If The Celtics Starting Five Is…

[celticsclay]

I don't think Grant is good enough to be a starting PF, let alone as the starting PF on a title team.  He's too small and isn't consistent enough offensively, and doesn't add additional value like Horford does (excellent passing, very good to elite defense).

Go through the list of champs over the years. It is often true that one starter was a role player in the same general class as Grant. The great Laker teams started AC Green or Rambis. The Bulls started Luc Longley, Brad Wennington or Will Perdue. San Antonio started Bruce Bowen.

Its a reasonable strategy.

I don't think it's reasonable when the rest of the starters are Timelord, Smart, Brown and Tatum.  Grant is just too limited at everything other than shooting.  Best case scenario, the team succeeds despite Grant's below-average contributions.  If the Celtics can upgrade the position going forward, they should.

Yeah, almost all championship teams have a special room type player on their roster and many have 2.  Those teams can get by with a lesser starter.  The handful or so teams in league history that have won a title without a then current top 5 player on their roster don't tend to have a role player type starter

A pretty decent amount of rankings have Tatum as a top 5 player right now.

[Vermont Green]

I don't think Grant is good enough to be a starting PF, let alone as the starting PF on a title team.  He's too small and isn't consistent enough offensively, and doesn't add additional value like Horford does (excellent passing, very good to elite defense).

Go through the list of champs over the years. It is often true that one starter was a role player in the same general class as Grant. The great Laker teams started AC Green or Rambis. The Bulls started Luc Longley, Brad Wennington or Will Perdue. San Antonio started Bruce Bowen.

Its a reasonable strategy.

I don't think it's reasonable when the rest of the starters are Timelord, Smart, Brown and Tatum.  Grant is just too limited at everything other than shooting.  Best case scenario, the team succeeds despite Grant's below-average contributions.  If the Celtics can upgrade the position going forward, they should.

Yeah, almost all championship teams have a special room type player on their roster and many have 2.  Those teams can get by with a lesser starter.  The handful or so teams in league history that have won a title without a then current top 5 player on their roster don't tend to have a role player type starter

A pretty decent amount of rankings have Tatum as a top 5 player right now.

I don't think Tatum is the issue.  He isn't Michael Jordan but he plenty good enough to be the number 1 on a title team.  Brown is more than fine to be the #2.  The idea that a title team can have 1 average player in the starters is true but with Grant starting, we arguably would have 3, Smart, RWIII, and Grant.  I see Smart as solid enough, he does a little bit of everything and defense and intangibles are off the charts.  RWIII is kind of that too.  Fine in a role on a title team.  But with already 2 players as just kind of fine, then you add in Grant who is a fringe starter at best, and you are light.  You need that PF to be more like Smart, solid.

And title teams really need to be 7 or 8 deep with reliable players.  White and Grant are terrific for 6 and 7.  I think we would need a PF starter who was in the 3-4 range, a solid starter, like Smart, but not necessarily an all star.

[Hoopvortex]

Looking at the big picture, Grant Williams has had a reputation overhaul on this site. Last year about this time, as I recall, he was being universally condemned for his awful defense, and more than one poster were even suggesting that he didn’t even belong in the league. How things have changed! Now it’s just a debate about whether he can start on a contender.

His defense is still underrated, and the surprising and significant additions to his game, especially in attacking closeouts and getting to the rim off the dribble, suggest that he’s a long way from reaching his ceiling.

All that dribble-driving, followed by high% finishing at the rim, and even more surprisingly in the paint short of the rim, were not things that I expected to see – maybe not during his whole career. And yet here we are.

I wonder what we’ll be saying next year at this time!

[CFAN38]

I am comfortable and excited by the idea of a home grown starting 5 for years to come. I am confident with Grant starting, however the value of the 6-8 roster spots can not be overlooked. As Al ages himself out of the league his replacement is going to be the key to the Williams’ starting at the 4 and 5. Starting this offseason I really hope BS starts taking some swings to find a big to develop for the future or land a younger vet to eat into Al’s minutes.

[PAOBoston]

Grant Williams is not starter material and should not be paid as a starter either. People keep saying he is “versatile” but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s good. He’s not a good defender or rebounder. He can’t really dribble or pass. He. A shoot the three. How much is that worth though?

If Cs are starting him going forward, they are going to get destroyed on the boards. He’s not bad for a player off the bench but if he’s starting for you, you don’t have any championship aspirations. I still believe Cs need to include him in some sort of package for a viable starter and eventual Horford replacement.

[Roy H.]

Grant Williams is not starter material and should not be paid as a starter either. People keep saying he is “versatile” but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s good. He’s not a good defender or rebounder. He can’t really dribble or pass. He. A shoot the three. How much is that worth though?

If Cs are starting him going forward, they are going to get destroyed on the boards. He’s not bad for a player off the bench but if he’s starting for you, you don’t have any championship aspirations. I still believe Cs need to include him in some sort of package for a viable starter and eventual Horford replacement.

I mostly agree, but I would say that Grant is a good defender.  He's not a great defender.

[Big333223]

I think this thread has correctly identified Grant as the position of concern. If he takes another leap next season, then maybe he'd be good enough to start for a title contender but he's definitely a leap away from being that caliber of guy.

This summer, I'd be looking into John Collins as a reclamation project (if he doesn't get moved out of Atlanta in-season) or Pascal Siakam is the Raptors decide to go that way (not sure the C's could afford him in a trade, though).

[Hoopvortex]

Grant Williams is not starter material and should not be paid as a starter either.

He's fifth in minutes per game so far this season. It's true that he mostly hasn't started (though he's got 16 starts out of 44). So while he might not be a "starter", he's playing starter's minutes.

People keep saying he is “versatile” but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s good.

Not sure why you put it in quotes. He guards up or down. Defense is a team game, and he is a consummate team defender.

He’s not a good defender or rebounder.

Can't agree about your defensive evaluation, coach.

As for rebounding, his own numbers are the pits - but the team numbers are not, when he's on the floor. I note with interest that Boston is currently #1 in the league at Defensive Rebounding (.781), with Grant playing starter minutes. The team is currently 9th in defense for the season (pts/possession, a couple of different algorithms), after a horrendous start - those bad November numbers are included. By the way, Boston improved that stat steadily even before Rob came back.

Just recalling something Tommy said about his early days. Russ told him not to worry about rebounding, just box out your man and I'll get the ball. It must have been truly amazing to have Bill Russell as a teammate.

He can’t really dribble or pass.

He's looked pretty good at his newfound dribbling skills this season, though, and the coaching staff appear to be encouraging him to attack closeouts aggressively; not surprising, since he's been one of the best finishers on the team. I'm sure that the staff appreciate his two-season improvement in getting turnovers down even more.

He. A shoot the three. How much is that worth though?

It's invaluable, I'd say. You can't leave him, which opens gaping holes in the defense for Tatum, Brown, Brogdon, White, and Smart to operate.

If Cs are starting him going forward, they are going to get destroyed on the boards.

And yet here we are. Again, Boston is #1 in the league in defensive rebounding. The opposite, I'd say, of "getting destroyed".

[Vermont Green]

You can look at stats to assess Grant's overall offensive and defensive impact using ORtg and DRtg:

Grant:
ORtg    116.3
DRtg    109.6

Team:
ORtg    117.8
DRtg    111.2

So the team is about 1.5 pts worse than team average on offense with Grant and about 1.6 pts better on defense with Grant (per 100 possessions).  These are imperfect stats at best but provide a decent generality.  I don't find this surprising.  Grant does play decent defense, suited to our switching scheme.  Not game altering defense, but decent defense.  On offense, he does provide a 3-pt threat but otherwise doesn't do anything special, while not doing things that hurt the team.

Regarding rebounding, I don't know how get a sorted stat for that to quantify it.  My qualitative observation is that that he is fundamentally sound, meaning he boxes out well, but that he does not have the length or spring to "go get" rebounds like some other bigs.  So again, just kind of "fine", nothing special.

I would be surprised if the Celtics view him as a future starter, Horford replacement.  My opinion is that we need someone better (and bigger) than Grant starting at PF if we want to contend with the current core team.  Grant has improved every year and is only 24.  He will always be a tweener though, undersized for PF and under-athletic for wing.  Marcus Morris is a tweener also and he has had a nice career.  I hope both happen, I hope we find a true starting level PF to replace Horford and I hope Grant stays around to provide depth off the bench.

[Vermont Green]

And yet here we are. Again, Boston is #1 in the league in defensive rebounding. The opposite, I'd say, of "getting destroyed".

But only 25th in the league in offensive rebounding (RWIII coming back will help with that).

I agree with your point about "getting destroyed" on the boards, I don't think that would happen just because Grant is on the floor or starting.  Grant can box out, that helps with defensive rebounding, even if he doesn't get the rebound.  But you generally need length and athleticism to get offensive rebounds.  Someone like RWIII.  Grant is not a good offensive rebounder, statistically or otherwise.  You like to get a little more offensive rebounding out of your starting PF than what Grant is going to give you.

[Hoopvortex]

And yet here we are. Again, Boston is #1 in the league in defensive rebounding. The opposite, I'd say, of "getting destroyed".

But only 25th in the league in offensive rebounding (RWIII coming back will help with that).

Not sure where you're finding that. BRef has .220, which is 23rd.

I agree with your point about "getting destroyed" on the boards, I don't think that would happen just because Grant is on the floor or starting.  Grant can box out, that helps with defensive rebounding, even if he doesn't get the rebound.  But you generally need length and athleticism to get offensive rebounds.  Someone like RWIII.  Grant is not a good offensive rebounder, statistically or otherwise.  You like to get a little more offensive rebounding out of your starting PF than what Grant is going to give you.

Yet another reason why that antiquated term "Power Forward" should be left in the '90s when it still made sense - not to mention that Grant is not one.

As to offensive rebounding, Grant is at 4.5%, marginally better than Al Horford. Whether or not either of them should be doing better, I think that they're helping the top NBA offense more by spacing the floor than by crashing the offensive board. Whatever else, they are not taking away from the #1 offense by doing what they are doing.