Sam Still An Option

by Jeff Clark on Feb 17, 2009 10:14 AM EST in Articles Comment 45 comments

By now you have heard that the Celtics have agreed to trade Sam Cassell and cash for a "heavily protected" 2nd round pick. Note: The deal isn't done yet, and there are still details to work out, but the Sac Bee is confirming the story.

It is safe to say that Danny is setting the table for something else to happen. What that is, nobody knows. Maybe Danny doesn't even know yet.

If I had to guess, I would say that this is actually another flexibility move. Danny wants to keep as many options open as he can.

I can't imagine that this is purely a financial move for the Celtics. Yes, this takes what is left of Sam's salary off the books for luxury tax consideration, but we also paid Sacramento to take on that salary. I would imagine that the dollars saved vs. spent are either a net loss or close enough to a wash to not matter much.

Obviously opening up a roster spot allows Danny to pick up any free agent that shakes out after the trade deadline on Thursday. I've got my fingers crossed for Joe Smith but I'll be eagerly watching the wire to see what else might pop up.

However, if nothing reasonable becomes available, I think Sam Cassell could still be an option. I really doubt Sam is in the Kings plans, so it is reasonable to assume that he'll be waived. As long as he's waived before March 1st, we can still pick him up for the stretch run. We just have to wait 30 days to do it. See the rules here:

If a player is waived after March 1, he is ineligible to be included in the playoff roster of any team that signs him for the remainder of that season.

If a team trades a player and the player is waived by the receiving team, the player's original team cannot re-sign that player for 30 days (during the season) or 20 days (during the offseason) following the date of the trade.

So say that Sam gets officially traded and waived by Feb. 20. That means he's eligible to return to the Celtics on March 20. That gives Danny a whole month to try to find a better option on the waiver wire. If he comes up empty, he can still pick up Sam. At that point in the season we'll still have 13 games left to shake off the cobwebs and work him into the rotation.

I wouldn't bank on much from that future 2nd rounder. The term "heavily protected" seems to indicate that we'll never see that pick. We may also never see Sam in a Celtics uniform again, but it is nice to know that we still have that option.

Roy Hobbes is smarter than I am with the finances, so I'll quote him on the particulars here (which I pulled from the comments below):

While Sam has a contract for around $1.2 million, the team is only paying him $797,581; the league subsidizes the rest for veteran salaries. As of right now, the team is through 63.4% of its schedule, and Sam has earned that amount of his salary. That means he’s owed approximately $291,798 for the rest of the season by whatever team is paying him.

So, in the case, a $500,000 cash payment (as reported) gives the Kings over $200,000 in their pocket, plus whatever additional savings they can get by buying Sam out. The Celtics, on the other hand, save the $291,788 owed to Sam, plus luxury tax on the entire $797,581. That means the team is paying $500,000 to save $1,089,369 (owed salary + luxury tax). It’s my understanding that if the team signs another player to the veteran minimum, they only have to pay luxury tax on the pro-rated salary of that player.

Here’s where things get interesting. If the team was planning on bringing Sam back, financially this may make sense. If Sam stayed on the team the entire season, the Celts would have owed him roughly $1.6 million in salary plus luxury tax. If he comes back with roughly 20 games left, (and if and only if the league treated Sam like any other minimum-salaried player) the team would only owe him approximately $389,000 in salary plus luxury tax: ($797,581 * 20/82s, doubled). Thus, if their plan is to only have Sam play a limited number of games prior to the playoffs, this trade would allow them to do so, while getting them approximately $205,000 in savings after paying Sacramento off ($1.6 million combined salary pre-trade – $505,666 paid salary to date – $389,000 current luxury tax – $500,000 to Sacramento = $205,334).

This assumes that the league treats Sam as any other minimum salaried player the team adds for the stretch run, rather than viewing this as a means of circumventing the salary cap.

