Welcome to Boston Terry Rozier

[KJandHondo35]

Why is it a bad pick? He was considered a first round pick and no one jumped out of their chairs in surprise. Is it because the Mock Drafts? Or no leaks?

I am critical because he's the third freakin PG. But, the player is OK.

He's a fine career backup whatever guard but theres this notion going around twitter and some on the board that he makes a guy like Smart expendable. That's so far from reality, maybe AB, but not Smart. If we were critical of how Smart was progressing I can't imagine what this board is gonna look like in 6 months.

[Banks2Pierce]

I just would love to read this board if ATL picked Rozier otta nowhere. People would be at how ridiculous that pick was, but because it was Danny that did that it's now a brilliant steal.

I don't think I'd be laughing at ATL(some would) because both franchises have worked up to the point of getting the benefit of the doubt. Ainge has more value-for-draft-spot picks than complete misses. Only one model seems to like him, but all of the model guys openly admit that they don't feel confident about defensive value getting captured. I do find it interesting how Brad singled it out as an Ainge decision and tend to wonder if that was just what came to his head or if there was a genuine divide among the FO.

Something encouraging is that the scout-y national types and the guys on here that watch a ton of ball are hesitant to lay into Ainge over this pick. It's because Rozier is clearly a special, fast-twitch athlete that is a skill or two away from being really interesting. And the shooting may already be somewhat fixed. I don't really care how his stats lineup with Marcus...I'd be thrilled with someone 70% of Smart at 16. A lot of colleges have spacing issues, but many others would be putting a wing-type at the 4 and a guard that could shoot alongside him. Pitino preferred to go with the bigs(Onuaku, Mathiang) that would muck it up on defense, but could not even catch a pass if they were wide open under the basket. It's definitely a case of looking for reasons to explain the worrying stats, but I think it's a fair response for anyone to have.

[SmartWentCrazy]

I just would love to read this board if ATL picked Rozier otta nowhere. People would be at how ridiculous that pick was, but because it was Danny that did that it's now a brilliant steal. This "grass is greener" idea has leaked so far as we are starting to tear into all of Smarts weaknesses just to prop up this idea that Rozier *could* be good. But the sad truth is Smart is and was 20x the player of Rozier. He's bigger, he is closer than you think athletically, he is a better passer, he's better at actually getting to the rim and finishing/drawing contact, he a more versatile defender (and just overall better), he's a better rebounder, and he's a better scorer...

I love that we can look at a combine number like “Rozier is 0.1 seconds faster than Smart in the 3/4 sprint” and just assume "oh this kid is gonna be so much better than Smart at driving". Even though when you compare the tape there was way more evidence of Smart getting past guys on the perimeter and then knowing what to do to get to the rim and finish at a HIGH rate. Rozier has the speed but gets lost after the first guy and ends up making a floater or some other weird half layup/hook-ish shot but this kid is talked about as a sure thing to drive and kick (even tho he never kicked, even tho there was so many times that would have been the right choice). Yeah sure "it was just the crappy offense", that was the problem, everything is just going to get miraculously better now, maybe but also maybe not. (Also should note Smart’s OKST had similar shooting issues, LeBryan Nash, their wing, shot 0 threes all season with Smart, but he found a way to make them better and not just chuck shots)

Here's their sophomore numbers:
Smart = 32.7MPG - 18PPG – 5.9RBS – 4.8AST – 2.9STL – 0.6BLK – 12.5FGA – 51.4 2P% - 29.9 3P% - 72.8 FT%
Rozier = 35MPG - 17.1PPG – 5.6RBS – 3.0AST – 2.0STL – 0.2BLK – 14.5FGA – 45.6 2P% - 30.6 3P% - 79.0 FT%

Rozier played more, shot more, scored less, assisted less, rebounded less…. But you read some of you guys and you’d think Rozier is leaps and bounds a better player than Smart was but they ain’t even in the same conversation. You wanna me to be jazzed up about combo guards? That’s easy if they are like 6’4”+, that’s something to look forward to. But a smaller and worse version of a player that already exists (who happens to be only 11 days younger Smart)? Yeah, no thanks.

