2015 NBA Draft Thread-Choke For Oak?

[Nick Kaufman]

Regardless of what incentives the forthcoming sale provides, the Nets don't have an incentive to be bad, because they don't have any picks. They do have an incentive to be as good as they can, because what else are they going to do?

The question is their capability to do so IMO.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Regardless of what incentives the forthcoming sale provides, the Nets don't have an incentive to be bad, because they don't have any picks. They do have an incentive to be as good as they can, because what else are they going to do?
The question is their capability to do so IMO.

That's the thing.....they DON'T have incentive to be good if good requires investing additional capital into the product. As I've mentioned they actively looked to reduce salary last trade deadline and now have an entire summer to continue attempting this goal. Good/Bad isn't the priority to a lame duck owner and the beauty of this for Celtics fans is that this uncertainty manifests down through the entire organization.

 

[zenter]

That's the thing.....they DON'T have incentive to be good if good requires investing additional capital into the product.

Good/Bad isn't the priority to a lame duck owner and the beauty of this for Celtics fans is that this uncertainty manifests down through the entire organization.

So, if W-L doesn't matter and this is mainly a monstrous land deal... Why does a couple years of relatively minor payroll liability matter so much?

The team has no incentive to be bad like the Sixers. They have no incentive to spend beyond the tax line like the Clippers. You agree with both of these. There's no reason any GM would want to hand a division competitor a top-5 pick. That all means: aim to get below tax line, field middling team for 1-2 years, go for Durant.

 

[EL Jeffe]

If WCS or maybe Henzonja are there at #9, sure - by all means put a package together. But if it's to move up for Johnson (who I like), Booker (who I hate) or Turner (full of risk), then why bother? I'd just as soon stay put and roll the dice on volume picks. I think Hunter is better than Booker anyway and if I'm taking a risky big, I'd take Upshaw (plus the extra rolls of the dice) over Turner.

 

[chilidawg]

If WCS or maybe Henzonja are there at #9, sure - by all means put a package together. But if it's to move up for Johnson (who I like), Booker (who I hate) or Turner (full of risk), then why bother? I'd just as soon stay put and roll the dice on volume picks. I think Hunter is better than Booker anyway and if I'm taking a risky big, I'd take Upshaw (plus the extra rolls of the dice) over Turner.

This.

 

[Auger34]

I think this is definitely an 8 person draft, so unless a team overdrafts someone (maybe Dekker to DET/Payne or someone of that ilk going earlier than expected) I would not spend heavy resources to move up.
However, I think people here are underselling Myles Turner a good amount and he seems like a perfect Danny pick (really highly rated HS recruit, stalled out in college due to questionable coaching and not great teammates).
Turner could be a prototype for the "pace and space" league. A rim protector (7'5 wingspan I believe) who can defend the PnR and also have the ability to knock down 3's on offense. Would be a great fit with what President Stevens is running on offense

 

[nighthob]

If WCS or maybe Henzonja are there at #9, sure - by all means put a package together. But if it's to move up for Johnson (who I like), Booker (who I hate) or Turner (full of risk), then why bother? I'd just as soon stay put and roll the dice on volume picks. I think Hunter is better than Booker anyway and if I'm taking a risky big, I'd take Upshaw (plus the extra rolls of the dice) over Turner.

Upshaw is a seven footer with heart problems that got kicked out college basketball's version of Florida. Just say no.

 

[moondog80]

Upshaw is a seven footer with heart problems that got kicked out college basketball's version of Florida. Just say no.

A seven footer who is an elite shot blocker with a college PER that was through the roof (30.05).  Of course there are issues, otherwise he'd be a high lottery pick.  Most mocks have him available at 28 or 33, I'll be pissed if they pass on him.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

A seven footer who is an elite shot blocker with a college PER that was through the roof (30.05).  Of course there are issues, otherwise he'd be a high lottery pick.  Most mocks have him available at 28 or 33, I'll be pissed if they pass on him.

