Author Topic: Is Grant a goner? (Yes: Traded to DAL for second rounders)  (Read 73388 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #75 on: July 19, 2022, 05:20:33 PM »

Offline Goldstar88

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10671
  • Tommy Points: 1416
Grant is going to be a tough call.  He is a useful, versatile, young player who has been improving.  But if it takes $12M to keep him, we may not be able to afford that.

I don’t see why we wouldn’t be able to afford that.  It’s for next year, the cap and tax will go up another 10%, and Horford isn’t getting paid $26.5 million next year.  Grant and Al are getting paid $30.8 million combined this year.  Collectively they’ll very likely cost less.

You are right, we could but to me, that is just too much money for him.  I like Grant, love his versatility but I don't see him as a $12M-$13M player.  I am almost always wrong about how much players can get on the open market though.  They always get more than I think.

He will be a restricted FA.  I think just under what Rob Williams got would be fair.  Maybe starting at say $9M?  His QO is $6.2M.  I am sure that will be offered and then he can test the market.

Yeah, I think you're just underestimating him a lot.  The MLE is currently forecast 4 years, $48.5 million, and will likely go up a little.   He's almost certain to exceed that if he hits free agency -- that MLE is his floor.

Grants a decent bench guy, however, I think many overestimate his abilities. In 24.4mpg last season, Grant gave the C’s 7.8pts and 3.6rebs per game. His per 36 is 11.6pts and 5.3rebs, which isn’t very good. His defense is good, but not great.

Now compare that to Rob who played 29.6mpg and gave the C’s 10pts, 9.6rebs and 2.2blks per game while playing great defense. His per 36 is 12.1pts, 11.7rebs, and 2.7blk. Rob is a much better player. Grant should not be paid more than Rob.

Rob got his contract after year 3, not after year 4.  Rob's year 3 numbers were 8 points, 7 boards and 2 blocks in 19 minutes per game.  And that was after showing pretty much nothing in his first two years, compared to Grant who's been in the rotation from practically Day 1 and has been much more regularly available than Rob.  You can't compare Grant at Year 3 to Rob in Year 4 and say "Oh, Grant can't be paid as much as Rob". 

And again, for what seems like the millionth time but can't be because I only have 4000 posts, the salary cap increases practically every year, and you have to take that into account.  Guys who sign a deal a year later, will, on average, be paid more than the guy who signed a year earlier.  It's just how it works.  It jumped a ton from last year to this year, substantially more than was projected when Rob signed his contract, and will increase again next year -- it's currently projected to be 12% higher when Grant's contract kicks in that it was projected to be for Rob's new deal when he signed.  So if they were equals, you'd expect Grant to make 12% more than Rob.  That would put Grant at about 4 years, $54 million guaranteed, with incentives taking the deal up to around 4 years $60 million.  I think somewhere between the MLE forecast of 4/$48.5 and 4/60, is where he ends up.

Ok, so let’s compare year 3 then.

Grant: In 24.4mpg: 7.8pts, 3.6rebs, 1ast, 0.7blk
Per36: 11.6pts, 5.3reb, 1.5ast, 1.1blk, 0.7stl

Rob: In 18.9mpg: 8pts, 6.9reb, 1.8ast, 1.8blk.
Per36: 15.2pts, 13.1rebs, 3.4ast, 3.3blk, 1.6stl

On second thought, Grant should be making quite a bit less than Rob. Maybe $8M/season. Didn’t realize how substantially different the numbers were between both players while in their 3rd year.


Quoting Nick from the now locked Ime thread:
Quote
At some point you have to blame the performance on the court on the players on the court. Every loss is not the coach's fault and every win isn't because of the players.

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #76 on: July 19, 2022, 05:22:17 PM »

Offline RJ87

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11685
  • Tommy Points: 1406
  • Let's Go Celtics!
Grant is going to be a tough call.  He is a useful, versatile, young player who has been improving.  But if it takes $12M to keep him, we may not be able to afford that.

I don’t see why we wouldn’t be able to afford that.  It’s for next year, the cap and tax will go up another 10%, and Horford isn’t getting paid $26.5 million next year.  Grant and Al are getting paid $30.8 million combined this year.  Collectively they’ll very likely cost less.