0 recs | Comment 45 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I don't think I've ever heard the term "Heavily protected 2nd rnd pick"

Seems like a no-lose move since Sam can come back.

by moiso on Feb 17, 2009 8:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

"Heavily protected 2nd rnd pick"

is a very common term during the period before the January 10th deadline, when teams are moving unguaranteed contracts.

by cordobes on Feb 17, 2009 8:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ESPN Headline

Anybody notice it says the Kings ship Cassel to Boston?

Guess they are tired of him already and are giving him back

by shiggins on Feb 17, 2009 9:03 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

nice catch

I never even noticed that – my brain just adjusted it in my head

"Would I rather be feared or loved? Easy. Both. I want people to be afraid of how much they love me." Michael Scott

by Jeff Clark on Feb 17, 2009 9:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’m curious how heavily protected the pick is; I know there are some limitations.

by theBird on Feb 17, 2009 9:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Here are the financial particulars as I understand them

While Sam has a contract for around $1.2 million, the team is only paying him $797,581; the league subsidizes the rest for veteran salaries. As of right now, the team is through 63.4% of its schedule, and Sam has earned that amount of his salary. That means he’s owed approximately $291,798 for the rest of the season by whatever team is paying him.

So, in the case, a $500,000 cash payment (as reported) gives the Kings over $200,000 in their pocket, plus whatever additional savings they can get by buying Sam out. The Celtics, on the other hand, save the $291,788 owed to Sam, plus luxury tax on the entire $797,581. That means the team is paying $500,000 to save $1,089,369 (owed salary + luxury tax). It’s my understanding that if the team signs another player to the veteran minimum, they only have to pay luxury tax on the pro-rated salary of that player.

Here’s where things get interesting. If the team was planning on bringing Sam back, financially this may make sense. If Sam stayed on the team the entire season, the Celts would have owed him roughly $1.6 million in salary plus luxury tax. If he comes back with roughly 20 games left, (and if and only if the league treated Sam like any other minimum-salaried player) the team would only owe him approximately $389,000 in salary plus luxury tax: ($797,581 * 20/82s, doubled). Thus, if their plan is to only have Sam play a limited number of games prior to the playoffs, this trade would allow them to do so, while getting them approximately $205,000 in savings after paying Sacramento off ($1.6 million combined salary pre-trade – $505,666 paid salary to date – $389,000 current luxury tax – $500,000 to Sacramento = $205,334).

This assumes that the league treats Sam as any other minimum salaried player the team adds for the stretch run, rather than viewing this as a means of circumventing the salary cap.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Feb 17, 2009 9:07 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

NO WAY THEY WAIVE HIM

Why would they trade away a second rounder for a player they will waive?

by rickyfan3.0... on Feb 17, 2009 9:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

to save money probably

"Would I rather be feared or loved? Easy. Both. I want people to be afraid of how much they love me." Michael Scott

by Jeff Clark on Feb 17, 2009 9:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

whatever sam is, he is a presence and players look up to him. i bet he can still play and i think he will be back, if not this year, next. someday a head coach- always an entertainer. he also has a shot.

by nazzbo on Feb 17, 2009 9:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Trade makes all kinds of sense for both parties. Clips save $$ straight-up; the C’s pay them more than Cassell’s contract. C’s save more money by not paying as much luxury tax. We’ve got a free roster spot in case a deal comes by that requires us to take on one more player than we receive, or in case we sign someone who’s waived. Sam gets bought out, probably at close to his full contract amount, and either rejoins the C’s as a player in 30 days (if we don’t fill the roster spot) or as an assistant coach (if we do).

Win-win-win-win. The only losers are the other owners who now get to split $800k less in luxury tax monies.

by theBird on Feb 17, 2009 9:57 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Trade Exception

Wouldn’t the C’s also gain a trade exception in the process which would have a shelf life of 1 year and be equal to Sam’s full salary since they aren’t taking back any contract in the deal?

Now say NJ wants to move forward in the rumored Vinsanity trade, the C’s could help facilitate that deal as a 3rd party who could potntially pick up a player making +/- 25% of Sam’s contract. Ditto any other deal that might go down in the next 48 hours.

by CeltsSteve on Feb 17, 2009 10:00 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Who said Cassell can't come back as a coach immediately?

If the Celtics’ plans were to make Cassell a coach, are there any rules that prohibit a team from making a player they traded away less than 30 days ago a coach? I guess this situation hasn’t ever really come up…

So technically, they could bring back Cassell as an assistant coach, and if they needed him for the stretch run, they could pull a Dana Barros one month after he was traded away.

by Greg on Feb 17, 2009 10:09 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

The Starman cometh?

God bless and good night!

by BrickJames on Feb 17, 2009 10:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

You beat me to it Roy.....

I had the same basic computations but with less detail, so i’m glad you beat me to it with the numbers Roy :)

Here’s a rundown of all we “get” from this deal IMO:

(a) at the very least, save some money (~$200k)

(b) flexibility to add a player who is waived/bought out w/o guys like Giddens/O’Bryant looking over their shoulder thinking their the ones gonna be waived to make room. If no one better comes along I’d bet Cassell gets re-added.

© good wil from the Kings — if nothing other than saving $200K ourselves, we “did the Kings a solid” by nettting them a few hundred thou (~$200K). The Kings have been in the news as being in the hole some $23M this season (they have money, so the net $ it’s more a good faith thing IMO).

(d) a $1.2M trade exception to use over the next year — potentially nothing to sneeze at next season as teams are looking to get under the cap for 2010 or under the lowered lux tax limit next season round this time.

(e) a late 2nd rounder (if at all). Hey we picked Ryan Gomes at #50, so in Ainge’s hands even a late 2nd can pay dividends. Anyone see how much it’s protected?

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 10:13 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

FWIW - MLE

By my calculations we still have ~$3.6M of our MLE to use on a player waived (i.e. to beat out another team’s bid).

MLE ($5.855) – POB ($1.442M) – Walker ($0.542) = ~$3.600

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 10:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Actually...

We have around $2.3 – $2.4 million left (confirmed by both the Globe and Herald).

That’s $5.585 million (MLE) – $2,650,000 (House) – $542,114 (Walker) = 2,392,886

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Feb 17, 2009 10:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Huh, that makes sense with House, sorry.

wouldn’t POB have to have come out of the MLE too since we had no other way to sign him and he was for more than the vet min?

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 10:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

According to shamsports.com...

POB was signed to a minimum contract. If not, he was signed with the LLE, because both the Globe and Herald say we have $2.3 million left.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Feb 17, 2009 10:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ESPN too....

ESPN and Sham have him at the vet min, hoopshype had him at $1.5M and I seemed to remember there being a discussion that he was signed at more than the vet min. I trust ESPN more than HH.

NO WAY with so many good FA’s hitting the market this summer that Ainge used the LLE this summer (since it’s a biannual exception).

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cassell has approval rights on a deal

keep in mind that sam has to approve the trade, so he wouldn’t be doing so if he thought he had to stay and play in SAC for the rest of the year. the buyout is pre-arranged, and the pick is likely protected to the last 5 or 10 picks of the 2nd roundover the nexy couple of years (where the Kings will certainly not be). meaning, the Cs will never actually get the pick. it’s simply about using the rules of the CBA to get the deal — which is strictly about money — done.

by ssspence on Feb 17, 2009 10:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Roster Spots

No, the deal is not just about money. It’s also about roster spots. The Kings have 15 players, so they must make a move. My guess is that they are making a 2 for 1 or 3 for 2 involving Salmons, Miller or both.

Meanwhile, the Celtics free up a roster spot to sign a player who is waived by another team as part of the roster machinations at the deadline. Fabricio Oberto, anyone?

by Brickowski on Feb 17, 2009 10:38 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

yes, and roster spots

my point was the player and pick involved are totally incidental to the two teams. neither will ever produce a player for either team that doesn’t come from an outside source.

by ssspence on Feb 17, 2009 10:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Again, you're wrong on this

it doesn’t work that way, the Kings wouldn’t be trade for Sam if they had 15 players already. Cassell is the 15th.

by cordobes on Feb 17, 2009 12:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So if we do have a trade exception, it can’t be combined with other players in a trade, right? It can’t be combined with, like, Scal and a draft pick to get Joe Smith, right? Basically, we could take someone else’s player at a vet minimum deal and only give back a traft pick, is my understanding right?

