The Celtics Offseason

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
20,613
Row 14
This is not necessarily true.

A team with enough cap space can give him a raise up to his max for next season, and then extend him at his max off of that.

It's part of why I had targeted Houston in a 3 way trade involving Brooklyn in a theoretical Jaylen trade. (I don't think Jaylen is getting traded)
Ok? But he would want to stay there instead of picking his new home. I don't think Jaylen has any interest in staying in Houston or Brooklyn
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
Ok? But he would want to stay there instead of picking his new home. I don't think Jaylen has any interest in staying in Houston or Brooklyn
We have no idea where Jaylen wants to play or what he values really. There is no reason to have any real idea if he would not want to sign in HOU or BKN, just as good a chance that he does. Maybe Jaylen says "I can be the guy here, they showed they wanted me by trading for me... or I love being in a big city with a thriving Black community, sign me up. I mean, what is the basis for this blanket assumption Jaylen WOULDN'T want to be the guy one of these franchises builds around? If anything the only things we know about Jaylen are:
1. He was really unhappy that the Celtics even discussed trading him.
2, He's expressed frustration with Boston at times in terms of the difficulty he's found in getting his projects off the ground.

Edit- basically every post you have on the Jaylen trade hypos is you ignoring basically the entire history of NBA star trades to fit a narrative you want to believe that Jaylen "can't" be traded because he won't re-sign any of these places, or nobody will be available in return, etc. etc. I assume it's because you don't WANT Jaylen to be traded (most don't including me except in very particular circumstance) and are trying to justify to yourself why it won't happen. If the Celtics wanted to trade Jaylen Brown he'd have a robust market, and it's likely he'd let a number of teams know that he'd be willing to re-sign if they traded for him, we have a long history of NBA trades to look at and see that has been the case.
 
Last edited:

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
We have no idea where Jaylen wants to play or what he values really. There is no reason to have any real idea if he would not want to sign in HOU or BKN, just as good a chance that he does. Maybe Jaylen says "I can be the guy here, they showed they wanted me by trading for me... or I love being in a big city with a thriving Black community, sign me up. I mean, what is the basis for this blanket assumption Jaylen WOULDN'T want to be the guy one of these franchises builds around? If anything the only things we know about Jaylen are:
1. He was really unhappy that the Celtics even discussed trading him.
2, He's expressed frustration with Boston at times in terms of the difficulty he's found in getting his projects off the ground.

Edit- basically every post you have on the Jaylen trade hypos is you ignoring basically the entire history of NBA star trades to fit a narrative you want to believe that Jaylen "can't" be traded because he won't re-sign any of these places, or nobody will be available in return, etc. etc. I assume it's because you don't WANT Jaylen to be traded (most don't including me except in very particular circumstance) and are trying to justify to yourself why it won't happen. If the Celtics wanted to trade Jaylen Brown he'd have a robust market, and it's likely he'd let a number of teams know that he'd be willing to re-sign if they traded for him, we have a long history of NBA trades to look at and see that has been the case.
I think people are scarred because the Celtics traded for (afaic recall) the ONLY star in the last couple decades who explicitly said he'd re-sign with a team and then didn't.

It's hard to overstate how much of an anomaly the Kyrie situation was.

As you note, that will not affect other teams' decisions, and there are plenty that would take Jaylen's word for it that he'd re-sign with them, were they to be on his list.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
I don't think Jaylen has any interest in staying in Houston or Brooklyn
Why would you/we think that? Obviously any team trading for him will have a better sense of the likelihood of him staying, but I see no reason why he wouldn't want to stay in HOU or BRK or anywhere else
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,101
In Houston, Jaylen would be playing for a coach he has spoken highly about and may get the chance to team up with Harden. In Brooklyn, Jaylen would teamed up with some up-and-coming players, depending upon who goes out in a trade. And he may very well find both communities to be friendlier to him than Boston. I think this is moot as I don't see him going anywhere, but IMO it's wrong to simply dismiss the idea of JB wanting to stay in either city.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
I am going to attempt to steer this conversation away from Jaylen because I think we have collectively covered about every angle on him staying/leaving.

I am going to operate under the assumption that he stays. My question after that is, how can the team be improved/rearranged this summer to maximize a potential 2 year window?

IMO, you try and sign & trade Grant to get some sort of asset back for him. Maybe to Utah for old friend Kelly Olynyk? Olynyk is a good rotation big and can start for Horford and Rob to ensure none of them get too burned out.

The other move that I would be looking at is either Pritchard or Brogdon for a big wing/Al replacement. As some of you are aware, I have looked into this previously and my top target was always Wendell Carter Jr. but I think that ship has sailed. Magic have no reason to give him up. I am struggling to think of names that would fit this archetype. @benhogan, any ideas on potential big wings/Al replacements that are somewhat realistic targets in a Brogdon or Pritchard trade?

No team is perfect in this day and age and if these types of moves are made, I think the biggest weakness on the team will be guard play/creation. We are going to need to see steps forward from White/Smart/Brown and Tatum in that regard.

I would also like to see an offense implemented with more motion/cutting. Too often, the offense would just bog down to ISO and 4 players standing around at the 3 point line. We've got to try and find a way to coax some easy baskets in the halfcourt. I would also like to see more offense run where Smart gets the ball in the high post and can operate. He's really damn good at either getting a basket or finding an open player
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
I am going to attempt to steer this conversation away from Jaylen because I think we have collectively covered about every angle on him staying/leaving.

I am going to operate under the assumption that he stays. My question after that is, how can the team be improved/rearranged this summer to maximize a potential 2 year window?

IMO, you try and sign & trade Grant to get some sort of asset back for him. Maybe to Utah for old friend Kelly Olynyk? Olynyk is a good rotation big and can start for Horford and Rob to ensure none of them get too burned out.

The other move that I would be looking at is either Pritchard or Brogdon for a big wing/Al replacement. As some of you are aware, I have looked into this previously and my top target was always Wendell Carter Jr. but I think that ship has sailed. Magic have no reason to give him up. I am struggling to think of names that would fit this archetype. @benhogan, any ideas on potential big wings/Al replacements that are somewhat realistic targets in a Brogdon or Pritchard trade?

No team is perfect in this day and age and if these types of moves are made, I think the biggest weakness on the team will be guard play/creation. We are going to need to see steps forward from White/Smart/Brown and Tatum in that regard.

I would also like to see an offense implemented with more motion/cutting. Too often, the offense would just bog down to ISO and 4 players standing around at the 3 point line. We've got to try and find a way to coax some easy baskets in the halfcourt. I would also like to see more offense run where Smart gets the ball in the high post and can operate. He's really damn good at either getting a basket or finding an open player
Flipping one or both for a non-guard is definitely a priority.

Problem is they are so wildly different in who would want them and what they'd bring back.

