Celtics still want to be the ones to pay Kyrie Irving, but possibilities abound

KG had a no trade in his contract, he had to sign off on the trade to Brooklyn. Was that an extension contract? I thought he negotiated his contract with Danny when his extension was up?

gyso wrote:

kdp59 wrote:the biggest problem the Celtics face is the cap issues we have right now.

IF Irving walks, we get nothing back and have no money for a high end replacement.

IF we let Rozier and  Morris walk, we face the same problem.

the way I see things right now Danny has really two options:

1) resign Irving and try to add Davis in a trade. make the final move in Danny's attempt to rebuild the team after the Nets trade.

2) watch Irving walk and then resign Morris and Rozier. This I think is Danny's second option. IN essence putting the team from last season back together (without Irving). Since someone brought up his name in this thread , Danny could possible bring back Thomas under this option (as well as keep the young talent we have and draft picks).

3)  resign Irving, see how it goes next season and trade him away when it goes south.  I call that the "Blake Griffin" option.

That is a good idea. The risk though, is that Kyrie's apparent value may continue to plummet, a la Deron Williams. Next year is going to be huge for Kyrie - he could emerge as a legit superstar you can build around, or a cautionary tale about over-rating a player in a changing league. If he has another bad year, whether truly bad or just perceived as bad, his trade value might diminish.

I don't know how to feel. One the one hand, I am trying to avoid the knee-jerk "everything is Kyrie's fault" reaction. Of course it is not that simple. Everyone seemed to suck against the Bucks, including our boy wonder coach. On a related note, the Bucks have looked pretty damn dominant. If they end up taking Toronto 3 to 1, and then beat then beat the Warriors in less than 7 (or even in 7), do we change how we view our series against the Bucks? Kyrie is a gifted scorer, and maybe the best ball handler I have ever seen. Others have correctly noted that he can get you a tough basket, which brings me to the other hand - you can't win long term getting tough baskets. In today's game, teams win long term by playing a game that facilitates high percentage, i.e. "easy" baskets. Kyrie's wizardry weaving through traffic with the ball and hitting a step back fade away, or his cojones to take a long 3 early in the clock, can get you a tough basket, but that is a tough way win in this league. Earlier in the season I wondered if Kyrie and Brad might be a bad fit. Kyrie's greatest skill is ball handling, whereas Brad's system works best if no one player is holding the ball for too long. You probably can win with Kyrie, but you might need a coach with a strong personality, someone who can not only deal with/stand up to a superstar ego, but also get other players to make sacrifices in a star-oriented offense. Those aren't Brad's natural strengths - Ironically, Doc might be better suited for that type of team.

All that being said, considering that we get nothing, not even meaningful cap room, if Kyrie walks, the best move would seem to be a sign and trade or a sign and keep-for-a-year and hope for the best. The good thing for us fans is that even if Kyrie does just walk, we know the remaining team can play, and could be right back in contention with the right moves and/or the right development of our youth.

Just remember, he walks, Terry is going to go, I don't care what anyone signs him for, get him out of here as fast as you can, that Mouth is one of the biggest problems in the locker room, Morris is going somewhere else, we can't afford him. Then there are the other questionables:?Brown, Theis, Baynes, Al????? So there are holes to be filled. Tatum still on his rookie deal, but there is a big if there. Does he go TO New Orleans? Does he stay? So many questions.

tjmakz wrote:

Re-signing with Boston wasn’t your question, it was about a sign and trade.
If Kyrie signs with Boston he can sign for 5 years.
If Kyrie is signed and traded or signs with another team, it can only be for 4 years.
Yes, there is a big difference when you are only comparing this next contract of 5 vs 4 years.
But Kyrie should make most of that money up in his contract after that one, if he is still playing then.
The money max matters to some and not to some, like it didn’t matter to Hayward.
It doesn’t seem like the money will be the determining factor with Kyrie.

The 5th year aside, Celtics can still offer him a much better deal. My point was just that. If Danny and Kyrie cannot come to an agreement, why would Kyrie even forgo the 12 million more he could make by signing a deal with Boston for 37.9 and then having Danny trade him where he wants to go. Guess to your point, 12 million is pocket change for a guy like Kyrie.

Hey MrKleen....how is Owen doing???? He must be getting big!!!

Al Horford has a 15% trade kicker. That is a disincentive for another team and a tougher challenge if the Celtics decided to trade him.

I am not suggesting that they trade him.

Some players demand no trade clauses or trade kickers in their contracts. Not sure how or if that works in a situation where a player is already being paid the max that he qualifies for.

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Hey MrKleen....how is Owen doing???? He must be getting big!!!

Rosalie - he is doing great.  Growing like a weed and loves sports



How are you feeling?