Strong Interest in Grant Williams (Rumor)

[Celtics4ever]

Some of his play this year has hurt his value.

[Jvalin]

When I talk to teams around the league, I think people are looking at him as somewhere in that $15 to $17 million dollar range in an extension.”

If this is the case, I'd rather trade him than pay him. That said, I believe the report is probably coming from Grant's agent who's trying to make more money for his client.

[Birdman]

Trade Grant Williams & Danilo Gallinari to Phoenix for Jae Crowder

Grant & Jae are both free agents & get rid of Danilo 2nd year

[Surferdad]

Trade Grant Williams & Danilo Gallinari to Phoenix for Jae Crowder

Grant & Jae are both free agents & get rid of Danilo 2nd year

I got a better idea. Don't resign Grant.  Gallo > Crowder

[JSD]

In 2-3 years, when max players are making $60-80 million a year, 15-17 will be a bargain.

Sign him

[bogg]

Would be a travesty if he gets that much from the Cs. Nice player but they should let him walk if he’s getting offers for that (I find that unlikely tbh). He’s a player without a position. He’s turned into a good 3 pt shooter but not sure that is enough to overcome his size and defensive limitations.

Eh, Boston's now at that point in team building where they're solidly in the tax going forward, so there isn't really a good way to replace Grant (or his salary slot) if you let him walk. It's not like you're freeing up cap space or unlocking the non-tax mid-level instead of the TMLE. I'd be pretty disappointed if they let him walk for nothing in order to save Wyc some tax payments.

[Neurotic Guy]

Would be a travesty if he gets that much from the Cs. Nice player but they should let him walk if he’s getting offers for that (I find that unlikely tbh). He’s a player without a position. He’s turned into a good 3 pt shooter but not sure that is enough to overcome his size and defensive limitations.

Eh, Boston's now at that point in team building where they're solidly in the tax going forward, so there isn't really a good way to replace Grant (or his salary slot) if you let him walk. It's not like you're freeing up cap space or unlocking the non-tax mid-level instead of the TMLE. I'd be pretty disappointed if they let him walk for nothing in order to save Wyc some tax payments.

As a potential annual contender for the next 5-10 years, the C's need to keep good rotation guys.  Grant recently turned 24 and his trajectory should be in a plus direction over the course of his next deal.  If C's are reluctant to make (or match) a decent offer then they should trade him for some value, but he's a more known quantity than anyone else they'll bring in.   Don't take him for granted. 

[Atzar]

Don't take him for granted.

You did that on purpose. 

[PAOBoston]

Would be a travesty if he gets that much from the Cs. Nice player but they should let him walk if he’s getting offers for that (I find that unlikely tbh). He’s a player without a position. He’s turned into a good 3 pt shooter but not sure that is enough to overcome his size and defensive limitations.

Eh, Boston's now at that point in team building where they're solidly in the tax going forward, so there isn't really a good way to replace Grant (or his salary slot) if you let him walk. It's not like you're freeing up cap space or unlocking the non-tax mid-level instead of the TMLE. I'd be pretty disappointed if they let him walk for nothing in order to save Wyc some tax payments.

As a potential annual contender for the next 5-10 years, the C's need to keep good rotation guys.  Grant recently turned 24 and his trajectory should be in a plus direction over the course of his next deal.  If C's are reluctant to make (or match) a decent offer then they should trade him for some value, but he's a more known quantity than anyone else they'll bring in.   Don't take him for granted.

Sorry, I dont buy this theory. If he was a starter or all star caliber player, sure, over step yourself and sign him. I don’t think they should saddle themselves with another mid teens contract for the #8 guy on the bench. Grant has improved since he got drafted but I dont think it’s wise to give him $15-20 mil a year as your 8th best player.

Let him test the market, if he gets that, let him walk. Otherwise, max I’d give this guy is like in the $12 million range. He doesn’t do a lot of things great to get that money. He’s very undersized and not a great rebounder or defender. He’s become a good 3 pt shooter but we’ve seen past history that it’s not smart to just overpay for good 3pt shooters. You can find specialist players for cheaper than that.

If the Cs feel like they won’t be able to sign him cheap, they should flip him and some of the other end of bench fodder for another player at the deadline.

[Neurotic Guy]

Don't take him for granted.

You did that on purpose.

Well… yes

[tenn_smoothie]

Why would Orlando, OKC or Indiana do this?

Even if they wanted to, why would Grant be their choice? He's a nice player, but paying non starting rotation players big money is death. All of the teams above have multiple guys that are quality young players at the 3/4 spot.

Bigger slaries for guys like Grant are really only justified in marginal cases where contenders are locked into salary cap issues. He stays a Celtic, or worst case, he gets signed and traded.

Grant is a good player. That's why. He can defend 3s and 4s at a high level. He can switch onto guards and bigs and hold his own. He's an excellent shooter and unselfish passer. He's very good in a read and react offensive system that flows. Plus, as Shams stated, he probably has more to his offensive game that's not being used right now. He's flashed the ability to score a little in the post, drive, and even function as the ball-handler in the pick-and-roll.

He's not a star, but he is the type of player that young teams should be investing in to pair with star playmakers like Haliburton, Banchero, or SGA.

I'd like to keep him. I'm not really interested in trading him for a marginal upgrade, but if you could combine his salary with Gallinari's and a few smaller ones to really upgrade the 4, then I'm interested.

Upgrade the backup 5.

[SHAQATTACK]

Don't take him for granted.

You did that on purpose.

Well… yes

Clever 

[GreenlyGreeny]

Would be a travesty if he gets that much from the Cs. Nice player but they should let him walk if he’s getting offers for that (I find that unlikely tbh). He’s a player without a position. He’s turned into a good 3 pt shooter but not sure that is enough to overcome his size and defensive limitations.

Eh, Boston's now at that point in team building where they're solidly in the tax going forward, so there isn't really a good way to replace Grant (or his salary slot) if you let him walk. It's not like you're freeing up cap space or unlocking the non-tax mid-level instead of the TMLE. I'd be pretty disappointed if they let him walk for nothing in order to save Wyc some tax payments.

As a potential annual contender for the next 5-10 years, the C's need to keep good rotation guys.  Grant recently turned 24 and his trajectory should be in a plus direction over the course of his next deal.  If C's are reluctant to make (or match) a decent offer then they should trade him for some value, but he's a more known quantity than anyone else they'll bring in.   Don't take him for granted.

Sorry, I dont buy this theory. If he was a starter or all star caliber player, sure, over step yourself and sign him. I don’t think they should saddle themselves with another mid teens contract for the #8 guy on the bench. Grant has improved since he got drafted but I dont think it’s wise to give him $15-20 mil a year as your 8th best player.

Let him test the market, if he gets that, let him walk. Otherwise, max I’d give this guy is like in the $12 million range. He doesn’t do a lot of things great to get that money. He’s very undersized and not a great rebounder or defender. He’s become a good 3 pt shooter but we’ve seen past history that it’s not smart to just overpay for good 3pt shooters. You can find specialist players for cheaper than that.

If the Cs feel like they won’t be able to sign him cheap, they should flip him and some of the other end of bench fodder for another player at the deadline.

Have to disagree. We’re losing a solid rotation player by letting him walk for nothing. Match what the market bears and if we can replace him somehow more cheaply in the future, then we trade him at that point. But letting him walk for nothing would really hamper the club given our current youth on the bench and expected draft picks in the near-future. Besides, Grant is still only 24 and could develop into a respectable starter.

[bogg]

Let him test the market, if he gets that, let him walk. Otherwise, max I’d give this guy is like in the $12 million range. He doesn’t do a lot of things great to get that money. He’s very undersized and not a great rebounder or defender. He’s become a good 3 pt shooter but we’ve seen past history that it’s not smart to just overpay for good 3pt shooters. You can find specialist players for cheaper than that.

Again though, the question isn't whether there are guys who do similar things around the league making in the low teens or less, it's whether Boston can find a player to replace Grant if he walks. You don't open up any ability to sign someone else for 10-12 million a year, because you don't have cap space and you're too far over the tax to use the non-tax mid-level or work a sign-and-trade. You're stuck with only the taxpayer mid-level to replace Grant, which you had to use with Grant too - it prevents you from plugging a hole or taking a flier elsewhere.

Theoretically you could spend some (increasingly scarce for Boston) second-rounders to convince the other team to do a sign-and-trade to create a TPE, and then later try to trade for someone to replace Grant, but you're burning (at least) a first and two seconds just to save Wyc some money.

Any way you cut it you're taking tools off the table over $2-5 million a year, you're not executing any big-brain strategy to improve the team. It's penny-wise, pound-foolish for a team chasing a ring.

[Goldstar88]

Let him test the market, if he gets that, let him walk. Otherwise, max I’d give this guy is like in the $12 million range. He doesn’t do a lot of things great to get that money. He’s very undersized and not a great rebounder or defender. He’s become a good 3 pt shooter but we’ve seen past history that it’s not smart to just overpay for good 3pt shooters. You can find specialist players for cheaper than that.

Again though, the question isn't whether there are guys who do similar things around the league making in the low teens or less, it's whether Boston can find a player to replace Grant if he walks. You don't open up any ability to sign someone else for 10-12 million a year, because you don't have cap space and you're too far over the tax to use the non-tax mid-level or work a sign-and-trade. You're stuck with only the taxpayer mid-level to replace Grant, which you had to use with Grant too - it prevents you from plugging a hole or taking a flier elsewhere.

Theoretically you could spend some (increasingly scarce for Boston) second-rounders to convince the other team to do a sign-and-trade to create a TPE, and then later try to trade for someone to replace Grant, but you're burning (at least) a first and two seconds just to save Wyc some money.

Any way you cut it you're taking tools off the table over $2-5 million a year, you're not executing any big-brain strategy to improve the team. It's penny-wise, pound-foolish for a team chasing a ring.

The team already has an insurance policy for Grant in Danilo Gallinari. Also, Grant is a RFA so he can’t “walk”. The Celtics would have to let him. This is exactly what happened with Smart after his rookie deal was up. Marcus thought he was worth more than what the C’s offered, he tested the market and other teams were not willing to pay. Boston handled that the right way and they are doing the same with Grant.