At #6, who do you Like/Dislike if this happens: (poll added)

[Gant]

Done. Poll added. Thanks.

[FreeDrop]

I like Randle 1, no brainer for me

Mcdermott 2 -- they really need a wing who can fill it up and be a go to scorer, ala Pierce.
What worries me is his size/defense. I dont think he'll be able to guard the good 2s and 3s and that's a big issue. If not here, i want the best shooting wing available at 17, whether that's Stauskus or Harris or whoever.

Smart 3 -- The only way I'd take him if the plan was to trade Rondo. If not, I think he's superfluous, dont want him at the 2 and dont need him at the 1.

the other two, no, don';t need any more at that position -- with the exception being Randle because he could be a top flight player and he is a low post presence.

Saric I dont know much about but he sounds like another Kelly O. I like Kelly, but dont need another whose a project.

The big guy, Nurkis, fills a definite need -- but dont know much about him. Could be a stiff.

[sam_I_am]

Ryanning

Great post even for being so long!

I think we are of like mind when it comes to Gordon.

Gordon at SF with KO at PF on defense allows KO to play perimeter in half court and be the trailer on fast break.

Whether or not he is BPA at 6, he is a great fit.

Also....great thread Gant

[soxfan2003]

Like --
1) Aaron Gordon very impressed with his ability to rotate on defense laterally. Gordon isn't just a hustle player with good athleticism but has great athleticism to go with the hustle. I'd be more concerned with his bad overall perimeter shooting if he was older and playing a guard position but think its a bit easier to hide at SF/PF especially if he just develops the NBA corner 3 and has a smart shot selection. Long term, I'm not that worried about him becoming Josh Smith of offense.

Gordon will have no problem cutting to the basket and finishing at the rim against good NBA defenses. Will be able to grab his share of offensive boards as well and still get back on defense with his speed if he fails to do so. Will never be Blake Griffin as a scorer -- I just don't think he has the body to add Blake's strength and bully opponents while maintaining his athleticism -- but certainly should be a better defender and perhaps even a moderately better ball handler.

I don't think the strength of Gordon's defense will be against very good post-up 4's some of which will just be longer and stronger then him but I think in time he will be reasonable enough to get by in those match-ups.

2) Marcus Smart. Extremely strong for a PG and strength when it comes with good to very good athleticism is often underrated. Add in the fire and competitiveness he plays with and its an impressive package. The first few times, I saw Gerald Green play, I was disappointed even though I knew going in he would be a project coming out of high school. His overall -- not jumping -- athleticism for basketball wasn't that good for a player that looked very weak even for his age and without very good basketball skills.

Smart may not be the fastest/quickest player, jump the highest or the most skilled but he has a lot of anti Gerald Green in his game. He is a damn good athlete for someone that looks like he has the body/strength to play in the NFL.

Smart still has to develop offensively at the PG position and he will never play near mistake free PG like a Conley or make some magical passes like a Rondo or Rubio but within 2 years , I think he can be very good at the position on both ends and have teams trying to matchup against the Celtics rather then vice-versa. I like him guarding PG's or SG's and even some SF's. His PG potential in terms of passing skills is probably halfway between Bradley and Rondo and I think that is good enough in most situations.

Obviously needs to work on his perimeter shot a lot but is coming into the NBA as a decent enough free throw shooter for a 2nd year college player. I see Smart as being a nice Rondo replacement but he does have some of the same weaknesses(perimeter shooting) so he will need to be paired with a shooter in the backcourt that the team has complete confidence in. If he didn't have that perimeter shooting weakness, he would be going in the top 3 of the draft.

I prefer Gordon over Smart but I won't complain with either player....

Dislikes
1) Randle... I think he can be a "good player" or if everything literally goes right for him a "very good" player but to do so I think he has to really improve his perimeter game on offense I don't think enough of his low post plays/drives will translate into the NBA for him to be good without the perimeter game.

And Randle strikes me as a player that if he develops into lets say an 18/10 player, he won't be quite as good as those numbers suggest or at least better then his numbers suggest so I don't think he will be a good value on his second NBA contract. The Celtics need better interior defense and I just don't see Randle doing that much to solve that problem.

Randle is pretty strong but he will just have above average strength for the PF position and given his other physical attributes, I don't think that is enough to be a real good player without a lot of growth to his perimeter game.

[kenifpassion]

Predictions:
Vonleh: bust
Randle: Joe Smith? or Big Zach?
Saric: bust
McD: Mike Miller? or Jimmer?
Smart: Flynn? or Lillard?
Aaron Gordon: a smart Josh Smith?


1st: Aaron Gordon (defensive player)
2nd: McD (offensive player, can shoot. would be great to play along with Rondo)
3rd: Randle (if Sully gets traded)
4th: Smart (if Rondo gets traded)

[threrf23]

Vonleh's my guy. I mentioned in a different thread, relative to age he at least comes fairly close to boasting Dwight Howard's size/frame (he is separated by an inch in height, 3" of standing reach, but may still be growing too), Chris Bosh's skill (dribbling, shooting, some post moves and good hook shot, gets to the line or at least shows the ability), Kenneth Faried's motor (aside from all the talk regarding his motor, despite averaging less than 30 mpg and being slightly injured late in the season, in conference play he led the Big 10 in rebounds per game and was 26th nationally in terms of defensive rebound %), and Ray Allen's work ethic (no one disputes his work ethic and he once ditched his family at Disneyland to practice bball). He might also have Tony Allen's head, but that is essentially why he may still be available at pick number six.

What it comes down to, to me, is this. While he might not reach his ceiling, his ceiling is IMO higher than the others' listed in the poll. And at the same time, the moment he steps onto the floor for us, his game is IMO Leon Powe esque. His rebounding should translate to the NBA, he is a decent free throw shooter (which bodes well for his jump shot), and his work ethic / character should limit his floor. A 19 y/o big man who can contribute nicely as an NBA role player has good trade value in a worst case scenario.

[NBAWestFan]

Pick the Next ZBoe Randle Made it to the championship game A good rebounder and able to score
down low.

McDermont is a flat out shooter. He can Stretch the floor and score 3 points instead of 2 points.

Smart - Hope he is smart

Vonelh has a lot of upside with his long arms and post-up shot.
He can score over taller players with his wing span.

Gordon is a heady true point who will make good decisions

[Frank Lucas]

I like Zach Lavine at 6 and I really don't care who is rank ahead of him. On my board he is the 5th best prospect in this draft. Danny would be smart to maybe trade down to 8 or 9 maybe but I am good drafting him at 6. To me Zach has a James Harden type game.

[ryaningf]

I like Zach Lavine at 6 and I really don't care who is rank ahead of him. On my board he is the 5th best prospect in this draft. Danny would be smart to maybe trade down to 8 or 9 maybe but I am good drafting him at 6. To me Zach has a James Harden type game.

Is this all based on some peyote fueled desert vision quest? Because when you actually watch the kid play basketball he comes off as a great athlete and a terrible basketball player. Gerald Green 2.0.

I watched a good chunk of UCLA basketball and Lavine looked uncomfortable on the court, poor recognition of spacing, no idea of what to do off the ball, and didn't bring much to the table except the occasional gasp inducing sportscenter moment. I hear now he left UCLA in large part because a.) he got mad hype because he's a freak athlete and b.) he wanted to play PG but his coach said no we got Kyle Andersen and my no talent kid is the backup PG on this team.

