How Much Is Too Much For Kevin Love?

http://www.celticsblog.com/2014/6/1/5758712/how-much-is-too-much-for-the-celtics-to-offer-for-kevin-love


How much is too much for the Celtics to offer for Kevin Love?
By Jeff Clark  @celticsblog on Jun 1 2014, 2:51p 144



What price would make you push away from the table?



First a word of sober caution.  As much as we'd like to believe that Kevin Love is in Boston to pave the way to a deal to the Celtics, there's no guarantees that he'll even get dealt, never mind to Boston.  The unsubstantiated rumors are running wild, but they were when Alex Rodriguez was supposed to be all but traded to the Red Sox as well.  Things change and rumors mislead.  We won't know it till it happens - and that might have to wait till draft night at the earliest.

With all that said, I'm still of the opinion that the Celtics have the most assets to offer the Timberwolves for Kevin Love.  Sure, the Cavs have the number 1 pick, but I'm not sure that's where Love would want to go (and sign an extension) and if they get seriously involved in the bidding anyway, I could still see the Celtics offering better quantity than the Cavs can.

By now you know the assets we can offer.  Bushels of picks, Jared Sullinger, Kelly Olynyk, and cap flexibility.

Let's spend a minute or two on cap flexibility, for clarity's sake.  Keith Bogans has a contract with a team option that can be traded and immediately waived.  That's $5.2M off the cap right away for anyone trading for him.  The same is also true for Chris Babb, Chris Johnson, and Phil Pressey (all make roughly $800K to $900K).

Then there's the Traded Player Exceptions ($10.2M via Paul Pierce trade and $2M via Courtney Lee trade).  A few notes about TPEs.  You cannot combine them with player salaries to make up Kevin Love's $15.7M salary next season.  You also can't combine them with each other.  So the TPE won't be used for Kevin Love or anyone making over $10.2M next season.  You could, however, use the TPE in creative ways.  You could use it to trade for a player the T-Wolves want and re-route him with other assets to Minnesota for Love.  Or you could do simultaneous trades where you take on a contract from the Wolves that they don't want anymore.

Let's pull that thread for minute.  If Minny is going to dump Love, they probably aren't going to be contending anytime soon.  If that's the case, they have no need for veterans making big dollar figures.  Kevin Martin comes to mind right away.  He's under contract for 3 more years (last year is a player option) at an average of $7M a year.  We could absorb that salary via the trade exception in one trade, and throw additional assets into a separate but related deal for Love.

Then we'd have Love, Rondo, Wallace, Green, and Martin making big dollars next year (and a lot less flexibility in 2015).  This might be worth it to add Love, but it is worth noting.

Then there's the draft picks.  Sure we could keep adding picks until they relented and said "yes."  After all, we got 3 picks (plus the right to swap picks) from the Nets for two veterans who might not play past this next year.  But at some point you are going to need picks for more than just Kevin Love.

We'll need to have a pipeline of cheap, talented players to fill in the gaps - in particular since the payroll will be top heavy with big money guys.  Additionally, I'm not sure if just adding Love and Martin makes this team a contender.  There's still the matter for getting a rim protector and in general this team is simply more than one piece away from contending - no matter how good the piece.

Without additional help, Love and Rondo could wind up stuck in another year of mediocrity and both could walk at the end of the year (assuming they don't sign extensions).

In a perfect world, the Celtics would be able to find a 3rd star the way they added Ray Allen in 2007.  To do any of that will require picks and tradable contracts as well.

So simply backing up the truck and offloading all the trade assets onto the front porch of the Twolves facility doesn't seem like a good long term option.

So the next logical question also happens to be the title of this post.  How much is too much?

For me, I'd be happy to start with a package that involves either Sully or Olynyk, the Bogans deal, and a draft pick.  That seems like the bare bones least amount that we could hope for (unless the market suddenly shifts in our favor somehow).  I'd be happy enough adding in another draft pick.  But when it comes to going to 3 picks that's about when I start to cringe.  Bill Simmons suggests sending 4 picks (and then using the TPE to get Asik).  I don't know about that.

