Offseason Cap situation

[100proof]

And there is always trade Kemba as well............................................................

[Smitty731]

Highly unlikely either Hayward or Kanter opts out. Hayward will take his $34M for next year and then see what he can get on the open market in a much better environment in 2021, with re-signing in Boston at that point the heavy favorite. By all accounts, the Haywards have no desire to move their young family again. But he's also not passing up $34M, nor should he.

Kanter won't touch $5M this offseason. None of the cap space teams would sign him and no one else is giving him more than half of their MLE. Plus, he LOVES Boston and has wanted to be there for a while now. He's not going anywhere.

Also, the current "favorite" for the cap is that the cap stays at ~$109M, but that the luxury tax line goes up to the projected ~139M. The reason being is that this doesn't unfairly penalize teams tax-wise, but also keeps the cap more in line with the new circumstances.

FWIW, I expect the Celtics to consolidate some of the draft picks, possibly lose Wanamaker, elevate Waters to a standard deal, bring back Tacko on a Two-Way and then rookie or two come in at the very end of the roster.

It's not really about money for Boston, but roster spots. During the hiatus, I wrote a long series for CelticsBlog about it if anyone wants to look it up.

I'm sure Hayward would consider opting out of $34.2M just like Horford opted out of $30M to sign for a little less with Philly. If the future years are enough money that he thinks it's worth locking in now.

If we offered Hayward a deal that pays him $30M in '20-21, $32.4M in '21-22 and $34.8M in '22-23, I bet he'd opt out. Sure, he's taking a paycut in '20-21. But I think the future years would be high enough vs what he would expect to sign for that it's worth it. I doubt he's getting offers starting at $32.4M next year.

If the tax line stays at $139M vs flat at $132M, then this type of deal becomes very feasible IMO. The lower the tax line, the more we'd need to slash Hayward's salary to stay under, even with a Kanter/Poirier salary dump deal. Since raises calculate off that first year salary, the lower you make it the tougher it gets to offer enough in the out years to justify it on his end. At a $132M tax line, not sure it will work unless he really loves it here. At $139M, I think it's very, very likely something can be worked out.

Based on his Tenure in Boston, is he worth more than Jaylen? How would some players feel if on multiple occasions they got to the ECFs without Gordo only to have him get a new contract worth MORE than what you are being paid....AGAIN.

That's not how it works. Guys understand that. There is a max salary structure in place. Brown knows he's signed for essentially his max (and will be even closer when all his bonuses are finalized). He's not going to upset about Hayward making more when Brown made the most he could.

Also, I can tell you that Boston doesn't have those guys anymore who are worried about how much guys make or how much guys play. They aren't that kind of group.

[BK_2020]

Hayward is a borderline All-Star in his prime coming off an excellent season. I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he picks up his option. Maybe he doesn't get the full 35%, but I don't see him getting less than what Tobias Harris or Kemba Walker got in 2019, especially in a bad FA market that has guys like FVV and Gallinari as the prize.
Maybe fans can convince themselves Hayward should take a discount because he's already made a lot of money and he got injured. I don't think Hayward goes for that line of reasoning.

[zoyathedestroya]

Hayward is a borderline All-Star in his prime coming off an excellent season. I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he picks up his option. Maybe he doesn't get the full 35%, but I don't see him getting less than what Tobias Harris or Kemba Walker got in 2019, especially in a bad FA market that has guys like FVV and Gallinari as the prize.
Maybe fans can convince themselves Hayward should take a discount because he's already made a lot of money and he got injured. I don't think Hayward goes for that line of reasoning.

From which team? Who has cap space? Would he want to play for Atlanta or Charlotte or New York?

[djFan71]

Also, the current "favorite" for the cap is that the cap stays at ~$109M, but that the luxury tax line goes up to the projected ~139M. The reason being is that this doesn't unfairly penalize teams tax-wise, but also keeps the cap more in line with the new circumstances.

Great insider tidbit, Smitty! Lux tax at $139M would be huge for BOS. Hopefully, it just makes it easier to keep guys and not be too far into the tax next year. Maybe just the first tier.

But if they really wanted to, it makes staying under the tax possible even with Gordon at full opt-in $34.1M. Though you'd be hemorrhaging some assets to make it happen: Use 26* to get rid of Kanter, Poirier and pick up Javonte (save the 100k guarantee & cheaper min). Sign another min to get to 14 and you're there. Not ideal, but it works.

* The math might allow it to be 30 instead of 26, but in my versions I was just over at $139.03M. But I was just using a rough vet min # of $1.62M


EDIT: Not advocating this approach at all. Hopefully we act like the contenders we are. But, just noting it's possible.

[BK_2020]

Hayward is a borderline All-Star in his prime coming off an excellent season. I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he picks up his option. Maybe he doesn't get the full 35%, but I don't see him getting less than what Tobias Harris or Kemba Walker got in 2019, especially in a bad FA market that has guys like FVV and Gallinari as the prize.
Maybe fans can convince themselves Hayward should take a discount because he's already made a lot of money and he got injured. I don't think Hayward goes for that line of reasoning.

From which team? Who has cap space? Would he want to play for Atlanta or Charlotte or New York?

Yes? Do you think Hayward sees playing for BOS as worth $10-30 mil. premium? I don't.

[100proof]

Hayward is a borderline All-Star in his prime coming off an excellent season. I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he picks up his option. Maybe he doesn't get the full 35%, but I don't see him getting less than what Tobias Harris or Kemba Walker got in 2019, especially in a bad FA market that has guys like FVV and Gallinari as the prize.
Maybe fans can convince themselves Hayward should take a discount because he's already made a lot of money and he got injured. I don't think Hayward goes for that line of reasoning.

From which team? Who has cap space? Would he want to play for Atlanta or Charlotte or New York?

I think Atlanta is a great fit for him personally.

[MagicBagley18]

And there is always trade Kemba as well............................................................

Never gonna happen. Not only is it terrible from an optics stand point around the league but also kemba had a good season here despite his playoff struggles which were huge.

[djFan71]

Spoiler:

100Proof, looks like you pulled your rookie scale numbers from here:

https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/rookie_scale/2021

Rookies always sign for 120% of this value, so a better estimate would be to multiple your numbers by 120%.

Also, I believe this is a scale based on the cap. So this is based off of the old $115M cap projection. If the cap stays flat to 2019-20, I believe the rookie scale would be about he same as this past year.

https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/rookie_scale/2020

So using the baseline there and then taking 120%, I have our picks costing the following:

#14 Pick 3,458,400
#26 2,035,800
#30 1,936,440
#47 898,310 (rookie minimum)

Definitely should take 120% of the scale numbers since that's what they all sign for. Not 100% sure on what exact rookie scale baseline would be though.

I absolutely did get the numbers from there.
It is an estimation of the cap situation and it is still pretty fluid right now.

120% isn't going to change, though. Definitely worth using the #s hugepatsfan provided.

I didn't know about #47, though. Can we sign 2nds and UDFAs for that little a cap hit? I assume Waters for that too (if he agrees as an RFA and doesn't get a bigger offer)? If so, that makes filling the last roster spot or 2 a lot easier when you're trying to duck. Like my post above you could use 30 instead of 26 easily if you bring on 47 instead of a vet min.

[100proof]

And there is always trade Kemba as well............................................................

Never gonna happen. Not only is it terrible from an optics stand point around the league but also kemba had a good season here despite his playoff struggles which were huge.

I would never say never, but I do agree with what you posted.

Seeing Marcus' dramatic improvement this season and if Hayward was a guarantee to resign, I could see Danny listening to offers, I could also see other GMs asking. For example Dallas really wanted Kemba, perhaps they ask in the offseason,.

[hugepatsfan]

Highly unlikely either Hayward or Kanter opts out. Hayward will take his $34M for next year and then see what he can get on the open market in a much better environment in 2021, with re-signing in Boston at that point the heavy favorite. By all accounts, the Haywards have no desire to move their young family again. But he's also not passing up $34M, nor should he.

Kanter won't touch $5M this offseason. None of the cap space teams would sign him and no one else is giving him more than half of their MLE. Plus, he LOVES Boston and has wanted to be there for a while now. He's not going anywhere.

Also, the current "favorite" for the cap is that the cap stays at ~$109M, but that the luxury tax line goes up to the projected ~139M. The reason being is that this doesn't unfairly penalize teams tax-wise, but also keeps the cap more in line with the new circumstances.

FWIW, I expect the Celtics to consolidate some of the draft picks, possibly lose Wanamaker, elevate Waters to a standard deal, bring back Tacko on a Two-Way and then rookie or two come in at the very end of the roster.

It's not really about money for Boston, but roster spots. During the hiatus, I wrote a long series for CelticsBlog about it if anyone wants to look it up.

I'm sure Hayward would consider opting out of $34.2M just like Horford opted out of $30M to sign for a little less with Philly. If the future years are enough money that he thinks it's worth locking in now.

If we offered Hayward a deal that pays him $30M in '20-21, $32.4M in '21-22 and $34.8M in '22-23, I bet he'd opt out. Sure, he's taking a paycut in '20-21. But I think the future years would be high enough vs what he would expect to sign for that it's worth it. I doubt he's getting offers starting at $32.4M next year.

If the tax line stays at $139M vs flat at $132M, then this type of deal becomes very feasible IMO. The lower the tax line, the more we'd need to slash Hayward's salary to stay under, even with a Kanter/Poirier salary dump deal. Since raises calculate off that first year salary, the lower you make it the tougher it gets to offer enough in the out years to justify it on his end. At a $132M tax line, not sure it will work unless he really loves it here. At $139M, I think it's very, very likely something can be worked out.

