The Celtics and the New CBA

[Roy H.]

For those who haven't followed closely, there are some big changes coming to the CBA that are going to affect luxury tax teams that are $17.5 million over the tax line.  Among them:

* No using the MLE
* No taking back more salary in trade than you send out
* Only being allowed to trade first rounders six years out, rather than seven years
* Can't sign players in the buyout market

Meanwhile, the new rules make the All-NBA team positionless, so slots will go to the top 15 players, even if theoretically 10 of those guys were guards.  Also, award winners must player 65+ games to qualify.

Some things I'm wondering:

How far in advance did ownership know these proposals were on the table?  Did this affect their spending this season?

With the benefit of hindsight, would it have been to the team's advantage to use all of the TPEs, since it will be harder to acquire players in the future?  Or, is it better that the team is leaner and closer to the "second apron" line of $17.5 million over the tax?

The value of first rounders is seemingly going to go up, as rich teams will have fewer options to improve externally.  Does this help the Celtics, who own all of their first rounders going forward (with the 2028 pick subject to swap rights with San Antonio)?  Does our current lack of second rounders hurt us?

Is Jaylen more or less likely to make All-NBA next season if its positionless?

[Vermont Green]

These are all good questions but I don't fully understand where we are at.  Looking at Spotrac, they say that the cap for 2023-24 will be $162,000,000 with the tax apron at $170,461,000 and that our taxable salaries are at $163,100,917 so we are over the cap but  below this new "apron"?  Note that the $163M does not include Grant or any other cap holds.

Right now, we have the tax payer MLE (about $7M) and the BAE (about $4M) available.  But if our total gets too high, we can't use them?  And is it correct that if we use them, the value can't take us over the new apron with those contracts included?

For example, if the apron is $162M$170M + $17.5M, this new limit is $187.5M.  We are at about $163M.  Say we sign Grant for $12M.  That gets us to $175M (just picking numbers to make the math easy).  We would still have about $12.5M to this new apron, allowing us to use the MLE and or BAE, even after signing Grant.

In any case, I see it as if we had used the TPE on a useless player, and that contract was now preventing us from using the MLE or from signing buyouts, that would be a real waste.  If the TPE was used on an actual useful player that was contributing, then it would be OK even if it prevented us from doing something else.  To me, that calculus has not changed.  I felt is was a bad idea to use the TPE on a useless player, just to use it, now it is just even a worse idea.  But if you can use the TPE on a good player.  Then it is good.

[Moranis]

Hindsight you absolutely use both TPE's to up your salary, which then allows you more trading options, since you can't take in more than you send out.  We can no longer package Gallinari, Pritchard, and the other smaller contracts to get a big contract.  We actually have to trade a big contract now and not having those extra big contracts makes a trade a lot harder.  I mean even trading Brown for someone like Lillard is a lot harder now. 

[Celtics2021]

These are all good questions but I don't fully understand where we are at.  Looking at Spotrac, they say that the cap for 2023-24 will be $162,000,000 and that our taxable salaries are at $163,100,917 so we are over the cap but does this mean that we are about $16M below this new "apron"?  Note that the $163M does not include Grant or any other cap holds.

Right now, we have the tax payer MLE (about $7M) and the BAE (about $4M) available.  But if our total gets too high, we can't use them?  And is it correct that if we use them, the value can't take us over the new apron with those contracts included?

For example, if the apron is $162M + $17.5M, this new limit is $179.5M.  We are at about $163M.  Say we sign Grant for $12M.  That gets us to $175M, still below the new apron but I assume we can't then use all of the $7M MLE?

In any case, I see it as if we had used the TPE on a useless player, and that contract was now preventing us from using the MLE or from signing buyouts, that would be a real waste.  If the TPE was used on an actual useful player that was contributing, then it would be OK even if it prevented us from doing something else.  To me, that calculus has not changed.  I felt is was a bad idea to use the TPE on a useless player, just to use it, now it is just even a worse idea.  But if you can use the TPE on a good player.  Then it is good.

The new apron is $17.5 million over the luxury tax, not cap.  So if you look at Spotrac, that’s the number to do you cap gymnastics from.

[Moranis]

Also that is a weird provision, as it means 2 big spending teams can't actually trade with each other because they both can't take in more salary then they let out.  They'd have to find at least 1 other team to absorb salary to make a trade which seems like a really strange thing to require.

