Celts Barred From Sign-And-Trades?

[Roy H.]

The team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season. ...

That suggests that once the Schroeder signing is official, we can't trade for Markannen, Hart, or anybody else, correct?

(Hat tip goCeltics)

[BudweiserCeltic]

The team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season. ...

That suggests that once the Schroeder signing is official, we can't trade for Markannen, Hart, or anybody else, correct?

(Hat tip goCeltics)

Well the thing is that the CBA uses the term Taxpayer Mid-Level exception if we're going above the Apron, I'm pretty sure we're not. We'd simply be hard capped, so I think we're safe to do both things.

Hopefully someone can enlighten.

[Ed Monix]

The team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season. ...

That suggests that once the Schroeder signing is official, we can't trade for Markannen, Hart, or anybody else, correct?

(Hat tip goCeltics)

Unfortunately the skeptic in me never believed the Celtics were going to sign anyone significant after Schroeder.

The Celtics are 6 million into the luxury tax, so I’m guessing it may be a fluke there’s reports of moving Kris Dunn & Bruno Fernando and that works out to be 6 million, ‘coincidentally’ out of paying any luxury tax.

[liam]

The team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season. ...

That suggests that once the Schroeder signing is official, we can't trade for Markannen, Hart, or anybody else, correct?

(Hat tip goCeltics)

Unfortunately the skeptic in me never believed the Celtics were going to sign anyone significant after Schroeder.

The Celtics are 6 million into the luxury tax, so I’m guessing it may be a fluke there’s reports of moving Kris Dunn & Bruno Fernando and that works out to be 6 million, ‘coincidentally’ out of paying any luxury tax.

I'd rather dump Dunn and Edwards. Bruno, a big strong guy off the bench is of more use.

[CFAN38]

The team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season. ...

That suggests that once the Schroeder signing is official, we can't trade for Markannen, Hart, or anybody else, correct?

(Hat tip goCeltics)

Unfortunately the skeptic in me never believed the Celtics were going to sign anyone significant after Schroeder.

The Celtics are 6 million into the luxury tax, so I’m guessing it may be a fluke there’s reports of moving Kris Dunn & Bruno Fernando and that works out to be 6 million, ‘coincidentally’ out of paying any luxury tax.

I'd rather dump Dunn and Edwards. Bruno, a big strong guy off the bench is of more use.

I agree, I don’t expect any more major moves but I do expect some sort of Dunn dumping trade still to come.

Maybe some sort of deal where Dunn does to a team that can use him for a 2nd that will never convey and Edwards goes to OKC for cash and a future 2nd (Edwards then gets released). That opens up room to keep Parker and sign N Hayes.

[Celtics2021]

I don’t believe the Celtics are barred from a sign-and-trade.  To sign Schroeder they used the regular MLE, but only signed him to the taxpayer MLE amount, permitting them to eventually go above the apron if the need/opportunity arises.  Alternatively they can make other moves that subject them to the apron.  In this way it’s different than the soft cap which you can go above and below during the year, gaining different benefits as you do.

Essentially the rule is that once you’re above the apron in a season, you’re subject to its restrictions, even if you later drop below it.  The Lakers can’t dump salary mid-way through the year to gain access to the BAE, for example.

Not 100% positive, but that’s always been my understanding.

[Ed Monix]

The team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season. ...

That suggests that once the Schroeder signing is official, we can't trade for Markannen, Hart, or anybody else, correct?

(Hat tip goCeltics)

Unfortunately the skeptic in me never believed the Celtics were going to sign anyone significant after Schroeder.

The Celtics are 6 million into the luxury tax, so I’m guessing it may be a fluke there’s reports of moving Kris Dunn & Bruno Fernando and that works out to be 6 million, ‘coincidentally’ out of paying any luxury tax.

I'd rather dump Dunn and Edwards. Bruno, a big strong guy off the bench is of more use.

I agree, I don’t expect any more major moves but I do expect some sort of Dunn dumping trade still to come.

Maybe some sort of deal where Dunn does to a team that can use him for a 2nd that will never convey and Edwards goes to OKC for cash and a future 2nd (Edwards then gets released). That opens up room to keep Parker and sign N Hayes.

I believe Jabari Parker’s deal is non-guaranteed so he can just be cut.

[Celtics2021]

I don’t believe the Celtics are barred from a sign-and-trade.  To sign Schroeder they used the regular MLE, but only signed him to the taxpayer MLE amount, permitting them to eventually go above the apron if the need/opportunity arises.  Alternatively they can make other moves that subject them to the apron.  In this way it’s different than the soft cap which you can go above and below during the year, gaining different benefits as you do.

Essentially the rule is that once you’re above the apron in a season, you’re subject to its restrictions, even if you later drop below it.  The Lakers can’t dump salary mid-way through the year to gain access to the BAE, for example.

Not 100% positive, but that’s always been my understanding.

Want to update this thought.  From the CBA:

(1) A Team shall be permitted to use the Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception in a Salary Cap Year only if (i) the Team’s Team Salary immediately following the Team’s use of such Exception
exceeds the Tax Level for such Salary Cap Year plus the Tax Apron Amount…

I’m not quite sure where we are relative to the apron at this point, but if we’re not above it now, then we didn’t use the taxpayer MLE.  If we are, then yes we did, and S&T’s are officially out.

[jambr380]

I don’t believe the Celtics are barred from a sign-and-trade.  To sign Schroeder they used the regular MLE, but only signed him to the taxpayer MLE amount, permitting them to eventually go above the apron if the need/opportunity arises.  Alternatively they can make other moves that subject them to the apron.  In this way it’s different than the soft cap which you can go above and below during the year, gaining different benefits as you do.

Essentially the rule is that once you’re above the apron in a season, you’re subject to its restrictions, even if you later drop below it.  The Lakers can’t dump salary mid-way through the year to gain access to the BAE, for example.

Not 100% positive, but that’s always been my understanding.

Want to update this thought.  From the CBA:
c

(1) A Team shall be permitted to use the Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception in a Salary Cap Year only if (i) the Team’s Team Salary immediately following the Team’s use of such Exception
exceeds the Tax Level for such Salary Cap Year plus the Tax Apron Amount…

I’m not quite sure where we are relative to the apron at this point, but if we’re not above it now, then we didn’t use the taxpayer MLE.  If we are, then yes we did, and S&T’s are officially out.

Good info C21. You probably don't know who saltlover is (unless this is you new account sl  ), but you've been providing some great information throughout the year - similar to our old friend. While I'm quite interested in the salary cap/CBA, it's always nice having people around who know more than I do (of which there are plenty). Another TP to you!

[BudweiserCeltic]

I don’t believe the Celtics are barred from a sign-and-trade.  To sign Schroeder they used the regular MLE, but only signed him to the taxpayer MLE amount, permitting them to eventually go above the apron if the need/opportunity arises.  Alternatively they can make other moves that subject them to the apron.  In this way it’s different than the soft cap which you can go above and below during the year, gaining different benefits as you do.

Essentially the rule is that once you’re above the apron in a season, you’re subject to its restrictions, even if you later drop below it.  The Lakers can’t dump salary mid-way through the year to gain access to the BAE, for example.

Not 100% positive, but that’s always been my understanding.

Want to update this thought.  From the CBA:

(1) A Team shall be permitted to use the Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception in a Salary Cap Year only if (i) the Team’s Team Salary immediately following the Team’s use of such Exception
exceeds the Tax Level for such Salary Cap Year plus the Tax Apron Amount…

I’m not quite sure where we are relative to the apron at this point, but if we’re not above it now, then we didn’t use the taxpayer MLE.  If we are, then yes we did, and S&T’s are officially out.

I don't think there's any did or didn't yet, usually it's standard procedure to not do anything officially until all moves have been considered, so I'd be surprised if Schroder is already signed. Mike Zarren is still around.

