2020 NBA Draft Thread

[snowman]

I still feel like we need another wing shooter to groom to replace Hayward (if/when he is injured again or is traded) battle and push Langford, or just be able to come in and hit some shots when needed. I like Langford, but his injuries are concerning me like Haywards are. I think a backup PG or PF can be found at 26. (trade the 30th see below)

I truly believe we can get 2 rookies that are collectively better than Edwards, Green and Poirier, who are just there holding down a roster spot. Just trade Poirier and Edwards, and don't pick up Green's option. We can trade Poirier and Edwards for the 30th and 3 mil cash to Charlotte or Atlanta.


pick 14 Saddiq Bey takes Edward's roster spot
pick 26 Zeke Nnaji takes Poirier's roster spot
pick 47 best pg available takes Water's G League roster spot as 2 way
resign Wannamaker
sign Waters to team contract takes Green's roster spot

[wco81]

Edwards is already out?

[djFan71]

I saw a lot of them both.
Anything particular you're after? Or just general views?

Just general, but for RJ how is his burst? Seems like quickness getting by people is what he'll hang his hat on from what I've read. How would he compare to Terry in that regard? But, yeah, beyond that, anything you wanna share would be great. But, don't kill yourself doing a 6 page review on my account.

I watch a ton of NBA, and plenty of NBL (Australian League) and it still becomes a challenge trying to project players from one into the other...lol

But I'd say the following about RJ;
1) He's legit fast up and down the court. Don't remember anyone really matching him here in a flat sprint, including Ball. He has a good handle at pace too, although he has a high-looking dribble to me. Tall for a ballhandler though, so might just be that.

2) He struggled a bit with pacing. At times he looked to be playing too fast, as if he was used to being able to blow past people. But he's not strong enough to take even minor contact (from adult pros, mind you). Trying to compensate by playing faster didn't look great at times.

3) When making his move against a back-peddling defender, he seemed to get a little bit of tunnel vision. I don't mean he was selfish (he is very team orientated) but more that he focuses on freezing the defender in front of him to the point that trailing defenders can catch up and influence the play. He got away with it a bit here, as he's long and fluid, but NBA level shot-blockers are going to catch him and spike a few, I think.

4) His pick and roll play needs work. But he does have a pick and roll game, and he was pretty good at using the pick. It's more the secondary decision-making and execution he needs to work on. To be honest, that's pretty good for an 18 year old.

5) Seems very coachable, and wants to be a rounded player. His off-the-ball offence clearly improved through the season. His off-the-ball defence was pretty hit and miss, but I think he'll be okay. His on-ball defence looked okay to me. Sure, there were plenty of lapses, and he definitely got overpowered, but he seems up for the challenge, and the combination of long arms, quick hands and feet...he'll be okay, even if not immediately.

All in all, I really like his game, and found myself happy when he showed plenty head to head against Ball. He doesn't have the same sort of upside, I would say, but he's one of those guys that you invest a couple of years in, and end up with a guy who can do a bit of everything, at good pace and with good length.

Awesome man, thanks for all the info. I was trying to think of a PG who was fast but not necessarily an awesome shooter or playmaker and still was a great player. I came up with Russ. He still intrigues me, though. Wouldn't hate it if he was 14. But, I'm not really expecting it.

[themoneyteam2]

Kevin O'Connor has the Celtics taking Cole Anthony at 14 and Isaiah Stewart at 26.

I would love both those picks to be completely honest. Both would be upgrades over the current bench.

[djFan71]

Kevin O'Connor has the Celtics taking Cole Anthony at 14 and Isaiah Stewart at 26.

I would love both those picks to be completely honest. Both would be upgrades over the current bench.

I like Woodard at 30, too. I might prefer Reed over Stewart, though, but not sure.

[themoneyteam2]

Kevin O'Connor has the Celtics taking Cole Anthony at 14 and Isaiah Stewart at 26.

I would love both those picks to be completely honest. Both would be upgrades over the current bench.

I like Woodard at 30, too. I might prefer Reed over Stewart, though, but not sure.

Yeah I forgot to include #30 my apologies. I doubt they keep all 3 picks though. Have a feeling they will trade 26 or 30 for a future 1st.

[hugepatsfan]

Kevin O'Connor has the Celtics taking Cole Anthony at 14 and Isaiah Stewart at 26.

I would love both those picks to be completely honest. Both would be upgrades over the current bench.

I read his scouting report on Cole Anthony. I thought it was interesting to not just look at the strengths, but the weaknesses. Not to nitpick, but to see if there were any red flags of why he wouldn't work here:

1) Shot selection: He forces too many contested looks instead of looking to pass, which causes bouts with streakiness.

Does this come down to who he is, or the situation he was in? Playing with Tatum/Brown/Kemba/Hayward/Smart, would he feel the need to force shots like he did on that terrible UNC team? You'd think not, though some people are just wired that way.

2) Not a pure playmaker, nor does he naturally make his teammates better. He needs to work on making advanced reads, but even on the simple passes his accuracy is underwhelming.

Through the years, Stevens has never gravitated towards the 10 assist per game type of guy. Just not how he runs his offense. The type of playmaking he seems to prefer is getting into the paint off of the P&R to break the defense down. So the fact that he's not a "pure playmaker" doesn't really seem to be much of a weakness in this system. Weak accuracy on simple passes would be a concern because you do need to be able to do that. But our system gravitates more towards scoring lead guards than playmakers.

3) Defensive versatility: He plays hard and smart, but he’s still undersized and likely to be targeted by opponents on switches or against elite guards.

IT, Kyrie, Kemba... all we've ever had are guards who need to be helped on that end. This weaknees just seems like more of the same and something the system is used to. As long as you play hard, which Cole Anthony does, it works fine for us. Obviously you'd prefer Smart level defenders everywhere but that's not practical and this seems to be a sacrifice we're willing to make in our lead guards.

4) Underwent surgery in 2019 for a partially torn meniscus in his right knee.

Hard to comment on medicals. Gotta have team docs look at the records/examine him and decide if it's a concern. Can't really assess how much of a concern this is or isn't as a fan.



So overall, it seems that all of the knocks on Cole Anthony are the things Stevens' system has historically accepted as weaknesses of its lead guards. The things he struggles with are the things Stevens hasn't historically asked his point guards to do. So in conclusion, the things he CAN'T do don't seem to be dealbreakers for us. So if the things he projects to be able to do he can actually do, I think he'd be a nice fit here.

I do still prefer Kira Lewis because I think the speed is just a can't teach thing that's going to increase the odds his skills translate of getting into the paint and breaking the defense down. But I've always felt Anthony is a good fit here.

[snowman]

Would we give up the 30th pick and 3 mil cash to a team to take Poirier and Edwards ? Would it take that much to move them? I know Boston can replace them with the 14th and 26th pick. This little bit of savings would free up 2 roster spots, and clear some off the lux tax. It could also help in the negotiating with Hayward's extension.

[djFan71]

Kevin O'Connor has the Celtics taking Cole Anthony at 14 and Isaiah Stewart at 26.

I would love both those picks to be completely honest. Both would be upgrades over the current bench.

I like Woodard at 30, too. I might prefer Reed over Stewart, though, but not sure.

Yeah I forgot to include #30 my apologies. I doubt they keep all 3 picks though. Have a feeling they will trade 26 or 30 for a future 1st.

Agreed. Though, like every draft now i'm starting to like the guys at our picks and want to keep 'em!
Woodard in particular is a guy I'd like.

[sully00]

If the C's were to offer their three picks for a lower pick this year (not including any current players in the offer, just the picks), how low do you think they could go - and would it be worth it?
TBH, I've not really paid any attention to the young crop of guys in the draft this year, so I have no idea who is worth trading up for (if anybody). I'm just pretty sure that the C's really don't need to add three rookies to their squad

My quick look tells me SA at 11 would be willing to move 14 for an extra pick or two. Not sure what that is worth for Boston.

DET at 7 has a lot of cap space available so they may be interested in the lower salary at 14 and adding two more cost friendly roster spots at 26 and 30. Boston also has 47 for a team short a 2nd round pick.

This draft is so random right now. I look for us to target guys like Jalen Smith, Kira Lewis, maybe Nesmith but he seems like an odd fit Boston usually goes for the guy who is good shooter skill wise but had a down year for whatever reason. Maybe one of the other PG's Maxey or Anthony.

Basically the only trade up guy I can buy into right now is Wiseman. You would think because of Embiid it would be a focus for Boston but after that series getting Daniel Theis' name on an extension is probably the focus.

[sully00]

Would we give up the 30th pick and 3 mil cash to a team to take Poirier and Edwards ? Would it take that much to move them? I know Boston can replace them with the 14th and 26th pick. This little bit of savings would free up 2 roster spots, and clear some off the lux tax. It could also help in the negotiating with Hayward's extension.

There is really no savings. They both make close to the minimum as it is. Yes it frees up roster spots but Boston likes Edwards and he will be making less than the minimum overtime on his contract. Poirier kind of sucks but he gives you some ballast in a trade. Guys will come and go but you don't give up a first round pick to deal with a 2 mil dollar salary.

[MaxwellSmart]

I still feel like we need another wing shooter to groom to replace Hayward (if/when he is injured again or is traded) battle and push Langford, or just be able to come in and hit some shots when needed. I like Langford, but his injuries are concerning me like Haywards are. I think a backup PG or PF can be found at 26. (trade the 30th see below)

I truly believe we can get 2 rookies that are collectively better than Edwards, Green and Poirier, who are just there holding down a roster spot. Just trade Poirier and Edwards, and don't pick up Green's option. We can trade Poirier and Edwards for the 30th and 3 mil cash to Charlotte or Atlanta.


pick 14 Saddiq Bey takes Edward's roster spot
pick 26 Zeke Nnaji takes Poirier's roster spot
pick 47 best pg available takes Water's G League roster spot as 2 way
resign Wannamaker
sign Waters to team contract takes Green's roster spot

Too bad we barely missed out on Herro last year....dude can shoot a bit.

[djFan71]

Would we give up the 30th pick and 3 mil cash to a team to take Poirier and Edwards ? Would it take that much to move them? I know Boston can replace them with the 14th and 26th pick. This little bit of savings would free up 2 roster spots, and clear some off the lux tax. It could also help in the negotiating with Hayward's extension.

There is really no savings. They both make close to the minimum as it is. Yes it frees up roster spots but Boston likes Edwards and he will be making less than the minimum overtime on his contract. Poirier kind of sucks but he gives you some ballast in a trade. Guys will come and go but you don't give up a first round pick to deal with a 2 mil dollar salary.

Not for free, but if you get a highly protected future first (top 20/25) that converts to 2 2nds like the reverse of what we did in 2016, then it could be a good way to go.

[Bleeding Green]

Would we give up the 30th pick and 3 mil cash to a team to take Poirier and Edwards ? Would it take that much to move them? I know Boston can replace them with the 14th and 26th pick. This little bit of savings would free up 2 roster spots, and clear some off the lux tax. It could also help in the negotiating with Hayward's extension.

No. Why are we giving up 3 players and three million dollars?! You still have to sign players with the extra roster spots and you're gonna be hard pressed to find players much cheaper than Carsen Edwards.

So if they do your plan, they have them with 11 players under contract next year (assuming Kanter backs out):

Walker: 34,379,100
Hayward: 34,187,085
Smart: 13,446,428
Tatum: 9.897,120
Brown: 23,883,929
Theis: 5,000,000
Langford: 3,631,200
WIlliams: 2,498,760
Williams: 2,029,920
14th pick: 3,707,400
26th pick: 2,182,440


11 players: 135,975,320

Still need to add in four min-level players which I think is 963005 per player. Then the 1,039,080 they owe Yabu, the 92,858 they owe Demetrius Jackson and the total is 140,959,278‬. Given away Edwards, Poirier, the 30th pick and have 4 min-level players on the roster. And still they're above the luxury tax that is estimated now (139 million). Someone check my math, but unless they sell all their picks or give Theis away, I don't see how they get below the luxury tax.

