The new CBA may significantly impact how the Celtics build from here

[Ed Hollison]

If you haven't come across it already, Jay King has a superb piece on Masslive on how the new CBA rules impact the Celtics' plans to build a contender.

http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2016/12/star-chasing_now_more_difficul.html

The big change is the introduction of the "designated player exception" (DPE). As I understand it, if a player makes an all-NBA team or is Defensive Player of the Year in the previous year or two of the past three years, or if he is MVP in any of the past three seasons, he can be considered for the DPE, which gives that player's team the ability to pay him more per year, and for more years, if he sticks with his current team.

Essentially, it gives superstar players less incentive to move on in free agency to a team like the Celtics.

Some key excerpts from the piece:

The new rule has the potential to impact free agents, like Blake Griffin, as well as theoretical trade targets like DeMarcus Cousins or Paul George. The Sacramento Kings could still decide they would rather move on, but now have the option to offer Cousins a longer, pricier extension this summer -- which could give them a better chance of keeping the center beyond his current contract. Same goes for the Indiana Pacers, who would have a much better chance to keep George if they can drastically overpay him compared to outside suitors. If he makes the All-NBA team this year, they will be able to offer him a lot more money over more years than anyone else.

Basically, the new CBA will make contract extensions far more attractive. Certain players who don't qualify as "designated players" will also be able to receive extensions earlier in the life of a contract, and will be able to sign longer extensions. That could keep players away from free agency, which is not good for a team like the Celtics that would prefer all sorts of movement, especially among the stars.

This means, according to the article's logic, that the C's will be perversely rooting for players like Paul George and Gordon Hayward TO NOT make the All-NBA teams:

This sounds counterintuitive because the Celtics would surely love to sign Griffin or Gordon Hayward this summer as free agents, or trade for someone like George. They should presumably want their targets playing great basketball, but with the new designated player exception that would come at a cost. Cousins is already eligible for the exception, but, according to Bontemps, any of the other aforementioned players will only become eligible this summer if 1) they make the all-NBA team this season, 2) they have made the all-NBA team in two of the last three years, 3) they have won the MVP at least once over the last three seasons, or 4) they have won Defensive Player of the Year in either the most recent season or two of the last three seasons.

Griffin, Hayward and George aren't going to win MVP or Defensive Player of the Year, but could all have strong cases for an all-NBA nod this season. The Celtics need that not to happen. Just read the Indy Star's estimate on how much George would make through the exception if he stays with the Pacers, versus how much he could make if he opts to leave them. The difference is huge -- and enough, perhaps, to convince a player of that caliber to pass up the chance to join a better team elsewhere. Similarly, Griffin might want to explore life away from the Clippers, but would have a tough time turning down so much money.

This by no means curtains for the Celtics' path to contendership, but I do think it moves the needle -- slightly at least -- towards being patient and building through their own home-grown superstars. The good news is that we have a good shot at developing our own stud, given the fact that we'll probably have three shots at it in the draft lottery in 2016 (Jaylen Brown), 2017, and 2018. We may just have to invest in what we have led by IT, Horford and the gang and hope that some young players emerge out of our stock of youth.

Curious to hear what others think.

[TrueFan]

It's a good thing for the league and the fans. Teams should have some kind of financial leverage to hold onto their star players. Otherwise we will keep seeing these super teams formed.

[Who]

It's a good thing for the league and the fans. Teams should have some kind of financial leverage to hold onto their star players. Otherwise we will keep seeing these super teams formed.

+1

[Donoghus]

This designated veteran thing is going to produce some eye popping numbers.  Saw Steve Kyler project out what Westbrook's next contract could look like on Twitter yesterday.

[PhoSita]

It's a good thing for the league and the fans. Teams should have some kind of financial leverage to hold onto their star players. Otherwise we will keep seeing these super teams formed.

+1

It's great for teams with really great players they drafted.

Not so great for teams that have positioned themselves to try to trade for or sign one of those players.

[TrueFan]

This designated veteran thing is going to produce some eye popping numbers.  Saw Steve Kyler project out what Westbrook's next contract could look like on Twitter yesterday.

So will the Warriors have to give Curry and Durant similar contracts?

They certainly would expect it if the Warriors are allowed.

[PhoSita]

This CBA news goes directly to the question I asked in the thread I created earlier -- what do we do if title contention with the current group appears increasingly unlikely?

Should the CBA change how the Celts operate? 


I tend to think that no matter what, as long as there remains some chance of the Celts signing or trading for somebody next summer or the summer after that, Ainge will hold back on any moves that would cause the team to take a step back.

[jambr380]

It's a good thing for the league and the fans. Teams should have some kind of financial leverage to hold onto their star players. Otherwise we will keep seeing these super teams formed.

They can already offer an extra year (and extra money on that year) and essentially have control of a player for 9 years if they draft that player. The current system is fine, in my opinion. Players are now going to feel locked in to their current team because the money will be so vastly different (less) if they choose to go to a situation they find more appealing.

I suppose a player could sign the contract and the demand to be traded at the first trade deadline, but matching salaries could be tough and the scope of the NBA could be a lot more tumultuous.

[MBunge]

It's a good thing for the league and the fans. Teams should have some kind of financial leverage to hold onto their star players. Otherwise we will keep seeing these super teams formed.

+1

It's great for teams with really great players they drafted.

Not so great for teams that have positioned themselves to try to trade for or sign one of those players.

I'm not so sure it affects trades.  Those have rarely ever been because a team doesn't want to pay a superstar.

It's going to further kill the chances of anyone to sign a top free agent, but if enough money gets spent it could open up the market for more mid-level guys.  We've already seen max deals go to guy who are not max players because teams just can't afford to lose them.  If we end up with the top 1-3 guys on a team all making max/DPE money, they may not be able to afford  high quality 4th and 5th starters.

Mike

[MattyIce]

This designated veteran thing is going to produce some eye popping numbers.  Saw Steve Kyler project out what Westbrook's next contract could look like on Twitter yesterday.

So will the Warriors have to give Curry and Durant similar contracts?

They certainly would expect it if the Warriors are allowed.

Is it just for one or can you designate more as long as they fit the qualifications ?

[Donoghus]

This designated veteran thing is going to produce some eye popping numbers.  Saw Steve Kyler project out what Westbrook's next contract could look like on Twitter yesterday.

So will the Warriors have to give Curry and Durant similar contracts?

They certainly would expect it if the Warriors are allowed.

Is it just for one or can you designate more as long as they fit the qualifications ?

Up to two.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

It's a good thing for the league and the fans. Teams should have some kind of financial leverage to hold onto their star players. Otherwise we will keep seeing these super teams formed.

+1

It's great for teams with really great players they drafted.

Not so great for teams that have positioned themselves to try to trade for or sign one of those players.

Right. So because the Celtics haven't really sucked over the last decade, they've had no top-tier draft picks such as Cousins or Griffin or Davis. Instead, Ainge has been trying to put the team in a great financial position (which he has) to be ready for great trade or free-agent opportunities, but those opportunities could now be much fewer and farther between, thanks to the new CBA.

In other words, the teams that have been tanking in recent years will be more likely to hold on to their good players (while still probably being bad teams), and the teams that have been trying to legitimately build something good via hard work, financial responsibility, etc. (such as Boston), will be decent, but with low odds of landing one of the next superstars.

In still other words, we have to hope that Jaylen Brown or one of the next two Nets picks turns into a superstar, or else Boston has little chance at a title in the near future.

Is that about right?

[PhoSita]

In other words, the teams that have been tanking in recent years will be more likely to hold on to their good players (while still probably being bad teams), and the teams that have been trying to legitimately build something good via hard work, financial responsibility, etc. (such as Boston), will be decent, but with low odds of landing one of the next superstars.

In still other words, we have to hope that Jaylen Brown or one of the next two Nets picks turns into a superstar, or else Boston has little chance at a title in the near future.

Is that about right?

From what I understand, the basic outcome of the new CBA changes is that teams that draft elite players will be much more likely to re-sign those players after they finish their 1st non-rookie deal.

Of particular note, this affects the pursuit of players like:

- Cousins
- Griffin
- Hayward
- George
- Westbrook
- Wall
- Davis
- Drummond

So yeah, I think it puts the Celts in a situation where they might have to draft their own superstar.  Alternatively, they could try to trade for young players that are sub-elite now but that might become something special in a different situation (e.g. what happened with Harden). 

Bottom line, getting "The Guy" (i.e. MVP caliber player) will be pretty difficult unless that player is getting toward the end of his prime and his team decides to move on (see: KG).

The Celts could also look at star players on the other end of their career --- guys hitting FA after the end of their 3rd contract or later.

In the next 3-4 years, those players will include:

- Kevin Durant (likely not going anywhere, but who knows)
- Chris Paul
- Kyle Lowry
- Paul Millsap
- Serge Ibaka
-Dwyane Wade
- Danilo Gallinari
- Melo
- LeBron (not going anywhere)
- Dwight
- LaMarcus


The Celts' plans haven't been totally ruined, but it looks like it's going to be a heckuva lot harder to steal another team's franchise player while that player is still in his prime.

[hardlyyardley]

Other than ego, please explain the difference in lifestyle or pass down to future generations, the difference between 230M before taxes and 200M before taxes.....maybe logic and where you want to be could override the financial implications

[tazzmaniac]

This designated veteran thing is going to produce some eye popping numbers.  Saw Steve Kyler project out what Westbrook's next contract could look like on Twitter yesterday.

So will the Warriors have to give Curry and Durant similar contracts?

They certainly would expect it if the Warriors are allowed.

Is it just for one or can you designate more as long as they fit the qualifications ?

From one of the linked articles, Durant isn't eligible because the Warriors didn't draft him or trade for him as a rookie. 

And this crucial stipulation: He has to be on the team that drafted him or has to have been traded on his rookie deal to another team.

That means players like Stephen Curry, DeMarcus Cousins, Russell Westbrook, John Wall and Gordon Hayward are eligible for this exception, while Kevin Durant is not.