All Things 2017 Draft

[Writebloc]

[/b]

Not sure if true, TBH.

An IT/Hayward/PG/Horford core is worse in every way compared to Curry/Klay/KD/Dray. I think we're better off long term keeping Fultz/Ball/Jackson/Tatum and trying to grow organically.

Save for the fact that it is going to be increasingly difficult to keep that core four of Curry/Klay/KD/Dray together, not to mention the bench pieces that surround those four are likely to be worse than what Ainge has accumulated to position around the Celtics. I'm not to be honest if Ainge could swing a deal for George and still pay Hayward max money? If they Wyc and ownership are willing to go way over the cap maybe, but that would be difficult. There will be salary implications in any of these scenarios that people ignore.

It's easy to keep the core together, less easy to keep the auxiliary pieces. They'll be able to replace them on cheap money deals though.

I personally think our best bet is to draft and develop. I think it is the path that gives us the best shot at winning a title.

In some respects that makes sense, but that certainly isn't the path the Celtics are apparently on, if so Horford wouldn't have been made a priority, nor would Ainge be hoarding cap space this season to try to acquire Hayward. There is some amalgamation of a draft and develop strategy and free agency acquisition and trade for key assets happening when you truly look at what Ainge has done so far. He hasn't used just one strategy, instead he's maintained flexibility in order to shift and change to whichever direction is the most advantageous to the franchise. It seems likely that if the lottery gods smile on the Celtics and the organization retains pick 1 or 2 they will keep the pick, if the C's get their typical lottery luck 3 or 4, or horrors worse Brooklyn continues it plunder of tanking squads than a truly despicable 5th pick than Ainge would likely package the draft pick. The Celtics off season is a Choose Your Own Adventure book with a dynamic flow chart that generally leads to positive outcomes. There are few positions where the Celtics end up with a negative situations, most are ranging from wildly successful to generally satisfactory. I think most fans will be slightly disappointing with the generally satisfactory outcome, but that scenario will still put the team in a far better situation than 90% of the teams in the NBA.

[Asian Celtic]

I think the direction we go (win now vs youth) will all depend on our playoff run. Go ECF at least til game 6 and we might see Danny cash in the assets. Go another 1st round exit and we'll likely cash in our vets for the youth movement.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Save for the fact that it is going to be increasingly difficult to keep that core four of Curry/Klay/KD/Dray together, not to mention the bench pieces that surround those four are likely to be worse than what Ainge has accumulated to position around the Celtics. I'm not to be honest if Ainge could swing a deal for George and still pay Hayward max money? If they Wyc and ownership are willing to go way over the cap maybe, but that would be difficult. There will be salary implications in any of these scenarios that people ignore.

It's easy to keep the core together, less easy to keep the auxiliary pieces. They'll be able to replace them on cheap money deals though.

I personally think our best bet is to draft and develop. I think it is the path that gives us the best shot at winning a title.

In some respects that makes sense, but that certainly isn't the path the Celtics are apparently on, if so Horford wouldn't have been made a priority, nor would Ainge be hoarding cap space this season to try to acquire Hayward. There is some amalgamation of a draft and develop strategy and free agency acquisition and trade for key assets happening when you truly look at what Ainge has done so far. He hasn't used just one strategy, instead he's maintained flexibility in order to shift and change to whichever direction is the most advantageous to the franchise. It seems likely that if the lottery gods smile on the Celtics and the organization retains pick 1 or 2 they will keep the pick, if the C's get their typical lottery luck 3 or 4, or horrors worse Brooklyn continues it plunder of tanking squads than a truly despicable 5th pick than Ainge would likely package the draft pick. The Celtics off season is a Choose Your Own Adventure book with a dynamic flow chart that generally leads to positive outcomes. There are few positions where the Celtics end up with a negative situations, most are ranging from wildly successful to generally satisfactory. I think most fans will be slightly disappointing with the generally satisfactory outcome, but that scenario will still put the team in a far better situation than 90% of the teams in the NBA.

The thing is, I think Ainge's plan has always been to draft and develop. What future assets has he traded to this point? A late 20's pick for IT?

Horford was a consequence of us going for Durant. That plan failed, and he's adjusted accordingly. I do think Ainge will go after another max level guy this offseason. I do not think he'll trade Brown or a Brooklyn pick for another piece. He's done everything in his power to have young pieces grow up in a winning environment. I hope that he doesn't switch the course after finally setting up said environment.

[London2Boston]

UCLA/Kentucky tonight. Should be a good one.

[2Mas]

On the latest Ringer NBA Show, Chris Mannix said that IT "will not be happy at all" if they draft Fultz or Ball.

I hope Danny tells him to STFU if that's the case. I fear that Danny will trade the pick and get short sighted.

I like Chris Mannix a lot. I kinda just got on the Podcast game (loving it tho).

People seem to be in love with the Dunc On Podcast, but i don't love it. It's okay, the main guy (old lawyer dude) is cool. but the other guy just seems like some nerdy little analytical guy who bases everything off stats. Not really my style.

To the topic -- Of course IT doesn't want the Celtics to draft a PG. That's like what MCW said about the 76ers tanking. You really think players are loosing on purpose for a better chance to get a guy in draft that's going to take their job? No shot. It's a little different with IT, but the point stands. Dude put us on his back, killing it, & we're gonna draft a teenager instead of going all in, so we can replace him once he demands 30m a season? I'm 100% on the Fultz train too. Just saying no wonder IT wouldn't be happy. I wouldn't be either.

[jmr07019]

[/b]

Not sure if true, TBH.

An IT/Hayward/PG/Horford core is worse in every way compared to Curry/Klay/KD/Dray. I think we're better off long term keeping Fultz/Ball/Jackson/Tatum and trying to grow organically.

Save for the fact that it is going to be increasingly difficult to keep that core four of Curry/Klay/KD/Dray together, not to mention the bench pieces that surround those four are likely to be worse than what Ainge has accumulated to position around the Celtics. I'm not to be honest if Ainge could swing a deal for George and still pay Hayward max money? If they Wyc and ownership are willing to go way over the cap maybe, but that would be difficult. There will be salary implications in any of these scenarios that people ignore.

It's easy to keep the core together, less easy to keep the auxiliary pieces. They'll be able to replace them on cheap money deals though.

I personally think our best bet is to draft and develop. I think it is the path that gives us the best shot at winning a title.

No it's not easy to keep the core together KD and Steph are going to get 35% of the cap this summer and Klay and Draymond are going to want 30% each. 130% for 4 guys is not easy

[jmr07019]

The Heat didn't win it all 4 years they had their big 3 and that team broke up much earlier than anyone expected. You can't be afraid to go for it

There's a reason the Spurs didn't trade Kawhi for a 30+ year old star in 2012. You don't sell your house to bet on a number in roulette.

Lol so much strawman in this post. I'm not arguing to trade for 30 year old stars and putting together the best team in the east is going to give you much better odds at a title than 1/37. People like you would have traded Duncan b/c "oh no the Heat! look how good they are. Let's go run and hide in the lotto with no real plan except we will magically nail every draft pick and then be a powerhouse in 8 years"

[SmartWentCrazy]

On the latest Ringer NBA Show, Chris Mannix said that IT "will not be happy at all" if they draft Fultz or Ball.

I hope Danny tells him to STFU if that's the case. I fear that Danny will trade the pick and get short sighted.

I like Chris Mannix a lot. I kinda just got on the Podcast game (loving it tho).

People seem to be in love with the Dunc On Podcast, but i don't love it. It's okay, the main guy (old lawyer dude) is cool. but the other guy just seems like some nerdy little analytical guy who bases everything off stats. Not really my style.

To the topic -- Of course IT doesn't want the Celtics to draft a PG. That's like what MCW said about the 76ers tanking. You really think players are loosing on purpose for a better chance to get a guy in draft that's going to take their job? No shot. It's a little different with IT, but the point stands. Dude put us on his back, killing it, & we're gonna draft a teenager instead of going all in, so we can replace him once he demands 30m a season? I'm 100% on the Fultz train too. Just saying no wonder IT wouldn't be happy. I wouldn't be either.

Dunc'd on is good because it offers me a different vantage point. Danny Leroux is a little obnoxious, but I do enjoy learning some from the stats he quotes. I skip a lot of episodes though for the reasons you've quoted.

