2017 NBA Draft Thread

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,978
Are we talking about if JB would be ranked in this draft if he was a freshman at Cal this year or are we talking about where JB would be drafted if he could magically re-enter the draft this year?

Because if the latter he'd be #2 easy - I mean if he shot 34% from 3 at Cal showing range out to the NBA 3P line, would he have been in the conversation for the #1 pick that year?
Not a chance he would've been in the conversation with Simmons, and I suspect most teams would've still preferred Ingram, who's nearly a year younger. I'm not so sure he'd be #2 over Jackson, even with their age proximity. Shooting was a concern for Jaylen, but there were also concerns that he was turnover prone, plus his general passivity at Cal, and his lack of defensive stats given his athleticism. I don't think teams view him as a potential primary initiator, whereas Jackson, with his excellent vision, has shown that potential. And I would guess that Jackson is still viewed as the superior defensive prospect.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
9,142
Twin Bridges, Mt.
Agreed. For all the talk on here about him being Jimmy Butler 2.0 it remains a higher likelyhood that he's just another guy. It's a pretty deep draft, I'd say he's around 10.
Drocca, take a look at Jaylen's per36 as a 20 yo versus Butler's per36 as a 22 yo. That doesn't mean that Jaylen's going to be better than Butler but Jaylen's per36 numbers compare pretty nicely to Kawhi, Hayward and Paul George's and like Jaylen, they were also 20 yo rookies.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/brownja02.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/butleji01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/leonaka01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/haywago01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/georgpa01.html
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Drocca, take a look at Jaylen's per36 as a 20 yo versus Butler's per36 as a 22 yo. That doesn't mean that Jaylen's going to be better than Butler but Jaylen's per36 numbers compare pretty nicely to Kawhi, Hayward and Paul George's and like Jaylen, they were also 20 yo rookies.
I don't think we should judge Jaylen based on box-score stats based on one year, but his box-score metrics are by far the worst of this set of players other than Butler, who barely played. Look at his BPM (the best single box-score metric available) to see this. Kawhi was immediately a very good player, George was average, Hayward was a generic rookie, while Brown's -4 score is far below replacement. In particular, he does very poorly in the single most predictive stat for any wing (probably any player): steals. His STL% is 1.1%, which is a very bad sign for value now, and a pretty bad sign for his future.

The case for Jaylen is that he's young and athletic, and that the box-score numbers don't tell the story on him. The numbers themselves are very bad however.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
9,142
Twin Bridges, Mt.
Well, I'll certainly defer to you in this case. I'm not sure how solid of a stat BPM is but do trust your knowledge. A notable weakness I saw for Jaylen compared to the other 3 (exc Butler) was FT %.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Are we talking about if JB would be ranked in this draft if he was a freshman at Cal this year or are we talking about where JB would be drafted if he could magically re-enter the draft this year?

Because if the latter he'd be #2 easy - I mean if he shot 34% from 3 at Cal showing range out to the NBA 3P line, would he have been in the conversation for the #1 pick that year?
That's like, your opinion man.
Brown is still bad. He was a controversial third in a BAD draft. He's been in the best possible landing spot, imo, and still been negative despite a period of very hot shooting. He is bad defensively.
There are tools but I disliked him as a prospect pre draft and he's better than my low expectations. I would not hesitate to take Jackson over him at the same position.
I would not think many would hesitate to take Tatum over him. I think Issac is significantly better too. And Smith.
He is Fox like to me. Some people love the tools and potential. Some see his flaws.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,423
Brown is a tough case.

I didn't like the pick a ton (I was a Jamal Murray guy) but understand the theory. The tools are all there, the head and intensity seem to be. His college team was bad and he was fairly effective even in a bad situation. He's been better this year than I thought he'd be, and saw flashes of potential for 'greatness'

But...

The advanced stats continue not to like him, and while he does a good thing or two each time he plays (and has shown a breadth of skills- posting up, threes, penetration, moving wtihout ball, good position and man defense) he also disappears a lot, and looks tentative and lost a lot. And after a year, there's no one 'thing' he clearly does at a good NBA level imo. He's young, he's not physically mature enough, he's definitely got a lot of upside and seems coachable and likeable etc. so I am far from pessimistic, but I also think there's real questions here still.

