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

[Half-Full]

I don't understand where this Niang love comes from. Hauser is a better shooter and defender. Hauser has a better career offensive rebounding % and the exact same career defensive rebounding %.

There's this idea that Niang is some tough rugged defender because he takes a couple cheap shots per game after someone blows by his cement block feet atrocious defense. No one fears Niang. No one thinks he's tough guy. He's a cheap shot artists and dirty player but not an actually good one where that type of enforced mentality benefits you and makes your opponents think.

And all this talk about him having more on offense than just shooting... he takes 2 field goal attempts from inside the arc per game compared to 1 for Hauser. Not a big difference, and Hauser shoots a better %. Oh, maybe the field attempts don't show it because he gets to the line? That'd be a valid counter, except that Niang only averages 1 free throw attempt every 2 games. That's double Hauser's rate, but so insignificant.

I think it's fair to say Niang is better on offense outside of shooting than Hauser but it's such a laughably immaterial volume that it doesn't really mean anything compared to Hauser not being an absolute sieve on defense and being a way better shooter in terms of actually having gravity and drawing defensive attention for it.

I'd actually like to keep Niang if tax situation allows it, but not because of this nonsense about him actually being decent. It's because he's that blend of being bad enough to only get a likely minimum salary on his next deal but also being decent enough that him on a minimum is also a nice fill the roster move. So with his connections to the area, if we keep him, I figure we can get a decent vet min signing for next year to fill in some spot minutes at the 4 behind Tatum when he's back.

If they can move Hauser for a starting big I'd do that, independent of Niang. But any trade of a non-starting player like Hauser for a starting player is always unrealistic in my mind.

people are trying to love Niang for the same reason they are trying to love simons.

Brad traded for them and that means they are awesome.

Yeah. If only he had traded for Giannis and Jokic. What was Brad thinking?

[Celts17Pride]

I personally would go get Nic Claxton from the Nets while you have an opportunity using Anfernee Simons. Maybe Brad Stevens has already tried or maybe Brad Stevens has no interest. I'll leave it to Brad Stevens, I think he knows better than myself. I think Claxton would cover up a lot of defensive deficiencies.

[Riverwalk2021]

Trade DWhite to OKC for Dort and ten first round draft picks. You'll win 20 games, get a top 4 pick and have a war chest of picks.

[Hal14]

Is Niang a better passer/handler than Hauser or does he just do it more to poor results? Not that assists are the be all and end all of passing, but they each average 1 assist/game. Niang is at 8.0 assist% compared to 6.5% for Hauser. But his turnover % is nearly double at 10.0% to 5.5% for Hauser.

I feel like people keep trying to sell Niang as more "diverse" than Hauser when in reality it means an extra couple of times per game he stupidly does something he isn't good at that on average yields poor results. Sure, if you handle more and pass more and drive more you'll have some highlights of you doing those things but he does all of them to terrible results.

C'mon now. If you've actually watched them play a decent amount, you wouldn't be asking this.

Anyone who watched Hauser can tell that he can't dribble, if he has the ball in the back court, he gets rid of it like it's a hot potato, even if the guy he's passing it to is Time Lord or Queta lol. Niang meanwhile has actual ball handling ability. If you watch them play, it's night and day in that aspect. Niang can post up, he can take his man off the dribble.

And again, if you watch them play, Niang is a much better passer. You can't just look at the numbers. Numbers are often influenced heavily by the team you're on. Being on a better team with better shooters = it's much easier to get assists. As far as the turnovers, Niang has higher usage and is actually used to handle the ball and create offense sometimes so it makes since he would have more turnovers than a guy who simply catches the ball and takes 3's.

[Half-Full]

people are trying to love Niang for the same reason they are trying to love simons.

Brad traded for them and that means they are awesome.

Really? I was thinking these two warm bodies are the best trash that Brad could get in order to get out of the 2nd apron. I have no love for either, but I understand why the trades happened. Not only that: like most here, I knew the trades were coming so I'm not complaining like an unattended baby with a huge diaper load.

If you are referring to me I also knew the trades were coming, I just knew that trading those 2 guys could easily have netter a superior return than when we are stuck with. Even if it meant losing a few 2nd round picks, or losing Hauser to get below the apron.

What did Brad miss out on? Why would he pass on a superior return, especially one that could "easily" have been made. Remember, it is not just Brad making the decisions. Those involved in the trade discussions have many years of basketball experience. How could they have all missed the mark?

[Riverwalk2021]

I personally would go get Nic Claxton from the Nets while you have an opportunity using Anfernee Simons. Maybe Brad Stevens has already tried or maybe Brad Stevens has no interest. I'll leave it to Brad Stevens, I think he knows better than myself. I think Claxton would cover up a lot of defensive deficiencies.

Haven't seen enough of Claxton but if I had to guess Brad wants to dump the contracts of Simmons, Niang, Hauser for cheaper win-now players on expiring, cheaper deals without send out any draft capital. He may have to at this rate though.

Not a fan of Vuc but like a Simmons for Vuc swap because Vuc is cheaper, fills a huge need and is on an expiring. The other deal that makes sense for both teams is WCJ for Hauser but we would need to attach draft capital which is probably a no go.

[jmr07019]

I don't understand where this Niang love comes from. Hauser is a better shooter and defender. Hauser has a better career offensive rebounding % and the exact same career defensive rebounding %.

There's this idea that Niang is some tough rugged defender because he takes a couple cheap shots per game after someone blows by his cement block feet atrocious defense. No one fears Niang. No one thinks he's tough guy. He's a cheap shot artists and dirty player but not an actually good one where that type of enforced mentality benefits you and makes your opponents think.

And all this talk about him having more on offense than just shooting... he takes 2 field goal attempts from inside the arc per game compared to 1 for Hauser. Not a big difference, and Hauser shoots a better %. Oh, maybe the field attempts don't show it because he gets to the line? That'd be a valid counter, except that Niang only averages 1 free throw attempt every 2 games. That's double Hauser's rate, but so insignificant.

I think it's fair to say Niang is better on offense outside of shooting than Hauser but it's such a laughably immaterial volume that it doesn't really mean anything compared to Hauser not being an absolute sieve on defense and being a way better shooter in terms of actually having gravity and drawing defensive attention for it.

I'd actually like to keep Niang if tax situation allows it, but not because of this nonsense about him actually being decent. It's because he's that blend of being bad enough to only get a likely minimum salary on his next deal but also being decent enough that him on a minimum is also a nice fill the roster move. So with his connections to the area, if we keep him, I figure we can get a decent vet min signing for next year to fill in some spot minutes at the 4 behind Tatum when he's back.

If they can move Hauser for a starting big I'd do that, independent of Niang. But any trade of a non-starting player like Hauser for a starting player is always unrealistic in my mind.

people are trying to love Niang for the same reason they are trying to love simons.

Brad traded for them and that means they are awesome.

Celtics fans rooting for Celtics players?! The audacity of these people smh

[Smart2Nesmith43]

Really? I was thinking these two warm bodies are the best trash that Brad could get in order to get out of the 2nd apron. I have no love for either, but I understand why the trades happened. Not only that: like most here, I knew the trades were coming so I'm not complaining like an unattended baby with a huge diaper load.

If you are referring to me I also knew the trades were coming, I just knew that trading those 2 guys could easily have netter a superior return than when we are stuck with. Even if it meant losing a few 2nd round picks, or losing Hauser to get below the apron.

What did Brad miss out on? Why would he pass on a superior return, especially one that could "easily" have been made. Remember, it is not just Brad making the decisions. Those involved in the trade discussions have many years of basketball experience. How could they have all missed the mark?

Well because Larry Russell isn't in the Celtics front office duh.

[Fierce1]

If you are referring to me I also knew the trades were coming, I just knew that trading those 2 guys could easily have netter a superior return than when we are stuck with. Even if it meant losing a few 2nd round picks, or losing Hauser to get below the apron.

What did Brad miss out on? Why would he pass on a superior return, especially one that could "easily" have been made. Remember, it is not just Brad making the decisions. Those involved in the trade discussions have many years of basketball experience. How could they have all missed the mark?

Well because Larry Russell isn't in the Celtics front office duh.

[Fierce1]

If Brad can get Claxton and Coby White for Simons, Hauser, and Tillman, we're set for next season.

Vuc or Claxton would be great.

[hugepatsfan]

Is Niang a better passer/handler than Hauser or does he just do it more to poor results? Not that assists are the be all and end all of passing, but they each average 1 assist/game. Niang is at 8.0 assist% compared to 6.5% for Hauser. But his turnover % is nearly double at 10.0% to 5.5% for Hauser.

I feel like people keep trying to sell Niang as more "diverse" than Hauser when in reality it means an extra couple of times per game he stupidly does something he isn't good at that on average yields poor results. Sure, if you handle more and pass more and drive more you'll have some highlights of you doing those things but he does all of them to terrible results.

