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

[footey]

I agree with Thomas Bryant as pretty useless. He had two playoff teams give him a try last year and both agreed he couldn't be trusted in big games / playoffs and either dumped him or sat him.

And for good reason. He can't be trusted in playoff games. He is one of the worst defensive big men in the entire league. He is woeful. He shouldn't be in any playoff hopeful team's rotation. I don't even like him as a 3rd stringer. There are more reliable guys out there who won't shoot you in the foot like T Bryant will.

Fits well under the definition of an "empty stats" player.

To me, Bryant would be Muscala or worse.  Richardson, I don't know,

Worse. Muscala is a much better player. He ain't good on D but he is still far better than T Bryant and Muscala is much more skilled on offense as well. Much better player. A legit end of rotation talent.

Yeah, most of us were kind of bummed when he elected to sign with Lakers last off season, I think he declined our MLE offer, or had we already signed Gallo?

[Roy H.]

I agree with Thomas Bryant as pretty useless. He had two playoff teams give him a try last year and both agreed he couldn't be trusted in big games / playoffs and either dumped him or sat him.

And for good reason. He can't be trusted in playoff games. He is one of the worst defensive big men in the entire league. He is woeful. He shouldn't be in any playoff hopeful team's rotation. I don't even like him as a 3rd stringer. There are more reliable guys out there who won't shoot you in the foot like T Bryant will.

Fits well under the definition of an "empty stats" player.

To me, Bryant would be Muscala or worse.  Richardson, I don't know,

Worse. Muscala is a much better player. He ain't good on D but he is still far better than T Bryant and Muscala is much more skilled on offense as well. Much better player. A legit end of rotation talent.

Yeah, most of us were kind of bummed when he elected to sign with Lakers last off season, I think he declined our MLE offer, or had we already signed Gallo?

We offered him the vet minimum; he chose the same contract with the Lakers.

[Celtics2021]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanth01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenja01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/willigr01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/watanyu01.html

Three of these guys are worth the minimum according to Hollinger; the other is worth $15+ million.

Yep.  That seems about right to me.  All four played with winning teams this past season.  Their net ratings on said teams:

-4.2
-1.2
-8.2
+5.3

Looking at playoff performances we get:

Played 1 minute
Played 5 minutes
-16.5
-3.4

I know there are some issues with net rating, but when you're looking at full-season numbers for players on good teams, that starts to wash out a bit.  One of these guys was on the court when generally good things happened to his good team during the regular season.  The other three weren't.  In the postseason, that continued to a degree.  Two of them couldn't see the floor.  One saw the floor and his team was generally wiped out.  And the last saw the floor and was a mediocre playoff rotation player.  Not a star, not a scrub.

No one has ever argued that Grant is a volume scorer.  But when you compare what happens to his teams with other players who also tend not to score much, despite relatively efficient scoring when they do, it's clear Grant's value isn't in points scored, which is not the same as having no value.  And that salary gets steep, quickly.  A marginal NBA win is worth somewhere in the $3.5 million to $5 million range, on average, depending on your analysis.  But NBA teams shouldn't treat wins marginally -- that extra win is worth much more to a contender than to a lottery team.  Even if Grant is worth a single extra win over JaMychael Green, that's several million in salary.  Two wins can quickly get you into the $10 million range.  Is Grant worth $15 million?  I think plausibly.  Is he worth $8 million?  Sure, that's plausible also.  Is he substantially different from a minimum-salary player?  Yes.

[Roy H.]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanth01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenja01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/willigr01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/watanyu01.html

Three of these guys are worth the minimum according to Hollinger; the other is worth $15+ million.

Yep.  That seems about right to me.  All four played with winning teams this past season.  Their net ratings on said teams:

-4.2
-1.2
-8.2
+5.3

Looking at playoff performances we get:

Played 1 minute
Played 5 minutes
-16.5
-3.4

I know there are some issues with net rating, but when you're looking at full-season numbers for players on good teams, that starts to wash out a bit.  One of these guys was on the court when generally good things happened to his good team during the regular season.  The other three weren't.  In the postseason, that continued to a degree.  Two of them couldn't see the floor.  One saw the floor and his team was generally wiped out.  And the last saw the floor and was a mediocre playoff rotation player.  Not a star, not a scrub.

