Hayward Undecided

[Curmudgeon]

In a perfect world of course but I don't think he's worth a max deal. Plus Washington needs to match whatever he's offered anyways otherwise they're kind of stuck. Unless they think Oubre is a good replacement or they're able to move Mahimni and Gortat.

You are contradicting yourself. If W#ashington needs to match, offer Porter a max deal. He may not be worth it, but that's Washington's problem if they match. Are you saying "Washington has to match but maybe they won't?"

We don't want to tie up our cap sheet by renouncing everyone, given potential sign-and-trade options or back-up plans, in order to sign Otto Porter to a max offer. It's a problem even if Washington matches, and if they don't, we don't want to give Porter a max.

So assuming Hayward says no, what are you going to do with the cap space? If you do nothing and then extend IT (and/or Bradley) it all goes "poof."

If you plan to keep IT, the 2017 Summer cap space is a one shot deal. Use it or lose it. You can spend the cap space on free agents and then go over the cap to sign IT and Bradley using your Bird rights. Or not. In one case you have Porter (or Gallinari,m or Monroe or whomever you elect to sign); In the other case you don't.

[VeryMuchWoke]

You are contradicting yourself. If W#ashington needs to match, offer Porter a max deal. He may not be worth it, but that's Washington's problem if they match. Are you saying "Washington has to match but maybe they won't?"

We don't want to tie up our cap sheet by renouncing everyone, given potential sign-and-trade options or back-up plans, in order to sign Otto Porter to a max offer. It's a problem even if Washington matches, and if they don't, we don't want to give Porter a max.

So assuming Hayward says no, what are you going to do with the cap space? If you do nothing and then extend IT (and/or Bradley) it all goes "poof."

If you plan to keep IT, the 2017 Summer cap space is a one shot deal. Use it or lose it. You can spend the cap space on free agents and then go over the cap to sign IT and Bradley using your Bird rights. Or not. In one case you have Porter (or Gallinari,m or Monroe or whomever you elect to sign); In the other case you don't.

Porter at the max is a negative asset. We're not renouncing Kelly and dumping one of Rozier/Smart/Bradley/Crowder/IT to free up space to offer him the max just to screw up Washington. Leave that to the Sixers, Nets, and Magic's of the league.

[Captain_Caveman]

You are contradicting yourself. If W#ashington needs to match, offer Porter a max deal. He may not be worth it, but that's Washington's problem if they match. Are you saying "Washington has to match but maybe they won't?"

We don't want to tie up our cap sheet by renouncing everyone, given potential sign-and-trade options or back-up plans, in order to sign Otto Porter to a max offer. It's a problem even if Washington matches, and if they don't, we don't want to give Porter a max.

So assuming Hayward says no, what are you going to do with the cap space? If you do nothing and then extend IT (and/or Bradley) it all goes "poof."

If you plan to keep IT, the 2017 Summer cap space is a one shot deal. Use it or lose it. You can spend the cap space on free agents and then go over the cap to sign IT and Bradley using your Bird rights. Or not. In one case you have Porter (or Gallinari,m or Monroe or whomever you elect to sign); In the other case you don't.

No, he's right. Renouncing everyone just to give Porter a max offer sheet that the Wiz are all but sure to match is a bad plan all around. It ties our money up and takes options off the table, all for a player we don't even need and won't even land.

Even if Hayward and Griffin say no, there are lots of other uses for cap room, or players we'd need to renounce to get it. Not renouncing guys could allow us to land Gallinari in a sign and trade while also retaining Kelly. With cap room, we could trade for guys like DeAndre or Marc Gasol without having to send back anything but draft picks. Or maybe just extend IT early to a shorter deal, which he might go for in order to reduce the risk on his side.

[Andrew McCeltic]

We don't want to tie up our cap sheet by renouncing everyone, given potential sign-and-trade options or back-up plans, in order to sign Otto Porter to a max offer. It's a problem even if Washington matches, and if they don't, we don't want to give Porter a max.

