The most likely plan spells the end for IT, Crowder, and possibly Smart.

[Ed Hollison]

I agree that a) the Celtics will go after Hayward and b) landing him would make someone instantly expendable. It's most likely Crowder.

Drafting Fultz or Ball presents a similar but separate issue. Can't imagine they continue to carry IT, Smart, Bradley, and Smart plus the new PG in that scenario.

My prediction if the Celtics land Hayward and draft Fultz or Ball: They trade one or more of those aforementioned guys away, then make a run at the title next year and come up short. They very controversially let IT walk in free agency after not offering him the max, and use the cap space instead to re-sign and extend other guys (like perhaps Smart). The following year they roll into the season with some PG combination of Fultz/Ball and Smart/Rozier (whoever's left), plus Hayward and J Brown at the 2-3 slots.

It's going to be painful to let IT go, but I think the Celtics will in that scenario. The advantage is that all of your starters can switch on defense and guard pretty much anyone (keep in mind Fultz and Ball are pretty tall for the PG position and can play D), and still have lots of ballhandling and playmaking on offense.

[TheSundanceKid]

Not buying it. I think DA goes after Hayward hard this summer. Trades Bradley for some big to help. Signs IT to an extension. Keeps the picks and develops the next wave of great C's to replace IT/Horford/Hayward.

There is no scenario where we sign Hayward and extend IT that works under the cap. Not unless you expect Isaiah to sign for 50% less than the max. Not even if you trade Bradley and renounce all our free agents is that remotely possible

[KGBirdBias]

I've been keeping my eye on Josh Jackson and Jason Tatum. I'm trying to see why we need Fultz or Ball when we have a good 4 guard rotation and 3 are really good defenders.

Ball looks like JKidd or Penny.

I'm concerned that Fultz hasn't made his team better and won't be in the tourney, but who is his game comparable too? I haven't seen enough of him. Is Fultz more DWade or more Harden?

[footey]

No matter what happens, we are hanging onto Crowder, unless he is part of a package for a super star.  His contract is so valuable for long time, he would be a value even off the bench. I also see Smart being off the bench long term. Just don't see him as a starter for us. 

I watched more video of Hayward lately, and am starting to see his appeal.  He and Jaylen could play 2/3 at the same time, and match up on defense appropriately. 

Whether or not we can give IT the max after signing Hayward, I defer to the cap masters on this board, I have no clue.

[CoachBo]

Horse sh...

it!!! Not buying the OPs scenario at all. It basically play Hayward with rookies and 2nd year players and dump the core that makes this team what it is. Totally not the most likely scenario.

Right. The OPs scenario is nonsense.

[Ed Hollison]

Not buying it. I think DA goes after Hayward hard this summer. Trades Bradley for some big to help. Signs IT to an extension. Keeps the picks and develops the next wave of great C's to replace IT/Horford/Hayward.

There is no scenario where we sign Hayward and extend IT that works under the cap. Not unless you expect Isaiah to sign for 50% less than the max. Not even if you trade Bradley and renounce all our free agents is that remotely possible

As I understand it, they need to shed someone's salary prior to signing a max free agent. But after that you can re-sign your own guys and go over the cap, no? Or would resigning everyone necessarily put us into the luxury tax?

[D Dub]

not a big fan of Hayward, would rather have Smart or Bradley playing two alongside IT to balance defense with offense. 

about the only trade I could see Ainge making at this point is if he gets the top overall pick, then sends it to Bird for Paul George. 

[TheSundanceKid]

Not buying it. I think DA goes after Hayward hard this summer. Trades Bradley for some big to help. Signs IT to an extension. Keeps the picks and develops the next wave of great C's to replace IT/Horford/Hayward.

There is no scenario where we sign Hayward and extend IT that works under the cap. Not unless you expect Isaiah to sign for 50% less than the max. Not even if you trade Bradley and renounce all our free agents is that remotely possible

As I understand it, they need to shed someone's salary prior to signing a max free agent. But after that you can re-sign your own guys and go over the cap, no? Or would resigning everyone necessarily put us into the luxury tax?

What you say is true, we can re-sign our Free Agents after, were we to retain their rights. For example, if we did trade Bradley for a future draft pick, we could keep KO's cap hold, sign a max FA and then re-sign KO by going over the cap.

The difference here is with guys currently under contract. There are two ways to extend the length of their contracts. One is to 'extend' their contract, going over the cap to do so, which is basically worthless under the new CBA, it makes no financial sense for most players to do this. The other option is to 'renegotiate' the contract, a la Westbrook and Harden. The problem here is that you can only use cap space to renegotiate a contract. Renegotiating IT to the max would take about $19m, if you sign a max FA there is very little chance to do that. Trading away Avery doesn't even make half that space.

I feel this year is quite different to last years FA, when it would have been an obvious choice to clear the space for 2 max FAs. This summer we would have to give up a lot more to get that one piece. It's much more questionable to me. I would be tempted to use the cap space to give IT the max, re-sign KO and then look to bring in some vet bigs on the cheap. To me that's actually a better option if you still aren't sold on IT long term, you sign him to a very friendly contract in the new CBA, smooth your cap over the next few years and give yourself a very tradeable asset.

[Tr1boy]

Nah. IT is staying even if C's do draft another guard. Also Crowder is a crazy good player under contract no way C's want to deal him.

Good... But not crazy good. Cmon

[Chris22]

Nah. IT is staying even if C's do draft another guard. Also Crowder is a crazy good player under contract no way C's want to deal him.

Good... But not crazy good. Cmon

Crowder leads the team in plus and minus.
He is very underrated.

[OldSchoolDude]

Some of you are missing the point.  The current plan is to keep and use the Brooklyn picks. If you draft a player #1 to 3, that player will eventually be a starter who also close games or will be a bust.  If Fultz or Ball is the real deal we have to let go of Smart or IT.   We are building a roster with top picks and those picks need to become the main go to players on the team or the picks are busts.  Also you don't sing a Max free agent to not play him.  So we have to end up with a go to line up of 2016 #3 pick (Brown), 2017 top 4 at worst, 2018 pick looking to be top 5, 2016 max FA Horford, 2017 max FA possibly Hayward or Griffin.

IT will have to be the first to go.  He is an unrestricted free agent after next season.  If Ball or Fultz looks like an all star to be there is no way we can offer IT a Max.  IT is playing to good to take 1/2 a max deal, come of the bench, and not be on the floor during crunch time. Even if he is still the better player the first year of a 5 year max deal, the team will be stuck with a horrible contact for 4 years.   The celtics have not budged on numerous opportunities to trade the pick.  They clearly want to keep it.

[OldSchoolDude]

Not buying it. I think DA goes after Hayward hard this summer. Trades Bradley for some big to help. Signs IT to an extension. Keeps the picks and develops the next wave of great C's to replace IT/Horford/Hayward.

This is my point.  If Fultz or Ball is going to become the starter do they sit on the bench for six years behind IT?  A five year Max deal starts after Fultz or Ball's Rookie year.  It's likely Fultz/Ball come off the bench his rookie year, but for the next 5 years after that?  That only happens if he is a bust.  Once the 2017 pick is ready to start and close  games you have to take the place of one of the current players doing that.  The same with adding the 2018 pick and the maturing of Brown.   

[TheSundanceKid]

Some of you are missing the point.  The current plan is to keep and use the Brooklyn picks. If you draft a player #1 to 3, that player will eventually be a starter who also close games or will be a bust.  If Fultz or Ball is the real deal we have to let go of Smart or IT.   We are building a roster with top picks and those picks need to become the main go to players on the team or the picks are busts.  Also you don't sing a Max free agent to not play him.  So we have to end up with a go to line up of 2016 #3 pick (Brown), 2017 top 4 at worst, 2018 pick looking to be top 5, 2016 max FA Horford, 2017 max FA possibly Hayward or Griffin.

IT will have to be the first to go.  He is an unrestricted free agent after next season.  If Ball or Fultz looks like an all star to be there is no way we can offer IT a Max.  IT is playing to good to take 1/2 a max deal, come of the bench, and not be on the floor during crunch time. Even if he is still the better player the first year of a 5 year max deal, the team will be stuck with a horrible contact for 4 years.   The celtics have not budged on numerous opportunities to trade the pick.  They clearly want to keep it.

Saying the current plan is to build through the draft is a wild assumption, especially given the fact that Ainge has been chasing Butler for over a year now and reportedly came close to landing Paul George. What you may mean is it is your preferred option, which is something completely different.

If we get Fultz or Ball and if they turn into all NBA players then it does not mean letting go of Smart or IT. If we draft Fultz he can play alongside either of those guys for years.

Also if we are building through the draft and making our top picks the got to guys, why are we signing a max FA to be just that? Surely it would make more sense to not sign a guy like Hayward in your scenario? Surely better to extend IT this summer so that when Fultz becomes the player you envisage we can trade IT for help in another area, as opposed to letting him walk for nothing...

This whole topic was kicked off by your most likely scenario, which was in fact not the most likely scenario and has now turned into your description of one of the many routes we could take this summer, which isn't even news considering we were talking about this last summer as well. None of that means that Smart and IT must go. That's literally like saying Crowder should have gone last summer because we drafted Brown

[footey]

A lot depends on what pick we get for sure. Especially if it's 4. More likely we trade it if that happens.

[OldSchoolDude]

Nah. IT is staying even if C's do draft another guard. Also Crowder is a crazy good player under contract no way C's want to deal him.

Good... But not crazy good. Cmon

Crowder leads the team in plus and minus.

He is very underrated.

Croweder is playing very well but Brown is on a path to be the better player and Hayward is already a better player.  When Brown matures he will replace Crowder as a starter and game closer.  The only way he doesn't replace Crowder is if he is a bust.   If we add Hayward he will replace Crowder immediately as the starter at SF and Crowder will have to play the 4 where at 6'6 he is ridiculously undersized.  If he plays PF for the 2017-18 season expect to see us draft a full sized PF with the 2018 pick.  Crowder will play out his great contract but he won't get big money from us when its done and he'll probably leave as a FA like Turner did.  Because he is playing so well on a great contract, I don't see him being traded.  I see us keeping him for his whole deal to solidify an excellent bench unit going forward.