So do we keep Sully and Zeller now?

[BudweiserCeltic]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

[saltlover]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

If we bring Sully back on a 1-year deal, he cannot be traded without consent.

[BudweiserCeltic]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

If we bring Sully back on a 1-year deal, he cannot be traded without consent.

I'm not always all that clear on when this applies, so I'll take your word for it.

[LooseCannon]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

If we bring Sully back on a 1-year deal, he cannot be traded without consent.

I'm not always all that clear on when this applies, so I'll take your word for it.

A player on a one-year deal who would have Bird or early Bird rights at the end of the contract would lose those rights if traded, so he has to give his consent to a trade and be willing to give those up.

[BudweiserCeltic]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

If we bring Sully back on a 1-year deal, he cannot be traded without consent.

I'm not always all that clear on when this applies, so I'll take your word for it.

A player on a one-year deal who would have Bird or early Bird rights at the end of the contract would lose those rights if traded, so he has to give his consent to a trade and be willing to give those up.

Yes, but theory states that once you have Bird Rights, you don't lose them even if traded. Sullinger has already gained his Bird Rights (unless I'm not recalling something), so why would he lose them by being traded?

I know the CBA FAQ states this example specifically, I'm just having trouble figuring out WHY that is, I'm missing something. Maybe something to do with it being a rookie contract per se?

[saltlover]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

If we bring Sully back on a 1-year deal, he cannot be traded without consent.

I'm not always all that clear on when this applies, so I'll take your word for it.

A player on a one-year deal who would have Bird or early Bird rights at the end of the contract would lose those rights if traded, so he has to give his consent to a trade and be willing to give those up.

Yes, but theory states that once you have Bird Rights, you don't lose them even if traded. Sullinger has already gained his Bird Rights (unless I'm not recalling something), so why would he lose them by being traded?

I know the CBA FAQ states this example specifically, I'm just having trouble figuring out WHY that is, I'm missing something. Maybe something to do with it being a rookie contract per se?

It was essentially to prevent teams and players from getting around the cap.  I don't know quite the rationale at this point, and it probably was relevant 15 or more years ago.  But they made it so a player lost his Bird rights or early bird rights if on a one-year contract and traded.  So they also gave players veto power over trades that would cost Bird rights.

I do think if Sully is brought back, it will be a 1+1 Amir-style deal, because that would enable him to be traded.  Ainge isn't going to want his hands tied to a player with whom he's has questionable interest (unless it's for the qualifying offer).

[BudweiserCeltic]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

If we bring Sully back on a 1-year deal, he cannot be traded without consent.

I'm not always all that clear on when this applies, so I'll take your word for it.

A player on a one-year deal who would have Bird or early Bird rights at the end of the contract would lose those rights if traded, so he has to give his consent to a trade and be willing to give those up.

Yes, but theory states that once you have Bird Rights, you don't lose them even if traded. Sullinger has already gained his Bird Rights (unless I'm not recalling something), so why would he lose them by being traded?

I know the CBA FAQ states this example specifically, I'm just having trouble figuring out WHY that is, I'm missing something. Maybe something to do with it being a rookie contract per se?

It was essentially to prevent teams and players from getting around the cap.  I don't know quite the rationale at this point, and it probably was relevant 15 or more years ago.  But they made it so a player lost his Bird rights or early bird rights if on a one-year contract and traded.  So they also gave players veto power over trades that would cost Bird rights.

I do think if Sully is brought back, it will be a 1+1 Amir-style deal, because that would enable him to be traded.  Ainge isn't going to want his hands tied to a player with whom he's has questionable interest (unless it's for the qualifying offer).

But the rule states (excluding any option year), though with a non-guaranteed contract that might be seen as a non-option year technically.

[LooseCannon]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

If we bring Sully back on a 1-year deal, he cannot be traded without consent.

I'm not always all that clear on when this applies, so I'll take your word for it.

A player on a one-year deal who would have Bird or early Bird rights at the end of the contract would lose those rights if traded, so he has to give his consent to a trade and be willing to give those up.

Yes, but theory states that once you have Bird Rights, you don't lose them even if traded. Sullinger has already gained his Bird Rights (unless I'm not recalling something), so why would he lose them by being traded?

I know the CBA FAQ states this example specifically, I'm just having trouble figuring out WHY that is, I'm missing something. Maybe something to do with it being a rookie contract per se?

It was essentially to prevent teams and players from getting around the cap.  I don't know quite the rationale at this point, and it probably was relevant 15 or more years ago.  But they made it so a player lost his Bird rights or early bird rights if on a one-year contract and traded.  So they also gave players veto power over trades that would cost Bird rights.

I do think if Sully is brought back, it will be a 1+1 Amir-style deal, because that would enable him to be traded.  Ainge isn't going to want his hands tied to a player with whom he's has questionable interest (unless it's for the qualifying offer).

But the rule states (excluding any option year), though with a non-guaranteed contract that might be seen as a non-option year technically.

A non-guaranteed year is not an option year.

[Neurotic Guy]

Very very tough on Sully here.  He is a talented young player, only 24.  He'll be inexpensive and he'll have a less major role on a team with Al Horford (and maybe Okafor). 

I understand the frustration with his weight but Sully off the bench for 15-20 per night (more/less depending on match-ups) sounds ok to me.  Horford and Amir providing professional role models.  Many people have a maturity spurt around 25 -- it's possible.  At a bargain price and with all practical motivators in place, it seems like a reasonable thought to bring him back.  It's obviously not the only acceptable option, but I think it is definitely acceptable.

[saltlover]

If we bring back Sully on a 1 year deal, how soon can we trade him?

I may be wrong but if we send him with no other player it's right away.

That's only for players that were acquired via trade using an exception (and not via cap room).

For free-agents, they can't be traded for 3-months after signing or mid December, whichever comes later.

Since Sullinger would be signed using his Bird Rights (I assume this is the case), it wouldn't be until January 15.

If we bring Sully back on a 1-year deal, he cannot be traded without consent.

I'm not always all that clear on when this applies, so I'll take your word for it.

A player on a one-year deal who would have Bird or early Bird rights at the end of the contract would lose those rights if traded, so he has to give his consent to a trade and be willing to give those up.

Yes, but theory states that once you have Bird Rights, you don't lose them even if traded. Sullinger has already gained his Bird Rights (unless I'm not recalling something), so why would he lose them by being traded?

I know the CBA FAQ states this example specifically, I'm just having trouble figuring out WHY that is, I'm missing something. Maybe something to do with it being a rookie contract per se?

It was essentially to prevent teams and players from getting around the cap.  I don't know quite the rationale at this point, and it probably was relevant 15 or more years ago.  But they made it so a player lost his Bird rights or early bird rights if on a one-year contract and traded.  So they also gave players veto power over trades that would cost Bird rights.

I do think if Sully is brought back, it will be a 1+1 Amir-style deal, because that would enable him to be traded.  Ainge isn't going to want his hands tied to a player with whom he's has questionable interest (unless it's for the qualifying offer).

But the rule states (excluding any option year), though with a non-guaranteed contract that might be seen as a non-option year technically.

A non-guaranteed year is not an option year.

Correct.  That's one of the reason team options are gone and non-guaranteed years are in.  They have much fewer restrictions.

[greece66]

It's a bit early for this IMO

Let's wait first to see if we ll sign any more FAs/make any trades.

[BudweiserCeltic]

It's a bit early for this IMO

Let's wait first to see if we ll sign any more FAs/make any trades.

It's a bit against the clock with QO, you have until July 23 with the ability to withdraw it without a player's consent. Yes, that's 2 weeks from now, but teams have a very good idea (at least fairly diligent teams like the Celtics are) about what opportunities are there and which aren't. So if a contract that works for both is on the table, you more than likely have to take it.

[walker834]

I guess I'm in the minority happy to have Sully back.

[droopdog7]

If the team is actually trying to maximize wins, then bringing back sully is a no brainer.  He would be our third best big then we have practically nothing after that (unless you count zeller).  Frankly, as much hate as sully gets, he's probably still better than any of those other guys will ever be.

[Surferdad]

I guess I'm in the minority happy to have Sully back.

That's an oversimplification.  Most CB posters would not mind having Sully back at the right price.  The cutoff seems to be around $8-10M, but he might get more in the market at which point most people think DA should not match it.