Author Topic: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?  (Read 1189 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #15 on: July 08, 2017, 01:25:44 PM »

Offline Darío SpanishFan

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 928
  • Tommy Points: 133
Morris' contract has been the obvious reason for this trade for us. It brings us not only a PF for the new season, but two. I guess Yabusele was not happy with the idea of stasing him for another year, so we have avoided some kind of trouble besides signing Hayward.

With the passing of time, and being the most devoted Bradley's fan, I'm starting to like the trade.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #16 on: July 08, 2017, 01:29:57 PM »

Offline BitterJim

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4554
  • Tommy Points: 631
Not really.  Celtics save about $3M  ($8m for AB vs. $5m Morris, roughly) which they need to make up for the $2M reduction in league cap in order to sign Hayward.

It's actually closer to $4 million saved on the trade (Bradley's salary is $8,808,989 this year). Take off the $300k extra for Hayward and you're at ~$3.5 million. Keeping Rozier means taking off $2 million and adding in $815k (since he takes the place of an empty roster hold), and put you at $2.3 million. Doing the same with Yabusele's $2.25 million puts you at $880k. Jackson will make $1.5 million next season, which is just $700k above the minimum, so we can keep him, too.

All we have to do is waive Mickey (assuming all my quick math here is right - I'll check it against my spreadsheet later)
I'm bitter.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #17 on: July 08, 2017, 01:40:37 PM »

Offline BitterJim

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4554
  • Tommy Points: 631
So does that mean once we do that we are spent up to the cap? And then we can do the MLE and LLE? I also don't understand the "cheaper to keep Jackson" comment.

Once we're up to the cap (or so close to it that signing someone would put us over), we'll only be allowed to sign people using exceptions. This would mean Bird Rights if we had any left this offseason (we don't),  contracts for 1st round picks (which is irrelevant to us right now - their cap holds are already factored into our cap calculations. It only really applies to teams that are already over the cap), mid-level/bi-annual/room exceptions (we only have the room exception because we used our cap space to sign someone, which is good for ~$4 million), and minimum salary exceptions (any team, no matter their cap situation, can sign as many minimum salary players as they want, provided they don't violate roster limits). We'll be able to sign one FA with the room exception (it can be split, but that makes no sense given how close it is to the vet minimum),  and then as many as we want to minimum contracts.

As for Jackson, it's just a peculiarity of his contract - his guaranteed money plus the empty roster spot hold ($650k+$815k=$1.465 million) is higher than his salary this year ($1.385 million), meaning that cutting him would actually reduce the cap space we had available. Trading him for no returning salary, on the other hand, would not have such an effect.
I'm bitter.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #18 on: July 08, 2017, 02:01:01 PM »

Offline JBcat

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2496
  • Tommy Points: 442
Not really.  Celtics save about $3M  ($8m for AB vs. $5m Morris, roughly) which they need to make up for the $2M reduction in league cap in order to sign Hayward.

It's actually closer to $4 million saved on the trade (Bradley's salary is $8,808,989 this year). Take off the $300k extra for Hayward and you're at ~$3.5 million. Keeping Rozier means taking off $2 million and adding in $815k (since he takes the place of an empty roster hold), and put you at $2.3 million. Doing the same with Yabusele's $2.25 million puts you at $880k. Jackson will make $1.5 million next season, which is just $700k above the minimum, so we can keep him, too.

All we have to do is waive Mickey (assuming all my quick math here is right - I'll check it against my spreadsheet later)

Very breakdown. TP.

If we wanted to could we keep Mickey and waive Jackson?  For what's worth I'd rather do that.  We already have 3 guys capable of playing the point in Thomas, Smart, and Rozier. 

From the little I saw of the D league last year I thought Mickey actually outplayed Yabu. I think Yabu might have been hurt though.  If anything Mickey gives us more big man depth we desperately need rather than 4th string PG costing us very little.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #19 on: July 08, 2017, 02:18:44 PM »

Offline BitterJim

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4554
  • Tommy Points: 631
Not really.  Celtics save about $3M  ($8m for AB vs. $5m Morris, roughly) which they need to make up for the $2M reduction in league cap in order to sign Hayward.

It's actually closer to $4 million saved on the trade (Bradley's salary is $8,808,989 this year). Take off the $300k extra for Hayward and you're at ~$3.5 million. Keeping Rozier means taking off $2 million and adding in $815k (since he takes the place of an empty roster hold), and put you at $2.3 million. Doing the same with Yabusele's $2.25 million puts you at $880k. Jackson will make $1.5 million next season, which is just $700k above the minimum, so we can keep him, too.

All we have to do is waive Mickey (assuming all my quick math here is right - I'll check it against my spreadsheet later)

Very breakdown. TP.

If we wanted to could we keep Mickey and waive Jackson?  For what's worth I'd rather do that.  We already have 3 guys capable of playing the point in Thomas, Smart, and Rozier. 

From the little I saw of the D league last year I thought Mickey actually outplayed Yabu. I think Yabu might have been hurt though.  If anything Mickey gives us more big man depth we desperately need rather than 4th string PG costing us very little.

We could keep Mickey over Jackson only if we could find some other team to take on Jackson without sending us back any salary. The two of them will make about the same amount, but Jackson's $650k guarantee would take up too much space
I'm bitter.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #20 on: July 08, 2017, 02:20:46 PM »

Offline No Nickname

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 259
  • Tommy Points: 20
So does that mean once we do that we are spent up to the cap? And then we can do the MLE and LLE? I also don't understand the "cheaper to keep Jackson" comment.

Once we're up to the cap (or so close to it that signing someone would put us over), we'll only be allowed to sign people using exceptions. This would mean Bird Rights if we had any left this offseason (we don't),  contracts for 1st round picks (which is irrelevant to us right now - their cap holds are already factored into our cap calculations. It only really applies to teams that are already over the cap), mid-level/bi-annual/room exceptions (we only have the room exception because we used our cap space to sign someone, which is good for ~$4 million), and minimum salary exceptions (any team, no matter their cap situation, can sign as many minimum salary players as they want, provided they don't violate roster limits). We'll be able to sign one FA with the room exception (it can be split, but that makes no sense given how close it is to the vet minimum),  and then as many as we want to minimum contracts.

As for Jackson, it's just a peculiarity of his contract - his guaranteed money plus the empty roster spot hold ($650k+$815k=$1.465 million) is higher than his salary this year ($1.385 million), meaning that cutting him would actually reduce the cap space we had available. Trading him for no returning salary, on the other hand, would not have such an effect.

Thanks so much for explaining!  I find this all fascinating.

Any thoughts on which FAs left that might be in that $4M salary range?  Bogut?  Probably not enough for Pau Gasol.  I wish Diaw were a FA.  He actually plays the best man-to-man defense on Lebron that I've seen.  I mean, he gives him the jumper every time, but his lateral quickness is so good that Lebron rarely seems to get around him.  And when Lebron stops and pump fakes or tries a post move, Diaw is big enough and tall enough to just "wall up" on Lebron, which he hates.  He wants guys who leave their feet so he can draw a foul or do an up and under.  Diaw even affects Lebron's turnaround fadeaways with his length.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #21 on: July 08, 2017, 02:23:37 PM »

Offline JBcat

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2496
  • Tommy Points: 442
Not really.  Celtics save about $3M  ($8m for AB vs. $5m Morris, roughly) which they need to make up for the $2M reduction in league cap in order to sign Hayward.

It's actually closer to $4 million saved on the trade (Bradley's salary is $8,808,989 this year). Take off the $300k extra for Hayward and you're at ~$3.5 million. Keeping Rozier means taking off $2 million and adding in $815k (since he takes the place of an empty roster hold), and put you at $2.3 million. Doing the same with Yabusele's $2.25 million puts you at $880k. Jackson will make $1.5 million next season, which is just $700k above the minimum, so we can keep him, too.

All we have to do is waive Mickey (assuming all my quick math here is right - I'll check it against my spreadsheet later)

Very breakdown. TP.

If we wanted to could we keep Mickey and waive Jackson?  For what's worth I'd rather do that.  We already have 3 guys capable of playing the point in Thomas, Smart, and Rozier. 

