My Post-Draft Synopsis

Heading into this draft we had multiple holes that need to be filled, not necessarily in this order:

1.  Point guard - someone who could run an offense and hit his shots.
2.  A Shooter - catch-and-shoot, come off pindowns, 3pt range, whatever just as long as when he threw it at the rim it went in.
3.  Center - long and lithe, big and immoveable, doesn't matter as long as he wasn't undersized height or lengthwise.

With 4 picks we ended up with 1 of the above.

RJ Hunter is, from what I've read, a real gunslinger.  At 6'6", he has SG size (and he's projected to be a SG and not an undersized SF like James Young).  Watching his draftexpress strengths video, I like that he went to the front of the rim a lot when he saw daylight despite having an outside shot good enough that he could have easily settled for taking that.  Not particularly fast, not uber athletic but crafty.  His release reminds me a little of Steph Curry's in that it's a little low, neither of them bring the ball way over their heads, but both of them have very quick releases (Curry's being little more than a hard dribble up and straight into a flick of the wrist).  I'm not saying Hunter is or will ever be as good as Curry, I'm just saying their mechanics are similar.  Shoots well off the dribble, shoots well off of curls, shoots well in motion, mediocre in catch-and-shoots.  That's ok, Brad wants a motion offense, I want a motion offense so if he's not good at standing around and waiting for the ball that's ok with me.  Additionally, he's a good passer, very good court vision, for a SG.  He looks quite good dishing pnr passes to rolling bigs.  Zeller and Sully will really like playing with him.  Defensively, Georgia State played a zone, so he didn't have much experience at man-to-man.  Not good.  However, he has good size (6'6", 6'10 1/2" wingspan).  He needs to add weight (185#).  At one point, Chad Ford had him up to #15 on his draft board.  Overall, I'm happy with this pick.

The other picks, to be honest, I just don't understand.  I understand that Danny tried to move up and couldn't, but once you are where you are shouldn't you either pick a player that is the best available or fills your needs?  Terry Rozier looks, to me, like an Avery Bradley clone.  Maybe he's a better ball handler and passer, but he's not a real offense-running point guard.  He can shoot, true, and that might nudge Phil Pressey out the door, but did Danny really use a #16 to kick Phil Pressey off the end of the bench?  That was suggested on the Draft Day thread last night (an excellent turnout, btw.  When the picks were in the mid-20s, so after we picked 16th, we still had 59 people on the board.  13 members and 46 voyeurs  :-)  My thought is that it's not Pressey who is gone, it's either Bradley or Smart.

An undersized PF?  Phew, I was worried.  We're really short on those...NOT!

And then another undersized point guard.

So, looking at these picks, for themselves, I am underwhelmed.  However...

Here's our roster depth chart, including prospects who will, at least, "get a fair shot" and likely re-signs:

5 - Zeller, Kelly, Colton Iverson (forgot about him, didn't you?)
4 - Sully, Kelly, Mickey
3 - Turner, Crowder, Young, Wallace
2 - Bradley, Smart, Hunter, Babb
1 - Thomas, Pressey, Rozier, Thornton

It's reasonable to assume that Mickey and Thornton are D-league bound, along with almost every other 2nd rounder, and so is Babb, again.  That leaves us with 14 (including Wallace).  That leaves one slot, not a lot of wiggle room there, but a roster that is heavily loaded (overloaded?) with young point guards and SGs.  I would like more length but there aren't many players in the league who have the height, weight and strength to put a body on Mozgov (or Thompson) and not just have him/them shrug you off, but Colton Iverson could be one of them.  We'll see.  I thought he showed great improvement last summer league (and I watched him VERY closely, since I knew that was a weak link of ours) and was very surprised when he didn't get an invite to camp.

NOT an awe-inspiring roster, it leaves little room for free agent signings with the depth is weighted towards the back court.

Now, let's look at the depth in some other rosters around the league, today:

Minny centers - Pekovic, Towns, Payne, Dieng.  That's 4, count'em, 4 centers.
Hornets centers - Big Al, Cody Zeller (the other white meat), Kaminsky, Hawes.  That's 4, count'em, 4 centers (and that assumes they don't re-sign Bismack BIYOOMMMBOOOOO!!!!).
Philly centers - Noel, Embiid, Okafur, Henry Sims, Hernangomez.  That's 5, count'em, 5 centers.
Indy centers - Hibbert, Turner, Mahinmi, Whittington.  That's 4, count'em, 4 centers.
Spurs centers - Splitter, Baynes, Diaw (undersized, but he plays and is listed as a center), Milutinov.  That 4, count'em, 4 centers.

My conclusion?  It ain't over until Trader Danny sings.  He couldn't/didn't move up (or out) last night but there are opportunities for adding to where we need depth and length and where other teams have a surplus.

Steve posted a link that says essentially the same thing, that the Celtics' picks were preludes to roster movement, just setting themselves up so moving players wouldn't create holes.  I agree with that.  Part of the reason is that nothing else makes sense and the second reason is that, as I pointed out, there are other teams that have roster imbalances too.  It's one thing to take a player and think they'll succeed in the NBA, and be wrong.  It's another to take a player you have no need for, know you have no need for and he's not even the best player left on the board, but you take him anyway.  Danny may be crazy, like a fox, but he isn't stupid.  Fab Melo was a mistake, he couldn't play in the NBA, but he filled a roster slot.  Sully was a risk, because of his back, and that turned out ok but I don't see where Rozier fits a roster need as the roster currently stands.

Which hints that it won't stand "as is".

Stay tuned for the next episode of "As My Stomach Turns".


bob
P.S.  The post-draft sushi and sake helped.  A lot.  Especially the sake.


.

David Aldridge ✔@daldridgetnt
Philly has a whole lot of young bigs. Boston has whole lot of young guards. Calls should be made.
9:30 PM - 25 Jun 2015
520 520 Retweets 448 448 favorites



bob
MY NOTE: My thought, exactly.


.

signs of hope?

1) Danny still has the same amount of possible cap space he had before the draft.

2) Mickey plays above the rim and COULD be a similer typ player as Draymond Green.

3) sorry...I'm out!

Nice write up.

Mickey probably won't be going to D-League. He was the top shot blocker in college basketball this year, while scoring 15 ppg and getting 10 rebounds in a top conference. He's also by far our most athletic frontcourt player. In fact, he's as athletic as any big in the NBA. He's like Josh Smith without the ball handling and awful shot selection.

This draft was very deep, and Danny hit solid singles and doubles, with the possible exception of Marcus Thornton. But he's probably at least a single as well. As an undersized shooting guard who shoots the lights out and has top notch athleticism, he'll probably fit just fine alongside a bigger point guard like Marcus Smart or Evan Turner.

BOB,

WELL WRITTEN AND THOUGHTFUL PIECE!

As I said , perhaps we trade into contention using Thomas as an asset and mix some free agents in as well.

I really feel at this point that we are in no man's land. Far side of the Moon!

112288

DBoss: "Other players that were available at 16 include Portis, Dekker, Justin Anderson and the other PF from LSU Jarrell Martin."

Dekker went 18th
Anderson went 21st
Portis went 22nd
Martin went 25th.

Outside of Dekker, multiple teams passed on all those guys. We have to accept that the NBA movers and shakers get a lot more info than we do as fans, or even that the mock draft experts like draft express get.

First of all, Danny did one thing last night that a lot of fans would benefit by emulating:

He didn't panic!

He realized, even before the crap started being shot, that he wasn't going to get a sniff of a difference-making center in the draft because the teams with the high picks were in love with those picks.  So he didn't waste a pick in either round by selecting a marginal center (Dakari Johnson) or a huge question mark (Robert Upshaw) who could have commanded just enough attention to make it difficult to cut them.

Next, by the time the second round came around, he drafted bodies.  You don't like to pass on an opportunity to make a draft pick, but Danny really didn't want four of them; and he knew that second-round contracts typically contain very low guarantees.  So he drafted a couple of players that could represent summer league fodder but whom I'll be shocked to see on the roster beyond training camp at the most.

Which is why it's not remotely appropriate to begin counting roster spaces at this juncture.  Twofer or threefer trades, cuts, and buyouts are just some of the factors that can change the roster size in a hurry.  The Celtics are unlikely to be operating this summer in the basis of a "one man gone, okay to add one man now" rationale.

As for Rozier, he can fill the basket, but he's not a floor general.  Sound like anyone else on the Celtics roster?  My initial thought was Avery Bradley.  But how about Isaiah Thomas?  Rozier has better defensive skills that Isaiah; he's three inches taller, and he's also a blur.  Moreover, perhaps he's not obsessed with the need to be "the man."  As a matter of fact, how off-the-wall is it to dream that, down the road, one man named Rozier might replace two men named Bradley and Thomas?  And, let's face it....at the moment, if you were to rank Thomas, Bradley and Rozier in terms of trade value, who do you think would be a the bottom of that pile?

As far as I'm concerned, the Celtics just drafted a possible backcourt catalyst and a possible backcourt sharpshooter with size.  They had no shot at an impact center.  The second round doesn't count, and fortunately it will probably not count against their roster numbers for long.

They still need Mr. Right at center.  Am I less likely to keep hearing names like Robin Lopez, Marc Gasol, D'Andre Jordan being tossed around than I have over the past several weeks?  There's no rule I know of that decrees that baskets or blocks count more if the player was drafted than as if he arrived via trade or free agency.

I'm not as bullish as many people on all the future draft picks owned by the Celtics, and this draft sort of speaks to my reasoning.  Quantity ain't the same as quality.  But I do believe an element of quantity can be effective based on the theory of bundling.

If two or three draft picks of unknown quality are packaged together, they very likely add up to greater perceived value than the totality of each of the three if utilized separately.  So I support the notion of using the draft picks in what might be called "trade impact bundle" form to enhance the appeal of a trade or to constitute the entire trade.

The crap shoot is an annual melée that titillates fans and enables selected teams to strike it rich, to the point where there should be a "tankmeisters anonymous" program for those who deify the draft to the point of being willing to compromise the integrity of the sport in order to gain a drafting edge.  In terms of true wheeling-and-dealing expertise, the remainder of the off-season—featuring trades and free agent signings—is where equal opportunity is more of a reality and superior knowledge of horseflesh and strategy can be more directly rewarded.  And the matter of shopping for need can represent a greater focus.

So the meadow muffin prelude to the real off-season is now over.  Now we get to the really interesting stuff.

Go Celtics

Sam

Sam, Mickey will be in the Celtics' rotation next year, and be a quality contributor as a rookie, with a good deal of untapped upside offensively.

He could easily end up having a better career than WCS.

"All of those players are better than Rozier."

They're all generally the same caliber of prospect. And in a really deep draft like this one, being ranked 10-15 spots apart doesn't mean anything at all, and team fit is more important.

Every year, there are late-first or second round picks that most every team passed on that outperform those picked higher, so that's not just Danny Ainge.

Rambone, I hope you're right.  It doesn't change anything I said.  The one addition is that, even when bodies are selected, the selector doesn't do it randomly.  He looks for some kind of ability.  On occasion, that ability mushrooms or just happens to fit with what the team needs; that's gravy.  But, for the most part, the bottom two of four draft picks by one team are going to be next to throwaways.

Sam

dboss wrote:Rambone

Every player drafted is a prospect but I would hardly considered the group mentioned to be the same caliber of prospect.

On the one hand you state that we have to accept that NBA movers and Shakerss...blah blah... blah.

Well the experts had Rozier ranked 30th overall and only the 9th best PROSPECT at the PG.  Did Danny somehow uncover a Gem?

The problem with Marcus Smart is that he cannot consistently knock down shots in the Celtics offense and he has a weak handle.  Rozier is also a horrible shooter and while his handle is better his 3 assists per game give little encouragement that he is remotely capable of running an offense.

I see NO value in this pick given team needs.

Last year I thought the Smart pick was a reach and here we are again and Danny is still reaching.  Danny Groundhog Day Ainge has struck again.

dboss

dboss,

So you consider Marcus Smart to be a bust of a pick? Who would you have taken instead at #6?


bob


.

I am quite sure last night did not go the way that Danny planned it would.
What does this now mean for Marcus Smart?
I think with the additions of Thomas and Rozier, it indicates that Marcus is not the point guard of the future which I am sure is what they were hoping for.

We sat in a row between a dad and his son who are Philly fans, and 4 guys who are Knicks fans.
After picks 2, 3 and 4, none of us were happy.
We wanted Okafor, Philly wanted Russell and NY fans did not want Porzingas.
Porzingas was the tallest player there. I hear the Knicks are listing him as 7'3".
After I thought about it, I am quite happy with Russell.
He can be a dynamic scorer and distributor in the NBA.
He has good size and quickness.
I always felt underwhelmed when watching Okafor but I loved his potential.
Okafor's motor/drive has been often questioned too.
I think the Lakers have a shot at Aldridge or Love and Robin Lopez or Asik, so I'm happy with Russell.

I can't even imagine what Philly's plan is now.
They really need guards.
Would Boston be willing to give up for Okafor: Thomas, Smart, Brooklyn's (non-protected) 2016 1st rounder and Boston's own (non-protected) 2016 1st rounder? The way Smart played this year, I am not even sure Philly would make that trade.

I was wondering whether you guys were happy or sad after the #2 pick.  I wanted the Lakers to pick Russell, as I though it might make Philly more likely to trade the #3 pick to the Celtics, who could pick Okafor.

I don't know about the Celtics, but I'd probably make that trade on their behalf.  However, I'd rather have Lopez than Okafor.  I'm still not giving up on a defensive emphasis.

Sam

dboss wrote:

rambone wrote:DBoss: "Other players that were available at 16 include Portis, Dekker, Justin Anderson and the other PF from LSU Jarrell Martin."

Dekker went 18th
Anderson went 21st
Portis went 22nd
Martin went 25th.

Outside of Dekker, multiple teams passed on all those guys. We have to accept that the NBA movers and shakers get a lot more info than we do as fans, or even that the mock draft experts like draft express get.

Ranbone

All of those players are better than Rozier.  Every team DID not pass on them which is evidenced by the fact that they were drafted.  We do not have to accept anything.  And I am certainly not going to accept the notion that Danny knows best.  year after year he passes on players that he should have and could have drafted.  

dboss

Does DeAndre Jordan ring a bell? Danny let that one slip right under his nose!

112288

112288 wrote:

dboss wrote:

rambone wrote:DBoss: "Other players that were available at 16 include Portis, Dekker, Justin Anderson and the other PF from LSU Jarrell Martin."

Dekker went 18th
Anderson went 21st
Portis went 22nd
Martin went 25th.

Outside of Dekker, multiple teams passed on all those guys. We have to accept that the NBA movers and shakers get a lot more info than we do as fans, or even that the mock draft experts like draft express get.

Ranbone

All of those players are better than Rozier.  Every team DID not pass on them which is evidenced by the fact that they were drafted.  We do not have to accept anything.  And I am certainly not going to accept the notion that Danny knows best.  year after year he passes on players that he should have and could have drafted.  

dboss

Does  DeAndre Jordan ring a bell?  Danny let that one slip right under his nose!

112288

112288,

Just like every other team that picked in the 1st round.

After watching Jordan become a major liability at the end of close games, I'm not so sure he's the 'pearl found in the mud' he's described as being. The Clippers had one empty possession after another after another after another because DeAndre Jordan couldn't hit a free throw to save his life, and the playoff life of his team. He was probably more responsible for the Clippers losing that series as any single player was.


bob


.

Believing that Rozier is a terrible shooter just shows you don't know the first thing about him, other than a quick glance at the mock drafts.

The same mock drafts that said Marcus Smart was an absolutely terrible 3 point shooter.

There's a difference between bad shot selection and terrible shooting ability, and Smart showed that by shooting 34% from NBA 3 as a rookie. Completely unexpected except for a few of us who knew Smart's 29% 3 point shooting in college was the result of bad shot selection, in part because of having the ball in his hands when the shot clock wound down.

Smart shot 34% from NBA 3 as a rookie, and Rozier is probably a better outside shooter than Smart.

For one thing, Rozier shot 37% from 3 the year before, when had other guard talent alongside him, and got better looks and shot with better shot selection.

Rozier also shot 79% from FT line this year, on over 4 attempts per game, which is good by any measure, unless you still miss Rajon Rondo.

The fact is that most of the draft experts are not experts, they're just lucky enough to have a job covering the draft. And most of them didn't even play basketball, so factors like shot selection and role don't even register to them as part of the equation when analyzing a prospect's shooting ability.

Bob,

Who did we pick?

I know he is a household name, right!

112288

RJ Hunter is considered one of the very best sharpshooters in this draft, better than D'Angelo Russell as a shooter, and yet Hunter shot 30.5% from three, which is almost identical to Rozier's 30.6% from 3 this year.

So why isn't Hunter considered a terrible god-awful shooter?

Shot selection.

Hunter shot 39% from 3 the year before, and Rozier shot 37% the year before.

And while Rozier is an outstanding 79% FT shooter, Hunter is an even more impressive 88% FT shooter. And college FT% is widely considered to be a better predictor than college 3 point shooting for predicting NBA 3 point shooting success.

Why? Shot selection.