All Things 2017 Draft
Moderators: bisme37, Parliament10, canman1971, shackles10, snowman, Froob, Darthlukey, Shak_Celts
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
- jcappy
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,785
- And1: 515
- Joined: Dec 21, 2004
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
His biceps look a little bigger in part because he's flexing them, and also because his arm is forward in the picture plane. And this gets him off the steroids questioning.
Champions aren't made in the gyms. Champions are made from something they have deep inside them -- a desire, a dream, a vision.
~ Muhammad Ali
~ Muhammad Ali
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
- Bar Fight
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,918
- And1: 17,233
- Joined: Sep 30, 2013
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
SmartWentCrazy wrote:klemen4 wrote:We are not getting nb.1...No way 3 years in a row the worst team gets first pick.
I expect nb.2 or 3.
Trade the pick if it's not nb.1
The thing about odds is that last years outcome literally doesn't matter. Neither does the year preceding it.
I don't think we get the 1st pick because our luck **** sucks. We probably get 4th overall and then lose Game 7 in devastating fashion the following night.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
- ConstableGeneva
- RealGM
- Posts: 50,523
- And1: 101,257
- Joined: Sep 22, 2012
- Location: Parody Account
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,845
- And1: 12,693
- Joined: Jun 12, 2009
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
BigTrade92 wrote:I'm fully convinced that it's either Fultz or trade the pick for Butler or George.
Cannot envision Ball, Jackson or Tatum in a C's uniform.
I've heard the Celtics really like Ball.
The most charitable interpretation is that it's ethnic cleansing and massive war crimes.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 4,358
- And1: 3,073
- Joined: Jul 03, 2003
- Location: hartford, ct.
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
If we don't get the first pick this year. I'll be forever bitter. Don't want anyone but fultz. 2nd pick is first loser
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 20,749
- And1: 34,848
- Joined: Dec 29, 2014
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,701
- And1: 3,752
- Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
Drafting Lonzo is basically sticking a fire poker in ITs eye. Those two cannot coexist on a court. Fultz and IT can work, and it sounds silly, but the Washington connection helps.
That said, Ainge is ruthless and would not be surprised at all if he took Lonzo anyways.
That said, Ainge is ruthless and would not be surprised at all if he took Lonzo anyways.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 10,128
- And1: 13,003
- Joined: Apr 14, 2014
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
It's Fultz,Ball or trade it if it drops to third. I'm fine with either option. I can also live with dropping to 2nd, but dropping two spots or further would be a slap.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,701
- And1: 3,752
- Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
I think DA would consider Jackson at 3 but after that it's trade mode
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 15,783
- And1: 5,324
- Joined: Feb 23, 2004
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
I don't really have anxiety about the lottery for us specifically. 1 or 2 would obviously be nicer, but I don't think 4 would even hurt all that bad for me as long as we don't get jumped by annoying teams(Miami would set me off).
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,944
- And1: 4,257
- Joined: May 30, 2003
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
rochrist wrote:ryaningf wrote:Fruit Pastilles wrote:How many times has he said he'll play for whoever drafts him though?
Of course he has a preference, everyone does, he's a kid. PP wanted to play in LA too, didn't stop us from drafting him.
Everyone wants to play in LA. That's why they still get meetings with marquee free agents even when everything about their team sucks.
It's tough to investigate one's intuition, but I just don't understand the reticence to Lonzo Ball. He's very fun to watch, plays with joy, and makes his teammates better. Do people have a hangover from Rondo? Or is it all because Lavar is a bozo?
I prefer to win and if possible I prefer to do it with improvisational style/beauty. That's the fan and the player in me talking, but I think it's a useful standard to distinguish good/great from TRANSCENDENT. Even though it's a pretty harsh standard (because winning and style rarely go hand in hand), only the all-time transcendent talents (like Magic or Bird or Lebron) can really manage to do both. I think Lonzo is another one of these types, and I really don't think there's another guy in the draft who comes close.
I really hope he doesn't go to LA. It'd be better for the league and better for him if he didn't.
Interesting. I don't see him as anything close to that kind of player. He's going to have a certain amount of trouble getting that shot of his off when he's playing with the big boys. He doesn't seem especially quick. He's a great passer, but we've already had the great passing PG who can't shoot.
