Is DA's Master Plan BOTH Hayward AND George?

[jade88]

Luxury tax would be insane. No way we're doing anything like that.

Cavs have Love, Lebron, Irving, and Thompson all on large contracts. Granted Thompson is at 80 mill.

[LilRip]

I don't understand why we can't have this team but GSW can keep a core of KD, Klay, Steph, Dray for the next 8-10 years (coming from JVG's quote of penciling the Warriors in the finals). Especially with KD and Steph both expiring this year (with Steph eligible for the super max) and Klay expiring the year after.

If KD is willing take a discount to win, wouldn't a guy like IT or even PG be amenable to taking a small discount too? If we can land PG, would Hayward be willing to take a minor discount too?

[gouki88]

I don't understand why we can't have this team but GSW can keep a core of KD, Klay, Steph, Dray for the next 8-10 years (coming from JVG's quote of penciling the Warriors in the finals). Especially with KD and Steph both expiring this year (with Steph eligible for the super max) and Klay expiring the year after.

If KD is willing take a discount to win, wouldn't a guy like IT or even PG be amenable to taking a small discount too? If we can land PG, would Hayward be willing to take a minor discount too?

I think that kind of attitude might be an extension of sorts of the "free agents don't come to Boston" school of thought. If GSW can keep that core together as JVG says, then we would comfortably be able to keep this one together - assuming they take discounts to go ring hunting.

[drogbagarnett]

I think he's gonna get Hayward, George, Butler, AND Klay. Just kidding. You're all nuts lol

Thank you! Lol!
TP to you!

[obnoxiousmime]

I don't understand why we can't have this team but GSW can keep a core of KD, Klay, Steph, Dray for the next 8-10 years (coming from JVG's quote of penciling the Warriors in the finals). Especially with KD and Steph both expiring this year (with Steph eligible for the super max) and Klay expiring the year after.

If KD is willing take a discount to win, wouldn't a guy like IT or even PG be amenable to taking a small discount too? If we can land PG, would Hayward be willing to take a minor discount too?

Top stars like LeBron and KD have already made a lot of money in their careers. It doesn't mean they'd be willing to play for free, but at this point championships are more important to their legacy than a few extra million. They also make an enormous amount from endorsements which are bolstered with the publicity and legitimacy a title brings.

Secondary stars do not make as much from endorsements, so the benefits of a title are more personal, not financial. A huge part of their income is still coming from their salary playing basketball as opposed to being a celebrity pitchman.

IT has never had a big money deal and this is his last opportunity to get one. George has made big money but his endorsement money is nowhere near the Currys, Durants, and LeBrons of the world, partly from relative lack of team success, personality, and small market.

The other unfair thing is, once your organization has already won a title with a group of players, it is a lot easier to expect them to take a discount. The Spurs kept their great teams together with Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker all not taking the highest possible deal the market would bear. This is because of their great team culture but also because the organization had cachet, the trust from the players that they would spend the money wisely and put the team in the best position to win more titles. The Patriots do the same thing, to the consternation of other NFL teams. Brady is still a top 1-2 quarterback but is only making 14 million/year.

The Celtics really aren't in a position where they can expect players to trust them and take discounts. They are trying to sign stars in free agency to the max, which means some players (not Horford who Atlanta didn't offer full five years) are already taking a discount just to sign with you. Durant knew signing with GS that he would pretty much be guaranteed multiple title shots. Boston can't offer such certainty.

[LilRip]

I don't understand why we can't have this team but GSW can keep a core of KD, Klay, Steph, Dray for the next 8-10 years (coming from JVG's quote of penciling the Warriors in the finals). Especially with KD and Steph both expiring this year (with Steph eligible for the super max) and Klay expiring the year after.

If KD is willing take a discount to win, wouldn't a guy like IT or even PG be amenable to taking a small discount too? If we can land PG, would Hayward be willing to take a minor discount too?

Top stars like LeBron and KD have already made a lot of money in their careers. It doesn't mean they'd be willing to play for free, but at this point championships are more important to their legacy than a few extra million. They also make an enormous amount from endorsements which are bolstered with the publicity and legitimacy a title brings.

Secondary stars do not make as much from endorsements, so the benefits of a title are more personal, not financial. A huge part of their income is still coming from their salary playing basketball as opposed to being a celebrity pitchman.

IT has never had a big money deal and this is his last opportunity to get one. George has made big money but his endorsement money is nowhere near the Currys, Durants, and LeBrons of the world, partly from relative lack of team success, personality, and small market.

The other unfair thing is, once your organization has already won a title with a group of players, it is a lot easier to expect them to take a discount. The Spurs kept their great teams together with Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker all not taking the highest possible deal the market would bear. This is because of their great team culture but also because the organization had cachet, the trust from the players that they would spend the money wisely and put the team in the best position to win more titles. The Patriots do the same thing, to the consternation of other NFL teams. Brady is still a top 1-2 quarterback but is only making 14 million/year.

The Celtics really aren't in a position where they can expect players to trust them and take discounts. They are trying to sign stars in free agency to the max, which means some players (not Horford who Atlanta didn't offer full five years) are already taking a discount just to sign with you. Durant knew signing with GS that he would pretty much be guaranteed multiple title shots. Boston can't offer such certainty.

I agree with this. But what if, with an assembled superteam of our own, we lose to GSW in the Finals (aka we got past Lebron and the Cavs) next year. We still have BKN's top 3 2018 pick and Fultz and Jaylen develop impressively over the year. Would IT insist on something like a 30m max and strap the team or couldnt he be convinced to take something like 23 to run it back against the Dubs? Couldn't PG be convinced to take 25 too?

[obnoxiousmime]

I don't understand why we can't have this team but GSW can keep a core of KD, Klay, Steph, Dray for the next 8-10 years (coming from JVG's quote of penciling the Warriors in the finals). Especially with KD and Steph both expiring this year (with Steph eligible for the super max) and Klay expiring the year after.

If KD is willing take a discount to win, wouldn't a guy like IT or even PG be amenable to taking a small discount too? If we can land PG, would Hayward be willing to take a minor discount too?

Top stars like LeBron and KD have already made a lot of money in their careers. It doesn't mean they'd be willing to play for free, but at this point championships are more important to their legacy than a few extra million. They also make an enormous amount from endorsements which are bolstered with the publicity and legitimacy a title brings.

Secondary stars do not make as much from endorsements, so the benefits of a title are more personal, not financial. A huge part of their income is still coming from their salary playing basketball as opposed to being a celebrity pitchman.

IT has never had a big money deal and this is his last opportunity to get one. George has made big money but his endorsement money is nowhere near the Currys, Durants, and LeBrons of the world, partly from relative lack of team success, personality, and small market.

The other unfair thing is, once your organization has already won a title with a group of players, it is a lot easier to expect them to take a discount. The Spurs kept their great teams together with Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker all not taking the highest possible deal the market would bear. This is because of their great team culture but also because the organization had cachet, the trust from the players that they would spend the money wisely and put the team in the best position to win more titles. The Patriots do the same thing, to the consternation of other NFL teams. Brady is still a top 1-2 quarterback but is only making 14 million/year.

The Celtics really aren't in a position where they can expect players to trust them and take discounts. They are trying to sign stars in free agency to the max, which means some players (not Horford who Atlanta didn't offer full five years) are already taking a discount just to sign with you. Durant knew signing with GS that he would pretty much be guaranteed multiple title shots. Boston can't offer such certainty.

I agree with this. But what if, with an assembled superteam of our own, we lose to GSW in the Finals (aka we got past Lebron and the Cavs) next year. We still have BKN's top 3 2018 pick and Fultz and Jaylen develop impressively over the year. Would IT insist on something like a 30m max and strap the team or couldnt he be convinced to take something like 23 to run it back against the Dubs? Couldn't PG be convinced to take 25 too?

