Grant “Corner Office” Williams

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,113
Santa Monica
Good discussion on this page.

FWIW, I think that the "Al replacement" discussion is a bit of a diversion. The problem that we have now is that we really only have one guy on the team whose skillset and body is ideal for the "Big" role, and he's a JAG (Kornet). Al's too old to play big for long, Blake is only a big in the sense that he's tall and slow now, Vonleh/Cabin Jelly are really not big enough to play real minutes, TL can't stay healthy. We need a TL replacement, and this is not Grant. Grant provides great positional flexibility from beef small to short big. The Poeltl jones is about getting a true big in here, not another 4 in disguise.
100% this.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Good discussion on this page.

FWIW, I think that the "Al replacement" discussion is a bit of a diversion. The problem that we have now is that we really only have one guy on the team whose skillset and body is ideal for the "Big" role, and he's a JAG (Kornet). Al's too old to play big for long, Blake is only a big in the sense that he's tall and slow now, Vonleh/Cabin Jelly are really not big enough to play real minutes, TL can't stay healthy. We need a TL replacement, and this is not Grant. Grant provides great positional flexibility from beef small to short big. The Poeltl jones is about getting a true big in here, not another 4 in disguise.
In this thread (the GW thread), discussing the possibility of GW taking over Al's role as the big-sidekick seems very appropriate.

I totally agree that GW isn't now, nor will ever be a TL replacement as a true C who protects the rim, rebounds, and picks up points on lobs -- GW is terrible at almost all those things.

Right now, they need a TL replacement. It is possible that that need will never go away due to TL's questionable long-term health. In either case, eventually/hopefully, they will need a TL backup and it seems fairly certain that that guy isn't on the current Celtics roster. But to me, that is more a discussion for another thread.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,000
I know we've started to assume Grant gets paid this offseason, but there are also a lot of ways he doesn't, even with strong performance and a deep playoff run (up to a championship).

He's averaging 9.3 pts and 1.8 assists on 28 mins a game: he's getting playing time, and looks good, but not putting up big counting numbers. He obviously can shoot, but only 3.3 attempts/game there as well.

This just isn't the profile of a guy who gets paid. It's very easy to see him getting Smart'd in RFA: waiting around awhile and then getting a face-saving discount deal from the Cs.

I don't really see where the uptick in counting stats will come from for him on this team, particularly as Brogdon comes back, and Hauser keeps taking 2nd unit 3-point attempts.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,113
Santa Monica
Grant, a starter now and when TL returns is being kicked around by Jared Weiss from "The Athletic" (a very worthwhile subscription)... Posted excerpts...

https://theathletic.com/3925564/2022/11/23/celtics-grant-williams-starting-lineup/?source=dailyemail&campaign=601983

Boston visited Memphis and Mazzulla wanted to try it out. White went to the bench and Williams got the start. He needed his defense to start imposing its will. Boston had to win the rebounding battle. The offense was clicking, but the physicality on defense was missing. Could Williams help set that tone from the beginning?

Well, it took them two weeks to lose another game, with Chicago finally getting the best of them Monday evening to snap a nine-game winning streak. Marcus Smart and Malcolm Brogdon were both healthy, yet Williams remained a starter and White came off the bench. Why is Mazzulla sticking with Williams?

The fourth-year big is averaging 11.1 points in 32.7 minutes per night since joining the starting lineup two weeks ago. He’s shooting 43.2 percent from deep on 4.6 attempts per game, while Boston’s defensive rating has been eighth in the league over these past eight games. Those are the numbers of someone winning their bet.

Twenty percent of the way through the season, he has become a legitimate wing who is looking to put the ball on the floor to make plays through the paint. He can change his direction with the ball and even drive different angles depending on how the defender closes out on him. He can kick it back behind him, throw it to the far corner or even slip it to a teammate hiding in the dunker spot behind the hoop. He’s gone from a basic passer to a real playmaking floor-spacer.

