Zach Lowe: Celtics calling around the league to rent out cap space

[Real World]

The one thing I'm not seeing mentioned anywhere in here, is who these $20 million players are, that the C's would theoretically be trading the expiring contracts of Wallace and McGee to.   

I don't believe the Celtics brass would take on $10-12 million in salary for a waste of a player, just so they could move from the early 2nd (Sixers pick) up to the late 1st (the Memphis pick via Denver).  I believe that's what McGee makes in salary, and if it were my money, I'd never do that deal.  It could literally mean moving up like 8 spots.  That's not worth $10-12 million.   Especially since in some drafts, it's actually more beneficial to have an early second rounder, than it is a late first.

That being said, I do love what Danny is doing, and the creative talk in this thread.  There are so many different angles to the cap, the draft, contracts, trade exceptions, etc. and most casual fans don't understand them.  It's good to see so many who do, or at the very least, have a genuine interest in this aspect of rebuilding process.   In the NBA, to rebuild and compete, is no small task. Some franchises either have it easier, or get lucky with a blue chip, franchise changing top pick.  Mediocrity, or years of outright suck, can go on for decades even.  While I don't think there is a way that guarantees success, I do think Danny is approaching this about as intelligently as he possibly can.  He's building a stock pile of picks, a roster of solid, young players, and a balance sheet loaded with flexibility.  At the very least, the team should be winning and relevant fairly soon, with picks and space still in reserve. We just have to be patient, and hope for a little luck along the way.  Like a top 3 pick in a loaded draft.  We were hoping for that last year, but oh well.

[LooseCannon]

I don't believe the Celtics brass would take on $10-12 million in salary for a waste of a player, just so they could move from the early 2nd (Sixers pick) up to the late 1st (the Memphis pick via Denver).  I believe that's what McGee makes in salary, and if it were my money, I'd never do that deal.  It could literally mean moving up like 8 spots.  That's not worth $10-12 million.   Especially since in some drafts, it's actually more beneficial to have an early second rounder, than it is a late first.

Based on previous NBA trades, the going rate for a taking on salary in exchange for a first (usually from a team expected to be good) seems to be $8-12 million.  If you think McGee isn't completely worthless, his value could make up the difference between spending $12 million and moving up 8 spots in the draft.  Basically, the money is within the range for the market rate for a first-round pick that is likely non-lottery, so it probably boils down to if you think McGee's production is worth an early second.

[Endless Paradise]

The problem with this is you're operating under the assumption that Boston is the only team willing to accept salary dumps.  Philly is so far under the salary cap and will be during the offseason that they could take on Lee and Barnes without sending out any salary in return.  Golden State has all the reason in the world not to dump any of their rotational players this season.

And the Celtics won't have cap space in the offseason like the Sixers ?

Warriors are a playoff team that can't wait until the offseason, a late 1st this year and a future 1st is nothing since they're about this year and next and not the next 5.

They're a playoff team that can't wait until the offseason?  What in the world are you talking about?  They're not paying luxury taxes this season.  Exactly why can't they wait until the summer?  Especially when it means they don't have to take back any salary since teams will have cap space.

[heitingas]

The problem with this is you're operating under the assumption that Boston is the only team willing to accept salary dumps.  Philly is so far under the salary cap and will be during the offseason that they could take on Lee and Barnes without sending out any salary in return.  Golden State has all the reason in the world not to dump any of their rotational players this season.

And the Celtics won't have cap space in the offseason like the Sixers ?

Warriors are a playoff team that can't wait until the offseason, a late 1st this year and a future 1st is nothing since they're about this year and next and not the next 5.

They're a playoff team that can't wait until the offseason?  What in the world are you talking about?  They're not paying luxury taxes this season.  Exactly why can't they wait until the summer?  Especially when it means they don't have to take back any salary since teams will have cap space.

And do you think they can just "dump" Lee on a team under the cap for free in the offseason ? You think it makes a difference in what they give up ?

GSW gave up 2 firsts I believe to dump Biedrins on Utah.

It would likely require the same price. And what do you mean not take back salary ? Are we giving them expirings (Bass, Thornton) or not ? AFAIK they come off the books on June 30. This move adds vets to GSW, 2 for 1 and gets Lee out of the way pre emptively.

Are you just arguing for the sake or arguing or what??

[freshinthehouse]

And do you think they can just "dump" Lee on a team under the cap for free in the offseason ? You think it makes a difference in what they give up ?

GSW gave up 2 firsts I believe to dump Biedrins on Utah.

It would likely require the same price. And what do you mean not take back salary ? Are we giving them expirings (Bass, Thornton) or not ? AFAIK they come off the books on June 30. This move adds vets to GSW, 2 for 1 and gets Lee out of the way pre emptively.

Are you just arguing for the sake or arguing or what??

GS did give up two picks, but Utah also picked up Richard Jefferson in that trade as well. 

From what I've noticed is that any contract around 10 mill is gonna cost a first round to get rid of. 

[Depalma2002]

I wonder what Ainge might be able to squeeze out of New York for taking on Bargnani's expiring deal. Would a 2018 1st be beyond the pale?

They are not that far over the tax that they have to resort to paying teams to get rid of contracts that are already expiring. They will look at other options before going to that.

First option, would probably look for someone to take on Calderon's deal without sending salary back. This would probably get you a lottery protected future first.

If someone can't do it without sending salary back, they still get out from under the long term deal but still would have to pay the tax since they would have to take on a player. The pick would likely need to be heavier protected so that the likelihood is that it eventually turns into 2 seconds.

If all else fails, to avoid paying the tax, they may be willing to give up a future second to a team willing to take Bargnani without sending back enough salary that it leaves them over the tax.

[Endless Paradise]

The problem with this is you're operating under the assumption that Boston is the only team willing to accept salary dumps.  Philly is so far under the salary cap and will be during the offseason that they could take on Lee and Barnes without sending out any salary in return.  Golden State has all the reason in the world not to dump any of their rotational players this season.

And the Celtics won't have cap space in the offseason like the Sixers ?

Warriors are a playoff team that can't wait until the offseason, a late 1st this year and a future 1st is nothing since they're about this year and next and not the next 5.

They're a playoff team that can't wait until the offseason?  What in the world are you talking about?  They're not paying luxury taxes this season.  Exactly why can't they wait until the summer?  Especially when it means they don't have to take back any salary since teams will have cap space.

And do you think they can just "dump" Lee on a team under the cap for free in the offseason ? You think it makes a difference in what they give up ?

GSW gave up 2 firsts I believe to dump Biedrins on Utah.

It would likely require the same price. And what do you mean not take back salary ? Are we giving them expirings (Bass, Thornton) or not ? AFAIK they come off the books on June 30. This move adds vets to GSW, 2 for 1 and gets Lee out of the way pre emptively.

Are you just arguing for the sake or arguing or what??

Firstly, Golden State dumped $24+ million in three useless players on Utah.  That's why the price was so steep.  They didn't give up two firsts just to get rid of Biedrins' corpse; they gave up two firsts and three seconds to have Utah tie up over a third of their cap space and three of their 15 roster spots on bad players.

Secondly, did you even bother reading my post at all?  How is using Harrison Barnes as a sweetener trying to "'dump' Lee on a team for free"?

Thirdly, despite what some LeBron trumpeters claimed here over the offseason, chemistry is very much so important.  Golden State is leading the league in record right now.  It's not very likely they make such a huge move when they've got such a good thing going right now.

Finally, you should probably follow the conversation before jumping in.  I was responding to a suggestion that Golden State would have to take a Lee-Wallace swap over the offseason.  There will be teams so far under the cap that Golden State wouldn't need to take back any salary in filler contracts whatsoever; they can just dump Lee and use Barnes and/or whatever few picks they still have left as incentive.  That's what I was talking about when I brought up the fact that Philly can take a Lee salary dump without sending salary back.  This honestly should have been apparent.

[D.o.s.]

27   Oklahoma City Thunder   LT   $-1,593,492

28   New York Knicks   LT   $-3,292,916

29   Cleveland Cavaliers LT   $-5,064,356

30   Brooklyn Nets   LT $-13,720,51

4 teams above are LT payers, BKN only team in danger of being repeater offenders, so if they can't move their big 3, expect them to try HARD to move KG and a smaller contract. Especially since they put their team up for sale.

So if Hinkie doesn't sell his cap for free, expect Ainge to fleece King once again.


We have Rondos and Rivers trade exceptions to absorb KG and a filler. I want a pick swap in 2019 and a 2020 unprotected 1st.

Oh man, if we manage to get Brooklyn to pay us to take back the contract KG signed WITH US...that would be pretty incredible.  Doubly so if we managed to cut their payroll enough to make it worth their while to take back the contract Wallace signed with them.

Wallace signed that deal with the Trail Blazers, IIRC.

[Endless Paradise]

Nah, Wallace's contract is a Billy King Special™.  Wallace was a pseudo-expiring when the Nets acquired him for the pick that eventually turned into Damian Lillard (he had a player option that he exercised).  Then, as a panic move to appease Deron Williams in free agency/trying to save face for trading what amounted to the fifth pick for a rental of Gerald Wallace to play for a non-playoff team, King compounded his mistake by re-signing him for $40 million over four years.

[fairweatherfan]

Nah, Wallace's contract is a Billy King Special™.  Wallace was a pseudo-expiring when the Nets acquired him for the pick that eventually turned into Damian Lillard (he had a player option that he exercised).  Then, as a panic move to appease Deron Williams in free agency/trying to save face for trading what amounted to the fifth pick for a rental of Gerald Wallace to play for a non-playoff team, King compounded his mistake by re-signing him for $40 million over four years.

Yurp.  The Wallace-Nets saga might be one of the more self-destructive chain of decisions a franchise has made in the modern era.  Trade a pick that becomes a superstar for a guy whose game promptly falls off a cliff, but sign him to a big deal before figuring that out, then manage to dump that contract for some aging stars, but at the expense of most of your future drafts, plus tens of millions in luxury tax, all to win one playoff series. 

It's pretty spectacular to watch from a distance, especially given that we're the main beneficiary.

[Real World]

I don't believe the Celtics brass would take on $10-12 million in salary for a waste of a player, just so they could move from the early 2nd (Sixers pick) up to the late 1st (the Memphis pick via Denver).  I believe that's what McGee makes in salary, and if it were my money, I'd never do that deal.  It could literally mean moving up like 8 spots.  That's not worth $10-12 million.   Especially since in some drafts, it's actually more beneficial to have an early second rounder, than it is a late first.

Based on previous NBA trades, the going rate for a taking on salary in exchange for a first (usually from a team expected to be good) seems to be $8-12 million.  If you think McGee isn't completely worthless, his value could make up the difference between spending $12 million and moving up 8 spots in the draft.  Basically, the money is within the range for the market rate for a first-round pick that is likely non-lottery, so it probably boils down to if you think McGee's production is worth an early second.

There's a significant difference between taking on a contract for a 1st round pick, and taking on a contract of that size to move from pick #34, to pick #25 in the draft.  The former can make arguable sense, the latter is a virtual waste of flexibility and resources.  Now if you told me you were trading away some 2nd that was projected to be in the 50's, then fine.  However, the Sixers will likely be one of the 5 worst teams in the league the next couple of years, which renders their 2nd rounder to be in the top end of round.  An area some teams actually prefer to be.

[Real World]

Nah, Wallace's contract is a Billy King Special™.  Wallace was a pseudo-expiring when the Nets acquired him for the pick that eventually turned into Damian Lillard (he had a player option that he exercised).  Then, as a panic move to appease Deron Williams in free agency/trying to save face for trading what amounted to the fifth pick for a rental of Gerald Wallace to play for a non-playoff team, King compounded his mistake by re-signing him for $40 million over four years.

Yurp.  The Wallace-Nets saga might be one of the more self-destructive chain of decisions a franchise has made in the modern era.  Trade a pick that becomes a superstar for a guy whose game promptly falls off a cliff, but sign him to a big deal before figuring that out, then manage to dump that contract for some aging stars, but at the expense of most of your future drafts, plus tens of millions in luxury tax, all to win one playoff series. 

It's pretty spectacular to watch from a distance, especially given that we're the main beneficiary.

Crazy really isn't it?  How one bad move can spiral into becoming the starting point of a franchises demise.  It's also why some teams are so loathe to trade unprotected, or high end draft picks.  Or why some others can be sold on the lottery ticket that acquiring a draft pick could be. 

[jambr380]

Nah, Wallace's contract is a Billy King Special™.  Wallace was a pseudo-expiring when the Nets acquired him for the pick that eventually turned into Damian Lillard (he had a player option that he exercised).  Then, as a panic move to appease Deron Williams in free agency/trying to save face for trading what amounted to the fifth pick for a rental of Gerald Wallace to play for a non-playoff team, King compounded his mistake by re-signing him for $40 million over four years.

Yurp.  The Wallace-Nets saga might be one of the more self-destructive chain of decisions a franchise has made in the modern era.  Trade a pick that becomes a superstar for a guy whose game promptly falls off a cliff, but sign him to a big deal before figuring that out, then manage to dump that contract for some aging stars, but at the expense of most of your future drafts, plus tens of millions in luxury tax, all to win one playoff series. 

It's pretty spectacular to watch from a distance, especially given that we're the main beneficiary.

I think the Blazers are still in the lead. They traded Wallace and got a superstar. We have had to endure three years of Wallace and are just hoping that Young or any of the 2016-18 picks can turn out anywhere near the caliber of Lillard.

But, yes, no matter how you slice - it is pretty disastrous for BKN...an honorable mention may be LAC and the pick they gave up to CLE that turned into Irving, but they got CP3 for Gordon so it all worked out for them in the end.

[JBcat]

I like him, and I think he is a little under the radar player.

The SF position doesn't seem very deep around the league, and there doesn't seem like many elite SF prospects on the horizon at least in this year's draft.  Harris and Crowder at SF we would have tough solid players.

Then if we can land a very good big man prospect I this year's draft then we have something going.

On a side note I hope James Young sticks at SG rather than SF, and hope one day he overtakes Bradley starting.

Edit- this was meant for the Harris thread. Lol

[CsBanner18]

The problem with this is you're operating under the assumption that Boston is the only team willing to accept salary dumps.  Philly is so far under the salary cap and will be during the offseason that they could take on Lee and Barnes without sending out any salary in return.  Golden State has all the reason in the world not to dump any of their rotational players this season.

And the Celtics won't have cap space in the offseason like the Sixers ?

Warriors are a playoff team that can't wait until the offseason, a late 1st this year and a future 1st is nothing since they're about this year and next and not the next 5.

They're a playoff team that can't wait until the offseason?  What in the world are you talking about?  They're not paying luxury taxes this season.  Exactly why can't they wait until the summer?  Especially when it means they don't have to take back any salary since teams will have cap space.

And do you think they can just "dump" Lee on a team under the cap for free in the offseason ? You think it makes a difference in what they give up ?

GSW gave up 2 firsts I believe to dump Biedrins on Utah.

It would likely require the same price. And what do you mean not take back salary ? Are we giving them expirings (Bass, Thornton) or not ? AFAIK they come off the books on June 30. This move adds vets to GSW, 2 for 1 and gets Lee out of the way pre emptively.

Are you just arguing for the sake or arguing or what??

Firstly, Golden State dumped $24+ million in three useless players on Utah.  That's why the price was so steep.  They didn't give up two firsts just to get rid of Biedrins' corpse; they gave up two firsts and three seconds to have Utah tie up over a third of their cap space and three of their 15 roster spots on bad players.

Secondly, did you even bother reading my post at all?  How is using Harrison Barnes as a sweetener trying to "'dump' Lee on a team for free"?

Thirdly, despite what some LeBron trumpeters claimed here over the offseason, chemistry is very much so important.  Golden State is leading the league in record right now.  It's not very likely they make such a huge move when they've got such a good thing going right now.

Finally, you should probably follow the conversation before jumping in.  I was responding to a suggestion that Golden State would have to take a Lee-Wallace swap over the offseason.  There will be teams so far under the cap that Golden State wouldn't need to take back any salary in filler contracts whatsoever; they can just dump Lee and use Barnes and/or whatever few picks they still have left as incentive.  That's what I was talking about when I brought up the fact that Philly can take a Lee salary dump without sending salary back.  This honestly should have been apparent.

I have a hard time buying into the idea that chemistry will keep GS from trading Lee. Ownership should be able to use their success w/o Lee to demonstrate he is expendable. Will some players be disappointed? Yes. Will they get over it? Eventually. This is a business. GS's on court chemistry has been just fine with Lee off the floor. I think ownership should be of the mindset that this will save their team money in the future. Take OKC for instance; they were ready to ruin lockerroom chemistry by trading Perk in a deal to acquire Lopez.

I think GS would be smart to give up a 1st w/ Lee and take on Bass & Thornton. Why wait until the offseason and allow Hinkie to swindle you out of Lee, Barnes & picks when the Celtics could offer you Bass & Thornton's expirings. If the trade is done now you can flip Thornton or Bass, or cut another player to add a vet who agreed to a buyout.

I could see a scenario where GS gives up Lee & Barnes in the offseason, but only if their getting back a quality PF/C that can shoot and start next to Bogut.

TBH, I'd rather do a deal with Denver. I believe they have the most incentive to do a deal. They could trade us Mcgee or Gallo along with the MEM pick they own in exchange for Bass, Thornton, & the rondo TPE. I may even be underestimating the assets we could get back. The trade gives DEN immediate cap space, and a TPE they could use to acquire more assets. They could either use the TPE to acquire a big name or use it to get a pick for allowing another team to dump salary just like I've proposed the Celtics do. For the Celtics; we get a 1st, and the chance to re-trade McGee in the future as an expiring for more assets.