Late August Bookkeeping - BOS/LAL/BRK

[redslastlaugh]

This is an idea for Boston to drop under the tax, for the Lakers to add offensive pop and open more capspace for next summer and for Brooklyn to fill their remaining cap space while adding some upside.

BOS trades Anfernee Simons ($27.7) to LAL and receives Jarred Vanderbilt ($11.6)

LAL trades Jarred Vanderbilt to BOS, Gabe Vincent to BRK, Dalton Knecht to BRK, a 2032 2nd to BRK

BRK trades a top-55 2nd round pick to LAL, top-55 2nd round pick to BOS

The "why" for all teams
Vando drops Boston under the tax, he's not a Mazzulla Ball player but C's live with his two years after this season

Simons gives Lakers a scoring guard in his prime for this year. Ant's on a big expiring, so LAL can open up capspace if he is not a fit after this year. Knecht came out of the gate hot, but at this point Jake LaRavia looks at least as good of a wing prospect. Knect is the price (plus a future 2nd) to clear Vando's future years, get Simons and then 2026 offseason optionality for rebuilding around Luka

Brooklyn fills their remaining cap space and adds another 2nd plus an athletic shooting wing in Knecht who was highly regarded a year or so ago. Brooklyn took a lot of playmakers and Knecht fits as a play finisher and shooter.

[Apz]

Dont see the point for lakers. Simons and reaves sounds like a disaster bench backcourt. Offensive "pop" isnt really lakers issue

[Devilanche]

I think Brooklyn wait it out and see if they can extract more at the trade deadline.

Not a bad trade for them though.

[Mavrelous]

It can be done as 2 trades:
Trade 1:
Simons to BK
Vando to BOS
Mann to LAL

Trade 2:
Highsmith for Maxi Kleber + 2nd.

This keeps cap hold for Cam Thomas, but eats the entire cap space left for BK, in return, BK dumps Terrance Mann money, Brooklyn clear cap for next year, keeps the room exception to take on small salary, they turn their cap space in MPJ, Simons, Maxi Kleber, #22, DEN 32 1st and 2 seconds, nice return.
Celtics stretch Simons money over 3 years, with interest.
Lakers get a defensive guard, and a defensive forward for little extra salary commitment.

[Mavrelous]

I think Brooklyn wait it out and see if they can extract more at the trade deadline.

Not a bad trade for them though.

Right now, Cam Thomas cap hold is 12M, once they sign him, any extra money would count against the cap, they are better off selling cap space now.

[Golabki]

As a Celtics fan, if they are that desperate to cut money this year (and I hope they aren't), I think I'd rather just waive and stretch Simons.

I agree with Lakers, Simons isn't the best fit with Reeves. That said, he'd be the 2nd best guard on their roster.

[Mavrelous]

As a Celtics fan, if they are that desperate to cut money this year (and I hope they aren't), I think I'd rather just waive and stretch Simons.

I agree with Lakers, Simons isn't the best fit with Reeves. That said, he'd be the 2nd best guard on their roster.

1. No, no one would rather have dead cap over active contract, trading Simons for Vando >> stretching Simons.
2. Unless you count Luka as a forward, he'd be the at best the 3rd best guard, with a healthy margin.

[Devilanche]

I think Brooklyn wait it out and see if they can extract more at the trade deadline.

Not a bad trade for them though.

Right now, Cam Thomas cap hold is 12M, once they sign him, any extra money would count against the cap, they are better off selling cap space now.

That’s the most likely route but not a fan of resigning cam Thomas

[Golabki]

As a Celtics fan, if they are that desperate to cut money this year (and I hope they aren't), I think I'd rather just waive and stretch Simons.

I agree with Lakers, Simons isn't the best fit with Reeves. That said, he'd be the 2nd best guard on their roster.

1. No, no one would rather have dead cap over active contract, trading Simons for Vando >> stretching Simons.
2. Unless you count Luka as a forward, he'd be the at best the 3rd best guard, with a healthy margin.

1. Vando can't play in the playoffs and is always hurt. He's a vet min guy. I'd rather have the dead cap and keep Tillman or Minott in the role on the minimum, which saves a bit more money. The argument for Vando would be that you could trade him... but even next offseason it would cost you to get off his deal. To be clear, just keeping Simons is WAY better than either of those from a basketball perspective, so in both cases you're hurting your team now and in the future because the owners have a mandate to save more money now.

