This is where I am at too, except that I'm not wild about Vonleh either. I would really be devastating if the C's don't land in the top 6.EL Jeffe said:
2014 NBA Draft Thread (No Spoilers You Clowns)
- Thread starter ZMart100
- Start date
Yeah, Vonleh has a nice 7-4 wingspan and big hands, but he only stands 6-8. He's just another power forward, plus he's not much of a passer. That's a liability in Stevens' motion offense.MillarTime said:
There is a drop off after #6, no question.
I want no part of Randle. I think his best comp as an NBA player is Tyler Hansbrough. They put on similar numbers as freshman in college, are basically the same size with same wingspan and have very similar games. Neither has any real post moves to speak of and neither can efficiently knock down mid-range jumpers. Instead, they relied on strength, and to a lesser degree quickness to get their points against over matched college defenders. When they have to play against length, as they will every night in the league, they struggle.
Eh. Hansbrough and Randle measure out similarly in length, but the biggest difference is Psycho T was a maxed out 234lbs coming out as a senior while Randle is already 250lbs as a frosh. Randle has much better functional strength and he's more powerful than Hansbrough ever was. He also has a much better first step.Swedgin said:
The jury is very much out how Randle will do against length - he struggled at times in college getting his shot blocked or altered and obviously he'll be playing against length every night in the league. However, like Z-Bo, I think he'll figure it out. Ultimately I think Randle will be a better player in the pros when he gets to play with a real point guard and his team is running set plays as opposed to playing with a bunch of McDonald's All American freshmen and sophs all out there focused on trying to help their draft stock.
EL Jeffe said:
Hansbrough was a much better defender than Randle, though. Which is to say that almost everybody is better defensively than Randle.
http://deanondraft.com/2014/04/25/visibility-bias-and-julius-randles-defense/comment-page-1/
I think Randle will be better than Hansbrough, but "better than Tyler Hansbrough" doesn't equate to being a top 5 pick.
I'll concede that Randle is stronger and somewhat more athletic than Hansbrough and as a result will have a slightly better career than good ol' Pyscho. But I think Randle ends up having a career much more akin to Pyscho than Z-Bo.EL Jeffe said:
The Z-Bo comp does not hold for a couple of reasons. First, Z-Bo has the length that Randle lacks. The interwebs put Randolph's wingspan at 7-4 to 7-5. Second, Randolph has always been a gifted post scorer. His scouting report from his draft describes him as having "as great hands and good post footwork able to hold position on the blocks and back down his defender ... Runs the floor well for someone his size ... Soft shooting touch around the basket uses a number of spins and drop steps to score ... Active on the boards can pull down rebounds out of position thanks to his good reach ... Plays good positional defense due to his great lateral quickness and wide body ."
It is also worth considering the direction in which the league is moving offensively. Much like the mid-range game, post ups are relatively inefficient scoring options. That is not to say that there is not room for elite post scorers. Just like elite mid-range shooters (i.e. Lamarcus and Dirk) still have a place, so to do special post scorers like Big Al, Z-Bo and increasingly Lebron. But if you are a league average post player, you are worth a lot less now than in the 90's.
i'm more bullish on randle than you guys. He had a 7' wingspan at the draft combine. He actually measured a fraction of an inch taller with fraction of an inch longer wingspan than kevin love. His 36" vertical is also just fine for an NBA 4.
Caveat: I share the same concerns on defense / rim protection, block/steal rate and "bully ball" style.
I saw him play several times and thought for his age and position, he had good combo of quickness/strength, very good ballhandling and good-looking mid-range jumper (which scouts list as a strength). The stats say he was not a good low-post scorer, but to my eyes his low post moves looked advanced for his age, so I have some hope those can develop.
None of these guys are finished products and all have their obvious weaknesses. I've done a ton of reading & seen a lot of tape & game action on these guys. This is actually a very tough decision for me within 1-3, 4-7 and 8-30. That's why the scouts get paid the big bucks.
