Author Topic: Hooray for Optionality!!  (Read 1060 times)

Celtics2021 and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #15 on: Yesterday at 08:59:04 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 64845
  • Tommy Points: -25354
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.
I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #16 on: Yesterday at 09:05:47 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 55626
  • Tommy Points: 2628
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonableTo me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

I agree.

When they are up earning $70mil in a 3 years time, the cap will have increased as well. The First Apron is $210mil now. It will likely be $240mil then (going up about 5% per annum, so roughly $10mil per annum added = $30mil extra).

So the Jays at $70 by 2 are $140mil/$240mil which is 58% rather than 70%. It is still a big number but smaller than is being presented by Brad and by the media. It continues to leave $100mil for a supporting cast around them.

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #17 on: Yesterday at 09:43:58 PM »

Offline keevsnick

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7334
  • Tommy Points: 717
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #18 on: Yesterday at 09:46:05 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 64845
  • Tommy Points: -25354
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.
I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 09:47:27 PM »

Online ozgod

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20055
  • Tommy Points: 1645
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonableTo me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

I agree.

When they are up earning $70mil in a 3 years time, the cap will have increased as well. The First Apron is $210mil now. It will likely be $240mil then (going up about 5% per annum, so roughly $10mil per annum added = $30mil extra).

So the Jays at $70 by 2 are $140mil/$240mil which is 58% rather than 70%. It is still a big number but smaller than is being presented by Brad and by the media. It continues to leave $100mil for a supporting cast around them.

Just for clarity, I think $70/$240m is 58% of the first apron, and 73% of the salary cap (which in 3 years is $191m, and yes the first apron would be $243m). It depends on if you see your denominator as the first apron or the salary cap. The way they negotiate these contracts, they generally tend to escalate annually to make sure they are ~35% of the cap (for a supermax) or ~30% for a max (though some players and front offices are willing to front-load them).

The first apron is typically 25% or so over the salary cap, so two supermaxes is 70% of 125% which is 56% of "spendable money" if you used the 1st apron as your hard limit. So that leaves 55% of the cap (or 44% of your space under the first apron) for your other 13 players.

Yes this is what the NBA has reduced us to...doing math instead of dreaming about championships  :police:
Any odd typos are because I suck at typing on an iPhone :D


Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #20 on: Yesterday at 09:49:20 PM »

Online ozgod

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20055
  • Tommy Points: 1645
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.

Actually, do you know some of those offers? I'm curious to work out the financial implications of those and see if they would have been better for us than taking in Mr Druggo. Mannix said "a good team made a better offer" but he refused to name it. Apparently Jaylen didn't want to go there and the Cs wanted to respect where he wanted to go, while still making sure they were ok with the return.
Any odd typos are because I suck at typing on an iPhone :D


Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #21 on: Yesterday at 09:55:00 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 64845
  • Tommy Points: -25354
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.

Actually, do you know some of those offers? I'm curious to work out the financial implications of those and see if they would have been better for us than taking in Mr Druggo. Mannix said "a good team made a better offer" but he refused to name it. Apparently Jaylen didn't want to go there and the Cs wanted to respect where he wanted to go, while still making sure they were ok with the return.

One was Reid + Bridges + picks, with Bridges obviously being tradeable to PHX for Allen + O'Neale. + picks.   I'm pretty sure that that one would have gotten us a decent size trade exception as well.
I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #22 on: Yesterday at 10:21:25 PM »

Online ozgod

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20055
  • Tommy Points: 1645
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.

Actually, do you know some of those offers? I'm curious to work out the financial implications of those and see if they would have been better for us than taking in Mr Druggo. Mannix said "a good team made a better offer" but he refused to name it. Apparently Jaylen didn't want to go there and the Cs wanted to respect where he wanted to go, while still making sure they were ok with the return.

One was Reid + Bridges + picks, with Bridges obviously being tradeable to PHX for Allen + O'Neale. + picks.   I'm pretty sure that that one would have gotten us a decent size trade exception as well.

Yes this was the one I had heard about...where apparently Jaylen made it clear he didn't want to go there. And apparently the Cs wanted Brandon Miller + filler instead of Bridges. It's hard to tell whether the dealbreaker was Jaylen's posture, or Miller being excluded. Maybe at the time they didn't want to try to figure out who might want the wifebeater so they went for the druggo instead  ;D
Any odd typos are because I suck at typing on an iPhone :D


Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #23 on: Yesterday at 10:28:31 PM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8959
  • Tommy Points: 1130
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.

Actually, do you know some of those offers? I'm curious to work out the financial implications of those and see if they would have been better for us than taking in Mr Druggo. Mannix said "a good team made a better offer" but he refused to name it. Apparently Jaylen didn't want to go there and the Cs wanted to respect where he wanted to go, while still making sure they were ok with the return.

One was Reid + Bridges + picks, with Bridges obviously being tradeable to PHX for Allen + O'Neale. + picks.   I'm pretty sure that that one would have gotten us a decent size trade exception as well.

The Charlotte-Phoenix deal was Bridges + 1st round pick and 2nd round pick for Allen, O?Neale, and a more distant 1st round pick.  Somehow on the board the picks sent with Bridges have been forgotten.  Charlotte sent out more in draft compensation than they received back in that deal.

