Getting Smart with Statistics

Soxfan in Fla

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2001
7,037
Grizzlies have very few contracts that Ainge would be interested in and Green/Jackson would be the two that come closest to matching salaries. Nets could use a lot of cap space to acquire Smart but Ainge needs an asset or two to make him want to trade Smart.
Billy King is back? How many 1st round picks can we swindle too?
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,372
I'm not advocating an overpay for Smart. I'm advocating a fair market multi-year offer. If he turns that down, fine, he can play for the QO and try again next year. I just don't want to drive the kid out of town by insulting him with a lowball offer.
The floor was set last year with what was probably a 4/$46M deal (or something like that).
Is there another team that currently has the cap space to make Smart an offer above the non-taxpayer MLE? I don't think so, which means there are no teams to which Smart can shop an offer starting at more than $9M. And the Celtics have no incentive to do a sign and trade unless there is a trade proposal they can't refuse.
Yes there are teams with cap space but SAC is like the only one that might have some level of interest. Both ATL and CHI have cap space but Smart does nothing for either team.

NO has space and if I'm running NO, I'm thinking really hard about trying to get Smart on something like 2/$36M - his defense would be terrific next to Davis - but they went with the much cheaper Payton. NO is hard capped BTW.

That's about it. Here's the breakdown: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/23979291/every-deal-all-30-nba-teams-make-2018-free-agency
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
17,263
Newton
My sense is that there’s more risk in letting Smart play under the QO for a year—even if Ainge has the intention of letting him walk next year—than we would like to acknowledge. As much as we like to think it’s all business and valuations, a player’s feelings can be hard to quantify.

Obviously, Smart is kind of a tricky guy to pin a value on. Notwithstanding his limited offensive skill set, Smart has an important role on this Celtics team – a characterization many of his teammates agree with. And at the end of the day, if he sees himself as important to the team’s success—and I think he does—and the Celtics don’t—and by all accounts they don’t want to pay him like he is—I think there’s a non-zero chance that things could get ugly even if, yes, they “win” the QO negotiation this offseason.

In that sense, it’s not dissimilar to the tug of war that went on last season between the Pats and Malcolm Butler. And we all saw how that “win” turned out. The point is, this sort of situation can impact a player’s performance to the detriment of the team.

To that end, I’m actually beginning to wonder if a S&T may be in the offing. Or perhaps a deadline deal which might remind other teams of the impact Smart can have on the court in a way the off-season cant.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,672
Would you sign Smart to a long-term deal starting at the non-taxpayer MLE? I doubt if Smart would accept that, but it's the staring point, isn't it? If that's too rich for you, then you may value Smart as a player, but not enough to keep him around.

I agree that Ainge has made his play and will probably "win" this negotiation when Smart accepts the QO. Whether it's a win long term remains to be seen.
That question isn't one that needs to be answered as it would never be presented as an option due to Smart's opinion of his market value. The decision is to offer the QO or extend to a ballpark of 4/$60m. Due to Smart's role on the team moving forward, the money necessary to re-sign better players over the next 3 years, and the repeater tax penalties I don't even feel this is a particularly difficult decision.

If Jaylen didn't exist.....if Hayward or Kyrie weren't here then it would be a completely different discussion as Smart wouldn't be behind all of these guys. You can't sign everyone when their payday comes due......there has to be logical decisions made on how you fiscally manage the organization looking out several years while not being persuaded by emotion. Haven't we learned this following the debates on Isaiah's extension talks and the worth of Crowder? We can go back even further to the Rondo debate.


My sense is that there’s more risk in letting Smart play under the QO for a year—even if Ainge has the intention of letting him walk next year—than we would like to acknowledge. As much as we like to think it’s all business and valuations, a player’s feelings can be hard to quantify.
Aren't we glad that allowing a players feelings to be hurt wasn't a factor in Ainge's decision to back up the Brinks truck for Isaiah, right?
 
Last edited:

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,372
Before quoting a floor for free agency, you may want to check with IT.
To my knowledge, IT was never made a serious offer. Smart was made an offer not even a year ago and turned it down. The post to which I responding mentioned a fair, market value multi-year offer.

IMO if DA offered Smart substantially less than what he was offered in October, it would be like a punch in the face to Smart.

Smart is signing for 3/$33M here and now.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,845
My sense is that there’s more risk in letting Smart play under the QO for a year—even if Ainge has the intention of letting him walk next year—than we would like to acknowledge. As much as we like to think it’s all business and valuations, a player’s feelings can be hard to quantify.
The fact he'd be playing for his next contract helps eliminate a lot of those fears. If Smart wants his big pay day, he's not going to get it by playing bad soldier.
 

steveluck7

Member
SoSH Member
May 10, 2007
2,837
Burrillville, RI
The fact he'd be playing for his next contract helps eliminate a lot of those fears. If Smart wants his big pay day, he's not going to get it by playing bad soldier.
My worry, though, is that he's going to equate (perhaps rightly so) his lack of a real offer to his lack of offensive stats and thus try to be more of a scorer next year and cost the team.
I don't worry about him loafing around. i'm worried about him trying to change the type of player he is
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,672
My worry, though, is that he's going to equate (perhaps rightly so) his lack of a real offer to his lack of offensive stats and thus try to be more of a scorer next year and cost the team.
I don't worry about him loafing around. i'm worried about him trying to change the type of player he is
This can be an issue when a team has multiple players playing for their payday rather than playing to win. With Smart, Rozier, and Morris (if he's still here) on that second unit I'm guessing there won't be many shot clock violations next year.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,573
Yes there are teams with cap space but SAC is like the only one that might have some level of interest. Both ATL and CHI have cap space but Smart does nothing for either team.
Multiple Sacramento writers have reported that they can’t find any source in the organization that will confirm Blakely’s report, so Blakely’s source was likely Smart’s agent.

NO has space and if I'm running NO, I'm thinking really hard about trying to get Smart on something like 2/$36M - his defense would be terrific next to Davis - but they went with the much cheaper Payton. NO is hard capped BTW.
I think you meant had, their use of the full MLE hard capped them, but even before the Randall signing they really only had the full MLE to offer (because they were too close to the cap). So the best they could have done was something like 4/38, which Boston would have matched in a cocaine heartbeat.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,672
Multiple Sacramento writers have reported that they can’t find any source in the organization that will confirm Blakely’s report, so Blakely’s source was likely Smart’s agent.



I think you meant had, their use of the full MLE hard capped them, but even before the Randall signing they really only had the full MLE to offer (because they were too close to the cap). So the best they could have done was something like 4/38, which Boston would have matched in a cocaine heartbeat.
Agreed on Happy spreading fake leaks.

You'll never see a team sign Marcus to an offer sheet of 4/$38m as he'd never agree to this and even if he did you'd be blocking your cap movement for 3 days (or is it 2 under the new CBA?). If something is going to come it's going to be in that 4/$60m range which doesn't appear likely but teams have lost their minds at the 11th hour in the past.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,372
I think you meant had, their use of the full MLE hard capped them, but even before the Randall signing they really only had the full MLE to offer (because they were too close to the cap). So the best they could have done was something like 4/38, which Boston would have matched in a cocaine heartbeat.
What I'm seeing on the internet (I don't follow NOP that closely) is that NO has about $16M of cap space left after Randle and Payton signings. E.g.,: https://www.thebirdwrites.com/2018/7/6/17526984/2018-nba-free-agency-pelicans-salary-cap-incentives-julius-randle-payton-james-ennis-clark-diallo. I believe they could create more if they really wanted to. But that would put them into luxury tax territory and NO has never paid the luxury tax in its history.

It will be interesting to see how Randle turns out.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
34,826
What I'm seeing on the internet (I don't follow NOP that closely) is that NO has about $16M of cap space left after Randle and Payton signings. E.g.,: https://www.thebirdwrites.com/2018/7/6/17526984/2018-nba-free-agency-pelicans-salary-cap-incentives-julius-randle-payton-james-ennis-clark-diallo. I believe they could create more if they really wanted to. But that would put them into luxury tax territory and NO has never paid the luxury tax in its history.

It will be interesting to see how Randle turns out.
This is not correct. The $16 mil refers to how much money they would hypothetically be able to spend before hitting the luxury tax. They are already over the cap, and so could only sign Smart or other external free agents to the veteran's minimum. The only way they can really spend more than that would be in retaining their own free agents, similar to how Boston can offer Smart as much as they want despite being over the salary cap.
 
