Author Topic: Posey Update  (Read 25629 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #75 on: July 15, 2008, 07:04:03 PM »

Offline zerophase

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2394
  • Tommy Points: 334
  • Anything's Possible
yea... you get nothing for coming in second in the nba. teams can be really good, for a long time but not coming up short gives you nothing (mavs, suns). i'm okay with the celtics going for it down, and losing a lot later. even when we won 24 games... we still walked away from the year with as much as the cavs and pistons had, and that is, nothing in terms of a championship. give poz the contract.

Become Legendary.

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #76 on: July 15, 2008, 07:07:12 PM »

Offline guava_wrench

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9931
  • Tommy Points: 777
Why would signing or not signing Posey have anything to do with rebuilding?

The reason for not signing Posey for too long is so that we can still compete for a championship in 2011, when Posey might not be that good and we might have a hard time getting the pieces we need around KG and PP.

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #77 on: July 15, 2008, 07:37:00 PM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
yea... you get nothing for coming in second in the nba. teams can be really good, for a long time but not coming up short gives you nothing (mavs, suns). i'm okay with the celtics going for it down, and losing a lot later. even when we won 24 games... we still walked away from the year with as much as the cavs and pistons had, and that is, nothing in terms of a championship. give poz the contract.
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #78 on: July 15, 2008, 07:44:21 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
yea... you get nothing for coming in second in the nba. teams can be really good, for a long time but not coming up short gives you nothing (mavs, suns). i'm okay with the celtics going for it down, and losing a lot later. even when we won 24 games... we still walked away from the year with as much as the cavs and pistons had, and that is, nothing in terms of a championship. give poz the contract.

This is the difference in how fans think, and how management needs to think.  Management still wins if their team goes deep into the playoffs.  They still make a lot of money, and remain in their fans conscious.  However, if they have a losing season, they lose a lot of money, and risk losing fans as well.  So it is in their best interest to keep the team competitive every year, even more than "going for it now".

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #79 on: July 16, 2008, 09:32:06 AM »

Offline GreenPride

  • The Green Kornet
  • Posts: 97
  • Tommy Points: 10
I look at it as 3 more years w/our big guys...so, i would give Posey a 3 year deal...nothing more.

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #80 on: July 16, 2008, 09:39:48 AM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
I look at it as 3 more years w/our big guys...so, i would give Posey a 3 year deal...nothing more.

I would give him the 4th year just to get him signed and then trade him after year 3.  His contract will be a reasonable expiring one that most teams can easily take on.
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #81 on: July 16, 2008, 10:05:54 AM »

Offline zerophase

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2394
  • Tommy Points: 334
  • Anything's Possible
i think that if you have posey's contract in year 4 and possibly one of our young guys, it would help to match salaries (like theo's contract did) and make trades.

Become Legendary.

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #82 on: July 16, 2008, 10:07:26 AM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6500
  • Tommy Points: 385
I look at it as 3 more years w/our big guys...so, i would give Posey a 3 year deal...nothing more.

I would give him the 4th year just to get him signed and then trade him after year 3.  His contract will be a reasonable expiring one that most teams can easily take on.

Plus, something tells me things aren't going to go as smoothly in three years as some people think.  Three years from now Pierce is only going to be 34; while he may be amenable to having a short contract,something tells me he isn't going to be crazy about the idea of taking a huge pay cut. Couple that with an extension for Rondo, and I'm not so sure we're going to have the immense cap space everyone thinks we're going to. 

Furthermore, what's another year?  Until Garnett's deal comes off the books, there isn't going to be a ton of rebuilding going on anyway.  If Ainge wants to have a big 2010, there's no reason why he can't have a big 2011 instead.

On top of all that, it's pretty silly to risk winning the next year or two to make big free agent runs down the road.  Look what happened to the Bulls when they saved up to land Duncan and T-Mac...they got Ron Mercer. 

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #83 on: July 16, 2008, 01:37:24 PM »

Offline paintitgreen

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1109
  • Tommy Points: 154
If we go to 4, it should be for slightly less money. That's negotiation. He leaves us enough money to sign Walker to a 3 year deal using some MLE money (probably about $500,000 for this year), we give him the 4th year.  As I said at the beginning of free agency, if he took a contract starting at $3.8 (non-Bird rights), I'd throw him the 5 years, so he gets security, we save over $3 million on the luxury tax this year, and probably another $3-4 next year, plus retain our MLE just in case we want to get somebody else.

I agree with the general concensus - if you're going nowhere, yes, I see the benefit of reducing payroll to get cap space to chase free agents. But when you just won a title, and have a chance at establishing a truly great team with another title or two, why not go for it by keeping what works?
Go Celtics.

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #84 on: July 16, 2008, 01:45:07 PM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
If we go to 4, it should be for slightly less money. That's negotiation. He leaves us enough money to sign Walker to a 3 year deal using some MLE money (probably about $500,000 for this year), we give him the 4th year.  As I said at the beginning of free agency, if he took a contract starting at $3.8 (non-Bird rights), I'd throw him the 5 years, so he gets security, we save over $3 million on the luxury tax this year, and probably another $3-4 next year, plus retain our MLE just in case we want to get somebody else.

I agree with the general concensus - if you're going nowhere, yes, I see the benefit of reducing payroll to get cap space to chase free agents. But when you just won a title, and have a chance at establishing a truly great team with another title or two, why not go for it by keeping what works?

What about signing Giddens?
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #85 on: July 16, 2008, 01:46:59 PM »

Offline crownsy

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8469
  • Tommy Points: 157
If we go to 4, it should be for slightly less money. That's negotiation. He leaves us enough money to sign Walker to a 3 year deal using some MLE money (probably about $500,000 for this year), we give him the 4th year.  As I said at the beginning of free agency, if he took a contract starting at $3.8 (non-Bird rights), I'd throw him the 5 years, so he gets security, we save over $3 million on the luxury tax this year, and probably another $3-4 next year, plus retain our MLE just in case we want to get somebody else.

I agree with the general concensus - if you're going nowhere, yes, I see the benefit of reducing payroll to get cap space to chase free agents. But when you just won a title, and have a chance at establishing a truly great team with another title or two, why not go for it by keeping what works?

What about signing Giddens?

rookie contracts are scaled, and you can offer them cap space or no, so i don't really see why we would tie up MLE or LLE money in walker and giddens.
“I will hurt you for this. A day will come when you think you’re safe and happy and your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth. And you will know the debt is paid.” – Tyrion

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #86 on: July 16, 2008, 01:51:11 PM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6500
  • Tommy Points: 385
If we go to 4, it should be for slightly less money. That's negotiation. He leaves us enough money to sign Walker to a 3 year deal using some MLE money (probably about $500,000 for this year), we give him the 4th year.  As I said at the beginning of free agency, if he took a contract starting at $3.8 (non-Bird rights), I'd throw him the 5 years, so he gets security, we save over $3 million on the luxury tax this year, and probably another $3-4 next year, plus retain our MLE just in case we want to get somebody else.

I agree with the general concensus - if you're going nowhere, yes, I see the benefit of reducing payroll to get cap space to chase free agents. But when you just won a title, and have a chance at establishing a truly great team with another title or two, why not go for it by keeping what works?

What about signing Giddens?

rookie contracts are scaled, and you can offer them cap space or no, so i don't really see why we would tie up MLE or LLE money in walker and giddens.

With Giddens, the MLE is irrelevant, first round contracts are scaled.  However, with a second round pick like Walker, if Ainge uses part of the MLE on him, he sign him to more than a two year deal.  The luxury of that, of course, is that if Walker blossoms before his third year, the C's have Bifd rights on him and can't lose him.  On the other hand, if midlevel money isn't used on him, he could blow up his second year, and the C's would have no option but to use the MLE on him or early Bird rights. 

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #87 on: July 16, 2008, 02:06:49 PM »

Offline eternal optimist

  • Drew Peterson
  • Posts: 2
  • Tommy Points: 0
I am sorry if this idea repeats something already discussed, I have not taken the time to read all the comments on this post, but I am wondering if the Celtics could keep James Posey with a compromise offer such as a five year deal where the fist two are guaranteed at the current full MLE, the final three years would be a player option at a lower salary.  The third year may drop to 4 million, the 4th year to 3 million and the fifth year to the vet minimum.  This would give Posey the option of signing with another team after 2 years if he gets a better offer.  I think the Celtics would be able to match the better offer if they wanted to keep him.  Do you think both sides would agree to an offer like this?

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #88 on: July 16, 2008, 03:28:17 PM »

Offline paintitgreen

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1109
  • Tommy Points: 154
Thanks, Jon. TP.

Essentially, first rounders get "rookie scale" contracts up to 5 years. The first 2 seasons are guaranteed, the 3rd and 4th are team options, and the 5th is a qualifying offer. The 4th year option and qualifying offer are at significantly higher rates than the first 3 years of the rookie scale (80-100% bump for the 4th season, another big bump for the qualifying offer season). The player need not accept the qualifying offer, but it's for the team's protection. If the qualifying offer is made, the player is a restricted instead of unrestricted free agent so the team can match any offer made after the player's 4th season (which is why Josh Smith, Andre Iguodala, Emeka Okafor, etc. are RFAs right now). And since the player will have played more than 3 (4) seasons under that contract, the player has Bird rights (even if he's been traded) and the team can match any offer without using exceptions.