The game has changed a bit but look at Billups who succeed in large part because of his 3 point shot. He wasn't as tall as Ball nor was he lightning quick or as gifted of a passer and he wasn't a legit lob target like Ball but still pretty darn great after he put it all together. Ball will never match Billups as a pure shooter in all likelihood but if Ball is very good from 3, he may be nearly as efficient of a scorr since he should have an edge over Billups in finishing at the rim because of his height advantage.
Rondo best year at Kentucky TS% 55% and 30.3% from 3.
Ball only year at UCLA TS% 67.3% and 41.2% from 3 while taking 5.4 per game....
I do agree with the notion that the college game hurts a Rondo type of player with elite quickness more than a Ball type of player since Rondo couldn't shoot the 3 ball well. And I do agree that Ball must have had better spacing on his team than Rondo at UK but some of that was obviously the difference in 3 point shooting between the two players.
The big difference is Ball is entering the NBA as someone that can shoot at the most important distance and has a great shot selection.
Ball does have question legit marks about his shooting form and I feel comfortable heavily discounting the possibility he will ever score much more than 20 PPG without reworking his shot which is hard to do. I won't deny that and his free throw average wasn't impressive for a freshman but tough to say someone can't shoot when they hit over 40% of their 3's with many of them from what I saw at least were from legit NBA distance and also have a super high TS% as a freshman.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
- 31to6
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,493
- And1: 30,853
- Joined: Nov 20, 2004
- Location: Tatum train
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
I don't get the automatic 'if it's not #1 or 2 we trade it' declarations. Jackson, Fox, and Tatum are right up there (or better than) Ball, in my eyes, and for all we know any DA love for Fultz could be a smokescreen because the guy doesn't always compete like we like.
I have no doubt Danny will be considering possible deals, regardless of where the pick lands, right up through (maybe after) draft night -- to be slapping cut-offs on this seems premature. Workouts, interviews, everyone getting on board the Jackson and/or Fox bandwagons -- this thing's far from set in stone.
I have no doubt Danny will be considering possible deals, regardless of where the pick lands, right up through (maybe after) draft night -- to be slapping cut-offs on this seems premature. Workouts, interviews, everyone getting on board the Jackson and/or Fox bandwagons -- this thing's far from set in stone.
Paul Pierce appreciation society.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,739
- And1: 20,101
- Joined: Jul 18, 2009
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
It's Fultz or Jackson. Ainge ain't taking Ball.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 14,172
- And1: 20,495
- Joined: Jul 24, 2010
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
LarryBirdsFingr wrote:165bows wrote:LarryBirdsFingr wrote:holy crap.
Trying not to get my hopes up but how funny would it be if the Celtics got two legit top-tier studs in the draft the next two years?
I full expect to be disappointed but man, gotta like the odds.
After Sully 6-pack pictures, I can no longer trust instagram. 7 times bitten...
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
- Asian Celtic
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,819
- And1: 7,002
- Joined: Jun 10, 2016
-
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
I am either a weirdo or in the minority that I Like Ball as much as Fultz but like tatum more than Jackson.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 20,749
- And1: 34,848
- Joined: Dec 29, 2014
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
Rexperez wrote:I am either a weirdo or in the minority that I Like Ball as much as Fultz but like tatum more than Jackson.
No, you're just normal. All of these guys are ranked very close to each other and anyone who's followed the draft knows the talent difference between them is large marginal. It's why clinching a top 4 pick was so important.
Ball/Jackson/Fultz are all clearly in the first tier. Tatum is very divisive, with some having him as high as two and others as low as 8. I personally see the former and have him slightly above Jackson as well.
You have a very reasonable big board, IMO.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 20,749
- And1: 34,848
- Joined: Dec 29, 2014
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
Not that fit is a factor when drafting this high, but you couldn't design a better fit at the 2 next to Lonzo Ball than Avery Bradley. Spaces the floor and saves Lonzo from going against elite athletes at PG.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
- 165bows
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 22,162
- And1: 15,025
- Joined: Jan 03, 2013
- Location: The land of incremental improvement.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
soxfan2003 wrote:rochrist wrote:ryaningf wrote:
Everyone wants to play in LA. That's why they still get meetings with marquee free agents even when everything about their team sucks.
It's tough to investigate one's intuition, but I just don't understand the reticence to Lonzo Ball. He's very fun to watch, plays with joy, and makes his teammates better. Do people have a hangover from Rondo? Or is it all because Lavar is a bozo?
I prefer to win and if possible I prefer to do it with improvisational style/beauty. That's the fan and the player in me talking, but I think it's a useful standard to distinguish good/great from TRANSCENDENT. Even though it's a pretty harsh standard (because winning and style rarely go hand in hand), only the all-time transcendent talents (like Magic or Bird or Lebron) can really manage to do both. I think Lonzo is another one of these types, and I really don't think there's another guy in the draft who comes close.
I really hope he doesn't go to LA. It'd be better for the league and better for him if he didn't.
Interesting. I don't see him as anything close to that kind of player. He's going to have a certain amount of trouble getting that shot of his off when he's playing with the big boys. He doesn't seem especially quick. He's a great passer, but we've already had the great passing PG who can't shoot.
The game has changed a bit but look at Billups who succeed in large part because of his 3 point shot. He wasn't as tall as Ball nor was he lightning quick or as gifted of a passer and he wasn't a legit lob target like Ball but still pretty darn great after he put it all together. Ball will never match Billups as a pure shooter in all likelihood but if Ball is very good from 3, he may be nearly as efficient of a scorr since he should have an edge over Billups in finishing at the rim because of his height advantage.
Rondo best year at Kentucky TS% 55% and 30.3% from 3.
Ball only year at UCLA TS% 67.3% and 41.2% from 3 while taking 5.4 per game....
I do agree with the notion that the college game hurts a Rondo type of player with elite quickness more than a Ball type of player since Rondo couldn't shoot the 3 ball well. And I do agree that Ball must have had better spacing on his team than Rondo at UK but some of that was obviously the difference in 3 point shooting between the two players.
The big difference is Ball is entering the NBA as someone that can shoot at the most important distance and has a great shot selection.
Ball does have question legit marks about his shooting form and I feel comfortable heavily discounting the possibility he will ever score much more than 20 PPG without reworking his shot which is hard to do. I won't deny that and his free throw average wasn't impressive for a freshman but tough to say someone can't shoot when they hit over 40% of their 3's with many of them from what I saw at least were from legit NBA distance and also have a super high TS% as a freshman.
Physically, Ball isn't much like Nash but Nash never averaged 20 ppg either. Even on fast paced teams. But Nash was a great playmaker and an extremely efficient shooter his entire career, similar to Ball's college production.
This is a bit random but Ball may be a mash-up of Billups and Nash.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 14,148
- And1: 8,437
- Joined: Nov 29, 2011
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
The Celtics will be picking 1 or to 2 come May 16. The reason you have the lottery is help the bad teams out/teams that missed the playoffs. Why even bother having the lottery if bad teams are not even guaranteed a top 3 selection.
This is where the NFL has it right though. Just award the team with the worst pick the top pick, and be done with it. No need bringing the luck factor into it. With that said i believe the Nets pick is going to be 1 or 2. I don't see it being 4 at all.
This is where the NFL has it right though. Just award the team with the worst pick the top pick, and be done with it. No need bringing the luck factor into it. With that said i believe the Nets pick is going to be 1 or 2. I don't see it being 4 at all.
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,845
- And1: 12,693
- Joined: Jun 12, 2009
Re: All Things 2017 Draft
Afam wrote:The Celtics will be picking 1 or to 2 come May 16. The reason you have the lottery is help the bad teams out/teams that missed the playoffs. Why even bother having the lottery if bad teams are not even guaranteed a top 3 selection.
This is where the NFL has it right though. Just award the team with the worst pick the top pick, and be done with it. No need bringing the luck factor into it. With that said i believe the Nets pick is going to be 1 or 2. I don't see it being 4 at all.
You realize it's just math, right? There's about a 35% chance we land the 4th pick.
The most charitable interpretation is that it's ethnic cleansing and massive war crimes.