Author Topic: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?  (Read 1605 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #15 on: June 25, 2018, 09:43:48 AM »

Offline ETNCeltics

  • NCE
  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 944
  • Tommy Points: 105
If we win a ring...will Al’s number go up the rafters?

No chance. He's not that caliber of player.

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #16 on: June 25, 2018, 09:44:33 AM »

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
  • Tommy Points: 185
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2018, 09:56:20 AM »

Offline Phantom255x

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9757
  • Tommy Points: 722
  • On To Banner 18!
I feel like Big Al is the kind of guy who wouldn't mind taking a "team-friendly deal" once his current deal is up. He actually seems to love playing here and enjoys the atmosphere (city, fans, etc.). Also, I know it's not my money and maybe Al himself thinks otherwise, but after his current deal is up, he'd have made about 200M from the contracts from his entire Hawks tenure and Boston one combined. My hope is, he'd stay on some sort of "discount" like 3/54M, or 4/72M with some 4th year option. Horford is the saavy veteran who could play some extra years IMO because of his style of play (not solely being predicated on speed, athleticism, etc.)
2018 Mock Trade Deadline (New York Knicks)

Roster: Porzingis, Kanter, Hardaway Jr, Julius Randle, Schroder, Beasley, Alex Abrines, Jarrett Jack, Frank Ntilikina, Lance Thomas, Kyle Singler, Josh Huestis, Ron Baker, Trey Burke, Luke Kornet, Isaiah Hicks

Future Draft Picks: https://www.prosportstransactions.com/basketball/DraftTrades/Future/Knick

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2018, 10:10:04 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11252
  • Tommy Points: 2424
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

It is not 100% impossible that the Celtics could slip under the tax next year if Al resigned for a deal that started at around $20 million in year 1.  Unlikely, but depending on what Smart signs for and if Baynes is signed to a long-term deal (or not, which would be helpful), it is conceivable.  Obviously the position and number of our 1sts next year also has an impact.  So I’m definitely pro opt-out in your scenario, as this would mean we wouldn’t hit the tax until Jaylen’s extension kicked in (after which, it is unavoidable so long as we have the core together).
“When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.”

Leviticus 19:33-34

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2018, 10:27:14 AM »

Offline timpiker

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1285
  • Tommy Points: 82
I think Al will help with his contract and stay.  And if the C's win a title or 2, Al staying all the time, his number will go up.

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #20 on: June 25, 2018, 10:28:53 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19547
  • Tommy Points: 927
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

It is not 100% impossible that the Celtics could slip under the tax next year if Al resigned for a deal that started at around $20 million in year 1.  Unlikely, but depending on what Smart signs for and if Baynes is signed to a long-term deal (or not, which would be helpful), it is conceivable.  Obviously the position and number of our 1sts next year also has an impact.  So I’m definitely pro opt-out in your scenario, as this would mean we wouldn’t hit the tax until Jaylen’s extension kicked in (after which, it is unavoidable so long as we have the core together).
It would also make a trade of Smart for a reduced salary player far more likely, which Boston could avoid the tax that way.

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2018, 10:31:23 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11252
  • Tommy Points: 2424
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

It is not 100% impossible that the Celtics could slip under the tax next year if Al resigned for a deal that started at around $20 million in year 1.  Unlikely, but depending on what Smart signs for and if Baynes is signed to a long-term deal (or not, which would be helpful), it is conceivable.  Obviously the position and number of our 1sts next year also has an impact.  So I’m definitely pro opt-out in your scenario, as this would mean we wouldn’t hit the tax until Jaylen’s extension kicked in (after which, it is unavoidable so long as we have the core together).
It would also make a trade of Smart for a reduced salary player far more likely, which Boston could avoid the tax that way.

I would not expect this to be how things would occur.  If Al were to opt out and accept less, it would be to help keep the core together, and I’m quite sure that includes Smart from Horford’s vantage point.
“When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.”

Leviticus 19:33-34

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #22 on: June 25, 2018, 11:42:02 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19547
  • Tommy Points: 927
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

It is not 100% impossible that the Celtics could slip under the tax next year if Al resigned for a deal that started at around $20 million in year 1.  Unlikely, but depending on what Smart signs for and if Baynes is signed to a long-term deal (or not, which would be helpful), it is conceivable.  Obviously the position and number of our 1sts next year also has an impact.  So I’m definitely pro opt-out in your scenario, as this would mean we wouldn’t hit the tax until Jaylen’s extension kicked in (after which, it is unavoidable so long as we have the core together).
It would also make a trade of Smart for a reduced salary player far more likely, which Boston could avoid the tax that way.

