Draft day musing on Danny Ainge

slamminsammya · Jun 22, 2017

PedroKsBambino said:
The juxtaposition of a discussion about Anthony Bennett and a second discussion about the assumption any number one pick is 2x likely to yield a superstar is interesting and instructive. While on average the number one pick is uniquely valuable, it is demonstrably not the case that every year that is true.

Whether this year is a "5 VORP" year or a "Anthony Bennett" year is an unknown, and while we can debate how relevant historical percentages are to deciding which we are closer to (this year is clearly not either the Lebron or Bennett extreme) we do know that this year's pick is not an average of multiple years---it's an assessment of a small set of individual players. People misunderstand how averages across a sample map to individual decisions all the time, and this is looking like another of those.

The juxtaposition in that particular case is also not really relevant. Bowiac's entire point is about the consensus best player being far likelier than other players to be successful. If anything, Bennett reinforces his point, since he was an out of nowhere why the hell are they taking him type first overall pick.

Big John · Jun 22, 2017

No one taken with a top 14 pick in 2013 was ever going to be a "5 VORP" player. The two best players in that draft-- by a huge margin--were taken at #15 and #27.

So, if Cleveland had selected Giannis with No. 1 instead of Bennett would the Jon Givoney's of the world all have chorused "great pick," or would it have been viewed as a head scratcher?

chilidawg · Jun 22, 2017

"5 VORP" isn't a particularly high bar, as 13 players met that standard this season. IT just missed at 4.8. Odds that a couple of the top 5 in this draft reach that threshold are pretty good.

While most finalists may have a 5 VORP player, I think that's not a sufficient threshold for a "transcendent" player.

godownswinging · Jun 22, 2017

I've heard this a few times this week, that Ainge sucks in the draft.

This article lists the Celtics as having extracted decent value from their picks relative to the league 2004-2012, although it doesn't include foreign players. If I'm reading the chart right it looks like the Celtics are top 5. It seems to support the idea that Ainge is fine in the draft.

Then again, he hasn't drafted Lebron, KD, or Curry so he sucks.

Edit: article timeline.

PedroKsBambino · Jun 22, 2017

slamminsammya said:
The juxtaposition in that particular case is also not really relevant. Bowiac's entire point is about the consensus best player being far likelier than other players to be successful. If anything, Bennett reinforces his point, since he was an out of nowhere why the hell are they taking him type first overall pick.

That's not so, at all.

First, the graph (and the specific comment I responded to) was about 5 WARP guys, not consensus best players. The graph shows all picks, not just top picks and certainly not just consensus top picks.

Second, various folks are using 'consensus first pick' and 'anticipated superstar' interchangeably and that's likely not appropriate. I think it is fair to say Fultz is a consensus first pick this year...and, he's pretty clearly not a 'consensus' first pick in the same way that Lebron, Davis, etc. were.

So, that data (and others I've seen) say you are more likely to get a 5 WARP guy at pick 1---agreed. But the data does not say that all guys selected first are equally likely to be a 5 WARP guy, which is my Bennett point.

I suspect if we adjust the data to pull out the Lebron type 'no doubt' number one picks (which is a level above Fultz) the graph would smooth out a bunch. Whether it smooths out enough to make the swap Ainge made a good prospective bet I am not at all sure of, but it's definitely less clear than is being suggested. That's all I am saying.

ifmanis5 · Jun 22, 2017

Danny made his move too quickly. The assets brought back aren't good enough. If he had waited he'd have enough ammo to land Porzingis by now, if that was a prime goal of his. He could be playing Phil and Philly off of each other and get a bidding war going. Plus, he never brought in Jackson for a workout which should have happened before it was too late. This looks kind of sloppy.

JCizzle · Jun 22, 2017

ifmanis5 said:
Danny made his move too quickly. The assets brought back aren't good enough. If he had waited he'd have enough ammo to land Porzingis by now, if that was a prime goal of his. He could be playing Phil and Philly off of each other and get a bidding war going. Plus, he never brought in Jackson for a workout which should have happened before it was too late. This looks kind of sloppy.

Jackson isn't on him at all. Danny wanted the kid to come in when he had the #1 AND tried again after getting the #3, but his agent said no. Meanwhile, Tatum worked out for us both before and after the trade. Jackson's agent just sucks (while protecting his client, to be fair).

TheRooster · Jun 22, 2017

In a year like this (no Lebron/Duncan), why would anyone in the media have an accurate read on who 29 diverse organizations view as the top prospect? Also, if 14 like Fultz, 5 prefer Tatum, 5 prefer Ball and 5 prefer Jackson is that a clear consensus?

OurF'ingCity · Jun 22, 2017

Maybe this is just my lack of knowledge regarding the NBA, but how exactly is Danny or any other GM supposed to know what the "pro scouting consensus" is anyway? It seems fairly clear that the media consensus has Fultz #1 overall but I'm not sure that translates into what the teams actually think. And I suppose you could call all the other GMs (or the ones you trust/respect the most), but what incentive do they have to tell you what they're actually thinking as opposed to just stonewalling you or giving you false information?

southshoresoxfan · Jun 22, 2017

bowiac said:
We can break this out, but I don't have a negative view of Ainge. I just had a very positive view last week, and now that's much lower in light of what I think was a serious mistake that I don't think he's earned the benefit of the doubt on. I'm not calling on him to be fired or anything. I just no longer view him as positively.

He had a player ranked higher than Fultz. He got a future top 5 pick to move down 2 spots.

What is wrong with people that cant understand that Danny Ainge had a diff view on Fultz than the rest of us?

southshoresoxfan · Jun 22, 2017

cheech13 said:
I made this point after the trade was made, but regardless of Danny's body of work, the downside risk on the #1 for #3 trade is so bad that it could potentially cost him his job. There's a very real chance that Fultz becomes a superstar, #3 does not and the extra pick is nothing more than a Rozier/James Young mid-first type. If that's the case he'll have potentially blown his chance at assembling a contender and created another one (Philly) in the process and that would, fairly or unfairly, destroy all the goodwill he's built up. He better hope he's right.

This is lunacy at its highest.

OurF'ingCity · Jun 22, 2017

I find it hard to believe any NBA GM would put any weight really at all on what reporters' mock drafts are saying, but maybe I'm underestimating how useful those are to those in the business.

But even if you assume media reports accurately reflect the consensus, I don't think you can necessarily use those in determining whether a trade is worthwhile. It may be that 29 GMs think Fultz is #1, but maybe half of them would still do the trade Danny did because they don't see the gap between 1 and 4 being particularly large. In fact I seem to recall somewhere in this thread someone quoted a tweet with an unnamed GM saying they loved the trade.

mcpickl · Jun 22, 2017

bowiac said:
For example, I think Ball is a better prospect than Fultz. If I was drafting #1, I'd take Fultz however, cause I don't think my amateur scouting, or even analytics are going to be better than the scouting consensus at the top of the draft. I think the same is true of the Celtics front office.

Man, really?

I would not want someone with this thinking running my team.

sox311 · Jun 22, 2017

southshoresoxfan said:
This is lunacy at its highest.

I don't think it is that crazy. It isn't like passing on Gianias or Kawhi. I have heard people say that "others have Ball or Jackson ranked higher." but I haven't heard anyone saying that they have him ranked higher. It is probably like passing on Kyrie for Derick Williams. (Man that draft stunk besides five studs) Or passing on John Wall for a Paul George if we are lucky, Wesley Matthews if not...

mcpickl · Jun 22, 2017

smastroyin said:
Think about this

Cleveland from 2011 to 2014 had:
2011 #1 - Irving
2011 #4 - Thompson
2012 #4 - Waiters
2013 #1 - Bennett turned into Love
2014 #1 - Wiggins turned into Love

Golden State from 2009 to 2012 had:
2009 #7 - Curry
2010 #6 - Udoh (with Ellis (picked 40th) and Kwame Brown) turned into Bogut and Stephen Jackson
2011 #11 - Thompson
2012 #7 - Barnes (and #35 Green)

The Cavs drafts you can't really argue with, right? It's a decent looking hit rate. But to really build through the draft you need an exceptional hit rate. I'm not sure Danny is exceptional.

How would you be able to compare Ainge to this though?

