The Sacramento Kings are finalizing a buyout with Jimmer Fredette

[Bosstown]

Please NO.

We have a ton of gaurds already.

He's short.

All he would be is another "fan identification" player aka Brian Scalabrine.

[saltlover]

Can we claim him off waivers or is salary too much

We can claim him off waivers using part of our Pierce trade exception, but doing so would put the Celtics about $1.5 million over the tax.  In addition to the extra salary you would pay Fredette just to be on the team for two months before become a free agent, it would also cost the C's about $2.25 million in luxury tax payments, as well as making them ineligible to receive a portion of the luxury tax paid by other teams (which will probably be $2-3 million in itself).  Considering how hard the Celtics worked to get under the luxury tax, claiming Jimmer and going back over the tax would be a total waste.

[LooseCannon]

Sometimes players just doesn't workout in certain cities under certain coaches/organizations because the schemes don't fit the player or the atmosphere & players around the player doesn't fit cohesively.

I'd say Jimmer Fredette is a bad fit for Boston under Brad Stevens because of his defensive deficiencies.  MarShon Brooks didn't play much for the Celtics.  I don't think the Celtics will be acquiring scorers who can't defend.

[saltlover]

Sometimes players just doesn't workout in certain cities under certain coaches/organizations because the schemes don't fit the player or the atmosphere & players around the player doesn't fit cohesively.

I'd say Jimmer Fredette is a bad fit for Boston under Brad Stevens because of his defensive deficiencies.  MarShon Brooks didn't play much for the Celtics.  I don't think the Celtics will be acquiring scorers who can't defend.

MarShon Brooks didn't play because he wasn't in the future plans, and he had no real trade value around the league.  If Jimmer is brought in, I'd assume the Celtics at least have the option to bring him back next year, if it isn't guaranteed in the contract.  Once you know a guy may or will be around, it makes a lot more sense to play him despite his deficiencies.

[JumpingJudkins]

The Celtics need -- now and in the future -- some knockdown 3-point shooters. They don't have any right now, and Jimmer would make sense. That's his one marketable skill.

[goCeltics]

sign him with wants left of the mle(~2.4 mill), pro rated they should still be under the tax, he average 25pts per 48 at 58% ts, he would be the best scorer on this team.

Come on danny recuirt!

[LooseCannon]

Sometimes players just doesn't workout in certain cities under certain coaches/organizations because the schemes don't fit the player or the atmosphere & players around the player doesn't fit cohesively.

I'd say Jimmer Fredette is a bad fit for Boston under Brad Stevens because of his defensive deficiencies.  MarShon Brooks didn't play much for the Celtics.  I don't think the Celtics will be acquiring scorers who can't defend.

MarShon Brooks didn't play because he wasn't in the future plans, and he had no real trade value around the league.  If Jimmer is brought in, I'd assume the Celtics at least have the option to bring him back next year, if it isn't guaranteed in the contract.  Once you know a guy may or will be around, it makes a lot more sense to play him despite his deficiencies.

MarShon Brooks and Jimmer Fredette are both the type of player who shouldn't be in the team's future plans.

Convince me that Fredette can be a better defender than Eddie House and I might change my mind about him.

[Finkelskyhook]

If the Cs have the wiggle room I would love for them to grab him in a buy low move. If not I to see him join a team that will develop him and use him for what he is good at. The Bulls could be an interesting fit, Thibs could work to hide him on D,

Thibs would have him playing D.

[the_Bird]

good lord.  will the fascination for Adam Morrison 2.0 never end?  kid had a great college career that isn't translating to the pro game.  just move on.

he's on his rookie deal and being bought out.  he couldn't be traded for a hill of beans.  he has an exremely limited skill set that requires better players on the floor with him to utilize that skillset.  that ought to be a clue that this kid isn't going to worth even the vet min to look at him.

He's hitting 50% of his 3's this year after shooting 42% last year.  Even though he's got a very limited skillset, that's a helluva skillset to have - especially given the lack of consistent outside shooters the C's currently have. 

I mean, serious, who's our best long-range shooter today?  AB and Green are OK, but they're hitting 35% from deep.  Bayless has been allright for his career, not so great this year.  They aren't *shooters*, per se.  KO will get better, no doubt, and Sully's at least working on being a stretch-guy...  but right now, there isn't anyone on the roster that you'd call an above-average three-point threat.

I'm certainly not a huge Jimmer fan, but I can see how he would potentially fit in Boston.  Cost should be minimal.  And we don't really have a surplus of guards anymore.   

