Welcome to Boston, Jaden Springer!

[31to6]

There is a role for Springer in Boston/NBA. But only if he can shoot.. And I mean better than Brissett. I don't want any more players with suspect shooting. It kills ball movement and spacing. But because he is 21 and does have decent mechanics from what I see, he has time. But not much IMO. He needs to show steady shooting improvements by early next year.

double the 18% from 3 he shot this season in Boston and we'll really have something!
(I do -- like you -- believe he can possibly do it)

Extremely small sample size, but in BOS this year he was +2.8 DBPM and -6.0 OBPM
As I previously posted I saw enough vs CHA to buy a season pass for next year on the Springer Train.

[Dogen]

There is a role for Springer in Boston/NBA. But only if he can shoot.. And I mean better than Brissett. I don't want any more players with suspect shooting. It kills ball movement and spacing. But because he is 21 and does have decent mechanics from what I see, he has time. But not much IMO. He needs to show steady shooting improvements by early next year.

Maybe it's unfair, but I've already made my personal verdict on Brissett's offensive skills: monumentally poor. I like him as a hustle guy on the team, but cringe every time he winds up for a move on O.

Springer, though, I do agree about the mechanics. He looks OK. Also agree that there's not much time to put it together. Even with his very intriguing Marcus-Tony-lite on-the-ball defense, it's not going to mean anything on a team that requires that at least 4 players on the court can shoot. It's why Philly gave up on him, apparently. Morey said as much, but Brad sees potential.

I'm certainly not giving up on Jaden yet. He's fine in the open court. It seems shooting is more mental at this point for him. Get him in for the summer, running some plays, lots of reps and getting comfortable finding his spot. If he can improve in one or two areas -- maybe become a Jrue protegy and get that corner three ball going? -- he'll keep a spot on the roster, maybe in the rotation.

[Hal14]

There is a role for Springer in Boston/NBA. But only if he can shoot.. And I mean better than Brissett. I don't want any more players with suspect shooting. It kills ball movement and spacing. But because he is 21 and does have decent mechanics from what I see, he has time. But not much IMO. He needs to show steady shooting improvements by early next year.

Maybe it's unfair, but I've already made my personal verdict on Brissett's offensive skills: monumentally poor. I like him as a hustle guy on the team, but cringe every time he winds up for a move on O.

Springer, though, I do agree about the mechanics. He looks OK. Also agree that there's not much time to put it together. Even with his very intriguing Marcus-Tony-lite on-the-ball defense, it's not going to mean anything on a team that requires that at least 4 players on the court can shoot.

If we require at least 4 players on the court who can shoot, then why can't Springer be the 5th player?

You have KP or Al at the 5 - they can both shoot..

Would Springer be better if he could shoot? Yes, of course.

Is there a chance he isn't able to stick around long term in Boston (or in the NBA in general) if his shooting doesn't improve? Yes.

But I don't really buy this "he only has a role in the NBA if he can shoot" stuff. It's overly-simplistic analysis imo.

-Okogie has been a solid rotation player for Suns - non shooter
-Lamar Stevens was a key rotation player for the Cavs..was a non-shooter
-Prior to this season (his age 23 season), Isaac Okoro couldn't really shoot but was still a solid rotation player for a Cavs team that went to the playoffs
-Dillon Brooks has had seasons where he was pretty much a non-shooter but he was still a starter/key reserve for some good Grizzly teams due to his defense, toughness, hustle and energy
-Tony Allen was a good rotation player for many years - non-shooter
-Caruso early on in his career wasn't a shooter, helped the Lakers win the 2020 title
-Bruce Brown early in his career couldn't really shoot but was still a good rotation players on some good teams..due to his defense, hustle, toughness, energy
-Gary Payton II was the 8th man for the Warriors when they won the
-Pat Bev has had seasons where he was pretty much a non-shooter, but was still a solid rotation player dude to his defense, hustle, toughness, energy
-Derrick White when he first got to Boston didn't shoot..yet he was a top 6 player on a team that went to the NBA finals
-Amen Thompson was very good this season for the Rockets..was a non-shooter
-Ausar Thompson was very good this season for the Pistons..was a non-shooter
-Oladipo has had seasons where he didn't shoot but was still a decent rotation player
-Haywood Highsmith cracked into the Heat rotation, without being a shooter..he did it with his defense, hustle, energy and toughness
-Brissett was a solid role player for Boston this season..didn't really shoot but was still able to make positive contributions almost every time he was on the floor - mostly due to his rebounding but also his hustle, energy, and defense

There's plenty of other examples too.

[Dogen]

There is a role for Springer in Boston/NBA. But only if he can shoot.. And I mean better than Brissett. I don't want any more players with suspect shooting. It kills ball movement and spacing. But because he is 21 and does have decent mechanics from what I see, he has time. But not much IMO. He needs to show steady shooting improvements by early next year.

Maybe it's unfair, but I've already made my personal verdict on Brissett's offensive skills: monumentally poor. I like him as a hustle guy on the team, but cringe every time he winds up for a move on O.

Springer, though, I do agree about the mechanics. He looks OK. Also agree that there's not much time to put it together. Even with his very intriguing Marcus-Tony-lite on-the-ball defense, it's not going to mean anything on a team that requires that at least 4 players on the court can shoot.

If we require at least 4 players on the court who can shoot, then why can't Springer be the 5th player?

You have KP or Al at the 5 - they can both shoot..

Would Springer be better if he could shoot? Yes, of course.

Is there a chance he isn't able to stick around long term in Boston (or in the NBA in general) if his shooting doesn't improve? Yes.

But I don't really buy this "he only has a role in the NBA if he can shoot" stuff. It's overly-simplistic analysis imo.

-Okogie has been a solid rotation player for Suns - non shooter
-Lamar Stevens was a key rotation player for the Cavs..was a non-shooter
-Prior to this season (his age 23 season), Isaac Okoro couldn't really shoot but was still a solid rotation player for a Cavs team that went to the playoffs
-Dillon Brooks has had seasons where he was pretty much a non-shooter but he was still a starter/key reserve for some good Grizzly teams due to his defense, toughness, hustle and energy
-Tony Allen was a good rotation player for many years - non-shooter
-Caruso early on in his career wasn't a shooter, helped the Lakers win the 2020 title
-Bruce Brown early in his career couldn't really shoot but was still a good rotation players on some good teams..due to his defense, hustle, toughness, energy
-Gary Payton II was the 8th man for the Warriors when they won the
-Pat Bev has had seasons where he was pretty much a non-shooter, but was still a solid rotation player dude to his defense, hustle, toughness, energy
-Derrick White when he first got to Boston didn't shoot..yet he was a top 6 player on a team that went to the NBA finals
-Amen Thompson was very good this season for the Rockets..was a non-shooter
-Ausar Thompson was very good this season for the Pistons..was a non-shooter
-Oladipo has had seasons where he didn't shoot but was still a decent rotation player
-Haywood Highsmith cracked into the Heat rotation, without being a shooter..he did it with his defense, hustle, energy and toughness
-Brissett was a solid role player for Boston this season..didn't really shoot but was still able to make positive contributions almost every time he was on the floor - mostly due to his rebounding but also his hustle, energy, and defense

There's plenty of other examples too.

Those are all great examples Hal, but we haven't seen enough of Springer yet to make much analysis if he can be an Allen/Payton/Bev type of player.

If it wasn't made clear (maybe I'm hedging my bet) Springer is becoming one of my favorite young Celtics. In the times he is in, I often focus in on his movements on offense to get a sense of how he's adopting to Joe's sets. In half court, he's often camped out in the corner, meaning spreading the floor for Payton or someone else. If he can hit that corner three, great. But often so far he's got his hands in his pockets, Romeo-style. That's not playing to his strengths.

