Both of these combos have 3 year of familiarity with one another as well. Smart/Rob in Boston and Horford/Schroder in Atlanta.Smart and Rob go together, Schroder and Al go together?
Both of these combos have 3 year of familiarity with one another as well. Smart/Rob in Boston and Horford/Schroder in Atlanta.Smart and Rob go together, Schroder and Al go together?
So Pritchard is a miss now too? After a pretty solid rookie campaign?My complaints on Ainge drafting mid to late 1st wasn’t so much about the misses but the lack of upside in those misses. Don’t miss on a Sullinger or a Pritchard when you are staring at their upside right in front of you. Miss on a freak athlete projection like a Begarin (or my beloved Gobert from prior years) to where you have a chance to a guy to grow into his length and athleticism (aka upside) on the cheap. Hopefully Brad’s choice of Begarin signals an end to the “safe” picks that are akin to kicking a FG on 4th and 3 when you’re down 5 in rhe 4Q.
From a role/rotation player POV, that's perfectly fair.The counterargument is that you are assuming Expected Value without showing your work.
Here's an article with a survey of several different draft value analysis methods: https://tonyelhabr.github.io/nba-decision_analysis/what-research-says-about-nba-draft-pick-value.html
Here's a second one with expected value from drafts until 2008: https://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm. According to this second one, the percent change of drafting a role player or worse with pick 14 is approximately 45%.
Since the JT draft, BOS has drafted one starter, two players who are seemingly in the rotation, and two more players who people have clamored to be in the rotation but at least one of them is probably no better than a role player. To me, that's probably expected value. Maybe a little more. Not a home run by any means but it just goes to show how much of a crap shoot it is picking outside of the top 5 in the NBA.
Or use them to dump players you sign a year later not to use. Oh wait, not that. I don't even have so much an issue with that if some of the other picks were looking better. Trade them for vets or use the players you selected.DNP-CD guarantees ZERO value. If that's the philosophy deal your mid/late 1sts for proven veterans, especially if you don't have the stomach or wherewithal to draft/develop young players. OR use those picks on foreign players (Mader/Begarin) and let them ripen overseas until they are ready to contribute like an NBA vet. Either way, the coach and the front office need to be on the same page and have a definitive approach.
I didn’t mean it in that context like they were already misses (even though PP seems well on his way) but that even if they were hits they provide minimal value as a role player on a rookie deal…..so if you’re going to miss, miss with a chance of drafting an impact player. Hence, my reference to a FG that does little as opposed to going for a TD and the lead (impact). I said that Ainge was staring at what their upside was the day he drafted them as their ceilings were/are extremely low. Same with Olynyk.So Pritchard is a miss now too? After a pretty solid rookie campaign?
The constant handwringing about one person’s role after another—Ainge’s drafting, Ime for always playing the wrong guys, the young guys who are now clear busts because they sat for a few games, Tatum for shooting poorly even as he’s passing out of double teams and playing exceptional defense—is exhausting. The list goes on – Marcus for shooting horribly while also trying to pass more, Brad for not blowing it all up by shipping the guys who are playing well out of town for Beale.
These guys aren’t puzzle pieces. This team is a work-in-progress with high upside. That’s because you have two Top 30 players who are still trying to figure out how to play complementary ball without losing what makes them Top 30 guys. Brad assembled a bunch of guys who may be able to help them figure it out. Ime is on board. There are going to be plenty of things to second-guess, because it’s a bit of a real-time experiment without having to create dramatic narratives about who failed this team more.
Enough with the miserablism already. This is a weird year bc of the pandemic and this team is more fun to watch as they try to coalesce than virtually anyone here is giving them credit for. Anything could happen.
Pritchard is a hit in the sense that his performance is already above the median expected value for his draft position. I don't think that's what HRB is getting at though. A guy like Pritchard is a low-ceiling pick, which probably increases your hit rate but at the expense of finding potentially great players later in the draft. Maybe those guys are Bane or Tillman, quite possibly not. I'm not sure last year's draft is the right example to use anyways, since 1) it looks like kind of a mediocre draft overall, but 2) we don't know how a lot of these players will turn out.So Pritchard is a miss now too? After a pretty solid rookie campaign?
