Author Topic: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward  (Read 7244 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #30 on: June 24, 2017, 09:33:20 PM »

Offline keevsnick

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5515
  • Tommy Points: 549
The more I am reading these kind of threads, the more I think it's just simpler to sign 1 of Hayward/Griffin, add a big using room exception or "moderate trade", and roll next season.

This George + Hayward plan seems so risky and complicated. VERY complicated  :o

It isn't really complicated. or doesn't have to be. All those convolutions are remote scenarios. They can get George in a simple deal with the Pacers, then sign Hayward as a FA. It's a question of the Pacers accepting Crowder and Bradley in a deal (which passes the ESPN trade machine), then signing Hayward to max. The key is dropping a bunch of salary of non core players.

Yep basically this. I mean technically I think its easier to sign Hayward first then trade for George with Bradley/Crowder. But same difference. At that point we wouldn't have the money to resign and extend George outright, but we could wait the year and resign him then. That's a risk, but I just have a hard time believing George is going to leave a team with 3 other all stars that makes a deep playoff run and can off him more money just to play on a dysfunctional LA team. Even if he does its still worth it as long as the price is low. We are likely to lose Avery anyway, and we have two other Crowder replacements (Brown and Tatum, maybe the 2nd rounder too) on the roster, so I don't consider them a huge loss. We have so many assets why not use a couple of the mid level ones to really load up, even if its just for one season?

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #31 on: June 24, 2017, 11:06:45 PM »

Offline KGBirdBias

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1649
  • Tommy Points: 125
The more I am reading these kind of threads, the more I think it's just simpler to sign 1 of Hayward/Griffin, add a big using room exception or "moderate trade", and roll next season.

This George + Hayward plan seems so risky and complicated. VERY complicated  :o

It isn't really complicated. or doesn't have to be. All those convolutions are remote scenarios. They can get George in a simple deal with the Pacers, then sign Hayward as a FA. It's a question of the Pacers accepting Crowder and Bradley in a deal (which passes the ESPN trade machine), then signing Hayward to max. The key is dropping a bunch of salary of non core players.

Yep basically this. I mean technically I think its easier to sign Hayward first then trade for George with Bradley/Crowder. But same difference. At that point we wouldn't have the money to resign and extend George outright, but we could wait the year and resign him then. That's a risk, but I just have a hard time believing George is going to leave a team with 3 other all stars that makes a deep playoff run and can off him more money just to play on a dysfunctional LA team. Even if he does its still worth it as long as the price is low. We are likely to lose Avery anyway, and we have two other Crowder replacements (Brown and Tatum, maybe the 2nd rounder too) on the roster, so I don't consider them a huge loss. We have so many assets why not use a couple of the mid level ones to really load up, even if its just for one season?

This has been my thought as well. It would take some real kahunas for PG to go to the Lakers after having a successful season. I doubt he would.

Here's the problem. Come next year IT will also want a new contract...then what? Personally I think at that point you'd have to give up either the Nets or Lakers pick so someone could take Horford off your hands if you want to resign IT. Then use the other pick to find Horford's replacement. Let's go to 2020

IT (semi-max to max)
Hayward (max)
PG (max)
Nets or Lakers pick (Porter)
Zizic
Tatum
Brown

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #32 on: June 25, 2017, 12:34:03 AM »

Offline jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13002
  • Tommy Points: 1756
  • Everybody knows what's best for you
KGBB - did you really just say that we would need to give up the Nets or Lakers pick to get rid of Horford? I can guarantee you that is not happening. Horford may not be a super-bargain, but he is still a plus contract/player on his current deal (barely, and his max is less than the new max). I promise you some other team would be happy to take Horford off of our hands for free.

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #33 on: June 25, 2017, 12:42:32 AM »

Offline ETNCeltics

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2720
  • Tommy Points: 306
KGBB - did you really just say that we would need to give up the Nets or Lakers pick to get rid of Horford? I can guarantee you that is not happening. Horford may not be a super-bargain, but he is still a plus contract/player on his current deal (barely, and his max is less than the new max). I promise you some other team would be happy to take Horford off of our hands for free.
Some fans have the most bizarre ideas for the franchise.

