Overpaid//bound-to-screw-up/potentially-or-outright bad moves this offseason?

[Eja117]

Because the QO was like 6mill.  They should have given him that and in the off chance he does well offer him more than other teams and he'd stay. No reason to overpay him by a lot with nobody bidding against us

[BCelts]

DeAndre Jordan -- He's almost completely unproven.  4 years, $43 million is pretty steep

Caron Butler -- Almost 32 years old, coming off two injury-plagued seasons.  3 years, $24 million. 

***

The big centers -- Tyson Chandler, and ultimately, Nene are going to be way overpaid.

The first two are exactly my thoughts.  These guys better reach their remaining potential or the Clippers are locked in salary cap hell for the next few years.  Reminds me of Orlando a few years ago; up-and-still-coming Dwight Howard and Jameer Nelson (who never up and came), they signed Lewis and Turkgulu to immense deals for their potential.  Is this next for the Clippers? 

I mildly disagree about the big men from an economic perspective.  They are not overpaid if they are a scarce resource you need.  Chandler's defense will help erase Amare's failings, which makes his deal "worth it."  Not as sure about Nene yet.

[PosImpos]

Because the QO was like 6mill.  They should have given him that and in the off chance he does well offer him more than other teams and he'd stay. No reason to overpay him by a lot with nobody bidding against us

we don't know that there wasn't anybody bidding against us.  if giving him a few million more for this year meant that we were sure to keep him without any issues, im fine with that (as long as wyc is okay paying the lux. tax dollars).

the deal has no effect on our cap flexibility moving forward at all.  essentially the only person taking the hit here is wyc, and if he's willing, then so be it.  giving green extra salary could also make it easier to match salaries if we trade him later in the season.

[BCelts]

Because the QO was like 6mill.  They should have given him that and in the off chance he does well offer him more than other teams and he'd stay. No reason to overpay him by a lot with nobody bidding against us

I disagree.  This is a deal that only helps in the long term when trading next year.  You can either eliminate salary by letting Green walk next year or you can include him in a sign and trade at a higher number if he has a good year when the Celtics try to completely re-tool.  This is a good deal for the options it gives us.

[Inside-Out]

I think the big money signings will all be regrets.  Chandler isn't worth the money he'll be paid, especially in NY.  His defense won't matter if nobody else plays D with him, and offensively he's not strong enough to warrant that paycheck.

BBD...hahahahahahahaha.

But I think there are more regrets on things not signed.  I'm pretty high on Jeff Green, and would have liked to see him get locked in to a reasonable long-term deal starting a bit over the midlevel.  In my mind, Danny had a chance to lock in talent long term for reasonable, like he did with Rondo.  JG will be an NBA player for the next 4-5 years, after all.

[Chris]

Because the QO was like 6mill.  They should have given him that and in the off chance he does well offer him more than other teams and he'd stay. No reason to overpay him by a lot with nobody bidding against us

I disagree.  This is a deal that only helps in the long term when trading next year.  You can either eliminate salary by letting Green walk next year or you can include him in a sign and trade at a higher number if he has a good year when the Celtics try to completely re-tool.  This is a good deal for the options it gives us.

The other thing this does, is keep the door open to trade Green before the deadline this year.

Had he been signed for the QO, there is a good chance he would veto any trade, because it would mean he would be giving up his bird rights, and unless the team he was traded to was under the cap, the most he could sign for as a starting salary (using non-bird rights) would be about $7.2 million per year.  However, with the $9 million salary this year, it means he could be traded, and could then resign (or be sign and traded) by the team that trades for him at a salary starting at $10.8 million, which will be much closer (or potentially higher) than what he will be looking for.

This should be the difference between him vetoing a trade, or not, and it also may make more teams more willing to trade for him, since they know they will have a much better chance of resigning him.

[Cman]

Because the QO was like 6mill.  They should have given him that and in the off chance he does well offer him more than other teams and he'd stay. No reason to overpay him by a lot with nobody bidding against us

I disagree.  This is a deal that only helps in the long term when trading next year.  You can either eliminate salary by letting Green walk next year or you can include him in a sign and trade at a higher number if he has a good year when the Celtics try to completely re-tool.  This is a good deal for the options it gives us.

The other thing this does, is keep the door open to trade Green before the deadline this year.

Had he been signed for the QO, there is a good chance he would veto any trade, because it would mean he would be giving up his bird rights, and unless the team he was traded to was under the cap, the most he could sign for as a starting salary (using non-bird rights) would be about $7.2 million per year.  However, with the $9 million salary this year, it means he could be traded, and could then resign (or be sign and traded) by the team that trades for him at a salary starting at $10.8 million, which will be much closer (or potentially higher) than what he will be looking for.

This should be the difference between him vetoing a trade, or not, and it also may make more teams more willing to trade for him, since they know they will have a much better chance of resigning him.

Agree with all points -- moreover, I believe under the new CBA given Green's $9M salary, he can be traded at the deadline (this year) for a player making a salry of 150% + $100k of his salary (i.e.: a player making $13.6M).  It just gives a lot more flexibility to the Cs in terms of what they can do this year, and only "hurts" Wyc.

[Chris]

Because the QO was like 6mill.  They should have given him that and in the off chance he does well offer him more than other teams and he'd stay. No reason to overpay him by a lot with nobody bidding against us

I disagree.  This is a deal that only helps in the long term when trading next year.  You can either eliminate salary by letting Green walk next year or you can include him in a sign and trade at a higher number if he has a good year when the Celtics try to completely re-tool.  This is a good deal for the options it gives us.

The other thing this does, is keep the door open to trade Green before the deadline this year.

Had he been signed for the QO, there is a good chance he would veto any trade, because it would mean he would be giving up his bird rights, and unless the team he was traded to was under the cap, the most he could sign for as a starting salary (using non-bird rights) would be about $7.2 million per year.  However, with the $9 million salary this year, it means he could be traded, and could then resign (or be sign and traded) by the team that trades for him at a salary starting at $10.8 million, which will be much closer (or potentially higher) than what he will be looking for.

This should be the difference between him vetoing a trade, or not, and it also may make more teams more willing to trade for him, since they know they will have a much better chance of resigning him.

Agree with all points -- moreover, I believe under the new CBA given Green's $9M salary, he can be traded at the deadline (this year) for a player making a salry of 150% + $100k of his salary (i.e.: a player making $13.6M).  It just gives a lot more flexibility to the Cs in terms of what they can do this year, and only "hurts" Wyc.

Unfortunately, that is not the case.  Unless the C's get under the luxury tax line, they can only take back 125% of the salary they are sending out.

[BCelts]

Because the QO was like 6mill.  They should have given him that and in the off chance he does well offer him more than other teams and he'd stay. No reason to overpay him by a lot with nobody bidding against us

I disagree.  This is a deal that only helps in the long term when trading next year.  You can either eliminate salary by letting Green walk next year or you can include him in a sign and trade at a higher number if he has a good year when the Celtics try to completely re-tool.  This is a good deal for the options it gives us.

The other thing this does, is keep the door open to trade Green before the deadline this year.

Had he been signed for the QO, there is a good chance he would veto any trade, because it would mean he would be giving up his bird rights, and unless the team he was traded to was under the cap, the most he could sign for as a starting salary (using non-bird rights) would be about $7.2 million per year.  However, with the $9 million salary this year, it means he could be traded, and could then resign (or be sign and traded) by the team that trades for him at a salary starting at $10.8 million, which will be much closer (or potentially higher) than what he will be looking for.

This should be the difference between him vetoing a trade, or not, and it also may make more teams more willing to trade for him, since they know they will have a much better chance of resigning him.

Agree with all points -- moreover, I believe under the new CBA given Green's $9M salary, he can be traded at the deadline (this year) for a player making a salry of 150% + $100k of his salary (i.e.: a player making $13.6M).  It just gives a lot more flexibility to the Cs in terms of what they can do this year, and only "hurts" Wyc.

Unfortunately, that is not the case.  Unless the C's get under the luxury tax line, they can only take back 125% of the salary they are sending out.

Still, 125% of 9M is 11.25.  While not a max player, there are a lot of options out there at the trade deadline for that money.

[Chris]

Because the QO was like 6mill.  They should have given him that and in the off chance he does well offer him more than other teams and he'd stay. No reason to overpay him by a lot with nobody bidding against us

I disagree.  This is a deal that only helps in the long term when trading next year.  You can either eliminate salary by letting Green walk next year or you can include him in a sign and trade at a higher number if he has a good year when the Celtics try to completely re-tool.  This is a good deal for the options it gives us.

The other thing this does, is keep the door open to trade Green before the deadline this year.

Had he been signed for the QO, there is a good chance he would veto any trade, because it would mean he would be giving up his bird rights, and unless the team he was traded to was under the cap, the most he could sign for as a starting salary (using non-bird rights) would be about $7.2 million per year.  However, with the $9 million salary this year, it means he could be traded, and could then resign (or be sign and traded) by the team that trades for him at a salary starting at $10.8 million, which will be much closer (or potentially higher) than what he will be looking for.

This should be the difference between him vetoing a trade, or not, and it also may make more teams more willing to trade for him, since they know they will have a much better chance of resigning him.

Agree with all points -- moreover, I believe under the new CBA given Green's $9M salary, he can be traded at the deadline (this year) for a player making a salry of 150% + $100k of his salary (i.e.: a player making $13.6M).  It just gives a lot more flexibility to the Cs in terms of what they can do this year, and only "hurts" Wyc.

Unfortunately, that is not the case.  Unless the C's get under the luxury tax line, they can only take back 125% of the salary they are sending out.

Still, 125% of 9M is 11.25.  While not a max player, there are a lot of options out there at the trade deadline for that money.

Oh, absolutely.

Of course, the best deal would just be that Green suddenly turns into a really good player this season.

[ChampKind]

Has there been a single good signing/contract over $5 million?

I don't think so. I can't think of any.

West with the Pacers. $10m/per is pricey for a 31 year old coming off an ACL tear, but it's just a two-year contract and it fills a need that the Pacers desperately needed to fill (both PF and post scoring). I like the way that Indiana looks now, with Collison/Hill/George/Granger/West/Hansbrough/Hibbert rounding out the immediate rotation. If I still lived there I'd actually re-up my season tickets for that.

[colincb]

I win, I win!!!

GSW sign Kwame for $7 million, 1 year.  I'd take Chris Wilcox over Kwame Brown any day of the week for the same number, except we paid less than half of that.

I think the Pacers-West deal was a good one BTW.

[LooseCannon]

Has there been a single good signing/contract over $5 million?

I don't think so. I can't think of any.

West with the Pacers. $10m/per is pricey for a 31 year old coming off an ACL tear, but it's just a two-year contract and it fills a need that the Pacers desperately needed to fill (both PF and post scoring). I like the way that Indiana looks now, with Collison/Hill/George/Granger/West/Hansbrough/Hibbert rounding out the immediate rotation. If I still lived there I'd actually re-up my season tickets for that.

Yeah, if West wants to play with a contender, I feel like the Pacers are on more certain ground beyond this year (but I trust in Ainge to have as good of a chance as any GM with the same assets and location to build a team).

[xmuscularghandix]

Jeff Green at 9mill

Sasha Pavlovich at something

Dooling over Delonte

[Change]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PP4RT-vv-o

Classic!