. Sure, he'd rather play for a winning team but he is happy enough staying with Washington. So he would strongly consider a Wizards offer especially if the Wizards offered more than the MLE.

As for Washington, I think it's unlikely that they pursue Miller. Washington has $20 million in cap space and are expected to make a run at a major free agent, likely a second tier one such as Amare Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer, David Lee and/or Rudy Gay. Of their free agents, they seem to be most interested in Josh Howard and would likely have to offer him a deal worth slightly more than the MLE. So a star + Howard is the first preference. I imagine they have some interest in Miller but because he's a fallback rather than a first option he is very much there for the taking.

Travis Outlaw + Clippers

The Clippers have to renounce all their free agents in order to free up enough cap space to sign a max contract free agent. That is their game plan. (Clippers already have a lot of money tied up in Baron, Kaman, Griffin, Gordon, 2010 pick = no wiggle room with their own free agents)

Travis Outlaw is fully available and highly unlikely to play for the Clippers next season.

Our prospects for next year depend quite a bit on improving the bench with the MLE, but it's no sure thing that we'll get what we need, and if we do, we'll have to sign someone for at least 1-2 years beyond KG's contract.  It needs to be worth that.  

Mike Miller at 30, 31, and 32 might be worth the full MLE, but I'm not sure about 33 and 34, and don't want to take up cap space in 2012 with him.  Ditto for a guy like Al Harrington, but he might be someone who would take a 2-year full MLE deal (I'm not sure what better offers he'd get).

Agreed -- no interest in hurting the 2012's cap flexibility for a player that doesn't fit into the club's long term future.

That is one of the reasons why I am so interested in Tyrus Thomas because I think he can play a big role in the long term. I love the idea of Thomas and Perkins together defensively for the next 6-8 years.

I think Thomas' quickness and Perk's brute force are an excellent defensive combination and a great foundation to build around ... especially with Rondo's defense and playmaking on the other end of the floor.

Thanks.

I suppose Miller is a possibility for MLE money, but the only holdback is that I suspect he'll get 4-year MLE offers (such as from the Lakers?), or a bit more money from a desperate team (Minny again?).  I wouldn't mind having Foye as a combo off the bench for reasonable money, either, so perhaps I'd try to work a deal with the Wiz involving Sheed's retiring contract, a S&T Tony and/or Quisy, and a future 1st.

I like Ty Thomas, and he'd defend well next to Perk, but a Rondo/Ty/Perk lineup would be a bit hampered offensively?  I'd swap BBD for him, but he's not the answer in my book.

The clips are crazy if they think a max FA that's actually worth the max is going there.   Better off to keep Outlaw for MLE-level cash, as the won't get a much better player, and will overpay at that.  

I guess Outlaw's the guy I'd make a run at with the MLE, and hope to swing Miller and Foye in a trade for spare parts and a future pick+cash.

Starters intact.

Bench:
Foye
Miller
Outlaw
BBD
Minimum deal big man-Battie? OR Nate in a running init w/BBD at C.

I think I like that bench enough to go beyond 2 year deals, if the money is decent.

[Who]

I like Ty Thomas, and he'd defend well next to Perk, but a Rondo/Ty/Perk lineup would be a bit hampered offensively?  I'd swap BBD for him, but he's not the answer in my book.

It would put a lot of pressure on the two wings to be scorers and shooters to make it work. If the wings were also good transition players it could be a deadly running team 1 through 4. A few hustle baskets inside. With a capable bench it could be a good-to-very good offensive team.

The other option is if a top big man becomes available you could always trade Perkins or Thomas because both players should have solid (Perk) to excellent (Ty Thomas) trade value on their new contracts.

But if you can't get that big, the best thing to do is a build a team that can compete on the interior defensively + on the boards and leave it up to the perimeter players to provide the large chunk of offense. Can without a talented offensive big man but you can't win without talented interior defenders/rebounders. The combination of Ty Thomas + Perkins can immediately create that dynamic for Boston.

[More Banners]

I like Ty Thomas, and he'd defend well next to Perk, but a Rondo/Ty/Perk lineup would be a bit hampered offensively?  I'd swap BBD for him, but he's not the answer in my book.

It would put a lot of pressure on the two wings to be scorers and shooters to make it work. If the wings were also good transition players it could be a deadly running team 1 through 4. A few hustle baskets inside. With a capable bench it could be a good-to-very good offensive team.

The other option is if a top big man becomes available you could always trade Perkins or Thomas because both players should have solid (Perk) to excellent (Ty Thomas) trade value on their new contracts.

But if you can't get that big, the best thing to do is a build a team that can compete on the interior defensively + on the boards and leave it up to the perimeter players to provide the large chunk of offense. Can without a talented offensive big man but you can't win without talented interior defenders/rebounders. The combination of Ty Thomas + Perkins can immediately create that dynamic for Boston.

I guess I'm a little gunshy to rate athletic, yet offensively challenged 4's.  Call it Ed Pinkney post-trauma disorder.

[wiley]

Rather have Ty Thomas and Damion James

Just thinking about the idea of those two on this Celtics team is exciting.

A major influx of defensive ability + rebounding + speed and quickness (Tyrus) + toughness (James).

A bench unit of Nate, Tony, James, Tyrus, BBD and Sheed alongside their starters. Six legitimate rotation players who all provide a different type of skill set and several of whom (Tony/James/Tyrus) who can play multiple positions and give you a huge number of lineup choices. A coach's dream. Probably the best bench in the league.

My only problem with that is it is really missing shooting.  I think it really hurt the C's not having a wing off the bench who could shoot AND defend.  So unless James learns to shoot, I can't get too excited about that group.

