Celtics 20-21 Roster Construction

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,981
Kiev, Ukraine
The only negative to signing TT is that he seems to block Timelord's development because I'm not sure when he sees the court if both TT and Theis are healthy.
Injuries happen (we should know this better than any team), and it's also very easy to routinely schedule rest for Theis and TT.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
3,089
If the switch finally turns on full time for TL, he would surpass both Theis and TT. We saw in the Toronto series how effective he could be when locked in.

Williams might never get there, though. His development has been slowed by injury and by his inability to focus on his assignments on the defensive end.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,981
Kiev, Ukraine
If the switch finally turns on full time for TL, he would surpass both Theis and TT. We saw in the Toronto series how effective he could be when locked in.

Williams might never get there, though. His development has been slowed by injury and by his inability to focus on his assignments on the defensive end.
And if he does make that leap, they can trade Theis at the deadline or let him walk, since he’s likely getting 7-9M in FA.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,390
Santa Monica
With a condensed schedule, the bench should and will play more regular-season minutes this season

Out: Hayward, Kanter, Wanamaker, VP

In: Tristen, Teague, Nesmith, Pritchard

Last season's theme was importing nice guys (after the Kyrie Show) led by Kemba-Ya. This year the theme is bringing in edgier, defined role players

I'm fine with how this all went down since I'm a huge Granite buyer and feel developing the rookies/2nd yr players around JayCrew gives the Celtics the best chance to win multiple championships.
BUT be prepared for sports radio and mainstream NBA media to eviscerate Danny. The same thing happened after Horford/Kyrie exited last year
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,981
Kiev, Ukraine
I'm fine with how this all went down since I'm a huge Granite buyer and feel developing the rookies/2nd yr players around JayCrew gives the Celtics the best chance to win multiple championships.
BUT be prepared for sports radio and mainstream NBA media to eviscerate Danny. The same thing happened after Horford/Kyrie exited last year
It's hilarious, because Milwaukee is out here lighting its franchise on fire and Philly made some minor upgrades while dealing away assets precisely to get rid of the Horford mistake (and to some degree finishing the Butler cleanup). Toronto re-signed Van Vleet, lost Ibaka, and doesn't have tons of room for internal improvement. And the narrative is "oh man, the rest of the East is improving so much!"

This offseason felt like a very clear decision by the Celtics to do 3 things:
1. go all-in on Tatum+Brown, and so draft shooting
2. preserve Kemba as much as possible
3. have a physical answer for Embiid/Bam/Giannis

Obviously scoring a TPE for Hayward would be great, but everything else is good. As many here have noted for awhile, Hayward's salary slot was kind of fake in that Tatum's raise would make it untenable to keep.
 

CreedBratton

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2009
3,415
Injuries happen (we should know this better than any team), and it's also very easy to routinely schedule rest for Theis and TT.
Exactly and something that hasn’t really been talked about enough is the schedule is going to be a lot more condensed this season. A lot more back to backs and 4 games in 5 nights so load management will be taken up a notch and having 3 capable guys to bang bodies is a good thing for this year.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,216
around the way
BUT be prepared for sports radio and mainstream NBA media to eviscerate Danny. The same thing happened after Horford/Kyrie exited last year
Better yet, don't listen to any of those jackholes.

They complained about signing Al, then complained that we let him walk. Like Borges lamenting the Seymour draft pick and then killing the team for trading the same guy.

The worst takes that you'll see here (and links shared here) are better than the wisest morsel that you'll read in mainstream NBA media or sports talk radio. Save yourself.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,394
So, a roster reset, figuring 15 on roster and 13 active:

PG: Kemba, Teague, Pritchard (Edwards, not really a PG, inactive?)
Wing: Tatum, Brown, Smart, Grant (can play some 5), Langford, Nesmith, Semi (Green inactive)
Big: Theis, Thompson, TL

2-way: Tacko, Waters

Thus, the only questions left are whether to grab a developmental FA instead of Green or Edwards right? And if you think you need to sign Tacko/Waters to regular roster that question goes away.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,390
Santa Monica
Better yet, don't listen to any of those jackholes.

They complained about signing Al, then complained that we let him walk. Like Borges lamenting the Seymour draft pick and then killing the team for trading the same guy.