I would not expect this to be how things would occur.  If Al were to opt out and accept less, it would be to help keep the core together, and I’m quite sure that includes Smart from Horford’s vantage point.
I have a hard time finding at best the 6th most important player a core player.

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #23 on: June 25, 2018, 11:44:59 AM »

Offline action781

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4383
  • Tommy Points: 387
In 2010, Ainge convinced Paul Pierce to opted out of his $21M/1 year contract and sign a $61M/4 years deal. Pierce took the long term money and gave the Celtics short-term flexibility, then they all sold it to the fan base as a "paycut", which technically it was. Rather brilliant marketing for the player as the Boston faithful ate it up. Now, does Ainge employ the same method with Horford? What would it take? After next season, Horford will have the option to pick up his $30M/1 year deal or decline it for a long term deal. What do you think that long term deal would look like? It would have to be significant enough to entice Horford to rip up $30M of guaranteed money. Would $75M/4 years get it done? How far would you go?


1. http://www.patriotledger.com/x2071996479/Celtics-Pierce-reportedly-becomes-unrestricted-free-agent
2. https://boston.sbnation.com/2010/6/29/1543785/paul-pierce-opt-out-free-agent-celtics-contract

Are we sure it would be beneficial for the Celtics for him to opt out in 2019-20 and spread out his money over 4 years?  I think the key things to figure will be:
1. How this affects entering the luxury tax, particularly for repeater status. 
2. how tradeable Horford's contract will be towards the end

For #1, I'm not sure until we see what happens with Marcus Smart.  If this can avoid us paying any tax in 2019-20 season, then absolutely.  My guess now is that it will likely make no difference though.
For #2, his contract will obviously be more tradeable if we let him play out his player option, then sign him for less per annum for the following 3 years.
2018 Mock Trade Deadline Philly 76ers

Guards:  A Bradley / Covington / Redick / Fultz / Bayless / Luwawu / Korkmaz
Forwards:  Saric / Simmons (point forward) / Trev Booker / J Anderson
Center:  Embiid / THE BOBAN / R Holmes

Picks: 2018 LAL 1st (if 1, 6-30), 2019 SAC 1st (if LAL 2-5), 2018 2nds from BKN, NYK, HOU, and 2019 SAC 2n

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #24 on: June 25, 2018, 12:02:27 PM »

Offline action781

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4383
  • Tommy Points: 387
To answer the central question of what size deal he would opt out for, you’ve gotta figure out what his agent thinks he can get for a contract in the Summer of 2020 at age 34.  It’s hard to find recent players to compare him to who got contracts around his skill level at that age, but I’ve got:

Pau Gasol got $49/3 years mil at age 37.
D Wade got $40/2 years mil at age 34.
Iguodala got $48/3 years at age 33.
Paul Milsap got 390/3 years mil at age 32.
Lamarcus Aldridge tacked 50/2 years mil on to the end of a player option at age 32.

That said, assuming no more cap spikes, I’d imagine his agent probably thinks he can find $50 mil/3 years or $40 mil/2 years in the Summer of 2020 at age 34.  (Which would not be team friendly deals.)  So for him to turn down the $30 mil player option, you’d have to extend him to $80 mil/4 years.  You might be able to shave $5-10 mil off of that in total for the long-term security you’re giving him which everyone will claim to be a “home team discount”.  So I’d say $70-75 mil/4 years in the summer of 2019 would be the ballpark of what to expect.  Anything less than that is a blessing and anything more would not be a good deal.
2018 Mock Trade Deadline Philly 76ers

Guards:  A Bradley / Covington / Redick / Fultz / Bayless / Luwawu / Korkmaz
Forwards:  Saric / Simmons (point forward) / Trev Booker / J Anderson
Center:  Embiid / THE BOBAN / R Holmes

Picks: 2018 LAL 1st (if 1, 6-30), 2019 SAC 1st (if LAL 2-5), 2018 2nds from BKN, NYK, HOU, and 2019 SAC 2n

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #25 on: June 25, 2018, 12:28:39 PM »

Offline CelticsElite

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7572
  • Tommy Points: 535
Too early to speculate about this stuff

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2018, 01:02:34 PM »

Offline bdm860

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4191
  • Tommy Points: 1838
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

It is not 100% impossible that the Celtics could slip under the tax next year if Al resigned for a deal that started at around $20 million in year 1.  Unlikely, but depending on what Smart signs for and if Baynes is signed to a long-term deal (or not, which would be helpful), it is conceivable.  Obviously the position and number of our 1sts next year also has an impact.  So I’m definitely pro opt-out in your scenario, as this would mean we wouldn’t hit the tax until Jaylen’s extension kicked in (after which, it is unavoidable so long as we have the core together).
It would also make a trade of Smart for a reduced salary player far more likely, which Boston could avoid the tax that way.

