Draft lottery question

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Champ

Whoa . I think his father has already made up his mind where he is going.

---

So,, now you are transferring your veiled soliloquy into arguing amongst YOURSELF . Wow! Lolol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rheem654

Is it realistic though? Boston is in win-now mode and would probably want as many win-now players as they can to make a run next year, too. And Bradley is a legit starter who played a key role in helping them get to the ECF. Smart can play some SF, too.

Wouldn't it make more sense for them to just keep Bradley and have depth for another championship run next season, and then just risk letting him walk next offseason? Rather than just getting a non-lottery pick back when they'll already have another highly drafted rookie with the '18 Nets pick.

---

Ainge is going to send the No. 1 overall pick, along w/ any package Utah wants & Boston is getting Hayward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckwheat

Celtics need D.C. to pass the Cavs.
Dell needs to make he trade.
We need Ball they need D.C.

---

Cousins for Ball would get Dell fired on the spot. We'd go from automatic playoff team to guaranteed lottery team. That is a ridiculous idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Ainge is going to send the No. 1 overall pick, along w/ any package Utah wants & Boston is getting Hayward.

---

Why does Boston need to do anything? Hayward is a UFA this summer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Ainge is going to send the No. 1 overall pick, along w/ any package Utah wants & Boston is getting Hayward.

---

Boston could just sign Hayward outright with capspace without trading any valuable picks or players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Why does Boston need to do anything? Hayward is a UFA this summer.

---

Exactly, beat me to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rheem654

Boston could just sign Hayward outright with capspace without trading any valuable picks or players.

---

Exactly. They're not trading anything for Hayward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

Exactly. They're not trading anything for Hayward.

---

Sign & Trade allows Hayward to receive more pay ! & you DONT bring in a 40 million $$ salary w/out getting rid of salary. C'mon, what do you think S&T is for? It helps both teams involved & sweetens the pot for FA .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Why does Boston need to do anything? Hayward is a UFA this summer.

---

Uh, Payroll ! Thus, the S&T was invented .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Sign & Trade allows Hayward to receive more pay ! & you DONT bring in a 40 million $$ salary w/out getting rid of salary. C'mon, what do you think S&T is for? It helps both teams involved & sweetens the pot for FA .

---

If they did a s/t they would never give up the #1 pick in a S/T. At most they'd give up someone like Rozier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

If they did a s/t they would never give up the #1 pick in a S/T. At most they'd give up someone like Rozier.

---

For Gordon Hayward? Are you kidding me ? You must have misspoke? Yeah, that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Sign & Trade allows Hayward to receive more pay ! & you DONT bring in a 40 million $$ salary w/out getting rid of salary. C'mon, what do you think S&T is for? It helps both teams involved & sweetens the pot for FA .

---

They're not giving up the #1 pick for a guy they can sign outright without giving up a thing. If Hayward doesn't choose to sign there, which I think he will, they will have plenty of other options.

So, what you are saying is Boston is going to sign Hayward to 35 millionish, keep their no. 1, & keep all of their IMPORTANT pieces, with Zero Cap ramifications. Thomas & Bradley are UFA's in 18. And Boston will have to either pay both of them big bucks are they walk. IT is playing for peanuts, as is Bradley right now. & Olynyk QO & Brown TO in 2018. If Boston wants Hayward & IT is there guy, they will definitely give their 1 in a S&T. Short term blinders are not good to have on. They can't pay everybody, so take care of future now. That's what S&T are

You realize that a S&T would assist the Celtics, right. It alleviates Cap situation for 2018 & beyond. Hey, if they sign Heyward straight up, that's cool, but if it's not there No. 1, it will be 2 other major contributors whom they will NOT be able to pay in 2018.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

Cousins for Ball would get Dell fired on the spot. We'd go from automatic playoff team to guaranteed lottery team. That is a ridiculous idea.

---

Your correct it's ridiculous who would trade a superstar for an unknown straight up and at this time we don't know what Ball would be probably never be as good as D.C.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

So, what you are saying is Boston is going to sign Hayward to 35 millionish, keep their no. 1, & keep all of their IMPORTANT pieces, with Zero Cap ramifications. Thomas & Bradley are UFA's in 18. And Boston will have to either pay both of them big bucks are they walk. IT is playing for peanuts, as is Bradley right now. & Olynyk QO & Brown TO in 2018. If Boston wants Hayward & IT is there guy, they will definitely give their 1 in a S&T. Short term blinders are not good to have on. They can't pay everybody, so take care of future now. That's what S&T are

---

No, if you took the time to read my other posts in this thread you would clearly see that I said that I expect the Celtics to trade either Bradley or Thomas, probably Bradley, for assets this off-season instead of letting him walk for nothing next off-season. But they would be fools to trade the number one pick for a player they could just sign outright.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

Your correct it's ridiculous who would trade a superstar for an unknown straight up and at this time we don't know what Ball would be probably never be as good as D.C.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

No one with a brain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Sign & Trade allows Hayward to receive more pay ! & you DONT bring in a 40 million $$ salary w/out getting rid of salary. C'mon, what do you think S&T is for? It helps both teams involved & sweetens the pot for FA .

---

Not anymore. The extra money is only available if the player re-signs with his team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I think if Boston gets Fultz, they should sell high on Isiah Thomas. He'll be a 29 year old free agent after next year looking for $30m per foot. He's only 5'9", but that still a lot of money for someone who can't defend or ride Space Mountain.

---

That's selling high alright. Meth head high. IT had a damn near mvp year and got them to where they are. Which is the EC finals. You don't trade that for an unknown rookie.

Sam Hinkie won the lottery. Think about what he assembled ( I know he was fired, but his mark was left on the 76ers this season), Embiid, Simmons, Josh Jackson (or Tatum), Saric, Okafor, Covington...that is a young team, that if given direction could really fly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

That's selling high alright. Meth head high. IT had a damn near mvp year and got them to where they are. Which is the EC finals. You don't trade that for an unknown rookie.

---

Yeah, thats how you end up looking like the Kings or the Suns.

You know why Hayward isn't going to Boston? He can make more money in Utah. Lebron is still playing in the East, so nobody but the Cavs will be making the Finals for the next forever. Utah has a better roster than Boston. The Jazz are on a better trajectory than most any other team in the NBA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

You know why Hayward isn't going to Boston? He can make more money in Utah. Lebron is still playing in the East, so nobody but the Cavs will be making the Finals for the next forever. Utah has a better roster than Boston. The Jazz are on a better trajectory than most any other team in the NBA

---

And the Warriors are in the West. Competitive balance is screwed in both conferences, not just the East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PelsFan2313

And the Warriors are in the West. Competitive balance is screwed in both conferences, not just the East.

---

Yeah unless the league is coming up with a 3rd conference the league has two monsters on both sides. Right now LeBron is closer to leaving his prime than Durant and Curry are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Sam Hinkie won the lottery. Think about what he assembled ( I know he was fired, but his mark was left on the 76ers this season), Embiid, Simmons, Josh Jackson (or Tatum), Saric, Okafor, Covington...that is a young team, that if given direction could really fly.

---

Safe to say you'd prefer Hinkie to Dempsey? I mean, Dimple. I mean, Durwood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Not anymore. The extra money is only available if the player re-signs with his team.

---

When did the structure change? As of 2016, if Team A knew there player was planning on leaving, Team A would re-sign their player to their max extension & then trade him . This benefits team A by receiving assets & benefits player because he gets paid full price & benefits Team B because it can lock player in for longer period. What part of this has changed ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Sign & Trade allows Hayward to receive more pay ! & you DONT bring in a 40 million $$ salary w/out getting rid of salary. C'mon, what do you think S&T is for? It helps both teams involved & sweetens the pot for FA .

---

No it doesn't. A S&T can only be for the value that the team trading for him could have offered to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

They're not giving up the #1 pick for a guy they can sign outright without giving up a thing. If Hayward doesn't choose to sign there, which I think he will, they will have plenty of other options.

---

Exactly, you dont give up your best assets for someone that is a UFA and willing to sign with you. Those assets will be used in another trade to get more talent. (i.e. trading Bradley to us for our '18 pick, yea there are better options out there thats just an example)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Sam Hinkie won the lottery. Think about what he assembled ( I know he was fired, but his mark was left on the 76ers this season), Embiid, Simmons, Josh Jackson (or Tatum), Saric, Okafor, Covington...that is a young team, that if given direction could really fly.

---

With Jrue or Lowry that's a really nice team

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

No it doesn't. A S&T can only be for the value that the team trading for him could have offered to begin with.

---

When did it change? One of the purposes of Sign & Trade was to allow FA to "Get Paid". As of 2016, this was a stipulation in the CBA, or maybe 2015. Can you tell me when the stips were changed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

When did the structure change? As of 2016, if Team A knew there player was planning on leaving, Team A would re-sign their player to their max extension & then trade him . This benefits team A by receiving assets & benefits player because he gets paid full price & benefits Team B because it can lock player in for longer period. What part of this has changed ?