[sully00]

Would we give up the 30th pick and 3 mil cash to a team to take Poirier and Edwards ? Would it take that much to move them? I know Boston can replace them with the 14th and 26th pick. This little bit of savings would free up 2 roster spots, and clear some off the lux tax. It could also help in the negotiating with Hayward's extension.

There is really no savings. They both make close to the minimum as it is. Yes it frees up roster spots but Boston likes Edwards and he will be making less than the minimum overtime on his contract. Poirier kind of sucks but he gives you some ballast in a trade. Guys will come and go but you don't give up a first round pick to deal with a 2 mil dollar salary.

Not for free, but if you get a highly protected future first (top 20/25) that converts to 2 2nds like the reverse of what we did in 2016, then it could be a good way to go.

Sure I don't see us rostering 4 rookies this year. So some sort of consolidation trade has to happen. I am kind of hoping for one of those too good to be true situations. Where a team like NO or ATL are staring at a max salary commitment to a guy that they aren't sure of and decide to liquidate. No idea what we would do with Ingram but I could figure John Collins out. Tough to do a deal with BRK but Jarret Allen is a guy to keep an eye out for as I am not sure of his long term fit with the dynamic duo.

[djFan71]

Would we give up the 30th pick and 3 mil cash to a team to take Poirier and Edwards ? Would it take that much to move them? I know Boston can replace them with the 14th and 26th pick. This little bit of savings would free up 2 roster spots, and clear some off the lux tax. It could also help in the negotiating with Hayward's extension.

No. Why are we giving up 3 players and three million dollars?! Would that really get them below the luxury tax? You still have to sign players with the extra roster spots and you're gonna be hard pressed to find players much cheaper than Carsen Edwards.

I think they're over the luxury tax no matter what unless Kanter backs out and they just sell all their draft picks.

All depends on Hayward. If he just opts in, no way. If he opts out and walks or resigns starting in the mid-20s, you can get there. Depends on if he wants 3/70, 3/80, etc. But, either way, I agree you don't sell them off. If you can punt them down the road and not lose value, great. If you can use them and salary & better player back at a lower salary, great. But, not just a sale. I think they'll try to minimize the tax, but aren't going to waste assets just to duck it.

[Bleeding Green]

lmao Hayward is not walking away from 34 million dollars, are you nuts? Going into an uncertain year, coming off another ankle injury where he missed almost the entire playoffs especially. 3/70? That's like him signing a 2/36 contract after next year which is not happening on any planet. And if he opts out, you absolutely have tons of room to fit under the luxury tax so you don't go selling off cheap young players and draft picks.

[djFan71]

lmao Hayward is not walking away from 34 million dollars, are you nuts? Going into an uncertain year, coming off another ankle injury where he missed almost the entire playoffs especially. 3/70? That's like him signing a 2/36 contract after next year which is not happening on any planet. And if he opts out, you absolutely have tons of room to fit under the luxury tax so you don't go selling off cheap young players and draft picks.

3/80 is a 2/46 contract. That's pretty reasonable. I only mention 3/70 since that gets you there with no other moves. But, yeah, it's not happening. And, I specifically said I wouldn't sell off picks or young players. Not sure what you're arguing against here.

[Bleeding Green]

Well you said you can get there, but you can only get there if you sell off young players and picks. 3/80 puts Hayward at ~24.5million the first year assuming usual 8% raises. And if you aren't selling off players and picks, you can't get below the lux tax unless I'm using all fake numbers here. Poirier, Edwards, 14, 26, 30 accounts for 12.1 million.

[SMTBSI]

Someone check my math, but unless they sell all their picks or give Theis away, I don't see how they get below the luxury tax.

Without a Hayward renegotiation, there's basically no way to get below the tax without completely nuking a contending team. The necessary steps would be so dramatic it would be perceived as a complete waving of the white flag. Even Kanter opting out, and trading into the future / selling off picks to move flotsam salaries wouldn't get it done.

Even with a plausible Hayward renegotiation, enough would have to be given away to materially harm our competitiveness.

I just don't see it. I guess they'll make "conservative" spending decisions to save a few bucks where they can, but the actual tax lines feels out of reach.