Are the Celtics now spending like a mid-market team?

[celtsfan84]

The Lakers are on a plane of their own.  They just signed a $3 billion TV deal.

The C's are getting a ton of money from their own TV deal. Remember they took a 20% stake in the local network instead of revenue directly like the Lakers. This allows them to make their TV deal look smaller than it is by the amount paid to the team directly for rights.

The Lakers are certainly getting more, but the C's can't complain.

The Celtics are one of the highest, no doubt, but I wouldn't think that a 20% stake and what used to be 15-20 million in rights fees even begins to approach the 3 billion that the Lakers will be getting.

Edit - According to Forbes, the Celtics more than doubled their local media revenue intake with the deal.  The deal is expected to give them in the $40 million range per year.  The Lakers deal is expected to give them in the $200 million range per year.

[minijericho29]

Is if fair to say that the C's are only willing to spend like a "mid-market" team at best?

Of course not.  The Lakers had a trade exception because they gave away Lamar Odom last year.  If the C's had an exception, they'd use it.

[clover]

There is a new luxury tax out there.



Plus (this is a big one), keeping the money down in certain locations allowed the Celtics to use the full MLE vs. the lesser MLE. 

To me, the question is whether the new luxury tax will keep the C's out of the stratosphere going forward, and whether the multibillionaire-owned (e.g., Dallas, Brooklyn) and biggest media-market teams (LA, NYC) will be in their own orbit ever after.

The C's won't be down in the small-market band, but they may not be up at the major-market level either.  This may be the first year of a 'new normal'.

[Greenbean]

Zach Lowe ‏@ZachLowe_SI
Lakers' payroll for '13 currently sitting around $88.2 million for 10 players. Lux tax line at $70M.
Retweeted by Paul Flannery


Wyc used to say they'd be more than willing to spend big money whenever they were contenders--and the C's are supposedly planning on contending next year.

But with the Lakers over $88M for 10 players and the C's not expected to go over $74M in total, is if fair to say that the C's are only willing to spend like a "mid-market" team at best?

I don't think that's fair to say. I think the Celtics would (because they have) spend as much money as they need to in order to win.

The problem is not that the Celtics are unwilling to spend, its that they're kind of limited under the CBA. They can't go out there and offer big money to Dwight Howard or Deron Williams this year, because Dwight Howard isn't a free agent right now, and Rajon Rondo's under an incredibly favorable contract.

Who else was a better option than Kevin Garnett and Jeff Green? Gerald Wallace? Joe Johnson's cap killing contract?

Actually Joe Johnson on these Celtics sounds like exactly the type of move I'd expect, but that notwithstanding...

I don't think is a matter of 'will they', I think its a matter of 'should they and can they'.

And what they can do, tehy shouldn't and what they should do, they can't. Not this off-season at least.

By agreeing to that player option, Dwight Howard gave up his rights to become a UFA. What a HUGE mistake. I keep thinking about that. In my opinion, Danny would have made a huge push for Dwight and may have passed on resigning every other piece except for Garnett this offseason.

Oh well....Dwight is a dope anyway.

[celticinorlando]

boston is positioning themselves to be around for the future..LA is financially going to be hurting

[Chris]

There is a new luxury tax out there.



Plus (this is a big one), keeping the money down in certain locations allowed the Celtics to use the full MLE vs. the lesser MLE. 

Yeah, while the luxury tax is a big deal, the new rules are a bigger deal.  If the C's really have used the MLE on Terry, then they now have a hard cap at about $74 million.  It is not by choice.

[Fafnir]

boston is positioning themselves to be around for the future..LA is financially going to be hurting

They're going all in to satisfy Kobe during his last few years of being a high level player.

After the next two years they're going to retreat to avoid the repeater tax from killing the families profits.

[celticinorlando]

boston is positioning themselves to be around for the future..LA is financially going to be hurting

They're going all in to satisfy Kobe during his last few years of being a high level player.

After the next two years they're going to retreat to avoid the repeater tax from killing the families profits.

thing is they are spending a lot of money and I am not so sure they can beat the spurs, thunder, heat and celtics...to me those are the 4 best teams...and i think the nuggets are about to pass them on the west food chain

[Fafnir]

Yeah if Howard were an FA, Danny would be attempting to make his pitch.

He wouldn't bother to renounce anyone, rather do what Dallas/Brooklyn did with Deron. If he shocked the world and decided to come to Boston then Danny would be working out an alternate plan to put talent around him. I'd be shocked if KG wouldn't be back for cheaper and obviously all the roleplaying pieces would get shifted.

[Fafnir]

boston is positioning themselves to be around for the future..LA is financially going to be hurting

They're going all in to satisfy Kobe during his last few years of being a high level player.

After the next two years they're going to retreat to avoid the repeater tax from killing the families profits.

thing is they are spending a lot of money and I am not so sure they can beat the spurs, thunder, heat and celtics...to me those are the 4 best teams...and i think the nuggets are about to pass them on the west food chain

Depends on how healthy their top 4 are (they have a top 4 as good as anyones) and if they can get ANYTHING from their 5 through 13 roster guys.

[Jon]

Also, how exactly could the C's spend more besides overpaying their own free agents?  Once you're over the cap, you can only pay your own guys and use exceptions. 

I think this is more a product of KG (and potentially Ray) signing smaller deals than they once had than anything else. 

[BballTim]

Zach Lowe ‏@ZachLowe_SI
Lakers' payroll for '13 currently sitting around $88.2 million for 10 players. Lux tax line at $70M.
Retweeted by Paul Flannery


Wyc used to say they'd be more than willing to spend big money whenever they were contenders--and the C's are supposedly planning on contending next year.

But with the Lakers over $88M for 10 players and the C's not expected to go over $74M in total, is if fair to say that the C's are only willing to spend like a "mid-market" team at best?

  It's not that easy to just spend unlimited money, is it? The Celts had to choose between renouncing half of their players and getting under the cap (and teams that are under the cap don't end up with $88M payrolls) or re-sign all of their players. They could have theoretically given their own players double what they needed to to get their payroll up to the Laker's level, but that wouldn't make us better.

  We aren't shedding contributing players to save money, that's about all you can ask for this year.

[Celts Fan 92]

nah we spending like  a team dat dont overpay fo wack contracts ie Asik to da Rockets

[wdleehi]

Not to mention the Celtics do not have a huge trade exception to use in a trade to bring in another huge contract.

[StartOrien]

Zach Lowe ‏@ZachLowe_SI
Lakers' payroll for '13 currently sitting around $88.2 million for 10 players. Lux tax line at $70M.
Retweeted by Paul Flannery


Wyc used to say they'd be more than willing to spend big money whenever they were contenders--and the C's are supposedly planning on contending next year.

But with the Lakers over $88M for 10 players and the C's not expected to go over $74M in total, is if fair to say that the C's are only willing to spend like a "mid-market" team at best?

  It's not that easy to just spend unlimited money, is it? The Celts had to choose between renouncing half of their players and getting under the cap (and teams that are under the cap don't end up with $88M payrolls) or re-sign all of their players. They could have theoretically given their own players double what they needed to to get their payroll up to the Laker's level, but that wouldn't make us better.

  We aren't shedding contributing players to save money, that's about all you can ask for this year.

No, spending that kind of money takes a true talent -