[kozlodoev]

All he would be is another "fan identification" player aka Brian Scalabrine.

Didn't realize that that most fans were 6'10, 240 lbs redheads. Or former PAC-10 first-teamers.

[the_Bird]

good lord.  will the fascination for Adam Morrison 2.0 never end?  kid had a great college career that isn't translating to the pro game.  just move on.

He is shooting 50% from 3.  He possesses an elite NBA skill, which sets him apart from Morrison.

Good, so he'll be Eddie House and not Adam Morrisson. Still hardly something to be extatic about.

Eddie Mansion was a deeply flawed player that nonetheless was able to kick around the league for eleven seasons and was a not-insignificant part of the C's title.  And, his career 3-pt% was less than Jimmer's has been (and Jimmer's gotten better each year).

At this point, what's to lose?  Afraid on taking minutes away from Phil Pressy?

[kozlodoev]

At this point, what's to lose?  Afraid on taking minutes away from Phil Pressy?

Eddie House was easy to get and relatively replaceable. And at this point, going over the luxury tax for a one-third-year rental of a fringe player in a meaningless season is just silly.

[LooseCannon]

good lord.  will the fascination for Adam Morrison 2.0 never end?  kid had a great college career that isn't translating to the pro game.  just move on.

He is shooting 50% from 3.  He possesses an elite NBA skill, which sets him apart from Morrison.

Good, so he'll be Eddie House and not Adam Morrisson. Still hardly something to be extatic about.

Eddie Mansion was a deeply flawed player that nonetheless was able to kick around the league for eleven seasons and was a not-insignificant part of the C's title.  And, his career 3-pt% was less than Jimmer's has been (and Jimmer's gotten better each year).

At this point, what's to lose?  Afraid on taking minutes away from Phil Pressy?

If I bothered to research it, I could probably come up with five D-League guards who I would rather take a flyer on than Jimmer.

[the_Bird]

At this point, what's to lose?  Afraid on taking minutes away from Phil Pressy?

Eddie House was easy to get and relatively replaceable. And at this point, going over the luxury tax for a one-third-year rental of a fringe player in a meaningless season is just silly.

...  well, you'd sign him to a pro-rated contract, at the vet minimum, for the rest of the season.  You wouldn't put in a waiver claim.  Given the absolute dearth of trade offers the Kings received, I don't see how Jimmer would be able to command any more than that.  Ideally, you'd get him to agree to a team-option for next season, as well.

I'm almost certain we've got enough room under the lux tax to do that.

[saltlover]

Sometimes players just doesn't workout in certain cities under certain coaches/organizations because the schemes don't fit the player or the atmosphere & players around the player doesn't fit cohesively.

I'd say Jimmer Fredette is a bad fit for Boston under Brad Stevens because of his defensive deficiencies.  MarShon Brooks didn't play much for the Celtics.  I don't think the Celtics will be acquiring scorers who can't defend.

MarShon Brooks didn't play because he wasn't in the future plans, and he had no real trade value around the league.  If Jimmer is brought in, I'd assume the Celtics at least have the option to bring him back next year, if it isn't guaranteed in the contract.  Once you know a guy may or will be around, it makes a lot more sense to play him despite his deficiencies.

MarShon Brooks and Jimmer Fredette are both the type of player who shouldn't be in the team's future plans.

Convince me that Fredette can be a better defender than Eddie House and I might change my mind about him.

Who cares if he's a better defender?  We're 26th in Offensive Rating this year and 28th in 3-point shooting.  Our defense is 15th -- while that's not championship defense, it's not what's holding us back.

You can't build a team around 15 complete players -- those players cost too much money.  You need some cheap specialists who compliment each other to go around 2-3 expensive, complete players.  If you can get a specialist like Jimmer, who's bordering on elite when it comes to perimeter scoring, for a bargain that doesn't cost you anything other than an already empty roster spot and the money you have left under the luxury tax line, you do it, and you try to lock him up for a few years.  At some point in the next 3-4 seasons, the Celtics will hopefully be back in contention, and then they'll be scrambling around to get a backcourt scorer, costing themselves a couple of 2nd round picks.  Might as well take care of the problem now and save the picks for some other need (probably the always needed veteran post presence).

If we don't get him, we don't get him, and life moves on.  But I think the Celtics, at least the current version, would be better off with him than without.  He can have Bayless' minutes, please and thank you.