Pick 35, or 25, or 31, or 34 and 39, or 38 and 39: Where we certainly will find the future of Celtics Basketball

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,385
Let's not overstate Sawn's offensive impact. Marion's career 3pt percentage is perfectly Marcus Smart-ish - but at half of Smarts attempts. Given how much stress Smart shooting has caused, i wonder what folks would have said if Shawn upped his attempts (yeah, it was a different game then). Andre Jackson shoots free throws at 70%, threes at 29% over his career (not a ton of volume). He shoots 2's at 52% an combined 43% from the field. None of that is great and is a far away from what Shawn was able to reach as a pro.

The real value Marion brought was almost all on "D" and in transition. How much of that can Andre provide? How much would he need to provide to be able to see the court?
It really depends on which version of Marion you're referring to. When he first entered the league he was one of the better 3-pt shooters in the league, a couple years just outside the Top-20, and also on high volume. Unusually, he stopped shooting them and stopped making them in his late-20's....while most players tend to reverse this trend.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,716
Olivier-Maxence Prosper now looks like he's going in the first. Pity, I was secretly hoping that Boston would get him.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,414
Jackson doesn't seem like he should be comped to Marion, who was a good offensive player in college who couldn't (and didn't) shoot 3s. Jackson is a non-factor in college. He was 11th on his own team in FGA/40, he took 42% of his shots from 3 and stunk at it, he didn't consistently get to the line. Now could he become a completely different player in the pros.... sure, but that profile reads more as "guy who never plays a second on NBA basketball" than "comparisons to former top 10 picks.


Maybe you hope he's Lu Dort? Though even Dort had much better volume and aggressiveness in college.
Yeah, reading a bit there's few precedents for guys that bad offensively in college making it.

What you'd target as a pro is guys like (later career) Igoudala, Draymond, PJ Tucker who almost never shoot but still have value. Two of those guys are bigs, and Iggy had more juice than Jackson, but that would be the concept I suppose....
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,385
Yeah, reading a bit there's few precedents for guys that bad offensively in college making it.

What you'd target as a pro is guys like (later career) Igoudala, Draymond, PJ Tucker who almost never shoot but still have value. Two of those guys are bigs, and Iggy had more juice than Jackson, but that would be the concept I suppose....
Rondo? I can't get the out of my head the sight of both guards at the top of a 2/3 zone defense dropping inside the paint as Rondo picked up the ball at the FT line with no idea what to do next. It was Vanderbilt bc DeMarre Carroll looked like prime-MJ that game. Then they moved him off the ball and had Patrick Sparks run the offense....then he was benched and moved out of the starting lineup. Poor guy couldn't get out of the NCAA rules fast enough.

You are correct that there are few though.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,935
Yeah, reading a bit there's few precedents for guys that bad offensively in college making it.

What you'd target as a pro is guys like (later career) Igoudala, Draymond, PJ Tucker who almost never shoot but still have value. Two of those guys are bigs, and Iggy had more juice than Jackson, but that would be the concept I suppose....
That's a bad way to project. Both those guys were better early in their career, and they declined. Low volume Lu Dort is basically the comp you're hoping for because guys like Draymond (elite passer), Tucker (made and stayed in the league with 3pt shooting), Iggy (Was an all-around all-star early) are guys who declined but retained defender respect, also they were really smart experienced vets. You can't comp them to a rookie, and you don't draft a guy hoping that he improves to the washed version of a better player.

Dort could I guess be a comp... Rondo I guess? Rondo was a better passer and less turnover prone.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,414
Yeah, HRB got the point....it's not (and wasn't described as) a skill projection, it's a question about player archetypes. Especially when trying to project an outlier skill package it seems silly to also ask that the development path be identical.

Dort is not a bad comp if the theory is "maybe he'll learn to shoot" which I agree is possible---I was playing through the archeype of "if he doesn't, can he potentially still be a meaningful NBA player"

A recent semi counter-example is Thybulle, though it's a big difference to be a plus passer and non-shooter (as all the guys I listed were, and Jackson is reported to be) than non-passer and non-shooter, as Thybulle is. Though even Thybulle was a 36% 3pt shooter in college, so there was arguably something to work with there.
 
Last edited:

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,414
The less-extreme version of the 'defense, passing, limited shooting' profile (Jamie Jacquez) has a green room invite, which doesn't guarantee anything but is a bit surprising, imo.

