Brandon Wallace Released

by Jeff Clark on Dec 18, 2007 1:24 PM EST in Boston Celtics News & Links

News out of Waltham (Souza) is that Brandon Wallace will be released:

WALTHAM - The feel-good story of Brandon Wallace making the Celtics after being signed as a free agent out of the draft has apparently come to an end.
Doc Rivers confirmed this morning that the Celtics will release the South Carolina product rather than reassign him to the Utah Flash of the NBDL. Wallace has been back in Boston for the past few weeks after suffering a carpal injury to his wrist.
The Celtics had a Dec. 20 deadline to release him or be required to pay him for the rest of the season.
"I told him this morning, Danny (Ainge) and I," Rivers said. "We need (roster) flexibility. It was more that (than a knock on his potential). Great kid, though."

Interesting that they feel like they need two spots for roster flexibility. I wonder what future moves Danny has in mind.

I'm sad to see the kid go, I liked him and his (long term) potential. Still, this opens the door for more roster depth. Perhaps the team can find and sign a big man (PJ Brown?) and a backup point that could be counted on more than Gabe Pruitt.

Tweet Comment 41 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Eh. I think the “roster flexibility” argument is probably a crock, but it was doubtful Wallace was going to see any major time here over the next couple of seasons. I’m not bothered by this, even if I’m skeptical that the team is going to be bringing in two new players to fill out the roster at any point in the future.

by Roy_Hobbs on Dec 18, 2007 2:37 PM EST reply actions

They’re setting up something….

by Donoghus on Dec 18, 2007 2:47 PM EST reply actions

This was almost certainly about money, not “roster flexibility.” They’re 20-2. The last thing you want to do is tamper with the chemistry by making roster changes.

by Brickowski on Dec 18, 2007 2:50 PM EST reply actions

I like the move, sad to see him go though. It gives us the chance to sign 2 more vets, it would be nice to see a good backup c/pf and pg come to this team.

by Champzilla on Dec 18, 2007 2:51 PM EST reply actions

I like the move. Wallace’s potential was limited and he wasn’t going to contribute any time soon. I’m not sure what’s coming, but I get the feeling if something comes it coming later rather than sooner.

by ManUp on Dec 18, 2007 2:52 PM EST reply actions

This team is going deep this year.
Tomorrow will be a great barometer of their potential.

by mcpu40 on Dec 18, 2007 3:01 PM EST reply actions

Hmmmm….Brandon wore the #8, didn’t he?

You don’t suppose…… :o

by PSquared on Dec 18, 2007 3:04 PM EST reply actions

cap flexibility…..kidding kidding……

by Edgar on Dec 18, 2007 3:07 PM EST reply actions

“Roster flexibility” is not necessarily only about spots. As little as Wallace was making, don’t forget that luxury tax doubles that.

by kozlodoev on Dec 18, 2007 3:07 PM EST reply actions

I certainly hope Brickowski is wrong….the amount of money is relatively minimal and I have only heard positive things about this kids upside. Makes me wonder about the roster both next year – if Posey goes -and beyond…However, I’ll keep the faith that DA knows what he is doing…

by Rick Robeys Return on Dec 18, 2007 3:08 PM EST reply actions

Ha P-Squared- Love it! Wish I could give TP’s on this.

Brandon Wallace= Derrick McKey

by tb727 on Dec 18, 2007 3:11 PM EST reply actions

What a difference a year makes. Last year the Kid is playing some NBA ball for us. this year he is cut. We certainly have flexibility now. It could not have been the money. he was making peanuts.

by Freeease1 on Dec 18, 2007 3:13 PM EST reply actions

Want some more roster flexibility? Release Scalabrine.

by lemonadesky on Dec 18, 2007 3:13 PM EST reply actions

They wanted to save money but I would imagine they have a Vet player in mind the 3 stars know and they like and it will just make the Celtics even better. Welcome to the new Celtics, younger players leaving and older players signing on such as House, Pollard, Posey, Allen and KG. This would be similar to the Red Sox and Patriots method keep some young players but have plenty of Vets to win a championship.

by CelticsWin on Dec 18, 2007 3:19 PM EST reply actions

Not Brandon Wallace!!!!!