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #24 on: Yesterday at 10:35:09 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 64845
  • Tommy Points: -25354
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.

Actually, do you know some of those offers? I'm curious to work out the financial implications of those and see if they would have been better for us than taking in Mr Druggo. Mannix said "a good team made a better offer" but he refused to name it. Apparently Jaylen didn't want to go there and the Cs wanted to respect where he wanted to go, while still making sure they were ok with the return.

One was Reid + Bridges + picks, with Bridges obviously being tradeable to PHX for Allen + O'Neale. + picks.   I'm pretty sure that that one would have gotten us a decent size trade exception as well.

The Charlotte-Phoenix deal was Bridges + 1st round pick and 2nd round pick for Allen, O?Neale, and a more distant 1st round pick.  Somehow on the board the picks sent with Bridges have been forgotten.  Charlotte sent out more in draft compensation than they received back in that deal.

I would rather have a 2033 first rounder from Phoenix than a 2029 first rounder from Charlotte.
I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #25 on: Yesterday at 10:42:02 PM »

Offline Phantom255x

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 40210
  • Tommy Points: 3524
  • On To Banner 19!
There were rumors the Wolves offered Reid + Gobert + pick(s) for Jaylen before they ultimately went and got Lamelo Ball
"Tough times never last, but tough people do." - Robert H. Schuller

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #26 on: Yesterday at 11:06:57 PM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8959
  • Tommy Points: 1130
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.

Actually, do you know some of those offers? I'm curious to work out the financial implications of those and see if they would have been better for us than taking in Mr Druggo. Mannix said "a good team made a better offer" but he refused to name it. Apparently Jaylen didn't want to go there and the Cs wanted to respect where he wanted to go, while still making sure they were ok with the return.

One was Reid + Bridges + picks, with Bridges obviously being tradeable to PHX for Allen + O'Neale. + picks.   I'm pretty sure that that one would have gotten us a decent size trade exception as well.

The Charlotte-Phoenix deal was Bridges + 1st round pick and 2nd round pick for Allen, O?Neale, and a more distant 1st round pick.  Somehow on the board the picks sent with Bridges have been forgotten.  Charlotte sent out more in draft compensation than they received back in that deal.

I would rather have a 2033 first rounder from Phoenix than a 2029 first rounder from Charlotte.

And that is a choice that may or may not prove to be correct, but it does mean that Bridges was not worth a pick on his own, which is at least the implication some have given.  I am not sure if that was the argument you were making.

We have heard the offer was Bridges, Reid, and picks.  Was it multiple 1st round picks?  Was it the same picks they wound up trading to Phoenix?  Who knows.  It was presumably not four 1st rounders since the Celtics would have certainly accepted that.  I can come up with pick combinations that would have made me prefer Reid, Allen, and the husk of Royce Oneale to the trade that was made, and I can come up with combinations that make me prefer our current deal.  I am not happy with any of them, to be honest, and I am mostly just shocked that Brown could not get more.  Like, Brandon Miller plus four picks sounded reasonable to me, but apparently it was so far from the market as to scare some teams off.

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #27 on: Yesterday at 11:31:55 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 64845
  • Tommy Points: -25354
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.

Actually, do you know some of those offers? I'm curious to work out the financial implications of those and see if they would have been better for us than taking in Mr Druggo. Mannix said "a good team made a better offer" but he refused to name it. Apparently Jaylen didn't want to go there and the Cs wanted to respect where he wanted to go, while still making sure they were ok with the return.

One was Reid + Bridges + picks, with Bridges obviously being tradeable to PHX for Allen + O'Neale. + picks.   I'm pretty sure that that one would have gotten us a decent size trade exception as well.

The Charlotte-Phoenix deal was Bridges + 1st round pick and 2nd round pick for Allen, O?Neale, and a more distant 1st round pick.  Somehow on the board the picks sent with Bridges have been forgotten.  Charlotte sent out more in draft compensation than they received back in that deal.

I would rather have a 2033 first rounder from Phoenix than a 2029 first rounder from Charlotte.

And that is a choice that may or may not prove to be correct, but it does mean that Bridges was not worth a pick on his own, which is at least the implication some have given.  I am not sure if that was the argument you were making.

We have heard the offer was Bridges, Reid, and picks.  Was it multiple 1st round picks?  Was it the same picks they wound up trading to Phoenix?  Who knows.  It was presumably not four 1st rounders since the Celtics would have certainly accepted that.  I can come up with pick combinations that would have made me prefer Reid, Allen, and the husk of Royce Oneale to the trade that was made, and I can come up with combinations that make me prefer our current deal.  I am not happy with any of them, to be honest, and I am mostly just shocked that Brown could not get more.  Like, Brandon Miller plus four picks sounded reasonable to me, but apparently it was so far from the market as to scare some teams off.

Royce O'Neale is a husk now?  He played 78 minutes for a playoff team,, outscoring, out-shooting, out-rebounding and out-passing Hauser.