I would not expect this to be how things would occur.  If Al were to opt out and accept less, it would be to help keep the core together, and I’m quite sure that includes Smart from Horford’s vantage point.
I have a hard time finding at best the 6th most important player a core player.

It's not without precedent though.

Durant supposedly took less so the Warriors could re-sign Iguodala and Livingston.

Quote
Kerr says Durant's generous pay cut allowed the team to keep Andre Iguodala and Shaun Livingston, which will hopefully lead to Durant and the team winning more titles.

Wade/Bosh/LeBron supposedly took less so the Heat could re-sign Haslem.

Quote
Wade called Bosh and asked him to cut $15 million off his salary for Haslem. Wade called James and asked him to do the same. Bosh and James barely knew Haslem. Just a few short conversations here and there. But Wade told them this team needed someone hungry and gritty and unselfish like Haslem, and promised to cut $17 million out of his own contract to make it happen, too.

I think those guys are definitely in the Smart range when it comes to roster importance. (Iggy and Livingston finished 5th/6th and 5th/7th in playoff mpg the last 2 years, while Haslem finished 6th in playoff mpg for the Heat in both '11 and '12, though if you wanted to argue Haslem was expected to be the 4th best player going into that first season, I wouldn't disagree).

After 18 months with their Bigs, the Littles were: 46% less likely to use illegal drugs, 27% less likely to use alcohol, 52% less likely to skip school, 37% less likely to skip a class

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2018, 01:05:05 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11252
  • Tommy Points: 2424
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

It is not 100% impossible that the Celtics could slip under the tax next year if Al resigned for a deal that started at around $20 million in year 1.  Unlikely, but depending on what Smart signs for and if Baynes is signed to a long-term deal (or not, which would be helpful), it is conceivable.  Obviously the position and number of our 1sts next year also has an impact.  So I’m definitely pro opt-out in your scenario, as this would mean we wouldn’t hit the tax until Jaylen’s extension kicked in (after which, it is unavoidable so long as we have the core together).
It would also make a trade of Smart for a reduced salary player far more likely, which Boston could avoid the tax that way.

I would not expect this to be how things would occur.  If Al were to opt out and accept less, it would be to help keep the core together, and I’m quite sure that includes Smart from Horford’s vantage point.
I have a hard time finding at best the 6th most important player a core player.

That’s fine.  Horford has gone out of his way to praise Smart over the last two years, often bringing him up unprompted, has called him the “soul of the team” more than once, etc.  I would be willing to bet the Horford thinks Smart is more of the core than Brown, and that’s not an insult to Jaylen.
“When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.”

Leviticus 19:33-34

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #28 on: June 25, 2018, 06:24:16 PM »

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
  • Tommy Points: 185
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

It is not 100% impossible that the Celtics could slip under the tax next year if Al resigned for a deal that started at around $20 million in year 1.  Unlikely, but depending on what Smart signs for and if Baynes is signed to a long-term deal (or not, which would be helpful), it is conceivable.  Obviously the position and number of our 1sts next year also has an impact.  So I’m definitely pro opt-out in your scenario, as this would mean we wouldn’t hit the tax until Jaylen’s extension kicked in (after which, it is unavoidable so long as we have the core together).
That's interesting. That would obviously be a massive coup for the franchise if we could get under the tax then. Is that inclusive of Irving signing a max contract?

Re: What 4 year deal would entice Horford to opt out and take a pay cut?
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2018, 06:25:47 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11252
  • Tommy Points: 2424
Without thinking about what Al would choose to do, would it not be better for us if he opts in?

We'll be in the tax that year anyway (hopefully for the first time). If Al opts out he would presumably want to recoup the money he is opting out of over the length of the contract. If he instead opts in and gets that $30m, would he be more inclined to take much less in the following years?

Say it was opt out and sign $80m over 4 years vs opt in earn $30m then sign $50m over 3 years. Which would we prefer?

It is not 100% impossible that the Celtics could slip under the tax next year if Al resigned for a deal that started at around $20 million in year 1.  Unlikely, but depending on what Smart signs for and if Baynes is signed to a long-term deal (or not, which would be helpful), it is conceivable.  Obviously the position and number of our 1sts next year also has an impact.  So I’m definitely pro opt-out in your scenario, as this would mean we wouldn’t hit the tax until Jaylen’s extension kicked in (after which, it is unavoidable so long as we have the core together).
That's interesting. That would obviously be a massive coup for the franchise if we could get under the tax then. Is that inclusive of Irving signing a max contract?

Yes.
“When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.”

Leviticus 19:33-34