Author Topic: Next year's team  (Read 2211 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Next year's team
« on: April 29, 2018, 04:21:31 PM »

Offline konkmv

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1518
  • Tommy Points: 104
Let's say that irwing Brown Tatum Hayward Horford are untradable ...
I think Larkin smart ojeleje theis yabusele  and baynes stay..
Rosier gets traded now for a high pick..
Morris will be traded as an expiring contract for a future pick
Monroe will leave
Nader will be shipped out...
So we need a playmaker a shooter and 2 bigs...

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2018, 04:24:30 PM »

Offline PAOBoston

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8134
  • Tommy Points: 535
Why would Morris get traded? He's on a super contract for a guy that can come off the bench and give you 20 on any given night.

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2018, 04:29:13 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12765
  • Tommy Points: 1546
Why would Morris get traded? He's on a super contract for a guy that can come off the bench and give you 20 on any given night.

Yeah, Morris isn't getting traded unless he's part of a package for a star.  And I don't think Ainge is going to make any big trades this summer, so I feel pretty confident Morris will be here for at least one more season.

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2018, 04:37:09 PM »

Offline hodgy03038

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3820
  • Tommy Points: 461
When  you say Nader getting shipped out you mean like on a cruise "one-way" right?

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #4 on: April 29, 2018, 05:07:33 PM »

Offline perks-a-beast

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2612
  • Tommy Points: 269
Although I don't hate the idea of trading Rozier for a lottery pick, I don't see it happening. No sane GM is giving up that high of a pick for one year of Rozier....except maybe Doc? Trading Rozier fo the Clippers for the 12th pick and grabbing Robert Williams out of Texas A&M would be alright - I think that kid is going to be special - possibly the next Clint Capela

My best guess is this is an uneventful summer - the antithesis of last summer. I see DA running it back minus Monroe, re-sign Smart, Larkin, and Baynes..

PG - K. Irving , T. Rozier , S. Larkin

SG - J. Brown , M. Smart

SF - G. Hayward , S. Ojeleye

PF - J. Tatum , M. Morris

C- A. Horford , D. Theis , A. Baynes

That 12 man rotation, in my opinion, is a legit title contender and can go toe to toe with any team in the NBA - including the Warriors.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2018, 05:18:18 PM by perks-a-beast »

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2018, 05:27:05 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
When  you say Nader getting shipped out you mean like on a cruise "one-way" right?

Carnival Cruise ;D.

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2018, 05:28:49 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48121
  • Tommy Points: 8800
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Let's say that irwing Brown Tatum Hayward Horford are untradable ...
I think Larkin smart ojeleje theis yabusele  and baynes stay..
Rosier gets traded now for a high pick..
Morris will be traded as an expiring contract for a future pick
Monroe will leave
Nader will be shipped out...
So we need a playmaker a shooter and 2 bigs...
Or, you know, we keep Rozier, Monroe and Morris and so don't create a need for a playmaker, a sharpshooter or a big. Why create the need for players when  we can keep the players we have that are still under contract? Why go look for a big when Monroe might settle for a 2-3 year deal at $6 million per and fits in well here?

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #7 on: April 29, 2018, 07:53:23 PM »

Offline spikelovetheCelts

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1616
  • Tommy Points: 113
  • Peace it's a board. We all will never agree.
All depends on Smart signing on how next year goes. If he leaves Rozier is staying. Baynes and Monroe will stay if we give them more than a year deal IMO. We also have our pick that can gets some minutes. Yabu should be able to contribute. We will be awesome with Ainge and Stevens.I am thankful for this extra playoff experience for Rozier, Tatum and Brown.
"People look at players, watch them dribble between their legs and they say, 'There's a superstar.'  Well John Havlicek is a superstar, and most of the others are figments of writers' imagination."
--Jerry West, on John Havlicek

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #8 on: April 29, 2018, 08:08:24 PM »

Offline Smokeeye123

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2374
  • Tommy Points: 156
If Im ainge i let smart walk and try to extend Rozier at 15mil per.

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #9 on: April 29, 2018, 08:11:42 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7837
  • Tommy Points: 770
I'm still having fun watching this year's team.

When it comes to it, though, if we bring back as much of the band as we can and everyone is relatively healthy, I think they win it all next year.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008, 2024

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2018, 08:15:31 PM »

Offline Chris22

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5081
  • Tommy Points: 460
Keep Smart and Rozier and trade Irving.