No one has ever argued that Grant is a volume scorer.  But when you compare what happens to his teams with other players who also tend not to score much, despite relatively efficient scoring when they do, it's clear Grant's value isn't in points scored, which is not the same as having no value.  And that salary gets steep, quickly.  A marginal NBA win is worth somewhere in the $3.5 million to $5 million range, on average, depending on your analysis.  But NBA teams shouldn't treat wins marginally -- that extra win is worth much more to a contender than to a lottery team.  Even if Grant is worth a single extra win over JaMychael Green, that's several million in salary.  Two wins can quickly get you into the $10 million range.  Is Grant worth $15 million?  I think plausibly.  Is he worth $8 million?  Sure, that's plausible also.  Is he substantially different from a minimum-salary player?  Yes.

Net Rtg is an estimate which isn't very reliable.

Look at his actual +/-.  He played in 15 games.  Our team was outscored with him on the court in nine of them.  In another four games, he was either +1 or +2.  In 13 out of 15 games, we either treaded water with him, or were outscored.  That doesn't impress me.

His overall numbers are skewed because of a 34 point blowout against the Sixers (in which he was +22) and a 17 point blowout against the Heat (+15).  Despite those two outliers, he was still a -24 over 15 games.

I'm not a mathematician, but I'm still confused how metrics estimate that we'll be +5.3 points per 100 possessions better with Grant on the floor, when in fact we were outscored with him when he actually played.

[Vermont Green]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanth01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenja01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/willigr01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/watanyu01.html

Three of these guys are worth the minimum according to Hollinger; the other is worth $15+ million.

Yep.  That seems about right to me.  All four played with winning teams this past season.  Their net ratings on said teams:

-4.2
-1.2
-8.2
+5.3

Looking at playoff performances we get:

Played 1 minute
Played 5 minutes
-16.5
-3.4

I know there are some issues with net rating, but when you're looking at full-season numbers for players on good teams, that starts to wash out a bit.  One of these guys was on the court when generally good things happened to his good team during the regular season.  The other three weren't.  In the postseason, that continued to a degree.  Two of them couldn't see the floor.  One saw the floor and his team was generally wiped out.  And the last saw the floor and was a mediocre playoff rotation player.  Not a star, not a scrub.

No one has ever argued that Grant is a volume scorer.  But when you compare what happens to his teams with other players who also tend not to score much, despite relatively efficient scoring when they do, it's clear Grant's value isn't in points scored, which is not the same as having no value.  And that salary gets steep, quickly.  A marginal NBA win is worth somewhere in the $3.5 million to $5 million range, on average, depending on your analysis.  But NBA teams shouldn't treat wins marginally -- that extra win is worth much more to a contender than to a lottery team.  Even if Grant is worth a single extra win over JaMychael Green, that's several million in salary.  Two wins can quickly get you into the $10 million range.  Is Grant worth $15 million?  I think plausibly.  Is he worth $8 million?  Sure, that's plausible also.  Is he substantially different from a minimum-salary player?  Yes.

Analyzing stats is fine, I do plenty of that myself, but I also watch the games and assess players based on what I see.  Some players, I don't get to see play much, so then, I have to rely on stats.  Of the available stats, On-Off splits, like the ones noted above, are probably the best thing you have to go on.  With Grant, I have seen him play plenty, so the stats only form one part of the equation.

Grant is a solid bench PF who is versatile to play some at C and even wing.  I have no idea how many win shares he should get but I have seen him help a top NBA team win games, including in the playoffs.  I have never seen Bryant do that (for example), at least not since his injury.  Not all 8 and 5 players are created equal.

Celtics2021's analysis of the wins and contract seem pretty in line with my more subjective analysis.  Player value is shifting due to the new CBA rules but I would have no problem paying Grant $10M.  $15M is starting to feel a little rich to me.  But this is based on past performance and prior CBA structures.  Things may well change.  Grant may hold more or less value, I don't know.  But I value Grant much higher than the Thomas Bryant I have seen the last couple of seasons.

[Roy H.]

As for win shares...

Celtics win shares:

White - 7.4
Horford - 6.3
Brogdon - 5.8
Brown - 5.0
Grant - 4.4
Timelord - 3.8
Smart - 3.7
Hauser - 3.4
Kornet - 3.3

Anybody else agree that Kornet and Hauser were each worth roughly as many wins Smart and Timelord?  According to the stats, Kornet adds more wins on a per-minute basis than Tatum.

[Celtics2021]

As for win shares...

Celtics win shares:

White - 7.4
Horford - 6.3
Brogdon - 5.8
Brown - 5.0
Grant - 4.4
Timelord - 3.8
Smart - 3.7
Hauser - 3.4
Kornet - 3.3

Anybody else agree that Kornet and Hauser were each worth roughly as many wins Smart and Timelord?  According to the stats, Kornet adds more wins on a per-minute basis than Tatum.

No one’s talking win shares stat here.  Not sure why you’re bringing them up.  It’s a problematic stat.

[Roy H.]

As for win shares...

Celtics win shares:

White - 7.4
Horford - 6.3
Brogdon - 5.8
Brown - 5.0
Grant - 4.4
Timelord - 3.8
Smart - 3.7
Hauser - 3.4
Kornet - 3.3

Anybody else agree that Kornet and Hauser were each worth roughly as many wins Smart and Timelord?  According to the stats, Kornet adds more wins on a per-minute basis than Tatum.

No one’s talking win shares stat here.  Not sure why you’re bringing them up.  It’s a problematic stat.

How are you judging wins added, then?  Getting routinely outscored in the playoffs -- despite being on the second best team in the NBA -- doesn't seem to add a lot of them.

[Celtics2021]

As for win shares...

Celtics win shares:

White - 7.4
Horford - 6.3
Brogdon - 5.8
Brown - 5.0
Grant - 4.4
Timelord - 3.8
Smart - 3.7
Hauser - 3.4
Kornet - 3.3

Anybody else agree that Kornet and Hauser were each worth roughly as many wins Smart and Timelord?  According to the stats, Kornet adds more wins on a per-minute basis than Tatum.

No one’s talking win shares stat here.  Not sure why you’re bringing them up.  It’s a problematic stat.

How are you judging wins added, then?  Getting routinely outscored in the playoffs -- despite being on the second best team in the NBA -- doesn't seem to add a lot of them.

Firstly, I’m talking about marginal wins in comparing Grant to the players you did.  He creates more — playoffs and regular season.  That should be evident to everyone.

As for a specific number, I’m sure every NBA team has a metric or three that they use, because when you’re offering someone a contract, you need various ways to peg their value.  Does Grant add 1.5 wins?  3 wins?  I’m sure you could make an argument for either, and I’m not picking one (it’s one reason I said $8 and $15 million were both plausible salaries).  Some of that will be system-specific, because certain role players work better with certain stars better than others do.  But it’s pretty outlandish to suggest that a well-run NBA team should value all large wings/small bigs who have similar point and rebound totals the same, as if that’s the only thing they can measure.

[Celtics2021]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanth01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greenja01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/willigr01.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/watanyu01.html

Three of these guys are worth the minimum according to Hollinger; the other is worth $15+ million.

Yep.  That seems about right to me.  All four played with winning teams this past season.  Their net ratings on said teams:

-4.2
-1.2
-8.2
+5.3

Looking at playoff performances we get:

Played 1 minute
Played 5 minutes
-16.5
-3.4

I know there are some issues with net rating, but when you're looking at full-season numbers for players on good teams, that starts to wash out a bit.  One of these guys was on the court when generally good things happened to his good team during the regular season.  The other three weren't.  In the postseason, that continued to a degree.  Two of them couldn't see the floor.  One saw the floor and his team was generally wiped out.  And the last saw the floor and was a mediocre playoff rotation player.  Not a star, not a scrub.

No one has ever argued that Grant is a volume scorer.  But when you compare what happens to his teams with other players who also tend not to score much, despite relatively efficient scoring when they do, it's clear Grant's value isn't in points scored, which is not the same as having no value.  And that salary gets steep, quickly.  A marginal NBA win is worth somewhere in the $3.5 million to $5 million range, on average, depending on your analysis.  But NBA teams shouldn't treat wins marginally -- that extra win is worth much more to a contender than to a lottery team.  Even if Grant is worth a single extra win over JaMychael Green, that's several million in salary.  Two wins can quickly get you into the $10 million range.  Is Grant worth $15 million?  I think plausibly.  Is he worth $8 million?  Sure, that's plausible also.  Is he substantially different from a minimum-salary player?  Yes.

Net Rtg is an estimate which isn't very reliable.

Look at his actual +/-.  He played in 15 games.  Our team was outscored with him on the court in nine of them.  In another four games, he was either +1 or +2.  In 13 out of 15 games, we either treaded water with him, or were outscored.  That doesn't impress me.

His overall numbers are skewed because of a 34 point blowout against the Sixers (in which he was +22) and a 17 point blowout against the Heat (+15).  Despite those two outliers, he was still a -24 over 15 games.

I'm not a mathematician, but I'm still confused how metrics estimate that we'll be +5.3 points per 100 possessions better with Grant on the floor, when in fact we were outscored with him when he actually played.

+5.3 is the regular season.  -3.4 is the playoffs.  Maybe you misread past season as post-season, which has nothing to do with mathematics.

In general, the postseason is hard.  You play against both better teams and the better players from those better teams.  Most everyone's numbers get worse.  An averagish player like Grant can dip to the negative, but he's playable, unlike the other three you mentioned.

[Who]

What are marginal wins?

Is this the value over replacement statistic?

[Celtics2021]

What are marginal wins?

Is this the value over replacement statistic?

Marginal is a comparative word.  In this case it means how many more wins Grant would produce than the players Roy suggests we should pursue instead.

[green_bballers13]

As for win shares...

Celtics win shares:

White - 7.4
Horford - 6.3
Brogdon - 5.8
Brown - 5.0
Grant - 4.4
Timelord - 3.8
Smart - 3.7
Hauser - 3.4
Kornet - 3.3

Anybody else agree that Kornet and Hauser were each worth roughly as many wins Smart and Timelord?  According to the stats, Kornet adds more wins on a per-minute basis than Tatum.

No one’s talking win shares stat here.  Not sure why you’re bringing them up.  It’s a problematic stat.

How are you judging wins added, then?  Getting routinely outscored in the playoffs -- despite being on the second best team in the NBA -- doesn't seem to add a lot of them.

Vermont Green hit the nail on the head- the eye test.

I don't think many will draw conclusions that Kornet is a stud because of "per minute win shares". Isolated statistics are flawed in basketball and life.

[Vermont Green]

These overall stats are just guidelines but I was curious what they had on 538.  I took the regular season WAR (wins above replacement) to just see where these players lined up:

Grant          1.8
Bryant         0.2
Craig           1.2
Richardson   0.8
Hauser        3.3

I did not try to dissect the formulas for this but these numbers are pretty much in line with my subjective opinion.  And I look at these as relative, not literal or absolute.  I included Hauser just for reference since the discussion is to bring in Craig or Richardson to bolter Hauser's position.  What this shows is that these stats are only so good.  Hauser gets some garbage time, probably more than the others, and that plumps up his stats.  That is probably part of it, but he is also just kind of an odd ball when it comes to these stats.

Anyway, make of these what you want.

[jmen788]

Folks are pointing to a bad plus minus for Grant but I would guess he was put on the floor with the scrubs a lot, not the starters.