CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: mahonedog88 on May 21, 2018, 12:39:20 PM
-
As most know, the contract situations are set up currently that just about the exact same team will be back next year. There a few exceptions though, most notably being Smart. I know there's been a lot of debate on what to pay him and rightfully so...but we haven't had a lot of Aron Baynes discussion either.
Statistically speaking, he's been one of the top defenders in the league all year, individually and within the team. His rim protection and paint presence is exactly what this team needed. It was like a breath of fresh air to see him roaming down there instead of Amir Johnson and Tyler Zeller.
But now the question becomes, what are you willing to pay him to make him stay? Right now he makes $4.3 million on this one year deal and it wouldn't shock me all that much if he signs another 1 year deal for next season too. Or maybe that's just my hope. Anything outside of bringing this gang back together next year, this time with Irving and Hayward, just seems like a disappointment to me.
-
I think he is an important piece to bring back. The only real defensive size the team has.
But he is not worth breaking the bank for. MLE level at most.
-
Totally agree we need him back.
-
I think we need to retain him. Hopefully he’d settle for less than $6 million annually.
-
If we can't upgrade him then keep him. I wish we had s mobile 7!footer but don't think they exist lol.
-
Definitely want him back. He will keep working on his 3pt shot and he really adds a different defensive dimension to this team.
He’s also the guy who can go from starter to supporter and be fine with it. He’s often the biggest cheerleader on the sidelines.
He seems pretty egoless (from the same cut as Smart), does whatever the team needs and is simply a great fit here.
-
I remember vaguely that we used the Room Exception to sign Baynes.. did we use the mid-level exception last year? Or did we lose it coz we were already over the cap.
In any case, if we go over the tax can we just use the tax-payer mid-level on him? Or if we can somehow sneak under the non-taxpayer mid?
Where the hell has saltlover gone recently?
-
I remember vaguely that we used the Room Exception to sign Baynes.. did we use the mid-level exception last year? Or did we lose it coz we were already over the cap.
In any case, if we go over the tax can we just use the tax-payer mid-level on him?
Where the hell has saltlover gone recently?
Teams that use cap room, like we did last year, don’t get the MLE, only the room exception.
I believe we can use the full MLE this year, but if we do we’re hard-capped at the “apron”, which is $4 million above the tax line. If we’re worried about exceeding the apron, we’ll stick to the Taxpayer MLE.
-
I think we absolutely bring him back. His defense in the playoffs has been great. I almost said he is the best def big man since KG, but Horford might be just a bit better on d based on the eye test only.
-
I remember vaguely that we used the Room Exception to sign Baynes.. did we use the mid-level exception last year? Or did we lose it coz we were already over the cap.
In any case, if we go over the tax can we just use the tax-payer mid-level on him?
Where the hell has saltlover gone recently?
Teams that use cap room, like we did last year, don’t get the MLE, only the room exception.
I believe we can use the full MLE this year, but if we do we’re hard-capped at the “apron”, which is $4 million above the tax line. If we’re worried about exceeding the apron, we’ll stick to the Taxpayer MLE.
Or hopefully he might take the 120% raise and settle for just $5.2 million so we can keep the Taxpayer MLE or regular MLE open
-
Given how so many big man contracts have turned into awful deals teams are trying to dump I think they'll be able to retain him. I don't really think a team is going to go over the 5.2 per year mark for him.
-
I remember vaguely that we used the Room Exception to sign Baynes.. did we use the mid-level exception last year? Or did we lose it coz we were already over the cap.
In any case, if we go over the tax can we just use the tax-payer mid-level on him?
Where the hell has saltlover gone recently?
Teams that use cap room, like we did last year, don’t get the MLE, only the room exception.
I believe we can use the full MLE this year, but if we do we’re hard-capped at the “apron”, which is $4 million above the tax line. If we’re worried about exceeding the apron, we’ll stick to the Taxpayer MLE.
Or hopefully he might take the 120% raise and settle for just $5.2 million so we can keep the Taxpayer MLE or regular MLE open
The taxpayer MLE is just $5.4 million next year. So if we decide to go into the tax he shouldn't use up that exception.
-
I remember vaguely that we used the Room Exception to sign Baynes.. did we use the mid-level exception last year? Or did we lose it coz we were already over the cap.
In any case, if we go over the tax can we just use the tax-payer mid-level on him?
Where the hell has saltlover gone recently?
Teams that use cap room, like we did last year, don’t get the MLE, only the room exception.
I believe we can use the full MLE this year, but if we do we’re hard-capped at the “apron”, which is $4 million above the tax line. If we’re worried about exceeding the apron, we’ll stick to the Taxpayer MLE.
Or hopefully he might take the 120% raise and settle for just $5.2 million so we can keep the Taxpayer MLE or regular MLE open
I agree with others on the ~$5M number. Not only does it allow us to use the full MLE for a Smart replacement (should he leave), but it would also allow us to stay just under the luxury tax if Smart or another player signs a contract for around the MLE.
I can't imagine Danny is going to just barely go over the tax given where this team's finances are going to be the next several years. I suppose we could re-sign Smart, re-sign Baynes, and use the MLE, but I would consider that *really* going for it, not just slightly going over the tax.
-
He seems very happy here. seems like the kind of guy who might stay here even if he could get more elsewhere. hoping that comes true
even with all our all star offense power potential next year w Hayward and Irving, i would like our chances a lot less if they lose Baynes. Need big guys like that.
-
I think he is an important piece to bring back. The only real defensive size the team has.
But he is not worth breaking the bank for. MLE level at most.
this may work. i dont know if baynes would take it. but i do know that ainge has a record of not overpaying for bench players.
-
Given how so many big man contracts have turned into awful deals teams are trying to dump I think they'll be able to retain him. I don't really think a team is going to go over the 5.2 per year mark for him.
I fear the Seventy Stinkers the most in this regard.
They've got money to spend and to weaken us at the same time strengthening themselves is a double win.
He'd be a great backup to Embiid and could spell him for extended lengths of time. I don't lijke the prospect of that at all.
-
Given how so many big man contracts have turned into awful deals teams are trying to dump I think they'll be able to retain him. I don't really think a team is going to go over the 5.2 per year mark for him.
I fear the Seventy Stinkers the most in this regard.
They've got money to spend and to weaken us at the same time strengthening themselves is a double win.
He'd be a great backup to Embiid and could spell him for extended lengths of time. I don't lijke the prospect of that at all.
I don't know how much Baynes will cost, seems like prolly not that much, but simply based on Philly now being in the mix and how guarded Embiid, I want to keep him around.
I'm hoping we can sign Smart to the MLE, re-up Baynes and still be under the cap. Can anyone tell me how likely it's looking that this could be possible?
I'd also like to send Nader packing and give his spot to Jabari Bird, but that's another story.
-
I hope we can keep Baynes, but we're going to be very good next year. A lot of veterans are going to love the prospect of playing for the Celtics next season.
Smart teams don't overpay for bench role players. With the cap and luxury tax limitations, you just can't do that.
And as much as I like what Baynes has brought to the table, it isn't just Baynes. It's Brad Stephens and what the rest of the roster did around Baynes. Let's not pretend he was some highly sought after free agent. Baynes has likely experienced the Evan Turner effect.
-
And as much as I like what Baynes has brought to the table, it isn't just Baynes. It's Brad Stephens and what the rest of the roster did around Baynes. Let's not pretend he was some highly sought after free agent. Baynes has likely experienced the Evan Turner effect.
Not really in this case. Baynes is basically the same player he’s always been. He’s used a little differently but his production is in line with his norms.
-
Given how so many big man contracts have turned into awful deals teams are trying to dump I think they'll be able to retain him. I don't really think a team is going to go over the 5.2 per year mark for him.
I fear the Seventy Stinkers the most in this regard.
They've got money to spend and to weaken us at the same time strengthening themselves is a double win.
He'd be a great backup to Embiid and could spell him for extended lengths of time. I don't lijke the prospect of that at all.
I don't know how much Baynes will cost, seems like prolly not that much, but simply based on Philly now being in the mix and how guarded Embiid, I want to keep him around.
I'm hoping we can sign Smart to the MLE, re-up Baynes and still be under the cap. Can anyone tell me how likely it's looking that this could be possible?
I'd also like to send Nader packing and give his spot to Jabari Bird, but that's another story.
Signing Smart to the MLE would be a bad move. We can resign him using Bird Rights, there's no reason to waste the MLE/limit the years we can give him/hard cap ourselves at the tax line
-
And as much as I like what Baynes has brought to the table, it isn't just Baynes. It's Brad Stephens and what the rest of the roster did around Baynes. Let's not pretend he was some highly sought after free agent. Baynes has likely experienced the Evan Turner effect.
Not really in this case. Baynes is basically the same player he’s always been. He’s used a little differently but his production is in line with his norms.
Except for the whole I now shoot threes part.
-
And as much as I like what Baynes has brought to the table, it isn't just Baynes. It's Brad Stephens and what the rest of the roster did around Baynes. Let's not pretend he was some highly sought after free agent. Baynes has likely experienced the Evan Turner effect.
Not really in this case. Baynes is basically the same player he’s always been. He’s used a little differently but his production is in line with his norms.
Except for the whole I now shoot threes part.
Regular season he hit them at his career average (14%). The post-season has been really odd; I can’t remember the last time a guy went from a non-factor to showcasing a mastered skill in the playoffs. It’s like if one post-season Andre Drummond turned into a 90% FT shooter.
-
And as much as I like what Baynes has brought to the table, it isn't just Baynes. It's Brad Stephens and what the rest of the roster did around Baynes. Let's not pretend he was some highly sought after free agent. Baynes has likely experienced the Evan Turner effect.
Not really in this case. Baynes is basically the same player he’s always been. He’s used a little differently but his production is in line with his norms.
Except for the whole I now shoot threes part.
Regular season he hit them at his career average (14%). The post-season has been really odd; I can’t remember the last time a guy went from a non-factor to showcasing a mastered skill in the playoffs. It’s like if one post-season Andre Drummond turned into a 90% FT shooter.
Regular season he barely shot threes if I recall correctly.
-
absolutely .............. you're going to keep one of the end-of-bench guys instead of him ?
-
.