Parliament10 wrote:Not me; I'd love to stay young. Granted we'll go through growing pains. But none of these players are going to stay young. The 30-somethings have a limited time. Our young Core has much more time to figure it out, while gaining experience.
I get that our guys are young but they are ready to win now, going younger is the wrong way to help them get over the hump IMO. I don't want to punt seasons just because we are young and we think we have a large window with youth.
I agree. We need to do better next season. Championship or bust mentality. We need some vets with tons of playoff experience. If we conitnue to gather youth, and wait for them to gain experience, then that will push us back several years, which ain’t good for our fan base. We need to compete every year. starting next season.
Celtics clearly have a 10+ year vision of staying competitive and plan on sticking to it instead of going all in for a 2-4 year window of a higher peak. They could cash in all the young players, picks, whatever for whichever disgruntled star and go attempt to win a title next year for sure, but then what? If all they do this offseason is churn the backend of the roster, use all their picks, they're still a top-3 Eastern Conference team with the second-best under-25 player in the NBA and probably right back in the ECF assuming normal health. Every year they seem to make a draft pick trade of some kind, either adding a pick or trading for a future pick. There is no roster I would do a 1-for-1 swap with in the NBA if I wanted to compete for the next decade outside of just swapping geographical location with the Lakers who just get an automatic +10 win buff to every season because of location.
I'll take 10 years of 50+ wins and incremental improvements over a 2-4 window of 55+ wins and then back to sucking for a few years, but everyone is different. I know I have a lot more fun when I know the Celtics are going to compete every year instead of having a couple years of high end followed by several seasons where I have to watch Evan Turner be the best player on the team. There is so much luck involved in a title that if that's all you care about, you're gonna have a bad time. We've seen it the last two Finals where the winner is absolutely 100 pct locked in because the opponent loses all of its players to injury in the first couple games. If Miami instead just got injured all at once a week ago, the Celtics would be in the FInals. If Gordon Hayward didn't go up for an alley-oop three years ago, Celtics could potentially have been to the Finals twice now in that span. If Kawhi's shot against Philly bounces out instead of in, maybe Philly goes to the Finals that year and Jimmy Butler remains in Philly after they beat a completely decimated Warriors squad.
Manocad wrote:I have an engineering degree, an exceptionally high IQ, and can point to the exact location/area of any country on an unlabeled globe.
I usually shake losses quicker than this but man that ending doesn't sit right with me! Just can't get over that entire series really. Feels like 12 Steps atm.
NAME ON THE FRONT OF THE JERSEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(!)
Shak_Celts wrote:I usually shake losses quicker than this but man that ending doesn't sit right with me! Just can't get over that entire series really. Feels like 12 Steps atm.
It’s because you know basketball and know the Celtics were a better team.
Absolutely did not deserve to win the series, but that is different than are you better than the heat or not.
djFan71 wrote:Depends on where the line ends up, and other moves. Smitty said they may still increase the lux line to $139M but keep cap flat. That makes it a lot easier to duck under than if it stays flat at $132M.
Danny said they expect to pay tax. But, you could still make moves to be under just to get you the ability to use the full non-tax MLE. Then use it and be right over again (but below the apron) and pay tax.
If that's not the goal, then either just keep Poirier or waive him if you want the roster spot rather than using an asset to dump him.
I believe if we cut or trade Kanter/Semi/Green/Poirier we get to 130 M in salaries. Can we use the Non-MLE then sign our draft picks ?
With all 3 draft picks, lose Kanter and also Poirier, you're at $138.9M when you factor in Yabu, Jackson and Green has $100k guarantee. That's only 13 players. I'm not sure if you have a cap hold for the 14th or not. I know you eventually need to get to 14, but if you only do cap holds thru 13, you're all set. Or, if you could sign the MLE as that 14th and you're $.1M under before the signing is that legit? I dunno. If not you need to make one more move first. Probably with Langford since there isn't enough salary savings on Williamses or Edwards to be had since you have to fill their spot anyways.
