Home
Register
Log inHere’s Report Indicating Why Celtics Aren’t Spending Amid NBA Free Agency
2 posters
Page 1 of 1
Here’s Report Indicating Why Celtics Aren’t Spending Amid NBA Free Agency
by 112288 Tue Aug 03, 2021 8:45 pm
Here’s Report Indicating Why Celtics Aren’t Spending Amid NBA Free Agency
Boston reportedly is prioritizing next season's class
NESN by Sean T. McGuire
As if the Boston Celtics sitting on their hands since the free agency period started Monday wasn’t enough of an indication, it seems we’ve been provided a bit of information to rationalize what the organization’s lack of signings.
“Celtics priority, according to a league source, is to retain a ‘salary structure’ that makes it possible to sign a ‘major’ player when he comes available, most likely next summer,” The Boston Herald’s Mark Murphy tweeted Tuesday, right around the same time point guard Patty Mills signed a two-year deal for pennies.
“Good chance they don’t use the $5.7 (million) taxpayers mid-level this time around,” Murphy added.
What’s it all mean?
Well, the Celtics essentially are punting on this free agency class in order to have their finances in line to make a play for someone — Bradley Beal comes to mind — next offseason. NESN.com wrote how it seemed to be what the Celtics were doing Monday night after Evan Fournier signed with the New York Knicks, Lonzo Ball agreed to a sign-and-trade with the Chicago Bulls and even inexpensive option T.J. McConnell returned to the Indiana Pacers.
NBA reporter Keith Smith shared Tuesday how the Celtics had anywhere from $5.9 million to $9.5 million to spend. It doesn’t seem as though the C’s will do much of anything, however, instead heading into next season with a roster that’s worse than the one who was forced to compete in the play-in round.
112288
Boston reportedly is prioritizing next season's class
NESN by Sean T. McGuire
As if the Boston Celtics sitting on their hands since the free agency period started Monday wasn’t enough of an indication, it seems we’ve been provided a bit of information to rationalize what the organization’s lack of signings.
“Celtics priority, according to a league source, is to retain a ‘salary structure’ that makes it possible to sign a ‘major’ player when he comes available, most likely next summer,” The Boston Herald’s Mark Murphy tweeted Tuesday, right around the same time point guard Patty Mills signed a two-year deal for pennies.
“Good chance they don’t use the $5.7 (million) taxpayers mid-level this time around,” Murphy added.
What’s it all mean?
Well, the Celtics essentially are punting on this free agency class in order to have their finances in line to make a play for someone — Bradley Beal comes to mind — next offseason. NESN.com wrote how it seemed to be what the Celtics were doing Monday night after Evan Fournier signed with the New York Knicks, Lonzo Ball agreed to a sign-and-trade with the Chicago Bulls and even inexpensive option T.J. McConnell returned to the Indiana Pacers.
NBA reporter Keith Smith shared Tuesday how the Celtics had anywhere from $5.9 million to $9.5 million to spend. It doesn’t seem as though the C’s will do much of anything, however, instead heading into next season with a roster that’s worse than the one who was forced to compete in the play-in round.
112288
112288- Posts : 7855
Join date : 2009-10-17
Re: Here’s Report Indicating Why Celtics Aren’t Spending Amid NBA Free Agency
by gyso Tue Aug 03, 2021 10:56 pm
It said:
“Good chance they don’t use the $5.7 (million) taxpayers mid-level this time around,” Murphy added.
That made me think, "That could be true, let me go look". I was looking to see if there was a minimum number of seasons with a Taxpayers-MLE. I was thinking, sure, the answer is three (or at least two). Nope. The little MLE has a maximum of three seasons and there is no minimum. (The big MLE has a maximum of four seasons and there is no minimum, so no honest mistake in confusing the two.)
The Celtics should take advantage of this and sign someone to a 1+1 (2-year) or a 1+1+1 (3-year) contract with the Taxpayers-MLE. The first year is guaranteed and the subsequent years are team option. This contract can be use in a trade or dropped after a season to shed salary. This kind of contract won't bring much (see Patty Mills above, he probably got a guaranteed contract) but it may bring in a one trick pony (like a no-D shooter).
I rate this comment 8
(out of 10)
It said:
It doesn’t seem as though the C’s will do much of anything, however, instead heading into next season with a roster that’s worse than the one who was forced to compete in the play-in round.
First, this is so much premature [you fill in the blank]. We have no idea who else will get added to the roster this summer. In addition to Richardson, I can see a couple more tough defenders and/or a shooter or two. Veteran players.
Second, does the author suffer from selective amnesia? Going into last season, we had no Kemba and no Romeo due to the short turn-around. Nesmith wasn't ready for primetime. Prichard didn't come along until Teague proved to be a mistake. We had to go with a two-big lineup, which also turned out to be a mistake. No, we sucked right out of the chute.
I rate this comment 10 (out of 10)
Rosalie, you have a good grip on the local media. What's up with Sean T. McGuire?
“Good chance they don’t use the $5.7 (million) taxpayers mid-level this time around,” Murphy added.
That made me think, "That could be true, let me go look". I was looking to see if there was a minimum number of seasons with a Taxpayers-MLE. I was thinking, sure, the answer is three (or at least two). Nope. The little MLE has a maximum of three seasons and there is no minimum. (The big MLE has a maximum of four seasons and there is no minimum, so no honest mistake in confusing the two.)
The Celtics should take advantage of this and sign someone to a 1+1 (2-year) or a 1+1+1 (3-year) contract with the Taxpayers-MLE. The first year is guaranteed and the subsequent years are team option. This contract can be use in a trade or dropped after a season to shed salary. This kind of contract won't bring much (see Patty Mills above, he probably got a guaranteed contract) but it may bring in a one trick pony (like a no-D shooter).
I rate this comment 8
(out of 10)It said:
It doesn’t seem as though the C’s will do much of anything, however, instead heading into next season with a roster that’s worse than the one who was forced to compete in the play-in round.
First, this is so much premature [you fill in the blank]. We have no idea who else will get added to the roster this summer. In addition to Richardson, I can see a couple more tough defenders and/or a shooter or two. Veteran players.
Second, does the author suffer from selective amnesia? Going into last season, we had no Kemba and no Romeo due to the short turn-around. Nesmith wasn't ready for primetime. Prichard didn't come along until Teague proved to be a mistake. We had to go with a two-big lineup, which also turned out to be a mistake. No, we sucked right out of the chute.
I rate this comment 10
(out of 10)Rosalie, you have a good grip on the local media. What's up with Sean T. McGuire?
_________________
gyso- Posts : 23024
Join date : 2009-10-13
Similar topics» Which Boston Celtics free agents are likely to return – and who aren’t?
» Jayson Tatum, Boston Celtics aren’t getting to the free throw line and it’s costing them
» Report: 'Prominent' free agents interested in Celtics
» Report: Celtics Looking To Address Rim Protection In Free Agency
» Bleacher Report of Most Intriguing Free Agents for Celtics
» Jayson Tatum, Boston Celtics aren’t getting to the free throw line and it’s costing them
» Report: 'Prominent' free agents interested in Celtics
» Report: Celtics Looking To Address Rim Protection In Free Agency
» Bleacher Report of Most Intriguing Free Agents for Celtics
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum