Cavs focused on Posey?

[Vermont Green]

You can use the MLE every year.  The Celtics will have a new MLE next July, no matter how many years Posey gets.  And if they don't use it this year, they lose it. 

You didn't think the players' union would agree to something silly like tying up the MLE for 5 years, did you?

OK, my bad.  It still might be nice to have it available this season but that certainly makes it a lot easier to swallow.

[bucknersrevenge]

How much total gross revenue do you think the Celtics take in? Include TV deals, merchandise, post-season games....everything.

Do you really think that Posey on the books for $7 million in 2011 is going to "hurt the team financially down the road"?

The Knicks have had $100 million+ payrolls the last few years with no playoffs until they finally started getting some stupid contracts off the books.

Now there is an excellent idea, let's be like the Knicks.

It is not just about total dollars.  To sign Posey to the MLE uses it up completely.  If they can get Posey for the Non-Bird exemption, then they can use the MLE on one or two other needed components.  You only get a few bullets when you are over the cap so you need to get the best value possible for those chances.

I think Posey at 4 years, $5.6M is not the best use of that money over the 4 years.  I also don't think Cle will spend that and if they do, maybe they lose Gibson or West.  You can't just sign whoever you want.

Curiously, you're the one who wants to copy the nicks: use the non-Bird or Bird exceptions to resign your own free-agents and then use the MLE to add other players. I agree with your rationale, but that would increase significantly our payroll.

The problem of not signing Posey with the MLE and split it in another players is: what other players? Anthony Johnson and Francisco Elson? They aren't even better than Cassell and PJ.

The ideal situation would be to hold on to the MLE to keep it available.  I am not suggesting that you spend it unless a good value is there or if you discover a need later on.  For example, an injury could force our hand to sign someone mid season (as we did with Cassell and PJ this year although without any injury involved).  If the MLE is gone, all you have is the league minimum.  If you still have the MLE in your back pocket, bingo, you have the flexibility to do what you need or to grab a really good value that may come along.  The same logic goes for the number of years too.  If we commit the MLE to Posey for 4 years, that means for 4 years we have nothing but the league minimum to add players (FA).  4 years of the MLE is a lot to commit to Posey.  This year or at least right now, maybe there is not a good investment of the MLE but by mid season or next year, who knows.  Give it to Posey for 4 years and that is it.  This is all just fan blog babble but my opinion is that it is too much to commit to Posey.  We are going to have other needs and opportunities over the next 4 years but I don't have a crystal ball.  Fans tend to be more rash than GM's (at least the good ones).  I don't think Danny is going to be rash and go all in for Posey but who knows.

Uh? You have a MLE every season... If you give Posey the MLE for 4 years, you can give the MLE to another player next season, and the following one, etc.

we could...and then pretty soon we could be the knicks too.

I was just saying we could, not that we should. What's your point exactly? That we shouldn't use the MLE this season?

no i think we should use it. i just wouldnt overpay for posey thats all.

[Brickowski]

The Celtics can't overpay for Posey because the max the can give him is a 5 year deal starting at the MLE.  That's a very modest overpayment given some of the money I've seen thrown around today-- assuming of course that Posey has no lingering injury issues.

Having said that, there are some fairly interesting players who might be had with the money that would otherwise have been spent on Posey. 

[Who]

To be honest, of the contenders he could go to, I think it is least damaging if he goes to the Cavs.  I don't think he is a great fit next to Lebron defensively.  I also think they were already an incredibly tough, and feisty team, so Posey's strengths don't stand out as much. 

Don't get me wrong, he definitely helps the Cavs, but I was much more worried about him going to a team like LA, Toronto, Portland, or some other team that he could really fit in well with.

I completely disagree. I think he helps Cleveland more than any other contender outside of Boston.

LeBron is quick enough to defend any position on the perimeter so now he's on opposing two guards most nights and Posey is at the three and they still have their great interior defense and rebounding. That would be an incredible defense. Just think of the difference between Posey and Wally. Now you have Posey at 6-8 with his massive wingspan and LeBron at 6-9 and his massive wingspan roaming the wings. Two very good one-on-one defenders and excellent help defenders. That's very tough.

Posey unlike most of the Cavs is a great stand still shooter. He likes to stand in one spot and wait for the ball. That's his game. Posey was incredibly efficient in the playoffs scoring like 1.46 points per shot. Posey is the perfect role player offensively to have beside LeBron James.

You mentioned they already are a tough team, I'd disagree and believe they need a lot more toughness on the perimeter. LeBron is the only mentally/physically tough player on that perimeter (Gibson has some mental toughness). The rest are dicey and I have very little confidence in them.

Posey would be a bigger addition to the Cavs than any other MLE player on the market.

[cordobes]

How much total gross revenue do you think the Celtics take in? Include TV deals, merchandise, post-season games....everything.

Do you really think that Posey on the books for $7 million in 2011 is going to "hurt the team financially down the road"?

The Knicks have had $100 million+ payrolls the last few years with no playoffs until they finally started getting some stupid contracts off the books.

Now there is an excellent idea, let's be like the Knicks.

It is not just about total dollars.  To sign Posey to the MLE uses it up completely.  If they can get Posey for the Non-Bird exemption, then they can use the MLE on one or two other needed components.  You only get a few bullets when you are over the cap so you need to get the best value possible for those chances.

I think Posey at 4 years, $5.6M is not the best use of that money over the 4 years.  I also don't think Cle will spend that and if they do, maybe they lose Gibson or West.  You can't just sign whoever you want.

Curiously, you're the one who wants to copy the nicks: use the non-Bird or Bird exceptions to resign your own free-agents and then use the MLE to add other players. I agree with your rationale, but that would increase significantly our payroll.

The problem of not signing Posey with the MLE and split it in another players is: what other players? Anthony Johnson and Francisco Elson? They aren't even better than Cassell and PJ.

The ideal situation would be to hold on to the MLE to keep it available.  I am not suggesting that you spend it unless a good value is there or if you discover a need later on.  For example, an injury could force our hand to sign someone mid season (as we did with Cassell and PJ this year although without any injury involved).  If the MLE is gone, all you have is the league minimum.  If you still have the MLE in your back pocket, bingo, you have the flexibility to do what you need or to grab a really good value that may come along.  The same logic goes for the number of years too.  If we commit the MLE to Posey for 4 years, that means for 4 years we have nothing but the league minimum to add players (FA).  4 years of the MLE is a lot to commit to Posey.  This year or at least right now, maybe there is not a good investment of the MLE but by mid season or next year, who knows.  Give it to Posey for 4 years and that is it.  This is all just fan blog babble but my opinion is that it is too much to commit to Posey.  We are going to have other needs and opportunities over the next 4 years but I don't have a crystal ball.  Fans tend to be more rash than GM's (at least the good ones).  I don't think Danny is going to be rash and go all in for Posey but who knows.

Uh? You have a MLE every season... If you give Posey the MLE for 4 years, you can give the MLE to another player next season, and the following one, etc.

we could...and then pretty soon we could be the knicks too.

I was just saying we could, not that we should. What's your point exactly? That we shouldn't use the MLE this season?

no i think we should use it. i just wouldnt overpay for posey thats all.

Okay, and who are we signing with the MLE in order to no be overpaying?

[bucknersrevenge]

The Celtics can't overpay for Posey because the max the can give him is a 5 year deal starting at the MLE.  That's a very modest overpayment given some of the money I've seen thrown around today-- assuming of course that Posey has no lingering injury issues.

Having said that, there are some fairly interesting players who might be had with the money that would otherwise have been spent on Posey. 

well i agree there has been some crazy money thrown around. doesnt mean we have to though. i mean if danny decides overpaying is the best option then so be it. i will be surprised if he does though. i will say that.

[indeedproceed]

Okay, and who are we signing with the MLE in order to no be overpaying?

Are you saying there is no affordable option, so if we are going to overpay anyway it should be posey, or are you saying that your plan is Posey, whats the other side?


I think that there are absoluely affordable options out there, but since the media does a crappy job on reporting who is offered how much money by which team for anyone not named maggette or posey, I don't know just how affordable they are.

I'd say one of Matt Barnes, JOsh Childress, Kelenna Azubuike, Dorrell Wright, Walterr Hermann, Carlos Delfino, Quintel Ross...there are people out there

People are so fixated on replacing James Posey vs keeping him, but why do we have to replace him? If we miss out on Posey, there is no other good "posey substitute" out there. But, if we sign a capable wing player that can fill in without making us pull out our hair and not single handedly lose games for LESS than the MLE, maybe we can add more to this team than just keeping Posey.

[cordobes]

Okay, and who are we signing with the MLE in order to no be overpaying?

Are you saying there is no affordable option, so if we are going to overpay anyway it should be posey, or are you saying that your plan is Posey, whats the other side?


I think that there are absoluely affordable options out there, but since the media does a crappy job on reporting who is offered how much money by which team for anyone not named maggette or posey, I don't know just how affordable they are.

I'd say one of Matt Barnes, JOsh Childress, Kelenna Azubuike, Dorrell Wright, Walterr Hermann, Carlos Delfino, Quintel Ross...there are people out there

People are so fixated on replacing James Posey vs keeping him, but why do we have to replace him? If we miss out on Posey, there is no other good "posey substitute" out there. But, if we sign a capable wing player that can fill in without making us pull out our hair and not single handedly lose games for LESS than the MLE, maybe we can add more to this team than just keeping Posey.

I understand that theory. I'd gladly let Posey go if we could spend part of the MLE in someone like Delfino and then spend the rest helping the team in other positions. Like signing Diop to be the backup center and Beno to be the backup PG. Excellent, I'm all for it. I'd be ecstatic to grab a huge talent like JR Smith if then we could sign a defensive minded swingman. But who's the defensive minded swingman you can add after signing JR Smith? Or the decent center? The safe PG with range in his shot? 

The problem is: assuming you sign, let's say Barnes, for 80% of the MLE, who are you exactly getting with the remaining? Someone so much better than another guy one can nab with the minimum salary?

p.s. - I'm not entirely sure, but I'd say that it'd be hard to get one of those RFAs (except Wright) for the entire MLE, let alone part of it.

[indeedproceed]

Okay, and who are we signing with the MLE in order to no be overpaying?

Are you saying there is no affordable option, so if we are going to overpay anyway it should be posey, or are you saying that your plan is Posey, whats the other side?


I think that there are absoluely affordable options out there, but since the media does a crappy job on reporting who is offered how much money by which team for anyone not named maggette or posey, I don't know just how affordable they are.

I'd say one of Matt Barnes, JOsh Childress, Kelenna Azubuike, Dorrell Wright, Walterr Hermann, Carlos Delfino, Quintel Ross...there are people out there

People are so fixated on replacing James Posey vs keeping him, but why do we have to replace him? If we miss out on Posey, there is no other good "posey substitute" out there. But, if we sign a capable wing player that can fill in without making us pull out our hair and not single handedly lose games for LESS than the MLE, maybe we can add more to this team than just keeping Posey.

I understand that theory. I'd gladly let Posey go if we could spend part of the MLE in someone like Delfino and then spend the rest helping the team in other positions. Like signing Diop to be the backup center and Beno to be the backup PG. Excellent, I'm all for it. I'd be ecstatic to grab a huge talent like JR Smith if then we could sign a defensive minded swingman. But who's the defensive minded swingman you can add after signing JR Smith? Or the decent center? The safe PG with range in his shot? 

The problem is: assuming you sign, let's say Barnes, for 80% of the MLE, who are you exactly getting with the remaining? Someone so much better than another guy one can nab with the minimum salary?

p.s. - I'm not entirely sure, but I'd say that it'd be hard to get one of those RFAs (except Wright) for the entire MLE, let alone part of it.

I agree with everything you wrote except the last part.

If we do sign someone for 60-70% of the MLE (2.8 Million-3 million) per, whos the other 2 million per guy? Thats a great question, but I really think that while its hard for me to answer, Danny Ainge probably has a few opinions on it, and really thats the whole point.

I do think many of the RFA's could be signed for the full MLE...the problem is you'd almost certainly be over-paying them.