So with Pritchard, you're likely looking at either:
1. Similar age guys who haven't really broken out either that a team wants to position swap
2. Cheap not very good vets that a team is dumping (and that team is interested in extending Pritchard).

For slot 1, I see:
Isaiah Jackson (IND)- not a shooter at all, roll and cut on O, Rim protector on D
Usman Garuba (HOU)- hasn't played much, shot 41% from 3 last year, but FT% and time as a teenager in Europe suggest it's likely fluky, grades out well defensively
Jeremiah Robinson-Earl (OKC) really raw, shot 34% so far from 3
Xavier Tillman (MEM)- undersized non-shooting big, lot of defensive value, offense is.....
Kai Jones (CHA) showed real improvement on D this year, offense is a tire fire, non-shooter.

Edit- For slot 2 there is NOTHING in his salary range, by far the best big guy is.... Mike Muscala.
Damian Jones (LAL) I guess?

I'll look at Brogdon matches (with more focus on other team needs than this list) in a new post later
 
Last edited:

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,193
San Francisco
I am going to attempt to steer this conversation away from Jaylen because I think we have collectively covered about every angle on him staying/leaving.

I am going to operate under the assumption that he stays. My question after that is, how can the team be improved/rearranged this summer to maximize a potential 2 year window?

IMO, you try and sign & trade Grant to get some sort of asset back for him. Maybe to Utah for old friend Kelly Olynyk? Olynyk is a good rotation big and can start for Horford and Rob to ensure none of them get too burned out.

The other move that I would be looking at is either Pritchard or Brogdon for a big wing/Al replacement. As some of you are aware, I have looked into this previously and my top target was always Wendell Carter Jr. but I think that ship has sailed. Magic have no reason to give him up. I am struggling to think of names that would fit this archetype. @benhogan, any ideas on potential big wings/Al replacements that are somewhat realistic targets in a Brogdon or Pritchard trade?

No team is perfect in this day and age and if these types of moves are made, I think the biggest weakness on the team will be guard play/creation. We are going to need to see steps forward from White/Smart/Brown and Tatum in that regard.

I would also like to see an offense implemented with more motion/cutting. Too often, the offense would just bog down to ISO and 4 players standing around at the 3 point line. We've got to try and find a way to coax some easy baskets in the halfcourt. I would also like to see more offense run where Smart gets the ball in the high post and can operate. He's really damn good at either getting a basket or finding an open player
Celtics half court offense was easily the best in the league last year. They were one of the only teams without a strong halfcourt / transition split actually.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
Ok? But he would want to stay there instead of picking his new home. I don't think Jaylen has any interest in staying in Houston or Brooklyn
I don't know.

But if they were going to trade him, a team that has Ime Udoka as coach, is in a desirable city, could make him the #1 option, can give him a healthy raise this year, and can sign him to a max extension a year early so he doesn't have to sweat out an injury next year seems a good a spot as any other, no?

Why would you think he wouldn't have any interest in staying in Houston?
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
Flipping one or both for a non-guard is definitely a priority.

Problem is they are so wildly different in who would want them and what they'd bring back.

So with Pritchard, you're likely looking at either:
1. Similar age guys who haven't really broken out either that a team wants to position swap
2. Cheap not very good vets that a team is dumping (and that team is interested in extending Pritchard).

For slot 1, I see:
Isaiah Jackson (IND)- not a shooter at all, roll and cut on O, Rim protector on D
Usman Garuba (HOU)- hasn't played much, shot 41% from 3 last year, but FT% and time as a teenager in Europe suggest it's likely fluky, grades out well defensively
Jeremiah Robinson-Earl (OKC) really raw, shot 34% so far from 3
Xavier Tillman (MEM)- undersized non-shooting big, lot of defensive value, offense is.....
Kai Jones (CHA) showed real improvement on D this year, offense is a tire fire, non-shooter.
Yup, the Pritchard trade would be really attempting to get back an 8th/9th man, which I don’t think is enough. I really think it needs to be a priority to make sure that Al and Rob aren't ESSENTIAL players on the roster next year. IMO, that means acquiring a player that is capable of starting (ideally an Al replacement since he is more malleable than Rob).

So, the question would be what could Brogdon bring back? Teams like Minnesota, the Clippers, Suns, Pelicans, Detroit, and Orlando could really use a player with his skillset. Maybe Naz Reid from Minnesota (I know he's a free agent but that type of player)? A 3 way trade that could bring back someone like John Collins or Okongwu? PJ Washington? DFS?

Simmons has floated a Brogdon and Rob for Ayton trade idea...personally, I don't love that one.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
I am going to attempt to steer this conversation away from Jaylen because I think we have collectively covered about every angle on him staying/leaving.

I am going to operate under the assumption that he stays. My question after that is, how can the team be improved/rearranged this summer to maximize a potential 2 year window?

IMO, you try and sign & trade Grant to get some sort of asset back for him. Maybe to Utah for old friend Kelly Olynyk? Olynyk is a good rotation big and can start for Horford and Rob to ensure none of them get too burned out.

The other move that I would be looking at is either Pritchard or Brogdon for a big wing/Al replacement. As some of you are aware, I have looked into this previously and my top target was always Wendell Carter Jr. but I think that ship has sailed. Magic have no reason to give him up. I am struggling to think of names that would fit this archetype. @benhogan, any ideas on potential big wings/Al replacements that are somewhat realistic targets in a Brogdon or Pritchard trade?

No team is perfect in this day and age and if these types of moves are made, I think the biggest weakness on the team will be guard play/creation. We are going to need to see steps forward from White/Smart/Brown and Tatum in that regard.

I would also like to see an offense implemented with more motion/cutting. Too often, the offense would just bog down to ISO and 4 players standing around at the 3 point line. We've got to try and find a way to coax some easy baskets in the halfcourt. I would also like to see more offense run where Smart gets the ball in the high post and can operate. He's really damn good at either getting a basket or finding an open player
I wouldn't trade Brogdon. We've been begging for scoring/shooting off the bench for years, hit a homerun in getting it with Brogdon, can't see any reason to trade him away.

Pritchard is almost certainly out of here, but I don't think he has much value. You're probably looking at a second round pick or two, or a Muscala level player.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
Yup, the Pritchard trade would be really attempting to get back an 8th/9th man, which I don’t think is enough. I really think it needs to be a priority to make sure that Al and Rob aren't ESSENTIAL players on the roster next year. IMO, that means acquiring a player that is capable of starting (ideally an Al replacement since he is more malleable than Rob).

So, the question would be what could Brogdon bring back? Teams like Minnesota, the Clippers, Suns, Pelicans, Detroit, and Orlando could really use a player with his skillset. Maybe Naz Reid from Minnesota (I know he's a free agent but that type of player)? A 3 way trade that could bring back someone like John Collins or Okongwu? PJ Washington? DFS?

Simmons has floated a Brogdon and Rob for Ayton trade idea...personally, I don't love that one.
I am also not a big fan of that trade, but yeah apparently local guys in PHX have mentioned Brogdon is a target for PHX, and well any trade for Brogdon likely has to include Ayton for salary reasons so for it to happen it would have to either be Ayton to BOS or a 3 team deal.

I wouldn't trade Brogdon. We've been begging for scoring/shooting off the bench for years, hit a homerun in getting it with Brogdon, can't see any reason to trade him away.

Pritchard is almost certainly out of here, but I don't think he has much value. You're probably looking at a second round pick or two, or a Muscala level player.
I think the issue is that people don't think Grant will be back, and that means the frontcourt is getting very thin. Also I would guess some people aren't sure you get another year of Brogdon being happy as a bench player. Especially if we go 2 big more, where he becomes the 7th/8th man instead of 6th given he's behind White.

I'd also guess part of it is $. You'll be paying 90M for 4 guards, that's a lot, especially when it doesn't include your franchise player... $40M+ on 2 bench players is rough.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
I wouldn't trade Brogdon. We've been begging for scoring/shooting off the bench for years, hit a homerun in getting it with Brogdon, can't see any reason to trade him away.

Pritchard is almost certainly out of here, but I don't think he has much value. You're probably looking at a second round pick or two, or a Muscala level player.
Agreed with what you're saying. It's not a dig on Brogdon, it's all about asset allocation. IMO, I think it's smarter to allocate the Brogdon slot salary to someone who can lessen the load of Al/Rob instead of another guard.

Maybe Grant can bring back someone who can legitimately play the Al role and reduce him to more of a part time/big game player. I am skeptical but it's a possibility
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
I am also not a big fan of that trade, but yeah apparently local guys in PHX have mentioned Brogdon is a target for PHX, and well any trade for Brogdon likely has to include Ayton for salary reasons so for it to happen it would have to either be Ayton to BOS or a 3 team deal.
What other teams do you think would even want Ayton? Dallas would but they have nothing to trade. Indiana signed him last year but I think they feel more comfortable with Turner now. Toronto is apparently fans of his but I am not sure what they could trade to Boston to get Brogdon to PHX...maybe Poeltl on a short term deal?

Every other team that I can think of that would conceivably be interested doesn't really have much to offer for Boston (Portland, Washington, maybe Miami)
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,302
deep inside Guido territory
I am also not a big fan of that trade, but yeah apparently local guys in PHX have mentioned Brogdon is a target for PHX, and well any trade for Brogdon likely has to include Ayton for salary reasons so for it to happen it would have to either be Ayton to BOS or a 3 team deal.



I think the issue is that people don't think Grant will be back, and that means the frontcourt is getting very thin. Also I would guess some people aren't sure you get another year of Brogdon being happy as a bench player. Especially if we go 2 big more, where he becomes the 7th/8th man instead of 6th given he's behind White.

I'd also guess part of it is $. You'll be paying 90M for 4 guards, that's a lot, especially when it doesn't include your franchise player... $40M+ on 2 bench players is rough.
Would Ayton work here? IMO he would. They could go with a double big lineup if you wanted or you can bring Horford and Rob both off the bench and keep them fresh. It would give them an option to run offense through Ayton when the 3's aren't going down.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
What other teams do you think would even want Ayton? Dallas would but they have nothing to trade. Indiana signed him last year but I think they feel more comfortable with Turner now. Toronto is apparently fans of his but I am not sure what they could trade to Boston to get Brogdon to PHX...maybe Poeltl on a short term deal?

Every other team that I can think of that would conceivably be interested doesn't really have much to offer for Boston (Portland, Washington, maybe Miami)
Memphis maybe?
Dallas I think would be, and if Kyrie tells them he wants PHX and won't re-sign that's an easy basis for the salary.
Hornets getting off the Hayward deal might make sense

Honestly I see a bunch of deals for Ayton that make sense, what I don't see a lot of is Ayton deals that make sense in a 3 way deal w/ BOS.

I guess if MEM thought Ayton and JJJ can play together you could do something like... Ayton, Pritchard, #35 and 2 PHX swaps (maybe more honestly) to MEM, Brogdon and Adams to PHX and Jones and Clark to BOS?

That's pretty out there and I have a tough time valuing the MEM guys.
 

Mloaf71

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
644
I wouldn't trade Brogdon. We've been begging for scoring/shooting off the bench for years, hit a homerun in getting it with Brogdon, can't see any reason to trade him away.

Pritchard is almost certainly out of here, but I don't think he has much value. You're probably looking at a second round pick or two, or a Muscala level player.
To me, under the assumption Jaylen stays, Smart is the outgoing player. I don't believe you can have both Jaylen and Smart in your core 5 when things tighten up in the playoffs. They are both too prone to turnovers or the boneheaded no pass pull up 3 possession.

So if I'm Brad and Mazzula, I elevate White to the Smart starting role, Brogdon remains 6th man giving you:

1. White
2. Jaylen
3. Tatum
4. TBD?
5. Horford

Bench: Brogdon, TimeLord, Grant or Grant Replacement, Hauser, Gallinari?

Starting lineup question is do you flip Smart for a 3 and D wing that slot or find a bigger 4 that can start next to Horford. Assuming you do that, you flip Grant for a more versatile (I guess prototypical) 3 and D type wing, and find your next Pritchard in the draft.

Ideally rotate your new wing, big man, Horford, and TimeLord, and Tatum through the 3 - 5 roles depending on whether you're playing small ball, 2 Bigs, or anywhere in between.

Question is who do Smart and Grant match up with salary wise?

Do the Hawks give you someone like Capella if you trade Smart? Boucher from Toronto? Nuric?

Not easy to be Brad an Zarren this offseason.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,947
If we need a third big to lessen the load on TL and Al, that suggests to me that perhaps we need to move on from at least one of those guys. What kind of player can we get who is competent in that role, yet would be ok not playing much in the event that neither of those guys is injured (a stretch,

Is it possible to turn Horford into something more useful / reliable? He’s not getting younger and I fear that his offensive contributions will continue to decline, esp in the playoffs where it’s harder to manage his playing time.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
Would Ayton work here? IMO he would. They could go with a double big lineup if you wanted or you can bring Horford and Rob both off the bench and keep them fresh. It would give them an option to run offense through Ayton when the 3's aren't going down.
I don't dislike Ayton in a vacuum, he gets a bad rap, but I'm not a fan of the trade mentioned, TL is so much better value for the money, and part of the long term plan was obviously about replacing Al without a max contract, Ayton doesn't really do that, he has some Al replacement vibes, but the salary is a concern once the extensions kick in.

