Author Topic: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns  (Read 6440 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #15 on: May 30, 2017, 04:26:04 AM »

Offline JOMVP

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1378
  • Tommy Points: 100
Those tax considerations are literally out of control. If anyone needs the situation put into perspective, read that article rather than just looking at our comments. It almost makes it a foregone conclusion in my mind that Avery is gone, which stinks because I really love him as a player. Unless they go the route of getting rid of Jae and replace him with Hayward and then decide to pay Bradley over Smart in the coming year. Which I guess is an option, but Smart will probably cost considerably less and you don't lose anything on defense but Bradley is clearly an upgrade offensively. The idea is though, that Fultz would take over Bradley's spot at the 2 and become the most dominant force we've ever witnessed in the NBA.

These tax concerns are exactly why I think Ainge and Co. are going to go after Hayward and then build through the draft after that. Those rookie controlled salaries will be a god send in years 3 and 4.

Yeah, I am not sure if we can realistically keep KO, either. If Jerebko is willing to sign to something similar to what he is making now ($5M/yr), then he has to be a real consideration over KO. As the article lays out very well, it would be a lot more than the $10M/yr extra that KO would be making over JJ.

Luxury tax = super-scary!

Yeah, every feasible option has Kelly Olynyk a goner which I think the consensus is out on that one. Whether we get Hayward or not, I think most of us prefer not to pay him.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #16 on: May 30, 2017, 04:55:07 AM »

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2493
  • Tommy Points: 199
Good article breaking down options for getting to MAX and future tax implications.  Didn't realize the tax was so harsh. 

http://www.celticshub.com/2017/05/26/looking-forward-celtics-future/

Great article, TP. It furthers my belief that Hayward is not worth it this summer. Giving up 2 or more likely 3 of Thomas, Smart, Bradley and Olynyk is not worth it. We do not become a better or more flexible team by doing that.

Whilst Ryan says that re-signing the core players still leaves us in the luxury tax, it is a much lesser luxury tax with much more flexibility. Were we to go that route we would be renegotiate Isaiah to the $25.25m max this year and sign him for 3 additional years. That's a contract length that fits with what Ryan suggests but significantly cheaper, where every dollar saved counts. Then re-sign the other 3 to the contracts Ryan suggests. Rough maths says we will be spending $6m less than Option 3 before luxury tax calculations.

Still a lot for a core that likely can't win a title but we would have multiple contracts that could be moved to better for the young guns timeline. And of course in trades you can take back less salary in return or ballast salary. I think we'd be in a very good position going forward in that scenario.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #17 on: May 30, 2017, 06:37:57 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
. Giving up 2 or more likely 3 of Thomas, Smart, Bradley and Olynyk is not worth it.

KO and Smart are never going to be max players and both have their warts.   I hate to loose AB but I won't cry if we lose KO nor Smart if he does not turn the corner on his shot.   Hayward is better than anyone on that list not named IT.

You can bet Ainge made CBS start KO to get a measure of him for next year against the Cavs, Those games he was found lacking.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #18 on: May 30, 2017, 06:52:12 AM »

Offline obnoxiousmime

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2421
  • Tommy Points: 258
Good article breaking down options for getting to MAX and future tax implications.  Didn't realize the tax was so harsh. 

http://www.celticshub.com/2017/05/26/looking-forward-celtics-future/

Great article, TP. It furthers my belief that Hayward is not worth it this summer. Giving up 2 or more likely 3 of Thomas, Smart, Bradley and Olynyk is not worth it. We do not become a better or more flexible team by doing that.

Whilst Ryan says that re-signing the core players still leaves us in the luxury tax, it is a much lesser luxury tax with much more flexibility. Were we to go that route we would be renegotiate Isaiah to the $25.25m max this year and sign him for 3 additional years. That's a contract length that fits with what Ryan suggests but significantly cheaper, where every dollar saved counts. Then re-sign the other 3 to the contracts Ryan suggests. Rough maths says we will be spending $6m less than Option 3 before luxury tax calculations.

