Discussing Other Teams' Moves - Part 6

[Kanyewest]

Smart is one of those players that looks a lot better than his numbers (TS%, ws/48) although maybe his on/off numbers are good. Also Kyrie could exercise his player option in 2019.

[nate33]

Boston will have an interesting dilemma on their hands when Hayward and Irving come back. You can make the argument that one of them has to go.

Their cap situation is in pretty decent shape. They can hold together their core of Kyrie, Smart, Brown, Hayward, Tatum, Morris and Horford for quite some time. The only cap casualty I see is that they would ultimately have to choose between Rozier or Smart. It'll be tough to keep both and my guess is that they'll keep Smart. Watch Ainge make a deal next year where they trade away Rozier for a future pick. Ainge never lets a player walk away without recouping some value.

* This summer: Smart and Morris are up for new contracts, and they have the room to retain both, though they will probably seek just a 2-year deal for Morris. Baynes is also up for a new contract and can be retained if he's cheap, but they also have Daniel Theis, who was a competent rookie for 900 minutes this season.
* 2019: Rozier is up for a new contract and he will probably have to go in order to preserve enough luxtax room to retain Jaylen Brown next year (or Rozier will be retained and Smart will get traded away).
* 2020: Brown is up for a new contract and they'll have the cap room to afford him.
* 2021: Tatum is up for a new contract and Horford comes off the books in time to pay him.

They also have a bunch more future 1sts coming their way. They have Sacramento's 2019 pick. They have the Clippers' top 15 protected 2019 pick, and they have Memphis' top 9 protected 2019 pick (which probably won't convey until 2020). Cheap depth shouldn't be a problem. And with some luck, one of those draft picks will be the big man to replace Horford when his contract expires in 3 years.

Boston will be an elite team for at least the next 8 years. They're the new San Antonio.

I think they keep Rozier. I don't know if Ainge is going to want to pay Irving the super max. I say it's interesting b/c of the situation you just laid out. If they kept Smart, their payroll jumps to probably $125 million next season. In 2019, they are faced with either signing Irving to a super max or keeping Rozier at say...$15 to $16 million per. So I do agree that talent wise they're in good shape but their books could be all sorts of chaotic in a year or two. This is why I think they'll try and find a trade for Hayward or Irving. Hayward was always redundant with Tatum and Brown there, I just don't see how they can pay him $31 million per year for him when they get more production out of two young guys making a combined $15 million.

Good point on Kyrie's supermax. I was assuming they'd be paying Kyrie's current contract through 2020, but forgot that his final year is a player option and he'll probably be pushing for a raise next summer. However, he's not eligible for a John Wall style supermax contract because he isn't on the team that drafted him. He is only eligible for a standard 7-year vet max contract which is 30% of the cap - the same size as Hayward's. So instead of $38M a year, it'll be more like $32M.

They can afford it and stay under the tax while retaining Smart, but they'll have to let both Rozier and Morris go by 2020. (Morris can be kept next year, but after that there will be luxtax implications.) The way I see it, Ainge can stay under the luxtax next year and the year after without too much trouble. in 2020-21, they may exceed the tax after resigning Jaylen Brown, but only for a year or so. Horford comes off the books a year after that, and Hayward the year after that.

I get your point about buyer's remorse on Hayward though. The signing made plenty of sense at the time, because they had no idea how good Brown and Tatum would be. But it is becoming evident that as good as Hayward is, he is likely to be the 3rd best forward on that roster in the not-too-distant future. You can't pay a third forward a max contract. He may get shopped.

If it comes down to a choice between Kyrie and Hayward, I think keeping Kyrie is a no-brainer. The one ingredient Boston lacks is a reliable late game isolation scorer. There aren't many guys in the league better at that than Kyrie.

[stilldropin20]

Their cap situation is in pretty decent shape. They can hold together their core of Kyrie, Smart, Brown, Hayward, Tatum, Morris and Horford for quite some time. The only cap casualty I see is that they would ultimately have to choose between Rozier or Smart. It'll be tough to keep both and my guess is that they'll keep Smart. Watch Ainge make a deal next year where they trade away Rozier for a future pick. Ainge never lets a player walk away without recouping some value.

* This summer: Smart and Morris are up for new contracts, and they have the room to retain both, though they will probably seek just a 2-year deal for Morris. Baynes is also up for a new contract and can be retained if he's cheap, but they also have Daniel Theis, who was a competent rookie for 900 minutes this season.
* 2019: Rozier is up for a new contract and he will probably have to go in order to preserve enough luxtax room to retain Jaylen Brown next year (or Rozier will be retained and Smart will get traded away).
* 2020: Brown is up for a new contract and they'll have the cap room to afford him.
* 2021: Tatum is up for a new contract and Horford comes off the books in time to pay him.

They also have a bunch more future 1sts coming their way. They have Sacramento's 2019 pick. They have the Clippers' top 15 protected 2019 pick, and they have Memphis' top 9 protected 2019 pick (which probably won't convey until 2020). Cheap depth shouldn't be a problem. And with some luck, one of those draft picks will be the big man to replace Horford when his contract expires in 3 years.

Boston will be an elite team for at least the next 8 years. They're the new San Antonio.

I think they keep Rozier. I don't know if Ainge is going to want to pay Irving the super max. I say it's interesting b/c of the situation you just laid out. If they kept Smart, their payroll jumps to probably $125 million next season. In 2019, they are faced with either signing Irving to a super max or keeping Rozier at say...$15 to $16 million per. So I do agree that talent wise they're in good shape but their books could be all sorts of chaotic in a year or two. This is why I think they'll try and find a trade for Hayward or Irving. Hayward was always redundant with Tatum and Brown there, I just don't see how they can pay him $31 million per year for him when they get more production out of two young guys making a combined $15 million.

Good point on Kyrie's supermax. I was assuming they'd be paying Kyrie's current contract through 2020, but forgot that his final year is a player option and he'll probably be pushing for a raise next summer. However, he's not eligible for a John Wall style supermax contract because he isn't on the team that drafted him. He is only eligible for a standard 7-year vet max contract which is 30% of the cap - the same size as Hayward's. So instead of $38M a year, it'll be more like $32M.

They can afford it and stay under the tax while retaining Smart, but they'll have to let both Rozier and Morris go by 2020. (Morris can be kept next year, but after that there will be luxtax implications.) The way I see it, Ainge can stay under the luxtax next year and the year after without too much trouble. in 2020-21, they may exceed the tax after resigning Jaylen Brown, but only for a year or so. Horford comes off the books a year after that, and Hayward the year after that.

I get your point about buyer's remorse on Hayward though. The signing made plenty of sense at the time, because they had no idea how good Brown and Tatum would be. But it is becoming evident that as good as Hayward is, he is likely to be the 3rd best forward on that roster in the not-too-distant future. You can't pay a third forward a max contract. He may get shopped.

If it comes down to a choice between Kyrie and Hayward, I think keeping Kyrie is a no-brainer. The one ingredient Boston lacks is a reliable late game isolation scorer. There aren't many guys in the league better at that than Kyrie.

Hayward case makes a strong argument for NBA's need to renegotiate contracts. Because hayward will now get a reduced role based on success of tatum and brown and Hayward likely wants to stay in boston and can more than make up for lost NBA wages with off court income given Boston takes over the east over the next 5 years. And Part of taking over the east is keeping Brown, Tatum, and Hayward. Which would be easier is hayward made less money.

perfect opportunity for all sides to renegotiate.

[nate33]

Hayward case makes a strong argument for NBA's need to renegotiate contracts. Because hayward will now get a reduced role based on success of tatum and brown and Hayward likely wants to stay in boston and can more than make up for lost NBA wages with off court income given Boston takes over the east over the next 5 years. And Part of taking over the east is keeping Brown, Tatum, and Hayward. Which would be easier is hayward made less money.

perfect opportunity for all sides to renegotiate.

I don't see it. I think the off-the-court revenue potential for a guy like Hayward pales in comparison to the money from his NBA contract, regardless of where he is playing and how successful his team is. Fact is, with the exception of a handful of superstars with flashy game, most endorsement deals are not all that much. Only Lebron, Durant, Curry, Harden, Kyrie and Westbrook make $10M or more annually (also Rose and Wade, but presumably due to fat contracts they signed a while ago).

Paul George, for example, makes $7.5M on endorsements.

Also, shoe contracts are drying up. They aren't giving out as much as they used to.

[long suffrin' boulez fan]

Some team is our conference is going to end up with Mike Budenholzer. And we’ll still have Brooks.

[Kanyewest]

Read on Twitter

[NatP4]

Guess how the Celtics have played in the playoffs? Starting lineup of Rozier-Brown-Tatum-Morris-Horford(small ball), a shortened bench, playing a backup guard (who doesnt really score or create his own shot) up and down the lineup for starters minutes.

Funny, I know another team that could’ve done the exact same thing. Started Wall Beal Oubre Porter Gortat and played Satoransky 30+ minutes up and down the lineup.

Celtics basically played two players off the bench tonight against Cleveland, one of them only played 17 minutes.

Having a great coach is awesome, having a coach that simply isn’t a moron would be an improvement for us.

[NatP4]

Read on Twitter

Very curious to see how his free agency plays out. Coming off a torn Achilles, his team was better without him.

Wonder how low his salary could drop.

[queridiculo]

I get your point about buyer's remorse on Hayward though. The signing made plenty of sense at the time, because they had no idea how good Brown and Tatum would be. But it is becoming evident that as good as Hayward is, he is likely to be the 3rd best forward on that roster in the not-too-distant future. You can't pay a third forward a max contract. He may get shopped.

If it comes down to a choice between Kyrie and Hayward, I think keeping Kyrie is a no-brainer. The one ingredient Boston lacks is a reliable late game isolation scorer. There aren't many guys in the league better at that than Kyrie.

Man, with the way this Boston team is playing I question whether I'd want either of them on the team longterm.

At least Hayward can play the 2 and 3, so in my book he's the better fit, because once you throw a ton of cash at Irving how much sense does it make to pay Smart, and how likely is Rozier going to want to be part of a team where he'll eternally be the 2nd banana?

Ainge is ruthless and has made a living out of taking advantage of teams desperate for star power, if I'm the Celtics I think long and hard about whether Irving is worth pushing your chips all in for.

[nate33]

I get your point about buyer's remorse on Hayward though. The signing made plenty of sense at the time, because they had no idea how good Brown and Tatum would be. But it is becoming evident that as good as Hayward is, he is likely to be the 3rd best forward on that roster in the not-too-distant future. You can't pay a third forward a max contract. He may get shopped.

If it comes down to a choice between Kyrie and Hayward, I think keeping Kyrie is a no-brainer. The one ingredient Boston lacks is a reliable late game isolation scorer. There aren't many guys in the league better at that than Kyrie.

Man, with the way this Boston team is playing I question whether I'd want either of them on the team longterm.

At least Hayward can play the 2 and 3, so in my book he's the better fit, because once you throw a ton of cash at Irving how much sense does it make to pay Smart, and how likely is Rozier going to want to be part of a team where he'll eternally be the 2nd banana?

Ainge is ruthless and has made a living out of taking advantage of teams desperate for star power, if I'm the Celtics I think long and hard about whether Irving is worth pushing your chips all in for.

Good point.

Also, it's not out of the question that Jason Tatum ultimately becomes a truly elite scorer, like a Harden or Durant. If that happens, they won't need Kyrie's isolation offense ability.

[Rafael122]

I hope Divac doesn't screw it up but that team already has a young core in Fox/Hield/Bogdanovic and young bigs like Skal and WCS. You add either Ayton or Doncic to that plus the potential cap room? They might push for the 8th seed next season.

[Kanyewest]

Guess how the Celtics have played in the playoffs? Starting lineup of Rozier-Brown-Tatum-Morris-Horford(small ball), a shortened bench, playing a backup guard (who doesnt really score or create his own shot) up and down the lineup for starters minutes.

Funny, I know another team that could’ve done the exact same thing. Started Wall Beal Oubre Porter Gortat and played Satoransky 30+ minutes up and down the lineup.

Celtics basically played two players off the bench tonight against Cleveland, one of them only played 17 minutes.

Having a great coach is awesome, having a coach that simply isn’t a moron would be an improvement for us.

I agree that Wall/Beal/Oubre/Porter/Gortat lineup is something that the Wizards should explore. Although, I'm not sure if using the Celtics as an argument to change the Wizards lineup considering that there is something about Marcus Morris that is very similar to Markieff Morris

[NatP4]

Guess how the Celtics have played in the playoffs? Starting lineup of Rozier-Brown-Tatum-Morris-Horford(small ball), a shortened bench, playing a backup guard (who doesnt really score or create his own shot) up and down the lineup for starters minutes.

