RealGM

I’m mixed on CelticsBlog, and always figure these “opposing coaches”evaluation pieces blow at least some smoke along with the real views. Nevertheless, this series they are doing on outsiders evaluating our younger players caught my attention.

They start off with Nesmith, and views are pretty mixed. High-end he’s a quality 3&D starter who complements the J’s; low end he’s a spot-up shooter and not much more.

You can tell, like here, there are mixed views on where he stands vis-a-vis Langford. More will come out in that discussion. I can’t imagine Brad would take a piece like this seriously as an information item for assessing his players’ trade value. But as a fan who doesn’t have much information, I look forward to seeing who says what.

SatchSanders wrote:I’m mixed on CelticsBlog, and always figure these “opposing coaches”evaluation pieces blow at least some smoke along with the real views. Nevertheless, this series they are doing on outsiders evaluating our younger players caught my attention.

They start off with Nesmith, and views are pretty mixed. High-end he’s a quality 3&D starter who complements the J’s; low end he’s a spot-up shooter and not much more.

You can tell, like here, there are mixed views on where he stands vis-a-vis Langford. More will come out in that discussion. I can’t imagine Brad would take a piece like this seriously as an information item for assessing his players’ trade value. But as a fan who doesn’t have much information, I look forward to seeing who says what.

while I think Nesmith will be way more high end than low end, but usually answers should/are somewhere in the middle.

Smitty has decent contacts.

That said, the article was basically a collection of projections as to how Nesmith will or won't develop.
-- Everybody (now) knows Nesmith hustles (especially/including on defense) and has an encouraging track record shooting spot-up 3s.
-- His mechanics in shooting on-the-move threes are unreliable, and the article contains a variety of guesses as to whether he'll solidify them or not.
-- The same goes for his mechanics and decision-making on defense.
-- Nobody has discerned any talent on his part in ball-handling.

I think that's quite a promising sign article on him. Don't think most ever expected star power out of him, just maybe a high level 3&D guy and that's what his trajectory still looks like.

I'm honestly surprised none of them mentioned how often he ends up splayed out on the floor. I've never seen a player fall over/go down as much as Nesmith. It's tied in with his hustle, but still he's a liability out there.

He's a really good compliment to a lot of the wings/guards we've got now, I'm expecting him to get plenty of opportunity.

cl2117 wrote:I think that's quite a promising sign article on him. Don't think most ever expected star power out of him, just maybe a high level 3&D guy and that's what his trajectory still looks like.

I'm honestly surprised none of them mentioned how often he ends up splayed out on the floor. I've never seen a player fall over/go down as much as Nesmith. It's tied in with his hustle, but still he's a liability out there.

He's a really good compliment to a lot of the wings/guards we've got now, I'm expecting him to get plenty of opportunity.

I noticed in that final summer league game there was a bit more on ball pressure and Nesmith struggled at times . I think ball handling is a big weakness right now. That’s such a back breaking skill to improve but Jaylen showed how much that can elevate your game. I dint think enough is made about this one skill and where it can take a player. Tatum improves his handle like jaylen did he could be the most unguardable player in the nba.

cool evaluations. that was a fun read.

my bottom line is pretty much exactly what the Independent Analyst said at the end. i could have written that. he'll start out solidly in the rotation and then transition to starting later in the year.

one scout was very against him starting because he couldn't be protected like he could off the bench. seems to me just the opposite -- starting him makes his role very narrow and well defined, a spot-up 3 guy who hustles and focuses on D. this is better protection than putting him with 2nd unit guys and expecting him to do more. this is why i like him as a starter, even if JRich plays more minutes in the end. but i can see the argument that nesmith needs to win the starting job, not just be handed it, especially since Jrich will be a better defender out of the gate.

No idea what half those scouts were watching. Defense is about the only thing Nesmith did halfway decent last year

The Pritchard article is now up. https://www.celticsblog.com/2021/9/14/22673734/scouts-view-payton-pritchard-boston-celtics

tl;dr
-- His shooting is a serious talent.
-- However, he needs to learn to do it on the pull-up and not just off a catch.
-- He needs to put in a lot more effort on defense.
-- It would be great if he could be a better passer.
-- If he improves a little, he'll be a good backup in the league for a long time. If he improves significantly, he'll be an above-average starting PG.

Love that feedback on Pritchard. Looking like a total steal at #26. He may not have the highest ceiling, but it looks like there is consensus that he's got a high floor. That's huge for a team that's looking to spend all it's money on big names if it can.

Shooting is the skillset I'm always least confident will develop. How many guys do you hear will be great "if he develops a jumper" or shoots the three ball better. The fact that no one seems to doubt PP's shooting chops is super encouraging. Defense and passing I feel like are things that come easier to guys as they get more comfortable at this level and get more of that "veteran savvy".

It seems like Pritchard has been in an excellent incubator for some of what he needs to work on. If he learned anything from Kemba's pull-up game or taking charges, we're in business. Same goes obviously for Smart's defensive approach. Unfortunately we didn't/don't have that traditional facilitator PG, but I guess that also opens up the opportunity for him to step more into that role as well.

Really enjoying this series. Will be really interesting to hear thoughts on these guys further down the roster as well as the new blood.

The Grant Williams post is up. https://www.celticsblog.com/2021/9/23/22689622/scouts-view-grant-williams-boston-celtics

There's rough consensus on offense: He improved a lot his second season, he's a good bet to improve more, he still won't be anything special when he does.

The word "rebound" literally was not mentioned in the article, nor was any synonym I recall like "board". Sign of the times, I guess. Or maybe just how Smitty phrased the questions.

Opinions as to the overall value of his defense seemed to differ quite a bit.

My favorite bit was:

We used his tape against Nikola Jokic to show our bigs how to get to Jokic. He stayed connect, got underneath Jokic and bothered the crap out of him. The problem is Boston only plays Denver twice, unless they both get to the Finals. But there are a few other Jokic-ish bigs in the league that Grant can defend. That’s what his role needs to be.

Fencer reregistered wrote:The Grant Williams post is up. https://www.celticsblog.com/2021/9/23/22689622/scouts-view-grant-williams-boston-celtics

There's rough consensus on offense: He improved a lot his second season, he's a good bet to improve more, he still won't be anything special when he does.

The word "rebound" literally was not mentioned in the article, nor was any synonym I recall like "board". Sign of the times, I guess. Or maybe just how Smitty phrased the questions.

Opinions as to the overall value of his defense seemed to differ quite a bit.

My favorite bit was:

We used his tape against Nikola Jokic to show our bigs how to get to Jokic. He stayed connect, got underneath Jokic and bothered the crap out of him. The problem is Boston only plays Denver twice, unless they both get to the Finals. But there are a few other Jokic-ish bigs in the league that Grant can defend. That’s what his role needs to be.

Interesting.

He did very well that game vs Jokic. By "Jokic-ish bigs" I assume he means bigs who are slow. Yeah, there's not too many out there. But hey, he can defend Thompson when he play Sacramento! lol and maybe Nukic too..

Then you have guys like Crowder, Nance and Marcus Morris who play the 4 and aren't super quick.

We'll see what happens. From some offseason photos, looks like Grant may have slimmed down a little and is more tone, less doughy so maybe he is quicker now..

My hope for Grant is he improves his body fat % and lateral quickness so he can defend wings more capably. It's great that he bothered Jokic for 10-20 possessions but realistically you can only ever use him as a change of pace defender. You are not gonna put Grant on an offensive weapon for 20-30 minutes a night. If Grant becomes good enough to be the first big off your bench or a top 8 rotation guy that would be a huge win in my book. I see him more as a 9th to 11th guy on a title contender. You hope for bit more out of a first round pick but at least he's not a complete bust and he seems like a great locker room guy.

