Avery Bradley Might be Available.

[Spike]

The market is already ramping up for the new TV deal. Teams are spending because they know they'll get bailed out with the salary cap skyrocketing in the near future. Our options are to pay IT, or hope and pray that Ray McCallum becomes a starting-level PG, and quick. At this point, IT at $8M is a bargain.

I'd rather we not play that game - what if the cap doesn't skyrocket? We're already up against the cap as it is.
I guess at first I'll wait to see the offer on paper before deciding, but if we're overspending, I'd rather do it for better fitting parts (which might come through an IT sign and trade) if possible.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

new cba was supposed to stop teams from burning $$ foolishly.

 

[LPKingsFan]

I'd say the new CBA was more about re-allocating the amount of revenue the league receives and sending more to the owners. The changes in BRI distribution accomplished that. Less money (relatively, compared to the owners) is now going players, now whether that is allocated to players that "deserve" it or not is another story.

Also, the issue is that the entire pie is growing--the new TV deals will/are bringing in more money to the league. Now, just because contracts are getting bigger does't mean even more money isn't going to owners, as the new CBA intended.

 

[Prince_XY]

I believe I have said elsewhere to match that 3/$24M offer to IT (if it is truly on the table) and run. Stephenson apparently is not willing to go as low as 5/$44M despite the fact that he has, in the past, shoved his girlfriend down the stairs and then slapped her head into the steps and he still has those crazy eyes that say he's going to do it again.

The market is already ramping up for the new TV deal. Teams are spending because they know they'll get bailed out with the salary cap skyrocketing in the near future. Our options are to pay IT, or hope and pray that Ray McCallum becomes a starting-level PG, and quick. At this point, IT at $8M is a bargain.

Let us not go panic buying in the highest order and go back to our senses.

Bradley is a STUD player who can play both 1 and 2 positions and at both ends of the floor, hence deserving that 4 years/32M.

Our very own IT cannot do that and yet we are quick to think of giving IT the same amount?

 

[Bricklayer]

Let us not go panic buying in the highest order and go back to our senses.

Bradley is a STUD player who can play both 1 and 2 positions and at both ends of the floor, hence deserving that 4 years/32M.

Our very own IT cannot do that and yet we are quick to think of giving IT the same amount?

Bradley is an undersized tweener guard with excellent defensive abilities and passable offensive ones. Stud however, he is not. $8mil a year is an overpay for a guy without a clear NBA position who would really be an ideal 3rd guard. I'm not sure who Ainge was bidding against. He was a restricted FA. Ainge could have offered $6 a year and then just matched if somebody else bumped to $7 or $8.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Let us not go panic buying in the highest order and go back to our senses.

Bradley is a STUD player who can play both 1 and 2 positions and at both ends of the floor, hence deserving that 4 years/32M.

Our very own IT cannot do that and yet we are quick to think of giving IT the same amount?

I agree with Brick that while Bradley is a fine player, stud is not the first word to come to mind.

But more to the point, it's clear that $8M is the minimum going rate. Here is the list of players who have a chance of being a starting PG in the NBA next year who are not either on a rookie deal or making at least $8M a year:

Dragic $7.5M
Calderon $7.1M
Chalmers FA
Thomas FA

That's it. That's the list. The going rate for a starting PG in free agency is $8M at the bottom end. That's the way it is. And if we don't accept that, we'll be paying bottom dollar to watch Jameer Nelson stink it up for us next year. We have the ability to match, and given the current market we very well should match $8M if the offer sheet comes in.

 

[sdballer]

I agree with Brick that while Bradley is a fine player, stud is not the first word to come to mind.

But more to the point, it's clear that $8M is the minimum going rate. Here is the list of players who have a chance of being a starting PG in the NBA next year who are not either on a rookie deal or making at least $8M a year:

Dragic $7.5M
Calderon $7.1M
Chalmers FA
Thomas FA

That's it. That's the list. The going rate for a starting PG in free agency is $8M at the bottom end. That's the way it is. And if we don't accept that, we'll be paying bottom dollar to watch Jameer Nelson stink it up for us next year. We have the ability to match, and given the current market we very well should match $8M if the offer sheet comes in.

I just don't know who can or will give him $8M at this point?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I'd rather we not play that game - what if the cap doesn't skyrocket? We're already up against the cap as it is.
I guess at first I'll wait to see the offer on paper before deciding, but if we're overspending, I'd rather do it for better fitting parts (which might come through an IT sign and trade) if possible.

It's the upcoming TV deal that's going to skyrocket the salary cap, and there's little short of a nuclear holocaust that's going to stop it. If there's a nuclear holocaust, I'm not going to be worried about the state of our cap.

We need to allow ourselves to plan for the future cap. All the other teams apparently are. Why allow ourselves to be left behind?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I just don't know who can or will give him $8M at this point?

If nobody does, that's fine. Sign him for less if the market truly won't bear it for him. But if an $8M offer sheet comes in, we can't balk at that without another plan in place.

 

[sdballer]

If nobody does, that's fine. Sign him for less if the market truly won't bear it for him. But if an $8M offer sheet comes in, we can't balk at that without another plan in place.

I agree it puts us in a tough spot. I'm just looking at his options and besides Dallas and LA (both of which would be a surprise to me at $8M+), I just don't think his options look great.

 

[Spike]

It's the upcoming TV deal that's going to skyrocket the salary cap, and there's little short of a nuclear holocaust that's going to stop it. If there's a nuclear holocaust, I'm not going to be worried about the state of our cap.

We need to allow ourselves to plan for the future cap. All the other teams apparently are. Why allow ourselves to be left behind?

Why would overspending on IT leave us behind? We can't continue to overspend for MLE talent, regardless of cap. A bigger cap gives us the opportunity to finally makes some moves, instead of always being at the max limit of our credit card.

Ultimately, I get your point. I just don't see it with regards to someone like IT.

 

[kingsboi]

Bradley is looking for a big pay day, I don't us to be the team to give it to him. He is a nice filler piece but we can't go and keep spending money for average players when we still have some dead weight that needs to be traded.

 

[sdballer]

Bradley is looking for a big pay day, I don't us to be the team to give it to him. He is a nice filler piece but we can't go and keep spending money for average players when we still have some dead weight that needs to be traded.

He already re-signed with Boston

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Why would overspending on IT leave us behind? We can't continue to overspend for MLE talent, regardless of cap. A bigger cap gives us the opportunity to finally makes some moves, instead of always being at the max limit of our credit card.

Ultimately, I get your point. I just don't see it with regards to someone like IT.

I think maybe you meant to put a "not" in the sentence I bolded?

Anyway, my point (which I suppose I can expand now that I'm not on my phone) is that our options at PG for next year may come down to IT at about $8M on a 3-4 year deal, or several worse options. The FA market for starting PGs is pretty grim this year. There's Lowry, who will probably stay in Toronto, there's Bledsoe, who we can't afford without swinging a deal, and there's IT. After that, you start to get down to the Darren Collison/Jameer Nelson/Mario Chalmers tier. Or wish in one hand and Ray McCallum in the other.

I think that going with one of those guys from the lower tier or with Ray probably makes us a significantly worse team. We want to challenge for the playoffs next year, but I think IT is the only reasonable FA way to do that (I know some people disagree on that). Those other guys won't get us there. So we can sit back, and be scared of spending money, and doom ourselves to miss the playoffs in the hope of being able to use cap space in the future, or we can take our shot knowing that IT's cap number is going to soften in the future as the cap rises. Other teams are "overspending" for talent now because they feel strongly that by the end of the contract it will not longer be an overpay, they'll have additional cap room, and they'll have the talent. If we "underspend", then we have more cap room in the future, but less ability to win now and less established talent on roster to woo good players with the cap room we've saved ourselves.

That's what I mean about having other teams leave us behind by spending if we don't. In other words, bleeding money to get talent now helps us more now than it hurts us in the future. Bleeding talent to get money now hurts us more now than it helps us in the future. This isn't necessarily true if the cap isn't going to go sky high, but all indications are that the cap is going to go sky high. We can't be afraid of spending money. We have an owner that's willing to spend, we have to use that.

Obviously, if we swing a deal for another PG (Rondo, or ??) then the point is moot. But that would also go under "spending money" - starting PGs just don't come cheaper than $8M unless they're on a rookie deal.

 

[Spike]

I think maybe you meant to put a "not" in the sentence I bolded?

Yup.

Anyway, my point (which I suppose I can expand now that I'm not on my phone) is that our options at PG for next year may come down to IT at about $8M on a 3-4 year deal, or several worse options. The FA market for starting PGs is pretty grim this year. There's Lowry, who will probably stay in Toronto, there's Bledsoe, who we can't afford without swinging a deal, and there's IT. After that, you start to get down to the Darren Collison/Jameer Nelson/Mario Chalmers tier. Or wish in one hand and Ray McCallum in the other.

I think that going with one of those guys from the lower tier or with Ray probably makes us a significantly worse team. We want to challenge for the playoffs next year, but I think IT is the only reasonable FA way to do that (I know some people disagree on that). Those other guys won't get us there. So we can sit back, and be scared of spending money, and doom ourselves to miss the playoffs in the hope of being able to use cap space in the future, or we can take our shot knowing that IT's cap number is going to soften in the future as the cap rises. Other teams are "overspending" for talent now because they feel strongly that by the end of the contract it will not longer be an overpay, they'll have additional cap room, and they'll have the talent. If we "underspend", then we have more cap room in the future, but less ability to win now and less established talent on roster to woo good players with the cap room we've saved ourselves.

That's what I mean about having other teams leave us behind by spending if we don't. In other words, bleeding money to get talent now helps us more now than it hurts us in the future. Bleeding talent to get money now hurts us more now than it helps us in the future. This isn't necessarily true if the cap isn't going to go sky high, but all indications are that the cap is going to go sky high. We can't be afraid of spending money. We have an owner that's willing to spend, we have to use that.

Obviously, if we swing a deal for another PG (Rondo, or ??) then the point is moot. But that would also go under "spending money" - starting PGs just don't come cheaper than $8M unless they're on a rookie deal.

I guess that's the thing. I'd rather look to swing a deal for a starting PG before spending the cash on IT. I understand it's a small window, but I also don't value him as a starting PG. I guess it depends on how this next week shakes out.