The Orlando series should have given you enough data to conclude that Sam is just a regular season player.

Don't use the stats, the eye test will tell you Sam is soft.

What happened when Sam was switched on to Banchero or Franz Wagner?

Sam also cannot drive to the basket and is a liability on fast breaks.

He is simply just a shooter, like Kyle Korver.

I'm not saying that Hauser is some superstar. Just better than Niang. You keep mentioning all of Hauser's weaknesses like they don't pretty much all apply to Niang. Niang is stronger but that doesn't translate to rebounding and just makes him slower on defense. I can't fathom that someone thinks Niang is a better player than Hauser.

Your point about Hauser being better to trade makes sense. It clears more long term money. Bigger salary to use now which helps the matching. But the key point is that unlike Niang he actually has some value league wide because he's better. That's all I'm arguing there.

[cl2117]

Sam was perfect with a healthy KP and a productive Jrue Holiday.

But right now Sam is more of a luxury than a need.

Cs have more than enough shooters, PP, Niang, Simons, and Baylor.

Problem with Sam is he's soft.
He gets pushed around by stronger players and he's not a threat to drive to the basket.

If it's between Niang and Sam, Niang has more tricks.

Niang even gets under your skin and doesn't shy away from physicality.

The 1st rnd series against Orlando really exposed Sam Hauser.

Niang is 5 years older and expiring though. Keep the younger guy who is already locked in on a solid contract and keep developing him with more minutes.

Don't dump him as a "luxury" in a bridge season to keep a guy who is at best marginally better and could easily jump ship next summer. We don't need to balance the roster for next year, we need to keep and develop pieces that are going to be able to contribute thereafter. Hauser is the clear choice between the two.

Hauser is on a more expensive contract, though. Roughly $11 mil a year. Niang is like $8mil this year. And since he's 32, maybe we're able to extend him for a couple more years at only like $4mil a year. So that's significant cost savings, for arguably a better player. And those cost. savings are crucial, given our financial situation.

Sure, Sam is younger and locked in for more years on his deal. Which means we could get more value for him in a trade.

Niang isn't exactly the most athletic guy though, I'd be worried about significantly diminishing returns to scale as he gets deeper into his 30's (same will 100% be true for Hauser). Sure his game may age well because he doesn't rely on athleticism, but it could also age like milk if he loses a step and is a pure liability on the defensive end (and Niang has no steps to spare on that end of the court).

Sam is right in his prime and while he doesn't have a high ceiling, his floor is rock solid, so barring injury I feel like he's an incredibly safe option in terms of value. I'd move Niang now for the cost savings and then if we are still squeezed in the future I think you'd be able to swap Hauser for the likes of Niang without an issue (maybe even literally Niang depending on where he ends up).

If it's an either/or proposition for this season I'm firmly in the Hauser camp unless he's an unavoidable cap casualty as we try to duck the tax.

[Shak_Celts]

If the Celtics are bad, they are bad, but I have been seeing some of the same people say that most of the time I have been a fan. Every season, maybe even when we got Jrue and KP, the same people tell us how many teams are better than us during the off-season. Any time any other team makes a move, we get post after the post saying how much better they are than we are.

Even with how badly we played, we went farther than most of the teams that a lot of you claimed to be better than us in the offseason. This has been happening for seasons upon seasons. “These teams have gotten so much better than us!!” It’s a theme every offseason.

Let it play out. You don’t have to convince us that we’re going to be bad, if that’s what you want, then why do you have to convince us? You already won!

No, the reason you’re trying to convince us (yourselves) is because you don’t believe we’ll actually be as bad as you say! You want us to be bad, you’re preaching that we’ll be bad, what’s the problem?? Confusing!

Bringing up the 6ers and Mavs after they jumped the teams with the worst records, means little to me.

[Hal14]

Niang is 5 years older and expiring though. Keep the younger guy who is already locked in on a solid contract and keep developing him with more minutes.

Don't dump him as a "luxury" in a bridge season to keep a guy who is at best marginally better and could easily jump ship next summer. We don't need to balance the roster for next year, we need to keep and develop pieces that are going to be able to contribute thereafter. Hauser is the clear choice between the two.

Hauser is on a more expensive contract, though. Roughly $11 mil a year. Niang is like $8mil this year. And since he's 32, maybe we're able to extend him for a couple more years at only like $4mil a year. So that's significant cost savings, for arguably a better player. And those cost. savings are crucial, given our financial situation.

Sure, Sam is younger and locked in for more years on his deal. Which means we could get more value for him in a trade.

Niang isn't exactly the most athletic guy though, I'd be worried about significantly diminishing returns to scale as he gets deeper into his 30's (same will 100% be true for Hauser). Sure his game may age well because he doesn't rely on athleticism, but it could also age like milk if he loses a step and is a pure liability on the defensive end (and Niang has no steps to spare on that end of the court).

Sam is right in his prime and while he doesn't have a high ceiling, his floor is rock solid, so barring injury I feel like he's an incredibly safe option in terms of value. I'd move Niang now for the cost savings and then if we are still squeezed in the future I think you'd be able to swap Hauser for the likes of Niang without an issue (maybe even literally Niang depending on where he ends up).

If it's an either/or proposition for this season I'm firmly in the Hauser camp unless he's an unavoidable cap casualty as we try to duck the tax.

Exactly. Niang is not a guy who has ever relied on athleticism. He's been effective due to his smarts, savvy, feel, skill, craft, shooting, toughness and strength. Exactly the type of guy whose game will age well.

I wouldn't necessarily say Hauser's floor is rock solid. His floor is a guy who's unplayable in the playoffs. Hauser has had 3 postseasons now where he's gotten rotation mins. 22-23 playoffs he was in and out of the rotation, eventually losing his rotation spot to Grant, even though Grant was playing with a hand injury so severe he got surgery right after the season. 23-24 he had his moments where he was good but also had moments where he was pretty much unpayable. He was hit or miss. And in the 24-25 playoffs, he was ok at times but overall was bad - partly of course due to the back injury - which for all we know will continue to linger and cause problems for the rest of his career.

Niang on the other hand has logged 100+ mins in 5 different postseasons and to my knowledge has been more consistently playable than Hauser during those 5 playoff runs.

Bottom line, overall as players they are pretty comparable. We could sit here all day and debate which one is better. At the end of the day, they're both like a 7th/8th man in your rotation. They're not gonna make or break your title chances. If they are that far down in the rotation and they are so comparable to each other that it's basically like splitting hairs, give me the cheaper guy. Hauser is locked in long term at like $11mil a year. Niang is $8 mil this year and after that we could probably resign him for like 2 years at $4mil a year or so. That's a significant cost savings, which means we have more $ available so that the rest of the roster can be better.

Or maybe after this season, we don't even bring Niang back, because who knows, maybe we find out this season that we are getting enough value from guys like Walsh/Hugo/Scheirman/Minott that we don't really need either Hauser or Niang. Again, it's just the 7th/8th man spot in the rotation..as long as you've got someone halfway decent in that slot, you're ok. For a spot that deep in the rotation, you don't need to be paying a guy over $10mil a year, especially when he's mainly just a shooter and you're already paying 2 other guys on your roster supermax money.

[Hal14]

Interesting the Windy report today that we're actively exploring trading Simons.

While I have advocated for Simons on here, I get it. On one hand, if we're not going for a title this season, mine as well move Simons to duck under the tax completely..why pay tax on a team you know isn't going to contend?

On the other hand, Simons is only 26 years old. As D-White ages, it's certainly fair to question whether he can be a reliable 3rd scoring option for a championship team, post-Tatum injury. And it's also fair to question whether Pritchard could handle such a large role.

So the case to keep Simons is, you need enough scoring weapons to win a title. Without Simons, we might not have that. With Simons, we probably do.

But then on the flip side, the benefit to keeping Simons I just outlined, might be outweighed by the cost to keep him this season + the cost to keep him long term, along with his defensive limitations. Maybe they feel like the dollar amount his extension would cost would be too pricey, given the amount we're already paying tatum/brown/white, not to mention Pritchard being a similar player on a much cheaper contract.

Plus they might feel like it'd be too hard to win a title with 2 guards (Pritchard, Simons) playing rotation mins who are suspect defenders. Not to mention Hauser (if he stays) has defensive limitations as well, and who knows if we will be able to get a C who can defend..

So I get it. Plus, part of OKC's blueprint for winning the title this year was having a deep squad of like 9 or 10 guys who could *all* defend.

It doesn't necessarily mean Simons will be traded. But it sounds like Brad is at least doing some due diligence to see what the trade market would look like for Simons, and if there is a deal out there where we could get sufficient value for him.

He's just doing his job. I mean for crying out loud, he was taking calls this summer for potential JB/White trades. It's no secret that during Brad's tenure, the only one who hasn't been a trade candidate is Tatum.

Other thing I would add - if we do simply just dump Simons and don't even get much value back for him, that pretty much tells me that we are basically tanking this season and are trying to get a lottery pick.

It just happened last season with the Mavs. Kyrie tore his ACL, mavs tanked, got no. 1 pick and got Cooper Flagg. There's 3-5 guys at the top of the 2026 draft with star upside..

[Larry_Russell]

If you are referring to me I also knew the trades were coming, I just knew that trading those 2 guys could easily have netter a superior return than when we are stuck with. Even if it meant losing a few 2nd round picks, or losing Hauser to get below the apron.

What did Brad miss out on? Why would he pass on a superior return, especially one that could "easily" have been made. Remember, it is not just Brad making the decisions. Those involved in the trade discussions have many years of basketball experience. How could they have all missed the mark?

Well because Larry Russell isn't in the Celtics front office duh.

I promise you there was better offers

[Larry_Russell]

Interesting the Windy report today that we're actively exploring trading Simons.
.

Of course they are, Simons is a bad player that Brad jumped at trading for to get those 2 second rounders (that he lost) thinking he could easily flip Simons.

Now he is worried he cant. Thats why he was trying to talk Simons up in that interview the other day. Simons has less value than Jrue.




And we all know Jrue didnt have much. But a 26 year old expiring player had to have 2-2nds attached to him to trade him for Jrue.

[jfs1000d]

4 Centers and none of them are legit NBA starting Center.

Tillman will be gone because he's just not fitting in.

So that's 3 Centers and Amari is a rookie who will need to go through the learning curve.

Celtics really weak at the PF and C position right now.

Sacrifice one of the shooters to improve the PF or C spot.

Tillman is gonna get every opportunity to play. Quetta, Garza, Tillman are the centers. Whoever plays well gets the job.

Tillman can also play as a 4 in a big lineup. He didn't play this year, doesn't mean he won't play next year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's trash.

We need Brad to do better than those 4 you mentioned.

For one year? Why?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fallguy]

Interesting the Windy report today that we're actively exploring trading Simons.

While I have advocated for Simons on here, I get it. On one hand, if we're not going for a title this season, mine as well move Simons to duck under the tax completely..why pay tax on a team you know isn't going to contend?

On the other hand, Simons is only 26 years old. As D-White ages, it's certainly fair to question whether he can be a reliable 3rd scoring option for a championship team, post-Tatum injury. And it's also fair to question whether Pritchard could handle such a large role.

So the case to keep Simons is, you need enough scoring weapons to win a title. Without Simons, we might not have that. With Simons, we probably do.

But then on the flip side, the benefit to keeping Simons I just outlined, might be outweighed by the cost to keep him this season + the cost to keep him long term, along with his defensive limitations. Maybe they feel like the dollar amount his extension would cost would be too pricey, given the amount we're already paying tatum/brown/white, not to mention Pritchard being a similar player on a much cheaper contract.

Plus they might feel like it'd be too hard to win a title with 2 guards (Pritchard, Simons) playing rotation mins who are suspect defenders. Not to mention Hauser (if he stays) has defensive limitations as well, and who knows if we will be able to get a C who can defend..

So I get it. Plus, part of OKC's blueprint for winning the title this year was having a deep squad of like 9 or 10 guys who could *all* defend.

It doesn't necessarily mean Simons will be traded. But it sounds like Brad is at least doing some due diligence to see what the trade market would look like for Simons, and if there is a deal out there where we could get sufficient value for him.

He's just doing his job. I mean for crying out loud, he was taking calls this summer for potential JB/White trades. It's no secret that during Brad's tenure, the only one who hasn't been a trade candidate is Tatum.

Other thing I would add - if we do simply just dump Simons and don't even get much value back for him, that pretty much tells me that we are basically tanking this season and are trying to get a lottery pick.

It just happened last season with the Mavs. Kyrie tore his ACL, mavs tanked, got no. 1 pick and got Cooper Flagg. There's 3-5 guys at the top of the 2026 draft with star upside..

I think you're on it with respect to the bolded stuff. White is going to get worse as a defender, maybe only incrementally, but worse. And PP will never be a stopper (on top of being small). Adding a poor defender like Simons doesn't make sense especially because he's not going to have the ball in his hands to generate offense a lot once JB/JT are both back and cooking.

[fallguy]

What did Brad miss out on? Why would he pass on a superior return, especially one that could "easily" have been made. Remember, it is not just Brad making the decisions. Those involved in the trade discussions have many years of basketball experience. How could they have all missed the mark?

Well because Larry Russell isn't in the Celtics front office duh.

I promise you there was better offers

Based on what?