Jrue the odd man out?

[jambr380]

Just ridiculous that the Celtics are looking at harsh penalties for doing an excellent job building a championship roster.

The supermax is a joke. I love Jaylen, but 65 million dollars is ridiculous.

For context, it's slightly over one percent of the Celtics' sale price.

But to be fair, Tatum's and Brown's total current contracts combined are around 10% of the sale price.

As far as Brown goes specifically, he sure decided to make his only All-NBA team at exactly the right time. Normally, fans would be bitter about that happening; but with Jaylen having a great playoff run and the Celtics winning a Title, it's hard to be upset about it.

Obviously Tatum deserves whatever we are allowed to give him.

[Kernewek]

Just ridiculous that the Celtics are looking at harsh penalties for doing an excellent job building a championship roster.

The supermax is a joke. I love Jaylen, but 65 million dollars is ridiculous.

For context, it's slightly over one percent of the Celtics' sale price.

But to be fair, Tatum's and Brown's total current contracts combined are around 10% of the sale price.

As far as Brown goes specifically, he sure decided to make his only All-NBA team at exactly the right time. Normally, fans would be bitter about that happening; but with Jaylen having a great playoff run and the Celtics winning a Title, it's hard to be upset about it.

Obviously Tatum deserves whatever we are allowed to give him.

Sure. There are a few reasonable complaints you can make about supermax contracts, and others that fall apart for a variety of reasons, but I think the core point to keep in mind is that the Celtics make more money off of guys like Jaylen and Jayson than the players do off of the team - same as any other top-performing employee.

Not to beat the dead horse, but the league ownership wanted these restrictions in place to attempt to improve competitive balance across the league by making the accounting around championship-tier teams more punitive so they would be harder to hold together. There's no reason to blame the players for that.

[Vermont Green]

I think the problem with the supermax contracts is that it takes up too much of the self imposed limits, 2nd apron and tax.  By the time you have 2 supermax contracts on your team, you don't have enough for the rest of the team.  The 2 supermax contracts end up being as much as 75% of the salary cap (which isn't the same as 75% of the 2nd apron).  The Celtics, for example, would be in a much better place relative to the 2nd apron if the max they could pay Tatum and Brown was less.  It is just out of balance a little.

If it was me, I would adjust the supermax contracts down some so that teams had more flexibility to fill out the rest of the roster.  Of course, there is nothing forcing teams to pay players the max, but the reality is that it actually makes things easier to have a max contract.

[Kernewek]

I think the problem with the supermax contracts is that it takes up too much of the self imposed limits, 2nd apron and tax.  By the time you have 2 supermax contracts on your team, you don't have enough for the rest of the team.  The 2 supermax contracts end up being as much as 75% of the salary cap (which isn't the same as 75% of the 2nd apron).  The Celtics, for example, would be in a much better place relative to the 2nd apron if the max they could pay Tatum and Brown was less.  It is just out of balance a little.

If it was me, I would adjust the supermax contracts down some so that teams had more flexibility to fill out the rest of the roster.  Of course, there is nothing forcing teams to pay players the max, but the reality is that it actually makes things easier to have a max contract.

Right - but the problem is that 29 teams in the league want the Celtics to be in a bad spot when it comes to filling out their roster, right? Just under a decade ago, everyone was put off by the fact that the Warriors were able to sign Durant - granted, that specific instance was a stars-aligning-moment due to his free agency and a cap spike from a TV deal - and before that it was Miami stockpiling superstars and so on and so on.

These sorts of moves are less possible under the current CBA, so it appears to be working as intended.

[jambr380]

I think a reasonable compromise would just be supermax contracts for your homegrown stars should count as a regular max on the salary cap. Teams that draft and develop players are being penalized for keeping them. Players would still get their money to stay

[Roy H.]

In an ideal situation for fans, the team would tread water salary-wise next season.  Bring back Horford and Kornet on minimum contracts if they'll agree.  Trade Tillman if you can.  That's a tremendous amount of tax, but it's not a "basketball penalty".

Then, the next season, we'd start the off-season under the second apron.  Our roster would be:

Tatum
Brown
White
Jrue
Pritchard
Hauser
Scheirman
Queta
Walsh

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/_/year/2026/sort/cap_total

That's $207 million for those nine players.  That would leave us $21 million to fill out the roster.  Assume 4 of those guys are vet minimums, at $10 million total (add a bit if our 2025 #1 pick is taking a spot).  That would give us $11 million to resign KP.  That's probably not realistic, but if we traded Hauser (and replace him with a $2.5 minimum), that's around $19.3 in starting salary.  That might be doable.

So, will ownership bite that bullet, since it avoids "basketball penalties" and keeps the team together?  Or do they just really want to save a massive amount of money by trading a starter?

[slamtheking]

In an ideal situation for fans, the team would tread water salary-wise next season.  Bring back Horford and Kornet on minimum contracts if they'll agree.  Trade Tillman if you can.  That's a tremendous amount of tax, but it's not a "basketball penalty".