Yeah, and if Chad Ford and Jonathan Givony mocked him in the top 10, everyone would be universally praising Ainge. I don't really care what those two guys think, much like I don't care what Mel Kiper Jr and Todd McShay think. It's all opinions-- clearly Ainge is excited by the kid, so some posters are too.

My opinion of Rozier is not at all tied to where he was in a mock draft. It comes from watching him play and seeing how limited his skills are.

And that's how it should be. People should (and are, in my opinion) make their own opinions rather than being a sheep and following Givony/Ford or Ainge. But criticizing people because they have a different opinion on a player than you is weak, especially when you imply that we'd all ridicule the pick if another team made it because it came "outta nowhere" (which is a comment solely based on mock drafts, by the way).

[KJandHondo35]

I just would love to read this board if ATL picked Rozier otta nowhere. People would be at how ridiculous that pick was, but because it was Danny that did that it's now a brilliant steal.

I don't think I'd be laughing at ATL(some would) because both franchises have worked up to the point of getting the benefit of the doubt. Ainge has more value-for-draft-spot picks than complete misses. Only one model seems to like him, but all of the model guys openly admit that they don't feel confident about defensive value getting captured. I do find it interesting how Brad singled it out as an Ainge decision and tend to wonder if that was just what came to his head or if there was a genuine divide among the FO.

Something encouraging is that the scout-y national types and the guys on here that watch a ton of ball are hesitant to lay into Ainge over this pick. It's because Rozier is clearly a special, fast-twitch athlete that is a skill or two away from being really interesting. And the shooting may already be somewhat fixed. I don't really care how his stats lineup with Marcus...I'd be thrilled with someone 70% of Smart at 16. A lot of colleges have spacing issues, but many others would be putting a wing-type at the 4 and a guard that could shoot alongside him. Pitino preferred to go with the bigs(Onuaku, Mathiang) that would muck it up on defense, but could not even catch a pass if they were wide open under the basket. It's definitely a case of looking for reasons to explain the worrying stats, but I think it's a fair response for anyone to have.

I've just seen a lot of really athletic 6'ers that were a "skill or two away " do nothing in the league. The bigger guys can get away with not having the skill but having the athletisim, the smaller you get the less room for error. He's a hard working guy so there is something to be optimistic about but even as the league gets smaller the guards are getting bigger. I'm just not seeing this end well, hopefully I'm wrong but only time will tell.

[KJandHondo35]

Yeah, and if Chad Ford and Jonathan Givony mocked him in the top 10, everyone would be universally praising Ainge. I don't really care what those two guys think, much like I don't care what Mel Kiper Jr and Todd McShay think. It's all opinions-- clearly Ainge is excited by the kid, so some posters are too.

My opinion of Rozier is not at all tied to where he was in a mock draft. It comes from watching him play and seeing how limited his skills are.

And that's how it should be. People should (and are, in my opinion) make their own opinions rather than being a sheep and following Givony/Ford or Ainge. But criticizing people because they have a different opinion on a player than you is weak, especially when you imply that we'd all ridicule the pick if another team made it because it came "outta nowhere" (which is a comment solely based on mock drafts, by the way).

"outta nowhere" was referring to me having about 10 other guys on my personal big board (which was starkly different from those produced by the national figure heads) that I'd rather have at 16.

[Bar Fight]

I honestly like Mickey and Hunter better than Rozier as prospects.

[Bar Fight]

Why is it a bad pick? He was considered a first round pick and no one jumped out of their chairs in surprise. Is it because the Mock Drafts? Or no leaks?

I am critical because he's the third freakin PG. But, the player is OK.

He's a fine career backup whatever guard but theres this notion going around twitter and some on the board that he makes a guy like Smart expendable. That's so far from reality, maybe AB, but not Smart. If we were critical of how Smart was progressing I can't imagine what this board is gonna look like in 6 months.

Doesn't even make AB expendable IMO. A Smart/Rozier line up in the backcourt would be terrible spacing wise. And it would probably encourage a guy like Sully to roam around the perimeter more, which we don't want at all. Bradley is an inconsistent shooter, but teams at least respect his shot enough to guard him out there, and he's pretty solid from the corners.

