Should the Celtics waive TA if they find three players that can help them now?

[Roy Hobbs]

I don't think they will.  Between Eddie, Scal, and Tony, the team has close to $9 million in expiring contracts to use as trade chips next season.  They team may want to hold on to him for that reason.  Plus, due to luxury tax, they're essentially going to be paying $5 million to have him on the roster next year, so they may as well try to get something out of him.

Very interesting point, and perhaps one reason why the Celtics were not so quick to jump on the oppty to get Nocioni.

Yeah, Nocioni would have limited next season's flexibility, and would have stuck them with a long-term contract.  Inversely, he would have increased flexibility this year and probably improved our chances at repeating.

[Gomesfan]

Whats the deaL W/ Ray's contract next year? Is that also an expiring contract?

[BrickJames]

No GM will ever waive a player with guaranteed money on the books the following season.

If his contract was expiring this year they'd probably bite the bullet. 

So, no.

[Gomesfan]

Brickjames, you have the best name on this site! So does Royhobbs considering Hoosiers is my favorite movie.

[Roy Hobbs]

No GM will ever waive a player with guaranteed money on the books the following season.

Well, not necessarily; the Kings just waived Moore, who has $2 million guaranteed next season.  I agree, though, that Tony won't be waived.

Whats the deaL W/ Ray's contract next year? Is that also an expiring contract?

He's an expiring, as well.  The question is, is he better as a trade chip, or as a player.  Not many players we can acquire will be as talented, and as good a fit as Ray, over the next couple of seasons.

[Gomesfan]

No GM will ever waive a player with guaranteed money on the books the following season.

Well, not necessarily; the Kings just waived Moore, who has $2 million guaranteed next season.  I agree, though, that Tony won't be waived.

Whats the deaL W/ Ray's contract next year? Is that also an expiring contract?

He's an expiring, as well.  The question is, is he better as a trade chip, or as a player.  Not many players we can acquire will be as talented, and as good a fit as Ray, over the next couple of seasons.

What if we where going to go after LBJ,Bosh Wade etc...

[cornbreadsmart]

i see no use for tony if we get deep in the playoffs. he'll be ignored on the perimeter.

[zerophase]

No GM will ever waive a player with guaranteed money on the books the following season.

Well, not necessarily; the Kings just waived Moore, who has $2 million guaranteed next season.  I agree, though, that Tony won't be waived.

Whats the deaL W/ Ray's contract next year? Is that also an expiring contract?

He's an expiring, as well.  The question is, is he better as a trade chip, or as a player.  Not many players we can acquire will be as talented, and as good a fit as Ray, over the next couple of seasons.

What if we where going to go after LBJ,Bosh Wade etc...

who is going to give you LBJ, Bosh, or Wade for a 34/35 year old Ray Allen? Even if his contract comes off the books, we won't have enough to make a go at those superstars.

[xmuscularghandix]

i see no use for tony if we get deep in the playoffs. he'll be ignored on the perimeter.

he's still a good defender and we're not just going to cut 2.5 mil.

[Jon]

If they brought in Marbury, Smith, and could get an effective wing, I'd cut Pruitt.

Why?

1) He won't sniff the floor with Rondo, House, Marbury, and another 2/3 on this roster.

2) There's a team option next year on him, which means not only won't we be responsible for paying him next year (unlike Allen and Giddens), but the team would likely not need him if Marbury had any interest in returning. 

There is not chance they would bring Marbury back the following year.  Marbury's ego would never allow him to take so little money to backup Rondo. 

I grant you that you're probably right on that.  Still doesn't change the fact that Pruitt a) might not be brought back anyway next year and b) certainly wouldn't be a huge loss.  Pruitt, at best, is a career backup and lucky to be in the league at all at this point. 

[Cman]

I don't think they will.  Between Eddie, Scal, and Tony, the team has close to $9 million in expiring contracts to use as trade chips next season.  They team may want to hold on to him for that reason.  Plus, due to luxury tax, they're essentially going to be paying $5 million to have him on the roster next year, so they may as well try to get something out of him.

Very interesting point, and perhaps one reason why the Celtics were not so quick to jump on the oppty to get Nocioni.