Yeah I’m not opposed to drafting that type of player when you are competing for a Championship (although I’d prefer trading the pick and using salary on a vet-min ring chaser) and was fine with the Pritchard pick on its own as we were about to be in the mix has the right things fallen into place. The issue I have is that this has always been a part of Ainge’s draft philosophy even when rebuilding which to me is inexcusable and a poor strategy.Pritchard is a hit in the sense that his performance is already above the median expected value for his draft position. I don't think that's what HRB is getting at though. A guy like Pritchard is a low-ceiling pick, which probably increases your hit rate but at the expense of finding potentially great players later in the draft. Maybe those guys are Bane or Tillman, quite possibly not. I'm not sure last year's draft is the right example to use anyways, since 1) it looks like kind of a mediocre draft overall, but 2) we don't know how a lot of these players will turn out.
I can't agree with this enough. There's nothing more disappointing to me than low-ceiling, high-floor players coming up short - I'd rather they take the gamble and if they lose, they lose. Tatum and Brown are really, really good basketball players, but they're not on the level of a Lebron or Durant obviously. The Celtics really needed to add variance to their portfolio the last couple of years to get additional young stars. I appreciate the swing at Romeo and I don't begrudge Ainge for that pick because if he could hit his upside, he'd be a great addition. He hasn't so far (still could, though increasingly unlikely), but at least they gave it a shot.My complaints on Ainge drafting mid to late 1st wasn’t so much about the misses but the lack of upside in those misses. Don’t miss on a Sullinger or a Pritchard when you are staring at their upside right in front of you. Miss on a freak athlete projection like a Begarin (or my beloved Gobert from prior years) to where you have a chance to a guy to grow into his length and athleticism (aka upside) on the cheap. Hopefully Brad’s choice of Begarin signals an end to the “safe” picks that are akin to kicking a FG on 4th and 3 when you’re down 5 in rhe 4Q.
I'm old enough to recall Luka Doncic being called an unathletic, low-ceiling prospect that should go outside the Top10Pritchard is a hit in the sense that his performance is already above the median expected value for his draft position. I don't think that's what HRB is getting at though. A guy like Pritchard is a low-ceiling pick, which probably increases your hit rate but at the expense of finding potentially great players later in the draft. Maybe those guys are Bane or Tillman, quite possibly not. I'm not sure last year's draft is the right example to use anyways, since 1) it looks like kind of a mediocre draft overall, but 2) we don't know how a lot of these players will turn out.
Who had Luka outside the top 10? And who said he's low ceiling?I'm old enough to recall Luka Doncic being called an unathletic, low-ceiling prospect that should go outside the Top10
You mean low ceiling, high floor players? I guess it depends on what kind of disappointment you are talking about. The former are disappointing because I really want them to work out because I can see their potential. They are fun to dream on, so when they don't work out, it is disappointing. But at the same time, I'm happy they took a chance on a guy who could actually make a real difference. There's also a chance they develop into a player just as useful as the high floor/low ceiling player.There's nothing more disappointing to me than high-ceiling, low-floor players coming up short -
HRB said he'd be a bust. I don't think he had him going outside the top 10 though. It was an outlier opinion.Who had Luka outside the top 10? And who said he's low ceiling?
I'm hard pressed to put much blame on Danny's drafts, and as a side note: I love watchin Luka. He's my favorite player to watch.HRB said he'd be a bust. I don't think he had him going outside the top 10 though. It was an outlier opinion.
Besides that, there are always going to be "hits" later in the draft. Those hits are outliers too, though. Maybe in one NBAverse, PP is FVV. I doubt it's this one. More often than not, he's what the scouting reports expect.
I bet that one guy is gloating about it now though. He was looking dead wrong last year and doubled and triple downed. The twitter poster.
HRB is one of my favorite posters and is very knowledgeable when it comes to hoops.HRB said he'd be a bust. I don't think he had him going outside the top 10 though. It was an outlier opinion.
Besides that, there are always going to be "hits" later in the draft. Those hits are outliers too, though. Maybe in one NBAverse, PP is FVV. I doubt it's this one. More often than not, he's what the scouting reports expect.
I bet that one guy is gloating about it now though. He was looking dead wrong last year and doubled and triple downed. The twitter poster.
To a point, but PP is older than Jayson Tatum. This stuff matters when determining how a player ends up, along with their length and athleticism.HRB is one of my favorite posters and is very knowledgeable when it comes to hoops.
My bigger point is labeling early is tough. All these kids are extremely talented and minutes/roles help players develop to their potential
The ceiling/floor labels is utter garbage
My memory isn’t the best but I’d have to had been drunk to say he’d be a bust since I was raving about his size and passing ability when he was 17. I did say the following year that I had questions about his shooting at ability to create space which I still do but from my recollection I had him right around where he was drafted maybe a slot or two lower.HRB said he'd be a bust. I don't think he had him going outside the top 10 though. It was an outlier opinion.