[Celtics2021]

Also that is a weird provision, as it means 2 big spending teams can't actually trade with each other because they both can't take in more salary then they let out.  They'd have to find at least 1 other team to absorb salary to make a trade which seems like a really strange thing to require.

The point, of course, is to create a de facto hard cap at $17.5 million above the tax.

Also, I assume that the size of the apron will increase proportional to the tax.  For instance, the initial apron was set at $5 million over the tax and has adjusted up to around $6.5 million over the tax as the cap has increased over time, and I assume that $17.5 million will be subject to the same annual adjustments.

[Roy H.]

Also, I assume that the size of the apron will increase proportional to the tax.  For instance, the initial apron was set at $5 million over the tax and has adjusted up to around $6.5 million over the tax as the cap has increased over time, and I assume that $17.5 million will be subject to the same annual adjustments.

Yes, I saw this confirmed somewhere.

Also, not all of the provisions related to the "second apron" will go into effect immediately.

[Vermont Green]

Hindsight you absolutely use both TPE's to up your salary, which then allows you more trading options, since you can't take in more than you send out.  We can no longer package Gallinari, Pritchard, and the other smaller contracts to get a big contract.  We actually have to trade a big contract now and not having those extra big contracts makes a trade a lot harder.  I mean even trading Brown for someone like Lillard is a lot harder now.

This is not correct.  Right now we still could package Gallinari and Pritchard and bring back a contract that is %125 in value because we are not over this new super tax apron.  If we had brought in a useless player just to have a contract to trade (Nerlens Noel was a popular target) then we could be over this new limit and not only limited in trades but also not able to use the MLE, BAE or sign buy outs.

If I have the numbers right, because we don't have any unnecessary contracts, we have the room to sign Grant, use the MLE and BAE, and still be below this new tax limit so we would not have any other restrictions on trades.  If we had a $20M contact on the books attached to a player no one wants, we would not be able to do any of this (well, we could still sign Grant).  All we would have is a player with a contract that makes him a negative value in a trade, meaning we have to add picks if that player is in any trade.

[Moranis]

Hindsight you absolutely use both TPE's to up your salary, which then allows you more trading options, since you can't take in more than you send out.  We can no longer package Gallinari, Pritchard, and the other smaller contracts to get a big contract.  We actually have to trade a big contract now and not having those extra big contracts makes a trade a lot harder.  I mean even trading Brown for someone like Lillard is a lot harder now.

This is not correct.  Right now we still could package Gallinari and Pritchard and bring back a contract that is %125 in value because we are not over this new super tax apron.  If we had brought in a useless player just to have a contract to trade (Nerlens Noel was a popular target) then we could be over this new limit and not only limited in trades but also not able to use the MLE, BAE or sign buy outs.

If I have the numbers right, because we don't have any unnecessary contracts, we have the room to sign Grant, use the MLE and BAE, and still be below this new tax limit so we would not have any other restrictions on trades.  If we had a $20M contact on the books attached to a player no one wants, we would not be able to do any of this (well, we could still sign Grant).  All we would have is a player with a contract that makes him a negative value in a trade, meaning we have to add picks if that player is in any trade.

only if we release the Grant Williams cap hold of 13 million, which seems like a poor strategy. With Grant's cap hold (and then presumably his contract), we won't be able to make a trade that brings back more money than we send out.

[Celtics2021]

Also, I assume that the size of the apron will increase proportional to the tax.  For instance, the initial apron was set at $5 million over the tax and has adjusted up to around $6.5 million over the tax as the cap has increased over time, and I assume that $17.5 million will be subject to the same annual adjustments.

Yes, I saw this confirmed somewhere.

Also, not all of the provisions related to the "second apron" will go into effect immediately.

Yes, I saw that too.  Curious which ones will be phased in — I imagine the no trading and the limit on MLEs will not be instantaneous, but the draft pick provision and buyout market probably will be.

[Roy H.]

Hindsight you absolutely use both TPE's to up your salary, which then allows you more trading options, since you can't take in more than you send out.  We can no longer package Gallinari, Pritchard, and the other smaller contracts to get a big contract.  We actually have to trade a big contract now and not having those extra big contracts makes a trade a lot harder.  I mean even trading Brown for someone like Lillard is a lot harder now.

This is not correct.  Right now we still could package Gallinari and Pritchard and bring back a contract that is %125 in value because we are not over this new super tax apron.  If we had brought in a useless player just to have a contract to trade (Nerlens Noel was a popular target) then we could be over this new limit and not only limited in trades but also not able to use the MLE, BAE or sign buy outs.

If I have the numbers right, because we don't have any unnecessary contracts, we have the room to sign Grant, use the MLE and BAE, and still be below this new tax limit so we would not have any other restrictions on trades.  If we had a $20M contact on the books attached to a player no one wants, we would not be able to do any of this (well, we could still sign Grant).  All we would have is a player with a contract that makes him a negative value in a trade, meaning we have to add picks if that player is in any trade.

Teams over the first tax apron can't use the BAE, I believe.

[Vermont Green]

Hindsight you absolutely use both TPE's to up your salary, which then allows you more trading options, since you can't take in more than you send out.  We can no longer package Gallinari, Pritchard, and the other smaller contracts to get a big contract.  We actually have to trade a big contract now and not having those extra big contracts makes a trade a lot harder.  I mean even trading Brown for someone like Lillard is a lot harder now.

This is not correct.  Right now we still could package Gallinari and Pritchard and bring back a contract that is %125 in value because we are not over this new super tax apron.  If we had brought in a useless player just to have a contract to trade (Nerlens Noel was a popular target) then we could be over this new limit and not only limited in trades but also not able to use the MLE, BAE or sign buy outs.

If I have the numbers right, because we don't have any unnecessary contracts, we have the room to sign Grant, use the MLE and BAE, and still be below this new tax limit so we would not have any other restrictions on trades.  If we had a $20M contact on the books attached to a player no one wants, we would not be able to do any of this (well, we could still sign Grant).  All we would have is a player with a contract that makes him a negative value in a trade, meaning we have to add picks if that player is in any trade.

only if we release the Grant Williams cap hold of 13 million, which seems like a poor strategy. With Grant's cap hold (and then presumably his contract), we won't be able to make a trade that brings back more money than we send out.

I could be wrong on the numbers but as I understand it, this new tax limit is $17.5M above the regular tax apron which is about $170M.  So this new limit is about $187.5M.

We are at about $163M with 12 contracts (doesn't include Grant, Griffin, or Chamagnie).  Say we sign Grant for $12M, that would put us at $175M.  Then assume we use the full available taxpayer MLE of $7M on a player.  That would get us to 14 players and about $182M.  That leaves us about $5M to sign a player for the 15th slot, with is likely a second round pick level player.

[Roy H.]

Hindsight you absolutely use both TPE's to up your salary, which then allows you more trading options, since you can't take in more than you send out.  We can no longer package Gallinari, Pritchard, and the other smaller contracts to get a big contract.  We actually have to trade a big contract now and not having those extra big contracts makes a trade a lot harder.  I mean even trading Brown for someone like Lillard is a lot harder now.

This is not correct.  Right now we still could package Gallinari and Pritchard and bring back a contract that is %125 in value because we are not over this new super tax apron.  If we had brought in a useless player just to have a contract to trade (Nerlens Noel was a popular target) then we could be over this new limit and not only limited in trades but also not able to use the MLE, BAE or sign buy outs.

If I have the numbers right, because we don't have any unnecessary contracts, we have the room to sign Grant, use the MLE and BAE, and still be below this new tax limit so we would not have any other restrictions on trades.  If we had a $20M contact on the books attached to a player no one wants, we would not be able to do any of this (well, we could still sign Grant).  All we would have is a player with a contract that makes him a negative value in a trade, meaning we have to add picks if that player is in any trade.

only if we release the Grant Williams cap hold of 13 million, which seems like a poor strategy. With Grant's cap hold (and then presumably his contract), we won't be able to make a trade that brings back more money than we send out.

I could be wrong on the numbers but as I understand it, this new tax limit is $17.5M above the regular tax apron which is about $170M.  So this new limit is about $187.5M.

We are at about $163M with 12 contracts (doesn't include Grant, Griffin, or Chamagnie).  Say we sign Grant for $12M, that would put us at $175M.  Then assume we use the full available taxpayer MLE of $7M on a player.  That would get us to 14 players and about $182M.  That leaves us about $5M to sign a player for the 15th slot, with is likely a second round pick level player.

$17.5 million above the luxury, not the first apron. 

The tax line is projected to be $162,000,000.  Therefore, the second apron would be $179,500,000.

Right now, our guaranteed salaries plus cap holds equals $181,559,456.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/2023/

[Moranis]

Hindsight you absolutely use both TPE's to up your salary, which then allows you more trading options, since you can't take in more than you send out.  We can no longer package Gallinari, Pritchard, and the other smaller contracts to get a big contract.  We actually have to trade a big contract now and not having those extra big contracts makes a trade a lot harder.  I mean even trading Brown for someone like Lillard is a lot harder now.

This is not correct.  Right now we still could package Gallinari and Pritchard and bring back a contract that is %125 in value because we are not over this new super tax apron.  If we had brought in a useless player just to have a contract to trade (Nerlens Noel was a popular target) then we could be over this new limit and not only limited in trades but also not able to use the MLE, BAE or sign buy outs.

If I have the numbers right, because we don't have any unnecessary contracts, we have the room to sign Grant, use the MLE and BAE, and still be below this new tax limit so we would not have any other restrictions on trades.  If we had a $20M contact on the books attached to a player no one wants, we would not be able to do any of this (well, we could still sign Grant).  All we would have is a player with a contract that makes him a negative value in a trade, meaning we have to add picks if that player is in any trade.

only if we release the Grant Williams cap hold of 13 million, which seems like a poor strategy. With Grant's cap hold (and then presumably his contract), we won't be able to make a trade that brings back more money than we send out.

I could be wrong on the numbers but as I understand it, this new tax limit is $17.5M above the regular tax apron which is about $170M.  So this new limit is about $187.5M.

We are at about $163M with 12 contracts (doesn't include Grant, Griffin, or Chamagnie).  Say we sign Grant for $12M, that would put us at $175M.  Then assume we use the full available taxpayer MLE of $7M on a player.  That would get us to 14 players and about $182M.  That leaves us about $5M to sign a player for the 15th slot, with is likely a second round pick level player.

$17.5 million above the luxury, not the first apron. 

The tax line is projected to be $162,000,000.  Therefore, the second apron would be $179,500,000.

Right now, our guaranteed salaries plus cap holds equals $181,559,456.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/2023/

We obviously don't need all of the cap holds, but we do need to keep Grant's 13 million which puts us right below the 2nd apron and basically not enough room to do anything worthwhile nor make a trade where we bring back more salary.  The only way that isn't an issue is if Grant's new contract's 1st year is way below his 13 million cap hold (which seems unlikely). 

Having that extra salary, especially from a contract that would be expiring, would have been very beneficial for trade purposes. 

[bdm860]

Is Jaylen more or less likely to make All-NBA next season if its positionless?

I think the games played is a bigger deal than positionless.  I think positionless will help (assuming next year's field mirrors this year's) with no worries about people leaving Jaylen off their ballot because they considered him a guard but ranked him 7th-8th there but had him above the 5th-6th ranked forwards or vice versa.

While some will argue guard is deeper, and so positionless will hurt Jaylen, I would use All-Star voting as a proxy for now, where Jaylen finished #2 in media voting for Eastern conference backcourt.  Seems he has the voter's respect.

Games played is going to be the bigger help I think.  If these new voting rules were implemented this year, it would mean LeBron, AD, Lillard, Durant, Kawhi, Curry, Halliburton, Morant, Irving, Booker, Harden, George, JJJ all won't be eligible, and I expect this pool of players to get a decent chunk of votes.

That leaves: Jokic, Embiid, Giannis, Tatum, Doncic, Butler, SGA, Sabonis, Randle, Markkanen, Fox, Edwards, Mitchell, Young, Garland, Brunson, Lavine, Siakim, Bam, Bridges, DeRozan, and a couple of others I'm probably overlooking.  I like Jaylen's odds to be in the top 15 against this pool of ~20-25 players.

Of course, next year's pool will be different.  Some people not in the conversation this year could be there next year (Ball, Zion, Ingram, Banchero, Wembanyama, Holmgren, etc.), others could be healthier (Curry, Lillard, Durant, Morant, Booker, etc.), but some current healthy people will get injured and/or decline while others might leapfrog Jaylen.  Next year, Jaylen will probably be ranked somewhere in the 15-30 best players in the NBA (ESPN had him #22 before the start of this season); Jaylen healthy, C's winning, and a normal distribution of missed games among the top players in the league is what will help Jaylen the most I think.


Inadvertently, the new rules might help Jaylen make it this year.  I'm sure there's voters on the fence if they should vote for guys like LeBron, George, Curry, Morant, Lillard, thinking to themselves, did this player play enough games?  Now that the threshold has been established, it will  be easier for them to justify that this player did not play enough games to get a vote.  Will be interested to see if impacts voters.  LeBron got 169 points last year playing 56 games, will end up somewhere between 51-55 this year.  Let's see if his votes drop off significantly.