The most notable difference this year has been the types of players he’s guarding, as Mazzulla will often have him start on a guard or wing before switching on to another big.

Williams is guarding the pick-and-rolls most of the time while the center hangs back on the baseline, so they often will have him in switch so he can bully a star off the ball and then jump onto a rolling big heading for the post. That helps prevent the post mismatches that hurt Boston early in the season and reduce cross-matches overall.

“In different lineups, you have to be prepared to do different things,” Williams said. “Fortunately, in the starting lineup, I’ll probably start on the best player and just switch or maintain that matchup. It’s kind of different than when you’re in the second unit and you have to do a better job of understanding who’s on the court at the right time.”

Starting Williams next to Horford has steadied Boston’s defensive rating, which ballooned for the first nine games of the season aside from an easy win over Washington and the second overtime loss to Cleveland. The Celtics had a defensive rating of 35 percent or lower in six of those first nine games, but have been above 50 percent in six of the eight consecutive games Williams has started since.

The defensive rebound rate has also stabilized a bit over this span, which is a gamble with Williams out there that is paying off in the aggregate. He gives up a height advantage most of the time, but he boxes out hard to get balls to fall into his hands more often than not.

“I’m a guy that you’ll never know what coverage I’ll be in,” Williams said. “I may be switching, I may be playing in touch or drop. You’ll never know what I’ll be in. For me, it’s just whatever coach asks me to do, I’ll be prepared for it.”

One of the rewards of starting is coming into the game knowing who you’re gonna guard and who else is out there. The starting lineups don’t change as much as the second-unit rotations, and starters are announced before the game. Williams can spend the first six minutes of the game knowing exactly who he wants to guard and who he’s picking up in a switch.

When he started against Oklahoma City, he spent time guarding a red-hot Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, then picked up Aleksej Pokuševski. Going from an unstoppable finisher to a high-flying 7-footer, Williams has to play completely differently to handle such a wide range of players.

But he’s never been a clean fit anywhere in his career thus far. Williams had to carve out his space to find a place he belongs. When Rob Williams comes back sometime in the near future, it’s unclear where Grant Williams will end up. He’s playing at a level where it may make sense for Horford to move to the bench, keeping him fresh as he tries to stay healthy for another deep postseason run.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,113
Santa Monica
I know we've started to assume Grant gets paid this offseason, but there are also a lot of ways he doesn't, even with strong performance and a deep playoff run (up to a championship).

He's averaging 9.3 pts and 1.8 assists on 28 mins a game: he's getting playing time, and looks good, but not putting up big counting numbers. He obviously can shoot, but only 3.3 attempts/game there as well.

This just isn't the profile of a guy who gets paid. It's very easy to see him getting Smart'd in RFA: waiting around awhile and then getting a face-saving discount deal from the Cs.

I don't really see where the uptick in counting stats will come from for him on this team, particularly as Brogdon comes back, and Hauser keeps taking 2nd unit 3-point attempts.
Last night was another example of that. Grant played 31 minutes. 3pts, 4 rebs, 3assts.
I think Grant has a lot of value to the Celtics, but other teams will see those #s and won't be enticed to pay him the money he wants.

ALSO, Horford's drop coverage was getting hunted and rinsed repeatedly. Expect an adjustment, see Grant cover Bam tighter and go switchy on Bam picks. If Grant can slow that play down, that adds a ton of value, but won't show up in the box.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Last night was another example of that. Grant played 31 minutes. 3pts, 4 rebs, 3assts.
I think Grant has a lot of value to the Celtics, but other teams will see those #s and won't be enticed to pay him the money he wants.

ALSO, Horford's drop coverage was getting hunted and rinsed repeatedly. Expect an adjustment, see Grant cover Bam tighter and go switchy on Bam picks. If Grant can slow that play down, that adds a ton of value, but won't show up in the box.
It looked to me like there were a number of possessions last night (OK, >2) where the initial coverage was GW on Lowry. I wonder if that was to prep for any Lowry/Bam P&R action.

