Celtics Offseason Primer

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
8,066
around the way
I mean, it's fair to say trading for Derrick White was kind of a go for it now move, no?

And Wyc still elected to not pay the tax this year, when they made the finals, and really could've used another guy.

And I agree the CAP approach will be different NOW than the previous two seasons, just not as different as some people here are expecting.

I don't believe Wyc isn't suddenly going to become a Ballmer or Lacob.
You can keep saying this because you're 100% convinced of this. That doesn't make it true.

There's value in delaying the repeater tax. Everyone knows this, even Wyc.

Keep beating that drum though.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
9,251
Toscana via Kyiv
We do have the Big 3 years as a little clue into what Wyc might be willing spend in luxury tax.

With a team that was definitely a championship contender they paid $8.2m, $8.3m, and $14.9m the first 3 years, roughly 12% of the cap the first 2 years, and 21% the 3rd. Ten percent of the cap today would be $14.9m.
This is before even getting into the subsequent increases in franchise values.

The wildcard here is that I don't know how much a global liquidity crunch affects things for Wyc.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,279
This is before even getting into the subsequent increases in franchise values.

The wildcard here is that I don't know how much a global liquidity crunch affects things for Wyc.
It's hard to know for sure, but I never thought Wyc's purchase was heavily leveraged, and it's been a while so the value of the team has certainly increased substantially since then. The NBA has a sweet TV deal in place. I guess local revenues could be a concern, but there is still a long waiting list for season tix. And I doubt very much Wyc had a lot of money in crypto.

I've still seen zero evidence that Wyc will avoid paying the luxury tax required to allow Stevens to bring in the right players. The idea that the team would not use the taxpayer MLE is borderline absurd, IMO, unless they have filled the equivalent of that spot with a major roster acquisition elsewhere.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
27,044
Tax will not be paid.
Keith Smith also confirmed Cs will not be taxpayers, although he said something about "re-working incentives". Note that he was correcting an earlier tweet of his sayi ng that Cs would be taxpayers so it's super close.
After re-working some incentive information, the Boston Celtics did indeed just duck in under the luxury tax for 2021-22.
Sorry for the confusion yesterday. Bonuses can be tricky to figure.
Boston still currently projects to be a taxpayer in 2022-23, so not much changes there.

View: https://twitter.com/KeithSmithNBA/status/1538152802127695874?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
9,251
Toscana via Kyiv
It's hard to know for sure, but I never thought Wyc's purchase was heavily leveraged, and it's been a while so the value of the team has certainly increased substantially since then. The NBA has a sweet TV deal in place. I guess local revenues could be a concern, but there is still a long waiting list for season tix. And I doubt very much Wyc had a lot of money in crypto.

I've still seen zero evidence that Wyc will avoid paying the luxury tax required to allow Stevens to bring in the right players. The idea that the team would not use the taxpayer MLE is borderline absurd, IMO, unless they have filled the equivalent of that spot with a major roster acquisition elsewhere.
I'm totally with you wrt his willingness to pay the tax all else being equal, just noting that some macro conditions might make it harder to get liquidity based on nominal franchise value. I'm sure others here know more.

If he is fine to get the cash, then his prior track record in the big 3 era indicates that he'd be fine with tax bills into the $25M+ range (as a % of the cap). Probably higher, given the explosion in franchise valuations.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
9,251
Toscana via Kyiv
Keith Smith also confirmed Cs will not be taxpayers, although he said something about "re-working incentives". Note that he was correcting an earlier tweet of his sayi ng that Cs would be taxpayers so it's super close.
After re-working some incentive information, the Boston Celtics did indeed just duck in under the luxury tax for 2021-22.
Sorry for the confusion yesterday. Bonuses can be tricky to figure.
Boston still currently projects to be a taxpayer in 2022-23, so not much changes there.

View: https://twitter.com/KeithSmithNBA/status/1538152802127695874?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Obviously I would have preferred to win the title and pay the tax, but given that that didn't happen, this is a pretty big deal wrt the repeater.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
31,512
Hingham, MA
Jan 22, 2006
172
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/267429/Nuggets-Drawing-Great-Trade-Interest-In-Monte-Morris

Monte is the anti-turnover machine the Celtics could use. He'd slide into a Top 8 rotational player on this team

2yrs/$18.6M left on his contract

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/morrimo01.html
Can't say I remember watching him play, but surface-level seems like a good fit on the offensive side of the ball. Obvious questions about whether he could fit into the defensive scheme.
 

NavaHo

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 29, 2010
288
I'm skeptical about the Celtics having a chance to win any bidding wars, when all they have for picks is a presimably late first next year, and there isn't much in the way of expendable assets on their bench. I feel like the most likely use of the TPE (if it gets used) is doing a team a favor getting an iffy contract off their books. Duncan Robinson, Kelly Olynyk, Doug McDermott (if SAS has regrets or other plans), etc.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,355
Santa Monica
I'm skeptical about the Celtics having a chance to win any bidding wars, when all they have for picks is a presimably late first next year, and there isn't much in the way of expendable assets on their bench. I feel like the most likely use of the TPE (if it gets used) is doing a team a favor getting an iffy contract off their books. Duncan Robinson, Kelly Olynyk, Doug McDermott (if SAS has regrets or other plans), etc.
a late 1st + salaries landed Christian Woods last week. Boston can combine the salary relief of the TPE + future picks + young players like PP/Nesmith/Begarin

Hard no on Duncan Robinson.

How is he on D? Would switch everything work with him? Or would he be more of a PP replacement?
You could put the ball in his hands with the 2nd unit he'd be playing with Smart or White, the D would be fine

The team will have lots of roster spots and PP would be great to keep on the roster.

The #1 issue with this team for the 100th time is ball security. Monte Morris excels here and he can shoot from deep. The "take foul" probably goes away which makes live ball TOs even more brutal
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
8,066
around the way
Can't say I remember watching him play, but surface-level seems like a good fit on the offensive side of the ball. Obvious questions about whether he could fit into the defensive scheme.
Not a terrible defensive player, especially given his size (which is woeful). Pritchard replacement indeed. Probably safer with the ball, which has value.
 

NavaHo

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 29, 2010
288
I'm skeptical about the Celtics having a chance to win any bidding wars, when all they have for picks is a presimably late first next year, and there isn't much in the way of expendable assets on their bench. I feel like the most likely use of the TPE (if it gets used) is doing a bad team a favor getting an iffy contract off their books. Duncan Robinson, Kelly Olynyk, Doug McDermott (if SAS has regrets or other plans), etc.
Hard no on Duncan Robinson.
Oh, totally agree. But that's about where my expectations are. Other teams know Boston has to act with the TPE deadline, and I'll be pleasantly surprised if anyone does them a favor.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
8,066
around the way
Oh, totally agree. But that's about where my expectations are. Other teams know Boston has to act with the TPE deadline, and I'll be pleasantly surprised if anyone does them a favor.
Other teams have payroll that they want to move and Processes that they want to Trust. It's not about doing the Celtics a favor. It's about teams being in a different stage of the team-building process than we are, IMO.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
37,929
Melrose, MA
Other teams have payroll that they want to move and Processes that they want to Trust. It's not about doing the Celtics a favor. It's about teams being in a different stage of the team-building process than we are, IMO.
Yep. A team may want to move some salary off its cap (and get their own traade exception) or create cap room. The Celtics are in a position to take some salary on for the right fit.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,052
You can keep saying this because you're 100% convinced of this. That doesn't make it true.

There's value in delaying the repeater tax. Everyone knows this, even Wyc.

Keep beating that drum though.
You're incorrect.

I'm not 100% convinced, that's why I say "I believe", that's an opinion, and not "I know" that would be 100% convinced.

Of course there's value in delaying repeater tax. There's also value in paying the tax to improve your team now. Would you have liked a stronger team in this past season if it meant paying the tax? I say yes. Are you a no? They had a pretty decent chance of winning this year, being in the finals and all.

I'm pretty sure everyone knows Wyc, an owner, knows there is value in delaying the repeater tax. Kinda obvious. It's money directly into his pocket.

Keep blowing that bugle though.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
46,386
Yep. A team may want to move some salary off its cap (and get their own traade exception) or create cap room. The Celtics are in a position to take some salary on for the right fit.
Yeah we have seen many many trades that seem like teams annoyingly doing favors for a title contender because they are just trying to clear the books, make room for younger cheaper players, etc.

We’ve also seen vets (and their agents) similarly doing favors for contenders by signing what seem like below market deals. Celtics’ title contention may put them in this conversation as well. Once upon a time James Posey was a dream acquisition for the Big Three team and it was basically a bridge deal to his last (and final) big contract, with his Celtics salary being considerably less than any post-rookie deal salary in his whole career. Hoping they can similarly use the MLE for that purpose again (Kyle Anderson).
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,042
He has a lot of miles for 28 yer old guy. I see him as different in that his skill set is unusual. He is just good enough at shooting, bringing the ball up, and scoring to play 1. But a decline means that doesn't work, as it didn't for a chunk of this season. Also, I love him, but I don't see him as a guy who will stop trying to be an impact guy, and just settle into a secondary role. I do think he is, and will next year be an excellent player, but he is the type of guy the wheels could come off suddenly. A good look at how bad tired Marcus was these last few games, is a predictor of what nagging injury Marcus could be like, and it isn't pretty.
He didn’t seem to be all that great of a defender in the last few games. And he was def a problem on the offensive end imo. Marcus tries to take over to end runs by the other team or hit impact threes when he should be helping to try and get better shots for other players. He needs to become more of a role player and fit into the team more in those situations… he has flashes of doing that. I’m not sure how coachable of a player he is… he seems to play a lot more by instinct.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,976
02130
Are people actually advocating trading the defensive player of the year (not to mention whatever intangibles Smart adds) and saying he's "close to a negative player"? Marcus Smart at a $17m cap hit is not something that needs fixing just because he looked bad to you in the last three games of the year.

I'm in the camp that thinks they just ran out of gas / were too banged up from playing all out since January, including 14 really tough and physical playoff games in 28 days against two of the best teams in the league. I don't think it's much more complicated than that. Tatum, TL and Smart had known injuries and other guys were probably playing through things as well.

I mean, Tatum played 67 games from January 5 until the end of the year and apart from a couple weeks at the end of the regular season, they were all basically games the Celtics needed to win.

Golden State had a bit more depth but really just more rest so their rotation played better. It's not like Otto Porter (8th in minutes) was particularly special during the Finals. Don't forget that Draymond and Klay played less than half of the regular season too and Steph missed three weeks right before the playoffs. Yes, those were injuries but they weren't subject to the wear and tear of those games, while Smart was playing through injuries and getting additionally banged up.

Boston has everyone under contract, the only real issues from a roster standpoint are depth and TL/ Horford's health and longevity. They should look to add pieces to take the weight off of them and hopefully get off to a hot start so they can make trade deadline moves with an eye towards making it all the way through the playoffs (and maybe give guys some rest in March/ April). Maybe they look for versatility so they have bench players who can match up better. But you don't have to make major changes and I'd argue you shouldn't move any of the starters other than Al for anyone other than a small handful of players (who are not likely to be available).
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
591
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/267429/Nuggets-Drawing-Great-Trade-Interest-In-Monte-Morris

Monte is the anti-turnover machine the Celtics could use. He'd slide into a Top 8 rotational player on this team

2yrs/$18.6M left on his contract

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/morrimo01.html
If you want an example of an owner cheaping out on paying the tax, Kroenke is Exhibit A. The Nuggets have the two time MVP in his prime, and the justification for moving best back up point guard in the league is that 1) their starting guard will be back from a serious knee injury (which surely will not require scheduled rest or missed games due to soreness) and 2) their second year guard, who was atrocious defensively, will fill the role.
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
6,700
He didn’t seem to be all that great of a defender in the last few games. And he was def a problem on the offensive end imo. Marcus tries to take over to end runs by the other team or hit impact threes when he should be helping to try and get better shots for other players. He needs to become more of a role player and fit into the team more in those situations… he has flashes of doing that. I’m not sure how coachable of a player he is… he seems to play a lot more by instinct.
He severely sprained his ankle two weeks before the Finals started.
 
