Celtics Off-Season News

[Roy H.]

I think my negativity is based on a couple of things:

1.  We've waited for the other shoe to drop with Brad's signings before, only to be left disappointed.  In the back of my head, I'm reasonably worried that CIO might be right:  what we see is what we get.  Brad doesn't value veterans the same way that a lot of other teams do.

2.  This roster isn't being managed in a vacuum where we can assume rational decisions will be made with the rotation.  We've got Joe.  And, I'd say there's a reasonable chance that Joe relies heavily on our top seven, and doesn't use the lesser players.  That's why I'm considering guys like Hauser and Pritchard as question marks.

3.  I don't understand the "fit" yet.  Potentially active roster players include Brissett, Banton, Davidson, Walsh, Kornet, etc.  None of them make much sense in Joe's "all threes, all the time" system.  He already struggles to integrate Timelord; I worry about him giving him 40% of the roster that can't shoot.

[gouki88]

-TPE won’t be used
-Brad won’t sign anyone else because he will claim he wants roster and cap flexibility through out the season to make deals. He said this last season and didn’t do anything regular season.

Brad thinks he can do what Miami does signing guys that are basically g leaguers and get away with it.

-your main bench 5 will be:
Brogdan (if he is healthy;PP he isnt).
Banton
Hauser
Brissett
Al or Rob

Walsh, Kornet and Davison are all towel wavers that won’t see the floor unless it’s a blowout. Walsh and Davison probably on two way deals.

That leaves you one roster spots. One will be filled by some summer league scrub (champaigne) or one will be left open for “future considerations”.

Boston’s bench would be one of the worst in the league. Flush with g league players and guys that can get hurt at an instant.

Why on earth is Banton ahead of Pritchard??

So you think PP and brogdan will play together in the back court? I don’t. That would be a very small line up

And I think PP ends up being the back up PG because brogdan is/will be injured meaning someone has to spell JB ( hence me putting Banton into the rotation)

How is it small? It’s an average sized PG and a slightly above average size SG. Do you think the NBA does 5 player line swaps? We have a much bigger team this season

 They don’t do 5 man line changes like the NHL?? I didn’t realize that!!

I think Banton might be better equipped to guard big wings than brogdan or PP.

Read a lot on here that Brogdan struggled defensively. Plus him being hurt will force someone to take those minutes.

It’s cute that you’re being sarcastic whilst acting as if the bench players will be playing without any starters alongside them.

Brogdon was mediocre defensively, then got hurt and played poorly on that end.

[Roy H.]

They don’t do 5 man line changes like the NHL??

Doc did.  I don't miss that particular piece of idiocy.

[gouki88]

I think my negativity is based on a couple of things:

1.  We've waited for the other shoe to drop with Brad's signings before, only to be left disappointed.  In the back of my head, I'm reasonably worried that CIO might be right:  what we see is what we get.  Brad doesn't value veterans the same way that a lot of other teams do.

2.  This roster isn't being managed in a vacuum where we can assume rational decisions will be made with the rotation.  We've got Joe.  And, I'd say there's a reasonable chance that Joe relies heavily on our top seven, and doesn't use the lesser players.  That's why I'm considering guys like Hauser and Pritchard as question marks.

3.  I don't understand the "fit" yet.  Potentially active roster players include Brissett, Banton, Davidson, Walsh, Kornet, etc.  None of them make much sense in Joe's "all threes, all the time" system.  He already struggles to integrate Timelord; I worry about him giving him 40% of the roster that can't shoot.

1. Does Brad not value vets? He went after Horford, Griffin, Brogdon & Gallinari.

2. Hauser played almost every game last season, and got 15MPG consistently. Him not playing in the playoffs was a bad choice I believe, but he should play.

3. That 40% of the roster will account for how much game time? Probably closer to 10%

[celticinorlando]

-TPE won’t be used
-Brad won’t sign anyone else because he will claim he wants roster and cap flexibility through out the season to make deals. He said this last season and didn’t do anything regular season.

Brad thinks he can do what Miami does signing guys that are basically g leaguers and get away with it.

-your main bench 5 will be:
Brogdan (if he is healthy;PP he isnt).
Banton
Hauser
Brissett
Al or Rob

Walsh, Kornet and Davison are all towel wavers that won’t see the floor unless it’s a blowout. Walsh and Davison probably on two way deals.

That leaves you one roster spots. One will be filled by some summer league scrub (champaigne) or one will be left open for “future considerations”.

Boston’s bench would be one of the worst in the league. Flush with g league players and guys that can get hurt at an instant.

Why on earth is Banton ahead of Pritchard??

So you think PP and brogdan will play together in the back court? I don’t. That would be a very small line up

And I think PP ends up being the back up PG because brogdan is/will be injured meaning someone has to spell JB ( hence me putting Banton into the rotation)

How is it small? It’s an average sized PG and a slightly above average size SG. Do you think the NBA does 5 player line swaps? We have a much bigger team this season

 They don’t do 5 man line changes like the NHL?? I didn’t realize that!!

I think Banton might be better equipped to guard big wings than brogdan or PP.

Read a lot on here that Brogdan struggled defensively. Plus him being hurt will force someone to take those minutes.

It’s cute that you’re being sarcastic whilst acting as if the bench players will be playing without any starters alongside them.

Brogdon was mediocre defensively, then got hurt and played poorly on that end.

I mean you sarcastically asked me if I think the nba swaps out 5 guys at a time like I am new to the sport. Just returning the favor.

You can love the bench. That’s your right and opinion. We will see what happens during the season. I don’t think it’s good enough and you do.

Just leave it at that

[cman88]

Why are we discounting Pritchard and Hauser?

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

[Roy H.]

I think my negativity is based on a couple of things:

1.  We've waited for the other shoe to drop with Brad's signings before, only to be left disappointed.  In the back of my head, I'm reasonably worried that CIO might be right:  what we see is what we get.  Brad doesn't value veterans the same way that a lot of other teams do.

2.  This roster isn't being managed in a vacuum where we can assume rational decisions will be made with the rotation.  We've got Joe.  And, I'd say there's a reasonable chance that Joe relies heavily on our top seven, and doesn't use the lesser players.  That's why I'm considering guys like Hauser and Pritchard as question marks.

3.  I don't understand the "fit" yet.  Potentially active roster players include Brissett, Banton, Davidson, Walsh, Kornet, etc.  None of them make much sense in Joe's "all threes, all the time" system.  He already struggles to integrate Timelord; I worry about him giving him 40% of the roster that can't shoot.

1. Does Brad not value vets? He went after Horford, Griffin, Brogdon & Gallinari.

2. Hauser played almost every game last season, and got 15MPG consistently. Him not playing in the playoffs was a bad choice I believe, but he should play.

3. That 40% of the roster will account for how much game time? Probably closer to 10%

Let's swing back to this after we get 40 games of Joe managing the roster.

But, if we're playing our top eight or nine players 90% of the minutes, that doesn't seem like a proper use of resources to me.  And, if part of the reason the "bottom 6" only gets 10% of the minutes is because they don't fit the coach's system, that's an even worse allocation of resources.

[cman88]

I think my negativity is based on a couple of things:

1.  We've waited for the other shoe to drop with Brad's signings before, only to be left disappointed.  In the back of my head, I'm reasonably worried that CIO might be right:  what we see is what we get.  Brad doesn't value veterans the same way that a lot of other teams do.

2.  This roster isn't being managed in a vacuum where we can assume rational decisions will be made with the rotation.  We've got Joe.  And, I'd say there's a reasonable chance that Joe relies heavily on our top seven, and doesn't use the lesser players.  That's why I'm considering guys like Hauser and Pritchard as question marks.

3.  I don't understand the "fit" yet.  Potentially active roster players include Brissett, Banton, Davidson, Walsh, Kornet, etc.  None of them make much sense in Joe's "all threes, all the time" system.  He already struggles to integrate Timelord; I worry about him giving him 40% of the roster that can't shoot.

1. Does Brad not value vets? He went after Horford, Griffin, Brogdon & Gallinari.

2. Hauser played almost every game last season, and got 15MPG consistently. Him not playing in the playoffs was a bad choice I believe, but he should play.

3. That 40% of the roster will account for how much game time? Probably closer to 10%

Let's swing back to this after we get 40 games of Joe managing the roster.

But, if we're playing our top eight or nine players 90% of the minutes, that doesn't seem like a proper use of resources to me.  And, if part of the reason the "bottom 6" only gets 10% of the minutes is because they don't fit the coach's system, that's an even worse allocation of resources.

Unless Brad is trying to move away from the "live/die by the 3" type playing style.

I mean right now Brogdon is probably our best shooter. maybe Hauser 2nd?

[Roy H.]

I think my negativity is based on a couple of things:

1.  We've waited for the other shoe to drop with Brad's signings before, only to be left disappointed.  In the back of my head, I'm reasonably worried that CIO might be right:  what we see is what we get.  Brad doesn't value veterans the same way that a lot of other teams do.

2.  This roster isn't being managed in a vacuum where we can assume rational decisions will be made with the rotation.  We've got Joe.  And, I'd say there's a reasonable chance that Joe relies heavily on our top seven, and doesn't use the lesser players.  That's why I'm considering guys like Hauser and Pritchard as question marks.

3.  I don't understand the "fit" yet.  Potentially active roster players include Brissett, Banton, Davidson, Walsh, Kornet, etc.  None of them make much sense in Joe's "all threes, all the time" system.  He already struggles to integrate Timelord; I worry about him giving him 40% of the roster that can't shoot.

1. Does Brad not value vets? He went after Horford, Griffin, Brogdon & Gallinari.

2. Hauser played almost every game last season, and got 15MPG consistently. Him not playing in the playoffs was a bad choice I believe, but he should play.

3. That 40% of the roster will account for how much game time? Probably closer to 10%

Let's swing back to this after we get 40 games of Joe managing the roster.

But, if we're playing our top eight or nine players 90% of the minutes, that doesn't seem like a proper use of resources to me.  And, if part of the reason the "bottom 6" only gets 10% of the minutes is because they don't fit the coach's system, that's an even worse allocation of resources.

Unless Brad is trying to move away from the "live/die by the 3" type playing style.

I mean right now Brogdon is probably our best shooter. maybe Hauser 2nd?

If Brad is trying to move away from it, he needs to hire a new head coach.

[celticinorlando]

Chris forsberg on his podcast believes Brad is looking more to the future (next season, season after) or in season (trade deadline) to add anything else to the roster.

I wish the Celtics would make a move on siakim. But I don’t think Brad will.

[Roy H.]

Chris forsberg on his podcast believes Brad is looking more to the future (next season, season after) or in season (trade deadline) to add anything else to the roster.

I wish the Celtics would make a move on siakim. But I don’t think Brad will.

I hope that isn't his strategy.  Wasting the prime of our players would be a bad decision.  Also, this year -- without the most severe apron penalties -- would seemingly be the year to go for it, not next year or the year after.

[celticinorlando]

Chris forsberg on his podcast believes Brad is looking more to the future (next season, season after) or in season (trade deadline) to add anything else to the roster.

I wish the Celtics would make a move on siakim. But I don’t think Brad will.

I hope that isn't his strategy.  Wasting the prime of our players would be a bad decision.  Also, this year -- without the most severe apron penalties -- would seemingly be the year to go for it, not next year or the year after.

He talked about the what if other big names want out and Boston having the assets to attract them. But the vibe I got was these moves were made for way down the line not right now.
 But it didn’t sound like it was we are going all in to win it now. Just a careful counting of the money and penalties

[cman88]

Chris forsberg on his podcast believes Brad is looking more to the future (next season, season after) or in season (trade deadline) to add anything else to the roster.

I wish the Celtics would make a move on siakim. But I don’t think Brad will.

I hope that isn't his strategy.  Wasting the prime of our players would be a bad decision.  Also, this year -- without the most severe apron penalties -- would seemingly be the year to go for it, not next year or the year after.

Yeah i hope not. but Forsberg tends to not have any sources in the organization. not sure how...

you have a 3 year clock with Brown/KP/Tatum. now is the time to try and go for it.

[footey]

Chris forsberg on his podcast believes Brad is looking more to the future (next season, season after) or in season (trade deadline) to add anything else to the roster.

I wish the Celtics would make a move on siakim. But I don’t think Brad will.

Siakam for Harden seems like a no brainer to me. They make about the same amount of money, they are both expiring, Harden wants out, Raptors need a point guard (Schroeder is a back up, sorry), and Maxey would flourish with Embiid and Siakam.  Or trade him in package for Lillard.

[RJ87]

I wish the Celtics would make a move on siakim. But I don’t think Brad will.

I don't see the Celtics taking on another large salary. Siakam makes almost $40m this year and is in line for max money after that.

If anything, I can see moving Brogdon for 2 smaller contracts to fill in some depth. But I don't think they're going to go more top heavy.