Could you use Bradley to dump Wallace?

[LarBrd33]

Just wanted to get a gauge on what you think Bradley's value is.

I think he's overpaid.  I'm in favor of trading him for an expiring.  We can always find Bradley-level talent for the type of money he makes.  8 mil for a starter seems reasonable.   But I want to head into this offseason with the most cap space possible.

We have like 30 mil in cap space this summer, but depending on if we are stuck paying Nelson and how much we end up giving to our rookies, it might be more like 20 mil.   

Getting stuck with Wallace next season isn't the worst thing in the world.  He can be utilized as an expiring contract.  You could include him with assets (picks/youth) to go after a big star.  Wallace actually gains trade value this summer.  The new-age "Theo Ratliff's Expiring Contract".

It's been suggested that we could dump Wallace's contract on a team with cap space at the expense of draft picks, but for the sake or argument, does anyone think you could utilize Bradley to dump Wallace's deal?

Say a team like the Knicks really likes Bradley and think he could slot in at SG now that they have dumped Shumpert and Smith.  Could you offer Bradley (8 mil x 4 years) + Wallace (10 mil x 2 years) for Amare's expiring contract?   

Probably not.  Knicks wouldn't jeopardize their cap space like that.  But are there any other teams out there that have bloated expiring deals and a need for a talent like Bradley?

[LarBrd33]

Not seeing many options.

Toronto can put together 15 mil in expiring dead weight:  Landry Field, Chuck Hayes, Tyler Hansbrough... those 3 guys kind of stink.   Wallace + Bradley is about 17 mil.

Not sure they have much need for Bradley.  I don't know if Toronto sees themselves as a player in free agency this year...  if not, maybe you could work something out with them if they like Bradley or want to get a 3rd team involved to re-route Bradley for a player of a different position.

[wdleehi]

Not worth it to get rid of Wallace.  No need to give up an asset to move Wallace until there is an actual player ready to sign with the Celtics and they need the space.

[LarBrd33]

Not worth it to get rid of Wallace.  No need to give up an asset to move Wallace until there is an actual player ready to sign with the Celtics and they need the space.

Not worth it?

If someone would give us 20 mil in expiring contracts for Bradley + Wallace, I'd consider it a major, major win for us.

In fact, I'd include Crowder's contract to sweeten the pot.  Crowder + Bradley + Wallace for Amare's expiring.  Sign me up.

[Monkhouse]

Not worth it to get rid of Wallace.  No need to give up an asset to move Wallace until there is an actual player ready to sign with the Celtics and they need the space.

Not worth it?

If someone would give us 20 mil in expiring contracts for Bradley + Wallace, I'd consider it a major, major win for us.

In fact, I'd include Crowder's contract to sweeten the pot.  Crowder + Bradley + Wallace for Amare's expiring.  Sign me up.

.....

Really?

I would at least expect one or two second rounders.

[LooseCannon]

I hope Bradley starts for the Celtics for the remainder of his contract just for the sheer entertainment value of watching your descent into madness.

[Who]

Bradley does not have that type of trade value.

Nobody is paying $17 million a year to have Avery Bradley on their team.

[ssspence]

Overkill. If you really need to remove Wallace to squeeze in 2015-16 FA signings, stretch him. I'd rather see us dump Turner ASAP.

[fantankerous]

Or would we be using Wallace to dump Bradley?

[TheFlex]

Not worth it to get rid of Wallace.  No need to give up an asset to move Wallace until there is an actual player ready to sign with the Celtics and they need the space.

Not worth it?

If someone would give us 20 mil in expiring contracts for Bradley + Wallace, I'd consider it a major, major win for us.

In fact, I'd include Crowder's contract to sweeten the pot.  Crowder + Bradley + Wallace for Amare's expiring.  Sign me up.

This is irrational. Clear that cap space to whiff on LMA and Gasol this summer?

No need to clear Wallace unless an opportunity arises to utilize the freed cap space. Next year he'll be an expiring contract, and in the 2016 offseason -- a.k.a. the first offseason we'll matter since 2012 -- he'll come off the books.

[Jonny CC]

Or would we be using Wallace to dump Bradley?

TP. 

[Jonny CC]

You can't use a bad contract (AB) to get rid of a worse contract (GW).  It will never work.

[saltlover]

I'd much prefer to use Wallace's contract to acquire a player via trade after weve filled up on free agents using cap room.  We have more than enough draft picks to use 1 or even 2 to move on from Crash when the time comes.  Wallace, Pressey and oodles of picks for Cousins sounds great.  Trade Wallace now and you cost yourself $5 mil in possible salary to spend (since C's can take back $5 million more than Wallace makes).

[PickNRoll]

You might get Bargnani and Calderon for Bradley and Wallace.  I'm not sure who loses that deal.  I don't think you can get any value for Bradley.

[Evantime34]

So I'm a much bigger Bradley fan than a lot of people on these forums. I think giving him up is way too much to get Wallace's contract off the books.

For that matter, I wouldn't give anything up to get rid of Wallace. We are in acquiring asset mode, we shouldn't be giving up assets in order to shed salary. Mostly because I don't believe the extra cap space we are receiving is worth giving up Bradley.

I think Bradley has value in the league, I would be fine with moving him but I would want it as part of a bigger deal bringing back a star rather than attaching him to Wallace to do what amounts to a smaller deal.

I think AB's value is such that if we found two top tier free agents that would sign here as a package deal, we could attach Bradley to Wallace in order to clear the space. Even then I think we could get rid of Wallace for a future late 1st.