Jan 22, 2006
172
I'm in the camp that thinks they just ran out of gas / were too banged up from playing all out since January, including 14 really tough and physical playoff games in 28 days against two of the best teams in the league. I don't think it's much more complicated than that. Tatum, TL and Smart had known injuries and other guys were probably playing through things as well.
I'll offer a slightly different take here: they reverted to their native selves. A lot of the improvement we saw from Jan-June was catching the bad O out of their system, but when stuff got tight they want back to their instincts, which are generally pretty gross on the offensive side.

You see this all the time in different walks of life: people can have a good spell of controlling their impulses, doing things a bit differently, creating space through deliberate mindfulness ... and as soon as things get tough they revert right back to who they were. It can be really heartbreaking to see in friends and family; its annoying to see it out of your basketball team.

To argue against myself: being utterly exhausted and reverting back to hero-ball probably look very similar to each other, so how can we really tell? Where I land is this: the offense looked gross pretty much as soon as the Brooklyn series was over. It wasn't just 3 bad games of offense, it was 3 bad series.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,042
Are people actually advocating trading the defensive player of the year (not to mention whatever intangibles Smart adds) and saying he's "close to a negative player"? Marcus Smart at a $17m cap hit is not something that needs fixing just because he looked bad to you in the last three games of the year.

I'm in the camp that thinks they just ran out of gas / were too banged up from playing all out since January, including 14 really tough and physical playoff games in 28 days against two of the best teams in the league. I don't think it's much more complicated than that. Tatum, TL and Smart had known injuries and other guys were probably playing through things as well.

I mean, Tatum played 67 games from January 5 until the end of the year and apart from a couple weeks at the end of the regular season, they were all basically games the Celtics needed to win.

Golden State had a bit more depth but really just more rest so their rotation played better. It's not like Otto Porter (8th in minutes) was particularly special during the Finals. Don't forget that Draymond and Klay played less than half of the regular season too and Steph missed three weeks right before the playoffs. Yes, those were injuries but they weren't subject to the wear and tear of those games, while Smart was playing through injuries and getting additionally banged up.

Boston has everyone under contract, the only real issues from a roster standpoint are depth and TL/ Horford's health and longevity. They should look to add pieces to take the weight off of them and hopefully get off to a hot start so they can make trade deadline moves with an eye towards making it all the way through the playoffs (and maybe give guys some rest in March/ April). Maybe they look for versatility so they have bench players who can match up better. But you don't have to make major changes and I'd argue you shouldn't move any of the starters other than Al for anyone other than a small handful of players (who are not likely to be available).
I, for one, think that Smarts role needs to change.. or that he needs to be added to. I think he’s a plus player, but he also makes the team have to play a certain way. He’s not a good enough shooter so he allows other teams to double Tatum or clog the lane. He’s not a good enough PG to not require Tatum to have to play point forward. He settles too often for his own shot imo. He likes to try and take over too often when he needs to set picks or do whatever else to fit more into a team role.
None of this has anything to do with his ankle or the playoffs.

I’m not advocating for trading him.. I just want to change his role or add players to reduce the stress on Tatum to create or to make more options for how the team can play. Generally the team just needs to get deeper and allow for more diversity of play.
 
Jan 22, 2006
172
I, for one, think that Smarts role needs to change.. or that he needs to be added to. I think he’s a plus player, but he also makes the team have to play a certain way. He’s not a good enough shooter so he allows other teams to double Tatum or clog the lane. He’s not a good enough PG to not require Tatum to have to play point forward. He settles too often for his own shot imo. He likes to try and take over too often when he needs to set picks or do whatever else to fit more into a team role.
None of this has anything to do with his ankle or the playoffs.

I’m not advocating for trading him.. I just want to change his role or add players to reduce the stress on Tatum to create or to make more options for how the team can play. Generally the team just needs to get deeper and allow for more diversity of play.
I think this is the trap with Smart. If he's not your pointguard, you're (1) bringing someone in at PG who is probably the weak link in your defense, which instantly changes the identity and scheme of the team, and (2) you've got a below-average offensive player that most teams don't respect, allowing them to double the Jays and slow down the game.

Smart at PG transformed this team defensively, but maybe also capped it offensively? I think its fair to ask if there's any kind of starting lineup with Marcus Smart in it that gets you where you want to be both on both sides of the ball.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,355
Santa Monica
If you want an example of an owner cheaping out on paying the tax, Kroenke is Exhibit A. The Nuggets have the two time MVP in his prime, and the justification for moving best back up point guard in the league is that 1) their starting guard will be back from a serious knee injury (which surely will not require scheduled rest or missed games due to soreness) and 2) their second year guard, who was atrocious defensively, will fill the role.
Kroenke owns Arsenal, Rams and Avalanche, also. I don't follow the Nuggets enough to opine too much on their spending/cap approach

Maybe it's a minutes thing and they want to get a wing for Morris? I just saw the headline, know Morris is strong with the ball going back to his days at Iowa St and TOs are the Celtics' Achilles heel
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,976
02130
I'll offer a slightly different take here: they reverted to their native selves. A lot of the improvement we saw from Jan-June was catching the bad O out of their system, but when stuff got tight they want back to their instincts, which are generally pretty gross on the offensive side.

You see this all the time in different walks of life: people can have a good spell of controlling their impulses, doing things a bit differently, creating space through deliberate mindfulness ... and as soon as things get tough they revert right back to who they were. It can be really heartbreaking to see in friends and family; its annoying to see it out of your basketball team.

To argue against myself: being utterly exhausted and reverting back to hero-ball probably look very similar to each other, so how can we really tell? Where I land is this: the offense looked gross pretty much as soon as the Brooklyn series was over. It wasn't just 3 bad games of offense, it was 3 bad series.
OK, well, explain what happened to the #1 Miami Heat or the defending champion Milwaukee Bucks then.

Playoffs are hard, of course teams are going to look worse. Every thing you do has been studied, dissected and planned for by the best coaches and players in the sport. They did a great job at countering for that against the 3 best teams in their conference until they ran out of steam / ran into someone a little bit better. It doesn't mean anything was wrong with what they were doing.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,976
02130
I, for one, think that Smarts role needs to change.. or that he needs to be added to. I think he’s a plus player, but he also makes the team have to play a certain way. He’s not a good enough shooter so he allows other teams to double Tatum or clog the lane. He’s not a good enough PG to not require Tatum to have to play point forward. He settles too often for his own shot imo. He likes to try and take over too often when he needs to set picks or do whatever else to fit more into a team role.
None of this has anything to do with his ankle or the playoffs.

I’m not advocating for trading him.. I just want to change his role or add players to reduce the stress on Tatum to create or to make more options for how the team can play. Generally the team just needs to get deeper and allow for more diversity of play.
I agree they need to add some bench pieces and I stated that.

The way Smart "makes" them play is what dominated the league for 5 months. They had a different backup PG to start the season and he definitely made them play a certain way...and it didn't work very well.

I don't think Smart's game needs fixing at all. Seeing him as selfish seems way off-base in particular. And perhaps more to the point I don't think the player you're really looking for is available.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,052
I, for one, think that Smarts role needs to change.. or that he needs to be added to. I think he’s a plus player, but he also makes the team have to play a certain way. He’s not a good enough shooter so he allows other teams to double Tatum or clog the lane. He’s not a good enough PG to not require Tatum to have to play point forward. He settles too often for his own shot imo. He likes to try and take over too often when he needs to set picks or do whatever else to fit more into a team role.
None of this has anything to do with his ankle or the playoffs.

I’m not advocating for trading him.. I just want to change his role or add players to reduce the stress on Tatum to create or to make more options for how the team can play. Generally the team just needs to get deeper and allow for more diversity of play.
What role would you suggest he play?

If it's a sixth man, what role would you suggest Derrick White play?
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
8,066
around the way
You're incorrect.

I'm not 100% convinced, that's why I say "I believe", that's an opinion, and not "I know" that would be 100% convinced.

Of course there's value in delaying repeater tax. There's also value in paying the tax to improve your team now. Would you have liked a stronger team in this past season if it meant paying the tax? I say yes. Are you a no? They had a pretty decent chance of winning this year, being in the finals and all.

I'm pretty sure everyone knows Wyc, an owner, knows there is value in delaying the repeater tax. Kinda obvious. It's money directly into his pocket.

Keep blowing that bugle though.
God help us. So is your argument that 3-4 months ago or even longer that obviously the Celtics were going to be 2 wins from the championship but that bastard Wyc was too cheap to go the extra mile and bring in talent to get us over the hump? Is that your argument?

Fucking tedious.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
26,804
Saskatoon Canada
OK, well, explain what happened to the #1 Miami Heat or the defending champion Milwaukee Bucks then.
He explained ti, that it happened at the end, which is why they won the series you mention and lost the last one. He mentions fatigue as a possible reason.

Personally, I think the Warriors' D forced the Celtics to play like they had earlier in the year, and the Cs shot well enough, and defended well enough to almost win it.
 
Jan 22, 2006
172
OK, well, explain what happened to the #1 Miami Heat or the defending champion Milwaukee Bucks then.

Playoffs are hard, of course teams are going to look worse. Every thing you do has been studied, dissected and planned for by the best coaches and players in the sport. They did a great job at countering for that against the 3 best teams in their conference until they ran out of steam / ran into someone a little bit better. It doesn't mean anything was wrong with what they were doing.
I was going to respond and say that I didn't think their offense in rounds 2 & 3 was particularly good, but I just went to look at the box scores and was surprised at how many points they wound up scoring. Consider my point retracted.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,052
God help us. So is your argument that 3-4 months ago or even longer that obviously the Celtics were going to be 2 wins from the championship but that bastard Wyc was too cheap to go the extra mile and bring in talent to get us over the hump? Is that your argument?

Fucking tedious.
No, my argument is that you can't know when obviously your team is going to be 2 wins from the championship ahead of time, so when you're in the mix don't be looking to duck the tax when you're a goddamn billionaire running around jabbering about Banner 18.

Do people really think the Celtics didn't really have much of a chance this season? The front office sure didn't act like it. They traded a first round pick and a first round pick at the deadline for Derrick White. They traded another first round pick before the season to flip Kemba Walker for 35 year old Al Horford.

Those don't strike me as, ah we're not really contenders now, let's just wait another year or two before Wyc thinks we're a contender.
Just because sports radio callers and fan board posters didn't think this was the year, doesn't mean the front office/players agree with you.

JFC after falling for the Boston Tax Resetters over at Fenway now we're falling for the Boston Coupon Clippers over at the Garden.

What's fucking tedious is fans worrying over billionaire owners bottom line.

I'm not expecting Wyc to throw money around like a Lacob or Ballmer.

But, can he just open up the purse strings a little? Is that so much to ask?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,279
No, my argument is that you can't know when obviously your team is going to be 2 wins from the championship ahead of time, so when you're in the mix don't be looking to duck the tax when you're a goddamn billionaire running around jabbering about Banner 18.

Do people really think the Celtics didn't really have much of a chance this season? The front office sure didn't act like it. They traded a first round pick and a first round pick at the deadline for Derrick White. They traded another first round pick before the season to flip Kemba Walker for 35 year old Al Horford.

Those don't strike me as, ah we're not really contenders now, let's just wait another year or two before Wyc thinks we're a contender.
Just because sports radio callers and fan board posters didn't think this was the year, doesn't mean the front office/players agree with you.

JFC after falling for the Boston Tax Resetters over at Fenway now we're falling for the Boston Coupon Clippers over at the Garden.

What's fucking tedious is fans worrying over billionaire owners bottom line.

I'm not expecting Wyc to throw money around like a Lacob or Ballmer.

But, can he just open up the purse strings a little? Is that so much to ask?
Was there an acquisition not made because of the tax? They picked up White and Theis. They got rid of a couple of pieces that simply didn't fit in Schroeder and Kanter, and a draft bust in Langford. If there was a move they could have made but didn't, your argument would make more sense, but it's not at all clear such a move existed.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,052
Was there an acquisition not made because of the tax? They picked up White and Theis. They got rid of a couple of pieces that simply didn't fit in Schroeder and Kanter, and a draft bust in Langford. If there was a move they could have made but didn't, your argument would make more sense, but it's not at all clear such a move existed.
Yes. They dumped Schroder (and to a much lesser extent Kanter/Bruno) into the Theis deal when they didn't have to.

They could've either kept Schroder as a bench player, or spun him as matching salary into a bench player who could play in the playoffs.

Or the could've used one of their TPEs to just take back salary for a bench upgrade.

Or they could've used the Fournier TPE to take back White, and maybe kept Josh Richardson if the Spurs deal were different.

One more guy could've come in handy in game 5 in GS, when you got zero from the three bench players who actually played.
 
Last edited:

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,506
If you want an example of an owner cheaping out on paying the tax, Kroenke is Exhibit A. The Nuggets have the two time MVP in his prime, and the justification for moving best back up point guard in the league is that 1) their starting guard will be back from a serious knee injury (which surely will not require scheduled rest or missed games due to soreness) and 2) their second year guard, who was atrocious defensively, will fill the role.
I mean, let's be honest, Monte Morris is pretty terrible defensively. And five years older than Bones to boot. I'm not going to ding them for wanting to clear out Morris given what they're spending on Jokic, Murray, Porter, Gordon, and Will the Thrill. Now if they were moving Barton I might agree with the point. But Morris is the living definition of fungible.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
10,167
No, my argument is that you can't know when obviously your team is going to be 2 wins from the championship ahead of time, so when you're in the mix don't be looking to duck the tax when you're a goddamn billionaire running around jabbering about Banner 18.

Do people really think the Celtics didn't really have much of a chance this season? The front office sure didn't act like it. They traded a first round pick and a first round pick at the deadline for Derrick White. They traded another first round pick before the season to flip Kemba Walker for 35 year old Al Horford.
Their win total over under was 45.5 and they were a borderline playoff team as of January, so yeah, I think it's fair to say that for much of this season people didn't think they had a chance.

They were 31-25 and tied for the 6th seed the day they traded for White.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,279
Yes. They dumped Schroder (and to a much lesser extent Kanter/Bruno) into the Theis deal when they didn't have to.

They could've either kept Schroder as a bench player, or spun him as matching salary into a bench player who could play in the playoffs.

Or the could've used one of their TPEs to just take back salary for a bench upgrade.

Or they could've used the Fournier TPE to take back White, and maybe kept Josh Richardson if the Spurs deal were different.

One more guy could've come in handy in game 5 in GS, when you got zero from the three bench players who actually played.
Do you have a cite indicating these trade ideas would have worked for the counter party?
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,986
The back of your computer
Yes. They dumped Schroder (and to a much lesser extent Kanter/Bruno) into the Theis deal when they didn't have to.

They could've either kept Schroder as a bench player, or spun him as matching salary into a bench player who could play in the playoffs.

Or the could've used one of their TPEs to just take back salary for a bench upgrade.

Or they could've used the Fournier TPE to take back White, and maybe kept Josh Richardson if the Spurs deal were different.

One more guy could've come in handy in game 5 in GS, when you got zero from the three bench players who actually played.
The Theis/Schroder trade was made right at the deadline, so the choice was either make the trade or not. Your other alternatives are wishcasting and hindsight analysis.

I have the sense that they wanted Schroder and Freedom off the team because they did not fit into the Stevens/Udoka system, while Theis was a better fit with the current players. Given the nature of the Spurs deal, I don't think Stevens had much leverage/inclination to strike a better deal. Keeping Richardson within the scope of the White deal meant going over the tax threshold. On the date of the trade, BOS was 31-25 and was the 7th seed in the East and trying to stay out of the play-in games, not wondering about Finals matchups.

It certainly seemed that Udoka was only playing 8-9 players deep, and the problem was not more players but rather the players they had (starters + bench) didn't play well for the last 2+ games of the Finals.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,535
Monte Morris is basically older Payton Pritchard. Good shooter, below average defender with bad size, and not really that good a passer for a PG. Not sure what problem he solves other than having a PP clone who is maybe a bit better with the ball but not quite as good from 3.


Here's a name I bet the Celtics kick the tires on:

Alec Burks, plays 2 or 3, but can bring the ball up as a 1, shoots 38% from 3 (over 40% the last 2 seasons) good defender.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
8,066
around the way
No, my argument is that you can't know when obviously your team is going to be 2 wins from the championship ahead of time, so when you're in the mix don't be looking to duck the tax when you're a goddamn billionaire running around jabbering about Banner 18.

Do people really think the Celtics didn't really have much of a chance this season? The front office sure didn't act like it. They traded a first round pick and a first round pick at the deadline for Derrick White. They traded another first round pick before the season to flip Kemba Walker for 35 year old Al Horford.

Those don't strike me as, ah we're not really contenders now, let's just wait another year or two before Wyc thinks we're a contender.
Just because sports radio callers and fan board posters didn't think this was the year, doesn't mean the front office/players agree with you.

JFC after falling for the Boston Tax Resetters over at Fenway now we're falling for the Boston Coupon Clippers over at the Garden.

What's fucking tedious is fans worrying over billionaire owners bottom line.

I'm not expecting Wyc to throw money around like a Lacob or Ballmer.

But, can he just open up the purse strings a little? Is that so much to ask?
Hey I'm eat the rich as much as the next guy. Want to bark up that tree, go right ahead.

I also like living in reality where every team--in both of the sports that you mention--hits the reset button and tries to time it right.

If you have posts from the deadline or even last offseason that show (good) ideas that you floated that would have materially improved this team, I tip my hat to your foresight and withdraw from this discussion with my tail between my legs. Otherwise, it seems like a straight rant against rich guys that doesn't acknowledge that a) there's a GFIN curve for everyone and b) where we are on the GFIN curve.

Tl;dr; if you saw the 2021 Sox and the 2022 Celtics getting as far as they did, you should quit posting here and gamble full-time.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,042
What role would you suggest he play?

If it's a sixth man, what role would you suggest Derrick White play?
I don’t think they should go by established norms actually., I like the idea of adapting to the teams you’re playing and playing to your strengths. Why should any team have the same starting five for every game? If you have a deeper bench you can play around a bit more.. especially when you have a very long team in general as the Celtics do. I guess my main concern about smart is his shooting.. and then the fact that I don’t think he’s a good enough passer either to be a PG… these aren’t concerns for the regular season, but more for the playoffs and seven game series. Anything to make the Celtics less predictable and defendable. If Marcus significantly improves his shooting this isn’t a question.. but until he does he’s an offensive liability in a playoff series IMO.
 

GB5

lurker
Aug 26, 2013
396
Do we think that this year put the Celts in the realm of legit Championship level team or do we think that most around the league thinks this was a one year wonder team?

The reason I ask is in the context of veterans around the league. Are we a ring chasing destination for veterans or are we still down the pecking order in this regard?
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
42,543
Do we think that this year put the Celts in the realm of legit Championship level team or do we think that most around the league thinks this was a one year wonder team?

The reason I ask is in the context of veterans around the league. Are we a ring chasing destination for veterans or are we still down the pecking order in this regard?
I’m sure they’re in the top group of ring chasing destinations. Don’t see how you (not you personally) can see this team with the young stars and think they’re a flash in the pan, especially given the prior year playoff runs.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,042
I’m sure they’re in the top group of ring chasing destinations. Don’t see how you (not you personally) can see this team with the young stars and think they’re a flash in the pan, especially given the prior year playoff runs.
They’ve been in the ECF in 2017, 2018 and 2020 before this last run.. and JB, JT are about to enter their primes.. why wouldn’t you want to play with them?
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
42,543
They’ve been in the ECF in 2017, 2018 and 2020 before this last run.. and JB, JT are about to enter their primes.. why wouldn’t you want to play with them?
Yup. And the Celtic brand still has some value. I bet we’ll be in the running for many buyouts and the like. Won’t land them all because LA, GS, and others are attractive as well. But we can also offer PT given our depth challenges.