If Avery Bradley asked for 5 mil for 4 years, would you do it?

[D.o.s.]

On the other hand, you do have to pay somebody.

[Mr October]

On the other hand, you do have to pay somebody.

I voted to wait until the offseason. Will the Celtics draft a guard? Exum, wiggins and Smart make Bradley expendable.

Will the Celtics trade some picks for a star player? If the celtics make a trade for say melo, and get capped out, resigning Bradley looks more appealing.

It's gonna be a fun draft, and hopefully a good summer. 

[mmmmm]

Not sure folks here really understand what the market comps are for a player like Bradley.

I would not be surprised if he gets an offer north of 7M per.  As Crimson points out, that's kind of the going rate for that kind of player.

Now, I'm not sure I'd want the Celtics in their position to pay that.  'Kinda depends on how other things shake out.

For example, let's say we get Embiid out of the lottery.  That means we aren't in need of shelling out big bucks on the 5 (for example, taking on Larry Sander's contract in trade).

On the other hand, let's say we end up drafting a stud SG like Wiggins.  In that case, I doubt we resign Bradley.

Numerous other events could totally change the picture.  I would not be surprised if we see at least one major trade before we have the answer to whether Danny will resign Bradley or not.

Keep in mind that, at the moment, we will enter the summer with only Chris Johnson & Babb as SGs under contract.

So if we don't pick up one in the draft, that somewhat increases Bradley's leverage.

[LooseCannon]

If Bradley asked for four years at $5m/year, I would counter-offer $6m/year for three years if he wasn't willing to have the fourth year partially guaranteed.

[PhoSita]

Not sure folks here really understand what the market comps are for a player like Bradley.

I would not be surprised if he gets an offer north of 7M per.  As Crimson points out, that's kind of the going rate for that kind of player.

Can you provide some examples?

Marcus Thornton got $8 million per a few years back, but that was a deal from the previous CBA.  I'm pretty sure that players like AB (tweener guard, significant injury history, spotty track record as a scorer, not a playmaker) are not commanding big salary these days.

In any case, I'd rather roll with Johnson at SG for next season than pay Avery more than the Full MLE.  We could probably keep Bayless for half the MLE (2.5 per), and while he's not the defender Avery is, he's a better playmaker, and comparable offensively.

On the other hand, you do have to pay somebody.

The Sixers beg to differ.  No sense in paying somebody just to pay somebody.

My feeling with Avery is he is thoroughly replaceable.  Unless securing him is the finishing touch on the rebuild, I don't really see the sense in it.  I'm not confident that he would be easily moved if he were making over 5 million a season.

[azzenfrost]

Yes. With years 2 and 3 as team options. Then year 4 as player option. Only year 1 has guaranteed money. Years 2, 3 and 4 tied to number of games played in case he gets injured.

[LooseCannon]

You can't have more than one option year in a contract, except for rookie scale contracts.

[LooseCannon]

Not sure folks here really understand what the market comps are for a player like Bradley.

I would not be surprised if he gets an offer north of 7M per.  As Crimson points out, that's kind of the going rate for that kind of player.

Can you provide some examples?

If you are looking at shooting guards who got contracts last off-season:
Kevin Martin - 4 years (including player option), starting at $6.5m
Monta Ellis - 3 years (including player option), starting at $8m
Gerald Henderson - 3 years (including player option), starting at $6m

I know some people disagree with me, but I would rather have Avery Bradley starting at SG rather than Henderson.  It's more controversial that I would take Bradley over Ellis.  A lot of people here who think Martin is better than Bradley would probably prefer Bradley because he is younger with upside (and I think you are just flat-out wrong and almost not worth debating with if you think that Bradley has plateaued and there is no way he gets better).

Henderson was also a restricted free agent supposedly looking for more and reportedly gave up a million per year to get that third year to be a player option.

I think the options regarding Bradley look something this:
lowball fully guaranteed four-year deal
four years for more money, but the fourth year guaranteed for no more than $1m (or a team option)
three years
three years for more money with a team option for the third year
three years for less money with a player option for the third year

[D.o.s.]

LC, per usual, nailed the four realistic options re: Bradley and his contract. Even if I'd rather have Ellis as the off-the-bench-guard than Bradley.

On the other hand, you do have to pay somebody.

The Sixers beg to differ.  No sense in paying somebody just to pay somebody.

My feeling with Avery is he is thoroughly replaceable.  Unless securing him is the finishing touch on the rebuild, I don't really see the sense in it.  I'm not confident that he would be easily moved if he were making over 5 million a season.

