Post#1327 » by Hal14 » Fri May 24, 2024 6:50 pm
Carrington is interesting. I could see him going as high as like the 12-18 range (which would mean no way in hell we get him). But I could also see him possibly slipping to like the 25-35 range.
The draft can be pretty unpredictable like that. Every year there's guys who go higher (Josh Primo, David Roddy, Ziaire Williams, Santi Aldama) or lower (TJD, BJ Boston, Jared Butler, Sharife Cooper, Jaden Hardy, EJ Liddell) than expected.
If we end up with a pick in like the 36-46 range and we take him, fine. But I'm not really jumping through hoops to take him higher than that because:
a) Guard who is kind of undersized (only measured 6'3.75" without shoes at combine), good shooter but really doesn't do much else..average at best defensively, average at best as a playmaker..skinny, needs to bulk up..young player..kind of a project..only thing he does well is shoot and he didn't even do that efficiently in college..doesn't really get to the rim, relies on off the dribble jumpers a lot..when I think about what recent prospects that description reminds me of, I think of guys like Tre Mann, Jalen Hood-Schifino, Terquavion Smith, Tyty Washington and perhaps Nick Smith Jr. None of those guys have really done much in the NBA.
b) How is Carrington getting minutes in Boston? I feel like it would be another Nesmith situation. Young guy with talent but needs development, needs NBA reps to develop but no real path to get those mins so has to get traded to a team where he can get those mins.
Any draft pick would have an uphill battle to try and carve out a role on a team as good as the Celtics - a team with depth and talent at every position. That's why the most likely outcome is trading out of the 1st round - taking a guy in the 35 - 60 range. Why? Because there's much less risk if that player doesn't end up contributing for Boston. It's much less of an investment than drafting a guy at 30, or moving up into the 20's.
We drafted 2 guys in the lottery (Nesmith, Langford) who couldn't earn a rotation spot - and that was when we had less depth and talent than we do now.
I just don't really see a path for us to draft and guard and that player actually gets minutes here. If we grab a guard as an UDFA, fine. But if we're using draft capital, I'd rather go for a big, forward or wing..
Nothing wrong with having a different opinion - as long as it's done respectfully. It'd be lame if we all agreed on everything
