How did we with "vet minimums" compared to other teams?

[Roy H.]

D grade here

Stevens has always been more worried about culture fits than talent fits for the team.  You can thank Tristan Thompson coming to the team via Danny for that fear.

I think that's right, at least partially.  Brad has stated that he wants to "add to the team, without taking away" or something like that.  He is very risk averse in terms of distractions, flawed character, etc.

Thompson may have something to do with it.  I also wonder if Brad's first free agent class -- Kanter/Freedom, Schroeder -- played into the (seeming) philosophy.

[jambr380]

My general worry is that we lost 3 rotation players (or rotation level players) in Smart, Grant, and Gallinari; but we we only obtained one definite in Porzingis. It gets pretty questionable once you get past our top 7 and for a leading contending team, it would have been nice to get a couple of definites rather than hopefuls.

They seem to be all in on Brissett and Pritchard. Svi and Hauser are probably fighting for the same spot in the rotation. And, for whatever reason, the organization is totally comfortable having Kornet play major minutes if it comes down to it.

On another note, I generally like our 2-way guys - especially Scrubb, so perhaps we'll get a nice surprise there.

[celticinorlando]

My general worry is that we lost 3 rotation players (or rotation level players) in Smart, Grant, and Gallinari; but we we only obtained one definite in Porzingis. It gets pretty questionable once you get past our top 7 and for a leading contending team, it would have been nice to get a couple of definites rather than hopefuls.

They seem to be all in on Brissett and Pritchard. Svi and Hauser are probably fighting for the same spot in the rotation. And, for whatever reason, the organization is totally comfortable having Kornet play major minutes if it comes down to it.

On another note, I generally like our 2-way guys - especially Scrubb, so perhaps we'll get a nice surprise there.

If Banton is playing the Celtics are in dire straits. Same with Kornet. Those two couldn't play dead in a horror movie.

No idea what Brissett is or what he brings. Can't really shoot. Seems like a hustle guy. Nothing more. I still say the bench is weak...esp with Rob and MB's injury history. Hauser and Svi are the same guy. Spot up shooters that lack any athleticism and can't create their own shot. PP shows flashes but nothing that says he is ready for big minutes (which he might be pressed into right out of the gate).

So the this bench is a lot like every other bench they have had. Concern is they are an injury or 2 away from being in some bad shape.

[CelticsWhat35]

My general worry is that we lost 3 rotation players (or rotation level players) in Smart, Grant, and Gallinari; but we we only obtained one definite in Porzingis. It gets pretty questionable once you get past our top 7 and for a leading contending team, it would have been nice to get a couple of definites rather than hopefuls.

They seem to be all in on Brissett and Pritchard. Svi and Hauser are probably fighting for the same spot in the rotation. And, for whatever reason, the organization is totally comfortable having Kornet play major minutes if it comes down to it.

On another note, I generally like our 2-way guys - especially Scrubb, so perhaps we'll get a nice surprise there.

There’s nothing definite about what Gallinari would be able to provide.  With his injury, it’s usually 2 years for a player to get back to full strength.  At his age, it’s possible that’s never going to happen

[jambr380]

My general worry is that we lost 3 rotation players (or rotation level players) in Smart, Grant, and Gallinari; but we we only obtained one definite in Porzingis. It gets pretty questionable once you get past our top 7 and for a leading contending team, it would have been nice to get a couple of definites rather than hopefuls.

They seem to be all in on Brissett and Pritchard. Svi and Hauser are probably fighting for the same spot in the rotation. And, for whatever reason, the organization is totally comfortable having Kornet play major minutes if it comes down to it.

On another note, I generally like our 2-way guys - especially Scrubb, so perhaps we'll get a nice surprise there.

There’s nothing definite about what Gallinari would be able to provide.  With his injury, it’s usually 2 years for a player to get back to full strength.  At his age, it’s possible that’s never going to happen

I was more talking about how we went into last year compared to how we are going into this year. The expectation was that Gallinari would be a major part of our rotation. This year, our big signing was Oshae Brissett and hoping Pritchard can take on a bigger role.