You are right, we could but to me, that is just too much money for him.  I like Grant, love his versatility but I don't see him as a $12M-$13M player.  I am almost always wrong about how much players can get on the open market though.  They always get more than I think.

He will be a restricted FA.  I think just under what Rob Williams got would be fair.  Maybe starting at say $9M?  His QO is $6.2M.  I am sure that will be offered and then he can test the market.

Yeah, I think you're just underestimating him a lot.  The MLE is currently forecast 4 years, $48.5 million, and will likely go up a little.   He's almost certain to exceed that if he hits free agency -- that MLE is his floor.

Grants a decent bench guy, however, I think many overestimate his abilities. In 24.4mpg last season, Grant gave the C’s 7.8pts and 3.6rebs per game. His per 36 is 11.6pts and 5.3rebs, which isn’t very good. His defense is good, but not great.

Now compare that to Rob who played 29.6mpg and gave the C’s 10pts, 9.6rebs and 2.2blks per game while playing great defense. His per 36 is 12.1pts, 11.7rebs, and 2.7blk. Rob is a much better player. Grant should not be paid more than Rob.

Rob got his contract after year 3, not after year 4.  Rob's year 3 numbers were 8 points, 7 boards and 2 blocks in 19 minutes per game.  And that was after showing pretty much nothing in his first two years, compared to Grant who's been in the rotation from practically Day 1 and has been much more regularly available than Rob.  You can't compare Grant at Year 3 to Rob in Year 4 and say "Oh, Grant can't be paid as much as Rob". 

And again, for what seems like the millionth time but can't be because I only have 4000 posts, the salary cap increases practically every year, and you have to take that into account.  Guys who sign a deal a year later, will, on average, be paid more than the guy who signed a year earlier.  It's just how it works.  It jumped a ton from last year to this year, substantially more than was projected when Rob signed his contract, and will increase again next year -- it's currently projected to be 12% higher when Grant's contract kicks in that it was projected to be for Rob's new deal when he signed.  So if they were equals, you'd expect Grant to make 12% more than Rob.  That would put Grant at about 4 years, $54 million guaranteed, with incentives taking the deal up to around 4 years $60 million.  I think somewhere between the MLE forecast of 4/$48.5 and 4/60, is where he ends up.

I'm not sure why we're comparing Rob and Grant because they're circumstances are completely different. Rob's sketchy injury history and the questions about whether or not he contributions would translate with a bigger role is why Rob's contract has ended up being a bargain. The team always had the upper hand in negotiations with Rob and it was never a question.

Those same circumstances don't exist for Grant - whether you think he's overrated or underrated. He proved himself capable of defensive versatility on a top defensive team and the team flat out needs his shooting. And he's been pretty durable over his career.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2022, 06:00:18 PM by RJ87 »
2021 Houston Rockets
PG: Kyrie Irving/Patty Mills/Jalen Brunson
SG: OG Anunoby/Norman Powell/Matisse Thybulle
SF: Gordon Hayward/Demar Derozan
PF: Giannis Antetokounmpo/Robert Covington
C: Kristaps Porzingis/Bobby Portis/James Wiseman

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #77 on: July 19, 2022, 05:26:52 PM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7142
  • Tommy Points: 979
Grant is going to be a tough call.  He is a useful, versatile, young player who has been improving.  But if it takes $12M to keep him, we may not be able to afford that.

I don’t see why we wouldn’t be able to afford that.  It’s for next year, the cap and tax will go up another 10%, and Horford isn’t getting paid $26.5 million next year.  Grant and Al are getting paid $30.8 million combined this year.  Collectively they’ll very likely cost less.

You are right, we could but to me, that is just too much money for him.  I like Grant, love his versatility but I don't see him as a $12M-$13M player.  I am almost always wrong about how much players can get on the open market though.  They always get more than I think.

He will be a restricted FA.  I think just under what Rob Williams got would be fair.  Maybe starting at say $9M?  His QO is $6.2M.  I am sure that will be offered and then he can test the market.

Yeah, I think you're just underestimating him a lot.  The MLE is currently forecast 4 years, $48.5 million, and will likely go up a little.   He's almost certain to exceed that if he hits free agency -- that MLE is his floor.

Grants a decent bench guy, however, I think many overestimate his abilities. In 24.4mpg last season, Grant gave the C’s 7.8pts and 3.6rebs per game. His per 36 is 11.6pts and 5.3rebs, which isn’t very good. His defense is good, but not great.