Every one of those picks is in the top #11.

Ainge has only picked that high twice. Smart at 6, which looks pretty reasonable compared to the rest of that draft, and Brown at 3 is way too early to tell.

I think peoples' expectations for Ainge and his drafts are way too high. He hasn't had a lot of high picks. I mean, people here still whine about JR Giddens who was picked 30th.

southshoresoxfan · Jun 22, 2017

sox311 said:
I don't think it is that crazy. It isn't like passing on Gianias or Kawhi. I have heard people say that "others have Ball or Jackson ranked higher." but I haven't heard anyone saying that they have him ranked higher. It is probably like passing on Kyrie for Derick Williams. (Man that draft stunk besides five studs) Or passing on John Wall for a Paul George if we are lucky, Wesley Matthews if not...

Sorry. Was more referring to Danny being fired over this move.

Danny started w 2 aging vets and turned it into IT, Jaylen, #3, BKN18 and the Lakers pick.

No, he should not be fired over this move.

JCizzle · Jun 22, 2017

sox311 said:
I don't think it is that crazy. It isn't like passing on Gianias or Kawhi. I have heard people say that "others have Ball or Jackson ranked higher." but I haven't heard anyone saying that they have him ranked higher. It is probably like passing on Kyrie for Derick Williams. (Man that draft stunk besides five studs) Or passing on John Wall for a Paul George if we are lucky, Wesley Matthews if not...

I think HRB has said a few times that Fultz likely wouldn't be a top 4 pick next year. If that holds and the LAL pick conveys, then this trade ends up looking pretty damn good. With some luck, you could be looking at a two year stretch that includes one of Tatum/Jackson/Isaac and two of Porter/Ayton/Donic (whoever else is highly rated).

wade boggs chicken dinner · Jun 22, 2017

cheech13 said:
I made this point after the trade was made, but regardless of Danny's body of work, the downside risk on the #1 for #3 trade is so bad that it could potentially cost him his job. There's a very real chance that Fultz becomes a superstar, #3 does not and the extra pick is nothing more than a Rozier/James Young mid-first type. If that's the case he'll have potentially blown his chance at assembling a contender and created another one (Philly) in the process and that would, fairly or unfairly, destroy all the goodwill he's built up. He better hope he's right.

You're correct it's risky and because of this, a lot of other GMs wouldn't have even touched it.

You are correct that if Fultz becomes a multiple-time All-Star and Jackson can't learn to play offense (or Tatum can't learn finish in the NBA), and LA, PHI, and SAC become really good really quickly, it's very possible that the Cs have gotten a mid-round pick in exchange for their trouble.

However, there's also a huge upside. If Fultz has problems with NBA-level athletes and there's not a huge difference between Fultz and Tatum/Jackson, and BOS could end up a second player next year who is better than Fultz plus the #3 for their troubles. Also, PHI would have squandered one of their assets and perhaps be stuck in the mediocrity cycle of hell for the foreseeable future.

There's risk on both sides.

RetractableRoof · Jun 22, 2017

bowiac said:
Sorry - when I write "Danny", I mean the "the Celtics front office". I don't mean to disaggregate the two. Apologies if that wasn't clear. As I mentioned above, if the reporting is wrong that the pro scouting consensus has Fultz as a clear #1, then I'm fine with the decision to trade down. By hubris, I mean that if in fact Fultz is the clear #1 pick to most front offices, then I think it is hubris for the Celtics to think their amateur scouting is better than everyone else's, and that Tatum is on par with him. If the reporting is wrong of course, and there is no "Fultz is a tier above" consensus, then all bets are off. I can only go off what I read however.

For example, I think Ball is a better prospect than Fultz. If I was drafting #1, I'd take Fultz however, cause I don't think my amateur scouting, or even analytics are going to be better than the scouting consensus at the top of the draft. I think the same is true of the Celtics front office.

I don't know what this means. I'm not saying he's a bad person. I'm saying based on the information available, I think he made a mistake to trade down. I don't think he should be fired for it or anything. He's a good GM who made a (serious) mistake in my opinion.

I'm mostly quoting this post to speak to your general points, not specifically this one...