Besides that, there are always going to be "hits" later in the draft. Those hits are outliers too, though. Maybe in one NBAverse, PP is FVV. I doubt it's this one. More often than not, he's what the scouting reports expect.
I bet that one guy is gloating about it now though. He was looking dead wrong last year and doubled and triple downed. The twitter poster.
Of course it’s an imperfect science that’s what is fun about attempting to forecast these things along with the reasoning. I feel the ceiling/floors are fairly predictable due to a players athletic traits but you are always going to have your outliers……these players shouldn’t deter from the larger sample however. You view a guys ceiling ike Pritchard, Olynyk, Sullinger and the like based on how such a large number of similarly size/athletic players have fared in the past. The counter is always the one-off like, “Look at Steve Nash though!” Those guys are always going to exist and they likely come with some outrageous trait such as a work ethic like Cole Anthony as an example. He’s a “low ceiling” guy in theory but he has a freakish quality that lengthens his ceiling.HRB is one of my favorite posters and is very knowledgeable when it comes to hoops.
My bigger point is labeling early is tough. All these kids are extremely talented and minutes/roles help players develop to their potential
The ceiling/floor labels at draft time/early years is utter garbage
Yes, that's what I meant, major typo on my part. Edited for clarity. You're right - there's nothing to dream on and the margin of error is so slimYou mean low ceiling, high floor players?
that's fair on PP, in regards to age.To a point, but PP is older than Jayson Tatum. This stuff matters when determining how a player ends up, along with their length and athleticism.
How much longer is PP a "kid" who is extremely talented and has a ton of potential? He turns 24 in February. He might have another offseason of limited growth. It is what it is.
Doncic was 19.
Agreed, of the recurring topics that come up on this forum, this is one of the least interesting. At least no one is saying Ainge wanted to trade all the Brooklyn picks for Justise Winslow and is lucky to have Tatum and Brown or whatever. Maybe Ainge put too much emphasis on certain qualities or personality traits while drafting from time to time. I think there are legitimate criticisms to be made about the last few years of Ainge's tenure, benhogan nailed it with his skepticism of the Kemba signing from day one, but when you have Jayson Tatum, Jaylen Brown, and Robert Williams drafted in the recent memory, the draft doesn't seem like a huge issue to me.I don't get the point of relitigating except to say "I was right, you was wrong lolz".
I understand that the concern is that this roster, as currently constituted, cannot win and that the team has few obvious resources to improve. I have no interest in unearthing old takes from this forum or elsewhere but I recall some pretty firm views that the Bucks/Giannis weren't built to win in the playoffs. I seem to remember takes as well that some of their roster moves had crippled them. I know Giannis is the answer to all of that but if you go back to prior champions, they all were able to maneuver to add talent when needed - even up against cap limits or with little in draft capital.
Again, if Stevens cannot creatively round out the roster around Tatum/Brown (or one of the two) then he probably isn't well suited for this job.
The debate around here at that time was where Luka belonged in the top 5 or so. A couple of people thought that he was the best player in the draft, most had it between 2 and 4. Nobody called him a bust to my knowledge.My memory isn’t the best but I’d have to had been drunk to say he’d be a bust since I was raving about his size and passing ability when he was 17. I did say the following year that I had questions about his shooting at ability to create space which I still do but from my recollection I had him right around where he was drafted maybe a slot or two lower.
The debate around here at that time was where Luka belonged in the top 5 or so. A couple of people thought that he was the best player in the draft, most had it between 2 and 4. Nobody called him a bust to my knowledge.
That said, many thought that athleticism might hold him back somewhat (as was sometimes said about Tatum). In neither case was that correct.
There are a few caveats that none of us know anything about, such as Porter's medicals, Mitchell Robinson (and his promise), and teams trading up to select one particular player so I'm not necessarily "mocking" this draft based on team selection only posting my draft order without factoring in team needs, system or any of those other variables. Many picks I see as interchangeable based on system or where the team drafting is today, like Trae Young vs Collin Sexton or JJJ vs Wendell, and I will note them as such. Yes, I like some guys much more than the mocks or general public and aren't as high as some who I feel are overhyped based on what I project them to be so here goes...…..
