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.