Playing off the ball is a huge transition for somebody used to having the ball in hands all the time, so I think there's an argument to be made that Lavine was played out of position and that's why he looked so clueless out there. At the same time, I saw ZERO PG skills when he did get opportunities. I saw a kid who took contested 3s and reckless drives at the rim...and hell maybe that's what some people think constitutes a PG these days (if they're Westbrook fans) but I want to see leadership, passing skills, ballhandling ability, moxie, and an advanced understanding of the game. I saw NONE of that. Just a kid who can jump like crazy, hit 3s, and made the occasional athletic dribble drive to the rim. He had a shaky understanding of the game and limited ball skills besides shooting.

Lavine is a prospect but he'll require lots of development and there's a good chance he doesn't develop at all. I wouldn't touch him in the lottery and I don't expect him to be a playoff ready rotation-caliber player for at least 5-7 years.

[Frank Lucas]

I'm not looking at Lavine as a point guard but as a shooting guard. The kids his not Gerald Green 2.0. Lavine has a much better jump shot than Gerald Green. The kid is a late bloomer with crazy upside. I would draft him and know that Brad would be the right coach for him. Lavine has a better jumper than Smart and Gordon.

[threrf23]

I'm not looking at Lavine as a point guard but as a shooting guard. The kids his not Gerald Green 2.0. Lavine has a much better jump shot than Gerald Green. The kid is a late bloomer with crazy upside. I would draft him and know that Brad would be the right coach for him. Lavine has a better jumper than Smart and Gordon.

I think you are forgetting that some people here wanted to trade PP for the chance to draft Gerald Green, because they thought that they had never seen a youngster with such a good jump shot.

Side discussion: Gerald Green, like Bazz Muhammed, was hyped up by people oblivious to the fact he was a full year old for his class. These guys likely let the hype get to their heads and didn't work as hard as they should have. Over the past ten years of drafts, these two are the only guys who were a full year old for their class and also ranked atop of it, top 3 by a consensus. OJ Mayo's another guy who was a full year old for his class and was heavily hyped. Lavine was not hyped nearly as much and was not old for his class, but he is still hyped a little bit based on his athleticism and there is also little indication he has ever cared that much IMO.

The "late bloomer" tag is IMO one of the worst designations for most draft prospects, they are often the guys who lack passion and/or work ethic and/or maturity and hence they underachieve until they need to achieve. LaVine's stats show very little, his 3 pt shooting stats and his FT% suggest nothing special about him even relative to his age, when you consider that Lavine was likely often playing against backups or on the floor with guys like Anderson and Adams. Basically on paper there is no reason to draft him except for his athleticism and his flashes. a la Daniel Orton, I think that is a sucker's bet. I won't go so far as to say he won't pan out, but even if he does does it happen before the end of his rookie contract? I would personally be unhappy with him if I had the #35 pick, forget about 6 and 17.

[ryaningf]

I'm not looking at Lavine as a point guard but as a shooting guard. The kids his not Gerald Green 2.0. Lavine has a much better jump shot than Gerald Green. The kid is a late bloomer with crazy upside. I would draft him and know that Brad would be the right coach for him. Lavine has a better jumper than Smart and Gordon.

Nobody's disputing that his jumper is pretty. Gerald had a pretty jumper too. The comparison had more to do with the fact that neither guy has much going on between ears.

Danny talked a week or 2 ago about how he doesn't look at pure athleticism but applied athleticism. To me, Lavine has great pure athleticism but little idea about how to apply it in a basketball setting. His BBIQ, IMO, is pretty terrible and he should have stayed in school and continued to study the game.

[2Mas]

Think the ppl on this board are very dramatic. I'm not going through posting everyone but even the player comparisons are strange.

Lol one dude called Gordon a pg! wtf?!

I too think LaVine is a potential major steal. I wouldn't take him 6, but def in the lotto cause he has many flaws still right now. But this -- "I wouldn't touch him in the lottery and I don't expect him to be a playoff ready rotation-caliber player for at least 5-7 years." ?! Come on Ryaningf lol.

THRERF23 -- Just because Vonleh skipped DISNEY LAND & there's no bad stories about his work ethic lol doesn't mean he has RAY ALLEN's work ethic. Come on man. & You mention stories about his motor? lol so does he or doesn't he? & Him being the tallest person in college getting 9rpg & Faried being 6'7 & avg 9rpg in the league is way different.

I don't think you guys are necessarily wrong, it's just hard to take everything so serious when the stuff some people right are just over the top. Giving people the wrong ideas lol.

[ryaningf]

I too think LaVine is a potential major steal. I wouldn't take him 6, but def in the lotto cause he has many flaws still right now. But this -- "I wouldn't touch him in the lottery and I don't expect him to be a playoff ready rotation-caliber player for at least 5-7 years." ?! Come on Ryaningf lol..

He's a 19 year old rail thin SG with 2 skills--shooting and elite athleticism--and very real concerns about his understanding of the game. It took Gerald Green 7-8 years to put it all together and if Lavine becomes a player it's going to be a long process. You'd really trust him in a playoff game within the next 4 years? Good luck with that.

[Frank Lucas]

I too think LaVine is a potential major steal. I wouldn't take him 6, but def in the lotto cause he has many flaws still right now. But this -- "I wouldn't touch him in the lottery and I don't expect him to be a playoff ready rotation-caliber player for at least 5-7 years." ?! Come on Ryaningf lol..

He's a 19 year old rail thin SG with 2 skills--shooting and elite athleticism--and very real concerns about his understanding of the game. It took Gerald Green 7-8 years to put it all together and if Lavine becomes a player it's going to be a long process. You'd really trust him in a playoff game within the next 4 years? Good luck with that.

You can say that about any kid in this draft. What did Parker and Wiggins do in their last game of the season in the tournament? Neither one of them had a Carmelo type moment leading their team to a long championship run. So can we count on them to be NBA playoff ready in 4 years? We don't know, all I'm saying is that I rather take Lavine over the players you guys are suggesting at 6. I think Lavine draft stock will got up as the draft process goes on.

[jfs1000d]

Randle at best is going to be in his own way a guy like Randolph, Monroe, Boozer, Al Jefferson - 20/10 guys who lack either the size, athleticism, length to be the ultimate big man. For 5 years Randle will be a huge asset. When it is time to pay him he will command a hefty salary but will be a liability because you will still need a 13 million dollar man to rim protect.

See, I don't get this right here. You need someone to protect the rim, but you don't need two bigs who can do that. Randle is as close to a lock to being a good NBA starter for the next 10 years as any other player in the draft, if not the most. He has become vastly underrated from his experience at Kentucky.

And for those who say, Celtics shouldn't take Randle because of Sullinger, the team won 25 games. Take the most talented player and sort everything out later.

People don't like PFs who aren't huge. I don't know where the Randle critiques come from. He only dominated college hoops, is explosive and has a lot of skills and power. I think his rebounding translates and I like him better as a prospect than Sully. Sully is 2 years more advanced, so that's a problem. But, Randle's a good player.

[Frank Lucas]

Checkout this scouting video of Zach Lavine. This kid is no Gerald Green and I mean that in a good way. He looks more like a Chandler Parson / Jamal Crawford type player. The Cs needs a guy who can get buckets with ease. I just like guards who come from the Seattle WA area. That part of the country has produce some very good NBA players.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Myt7Hg8s4uw

[Egregiousness]

at 6, Saric is our chance at a home run. i think worst case scenario is hes a galinari clone. The kid can play.

[mos_def]

at 6, Saric is our chance at a home run. i think worst case scenario is hes a galinari clone. The kid can play.

you watch Euro basketball?

[Egregiousness]

at 6, Saric is our chance at a home run. i think worst case scenario is hes a galinari clone. The kid can play.

you watch Euro basketball?

no, not a lot. but i watched the championship online and was pretty impressed. I also have seen quite a bit of both marcus smart and noah vonleh to know they will be quite mediocre in the nba.