Well, the thing about the cap is that you cannot add new players (besides minimum deals, exceptions, etc.) once you have exceeded it. However, you are free to re-sign whomever is already on the roster to deals that in excess of the cap. So really what the Celtics are trying to do is squeeze in one more max player before they go over the cap, after which their flexibility is more limited.

That means if George and Thomas take a discount next year, they wouldn't be helping the Celtics add players because the team would already be over the cap. It would only make a difference in the potential luxury tax payments the team may have to make. To put it simply, asking them to take a pay cut next season would save the team money but not necessarily give them much benefit in keeping the team together or signing new players.

For example, Durant is going to take a slight pay cut this year because it will allow GS to keep some bench players. If Durant signed for the absolute most he could get, GS would not be allowed to go over the cap to sign guys like Iguodala and Livingston. Their rights would be renounced and they'd be UFA. Then they could only be re-signed by GS if they sign for the MLE or something like that. This is an example of a pay cut having a very direct, clear benefit to the team. Asking Thomas and George to take a pay cut next season wouldn't have such an obvious benefit, it would just be saving the owners some money.

[tazzmaniac]

Luxury tax would be insane. No way we're doing anything like that.

Cavs have Love, Lebron, Irving, and Thompson all on large contracts. Granted Thompson is at 80 mill.

Lebron will make 33.3M but Love, Irving and Thompson are only making 22.6M, 18.7M and 16.4M respectively for a total of ~91M.  Even so, the Cavs are in luxury tax so they'll need to manage it.  After next season, we'd be looking at IT, Hayward, George and Horford costing ~120M.  Start adding in Smart, Fultz, 2018 1st, Crowder, etc and the luxury tax explodes. 

[CFAN38]

I believe a few weeks ago I heard Marks (for NETS GM) speculate that the Cs could give the Paces a low ball offer that would actually be the best offer the Pacers would receive. I think it was something like Crowder + Rozier + a future non Nets 1st. The Pacers maybe forced to take it and then the Cs would have George on the team make a deep playoff run and force him to make the tough choice of leaving winning in Boston for LA. If he does leave this wouldn't really effect the Cs future assuming they retain Fultz( assuming he is the pick). Brown, and the Nets 18.

I am not sure how the sequence of events would go down with a George trade and Hayward signing but it would be an amazing turn of events for DA.


A side thought that I am NOT in favor of.

What if the DA doesnt have Fultz as fare ahead of other prospects in this draft as many of us assume he is. If he thinks the player available at #5 is close to equal to Fultz could this and a potential PG trade be the reasoning behind Fultz working out for the Kings? Maybe we see #1 traded for #5, #10, WCS and a future 1st. Lets say the Cs draft Smith Jr. at #5 then trade #10 + Crowder + ?? (not sure if AB would have to be added in order to make cap space work). Then if Hayward signs. The Cs could then sign Hayward



 

 

[LilRip]

I don't understand why we can't have this team but GSW can keep a core of KD, Klay, Steph, Dray for the next 8-10 years (coming from JVG's quote of penciling the Warriors in the finals). Especially with KD and Steph both expiring this year (with Steph eligible for the super max) and Klay expiring the year after.

If KD is willing take a discount to win, wouldn't a guy like IT or even PG be amenable to taking a small discount too? If we can land PG, would Hayward be willing to take a minor discount too?

Top stars like LeBron and KD have already made a lot of money in their careers. It doesn't mean they'd be willing to play for free, but at this point championships are more important to their legacy than a few extra million. They also make an enormous amount from endorsements which are bolstered with the publicity and legitimacy a title brings.

Secondary stars do not make as much from endorsements, so the benefits of a title are more personal, not financial. A huge part of their income is still coming from their salary playing basketball as opposed to being a celebrity pitchman.

IT has never had a big money deal and this is his last opportunity to get one. George has made big money but his endorsement money is nowhere near the Currys, Durants, and LeBrons of the world, partly from relative lack of team success, personality, and small market.