So assuming Hayward says no, what are you going to do with the cap space? If you do nothing and then extend IT (and/or Bradley) it all goes "poof."

If you plan to keep IT, the 2017 Summer cap space is a one shot deal. Use it or lose it. You can spend the cap space on free agents and then go over the cap to sign IT and Bradley using your Bird rights. Or not. In one case you have Porter (or Gallinari,m or Monroe or whomever you elect to sign); In the other case you don't.

No, he's right. Renouncing everyone just to give Porter a max offer sheet that the Wiz are all but sure to match is a bad plan all around. It ties our money up and takes options off the table, all for a player we don't even need and won't even land.

Even if Hayward and Griffin say no, there are lots of other uses for cap room, or players we'd need to renounce to get it. Not renouncing guys could allow us to land Gallinari in a sign and trade while also retaining Kelly. With cap room, we could trade for guys like DeAndre or Marc Gasol without having to send back anything but draft picks. Or maybe just extend IT early to a shorter deal, which he might go for in order to reduce the risk on his side.

Yeah, worst case is we give Jerebko another year at 8 million or so, Amir at 15. Keep Tyler Zeller, get Olynyk on a 1+1. Then we've still got contracts to package with picks for Butler, George, whoever.

Portland is willing to give up a 1st to move a contract. I'd rather get Giles with the 15th pick and take on Crabbe's or Turner's deal than max Porter.

Just as likely Porter goes somewhere else, and we deal Crowder/Zeller to WAS for Gortat and a 1st..

[Andrew McCeltic]

Could see us sign and trade a lot for Gallo, actually.

[FlatearthZorro]

Could see us sign and trade a lot for Gallo, actually.

Why wouldl we sign and trade a lot for Gallo if he's a FA? Also why wouldn't we trade for Wilson Chandler who's a better player and was better at both ends of the court last season? There were a ton of rumors Chandler wanted to leave Denver.

[Darthlukey]

So assuming Hayward says no, what are you going to do with the cap space? If you do nothing and then extend IT (and/or Bradley) it all goes "poof."

If you plan to keep IT, the 2017 Summer cap space is a one shot deal. Use it or lose it. You can spend the cap space on free agents and then go over the cap to sign IT and Bradley using your Bird rights. Or not. In one case you have Porter (or Gallinari,m or Monroe or whomever you elect to sign); In the other case you don't.

No, he's right. Renouncing everyone just to give Porter a max offer sheet that the Wiz are all but sure to match is a bad plan all around. It ties our money up and takes options off the table, all for a player we don't even need and won't even land.

Even if Hayward and Griffin say no, there are lots of other uses for cap room, or players we'd need to renounce to get it. Not renouncing guys could allow us to land Gallinari in a sign and trade while also retaining Kelly. With cap room, we could trade for guys like DeAndre or Marc Gasol without having to send back anything but draft picks. Or maybe just extend IT early to a shorter deal, which he might go for in order to reduce the risk on his side.

Yeah, worst case is we give Jerebko another year at 8 million or so, Amir at 15. Keep Tyler Zeller, get Olynyk on a 1+1. Then we've still got contracts to package with picks for Butler, George, whoever.

Portland is willing to give up a 1st to move a contract. I'd rather get Giles with the 15th pick and take on Crabbe's or Turner's deal than max Porter.

Just as likely Porter goes somewhere else, and we deal Crowder/Zeller to WAS for Gortat and a 1st..

Wouldn't mind getting Crabbe and the 15th at all of they strike out on other players in free agency. Really puts the owness on Ainge to move Bradley or crowder though

[Darthlukey]

Could see us sign and trade a lot for Gallo, actually.

Why wouldl we sign and trade a lot for Gallo if he's a FA? Also why wouldn't we trade for Wilson Chandler who's a better player and was better at both ends of the court last season? There were a ton of rumors Chandler wanted to leave Denver.

Gallo is a small forward, thats how he plays. But to end games, you really want to play him at the 4. Can you do that with chandler? I don't know much about him

[Darthlukey]

We don't want to tie up our cap sheet by renouncing everyone, given potential sign-and-trade options or back-up plans, in order to sign Otto Porter to a max offer. It's a problem even if Washington matches, and if they don't, we don't want to give Porter a max.

So assuming Hayward says no, what are you going to do with the cap space? If you do nothing and then extend IT (and/or Bradley) it all goes "poof."

If you plan to keep IT, the 2017 Summer cap space is a one shot deal. Use it or lose it. You can spend the cap space on free agents and then go over the cap to sign IT and Bradley using your Bird rights. Or not. In one case you have Porter (or Gallinari,m or Monroe or whomever you elect to sign); In the other case you don't.

Porter at the max is a negative asset. We're not renouncing Kelly and dumping one of Rozier/Smart/Bradley/Crowder/IT to free up space to offer him the max just to screw up Washington. Leave that to the Sixers, Nets, and Magic's of the league.

Surely the Nets will offer him a max, just to get shot down by the wizards. Probably the same thing with pope at detroit

[FlatearthZorro]

Could see us sign and trade a lot for Gallo, actually.

Why wouldl we sign and trade a lot for Gallo if he's a FA? Also why wouldn't we trade for Wilson Chandler who's a better player and was better at both ends of the court last season? There were a ton of rumors Chandler wanted to leave Denver.

Gallo is a small forward, thats how he plays. But to end games, you really want to play him at the 4. Can you do that with chandler? I don't know much about him

Yea, he has legit size, can shoot 3s, rebounds and defends better than Gallinari, to add to that he doesn't have Danillo's injury history.

[Andrew McCeltic]

Could see us sign and trade a lot for Gallo, actually.

Why wouldl we sign and trade a lot for Gallo if he's a FA? Also why wouldn't we trade for Wilson Chandler who's a better player and was better at both ends of the court last season? There were a ton of rumors Chandler wanted to leave Denver.

I wouldn't, but sometimes I put an Ainge wildcard in my scenarios. He does obvious stuff like IT for a 1st, but no one saw Crowder etc. for Rondo coming.

Imagining something like Zeller's deal, Olynyk S&T, Yabu and/or Rozier for Gallo at like 20 million per, and we keep holds on Amir and Jerebko, roll them over for another year, extend Smart.

[FlatearthZorro]

Could see us sign and trade a lot for Gallo, actually.

Why wouldl we sign and trade a lot for Gallo if he's a FA? Also why wouldn't we trade for Wilson Chandler who's a better player and was better at both ends of the court last season? There were a ton of rumors Chandler wanted to leave Denver.

I wouldn't, but sometimes I put an Ainge wildcard in my scenarios. He does obvious stuff like IT for a 1st, but no one saw Crowder etc. for Rondo coming.

Imagining something like Zeller's deal, Olynyk S&T, Yabu and/or Rozier for Gallo at like 20 million per, and we keep holds on Amir and Jerebko, roll them over for another year, extend Smart.

Both Amir and Jerebko are useless. To me Gallo is a worst case scenario as he's injury prone and last year was averaging 18 points- only 4 more than Jae(2 or 1 and a half buckets). Having him at 20 mils is god awful. I'd rather have Millsap, easily at 25-26.

Just going to follow up: Gallinari games played in the past 6 seasons:

11-12 : 43 GP
12-13: 71 GP
13- 14: 0
14-15: 59
15-16: 53
16-17: 63

He's varely played 70 games once in that span, I doubt this trend changes going into his 30's.

[Andrew McCeltic]

Why wouldl we sign and trade a lot for Gallo if he's a FA? Also why wouldn't we trade for Wilson Chandler who's a better player and was better at both ends of the court last season? There were a ton of rumors Chandler wanted to leave Denver.

