Poll

Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)?

Good
15 (88.2%)
Bad
0 (0%)
Ugly
2 (11.8%)

Total Members Voted: 17

Author Topic: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)  (Read 3019 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« on: December 29, 2016, 11:25:07 AM »

Offline Fireworks_Boom!

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 502
  • Tommy Points: 57
2016
1. We get to watch IT continue to develop as an All Star and go-to-scorer.
2. We get to watch Coach Stevens develop as a coach from managing rookie draftees and role players to managing a team of true NBA talent.
3. We get to watch young players like Brown and Rozier develop.
4. We get to watch players like Smart and Bradley develop their scoring ability.
5. We get to watch a true professional All Star C/PF do all the dirty work in Horford.
6. We hopefully get to watch this team win a playoff series (or 2).

2017
1. We get to see our success attract other All Star level free agents.
2. We get to see us become true contenders for a championship.
3. We get to watch young up and comers like Zizic, Yabusele & Nader (all of which look ridiculous) become part of the rotation.
4. We get to watch lottery draft picks develop (Brown and whatever the Brooklyn picks become if we hold them).

Not a single team in the NBA can boast such promising outlook.

We've got the rotation nearly set. I believe we are 2 pieces away from contention:
Ball Handlers: Thomas/Rozier/Jackson
Wings: Bradley/Smart
Swings: **Missing Piece**/Crowder/Brown/Nader
Bigs: Horford/**Missing Piece**/Zizic/Yabusele

Please: get rid of Olynyk & Zeller. Thanks!
« Last Edit: December 29, 2016, 11:31:52 AM by Fireworks_Boom! »

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2016, 11:41:00 AM »

Offline GreenEnvy

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4676
  • Tommy Points: 1043
I'm very optimistic about this team as well and I think Danny has set this team up for a great future. I think if we get the elite big to pair with Horford, Crowder can undoubtedly be the starting SF on a contender. He's the perfect type who doesn't need many shots to be effective. He's a good spot-up shooter, he swings the ball well, and of course plays great D.

The only missing piece is a big like Cousins. The same can be said for about 6 other playoff teams, but we may be the only one on the cusp of making noise in the playoffs that actually has the assets to obtain him.
CELTICS 2024

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2016, 12:01:48 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48121
  • Tommy Points: 8800
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
I find it hard to believe this team will attract a major free agent that vaults us into contendership status. But if we do there is no way four rookies, Brown and Rozier would be in a 10 or 11 man rotation at the same time.


Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2016, 12:36:28 PM »

Offline Phantom255x

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38401
  • Tommy Points: 3458
  • On To Banner 19!
I voted "Good", BUT...

There's literally no Free Agent out there that vaults us into legitimate contention sadly... (this next summer I mean) :'(

Blake Griffin? Staying in LA. Gordon Hayward? Staying in Utah.

Besides that you have to settle on the likes of Ibaka and Noel, who may improve this team but doesn't make us true contenders. Also would command a pretty large contract.

I see two legitimate needs for this team to become true contenders:

1. A go-to scorer alongside IT - When teams contain Isaiah Thomas especially late in games, there needs to be someone else who can step up and score consistently on offense. Bradley occasionally has, but a smooth scorer would be nice, and Hayward could have been that guy sadly. Losing Bradley to injury last April in the playoffs against Atlanta hurt us a ton.

2. A big who can score and rebound - Blake Griffin would have been ideal but he won't be available either. Unless you are perfectly fine with the likes of Zeller and Olynyk out there for rebounding.. then that's a BIG need, especially when facing good teams in the playoffs. It looks like now we have to wait for Zizic next season.. or trade for Cousins OR one of Denver's bigs. Or settle for Ibaka/Noel. I think Ainge will do *something* this off season for sure here.

@Fireworks_Boom, you pretty much identified the "needs" I listed though by putting "missing piece" under Center and Swings in your post.

Also, PLEASE NO TO MILLSAP. All Millsap does it make us the new Atlanta Hawks. Horford-Millsap were the duo in ATL, and then they would become the duo in Boston too, except you replace Jeff Teague with Isaiah Thomas in this scenario.

It could get ugly if Boston doesn't do much the next few seasons because then they are only a "middle of the pack". I'm sure we want to at least be a team that has a decent chance at beating GSW or CLE in a playoff series (right now we aren't.. but maybe in a year or two?).
"Tough times never last, but tough people do." - Robert H. Schuller

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2016, 12:36:40 PM »

Offline Fireworks_Boom!