He's been shut down by a heart issue and may never play again. He was a risk due to his drug issues prior to this......now he's maybe a mid-2nd type of flier at best and I'm on who loves his skillset.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

So, if W-L doesn't matter and this is mainly a monstrous land deal... Why does a couple years of relatively minor payroll liability matter so much?

The team has no incentive to be bad like the Sixers. They have no incentive to spend beyond the tax line like the Clippers. You agree with both of these. There's no reason any GM would want to hand a division competitor a top-5 pick. That all means: aim to get below tax line, field middling team for 1-2 years, go for Durant.

The GM isn't calling the shots, the lame duck owner who doesn't care about handing a division competitor a lottery pick that could turn into something down the road is. The don't have to be Sixers-bad to land a Top-5 pick and they are already a lottery team so ditching their talent isn't likely to result in a middling team since that is what they are WITH the talent they currently have.

 

[moondog80]

He's been shut down by a heart issue and may never play again. He was a risk due to his drug issues prior to this......now he's maybe a mid-2nd type of flier at best and I'm on who loves his skillset.

  
"Never play again" seems like a stretch, I haven't seen anyone speculate that.  And the drug issues...if it's just that he's a 21 year old who smoked pot, I don't care.
 
Chad Ford has the Celtics picking him 33rd in his latest mock, released yesterday.  And if they pick him, the most likely scenario is that he's a bust.  Which is fine, because it's the 33rd pick.  What are the chances of getting even a solid rotation guy?  10%?  And the C's, with their roster and bevy of picks, they don't need a solid rotation guy, they need to swing for the fences.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

  
"Never play again" seems like a stretch, I haven't seen anyone speculate that.  And the drug issues...if it's just that he's a 21 year old who smoked pot, I don't care.
 
Chad Ford has the Celtics picking him 33rd in his latest mock, released yesterday.  And if they pick him, the most likely scenario is that he's a bust.  Which is fine, because it's the 33rd pick.  What are the chances of getting even a solid rotation guy?  10%?  And the C's, with their roster and bevy of picks, they don't need a solid rotation guy, they need to swing for the fences.

I was the first poster I recall who was on the Upshaw bandwagon back in Feb/March so I'm well aware of his upside. Everything I've heard including from Ford was that Upshaw's issues are much greater than "smoked a little pot"......he tweeted back in May:

Chad Ford 1:50 PM ET
Might be the best rim protector in the draft. A lottery talent. But the off-the-court issues are serious. More serious than teams initially thought. Everyone is pulling for him to get his life turned around, but I think there are some serious reservations from NBA teams about drafting him in the first round.


....and No, it is not a stretch to say a guy will never play again once he's shut down with heart issues. We've seen this many many times....Fred Hoiberg, Cuttino Mobley, Isaiah Austin, the kid from Georgetown Tyler Adams, Purdue's Jay Simpson last year. It is not uncommon for heart issues to end basketball careers of young players. The kid had a ton to overcome even before this latest development.

 

[moondog80]

I was the first poster I recall who was on the Upshaw bandwagon back in Feb/March so I'm well aware of his upside. Everything I've heard including from Ford was that Upshaw's issues are much greater than "smoked a little pot"......he tweeted back in May:

Chad Ford 1:50 PM ET
Might be the best rim protector in the draft. A lottery talent. But the off-the-court issues are serious. More serious than teams initially thought. Everyone is pulling for him to get his life turned around, but I think there are some serious reservations from NBA teams about drafting him in the first round.


....and No, it is not a stretch to say a guy will never play again once he's shut down with heart issues. We've seen this many many times....Fred Hoiberg, Cuttino Mobley, Isaiah Austin, the kid from Georgetown Tyler Adams, Purdue's Jay Simpson last year. It is not uncommon for heart issues to end basketball careers of young players. The kid had a ton to overcome even before this latest development.

 
 
But surely there are many situations where heart issues have not ended a players' career.
 
I get that there are red flags.  That's why he'll probably be available.  But what's the downside?  Passing on a kid who has a 10% chance to be Jae Crowder?

 

[nighthob]

Or a 10% chance to be a quality NBA swingman (Connaughton), or a 10% chance to be smallball 4 (Alexander), or a 10% chance of being Willie Cauley-Stein (Wood), or a 10% chance of being a starting SG (Vaughn). Upshaw isn't going to be the only lottery ticket. Given that he was expelled from a school that pretty much never expels basketball players for any reason, the drug problems, and the heart problems, it's best to just let someone else waste the pick in hopes that doctors can fix the heart issues.

 

[ElcaballitoMVP]

I'm on the fence with trading up, esp if it's to #9. If they just have to give up something like 16, 28 and 45, I can get behind that. But I don't want to give up a James Young or a promising future 1st to do it. 
 
WCS would be a nice target, but I doubt he's on the board at 9. Hezonja and Justice would be two other guys I'd target at 9, but again I don't know that they'll be there. 
 
If they stay at 16, I like Turner and Bobby Portis. While both are PF's, I think both can be upgrades over Sully/Olynyk and allows Danny to move one in another deal. And an off-the-radar guy I think Danny might like is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson. He's getting some late buzz for his defensive versatility. I don't know that he will shoot well enough to be a starter, but he'd add another lock down defender to the rotation. While a Smart, Bradley, RHJ trio wouldn't be able to score, they'd give opposing back courts fits on the defensive end. He's a bit of a reach at 16, but he can come in and fill a role right away. 

 

[04101Seadog]

I'm with Elcab with being on the fence. It depends on who is there and what it will take to get up there. If WCS, Winslow, or Hezonja are still there I think the C's wont be the only ones trying to move up and therefore the price is going to be steep. That being said any of those three would be a leap in the right direction. Upshaw has been cleared to play again, so the heart problem may not be a huge issue - the thing is though how much of the info coming out is coming from teams that might want to knock him out of even the second round just to pick him up as a FA? He's got a ton of question marks, and is a major kuncklehead but with all the picks we have I agree it's better to swing for the fences on him rather than to stash a euro. 

 

[nighthob]

One piece of information that isn't traceable to NBA teams is the expulsion from Fresno State. Nor the drug problems, since he's already done a rehab stint. Nor that it ain't just a pot problem, because pot doesn't effect your heart (well, aside from long term junkfood eating) and Fresno State doesn't expel for sparkin' doobies.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I'm with Elcab with being on the fence. It depends on who is there and what it will take to get up there. If WCS, Winslow, or Hezonja are still there I think the C's wont be the only ones trying to move up and therefore the price is going to be steep. That being said any of those three would be a leap in the right direction. Upshaw has been cleared to play again, so the heart problem may not be a huge issue - the thing is though how much of the info coming out is coming from teams that might want to knock him out of even the second round just to pick him up as a FA? He's got a ton of question marks, and is a major kuncklehead but with all the picks we have I agree it's better to swing for the fences on him rather than to stash a euro. 

It's the 3rd time he's been shut down due to his heart, apparently had continued drug issues following the first two and we are an organization that went through Len and Reggie. I love his skillset but no longer sure this is the best use of our resources.

It's a shame we had to lose 5 slots in this draft for the joy of being swept in the first round. We don't have many assets willing to give up to move into the Top-9.....16 + 28 doesn't figure to do it.

 

[nighthob]

It's a shame we had to lose 5 slots in this draft for the joy of being swept in the first round. We don't have many assets willing to give up to move into the Top-9.....16 + 28 doesn't figure to do it.

I thought Detroit and Charlotte were Boston's two best shots at moving up, but their recent trades lead me to think they're staying put and Boston's more or less screwed here. If Oubre or Turner doesn't make it until 16, then I'd prefer to see them cash the pick in with Charlotte for a future first (for letting them take Hunter) or maybe to Philly if there's someone that they love at #16.

