Clarke is a weird one, his combine wingspan measurement really killed him. Before that I was very in on him as a smallball big. He's got a lot of skill, quick twitch athleticism, and with the NBA conditioning, he was looking like a guy who could be 6'8" 230 or so, basically Draymond sized, with a lot of Draymond qualities. He rebuilt his shot completely, and after a rough first month, his FT shooting both looked good and showed good results (73%). If he had a 7ft wingspan he'd be a great pickup. An ideal defensive small 5, who looked like a candidate to develop a 3pt shot. Sadly his wingspan is like 6'9" and that limits his potential.
It’s a frame thing. Hayes looks like he can carry 255-265 pretty easily. Claxton I’m not that sure about. But he’s absolutely more skilled than Hayes. If he had Hayes’ frame he’d be a top 8 pick.
Yeah, I still like him, but he works better with Horford spacing the floor than in a Baynes/Timelord world. He’d look fabulous in Minnesota where KATman exists to space the floor offensively and could use someone like Clarke playing help D in front of him.
I don't think so, especially as Atlanta currently owns 10, and has a TON of picks, and it seems like they are looking to consolidate and move up somewhere, instead
No, especially because MIN reportedly has a deal with Hachimura. ATL is looking to use 8 and 10 to move up and is actively trying to trade their 2nd rounders, so they are also not a candidate. WAS may want to make a deal for additional picks, however, so it is possible that 14 and 20 get you to 9.
I do wonder though, if you're not really contending this year and you think his defense plays in the NBA, why not grab him. His FT% on the rebuilt shot are impressive, and his outside shooting is more a "never shot any" than a "was bad at shooting" lots of current 3pt threat NBA bigs had a similar story in college (including the mentioned KAT, 2-8 vs. Clarke's 4-15). Of course a lot rides on whether you buy his improved FT% was based on the rebuilt shot vs. just a fluke year. One thing about not being a contender and having your 2 long term hopeful contributors as versatile wings, is you don't really need to draft for current fit if you think a guy will fit in 2-3 years.
Yes to all this. Hayes was a blue chip WR prospect before his growth spurt and came to bball on the late side, but he really has some great physical tools. Claxton has a really nice handle, but I don't know how useful that is if it's something he'd rarely be asked to do in the NBA. I do think this draft has a decent number of rotation wings and undersized bigs that could be had later on, but as far as the high end upside projections based on relative youth, body type (room for development) and functional athleticism, there are some guys to get hopeful about within throughout the Celtics' range. In more or less descending order for me:
If Hayes had Claxton’s drive & kick game or shooting potential we’d be calling this a four man draft. But Claxton’s frame is so painfully thin that I’m not sure that he can get much past 240. But worth a gamble at 20/22.
Lecque might be there in the second and represents another home run swing player.
The intrigue is that if he reaches his potential, you may have a poor man’s Damian Lillard on your hands. He has a great handle and his shooting is elite. In today’s NBA, those are incredibly valuable skills.
It’s not terrible to my eyes. He has some shoulders, as opposed to a guy like Jalen McDaniels, who’d I’d have off my board due to frame even ignoring his alleged shitheadery.
Me either. But I've seen enough of Ty Jerome to think that he will be a very good NBA player. Can Garland defend? Perhaps, but I know that Jerome can.
Agreed its nuts but happens every year.
Garland looks really really good to me...…I'm a fan of Coby White as well. You don't need a large sample size to see his skillset translating into a really good NBA point guard just like you didn't need to see a ton of Kyrie back when he was at Duke. . Swapping Jaylen for him frees up Hayward to return to the starting lineup while filling an enormous future need at the 1 is Garland is all he appears to be while also gaining two additional years of a Garland's rookie deal. He's always played against older players growing up including his father, former NBA PG Winston Garland so making the jump to compete against more physically and mentally mature players shouldn't affect Garland as it could other rookies early on in their careers. I like Jaylen but there are a bunch of factors that make a deal for Garland the play here.
This is 2019. There is more AAU tape on players today then there was on most players collegiate careers 30 years ago. Garland has a reputation as a heady defender and tough competitor against elite competition who has the physical tools to be just fine in this area.
