Celtics 2025-26, Off-Season/Training Camp Thread

[165bows]

I don't think Gary Trent is going to help this particular team as much as the Bucks. We were +21.2 on offense with both Brown and Tatum sitting, +8.4 when Brown plays and Tatum sits, and +15.3 when Tatum plays and Brown sits. We don't need firepower off the bench. We just need Jaylen Brown to be less destructive to team offense, which isn't going to be helped by getting a 2nd tunnel-vision me first guy.

Right, this team just needs a rich man's Anton Watson, a skilled 4 that can guard a bunch of positions with size and just keep the offense moving.

[brackdan70]

The profit comes from the appreciation of the team asset, not from operating income.

Well that’s not profit. It’s unrealized until you sell. But yeah appreciation is a benefit and likely one of the big reasons you would want to own a franchise like the Celtics.

But that's what it is. I am tired of people claiming "Oh, no--they can spend more than they take in in income!" when for a winning team that is a great investment. Track the value of the Warriors when they started winning. Very much like most tech startups that can, yes, "profitably", operate at a loss for years.

Yeah I wasn’t claiming or suggesting that profit margin is the driving factor. I think you are spot on that appreciation I really important.
However, with the repeater tax penalties I think it is fair to ask how long a franchise will operate with a net loss. The appreciation is unrealized so you have to come up with money somewhere to cover costs, whether that’s financing, or using owners money. It is fair to ask how long operating at a significant net loss is sustainable.
Like I said I think the Cs will have no problem paying up for 2025/26, but I am unsure what they will do going forward. I’d think if they are winning the keep paying, but at the same time try to induce that bill and at some point in the near future try to reset the repeater tax. I think it’s feasible with the cap going up faster than the value of these extensions the Cs have signed.

[BK_2020]

Well Amazon is still operating at a loss after 20 years

[cloverleaf]

Well that’s not profit. It’s unrealized until you sell. But yeah appreciation is a benefit and likely one of the big reasons you would want to own a franchise like the Celtics.

But that's what it is. I am tired of people claiming "Oh, no--they can spend more than they take in in income!" when for a winning team that is a great investment. Track the value of the Warriors when they started winning. Very much like most tech startups that can, yes, "profitably", operate at a loss for years.

Yeah I wasn’t claiming or suggesting that profit margin is the driving factor. I think you are spot on that appreciation I really important.
However, with the repeater tax penalties I think it is fair to ask how long a franchise will operate with a net loss. The appreciation is unrealized so you have to come up with money somewhere to cover costs, whether that’s financing, or using owners money. It is fair to ask how long operating at a significant net loss is sustainable.
Like I said I think the Cs will have no problem paying up for 2025/26, but I am unsure what they will do going forward. I’d think if they are winning the keep paying, but at the same time try to induce that bill and at some point in the near future try to reset the repeater tax. I think it’s feasible with the cap going up faster than the value of these extensions the Cs have signed.

I can tell you exactly how long it makes sense: as long as they are winning. I doubt a new purchaser of the C's, very likely in it for more than just "asset appreciation", which is what drives the value of these franchises, would be so short-sighted as to stop spending for a winning team.

[brackdan70]

But that's what it is. I am tired of people claiming "Oh, no--they can spend more than they take in in income!" when for a winning team that is a great investment. Track the value of the Warriors when they started winning. Very much like most tech startups that can, yes, "profitably", operate at a loss for years.

Yeah I wasn’t claiming or suggesting that profit margin is the driving factor. I think you are spot on that appreciation I really important.
However, with the repeater tax penalties I think it is fair to ask how long a franchise will operate with a net loss. The appreciation is unrealized so you have to come up with money somewhere to cover costs, whether that’s financing, or using owners money. It is fair to ask how long operating at a significant net loss is sustainable.
Like I said I think the Cs will have no problem paying up for 2025/26, but I am unsure what they will do going forward. I’d think if they are winning the keep paying, but at the same time try to induce that bill and at some point in the near future try to reset the repeater tax. I think it’s feasible with the cap going up faster than the value of these extensions the Cs have signed.