Funny, I know another team that could’ve done the exact same thing. Started Wall Beal Oubre Porter Gortat and played Satoransky 30+ minutes up and down the lineup.

Celtics basically played two players off the bench tonight against Cleveland, one of them only played 17 minutes.

Having a great coach is awesome, having a coach that simply isn’t a moron would be an improvement for us.

I agree that Wall/Beal/Oubre/Porter/Gortat lineup is something that the Wizards should explore. Although, I'm not sure if using the Celtics as an argument to change the Wizards lineup considering that there is something about Marcus Morris that is very similar to Markieff Morris

Well, Marcus Morris is far more wing player than big unlike Markieff, and they throw Marcus smart out there and play Tatum at the 4 at times. Next year they’re gonna have Hayward back and probably play full time small ball.

But point taken

[nate33]

Guess how the Celtics have played in the playoffs? Starting lineup of Rozier-Brown-Tatum-Morris-Horford(small ball), a shortened bench, playing a backup guard (who doesnt really score or create his own shot) up and down the lineup for starters minutes.

Funny, I know another team that could’ve done the exact same thing. Started Wall Beal Oubre Porter Gortat and played Satoransky 30+ minutes up and down the lineup.

Celtics basically played two players off the bench tonight against Cleveland, one of them only played 17 minutes.

Having a great coach is awesome, having a coach that simply isn’t a moron would be an improvement for us.

I agree that Wall/Beal/Oubre/Porter/Gortat lineup is something that the Wizards should explore. Although, I'm not sure if using the Celtics as an argument to change the Wizards lineup considering that there is something about Marcus Morris that is very similar to Markieff Morris

Yeah, the key with Boston isn't so much that they play a small ball lineup with a true SF at the PF position, because they don't. The important thing about Boston is their switchability on defense. And that's due to Horford (and Smart). Basically the difference between them and us isn't having Oubre replace Morris. It's having an agile center like Horford replace Gortat.

I'm not saying Markieff shouldn't be replaced. But the reason for replacing him isn't due to him being a natural PF because that's not the problem. Markieff, despite being a natural PF, can switch onto all 5 positions adequately. Replacing Markieff is desirable because he's not all that good in general, but he is the right "type" of player.

[NatP4]

Guess how the Celtics have played in the playoffs? Starting lineup of Rozier-Brown-Tatum-Morris-Horford(small ball), a shortened bench, playing a backup guard (who doesnt really score or create his own shot) up and down the lineup for starters minutes.

Funny, I know another team that could’ve done the exact same thing. Started Wall Beal Oubre Porter Gortat and played Satoransky 30+ minutes up and down the lineup.

Celtics basically played two players off the bench tonight against Cleveland, one of them only played 17 minutes.

Having a great coach is awesome, having a coach that simply isn’t a moron would be an improvement for us.

I agree that Wall/Beal/Oubre/Porter/Gortat lineup is something that the Wizards should explore. Although, I'm not sure if using the Celtics as an argument to change the Wizards lineup considering that there is something about Marcus Morris that is very similar to Markieff Morris

Yeah, the key with Boston isn't so much that they play a small ball lineup with a true SF at the PF position, because they don't. The important thing about Boston is their switchability on defense. And that's due to Horford (and Smart). Basically the difference between them and us isn't having Oubre replace Morris. It's having an agile center like Horford replace Gortat.

I'm not saying Markieff shouldn't be replaced. But the reason for replacing him isn't due to him being a natural PF because that's not the problem. Markieff, despite being a natural PF, can switch onto all 5 positions adequately. Replacing Markieff is desirable because he's not all that good in general, but he is the right "type" of player.

I mean, duh. If you have a big that can switch and guard on the perimeter, fine. There is still another end of the court. We don’t have that in Markieff morris, he is a bad defender that was awful this season, he doesn’t rebound, defend, or provide adequate spacing on offense.

He is NOT the “ right type of player” Otto Porter is. Keef is a true PF, not a wing player, you want a wing player their in todays NBA. 4 perimeter players that can drive and shoot and get a lot of 3s up. Watch the real nba finals between Houston and GS. There is never two bigs on the court, in fact, Capela is the only true big playing.