I'd feel better if there was lottery protection on the picks.  I'd also make the Wolves pick between dumping Martin's salary and getting additional picks.  Martin can still score but he's bad on defense and I'm not sure if they'll find great value for him on the market with that contract of his.

So what do you think?  How much would you be willing to offer for Kevin Love?  What would make you push away from the table and say "no thanks?"



bob
MY NOTE:  I highlighted the paragraphs about the TPE because the advantages and limitations of it are not clear to all people.  Regardless of whether it is used in the Love Sweepstakes or not it is an asset Danny has and can use, subject to its limitations.  It expires 7/12.


.

I don't believe it's a matter of how many assets the Celtics have to offer. I think it's a matter of how many assets the Celtics have to offer after they get "Mr. Right" in the middle. Fill the hole first, and then think about upgrades.

Sam

Number 1 priority is adding 2 all league scorers and or rebounders. Love qualifies as both a scorer and rebounder However the team must still be able to accumulate and retain the necessary assets over the next 2- 3 years to land another all league scorer and or rebounder. Then its off to the races.

swish

swish wrote:Number 1 priority is adding 2 all league scorers and or rebounders. Love qualifies as both a scorer and rebounder However the team must still be able to accumulate and retain the necessary assets over the next 2- 3 years to land another all league scorer and or rebounder. Then its off to the races.

swish

swish,


You don't consider getting a rim protector/shot intimidator/baseline defender one of the top 2 priorities (scoring and rebounding being 1/2 or 2/1)?

Sully is a rebounding fool, Bass and Hump are pretty damn good too, but none of them are 6'11"/7'0" + tall, long rim protectors.


bob
btw, Sully and Hump both average 10.4 rebs/36mpg (or a whisker away from it), Kevin Love gets 12.4 rebs/36mpg. Considering Sully played out of position most of the year, there isn't as much of a difference as you might think.


.

bob

And neither one is even close to being and all league performer.

swish

swish wrote: bob

And neither one is even close to being and all league performer.

swish

swish,

How about my question?


bob


.

bob

Only if he was an all league performer. As stated above, ending up with at least 2 ALL LEAGUE scorers and or rebounders would be my rebuilding goal and its more than likely that a rim protector would probably fill the bill as a rebounder.

swish

swish wrote:bob

Only if he was an all league performer.  As stated above, ending up with at least 2 ALL LEAGUE scorers and or rebounders would be my rebuilding goal and its more than likely that a rim protector would probably fill the bill as a rebounder.

swish

swish,

Love's defense is dubious and he is not a rim protector. So there's at least one example of a rebounder who is not a rim protector. KG was an all-league rim protector and great baseline defender, but he wasn't all-league at scoring or rebounding.

It's harder to rebound when you're always taking the ball out of the bottom of the net and that's what happens when you don't have rim protection.


bob


.

bob
I don't know what the qualifications are to make ALL LEAGUE but certainly you can say that they both excelled in scoring and rebounding.
swish

swish wrote:bob
I don't know what the qualifications are to make ALL LEAGUE but certainly you  can say that they both excelled in scoring and rebounding.
swish

swish,

During KG's 6 seasons in Boston he averaged, /36mpg:  18.3 points, 9.7 rebounds, 3.2 assists, 1.2 blocks.
The guy he replaced, Al Jefferson averaged, / 36mpg:     19.4mpg, 10.0 rebounds, 2.1 assists, 1.6 blocks.

Last year Sully averaged, /36mpg:  17.3 points, 10.6 rebounds, 2.1 assists, .9 blocks.

Last year Kelly averaged, /36mpg:  15.6 points, 9.4 rebounds, 2.8 assists, .7 blocks.

