Grant “Corner Office” Williams

shoelace

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 24, 2019
268
Were Celtics fans who saw how critical Grant was in defending Bam and Giannis last spring really thinking during these playoff series, “Ya know we’ve got a nice 8/9th man out there right now.”? I ask this in all seriousness.

This also ties in to my point in other thread about how fans undervalue switchable wings/bigs (or how teams overvalue them).
I agree with this, Grant is a better player than he is getting credit for here. I feel like some posters struggle to properly evaluate the talent and value of roleplayers. I'm remembering the "DANIEL THEIS IS AN ALBATROSS" stuff from last year and then he ends up being a piece of a package to acquire Malcolm Brogdon, lol. This conversation happens with every RFA, it seems, and it always comes down to this nebulous idea that there's just some player out there that you can somehow acquire to do most of (I guess we're settling on 80%?) of what the RFA does for less money. Grant swung the Bucks series last year, that 20% downgrade could save some luxury tax payments, but you're losing real, meaningful on-court production by doing that and maybe you end up losing that series without him. Who are they acquiring to fill this role who can defend guys like Giannis and Durant in the playoffs and shoot 40% from three? I'm not convinced it's Mike Muscala, lol. And I like Muscala, but he's been a 15 MPG player for his career for a reason.

They have let RFAs go in the past, but at least to my recollection that was when they had a meaningful chance to sign a max free agent. Yes, there is new management, but Brad has shown a willingness to acquire market price, high-end roleplayers (Brodgon and White), so I don't see why he wouldn't extend Grant. I expect he puts Grant in that category, regardless of his DARKO. I'm sure Brad, like most GMs, doesn't give a shit about that at all in terms of evaluating his impact on the court. If the tax implications become too great in a future season, like if they have to supermax Jaylen, Brad can just trade Grant at that point. Al is taking a $17,000,000 pay cut next season, which is probably in the range of what Grant will end up getting, so Grant's raise is getting absorbed into that. Dump Pritchard (doing him a solid, honestly) and Gallinari into space for nothing if tax savings are a concern and replace those guys within minimum contract ring chasers.

Grant is close friends with Tatum, so there may be added benefit to keeping him around if it makes Tatum happy. If the Celtics win a championship this year, which is a real possibility, I can't see them doing a sign and trade with Grant or letting him walk. That feels like a good way to alienate your roster. Now, if they get bounced in the Conference Semifinals or something this year and want to retool the entire roster, it's a different story.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
The Grant Williams salary debate always has me thinking about insurance and how there can be a huge difference between market value and replacement value. Like, it may not do me a lot of good if you compensate me for the value of what I lost if it’s something I still want or need and I can’t then go out and get another one with the money I’ve received.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
The beauty of this discussion is that in a few short months we get price discovery and then we'll get simultaneous cries of underpay and overpay from the crowd here (with no real basis for either conclusion).

As a side note, I haven't heard of NBA players complaining about the pay of others very often if at all, especially given that a lot of salaries are essentially formulaic and designed to fit within a cap. Also, I would think a player whose team uses Bird rights or any other mechanism to pay up to retain players might actually be a great place to play, especially if its a contending team like Boston.

Finally, I think players realize that even if a bad player gets "overpaid" whatever that means, it generally benefits everyone by setting the market higher. I mean I have seen people arguing for discounts during a bull market but those discussions typically end quickly.
 
Last edited:

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The issue (for me) with paying GW something in excess of $20M per year is not about luxury tax or Wyc’s money or cap implications, it’s about how it might impact the chemistry of Marcus, DW, and RW who see a guy who is below them all in the value order leap far over them all in the money order.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
I agree with this, Grant is a better player than he is getting credit for here. I feel like some posters struggle to properly evaluate the talent and value of roleplayers. I'm remembering the "DANIEL THEIS IS AN ALBATROSS" stuff from last year and then he ends up being a piece of a package to acquire Malcolm Brogdon, lol. This conversation happens with every RFA, it seems, and it always comes down to this nebulous idea that there's just some player out there that you can somehow acquire to do most of (I guess we're settling on 80%?) of what the RFA does for less money. Grant swung the Bucks series last year, that 20% downgrade could save some luxury tax payments, but you're losing real, meaningful on-court production by doing that and maybe you end up losing that series without him. Who are they acquiring to fill this role who can defend guys like Giannis and Durant in the playoffs and shoot 40% from three? I'm not convinced it's Mike Muscala, lol. And I like Muscala, but he's been a 15 MPG player for his career for a reason.

They have let RFAs go in the past, but at least to my recollection that was when they had a meaningful chance to sign a max free agent. Yes, there is new management, but Brad has shown a willingness to acquire market price, high-end roleplayers (Brodgon and White), so I don't see why he wouldn't extend Grant. I expect he puts Grant in that category, regardless of his DARKO. I'm sure Brad, like most GMs, doesn't give a shit about that at all in terms of evaluating his impact on the court. If the tax implications become too great in a future season, like if they have to supermax Jaylen, Brad can just trade Grant at that point. Al is taking a $17,000,000 pay cut next season, which is probably in the range of what Grant will end up getting, so Grant's raise is getting absorbed into that. Dump Pritchard (doing him a solid, honestly) and Gallinari into space for nothing if tax savings are a concern and replace those guys within minimum contract ring chasers.

Grant is close friends with Tatum, so there may be added benefit to keeping him around if it makes Tatum happy. If the Celtics win a championship this year, which is a real possibility, I can't see them doing a sign and trade with Grant or letting him walk. That feels like a good way to alienate your roster. Now, if they get bounced in the Conference Semifinals or something this year and want to retool the entire roster, it's a different story.
I'm skeptical anyone said Daniel This was an albatross? They desperately needed a BIG with TimeLords injury
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
The beauty of this discussion is that in a few short months we get price discovery and then we'll get simultaneous cries of underpay and overpay from the crowd here (with no real basis for either conclusion).

As a side note, I haven't heard of NBA players complaining about the pay of others very often if at all, especially given that a lot of salaries are essentially formulaic and designed to fit within a cap. Also, I would think a player whose team uses Bird rights or any other mechanism to pay up to retain players might actually be a great place to play, especially if its a contending team like Boston.

Finally, I think players realize that even if a bad player gets "overpaid" whatever that means, it generally benefits everyone by setting the market higher. I mean I have seen people arguing for discounts during a bull market but those discussions typically end quickly.
To your point, I think the relationships between a player and his agent (and agents team) educated them on what the market is a shit ton better than two decades ago. Back then we heard of players complaining they couldn’t even reach their guy after he signed his deal. In other words, the business relationship that todays players have with their people has educated them a lot more in the business side of the game.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,157
I think players understand that the market goes up, so I would be very skeptical that Marcus Smart would be upset that Grant was being paid more. It would just make Smart feel confident that when it was his turn he’d make even more. Now if Smart was negotiating an extension at the same time ad Grant, that’d be different
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
I think players understand that the market goes up, so I would be very skeptical that Marcus Smart would be upset that Grant was being paid more. It would just make Smart feel confident that when it was his turn he’d make even more. Now if Smart was negotiating an extension at the same time ad Grant, that’d be different
Indeed and if a team decides to pay one player in lieu of another, the person on the short end might be understandably bitter but they are gone anyway. And if a player signed their deal in a poor market a year or two prior they too might be frustrated but I would imagine its more at events overall than the team or at others who got paid.

But then again, money makes folks behave irrationally all the damn time.
 

shoelace

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 24, 2019
268
I'm skeptical anyone said Daniel This was an albatross? They desperately needed a BIG with TimeLords injury
I was being hyperbolic, but there was concern about acquiring Theis because he had two years remaining on his contract and that might make him more difficult to move without stapling assets to him. In the grand scheme of things, he ended up being traded with a possible draft bust and what will likely be the 29th or 30th overall pick for an elite roleplayer, so he clearly wasn't a huge negative. We had folks saying that just signing DeMarcus Cousins would have been a better move than trading for Theis and stuff like that. It's all in the Theis trade thread. It wasn't everyone or even the majority of posters, but there was definitely conversation around that.

I bring it up because this is a constant thing on this forum, people overreacting to what they perceive as an overpay that isn't, and it usually revolves around the complex question of how to value roleplayers. But the real issue is that these contract numbers are extremely context driven, and so it's hard to really pin that down and say "Is player X really worth $20,000,000?" That said, most NBA front offices are pretty smart, if Grant is getting offers for $18,000,000-20,000,000 a year, that's his value. He would be tradeable at that number. So, if you like the player and he fits well with your roster, just re-sign him and trade him later if there is some financial imperative to do so. I expect that's what they'll do, we'll see.

I also don't see him as being the kind of guy who gets a huge RFA number. He's a limited upside, elite roleplayer. He doesn't move the needle for anyone other than a contender or fringe contender, and you wouldn't allow him to go to one of those teams anyway. It's better for teams like Indiana to use that to make an offer to someone who might be able to help push them over the top to be a clear playoff contender. I'm guessing he ends up back here on like a 4 year, $65-$70,000,000 deal.
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
I was being hyperbolic, but there was concern about acquiring Theis because he had two years remaining on his contract and that might make him more difficult to move without stapling assets to him. In the grand scheme of things, he ended up being traded with a possible draft bust and what will likely be the 29th or 30th overall pick for an elite roleplayer, so he clearly wasn't a huge negative. We had folks saying that just signing DeMarcus Cousins would have been a better move than trading for Theis and stuff like that. It's all in the Theis trade thread. It wasn't everyone or even the majority of posters, but there was definitely conversation around that.

I bring it up because this is a constant thing on this forum, people overreacting to what they perceive as an overpay that isn't, and it usually revolves around the complex question of how to value roleplayers. But the real issue is that these contract numbers are extremely context driven, and so it's hard to really pin that down and say "Is player X really worth $20,000,000?" That said, most NBA front offices are pretty smart, if Grant is getting offers for $18,000,000-20,000,000 a year, that's his value. He would be tradeable at that number. So, if you like the player and he fits well with your roster, just re-sign him and trade him later if there is some financial imperative to do so. I expect that's what they'll do, we'll see.