Now compare that to Rob who played 29.6mpg and gave the C’s 10pts, 9.6rebs and 2.2blks per game while playing great defense. His per 36 is 12.1pts, 11.7rebs, and 2.7blk. Rob is a much better player. Grant should not be paid more than Rob.

Rob got his contract after year 3, not after year 4.  Rob's year 3 numbers were 8 points, 7 boards and 2 blocks in 19 minutes per game.  And that was after showing pretty much nothing in his first two years, compared to Grant who's been in the rotation from practically Day 1 and has been much more regularly available than Rob.  You can't compare Grant at Year 3 to Rob in Year 4 and say "Oh, Grant can't be paid as much as Rob". 

And again, for what seems like the millionth time but can't be because I only have 4000 posts, the salary cap increases practically every year, and you have to take that into account.  Guys who sign a deal a year later, will, on average, be paid more than the guy who signed a year earlier.  It's just how it works.  It jumped a ton from last year to this year, substantially more than was projected when Rob signed his contract, and will increase again next year -- it's currently projected to be 12% higher when Grant's contract kicks in that it was projected to be for Rob's new deal when he signed.  So if they were equals, you'd expect Grant to make 12% more than Rob.  That would put Grant at about 4 years, $54 million guaranteed, with incentives taking the deal up to around 4 years $60 million.  I think somewhere between the MLE forecast of 4/$48.5 and 4/60, is where he ends up.

Ok, so let’s compare year 3 then.

Grant: In 24.4mpg: 7.8pts, 3.6rebs, 1ast, 0.7blk
Per36: 11.6pts, 5.3reb, 1.5ast, 1.1blk, 0.7stl

Rob: In 18.9mpg: 8pts, 6.9reb, 1.8ast, 1.8blk.
Per36: 15.2pts, 13.1rebs, 3.4ast, 3.3blk, 1.6stl

On second thought, Grant should be making quite a bit less than Rob. Maybe $8M/season. Didn’t realize how substantially different the numbers were between both players year 3.

I think you missed the part where Grant played 1875 minutes and Rob only played 985.  That's a huge difference, and it can't be ignored how Rob's historic lack of availability dampened his contract value.  Heck, even in year 4, Rob's healthiest Grant still saw the floor more both in the regular season and the postseason (and by over 250 minutes in the postseason).  In the postseason he played both more total minutes and per game.

When Rob is healthy, he's a $25 million player.  But he's not healthy all the time, or even close to it.  Grant is, and that's valuable in and of itself.

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #78 on: July 19, 2022, 05:59:47 PM »

Offline Goldstar88

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10671
  • Tommy Points: 1416
Grant is going to be a tough call.  He is a useful, versatile, young player who has been improving.  But if it takes $12M to keep him, we may not be able to afford that.

I don’t see why we wouldn’t be able to afford that.  It’s for next year, the cap and tax will go up another 10%, and Horford isn’t getting paid $26.5 million next year.  Grant and Al are getting paid $30.8 million combined this year.  Collectively they’ll very likely cost less.

You are right, we could but to me, that is just too much money for him.  I like Grant, love his versatility but I don't see him as a $12M-$13M player.  I am almost always wrong about how much players can get on the open market though.  They always get more than I think.

He will be a restricted FA.  I think just under what Rob Williams got would be fair.  Maybe starting at say $9M?  His QO is $6.2M.  I am sure that will be offered and then he can test the market.

Yeah, I think you're just underestimating him a lot.  The MLE is currently forecast 4 years, $48.5 million, and will likely go up a little.   He's almost certain to exceed that if he hits free agency -- that MLE is his floor.

Grants a decent bench guy, however, I think many overestimate his abilities. In 24.4mpg last season, Grant gave the C’s 7.8pts and 3.6rebs per game. His per 36 is 11.6pts and 5.3rebs, which isn’t very good. His defense is good, but not great.

Now compare that to Rob who played 29.6mpg and gave the C’s 10pts, 9.6rebs and 2.2blks per game while playing great defense. His per 36 is 12.1pts, 11.7rebs, and 2.7blk. Rob is a much better player. Grant should not be paid more than Rob.

