Report: Celtics still looking to utilize trade exception?

[Roy H.]

At today's press conference:

John Karalis @John_Karalis about 43 minutes ago

Asked Brad Stevens if there's a limit to the spending to round out the roster considering the current tax bill, and he says no. There are mutliple TPEs to use and he says he has clearance to use them

I hope that's true, but I doubt it is. 

But, if it is true, then there's absolutely no reason not to use the TPE by 7/18.

While it may be true there just is no way they will spend 10+m on a player who may spot start and play 15mpg otherwise.  The only reason to do this is if it's a player that can be a starter in the league, is signed for multiple years to take over Al's spot in the rotation next year.  I don't think anyone is available right now that would make sense.  I can see the smaller one's being used in season but the big TPE I just don't see it unless a big trade goes down and we can get a good player from a team that needs to clear salary.

Doesn't this reasoning only make sense if there's a spending cap / budget, though?

Because, if Brad's marching orders are "do whatever it takes, no matter the cost", then even an incremental improvement and preservation of the salary slot is in the team's best interests, right?

It depends on the cost to preserve that asset. Do you give up PP for Malik Beasley using the TPE ( I chose Beasely because he was the highest expiring that fits in the TPE)?

If you make a desperation move now to spend the existing budget, does it impact future budget?

Regarding the second question, I'm going under the assumption that Brad is being truthful, and that the sky is the limit with the budget for this season.

As for the first question, I think there are multiple trades out there that would preserve a lot of the salary flexibility without having to give up assets.  Terrence Ross, for instance, has got to be available for free.  Acquiring him and sending him home would be more beneficial than letting the TPE expire, right?

[Roy H.]

True contending teams don't waste assets like that.  If Boston doesn't use it, I think they are signaling they don't actually expect to compete this year.

True contending teams waste assets all the time though.

Golden State just let Payton and Porter walk losing 2 rotiational players worth ~15.3m in assets (based on annual value of new deals) for nothing.

Phoenix seems to letting Ayton walk (though they may get something in return, but it also may be pennies on the dollar).

Milwaukee let Brogdon go for peanuts, didn't use the trade exception they got out of it.

In '21, the Heat let a 7.5m TPE expire.

I don't know if you think Dallas is contending, but they just let a 10.9m exception expire (in hopes of re-signing Brunson).

Clippers have an 8.5m trade exception that expires in less than a week, so let's see if they use it.


Losing assets for nothing (or pennies) certainly happens for contending teams too.

Additionally, I just read that the Heat passed on signing T.J. Warren because they didn't want to pay the tax.  Of course, I have no idea if that's true, because the author called him "P.J. Warren".

https://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article263356018.html

[sgrogan]

At today's press conference:

John Karalis @John_Karalis about 43 minutes ago

Asked Brad Stevens if there's a limit to the spending to round out the roster considering the current tax bill, and he says no. There are mutliple TPEs to use and he says he has clearance to use them

I hope that's true, but I doubt it is. 

But, if it is true, then there's absolutely no reason not to use the TPE by 7/18.

While it may be true there just is no way they will spend 10+m on a player who may spot start and play 15mpg otherwise.  The only reason to do this is if it's a player that can be a starter in the league, is signed for multiple years to take over Al's spot in the rotation next year.  I don't think anyone is available right now that would make sense.  I can see the smaller one's being used in season but the big TPE I just don't see it unless a big trade goes down and we can get a good player from a team that needs to clear salary.

Doesn't this reasoning only make sense if there's a spending cap / budget, though?

Because, if Brad's marching orders are "do whatever it takes, no matter the cost", then even an incremental improvement and preservation of the salary slot is in the team's best interests, right?

It depends on the cost to preserve that asset. Do you give up PP for Malik Beasley using the TPE ( I chose Beasely because he was the highest expiring that fits in the TPE)?

If you make a desperation move now to spend the existing budget, does it impact future budget?

Regarding the second question, I'm going under the assumption that Brad is being truthful, and that the sky is the limit with the budget for this season.

As for the first question, I think there are multiple trades out there that would preserve a lot of the salary flexibility without having to give up assets.  Terrence Ross, for instance, has got to be available for free.  Acquiring him and sending him home would be more beneficial than letting the TPE expire, right?

Well yea, "you have free reign until you do something stupid"
In general yes, If we can preserve some portion of the TPE without creating a distraction, it's only money.
Ownership's willingness to spend (if true) is an asset in and of itself.

[Moranis]

True contending teams don't waste assets like that.  If Boston doesn't use it, I think they are signaling they don't actually expect to compete this year.

True contending teams waste assets all the time though.

Golden State just let Payton and Porter walk losing 2 rotiational players worth ~15.3m in assets (based on annual value of new deals) for nothing.

Phoenix seems to letting Ayton walk (though they may get something in return, but it also may be pennies on the dollar).

Milwaukee let Brogdon go for peanuts, didn't use the trade exception they got out of it.

In '21, the Heat let a 7.5m TPE expire.

I don't know if you think Dallas is contending, but they just let a 10.9m exception expire (in hopes of re-signing Brunson).

Clippers have an 8.5m trade exception that expires in less than a week, so let's see if they use it.


Losing assets for nothing (or pennies) certainly happens for contending teams too.

Having a guy leave in free agency is not the same thing as not utilizing an asset.  And the Warriors signed Divincenzo as a replacement (who is frankly probably better than Payton or Porter).  They also have Wiseman coming back.  They also had a roster crunch issue. 

Phoenix isn't going to let Ayton go for nothing.  They will get something for him.

I'm not sure Milwaukee was considered a contending team when they choose Bledsoe over Brogdon, but Brogdon has been injured so much and I'm not sure they acquire Jrue if they had kept him, so it worked out ok (the RJ Hampton pick was also in the Jrue trade).  And Milwaukee didn't actually end up with a trade exception.  They bungled it with some mismanagement in signing Lopez and managing Hill's contract and ended up not having a trade exception to use.  So they wasted the asset, just in a different way entirely.

The Heat had just been swept in the 1st round.  I'm not sure they felt they were a contender, but yes, they should have used the 7.5 TPE if they had the roster room and ability.  I don't know if, for example, they still could have brought Lowry on if they used the TPE.  If they could have, then yes they should have used it. 

The Clippers are at or just near the roster max limit.  I don't know if they have the space to use the TPE.  That isn't a problem for Boston with 3 open spots though.  But if the Clippers have the room, they absolutely should use the TPE.  Mavs are in a similar spot, but also should have used it if they were able.   

[Chief]

Detroit had a lot of players and probably would easily trade Noel. He seems like a great backup to Timelord.

OK, that is a fair example, $9.2M is a lot for player you are not even sure you are going to need, but I agree, he probably could be had.

I personally don't see the need to do this now.  Nerlens becomes our 5th big.  He put up 3 pts and 5.6 rebs in 22 min last season.  I don't think he is better than Grant.  I think there are comparable 5th bigs that could be acquired at almost anytime and likely for the min.  If we get to the trade deadline and RWill is injured, Horford isn't holding up, and we are desperate, maybe.  But not now.

Or if they buy him out and we can sign him for a min contract, that would be fine.

Nerlens had 1.2 steals and 1.2 blocks in those 22 minutes. Per36 that's 1.9 and 2.0 steals/blocks with 9.0 rebounds. By comparison, Timelord Per36 is 1.1 steals, 2.7 blocks and 11.7 rebounds. Nerlens had a DBPM of 3.3 with Williams at 3.1.

If you get Nerlens, it's for his defense and defensive versatility.

But, best to get him once Detroit releases him and not with the Fournier TPE. Though, since it's not my money, I have zero issue with using the TPE to get him.

Exactly...Celtics defense wouldn't miss a beat.

[Vermont Green]

True contending teams don't waste assets like that.  If Boston doesn't use it, I think they are signaling they don't actually expect to compete this year.

True contending teams waste assets all the time though.

Golden State just let Payton and Porter walk losing 2 rotiational players worth ~15.3m in assets (based on annual value of new deals) for nothing.

Phoenix seems to letting Ayton walk (though they may get something in return, but it also may be pennies on the dollar).

Milwaukee let Brogdon go for peanuts, didn't use the trade exception they got out of it.

In '21, the Heat let a 7.5m TPE expire.

I don't know if you think Dallas is contending, but they just let a 10.9m exception expire (in hopes of re-signing Brunson).

Clippers have an 8.5m trade exception that expires in less than a week, so let's see if they use it.


Losing assets for nothing (or pennies) certainly happens for contending teams too.

Additionally, I just read that the Heat passed on signing T.J. Warren because they didn't want to pay the tax.  Of course, I have no idea if that's true, because the author called him "P.J. Warren".

https://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article263356018.html

PJ Warren, TJ Tucker, whatever (you are right, hard to know what he is talking about).  But in either case, TJ Warren on an MLE is a pretty good deal but Miami has plenty of wings (if you ever can have plenty).  And PJ Tucker could have been signed also but I assume $10M'ish was too rich for Miami.

Teams will not be successful if they spend unwisely.  I think that is the case with Miami electing not to sign Tucker and Warren and it is the case for the Celtics as they make their choices.  The Celtics are going to sign some vet mins, probably a wing and a big at least.  But I doubt that they are going to do some big trade using the Fournier TPE just to do a trade.

To me, I take Stevens' statements as he can make a deal if he feels it is a good deal but I don't think the owners expect that he is going to make a bad deal just to make a deal.  If they weren't going to spend money, they wouldn't have signed Gallinari and traded for Brogdon.  Those both appear at this point to be good, smart, value deals.  But I don't think the owners would be happy with Stevens if he had overpaid some stiff with MLE or if he makes a bad trade with any TPE.

They will sign a few vet mins, barring some bigger deal that is extremely unlikely at this point.  They will start the season with what they have, which is a really good and deep roster, and they will probably make some trade or trades around the trade deadline to deal with real actual weaknesses or holes.  In the meantime, they have options they can deploy if something silly good presents itself, either as a stand alone deal or helping to facilitate some other deal.

[Celtics4ever]

I agree with Max, we could use a tough guy.   Our roster is sorely lacking an enforcer type.

[BruceBanner18]

To the point of needing to upgrade a position vs adding a player -

Udoka plays an 8-man rotation. A simple breakdown of the current roster by minutes looks like this (note: obviously the minutes will ultimately be different so the minutes flex up or down ~4 min just keeping it simple for this convo):

1/2 = 96 min = Smart/Brogdan/White all at 32
3/4 = 96 min = Tatum/Brown/Grant all at 32
5 = 48 min = TimeLord 32/Horford 16

So if we are healthy and add another player, who's giving up minutes from the top 8?

The next 3 players on the roster are:

Pritchard (back up 1/2)
Gallinari (back up 3/4)
Vet Center yet to be signed (back up 5)

These 3 roster slots would not play on nights we are at full strength and Ime is trying to win. So spending on these roster slots do not help win in the playoffs (barring injury). These slots are to help manage the long season/seeding.

The last spot on the 12 man roster is likely Hauser at this point and he is prob garbage time only.

Spot 13 is Kornet who will likely be active on the nights Horford sits and the Vet Center moves up to back up.

My point is, outside of a backup big, any addition would likely require White or Grant to be moved. I don't think that is likely. So any money being spent is almost certainly on a backup big with a contract that can be moved (like Theis' addition at deadline).

[nickagneta]

To the point of needing to upgrade a position vs adding a player -

Udoka plays an 8-man rotation. A simple breakdown of the current roster by minutes looks like this (note: obviously the minutes will ultimately be different so the minutes flex up or down ~4 min just keeping it simple for this convo):

1/2 = 96 min = Smart/Brogdan/White all at 32
3/4 = 96 min = Tatum/Brown/Grant all at 32
5 = 48 min = TimeLord 32/Horford 16

So if we are healthy and add another player, who's giving up minutes from the top 8?

The next 3 players on the roster are:

Pritchard (back up 1/2)
Gallinari (back up 3/4)
Vet Center yet to be signed (back up 5)

These 3 roster slots would not play on nights we are at full strength and Ime is trying to win. So spending on these roster slots do not help win in the playoffs (barring injury). These slots are to help manage the long season/seeding.

The last spot on the 12 man roster is likely Hauser at this point and he is prob garbage time only.

Spot 13 is Kornet who will likely be active on the nights Horford sits and the Vet Center moves up to back up.

My point is, outside of a backup big, any addition would likely require White or Grant to be moved. I don't think that is likely. So any money being spent is almost certainly on a backup big with a contract that can be moved (like Theis' addition at deadline).

Couple things. Udoka's rotation was 8 players last year. That doesn't mean it will be this year. Second, there is the very strong possibility that the Celtics make a trade not sending out players, just a TPE and a draft pick

[Roy H.]

I think those predicting that Gallo will be out of the rotation are going to be surprised.  We didn't sign him to wave a towel.

[BruceBanner18]

To the point of needing to upgrade a position vs adding a player -

Udoka plays an 8-man rotation. A simple breakdown of the current roster by minutes looks like this (note: obviously the minutes will ultimately be different so the minutes flex up or down ~4 min just keeping it simple for this convo):

1/2 = 96 min = Smart/Brogdan/White all at 32
3/4 = 96 min = Tatum/Brown/Grant all at 32
5 = 48 min = TimeLord 32/Horford 16

So if we are healthy and add another player, who's giving up minutes from the top 8?

The next 3 players on the roster are:

Pritchard (back up 1/2)
Gallinari (back up 3/4)
Vet Center yet to be signed (back up 5)

These 3 roster slots would not play on nights we are at full strength and Ime is trying to win. So spending on these roster slots do not help win in the playoffs (barring injury). These slots are to help manage the long season/seeding.

The last spot on the 12 man roster is likely Hauser at this point and he is prob garbage time only.

Spot 13 is Kornet who will likely be active on the nights Horford sits and the Vet Center moves up to back up.

My point is, outside of a backup big, any addition would likely require White or Grant to be moved. I don't think that is likely. So any money being spent is almost certainly on a backup big with a contract that can be moved (like Theis' addition at deadline).

Couple things. Udoka's rotation was 8 players last year. That doesn't mean it will be this year. Second, there is the very strong possibility that the Celtics make a trade not sending out players, just a TPE and a draft pick

Well, I didn't say "Ime had an 8 man last year which means he will have an 8 man this year" I laid out the minutes and asked who plays less from the top 8. So I ask you again, with this additional player in the rotation who are you playing less?

To your second point, IF we add a player with the TPE and a pick it only makes sense if that player is a backup big with the potential of outplaying Horford or Grant otherwise it is a waste of resources/the opportunity cost is too much.

[Vermont Green]

To the point of needing to upgrade a position vs adding a player -

Udoka plays an 8-man rotation. A simple breakdown of the current roster by minutes looks like this (note: obviously the minutes will ultimately be different so the minutes flex up or down ~4 min just keeping it simple for this convo):

1/2 = 96 min = Smart/Brogdan/White all at 32
3/4 = 96 min = Tatum/Brown/Grant all at 32
5 = 48 min = TimeLord 32/Horford 16

So if we are healthy and add another player, who's giving up minutes from the top 8?

The next 3 players on the roster are:

Pritchard (back up 1/2)
Gallinari (back up 3/4)
Vet Center yet to be signed (back up 5)

These 3 roster slots would not play on nights we are at full strength and Ime is trying to win. So spending on these roster slots do not help win in the playoffs (barring injury). These slots are to help manage the long season/seeding.

The last spot on the 12 man roster is likely Hauser at this point and he is prob garbage time only.

Spot 13 is Kornet who will likely be active on the nights Horford sits and the Vet Center moves up to back up.

My point is, outside of a backup big, any addition would likely require White or Grant to be moved. I don't think that is likely. So any money being spent is almost certainly on a backup big with a contract that can be moved (like Theis' addition at deadline).

Couple things. Udoka's rotation was 8 players last year. That doesn't mean it will be this year. Second, there is the very strong possibility that the Celtics make a trade not sending out players, just a TPE and a draft pick

I don't disagree that as the roster stands now and assuming everyone is in general, healthy and available (a big IF), our roster/rotation is fine, quite good actually.  But based on last season, and every season other than 2020/21, we have mostly played based on a core rotation of:

1  Combo/PG  (Smart)
2  G/F Wings  (Brown/Tatum)
2  PF/C Bigs   (Horford/RWill)

I don't see any reason that we would go away from that.  That does not mean we will always play exactly this way, we will play plenty with 2 combo, 2 bigs and 1 wing; or 2 combo, 2 wing, and 1 big.   Assuming the same starters (at least at the beginning of the season) that means our regular rotation back ups for each of those categories are (I am excluding the deep bench):

Combo/PG   White/Pritchard
G/F Wing     Brogdon
PF/C Bigs    Gallinari/Grant

That is still 10 deep if you include Pritchard.  Our "shallowest" position is the G/F Wing.  Brogdon becomes the principal back up but I am not even sure if his natural position is wing.  I think he can be fine at wing but to me, another bench wing is a greater need than an insurance big (which I think is what BruceBanner is saying).  We are 4 deep at the big position, 3+ deep at the combo slot (Brogdon can play there but probably won't).  We are only 3 deep at wing, 2.75 really if you consider that Brogdon is not a natural wing but can play as a wing.  As of now, Hauser is our 4th wing. 

Not the end of the world, but picture what happens if Brown's wrist is sore and he has to sit out.  Suddenly the wing position looks pretty thin.  Brogdon starts and Hauser is the first wing off the bench.  More likely, Pritchard and White see more minutes but neither of them are really wings.  Compare that to our big rotation, say with Horford resting a back to back.  We can start Gallinari and bring Grant off the bench.  Maybe Kornet gets 10 min if someone is in foul trouble.

[nickagneta]

To the point of needing to upgrade a position vs adding a player -

Udoka plays an 8-man rotation. A simple breakdown of the current roster by minutes looks like this (note: obviously the minutes will ultimately be different so the minutes flex up or down ~4 min just keeping it simple for this convo):

1/2 = 96 min = Smart/Brogdan/White all at 32
3/4 = 96 min = Tatum/Brown/Grant all at 32
5 = 48 min = TimeLord 32/Horford 16

So if we are healthy and add another player, who's giving up minutes from the top 8?

The next 3 players on the roster are:

Pritchard (back up 1/2)
Gallinari (back up 3/4)
Vet Center yet to be signed (back up 5)

These 3 roster slots would not play on nights we are at full strength and Ime is trying to win. So spending on these roster slots do not help win in the playoffs (barring injury). These slots are to help manage the long season/seeding.

The last spot on the 12 man roster is likely Hauser at this point and he is prob garbage time only.

Spot 13 is Kornet who will likely be active on the nights Horford sits and the Vet Center moves up to back up.

My point is, outside of a backup big, any addition would likely require White or Grant to be moved. I don't think that is likely. So any money being spent is almost certainly on a backup big with a contract that can be moved (like Theis' addition at deadline).

Couple things. Udoka's rotation was 8 players last year. That doesn't mean it will be this year. Second, there is the very strong possibility that the Celtics make a trade not sending out players, just a TPE and a draft pick

Well, I didn't say "Ime had an 8 man last year which means he will have an 8 man this year" I laid out the minutes and asked who plays less from the top 8. So I ask you again, with this additional player in the rotation who are you playing less?

To your second point, IF we add a player with the TPE and a pick it only makes sense if that player is a backup big with the potential of outplaying Horford or Grant otherwise it is a waste of resources/the opportunity cost is too much.

I think you need to go back and re-configure your minutes. I don't see Brogdon, White, Grant or Timelord averaging  32 minutes. Horford will play more than 16 minutes. Gallo is going to get minutes. So will Pritchard.

And the per minute per player will be higher because players will play more minutes when other players are out due to injury or rest.

I see a 9-10 man rotation. 11 if another quality player shows up. It doesn't mean all 11 players will play every game. But there will be 10-11 players in Ime's good graces that will be playing regular rotation minutes.

[Roy H.]

To the point of needing to upgrade a position vs adding a player -

Udoka plays an 8-man rotation. A simple breakdown of the current roster by minutes looks like this (note: obviously the minutes will ultimately be different so the minutes flex up or down ~4 min just keeping it simple for this convo):

1/2 = 96 min = Smart/Brogdan/White all at 32
3/4 = 96 min = Tatum/Brown/Grant all at 32
5 = 48 min = TimeLord 32/Horford 16

So if we are healthy and add another player, who's giving up minutes from the top 8?

The next 3 players on the roster are:

Pritchard (back up 1/2)
Gallinari (back up 3/4)
Vet Center yet to be signed (back up 5)

These 3 roster slots would not play on nights we are at full strength and Ime is trying to win. So spending on these roster slots do not help win in the playoffs (barring injury). These slots are to help manage the long season/seeding.

The last spot on the 12 man roster is likely Hauser at this point and he is prob garbage time only.

Spot 13 is Kornet who will likely be active on the nights Horford sits and the Vet Center moves up to back up.

My point is, outside of a backup big, any addition would likely require White or Grant to be moved. I don't think that is likely. So any money being spent is almost certainly on a backup big with a contract that can be moved (like Theis' addition at deadline).

Couple things. Udoka's rotation was 8 players last year. That doesn't mean it will be this year. Second, there is the very strong possibility that the Celtics make a trade not sending out players, just a TPE and a draft pick

I don't disagree that as the roster stands now and assuming everyone is in general, healthy and available (a big IF), our roster/rotation is fine, quite good actually.  But based on last season, and every season other than 2020/21, we have mostly played based on a core rotation of:

1  Combo/PG  (Smart)
2  G/F Wings  (Brown/Tatum)
2  PF/C Bigs   (Horford/RWill)

I don't see any reason that we would go away from that.  That does not mean we will always play exactly this way, we will play plenty with 2 combo, 2 bigs and 1 wing; or 2 combo, 2 wing, and 1 big.   Assuming the same starters (at least at the beginning of the season) that means our regular rotation back ups for each of those categories are (I am excluding the deep bench):

Combo/PG   White/Pritchard
G/F Wing     Brogdon
PF/C Bigs    Gallinari/Grant

That is still 10 deep if you include Pritchard.  Our "shallowest" position is the G/F Wing.  Brogdon becomes the principal back up but I am not even sure if his natural position is wing.  I think he can be fine at wing but to me, another bench wing is a greater need than an insurance big (which I think is what BruceBanner is saying).  We are 4 deep at the big position, 3+ deep at the combo slot (Brogdon can play there but probably won't).  We are only 3 deep at wing, 2.75 really if you consider that Brogdon is not a natural wing but can play as a wing.  As of now, Hauser is our 4th wing. 

Not the end of the world, but picture what happens if Brown's wrist is sore and he has to sit out.  Suddenly the wing position looks pretty thin.  Brogdon starts and Hauser is the first wing off the bench.  More likely, Pritchard and White see more minutes but neither of them are really wings.  Compare that to our big rotation, say with Horford resting a back to back.  We can start Gallinari and bring Grant off the bench.  Maybe Kornet gets 10 min if someone is in foul trouble.

One thing, VG:  in his press conference, Brad mentioned adding somebody at the "5 position".  In other words, he is differentiating between "bigs" and a center.  I don't think we can necessarily co-mingle PFs with Cs when it comes to roster needs.

[Moranis]

To the point of needing to upgrade a position vs adding a player -

Udoka plays an 8-man rotation. A simple breakdown of the current roster by minutes looks like this (note: obviously the minutes will ultimately be different so the minutes flex up or down ~4 min just keeping it simple for this convo):

1/2 = 96 min = Smart/Brogdan/White all at 32
3/4 = 96 min = Tatum/Brown/Grant all at 32
5 = 48 min = TimeLord 32/Horford 16

So if we are healthy and add another player, who's giving up minutes from the top 8?

The next 3 players on the roster are:

Pritchard (back up 1/2)
Gallinari (back up 3/4)
Vet Center yet to be signed (back up 5)

These 3 roster slots would not play on nights we are at full strength and Ime is trying to win. So spending on these roster slots do not help win in the playoffs (barring injury). These slots are to help manage the long season/seeding.

The last spot on the 12 man roster is likely Hauser at this point and he is prob garbage time only.

Spot 13 is Kornet who will likely be active on the nights Horford sits and the Vet Center moves up to back up.

My point is, outside of a backup big, any addition would likely require White or Grant to be moved. I don't think that is likely. So any money being spent is almost certainly on a backup big with a contract that can be moved (like Theis' addition at deadline).

Couple things. Udoka's rotation was 8 players last year. That doesn't mean it will be this year. Second, there is the very strong possibility that the Celtics make a trade not sending out players, just a TPE and a draft pick

Well, I didn't say "Ime had an 8 man last year which means he will have an 8 man this year" I laid out the minutes and asked who plays less from the top 8. So I ask you again, with this additional player in the rotation who are you playing less?

To your second point, IF we add a player with the TPE and a pick it only makes sense if that player is a backup big with the potential of outplaying Horford or Grant otherwise it is a waste of resources/the opportunity cost is too much.

I think you need to go back and re-configure your minutes. I don't see Brogdon, White, Grant or Timelord averaging  32 minutes. Horford will play more than 16 minutes. Gallo is going to get minutes. So will Pritchard.

And the per minute per player will be higher because players will play more minutes when other players are out due to injury or rest.

I see a 9-10 man rotation. 11 if another quality player shows up. It doesn't mean all 11 players will play every game. But there will be 10-11 players in Ime's good graces that will be playing regular rotation minutes.

I think the everyone is healthy regular season rotation will look something like this

PG - Smart 32, White 16
SG - Brown 24, Brogdon 24
SF - Tatum 36, Brown 12
PF - Al 8, Gallo 20, Grant 20
C - Rob 28, Al 20

In the playoffs, I think that gets crunched a lot though

PG - Smart 36, Brogdon 12
SG - Brown 30, Brogdon 18
SF - Tatum 40, Brown 8
PF - Al 16, Gallo 20, Grant 12
C - Rob 32, Al 16

Something like that. 

Pritchard isn't in the rotation at all and I do actually think White is expendable if the team can upgrade the Gallo/Grant part of the rotation (which could come with either another center and Al spending more time at PF or by getting a better PF).