What's left this off season?

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,080
Came here to post Baynes... Probably nothing left but if we're planning on just getting a big body while we wait for buyouts and trade candidates I'd be happy with him over some of the other toasty guys
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
20,511
Los Angeles, CA
I hope he has enough left and wants to come here because I feel like it would be great to have his familiar face in the locker room too. I always got the sense that he was well liked.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
37,262
Melrose, MA
So, I don't actually believe the Celtics will be signing Baynes.

But...

Baynes' first three years in the NBA were with the Spurs, who had a young assistant coach named Ime Udoka.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
5,669
Baynes played pretty well in short minutes in the two games he played in the Olympics before he was stricken, putting up nine and six in only 14 minutes per game with great efficiency. I like the idea of him as a bit of an enforcer as the third or fourth center.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
1,777
I was going to do a deep dive into these 2 Olympic games (a dud against Nigeria & a good game against Nicolò Melli & Italy), but there's really not much point, it's obviously a tiny sample size & it wasn't that fun of a read lol

I will mention that for Australia, Baynes appeared to be backing up a guy named Nick Kay, a 29 y/o 6'9 member of the Shimane Susanoo Magic of the Japanese B League.

The main thing I noticed when looking at Baynes earlier today is that I thought his prime was better than it actually was...

Glad he's healthy & wish him the best of luck in all endeavors.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,112
Honolulu HI
I know there has been a lot of talk about the luxury tax implications of using the TPE, and how - for every dollar spent now -the Cs will be penalized multiple times that amount in taxes. That said, the Cs are currently the favorite to win the championship, and that is the type of rare opportunity that I can’t imagine Wyc wants to squander. Meanwhile they have two key members of their rotation - Timelord and Al- who will almost certainly be restricted due to age and injury risk who are currently backed up by a guy who probably wouldn’t even be picked up if the Cs put him on waivers (Luke Kornet). This is an unacceptable amount of risk, and considering how much of an opportunity this season represents, the Cs ownership deserves criticism if it’s okay with that gamble.
Making this even more frustrating is that good players are available using the TPE. In particular, Jacob Poetl, seems ideal, as he is almost certainly obtainable (a protected first, at most, almost certainly gets it done) and a great match, both in the short and long term for the Cs.
After all, this Cs team is built on defense, and, in particular, is most dominant when TL’s rim protection is added to an already stifling perimeter defense. I think we all saw that last year, that when TL and Al were both on the bench the difference was huge, and that’s when they had Theis who was capable of being effective in the TL role against some offenses. Are the Cs really going to try to have Kornet fill that roll? Really? Or bring in a reclamation project like Baynes? All when a defensive stud in his prime like Poetl is readily available? Further, wouldn’t someone like Poetl also be good as an Al replacement long term? Also, even though the Cs are presumably looking for a 3rd big, at the end of the year would it really be shocking if that “3rd big” played more than either an aging Al or a chronically hurt TL? They need someone solid in that roll, and if Wyc isn’t going to be okay with that because of the tax he needs to be criticized accordingly. Teams shouldn’t be expected to take on huge tax burdens every year, but you don’t want to risk squandering a championship to avoid a tax bill..
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportingnews.com/us/amp/nba/news/hidden-gems-jakob-poeltl-is-the-best-center-that-nobodys-talking-about/1acr9r7wz5mg913hug0jnr42sk
 
Last edited:

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,003
I know there has been a lot of talk about the luxury tax implications of using the TPE, and how - for every dollar spent now -the Cs will be penalized multiple times that amount in taxes. That said, the Cs are currently the favorite to win the championship, and that is the type of rare opportunity that I can’t imagine Wyc wants to squander. Meanwhile they have two key members of their rotation - Timelord and Al- who will almost certainly be restricted due to age and injury risk who are currently backed up by a guy who probably wouldn’t even be picked up if the Cs put him on waivers (Luke Kornet). This is an unacceptable amount of risk, and considering how much of an opportunity this season represents, the Cs ownership deserves criticism if it’s okay with that gamble.
Making this even more frustrating is that good players are available using the TPE. In particular, Jacob Poetl, seems ideal, as he is almost certainly obtainable (a protected first, at most, almost certainly gets it done) and a great match, both in the short and long term for the Cs.
After all, this Cs team is built on defense, and, in particular, is most dominant when TL’s rim protection is added to an already stifling perimeter defense. I think we all saw that last year, that when TL and Al were both on the bench the difference was huge, and that’s when they had Theis who was capable of being effective in the TL role against some offenses. Are the Cs really going to try to have Kornet fill that roll? Really? Or bring in a reclamation project like Baynes? All when a defensive stud in his prime like Poetl is readily available? Further, wouldn’t someone like Poetl also be good as an Al replacement long term? Also, even though the Cs are presumably looking for a 3rd big, at the end of the year would it really be shocking if that “3rd big” played more than either an aging Al or a chronically hurt TL? They need someone solid in that roll, and if Wyc isn’t going to be okay with that because of the tax he needs to be criticized accordingly. Teams shouldn’t be expected to take on huge tax burdens every year, but you don’t want to risk squandering a championship to avoid a tax bill..
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportingnews.com/us/amp/nba/news/hidden-gems-jakob-poeltl-is-the-best-center-that-nobodys-talking-about/1acr9r7wz5mg913hug0jnr42sk
I've been as critical as anyone on this board about Wyc spending, and even I think this is unreasonable.

Adding Poeltl would add around 50M in salary + tax next season.

That's asking way too much in my opinion.

And that's before even getting into would the Spurs take your protected first (at most) in 2025 at the earliest, or if it's reasonable to expect Poeltl to be happy going into next season as a backup center at 27 years old and in a contract year when he's good enough to be a solid starter.

Assuming the Celtics finish this season with their payroll around where it is now (including Gallinari), ownership has done more than enough.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,112
Honolulu HI
I've been as critical as anyone on this board about Wyc spending, and even I think this is unreasonable.

Adding Poeltl would add around 50M in salary + tax next season.

That's asking way too much in my opinion.

And that's before even getting into would the Spurs take your protected first (at most) in 2025 at the earliest, or if it's reasonable to expect Poeltl to be happy going into next season as a backup center at 27 years old and in a contract year when he's good enough to be a solid starter.

Assuming the Celtics finish this season with their payroll around where it is now (including Gallinari), ownership has done more than enough.
I think it depends on how risky you feel the current roster is. With the addition of Brogdon, the Cs have an impressive array of young, big wings and PGs that all play strong defense, and, except for Brogdon, have little to no durability concerns. Yet, the team's defense first approach also requires matching those players with a defensive-minded front court. Right now, that requires having either one or both of Robert Williams or Al Horford on the floor, and that puts a tremendous amount of pressure on the two players (outside of Brogdon) that are the two biggest injury/age-related decline concerns on the roster.
It's already been reported that the Cs will not have Al play the second game of a back-to-back next year and that makes sense, but wouldn't it also make sense to sit TL in these situations? After all, does anyone really think there won't be an extended stretch where TL sits next year? Heck, am I the only one who fears that there is an uncomfortably reasonable chance that TL may not not even be available for next year's playoffs? What happens to the team's defensive rating when Danilo Gallinari (or Luke Kornet) ends up taking much of the minutes we assumed were going to to TL? I just don't think these are acceptable risks, especially not in a world where a 27-year old defensive beast like Jacob Poetl is available on the trade market. If he could be acquired for assets that don't damage the team's rotation (Pritchard and a 1st?) don't you have to make that trade? This may be the only way to not only protect against losing Al or TL, but also prevent the team from being in that situation in the first place (by allowing Udoka to give plenty of rest to both of them). If, in the end, a relatively predictable scenario emerges, where one or both of TL ad AH aren't available and the team ends up relying too heavily on Gallinari at the C, would it shock anyone if that ends up the difference between a championship title and a loss in the EC Finals? All so that they ownership doesn't have to pay a tax that is far below what the Warriors pay regularly?
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,080
I think it depends on how risky you feel the current roster is. With the addition of Brogdon, the Cs have an impressive array of young, big wings and PGs that all play strong defense, and, except for Brogdon, have little to no durability concerns. Yet, the team's defense first approach also requires matching those players with a defensive-minded front court. Right now, that requires having either one or both of Robert Williams or Al Horford on the floor, and that puts a tremendous amount of pressure on the two players (outside of Brogdon) that are the two biggest injury/age-related decline concerns on the roster.
It's already been reported that the Cs will not have Al play the second game of a back-to-back next year and that makes sense, but wouldn't it also make sense to sit TL in these situations? After all, does anyone really think there won't be an extended stretch where TL sits next year? Heck, am I the only one who fears that there is an uncomfortably reasonable chance that TL may not not even be available for next year's playoffs? What happens to the team's defensive rating when Danilo Gallinari (or Luke Kornet) ends up taking much of the minutes we assumed were going to to TL? I just don't think these are acceptable risks, especially not in a world where a 27-year old defensive beast like Jacob Poetl is available on the trade market. If he could be acquired for assets that don't damage the team's rotation (Pritchard and a 1st?) don't you have to make that trade? This may be the only way to not only protect against losing Al or TL, but also prevent the team from being in that situation in the first place (by allowing Udoka to give plenty of rest to both of them). If, in the end, a relatively predictable scenario emerges, where one or both of TL ad AH aren't available the team ends up relying too heavily on Gallinari at the C, would it shock anyone if that ends up the difference between a championship title and a loss in the EC Finals? All so that they ownership doesn't have to pay a tax that is far below what the Warriors pay regularly?
The entirety of the league pays far below what the Warriors pay regularly, they are not a sustainable model for anyone else. The Warriors both have very rich owners, and bring in ridiculous revenue, in part because they absolutely juiced the hell out of their ticket prices (average Warriors ticket is 3x what the average Celtics ticket is).

The Celtics will pay about the 4th most tax this year, despite not being repeaters. That's more than reasonable.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,220
Santa Monica
I think it depends on how risky you feel the current roster is. With the addition of Brogdon, the Cs have an impressive array of young, big wings and PGs that all play strong defense, and, except for Brogdon, have little to no durability concerns. Yet, the team's defense first approach also requires matching those players with a defensive-minded front court. Right now, that requires having either one or both of Robert Williams or Al Horford on the floor, and that puts a tremendous amount of pressure on the two players (outside of Brogdon) that are the two biggest injury/age-related decline concerns on the roster.
It's already been reported that the Cs will not have Al play the second game of a back-to-back next year and that makes sense, but wouldn't it also make sense to sit TL in these situations? After all, does anyone really think there won't be an extended stretch where TL sits next year? Heck, am I the only one who fears that there is an uncomfortably reasonable chance that TL may not not even be available for next year's playoffs? What happens to the team's defensive rating when Danilo Gallinari (or Luke Kornet) ends up taking much of the minutes we assumed were going to to TL? I just don't think these are acceptable risks, especially not in a world where a 27-year old defensive beast like Jacob Poetl is available on the trade market. If he could be acquired for assets that don't damage the team's rotation (Pritchard and a 1st?) don't you have to make that trade? This may be the only way to not only protect against losing Al or TL, but also prevent the team from being in that situation in the first place (by allowing Udoka to give plenty of rest to both of them). If, in the end, a relatively predictable scenario emerges, where one or both of TL ad AH aren't available and the team ends up relying too heavily on Gallinari at the C, would it shock anyone if that ends up the difference between a championship title and a loss in the EC Finals? All so that they ownership doesn't have to pay a tax that is far below what the Warriors pay regularly?
Poeltl would be a great addition but like CD/Pickle noted above too costly. Is the delta between JP and a center from the buyout market enough to drop an additional $45-50M? o_O

If you wanted to build something around White for Poeltl + wing/PG (or include a 3rd team) you could make the $$$ work. The Spurs could even take on a bit of money, which would free up Brad to use their smaller TPEs in Jan/Feb

BTW I'm not advocating this, just showing there is a cost in talent by adding Poeltl now. I'd rather keep White and be patient, decent vet min players will shake out
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
7,670
around the way
Poeltl would be a great addition but like CD/Pickle noted above too costly. Is the delta between JP and a center from the buyout market enough to drop an additional $45-50M? o_O

If you wanted to build something around White for Poeltl + wing/PG (or include a 3rd team) you could make the $$$ work. The Spurs could even take on a bit of money, which would free up Brad to use their smaller TPEs in Jan/Feb

BTW I'm not advocating this, just showing there is a cost in talent by adding Poeltl now. I'd rather keep White and be patient, decent vet min players will shake out
Yeah, and I don't think that White is worth it. Basically don't think that Grant is worth it either, as he's both big and wing depth. PP is redundant, but he doesn't offset enough of that big chunk to make it not a big chunk.

I like Poeltl, but he's not a 50MM needle-mover. A guy like that may become available somehow still, and that's Brad's problem to sell to ownership. Tough to go to the mat for Poeltl, even though he's a nice player.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
24,979
Just think of it like a year off, like Horford had in OKC!
The enormous difference was that Horford was still an NBA player on the back nine of his prime. If Baynes wasn’t injured he’d have spent last season playing the back nine.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,220
Santa Monica
The enormous difference was that Horford was still an NBA player on the back nine of his prime. If Baynes wasn’t injured he’d have spent last season playing the back nine.
The hospital stay was driven by a fall/spinal cord injury.

With his style of play, it's probably time for Aron to hang them up
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,445
Yeah, and I don't think that White is worth it. Basically don't think that Grant is worth it either, as he's both big and wing depth. PP is redundant, but he doesn't offset enough of that big chunk to make it not a big chunk.

I like Poeltl, but he's not a 50MM needle-mover. A guy like that may become available somehow still, and that's Brad's problem to sell to ownership. Tough to go to the mat for Poeltl, even though he's a nice player.
The only real utility I can see to Poeltl is taking him in short term to be dumped into someone else’s cap space/TPE later in order to reset the Fournier TPE.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,013
The only real utility I can see to Poeltl is taking him in short term to be dumped into someone else’s cap space/TPE later in order to reset the Fournier TPE.
With the 2023 first round pick already traded in the Brogdon deal, I don’t see Stevens using more draft capital out to 2025 (or beyond) to acquire a third big or extended the TPE.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,112
Honolulu HI
With the 2023 first round pick already traded in the Brogdon deal, I don’t see Stevens using more draft capital out to 2025 (or beyond) to acquire a third big or extended the TPE.
I think the primary issue is the tax.
The Cs are in win now mode, and have a legitimate chance at a championship. I don't think a 2025 1st round pick (a pick that most likely won't even be good) has enough value to prevent the Cs from maximizing their chances of a title
It's also important to remember that Poetl is young enough that he could provide long term value as well, as - if the Cs made a move for him- he'd be the likely candidate to become the Al Horford replacement this team will eventually need.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,013
I think the primary issue is the tax.
The Cs are in win now mode, and have a legitimate chance at a championship. I don't think a 2025 1st round pick (a pick that most likely won't even be good) has enough value to prevent the Cs from maximizing their chances of a title
It's also important to remember that Poetl is young enough that he could provide long term value as well, as - if the Cs made a move for him- he'd be the likely candidate to become the Al Horford replacement this team will eventually need.
It’s not about the value of a 2025 1st round pick (a pick that most likely won’t even be good) as much as it is the opportunity cost of locking up draft picks (including ‘24 and ‘26) that could be used to grease other trades (like Horford, White, Brogdon, etc.).
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
28,035
To a smaller degree, it's also about having low-cost guys on the roster/bench. It's not easy to build the roster out if everyone is a vet, especially as they will have two max guys in all probability plus several mid-upper mid guys in Smart, White, TL, Brogdon. So part of the value of picks is that it is cost-controlled guys who can give you minutes and may be value players if they hit even a little bit. That's both about cost and mindset---young players (at least where Celts will draft) typically understand they have to play a role and learn and that's useful to a team.

They got too young at end of Danny's tenure---too many young guys, not enough opportunity or real proven depth. So, given the young core I'm ok giving up three picks in a row for Horford/dumping Kemba; White; and Brogdon. But at some point if you don't refill the bench a bit you're likely to end up thin there because while there's a lot of vet mins, last year's Lakers are an example of why you also want SOME youth and energy mixed in too and that typically requires some picks.

I would love to keep the TPE alive, because it's an asset they can't replace. But realistically, the Brogdon deal shows a lot of commitment from ownership and I'm not sure there's a player worth the cost who they can get for it. I do believe they will use it if magic happens----say, for example, John Collins magically needs a home without taking salary back I do think Celts would swallow the cost and figure it out later (and in spite of above comments on picks, I'd throw one in for that!) I don't expect that to be how this all plays out.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
1,013
I do believe they will use it if magic happens----say, for example, John Collins magically needs a home without taking salary back I do think Celts would swallow the cost and figure it out later (and in spite of above comments on picks, I'd throw one in for that!) I don't expect that to be how this all plays out.
Sadly, no amount of magic is going to help Collins’ $23.5M contract fit into a $17.1M traded player exception.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,220
Santa Monica
Sadly, no amount of magic is going to help Collins’ $23.5M contract fit into a $17.1M traded player exception.
Ha, that's funny.

Even using the two smaller TPEs (Hernangomez $7M/Schroeder $6M) will be a stretch. Expect vet mins to fill out the roster.

I read somewhere that vet minimum contracts count the same against the CAP/tax no matter what the price (they vary in price due to years in the NBA)
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
26,726
I read somewhere that vet minimum contracts count the same against the CAP/tax no matter what the price (they vary in price due to years in the NBA)
Yes, it's called the minimum salary exception (see #22 in CBA FAQs). Team pays equivalent to 2-year minimum salary and for players who have more than 2 years' experience, the league reimburses the team for the difference. It's to incentivize teams to sign vets.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
4,103
I’m not sure where this should go but Seth Partnow has started his player tiers series where he ranks the top 125 players in the NBA.

The Celtics are very well represented thus far…

Tier 5 (85-125): Grant Williams
Tier 4B (60-84): Derrick White and Malcolm Brogdon
Tier 4A (41-59): Marcus Smart, Al Horford and Rob Williams

So, at least according to this exercise, the Celtics will field an 8 man rotation where all of the players are among the top 125 in the league. And their 9th man, Gallinari, was in Tier 5 last year.

In short, this team should be really fucking good
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,220
Santa Monica

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
3,955
If the budget is unlimited then Poeltl is the player to target...

still don't completely buy they will spend more TAX $$$. Whiteside, on vet min, is the best option for now

expect slightly better options than Hassan during the buyout window mid-season
Any expected buyout options you're looking forward to? Hard to predict what will be available but maybe Derrick Favors?
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
4,103
If the budget is unlimited then Poeltl is the player to target...

still don't buy the "unlimited budget" stuff and believe Whiteside is the best option for now

expect slightly better options than Hassan during the buyout window mid-season
I think Poeltl is a combination of cost (that’s a hell of a lot of money for a backup center), cost in a trade, and then willingness to accept a role. He doesn’t seem like a great fit for what they’re looking for. As crazy as it is to say I honestly think he’s probably overqualified.

The ideal (for me) would be someone like Steven Adams. Adams himself would be perfect but unfortunately his contract is prohibitive. But that player archetype. Good defender, good rebounder, doesn’t need the ball, and is content with any sort of role.

Of course, it’s much easier to describe what you are looking for than actually going out, finding and acquiring them
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,220
Santa Monica
I think Poeltl is a combination of cost (that’s a hell of a lot of money for a backup center), cost in a trade, and then willingness to accept a role. He doesn’t seem like a great fit for what they’re looking for. As crazy as it is to say I honestly think he’s probably overqualified.

The ideal (for me) would be someone like Steven Adams. Adams himself would be perfect but unfortunately his contract is prohibitive. But that player archetype. Good defender, good rebounder, doesn’t need the ball, and is content with any sort of role.

Of course, it’s much easier to describe what you are looking for than actually going out, finding and acquiring them
not a starter but unfortunately TL is fragile and will need to be handled with care.

Al is already slated for a lighter schedule which makes sense

Poeltl, if healthy, would see good size minutes no matter what..the role will be very large when the inevitable injury occurs
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
27,080
If the budget is unlimited then Poeltl is the player to target...

still don't completely buy they will spend more TAX $$$. Whiteside, on vet min, is the best option for now

expect slightly better options than Hassan during the buyout window mid-season
Green light to spend whatever it takes "if it's the right deal" seems right to me....

Green light to add a bench big at $7-9M a year... maybe not.
Green light to add salary in a trade that upgrades a top rotation spot... yep.

So a Poetl trade might not be where they spend, but if there was a deal that turned White or Grant into a prime age (or younger) top end PF option that slid Al to the bench... sure they'll go deeper into the tax for that.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,220
Santa Monica
Any expected buyout options you're looking forward to? Hard to predict what will be available but maybe Derrick Favors?
mid-season underperforming teams and a tanker that
(1) wants to buy out the last year of the contract and save a few shekels
(2) increase PT to youngsters
(3) hook up their vet to ring chase with Boston

Spurs may just get there by January. OKC (Muscala/Favors)

Green light to spend whatever it takes "if it's the right deal" seems right to me....

Green light to add a bench big at $7-9M a year... maybe not.
Green light to add salary in a trade that upgrades a top rotation spot... yep.

So a Poetl trade might not be where they spend, but if there was a deal that turned White or Grant into a prime age (or younger) top end PF option that slid Al to the bench... sure they'll go deeper into the tax for that.
White/Grant+ for Collins works...extra $2.3M
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
3,988
Cultural hub of the universe
Green light to spend whatever it takes "if it's the right deal" seems right to me....

Green light to add a bench big at $7-9M a year... maybe not.
Green light to add salary in a trade that upgrades a top rotation spot... yep.

So a Poetl trade might not be where they spend, but if there was a deal that turned White or Grant into a prime age (or younger) top end PF option that slid Al to the bench... sure they'll go deeper into the tax for that.
Ime likes his 2 bigs though, so a 3rd big could be part of a 3 man rotation rather than just a bench big. Combine that with Tatum and Gallinari and you don't need much else up front. Might make GW a little superfluous.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
7,395
New York, NY
I'm a little surprised White and Brogdon are in the same tier. Also a little surprised Smart is in a higher tier than Brogdon.
Why? Both Smart and White are much better defenders than Brogdon and neither is a bad offensive player, although neither is particularly good on that end. The ranking seem about right and there’s probably a better case for Smart or Horford being in the next tier up (I’m not making this case) than that Brogdon or White are too low. Reliability is also a part of this ranking, and Brogdon’s health issues hurt his ranking (healthy he has a case for the 4A tier, which he was in the prior 2 years, although it’s pretty much impossible to see him higher than that). There’s a reasonable argument White should be 5A, where he was the last couple years, and it is a bit harder to understand why he has gone up in rankings after a bad season.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
38,485
Why? Both Smart and White are much better defenders than Brogdon and neither is a bad offensive player, although neither is particularly good on that end. The ranking seem about right and there’s probably a better case for Smart or Horford being in the next tier up (I’m not making this case) than that Brogdon or White are too low. Reliability is also a part of this ranking, and Brogdon’s health issues hurt his ranking (healthy he has a case for the 4A tier, which he was in the prior 2 years, although it’s pretty much impossible to see him higher than that). There’s a reasonable argument White should be 5A, where he was the last couple years, and it is a bit harder to understand why he has gone up in rankings after a bad season.
Plus they are Seth Partnow rankings. Others may come up with different tiering based on other criteria. Partnow is sharp as hell but I suspect that he would not refer to this as a precise exercise. And in the end, even if the tiering is bang on, we all know that it may mean absolutely nothing in terms of wins.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,220
Santa Monica
I'm a little surprised White and Brogdon are in the same tier. Also a little surprised Smart is in a higher tier than Brogdon.
I like his list, but it's really gutsy. I'd expect him to get a bunch of criticism

Tier 5 85-125. He has RJ Barrett and Julius Randle as 5A.
He also has Immanuel Quickley and Quentin Grimes at 5A. That's ballsy. I like Grimes/Quickley a lot & thought the Brunson move was unnecessary. Putting those two in there will raise eyebrows league-wide
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
4,103
I like his list, but it's really gutsy. I'd expect him to get a bunch of criticism

Tier 5 85-125. He has RJ Barrett and Julius Randle as 5A.
He also has Immanuel Quickley and Quentin Grimes at 5A. That's ballsy. I like Grimes/Quickley a lot & thought the Brunson move was unnecessary. Putting those two in there will raise eyebrows league-wide
The biggest omission to me is that he apparently won’t have Wendell Carter as one of his top 125 players (I highly doubt he will be top 40). To me that’s absolutely fucking nuts. Is there a single person that would not trade Grant Williams for Wendell Carter?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
20,955
The biggest omission to me is that he apparently won’t have Wendell Carter as one of his top 125 players (I highly doubt he will be top 40). To me that’s absolutely fucking nuts. Is there a single person that would not trade Grant Williams for Wendell Carter?
His mom?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
15,220
Santa Monica
The biggest omission to me is that he apparently won’t have Wendell Carter as one of his top 125 players (I highly doubt he will be top 40). To me that’s absolutely fucking nuts. Is there a single person that would not trade Grant Williams for Wendell Carter?
Grimes in there after playing 1/2 season, averaging 6 ppg and being considered a reach in the late first round is kind of funny.

BUT I get the Granite complaints after he ghosted the ECF and Finals
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
37,262
Melrose, MA
I'm a little surprised White and Brogdon are in the same tier. Also a little surprised Smart is in a higher tier than Brogdon.
Someone posted DARKO ratings for Smart, Brogdon, White, that, to me, fit with those rankings.

Smart: clearly the best defensive and all around player
Brogdon: clearly the best offensive player
White: clearly the least of the three

But, add in the caveat that Brogdon is a major health risk, and maybe that puts he and White in the same tier, below Smart.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
1,777
The biggest omission to me is that he apparently won’t have Wendell Carter as one of his top 125 players (I highly doubt he will be top 40). To me that’s absolutely fucking nuts. Is there a single person that would not trade Grant Williams for Wendell Carter?
Let's make it happen (sorry Grant's mom).

GW + DW for WCJ + Suggs

Suggs was awful last year & is clearly bad at basketball & GW is apparently better than WCJ, so Magic should probably throw in some picks or Franz Wagner or something.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
20,955
Give Begarin the 2nd 2 way deal.
Sign Kabengele to an NBA deal, possibly to be our back up big.

In that scenario, what would people want with the 14th spot? IIRC, there is no point keeping the 14th spot open. Although paying the 13 guys more wouldn't hurt team morale.

I'm guessing a wing, but maybe a big other than Kabengele.