Regardless, the way that the Heat ran everything off some sort of Bam pick action was particularly notable, (didn't hurt that Scale kept harping on it). Attention must be paid!
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,154
San Francisco
It really is remarkable what a good screen setter Bam is. I think Marcus was the only guy I saw capable of staying attached to hips through those screens or even recovering enough to contest the pullups from behind.
 

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
1,242
Herndon, VA
It really is remarkable what a good screen setter Bam is. I think Marcus was the only guy I saw capable of staying attached to hips through those screens or even recovering enough to contest the pullups from behind.
It drives me crazy, mostly because I cannot believe it's legal to spread his legs -wide apart- to intercept people trying to come over the screen.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,463
It drives me crazy, mostly because I cannot believe it's legal to spread his legs -wide apart- to intercept people trying to come over the screen.
It's not, but the problem is if you let him trip you and you don't get the call (which you don't a lot of the time) you just gave up an easy bucket.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,209
Nick Kyrgios is likely a member here and posts in the gamethreads. I don't know that for sure but it all tracks now.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
63,743
Rotten Apple
Another awful game. His stock price just before the deadline couldn't be lower. Not optimal timing.

Since his great game against Toronto...
gant2.jpg
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Grant seeking $20 million a year. *Sigh.* Seems like a long shot we keep him, because based on his recent play, that would seem an overpay that Brad won't go for.
Based on the FA signings of the past 3 years, coupled with the cap increase this summer, I wouldn’t call $20m a year for a starting frontcourt player an overpay. That seems to be in line with the market.
 
Last edited:

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I agree, but Grant isn't a starting player. Not on this team (sans injuries/rest) and not on any good team.
He’s started over 40 games and played close to starters minutes on one of the best teams in the league for two seasons now. He’s going to be starting for whoever he signs with next year as he’s going to be paid as a starter.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
Not a lot of teams have cap space this summer. I don't think a player like Grant will be very intriguing to rebuilding teams like Houston or San Antonio. Orlando already has a zillion forwards and desperately needs guards. I think Indiana could be interested in his services, but would they be willing to tie up their cap on a player like him? Possibly, but it seems doubtful because he's an RFA, so they'd be holding their room for the beginning of FA until the Cs decided what to do.

The best most teams can offer him is the mid-level unless there's a sign-and-trade out there. I think Grant gets stuck in the Marcus Smart trap in that he's hitting the market at a shitty time. He'll probably get less than that $20 million he expects, and I think it'll come from the Cs.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,000
Not a lot of teams have cap space this summer. I don't think a player like Grant will be very intriguing to rebuilding teams like Houston or San Antonio. Orlando already has a zillion forwards and desperately needs guards. I think Indiana could be interested in his services, but would they be willing to tie up their cap on a player like him? Possibly, but it seems doubtful because he's an RFA, so they'd be holding their room for the beginning of FA until the Cs decided what to do.

The best most teams can offer him is the mid-level unless there's a sign-and-trade out there. I think Grant gets stuck in the Marcus Smart trap in that he's hitting the market at a shitty time. He'll probably get less than that $20 million he expects, and I think it'll come from the Cs.
Indiana apparently wanted him in the Brogdon deal, and they see themselves as being able to add rotation players now, so they'd be my most likely candidate to bid. Offer 4/$85 and make the Celtics really sweat?
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
Grant had a nice ~50 game stretch of improvement per DARKO, but his contribution has flattened for over 100 games now. No worse, but no more improvement on an impact basis for quite some time now. He's 24, so that's not alarming per se. But his growth curve doesn't indicate that he's going to get materially better anymore. JT and JB are both older and still improving. Grant is not.

The question is not whether Grant's ceiling is worth 4/85. The question is whether Grant's current impact is worth 21MM next year and for three years after that. I'm still inclined to say yes, just because the cap keeps going up and big wings don't grow on trees. But man, that's a big price tag for a negative DARKO guy. LEBRON doesn't have Grant has a positive guy either, so it's not just a DARKO thing.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
Indiana apparently wanted him in the Brogdon deal, and they see themselves as being able to add rotation players now, so they'd be my most likely candidate to bid. Offer 4/$85 and make the Celtics really sweat?
Yeah, I think that's interesting. But if you're Indiana, do you want to sit out the meat of free agency to bid on an RFA? It looks like they can get to about $32 million if they renounce holds on not very important players like Goga and James Johnson. Why not just go after Kuzma or Jerami Grant, higher upside UFAs that can probably do more to help you win now than Grant can?
 

4 6 3 DP

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2001
2,370
Grant plays important minutes for this team and I'm not sure there's an easy way to replace his minutes with their lack of picks/space. Feels like you almost have to resign him.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
Grant had a nice ~50 game stretch of improvement per DARKO, but his contribution has flattened for over 100 games now. No worse, but no more improvement on an impact basis for quite some time now. He's 24, so that's not alarming per se. But his growth curve doesn't indicate that he's going to get materially better anymore. JT and JB are both older and still improving. Grant is not.

The question is not whether Grant's ceiling is worth 4/85. The question is whether Grant's current impact is worth 21MM next year and for three years after that. I'm still inclined to say yes, just because the cap keeps going up and big wings don't grow on trees. But man, that's a big price tag for a negative DARKO guy. LEBRON doesn't have Grant has a positive guy either, so it's not just a DARKO thing.
I think the assessment of him might look different if he was on a different team.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
I think the assessment of him might look different if he was on a different team.
BPM also has him down there. But yes, on another team in a different role results would be different. It's not certain that they'd be better though.


Removing Gallinari and Muscala for SSS, this is DARKO. Who would you move Grant above? Kornet. I love Grant and want him around. It will be interesting to see what the market thinks, similar to when Marcus tested the waters.

61256
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Grant had a nice ~50 game stretch of improvement per DARKO, but his contribution has flattened for over 100 games now. No worse, but no more improvement on an impact basis for quite some time now. He's 24, so that's not alarming per se. But his growth curve doesn't indicate that he's going to get materially better anymore. JT and JB are both older and still improving. Grant is not.

The question is not whether Grant's ceiling is worth 4/85. The question is whether Grant's current impact is worth 21MM next year and for three years after that. I'm still inclined to say yes, just because the cap keeps going up and big wings don't grow on trees. But man, that's a big price tag for a negative DARKO guy. LEBRON doesn't have Grant has a positive guy either, so it's not just a DARKO thing.
Grant never really projected to be a big leap guy though as he entered the league physically developed and ready to play. He was always a high floor/lower ceiling guy where you pretty much knew what you were getting. The one ball skill he could improve was 3-pt shooting which he the one area where he has taken a huge leap. Moving forward he’s about as big a “what you’ve got is what you’ll get” as there is and that’s a pretty good player in this league. He’s going to get paid by someone if we don’t but his skillset, if gone, is one we’ll be immediately looking to replace. That isn’t easy to do.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
Grant never really projected to be a big leap guy though as he entered the league physically developed and ready to play. He was always a high floor/lower ceiling guy where you pretty much knew what you were getting. The one ball skill he could improve was 3-pt shooting which he the one area where he has taken a huge leap. Moving forward he’s about as big a “what you’ve got is what you’ll get” as there is and that’s a pretty good player in this league. He’s going to get paid by someone if we don’t but his skillset, if gone, is one we’ll be immediately looking to replace. That isn’t easy to do.
Agreed on Grant's floor and ceiling, but I always look at the data because some guys actually DO keep improving beyond the general cutoff ages where plateau often happens.

I think that replacing 80% of what Grant does is easy enough with low firsts or high seconds (or Justin Jackson plus two seconds). But I agree that replacing 100% of what Grant does is not easy. So possibly the question is whether the incremental 20% is worth 20MM. I think that it is, but I get why others might not. This is not "do we pay Avery Bradley" or same question when Smart came up. Grant is the 8th man on this team. What is he on a bad team, 5th? Do they want to spend that on a borderline starter?
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,427
I know that relative salaries are not the be-all and end-all due to inflation and what not, but I'm not sure you would be in a good place if your 8th best player is making the 4th most on your team, especially when he's ahead of 3 starters.
But they're up against the cap next season. Its not like they'll just be able to sign someone for a few million less to replace most of his production.

They own his bird rights. They can resign him and go over the cap, or they can sign someone off the scrap heap for cheap and cross their fingers.

He'll be an overpay, but I don't see many other options.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
But they're up against the cap next season. Its not like they'll just be able to sign someone for a few million less to replace most of his production.

They own his bird rights. They can resign him and go over the cap, or they can sign someone off the scrap heap for cheap and cross their fingers.

He'll be an overpay, but I don't see many other options.
Contenders often end up with guys like this on big contracts. That doesn’t mean the Celtics will go out like the Warriors all of the sudden, but they’re definitely not letting Grant’s salary disappear. They need someone there and he already works.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,000
Contenders often end up with guys like this on big contracts. That doesn’t mean the Celtics will go out like the Warriors all of the sudden, but they’re definitely not letting Grant’s salary disappear. They need someone there and he already works.
In addition, Grant is a 16-game player, as opposed to 82. He has been very successful against Giannis, Embiid, and Durant, and a lot of title equity the next couple years runs through those guys. You also can't play him off the floor in the playoffs: he works in a lot of matchups. I don't see how the Celtics let him go, even if they're not thrilled with the cost.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
Restricted free agents are in a tough spot. The only ones over the past few years to sign for more than 20 per year are Ayton (33 mill), Simons (25), Collins (25), Allen (20), Lonzo (20), Ingram (31).

Grant seems more likely to fall in the Bogdanovic, Markkanen range than those guys. That range is like 16-18 mill
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,463
I think Grant's market might be surprisingly low, less because nobody wants him, than that nobody who wants him AND has cap space is going to want to offer sheet him and lose out on 48 hours of FA... much like a smaller $ Ayton last year. Teams have a pretty good idea how much BOS values him in RFA based on what they asked at the deadline.
My guess is it goes 1 of 3 ways:
1. He shops around, comes back on a deal less than he's reportedly asking for
2. He finds an offer sheet, in the 16-18M range and reluctantly the Celtics match it.
3. He gets traded in a S&T
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
Just an old man yelling at clouds comments but 20 million bucks a year for that guy? Christ i wish i had a better jump shot.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
Grant is a role player who slots in nicely if he's your 8th/9th man....h e might even get some crunch time minutes against the right team or if he's hot from 3. But in general, the advanced metrics don't think much of him because he's not that good.

He does have some value to the Celtics and I think Brad would prefer him back at the right price, but he is not a guy you stretch for in my opinion. If he gets 20M+ from someone else, congrats to Grant and condolences to his new team.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Were Celtics fans who saw how critical Grant was in defending Bam and Giannis last spring really thinking during these playoff series, “Ya know we’ve got a nice 8/9th man out there right now.”? I ask this in all seriousness.

This also ties in to my point in other thread about how fans undervalue switchable wings/bigs (or how teams overvalue them).
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,113
Santa Monica
the Pacers make a lot of sense as a suiter, but I wonder how much RFA excites them after the Ayton faceplant?

I love Grant's defense & efficient shooting. His rookie year made Gordon Hayward expendable (Smart starts>>>Grant rotation) which saved Wyc countless millions. He is now playing "starters" minutes and his counting numbers won't wow anyone. It's been said a million times, but POINTz pay and 9ppg doesn't scream $80M+++/4yrs

I dread yielding to authority on a discussion board (it's passive-aggressive/lame posting IMO), but Brad/Zarren are very cognizant of Grants' market value. There are several moving pieces here, like the NBA TV contract, salary cap estimates, & the Jays' future price tags. Zarren will have an excellent idea on all those variables. I don't think Grant has done anything that WOWed the market so far this season. I'm guessing it plays out like Marcus Smart RFA.

I recognize the goal is Championships, not salary cap efficiency. PLUS it's only "Wyc's money". BUT we also need to recognize the C's don't do $600M/yr in revenue like the Warriors, so there will be a limit. I also have no clue how the rest of the roster would react to Grant being the 3rd highest-paid Celtic while being the 8th man in the rotation.

@Jimbodandy makes a good point about getting a player that does 80% of what Grant does. We may have 2 players already on the roster in Horford/Muscala that do Grant stuff. That's a pretty good hedge in case RFA goes haywire.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I also have no clue how the rest of the roster would react to Grant being the 3rd highest-paid Celtic while being the 8th man in the rotation.
I highly doubt there is a player on the roster, or coach for that matter, who considers Grant and his 28mpg that often includes crunch time the 8th man in their rotation.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
Were Celtics fans who saw how critical Grant was in defending Bam and Giannis last spring really thinking during these playoff series, “Ya know we’ve got a nice 8/9th man out there right now.”? I ask this in all seriousness.
This is a bad strawman. We know Grant's utility in certain roles/games. The question is whether he's worth $20 million+ over the next four years. That goes beyond matchups against Giannis and Bam - let's not forget he was pretty bad against the Ws in the finals. Paying $20 million to a guy who averages 4/2/1 on the biggest stage is probably not the best use of cap space.

The Celtics simply can't pay everyone who contributes market value when Tatum and Brown are max players. They need to pick and choose their spots. Is GW one of the keepers? It's a really hard question.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,113
Santa Monica
I highly doubt there is a player on the roster, or coach for that matter, who considers Grant and his 28mpg that often includes crunch time the 8th man in their rotation.
One of Grant's greatest strengths is he always plays. Being vertically challenged has its benefits.

It should go into the "pay equation" but much like defense it doesn't

I'm certainly not putting him ahead of White or Brogdon in importance. So which one of TimeLord, Smart, and Horford is Grant ahead of in the rotation?
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
This is a bad strawman. We know Grant's utility in certain roles/games. The question is whether he's worth $20 million+ over the next four years. That goes beyond matchups against Giannis and Bam - let's not forget he was pretty bad against the Ws in the finals. Paying $20 million to a guy who averages 4/2/1 on the biggest stage is probably not the best use of cap space.

The Celtics simply can't pay everyone who contributes market value when Tatum and Brown are max players. They need to pick and choose their spots. Is GW one of the keepers? It's a really hard question.
It’s definitely not a bad straw man when it keeps being repeated that he’s out 8/9th man. Personally, I’m unsure how to value him for our team moving forward and sure, while he was less than good in a bad matchup against the Warriors speed which we all expected, he still started 5 games and avg 27mpg in the postseason last year…..8/9th don’t do this. Our actual 8/9th men in last years playoffs saw sparse 12.9mpg and our 9th had a bunch of DNP-CD mixed in.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
It’s definitely not a bad straw man when it keeps being repeated that he’s out 8/9th man. Personally, I’m unsure how to value him for our team moving forward and sure, while he was less than good in a bad matchup against the Warriors speed which we all expected, he still started 5 games and avg 27mpg in the postseason last year…..8/9th don’t do this. Our actual 8/9th men in last years playoffs saw sparse 12.9mpg and our 9th had a bunch of DNP-CD mixed in.
You're completely ignoring context. When this team is healthy, he's the 8th/9th man. If he's not, who is? Derrick White? Brogdon? Horford? Smart? Time Lord? Tatum? Brown?