Still a lot for a core that likely can't win a title but we would have multiple contracts that could be moved to better for the young guns timeline. And of course in trades you can take back less salary in return or ballast salary. I think we'd be in a very good position going forward in that scenario.

A young player on a max deal (who deserves it) is more valuable than multiple role players on market price-deals. The only reason we have our current depth is because Olynyk and Smart are still on their rookie deals. Once they make market level money, they cease to be efficient uses of your cap space. Keeping everybody who is good but not great is simply not realistic and will tie this team down to mediocrity.

Not to mention, why would some of these players even want to stay if Fultz is the obvious heir apparent? They would be signing a contract just to keep a seat warm until they are inevitably traded. You can't just assume everybody would WANT to come back. Will a team with cap space offer Smart a chance to be their starter? Probably not, but wouldn't he do better to go to a team where he has a shot at starting, and isn't locked into a bench role? He was a sixth overall pick, after all.

If we can't sign Hayward I think Ainge will use the space to either extend Bradley or Thomas, and use the rest on Amir Johnson-type flexible deals with options. Flexibility to trade for a star is more important than keeping a possibly untradeable role player on a bad deal.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #19 on: May 30, 2017, 07:26:07 AM »

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2493
  • Tommy Points: 199
A young player on a max deal (who deserves it) is more valuable than multiple role players on market price-deals. The only reason we have our current depth is because Olynyk and Smart are still on their rookie deals. Once they make market level money, they cease to be efficient uses of your cap space. Keeping everybody who is good but not great is simply not realistic and will tie this team down to mediocrity.

Not to mention, why would some of these players even want to stay if Fultz is the obvious heir apparent? They would be signing a contract just to keep a seat warm until they are inevitably traded. You can't just assume everybody would WANT to come back. Will a team with cap space offer Smart a chance to be their starter? Probably not, but wouldn't he do better to go to a team where he has a shot at starting, and isn't locked into a bench role? He was a sixth overall pick, after all.

If we can't sign Hayward I think Ainge will use the space to either extend Bradley or Thomas, and use the rest on Amir Johnson-type flexible deals with options. Flexibility to trade for a star is more important than keeping a possibly untradeable role player on a bad deal.
On mediocrity, I agree if this team was going to be the end goal. It's not, the end goal will be a team built around Fultz, Brown etc. The thing is, we will be a team building around young guys that is always over the cap. It will be difficult for us to ever sign free agents. So we'll rely on trades to improve/maintain our talent level. So I would want tradeable players/contracts which we can use to improve or align talent with those guys. Hayward is a max player, I agree, however does he fit the timeline of Brown and Fultz? If not then are we going to trade him down the line for future assets? I can't see that happening. But I could see that happening with IT, KO and possibly Bradley/Smart.

Yes I could see Smart or KO wanting to go somewhere and start but they are RFAs and we control the final outcome. There is an obvious balance to strike from a GM perspective but Danny has been ready to trade people for years and the players know that. They still give their all for the team.

I think what you suggest is certainly possible as well and would definitely be more effective in the coming years than in past years. The cap rises really ruined our chances of trading for stars. What I would say though is that players keep developing after their rookie deals, just look at Bradley, so we shouldn't assume that KO for example has reached his peak. There is every chance he signs a $12-14m deal and outperforms it.
Quote
. Giving up 2 or more likely 3 of Thomas, Smart, Bradley and Olynyk is not worth it.

KO and Smart are never going to be max players and both have their warts.   I hate to loose AB but I won't cry if we lose KO nor Smart if he does not turn the corner on his shot.   Hayward is better than anyone on that list not named IT.

You can bet Ainge made CBS start KO to get a measure of him for next year against the Cavs, Those games he was found lacking.

