Welcome to Boston, Jaden Springer!

[Homerclease]

I’ll be shocked if he isn’t traded. I like having a young developmental talent like him on the roster, but $4 million can be better spent elsewhere.

They can’t just spend another 4 million by moving him, it doesn’t work that way. They didn’t pay a high second to rent this kid for half a season during a title run

[brackdan70]

Due to lack of options this guy may have to be my 2024-2025 Binky (along with Queta) so expect me to irrationally defend him despite what your numbers say nerds!

I’m with you the only number that matters is rings and he already has one at age 21.

[hugepatsfan]

Just looking at the team's cap sheet on paper it's really, really hard to justify Springer's salary. REALLY hard. But, they knew the cap sheet when they traded for him. The only moves that have happened since then are 1) Queta signed to a minimum deal that has a team option, 2) Brissett opted out, 3) Jrue extension. #1 and #2 are vet min fodder deals. No actual impact on anything else salary wise. We're going to have some vet min guys on the end of the roster, whether it's them or someone else.

I guess you could maybe argue that they still weren't sure if Jrue would re-sign at the deadline so they traded for a defensive guard as insurance that they now don't need. But it's hard to believe they didn't have an idea of what was going on with Jrue and it's hard to believe that Springer is some sort of locked in plan.

The other possibility is that they just wanted a contract to trade. The Grant TPE they used for him wouldn't be able to be used past the deadline because of 2nd apron rules kicking in, so that was there last chance. I think the new CBA even limits vet min trades. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure we now wouldn't even be able to trade a player on the 5th year salary minimum for a guy on the 8th (since it would be a bit more). Maybe I'm off. But even so, having Springer's $4M expiring deal does open up some extra possibilities to trade for guys making more than the minimum, even if only a bit more. But if that was the goal, they probably could have found players that teams would give away without demanding a good 2nd round pick back.

We can scoff at it all we want, but the most obvious answer here is that Brad just likes Springer and sees developmental potential. I'm sure the trade angle could come into play if he flops during the year or if there's just a great offer out there. But even though Holiday/White/Brown/Tatum/Hauser/Pritchard are all under contract, there's still a need for one more guy to play regular season minutes at least. Probably 2 when you factor in missed games for rest and injuries. It's the boring answer but they probably will just give Springer a chance to compete for those minutes, and they seemingly like his upside in them.

[sam_I_am]

I’ll be shocked if he isn’t traded. I like having a young developmental talent like him on the roster, but $4 million can be better spent elsewhere.

They can’t just spend another 4 million by moving him, it doesn’t work that way. They didn’t pay a high second to rent this kid for half a season during a title run

They can trade him for a veteran player making $4 million or less. When Sam Hauser goes for 2 million, paying 4 million to a G-leaguer doesn’t make sense for a hard capped team in its championship window. Maybe he just needs a training camp under him to turn heads. I’d be happy to be wrong because I like athletes with upside.

[Hal14]

I’ll be shocked if he isn’t traded. I like having a young developmental talent like him on the roster, but $4 million can be better spent elsewhere.

$4 mil is chump change in today's NBA. Let's not act like he's making $10 mil a year. If he was, Brad would have never traded for him.

I think Brad knows what he's doing. He knows exactly how much Springer is getting paid. And it makes no sense to trade the guy right after we just traded for him - before ever giving him a real chance or actually trying to develop him first..

[Homerclease]

I’ll be shocked if he isn’t traded. I like having a young developmental talent like him on the roster, but $4 million can be better spent elsewhere.

They can’t just spend another 4 million by moving him, it doesn’t work that way. They didn’t pay a high second to rent this kid for half a season during a title run

They can trade him for a veteran player making $4 million or less. When Sam Hauser goes for 2 million, paying 4 million to a G-leaguer doesn’t make sense for a hard capped team in its championship window. Maybe he just needs a training camp under him to turn heads. I’d be happy to be wrong because I like athletes with upside.

What Sam Hauser makes is irrelevant to Jaden Springer.

https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/

Here’s the list of guys for next year, any name in particular jump out at you?

[Curmudgeon]

LOL, they are finally out from under Demetrius Jackson, who appears to be out of professional basketball entirely, having last played in Spain in 2021.

[Hal14]

They can trade him for a veteran player making $4 million or less.

Any player who is significantly better than Springer (And they'd have to be significantly better, because otherwise, what's the point in making the trade?) is probably making a lot more than $4 mil a year. Or, they're a player who is so good that in order to get them in exchange for Springer, we'd have to attach additional assets to the deal for the other team to actually agree to it - in which case, it's probably not worth it.

Also, consider that our top 8-9 rotation players for next season are set in stone. So whatever player you're thinking we would trade Springer for, they have to be significantly better than Springer but not so good that they're making more than $4 mil and also they can't be so good that they're gonna get pissed off about not being a top 8-9 rotation player..they have to be a player who will be okay with inconsistent playing time - since we don't have much playing time to offer any new players who get added to the roster.

You add it all up, and that player who checks all of those boxes probably doesn't exist. And if they do exist, we would have traded for that player at the deadline - instead of trading for Springer.

When Sam Hauser goes for 2 million, paying 4 million to a G-leaguer doesn’t make sense

Clearly Brad disagrees, or he wouldn't have made the trade in the 1st place.

Just because Hauser is on a bargain basement contract, that doesn't mean you go and trade a guy who happens to be making more than him.

[sam_I_am]

They can trade him for a veteran player making $4 million or less.

Any player who is significantly better than Springer (And they'd have to be significantly better, because otherwise, what's the point in making the trade?) is probably making a lot more than $4 mil a year. Or, they're a player who is so good that in order to get them in exchange for Springer, we'd have to attach additional assets to the deal for the other team to actually agree to it - in which case, it's probably not worth it.

Also, consider that our top 8-9 rotation players for next season are set in stone. So whatever player you're thinking we would trade Springer for, they have to be significantly better than Springer but not so good that they're making more than $4 mil and also they can't be so good that they're gonna get pissed off about not being a top 8-9 rotation player..they have to be a player who will be okay with inconsistent playing time - since we don't have much playing time to offer any new players who get added to the roster.

You add it all up, and that player who checks all of those boxes probably doesn't exist. And if they do exist, we would have traded for that player at the deadline - instead of trading for Springer.

When Sam Hauser goes for 2 million, paying 4 million to a G-leaguer doesn’t make sense

Clearly Brad disagrees, or he wouldn't have made the trade in the 1st place.

Just because Hauser is on a bargain basement contract, that doesn't mean you go and trade a guy who happens to be making more than him.

He hasn’t paid him a full $4million yet so it isn’t clear he disagrees. Springer showed next to nothing for us on the court. He was easily the worst player on the roster for the entire season. I know Brad liked what he saw in summer league and maybe he impressed more in practice than I am aware.

I don’t mean to be negative, but I do believe his greatest value to this team is that his expendable contract is bigger than all our other expendable contracts.

[Parliament10]

They can trade him for a veteran player making $4 million or less.

Any player who is significantly better than Springer (And they'd have to be significantly better, because otherwise, what's the point in making the trade?) is probably making a lot more than $4 mil a year. Or, they're a player who is so good that in order to get them in exchange for Springer, we'd have to attach additional assets to the deal for the other team to actually agree to it - in which case, it's probably not worth it.

Also, consider that our top 8-9 rotation players for next season are set in stone. So whatever player you're thinking we would trade Springer for, they have to be significantly better than Springer but not so good that they're making more than $4 mil and also they can't be so good that they're gonna get pissed off about not being a top 8-9 rotation player..they have to be a player who will be okay with inconsistent playing time - since we don't have much playing time to offer any new players who get added to the roster.

You add it all up, and that player who checks all of those boxes probably doesn't exist. And if they do exist, we would have traded for that player at the deadline - instead of trading for Springer.

When Sam Hauser goes for 2 million, paying 4 million to a G-leaguer doesn’t make sense

Clearly Brad disagrees, or he wouldn't have made the trade in the 1st place.

Just because Hauser is on a bargain basement contract, that doesn't mean you go and trade a guy who happens to be making more than him.

He hasn’t paid him a full $4million yet so it isn’t clear he disagrees. Springer showed next to nothing for us on the court. He was easily the worst player on the roster for the entire season. I know Brad liked what he saw in summer league and maybe he impressed more in practice than I am aware.

I don’t mean to be negative, but I do believe his greatest value to this team is that his expendable contract is bigger than all our other expendable contracts.

Agreed. The best thing shown so far from Springer, is his Tradable contract.

[CelticsPride18]

They can trade him for a veteran player making $4 million or less.

Any player who is significantly better than Springer (And they'd have to be significantly better, because otherwise, what's the point in making the trade?) is probably making a lot more than $4 mil a year. Or, they're a player who is so good that in order to get them in exchange for Springer, we'd have to attach additional assets to the deal for the other team to actually agree to it - in which case, it's probably not worth it.

Also, consider that our top 8-9 rotation players for next season are set in stone. So whatever player you're thinking we would trade Springer for, they have to be significantly better than Springer but not so good that they're making more than $4 mil and also they can't be so good that they're gonna get pissed off about not being a top 8-9 rotation player..they have to be a player who will be okay with inconsistent playing time - since we don't have much playing time to offer any new players who get added to the roster.

You add it all up, and that player who checks all of those boxes probably doesn't exist. And if they do exist, we would have traded for that player at the deadline - instead of trading for Springer.

When Sam Hauser goes for 2 million, paying 4 million to a G-leaguer doesn’t make sense

Clearly Brad disagrees, or he wouldn't have made the trade in the 1st place.

Just because Hauser is on a bargain basement contract, that doesn't mean you go and trade a guy who happens to be making more than him.

He hasn’t paid him a full $4million yet so it isn’t clear he disagrees. Springer showed next to nothing for us on the court. He was easily the worst player on the roster for the entire season. I know Brad liked what he saw in summer league and maybe he impressed more in practice than I am aware.

I don’t mean to be negative, but I do believe his greatest value to this team is that his expendable contract is bigger than all our other expendable contracts.[/quotes]

Being a 2nd apron team Springer contract isn’t bringing back any piece that will help significantly. Stevens clearly likes him if he doesn’t show anything by the 2025 trade deadline we might trade to lower the tax bill.

[ConstableGeneva]

Which players are you even getting in a trade at that price point? This isn't the old CBA where a $4M player can net you $5M incoming player or greater if you aggregate with another outgoing salary. Neither is legal now if you're a second apron team.

So you're basically trading for minimum-salaried players or guys on rookie contracts (late 1st rounders or 2nd rounders) who you really like (which Springer essentially is).

[djFan71]

Which players are you even getting in a trade at that price point? This isn't the old CBA where a $4M player can net you $5M incoming player or greater if you aggregate with another outgoing salary. Neither is legal now if you're a second apron team.

So you're basically trading for minimum-salaried players or guys on rookie contracts (late 1st rounders or 2nd rounders) who you really like (which Springer essentially is).

That's the bind Stevens and Zarren have put us in since they're so bad at the cap. /green

[Fierce1]

Losing Brissy and Svi most likely not coming back will offset the 4m of Springer.

So I think Cs don't have to get rid of Springer's contract right now.

Let Walsh and Springer compete for the 10th roster spot that Brissy vacated.

[brackdan70]

Jaden stays.

[ConstableGeneva]

Which players are you even getting in a trade at that price point? This isn't the old CBA where a $4M player can net you $5M incoming player or greater if you aggregate with another outgoing salary. Neither is legal now if you're a second apron team.

So you're basically trading for minimum-salaried players or guys on rookie contracts (late 1st rounders or 2nd rounders) who you really like (which Springer essentially is).

That's the bind Stevens and Zarren have put us in since they're so bad at the cap. /green

Flexibility is still flexibility. It is still a tradeable contract that we wouldn't have otherwise. There are a bunch of names they could be interested in. But it does seem they traded for him because he's ahead in development relative to any draftee they would've brought in with the pick they traded.

[djFan71]

Which players are you even getting in a trade at that price point? This isn't the old CBA where a $4M player can net you $5M incoming player or greater if you aggregate with another outgoing salary. Neither is legal now if you're a second apron team.

So you're basically trading for minimum-salaried players or guys on rookie contracts (late 1st rounders or 2nd rounders) who you really like (which Springer essentially is).

That's the bind Stevens and Zarren have put us in since they're so bad at the cap. /green

Flexibility is still flexibility. It is still a tradeable contract that we wouldn't have otherwise. There are a bunch of names they could be interested in. But it does seem they traded for him because he's ahead in development relative to any draftee they would've brought in with the pick they traded.

I think I may just have to give up on sarcasm.

[ConstableGeneva]

That's the bind Stevens and Zarren have put us in since they're so bad at the cap. /green

Flexibility is still flexibility. It is still a tradeable contract that we wouldn't have otherwise. There are a bunch of names they could be interested in. But it does seem they traded for him because he's ahead in development relative to any draftee they would've brought in with the pick they traded.

I think I may just have to give up on sarcasm.

No, I got it. Just trying to play devil's advocate on myself.

[jfs1000d]

Guys. Brad did not have time to make this trade. He wanted Springs, and he did it knowing that kid won’t play. He is going to pick up the option. And sign an Aaron Nesmith -like deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t mind the idea of developing him but I like it better on a Jordan Walsh type contract. Maybe we don’t keep PP or Holiday. I was intrigued when they signed him but he doesn’t look good enough to keep at $4 million, let alone $11 million Nesmith makes.

Trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. His Defense looks good.
But, this is his 3rd year. I'm thinking, that he's not going to improve too much?

He can play D. That’s good enough for me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[djFan71]

Flexibility is still flexibility. It is still a tradeable contract that we wouldn't have otherwise. There are a bunch of names they could be interested in. But it does seem they traded for him because he's ahead in development relative to any draftee they would've brought in with the pick they traded.

I think I may just have to give up on sarcasm.

No, I got it. Just trying to play devil's advocate on myself.

Phew. I figured you of anyone would.

Just for the (non-sarcastic, not in reply to CG) record:

I'm solidly in camp Brad & Zarren new exactly what they were doing and what the 2nd apron financial ramifications would be and decided to trade for a player that they liked despite them. They always expected it to be for next season as well. So, what he did(n't) do this year on the team post-deadline means nada. They like Springer and think he has potential and we should expect him to play/develop it next year.

The idea that we're going to trade him and Pritchard and hobble by on vet mins and & 2nd round draft vet min salaries on 14 players while defending a title is crazy to me. Wyc gave the money-green colored light to Brad and he hit the gas.