This brings up an interesting question, which is, if Mike Miller had been there in game 7 or the whole Lakers series, how much would he have played?  Ray and Paul take up so many minutes, and if Ray's back I think we have to think twice out bringing in a shooter who doesn't do other things at a high enough level.....If Ray leaves however, we may need 2 shooters to replace him depending on the quality, and therefore minutes, of the first one we get our hands on...I'm okay with Mike Miller in the end if we can't get a desired SF elsewhere, but I'd prefer younger faster guys if possible.....you know what they say keeps old folks young.....hanging around young folks!  Get the big 3 some young pups!

[wiley]

Rather have Ty Thomas and Damion James

Just thinking about the idea of those two on this Celtics team is exciting.

A major influx of defensive ability + rebounding + speed and quickness (Tyrus) + toughness (James).

A bench unit of Nate, Tony, James, Tyrus, BBD and Sheed alongside their starters. Six legitimate rotation players who all provide a different type of skill set and several of whom (Tony/James/Tyrus) who can play multiple positions and give you a huge number of lineup choices. A coach's dream. Probably the best bench in the league.

My only problem with that is it is really missing shooting.  I think it really hurt the C's not having a wing off the bench who could shoot AND defend.  So unless James learns to shoot, I can't get too excited about that group.

This brings up an interesting question, which is, if Mike Miller had been there in game 7 or the whole Lakers series, how much would he have played?  Ray and Paul take up so many minutes, and if Ray's back I think we have to think twice out bringing in a shooter who doesn't do other things at a high enough level.....If Ray leaves however, we may need 2 shooters to replace him depending on the quality, and therefore minutes, of the first one we get our hands on...I'm okay with Mike Miller in the end if we can't get a desired SF elsewhere, but I'd prefer younger faster guys if possible.....you know what they say keeps old folks young.....hanging around young folks!  Get the big 3 some young pups!

as usual forgot half of what I wanted to say....which is that if Ray stays, Doc has to consider playing him less when he struggles.  This has not happened yet and would be a turning point in Ray's stint in Boston...so if we got Mike Miller, I would hope he'd be used when Ray ( or Paul) struggles, including in the playoffs.....

If the lineup above came to pass:  Ty Thomas and Damion James being added, then I'd throw caution to the wind and start Tony Allen and play Ray with Nate, Ty and Damion.....Ray getting more minutes than Tony on some nights and not more on others....it's bench time if we want to win another one...

[wiley]

I like Ty Thomas, and he'd defend well next to Perk, but a Rondo/Ty/Perk lineup would be a bit hampered offensively?  I'd swap BBD for him, but he's not the answer in my book.

It would put a lot of pressure on the two wings to be scorers and shooters to make it work. If the wings were also good transition players it could be a deadly running team 1 through 4. A few hustle baskets inside. With a capable bench it could be a good-to-very good offensive team.

The other option is if a top big man becomes available you could always trade Perkins or Thomas because both players should have solid (Perk) to excellent (Ty Thomas) trade value on their new contracts.

But if you can't get that big, the best thing to do is a build a team that can compete on the interior defensively + on the boards and leave it up to the perimeter players to provide the large chunk of offense. Can without a talented offensive big man but you can't win without talented interior defenders/rebounders. The combination of Ty Thomas + Perkins can immediately create that dynamic for Boston.

I guess I'm a little gunshy to rate athletic, yet offensively challenged 4's.  Call it Ed Pinkney post-trauma disorder.

Optimistic outlook:  Ty is better or as good as advertised.  Perk starts taking and hitting his short baseline jumpers......worst case, Perk ends up a bench beast while we start some new center who shoots from outside.....

[snively]

Rather have Ty Thomas and Damion James

Just thinking about the idea of those two on this Celtics team is exciting.

A major influx of defensive ability + rebounding + speed and quickness (Tyrus) + toughness (James).

A bench unit of Nate, Tony, James, Tyrus, BBD and Sheed alongside their starters. Six legitimate rotation players who all provide a different type of skill set and several of whom (Tony/James/Tyrus) who can play multiple positions and give you a huge number of lineup choices. A coach's dream. Probably the best bench in the league.

My only problem with that is it is really missing shooting.  I think it really hurt the C's not having a wing off the bench who could shoot AND defend.  So unless James learns to shoot, I can't get too excited about that group.

How good is James' shooting? He took about more than a fifth of his shots from behind the arc last season and hit 38%. The year before he was only shooting 22% in a similar number attempts and they year before that he was at 41%, again in a similar number of attempts. I would expect him to be a solid shooter in the NBA next season. Not a marksman but solid. Is there any reason to think that expectation is too high?

A solid shooting three + a very good shooter in Nate. That is a good enough foundation for me ... if the wing is bringing in high quality rebounding (a major need) and quality defense. Can leave Tony on the bench on the nights where Boston needs more shooting and/or give James some minutes at the four and spread the floor like the C's did with Posey.

Not sure where you got 22% from.  According to DX, James shot 41%, 33% and 38% from the college 3 in his past 3 seasons. 

I agree that James should transition into a low-to-mid 30s spot-up 3pt shooter fairly quickly.  He's just not very good on the move: his shot is too flat and eliminates any margin for error. 

James as the back-up 3 would certainly be a big shooting improvement over Marquis Daniels and probably stretch the floor about as well as Finley did. 

The great thing about James is that he can fit with either of my preferred MLE choices: Mike Miller or Tyrus Thomas.  The Miller/James combo greatly boosts our offensive potency while significantly bolstering our defensive rebounding.  James/Thomas provides a massive boost to our latent transition game, rebounding and defensive pressure/endurance.