League executive predicts Khris Middleton will receive $15mill/season

[Who]

In addition to that, if you don't acquire players now you'll also be left without good tools other than rookie contracts and draft picks for trade assets.

Isn't that basically the only things all other teams want though? 

Only 3 ways to acquire players: free agents, trades, and draft, so of course if we don't sign free agents we're only left with the other two.

The thing is having cap space make trades so much easier, unless you think Minnesota really wanted Theo Ratliff when the C's got Garnett, or the C's really wanted to get Gerald Wallace and Keith Bogans from the Nets.

It will be much easier to acquire Cousins when the C's only have to send a few draft picks out and a young player or two instead of also having to find $15m in contracts to send back to Sacramento to make the deal work 

As I said, if we spend our cap space this year we'll have it once again next year. So in that regard having another skilled player on roster makes trading away assets that much vital, else you're left naked. That said, as I mentioned, teams have VERY low incentive in trading skilled players at this moment. Chances Cousins gets traded right now are very very slim.

This stands out to me as well. With all the cap space everybody has on the horizon, very few teams are looking to break up their teams and start over. They are hopeful (and rightly so) that they can use the cap space to add to their teams and continue moving forward. Unlike previous seasons when several teams had little to no prospects of adding to their team, now (just about) everybody has reason to believe they can change things without blowing up their team because all this cap space gives them flexibility to make those changes.

I think the trade landscape is much quieter right now than it has usually been over the last 7-10 years ... and I think it will continue to be quieter until after the new cap sets in.

Not dead. Just quieter. Less availability of stars. Less teams breaking up their squads. Less value on the trade market. There will still be some guys available. Just less of them.

So for the short term future, I think that free agency is much more likely to yield talented players than playing the trade market.

[Moranis]

You guys are extremely shortsighted honestly. I'm averse to spending on the wrong guys as anyone around here, but this talk about overpaying or not all is doing is showing very little insight into our cap situation and that of the league in particular going forward.

You guys do realize that the entire league will have a crap load of cap space the following years right? If you don't make a move right now, you'll be left behind because you''ll not be attracting anyone otherwise in the future.

In addition to that, if you don't acquire players now you'll also be left without good tools other than rookie contracts and draft picks for trade assets.

And I love that all you guys are bringing up past blunders with overpaying players, but you guys DO realize that even if we waste ALL our cap space this year, we'll also have a ton of cap space the following free-agency right?

Making a move in this particular free-agency will NOT tie our hands behind our backs going forward. We have a lot of cap flexibility, a lot of team option, a lot of cost controlled players in our roster on short term contracts.

If the decision is to get no one or "over"spend on Middleton this Summer the choice is quite clear, you have to spend on acquiring the talent.

The ONLY saving grace here is that if we don't manage to spend this year, we still have the trade exception at our disposal. But looking around the market, it does seem that teams are going to be a bit averse at trading away talent, so not sure how much good retaining the exception will be. With that being said, I prefer to acquire the player that can be had than hope that a trade happens at some point.

If the C's sign Middleton, who is Boston's #1 guy, who is Boston's #2 guy?  Can you win a title with those players as you 1 and 2?  If the answer is no, then you don't sign Middleton. 

It makes no sense to add role players to a team that lacks top tier talent because you can't win a title without top tier talent, and it is much more difficult to acquire top tier talent if you are over (or near) the cap. 

The simple truth is Middleton doesn't make Boston a title contender and in fact may make the team farther from a title contender by making the team slightly better and taking up cap space.  It just doesn't make sense.  Now if Boston somehow lands a top tier player, adding Middleton makes a lot more sense, but you still don't give a glorified role player 15 million a year (or 11 million if you want to use that fuzzy math).  You can find much greater value much cheaper than that.  The only way you sign Middleton to that sort of contract is if you truly believe he can be a #2 guy on a title team (and I don't think anyone actually believes that).

I guess you missed the part of how we'll regain cap space almost immediately and the value of acquiring tradeable assets, on what will be cost controlled assets going forward compared to the market value in the future years.

I didn't miss anything, but if you have 15 million going to Middleton, who presumably by your answer you agree is not a 1 or 2, then it still limits your options going forward.

In basketball you don't sign role players if you don't have your "stars".  It just doesn't make sense.

[BudweiserCeltic]

You guys are extremely shortsighted honestly. I'm averse to spending on the wrong guys as anyone around here, but this talk about overpaying or not all is doing is showing very little insight into our cap situation and that of the league in particular going forward.

You guys do realize that the entire league will have a crap load of cap space the following years right? If you don't make a move right now, you'll be left behind because you''ll not be attracting anyone otherwise in the future.

In addition to that, if you don't acquire players now you'll also be left without good tools other than rookie contracts and draft picks for trade assets.

