ImageImageImage

Lillard (signs with Blazers 7/17/25)

Moderators: bisme37, Froob, Darthlukey, Shak_Celts, Parliament10, canman1971, shackles10, snowman

User avatar
Ed Pinkney
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,077
And1: 5,236
Joined: Jun 23, 2007
Location: Australia
 

Re: Lillard 

Post#121 » by Ed Pinkney » Sun Jul 6, 2025 9:22 pm

bisme37 wrote:
gocelts wrote:Not sure how I’ll like post Achilles Lillard since I wasn’t a fan him before. I don’t understand how this would work…won’t he still want to get another payday once he’s healthy ? What the point of having him because keeping Tatum company on the bench?


Idea is we give him the minimum for two years. He rehabs with his pal JT, then they come back around the same time and we suddenly add two Allstars to the active roster.

I've never been a big Dame guy but for the minimum it's low risk, high reward, and a good fit for both parties imo. He is still getting paid by the Bucks and knows he's not getting a new mega-contract while he has a torn achilles.



Agree on all of your points too. If it is the minimum then it’s a no brainer, other than he takes an active roster spot for most or all of the season and can’t play.
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 41,038
And1: 27,915
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: Lillard 

Post#122 » by Fencer reregistered » Sun Jul 6, 2025 10:10 pm

Parliament10 wrote:
jfs1000d wrote:
brackdan70 wrote:I don’t think it makes any sense for the Celtics…unless is he going to accept a two year minimum?
I guess if that’s the case ok…but then we need to trade Hauser or Simons or Niang to get back under the 2nd Apron still. Feels like Lilliard doesn’t fit the path.

2 year minimum, sure. What else would we give him?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe that we can give him the Taxpayer MLE?
But, we have to stay under the 2nd Apron, to do it.


Already discussed. How does the Celtics paying Lillard more than minimum salary benefit anybody except the Bucks?
Banned temporarily for, among other sins, being "Extremely Deviant".
gocelts
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,089
And1: 1,966
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Location: Illadelphia

Re: Lillard 

Post#123 » by gocelts » Sun Jul 6, 2025 10:15 pm

I get it…but why would he choose us, if the only way we make out is to trade him in 26/27? Dude is getting millions to not play for the Bucks the next 5 years. He can rehab anywhere, and pick wherever he wants once he’s better. We’d have to agree not to trade him and we’d get a decent player and an unbelievable deal his 2nd year.
~gocelts
playa-hater
RealGM
Posts: 22,354
And1: 24,022
Joined: Aug 29, 2020
 

Re: Lillard 

Post#124 » by playa-hater » Sun Jul 6, 2025 10:29 pm

For the posters saying They didn't like Dame before. That was also at his ridiculous price tag. How can anyone complain about dame when it only cost minimum?

You one hundred percent give him a chance. There is absolutely no risk at his salary. Now imagine a reward if he can play Anywhere near pre. Injury.
2 things need to go.. my lack of spell check and Joe.. :nod:
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 41,038
And1: 27,915
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: Lillard 

Post#125 » by Fencer reregistered » Sun Jul 6, 2025 11:05 pm

Banned temporarily for, among other sins, being "Extremely Deviant".
User avatar
Green89
RealGM
Posts: 28,320
And1: 27,795
Joined: Apr 01, 2013

Re: Lillard 

Post#126 » by Green89 » Mon Jul 7, 2025 12:19 am

It's happening!!

Read on Twitter
User avatar
TheMartian
General Manager
Posts: 8,917
And1: 6,720
Joined: Oct 13, 2004
 

Re: Lillard 

Post#127 » by TheMartian » Mon Jul 7, 2025 12:37 am

So, have we signed Lillard yet?
Curmudgeon
RealGM
Posts: 41,616
And1: 25,243
Joined: Jan 20, 2004
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Lillard 

Post#128 » by Curmudgeon » Mon Jul 7, 2025 1:12 am

Beal is next. Then CP3
Stevens is running an assisted living facility.
But seriously, if we could trade Anfernee Simons for Lillard on a minimum deal I'd be all for it.
"Numbers lie alot. Wins and losses don't lie." - Jerry West
"You are what your record says you are."- Bill Parcells
"Offense sells tickets. Defense wins games. Rebounding wins championships." Pat Summit
jfs1000d
RealGM
Posts: 28,044
And1: 14,868
Joined: Jun 25, 2004

Re: Lillard 

Post#129 » by jfs1000d » Mon Jul 7, 2025 1:15 am

Curmudgeon wrote:Beal is next. Then CP3
Stevens is running an assisted living facility.
But seriously, if we could trade Anfernee Simons for Lillard on a minimum deal I'd be all for it.

lol. This made me laugh. Get AL too. Maybe it gets lebron here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 41,038
And1: 27,915
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: Lillard 

Post#130 » by Fencer reregistered » Mon Jul 7, 2025 3:02 am

Curmudgeon wrote:Beal is next. Then CP3
Stevens is running an assisted living facility.
But seriously, if we could trade Anfernee Simons for Lillard on a minimum deal I'd be all for it.


