2017 Celtics Offseason: News and General Discussion

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,284
Ugh, whyyyy? Just to mess with the Celtics' draft pick? Seemed like a much better fit on the Cs.

Festus Ezeli, anyone?
I don't think Ezeli ever plays again. He never even practiced for the Blazers and I think his last setback in March was expected to keep him out for the '17-'18 season.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
18,198
Ugh, whyyyy? Just to mess with the Celtics' draft pick? Seemed like a much better fit on the Cs.

Festus Ezeli, anyone?
Bogut could still end up in Boston. This sounds like an agent favor to Pelinka. Bogut gets to chill in LA with his boy Luke for a few months as the season shapes up and teams evaluate their needs until he's dealt to a contender at the deadline for some type of draft pick.

Everybody wins.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
22,634
Melrose, MA
Adam Himmelsbach with some key questions going into camp.

He notes that the 2 questions about the starting lineup are likely to be Smart vs Brown at SG and Morris vs Baynes at center, but comes down thinking Smart will start:

The guess here is that Smart gets the nod, mostly because the Celtics are counting on third-year guard Terry Rozier to emerge as the main ballhandler in the second unit.
I'm not sure I agree. I think that Rozier's role should probably start with the minutes that Kyrie is on the bench, but I think Smart runs the offense better than Rozier at this point and should also be out there when Kyrie isn't. Brown, on the other hand, may be better served by getting his minutes with the starters.
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,087
I've been firmly in the start Smart camp for a while but recently flipped to Brown. My usual philosophy is you always start the best 5 players and Smart is a top-5 player on this roster, with the hope that Rozier has improved enough to run the second unit. But, the starting unit has 3 great play-makers, so the biggest need is really a 3-and-D guy. Smart is more playmaker-and-D; Brown has a better chance of being that guy. The X factors are what Stephens sees in practice. If Smart's shot and Rozier's playmaking have improved, then he could start Smart. The other Big position is a little more murky. I might go Baynes as "starter" but in limited minutes designed to make sure Horford doesn't take too much of a pounding at the 5. This team needs another big body badly.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
22,634
Melrose, MA
I've been firmly in the start Smart camp for a while but recently flipped to Brown. My usual philosophy is you always start the best 5 players and Smart is a top-5 player on this roster, with the hope that Rozier has improved enough to run the second unit. But, the starting unit has 3 great play-makers, so the biggest need is really a 3-and-D guy. Smart is more playmaker-and-D; Brown has a better chance of being that guy. The X factors are what Stephens sees in practice. If Smart's shot and Rozier's playmaking have improved, then he could start Smart. The other Big position is a little more murky. I might go Baynes as "starter" but in limited minutes designed to make sure Horford doesn't take too much of a pounding at the 5. This team needs another big body badly.
It seems insane to me to rely on maybe the 5th best playmaker on the team (after the big 3 and Smart) to run the second unit offense. To me, Rozier's most obvious role on this team is energy, rebounding, ballhandling, and hopefully improved shooting off the bench. On the other hand, I don't think he's ready to playmake his way out of a wet paper bag.

I think a good starting place for his minutes would be those minutes Kyrie is on the bench, plus whatever else he can earn. But whether he starts or not, I'd like to see Smart running the show when Rozier is in, hopefully aided by one of Horford or Heyward most of the time.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,414
New York, NY
It seems insane to me to rely on maybe the 5th best playmaker on the team (after the big 3 and Smart) to run the second unit offense. To me, Rozier's most obvious role on this team is energy, rebounding, ballhandling, and hopefully improved shooting off the bench. On the other hand, I don't think he's ready to playmake his way out of a wet paper bag.

I think a good starting place for his minutes would be those minutes Kyrie is on the bench, plus whatever else he can earn. But whether he starts or not, I'd like to see Smart running the show when Rozier is in, hopefully aided by one of Horford or Heyward most of the time.
There won't be a second unit offense. There will be a first unit offense, a Hayward and bench offense, and a Kyrie and bench offense.