Yeah, Nocioni would have limited next season's flexibility, and would have stuck them with a long-term contract.  Inversely, he would have increased flexibility this year and probably improved our chances at repeating.

I completely agree.  On Thursday I had a fantasy that within a couple weeks our bench would be:

Marbury or Bobby Jackson
Eddie House
Nocioni
Powe
Joe Smith or Rasho

[Roy Hobbs]

I don't think they will.  Between Eddie, Scal, and Tony, the team has close to $9 million in expiring contracts to use as trade chips next season.  They team may want to hold on to him for that reason.  Plus, due to luxury tax, they're essentially going to be paying $5 million to have him on the roster next year, so they may as well try to get something out of him.

Very interesting point, and perhaps one reason why the Celtics were not so quick to jump on the oppty to get Nocioni.

Yeah, Nocioni would have limited next season's flexibility, and would have stuck them with a long-term contract.  Inversely, he would have increased flexibility this year and probably improved our chances at repeating.

I completely agree.  On Thursday I had a fantasy that within a couple weeks our bench would be:

Marbury or Bobby Jackson
Eddie House
Nocioni
Powe
Joe Smith or Rasho

The great thing about the potential Nocioni trade was that it would have left us with *four* open roster spots.  Our roster would have been:

Perk
KG
Pierce
Ray
Rondo

Nocioni
House
Powe
BBD (if not traded, Giddens if he was)
Pruitt
Walker

FA (Smith?)
FA (Moore?)
FA (Jackson?)
FA (Starbury?)

Now, the downside of that trade is that you're working in a lot of new bodies into your rotation.  However, I really think from the Celtics perspective, this trade would have worked out (especially if Sacramento would take Giddens, instead of BBD, as Hollinger suggested was the case).

Now, in the end, this may be moot -- at least one report says Sacramento would have walked away if we didn't.  However, I think it's too bad that the team wouldn't pull the deal on a clear talent upgrade simply due to financial concerns.

[RebusRankin]

Side question but is Rasho getting bought out? He'd be a nice back-up center.

[Cman]

Now, in the end, this may be moot -- at least one report says Sacramento would have walked away if we didn't.  However, I think it's too bad that the team wouldn't pull the deal on a clear talent upgrade simply due to financial concerns.

Agreed, would have been great.  Hard to know what happened -- I read that the Cs walked away, but also I think one article that Sacramento walked away (but maybe it is that they *would* have walked away if C's hadn't, as you suggest).

It is all now water under the bridge, like the non-resigning of Posey, but one always wonders what could have been in an alternate universe....

Hopefully Cs win in June and I won't have to wonder too much 

[CoachBo]

I don't think they will.  Between Eddie, Scal, and Tony, the team has close to $9 million in expiring contracts to use as trade chips next season.  They team may want to hold on to him for that reason.  Plus, due to luxury tax, they're essentially going to be paying $5 million to have him on the roster next year, so they may as well try to get something out of him.

Very interesting point, and perhaps one reason why the Celtics were not so quick to jump on the oppty to get Nocioni.

Yeah, Nocioni would have limited next season's flexibility, and would have stuck them with a long-term contract.  Inversely, he would have increased flexibility this year and probably improved our chances at repeating.

I completely agree.  On Thursday I had a fantasy that within a couple weeks our bench would be:

Marbury or Bobby Jackson
Eddie House
Nocioni
Powe
Joe Smith or Rasho

The great thing about the potential Nocioni trade was that it would have left us with *four* open roster spots.  Our roster would have been:

Perk
KG
Pierce
Ray
Rondo

Nocioni
House
Powe
BBD (if not traded, Giddens if he was)
Pruitt
Walker

FA (Smith?)
FA (Moore?)
FA (Jackson?)
FA (Starbury?)

Now, the downside of that trade is that you're working in a lot of new bodies into your rotation.  However, I really think from the Celtics perspective, this trade would have worked out (especially if Sacramento would take Giddens, instead of BBD, as Hollinger suggested was the case).

Now, in the end, this may be moot -- at least one report says Sacramento would have walked away if we didn't.  However, I think it's too bad that the team wouldn't pull the deal on a clear talent upgrade simply due to financial concerns.

I agree. Unfortunately, it would appear that we now know that cash is our priority, not titles.