Who doesn’t make the roster?

[Jvalin]

Dunn gets traded in as salary dumped with a 2nd and cash to help stay out of the luxury tax

If we are underachieving at the deadline, I could see us packaging Dunn with Romeo in order to avoid the tax. Let's say we get a second rounder out of it (plus cap relief). Don't expect us to underachieve, but you never know what to expect with a rookie head coach.

As things stand right now we're $6,608,558 over the tax line. Dunn's salary is $5,005,350.

If we're underachieving, the easiest way to get under the tax might be to send Schroder to a contender for the stretch run.  We should hopefully be able to get a couple of seconds out of it.

It wouldn't get us under the tax though. Schroder's salary is $5,890,000. As things stand right now, we're $6,608,558 over the tax line.

If we trade Edwards along with a 2nd before the start of the season for example, then if we are underachieving come trade deadline then trade Schroder for a couple 2nds that should do the trick in sneaking under the tax.

If we dump both Schroder and Edwards without replacing one of them, we'll have 14 players under contract. Would you want us to finish the season with 14 players instead of 15 in order for Wyc to avoid the tax?

Does it matter what we want?

You are right. Let's shut down CelticsStrong then, cause our opinion doesn't matter anyway. All that matters is what Wyc wants.

Come on man! Yes, it matters what the fans want. The Celtics exist only because the fans support the team.

I'm just not sensing that there will be any sort of fan revolt if the team doesn't fill it's 15th roster slot after the trade deadline, particularly if we're underachieving.

I mean, if the off-season was based upon what I wanted, we'd still have Evan Fournier.   And, I think that if the majority of fans realized that he was let go for budgetary, rather than competitive, reasons, they'd argue we should have signed him.  But, I'm pretty sure the front office doesn't care.

If Wyc forces the team to finish the season with 14 players, then he's one of the cheapest owners around the NBA. Don't think it is likely to happen though unless we face a massive injury crisis and we tank the season.

Obviously, the front office doesn't care what each and every fan wants. Since when did that prevent us from criticizing the front office / expressing our opinion? If the offseason was based upon what I wanted, we would have traded anybody but the Jays + multiple picks for Ben Simmons.

Does it matter what we want?

And regardless of what we want, is there all that much value or team quality lost by not having your 15th man on the roster. For instance, are the C's all that much worse a team if Jabari and Edwards or Dunn and Edwards not on the team this year? I don't think so.

Personally speaking, I find it weird when fans care more about Wyc's money than they do about the success of their favorite team. It's one thing to say that Wyc won't pay a record-breaking tax for an underachieving team, it's a different thing to want to sabotage the team in order for Wyc to save money.

Are you sabotaging the team by only carrying 14 guys? How often are the 15th rotational piece a contributor to the team that a two way player can't fill? I think the answer is close to never.

Couple years back the team went with 14 guys almost the whole year and, if memory serves me, picked up Greg Monroe late in the season and he contributed next to nothing the rest of that year.

14 players? 15? There is little difference and it certainly wouldn't sabotage a team.

''Couple of years back the team went with 14 guys almost the whole year'' cause we were waiting to use our $8.4 million Disabled Player Exception (we got it cause Hayward broke his foot). Monroe was the best available free agent via the buyout market. He failed to meet expectations, but we did the best we could to strengthen the roster.

Are you sabotaging the team by only carrying 14 guys?

Of course you are. The NBA allows teams to have up to 15 players (plus the 2-way contracts). If an owner wants to pay 14 players in order to save money, then he's sabotaging his team's success. Remember Shane Larkin? He was our 3rd/4th string PG in 2018 (that was the year we got Monroe), yet he proved to be a valuable player when Kyrie got injured.

the likelihood a team is carrying 14 players to save money vs keeping an open spot to bring in a buy-out or TPE candidate later in the season is minimal.  what examples do you have of teams carrying 14 players purely for the financial savings?

Read the posts above mate. The premise was that if the team underachieves, we can avoid the tax by dumping Schroder + Edwards and then carrying 14 players.

I'm with you. Don't think it will happen. That's what I'm saying.

[Moranis]

Dunn gets traded in as salary dumped with a 2nd and cash to help stay out of the luxury tax

If we are underachieving at the deadline, I could see us packaging Dunn with Romeo in order to avoid the tax. Let's say we get a second rounder out of it (plus cap relief). Don't expect us to underachieve, but you never know what to expect with a rookie head coach.

As things stand right now we're $6,608,558 over the tax line. Dunn's salary is $5,005,350.

If we're underachieving, the easiest way to get under the tax might be to send Schroder to a contender for the stretch run.  We should hopefully be able to get a couple of seconds out of it.

It wouldn't get us under the tax though. Schroder's salary is $5,890,000. As things stand right now, we're $6,608,558 over the tax line.

If we trade Edwards along with a 2nd before the start of the season for example, then if we are underachieving come trade deadline then trade Schroder for a couple 2nds that should do the trick in sneaking under the tax.

If we dump both Schroder and Edwards without replacing one of them, we'll have 14 players under contract. Would you want us to finish the season with 14 players instead of 15 in order for Wyc to avoid the tax?