Other decent podcasts, if interested:

Locked on Celtics
Game Theory by Sam Vecenie (good for college break down)

To the main point, that was my read too. My biggest takeaway was that I think that IT now sees himself as the face of the franchise and may start trying to voice his opinion on the direction of the Celtics more, and that's not something I want at all. IT has been a little to focused on coaching and FO decisions for my liking recently.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Save for the fact that it is going to be increasingly difficult to keep that core four of Curry/Klay/KD/Dray together, not to mention the bench pieces that surround those four are likely to be worse than what Ainge has accumulated to position around the Celtics. I'm not to be honest if Ainge could swing a deal for George and still pay Hayward max money? If they Wyc and ownership are willing to go way over the cap maybe, but that would be difficult. There will be salary implications in any of these scenarios that people ignore.

It's easy to keep the core together, less easy to keep the auxiliary pieces. They'll be able to replace them on cheap money deals though.

I personally think our best bet is to draft and develop. I think it is the path that gives us the best shot at winning a title.

No it's not easy to keep the core together KD and Steph are going to get 35% of the cap this summer and Klay and Draymond are going to want 30% each. 130% for 4 guys is not easy

Klay has 2 years after this one, dray has 3. They're both locked in for around 15-20% of the cap. They also bring in a **** ton of revenue as one of the more popular teams in the league. They'll be alright

[darylbe]

If we drafted Josh Jackson, how would he and brown play? Brown to the 2 and Josh on the wing?

[SmartWentCrazy]

The Heat didn't win it all 4 years they had their big 3 and that team broke up much earlier than anyone expected. You can't be afraid to go for it

There's a reason the Spurs didn't trade Kawhi for a 30+ year old star in 2012. You don't sell your house to bet on a number in roulette.

Lol so much strawman in this post. I'm not arguing to trade for 30 year old stars and putting together the best team in the east is going to give you much better odds at a title than 1/37. People like you would have traded Duncan b/c "oh no the Heat! look how good they are. Let's go run and hide in the lotto with no real plan except we will magically nail every draft pick and then be a powerhouse in 8 years"

A) look up the word 'hypocrite'. How you can accuse me of making a straw man argument then say I'd advocate trading a top 10 player of all time in the next sentence? Its hysterical.

B) learn how to read. I've clearly said that I believe the plan should be to moderately compete now while developing elite young pieces in a winning environment. Not every pick will hit, but it gives you the best out in my opinion. In no posts have i advocated for hiding in the lottery.

C) you're posting in a draft thread. There are plenty of other threads to advocate trading away every future piece for a 3 year run that aligns concurrently with arguably the most talented team of all time. This isn't the best location for that

D) the only way to get Paul George or Jimmy Butler will be to trade our Brooklyn pick. If it falls to 3, 4 or 5, we'll likely have to include Brown too. I'll pass on that. If (when) it inevitably fails, we'll be back to square 1 and face another 5-7 years of rebuilding. No thanks.

[Writebloc]

It's easy to keep the core together, less easy to keep the auxiliary pieces. They'll be able to replace them on cheap money deals though.

I personally think our best bet is to draft and develop. I think it is the path that gives us the best shot at winning a title.

In some respects that makes sense, but that certainly isn't the path the Celtics are apparently on, if so Horford wouldn't have been made a priority, nor would Ainge be hoarding cap space this season to try to acquire Hayward. There is some amalgamation of a draft and develop strategy and free agency acquisition and trade for key assets happening when you truly look at what Ainge has done so far. He hasn't used just one strategy, instead he's maintained flexibility in order to shift and change to whichever direction is the most advantageous to the franchise. It seems likely that if the lottery gods smile on the Celtics and the organization retains pick 1 or 2 they will keep the pick, if the C's get their typical lottery luck 3 or 4, or horrors worse Brooklyn continues it plunder of tanking squads than a truly despicable 5th pick than Ainge would likely package the draft pick. The Celtics off season is a Choose Your Own Adventure book with a dynamic flow chart that generally leads to positive outcomes. There are few positions where the Celtics end up with a negative situations, most are ranging from wildly successful to generally satisfactory. I think most fans will be slightly disappointing with the generally satisfactory outcome, but that scenario will still put the team in a far better situation than 90% of the teams in the NBA.