Then, the next season, we'd start the off-season under the second apron.  Our roster would be:

Tatum
Brown
White
Jrue
Pritchard
Hauser
Scheirman
Queta
Walsh

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/_/year/2026/sort/cap_total

That's $207 million for those nine players.  That would leave us $21 million to fill out the roster.  Assume 4 of those guys are vet minimums, at $10 million total (add a bit if our 2025 #1 pick is taking a spot).  That would give us $11 million to resign KP.  That's probably not realistic, but if we traded Hauser (and replace him with a $2.5 minimum), that's around $19.3 in starting salary.  That might be doable.

So, will ownership bite that bullet, since it avoids "basketball penalties" and keeps the team together?  Or do they just really want to save a massive amount of money by trading a starter?

I don't see either Horford or Kornet taking the minimum.  Kornet especially -- he hasn't had a big payday and this season he's definitely showing he's worth MLE money.  Horford's worth MLE too but might have trouble getting a team to pay that for more than 2 seasons.  Dumping Tillman is a must.  Wasted roster spot

I don't see them getting under the second apron next year unless they move a starter for someone making a lot less money.  If they win the title, they may just bite the bullet and ride this roster out for another run.  if they come up short, like non-finals short, I'd be surprised if at least Jrue's not traded and possibly another key player to get under that second apron.

[Kernewek]

In an ideal situation for fans, the team would tread water salary-wise next season.  Bring back Horford and Kornet on minimum contracts if they'll agree.  Trade Tillman if you can.  That's a tremendous amount of tax, but it's not a "basketball penalty".

Then, the next season, we'd start the off-season under the second apron.  Our roster would be:

Tatum
Brown
White
Jrue
Pritchard
Hauser
Scheirman
Queta
Walsh

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/_/year/2026/sort/cap_total

That's $207 million for those nine players.  That would leave us $21 million to fill out the roster.  Assume 4 of those guys are vet minimums, at $10 million total (add a bit if our 2025 #1 pick is taking a spot).  That would give us $11 million to resign KP.  That's probably not realistic, but if we traded Hauser (and replace him with a $2.5 minimum), that's around $19.3 in starting salary.  That might be doable.

So, will ownership bite that bullet, since it avoids "basketball penalties" and keeps the team together?  Or do they just really want to save a massive amount of money by trading a starter?

I don't see either Horford or Kornet taking the minimum.  Kornet especially -- he hasn't had a big payday and this season he's definitely showing he's worth MLE money.  Horford's worth MLE too but might have trouble getting a team to pay that for more than 2 seasons.  Dumping Tillman is a must.  Wasted roster spot

I don't see them getting under the second apron next year unless they move a starter for someone making a lot less money.  If they win the title, they may just bite the bullet and ride this roster out for another run.  if they come up short, like non-finals short, I'd be surprised if at least Jrue's not traded and possibly another key player to get under that second apron.

I think Horford's most likely to retire, but an MLE seems farfetched vs. a minimum, if only because the teams that can afford it don't seem like the kind of teams he'd want to spend his last years in the league with.

Not sure what the market looks like for Holiday, either - but I think the front office would try.

[Roy H.]

In an ideal situation for fans, the team would tread water salary-wise next season.  Bring back Horford and Kornet on minimum contracts if they'll agree.  Trade Tillman if you can.  That's a tremendous amount of tax, but it's not a "basketball penalty".

Then, the next season, we'd start the off-season under the second apron.  Our roster would be:

Tatum
Brown
White
Jrue
Pritchard
Hauser
Scheirman
Queta
Walsh

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/_/year/2026/sort/cap_total

That's $207 million for those nine players.  That would leave us $21 million to fill out the roster.  Assume 4 of those guys are vet minimums, at $10 million total (add a bit if our 2025 #1 pick is taking a spot).  That would give us $11 million to resign KP.  That's probably not realistic, but if we traded Hauser (and replace him with a $2.5 minimum), that's around $19.3 in starting salary.  That might be doable.

So, will ownership bite that bullet, since it avoids "basketball penalties" and keeps the team together?  Or do they just really want to save a massive amount of money by trading a starter?

I don't see either Horford or Kornet taking the minimum.  Kornet especially -- he hasn't had a big payday and this season he's definitely showing he's worth MLE money.  Horford's worth MLE too but might have trouble getting a team to pay that for more than 2 seasons.  Dumping Tillman is a must.  Wasted roster spot

I don't see them getting under the second apron next year unless they move a starter for someone making a lot less money.  If they win the title, they may just bite the bullet and ride this roster out for another run.  if they come up short, like non-finals short, I'd be surprised if at least Jrue's not traded and possibly another key player to get under that second apron.

Kornet has been great this year, and is one of the most likeable guys in the NBA.  But, he's still a 5/5 guy.  How many of those guys are getting the MLE?  His stats are about the same as last year, after which he got the minimum (and agreed to it one minute into free agency).

I don't see a big payday for a loveable backup center.  It only takes one team, but I think the minimum is reasonable.

[keevsnick]

In an ideal situation for fans, the team would tread water salary-wise next season.  Bring back Horford and Kornet on minimum contracts if they'll agree.  Trade Tillman if you can.  That's a tremendous amount of tax, but it's not a "basketball penalty".

Then, the next season, we'd start the off-season under the second apron.  Our roster would be:

Tatum
Brown
White
Jrue
Pritchard
Hauser
Scheirman
Queta
Walsh

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/boston-celtics/cap/_/year/2026/sort/cap_total

That's $207 million for those nine players.  That would leave us $21 million to fill out the roster.  Assume 4 of those guys are vet minimums, at $10 million total (add a bit if our 2025 #1 pick is taking a spot).  That would give us $11 million to resign KP.  That's probably not realistic, but if we traded Hauser (and replace him with a $2.5 minimum), that's around $19.3 in starting salary.  That might be doable.

So, will ownership bite that bullet, since it avoids "basketball penalties" and keeps the team together?  Or do they just really want to save a massive amount of money by trading a starter?

I don't see either Horford or Kornet taking the minimum.  Kornet especially -- he hasn't had a big payday and this season he's definitely showing he's worth MLE money.  Horford's worth MLE too but might have trouble getting a team to pay that for more than 2 seasons.  Dumping Tillman is a must.  Wasted roster spot

I don't see them getting under the second apron next year unless they move a starter for someone making a lot less money.  If they win the title, they may just bite the bullet and ride this roster out for another run.  if they come up short, like non-finals short, I'd be surprised if at least Jrue's not traded and possibly another key player to get under that second apron.

Kornet has been great this year, and is one of the most likeable guys in the NBA.  But, he's still a 5/5 guy.  How many of those guys are getting the MLE?  His stats are about the same as last year, after which he got the minimum (and agreed to it one minute into free agency).

I don't see a big payday for a loveable backup center.  It only takes one team, but I think the minimum is reasonable.

I don't think Porzingis at 19 million is remotely realistic. That's 11 million less than the 30 million he's making right now, which was already a team friendly deal and in an environment where the cap is rising 10% a year. I'd be shocked if he extended for less than 30.

To be honest, i might consider moving Holiday regardless. Its not just the cost of the contract that worries me, its the potential that he might be nearing a significant drop off in play. I think he's already fallen off a bit this year, and next year will be his age 35 season. Better to be a year ahead of it and get off the 104 million remaining on his contract than be a year late and completely stuck with it.

It depends of course on what the return would be. One idea might be:

Holiday to the bulls for Lonzo Ball and Jalen Smith. They make a combined 19 million so you shave 13 million next year. Lonzo takes Holidays spot, Smith takes Horford's role. The Bulls are always chasing the 8-10 seed and might view Holidya as someone who helps them do that.

[Vermont Green]

I think a reasonable compromise would just be supermax contracts for your homegrown stars should count as a regular max on the salary cap. Teams that draft and develop players are being penalized for keeping them. Players would still get their money to stay

I like that.  Kind of like how the vet min contracts are partially subsidized or credited.

[keevsnick]

I think a reasonable compromise would just be supermax contracts for your homegrown stars should count as a regular max on the salary cap. Teams that draft and develop players are being penalized for keeping them. Players would still get their money to stay

I like that.  Kind of like how the vet min contracts are partially subsidized or credited.

Yes to this. The point of a salary cap should be to prevent big market teams from forming super teams by simple throwing money at free agents or strong arming small markets into trading them superstars at a discount. The point SHOULD NOT be to penalize a team that drafted/developed well (Brown, Tatum, Pritchard, Hauser, Kornet) or made savy trades (Horford, White, Holiday, Porzingis).

The Celtics are a very good team, but the idea that they will need to pay more in TAX than TEAM SALARY to keep together a very god but not unbeatable team is ludicrous.

[Vermont Green]

I think that if they want to be under the 2nd apron for the 2026-27 season, a starter is going to have to go.  There may be theoretical pathways to get there, but hard for me to see it.

The problem for the players is that nearly every team is bumping up against the restrictions.  Not all teams will have the MLE for example.  Most of the contending teams won't.  Maybe teams like DET.  And teams that have the MLE, aren't going to use it on a player like Kornet and probably not Horford.  Porzingis could be in play for that.

So if a team wants Kornet, for example, they can sign him with cap space if they have it, sign him with part of the MLE if they have it, or they can offer a min contract.  For teams that have cap space or MLE, are they going to want to use that for Kornet.  I expect some offers for these players, but not a whole lot.

Hauser could be traded easily enough but that is not nearly enough.  Holiday will be a prime candidate, but it is still tricky to make a deal work.  We can still be a very good team without Hauser and Holiday.  I am not so sure if we lose Horford and Porzingis.

[mobilija]

If we can ride Jrue out one more year then I bet he would be fairly valuable with one year left on his contract. A championship caliber vet for one year to help push a young playoff team, someone will jump at that.

Trading Jrue this summer hinges on 1) we don?t go back to back and/or 2) if our big man depth gets decimated, ie Kornet and Horford both leave.  Trading him for a more middle/low salary player that can contribute in the top 8 rotation would be one of the only ways we have to maintain high talent for the future in our rotation.

[otherdave]

True has a player option for 27 28 for 37.2 million, pretty sure he will opt in.

So after this season he is pretty much under contract for 3 more years.