Time for a change?

[Who]

I think the playoffs are different than the regular season. I do not think Simons would have gotten a ton of play in these playoffs honestly because you have to choose him or Pritchard. It?s tough to have two guys people can attack and Pritchard has a bit more strength to resist at times than Simons. Same for Brunson since he is pretty strong so he is not as easy to pick on as Simons in my opinion. I would take Simons back if we trade Pritchard otherwise not really worth what we would likely have to pay for him.

Well I'm just some schmo on the internet.  So let's allow his coach tell us how Simons' defense is completely different now:

https://www.tiktok.com/@nbcsboston/video/7595799206477024567

And here's video evidence of the transformation he made from the first two months of the season to the last two:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy6N9ogl8C0

That's better evidence than what my personal opinion is on a keyboard.

Simons finished the season hurt after reaggrevating an injury from the Celtics training camp, so I am not sure he would have gotten any playing time.  I also am not convinced that some nice things were not said about him just to try to improve his trade value.

That said, I liked him and would be happy to have him back next year.  Defense aside, we could have used his offensive energy during the Philly series if he were available.

We do not have enough scorers.

We are going to have to live with somebody who is subpar defensively. Whether that is a guard like A Simons or a big man like Vucevic. We need some more offense. We cannot just have 4 guys who can get baskets and then a bunch of garbage men (Queta, J Walsh, Hugo, Baylor, Garza).

It would be great to get a two-way player with shot creation skills but those guys cost a ton of money / trade assets. We do not have much of either of those. We have the MLE.

Exactly. TP.

I think the issue is if Pritchard isn't capable of doing what Simons is doing, what is he here for? He's supposed to be our bench guard scorer. Now we apparently need two of them, both of whom aren't great on defense. I know they're not exactly the same player, but we have other needs on the roster as well.

This wouldn't be as big of a concern if White actually was shooting up to his potential and Pritchard didn't get overwhelmed by the tougher defenses in the playoffs. Shooting is supposed to be one of their specialties, and now we're saying we also need a third guard for whom shooting is his primary skill.

I do like Simons and if you can get him for a bargain, go for it. It would have to be cheap enough so it could be moved if necessary, however, because I think if we're trying to go where we need to go, we eventually do need more heft at the position.

I guess what I'm saying is more shooting is nice, but I thought the big picture goal after the disappointing playoff result was 1) more rim pressure on offense so we're not so 3 reliant and 2) upping our overall size, athleticism, and physicality on the team. Even if there's no clearcut alternative two-way guy out there, is there an opportunity cost to signing Simons and playing him the minutes he expects over some other player (Ron Harper Jr.!). Or, maybe a drafted player since this is a guard-heavy draft. It would be nice to get a long-term guard for the future to eventually replace White or Pritchard in the next few years (or even now if White is on the trade block).

The goal would be to keep Pritchard in the starting lineup thus creating a need for a bench guard.

I'd like to have another ball-handler and ball mover in that starting lineup to help the Jays. I like having two ball-handling guards next to them to help facilitate the offense. Rather than a wing player (SG/SF) as the 5th starter who doesn't handle the ball or pass the ball well and puts more pressure on the Jays.

I also like having a dynamic shooter / shot maker alongside them to provide true spacing ... versus a spot up shooter like Hauser / Baylor or non shooters like J Walsh / Hugo. Pritchard can not only shoot spot ups but also off the dribble. He opens up the offense.

If Pritchard is in the starting lineup, I don?t think that is a championship caliber team. Imagine him trying to cover SGA/Williams or Fox/Castle. He would get eaten alive. Pritchard should be coming off the bench.

If we can get somebody better than Pritchard to start, I am all for it.

I just do not know who that player is.

[Who]

Keon Ellis could be a good FA target. He is coming off a bad season where his playing time was limited so he shouldn't cost too much. Not sure what he would need. $7-8mil per year? Not sure.

Keon Ellis could start for us at SG. He is a small SG (6-4 180lbs) but a very good athlete and a very good defender. He would be great for defending quick SGs / combo guards like Edgecombe + be able to switch onto defending quick PGs with D White defending SGs. K Ellis is not a good offensive player but he shoots the 3 well. He is low usage. Doesn't make many mistakes.

[Vermont Green]

Based on the assumption that (4) of the starting (5) next season will be Tatum, Brown, White, and Queta (as things stand now), the question then is who is the 5th starter.  Last season those (4) + Hauser played 153 minutes over 13 games and had a NRtg of +6.1.  Those (4) + Pritchard played 50 minutes over 11 games with a NRtg of +46.4.  There are no minutes with Simons and this core group of (4) starters.