Podziemski and (as nighthob alluded) OMP also got them.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,716
I always decline to comment on the Marquette guys because everyone (rightfully) takes my opinions on Marquette guys with a grain of salt lick of great rock salt rock mountain of salt. Sometimes I’m right (Crowder, Butler, Matthews), but for every Jae Crowder or Jimmy Butler there's three Henry Ellensons, Vander Blues, or Markus Howards. I've still been rooting for OMP to float to Boston at 35. Or, alternatively, for Boston to find some way to turn Pritchard into OMP and then use #35 on Keyontae Johnson.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,990
Cultural hub of the universe
Vecenie on Jackson, interesting take.

"I love Jackson. He was one of my two favorite players in college basketball last season because it’s clear he thinks the game at an exceptional level. His ability to play at high speed and process everything that’s happening around him is not normal. His reactivity and quick decision-making are superb. His movement without the ball is terrific. He’s an elite athlete with terrific, functional traits that will impact the game at an extremely high level because he also plays with a never-ending motor. He’ll defend across the positional spectrum and will provide terrific team defense. But in today’s NBA, you must be able to do something on offense to score. Otherwise, teams will leave you alone, and there will be poor impacts on your team. And yet, Connecticut still scored 124.3 points per 100 possessions when Jackson was on the court versus 114.3 when he was off it, per Pivot Analysis, because of the way he’s able to move without the ball, push tempo and make plays for his teammates. So, where does that leave us? At the end of the day, I’m just willing to bet on Jackson"

Julian Phillips:

Phillips is such an interesting bet because the defense is terrific already, and at lower levels, the offense has shown the exact skill set that he needs to be successful. Phillips clearly has real touch. He made about 37 percent from 3 in 2021-22, combining his AAU and high school stats. And yet, his offensive performance at Tennessee was so disastrous that it’s hard to buy him as a real shooter. And this wasn’t really a situation where you can blame an archaic collegiate offense. Phillips simply missed a lot of open looks and missed them badly in many cases. It comes down to believing that you can fix the shot and put some strength on Phillips’ frame. If you believe in your ability to do that as an organization, then you take him either late in the first round or early in the second. If you don’t, then you have him probably in the two-way bucket as an intriguing high-upside defensive flier. The range of outcomes both in Phillips’ career and on draft night will be wide.

Rayan Rupert
"Rupert’s length gives him an awful lot to be excited about as a long-term investment. He has a terrific frame and tremendous upside on defense due to his physical tools and lateral quickness. He’s a former point guard who is at least comfortable handling the ball and making plays, which should allow him to continue to build on those skills to the level he needs them in the NBA. He is your patented 3-and-D type prospect if the shooting comes through. But his season as shooter was not good enough to instill a whole lot of confidence on that piece of his game coming through. It’d be ambitious to expect him to turn into a 15-point-pergame scorer or to provide much offensive value in the first three years of his career. But he’s likely going to be a very difficult problem for offenses when he’s defending due to his rotational instincts, motor and on-ball potential. If all his skills hit, you can squint and see a starter down the road. But that requires you to really have a plan for how to work through his issues with his shooting base. If you’re going to make a developmental bet as an NBA team, I get buying into Rupert."

This is just the short list of guys with NBA athleticism and undeveloped offensive games. Which one will actually pop and we'll go doh, should've drafted that one?
 
Last edited:

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,263
Looks like the Nuggets traded their 2024 FRP for the #29 pick, so they'll pick at #29 and #32 before the Celtics (they will also pick at #37). My guess is they will be grabbing some high floor, low ceiling role players (unfortunately).
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,716
I would hate that. Camara is the definition of low floor/medium ceiling player. He's the guy you draft with a pick in the 50-60 range because there's nothing else available. There's a remote chance that he turns into a 3&D guy, but there are better prospects with that same potential outcome.
 

