Why does everyone say getting Zinger means it's a given G Will is gone?

[jmen788]

I'm guessing since all the experts are saying that, there's a good reason... but what is it? CBA stuff with the second apron?

[keevsnick]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

[jmen788]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

[keevsnick]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

[jmen788]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

If we can't get anything better I'd give the 18M! It ain't my money, plus it isn't cheap to go to a Cs game (they raise the prices to make up for their costs, I'd guess). But yeah, he isn't worth 18.. but I mean if it is that or you get nothing in return, I think I'd do it and try and trade him next year if (or when) we need to.

[Roy H.]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

If we can't get anything better I'd give the 18M! It ain't my money, plus it isn't cheap to go to a Cs game (they raise the prices to make up for their costs, I'd guess). But yeah, he isn't worth 18.. but I mean if it is that or you get nothing in return, I think I'd do it and try and trade him next year if (or when) we need to.

The problem is if you pay him $18 million this year, you're probably going to have to give up draft picks to dump him next year.

$18 million for a guy who averages 8/5 is just a wild waste of resources in my opinion.  The only way it would make sense is $18 million this year, with a team option / non-guaranteed salary next year.

[jmen788]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

If we can't get anything better I'd give the 18M! It ain't my money, plus it isn't cheap to go to a Cs game (they raise the prices to make up for their costs, I'd guess). But yeah, he isn't worth 18.. but I mean if it is that or you get nothing in return, I think I'd do it and try and trade him next year if (or when) we need to.

The problem is if you pay him $18 million this year, you're probably going to have to give up draft picks to dump him next year.

$18 million for a guy who averages 8/5 is just a wild waste of resources in my opinion.  The only way it would make sense is $18 million this year, with a team option / non-guaranteed salary next year.

But with how salaries have skyrocketed etc... isn't $18M basically what $10M used to be? Would we really need to give anything up to get rid of him in a year? You may be right I have no idea.. but if we are trying to win a title shouldn't we match if it is $18M when we will get nothing close to as good as him otherwise? I 1000% percent agree he is worth nowhere near that much money, just for the record.

[Roy H.]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

If we can't get anything better I'd give the 18M! It ain't my money, plus it isn't cheap to go to a Cs game (they raise the prices to make up for their costs, I'd guess). But yeah, he isn't worth 18.. but I mean if it is that or you get nothing in return, I think I'd do it and try and trade him next year if (or when) we need to.

The problem is if you pay him $18 million this year, you're probably going to have to give up draft picks to dump him next year.

$18 million for a guy who averages 8/5 is just a wild waste of resources in my opinion.  The only way it would make sense is $18 million this year, with a team option / non-guaranteed salary next year.

But with how salaries have skyrocketed etc... isn't $18M basically what $10M used to be? Would we really need to give anything up to get rid of him in a year? You may be right I have no idea.. but if we are trying to win a title shouldn't we match if it is $18M when we will get nothing close to as good as him otherwise? I 1000% percent agree he is worth nowhere near that much money, just for the record.

That's the question, I guess.  Can we get something close to him for less?

Grant is an 8/5 guy on 40% 3PT% with good defense.

Is it better to spend $18 million on him, or $2 million on JaMychal Green?

[Kernewek]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

If we can't get anything better I'd give the 18M! It ain't my money, plus it isn't cheap to go to a Cs game (they raise the prices to make up for their costs, I'd guess). But yeah, he isn't worth 18.. but I mean if it is that or you get nothing in return, I think I'd do it and try and trade him next year if (or when) we need to.

The problem is if you pay him $18 million this year, you're probably going to have to give up draft picks to dump him next year.

$18 million for a guy who averages 8/5 is just a wild waste of resources in my opinion.  The only way it would make sense is $18 million this year, with a team option / non-guaranteed salary next year.

But with how salaries have skyrocketed etc... isn't $18M basically what $10M used to be? Would we really need to give anything up to get rid of him in a year? You may be right I have no idea.. but if we are trying to win a title shouldn't we match if it is $18M when we will get nothing close to as good as him otherwise? I 1000% percent agree he is worth nowhere near that much money, just for the record.

That's a not-incorrect way of thinking about it in some ways - mostly because the salaries are determined by a percentage of the cap, not a hard and fast number. There are also rules around year on year increases in your contract, and if that YoY increase goes up less than the cap increase, the team winds up with more cap space than anticipated.

This is also why Jalen's pending supermax could be less painful, in some senses, a few years in.

[jmen788]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

If we can't get anything better I'd give the 18M! It ain't my money, plus it isn't cheap to go to a Cs game (they raise the prices to make up for their costs, I'd guess). But yeah, he isn't worth 18.. but I mean if it is that or you get nothing in return, I think I'd do it and try and trade him next year if (or when) we need to.

The problem is if you pay him $18 million this year, you're probably going to have to give up draft picks to dump him next year.

$18 million for a guy who averages 8/5 is just a wild waste of resources in my opinion.  The only way it would make sense is $18 million this year, with a team option / non-guaranteed salary next year.

But with how salaries have skyrocketed etc... isn't $18M basically what $10M used to be? Would we really need to give anything up to get rid of him in a year? You may be right I have no idea.. but if we are trying to win a title shouldn't we match if it is $18M when we will get nothing close to as good as him otherwise? I 1000% percent agree he is worth nowhere near that much money, just for the record.

That's the question, I guess.  Can we get something close to him for less?

Grant is an 8/5 guy on 40% 3PT% with good defense.

Is it better to spend $18 million on him, or $2 million on JaMychal Green?

My counter would be that JaMycha is on the downswing of his career (or logically I would think so). Plus, with Grant, didn't our incompetent/unqualified coach refuse to play him for some unknown reason? It probably would have helped keep our starters minutes down had we played him more... the conspiracy theorist in me thinks we kept his minutes/numbers down to try and resign him cheap... no other reason I can think of on why we wouldn't have played him more this year.

[Roy H.]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

If we can't get anything better I'd give the 18M! It ain't my money, plus it isn't cheap to go to a Cs game (they raise the prices to make up for their costs, I'd guess). But yeah, he isn't worth 18.. but I mean if it is that or you get nothing in return, I think I'd do it and try and trade him next year if (or when) we need to.

The problem is if you pay him $18 million this year, you're probably going to have to give up draft picks to dump him next year.

$18 million for a guy who averages 8/5 is just a wild waste of resources in my opinion.  The only way it would make sense is $18 million this year, with a team option / non-guaranteed salary next year.

But with how salaries have skyrocketed etc... isn't $18M basically what $10M used to be? Would we really need to give anything up to get rid of him in a year? You may be right I have no idea.. but if we are trying to win a title shouldn't we match if it is $18M when we will get nothing close to as good as him otherwise? I 1000% percent agree he is worth nowhere near that much money, just for the record.

That's the question, I guess.  Can we get something close to him for less?

Grant is an 8/5 guy on 40% 3PT% with good defense.

Is it better to spend $18 million on him, or $2 million on JaMychal Green?

My counter would be that JaMycha is on the downswing of his career (or logically I would think so). Plus, with Grant, didn't our incompetent/unqualified coach refuse to play him for some unknown reason? It probably would have helped keep our starters minutes down had we played him more... the conspiracy theorist in me thinks we kept his minutes/numbers down to try and resign him cheap... no other reason I can think of on why we wouldn't have played him more this year.

Is Grant in the upswing of his career?  He regressed slightly last season, if anything.

[jmen788]

People are assuming they will want to stay below the 2nd apron (134% of the cap) which this year is about 179 million. After adding salary in the Smart/KP trade its basically impossible to stay below that number and bring back Grant as the team is currently constructed.

Now of course its debatable whether they will or should stay below the 2nd apron. The new CBA has some pretty steep team building penalties for being over that apron, but most of those don't kick in this coming year so there's no reason other than tax money why they can't spend over that limit this year. Buuuut those penalties will kick in the year after that, so it may very well be better not to sign  up more long term salary like grant if you plan on paying brown/tatum/KP. If you do re-sign Grant there's a decent chance you just have to dump him in a year to get below the 2nd apron.

But right now it just so hard to know what they plan. Maybe they move Brogdon and open up money, maybe they don't care about the 2nd apron, maybe they bring Grant back on a good contract and trade him in a year for a pick. Who knows.

I think the main reason people think he's gone is Joe didn't really play him last year and with three rotation bigs he seems to have even less of a role.

Thank you! TP! Really didn't know all this.. knew a bunch about the 2nd apron which made me look cool to my friends but not to this degree lol. I guess in my opinion we should keep him if the penalties won't be this year... and kick the can down the road to next year and if anything trade him for pics etc. if needed. Maybe this will be a good test of our owners if they will pay the tax--- truth is, I think Wyc is not a billionaire and maybe cannot pay the tax like other owners can, but could be wrong on that.

Ya basically a lot of this depends on Wyc's willingness to spend and the contract Grant ends up getting. If he's making 18 million year 1, I'd let him go. If its 13 million year 1 I'd re-sign him. Its tough not knowing what the offer will be.

If we can't get anything better I'd give the 18M! It ain't my money, plus it isn't cheap to go to a Cs game (they raise the prices to make up for their costs, I'd guess). But yeah, he isn't worth 18.. but I mean if it is that or you get nothing in return, I think I'd do it and try and trade him next year if (or when) we need to.

The problem is if you pay him $18 million this year, you're probably going to have to give up draft picks to dump him next year.

$18 million for a guy who averages 8/5 is just a wild waste of resources in my opinion.  The only way it would make sense is $18 million this year, with a team option / non-guaranteed salary next year.

But with how salaries have skyrocketed etc... isn't $18M basically what $10M used to be? Would we really need to give anything up to get rid of him in a year? You may be right I have no idea.. but if we are trying to win a title shouldn't we match if it is $18M when we will get nothing close to as good as him otherwise? I 1000% percent agree he is worth nowhere near that much money, just for the record.

That's the question, I guess.  Can we get something close to him for less?

Grant is an 8/5 guy on 40% 3PT% with good defense.

Is it better to spend $18 million on him, or $2 million on JaMychal Green?

My counter would be that JaMycha is on the downswing of his career (or logically I would think so). Plus, with Grant, didn't our incompetent/unqualified coach refuse to play him for some unknown reason? It probably would have helped keep our starters minutes down had we played him more... the conspiracy theorist in me thinks we kept his minutes/numbers down to try and resign him cheap... no other reason I can think of on why we wouldn't have played him more this year.

Is Grant in the upswing of his career?  He regressed slightly last season, if anything.

Maybe he isn't. Feel he didn't get a real chance based on not being played. I like his chances of being on the up a lot more than JaMichael's.. but if Joe won't play him then yeah we may as well let him go, i guess.

[goCeltics]

I think people were thinking that ownership was not willing to go deep into the tax, but when you consider that the kp trade added around $30 to the luxury tax bill for the season just passed, I think these fears can be dismissed.

I would be surprised if the Celtics did not match a GW offer sheet unless they felt that he at that number would have negative trade value

[Moranis]

If you want to claim you want to win a title, then you can't waste assets and letting Grant Williams walk is wasting an asset.

[vjcsmoke]

I'm guessing since all the experts are saying that, there's a good reason... but what is it? CBA stuff with the second apron?

I would love to keep Grant Williams but he's gonna be an RFA.  So I dunno teams can easily make him an offer that the Celtics can't match if they don't want to get heavily into the luxury tax.