If we need a third big to lessen the load on TL and Al, that suggests to me that perhaps we need to move on from at least one of those guys. What kind of player can we get who is competent in that role, yet would be ok not playing much in the event that neither of those guys is injured (a stretch,

Is it possible to turn Horford into something more useful / reliable? He’s not getting younger and I fear that his offensive contributions will continue to decline, esp in the playoffs where it’s harder to manage his playing time.
Al took a massive paycut on his extension, even aging Al for $10M next year is a steal, no way they want to trade him, maybe reduce his minutes, play more Gallo and Muscala in the regular season, but if you want an improvement on Al, it's gonna cost a lot and it's going to involve trading Brogdon or Smart at minimum.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
I think the issue is that people don't think Grant will be back, and that means the frontcourt is getting very thin. Also I would guess some people aren't sure you get another year of Brogdon being happy as a bench player. Especially if we go 2 big more, where he becomes the 7th/8th man instead of 6th given he's behind White.

I'd also guess part of it is $. You'll be paying 90M for 4 guards, that's a lot, especially when it doesn't include your franchise player... $40M+ on 2 bench players is rough.
I don't think Grant is going to be back either, but I'm not looking to fill one hole in a bench big, by opening up another hole at shooter/scorer off the bench.

I also don't think they'll be going two big more. It doesn't seem Mazzulla wants to. So in my mind, assuming no big changes, Jaylen stays spending more of his time on the wing and Smart/White/Brogdon continue filling most of the minutes at the two guard spots.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
To me, under the assumption Jaylen stays, Smart is the outgoing player. I don't believe you can have both Jaylen and Smart in your core 5 when things tighten up in the playoffs. They are both too prone to turnovers or the boneheaded no pass pull up 3 possession.

So if I'm Brad and Mazzula, I elevate White to the Smart starting role, Brogdon remains 6th man giving you:

1. White
2. Jaylen
3. Tatum
4. TBD?
5. Horford

Bench: Brogdon, TimeLord, Grant or Grant Replacement, Hauser, Gallinari?

Starting lineup question is do you flip Smart for a 3 and D wing that slot or find a bigger 4 that can start next to Horford. Assuming you do that, you flip Grant for a more versatile (I guess prototypical) 3 and D type wing, and find your next Pritchard in the draft.

Ideally rotate your new wing, big man, Horford, and TimeLord, and Tatum through the 3 - 5 roles depending on whether you're playing small ball, 2 Bigs, or anywhere in between.

Question is who do Smart and Grant match up with salary wise?

Do the Hawks give you someone like Capella if you trade Smart? Boucher from Toronto? Nuric?

Not easy to be Brad an Zarren this offseason.
Nurkic was awful last year. He looked like he had a fork coming out of his back. Boucher is incredibly foul prone and can't stay on the court.

Smart does have a predilection for making a dumb pass but I also think he's the best passer/point guard on the roster? It's a conversation with White and I might be wrong in saying that Smart is more of a PG than White.
However, Brogdon is a 0 guard. Watching him in the playoffs was eye opening. He showed almost no interest in passing the ball to anyone. Whenever he got the ball, it was pretty much him calling his own number and shooting. Maybe that was just the role he was specifically asked to play by the team but I am skeptical
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
I don't think Grant is going to be back either, but I'm not looking to fill one hole in a bench big, by opening up another hole at shooter/scorer off the bench.

I also don't think they'll be going two big more. It doesn't seem Mazzulla wants to. So in my mind, assuming no big changes, Jaylen stays spending more of his time on the wing and Smart/White/Brogdon continue filling most of the minutes at the two guard spots.
So if Grant leaves, your cover for the 37 year old Al Horford and the injury prone Rob Williams is Luke Kornet and the 35 year old just coming off of a torn ACL who wasn't that mobile even before the tear? Or do you have faith that Pritchard can return a capable rotational big man in a trade?
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
If we need a third big to lessen the load on TL and Al, that suggests to me that perhaps we need to move on from at least one of those guys. What kind of player can we get who is competent in that role, yet would be ok not playing much in the event that neither of those guys is injured (a stretch,

Is it possible to turn Horford into something more useful / reliable? He’s not getting younger and I fear that his offensive contributions will continue to decline, esp in the playoffs where it’s harder to manage his playing time.
Al and TL are both bargains for what they bring to the table. Everyone knows TL's warts so it's highly unlikely that there's an offer out there that makes it worth trading him.

In order to bring back someone close to their level of play, you have to trade one of Brogdon or Smart. (Or you could sign and trade Grant, combine him with Pritchard and multiple picks but then you would likely be facing severe salary consequences in the near future)
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
So if Grant leaves, your cover for the 37 year old Al Horford and the injury prone Rob Williams is Luke Kornet and the 35 year old just coming off of a torn ACL who wasn't that mobile even before the tear? Or do you have faith that Pritchard can return a capable rotational big man in a trade?
You probably start out with Gallo/Muscala as the third big role, which if they continue playing smaller will be a 9th man behind Hauser, sign some veteran center at the minimum as depth(maybe everyones favorite Daniel Theis gets bought out by Indiana?), and if you need help there you try to find it at the deadline.

And again, I have no faith Pritchard can return much of anything because I don't think he's worth much.

It would be great to have a third good big, but I'm not looking to move one of my three good guards to do it.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
I'd be receptive to an Ayton deal given his age and scoring/rebounding ability but Brogdon/TL is too much, even if both carry significant injury risk.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
I do think people are underrating Muscala a little bit, he was good for OKC, he came here late in the year, he has real potential to play a role next year in some of those Grant minutes.

I could see running it back 1 more year, with basically just flipping Pritchard for a lotto ticket (Garuba?) developmental big.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
20,613
Row 14
To me, under the assumption Jaylen stays, Smart is the outgoing player. I don't believe you can have both Jaylen and Smart in your core 5 when things tighten up in the playoffs. They are both too prone to turnovers or the boneheaded no pass pull up 3 possession.

So if I'm Brad and Mazzula, I elevate White to the Smart starting role, Brogdon remains 6th man giving you:

1. White
2. Jaylen
3. Tatum
4. TBD?
5. Horford

Bench: Brogdon, TimeLord, Grant or Grant Replacement, Hauser, Gallinari?

Starting lineup question is do you flip Smart for a 3 and D wing that slot or find a bigger 4 that can start next to Horford. Assuming you do that, you flip Grant for a more versatile (I guess prototypical) 3 and D type wing, and find your next Pritchard in the draft.

Ideally rotate your new wing, big man, Horford, and TimeLord, and Tatum through the 3 - 5 roles depending on whether you're playing small ball, 2 Bigs, or anywhere in between.

Question is who do Smart and Grant match up with salary wise?

Do the Hawks give you someone like Capella if you trade Smart? Boucher from Toronto? Nuric?

Not easy to be Brad an Zarren this offseason.

Are you using Tatum as a point forward? White is not a good enough distributor to start him as your PG. At best he is a secondary ball handler.

Edit - So you want Tatum to bring the ball up, play D, and score 30 a night? Even Jordan didn't do that.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
To me, under the assumption Jaylen stays, Smart is the outgoing player. I don't believe you can have both Jaylen and Smart in your core 5 when things tighten up in the playoffs. They are both too prone to turnovers or the boneheaded no pass pull up 3 possession.

So if I'm Brad and Mazzula, I elevate White to the Smart starting role, Brogdon remains 6th man giving you:

1. White
2. Jaylen
3. Tatum
4. TBD?
5. Horford

Bench: Brogdon, TimeLord, Grant or Grant Replacement, Hauser, Gallinari?

Starting lineup question is do you flip Smart for a 3 and D wing that slot or find a bigger 4 that can start next to Horford. Assuming you do that, you flip Grant for a more versatile (I guess prototypical) 3 and D type wing, and find your next Pritchard in the draft.

Ideally rotate your new wing, big man, Horford, and TimeLord, and Tatum through the 3 - 5 roles depending on whether you're playing small ball, 2 Bigs, or anywhere in between.

Question is who do Smart and Grant match up with salary wise?

Do the Hawks give you someone like Capella if you trade Smart? Boucher from Toronto? Nuric?

Not easy to be Brad an Zarren this offseason.
I'll never understand the demand to move Smart out of here.

If he wasn't on the current roster and I described a guy who can be your lead ball handler, the best passer on your team, a good screener for a guard, doesn't take a ton of shots, can bully smaller guards and score in the post which no one else on your team really does. On defense is a terrific versatile defender, so good that he was named the best defender in the league a year ago!, experienced, tough, only 29 years old and on a great contract. Downside, not a good outside shooter and is too aggressive.

If that guy wasn't named Marcus Smart, people would be like holy shit that guy is available? How do we get him?

But since he is Marcus Smart it's how do we get rid of this guy.

I understand I'm biased because I'm as big a Smart fan as there is, but I just don't get it.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
I'll never understand the demand to move Smart out of here.

If he wasn't on the current roster and I described a guy who can be your lead ball handler, the best passer on your team, a good screener for a guard, doesn't take a ton of shots, can bully smaller guards and score in the post which no one else on your team really does. On defense is a terrific versatile defender, so good that he was named the best defender in the league a year ago!, experienced, tough, only 29 years old and on a great contract. Downside, not a good outside shooter and is too aggressive.

If that guy wasn't named Marcus Smart, people would be like holy shit that guy is available? How do we get him?

But since he is Marcus Smart it's how do we get rid of this guy.

I understand I'm biased because I'm as big a Smart fan as there is, but I just don't get it.
I like Smart and don't particularly want to trade him but this a pretty selective and brightside way to describe him. I could similarly accurately describe him thus:
Good versatile defender but struggles with the quick PGs, appears to be declining, is his current team's lead ball handler but likely would not be on most/all other teams in the league, one of the worst turnover rates in the league both by rate and by comparison to usage, exceptionally poor rebounder for any size, over the last 2 years no player has attempted more of their shots from 3 while hitting a lower rate, struggles with decision making on offense particularly in crunch time.

I think the impetus from many people to trade Smart is simple... he's a negative offensive player and having him as your primary ball handler means mediocre assist rates and terrible turnover rates out of PG. His defense is great, but so (in a slightly different way) is Derrick White's. Smart is a combo guard masquerading as a point, and given the struggles to run late-game offense against playoff caliber defenses, it's not that surprising some people would prefer to move on from him and look to find a more balanced approach.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
IMO, the Smart issues here stem from familiarity with his flaws (and all players have them - even binkies) breeding contempt as well as a failure to value stops properly.

Smart can get stops at an elite level, even if he doesn't always. He is the inverse of a good scorer/poorish defender. People like those players because they are often targets as a return for Smart.

If people weighed his defensive ability above his outside shooting - and you could absolutely make a case for that - he'd be a lot more highly thought of than he is now. That's not how most fans operate though.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
I like Smart and don't particularly want to trade him but this a pretty selective and brightside way to describe him. I could similarly accurately describe him thus:
Good versatile defender but struggles with the quick PGs, appears to be declining, is his current team's lead ball handler but likely would not be on most/all other teams in the league, one of the worst turnover rates in the league both by rate and by comparison to usage, exceptionally poor rebounder for any size, over the last 2 years no player has attempted more of their shots from 3 while hitting a lower rate, struggles with decision making on offense particularly in crunch time.

I think the impetus from many people to trade Smart is simple... he's a negative offensive player and having him as your primary ball handler means mediocre assist rates and terrible turnover rates out of PG. His defense is great, but so (in a slightly different way) is Derrick White's. Smart is a combo guard masquerading as a point, and given the struggles to run late-game offense against playoff caliber defenses, it's not that surprising some people would prefer to move on from him and look to find a more balanced approach.
But, this is part of the framing I hate. Derrick White is also a great defender, and his strengths and weaknesses match up with Smart near perfectly, so why is it pointed out that Smart can be moved because you have White?

Why not both????

And we've gone through this before, I flat out disagree with you that Smart is an exceptionally poor rebounder for any size. I think that's straight crazy. He's not going to grab many rebounds because he's either on the perimeter, or he's challenging the shot. He could easily grab more rebounds if he wanted to using the Kris Humphries method, just let your guy shoot and run to the glass in the hopes that he misses. I'll gladly take Smart in a battle against most other teams point guards in a fight for a rebound.

He also doesn't really run late game offense because stars do that. Tatum usually has the ball in late situations.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
IMO, the Smart issues here stem from familiarity with his flaws (and all players have them - even binkies) breeding contempt as well as a failure to value stops properly.

Smart can get stops at an elite level, even if he doesn't always. He is the inverse of a good scorer/poorish defender. People like those players because they are often targets as a return for Smart.

If people weighed his defensive ability above his outside shooting - and you could absolutely make a case for that - he'd be a lot more highly thought of than he is now. That's not how most fans operate though.
I agree with you, I suspect this is a big part of it. The longer a player is with a team, you don't appreciate the positives so much as you dwell on the negatives. If Brogdon had been here the last 8 years, we'd be losing our minds about how bad he is on defense. But since he's new, we can turn the blinders on and focus on his offense.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,213
If you plan to keep Grant you probably don't need a big---he and Muscala augment Kornet/Gallo and that's enough. I'd love a younger, active big who looked like a poor man's TL as well but that's more likely a lottery ticket item than something you trade value for with all those guys ahead of him on depth chart.

If you plan for Grant to go, I wonder if it's a sign and trade as that expands the set of buyers. The goal (which would involve a third team/second trade) is likely to effectively turn Grant and PP into a quality rotation big. Whether that is a big wing or a 4/5 will be illuminating about how they are thinking about two bigs going forward, imo.

If you can't do that, it's not end of world to go into year with a bit of a gap there which you know you need to address during year, especially if you get some kind of draft asset for PP. That isn't my first choice, but can imagine it's a fallback.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
IMO, the Smart issues here stem from familiarity with his flaws (and all players have them - even binkies) breeding contempt as well as a failure to value stops properly.

Smart can get stops at an elite level, even if he doesn't always. He is the inverse of a good scorer/poorish defender. People like those players because they are often targets as a return for Smart.

If people weighed his defensive ability above his outside shooting - and you could absolutely make a case for that - he'd be a lot more highly thought of than he is now. That's not how most fans operate though.
I think this used to be the case for sure. I think now people are wondering about late game more than anything. A real microscope has gone on the Celtics' multi-year horror show in clutch situations. Tatum is an okay but nothing special playmaker though improving, Brown has also improved some but is still not a particularly good ball handler, and he has more TO issues than Tatum. Smart is the best playmaker of the bunch, borderline starting PG quality... he's also horrifically turnover prone. At some point you want at least one guy out there who can create for others at a high rate without turning it over.

But, this is part of the framing I hate. Derrick White is also a great defender, and his strengths and weaknesses match up with Smart near perfectly, so why is it pointed out that Smart can be moved because you have White?

Why not both????

And we've gone through this before, I flat out disagree with you that Smart is an exceptionally poor rebounder for any size. I think that's straight crazy. He's not going to grab many rebounds because he's either on the perimeter, or he's challenging the shot. He could easily grab more rebounds if he wanted to using the Kris Humphries method, just let your guy shoot and run to the glass in the hopes that he misses. I'll gladly take Smart in a battle against most other teams point guards in a fight for a rebound.

He also doesn't really run late game offense because stars do that. Tatum usually has the ball in late situations.
I think you can have White and Smart on defense, Smart's defense is very very good, it's why he's on this team and starting. As to rebounding, we've gone over this before, but I do not care what argument on system you make, Marcus was 176th of 190 qualifiers in rebound rate, that's incredibly low no matter where he is playing. I don't care if he's gonna win a battle for a rebound, I care that he provides very few rebounds over the course of the season, production matters, it's like the guys whose stroke looks amazing the one time they hit it but they shoot 30%, or worse just don't shoot at all. Smart runs plenty of the late-game offense, he and Tatum are usually the people who touch the ball. A ton of this post-season was Smart gets the inbounds or brings it up, plays 2 man with Tatum (how most of those 3s he took late in games happened).

Listen, my point wasn't that was a fully accurate description of Smart, just that it was a the downside view of him to counter your wildly over optimistic upside view of him.

Marcus is a deeply flawed but also quite good player. He's probably somewhat miscast as the PG of this team, and ideally would be playing combo guard with some 6th man responsibilites while someone who could distribute without turning it over ran much more of the offense.

I note you didn't push back on the biggest negative... 17.9% turnover rate on 17.8% usage (and a decent but not top end 26.4% AST rate) is just straight up unacceptable from your primary ballhandler.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
If you plan to keep Grant you probably don't need a big---he and Muscala augment Kornet/Gallo and that's enough. I'd love a younger, active big who looked like a poor man's TL as well but that's more likely a lottery ticket item than something you trade value for with all those guys ahead of him on depth chart.

If you plan for Grant to go, I wonder if it's a sign and trade as that expands the set of buyers. The goal (which would involve a third team/second trade) is likely to effectively turn Grant and PP into a quality rotation big. Whether that is a big wing or a 4/5 will be illuminating about how they are thinking about two bigs going forward, imo.

If you can't do that, it's not end of world to go into year with a bit of a gap there which you know you need to address during year, especially if you get some kind of draft asset for PP. That isn't my first choice, but can imagine it's a fallback.
I do wonder what Grant, PP and a pick could fetch you. Is that enough for PJ Washington? Charlotte has so many needs but I would argue they don’t really need a big man (Richards, Mark Williams, Kai Jones)
 

Mloaf71

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
644
I think this used to be the case for sure. I think now people are wondering about late game more than anything. A real microscope has gone on the Celtics' multi-year horror show in clutch situations. Tatum is an okay but nothing special playmaker though improving, Brown has also improved some but is still not a particularly good ball handler, and he has more TO issues than Tatum. Smart is the best playmaker of the bunch, borderline starting PG quality... he's also horrifically turnover prone. At some point you want at least one guy out there who can create for others at a high rate without turning it over.



I think you can have White and Smart on defense, Smart's defense is very very good, it's why he's on this team and starting. As to rebounding, we've gone over this before, but I do not care what argument on system you make, Marcus was 176th of 190 qualifiers in rebound rate, that's incredibly low no matter where he is playing. I don't care if he's gonna win a battle for a rebound, I care that he provides very few rebounds over the course of the season, production matters, it's like the guys whose stroke looks amazing the one time they hit it but they shoot 30%, or worse just don't shoot at all. Smart runs plenty of the late-game offense, he and Tatum are usually the people who touch the ball. A ton of this post-season was Smart gets the inbounds or brings it up, plays 2 man with Tatum (how most of those 3s he took late in games happened).

Listen, my point wasn't that was a fully accurate description of Smart, just that it was a the downside view of him to counter your wildly over optimistic upside view of him.

Marcus is a deeply flawed but also quite good player. He's probably somewhat miscast as the PG of this team, and ideally would be playing combo guard with some 6th man responsibilites while someone who could distribute without turning it over ran much more of the offense.

I note you didn't push back on the biggest negative... 17.9% turnover rate on 17.8% usage (and a decent but not top end 26.4% AST rate) is just straight up unacceptable from your primary ballhandler.
CD you summed up my thoughts much better than I did.

Smart in and of himself isn't a problem. His weaknesses, unfortunately, line up with the teams weaknesses as a whole and with Jaylen's as well.

So if you're going to improve ball movement and cut down on turnovers you can either trade Jaylen or Smart. With Smart we have a similar player in White, Jaylen is much harder to see how you replace.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
I think this used to be the case for sure. I think now people are wondering about late game more than anything. A real microscope has gone on the Celtics' multi-year horror show in clutch situations. Tatum is an okay but nothing special playmaker though improving, Brown has also improved some but is still not a particularly good ball handler, and he has more TO issues than Tatum. Smart is the best playmaker of the bunch, borderline starting PG quality... he's also horrifically turnover prone. At some point you want at least one guy out there who can create for others at a high rate without turning it over.



I think you can have White and Smart on defense, Smart's defense is very very good, it's why he's on this team and starting. As to rebounding, we've gone over this before, but I do not care what argument on system you make, Marcus was 176th of 190 qualifiers in rebound rate, that's incredibly low no matter where he is playing. I don't care if he's gonna win a battle for a rebound, I care that he provides very few rebounds over the course of the season, production matters, it's like the guys whose stroke looks amazing the one time they hit it but they shoot 30%, or worse just don't shoot at all.
Again, I don't care at all about total rebounds, and I do not care what argument on system you make. Rebounds are the RBI of basketball.