If he was the "Non-shooter" in the bench squad, and surround him with Pritchard, Hauser, Al, and one starter, then yeah, he can be that 5th guy. But if he's only playing one side of the court, on D, then it's really only spot minutes. He's got some PG skills, maybe can work over the summer on the plays and have him bring the ball up with Pritchard off the ball. He's good downhill. Would be great to see him moving to the basket and be able to swing out to Pritchard, Hauser, Al.

And most of the guys you listed got better shooting after a few years. TA, Pat Bev, Bruce Brown,... Derrick White! I think Springer is going to be better than he's shown so far, BUT, this team is focused on the big prize, so the development time might be in Maine, or very limited minutes. We KNOW that Joe has a pretty tight leash on the rotation.

With all that, I'm very bullish on Springer making it. He may stick with the team without a reliable jumper, but let's face it - as Morey said - when your position is Shooting Guard, it does help to have a shot. That's why I mentioned Jaden adding at least one killer skill this summer. If he can get that corner 3 working, PP might actually pass him the ball during the games. So far, I don't think he's hit one corner 3, but it's something he will get better at with practice. Practice + meaningful minutes.

It's mainly mental for Springer, imo, the shooting that is. If he finds a few sweet spots on the floor and really drills it into his DNA, the team will have confidence to get him the ball in those spots. The Celtics are a well oiled machine now. Springer is more of an open court improviser thus far. He just needs to put in the time and reps, the shots will start to fall.

[cl2117]

The thing that still has me scratching my head about Springer is his contract. We're on the hook for $4m next year, which is a lot of money for a fringe guy on a 2nd apron team. Barring Kornet/Tillman getting a decent bump on their extensions, he'll be the 8th highest paid player on the team. Not my money, so as long as ownership are down with footing the bill then more power to them, but it still seems a bit odd to me.

I guess you have to take it as another sign that the staff has confidence in the bet paying off. Cassell coached him his first two years in Philly, we gave up a mid 2nd rounder for him and are going to pay him $4m next year (not even accounting for the tax we'll incur because of him). Gotta assume they see him as a genuine contributor next year given all that.

Also given the restrictions we're under as a 2nd apron team, I think it does make sense to target "2nd draft" kind of guys who haven't popped yet, but are further along in their development and potentially can offer returns sooner rather than later. Walsh is a great example of how 2nd round guys with lots of tools and athleticism are still going to need significant development time before they'll get a chance to make an impact. Getting a guy 2-3 years into their NBA journey that still needs to develop but is more poised to turn that corner into being a rotation player is a worthy gamble. Ideally you do both to get instant returns while also still trying to build your own homegrown pipeline.

[31to6]

The thing that still has me scratching my head about Springer is his contract. We're on the hook for $4m next year, which is a lot of money for a fringe guy on a 2nd apron team. Barring Kornet/Tillman getting a decent bump on their extensions, he'll be the 8th highest paid player on the team. Not my money, so as long as ownership are down with footing the bill then more power to them, but it still seems a bit odd to me.

I guess you have to take it as another sign that the staff has confidence in the bet paying off. Cassell coached him his first two years in Philly, we gave up a mid 2nd rounder for him and are going to pay him $4m next year (not even accounting for the tax we'll incur because of him). Gotta assume they see him as a genuine contributor next year given all that.

Also given the restrictions we're under as a 2nd apron team, I think it does make sense to target "2nd draft" kind of guys who haven't popped yet, but are further along in their development and potentially can offer returns sooner rather than later. Walsh is a great example of how 2nd round guys with lots of tools and athleticism are still going to need significant development time before they'll get a chance to make an impact. Getting a guy 2-3 years into their NBA journey that still needs to develop but is more poised to turn that corner into being a rotation player is a worthy gamble. Ideally you do both to get instant returns while also still trying to build your own homegrown pipeline.