With respect to the cap and exceptions, teams have a "Rookie Exception" for players signed to rookie scale contracts. Thus, if a team is over the cap, rookie scale contracts do not count against a team's other exceptions (MLE or bi-annual LLE). A team can sign its first rounders and still use all of its MLE and LLE. So signing Giddens will not affect or be affected by our use of the MLE and/or LLE.

Second rounders are different, since the Rookie Exception covers only rookie scale contracts, which are only available to first round picks. If the team is over the cap, second round picks must be signed using the team's other salary cap exceptions - the mid-level, lower-level (or bi-annual), and minimum contract exceptions. However, if a team uses the LLE or minimum contract exception, it may only sign the second rounder to a 2 year deal (those exceptions may only be used for 2 year deals). A player does not get full Bird rights until he has played 3 years with a team (or has played 3 years and has changed teams only by trade).

Pruitt/Powe and Davis are an example of the differences. We used a portion of the MLE to sign Powe 2 years ago and Pruitt last year, so we got them for three years (even though their contracts only started at the minimum level). The players will have full Bird rights when their contracts expire, and we can resign them for any amount, regardless of cap space, without using our salary cap exceptions. On the other hand, we did not use the MLE on Davis (my recollection is he only wanted a 2 year deal but I may be wrong), so we just signed him using the minimum contract exception, under which the contract was limited to 2 years. 

So, after this season, both Davis and Powe will be free agents, but only Powe has full Bird rights; Davis has early Bird rights (2 years on same team, or only being moved by trade). Since both are in their first 5 (I think that's the rule) seasons, they are Restricted Free Agents, meaning we have the right to match offers. However, since we will be over the cap, we can only use cap space or available exceptions.

For Powe, since he has Bird rights and is a qualifying veteran free agent, we can use our veteran free agent exception to resign him to any contract up to the maximum player contract. That is, nobody can outbid us for Powe - we can match any possible offer. That exception is available only to resign a player, and is not available to sign a free agent from another team.

Davis, though, only has Early Bird Rights, so the Veteran Free Agent exception only allows us to resign him to a contract up to 175% of his current salary. If a team offers him more than 175% of his current salary, we cannot use the VFA exception. We will only have up to the MLE to resign him.

If a team without cap space offers Powe a full-MLE contract, we can match it and still have our MLE available. If a team with cap space offers Powe a contract worth more than the MLE (say, $7 mil starting salary), we can still match it. If a team offers Davis a full-MLE contract, we can match it, but will have to use our MLE to resign him, and cannot use it to get other free agents. And if a team with cap space offers more than the MLE to Davis, we cannot match it.

That is what happened to Arenas when Golden State drafted him in the second round. After his 2 year minimum salary contract expired, Golden State could offer only the MLE to keep him. Washington offered him more than the MLE, and Golden State, though it wanted to, could not match.

That is why it would be better to use a portion of the MLE to sign Walker to a 3 year deal, starting at the minimum salary. If he does happen to blow up - and considering this kid was a top-10 prospect if not for his injuries, it's possible - and is on a 2-year contract, then we will be limited to the MLE in resigning him.

Now, it's very rare for a second rounder to blow up to the point that he can command a contract above the MLE after 2 years. Arenas may be the only example. So having the flexibility to resign him at any cost is not the big factor. The big factor is the ability to avoid using other exceptions to resign a good second round pick you make. Davis is highly unlikely to get an offer above the MLE next year, even if he has a very good season. But if a team signs him to an offer sheet with a salary starting at, say, $3 million, the Celtics will be able to match, but will have to use $3 million of their MLE to resign him, which hurts flexibility in free agency.

Having full Bird rights, instead of early Bird rights, then, is a huge bonus, and makes the 3 year contract well worth it (particularly since various team options and escape clauses can let the team guarantee three years if the player works out, but have the flexibility to dump the player in his second year if he doesn't work out with few if any salary cap ramifications).

By the way, the VFA exception also applies to players who have neither Bird rights nor early Bird rights - players who have played only one season with their current team. However, the VFA exception only allows a team to resign its "non-Bird" players to a contract with a starting salary at 120% of the previous salary (instead of 175% for early Bird players or any amount for Bird players). It is the VFA exception that would allow us to resign Posey and House for contracts at 120% of their previous salary without using the MLE or LLE.
Go Celtics.

Re: Posey Update
« Reply #89 on: July 16, 2008, 03:32:51 PM »

Offline Roy Hobbs

  • In The Rafters
  • The Natural
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33333
  • Tommy Points: 6430
  • Doc could learn a thing or two from Norman Dale
TPs, Jon and paintitgreen.  You guys can help write the FAQ next season. ;)

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Portland CrotoNats:  2009 CB Draft Champions