My point is that the guy KG replaced was a better scorer and rebounder than he was.  Sully was almost as good at scoring and better at rebounding last year than KG was during 6 years in Boston.  He did that playing out of position and with an injured hand for much of the 2nd half of the season.  Kelly didn't score as much as the other two but rebounded comparably to KG and had a really poor first couple of months which watered these numbers down.  Would you consider Sully or Kelly to be comparable to KG?  Of course not, but their scoring and rebounding numbers aren't that far apart.  What separates them primarily is that KG was a defensive anchor, rim protector and shot intimidator.  Pierce was the all-league scorer that went nowhere (along with pretty good scorer Antoine Walker.  Ricky Davis could light it up pretty well too) until defensive anchor and rim protector Kevin Garnett came along.  Then we were ready for a championship run.  Yeah, Ray Allen was there too, I'm not diminishing his role, but he wasn't any more indispensable than other 3-and-D guys (Delonte West was a pretty good shooter too and he played better defense than Ray and he also played some point guard), he was just a more respected shooter.  The difference between 2007 and 2008?  Defense, led by Al Jefferson's (who has never been known for his defense) replacement, KG.  In all the time Love has been in Minny they have never made the playoffs, never.  KG's Minny made the playoffs 8 out of 12 years and who did he have playing with him?  Wally and Sam Cassell?  Big deal.  That's weaker than Love, Rubio and Pekovic.

To me, that highlights our need to get that position filled first (or, at least, by the beginning of camp).  I'd like to have Kevin Love, but we don't need him to have a front court that can play with anybody.  Without a rim protector we wouldn't get out of the 1st round of the playoffs, no matter how well we shot, because the other team would be scoring well also.  In fact, if we swap out one or more of our PFs for Love the need for a rim protector becomes even more acute since his position has now become a defensive liability.


bob


.

Bob

 The magic number is 2.   2 ALL LEAGUE performers on the roster. In 2007-08 Danny had 1 all league player on the team (Pierce) and added 2 ALL LEAGUE players to the club ( Allen and Garnett). Of the players they replaced, none have been selected to the ALL LEAGUE TEAM.  The all league selection is quite special because it rates the player as 1 of the 3 or 6 best players at his position. With about 450 players to choose from its quite an honor.

   Like I pointed out under another topic,  since 1949-50 through the 2012-13 seasons, 56 out of the 64 years has had the Championship club blessed by the presence of at least 2 all league performers on its roster.
As to this coming season.   Would the team be better off next year with a better center. Absolutely ! But what is the financial impact of Asik. Another 12-15 mil to go along with Rondo's 12-15 mil. Remember, Rondo"s being paid 12 mil to hand out assist to scorers that ranked next to last in fg%. What a waste of money.  Since the elite scorers command the big bucks I suggest that we  accumulate the assets necessary to be in the hunt for the all leaguers over the next 2-3 years Then fill out the roster with the less expensive role players. It sure did work in 2007-08.

swish

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The heck with the financial impact. That's Danny's problem. He has proven in the past (as recently as prior to the 2012-13 season) that he could find ways to acquire guys (Terry, Lee) when everyone was saying it would be impossible with the limitations he had. Yes, neither of them worked out in the long run; but, before the season, they were widely sought-after commodities, and Danny got them.

Sam

swish wrote:Bob

 The magic number is 2.   2 ALL LEAGUE performers on the roster. In 2007-08 Danny had 1 all league player on the team (Pierce) and added 2 ALL LEAGUE players to the club ( Allen and Garnett). Of the players they replaced, none have been selected to the ALL LEAGUE TEAM.  The all league selection is quite special because it rates the player as 1 of the 3 or 4 best players at his position. With about 450 players to choose from its quite an honor.

   Like I pointed out under another topic,  since 1949-50 through the 2012-13 seasons, 56 out of the 64 years has had the Championship club blessed by the presence of at least 2 all league performers on its roster.
As to this coming season.   Would the team be better off next year with a better center. Absolutely ! But what is the financial impact of Asik. Another 12-15 mil to go along with Rondo's 12-15 mil. Remember, Rondo"s being paid 12 mil to hand out assist to scorers that ranked next to last in fg%. What a waste of money.  Since the elite scorers command the big bucks I suggest that we  accumulate the assets necessary to be in the hunt for the all leaguers over the next 2-3 years Then fill out the roster with the less expensive role players. It sure did work in 2007-08.

swish

swish,

I'm not familiar with ALL LEAGUE.  Is that the same as All-NBA?  If so, then in 2011-2012 the NYK had Carmelo Anthony and Tyson Chandler as All-Leaguers and they didn't do diddly-squat.  

Kevin Love was on the 2012-2013 team but was left off last year's.  David Lee was on it.  Did David Lee have a better year than Kevin Love, or LaMarcus Aldridge, who was also left off?  Nope, he did not.  So, what does this tell me?  It tells me to wonder who is doing the selecting.  The All-NBA team is selected by sportswriters from U.S. and Canada.  You know, like the whores at ESPN and the pestilence of weevils in the NY/NJ media market that think Rondo should go to the Knicks for an overblown contract and some spare parts because they think Carmelo's a winner and all he needs is another All-NBA player (having Tyson Chandler wasn't enough. That must be why they didn't get out of the 2nd round either despite being in the embarrassingly weak EC).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-NBA_Team


Nevertheless, it's hard to argue with the premise that having one of the best players at their position on your team is a bad thing.  Whether a team chosen by the media is the Oracle we should use, I don't know, but you definitely want the best players in the league on your team assuming that he fits well into your system.  The Lakers had Kobe and Dwight in 2012-2013 and that was pure, unadulterated tincture of "butt ugly".  The Clippers had Chris Paul and Blake Griffin on the All-NBA team in 2011-2012 AND 2012-2013 and they never made it out of the 2nd round either year.

Maybe it's a bit more complicated.



bob


.


bob



.

bob

Having 2 or more all leaguers on your team does not insure a championship but it sure will make you a genuine contender a very high percentage of the time. With 5 or 6 other contenders with the same qualifications each year some fine tuning and a lot of luck will produce a winner. Only I team can get the ring and the difference between winning and losing is often times decided by a single play or two.

As to who selects the all leaguers. Does it really matter ?. We could probably select a panel from this board and come up with our own 15 player consensus all league team that would be very legitimate.

swish

bob

Of course there will be teams like the Clippers that will not win the championship. Are they a team that figures as a serious contender for the near future ? Sure they are. This years finals pit 2 teams with 2 or more all leaguers. The Heat with James, Wade and Bosh and the Spurs with Duncan, Parker and Ginobili. Two more legitimate challengers for the ring.

swish

as to the original piece and question:

I am on record as saying before that I feel Love will cost Green, Sully our #6 pick this year and first round pick next season (minimum, more if a real bidding war starts). Green is needed to make the salarys work and Minny can use him at SF.

I am fine with the trade above to get Love here ,as long as there is a wink and nod with his agent (did I read somewhere he has the same agent and Pierce?) as to an extension deal.

to sweeten the pot if needed, I throw in Bogan's $5M non-guaranteed deal to take back one of their players back in a salary dump for them.

However I see Minnesota more likely interested in dropping Budinger (with his bad knees and $5M deal over the next 2 years) over Martin.

so to re-cap:

Love and Budinger to Boston

Sully, Green, Bogans, #6 this year and our first next year, is the MAX deal I would accept.


we'd be limited in this trade in bringing any other Free agents this year ($5M or so). though we'd still be able to bring Bradley back and go over the cap.

who would play SF on this team?

Wallace?
Budinger?
Johnson?

Likely a mid-level or lower FA, IMO.

still no center on this team though, unless Bass or KO could be moved to acquire one. ( Bass for Perkins?)

http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/report-twolves-quietly-preparing-trade-kevin-love



Report: T'wolves quietly preparing to trade Kevin Love
June 3, 2014, 8:15 am



Everything that happens in the next couple weeks on the Kevin Love trade front is window dressing, posturing, and the occasional smoke screen. Everyone is positioning themselves right now (even Love on his travels), talks are incredibly preliminary. Things get serious the week of the draft. Just remember that as we catch you up on the latest posturing below.

Timberwolves’ president Flip Saunders came out recently and said he expects Kevin Love to be with the Timberwolves next season. Which echoes what their owner had said previously.

Of course they say that publicly, what else are they going to say? And of course they don’t want to trade their franchise player.

However, privately they are prepping for a trade that could come as soon as draft day, reports Sean Deveney at The Sporting News.

Publicly, the Timberwolves are saying they expect Love to be in training camp with the team next fall. But behind the scenes, as one source put it, the Timberwolves are, “paving the way to make something happen sooner rather than later.” Sooner, of course, would be draft night.

The Timberwolves have put out feelers on what possible offers might be on the table for Love on draft night. Despite their public protestations, around the league, front office executives say that the market for Love is open, but the initial asking price is high. While the Timberwolves would expect lottery draft choices in return for Love—including a high pick in this draft—they also want a young player with star potential, according to a source.

This is trading 101: Even if you’re going to move someone you can’t seem eager, you need to seem willing to walk away from the table to make sure you get the most out of the deal. Just like any negotiation the person most willing to walk away from the table does best. Minnesota needs to seem ambivalent while letting teams know they are willing to deal.

Minnesota needs to make a deal between now and the end of next February, it doesn’t need to seem eager to do it now. Make teams try to blow your doors off.

Love has some say in this process — he can opt out after next season from any team that trades for him. No team wants to rent him, they will want him to at least opt in, and that gives Love some leverage on who gets invited to dance (although Sacramento wants to crash the party anyway).

Love has his preferences, something Ric Bucher talked about at Bleacher Report.

“Sources close to the situation tell me that Love if it’s a choice between the Golden State Warriors and the Houston Rockets, would chose the Warriors.”

Love and Stephen Curry would instantly make the most dangerous pick-and-pop combo in the league.

But are the Warriors willing to go all in with some quality players?

-- Kurt Helin, NBC's Pro Basketball Talk




bob
MY NOTE:  This writer is making it sound like GSW has the inside track (presuming they are willing to pony up Klay Thompson, I guess).  Interestingly, it's being presented as GSW vs Houston and Boston wasn't mentioned. Then again, Ric Bucher is a Bay Area reporter. I'll keep my eyes and ears open around here and see if K-Love decides to pop in to the Bay Area "just to see what it's like".



.

I'm not familiar with the "all league" term either. Obviously, it must mean a pretty darned good player, but I wonder what the criteria are. Is it the same as being an "elite" player" or a "top 10 player" (both terms that I detest on the grounds that I will always maintain that, more often than not, it's all about the team)?

Sam

swish wrote:bob

 Having 2 or more all leaguers on your team does not insure a championship but it sure will make you a genuine contender a very high percentage of the time. With 5 or 6 other contenders with the same qualifications each year some fine tuning and a lot of luck will produce a winner. Only I team can get the ring and the difference between winning and losing is often times decided by a single play or two.

As to who selects the all leaguers. Does it really matter ?. We could probably select a panel from this board and come up with our own 15 player consensus all league team that would be very legitimate.

swish

swish,

Sorry, but if you're going to choose from a list that is subjective in nature, I don't care what it is a list of, who the selectors are and what their qualifications are absolutely, positively, indubitably matter.

Suppose the All-NBA/All-League team was selected by the fans?  The same fans who named Kobe Bryant an all-star starter (meaning he was supposed to be one of the top 5 players in the WC and the #1 top SG) last year even though he only played in 6 games (and didn't play well in them either)? Would you trust that list as much if the players on the list were chosen by NBA coaches? Other NBA players?


bob


.

Sam

Elite would be a good term to describe these all nba stars and I hope that the Celtics can grab 2 or 3 of them in the next 3 years.
swish

bob

The selection is made by voting media members. I'm quite comfortable with their choices but I'm sure that others would disagree. But the same holds true for Hall Of Fame selections. Doesn't stop people from referring to the HOF when commenting on a players achievements.
We've gone back and forth on this subject a few times now. Our opinions have been expressed now its time to put this baby to bed.

swish

Swish, you saw the old Celtics. Pick a Celtics team between 1960 and 1969 and tell me how many players on those teams would qualify, by your standards, as all-league players? Because Red picked most of them for their most outstanding single attribute—not because they were all-around greats like Oscar Robertson. Just curious.

