Author Topic: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe  (Read 7071 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« on: November 24, 2014, 01:01:26 AM »

Offline rutzan

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 721
  • Tommy Points: 85
Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe

or variations thereof...

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #1 on: November 24, 2014, 02:13:23 AM »

Online jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
I might do:

Bos: Monroe, Smith

Det: Green, Sully, Bass, Clips 1st

We'd have to get a verbal guarantee from Monroe to resign, though.

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #2 on: November 24, 2014, 02:28:14 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
Greg Monroe has an effective no-trade clause because he signed his offer sheet.  Due to the fact his Bird rights do not transfer, since he's on a 1-year deal, the Celtics (or any team acquiring him) would have to use cap space to re-sign him next year.  Thus it is a) silly to trade for him, since we might not have the cap space to keep him, and b) silly for him to agree to be traded, since it could cost him money on his next contract.

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #3 on: November 24, 2014, 03:02:04 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
Greg Monroe has an effective no-trade clause because he signed his offer sheet.  Due to the fact his Bird rights do not transfer, since he's on a 1-year deal, the Celtics (or any team acquiring him) would have to use cap space to re-sign him next year.  Thus it is a) silly to trade for him, since we might not have the cap space to keep him, and b) silly for him to agree to be traded, since it could cost him money on his next contract.
Just so you know A) Team will have the cap space unless they take on more non-expiring deals. Only 42* million committed to 2015. B) Pistons are the only team that could sign him to above market level max or extra years and they already said no which is why he got stuck with QO. He has to go somewhere else and in that case bird rights never mattered.

People have to stop saying Monroe can't be traded for. A risk yes if he doesn't resign, impossible to get no.

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #4 on: November 24, 2014, 07:58:33 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34023
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
Greg Monroe has an effective no-trade clause because he signed his offer sheet.  Due to the fact his Bird rights do not transfer, since he's on a 1-year deal, the Celtics (or any team acquiring him) would have to use cap space to re-sign him next year.  Thus it is a) silly to trade for him, since we might not have the cap space to keep him, and b) silly for him to agree to be traded, since it could cost him money on his next contract.
Just so you know A) Team will have the cap space unless they take on more non-expiring deals. Only 42* million committed to 2015. B) Pistons are the only team that could sign him to above market level max or extra years and they already said no which is why he got stuck with QO. He has to go somewhere else and in that case bird rights never mattered.

People have to stop saying Monroe can't be traded for. A risk yes if he doesn't resign, impossible to get no.


Because it is not a good risk to take.  He leaves, and the Celtics are just stuck with Smith's bad contract.


I want Monroe, but he is to expensive as a one year rental who I wouldn't be shocked doesn't want to give up his bird rights. 


I do think he makes for an interesting sign and trade option next season though. 

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #5 on: November 24, 2014, 08:24:56 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
Greg Monroe has an effective no-trade clause because he signed his offer sheet.  Due to the fact his Bird rights do not transfer, since he's on a 1-year deal, the Celtics (or any team acquiring him) would have to use cap space to re-sign him next year.  Thus it is a) silly to trade for him, since we might not have the cap space to keep him, and b) silly for him to agree to be traded, since it could cost him money on his next contract.
Just so you know A) Team will have the cap space unless they take on more non-expiring deals. Only 42* million committed to 2015. B) Pistons are the only team that could sign him to above market level max or extra years and they already said no which is why he got stuck with QO. He has to go somewhere else and in that case bird rights never mattered.

People have to stop saying Monroe can't be traded for. A risk yes if he doesn't resign, impossible to get no.

Just so so you know:

A) This trade increases the Celtics salary obligations next year, since Smith makes $13.5 million.

B) Draft picks have cap holds too, and the way we're playing ours will have a pretty large one.

C) Rondo will have a max cap hold.  Even if Rondo signed a less-than-max deal, there would not be any cap room left to give Monroe near what he wants since you have Smith on board.  Unless you want to have Smith and Monroe with no Rondo, which would be different than every argument I've seen on this board for the last three years, since the #1 pro-Smith argument is that Rondo would help his shot selection.  And most pro-Monroe arguments think he pairs nicely with Rondo too.

D) There were many reports over the summer that Monroe hates playing with Smith, so I don't know why you think he'd agree to be traded with him to Boston and then re-sign here to boot.

