sully00 wrote:Fencer reregistered wrote:So the FAQ is back up. I thought otherwise and didn't check. Thanks!
So repeater is based on you having been in the luxury tax 3 of the past 4 seasons. Uh ... I've forgotten which recent years the Cs were or weren't in the luxury tax.Bleeding Green wrote:Yeah the repeater tax is insane in the NBA. You can read about it here: http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q18
If you expect the Celtics to be competitive for the next 5+ seasons and for Tatum to be maxed, Smart re-signed, one of the young players re-signed to a 20mm+ contract, Hayward traded for future salary considerations, etc, it's not hard to, in a few years be staring down at 100+ million in tax for a given year. The Warriors are paying 64 mil in tax this year and they sucked ass last year, will probably be middling this year. Crazy how fast things change. And they have a trade exception from the Iguodala trade, that if they use fully, their tax bill would be like 135 million.
It's not my money, but if the Celtics aren't competing for titles every single year, I wouldn't expect the owners to be OK with chucking 100 million down the drain so their team can lose in the ECF every year. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm no expert.
Boston paid 3.8 mil in lux tax in '18-'19 otherwise they have been under.
And will almost assuredly in '21-22 with Tatum's max. So, it would be really nice to not do it '20-21 to break up the 3 of past 4 seasons run.