[KJandHondo35]

Something encouraging is that the scout-y national types and the guys on here that watch a ton of ball are hesitant to lay into Ainge over this pick.

Have to say this is a really well done sub-tweet.

[KumaJG]

Why is it a bad pick? He was considered a first round pick and no one jumped out of their chairs in surprise. Is it because the Mock Drafts? Or no leaks?
U
I am critical because he's the third freakin PG. But, the player is OK.

He's a fine career backup whatever guard but theres this notion going around twitter and some on the board that he makes a guy like Smart expendable. That's so far from reality, maybe AB, but not Smart. If we were critical of how Smart was progressing I can't imagine what this board is gonna look like in 6 months.

He makes guys like Smart/AB expendable because he can fill the position if/when they get traded.

[KJandHondo35]

Why is it a bad pick? He was considered a first round pick and no one jumped out of their chairs in surprise. Is it because the Mock Drafts? Or no leaks?
U
I am critical because he's the third freakin PG. But, the player is OK.

He's a fine career backup whatever guard but theres this notion going around twitter and some on the board that he makes a guy like Smart expendable. That's so far from reality, maybe AB, but not Smart. If we were critical of how Smart was progressing I can't imagine what this board is gonna look like in 6 months.

He makes guys like Smart/AB expendable because he can fill the position if/when they get traded.

"fill the postion" in the sense of him being on the court and kinda doing a bad impression of what Smart or AB did? Sure, I guess. I just thought collectivly we where looking for this team to be better.

[KumaJG]

Sometimes you have to give up something to gain something

[lon3lytoaster]

Why is it a bad pick? He was considered a first round pick and no one jumped out of their chairs in surprise. Is it because the Mock Drafts? Or no leaks?
U
I am critical because he's the third freakin PG. But, the player is OK.

He's a fine career backup whatever guard but theres this notion going around twitter and some on the board that he makes a guy like Smart expendable. That's so far from reality, maybe AB, but not Smart. If we were critical of how Smart was progressing I can't imagine what this board is gonna look like in 6 months.

He makes guys like Smart/AB expendable because he can fill the position if/when they get traded.

I don't think Smart is expendable at this point. Yes, I'd trade him if it got us a superstar but he's not expendable or a throw in. He was brought along slowly, worked on his 3 point shot and came a long way over the course of the season. Showed some flashes in the playoffs as well.

Bradley, yes I think is expendable and we need to move him because of the lack of guard skills. He also doesn't d up anymore and for the mkst part, was one of our bigger net negatives this year. Rozier has more than just a pull up 20-foot jumper.

[Banks2Pierce]

I've just seen a lot of really athletic 6'ers that were a "skill or two away " do nothing in the league.

I went into past draft history with a reasonably open mind, but I'm finding that this profile ends up producing at a better rate than I thought for mid-late first rounders. Jeff Teague, Eric Bledsoe, Darren Collison, Reggie Jackson, Bradley, Lowry, Schroeder, George HIll seem to vastly outnumber the Marquis Teague, Gabe Pruitt list. It's actually hard to find the bad ones. Very interesting to me.

And I have no idea what you are referencing with the sub-tweet thing.

[ryaningf]

I've got a huge problem with Smart at PG. Woulda taken Payton ahead of him last year because of it. I hate watching guys learn how to play PG at the NBA level.

That said, the Cs feel different. They feel PG is his best position. And in comparison to Rozier, Smart is a much better PG prospect. Better understanding of the position, better vision, better leader. I can see why they want to do it...I just think Smart is a better SG prospect and would have become a hotter prospect with better trade value had we taken that developmental path.
[...]

We'll see if the Cs feel differently. They sure had Smart off the ball every time either Isaiah or Turner or Pressey were in the game with him. And as stated, the ball just constantly swung around the perimeter when he was at PG. The offense sucked. You can't imagine Ainge and Stevens are blind to that. If they were all that invested in Smart at PG, and were all that confident in that prospect, I don't think they'd have had him off the ball as much as they did. I doubt they'd have traded for IT. He beats very few people off the bounce. I don't think he's quick enough to do it in the NBA. If you can't collapse a defense, it's very difficult to create for others. I simply don't see them as being invested in him becoming a PG. He has a better shot at improving his shot and becoming a competent SG, but that's iffy too. What he will certainly be is a heck of a good defender.