What if the Ainge/Front Office collective team has agreed that Fulz IS the consensus best pick - but that he is not going to be the transcendent player other organizations might think he is. Whether its makeup, or heart, or XYZ characteristic they don't think he is going to be that alpha star that a championship team needs (by whatever set of criteria they identify the alpha star to need). In that case, is he/they still obligated to pick Fulz in your mind? That to me is what a large number of organizations would do - take Fulz as the safe pick. If Ainge did that - no one would have blinked - even if Fulz craters (no one is saying he will) because he took the right guy. No one kills Portland for the Oden pick, right?

But if Ainge in his heart of hearts is saying I need the home run, and Fulz might be a double, maybe even a triple but not a home run. We can't win without that alpha player and he isn't it. At that point, it isn't hubris (IMO) to say "what can we do with this situation". He asks around and gets the most he can get (and only he knows if he extracted the most because regardless of the hot takes there isn't a lot of NBA history assigning value to dropping from 1 to 3 in the first round). He only dropped 2 slots and believes that he'll still get the player he wanted. This player isn't the consensus number 1, but if the alpha player wasn't available, he turned the #1 in a non alpha year into his desired player and a shot at a #2 in the next year where maybe there is a second alpha (not to mention the Nets pick which can become a #1 in a draft where there SEEMS to be a consensus alpha.

I don't see that as hubris, or the absence of humility. I think it is just stone cold calculating and doing what he believes is right without worrying about the naysayers outside the room.

sox311 · Jun 22, 2017

JCizzle said:
With some luck, you could be looking at a two year stretch that includes one of Tatum/Jackson/Isaac and two of Porter/Ayton/Donic (whoever else is highly rated).

When ever I get excited about this I think about Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler together on the Bulls.

I was actually in NYC staying at the same hotel as all the draftees and TNT employees that night. I loved it then as a recent college grad from little old Idaho in the big city, I would be like a little kid in the candy store with how much I love and follow the NBA more closely and in depth now. I even rode an elevator with Troy Murphy, Kenny Smith, and Ernie Johnson. Much better results for me than for the Cs that night, after the JJ trade of course.

PedroKsBambino · Jun 22, 2017

mcpickl said:
Man, really?

I would not want someone with this thinking running my team.

It's the 'wisdom of crowds' argument and there's a lot more nuance to it especially in expert markets like NBA drafts.

A simple way to think about it is that if you don't have one of the guys who can reliably beat the market you should seek one, because the other implication of hitting 'average' on every draft pick is that doing so very likely doesn't actually make you a winning team.

HomeRunBaker · Jun 22, 2017

JCizzle said:
I think HRB has said a few times that Fultz likely wouldn't be a top 4 pick next year. If that holds and the LAL pick conveys, then this trade ends up looking pretty damn good. With some luck, you could be looking at a two year stretch that includes one of Tatum/Jackson/Isaac and two of Porter/Ayton/Donic (whoever else is highly rated).

Yes. What I actually said was that if Ayton, Doncic, and Porter were draft eligible out of high school THIS year (which players will be again really soon but that's for another thread) than Fultz is going #4.....and I like Fultz! I feel he is going to be a CJ McCollum-type which is a really good player but not a transcendent player. The potential home run value in the return for Fultz isn't in todays 3rd pick....it could still be great if a Porzingis deal goes down but the real shot at a transcendent talent is if the Lakers land in the #2-5 range next summer to go along with the Nets pick.

The thing about Ainge is that this isn't the first time he wasn't sold on the "consensus" #1 pick when it was made known right away that he was drafting Durant over Oden. This isn't some schmuck like Kahn in Minnesota......Ainge has pulled off a couple Auerbachian deals already and rebuilt this organization from the bottom to the top once and we are now set up to be a 50+ win team for the next decade after bottoming out to secure these Nets picks. We don't have to agree with everything he does like Giddens, like Olynyk, and he isn't going to be perfect......but man, after what he's accomplished I'm firmly entrenched in the "In Danny We Trust" life.

NomarsFool · Jun 22, 2017

This discussion reminds me of that awful Kevin Costner movie - I think it was called Draft Day? KC has the #1 pick, and there's a consensus #1 and KC agonizes over whether to take the consensus QB#1 or go with the guy he likes the most (some defensive player I think?). SPOILER ALERT - he decides to take his favorite guy, which seemed really stupid to me - because he could have traded down and still got his guy. So, I'm glad Ainge isn't as stupid as Kevin Costner. If he really wanted Tatum, he did the right thing (or the better thing than taking Tatum #1 - THAT would have been really stupid).

The only thing I don't really like about this is I think there was a legit question about whether we really want IT as the long-term PG of the future. Now they've pretty much decided to go with him forever (and will give him a huge contract in the near future).

Papelbon's Poutine · Jun 22, 2017

NomarsFool said:
This discussion reminds me of that awful Kevin Costner movie - I think it was called Draft Day? KC has the #1 pick, and there's a consensus #1 and KC agonizes over whether to take the consensus QB#1 or go with the guy he likes the most (some defensive player I think?). SPOILER ALERT - he decides to take his favorite guy, which seemed really stupid to me - because he could have traded down and still got his guy. So, I'm glad Ainge isn't as stupid as Kevin Costner. If he really wanted Tatum, he did the right thing (or the better thing than taking Tatum #1 - THAT would have been really stupid).

Not that I blame you if the answer is no, but did you actually watch that movie?

NomarsFool · Jun 22, 2017

Sorry, I forgot that he actually traded UP to get the #1 pick early in the movie. But, still, I was annoyed that after he had the #1 and realized he didn't want the QB at #1, he should have traded down and picked up the LB.

PC Drunken Friar · Jun 22, 2017

NomarsFool said:
Sorry, I forgot that he actually traded UP to get the #1 pick early in the movie. But, still, I was annoyed that after he had the #1 and realized he didn't want the QB at #1, he should have traded down and picked up the LB.

You got the wrong team, too.

FL4WL3SS · Jun 22, 2017

I think what is missing in the evaluation of the trade down to #3 is that he has exactly one trading partner. This wasn't a situation where he has multiple teams bidding on that pick for the #3 pick, he only had one team to negotiate with for that pick. The return might have been a bit light, but it's not like he had a ton of bargaining power. If he thought that #3 was where he wanted to be and still get his guy, then he probably needed to make a few concessions. I wouldn't be surprised, given his quotes, that they approached Philly first, in which case you already give up some bargaining power.

The fact he was able to pull off the deal and still get his guy should be a net positive. I'm not convinced he could have gotten more given the circumstances.

Koufax · Jun 22, 2017

Folks here did a detailed review of Danny's draft skills a couple of years ago, and the conclusion was that he is average. Where he excels is deal-making, such as getting IT for nothing at all. Let's see what deal he can make with his cornucopia of picks. Last year he did nothing. This year, so far, nothing. He's still got quite a stash and, given the position that the Celtics are in, he deserves a bit more patience.

FL4WL3SS · Jun 22, 2017

If he thought that Tatum was the best player in the draft, making a trade and getting extra assets is completely reasonable, regardless if the return wasn't the absolute best.

Your problem seems to be that you don't agree with the player assessment, which is reasonable, but slamming him for the return seems a bit silly.

Jed Zeppelin · Jun 22, 2017

I don't think this signals anything in particular about IT's future. At least I hope not. League is full of usable point guards, most of which won't crush your entire defense by their mere presence on the court.

Personally I would have held out for both LA and SAC picks but I've been a Fultz booster all along.

southshoresoxfan · Jun 22, 2017

bowiac said:
My complaint is that if he couldn't get more, then it's a fine outcome to just take Fultz. Ainge has not earned the benefit of the doubt for that kind of decision in my mind.

Anyway, it's over. A gutpunch of a week, both with the trade, and then the pick itself, but there's always next lottery.

Can you explain how Danny hasnt earned trust in this regard?

NomarsFool · Jun 22, 2017

PC Drunken Friar said:
You got the wrong team, too.

KC = Kevin Costner.

Strike4 · Jun 22, 2017

Papelbon's Poutine said:
Not that I blame you if the answer is no, but did you actually watch that movie?

wade boggs chicken dinner · Jun 22, 2017

One thing to take into consideration. I have to expect that Brad has a tremendous amount of input into the draft. Assuming he is on board with the evaluation of Tatum v Fultz - particularly in terms of his system - do people feel better about the decision?

In Brad we trust.

Grin&MartyBarret · Jun 23, 2017

moondog80 said:
But Fultz is not LeBron James, nor will he be. He might be Kyrie Irving, one of those guys who, in your words, is good enough to create a middling playoff team (at best).

I don't know if the difference between Fultz and Tatum/Jackson is big, small, or zero. But I think Ainge understands asset management (and acts accordingly) as well as any GM in the league, and we know form his previous statements that he also understands that this team needs quality, not quantity. So I have to assume that Ainge (along with the rest of the front office) sees no separation in the top 4, so he's exploiting the fact that Philly disagrees with him. And I don't think he could have gotten more. Philly knew what Ainge was up to; if the Cs were making this deal, it meant they didn't care much about the difference from 1 to 3. So the Philly/Sacto pick was more than enough since the C's were ending up with the guy they want (or close) anyway.

My critique has nothing to do with whether Fultz is LeBron or not, though as Bowiac pointed out, the #1 pick has a much higher chance of being elite than the number 3.

My bigger concern is that Ainge is overvaluing his assets -- both picks and young players -- and that when the music stops in a couple of years, the Celtics are going to be a solid team that's not a real contender. Jaylen Brown's been driven off the lot; he had a surprisingly good rookie year by being like the 6th best (this is a guess, but bet it's close) guy in his class. As an asset, he'll have to see a substantial improvement in year two if he's going to be the centerpiece of any big deals.

Tatum feels like a solid B to me. Nice enough player, but with Crowder, Brown, And potentially Hayward how much growth can reasonably expected out of him?

And now the C's are left waiting and hoping the Nets pick next year is their savior. And if it ends up at 3, what then? What if Luca Doncic is really, really good but that just means he's Danilo Gallinari that stays healthy? Or a year in college exposes Porter or whoever else is meant to make next year's class so great.

People here keep saying "this is about being good in 3 years when the Warriors are declining", but right now, I have trouble seeing how this team's significantly better in three or for years. IT will be gone, Bradley will be gone, Horford will be gone, even Hayward, if they sign him, will be 31.

They don't have a young player to build around. Their picks thus far have netted role players, yet they've been unwilling to include those picks and role players in deals for a guy to build around. Put it this way: people here balked at including Zizic and Brown in a deal for Porzingis. Jaylen Brown and Ante Zizic.

I worry the options are drying up for Ainge. What's the path to getting the guy who makes them a contender I 3-4 years? How will they be better than Minnesota, Milwaukee, Philly, Denver, etc? They're setting themselves up to compete when Golden State's not reigning champs, but in terms of actual talent, there are a lot of teams who look better suited to do that than Boston.

HomeRunBaker · Jun 23, 2017

bowiac said:
My sense is that Ainge has been excellent at evaluating NBA talent, and is very good at trading, and acquiring assets. His draft results look basically like the results of an average drafter to me however.

This is an excellent synopsis of Ainge's resume. Overall, between the trades he has not only won but won in landslides in a competitive marketplace I don't see how this doesn't place him at the top of the leagues GM's along with Buford in San Antonio.

HomeRunBaker · Jun 23, 2017

Grin&MartyBarret said:
My critique has nothing to do with whether Fultz is LeBron or not, though as Bowiac pointed out, the #1 pick has a much higher chance of being elite than the number 3.

My bigger concern is that Ainge is overvaluing his assets -- both picks and young players -- and that when the music stops in a couple of years, the Celtics are going to be a solid team that's not a real contender. Jaylen Brown's been driven off the lot; he had a surprisingly good rookie year by being like the 6th best (this is a guess, but bet it's close) guy in his class. As an asset, he'll have to see a substantial improvement in year two if he's going to be the centerpiece of any big deals.

Tatum feels like a solid B to me. Nice enough player, but with Crowder, Brown, And potentially Hayward how much growth can reasonably expected out of him?

And now the C's are left waiting and hoping the Nets pick next year is their savior. And if it ends up at 3, what then? What if Luca Doncic is really, really good but that just means he's Danilo Gallinari that stays healthy? Or a year in college exposes Porter or whoever else is meant to make next year's class so great.

