# Blount Resigns With Celtics, 6 Yr. Deal



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Just saw it on ESPN Bottom Line, D.A. reports it...


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

He better play like he did last year or better. None of this "I have a contract now, so I can lay back". Blount is decent in the East, but he's still not the answer to the West big men. Does this mean Mihm will probably not come back since Raef will be playing?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

That's great news, phew I had small hope (never said he won't resign) and yay. lol

But seriously I'm very surprised but happy a lot more.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*I like the move*

Glad to see Blount show loyalty. Doc Rivers is a player's coach, and I hope he gets other guys to see that playing in Boston can't be that bad. 

I don't see the need to bring Mihm back now. Raef and Kendrick can fill the rest of the minutes.

5-Blount/Raef/Perkins
4-Raef/Jefferson

If anyone makes an offer to Mihm, do not match.


----------



## brazys (Jul 17, 2002)

A bit from ESPN Insider about it:

(Note to mods: if it's illegal to post bits from Insider, please leave a note about it after deleting this message. Thank you)

And it is illegal. Paraphrase until your hearts content, but when you quote, I edit and delete. ---agoo


----------



## greenmartin34 (Jun 26, 2004)

if blount have the performance like like last year, celtic will be a good team. raef and perkins are always injured, so we still need a big man. this big man may not be mihm as his salary is probably not cheap.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*MLE*

I have heard differing reports on whether or not we could still use an exception after signing Blount. 

My understanding was that if we signed Blount, we lose our MLE. I think that is the case, which means we will get no depth behind Blount.

However, two days ago I saw that if the Celtics signed Blount, they could still use their MLE on someone like McDyess or Thomas. This cannot be true, can it?

Also, we should now let Mihm walk. I doubt anyone could be stupid enough to pay him more than $3.9M per year, though.


----------



## -James- (Apr 27, 2004)

im surprised... i was convinced he was going to the heat after they let skip walk away...


----------



## CrossOver (May 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jae05</b>!
> im surprised... i was convinced he was going to the heat after they let skip walk away...


Riley isnt overpaying for *anyone* this off season.

He's working towards the year Grant and EJ's contracts come off the books and wont sign anyone past 3 years.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>greenmartin34</b>!
> if blount have the performance like like last year, celtic will be a good team. raef and perkins are always injured, so we still need a big man. this big man may not be mihm as his salary is probably not cheap.


How's Perkins always injured? He had one injury last year (he missed the summer league) and sprained his shoulder yesterday but it seems fine now. 



> I have heard differing reports on whether or not we could still use an exception after signing Blount.
> 
> My understanding was that if we signed Blount, we lose our MLE. I think that is the case, which means we will get no depth behind Blount.
> 
> ...


There's a rumor that we have Blount's bird rights and that we didn't use the mle to sign him. I don't know how we got his bird rights though.


----------



## Lusty RaRue (Sep 9, 2003)

The Celtic used their MLE to re-sign Blount.

The Celtic could re-sign Mihm and trade LaFrentz.

If they do, a deal like:

Antonio Davis(2 years) +
Jamal Crawford($7 mil.?)
total 1st year: about $20 mil.

for

LaFrentz(5 years) +
Stewart(1 year) +
Atkins(2 years)
total 1st year: about $18.1 mil.

should work despite the BYC status Crawford will have. If not, the inclusion of Chris Jefferies(1 year @ $.9 mil.) should do the trick.

The long term keepers are Crawford for the Celtic and LaFrentz for the Bull while the others go away in 2 or fewer years.


----------



## -James- (Apr 27, 2004)

from what i hear on the raptor boards, appearently you cant package anyone with a sign and trade player.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

I think this is a great signing. Blount may not be all-star material but he works hard, keeps in great shape and always has tried to get better. What he did at end of last year is not like a Battie or a Dampier lottery bust playing hard for a contract. This is a guy who has worked hard and developed into a player.

The other smart thing about this signing is that many teams wanted him at MLE money anyway so he is a tradeable commodity. I still think team should resign Mihm or sign and trade. No reason to let valuable commodities walk away. Big men in the NBA are like starting pitchers - you can never have enough.


