Is Blake Considering the Celtics?

[slamtheking]

in a vacuum, I take Griffin because he fills a bigger hole on this team.  a front court of Blake and Al is better than what GSW and Cleveland have. 

[hwangjini_1]

... "Are we considering making a ruin at Blake Griffin?" I would say probably not.

ha, ha...cutest typo i have seen in a while. a tp as a reward for your inaccurate but funny fingers.

[hodgy03038]

... "Are we considering making a ruin at Blake Griffin?" I would say probably not.

ha, ha...cutest typo i have seen in a while. a tp as a reward for your inaccurate but funny fingers.

Nice catch but I don't see the TP you promised     

[manl_lui]

... "Are we considering making a ruin at Blake Griffin?" I would say probably not.

ha, ha...cutest typo i have seen in a while. a tp as a reward for your inaccurate but funny fingers.

Nice catch but I don't see the TP you promised     

you get a TP from me for the quick chuckle =D

[Casperian]

I know that's not what you asked, footey, but I'd be happy with either one of them, and so should you. Both are great players.

This whole Griffin/Hayward debate and the inevitably accompanying Griffin injury non-story would hold a lot more water if we could all just admit that we have absolutely no freakin' clue what we're talking about.  Nobody here is Blake's doctor, his therapist, or owner of a magic crystal ball.  This is a prime example of group-think, imo, where one guy just repeats the nonsense he heard from another guy until it becomes canon.

I trust the Celtics' FO to make the right decision. If we go for Hayward, great, if we sign Griffin, awesome.

So, to answer the OP's question, I guess I want us to go for the player we have the better chance of signing, whoever that is.

[green_bballers13]

I've been pushing the sign Griffin and trade for George angle for awhile on here.

TP.

It's the only way to immediate contention. We should really explore this opportunity.

Is there a way to do it under the cap?

Mike

Depending on what the cap is at the end of the day, the Celtics could realistically create the room to sign Griffin by waiving all free agents and trading Rozier for no salary next season (i.e. a future draft pick or a draft and stash).  Then to acquire George (and Seraphin for roster purposes), Boston would need to trade Fultz, Smart, and Crowder (You could swap Bradley for those guys, but if it is Fultz it probably means BKN 18 and I'd rather not do that and I'd rather have Bradley than Smart or Crowder).

Those moves leave a starting 5 of Thomas, Bradley, George, Griffin, Horford, with basically just Brown, Zizic, Nader, 37, and Seraphin on the bench (with Yabusele still stashed).  Boston then signs some vets and young guys to minimum to fill in the bench.  I think Amir might come back at the minimum.  Green might also be a possibility as well though I would expect him to get more than that elsewhere.  Heck to keep a bit more continuity I'd bring Zeller back at the minimum if he couldn't do better elsewhere (if it is Boston or somewhere else for not much cost or PT difference, why not just stay in Boston). 

Depth is a clear a problem, but that starting 5 would not only be a threat to the Cavs, but the Warriors as well.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but I don't think that team is a contender. Top 4? yes. Steal a game in the Finals from GS? Maybe. They still get trounced.

And that is assuming they beat Cleveland, which would not be a guarantee. I think CLE is going to improve (somehow).

[TopDawggRay]

What if we traded, AL?

[KGBirdBias]

Sounds like Pierce has been putting in some work on Griffin.

[Ilikesports17]

What if we traded, AL?

Nope

[No Nickname]

I want us to go for the player we have the better chance of signing, whoever that is.

Word.

[footey]

I want us to go for the player we have the better chance of signing, whoever that is.

Word.

Of course, but that doesn't mean anything if both are willing to sign on the same terms, which is how I phrased the question. 

[Casperian]

I want us to go for the player we have the better chance of signing, whoever that is.

Word.

Of course, but that doesn't mean anything if both are willing to sign on the same terms, which is how I phrased the question.

Fine, then I'll give you a different non-answer:

I believe fit is secondary to talent, which is what we need first and foremost. So again, I'd be happy with either one of them.

Seriously, though, as of right now, Blake's the better fit, but I think we can easily calibrate the rest of the roster to accomodate a potential Hayward signing, which makes this particular point moot, imo.

[Bobshot]

I don't know how they could get both these guys, but anything's possible in the cap soft NBA. The Cavs and the Warriors, and even the Spurs have shown that. I would guess youth and durability is on Hayward's side, but Griffin might be the better fit as a 4. His injury history might scare some people away.

[No Nickname]

I want us to go for the player we have the better chance of signing, whoever that is.

Word.

Of course, but that doesn't mean anything if both are willing to sign on the same terms, which is how I phrased the question.

Fine, then I'll give you a different non-answer:

I believe fit is secondary to talent, which is what we need first and foremost. So again, I'd be happy with either one of them.

Seriously, though, as of right now, Blake's the better fit, but I think we can easily calibrate the rest of the roster to accomodate a potential Hayward signing, which makes this particular point moot, imo.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner!

[ETNCeltics]

Getting Griffin and Hayward or one of them + George is a practical impossibility.

Ainge is going to sign IT to a max contract, or at least something close to it. There's no way the Celts are carrying 4 max contracts, even if they could get it in the cap, the luxury tax would be crippling.

And trading one of our BRK picks for a one year rental of George is about the dumbest thing I've read on this board.