What does that net out to? I'd rather him than some 'play it safe' pick like Hield (and that's even more true a year later) but I think we're overstating how much the view of him may have changed, too.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,297
New York, NY
Would Brown as drafted even be a lottery pick this year? Him bring a possible 5-10 guy is because he has improved significantly. Last year's class was awful.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Would Brown as drafted even be a lottery pick this year? Him bring a possible 5-10 guy is because he has improved significantly. Last year's class was awful.
Borderline at best. Though late lottery seems very plausible as his upside is decent due to athleticism and youth. But yes last year was bad, and so far Ingram has made it worse and that is still assuming Simmons recovers.
 

ugmo33

Member
SoSH Member
May 6, 2016
167
In particular, he does very poorly in the single most predictive stat for any wing (probably any player): steals. His STL% is 1.1%, which is a very bad sign for value now, and a pretty bad sign for his future.
Just curious, are you saying that steals are the most predictive stat in terms of future success in general? just defense?
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
31,626
That's like, your opinion man.
Brown is still bad. He was a controversial third in a BAD draft. He's been in the best possible landing spot, imo, and still been negative despite a period of very hot shooting. He is bad defensively.
There are tools but I disliked him as a prospect pre draft and he's better than my low expectations. I would not hesitate to take Jackson over him at the same position.
I would not think many would hesitate to take Tatum over him. I think Issac is significantly better too. And Smith.
He is Fox like to me. Some people love the tools and potential. Some see his flaws.
JB was drafted #3 so I didn't think I was going out on a limb by saying that if scouts knew he could shoot, he'd be in a conversation but YMMV.

Of course, if you think JB is (was?) bad defensively, you're not going to be high on him but I think the Cs rate him higher on defense than you do.

I don't think there are a ton of people who would rather have Isaac right now versus Brown right now (but I could be wrong). To me, Isaac is Chriss, only not as good a shooter and less skilled.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Just curious, are you saying that steals are the most predictive stat in terms of future success in general? just defense?
Of any standard box-score stat, I'd rather know a player's steals rate than anything else. The impact is probably heavily-weighted on defense, but steals impact offense too, and may potentially also serve as a proxy for "basketball-IQ" generally. Or at least that's the common theory.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,978
JB was drafted #3 so I didn't think I was going out on a limb by saying that if scouts knew he could shoot, he'd be in a conversation but YMMV.

Of course, if you think JB is (was?) bad defensively, you're not going to be high on him but I think the Cs rate him higher on defense than you do.

I don't think there are a ton of people who would rather have Isaac right now versus Brown right now (but I could be wrong). To me, Isaac is Chriss, only not as good a shooter and less skilled.
I think their are plenty of people who would prefer Isaac. I know I'd have to think hard about the choice. With respect to Chriss, him and Isaac are pretty different players, and I don't see much evidence that Chriss is a better shooter. Both shot 35% from three in their Freshman years, with Isaac having 1.5x the attempts, while shooting 78% from the line compared to Chriss's 68.5%. I imagine that would project him as a better shooter. Defensively, Chriss was considered a lost cause, and as expected, had an awful rookie year on defense. Isaac, on the other hand, is widely considered the best defensive prospect in the class and a Swiss Army knife type who can protect the rim and defend the perimeter. FWIW, Isaac's DBPM was double Chriss's- 6.2 vs 3.1.

Part of the problem is that Jaylen's archetype- a pure scoring SF who hasn't shown much capacity to facilitate for others- is generally out of favor in the NBA right now. I see Tatum getting dinged for it in scouting reports, and his shooting and defensive peripherals are better than Brown's were. I was really down on Brown going into the draft, but I have come around some. Much of that is likely due to my green-colored glasses, but I do really like some things I see- he has elite body control, his shooting stroke looks better than I thought, he looks good on man D, even while he's often lost on team defense, and handle looks to be getting better by the day. There's definitely potential for him to be a very tough match-up. Like with a lot of guys, much will depend on how he works on his craft.
 
Last edited:

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
Isn't it uncommon (these days) for a kid to show up out of college and be good at team defense? In my eyes it takes a while for a player to really get it on the team defense end - often times players don't get it until their teammates make it a priority a la KG.

Speaking to Brown, he's athletic and plays decent (not great) man defense in my eyes. I think he will improve - he has the physical tools to get in front when he needs to. He has enough brain power to understand the concepts of team defense if he does make it a priority. Unfortunately, beyond concepts, I think the majority of team defense growth happens on the court at full speed during games. Hopefully he is absorbing what he is seeing this series and in the playoffs and realizing that defensive expectations are different from the regular season. I guess I'm saying I believe he is going to grow into at least a decent team defender. It's why I'm bothered that he isn't getting more run during these playoffs when others on the team are floundering. He needs that development time - if for no other reason than to see where he needs to grow. I'm still high on Brown. I don't care that it was a weak draft - I think Ainge picked someone who could grow into what the Celtics needed.

I don't know enough about this years players to know where he would fall in this draft for comparison. But drafts are funny things, I mean in 1998 the Celtics picked Paul Pierce up in the 10th slot, right? I've seen growth in confidence, and in play from Brown this year - even given his fluctuating minutes per game over the season. I do think that he has the physical skills and upside to value him to be what Ainge hoped he would be - a building block for a contender in 2-3 years. From that perspective, I think he gets there. Now if Ainge finds/uses him in a deal for a player who accelerates that window without overly compromising the length of the window, then that's fine too.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
10,227
San Francisco
My understanding with steals is that at some point they basically ran some regressions based on box score stats and discovered steals were way way way more important than anything else, to a very surprising degree, but no one is totally certain about. Bowiac cited the theory that steals serve as a proxy for basketball IQ, which makes some sense when you think historically about players who have had lots of steals, in particular traditional floor generals like John Stockton, as well as guys like Larry Bird and Magic.

So that is one theory - that steals are a proxy for more stuff going on under the hood so to speak. There is another theory, not necessarily disjoint from the first, that steals in themselves provide far greater marginal value than other box score outcomes like made shots or rebounds for a variety of reasons - they frequently lead to more efficient offensive outcomes like fast breaks, they rob your opponent of an attempt, they are a rarer skill etc. etc.

Highly recommend the article Bowiac linked.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
31,626
Of any standard box-score stat, I'd rather know a player's steals rate than anything else. The impact is probably heavily-weighted on defense, but steals impact offense too, and may potentially also serve as a proxy for "basketball-IQ" generally. Or at least that's the common theory.
Here's some Q&A on the article (I've only linked to the last part but the three other parts can be found here too): https://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/steals-are-predictive-but-are-they-that-important/
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,851
deep inside Guido territory
Here's the exact odds the Celtics have for the draft in terms of where they're picking. The worst pick they can have is 4 because after the top 3 are selected by the lottery #4 on down are in order of worst record to best record remaining. The link below contains a chart of every team's odds. For instance, Sacramento can not get the #1 pick because Philly can swap picks with them.

Q: How likely are the Celtics to get a top-2 or top-3 pick?
MZ: Brooklyn finished with the worst record this year. Figuring out the overall probability of getting any particular pick is a bit tricky, because the odds in the 2nd and 3rd pick drawings depend on who wins the first drawing (for example, if the 2nd worst team, which has 199 combinations assigned to it, wins the 1st pick, we have a 250/801=31.2% chance to win the second pick, but if the 14th-worst team, which has only 5 combinations assigned to it, wins, we have only a 250/995=25.1% chance at the second pick -- and the math gets even more complicated when you start working on the third pick). However, David’s done the math, and it turns out that entering the lottery, with 250 combinations, the Celtics have a 25.0% chance of getting the top pick, a 21.5% chance of getting the 2nd pick, and a 17.8% chance of getting the 3rd pick. This means that entering the lottery, we have a 46.5% chance of getting a top 2 pick, and a 64.3% chance of getting a top 3 pick.

http://www.nba.com/celtics/news/sidebar/2017-draft-lottery-qa?sf77193347=1
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
31,626
I think their are plenty of people who would prefer Isaac. I know I'd have to think hard about the choice. With respect to Chriss, him and Isaac are pretty different players, and I don't see much evidence that Chriss is a better shooter. Both shot 35% from three in their Freshman years, with Isaac having 1.5x the attempts, while shooting 78% from the line compared to Chriss's 68.5%. I imagine that would project him as a better shooter. Defensively, Chriss was considered a lost cause, and as expected, had an awful rookie year on defense. Isaac, on the other hand, is widely considered the best defensive prospect in the class and a Swiss Army knife type who can protect the rim and defend the perimeter. FWIW, Isaac's DBPM was double Chriss's- 6.2 vs 3.1.

Part of the problem is that Jaylen's archetype- a pure scoring SF who hasn't shown much capacity to facilitate for others- is generally out of favor in the NBA right now. I see Tatum getting dinged for it in scouting reports, and his shooting and defensive peripherals are better than Brown's were. I was really down on Brown going into the draft, but I have come around some. Much of that is likely due to my green-colored glasses, but I do really like some things I see- he has elite body control, his shooting stroke looks better than I thought, he looks good on man D, even while he's often lost on team defense, and handle looks to be getting better by the day. There's definitely potential for him to be a very tough match-up. Like with a lot of guys, much will depend on how he works on his craft.
I guess I'm on an island on this one, but it's tough for me to pick a guy who didn't have one post-up his entire season, hardly ever played in PnR, and has almost 1/2 of his shots as the spot-up variety versus a guy who can clearly finish at the NBA level and also appears to be able to punish a lot of guys in the post already.

Yes, Isaac is a tantalizing prospect and he could become really really good. At the very least, he should be an insanely valuable 3 & D guy. And while I didn't watch very much FSU at all, what I did watch and what I heard about is that he has a long way to go before he becomes a complete basketball player, much less and All-Star.

And just to be clear, as long we stay away from Ball, I'm going to be very excited to watch the Cs play next year.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,463
Fultz would seem to be the best guy in that top grouping to be able to step up in the middle of one of these hellacious runs the Wizards drop on us and get some points.

I think IT has improved from last year's "You can shut him down in the postseason" to this year's "You can't shut him down all game but for an 6-10 minute span you can" and teams are dropping 21-0 and 26-0 runs on us.

I think a guy like Fultz (irrespective of other moves that may happen as well, I'm talking about simply adding him to this team) would be the best bet to help.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,851
deep inside Guido territory
Who do people want to target with their early 2nd round pick? It's either going to be #35 or #36. Should it be a high upside younger guard to eventually replace Bradley or Smart such as Ham Diallo? A raw big man such as Thomas Bryant or Johnathan Motley? An international guy who can rebound like Mathias Lessort?

It will be interesting to see who shoots up the board late and who drops. If someone like Harry Giles, Bam, or Caleb Swanigan drop to the 2nd round that would be great but I can't see that happening.

Lessort is intriguing. He checks a lot of Ainge boxes off in that he plays extremely hard, is a really good athlete, can defend multiple positions, and competes on the glass. He has a lot to work on but I would like the pick in the 2nd round. To me, he sounds like the Terry Rozier of big men.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,312
Melrose, MA
Kevin O'Connor and Jonathan Tjarks are doing a series of podcasts on the Ringer NBA feed previewing the NBA draft. The first one focused on top forwards in the draft, but O'Connor started out by listing his current top 10, which surprised me:

1. Fultz
2. Tatum
3. Ball
4. Fox
5. Jackson
6. Monk
7. Isaac
8. D.Smith
9. Markkanen
10. Anunoby

(Tjarks' list was similar overall, except that he had Isaac near the top of the draft and Tatum much lower.)

I've been a fan of O'Connor's prospect coverage for a while, so found it very interesting that he has Tatum and Fox rated higher (and Jackson lower) than most previous consensus rankings that I have seen.

Jackson slipped for him bacause of his shot. Fox they didn't discuss, as the podcast focused on forwards, but I found it interesting that O'Connor had him so high, especially since, like Jackson, shooting is a potential issue. (As an aside, my brother, a HS track coach, always hones in on players' athleticism and has been raving nonstop about Fox since the tournament.)

Most interesting for me was O'Connor's take on Tatum. While noting that Tatum was, athletically, not the equal of some of the other guys on the list (Jackson, Isaac), he noted Tatum's offensive ability, footwork, etc., and thought that among the forwards, Tatum was the guy with the best potential as a scorer. He suggested that some of Tatum's offensive actions reminded him of Paul Pierce (note that this wasn't offered as a straight comparison). He added that the Celtics, in particular, should be thinking about Tatum because, among the available forwards, he could best fill the Celtics' need for another scorer to take some of the heat off of IT.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,962
Who do people want to target with their early 2nd round pick? It's either going to be #35 or #36. Should it be a high upside younger guard to eventually replace Bradley or Smart such as Ham Diallo? A raw big man such as Thomas Bryant or Johnathan Motley? An international guy who can rebound like Mathias Lessort?

It will be interesting to see who shoots up the board late and who drops. If someone like Harry Giles, Bam, or Caleb Swanigan drop to the 2nd round that would be great but I can't see that happening.

Lessort is intriguing. He checks a lot of Ainge boxes off in that he plays extremely hard, is a really good athlete, can defend multiple positions, and competes on the glass. He has a lot to work on but I would like the pick in the 2nd round. To me, he sounds like the Terry Rozier of big men.
Tankathon shows the Celtics as picking Jonathan Jeanne. Skinny as a rail but 7'2" and athletic.
 

boca

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
553
Would Brown as drafted even be a lottery pick this year? Him bring a possible 5-10 guy is because he has improved significantly. Last year's class was awful.
Is it not a bit early to be making definitive judgements like that?
 

Steve Dillard

wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2003
6,013
I'm going to shut down all media on the 16th so as not to jinx this. So far, my realgm sims have us picking 4, 4, 3 and 1. In total, I'm about 60% for the 4th pick. It's going to be a kick in the balls dreaming of Fultz, being pleased with Ball, and accepting Jackson at 3, but having to take a project like Tatum, Isaacs.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,978
Who do people want to target with their early 2nd round pick? It's either going to be #35 or #36. Should it be a high upside younger guard to eventually replace Bradley or Smart such as Ham Diallo? A raw big man such as Thomas Bryant or Johnathan Motley? An international guy who can rebound like Mathias Lessort?

It will be interesting to see who shoots up the board late and who drops. If someone like Harry Giles, Bam, or Caleb Swanigan drop to the 2nd round that would be great but I can't see that happening.

Lessort is intriguing. He checks a lot of Ainge boxes off in that he plays extremely hard, is a really good athlete, can defend multiple positions, and competes on the glass. He has a lot to work on but I would like the pick in the 2nd round. To me, he sounds like the Terry Rozier of big men.
Typically I'd prefer swing-for-the-fences type picks in the second round, because there such a small chance that anyone picked there will be a productive player, so certainly Giles (but he won't be there) and Bryant, or a crazy athlete like Cameron Oliver. Maybe Rawle Alkins out of Arizona if he stays in the draft. Edmond Sumner is another guy I like in terms of upside. He's a bit older has some definite holes in his game (shot, decision-making) and he's coming off of an ACL, but he's got good size and athleticism for a guard, plus he's aggressive and gets to the rim easily. If he gets works his way into a 35% shooter from 3 and is able to control his game a bit more, he can be a good two-way combo guard in the NBA. Out of the American guys, I think he's the second round guy with the most potential to become an All-Star type. Jawun Evans probably won't be there, but I think he can be a starting PG.

There are a bunch of guys who should be there that I think have pretty solid low-ceiling/high floor potential as bench contributors. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Swanigan is there, he'll suffer greatly from not being able to bully-ball NBA guys, but with his shooting and passing he could be a second unit offensive big. Jordan Bell as a energy/defensive bench guy. I definitely think Monte Morris could have a longish career as a back-up PG. Sindarius Thornwell probably played himself into the first with his excellent tourney, but he's a solid two-way wing. And sorry Frank Mason, but Josh Hart is my candidate for the 2018 Malcolm Brogdon Award for a high profile college senior who contributes immediately and makes everyone wonder why he fell to the 2nd.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Fultz would seem to be the best guy in that top grouping to be able to step up in the middle of one of these hellacious runs the Wizards drop on us and get some points.

I think IT has improved from last year's "You can shut him down in the postseason" to this year's "You can't shut him down all game but for an 6-10 minute span you can" and teams are dropping 21-0 and 26-0 runs on us.

I think a guy like Fultz (irrespective of other moves that may happen as well, I'm talking about simply adding him to this team) would be the best bet to help.
Can those of you draft experts sketch out the likely picks that the Celts might make for each slot, especially #4 (as it seems like Fultz/Ball/Jackson seem to be a pretty consensus top 3)?
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,997
Saint Paul, MN
I think a decently probable scenario is

Celts get # 1 pick, Fultz it is.
Celts get # 2 or # 3. Pick gets traded.
Celts get # 4. Danny selects Tatum. He seems to fit with what the Ceklts need and add that to the fact that trading the # 4 will not likely offer much of a return.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,978
Can those of you draft experts sketch out the likely picks that the Celts might make for each slot, especially #4 (as it seems like Fultz/Ball/Jackson seem to be a pretty consensus top 3)?
It certainly seems like Ball is consensus top 3 in mock drafts, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's significantly greater variance in how NBA teams rate him. He really is the most unorthodox elite prospect I can really think of in recent memory. For as much as I've raved about watching him here, and bagged on Dennis Smith Jr., it's easier for me to envision that DSJ's red flags will be solved by NBA spacing and a non-clusterfuck environment than it is Lonzo will greatly improve his lateral quickness and his ability to run the pick and roll.

