Wouldn't this make sense? (Celtics/Knicks trade idea)

[Endless Paradise]

They didn't plan on 2015 free agency for the chance to sign guys like Thornton and Bass. They're simply not going to take on another albatross contract after the disaster of the past few years, especially last season with them taking on Bargnani's contract.  They'd rather just let Amare's contract expire for the $23 million in cap space to wave at guys like Aldridge, Jordan, Marc Gasol, etc.

I follow the Knicks closely -- trust me, they've made their plan clear and it's not to sign middling free agents.

[gpap]

They didn't plan on 2015 free agency for the chance to sign guys like Thornton and Bass. They're simply not going to take on another albatross contract after the disaster of the past few years, especially last season with them taking on Bargnani's contract.  They'd rather just let Amare's contract expire for the $23 million in cap space to wave at guys like Aldridge, Jordan, Marc Gasol, etc.

I follow the Knicks closely -- trust me, they've made their plan clear and it's not to sign middling free agents.

Let's not forget however the Celts will also have upward of 30 million in cap space next season to re-sign Rondo and hopefully get in one of those FA's you mentioned.

[JSD]

There is no way the Knicks are taking money on beyond this season. Wallace will likely ride out his contract as a Celtic unless WE give a team a 1st pick to take him on. To me, the big incentive for the Celtics would be to compress the roster, which I think is important at this point. Plus, if Amare can give you a solid 20 minutes a game then I would say we get the best player in the deal.

Really, what this trade would come down to is this:

Is Amare and the roster compression worth adding an additional $6 million in payroll and being $8 million beyond the LT threshold that we would have to address by the deadline?

Another element of this, what would it take to get Philly to absorb Wallace? We own their (very high) upcoming 2nd rounder, I wonder if we give that back to them, send cash, and add our own 2nd rounder into the mix, if they would do it? That would solve everything.

[diconzo]

I think this trade is close but it needs a few revisions. A trade like this has to have certain requirements:

1. This needs to be worth our while more than just roster spots. AKA we need to get rid of Wallace

2. The Knicks have the expirings we want, but absolutely will not take on salary for next season

This leads to one thing --> A third team that has cap space has to facilitate. Enter 76ers

BOS sends: Wallace, Anthony, Thornton, Bass, Bogans
BOS gets: Stoudemire, Hardaway Jr

NYK sends: Stoudemire, Hardaway Jr, Future 2nd
NYK gets: Thornton, Bass, Bogans

PHI sends: n/a
PHI gets: Wallace, Anthony, Future 2nd



-Philly only has Embiid, Noel, and MCW on the roster for sure next season, I'm sure you can sell Hinkie (A Morey disciple ) on the veteran presence/future 2nd. Not to mention they need to get to the salary floor

-Knicks save almost $10 Million(!) in salaries this year, not to mention their luxury tax payment, maintain their flexibility, and essentially just swap Amare for Bass & Hardaway Jr for Thornton. I don't think this is a hard sell for the Knicks

And as for us isn't this the exact type of trade we've been looking for? Clears all our logjams, frees minutes for the young guys, and cuts roughly $5 million off our salaries this year. It even kind of makes us a better team on the court if Amare can stay healthy (riiight)

[JSD]

Philly having to get to the salary floor is a bit of a misnomer. Whatever shortfall that ends up happening would be distributed to their on roster players.

Example: Philly ends up $30 million below the floor, that $30 M gets divided and distributed to Embiid, MCW, Noel ect.

So I'm not sure Hinkie cares one way or another, and probably wouldn't mind giving his own guys a few extra million and a pat on the butt. In other words, Philly would need more than just a 2nd rounder to take on Wallace. Cash and other assets would likely have to be involved.

[Lucky17]

This myth of the salary floor requirement needs to end.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q15

Teams with a team salary below the minimum are surcharged for their shortfall, with the money distributed among the players on that team.

There's no incentive for a team like the Sixers to take on payroll, especially non-expiring payroll, when failure to meet the salary floor bears very little consequence.

Edit: JSD beat me to it.

[D.o.s.]

