The Celtics Salary Cap Situation

[elrod enchilada]

Inspired by the Dwyane Wade thread, I did some researtch to settle for all time that the Cs cannot and will not get under the cap in 2010.

http://celtics.realgm.com/articles/367/ ... situation/

[phoolishly_insane]

Even if we sign Rondo to an extension, there's no way we'll be under the cap.
Rondo will sign for $10m+ per year and not less.

[CelticFaninLBC]

Yep, Rondo will get a big deal. I'm guessing they'll have cap space in 2011-12. Hence why they didn't sign Posey to a 4 year deal.... I wouldn't be surprised in Pierce and KG restructure their deals...

[celtxman]

Yep, Rondo will get a big deal. I'm guessing they'll have cap space in 2011-12. Hence why they didn't sign Posey to a 4 year deal.... I wouldn't be surprised in Pierce and KG restructure their deals...

Thank you Elrod for the excellent article and all of the pertinent information in it. If the goal has been to squeeze the most championships out of the Big Three because of their age, I can't worry about 2011/12, and the Celtics may have made a big mistake in not re-signing Posey. All of these numbers had to have been tossed around the Celtic board room, and to lose 2-3 years of an effective, clutch Posey with nothing at the end of the rainbow for the sacrifice could prove to be very costly. I can only hope the Celtics get luckier than last year with the MLE, but as Corey Magette showed us, most players would rather get more money on a bad team. And with getting under the cap in vogue for everybody, these $5-8 million dollar players who are borderline MLE players will now get more with teams who lose out on the stars and are desperate not to come out empty-handed. The longshot possibilities for 2009 are Rasheed Wallace, Rip Hamilton, Dwight Gooden, Chris Wilcox and Jamal Crawford for the MLE. Probably the best possibility is McDyess simply on his interview where he said the Celtics were "very, very close" and his ability to leave money on the table for comfort. But what does that have to do with Posey? With the MLE you could have both unless you are too worried about the budget.
There is that old story about the guy who went to the massive power plant that was malfunctioning and in big trouble. He walked around the crippled plant, stopped and thought for a second. Then he flipped a small switch and everything was fixed. He then handed the plant a bill for $10,000. When the stunned plant manager asked for an itemized bill, the guy wrote down $1 to flip the switch and $9,999 for the knowledge to flip the switch. The power plant would have been shut down without the knowledge. Posey was not worth 4 years at the MLE to a non-playoff team - it would be a terrible move. Posey was not worth 4 years to the Cavs - they still have chips in Sczcerbiak and Eric Snow's expiring contracts to be able to improve. But in the unique hamstrung place the Celtics appear to be - with the obvious chemistry and need that Posey filled, I wonder if there are second thoughts. Posey could have been that overpaid switch that kept the championship machine going.
I was OK with letting Posey go on the premise that there would be some type of on the court benefit for the Celtics even if it was as late as 2010. If we go to Game 7 this year against Cleveland (on the road because we finish two games behind the Cavs) and we lose by 3 points in the Game, how could you NOT think "what if" with Posey? I understand the general concept here is not new. But Elrod's depressing but clear explanation of the cap facts IMO puts the Celtics' decision into question, and for what? A POSSIBLE stab at a free agent in 2011? Good grief - realistically they have a better chance of getting more worth out of Posey's expiring contract.
It was mentioned to me that the Cavs have a terrible $91 million in salaries. But always having a couple of bad contracts that expire puts them into a place where they can get better just like the Celtics had Ratleff to get Garnett. They are in a better position next year as well. What was a curse for a lousy team like the Knicks (trading expiring contracts) can be a blessing for a good team, if it is used properly. If they aren't worried about paying $10 million more in salaries (and tack on another $10 million in luxury tax), were we really worried about it? Help me understand this.

[hiphop1]

We will trade Ray when he is an Expiring.

[sully00]

Posey's contract was crippling. They went above what they were comfortable paying him to bring him back but paying him 7 mil at 36-37 years old is ridiculous. More over he is not the defensive factor he was last season and while he is shooting the ball well the Hornets are a worse team. This team is as good or better. What exactly would we be better at if we had Posey still?

As for the Cav's they are going to piss away around 20 mil in bucks in lux tax payments and missing out on the dispersal of that money. On top of that 91 mil in salary they are paying out. A result of them giving bad contracts to players like Larry Hughes and Donyell Marshall (exact same situation as Posey) so they had to take on even more expensive bad contracts. In the end they have to prove to the king they can surround him with the pieces necessary but that team isn't making money this season and it is a business and if they could trade salary situations with the Celts I am sure they would.

