Post Season Moves and Observations

Some potential 1st rounders on my wish list.

Arnett Moultrie PF/C
Terrence Ross SF

Andrew Nicholson PF/C but..undersized.
Mo Harkless SF

Sleeper ...Jeff Taylor SF

Draft is so deep you can get a quality player through pick 30.

Celts could trade up and land a top 10 prospect. Doc may not want to reopen pre school

Dboss

Bob,

Sadly, not long.

Regards

dboss,

Moultrie would be my absolute #1 choice; I'm just convinced he'll be gone.

Regards

Sam and/or cow,

Sam pretty much hit my reasoning for suggesting the possibility that Pierce would make part of a good trade package. He's my favorite Celt since Bird, no question; I'm just looking at what might make sense and possibly be in the realm of reality.

It's the combination of factors I've mentioned before that leads me to conclude I wouldn't be surprised to see him traded. He does still have value and could still be The Man for another couple of years. But as our team stands we don't appear (to me) to have what it takes to make it quite as far as we did this year. It makes sense to start the long awaited rebuild.

We have several parts in our favor, kind of like '07, just not the same types of parts. Instead of a group of young players that might make a big attractive package we have picks in a deep draft, a veteran player that is still a top scorer and cash.

If you reason that; 1.) that top scorer has a year or two left but we can already see him slip ever so slightly and that 2.) as presently constituted this club will not get him to the point of playing for a championship, why not use his still relatively high value to help set ourselves up for the longer term?

If you then look at our greatest need, even minus Pierce, where do you go? We have a point guard, that's step one; would step 2 be a big? I would think we need someone who can defend, score and get a rebound. That leads me to PF or C. I might look for more scoring next and that's a wing so either SG or SF fills the gap.

We pick late, even if it is a deep draft, so how attractive are back-to-back picks in the 20's? Not very; same odds on either pick being a difference maker (thanks for that term, gyso). Yet the draft is deep and you probably will get a player in either spot that will contribute quickly. So why not go shopping with one of those picks and a proven veteran? That might be enough to pry a big loose from a team that already is well-covered in the front court at C and PF or maybe has decent depth. I'm not suggesting whom, just the concept.

But since we are still building for the future, why trade both of those round one picks, since they do both have the same relative value and we could come away with a young player who can help immediately.

If we try to retain Pierce and trade the two picks what can we get? We might be able to move up a few spots, but probably not far. That isn't going to give us a game changer, or even an appreciably better pick. We also walk away with one new potential difference maker (there it is again gyso; man you're good). However, if we're willing to part with him and one of the picks we get back a veteran at a position we need to fill and a player to draft that could be significant going into the future.

In that scenario we have Pierces contract gone to help with the contract on the new vet and we still have huge money from KG and Ray's departure.

No free agent worth chasing this year? That's OK, maybe the rebuild takes two years instead of one a la '07. KG has been rumored to only want to come back if we're still competitive. Adding himself to our new difference-making big, Rondo, Bradley, Green (wants to be here) and a bench that could potentially include Bass, Pietrus, Moore, Stiemsma and Johnson, plus a hot first rounder and maybe even someone of interest from the second round could make us as competitive or better than if we do nothing but use our two first round picks.

Off season 2013 might be a better time for free agency and we'll look more like a rebuilding but solid team; an attractive playoff bound option that needs a player or two to put it over the top. At that point, minus whatever it costs us to hold KG for a year and whatever we may have not spent from Ray, we also start losing some cap holds like Marbury's money. Now we can be really aggressive free agent shoppers.

And that's how I conclude that it's time to trade Paul Pierce.

Did I ramble or go too far with all of that? Sorry.

Even my wife says I oversell it whenever I'm trying to sell her my view.

...and then she still wins.

dboss wrote:Some potential 1st rounders on my wish list.

Arnett Moultrie PF/C - projected #19 by draftexpress, #16 by mynbadraft, #21 by bleacherreport
Terrence Ross SF - projected #18 by draftexpress, #18 by mynbadraft, #16 by bleacherreport

Andrew Nicholson PF/C but..undersized. - projected #24 by draftexpress, #24 by mynbadraft, #27 by bleacherreport
Mo Harkless SF - projected #20 by draftexpress, #20 by mynbadraft, #18 by bleacherreport

Sleeper ...Jeff Taylor SF - projected #26 by draftexpress, #27 by mynbadraft. NOT PROJECTED AS A 1ST ROUND PICK BY bleacherreport.