----------



## vandyke (Jan 8, 2004)

Kudos to Ainge and Rivers for getting Blount to sign, and even better that we keep him away from teams we have to compete with like Miami, and Philly, not sure what the money is but it doesn't matter if Foyle, Turkolu, Okur, are getting that kind of money than Blount deserves his also, one thing though as much as Blount ran his mouth last year about him being out of here, as you can see it comes down to what it usually does who can offer the most money. Now you look at this team and all of the sudden we are a pretty deep team most likely we will probably keep Mihm and allow him to become a unrestricted free agent next year. 

Guards and Small forwards
Banks
Atkins
West
Pierce
Davis
Welsch
Allen
JJones
McCarty

PF and C
Mihm
LaFrentz
Big Al J.
Blount
Perkins

I am looking forward to this year, and there are a lot of Ainge bashers on this post for once I would like to see a little credit for what Ainge is trying to build here, and I would like anybody to tell me that the team we had with Walker, Battie, E. Williams, Delk and Kedrick Brown in the long run would have been better than the team we are assembling now, we have so much more depth, speed, athleticism, shooting, etc.


----------



## Lusty RaRue (Sep 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jae05</b>!
> from what i hear on the raptor boards, appearently you cant package anyone with a sign and trade player.


A common fallacy.


----------



## KJay (Sep 22, 2002)

well I have never liked Mihm but if someone would give something back to the CELTS then I would do it


----------



## rowdyness (Jan 21, 2004)

I like the Blount signing. We werent going to get anyone better than Blount and if he can keep working hard and improving his game then we may have the 2nd or 3rd best center in the east which isnt saying much. I also saw where Chad? Ford said we still have the MLE and are looking at McDyess. I would still rather see Thomas than McDyess soley because Antonio is so injury prone. If Antonio is over the injuries then I would rather have him. He could be a potential scoring option.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Trade Kicker*

Blount's new contract has a 15% trade kicker, so his salary goes up by 15% for the remainder of his contract if the Celtics ever trade him.

Think this guy wants to stay?


----------



## KJay (Sep 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rowdyness</b>!
> I like the Blount signing. We werent going to get anyone better than Blount and if he can keep working hard and improving his game then we may have the 2nd or 3rd best center in the east which isnt saying much. I also saw where Chad? Ford said we still have the MLE and are looking at McDyess. I would still rather see Thomas than McDyess soley because Antonio is so injury prone. If Antonio is over the injuries then I would rather have him. He could be a potential scoring option.


 I'd take Thomas too, because you don't know when Antonio is going to go down again


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

The Celtics did not use their MLE to re-sign Blount. They used their early Bird exception, whihc is the "median salary" and therefore is exactly the same as the MLE, except that the C's can give 12.5% annual raises instead of 10% to re sign their own player.

so the Celtics still have their MLE to sign someone else. Unfortunately they have no roster space.

Six years from now, when Blount is 34 years old, we will owe him 9 million. Still think it's a good deal?


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Blount is one sly fox. He did what he had to to get the price to go up, In the end he is getting paid a lot more then he is worth.
Almost 7 million a year.

He played well the second half last year.
Good for him.

I do wonder what this means for Raef. I thought he was our center of the future but since he is limping around I guess not.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Good for Blount, Good for the Celtics*

I defy anyone to name 3 centers who played better in the East last year down the stretch. Blount was great.

If he plays like that next year, he'll be worth every penny of the 5.1 million.

As for Raef, I see him as a PF. Not a center.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> How's Perkins always injured? He had one injury last year (he missed the summer league) and sprained his shoulder yesterday but it seems fine now.



Exactly what I was thinking...Plus he barely played last year, so how can you label him always injured? Bad assumption.


----------



## Lusty RaRue (Sep 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> The Celtics did not use their MLE to re-sign Blount. They used their early Bird exception, whihc is the "median salary" and therefore is exactly the same as the MLE, except that the C's can give 12.5% annual raises instead of 10% to re sign their own player.
> 
> so the Celtics still have their MLE to sign someone else. Unfortunately they have no roster space.
> ...


I apologize, you're absolutely correct. I thought the Celtic only had non-bird rights but they get credit for the end of last year. d'oh! Sorry.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#17

As an outsider(Bull fan) I think it hinges on the integrity of Blount. If this was soley a push for bucks, then it will be a problem. Otherwise I like it. 

Dampier is in a similar situation.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Great News!*

So, the Celtics have, at my count, 17 players. 

If Mihm gets an offer somewhere else, that would make 16.

Justin Reed doesn't have a contract, I don't think. We don't have to sign him. 

That could put us at 15 players.

We could trade players, too.

Bottom line: If there is a way to get bigger and tougher with the MLE, use all or part of it.

I still like Etan Thomas.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

*THANK YOU!*

From a Sixers fan, I really thank the Danny Ainge and the Celtics organization for re-signing Mark Blount. I was afraid that the Sixers were going to sign him, and he'd basically tank it for the duration of the contract.

Yes, I know the Sixers offered a contract that overpays Brian Skinner, but missing out on Blount means we're still going to start Samuel Dalembert.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Personally, I feel they overpaid him, but to even get a low-post presence makes this deal a sucess. Six years is certainly a tad excess. Like Big John said, I wouldn't want him earning just under nine million in the fifth year of his contract at the age of 33, but this deal helps the Celtics immediate future. If we could move Pierce, Walter, Jones, or one of our rookie shooting guards, we could clear roster space to sign someone who adds depth like Darius Songalia. ESPN link


----------



## theBirdman (Jun 20, 2003)

I think it was a good move. 6 years is a bit much, but we have the possibility to trade him if we want. That is better than nothing. 
And Skinner was offered 25 mil for 5 years. That is a good deal for Philly!


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: THANK YOU!*



> Originally posted by <b>PhillyPhanatic</b>!
> From a Sixers fan, I really thank the Danny Ainge and the Celtics organization for re-signing Mark Blount. I was afraid that the Sixers were going to sign him, and he'd basically tank it for the duration of the contract.
> 
> Yes, I know the Sixers offered a contract that overpays Brian Skinner, but missing out on Blount means we're still going to start Samuel Dalembert.


You wouldn't want to see 2 very good defensive Centers on the court at the same time?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

And the rumor now switches that we've signed Blount to the MLE for 6 years and another one says we've signed Blount for 4 years for 40 million. :/


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> And the rumor now switches that we've signed Blount to the MLE for 6 years and another one says we've signed Blount for 4 years for 40 million. :/


Four years, forty million? Where did you hear that. ESPN had a quote with Blount's agent and it usually is credible so I think six years, forty-one million is the correct assumption. OT: 1700th Post.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

I really did not see this move coming at all. I didn't think Blount would ever be back here. Who knew?

And if you think that he's getting too much money, look at what Adonal Foyle is getting from the Warriors and compare his stats with Blount's. The guy is a career backup and not a very good one, and he got 5 years and 41 mil from the Warriors. Blount's pratically a bargain compared to that guy.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Celts11</b>!
> 
> 
> Four years, forty million? Where did you hear that. ESPN had a quote with Blount's agent and it usually is credible so I think six years, forty-one million is the correct assumption. OT: 1700th Post.


FSN NE said both of that.

EDIT: I agree agoo, I think Blount is overpaid but when you compare him to what some guys have been getting these past few days, especially Foyle, Blount should get at least that and more.


----------



## SamIam (Jun 1, 2004)

This reminds me of when Pitino signed Battie and Potopenko to long term deals because at the time they really had no choice. However, Blount is a much better risk than those two because he is 7 foot, healthy, can run the floor and has improved. His performance against Jermaine O'Neal in the playoffs was worthy of notice and a sign of how good he could be next year.

However, it basically ties the Celtics hands for another 3-4 years barring a trade of Pierce or La Frenz. It means in the near term the Celtics are dependent on La Frenz and Blount to be an effective enough front court to allow SF and guard positions to carry team. It also means that the hope of the franchise is squarely on the development of Jefferson and/or Perkins into star players.

But what else could they do? Let Blount walk and hope for lottery land next year?


----------



## amd pwr (Jun 24, 2003)

I hope the celtic let Mihm walk cause I really want to see Perkins get some playing time.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Man, this hit me like a rock from behind a hedge, I didn't think we'd even make a real attempt at resigning Mark. I think his contract is too much and too long for a guy with hands of stone, but looking at the current market it seems that's what it is for big guys with ANY ability so I'm not upset about it. At least he trys hard. I do hope Perk still gets minutes though. The 6 years was a kind of shock and the trade kicker kind of binds our hands some but whatever. It's not a Raef contract!


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>whiterhino</b>!
> Man, this hit me like a rock from behind a hedge, I didn't think we'd even make a real attempt at resigning Mark. I think his contract is too much and too long for a guy with hands of stone, but looking at the current market it seems that's what it is for big guys with ANY ability so I'm not upset about it. At least he trys hard. I do hope Perk still gets minutes though. The 6 years was a kind of shock and the trade kicker kind of binds our hands some but whatever. It's not a Raef contract!


The best thing about Mark is that he works very hard and is never injured. I don't remember the last time he missed a game or two because of injury.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Thanks for the jinx, aqua*

While you're at it, care to speculate about the injury futures of Pierce, LaFrentz or Big Al?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Thanks for the jinx, aqua*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> While you're at it, care to speculate about the injury futures of Pierce, LaFrentz or Big Al?


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>whiterhino</b>!
> I think his contract is too much and too long for a guy with hands of stone


Blount had problems catching the ball the first half of the season, but I think it was because he was never expecting anyone to pass it to him. In the second half, he was actually a lot better at catching and finishing around the basket. If he knows he's going to be involved in plays, I think he's fine. I think now he knows that his teammates will be looking for him.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

For the money he's gonna be making, he BETTER expect to be getting the ball. 
Any guesses on how long Ricky will be in Boston, I just have a feeling his days are numbered now with Mark's signing, don't know why, just a gut feeling.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> 
> Blount had problems catching the ball the first half of the season, but I think it was because he was never expecting anyone to pass it to him. In the second half, he was actually a lot better at catching and finishing around the basket. If he knows he's going to be involved in plays, I think he's fine. I think now he knows that his teammates will be looking for him.


Good point, if you guys remember as soon as Blount got a few plays for him he started to really play well.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

I have always liked Mark and think he is a decent player but with Mihm getting an offer of 3.9 milllion, and Blount is getting almost 7 while we already have a center in Raef overpaidf Lafrentz I do not get this signing. We have so many holes we need to fill and a center (who most likely will be a back up to wonder knee's IF he can finally earn his money then this makes no sense.

Mark went for the money and who can blame him.

We are going to have the same team as last year plus 4 new rookies.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Good Point, last laugh*

I hope somebody offers Mihm $4 million or more and he takes it. 

Although our team will be a little different than last year:

1) We have a better coach
2) We should have more of Raef
3) Perkins and Banks have a year under their belt
4) We have Chucky for a full season
5) Jiri has a full season under his belt
6) We have BIG AL!!!

I am optimistic!


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Good Point, last laugh*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> I hope somebody offers Mihm $4 million or more and he takes it.
> 
> Although our team will be a little different than last year:
> ...


Agreed. Although it is the same team, we are looking at different results.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

I'm pretty sure you can take back a qualifying offer. Also, a QO means that if no one else signs him to an offer sheet, he's ours for 3.9 mil next season. I say, why not take a shot on a young, seven footer with talent? There aren't many of them sitting around the NBA.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*You're right*

You don't want to pass on young 7-footers with talent. By the way, who are you talking about?


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

Thats good- he got a fair contract.

There would have definately been a soft spot had he left.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Marcus13</b>!
> Thats good- he got a fair contract.
> 
> There would have definately been a soft spot had he left.


I actually think we may have signed him because he's a servicable big man which is a commodity in a trade so I won't be surprised if he's a peice in a trade I see coming anytime before the season....Danny won't start the season with the same team he had last year that played so awful and a group of rooks....there will be a shakeup....Mihm could be a peice of that.


----------