I wouldn't, but sometimes I put an Ainge wildcard in my scenarios. He does obvious stuff like IT for a 1st, but no one saw Crowder etc. for Rondo coming.

Imagining something like Zeller's deal, Olynyk S&T, Yabu and/or Rozier for Gallo at like 20 million per, and we keep holds on Amir and Jerebko, roll them over for another year, extend Smart.

Both Amir and Jerebko are useless. To me Gallo is a worst case scenario as he's injury prone and last year was averaging 18 points- only 4 more than Jae(2 or 1 and a half buckets). Having him at 20 mils is god awful. I'd rather have Millsap, easily at 25-26.

Just going to follow up: Gallinari games played in the past 6 seasons:

11-12 : 43 GP
12-13: 71 GP
13- 14: 0
14-15: 59
15-16: 53
16-17: 63

He's varely played 70 games once in that span, I doubt this trend changes going into his 30's.

Amir is good, Jerebko has his moments. What I meant (can't remember if I said it already in this thread) is that by keeping them for another year, we'd have big fat expiring contract chips again. So say you get Gallo, draft Fultz, and have 20 million in expirings, the BKN 18, other picks, and Jaylen, Zizic, Fultz on rookie deals. You have the flexibility to get Butler, George, anyone else who comes on the market - Marc Gasol, Anthony Davis, etc.

Re: Gallo's health, it's a major or minor problem. He's weak defensively, and has other stray issues. But he can definitely score, and create his own shot, like IT. He might do well for us with less offensive responsibility - as many shot attempts, but able to stay in the background on some plays, not having to do as much. He's still young-ish, and a 2 or 3 year deal could work well for us and him.

I don't know what kind of injuries he's accumulating, I'm not a trainer or doctor, but it's possible if he gets serious about his health and conditioning getting older, he could put together some 70-80 game runs. Tyson Chandler, Grant Hill, Marcus Camby are players I think of who moved beyond their injury-prone years to stabilize a little.

[chrisab123]

Porter is 23 years old, healthy, was a #3 pick and shot over 43 percent from beyond the arc last year. That was 5th overall in the entire NBA. He averaged one less rebound per 36 than Olynyk.

Pretty good consolation prize if you can't get Hayward IMHO. I'll certainly take Porter over Gallinari.

In a perfect world of course but I don't think he's worth a max deal. Plus Washington needs to match whatever he's offered anyways otherwise they're kind of stuck. Unless they think Oubre is a good replacement or they're able to move Mahimni and Gortat.

You are contradicting yourself. If W#ashington needs to match, offer Porter a max deal. He may not be worth it, but that's Washington's problem if they match. Are you saying "Washington has to match but maybe they won't?"

If he was willing to sign a 16 million a year deal or something of that effect I'd take him. He's not a max player. BUT since he's restricted someone will offer him the max and essentially force Washington to overpay him. Most likely they'll match but if not then whoever gets Porter is probably regretting that contract next year.

[brackdan70]

In a perfect world of course but I don't think he's worth a max deal. Plus Washington needs to match whatever he's offered anyways otherwise they're kind of stuck. Unless they think Oubre is a good replacement or they're able to move Mahimni and Gortat.

You are contradicting yourself. If W#ashington needs to match, offer Porter a max deal. He may not be worth it, but that's Washington's problem if they match. Are you saying "Washington has to match but maybe they won't?"

If he was willing to sign a 16 million a year deal or something of that effect I'd take him. He's not a max player. BUT since he's restricted someone will offer him the max and essentially force Washington to overpay him. Most likely they'll match but if not then whoever gets Porter is probably regretting that contract next year.

Porter is an easy max RFA. pretty silly to think otherwise. I would be surprised if Wiz didn't match any offer.
as a 23 year old he really put up special numbers. TS% 0.628, BPM 3.9, Ortg 129, Drtg 108, 3pt% 0.434, TRB% 11.1 (very good for a wing)

Porter will be 24-28 (his prime) for his next contract. the above numbers compare positively to our favorite FA target....and his Max would start at 25.25 million. Would be amazing if we could get Porter but IMO he is not obtainable.