2. I was counting Luka as a forward because he almost never guards guards.

[Mavrelous]

1. Vando can't play in the playoffs and is always hurt. He's a vet min guy. I'd rather have the dead cap and keep Tillman or Minott in the role on the minimum, which saves a bit more money. The argument for Vando would be that you could trade him... but even next offseason it would cost you to get off his deal. To be clear, just keeping Simons is WAY better than either of those from a basketball perspective, so in both cases you're hurting your team now and in the future because the owners have a mandate to save more money now.

Vando is a bad contract, but bad contract is better than dead money, next year the Celtics will likely want to trade for a player to retool around Tatum, Brown and White, and Vando can be a filler salary, Simons dead money can't be used, it'll just sit there.
Yes, Simons for 1 year at 27M is better than Vando on 34M/3, but there is a reason the trade was proposed, it helps Celtics duck tax and start repeater tax reset.

[hugepatsfan]

Value seems fine all around IMO.

BOS actually takes on extra money and downgrades player, but the spread over 3 years is optimal for their salary situation. Current year savings always cost a premium so could argue they owe extra as well, but I do think the downgrade in talent and taking on a contract that spans 3 years (honestly, that's an eternity in today's NBA for a non star or even starter) is enough. And let's stop the silliness that dead money on a Simons waive/stretch is better than Vando for 3 years too.

BRK... selling cap space for what seems like fair value. More than fair value actually, IMO. I'd say Vincent's expiring is worth like 2-3 2nds. So this is valuing Knecht as 2 2nds which seems a little low for a guy just drafted in the 1st that wasn't awful, even if I don't think he's some super hot prospect or anything.

The LAL side is the toughest. "Value" is fine, but do they want to give up Knecht right now to save money later. Simons doesn't do much for them in the short term, which is fine because it's all about finances anyway and any on court contributions are secondary (also, they could still use Simons just fine because Smart and Luka can be slotted in defensively at wing spots). But overall, it feels like they could be better off just keeping what they have for now. They can, most likely, use Knecht and 2nds to dump Vando next year if they need to same way they're doing it now. This removes the ability to capitalize on any potential upside Knecht shows if given opportunity and the potential for having spent assets, albeit nothing major, for flexibility that they might not even need next year depending on moves available.

I feel like you could cut Knecht out of this and have it be fair, maybe LAL and BOS each chip in an extra 2nd. BRK taking Vincent before Cam Thomas' cap hold eats that space up for a few 2nds makes sense. BOS probably gripes about adding a 2nd, this deal stands to save them over $100M in terms of salary/tax savings this year, getting a tax payout this year for being under the line, and paying regular vs. repeater rates next year if they go back over when Tatum is healthy. It's just good business, and paying a 2nd (or two) to do it is fine if push comes to shove.

That introduces some apron issues for LAL to cut Knecht out, so that needs to be sorted out, probably with Kleber. So maybe that expands the deal a bit and it starts to unravel from there. But high level, that's what I think is best off - leaving Knecht out.

[Scoot McGroot]

This is an idea for Boston to drop under the tax, for the Lakers to add offensive pop and open more capspace for next summer and for Brooklyn to fill their remaining cap space while adding some upside.

BOS trades Anfernee Simons ($27.7) to LAL and receives Jarred Vanderbilt ($11.6)

LAL trades Jarred Vanderbilt to BOS, Gabe Vincent to BRK, Dalton Knecht to BRK, a 2032 2nd to BRK

BRK trades a top-55 2nd round pick to LAL, top-55 2nd round pick to BOS

The "why" for all teams
Vando drops Boston under the tax, he's not a Mazzulla Ball player but C's live with his two years after this season

Simons gives Lakers a scoring guard in his prime for this year. Ant's on a big expiring, so LAL can open up capspace if he is not a fit after this year. Knecht came out of the gate hot, but at this point Jake LaRavia looks at least as good of a wing prospect. Knect is the price (plus a future 2nd) to clear Vando's future years, get Simons and then 2026 offseason optionality for rebuilding around Luka

Brooklyn fills their remaining cap space and adds another 2nd plus an athletic shooting wing in Knecht who was highly regarded a year or so ago. Brooklyn took a lot of playmakers and Knecht fits as a play finisher and shooter.

Not legal, as is. LA ends up only $527k under their hard cap at the 1st apron and 2 players under the roster minimum. They have to clear more salary to try and make it legal, which would currently require either Maxi, Rui, or one of their big 3 (Lebron, Luka, or Reaves) as everyone else is guaranteed, but trade restricted, or makes too little to make a difference if traded (Bronnie).

[brackdan70]

I don’t know how important it is for the Celtics to get under the tax this season. The cost to future flexibility doesn’t seem worth it to me.
I’d rather just let Simons expire.
Vando doesn’t help at all for when Tatum is back.

[redslastlaugh]

This is an idea for Boston to drop under the tax, for the Lakers to add offensive pop and open more capspace for next summer and for Brooklyn to fill their remaining cap space while adding some upside.

BOS trades Anfernee Simons ($27.7) to LAL and receives Jarred Vanderbilt ($11.6)

LAL trades Jarred Vanderbilt to BOS, Gabe Vincent to BRK, Dalton Knecht to BRK, a 2032 2nd to BRK

BRK trades a top-55 2nd round pick to LAL, top-55 2nd round pick to BOS

Not legal, as is. LA ends up only $527k under their hard cap at the 1st apron and 2 players under the roster minimum. They have to clear more salary to try and make it legal, which would currently require either Maxi, Rui, or one of their big 3 (Lebron, Luka, or Reaves) as everyone else is guaranteed, but trade restricted, or makes too little to make a difference if traded (Bronnie).

The extra layers of trade rules in the new CBA has zapped all the joy out of life, lol ...

[Scoot McGroot]

This is an idea for Boston to drop under the tax, for the Lakers to add offensive pop and open more capspace for next summer and for Brooklyn to fill their remaining cap space while adding some upside.

BOS trades Anfernee Simons ($27.7) to LAL and receives Jarred Vanderbilt ($11.6)

LAL trades Jarred Vanderbilt to BOS, Gabe Vincent to BRK, Dalton Knecht to BRK, a 2032 2nd to BRK

BRK trades a top-55 2nd round pick to LAL, top-55 2nd round pick to BOS

Not legal, as is. LA ends up only $527k under their hard cap at the 1st apron and 2 players under the roster minimum. They have to clear more salary to try and make it legal, which would currently require either Maxi, Rui, or one of their big 3 (Lebron, Luka, or Reaves) as everyone else is guaranteed, but trade restricted, or makes too little to make a difference if traded (Bronnie).

The extra layers of trade rules in the new CBA has zapped all the joy out of life, lol ...

The owners wanted a hard cap and limitations on adding salary to the rosters, and this is what they came up with...

[Golabki]

1. Vando can't play in the playoffs and is always hurt. He's a vet min guy. I'd rather have the dead cap and keep Tillman or Minott in the role on the minimum, which saves a bit more money. The argument for Vando would be that you could trade him... but even next offseason it would cost you to get off his deal. To be clear, just keeping Simons is WAY better than either of those from a basketball perspective, so in both cases you're hurting your team now and in the future because the owners have a mandate to save more money now.

Vando is a bad contract, but bad contract is better than dead money, next year the Celtics will likely want to trade for a player to retool around Tatum, Brown and White, and Vando can be a filler salary, Simons dead money can't be used, it'll just sit there.
Yes, Simons for 1 year at 27M is better than Vando on 34M/3, but there is a reason the trade was proposed, it helps Celtics duck tax and start repeater tax reset.

I understand they want to get under the tax, but they can do that by stretching him too.

If they're getting Gabe Vincent or Maxi Kleber, I think it's an easy "yes". Even if Vando was on a 2 year deal, I'd feel better about it. But this is bad enough on value that if this is the best you can do, you may just want to stretch him instead... which I agree is a terrible option.

[brackdan70]

1. Vando can't play in the playoffs and is always hurt. He's a vet min guy. I'd rather have the dead cap and keep Tillman or Minott in the role on the minimum, which saves a bit more money. The argument for Vando would be that you could trade him... but even next offseason it would cost you to get off his deal. To be clear, just keeping Simons is WAY better than either of those from a basketball perspective, so in both cases you're hurting your team now and in the future because the owners have a mandate to save more money now.

Vando is a bad contract, but bad contract is better than dead money, next year the Celtics will likely want to trade for a player to retool around Tatum, Brown and White, and Vando can be a filler salary, Simons dead money can't be used, it'll just sit there.
Yes, Simons for 1 year at 27M is better than Vando on 34M/3, but there is a reason the trade was proposed, it helps Celtics duck tax and start repeater tax reset.

I understand they want to get under the tax, but they can do that by stretching him too.

If they're getting Gabe Vincent or Maxi Kleber, I think it's an easy "yes". Even if Vando was on a 2 year deal, I'd feel better about it. But this is bad enough on value that if this is the best you can do, you may just want to stretch him instead... which I agree is a terrible option.

I think they would love to get under the tax but not at the cost of future flexibility or 1st round picks.
I am pretty sure the Celtics won’t make a deal like this. They have done their cutting and can pay the current projected tax bill and remain highly profitable.
Sure if they can get under the tax with a reasonable trade they will likely consider that, but bring on a negative contract for 3 years and especially a guy that doesn’t help, just seems dumb.

[Mavrelous]

1. Vando can't play in the playoffs and is always hurt. He's a vet min guy. I'd rather have the dead cap and keep Tillman or Minott in the role on the minimum, which saves a bit more money. The argument for Vando would be that you could trade him... but even next offseason it would cost you to get off his deal. To be clear, just keeping Simons is WAY better than either of those from a basketball perspective, so in both cases you're hurting your team now and in the future because the owners have a mandate to save more money now.

Vando is a bad contract, but bad contract is better than dead money, next year the Celtics will likely want to trade for a player to retool around Tatum, Brown and White, and Vando can be a filler salary, Simons dead money can't be used, it'll just sit there.
Yes, Simons for 1 year at 27M is better than Vando on 34M/3, but there is a reason the trade was proposed, it helps Celtics duck tax and start repeater tax reset.

I understand they want to get under the tax, but they can do that by stretching him too.

If they're getting Gabe Vincent or Maxi Kleber, I think it's an easy "yes". Even if Vando was on a 2 year deal, I'd feel better about it. But this is bad enough on value that if this is the best you can do, you may just want to stretch him instead... which I agree is a terrible option.

I get not wanting to make the deal, everyone is entitled to his opinion, but the deal is much better than waiving and stretching Simons.

[redslastlaugh]

I think they would love to get under the tax but not at the cost of future flexibility or 1st round picks.
I am pretty sure the Celtics won’t make a deal like this. They have done their cutting and can pay the current projected tax bill and remain highly profitable.
Sure if they can get under the tax with a reasonable trade they will likely consider that, but bring on a negative contract for 3 years and especially a guy that doesn’t help, just seems dumb.

Other posters have indicated that this trade wouldn't even be possible because of CBA trade rules, but to address the issues you raise:

getting under the tax this year and next, should allow us to go more deeply into spending to make a 2nd run at the back end of the JT/JB/DW core. Getting out of the repeater tax is the path to the most flexibility

about Vando's 3 yrs specifically: People said the same when we brought back Theis for Schroder at the 2022 deadline. Theis had 3 more years left at bad money and people were, "it's gonna take assets now to dump Theis's money," but Theis just became salary matching for Brad to acquire Brogdon and so, Vando is similiar money to Theis given salary inflation over 3 years, and would probably end up beneficial as the matching salary filler in a trade package.

but also, these points are not that compelling and Ant's $27.7 just dropping off the books provides a good bit of optionality as well, lol

[hugepatsfan]

I don’t know how important it is for the Celtics to get under the tax this season. The cost to future flexibility doesn’t seem worth it to me.
I’d rather just let Simons expire.
Vando doesn’t help at all for when Tatum is back.

Assuming they found a Simons deal that sheds $12.1M to avoid the tax, the financial implications would be:

1) $12.1M salary saved
2) $39.5M tax bill erased
3) get payout from tax paying teams of about $10-15M as a non-taxpaying team
4) pay regular rates instead of repeater rates next year - for comparison, at the $12.1M we're in the tax now the tax bill would be $9.1M instead of $39.5M if we were at regular rates vs. repeater rates, so net savings of $30.4M

All together, that could be close to $100M of savings that come from trading Simons to duck the tax this year (assuming they go back over it to about the 1st apron next year).

Looking ahead to next year when Tatum is back, with Simons off the books, the Celtics are currently about $20.4M below the tax line and $29.0M below the 2nd apron. That's before using their 1st round pick and, hypothetically, signing a MLE player (full or taxpayers depending on the next step). My general assumption is that they'd try to S&T Simons as well to add another piece. All this takes them back into the tax.

In the grand scheme of things, they probably end up in the same spot either scenario. Keep Simons and pay tax this year and then S&T him on a MLE range contract for either a piece back or a TPE to use in a separate addition... OR trade him for Vandy and save $100M over 2 years while getting that same player just using Vandy's 2 year deal as salary filler. They traded for Brogdon, as an example, with Theis' salary locked in for multiple years. I imagine Vandy could be used the same way with picks attached.