From the little I saw of the D league last year I thought Mickey actually outplayed Yabu. I think Yabu might have been hurt though.  If anything Mickey gives us more big man depth we desperately need rather than 4th string PG costing us very little.

We could keep Mickey over Jackson only if we could find some other team to take on Jackson without sending us back any salary. The two of them will make about the same amount, but Jackson's $650k guarantee would take up too much space

Thanks, TP again. 

Jackson has sat out the last 2 summer league games. I wonder if something is up.  We could trade him, and get back a protected 2nd round pick.

I read somewhere the Celtics gave permission to Mickey to sit out summer league to focus on his offseason program.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #22 on: July 08, 2017, 02:30:29 PM »

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Tommy Points: 205
So...yes or no, Yabusele is on the roster now?
If so, we should be more excited than we are.


"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #23 on: July 08, 2017, 02:46:43 PM »

Offline BitterJim

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4554
  • Tommy Points: 631
So...yes or no, Yabusele is on the roster now?
If so, we should be more excited than we are.



He's not on the roster until we sign him, and we haven't done that yet. I saw something on /r/bostonceltics that said he was in Boston, though, so it's very possible that we sign him when we sign Hayward.
I'm bitter.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #24 on: July 08, 2017, 02:47:35 PM »

Offline footey

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6676
  • Tommy Points: 781
Not really.  Celtics save about $3M  ($8m for AB vs. $5m Morris, roughly) which they need to make up for the $2M reduction in league cap in order to sign Hayward.

It's actually closer to $4 million saved on the trade (Bradley's salary is $8,808,989 this year). Take off the $300k extra for Hayward and you're at ~$3.5 million. Keeping Rozier means taking off $2 million and adding in $815k (since he takes the place of an empty roster hold), and put you at $2.3 million. Doing the same with Yabusele's $2.25 million puts you at $880k. Jackson will make $1.5 million next season, which is just $700k above the minimum, so we can keep him, too.

All we have to do is waive Mickey (assuming all my quick math here is right - I'll check it against my spreadsheet later)

Very breakdown. TP.

If we wanted to could we keep Mickey and waive Jackson?  For what's worth I'd rather do that.  We already have 3 guys capable of playing the point in Thomas, Smart, and Rozier. 

From the little I saw of the D league last year I thought Mickey actually outplayed Yabu. I think Yabu might have been hurt though.  If anything Mickey gives us more big man depth we desperately need rather than 4th string PG costing us very little.

Yabu was hurt. In summer league year before Yabu far outplayed Mickey. He is a much better prospect than Mickey.

Re: What are the cap implications of the Bradley trade?
« Reply #25 on: July 08, 2017, 03:04:13 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16998
  • Tommy Points: 807
Not really.  Celtics save about $3M  ($8m for AB vs. $5m Morris, roughly) which they need to make up for the $2M reduction in league cap in order to sign Hayward.

It's actually closer to $4 million saved on the trade (Bradley's salary is $8,808,989 this year). Take off the $300k extra for Hayward and you're at ~$3.5 million. Keeping Rozier means taking off $2 million and adding in $815k (since he takes the place of an empty roster hold), and put you at $2.3 million. Doing the same with Yabusele's $2.25 million puts you at $880k. Jackson will make $1.5 million next season, which is just $700k above the minimum, so we can keep him, too.

All we have to do is waive Mickey (assuming all my quick math here is right - I'll check it against my spreadsheet later)

Very breakdown. TP.

If we wanted to could we keep Mickey and waive Jackson?  For what's worth I'd rather do that.  We already have 3 guys capable of playing the point in Thomas, Smart, and Rozier. 

From the little I saw of the D league last year I thought Mickey actually outplayed Yabu. I think Yabu might have been hurt though.  If anything Mickey gives us more big man depth we desperately need rather than 4th string PG costing us very little.

Yabu was hurt. In summer league year before Yabu far outplayed Mickey. He is a much better prospect than Mickey.
I agree but to his real point, we don't need a 4th PG like Jackson and keeping an extra big around makes more sense.
Ohio State 2014/15 National Champions.