Avery Bradley has a HORRIBLE contract - what was Ainge thinking?

[jyyzzoel]

A lot of people are trying to justify Avery's contract of 8 million per year for 4 years by saying that the salary cap is increasing...  So I've tried to find a way to justify such a contract by looking at every method available of measuring a players effectiveness on the court.

I understand that Avery Bradley was voted onto the NBA's All-Defensive second team in 2012-13.  I also understand that he is scoring 14 points per game.  So the first argument would be that we have a lockdown defender who can do a fair job scoring the ball.

Using that argument I would say the contract is justifiable.

However EVERY metric that measures a players overall effectiveness while on the floor SCREAMS that he isn't just an average shooting guard in the league, but a BELOW average shooting guard in the league.

If you prefer:

John Hollinger's PER
Avery has a per of 11.3 at the moment.  I believe the highest his per has every been his entire career is 13.  An average nba player has a per of 15.  Stacking his 11.3 per against only the other shooting guards in the league, and then only those shooting guards who average at least 25 mins per game - he is ranked 39th:  http://www.draftexpress.com/stats.php?sort=&q=usage&league=NBA&year=2015&per=pergame&min=25&pos=SG&qual=all

WS/40
He is ranked 41st among other shooting guards who play at least 25 mins per game.

John Hollinger's recent metric VA
VA: Value Added - the estimated number of points a player adds to a team’s season total above what a 'replacement player' (for instance, the 12th man on the roster) would produce.
Avery's VA is 1.5 - over an entire season.  Out of all 334 players in the entire league this year, he is ranked 240th!  So it's saying he's in the worst 28% of all the players in the league in this category. http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/sort/VORP/page/5

Hollinger's other metric EWA
This metric gives the estimated number of wins a player adds to a team’s season total above what a 'replacement player' would produce.
 Avery's EWA is only 0.1.  He is tied for 227th out of 334.  Meaning he is in the lowest 32% of the league.

Wages of Wins/ Boxscore Geeks
These guys have many different methods of measuring a player effectiveness.   

I like ADJP48.  All you need to know is that after everything is adjusted the value for an average nba player, in comparison to the rest of the players of his position is 0.100)  Avery's is .041. so take the average nba shooting guard from this season - just an average one not a good one or great one, and decrease his effectiveness by 59% and you have avery.

If you don't like that metric, pick and choose any one you want, and Avery will be far down the bottom:  http://www.boxscoregeeks.com/players?direction=asc&minimum=true&positions%5B%5D=SG&sort=per48_position_adj_prod

According to ESPN Avery is the 87th highest paid player in the NBA this season. That puts him in the top 22% of all player earnings in the league.  http://espn.go.com/nba/salaries/_/page/3

If the NBA's new minimum contract went up from $507,336 and then after the salary cap rises majorly in the coming seasons the minimum contract went to at least 3 million dollars for any player to just and warm the bench, I could look at all of the data and somehow justify Avery's contract.

I could list all the shooting guards (who aren't on their rookie contracts) who have been as effective overall as Avery has this season, and show you what they're all getting paid, but it would hurt.

Someone's going to say that Avery has potential, but look in the metrics of his past seasons - even the best of them isn't a big improvement from where he is right now - and he's 24 years old. NBA players on average peak at 25.  He's basically at his peak.

I used to be a major, MAJOR Avery Bradley fan.  I want to like this contract.  If anyone can please explain how someone who, by EVERY metric available, is said to be not a very effective NBA player can be paid basically 8 million dollars a year for the next 4 years, and have it be a FAIR and REASONABLE contract, I would love it.

Did Danny Ainge get robbed? Please tell me it wasn't that bad...

[BballTim]

  FWIW, I don't think there's much of a point in listing multiple ways Hollinger ranks him. It's probably just the same or very similar data being repackaged in different ways. Some of the win shares are based on PER as well.

[obnoxiousmime]

It's funny because Hollinger now works for the Grizzlies and was there when they dealt for Courtney Lee who is now starting and playing well for them. I wonder what would have happened if we dealt Bradley instead. Is there really a big enough drop off between the two to justify the difference in salary?

Lee would have been signed for 2 years (including this one) for 11 million. Bradley is signed for 4 years, 36 million. I think I'd rather have the Lee deal.

It's true when people say that Bradley's deal will not look onerous when the cap rises. However, it's possible that that money could have gone to a different player whose deal would have ALSO looked good when the cap rises. My main concern is that the deal may be hard to move if sometime in the next 4 years the Celtics need the flexibility to do some other deal. Bradley doesn't have the greatest health record and that could always endanger his contract's moveability. 

Also, let's just admit that so far Bradley has not improved from last season. The original rationale was that we were paying for further improvement since "he's only 23!" Obviously all players will improve somewhat from 23-27 due to experience, but will he improve significantly?

Let's say in the next year a star becomes available - Will Bradley's deal's possible inclusion be:
A) A major hindrance.
B) A minor hindrance.
C) Even value.
D) A positive asset.

Right now I think the answer is B to A.

[Eddie20]

Try reeling off 40 shooting guards that are better than him.

At the same age Dumars had a PER of 13.7 and a career PER of 15.3. Dumars, similarly, was a player that would score offensively, but wouldn't rack up assists and rebounds. On the defensive end, like Bradle, he would play great defense, but wouldn't gamble so his steals were always low.