E) Even if this were a different random message board trade that didn't include Smith, Monroe still risks losing money in his next contract if he agrees to any trade anywhere.  Since his Bird rights do not travel with him to his new team, he cannot be part of a sign-and-trade next summer (unless he gets no more than 120% of his current salary, which is about half of what he's looking for).  This limits the number of teams he can potentially sign with.  It's a pretty basic rule of economics that if demand drops and supply is held constant (there will be the same number of Greg Monroes available), the price drops.  Unless he's so coveted that he's likely to get the max regardless, he very well could find himself with fewer options, and thus less negotiating power.  Players just don't waive that no-trade power unless they're sure they'd be going to a better situation.  If we were looking like a solid playoff team, it might be a different story, since performing well in the playoffs could increase his value, and if nothing else he'd get to experience winning, and get extra money from his playoffs share.  But we're not looking like that any more or less than Detroit is, so it's moot.

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #6 on: November 24, 2014, 08:26:40 AM »

Offline CFAN38

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4878
  • Tommy Points: 420
I'm not sure that Smith + Monroe > Green and Sully. Let alone a first picks worth better.
Mavs
Wiz
Hornet

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #7 on: November 24, 2014, 08:43:46 AM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 36776
  • Tommy Points: 2961
Monroe has the gifts ,but not the worth ethic and drive .and he is still not a center.  Smith is now on the backside of his career , and will headed down pretty much every year.  He peaked in Atlanta , they dumped him and his stupid salary .  He is NOT worth huge money anymore. 

These two guys just don't fit how I believe Danny is trying to build the team.   Maybe Monroe or Smith as a bargain deal .  Otherwise just keep the younger guys.  I had rather have Jeff Green .

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #8 on: November 24, 2014, 08:49:40 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
Greg Monroe has an effective no-trade clause because he signed his offer sheet.  Due to the fact his Bird rights do not transfer, since he's on a 1-year deal, the Celtics (or any team acquiring him) would have to use cap space to re-sign him next year.  Thus it is a) silly to trade for him, since we might not have the cap space to keep him, and b) silly for him to agree to be traded, since it could cost him money on his next contract.
Just so you know A) Team will have the cap space unless they take on more non-expiring deals. Only 42* million committed to 2015. B) Pistons are the only team that could sign him to above market level max or extra years and they already said no which is why he got stuck with QO. He has to go somewhere else and in that case bird rights never mattered.

People have to stop saying Monroe can't be traded for. A risk yes if he doesn't resign, impossible to get no.

Just so so you know:

A) This trade increases the Celtics salary obligations next year, since Smith makes $13.5 million.

B) Draft picks have cap holds too, and the way we're playing ours will have a pretty large one.

C) Rondo will have a max cap hold.  Even if Rondo signed a less-than-max deal, there would not be any cap room left to give Monroe near what he wants since you have Smith on board.  Unless you want to have Smith and Monroe with no Rondo, which would be different than every argument I've seen on this board for the last three years, since the #1 pro-Smith argument is that Rondo would help his shot selection.  And most pro-Monroe arguments think he pairs nicely with Rondo too.

D) There were many reports over the summer that Monroe hates playing with Smith, so I don't know why you think he'd agree to be traded with him to Boston and then re-sign here to boot.

E) Even if this were a different random message board trade that didn't include Smith, Monroe still risks losing money in his next contract if he agrees to any trade anywhere.  Since his Bird rights do not travel with him to his new team, he cannot be part of a sign-and-trade next summer (unless he gets no more than 120% of his current salary, which is about half of what he's looking for).  This limits the number of teams he can potentially sign with.  It's a pretty basic rule of economics that if demand drops and supply is held constant (there will be the same number of Greg Monroes available), the price drops.  Unless he's so coveted that he's likely to get the max regardless, he very well could find himself with fewer options, and thus less negotiating power.  Players just don't waive that no-trade power unless they're sure they'd be going to a better situation.  If we were looking like a solid playoff team, it might be a different story, since performing well in the playoffs could increase his value, and if nothing else he'd get to experience winning, and get extra money from his playoffs share.  But we're not looking like that any more or less than Detroit is, so it's moot.

A, B, C) Swing Wallace into trade or to someone else for expiring and you cover cap holds. Also Cap is going up by probably 10 million due to NBA not wanting crazy cap raise in two years. So you don't have to go crazy over trading Wallace too even by adding Smith and cap holds there will plenty of space.

D) Pure rumor and a joke to use.

E)I already addressed this, as a FA he gets no benefit of Bird rights anyways. Remember if Pistons were going to do a even near max deal it would have been done. Pistons won't.  Likely he is stuck at market rate max and 4 years. No s&t over that are allowed so no benefit to bird rights unless you are staying. But as I said Pistons didn't want to pay the man.

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2014, 09:30:16 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34023
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
Greg Monroe has an effective no-trade clause because he signed his offer sheet.  Due to the fact his Bird rights do not transfer, since he's on a 1-year deal, the Celtics (or any team acquiring him) would have to use cap space to re-sign him next year.  Thus it is a) silly to trade for him, since we might not have the cap space to keep him, and b) silly for him to agree to be traded, since it could cost him money on his next contract.
Just so you know A) Team will have the cap space unless they take on more non-expiring deals. Only 42* million committed to 2015. B) Pistons are the only team that could sign him to above market level max or extra years and they already said no which is why he got stuck with QO. He has to go somewhere else and in that case bird rights never mattered.

People have to stop saying Monroe can't be traded for. A risk yes if he doesn't resign, impossible to get no.

Just so so you know:

A) This trade increases the Celtics salary obligations next year, since Smith makes $13.5 million.

B) Draft picks have cap holds too, and the way we're playing ours will have a pretty large one.

C) Rondo will have a max cap hold.  Even if Rondo signed a less-than-max deal, there would not be any cap room left to give Monroe near what he wants since you have Smith on board.  Unless you want to have Smith and Monroe with no Rondo, which would be different than every argument I've seen on this board for the last three years, since the #1 pro-Smith argument is that Rondo would help his shot selection.  And most pro-Monroe arguments think he pairs nicely with Rondo too.

D) There were many reports over the summer that Monroe hates playing with Smith, so I don't know why you think he'd agree to be traded with him to Boston and then re-sign here to boot.

E) Even if this were a different random message board trade that didn't include Smith, Monroe still risks losing money in his next contract if he agrees to any trade anywhere.  Since his Bird rights do not travel with him to his new team, he cannot be part of a sign-and-trade next summer (unless he gets no more than 120% of his current salary, which is about half of what he's looking for).  This limits the number of teams he can potentially sign with.  It's a pretty basic rule of economics that if demand drops and supply is held constant (there will be the same number of Greg Monroes available), the price drops.  Unless he's so coveted that he's likely to get the max regardless, he very well could find himself with fewer options, and thus less negotiating power.  Players just don't waive that no-trade power unless they're sure they'd be going to a better situation.  If we were looking like a solid playoff team, it might be a different story, since performing well in the playoffs could increase his value, and if nothing else he'd get to experience winning, and get extra money from his playoffs share.  But we're not looking like that any more or less than Detroit is, so it's moot.

A, B, C) Swing Wallace into trade or to someone else for expiring and you cover cap holds. Also Cap is going up by probably 10 million due to NBA not wanting crazy cap raise in two years. So you don't have to go crazy over trading Wallace too even by adding Smith and cap holds there will plenty of space.

D) Pure rumor and a joke to use.

E)I already addressed this, as a FA he gets no benefit of Bird rights anyways. Remember if Pistons were going to do a even near max deal it would have been done. Pistons won't.  Likely he is stuck at market rate max and 4 years. No s&t over that are allowed so no benefit to bird rights unless you are staying. But as I said Pistons didn't want to pay the man.


His bird rights have a lot of value to him and the team.  They can still sign and trade him. 




So now the Celtics have to give up even more assets to keep Monroe?  And if it fails, they have given up so many assets and only have the overpayed Smith to show for it?





If the Celtics want him, a sign and trade makes the most sense after the season. 




And yes, Monroe is a C.  The biggest issue with him in Detroit is they play him at PF so much.  His best numbers the past two seasons (offensively and defensively) is when he slides over to C. 

trading for Greg Monroe
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2014, 10:26:22 AM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
To Celtics: Monroe
To Pistons:  Bass, Young, future 1st

Would the Pistons bite at this offer?

Their lineup

Drummond
Smith
Singler/Young
KCP
Jennings

Celtics lineup

Monroe (better center than a pf)
Sullinger/KO
Green
AB
Rondo

Even though monroe doesnt help alot on the defensive end, he would instantly become the teams most reliable rebounder and able to post up his defender. From there has a nice hook shot, up and unders and is an excellent passer to feed the open man.

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #11 on: November 24, 2014, 11:04:09 AM »

Offline Endless Paradise

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2853
  • Tommy Points: 182
The idea that the Pistons don't want Monroe because they didn't re-sign him is absurd for the simple fact that if they really didn't want him, they wouldn't have even extended the qualifying offer. There's nothing stopping Monroe from doing what Spencer Hawes did with the Sixers a few years ago and signing a new deal after playing out the season. 