Hayward is better than KO, Bradley or Smart, agreed. That doesn't mean that signing him at the expense of those guys is the best move for the franchise. For me it comes down to the timelines. As I have mentioned above we will be a team over the cap when we try to build around Fultz, Brown etc so we will have to rely on trades to add complimentary players instead of free agency.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #20 on: May 30, 2017, 05:03:12 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
As I have mentioned above we will be a team over the cap when we try to build around Fultz, Brown etc so we will have to rely on trades to add complimentary players instead of free agency.

There are literally games when Smart and KO dominate.  There are games where they do not compliment any other players and are nigh uselss, too.  This is more true of KO because Smart usually makes a ton of 50/50 plays and plays D.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #21 on: May 30, 2017, 05:17:58 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6970
  • Tommy Points: 466
Okay, I know it's not my money but I don't see the luxury tax as the issue.  Rather, the actual cap is the problem.  How do we fit free agents into the space BEFORE we run out of room by paying our own players?  That's the trickiest part of all this I think.

And yeah, look like some guys just have to go if we're going to preserve space.  If we can sign Hayward and somehow keep Avery this summer (letting KO walk), then that's what I would go for.  I'm still not worried about the short term (i.e., next year).  Then I would actually prioritize Avery over IT at that time because I think he would be cheaper and be a better trade chip down the line. 

Ultimately, we probably need to cash in on either the 18' Brooklyn pick or Brown or both to get another very good player in here.  Hopefully Brown continues to show promise and Brooklyn continues to suck.  At that time, we'd be looking at Avery, Fultz, Hayward, and Al as sure starters plus whatever we can get back for Brown/Brooklyn 18 (hopefully a good player that is a big). 

Then I guess Crowder off the bench and we try and keep Smart and Rozier and fill in the rest.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2017, 05:28:19 PM by droopdog7 »

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #22 on: May 30, 2017, 05:23:32 PM »

Offline Future Celtics Owner

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3097
  • Tommy Points: 191
  • Celtic's only raise championship Banners
Quote
As I have mentioned above we will be a team over the cap when we try to build around Fultz, Brown etc so we will have to rely on trades to add complimentary players instead of free agency.

There are literally games when Smart and KO dominate.  There are games where they do not compliment any other players and are nigh uselss, too.  This is more true of KO because Smart usually makes a ton of 50/50 plays and plays D.
tp

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #23 on: May 30, 2017, 05:28:27 PM »

Offline Future Celtics Owner

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3097
  • Tommy Points: 191
  • Celtic's only raise championship Banners
Okay, I know it's not my money but I don't see the luxury tax as the issue.  Rather, the actual cap is the problem.  How do we fit free agents into the space BEFORE we run out of room by paying our own players?  That's the trickiest part of all this I think.

And yeah, look like some guys just have to go if we're going to preserve space.  If we can sign Hayward and somehow keep Avery this summer (letting KO walk), then that's what I would go for.  I'm still not worried about the short term (i.e., next year).  Then I would actually prioritize Avery over IT at that time because I think he would be cheaper and be a better trade chip down the line. 

Ultimately, we probably need to cash in on either the 18' Brooklyn pick or Brown or both to get another very good player in here.  Hopefully Brown continues to show promise and Brooklyn continues to suck.  At that time, we'd be looking at Avery, Fultz, Hayward, Al, and Crowder as sure starters plus whatever we can get back for Brown/Brooklyn 18 (hopefully a good player that is a big). 

The I guess we try and keep Smart and Rozier and fill in the rest.
People are sleeping on Jaylen Brown. He is a different form of Jimmy Butler and has legitimate potential for exponential growth.


Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #24 on: May 30, 2017, 06:09:03 PM »

Offline RodyTur10

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2757
  • Tommy Points: 291
  • Always offline from 9pm till 3am
Okay, I know it's not my money but I don't see the luxury tax as the issue.  Rather, the actual cap is the problem.  How do we fit free agents into the space BEFORE we run out of room by paying our own players?  That's the trickiest part of all this I think.

And yeah, look like some guys just have to go if we're going to preserve space.  If we can sign Hayward and somehow keep Avery this summer (letting KO walk), then that's what I would go for.  I'm still not worried about the short term (i.e., next year).  Then I would actually prioritize Avery over IT at that time because I think he would be cheaper and be a better trade chip down the line. 