I would like to see the C's add a piece before the playoffs and I think they will and it will likely not involve money spent.

Back to Elrod's article. A couple of points I don't really understand. If Boston intenion is to get under the salary cap for '10 offseason they aren't signing anyone till then. The simply will have KG, Paul, and Perk under contract. They will either sign Rondo to a contract equal or less than his cap hold or leave him restricted.

They will renounce Ray's rights and everyone else. Baby and Powe will be restricted FA's Boston really only needs one of them no way they lose both to offer sheets the year before the FA bomb hits.

The key to the idea would be that Pierce would again replace his option with an extension that matches the one KG signed. Making him 16.5 mil.

KG 18.8, PP 16.5, Perk 4.4, Rondo's cap hold of about 6 mil and 4 mil for the 8 minimum salalry holds of $475,000. That is 50 mil. They would unload their first round draft pick and that will be that.

That isn't 15-20 mil under but it is 10-12 under and that is enough to get a guy who is more interested in winning a title than they are getting every last dollar.

[sully00]

Just to clarify the above point I in now way support doing that I am very hopeful that Rajon Rondo and Bill Walker will be the recipients of Ray Allen's diminished salary as Ray finishes out his career in Boston in style if not excess.

[humblebum]

I can't imagine how nasty the Celtics will be if Rondo, Walker reach their potential. Both guys have true star potential, with Rondo clearly being more proven at this point. Walker has a really good NBA body and has a really, really aggressive mentality that may serve him well in the NBA if he can stay healthy. His jumper looks like it needs refinement and repetition and it will be Maggette-like (he's the player I sort of envision for Walker from a skills perspective). Beyond these two guys the Celtics still have some respectable potential in guys like Gabe, Glen, Leon, and Patrick O'Bryant.

This thread just reminds me of how far I have to go in terms of understand the salary structure of the NBA. "sigh"

[celtxman]

So it is correct to say that the Celtics cannot appreciably improve their roster, short of trades, minimum level free agent signings or the mid-level excepttion for many years?

[elrod enchilada]

yes, but that is not as dire as it may seem. That was also the case for Danny when he took over the team in 2003. He was over the cap, saddled with dead weight, and he managed to parlay his assets into a champion by his fifth season. The Lakers, too, built their current contender without being under the salary cap.

There are many other tools at a GM's disposal. He could do sign-and-trades for free agents, for example. Plus, Danny could get us under the cap comfortably by 2012 or 2013 if that became a priority.

Trust in Danny.

[Havlicek17]

Elrod's article is correct. We will not be players in the 2010 FA class, we were built to win championships now! Stop dreaming about getting Lebron, Wade, etc, and start enjoying the ride for the next few years is how I see it.

We will either win or contend for the championship over the next few years. Our salary structure is perfect as Ray's salary expires at the right time to resign both Ray and Rondo and keep these starters in tact for the next few years. There isn't another shooter I would rather have in the NBA.

50/40/90...

[Jammer]

sully:

The Celtics won't renounce Ray's rights,

because if they did,

they would be limited to either

the mid-level or Cap Room, one or the other.

When Ray turns 35 in July of 2010 there's a good chance that he
will be able to get a deal in excess of the MLE.

[celtxman]

[quote="elrod enchilada"]yes, but that is not as dire as it may seem. That was also the case for Danny when he took over the team in 2003. He was over the cap, saddled with dead weight, and he managed to parlay his assets into a champion by his fifth season. The Lakers, too, built their current contender without being under the salary cap.

There are many other tools at a GM's disposal. He could do sign-and-trades for free agents, for example. Plus, Danny could get us under the cap comfortably by 2012 or 2013 if that became a priority.

Trust in Danny.[/quotE)Ainge did a masterful job the first off-season and I do believe he will get something done. But what is your honest evaluation of this past off-season? Using mid-level exception monies just to keep players you already had. When you see Tony Allen be such a non-factor in the loss to the Lakers do you worry that the unbelievable faithfulness in TA may be deadly, and sacrificing Posey with apparantly no way to replace him may be equally deadly? No one has given me an adaquete reason given the salary cap situation you laid out why Posey wasn't kept. Really at the end of the day when you think about it, name me the championship team that won it, got under the cap and then added another player? Frankly you are better off signing mid-level players to full value and at some point you have decent, tradeable expiring contracts.
Not having Posey or another valuable player was extremely costly. I defy one poster to tell me that Posey wouldn't have made offensive and defensive plays that the Celtics take that game in regulation.

[chakdaddy]

He could do sign-and-trades for free agents, for example.

I think sign-and-trades essentially don't happen except for cases like Rashard Lewis, where a team has the cap room to sign the guy, but offers some low pick or sundry nothings in order to make the contract offer slightly higher.

The only time I can think of that a guy really was signed and traded was...Antoine.

[chakdaddy]

One other nice thing...you don't have to renounce a player until it's necessary. So there's no need to renounce Ray unless someone has agreed to a contract.

It seems pretty unlikely, but I think we could grab someone in the 10-12 mil range if Pierce renegotiates and if we pull some Alonzo Mourning/Juwan Howard type shenanigans with Rondo...like letting him become an RFA, then signing someone, and then miraculously coming to prompt agreement on a multiyear contract.

Interesting thing is, we'll be close to the cap, without any really bad contracts; just solid players with pretty big contracts. It's kind of fair that way, really.

Too bad the old "salary slot" rule doesn't exist.

[sully00]

sully:

The Celtics won't renounce Ray's rights,

because if they did,

they would be limited to either

the mid-level or Cap Room, one or the other.

When Ray turns 35 in July of 2010 there's a good chance that he
will be able to get a deal in excess of the MLE.

This is the problem with this discussion. You can't use two different sets of variables. If you are trying to get under the cap it is to replace Ray Allen, he isn't coming back.

What I am trying to point out is that it is clearly possible and plausible for Boston to go this route. Obviously you are back to filling the roster out with minimum contracts and frankly it doesn't make a lot of sense for several reasons but the reason we don't do it isn't because we have to give Baby or Powe 3 mil or we are wondering what to do with draft picks and role players.

In the end the reason you probably don't do it is you can re sign Ray and add another player at the MLE and make your team better. Beyond that most FA signings suck, it is like buying a brand new car, it is really cool for about a day and realize you just paid way too much for something. Like paying Jason Kapono the same money as Leandro Barbosa or Hedu Turkgolu and you start looking for a basket to barf in.

celtxman

You are totally missing the point. Everyone knows James Posey would help this team this year. Boston would have paid James more than anyone else for this year and next, and hell they may have even gone 3, knowing it was a mistake. But what they wouldn't and simply can't do and hope to remain a contender was go 4 years and be owing James 7 mil knowing he is going to be minimum salary value player at that point and likely a guy they will just cut. James Posey on a 25 mil contract is not a trade asset he is a cap killer.

Boston would have liked to add someone in FA they could not find a fit. So the answer is not to just burn the money and spend it on someone anyhow especially when you are paying a dollar tax on everyone you spend. They used the MLE to re sign Eddie House and to sign Bill Walker to a contract and left the option open to go after someone this offseason when it will be a better market.

[Fencer reregistered]

Nice public service, but I think you made at least one CBA error.

You say that if the Cs got under the cap to sign a FA, they couldn't use the MLE. Uh, why couldn't they use the MLE after signing him (and Rondo) and getting back up over the cap?

[ss1986v2]

Nice public service, but I think you made at least one CBA error.

You say that if the Cs got under the cap to sign a FA, they couldn't use the MLE. Uh, why couldn't they use the MLE after signing him (and Rondo) and getting back up over the cap?

to actually get the cap space to begin with, you have to renounce your exceptions.

[sully00]

The Mid Level Exception is an exception to teams that are over the cap. To actually be under the cap you have to have more space than the exception including all cap holds and draft picks contracts.

In the end I don't think it really matters all that much. I don't think Boston can afford not to add to its roster this off season, and there are going to be very good values in FA and not a lot of buyers. I think that RFA's will be able to be had as well as vets, some former all stars who are worth more than the MLE but teams just aren't going to screw up their cap space over.

[elrod enchilada]

You guys know your stuff: we have to renounce our exceptions or they count against the cap. If a team was way way below the cap it could keep its exceptions possibly and still sign a stud max contract guy. Maybe that is what the Knicks will shoot for in 2010 if they cannot dump Curry/Jeffries and thereby have room for two max contract guys.

I, for one, want Danny to use the MLE slot and the other exception ($2m per for 2 years) this summer to bring in bench support for this team. Play to win now.

I am glad this board has space for a thread like this, where there is some commitment to getting the facts straight. I was able to get all the salary information verfied to the actual contract amounts by our good friends at RealGM. (They are not allowed to post this information for public consumption, but it is the data they use for the trade checker.) For what it is worth, I ran this piece by several people in the know, including Larry Coon and a lawyer who helped draft the salary cap in the CBA, and they were very pleased to see something like this out there.

It is generating exactly the sort of discussion I was hoping for.