Waiting On Indy

by Jeff Clark on Jul 26, 2009 12:34 PM EDT in Boston Celtics Rumors

According to the Globe,it looks like the Celtics are waiting on Indiana to finish up roster moves before we can complete the Marquis Daniels sign and trade.

Several pieces are falling into place in Indiana, which could clarify how Daniels becomes a Celtic, one of them being if Jamaal Tinsley clears waivers Wednesday.

Indiana also decided not to match Toronto's offer for guard Jarrett Jack (four years, $20 million). The Pacers added guard Dahntay Jones from Denver (four years, $11 million) and their next target appears to be Dallas center Ryan Hollins. The Pacers have been proactive in the market and, once their roster is settled, they should be able to conclude the Daniels deal.

Indy Cornrows looks at the roster limit and deduces that it would have to be just one player coming back for "Quisy."

At this point, any sign-and-trade with Boston for Marquis Daniels could only include one player since Quisy's spot on the roster has already been vacated and that would max out the roster at 15.

That might mean that we still might be able to dump Tony Allen on them, which the Globe reports is the Celtics preference:

The Celtics apparently are willing to part with Tony Allen, who is in the last year of his contract and could fill a backup role with the Pacers.

And of course there's still the Big Baby watch. The New York Post reports that the Nets are back in the mix.

"There is a sincere interest," Davis' agent, John Hamilton, said of the Nets.

And finally the Globe is reporting that any Rondo negotiations are still on the backburner.

Any dealings with Rondo will probably remain on the back burner until other roster issues are sorted out and Celtics president of basketball operations Danny Ainge returns from vacation next week.

Perhaps Danny's vacation has slowed things down as well. Which is fine by me. He deserves a vacation, especially after having a heart attack this year.

Tweet Comment 30 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The Pacers could include at least one of their bigs in the Daniel’s deal.

by BudweiserCeltic on Jul 26, 2009 12:43 PM EDT reply actions

Finally an update on this. : )

And yes, Ainge SHOULD be on a vacation for once. Glad to see he got that. Maybe he’ll be able to do this deal with a clear head, and what not.

by Tai on Jul 26, 2009 12:47 PM EDT reply actions

"...says Davis' agent.."

I have learned to pretty much disregard everything bbd’s agent says. The guy should have stopped talking 3 weeks ago.

by TomHamilton30 on Jul 26, 2009 12:56 PM EDT reply actions

My Daniels’ S&T proposal: Doesn’t give Indiana much talent back, but gives them TA at a reduced cost, saves $$ for the C’s while helping Daniels pick up a little more $$.

Boston signs Daniels to a $2.5M – $3.0M/yr contract, about the same as TA’s. S&T with Indiana, Daniels for TA + $1.5M cash.

Indiana gets TA at a net cost of $1.0M ($2.5M salary less $1.5M kickback). Low-cost backup wing.

Daniels get a little more $$ than if he signs at the LLE.

Boston pays Daniels about $1M more than they would if he signed at the LLE. GIven the luxury tax, the real cost of this “bonus” is $2M. In addition, they gave Indiana $1.5M. Total “extra” cost by doing the S&T instead of just using the LLE is therefore $3.5M.

But, they don’t have to pay Tony Allen to sit on the bench with his thumb up his hundquarters. His $2.5M salary off the books, with the luxury tax, effectively saves ownership $5M, more than offsetting both the extra money they gave Daniels AND the cash they slid to Indiana to take TA off our hands. Win-win-win (losers are the other NBA teams who get to share in the luxury tax payments).

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 1:11 PM EDT reply actions

Good analysis if true

I hate to finally throw in the hat on TA because of glimpses of his pure slashing ability towards the basket and his often great defense. Each time I gave up on him he came back and proved me wrong – for a short period of time.

This was always just enough to keep me intrigued. However I guess it may be time to cut the cord on this “flash”. I think he hurt his one knee originally when he ran away from the 3:00 AM restaurant incident/shooting. His dribbling, his inconsistency on offense, and his injuries etc…. all add up to enough flash and not enough light.

I know little about Marquis Daniels except what I have read. Never paid attention to his play. You always hate trade someone with flashes of real talent. However a flash is not a lightbulb and we need something that stays “on” more than a few games.

