Author Topic: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?  (Read 1615 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #30 on: November 13, 2017, 09:23:08 PM »

Offline Chef Parish

  • Aron Baynes
  • Posts: 128
  • Tommy Points: 87
Here are all the relevant details:

We currently have 107.3M committed to 11 players for 2018-19.   The luxury tax threshold should be around 120M.   So that leaves us about 12.7M of space below the threshold with which to fill the remaining 4 slots.

Our options for filling those 4 open roster slots and chewing up that salary space will include:

Marcus Smart, Restricted Free Agent w/Bird Rights.
Aron Baynes, Unrestricted Free Agent, no Bird Rights.
Shane Larkin, Unrestricted Free Agent, no Bird Rights.
Boston Celtics 2018 1st round pick which will have a roughly ~1.5M cap hit.
LAL18 pick (if it conveys) which will have anywhere from a 4M to a 7M cap hit.  Or none.

I suspect Marcus will be trying to get Gary Harris size money, which would be a hit on the order of 12-15M per year.

Given that Baynes is a UFA and we will not have his Bird Rights, the maximum we would be able to pay him will be via the Mid Level Exception, which should be around 8.4M.    I have a hard time thinking he won't get paid that much if he continues to play at his current level.

Larkin probably has to go look for another job elsewhere or sign another vet minimum contract to stay with us.   

And of course if the LAL18 pick conveys, then that will have a pretty big impact on this.

It's really hard to envision how they can sign both Smart and Baynes and stay under the tax threshold.

Keep in mind also, when proposing solutions, that the following year will be the option years of both Al Horford and Kyrie Irving as well as the RFA years of Rozier and Theis.
definitely an interesting dilemma but considering this team is designed to compete for a title, Wyc and company have shown a willingness to pay the tax in the past when they have a top team with a legit chance to contend.  if keeping Smart and Baynes (if possible but if he plays like this the rest of the year, we won't get him back with the MLE so this becomes a moot discussion) puts us into tax territory, I don't think Wyc would hesitate to pony up the cash.  It's not like Boston doesn't provide ample other sources of income for the team besides the playoff ticket revenue


This pic is why the Celtics can go into tax territory. Thank you General Electric. I knew the logo on the jerseys would pay off.


Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #31 on: November 13, 2017, 10:03:51 PM »

Offline More Banners

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3543
  • Tommy Points: 238
It's not so much the tax as it is the repeater tax down the road.

Both players are role players, and by definition replaceable. Like both, but these aren't the guys you structure your payroll plan around. Marcus replaced Bradley who replaced Tony Allen. Danny has an eye for guards, and there's a lot more talent to choose from under 6'5 than over 6'9, so my bet is on Baynes.

Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #32 on: November 13, 2017, 11:18:51 PM »

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3204
  • Tommy Points: 310
Smart should be a goner unless he takes the QO or something close to it.  Hayward is going to need 30+ minutes and a good chunk of that would come from Smart. 

Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #33 on: November 13, 2017, 11:23:20 PM »

Offline azzenfrost

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1158
  • Tommy Points: 100
Tough choice. I'm really liking Baynes so far. But Marcus has so much heart. For now I'll probably go with Baynes.
I moved the cheese.

Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #34 on: November 13, 2017, 11:35:51 PM »

Offline Forza Juventus

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 914
  • Tommy Points: 45
We haven't paid the taxes yet in the Brad Stevens era so if we have to pay the tax then pay it. We should be making decisions based on basketball this is not a hedge fund. It's not like we fans make any of the money anyway. Pay the tax if it comes to that. It's fair to criticize if they don't.
Azzurri | Juventus | Boston Celtics | Kentucky Basketball

Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #35 on: November 14, 2017, 12:40:01 AM »

Offline Kuberski33

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3308
  • Tommy Points: 171
I love Baynes but Theiss may be the starting center next season if he progresses offensively.  I'm starting to believe that Smart is an integral part of this team so I'd prioritize him.

Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #36 on: November 14, 2017, 03:52:39 AM »

Offline Androslav

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1019
  • Tommy Points: 194
Too early for this kind of convo IMO.

Guys still have a lot to prove, remain healthy, we don't know what will come out of the LaKings pick that has significant salary if conveys and could substitute them (eg. Baynes-Ayton/Bamba), the whole Hayward situation, who will kick us out of the playoffs and why.
Hey, maybe one of them is found with 4 pounds of weed in the trunk by then.

Baynes and Smart (to a lesser extent) are not cerebral players that can't be substituted in any way. I like both a lot, but it is too early.

Reminder: Last year we also had "players that must return", only 4/15 made it :)
"The joy of the balling under the rims."

Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #37 on: November 14, 2017, 06:58:27 AM »

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2075
  • Tommy Points: 170
If we get the 1 seed this year without Hayward, compete well and look like being a serious title contender then I see no reason for us not to go into the tax. The key will be controlling it and having an escape route out of it before the repeater tax.
I haven't got the long term outlook in front of me but I imagine that Baynes would sign a 2 year deal meaning his contract won't affect the repeater tax. I'd expect Marcus to be signed to a 3 year deal that would mean he comes off the books at the point we might expect to pay Tatum, giving a net zero on salary.
At least in the short term I wouldn't think it's a problem to have both, especially if we can prove we would be top of the East.

Re: Cap Experts: Next Year - Keep Smart or Baynes?
« Reply #38 on: November 14, 2017, 11:35:05 AM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3097
  • Tommy Points: 467

Here are all the relevant details:

We currently have 107.3M committed to 11 players for 2018-19.   The luxury tax threshold should be around 120M.   So that leaves us about 12.7M of space below the threshold with which to fill the remaining 4 slots.

Our options for filling those 4 open roster slots and chewing up that salary space will include:

Marcus Smart, Restricted Free Agent w/Bird Rights.
Aron Baynes, Unrestricted Free Agent, no Bird Rights.
Shane Larkin, Unrestricted Free Agent, no Bird Rights.
Boston Celtics 2018 1st round pick which will have a roughly ~1.5M cap hit.
LAL18 pick (if it conveys) which will have anywhere from a 4M to a 7M cap hit.  Or none.

I suspect Marcus will be trying to get Gary Harris size money, which would be a hit on the order of 12-15M per year.

Given that Baynes is a UFA and we will not have his Bird Rights, the maximum we would be able to pay him will be via the Mid Level Exception, which should be around 8.4M.    I have a hard time thinking he won't get paid that much if he continues to play at his current level.

Larkin probably has to go look for another job elsewhere or sign another vet minimum contract to stay with us.   

And of course if the LAL18 pick conveys, then that will have a pretty big impact on this.

It's really hard to envision how they can sign both Smart and Baynes and stay under the tax threshold.

Keep in mind also, when proposing solutions, that the following year will be the option years of both Al Horford and Kyrie Irving as well as the RFA years of Rozier and Theis.

Agree with everything except Baynes.  With the limited amount of cap room most teams will have next summer, I would be shocked if Baynes received more than the full MLE, and very surprised if he received more than the taxpayer MLE. Hes a useful player, but he turns 32 in the middle of next season and has never averaged 20 minutes per game in his career, this year included.  As valuable as hes been in his minutes on the court, that screams MLE to me.
Let me clarify:  My comment wasn't meant to indicate I think he will get paid _more_ than the MLE, but rather that I think he will likely get exactly that.  There may not be many teams with a lot of cap space (and those teams don't tend to be contenders) but there are multiple teams that will have the MLE available.  And I expect one or more would be glad to use that on a player like Baynes.   Having a "true classic big" who can play ~20 minutes of above average low-paint defense has been part of the formula for each of the recent championship teams (Splitter, Bogut, Mozgov, Thompson, Zaza, McGee, Ezeli -- these "non-3PT-shooting" bigs all have rings now.  Heck, Baynes also has one, as he was providing backup on that role behind Splitter).

In other words, we should expect that (barring injury or some other event that changes his value) that his price next summer will be the MLE.

Do you mean the full MLE?  Currently there are 12 teams (including the Celtics) who would project to be in or near enough to th luxury tax/apron that theyd be ineligible for the big MLE next season, and there are a few other teams who would fall into that category if they keep a key free agent (New Orleans with Cousins, Milwaukee with Parker, Detroit with Bradley, etc).  At least half the league is likely to be unable to offer the full MLE.  On top of that, we see what similar centers like Dedmon and Pachulia have gone for the last two seasons, not to mention Baynes himself, and I just dont see the market for anything more than the taxpayer MLE.  I like him, but hes not playing exceptionally better than the last couple of seasons.  He just looks amazing because the void of his skillset was missed more than many of us realized.

Too many variables to be certain what the landscape will look like next July, but I'm pretty confident Baynes will probably get offered the taxpayer MLE at a minimum and the full MLE at a maximum.  He's a solid, starting-quality role-player and that's role-player money.

Dedmon is actually getting more than the tax-payer MLE now at 6M (with a player option on 6.3M next year)... to be the back up behind Plumlee, a similar 'classic big' getting paid 12.5M.  So even non-contender ATL has 18.5M wrapped up on two players at the 5.  The Cavs have 16.4M - 18.5M committed to Thompson.   Ancient, 35-year old Nene' is getting 3.5M - 3.8M guaranteed for the next three seasons.   Cappella will be off his rookie deal and likely to cost a fair penny next summer.   Al Jefferson is getting 10M for two years.   We just paid Amir Johnson two years at 12M each and he's getting 11M this year.   Vucevic is getting 12M+.  Cody Zeller is getting 12M+.

Teams still pay for size, if they think it is reasonably competent at playing basketball.   Baynes has shown he's more than reasonably competent.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.
#OneCitizenOneVote - True Election Reform:  Eliminate the anti-democratic Electoral College farce now.