They can try all they want. Memphis didn't trade Conley so they could pass on a potential franchise PG to select 4th in what is considered a 3-player draft at the top. What could they possibly offer to make it enticing enough for the Grizzlies to completely shift gears?
It depends what they think the difference between Morant and Garland is, Garland seems to be jumping up in people's estimation at the end here and Memphis could get him as their potential franchise PG at 4th. I'd at least be curious to hear what they offer...
They’d really need to convert that Laker haul into a player that could tempt the Grizz. Unless Chris Wallace likes Lonzo that’s the LA pick package. Or Ingram/#4/LA pick(s) for Barrett with Memphis grabbing Garland instead. I honestly don’t see Morant as a franchise player so I’d probably look at trades more favorably. I think his ceiling’s as a top twentyish player, so I think there’s a package that could induce me to draft a top fiftyish one instead.
This is a fair point. It is just such a daring move that few GM/owners are willing to make in moving down.It depends what they think the difference between Morant and Garland is, Garland seems to be jumping up in people's estimation at the end here and Memphis could get him as their potential franchise PG at 4th. I'd at least be curious to hear what they offer...
That would be a very exciting development for Knicks fans also IMO (lucking into Morant at 3), which is why it will not happen.
Plus he’s played a lot for Team USA and has typically drawn good reviews for his play and how he’s looked in scrimmage against NBA-level talent (Tre Jones can defend) with stat lines from the Hoops Summits to match. Balance, footwork, handles, shake, and shooting off the dribble and off the catch- it’s easy to see what he’d add to the Celtics. My main concern is that “routinely misses basic reads” is frequent criticism of him as a ball-handler, both in his limited time at Vandy and with Team USA. But there’s a lot there for a good coach to work with. Then again, I’d be happy just taking Tremont Waters a round later.
Yeah, unless they have really good intelligence that the Knicks wouldn't take Morant at #3, there's no way that's happening. And even the Knicks FO isn't dumb enough to pass on Morant.
Hard to see Morant dropping from 3 - have to imagine teams looking for a PG (PHO, CHI, ORL...) would try to trade up and grab him, and if the Knicks are not drafting a PG because they signed Kyrie, have to figure they can probably get Hunter or Culver or Reddish at 6-7.
Yeah, although we've seen it twice at the top of the draft the past two years, and it worked out great for the Celtics, and ok for the Hawks (Luka vs Trae got a lot closer as the year went on). Recency bias affects GMs/owners as much as anyone, so it might feel less risky now.
Goga' strengths- rim protection, floor-spacing, screen-setting - would really help the Jays on both sides of the ball. I don't think he's a stash candidate though, as he's typically described as one of the most NBA-ready late lottery picks and he's been successful grown men.
Not really. Ainge never mentioned Fultz by name after winning the lottery and after bringing him in it was obvious he didn't like him which led to Fultz scheduling workouts with other teams. Doncic had plenty of question marks and refused to workout or meet with Atlanta prior to the draft.
Robert Covington is good, and is signed to a team-friendly deal. He was the centerpiece to a trade that brought in Jimmy Butler. Meanwhile, it's the #4 pick in an unusually weak draft, where conventional wisdom is that there's not much difference between #4 and #11 (see for example, the number of draft boards which have Garland ranked anywhere from like 4th to 15th).
Agree to disagree. Covington does nothing for a team with the Pelicans’ time horizon. This may be a 3 player draft but teams always find new love interests close to the draft. Someone will fall in love with Garland, Hunter, etc. I’m not giving that up for Robert Covington.
It's unique in that Garland is a PG and teams in need of a PG generally fall head over heels with the best ones of a draft. Hunter can fit in with pretty much anyone with his skillset but Garland will be the specific target of a select few teams who will prop up his value.
Possible Targets:
Maybe a bit of a reach at 14 but I'd be thrilled with Herro at 20 or 22. I see a lot of JJ Redick in his game and the Celtics need better outside shooting. I like the kid a lot.
Technically five, but the first two were selected for Memphis, and come to fruition when Boston picks at #20 tonight.
Not that they're always correct, but the betting market strongly suggests he won't be there in the 20's.
My book who has these up has Herro U17.5 and you have to lay -270.
Sure why not if nobody objects. Keeping it all in one place is always good. Over the past week we've had several threads that all ran into each other.
