Holy Offseason I Can’t Believe it’s July FA/Trade/Waiver Thread

[jfs1000d]

If the FO is happy to pay it just keep both guys for the first half they are better than whatever else they’d bring back.

This works just stay under second apron.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dogen]

The front court is absolute ass but if Brad gets rid of terrorists Walsh and Tillman, I can live with this roster.

I know that Walsh is looking more redundant now with the additions of Scheierman, Gonzalez and Minott in particular, but i wanna see what he can do coming into year 3.

He looks a bit more filled out now, and he's still the youngest on the roster except for Gonzalez.

So, he's the summer league vet now, let's see what he can do. Maybe there will be a glut at that position and one of those guys will get packaged later in the season, but I don't want to see a player like Walsh get let go when this may be his breakout year.

It also sounds like Brad and Joe are going to be experimenting with style, which may mean we're going to see some switches in lineups, particularly with the bigs (Queta, Garza and Williams, Oh My!) and those wings.

It's going to be fun watching those combinations. May not lead to many wins at first, but as long as the guys are competing.

We could even see the 4 aforementioned players on the court at the same time! At least in summer league.

[Fierce1]

One of Niang and Hauser has to go.

I prefer keeping Niang because he's the better overall player and he has some dawg in him.

Use Sam in a trade that will get the Cs a big man.

[darrendaye]

The front court is absolute ass but if Brad gets rid of terrorists Walsh and Tillman, I can live with this roster.

I know that Walsh is looking more redundant now with the additions of Scheierman, Gonzalez and Minott in particular, but i wanna see what he can do coming into year 3.

He looks a bit more filled out now, and he's still the youngest on the roster except for Gonzalez.

So, he's the summer league vet now, let's see what he can do. Maybe there will be a glut at that position and one of those guys will get packaged later in the season, but I don't want to see a player like Walsh get let go when this may be his breakout year.

It also sounds like Brad and Joe are going to be experimenting with style, which may mean we're going to see some switches in lineups, particularly with the bigs (Queta, Garza and Williams, Oh My!) and those wings.

It's going to be fun watching those combinations. May not lead to many wins at first, but as long as the guys are competing.

We could even see the 4 aforementioned players on the court at the same time! At least in summer league.

Walsh has a 4.5" greater reach than Scheierman and Gonzalez, IMO that puts him in a different category from a defensive scheme standpoint. Minott and he are in direct competition.

[hugepatsfan]

One of Niang and Hauser has to go.

I prefer keeping Niang because he's the better overall player and he has some dawg in him.

Use Sam in a trade that will get the Cs a big man.

Why does one have to go? Moving one but not the other doesn't do anything to get us below the tax. We're technically over the 2nd apron right now by about $300K but easy to shed that with a smaller move.

The "dog" that Niang has in him is taking cheap shots at people to make up for the fact that he's a downright terrible defender. He couldn't guard you or me. Hauser, on the other hand, is decent on defense. And both are shooters only except Hauser shoots it better on higher difficulty shot profile. No idea how Niang is a better overall player.

[cloverleaf]

The front court is absolute ass but if Brad gets rid of terrorists Walsh and Tillman, I can live with this roster.

I know that Walsh is looking more redundant now with the additions of Scheierman, Gonzalez and Minott in particular, but i wanna see what he can do coming into year 3.

He looks a bit more filled out now, and he's still the youngest on the roster except for Gonzalez.

So, he's the summer league vet now, let's see what he can do. Maybe there will be a glut at that position and one of those guys will get packaged later in the season, but I don't want to see a player like Walsh get let go when this may be his breakout year.

It also sounds like Brad and Joe are going to be experimenting with style, which may mean we're going to see some switches in lineups, particularly with the bigs (Queta, Garza and Williams, Oh My!) and those wings.

It's going to be fun watching those combinations. May not lead to many wins at first, but as long as the guys are competing.

We could even see the 4 aforementioned players on the court at the same time! At least in summer league.

Walsh sounded confident in his interview today. Said he was shooting well and the team knew it. We'll see how he's grown since last summer.

[hugepatsfan]

The front court is absolute ass but if Brad gets rid of terrorists Walsh and Tillman, I can live with this roster.

I know that Walsh is looking more redundant now with the additions of Scheierman, Gonzalez and Minott in particular, but i wanna see what he can do coming into year 3.

He looks a bit more filled out now, and he's still the youngest on the roster except for Gonzalez.

So, he's the summer league vet now, let's see what he can do. Maybe there will be a glut at that position and one of those guys will get packaged later in the season, but I don't want to see a player like Walsh get let go when this may be his breakout year.

It also sounds like Brad and Joe are going to be experimenting with style, which may mean we're going to see some switches in lineups, particularly with the bigs (Queta, Garza and Williams, Oh My!) and those wings.

It's going to be fun watching those combinations. May not lead to many wins at first, but as long as the guys are competing.

We could even see the 4 aforementioned players on the court at the same time! At least in summer league.

Walsh has a 4.5" greater reach than Scheierman and Gonzalez, IMO that puts him in a different category from a defensive scheme standpoint. Minott and he are in direct competition.

I think if Walsh is going to stick in the NBA, he'll have to adapt to a small ball 4 type of role (think old friend Brissett) or he'll need to up his shooting many times over to stick on the wing. He has the height/wingspan to adapt to that small ball 4 kind of role but he has to actually play like it. Right now he very much plays like a wing despite not having the shooting to hack it there.

If he does both (shooting and small ball 4) then he'll end up making a lot of money when his career is said and done.

[cloverleaf]

One of Niang and Hauser has to go.

I prefer keeping Niang because he's the better overall player and he has some dawg in him.

Use Sam in a trade that will get the Cs a big man.

Why does one have to go? Moving one but not the other doesn't do anything to get us below the tax. We're technically over the 2nd apron right now by about $300K but easy to shed that with a smaller move.

The "dog" that Niang has in him is taking cheap shots at people to make up for the fact that he's a downright terrible defender. He couldn't guard you or me. Hauser, on the other hand, is decent on defense. And both are shooters only except Hauser shoots it better on higher difficulty shot profile. No idea how Niang is a better overall player.

I was surprised that more people didn't pick up on Brad, in response to questions, a couple of times saying there could be merit to getting out of the luxury tax altogether. He also said he was fine going into the season with what they've got (which I don't think anyone believes), but he pointedly twice didn't shoot down the possibility of their going all the way below the luxury tax, which would have to be done for the next two years to make any difference. I'm not saying they'll nearly definitely do it, but...

[Half-Full]

The front court is absolute ass but if Brad gets rid of terrorists Walsh and Tillman, I can live with this roster.

I know that Walsh is looking more redundant now with the additions of Scheierman, Gonzalez and Minott in particular, but i wanna see what he can do coming into year 3.

He looks a bit more filled out now, and he's still the youngest on the roster except for Gonzalez.

So, he's the summer league vet now, let's see what he can do. Maybe there will be a glut at that position and one of those guys will get packaged later in the season, but I don't want to see a player like Walsh get let go when this may be his breakout year.

It also sounds like Brad and Joe are going to be experimenting with style, which may mean we're going to see some switches in lineups, particularly with the bigs (Queta, Garza and Williams, Oh My!) and those wings.

It's going to be fun watching those combinations. May not lead to many wins at first, but as long as the guys are competing.

We could even see the 4 aforementioned players on the court at the same time! At least in summer league.

Walsh has a 4.5" greater reach than Scheierman and Gonzalez, IMO that puts him in a different category from a defensive scheme standpoint. Minott and he are in direct competition.

In his recent interview, he talked about how he tried to be like the Jays. He realizes that he needs to play his own game, and I think that comes from confidence. It should free his game up. There is a lot I like about his game. He's very active, mixes it up in the paint, good rebounder, defender, and he's been working on his shot. I'm looking forward to seeing him play, and with the departure/absence of players, minutes will be available. I think he will be able to take advantage of that. Yes, there will be competition, and that's a good thing, but I feel Jordan will be in the thick of it.

[fallguy]

One of Niang and Hauser has to go.

I prefer keeping Niang because he's the better overall player and he has some dawg in him.

Use Sam in a trade that will get the Cs a big man.

Why does one have to go? Moving one but not the other doesn't do anything to get us below the tax. We're technically over the 2nd apron right now by about $300K but easy to shed that with a smaller move.

The "dog" that Niang has in him is taking cheap shots at people to make up for the fact that he's a downright terrible defender. He couldn't guard you or me. Hauser, on the other hand, is decent on defense. And both are shooters only except Hauser shoots it better on higher difficulty shot profile. No idea how Niang is a better overall player.

I was surprised that more people didn't pick up on Brad, in response to questions, a couple of times saying there could be merit to getting out of the luxury tax altogether. He also said he was fine going into the season with what they've got (which I don't think anyone believes), but he pointedly twice didn't shoot down the possibility of their going all the way below the luxury tax, which would have to be done for the next two years to make any difference. I'm not saying they'll nearly definitely do it, but...

There's an argument to do it next year and if a single year triggered a reset I'm sure they would do it. But not sure it makes sense to do two years given how it would limit the 26-27 team and a key year of Tatum's prime.

That said - I don't believe for a second they're not trying to move multiple guys on this roster.

[cloverleaf]

I know that Walsh is looking more redundant now with the additions of Scheierman, Gonzalez and Minott in particular, but i wanna see what he can do coming into year 3.

He looks a bit more filled out now, and he's still the youngest on the roster except for Gonzalez.

So, he's the summer league vet now, let's see what he can do. Maybe there will be a glut at that position and one of those guys will get packaged later in the season, but I don't want to see a player like Walsh get let go when this may be his breakout year.

It also sounds like Brad and Joe are going to be experimenting with style, which may mean we're going to see some switches in lineups, particularly with the bigs (Queta, Garza and Williams, Oh My!) and those wings.

It's going to be fun watching those combinations. May not lead to many wins at first, but as long as the guys are competing.

We could even see the 4 aforementioned players on the court at the same time! At least in summer league.

Walsh has a 4.5" greater reach than Scheierman and Gonzalez, IMO that puts him in a different category from a defensive scheme standpoint. Minott and he are in direct competition.

In his recent interview, he talked about how he tried to be like the Jays. He realizes that he needs to play his own game, and I think that comes from confidence. It should free his game up. There is a lot I like about his game. He's very active, mixes it up in the paint, good rebounder, defender, and he's been working on his shot. I'm looking forward to seeing him play, and with the departure/absence of players, minutes will be available. I think he will be able to take advantage of that. Yes, there will be competition, and that's a good thing, but I feel Jordan will be in the thick of it.

What stood out to me from his interview today was how confident he said he is now in his shot--and that the team is confident in his shot too. I hope he's right.

[fallguy]

Walsh has a 4.5" greater reach than Scheierman and Gonzalez, IMO that puts him in a different category from a defensive scheme standpoint. Minott and he are in direct competition.

In his recent interview, he talked about how he tried to be like the Jays. He realizes that he needs to play his own game, and I think that comes from confidence. It should free his game up. There is a lot I like about his game. He's very active, mixes it up in the paint, good rebounder, defender, and he's been working on his shot. I'm looking forward to seeing him play, and with the departure/absence of players, minutes will be available. I think he will be able to take advantage of that. Yes, there will be competition, and that's a good thing, but I feel Jordan will be in the thick of it.

What stood out to me from his interview today was how confident he said he is now in his shot--and that the team is confident in his shot too. I hope he's right.

This is legitimately exciting.

[djFan71]

Why does one have to go? Moving one but not the other doesn't do anything to get us below the tax. We're technically over the 2nd apron right now by about $300K but easy to shed that with a smaller move.