And I love that all you guys are bringing up past blunders with overpaying players, but you guys DO realize that even if we waste ALL our cap space this year, we'll also have a ton of cap space the following free-agency right?

Making a move in this particular free-agency will NOT tie our hands behind our backs going forward. We have a lot of cap flexibility, a lot of team option, a lot of cost controlled players in our roster on short term contracts.

If the decision is to get no one or "over"spend on Middleton this Summer the choice is quite clear, you have to spend on acquiring the talent.

The ONLY saving grace here is that if we don't manage to spend this year, we still have the trade exception at our disposal. But looking around the market, it does seem that teams are going to be a bit averse at trading away talent, so not sure how much good retaining the exception will be. With that being said, I prefer to acquire the player that can be had than hope that a trade happens at some point.

If the C's sign Middleton, who is Boston's #1 guy, who is Boston's #2 guy?  Can you win a title with those players as you 1 and 2?  If the answer is no, then you don't sign Middleton. 

It makes no sense to add role players to a team that lacks top tier talent because you can't win a title without top tier talent, and it is much more difficult to acquire top tier talent if you are over (or near) the cap. 

The simple truth is Middleton doesn't make Boston a title contender and in fact may make the team farther from a title contender by making the team slightly better and taking up cap space.  It just doesn't make sense.  Now if Boston somehow lands a top tier player, adding Middleton makes a lot more sense, but you still don't give a glorified role player 15 million a year (or 11 million if you want to use that fuzzy math).  You can find much greater value much cheaper than that.  The only way you sign Middleton to that sort of contract is if you truly believe he can be a #2 guy on a title team (and I don't think anyone actually believes that).

I guess you missed the part of how we'll regain cap space almost immediately and the value of acquiring tradeable assets, on what will be cost controlled assets going forward compared to the market value in the future years.

I didn't miss anything, but if you have 15 million going to Middleton, who presumably by your answer you agree is not a 1 or 2, then it still limits your options going forward.

In basketball you don't sign role players if you don't have your "stars".  It just doesn't make sense.

The assumption that it limits us is flawed. The free-agency landscape is going to dramatically change. As I mentioned, just about every team following this year will have an excess of money to throw around. You're not going to be landing any star players if your team isn't retaining skilled players, so the more talent you can have signed by then the better. And to go with that a max contract of that nature is actually cost controlled in the following years. And having him signed also provides you with an asset to trade if needed be, again a young cost controlled asset.

The big question here is if Middleton's past year was a fluke or not more than a question of over spending on a player this free agency or not. And even if it ends up being a fluke, it will remain true that he's a fairly young asset, who can defend and shoot. Shouldn't be too difficult to move if needed be on worst case scenario. Our abundance of draft picks lessens the risk as well.

Considering our payroll and the cap situation going forward there's a bigger risk on not signing any skill players this year than there is with overpaying on a player on the current salary structure.

[Moranis]

Let's just say the cap does jump to 100 million a couple of seasons.  The Celtics still won't have any star players and then won't have the room for multiple max contract players if they lock up stupid money to players like Khris Middleton.  It just doesn't make any sense to sign at best a 3rd option to pretty sizeable money when you don't have your 1st or 2nd option.  I'm not saying Boston shouldn't do anything, I'm just saying Boston shouldn't be signing Khris Middleton to that kind of contract.  It just doesn't make sense given the current talent (or lack thereof) that is on the team.  I'd much rather give that money to Greg Monroe, who I think could possibly be a 2nd option, who plays a much more difficult position to fill, and who is just flat out better than a guy like Middleton.

[mahcus smaht]

Let's just say the cap does jump to 100 million a couple of seasons.  The Celtics still won't have any star players and then won't have the room for multiple max contract players if they lock up stupid money to players like Khris Middleton.  It just doesn't make any sense to sign at best a 3rd option to pretty sizeable money when you don't have your 1st or 2nd option.  I'm not saying Boston shouldn't do anything, I'm just saying Boston shouldn't be signing Khris Middleton to that kind of contract.  It just doesn't make sense given the current talent (or lack thereof) that is on the team.  I'd much rather give that money to Greg Monroe, who I think could possibly be a 2nd option, who plays a much more difficult position to fill, and who is just flat out better than a guy like Middleton.

It does make sense so long as you believe he will outplay his contract because then if it comes to it you just trade him to open up room for that second max contract and boom now you have your two max guys, you enjoyed more success than you would have without Middleton and the handful of spots in draft order he cost you should be more than made up by the haul you get for Middleton when you trade him for picks.

Middleton, Harris, and Monroe are all nice pieces who are young and improving and whom will never be looked at, with a 15 mil contract and scoffed at.

I dont think it will ever be difficult to convince a team to take those kind of guys on as salary dumps.

Because these are all players on the upswings of their careers you avoid any risk of a wallace situation.

Middleton, at worst is a lights out 3 pt shooter who can play either wing and defend at an acceptable level. thats probably worth ~12 mil under the new cap. Now what if he doesnt regress on D and he learns to create his own shot and get to the line a bit. What if hes the guy who played the second half of the season for Milwakee? what if hes even better? I mean hes 23, improved every year, and I think Brad is a far better coach then Jason Kidd.

Now you have a 17ppg scorer who you can either use to entice free agents, use as a centerpiece to trade for a star, or trade to clear cap space for the 30 mil max guy.

[LooseCannon]

I feel better about the idea of giving Middleton $15m/year this summer than I did about the idea of giving Lance Stephenson $12m/year last summer.

[Donoghus]

I feel better about the idea of giving Middleton $15m/year this summer than I did about the idea of giving Lance Stephenson $12m/year last summer.

I'm not sure that's too reassuring.

[Evantime34]

Let's just say the cap does jump to 100 million a couple of seasons.  The Celtics still won't have any star players and then won't have the room for multiple max contract players if they lock up stupid money to players like Khris Middleton.  It just doesn't make any sense to sign at best a 3rd option to pretty sizeable money when you don't have your 1st or 2nd option.  I'm not saying Boston shouldn't do anything, I'm just saying Boston shouldn't be signing Khris Middleton to that kind of contract.  It just doesn't make sense given the current talent (or lack thereof) that is on the team.  I'd much rather give that money to Greg Monroe, who I think could possibly be a 2nd option, who plays a much more difficult position to fill, and who is just flat out better than a guy like Middleton.

Khris Middleton is an asset we could add in free agency, who could be used in a trade to bring a star. If we aren't willing to match the highest offer, then we are short an asset we could use to trade for a star.

Given the choice between Monroe and Middleton I would also pick Monroe. If it's Middleton or cap space, I choose Middleton.

[Roy H.]

I feel better about the idea of giving Middleton $15m/year this summer than I did about the idea of giving Lance Stephenson $12m/year last summer.

I'm not sure that's too reassuring.

That's the worry.  Stephenson "only" got $9 million, but he regressed heavily, and Charlotte has had a hard time moving his contract.

Isn't it reasonable to assume that Middleton is a candidate for regression?  He was a very poor defender prior to this year, and he's only been a good offensive weapon for about half a season.  It's possible, and perhaps probable, that he'll fall off in one or both of those areas.

What evidence is there that Middleton isn't simply a product of Jason Kidd's system? 

Middleton, Harris, and Monroe are all nice pieces who are young and improving and whom will never be looked at, with a 15 mil contract and scoffed at.

What are you basing that on?  Do young players never plateau or regress?

[Forza Juventus]

We need to trade for someone or sign someone with our cap space this offseason. If the narrative from the media or fans is that it is an overpay than so be it.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I feel better about the idea of giving Middleton $15m/year this summer than I did about the idea of giving Lance Stephenson $12m/year last summer.

I'm not sure that's too reassuring.

That's the worry.  Stephenson "only" got $9 million, but he regressed heavily, and Charlotte has had a hard time moving his contract.

Isn't it reasonable to assume that Middleton is a candidate for regression?  He was a very poor defender prior to this year, and he's only been a good offensive weapon for about half a season.  It's possible, and perhaps probable, that he'll fall off in one or both of those areas.

What evidence is there that Middleton isn't simply a product of Jason Kidd's system? 

Middleton, Harris, and Monroe are all nice pieces who are young and improving and whom will never be looked at, with a 15 mil contract and scoffed at.

What are you basing that on?  Do young players never plateau or regress?

Part of the problem with Stephenson is that he's a locker room cancer.

[wdleehi]

We need to trade for someone or sign someone with our cap space this offseason. If the narrative from the media or fans is that it is an overpay than so be it.

So says the Knicks.

[Forza Juventus]

We need to trade for someone or sign someone with our cap space this offseason. If the narrative from the media or fans is that it is an overpay than so be it.

So says the Knicks.

Not even close to the same. Everyone will have cap space next summer and if we have an opportunity to sign a good and young player this summer when not everyone has cap space we have to take that opportunity.

[Roy H.]

We need to trade for someone or sign someone with our cap space this offseason. If the narrative from the media or fans is that it is an overpay than so be it.

So says the Knicks.

And Joe Dumars.

[Forza Juventus]

We need to trade for someone or sign someone with our cap space this offseason. If the narrative from the media or fans is that it is an overpay than so be it.

So says the Knicks.

And Joe Dumars.

Again, that's not even close to the same.