I agree with you though, in today’s NBA, a couple things have changed just recently, you want a point guard that can score, and a 5 that can switch and guard guards. Truthfully, Wall and Gortat don’t really fit the new nba style. A few years ago when teams would help and recover, before teams switched everything, that wall and Gortat pick and roll was unstoppable with proper spacing.

But simple truth, Marcus Morris and Jayson Tatum are small forwards playing PF, Markieff and Mike Scott and Jason Smith are PF/Cs playing PF

[pcbothwel]

Look, we really need to get some things straight about Kieff.
Cons: slow first step, not long, AST% : TOV% is poor, doesnt rebound well, doesnt draw enough fouls, energy/defense ebbs and flows, not a rim protector

With that said, people need to stop saying he cant spread the floor or play defense. The guy is a legit 36-37% 3pt shooter on decent volume with an overall TS of 56.6% last year. A year in which we all acknowledge he played hurt.
Defensively, DBPM, DRtg, and DRPM have all shown Kieff to be above average to very good over the last few years. Yes, he can be inconsistent with his effectiveness/intensity, but dont let that cloud the bigger picture.

Fact is, if Kieff comes back this year healthy and is still making 37% of his 3's on solid volume, I think he has one of his best years of his career. He can guard a lot of the smaller 5's these days and spread the floor.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Also, it's not out of the question that Jason Tatum ultimately becomes a truly elite scorer, like a Harden or Durant. If that happens, they won't need Kyrie's isolation offense ability.

Tatum is good, no doubt, but I've seen enough at this point to think that Brad Stevens can get a patchwork of almost any players out there and make them into a team that wins a playoff round or two. Some team is going to pay the Celtics' guys in free agency and is going to wind up with buyer's remorse in a big way. It isn't that their players aren't good, but it's that they aren't as good as they look for the Celtics. I'm curious to see what the Celtics do when it's time to pay guys like Rozier and Tatum, because realistically they might be able to get away with continually just flipping players and treating them as disposable with the way Stevens is getting the best out of them all.

[nate33]

Also, it's not out of the question that Jason Tatum ultimately becomes a truly elite scorer, like a Harden or Durant. If that happens, they won't need Kyrie's isolation offense ability.

Tatum is good, no doubt, but I've seen enough at this point to think that Brad Stevens can get a patchwork of almost any players out there and make them into a team that wins a playoff round or two. Some team is going to pay the Celtics' guys in free agency and is going to wind up with buyer's remorse in a big way. It isn't that their players aren't good, but it's that they aren't as good as they look for the Celtics. I'm curious to see what the Celtics do when it's time to pay guys like Rozier and Tatum, because realistically they might be able to get away with continually just flipping players and treating them as disposable with the way Stevens is getting the best out of them all.

I don't think Ainge's decisions will be all that difficult. It sucks when average-starter caliber players are free agents because you can get stuck paying $12-20M for them. But overpaying is not a problem when elite players hit free agency because of the cap on maximum salary. For the most part, Boston's key players will be max caliber players and retaining them will be no-brainers.

Smart is a free agent this year. They're pretty likely to keep him because nobody has the cap room to bid up his price. They'll probably retain him for $8-12M a year. A modest overpay, but he is a team leader and helps set the tone with his effort and swagger. If necessary, he can be moved down the road.

Rozier is a free agent next summer. I think they'll probably sense that Rozier won't stay around to be paid a backup's salary so they'll try and trade him for value, particularly if Kyrie and Smart are healthy when the Trade Deadline comes around. They'll probably work out a Kyrie extension for the 30% max at this time.

In 2 years, Brown is a free agent, but matching a 25% max offer will be fair value for him. He'll be better than Beal or Porter when they got their extensions. No buyers remorse here.

It's not until 3 years that they'll have to make a decision on Tatum. They'll know by then whether he's a superstar or merely just a pretty good scorer. If he doesn't make an All-NBA team by then, he'll only cost 25% of the cap.

[I_Like_Dirt]

See, I'm not actually sure they will be max caliber, and if they are, they're on the lower end of that scale. Both Irving and Horford may opt out after this season. Are they max caliber? I'd say Irving is, though his health is a problem and was for the Cavs, too, and he's on the lower end of the max salary scale. I'm not convinced Horford will be.

Tatum, I believe is a lot closer to Rashard Lewis (who was still an allstar on some very good teams himself) than to a future top 10 player, but he's made to look way better than he is (which is still very good) thanks to Stevens. But they can wait on him. Jaylen Brown is a bit more interesting to me in that I believe he has more upside than Tatum but also more downside, and given I think Stevens is making him look better than he is, that's a problem. But like Tatum, the Celtics can wait on him anyway. I'm not convinced he will be better than Beal or Porter. Put Beal in Stevens' hands and I think he looks significantly better than he does on the Wizards, and he already looks like an allstar on the Wizards.

The guys the Celtics do have to pay? Besides Horford and Kyrie, Smart, Baynes, Rozier, Morris. None of those guys are max level players. I know people think Rozier is, but I'm not convinced. I think he's a legit starting PG, but I don't think he's a superstar or anything. I think he's benefitting a lot from the Stevens effect. To be honest, I think the bigger issue is that these guys are all actually not as good as they appear on the Celtics and so will come with inherently high salary demands.

I think it's far more likely that Ainge is ruthless, as he has consistently proven himself to be, pushes these guys as hard as he can, and lets Stevens drive them in the playoffs on a short bench for more minutes than they've played before, then trades them just before they hit free agency, only to watch them not be shown to not be as good as they thought to be when they played for Stevens and now they're dealing with nagging injuries after pushing themselves so hard and getting hurt more than a few times on the Celtics. We've seen a similar story play out with the likes of Thomas, Bradley and Crowder. I expect the same thing once again.

[nate33]

See, I'm not actually sure they will be max caliber, and if they are, they're on the lower end of that scale. Both Irving and Horford may opt out after this season. Are they max caliber? I'd say Irving is, though his health is a problem and was for the Cavs, too, and he's on the lower end of the max salary scale. I'm not convinced Horford will be.

Tatum, I believe is a lot closer to Rashard Lewis (who was still an allstar on some very good teams himself) than to a future top 10 player, but he's made to look way better than he is (which is still very good) thanks to Stevens. But they can wait on him. Jaylen Brown is a bit more interesting to me in that I believe he has more upside than Tatum but also more downside, and given I think Stevens is making him look better than he is, that's a problem. But like Tatum, the Celtics can wait on him anyway. I'm not convinced he will be better than Beal or Porter. Put Beal in Stevens' hands and I think he looks significantly better than he does on the Wizards, and he already looks like an allstar on the Wizards.

The guys the Celtics do have to pay? Besides Horford and Kyrie, Smart, Baynes, Rozier, Morris. None of those guys are max level players. I know people think Rozier is, but I'm not convinced. I think he's a legit starting PG, but I don't think he's a superstar or anything. I think he's benefitting a lot from the Stevens effect. To be honest, I think the bigger issue is that these guys are all actually not as good as they appear on the Celtics and so will come with inherently high salary demands.

I think it's far more likely that Ainge is ruthless, as he has consistently proven himself to be, pushes these guys as hard as he can, and lets Stevens drive them in the playoffs on a short bench for more minutes than they've played before, then trades them just before they hit free agency, only to watch them not be shown to not be as good as they thought to be when they played for Stevens and now they're dealing with nagging injuries after pushing themselves so hard and getting hurt more than a few times on the Celtics. We've seen a similar story play out with the likes of Thomas, Bradley and Crowder. I expect the same thing once again.

I'm really surprised by your dismissal of Tatum. I think he is really, really good.

If you rank rookies by WS/48, and counting only those that played 2000 minutes or more, Tatum had one of the best 5 rookie seasons of anybody in the past 10 years. Only Simmons, Griffin, Towns and Greg Monroe outrank him. (And Towns, Griffin and Monroe are polished scoring big men with suspect D, guys whom WS/48 tends to overrate.)

It's pretty damn rare for a wing player this young to be so effective of a scorer. Here's a screen of wing players (6-5 to 6-9), age 21 or younger, who score 21+ points per 100 possessions with an ORtg north of 110 and a WS/48 of at least .100 of 1800 or more minutes.



I like the company he keeps. And Tatum did at the youngest age of everyone. And he did it in his rookie year. (On that list, only MJ, Magic, Kirilenko, Cummings, Barkley and Webber did it their rookie year.)