---

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q93

Quote:

---

Under the current CBA a player receives the same contract via sign-and-trade (four years, 4.5% raises) that he could get by signing with his new team directly, and can receive a larger Bird contract only if he stays with his previous team.

---

The old incentives aren't there anymore, as the next line of that paragraph says the only real reason is if a player wants to go to a salary capped team with no room to sign them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

When did it change?

---

It was part of the 2011 CBA but they phased it in after a few years along with some of the S&T taxpayer restrictions IIRC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Sam Hinkie won the lottery. Think about what he assembled ( I know he was fired, but his mark was left on the 76ers this season), Embiid, Simmons, Josh Jackson (or Tatum), Saric, Okafor, Covington...that is a young team, that if given direction could really fly.

---

The biggest advantage is all the room for error the Colangelos inherited with this team. They'll end up with 3 or 4 top end potential players, a bunch of quality young role players, and a ton of cap space.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

Safe to say you'd prefer Hinkie to Dempsey? I mean, Dimple. I mean, Durwood.

---

If I knew that we would be missing out on the playoffs as much as we have been, then yeah, give me Hinkie all day over Demps. Hinkie built his team to lose, and win the lottery. Demps has built this team to be mediocre, and win nothing.

Just to expand on what others have stated, the new CBA that goes into effect this offseason does not change anything with how S&Ts work.

Awhile back I thought you could add a 5th year to a S&T because I thought that was what Ariza got but someone pointed out that wasn't the case so I went back and checked.

The current S&T is the same as what will be when the future CBA comes in. 4 year deal, with the maximum being what the other team can offer in regular free agency.

For those interested this topic is covered far more extensively at www.cbafaq.com with question #91.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

You know why Hayward isn't going to Boston? He can make more money in Utah. Lebron is still playing in the East, so nobody but the Cavs will be making the Finals for the next forever. Utah has a better roster than Boston. The Jazz are on a better trajectory than most any other team in the NBA

---

Your first two sentences are true, he can make more with Utah, than he could in Boston. I completely disagree with the rest though. Like Throne pointed out, LeBron will decline before Durant and Curry, thus making the road to the finals easier in the East, than the West. Boston has a better team right now than the Jazz and their future is brighter. Boston is playing in the ECF as the number one seed, they have the top pick in a loaded draft this year and they'll probably have a top 3 pick again next year. How on earth could you claim that Utah is on a better trajectory? Utah has a good coach, Boston has a better coach. Boston's GM has a better track record. Boston has better history and culture. Boston would be the smarter choice for Hayward, if winning is his ultimate goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

Your first two sentences are true, he can make more with Utah, than he could in Boston. I completely disagree with the rest though. Like Throne pointed out, LeBron will decline before Durant and Curry, thus making the road to the finals easier in the East, than the West. Boston has a better team right now than the Jazz and their future is brighter. Boston is playing in the ECF as the number one seed, they have the top pick in a loaded draft this year and they'll probably have a top 3 pick again next year. How on earth could you claim that Utah is on a better trajectory? Utah has a good coach, Boston has a better coach. Boston's GM has a better track record. Boston has better history and culture. Boston would be the smarter choice for Hayward, if winning is his ultimate goal.

---

The money isn't even much different. It's very close unless 4 years are compared to 5, but Hayward's going to get another contract in the 5th year anyway. Hayward will strongly consider Boston and sign with them if he does not stay in Utah.

To make this happen Boston needs to renounce some players, the only one of consequence being Olynyk, and probably trade one of their vet guards to create enough cap space, rebalance their roster, and open playing time for Fultz.

They'll move forward with a vet core of Thomas/Horford/Hayward/others and a talented rising second core of Fultz/Brooklyn 18/Brown/Zizic, who will increasingly become prominent. It's a good situation that sets them up for a very long time.

Now that Hayward didn't make an All-NBA team this year he can't get the supermax from Utah, same thing happened to Paul George. Those guys now have even less incentive to stay with their team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Now that Hayward didn't make an All-NBA team this year he can't get the supermax from Utah, same thing happened to Paul George. Those guys now have even less incentive to stay with their team.

---

I think both are gone. Hayward will make enough being apart of a great Celtics team to make up the difference.

If Hayward leaves and Hill follows, thats one less team we have to compete with in the west.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AUSSIE_PELICAN

If Hayward leaves and Hill follows, thats one less team we have to compete with in the west.

---

That's what I'm thinking. They'll probably lose both players and take a couple steps backwards.

I posted a couple of weeks ago that Utah wasn't making the playoffs next year. I can't wait to see if fans burn jerseys and unleash their hate on Hayward the way they did LeBron and Durant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I posted a couple of weeks ago that Utah wasn't making the playoffs next year. I can't wait to see if fans burn jerseys and unleash their hate on Hayward the way they did LeBron and Durant.

---

I still think Utah will compete for the playoffs next year, they just won't be a top 6 seed if they lose Hayward, which is looking more likely each day. They'll probably be fighting for the 8th seed, if they lose Hayward and Hill.

Still, no one is going to burn anything over Hayward. I've seen you ask that question more than once and I still can't figure out why. Surely you realize that Hayward leaving Utah for Boston, wouldn't be even remotely close to what Durant or LeBron did. Hayward isn't a top 2 player in the league for one, he's maybe a top 25 player. Maybe.

So, because of who he is, people won't care near as much for one. He isn't the polarizing figure that Durant is. Also, leaving Utah for Boston isn't nearly as cowardly as what Durant pulled. No one can touch what Durant did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

I still think Utah will compete for the playoffs next year, they just won't be a top 6 seed if they lose Hayward, which is looking more likely each day. They'll probably be fighting for the 8th seed, if they lose Hayward and Hill.

Still, no one is going to burn anything over Hayward. I've seen you ask that question more than once and I still can't figure out why. Surely you realize that Hayward leaving Utah for Boston, wouldn't be even remotely close to what Durant or LeBron did. Hayward isn't a top 2 player in the league for one, he's maybe a top 25 player. Maybe.

So, because of who he is, people won't care near as much for one. He isn't the polarizing figure that Durant is. Also, leaving Utah for Boston isn't nearly as cowardly as what Durant pulled. No one can touch what Durant did.

---

The vitriol spewed when LeBron left Cleveland was over the top. Burning jerseys and saying he betrayed the city, only to have him return and the same fans fawn over him. Sports bring out the worst in people (see: Katrina references from other fan bases), but I don't think Utah has the history of losing that makes Cleveland fans so desperate for a winner. Hayward will be praised for making the right basketball decision because Utah won't contend against the Spurs/Warriors/Rockets (and maybe a healthy Clippers team) as currently constituted. Unfortunately, I don't think Hayward moves the needle for Boston into Elite team category unless a few other things happen.

Re: Durant - Cowardly is a strong word, but fan is short for fanatic. If you're not a fan of the Warriors (and of course I am not), the last thing you want to see is for that team to improve. The icing is it simultaneously weakened the team that nearly beat them last year.

Winning championships in the NBA is difficult given health, coaching, roster and luck. Players of Durant's caliber feel pressure to win rings as validation of how good they are. If he stays and doesn't win one, it would be used against him. If he leaves in an attempt to win one, he gets ridiculed. I'm not saying deciding to join the team you lost to the previous year doesn't deserve criticism, but it wasn't cowardly.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Sam Hinkie won the lottery. Think about what he assembled ( I know he was fired, but his mark was left on the 76ers this season), Embiid, Simmons, Josh Jackson (or Tatum), Saric, Okafor, Covington...that is a young team, that if given direction could really fly.

---

Yet, we are still talking major "ifs" this many years after Hinkie took over. Embiid has only played half a season before yet another injury. Simmons and Jackson (or Tatum) have yet to play. They are trying desperately to get rid of Okafor...a lottery pick. Covington's ceiling is that of a solid player.

Most people thought they'd make a meteoric rise by now a la Westbrook/Durant/Harden OKC. Not even sure they've found their OKC Harden yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

Your first two sentences are true, he can make more with Utah, than he could in Boston. I completely disagree with the rest though. Like Throne pointed out, LeBron will decline before Durant and Curry, thus making the road to the finals easier in the East, than the West. Boston has a better team right now than the Jazz and their future is brighter. Boston is playing in the ECF as the number one seed, they have the top pick in a loaded draft this year and they'll probably have a top 3 pick again next year. How on earth could you claim that Utah is on a better trajectory? Utah has a good coach, Boston has a better coach. Boston's GM has a better track record. Boston has better history and culture. Boston would be the smarter choice for Hayward, if winning is his ultimate goal.

---

Sure Boston is the #1 seed in the East, but they aren't the real "#1 seed in the East". Toronto was pretty hot as well last year, each team in the East is a new flavor, but the Cavs are old faithful chocolate...or vanilla. They are the one everyone comes back to. As to any potential suitors being better than Utah, in Utah he is the Alpha, and he has Gobert and Hill, that is as solid a trio as what he would have in Boston with IT and Horford. He knows how he fits in Utah, in Boston whos to say how he will fit. I would say Stevens and Snyder are a wash. Both are on the rise, and both are proving that they have systems that can get the most out of the talent on hand.

I think people say that Hayward is headed for Boston because of Stevens, but Hayward has a solid relationship with Snyder and the Millers as well. Tough to see him leaving Utah and those comforts for Boston.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

Yet, we are still talking major "ifs" this many years after Hinkie took over. Embiid has only played half a season before yet another injury. Simmons and Jackson (or Tatum) have yet to play. They are trying desperately to get rid of Okafor...a lottery pick. Covington's ceiling is that of a solid player.

Most people thought they'd make a meteoric rise by now a la Westbrook/Durant/Harden OKC. Not even sure they've found their OKC Harden yet.

---

Who expected them to make a meteoric rise by now? When Hinkie was canned people were talking about how he left them in lottery winning shape (a losing team) for multiple years as all he had was a young inexperienced team, with marginal talent playing big minuets. Nobody was expecting them to be the Thunder or even the Wolves. They will improve next year, and continue upwards the year following. Embiid has the makings of a great talent.

You are right though, we are still talking major "ifs" but they are about our team, and what it will take for them to be competitive next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sujaguar00

The vitriol spewed when LeBron left Cleveland was over the top. Burning jerseys and saying he betrayed the city, only to have him return and the same fans fawn over him. Sports bring out the worst in people (see: Katrina references from other fan bases), but I don't think Utah has the history of losing that makes Cleveland fans so desperate for a winner. Hayward will be praised for making the right basketball decision because Utah won't contend against the Spurs/Warriors/Rockets (and maybe a healthy Clippers team) as currently constituted. Unfortunately, I don't think Hayward moves the needle for Boston into Elite team category unless a few other things happen.

Re: Durant - Cowardly is a strong word, but fan is short for fanatic. If you're not a fan of the Warriors (and of course I am not), the last thing you want to see is for that team to improve. The icing is it simultaneously weakened the team that nearly beat them last year.

Winning championships in the NBA is difficult given health, coaching, roster and luck. Players of Durant's caliber feel pressure to win rings as validation of how good they are. If he stays and doesn't win one, it would be used against him. If he leaves in an attempt to win one, he gets ridiculed. I'm not saying deciding to join the team you lost to the previous year doesn't deserve criticism, but it wasn't cowardly.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I agree with 95% of this. But I would also add that teammates and coaches matter. Russ is a chucker; Steph is a willing passer. The GSW ball movement is a better style for KD, and Kerr is a better coach than Billy Donovan.

But mostly I'd like to add that the Bay Area is a very different city from Oklahoma City, with very different off court interest that KD can pursue. That had to be a factor as well. KD has gotten very plugged in to the venture capital scene in the Bay.

There are usually a lot of different personal reasons we can't process as fans that go into these decisions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Sure Boston is the #1 seed in the East, but they aren't the real "#1 seed in the East". Toronto was pretty hot as well last year, each team in the East is a new flavor, but the Cavs are old faithful chocolate...or vanilla. They are the one everyone comes back to. As to any potential suitors being better than Utah, in Utah he is the Alpha, and he has Gobert and Hill, that is as solid a trio as what he would have in Boston with IT and Horford. He knows how he fits in Utah, in Boston whos to say how he will fit. I would say Stevens and Snyder are a wash. Both are on the rise, and both are proving that they have systems that can get the most out of the talent on hand.

I think people say that Hayward is headed for Boston because of Stevens, but Hayward has a solid relationship with Snyder and the Millers as well. Tough to see him leaving Utah and those comforts for Boston.

---

It'll be easier when Hill leaves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I agree with 95% of this. But I would also add that teammates and coaches matter. Russ is a chucker; Steph is a willing passer. The GSW ball movement is a better style for KD, and Kerr is a better coach than Billy Donovan.

But mostly I'd like to add that the Bay Area is a very different city from Oklahoma City, with very different off court interest that KD can pursue. That had to be a factor as well. KD has gotten very plugged in to the venture capital scene in the Bay.

There are usually a lot of different personal reasons we can't process as fans that go into these decisions.

---

This is true. A friend of mine pitched to KD's team this last January. I had the honor of creating their pitchbook, and financial models. In this regard, I think your young superstars are smarter than the old guys. KD, Lebron, Baron Davis, Steph, Melo, they are all very into reinvesting their money, and they are involved in some great projects across the board. I heard Kevin Looney is also in on a VC that is a spin off of Google.