Re: Lee traded

by **k_j_88** Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:51 pm

Outside wrote:Although trades were likely from the get-go, having the first domino fall leads to unbridled speculation about who's going next. There very well could be additional trades, but it will be interesting to see how the speculation affects the team's focus.

They just started a road trip, and being on the road may actually be good for them to deal with the situation. Unfortunately, it's a road trip out West against really tough teams, plus Denver at altitude. It will be interesting to see how they come out of this.

They could strike out, which I don't think would be good for their development.

They play hard but have been coming up short more and more. Other teams are gelling and getting better and Boston is still testing the waters it would seem. I'm concerned about the residual impact of so many losses at once from a morale standpoint.

KJ

by **bobheckler** Tue Jan 07, 2014 7:20 pm

tjmakz wrote:
k_j_88 wrote:
gyso wrote:KJ,

When the Celtics signed Jason Terry and Courtney Lee, the Celtics were still considered to be contenders. The previous year, the playoffs almost ended with a trip to the finals. Many would say the season ended with a ref rob-job.

JT was signed using the mid-level exception (MLE), guaranteed, for three years. That was:

1. Before Ray Allen jumped ship, so JT was an addition to the prior team.
2. When almost everyone thought JT was still in the late stages of his prime years.
3. Considered to be typical of what quality free agents of his ilk cost for contenders.
4. Considered to be a good signing at the time (ie: good GMing)

CL was signed to a MLE sized contract, guaranteed, for three years. That was:

5. After Ray Allen jumped ship, so CL was a replacement of a lost asset.
6. After the Celtics had used up the MLE for that year and had NOTHING left to sign a good player.
7. A contract cobbled together using sticks and twigs.
8. Considered to be a great signing at the time (ie: great GMing), considering #6 & 7.
9. A sign-and-trade, which required a 3-year contract.
10. Considered to be typical of what quality free agents of his ilk cost for contenders.

After the next season, Ainge decided that the Celtics were no longer contenders. He:

11. Traded three over paid, past their prime players for a couple of "good player- bad contract" guys and three 1st round draft picks.
12. Traded one of the highest-paid coaches (who wanted out anyway) for a 1st round draft pick.
13. Signed a coach out of nowhere, who seems to be a great choice for a rebuilding non-contending team.
14. Traded a multi-year contract (that no longer made sense) for an expiring contract.

The biggest difference between then and now is that after last season, the Celtics are no longer considered to be contenders. Contenders generally over-pay and non-contenders should not. Another difference is found when comparing JT's/CL's contract and skill level with that of Keith Bogans' contract. The prior contracts were MLE (ish) three year, all guaranteed and the latter was MLE (ish) three year, non-guaranteed in the last two years. That contract (KB's) is considered by many experts to be extremely tradable throughout it's timeframe, due to it's size and it's expiring nature (and maybe should have been included as #15 above).

All the above were considered (at the time) to be good to great GMing. I don't see where you can look at older contracts in the now and consider that as bad GMing, and when circumstances change and those contracts are off-loaded, that is considered to be "lucky" and not good GMing. Perhaps the other guys are just bad GM's.

NBA contracts just cannot be looked at out of context. KB is making more money in this one year than he practically did his entire career, but was over-paid for the above reason plus it was necessary in order to make the Celtic-Net trade. I have read that both Gerald Wallace and Kris Humphries were over-paid by the Nets just so that Brooklyn could have some large salaries to trade for other large salaried better-quality players.

gyso

PS: Third man in is a penalty in hockey, so I will just have to go sit in the box for a couple minutes. Or is it five, I cannot remember. (LOL)

The window was closing. I realize that injuries hastened that, but I didn't really think the KG-PP having a chance would last beyond this season anyway. This is somewhat of a rhetorical questions but at the time did Ainge think he could squeeze another 4 years (length of Lee's contract) out of them? After such long careers, that wouldn't really sound feasible.

In either case, they freed up some salary space for next year. But I don't understand why they gave OKC a draft pick.

KJ

KJ,

I am assuming they included OKC so they could make the Lee for Bayless/Gomes salaries close enough to pass the trade requirements.
It doesn't look like Boston or Memphis are using a trade exception.
For OKC's involvement, they are receiving a 2nd round pick.
Boston will or has waived Gomes, so they save money by not acquiring Bayless and a player with a guaranteed contract.

TJ and KJ,

It now looks like Memphis, who had almost $7.5M left on the trade exception from the Rudy Gay deal, will use that money to absorb Lee's contract.

So. We get Bayless (we'll see what that's worth) and eliminate $11M of Lee's contract, pay a smidge for Gomes contract this year and give up a 2016 2nd rounder (and lose Lee).

IF (big if) Bayless comes in and does a good job for us and makes us forget about Lee, whom we like, quickly then this is another coup by Danny since (assuming we like Bayless as much, albeit differently, than Lee) it would then boil down to eliminating $11M of contract over 2 years for a 2nd round pick 3 years from now.

Big if.

bob

.