Draft is so deep you can get a quality player through pick 30.

Celts could trade up and land a top 10 prospect. Doc may not want to reopen pre school

Dboss

dboss,

I'd be willing to bet Doc doesn't want to re-open pre-school and KG doesn't either.

See my projected draft pick standings to your specific choices above. Mynbadraft has the Celtics drafting Austin Rivers at 21. Everything I hear is that he's going sooner than that, which would push other players down to us. Nobody knows for sure, except for the obvious top few picks all the GMs keep their cards close to their vests, but it looks like NOBODY expects Terrence Ross or Moe Harkless to drop down to us. I was shocked to see that ANYBODY projects Moultrie dropping all the way down to us.

bob

.

Bob

The first two are projected to be gone before we get our first choice.

But we could trade up and get someone we really want.

Not sure if adding Two more rookies given the two from last year makes sense.

I would love Ross at 18 if we can live with jjj.

Dboss

Bob

Also someone or two always rises or falls.

Depends on which team is picking and what their needs are.

Dboss

Cow,

I think the major difference in our rationale is that you seem to be thinking about the difficulty of replacing Paul Pierce, almost in the sense of trying to clone him. I think of the team first—what the TEAM would be like going forward with Paul Pierce versus going forward with another player who is specifically NOT like Paul Pierce but might be a better fit in an up-tempo environment.

Yes, we would lose some very good attributes that Paul still represents. But what might the Celtics gain if another player (even more of a role player than a star) fits in better with a revamped Celtics offense with chemistry that potentially makes all five players more dangerous? In other words, you give some and get a lot. I believe that, if they received the right player in trade, what they'd get would be far more than what they'd lose in the form of a declining, progressively slower Pierce.

At some point, the Celtics will cut the cord with Paul Pierce. Is it better to do it now, while there would presumably be a healthy demand for him and his replacement might be a better fit with a Rondo-led up-tempo offense? Or would it be better to do it two years down the road, when we would get nothing for him after having gone through two more years with an offense that has no clear identity?

I'm afraid it's a physical impossibility for me to discuss an individual player without referring to the effectiveness of the entire team as a context.

Sam

No Pierce? No Garnett, that is a given

Rosalie,

The sequence of events will be very important. I believe the Garnett decision will be made before any possible decision on Pierce. If KG stays, it certainly increases the likelihood that they'll keep Paul. If KG goes, Paul could be traded. And, in the latter case, I imagine Paul might thank the Celtics for doing him a favor.

Sam

I don't know about that Sam, I think it will be quite a blow to Paul to not finish his career here in Boston. He has always expressed his desire to be able to retire a Celtic. I know what you are saying, playing with a team that is rebuilding is the furthest thing from his mind, and I can't say I would blame him. Been there, done that, if you know what I mean. I just can't believe they will trade him. I have come to the resolution that Ray is gone probably, but, to see that happen with Paul would break my heart. You know what a die hard I am. But.......Life changes......things change.......who knows what Danny is thinking.

I read today that they have been trying to bundle the two picks plus JJJ for the #2 pick. I find that hard to fathom. Rumors, rumors rumors.....where do they come up with this stuff?

Now that Bass has opted out how should Boston respond.

I liked Bass but his weaknesses were obvious.

1. He struggled to score in the post against taller players

2. His understanding of defensive rotations was lacking, continually missing defensive assignments

Good features

1. Good 12-15 foot jump shooter.
2. Real nice guy...does not make waives.

If he comes off the bench he is not a double digit scorer and he benefited from Rajon's passing skills.

We have already discussed the need for more length in the starting lineup so the $4.25 million on the table seems about just right.

Let him walk.

Dboss

Rosalie,

I understand the way you feel. I'm trying to keep emotion out of it and be as objective as possible. Where did you hear the news about the Celtics trying to move up in the draft?

Sam

Dboss,

Interesting analysis of Bass. I'd be more tempted to add a million or two per year to keep him.

• Off the bench, he might be a double-figure scorer depending on whom he subs for. If it's a rookie, for instance, Bass could easily get at least half the PF time.

• Yes, he benefited from Rondo's presence, but Rondo has played a significant number of bench minutes in the past. Moreover, Bass can get some points as a garbage collector.

• I think that, in the right environment, Bass may be a pretty fast learner. By Doc's assessment (and I agree), he made great strides as a defensive player this season.

• He also seems to relish finishing on the break, although I admit his hands are sometimes suspect. I think some of that was not being ready for some of Rondo's passes. Stiemsma had a similar problem earlier in the season. Greg's hands seemed to improve over time. I hope Bass could do the same.

I just hate to lose a really solid team player who can be a pretty reliable mid-range scorer and can also bang the boards. (I believe he had career-high rebounds this season.)

Sam

I read it on Bleacher Reports, which sometimes can be suspect. The rumors being put out there are crazy on all web sites. Everyone wants to get one up on each other.

sam

I do like Bass but I do not want to see Celts overpay him.

I really do not think he has a high basketball IQ. At times watching him bury his head and run into a brick wall was a head scratcher. In last game against Heat lebron was blowing by him at will. Well that might note be a fair observation given how good lebron is.

mid level exception money is about right I suppose but why did he walk? Did Danny say go find an offer and we'll match it?

I am just trying to recall how many things he does really well. Midrange and very good foul shooter ok rebounder, bad hands,.average speed , tunnel vision at times, no clearly defined low post move, unable to consistently make the proper defensive rotation, no ball handling skills....

Do we pay him for what he did or do we pay him for what he might be able to do

Dboss

I think the fact that he struggled at times in the playoffs has shaded what he did during the year. How many times did we read what a great deal it was that Danny made, getting rid of the pouting Davis before he was forced to pay him a salary he shouldn't get? I know he had some lousy games at the end of the season, but I do think he should come back next year. How much of a big pay day is he going to get???? I can't imagine paying a guy like him much more than the mid level, but it will be interesting to see how other teams value what he did this year.

Cow,

Actually, I'm not at all certain that, if Pierce were no longer to be here, his replacement would come from a trade. It could potentially be Jeff Green or one of the many scoring wings available in the draft or BOTH Green and a draftee. If Pierce were traded, it wouldn't necessarily have to be for a wing.

I never said I'd look to a scorer to make others better or to be a clutch stud or a shot creating terror. Those are your assumptions, not mine.

I'd look for a wing who can help make a fast break hum by finishing well and being a really good perimeter shooter. I have faith that, as long a a given player has those two attributes and can fit neatly into a more up-tempo system, simply being part of the system is very likely to make him much better and more well-rounded than in college. I wouldn't necessarily expect him to be a great clutch shooter right out of the box, but I'd hope that the system would eventually position him (as well as others in the rotation) to become dangerous at crunch time.

I think the Auerbach system halped make Sam Jones a much more well-rounded and dangerous player. I think the Heinsohn system made Jo Jo White a much more well-rounded and dangerous player. I think the K.C. Jones system made Dennis Johnson a much more well-rounded and dangerous player. I see no reason why the Doc Rivers system couldn't take a really good scorer and round him into a a much more well-rounded and dangerous player.

You're more of a player guy. I'm more of a system guy. There's certainly nothing wrong with either perspective. They just happen to be different.

Sam

I believe the argument that Bass is not a good defender is overstated. I'd like to point out that Doc assigned Bass to defend LeBron in game 7. He didn't just get caught guarding LBJ on switches, it was obvious LBJ was his man. Pierce was getting into trouble, Rondo and Daniels were overmatched and Sasha (a solid defender with strength and good height) never got off the bench.

Here's an excerpt from a Chris Forsberg article from ESPN - Boston on Bass' defensive capabilities. This article was written on 3/19, before Avery Bradley came into his own.

Bass currently ranks as Boston's best overall on-ball defender. For the season, he's allowed a mere 0.658 points per play, ranking him in the 96th percentile among all NBA players. Yes, he's even slightly ahead of Garnett (0.689 ppp, 95th percentile). Now, those missed rotations might have padded his stats a little bit (players will invariably be scored upon more when they scramble to help), but a 333-possession sample size through 44 games suggests Bass' defensive numbers are legit.

Brandon Bass labored under the same constraints that everybody else did. Almost no training camp or pre-season, almost no practice days. This was his first year with Doc River's system, first year with KG. His defense improved over this season. If you want to say "that's not saying much because it stunk in the beginning!", fine, but it definitely improved to the point where we still had one of the top defenses in the league with Bass as a starter. You cannot execute a lock-down team defense, like we had the last month of the season, if your starting power forward isn't a good defender. That is just too glaring a weakness for it to not be exploited by opposing coaches.

He's still pretty young, in his prime really, maybe instead of paying him a lot more let's just add another year onto the contract.

bob

.

During an appearance last night on CSNNE, Bob Ryan stated the Celtics are high on North Carolina swingman Harrison Barnes. It’s going to take more than the Celtics 21st and 22nd picks to land Barnes. There’s a report that Charlotte is considering Barnes with the 2nd pick.

6'8", 225# SF. 6'11+ wingspan. Just posted a 39 1/2" vertical leap at the Chicago draft combine.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Harrison-Barnes-5705/

bob


.

Could he be the player responsible for the report Rosalie heard about the Celtics trying to trade their two first and JJJ for the #2 pick?

Is it possible that, at #2, there will be no center who would be good enough to draft? Pending trades and ability to sign free agents, the Celtics' quality depth at SF would seem to dwarf their quality depth at center.

Sam

Sam,

He might be.

After Anthony Davis of Kentucky, who is almost certainly going #1, the next center up is Andre Drummond of UConn. 6'11 3/4" w/shoes, 279#, 7'6 1/4" wingspan, 18 years old. Draftexpress says his best case is another Serge Ibaka and his worst case is DeAndre Jordan. Sounds like a no lose proposition to me. He's projected to go #6 by draftexpress and mynbadraft.


http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andre-Drummond-5772/


Meyers Leonard of Illinois is projected by draftexpress to go #12. 7'1 1/4". That's all the true centers in the lottery. Jared Sullinger is listed as a center, because that's what he played in college, but he's a 6'9" bruiser. A throwback NBA PF, not a center.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Meyers-Leonard-5756/

bob

.

Bob,

Thanks for that information. If you had the #2 pick for the Celtics, would you rather get Barnes or Drummond? I like the sound of Drummond's being between Ibaka and Jordan.

Sam

sam wrote:Bob,

Thanks for that information. If you had the #2 pick for the Celtics, would you rather get Barnes or Drummond? I like the sound of Drummond's being between Ibaka and Jordan.

Sam

sam,

Keeping with my philosophy that quality bigs and pgs are rare as hen's teeth and wings are a dime-a-dozen, I'd take Drummond in a hummingbird's heartbeat. This kid is as big now as Bynum and he's only going on 19. Who knows? Maybe his coming from UConn may even tug at Ray's heartstrings and make him consider staying to mentor the kid. Throw on top of that how desperate we are for a legit center and that we have a shooter in Moore now and a pretty good shooter at SF with Green (I'm assuming he's coming back) taking Drummond seems like a no-brainer and damned if "no-brains" doesn't describe me to a T.

Then again, if you look at the more transcendent players in the last 20 years, who were they? Michael Jordan, SG; Tim Duncan, C/PF (The Big Fundamental); Shaq, C (forcing GMs to adjust to handle his battering ram style); Kobe Bryant, SG (the closer); Steve Nash, PG (who brought back the cache and value of a true pass-first point guard/floor general); LBJ, SF (point forward); Kevin Garnett, C/PF (revolutionizing the center position by being a 7-footer able to defend 3 positions while also being able to shoot from range). 4 bigs/pgs, 3 wings. So, maybe I'm not giving wings enough credit for the impact they can have on the game. From what I've read about Barnes he is a tremendous athlete that can shoot out to NBA 3pt range now and can explode off the floor with a 39" no-step vertical leap. That's pretty damn spectacular.

LBJ was the #1 pick of the 2003 draft. Do you remember who was #2? Probably not, because it was 7'0", 270# C Darko Milicic. #3 was Carmelo, #4 was Bosh, #5 was Wade, #6 was Kaman, #7 was Kirk Hinrich, #8 was TJ Ford, #9 Mike Sweetney, #10 Jarvis Hayes, #11 Mickael Pietrus, #12 Nick Collison, #13 Marcus Banks (whom we traded up for). A rich draft, but throws the whole "go big" out the window (and when I say "big" I'm looking at you, Sweetney. Partially because I can't see around you). That was a "go for the best athlete available" draft.


bob

.