The worst takes that you'll see here (and links shared here) are better than the wisest morsel that you'll read in mainstream NBA media or sports talk radio. Save yourself.
those ESPN/TNT broadcasts (except Doris) can be tough sledding

While I liked Kanter for regular-season wins, even the Brad Machine couldn't Houdini him into the high leverage playoff games where we needed some defensive toughness/depth from the 5.

To stay consistent, I'm still not thrilled with Kemba's knee/future and would have wanted Hayward to resign and Kemba sent to NY. BUT I severely mistook Gordon's final price tag and could be equally wrong on Kemba's knee
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,216
around the way
those ESPN/TNT broadcasts (except Doris) can be tough sledding

While I liked Kanter for regular-season wins, even the Brad Machine couldn't Houdini him into the high leverage playoff games where we needed some defensive toughness/depth from the 5.

To stay consistent, I'm still not thrilled with Kemba's knee/future and would have wanted Hayward to resign and Kemba sent to NY. BUT I severely mistook Gordon's final price tag and could be equally wrong on Kemba's knee
We are always speculating based on incomplete information, but the inferences are sound more often than not. And we're not looking for clickbait. :)
 

Euclis20

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
3,622
Imaginationland
The only negative to signing TT is that he seems to block Timelord's development because I'm not sure when he sees the court if both TT and Theis are healthy.
It's year 3, if Timelord can't win minutes on his own merit it's not worth worrying about.
 

Euclis20

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
3,622
Imaginationland
So, is it a given that Theis is the [usual] starter? The team doesn't lose a whole lot in the starting lineup swapping out Hayward for Smart, but one thing we definitely will miss is rebounding. Without a traditional center on the floor, our 3 big wings all averaged about 6.5-7 RPG. Hayward averaged just over 7 rebounds per 36 minutes, compared with Smart who averaged just over 4 rebounds per 36 minutes. Considering rebounding is his biggest strength, is Thompson a better fit with the starters? He doesn't stretch the floor like Theis can, but is a more than capable screener.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
47,141
deep inside Guido territory
If they land Bogdan, they can roll with this.

Kemba
Bogdan
Brown
Tatum
Theis

Smart
Teague
TT
Grant
RW
Neismeth
Langford
Pritchard
Semi
Green

A very good starting 5 and a core bench mob of Smart/TT/Teague is a roster that can win the East.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
6,087
Random thought: if they roll out a starting lineup of Kemba, Smart, Jaylen, Tatum, and Thompson, the lowest drafted guy out there will actually be Kemba, taken at #9. Then it’s a #6, a #4, and two #3s, for an average draft spot of #5. Also, all five were McDonald’s All-Americans their respective years. Some serious pedigree there, not that it matters at this point, but interesting to me at least.
 

Euclis20

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
3,622
Imaginationland
Random thought: if they roll out a starting lineup of Kemba, Smart, Jaylen, Tatum, and Thompson, the lowest drafted guy out there will actually be Kemba, taken at #9. Then it’s a #6, a #4, and two #3s, for an average draft spot of #5. Also, all five were McDonald’s All-Americans their respective years. Some serious pedigree there, not that it matters at this point, but interesting to me at least.
In stark contrast to their first EC finals team of this generation, in 2016-2017. Their starting 5 was Thomas (60th), Bradley (19th), Crowder (34th), Horford (3rd) and Johnson (56th).
 

Bleedred

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 21, 2001
7,945
Boston, MA
To me, it seems that the principle thing holding the Timelord back is that he is a colossally stupid* basketball player. Like no basketball IQ whatsoever, playing solely on athleticism. Grant Williams seemingly understood the defensive rotations and system that Brad employs within a month of putting on the green, whereas the TL looked lost on almost every possession of every series I watched him play. He's so athletic that he warrants multiple opportunities to figure it out, and maybe something clicks at some point, but I'm not terribly bullish on a guy that looks to me to be one of the dumbest* players on the team.

*By "stupid" and "dumb," I am not impugning his actual intelligence, just his basketball IQ.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
1,730
To me, it seems that the principle thing holding the Timelord back is that he is a colossally stupid* basketball player. Like no basketball IQ whatsoever, playing solely on athleticism. Grant Williams seemingly understood the defensive rotations and system that Brad employs within a month of putting on the green, whereas the TL looked lost on almost every possession of every series I watched him play. He's so athletic that he warrants multiple opportunities to figure it out, and maybe something clicks at some point, but I'm not terribly bullish on a guy that looks to me to be one of the dumbest* players on the team.

*By "stupid" and "dumb," I am not impugning his actual intelligence, just his basketball IQ.
It makes no sense, but Time Lord seems much more instinctive at the offensive end, where he's made more than a few great passes and generally goes where he's supposed to go, at the right time. His basketball IQ on offense is light years ahead of his IQ on defense, for whatever reason.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,216
around the way
It makes no sense, but Time Lord seems much more instinctive at the offensive end, where he's made more than a few great passes and generally goes where he's supposed to go, at the right time. His basketball IQ on offense is light years ahead of his IQ on defense, for whatever reason.
That's accurate and not totally bizarre either. We've all seen people that are wildly gifted mind readers on the defensive end that look like they never saw a basketball before on offense too. BBIQ is neither blanket O/D, nor uncoachable.

The folks surmising that TL skated on D because of his athleticism are probably right. And Grant maybe had no choice but to be a sponge from a younger age, since he wasn't nearly as bouncy.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,617
Saint Paul, MN
Still want them to add some wing depth with the BAE.

Is Demarre Carroll cooked?

Can we turn Evan Turner back into the Evan Turner of 2015? Would we even want 2015 Evan Turner on this team?

Jared Dudley anyone?

Glenn Robinson III?
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
6,087
Still want them to add some wing depth with the BAE.

Is Demarre Carroll cooked?

Can we turn Evan Turner back into the Evan Turner of 2015? Would we even want 2015 Evan Turner on this team?

Jared Dudley anyone?

Glenn Robinson III?
Didn’t Teague get the BAE? It was he a vet min deal?
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,390
Santa Monica
Roster

1. Kemba
2. Smart
3. Brown
4. Tatum
5. Theis

6. Teague
7. TT
8. Grant
9. Time Lord
10. Nesmith
11. Langford
12. Pritchard
13. Semi
14. Edwards
15. Green?

2-way
Tacko
Tre Waters
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
18,256
Javonte Green seems like the guy that should not get too comfortable in whatever apaertment he rents in BOS
he's in the same spot as last year, 15th man, good enough to give you some wing minutes, but also no salary comitment beyond the year so if you need to make a move he's the one who goes.
 

DGreenwood

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 2, 2003
1,332
Seattle
I'm not a salary cap guy but I'm fascinated by it this year because I really want them to stay under the luxury tax one more year before diving head first into it next year. So if I get any of this wrong feel free to set me straight. I got the cap hit numbers from this place. For the recent draftees I just used the rookie scale.

Roster : $117 million total

1. Kemba ($34.4 million)
2. Smart ($13.4 million)
3. Brown ($23.9 million)
4. Tatum ($9.9 million)
5. Theis ($5 million)

6. Teague ($3.6 million, if he got the BAE, less if he got the vet minimum)
7. TT ($9.3 million)
8. Grant ($2.5 million)
9. Time Lord ($2 million)
10. Nesmith ($2.9 million)
11. Langford ($3.6 million)
12. Pritchard ($1.7 million)
13. Semi ($1.8 million)
14. Edwards ($1.5 million)
15. Green? ($1.5 million)


Dead Money: $1.1 million total

Yabusele ($1 million)
D Jackson ( $93K)

2-way
Tacko (doesn't count)
Tre Waters (doesn't count)

That's a total of $118.1 million in roster and dead money. Unless there are other costs I'm not counting, that leaves about $14.5 million to play with before they hit the $132.6 million luxury tax. I know there are websites that track this stuff but with all of the recent news that hasn't yet turned into official transactions, I couldn't find anything giving a peek at where the Celtics are right now. Did I mess it up?


edit: If the two rookies sign for 120% of scale (instead of scale), that takes the roster and dead money to $119 million, leaving $13.6 million before the luxury tax. Thanks for the help on that part.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
18,256
I'm not a salary cap guy but I'm fascinated by it this year because I really want them to stay under the luxury tax one more year before diving head first into it next year. So if I get any of this wrong feel free to set me straight. I got the cap hit numbers from this place. For the recent draftees I just used the rookie scale.

Roster : $117 million total

1. Kemba ($34.4 million)
2. Smart ($13.4 million)
3. Brown ($23.9 million)
4. Tatum ($9.9 million)
5. Theis ($5 million)

6. Teague ($3.6 million, if he got the BAE, less if he got the vet minimum)
7. TT ($9.3 million)
8. Grant ($2.5 million)
9. Time Lord ($2 million)
10. Nesmith ($2.9 million)
11. Langford ($3.6 million)
12. Pritchard ($1.7 million)
13. Semi ($1.8 million)
14. Edwards ($1.5 million)
15. Green? ($1.5 million)


Dead Money: $1.1 million total

Yabusele (($1 million)
D Jackson ( $93K)

2-way
Tacko (doesn't count)
Tre Waters (doesn't count)

That's a total of $118.1 million in roster and dead money. Unless there are other costs I'm not counting, that leaves about $14.5 million to play with before they hit the $132.6 million luxury tax. I know there are websites that track this stuff but with all of the recent news that hasn't yet turned into official transactions, I couldn't find anything giving a peak at where the Celtics are right now. Did I mess it up?
The rookie numbers are too low (you probably used scale, 1st rounders almost always sign for 120% of scale).
Otherwise looks close.
Below is a link to Keith Smith's cap sheets, which I've found are the best publicly available, with the official numbers as of yesterday (so only deals that actually happened, but it will let you see the holds and such that are coming off
and the MLE/BAE that will be added)

View: https://twitter.com/KeithSmithNBA/status/902247114377396224
 

oumbi

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 15, 2006
3,092
Thanks for the information Greenwood. I have a question since I am not particularly knowledgable about NBA salary rules. You estimate that the Celtics are about $14.5 million below the cap. But, if they were to include another player in a trade later would that player's salary be deducted?

For example, Ainge trades away TT and his $9 million dollar salary. Does that mean the Celtics can take on $23.5 million in new salary and NOT go over the cap? Thanks.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
6,087
Thanks for the information Greenwood. I have a question since I am not particularly knowledgable about NBA salary rules. You estimate that the Celtics are about $14.5 million below the cap. But, if they were to include another player in a trade later would that player's salary be deducted?

For example, Ainge trades away TT and his $9 million dollar salary. Does that mean the Celtics can take on $23.5 million in new salary and NOT go over the cap? Thanks.
That’s right. Tax calculations are done at the end of the season, without prorating for how much time is spent on the initial roster. So if they send out $9 million by the trade deadline they can take in $23.5 million (or whatever the figure is) and stay under the tax line for the season.

Edit: never mind this with regards to the cap, I was thinking you were asking about the tax.
 

DGreenwood

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 2, 2003
1,332
Seattle
The rookie numbers are too low (you probably used scale, 1st rounders almost always sign for 120% of scale).
Otherwise looks close.
Below is a link to Keith Smith's cap sheets, which I've found are the best publicly available, with the official numbers as of yesterday (so only deals that actually happened, but it will let you see the holds and such that are coming off
and the MLE/BAE that will be added)

View: https://twitter.com/KeithSmithNBA/status/902247114377396224
Yeah, I used rookie scale, thanks for the note about what they usually sign for, that should eat up almost another $1 million. I feel like I knew that somewhere in the back of my head but didn't account for it. And thanks for the spreadsheets, that'll keep me busy.
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,390
Santa Monica
Thanks for the information Greenwood. I have a question since I am not particularly knowledgable about NBA salary rules. You estimate that the Celtics are about $14.5 million below the cap. But, if they were to include another player in a trade later would that player's salary be deducted?

For example, Ainge trades away TT and his $9 million dollar salary. Does that mean the Celtics can take on $23.5 million in new salary and NOT go over the cap? Thanks.
they are over the cap already, under the luxury tax

they pretty much need to match salaries in a TT trade.

The Hayward S&T would be very helpful, they could use a piece of that to get a decent player from a seller at the trade deadline without matching salaries
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,958
That’s right. Tax calculations are done at the end of the season, without prorating for how much time is spent on the initial roster. So if they send out $9 million by the trade deadline they can take in $23.5 million (or whatever the figure is) and stay under the tax line for the season.

Edit: never mind this with regards to the cap, I was thinking you were asking about the tax.
There is one line the Celtics do not want to cross, and that is the luxury tax line. There is a 2nd line the team cannot cross, and that is the apron that is roughly $6M above the luxury tax line. They cannot cross the apron because they used the full MLE to sign Thompson, so they are hard-capped for this season.

