How can the Boston Celtics get under the luxury tax?
How can the Boston Celtics get under the luxury tax for the coming 2025-26 NBA regular season? The Celtics are currently set to trigger some of the harshest second apron punishments laid out by the league's collective bargaining agreement (CBA) due to their incoming, historic payroll and tax bill. That, coupled with the fact that star Boston forward Jayson Tatum will likely miss all (or at least most) of next season makes for a likely mandate from the team's front office to trim some salary from the roster.
Who are the most likely candidates to get dealt into another ball club's cap structure before the 2026 NBA trade deadline? The conventional wisdom is that it will be one of Jrue Holiday, Kristaps Porzingis, or Sam Hauser, but is there another way to get such a move taken care of?
Advertisement
The folks behind the "98.5 The Sports Hub" YouTube channel put together a clip from a recent episode of their "Toucher and Hardy" show with guest Brian Robb of Mass Live. Check it out below to hear what they had to say.
This article originally appeared on Celtics Wire: How can the Boston Celtics get under the luxury tax?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
32 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Pacers Plan for Myles Turner Reportedly Revealed
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Indiana Pacers are just two wins away from winning an NBA title. Myles Turner is one of the big reasons why they are in the NBA Finals in the first place. Turner is someone who has had his name in trade rumors for each of the last few years. It seems like for each of the last five years or so that he has been in rumors. It's clear that Turner is someone who is valued across the NBA. If so many other teams want him, maybe the Pacers should try to keep him long-term. Read more: Lakers Legend Magic Johnson Delivers Powerful Message to Luka Doncic Myles Turner #33 of the Indiana Pacers reacts against the New York Knicks during the fourth quarter in Game Three of the Eastern Conference Finals. Turner will be a free agent for the first time... Myles Turner #33 of the Indiana Pacers reacts against the New York Knicks during the fourth quarter in Game Three of the Eastern Conference Finals. Turner will be a free agent for the first time this offseason. More Photo byTurner is going to be a free agent for the first time in his career this summer. He is likely going to be the top free-agent center available this summer, and the Pacers know it. In order to keep him, the Pacers will need to pay into the luxury tax for the first time in 20 years. It sounds like that is the plan once the offseason hits. "The Indiana Pacers know they need to have Myles Turner back. They can't afford to lose him."@ShamsCharania says the Pacers are "prepared and expecting to pay the luxury tax" to keep Myles Turner 💰 — NBA on ESPN (@ESPNNBA) June 12, 2025 Turner is the longest-tenured Pacers player on the roster. He has been there for ten years and has seen a lot of iterations of this team. This is the first time that he is playing in the NBA Finals. While his offensive production hasn't been great so far, his defense has been solid. Pacers coach Rick Carlisle has said that Turner is dealing with an illness, which could explain why he hasn't been able to hit the number of shots that he normally does. Keeping Turner for the foreseeable future is a priority for the Pacers. He fits how the team plays perfectly because of his ability to hit threes and block shots in the paint. The Pacers have already proven that this current core can compete for a championship. Keeping them together for as long as possible is what the organization should do, even if paying the luxury tax is the only way to do it. Turner is going to command a decent amount of money, as he should. He is the best center on the market and is hitting the market at the perfect time. The rest of the starting lineup is locked up for quite a few years, so they just need to do the same for Turner. If they do that, they will be a hard team to beat. More NBA on Newsweek: Knicks' Coaching Search Receives Harsh Criticism From NBA Insider
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NCAA Fights Tennessee Hooper's Request to Play a Fifth Season
The NCAA on Monday motioned a federal judge to deny Zakai Zeigler's motion for an injunction in his antitrust lawsuit to keep playing playing Division I basketball as a college graduate who already played four D-1 seasons. The NCAA's motion sends a warning that Zeigler's lawsuit could open the door to numerous players staying on teams for years after they graduate—and taking spots away from incoming freshmen. Zeigler, 22, graduated from the University of Tennessee last month. The 5-foot-9 native of Long Island, N.Y. is a two-time SEC Defensive Player of the Year and set several team records. He played all four seasons at Tennessee, where he also received recognition for academic achievement. Advertisement More from Zeigler would like to play a fifth season as a graduate student, but the NCAA only allows four seasons of intercollegiate competition within a five-year window. Zeigler contends the four-seasons rule violates antitrust law by depriving him and similarly situated players of athletic skill development and NIL opportunities—Zeigler contends he'd earn as much as $4 million in NIL in 2025-26 since he's a well-known and successful college player from a prominent program. He argues there's a less restrictive approach where the NCAA could allow for an additional season if a player completed their undergraduate degree in four years, meaning they did not red shirt and their academic advancement followed the typical path for college students. The NCAA repudiates Zeigler's arguments in a brief authored by Taylor J. Askew and Rakesh Kilaru and colleagues from Holland & Knight and Wilkinson Stekloff. Among the points raised in the NCAA's brief is that Zeigler is not an NBA prospect and thus an additional season is unlikely to make him a candidate for the NBA. 