Are you happy with the House & Tony Allen signings?

[Birdbrain]

People are seriously complaining about a 2 year contract? It's pretty clear the MLE was only being used for Posey so why not split it up.  Save some money and lose only 1 guy in the process.

[Jon]

Yes but I'm not that pleased with the contract length. Happy overall though. Happy with both of them.

would you have wanted the contract lengths to be longer or shorter? I think 2 years was just enough to get them to come back and to get them off the books in time for 2010. It also makes them valuable trade contracts if we chose to use them as such.

I'd have preferred them to be shorter, one year deals. I'm concerned about whether or not Danny will be able to spend his MLE next offseason.

Although Tony's contract could work out as a bonus if he succeeds well next season. Eddie, didn't see the need to give Eddie a second season at that pay rise.

This seems kind of like a lesser version of the Scal contract.  While it's not abominable given the small money, it does seem like another case of Ainge bidding against himself.  Now I don't know what the real interest was in House and Allen from other teams, but it doesn't seem to me like House needed to get that second year.  I feel that even more so with Tony Allen.  I have trouble believing anyone would give him anything more than the minimum for one year; he was the twelfth man last year on this team and saw less meaningful minutes in the playoffs than anyone on the active roster. 

  Why is it a case of Ainge bidding against himself? I heard they were both looking for 3 year deals.

I'm sure they would have liked 3 year deals.  I'm sure Sam Cassell would love the full MLE too. 

I don't know what they were going to get out there, but we certainly didn't hear a lot of buzz about those two.  And while I could entertain the idea there might have been some interest in House, I have a very tough time believing teams were really all that excited about signing Tony Allen to anything more than the minimum. 

[Who]

People are seriously complaining about a 2 year contract? It's pretty clear the MLE was only being used for Posey so why not split it up.  Save some money and lose only 1 guy in the process.

Because it puts another $5mil on the salary cap which makes it difficult for the club to pay the MLE next season to a top tier role player. If that $5mil wasn't there, it would be easier.

That's my complaint with the second year of their contracts. Once there wasn't a suitable talent available at the MLE, I wanted to see Danny keep theat flexibility to try again next year for that high quality player. That meant one year contracts.

That puts us two years further into Ray/KG/Paul's careers and both years go by without that top reserve player to aid them. Next year's MLE was the next best option to fill that void after Posey left the club, now it's harder to use because of the salary cap implications from those second years on those two contracts.

[lantinm]

House's second year is a player option for 2.9 mill.  I think Danny did a great job here in securing both Eddie and Tony.  We also have half of the MLE to use.  From the blog entry below, it looks like it could be Devean George.


The Celtics agreed to terms with guards Eddie House and Tony Allen to return, general manager Danny Ainge announced today. Both will get two-year contracts (though House's second year is a player option, according to an NBA source). House's deal was made using a portion of the team's $5.5 million mid-level exception. According to the source, House will make $2.7 million next season and $2.9 million the year after if he excercises his option.

House, who will enter his second season with the team, averaged 7.5 points and 19 minutes per game during the regular season, but those averages dropped to 2.5 points and just under 8 minutes in the postseason. Allen, who will enter his fifth season in green, averaged 6.6 points and just over 18 minutes per game during the regular season and 1.3 points in about 4 minutes per game in the playoffs.

***

Agent Mark Bartelstein, who also represents House, said the Celtics are interested in another of his free-agent clients: forward Devean George, who averaged 3.7 points per game for the Mavericks last season. The 31-year-old George played on three Lakers title teams.


http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/2008/07/celtics_agree_t.html

[wdleehi]

People are seriously complaining about a 2 year contract? It's pretty clear the MLE was only being used for Posey so why not split it up.  Save some money and lose only 1 guy in the process.

Because it puts another $5mil on the salary cap which makes it difficult for the club to pay the MLE next season to a top tier role player. If that $5mil wasn't there, it would be easier.

That's my complaint with the second year of their contracts. Once there wasn't a suitable talent available at the MLE, I wanted to see Danny keep theat flexibility to try again next year for that high quality player. That meant one year contracts.

That puts us two years further into Ray/KG/Paul's careers and both years go by without that top reserve player to aid them. Next year's MLE was the next best option to fill that void after Posey left the club, now it's harder to use because of the salary cap implications from those second years on those two contracts.

I think the 2nd year makes the contract easier to trade.

[greenwise]

 We also have half of the MLE to use.  From the blog entry below, it looks like it could be Devean George.

Will George come for the half-MLE? I would rather spend it on a big and try and sign George for the vet minimum...

[lantinm]

 We also have half of the MLE to use.  From the blog entry below, it looks like it could be Devean George.

Will George come for the half-MLE? I would rather spend it on a big and try and sign George for the vet minimum...

I think he would.  I don't see many teams spending more than 2.7 mill on George.

[Who]

People are seriously complaining about a 2 year contract? It's pretty clear the MLE was only being used for Posey so why not split it up.  Save some money and lose only 1 guy in the process.

Because it puts another $5mil on the salary cap which makes it difficult for the club to pay the MLE next season to a top tier role player. If that $5mil wasn't there, it would be easier.

That's my complaint with the second year of their contracts. Once there wasn't a suitable talent available at the MLE, I wanted to see Danny keep theat flexibility to try again next year for that high quality player. That meant one year contracts.

That puts us two years further into Ray/KG/Paul's careers and both years go by without that top reserve player to aid them. Next year's MLE was the next best option to fill that void after Posey left the club, now it's harder to use because of the salary cap implications from those second years on those two contracts.

I think the 2nd year makes the contract easier to trade.

Yes it does (in a years time) but I'd rather have the cap space. Cap space is more likely to net that high quality role player.

[Jon]

People are seriously complaining about a 2 year contract? It's pretty clear the MLE was only being used for Posey so why not split it up.  Save some money and lose only 1 guy in the process.

Because it puts another $5mil on the salary cap which makes it difficult for the club to pay the MLE next season to a top tier role player. If that $5mil wasn't there, it would be easier.

That's my complaint with the second year of their contracts. Once there wasn't a suitable talent available at the MLE, I wanted to see Danny keep theat flexibility to try again next year for that high quality player. That meant one year contracts.

That puts us two years further into Ray/KG/Paul's careers and both years go by without that top reserve player to aid them. Next year's MLE was the next best option to fill that void after Posey left the club, now it's harder to use because of the salary cap implications from those second years on those two contracts.

I think the 2nd year makes the contract easier to trade.

How so?

[Birdbrain]

Won't the C's be over the cap anyway? 

Why does this mean the C's can't use the full MLE next year?

I think the C's designated Posey as the only player worth the MLE and if he didn't sign no one was getting it.  Next year will be the same if there is someone Danny thinks is worth it for whatever years he determines I believe they would sign him.  I feel the Owners will do what Danny believes is best and why wouldn't they.

[NUMBA 17]

im happy with both.....i dont think 2 years for that money is that bad for those 2...especially House, who proved to be a spark off the bench, and capable of playing important minutes in the playoffs......  T. Allen is a little more shaky, but I really think he'll be much better with more than a year away from that bad knee injury......

[Who]

Won't the C's be over the cap anyway? 

Why does this mean the C's can't use the full MLE next year?

I think the C's designated Posey as the only player worth the MLE and if he didn't sign no one was getting it.  Next year will be the same if there is someone Danny thinks is worth it for whatever years he determines I believe they would sign him.  I feel the Owners will do what Danny believes is best and why wouldn't they.

They can use their MLE next season but it will be harder because of the luxury tax. It will cost a lot of money and that will make it difficult.

I didn't and don't expect them to keep paying out the MLE each offseason. It's too expensive.

[greg_kite]

People are seriously complaining about a 2 year contract? It's pretty clear the MLE was only being used for Posey so why not split it up.  Save some money and lose only 1 guy in the process.

Because it puts another $5mil on the salary cap which makes it difficult for the club to pay the MLE next season to a top tier role player. If that $5mil wasn't there, it would be easier.

That's my complaint with the second year of their contracts. Once there wasn't a suitable talent available at the MLE, I wanted to see Danny keep theat flexibility to try again next year for that high quality player. That meant one year contracts.

That puts us two years further into Ray/KG/Paul's careers and both years go by without that top reserve player to aid them. Next year's MLE was the next best option to fill that void after Posey left the club, now it's harder to use because of the salary cap implications from those second years on those two contracts.

I think the 2nd year makes the contract easier to trade.

Yes it does (in a years time) but I'd rather have the cap space. Cap space is more likely to net that high quality role player.

I think by giving them two year deals you don't have to dip into the midlevel next year because they're already locked up.  Now instead of worrying about losing depth in Eddie and Tony they can use all of the midlevel next year on one person.  If Posey and House both were signed for two years last year with no opt outs then this summer would have been real easy.  Danny will have the midlevel to improve the team, not just to keep players we already have (like this year).

Now if he can get a small forward for two years at the remaining 2.8 mil or so then they can use the full mid-level next year on a decent center.  Maybe J.O.?

[Jon]

Won't the C's be over the cap anyway? 

Why does this mean the C's can't use the full MLE next year?

I think the C's designated Posey as the only player worth the MLE and if he didn't sign no one was getting it.  Next year will be the same if there is someone Danny thinks is worth it for whatever years he determines I believe they would sign him.  I feel the Owners will do what Danny believes is best and why wouldn't they.

It's not that simple.  First of all, contrary to what someone said above, having a two year deal for Tony Allen doesn't help us next year with the MLE as we have his Bird rights.  However, having Allen and House under contract next year could hurt our chances of using the MLE because of luxury tax reasons.  Right now House and Allen are almost costing us the equivalent of the MLE (however, it is only being used towards House, because we don't have his Bird rights).  The same will be the case next year.  The question becomes, will Wyc and Co. be OK with Danny going out and spending close to 6 million (which will cost them 12 million) next year on top of that?  Maybe.  But it'd be more likely if House and Allen were coming off the books, freeing up over 5 million dollars (which because of the luxury tax, costs Wyc closer to 11 million). 

Plus, in a years time, will we even want Allen and House?  Who's to say Pruitt, Giddens, and Walker all don't pass them on the depth chart? 

[Mr October]

Won't the C's be over the cap anyway? 

Why does this mean the C's can't use the full MLE next year?

I think the C's designated Posey as the only player worth the MLE and if he didn't sign no one was getting it.  Next year will be the same if there is someone Danny thinks is worth it for whatever years he determines I believe they would sign him.  I feel the Owners will do what Danny believes is best and why wouldn't they.

What about Maggette? With KG's contract dropping next year, I think the owners will be willing to spend the MLE, provided the player gives them more revenue now or down the road.... a young player to add to the core, or a big name who takes a discount for a year or 2, etc.