Or resigning Hayward to a deal with a slightly lower starting contract, say $30M instead of $34.1 makes it simple, but obviously you now have issue when Tatum's max kicks in due to Hayward's future years.
So, if lux tax is $139M, and: - Hayward opts in at $34.1M. - We let all non-guaranteeds go - Keep all 3 first round picks with their 120% cap holds
That's $145.6M for 15 guys (including Yabu, Jackson, Green $)
If you trade Kanter to POR TPE, maybe get a 2nd back or neutral at best. Maybe it costs a 2nd. You're still just over at $140.6M. You use another 2nd to trade away Poirier. Or.... even stretch him over 3 years and you get to $138.9M.
That's with 13 roster spots. So, no incomplete charge. I believe at that point you can then use the full non-tax MLE. You just need to stay under the apron after that, like anyone using the full MLE.
The downsides are: - Any cost to get rid of Kanter, Poirier. - Can you actually sign someone at the full MLE that is going to better than Kanter next year? Sure there's guys out there, but will they sign with BOS? - You're hard-capped at the apron, so it limits any deadline moves.
Bleeding Green wrote:Celtics clearly have a 10+ year vision of staying competitive and plan on sticking to it instead of going all in for a 2-4 year window of a higher peak. They could cash in all the young players, picks, whatever for whichever disgruntled star and go attempt to win a title next year for sure, but then what? If all they do this offseason is churn the backend of the roster, use all their picks, they're still a top-3 Eastern Conference team with the second-best under-25 player in the NBA and probably right back in the ECF assuming normal health. Every year they seem to make a draft pick trade of some kind, either adding a pick or trading for a future pick. There is no roster I would do a 1-for-1 swap with in the NBA if I wanted to compete for the next decade outside of just swapping geographical location with the Lakers who just get an automatic +10 win buff to every season because of location.
I'll take 10 years of 50+ wins and incremental improvements over a 2-4 window of 55+ wins and then back to sucking for a few years, but everyone is different. I know I have a lot more fun when I know the Celtics are going to compete every year instead of having a couple years of high end followed by several seasons where I have to watch Evan Turner be the best player on the team. There is so much luck involved in a title that if that's all you care about, you're gonna have a bad time. We've seen it the last two Finals where the winner is absolutely 100 pct locked in because the opponent loses all of its players to injury in the first couple games. If Miami instead just got injured all at once a week ago, the Celtics would be in the FInals. If Gordon Hayward didn't go up for an alley-oop three years ago, Celtics could potentially have been to the Finals twice now in that span. If Kawhi's shot against Philly bounces out instead of in, maybe Philly goes to the Finals that year and Jimmy Butler remains in Philly after they beat a completely decimated Warriors squad.
huh? When Danny panicked and got Kemba, thus saddling us with that awful contract, combined with the awful drafting in 2016, 2018 and 2019, he pretty much put us in a 2-4 year window. Yes we hopefully will still have Tatum who is superstar in the making, for now. But will he want to stay, knowing how bad Danny is at drafting and the war chest being gone after this draft anyway? It's not like with so many other young teams that have very talented players developing beyond their star(s). Our cupboard is bare. We can't go forward like this. Kemba has to be moved. Hayward needs to be traded to recoup picks and improve the bench. As is we're pretenders and will stay that way, for our 2-4 year window. After that? It'll be just like Pierce all over again except Danny doesn't have a best friend to bail him out nor a clueless Russian owner to swindle in a trade.
djFan71 wrote:Moving this over from the draft thread.
Spoiler:
djFan71 wrote:
CelticsPride18 wrote: I believe if we cut or trade Kanter/Semi/Green/Poirier we get to 130 M in salaries. Can we use the Non-MLE then sign our draft picks ?
With all 3 draft picks, lose Kanter and also Poirier, you're at $138.9M when you factor in Yabu, Jackson and Green has $100k guarantee. That's only 13 players. I'm not sure if you have a cap hold for the 14th or not. I know you eventually need to get to 14, but if you only do cap holds thru 13, you're all set. Or, if you could sign the MLE as that 14th and you're $.1M under before the signing is that legit? I dunno. If not you need to make one more move first. Probably with Langford since there isn't enough salary savings on Williamses or Edwards to be had since you have to fill their spot anyways.
Or resigning Hayward to a deal with a slightly lower starting contract, say $30M instead of $34.1 makes it simple, but obviously you now have issue when Tatum's max kicks in due to Hayward's future years.
So, if lux tax is $139M, and: - Hayward opts in at $34.1M. - We let all non-guaranteeds go - Keep all 3 first round picks with their 120% cap holds
That's $145.6M for 15 guys (including Yabu, Jackson, Green $)
If you trade Kanter to POR TPE, maybe get a 2nd back or neutral at best. Maybe it costs a 2nd. You're still just over at $140.6M. You use another 2nd to trade away Poirier. Or.... even stretch him over 3 years and you get to $138.9M.
That's with 13 roster spots. So, no incomplete charge. I believe at that point you can then use the full non-tax MLE. You just need to stay under the apron after that, like anyone using the full MLE.
The downsides are: - Any cost to get rid of Kanter, Poirier. - Can you actually sign someone at the full MLE that is going to better than Kanter next year? Sure there's guys out there, but will they sign with BOS? - You're hard-capped at the apron, so it limits any deadline moves.
Does that seem right to everyone/anyone?
Any more signings will count against our total salary. So signing a player to full non-tax MLE wouldn't be allowed since we're going over the tax post-signing. Using your calculations, we'll be over tax since we have to sign a 14th guy, even if it's the minimum.
ConstableGeneva wrote:Any more signings will count against our total salary. So signing a player to full non-tax MLE wouldn't be allowed since we're going over the tax post-signing. Using your calculations, we'll be over tax since we have to sign a 14th guy, even if it's the minimum.
Isn't that what the apron is for? I didn't think you had to stay under the lux tax to use the full MLE. Just be under it at the signing, then stay under the apron. But, i could very easily be wrong on that.
ConstableGeneva wrote:Any more signings will count against our total salary. So signing a player to full non-tax MLE wouldn't be allowed since we're going over the tax post-signing. Using your calculations, we'll be over tax since we have to sign a 14th guy, even if it's the minimum.
Isn't that what the apron is for? I didn't think you had to stay under the lux tax to use the full MLE. Just be under it at the signing, then stay under the apron. But, i could very easily be wrong on that.
Teams above the Apron have a smaller Mid-Level exception (see question number 25). It can be used to offer a mid-level contract no longer than three years, while other teams can offer four. The starting salary is also lower.
So, I think we can use the full as long as we stay under the apron. BUT... if we're that close the full MLE would put us over the apron. Lol...
Keys to the offseason to put us in best position going forward:
1) Trade Hayward when he opts in. Find a partner who has the cap room and where Hayward would sign a long term deal with, a need for a damn good #2 veteran at the 3/4 position, who have salary they want to part with to match along with a surplus of young developing talent or just cap space to absorb his salary
Teams that fit that description (bolded being the best fits and best potential returns)
2) Trade Kemba Walker. This is very unlikely given the awful contract, injury history, and him proving definitively he's not a difference maker. Thanks Danny!!!! But if there's a single team that wants him and it only takes one of our 1st rounders and scrub draft picks from last couple of drafts...DO IT!!!!
3) Draft well in the upcoming draft. Almost all of what ails us could have been fixed with a strong 2019 draft. But Danny blew it like usual. He must hit on his draft picks. There will be potential starters scattered throughout the first and second rounds. He has multiple picks. He cannot have a repeat performance of 2019. As we get closer to the draft I'll put out a Big Board and who we should pick. Just know it's not a weak draft and there should be guys available who we can surround Tatum and Brown with.
Also, who knows where the apron will be at this year. If the cap stays flat, then in theory the apron does too. But that means it's pretty much at the presumed lux tax # of $139M. Or do they make it still $6M higher than the lux tax? Shrug.
Either way, seems like there might be a touch more work to use the full MLE. And it's probably not worth it.
Shak_Celts wrote:I usually shake losses quicker than this but man that ending doesn't sit right with me! Just can't get over that entire series really. Feels like 12 Steps atm.
That 3 from Jimmy Butler at the end of game 1 haunts me. We win that game, everything is different. Major bummer.
If the goal is to get healthier (like Ainge and some posters here said), then Oladipo doesn't make much sense. He's averaged 60 games/season for his career (or just 49 if you take the last 4 seasons).
Who would you trade away for him?
If you trade Hayward (a popular option it looks like), you are definitely getting worse health-wise. Plus, you'd end up with one of the tiniest backcourts in basketball if you start Kemba and Dipo.
If you trade Kemba for Dipo however, you get bigger in the backcourt but, once again, more exposed health-wise. You do get out of Kemba's contract, which is good if you are worried about Kemba's age and health, but Dipo could end up being a one-year rental (would you throw the Brinks truck at a 28-y/o guy who can't stay on the court?).
It all depends how badly you want Turner, I guess.
Finally, would Indiana want any of Kemba and Hayward?
Another trade option, it may be time to sell high on Theis. He has a team option this year and seems to have the highest value he'll ever have as a starter. Going to be looking for a big deal next offseason. Does it make sense to move him for another big? Bench depth?
JHTruth wrote:Another trade option, it may be time to sell high on Theis. He has a team option this year and seems to have the highest value he'll ever have as a starter. Going to be looking for a big deal next offseason. Does it make sense to move him for another big? Bench depth?
Theis most likely will be part of a trade package with Hayward in my opinion
JHTruth wrote:Another trade option, it may be time to sell high on Theis. He has a team option this year and seems to have the highest value he'll ever have as a starter. Going to be looking for a big deal next offseason. Does it make sense to move him for another big? Bench depth?
Theis most likely will be part of a trade package with Hayward in my opinion
Which i think is a shame, he has amazing value as our back up centre, he is just not anywhere near good enough to be a starting centre on a contender
JHTruth wrote:Another trade option, it may be time to sell high on Theis. He has a team option this year and seems to have the highest value he'll ever have as a starter. Going to be looking for a big deal next offseason. Does it make sense to move him for another big? Bench depth?
Theis most likely will be part of a trade package with Hayward in my opinion
Which i think is a shame, he has amazing value as our back up centre, he is just not anywhere near good enough to be a starting centre on a contender
I would hope that we'd keep Theis, and trade others, Like maybe an opted in Kanter? Theis is good as a backup Center, and/or situational Starter.
"You have to put the work in. Nothing is given." ~ Jayson Tatum
Celts17Pride wrote:Theis most likely will be part of a trade package with Hayward in my opinion
Which i think is a shame, he has amazing value as our back up centre, he is just not anywhere near good enough to be a starting centre on a contender
I would hope that we'd keep Theis, and trade others, Like maybe an opted in Kanter? Theis is good as a backup Center, and/or situational Starter.
Yes but he's going to want a starting role and the big money that comes with it next offseason. Are we going to pay him starter $? Right now he has great value because he's cheap. His value will rapidly diminish on a new expensive deal
Darthlukey wrote:Which i think is a shame, he has amazing value as our back up centre, he is just not anywhere near good enough to be a starting centre on a contender
I would hope that we'd keep Theis, and trade others, Like maybe an opted in Kanter? Theis is good as a backup Center, and/or situational Starter.
Yes but he's going to want a starting role and the big money that comes with it next offseason. Are we going to pay him starter $? Right now he has great value because he's cheap. His value will rapidly diminish on a new expensive deal
Agree with that 100%, if he isnt on mates rates then he walks. But how many contending or even playoff level teams would he start for? None spring to mind, but I haven't dedicated a lot of thought to it