I like Brick's thoughts - the euros tend to be boom-bust types which is what I want with the 17 pick (and why i also recommended Levine), also Warren would be a quality NBA scorer. In the lottery I am most intrigued by Vonleh due to his combination of size, length & skills - the knock on him is subpar athleticism, so the question is whether that can be improved. He has the potential to be a star & matchup nightmare at 3 positions 3-4-5.
Caveat: I share the same concerns on defense / rim protection, block/steal rate and "bully ball" style.
I saw him play several times and thought for his age and position, he had good combo of quickness/strength, very good ballhandling and good-looking mid-range jumper (which scouts list as a strength). The stats say he was not a good low-post scorer, but to my eyes his low post moves looked advanced for his age, so I have some hope those can develop.
None of these guys are finished products and all have their obvious weaknesses. I've done a ton of reading & seen a lot of tape & game action on these guys. This is actually a very tough decision for me within 1-3, 4-7 and 8-30. That's why the scouts get paid the big bucks.
I like Brick's thoughts - the euros tend to be boom-bust types which is what I want with the 17 pick (and why i also recommended Levine), also Warren would be a quality NBA scorer. In the lottery I am most intrigued by Vonleh due to his combination of size, length & skills - the knock on him is subpar athleticism, so the question is whether that can be improved. He has the potential to be a star & matchup nightmare at 3 positions 3-4-5.
So the combine numbers are here for anyone who hasn't seen them.
http://stats.nba.com/draftCombineAnthro.html?pageNo=1&rowsPerPage=100&sortField=WINGSPAN&sortOrder=DES
Thoughts so far:
Vonleh can probably play C in the NBA. Height is borderline at 6'9.5" however he has huge hands, massive wingspan, good standing reach, and very good jumping ability.
His lateral quickness was acceptable and his 3/4 court sprint was good.
Aaron Gordon is freak: 6' 8.75" , some of the biggest hands in the class, just under 7' wingspan, top 10 vertical, 7th best lane agility (way ahead of other guys his size), and the best shuttle run regardless of position.
Zach LaVine: Moving up. Second highest vertical, 8th in sprint, 2nd best shuttle, destroyed the competition in lane agility, just under 6'6". Shot well particularly off the dribble.
Dante Exum: Basically slightly worse than Zach LaVine in all athletic categories, but a tiny bit bigger. Like Gordon Didn't shoot.
Randle: 6'9", 7' wingspan, Smallish Hands but not ridiculously so, acceptable but not outstanding in every speed, agility, jumping category. Didn't shoot.
Smart- Didn't shoot, mediocre in every athletic test except standing vertical. Just over 6'3" but a huge wingspan over 6'9", high bodyfat.
http://stats.nba.com/draftCombineAnthro.html?pageNo=1&rowsPerPage=100&sortField=WINGSPAN&sortOrder=DES
Thoughts so far:
Vonleh can probably play C in the NBA. Height is borderline at 6'9.5" however he has huge hands, massive wingspan, good standing reach, and very good jumping ability.
His lateral quickness was acceptable and his 3/4 court sprint was good.
Aaron Gordon is freak: 6' 8.75" , some of the biggest hands in the class, just under 7' wingspan, top 10 vertical, 7th best lane agility (way ahead of other guys his size), and the best shuttle run regardless of position.
Zach LaVine: Moving up. Second highest vertical, 8th in sprint, 2nd best shuttle, destroyed the competition in lane agility, just under 6'6". Shot well particularly off the dribble.
Dante Exum: Basically slightly worse than Zach LaVine in all athletic categories, but a tiny bit bigger. Like Gordon Didn't shoot.
Randle: 6'9", 7' wingspan, Smallish Hands but not ridiculously so, acceptable but not outstanding in every speed, agility, jumping category. Didn't shoot.
Smart- Didn't shoot, mediocre in every athletic test except standing vertical. Just over 6'3" but a huge wingspan over 6'9", high bodyfat.
Cellar-Door said:
Will take your word for it, but having watched him this year, that's interesting to hear. I don't know if he made a pull up jump shot all season. Pretty much all 3s or attempted drives to the basket.
