Should The Celtics Trade Up In The 2015 Draft?

The idea of trading up has to be on Ainge's mind as he is a very good GM.   Such a trade is very possible with all of the draft picks that he has accumulated. and I would bet that he calls every team drafting in front of the Cs before the draft takes place in late June.  It is just not likely that even half of the draft picks that the Celtics currently own will ever see the inside of the Waltham practice facility.

This team needs at least two (three would be even better) new faces next year who can flourish as starters next season for the re-build to continue forward in the same manner and at the same pace that it has been going from last year to this year.

Basically, there are three avenues to find new talent.  Trade for it, draft it or sign it as a free agent.  I have no problem trading up to get a better draft pick that would likely get used on a center.

you can't argue with much there, except I doubt Ainge will be able to move up to the #1 or 2 spot.

Any GM passing on Okafor or Towns would cost themselves their job, IMO.

and I disagree with you Wide about how many new faces we need here. I think we need ONE real upgrade (preferably at Center) to move into the top half of the teams on the east next season.

so one FA signee, or traded player will do the trick for me ( of course he needs to be the RIGHT player). the other two "new faces" can be rookies who may or may not see considerable time next season.

my reasoning is, we are basically a .500 team with the roster as it is currently. adding ONE quality big man, moves everyone else down a peg and the whole team UP accordingly.

Answering all the most recent threads here.

If there is a player that fills a need and a trade up is required to get him then absolutely..trade up.

Looks like this thread falls into the sticky pile.....

The Celtics have 2 first rounders and I believe 3 second rounders.

There may be a few diamonds in the rough in the second round.

DA has enough picks to gamble more than usual.  He could trade 2 for 1 in the first and 2 for 1 in the second and still have a pick in round 2 and/or multiple other combinations.  It is highly unlikely that they add 5 drafts picks.

dboss

The Washington pick in the second round has some protections on it , though I am not sure what they are right now. so we may or may not end up with it.

I can't see more than three rookies here next year either.

we have a spot with Randolph.

then maybe Gigi

perhaps Jerebko?

Bass and Crowder would be nice to keep.

kdp59 wrote:The Washington pick in the second round has some protections on it , though I am not sure what they are right now. so we may or may not end up with it.

I can't see more than three rookies here next year either.

we have a spot with Randolph.

then maybe Gigi

perhaps Jerebko?

Bass and Crowder would be nice to keep.

The Washington 2nd round pick that Boston is owed is top 49 protected.
As of right now Washington would keep the pick as it is #48.

I'm not a college game aficionado.  But, I've heard so much about Cauley-Stein's being a legitimate defender/rebounder/intimidator that I've almost assumed he's already on the roster and stashed in Maine or Nantucket or somewhere.

Mr. Ainge, let me be very clear.  If anyone says to you, "Blankety blank is a legitimate center who may not be the most skilled defender but.........." do not, I repeat, do not listen to the rest of the sentence.

If, by trading pieces of paper (aka draft picks) for a true defensive force in the middle, Danny can alter the draft from a crap shoot to a virtually sure thing, I'd be all for it.  I haven't yet seen a piece of paper that can make the lane a very unpleasant place for opponents.

I wouldn't mind seeing Sully and/or Olynyk and/or Young included with picks in a package that might net the Celtics Cauley-Stein, although I'm afraid Sully may not have much trade value at draft time, being regarded as potentially damaged goods.

I have concerns about a long-term role of Sully on an up-tempo team (which is a direction in which I'd like to see the Celtics go), although there could be an argument for his functioning primarily as a rebounder/outlet passer in the defensive end.  I realize that (on the assumption that he will be whole again) Sully can be an offensive force down below.  But it's possible that bringing in a defensive-minded intimidator at center will require playing the new guy down low on offense to maximize whatever offense he can muster.

As much as I try, I find it very difficult to envisioning Olynyk exhibiting the kind of agility that's useful to a stretch four in the NBA.  Yes, I'm well aware that the three-pointer is one of the main directions in which the NBA is headed right now, although I'm quite certain that opinion is out there only to torture me.

I'm becoming a bit deaf when I hear people bleating that Young hasn't been given enough minutes.  The fact that keeps tearing up the DL but doesn't seem to improve at all from not doing much of anything in the bigs brings the nasty word "ceiling" to mind.  I think a lot of us felt that he mainly needed repetitions to start growing into a contributing Celtic.  I'm afraid the need is deeper and involves a load of education because he's the embodiment of a one-trick pony, and that one trick isn't even three-point shooting.  It's an obligatory one (no more, no less) three-pointer per game.

Right now (and I may have to barricade the doors of my house after this one), I believe I'd prefer to see Bass starting and Jerebko coming off the bench at PF to begin next season.  Given the way they're being used now (which is my only current frame of reference), their collective skills represent the most intriguing combination of both offensive and defensive PF versatility, with the least amount of PF vulnerability, on the team.  

Next season, on a consistent basis, I'd like to see Crowder as a versatile, dynamic sixth man and Thomas as a consistently dynamic starter at the floor general position.

Where does all of this lead me?  Personally, I enjoy the current team so much that I'd be very happy to see the Celtics  proceed cautiously with the objective of getting Cauley-Stein plus a sharpshooting shooting guard this summer.  Then I'd like to see what the following rotation could achieve over the first half of next season and then fill in points of vulnerability via mid-season trades.  (I have deliberately omitted Sully, Olynyk and Young for reasons mentioned above.)


Cauley-Stein
Bass
Turner
Bradley
Thomas

Zeller
Jerebko
Crowder
Sharpshooting young SG
Smart

Datome or a second-rounder for offensive spark upon demand
Pressey or a secnod-rounder for a push of the ball and defense on demand
Randolph or his maiden name of Iverson or pick one of Sully, Kelly, Young
Next season's Project D'année or pick one of Sully, Kelly, Young
Position of Flexibility for Danny or pick one of Sully, Kelly Young

Sam

Sam,

you always make your arguments well. its well known by now that I like Kelly more than most ( I would say). not that I think he will ever become Dirk (he won't). But exactly because I think he fits what Stevens wants form his bigs ( naturel 3 point shooter).

The high BB IQ guys seems to also be a choice of Stevens I would argue.

Kelly has better passing skils than most near seven footers as well. and his rotations on the defensive end are improving as this season moves along. though his lack of foot speed will never allow him to be a good defender (maybe average only).

I also like Young more than most, as he is VERY young still. his pre-season injury set him back (much like Bradley, who also was a BUST after his rookie year). I'll give the kid a full off-season and pre season with the team before giving up on him. He has the natural shooting stroke with the range needed to be that shooter you want. And I think if he stays healthy , you will be surprised by his improvement in year two.

When I see your projected lineup for next season, a few things come to mind.

even IF Ainge can somehow snag Cauley-Stein, I don't think he starts over Zeller next season. Perhaps in year 2 or 3, but not as a rookie. He is older for sure than the typical high first rounder 19 YO, but he still is a rookie and frankly a one trick pony at Kentucky. he would need time, IMO.

I wonder why you would change the starting roster form the current one?

I think our record with Zeller, Bass, Turner, Bradley and Smart as our starting five is one of the best in the East now. Maybe someone could pipe in with the exact record.

Thomas is great as that kick starter off the bench as a 6th man and I see no reason to change that either.

so changes to your roster I would make are: ( I'll assume Kelly is traded with our highest first to move up for Cauley-Stein here).

Zeller
Bass ($7M or cap space)
Turner
Bradley
Smart
( I ain't messing with a good thing here)

Cauley-Stein
Jerebko ( $4M in cap space)
Crowder ( $4M in cap Space)
Young ( he steps up into the spot shooter role)
Thomas

Rest:
Sully ( he will play if healthy and here)
Wallace ( I would ask him if he wants to stay or be released to try to latch on with another team for his final NBA season).
Pressey
RJ Hunter -#24 pick (another option as a spot up shooter)
R. Upshaw- #33 pick

If Wallace opts to leave, no stretching of his $10M is needed as we are still about $5M BELOW the cap. so Money is there for a mid-level FA late (think a Turner type signing).

tjmakz wrote:

kdp59 wrote:The Washington pick in the second round has some protections on it , though I am not sure what they are right now. so we may or may not end up with it.