I’d love Oberto on this team. He’s like the Argentinian Potopeko!

by theBird on Feb 17, 2009 10:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

that is basically how I understand it to be. And it can’t be combined with any other trade exceptions either to take back a larger salary.

by Berkcelt on Feb 17, 2009 11:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

correct

we can trade a 2nd rounder (i.e. the mega protected one by SAC) to a team looking to get under the Lux Tax or further under the cap for a player with a salary UP TO $1,262,275

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 11:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually...

That salary can be up to $1,362,275, as we’re allowed to add $100k to make trades work. The usual “125% + $100k” rule isn’t in effect, but we do have a “100% + $100k” option.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Feb 17, 2009 11:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

A move with purpose...

This type of move may save money, but the important indicator is that there is a SPECIFIC series of events that are about to play out in order for this team to acquire additional playoff-push help.

If Boston wanted to clear a roster spot it could have done so without wasting the effort to save 200k – which is a pittance in NBA land…the fact that this deal was consummated indicates that Ainge has a specific target on the horizon and facilitated this move in order to help Sac make their additional move

Sac is likely to move Salmons to OKC and Joe Smith or Nick Collison is likely to be a part of that package – as well as Earl Watson I suppose…helping Sac to populate their roster is going to allow them to turn around and trade Smith/Collison to Boston…

Sac has 15 players already, so they can’t technically ACCEPT Cassell until they have roster spots free – regardless of if they cut him or not – this “trade” is a setup to get in on the OKC/SAC deal…

We’re getting our big man and likely getting Cassell back too – Boston would likely be trading Scal or TA in this scenario, coupled with Cassell’s 1.2 million…

by BillfromBoston on Feb 17, 2009 10:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

man I hope this is true

I like it, I like it a lot

"Would I rather be feared or loved? Easy. Both. I want people to be afraid of how much they love me." Michael Scott

by Jeff Clark on Feb 17, 2009 10:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sacramento has 14 players....

as I’m 99% sure Abdur Rahim’s retirement was processed, and ESPN lists only 14 players.

Furthermore I think OKC wants Chandler not Salmons (who’d play behind Green and Durant).

Sorry to disappoint you Jeff.

And since Cassell will have been just traded, he can’t be packaged with other players to make a bigger deal. I think it’s more Ainge wanted to save money AND get a $1.2M trade exception which he can use to get a Brian Skinner, Melvin Ely, Ryan Bowen, Matt Barnes, Jared Dudley, et al (who all make > $1.2M)

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 11:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Correct, they have 14 players

by cordobes on Feb 17, 2009 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

… it only saves the team $200k if we sign Sam or another player. If we keep the slot open, it saves the team $509k, or basically Bill Walker’s salary for a year. I don’t expect that to happen, but that’s more than a pittance.

It makes sense that this would be setting up one or both of the teams for a further trade, but that’s not guaranteed. If New Orleans is moving Smith or Collison, I’m sure they can do better than Scal + Tony (although Collison’s salary complicates things).

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Feb 17, 2009 11:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

there’s no reason not to save that $200K, unless Sam really figured into the plans this year. I shouldn’t have said the money was the main reason - flexibility is the main reason. We gain the exception, the roster slot, maybe a 2nd rounder and $200K in savings and only lose Cassell’s $790K salary to include in a deal (and since we don’t really have enough exp. salaries to make a substantial offer, that’s not a huge loss).

I think we’ll look to see what’s available via a trade with the exception … if we don’t find anything there we’ll look at who’s waived/bought out…. if we don’t find anything there we’ll try and resign Cassell. I hope he doesn’t get claimed by a team like ORL or LAL who could use a 3rd PG.

Another Low Risk/Poss. high reward deal by Ainge.

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 11:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seems spurious at best...

…that Boston would compromise the depth of their roster simply at the chance of acquiring a FA and to save some cash…Cassell was the ONLY veteran PG on the roster and had been practicing well with the team, so I can’t imagine they’d set him free on a lark…

The team has to have something in place and this is the set up, no chump change and roster spot is worth taking the risk of relying on a TA/House/Rondo rotation come playoff time – Doc, Danny, and Wyc pretty much admitted this is not the way to go already…

by BillfromBoston on Feb 17, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cassell will be missed

I do think that Cassell played an important role on this team esp. mentoring the younger guys and pumping up KG. I think it’s a gamble on Ainge’s part — and not a horrible one — that Cassell won’t be picked up on waivers.

But you forgot Pruitt in your list. I’d rather have him on the floor 100 times out of 100 than TA at this point. He reminds me a little of Gomes (when Gomes was first getting mins) in that he’s anti-flashy but fundamentally sound.

I think his major drawback is that he’s too deferential when he’s on the floor, a problem solved by more mins. and the confidence that comes with said mins.

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

Danny just said that he doesn’t have anything lined up. Of course, you can’t rely upon anything a GM says, but this deal still makes sense even if another shoe isn’t about to drop.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Feb 17, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’m not sure about Abdur Rahim. They’ve been trying to get a “career ending injury” determination to get him off their cap. But I don’t know if he is officially retired.

by Brickowski on Feb 17, 2009 11:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

my bad...

SAR doesn’t count on the active roster, just the salary cap…Cassell makes it 15…

by BillfromBoston on Feb 17, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Roy Hobbs...You Da Man!

Great explanation. I prefer to blog about who’s playing well/badly. The arcane money rules are interesting but I’m not going to spend the time to understand them so props for laying them out.

You know, if Oklahoma doesn’t blow it, they are sitting with a very large stack of chips – bench ridden veterans to deal, 5 1st round picks in next two years, 3 core players (Durant, Greene, Westbrook) to build out from. Better position I think than Portland. What do you think?

by Wildblu1 on Feb 17, 2009 12:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Ainge confirms

Spears on the Globe blog got confirmation from Danny; his post says Sac is expected to waive Cassell and a team looking for a vet PG could pick him up off of waivers.

It’s going to be interesting to see how the team responds to this, specifically the bench because it means things are heating up. I guess the good thing is, with an open roster spot there is now a possibility that a player can be added without anyone getting shipped off.

by Berkcelt on Feb 17, 2009 12:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'll bet

the League looks into this. It may be technically within the rules but the League may want to change the rules after these shenanigans.

by The Real Large James 2 on Feb 17, 2009 2:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Kings fan here

Thanks for the money guys. That’s essentially what this trade was.

You guys get a free roster spot and a protected 2015 second round pick.

We get about $350,000 after we waive Sam.

As has already been stated on our blog, we can’t keep Sam, because he takes up our 15th roster spot, and his balls are the 16th and 17th.

by Aykis16 on Feb 17, 2009 3:25 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

gotta love Ainge

he’s always looking out for the future

we are in prime position to be players in the 2nd round of the 2015 draft

"Would I rather be feared or loved? Easy. Both. I want people to be afraid of how much they love me." Michael Scott

by Jeff Clark on Feb 17, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hahah

Good one, I recommend that joke.

by cordobes on Feb 17, 2009 7:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting point from Tom Ziller

Not a simple money making deal for the Kings though…..

There’s one other pertinent note: Sacramento is damn close to the luxury tax threshold, as well. This is a risky move, unless the Kings otherwise expect to move away from the threshold. The easy way would be if an independent doctor agrees that Shareef Abdur-Rahim can no longer play and is eligible for a medical retirement effective in November 2008. That would clear almost $6 million off the Kings’ 2008-09 salary cap. (Reef still gets paid.) Everyone believes this will happen.

There could also be a few cap-cutting moves on the horizon. Regardless, someone should ask Cassell how he feels about spending the (I assume) final year of his NBA playing career stuck between the bench and last place.

by Gainesville Celtic on Feb 17, 2009 4:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs