In hindsight, do we keep Grant?

[PAOBoston]

I think part of the issue wasn’t just money but playing time as well. Grant was gonna get like $15 mil to be 4th string guy (Horford/Porzingis/Williams)? Think he wanted to get paid and get minutes. Also didn’t think he jived with Mazzulla.

I think a lot of that is true, but keep in mind that he was restricted.  If Brad wanted him back, he'd be here.

I don’t disagree that they “could” have matched. I think it really boiled down to a combo of money and dealing with a possibly disgruntled player in terms of playing time and usage. Once KP came on aboard, it sort of lessened the need for a big man shooter/defender.

Yeah.  This thread is really just theoretical, hindsight is 20/20, etc.

It's basically asking, if we knew we were making the KP and Jrue trades, would we have kept Grant.  That doesn't negate the reasons why we passed on signing him in the first place, but those things have now changed.

My guess:  we keep him, at least in the short-term.  I do think we would have looked to trade him for a different type of big man on a shorter contract.  I think the analysis about our depth and salary implications would have changed.  At this point, we need to be "all in".

Yes, I agree. Thought the Pritchard extension talks were interesting news tid bit. Maybe learned a lesson from not extending guys sooner to keep for potential salary matching in trades?

[Roy H.]

I think part of the issue wasn’t just money but playing time as well. Grant was gonna get like $15 mil to be 4th string guy (Horford/Porzingis/Williams)? Think he wanted to get paid and get minutes. Also didn’t think he jived with Mazzulla.

I think a lot of that is true, but keep in mind that he was restricted.  If Brad wanted him back, he'd be here.

I don’t disagree that they “could” have matched. I think it really boiled down to a combo of money and dealing with a possibly disgruntled player in terms of playing time and usage. Once KP came on aboard, it sort of lessened the need for a big man shooter/defender.

Yeah.  This thread is really just theoretical, hindsight is 20/20, etc.

It's basically asking, if we knew we were making the KP and Jrue trades, would we have kept Grant.  That doesn't negate the reasons why we passed on signing him in the first place, but those things have now changed.

My guess:  we keep him, at least in the short-term.  I do think we would have looked to trade him for a different type of big man on a shorter contract.  I think the analysis about our depth and salary implications would have changed.  At this point, we need to be "all in".

Yes, I agree. Thought the Pritchard extension talks were interesting news tid bit. Maybe learned a lesson from not extending guys sooner to keep for potential salary matching in trades?

It will be interesting to see going forward, because if we're a second apron team next year, we won't be able to aggregate salaries in trade.

[ozgod]

I think part of the issue wasn’t just money but playing time as well. Grant was gonna get like $15 mil to be 4th string guy (Horford/Porzingis/Williams)? Think he wanted to get paid and get minutes. Also didn’t think he jived with Mazzulla.

I think a lot of that is true, but keep in mind that he was restricted.  If Brad wanted him back, he'd be here.

I don’t disagree that they “could” have matched. I think it really boiled down to a combo of money and dealing with a possibly disgruntled player in terms of playing time and usage. Once KP came on aboard, it sort of lessened the need for a big man shooter/defender.

Yeah.  This thread is really just theoretical, hindsight is 20/20, etc.

It's basically asking, if we knew we were making the KP and Jrue trades, would we have kept Grant.  That doesn't negate the reasons why we passed on signing him in the first place, but those things have now changed.

My guess:  we keep him, at least in the short-term.  I do think we would have looked to trade him for a different type of big man on a shorter contract.  I think the analysis about our depth and salary implications would have changed.  At this point, we need to be "all in".

I think the point that Brad and Co are wrestling with, is what point in the season we need to be all-in. Do we need to exceed the 2nd apron before the season starts on insurance signings? Or do we wait until the trade deadline, after a couple of months of games, where it might become obvious what our needs would be, depending on form or injuries. My feeling is they will sit tight and wait to see how this new team gels, or whether Horford can still handle Embiid and Giannis in a one-big lineup, or if anyone gets injured. Grant might have been a "nice to have" at $18m a year if you look at it that way.

[SHAQATTACK]

At the time of the Grant Williams S&T, he obviously had no idea that he'd be trading Timelord and that our depth would take a bit of a hit.  Now, though, it seems like the Celtics have gone "all in". 

In hindsight, would Brad have kept Grant?  Or would he have still made the S&T?

I think he would have kept him and see how things went .

[Who]

Hard to see how they could afford to pay G Williams after taking on Jrue's & Porzingis' contracts. Too much money tied up in the Big 4. Then D White as a 5th.

The cost of him (pay + luxury tax payments) relative to his value on the court wouldn't be worth it.

In purely sporting terms, you'd love to have him but financially I do not think it would have been viable.

[obnoxiousmime]

Wasn't it an outrageous figure to keep him once you added luxury tax payments? I understand paying extra for star players, but not role players that don't want to stay, don't like their role, and doesn't get along with the coach.

Don't get me wrong, I really valued Grant's durability, strength, and combination of defense and outside shooting. However, I also think that sometimes you do have to just let somebody go if they don't want to be here. Deep down, he wasn't going to be happy with his role here and you can't just keep a guy in that situation forever just to "keep the asset."

[Moranis]

We always should have kept Grant at that money.

[Neurotic Guy]

Jordan Walsh is Grant II.  Not exactly the same player but personality-wise they seem pretty alike

[jmen788]

I wanted to keep Grant. I thought he would maybe get 12M a year (he obviously did better). But, I am no cap expert, and now we are so top-loaded even though he would be a very helpful 3rd big (even though he is maybe 6 foot 6), idk how we could make it work money wise. I really would love the Jrue trade if he was 3 years younger. 34 for a guard... yikes.

[Silas]

I wanted to keep Grant. I thought he would maybe get 12M a year (he obviously did better). But, I am no cap expert, and now we are so top-loaded even though he would be a very helpful 3rd big (even though he is maybe 6 foot 6), idk how we could make it work money wise. I really would love the Jrue trade if he was 3 years younger. 34 for a guard... yikes.

How about 2 years younger?  He is actually 33, will turn 34 next June.

[jmen788]

I wanted to keep Grant. I thought he would maybe get 12M a year (he obviously did better). But, I am no cap expert, and now we are so top-loaded even though he would be a very helpful 3rd big (even though he is maybe 6 foot 6), idk how we could make it work money wise. I really would love the Jrue trade if he was 3 years younger. 34 for a guard... yikes.

How about 2 years younger?  He is actually 33, will turn 34 next June.

Sorry, sir-- unclear what your point is. He will be 34 during this season. I would prefer he was turning 30. He may only have 1 or 2 good years left (hope I'm wrong). You splitting hairs over a few months in age may be green tinted glassed at play. I'm a Homer too but I look at things objectively. The big 3 (with pierce kg ray) was basically cooked after 2 years together. Most don't age like LeBron.

[gouki88]

I wanted to keep Grant. I thought he would maybe get 12M a year (he obviously did better). But, I am no cap expert, and now we are so top-loaded even though he would be a very helpful 3rd big (even though he is maybe 6 foot 6), idk how we could make it work money wise. I really would love the Jrue trade if he was 3 years younger. 34 for a guard... yikes.

How about 2 years younger?  He is actually 33, will turn 34 next June.

Sorry, sir-- unclear what your point is. He will be 34 during this season. I would prefer he was turning 30. He may only have 1 or 2 good years left (hope I'm wrong). You splitting hairs over a few months in age may be green tinted glassed at play. I'm a Homer too but I look at things objectively. The big 3 (with pierce kg ray) was basically cooked after 2 years together. Most don't age like LeBron.

It’s not splitting hairs, he won’t be 34 until the next Finals.

We’ve been well served by the fossil that is Al Horford

[green_bballers13]

We always should have kept Grant at that money.

Even if he annoyed the other players? I'm not sure if this actually happened, but there were rumors.

[green_bballers13]

Jordan Walsh is Grant II.  Not exactly the same player but personality-wise they seem pretty alike

I think Jordan Walsh is going to contribute immediately on defense. Great pick.

[jmen788]

I wanted to keep Grant. I thought he would maybe get 12M a year (he obviously did better). But, I am no cap expert, and now we are so top-loaded even though he would be a very helpful 3rd big (even though he is maybe 6 foot 6), idk how we could make it work money wise. I really would love the Jrue trade if he was 3 years younger. 34 for a guard... yikes.

How about 2 years younger?  He is actually 33, will turn 34 next June.

Sorry, sir-- unclear what your point is. He will be 34 during this season. I would prefer he was turning 30. He may only have 1 or 2 good years left (hope I'm wrong). You splitting hairs over a few months in age may be green tinted glassed at play. I'm a Homer too but I look at things objectively. The big 3 (with pierce kg ray) was basically cooked after 2 years together. Most don't age like LeBron.

It’s not splitting hairs, he won’t be 34 until the next Finals.

We’ve been well served by the fossil that is Al Horford

To each their own but to me it is splitting hairs. Dude has a lot of miles under him and most PGs donr get better at 34, 35, 36.