I can't see more than three rookies here next year either.

we have a spot with Randolph.

then maybe Gigi

perhaps Jerebko?

Bass and Crowder would be nice to keep.

The Washington 2nd round pick that Boston is owed is top 49 protected.
As of right now Washington would keep the pick as it is #48.

thanks for the clarification on that!

kdp59 wrote:Sam,

you always make your arguments well. its well known by now that I like Kelly more than most ( I would say). not that I think he will ever become Dirk (he won't). But exactly because I think he fits what Stevens wants form his bigs ( naturel 3 point shooter).

The high BB IQ guys seems to also be a choice of Stevens I would argue.

Kelly has better passing skils than most near seven footers as well. and his rotations on the defensive end are improving as this season moves along. though his lack of foot speed will never allow him to be a good defender (maybe average only).

I also like Young more than most, as he is VERY young still. his pre-season injury set him back (much like Bradley, who also was a BUST after his rookie year). I'll give the kid a full off-season and pre season with the team before giving up on him. He has the natural shooting stroke with the range needed to be that shooter you want. And I think if he stays healthy , you will be surprised by his improvement in year two.

When I see your projected lineup for next season, a few things come to mind.

even IF Ainge can somehow snag Cauley-Stein, I don't think he starts over Zeller next season. Perhaps in  year 2 or 3, but not as a rookie. He is older for sure than the typical high first rounder 19 YO, but he still is a rookie and frankly a one trick pony at Kentucky. he would need time, IMO.

I wonder why you would change the starting roster form the current one?

I think our record with Zeller, Bass, Turner, Bradley and Smart  as our starting five is one of the best in the East now. Maybe someone could pipe in with the exact record.

Thomas is great as that kick starter off the bench as a 6th man and I see no reason to change that either.

so changes to your roster I would make are: ( I'll assume Kelly is traded with our highest first to move up for Cauley-Stein here).

Zeller
Bass ($7M or cap space)
Turner
Bradley
Smart
( I ain't messing with a good thing here)

Cauley-Stein
Jerebko ( $4M in cap space)
Crowder ( $4M in cap Space)
Young ( he steps up into the spot shooter role)
Thomas

Rest:
Sully ( he will play if healthy and here)
Wallace ( I would ask him if he wants to stay or be released to try to latch on with another team for his final NBA season).
Pressey
RJ Hunter -#24 pick (another option as a spot up shooter)
R. Upshaw- #33 pick

If Wallace opts to leave, no stretching of his $10M is needed as we are still about $5M BELOW the cap. so Money is there for a mid-level FA late (think a Turner type signing).

kdp,

Are you expecting that Wallace will leave and walk away from guaranteed money?
I expect that he will be paid $10+m next season with Boston and then retire.
Yes, Boston might decide to stretch Wallace's final year.

Hi,
I'd rather save all those picks for a star player that could be available this year or the next.

AK

Sam,

I agree with many of your thoughts on Olynyk, at least to some degree. But, I think that you may be holding the fact that he is seven feet tall over his head, and think that you may value him more and more if he were only 6' 10".

He is some things, has some room to grow in other areas, has gotten better already in some areas and is not some things (and, likely never will be).

He is: basketball smart, plays hard, can shoot, passes well, seems to fit in well with teammates regardless of the hair cut

He has room to grow: needs to get stronger, needs to gain more confidence in his shot enough to shoot more often

He has improved since in arriving in Boston: plays much better team defense, fouls much less than last year, fits the new offensive system much better, even plays 'better' man to man defense (although still not really good)

He is not: a good defensive one on one player, a shot blocker and not traditionally an NBA "big". Also, not likely to be Dirk's statistical twin either.