His contract next year -- and beyond that -- are both worth wondering about. If he has a decent developmental year next year, can they re-up him at or below $4M?

I wonder if he's Jrue insurance -- either longer term, or in the unlikely case he left as a FA this summer. Maybe to a degree same question(s) with Derrick. Payton has developed nicely, but I took it as a sign they're not particularly high on especially the defensive future abilities of Davison, Begarin, and/or YAM MADAR -- especially guarding bigger guards/wings. Given the $$ and draft capital, they must have real hope that Springer can do that.

[playa-hater]

There is a role for Springer in Boston/NBA. But only if he can shoot.. And I mean better than Brissett. I don't want any more players with suspect shooting. It kills ball movement and spacing. But because he is 21 and does have decent mechanics from what I see, he has time. But not much IMO. He needs to show steady shooting improvements by early next year.

Maybe it's unfair, but I've already made my personal verdict on Brissett's offensive skills: monumentally poor. I like him as a hustle guy on the team, but cringe every time he winds up for a move on O.

Springer, though, I do agree about the mechanics. He looks OK. Also agree that there's not much time to put it together. Even with his very intriguing Marcus-Tony-lite on-the-ball defense, it's not going to mean anything on a team that requires that at least 4 players on the court can shoot.

If we require at least 4 players on the court who can shoot, then why can't Springer be the 5th player?

You have KP or Al at the 5 - they can both shoot..

Would Springer be better if he could shoot? Yes, of course.

Is there a chance he isn't able to stick around long term in Boston (or in the NBA in general) if his shooting doesn't improve? Yes.

But I don't really buy this "he only has a role in the NBA if he can shoot" stuff. It's overly-simplistic analysis imo.

-Okogie has been a solid rotation player for Suns - non shooter
-Lamar Stevens was a key rotation player for the Cavs..was a non-shooter
-Prior to this season (his age 23 season), Isaac Okoro couldn't really shoot but was still a solid rotation player for a Cavs team that went to the playoffs
-Dillon Brooks has had seasons where he was pretty much a non-shooter but he was still a starter/key reserve for some good Grizzly teams due to his defense, toughness, hustle and energy
-Tony Allen was a good rotation player for many years - non-shooter
-Caruso early on in his career wasn't a shooter, helped the Lakers win the 2020 title
-Bruce Brown early in his career couldn't really shoot but was still a good rotation players on some good teams..due to his defense, hustle, toughness, energy
-Gary Payton II was the 8th man for the Warriors when they won the
-Pat Bev has had seasons where he was pretty much a non-shooter, but was still a solid rotation player dude to his defense, hustle, toughness, energy
-Derrick White when he first got to Boston didn't shoot..yet he was a top 6 player on a team that went to the NBA finals
-Amen Thompson was very good this season for the Rockets..was a non-shooter
-Ausar Thompson was very good this season for the Pistons..was a non-shooter
-Oladipo has had seasons where he didn't shoot but was still a decent rotation player
-Haywood Highsmith cracked into the Heat rotation, without being a shooter..he did it with his defense, hustle, energy and toughness
-Brissett was a solid role player for Boston this season..didn't really shoot but was still able to make positive contributions almost every time he was on the floor - mostly due to his rebounding but also his hustle, energy, and defense

There's plenty of other examples too.

Of course you can not reply without giving a little demeaning Dig AGAIN like you are some sort of expert then you list a bunch of players as Proof when in many cases there is an apples to Orange situation. Some payers listed are extremely talented and young lottery picks. Others exceled at other things besides shooting. Putting Oladipo and D White in your argument in the same shooting category with Springer is so typical You while ignoring the huge impact they make doing many other things.

Some on your list excel at getting in the lane and finishing well such as T Allen, Caruso and Brown. Springer hasn't even done that yet while still shooting well below average. Some of your guys played in a less emphasized shooting ERA as well. Factor in Boston's extreme emphasis on 3 point shooting and my stance is even more likely to hold true.

Then you drown posters out knowing most/all don't have time or desire to respond to each and every player/Item you present.

Please respond to someone or anyone else.

[Dogen]

The thing that still has me scratching my head about Springer is his contract. We're on the hook for $4m next year, which is a lot of money for a fringe guy on a 2nd apron team. Barring Kornet/Tillman getting a decent bump on their extensions, he'll be the 8th highest paid player on the team. Not my money, so as long as ownership are down with footing the bill then more power to them, but it still seems a bit odd to me.

I guess you have to take it as another sign that the staff has confidence in the bet paying off. Cassell coached him his first two years in Philly, we gave up a mid 2nd rounder for him and are going to pay him $4m next year (not even accounting for the tax we'll incur because of him). Gotta assume they see him as a genuine contributor next year given all that.

Also given the restrictions we're under as a 2nd apron team, I think it does make sense to target "2nd draft" kind of guys who haven't popped yet, but are further along in their development and potentially can offer returns sooner rather than later. Walsh is a great example of how 2nd round guys with lots of tools and athleticism are still going to need significant development time before they'll get a chance to make an impact. Getting a guy 2-3 years into their NBA journey that still needs to develop but is more poised to turn that corner into being a rotation player is a worthy gamble. Ideally you do both to get instant returns while also still trying to build your own homegrown pipeline.

Springer is likely going to be the 9th/10th best player on the team, with some upside yet to come, so the contract could end up being a good deal. I'm thinking of him as being our "Dark Hauser" (Batman reference, not skin), basically a guy that does all the disruptive energy work and can influence the game with his defense, similar to how Sam can come in and move the needle on offense when his shot is really wet.

To your point about the 2-3 year player, yes, exactly. He's a bit more spendy than a late first/early second, but Philly already invested the development time on him. Now he may be ready for rotation minutes and the Celtics also have Walsh "in the wings" as it were.

[brackdan70]

The thing that still has me scratching my head about Springer is his contract. We're on the hook for $4m next year, which is a lot of money for a fringe guy on a 2nd apron team. Barring Kornet/Tillman getting a decent bump on their extensions, he'll be the 8th highest paid player on the team. Not my money, so as long as ownership are down with footing the bill then more power to them, but it still seems a bit odd to me.

I guess you have to take it as another sign that the staff has confidence in the bet paying off. Cassell coached him his first two years in Philly, we gave up a mid 2nd rounder for him and are going to pay him $4m next year (not even accounting for the tax we'll incur because of him). Gotta assume they see him as a genuine contributor next year given all that.

Also given the restrictions we're under as a 2nd apron team, I think it does make sense to target "2nd draft" kind of guys who haven't popped yet, but are further along in their development and potentially can offer returns sooner rather than later. Walsh is a great example of how 2nd round guys with lots of tools and athleticism are still going to need significant development time before they'll get a chance to make an impact. Getting a guy 2-3 years into their NBA journey that still needs to develop but is more poised to turn that corner into being a rotation player is a worthy gamble. Ideally you do both to get instant returns while also still trying to build your own homegrown pipeline.

His contract next year -- and beyond that -- are both worth wondering about. If he has a decent developmental year next year, can they re-up him at or below $4M?

I wonder if he's Jrue insurance -- either longer term, or in the unlikely case he left as a FA this summer. Maybe to a degree same question(s) with Derrick. Payton has developed nicely, but I took it as a sign they're not particularly high on especially the defensive future abilities of Davison, Begarin, and/or YAM MADAR -- especially guarding bigger guards/wings. Given the $$ and draft capital, they must have real hope that Springer can do that.

He is an RFA in summer of 2025 so the Cs can offer him the QO, agree to a deal which could be around or below 4 million/ year..or more, or not offer the QO and let him hit free agency. I think his QO is 6 million and change.
I guess how it shakes out depends a lot on how he develops and contributes next year. He is a guy with elite on ball Defense skills and will be 22 yo then, I’d guess they figure out how to keep him unless he completely duds next year.
I think they can do a rookie extension as well this summer? That would surprise me a bit if that happened.

[Hal14]

The thing that still has me scratching my head about Springer is his contract. We're on the hook for $4m next year, which is a lot of money for a fringe guy on a 2nd apron team.

Springer on a rookie contract. He was a late 1st round pick. Next season is his 4th in the NBA. He's making the amount that late 1st round picks make in their 4th season.

People on here keep fixating on that $4.0 mil number for next season, but keep in mind - this past season he only made $2.2 mil. The bump from $2.2 this season to $4.0 next season is because most players improve from their 3rd season to their 4th season. By year 4 in the NBA, a player (especially one who was a 1st round pick) is probably contributing pretty well for their team. The players who are in year 4 and are flops - well, chances are out of the league by then, or gotten waived so they are not making rookie contract money anymore.

1st round picks get a slight bump in salary from year 3 to year 4. Again, because they usually improve a pretty good amount by year 4. So I don't really think it's fair for there to be this much criticism of that contract when we haven't yet seen year 4 Springer..we don't yet know what improvement he will make next season..we don't know yet what his role will be on next year's team, how much he'll play, etc.

Either he continues on his development path and is a solid contributor for us next season (in which case no one will give a hoot about the $4 mil) or he doesn't..in which case we use his contract for salary matching in a trade (and the fact that he's making $4 mil instead of only $2 means that we can get a better player in return via trade) so either way, it's a win.

Lastly, $4 mil really isn't that much in today's NBA. End of the bench guys usually get $2 or $3 mil. Springer next season is gonna get $4 mil. That's barely more than $2 or $3.

Barring Kornet/Tillman getting a decent bump on their extensions, he'll be the 8th highest paid player on the team.

I mean, Ben Simmons was the highest paid player on the Nets this season.

Johnathan Isaac was the highest paid player on the Magic. Paolo (their best player, only all-star) was only their 5th highest paid player.

Gordon Hayward is the 2nd highest paid player on the Thunder. Meanwhile Jdub (arguably their 2nd best player) is their 9th highest paid player this season.

I could keep going but you get the idea. You could do this with a million players and be like "oh, this seems odd that player X is the 3rd highest paid player on his team and he's not that good or player Y is really good but he's the 9th highest aid player on his team. It's doesn't really mean very much.

Also, everyone in the league knows that Hauser is playing better than a guy on a $2 mil a year contract. But it's his 1st contract in the NBA after going undrafted. So that's what he makes. It is what it is.

His next contract will be for much more $ than that - everyone knows this. But next season, Springer makes slightly more - because he was a 1st round pick and Hauser was undrafted.

Also, Springer is only 21 and Hauser is 26 yrs old. So it makes sense that Hauser is better right now. But who knows, maybe once Springer develops more he ends up being a solid contributor - that $4 mil could end up looking like a bargain. And Hauser's next contract - let's say he gets $11 mil a year..but who knows, maybe 2 yrs from now he's struggling on D and the shots aren't falling as much..people could be saying that Springer's $4 mil contract is better than Hauser's $11 mil a year contract..

[cl2117]

The thing that still has me scratching my head about Springer is his contract. We're on the hook for $4m next year, which is a lot of money for a fringe guy on a 2nd apron team.

Springer on a rookie contract. He was a late 1st round pick. Next season is his 4th in the NBA. He's making the amount that late 1st round picks make in their 4th season.

People on here keep fixating on that $4.0 mil number for next season, but keep in mind - this past season he only made $2.2 mil. The bump from $2.2 this season to $4.0 next season is because most players improve from their 3rd season to their 4th season. By year 4 in the NBA, a player (especially one who was a 1st round pick) is probably contributing pretty well for their team. The players who are in year 4 and are flops - well, chances are out of the league by then, or gotten waived so they are not making rookie contract money anymore.