oumbi

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 15, 2006
4,193
I would hate that. Camara is the definition of low floor/medium ceiling player. He's the guy you draft with a pick in the 50-60 range because there's nothing else available. There's a remote chance that he turns into a 3&D guy, but there are better prospects with that same potential outcome.
I see your point. But maybe PBS wants to see whether to sign him if he goes undrafted.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,716
I see your point. But maybe PBS wants to see whether to sign him if he goes undrafted.
That was my thought when I saw that. He’s definitely worth the risk as a UDFA signing. But at 35 there are going to be better guys available. Well, the ones that Denver doesn’t snag at 29 and 32.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
I have not done any draft research but after a few minutes of Googling Colby Jones’s name stuck out to me. Sounds like a Marcus Smart clone (good passer/defender, bad at shooting) and projected to go late first/early second.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,385
I have not done any draft research but after a few minutes of Googling Colby Jones’s name stuck out to me. Sounds like a Marcus Smart clone (good passer/defender, bad at shooting) and projected to go late first/early second.
I'm pining for my guy Trayce Jackson-Davis to step into Grant's role.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,684
The two players that were mentioned earlier as Brad targets, Jaime Jacquez and OMP, are both projected to go before 25….wonder who else is on the list that Brad wants
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,716
I am going to be royally pissed if Boston moved Marcus and didn't get OMP. And without #35 no way of adding someone like Keyontae Johnson as backend filler.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
The two players that were mentioned earlier as Brad targets, Jaime Jacquez and OMP, are both projected to go before 25….wonder who else is on the list that Brad wants
Celtics could pretty easily move up if there’s someone they really want. Houston has #20 so I could see them biting on an offer of #25 plus a pick next year.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,511
Is 25 and GS' pick next year enough to get #10 from Dallas? Maybe they'd have to include Grant somehow. If so, that puts them in range to pick a lot more interesting prospect like Coulibaly or Dick.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,385
Is 25 and GS' pick next year enough to get #10 from Dallas? Maybe they'd have to include Grant somehow. If so, that puts them in range to pick a lot more interesting prospect like Coulibaly or Dick.
Not even remotely close. The value of NBA draft picks is much more too heavy than that of the NFL or other leagues.
 

wilked

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,066
Not even remotely close. The value of NBA draft picks is much more too heavy than that of the NFL or other leagues.
When I look at trade value charts I see:
Pick 10 - 1700
Pick 25 - 700

Since GS next year's pick is unknown, I feel like an approx value might be ~pick 25, so another 700. Then you might have to discount it a little since it's future pick.

Pick 25 + 2024 GS + Celtics 2024 1st feels like it matches to me. I'd have to really love the player at 10 to pull the trigger on that though
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,990
Cultural hub of the universe
If OMP and Jaquez are moving up, someone else has to fall. Guys like Leonard Miller and Kris Murray might be in play. Ben Sheppard is an interesting shooter who would fit. TJD if you're so inclined (I'm less impressed) should be there at 25.

Draft is always a crap shoot.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,385
When I look at trade value charts I see:
Pick 10 - 1700
Pick 25 - 700

Since GS next year's pick is unknown, I feel like an approx value might be ~pick 25, so another 700. Then you might have to discount it a little since it's future pick.

Pick 25 + 2024 GS + Celtics 2024 1st feels like it matches to me. I'd have to really love the player at 10 to pull the trigger on that though
This is way off in the NBA from what we've seen historically. Once you get to the bottom of the first round the value of these picks fall dramatically. Last year for instance the Grizzlies traded two #1's (22 & 29) to move up just 3 slots to take the guy they targeted. Two years ago, OKC traded 34 & 36 to get to 32, the year before Minnesota 25 and 33 for 23, etc etc.
 

wilked

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,066
This is way off in the NBA from what we've seen historically. Once you get to the bottom of the first round the value of these picks fall dramatically. Last year for instance the Grizzlies traded two #1's (22 & 29) to move up just 3 slots to take the guy they targeted. Two years ago, OKC traded 34 & 36 to get to 32, the year before Minnesota 25 and 33 for 23, etc etc.
I hear you - I just wonder why the charts don't reflect that (I checked a few different charts / sources). I agree that your data points you cited make it clear that my numbers don't make sense...
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,935
I hear you - I just wonder why the charts don't reflect that (I checked a few different charts / sources). I agree that your data points you cited make it clear that my numbers don't make sense...
He was coming off two years of being hurt, and he was in WAS the wasteland of the NBA, the "best players" lists are mostly narrative driven rather than any real analysis, they exist to start twitter fights
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,935
Looking at final mocks, this happened too late for a lot of people.

Ringer updated to BOS and they have us taking OMP, Athletic (Harper) has Colby Jones, Athletic (Vecinie) has Sasser

Bunch still have Memphis but given both playoff contenders with somewhat similar needs worth looking at:they have Podz in several, Colby Jones,
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,027
AZ
Reading draft profiles, I'm curious what those who watched enough college hoops to have a view make of Andre Jackson. I just didn't watch any this past year, and so I feel lost in the draft!

Profile-wise, he's pretty unique and I'm intrigued but this is a case where you really would like the eye-test as well. There's no-shoot guys who have had impact in NBA for sure, though as Hollinger notes today there's very few who were this extreme a 'no-shoot' guy in college as well.

Anyone have a guess on whether he can cut it in NBA?
Jackson was a great college player because he saw the matrix. He is one of those players you see from time to time who just knows what is going to happen a tenth of a second before anyone else on the floor. I think it gets called “basketball IQ” or whatever. Especially when the game is moving fast, he has the ability to size up the situation and to anticipate where the offense is going to go and get to his spot. On offense he has a very fast processor, and when combined with an intuitive sense of where his people will be, he figures out the highest percentage. But that — and size and length — are what he brings.

I don’t know how well that translates. Players are so much quicker and faster at the next level. I think he gets taken in the last third of round one and if I had to predict I think he will not be available at 25. The stuff he has cannot be learned easily. He will not stick if he cannot learn to make baskets with more efficiency, but he is a one defect player with difficult to replicate skills, so once you get out of the lottery and are looking only at guys who have some deficits, his skills are a little easier to bank on. Since you are not compromising physically — his size, length and athleticism are pretty good — when you get to the part of the drat where you have to take a flyer at least in part, I think he checks a lot of boxes.
 

BigMike

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 26, 2000
23,250
When I look at trade value charts I see:
Pick 10 - 1700
Pick 25 - 700

Since GS next year's pick is unknown, I feel like an approx value might be ~pick 25, so another 700. Then you might have to discount it a little since it's future pick.

Pick 25 + 2024 GS + Celtics 2024 1st feels like it matches to me. I'd have to really love the player at 10 to pull the trigger on that though
But what does it do for a Dallas team that is trying to get better now?

the 2024 draft is considered generationally bad. In the end some players will emerge, and there will likely be decent depth pieces in the late teens and 20s, but the top of the draft is considered absolute crap, with some saying the potential #1 guy if he has a good year, but not an unexpected unbelievable type season, would be viewed somewhere around 7 or 8 in this draft

Dallas has been rumored to be interested in dealing 10, but they are looking at something like Capella/Collins and the #15 for #10. Or maybe 22 and a couple of NJ depth pieces (Dorian Finney Smith & Royce Oneal). They are not going to be temped by 25, and a couple of projects they can draft in 2024
 

Carmine Hose

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2001
5,046
Dorchester, MA
I'd hold on to that GS pick next year. Could be a lottery ticket with potential age/injury issues. Last time it happened in the Bay, the pick ended up being #2.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,783
if Boston doesn’t trade the pick, the Smart trade just made Summer League more compelling.

Is Boston done acquiring bigs? I wonder if Detroit would want the 25th pick for Isaiah Stewart.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,767
I'll add Podziemski & Prosper as my reaches at 25

BUT I'm still on Trace Jackson-Davis & Andre Jackson bandwagon
Hell yes to Andre Jackson.

The Celtics need a ball handler. Jackson is a really good one.
The Celtics need a playmaker. Jackson is a really good one.
The Celtics need a defensive assassin. Jackson is an elite one that can cover 1-4.

So he can't shoot. No biggie, not with everything else Boston can put around him. He works unbelievably hard. On and off the court. Hustles like crazy. Does all the dirty work. And he's a tremendous person.

He's basically a much bigger, much younger, much more athletic version of Marcus Smart, though he can't shoot as well. So there's a hole in his game. That's ok. If he was a great shooter he'd be a top 3-4 draft pick. You can live with this hole. A lineup of Jackson, Brown, Tatum, Porzingis, and Horford would be unbelievable defensively and there's plenty of scoring there.

The more I think about it, Jackson is really a PERFECT fit for this squad.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,511
I'd hold on to that GS pick next year. Could be a lottery ticket with potential age/injury issues. Last time it happened in the Bay, the pick ended up being #2.
Just our lottery luck this will happen with a Top-4 protected pick. Anyone know what this pick would default to if so?
 

BigMike

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 26, 2000
23,250
@nighthob mentioned Kevin Porter, Jr.
Do you want KPJ? He has talent, but he has been a problem child through much of his time in Houston. Houston could absorb what looks like just a cap dump in Brogdon, and could maybe flip him at the deadline if he shows he can still play. But I can't see Houston wanting another first round pick this year. They are already struggling with too many young players, and some rumors have them dumping 20 because they can't take anymore picks.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,391
Santa Monica
If Kevin Porter Jr is the answer, I don't want to know the question.

He is a firm PASS, I'd much rather have Brogdon
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,935
If Kevin Porter Jr is the answer, I don't want to know the question.

He is a firm PASS, I'd much rather have Brogdon
Honestly I think Brogdon is getting underrated because people only look at last year for his offense when he was asked to be a bench scorer, he was much better as a true PG in IND (a better passer with fewer turnovers than Marcus) and while his defense was not good last year, it wasn't the disaster many make out. When healthy it was just meh, and with better rim protection behind him you can get away wit that.