If you could keep only one...

[Roy H.]

... do you keep Grant Williams (let's say at his cap hold, $12.9 million per year, over 4 years), or do you use the Taxpayer MLE?

As I mentioned in another thread, I'd be inclined to trade Williams for a #2 and would hope that Gallinari / Muscala / Hauser could pick up the slack.  I'd try to use the Taxpayer MLE on a backup wing.

And no, "let's keep everyone" isn't an option.  If that's your pitch, make it in the "CBA changes" thread.

[Who]

What type of player can you get with the taxpayer MLE?

[Celtics2021]

I'd definitely keep Grant.  I don't think the taxpayer MLE is likely to provide any better options.

As for trading Grant, we can only trade him if he doesn't sign a QO -- my gut says if there's a team interested in him using cap space/MLE that they'll just sign him and dare the C's to match, due to the salary crunch that inspired this post.  I don't think a sign-and-trade for a 2nd is actually an option the C's will have.

[Who]

I am looking at some FA lists. These guys stand out as possible taxpayer MLE guys:

Torrey Craig
Naz Reid
Mason Plumlee


Big drop-off from the big names & starter quality players to only a few of names at MLE to then a whole load of minimum contract type guys. Lots of useful players available for the minimum. Not that many in the in-between phase.

[Roy H.]

What type of player can you get with the taxpayer MLE?

That's the question.  Last season the TMLE-range signings were Gallo, Otto Porter, Joe Ingles, Lonnie Walker, Donte Divincenzo,  Dewayne Dedmon, Danuel House Jr., Javale McGee, Ricky Rubio and several guys below that salary range.  (Note:  not all of these guys were signed using the TMLE, but were in that average annual value).

The year before, Dennis Schroder, Torey Craig, Robin Lopez, Kendrick Nunn, Bruce Brown, Jeff Green, Jared Vanderbilt, Nic Batum

But obviously, it's a wide range.  Targets this year?  https://hoopshype.com/lists/2023-nba-free-agent-rankings-top-players-available-summer/

It's hard to predict.  Does Kelly Oubre want to play on a contender?  Seth Curry?  Jalen McDaniels?  Thomas Bryant?  Torrey Craig?

Not all of those guys will be available, but some could be.

[Roy H.]

I'd definitely keep Grant.  I don't think the taxpayer MLE is likely to provide any better options.

As for trading Grant, we can only trade him if he doesn't sign a QO -- my gut says if there's a team interested in him using cap space/MLE that they'll just sign him and dare the C's to match, due to the salary crunch that inspired this post.  I don't think a sign-and-trade for a 2nd is actually an option the C's will have.

Some teams interested in Grant presumably would also want to use their MLE.  Or, as some have speculated, he might make more than the MLE.

[Vermont Green]

I am looking at some FA lists. These guys stand out as possible taxpayer MLE guys:

Torrey Craig
Naz Reid
Mason Plumlee


Big drop-off from the big names & starter quality players to only a few of names at MLE to then a whole load of minimum contract type guys. Lots of useful players available for the minimum. Not that many in the in-between phase.

The Celtics are going to be taxpayers so the MLE for us will be $5M, right?  (Spotrac and RealGM both have the same value).  So if the question is can we get Naz Reid for $5M or get Grant at $13M, that is pretty obvious.  You take Naz Reid at $5M.  But the better players in this range are either going to go to teams not paying the tax (MLE=$12M) or stay with their current teams and in either case, get much better contracts.  This is the reverse for Grant.  The Celtics can pay him more.

I know you made the rule that you can't assume to do both but even if we sign Grant, the taxpayer MLE is now such a small contract, if you can get a useful player for that value, of course the Celtics are going to do that.

[Celtics2021]

I'd definitely keep Grant.  I don't think the taxpayer MLE is likely to provide any better options.

As for trading Grant, we can only trade him if he doesn't sign a QO -- my gut says if there's a team interested in him using cap space/MLE that they'll just sign him and dare the C's to match, due to the salary crunch that inspired this post.  I don't think a sign-and-trade for a 2nd is actually an option the C's will have.

Some teams interested in Grant presumably would also want to use their MLE.  Or, as some have speculated, he might make more than the MLE.

For sure, but if the Celtics are letting Grant go so they can get the MLE, they aren’t going to take significant salary back in a trade, so I’m not sure that teams would be able to preserve their MLE in the way you think they’d want to.  Maybe a team with a TPE, but that’s about it.

[BitterJim]

I am looking at some FA lists. These guys stand out as possible taxpayer MLE guys:

Torrey Craig
Naz Reid
Mason Plumlee


Big drop-off from the big names & starter quality players to only a few of names at MLE to then a whole load of minimum contract type guys. Lots of useful players available for the minimum. Not that many in the in-between phase.

The Celtics are going to be taxpayers so the MLE for us will be $5M, right?  (Spotrac and RealGM both have the same value).  So if the question is can we get Naz Reid for $5M or get Grant at $13M, that is pretty obvious.  You take Naz Reid at $5M. But the better players in this range are either going to go to teams not paying the tax (MLE=$12M) or stay with their current teams and in either case, get much better contracts.  This is the reverse for Grant.  The Celtics can pay him more.

I know you made the rule that you can't assume to do both but even if we sign Grant, the taxpayer MLE is now such a small contract, if you can get a useful player for that value, of course the Celtics are going to do that.

What's the benefit of saving ~$8 million in that case, though? If we're only adding one or the other then we aren't going to reach the second apron anyway.

And in the case of keeping Grant, you could take back more salary in a trade. For a team that still has all of their picks, that could be important (especially with the new trade rules around being above the second apron). Obviously it all goes out the window if Grant is still looking for $20 million, but if he wants to sign for ~$13 million I'd take it.

And though not directly related, but I wonder if we would try to sign him to a flat or decreasing contract to help avoid the second apron in future years (when more of the second apron rules start coming into effect)

[Celtics4ever]

Taxpayer  MLE  for me all the way, providing Hauser and Gallo can step up.  Use the MLE for Naz Reid.  Wings are easier to find or trade Pritchard for a wing with defensive mindset since we have Hauser.

This would mean we are keeping Brown and Brogdon.  Draft  best playeravailable at 35.

[boscel33]

I'd keep the MLE and try to get McDaniels.

[keevsnick]

Deleted

[keevsnick]

... do you keep Grant Williams (let's say at his cap hold, $12.9 million per year, over 4 years), or do you use the Taxpayer MLE?

As I mentioned in another thread, I'd be inclined to trade Williams for a #2 and would hope that Gallinari / Muscala / Hauser could pick up the slack.  I'd try to use the Taxpayer MLE on a backup wing.

And no, "let's keep everyone" isn't an option.  If that's your pitch, make it in the "CBA changes" thread.

It has to be Grant Williams. The taxpayer MLE is actually being SHRUNK under the new CBA. For the coming year it will be only 5.0 million. That's barely more than the BI-annual at 4.5 and now far less than the non-tax midlevel at 12.2.

In other words the tax-mid level is going to have less purchasing power than ever.

[Moranis]

Teams trying to win should never waste assets and letting Grant go is wasting an asset unless he gets offered a ridiculous contract.

[Who]

I'd keep the MLE and try to get McDaniels.

He didn't make much of an impression on me during our playoff series against the 76ers.

Didn't Danuel House end up taking over his playing time because of how ineffective McDaniels was?