Smart runs plenty of the late-game offense, he and Tatum are usually the people who touch the ball. A ton of this post-season was Smart gets the inbounds or brings it up, plays 2 man with Tatum (how most of those 3s he took late in games happened).
Yes, he and Tatum are the two people who touch the ball. Smart takes the ball over halfcourt, hands or passes the ball to Tatum, screens for Tatum to get a switch then Tatum runs the offense. That's not Smart running anything.

Listen, my point wasn't that was a fully accurate description of Smart, just that it was a the downside view of him to counter your wildly over optimistic upside view of him.
I could've sworn I said I'm biased because I'm as big a Smart fan as there is. You're probably going to get an optimistic view from someone who admits they're biased. Felt it might be necessary with all the wildly over pessimistic downside views of him I'm seeing here.

Marcus is a deeply flawed but also quite good player. He's probably somewhat miscast as the PG of this team, and ideally would be playing combo guard with some 6th man responsibilites while someone who could distribute without turning it over ran much more of the offense.

I note you didn't push back on the biggest negative... 17.9% turnover rate on 17.8% usage (and a decent but not top end 26.4% AST rate) is just straight up unacceptable from your primary ballhandler.
Disagree on deeply flawed.

Disagree on being miscast, because this team doesn't need an old school PG. Offense will run thru the star, no matter who the PG is.

Didn't push back on what you think his biggest negative is, because I disagree with it. Almost in the same way as rebounds, turnovers can easily be cut by changing your play for the worse. Rather than try to hit guys making backdoor cuts and lob attempts for easy baskets that are higher risk, you just make safe passes around the perimeter, rarely get your teammates easy baskets but have a low turnover rate. Not looking to have a Sam Bradford as a point guard at all.

Edit: When did a 2.7 to 1 assist to turnover ratio become not just bad, but unacceptable?
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
Didn't push back on what you think his biggest negative is, because I disagree with it. Almost in the same way as rebounds, turnovers can easily be cut by changing your play for the worse. Rather than try to hit guys making backdoor cuts and lob attempts for easy baskets that are higher risk, you just make safe passes around the perimeter, rarely get your teammates easy baskets but have a low turnover rate. Not looking to have a Sam Bradford as a point guard at all.

Edit: When did a 2.7 to 1 assist to turnover ratio become not just bad, but unacceptable?
Ignoring the rest, this is where I think we have the most fundamental disagreement on who Marcus is as a player and what people who would like more of a real PG are concerned with....
Nobody is asking for Sam Bradford, they're asking to not have Carson Wentz where the risks are immense and the rewards modest.

High risk is great, if it comes with high reward. Marcus has the 3rd highest TO rate of PGs in the NBA this year, the 3 ahead of him....
TJ McConnell who was awful, Caruso, really bad on offense, and Russ... but Russ had a slightly higher turnover rate (0.5%) with a MUCH higher reward rate in assists (12.2%),

If Marcus was getting an assist rate in the 30s you could live with 18% turnovers. Maybe even if he was upper 20s but also using more possessions on efficient offense. He's not though, he's using a low number of possessions on mostly inefficient offense, assisting at a decent but unspectacular rate (basically he's Bradley Beal in AST rate) and turning it over like he's Westbrook or a high usage post player.

As to ratio... it was less about A/TO (where he's lower end of PGs but not terrible) it was about how many turnovers he has for how low his usage is, usually you're fine with higher turnover rates from your highest usage players, because it's understood that anyone who is consistently going to the basket and making plays is going to have a few more turnovers (strips, offensive fouls, uncalled hacks, etc.)

Marcus is a good player, I think we should give him another year at least... but any discussion of him as an offensive player should note that he provides very little positive value on that end... his value is almost entirely in his defense. There are some reasons for concern long term there, and certainly he shouldn't be considered some untouchable core piece of this roster, he's an important piece, but also the most expendible of the guys who has been here a while.

To me the reason not to trade Marcus is that he's a niche piece, not many teams want/need what he brings and those that do aren't going to swap him for the pieces that would upgrade us.

Edit- and who knows, maybe Marcus comes back next year and refines his decision making, starts figuring out when to take risks and when not to and it leads to a reduction in the number of empty or negative possessions he creates. The potential is there, he's not a bad passer, he's a pretty good one, it's just that much like his shooting he often makes really poor decisions, often in high leverage situations.
 
Last edited:

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
Ignoring the rest, this is where I think we have the most fundamental disagreement on who Marcus is as a player and what people who would like more of a real PG are concerned with....
Nobody is asking for Sam Bradford, they're asking to not have Carson Wentz where the risks are immense and the rewards modest.

High risk is great, if it comes with high reward. Marcus has the 3rd highest TO rate of PGs in the NBA this year, the 3 ahead of him....
TJ McConnell who was awful, Caruso, really bad on offense, and Russ... but Russ had a slightly higher turnover rate (0.5%) with a MUCH higher reward rate in assists (12.2%),

If Marcus was getting an assist rate in the 30s you could live with 18% turnovers. Maybe even if he was upper 20s but also using more possessions on efficient offense. He's not though, he's using a low number of possessions on mostly inefficient offense, assisting at a decent but unspectacular rate (basically he's Bradley Beal in AST rate) and turning it over like he's Westbrook or a high usage post player.
Isn’t the crux of the issue that Smart still has the highest AST% on the Celtics? I like Smart but I am certainly no Marcus truther….however, is there a better PG option on the roster? White’s more of a secondary guy, Brogdon has shown some PG capabilities in his career but this year definitely wasn’t a playmaker for others
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
Isn’t the crux of the issue that Smart still has the highest AST% on the Celtics? I like Smart but I am certainly no Marcus truther….however, is there a better PG option on the roster? White’s more of a secondary guy, Brogdon has shown some PG capabilities in his career but this year definitely wasn’t a playmaker for others
It is indeed the problem, which is why I agree that the idea of trading Smart just to run White at PG is not a good one. I was thinking more of the people who talk about trading Marcus and adding more of a playmaker in that or some ancillary deal.

Brogdon wasn't as bad as people make out (and I'm one of those people), he had around 20% AST rate, so definitely trailed Marcus, turned it over a lot less, but nothing about his profile says true PG either. Though if I'm being fair to him, his role was clearly "score off the bench", his previous year he had the same AST% Marcus had this year with a much lower TOV%, has 3 of the 4 best AST% seasons between the pair and Marcus has 7 seasons with higher TOV% than Brogdon's highest (his rookie year).

On paper Brogdon hypothetically projects as a better playmaker and scorer than Marcus, but.......

Marcus' defense has real value, and Brogdon's fell off a cliff in recent years. So he's running bench unit and being told to look for his 1st.
If you combined Brogdon's offense and Marcus' defense you'd have pretty close to a perfect PG.... but you can't so instead we mix and match and hope for the best.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
It is indeed the problem, which is why I agree that the idea of trading Smart just to run White at PG is not a good one. I was thinking more of the people who talk about trading Marcus and adding more of a playmaker in that or some ancillary deal.

Brogdon wasn't as bad as people make out (and I'm one of those people), he had around 20% AST rate, so definitely trailed Marcus, turned it over a lot less, but nothing about his profile says true PG either. Though if I'm being fair to him, his role was clearly "score off the bench", his previous year he had the same AST% Marcus had this year with a much lower TOV%, has 3 of the 4 best AST% seasons between the pair and Marcus has 7 seasons with higher TOV% than Brogdon's highest (his rookie year).

On paper Brogdon hypothetically projects as a better playmaker and scorer than Marcus, but.......

Marcus' defense has real value, and Brogdon's fell off a cliff in recent years. So he's running bench unit and being told to look for his 1st.
If you combined Brogdon's offense and Marcus' defense you'd have pretty close to a perfect PG.... but you can't so instead we mix and match and hope for the best.
Brogdon was a 29% AST rate / 11.5% TOV rate guy on ~25%+ USG over his three year Pacer stint, which is the only time he's played as a point guard. That also probably wore him down.

He played a very different role this year, and while it resulted in him being a hyper efficient scorer, you wonder whether the Celtics wouldn't have been better served with Brogdon playing the role of a lead guard off the bench instead of just being a pure scorer. Even if you still start Smart because of defense and the need to keep Brogdon from breaking down, maybe he develops more of a two man game with Tatum and Brown over the regular season and could've been more helpful in breaking offenses down in crunch time.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,127
Santa Monica
I am going to attempt to steer this conversation away from Jaylen because I think we have collectively covered about every angle on him staying/leaving.

I am going to operate under the assumption that he stays. My question after that is, how can the team be improved/rearranged this summer to maximize a potential 2 year window?

IMO, you try and sign & trade Grant to get some sort of asset back for him. Maybe to Utah for old friend Kelly Olynyk? Olynyk is a good rotation big and can start for Horford and Rob to ensure none of them get too burned out.

The other move that I would be looking at is either Pritchard or Brogdon for a big wing/Al replacement. As some of you are aware, I have looked into this previously and my top target was always Wendell Carter Jr. but I think that ship has sailed. Magic have no reason to give him up. I am struggling to think of names that would fit this archetype. @benhogan, any ideas on potential big wings/Al replacements that are somewhat realistic targets in a Brogdon or Pritchard trade?

No team is perfect in this day and age and if these types of moves are made, I think the biggest weakness on the team will be guard play/creation. We are going to need to see steps forward from White/Smart/Brown and Tatum in that regard.

I would also like to see an offense implemented with more motion/cutting. Too often, the offense would just bog down to ISO and 4 players standing around at the 3 point line. We've got to try and find a way to coax some easy baskets in the halfcourt. I would also like to see more offense run where Smart gets the ball in the high post and can operate. He's really damn good at either getting a basket or finding an open player
The Horford/TL, age/injury conundrum has been with us for two seasons now. Brad partially addressed it with Muscala, who might be able to add some value next season. Tatum can play up as a 4 with the back-up units with Hauser @ the 3 coming off the bench. I like the kid from Indiana, Trace Jackson-Davis, in the draft (he's been mocked in the 2nd round - First Team All-American 6'9") he may have potential.

Kelly O would be nice. The one player nobody's mentioned who plays +++D & is solid on offense is 29yr old Kyle Anderson. He's on a very cheap deal ($9.2MM) next season. There may be bad blood between Kyle/Rudy after their playoff punch-up, maybe PP + Gallo for Kyle would hold some interest to the Wolves?

Also, feels like Grant is gone, Joe really crushed his minutes/pay potential. Maybe a Grant S+T with Minnesota to get a year of Kyle Anderson?
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
The Horford/TL, age/injury conundrum has been with us for two seasons now. Brad partially addressed it with Muscala, who might be able to add some value next season. Tatum can play up as a 4 with the back-up units with Hauser @ the 3 coming off the bench. I like the kid from Indiana, Trace Jackson-Davis, in the draft (he's been mocked in the 2nd round - First Team All-American 6'9") he may have potential.

Kelly O would be nice. The one player nobody's mentioned who plays +++D & is solid on offense is 29yr old Kyle Anderson. He's on a very cheap deal ($9.2MM) next season. There may be bad blood between Kyle/Rudy after their playoff punch-up, maybe PP + Gallo for Kyle would hold some interest to the Wolves?

Also, feels like Grant is gone, Joe really crushed his minutes/pay potential. Maybe a Grant S+T with Minnesota to get a year of Kyle Anderson?
After doing a bit more research, I think there are a few clear targets:
-Naz Reid and Kyle Anderson (MIN)
-PJ Washington (CHA)
-Kelly Olynyk (UTA)

Or maybe they bring Grant back and he gets more playing time…I just don’t think there’s anyway that they let Grant leave and don’t replace him with someone close to or better than him
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
8,725
What sort of effect will the CBA have on the trade deadline going forward? Feel free to dumb it down to 'Good for the C's' or 'Bad...' if need be : )
 

TrapperAB

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 25, 2002
3,041
West Hartford, CT
My question about Grant is what value does Brad put on a regular season player? Grant got buried in the playoffs... but he also helped get them there. I'm not a huge Grant fan (his chirping at the refs pisses me off), but he's a useful 3-and-D guy. 39.5% from three this year... 8.1/4.6/1.7 in 26 minutes. Smart posters in here say that his defense regressed this year, but to my untrained eyes he didn't totally fall off a cliff.

Is Grant worth matching if he's offered $12 million a year? When he can contribute to the team for the first 82 as part of the second unit? He won't get a ton of minutes in the postseason (if he's a mess like he was this year), but as a role player, how much of an upgrade are these other guys? And is the price we'd have to pay (draft capital?) worth that upgrade?

Personally, I'd prefer to S&T him -- especially if Mazzulla isn't high on him -- but I have to admit that I do find him useful when the corner three is falling.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,466
Also, feels like Grant is gone, Joe really crushed his minutes/pay potential. Maybe a Grant S+T with Minnesota to get a year of Kyle Anderson?
Kind of contradictory no? If Joe cutting his minutes hurts his value it makes it more likely he's back. Grant's return is almost certainly tied directly to how big an offer sheet he can get.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,127
Santa Monica
Kind of contradictory no? If Joe cutting his minutes hurts his value it makes it more likely he's back. Grant's return is almost certainly tied directly to how big an offer sheet he can get.
Sure, if Grant gets cheap enough, he becomes an asset, hence the sign & trade to the Wolves for Slo-Mo
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
This season seemed to especially drive home the point that the regular season doesn’t matter that much. Having 10 good players is good for being competitive night in and night out and weathering the injuries that come up over the season, but come playoff time (assuming your team is healthy, which I guess is a big assumption) you really just need to have the best 7-8 players.