The only plausible reason for him not beating anybody off the bounce is the sprained ankle. They do take a long time to come back from, but the thing is, I don't remember him beating people and collapsing defenses *before* he sprained his ankle, so I will continue to believe he can't do it at this level until he proves that he can, because he hasn't thus far.

All this is true, but IMO they had him playing cautiously (like an old Derek Fisher as Slart hilariously noted last season) as a way to learn the position. As in, he had 2 major areas to work on: shot selection and running a team. They played him off the ball A LOT because: a) the team was better when they did and b) it allowed him to work on his shot selection by concentrating mostly on spot-up open shots with his feet set. The times he played PG were limited because a) he wasn't very good at it and the team's play suffered and b) when he did play he mostly ran offense in a very passive manner, not looking to attack off the dribble or look for open shots. I think his was all designed for his optimal development. This is a PROCESS and they're starting slow and making sure he gets the fundamentals down pat.

I'm with you though; I'd rather put him at 2 and gave him the green light and say go get us buckets I don't care about turnovers or bad shots just be aggressive. I think that drives up his value league-wide, gets him in the rookie game, gets him first team all rookie or maybe even a legit ROTY candidate. I don't think he has the mentality of a PG and I think taking 3-4 years to teach him the position while you have him on cost-controlled rookie contract isn't the best use of him as an asset (might be long term, though). Right about the time he gets it as a PG you're going to have to MAX him out. Basically you waste his prime under-market-value years and then have to pay retail when he gets it--I just think that's bad business (but if he turns into a top 10-20 player than I'm wrong).

That said, I thought he showed great growth throughout the year learning good from bad shots and learning the nuances of the position. He's going to play PG all summer league long. He's made lots of strides and I think the Cs developmental game plan has a lot to do with that--most teams just throw the guy into the fire and hope he gets it, some guys respond, some don't, some are like rookie QBs who get beat up behind a poor offensive line and they never are able to regain the confidence of those early beatings. The Cs are taking a more circumspect path, building him up brick by brick.

[ryaningf]

Look, man. You can simplify this by asking the question: what does Brad Stevens want HIS point guard to do? Do you think he cares about flashy assists? Tricky ball handling? No. He also doesn't want ANY player dribbling the ball for more than a couple seconds. He wants decisiveness. When you take a guy like Rondo or Payton... they need the ball. They need multiple picks and off ball motion actions WITH THE BALL IN THEIR HANDS. Brad wants to disperse that playmaking throughout the entire roster. And not just once the guys catch the ball. He wants players who don't have the ball, to be able to move themselves to open areas (which is why Zeller and Olynyk and Sullinger are here, they move, relocate, and they're always a "triple threat" or "live" ball handler). So Stevens wants guys who can shoot, pass, drive, move the ball and move themselves in any situation. Five guys who can all do that at the same time, with good range on their shots, hopefully 5 out to the 3 point line and then tough rugged guys 1-4 who can "lock in" on the ball defensive, with the quickness and length (important to note that Smart, Bradley and Rozier all have GREAT length/height ratios) to chase shooters and the skills and mental toughness to persist in shooting and attacking the rim for a full 48. There are a lot of things happening in player health that impact this discussion as well... giving guys strategic rest is HUGE. Look at what happened to the Cavaliers? These guys are human, they get tired.

Depth is the crucial aspect of Stevens gameplan. If you can pressure the ball for 48 minutes (Smart, Rozier and Bradley all being tireless and bullish defensive is a damn good start, even Thomas is spunky for his size, he's like a little Ray Rice (sorry, just a physical comp). If you can stretch every position, out to your frontcourt positions to complement that and the ball moves, mix in some offensive rebounding? The Celtics want to wear teams out mentally and physically. Forcing teams to beat you is the easiest path to winning, because there are a ton of teams built on a tank philosophy. Which is another reason to try and aggressively improve. That advantage could be gone soon. Build the program. Build the buzz. Attract the right people. Pick the right people.

It starts at the top. They've picked the right people there. Thomas is the right people. Smart is the right people. We cool. We cool.

If Winslow showed Ginobli level skills why did he drop to 10?