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #11 on: April 29, 2018, 08:19:23 PM »

Offline otherdave

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 500
  • Tommy Points: 126
  • takes.....MAKES!!!!
Whether you like or follow salary cap/luxury tax stuff, rest assured Wyc, Danny and Mike Zarren are.  Whether this summer has few roster changes or something a little more robust, everything will be driven be staying under the luxury tax threshold one last year.  The salary cap and lux tax thresholds will not be determined until July 6th.  Projections have salary cap at 101/102 million, which would put the lux tax threshold at 122/123 mil.  Management will keep total payroll below this lux tax amount, let's assume that it is 122.5 million.

Teams may have 15 players under contract (not counting 2 way players), but must have at least 14.  With the target of keeping payroll under 122.5 m with a little cushion to spare, C's most assuredly will only keep 14 players next year.

C's currently have 11 players under contract for next year, 3 others are UFA's (Larkin, Baynes, Monroe) and Smart is a RFA.

These 11 total 11.7 mil, D. Jackson's guaranteed salary was stretched when he was waived last summer, so add another $92,857 and our pick at 27 will slot to $1,640,400 (I believe).  If we keep the pick, we are now at 12 players and a payroll of about 109.1 mil.

So there is 13 mil left to spent to keep under our goal, and Smart, Baynes, Monroe and Larkin are not signed at this point.  I think this is the launching point for our blog debates between now and July/August, once the dust settles.

For example, if you could even resign Baynes and Monroe for a combined 13 mil, then Smart and Larkin are gone.

If you want to keep Smart and lets say Baynes, then Monroe and Larkin walk and someone who already has a contract (say Morris at 5,375,0000) would have to be traded with little to no salary coming back.

I think Larkin will get a nice offer beyond what C's will want to afford and he will be gone.

I think it is a win-win for both Danny and Smart's camp to sign a one year deal in the 9 to 11 mil range.

So if Shane walks and Smart comes back, there is one slot left, not much money (enough for a min contract) and Baynes and Monroe not signed.

I think ultimately management has to decide who they most want back: Baynes, Monroe or Morris.  If you pick Morris over the other two, you are done: sign Smart and a min contract.  If you want one the centers, you will have to move Morris for a pick or something to clear salary space for one of the bigs.

Whether you trade Rozier while his value is high or package him with Morris to get one player back is probably its own topic for later in the spring.


Re: Next year's team
« Reply #12 on: April 29, 2018, 08:43:55 PM »

Offline cman88

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5530
  • Tommy Points: 397
I dont understand why some posters are adamant the Celtics management wont go into luxury tax? Wyc has said several times that if they have a chance to win a championship they will have no problem going into the luxury tax.

If they feel next year is their year and by having an extra player and going into the tax will bring home Banner 18 I dont see them being cheap.

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #13 on: April 30, 2018, 01:08:54 PM »

Offline otherdave

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 500
  • Tommy Points: 126
  • takes.....MAKES!!!!
I dont understand why some posters are adamant the Celtics management wont go into luxury tax? Wyc has said several times that if they have a chance to win a championship they will have no problem going into the luxury tax.

If they feel next year is their year and by having an extra player and going into the tax will bring home Banner 18 I dont see them being cheap.


I think the owners are going to be quite generous over the next several years, just not next year.  Besides being generous, they are also smart businessmen - that's why they own the C's after all!  Most fans are wrapped up in the current season and maybe some peeking ahead to the off season and next year.  The owners are fans too, but as owners, they are also looking five years out.  When you take the long term view, it is just really smart business to delay the start of the lux tax repeater clock by one year, especially when this can be achieved with little pain involved.

If Irving gets extended, Jaylen and Jason get their second contracts, etc, etc., it is easy to picture the Celtics being over the lux tax thresold for several years in a row.  In fact it is really hard to come up with scenarios where the C's retain most of their best players and don't go over the tax threshold (by a lot).  I think long term the owners are committed to spending the necessary funds to contend for banners (they have done it before).

Lets look at some pretend dollars.  Starting with the year after next, the 2019 -2020 season, let's assume that the C's will be 20 mil over the lux tax threshold for several years in a row.  That will result in a normal lux tax bill of $45 million dollars (I did the math) on top of the payroll of approximately 145 mil.  Now we need to bring in the higher "repeater" lux tax rates (that kick in if a team has been over the lux tax threshold 3 of the last 4 seasons).  The "repeater" tax bill calculates to $65 million, an increase of 20 million.

Coming back to next season, most of this year's team can probably be brought back while staying under the lux tax threshold of approximately 122/123 mil.  The owners have to ask themselves how important are the last 3 bench players with respect to achieving a championship.  How much did Greg Monroe (for example) play in the Bucks series, how much will he play going forward in the playoffs?

If Monroe (in this example) is deemed absolutely essential, I guess you bring him back and go over the tax threshold by 3 million and start the repeater tax clock ticking. If he is deemed not essential, you sign a 1 mil min contract player and stay under the threshold one last year.

It seems the owners choice is:
go over the threshold by a small amount (1 to 5 million???) which will move up an additional
$20 mil tax bill by one year
or
let some end of the bench players walk in order to stay under the tax threshold thus pushing an additional 20 million tax out into the future by one year.

The bloggers that are adamant about staying under the tax next year are simply predicting that the shrewd business owners will pick the second choice. Those bloggers then suggest possibilities that fit under that second parameter.

I guess time will tell.  :)

Re: Next year's team
« Reply #14 on: April 30, 2018, 01:35:53 PM »

Offline shake603

  • Lonnie Walker IV
  • Posts: 68
  • Tommy Points: 13
I dont understand why some posters are adamant the Celtics management wont go into luxury tax? Wyc has said several times that if they have a chance to win a championship they will have no problem going into the luxury tax.

If they feel next year is their year and by having an extra player and going into the tax will bring home Banner 18 I dont see them being cheap.


I think the owners are going to be quite generous over the next several years, just not next year.  Besides being generous, they are also smart businessmen - that's why they own the C's after all!  Most fans are wrapped up in the current season and maybe some peeking ahead to the off season and next year.  The owners are fans too, but as owners, they are also looking five years out.  When you take the long term view, it is just really smart business to delay the start of the lux tax repeater clock by one year, especially when this can be achieved with little pain involved.

If Irving gets extended, Jaylen and Jason get their second contracts, etc, etc., it is easy to picture the Celtics being over the lux tax thresold for several years in a row.  In fact it is really hard to come up with scenarios where the C's retain most of their best players and don't go over the tax threshold (by a lot).  I think long term the owners are committed to spending the necessary funds to contend for banners (they have done it before).

Lets look at some pretend dollars.  Starting with the year after next, the 2019 -2020 season, let's assume that the C's will be 20 mil over the lux tax threshold for several years in a row.  That will result in a normal lux tax bill of $45 million dollars (I did the math) on top of the payroll of approximately 145 mil.  Now we need to bring in the higher "repeater" lux tax rates (that kick in if a team has been over the lux tax threshold 3 of the last 4 seasons).  The "repeater" tax bill calculates to $65 million, an increase of 20 million.

Coming back to next season, most of this year's team can probably be brought back while staying under the lux tax threshold of approximately 122/123 mil.  The owners have to ask themselves how important are the last 3 bench players with respect to achieving a championship.  How much did Greg Monroe (for example) play in the Bucks series, how much will he play going forward in the playoffs?

If Monroe (in this example) is deemed absolutely essential, I guess you bring him back and go over the tax threshold by 3 million and start the repeater tax clock ticking. If he is deemed not essential, you sign a 1 mil min contract player and stay under the threshold one last year.

It seems the owners choice is:
go over the threshold by a small amount (1 to 5 million???) which will move up an additional
$20 mil tax bill by one year
or
let some end of the bench players walk in order to stay under the tax threshold thus pushing an additional 20 million tax out into the future by one year.

The bloggers that are adamant about staying under the tax next year are simply predicting that the shrewd business owners will pick the second choice. Those bloggers then suggest possibilities that fit under that second parameter.

I guess time will tell.  :)

Thank you for posting this!

I have two questions if you'll humor me.

First, if the Lakers pick conveys at 3 and we select a player instead of trading the pick, how difficult does that make it to retain say, Smart and Baynes?

Second, if Smart takes the QO, how much does that change the space for us in those two scenarios (with pick and without)?


Also as a comment in general about the roster make-up, If anyone is suggesting we trade Rozier for a draft pick in this upcoming draft, should we also be talking about how much more leverage that gives Smart in free agency right after? I'm not sure how much that matters but I think the order of operations is unfriendly to keeping them both.