His Bird rights are very much so still important.

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #12 on: November 24, 2014, 11:19:21 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
Greg Monroe has an effective no-trade clause because he signed his offer sheet.  Due to the fact his Bird rights do not transfer, since he's on a 1-year deal, the Celtics (or any team acquiring him) would have to use cap space to re-sign him next year.  Thus it is a) silly to trade for him, since we might not have the cap space to keep him, and b) silly for him to agree to be traded, since it could cost him money on his next contract.
Just so you know A) Team will have the cap space unless they take on more non-expiring deals. Only 42* million committed to 2015. B) Pistons are the only team that could sign him to above market level max or extra years and they already said no which is why he got stuck with QO. He has to go somewhere else and in that case bird rights never mattered.

People have to stop saying Monroe can't be traded for. A risk yes if he doesn't resign, impossible to get no.

Just so so you know:

A) This trade increases the Celtics salary obligations next year, since Smith makes $13.5 million.

B) Draft picks have cap holds too, and the way we're playing ours will have a pretty large one.

C) Rondo will have a max cap hold.  Even if Rondo signed a less-than-max deal, there would not be any cap room left to give Monroe near what he wants since you have Smith on board.  Unless you want to have Smith and Monroe with no Rondo, which would be different than every argument I've seen on this board for the last three years, since the #1 pro-Smith argument is that Rondo would help his shot selection.  And most pro-Monroe arguments think he pairs nicely with Rondo too.

D) There were many reports over the summer that Monroe hates playing with Smith, so I don't know why you think he'd agree to be traded with him to Boston and then re-sign here to boot.

E) Even if this were a different random message board trade that didn't include Smith, Monroe still risks losing money in his next contract if he agrees to any trade anywhere.  Since his Bird rights do not travel with him to his new team, he cannot be part of a sign-and-trade next summer (unless he gets no more than 120% of his current salary, which is about half of what he's looking for).  This limits the number of teams he can potentially sign with.  It's a pretty basic rule of economics that if demand drops and supply is held constant (there will be the same number of Greg Monroes available), the price drops.  Unless he's so coveted that he's likely to get the max regardless, he very well could find himself with fewer options, and thus less negotiating power.  Players just don't waive that no-trade power unless they're sure they'd be going to a better situation.  If we were looking like a solid playoff team, it might be a different story, since performing well in the playoffs could increase his value, and if nothing else he'd get to experience winning, and get extra money from his playoffs share.  But we're not looking like that any more or less than Detroit is, so it's moot.

A, B, C) Swing Wallace into trade or to someone else for expiring and you cover cap holds. Also Cap is going up by probably 10 million due to NBA not wanting crazy cap raise in two years. So you don't have to go crazy over trading Wallace too even by adding Smith and cap holds there will plenty of space.

D) Pure rumor and a joke to use.

E)I already addressed this, as a FA he gets no benefit of Bird rights anyways. Remember if Pistons were going to do a even near max deal it would have been done. Pistons won't.  Likely he is stuck at market rate max and 4 years. No s&t over that are allowed so no benefit to bird rights unless you are staying. But as I said Pistons didn't want to pay the man.


His bird rights have a lot of value to him and the team.  They can still sign and trade him. 




So now the Celtics have to give up even more assets to keep Monroe?  And if it fails, they have given up so many assets and only have the overpayed Smith to show for it?





If the Celtics want him, a sign and trade makes the most sense after the season. 




And yes, Monroe is a C.  The biggest issue with him in Detroit is they play him at PF so much.  His best numbers the past two seasons (offensively and defensively) is when he slides over to C.
Again Bird rights mean little to him unless he stays (meaning can't s&t for same $ or years). Does hold some value to Pistons though as they can get something for him in a s&t but do have to take on salary at his level,  yikes.

We don't even know what it would be to get Monroe and Smith but as I said with cap going up and Wallace will soon be expiring contract the assets you give up won't be needed or that much if you want more room.

.

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #13 on: November 24, 2014, 11:21:52 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
The idea that the Pistons don't want Monroe because they didn't re-sign him is absurd for the simple fact that if they really didn't want him, they wouldn't have even extended the qualifying offer. There's nothing stopping Monroe from doing what Spencer Hawes did with the Sixers a few years ago and signing a new deal after playing out the season. 

His Bird rights are very much so still important.
No one has said Pistons don't want him. I said at max $ they don't. 

Re: Idea: Green. Sully or Oly, #1 for Smoove, Monroe
« Reply #14 on: November 24, 2014, 11:25:23 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34023
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
Greg Monroe has an effective no-trade clause because he signed his offer sheet.  Due to the fact his Bird rights do not transfer, since he's on a 1-year deal, the Celtics (or any team acquiring him) would have to use cap space to re-sign him next year.  Thus it is a) silly to trade for him, since we might not have the cap space to keep him, and b) silly for him to agree to be traded, since it could cost him money on his next contract.
Just so you know A) Team will have the cap space unless they take on more non-expiring deals. Only 42* million committed to 2015. B) Pistons are the only team that could sign him to above market level max or extra years and they already said no which is why he got stuck with QO. He has to go somewhere else and in that case bird rights never mattered.

People have to stop saying Monroe can't be traded for. A risk yes if he doesn't resign, impossible to get no.

Just so so you know:

A) This trade increases the Celtics salary obligations next year, since Smith makes $13.5 million.

B) Draft picks have cap holds too, and the way we're playing ours will have a pretty large one.

C) Rondo will have a max cap hold.  Even if Rondo signed a less-than-max deal, there would not be any cap room left to give Monroe near what he wants since you have Smith on board.  Unless you want to have Smith and Monroe with no Rondo, which would be different than every argument I've seen on this board for the last three years, since the #1 pro-Smith argument is that Rondo would help his shot selection.  And most pro-Monroe arguments think he pairs nicely with Rondo too.

D) There were many reports over the summer that Monroe hates playing with Smith, so I don't know why you think he'd agree to be traded with him to Boston and then re-sign here to boot.

E) Even if this were a different random message board trade that didn't include Smith, Monroe still risks losing money in his next contract if he agrees to any trade anywhere.  Since his Bird rights do not travel with him to his new team, he cannot be part of a sign-and-trade next summer (unless he gets no more than 120% of his current salary, which is about half of what he's looking for).  This limits the number of teams he can potentially sign with.  It's a pretty basic rule of economics that if demand drops and supply is held constant (there will be the same number of Greg Monroes available), the price drops.  Unless he's so coveted that he's likely to get the max regardless, he very well could find himself with fewer options, and thus less negotiating power.  Players just don't waive that no-trade power unless they're sure they'd be going to a better situation.  If we were looking like a solid playoff team, it might be a different story, since performing well in the playoffs could increase his value, and if nothing else he'd get to experience winning, and get extra money from his playoffs share.  But we're not looking like that any more or less than Detroit is, so it's moot.

A, B, C) Swing Wallace into trade or to someone else for expiring and you cover cap holds. Also Cap is going up by probably 10 million due to NBA not wanting crazy cap raise in two years. So you don't have to go crazy over trading Wallace too even by adding Smith and cap holds there will plenty of space.

D) Pure rumor and a joke to use.

E)I already addressed this, as a FA he gets no benefit of Bird rights anyways. Remember if Pistons were going to do a even near max deal it would have been done. Pistons won't.  Likely he is stuck at market rate max and 4 years. No s&t over that are allowed so no benefit to bird rights unless you are staying. But as I said Pistons didn't want to pay the man.


His bird rights have a lot of value to him and the team.  They can still sign and trade him. 




So now the Celtics have to give up even more assets to keep Monroe?  And if it fails, they have given up so many assets and only have the overpayed Smith to show for it?





If the Celtics want him, a sign and trade makes the most sense after the season. 




And yes, Monroe is a C.  The biggest issue with him in Detroit is they play him at PF so much.  His best numbers the past two seasons (offensively and defensively) is when he slides over to C.
Again Bird rights mean little to him unless he stays (meaning can't s&t for same $ or years). Does hold some value to Pistons though as they can get something for him in a s&t but do have to take on salary at his level,  yikes.

We don't even know what it would be to get Monroe and Smith but as I said with cap going up and Wallace will soon be expiring contract the assets you give up won't be needed or that much if you want more room.

.


And that money would come attached to something the Pistons want. 

And it allows more flexibility for Monroe to which team he wants to go to. 


And it allows Monroe to still earn the max.  If he plays well enough and the Pistons find a desperate GM to take that Smith contract for them, who knows, maybe the Pistons do offer him the max next year.  Stranger things have happened in the NBA.



Meanwhile, the Celtics still should not be giving up assets for rentals.  Especially a rental that is not going to put them over the top.