[Vermont Green]

My general worry is that we lost 3 rotation players (or rotation level players) in Smart, Grant, and Gallinari; but we we only obtained one definite in Porzingis. It gets pretty questionable once you get past our top 7 and for a leading contending team, it would have been nice to get a couple of definites rather than hopefuls.

They seem to be all in on Brissett and Pritchard. Svi and Hauser are probably fighting for the same spot in the rotation. And, for whatever reason, the organization is totally comfortable having Kornet play major minutes if it comes down to it.

On another note, I generally like our 2-way guys - especially Scrubb, so perhaps we'll get a nice surprise there.

There’s nothing definite about what Gallinari would be able to provide.  With his injury, it’s usually 2 years for a player to get back to full strength.  At his age, it’s possible that’s never going to happen

I agree with this.  You can't really count Gallinari as a loss.  We traded Smart for Porzingis.  That is the principle swap.  We included Gallinari and Muscala (who combined to contribute pretty much nothing to the team last season) for salary purposes but got 2 firsts back from Memphis and sent out a high second round pick (#35) to Washington.  So in a convoluted way, you can say that Walsh replaced Gallinari.  If Walsh steps on the court even once, he will have done more for the Celtics than Gallinari did last season, but this has nothing to do with the vet min class.

Grant was a useful player that contributed last season.  He was the 3rd big (behind Horford and Williams) most of the season, in terms of his spot in the rotation.  He would now be the 4th big with Porzingis added, the 8th or 9th guy at best (Grant, Hauser, Pritchard all in that 8, 9, 10 range).  There will be injuries and "minutes management" but Grant's role or opportunity would have been diminished in any case.  I see him as being replaced by Brissett (one of our vet min guys)  You would be surprised how similar their stats are and Brissett is actually taller.  We will have to see how Brissett looks on this team but I think he is going to work out as that 8th or 9th guy (if he does about what he did in IND), versatile in different ways than Grant and not as good from 3, but I am hopeful he can do what the Celtics need him to do.

You can say that Svi replaced Muscala.  I know this is a stretch from a positional standpoint, but it works from a process of elimination perspective.  I was hopeful when we got Muscala but he really disappointed.  Maybe the coach didn't know how to use him, I don't know, but he didn't do much.  I am now hopeful with Svi.  Svi does not need to do all that much to eclipse what Muscala did.  And Banton replaces Champagnie as a deep bench prospect, I have no expectation at all for Banton other than maybe you catch lightning in a bottle and he develops into something in time.

[Roy H.]

I was hopeful when we got Muscala but he really disappointed.  Maybe the coach didn't know how to use him, I don't know, but he didn't do much.

It's a tangent, but I don't think Muscala disappointed.  He was extremely efficient, he played hard, and one a per-minute basis he was just as productive as he has been for most of his career.  He had an estimated Net Rtg of +8.0 per 100 possessions, so he was doing his part there, too.

Our idiot coach just didn't play him.  So, Muscala's tenure in Boston may have been disappointing overall, but that's mostly because Joe wouldn't play him in the playoffs, even when others were struggling.  Joe was the disappointment, not Muscala.

[Vermont Green]

My general worry is that we lost 3 rotation players (or rotation level players) in Smart, Grant, and Gallinari; but we we only obtained one definite in Porzingis. It gets pretty questionable once you get past our top 7 and for a leading contending team, it would have been nice to get a couple of definites rather than hopefuls.

They seem to be all in on Brissett and Pritchard. Svi and Hauser are probably fighting for the same spot in the rotation. And, for whatever reason, the organization is totally comfortable having Kornet play major minutes if it comes down to it.

On another note, I generally like our 2-way guys - especially Scrubb, so perhaps we'll get a nice surprise there.

There’s nothing definite about what Gallinari would be able to provide.  With his injury, it’s usually 2 years for a player to get back to full strength.  At his age, it’s possible that’s never going to happen

I was more talking about how we went into last year compared to how we are going into this year. The expectation was that Gallinari would be a major part of our rotation. This year, our big signing was Oshae Brissett and hoping Pritchard can take on a bigger role.

Was it?  Who was expecting this?  Even when he was signed, before the injury, his projected role was a bench big, about equal to Grant on the depth chart or say in relative importance to the rotation.  Post injury, he may be closer to Blake Griffin.

I agree that a recovered Gallinari could have role on this team as a bench PF but I see it as he would be on the bubble to even make the playoff rotation.  And that is assuming near full recovery or better.  Between losing both Grant and Gallinari, I agree there is a hole or soft spot for a bench PF.  But we are talking about the 8th or 9th guy on the roster, not in my mind a "major rotation piece".

And you are right, our big vet min signing was Brissett.  Not all that exciting.  It will be fun to watch and compare how Grant, Gallinari, and Brissett all do in their new roles on their new teams.  I am sure there will be plenty of opportunity to second guess. 

[Vermont Green]

I was hopeful when we got Muscala but he really disappointed.  Maybe the coach didn't know how to use him, I don't know, but he didn't do much.

It's a tangent, but I don't think Muscala disappointed.  He was extremely efficient, he played hard, and one a per-minute basis he was just as productive as he has been for most of his career.  He had an estimated Net Rtg of +8.0 per 100 possessions, so he was doing his part there, too.

Our idiot coach just didn't play him.  So, Muscala's tenure in Boston may have been disappointing overall, but that's mostly because Joe wouldn't play him in the playoffs, even when others were struggling.  Joe was the disappointment, not Muscala.

I recognize the coaching aspect and that is why I mentioned it.  I also recognize that coming to a new team mid-season is hard.  Look at White when he first got here, he was not near his full potential.  But when I say I was disappointed with Muscala, I am basing that largely on what I saw on the court.  To me, it was kind of like Fournier.  Fournier's numbers looked good too but I didn't see it on the court.  I thought Fournier was going to be good but I was disabused once I got to see him play in a Celtics' uniform.  I felt the same about Muscala.  He had moments when I would say to myself, that looks good, but then he would kind of disappear and just float around the court while everyone else was playing basketball.

Bottom line for me was that Muscala was simply not as good as I had hoped and I would not have played him in the playoffs either.  Maybe if he had another season to integrate and get comfortable with the team, like White, who knows.

[No Nickname]

Well until opening night our "offseason" isn't over. 

My hope is that we're holding on to some open roster spots to see who might be cut from training camps around the league.

All it takes is one useful player to change the perspective on this.  Are there any 8-9 roster spot guys who will get cut from other teams?  Probably not, but maybe a #10 elsewhere could be a #9 here.

[Celtics2021]

Well until opening night our "offseason" isn't over. 

My hope is that we're holding on to some open roster spots to see who might be cut from training camps around the league.

All it takes is one useful player to change the perspective on this.  Are there any 8-9 roster spot guys who will get cut from other teams?  Probably not, but maybe a #10 elsewhere could be a #9 here.

#9 is either Hauser or Pritchard.  There’s no one getting cut who’s likely better than either of those two.  (Maybe someone gets cut who has a blowup year on a new team, but that’s a different thing, and you could just as easily get a blowup year from somebody already in our camp).

The hope is that #16 somewhere else might be better than number 11 here, which is more possible because we’ve got a top-heavy roster and other teams have deep rosters, but no way are we getting a guaranteed rotation guy from the waiver market.

[mobilija]

I was hopeful when we got Muscala but he really disappointed.  Maybe the coach didn't know how to use him, I don't know, but he didn't do much.

It's a tangent, but I don't think Muscala disappointed.  He was extremely efficient, he played hard, and one a per-minute basis he was just as productive as he has been for most of his career.  He had an estimated Net Rtg of +8.0 per 100 possessions, so he was doing his part there, too.

Our idiot coach just didn't play him.  So, Muscala's tenure in Boston may have been disappointing overall, but that's mostly because Joe wouldn't play him in the playoffs, even when others were struggling.  Joe was the disappointment, not Muscala.

I think if Muscala were still on the team, had a training camp to battle Kornet for the 4th big spot, we'd be in a better spot. Offensively, he'd replace what we lost in Grant with better rebounding but less defensive versatility.

I think it was more of an amount of time on the team, skill level compared to who was already comfortable on the team in his position than a bad coaching issue that caused him to play so little.

In a fantasy world, if we signed Muscala as a vet min this offseason, how much sunnier would our vet min outlook be? I think significantly.

