CHI/LAL/BOS

Moderators: MoneyTalks41890, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, BullyKing, Andre Roberstan, loserX, Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger

cl2117
General Manager
Posts: 8,997
And1: 7,620
Joined: Jun 14, 2013
 

Re: CHI/LAL/BOS 

Post#21 » by cl2117 » Fri Sep 13, 2024 2:30 pm

hugepatsfan wrote:Your numbers are correct but you're not factoring in my point about doing it midseason. In this scenario, they'd keep Springer and Pritchard for now. Then make the salary dumping deals at the deadline. For simplicity sake, let's just say midyear instead of exactly at the deadline. At that point is when they'd convert Watson and sign Walker. So the minimum salaries you have would be pro rated for only half the year. That's what would count in their tax calc and when you slash you minimum salary numbers in half, they more than make up the $173K. They'd actually be able to sign another pro rated minimum deal as well for the 15th spot.

The contract they signed Walker to allows them to give him a bonus if they assign him to Maine out of camp. They can also massage the numbers by signing him to a couple of 10-day deals as well prior to actually executing the Pritchard/Springer deals. If they think Walker can be a viable replacement for Pritchard as the 8th man in the playoff rotation then honestly, it's probably the smart move to duck the tax via trading Pritchard/Springer.

That's really cool, I hadn't considered/known about the idea that it'd be a pro-rated impact based on when the deal happens in terms of counting towards the 2nd apron, but that makes sense. So basically you just need to find teams with TPE's or enough non-guaranteed salary that you could clear the PP/Springer salary completely at some point mid-season? I guess the only issue would be if the limited teams that can fill that role for you try to extort you due to the scarcity of options, but even then you could just tell them to f' off and keep the team together.

redslastlaugh wrote:EDIT: not entirely relevant at this point, but why did we trade #41 for Jaden Springer in the first place. Seems like we don’t have it in the budget to extend him so he’s gone after the year. He didn’t help last playoffs, & probably isn’t helping this upcoming playoffs. We could use him if we need a salary to trade for deadline playoff reinforcements, but we coulda got Jalen McDaniels salary for the rights to Josip Sesar or whatever (lol) a top 55 protected 2nd, ie “NOTHING” to just take dead money off another teams books, u don’t have to give them the 41st pick.

A mid-second, like 41, could be flipped for a future second or, in light of the budget restraints, we just take a flier on a stash, like Nikola Djurisic who isn’t coming over and some scouts felt he had late first potential. Brad and Zarren have hit an awesome percentage but Jaden Springer… I just don’t get it, especially if we end up moving future draft capital to dump him to get under the apron.

I think the simplest answer is the most obvious one: they just like Springer as a prospect.

Both Sam Cassell and Tyler Lashbrook (one of our player development coaches), worked with him in Philly and obviously really liked what they saw. He has a good pedigree, he's still young (two years younger than both the "rookies" the Celtics drafted this year) and he adds something not already on the roster given his defensive chops on the wing.

The C's also had a TPE to use that was going to expire if they didn't. If that expires they lose that salary slot forever, so if they wanted to leave that door open they had to add someone. He's expensive this year with the tax multiplier but they could shed his contract if they needed to and there's the possibility of extending him on a more reasonable number (e.g. the minimum) if he shows enough to warrant that.

I agree though, it is a bit of a head scratcher given the cost to acquire him (overpay in my opinion) and the tax implications. But if they really do like him, especially with Cassell's seal of approval, then it's probably just as simple as that.
UHar_Vinnie wrote:If you don't lean forward while hugging a dude, you are gonna have a wiener touching incident. You know this.
redslastlaugh
Analyst
Posts: 3,168
And1: 3,937
Joined: Aug 13, 2011

Re: CHI/LAL/BOS 

Post#22 » by redslastlaugh » Mon Sep 16, 2024 3:37 am

cl2117 wrote:
redslastlaugh wrote:EDIT: not entirely relevant at this point, but why did we trade #41 for Jaden Springer in the first place. Seems like we don’t have it in the budget to extend him so he’s gone after the year. He didn’t help last playoffs, & probably isn’t helping this upcoming playoffs. We could use him if we need a salary to trade for deadline playoff reinforcements, but we coulda got Jalen McDaniels salary for the rights to Josip Sesar or whatever (lol) a top 55 protected 2nd, ie “NOTHING” to just take dead money off another teams books, u don’t have to give them the 41st pick.

A mid-second, like 41, could be flipped for a future second or, in light of the budget restraints, we just take a flier on a stash, like Nikola Djurisic who isn’t coming over and some scouts felt he had late first potential. Brad and Zarren have hit an awesome percentage but Jaden Springer… I just don’t get it, especially if we end up moving future draft capital to dump him to get under the apron.

I think the simplest answer is the most obvious one: they just like Springer as a prospect.

Both Sam Cassell and Tyler Lashbrook (one of our player development coaches), worked with him in Philly and obviously really liked what they saw. He has a good pedigree, he's still young (two years younger than both the "rookies" the Celtics drafted this year) and he adds something not already on the roster given his defensive chops on the wing.

The C's also had a TPE to use that was going to expire if they didn't. If that expires they lose that salary slot forever, so if they wanted to leave that door open they had to add someone. He's expensive this year with the tax multiplier but they could shed his contract if they needed to and there's the possibility of extending him on a more reasonable number (e.g. the minimum) if he shows enough to warrant that.

I agree though, it is a bit of a head scratcher given the cost to acquire him (overpay in my opinion) and the tax implications. But if they really do like him, especially with Cassell's seal of approval, then it's probably just as simple as that.

Yea, probably not wanting lose the salary slot if the TPE expired was a big part of it.

Also maybe Wyc was giving the green light to spend but other factions in ownership weren’t onboard or whatever and now the Springer contract looks different to the front office cuz they were making decisions before they were privy to this all this new sh*t going on in the Grousbeck family.
redslastlaugh
Analyst
Posts: 3,168
And1: 3,937
Joined: Aug 13, 2011

Re: CHI/LAL/BOS 

Post#23 » by redslastlaugh » Mon Sep 16, 2024 3:49 am

Another crack at this trade idea, if Chicago just wants to compete rather than tank for draft position and Boston gets more serious about cutting salary commitments going forward is just to cut LAL out of the trade.

And then it’s just:

Boston sends Jrue Holiday
Chicago sends Lonzo Ball & Ayo Dosunmu

Boston cuts $100 (roughly) million off the long term books and Chicago gets Jrue, pretty clean deal. Maybe the Bulls toss in a future draft pick, couple of seconds perhaps.

Lonzo is expiring and Ayo is a contributor on a good value contract, $15 million over this season and next. Jrue is four years at $135 million but a talent upgrade for CHI, if they can stomach the price.
cl2117
General Manager
Posts: 8,997
And1: 7,620
Joined: Jun 14, 2013
 

Re: CHI/LAL/BOS 

Post#24 » by cl2117 » Fri Sep 20, 2024 9:30 am

redslastlaugh wrote:Another crack at this trade idea, if Chicago just wants to compete rather than tank for draft position and Boston gets more serious about cutting salary commitments going forward is just to cut LAL out of the trade.

And then it’s just:

Boston sends Jrue Holiday
Chicago sends Lonzo Ball & Ayo Dosunmu

Boston cuts $100 (roughly) million off the long term books and Chicago gets Jrue, pretty clean deal. Maybe the Bulls toss in a future draft pick, couple of seconds perhaps.

Lonzo is expiring and Ayo is a contributor on a good value contract, $15 million over this season and next. Jrue is four years at $135 million but a talent upgrade for CHI, if they can stomach the price.

Ain't no way Brad is taking on Lonzo, even as an expiring, but think Chicago swapping Ayo for Jrue makes even less sense. The Bulls are overloaded with ugly salary (Lavine, Lonzo, Vuc, Pat Williams now), it'd be malpractice on their part to take on such a huge contract for a 34 year old when they're not even close to being contenders.

I think you're on the right track that Jrue will likely be the odd man out when ownership finally make Brad dip out of the 2nd apron, but I think the teams you'd target for him would be either

a) elite teams that need a shakeup (ironically very much like the Bucks if they wanted to move on from Dame)
or
b) young teams that don't have crazy payrolls and are looking for a veteran star that can help them elevate to the next level

In either scenario I think you're looking at getting back multiple roleplayers that make enough less than Jrue that they can drop below the 2nd apron, but still could potentially give the C's enough depth to support the remainder of the core (with the former scenario requiring a third team to be involved).

I'd be looking at a team like the Magic, who might be willing to take on Jrue's deal if they felt like he could help elevate their younger talent sooner rather than later. Wendell Carter Jr. and one of their guards (Black/Anthony) for Jrue as the core of it, with draft capital added as needed. C's take a step back but get a replacement for Horford and a bench guard while being able to easily maneuver their way below the apron.
UHar_Vinnie wrote:If you don't lean forward while hugging a dude, you are gonna have a wiener touching incident. You know this.

Return to Trades and Transactions