1. Marvin Bagley
2. Mo Bamba
3. DeAndre Ayton
4. Kevin Knox (want to have him at 3 so bad here, it's close)
5a. Wendell Carter
5b. Jaren Jackson
7. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander (made for todays NBA)
8. Mikal Bridges
9a. Trae Young
9b. Collin Sexton
11. Luka Doncic
12. Michael Porter (I'd need clean meds to go higher and the new hip injury doesn't help me here)
My 1/2 have been rock solid for awhile with a gap to 3 but not an enormous one. I've been an Ayton guy forever but his stiffness and motor give me pause as to his ceiling. After 12 though is where I see the most significant dropoff.
I'm afraid that even 42% PP has limited value on this team if he doesn't improve his ability to create separation and/or get guys on his hip. He flashed that, but it's gone. And the book is out on him that you don't have to leave your feet at the rim too. He's Carsen Edwards right now. Slightly taller but with less jump on his jumper.that's fair on PP, in regards to age.
Unless he shoots well over 40% from 3 he's going to have trouble sticking. He did pull it off last season, so I'd be willing to stick it out after masked PP couldn't hit the broad side of a barn
This team came into the season in desperate need of ++3pt shooting w/DS, TL, MS & JRich playing major minutes/roles.I'm afraid that even 42% PP has limited value on this team if he doesn't improve his ability to create separation and/or get guys on his hip. He flashed that, but it's gone. And the book is out on him that you don't have to leave your feet at the rim too. He's Carsen Edwards right now. Slightly taller but with less jump on his jumper.
Isn't Jabari worth some minutes to try to see what he's able to do? He's only 26+The answer, at the moment, is to develop what you got. I completely understand the need for a rookie HC to win but UNLESS you're a top 8 (top 4 EC) contender your approach should be a hair different than what we have seen so far (especially during Oct/Nov/Dec regular season NBA hoops)
The delta between Grant, Langford, Nesmith + Pritchard getting consistent 10-15mpg isn't much different than overplaying the starter's THIBs style or using retreads like Parker, Hernangomez, Teague. I highly doubt you "lose" the team by playing high-energy 2nd/3rd yr players that almost always defer to the top 6-7 players. All four of them are very willing to dive on the floor, hustle, play with the right attitude.
PLUS those four aren't nearly complete. Nobody has one damn clue on how good/bad they will be. Game to game Grant looks like he can hit 3s, then the next game he can't guard a chair. Same with the other 3. The only way to know if they can develop is to give them small/defined bench roles and stagger them into games consistently with the starters. Then decide if they should stick or get moved at the trade deadline or at year-end.
DNP-CD guarantees ZERO value. If that's the philosophy deal your mid/late 1sts for proven veterans, especially if you don't have the stomach or wherewithal to draft/develop young players. OR use those picks on foreign players (Mader/Begarin) and let them ripen overseas until they are ready to contribute like an NBA vet. Either way, the coach and the front office need to be on the same page and have a definitive approach.
Haiburton and SGA are catnipI've been fucking busy of late, so I apologize for not going back through the thread to find the Trade Jaylen!!! posts (or really making any attempt to catch up to the conversation, there's a point where you open a 19 page thread and find that you were last there at around page 15). But I would like to revisit the Brown trade scenarios. I've exited the Beal train because the Wiz have been really good so far and they'd be more likely to be looking to add Brown than trade Beal for him (and if that team wins 50 games this year and makes the second round I wager that Beal re-signs with them).
It would be ideal if Tatum's running mate were a better playmaker. Someone like Marcus, but a scorer. Someone like Malcolm Brogdon fits the bill, except that he's about to turn 29. High school Cam Reddish looked like he could turn in to that kind of guy, but NBA Cam Reddish is sort of a black hole on offense. Plus he's not nearly the shooter/scorer.
So it pretty much comes down to two possible trade partners that I can see. The first is the Kings with Haliburton and Barnes (Boston would need to include something else to make that palatable). That would close Boston's needs at two spots, with Barnes providing them a big wing to run with Tatum and Haliburton providing them with a versatile G that can fit with just about anyone.
The other is the guy that Boston would likely have picked had they not traded for the Demon Kyzuzu, Shae Gilgeous-Alexander. Usually guys that sign extensions are near impossible to trade before the new deal kicks in, but the Thunder can clear the cap space to absorb Brown's deal outright, so something could be constructed around Brown/whatever for SGA/whatever. SGA still needs to improve his shooting, but he fills every other need, switchability on D, scoring, playmaking, etc..
In one NBAverse, PP is Jerry West. Of course that requires him being bit by a radioactive spider or a werewolf, I forget which. And there are a billion zillion NBAverses. . . .Besides that, there are always going to be "hits" later in the draft. Those hits are outliers too, though. Maybe in one NBAverse, PP is FVV. I doubt it's this one. More often than not, he's what the scouting reports expect.
