Moderators: bisme37, Darthlukey, Shak_Celts, Parliament10, shackles10, snowman, Froob, canman1971
bisme37 wrote:I tried to keep this thought internal but I've gotta say our team got substantially less handsome yesterday lol.
I remember Arsenio Hall doing a stand up skit on in on a Rodney Dangerfield special. 
Shak_Celts wrote:bisme37 wrote:I tried to keep this thought internal but I've gotta say our team got substantially less handsome yesterday lol.
Woahhhhhh!!! That’s not cool…
Only because Al is still serving face!
(He’s not going until I give him permission!)
Celtics_Champs wrote:Celticlifer wrote:Celtics_Champs wrote:
Ahh crap, we are going to draft Danny Wolf, aren’t we.
What's your problem with wolf? Perfect fit for our style, I think he'll be a good shooter, mechanics are solid. If we lose Kornet, he will look very attractive.
Oh no problem with him, I don’t know much about him. I am just responding to Bisme’s post that the Celtics got uglier.
Shak_Celts wrote:FrodoFraggins wrote:So the Jrue trade was surprising in how much salary he took back, but maybe he felt like he would take care of that with the KP trade. KP having no value wasn't a shock and I think a certain amount of homerism is in play for people thinking Brad got fleeced.
Brad's not dumb enough to blow the team up just because Tatum's out most or all of the season. And I don't see any team making crazy offers for JB or DW.
And maybe Brad will see how out of his depth Mazzula is next year and look for a replacement.
Shams said they were already getting crazy offers. How crazy does Brad need it to be is the question.
themoneyteam2 wrote:The Corey's wrote:GreenBlooded wrote:
I agree they are **** next year but that is exactly why this is the year they're most likely to make a big move on draft night
I'd love to see it but I'm not holding my breath.
You wouldn't love to see it though that's the gag. Even when they won the Finals in 2024 you still were crying about some nonsense of "they should have swept the Mavs instead of in 5". It's ok to admit your whole shtick on here is getting old.
What value are you adding? Serious question. Not meant to attack but what's the point of all of your posts?
bfchs123 wrote:FrodoFraggins wrote:So the Jrue trade was surprising in how much salary he took back, but maybe he felt like he would take care of that with the KP trade. KP having no value wasn't a shock and I think a certain amount of homerism is in play for people thinking Brad got fleeced.
Brad's not dumb enough to blow the team up just because Tatum's out most or all of the season. And I don't see any team making crazy offers for JB or DW.
And maybe Brad will see how out of his depth Mazzula is next year and look for a replacement.
I think people underestimate how much value ~$22 million of cap space / savings is worth in the current environment where the Nets were one of (or the only?) team that could even pull something like this off. It was always somewhat this way but with the new penalties, it will take a good amount of value to move off salary, especially when you're trading for pure space and not smaller amounts / duration.
hugepatsfan wrote:Tatum is out for next year. Maaaaaaybe he comes back late in the year/for the playoffs but can't expect much. Realistically, the injury shut them out of contention in 25-26 season. Looking ahead to 26-27 season, Porzingis wasn't even under contract and he'll be a 31 year old injury prone player who's never had a healthy playoff run. Jrue would be in his age 36 season and while I think the talk of his decline have been absurdly overstated, you do have to think it will actually be coming at some point. People talk about "blowing it up" here, but I'm not sure they've traded away a single piece that would be overly positive to the next time Tatum is even truly available for a title run. Maybe Jrue keeps staving off decline but that's a question mark.
The Celtics right now are $29.9M below the tax for 26-27 with 10 players already signed (including their 2 picks tonight/tomorrow). For this year, they're $16.7M over the tax line right now and that's with $35.9M of expiring salary between Simons/Niang... I think they can probably trim that down to below the tax without including any future 1sts (probably need to use 2nds though). That allows them to keep Tatum/Brown/White/Hauser/Pritchard and all of their 1st round picks. Those are the pieces, IMO, that are going to contribute positively to their next "window" to win.
Obviously they made their team worse, but I don't think they've actually done anything to harm a real shot at having a title contending team for them since Tatum is out this year.
themoneyteam2 wrote:The Corey's wrote:You wouldn't love to see it though that's the gag. Even when they won the Finals in 2024 you still were crying about some nonsense of "they should have swept the Mavs instead of in 5". It's ok to admit your whole shtick on here is getting old.
What value are you adding? Serious question. Not meant to attack but what's the point of all of your posts?
djFan71 wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:Tatum is out for next year. Maaaaaaybe he comes back late in the year/for the playoffs but can't expect much. Realistically, the injury shut them out of contention in 25-26 season. Looking ahead to 26-27 season, Porzingis wasn't even under contract and he'll be a 31 year old injury prone player who's never had a healthy playoff run. Jrue would be in his age 36 season and while I think the talk of his decline have been absurdly overstated, you do have to think it will actually be coming at some point. People talk about "blowing it up" here, but I'm not sure they've traded away a single piece that would be overly positive to the next time Tatum is even truly available for a title run. Maybe Jrue keeps staving off decline but that's a question mark.
The Celtics right now are $29.9M below the tax for 26-27 with 10 players already signed (including their 2 picks tonight/tomorrow). For this year, they're $16.7M over the tax line right now and that's with $35.9M of expiring salary between Simons/Niang... I think they can probably trim that down to below the tax without including any future 1sts (probably need to use 2nds though). That allows them to keep Tatum/Brown/White/Hauser/Pritchard and all of their 1st round picks. Those are the pieces, IMO, that are going to contribute positively to their next "window" to win.
Obviously they made their team worse, but I don't think they've actually done anything to harm a real shot at having a title contending team for them since Tatum is out this year.
Do you think it makes sense to duck the tax this year, but then go over for 26-27 to rebuild a contender?
That's the part I struggle with. If you're not resetting the repeater tax rates by being out for 2 years, you save money once, but don't improve the long term tax rate. So, if you do more moves and lose more value to duck the tax this year, you're almost implying that you will stay under again when Tatum is back in 26-27 and not fully try to contend til 27-28.
With the expiring contracts you're obviously under for 26-27 like you say, but with a built in assumption that you can aggregate and take back extra, and use the TPEs and MLE to add that salary right back and try to contend in 26-27.
Now if you can have your cake and eat it to by trading Simons and getting back a PJ or some young cheap guy like Anthony Black, etc, then by all means do it. But if you chip away at your assets to chip away at the salary, I'm not sure it is. Unless you're planning a 2 year tax duck.
djFan71 wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:Tatum is out for next year. Maaaaaaybe he comes back late in the year/for the playoffs but can't expect much. Realistically, the injury shut them out of contention in 25-26 season. Looking ahead to 26-27 season, Porzingis wasn't even under contract and he'll be a 31 year old injury prone player who's never had a healthy playoff run. Jrue would be in his age 36 season and while I think the talk of his decline have been absurdly overstated, you do have to think it will actually be coming at some point. People talk about "blowing it up" here, but I'm not sure they've traded away a single piece that would be overly positive to the next time Tatum is even truly available for a title run. Maybe Jrue keeps staving off decline but that's a question mark.
The Celtics right now are $29.9M below the tax for 26-27 with 10 players already signed (including their 2 picks tonight/tomorrow). For this year, they're $16.7M over the tax line right now and that's with $35.9M of expiring salary between Simons/Niang... I think they can probably trim that down to below the tax without including any future 1sts (probably need to use 2nds though). That allows them to keep Tatum/Brown/White/Hauser/Pritchard and all of their 1st round picks. Those are the pieces, IMO, that are going to contribute positively to their next "window" to win.
Obviously they made their team worse, but I don't think they've actually done anything to harm a real shot at having a title contending team for them since Tatum is out this year.
Do you think it makes sense to duck the tax this year, but then go over for 26-27 to rebuild a contender?
That's the part I struggle with. If you're not resetting the repeater tax rates by being out for 2 years, you save money once, but don't improve the long term tax rate. So, if you do more moves and lose more value to duck the tax this year, you're almost implying that you will stay under again when Tatum is back in 26-27 and not fully try to contend til 27-28.
With the expiring contracts you're obviously under for 26-27 like you say, but with a built in assumption that you can aggregate and take back extra, and use the TPEs and MLE to add that salary right back and try to contend in 26-27.
Now if you can have your cake and eat it to by trading Simons and getting back a PJ or some young cheap guy like Anthony Black, etc and duck the tax this year, then by all means do it. But if you chip away at your assets to chip away at the salary, I'm not sure it is the right path. Unless you're planning a 2 year tax duck.
hugepatsfan wrote:djFan71 wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:Tatum is out for next year. Maaaaaaybe he comes back late in the year/for the playoffs but can't expect much. Realistically, the injury shut them out of contention in 25-26 season. Looking ahead to 26-27 season, Porzingis wasn't even under contract and he'll be a 31 year old injury prone player who's never had a healthy playoff run. Jrue would be in his age 36 season and while I think the talk of his decline have been absurdly overstated, you do have to think it will actually be coming at some point. People talk about "blowing it up" here, but I'm not sure they've traded away a single piece that would be overly positive to the next time Tatum is even truly available for a title run. Maybe Jrue keeps staving off decline but that's a question mark.
The Celtics right now are $29.9M below the tax for 26-27 with 10 players already signed (including their 2 picks tonight/tomorrow). For this year, they're $16.7M over the tax line right now and that's with $35.9M of expiring salary between Simons/Niang... I think they can probably trim that down to below the tax without including any future 1sts (probably need to use 2nds though). That allows them to keep Tatum/Brown/White/Hauser/Pritchard and all of their 1st round picks. Those are the pieces, IMO, that are going to contribute positively to their next "window" to win.
Obviously they made their team worse, but I don't think they've actually done anything to harm a real shot at having a title contending team for them since Tatum is out this year.
Do you think it makes sense to duck the tax this year, but then go over for 26-27 to rebuild a contender?
That's the part I struggle with. If you're not resetting the repeater tax rates by being out for 2 years, you save money once, but don't improve the long term tax rate. So, if you do more moves and lose more value to duck the tax this year, you're almost implying that you will stay under again when Tatum is back in 26-27 and not fully try to contend til 27-28.
With the expiring contracts you're obviously under for 26-27 like you say, but with a built in assumption that you can aggregate and take back extra, and use the TPEs and MLE to add that salary right back and try to contend in 26-27.
Now if you can have your cake and eat it to by trading Simons and getting back a PJ or some young cheap guy like Anthony Black, etc, then by all means do it. But if you chip away at your assets to chip away at the salary, I'm not sure it is. Unless you're planning a 2 year tax duck.
I think you stay under again in 26-27. Right now, with 10 player signed if you include #28 and #32, they're $29.9M under the tax line for 26-27 right now. I expect that they'll combine the Jrue/KP deals into one big 4 team deal. Niang and Simons will be acquired via salary matching with Porzingis and then you get a full $32.4M TPE for Jrue. Then after that you deal Simons/Niang for expiring salary but lower so you duck the tax this year.
That means next year, they should have a pretty decent 1st rounder to add. And then a couple vet min fillers. But the "crown jewel" addition is you use that TPE to use up the rest of that $30M cushion of tax room you have and add hopefully one really solid player to fit in as the "4th guy" behind Tatum/Brown/White and ahead of Pritchard/Hauser and the collection of younger players they've hopefully developed (Scheierman, 2025 #28, 2025 #32, 2026 1st rounder... Queta/Walsh to a lesser extent).
I think if we assume they can add a good ~$20M salary player with that TPE by attaching picks who's a starting level player that's a pretty good team. Maybe not a "balls to the wall" attempt at competing but a good one for Tatum's first year back. Then in 27-28 it's truly unrestricted spending. No repeat rates. No 2nd apron repeater penalties. Right back to being able to do anything they want to do.
SparringPartner wrote:djFan71 wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:Tatum is out for next year. Maaaaaaybe he comes back late in the year/for the playoffs but can't expect much. Realistically, the injury shut them out of contention in 25-26 season. Looking ahead to 26-27 season, Porzingis wasn't even under contract and he'll be a 31 year old injury prone player who's never had a healthy playoff run. Jrue would be in his age 36 season and while I think the talk of his decline have been absurdly overstated, you do have to think it will actually be coming at some point. People talk about "blowing it up" here, but I'm not sure they've traded away a single piece that would be overly positive to the next time Tatum is even truly available for a title run. Maybe Jrue keeps staving off decline but that's a question mark.
The Celtics right now are $29.9M below the tax for 26-27 with 10 players already signed (including their 2 picks tonight/tomorrow). For this year, they're $16.7M over the tax line right now and that's with $35.9M of expiring salary between Simons/Niang... I think they can probably trim that down to below the tax without including any future 1sts (probably need to use 2nds though). That allows them to keep Tatum/Brown/White/Hauser/Pritchard and all of their 1st round picks. Those are the pieces, IMO, that are going to contribute positively to their next "window" to win.
Obviously they made their team worse, but I don't think they've actually done anything to harm a real shot at having a title contending team for them since Tatum is out this year.
Do you think it makes sense to duck the tax this year, but then go over for 26-27 to rebuild a contender?
That's the part I struggle with. If you're not resetting the repeater tax rates by being out for 2 years, you save money once, but don't improve the long term tax rate. So, if you do more moves and lose more value to duck the tax this year, you're almost implying that you will stay under again when Tatum is back in 26-27 and not fully try to contend til 27-28.
With the expiring contracts you're obviously under for 26-27 like you say, but with a built in assumption that you can aggregate and take back extra, and use the TPEs and MLE to add that salary right back and try to contend in 26-27.
Now if you can have your cake and eat it to by trading Simons and getting back a PJ or some young cheap guy like Anthony Black, etc and duck the tax this year, then by all means do it. But if you chip away at your assets to chip away at the salary, I'm not sure it is the right path. Unless you're planning a 2 year tax duck.
I'm not sure of the exact details, but don't you have to be out of the luxury tax for 3 out of 5 years, or something similar, for it to even matter?
GreenBlooded wrote:I know the focus has been on aprons, tax bills, the age and fragility of the supporting cast but as the dust clears from the trades... Who's playing PF and C next year and in 26?
SparringPartner wrote:themoneyteam2 wrote:The Corey's wrote:You wouldn't love to see it though that's the gag. Even when they won the Finals in 2024 you still were crying about some nonsense of "they should have swept the Mavs instead of in 5". It's ok to admit your whole shtick on here is getting old.
What value are you adding? Serious question. Not meant to attack but what's the point of all of your posts?
2020 - bubble, go down 0-2, lose
2022 - Homecourt, 2-1 lead, lose three straight
2023 - Homecourt, go down 0-3, lose
2024 - YES, finally
2025 - Homecourt, go down 0-2, lose
Have low standards, that's fine, but don't call others out because they have higher standards than you; how you lose matters. Regular-season wins mean more to you than competing for a championship. If you're not competing for championships, you should be resetting, period.
SparringPartner wrote:themoneyteam2 wrote:The Corey's wrote:You wouldn't love to see it though that's the gag. Even when they won the Finals in 2024 you still were crying about some nonsense of "they should have swept the Mavs instead of in 5". It's ok to admit your whole shtick on here is getting old.
What value are you adding? Serious question. Not meant to attack but what's the point of all of your posts?
2020 - bubble, go down 0-2, lose
2022 - Homecourt, 2-1 lead, lose three straight
2023 - Homecourt, go down 0-3, lose
2024 - YES, finally
2025 - Homecourt, go down 0-2, lose
Have low standards, that's fine, but don't call others out because they have higher standards than you; how you lose matters. Regular-season wins mean more to you than competing for a championship. If you're not competing for championships, you should be resetting, period.
themoneyteam2 wrote:The Corey's wrote:GreenBlooded wrote:
I agree they are **** next year but that is exactly why this is the year they're most likely to make a big move on draft night
I'd love to see it but I'm not holding my breath.
You wouldn't love to see it though that's the gag. Even when they won the Finals in 2024 you still were crying about some nonsense of "they should have swept the Mavs instead of in 5". It's ok to admit your whole shtick on here is getting old.
What value are you adding? Serious question. Not meant to attack but what's the point of all of your posts?
phincsfan wrote:This is for the 26/27 season:
If Stevens feels confidant about adding Simons for the future and he gets a 30mil per year contract that would put the C's at 206mil with a roster of
JT
JB
White
Simons
Sam
PP
Rico
Neems
25' rookie
26' rookie
I'm gonna estimate the 2nd apron will be close to just above 220mil
I'm gonna estimate the luxury tax will be between 180-185mil
That group will also have at least one 25' rookie and a 26' rookie contract.
They need to get ready to continue to develop rookies with the big club and not Maine.
I was a fan of Joe and called in to Zolak and Beetle in Sept of 23' singing his praises.
But he needs to adjust to developing and playing rookies a lot more. They're getting paid real money so they need to play and develop.
Celticlifer wrote:SparringPartner wrote:themoneyteam2 wrote:
2020 - bubble, go down 0-2, lose
2022 - Homecourt, 2-1 lead, lose three straight
2023 - Homecourt, go down 0-3, lose
2024 - YES, finally
2025 - Homecourt, go down 0-2, lose
Have low standards, that's fine, but don't call others out because they have higher standards than you; how you lose matters. Regular-season wins mean more to you than competing for a championship. If you're not competing for championships, you should be resetting, period.
Just wat to clarify this very astute post.
2020 - bubble, go down 0-2, lose IN CONFERENCE FINALS
2022 - Homecourt, 2-1 lead, lose IN FINALS
2023 - Homecourt, go down 0-3, lose IN CONFEENCE FINALS
2024 - YES, finally
2025 - Homecourt, go down 0-2, lose[/b]
We should stop with all this tanking.