There's no need to be worried about CBA changes yet

[Roy H.]

Right now, we have the following players under contract:

Tatum
Brown
Brogdon
Smart
White
Williams III
Horford
Gallinari
Pritchard
Muscula
Kornet
Champagnie
Hauser

Those salaries, plus the dead cap hit of Demetrius Jackson, total $166,144,883.  That's only $4,144,883 above the tax. 

If we waive Kornet and Champagnie, that saves roughly $4 million (I'm not sure how much of Kornet's guaranteed amount is).

So, with the following roster, we'd be at right about the tax line:

Tatum
Brown
Brogdon
Smart
White
Williams III
Horford
Gallinari
Pritchard
Muscula
Kornet
Champagnie
Hauser

We'd be approximately $16.5 million below the "second apron", with 11 players under contract.  We'd need to fill out at least three spots.  And, if we trade Pritchard, we'd save another $4 million, and would have $20.5 million below the second apron to fill out four spots. 

(Note:  this is largely theoretical, because most, if not all, of the penalties regarding the second apron don't come into affect yet.)

Now, all that said, what we do with Grant Williams will decide whether we're comfortably below the second apron, or if we're close to it.  If Grant plays for his $8.5 qualifying offer, we're golden.  If he receives closer to his cap hold -- $12.9 million -- it's a finer shave.

Personally, I think the team might be better off trading Grant if he won't play for the QO (which he likely wouldn't).  We'd then have plenty of room to use the Taxpayer MLE to add somebody to the rotation.

[Kernewek]

Assuming you're using Spotrac for these figures - you can check the players' guaranteed contracts in the individual player section. So for Kornet he's 100% guaranteed: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/luke-kornet-23670/

[Roy H.]

Assuming you're using Spotrac for these figures - you can check the players' guaranteed contracts in the individual player section. So for Kornet he's 100% guaranteed: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/luke-kornet-23670/

Thanks.  I saw that, but it also says "2023-24: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed on 1/10/24"

[Celtics2021]

Assuming you're using Spotrac for these figures - you can check the players' guaranteed contracts in the individual player section. So for Kornet he's 100% guaranteed: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/luke-kornet-23670/

Thanks.  I saw that, but it also says "2023-24: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed on 1/10/24"

It would be very surprising if his second year were guaranteed.  It’s quite unusual to have a player with a partial guarantee in year 1 and a full guarantee in year 2 that takes effect before the end of season 1.

[Vermont Green]

Assuming you're using Spotrac for these figures - you can check the players' guaranteed contracts in the individual player section. So for Kornet he's 100% guaranteed: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/luke-kornet-23670/

Thanks.  I saw that, but it also says "2023-24: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed on 1/10/24"

It would be very surprising if his second year were guaranteed.  It’s quite unusual to have a player with a partial guarantee in year 1 and a full guarantee in year 2 that takes effect before the end of season 1.

Not sure I follow.  As stated, the second year (2023-24) is NOT guaranteed.  It only becomes guaranteed if he is still on the team on 10 Jan 2024.  I read that as he can be cut anytime prior to that.  It is not a lot of money in any case.

We probably end up above that second apron in the end, like a lot of teams will.

[Vermont Green]

Also noticed that Gallinari has a deadline coming up on 20 Jun 2023 to pick up the player option for 2023-24.  I think the expectation is that he will pick it up but I wonder what he is waiting for.

[Roy H.]

We probably end up above that second apron in the end, like a lot of teams will.

Why so?  What additional salaries are you thinking we add?

Ultimately it's not as important to be under the second apron this coming season, but I think that it's easily avoidable.

[Roy H.]

Also, I think it's unlikely that we fill out the 15th roster spot this season, based upon 1) management's reluctance to fill it last year; and 2) because we can have three players on two-way contracts.

[Vermont Green]

We probably end up above that second apron in the end, like a lot of teams will.

Why so?  What additional salaries are you thinking we add?

Ultimately it's not as important to be under the second apron this coming season, but I think that it's easily avoidable.

