So do we let IT and Avery walk as free agents after next season?

[Eja117]

If you let either walk you better have a plan to replace them.  This isn't the Patriots. I don't think you can be a frugal team and win rings in the NBA. You can try.

[number_n9ne]

Wyc said on Felger & Mazz that during the KD meeting, KD asked if he'd be willing to go over the luxery tax to keep the core together to which he responded yes. Look for the C's to add another max FA next summer to their core. If not, I'd expect them to renegotiate with Bradley and Thomas:

Beyond that, Bradley and Thomas are in the final years of their deals. If the Celtics have leftover cap space that is unlikely to be used to add new players, they could use that money to renegotiate and extend deals with either or both players. This tactic has been put to use more often over last few years with players like Russell Westbrook, James Harden and Danilo Gallinari.

http://www.celticsblog.com/2016/9/5/12799150/nba-boston-celtics-salary-cap-roster-outlook

Wyc on Felger & Mazz:
http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/question-kevin-durant-asked-wyc-grousbeck

[number_n9ne]

Wyc said on Felger & Mazz that during the KD meeting, KD asked if he'd be willing to go over the luxury tax to keep the core together to which he responded yes. Look for the C's to add another max FA next summer to their core. If not, I'd expect them to renegotiate with Bradley and Thomas:

Beyond that, Bradley and Thomas are in the final years of their deals. If the Celtics have leftover cap space that is unlikely to be used to add new players, they could use that money to renegotiate and extend deals with either or both players. This tactic has been put to use more often over last few years with players like Russell Westbrook, James Harden and Danilo Gallinari.

http://www.celticsblog.com/2016/9/5/12799150/nba-boston-celtics-salary-cap-roster-outlook

Wyc on Felger & Mazz:
http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/question-kevin-durant-asked-wyc-grousbeck

If the C's do add a max FA, they can still resign Bradley and Thomas and pay the Luxury Tax.

[Csfan1984]

TBD

[Moranis]

paying the luxury tax and paying the highest tax bill in NBA history are two entirely different things. 

If Boston signs a true max contract player next summer, I can't see anyway it keeps all of Bradley, Thomas, Crowder, Smart, and Olynyk. 

I mean you are looking at in 2018

Horford 29 million
Other Max FA 28 million
Crowder 7.3 million
Brown 5.1 million
BKN 17 5 million (based on current scale not new CBA)
BKN 18 4 million (based on current scale not new CBA)
Rozier 3 million
Zizic, Yab, BOS 18 4 million (based on current scale not new CBA)

That is 85.4 million from 10 players and doesn't even account for the increase in rookie salaries expected with the new CBA.  If you keep the 4 guys above (that aren't under contract for 18) you would probably be looking at something like

Thomas 22 million
Bradley 18 million
Olynyk 16 million (2nd year of his extension)
Smart 12 million

I think those are reasonable enough salaries barring injury or drastic changes in play for another 68 million.  Add that to the 85.4 million and you are looking at a payroll of 153.4 million dollars with one open roster spot (for Mickey or Jackson or someone else). 

There is no way Boston is holding a 150 million plus payroll.  None at all.  That is just too high even for a legit contender.  That is why I think Boston will look to move players and assets either at the deadline or this summer for a player.  They have to consolidate and upgrade the starting lineup and just adding a max contract player in free agency doesn't alleviate these other issues.  So like if Hayward signs, I would absolutely expect Bradley and/or Smart to get moved.  If Boston adds a PF/C, I would expect Olynyk to be let go, etc.   

[number_n9ne]

paying the luxury tax and paying the highest tax bill in NBA history are two entirely different things. 

If Boston signs a true max contract player next summer, I can't see anyway it keeps all of Bradley, Thomas, Crowder, Smart, and Olynyk. 

I mean you are looking at in 2018

Horford 29 million
Other Max FA 28 million
Crowder 7.3 million
Brown 5.1 million
BKN 17 5 million (based on current scale not new CBA)
BKN 18 4 million (based on current scale not new CBA)
Rozier 3 million
Zizic, Yab, BOS 18 4 million (based on current scale not new CBA)

That is 85.4 million from 10 players and doesn't even account for the increase in rookie salaries expected with the new CBA.  If you keep the 4 guys above (that aren't under contract for 18) you would probably be looking at something like

Thomas 22 million
Bradley 18 million
Olynyk 16 million (2nd year of his extension)
Smart 12 million

I think those are reasonable enough salaries barring injury or drastic changes in play for another 68 million.  Add that to the 85.4 million and you are looking at a payroll of 153.4 million dollars with one open roster spot (for Mickey or Jackson or someone else). 

There is no way Boston is holding a 150 million plus payroll.  None at all.  That is just too high even for a legit contender.  That is why I think Boston will look to move players and assets either at the deadline or this summer for a player.  They have to consolidate and upgrade the starting lineup and just adding a max contract player in free agency doesn't alleviate these other issues.  So like if Hayward signs, I would absolutely expect Bradley and/or Smart to get moved.  If Boston adds a PF/C, I would expect Olynyk to be let go, etc.

You're right they're not gonna pay the highest tax bill in history, but I don't think they are looking to move on from Thomas AND Bradley. It's kinda hard to guess what they will do in 2 years right now, or if all of the players you listed above will even still be here.

[mef730]

I had to go back and reread this thread, in which Ainge got so much criticism for forking out a whopping $8m per year for AB:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72166.0

In Danny we trust.

Mike

[fairweatherfan]

I had to go back and reread this thread, in which Ainge got so much criticism for forking out a whopping $8m per year for AB:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72166.0

In Danny we trust.

Mike

TP, that's a classic. 

Personally I think we'll be losing one of the 2, but which one depends on how much IT can get elsewhere. If we can keep him at a bargain we will, but Avery's younger and his game will likely age better. Both are undersized players, who historically fade pretty quickly once on the wrong side of 30, though.

[alldaboston]

IT is good as gone. 

Bradley we will pay to keep.

Agree here.

IT will be overpaid most likley  by someone else. Keep Bradley  for his all around game.

All we need is Smart or Rozier to step up or grow up and IT is expendable.

That is still  a formidable backcourt.

Why is that? Other teams won't want to pay him a max for the same reasons that we won't want to pay him a max. I'm OK with signing him for like 15-18 million for 3 years once his contract is up though. I seriously doubt he get a max offer anywhere. Other teams have had the same concerns about him, currently have the same concerns about him, and will continue to have the same concerns about him.

Otherwise, he would have easily gotten a much better offer than the one he got from Phoenix after he averaged like 20 and 6 in his third year. Teams like his skill set, but also won't dish out money to him because of his stature. I think he ends up staying in Boston.

Well same can be said about ET, Ryan Anderson and they got paid larger amounts by somebody else

IT getting a few million dollars more or one additional will mean he wont be back

If Rozier and Smart can play as expected, there wont be urgency to keep IT for the long run... plus his attitude that he needs to start wont make things go smoothly....

Can you imagine IT reaction when cbs tells him rozier will be starting or rozier ends the the game and he has to come off the bench?

Yeah, except not every team has a guy like Anderson already. Not every team has a guy like Evan, a backup ball handler who can run the offense.

Every team (read: EVERY TEAM) has either a starting level point guard already, or a star point guard, or a young prospect that they would like to develop into their starting point guard. Obviously a lot can change in 2 years, but no team really NEEDS Isaiah. We need Isaiah.

[td450]

I see this as all pivoting around what happens next June. We are likely to get a great pick, and as of right now, the best prospects are point guards and small forwards, with the point guard group looking particularly talented.

If we get a shot at a point guard in the 2017 draft with superstar potential (Marquelle Fultz please!!!), we probably move IT and possibly other assets for a young big man.

Otherwise, we probably keep him. Either way, we should keep AB.

[bdm860]

Add that to the 85.4 million and you are looking at a payroll of 153.4 million dollars with one open roster spot (for Mickey or Jackson or someone else). 

There is no way Boston is holding a 150 million plus payroll.  None at all.  That is just too high even for a legit contender.

Payrolls are going to change with the new cap though.

With the $50m-60m-ish cap we had for the last 10 years, we constantly saw teams in the $80m-$90m range.  Though there were fewer after the most recent luxury tax rules were implemented, there were still like 2-4 per year, right?.

$60m cap, $80m-$85m payroll is 133%-142% of the cap.  2018 and 2019 salary cap are projected to be $102-$108m.  Luxury tax is usally 120% of the salary cap so will be about $130m, and if we apply the same percentages we've seen teams go over in the past, that gets you in the $140m+ range, $150m+ on the higher side.

Portland's already at $120m this year and supposed to be $126m next  Cleveland's at $130m now.  I wouldn't be surprised to see teams start getting in that $140m-$150m range over the next few years, and if the C's can add a max contract and keep everyone, you'd have to hope they'd be contenders that ownership would be willing to pay.

Of course part of this assumes they adjust the current luxury tax rules to the higher salary cap.  Doesn't make sense (to me at least) to keep the same fixed dollar amount luxury tax penalty thresholds with the much higher cap.  I guess we'll see if this is addressed in the new CBA they're currently negotiating.  Even if it's not, the top threshold is currently $20m over the luxury tax line (which could be $130m), so I still think we'll see a few teams get to around, if not right under $150m.  Might not sound so outrageous in a couple of years.

[Donoghus]

I had to go back and reread this thread, in which Ainge got so much criticism for forking out a whopping $8m per year for AB:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72166.0

In Danny we trust.

Mike

That's amazing. 

I'm also glad I can breathe a giant sigh of relief on that one.

[mmmmm]

I had to go back and reread this thread, in which Ainge got so much criticism for forking out a whopping $8m per year for AB:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72166.0

In Danny we trust.

Mike

Man, I wish I could award multiple Tommy Points for that.  Well done, sir.

I think Danny has a pretty good idea on what he should or shouldn't pay for each of these players and will do the right thing when the time comes.  There are several variables that need to play out between now and then before decisions have to be made so at the moment there is no need to get one's panties in a bunch over whether we can afford IT and/or AB and/or Smart and/or KO.

[GratefulCs]

I had to go back and reread this thread, in which Ainge got so much criticism for forking out a whopping $8m per year for AB:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72166.0

In Danny we trust.

Mike

TP

I can't believe the flak he got for that

You just can't please everyone

[mqtcelticsfan]

There are so many unknown variables that would affect the answer to this question. Do we trade our assets for an established star? If so, what position is that star? Do we hold on to our current pieces and contend this year as constructed? Do we show ourselves to be a mediocre roster as constructed and decide to go in a different direction? Do the Nets hand over a #1 overall pick and a guard proves to be a generational talent? Between the assets we own and the different directions our current team could go, I'm not confident in answering the question.