[Vermont Green]

I don’t believe the Celtics are barred from a sign-and-trade.  To sign Schroeder they used the regular MLE, but only signed him to the taxpayer MLE amount, permitting them to eventually go above the apron if the need/opportunity arises.  Alternatively they can make other moves that subject them to the apron.  In this way it’s different than the soft cap which you can go above and below during the year, gaining different benefits as you do.

Essentially the rule is that once you’re above the apron in a season, you’re subject to its restrictions, even if you later drop below it.  The Lakers can’t dump salary mid-way through the year to gain access to the BAE, for example.

Not 100% positive, but that’s always been my understanding.

Want to update this thought.  From the CBA:

(1) A Team shall be permitted to use the Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception in a Salary Cap Year only if (i) the Team’s Team Salary immediately following the Team’s use of such Exception exceeds the Tax Level for such Salary Cap Year plus the Tax Apron Amount…

I’m not quite sure where we are relative to the apron at this point, but if we’re not above it now, then we didn’t use the taxpayer MLE.  If we are, then yes we did, and S&T’s are officially out.

By my count, signing Schroder at $5.89M would put us about $200,000 over the apron amount of $143M.  That is by no means official.  This seems like a really pointless clause and also ambiguous.  What about if you only use $5.6M of the Tax payer MLE and that doesn't put you over the apron?  Is that really using part of the Tax Payer or the non tax payer MLE?  It is kind of a chicken and egg thing.  The sign and trade we potentially do could save us money and get us back under the apron.

This makes no sense.  I am not sure a S&T is going to happen in any case so maybe it is all moot but it is still pointless from what I can see.  If you do a S&T, you are hard capped so you can't be a tax payer and ergo, any MLE will be all or a portion of the Non-Tax payer version.  You are hard capped so you can only use the MLE up to the cap in any case once the S&T is done.

I doubt that Schroder will mind waiting to sign and if necessary, we can find a way to cut the small about we need to but this would only be necessary if a viable S&T is on the table.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I don’t believe the Celtics are barred from a sign-and-trade.  To sign Schroeder they used the regular MLE, but only signed him to the taxpayer MLE amount, permitting them to eventually go above the apron if the need/opportunity arises.  Alternatively they can make other moves that subject them to the apron.  In this way it’s different than the soft cap which you can go above and below during the year, gaining different benefits as you do.

Essentially the rule is that once you’re above the apron in a season, you’re subject to its restrictions, even if you later drop below it.  The Lakers can’t dump salary mid-way through the year to gain access to the BAE, for example.

Not 100% positive, but that’s always been my understanding.

Want to update this thought.  From the CBA:

(1) A Team shall be permitted to use the Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception in a Salary Cap Year only if (i) the Team’s Team Salary immediately following the Team’s use of such Exception exceeds the Tax Level for such Salary Cap Year plus the Tax Apron Amount…

I’m not quite sure where we are relative to the apron at this point, but if we’re not above it now, then we didn’t use the taxpayer MLE.  If we are, then yes we did, and S&T’s are officially out.

By my count, signing Schroder at $5.89M would put us about $200,000 over the apron amount of $143M.  That is by no means official.  This seems like a really pointless clause and also ambiguous.  What about if you only use $5.6M of the Tax payer MLE and that doesn't put you over the apron?  Is that really using part of the Tax Payer or the non tax payer MLE?  It is kind of a chicken and egg thing.  The sign and trade we potentially do could save us money and get us back under the apron.

This makes no sense.  I am not sure a S&T is going to happen in any case so maybe it is all moot but it is still pointless from what I can see.  If you do a S&T, you are hard capped so you can't be a tax payer and ergo, any MLE will be all or a portion of the Non-Tax payer version.  You are hard capped so you can only use the MLE up to the cap in any case once the S&T is done.

I doubt that Schroder will mind waiting to sign and if necessary, we can find a way to cut the small about we need to but this would only be necessary if a viable S&T is on the table.

I think what matters is the point in time when the contract is signed, I would presume that the contract you present to the league has to specifically state what exception you're using. To that end, depending on the state of your roster at the point of signing said player, and based on how the team salary is counted as it regards the Apron for using these exceptions (which is a different calculation than the one we usually use to see if we have cap space, will pay tax, etc.), it's is then that one decides which exception was used and it should be specified in the contract presented to the league I would think.

If for some reason or another the team gets under the apron after the Taxpayer MLE is used, then that's not the league's concern.

I don't think you can officially sign a player to the Non-Taxper MLE just because you have the intention of going under at some point in the future, I may be wrong, but I doubt that's the case.

That's why I doubt we have officially signed Schoder yet, that would seem like a rookie mistake from the front office that supposedly features the cap guru in Mike Zarren.

[Roy H.]

would presume that the contract you present to the league has to specifically state what exception you're using

I believe that this is correct.

[Vermont Green]

would presume that the contract you present to the league has to specifically state what exception you're using

I believe that this is correct.

But what if you are under the tax at the time of signing someone to a portion of the MLE?  Do you have to declare tax or non tax a that time?  It is kind of double jeopardy.  If you declare non-Tax, and that can't change, you are hard capped even though you may have only used $5M of the MLE.  If you declare Tax MLE, I guess no hard cap but then no S&T.  And could you even declare the Tax MLE if you aren't in fact over the tax at that time?  The way this reads, I don't think so.  Kind of dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.

Anyway, it appears the easy work around is to just have Schroder wait a bit.  I don't think we are doing a sign and trade at this point anyway.  And we may or may not get under the tax with subsequent deals.  In a way it seems better if we aren't under when we sign Schroder.  If we are under when we sign Schroder, even if it is below the Tax MLE limit, we would become hard capped because the league would take this as using a portion the non-Tax MLE, correct?  If we are over, the exact same value would be taken as Tax MLE and no hard cap, correct?

If we do the latter, we could get back under the tax apron level later (and delay the tax clock for another season), at least I think, or decide to go big and go even more over the tax with a trade if we want.  The only thing we couldn't do is a S&T.

[BudweiserCeltic]

would presume that the contract you present to the league has to specifically state what exception you're using

I believe that this is correct.

But what if you are under the tax at the time of signing someone to a portion of the MLE?  Do you have to declare tax or non tax a that time?  It is kind of double jeopardy.  If you declare non-Tax, and that can't change, you are hard capped even though you may have only used $5M of the MLE.  If you declare Tax MLE, I guess no hard cap but then no S&T.  And could you even declare the Tax MLE if you aren't in fact over the tax at that time?  The way this reads, I don't think so.  Kind of dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.

Anyway, it appears the easy work around is to just have Schroder wait a bit.  I don't think we are doing a sign and trade at this point anyway.  And we may or may not get under the tax with subsequent deals.  In a way it seems better if we aren't under when we sign Schroder.  If we are under when we sign Schroder, even if it is below the Tax MLE limit, we would become hard capped because the league would take this as using a portion the non-Tax MLE, correct?  If we are over, the exact same value would be taken as Tax MLE and no hard cap, correct?

If we do the latter, we could get back under the tax apron level later (and delay the tax clock for another season), at least I think, or decide to go big and go even more over the tax with a trade if we want.  The only thing we couldn't do is a S&T.

If you use the Non-Taxpayer MLE you're hard capped at the Apron. The only way you can go above it is if you use only a portion of the Non-Taxpayer MLE that doesn't exceed the amount of a Taxpayer MLE. If we go above the apron, then the Non-Taxpayer magically converts to the Taxpayer one at that point, and all that would entail (no S&T possibility at that point).

So if we manage to sign Schoder with the Non-Taxpayer MLE, to the amount we've agreed (which is the same as the full Taxpayer one), then we can go above the apron later... given that we don't do a S&T, which would hard cap us then.