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 502
  • Tommy Points: 57
This is where I am fine with packaging some of our young talent to land someone like Cousins. For example, no way Sacramento says no to a trade package of Jaylen Brown both Brooklyn picks, Johnson/Zeller for Cousins.

I'm sure most would see this as an overpay but thinking of it from a pure roster basis, this team is legit contender.

Ball Handlers: Thomas/Rozier/Jackson
Wings: Bradley/Smart
Swings: Gordon Hayward/Crowder/Brown/Nader
Bigs: Horford/DeMarcus Cousins/Zizic/Yabusele/Jordan Mickey

At quick glance, getting under the $102m salary cap:
Thomas: $6.3m
Rozier: $2m
Jackson: $1.4m
Bradley: $8.8m
Smart: $4.6m
Gordon Hayward: $25m???
Crowder: $6.8M
Nader: $1m
Horford: $27.75m
Cousins: $18.1m
Zizic: $2m
Yabusele: $2m
Mickey: $1.3m
Draft Pick Holds: couple 2nd round picks ($3m)

Total: $110m (above cap but below luxury)

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2016, 12:42:48 PM »

Offline Phantom255x

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38401
  • Tommy Points: 3458
  • On To Banner 19!
This is where I am fine with packaging some of our young talent to land someone like Cousins. For example, no way Sacramento says no to a trade package of Jaylen Brown both Brooklyn picks, Johnson/Zeller for Cousins.

I'm sure most would see this as an overpay but thinking of it from a pure roster basis, this team is legit contender.

Ball Handlers: Thomas/Rozier/Jackson
Wings: Bradley/Smart
Swings: Gordon Hayward/Crowder/Brown/Nader
Bigs: Horford/DeMarcus Cousins/Zizic/Yabusele/Jordan Mickey

At quick glance, getting under the $102m salary cap:
Thomas: $6.3m
Rozier: $2m
Jackson: $1.4m
Bradley: $8.8m
Smart: $4.6m
Gordon Hayward: $25m???
Crowder: $6.8M
Nader: $1m
Horford: $27.75m
Cousins: $18.1m
Zizic: $2m
Yabusele: $2m
Mickey: $1.3m
Draft Pick Holds: couple 2nd round picks ($3m)

Total: $110m (above cap but below luxury)

Sacramento says yes to that package, but I think Ainge says "hell no".

I've always been on the Boogie-to-Boston train, and still am. Just don't think Ainge and Stevens want him here especially at that price.

I seriously doubt Hayward is going to be available (Utah doing extremely well this season and can offer more $$$ + extra year). Also Hayward's max contract I believe at least is around 28.8M/Year (close to 30M - not 25M).

It's a shame though because Hayward could easily fit like a glove in this offense and be the go-to scorer alongside IT. We need a scoring wing, Hayward would be just that. He's also shooting extremely well this season (averaging 22/6/4). I would love to have him (as I stated in my previous reply on this post). 

And with due respect to Crowder, I view him more as that 6th or 7th player on a championship team roster who can provide a spark off the bench, while also starting some games if needed. Having Crowder as backup to Hayward would not be bad at all, and I think helps this team a ton as well.
"Tough times never last, but tough people do." - Robert H. Schuller

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #6 on: December 29, 2016, 12:55:43 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48121
  • Tommy Points: 8800
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Cant go over the cap to sign a free agent. So Hayward couldnt be signed if we trade for Cousins.

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #7 on: December 29, 2016, 01:13:02 PM »

Offline Bobshot

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2055
  • Tommy Points: 141
Cousins is the only guy that could put them in a league with the Cavs or Warriors. The question is what they have to give up to get him. I would give them anything they wanted except for the starting 5 and Smart. Keep the core team intact. Give 'em everything else. That includes Brown and Nets picks.

To get Cousins, you have to blow the Kings away. Brown and Nets picks would be a strong  move in that direction. Top it off with some cap filler--AJ, Zeller, etc. And maybe you have a deal.

If you want to use those draft picks for a star, the best bet is to trade them to a bad team that values them. That would be the Kings.

If you can get Cousins without moving your top 6 players, you do it in a heartbeat. The Red Sox just did it getting Sale. It would vault them into contention.

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #8 on: December 29, 2016, 01:19:01 PM »

Offline BitterJim

  • NGT
  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9219
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Cant go over the cap to sign a free agent. So Hayward couldnt be signed if we trade for Cousins.

Yeah, although it would be possible to draft someone with the Nets pick, sign Hayward, and then trade the drafted player and the rest of that package for Cousins (presumably, the trade would have been agreed to around draft time, but we would be holding off until after signing Hayward to make it official).  The biggest issues with that, though, are signing Hayward and the possibility of the pick being worse than currently anticipated, meaning that our package might not be enough.  On the other hand, if the pick turned out to be #1 overall then we could probably take out either Jaylen or the 2018 pick (maybe even both)
I'm bitter.

"There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state. The other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people." - Commander Adams, Battlestar Galactica

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #9 on: December 29, 2016, 03:46:19 PM »

Offline Fireworks_Boom!

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 502
  • Tommy Points: 57
So if we held back Zeller in the trade and we waived him instead of retaining him next year, would this free up his $8m? So replace Zeller with Jonas Jerebko in the proposed Kings trade would alleviate this "can't sign a player and go over max" issue. Am I incorrect in this thinking?

Cant go over the cap to sign a free agent. So Hayward couldnt be signed if we trade for Cousins.

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #10 on: December 29, 2016, 03:48:50 PM »

Offline Fireworks_Boom!

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 502
  • Tommy Points: 57
You have to admit this team:

  PG: Thomas
  SG: Bradley
  SF: Hayward
  PF: Horford
  C: Cousins

  Bench: Crowder, Smart, Rozier, Zizic, Yabusele, Mickey, Nader


is legit a contender!

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #11 on: December 29, 2016, 04:23:50 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48121
  • Tommy Points: 8800
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
You have to admit this team:

  PG: Thomas
  SG: Bradley
  SF: Hayward
  PF: Horford
  C: Cousins

  Bench: Crowder, Smart, Rozier, Zizic, Yabusele, Mickey, Nader


is legit a contender!
5 rookies on the squad would mean perfect health necessary to contend. Contenders need quality vets who can fill roles. This bench has none of that.

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #12 on: December 29, 2016, 04:24:40 PM »

Offline BitterJim

  • NGT
  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9219
  • Tommy Points: 1239
So if we held back Zeller in the trade and we waived him instead of retaining him next year, would this free up his $8m? So replace Zeller with Jonas Jerebko in the proposed Kings trade would alleviate this "can't sign a player and go over max" issue. Am I incorrect in this thinking?

Cant go over the cap to sign a free agent. So Hayward couldnt be signed if we trade for Cousins.

You can't sign a player that you don't have bird rights to if doing so would put you over the cap.  You need to clear up money so that you are under the cap by at least the value of the contract you want to sign.  That mans that, for a $25 million player (which for the record would not be enough for Hayward) and a $102 million cap, you need to have a total salary of $77 million (including cap holds) or less.  For the Celtics this upcoming summer (if a Boogie trade was made that didn't include AB/IT/Jae/Horford/Smart, you have:

Horford $27.73 million
Cousins $16.78 million
Bradley $8.81 million
Crowder $6.80 million
Isaiah $6.26 million
Smart $4.54 million
Rozier $1.99 million

Which brings you to $72.91 million for 7 players.  Assuming that you renounce all other cap holds (including either renouncing the rights to Nader, Zizic, and Yabu, or getting them to agree to sign a paper saying that they will play overseas instead of in Boston next year, which is highly unlikely), it brings your total to $75.7 million (since you need to add the league minimum salary for each roster spot up to 12 under the current CBA).  However, the new CBA increases this to 13 players/roster holds minimum AND increases the minimum salary, so that $1.3 million in wiggle room would almost definitely disappear.  Even if you could get Hayward to sign for $25 million (which is essentially impassible considering that he qualifies for 30% of the cap, which will be over $30 million), and were okay with this team having a worse bench than GSW, you still probably couldn't manage it just due to the new CBA.

If you want to add Cousins and Hayward to this team, you need to sign Hayward and then trade for Boogie (likely after the draft, so that you could use Brown+2017 pick's salaries to match Boogie[it would leave you a couple million short but you could make it work])
I'm bitter.

"There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state. The other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people." - Commander Adams, Battlestar Galactica

Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #13 on: December 29, 2016, 04:35:48 PM »

Offline Bobshot

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2055
  • Tommy Points: 141
I think that thread on cap space from Eric Pincus spells it out. They have room for one FA star if they renounce AJ, Zeller and KO or Jerebko.

They could get somebody else of note if they made a separate trade of others for salaries.


Re: Celtics Outlook (Good, Bad or Ugly)
« Reply #14 on: December 29, 2016, 04:36:15 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8784
  • Tommy Points: 856
You have to admit this team:

  PG: Thomas
  SG: Bradley
  SF: Hayward
  PF: Horford
  C: Cousins

  Bench: Crowder, Smart, Rozier, Zizic, Yabusele, Mickey, Nader


is legit a contender!
yeah its also really unlikely to happen.