Yes, if he stood next to most of us he would appear to be a "BIG". A full 9 inches taller than I am, but still not a "big", physical player that at 7 feet he might be expected to be in the NBA. He certainly would have been a "big" on any team that I ever played for, but I never played on any team that was even close to an college team.

Bill Russell was a "Big" even though he may not have been even 6'9, Dave Cowens was a "Big" even though he may not have been 6'8, Wes Unseld was a "Big" even though only 6'7, but these guys were "Bigs" because of what they did and not so much for their height alone.

Perhaps, in your mind, don't let those 2 inches stretch Olynyk into an NBA "Big".

On another note, I am so glad that tall players were not called "BIGS" until only just recently. Wouldn't mind if the term were fully retired forever in the next minute either.

kdp,

Are you expecting that Wallace will leave and walk away from guaranteed money?
I expect that he will be paid $10+m next season with Boston and then retire.
Yes, Boston might decide to stretch Wallace's final year.[/quote]


No, Wallace as $10M guaranteed no matter what.

what I meant was I would ask him if he wanted to play his final year here or if he would rather attempt to latch on with another team. Either way WE pay him. We have the cap space, he has been a team player since being here and it would be a nice gesture for AInge/Stevens to do. He MAY decide to stay here, whcih would be fine with me too.

Clyde,

While most NBA heights are exaggerated these days, that wasn't the case in the "old days." While you could assume a current player listed at 6'9" might really be under 6'8" in bare feet, that would be incorrect for Bill Russell. He was variously listed at 6'9" or 6'10", but the most reliable figure is 6 feet 9 5/8 inches.

At least early in his career, he preferred being called 6'9" ("Don't call me 6-foot-10, I'm enough of a goon as it is").
http://www.si.com/vault/1955/03/28/601407/the-big-surprise-of-1955

Russell also has a 7'4" wingspan, and in many cases, standing reach and wingspan are more critical to a center's shotblocking potential than height. It also didn't hurt that Russell could jump out of the gym and run like a gazelle.

In Unseld's case, 6'7" is probably an accurate height (not counting the hair). He also had a very good wingspan, but he excelled as a center physically due to his strength and bulk. Even more important, he had a center's attitude and intimidating presence. Same goes for Cowens. Olynyk most definitely doesn't have that, regardless of his height.

Clyde, I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you say I'd value Olynyk more if he were only 6' 10".  Whether he's 7' 0" or 6' 10", his roster slot is one of perhaps five on a squad that's reserved for players who specialize in the kinds of skills that most distinguish players in that general size group.  Calling then "bigs" is a convenient way of categorizing them.  It may not be specific enough as a moniker, but their jobs tend to involve rebounding and tough defense against other players in their general size group. 

Regardless of size, I value players according to their ability to play roles that will positively impact their team without commensurate negative impact.  In my mind, the direction in which Kelly is headed is not moving sufficiently in the direction of positives over negatives.

Actually, Kelly has averaged 3.4 fouls per game this season versus 3.2 last season.  He has also played 3 more minutes per game this year, so a little increase is understandable.  But I don't believe there's statistical support to the effect that he's fouling less than last year, despite the fact that he should have a comparative advantage by defending shorter players than last year.

And that brings up a big reason why, although his team defense displays a few more good "moments" this year than last, I don't believe a major and consistent improvement in his defense over time is in the cards.  He's leg-heavy; he has short arms for his size; he's not a quick (or high) jumper, and he lacks agility.  (I've always felt the top half and bottom half of his body are not in close communications.)  His smarts and shooting prowess help to offset some of those deficiencies; but not enough in my opinion.

This is not to say I believe Kelly couldn't possibly fill a useful role with the Celtics of next season (and perhaps beyond).  A lot will depend on the strengths of whoever is filling the so-called "intimidator's" role.  If his offensive strength is down low (a very likely possibility), I can see Kelly operating out of a high post to help spread the floor and knock down threes and swing the ball crisply.

However, his net value will be a matter of how many points he enables or scores himself versus the number of points on which he fails in his role to stop an opponent.  I will always see the defensive end as being more of an overall team catalyst and more of a way gain in short, more of an identity of a team.  That's why a Celtic who's not a really solid defender must have unusual offensive skills to warrant his defensive shortcomings.  (Paging Mr. Thomas.)  At present, I don't think Kelly's value added is sufficient to help move the team from an exciting, perhaps over-achieving, stage to upcoming rungs of the ladder leading to true contention.

Having said all that, it could be argued that, depending on what kinds of skills will best complement the advent of the "intimidator," Kelly could wind up representing a better long-term prospect (and certainly a lower health risk) than Sully.

Sam

Bob,

we could actually take on Love's salary for next season (assumng he opts in on his $15M player option) by trading Sully and say our top draft pick (combined around $4M from memory).

we'd have to renounce Bass and probably Jerebko to do it though (as well as any trade exceptions to get below the cap).

the problem of course with Love is we haven't filled our biggest void on this team left, rim protector.

assuming Crowder would be re-signed to a market deal (say $4M),
we'd only have around $6M or so in cap space left.

not enough for a top level rim protecter but maybe enough for a guy like Koufas or Biyombo.

so I guess the question then becomes would a roster of:

Zeller
Koufas or Biyombo
Robert Upshaw ( draft pick #33)
Love
Olynyk
Crowder
Wallace
Turner
Bradley
Smart
Thomas
Young
Pressey
RJ Hunter ( draft pick #26)

be a team that is an improvement over this year?

and if so how much?

that team certainly looks like a top 4 team in the east to me, could it compete for a title?

kdp59 wrote:so I guess the question then becomes would a roster of:

Zeller
Koufas or Biyombo
Robert Upshaw ( draft pick #33)
Love
Olynyk
Crowder
Wallace
Turner
Bradley
Smart
Thomas
Young
Pressey
RJ Hunter ( draft pick #26)

be a team that is an improvement over this year?

and if so how much?

that team certainly looks like a top 4 team in the east to me, could it compete for a title?

I suppose that roster would be an improvement, but compete for a title? No.

Bob,

I'm pretty sure I heard a "talking head" say, last night, that Sully had lost 20 pounds.  I wish I had a link.

Sam

Sam,

A source for Sullinger's weight loss:

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics_nba/boston_celtics/2015/04/is_early_return_right_for_jared_sullinger

This hopefully is indication of a more permanent lifestyle change than a temporary loss due to increased scrutiny.

If Sullenger has actually lost 20 pounds already he is on the right path to becoming an all star player. Of course, he needs to continue to follow through with his new diet as the pounds come off more slowly after you lose the first "easy' pounds.

Plenty of time for him to get down to 250 by the start of preseason. In fact, he could lose more body fat and come back looking chiseled by October.

This guy has league all star potential as he can score 20 per night, get 9-12 rebounds, etc if he can play more minutes per game and stays much closer to the hoop on offense. With less weight he will also be a better defender even if he never makes the all defensive team. Even thinking of trading Sullenger is a mistake if he continues to shed the unnecessary body fat.

Should the Celtics trade up in the draft? Yes, if it helps us land a keeper, let alone a building block. We already have committed to the draft, trading established players for picks. Now, let's get the best picks possible. Beat has provided a chart on how recent early picks are doing and about half are making an impact, albeit some on lousy teams. The same might be said of our 2014 picks; one Smart is making it, and one, Young, has done little. On balance, one out of two has been very good for this year's team. As for Sully, I'd hate to lose him yet. His weight seems to have been an issue for years, but he has shown great potential and maybe he can trim down. Danny called him out and if that doesn't get the message through in the next year, trade him, by the pound. I have no faith in Love, and everyone knows you can't buy Love (at a reasonable price), so please, no about this over-priced weak defender. Hawk

Thanks for the link, Outside.

Sam

another article about Cauley-Stein being a Cletic target.

http://www.celticsblog.com/2015/4/7/8334785/willie-cauley-stein-is-the-rim-protector-boston-celtics-are-looking-for-kentucky-2015-nba-draft