I can tell you exactly how long it makes sense: as long as they are winning. I doubt a new purchaser of the C's, very likely in it for more than just "asset appreciation", which is what drives the value of these franchises, would be so short-sighted as to stop spending for a winning team.

Yeah I agree with that…but if the franchise is losing 100 m a year…depending on how deep the pockets of the ownership group is, there may come a point, where you have to reset that repeater tax.
I think this can be done while remaining competitive, so I am not worried.

[sam_I_am]

I don't think Gary Trent is going to help this particular team as much as the Bucks. We were +21.2 on offense with both Brown and Tatum sitting, +8.4 when Brown plays and Tatum sits, and +15.3 when Tatum plays and Brown sits. We don't need firepower off the bench. We just need Jaylen Brown to be less destructive to team offense, which isn't going to be helped by getting a 2nd tunnel-vision me first guy.

Trent is not available, he signed a contract with Bucks for 2.6 million.

However, there are many unsigned free agents available. If Brad can find a guy who can contribute more than average G league talent at the end of our roster then why not. Trent shot 40% from 3 and has averaged 15 ppg in the NBA several years in a row and is age 26. He may have tunnel vision as you say but he’s still a lot better than 6 guys on our roster getting paid the same. Dallas signed Jones Jr. last year to a minimum and he started in the finals.

[hugepatsfan]

I don't think Gary Trent is going to help this particular team as much as the Bucks. We were +21.2 on offense with both Brown and Tatum sitting, +8.4 when Brown plays and Tatum sits, and +15.3 when Tatum plays and Brown sits. We don't need firepower off the bench. We just need Jaylen Brown to be less destructive to team offense, which isn't going to be helped by getting a 2nd tunnel-vision me first guy.

Trent is not available, he signed a contract with Bucks for 2.6 million.

However, there are many unsigned free agents available. If Brad can find a guy who can contribute more than average G league talent at the end of our roster then why not. Trent shot 40% from 3 and has averaged 15 ppg in the NBA several years in a row and is age 26. He may have tunnel vision as you say but he’s still a lot better than 6 guys on our roster getting paid the same. Dallas signed Jones Jr. last year to a minimum and he started in the finals.

Guys signing for minimum deals are usually hoping that they don't have to settle for that again the next year so they prioritize finding a spot that they can showcase themselves for more interest next year. We don't have much of that to offer.

I think the one position where we could carve out a decently appealing role would be a backup PF to Tatum. For the right guy, you could carve out a 15-20 minute a night role with a competitive opportunity to stick in the playoff rotation. But of the options left at that spot, I think they're better off just giving Watson/Tillman/Walsh/Scheierman the opportunity to fill those minutes (either directly at the 4 backing up Tatum or indirectly via shifting Brown/Hauser/Horford over to that spot more than they would otherwise play there).

[Hal14]

Trent is not available, he signed a contract with Bucks for 2.6 million.

However, there are many unsigned free agents available. If Brad can find a guy who can contribute more than average G league talent at the end of our roster then why not. Trent shot 40% from 3 and has averaged 15 ppg in the NBA several years in a row and is age 26. He may have tunnel vision as you say but he’s still a lot better than 6 guys on our roster getting paid the same. Dallas signed Jones Jr. last year to a minimum and he started in the finals.

How are either of those examples (Trent, DJJ) relevant to the Celtics?

Trent is gonna start in MIL. DJJ started in Dallas.

We have no starting positions available. Our top 10 players off last year's championship team are all back..