[knuckleballer]

How about the fact that he just turned 24, we have him locked up for four years, and the salary cap is about to sky rocket...  http://grantland.com/the-triangle/nbas-new-tv-deal-blow-up-the-salary-cap/

[jyyzzoel]

How about the fact that he just turned 24, we have him locked up for four years, and the salary cap is about to sky rocket...  http://grantland.com/the-triangle/nbas-new-tv-deal-blow-up-the-salary-cap/

obviously didn't read the post.

[clover]

Try reeling off 40 shooting guards that are better than him.

At the same age Dumars had a PER of 13.7 and a career PER of 15.3. Dumars, similarly, was a player that would score offensively, but wouldn't rack up assists and rebounds. On the defensive end, like Bradle, he would play great defense, but wouldn't gamble so his steals were always low.

Even if there were 40 SGs better than him, that would put him in the top tier of bench rotation SGs, without accounting for his relative youth. And, while his contract is a little high for such a, say, 7-8th man now, not only is the clock just starting to tick on future contracts eclipsing his, as noted, that usual dynamic is going to be juiced by an exceptional leap in new contract values.

Bradley has his limits as a player (handle, IQ, passing, size) but his contract is perfectly adequate--especially as a starting SG placeholder for young Mr. Young. 

[mctyson]

Bradley's is like Jeff Green's contract.  When Green signed his, this whole board flipped out.  Now you don't hear a peep about Green being overpaid.

It's better to lock these guys in now for a multiple years then to try and bring in a replacement Free Agent, who you know more times than not you are definitely overpaying for.

[mctyson]

Try reeling off 40 shooting guards that are better than him.

At the same age Dumars had a PER of 13.7 and a career PER of 15.3. Dumars, similarly, was a player that would score offensively, but wouldn't rack up assists and rebounds. On the defensive end, like Bradle, he would play great defense, but wouldn't gamble so his steals were always low.

Even if there were 40 SGs better than him, that would put him in the top tier of bench rotation SGs, without accounting for his relative youth. And, while his contract is a little high for such a, say, 7-8th man now, not only is the clock just starting to tick on future contracts eclipsing his, as noted, that usual dynamic is going to be juiced by an exceptional leap in new contract values.

Bradley has his limits as a player (handle, IQ, passing, size) but his contract is perfectly adequate--especially as a starting SG placeholder for young Mr. Young. 

And as noted here, none of Hollinger's stats really account for defense. 

[knuckleballer]

How about the fact that he just turned 24, we have him locked up for four years, and the salary cap is about to sky rocket...  http://grantland.com/the-triangle/nbas-new-tv-deal-blow-up-the-salary-cap/

obviously didn't read the post.

Well, that is the answer to your question of what was Ainge thinking.  He's young, improving, and his contract will not be burdensome as the cap rises as much as projected.  It was smarter to lock up an asset rather than let him walk away.

[Vermont Green]

Many times when a player signs a big contract, you look at the first few years and say it was Ok but then the last few years, the player declines and the number looks bad.  That is especially true in baseball but also happens plenty in basketball.

In the case of this contract for Bradley, I can see how you can criticize the first 17 games of the contract and turn your nose up at his production as part of a bad team.  I think Bradley does still have upside though and will improve not only this year but also over the entire 4 years.  You never know of course, but I think this will be a contract that looks just fine in year 3 and 4.

It is hard to argue that on paper it looks like we would be better off having Courtney Lee than Bradley based on the first 17 games but Lee has the luxury of playing on a good team.  He did not do all that well when he had his chance to play on a bad Celtics team.  Swapping Lee and Bradley for the rest of the season would not make that much difference for either team in my opinion.  And just because Memphis has Lee on a good contract does not mean Bradley's is a bad contract.

My overall opinion of Bradley is that he has improved tremendously since his rookie year and is still very young.  Clearly some people feel he is done improving or will improve at a much slower pace.  No one can know of course how much more he will improve but I don't see any reason not to expect more improvement.  He has a "you can't teach that" stroke and can't teach defense.  That is a pretty good base to build a player on.

[GreenWarrior]

Try reeling off 40 shooting guards that are better than him.

just because the field isn't good doesn't mean he's worth this contract.

I personally feel all the things wrong with AB get glossed over because he takes and makes a lot of unnecessary difficult shots.

[GreenWarrior]

Bradley's is like Jeff Green's contract.  When Green signed his, this whole board flipped out.  Now you don't hear a peep about Green being overpaid.

It's better to lock these guys in now for a multiple years then to try and bring in a replacement Free Agent, who you know more times than not you are definitely overpaying for.

I think people upset about green and his contract have just tired, complaining about it...he's still not worth it.

[hwangjini_1]

nice research, but to what end? even if we take all your points as gospel, i am unsure of the ultimate point of it all. simply to get angry because bradley makes 8 million instead of 4 or 5 million?

bradley's contract is not a team killer and he does produce on offense and defense. is he overpaid? perhaps, though in 3 years lets revisit that thought. besides, who was it that the celtics could not sign because of this contract? what lost opportunity was there?

are we next to channel our outrage and indignation towards thornton? he makes more than bradley and is not as good a player. ooooohhh....the inhumanity!

then who is next in this hit parade of rage....wallace? green?

[Chris22]

Ainge should have let Bradley walk.

He's too small to play the two, and he can't handle well enough to play the point.