Rob got his contract after year 3, not after year 4.  Rob's year 3 numbers were 8 points, 7 boards and 2 blocks in 19 minutes per game.  And that was after showing pretty much nothing in his first two years, compared to Grant who's been in the rotation from practically Day 1 and has been much more regularly available than Rob.  You can't compare Grant at Year 3 to Rob in Year 4 and say "Oh, Grant can't be paid as much as Rob". 

And again, for what seems like the millionth time but can't be because I only have 4000 posts, the salary cap increases practically every year, and you have to take that into account.  Guys who sign a deal a year later, will, on average, be paid more than the guy who signed a year earlier.  It's just how it works.  It jumped a ton from last year to this year, substantially more than was projected when Rob signed his contract, and will increase again next year -- it's currently projected to be 12% higher when Grant's contract kicks in that it was projected to be for Rob's new deal when he signed.  So if they were equals, you'd expect Grant to make 12% more than Rob.  That would put Grant at about 4 years, $54 million guaranteed, with incentives taking the deal up to around 4 years $60 million.  I think somewhere between the MLE forecast of 4/$48.5 and 4/60, is where he ends up.

Ok, so let’s compare year 3 then.

Grant: In 24.4mpg: 7.8pts, 3.6rebs, 1ast, 0.7blk
Per36: 11.6pts, 5.3reb, 1.5ast, 1.1blk, 0.7stl

Rob: In 18.9mpg: 8pts, 6.9reb, 1.8ast, 1.8blk.
Per36: 15.2pts, 13.1rebs, 3.4ast, 3.3blk, 1.6stl

On second thought, Grant should be making quite a bit less than Rob. Maybe $8M/season. Didn’t realize how substantially different the numbers were between both players year 3.

I think you missed the part where Grant played 1875 minutes and Rob only played 985.  That's a huge difference, and it can't be ignored how Rob's historic lack of availability dampened his contract value.  Heck, even in year 4, Rob's healthiest Grant still saw the floor more both in the regular season and the postseason (and by over 250 minutes in the postseason).  In the postseason he played both more total minutes and per game.

When Rob is healthy, he's a $25 million player.  But he's not healthy all the time, or even close to it.  Grant is, and that's valuable in and of itself.

Yes, Grant plays more, but not nearly as well. People are making it sound like he’s an irreplaceable part of the rotation. He’s not. The Boston Celtics have a record of 9-8 without Grant Williams. If the price tag is too high, let him walk. I don’t see many teams out there paying more than $10M/year for 7pts/3rebs per game.
Quoting Nick from the now locked Ime thread:
Quote
At some point you have to blame the performance on the court on the players on the court. Every loss is not the coach's fault and every win isn't because of the players.

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #79 on: July 19, 2022, 06:50:55 PM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23317
  • Tommy Points: 2509
Grant is going to be a tough call.  He is a useful, versatile, young player who has been improving.  But if it takes $12M to keep him, we may not be able to afford that.

I don’t see why we wouldn’t be able to afford that.  It’s for next year, the cap and tax will go up another 10%, and Horford isn’t getting paid $26.5 million next year.  Grant and Al are getting paid $30.8 million combined this year.  Collectively they’ll very likely cost less.

You are right, we could but to me, that is just too much money for him.  I like Grant, love his versatility but I don't see him as a $12M-$13M player.  I am almost always wrong about how much players can get on the open market though.  They always get more than I think.

He will be a restricted FA.  I think just under what Rob Williams got would be fair.  Maybe starting at say $9M?  His QO is $6.2M.  I am sure that will be offered and then he can test the market.

Yeah, I think you're just underestimating him a lot.  The MLE is currently forecast 4 years, $48.5 million, and will likely go up a little.   He's almost certain to exceed that if he hits free agency -- that MLE is his floor.

I have to agree. If 37 year old PJ Tucker can get a 3 year MLE deal with a player option at age 40, Grant should have no issue getting an MLE offer too. That should be his agent's starting point.

I get that PJ Tucker is kind of a good comp for Grant but Tucker has started 581 games including 70 for Miami last season, he is an established starting PF.  Grant is not, and I don't think ever will be.  Tucker is better.  He may not be in 2 or 3 years but right now, he is better.  Tucker got 3 years/$33M.  He started at $10.5M.  I am saying Grant should start more like $9M not $12M.  It is all in the same ball park.