The big difference is that there isn't a Philly there for Hayward this offseason. Philly was a good team that had cap space. All of the teams with cap space are bad teams.

And guys don't opt out to take so little less in the first year. Also, Boston is probably paying the tax no matter what next season. I think they're more like to offer Hayward a front-loaded contract, where it declines each season, if he was to opt out. Which, I am fairly certain isn't happening.

We are his Philly. Just like Philly was willing to overpay Horford I think we would be willing to do that type of deal for Hayward if it was structured such that we dipped the tax for a year and thus repeater rates down the line.

[Captain_Caveman]

Great info from Smitty on the cap/tax. My understanding is that to accomplish that, the backloaded national TV money will have to be brought forward, which could leave the cap relatively flat for several years. I imagine that several non-taxpayers will fight the $139m threshold, but there were several teams set to go over the reduced figure, so they probably won't get enough backing if they try to fight it.

[BostonCouchGM]

2021 is an all-time bad FA class. 2022 FA class is ridiculous. I really wouldn't be surprised no matter what he does. Opting in gets him $34 million but also limits his next contract. He won't be able to get it here so he's essentially committing to playing here for one more year than uprooting his family. Opting out will allow him to sign somewhere for 5 years and give his family stability and take advantage of the weak FA market. Opting out and signing with us seems impossible because how can we afford him AND Tatum? Good thing Danny had such a strong draft in 2019 and surely will have another great draft coming up, as we have a stable full of extremely talented young guys comping at the bit to become starters or stars...oh wait

[3D Chess]

Good thing Danny had such a strong draft in 2019 and surely will have another great draft coming up, as we have a stable full of extremely talented young guys comping at the bit to become starters or stars...oh wait

Tell me which team has a stable full of extremely talented young guys sitting on their bench, then tell me how many of them made even the second round of the playoffs.

Our extremely talented young guys ARE stars - that's how you want it to be.

[hugepatsfan]

My concern with the tax isn't what it means for '20-21. I don't think what we have is exorbitant. My concern is down the line, especially considering how if we stay over the tax this year and keep Hayward long term we're locked into the tax in '21-22 and then repeater in '22-23.

If Wyc says no to the repeater tax that comes with Hayward staying long-term, then you really have to consider things. Because with Tatum's extension kicking in we don't even really get savings by letting him walk. Then there are also player raises built into all the other contracts. If Wyc says we have to avoid repeater rates, we need to get under the tax in one of the next 3 years. And doing it in '21-22 or '22-23 is going to require a lot of penny pinching even in addition to letting Hayward walk. Especially if the cap is lowered in future years to prevent as much of a drop next year. The sacrifices it takes to get under the tax now pale in comparison to what it'd take in one of the next 2 years. So if Wyc prohibits Ainge from getting into repeater rates then it's really in our best interests to tackle that issue right now, because it only gets harder down the line.

And maybe Wyc is willing to pay that. I bet he probably is. BUT, what if that cost of keeping Hayward long-term puts us in a spot where Wyc draws the line at keeping Theis for what will likely be full MLE type money next year? What if at a repeater rate penalty he won't sign off on using the tax payers MLE in '22-23 but he would at a normal rate? You're still likely to see ome penny pinching down the line because we jsut have an expensive team.

And there's a downside to getting under as well. I know I've suggested new deals for Hayward that lower '20-21 cap hit but definitely inflate his cap numbers down the line. That pushes the tax bill higher in future years and might wipe out the benefit of getting under in '20-21.

At the end of the day, and I'm sure our front office will, you really have to look at the bigger picture. You can't just consider 2020-21 from a financial standpoint. It seemed we were in good shape with a $139M tax line o hopefully that sticks. Realistic moves can be made to dip below the tax there and that should set us up in good shape to keep main pieces down the line. But if that fact changes, then we just need to make sure we've adjusted to something that is feasible long term in the new environment.

[MagicBagley18]

My concern with the tax isn't what it means for '20-21. I don't think what we have is exorbitant. My concern is down the line, especially considering how if we stay over the tax this year and keep Hayward long term we're locked into the tax in '21-22 and then repeater in '22-23.

If Wyc says no to the repeater tax that comes with Hayward staying long-term, then you really have to consider things. Because with Tatum's extension kicking in we don't even really get savings by letting him walk. Then there are also player raises built into all the other contracts. If Wyc says we have to avoid repeater rates, we need to get under the tax in one of the next 3 years. And doing it in '21-22 or '22-23 is going to require a lot of penny pinching even in addition to letting Hayward walk. Especially if the cap is lowered in future years to prevent as much of a drop next year. The sacrifices it takes to get under the tax now pale in comparison to what it'd take in one of the next 2 years. So if Wyc prohibits Ainge from getting into repeater rates then it's really in our best interests to tackle that issue right now, because it only gets harder down the line.

And maybe Wyc is willing to pay that. I bet he probably is. BUT, what if that cost of keeping Hayward long-term puts us in a spot where Wyc draws the line at keeping Theis for what will likely be full MLE type money next year? What if at a repeater rate penalty he won't sign off on using the tax payers MLE in '22-23 but he would at a normal rate? You're still likely to see ome penny pinching down the line because we jsut have an expensive team.

And there's a downside to getting under as well. I know I've suggested new deals for Hayward that lower '20-21 cap hit but definitely inflate his cap numbers down the line. That pushes the tax bill higher in future years and might wipe out the benefit of getting under in '20-21.

At the end of the day, and I'm sure our front office will, you really have to look at the bigger picture. You can't just consider 2020-21 from a financial standpoint. It seemed we were in good shape with a $139M tax line o hopefully that sticks. Realistic moves can be made to dip below the tax there and that should set us up in good shape to keep main pieces down the line. But if that fact changes, then we just need to make sure we've adjusted to something that is feasible long term in the new environment.

I’m sure mike Zarren will I wouldn’t over think it

[captain green]

Couple of things I see
1: green contract isn't guaranteed so he is gone.
2: semi contract too cheap not to keep
3: Hayward and kanter opting in
4: Brad has bird rights likely signed again.
5: have to trade poirer
6: edwarfs contract is cheap so I'd imagine were keeping him
7: I actually see ainge selling picks if no trades happen
8: we are paying the tax. It's not easy to get out of due to kemba

[Smitty731]

Spoiler:

100Proof, looks like you pulled your rookie scale numbers from here:

https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/rookie_scale/2021

Rookies always sign for 120% of this value, so a better estimate would be to multiple your numbers by 120%.

Also, I believe this is a scale based on the cap. So this is based off of the old $115M cap projection. If the cap stays flat to 2019-20, I believe the rookie scale would be about he same as this past year.

https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/rookie_scale/2020

So using the baseline there and then taking 120%, I have our picks costing the following:

#14 Pick 3,458,400
#26 2,035,800
#30 1,936,440
#47 898,310 (rookie minimum)

Definitely should take 120% of the scale numbers since that's what they all sign for. Not 100% sure on what exact rookie scale baseline would be though.

I absolutely did get the numbers from there.
It is an estimation of the cap situation and it is still pretty fluid right now.

120% isn't going to change, though. Definitely worth using the #s hugepatsfan provided.

I didn't know about #47, though. Can we sign 2nds and UDFAs for that little a cap hit? I assume Waters for that too (if he agrees as an RFA and doesn't get a bigger offer)? If so, that makes filling the last roster spot or 2 a lot easier when you're trying to duck. Like my post above you could use 30 instead of 26 easily if you bring on 47 instead of a vet min.

If the cap settles at the current ~$109M, then the salary for a player with 0 years of experience can be as low as $898,310. That's also the cap hit. If that plyers is undrafted however, the tax hit is the same as the 2-year veteran minimum of $1,620,564.

Waters' minimum, if he's on a standard contract, is $1,445,697.

There is very little chance the Celtics will be worried about $500-700K, if they are already paying the tax. That sort of cheapness is what agents and players notice. Look at Giannis. He's not happy that the Bucks got cheap. The Celtics aren't going to risk sending any sort of the same message to any of their players. Not when they are a title contender.

[Smitty731]

And there is always trade Kemba as well............................................................

There isn't.

[reload141]

Spoiler:

I absolutely did get the numbers from there.
It is an estimation of the cap situation and it is still pretty fluid right now.

120% isn't going to change, though. Definitely worth using the #s hugepatsfan provided.

I didn't know about #47, though. Can we sign 2nds and UDFAs for that little a cap hit? I assume Waters for that too (if he agrees as an RFA and doesn't get a bigger offer)? If so, that makes filling the last roster spot or 2 a lot easier when you're trying to duck. Like my post above you could use 30 instead of 26 easily if you bring on 47 instead of a vet min.

If the cap settles at the current ~$109M, then the salary for a player with 0 years of experience can be as low as $898,310. That's also the cap hit. If that plyers is undrafted however, the tax hit is the same as the 2-year veteran minimum of $1,620,564.

Waters' minimum, if he's on a standard contract, is $1,445,697.

There is very little chance the Celtics will be worried about $500-700K, if they are already paying the tax. That sort of cheapness is what agents and players notice. Look at Giannis. He's not happy that the Bucks got cheap. The Celtics aren't going to risk sending any sort of the same message to any of their players. Not when they are a title contender.

Love the info on the cap Smitty, keep up the good work!