We’re DOOMED.

- Mk

by mkogav on Dec 18, 2007 3:20 PM EST reply actions

It’s not about money… please…. Danny is setting something up before the trading deadline… and besides…

Brandon was a long shot to say the least…..maybe if we still had our young core, he would have stayed, but were not there anymore and we need to look for more presence for this current team….

I’m sure Danny has something in the works for down the road….

by Ancient Red on Dec 18, 2007 3:23 PM EST reply actions

Make way for…Jason Kidd!!!

by Mon on Dec 18, 2007 3:28 PM EST reply actions

Me thinks this speaks volumes about Pollard ever playing this season and perhaps even concerns about Ray Allen’s ankle.

There are two players coming…..bank it.

There is no “wait until next year.” The owners will spend.

by JB_Celticsstuff on Dec 18, 2007 3:47 PM EST reply actions

We’re 20-2 but we need a big man. WE need a center to back up Perk….Pollard is not the answer! Come playoff time we’ll need that backup… a back up point guard wouldnt hurt either…dont like Garnett at the five spot…

by Flaco519 on Dec 18, 2007 3:56 PM EST reply actions

Do the T wolves have an open roster spot?

by Bidder225 on Dec 18, 2007 3:57 PM EST reply actions

i just dont see us breaking in 2 new rotation type player a quarter of the way into the season. i agree with brick here. i think the “roster flexibility” stuff is hogwash. this has got to be about money. plus we have a bench that’s been pretty solid thus far, why mess with a group thats 9 strong right now? we’re solid in the backcourt. i could MAYBE see us bringing in another big but thats it.

by bucknersrevenge on Dec 18, 2007 4:04 PM EST reply actions

We’ll be good with our present roster… Why mess with good chemistry… Sorry, but Antoine Walker isn’t coming… He’s done… :)

by Cry Baby on Dec 18, 2007 4:11 PM EST reply actions

How would two new VETS mess up the chemistry? I think it will only help, bringing in players who are going to do whatever it takes to get a ring and add more leadership and experience to this team.

by Champzilla on Dec 18, 2007 4:20 PM EST reply actions

I’m sure the Pistons had no problem messing with their chemistry when they traded for 2 new players this week.

by Jeff Clark on Dec 18, 2007 4:27 PM EST reply actions

Happy Holidays Brandon, from the Celtics Management.

by The Real Large James on Dec 18, 2007 4:31 PM EST reply actions

Right.
It’s not like they’re deleting Tony Allen, or someone like that who has made significant contributions to the team this year.
This is a non-story so far.

by mcpu40 on Dec 18, 2007 4:38 PM EST reply actions

I’m not convinced we won’t see Reggie Miller on this roster by year’s end. I’ve felt that way all along. He said he couldn’t take the rigors of a full season, but had a strong desire to play with KG. Given both Allen’s potential for injury at any time he would not be a bad vet to have off the bench for the last 3rd of the season and into the playoffs.

PJ Brown maybe for the other spot? I am positive that they did not cut Wallace for roster flexibility in relation to creating roster space for a trade. I don’t see them trading any one player for additional players (i.e. 1 for 2) because it doesn’t make any sense for them to divide their assets. The roster flexibility is purely financial, they want to add players to this roster for the playoffs (trade or FA) if they can and they’d rather the luxury tax money be better spent on vets that will help them this year. Otherwise it’s not worth the expense. No other player can be cut at this point to save money…

by Jughead on Dec 18, 2007 4:46 PM EST reply actions

lemonadesky,
Pollard needs to go long before Scal.

As for Wallace, imagine being a day or 2 away from guaranteed $427,000 … and then it gets ripped away. That must suck.

by Cousin It on Dec 18, 2007 4:48 PM EST reply actions

At least he has that nice suit that KG bought all the rookies in Italy.

by youngcrv on Dec 18, 2007 4:57 PM EST reply actions

Frankly I would have preferred that they cut Pollard seeing as he’s become theo ratliff minus the useful expiring contract, but Wallace was always going to be a long shot to become an NBA player (I for one wasn’t that impressed with his summer league play). This team could still use some extra depth and PG and C and since Wallace doesn’t fill either of those holes Danny may as well get someone who will. While the Celts did cut Wallace now so they won’t have to pay his full contract NOTHING the Celts have done this year indicates that their main concern is keeping costs down. We heard the same talk from critics in the offseason claiming that Garnett’s contract would keep them from trading for him and then we heard how they wouldn’t use the full MLE once they had. Look how thing turned out.

by Byrdman on Dec 18, 2007 5:01 PM EST reply actions

things* turned out. Oh, and there’s no way Miller joins. He couldn’t carry Posey’s jock right now.

by Byrdman on Dec 18, 2007 5:03 PM EST reply actions

Freeease1 said:
What a difference a year makes. Last year the Kid is playing some NBA ball for us. this year he is cut. We certainly have flexibility now. It could not have been the money. he was making peanuts.

Wallace didn’t play for us last year- he is a rookie.

by tb727 on Dec 18, 2007 5:28 PM EST reply actions

Jeff said:
I’m sure the Pistons had no problem messing with their chemistry when they traded for 2 new players this week.

Pistons aren’t a true contender. They’re making trades because they need to make trades to get back up there. The trade didn’t achieve that but it allows them flexibility to try next year.

by Who on Dec 18, 2007 7:08 PM EST reply actions

So, if a trade is in the works (thus requiring “roster flexibility”) who on the current roster is on the block?

My guess is that it’s Tony Allen for a backup pg and another big body.

by Brickowski on Dec 18, 2007 7:22 PM EST reply actions

Btw Justin, I agree with you 100% on your Reggie Miller assessment…

by tb727 on Dec 18, 2007 7:47 PM EST reply actions

Reuben Patterson?

by BigDogPitbull on Dec 18, 2007 7:58 PM EST reply actions

Justin I also think it could be a prelude to Reggie Miller being here before the year is over.
Money had to be a part of it, 400K luxury tax goes a long way to paying whoever they sign.

by CfanMissippi on Dec 18, 2007 8:02 PM EST reply actions

I said it at the beginning of the season and I’ll say it again. It’s a crime that Earl Boykins is not in the NBA. He can still play hard. He could be our back-up PG and House could move to SG. He is an upgrade over T. Allen, especially if Ray starts sitting out games due to his ankles. What free agent bigs are out there that we could sign??

Just my thoughts!!

by gizmo010101 on Dec 18, 2007 8:20 PM EST reply actions

the move brings back all our speculative powers that were so evident in year/s past. wallace will find a spot somewhere, if not the nba, europe, or the nbdl- good luck to you.

by nazzbo on Dec 18, 2007 9:59 PM EST reply actions

I don’t see where the two players are coming from that will fill these two roster spots.

Bad decision in my book. Should have kept paying Wallace and see what happens later on. If he pans out he’d be worth his weight in gold next season when this bench has to be built all over again.

by Who on Dec 18, 2007 11:09 PM EST reply actions

Next years bench wasn’t going to include Brandon Wallace. This move was a no-brainer. We will surely have one or two mid-season signings whether it be veterans not presently playing (Miller, Brown) or buyouts like a Cassell…..it would be poor business to pay almost $1m to keep Wallace around for another month prior to releasing him at that point. Wyc and Co. are spending money to win a championship but they are not foolish enough to simply throw money away without the chance of a return.

by HRB on Dec 18, 2007 11:53 PM EST reply actions