I read with interest all the suggestions about trades but it often seems to me that the issue is not the quality of player being sought or the "expendability" of the Celtic player being offered. The issue is what effect does a proposed trade have on longer term flexility in rebuilding the Celts? Flexibility starts with salary space. I would love the Celts to be in the position that Portland was this year. They were able to get Tom Robinson and Robin Lopez for nothing because they had space. Those guys may not be big time game changers but then again they were a lot better than the alternatives and they were free. Let me start with next year's salary commitments in the absence of trades: EXPIRING Humphreys $12 million Bogans $5 million total $17 million RESTRICTED FREE AGENTS Bradley Crawford DRAFT PICKS High lottery $3 million Low first round $1 million TOTAL $4 MILLION COMMITMENTS Rondo $13 million Wallace $10 million Green $9 million Bass $7 million Lee $5.5 million Faverani $2 million Olynyk $2 million Sullinger $1.5 million Brooks $2.2 million Pressey $0.8 million TOTAL $57 MILLION THIS IS ALSO 12 PLAYERS WITH THE PICKS TOTAL WITH PICKS $61 MILLION It is hard for me to imagine that Bradley can be signed for $5 million but let's assume it TOTAL WITH BRADLEY $66 MILLION THAT IS 13 PLAYERS The Celts are already knocking on the door of the luxury tax. Yet many people keep suggesting that there is a trade for Humphreys and Bogans. How? You don't trade expiring for expiring and if you take back essentially equivalent money of $12 to $17 million the Celts are way over the tax limit. And many people want to use the $10 million trade exception held by Celts. How? Again it would take the Celts over the tax limit. The Celts need to dump salary not take on salary. Now if you believe you can swindle some team out of much better players at equal salaries for Wallace, Bass or Lee...good luck. But even such a magical trick doesn't create salary flexibility. My dream is that you can trade them and your first born for expiring contracts. Even if the Celts could in principle compete for first class free agents, it is extremely hard to see how they get far enough under the salary cap. And as Ainge has said, operating under the cap is not so attractive, unless you want to be down there a long time. And if the Celts want to keep Rondo, they will have to pay up in not too long a time. There must be room under the tax for that. May view is that trading our mediocre players for someone else's mediocre players is a story of long term --- well, mediocrity. If we are going to rebuild through the draft -- ok but the Celts also need to dump a good bit of salary to have any flexibility in how assets can be exploited over time in a rebuilding effort.