Is Grant a goner? (Yes: Traded to DAL for second rounders)

[PAOBoston]

From reading some blurbs from the Jared Weiss column with Grant, it sounded like Grant knew he wasn’t going to get any playing time after the KP trade. I guess it makes sense to not keep him at that price if they knew they weren’t going to play him much.

The real question now though is what do they do to fill out the bench.

[PAOBoston]

I can’t see how anyone says this team is better today. They are extremely top heavy with maybe 6 or 7 legit players.

Bench is massively flawed. Brogdan your only scorer and he’s most of the time hurt.

Where does Boston turn if they have injuries to the starters?

I don’t want to hear about Sam Hauser anymore. Guy is what he is. Spot up shooter that can’t get his own shot and can’t defend.

Brissett is a g leaguer.

Walsh a rookie who can’t shoot.

Banton is a practice player

Where is the the bench scoring coming from again?

The bench is a huge reason the nuggets won the title. They have three or four legit players that had a massive impact.

Is it Horford, Timelord, or both who are “maybe” legit players?

1. Tatum
2. Brown
3. Porzingis
4. White
5. Brogdon
6. Timelord
7. Horford
8. Hauser
9. Pritchard
10. Brissett

I would argue that Hauser & Pritchard are on the same level as Braun/Green who was Denver’s 8th guy in the rotation. Same level as Duncan Robinson, who was their 8th man.

People will point to the Miami series, but that was won by their 3-6 kind of guys in Vincent & Martin. Would anyone take those two over White or Brogdon?

Your whinging just doesn’t seem to make any sense to me. Please name these three / four Nuggets bench pieces who had this massive impact. You are ridiculously high on other benches whilst being absurdly critical of ours.

I think if everyone is healthy Boston has 7 legit players.

I am pointing out that after those top 7 guys you listed Boston doesn’t have anyone that can be considered regular rotational players that impact a game. Denver had Braun, brown and Jeff green.

You seem to be extremely happy with the direction of the bench which is your right. But there are players that the coach doesn’t even trust that you are counting on.

Why are we discounting Pritchard and Hauser?

Both have proven to be NBA caliber players and should receive playing time.

It’s concerning that Joe doesn’t trust either of them. Celtics needed shooting and some grit in the playoff and neither were looked at.

Maybe he will be forced to use them this year.

I believe it is year 3 for both of them coming up. That is typcially the make or break year. Players are expected to make a “jump” in year 3. The Cs will need them to.

[cman88]

Why are we discounting Pritchard and Hauser?

Both have proven to be NBA caliber players and should receive playing time.

Why did *Joe* discount Pritchard and Hauser (and Grant, as well).

Yeah but thats a coaching problem. if thats the case whomever brad brings in wont play either so it doesnt matter if we sign NBA quality vets.

Both SHOULD see playing time next year. they have proven they are NBA quality reserves.

[Vermont Green]

When I look at this from a purely team or roster standpoint, I am disappointed that we did not get something for Grant, something meaning actual players.  We do have the TPE and some spare 2nd round picks that we can use to get a player but that is to be seen.  I am sure the new CBA and second apron were big factors in this.  I don't understand all the implications of this, I can acknowledge that it is reasonable for the team to consider the implications but I don't fully understand what those are so I can't really judge this from that aspect.

This is not a calamity though.  We are talking about the 8th or maybe even 9th guy on the roster.  Grant is a useful, versatile bench player.  Guys like him are nice to have on the roster.  But I think we have really improved and better balanced our top 7 players with the addition of Porzingis.  So we are better at the top but right now, don't have great depth as compared to last season.  We can fix that with one trade or signing though and our 8-11 or 8-12 players will be just as good as last season.

The team as it stands can win a championship, I think it was the Vegas favorite after the Porzingis trade.  We have two open roster spots plus Champagnie and Kornet are both non-guaranteed so 2 more roster spots can be opened up easily.  I hope we add a couple more useful players to shore up the depth/bench, I am sure we will.

I hope Grant does well in Dallas.  He always played hard, did whatever the team asked.  He is a good guy to have on any team.  I think DAL is going to find that they overpaid for Grant but good for him getting his money.

[celticinorlando]

When I look at this from a purely team or roster standpoint, I am disappointed that we did not get something for Grant, something meaning actual players.  We do have the TPE and some spare 2nd round picks that we can use to get a player but that is to be seen.  I am sure the new CBA and second apron were big factors in this.  I don't understand all the implications of this, I can acknowledge that it is reasonable for the team to consider the implications but I don't fully understand what those are so I can't really judge this from that aspect.

This is not a calamity though.  We are talking about the 8th or maybe even 9th guy on the roster.  Grant is a useful, versatile bench player.  Guys like him are nice to have on the roster.  But I think we have really improved and better balanced our top 7 players with the addition of Porzingis.  So we are better at the top but right now, don't have great depth as compared to last season.  We can fix that with one trade or signing though and our 8-11 or 8-12 players will be just as good as last season.

The team as it stands can win a championship, I think it was the Vegas favorite after the Porzingis trade.  We have two open roster spots plus Champagnie and Kornet are both non-guaranteed so 2 more roster spots can be opened up easily.  I hope we add a couple more useful players to shore up the depth/bench, I am sure we will.

I hope Grant does well in Dallas.  He always played hard, did whatever the team asked.  He is a good guy to have on any team.  I think DAL is going to find that they overpaid for Grant but good for him getting his money.

Excellent post.

[Wretch]

This move is 100% related to the 2nd apron in the new CBA. It's a bit disingenuous to complain that other teams are signing "legit" NBA players and the Cs are signing g leaguers. It's been documented that the Ca have tried to sign players like Pat Bev to more than minimum contracts but the July 6 RFA signing date meant vets would have to wait to sign and most vets on the edge of being outbof the league are taking certainty of role and of the early contract.

What provision of the CBA prevented us from signing vets until the Grant Williams situation was resolved? Perhaps MLE free agents, but I think it's unlikely that we use the MLE, anyway.  Grant's interview in the Athletic makes it sound like the Celtics were committed to trading Grant throughout the process, and that the holdup was insisting on a first rounder.

If grant had signed the QO or if they couldn't work out a S/T and matched an offer sheet then they wouldn't have had the cap flexibility to sign vets over the vet minimum.

A lot of vetsl FA also want to go to less deep/talented teams so they can put up stats for the next contract. Most of "legit" vets would have break glass in case if emergency roles with the Cs. That's not great for getting the next contract.

[Roy H.]

This move is 100% related to the 2nd apron in the new CBA. It's a bit disingenuous to complain that other teams are signing "legit" NBA players and the Cs are signing g leaguers. It's been documented that the Ca have tried to sign players like Pat Bev to more than minimum contracts but the July 6 RFA signing date meant vets would have to wait to sign and most vets on the edge of being outbof the league are taking certainty of role and of the early contract.

What provision of the CBA prevented us from signing vets until the Grant Williams situation was resolved? Perhaps MLE free agents, but I think it's unlikely that we use the MLE, anyway.  Grant's interview in the Athletic makes it sound like the Celtics were committed to trading Grant throughout the process, and that the holdup was insisting on a first rounder.

If grant had signed the QO or if they couldn't work out a S/T and matched an offer sheet then they wouldn't have had the cap flexibility to sign vets over the vet minimum.

A lot of vetsl FA also want to go to less deep/talented teams so they can put up stats for the next contract. Most of "legit" vets would have break glass in case if emergency roles with the Cs. That's not great for getting the next contract.

We're not that deep, and nobody is suggesting we should have signed guys for more than the vet minimum. 

That said, the chances of Grant playing for the QO have always been zero, and as has become apparent, there's never been any realistic chance of the Celts matching on Grant, either.  They have chosen to be beholden to the second apron.  (That said, there's nothing that prevented us from both matching and using the vet minimum.  There's no hard cap in that scenario.)

[Wretch]

This move is 100% related to the 2nd apron in the new CBA. It's a bit disingenuous to complain that other teams are signing "legit" NBA players and the Cs are signing g leaguers. It's been documented that the Ca have tried to sign players like Pat Bev to more than minimum contracts but the July 6 RFA signing date meant vets would have to wait to sign and most vets on the edge of being outbof the league are taking certainty of role and of the early contract.

What provision of the CBA prevented us from signing vets until the Grant Williams situation was resolved? Perhaps MLE free agents, but I think it's unlikely that we use the MLE, anyway.  Grant's interview in the Athletic makes it sound like the Celtics were committed to trading Grant throughout the process, and that the holdup was insisting on a first rounder.

If grant had signed the QO or if they couldn't work out a S/T and matched an offer sheet then they wouldn't have had the cap flexibility to sign vets over the vet minimum.

A lot of vetsl FA also want to go to less deep/talented teams so they can put up stats for the next contract. Most of "legit" vets would have break glass in case if emergency roles with the Cs. That's not great for getting the next contract.

We're not that deep, and nobody is suggesting we should have signed guys for more than the vet minimum. 

That said, the chances of Grant playing for the QO have always been zero, and as has become apparent, there's never been any realistic chance of the Celts matching on Grant, either.  They have chosen to be beholden to the second apron.  (That said, there's nothing that prevented us from both matching and using the vet minimum.  There's no hard cap in that scenario.)

the Cs with or without GW are a lot more deep than either LA team and Phoenix, the teams many are holding up as examples of what should have been done by the Cs.

I wish GW could have been kept but i understand why he wasn't and I am ok with the signings and trying to bet on younger player potential over older vet past performance.

[wdleehi]

I wonder if the William's uncertainty may also have hurt the Celtics ability to sign a vet min player who may have been worried that the possible minutes would have been sucked up if Grant stayed.


Now, there seems to be clear PF minutes available off the bench.   

[Roy H.]

I wonder if the William's uncertainty may also have hurt the Celtics ability to sign a vet min player who may have been worried that the possible minutes would have been sucked up if Grant stayed.


Now, there seems to be clear PF minutes available off the bench.

Let's hope it works out that way and we sign somebody competent.

Spotrac has the following PFs available:

JaMychael Green (#11 free agent PF)
Dario Saric (#12)
Derrick Jones (#14)
Wenyan Gabriel (#15)
Justice Winslow (#16)
Darius Bazely (#19)
Trendon Watford (not ranked)
Bol Bol (not ranked)

P.J. Washington is ranked 3rd; he's not an option.

[jbpats]

Grant claims the difference in deals, and why he chose Dallas, was due to Massachusetts tax implications.

Rarely do players ever admit this, and I hate how teams have a competitive advantage over us simply because of our state tax structure. It is completely unfair. All sports teams should be taxed the same, i'd say the tax imposed should be based on the HQ of the league and not where the team resides.. and if a team has a higher tax penalty because of their state they should have a higher allowance to go over their respective league cap to neutralize it. There has to be some sort of way to even the playing field with this.

**I do realize the second scenario i proposed is impossible to manage, but still there should be a way to police this somehow.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/grant-williams-reacts-trade-explains-124956302.html

[footey]

Grant claims the difference in deals, and why he chose Dallas, was due to Massachusetts tax implications.

Rarely do players ever admit this, and I hate how teams have a competitive advantage over us simply because of our state tax structure. It is completely unfair. All sports teams should be taxed the same, i'd say the tax imposed should be based on the HQ of the league and not where the team resides.. and if a team has a higher tax penalty because of their state they should have a higher allowance to go over their respective league cap to neutralize it. There has to be some sort of way to even the playing field with this.

**I do realize the second scenario i proposed is impossible to manage, but still there should be a way to police this somehow.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/grant-williams-reacts-trade-explains-124956302.html

Taxachusetts.

[celticinorlando]

Grant claims the difference in deals, and why he chose Dallas, was due to Massachusetts tax implications.

Rarely do players ever admit this, and I hate how teams have a competitive advantage over us simply because of our state tax structure. It is completely unfair. All sports teams should be taxed the same, i'd say the tax imposed should be based on the HQ of the league and not where the team resides.. and if a team has a higher tax penalty because of their state they should have a higher allowance to go over their respective league cap to neutralize it. There has to be some sort of way to even the playing field with this.

**I do realize the second scenario i proposed is impossible to manage, but still there should be a way to police this somehow.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/grant-williams-reacts-trade-explains-124956302.html

This is seen quite a bit in the NHL.

[Vermont Green]

Grant claims the difference in deals, and why he chose Dallas, was due to Massachusetts tax implications.

Rarely do players ever admit this, and I hate how teams have a competitive advantage over us simply because of our state tax structure. It is completely unfair. All sports teams should be taxed the same, i'd say the tax imposed should be based on the HQ of the league and not where the team resides.. and if a team has a higher tax penalty because of their state they should have a higher allowance to go over their respective league cap to neutralize it. There has to be some sort of way to even the playing field with this.

**I do realize the second scenario i proposed is impossible to manage, but still there should be a way to police this somehow.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/grant-williams-reacts-trade-explains-124956302.html

It is hard to follow what Grant is trying to say.  It is not clear if the Celtics were still willing to "match" (it is not a match in the true sense) the $54M and Grant expressed a preference to be traded, or if he is just trying to rationalize not signing with the Celtics before he became an RFA.  It kind of sounds like the former but it is not 100% clear to me. 

I am OK with passing on paying Grant Williams $54M.  Now they need to do something the the TPE though.

[Neurotic Guy]

Grant claims the difference in deals, and why he chose Dallas, was due to Massachusetts tax implications.

Rarely do players ever admit this, and I hate how teams have a competitive advantage over us simply because of our state tax structure. It is completely unfair. All sports teams should be taxed the same, i'd say the tax imposed should be based on the HQ of the league and not where the team resides.. and if a team has a higher tax penalty because of their state they should have a higher allowance to go over their respective league cap to neutralize it. There has to be some sort of way to even the playing field with this.

**I do realize the second scenario i proposed is impossible to manage, but still there should be a way to police this somehow.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/grant-williams-reacts-trade-explains-124956302.html

Taxachusetts.

Well in perspective - Mass income tax rate is 5%. With deductions (who knows in Grant’s case) probably talking about $500,000 a year.  Idk - doesn’t seem like that’s enough to sway unless everything else is equal. In the long run, he makes 52M instead of 54M.   Easy for me to say, but that 2M probably not going to make or break him.  And who knows ultimately if playing for the Cs ends up paying off better in endorsements….