1st round picks get a slight bump in salary from year 3 to year 4. Again, because they usually improve a pretty good amount by year 4. So I don't really think it's fair for there to be this much criticism of that contract when we haven't yet seen year 4 Springer..we don't yet know what improvement he will make next season..we don't know yet what his role will be on next year's team, how much he'll play, etc.

Either he continues on his development path and is a solid contributor for us next season (in which case no one will give a hoot about the $4 mil) or he doesn't..in which case we use his contract for salary matching in a trade (and the fact that he's making $4 mil instead of only $2 means that we can get a better player in return via trade) so either way, it's a win.

Lastly, $4 mil really isn't that much in today's NBA. End of the bench guys usually get $2 or $3 mil. Springer next season is gonna get $4 mil. That's barely more than $2 or $3.

Barring Kornet/Tillman getting a decent bump on their extensions, he'll be the 8th highest paid player on the team.

I mean, Ben Simmons was the highest paid player on the Nets this season.

Johnathan Isaac was the highest paid player on the Magic. Paolo (their best player, only all-star) was only their 5th highest paid player.

Gordon Hayward is the 2nd highest paid player on the Thunder. Meanwhile Jdub (arguably their 2nd best player) is their 9th highest paid player this season.

I could keep going but you get the idea. You could do this with a million players and be like "oh, this seems odd that player X is the 3rd highest paid player on his team and he's not that good or player Y is really good but he's the 9th highest aid player on his team. It's doesn't really mean very much.

Also, everyone in the league knows that Hauser is playing better than a guy on a $2 mil a year contract. But it's his 1st contract in the NBA after going undrafted. So that's what he makes. It is what it is.

His next contract will be for much more $ than that - everyone knows this. But next season, Springer makes slightly more - because he was a 1st round pick and Hauser was undrafted.

Also, Springer is only 21 and Hauser is 26 yrs old. So it makes sense that Hauser is better right now. But who knows, maybe once Springer develops more he ends up being a solid contributor - that $4 mil could end up looking like a bargain. And Hauser's next contract - let's say he gets $11 mil a year..but who knows, maybe 2 yrs from now he's struggling on D and the shots aren't falling as much..people could be saying that Springer's $4 mil contract is better than Hauser's $11 mil a year contract..

Look at it this way, Jrue declining his player option and saving the C's $7m on his contract next year actually saves them something like $35m in luxury tax payments. Taking on Springer instead of getting a young guy like Queta or a vet like Brissett/Stevens is going to cost them like an extra $8m in luxury tax.

That's like giving back 20%+ of the luxury tax savings from Jrue's deal. That's why it sticks out as a bit of head scratcher. And the Nets, Magic, Thunder aren't paying the tax. That's why it's interesting to see a team that's going to be deep in the tax already willing to trade for a guy that could end up not even being part of the rotation next year and will cost almost twice as much as a generic replacement (like $10m total between luxury tax and salary).

Again, all that was just to say that C's brass must genuinely think that Springer has a pretty decent chance of making that jump between years 3 and 4 and being worth the tax he's going to cost us. Our top 8 is locked in for next year, Oshae, Queta, Kornet, Tillman and Walsh could all be back and deserve their own minutes. That's 6 guys competing for the spare minutes, Springer being almost twice the cost of all the rest. I don't think Brad would sign on to pay that kind of money unless there was a real path to Springer finding his way into the rotation.

[brackdan70]

The thing that still has me scratching my head about Springer is his contract. We're on the hook for $4m next year, which is a lot of money for a fringe guy on a 2nd apron team.

Springer on a rookie contract. He was a late 1st round pick. Next season is his 4th in the NBA. He's making the amount that late 1st round picks make in their 4th season.

People on here keep fixating on that $4.0 mil number for next season, but keep in mind - this past season he only made $2.2 mil. The bump from $2.2 this season to $4.0 next season is because most players improve from their 3rd season to their 4th season. By year 4 in the NBA, a player (especially one who was a 1st round pick) is probably contributing pretty well for their team. The players who are in year 4 and are flops - well, chances are out of the league by then, or gotten waived so they are not making rookie contract money anymore.

1st round picks get a slight bump in salary from year 3 to year 4. Again, because they usually improve a pretty good amount by year 4. So I don't really think it's fair for there to be this much criticism of that contract when we haven't yet seen year 4 Springer..we don't yet know what improvement he will make next season..we don't know yet what his role will be on next year's team, how much he'll play, etc.

Either he continues on his development path and is a solid contributor for us next season (in which case no one will give a hoot about the $4 mil) or he doesn't..in which case we use his contract for salary matching in a trade (and the fact that he's making $4 mil instead of only $2 means that we can get a better player in return via trade) so either way, it's a win.

Lastly, $4 mil really isn't that much in today's NBA. End of the bench guys usually get $2 or $3 mil. Springer next season is gonna get $4 mil. That's barely more than $2 or $3.

Barring Kornet/Tillman getting a decent bump on their extensions, he'll be the 8th highest paid player on the team.

I mean, Ben Simmons was the highest paid player on the Nets this season.

Johnathan Isaac was the highest paid player on the Magic. Paolo (their best player, only all-star) was only their 5th highest paid player.

Gordon Hayward is the 2nd highest paid player on the Thunder. Meanwhile Jdub (arguably their 2nd best player) is their 9th highest paid player this season.

I could keep going but you get the idea. You could do this with a million players and be like "oh, this seems odd that player X is the 3rd highest paid player on his team and he's not that good or player Y is really good but he's the 9th highest aid player on his team. It's doesn't really mean very much.

Also, everyone in the league knows that Hauser is playing better than a guy on a $2 mil a year contract. But it's his 1st contract in the NBA after going undrafted. So that's what he makes. It is what it is.

His next contract will be for much more $ than that - everyone knows this. But next season, Springer makes slightly more - because he was a 1st round pick and Hauser was undrafted.

Also, Springer is only 21 and Hauser is 26 yrs old. So it makes sense that Hauser is better right now. But who knows, maybe once Springer develops more he ends up being a solid contributor - that $4 mil could end up looking like a bargain. And Hauser's next contract - let's say he gets $11 mil a year..but who knows, maybe 2 yrs from now he's struggling on D and the shots aren't falling as much..people could be saying that Springer's $4 mil contract is better than Hauser's $11 mil a year contract..

Look at it this way, Jrue declining his player option and saving the C's $7m on his contract next year actually saves them something like $35m in luxury tax payments. Taking on Springer instead of getting a young guy like Queta or a vet like Brissett/Stevens is going to cost them like an extra $8m in luxury tax.

That's like giving back 20%+ of the luxury tax savings from Jrue's deal. That's why it sticks out as a bit of head scratcher. And the Nets, Magic, Thunder aren't paying the tax. That's why it's interesting to see a team that's going to be deep in the tax already willing to trade for a guy that could end up not even being part of the rotation next year and will cost almost twice as much as a generic replacement (like $10m total between luxury tax and salary).

Again, all that was just to say that C's brass must genuinely think that Springer has a pretty decent chance of making that jump between years 3 and 4 and being worth the tax he's going to cost us. Our top 8 is locked in for next year, Oshae, Queta, Kornet, Tillman and Walsh could all be back and deserve their own minutes. That's 6 guys competing for the spare minutes, Springer being almost twice the cost of all the rest. I don't think Brad would sign on to pay that kind of money unless there was a real path to Springer finding his way into the rotation.

After the top 8 he is the only guard and his versatility and D should get him some minutes.
I would guess Springer and Tillman end up being our 9 and 10. Tillman will end up getting paid at least 4 million per year I think as well.
I agree they must be high on him to have made that trade and feel he can contribute