 

[Cellar-Door]

I'm less and less enamored of Upshaw than I was, and I didn't start out a big fan.
Sure, a few guys have played after heart concerns, and sure some guys have come back from drug problems.
How many came back from both?
Writing off his drug issues as a 21 year old liking to smoke pot is really really underselling it. He got kicked out of two programs, one of which is pretty notorious for bad behavior. He clearly has significant issues.
Beyond that... I'm not sure how good he really is.
His offensive game is non-existant, and his entire value is defense. He also had a massive jump in blocks this year which is what drove his value, but there are concerns about that as well. He played exclusively zone, he played only 19 games which included all of the soft warmup games on UW's schedule.
He had a few impressive games (6 BLKS v Utah), but a large proportion of his block came against teams with nothing close to an NBA talent. (San Jose St, Seattle, South Carolina St., Eastern Washington, Tulane, Grambling, Stony Brook, Long Beach St.) bulking up on blocks against teams that mostly max out at 6'7"-6'8", while in a zone, isn't impressive enough to me to counteract health red flags, personal issues, work ethic concerns, and a guy who got booted from 2 programs when it takes being a serious fuckup to get booted from even one if you can play.

 

[amfox1]

So, what do we think the value of 16+28 is? 13 or 14?

 
Two years ago, (1) #9 was traded for #14 and #21, (2) #13 was traded for #16 and 2 second round picks and (3) #16 was traded for #18 and #44.
 
Last year, (1) #11 and a player were traded for #16, #19 and a second round pick, and (2) #10 was traded for #12, a second round pick and a future first round pick (crazy).
 
I'm thinking that #16 and #28 can move BOS up 2-4 spots only, and I'm not sure I see OKC or ATL trading their picks.  

 

[nighthob]

In fairness the 2013 draft was a disaster starting from pick #1. So it's hard to compare pick values in a pool like that (where teams evaluate everything as a crap shoot) with a normal year. The 2014 guidelines are probably more realistic.

 

[TheDeuce222]

Question for anyone who knows: can we protect the Brooklyn picks if we want to trade them?  Normally, I would think we could, but normally the way protections work is that if a pick doesn't convey in one year, then it should convey in the next year or eventually with two seconds or something like that.  But when you're getting a pick conditionally from another team, it is a little more complicated.  
 
So, for instance, could we trade 16, 28, and 33 plus the Brooklyn pick protected for the top 5 next year to New York for the 4 pick?  My guess is it wouldn't be legal to just say, if it is top 5 in 2016, the Celtics keep it and the Knicks get nothing.  Perhaps we could promise to give them the highest first round pick we have next year that is outside of the top 5.  

 

[amfox1]

Question for anyone who knows: can we protect the Brooklyn picks if we want to trade them?  Normally, I would think we could, but normally the way protections work is that if a pick doesn't convey in one year, then it should convey in the next year or eventually with two seconds or something like that.  But when you're getting a pick conditionally from another team, it is a little more complicated.  
 
So, for instance, could we trade 16, 28, and 33 plus the Brooklyn pick protected for the top 5 next year to New York for the 4 pick?  My guess is it wouldn't be legal to just say, if it is top 5 in 2016, the Celtics keep it and the Knicks get nothing.  Perhaps we could promise to give them the highest first round pick we have next year that is outside of the top 5.  

 
Yes, because the Brooklyn pick is unprotected, Boston can protect it if the pick is traded to another team.

 

[zenter]

Question for anyone who knows: can we protect the Brooklyn picks if we want to trade them?  Normally, I would think we could, but normally the way protections work is that if a pick doesn't convey in one year, then it should convey in the next year or eventually with two seconds or something like that.  But when you're getting a pick conditionally from another team, it is a little more complicated.  
 
So, for instance, could we trade 16, 28, and 33 plus the Brooklyn pick protected for the top 5 next year to New York for the 4 pick?  My guess is it wouldn't be legal to just say, if it is top 5 in 2016, the Celtics keep it and the Knicks get nothing.  Perhaps we could promise to give them the highest first round pick we have next year that is outside of the top 5.  

 

 
Yes, because the Brooklyn pick is unprotected, Boston can protect it if the pick is traded to another team.

 
Yup. In fact, no need to specify which pick they get, giving both teams less uncertainty. Is the below too homer-y?
 
BOS Sends: 16 + 28 + 33 + best of 2016 picks (top-6 protected)
NYK Sends: 4 + 2017 2nd Rd
 
 

So, what do we think the value of 16+28 is? 13 or 14?

 
Trade value? Yeah. Which overvalues picks somewhat.
 
Most things I've read peg 16+28 between 6 and 9 in terms of on-court (or production/$) value. For instance (scroll about halfway down to the relative value chart)...
 
That said, the virtue of fewer bodies producing X might push that down to 11-14.

 

[mcpickl]

So, what do we think the value of 16+28 is? 13 or 14?

 
That's about right. Can't imagine it gets you higher than 13. I wouldn't do it if I were Boston. I'd rather take the two shots.

 
 
Yup. In fact, no need to specify which pick they get, giving both teams less uncertainty. Is the below too homer-y?
 
BOS Sends: 16 + 28 + 33 + best of 2016 picks (top-6 protected)
NYK Sends: 4 + 2017 2nd Rd
 
 
 

Way too homer-y in my opinion.
 
Even if next years' pick was guaranteed to be the best case scenario of pick #7, I don't think the Knicks do it.
 
After the season the Knicks just went through, they can't deal down from #4 for a package of middling picks.
 
Imagine if after the year the Celtics went through last year, and Ainge traded down from #6 for three lower picks and a future pick guaranteed to be lower than the one he just gave up. We'd riot.

 

[zenter]

 
That's about right. Can't imagine it gets you higher than 13. I wouldn't do it if I were Boston. I'd rather take the two shots.
Way too homer-y in my opinion.
 
Even if next years' pick was guaranteed to be the best case scenario of pick #7, I don't think the Knicks do it.
 
After the season the Knicks just went through, they can't deal down from #4 for a package of middling picks.
 
Imagine if after the year the Celtics went through last year, and Ainge traded down from #6 for three lower picks and a future pick guaranteed to be lower than the one he just gave up. We'd riot.

 
Oh, right. Pre-edit, I was thinking Charlotte's 9th pick, but then thought "hey, that wasn't what this guy was asking" and didn't update the C's side of the trade...
 
BOS Sends: 16 + 28 + 33 + best of 2016 picks (top-6 protected)
CHA Sends: 9 + 2017 2nd Rd
 
Yikes.

 

[bowiac]

538 posted their projections. They basically match other statistical methods, but are easier to parse than others. D'Angelo Russell is the most interesting player in the draft as a big boom/bust guy.

 

[Cellar-Door]

538 posted their projections. They basically match other statistical methods, but are easier to parse than others. D'Angelo Russell is the most interesting player in the draft as a big boom/bust guy.

The model loves it some Dakari Johnson, Christian Wood and Cliff Alexander all projected 2nd rounders.
Also interesting that it really doesn't like Upshaw even without really taking into account his red flags (It might slightly in that it cares what school you played at, but that probably helps him since he got kicked out of a Mountain West school and upgraded to PAC-12.

 

[jmm57]

Kind of disappointing to not even mention Mudiay. Impossible to use their metric, but I would have expected something in the writeup

 

[Vegas Sox Fan]

Most mocks I've seen have Vaughn ahead of Wood and even have Wood falling out of the first. I think he would be a huge get as a project to take in the second.