'All publicly available evidence indicates that Plaintiff, respectfully, has a difficult path to the NBA, at this juncture,' the brief states. The brief acknowledges that Zeigler is a terrific college player—he's the all-time leading scorer and assist leader in Tennessee history—but pivots from that point to assert, 'presumably, if [Zeigler] had a viable path to the NBA, given his resume, he would already be a viable prospect. After all, NBA scouts would have seen him play in 138 collegiate contests.' The brief also bluntly mentions, 'there is no proof in the record that Plaintiff was even invited to either the NBA Combine or G-League Combine this year.' Advertisement Similarly, the NCAA highlights how 'there is no evidence that one more season of participation in college basketball is necessary' for Zeigler to play pro hoops. To that point, Zeigler could have tried to join the NBA, G League or a foreign league years ago. He met their minimum age and experience requirements but chose to remain in college and advance toward a degree. Zeigler is also depicted as selfish. As the NCAA spins it, Zeigler is asking a court to make him the first college athlete 'in history' to obtain a judicial decree to play a fifth season 'as a matter of right.' If Zeigler is granted that chance, there would be a loser: a roster spot for a graduating high school senior would otherwise join the Volunteers would be 'reapportioned' to Zeigler. In fact, the NCAA estimates that if college seniors who played four seasons could play another season and chose to do so, somewhere between 20% and 25% of roster spots that would have gone to incoming freshmen would be lost. 'While Plaintiff focuses only on what that means for himself,' the NCAA writes, 'he does so to the detriment of the entering student-athletes who dream of being the next Zakai Zeigler.' In that same spirit, the NCAA defends the four seasons rule as reflecting 'the lifecycle of a collegiate athlete.' Stated differently, NCAA sports are intended to be a career. A college student plays a sport and their college athletic career time ordinarily ends when they graduate. This 'lifecycle,' the NCAA argues, ensures a 'steady stream of opportunities' for graduating high school players to gain a college education and play sports. Advertisement 'College athletics,' the NCAA asserts, 'is a means to a better end for student-athletes—not the end itself.' The NCAA also maintains that Zeigler, like other athletes who have sued the NCAA in recent months to extend their eligibility, has 'misapprehended' the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in NCAA v. Alston (2021) for legal principles that the Court rejected. Although Alston is sometimes linked to NIL, the case had nothing to do with NIL. The NCAA stresses that Alston only addressed compensation rules for athletes' education-related expenses, which are subject to antitrust scrutiny since they involve commercial activity. However, Alston does 'not touch' eligibility rules, which the NCAA asserts fall outside the scope of antitrust scrutiny. As the NCAA tells it, eligibility rules are not about commercial transactions and instead concern who counts as a college athlete—a 'necessary' ingredient 'to create the product of collegiate sports.' Even Justice Brett Kavanaugh's oft-cited concurring opinion, in which lambasted the NCAA and amateurism, explicitly stated that Alston 'involves only a narrow subset of the NCAA's compensation rules.' The NCAA further asserts that relevant precedent in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which governs the Tennessee federal court where Zeigler sued, also instructs that eligibility rules fall outside the scope of antitrust scrutiny. As the NCAA recently cited in an appellate brief in Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia's case against the NCAA regarding eligibility rules, the Sixth Circuit held in Claude Bassett v. NCAA (2008) that enforcement of NCAA rules 'is not within the purview of antitrust law' since those rules are not related to commercial or business activities. Advertisement Another alleged defect in Zeigler's lawsuit is that it has 'no limiting principle,' meaning if a player has a legal right to play a fifth season so they can earn more NIL and further refine athletic skills, the same player could raise the same argument for a sixth season and so on. Universities have no shortage of graduate programs in which an athlete could remain enrolled for, at least in theory, many years. The NCAA also contends that a core premise of Zeigler's lawsuit, which argues that removing experienced college players harms the labor market, is erroneous. While Zeigler suggests NIL deals are most lucrative for seniors, the NCAA says 'non-seniors, on average, have higher NIL valuations than seniors.' The NCAA's expert witness, Cal Berkeley economics professor Matthew Backus, provided a declaration referencing that individual NIL valuations for college basketball players shows that non-seniors' have a higher average NIL valuation than seniors, $1.2 million compared to $1.07 million. The issuance of a preliminary injunction for Zeigler, the NCAA argues, is also misplaced because any harm he suffers from not playing can be quantified. A core element to a preliminary injunction is that denial of one by a judge would likely cause the plaintiff irreparable harm, meaning a harm that money damages can't remedy. The NCAA maintains there are several problems with Zeigler claiming irreparable harm. One is that he 'has known since his first day on campus that he had five years to complete four seasons' and yet waited until after he graduated college to sue. The NCAA believes that Zeigler manufactured an emergency when in reality, he could have sued years ago, giving the court time to review the case's merits. Advertisement Also, the NCAA asserts, any injury Zeigler suffers by a denial to keep playing would be calculable. The NCAA notes that Zeigler didn't enter the transfer portal, 'unlike 100+ other collegiate basketball players who have exhausted their eligibility but are either contemplating suing for more or hoping for an NCAA rule change.' If Zeigler plays another season, 'he will assuredly play for the University of Tennessee,' the NCAA points out. Zeigler submitted a supporting exhibit of data from Spyre Sports Group, which has an NIL collective for Tennessee athletics and estimates Zeigler's NIL value in another season would be worth $2 million to $4 million. That is important, the NCAA maintains, because it shows Zeigler's potential legal injury could be resolved by monetary damages if he eventually wins a trial. U.S. District Judge Katherine A. Crytzer will hold a hearing on Zeigler's motion for a preliminary injunction on Friday at 1:45 pm local time in a Knoxville (Tenn.) federal courthouse. Best of Sign up for Sportico's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Adam Silver addresses negative feedback through first 2 games of the 2025 NBA Finals
NBA commissioner Adam Silver has addressed the negative feedback from the first two games of the 2025 NBA Finals between the Oklahoma City Thunder and Indiana Pacers. Fans have expressed their dissatisfaction on social media over the lack of effort to make the Finals series feel different than the regular season. The first factor that led to sour reactions was how the NBA did not have the special finals on-court logos featuring the Larry O'Brien trophy. Advertisement After fans lashed out on social media during Game 1, the league flashed virtual NBA Finals and Larry O'Brien icons on the court at Paycom Center for Game 2. Still, viewers were not satisfied with the quality of the graphics during the ESPN broadcast. Before Wednesday night's Game 3 in Indiana, Silver joined the ESPN panel and explained their decision. "I've seen some of the chat on social media about on-court decals. People don't realize they went away a decade ago because there were claims that, Kendrick [Perkins] knows, they were slippery," Silver said, pointing to former center Kendrick Perkins, who was on the broadcast. Advertisement "We're back to adding them virtually, so those are on," he added. Silver also addressed the low ratings through the first two games of the Thunder-Pacers series. Game 1 was the least-watched first game of the Nielsen meter era (since 1988) outside the COVID-19-marred seasons in 2020 and 2021, averaging a 4.7 rating and 8.91 million viewers on ABC, per Sports Media Watch. The game suffered an 18% drop in ratings and 19% in viewership. The Thunder's Game 2 blowout over the Pacers did not do any better, as it drew nearly identical numbers to the series opener. OKC's 123-107 win became the second-least watched Game 2 since 2007, excluding the 2020 bubble, with 8.76 million viewers on average on ABC. Still, Silver insisted that the Finals are impacting the small markets of Oklahoma City and Indianapolis. On their way to the Finals, the Pacers and Thunder defeated teams with huge stars from bigger markets by knocking off the New York Knicks and Minnesota Timberwolves. Advertisement "It's an interesting time in society," Silver said. "We have two markets that are completely captured by the Finals. Every store you go to, there's signage. Everybody on the street is wearing team colors. I've been doing this for a long time; I don't remember it being two markets that feel so dominant to have these games. "As a media matter, people compare us to 20 years ago, but Games 1 and 2, so far, are the highest-rated programs in May and June so far on television," he added. "If something beats us, it'll be another sports program. 20 years ago, we often didn't win the night when the Finals were on, but the absolute rating is lower now. " Indiana took the series lead with a 107-116 win as the series shifted to The Hoosier State. The Pacers will look to secure a 3-1 lead in Game 4 on Friday night before the series heads back to Oklahoma City.