I think you answered the question, it just isn't that important.  We probably sign Grant in my mind.  That could be $10M to $12M.  Then pick up someone with the MLE and we are right there.  Add in a couple of vet min contracts to round out the roster (if we cut Kornet and any others).

I don't want to "overpay" Grant, and I don't think they'll need to but if they don't match, he will be hard to replace.  And the taxpayer MLE has been proven to yield decent, useful players.

[BitterJim]

Right now, we have the following players under contract:

Tatum
Brown
Brogdon
Smart
White
Williams III
Horford
Gallinari
Pritchard
Muscula
Kornet
Champagnie
Hauser

Those salaries, plus the dead cap hit of Demetrius Jackson, total $166,144,883.  That's only $4,144,883 above the tax. 

If we waive Kornet and Champagnie, that saves roughly $4 million (I'm not sure how much of Kornet's guaranteed amount is).

So, with the following roster, we'd be at right about the tax line:

Tatum
Brown
Brogdon
Smart
White
Williams III
Horford
Gallinari
Pritchard
Muscula
Kornet
Champagnie
Hauser

We'd be approximately $16.5 million below the "second apron", with 11 players under contract.  We'd need to fill out at least three spots.  And, if we trade Pritchard, we'd save another $4 million, and would have $20.5 million below the second apron to fill out four spots. 

(Note:  this is largely theoretical, because most, if not all, of the penalties regarding the second apron don't come into affect yet.)

Now, all that said, what we do with Grant Williams will decide whether we're comfortably below the second apron, or if we're close to it.  If Grant plays for his $8.5 qualifying offer, we're golden.  If he receives closer to his cap hold -- $12.9 million -- it's a finer shave.

Personally, I think the team might be better off trading Grant if he won't play for the QO (which he likely wouldn't).  We'd then have plenty of room to use the Taxpayer MLE to add somebody to the rotation.

Who do you see us getting in return for Grant that would be better than keeping him (after adding a taxpayer-MLE player)? We would have to sign-and-trade him (which would hard cap the team acquiring him), and how many teams 1. want to pay him significantly more than us, 2. don't have the cap space to sign him outright, and 3. want to give up a useful player to bring him in?

I think we can all agree that Grant is more useful than anyone we could sign with the taxpayer MLE. And others might not agree, but I think it would take more than 2 mini-MLE level players to offset Grant. Can we get back a player above the level of the mini-MLE in a Grant sign-and-trade?

[Kernewek]

Assuming you're using Spotrac for these figures - you can check the players' guaranteed contracts in the individual player section. So for Kornet he's 100% guaranteed: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/luke-kornet-23670/

Thanks.  I saw that, but it also says "2023-24: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed on 1/10/24"

Correct - January tenth is the league-wide guarantee date for salaries this season, so basically if he's on the roster until the seventh (because players have to be allowed to clear waivers) his contract becomes fully guaranteed.

For anyone following along, this is important because waived players are still owed the full amount of their contract and that full amount still counts against the cap, but "a player's non-protected salary is removed from the team salary as soon as the team requests waivers", as Larry Coon's FAQ puts it. It matters less with Kornet, but you can look at the CP3 situation in Phoenix at the moment to see a bigger example.

[Celtics2021]

Assuming you're using Spotrac for these figures - you can check the players' guaranteed contracts in the individual player section. So for Kornet he's 100% guaranteed: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/luke-kornet-23670/

Thanks.  I saw that, but it also says "2023-24: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed on 1/10/24"

It would be very surprising if his second year were guaranteed.  It’s quite unusual to have a player with a partial guarantee in year 1 and a full guarantee in year 2 that takes effect before the end of season 1.

Not sure I follow.  As stated, the second year (2023-24) is NOT guaranteed.  It only becomes guaranteed if he is still on the team on 10 Jan 2024.  I read that as he can be cut anytime prior to that.  It is not a lot of money in any case.

We probably end up above that second apron in the end, like a lot of teams will.

Spotrac’s salary’s table shows it as already being fully guaranteed, while the text says it is not.  I was saying that given the inconsistency, I would go with the text because most players don’t have a second year guaranteed coming off a first year that’s not guaranteed.

[Vermont Green]

Assuming you're using Spotrac for these figures - you can check the players' guaranteed contracts in the individual player section. So for Kornet he's 100% guaranteed: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/luke-kornet-23670/

Thanks.  I saw that, but it also says "2023-24: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed on 1/10/24"

It would be very surprising if his second year were guaranteed.  It’s quite unusual to have a player with a partial guarantee in year 1 and a full guarantee in year 2 that takes effect before the end of season 1.

Not sure I follow.  As stated, the second year (2023-24) is NOT guaranteed.  It only becomes guaranteed if he is still on the team on 10 Jan 2024.  I read that as he can be cut anytime prior to that.  It is not a lot of money in any case.

We probably end up above that second apron in the end, like a lot of teams will.

Spotrac’s salary’s table shows it as already being fully guaranteed, while the text says it is not.  I was saying that given the inconsistency, I would go with the text because most players don’t have a second year guaranteed coming off a first year that’s not guaranteed.

OK, then I agree completely.

In the end, I am fine with Kornet as the 14th or whatever player on the roster.  And if we end up with better options, we have the flexibility to cut him.  His deal is less than a deck chair in the big scheme of things.

[Roy H.]

Right now, we have the following players under contract:

Tatum
Brown
Brogdon
Smart
White
Williams III
Horford
Gallinari
Pritchard
Muscula
Kornet
Champagnie
Hauser

Those salaries, plus the dead cap hit of Demetrius Jackson, total $166,144,883.  That's only $4,144,883 above the tax. 

If we waive Kornet and Champagnie, that saves roughly $4 million (I'm not sure how much of Kornet's guaranteed amount is).

So, with the following roster, we'd be at right about the tax line:

Tatum
Brown
Brogdon
Smart
White
Williams III
Horford
Gallinari
Pritchard
Muscula
Kornet
Champagnie
Hauser

We'd be approximately $16.5 million below the "second apron", with 11 players under contract.  We'd need to fill out at least three spots.  And, if we trade Pritchard, we'd save another $4 million, and would have $20.5 million below the second apron to fill out four spots. 

(Note:  this is largely theoretical, because most, if not all, of the penalties regarding the second apron don't come into affect yet.)

Now, all that said, what we do with Grant Williams will decide whether we're comfortably below the second apron, or if we're close to it.  If Grant plays for his $8.5 qualifying offer, we're golden.  If he receives closer to his cap hold -- $12.9 million -- it's a finer shave.

Personally, I think the team might be better off trading Grant if he won't play for the QO (which he likely wouldn't).  We'd then have plenty of room to use the Taxpayer MLE to add somebody to the rotation.

Who do you see us getting in return for Grant that would be better than keeping him (after adding a taxpayer-MLE player)? We would have to sign-and-trade him (which would hard cap the team acquiring him), and how many teams 1. want to pay him significantly more than us, 2. don't have the cap space to sign him outright, and 3. want to give up a useful player to bring him in?

I think we can all agree that Grant is more useful than anyone we could sign with the taxpayer MLE. And others might not agree, but I think it would take more than 2 mini-MLE level players to offset Grant. Can we get back a player above the level of the mini-MLE in a Grant sign-and-trade?

In the future, if the team is worried about chunk salaries harming our financial flexibility, Grant would seem to be a guy who is replaceable.

Personally, I'm fine with the backup PF being Muscula and/or Gallo.  I'd be inclined to move him for an expiring contract / TPE and a #2.  Or, if he didn't take the QO and there was no S&T in place, I'd let him walk unless he was signed to a bargain contract.

Between Muscula, Gallo and a TMLE guy, I think we can more than adequately replace Williams.

[Phantom255x]

Also, the fact that Mazzulla barely played PP, Hauser, Muscala, and even G-Will for stretches during the postseason makes me less concerned about the CBA changes. If last season is an indication, when it gets close to or is playoff time, Mazz probably has a strict 7-8 man rotation.

And regular season won't matter as much IMO because lets be real, this team is below .500 in 22+ combined home games over the last 2 seasons in the playoffs. Getting the 1 seed might not be as valuable as we think particularly for this team that's also proven it can choke against mediocre teams anyways.