Bradley vs. Bayless

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from celticelmo. Show celticelmo's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to xxcodyfxx's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think Bayless is awful.. I would rather have Bradley if I had too choose, or how about we just sign Gordon Haywood instead of either of them. 

    [/QUOTE]

    +1

    And I'm not mad crazy about him either...but he's better than either little person

    [/QUOTE]

    At the beginning of the year, I was ready to back Bradley but the kid just cannot stay healthy. Unless he plays for a bunch less than "he" thinks he is worth, I would let him walk. I am also not a big Bayless. If we were lucky enough to score Wiggins in the draft, I would let them both walk because IMHO, I think Wiggins will be a 2 in the NBA. I guess it all depends on how the ping pong balls fall before a decision on either of these two can be made.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from romneywins. Show romneywins's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Gasthoerer's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    It would be bad to overpay for AB, but Bayless over Pressey or AB for the same money sound crazy.

    Bayless is a shoot happy undersized SG who plays lousy D and shoot a hair ver .400.AB is an undesized as well but is younger, seems to be a better shooter and can be a game changer on D.

    For a contender it would depend on the overall team structure but even then I would root for AB. For a team like the Cs it is not even close.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bingo!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Bayless can pass the ball, Bradley looks like a jr hi guy passing the ball.  Braley is much more shoot happ than Bayless.  There is just not that much difference, go ahead and lock a lot of money up in Bradley and just hope he learns how to play with the rest of the team.  Bayless and Bradley both have hot steaks.  Bayless can bring the ball down the court and get us started, Bradley had demonstrated that he had problems doing this. Pressey can not shoot and is too small.  Bayless is every bit as good as these guys if you looke at what he does for the team and his skill level compared to Pressey and Bradley.  Bayless does not need to be that great to be as good as pressey and bradley.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Petey62's comment:

    [QUOTE]

    Mployee, you might be right.  Even though it's not my money, I'm being a "tight-wad" about making my starting point $3 million with Bayless.  I'd start out with a slight pay decrease offer because he is not getting better.  I think Bayless is what he is.  It's not like he's on the upswing and his skills are improving.  He'll be a veteran journeyman who can get hot and score in bunches off the bench.  He pretty much won't be counted on for anything more than that.

    I'd also want to stay firm because in the next couple years, we can probably draft someone to replace him who will be younger, taller and cheaper.

    But you may very well be right that the Celtics may look to keep him at his current salary if he accepts.  But I definitely would not go up to $3.5 million per year with him.

    [/QUOTE]


    Bingo!

    So why should the Celts spend 3m on Bayless when the Celts can get a guard like Shabazz Napier?

    Remember, the Celts have 2 1str picks this season.

    Those 2 1st rounders will be part of the payroll for next season.

    If the Celts get the #4 pick and the #18 pick, that's 3.3m for the 4th pick and 1.3m for the 18th pick.

    [/QUOTE]

    Fierce, you make some very good points but I think your logic is somewhat short-sighted.  You are asking why the Celtics should spend $3M on Bayless when they can spend $1.3M on the 18th pick (for a guard like Napier)?

    Before responding, consider this!

    Have you considered the question "why would the Celtics pay $7M for AB (or even $6M) when they can select a guard like Napier or Harrison (if he comes out) with the 18th pick and pay $1.3M"?

    Even YOU would have to agree that this is the more practical question.  Wouldn't you?

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    Fierce, do you read other people's posts?

    When I read your posts (and anyone else's), I respond accordingly TO THE POINT IN YOUR POST.  However, you seem to totally disregard another poster's point and dismiss it without the courtesy of even replying to what it is they're posting.

    I'm serious, it's like you aren't even reading what I'm writing and you respond with something having NOTHING to do with my post.  Are you so adamant that your position is so right that you don't even address what I'm posting?

    Do you even consider the merits of other posters if their opinion differs from yours?

    Now to respond to your post, the reason why you DON'T keep AB is because he's not worth the Celtics paying him $7-7.5 million per year.  In the next two drafts (incl draft night trade possibility), there is high probability that the Celtics will draft the pieces that will make up the next Celtics playoff team.  In the next two seasons, AB will become "Bayless today with defense".  Bayless is just 2 years older than AB.  AB is slowing falling into the category of "AB is what he is" and investing $28 million over 4 years is not practical for our rebuild.

    Now do me a favor, consider what I've posted.  Read it and comment eloquently like I know you're capable.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Petey62's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Fierce, do you read other people's posts?

    When I read your posts (and anyone else's), I respond accordingly TO THE POINT IN YOUR POST.  However, you seem to totally disregard another poster's point and dismiss it without the courtesy of even replying to what it is they're posting.

    I'm serious, it's like you aren't even reading what I'm writing and you respond with something having NOTHING to do with my post.  Are you so adamant that your position is so right that you don't even address what I'm posting?

    Do you even consider the merits of other posters if their opinion differs from yours?

    Now to respond to your post, the reason why you DON'T keep AB is because he's not worth the Celtics paying him $7-7.5 million per year.  In the next two drafts (incl draft night trade possibility), there is high probability that the Celtics will draft the pieces that will make up the next Celtics playoff team.  In the next two seasons, AB will become "Bayless today with defense".  Bayless is just 2 years older than AB.  AB is slowing falling into the category of "AB is what he is" and investing $28 million over 4 years is not practical for our rebuild.

    Now do me a favor, consider what I've posted.  Read it and comment eloquently like I know you're capable.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Pete

     

     

    Next season the Celts will still be a lottery team.

    The reason why I see no need to re-sign Bayless is he's not needed.

    Next season is still about player development.

     

    You yourself said Bayless is already a finished product.

    So he doesn't fit in if the goal is to develop players and not win as many games as you can.

     

    Besides money, Bayless would also eat up playing time.

    I say give the playing time to someone else younger.

     

    But if the Celts are a playoff team, I agree with you that having Bayless for cheap is a good idea.

    [/QUOTE]
     

    This is Fierce's goal.  This isn't the Celtics goal.  The Celtics DO want to develop players but they do not want to lose as many games as possible. If that were the case, Bass, Humphries and probably Jeff Green would have been gone at the trade deadline.  If that were the case, Bass and Humphries would not be our starting bigs, thus eating Sully and KO's time.

    You don't speak for Celtics management.  That's funny, like Fiercy the BDC poster (or imposter) knows the goals of the organization.  You're funny. 

    Where do you get your reasoning?

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticGreenLP. Show CelticGreenLP's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    In response to Mployee8's comment:
    [QUOTE

    He will get his superstar in 2015 unless another team decides to sell out early .... Minny?

    Otherwise he will get All-Star type players this summer ... Hayward & Monroe or Gortat types that when added to RR, Green, Sully can make a difference.

    [/QUOTE]

    Absolutely agree that there is a chance DA can get KLove and he and Rondo could attract another top tier player to sign in '15, which in my eyes is the only way to shorten the rebuild that gives us a true contender. There are some good Centers avail. in '15; M.Gasol, Hibbert, Big Al, Brook Lopez.

    But I also have to say that none of Hayward, Monroe, or Gortat have been, (and probably never will be) all-stars.  All three are 3rd tier type starters.  You can have one but 3 (4 if you keep Green) guys like this will just eat up what you can offer to real all-stars. 

    I think the Spurs model is the way to go.  You are careful and smart choosing who your top three guys are, pay them well, then fill in with vets in their last contracts, team friendly deals, and guys on rookie contracts.  The heat and the 08 Celts were built the same way.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from FierceBrand. Show FierceBrand's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    Marc Stein ✔ @ESPNSteinLine
    ESPN sources say Milwaukee Bucks are closing in on a deal with free-agent guard Jerryd Bayless

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from PHX85014. Show PHX85014's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    I'm glad they resigned Avery Bradley, but would rather they signed Jerryd Bayless instead of Phil Pressey, no brainer

    Bayless is simply a much better player than Pressey and can play either point or 2 guard better than Pressey

    Now they will lose Bayless 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from FierceBrand. Show FierceBrand's posts

    Re: Bradley vs. Bayless

    In response to PHX85014's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm glad they resigned Avery Bradley, but would rather they signed Jerryd Bayless instead of Phil Pressey, no brainer

    Bayless is simply a much better player than Pressey and can play either point or 2 guard better than Pressey

    Now they will lose Bayless 

    [/QUOTE]

    The difference between Bayless and Pressey is Pressey will cost less, a lot less!

     

Share