Report: Celtics still looking to utilize trade exception?

[droopdog7]

Ownership cheaping out once again. Wyc needs to sell

Or maybe they're happy with the makeup of the team in terms of chemistry, and there was nobody available?

I think it’s somewhere in the middle.

I think that there were players available.  And, I don’t think those guys are huge chemistry risks.

But, those guys probably added incremental value.  Take Josh Richardson.  He was definitely available, he’s a good soldier, and he fills a need.  But, he’s more of a pretty good fit, versus a great fit.

We’d pay him his contact of around $12 million, plus around $48 million in tax.  So, it could be said that Wyc cheaped out.  It’s probably reasonable for him to do so, though, because $60 million is a ton to pay for a role player who may not add much.

I don’t think anyone can call not spending 60 million on a Josh Richardson cheaping out, under any circumstances.  I call it not being an idiot.

[ozgod]

Ownership cheaping out once again. Wyc needs to sell

Or maybe they're happy with the makeup of the team in terms of chemistry, and there was nobody available?

I think it’s somewhere in the middle.

I think that there were players available.  And, I don’t think those guys are huge chemistry risks.

But, those guys probably added incremental value.  Take Josh Richardson.  He was definitely available, he’s a good soldier, and he fills a need.  But, he’s more of a pretty good fit, versus a great fit.

We’d pay him his contact of around $12 million, plus around $48 million in tax.  So, it could be said that Wyc cheaped out.  It’s probably reasonable for him to do so, though, because $60 million is a ton to pay for a role player who may not add much.

I don’t think anyone can call not spending 60 million on a Josh Richardson cheaping out, under any circumstances.  I call it not being an idiot.

That's really the thing...the fact that no matter what part of the TPE we used we would pay $3.75m in tax for every $1m in salary. So a $10m guy becomes a max player costing $47.5m. It's a tough equation to swallow given what utility and value such a guy would provide. Plus at $10m ($47m total) you're paying a guy to play a role in the rotation which already has a lot of players in it, so minutes would have to be carved out from other players. If you were to use the TPE on an insurance guy, say paying him $5m, that's still $23m for a guy to sit on the bench.

To me, if they were going to use the TPE, it would have made the most sense to add it in a trade for an existing rotation player for an upgrade. E.g. ship out White and his $17m salary for a guy in the $30m range, using $13m of the TPE. It doesn't make economic or rotation sense to add a player with it without shipping someone in the rotation out as well. I've qualified every comment by saying it's not my money so if Wyc wanted to add a guy to sit on the bench as insurance, more power to him. But if I were to put myself in Brad's shoes, even if he said Wyc gave him the green light to spend, it would be an awkward conversation to have with ownership telling them they should spend $50m for a low-minutes guy as a maybe. ("Come on Wyc, I know you're loaded, what's fifty mill here and there among friends? The fans will be really happy!"  )

[colincb]

.

[stes]

Maybe they believe somebody like Olynyk or Favors will eventually be bought out, so why take on this enormous tax bill, when you can try to sign them for a minimum later. Kelly for a minimum would be a nice add, imo.

[gouki88]

Maybe they believe somebody like Olynyk or Favors will eventually be bought out, so why take on this enormous tax bill, when you can try to sign them for a minimum later. Kelly for a minimum would be a nice add, imo.

This is my thinking too. Either waiting for a minimum buyout, or thinking about using one of the smaller TPEs on a lesser piece.

[Celtics2021]

Maybe they believe somebody like Olynyk or Favors will eventually be bought out, so why take on this enormous tax bill, when you can try to sign them for a minimum later. Kelly for a minimum would be a nice add, imo.

This is my thinking too. Either waiting for a minimum buyout, or thinking about using one of the smaller TPEs on a lesser piece.

Also, when you’re talking about adding someone who is likely the 10th or 11th man, doing so later in the year when you know what you need makes more sense.  Sure, we think it will be a 3rd center or 5th big, but injuries can happen to anyone, and there’s always the possibility that throughout the first half of the season a different deficiency is discovered that is more in need of fixing.  The Celtics are becoming more limited in their ability to patch such holes, in part due to there being some salary maximum, and also due to the dwindling number of draft picks to trade.

[A Future of Stevens]

Its my understanding Brad has done a good job holding on to firsts correct? He hasn't completely jettisoned a pick more than a year out. We owe this years to Indy for Brogdon. And we have a possible swap with SA a few years down the line.

[ozgod]

Ownership cheaping out once again. Wyc needs to sell

Or maybe they're happy with the makeup of the team in terms of chemistry, and there was nobody available?

I think it’s somewhere in the middle.

I think that there were players available.  And, I don’t think those guys are huge chemistry risks.

But, those guys probably added incremental value.  Take Josh Richardson.  He was definitely available, he’s a good soldier, and he fills a need.  But, he’s more of a pretty good fit, versus a great fit.

We’d pay him his contact of around $12 million, plus around $48 million in tax.  So, it could be said that Wyc cheaped out.  It’s probably reasonable for him to do so, though, because $60 million is a ton to pay for a role player who may not add much.

I don’t think anyone can call not spending 60 million on a Josh Richardson cheaping out, under any circumstances.  I call it not being an idiot.

That's really the thing...the fact that no matter what part of the TPE we used we would pay $3.75m in tax for every $1m in salary. So a $10m guy becomes a max player costing $47.5m. It's a tough equation to swallow given what utility and value such a guy would provide. Plus at $10m ($47m total) you're paying a guy to play a role in the rotation which already has a lot of players in it, so minutes would have to be carved out from other players. If you were to use the TPE on an insurance guy, say paying him $5m, that's still $23m for a guy to sit on the bench.

To me, if they were going to use the TPE, it would have made the most sense to add it in a trade for an existing rotation player for an upgrade. E.g. ship out White and his $17m salary for a guy in the $30m range, using $13m of the TPE. It doesn't make economic or rotation sense to add a player with it without shipping someone in the rotation out as well. I've qualified every comment by saying it's not my money so if Wyc wanted to add a guy to sit on the bench as insurance, more power to him. But if I were to put myself in Brad's shoes, even if he said Wyc gave him the green light to spend, it would be an awkward conversation to have with ownership telling them they should spend $50m for a low-minutes guy as a maybe. ("Come on Wyc, I know you're loaded, what's fifty mill here and there among friends? The fans will be really happy!"  )

You couldn't add a player to a TPE to get a player who's worth more than the TPE.

If that's the case then there really was no good reason to use the $17m in its entirety then.

[Surferdad]

Ownership cheaping out once again. Wyc needs to sell

Or maybe they're happy with the makeup of the team in terms of chemistry, and there was nobody available?

I think it’s somewhere in the middle.

I think that there were players available.  And, I don’t think those guys are huge chemistry risks.

But, those guys probably added incremental value.  Take Josh Richardson.  He was definitely available, he’s a good soldier, and he fills a need.  But, he’s more of a pretty good fit, versus a great fit.

We’d pay him his contact of around $12 million, plus around $48 million in tax.  So, it could be said that Wyc cheaped out.  It’s probably reasonable for him to do so, though, because $60 million is a ton to pay for a role player who may not add much.

I don’t think anyone can call not spending 60 million on a Josh Richardson cheaping out, under any circumstances.  I call it not being an idiot.

That's really the thing...the fact that no matter what part of the TPE we used we would pay $3.75m in tax for every $1m in salary. So a $10m guy becomes a max player costing $47.5m. It's a tough equation to swallow given what utility and value such a guy would provide. Plus at $10m ($47m total) you're paying a guy to play a role in the rotation which already has a lot of players in it, so minutes would have to be carved out from other players. If you were to use the TPE on an insurance guy, say paying him $5m, that's still $23m for a guy to sit on the bench.

To me, if they were going to use the TPE, it would have made the most sense to add it in a trade for an existing rotation player for an upgrade. E.g. ship out White and his $17m salary for a guy in the $30m range, using $13m of the TPE. It doesn't make economic or rotation sense to add a player with it without shipping someone in the rotation out as well. I've qualified every comment by saying it's not my money so if Wyc wanted to add a guy to sit on the bench as insurance, more power to him. But if I were to put myself in Brad's shoes, even if he said Wyc gave him the green light to spend, it would be an awkward conversation to have with ownership telling them they should spend $50m for a low-minutes guy as a maybe. ("Come on Wyc, I know you're loaded, what's fifty mill here and there among friends? The fans will be really happy!"  )

Exactly.  I hope everyone reads this and realizes that, though we are fans and have a right to hope the C's spend to win a chip, that this is still a business.  Frankly, I'm glad this deadline has passed but they've got a couple more smaller TPE's and the same issue will apply.  A $6M guy will cost $24M to mostly sit on the bench.  Doesn't make much sense.

[PAOBoston]

Overall disappointing to let an asset like that go unused. Hopeful they can get adequate players to fill those roles but honestly not really optimistic. I think they are ok at the wing for the most part in an emergency but they are screwed if Williams or Horford need time  off. Timelord is never healthy and if we are banking on 36 year old Horford playing 30+ mins we are in trouble.

[Vermont Green]

Someone suggested in another post that we shouldn't necessarily attribute all of the tax that is created by adding one player, solely to that player since the tax is really the result of the aggregate of all salaries.  That is true and that is fair but it is also hard to do.  Horford is for example as much responsible for the tax as Gallinari is, more actually.  So it isn't fair to say Gallinari is really costing the team $6.4M X 3 or however it works.  But I get it that it feels that way.

I think even if you accept this and set aside the tax, there is no reason to trade for a player just to make a trade.  If there was a player that really made an impact on the roster, then it would be smart to add up to $17M in salary.  But for $17M, that should be a top 6 or top 7 player.  Our roster is pretty set through 8 or 9 so the players we are going to add are more in the 10-12 range.  You don't pay $17M or even $10M for those players, even if you are in a full all in win now mode.  There is simply no need to.  There will be comparable other options at lower cost.

I am not surprised that this expired nor am I critical of ownership for it.  We got Brogdon.  That alone makes this a home run off season.  Add Gallinari to that at the MLE salary that that is a triple (Gallinari at $20M would have been something different).  We are on our way to hitting for cycle.  Get a good insurance big and an insurance wing and we have the double and single for the cycle.

[Celtics4ever]

At the end of the day, other teams knew it was expiring and probably drove for hard bargins I wager

[Celtics2021]

At the end of the day, other teams knew it was expiring and probably drove for hard bargins I wager

On the converse, the Celtics having the TPE gave them many avenues to add a significant piece, which might have caused the Pacers to not drive as hard of a bargain for Brogdon, since the C’s could have turned elsewhere.

[Roy H.]

At the end of the day, other teams knew it was expiring and probably drove for hard bargins I wager

It depends on what the motivation of the other team was.  With the Celtics' TPE expiring, those teams also lost one of the few avenues of completing a pure salary dump.  Now teams are left with just the Spurs and the Pacers, I think?  Those teams are unlikely to give positive assets to acquire a veteran player, meaning the selling teams will now need to attach an asset if they're looking for salary relief.

My guess is that the Celtics looked at what was available, and decided it just wasn't worth the monetary cost.  If you assume the Celtics cleared around $100 million in profits last year (perhaps a tick more), and would have made around $100 million or so this year if they'd kept to the luxury tax, then the Celtics current payroll makes sense.

We're about $20 million over the tax right now, and looking at $44,518,789 in payments.  So, assume we're $65 million over the standard budget.  $100 million in profits turns into around $35 million now.

Then, we've got three roster spots.  Assume those come in at $5 million combined (which is on the low end).  The luxury tax hit on that $5 million is $18.75 million.  So, total cost on filling those spots with cheap contracts (like Matt Ryan cheap) is $23.75 million.  So, $35 million in profits is around $11 million now.

Any salary beyond that is multiplied by 4.25 for the first $5 million; 4.75 for the next $5 million, etc.

So, operating income (profits) are relatively stable, Wyc can add about $7 million total to fill the three roster spots.  That would put total payments at around $100 million over the tax line.

Now, maybe the team got a revenue bump due to the Finals run, so the numbers can be adjusted slightly upward.  But, I don't think many ownership groups will operate at a loss unless it's to significantly increase their chance at winning.

(Reminder:  these are rough estimates.)

[Surferdad]

Someone suggested in another post that we shouldn't necessarily attribute all of the tax that is created by adding one player, solely to that player since the tax is really the result of the aggregate of all salaries.  That is true and that is fair but it is also hard to do.  Horford is for example as much responsible for the tax as Gallinari is, more actually.  So it isn't fair to say Gallinari is really costing the team $6.4M X 3 or however it works.  But I get it that it feels that way.
...

I was going to bring this up in my post just above.  While it's true that all salaries contribute to the tax in a pro-rated manner, the stark reality is that ownership is trying to decide NOW on adding more salary (via TPE).  The incremental tax of using the TPE MUST BE part of the consideration in spite of the fact that all salaries contribute to the total team salary.