I'm aggravated with Danny Ainge for trading out of Fultz, but I'm at least confident he hasn't lost his mind and would give up a high pick and ditch Horford.


Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #34 on: June 25, 2017, 12:43:44 AM »

Offline GreenEnvy

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4551
  • Tommy Points: 1031
Screw it, I'd roll with 4 max players and into the abyss of luxury tax. $120M on 4 players? Awesome. $160M payroll? Let's do it. We will be the team that ends LeBron's legacy. We will be the team that dethroned the Warriors little reign of terror.

Wyc and co. will still make money if we are hanging more banners.

I say sign Hayward and then trade Bradley/Crowder/Smart/LAC or MEM 1st for George. I love all three guys, but Crowder is redundant, AB deserves to get paid, and Smart will get a sizeable raise as well.

Trading away three impact players who are all defensive studs is a tough pill to swallow, but we are getting all-stars in return and will rely on draft picks and young guys at lower salaries to fill their voids and add depth. Rozier, Brown, Zizic, Tatum, Ojeleye, and some vets will solidify the bench. Maybe we get Porter/Anton/Doncic next year.

We should be able to stay under the luxury tax threshold this season, avoiding the repeater another season. If we send out enough salary for George (say Bradley/Crowder/Smart/Jackson/pick), it's possible. Using rough estimates, Hayward (or Griffin) 30M + Horford 28M + George 20M + Thomas 6M = 84M. Tatum 5M, Brown 5M, Zizic 1.5M, Rozier 2M, Ojeleye 1M adds approximately 15M. That's roughly 99M for 9 players. The luxury tax is set at $119M I believe. We can certainly add multiple vet min guys to round out the roster for under $20M (might not even be able to if we wanted since we can only sign vet min guys).

So, we would enter the luxury tax in 2018-19 when we give IT4 and PG13 their max contracts. Then we get hit really hard the year after, but that's Horford's last year of the contract. I think we can handle one year of severe penalty.

Forgive me if this post is littered with inaccuracies, but I'm under the impression it's possible. Let me dream!
CELTICS 2024

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #35 on: June 25, 2017, 12:58:35 AM »

Offline ETNCeltics

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2720
  • Tommy Points: 306
Forgive me if this post is littered with inaccuracies, but I'm under the impression it's possible. Let me dream!
It's not really possible. We don't have one of the extremely wealthy owners, and the penalty is 350% for a repeat offender.

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #36 on: June 25, 2017, 01:08:11 AM »

Offline GreenEnvy

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4551
  • Tommy Points: 1031
Forgive me if this post is littered with inaccuracies, but I'm under the impression it's possible. Let me dream!
It's not really possible. We don't have one of the extremely wealthy owners, and the penalty is 350% for a repeat offender.

Not possible, not probable, or not ideal?

Even if we went $20M over the tax threshold, which by then hopefully is closer to $125-130M, that's $70M in tax. Definitely a lot of money, but if we are hosting 10+ playoff games a season and winning championships, I think that will bring in plenty of added revenue to offset that.

If Ainge is fully confident that's the team able to climb the ladder, I don't see our owners as unwilling to pay for a championship. They've seen what it's like to win it all.
CELTICS 2024

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #37 on: June 25, 2017, 01:29:56 AM »

Offline ETNCeltics

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2720
  • Tommy Points: 306
Forgive me if this post is littered with inaccuracies, but I'm under the impression it's possible. Let me dream!
It's not really possible. We don't have one of the extremely wealthy owners, and the penalty is 350% for a repeat offender.

Not possible, not probable, or not ideal?

Even if we went $20M over the tax threshold, which by then hopefully is closer to $125-130M, that's $70M in tax. Definitely a lot of money, but if we are hosting 10+ playoff games a season and winning championships, I think that will bring in plenty of added revenue to offset that.

If Ainge is fully confident that's the team able to climb the ladder, I don't see our owners as unwilling to pay for a championship. They've seen what it's like to win it all.
Not probable, likely impossible, and far from ideal. All the playoff games in the world won't make up for the extra ~$100 million in payroll & penalties you're spending.

That's never going to happen, nor should any rational person expect it to. Many NBA owners are far wealthier than ours, and most of them haven't paid anything approaching what you're suggesting. I don't think anyone has paid a penalty of that magnitude other than NJN.

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #38 on: June 25, 2017, 01:56:34 AM »

Offline GreenEnvy

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4551
  • Tommy Points: 1031
Forgive me if this post is littered with inaccuracies, but I'm under the impression it's possible. Let me dream!
It's not really possible. We don't have one of the extremely wealthy owners, and the penalty is 350% for a repeat offender.

Not possible, not probable, or not ideal?

Even if we went $20M over the tax threshold, which by then hopefully is closer to $125-130M, that's $70M in tax. Definitely a lot of money, but if we are hosting 10+ playoff games a season and winning championships, I think that will bring in plenty of added revenue to offset that.

If Ainge is fully confident that's the team able to climb the ladder, I don't see our owners as unwilling to pay for a championship. They've seen what it's like to win it all.
Not probable, likely impossible, and far from ideal. All the playoff games in the world won't make up for the extra ~$100 million in payroll & penalties you're spending.

That's never going to happen, nor should any rational person expect it to. Many NBA owners are far wealthier than ours, and most of them haven't paid anything approaching what you're suggesting. I don't think anyone has paid a penalty of that magnitude other than NJN.

Well it certainly seems possible, well within the rules of the cap via trades and free agency.

Probably? That remains to be seen but many rumors have Ainge going after Hayward and George. Maybe not likely just yet, but if one domino falls, the other just may.

As far as ideal and rational thinking, how does Golden State and Cleveland stay together without entering that severe tax?  Even teams like OKC and POR are going down that road without being contenders. This is the bar that's been set by the top teams.

Just like the Yankees in baseball, remember when they were usually the only team or two to pay luxury tax? Last year what, 6 teams did? Maybe more this year. That's the way it goes. To compete, you need four stars. Three didn't cut it for GSW last year, and the same didn't cut it for CLE this one. If we don't want to compete, we should have kept the top pick and played the long game. But we didn't. Ainge is looking to contend now. Hayward/Giffin alone won't move the needle enough to topple both finalists. We need both.

Perhaps it won't happen. Maybe you're right. But no team is winning without four great players. Warriors already have theirs, and will soon have to pay them all what they are worth. Cleveland is desperately trying to add a fourth. We are the next team able to do so. We shall soon see.
CELTICS 2024

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #39 on: June 25, 2017, 02:25:58 AM »

Offline knuckleballer

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6363
  • Tommy Points: 664
Forgive me if this post is littered with inaccuracies, but I'm under the impression it's possible. Let me dream!
It's not really possible. We don't have one of the extremely wealthy owners, and the penalty is 350% for a repeat offender.

Not possible, not probable, or not ideal?

Even if we went $20M over the tax threshold, which by then hopefully is closer to $125-130M, that's $70M in tax. Definitely a lot of money, but if we are hosting 10+ playoff games a season and winning championships, I think that will bring in plenty of added revenue to offset that.

If Ainge is fully confident that's the team able to climb the ladder, I don't see our owners as unwilling to pay for a championship. They've seen what it's like to win it all.
Not probable, likely impossible, and far from ideal. All the playoff games in the world won't make up for the extra ~$100 million in payroll & penalties you're spending.

That's never going to happen, nor should any rational person expect it to. Many NBA owners are far wealthier than ours, and most of them haven't paid anything approaching what you're suggesting. I don't think anyone has paid a penalty of that magnitude other than NJN.

Well it certainly seems possible, well within the rules of the cap via trades and free agency.

Probably? That remains to be seen but many rumors have Ainge going after Hayward and George. Maybe not likely just yet, but if one domino falls, the other just may.

As far as ideal and rational thinking, how does Golden State and Cleveland stay together without entering that severe tax?  Even teams like OKC and POR are going down that road without being contenders. This is the bar that's been set by the top teams.

Just like the Yankees in baseball, remember when they were usually the only team or two to pay luxury tax? Last year what, 6 teams did? Maybe more this year. That's the way it goes. To compete, you need four stars. Three didn't cut it for GSW last year, and the same didn't cut it for CLE this one. If we don't want to compete, we should have kept the top pick and played the long game. But we didn't. Ainge is looking to contend now. Hayward/Giffin alone won't move the needle enough to topple both finalists. We need both.

Perhaps it won't happen. Maybe you're right. But no team is winning without four great players. Warriors already have theirs, and will soon have to pay them all what they are worth. Cleveland is desperately trying to add a fourth. We are the next team able to do so. We shall soon see.

GS and Cleveland had players enter into long term contracts before the salary cap exploded or before some of the stars broke out.  Curry made $12 million this past season.  Next season, Thompson makes $17.8 mill and Green makes $16.4.  Kevin Love makes $22.6 mill, Irving $18.9 and Thompson 16.4 this upcoming season.  If the Celtics sign Hayward, then trade for George, and then re-sign George and IT to max contracts, they will have four guys making around $30 million each.

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #40 on: June 27, 2017, 03:05:27 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Neat idea.  It's still difficult, arguably just as difficult because you'd need to send Utah at least $23.7 million in outgoing salary.  What you'd want to do is just use cap room to acquire/extend George, sending as little in salary as you need.  So Rozier and future picks would be about enough if we let Olynyk walk.  Then use the cap room, because any excess cap room after extending George would just go to waste, since cap room doesn't count for matching salaries.

Now you have to get to $23.7 million, from Crowder, Smart, Bradley, and Smart.  Bradley+Crowder+Brown is only $20.5 million, so you'd have to add Smart as well.

Would Utah do Bradley, Crowder, Brown, and Smart for a S&T for Hayward? I'd have to think so.  The roster would look like this:

IT
George
Tatum
Hayward
Horford
Zizic
Room-level exception
2nd-rounders and minimum salary players.

So that's an elite core four, with two rookies who could hopefully provide quality production, but the roster falls off really quickly.  It wouldn't be completely unaffordable next year, however, so that's a good thing.
what if Boston acquired George using Zeller or Olynyk (obviously plus some high value future picks)? Would it still have enough cap room to extend George?  If the cap room disappears anyway no reason to have any left. If so does that allow Rozier to go out and keeping Smart?  What about Jackson, Mickey, etc. does Boston still need to waive them to have the room to extend George?
Salt, I didn't know if you saw this particular question?  Would doing that alter any of your analysis?  If somehow Boston can keep Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey to use as salary instead of Smart, I'd think Utah would still do it and then Boston gets to keep Smart, which just makes the overall roster better.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #41 on: June 27, 2017, 03:17:36 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
Neat idea.  It's still difficult, arguably just as difficult because you'd need to send Utah at least $23.7 million in outgoing salary.  What you'd want to do is just use cap room to acquire/extend George, sending as little in salary as you need.  So Rozier and future picks would be about enough if we let Olynyk walk.  Then use the cap room, because any excess cap room after extending George would just go to waste, since cap room doesn't count for matching salaries.

Now you have to get to $23.7 million, from Crowder, Smart, Bradley, and Smart.  Bradley+Crowder+Brown is only $20.5 million, so you'd have to add Smart as well.

Would Utah do Bradley, Crowder, Brown, and Smart for a S&T for Hayward? I'd have to think so.  The roster would look like this:

IT
George
Tatum
Hayward
Horford
Zizic
Room-level exception
2nd-rounders and minimum salary players.

So that's an elite core four, with two rookies who could hopefully provide quality production, but the roster falls off really quickly.  It wouldn't be completely unaffordable next year, however, so that's a good thing.
what if Boston acquired George using Zeller or Olynyk (obviously plus some high value future picks)? Would it still have enough cap room to extend George?  If the cap room disappears anyway no reason to have any left. If so does that allow Rozier to go out and keeping Smart?  What about Jackson, Mickey, etc. does Boston still need to waive them to have the room to extend George?
Salt, I didn't know if you saw this particular question?  Would doing that alter any of your analysis?  If somehow Boston can keep Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey to use as salary instead of Smart, I'd think Utah would still do it and then Boston gets to keep Smart, which just makes the overall roster better.

No, it wouldn't help.  As of July 1st, the Celtics will have the cap room to trade for George outright.  If Indiana wanted Zeller, or could agree to a sign and trade with Olynyk, that's fine, but it would have no impact on the cap room needed to extend George, since both of those players are already assumed to be off the books when creating max cap space.

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #42 on: June 27, 2017, 03:25:25 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Neat idea.  It's still difficult, arguably just as difficult because you'd need to send Utah at least $23.7 million in outgoing salary.  What you'd want to do is just use cap room to acquire/extend George, sending as little in salary as you need.  So Rozier and future picks would be about enough if we let Olynyk walk.  Then use the cap room, because any excess cap room after extending George would just go to waste, since cap room doesn't count for matching salaries.

Now you have to get to $23.7 million, from Crowder, Smart, Bradley, and Smart.  Bradley+Crowder+Brown is only $20.5 million, so you'd have to add Smart as well.

Would Utah do Bradley, Crowder, Brown, and Smart for a S&T for Hayward? I'd have to think so.  The roster would look like this:

IT
George
Tatum
Hayward
Horford
Zizic
Room-level exception
2nd-rounders and minimum salary players.

So that's an elite core four, with two rookies who could hopefully provide quality production, but the roster falls off really quickly.  It wouldn't be completely unaffordable next year, however, so that's a good thing.
what if Boston acquired George using Zeller or Olynyk (obviously plus some high value future picks)? Would it still have enough cap room to extend George?  If the cap room disappears anyway no reason to have any left. If so does that allow Rozier to go out and keeping Smart?  What about Jackson, Mickey, etc. does Boston still need to waive them to have the room to extend George?
Salt, I didn't know if you saw this particular question?  Would doing that alter any of your analysis?  If somehow Boston can keep Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey to use as salary instead of Smart, I'd think Utah would still do it and then Boston gets to keep Smart, which just makes the overall roster better.

No, it wouldn't help.  As of July 1st, the Celtics will have the cap room to trade for George outright.  If Indiana wanted Zeller, or could agree to a sign and trade with Olynyk, that's fine, but it would have no impact on the cap room needed to extend George, since both of those players are already assumed to be off the books when creating max cap space.
If Boston were to keep Zeller would there be enough room to trade for and extend George (with or without any other salary like say Rozier)?  So essentially trade Rozier for George and then extend George without giving up Zeller.  Then use Zeller in the trade to Utah.  Or maybe Boston trades Crowder to Indiana (and that way keeps Zeller), whose extra salary the makes up the difference in the trade to Utah allowing Boston to keep Smart. 

It just seems to me there would be a way to work the numbers to make it work, but perhaps I'm wrong.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #43 on: June 27, 2017, 03:52:04 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
Neat idea.  It's still difficult, arguably just as difficult because you'd need to send Utah at least $23.7 million in outgoing salary.  What you'd want to do is just use cap room to acquire/extend George, sending as little in salary as you need.  So Rozier and future picks would be about enough if we let Olynyk walk.  Then use the cap room, because any excess cap room after extending George would just go to waste, since cap room doesn't count for matching salaries.

Now you have to get to $23.7 million, from Crowder, Smart, Bradley, and Smart.  Bradley+Crowder+Brown is only $20.5 million, so you'd have to add Smart as well.

Would Utah do Bradley, Crowder, Brown, and Smart for a S&T for Hayward? I'd have to think so.  The roster would look like this:

IT
George
Tatum
Hayward
Horford
Zizic
Room-level exception
2nd-rounders and minimum salary players.

So that's an elite core four, with two rookies who could hopefully provide quality production, but the roster falls off really quickly.  It wouldn't be completely unaffordable next year, however, so that's a good thing.
what if Boston acquired George using Zeller or Olynyk (obviously plus some high value future picks)? Would it still have enough cap room to extend George?  If the cap room disappears anyway no reason to have any left. If so does that allow Rozier to go out and keeping Smart?  What about Jackson, Mickey, etc. does Boston still need to waive them to have the room to extend George?
Salt, I didn't know if you saw this particular question?  Would doing that alter any of your analysis?  If somehow Boston can keep Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey to use as salary instead of Smart, I'd think Utah would still do it and then Boston gets to keep Smart, which just makes the overall roster better.

No, it wouldn't help.  As of July 1st, the Celtics will have the cap room to trade for George outright.  If Indiana wanted Zeller, or could agree to a sign and trade with Olynyk, that's fine, but it would have no impact on the cap room needed to extend George, since both of those players are already assumed to be off the books when creating max cap space.
If Boston were to keep Zeller would there be enough room to trade for and extend George (with or without any other salary like say Rozier)?  So essentially trade Rozier for George and then extend George without giving up Zeller.  Then use Zeller in the trade to Utah.  Or maybe Boston trades Crowder to Indiana (and that way keeps Zeller), whose extra salary the makes up the difference in the trade to Utah allowing Boston to keep Smart. 

It just seems to me there would be a way to work the numbers to make it work, but perhaps I'm wrong.

There's no way to make the numbers work.  You need cap space to extend George, and Zeller takes up cap space.  Also, I'm fairly sure Zeller's contract guarantees before the moratorium period expires, so he'd need to be released before these signings and trades could occur.

Re: Cap expert question (saltover?) Re. George/Hayward
« Reply #44 on: June 27, 2017, 08:17:16 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Neat idea.  It's still difficult, arguably just as difficult because you'd need to send Utah at least $23.7 million in outgoing salary.  What you'd want to do is just use cap room to acquire/extend George, sending as little in salary as you need.  So Rozier and future picks would be about enough if we let Olynyk walk.  Then use the cap room, because any excess cap room after extending George would just go to waste, since cap room doesn't count for matching salaries.

Now you have to get to $23.7 million, from Crowder, Smart, Bradley, and Smart.  Bradley+Crowder+Brown is only $20.5 million, so you'd have to add Smart as well.

Would Utah do Bradley, Crowder, Brown, and Smart for a S&T for Hayward? I'd have to think so.  The roster would look like this:

IT
George
Tatum
Hayward
Horford
Zizic
Room-level exception
2nd-rounders and minimum salary players.

So that's an elite core four, with two rookies who could hopefully provide quality production, but the roster falls off really quickly.  It wouldn't be completely unaffordable next year, however, so that's a good thing.
what if Boston acquired George using Zeller or Olynyk (obviously plus some high value future picks)? Would it still have enough cap room to extend George?  If the cap room disappears anyway no reason to have any left. If so does that allow Rozier to go out and keeping Smart?  What about Jackson, Mickey, etc. does Boston still need to waive them to have the room to extend George?
Salt, I didn't know if you saw this particular question?  Would doing that alter any of your analysis?  If somehow Boston can keep Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey to use as salary instead of Smart, I'd think Utah would still do it and then Boston gets to keep Smart, which just makes the overall roster better.

No, it wouldn't help.  As of July 1st, the Celtics will have the cap room to trade for George outright.  If Indiana wanted Zeller, or could agree to a sign and trade with Olynyk, that's fine, but it would have no impact on the cap room needed to extend George, since both of those players are already assumed to be off the books when creating max cap space.
If Boston were to keep Zeller would there be enough room to trade for and extend George (with or without any other salary like say Rozier)?  So essentially trade Rozier for George and then extend George without giving up Zeller.  Then use Zeller in the trade to Utah.  Or maybe Boston trades Crowder to Indiana (and that way keeps Zeller), whose extra salary the makes up the difference in the trade to Utah allowing Boston to keep Smart. 

It just seems to me there would be a way to work the numbers to make it work, but perhaps I'm wrong.

There's no way to make the numbers work.  You need cap space to extend George, and Zeller takes up cap space.  Also, I'm fairly sure Zeller's contract guarantees before the moratorium period expires, so he'd need to be released before these signings and trades could occur.
I know you need cap space but with Zeller, Jackson, Mickey, and Tatum isn't Boston like 23 million under the cap.  I mean That is what spotrac shows. George is 19.5 so 3.5 plus Crowder at 6.8 gets Boston there. Boston then has Bradley, Zeller, Brown, Rozier, Jackson, and Mickey to send to Utah and thus can keep Smart
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip