The Celtics Need a Dramatic Change

[PhoSita]

This won't work.

Fournier has a large cap hold that counts against the numbers until he is signed or renounced. So you can't clear cap space, sign someone then re-sign Fournier using his Bird rights. The Fournier cap hold keeps you above the salary cap line.

None of the moves I mentioned require cap space.  It's mostly about trying to create room under the luxury tax.

[Bobshot]

I think Wyc needs to take the reigns and change the management. Danny has been there long enough.  Stevens is more or less joined at the hip with Ainge, which is part of the problem. I doubt this will happen, since Wyc is not a hands on owner. Danny runs the show. But he isn't getting results, and I don't see a direction to improvement. Ainge has made a lot of bad decisions the past few years. One was thinking Walker was better than Rozier. Maybe Danny's problem is he was a 2 guard, and that's all he sees. A lot of teams have gotten better with more aggressive GMs.

[nickagneta]

This won't work.

Fournier has a large cap hold that counts against the numbers until he is signed or renounced. So you can't clear cap space, sign someone then re-sign Fournier using his Bird rights. The Fournier cap hold keeps you above the salary cap line.

None of the moves I mentioned require cap space.  It's mostly about trying to create room under the luxury tax.

Sure sounded like it

Those two moves would put you around $16.5 million under the cap ... I think.  I'm not a cap guru.  Just using Spotrac here.  But you could then re-sign Fournier for, let's say, $20 million per year over 3 years, with a team option on the third year.


You could use cap space to sign somebody else first, or you could not do that and use the MLE again (since re-signing Fournier doesn't require cap space).

Next year staying under the tax doesn't matter. They stayed under this year so they could go over the tax line for a few years.

[PhoSita]

You're better off trading Smart and Kemba for hopefully better players, using the TPE(which you would also had to renounce in your unable to do scenario) to bring in someone in trade and rebuilding that way.

Kemba, Smart and a raft of picks for Beal seems right. Let Beal be the PG or Pritchard.

Pritchard
Beal
Brown
Tatum
Timelord
 
Fournier-sixth man

Then you have a raft of youth and the TPE you might have to move with Thompson to upgrade the team.

In this scenario the team is likely paying a huge luxury tax bill.  Is Beal-Brown-Tatum good enough to justify that?  For how many seasons?


Staying under the luxury tax next year isn't important per se, except to the extent that Wyc et al like money.  We assume they like money, right?  I definitely assume that.

A few million over the tax is one thing.  But once you go 10, 15, 20 million over the tax, your tax bill ends up being something insane like $50-60 million.  Is ownership paying that kind of bill for a 45 win team? A 50 win team?  Are they ever going to pay that kind of a tax bill?  They never have in the past.


Realistically, the team cannot keep Fournier this summer without offloading at least as much salary.  If they move Kemba, they aren't going to be able to take back anything like the same amount of salary.  It's very limiting.

[nickagneta]

You're better off trading Smart and Kemba for hopefully better players, using the TPE(which you would also had to renounce in your unable to do scenario) to bring in someone in trade and rebuilding that way.

Kemba, Smart and a raft of picks for Beal seems right. Let Beal be the PG or Pritchard.

Pritchard
Beal
Brown
Tatum
Timelord
 
Fournier-sixth man

Then you have a raft of youth and the TPE you might have to move with Thompson to upgrade the team.

In this scenario the team is likely paying a huge luxury tax bill.  Is Beal-Brown-Tatum good enough to justify that?  For how many seasons?


Staying under the luxury tax next year isn't important per se, except to the extent that Wyc et al like money.  We assume they like money, right?  I definitely assume that.

A few million over the tax is one thing.  But once you go 10, 15, 20 million over the tax, your tax bill ends up being something insane like $50-60 million.  Is ownership paying that kind of bill for a 45 win team? A 50 win team?  Are they ever going to pay that kind of a tax bill?  They never have in the past.


Realistically, the team cannot keep Fournier this summer without offloading at least as much salary.  If they move Kemba, they aren't going to be able to take back anything like the same amount of salary.  It's very limiting.

Disagree. I think the plan all along once Hayward left was to go over the tax line next year. I see no reason to simply dump players and make the team exceedingly worse, just to save tax money.