The only way they can take back $23.5 in salary in your scenario is if they are able to secure a TPE via a Hayward sign-and-trade (barring an unexpected trade of Kemba, or a totally unrealistic scenario such as a trade of Jaylen Brown). They could then use the TPE to take salary in a trade without worrying about getting the salaries of the outgoing and incoming players to match up. They do have small TPE's they could use (Poirier, Kanter) for smaller trades.
 

oumbi

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 15, 2006
3,092
That’s right. Tax calculations are done at the end of the season, without prorating for how much time is spent on the initial roster. So if they send out $9 million by the trade deadline they can take in $23.5 million (or whatever the figure is) and stay under the tax line for the season.

Edit: never mind this with regards to the cap, I was thinking you were asking about the tax.
I think I was asking about the tax, but as I already noted I am not good at these things.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,394
Wouldn't you rather have Shaq Harrison than Green at the end of the rotation?
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
3,089
Wouldn't you rather have Shaq Harrison than Green at the end of the rotation?

For garbage time entertainment value alone, I’d want Green.

He’s a known commodity to the Celtics, and is an incredible athlete. I can see him actually playing real rotation minutes if called upon. A lot of people on this board aren’t high on him because of his ancientness at age 26. Hopefully, he will get better from three if he’s a Celtic again this season
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
6,087
I think I was asking about the tax, but as I already noted I am not good at these things.
So, roughly speaking, there are three lines that are important for salary purpose.

The first is the salary cap. Until you hit the cap, you can sign or trade for anyone, so long as doing so doesn’t bring you over the cap. There are rules for what counts against the cap beyond salaries (cap holds, incomplete roster charges if you don’t have a full roster, etc.) but you’re essentially free to operate until you’ve hit the cap. Once you’re over the cap, you can only sign or trade for players if you fit into one of the CBA’s exemptions or exceptions (Bird rights to re-sign your own players, matching salaries in a trade, the appropriate mid-level exemption, etc.). The salary for the purpose of the cap is calculated as you make each transaction. The Celtics, being over the cap, need to use these tools this off-season to fill out the roster, and the TPE generated by a potential Hayward trade would be one of these tools.

The second line that matters is the luxury tax line, which is higher than the salary cap, and determines how much a team must pay as a penalty for competitive balance redistribution if they finish the season above it. This is calculated at the end of the season, including all moves taken through the end of the season, so you can be above it mid-season but dump salary at the deadline and get under the tax. This is the one we were anticipating the Celtics endeavoring to stay below this season since it becomes more punitive if you are above the tax line three seasons out of four. Anticipating Tatum’s max extension kicking in next season, Jaylen’s deal starting this season, Kemba’s deal, etc., staying under this season helps put off the repeater penalties so they can build the roster in the coming seasons without massive hits to ownerships pocket books. So while even if it would be legal for them to take a $28 million or so player into a Hayward TPE for salary cap purposes (subject to the next paragraph), if doing so would put them above the luxury tax line, they likely wouldn’t do it (unless they were getting a real impact player).

The final line is the apron, which sits even higher than the tax line. If you execute certain kinds of transactions, such as a receiving a player in a sign and trade or using the full mid-level exemption, you can’t cross the apron, no matter what, that season. It’s what we say when a team is “hard capped” at the apron, as opposed to the “soft cap” of the normal salary cap, which has exemptions and such. The Celtics used the full mid-level exception on Tristan Thompson, so they cannot go above the apron no matter what this season. So even if they are ok with the financial implications of using the Hayward TPE to go above the luxury tax line, if doing so would put them above the apron, they wouldn’t be allowed to do it.

It’s obviously a lot more complicated than that and there are exceptions and caveats to most of the above, but that’s the three basic lines we watch out for. This is probably the best resource for specific questions, though even then it’s quite arcane:
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
18,256
Wouldn't you rather have Shaq Harrison than Green at the end of the rotation?
Not particularly no. I think Harrison is not a better player, and if you're going to cut Green who already knows the system I'd want it to be for someone better.

I thought Lowe had a great point on his podcast where he pointed out (using Harrison as his example) that there are all these twitter darling role players, who are roster fungible. Harrison to me is one of those guys. He plays hard, he's a pretty decent defender, he's not an NBA quality player on the other end. I think there are easily a dozen, proably more FAs right now I'd far prefer to Harrison.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,394
Not particularly no. I think Harrison is not a better player, and if you're going to cut Green who already knows the system I'd want it to be for someone better.

I thought Lowe had a great point on his podcast where he pointed out (using Harrison as his example) that there are all these twitter darling role players, who are roster fungible. Harrison to me is one of those guys. He plays hard, he's a pretty decent defender, he's not an NBA quality player on the other end. I think there are easily a dozen, proably more FAs right now I'd far prefer to Harrison.
I doubt you can get to a dozen, though I don’t have specific passion for Harrison.

I took Lowe’s point, which has been made here for years in particular as to the Spurs, is that roles and context matter. There's certainly a risk that people take small samples for role players and over-extrapolate. But the role for Harrison is one Celtics have—and the question is comparing him to Javonte Green, who is not to date an nba player at either end. System fit matters, but Green is not going to play a lot so it's not much of an issue here.

We seem to have a different view of the end of the roster---you have suggested most possible draft picks had less upside than what they have, and all free agents. I like all three guys at the end of the rotation, but I don't see the irreplaceability that you do. I certainly hope you are right about the value of Tacko, Waters, and Green!
 
Last edited:

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,384
Exceptions are not counted towards the luxury tax until they are used.
But, is there really any point in discussing whether they can get a TPE for Hayward then? It obviously isn't valuable unless used, and if using it would bring them to the hard apron limit they can't use it, and is there really much chance of finding someone that would justify going over the luxury tax line?

I have to admit, I'm a little confused by the Gordon Hayward situation. There were a number of people with the firm belief the Celtics could never re-sign Hayward due to the luxury tax repeater penalties. But, they reportedly offered him ~$25 million a year. So, they were willing to pay the penalties for a player of GH's caliber (or somehow that doesn't get them into the luxury tax).
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,958
But, is there really any point in discussing whether they can get a TPE for Hayward then? It obviously isn't valuable unless used, and if using it would bring them to the hard apron limit they can't use it, and is there really much chance of finding someone that would justify going over the luxury tax line?

I have to admit, I'm a little confused by the Gordon Hayward situation. There were a number of people with the firm belief the Celtics could never re-sign Hayward due to the luxury tax repeater penalties. But, they reportedly offered him ~$25 million a year. So, they were willing to pay the penalties for a player of GH's caliber (or somehow that doesn't get them into the luxury tax).
There absolutely is huge benefit for the Celtics getting a TPE for Hayward, which would be far, far more valuable to them then a future 2nd round pick. If they get a TPE for Hayward's full salary (~$30M), they would have several options:

1.) Use some of it to acquire a player at the trade deadline while staying under the luxury tax (somewhere around $12-14M).

2.) Use some of it to acquire a player at the trade deadline while staying under the hard-cap (somewhere around $18-20M). This forces them to pay luxury tax, however.

3.) Use it to acquire a player via sign-and-trade (or trade) next offseason, when they could use the full $30M. They are certain to be taxpayers next season anyway, but they would have had the benefit of a reset this year.

In options 1 and 2, they would also have the ability to use the remaining TPE to pick up another player in the offseason.

At $25M/yr for Hayward, the Celtics could have avoided the luxury tax, as they would not have signed Tristan Thompson, and probably would not have picked up Semi's option. But it would have been very tight. Had Hayward opted in for $34M, they would not have been able to avoid luxury tax unless they could find a taker for Kemba's contract.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,394
But, is there really any point in discussing whether they can get a TPE for Hayward then? It obviously isn't valuable unless used, and if using it would bring them to the hard apron limit they can't use it, and is there really much chance of finding someone that would justify going over the luxury tax line?

I have to admit, I'm a little confused by the Gordon Hayward situation. There were a number of people with the firm belief the Celtics could never re-sign Hayward due to the luxury tax repeater penalties. But, they reportedly offered him ~$25 million a year. So, they were willing to pay the penalties for a player of GH's caliber (or somehow that doesn't get them into the luxury tax).
Odds are they do not use the whole thing, though....it is more likely the use part of it. If they do need to use the whole thing it would be for a more impactful player and then yes..you'd need to calculate who you need to send back to stay under the tax.

The representations made along the way about what the Celtics would be economically unwilling to do were never well-founded and as you note were disproven by multiple reprorts. We're all just guessing here.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,981
Kiev, Ukraine
It's likely the Celtics saw Hayward as a significant (tradeable) asset at 25/year, or else could have shifted into "move Kemba" mode. My preference definitely would have been sign Hayward, move Kemba, and then sign a TT type.

Hayward probably didn't like what was behind either Celtics door: he would have stayed the 3rd/4th option, or been shipped off somewhere without any choice in the matter.