The other unfair thing is, once your organization has already won a title with a group of players, it is a lot easier to expect them to take a discount. The Spurs kept their great teams together with Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker all not taking the highest possible deal the market would bear. This is because of their great team culture but also because the organization had cachet, the trust from the players that they would spend the money wisely and put the team in the best position to win more titles. The Patriots do the same thing, to the consternation of other NFL teams. Brady is still a top 1-2 quarterback but is only making 14 million/year.

The Celtics really aren't in a position where they can expect players to trust them and take discounts. They are trying to sign stars in free agency to the max, which means some players (not Horford who Atlanta didn't offer full five years) are already taking a discount just to sign with you. Durant knew signing with GS that he would pretty much be guaranteed multiple title shots. Boston can't offer such certainty.

I agree with this. But what if, with an assembled superteam of our own, we lose to GSW in the Finals (aka we got past Lebron and the Cavs) next year. We still have BKN's top 3 2018 pick and Fultz and Jaylen develop impressively over the year. Would IT insist on something like a 30m max and strap the team or couldnt he be convinced to take something like 23 to run it back against the Dubs? Couldn't PG be convinced to take 25 too?

Well, the thing about the cap is that you cannot add new players (besides minimum deals, exceptions, etc.) once you have exceeded it. However, you are free to re-sign whomever is already on the roster to deals that in excess of the cap. So really what the Celtics are trying to do is squeeze in one more max player before they go over the cap, after which their flexibility is more limited.

That means if George and Thomas take a discount next year, they wouldn't be helping the Celtics add players because the team would already be over the cap. It would only make a difference in the potential luxury tax payments the team may have to make. To put it simply, asking them to take a pay cut next season would save the team money but not necessarily give them much benefit in keeping the team together or signing new players.

For example, Durant is going to take a slight pay cut this year because it will allow GS to keep some bench players. If Durant signed for the absolute most he could get, GS would not be allowed to go over the cap to sign guys like Iguodala and Livingston. Their rights would be renounced and they'd be UFA. Then they could only be re-signed by GS if they sign for the MLE or something like that. This is an example of a pay cut having a very direct, clear benefit to the team. Asking Thomas and George to take a pay cut next season wouldn't have such an obvious benefit, it would just be saving the owners some money.

I'm no cap expert but wouldn't GSW have Bird Rights to both Iggy and Livingston? And then the rest of that team is composed of minimum guys anyway.

[Darío SpanishFan]

No way Paul George starts and plays most of his minutes as PF. That's not happening (well, it may happen and so we lose him for nothing in 2018).

[Moranis]

I don't understand why we can't have this team but GSW can keep a core of KD, Klay, Steph, Dray for the next 8-10 years (coming from JVG's quote of penciling the Warriors in the finals). Especially with KD and Steph both expiring this year (with Steph eligible for the super max) and Klay expiring the year after.

If KD is willing take a discount to win, wouldn't a guy like IT or even PG be amenable to taking a small discount too? If we can land PG, would Hayward be willing to take a minor discount too?

Top stars like LeBron and KD have already made a lot of money in their careers. It doesn't mean they'd be willing to play for free, but at this point championships are more important to their legacy than a few extra million. They also make an enormous amount from endorsements which are bolstered with the publicity and legitimacy a title brings.

Secondary stars do not make as much from endorsements, so the benefits of a title are more personal, not financial. A huge part of their income is still coming from their salary playing basketball as opposed to being a celebrity pitchman.

IT has never had a big money deal and this is his last opportunity to get one. George has made big money but his endorsement money is nowhere near the Currys, Durants, and LeBrons of the world, partly from relative lack of team success, personality, and small market.

The other unfair thing is, once your organization has already won a title with a group of players, it is a lot easier to expect them to take a discount. The Spurs kept their great teams together with Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker all not taking the highest possible deal the market would bear. This is because of their great team culture but also because the organization had cachet, the trust from the players that they would spend the money wisely and put the team in the best position to win more titles. The Patriots do the same thing, to the consternation of other NFL teams. Brady is still a top 1-2 quarterback but is only making 14 million/year.

The Celtics really aren't in a position where they can expect players to trust them and take discounts. They are trying to sign stars in free agency to the max, which means some players (not Horford who Atlanta didn't offer full five years) are already taking a discount just to sign with you. Durant knew signing with GS that he would pretty much be guaranteed multiple title shots. Boston can't offer such certainty.

I agree with this. But what if, with an assembled superteam of our own, we lose to GSW in the Finals (aka we got past Lebron and the Cavs) next year. We still have BKN's top 3 2018 pick and Fultz and Jaylen develop impressively over the year. Would IT insist on something like a 30m max and strap the team or couldnt he be convinced to take something like 23 to run it back against the Dubs? Couldn't PG be convinced to take 25 too?

Well, the thing about the cap is that you cannot add new players (besides minimum deals, exceptions, etc.) once you have exceeded it. However, you are free to re-sign whomever is already on the roster to deals that in excess of the cap. So really what the Celtics are trying to do is squeeze in one more max player before they go over the cap, after which their flexibility is more limited.

That means if George and Thomas take a discount next year, they wouldn't be helping the Celtics add players because the team would already be over the cap. It would only make a difference in the potential luxury tax payments the team may have to make. To put it simply, asking them to take a pay cut next season would save the team money but not necessarily give them much benefit in keeping the team together or signing new players.

For example, Durant is going to take a slight pay cut this year because it will allow GS to keep some bench players. If Durant signed for the absolute most he could get, GS would not be allowed to go over the cap to sign guys like Iguodala and Livingston. Their rights would be renounced and they'd be UFA. Then they could only be re-signed by GS if they sign for the MLE or something like that. This is an example of a pay cut having a very direct, clear benefit to the team. Asking Thomas and George to take a pay cut next season wouldn't have such an obvious benefit, it would just be saving the owners some money.

I'm no cap expert but wouldn't GSW have Bird Rights to both Iggy and Livingston? And then the rest of that team is composed of minimum guys anyway.

Their issue is they need cap room to sign Durant and they will struggle to get the required cap room without releasing both Iggy and Livingston's cap holds.  If they do that, then they lose Bird Rights.

[Moranis]

The trade in the opening thread is impossible because in order to sign Hayward/Griffin you have to let all the free agents go.  Enough salary also has to be cleared to have room for the max.  Rozier might be enough (depending on the actual cap - so Cleveland winning a couple of more games might increase the ticket sales and thus BRI enough to make it just Rozier), but it might take Bradley (hopefully Rozier is enough).  You then trade Crowder, Smart, and Fultz for George (and Seraphin).  That will allow for a max and George and the team still has Brown and the BKN 18 as potential cornerstones going forward.

I'd prefer Griffin personally as opposed to Hayward so that would leave a starting 5 of Thomas, Bradley, George, Griffin, and Horford with Brown, Seraphin, Zizic, Nader, #37 (Yabu stays overseas 1 more year) on the bench.  You then add in some veteran free agents (maybe Amir, Zeller, and Green come back for the minimum).  That still leaves a decision point on Bradley and Thomas next summer (George is a clear max and you only make the trade for him with the understanding and intention that he re-signs). 

[td450]

I don't understand why we can't have this team but GSW can keep a core of KD, Klay, Steph, Dray for the next 8-10 years (coming from JVG's quote of penciling the Warriors in the finals). Especially with KD and Steph both expiring this year (with Steph eligible for the super max) and Klay expiring the year after.

If KD is willing take a discount to win, wouldn't a guy like IT or even PG be amenable to taking a small discount too? If we can land PG, would Hayward be willing to take a minor discount too?

They have Klay under contract at around $18M for two more years, and Draymond at around $18M for three years.

It will be interesting to watch what Durant and Curry insist on after this year.

That being said, they will be paying some huge bills no matter how it plays out. However, either way, the contracts for Klay and Draymond give GS a structural advantage over anyone trying to compete against them for at least two years. The only way is to get a great player or two who is not on a max deal. That means Jimmy Butler > Paul George. Players on controlled contracts are even better (Porzingas)

[kozlodoev]

No.