I mean, if they do that, if next year they knowingly take a major move backwards just to save some luxtax money, the Celtics and CB/CS will be dead to me until I see major change, much like the Red Sox have been dead to me since moving Betts.

[Jiri Welsch]

I’d sell high on Tatum. Maybe he becomes a leader somewhere else but I doubt it. I’m sure Ainge will get calls over the summer.

I’d like to get rid of Kemba’s awful contract but would hate to give up Pritchard, Langford, or Nesmith.

The issue with Tatum is he's a potentially generational talent. The likelihood that Tatum develops an inner "dog" and actually gets to being a Top 5 player is a lot better than us trading Tatum and getting proportional value and going through a quick rebuild.

I think it’s pretty clear that he’s a good player but not a generational talent. He’s in that Jamaal Murray and Devin Booker tier.

Currently, yes. But he has it in him to continue to improve. He also has innate traits and skills those two guys you mentioned don't have -- he's almost 6'10'' and can take anyone 1-on-1. He's a good rebounder and can guard 3 positions. People like Tatum don't come round often.

[Donoghus]

I’d sell high on Tatum. Maybe he becomes a leader somewhere else but I doubt it. I’m sure Ainge will get calls over the summer.

I’d like to get rid of Kemba’s awful contract but would hate to give up Pritchard, Langford, or Nesmith.

The issue with Tatum is he's a potentially generational talent. The likelihood that Tatum develops an inner "dog" and actually gets to being a Top 5 player is a lot better than us trading Tatum and getting proportional value and going through a quick rebuild.

I think it’s pretty clear that he’s a good player but not a generational talent. He’s in that Jamaal Murray and Devin Booker tier.

Currently, yes. But he has it in him to continue to improve. He also has innate traits and skills those two guys you mentioned don't have -- he's almost 6'10'' and can take anyone 1-on-1. He's a good rebounder and can guard 3 positions. People like Tatum don't come round often.

Tatum has a higher ceiling than those two.  Its just a matter if he can get there.

[Jiri Welsch]

Tatum has a higher ceiling than those two.  Its just a matter if he can get there.

Agreed. This is why the Celtics' roster moves for the next three years need to be centered around getting the most out of Tatum.

Brad's a great coach but doesn't click with Tatum? Unfortunately Brad might need to go if that's the case.

Smart is a great defender but ultimately takes too much away from the Tatum-centric offense? Smart might need to go.

Whether we like it or not, we hitched our wagons to Tatum and need to see what he can become. My issue is that he hasn't shown an ability to lead yet. He has that weird "stoicism mixed with ambivalence" personality that seems to be en vogue these days among NBA players. He also spends more time complaining about missed calls than he does trying to motivate his teammates. In short: he's still super immature.

[PhoSita]

I mean, if they do that, if next year they knowingly take a major move backwards just to save some luxtax money, the Celtics and CB/CS will be dead to me until I see major change, much like the Red Sox have been dead to me since moving Betts.

I think it's important to emphasize that going 3,4,5 million over the tax is a very different situation than going 10, 15, 20 million over.

I don't remember the exact luxury tax rules, but there are certain thresholds where the tax penalty goes from being $1 for $1 to $2 for 1, then $3 for 1.  So once you get to the point of being $20 million over the tax (as the team would be if they simply re-signed Fournier without dumping anyone else), they'd have a luxury tax bill of something like $60+ million.

I really don't think they're paying that.


But if they're just paying like, $5 million, I assume that won't be an issue.

[PhoSita]

Saying Tatum is on the same level as Murray or Booker is straight up slander.

Tatum was the lead scorer of an ECF team in his rookie season as a teenager.

He put up 25-10-5 on good shooting in three playoff series just last summer.


Neither Murray nor Booker has ever done anything like that.



Tatum is not perfect.  He needs to improve as a closer.  He needs to be more of an emotional leader on the floor.  He needs to get to the line more.

But he's really, really good.

[perks-a-beast]

I think they need to move on from Walker. 

If the Clippers flame out, I think i'd try something like this

Walker, Thompson for Zubac, Beverley, Morris as the basic framework (hard to tell exactly where the numbers will fall on if more needs to come to Boston)

Gives Boston a young big man, who hopefully can pair with Williams, but either way gives a nice 1/2 combo at center. 

Then I'd try to trade Smart for a younger better offensive player.  Someone like Bogdanovic or Bertans would be a nice target.

So if you do that you have roughly (with a spot for the 1st rounder and a F.A.)

PG - Beverley, Pritchard, Edwards
SG - Brown, Fournier, Langford
SF - Tatum, Nesmith
PF - Bertans, Morris
C - R. Williams, Zubac, Wagner

I think that team while not a dramatic change, has a lot more depth, some younger better fitting pieces, etc.  And Boston would still have the draft picks and salary needed to go after someone like Beal should he become available.

I like this one a lot. I'd then flip Pat Bev along with Grant for Rubio who would help with ball movement.

Then trade Smart and Edwards to ATL for Bogdanovic and draft considerations

Re-sign Fournier, Kornet, Ojeleye.

Draft Davion Mitchell and Isaiah Livers

R. Rubio - P. Pritchard - D. Mitchell
E. Fournier - B. Bogdanovic - A. Nesmith
J. Brown - R. Langford - S. Ojeleye
J. Tatum - M. Morris - I. Livers
R. Williams - I. Zubac - L. Kornet

[tazzmaniac]

I mean, if they do that, if next year they knowingly take a major move backwards just to save some luxtax money, the Celtics and CB/CS will be dead to me until I see major change, much like the Red Sox have been dead to me since moving Betts.

I think it's important to emphasize that going 3,4,5 million over the tax is a very different situation than going 10, 15, 20 million over.

I don't remember the exact luxury tax rules, but there are certain thresholds where the tax penalty goes from being $1 for $1 to $2 for 1, then $3 for 1.  So once you get to the point of being $20 million over the tax (as the team would be if they simply re-signed Fournier without dumping anyone else), they'd have a luxury tax bill of something like $60+ million.

I really don't think they're paying that.


But if they're just paying like, $5 million, I assume that won't be an issue.

See cba faq for luxury tax penalties. 
http://cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q18

[PhoSita]

I mean, if they do that, if next year they knowingly take a major move backwards just to save some luxtax money, the Celtics and CB/CS will be dead to me until I see major change, much like the Red Sox have been dead to me since moving Betts.

I think it's important to emphasize that going 3,4,5 million over the tax is a very different situation than going 10, 15, 20 million over.

I don't remember the exact luxury tax rules, but there are certain thresholds where the tax penalty goes from being $1 for $1 to $2 for 1, then $3 for 1.  So once you get to the point of being $20 million over the tax (as the team would be if they simply re-signed Fournier without dumping anyone else), they'd have a luxury tax bill of something like $60+ million.

I really don't think they're paying that.


But if they're just paying like, $5 million, I assume that won't be an issue.

See cba faq for luxury tax penalties. 
http://cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q18

So for quick reference:

0-5 mil over --> $1.50 tax rate

5-10 over --> $1.75 tax rate

10-15 over --> 2.50 tax rate

15-20 over --> 3.25 tax rate

20+ --> $3.75 and increasing .50 for each additional 5.


The Celts are already at around $132 million heading into next season without adding any money, which is right at the tax line.

So if they sign Fournier to something like 4 years / $80 million, they'd be paying something like a $75 million tax bill, for essentially the same team.

[RJ87]

You add better, more complementary pieces around the Jays and actually let them mature. This is their first full seasons as the unquestioned top guys. The idea that they were supposed to pull it off without growing pains was a fantasy scenario.

[Celtics4ever]

I am sticking with the team no matter what.   I do believe we need changes but I think just upgrading talent around some of the  Jays will be a big help.   It is the bottom half of the roster where I think we could improve most.   I mean we have  PF rated 32, 33 in Hollinger's advanced stats with Grant and Semi being 33rd and 32 respectively.

Kemba is 11th in PG , Tatum is 2nd among SF, Brown is 4th among SG and Rob is 2nd among C's.

We upgrade the four and it would really help us.

http://insider.espn.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/league/east

Then get some people who can actually produce off the bench and it would go a long ways towards helping us.   That would help a great deal.