 

[bowiac]

The model loves it some Dakari Johnson, Christian Wood and Cliff Alexander all projected 2nd rounders.
Also interesting that it really doesn't like Upshaw even without really taking into account his red flags (It might slightly in that it cares what school you played at, but that probably helps him since he got kicked out of a Mountain West school and upgraded to PAC-12.

It's a bit simplistic, but it's not terribly far off to say that most players that statistical models like less than consensus have poor steal rates. Upshaw's steal rate is pretty poor.
 
I don't know the details of the 538 model (I usually use Layne Vashro's stuff over at Nylon Calculus), so maybe that's not exactly what's going on here however.

 

[Cellar-Door]

It's a bit simplistic, but it's not terribly far off to say that most players that statistical models like less than consensus have poor steal rates. Upshaw's steal rate is pretty poor.
 
I don't know the details of the 538 model (I usually use Layne Vashro's stuff over at Nylon Calculus), so maybe that's not exactly what's going on here however.

It's probably a bunch of things. Looking at the list in the article of some of the things they look at he's not very good at most of them. He's pretty good in terms of usage and eFG%, his STL% isn't great, his AST% is bad even for a C, his ORB% isn't very good for a C, and he gets hurt a lot I would guess by the schedule adjustment since he played mostly cupcakes.
Though their model likes him more than Vashro's.

 

[RedOctober3829]

If Jahlil Okafor is available at No. 4, the New York Knicks will take him.  If Okafor is gone, somebody is going to take the No. 4 pick from the Knicks.  This is the intel I am hearing from points near and far as we count down the days to the 2015 NBA Draft. Phil Jackson has a bare cupboard when it comes to future draft picks, and he is inclined to trade down in exchange for multiple picks in this year’s draft and in future drafts.  How bare is the Knicks’ cupboard?  They do not have a second-round pick in 2015, nor in 2016 or 2018.  They do not have a first-round pick in 2016, having sent it to the Toronto Raptors for Andrea Bargnani.
So WWPD — What Will Phil Do?
 
The educated guess here is that he will go back and forth with Sam Hinkie of Philadelphia and Danny Ainge of Boston in an effort to restock the cupboard.
The Celtics have picks 16, 28, 33 and 45 in this year’s draft, along with the rights to Brooklyn’s No. 1 picks in 2016, 2017 (right to swap) and 2018. They also have the Mavericks’ first-round pick in 2016, the Mavericks’ first-round pick in 2016 (protected 1-7), the Timberwolves first-round pick in 2016 (protected 1-12), and the Grizlies’ first-round pick in 2018 (protected 1-12).
The 76ers have picks 3, 35, 37, 47, 58 and 60 in this year’s draft. They also own the rights to four first-round picks next year: Their own, the Lakers’ (protected 1-3), the Heat’s (protected 1-10), the Thunder’s (protected 1-15), along with nine second-round picks from other teams between 2016 and 2020.
Both Ainge and Hinkie can load up Phil’s wheelbarrow and restock his cupboard if that is what Jackson chooses to do. At this point, I would say it is more likely than not that Jackson trades the No. 4 pick before the draft.
 

 http://www.sheridanhoops.com/2015/06/19/podcast-knicks-likely-to-trade-no-4-pick/#yKk8s0WqWKsSKKLu.99

 

[amfox1]

Let's assume Sheridan's report is true, and let's assume that Towns, Okafor and Russell are off the board at #4.
 
Who do we want and what are we willing to give up to get him?

 

[nighthob]

Cauley-Stein or Porzingas, I'd guess. I just wouldn't want to get into a bidding war with Philly over them because even if you win you lose.

 

[amfox1]

Rumors are that PHI will take Porzingis, rather than Russell, at 3.  Obviously, it could be a smokescreen.  Wonder if (a) NYK makes a trade if Russell is still on the board and (b) PHI would be interested in trading for 4 in any event.
 
Seems to me that BOS can put a better trade package together than PHI because BOS can trade first rounders this year and next and PHI cannot do that.  Seems to me that a BOS package of 16, 28, 45 and a first and a second in 2016 would be better than a PHI package of 35, 37, two firsts and a second in 2016.  I would want to keep 33 in a potential trade.

 

[nighthob]

Philly wouldn't have a problem picking up first rounders this year. Heck, if I'm the Celtics I'd gladly give them 16/28 for the LA #1   :q:

 

[ElcaballitoMVP]

Rumors are that PHI will take Porzingis, rather than Russell, at 3.  Obviously, it could be a smokescreen.  Wonder if (a) NYK makes a trade if Russell is still on the board and (b) PHI would be interested in trading for 4 in any event.
 
Seems to me that BOS can put a better trade package together than PHI because BOS can trade first rounders this year and next and PHI cannot do that.  Seems to me that a BOS package of 16, 28, 45 and a first and a second in 2016 would be better than a PHI package of 35, 37, two firsts and a second in 2016.  I would want to keep 33 in a potential trade.

 
I don't know. If you could get Philly to give up their '16 first and the one owed to them by the Lakers next year (top 3 protected), I'd take that over 16, 28 and say BKL's 2016 1st.  

 

[moly99]

I can't believe the Knicks are that dumb. Who the F gives up a top 5 pick for a bunch of late lottery picks? A big stack of young roleplayers isn't going to fix that team.

 

[FredCDobbs]

Why do I have a sinking feeling we'll get Dekker at 16 and it will feel utterly underwhelming.

 

[FredCDobbs]

I think Danny is having Gordon Hayward flashbacks.

 

[ifmanis5]

Knicks are active in the rumor mill. Some reports have them trading their pick for Eric Bledsoe. Chris Sheridan thinks a deal with Boston is a possibility.
 
LINK: http://www.sheridanhoops.com/2015/06/19/podcast-knicks-likely-to-trade-no-4-pick/

 

[Devizier]

What do the Celtics have to offer for the Knicks? Bradley, Sullinger, Thomas and picks? That would make me vomit if I were a Knicks fan.

 

[Steve Dillard]

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/20/report-lakers-celtics-looking-to-trade-out-of-late-first-round-picks-in-nba-draft/

Celts looking to trade later first round pick due to guaranteed contract

 

[JCizzle]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/06/20/celtics-did-their-homework-before-drafting-marcus-smart/QQD84kt35xUb4YZ4vhNM4M/story.html

Good read from Adam Himmelsbach about the draft process for Smart. Didn't realize they had such a small scouting team.

 

[ifmanis5]

RealGM has a report that says Celtics want to move up for Texas' rim protector Myles Turner. Makes sense to me.

 

[swingin val]

stretch 4 that can defend? sign me up

 

[EL Jeffe]

Turner runs and jumps like (post injuries) Sam Bowie or Bill Walton. He's a below the rim 7' dude who blocks shots on length, not on explosiveness; I don't think that will play up in the NBA. He can shoot the hell out of the ball, but so can Olynyk. I'd be pretty bummed if they gave up real assets to go get Turner.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Turner runs and jumps like (post injuries) Sam Bowie or Bill Walton. He's a below the rim 7' dude who blocks shots on length, not on explosiveness; I don't think that will play up in the NBA. He can shoot the hell out of the ball, but so can Olynyk. I'd be pretty bummed if they gave up real assets to go get Turner.

Define "real assets." 16th isn't super valuable and 28th is almost a hindrance with a couple years guaranteed money for a player who is almost guaranteed to not make it. Ainge isn't going to give up future potential lottery picks in the Brooklyn, Dallas, or even our own pick next year for Myles Turner. Everybody is talking right now and Ainge likely will have 6-7 contingency plans on Thursday night based on who is selected where. If Turner is available at 12-13 then yeah maybe do a little something to climb but I agree that Turner is just outside of my 8-9 "Can't miss" guys.....but then again I'm one of the few I've heard who loves this draft (just not where we are picking).