Sam

Sam
Happy to oblige.
On the 59-60 team---- Russ, Cousy, Sharman.
60-61 " " " Heinsohn
61-62 " ", Heinsohn
62-63 " " "
63-64 " Hondo "
64-65 " S Jones, Hondo
65-66 " " "
66-67 " " "
67-68 " " " Howell
68-69 " " " "

Above players were nba all league players during or prior to the years as listed. Not my list but I can't say that I disagree with it. All elite players during their generation.
10 players selected-2 centers, 4 forwards, 4 guards. Player pool ranging from about 100 in 1959-60 to about 170 in 1968-69. Since 1988-89 its been 15 players with a player pool that is now in the 450 range. I think its time to add another 5 players to the mix.

swish

http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/story/2014-06-02/wolves-celtics-kevin-love-trade-rumors-nba-draft-free-agency-flip-saunders-vinny-del-negro


SN sources: Still patient with Love, Wolves 'paving the way' for draft-day deal

Sean Deveney @SeanDeveney Email RSS
June 2, 2014 4:06pm EDT




BOSTON — Kevin Love has not done much to hide the fact that he was in Boston this weekend, on what he says was a vacation. But his presence here has fueled speculation that Love would welcome a trade to the Celtics this offseason.

According to league sources, the Timberwolves remain ambivalent about trading Love, who is heading into the final year of his contract and has indicated to the team that he won’t sign an extension before free agency hits next summer.

Publicly, the Timberwolves are saying they expect Love to be in training camp with the team next fall. But behind the scenes, as one source put it, the Timberwolves are, “paving the way to make something happen sooner rather than later.” Sooner, of course, would be draft night.

The Timberwolves have put out feelers on what possible offers might be on the table for Love on draft night. Despite their public protestations, around the league, front office executives say that the market for Love is open, but the initial asking price is high. While the Timberwolves would expect lottery draft choices in return for Love—including a high pick in this draft—they also want a young player with star potential, according to a source.

The Timberwolves will also need to gauge Love’s reaction to different destinations. Because Love is under contract for next year and can be a free agent in 2015, any team that trades for him would prefer to have an assurance that he would be willing to sign an extension—and with such an assurance, Minnesota can set a higher asking price.

Last month, Yahoo! Sports reported that Sacramento would be willing to trade for Love without knowing whether he would sign an extension, but that is not the Timberwolves’ preference.

Minnesota has, thus far, been underwhelmed with the potential return it could get for Love, which is not a surprise given that we are still more than three weeks away from the draft—the market for a Love trade is still taking shape.

As one general manager put it, “It won’t be until the week before the draft that this thing gets serious. There is no reason to put your cards on the table too early. If it is going to happen on draft night, it will come together quickly.”

As for the Celtics, making a deal for Love is a priority, even if it costs this year’s top pick, which is No. 6 in the draft. From the Timberwolves’ point of view, the Celtics have plenty of draft picks available—their top pick, plus No. 17 in this draft, as well as picks belonging to themselves and the Clippers in 2015, plus their own and the Nets’ in 2016 and 2018. (Boston has Philadelphia’s pick next year, but only if the Sixers somehow make the playoffs.)

But what Boston is lacking is a young player with high-ceiling potential. The Celtics have no intention of including Rajon Rondo in a Love deal, because playing with Rondo would be one of the main lures in getting Love to sign an extension—and, of course, the Timberwolves already have Ricky Rubio.

Beyond Rondo, the Celtics’ roster mostly consists of decent rotation players like Jared Sullinger, Avery Bradley and Kelly Olynyk. That’s not quite what the Timberwolves have in mind as a return for Love—the question then becomes how much Minnesota values Boston’s picks, and which ones the Celtics would be willing to send.

All in all, the Timberwolves have yet to fully define where Love’s value is. They’re willing to hold out until the summer before making a deal—much as they did when they dealt Kevin Garnett to the Celtics seven years ago—but they’re laying the groundwork, at least, to pull the trigger on draft night.



bob
MY NOTE:  If Minny doesn't want Sully, that's fine with me.  I think they're nuts, but who am I to argue?  How about we throw in two or three of our 9 draft picks and Bass or Hump (NOT rotation players) and maybe Green to make the numbers work? If they want a player with high potential, and Sully and Kelly don't qualify for them, then we really only have 2 (Rondo and Green) or maybe 3 (Bradley).




.

I like the idea of using picks to sweeten the pot. Three picks plus Bass and Green works at least financially. I'm not sure Minny will find a team willing to trade an elite player for Love. The longer this goes on, the less leverage the Wolves will have on the trading market.

Sam