Does it matter what we want?

You are right. Let's shut down CelticsStrong then, cause our opinion doesn't matter anyway. All that matters is what Wyc wants.

Come on man! Yes, it matters what the fans want. The Celtics exist only because the fans support the team.

I'm just not sensing that there will be any sort of fan revolt if the team doesn't fill it's 15th roster slot after the trade deadline, particularly if we're underachieving.

I mean, if the off-season was based upon what I wanted, we'd still have Evan Fournier.   And, I think that if the majority of fans realized that he was let go for budgetary, rather than competitive, reasons, they'd argue we should have signed him.  But, I'm pretty sure the front office doesn't care.

You don't think the majority of the fans know this.  I'm pretty sure everyone knows the team didn't want to pay him the money he ended up getting.

I think the majority of fans don't realize that we could have made every single move we made this off-season while still resigning Fournier.  There's a lot of confusion about cap rules, and I think that there's been a narrative that the team "couldn't afford" Fournier. 

If Wyc wanted to pay as much tax as, say, Milwaukee, we could have had the same team plus Fournier, which is quite simply a better team.

maybe, maybe not.  If Fournier is on the roster taking up a roster spot, someone else isn't and the team already needs to let someone go.  And that person that Fournier replaced may very well be Schroder, who fits roster construction wise a lot more (even Kanter makes more sense roster wise).  It isn't as easy to say every move would be the same because the team is already over the roster limit as is. 

When most people say it was Richardson or Fournier, they aren't saying the team couldn't have had both, just that it didn't make sense to have both.

[Surferdad]

Dunn gets traded in as salary dumped with a 2nd and cash to help stay out of the luxury tax

If we are underachieving at the deadline, I could see us packaging Dunn with Romeo in order to avoid the tax. Let's say we get a second rounder out of it (plus cap relief). Don't expect us to underachieve, but you never know what to expect with a rookie head coach.

As things stand right now we're $6,608,558 over the tax line. Dunn's salary is $5,005,350.

If we're underachieving, the easiest way to get under the tax might be to send Schroder to a contender for the stretch run.  We should hopefully be able to get a couple of seconds out of it.

It wouldn't get us under the tax though. Schroder's salary is $5,890,000. As things stand right now, we're $6,608,558 over the tax line.

If we trade Edwards along with a 2nd before the start of the season for example, then if we are underachieving come trade deadline then trade Schroder for a couple 2nds that should do the trick in sneaking under the tax.

If we dump both Schroder and Edwards without replacing one of them, we'll have 14 players under contract. Would you want us to finish the season with 14 players instead of 15 in order for Wyc to avoid the tax?

Does it matter what we want?

You are right. Let's shut down CelticsStrong then, cause our opinion doesn't matter anyway. All that matters is what Wyc wants.

Come on man! Yes, it matters what the fans want. The Celtics exist only because the fans support the team.

I'm just not sensing that there will be any sort of fan revolt if the team doesn't fill it's 15th roster slot after the trade deadline, particularly if we're underachieving.

I mean, if the off-season was based upon what I wanted, we'd still have Evan Fournier.   And, I think that if the majority of fans realized that he was let go for budgetary, rather than competitive, reasons, they'd argue we should have signed him.  But, I'm pretty sure the front office doesn't care.

You don't think the majority of the fans know this.  I'm pretty sure everyone knows the team didn't want to pay him the money he ended up getting.

I think the majority of fans don't realize that we could have made every single move we made this off-season while still resigning Fournier.  There's a lot of confusion about cap rules, and I think that there's been a narrative that the team "couldn't afford" Fournier. 

If Wyc wanted to pay as much tax as, say, Milwaukee, we could have had the same team plus Fournier, which is quite simply a better team.

Sure, but that's not reality.  Wyc is running a business and it's not just about paying the tax this season, but also the risk of repeater tax the following season.  So I actually think that most fans had it right: The team couldn't afford Fournier.

[Roy H.]

Dunn gets traded in as salary dumped with a 2nd and cash to help stay out of the luxury tax

If we are underachieving at the deadline, I could see us packaging Dunn with Romeo in order to avoid the tax. Let's say we get a second rounder out of it (plus cap relief). Don't expect us to underachieve, but you never know what to expect with a rookie head coach.

As things stand right now we're $6,608,558 over the tax line. Dunn's salary is $5,005,350.

If we're underachieving, the easiest way to get under the tax might be to send Schroder to a contender for the stretch run.  We should hopefully be able to get a couple of seconds out of it.

It wouldn't get us under the tax though. Schroder's salary is $5,890,000. As things stand right now, we're $6,608,558 over the tax line.

If we trade Edwards along with a 2nd before the start of the season for example, then if we are underachieving come trade deadline then trade Schroder for a couple 2nds that should do the trick in sneaking under the tax.

If we dump both Schroder and Edwards without replacing one of them, we'll have 14 players under contract. Would you want us to finish the season with 14 players instead of 15 in order for Wyc to avoid the tax?

Does it matter what we want?

You are right. Let's shut down CelticsStrong then, cause our opinion doesn't matter anyway. All that matters is what Wyc wants.

Come on man! Yes, it matters what the fans want. The Celtics exist only because the fans support the team.

I'm just not sensing that there will be any sort of fan revolt if the team doesn't fill it's 15th roster slot after the trade deadline, particularly if we're underachieving.

I mean, if the off-season was based upon what I wanted, we'd still have Evan Fournier.   And, I think that if the majority of fans realized that he was let go for budgetary, rather than competitive, reasons, they'd argue we should have signed him.  But, I'm pretty sure the front office doesn't care.

You don't think the majority of the fans know this.  I'm pretty sure everyone knows the team didn't want to pay him the money he ended up getting.

I think the majority of fans don't realize that we could have made every single move we made this off-season while still resigning Fournier.  There's a lot of confusion about cap rules, and I think that there's been a narrative that the team "couldn't afford" Fournier. 

If Wyc wanted to pay as much tax as, say, Milwaukee, we could have had the same team plus Fournier, which is quite simply a better team.

Sure, but that's not reality.  Wyc is running a business and it's not just about paying the tax this season, but also the risk of repeater tax the following season.  So I actually think that most fans had it right: The team couldn't afford Fournier.

We're not looking at repeater tax the following season.  That only kicks in when a team has paid tax in 4 out of 5 seasons.  At the end of that 4th tax-paying season, there's a repeater tax due.  We haven't paid luxury tax since 2018.  Therefore, if we pay the tax this year, the earliest we'd have to pay the repeater tax is at the end of the 2024 season.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/tax/

As for running a business, the Celtics are much more valuable and profitable than teams like the Bucks and Jazz, both of whom are deep into the tax this season.  The Jazz are worth half of what the Celtics are, and make about half the profit.  The Bucks were, before their championship, worth even less and made even less profit; we'll see if a title changes that.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2021/02/10/nba-team-values-2021-knicks-keep-top-spot-at-5-billion-warriors-bump-lakers-for-second-place/

[Jvalin]

Personally speaking, I find it weird when fans care more about Wyc's money than they do about the success of their favorite team. It's one thing to say that Wyc won't pay a record-breaking tax for an underachieving team, it's a different thing to want to sabotage the team in order for Wyc to save money.

The way I look at contracts as a fan is the team needs to sign smart contracts or it hurts the team in the end.  It is not that I care about the owner's money, it is a salary cap league and if you sign bad contracts, you end up a bad team.  If you sign players just because you can, it eventually ends up hurting the team if it is a bad contract.

Fournier was about value and yes, we could have signed him and gotten around the cap but in the long run, if Richardson turns out to be a better contract value, the team will be better for it based on other talent we are able to bring in.  It would have made no sense to have both Richardson and Fournier on the team.  It was one or the other.  They are not that much different.

Fournier and JRich aren't all that similar. Fournier is an offensive-minded player. He ain't mobile enough to stay in front of explosive guards on defense, hence he's at his best when playing at the 3. JRich is a 2-way player. He's a versatile/switchable defender and a decent shot creator (albeit worse than Fournier). He's at his best when playing at the 2. They could have easily coexisted in the same lineup. Problem was that Wyc is cheap. He wasn't willing to pay the necessary tax in order to keep both of them. Don't get me wrong, the tax would have exploded through the roof. I get why the C's opted for JRich over Fournier, but please don't act as if it was the best decision for the team. It was just the best decision for Wyc cause he saved money.

You want another example? According to Shams, Thad Young may be available. He's on a relatively reasonable expiring contract. He also plays a position of need for us. The C's are worryingly thin at the swing positions. Do you expect us to go after him? I don't, cause I highly doubt Wyc would be willing to pay the necessary tax. It has nothing to do with hurting the team in the future. He'd be off the books next summer. Let's face it, Wyc is cheap.

[#1P4P]

If the circumstances were equal, Edwards would be the likeliest candidate. Under the circumstances, Edwards has a guaranteed salary and Parker doesn’t, and they’re both projected to be 10-15 on the depth chart. The decision depends on Parker’s defensive improvement and clearly winning a competition between him Grant for backup/spot 4 minutes.

Jabari Parker: No money guaranteed in 2021/22, HoopsHype has learned. Guarantee increases to $100,000 if not waived by August 24, 2021 and increases again to 50 percent if not waived on or before the team’s first day of the 2021/22 regular season

[JBcat]

Just playing around with idea of what a rotation might look like with Fournier and everyone  else minus let’s say Edwards on the team.

Horford 24 minutes R Williams 24
Tatum 32 Brown 4
Fournier 32 Brown 16
Brown 12 Richardson 28 Schroder 8
Smart 28 Schroder 20

That leaves roughly 12 open minutes for the rest of the roster for spot minutes, and that’s assuming everyone stays healthy which is never the case.  That’s a hell of a team.  It leaves little development time for the likes of Pritchard, Nesmith, Langford, etc but if any of them come on strong in practice you could try a 2 for 1 type deal later in the season if need be.

Oh well fun to daydream.