Which one would play more defense? :D
Banned temporarily for, among other sins, being "Extremely Deviant".
bucknersrevenge
RealGM
Posts: 11,216
And1: 15,025
Joined: Jul 05, 2012
Location: Southern Maryland
Contact:
         

Re: Lillard 

Post#131 » by bucknersrevenge » Mon Jul 7, 2025 3:41 am

Respect to Washburn as a beat reporter but I'm not buying him as a credible source on Lillard for one nanosecond. He sounds like a guy believing in who Lillard was 3 years ago. I'm not even sure winning a ring is the most important thing for Lillard. And the comment about him not coming off the bench makes even more sense. Lillard wants to win HIS way. He won't put up with being a 3rd or 4th option coming all the way to Boston. He could certainly beat out Brandin Podziemski for the other starting G spot. Kerr would certainly do it. Playing back home on the west coast in his hometown, closer to his kids. I think that's eventually gonna be where his head is at. I'm good with that personally. He's not the guy we want here anyway.
and that's "MR. Irrelevant" to you!!

Founder of The Red's Disciples Podcast
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKArn8FGRYRxGqNDg8J4IAQ/featured
User avatar
grindtime22
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,215
And1: 4,694
Joined: Jan 30, 2012
     

Re: Lillard 

Post#132 » by grindtime22 » Mon Jul 7, 2025 4:24 am

Fencer reregistered wrote:
Parliament10 wrote:
jfs1000d wrote:2 year minimum, sure. What else would we give him?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe that we can give him the Taxpayer MLE?
But, we have to stay under the 2nd Apron, to do it.


Already discussed. How does the Celtics paying Lillard more than minimum salary benefit anybody except the Bucks?


Pretty sure it would benefit Lillard financially. Bucks can't offset all of it.

(New Salary-Vet Minimum)/2 is my understanding
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 41,038
And1: 27,915
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: Lillard 

Post#133 » by Fencer reregistered » Mon Jul 7, 2025 4:44 am

grindtime22 wrote:
Fencer reregistered wrote:
Parliament10 wrote:I believe that we can give him the Taxpayer MLE?
But, we have to stay under the 2nd Apron, to do it.


Already discussed. How does the Celtics paying Lillard more than minimum salary benefit anybody except the Bucks?


Pretty sure it would benefit Lillard financially. Bucks can't offset all of it.

(New Salary-Vet Minimum)/2 is my understanding


I've never heard anything remotely like that before. Is it Lillard-specific? Standard practice? General CBA-forced practice?
Banned temporarily for, among other sins, being "Extremely Deviant".
jfs1000d
RealGM
Posts: 28,044
And1: 14,868
Joined: Jun 25, 2004

Re: Lillard 

Post#134 » by jfs1000d » Mon Jul 7, 2025 4:47 am

Here is AI on Lillard. There is no bidding war to be had for his services.

If Damian Lillard is waived and then signs with another NBA team, his previous contract with the Bucks will be offset by the amount of his new contract. This means that whatever salary Lillard earns from his new team will be subtracted from what the Bucks still owe him for the remaining years of his original contract.
For example, if Lillard was owed $54.1 million for the upcoming season and signs with a new team for $5 million, the Bucks would only need to pay him $49.1 million for that season. This offset applies for the duration of the guaranteed money he was owed, typically for the next two seasons in this case.
Because of this offset rule, there is little financial incentive for Lillard to sign for more than the minimum with his next team, since any additional salary he earns would just reduce the amount the Bucks owe him. This allows him to choose a team based on fit or championship potential without sacrificing his total earnings


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
chrisab123
RealGM
Posts: 15,201
And1: 10,611
Joined: Jul 07, 2012
         

Re: Lillard 

Post#135 » by chrisab123 » Mon Jul 7, 2025 9:19 pm

I still say this guy is a lock for South Beach. I don’t care what BS poster on twitter from Revere says. He’s not coming. In the event that he did, let’s just say for **** and giggles he called the Celtics and was like “to hell with no taxes, beautiful weather, beautiful women, and endorsements, I want to ball with my buddy” then yeah it would probably work for a year or two which is all you really need.

But he’s going be on the court for opening night in 26-27. It might even be in Boston, but it will be in a Miami Heat uniform.
Hal14
RealGM
Posts: 21,929
And1: 20,642
Joined: Apr 05, 2019

Re: Lillard 

Post#136 » by Hal14 » Mon Jul 7, 2025 10:02 pm

Green89 wrote:It's happening!!

Read on Twitter

C'mon now. Celtics forum? That's like the least reliable source on the internet.
1/11/24 The birth of a new Hal. From now on being less combative, avoiding confrontation - like Switzerland :)
User avatar
grindtime22
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,215
And1: 4,694
Joined: Jan 30, 2012
     

Re: Lillard 

Post#137 » by grindtime22 » Mon Jul 7, 2025 11:14 pm

Fencer reregistered wrote:
grindtime22 wrote:
Fencer reregistered wrote:
Already discussed. How does the Celtics paying Lillard more than minimum salary benefit anybody except the Bucks?


Pretty sure it would benefit Lillard financially. Bucks can't offset all of it.

(New Salary-Vet Minimum)/2 is my understanding


I've never heard anything remotely like that before. Is it Lillard-specific? Standard practice? General CBA-forced practice?


I'm looking, maybe I'm wrong with the current CBA. Research on this is significantly harder without cbafaq continuing. This was for sure the formula on the prior CBA.
User avatar
grindtime22
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,215
And1: 4,694
Joined: Jan 30, 2012
     

Re: Lillard 

Post#138 » by grindtime22 » Mon Jul 7, 2025 11:21 pm

grindtime22 wrote:
Fencer reregistered wrote:
grindtime22 wrote:
Pretty sure it would benefit Lillard financially. Bucks can't offset all of it.

(New Salary-Vet Minimum)/2 is my understanding


I've never heard anything remotely like that before. Is it Lillard-specific? Standard practice? General CBA-forced practice?


I'm looking, maybe I'm wrong with the current CBA. Research on this is significantly harder without cbafaq continuing. This was for sure the formula on the prior CBA.


Here is some evidence

Read on Twitter


Read on Twitter


Keith is still linking to this part of cbafaq so I'm going to assume the formula carried over to the new CBA. I believe the 1 year vet minimum is used so you are basically looking at 2 million for that to make it simple.

If you sign him for 10, the Bucks can only offset 4. They can only get offsets this year and next.
User avatar
grindtime22
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,215
And1: 4,694
Joined: Jan 30, 2012
     

Re: Lillard 

Post#139 » by grindtime22 » Mon Jul 7, 2025 11:36 pm

jfs1000d wrote:Here is AI on Lillard. There is no bidding war to be had for his services.

If Damian Lillard is waived and then signs with another NBA team, his previous contract with the Bucks will be offset by the amount of his new contract. This means that whatever salary Lillard earns from his new team will be subtracted from what the Bucks still owe him for the remaining years of his original contract.
For example, if Lillard was owed $54.1 million for the upcoming season and signs with a new team for $5 million, the Bucks would only need to pay him $49.1 million for that season. This offset applies for the duration of the guaranteed money he was owed, typically for the next two seasons in this case.
Because of this offset rule, there is little financial incentive for Lillard to sign for more than the minimum with his next team, since any additional salary he earns would just reduce the amount the Bucks owe him. This allows him to choose a team based on fit or championship potential without sacrificing his total earnings


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


What AI did you use?

Here is what google search "AI" shows when asking "can bucks offset damian lillards salary when he signs with new team"

Yes, the Milwaukee Bucks can get a salary offset if Damian Lillard signs with another team after being waived, but the offset only impacts their luxury tax situation, not their immediate cap space. The offset is calculated as the difference between Lillard's new contract and the veteran's minimum salary, divided by two. Even if Lillard signs for the minimum, the Bucks can only potentially benefit by a small amount (around $775,000 per year).

Here's a more detailed explanation:
Waiving and Stretching:
The Bucks waived Lillard and stretched his remaining contract (two years, $113 million) over five years, meaning they'll pay him $22.5 million per year for the next five years.
Luxury Tax Offset:
When a player is waived and stretched, their salary counts against the team's luxury tax, but the team can receive a salary offset if the player signs with another team.
Offset Calculation:
The offset is calculated by subtracting the veteran's minimum salary (around $2.05 million for a player with Lillard's experience) from the new contract's salary and dividing the result by two.
Limited Impact:
Even if Lillard signs for the maximum amount, the offset is limited by the veteran's minimum. For example, if he signs for the minimum, the Bucks would only see a benefit of about $775,000 per year.
Focus on Luxury Tax:
The offset primarily affects the Bucks' luxury tax bill, not their ability to sign players.
Lillard's Flexibility:
Lillard can essentially sign with any team he chooses, even for the minimum, as his full salary will still be paid by the Bucks.


There is some context that isn't precise, but I believe this is broadly correct.
jfs1000d
RealGM
Posts: 28,044
And1: 14,868
Joined: Jun 25, 2004

Re: Lillard 

Post#140 » by jfs1000d » Mon Jul 7, 2025 11:47 pm

chrisab123 wrote:I still say this guy is a lock for South Beach. I don’t care what BS poster on twitter from Revere says. He’s not coming. In the event that he did, let’s just say for **** and giggles he called the Celtics and was like “to hell with no taxes, beautiful weather, beautiful women, and endorsements, I want to ball with my buddy” then yeah it would probably work for a year or two which is all you really need.

But he’s going be on the court for opening night in 26-27. It might even be in Boston, but it will be in a Miami Heat uniform.

The taxes thing is so overdone. He will
Be on a minimum deal. His bucks salary isnt gonna be taxed in Boston. Only his minimum salary, and I my for games okayed in Boston.

No one makes that decision based in taxes. And, beautiful women? They are beautiful women everywhere. Dime a dozen in fact. And lillard is 37. He don't want a 24 year old hanger on. He’s a grown up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Return to Boston Celtics