Demetrius got paid!

[otherdave]

I think cap management/flexibility could have something to do with the signing.  Lets assume that RJ Hunter, James Young and D Jackson are never going to have huge NBA careers. Lets assume Bentil will not make the final roster, but is getting a first year partial guarantee to get him to camp and then possibly Maine.

Lets assume Jackson is now making the final roster and either Young or RJ have to go.  Lets pick on Young. James is due $2,803507 for the 2017-2018 season. C's must pick up that option by this Oct 31.  If they waive/trade him, Danny has just created about 1.5 mil in cap space for summer of 2017 (the difference between Young's 2.8 and Jackson's salary of about 1.3).  Perhaps JY and DJ will always be in the 12th to 15th position on whatever roster they are on (i.e. not  impact players), but an additional 1.5 mil in cap space could be very important.

I expect Ainge to keep "turning over" low cost bench guys for even lower cost bench guys over the next few years.  As players get into the 3rd and 4th year of their rookie deals, they can be replaced by cheaper 1st year rookies.

For me this has a lot to do with finances, rather than this player's abilities vs. that player's abilities.

[saltlover]

I'm worried about the roster space. Danny may have to waive some of the young guys for nothing. I would trade some of them for second rounders if necessary

It happens.  We had 12 draft picks and 7 first round picks in three seasons.  We knew (or should have known) that not all would pan out.  I just shrug my shoulders and move on.

It still seems ... unnecessary.   What is compelling about adding Jackson to the roster now, rather than stashing him?

Unlike Lefty, I totally get why the contract is structured that way.  I just don't get why we wouldn't stash both Jackson and Bentil.    If both refuse to be stashed, then why draft them?  Are they that much more compelling as end-of-roster pieces than the end-of-roster pieces we already have?

To me, the oddity has nothing to do with Jackson getting such a nice contract -- the Tyler Johnson example (not a "comp") makes it clear the "why" of structuring that way.  The oddity is the situation at all.  Why are we crowding the roster, which forces roster moves, when it could have been avoided.

If the answer is as simple as, "They like Jackson & Bentil more than they like Hunter & Young and they refuse to be stashed.", then I guess that's fine.  But do they really like Jackson & Bentil that much more than guys like Zipser or Cornelie, who almost certainly could have been stashed internationally?

With regards to Jackson, I think it is clear that they like him more than Zipser and Cornelie, in addition to more than Young and Hunter.  I can't find the tweet now, but they drafted him with the intention of having him on the roster according to some tweet from draft night (it was posted in the draft night thread if you want to fact check me).  The quote in this thread from Stevens regarding Jackson, also taken immediately after draft night, further corroborates that tweet.  Whether to sign him to a long deal using cap room or a shorter deal using the room exception obviously wasn't apparent until the Celtics had determined what cap space would or would not be used, I would bet.  But they very much like Jackson, and that has been apparent from the moment he was drafted and onwards.  Whether their evaluation of him is correct is an entirely different debate, of course, and one that won't be clear for a couple of years.  But Jackson was their guy at 31, so of course he was their guy at 45.

As for Bentil, I have a feeling that he will have signed a four-year contract as well, with the first year being above the minimum, and guaranteed at a good amount (about $400k).  Doing this will mean that teams above the cap can't claim him if he's released (due to the lack of a minimum salary exception), and teams below the cap will have to like him enough to want to take on that guarantee.  He will then be able to remain with the Celtics system in Maine as a training camp release, and the sizable guarantee will buy his loyalty to not sign a contract with another team this season (or at least without giving the Celtics notice).  If there is a roster spot at the end of the season, he might be signed to fill it, and if not, he'll go to Summer league again with the Celtics, and they'll decide whether he's a Celtic going forward or someone who should make his way elsewhere.

Again, on draft night it was tweeted that Bentil would be brought to camp with a chance to make the team, and that's what looks like will happen.  Is all that as optimal as choosing Cornelie and keeping him overseas?  I'm less sure, but this is a thread about Jackson.  Once we know for sure how Bentil's contract is structured, I'll have more opinion on that.  But if the Celtics feel they can successfully keep Bentil in Maine for a season if he can't make the roster, and think that he can develop into a better player in Maine under their coaching than either he could or another player could in Europe, it's at least a defensible position.

[Ed Hollison]

I agree that Ainge is savvy in looking for low-cost role players in an environment where NBA vets' salaries are exploding. Doesn't get better than 2nd round picks. $1.3m is peanuts compared to what a halfway decent backup PG typically earns.

With that said, my expectation was that the C's would be content to do with him what they did with Marcus Thornton: have him sign overseas and develop his skills there. If he ever starts tearing up whatever league he's playing in, you offer him a contract at that point to come over to the NBA.

The fact that they took very different approaches with Jackson as they did with Thornton tells me that 1) they really like Jackson, and they believe he's going to contribute, if not this year then in years 2 and 3; and 2) they are likely to trade at least one of Bradley, Smart, Rozier.

[vjcsmoke]

They really like him!

But doesn't signing these picks signal that the Celtics have given up on a big trade in the near future.  Or at least they have to wait 30 days before trading these guys although come to think about it, 2nd round players really have zero trade value.  But it does affect our cap space.

[Surferdad]

They really like him!

But doesn't signing these picks signal that the Celtics have given up on a big trade in the near future.  Or at least they have to wait 30 days before trading these guys although come to think about it, 2nd round players really have zero trade value.  But it does affect our cap space.

No one would mistake me for a "capologist", but I think this may makes sense.  In other words, no big trade is going down now, or even before the season starts, but DA may already be thinking ahead to the trade deadline in February.  As usual, he is one step ahead of the rest of us.

[mmmmm]

I think cap management/flexibility could have something to do with the signing.  Lets assume that RJ Hunter, James Young and D Jackson are never going to have huge NBA careers. Lets assume Bentil will not make the final roster, but is getting a first year partial guarantee to get him to camp and then possibly Maine.

No. It doesn't work that way.  If we sign him to an NBA contract then he is, indeed, on the roster.   We can send him to Maine, but he'd still be on the 15-man roster.

Lets assume Jackson is now making the final roster and either Young or RJ have to go.  Lets pick on Young. James is due $2,803507 for the 2017-2018 season. C's must pick up that option by this Oct 31.  If they waive/trade him, Danny has just created about 1.5 mil in cap space for summer of 2017 (the difference between Young's 2.8 and Jackson's salary of about 1.3).  Perhaps JY and DJ will always be in the 12th to 15th position on whatever roster they are on (i.e. not  impact players), but an additional 1.5 mil in cap space could be very important.

I expect Ainge to keep "turning over" low cost bench guys for even lower cost bench guys over the next few years.  As players get into the 3rd and 4th year of their rookie deals, they can be replaced by cheaper 1st year rookies.

For me this has a lot to do with finances, rather than this player's abilities vs. that player's abilities.

The goal of saving 1.5M of cap space for the summer of 2017 seems rather dubious, especially given the error bars on projections for what the cap will be.   

Managing the 15-man roster limit would seem to be a much more important priority.

[mmmmm]

They really like him!

But doesn't signing these picks signal that the Celtics have given up on a big trade in the near future.  Or at least they have to wait 30 days before trading these guys although come to think about it, 2nd round players really have zero trade value.  But it does affect our cap space.

No one would mistake me for a "capologist", but I think this may makes sense.  In other words, no big trade is going down now, or even before the season starts, but DA may already be thinking ahead to the trade deadline in February.  As usual, he is one step ahead of the rest of us.

No, it just means that the pieces that were just signed can't be included in a trade until their respective vesting periods are up.   

A trade could still happen today using other pieces on the roster.   Some would argue that a reason for signing Jackson is because maybe they intended to move Smart or Rozier.  Or a reason for signing Zeller is to add big man depth if someone like Amir or Olynyk were about to be moved.

As usual with Danny, you can't be certain you have all his plans figured out because he tends to leave himself with multiple possible moves.

[otherdave]

Lets assume Bentil will not make the final roster, but is getting a first year partial guarantee to get him to camp and then possibly Maine.

No. It doesn't work that way.  If we sign him to an NBA contract then he is, indeed, on the roster.   We can send him to Maine, but he'd still be on the 15-man roster.

Read my sentence more carefully.  Bentil does not make final 15 man roster, i.e. he is cut.  He is free to do whatever he wants. But possibly he agrees to play the year in Maine on the D-League payroll.  He might agree to this because C's have given him some guaranteed $ up front. Under this scenario, he is playing in Maine, but not on the C's 15 man roster and no call ups to C's.

[86MaxwellSmart]

He must look really good in practice, because in the SL games he could hardly get the ball up court and get us into our offense.

No idea why this guy is considered a decent prospect...all he did was dribble the air out of the ball.

[jambr380]

Lets assume Bentil will not make the final roster, but is getting a first year partial guarantee to get him to camp and then possibly Maine.

This was an interesting point you made. I am sure SL could chime in here, but is this a possible way to get around the 15-man roster maximum? If you know for sure that you will not be bringing a player to the team in the upcoming year, but want to keep him (and keep him happy), why would it not be possible to give him a partially-guaranteed first year, cut him (allowing him to collect a one-year NBA salary), and then send him to the D-League with a handshake agreement that he will not sign anywhere else and be available for your team next year?

Edit: You addressed this point more specifically a couple of posts before mine.

[Fafnir]

Lets assume Bentil will not make the final roster, but is getting a first year partial guarantee to get him to camp and then possibly Maine.

This was an interesting point you made. I am sure SL could chime in here, but is this a possible way to get around the 15-man roster maximum? If you know for sure that you will not be bringing a player to the team in the upcoming year, but want to keep him (and keep him happy), why would it not be possible to give him a partially-guaranteed first year, cut him (allowing him to collect a one-year NBA salary), and then send him to the D-League with a handshake agreement that he will not sign anywhere else and be available for your team next year?

You can do what the Thunder did and have their draft pick, a local stash. Handshake and a sign and cut doesn't give you any assurances and the league would surely punish a team if a player refused a NBA call up and they suspected such a thing.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/oklahoma-city-thunder-josh-huestis-d-league-first-round-draft-pick/

[saltlover]

Lets assume Bentil will not make the final roster, but is getting a first year partial guarantee to get him to camp and then possibly Maine.

This was an interesting point you made. I am sure SL could chime in here, but is this a possible way to get around the 15-man roster maximum? If you know for sure that you will not be bringing a player to the team in the upcoming year, but want to keep him (and keep him happy), why would it not be possible to give him a partially-guaranteed first year, cut him (allowing him to collect a one-year NBA salary), and then send him to the D-League with a handshake agreement that he will not sign anywhere else and be available for your team next year?

I mentioned this as well.  The key is that when you release him, he's available for another team to pick up on waivers.  If he's signed to a contract for the minimum salary this year, any team can pick him up.  That team could keep him, or even would then be able to release him themselves and send them to their own  D-league team.  The Celtics did this themselves with Jarell Eddie a couple of seasons ago, claiming him late in October after the Hawks released him.  However, if he's signed for more than the minimum (even just a dollar more), teams over the cap would not be able to claim him.  There will still be a half dozen or so teams under the cap, but the number of teams who could mess things up would be minimized.

Furthermore, the more he is given as a guarantee, the less a team would be likely to pick him up themselves.  Say he is guaranteed $400k -- if he's released and claimed, another team would be on the hook for that $400k.  That's not a hugely expensive amount, especially with a couple of teams beneath the salary floor, but it's another impediment for a team to stash him themselves.

But if he makes it through waivers, a nice enough guarantee would hopefully create loyalty with a player for a season.  D-league pays virtually nothing, so taking in a solid six figures is meaningful.

[mmmmm]

Lets assume Bentil will not make the final roster, but is getting a first year partial guarantee to get him to camp and then possibly Maine.

No. It doesn't work that way.  If we sign him to an NBA contract then he is, indeed, on the roster.   We can send him to Maine, but he'd still be on the 15-man roster.

Read my sentence more carefully.  Bentil does not make final 15 man roster, i.e. he is cut.  He is free to do whatever he wants. But possibly he agrees to play the year in Maine on the D-League payroll.  He might agree to this because C's have given him some guaranteed $ up front. Under this scenario, he is playing in Maine, but not on the C's 15 man roster and no call ups to C's.

The guaranteed money (which in Bentil's case is probably a few hundred K) would get him to camp, and it might make him more agreeable to then (if cut) go to Maine (instead of some other D-League affiliate or international).  But no decent agent would allow his player to agree to a handshake promise to not sign with another NBA team.  He would be an unrestricted free agent in this scenario and if another team were to offer him even just the league minimum, that's too much money for these kids to say no to.  Even if just offered a 10-day, that's an opportunity that might open other opportunities that a kid would be crazy to say no to on a promise that his original drafting team (that no longer has his rights and had no room on the roster for him) "might" have room down the road.

The NBA needs to fix it's developmental league and expand it's roster to allow for developmental slots.   Right now it's very much broken.  The NBA-DL contracts are ridiculously small so very few players want to be 'stashed' there.  Their only financially viable option if they go the 'stash' route is to hope to get a decent contract on an international team.   Otherwise, the player has to play a bit of hardball and insist on an NBA contract forcing the team to use a roster spot or to lose the player's rights.

Edit:  fixed the quote boxes

[jambr380]

TP to faf, sl, and mmmm -

I did not think about the clearing waivers aspect, but it looks like that could be mostly prevented.

I am in full agreement that something needs to be done about the D-League. It seems we have basically been 'punished' for acquiring so many picks - this should not be the case. Hopefully [for us] none of these players we will need to give up on go on to have celebrated careers (but, for their sake, I am okay with them being pretty good).

[walker834]

I think the answer is kind of obvious here and people overcomplicate things with different viewpoints.  He was signed long term for the same reason mickey was because the celtics felt he is a pretty good player as far as depth or if we make trades. They did the same with mickey.  just gives us an extra big and pg who we can develop who isn't that good out of the gate where we have to play them, but both players are solid enough where we can move them around.

I don't think DA overthinks things too much.  He just is a pretty smart guy. Accurate is good.

I think we had the space.  It would be more expensive to sign him each year I think.  There aren't that many roster spots why he isn't going to do it with everyone but having a couple guys that way doesn't hurt.

The celtics probably like him too.  They aren't going to draft the same kind of players every year.  He fills a role as a guy to develop long term as a roleplayer. Mickey is the same thing.  Yeah we could trade them too but the celtics probably like both mickey and jackson as potential roleplayers some day.

They probably felt comforatable doing that because of the types of players and people they are and the players agreed as well.