Thanks for the analysis theBird

Is it Soup Yet?

by Master Po on Jul 26, 2009 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions

IF, and this is a HUGE if, but if TA is ever to develop into a legit, rotation-caliber NBA player, he needs some consistency in his playing time. He’s not going to get that in Boston. Daniels takes his spot in the rotation, and we still have Giddens/Walker to hopefully develop into the player that Tony SHOULD be.

TA on our bench next year does us no good (you can’t trust him not to screw up) and it does him no good. I don’t think the opportunities are any better for him elsewhere.

Heck, I wonder if we slid Indy more like $2.5M instead of $1.5M, we’d end up not making any money on the deal but Larry could just buy out Tony and keep whatever savings were left. Net-net, we’d save $5M from losing TA’s contract but pay Indiana $2.5M and whatever extra we gave Daniels (x2) over the LLE. Tony could then try to latch onto a team where he might see the court, and Larry could keep his team well-scrubbed.

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions

Math skills

Man, where did you go to school? This is some Bernie Madoff-level accounting…

FYI,

If Indy sign-and-trades us Daniels (at 2.5 million per year as you suggest) for TA + 1.5 million, our net loss will be the 1.5 million we give up in the deal. Any ‘savings’ we get from trading TA’s contract is eaten up by Daniels’ new contract, since they’re both making the same money.

If we use the LLE to sign Daniels, not only will it probably be a one-year deal (meaning he’ll be a free agent next summer), it’ll cost us almost 4 million more (with luxury tax penalties included). So, it’s cheaper to do a sign-and-trade (which is obvious if you think about it).

However, any cost-benefit analysis should take into account the fact that they want to trade for Daniels not only because they want to keep him long term and move some salary in return, but because they also want to use the LLE on another player. So, either way, the LLE is getting spent. So it doesn’t make much sense to start figuring our savings.

And the same holds for simply signing Daniels with the LLE. In that scenario, we’d probably still end up moving TA (along with other expirings), which means that in the final analysis there wouldn’t be any savings. We’re looking to use the LLE and add players using our expiring contracts (House/Scal/TA/Pruitt/Giddens is around 10 million in expiring salary).

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jul 26, 2009 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m only thinking about 2010, not considering dollars in 2011 and beyond.

Scenario 1: No sign + trade, Celtics sign Daniels at the LLE ($1.8M)
Daniels’ new contract: $1.8M
Celtics retain TA (current contract is $2.5M)
Total salaries: $4.3M

Plus: luxury tax: $4.3M
Total cost: $8.6M

Scenario 2: S&T, Daniels for TA, Daniels gets $2.8M/yrFrom Boston’s persctive:
Daniels’ contract: $2.8M
TA’s contract: $0 (traded to Indy)
Total salaries: $2.8M

Plus: luxury tax: $2.8M
Plus: “kickback” to Indiana: $1.5M
Total cost: $7.1M

Savings: $1.5M

Indiana’s perspective:
TA’s contract: $2.5M
Less: Boston’s kickback ($1.5M)
Net cost of Tony Allen: $1.0M

This assumed Indy doesn’t pay the luxury tax; I know they’re close.

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions

EDIT: Oh, and sure they’ll end up spending the LLE on another player. That doesn’t affect the math about the best way to get Daniels aboard. Separate transactions. The cheapest way for the Celtics to acquire Daniels is to give Indiana Tony Allen and pay them enough money (up to his full salary) where it’s worth their while to have him on their roster.

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Like I said, Madoff-level accounting...

Maybe we have different ideas of what constitutes ‘savings.’ But anytime you send a team 1.5 million to grease the wheels in a trade, that’s 1.5 million you’re losing—and there ain’t no savings anywhere.

You try to defend your shady logic by saying that using the LLE on another player and trading for Daniels are ‘separate transactions,’ but you fail to realize that you factored the cost of the LLE (if given to Daniels) into your argument as to how paying Indy 1.5 million would end up saving the Cs 1.5 million. You basically created two worlds—one where we spent the LLE and still had TA and one where we traded TA for Daniels and didn’t use the LLE. You then concluded, viola!, look at all the savings! But the savings are there because you left the LLE off one side of the ledger…

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jul 26, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions

But… they ARE separate transactions.

Let’s say Danny wants to sign Bruce Bowen, but Bruce will only sign for the LLE, not the vet min (maybe a bad example; pick any player that we’ll need the LLE to sign).

If you want to consider the subsequent spending of the LLE into the equation, how are you accounting for the fact that we CANNOT sign Bowen (or whoever) in this equation without acquiting Daniels via a S&T?

If the Celtics and Indiana do my proposed deal, and the Celtics make no further moves, they save $1.5M. Why? Because they do not have Tony Allen; no big deal, he’s wholly redundant with Daniels. The total cost is higher than if they do not sign Daniels and just roll with TA, but if they want Daniels it’s cheaper to unload Tony Allen in the process.

If they acquire Daniels via a S&T, will they later spend the LLE? Sure, if acquiring Bowen or whoever makes sense. You can’t add that cost into the cost of acquiring Daniels, though. Hell, making another signing isn’t even an option if they use the LLE on Daniels. If they decide they want to sign Bowen at the LLE and it costs them more luxury tax dollars, those luxury tax dollars are wholly related to the decision to sign Bowen – they have nothing to do with the Daniels.

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions

Let me try and simplify how I’m looking at this.

They’ve decided they want Daniels, and they do not need TA.

S&T; they get their guy and cut the money they spend on TA.
LLE; they gotta pay them both.

The S&T also gives the flexibility to make more moves in the future, which they may or may not do (I personally think they’ll hold on using the LLE until February, if they use it at all).

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions

yeah, yeah, yeah

there’s a net salary gain if we sign Daniels to the LLE, and there’s no net salary gain if we trade TA for a signed-and-traded Daniels. But the other claims you were making were false and that’s why I called you on them.

There is NO WAY you can send 1.5 million to Indy in a TA for Daniels deal and then turn around and claim you saved 1.5 million. You came up with that # because you wrongly figured the LLE into one side of the equation. Obviously, you can’t see that. There’s not much more I can say—you’re wrong.

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jul 26, 2009 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions

I ain’t wrong. The presence of the luxury tax makes the NBA markets inefficient; basically, you have arbitrage opportunities. If you don’t want TA on the team, it saves money to send him to Indiana, even if we essentially pay most of his salary. Send Indiana $1.5M to save $2.5M in luxury tax; of COURSE it’s cheaper to do the deal that way.

What happens with the LLE later on is irrelevant.

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions

You don't know what you're talking about

If you send TA to Indy, you’re taking back a similar amount of salary—ergo, there is NO savings. The 2.5 million in luxury tax that you would have paid out on TA’s contract is now being paid out in Daniels’ contract…and if you throw in 1.5 million to make the deal go down, then that’s a net loss of 1.5 million…

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jul 26, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions

For further clarificiation, I’m not saving it’s cheaper to sign him than to NOT sign him; if you ARE going to sign him, it’s cheaper do so via the proposed S&T than via the LLE.

Hell, we could trade Tony Allen, a second-round pick, + $2.5M to Oklahoma City, have them buy him out for the full $2.5M, then re-sign Tony at $1.0M and come out ahead.

$2.5M payment to Oklahoma City
+$1.0M new contract for TA
+$1.0M luxury tax

versus
$2.5M contract
+$2.5M luxury tax

TA makes an extra $1M (but loses Bird rights), Celtics save $500k, Oklahoma City gets a free draft pick.

Ain’t the NBA CBA grand?

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions

Seriously, this is getting old...

Your statements fall into two camps—things that are obvious and things that are completely wrong.

In the obvious category, we have the fact that it would be cheaper to trade for Daniels than to sign him to the LLE. Why? Because TA’s salary would cancel out Daniels’ salary in any trade, but signing Daniels to the LLE would add another player without subtracting any—ergo, more players equals more salary ramifications. Everybody knows this.

In the completely wrong category is the assertion that greasing the wheels in a TA for Daniels deal with 1.5 million dollars going to Indy would result in a net savings of 1.5 million. That’s completely absurd.

by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Jul 26, 2009 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions

But that doesn’t happen, because excluding Tinsley, and including Jones, Price, Watson and Hollins, the Pacers have 15 players and cannot get any players in return

by P2 on Jul 26, 2009 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Either Boston sends Indiana enough money to buy our TA outright (which makes the math a little tighter, but still works out in our favor), or do TA + Pruitt (who’s then cut) for Daniels and Diener. The latter would net them one additional roster spot for TA.

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Tony Allen

Part of me wants to see Tony Allen sent over to Indiana. I’d like to see him get a change of scenery, which might revive his career. I’d like to see him make good.

But part of me worries Allen would be too close to home, Chicago, which is maybe 3 hours up the road. I suspect he’d be better off being farther away from his old neighborhood.

by no kidding on Jul 26, 2009 1:15 PM EDT reply actions

No need to go to Chicago to get into trouble when playing for the Pacers; just as Stephen Jackson, Jamaal Tinsley, and our boy Daniels about that!

Makes me wonder what Larry’s thinking; he’s done seemingly nothing over the past few years but get rid of as many knuckleheads as he can, giving them up for pennies on the dollar at best, and now he’s thinking about bring on Tony Allen? Goal #1 has been to have as clean-cut a team as is possible, and now he’s even having conversations about taking TA?

Might not be a good move for Tony, anyway; those Chi-town gangsters he apparently owes money to will only be a couple hours away!

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions

The sign-and-trade doesn’t look to be going through, because they have 11 players under contract (without Tinsley). Add Watson and Jones, you already have 13. A.J. Price will be signed, too, so that makes it 14.

If they sign Ryan Hollins, that will make it 15, so no room to send out another player, unless they’re having another deal or we’re getting a player back, but that wouldn’t work salary-wise.

Can somebody explain this?

by P2 on Jul 26, 2009 1:21 PM EDT reply actions

perhaps boston wants to g et rid of ta and retain their lle soo bad that they are giving them cash so that indy can release ta and not be affected.

so esential its win win for boston. an nothing for indy

just a guess

by NEFOOL on Jul 26, 2009 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm wondering

If maybe we wouldn’t be taking another player back from Indy, like Diener? I can’t really figure out why Indiana would make this deal essentially entirely to help us without having to take back some salary or something in the process…

by Silhouette on Jul 26, 2009 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Also from Yahoo

Looks like the Grizz are gonna sign Marcus Williams to a deal. Too bad, he was easily my top choice for a backup point.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Aij.uGs1uja6s8Vvv4Wmn7q8vLYF?slug=ys-freeagentbuzz072509&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

by Silhouette on Jul 26, 2009 2:05 PM EDT reply actions

That's a nice thought, but Williams will be making way more than the Celtics could have offered.

by Cousin It on Jul 26, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Uh, probably not. That article indicated that they signed him to a make-good contract, meaning that it’s not guaranteed unless he makes the team in training camp. If that’s really the case, it’ll be for the minimum.

Remember when people wanted to draft him instead of Rondo?

by theBird on Jul 26, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions

no wonder things havent been getting done...danny isnt in the office

figure out what to do with davis, trim the fat on the roster i.e. giddens, walker, pruitt, tony….get the daniels deal done

by celticinorlando on Jul 26, 2009 4:13 PM EDT reply actions

I Highly Doubt It....

I don’t believe Tony Allen is going to Indiana (too risky for his personal life). I think Indy may trade for him but buy out his contract or trade him, because there is no need for another Dhantay Jones on Indy. Tony will be moved elsewhere. Remember yall Indy is doing Boston a favor, they don’t need any of our players, or any type of value. C’s can sign Daniels str8 up but, they’ll have to use the LLE which is only good for a year or 2, and I believe they want to have Daniels long-term.

It’ll be a 2 for 2 deal. I can’t imagine Indy having Ford, Diener, & watson. Watson is probably headed to Boston with Daniels, for Tony Allen & Giddens. Pruitt/Scal/Davis will be shipped together elsewhere with the agreement of Scal being bought out to return to Boston. My 2 cents

by Rtpas11 on Jul 26, 2009 4:54 PM EDT reply actions

Indy Fan Here..

The Pacers are holding out for Giddens from Boston or they will try to sign Luther Head and let Marquis Daniels sign. I highly doubt they will take Tony Allen off your hands..

by Memphis Red Dogs on Jul 27, 2009 10:23 PM EDT reply actions