Smart should start because he's better than Brown and a better fit next to Kyrie. Kyrie needs a guard next to him who can defend the point against elite point guards and wings against teams with weak point guards. Brown is a better fit running with a point guard who can play defense.

As for Baynes, he either is going to see a big minutes bump or not start, because we basically need one of he or Horford on the floor at all times. If Baynes is going to start, that means he needs to be playing 25 minutes instead of 15.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It seems insane to me to rely on maybe the 5th best playmaker on the team (after the big 3 and Smart) to run the second unit offense. To me, Rozier's most obvious role on this team is energy, rebounding, ballhandling, and hopefully improved shooting off the bench. On the other hand, I don't think he's ready to playmake his way out of a wet paper bag.

I think a good starting place for his minutes would be those minutes Kyrie is on the bench, plus whatever else he can earn. But whether he starts or not, I'd like to see Smart running the show when Rozier is in, hopefully aided by one of Horford or Heyward most of the time.
I agree. It will be interesting if Brad will think less in terms of first unit/second unit, and more in terms of multiple alternate groupings, that make the substitutions not happen en masse. Maybe we see some Irving/Smart/Heyward/Horford/Baynes, then some Rozier/Smart/Heyward/Horford/Morris, then some Irving/Brown/Tatum/Morris/Baynes, etc. Try to keep 2 or 3 starters in at all times, and at least one of Irving or Heyward.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,414
New York, NY
Amir Johnson is only 6'9". Is this all about losing Tyler Zeller or Jonas Jerebko?
It's about the fact that we have two players who are NBA 5s who have historically collectively averaged about 48 minutes per game, so the logical assumption is that they won't play much on the court at the same time.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,536
It's about the fact that we have two players who are NBA 5s who have historically collectively averaged about 48 minutes per game, so the logical assumption is that they won't play much on the court at the same time.
but we are also in an era where teams play without a 5 for long stretches of time.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
7,488
Santa Monica
As for Baynes, he either is going to see a big minutes bump or not start, because we basically need one of he or Horford on the floor at all times. If Baynes is going to start, that means he needs to be playing 25 minutes instead of 15.
We can play 'small' with Morris or Theis at the 5. Maybe even Semi or Yabu. So one of Baynes/Horford doesn't have to be on the floor.

My bigger concern is if either Horford or Baynes gets injured. Then we HAVE to play 'small' a lot of the time, and we don't want this team to be cornered with HAVING to do anything. This team would be better served with a Center as their #15 player or with one playing for Maine that can come up and play D in case of injury. Basically a replacement for Zizic's spot on the roster.

People hold up the Warriors as the model franchise and their ability to play 'small', but they do have 4 players at 6'11" or taller. We have none.

I guess there will be plenty of Centers to pick up off the scrap heap during the season, but I'd rather take care of it before the season begins.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
7,488
Santa Monica
Pachulia and Mcgee and?????
The kid from Vandy and last year 1st round pick, Damian Jones is 7'. I thought KD (listed at 6'9") was 6'11", and was wrong.

They also have vet David West and Oregon rookie big men Boucher and Bell.
 
Last edited:

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,271
Saint Paul, MN
David West is 6'9", as is Jordan Bell.

The kid from Vandy played 85 minutes last year.

I am sure the Celtics could find someone 6'11" or taller this year, that could give them what Jones gave the Warriors last year.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
7,488
Santa Monica
David West is 6'9", as is Jordan Bell.

The kid from Vandy played 85 minutes last year.

I am sure the Celtics could find someone 6'11" or taller this year, that could give them what Jones gave the Warriors last year.
McGee, ZaZa and West were pretty healthy last season, so Jones wasn't needed.
My point is the Celtics need depth at the 5 in case of injury to Baynes/Horford. He can be #15 or on the Red Claws, and hopefully, plays minimal minutes like Jones did last season.
 
Last edited:

Spelunker

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
6,130

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,271
Saint Paul, MN
Does it really matter if he is 6'9" or 7'0"? He is tall and a damn fucking good basketbal player. An dlumping him in with guys like McGee and Jones and Baynes and whoever, just because they may happen to be over 6'11" is ridiculous.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,929
It's the other way around, I think. Durant may be 6'11", but that's not really what they were discussing.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
7,488
Santa Monica
Does it really matter if he is 6'9" or 7'0"? He is tall and a damn fucking good basketbal player. An dlumping him in with guys like McGee and Jones and Baynes and whoever, just because they may happen to be over 6'11" is ridiculous.
Can you take a breath for a second?
I found it interesting that the team most famous for 'small ball', has four 'tall' players on their roster. Just drop it, no one is comparing KD's hoop skills with those other players.

If you don't want a minimum contract back-up Center to be our #15 or on our G-League team that's fine. It's a very minor roster move that I suggested.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
18,198
Does it really matter if he is 6'9" or 7'0"? He is tall and a damn fucking good basketbal player. An dlumping him in with guys like McGee and Jones and Baynes and whoever, just because they may happen to be over 6'11" is ridiculous.
No of course not but by linking an article where the author essentially states that it is ridiculous to say that Durant is 6-9 despite the only official measurement of him showing him to be 6-9 will always lead to questioning who to believe. We know of one official measurement as far as I'm aware of.......6-9. Of course in the end it doesn't matter but it's kinda hard to call people out for suggesting that Durant is the height that he was measured to be.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,271
Saint Paul, MN
Can you take a breath for a second?
I found it interesting that the team most famous for 'small ball', has four 'tall' players on their roster. Just drop it, no one is comparing KD's hoop skills with those other players.

If you don't want a minimum contract back-up Center to be our #15 or on our G-League team that's fine. It's a very minor roster move that I suggested.
I wasn't saying that anyone was comparing them. I was refuting the initial claim that GS was in fact a tall team and that the Celtics are somehow disadvantaged because they only have 2 players over 6'11".

Last year, Zaza + McGee + Jones averaged fewer minutes per game combined than Al Horford did.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,414
New York, NY
I wasn't saying that anyone was comparing them. I was refuting the initial claim that GS was in fact a tall team and that the Celtics are somehow disadvantaged because they only have 2 players over 6'11".

Last year, Zaza + McGee + Jones averaged fewer minutes per game combined than Al Horford did.
First, the Celtics have zero players over 6'11", or even that tall. Second, since it was my post that set this off, my principal point wasn't the height issue, it was a positional issue. We have two 5s, Horford and Baynes. We don't have anyone else who has experience at that position. Morris, Hayward, Tatum, and Brown are all small for the 4 and are not 5s, even in a small ball unit. Theis was a 5 in Europe but is undersized. He might be able to play the modern NBA 5. Semi and Yabu both have the potential strength to play a small ball 5, but they are both rookies and neither is proven. The odds either can actually pull off a role that basically only Draymond Green has demonstrated the capacity to play at their size is not good.

In other words, even accepting the realities of the modern NBA, we remain very thin at the 5. It's not an issue of lack of height, and I shouldn't have made it seem that way, although height is a factor. It's an issue of us lacking a guy I'm comfortable with as a third 5. In other words, I actually would feel a lot more comfortable with our big depth if we had Tyler Zeller at the back of the roster. There are still several players like that out there, though, so it may be that Ainge feels no real pressure to add one just yet. He may want to see what Theis, Yabu, and Semi bring to the table before making a move, and that's fine.

But, without someone else who looks like a rotation player at the 5, starting Baynes and Horford together seems like an unlikely option for our roster construction.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
1,656
Cultural hub of the universe
First, the Celtics have zero players over 6'11", or even that tall. Second, since it was my post that set this off, my principal point wasn't the height issue, it was a positional issue. We have two 5s, Horford and Baynes. We don't have anyone else who has experience at that position. Morris, Hayward, Tatum, and Brown are all small for the 4 and are not 5s, even in a small ball unit. Theis was a 5 in Europe but is undersized. He might be able to play the modern NBA 5. Semi and Yabu both have the potential strength to play a small ball 5, but they are both rookies and neither is proven. The odds either can actually pull off a role that basically only Draymond Green has demonstrated the capacity to play at their size is not good.

In other words, even accepting the realities of the modern NBA, we remain very thin at the 5. It's not an issue of lack of height, and I shouldn't have made it seem that way, although height is a factor. It's an issue of us lacking a guy I'm comfortable with as a third 5. In other words, I actually would feel a lot more comfortable with our big depth if we had Tyler Zeller at the back of the roster. There are still several players like that out there, though, so it may be that Ainge feels no real pressure to add one just yet. He may want to see what Theis, Yabu, and Semi bring to the table before making a move, and that's fine.

But, without someone else who looks like a rotation player at the 5, starting Baynes and Horford together seems like an unlikely option for our roster construction.
I think this gets it right. A third center seems to me to be the best use of our open roster spot.
 

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
707
Herndon, VA
I think this gets it right. A third center seems to me to be the best use of our open roster spot.
I think you keep forgetting that the Celtics were saying the way Brad's system works he needs ballhandlers, wings, and bigs. Focusing narrowly on 5's eliminates the 4s who could play big. I would stop thinking about 5' s and look harder at people who could play the big role under Brad's system.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,966
Brad's offense doesn't require a traditional low post player, although if he had one, I'm guessing he could adapt. It's the defensive end that worries me, namely rebounding and rim protection. Baynes and hopefully Theiss bring a little of that. But when one of those two is not on the floor, I fear a parade of uncontested dunks and layups, not to mention offensive rebounds. They will miss Crowder on the defensive glass.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
18,198
I think you keep forgetting that the Celtics were saying the way Brad's system works he needs ballhandlers, wings, and bigs. Focusing narrowly on 5's eliminates the 4s who could play big. I would stop thinking about 5' s and look harder at people who could play the big role under Brad's system.
The other thing is that this team will no longer be judged on regular season performance. This is now a team built with the goal of playoff success so there is no rush to sign a bad 5 in September when there could be either greater needs in February or the opportunity to add someone like Bogut if he's healthy for a low 1st/late 2nd or saving that spot to acquire a buyout big.

First, the Celtics have zero players over 6'11", or even that tall. Second, since it was my post that set this off, my principal point wasn't the height issue, it was a positional issue. We have two 5s, Horford and Baynes. We don't have anyone else who has experience at that position. .
Baynes measured at 7-0 with shoes at the Portsmouth Combine. I don't understand the issue with having "only" two players who can play the 5 in September. We will have a much better idea if Theis can give us anything there in a pinch and.or the opportunity to add someone in February. Nobody we acquire right now is going to be in the rotation so signing an end of bench man who can't play simply because he is 7-feet doesn't really help.
 
Last edited:

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
18,198
It's only an issue when one of them gets hurt.
Right. This is why I'd prefer waiting until February, or later, for a quality backup-5 to become available who can actually contribute to the team in the playoffs rather than locking up a spot for a player incapable of contributing in the playoffs. All the more reason to practice patience As I said upthread......this is no longer about regular season wins as nobody will care or remember if we win 52 or 56 games.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
18,198
This happened back in August but I wasn't aware of it and didn't see it mentioned anywhere on this forum, but the Celtics signed G Andrew White.

http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2017/08/boston_celtics_sign_former_syr.html

old news is old.

edit: Puts them at 16 players and 2 2 ways players, so he's probably going to get cut right away regardless.
We have 20 players in training camp.......the 14 guaranteed contracts, 2 two-ways (Bird and Allen), then the 4 partials that are not fully guaranteed who are there to fill out the roster for the purpose of training camp. White is included in the group of 4 along with LJ Peak, Devin Williams, and Jonathan Holmes.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,410
Lose, you're not supposed to say things like that.