[cl2117]

Yeah I wasn’t claiming or suggesting that profit margin is the driving factor. I think you are spot on that appreciation I really important.
However, with the repeater tax penalties I think it is fair to ask how long a franchise will operate with a net loss. The appreciation is unrealized so you have to come up with money somewhere to cover costs, whether that’s financing, or using owners money. It is fair to ask how long operating at a significant net loss is sustainable.
Like I said I think the Cs will have no problem paying up for 2025/26, but I am unsure what they will do going forward. I’d think if they are winning the keep paying, but at the same time try to induce that bill and at some point in the near future try to reset the repeater tax. I think it’s feasible with the cap going up faster than the value of these extensions the Cs have signed.

I can tell you exactly how long it makes sense: as long as they are winning. I doubt a new purchaser of the C's, very likely in it for more than just "asset appreciation", which is what drives the value of these franchises, would be so short-sighted as to stop spending for a winning team.

Yeah I agree with that…but if the franchise is losing 100 m a year…depending on how deep the pockets of the ownership group is, there may come a point, where you have to reset that repeater tax.
I think this can be done while remaining competitive, so I am not worried.

Realistically our options are:

1) Keep winning, will put pressure on ownership to keep footing the bill
2) Restructure to dip out of the repeater tax hell

If we're not doing #1, people are going to be calling for change anyway, which will be the excuse/pivot point to do #2. We'd need to be in Brady/Belichick three out of four years in the Finals and coming away with wins, to be able to justify the kind of financial losses we'd sustain in years 4-6 of this run. If we get in that territory and we finally have to dip out we should have enough to show for it that I think people will understand.

Either KP or Jrue ultimately needs to go and/or we need to hit on some of our picks and speculative trades (e.g. Springer/Tillman) in order to keep things chugging along. Both probably need to happen.

We've definitely got at least a 2 year additional runway though, so enjoy it while it's here, it's way longer than most teams get anyway.

[playa-hater]

With Hauser now signing this is the most "Closure" I feel in an offseason for Boston since message boards began.. Having nothing of major consequences to talk about concerning Boston is such a breath of fresh Air.

At the same time I already can't wait for when our Road to repeat starts!!

[sam_I_am]

Trent is not available, he signed a contract with Bucks for 2.6 million.

However, there are many unsigned free agents available. If Brad can find a guy who can contribute more than average G league talent at the end of our roster then why not. Trent shot 40% from 3 and has averaged 15 ppg in the NBA several years in a row and is age 26. He may have tunnel vision as you say but he’s still a lot better than 6 guys on our roster getting paid the same. Dallas signed Jones Jr. last year to a minimum and he started in the finals.

How are either of those examples (Trent, DJJ) relevant to the Celtics?

Trent is gonna start in MIL. DJJ started in Dallas.

We have no starting positions available. Our top 10 players off last year's championship team are all back..

I just said it is my preferred option. Of course players have to agree to come here. Tillman did. Others might as well because injuries and load management will create some opportunity. We are in win now mode so wasting spots to develop guys that aren’t that promising vs. getting a proven veteran is unwise. We pretty much have a good idea that none of our 2 ways or recent draft picks are going to contribute meaningfully this year.

[ConstableGeneva]

Read on Twitter

[BK_2020]

Trent is not available, he signed a contract with Bucks for 2.6 million.

However, there are many unsigned free agents available. If Brad can find a guy who can contribute more than average G league talent at the end of our roster then why not. Trent shot 40% from 3 and has averaged 15 ppg in the NBA several years in a row and is age 26. He may have tunnel vision as you say but he’s still a lot better than 6 guys on our roster getting paid the same. Dallas signed Jones Jr. last year to a minimum and he started in the finals.

How are either of those examples (Trent, DJJ) relevant to the Celtics?

Trent is gonna start in MIL. DJJ started in Dallas.

We have no starting positions available. Our top 10 players off last year's championship team are all back..

I just said it is my preferred option. Of course players have to agree to come here. Tillman did. Others might as well because injuries and load management will create some opportunity. We are in win now mode so wasting spots to develop guys that aren’t that promising vs. getting a proven veteran is unwise. We pretty much have a good idea that none of our 2 ways or recent draft picks are going to contribute meaningfully this year.

Tillman was traded for peanuts.