Last edited:

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,573
What I'm seeing on the internet (I don't follow NOP that closely) is that NO has about $16M of cap space left after Randle and Payton signings.
They have $16 million left under the hard cap, not the salary cap.

You'll never see a team sign Marcus to an offer sheet of 4/$38m as he'd never agree to this and even if he did you'd be blocking your cap movement for 3 days (or is it 2 under the new CBA?).
We were discussing the Pelicans, and I agree they wouldn’t have signed a valuable RFA to an MLE deal.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,257
Santa Monica
My sense is that there’s more risk in letting Smart play under the QO for a year—even if Ainge has the intention of letting him walk next year—than we would like to acknowledge. As much as we like to think it’s all business and valuations, a player’s feelings can be hard to quantify.

In that sense, it’s not dissimilar to the tug of war that went on last season between the Pats and Malcolm Butler. And we all saw how that “win” turned out. The point is, this sort of situation can impact a player’s performance to the detriment of the team.
We heard this same nonsense when IT4 was talking contract and we see how that ended up. Thank goodness Danny didn't flinch one bit. Celtic Mgmt has earned the right to have the fans 100% trust in contract/trade situations.
It's not like the Celtics are cheap, they will pay up for unrestricted free agents. BUT if a player is an RFA the Celtics should retain their OPTION to match or decline another teams deal.

For every Malcolm Butler 1yr bad contract situation, there are 5 Pablo Sandoval bad multi-yr guaranteed contracts. Those 4yr deals are much more crippling for an organization than one unhappy camper for one season.

If Marcus signs a 1yr QO he will play his butt off or he won't get minutes (which would hurt his value).
 
Last edited:

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,562
Ainge has every reason to expect a hometown discount if he signs Smart to a multi-year deal now. That may not be true next June. And I think Smart will play his butt off no matter what his contract status might be. It's just the way he is.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,372
This is not correct. The $16 mil refers to how much money they would hypothetically be able to spend before hitting the luxury tax. They are already over the cap, and so could only sign Smart or other external free agents to the veteran's minimum. The only way they can really spend more than that would be in retaining their own free agents, similar to how Boston can offer Smart as much as they want despite being over the salary cap.
You and Nighthob are correct; brain fart on my part.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
21,076
Melrose, MA
That question isn't one that needs to be answered as it would never be presented as an option due to Smart's opinion of his market value. The decision is to offer the QO or extend to a ballpark of 4/$60m. Due to Smart's role on the team moving forward, the money necessary to re-sign better players over the next 3 years, and the repeater tax penalties I don't even feel this is a particularly difficult decision.
I think there's a middle of the road option. The Q.O. is $6.1m. So the Celtcs could offer something like 2/$21m, then move Morris.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,178
I think there's a middle of the road option. The Q.O. is $6.1m. So the Celtcs could offer something like 2/$21m, then move Morris.
Something like 2/$24 with the second year being a player option might be palatable for both sides. Smart doesn’t have to suffer the ignominy of playing for the QO but both sides retain maximum flexibility going forward.
 

Pxer

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2007
1,394
Maine
Something like 2/$24 with the second year being a player option might be palatable for both sides. Smart doesn’t have to suffer the ignominy of playing for the QO but both sides retain maximum flexibility going forward.
How does this give the Celtics any advantage over playing for the QO?

They pay a high salary this year AND give him a player option?
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,073
How does this give the Celtics any advantage over playing for the QO?

They pay a high salary this year AND give him a player option?
If I understand the posters thought process, the point is that the Celtics pay Smart closer to what he believes he is worth next season and give both sides some optionality while not tying up their cap on him longer-term. Smart gets a potential second year and the Celtics create some good will if they want to retain him beyond this season.

I am not sure that Ainge et al would bite on something like this. However if they value him enough to try to figure out how to keep him around, its a nice way to meet in the middle.

To answer your question, its far more costly than the QO and if money next year is all that matters, they likely won't offer anything like this deal.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,562
It's not worth letting Marcus Morris go unless they can lock Smart up for at least two years, or maybe three.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,158
Saint Paul, MN
I agree. Morris provides something that nobody else on the bench can provide. It may be frustrating, but he can consistently get decent looks with the ball in his hands with the shot cloc winding down. He also provides even more switchable defense lineups. Brown, Hayward, Tatum, Morris, Horford is riduculously switchy
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,257
Santa Monica
Agreed BigJohn and Moops...After a season where we lost numerous players to injuries. AND had guys like Semi/Yabu start games, you'd think we'd appreciate depth. Danny is not in a hurry to give MaMo away for a can of spam, to make sure he bids against himself... and writes Marcus a free option for next season. Jeesh, enough with the goodwill garbage. Marcus is a restricted free agent not unrestricted. Happy Walters, go earn your agents fee, and get a deal so Ainge can either match or pass. Otherwise, take the QO and talk next season when Marcus is unrestricted.

I'm getting fed up with Marcus' camp leaking BS to the press, where is their goodwill?
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,100
Because if he’s playing on an extension he doesn’t have the no trade status that comes on a QO deal.
He gets a no trade on a 1+1 as well, Baynes currently has no trade protection.

I might be the president of Team Keep Marcus, and I'd never do a 1+1 for him.

Gives the Celtics zero upside.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,100
Agreed BigJohn and Moops...After a season where we lost numerous players to injuries. AND had guys like Semi/Yabu start games, you'd think we'd appreciate depth. Danny is not in a hurry to give MaMo away for a can of spam, to make sure he bids against himself... and writes Marcus a free option for next season. Jeesh, enough with the goodwill garbage. Marcus is a restricted free agent not unrestricted. Happy Walters, go earn your agents fee, and get a deal so Ainge can either match or pass. Otherwise, take the QO and talk next season when Marcus is unrestricted.

I'm getting fed up with Marcus' camp leaking BS to the press, where is their goodwill?
If he signs the QO, he's gone next year for sure.

He's expected to get paid two years in a row, he's pissed off, the Celtics would have to massively overpay to keep him.

Guys just don't sign long term with their current teams the year after signing the QO.

Here's the list of guys who've done so in the last 20+ years.

Spencer Hawes

That's it.

You can be OK with having Smart on the QO, but I'd just about rule out thinking you can get him on the QO then still keep him after next season.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,089
If he signs the QO, he's gone next year for sure.

He's expected to get paid two years in a row, he's pissed off, the Celtics would have to massively overpay to keep him.

Guys just don't sign long term with their current teams the year after signing the QO.

Here's the list of guys who've done so in the last 20+ years.

Spencer Hawes

That's it.

You can be OK with having Smart on the QO, but I'd just about rule out thinking you can get him on the QO then still keep him after next season.
Given that we have Rozier’s RFA rights next summer, I’m ok with this. If Kyrie stays, losing Smart isn’t that big of a deal for me. If Kyrie goes, we can afford to pay Scary Terry.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,178
To expand on my earlier post, contracts don't happen in a vacuum. Agents take note of this kind of stuff, as do other players. Giving Smart something closer to market value instills some goodwill and gives you a chance to re-sign him next year. If he takes the qualifying offer, he's gone. That's it. Give it one more year in case something unforeseen happens with Kyrie or Rozier.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,100
Given that we have Rozier’s RFA rights next summer, I’m ok with this. If Kyrie stays, losing Smart isn’t that big of a deal for me. If Kyrie goes, we can afford to pay Scary Terry.
I trade Rozier this summer, assuming Kyrie is here and healthy-ish.

I don't see a role he could be happy with on this team, and his value is at its highest point.

I don't think he and Kyrie can play together without getting scorched on defense, which leaves him with just the minutes Kyrie is on the bench, in important games anyways.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,089
I trade Rozier this summer, assuming Kyrie is here and healthy-ish.

I don't see a role he could be happy with on this team, and his value is at its highest point.

I don't think he and Kyrie can play together without getting scorched on defense, which leaves him with just the minutes Kyrie is on the bench, in important games anyways.
I think you need to keep Rozier as an insurance policy to Kyrie for this season and next summer. Can’t imagine anything we’d receive in trade would be worth giving that up. Kyrie misses tons of games so Rozier will be needed.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,073
To expand on my earlier post, contracts don't happen in a vacuum. Agents take note of this kind of stuff, as do other players. Giving Smart something closer to market value instills some goodwill and gives you a chance to re-sign him next year. If he takes the qualifying offer, he's gone. That's it. Give it one more year in case something unforeseen happens with Kyrie or Rozier.
Agreed. Smart's woeful shooting is the only reason the guy doesn't have a contract in hand. Even considering that deep flaw, the guy clearly brings a lot to the table from a defense, ballhandling and leadership standpoint.

That said, the long running debate about how we and the Celtics value Smart will be resolved one way or another when this is all said and done. If they are ok with letting him take the QO and play out the string, it will be clear (per some others in this thread) that the Celtics don't value his skillset as much as some of us previously believed.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
2,946
New York City
That said, the long running debate about how we and the Celtics value Smart will be resolved one way or another when this is all said and done. If they are ok with letting him take the QO and play out the string, it will be clear (per some others in this thread) that the Celtics don't value his skillset as much as some of us previously believed.
I dunno if that's really true. If the Celtics view Smart's true value at, say, $13m a year, but know that no one else will pay that much, why should they unilaterally increase their price as opposed to getting, in their view, a nice bargain due to a crappy market for FAs?
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,073
I dunno if that's really true. If the Celtics view Smart's true value at, say, $13m a year, but know that no one else will pay that much, why should they unilaterally increase their price as opposed to getting, in their view, a nice bargain due to a crappy market for FAs?
To clarify, imho, they would only increase their offer to him to try to maintain some goodwill with him and entice him to consider sticking around beyond this upcoming season. As other posters have noted, if he comes back at the QO, he is almost certainly gone.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,257
Santa Monica
I trade Rozier this summer, assuming Kyrie is here and healthy-ish.

I don't see a role he could be happy with on this team, and his value is at its highest point.

I don't think he and Kyrie can play together without getting scorched on defense, which leaves him with just the minutes Kyrie is on the bench, in important games anyways.
Ugh. Let me get this straight. You'd like to sign Smart for 4yrs @ $50M. Turn around and deal MaMo for a ham sandwich (due to salary/repeater purposes). Then deal Rozier (who didn't yield a first rounder last year) this Summer for what? Because you think Rozier's defense is Kyrie-like?

I know Terry didn't cover himself in glory when he was rotated on Lebron in the playoffs, but no one stopped Bron. The rest of the year Terry was fine defensively and better than Kyrie.

Put me down for Smart on the QO, keep MaMo, and keep the improving Terry Rozier and his RFA option next off-season. Kyrie and Hayward will be brought along slowly all season. Players tire or get injured, we need the depth. Plus Brad thrives with a deep bench.

This is a championship caliber team and dealing Rozier/Morris, for not much, does not make them better

Playing armchair shrink and deciding who will be happy/sad due to PT in July is also pre-mature.
 
Last edited:

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,672
Agreed BigJohn and Moops...After a season where we lost numerous players to injuries. AND had guys like Semi/Yabu start games, you'd think we'd appreciate depth. Danny is not in a hurry to give MaMo away for a can of spam, to make sure he bids against himself... and writes Marcus a free option for next season. Jeesh, enough with the goodwill garbage. Marcus is a restricted free agent not unrestricted. Happy Walters, go earn your agents fee, and get a deal so Ainge can either match or pass. Otherwise, take the QO and talk next season when Marcus is unrestricted.
Yeah, Ainge has an enormous advantage here in this market with Smart being restricted.....why people want to give this up for the sake of "goodwill" really is stunning.. This is high stakes poker.....the side without leverage generally loses. This situation is unique with the market this summer.....I don't believe for one second that Smart taking the QO has any effect on next summers FA negotiations as he is/was always going to go to the highest bidder except for the market being completely different along with us not retaining rights. Someone who was in Vegas (I think) and has connections said it best a few pages ago...…..Utah wanted Exum at that price more than Ainge wants Smart at that price. With our tax crunch coming up this is where I am too.

I'm getting fed up with Marcus' camp leaking BS to the press, where is their goodwill?
Meh, there is no goodwill when you're competing at this level. Walters is simply doing his job which is to try and generate interest to get an offer sheet in front of them. They met with several teams in Vegas and Ainge put him on the spot this summer......go get your client an offer sheet. One of my theories is that Ainge had his "offer" to Smart last year leaked despite it being fake news to dissuade teams from making Smart a RFA offer knowing it would have to exceed that amount of the fake leak. It's a truly brilliant play if, like I believe, Ainge has zero interest in Smart at a 4/$48m while getting great value out of him expiring at $6m on a QO.
 

sox311

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 30, 2004
1,628
That's what she said.
This is far from about what Marcus is worth. Either to the Celtics or anyone else in this market or any in the past.

If you have two cars and you have the option to get a third that will make you drive two of them much less and you have to pay three times the asking price for the third car that would be like what signing Marcus to a long term overpriced contract this offseason. And you have to get rid of your motorcycle too (Marcus Morris).

I have a couple questions I know some of you can answer.
1-Can Danny structure a deal where Marcus gets paid 7M this year and then his salary is bumped for the next two or three years of a deal? Like a 4/49 at 7/14/14/14 per year.
2-Can Marcus take the QO and then sign an extension soon after that will lock him up for two or three years after? (I think he can only sign for 120% of what he makes this year in this method and possibly not until December?)

Thanks!
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,672
If Smart does sign an offer sheet that Ainge doesn't match from a Atlanta, Sacramento, or Chicago we now have a poor mans Smart on the market with the Bulls rescinding their QO on David Nwaba which seems to be the precursor to a larger move coming right around the corner.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,100
Ugh. Let me get this straight. You'd like to sign Smart for 4yrs @ $50M. Turn around and deal MaMo for a ham sandwich (due to salary/repeater purposes). Then deal Rozier (who didn't yield a first rounder last year) this Summer for what? Because you think Rozier's defense is Kyrie-like?
Yes.

I'd try to trade Rozier for a guy on a rookie deal that can be a cheap bench guy for multiple years when they'll likely be in the tax. A Josh Hart type(EDIT: looking a bit into this, maybe Celtics could get Wes Iwundu and OKCs top 20 protected pick from Orlando for Rozier. Or Davon Reed and Milwaukees protected pick from Phoenix.)

I don't think it takes much to see a minute crunch here, the regular season doesn't matter for this team so I'm looking at the playoffs. They can play the non-rotation guys they want to develop like Williams, Semi, and Wanamaker(to a lesser extent) to get them through the regular season if necessary.

Figure your top five guys play the 36 minutes a game that Horford/Tatum played this year. That leaves 60 total minutes for everyone else. I'd figure Baynes/Theis to play most, if not all, of the 24 minutes that Horford/Tatum are on the bench. I think Smart plays a minimum 20 minutes, I think it'll be more mid 20s, at the point/wing. Say Smart/Baynes/Theis combine for only 40 minutes. That leaves 20 minutes total for Morris/Rozier/Semi/anyone else they pickup or earns minutes.

Doesn't feel like nearly enough to me.

Then considering Morris and Rozier are going into a season where they're looking to earn their next contracts, and their trade value is likely as high as it will ever be for Boston, I'd look to cash them in.

If Smart is here on the QO, I'd probably keep Morris since he's decent depth for injury concerns, likely doesn't have much trade value, and the tax wouldn't be an issue. But I'd have zero issues moving him to avoid tax if necessary. He's a luxury item.
 
Last edited:

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
2,946
New York City
I have a couple questions I know some of you can answer.
1-Can Danny structure a deal where Marcus gets paid 7M this year and then his salary is bumped for the next two or three years of a deal? Like a 4/49 at 7/14/14/14 per year.
2-Can Marcus take the QO and then sign an extension soon after that will lock him up for two or three years after? (I think he can only sign for 120% of what he makes this year in this method and possibly not until December?)
1 - no, when signing players with Bird rights raises are limited to 8%. So if they started with 7m in year 1, year 2 could be a max of 7.56m, etc.

2 - I believe the answer to this is no. The general rule is that extensions can't be signed for contracts fewer than 3 seasons, so since the QO is essentially a 1-year contract I don't think an extension is possible unless I'm missing a nuance.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,672
Then considering Morris and Rozier are going into a season where they're looking to earn their next contracts, and their trade value is likely as high as it will ever be for Boston, I'd look to cash them in.
Both are expiring contracts so you aren't likely to get much for them this summer. I'm sure contenders would love either at the deadline as a cheap rental but those are precisely the teams we don't want to be helping. I definitely don't see a market for Rozier as he's going to be due a big contract next summer while being a valuable second unit guy for us and the only way you move Morris is if they demand a trade in a contract year, which isn't out of the realm.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,257
Santa Monica
Yeah, Ainge has an enormous advantage here in this market with Smart being restricted.....why people want to give this up for the sake of "goodwill" really is stunning.. This is high stakes poker.... Someone who was in Vegas (I think) and has connections said it best a few pages ago...…..Utah wanted Exum at that price more than Ainge wants Smart at that price. With our tax crunch coming up this is where I am too.



Meh, there is no goodwill when you're competing at this level. Walters is simply doing his job which is to try and generate interest to get an offer sheet in front of them. They met with several teams in Vegas and Ainge put him on the spot this summer......go get your client an offer sheet. One of my theories is that Ainge had his "offer" to Smart last year leaked despite it being fake news to dissuade teams from making Smart a RFA offer knowing it would have to exceed that amount of the fake leak. It's a truly brilliant play if, like I believe, Ainge has zero interest in Smart at a 4/$48m while getting great value out of him expiring at $6m on a QO.
That was my quote. I went to Vegas on Monday-Tuesday (45min flight from LAX) and had a ball. Sat around watched hoops for hours with owners, GMs, players, Coach Stevens, etc...My buddy is the Director of Ops for an NBA team, he runs his teams cap. I spoke to him at length about Smart/Exum/Barton. Was surprised how open he was about the situation. And some of the blunders he made on signings. The NBA is really in new territory with the salary cap/contracts/RFA/UFA/etc. The salary bump a few seasons back and all the huge contracts handed out have made the market very perverse. He credited a lot of the Celtics front office success to Mike Zaren.

IT4 1yr for $2M with Nuggets :(
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
251
Re the goodwill component. This is where Smart's choice of representation (putting aside overall competency) does hurt him. Goodwill is a consideration when an agent represents max level players whom a team wants to attract as either free agent or trade destination down the line. KCP doesn't get those deals with the Lakers if Happy is his agent. Likewise, if Smart was with Wasserman is Danny more willing to make offer that allows Marcus to save face.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,100
Both are expiring contracts so you aren't likely to get much for them this summer. I'm sure contenders would love either at the deadline as a cheap rental but those are precisely the teams we don't want to be helping. I definitely don't see a market for Rozier as he's going to be due a big contract next summer while being a valuable second unit guy for us and the only way you move Morris is if they demand a trade in a contract year, which isn't out of the realm.
Rozier can agree to an extension now though.

I could see a team making a move for him now and try to lock in an extension while being the only team who can negotiate with him.

And yes on Morris, not looking to move him. Just would if I needed to if ducking the tax became an issue.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
21,076
Melrose, MA
And Smart would be an unrestricted FA next year either way. No chance they "settle"on 1+1 at 12 million a year.
Agreed. If they went 1+1 on a short deal that overpays Smart in year 1, it would be the Celtics getting the option not Smart. The more realistic options I see are QO, 2-year deal, or 2+1 deal with Smart having the option (which he almost certainly would decline anyway).

Given that we have Rozier’s RFA rights next summer, I’m ok with this. If Kyrie stays, losing Smart isn’t that big of a deal for me. If Kyrie goes, we can afford to pay Scary Terry.
Kyrie is the big question here. If there's any chance he leaves, the Celtic need to hang on to at least one of Smart or Rozier.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,257
Santa Monica
Yes.


I don't think it takes much to see a minute crunch here, the regular season doesn't matter for this team so I'm looking at the playoffs. They can play the non-rotation guys they want to develop like Williams, Semi, and Wanamaker(to a lesser extent) to get them through the regular season if necessary.

Figure your top five guys play the 36 minutes a game that Horford/Tatum played this year. That leaves 60 total minutes for everyone else. I'd figure Baynes/Theis to play most, if not all, of the 24 minutes that Horford/Tatum are on the bench. I think Smart plays a minimum 20 minutes, I think it'll be more mid 20s, at the point/wing. Say Smart/Baynes/Theis combine for only 40 minutes. That leaves 20 minutes total for Morris/Rozier/Semi/anyone else they pickup or earns minutes.

Doesn't feel like nearly enough to me.

Then considering Morris and Rozier are going into a season where they're looking to earn their next contracts, and their trade value is likely as high as it will ever be for Boston, I'd look to cash them in.

If Smart is here on the QO, I'd probably keep Morris since he's decent depth for injury concerns, likely doesn't have much trade value, and the tax wouldn't be an issue. But I'd have zero issues moving him to avoid tax if necessary. He's a luxury item.
Doing a regular season minute's estimate, a full 3 months ahead of pre-season games is somewhat premature. Doing a minute's estimate for the 2019 playoffs 9 months prior is downright silly. Especially when you start extrapolating the minutes played by Tatum/Horford in the 2018 Playoffs for ALL 5 starters in the 2019 playoffs. As you know the 2018 Celtic playoff team was missing numerous starters and rotational players. Tatum/Horford/Rozier had to play major minutes. Coach Stevens had no choice. Which brings me to my next point, the Celtics will have injuries, its part of the game. Your estimates are based on a 100%, fully healthy ballclub. If that happens great, but wouldn't count on it.

PLUS Brad thrives with a deep bench, it lets him go situational all game long. Stevens coaching skill is a huge competitive advantage for this team. Giving him as many arrows for his quiver is the most efficient way to build this roster.

Trading proven veterans on short, cheap deals to our competitors when vying for a championship is not clever. I'm glad that Danny & Co are at the helm and won't be doing that.

Here is my early 2018-19 roster estimate:
Baynes, Horford, Tatum, Brown, Irving, Hayward, Rozier, Morris, Smart, Theis, Semi, Williams, Wanamaker, Bird, Yabusele. First 10 are the main rotation, last 5 fill in for blowouts/injuries/rest for rotational players. Minutes are based on production/situation/health, not on contract status.
 
Last edited:

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,672
Rozier can agree to an extension now though.

I could see a team making a move for him now and try to lock in an extension while being the only team who can negotiate with him.
This would never happen though because there isn't a match. We are talking about Terry Rozier here.....not Karl Anthony Towns. A team isn't going to trade a piece that Ainge would seem more valuable than Rozier this season for the right to pay Rozier 4/$80m or whatever. Ainge isn't going to give Rozier away for nothing and allowing him to walk next summer isn't losing him for nothing. There is tremendous value in having Rozier play this season as a Celtic......better than anything a team would give up for him right now.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,177
Maine
Could they Structure something LT with Smart thus?
16 mil in 2018-19
12 in 19-20
10 in 20-21
8 in 21-22

4 Years 46

We can discuss length (maybe 3 years instead of 4, player opt in year 4 etc etc). We might also have to get rid of MaMo(or Yab??) to make this work this year to not get into repeater tax.

But wouldnt this help with "Cap Penalty dollars" when we really have a crunch later on? I would rather pay the tax on 10 million (in 20-21) or 8 in 21-22 then 11.5 Million which is what a "straight" 4/46 would work out to be.

Even if you take the QO out this year (6 million) the deal above (or something like it) because you assume we could get him for that this year, It would be like Smart getting 3 years x 13.33 for a total of 3/40 Next year from the Celts. Doesnt seem like a terrible over pay for Smart and locks down a "leader" who can play 3 positions on D and chip in on offense.

Seems like it does everything we want unless we really want to cut bait from Smart after this year (assuming we could get him back on the QO). Locks him up LT. Keeps our Repeater tax as low as possible for as long as possible. Provides "Goodwill" which has some, even if ambiguous, value. And allows depth (minus perhaps MaMo).

I guess the question would be if Smart would accept 4/46.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,158
Saint Paul, MN
Why are we paying Smart nearly 12 million dollars a year in any of these scenarios? That is a ridiculous overpay considering he has no offers. If the choice is him playing for one year at the QO and maybe leaving next year, vs paying him 4/46, I will take the former every single time.