Celtics pick Carsen Edwards at #33 in 2nd Rd (Are you glad you stayed awake now?)

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
30,188
Definitely needed to find some scoring off the bench, and Edwards can score. Seeing him instead of Terry Fucking Rozier coming into the game and taking shots will be worth a lot for my mental health.
 

The Allented Mr Ripley

holden
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2003
11,595
South Shore, MA
He was in Bo Jackson Tecmo Bowl mode against Virginia in the NCAAs this past March (for the whole tournament, really). Worth a look based on that alone.
 
Last edited:

CaptainLaddie

dj paul pfieffer
SoSH Member
Sep 6, 2004
26,612
the district
I know it's a bunch of highlight reels, but holy shit this guy seems like a steal. Yes, he's small but he clearly has moves and can shoot the basketball.

FWIW my buddy who's a huge Sixers fan is *furious* they gave up the pick just ahead of them to the Celts just to see the Celts take him.

I'm rooting so hard for him.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,416
Kiev, Ukraine
I get the "IT 2.0" jokes, but there really is a massive, massive difference between 5-8 and 6-1. Like the pick, although if past history is any guide, my likes and dislikes don't really matter wrt picks.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,700
It’s because he’s not really 6’1”. He’s barely 6’ in his platform sneakers. Don’t get me wrong, I love him at 33 and think he’ll be a good backup PG for the life of the deal. But he’s still smurfy.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,416
Kiev, Ukraine
It’s because he’s not really 6’1”. He’s barely 6’ in his platform sneakers. Don’t get me wrong, I love him at 33 and think he’ll be a good backup PG for the life of the deal. But he’s still smurfy.
Yeah, my point is more that IT is just such a freak outlier in height that even smurfs aren't really comparable to him.
 

Soxfan in Fla

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2001
7,056
Watched a lot of him in the Big 10. To me he’s a chucker that takes a lot of bad shots. He shot Purdue out of some games last year. When he’s on he’s awesome. When he’s off his shot selection gets worse. Fine pick at 33 I guess.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,812
Don’t know where to put this but we signed DePaul’s wing Max Strus to a two-way contract. I wouldn’t be surprised if this kid makes it in the league.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,416
Kiev, Ukraine
I thought this dude was a lefty after seeing his first few sick dunks. Then he pulls up for a three and shoots with his right hand.
Yeah, I like the overall skill level. It won’t be like with Jaylen where you’re waiting 2+ years to see whether he can dribble (and I’m higher on Jaylen than most here).

Seems like a solid upside pick.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
14,613
Edwards did the combine twice, both times came in at 6.025" 199 with a pretty nice 6'6" wingspan. Finding comps is actually a little hard for his body.
.
Ty Lawson, Patty Mills are heigh comps, but his wingspan blows them away

2007-8 had an interesting comp... Mike Conley, who is 0.5" taller, but has about 0.5" less wingspan and was 20+ pounds lighter
2005-6 had an Ray Felton, exact same height and weight, but shorter wingspan

So we'll see how he turns out, but maybe some potential to be not bad defensively in that huge wingspan.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,416
Kiev, Ukraine
Edwards did the combine twice, both times came in at 6.025" 199 with a pretty nice 6'6" wingspan. Finding comps is actually a little hard for his body.
.
Ty Lawson, Patty Mills are heigh comps, but his wingspan blows them away

2007-8 had an interesting comp... Mike Conley, who is 0.5" taller, but has about 0.5" less wingspan and was 20+ pounds lighter
2005-6 had an Ray Felton, exact same height and weight, but shorter wingspan

So we'll see how he turns out, but maybe some potential to be not bad defensively in that huge wingspan.
Yeah, people are making way too big a deal about this imo. There are plenty of comps who have been passable to good defenders at his wingspan+standing reach.

Doesn’t mean he’ll be a good defender, but the IT comps are dumb.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
Nov 17, 2010
10,614
I LOVE his release. Deep behind his head, but somehow lightning quick. Tons of pop in his legs for extra height, too. Takes some off balanced shots to get things off quicker, which can lead to problems, but with his shot, I dont see his height being a problem at all.
 

bradmahn

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
540
Edwards did the combine twice, both times came in at 6.025" 199 with a pretty nice 6'6" wingspan. Finding comps is actually a little hard for his body.
.
Ty Lawson, Patty Mills are heigh comps, but his wingspan blows them away

2007-8 had an interesting comp... Mike Conley, who is 0.5" taller, but has about 0.5" less wingspan and was 20+ pounds lighter
2005-6 had an Ray Felton, exact same height and weight, but shorter wingspan

So we'll see how he turns out, but maybe some potential to be not bad defensively in that huge wingspan.
Rajon Rondo is 6'1" with a reported 6'9" (!) wingspan.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,728
Watched a lot of him in the Big 10. To me he’s a chucker that takes a lot of bad shots. He shot Purdue out of some games last year. When he’s on he’s awesome. When he’s off his shot selection gets worse. Fine pick at 33 I guess.
To be honest I’m glad to hear he was a chucker. He shot an adequate but not too exciting 37% from 3 with a huge sample size in his college career. Last year he was 36% on over 10 per game. Those percentages on mostly open “good” shots aren’t too hot. But if he’s doing that while taking lots of bad shots and being forced to carry the offense, that’s pretty good.

In the NBA as a second round pick, surely he knows he will have to change his shot selection so I’m not worried about having to fix that. 82% FT career is solid, another good indicator. He won’t amount to much in the NBA unless he’s an above average 3 point shooter so I’m glad to hear his percentages were deflated by poor shot selection.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,832
Waltham, MA
To be honest I’m glad to hear he was a chucker. He shot an adequate but not too exciting 37% from 3 with a huge sample size in his college career. Last year he was 36% on over 10 per game. Those percentages on mostly open “good” shots aren’t too hot. But if he’s doing that while taking lots of bad shots and being forced to carry the offense, that’s pretty good.

In the NBA as a second round pick, surely he knows he will have to change his shot selection so I’m not worried about having to fix that. 82% FT career is solid, another good indicator. He won’t amount to much in the NBA unless he’s an above average 3 point shooter so I’m glad to hear his percentages were deflated by poor shot selection.
His sophomore year under slightly less usage, yet still a sizable sample, he shot 40.5% from three. That seems promising. And his FT% is pretty good at 81.7%.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
34,877
To be honest I’m glad to hear he was a chucker. He shot an adequate but not too exciting 37% from 3 with a huge sample size in his college career. Last year he was 36% on over 10 per game. Those percentages on mostly open “good” shots aren’t too hot. But if he’s doing that while taking lots of bad shots and being forced to carry the offense, that’s pretty good.
I was reading the article linked below and remembered your comment here.

In his junior season, Edwards played an insane role on a creation-starved Purdue team. He was encouraged to shoot. A lot. And a lot of super difficult attempts. Despite all that, despite taking a staggering 237 off-the-dribble jumpers in the half court, he finished in the 71st percentile in efficiency on those shots.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
3,878
To be honest I’m glad to hear he was a chucker. He shot an adequate but not too exciting 37% from 3 with a huge sample size in his college career. Last year he was 36% on over 10 per game. Those percentages on mostly open “good” shots aren’t too hot. But if he’s doing that while taking lots of bad shots and being forced to carry the offense, that’s pretty good.

In the NBA as a second round pick, surely he knows he will have to change his shot selection so I’m not worried about having to fix that. 82% FT career is solid, another good indicator. He won’t amount to much in the NBA unless he’s an above average 3 point shooter so I’m glad to hear his percentages were deflated by poor shot selection.
Yep. I mentioned this in the draft thread, but here’s a wordier explanation from one of the scouting reports linked earlier:

"Way better shooter than the percentages indicate – role at Purdue was to be the volume scorer this year, leading to inefficient shot selection. When the team was more interior focused last year, he was able to hone in on his shot selection a bit more and he was hitting a higher percentage across all types of actions. When he gets hot, he can put up a points very quickly. I don’t think he’s a knockdown consistent shooter, but he’s not nearly as streaky as he looks this year – probably somewhere in between, but closer to him being a consistent shooter. Compact release, good balance, good elevation on the shot, good release point, and quick. Does not need much time to set and release. Has DEEP range both off of C&S and off the bounce – shot 82/238 from NBA three (through 3/4/19). Uses the threat of his jumper pretty well setting up closer looks, either at the rim or slightly closer off the bounce jumpers. Can hit an open drop-off pass, too. Sudden ability to pull up off the bounce takes defenses by surprise."

The mere fact that he took 238 NBA threes(!) in college is wild and, plus the off the dribble volume from DrewDog’s post shows the leash he was given at Purdue after they lost Swanigan then Haas. I'm not really bullish on his ability to run an offense full time, but as a microwave bench scorer, or more of a pure 2 guard next to Smart, he'll be fun. I don't think he's a terrible liability on D, either, with his strength and length making him play a bit bigger than his height indicates.

He was definitely a binkie of Sixers twitter (they really want a shooting/bench scoring/ball handler), so there was some nice schadenfreude there as a bonus for those of us who are just petty like that.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,779
Santa Monica, CA
Watching him in person in March, his footwork is so unorthodox. It reminded me of Steve Nash, almost like a soccer player.

This kid is stout and tough and can fill it up. Have to love it in the second round.

Williams and this kid are the types of guys I like to see the C's take outside the lottery. Guys
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
3,895
not really,. I mean Salim Stoudamire was a better shooter at a similar size and he washed out pretty quickly.
To be fair, Stoudamire was drafted in 2005 and last played in 2008; the league in general has changed a bit since then, the value of shooting in particular.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,653
I kinda like the kid from New Haven who can pass the ball and averaged three steals per game. I'm looking forward to watching him in Summer League. I'm looking forward to watching Edwards too, but he has to show something on defense.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
3,878
Better shooter in what sense? I feel like post-Steph that means something different.

He was lights out, and like Edwards, not a true PG, but IIRC, Carsen plays “bigger”, is better at getting to the rim (and line) and better on D. And as you note, shooting is more of a premium now. But an interesting comp nevertheless, and one that should bring some caution. Small SGs have to be really, really good at scoring.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
21,304
Melrose, MA

He was lights out, and like Edwards, not a true PG, but IIRC, Carsen plays “bigger”, is better at getting to the rim (and line) and better on D. And as you note, shooting is more of a premium now. But an interesting comp nevertheless, and one that should bring some caution. Small SGs have to be really, really good at scoring.
The big difference in their lines is that Stoudamire shot higher percentages and was more efficient, while Edwards had a DRAMATICALLY higher usage rate. Edwards’ lowest usage was above Stoudamire’s highest and was overall 10% higher, which is a big deal. One guy was a lead guard, the other was basically the single option and shot creator on his team.

The other big difference is that the game has changed a lot in the 15 years between them, so I would imagine you would see major differences in shot selection and creation between the two of them. The deep three wasn’t a routine thing back then, for example, or shooting in traffic generally the way Edwards does.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
3,878
The big difference in their lines is that Stoudamire shot higher percentages and was more efficient, while Edwards had a DRAMATICALLY higher usage rate. Edwards’ lowest usage was above Stoudamire’s highest and was overall 10% higher, which is a big deal. One guy was a lead guard, the other was basically the single option and shot creator on his team.

The other big difference is that the game has changed a lot in the 15 years between them, so I would imagine you would see major differences in shot selection and creation between the two of them. The deep three wasn’t a routine thing back then, for example, or shooting in traffic generally the way Edwards does.
His usage was basically unprecedented for a major college program. I looked at a bunch of recent-ish NBA guys in college, and the closest I found, in terms of size and shooting volume are Jannero Pargo at Arkansas, JJ Barea at Northeaster, and Yogi Farrell at Indiana. And they're not that close, except for Barea, who was also averaging 8.3 assists/game as a senior, though Northeastern's a long way from the Big Ten. He’s a rare dude. Guys that size are typically primarily distributors. Even IT who has generational bucket-getting chops averaged over 6 assist/game in his last year at Washington, as opposed to Edwards’ 2.9.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
14,613
The big difference in their lines is that Stoudamire shot higher percentages and was more efficient, while Edwards had a DRAMATICALLY higher usage rate. Edwards’ lowest usage was above Stoudamire’s highest and was overall 10% higher, which is a big deal. One guy was a lead guard, the other was basically the single option and shot creator on his team.