[Gomes3PC]

Maxing Porter with this teams resigns us to never being better than what we are now. Porter is a nice player, but he is not a dynamic player at either end. You're paying him the max mainly because he had a hot first half of the year from 3, when he shot 47% from deep. Post-ASB he shot 34% from 3, more in line with his career average, and in the playoffs he shot under 30%.

If Porter is really more of a ~35% shooter from deep and not 40%+, he's something along the lines of a healthy DeMarre Carroll. That's a nice player, but more of a $15M/yr guy and not a max guy. I suppose you pay more to see if he develops further, but I just don't see the explosion of defensive focus to be elite at either end as a defensive stopper or as a primary playmaker.

[Gomes3PC]

If we're going to max offer a RFA, frankly I'd rather go after KCP. He's already a borderline elite defender and I've seen more from him suggesting he can be a 2nd option playmaker than I have ever seen from Porter.

[VeryMuchWoke]

Porter is an easy max RFA. pretty silly to think otherwise. I would be surprised if Wiz didn't match any offer.
as a 23 year old he really put up special numbers. TS% 0.628, BPM 3.9, Ortg 129, Drtg 108, 3pt% 0.434, TRB% 11.1 (very good for a wing)

Porter will be 24-28 (his prime) for his next contract. the above numbers compare positively to our favorite FA target....and his Max would start at 25.25 million. Would be amazing if we could get Porter but IMO he is not obtainable.

For the longest time max contracts were reserved for star players. You can only fit 2-3 max contracts on a team, and generally the goal would be to build a team around 2-3 star players. With recent revisions to the CBA max players can receive an even higher percentage of the cap, so, if anything, fewer players should be worthy of the max. Perception, however, seems to be the opposite.

Do you believe that every decent 3rd or 4th starter is deserving of a max, or do you believe Otto Porter is a future all star? Why?

[sam_I_am]

Could see us sign and trade a lot for Gallo, actually.

Why wouldl we sign and trade a lot for Gallo if he's a FA? Also why wouldn't we trade for Wilson Chandler who's a better player and was better at both ends of the court last season? There were a ton of rumors Chandler wanted to leave Denver.

There is no such thing as a free agent for the Celtics this year. We have to renounce half our roster to clear space for "free agent".

That is why in my opinion we should pick the player we wish to target. If it is Hayward - we lose KO, Bradley/Smart or Crowder, Amir, Jerebko etc. If it is George we lose Smart/Crowder and a pick. I don't see much of a difference . If we try for both Hayward and George we lose Smart, Crowder,.Bradley and IT next year.

Nothing is free. It really comes down to Danny's choice amongst what is possible and each choice comes with opportunity costs.

[FlatearthZorro]

Could see us sign and trade a lot for Gallo, actually.

Why wouldl we sign and trade a lot for Gallo if he's a FA? Also why wouldn't we trade for Wilson Chandler who's a better player and was better at both ends of the court last season? There were a ton of rumors Chandler wanted to leave Denver.

There is no such thing as a free agent for the Celtics this year. We have to renounce half our roster to clear space for "free agent".

That is why in my opinion we should pick the player we wish to target. If it is Hayward - we lose KO, Bradley/Smart or Crowder, Amir, Jerebko etc. If it is George we lose Smart/Crowder and a pick. I don't see much of a difference . If we try for both Hayward and George we lose Smart, Crowder,.Bradley and IT next year.

Nothing is free. It really comes down to Danny's choice amongst what is possible and each choice comes with opportunity costs.

If we want Hayward we need to renounce KO/Jerebko/Amir/Green and trade one of Smart/Rozier/Crowder to get to that 30 mils I think. I think we're at 27 when we renounce or something close to that, I have to double check.