Maybe LaVine has been working hard on his game, and improving on his weaknesses. Of course, there is also the chance he can do things in practice that he can't take into the game.
I'm going off the drill numbers from the combine. I also was surprised. It could be that he has difficulty getting shots up against in game defense which makes a difference.radsoxfan said:
Thanks, but there have been plenty of insightful posts in this thread.riboflav said:
I just hope Ainge kills it on June 26, because they need to find at least one core player in this draft (or via a draft night trade), and preferably two.
Tomorrow is the biggest day for the Celtics in at least a few years. Red needs to pull some strings up there. Can't believe the lottery is already here!
Pagliuca will represent the Celtics at the lottery & wear a tie that Red gave him.
http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/2014/05/steve_pagliuca_will_represent_celtics_at_draft_lottery.html
http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/extras/celtics_blog/2014/05/steve_pagliuca_will_represent_celtics_at_draft_lottery.html
So, what's this year's most popular conspiracy theory? First pick to Milwaukee because of their high selling price? First pick to the Lakers/Celtics because of the size of their markets? First to Orlando to make up for Dwight Howard leaving? Jabari to Salt Lake City to capture the Church of the Ladder Day Saints demo?
Conspiracy theory has to be first pick to the Lakers. It gives Kobe a playmate as he rides off into the sunset, and then someone to seamlessly assume the mantle once he does.
Awesome!ALiveH said:
As a good luck charm, Pagliuca said he’s planning on wearing a tie that Celtics patriarch Red Auerbach gave him in 2002 when a group that included Pagliuca bought the team. It’s an older tie, Pagliuca said, perhaps from the 1950s, and it’s blue with a green stripe. “I think it even has a little leprechaun on it,” he said. Pagliuca said he’s also open to any suggestions.
If Stern was conducting the lottery I would be totally on board with the skeptics for a conspiracy, but with him out of the picture, I think things go down just fine. The Celtics have had probably the worst luck in the lottery of any franchise, so hopefully, the karma gods wake up and deliver something for us.
Why do we continue to take Red Auerbach memorabilia to the lottery?
It hasn't served us very well. Time for a change.
How about sending Bill Russell?
It hasn't served us very well. Time for a change.
How about sending Bill Russell?
I vote we send Pierce and KG. They have brought us good things in the past and the comedic effect of having current Nets players at the lottery for us would be great.
We should then send them again when the Nets are sending us their future lottery picks.
We should then send them again when the Nets are sending us their future lottery picks.
Kliq said:
I dunno, I think Silver is just a Skinny Stern. I'm on board with the conspiracy that the Bucks get #1 and the Lakers get a top 3. I wouldn't attribute the Celtics bad luck in the lottery to actual luck, but to politics or whatever it is. The same reason Stern put the screws to the Celtics on Reggie Lewis' postmortem contract is why the Celtics have gotten nowhere in the lottery.
Joe Forte's oversized Laker jersey complete with 24 lb. gold chain that he once wore on the Celtics bench which was motivation for today's dress code policy?Dan to Theo to Ben said:
So we have the #6 pick.
Seems likely WIggins, Embiid, Parker, Exum will be off the board.
Options will probably be this group:
Smart, Vonleh, Randle, McDermott, Gordon, Saric.
Seems likely WIggins, Embiid, Parker, Exum will be off the board.
Options will probably be this group:
Smart, Vonleh, Randle, McDermott, Gordon, Saric.
I like Gordon, and could be talked into Vonleh. I like Randle as a player, but the fit is poor.
Saric I know almost nothing about, I hate Smart, and while I think McDermott will be a solid pro, I like a gamble on upside at 6.
Saric I know almost nothing about, I hate Smart, and while I think McDermott will be a solid pro, I like a gamble on upside at 6.
Not out of the realm of possibility that Exum is there. Figure some combo of Wiggins, Embiid Parker 1-3. Orlando has long been said to love Smart, and Utah just drafted Burke at the 1 and could lean towards Vonleh/Gordon/Randle.
I want Vonleh at #6, I think he ends up being a good center, but I suspect he'd off the board at Celtics pick.
Gordon would be my second choice, though he's probably not a great fit on a team with Rondo because of the lack of shooting.
I'd be lying if I said I'm familiar enough with either guy to be certain, I think I'll be happy with whoever Ainge grabs. I'm confident he'll get an excellent prospect there.
Gordon would be my second choice, though he's probably not a great fit on a team with Rondo because of the lack of shooting.
I'd be lying if I said I'm familiar enough with either guy to be certain, I think I'll be happy with whoever Ainge grabs. I'm confident he'll get an excellent prospect there.
IF LaVine was there at 17 (his combine performance probably bumped him into the top 15), A Gordon/LaVine draft would be the most high risk high reward ever.
Anyone think stauskaus is out of the realm of possibility? Measured well at the combine and the kid can score. Id take odds he ends up being the best guy in the draft its said and done
Idk that because theres some tiers weve created that u cant take a shot on an athletic wing who can already shoot at 6
I go Marcus Smart because I think his floor is highest. Projects to be elite defender, natural leader who gives a fuck, already plays with a edge. Plenty of time to improve his jump shot.
I can't see it, too many better talents available at 6 and he probably won't be there at 17.southshoresoxfan said:
I'd absolutely bet against him being the best player in this draft.
He can shoot the three well enough that his downside is a specialist and a decent NBA career.
Concerns are whether he brings anything else to the table. Is he a big 2 or a small 3? Can he rebound or defend at the next level?
I also wonder if he can beat his man off the dribble in the NBA.
he wasn't a leader in college, he was a petulant whiner, he has a lot of Melo in his personality.MillarTime said:
Meh. His coaches and teammates loved him. Also remember Billy Donovan saying he was the ultimate leader and winner after he coached him on the US Junior National team.Cellar-Door said:
His performance and behavior said otherwise. He threw tantrums on several occasions, constantly flopped all over the place, and jacked up terrible shots whenever his team was in trouble. I don't doubt he is a competitive guy who practices hard and that gets him a lot of leadership cred, but in the NBA, you're professionals, on court is where it counts.MillarTime said:
I am aware of Smart's flaws and why his stock has slipped a bit since last year. He'd be going in the top 3 if they didn't exist. At #6, when the talent is comparable, I'll take 21 yr old who's coach thinks the below:
http://mweb.cbssports.com/ncaab/eye-on-college-basketball/22794452/easy-to-understand-why-usa-basketball-loves-marcus-smart
"I've never been around another player in my whole life -- not when I was a player and not since I've been a coach -- that is able to bring it EVERY SINGLE DAY," Ford said. "I don't care if it's two-a-days, three-a-days or five-a-days. I don't care if it's 6 a.m. I don't care if it's the day after a big win. It's ridiculous. I knew he was a great leader, but it's even been a shock to me. Everybody, at some point, has a bad day in terms of coming ready to play. But he never takes a day off. He comes everyday to win every drill. Everyday. Every drill. I don't care when it is or what it is. Everyday he's ready. It's ridiculous."
http://mweb.cbssports.com/ncaab/eye-on-college-basketball/22794452/easy-to-understand-why-usa-basketball-loves-marcus-smart
"I've never been around another player in my whole life -- not when I was a player and not since I've been a coach -- that is able to bring it EVERY SINGLE DAY," Ford said. "I don't care if it's two-a-days, three-a-days or five-a-days. I don't care if it's 6 a.m. I don't care if it's the day after a big win. It's ridiculous. I knew he was a great leader, but it's even been a shock to me. Everybody, at some point, has a bad day in terms of coming ready to play. But he never takes a day off. He comes everyday to win every drill. Everyday. Every drill. I don't care when it is or what it is. Everyday he's ready. It's ridiculous."
Not only that but his shot is broken and he doesn't have a position. Ainge wouldn't give a similar player in Tony Allen a 3rd year at cheap money I don't expect him to use the #6 pick on a player who could maybe someday be as productive.Cellar-Door said: