Why Stith?

[Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>]

I initially thought that we were not going to resign Stith but O'Brien and 
Wallace evidently would like to keep him, at least for the right price. I 
think it actually does make some sense. When you look at the roster 
initially, you think that there's so many people who can play 2/3. But 
Stith is clearly a much better complementary player to Pierce and Walker 
than Eric Williams and McCarty. Those two shouldn't even be on our depth 
chart. Stith didn't shoot great from 2 pt range last year, but he was 4% 
higher than Williams and McCarty. That's quite a big difference.

So ignoring those two (my guess is that McCarty only sees time at 4 on a 
pressing unit, if he gets any time at all), you currently have Pierce and 3 
rookies. While the rookies seem talented, I think there will be times when 
the Celtics will want a defensively strong veteran who knows the system. 
Stith also shot pretty decently from 3 point range.

Carrying five 2/3 types on the roster isn't such a huge amount, especially 
with three rookies, with Forte possibly getting some minutes at point guard 
also. If we lose Stith, it's not a disaster, but he's probably a 
significant upgrade over Eric Williams, and a leader in the locker room as 
well. I don't know how small a deal he'd be willing to take though. We can 
offer him a one-year deal for a decent amount of money, to help us through 
the transition, and renounce him or sign him to a lesser deal (depending on 
how the rookies develop) at the end of the season to avoid the luxury tax. 
Of course, you could argue that we should spend the money using the 
exemption for guys like Alvin Williams or Nazr Mohammed, but I don't think 
these guys would give up their Bird rights to accept a one-year deal 
knowing that they'd have to be renounced for luxury tax reasons.

Alex