Hinkie may not care, but the ownership certainly do. Also, the board of Governors are not too stoked about what Philly's doing anyway, and they don't want to lose any more good will than they have to.

Also, I mean, you're talking about the people who locked out the players because they "were making too much money." They don't want to pay them a cent more than they have to.

You know the last people to miss the salary floor? I'll let you guess and then give you a hint: they're not owners anymore.

edit: that's not to say that I think Philly goes in on this trade. I don't think they do.

[JSD]

Well Tp for the source Lucky17, I really didn't feel like looking it up.

[JSD]

I like the idea of including Philly in the trade with the Knicks and Celtics sending 2nd rounders, Knick rookie scales, and cash to take on Wallace. Still not sure if they do it, but they did just give up Thad Young for a pick 20 something 1st rounder, so who knows.

[MBunge]

There's no incentive for a team like the Sixers to take on payroll, especially non-expiring payroll, when failure to meet the salary floor bears very little consequence.

Edit: JSD beat me to it.

1.  I'm not sure paying guys millions of extra dollars for nothing is something most owners will be happy with.

2.  What happens when Philly does start adding salary and that extra money for guys goes away?

Mike

[JSD]

There's no incentive for a team like the Sixers to take on payroll, especially non-expiring payroll, when failure to meet the salary floor bears very little consequence.

Edit: JSD beat me to it.

1.  I'm not sure paying guys millions of extra dollars for nothing is something most owners will be happy with.

2.  What happens when Philly does start adding salary and that extra money for guys goes away?

Mike

1. Maintaining flexibility isn't really nothing, though I'm sure they rather lease out their cap space for worthy enough incentive.

2. Their player's salaries revert back to the contract that THEY signed.


I liken it to OT at my job, I take it when it's available and definitely enjoy the extra money, but when we are fully staffed and it dries up a bit, I don't fault management. The terms of my employment were not set with the notion that I would be garenteed OT.

[Endless Paradise]

The Sixers are certainly not eating Wallace's contract without at least a first, so if you're going to try to dump that on them, you might as well not be stingy and offer a first.  The Celtics weren't willing to take Thornton's expiring without at least a first, so why would you expect the Sixers to take on over twice the money for twice the years for just a second?

[Geo123]

No

+1

[Future Celtics Owner]

There is no way the Knicks are taking money on beyond this season. Wallace will likely ride out his contract as a Celtic unless WE give a team a 1st pick to take him on. To me, the big incentive for the Celtics would be to compress the roster, which I think is important at this point. Plus, if Amare can give you a solid 20 minutes a game then I would say we get the best player in the deal.

Really, what this trade would come down to is this:

Is Amare and the roster compression worth adding an additional $6 million in payroll and being $8 million beyond the LT threshold that we would have to address by the deadline?

Another element of this, what would it take to get Philly to absorb Wallace? We own their (very high) upcoming 2nd rounder, I wonder if we give that back to them, send cash, and add our own 2nd rounder into the mix, if they would do it? That would solve everything.

Id rather keep the Philly picks. They are essentially 2 late first rounders and can come in handy.

Wallace can stay because we are not competing super soon and it would be a waste to give up an asset to get rid of him.

[Irish Stew]

Knicks Get: Thorton, Bass, Anthony, Bogans

Celtics Get: Amare

Knicks do it for more immediate veteran depth, Instant LT savings as they can cut Bogans, maintain cap flexibility next offseason as all of the incoming players would be expiring.

Celtics do it to compress their roster and free up playing time for the young guys. They also maintain their flexibility as Amare is also expiring.

I think a deal like this would make a lot of sense for both teams, though the Celtics would have some luxery tax concerns they would need to address before next deadline.

In some ways, this is just rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic for both teams. The Knicks would probably do it because they can just cut Bogans. I am still puzzled as to why we would do it without further compensation? For those who think that the Knicks would ever take Wallace, even with draft choices, that is unrealistic. They are totally devoted to creating as much cap space as possible at the end of the 2014-2015 season. Even if the cap isn't raised (it will be raised), they would be at least $20+ million under the present cap if they do nothing.