Author Topic: Herald: Orlando willing to match contract, Celtics end pursuit of Tobias Harris  (Read 11271 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
If Orlando's going to match, why is this even a debate?  I get the disappointment over not adding any impact players, but making moves to free up cap space that will promptly be made meaningless when the Magic match would be pointless.

They might be throwing that out there to scare teams off.

Might be, but I'd expect our front office to have better information on that, and the claim is they'll match anything.  I don't see why we should be clearing out cap space just to find out if they're serious.  Doubly so if we didn't want to give Harris the max anyway.

Offline Lucky17

  • DKC Commish
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16021
  • Tommy Points: 2352
I realize that giving max deals to Harris and Monroe, which I think would have been possible if we used a first to get rid of Wallace, would have significantly limited the moves we could make over the next two seasons.  But I think Ainge is valuing future flexibility too much over improving the team right now.

Mike

Using cap space, we still have about $15m to offer with the simple move of stretching Wallace.

TP.  Cutting Pressey would trim a little more, too, yes?

I think Monroe would slot in nicely with the other moves made so far. Wonderif Ainge can do it.
DKC League is now on reddit!: http://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
If Orlando's going to match, why is this even a debate?  I get the disappointment over not adding any impact players, but making moves to free up cap space that will promptly be made meaningless when the Magic match would be pointless.

They might be throwing that out there to scare teams off.

Might be, but I'd expect our front office to have better information on that, and the claim is they'll match anything.  I don't see why we should be clearing out cap space just to find out if they're serious.  Doubly so if we didn't want to give Harris the max anyway.

Correct.  I suppose it would be nice to hang around in the discussion in case a sign-and-trade can be worked out, but Orlando probably wants a pricy package in return.  For Harris fans, the best thing to hope for is that he pulls a Greg Monroe and signs a qualifying offer, re-entering free agency next year when we have the room.  Of course, his price might be even higher as he tries to recoup lost income from this year.

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
I realize that giving max deals to Harris and Monroe, which I think would have been possible if we used a first to get rid of Wallace, would have significantly limited the moves we could make over the next two seasons.  But I think Ainge is valuing future flexibility too much over improving the team right now.

Mike

Using cap space, we still have about $15m to offer with the simple move of stretching Wallace.

TP.  Cutting Pressey would trim a little more, too, yes?

I think Monroe would slot in nicely with the other moves made so far. Wonderif Ainge can do it.

We are under $15 million left if Wallace is stretched, and pretty much every cap projection out there excludes Pressey and Babb.  Many also (wrongly) exclude Rozier and Hunter.  We're in the $12-13 million range if we only count Crowder's cap hold and stretch Wallace. 

As I've said umpteen times, if we really want Harris it should be a sign-and-trade anyway, because then Orlando isn't matching and causing problems.  But I guess we don't really want Harris at those dollars and with whatever the compensation is to Orlando.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if Orlando had a pretty high asking price.

Offline Cman

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13068
  • Tommy Points: 120
I don't think its a "front" by Orlando. They haven't had any success with FAs, so they likely want to keep Harris. They certainly have the cap space to do it.
Celtics fan for life.

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
I realize that giving max deals to Harris and Monroe, which I think would have been possible if we used a first to get rid of Wallace, would have significantly limited the moves we could make over the next two seasons.  But I think Ainge is valuing future flexibility too much over improving the team right now.

Mike

Using cap space, we still have about $15m to offer with the simple move of stretching Wallace.

TP.  Cutting Pressey would trim a little more, too, yes?

I think Monroe would slot in nicely with the other moves made so far. Wonderif Ainge can do it.

Reportedly we haven't even formally contacted Monroe.  Sounds like we either don't want him here at what he'd cost or he doesn't want to be here.  So probably no-go there too.

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18699
  • Tommy Points: 1818
I realize that giving max deals to Harris and Monroe, which I think would have been possible if we used a first to get rid of Wallace, would have significantly limited the moves we could make over the next two seasons.  But I think Ainge is valuing future flexibility too much over improving the team right now.

Mike

Using cap space, we still have about $15m to offer with the simple move of stretching Wallace.

TP.  Cutting Pressey would trim a little more, too, yes?

I think Monroe would slot in nicely with the other moves made so far. Wonderif Ainge can do it.

We are under $15 million left if Wallace is stretched, and pretty much every cap projection out there excludes Pressey and Babb.  Many also (wrongly) exclude Rozier and Hunter.  We're in the $12-13 million range if we only count Crowder's cap hold and stretch Wallace. 

As I've said umpteen times, if we really want Harris it should be a sign-and-trade anyway, because then Orlando isn't matching and causing problems.  But I guess we don't really want Harris at those dollars and with whatever the compensation is to Orlando.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if Orlando had a pretty high asking price.

I don't have it that way.

I'm using guesstimates (not mine, but that's all we can do at this point) of $11,750,000 for Amir and $4,820,000 for Jerebko. I'm also working under the assumption of the new projected cap of $69 million.

So with keeping all that in mind, we should have near $15 million (if Wallace is stretched). It's all dependent on how contracts are structured, but considering that nothing will be finalized until needed, it should give the Celtics some wiggle room on how to go about that.

I agree with the rest of what you're saying.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2015, 10:33:03 AM by BudweiserCeltic »

Offline KeepRondo

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5161
  • Tommy Points: 215
I realize that giving max deals to Harris and Monroe, which I think would have been possible if we used a first to get rid of Wallace, would have significantly limited the moves we could make over the next two seasons.  But I think Ainge is valuing future flexibility too much over improving the team right now.

Mike

Using cap space, we still have about $15m to offer with the simple move of stretching Wallace.

TP.  Cutting Pressey would trim a little more, too, yes?

I think Monroe would slot in nicely with the other moves made so far. Wonderif Ainge can do it.

We are under $15 million left if Wallace is stretched, and pretty much every cap projection out there excludes Pressey and Babb.  Many also (wrongly) exclude Rozier and Hunter.  We're in the $12-13 million range if we only count Crowder's cap hold and stretch Wallace. 

As I've said umpteen times, if we really want Harris it should be a sign-and-trade anyway, because then Orlando isn't matching and causing problems.  But I guess we don't really want Harris at those dollars and with whatever the compensation is to Orlando.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if Orlando had a pretty high asking price.
So what would be the trade then?

Gerald Wallace and the 2018 Nets pick for Tobias Harris?

Offline greg683x

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4096
  • Tommy Points: 585
When was the last time Ainge gave out a max?

He's handed out the max to retain and extend his own players (Pierce and Garnett's Extensions)

He's never handed out an extension to a free agent.  It's worth noting though that he's never had an opportunity to until now.
Greg

Offline timpiker

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1696
  • Tommy Points: 112
Thanks!

Offline gpap

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8224
  • Tommy Points: 417
I would just make a deal with Brooklyn to get Joe Johnson and play him at SF

I know he's 33, but he can still play and would give us a veteran presence

Something like Avery and Wallace for Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack

Isaiah is our starting PG with Smart at SG, Johnson at SF and Jack as our back-up PG (or maybe flip Jack and Isaiah.)

Offline hodgy03038

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3701
  • Tommy Points: 440
  • Marcus Smart #1 Fan
I would just make a deal with Brooklyn to get Joe Johnson and play him at SF

I know he's 33, but he can still play and would give us a veteran presence

Something like Avery and Wallace for Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack

Isaiah is our starting PG with Smart at SG, Johnson at SF and Jack as our back-up PG (or maybe flip Jack and Isaiah.)

Joe Johnson is TERRIBLE. No way. Why take that salary off the Brooklyn books to allow them to get better. That would be addition by subtraction for them. Really not too good of an offer.

Johnson 14.4 PPG/4.8 RBG/ 3.7 APG .435 FG%

Owed 25.9 MILLION next year!!!!!


Turner is better.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2015, 11:45:31 AM by hodgy03038 »

Offline gpap

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8224
  • Tommy Points: 417
I would just make a deal with Brooklyn to get Joe Johnson and play him at SF

I know he's 33, but he can still play and would give us a veteran presence

Something like Avery and Wallace for Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack

Isaiah is our starting PG with Smart at SG, Johnson at SF and Jack as our back-up PG (or maybe flip Jack and Isaiah.)

Joe Johnson is TERRIBLE. No way. Why take that salary off the Brooklyn books to allow them to get better. That would be addition by subtraction for them. Really not too good of an offer.

Johnson 14.4 PPG/4.8 RBG/ 3.7 APG .435 FG%

Owed 25.9 MILLION next year!!!!!


Turner is better.


No he's not and you're not doing Brooklyn any favors.

Johnson only has one year left and is a very good player.

Oh, Turner is DEFINITELY not better.

In fact, if you really want Brooklyn to be bad, include Turner in this deal to Brooklyn

Offline hodgy03038

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3701
  • Tommy Points: 440
  • Marcus Smart #1 Fan
I would just make a deal with Brooklyn to get Joe Johnson and play him at SF

I know he's 33, but he can still play and would give us a veteran presence

Something like Avery and Wallace for Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack

Isaiah is our starting PG with Smart at SG, Johnson at SF and Jack as our back-up PG (or maybe flip Jack and Isaiah.)

Joe Johnson is TERRIBLE. No way. Why take that salary off the Brooklyn books to allow them to get better. That would be addition by subtraction for them. Really not too good of an offer.

Johnson 14.4 PPG/4.8 RBG/ 3.7 APG .435 FG%

Owed 25.9 MILLION next year!!!!!


Turner is better.


No he's not and you're not doing Brooklyn any favors.

Johnson only has one year left and is a very good player.

Oh, Turner is DEFINITELY not better.

In fact, if you really want Brooklyn to be bad, include Turner in this deal to Brooklyn


It's absolutely ridiculous. Why do you think they are trying hard to trade him and they will get NO takers? He's 33 and over the hill. He is a half-court player that would never fit in to Brad's system. 25.9 million next year means that he has 2 years on his contract. That's Kobe money or LeBron money. He is not very good any more but I will take some of whatever you are smoking.

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
I would just make a deal with Brooklyn to get Joe Johnson and play him at SF

I know he's 33, but he can still play and would give us a veteran presence

Something like Avery and Wallace for Joe Johnson and Jarrett Jack

Isaiah is our starting PG with Smart at SG, Johnson at SF and Jack as our back-up PG (or maybe flip Jack and Isaiah.)

Joe Johnson is TERRIBLE. No way. Why take that salary off the Brooklyn books to allow them to get better. That would be addition by subtraction for them. Really not too good of an offer.

Johnson 14.4 PPG/4.8 RBG/ 3.7 APG .435 FG%

Owed 25.9 MILLION next year!!!!!


Turner is better.


No he's not and you're not doing Brooklyn any favors.

Johnson only has one year left and is a very good player.

Oh, Turner is DEFINITELY not better.

In fact, if you really want Brooklyn to be bad, include Turner in this deal to Brooklyn
This trade doesnt work with salaries. Bradley and Wallace make a combined18 million Jack and Joe make a combined 32 Million. We dont have 14 mil in crap salaries to make this work.

Now the logical  thing would be to take out Jarret Jacks 6 million from the equation but that also doesnt make sense because the trade still doesnt work and now you lose the trade because you trade a cost controlled 24 year old player for an expiring 34 year old player who is arguably not as good of a player in the first place(yes I know you probably think JJ is better but the fact is arguable)
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.