Vucevic-Tatum-Brown-White-Pritchard had a NRtg of +44.7, but in only 12 regular season minutes.  Vucevic-Tatum-Brown-White-Hauser had a NRtg of -75.0 but in literally only 1 minute of court time.  Vucevic and Tatum only had a few games in the regular season where both were playing.  In the playoffs, Starters+Vucevic+Pritchard was +19.6 NRtg (34 min) and with Hauser it was -19.9 in 27 minutes.

This seems to support premise that a ball handling 5th starter is better than a purely shooting 5th starter whether Queta or Vucevic as the big.  This is a small'ish sample size but enough to mean something.  I tend to agree that the team is better served by having Pritchard off the bench.  In my mind, that applies to Hauser also.

[Jiri Welsch]

Based on the assumption that (4) of the starting (5) next season will be Tatum, Brown, White, and Queta (as things stand now), the question then is who is the 5th starter.  Last season those (4) + Hauser played 153 minutes over 13 games and had a NRtg of +6.1.  Those (4) + Pritchard played 50 minutes over 11 games with a NRtg of +46.4.  There are no minutes with Simons and this core group of (4) starters.

Vucevic-Tatum-Brown-White-Pritchard had a NRtg of +44.7, but in only 12 regular season minutes.  Vucevic-Tatum-Brown-White-Hauser had a NRtg of -75.0 but in literally only 1 minute of court time.  Vucevic and Tatum only had a few games in the regular season where both were playing.  In the playoffs, Starters+Vucevic+Pritchard was +19.6 NRtg (34 min) and with Hauser it was -19.9 in 27 minutes.

This seems to support premise that a ball handling 5th starter is better than a purely shooting 5th starter whether Queta or Vucevic as the big.  This is a small'ish sample size but enough to mean something.  I tend to agree that the team is better served by having Pritchard off the bench.  In my mind, that applies to Hauser also.

I agree with your larger point about adding a ball-handler to the group.

Separately, I'm not sure why we would assume Queta stays in the starting lineup. I think Queta revealed himself to be an extremely solid backup this year.

The Celtics need to find two starters if they want to compete. Whether that means keeping Tatum/Brown/White is a different discussion.

But after one championship and multiple years of flame-outs in the playoffs, it seems apparent that the Celtics need a couple guys outside of those three who can get you a clutch bucket. Especially to stop runs, because the three of them often flounder in those difficult moments.

Queta is too limited a player to fill that role. And the days of a specialist 3-point shooter as a starter seem to be in the past.

[celticinorlando]

Based on the assumption that (4) of the starting (5) next season will be Tatum, Brown, White, and Queta (as things stand now), the question then is who is the 5th starter.  Last season those (4) + Hauser played 153 minutes over 13 games and had a NRtg of +6.1.  Those (4) + Pritchard played 50 minutes over 11 games with a NRtg of +46.4.  There are no minutes with Simons and this core group of (4) starters.

Vucevic-Tatum-Brown-White-Pritchard had a NRtg of +44.7, but in only 12 regular season minutes.  Vucevic-Tatum-Brown-White-Hauser had a NRtg of -75.0 but in literally only 1 minute of court time.  Vucevic and Tatum only had a few games in the regular season where both were playing.  In the playoffs, Starters+Vucevic+Pritchard was +19.6 NRtg (34 min) and with Hauser it was -19.9 in 27 minutes.

This seems to support premise that a ball handling 5th starter is better than a purely shooting 5th starter whether Queta or Vucevic as the big.  This is a small'ish sample size but enough to mean something.  I tend to agree that the team is better served by having Pritchard off the bench.  In my mind, that applies to Hauser also.

I think they add a big in FA to start. Also think they add either a true PG to pair with white or a combo guard. I do not think the last 2 starters are on the roster yet.

[Vermont Green]

As I tried to make clear, I was looking at line up numbers from last year to assess what types of players worked best together with Tatum, Brown, and White.  I looked a Queta as the primary big but also looked at Vucevic, two very different types of bigs.  It would be nice to add (2) starters to the team so that Pritchard, Hauser, and Queta can go to the bench (or maybe Hauser is traded to make room for a different player), but I am not so sure how likely that is.

The starters will likely be constructed as follows:

Guard + White + Brown + Tatum + Big

The guard could be Pritchard, Hauser, Walsh, Hugo, Schierman, or someone new.

The big could be Queta, Vucevic, or someone new.

I agree that ideally, the guard would be someone who can handle the ball and score, while playing respectable defense.  Same for the big, ideally a scoring big with some defense.  None of the current options are really starters, that is the problem.  All of them are better suited as bench players.

So what is the priority if you can only realistically bring in one starter level player, either a guard or a big?

[Who]

Based on the assumption that (4) of the starting (5) next season will be Tatum, Brown, White, and Queta (as things stand now), the question then is who is the 5th starter.  Last season those (4) + Hauser played 153 minutes over 13 games and had a NRtg of +6.1.  Those (4) + Pritchard played 50 minutes over 11 games with a NRtg of +46.4.  There are no minutes with Simons and this core group of (4) starters.

Vucevic-Tatum-Brown-White-Pritchard had a NRtg of +44.7, but in only 12 regular season minutes.  Vucevic-Tatum-Brown-White-Hauser had a NRtg of -75.0 but in literally only 1 minute of court time.  Vucevic and Tatum only had a few games in the regular season where both were playing.  In the playoffs, Starters+Vucevic+Pritchard was +19.6 NRtg (34 min) and with Hauser it was -19.9 in 27 minutes.

This seems to support premise that a ball handling 5th starter is better than a purely shooting 5th starter whether Queta or Vucevic as the big.  This is a small'ish sample size but enough to mean something.  I tend to agree that the team is better served by having Pritchard off the bench.  In my mind, that applies to Hauser also.

I agree with your larger point about adding a ball-handler to the group.

Separately, I'm not sure why we would assume Queta stays in the starting lineup. I think Queta revealed himself to be an extremely solid backup this year.

The Celtics need to find two starters if they want to compete. Whether that means keeping Tatum/Brown/White is a different discussion.

But after one championship and multiple years of flame-outs in the playoffs, it seems apparent that the Celtics need a couple guys outside of those three who can get you a clutch bucket. Especially to stop runs, because the three of them often flounder in those difficult moments.

Queta is too limited a player to fill that role. And the days of a specialist 3-point shooter as a starter seem to be in the past.

A couple of things there.

(1) The last line - the days of the specialist 3pt shooter seem over. I agree.

The league has been moving away from guys who just stand at the three point line (like Hauser) and more towards guys who can shoot, catch and drive, makes passes off the drive. That you need guys who can make decisions off the dribble with their passing in order to have good team offense / good ball movement.

That opposition defenses have gotten so good at switching and defending the perimeter that you need guys who can penetratate that. Not just your stars but your role players too. Not a lot but some of that.

(2) I have Queta locked in as a starter. I think he is a top 20 center. He will be hard to upgrade. Likely prohibitively expensive to upgrade.

In a minority opinion, I do still have some interest in possibly starting Vucevic ahead of Queta. Reason being to open up the offense more with Vucevic's high post passing and varied scoring arsenal. I like the idea of him being a 15ppg 28mpg center. Queta a 20mpg backup center. But most likely it would be the other way around with Queta starting (defense) and getting 28mpg and Vooch (offense) coming off the bench for 20mpg. Or some other backup center replacing Vooch and being that bench center.

(3) Queta and the playoffs. I disagree that he showed that he needed to upgrade. I thought he struggled in his 1st playoffs (as a significant player). It will be a learning experience for him. I expect him to do better moving forward.

If he doesn't do better next year, then I would look to move him back to a bench role. But he showed enough as a starter during the regular season that he can be a solid starting center in the league so I would show him some patience. Put this year down to youth / inexperience.

[Vermont Green]

As to Vucevic, I remain optimistic that we did not see his best play in his short time with BOS last season.  I still remember how much White struggled when he was first traded.  I am hoping it is the same deal with Vucevic, that once he has a chance to get more comfortable, that he will play better.  Maybe even enough better to be a starter over Queta, but that could be a stretch.  And BOS still needs to sign him for any of this to matter.  I don't think anyone is going to offer him silly money, but you never know.

As to Queta, having one non-shooter on the floor as a starter is not the end of the world, but it far from ideal.  That to me is the tough question for the off season, do you spend on a big (FA or trade) or do you spend on guard.  CJ McCollum for example is a FA.  He might be a nice piece to add who shouldn't cost all of our cap room money.

[obnoxiousmime]

I think the playoffs are different than the regular season. I do not think Simons would have gotten a ton of play in these playoffs honestly because you have to choose him or Pritchard. It?s tough to have two guys people can attack and Pritchard has a bit more strength to resist at times than Simons. Same for Brunson since he is pretty strong so he is not as easy to pick on as Simons in my opinion. I would take Simons back if we trade Pritchard otherwise not really worth what we would likely have to pay for him.

Well I'm just some schmo on the internet.  So let's allow his coach tell us how Simons' defense is completely different now:

https://www.tiktok.com/@nbcsboston/video/7595799206477024567

And here's video evidence of the transformation he made from the first two months of the season to the last two:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy6N9ogl8C0

That's better evidence than what my personal opinion is on a keyboard.

Simons finished the season hurt after reaggrevating an injury from the Celtics training camp, so I am not sure he would have gotten any playing time.  I also am not convinced that some nice things were not said about him just to try to improve his trade value.

That said, I liked him and would be happy to have him back next year.  Defense aside, we could have used his offensive energy during the Philly series if he were available.

We do not have enough scorers.

We are going to have to live with somebody who is subpar defensively. Whether that is a guard like A Simons or a big man like Vucevic. We need some more offense. We cannot just have 4 guys who can get baskets and then a bunch of garbage men (Queta, J Walsh, Hugo, Baylor, Garza).

It would be great to get a two-way player with shot creation skills but those guys cost a ton of money / trade assets. We do not have much of either of those. We have the MLE.

Exactly. TP.

I think the issue is if Pritchard isn't capable of doing what Simons is doing, what is he here for? He's supposed to be our bench guard scorer. Now we apparently need two of them, both of whom aren't great on defense. I know they're not exactly the same player, but we have other needs on the roster as well.

This wouldn't be as big of a concern if White actually was shooting up to his potential and Pritchard didn't get overwhelmed by the tougher defenses in the playoffs. Shooting is supposed to be one of their specialties, and now we're saying we also need a third guard for whom shooting is his primary skill.

I do like Simons and if you can get him for a bargain, go for it. It would have to be cheap enough so it could be moved if necessary, however, because I think if we're trying to go where we need to go, we eventually do need more heft at the position.

I guess what I'm saying is more shooting is nice, but I thought the big picture goal after the disappointing playoff result was 1) more rim pressure on offense so we're not so 3 reliant and 2) upping our overall size, athleticism, and physicality on the team. Even if there's no clearcut alternative two-way guy out there, is there an opportunity cost to signing Simons and playing him the minutes he expects over some other player (Ron Harper Jr.!). Or, maybe a drafted player since this is a guard-heavy draft. It would be nice to get a long-term guard for the future to eventually replace White or Pritchard in the next few years (or even now if White is on the trade block).

The goal would be to keep Pritchard in the starting lineup thus creating a need for a bench guard.

I'd like to have another ball-handler and ball mover in that starting lineup to help the Jays. I like having two ball-handling guards next to them to help facilitate the offense. Rather than a wing player (SG/SF) as the 5th starter who doesn't handle the ball or pass the ball well and puts more pressure on the Jays.

I also like having a dynamic shooter / shot maker alongside them to provide true spacing ... versus a spot up shooter like Hauser / Baylor or non shooters like J Walsh / Hugo. Pritchard can not only shoot spot ups but also off the dribble. He opens up the offense.

If Pritchard is in the starting lineup, I don?t think that is a championship caliber team. Imagine him trying to cover SGA/Williams or Fox/Castle. He would get eaten alive. Pritchard should be coming off the bench.

If we can get somebody better than Pritchard to start, I am all for it.

I just do not know who that player is.

Pritchard wasn't as effective as a starter vs. coming off the bench this year. I know that was without Tatum in the lineup, but he seems to play freer off the bench regardless. He seems very conscious that the early priority is always to get the first option into a rhythm, so he's often just standing around as a floor spacer.

As a fantasy owner of Pritchard the last few years, I was particularly sensitive to his numbers as a starter vs. sixth man. There were so many games where he's the so-called, starter but basically isn't involved at all in the early offense.  When you look at the box score in the first quarter, he may have taken a couple shots but for the most part he was not empowered to cook, which I think we can all agree is necessary for him to be his best self. Coming off the bench just seems to empower him and give him the permission to be more aggressive in finding his shot.

Then you just add in the fact that he makes the average lineup size very small (especially next to White) and rarely causes disruption on the defensive end (he can't bother people's shots nor their passes due to size/length limitations, and a double team where he's one of the doublers might as well be a single cover) and it's just not ideal.

I get that the best teams are now realizing the effectiveness of having as many dynamic offensive players as possible in their starting and closing lineups, but another big trend is avoiding having too many small/weak guards. If we add Simons, we're just adding another one to the mix.

That's why I'd keep Pritchard in his bench role. During the regular season when there is less game planning, he can be a floor raiser. Then during the playoffs when he becomes a ceiling lower-er, it won't be as disruptive if you need to reduce his minutes and play with more size.

[jambr380]

Speaking of Pritchard, this was reported last week:

[Deveney] Celtics will offer Payton Pritchard 3 year, $67 million dollars extension this offseason, ?fingers crossed? he takes it

What do we all think of this? On one hand, Pritchard has been invaluable in his role for the Celtics for years now, but part of that has been him being on such a value contract. If we offer him $22.3M/yr, that will take up a lot more of our salary cap and limit our flexibility.

That is why I would be in favor of signing a scoring guard like Simons, Sexton, or Coby Williams to the full MLE over 4 years. It would give us the ability to move on from Pritchard, while having a cheaper replacement ready to go.

Not saying I want to trade him this offseason - I'm not even adamantly against the contract and keeping him moving forward - but I wonder what we could actually get in a trade for Pritchard if we made him available. This isn't something that has often been talked about, but the noise might get louder if we are faced with signing him to such a big extension.