The "dog" that Niang has in him is taking cheap shots at people to make up for the fact that he's a downright terrible defender. He couldn't guard you or me. Hauser, on the other hand, is decent on defense. And both are shooters only except Hauser shoots it better on higher difficulty shot profile. No idea how Niang is a better overall player.

I was surprised that more people didn't pick up on Brad, in response to questions, a couple of times saying there could be merit to getting out of the luxury tax altogether. He also said he was fine going into the season with what they've got (which I don't think anyone believes), but he pointedly twice didn't shoot down the possibility of their going all the way below the luxury tax, which would have to be done for the next two years to make any difference. I'm not saying they'll nearly definitely do it, but...

There's an argument to do it next year and if a single year triggered a reset I'm sure they would do it. But not sure it makes sense to do two years given how it would limit the 26-27 team and a key year of Tatum's prime.

That said - I don't believe for a second they're not trying to move multiple guys on this roster.

I think you can be opportunistic. If a good deal comes along to let you duck without losing assets, do it. You can't duck twice without ducking once. It gives you the option for 26-27 as well, but doesn't require you to do it.

[fallguy]

I was surprised that more people didn't pick up on Brad, in response to questions, a couple of times saying there could be merit to getting out of the luxury tax altogether. He also said he was fine going into the season with what they've got (which I don't think anyone believes), but he pointedly twice didn't shoot down the possibility of their going all the way below the luxury tax, which would have to be done for the next two years to make any difference. I'm not saying they'll nearly definitely do it, but...

There's an argument to do it next year and if a single year triggered a reset I'm sure they would do it. But not sure it makes sense to do two years given how it would limit the 26-27 team and a key year of Tatum's prime.

That said - I don't believe for a second they're not trying to move multiple guys on this roster.

I think you can be opportunistic. If a good deal comes along to let you duck without losing assets, do it. You can't duck twice without ducking once. It gives you the option for 26-27 as well, but doesn't require you to do it.

Yeah, good points all and probably how they're approaching it.

[cloverleaf]

I was surprised that more people didn't pick up on Brad, in response to questions, a couple of times saying there could be merit to getting out of the luxury tax altogether. He also said he was fine going into the season with what they've got (which I don't think anyone believes), but he pointedly twice didn't shoot down the possibility of their going all the way below the luxury tax, which would have to be done for the next two years to make any difference. I'm not saying they'll nearly definitely do it, but...

There's an argument to do it next year and if a single year triggered a reset I'm sure they would do it. But not sure it makes sense to do two years given how it would limit the 26-27 team and a key year of Tatum's prime.

That said - I don't believe for a second they're not trying to move multiple guys on this roster.

I think you can be opportunistic. If a good deal comes along to let you duck without losing assets, do it. You can't duck twice without ducking once. It gives you the option for 26-27 as well, but doesn't require you to do it.

I think Felger had a decent take saying Brad's talking about it having value but not at the cost of flexibility re: picks makes it sound as if he can only dump Simons or whomever with adding picks as sweeteners and that Chisholm is saying he doesn't need to do that if there's such a basketball cost involved.

[fallguy]

Still don't see a reason to move Sam. Great contract, good player, continuity with the holdover guys.

[celtxman]

My prediction?

This is pretty much what the roster will look like on opening night.

Except we're gonna get under 2nd apron. We're just barely over, so all we gotta do is trade/waive either Tillman/Walsh/JD. If it's Tillman, then we'd have to get another big. So then we'd still have to end up dumping either Walsh/JD to get back under 2nd apron and get back down to 14 players on the standard roster.

So do we keep Tillman or no? I'd say it's a 50/50. We might keep him. But at the same time, he's not some young kid with upside we're developing. And he was pretty much useless last season on the court. So it's almost like a wasted roster spot..so I could see them dumping him and picking up another big who has upside and/or is more likely to provide some on court value.

As for who gets dumped between JD and Walsh, it could go either way I think. Walsh has shown more and played more during non-garbage time mins. However, JD plays a position/role we have a greater need for. Like we if lose JD, we might need to acquire another PG/ball handler to make up for that loss. But if Walsh is dumped? We lose nothing. We have plenty of other wings.

We probably won't know for sure which of these 3 is staying/going till after summer league. If Walsh does really well at SL, he's probably staying (or he has raised his trade value enough that we could get some value in return for him) but if he struggles, I figure he could get dumped via trade or get waived right after SL ends.

I'd be very surprised if they waved anybody just to get under the 2nd apron before opening night, there's literally no reason to do so. They can get under the 2nd apron at any point this season by waiving one of those guys, and being over the 2nd apron to START the season comes with no real penalty. It matters where they finish, not start. But besides that with Tatum out at least most the year if not all I doubt they'd want to start the year with only 13 healthy players on roster. Especially not if they plan on giving ample rest to the vets as part of a soft tank.

I do wonder what the plan is at center. They have a grand total of TWO guys who are healthy and over 6'8. Queta and Garza played a grand total of about 1100 minutes last year, those are their only two real centers. If queta misses any time, at all, it gets real dark. Last year they carried 4. Tillman and Minott can both probably play some small ball 4 and I'm sure they'll do a fair amount of that, but I'd think they would have at least one more actual "big" man on roster. Amari Williams may factor in, but as a 2-way he's limited to 50 games.

Yes. Even the KP and Jrue trades were officially for the 2025-26 season. No immediate financial reason to trade them. Knowing that they traded them quickly, it feels like they would try to do something for a real big man with the "flexibility " . I've been a guy who would like to see considerable Queta time. But right now we have the worst big man situation in the NBA. The good news is that Brad essentially said that moves will not just be decided by money.

[Celts17Pride]

Read on Twitter

[Hal14]

One of Niang and Hauser has to go.

I prefer keeping Niang because he's the better overall player and he has some dawg in him.

Use Sam in a trade that will get the Cs a big man.

Why does one have to go? Moving one but not the other doesn't do anything to get us below the tax. We're technically over the 2nd apron right now by about $300K but easy to shed that with a smaller move.

The "dog" that Niang has in him is taking cheap shots at people to make up for the fact that he's a downright terrible defender. He couldn't guard you or me. Hauser, on the other hand, is decent on defense. And both are shooters only except Hauser shoots it better on higher difficulty shot profile. No idea how Niang is a better overall player.

I think they're both good shooters. And I think it's debatable which one is the better defender.

Niang is definitely a better defender than you're giving him credit for. I'm not saying he's an elite defender but neither is Hauser. Niang might not be the tallest (he's about same height/wingspan as Hauser), the quickest or the most athletic forward - what he lacks in height/quickness/athleticism he makes up for with smarts, savvy, quick hands, effort, positioning, strength and physicality.

Rebounding-wise I'd say they're comparable.

The main difference is in terms of passing, ball handling, driving closeouts, attacking the basket, post moves, finishing near the basket through contact, setting hard screens - stuff like that it's a significant edge for Niang.

However, I do agree with you that we don't have to move one of them. They are somewhat redundant on the same team. But if the only goal is to get under the 2nd apron, we could just do that with a smaller move, like waiving or trading 1 of JD/Walsh/Tillman..

Lastly, as for your comment in bold, Brad Stevens himself seems to disagree:

Read on Twitter

[Fierce1]

One of Niang and Hauser has to go.

I prefer keeping Niang because he's the better overall player and he has some dawg in him.

Use Sam in a trade that will get the Cs a big man.

Why does one have to go? Moving one but not the other doesn't do anything to get us below the tax. We're technically over the 2nd apron right now by about $300K but easy to shed that with a smaller move.

The "dog" that Niang has in him is taking cheap shots at people to make up for the fact that he's a downright terrible defender. He couldn't guard you or me. Hauser, on the other hand, is decent on defense. And both are shooters only except Hauser shoots it better on higher difficulty shot profile. No idea how Niang is a better overall player.

That's because Niang is better inside the 3pt line.

We can agree to disagree about who's better, but one has to go.

And the tax seems to be a secondary issue as seen by not trading Simons before the trade became official.