bwgood77 wrote:NavLDO wrote:I'd still like to see what these guys could do in a traditional development scenario. Someone, anyone (because I'm not going to do the research to find the answer), tell me when the last time...or heck, if ever, a GM spent two top 10 picks on two under 20, highly-developmental players who played the same position, then tell me who they were, and how they both turned out to be great players...because surely McD must have had some type of blueprint to go off of when he decided to go that direction.
Seriously, all three of those guys are doomed...Chriss, Bender, and JJ.  They're all going to fail. NOT because they aren't good enough, but because they are in an impossible situation.  You've finally broken me down, Frank (well, not you...McD has done it with his dumb approach to team building), but I'm on the dump McD bandwagon the day after the Trade Deadline is over, if he has not traded one of the 2 PFs, and one of Warren or JJ. 
Stupid waste of a 4th overall pick...TWO YEARS IN A ROW!!!  Amazing, actually.  I'm ok with 'sucking' the rest of the season, but then play JJ, and play Chriss or Bender...again (beating that dead horse)...Pick one!  Really is a waste of draft picks if they don't start developing these kids, and letting Warren believe he's our starter of the future?  That's a Dragic scenario waiting to happen again once he's 'sat' in favor of JJ.
I know you ignore the "positionless" basketball thing and the fact that you need 8 or so rotation players playing major minutes and who starts isn't always the most important....but...
The Celtics drafted SF Jaylen Brown #3.  The following year they drafted SF Jayson Tatum #3, signed SF Gordon Hayward to a max and traded for SF Marcus Morris who often starts.
They all seem to be progressing fairly well.  Hayward's injured, but given you wanted an example of two high lottery picks being drafted who play the same position there is one.
Funny thing is, in 2014 they took PG Marcus Smart #6 and then the next year they took PG Terry Rozier #16 and even traded for IT the same year.  They all played quite a bit.  They also had combo guard Avery Bradley in there.  They still had those two young rookie contract PGs when trading for all star Kyrie Irving.
That team worked out ok and all their players seem to develop fairly well.
Also, you mentioned something about Brooklyn being in a dilemma.  They want to start Dinwiddie and Russell together....I posted articles and links yesterday...they say Dinwiddie being 6'6 can guard any 2s...and Russell is great and sometimes better off ball.
 
I know you like to ignore reality, but Smart and Rozier is far from what I, or anyone else would call, 'developed properly', unless you consider a Guard in his 4th season shooting a career .356/.292(3PT) is what you call (developed). Jaylen Brown was a 2/3 coming in that played the 3 last year, not very much, mind you, and not very well, and was moved to the 2 this year for Tatum, and is playing full time, and, voila' is playing much better on a full time basis, rather than the part time basis he was playing last year.  And Tatum is playing full time this year, starting, and looky there, is developing nicely.
Just because the Celtics are good because they now have Kyrie Irving...you know, the PG you didn't want last summer, because you didn't want to trade for our uber-awesome SF that's not getting starter minutes, unless Warren is hurt?  And were good last year because IT blew up into an All-Star...don't confuse having an actual decent PG leading the team with some half developed scrubs as to why they are good.
Make no mistake; the Celtics are good because of Irving, Horford, Tatum, and now, Brown (with full starter minutes at the 2)...not because Smart and Rozier were developed properly using 'positionless basketball'. And they were good last year due to IT, Bradley, Crowder, and Horford--again, not due to how Rozier and Smart were expertly developed using 'positionless basketball', or whatever the heck your point is.
The fact is, Brown was a 2/3, that moved to 2, and not until he got starter minutes, did he start playing 'well'.
Smart was a 1/2, that, well, just isn't very good.
Rozier is a passable back-up/bench player.
Tatum is playing his natural position of 3, and is starting and developing nicely.
Oh, and they have an All-Star PG leading them.
Hayward is out, as you stated.  If he wasn't, would Tatum be getting his minutes?  You are trying to argue a point with a hollow example, but nice try.  My assertion that these guys need full-time starter minutes with a decent PG still stands.