Celtics Sold, for $6.1B – (New Owners: Chisholm as Governor, Wyc as Alternate/CEO)

[Fencer reregistered]

Sounds like they really do plan to get under the second apron soon.

Read on Twitter

[31to6]

I don’t buy that it’s the basketball penalties. No MLE. Can’t trade your pick 7 years out (how **** arbitrary is that?). Picks eventually get sent to the end of the 1st round, where we want them to be anyways.

Big whoop to all that, I say.

If they manage to salary dump Jrue, fine. I won’t like it but I’ll understand. If they have to do more, it should be JB outbound, imo — though I don’t understand how you don’t bring back matching salary and therefore how you’re making luxury tax progress.

Jayson, Derrick, KP should be the core, if Chisholm and Co aren’t going to pay for the current roster

[165bows]

I don’t buy that it’s the basketball penalties. No MLE. Can’t trade your pick 7 years out (how **** arbitrary is that?). Picks eventually get sent to the end of the 1st round, where we want them to be anyways.

Big whoop to all that, I say.

If they manage to salary dump Jrue, fine. I won’t like it but I’ll understand. If they have to do more, it should be JB outbound, imo — though I don’t understand how you don’t bring back matching salary and therefore how you’re making luxury tax progress.

Jayson, Derrick, KP should be the core, if Chisholm and Co aren’t going to pay for the current roster

1000% this sounds like bull**** to me, oh wow can’t have a good team every year we might get a bad draft pick.

[ConstableGeneva]

I don’t buy it either. It is about money and they’re prepping the fans for the inevitable.

[Gant]

Here are the major second apron restrictions, which greatly curtail talent acquisition through all three methods: free agency, trade, and the draft.

Even if that's something a GM could choose to ignore and spending is no issue, the frozen draft pick seven years out is the final killer. You could have a bottom three record by then and be locked into the 30th pick. Ignoring that is extremely high risk.

As I understand it, if you keep staying above the line, you'd be stacking these future untradable 30th picks year after year. Imagine ending up with a bad team in that position.

Even Steve Ballmer, who's worth about 117 billion and could easily pay a few hundred million in penalties out of petty cash, had to cave to reality and shed some salary.


The second apron restrictions:

—Can’t acquire a player via sign-and-trade

—Can’t use mid-level or bi-annual exception in free agency

—Can’t sign a player who was making more than mid-level via buyout

—Can’t aggregate two or more player salaries in a trade

—Can’t send out cash in a trade

—A future first round pick is frozen seven years out (unable to be traded) a team is in second apron.

—Frozen first round picks could be moved to end of first round if a team stay above second apron in three of five years

[ConstableGeneva]

When owner spoke about aligning his goals with the team’s/Brad’s… getting under apron(s)/tax would be hitting two birds with one stone. More flexibility with team building for Brad and less operational cost for the owners. Bottomline, our roster is gonna see some change. By how much they cut the salary, stay tuned! We’re only 3-4 months away. From the owners standpoint, it is about the money. Give me a break, Wyc lol.

[ConstableGeneva]

As long as Brad stays on as SBOBO and Jayson isn't traded/doesn't ask out, Cs will be fine. I really believe that. We may need to hit on a George Hill for the pick that became Kawhi type of trade to further extend our window. Or hit on a 2nd that turns out to be the next Draymond or a late first that becomes the next Butler. Carrying this high of a payroll was never going to be a long term deal.

[brackdan70]

Here are the major second apron restrictions, which greatly curtail talent acquisition through all three methods: free agency, trade, and the draft.

Even if that's something a GM could choose to ignore and spending is no issue, the frozen draft pick seven years out is the final killer. You could have a bottom three record by then and be locked into the 30th pick. Ignoring that is extremely high risk.

As I understand it, if you keep staying above the line, you'd be stacking these future untradable 30th picks year after year. Imagine ending up with a bad team in that position.

Even Steve Ballmer, who's worth about 117 billion and could easily pay a few hundred million in penalties out of petty cash, had to cave to reality and shed some salary.


The second apron restrictions:

—Can’t acquire a player via sign-and-trade

—Can’t use mid-level or bi-annual exception in free agency

—Can’t sign a player who was making more than mid-level via buyout

—Can’t aggregate two or more player salaries in a trade

—Can’t send out cash in a trade

—A future first round pick is frozen seven years out (unable to be traded) a team is in second apron.

—Frozen first round picks could be moved to end of first round if a team stay above second apron in three of five years

Yeah I think that last one is the killer and I am not sure I totally understand it. But if that pick gets frozen at 30, well you better be winning championships or at least contenders. So yeah I can see teams doing what they can to avoid that 3 in 5.
But I also think the repeater tax is really the harshest penalty and that Wyc was half full of BS saying it’s not the tax.

[31to6]

Sounds like homies here know what it is.
Celtics to be sold to another fan with medium-sized pockets.
The mega rich didn't swoop in to save us from salary slashing.
And: fine. That's a medium outcome.
BUT I'M TELLING YOU IF THEY DON'T BRING AL BACK WE MARCH

[165bows]

When owner spoke about aligning his goals with the team’s/Brad’s… getting under apron(s)/tax would be hitting two birds with one stone. More flexibility with team building for Brad and less operational cost for the owners. Bottomline, our roster is gonna see some change. By how much they cut the salary, stay tuned! We’re only 3-4 months away. From the owners standpoint, it is about the money. Give me a break, Wyc lol.

Right there are plenty of good rationales here but it would take five minutes to find all the 2031 unprotected first rounders teams happily traded (and would have done way more if not more entertaining from doing so) so the idea that teams would never jeopardize a pick that far out is laughable.

At first glance it’s kind of a slap in the face the reasoning is so farcical but it’s also prob the best we are going to get so there’s that.

[31to6]

Chisholm said he loves Forsberg and Abby, and Leon Poe, said he's all about banners, and rambled about the glory of the Boston Celtics for a day.
Now Wyc -- who is happy to 'stay on' for two years -- is laying the foundation for needing to cut payroll.
Meanwhile Scheierman is getting a real audition for a rotation role next season, and this team had better be locked in this spring because it's as good a chance as they'll get!

[ConstableGeneva]

When owner spoke about aligning his goals with the team’s/Brad’s… getting under apron(s)/tax would be hitting two birds with one stone. More flexibility with team building for Brad and less operational cost for the owners. Bottomline, our roster is gonna see some change. By how much they cut the salary, stay tuned! We’re only 3-4 months away. From the owners standpoint, it is about the money. Give me a break, Wyc lol.

Right there are plenty of good rationales here but it would take five minutes to find all the 2031 unprotected first rounders teams happily traded (and would have done way more if not more entertaining from doing so) so the idea that teams would never jeopardize a pick that far out is laughable.

At first glance it’s kind of a slap in the face the reasoning is so farcical but it’s also prob the best we are going to get so there’s that.

From PR standpoint, "we're doing this for flexibility and sustainability" sounds like it's for the good of the team so it's more easily digestible for the fans without getting down to the dirty details. Fans don't want to hear about owners tightening purses. You almost always want to present the basketball reasons for doing something to minimize the backlash.

[brackdan70]

The way I understand the CBA…which may be wrong.
The stringent 2nd apron penalties did not kick in until the current year. If that’s true then this is the first year that counts as them being over the second apron as far as the clock for 3 out of 5 to freeze that future first. Am I right or wrong on this?

[sam_I_am]

I think trading Jaylen Brown is the obvious play and I’m a ‘Stan’. His age makes him a perfect get for teams on the rise that need a veteran star - teams like Houston, Detroit, OKC(if they flame out) etc. His age, injury history, and style also make him someone that could possibly start to decline like Smart.

Tatum has shown he can excel with role players now with his emerging elite playmaking. Obviously, there are still some questions about his leadership in the playoffs and his ability to be ‘the guy’ like Jokic and SGA without a wing man like Brown. I personally don’t think those worries are legit.

I don’t want to trade Brown but it is the obvious play given the supermax issue. I believe the trade would help even if for matching salaries because the supermax will always go up as a % whereas others would not. Trading Sam and Jrue would have to be salary dumps or for expiring deals to help.

[Gant]

Going over the second apron, even for 2 years is doable and not even a problem. Teams just have to avoid the 3 in 5. All teams do. No team can perpetually be in that seven-year-away draft penalty.

I think the Celtics are only over for one year so far, which means if they won the title again, they'd be tempted to let it ride one more season, but after that they'd have to stay under for years in a row.

Horford won't make enough to be the issue. If he wants to keep playing, they'll have him back.

They'll likely have to move out one substantial salary this offseason or next, plus possibly Hauser depending on other factors. It won't be Tatum, and highly doubtful it's White. Holiday could be the one due to age, or Brown because of salary. If it's Brown, a lower priced talent could come back in return.

This is offseason talk though.

[165bows]

The way I understand the CBA…which may be wrong.
The stringent 2nd apron penalties did not kick in until the current year. If that’s true then this is the first year that counts as them being over the second apron as far as the clock for 3 out of 5 to freeze that future first. Am I right or wrong on this?

Idk which but that’s a big thing in interpreting what they’ve said in terms of next year.

[165bows]

I think trading Jaylen Brown is the obvious play and I’m a ‘Stan’. His age makes him a perfect get for teams on the rise that need a veteran star - teams like Houston, Detroit, OKC(if they flame out) etc. His age, injury history, and style also make him someone that could possibly start to decline like Smart.

Tatum has shown he can excel with role players now with his emerging elite playmaking. Obviously, there are still some questions about his leadership in the playoffs and his ability to be ‘the guy’ like Jokic and SGA without a wing man like Brown. I personally don’t think those worries are legit.

I don’t want to trade Brown but it is the obvious play given the supermax issue. I believe the trade would help even if for matching salaries because the supermax will always go up as a % whereas others would not. Trading Sam and Jrue would have to be salary dumps or for expiring deals to help.

Right to actually get under they need to reduce 20-30M total.

[165bows]

Going over the second apron, even for 2 years is doable and not even a problem. Teams just have to avoid the 3 in 5. All teams do. No team can perpetually be in that seven-year-away draft penalty.

I think the Celtics are only over for one year so far, which means if they won the title again, they'd be tempted to let it ride one more season, but after that they'd have to stay under for years in a row.

Horford won't make enough to be the issue. If he wants to keep playing, they'll have him back.

They'll likely have to move out one substantial salary this offseason or next, plus possibly Hauser depending on other factors. It won't be Tatum, and highly doubtful it's White. Holiday could be the one due to age, or Brown because of salary. If it's Brown, a lower priced talent could come back in return.

This is offseason talk though.

I get what you are saying but there are multiple teams down multiple future unprotected picks deep in the future. Not saying that’s a good strategy but teams do a ton of it and had to actually be prohibited from inside they insisted on doing it to their own detriment.

So the “no team” language doesn’t hold water and is the big tell.

[165bows]

When owner spoke about aligning his goals with the team’s/Brad’s… getting under apron(s)/tax would be hitting two birds with one stone. More flexibility with team building for Brad and less operational cost for the owners. Bottomline, our roster is gonna see some change. By how much they cut the salary, stay tuned! We’re only 3-4 months away. From the owners standpoint, it is about the money. Give me a break, Wyc lol.

Right there are plenty of good rationales here but it would take five minutes to find all the 2031 unprotected first rounders teams happily traded (and would have done way more if not more entertaining from doing so) so the idea that teams would never jeopardize a pick that far out is laughable.

At first glance it’s kind of a slap in the face the reasoning is so farcical but it’s also prob the best we are going to get so there’s that.

From PR standpoint, "we're doing this for flexibility and sustainability" sounds like it's for the good of the team so it's more easily digestible for the fans without getting down to the dirty details. Fans don't want to hear about owners tightening purses. You almost always want to present the basketball reasons for doing something to minimize the backlash.

Exactly this is just the least bad way to handle the situation

[Gant]

Going over the second apron, even for 2 years is doable and not even a problem. Teams just have to avoid the 3 in 5. All teams do. No team can perpetually be in that seven-year-away draft penalty.

I think the Celtics are only over for one year so far, which means if they won the title again, they'd be tempted to let it ride one more season, but after that they'd have to stay under for years in a row.

Horford won't make enough to be the issue. If he wants to keep playing, they'll have him back.

They'll likely have to move out one substantial salary this offseason or next, plus possibly Hauser depending on other factors. It won't be Tatum, and highly doubtful it's White. Holiday could be the one due to age, or Brown because of salary. If it's Brown, a lower priced talent could come back in return.

This is offseason talk though.

I get what you are saying but there are multiple teams down multiple future unprotected picks deep in the future. Not saying that’s a good strategy but teams do a ton of it and had to actually be prohibited from inside they insisted on doing it to their own detriment.

So the “no team” language doesn’t hold water and is the big tell.

That's a fair point, but those teams traded their picks to get a valuable player. The Celtics already traded for their current players, and now they'd "trade" more picks just to keep them.

That may be even be worth it, but it's much more risky than, for example, trading the 2028 pick swap for Derrick White. Tatum will be 30 in 2028, and the team will still be good, which means the pick won't be worth much. But 7 years from now Tatum will be 34 and Brown will 35. Who knows where the team will be then?

Dropping the 2033 pick to #30 would be a certainty; and you get nothing additional back for it.

Any way you cut it, tough decisions have to be made. The decision to keep the team whole is not an easy one.