If I was the Celtics, I would not have paid $33M for Tucker.  And just because PHI decided to pay that to Tucker, doesn't make it a good idea for the Celtics to pay Grant 4 years and $50M or whatever it is that is being suggested.  PHI has a long history of bad contracts.

We didn't see much of PJ Tucker when he was 23 because he didn't make it to the NBA till he was 27.  Of course that says next to nothing for certain about Grant's future but leads me to think that he very well could be a starter.  Experience and skill development still happening for Grant.  We saw some offensive moves in the making last season that could become more a part of his repertoire. I do think Grant could be a starter or could be a very versatile and valuable 6 to 8 man.

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #80 on: July 21, 2022, 02:33:15 AM »

Online SparzWizard

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16057
  • Tommy Points: 990
Steph Curry spoke at the ESPYs, greeting Grant Williams and threw a jab at him saying he might let GWill wear his ring.

Warriors and Curry were lucky they cakewalked their way to the Finals, again...


#JTJB (Just Trade Jaylen Brown)
#JFJM (Just Fire Joe Mazzulla)

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #81 on: July 21, 2022, 02:57:27 AM »

Offline PAOBoston

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8098
  • Tommy Points: 533
Steph Curry spoke at the ESPYs, greeting Grant Williams and threw a jab at him saying he might let GWill wear his ring.

Warriors and Curry were lucky they cakewalked their way to the Finals, again...
Grant deserved that. Not sure why the #8 guy on the roster saying things like the Cs were better team after they choked and lost 3 straight. Grant needs to keep his mouth shut considering he was a total zero in the playoffs outside of the Bucks game 7.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2022, 05:41:33 AM by PAOBoston »

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #82 on: July 21, 2022, 06:48:53 AM »

Offline ozgod

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16751
  • Tommy Points: 1362
Steph Curry spoke at the ESPYs, greeting Grant Williams and threw a jab at him saying he might let GWill wear his ring.

Warriors and Curry were lucky they cakewalked their way to the Finals, again...
Grant deserved that. Not sure why the #8 guy on the roster saying things like the Cs were better team after they choked and lost 3 straight. Grant needs to keep his mouth shut considering he was a total zero in the playoffs outside of the Bucks game 7.

He has a slightly inflated idea of his own importance probably  :police: :angel:
Any odd typos are because I suck at typing on an iPhone :D

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #83 on: July 21, 2022, 07:26:00 AM »

Offline PAOBoston

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8098
  • Tommy Points: 533
Steph Curry spoke at the ESPYs, greeting Grant Williams and threw a jab at him saying he might let GWill wear his ring.

Warriors and Curry were lucky they cakewalked their way to the Finals, again...
Grant deserved that. Not sure why the #8 guy on the roster saying things like the Cs were better team after they choked and lost 3 straight. Grant needs to keep his mouth shut considering he was a total zero in the playoffs outside of the Bucks game 7.

He has a slightly inflated idea of his own importance probably  :police: :angel:
He is most certainly an irrational confidence type of guy.

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #84 on: July 21, 2022, 08:35:21 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Steph Curry spoke at the ESPYs, greeting Grant Williams and threw a jab at him saying he might let GWill wear his ring.

Warriors and Curry were lucky they cakewalked their way to the Finals, again...
Grant deserved that. Not sure why the #8 guy on the roster saying things like the Cs were better team after they choked and lost 3 straight. Grant needs to keep his mouth shut considering he was a total zero in the playoffs outside of the Bucks game 7.

He has a slightly inflated idea of his own importance probably  :police: :angel:
He is most certainly an irrational confidence type of guy.
having confidence is great.  backing that up on the court would be even better

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #85 on: July 21, 2022, 08:57:10 AM »

Online Birdman

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9170
  • Tommy Points: 412
Grant is meh to me..good guy to have on bench but nothing spectacular.. he can be easily be replace
C/PF-Horford, Baynes, Noel, Theis, Morris,
SF/SG- Tatum, Brown, Hayward, Smart, Semi, Clark
PG- Irving, Rozier, Larkin

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #86 on: July 21, 2022, 09:07:05 AM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
We didn't see much of PJ Tucker when he was 23 because he didn't make it to the NBA till he was 27.  Of course that says next to nothing for certain about Grant's future but leads me to think that he very well could be a starter.  Experience and skill development still happening for Grant.  We saw some offensive moves in the making last season that could become more a part of his repertoire. I do think Grant could be a starter or could be a very versatile and valuable 6 to 8 man.

That is fair, Grant could continue to improve and end up better that PJ Tucker.  I don't expect that kind of trajectory based on what I have seen from Grant so far but you never know.  When there is remaining ceiling in a player, usually you see them as more of a raw talent, you can see ability but it is just not manifesting itself on the court.  Nesmith is more like that.  Not saying I think Nesmith will be a starter but you get the sense with him that there is potentially more in there, that he is not making the most of his ability yet.  And that if he figures it out, he could be a lot better.

With Grant, I see a guy that is already getting absolutely the most out of his ability.  And I say that as a compliment.  We'll see.  But as it stands, I would not pay Grant with the expectation that he will become a starter.  I pay him as a very solid, versatile, consistent bench player.  To me, that is a contract that starts at say $9M.  To others, that starts at $12M or more I guess.  In the end, someone in the league usually ends up stepping up and overpaying so we shall see.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2022, 09:20:24 AM by Vermont Green »

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #87 on: July 21, 2022, 02:09:42 PM »

Offline footey

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15965
  • Tommy Points: 1833
Grant on the Long Shot podcast was asked who were the most under-rated NBA sharpshooters. After listing Seth Curry and Paddy Mills, Grant singled out Sam Hauser as being phenomenal shooter unlike any he’s ever seen. Let’s hope it translates to games. He also said Sam doesn’t move without the ball like Duncan Robinson.

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #88 on: July 21, 2022, 02:43:46 PM »

Offline Rondo9

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5379
  • Tommy Points: 277
Steph Curry spoke at the ESPYs, greeting Grant Williams and threw a jab at him saying he might let GWill wear his ring.

Warriors and Curry were lucky they cakewalked their way to the Finals, again...
Grant deserved that. Not sure why the #8 guy on the roster saying things like the Cs were better team after they choked and lost 3 straight. Grant needs to keep his mouth shut considering he was a total zero in the playoffs outside of the Bucks game 7.

Should've known Celticsblog would trash their own players. Seessh this place is becoming more miserable by the day.

Re: Is Grant a goner?
« Reply #89 on: July 21, 2022, 02:51:55 PM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7142
  • Tommy Points: 979
Steph Curry spoke at the ESPYs, greeting Grant Williams and threw a jab at him saying he might let GWill wear his ring.

Warriors and Curry were lucky they cakewalked their way to the Finals, again...
Grant deserved that. Not sure why the #8 guy on the roster saying things like the Cs were better team after they choked and lost 3 straight. Grant needs to keep his mouth shut considering he was a total zero in the playoffs outside of the Bucks game 7.

Should've known Celticsblog would trash their own players. Seessh this place is becoming more miserable by the day.

It’s a vocal minority, unfortunately.

If you have The Athletic, they did a nice profile on Grant this week, including his endearingly irrational confidence.  Here’s a preview:

Quote
Grant Williams wanted to make a strong first impression on Danny Ainge. Sitting in Ainge’s office just after being drafted by the Celtics, Williams peered out the window and spotted a blank banner hanging in the corner of the Auerbach Center.

Puzzled why there was this empty stretch of canvas hiding in plain sight among a sea of 17 championship banners, he thought for a second and the first word to come out of his mouth as a Celtic was, “Why?”

Ainge, Boston’s president of basketball operations at the time, explained the symbolism, the history and the goal. He had been a part of raising those banners as a player and an executive. He had seen everything it took to get there.

Williams, who had just been selected 22nd in the 2019 NBA Draft out of Tennessee, grinned with a naive yet assured optimism and simply told him, “I’m gonna get you that banner.”

“I knew from my life that’s the one goal that I had and it’s not even the MVPs or anything else, it was that Banner 18 for the Celtics franchise,” Williams says with conviction. “That’s something I feel like that we both understood with one another, that’s the number one goal. From the beginning, that was my way of cementing history with this franchise and my way of doing it with the team.”

Ainge laughs remembering the moment a 20-year-old role player, on his first day in the building, declaring he was going to deliver him a title. The now Utah Jazz CEO doesn’t recall exactly what his response was, but there certainly were some chuckles. “I probably would have told him, like, you got a long way to go son and you got to get better on defense and become a better shooter. Probably told him all those things. But I think that he’s put in the time and work.”