Ultimately, we probably need to cash in on either the 18' Brooklyn pick or Brown or both to get another very good player in here.  Hopefully Brown continues to show promise and Brooklyn continues to suck.  At that time, we'd be looking at Avery, Fultz, Hayward, Al, and Crowder as sure starters plus whatever we can get back for Brown/Brooklyn 18 (hopefully a good player that is a big). 

The I guess we try and keep Smart and Rozier and fill in the rest.
People are sleeping on Jaylen Brown. He is a different form of Jimmy Butler and has legitimate potential for exponential growth.

I agree. When people are making their ideal future line-ups it's really befulddling to me that they prefer Crowder over Brown. There are a lot of difficult decisions to be made for the team, but after this year (to me) it's clear that Crowder is an average SF who isn't able to consistently defend the elite forwards in the league.

His primarily value comes of his bargain contract. But that contract will ultimately expire and then he will obviously ask for a lot more money. Besides that, form what we've seen from his body language and talk in the media we can safely assume that Crowder will not accept a minor role from the bench.

On the other hand, Brown has shown flashes of huge potential. I find his rookie season quite surprising as the expectation were that it would take years for him to make noteworthy contributions to the team. But instead he was the best player on the team in a playoff game in the NBA-conference finals. I wonder what would happen if Brown got the trust from Stevens to play 30+ minutes on nightly basis.

Holding on to Crowder because he gives you good value for his contract and is pretty solid overall is exactly the kind of choice that gets you into trouble. It seems like a safe bet, but it's just not good enough. And that's all that matters. Of course you could view him as a role player from the bench, but as I said he won't accept that. His biggest value to the Celtics would be brought in a trade.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #25 on: May 30, 2017, 06:13:32 PM »

Offline Boston Garden Leprechaun

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18478
  • Tommy Points: 1551
Quote
. Giving up 2 or more likely 3 of Thomas, Smart, Bradley and Olynyk is not worth it.

KO and Smart are never going to be max players and both have their warts.   I hate to loose AB but I won't cry if we lose KO nor Smart if he does not turn the corner on his shot.   Hayward is better than anyone on that list not named IT.

You can bet Ainge made CBS start KO to get a measure of him for next year against the Cavs, Those games he was found lacking.

good points
LET'S GO CELTICS!

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #26 on: May 30, 2017, 06:14:31 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
Quote
. Giving up 2 or more likely 3 of Thomas, Smart, Bradley and Olynyk is not worth it.

KO and Smart are never going to be max players and both have their warts.   I hate to loose AB but I won't cry if we lose KO nor Smart if he does not turn the corner on his shot.   Hayward is better than anyone on that list not named IT.

You can bet Ainge made CBS start KO to get a measure of him for next year against the Cavs, Those games he was found lacking.
Id be shocked if Ainge made CBS start KO
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #27 on: May 30, 2017, 06:15:42 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6970
  • Tommy Points: 466
Okay, I know it's not my money but I don't see the luxury tax as the issue.  Rather, the actual cap is the problem.  How do we fit free agents into the space BEFORE we run out of room by paying our own players?  That's the trickiest part of all this I think.

And yeah, look like some guys just have to go if we're going to preserve space.  If we can sign Hayward and somehow keep Avery this summer (letting KO walk), then that's what I would go for.  I'm still not worried about the short term (i.e., next year).  Then I would actually prioritize Avery over IT at that time because I think he would be cheaper and be a better trade chip down the line. 

Ultimately, we probably need to cash in on either the 18' Brooklyn pick or Brown or both to get another very good player in here.  Hopefully Brown continues to show promise and Brooklyn continues to suck.  At that time, we'd be looking at Avery, Fultz, Hayward, Al, and Crowder as sure starters plus whatever we can get back for Brown/Brooklyn 18 (hopefully a good player that is a big). 

The I guess we try and keep Smart and Rozier and fill in the rest.
People are sleeping on Jaylen Brown. He is a different form of Jimmy Butler and has legitimate potential for exponential growth.

I agree. When people are making their ideal future line-ups it's really befulddling to me that they prefer Crowder over Brown. There are a lot of difficult decisions to be made for the team, but after this year (to me) it's clear that Crowder is an average SF who isn't able to consistently defend the elite forwards in the league.

His primarily value comes of his bargain contract. But that contract will ultimately expire and then he will obviously ask for a lot more money. Besides that, form what we've seen from his body language and talk in the media we can safely assume that Crowder will not accept a minor role from the bench.

On the other hand, Brown has shown flashes of huge potential. I find his rookie season quite surprising as the expectation were that it would take years for him to make noteworthy contributions to the team. But instead he was the best player on the team in a playoff game in the NBA-conference finals. I wonder what would happen if Brown got the trust from Stevens to play 30+ minutes on nightly basis.

Holding on to Crowder because he gives you good value for his contract and is pretty solid overall is exactly the kind of choice that gets you into trouble. It seems like a safe bet, but it's just not good enough. And that's all that matters. Of course you could view him as a role player from the bench, but as I said he won't accept that. His biggest value to the Celtics would be brought in a trade.
Here's the thing.  In a vacuum, I don't prefer Crowder over Brown.  But fans have it all wrong.  They only ever want to trade bad over good.  No one ever wants to trade good players.  ever.  I live in a world where you have to give to get. 

I like Brown.  I think he has potential but yeah, he's far from a surefire star.  But, I don't have time to wait for him.  And he may never get there.  And in my scenario,Crowder is now my bench guy because we have Hayward.  Thus we don't need Brown and I would welcome what he can bring back.  If he's as good as some people think, it should be significant no?

 What I'm trying to do is lay out a possible plan given the circumstances.  I would love to keep them all but that won't be possible. 

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #28 on: May 30, 2017, 06:18:58 PM »

Offline Boston Garden Leprechaun

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18478
  • Tommy Points: 1551
Okay, I know it's not my money but I don't see the luxury tax as the issue.  Rather, the actual cap is the problem.  How do we fit free agents into the space BEFORE we run out of room by paying our own players?  That's the trickiest part of all this I think.

And yeah, look like some guys just have to go if we're going to preserve space.  If we can sign Hayward and somehow keep Avery this summer (letting KO walk), then that's what I would go for.  I'm still not worried about the short term (i.e., next year).  Then I would actually prioritize Avery over IT at that time because I think he would be cheaper and be a better trade chip down the line. 

Ultimately, we probably need to cash in on either the 18' Brooklyn pick or Brown or both to get another very good player in here.  Hopefully Brown continues to show promise and Brooklyn continues to suck.  At that time, we'd be looking at Avery, Fultz, Hayward, Al, and Crowder as sure starters plus whatever we can get back for Brown/Brooklyn 18 (hopefully a good player that is a big). 

The I guess we try and keep Smart and Rozier and fill in the rest.
People are sleeping on Jaylen Brown. He is a different form of Jimmy Butler and has legitimate potential for exponential growth.



sure hope we keep him and he pans out. i think he will.
LET'S GO CELTICS!

Re: Celtics Hub article on cap options and tax concerns
« Reply #29 on: May 30, 2017, 06:23:20 PM »

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2493
  • Tommy Points: 199
Quote
As I have mentioned above we will be a team over the cap when we try to build around Fultz, Brown etc so we will have to rely on trades to add complimentary players instead of free agency.

There are literally games when Smart and KO dominate.  There are games where they do not compliment any other players and are nigh uselss, too.  This is more true of KO because Smart usually makes a ton of 50/50 plays and plays D.
You could say the same about most rotation calibre players in the league... It's why they aren't stars. Unfortunately you can't have a team of stars so you have to make do. You also hope that as they get older then become more consistent.

Honestly I don't get the argument you're making. Even Lebron James has bad games, will you use that to his detriment in contract talks?