I also don't see him as being the kind of guy who gets a huge RFA number. He's a limited upside, elite roleplayer. He doesn't move the needle for anyone other than a contender or fringe contender, and you wouldn't allow him to go to one of those teams anyway. It's better for teams like Indiana to use that to make an offer to someone who might be able to help push them over the top to be a clear playoff contender. I'm guessing he ends up back here on like a 4 year, $65-$70,000,000 deal.
Ok I agree with most of that. Theis at $8M was pretty handy back-up 5 last year, but it was a longish deal so maybe that annoyed some folks.

At the end of the day, it's the RFA optionality that really dings Grant's price, as it did to Smart. If Brad was cavalier with ~$20M they would have just written that check last summer. I'm not sure Grant has increased his value through 50-odd games this year. I suspect Brad/Zarren aren't all that concerned, they got this one.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
It’s definitely not a bad straw man when it keeps being repeated that he’s out 8/9th man. Personally, I’m unsure how to value him for our team moving forward and sure, while he was less than good in a bad matchup against the Warriors speed which we all expected, he still started 5 games and avg 27mpg in the postseason last year…..8/9th don’t do this. Our actual 8/9th men in last years playoffs saw sparse 12.9mpg and our 9th had a bunch of DNP-CD mixed in.
Why you're saying 9th is beyond me.

I said 8th. I showed a list of the guys ahead of him. If you want to make a case why he's better than JB, JT, MS, AH, MB, DW, or RW, please be my guest.

He wasn't our 8th man last year, but he is now. He's probably a 6-7 on most teams, a 4-5 on bad ones. If that's a 21MM x4 player, so be it. I'm all for keeping him at that rate, especially if there really isn't a better way to spend that 21MM. But you haven't refuted anything that has been said about Grant being the 8th man except to remind us that he wasn't last year.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Why you're saying 9th is beyond me.

I said 8th. I showed a list of the guys ahead of him. If you want to make a case why he's better than JB, JT, MS, AH, MB, DW, or RW, please be my guest.

He wasn't our 8th man last year, but he is now. He's probably a 6-7 on most teams, a 4-5 on bad ones. If that's a 21MM x4 player, so be it. I'm all for keeping him at that rate, especially if there really isn't a better way to spend that 21MM. But you haven't refuted anything that has been said about Grant being the 8th man except to remind is that he wasn't last year.
Others have said 8/9 on this board today it wasn’t only in reference to your post. I’ve read 9 at least twice today unless I’m losing my mind…..which is not out of the realm to be fair.

He’s avg 28 mpg THIS year while starting 37% of our games. He closes games. How does this equate to an 8th man? Grant is 4 mpg shy of being 3rd on the team in mpg. He’d even probably be closer if not for foul trouble.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
He’s avg 28 mpg THIS year while starting 37% of our games. He closes games. How does this equate to an 8th man? Grant is 4 mpg shy of being 3rd on the team in mpg. He’d even probably be closer if not for foul trouble.
You have yet to tell us who the 8th man on this team actually is if not Grant.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
You have yet to tell us who the 8th man on this team actually is if not Grant.
Does it matter? My only point is that it’s disingenuous to use that term of 8/9th man in describing Grants value to us or to another team looking to sign him over the summer when he’s playing the majority of minites on arguably the best team in the league.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
11,862
He's an 8th man on a healthy Celtics team (starting a bunch due to injuries/resting), likely a 6th man on a contender, and a starter on a fringe team.

These can all be true.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
Does it matter? My only point is that it’s disingenuous to use that term of 8/9th man in describing Grants value to us or to another team looking to sign him over the summer when he’s playing the majority of minites on arguably the best team in the league.
As this response illustrates, it’s really hard to argue that Grant isn’t at best the 8th best player on the Celtics. He’s probably more like a 6th/7th man in traditional usage of those terms to describe a skill level. (He was our 7th best player last year, and I think one could make an argument for putting him ahead of Brogdon, although I wouldn’t.)

That really doesn’t matter though. Objectively, Grant isn’t a $20 million player unless you think all the advanced metrics are wrong. This year, he has a -1.12 LEBRON, the best of his career, which is good for 117th among players with at least 1,200 minutes. RAPTOR ranks him 113th using the same minutes cutoff. I don’t think DARKO has a similar way to compare single season performance by minutes, but it has a virtually identical view of his skill level (around -1, which is the same as RAPTOR).

Now, there’s an argument that Grant is an elite playoff defender. He certainly looked like on at times last year. I could see Grant getting a big payday if he comes back again this year and shows out as a lock down playoff defender on Giannis, Durant, etc. (Grant rates as around average in the playoffs last year, with the difference being his defense, so he really was better but that numbers are still well behind the consensus reaction from watching the games.) But regular season Grant Williams is not worth $20 million a year. And Brad has generally seemed to value players with strong statistical profiles, so it’s hard to see him paying that much for Grant if he does have a market at that level.
 