I mean, to hit the salary floor.

[CelticG1]

Not sure folks here really understand what the market comps are for a player like Bradley.

I would not be surprised if he gets an offer north of 7M per.  As Crimson points out, that's kind of the going rate for that kind of player.

Can you provide some examples?

If you are looking at shooting guards who got contracts last off-season:
Kevin Martin - 4 years (including player option), starting at $6.5m
Monta Ellis - 3 years (including player option), starting at $8m
Gerald Henderson - 3 years (including player option), starting at $6m

I know some people disagree with me, but I would rather have Avery Bradley starting at SG rather than Henderson.  It's more controversial that I would take Bradley over Ellis.  A lot of people here who think Martin is better than Bradley would probably prefer Bradley because he is younger with upside (and I think you are just flat-out wrong and almost not worth debating with if you think that Bradley has plateaued and there is no way he gets better).

Henderson was also a restricted free agent supposedly looking for more and reportedly gave up a million per year to get that third year to be a player option.

I think the options regarding Bradley look something this:
lowball fully guaranteed four-year deal
four years for more money, but the fourth year guaranteed for no more than $1m (or a team option)
three years
three years for more money with a team option for the third year
three years for less money with a player option for the third year

I think the monta ellis and  kevin martin comps are ridculous. Those guys are proven nba players ho have pretty much been the best players on their respectiv teams for consecutive years with much less injury history.

Its undeterminable if Bradley is a bust yet or not.

Has he had one healthy season? Do you not think this is much of a factor?

I think this season alone brought his stock way down.

Comps that ive seen closer to him would be Tony Allen.

[kozlodoev]

I think the monta ellis and  kevin martin comps are ridculous. Those guys are proven nba players ho have pretty much been the best players on their respectiv teams for consecutive years with much less injury history.

You surely haven't followed them very closely.

Kevin Martin has been in the league for 10+ seasons and has played in 80 games twice (never in the full 82). Actually, he's aveaged about 57 games a season (excluding the lockout-shortened one from tha count, where he played only 40 games, too).

Monta Ellis is pretty much the same story: he has played 82 games once, and 80 games once; 9+ seasons, average of 57 games per full season.

[Moranis]

He is certainly worth that contract to somebody, I'm just not sure he is worth it to the Celtics at this point.  He is a very solid 3rd guard for a team, which puts his value at 5-6 million a year, but Boston is not a team that needs 3rd guard type players.  Thus the hesitation.

[PhoSita]

Not sure folks here really understand what the market comps are for a player like Bradley.

I would not be surprised if he gets an offer north of 7M per.  As Crimson points out, that's kind of the going rate for that kind of player.

Can you provide some examples?

If you are looking at shooting guards who got contracts last off-season:
Kevin Martin - 4 years (including player option), starting at $6.5m
Monta Ellis - 3 years (including player option), starting at $8m
Gerald Henderson - 3 years (including player option), starting at $6m

K-Mart and Ellis are far superior to Bradley, so those don't seem like good comps to me.

Henderson is the best comp I've seen.  He's also fairly injury prone, and has a suspect outside shot.  Henderson is significantly bigger than Bradley, however.

I could see another team giving Bradley 5 or 6 million a year.  I don't think it makes sense for the Celtics to sign him for more than 4 a year, however.  Like I said, he's replaceable.  Also, I really want the Celtics to avoid signing multi-year "luxury" contracts to roleplayers, so we don't end up stuck with guys we can't move -- e.g. Bass.

[wdleehi]

No.



The new tax system has put in a "hard cap"


A player like AB is going to be squeezed.  A lot of the former "MLE" players are going to be squeezed.


It is these types of deals built up within a teams salary structure that will cause issues.  Teams would be wise to leave as much space under the "tax" level to pay to keep stars (or have the room to get them later)   Don't be the team that has to trade a star just to stay under the tax.   (see the Thunder and Harden)


I would hope they offer a 4 year deal closer to 12 million or a 2 year deal at 8 million. 

[PhoSita]

No.



The new tax system has put in a "hard cap"


A player like AB is going to be squeezed.  A lot of the former "MLE" players are going to be squeezed.


It is these types of deals built up within a teams salary structure that will cause issues.  Teams would be wise to leave as much space under the "tax" level to pay to keep stars (or have the room to get them later)   Don't be the team that has to trade a star just to stay under the tax.   (see the Thunder and Harden)


I would hope they offer a 4 year deal closer to 12 million or a 2 year deal at 8 million.

Spot on.

Teams have to be much more careful about extending themselves to keep role players.