Author Topic: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.  (Read 10378 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #15 on: October 14, 2014, 10:54:52 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.
while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #16 on: October 14, 2014, 10:57:50 AM »

Offline gpap

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8224
  • Tommy Points: 417
Rondo, Gay, and Gasol isn't a championship level core.  Gay and Gasol have already been teammates.  I don't really want Gay.

I beg to differ.
begging is so unbecoming.

That group would need at least a 4th (and probably 5th) player at their talent level to be a contender.   it'd be the equivalent of swapping Green for Gay and saying Rondo/Green/Gasol is a contender.  no one would think that's the case.

Contenders will typically have an advantage of the competition at most positions.  Rondo can give us that as can Gasol at PG and C respectively.  Gay (or Green) doesn't really do that for us at SF most nights.  it's usually a wash or a disadvantage for us.
We don't have anyone else on the roster that I would say gives us an advantage over the opposition on most nights.

Then it's Danny Ainge's job to find that 4th and 5th missing piece to the puzzle.

What about Sullinger, Bradley, Olynyk, etc?

Are they not on that level?

certainly not yet and AB would have to make some unanticipated improvements to sniff that level. 

Sully looks to have improved over last year so he may get there in another year or 2.  KO looks better but he's still got a lot of improvements to make.

I don't disagree it's Danny's job to find that talent but no one just hands you those types of players and you have to get very luck to have them fall into your lap in the lottery.

also, I don't see Smart on that level either until he can bury shots consistently.  he's a good 2-3 years from any thought of being on that level as well.

Then maybe DA could try to use those "assets" (such as Bradley, Olynyk, etc) in a trade package to upgrade the roster.

Of course, it's not a guarantee that he'll be able to land any improved talent in return.

I certainly agree that the peripheral talent on the team would need to step up, no doubt.

But, I also think that a threesome of Rondo/Gay/Gasol is going to be as good of a core as we are going to find and we'd be pretty lucky to score that (personally I still think landing Gasol is a long-shot and that Deandre Jordan could be a more realistic target.)

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #17 on: October 14, 2014, 11:03:37 AM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7640
  • Tommy Points: 441
Rondo, Gay, and Gasol isn't a championship level core.  Gay and Gasol have already been teammates.  I don't really want Gay.

I beg to differ.
That big 3 doesn't have a single player as good as Lebron, Love, or Irving.  I don't see how you think those 3 equal a championship core.

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #18 on: October 14, 2014, 11:19:08 AM »

Offline gpap

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8224
  • Tommy Points: 417
Rondo, Gay, and Gasol isn't a championship level core.  Gay and Gasol have already been teammates.  I don't really want Gay.

I beg to differ.
That big 3 doesn't have a single player as good as Lebron, Love, or Irving.  I don't see how you think those 3 equal a championship core.

I think the Cavs big 3 would have more talent, but I also think a big 3 of Rondo/Gay/Gasol could give them a run for their money.

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #19 on: October 14, 2014, 11:46:08 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
I can't see Sacramento doing that trade at all.  Now maybe if Bass and Thompson or Landry were included it might make a bit more sense for them, of course some of the sense for Boston disappears in that situation.  Thompson is listed at 6'11" so perhaps he could play some center making it a bit more viable for Boston.  Again not sure I do it if I'm Boston, but I think Sacramento would be more on board for Gay, Thompson for Green, Bass, Wallace, LAC #1 (maybe make them take Anthony as well to clear more salary this year).
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #20 on: October 14, 2014, 01:17:42 PM »

Offline FreddieJ

  • Kristaps Porzingis
  • Posts: 189
  • Tommy Points: 7
Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.

It's a good point.

Plus maybe I am in the minority when I say this, but I think Rudy Gay is a better player than Jeff Green.

Minority of who? Celtics fans here?

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #21 on: October 14, 2014, 01:20:44 PM »

Offline Yoki_IsTheName

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11134
  • Tommy Points: 1304
  • I'm a Paul Heyman guy.
Thats a lot to give up for a rental...

Id do without the first for the rental, but with the pick, we better keep Rudy Gay.
2019 CStrong Historical Draft 2000s OKC Thunder.
PG: Jrue Holiday / Isaiah Thomas / Larry Hughes
SG: Paul George / Aaron McKie / Bradley Beal
SF: Paul Pierce / Tayshaun Prince / Brian Scalabrine
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge / Shareef Abdur-Raheem / Ben Simmons
C: Jermaine O'neal / Ben Wallace

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #22 on: October 14, 2014, 01:21:25 PM »

Offline snively

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5866
  • Tommy Points: 454
Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.
while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Wallace's deal is becoming less of a hideous tragedy as it winds down, but giving up a first round pick for a major boost to our 2015 FA opportunities is hardly a hideous tragedy either.
2016 CelticsBlog Draft: Chicago Bulls

Head Coach: Fred Hoiberg

Starters: Rubio, Danny Green, Durant, Markieff Morris, Capela
Bench: Sessions, Shumpert, G. Green, T. Booker, Frye
Deep Bench: CJ Watson, H. Thompson, P. Zipser, Papagiannis, Mejri

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #23 on: October 14, 2014, 01:26:26 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18699
  • Tommy Points: 1818
Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.
while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Wallace's deal is becoming less of a hideous tragedy as it winds down, but giving up a first round pick for a major boost to our 2015 FA opportunities is hardly a hideous tragedy either.


The thing about Wallace is that we can stretch his contract next year, and pay him $3 million per year for 3 seasons.

So the question is, is gaining that $3 million extra in cap space next year (and avoid paying $3 million for 2 more years after that) worth the first rounder? I'm of the opinion that it isn't, but I'll have to see how the salary cap plays out.

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #24 on: October 14, 2014, 01:34:42 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.
while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Wallace's deal is becoming less of a hideous tragedy as it winds down, but giving up a first round pick for a major boost to our 2015 FA opportunities is hardly a hideous tragedy either.

the question is, who's likely to be available as a FA that would be worth throwing away that pick?  I don't see Aldridge or Gasol moving in free agency and they're about all that's worth giving up a pick for. 

I think next year Danny makes his moves via trades and the draft rather than free agency.  with that in mind, Wallace's deal becomes much more useful in swinging a deal for a well-paid player.  without his salary to use in balancing monies in the trade the C's may have to include more young players that we'd prefer to keep instead of using draft picks to get that player.  it all depends on what avenue Danny thinks is his best chance to acquire better players

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #25 on: October 14, 2014, 01:36:18 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.
while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Wallace's deal is becoming less of a hideous tragedy as it winds down, but giving up a first round pick for a major boost to our 2015 FA opportunities is hardly a hideous tragedy either.


The thing about Wallace is that we can stretch his contract next year, and pay him $3 million per year for 3 seasons.

So the question is, is gaining that $3 million extra in cap space next year (and avoid paying $3 million for 2 more years after that) worth the first rounder? I'm of the opinion that it isn't, but I'll have to see how the salary cap plays out.
I definitely wouldn't stretch Wallace out.  we're not contending next year.  if we can't use him as part of a trade, let him play out the contract and be rid of him for the following year.

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2014, 01:46:13 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18699
  • Tommy Points: 1818
Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.
while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Wallace's deal is becoming less of a hideous tragedy as it winds down, but giving up a first round pick for a major boost to our 2015 FA opportunities is hardly a hideous tragedy either.


The thing about Wallace is that we can stretch his contract next year, and pay him $3 million per year for 3 seasons.

So the question is, is gaining that $3 million extra in cap space next year (and avoid paying $3 million for 2 more years after that) worth the first rounder? I'm of the opinion that it isn't, but I'll have to see how the salary cap plays out.
I definitely wouldn't stretch Wallace out.  we're not contending next year.  if we can't use him as part of a trade, let him play out the contract and be rid of him for the following year.

Who says we are not contending next year? And also, it's about opportunity, next year might just be the best chance to use our cap space, after that it gets trickier with our own players coming off their rookie deals, etc.

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #27 on: October 14, 2014, 01:52:08 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
I would rather have Rudy than Jeff, I just do not see them doing it for anything this side of Rondo.

Rondo wants to play with Gay, I think he could lure him here possibly.   Then deal Jeff for a pick or let him walk.  I know we are not a mecca for free agents though.   

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #28 on: October 14, 2014, 02:51:48 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.
while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Wallace's deal is becoming less of a hideous tragedy as it winds down, but giving up a first round pick for a major boost to our 2015 FA opportunities is hardly a hideous tragedy either.


The thing about Wallace is that we can stretch his contract next year, and pay him $3 million per year for 3 seasons.

So the question is, is gaining that $3 million extra in cap space next year (and avoid paying $3 million for 2 more years after that) worth the first rounder? I'm of the opinion that it isn't, but I'll have to see how the salary cap plays out.
I definitely wouldn't stretch Wallace out.  we're not contending next year.  if we can't use him as part of a trade, let him play out the contract and be rid of him for the following year.

Who says we are not contending next year? And also, it's about opportunity, next year might just be the best chance to use our cap space, after that it gets trickier with our own players coming off their rookie deals, etc.
do you honestly believe that with this roster we're anywhere near contending next year? 

I'm not worried about the cap space in regards to our players coming off their rookie deals right now.  no one's shown that they're worth breaking the bank for yet.  the league will also have a higher cap so still not worried about it especially when all the vet contracts we want to shed will have come off by that following year at the latest (and most of them coming off the books after this year).

the 2015 offseason will have us trying to resign Rondo, living with Wallace's deal for one more year (while undoubtedly trying to use it in a trade for someone to pair with Rondo), AB's deal, Turner's cheap deal and a number of young players still on their rookie deals.  last thing I see as a hurdle is having to stretch Wallace or give away picks to move his contract.

Re: Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.
« Reply #29 on: October 14, 2014, 03:02:48 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Gay played very well in Sacramento last year, better than his career numbers anywhere else he played. If he returns to being the Rudy Gay of Memphis or Toronto and Sacramento is playing losing basketball, I could see them possibly looking to move on from Gay. If he comes out and continues to play like he did in Sactown last year, the Kings are not trading Rudy Gay.