Just a bit outside

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2011
7,927
Monument, CO
Grant is your first big/wing off the bench. You could argue anywhere 6-8 on this team. Hr may not be better than White or Brogdon but I think missing Grant has more of an effect than missing one of those two.
He is important in that role taking minutes and punishment during the regular season and matches up defensively against some of the best players in the game. I hope they can find a way keep him that works in the budget.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,425
As this response illustrates, it’s really hard to argue that Grant isn’t at best the 8th best player on the Celtics. He’s probably more like a 6th/7th man in traditional usage of those terms to describe a skill level. (He was our 7th best player last year, and I think one could make an argument for putting him ahead of Brogdon, although I wouldn’t.)

That really doesn’t matter though. Objectively, Grant isn’t a $20 million player unless you think all the advanced metrics are wrong. This year, he has a -1.12 LEBRON, the best of his career, which is good for 117th among players with at least 1,200 minutes. RAPTOR ranks him 113th using the same minutes cutoff. I don’t think DARKO has a similar way to compare single season performance by minutes, but it has a virtually identical view of his skill level (around -1, which is the same as RAPTOR).

Now, there’s an argument that Grant is an elite playoff defender. He certainly looked like on at times last year. I could see Grant getting a big payday if he comes back again this year and shows out as a lock down playoff defender on Giannis, Durant, etc. (Grant rates as around average in the playoffs last year, with the difference being his defense, so he really was better but that numbers are still well behind the consensus reaction from watching the games.) But regular season Grant Williams is not worth $20 million a year. And Brad has generally seemed to value players with strong statistical profiles, so it’s hard to see him paying that much for Grant if he does have a market at that level.
Again...it doesn't really matter if he's worth $20M a season. The issue is that, because we're over the cap, we can't replace him with anything but lottery tickets that almost certainly won't provide the same value.

So, either we overpay for him, or lose him and replace him with a much worse player.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
As this response illustrates, it’s really hard to argue that Grant isn’t at best the 8th best player on the Celtics. He’s probably more like a 6th/7th man in traditional usage of those terms to describe a skill level. (He was our 7th best player last year, and I think one could make an argument for putting him ahead of Brogdon, although I wouldn’t.)

That really doesn’t matter though. Objectively, Grant isn’t a $20 million player unless you think all the advanced metrics are wrong. This year, he has a -1.12 LEBRON, the best of his career, which is good for 117th among players with at least 1,200 minutes. RAPTOR ranks him 113th using the same minutes cutoff. I don’t think DARKO has a similar way to compare single season performance by minutes, but it has a virtually identical view of his skill level (around -1, which is the same as RAPTOR).

Now, there’s an argument that Grant is an elite playoff defender. He certainly looked like on at times last year. I could see Grant getting a big payday if he comes back again this year and shows out as a lock down playoff defender on Giannis, Durant, etc. (Grant rates as around average in the playoffs last year, with the difference being his defense, so he really was better but that numbers are still well behind the consensus reaction from watching the games.) But regular season Grant Williams is not worth $20 million a year. And Brad has generally seemed to value players with strong statistical profiles, so it’s hard to see him paying that much for Grant if he does have a market at that level.
Agree with all of this 100%. I was one of the people who said 8/9 earlier HRB, please accept my apologies, I am happy to say 8th.

On a good team he is still just a bench guy to me, and his profile by many advanced metrics is simply not very good.

I do think Brad values him, but I also don't expect him to be a guy we stretch the budget for. 20M/year doesn't get what it used to, but that still seems to be more than Grant is worth.

4/60 or so I think works.... otherwise we appreciate your efforts and good luck at your next stop (hopefully with a ring to show off).
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
Again...it doesn't really matter if he's worth $20M a season. The issue is that, because we're over the cap, we can't replace him with anything but lottery tickets that almost certainly won't provide the same value.

So, either we overpay for him, or lose him and replace him with a much worse player.
Yes and no. Certainly we can't automatically take the $ saved and put it into a new 15+M guy. But Wyc also presumably has a budget and things get expensive quickly up there.

I have faith in Brad to be able to find a similar (perhaps slightly worse) version of Grant, at a much cheaper number if it comes to that.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
11,862
Again...it doesn't really matter if he's worth $20M a season. The issue is that, because we're over the cap, we can't replace him with anything but lottery tickets that almost certainly won't provide the same value.

So, either we overpay for him, or lose him and replace him with a much worse player.
Right. This is solely about Wyc's money. So I'll be very pissed if we don't match, given that he's a billionaire with a constantly appreciating asset.
 

GeorgeCostanza

tiger king
SoSH Member
May 16, 2009
7,286
Found in central mass
I don’t know that there are any other guys who shoot 40+% from 3 and can respectably slow down Embiid and Giannis. It’s hard to quantify so I understand why people in this thread are all over the map.

I for one love the guy and would hate to see him go.
 
Last edited:

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
I don’t know that there are any other guys who shoot 40+% and can respectably slow down Embiid and Giannis. It’s hard to quantify so I understand why people in this thread are all over the map.

I for one love the guy and would hate to see him go.
That's fair, and HRB also called out his ability to bother other guys and how much that matters in playoff matchups. If it's money or Grant, of course I'd rather have Grant. He's a guy who does the little things too.

The range of guys making between 20M and 22M this year, per HoopsHype, is as follows: Vucevic, Rozier, VanVleet, Heild, Jerami Grant, Mikal Bridges, Jarrett Allen.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
That's fair, and HRB also called out his ability to bother other guys and how much that matters in playoff matchups. If it's money or Grant, of course I'd rather have Grant. He's a guy who does the little things too.

The range of guys making between 20M and 22M this year, per HoopsHype, is as follows: Vucevic, Rozier, VanVleet, Heild, Jerami Grant, Mikal Bridges, Jarrett Allen.
If Wyc just doesn't at all care about $, then yeah sign me up.

For what it's worth, Grant likely would be the worst player in the 20-22M group


Grant1.pngGrant2.png
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
I can see why he thinks that he belongs in that group. I like him better than Grant, Rozier, Hield, and Vucevic, even if those guys do some things better.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
I can see why he thinks that he belongs in that group. I like him better than Grant, Rozier, Hield, and Vucevic, even if those guys do some things better.
Definitely a mixed bag of players with some different strengths and flaws. I can see him over Hield or J.Grant, especially when you consider role. I'd take GWill over Vucevic now for sure, but wouldn't have when Vuc was entering his prime.

Overall he looks on the low end of that group but sure if Wyc just doesn't care at all about $, bring on 4/85.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Only caveat is that that group signed their contracts when the cap was a lot lower, so a group making 16-18 is a better comparison.

Which, once again, shows how hard the rapidly rising cap makes these value intuitions. Current Grant at $20M is an overpay, but not as much of one as it *feels*.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,425
So, I doubt he gets offered $20M a year, but if the offer is there the Cs need to match.

Business being what it is, I assume the Cs offer a respectable $12-14M a year, he shops it around, nobody wants to lose the 48 hours of free agency/play the offer sheet game with the Celtics, and they end up settling on 3-4 years at $16-18M.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Grant's usage:

2019-20: 8th in regular season, 7th in playoffs
2020-21: 7th in regular season, 10th in playoffs
2021-22: 5th in regular season, 5th in playoffs - in a team that reached the finals
2022-23: 4th in regular season, on what is so far the best team in the league

It is all well and good to say that when the Celtics are healthy he is the 8th best player, but they aren't always healthy and certain players above him (Rob, Horford, Brogdon) are never going to play more minutes.

I'm not going to speculate on his precise monetary value, but I think dismissing him as an 8th man is missing the forest for the trees. He's an "8th man" who played starter minutes in a playoff run that would have ended with a round 2 loss if not for him. Were he to leave he would be far more difficult to replace than an 8th man.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,157
Maybe a different way to think about it, who are the guys from his class that are entering RFA this Summer?

How does Grant compare with them?

And, while this is not easy, how many players typically get paid 16-20 in a given RFA season?
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,425
Maybe a different way to think about it, who are the guys from his class that are entering RFA this Summer?

How does Grant compare with them?

And, while this is not easy, how many players typically get paid 16-20 in a given RFA season?
Why think about it that way? This feels like a no-brainer. I'm a little confused how this is even a conversation.

The Celtics are in a unique situation. They're staring at a long championship window with no cap space. They are NOT going to be able to replace Grant in free agency. I mean, never say never, but...with the space they'll have, you're looking at bottom third of the roster players. Blake Griffin types. The only way they can (essentially) go over the cap is by re-signing Bird-rights guys like Grant.

So, if he gets offered a large contract, they either match - at the expense of Wyc's wallet and nothing else - or their roster gets worse.

They COULD replace his value by getting creative and trading away assets...but why? Why trade away assets they could use to better their roster during this window in order to hope they can replace Grant? They'd be burning assets to stay level instead of using them to improve. And the only reason would be because it costs Wyc money.

Someone mentioned it earlier, and I was hesitant to because of the obvious gap between a legendary team and this one, but I think the situations are apt. This is what the Warriors did to stay at the top. They drafted/built a foundation, paid to keep it together and blow past the cap, and then use the depth contracts as trade ballast when needed.

This was what Danny blew it all up for. To get to this point. A championship caliber team that they can keep together for a long window. Wyc just hast to pony up the cash.

Be smart, don't bid against yourselves...but pay Grant when it's time.
 
Last edited:

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,199
CA
Maybe a different way to think about it, who are the guys from his class that are entering RFA this Summer?

How does Grant compare with them?

And, while this is not easy, how many players typically get paid 16-20 in a given RFA season?
2019 1st Round Draft Picks who are RFAs in 2023:

Grant Williams (22nd pick) Career WS 11.4
Mfiondu Kabengele (27th pick) WS 0.4
PJ Washington (12th pick) WS 10.2
Coby White (7th pick) WS 7.3
Goga Bitadze (18th pick) WS 4.4
Rui Hachimura (9th pick) WS 6.4
Jaxson Hayes (8th pick) WS 13.5
Cam Reddish (10th pick) WS 1.9
Darius Bazley (23rd pick) WS 2.7
Matisse Thybulle (20th pick) WS 10.2
Cam Johnson (11th pick) WS 12.5
Nassir Little (25th pick) WS 4.2
Romeo Langford (14th pick) WS 2.1
Nickeil Alexander-Walker (17th pick) WS 1.4

2019 1st Round Draft Picks who signed extensions already:

Zion Williamson (5 years / $194M) WS 14.2
Ja Morant (5 years / $194M) WS 18.9
RJ Barrett (4 years / $107M) WS 7.6
Deandre Hunter (4 years / $90M) WS 5.1
Darius Garland (5 years / $194M) WS 12.5
Tyler Herro (4 years / $120M) WS 9.7
Brandon Clarke (4 years / $50M) WS 19.8
Jordan Poole (4 years / $128M) WS 8.4
Keldon Johnson (4 years / $74M) WS 10.4
Kevin Porter Jr (4 years / $64M) WS 2.4

I know WS is not perfect, but included for context — others can add better comps.

Still, Brandon Clarke seems like a GREAT deal!
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
I know WS is not perfect, but included for context — others can add better comps.

Still, Brandon Clarke seems like a GREAT deal!
Hard to argue with Grant that he doesn't deserve the De'Andre Hunter contract.... The Hawks are so dumb.

I think it will be interesting to see what Brad/Wyc do if things somehow get above 4/60-70 in RFA.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,489
Why think about it that way? This feels like a no-brainer. I'm a little confused how this is even a conversation.

The Celtics are in a unique situation. They're staring at a long championship window with no cap space. They are NOT going to be able to replace Grant in free agency. I mean, never say never, but...with the space they'll have, you're looking at bottom third of the roster players. Blake Griffin types. The only way they can (essentially) go over the cap is by re-signing Bird-rights guys like Grant.

So, if he gets offered a large contract, they either match - at the expense of Wyc's wallet and nothing else - or their roster gets worse.

They COULD replace his value by getting creative and trading away assets...but why? Why trade away assets they could use to better their roster during this window in order to hope they can replace Grant? They'd be burning assets to stay level instead of using them to improve. And the only reason would be because it costs Wyc money.

Someone mentioned it earlier, and I was hesitant to because of the obvious gap between a legendary team and this one, but I think the situations are apt. This is what the Warriors did to stay at the top. They drafted/built a foundation, paid to keep it together and blow past the cap, and then use the depth contracts as trade ballast when needed.

This was what Danny blew it all up for. To get to this point. A championship caliber team that they can keep together for a long window. Wyc just hast to pony up the cash.

Be smart, don't bid against yourselves...but pay Grant when it's time.
Your point is well taken but here's the problem.

I'm sure POBOBS signs GW in a NY minute if it's 4 years adn $16M or less a year. He might have to think a little bit if it gets inot the $18M/year range but does it and as you point out, even going up to $20M/year is probably the correct thing to do (unless luxury taxes becomes a more important consideration than talent).

However, it's free agency and it only takes one team to fall in love with GW to start throwing around bigger numbers, even potentially much bigger number.

My non-GM, non-expert feeling is that if GW gets $25M/year for four years, he's gone, and if he gets $20M/year or under he stays and everything between that will depend on other things (like whether they already have a ring and what they do with Gallo and PP). But who knows? After all, while it's only money, it's still money.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,157
2019 1st Round Draft Picks who are RFAs in 2023:

Grant Williams (22nd pick) Career WS 11.4
Mfiondu Kabengele (27th pick) WS 0.4
PJ Washington (12th pick) WS 10.2
Coby White (7th pick) WS 7.3
Goga Bitadze (18th pick) WS 4.4
Rui Hachimura (9th pick) WS 6.4
Jaxson Hayes (8th pick) WS 13.5
Cam Reddish (10th pick) WS 1.9
Darius Bazley (23rd pick) WS 2.7
Matisse Thybulle (20th pick) WS 10.2
Cam Johnson (11th pick) WS 12.5
Nassir Little (25th pick) WS 4.2
Romeo Langford (14th pick) WS 2.1
Nickeil Alexander-Walker (17th pick) WS 1.4
How many teams will have room to sign some of these guys to big offer sheets? It is a bit of musical chairs. I can't remember now, can they still sign an extension between now and RFA season, or is that not possible?

Side note, it's interesting what a crapshoot the draft really is at the end of the day.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
Why think about it that way? This feels like a no-brainer. I'm a little confused how this is even a conversation.

The Celtics are in a unique situation. They're staring at a long championship window with no cap space. They are NOT going to be able to replace Grant in free agency. I mean, never say never, but...with the space they'll have, you're looking at bottom third of the roster players. Blake Griffin types. The only way they can (essentially) go over the cap is by re-signing Bird-rights guys like Grant.

So, if he gets offered a large contract, they either match - at the expense of Wyc's wallet and nothing else - or their roster gets worse.

They COULD replace his value by getting creative and trading away assets...but why? Why trade away assets they could use to better their roster during this window in order to hope they can replace Grant? They'd be burning assets to stay level instead of using them to improve. And the only reason would be because it costs Wyc money.

Someone mentioned it earlier, and I was hesitant to because of the obvious gap between a legendary team and this one, but I think the situations are apt. This is what the Warriors did to stay at the top. They drafted/built a foundation, paid to keep it together and blow past the cap, and then use the depth contracts as trade ballast when needed.

This was what Danny blew it all up for. To get to this point. A championship caliber team that they can keep together for a long window. Wyc just hast to pony up the cash.

Be smart, don't bid against yourselves...but pay Grant when it's time.
I agree Boston shouldn't bid against themselves, let Grant go get a deal, and match it if Brad/Zarren don't have a back-up plan. BUT I expect they have contingencies.

We all want to spend Wyc's money to the extreme. There isn't a person on here that thinks they will be better without Grant.

The Warriors pay $160M a year in taxes without batting an eye. They are about to lose a key player in Draymond Green who wanted a $30M/yr ext. like his buddy Jordan Poole received. I suspect Dray not getting love from Bob and the JP overpay created some tension in the preseason.

The Celtics are the 4th highest tax-paying team at the moment with Brown/Tatum due for massive raises over the next few years.

Note: if the Celtics had an unlimited budget they probably would have used the TPEs that expired instead of keeping an open roster spot.

Prepare for the worst (Grant gets a sizeable offer & we lose him) & hope for the best (RFA dents Grant's price tag and they get him on a reasonable deal)
 
Last edited:

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
How many teams will have room to sign some of these guys to big offer sheets?
I think the bigger question is how many of these guys will be worth big offer sheets. It's pretty much Grant and Cam Johnson and everyone else is a gamble (HRB's love for Rui aside). And even they probably aren't at the "We have to sign this guy to an offer sheet and forego normal free agency" level.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
The Celtics are 17-5 with Grant starting this season. Having a reserve plug and play seamlessly as a starter on a team where one starting big is made out of crystal, and the other is old enough to have battled LeBron when his hairline wasn’t CGI-ed is a valuable thing. Added bonuses: He can defend Giannis, Embiid, and Jokic, with the ability to cover 1-5 on switches, and is a 40%+ shooter from three.

With the Jays figuring to have a long championship window, key role players like Grant Williams need to be retained, even at $3 million over what is considered good value.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
So which of these teams do we see giving Grant this hypothetical $20M a year deal:
  1. Houston Rockets - $56.2 million
  2. Utah Jazz - $53.8 million
  3. San Antonio Spurs - $46.0 million
  4. Oklahoma City Thunder - $30.4 million
  5. Detroit Pistons - $27.9 million
  6. Indiana Pacers - $26.6 million
  7. Sacramento Kings - $21.5 million
  8. Orlando Magic - $21.1 million
Kings and Pacers maybe?
Kings and Pacers are great fits. If OKC decides to start really going for it, they make sense too.

The Pacers could overpay him and still do a declining contract, which would make Grant a significant asset on the back end of the deal.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,947
The Celtics are 17-5 with Grant starting this season. Having a reserve plug and play seamlessly as a starter on a team where one starting big is made out of crystal, and the other is old enough to have battled LeBron when his hairline wasn’t CGI-ed is a valuable thing. Added bonuses: He can defend Giannis, Embiid, and Jokic, with the ability to cover 1-5 on switches, and is a 40%+ shooter from three.

With the Jays figuring to have a long championship window, key role players like Grant Williams need to be retained, even at $3 million over what is considered good value.
This. All of this.

I mean, if we're talking about 17mil/year or 20mil/year, does it matter if the guy wins you games?

Of course, it's hard for me to even understand the player's side of these things either. I'd be just as happy with $340,000 a week, instead of $400,000 a week to play the game I love.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Kings and Pacers are great fits. If OKC decides to start really going for it, they make sense too.

The Pacers could overpay him and still do a declining contract, which would make Grant a significant asset on the back end of the deal.
I can’t imagine Grant ever agreeing to a declining contract during his prime years. That only makes sense for a player when they can lock up an additional year on the backend of their career when they would otherwise be a FA whose role would be similar to Blake and on a min deal. I would also imagine this is something the agent and the Players Association wouldn’t be in line with as they fought for the salary escalations during the labor negotiations.

The market still has a ways to go before it shakes out with the Player Option guys opting in and such. Grant’s destination will likely be a team who misses out on their primary target and use Grant as a fall back option to use their space. He’s going to be one of the more sought after guys in that sub-market assuming he isn’t off the board right away.
 
Last edited:

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,754
Pittsburgh, PA
Just an old man yelling at clouds comments but 20 million bucks a year for that guy? Christ i wish i had a better jump shot.
He's also 6'6" and built like a brick shithouse. Joel Embiid is a physical freak, and can't move him. He can keep up with all but the fastest guards. There may be a lot of people with good jump shots, but not a lot of them can say that, too. And that happens to have a lot of value to a few specific teams.

That's basically Marcus Smart money. Not too far above Time Lord money ($12.5M). Grant should come in somewhere north of TL and I would hope a little shy of Smart. Add a few years of inflation since those deals, and that feels right.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,754
Pittsburgh, PA
Right. This is solely about Wyc's money. So I'll be very pissed if we don't match, given that he's a billionaire with a constantly appreciating asset.
Wyc is on record that he doesn't care how much we spend, that we're in win-now mode. So the choice is between GW, or whoever we could get with his salary slot in a S&T.

I don't know the likely names in that conversation but if we're trading a $20M contract, we can take back $16-25M in 2023-24 salary. There are a lot of useful players in that range, but our first priority would be to replace our "3rd wing" role, for which we'd need... most of what Grant brings to the table. I'd sooner keep his defense than his outside shooting, but either one are pretty expensive skills at his size.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I can’t imagine Grant ever agreeing to a declining contract during his prime years. That only makes sense for a player when they can lock up an additional year on the backend of their career when they would otherwise be a FA whose role would be similar to Blake and on a min deal. I would also imagine this is something the agent and the Players Association wouldn’t be in line with as they fought for the salary escalations during the labor negotiations.

The market still has a ways to go before it shakes out with the Player Option guys opting in and such. Grant’s destination will likely be a team who misses out on their primary target and use Grant as a fall back option to use their space. He’s going to be one of the more sought after guys in that sub-market assuming he isn’t off the board right away.
Guys sign contracts that step down rather than step up each year all the time. I mean something like 4/85 with the first year at $23M (have to do out the exact numbers). Aaron Gordon, to take one example, was on exactly this type of deal.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,518
Maine
We all talk about "Wycs Money" but at the end of the day its the "Celtics money".
Wyc could be like "I have 400 million in Networth so I am fine. I dont need any influx from the Celts every year".

I think the real question is how much can the Celts afford to continue to pay BEFORE Wyc has to start writing checks out of his net worth. Cause yea....400 is alot....but not that much.

Couldnt (in thoery) he also do something that infused cash into the org? Championships would make sponsorships more valuable. Ticket prices could be increased. A heavy pocketed Minority owner (TB? Or FSG?) could be brought in to ride the championship wave and spend some money.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
We all talk about "Wycs Money" but at the end of the day its the "Celtics money".
Wyc could be like "I have 400 million in Networth so I am fine. I dont need any influx from the Celts every year".

I think the real question is how much can the Celts afford to continue to pay BEFORE Wyc has to start writing checks out of his net worth. Cause yea....400 is alot....but not that much.

Couldnt (in thoery) he also do something that infused cash into the org? Championships would make sponsorships more valuable. Ticket prices could be increased. A heavy pocketed Minority owner (TB? Or FSG?) could be brought in to ride the championship wave and spend some money.
The good news in all of this Grant Brinks Truck conversation is that this is an offseason problem, not a now problem. Fun to talk about for sure. If we're hanging banner #18, it'll be fun to discuss over brews on the beach.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
He's also 6'6" and built like a brick shithouse. Joel Embiid is a physical freak, and can't move him. He can keep up with all but the fastest guards. There may be a lot of people with good jump shots, but not a lot of them can say that, too. And that happens to have a lot of value to a few specific teams.

That's basically Marcus Smart money. Not too far above Time Lord money ($12.5M). Grant should come in somewhere north of TL and I would hope a little shy of Smart. Add a few years of inflation since those deals, and that feels right.
It's not a particularly serious comment. I'm sure he's worth something like 20 million in the context of a world wide sports league; he has very marketable talents shared by only by what, 100-200 people on earth, and it's not like athletic strong six foot six guys grow on trees. It's just a huge huge huge amount of money.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
2019 1st Round Draft Picks who are RFAs in 2023:

Grant Williams (22nd pick) Career WS 11.4
Mfiondu Kabengele (27th pick) WS 0.4
PJ Washington (12th pick) WS 10.2
Coby White (7th pick) WS 7.3
Goga Bitadze (18th pick) WS 4.4
Rui Hachimura (9th pick) WS 6.4
Jaxson Hayes (8th pick) WS 13.5
Cam Reddish (10th pick) WS 1.9
Darius Bazley (23rd pick) WS 2.7
Matisse Thybulle (20th pick) WS 10.2
Cam Johnson (11th pick) WS 12.5
Nassir Little (25th pick) WS 4.2
Romeo Langford (14th pick) WS 2.1
Nickeil Alexander-Walker (17th pick) WS 1.4

2019 1st Round Draft Picks who signed extensions already:

Zion Williamson (5 years / $194M) WS 14.2
Ja Morant (5 years / $194M) WS 18.9
RJ Barrett (4 years / $107M) WS 7.6
Deandre Hunter (4 years / $90M) WS 5.1
Darius Garland (5 years / $194M) WS 12.5
Tyler Herro (4 years / $120M) WS 9.7
Brandon Clarke (4 years / $50M) WS 19.8
Jordan Poole (4 years / $128M) WS 8.4
Keldon Johnson (4 years / $74M) WS 10.4
Kevin Porter Jr (4 years / $64M) WS 2.4

I know WS is not perfect, but included for context — others can add better comps.

Still, Brandon Clarke seems like a GREAT deal!
We should probably start a thread debating if Thybulle is worth $20 million/year. He’s obviously an inferior offensive player to Grant, but he also is actually an elite defender and is a similar caliber of player:

61297
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Guys sign contracts that step down rather than step up each year all the time. I mean something like 4/85 with the first year at $23M (have to do out the exact numbers). Aaron Gordon, to take one example, was on exactly this type of deal.
That was an extension he signed with Orlando not as a FA in the open market. Are there any FA contracts signed in this manner?