People here keep saying "this is about being good in 3 years when the Warriors are declining", but right now, I have trouble seeing how this team's significantly better in three or for years. IT will be gone, Bradley will be gone, Horford will be gone, even Hayward, if they sign him, will be 31.

They don't have a young player to build around. Their picks thus far have netted role players, yet they've been unwilling to include those picks and role players in deals for a guy to build around. Put it this way: people here balked at including Zizic and Brown in a deal for Porzingis. Jaylen Brown and Ante Zizic.

I worry the options are drying up for Ainge. What's the path to getting the guy who makes them a contender I 3-4 years? How will they be better than Minnesota, Milwaukee, Philly, Denver, etc? They're setting themselves up to compete when Golden State's not reigning champs, but in terms of actual talent, there are a lot of teams who look better suited to do that than Boston.

This sounds like one of hundreds of posts written about Ainge leading up to July, 2007. I should know.....I wrote more than one of them! What if he made those trades for Iverson? For Stackhouse? instead of building a deeper pool of assets. The pieces he has right now is waiting on the Anthony Davis', the KAT's, or the next transcendent player who becomes available. You talk about being "left waiting and hoping the Nets pick is their savior"......while omitting the Lakers pick next year/Kings following which is in the same range. Never in the history of this league has a GM built a 50-win team AND compiled the most impressive list of future picks that any team has ever assembled......and somehow Celtics fans find a way to complain. God the negativity in this town sucks....and it stinks!

smastroyin · Jun 23, 2017

Let's hope he gets one of those guys.

I will say, one thing about the kind of "off on his own" evaluations is it makes it more difficult to trade. Like, maybe the Bulls really wanted Brown but I doubt it. Sounds like they were locked in on Dunn both at the draft last year and still this year. Similar for Hield to Sacto. If you are drafting guys that noone else rates as highly as you, you basically are the only team that can extract real value from them. So you have to be right more often.

ALiveH · Jun 23, 2017

I've been preaching patience all along, even Cousins for being a head case. But the only non-trade that has irked me is Butler. This is a guy who is a top-10 player in the league (criminally underrated by some on this board IMO) - he's like an Avery Bradley except with size and a complete offensive game. Minnesota got him for the equivalent of Avery Bradley, Jaylen Brown and one of Rozier / Smart. If we had done that trade I think we're a >60 win team and have a real chance at beating Cleveland (assuming IT health).

I know we're after PG. Maybe that's the right move at a far cheaper price to account for the contract being worse and him being an inferior player. Maybe patience is the right move too, and some day KAT or AD or Westbrook or another young megastud will be available. But, again I'm kinda surprised they didn't go for Butler who seemingly wouldn't have cost a king's ransom, is in the next tier just below the megastuds, and would have left ample assets in the warchest. Or maybe there's a plausible explanation like that Chicago's FO is in disarray and/or irrationally didn't want to trade him in-conference b/c they thought they could compete with us in the next 3-5 years.

lexrageorge · Jun 23, 2017

Grin&MartyBarret said:
My critique has nothing to do with whether Fultz is LeBron or not, though as Bowiac pointed out, the #1 pick has a much higher chance of being elite than the number 3.

My bigger concern is that Ainge is overvaluing his assets -- both picks and young players -- and that when the music stops in a couple of years, the Celtics are going to be a solid team that's not a real contender. Jaylen Brown's been driven off the lot; he had a surprisingly good rookie year by being like the 6th best (this is a guess, but bet it's close) guy in his class. As an asset, he'll have to see a substantial improvement in year two if he's going to be the centerpiece of any big deals.

Tatum feels like a solid B to me. Nice enough player, but with Crowder, Brown, And potentially Hayward how much growth can reasonably expected out of him?

And now the C's are left waiting and hoping the Nets pick next year is their savior. And if it ends up at 3, what then? What if Luca Doncic is really, really good but that just means he's Danilo Gallinari that stays healthy? Or a year in college exposes Porter or whoever else is meant to make next year's class so great.

People here keep saying "this is about being good in 3 years when the Warriors are declining", but right now, I have trouble seeing how this team's significantly better in three or for years. IT will be gone, Bradley will be gone, Horford will be gone, even Hayward, if they sign him, will be 31.

They don't have a young player to build around. Their picks thus far have netted role players, yet they've been unwilling to include those picks and role players in deals for a guy to build around. Put it this way: people here balked at including Zizic and Brown in a deal for Porzingis. Jaylen Brown and Ante Zizic.

I worry the options are drying up for Ainge. What's the path to getting the guy who makes them a contender I 3-4 years? How will they be better than Minnesota, Milwaukee, Philly, Denver, etc? They're setting themselves up to compete when Golden State's not reigning champs, but in terms of actual talent, there are a lot of teams who look better suited to do that than Boston.

For the record, the asking price for Porzingis was far more than just Jaylen Brown and Zizic; it was also this year's #3 and next year's Nets pick. And Jae Crowder.

I still think some folks here are underrating Brown's growth potential. His ceiling could well be higher than any of his fellow draftees.

sezwho · Jun 23, 2017

One of the things which makes Ainge's run of rebuilding this team even more impressive is that the massive salary cap increase suddenly decreased the value of his draft pick horde for a season or two. Controlled price assets were worth less (please note I didn't say worthless) and all the excess cap space meant this last Lakers-style dumping of a top three draft pick just to dump Mozgov along with it (yes, I like Lopez but don't think he moved the needle) had stopped...but now the exact opposite happened. The cap is now lower then expected and the price for expensive players like Butler went down. I want to turn this newly enhanced value pick-pile into PG and will be quite bummed if they don't.

ALiveH · Jun 23, 2017

but arguably new CBA increased value of high draft picks because the incumbent team is at a bigger advantage than before in keeping their studs.

Buster Olney the Lonely · Jun 23, 2017

Grin&MartyBarret said:
They don't have a young player to build around. Their picks thus far have netted role players, yet they've been unwilling to include those picks and role players in deals for a guy to build around. Put it this way: people here balked at including Zizic and Brown in a deal for Porzingis. Jaylen Brown and Ante Zizic.

You might be 100% correct. Jaylen Brown hits his ceiling and is Jason Richardson. Tatum is not Paul Pierce or Carmelo Anthony, but the next TJ Warren. Nice players who don't move the needle. And that the next ascendant team is Milwaukee or Minnesota. Hard not to like what you see there.

Two things:
1. Elite talent get traded for a package of these types of players all the time. Last night Jimmy Butler, who I think we all agree is an elite player, netted what? Zach Lavine and Kris Dunn? And the right to draft Lauri Markkanen? Kevin Garnett, one of the best big men in the last 20 years, yielded Al Jefferson, Ryan Gomes, Sebastian Telfair and a few other players who aren't worth mentioning. The Lakers traded Shaq for Caron Butler, Brian Grant and Lamar Odom. Yeah it's frustrating that he didn't pull the trigger last night on a Butler trade. Or last deadline, he didn't get Boogie Cousins. But the fact that he did the Garnett trade (and Ray Allen trade) signals to me that he knows how this works.
2. We don't actually know what was discussed for Porzingis, do we? Maybe Phil was trying to work Noah's horrendous contract into a deal and Ainge wouldn't bite. The fact that people here didn't want to include Brown or Zizic in a trade is irrelevant, unless Ainge is a poster here. I don't believe he is.

The more interesting question is why is Phil shopping a 21-year-old seven-footer who should be the cornerstone of any franchise? Because he blew off an exit interview? If that's the case the other GMs should just be patient. Because maybe next year Porzingis does something really awful like insults Phil in a tweet (I don't even know if he tweets) or refuses to read Phil's book recommendation (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance? The Dharma Bums?) . Then maybe Porzingis' trade value is less than what it is now and that's when Ainge pounces!

Draft day musing on Danny Ainge

Member

New Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak

Member

Member

Member

Member

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak

Member

Member

Member

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak

Member

Member

Member

Member

tolerates intolerance

Member

Well-Known Member

bet squelcher

Member

Homeland Security

Member

Member

Member

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak

Well-Known Member

Member

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak

Member

bet squelcher

bet squelcher

simpering whimperer

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member