If you didn't like the deal, why are you defending it tooth and nail, like you have a personal stake in defending Brent Stevens' honor?
I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #28 on: Today at 12:01:21 AM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8959
  • Tommy Points: 1130
Quote
I agree Roy. But as Brad said, the Jays were eating up 70% of our cap and that makes it hard to put competitive guys around them to make the team competitive.

The cap part is right, but the cap isn't a realistic spending budget for an NBA team.

The Jays took up almost exactly 50% of the $209 million first apron hard cap.  That leaves roughly $105 million to fill out the roster.  To me, that's not unreasonable.  To me, the 70% thing is just a talking point, particularly since Paul George accounts for almost as large of a percentage as JB did.for 2/3 of the relevant time frame.

People are looking at the George vs Jaylen contract all wrong. Yes, George makes almost as much as Jaylen. But you have to look at it as sort of like the Holiday/Simons trade. Its REALLY hard to get of large contracts, it's nearly impossible to do all at once, you have to do it in stages. With Holiay/Simons they were able to first get o two years then later lip Simons to get under the tax. With George they save a year off the contract, three years if you consider they probably had to extend Jaylen if they kept him, and now as soon as next offseason he's a movable expiring contract.

So yes, they don't save much money immediately but they have a potential to save a lot as soon as next summer, whereas if you keep Jaylen you're really committing to him long term. They valued the "optionality"+ picks over whatever the difference between Jaylen vs George is this year

Except there were other offers that included more reasonable contracts coming back.

Actually, do you know some of those offers? I'm curious to work out the financial implications of those and see if they would have been better for us than taking in Mr Druggo. Mannix said "a good team made a better offer" but he refused to name it. Apparently Jaylen didn't want to go there and the Cs wanted to respect where he wanted to go, while still making sure they were ok with the return.

One was Reid + Bridges + picks, with Bridges obviously being tradeable to PHX for Allen + O'Neale. + picks.   I'm pretty sure that that one would have gotten us a decent size trade exception as well.

The Charlotte-Phoenix deal was Bridges + 1st round pick and 2nd round pick for Allen, O?Neale, and a more distant 1st round pick.  Somehow on the board the picks sent with Bridges have been forgotten.  Charlotte sent out more in draft compensation than they received back in that deal.

I would rather have a 2033 first rounder from Phoenix than a 2029 first rounder from Charlotte.

And that is a choice that may or may not prove to be correct, but it does mean that Bridges was not worth a pick on his own, which is at least the implication some have given.  I am not sure if that was the argument you were making.

We have heard the offer was Bridges, Reid, and picks.  Was it multiple 1st round picks?  Was it the same picks they wound up trading to Phoenix?  Who knows.  It was presumably not four 1st rounders since the Celtics would have certainly accepted that.  I can come up with pick combinations that would have made me prefer Reid, Allen, and the husk of Royce Oneale to the trade that was made, and I can come up with combinations that make me prefer our current deal.  I am not happy with any of them, to be honest, and I am mostly just shocked that Brown could not get more.  Like, Brandon Miller plus four picks sounded reasonable to me, but apparently it was so far from the market as to scare some teams off.

Royce O'Neale is a husk now?  He played 78 minutes for a playoff team,, outscoring, out-shooting, out-rebounding and out-passing Hauser.

If you didn't like the deal, why are you defending it tooth and nail, like you have a personal stake in defending Brent Stevens' honor?

His defense was awful last year.  The Suns were 11 points worse per 100 when he played.  There was no one else in their rotation who was close to that number.  The next worse was Mark Williams at -4.  At one point he was leading the league in the percentage of drives defended that resulted in blow-bys.  I do not know if that continued.  Husk may have been a strong word, as he got on the court a ton, but I am sure Phoenix fans are happy to see him gone.  I remember him looking awful the game we played in Phoenix.

I have accepted the deal as being what it is.  I really do like the picks we got.  With the flattened lottery and that play-in teams have good odds to move up, I really like the chance that we get a top 10, maybe even top 5 pick in 2028, which looks like a really nice class.  (The Clippers look destined for the lottery, and Philly has not been a strong regular-season team since Embiid is so prone to missing so much time, so getting play-in lotto balls from them seem possible).  And I think that the 2031 pick has a good chance too.  The Sixers might be starting a rebuild right around then, or having a very old and expensive Embiid and Brown on the team, limiting other moves.  I wanted more of them, of course.  But I think they are better picks than we would have gotten from Charlotte or Minnesota or Denver or other teams that may have had some interest.

I do not know why you hate Paul George so much.  Is it his mental health issues?  I feel I have seen you be sympathetic to others working through that before, so it does not feel right.  You criticize playoff performance, but he outplayed Jaylen just a couple months ago.  It feels oddly personal, like someone you know knows him and says he is a total jerk even compared to other basketball players.  Disappointed that he is the player, I get that.  I do not completely agree, but I find it a rational argument. But attacking his mental health feels like a low blow, and unlike you.

Re: Hooray for Optionality!!
« Reply #29 on: Today at 12:17:13 AM »

Online rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10413
  • Tommy Points: 361
Never heard optionality before. And I?m an editor.
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'

You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.

C.S. Lewis