For me, it's Fultz <big gap> Jackson <big gap> then Tatum, who has a more tenuous grasp on #3, with Ball and DSJ in the conversation for #4, and Isaac and Markkanen behind them. I think the Ainge tries hard to move the pick if it's not Fultz.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
31,626
Jackson slipped for him bacause of his shot. Fox they didn't discuss, as the podcast focused on forwards, but I found it interesting that O'Connor had him so high, especially since, like Jackson, shooting is a potential issue. (As an aside, my brother, a HS track coach, always hones in on players' athleticism and has been raving nonstop about Fox since the tournament.)
Small sample size and all, but Fox shot 37.5 percent from 3 over his last 15 games of the year, and a gaudy 47.4 percent in his last 10. He also shot 73 percent from the free throw line.

Watching John Wall so much makes me think that Fox has a pretty high floor in the current NBA.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,978
Small sample size and all, but Fox shot 37.5 percent from 3 over his last 15 games of the year, and a gaudy 47.4 percent in his last 10. He also shot 73 percent from the free throw line.

Watching John Wall so much makes me think that Fox has a pretty high floor in the current NBA.
Yet he still only ended up at 24.6% for the year at the college 3. And for non-3s, his .647 points per possession on jump shots would have him slotted between Elfrid Payton and Michael Carter-Williams for worst among drafted guards in the past decade. FWIW, Andrew Johnson's model of projecting NBA 3PT% from college stats has him at 33.2%. I think he could be a decent, but not great, offensive player with those numbers. That said, if he turns himself into, say, a 38% shooter, he'll be a menace to deal with given the space he'll have in the NBA. He'd be up there with Fultz if he figured it out, but I think he's a long shot to do so.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,069
Typically I'd prefer swing-for-the-fences type picks in the second round, because there such a small chance that anyone picked there will be a productive player, so certainly Giles (but he won't be there) and Bryant, or a crazy athlete like Cameron Oliver. Maybe Rawle Alkins out of Arizona if he stays in the draft. Edmond Sumner is another guy I like in terms of upside. He's a bit older has some definite holes in his game (shot, decision-making) and he's coming off of an ACL, but he's got good size and athleticism for a guard, plus he's aggressive and gets to the rim easily. If he gets works his way into a 35% shooter from 3 and is able to control his game a bit more, he can be a good two-way combo guard in the NBA. Out of the American guys, I think he's the second round guy with the most potential to become an All-Star type. Jawun Evans probably won't be there, but I think he can be a starting PG.

There are a bunch of guys who should be there that I think have pretty solid low-ceiling/high floor potential as bench contributors. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Swanigan is there, he'll suffer greatly from not being able to bully-ball NBA guys, but with his shooting and passing he could be a second unit offensive big. Jordan Bell as a energy/defensive bench guy. I definitely think Monte Morris could have a longish career as a back-up PG. Sindarius Thornwell probably played himself into the first with his excellent tourney, but he's a solid two-way wing. And sorry Frank Mason, but Josh Hart is my candidate for the 2018 Malcolm Brogdon Award for a high profile college senior who contributes immediately and makes everyone wonder why he fell to the 2nd.
My draft philosophy is the opposite. I feel it is much easier to find a productive role player down here rather than a home run as the best raw/high upside athletic guys are usually taken fliers on in the mid-first round. Ainge has drafted these older and more experienced types like Big Baby, Powe, Harangody, Ryan Gomes, Orien Greene, Brandon Hunter, E'Twaun Moore, etc in the past.

Alec Peters (Valpo) and Josh Hart are two that fit this mold although my 2nd round binky flier is PJ Dozier out of South Carolina.
 

tbrown_01923

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2006
796
HRB - how does the roster fill out next year? Will they be able to slot those type (low ceil/high floor) on the roster next year? There are two scenarios superstar and run-it-back. In the run it back, don't we turn over the end of the roster with the stashed players we already have and bring back the Swede? If we make a move for a near max, I guess those types may be useful in filling out the back of the roster - but more so than vet mins and their current fodder?
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,978
HRB - how does the roster fill out next year? Will they be able to slot those type (low ceil/high floor) on the roster next year? There are two scenarios superstar and run-it-back. In the run it back, don't we turn over the end of the roster with the stashed players we already have and bring back the Swede? If we make a move for a near max, I guess those types may be useful in filling out the back of the roster - but more so than vet mins and their current fodder?
Right, this is the part that I didn't articulate. High ceiling type who slip to the second round will have some pretty big flaws, and will of course be longer long-shots than guys who go in the mid-first, but it's not like there's a ton of opportunity cost associated with foregoing the E'Twaun Moore's of the world when, under most circumstances, a team can typically go out an sign comparable guys for short money. If you identify a low-ceiling guy who you think can be above replacement level and there's nobody you like in terms of upside left on the board, by all means, make that pick. It's why I like Siakam last year. Hart and Monte Morris in this draft are those guys for me in this draft, and I'd be fine with them. Though less fine if Sumner is still available.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,069
Right, this is the part that I didn't articulate. High ceiling type who slip to the second round will have some pretty big flaws, and will of course be longer long-shots than guys who go in the mid-first, but it's not like there's a ton of opportunity cost associated with foregoing the E'Twaun Moore's of the world when, under most circumstances, a team can typically go out an sign comparable guys for short money. If you identify a low-ceiling guy who you think can be above replacement level and there's nobody you like in terms of upside left on the board, by all means, make that pick. It's why I like Siakam last year. Hart and Monte Morris in this draft are those guys for me in this draft, and I'd be fine with them. Though less fine if Sumner is still available.
My point was that the high ceiling guys worth investing in aren't available in the second round.....they are typically drafted in the mid-first or slip no further than high-2nd round like Ivaca Zubac last year. Look at last year....Papagiannis went 13, Wade Baldwin 17 based almost solely off his ridiculous physicals, Zizic 23, and Labissiere 28.

Down past that the best you're usually going to get are the Kay Felder's and Paul Zipser's.......as the upside guys remaining like Diamond Stone and Zhou Qi are really kinda terrible and long shots to ever play significant minutes. Chieck Diallo went 33 and probably belongs in that Stone/Qi group.......these are the guys available as the high upside guys you want to invest in were already taken in the spots I listed above. The only players Ainge has drafted in the 2nd round to contribute have been those more "NBA ready" role players like Big Baby, Powe, and Gomes.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,069
HRB - how does the roster fill out next year? Will they be able to slot those type (low ceil/high floor) on the roster next year? There are two scenarios superstar and run-it-back. In the run it back, don't we turn over the end of the roster with the stashed players we already have and bring back the Swede? If we make a move for a near max, I guess those types may be useful in filling out the back of the roster - but more so than vet mins and their current fodder?
In the run it back we will have MORE spots to fill and have the stashed players and draft picks to do so.

* It's pretty clear we won't be picking up Zeller's team option and his slot will be replaced by Zizic.
* Same with Mickey's option, replaced with Yabusele.
* James Young will be gone, say his spot is filled by whoever we select at 37
* Green, Jerebko, and Amir aren't under contract for next year. Maybe one returns, one roster spot replaced by the lottery pick, and another to sign a cheap veteran FA guy like Green last year.

Those are the easy ones......that doesn't take into account the tricky contract situations coming up where Olynyk and/or Bradley play elsewhere next season.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,297
New York, NY
My point was that the high ceiling guys worth investing in aren't available in the second round.....they are typically drafted in the mid-first or slip no further than high-2nd round like Ivaca Zubac last year. Look at last year....Papagiannis went 13, Wade Baldwin 17 based almost solely off his ridiculous physicals, Zizic 23, and Labissiere 28.

Down past that the best you're usually going to get are the Kay Felder's and Paul Zipser's.......as the upside guys remaining like Diamond Stone and Zhou Qi are really kinda terrible and long shots to ever play significant minutes. Chieck Diallo went 33 and probably belongs in that Stone/Qi group.......these are the guys available as the high upside guys you want to invest in were already taken in the spots I listed above. The only players Ainge has drafted in the 2nd round to contribute have been those more "NBA ready" role players like Big Baby, Powe, and Gomes.
Of course, Draymond Green and DeAndre Jordan were both drafted with a pick one higher than the Celtics first 2nd round selection. That hitting on high upside second rounders is rare does not mean they don't exist. This is also a really deep draft, so there's likely to be some interesting upside picks left at 36. 53 and 56 are a different story.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,069
Of course, Draymond Green and DeAndre Jordan were both drafted with a pick one higher than the Celtics first 2nd round selection. That hitting on high upside second rounders is rare does not mean they don't exist. This is also a really deep draft, so there's likely to be some interesting upside picks left at 36. 53 and 56 are a different story.
Draymond was a 22-yr old physically mature player considered a guy ready to contribute immediately not a high upside flier that would take time to develop. DeAndre was the high upside flier as he was a horrific college basketball player the one year he was at A & M but he had the physicals.....and still he was nabbed just after the 1st round ended. Those guys like DeAndre go earlier and earlier every year. Who are the types that have high upside potential that will be on the board at 37?
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,069
The best upside guys I see in that area are Hamidou Diallo and Jonathan Jeane. Both have close to zero tape on them.
I don't know a thing about Diallo except that 18-yr old 2-guard who aren't elite are a dime a dozen. Jeane I like a lot.....for same reasons I loved Gobert a few years ago. How the heck does he ever last to 37 though? I mean Gobert was still around in the mid-20's which shocked me but this is a comp/copycat league and Jeane's skillset is more Gobert with the athleticism and coordination to go along with his insane physicals than he is Keith Closs who was just plain raw without the motor that Jeane and Gobert possess. I expect when all is said and done Jeane is a 1st rounder.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,962
Tankathon now agrees with you, showing Jeanne going at #33, with the Celtics picking Tony Bradley. Since the Celts have three second round picks and few available roster spots (after taking into account Zizix, Yabu and their first round pick), is it possible for them to package their three second round picks to move up a few slots in the second round?
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,312
Melrose, MA
Tankathon now agrees with you, showing Jeanne going at #33, with the Celtics picking Tony Bradley. Since the Celts have three second round picks and few available roster spots (after taking into account Zizix, Yabu and their first round pick), is it possible for them to package their three second round picks to move up a few slots in the second round?
Don't they have to convey a 2nd to Brooklyn as part of the pick swap, or has that already been done?
 

GreenMonster49

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
653
Don't they have to convey a 2nd to Brooklyn as part of the pick swap, or has that already been done?
Yes, that pick is going to Brooklyn. The picks that the Celtics have are:

2017 second round draft pick from Cleveland
Cleveland's 2017 2nd round pick to Boston [Boston-Cleveland, 9/25/2014]

2017 second round draft pick from L.A. Clippers
L.A. Clippers' 2017 2nd round pick to Boston [Boston-L.A. Clippers-Phoenix, 1/15/2015]

2017 second round draft pick from Minnesota
Minnesota's 2017 2nd round pick to Boston (via Phoenix) [Minnesota-New Orleans-Phoenix, 7/27/2012; Boston-Phoenix, 1/9/2015]
Tankathon lists these as #53, #56, and #37, respectively. The Celtics' original 2nd round going to Brooklyn is #57.
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,119
I don't know a thing about Diallo except that 18-yr old 2-guard who aren't elite are a dime a dozen.
All I know about Diallo is that he was ranked 10th overall in his class coming out of high school, is 6'5 with a 6'10 wingspan, folks were saying he might be the best pure athlete in his class, but needs to improve his handle and shooting. He redshirted this year which is why he dropped. I know how Ainge loves those guys who were ranked highly in their HS class but dropped (like Avery and Sully). Of course, now there's buzz that Diallo might go somewhere late 1st.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Jokic went 41st, but I'm not sure he was considered a high ceiling guy. That was also a really deep draft. The Draymond Green draft had Khris Middleton go at 39 but that was partly due to injury concerns.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,978
Here are the combine measurements:
Jeanne, Thomas Bryant, and Ike Anigbogu all have wingspans over 7'6". Tony Bradley came in at 7'5". Other notable measurements, for me at least:

- OG Anunoby wingspan at 7'2". If he develops any sort of offensive game, he's a player.
- Zach Collins at only 7'1". A bit under what I would've expected, but he'll still be a lottery pick
- Dozier at 6'11 is excellent for a SG
- So is Donovan Mitchell's 6'10". Plus he's built like a brick shithouse, weighing in at 211 with 5.9% body fat.
- Edmond Sumner at 6'9", for a PG.
- Hamidou Diallo at 6'11.25"

Jordan Bell only clocked in at 6'8.5" in shoes with a 6'11.75" wingspan, but I think he's probably my preferred target in the second- great energy, great screener, excellent athlete who can protect the rim and defend in space.