They makes 0 sense. Deals are reported in their full amount (guatanteed and non-guaranteed). There's no way this is a 4 year, $64M deal. It could be something like 12, 13, 14, 15, with 9M guaranteed in year 4.
Okay then so wasn’t the summer of 2016? It was league wide economics that saw inflated contracts. Everyone blames olshey for that but when he signs a good deal it’s the economics. Get the fuck out of here with that bs. Hahahaha
Absolutely agree!!!!.......except...... he needs to use the TPE. If he doesn't, it's RLEC all over again.
Even with the economics of 2016, NO ONE was offering Turner anywhere close to what Olshey did and admittedly, even Turner was"shocked" by the offer. https://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2016/11/evan_turner_was_as_shocked_by.html
I know and I get it but it’s funny how some will not give credit when credit is due. Even @Gronk Brady gave him credit.
Pretty much exactly what i was going to ask. Would love to see all the offers that were made to Turner and know what would be considered "Close". Somehow i missed getting all that information. Heck i'm not even sure what teams were also making offers?
That's the point....there weren't any. $17M is not close to....zero. Someone in the league told me the Celts would have offered him the full MLE but that was it. That would have been about half of what Olshey ponied up.
So someone who almost singlehandedly made a team with Dame and CJ a top 10 defense has no place in the NBA because he doesn't shoot 3's?
I wish Olshey didn't sign Turner, but if Boston was willing to offer the full-MLE we don't know how much higher they would've gone to keep him. The Blazers pretty much have to give an offer free agents can't refuse to get someone like Evan Turner (once again, not a good choice). The Celtics are pretty much going through the same thing with Marcus Smart right now. The difference is that it's not 2016 so most teams have at best the MLE to offer, which Smart obviously feels he deserves more than.
I agree. It's also interesting how the simple difference in availability effects the way players respond to offers. Money does indeed make the world go round.
I disagree with this. I think small ball has about reached its peak. There is a flock of bigs coming out that will start dominating in a few years if remained healthy. Kat, imbeid, etc. I think over the next five years we see it trend back and maybe nurk is one of the leader of the charge for back to the basket, big man inside ball.
I think that poster is kind of an ass, generally. No contract is ever reported that way, that I've seen.
Plus, the Turner chapter isn't yet over as far as his role and contribution to the team's expected success. Paul and Neil knew exactly what they were getting in Turner and wanted him as part of the core going forward to the next step. Money is not capital, the tool you purchase with money is capital. Chalk for the school teacher, Hammer for the carpenter, Player for a pro team. Some organizations and people way over spend on products with certain features they like even knowing there are weakness's too.
Which all teams have to do at times because the tools that are complete and versatile to fit any and all needs are far and few between.
I'm not usually afraid of people but I'd ask him if his cars needed any work. Free of charge of course.
Given our undersized, defensively challenged backcourt, Nurk has more value to us than he would to most teams. Fact is, we'd be a below .500 team without him. That's exactly what we were. 23-32 (.418) with Plumlee at center prior to the trade. With Nurk as a starter, we're 62-36 (.633). And Nurk is a dying breed? Do you really long to return to the pre-Nurk days when we had a losing record and one of the worst defenses in the entire league? Neil got Nurk and a 1st round pick from DEN for Plumlee and in the end resigned Nurk for less per year than DEN is paying Plumlee to come off their bench. And Neil is the idiot? You sure about that? BNM
We talk about how sometimes players team up with their buddies to stack teams. We say that will never happen to us. Last year we thought maybe Dame could attract a Paul George or Carmelo Anthony. It didn't happen. Maybe it just did? Maybe Nurk took a reasonable, long term deal because he likes the team, the coaches, but mostly to play with Dame "Fourth in MVP Voting" Lillard. I'd be willing to bet that The Lillard Effect had a lot to do with it.