Grant was 7th in total minutes on the Celtics last year which speaks more to the Celtics lack of depth last year than of Grant's ability. I hope to see that number go down this year.

I'm finding I tend to agree with Eastern Conference Scout #3 on his evaluation of these guys. Sees Nesmith as a 15-20 minute guy this year, focusing on 2-3 dribble attacks of closeouts as area of improvement. Says Pritchard can be a mid-level starting PG if he improves playmaking & defense. Says PP needs to focus his practice on P&R passing & pullup jumpers, while going to Marcus Smart school on defense. And thinks Grant's offense is good enough to let his defense play as a fourth big.

I'm really interested to see what he says about Langford.

I agree with the scout that said they'd like to see Grant go one way or the other in terms of slimming down to increase his quickness or bulking up to make him more of a banger. That tweener body type works in college, but at the next level means he's just a matchup dependent role player.

Personally I'd like to see Grant get slimmer/quicker. Feels like he's still got some baby fat on him that's not doing him many favors. I don't have him pegged as a banger, but as a stretch 4/small ball 5 I think he's got some real utility.

He gets way too much hate from fans who have unrealistic expectations, which I think in part stems from Danny's obsession with similar bigs (Sully/Yabs etc.). I know it feels like it's the same old story, but just re-base your expectations for Grant and he's exactly the kind of back-end of the rotation big we'd be looking for.

Overall that's a fairly encouraging roundup from the scouts. Not nearly as negative as most around here seem to feel about him. He's never gonna be a top 8 rotation guy but somewhere in the 10-12 range with some match-ups where he can be even better seems feasible.

Meh. Williams defends 3-4 positions, hits the three and sets the best pick on the team now that Theis is gone. He's a valuable piece. Even as a rookie when he wasn't hitting shots he was valuable.

Curmudgeon wrote:Meh. Williams defends 3-4 positions, hits the three and sets the best pick on the team now that Theis is gone. He's a valuable piece. Even as a rookie when he wasn't hitting shots he was valuable.

I’m not even sure he makes the team tbh. He’s horrible

Homerclease wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote:Meh. Williams defends 3-4 positions, hits the three and sets the best pick on the team now that Theis is gone. He's a valuable piece. Even as a rookie when he wasn't hitting shots he was valuable.

I’m not even sure he makes the team tbh. He’s horrible

Grant Williams can switch off on all 5 positions pretty well. That alone will keep him in the league.

Parliament10 wrote:

Homerclease wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote:Meh. Williams defends 3-4 positions, hits the three and sets the best pick on the team now that Theis is gone. He's a valuable piece. Even as a rookie when he wasn't hitting shots he was valuable.

I’m not even sure he makes the team tbh. He’s horrible

Grant Williams can switch off on all 5 positions pretty well. That alone will keep him in the league.

Grant Williams is bad, can’t defend anything and is on the verge of eating himself out of the league. The GM who drafted him is out, his coach is new and Grant has shown little to no desire to actually work on his game in the offseason. Why people think he’s a lock to make this team baffles me

Homerclease wrote:

Parliament10 wrote:

Homerclease wrote:I’m not even sure he makes the team tbh. He’s horrible

Grant Williams can switch off on all 5 positions pretty well. That alone will keep him in the league.

Grant Williams is bad, can’t defend anything and is on the verge of eating himself out of the league. The GM who drafted him is out, his coach is new and Grant has shown little to no desire to actually work on his game in the offseason. Why people think he’s a lock to make this team baffles me

Where are you getting this information from?

Parliament10 wrote:

Homerclease wrote:

Parliament10 wrote:Grant Williams can switch off on all 5 positions pretty well. That alone will keep him in the league.

Grant Williams is bad, can’t defend anything and is on the verge of eating himself out of the league. The GM who drafted him is out, his coach is new and Grant has shown little to no desire to actually work on his game in the offseason. Why people think he’s a lock to make this team baffles me

Where are you getting this information from?

What information?