|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 17, 2014 18:11:44 GMT -5
I think Danny passed on Humps, and Bayless because he didn't want to tie up money over a number of years. I thought their contracts were rather cap friendly per year, but when you stretch out the number of years, every dollar counts versus the cap.
|
|
cfoo
Welcome To Celtics Green!
Posts: 1
|
Post by cfoo on Jul 17, 2014 19:45:08 GMT -5
Maybe. We pretty much picked up 2 cheaper younger players and a draft pick vs committing to two mediocre players. Hump and Bayless weren't worth committing long term money to. Seems like a good tradeoff and good business sense to me while keeping our eye on the prize. Still hope Rondo is here come the season though. He tore up his knee and should come back strong. Not many players or people can do that or play at that level or do the things he does. He's valuable. He's still one of the best pgs in the nba and entering his prime.
|
|
cfoo
Welcome To Celtics Green!
Posts: 1
|
Post by cfoo on Jul 17, 2014 20:06:40 GMT -5
Zeller and Thornton probably fit better too. At least Zeller is 7 feet and a center. Humphries wasn't. Which one is a b etter defender is probably debateable though. But Zeller is a pretty smart player. Longterm it's somewhat taking a flier but he could do alright. There isn't a whole lot of risk or much to lose there. Thornton same thing. He's a cheaper option over bayless and can score in bunches. Not the most consistant player in the world but as a bench guy and low risk.
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jul 17, 2014 20:18:57 GMT -5
I think Danny passed on Humps, and Bayless because he didn't want to tie up money over a number of years. And we're also getting pretty close to luxury tax territory.
|
|
cfoo
Welcome To Celtics Green!
Posts: 1
|
Post by cfoo on Jul 17, 2014 20:28:33 GMT -5
True that.. Not sure what the luxury tax is but Humphries was not worth paying him plus the tax. I don't think it was ainge trying to help Cleveland out either. It was a good trade for us.
|
|
cfoo
Welcome To Celtics Green!
Posts: 1
|
Post by cfoo on Jul 17, 2014 20:35:36 GMT -5
It's just good business and a basketball move too. It doesn't mean we won't go over the tax eventually either and pay it, but if the roster is paired down and in order we'll be paying less of a tax and paying the tax on players that are actually worth that.
All I see so far is housecleaning by Ainge that doesn't mean much either way. Not buying the hype either. We are somewhat prepared to make moves is all I know.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jul 17, 2014 20:59:41 GMT -5
Plus, what would they really bring to the team? Make us a 33 win team instead of 31?
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jul 17, 2014 21:01:10 GMT -5
Yeah, and the tax is not like it was in years past. It get's pretty crazy in a hurry now.
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 17, 2014 21:48:12 GMT -5
The way the CBA is now written, it forces teams to not be over the limit for X many seasons. W/ BOS, the team is no where near when paying the luxury tax makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by FLCeltsFan on Jul 19, 2014 6:53:26 GMT -5
The Celtics are not going to compete for a title this season. It makes sense to stay under the Lux tax line as long as they can until they are ready to compete. I don't think Danny knows yet exactly what direction the team is going. He still hopes to get Kevin Love or a star to pair with Rondo. If so, he is going to want to bring in more experienced players. If not then keep the young guys and either make them more valuable for a trade or as stars for the Celtics.
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 25, 2014 20:22:27 GMT -5
You do not go over the luxury tax line unless your championship ready. This team is bottom feeder ready.
|
|