Just figure the Spurs need to do something, they have been sliding for years now.Why would the Spurs? It doesn't really accelerate their window. I've been suggesting the Kings trade for awhile because I think it works for both teams.
Jaylen seems like a guy you trade for if you have the first star already in place.
Why would Boston need to include something there? As good as Barnes has been this year, I'd imagine Sac would have kick something back for an in his prime all-star who's on a team friendly deal for the next 2+ years. I might be overestimating his market, though.The first is the Kings with Haliburton and Barnes (Boston would need to include something else to make that palatable).
Because Barnes isn't far off Brown. It largely depends what you think of Haliburton's ceiling.Why would Boston need to include something there? As good as Barnes has been this year, I'd imagine Sac would have kick something back for an in his prime all-star who's on a team friendly deal for the next 2+ years. I might be overestimating his market, though.
I don’t want to go down the rabbit hole of arguing fake Jaylen trades…beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I think it’s kind of a pointless exercise honestly…Because Barnes isn't far off Brown. It largely depends what you think of Haliburton's ceiling.
edit: I also think Barnes is one of the more underrated players in the league.
I meant on the floor, Barnes probably gives you 90-95% of what Brown does. That's where Haliburton comes in.I don’t want to go down the rabbit hole of arguing fake Jaylen trades…beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I think it’s kind of a pointless exercise honestly…
However, I can GUARANTEE one thing, and that’s that there’s no NBA team in the league that thinks that Harrison Barnes and Jaylen Brown have similar trade value
I suppose it depends on where you see Haliburton’s ceiling. I think most people around the league would put it close to Brown’s. Barnes never really panned out as a defender, but he shoots threes well at volume and there’s always the hope that on a squad with Al & Marcus that he starts busting tail on that end of the floor.Why would Boston need to include something there? As good as Barnes has been this year, I'd imagine Sac would have kick something back for an in his prime all-star who's on a team friendly deal for the next 2+ years. I might be overestimating his market, though.
21/22 Harrison Barnes might give you almost everything JB does, but I'm skeptical this continues. He's off to an incredible start, with career highs in points, rebounds, steals, free throws, 3s, fg% and 3p%. Maybe at age 29 he's finally hit his stride (he's never made an all-star team, not even close, but this year he'd deserve it), or maybe it's a flukey good start and he's still the same guy he's been since leaving GS - a moderately above average player with nice numbers playing for bad teams.I meant on the floor, Barnes probably gives you 90-95% of what Brown does. That's where Haliburton comes in.
I really nailed that draft! I def didn’t foresee the game shifting to the degree it did. Knox hasn’t gotten it and I’m still blown away that Bagley never improved once he got to a more wide open NBA. You don’t miss any harder than I did that draft.HRB had him 11th talent wise. It's where he projected them to be when they were end products, not where they'd go in the draft. At least how I read it.
Haliburton's first season was better or equal to any of Jaylen's first 3 seasons. He shot better from all 3 spots and right now is a better distributor, and will grow into a much better defender. So it wouldn't shock me if Sac viewed his eventual upside to be greaterI like Halliburton but pretty sure there’s no team who thinks his upside is equal to what Brown is today, much less what he might grow into. Which is why that deal doesn’t make sense for Celtics unless the goal is to win a playoff series this year or there are major chemistry issues we haven’t heard about (which I do not rule out)
I don't see it that way at all. To me, NBA teams focus mostly on potential for guys in this age range and JB's potential---athletically in particular---has always been far above Halliburton's. Which is especially important because sitting here today his play is as well. Brown is a vastly better scorer, and has tools to be a much more versatile defender and has shown that in flashes (though, as we've all noted, not consistently). I agree Halliburton is a better distributor. That said, and agreeing there's a couple years of age difference, I think there's no way any team is valuing Halliburton above Brown even figuring in contract (a big benefit for Halliburton right now). One is an all-star now with the potential to possibly be a first team all-NBA talent (though I don't know Brown will quite get there) and one is a very good player who looks like he might make an all-star game in a good-case scenario. But you never trade the first for the second. Even if one thinks Halliburton is a better player today (which is a tough case to make, even with Halliburton's efficiency) I don't think teams will project them similarly going forward.Haliburton's first season was better or equal to any of Jaylen's first 3 seasons. He shot better from all 3 spots and right now is a better distributor, and will grow into a much better defender. So it wouldn't shock me if Sac viewed his eventual upside to be greater
I really don't see the Kings moving him + Barnes for JB. Also don't see the Celtics trading Brown. Stalemate