The thing is, I think Ainge's plan has always been to draft and develop. What future assets has he traded to this point? A late 20's pick for IT?

Horford was a consequence of us going for Durant. That plan failed, and he's adjusted accordingly. I do think Ainge will go after another max level guy this offseason. I do not think he'll trade Brown or a Brooklyn pick for another piece. He's done everything in his power to have young pieces grow up in a winning environment. I hope that he doesn't switch the course after finally setting up said environment.

If Ainge signs another free agent and all signs are pointing to that being the focus of the franchise right now, there will be no way they sit on their laurels and play the draft and develop game, that's not going to happen. I doubt that Ainge will trade Brown, he fits this roster too well. I won't be surprised if they trade Brooklyn '17 if it is a pick they aren't interested in, and I think Brooklyn '18 is certainly an asset that could be moved in a future deal.

[2Mas]

Dunc'd on is good because it offers me a different vantage point. Danny Leroux is a little obnoxious, but I do enjoy learning some from the stats he quotes. I skip a lot of episodes though for the reasons you've quoted.

Other decent podcasts, if interested:

Locked on Celtics
Game Theory by Sam Vecenie (good for college break down)

To the main point, that was my read too. My biggest takeaway was that I think that IT now sees himself as the face of the franchise and may start trying to voice his opinion on the direction of the Celtics more, and that's not something I want at all. IT has been a little to focused on coaching and FO decisions for my liking recently.

Danny! yup that's him. Yeah. I like to use the stats as a tool to keep in my head, but i'm not gonna make a team by the stats or anything like that. - That's his style. He's on the Juan Hernangomez over Jaylen Brown cause his points per possesion is better kinda thing lol.

Locked on Celtics is better than Celtics beat? I'll definitely give it a try. Thanks for the suggestion.

& Yeah i feel you on IT. That's kinda why I like PG13. I think he's said that. PG's job is to play, not tell Bird who he wants. & I love IT. I think he can win a chip with him as our starting PG. & I want to sign him long term. But I do not want him thinking he can tell the franchise who we should get, Brad needs to do this. People need to do that. - Nope. Do your job & play your part. If everyone does their part, then we'll be fine. Gm needs to manage. Coach needs to coach. Players need to play. No one steps on each other & we'll be alright.

[SmartWentCrazy]

In some respects that makes sense, but that certainly isn't the path the Celtics are apparently on, if so Horford wouldn't have been made a priority, nor would Ainge be hoarding cap space this season to try to acquire Hayward. There is some amalgamation of a draft and develop strategy and free agency acquisition and trade for key assets happening when you truly look at what Ainge has done so far. He hasn't used just one strategy, instead he's maintained flexibility in order to shift and change to whichever direction is the most advantageous to the franchise. It seems likely that if the lottery gods smile on the Celtics and the organization retains pick 1 or 2 they will keep the pick, if the C's get their typical lottery luck 3 or 4, or horrors worse Brooklyn continues it plunder of tanking squads than a truly despicable 5th pick than Ainge would likely package the draft pick. The Celtics off season is a Choose Your Own Adventure book with a dynamic flow chart that generally leads to positive outcomes. There are few positions where the Celtics end up with a negative situations, most are ranging from wildly successful to generally satisfactory. I think most fans will be slightly disappointing with the generally satisfactory outcome, but that scenario will still put the team in a far better situation than 90% of the teams in the NBA.

The thing is, I think Ainge's plan has always been to draft and develop. What future assets has he traded to this point? A late 20's pick for IT?

Horford was a consequence of us going for Durant. That plan failed, and he's adjusted accordingly. I do think Ainge will go after another max level guy this offseason. I do not think he'll trade Brown or a Brooklyn pick for another piece. He's done everything in his power to have young pieces grow up in a winning environment. I hope that he doesn't switch the course after finally setting up said environment.

If Ainge signs another free agent and all signs are pointing to that being the focus of the franchise right now, there will be no way they sit on their laurels and play the draft and develop game, that's not going to happen. I doubt that Ainge will trade Brown, he fits this roster too well. I won't be surprised if they trade Brooklyn '17 if it is a pick they aren't interested in, and I think Brooklyn '18 is certainly an asset that could be moved in a future deal.

Perhaps, but we signed a 30 year old Horford last year and traded no picks at all, despite having multiple options to do so. There's nothing to indicate that Ainge will switch things up now, other than the subjective opinion of you or I.

[KumaJG]

Dennis Smith

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[greenroom31]

Every time I watch Josh Jackson I get a little more concerned about his potential.

He reminds me of Justise Winslow in that he's the 3rd best offensive player on a team and thrives in a very specific role, but if you hand him the ball and tell him to be the creator he's basically got one move -- up-fake and drive to the rim. Another similarity is that he has bad mechanics but pretty good shooting numbers on a small sample size that mislead you about what type of shooter he will be at the next level.

The difference is that Winslow was younger -- he turns 21 on Sunday, so he was barely 19 during the NCAA tournament of his freshman year. Josh Jackson turned 20 in early February. In other words despite being two draft classes apart, Jackson is less than a year younger than Winslow. Also, Jackson is taller than Winslow was, although Winslow had a similar wingspan.

For those reasons, the more I think about it and watch Jackson the more confident I am that he should be below Ball and Fultz, and possibly even below Tatum and Monk.

[greenroom31]

Winslow's per 40 numbers: 17.3 points on 48.6% shooting (41.8% from 3pt on 110 attempts), 64.1% FT (on 156 attempts), 8.9 rebounds, 2.8 assists, 1.8 steals, 1.2 blocks, 2.5 TOs, 57.2% TS, 55.1% eFG, 22.3 PER, 5.5 WS

Jackson's per 40 numbers: 21.5 points on 51.5% shooting (38.6% from 3pt on 88 attempts), 56.3% FT (on 167 attempts), 9.4 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 2.2 steals, 1.4 blocks, 3.5 TOs, 56.2% TS, 55.6% eFG, 24.4 PER, 4.8 WS

Again, factor in that Jackson was more than a full year older and these are pretty comparable numbers IMO.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Winslow's per 40 numbers: 17.3 points on 48.6% shooting (41.8% from 3pt on 110 attempts), 64.1% FT (on 156 attempts), 8.9 rebounds, 2.8 assists, 1.8 steals, 1.2 blocks, 2.5 TOs, 57.2% TS, 55.1% eFG, 22.3 PER, 5.5 WS

Jackson's per 40 numbers: 21.5 points on 51.5% shooting (38.6% from 3pt on 88 attempts), 56.3% FT (on 167 attempts), 9.4 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 2.2 steals, 1.4 blocks, 3.5 TOs, 56.2% TS, 55.6% eFG, 24.4 PER, 4.8 WS

Again, factor in that Jackson was more than a full year older and these are pretty comparable numbers IMO.

2pt Jumper% per Hoop-Math:

Jackson- 38.2%
Winslow- 26.9%

Height, without shoes:

Jackson-6'7
Winslow-6'4.5

[jmr07019]

Jackson has better ball handling, passing and a better first step than Winslow but being a better offensive player than Winslow is a very low bar to set.

[Bar Fight]

Every time I watch Josh Jackson I get a little more concerned about his potential.

He reminds me of Justise Winslow in that he's the 3rd best offensive player on a team and thrives in a very specific role, but if you hand him the ball and tell him to be the creator he's basically got one move -- up-fake and drive to the rim. Another similarity is that he has bad mechanics but pretty good shooting numbers on a small sample size that mislead you about what type of shooter he will be at the next level.

The difference is that Winslow was younger -- he turns 21 on Sunday, so he was barely 19 during the NCAA tournament of his freshman year. Josh Jackson turned 20 in early February. In other words despite being two draft classes apart, Jackson is less than a year younger than Winslow. Also, Jackson is taller than Winslow was, although Winslow had a similar wingspan.

For those reasons, the more I think about it and watch Jackson the more confident I am that he should be below Ball and Fultz, and possibly even below Tatum and Monk.

I would say he's their second best offensive player at worst. And that's behind a guy he is a lot younger and less experienced than. You could argue similar things with Tatum.