The other big difference is that the game has changed a lot in the 15 years between them, so I would imagine you would see major differences in shot selection and creation between the two of them. The deep three wasn’t a routine thing back then, for example, or shooting in traffic generally the way Edwards does.
It isn't a perfect match, but it was more to point out that there really isn't a "his floor is NBA rotation player" skill out there. The floor for draft picks is out of the league in 3 years, and there isn't really any single skill that can keep you in the league if you aren't at least decent at most else, Stoudamire was an amazing shooter in college, and even a very good one in the pros. His defense was so horrid he bounced out, Jimmer is a decent example too, he could score in the NBA, but nothing else, so off to China he went. I think Edwards is probably going to be an NBA rotation player, but it definitely isn't his floor.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,363
New York, NY
If Edwards works out in the NBA, he could be a very good fit next to Smart, who is a PG on offense but cannot defend the position. Having a scoring guard with the quickness to matchup at the point on defense would be a nice compliment. Edwards also presumably has the handle to bring the ball up against pressure, which is another weakness of Smart. Incidentally, this fit may also be part of why Philly was rumored to be interested, since Simmons presence also means Philly has a need for a guard that can play the point defensively but is a scorer instead of initiator on offense.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
21,304
Melrose, MA
It isn't a perfect match, but it was more to point out that there really isn't a "his floor is NBA rotation player" skill out there. The floor for draft picks is out of the league in 3 years, and there isn't really any single skill that can keep you in the league if you aren't at least decent at most else, Stoudamire was an amazing shooter in college, and even a very good one in the pros. His defense was so horrid he bounced out, Jimmer is a decent example too, he could score in the NBA, but nothing else, so off to China he went. I think Edwards is probably going to be an NBA rotation player, but it definitely isn't his floor.
Fair enough, I agree almost no one is a sure thing. But he definitely seems like someone who has strong odds of being able to score in the NBA, much longer odds of doing much else.
 

tbrown_01923

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2006
415
I'm not really bullish on his ability to run an offense full time, but as a microwave bench scorer, or more of a pure 2 guard next to Smart, he'll be fun.
^^ this is where I am at. Looking at his highlights and reading his scouting report he has the real opportunity to be successful with the celtics. There are enough folks on this team that cna move the ball and which they can run offense through that they will not need carsen for that. I am sure brad will try and pick favorable matchups. And I am not so sure he is as small as people are portraying him as, 6 feet decent wingspan, seems to be getting stronger - but already at a decent weight. I think he is going to be fun!
 

bowiac

I've been living a lie.
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,303
New York, NY
I'm not a fan of comps generally, but here are Edwards' top comps from Jesse Fischer's model.



It's not an inspiring list, but that's just due to the nature of comps. If you look at the comps for other players, basically everyone other than Zion has fringe rotation guys as comps.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,689
Somewhere
It's not an inspiring list, but that's just due to the nature of comps. If you look at the comps for other players, basically everyone other than Zion has fringe rotation guys as comps.
Well, it’s also because most players have uninspiring careers.
 

bowiac

I've been living a lie.
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,303
New York, NY
Yeah - that's what I meant by the nature of comps. Most draft picks don't work out, so their best comps tend to be pretty awful.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,689
Somewhere
Yeah - that's what I meant by the nature of comps. Most draft picks don't work out, so their best comps tend to be pretty awful.
This is what I like about the boom bust formulation. The variance is everything in these projections.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
1,912
Looking forward to Edwards lighting up Summer League. Hoping for him to be a JJ Barea type as his floor.