[Jammer]

...
Guys signing for minimum deals are usually hoping that they don't have to settle for that again the next year so they prioritize finding a spot that they can showcase themselves for more interest next year. We don't have much of that to offer.

I think the one position where we could carve out a decently appealing role would be a backup PF to Tatum. For the right guy, you could carve out a 15-20 minute a night role with a competitive opportunity to stick in the playoff rotation. But of the options left at that spot, I think they're better off just giving Watson/Tillman/Walsh/Scheierman the opportunity to fill those minutes (either directly at the 4 backing up Tatum or indirectly via shifting Brown/Hauser/Horford over to that spot more than they would otherwise play there).

In 2023 Walsh played in 9 games for about 90 total minutes.

In 2024 he realistically doesn't deserve to ever be on the floor. Unfortunately, to get any team to take the dud, the Celtics would likely have to include his $1,891,357 2024 salary, his $200,000 guarantee for the next season plus around $250,000 for doing the favor.
It would cost around $2,341,357 just to ship him into cap space. Basketball IQ is LOWWWWW. Can't dribble. Turnover machine. Shot 2 Free Throws in 90 minutes of court time last year.

[sam_I_am]

How are either of those examples (Trent, DJJ) relevant to the Celtics?

Trent is gonna start in MIL. DJJ started in Dallas.

We have no starting positions available. Our top 10 players off last year's championship team are all back..

I just said it is my preferred option. Of course players have to agree to come here. Tillman did. Others might as well because injuries and load management will create some opportunity. We are in win now mode so wasting spots to develop guys that aren’t that promising vs. getting a proven veteran is unwise. We pretty much have a good idea that none of our 2 ways or recent draft picks are going to contribute meaningfully this year.

Tillman was traded for peanuts.

Yes he was. And he’s still better than any of our summer leaguers with a shot at 15th spot.

[ConstableGeneva]

Read on Twitter

[brackdan70]

...
Guys signing for minimum deals are usually hoping that they don't have to settle for that again the next year so they prioritize finding a spot that they can showcase themselves for more interest next year. We don't have much of that to offer.

I think the one position where we could carve out a decently appealing role would be a backup PF to Tatum. For the right guy, you could carve out a 15-20 minute a night role with a competitive opportunity to stick in the playoff rotation. But of the options left at that spot, I think they're better off just giving Watson/Tillman/Walsh/Scheierman the opportunity to fill those minutes (either directly at the 4 backing up Tatum or indirectly via shifting Brown/Hauser/Horford over to that spot more than they would otherwise play there).

In 2023 Walsh played in 9 games for about 90 total minutes.

In 2024 he realistically doesn't deserve to ever be on the floor. Unfortunately, to get any team to take the dud, the Celtics would likely have to include his $1,891,357 2024 salary, his $200,000 guarantee for the next season plus around $250,000 for doing the favor.
It would cost around $2,341,357 just to ship him into cap space. Basketball IQ is LOWWWWW. Can't dribble. Turnover machine. Shot 2 Free Throws in 90 minutes of court time last year.

Pretty extreme take. He is 20. Yeah still raw but potential is there, particularly as a plus rebounder and defender.

[ConstableGeneva]

Read on Twitter

[Homerclease]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=2r3K1qCL2UmIu9zb8OVdDw

[playa-hater]

With Hauser now signing this is the most "Closure" I feel in an offseason for Boston since message boards began.. Having nothing of major consequences to talk about concerning Boston is such a breath of fresh Air.

At the same time I already can't wait for when our Road to repeat starts!!

Guess I should also add something.Most of us already know.. Take nothing in life or in this case basketball for granted... Today on my 58th birthday, I find out I have a torn MCL and Meniscus.. Hard enough , competing with young ball players at my age already.. but this is a tough setback , and I don't know if I will ever be close to the same.. feels like I may have played my last competitive basketball ever..

I Need Boston and my 13 year old to pick up the basketball slack bigtime..