[Atzar]

I think if Muscala were still on the team, had a training camp to battle Kornet for the 4th big spot, we'd be in a better spot. Offensively, he'd replace what we lost in Grant with better rebounding but less defensive versatility.

I think it was more of an amount of time on the team, skill level compared to who was already comfortable on the team in his position than a bad coaching issue that caused him to play so little.

In a fantasy world, if we signed Muscala as a vet min this offseason, how much sunnier would our vet min outlook be? I think significantly.

My personal opinion of Muscala last season was that he is a cone on defense, with inadequate quickness to switch out on the perimeter and no instincts for rim protection on the interior.  He needs to be a threat to score at a high rate in order to justify his presence on the court, and on the Celtics he's just not going to have high enough usage to do that. 

We could use him insofar as we could use any warm body to soak up some irregular minutes behind three players who are all likely to miss time (Blake could also do that just fine if he wants one more year), but I don't think he moves the needle.  I know I'm lower on him than the consensus on this site, and I acknowledge that stats generally have a more favorable view of his defensive contributions than I do.  So take my opinion with the necessary grain of salt, but there it is. 

[jambr380]

My general worry is that we lost 3 rotation players (or rotation level players) in Smart, Grant, and Gallinari; but we we only obtained one definite in Porzingis. It gets pretty questionable once you get past our top 7 and for a leading contending team, it would have been nice to get a couple of definites rather than hopefuls.

They seem to be all in on Brissett and Pritchard. Svi and Hauser are probably fighting for the same spot in the rotation. And, for whatever reason, the organization is totally comfortable having Kornet play major minutes if it comes down to it.

On another note, I generally like our 2-way guys - especially Scrubb, so perhaps we'll get a nice surprise there.

There’s nothing definite about what Gallinari would be able to provide.  With his injury, it’s usually 2 years for a player to get back to full strength.  At his age, it’s possible that’s never going to happen

I was more talking about how we went into last year compared to how we are going into this year. The expectation was that Gallinari would be a major part of our rotation. This year, our big signing was Oshae Brissett and hoping Pritchard can take on a bigger role.

Was it?  Who was expecting this?  Even when he was signed, before the injury, his projected role was a bench big, about equal to Grant on the depth chart or say in relative importance to the rotation.  Post injury, he may be closer to Blake Griffin.

I agree that a recovered Gallinari could have role on this team as a bench PF but I see it as he would be on the bubble to even make the playoff rotation.  And that is assuming near full recovery or better.  Between losing both Grant and Gallinari, I agree there is a hole or soft spot for a bench PF.  But we are talking about the 8th or 9th guy on the roster, not in my mind a "major rotation piece".

And you are right, our big vet min signing was Brissett.  Not all that exciting.  It will be fun to watch and compare how Grant, Gallinari, and Brissett all do in their new roles on their new teams.  I am sure there will be plenty of opportunity to second guess.

We used the taxpayer MLE on him (which we didn't this year) and clearly promised him a role. He chose us over other suitors. I am not saying he was going to be an all-star level player, but he was expected to get major minutes - especially with Al and Rob likely expected to miss time. We literally went out and traded for the younger, bigger, better version of him this offseason, so the team saw his position as a need/desire.

I am hoping for the best from Brissett and Walsh, but I would have been a lot happier if we had signed a guard/wing of the same caliber in someone like Richardson or Gordon.

[Vermont Green]

The Wizards have 17 players currently on guaranteed contracts.  They are going to have to do something.  I don't believe that we can trade for either Gallinari or Muscala (Muscala could fit the TPE, but not Gallinari).  And if they are waived by WAS directly, I don't believe we could sign them.  What would have to happen is for WAS to trade one or both in a salary dump and then the new team waive them.  Then we could offer a min contract.

That scenario may not be all that far fetched, that one or both are traded in some kind of a salary dump trade and then waived before the start of the season.  It is a lot of dots that would have to connect to have either end up back on the Celtics though.  If I was WAS, I would try to get Gallinari back playing and he could have some legit value to contender in a mid-season trade, not a ton of value, but something.  I don't see Muscala having any trade value at any point so maybe they do find a way to salary dump trade him before the season starts.  Delon Wright is another expiring contract they have ($8.2M), he could be in their primary rotation though. 

WAS will be a roster to watch.