Stith and Carr

[Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>]

The quote is from the Boston Globe:

''We have tremendous respect for Bryant and we would love to have Bryant in a
Boston Celtics uniform,'' said Celtics coach Jim O'Brien. ''In the event
that we
can't get a Bryant Stith, then Chris Carr is a guy that's been with us a year
and we like guys that have been with us. We don't want to lose people.''

Personally I like Stith as a veteran influence and leader, and as a role
player
complementing Walker and Pierce, he is superior to Eric Williams. But with
fourteen guaranteed contracts, including five swingmen (I count McCarty as a
backup power forward with the current roster), I'd prefer to see the money and
roster spot spent on an exception player that has a future at a need position,
like point guard. I read a report somewhere that suggested Alvin Williams;
wouldn't that be ironic? 

But then again, Stith may not receive an exception offer from another team.
Obviously, if we really want to keep him, we can - we have his Bird rights
- so
when O'Brien is talking about "the event that we can't get a Bryant Stith,"
he's really saying, "the event that Bryant Stith wants a significant contract
which we're not about to give him." My guess is that the Celtics would like to
bring him back for some amount more than the veteran's minimum (as a sign of
respect) but significantly less than the $4.5M exception, and probably for two
years or less.

Now if our budget is not too constrained, then maybe we go ahead and cut
McCarty and spend the middle class exemption. I don't think that would put us
above the luxury tax threshold this year, but we'd have to be careful because
of Pierce's extension presumably kicking in during the 2002 offseason.

As a side note, I think the reason why the luxury tax is so feared is because
it is a discontinuous cutoff: once you're $1 over the cutoff, you don't get to
share in the pot that's generated by the over-the-tax teams. I doubt that
payoff is more than around $4-5M per team, but think about it this way. Say
you
are right at the threshold and an opportunity comes up to use your exception
for $4.5M. Then you get taxed another $4.5M and you lose $4M in additional tax
payouts. So that player is costing you $13M per year - the equivalent of a
maximum contract. It's a pretty effective deterrent for all but the wealthiest
owners.

Alex