I used to get annoyed when you'd seemingly forget what you said last week and/or ignored my POV to go off on tangents that aren't related to anything, then you disclosed the extracurriculars (of which I too partake, though at a level which allows my to maintain internally consistent self-perception with knowledge of what I said this time last year) and I get it now, it's like shooting the **** at the bar, what was said in the past doesn't matter because it's like we just met and with the craziness at this bar we must be ready to change subjects at a moment's notice. It's all about BEING IN THE MOMENT with you. We cool now.

But your tangent on Stevens is product of you trying to find meaning where none exists. He doesn't have a system. He's supersmart and has no ego and thus continually molds and tweaks what he runs to get the best out of his players. In that way, he's the perfect coach for Danny, a GM who's continually on the prowl for marginal roster improvements. With Doc, a guy who had a system and way of doing things, the roster changes were deterimental, Doc could never figure out how to make use of the guys Danny brought in mid-year and the team chemistry could never reform.

Rozier is a poor decision maker, he takes bad shots, he's small and he can't do basic PG things, but he's athletic as hell, is a willing worker, and he plays hard. There's a lot to work with there for a coach of Brad's ilk and undoubtedly he'll bring out a lot in Terry and find a good role for all that but let's cut it with the grand narrative BS, okay? You can't blare on about BPA on one hand and then spout the grand narrative of Brad's system and ideal team on the other hand, it's self-contradictory, as in one does not follow the other. I understand this has limited meaning to you but most of the rest of us try to maintain consistency from idea to idea so it sticks out.

Winslow fell to 10 for the same reasons Paul Pierce fell to 10.

[KJandHondo35]

I've just seen a lot of really athletic 6'ers that were a "skill or two away " do nothing in the league.

I went into past draft history with a reasonably open mind, but I'm finding that this profile ends up producing at a better rate than I thought for mid-late first rounders. Jeff Teague, Eric Bledsoe, Darren Collison, Reggie Jackson, Bradley, Lowry, Schroeder, George HIll seem to vastly outnumber the Marquis Teague, Gabe Pruitt list. It's actually hard to find the bad ones. Very interesting to me.

And I have no idea what you are referencing with the sub-tweet thing.

I actually like the Reggie Jackson comp. Well done, Rozier already is a better defender, similar volume shooting mentality. I'm slightly more interested.

Like I 100% hope I'm way off base, I hope he's solid, I hope he does fit with Smart. I'm just going to temper my expectations (probably bc I don't want to get burned again a la Winslow).

[ryaningf]

IMO DA is obsessed with combo guards and that obsession has hurt the team. He says he selected the best player, but to his biased mind a combo guard is always the best player. Next year he will probably select two more athletic combo guards, regardless of the teams needs.

In this sense, I don't think it has hurt team, but take that out it is accurate. Danny is much more interested in versatile combo guards than the classic 6-6 SG and the Rondo style PG. That is clear.

I think Danny likes players like himself who can dribble, create and score. He wants PGs who can score and attack the rim. which in this era of pick and roll is actually the way to go.

Ainge wants a ball dominant PG who can score first in the PnR and also defend like an animal. Passing ability and tempo setting appear to be secondary.

No, the bolded is not clear. What is clear is that there are far fewer true PGs or classic 6-6 SG around than there are combo guards. Combo guards (read: short shooting guards who can dribble) and undersized PFs are the most abundant types of players in America and thus it's no surprise that Danny often drafts one or the other every damn year. It's not because he loves those types, it's just that there are a lot of them and if you're looking for hidden gems they're usually combo guards or undersized PFs.

[165bows]

Something encouraging is that the scout-y national types and the guys on here that watch a ton of ball are hesitant to lay into Ainge over this pick.

Have to say this is a really well done sub-tweet.

I have to say there were a bunch of guys that I normally read pretty much killed the pick when it was made. I didn't post it since it was already negative enough and I'm pretty patient to see how it turns out before I crank out.

But Dean Demakis said it was awful, Ed Weiland gave the C's an F for the draft and I think there were others.

Actually there was this, and he called it a worse pick than James Young (which he didn't like).

@deanondraft: Terry Rozier is like a hybrid of Avery Bradley and Marcus Smart's worst qualities.

Hopefully he is wrong.

[ryaningf]

Ha, I posted that whole string of Dean tweets earlier in this thread. For a guy who rarely tweets much, he sent out 8 negative Rozier tweets in succession.

He did walk that back a bit in his post-draft reordering article. Here are a few nuggets that relate to this thread:

I am all in on Justise Winslow. Even if his height was mildly disappointing and he shot poorly in workouts, there is still so so much to like about his profile. It was mostly bad GM’s that passed him up while one of my fave GM’s in Danny Ainge was trying to trade up for him every step of the way starting at #4. He has such clear two way upside with a high floor to boot, I cannot fathom that it was remotely correct for him to slide that far.

Rondae Hollis-Jefferson is the second biggest steal in the draft behind Winslow. His offensive limitations are a big concern, but his combination of physical tools and defensive acumen is so elite that they are worth stomaching. I am surprised at how many smart FO’s passed him up with non-lotto picks, but once upon a time Daryl Morey drafted Marcus Morris ahead of Kawhi Leonard so I’m sticking to my guns that RHJ slid way too far.

I bumped up Terry Rozier a long way from 50 to 25. I remain unimpressed with his offensive skill set, but he does have the length and frame to guard SG’s. Further, it is possible that the Celtics can parlay his elite first step into a nice slashing game with better coaching, spacing, and skill development. I appreciate the athleticism + defense strength tandem in prospects so this pick may not be historically bad. That said, his current offensive package is highly worrisome for a 21 year old 6’2″ player, and I suspect the Celtics are being overly optimistic about his growth potential by taking him at #16. So it’s still a reach in my book.

Here's his overall take:

16. Boston: Terry Rozier

Danny Ainge’s biggest draft strengths and weaknesses were on full display last night. When there is a slam dunk pick to be made, he makes it and he correctly tried to pay up to acquire Justise Winslow in a trade every pick from 4 to 9. But once Charlotte declined, Ainge showed his weakness of reaching for busts when no clear BPA exists (see: Marcus Banks, Fab Melo, JR Giddens, maybe James Young). I rated Rozier 50th on my big board, and in retrospect that is far too low given his athleticism and defense baseline to go along with a competent jump shot. He is 1″ shorter with 1″ longer wingspan than Avery Bradley, and it is well within reach for him to become a similar caliber player which is not a terrible outcome for the #16 overall pick.

Of course the point of the draft is not to avoid bad outcomes, it is to achieve great outcomes. The Celtics already have two young, undersized 3 + D SG’s and adding a third one who upgrades neither is of little value to a team that got swept in the first round. It’s clear that they are gambling on Brad Stevens being able to parlay Rozier’s great first step and work ethic into an effective NBA slasher. The value of Rozier as a prospect largely hinges on the value of his slashing upside, and there is a coherent argument to be made that he has enough to be an acceptable selection at #16 overall. I still believe it was a reach given how limited his PG skills and decision making are for a 21 year old, but a less egregious one than my initial big board would indicate.

from http://www.deanondraft.com

[KJandHondo35]

I'm with you though; I'd rather put him at 2 and gave him the green light and say go get us buckets I don't care about turnovers or bad shots just be aggressive. I think that drives up his value league-wide, gets him in the rookie game, gets him first team all rookie or maybe even a legit ROTY candidate. I don't think he has the mentality of a PG and I think taking 3-4 years to teach him the position while you have him on cost-controlled rookie contract isn't the best use of him as an asset (might be long term, though). Right about the time he gets it as a PG you're going to have to MAX him out. Basically you waste his prime under-market-value years and then have to pay retail when he gets it--I just think that's bad business (but if he turns into a top 10-20 player than I'm wrong).

I'm interested in your opinion regarding this. Isn't it a solid plan to groom Smart into a more attack PG even if it may take 3 seasons to get him comfortable? Like his value is lower now but I always thought a 6'4" PG that can get 17-7-5 is better than an undersized SG that is only getting about 3 assists or whatever and isn't really a marksman in terms of value. Like I'm not at all looking to move him now so I'm impartial about is current value, but I think it's conceptually a really good play for all parties to be patient and let him grow into the lead PG.