Paul Pierce contract myths

[Jeff]

Interesting article here by CelticsHub (that I haven't fact checked -- and I won't cause I'm lazy)

http://celticshub.com/2013/05/10/paul-pierces-contract-dispelling-the-myths-and-stating-the-facts/

most interesting section:

FICTION: The Celtics would be unable to sign Pierce for a team friendly contract this season after waiving him due to CBA rules.
This is where contract language is very important. If the C’s dump Pierce by June 30th, they would NOT be buying him out, only waiving him. By waiving him, this puts no limitations on their ability to sign him for next season. If they bought him out, new CBA rules limit teams from resigning players for a full year from the date they are bought out. That is not the case here with Pierce.

FACT: If the Celtics waive Pierce, they lose bird rights on him.
Before you get too excited about that last piece of fiction, a sobering fact follows. By waiving Pierce, Boston forfeits all bird rights on Pierce. That leads us to another unfortunate fact.

FACT: The Celtics would be highly unlikely to sign Pierce to a new contract for the 2013-14 season after waiving him before June 30th due to their salary cap situation.
Remember all that committed money Ainge has on the books for next year? That’s incredibly limiting in this situation. If the C’s wanted to bring back Pierce on a smaller deal for 2013-14 after waiving him, they probably wouldn’t be able to do it, since without bird rights on Pierce, there is no real flexibility to sign him. The mid-level exception would be available, but Pierce is likely to command much more than that on the open market. Plus, it’s unclear if the team would even want to use an exception like that on Pierce when they don’t have to. However you slice it, unless Danny does so major wheeling and dealing of the rest of the roster to create salary cap room, this scenario isn’t happening.

I don't know, call me crazy, but why wouldn't Pierce just sign the MLE for 2 years - or even one just so he could retire a Celtic?  he wouldn't be leaving THAT much money on the table and he'd still be getting the 5M to waive his current contract

thoughts?  am I missing something?

[LooseCannon]

Pierce taking an effective pay cut by agreeing to be waived and sign for less (if no one claims him) makes sense if he is doing it to enable the team to sign someone.  If he came back for the minimum, that would give the Celtics enough room under the apron to use the full MLE rather than the taxpayer MLE and the flexibility to do a sign-and-trade.

There's no point in Pierce going along with that if you are just going to turn around and sign him for the MLE.

[Yogi]

I do not think this article is actually correct. 

How can we pay Paul Pierce 5 million this year to waive him and then pay him more to play for us again?  That is one contract to not play for us and another to play for us. 

[nickagneta]

Even if the C's get Paul through waivers and talking to him about the MLE as a contract for next year, the only way I see him signing that contract, for probably less than he could get on the open market, is to give him a no-trade clause. Why would he sign for less knowing that he might just be dealt around the trade deadline, to somewhere he wouldn't want to be, if the Celtics season goes to pot? Makes no sense.

[manl_lui]

Even if the C's get Paul through waivers and talking to him about the MLE as a contract for next year, the only way I see him signing that contract, for probably less than he could get on the open market, is to give him a no-trade clause. Why would he sign for less knowing that he might just be dealt around the trade deadline, to somewhere he wouldn't want to be, if the Celtics season goes to pot? Makes no sense.

theoretically, say Pierce gets his no trade clause and willing to come back for the MLE, how much cap space will we have?

[snively]

Pierce's talent might command more than the MLE, but he'd only be willing to sign with a contender.  What contender could pay him more?  Miami's capped out. Ditto OKC, San Antonio, Memphis, Golden St., New York, Indy and Chicago (all the playoff teams left in the race).  Ditto Brooklyn and the LA teams that got bounced in the first round.

So really it comes down to Houston and Dallas (if generously labeled as a contender) and I doubt either going to offer Pierce a lavish contract offer (especially with quality SF options on board already for both teams and Cuban's recent aversion to long-term salary commitments).

So I think it's very likely that Pierce would only be looking at a slate of MLE and MMLE offers.

[Roy H.]

FICTION:  This CelticsHub quote:

If they bought him out, new CBA rules limit teams from resigning players for a full year from the date they are bought out.

Larry Coon says this is incorrect, despite Doc Rivers using it as an excuse for why the Celtics didn't sign Keyon Dooling.  There's nothing in the CBA that Larry Coon is aware of that prevents a team from re-signing a player it bought out, so long as that player isn't placed on amnesty waivers.  That's consistent with my understanding, as well.

[nickagneta]

Even if the C's get Paul through waivers and talking to him about the MLE as a contract for next year, the only way I see him signing that contract, for probably less than he could get on the open market, is to give him a no-trade clause. Why would he sign for less knowing that he might just be dealt around the trade deadline, to somewhere he wouldn't want to be, if the Celtics season goes to pot? Makes no sense.

theoretically, say Pierce gets his no trade clause and willing to come back for the MLE, how much cap space will we have?

None. But if you amnesty Pierce, you have no cap space and if you trade him you have no cap space.

But it saves the C's $5 million in salary and gets them under the luxury line enough that if they don't add too much more salary, saves them luxury tax penalty money and perhaps even being in the luxury tax, which, you definitely don't want to be in consecutive years, year after year. The penalties accrue to even higher penalties when you do that as a franchise.

[rondohondo]

This still wouldn't open up cap space though . So I don't see how we would make any improvements to the current roster .

And if we can't make improvements , what is the point in bringing PP back when we can get something worthwhile back?

I think the Josh Smith trade will be revisited  .

[rondohondo]

If they can cut him and then resign him for 5 mil a year , won't that look good to a team like Dallas .

I think they could have pp under contract for 5mil , and still have enough to add 2 max players .

[goCeltics]

The reason to waive pierce and get him back at the MLE,

1) keeps the c's well enough below the apron to attempt a josh smith, al jefferson sign and trade, etc

2) save wyc serious money, 5.33m of the contract value, plus (penalty rate) 2.75*5.33m, as the c's likely to be in the tax. Thats about 20 million dollars wyc saves, which his entitled to try and save, he certainly hasn't been stingy

[nickagneta]

We will not be getting a player the caliber of

Josh Smith
Kevin Love
Blake Griffin
Russell Westbrook
Marc Gasol

or anyone in that "Just Below Elite Star" level player for Paul Pierce. trading Pierce will make this team worse immediately and possibly the long run, depending on how bad a package you get for Pierce.

You might get Caron Butler, Grant Hill and Wiilie Green for Pierce.

You might get kris Humphries and a future bad draft pick for Pierce.

You might get a bunch of crap expiring contracts from the Lakers.

Denver might give you Wilson Chandler, Anthony Randolph and Jordan Hamilton for Pierce.

But I don't see where these types of trades help the Celtics either next year or in the future. No one is giving up good future talent or high draft picks for Paul Pierce on a $15 million contract.

[Yogi]

We will not be getting a player the caliber of

Josh Smith
Kevin Love
Blake Smith
Russell Westbrook
Marc Gasol

or anyone in that "Just Below Elite Star" level player for Paul Pierce. trading Pierce will make this team worse immediately and possibly the long run, depending on how bad a package you get for Pierce.

You might get Caron Butler, Grant Hill and Wiilie Green for Pierce.

You might get kris Humphries and a future bad draft pick for Pierce.

You might get a bunch of crap expiring contracts from the Lakers.

Denver might give you Wilson Chandler, Anthony Randolph and Jordan Hamilton for Pierce.

But I don't see where these types of trades help the Celtics either next year or in the future. No one is giving up good future talent or high draft picks for Paul Pierce on a $15 million contract.

What kind of package would we need to land Blake Smith?  That guy sounds awesome.

[j804]

This still wouldn't open up cap space though . So I don't see how we would make any improvements to the current roster .

And if we can't make improvements , what is the point in bringing PP back when we can get something worthwhile back?

I think the Josh Smith trade will be revisited  .

WHy would Atlanta want Pierce for a year he's not going to put them over the top?

[danglertx]

We will not be getting a player the caliber of

Josh Smith
Kevin Love
Blake Smith
Russell Westbrook
Marc Gasol

or anyone in that "Just Below Elite Star" level player for Paul Pierce. trading Pierce will make this team worse immediately and possibly the long run, depending on how bad a package you get for Pierce.

You might get Caron Butler, Grant Hill and Wiilie Green for Pierce.

You might get kris Humphries and a future bad draft pick for Pierce.

You might get a bunch of crap expiring contracts from the Lakers.

Denver might give you Wilson Chandler, Anthony Randolph and Jordan Hamilton for Pierce.

But I don't see where these types of trades help the Celtics either next year or in the future. No one is giving up good future talent or high draft picks for Paul Pierce on a $15 million contract.

You are looking talent wise at why teams wouldn't trade for Pierce.  You have to look at unloading a salary and creating flexibility with the cap.  They can unload  16mil or so and only take back 5mil.  That is HUGE for teams that would get them under the lux tax or salary cap.

Just as an example, look at Kevin Love.  Pekovic or whatever that big Russian guy's name is has pretty much beaten out Love for the C starter spot.  Sure Love can be the backup and PF but they are going to have to pay that large Russian dude too.  They are committed in large money for Love for several more years and the guy has some injury concerns, to say the least.

You can't underestimate how much clearing his salary is worth to the TWolves.