The Plan For the #1, er, #3 Overall Pick?
- Thread starter pdaj
- Start date
I was initially in the same boat except with Jackson, but people have converted me to Tatum. I think I had been too enamored with Jackson after seeing a montage of his explosive drives and finishes, but that mostly came courtesy of collegiate players who were vastly inferior athletes moving out of his way. If Tatum's defensive ceiling is comparable to Jackson's, then Tatum's shooting ability puts him over the top. The Celtics desperately need more consistent shooters, and while Fultz would have fit that need, having a big athletic wing providing it fills two needs instead of 1.
Hopefully by the end of today we aren't subjected to anymore takes on the main ESPN shows or local talk radio along the lines of "I can't figure out what Danny Ainge is thinking". As you, a few other posters, and the more astute NBA writers have been trying to point out, the logic is clear. If you like who you can get at #3 as much as what you can get at #1, why not cash in and add another high lottery pick as a "freebie". I believe if they are trying to make a trade, it won't involve this year's pick but rather the other pick they get in this deal along with next year's Brooklyn pick.
Guy on SiriusXM NBA Radio (didn't catch his name)said Jackson is Kawhi Leonard-lite. That his offense is better now than when KL came out and his competitiveness is off the charts.
Long form on Jayson Tatum here: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2711366-built-for-basketball-jayson-tatum-was-born-and-raised-to-be-an-nba-star. Fun quote:
Tatum's dad remembers the moment he realized his son was a special talent. Tatum was in fifth grade and playing in a league with grown men—and he averaged 25 points per game. "The older guys were like, 'Hold on, how old's this kid?'" Justin Tatum laughs.
Tatum vs. Jackson is such a tough call but I'm leaning Tatum due to his offensive skills. He really does remind you of Pierce in the half court. Love that he is a knockdown FT shooter. Jackson is the better athlete but the difference isn't great enough to make a huge difference for me. End of the day, I'm more comfortable with Tatum's potential improvement from 3pt and defense than I am in Jackson becoming a plus NBA scorer. A wing rotation of George or Butler/Hayward/Brown/Tatum would simply be insane if they can pull it off.
The biggest difference between KL and JJ is that KL has a 7'0" wingspan and weighs somewhere around 230 pounds. The weight is the biggest factor as it's doubtful that JJ will be able to guard the 4.
I think it was Dean on draft who pointed out that while JJ is clearly the best athlete on the floor when he plays at the college level, he's not going to be nearly the best athlete when he plays in the NBA so if the Cs take him, there's going to be a learning curve there. I mean when compared to other wings like LBJ, KL, Paul George - not to mention freaks like Giannis or Durant - JJ is going to be at a disadvantage.
Still if the Cs do draft him, this article from the 2016 McD's all-star game will bring a smile to my face: https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/even-among-mcdonalds-all-americans-josh-jackson-stands-out
Ainge has been quoted as saying this team has very good players, they need a great one (or two). My guess is that he doesn't think that Fultz' ceiling is high enough.
There was a graphic in a recent ESPNMagazine (the one with Manny Machado on the cover, and I apologize as I don't have it in front of me so I'm going off memory) where they had polled a bunch of NBA cognoscenti (not sure if they were pundits, execs, or both) rating the top 15-20 players in this draft by their ceilings, divided into four bins: multiple all-star, one time all-star, solid starter or role player/bust. Or if you prefer, great, very good, good, not so good. Fultz had the highest combined percentage for the top three bins, but not a very high pct for the top -- IOW, high floor, low ceiling. The guy with the highest pct of great, but not a high top 3 combination was someone that no one here has even mentioned, (and again I apologize for my faulty memory,) but I think it might have been Jonathan Isaac.
That much is true. When Kawhi was at SD State he couldn't dribble or shoot but he had the physicals. Too much is being made out of FT% of 18-year olds in determining how they will shoot 3PT as 25-year olds imo. Placing some weight on it is fine but too many here look at this one number for a freshman to skew the overall picture of the prospects ability to shoot the ball from distance.
Last edited:
Wouldn't surprise me. Isaac is the real swing-for-the-fences pick, IMO. If Danny were to trade down again (with Sacramento), I'd be all in on him. 6'10", 35% 3pt shooter in college, 78%FT shooter . Good rebounder. The few times I watched him I came away impressed. I'd be curious to hear what others think
Between Jackson and Tatum, put me down for Jackson. With Jackson, the only real (on court) question for me is the shooting, but he made enough shots at Kansas for me to take him #3. It's a question of whether he'll continue to make shots at the NBA level, but I'd bet on yes. Outside of that (which is a genuine question), the guy is instinctive, plays/competes hard, plays aggressively and defends, so the floor is still pretty high. I think he'll also be a guy you can use to facilitate your offense, but again, that's assuming he can knock down shots at an efficient enough clip. (I don't think Jaylen Brown, for example, has the creativity, vision or feel for the game to run your offense through him.) If Jackson proves he can shoot at the NBA level, I think you're looking at a genuine star.
I like Tatum and he's a very gifted and natural scorer, but he has more question marks for me. I think he needs to be an NBA 4 because I don't think he's athletic enough to handle NBA wings. At the 4, is he tough enough? Can he defend quality Bigs? Will he rebound enough? I'm a Tatum fan in general and I'd be perfectly happy with him, but I don't think he's the type of 4 you put next to Hortford and feel great about. While he's a big talent upgrade over Amir and Olynyk, you'd still be seeing opposing teams play volleyball off the glass against Boston. I think there's more to Tatum than say T.J. Warren, but there's enough T.J. Warren stuff there to give me a little more pause at #3 than what I have with Jackson.
FWIW, I'm probably the biggest Lonzo Ball fan here (Mark Jackson and Jason Kidd are the only college players I've seen with Ball's vision, instincts, pace and feel for the game - he's truly elite in those areas), but I don't think he's a roster fit or someone Boston is genuinely considering. But I do think on the right team, Ball is going to be special.
I like Tatum and he's a very gifted and natural scorer, but he has more question marks for me. I think he needs to be an NBA 4 because I don't think he's athletic enough to handle NBA wings. At the 4, is he tough enough? Can he defend quality Bigs? Will he rebound enough? I'm a Tatum fan in general and I'd be perfectly happy with him, but I don't think he's the type of 4 you put next to Hortford and feel great about. While he's a big talent upgrade over Amir and Olynyk, you'd still be seeing opposing teams play volleyball off the glass against Boston. I think there's more to Tatum than say T.J. Warren, but there's enough T.J. Warren stuff there to give me a little more pause at #3 than what I have with Jackson.
FWIW, I'm probably the biggest Lonzo Ball fan here (Mark Jackson and Jason Kidd are the only college players I've seen with Ball's vision, instincts, pace and feel for the game - he's truly elite in those areas), but I don't think he's a roster fit or someone Boston is genuinely considering. But I do think on the right team, Ball is going to be special.
Isaac is definitely the swing-for-the-fences pick. I didn't know that he had a late growth spurt and had been a shooting guard (http://www.naplesnews.com/story/sports/nba/2017/06/17/nba-naples-native-jonathan-isaac-florida-state-expected-go-early-draft/405362001/) before sprouting up to 6'10". Problem is that he has virtually no post-up game right now, he doesn't much of a mid-range game, and he's years away from his potential.
Also, at 6'10", 210 pounds, he probably falls into the Dragan Bender "doesn't have a NBA body" category, which makes me skeptical that DA would take him.
Though one thing Isaac should be able to do is give KD some trouble on defense.
If Jackson had Tatum's offensive polish or Tatum had Jackson's athleticism/defense, you're probably looking at the #1 pick. Jackson's shortcomings (besides his wingspan) are the more possible to be learned, which is why I lean the same way. If Tatum doesn't hit the PP/Melo ceiling I fear he could be a guy who doesn't do enough to help you win. Maybe I understate his athleticism and defensive potential. If he were taller he could be another Dirk.
I am a big Duke fan so I can speak to the whole Jayson Tatum experience. During the period that Coach K took his leave of absence for surgery in the first half of the year, it's not a stretch to say that Tatum was one of my least favorite Duke players ever (I am 29 and my parents are alumni so I have been watching closely for a long time). He had no idea how to play within a team concept. Every possession where he touched the ball would inevitably end with him taking a shot. He complained to the refs all the time and did not seem interested in defending at all. Part of this is because his high school team was awful so he had to be THE GUY. He clearly was not in an environment where he could make the right basketball play and trust his teammates.
However, when K came back a switch went off and he improved big time (to the point where I actually like him now). He started passing more and picking his spots when to go 1 on 1. He turned the energy up, stopped complaining and gave much more effort on the defensive end.
All of this is to say, I think Tatum is the perfect Boston pick. All of his faults and bad habits (short of elite foot speed and change of direction which he will never have) will be worked out of him by Stevens and co....or he won't play at all. And Tatum is a truly gifted scorer. He's sneaky athletic and has the footwork and moves of a much older prospect.
I'm skeptical of Josh Jackson as well. His shooting motion is bad, his FT% was awful, and his measurables (especially wing span) aren't that elite. He's old for a college freshman and his skillset (elite defender, toughness, competitiveness) is great but is very redundant with this Celtics team. And all of that doesn't even account for all of the off court problems.
I trust Ainge but if this trade is as rumored (by the way, have the picks and protections actually been confirmed by anyone reputable? I know Woj put some stuff out there but it seemed more like a general idea. Derek Bodner is the one who "confirmed" the 2-5 protection, but with all due respect to Bodner, I have never seen him break a story ever) and they end up with Josh Jackson I think Ainge made a terrible mistake and really whiffed with what he was given
Adam Himmelsbach said on Zo and Bertrand that not only did Josh Jackson refuse to come to Boston to work out but that he cancelled a workout that the Celtics were going to travel to. He reportedly told them straight up not to come. This is a very odd situation. Maybe him and his agent see the backlog of wings on the team currently and he doesn't want to have limited playing time if all are still on the team come training camp.
The trade just doesn't do it for me. I like Fultz's projection, and JJ/Tatum/etc, are meh in comparison. That being said, I'd rather the Cs scratch a lotto ticket on JJ or Tatum than try to add someone else.
If the Lakers pick ends up 2 or 3 next year, it's a win, but that's improbable at this point. I coveted the certainty of Fultz over more ping pong balls and no improvement from the Lakers/Kings.
If the Lakers pick ends up 2 or 3 next year, it's a win, but that's improbable at this point. I coveted the certainty of Fultz over more ping pong balls and no improvement from the Lakers/Kings.
Last edited:
I hate everything about this trade. This organization has too many bodies as it is. This reeks too much of Ainge trying to look smarter than the rest of the room. The Celtics finally win the lottery and they're going to pass up on the consensus #1, give a team in their division that player that is a perfect fit, downgrade and end up with another Marcus Smart level player for their troubles. Hate it.
Didn't he go to Chaminade? He played with 3 other D1 players. They won a state title. He played on the U17 National Team and the U19 National Team.
""
Even after a grain of salt because of the source- this would make my week, if true.
Don't freak out, but, on @PardonMyTake, Blake Griffin put Boston on his Mt. Rushmore of NBA cities alongside Toronto, Phoenix and NY
I'd read exactly nothing into this. PMT is a great podcast, but the whole bit was to satirize the FA process.
So when will the official deal come down? Weird that it's been a story all weekend, but it's Monday and nothing is official yet.
Seems to me that this trade is about a few things:
1. Fultz's defensive ability or lack thereof
2. If you keep IT you have to have a strong 2 guard to make up for his lack of defense. As part of this it seems like DA is enamored with Avery Bradley and would like to keep him.
3. This year's draft is weak on big men whereas next year is supposed to have a few strong big men coming out. Danny seems to be hoping that he gets a few picks in the early lottery next year so he can improve at the 4 and 5.
4. DA doesn't think that the team can compete with Cleveland or GS without quality big mean.
5. The cap cost difference between the number one pick and the number three pick.
I don't love this trade because I feel as though you're giving a really good player to a young, talented team that is in your division that is going to develop at the same time as the C's. One of the major problems the Celts had last year seemed to be quality shooting. Smart, Crowder, Bradley have spurts of ok shooting, but none of them are natural scorers in the way that Fultz seems to be. I do wonder about Fultz having only one year of school though and how poorly his team performed and how his numbers should be viewed given how he didn't play regularly against elite college teams.
1. Fultz's defensive ability or lack thereof
2. If you keep IT you have to have a strong 2 guard to make up for his lack of defense. As part of this it seems like DA is enamored with Avery Bradley and would like to keep him.
3. This year's draft is weak on big men whereas next year is supposed to have a few strong big men coming out. Danny seems to be hoping that he gets a few picks in the early lottery next year so he can improve at the 4 and 5.
4. DA doesn't think that the team can compete with Cleveland or GS without quality big mean.
5. The cap cost difference between the number one pick and the number three pick.
I don't love this trade because I feel as though you're giving a really good player to a young, talented team that is in your division that is going to develop at the same time as the C's. One of the major problems the Celts had last year seemed to be quality shooting. Smart, Crowder, Bradley have spurts of ok shooting, but none of them are natural scorers in the way that Fultz seems to be. I do wonder about Fultz having only one year of school though and how poorly his team performed and how his numbers should be viewed given how he didn't play regularly against elite college teams.
Not to further derail the thread but being a casual NBA fan, the comments here are really interesting to me. Thanks to all who are contributing.
My read so far is that SoSH consensus is that more than 50% of you are in the "not yet convinced that this was a good idea" camp. For a variety of reasons. I'm planning to stay tuned to see what develops.
My read so far is that SoSH consensus is that more than 50% of you are in the "not yet convinced that this was a good idea" camp. For a variety of reasons. I'm planning to stay tuned to see what develops.
Also saw a link on twitter, which I didn't copy for some reason, that the Celtics were put off a bit by the fact his college team didn't win more.
HRB has converted nearly every single one of you into wingspan nuts
Jackson has a 6'10" wingspan and is 6'7" tall. His wingspan is fine. Sure, he isn't Leonard, but not many people are. To put it into perspective, Jackson has the same wingspan as everyone's favorite wingspan poster boy, Kelly Olynyk. Except Olynyk is 5 inches taller
What makes you think he's the only GM that would do this??? And if it were the case, I'd kind of be happy about that. I'd rather him make the tough decisions that others are too afraid to make. Kinda like that guy we have calling the shots in Foxboro.
Meanwhile, Tatum's 6'11" wingspan is deemed "impressive" even though it is only 1-1/4" greater than Jackson. The difference in standing reach is even less, a mere 3/4" apparently.
http://www.nbadraft.net/face-josh-jackson-vs-jayson-tatum
For some reason I had it in my head that it was more like 6'8" (may have read it somewhere). That he shoots like a t-rex would doesn't help the perception.HRB has converted nearly every single one of you into wingspan nuts
Jackson has a 6'10" wingspan and is 6'7" tall. His wingspan is fine. Sure, he isn't Leonard, but not many people are. To put it into perspective, Jackson has the same wingspan as everyone's favorite wingspan poster boy, Kelly Olynyk. Except Olynyk is 5 inches taller
GMs have such a short lifespan, he might not be the only guy who is perpetually free to choose his own path but I'd bet the number of guys who would pass on Fultz in this spot isn't very large. Of course, usually the guys in this spot are only there because they've been bad at building a winning team and literally have no leeway among fans and management to buck the consensus so it's hard to say, since we never really have the ability to see what the Bufords and Moreys of the world would do in these scenarios.
I think Tatum gets knocked because of how smooth he is. He isn't flashily athletic in the way a Josh Jackson is, and so people think of him as a post knee surgeries Jabari Parker. The thing is that despite the flash Josh Jackson isn't as athletic as the top NBA wings, and I think he projects as more as an Andre Iguodala type than anything else (which is still a good player, but not worth the first pick).
Phoenix is allegedly enamoured of Josh Jackson, I wonder if Boston could work out a swap of 3 for 4 in exchange for swap of their 2018 first for the pick Miami owes Phoenix? Because I'd feel pretty confident in Boston adding Tatum, he has the frame and length to play the 4 spot in the pace & space era, and could be lethal in that role.
Tatum is broader in the shoulders, it's easier to see him playing at 235-245 than Jackson. And it's easier to see him starting at the 4 than Jackson, where any perceived athletic shortcomings are a moot point (because regardless of your feelings about how Tatum matches up athletically with wings he's more than athletic enough for the 4 spot). That's really the issue here.
Jackson will likely be a very good NBA SF, but there's a question if his lateral quickness allows him to guard 1s and 2s in more than bursts and that his frame might prevent him from guarding 4s. He's sort of a bigger Andre Iguodala, which is a really good player, don't get me wrong, I just think that Tatum has more upside.
Yeah, I was listening to a show on 98.5 or something this weekend and they interviewed a reporter from Seattle who said that the losses didn't seem to bother Fultz. Unlike IT when he played there who would seemingly will his team to win. Said he saw a lot of them playing pick up games against each other and IT's team would usually win.
UW did have a number of players leave, but they were still supposed to finish middle of the standings and have an ok year... instead they finished near the bottom.
That's kind of my point. Most GM's likely wouldn't make it because the easy road (and job security road) is to do the safest thing. That's not always the best thing.
I can't see Phoenix risking their potential 2018 lotto pick to take Jackson over Tatum but if they were, I'd jump all over that deal although I'm sure it would have some protections in 2018.
I think that underrates Andre Iguodala. Andre Iguodala is absolutely worth the first pick. If we could get a young Andre Iguodala out of this pick I think that's a homerun. I'm not sure that Jackson is a young Andre Iguodala, because that's a really awesome player. From 06-10 he averaged about 18, 6 and 5. That's good.
They wouldn't be risking a 2018 lottery pick, they'd be risking Miami's top ten protected first. If the pick conveys it would be a mid first, but from Boston's perspective it would be worth moving from a pick in the 23-27 range to one in the 12-18 range (depending on what Miami adds this summer).
Iguodala was/is a fantastic complementary player, you want considerably more than that from a first pick.
I don't know, that seems probably below average for the first pick in the draft.
This doesn't necessarily add more bodies, at least not this year since they didn't add any 2017 picks. If they were sold on Fultz being a level above Tatum (or Jackson), I'm guessing they don't make this deal. I think it is as simple as Ainge deciding Tatum or Jackson is a better fit for their roster, so they might as well get something extra. If they decide they want someone other than Fultz, why stay at 1 to do it?
I agree it's scary to help facilitate Philadelphia getting another piece, because they are eyeing essentially the same Championship window you are. The flip side though is that you at least extracted a valuable asset from them that they won't get to use as trade bait or for another top 5 pick.
Philadelphia was getting another piece no matter what. Now they get one that is maybe a bit better (though Ainge doesn't seem to think so) but they lose an asset in the process. I'm not worried about helping them.
Trade is official.
Getting #3 2017 and Lakers 2018 if in 2-5 range. If Lakers pick is not in range get the better of Sacramento or Philadelphia pick in 2019 unless it's the #1 pick
http://www.nba.com/celtics/news/pressrelease/press-061917-celtics-acquire-first-round-draft-pick
Getting #3 2017 and Lakers 2018 if in 2-5 range. If Lakers pick is not in range get the better of Sacramento or Philadelphia pick in 2019 unless it's the #1 pick
http://www.nba.com/celtics/news/pressrelease/press-061917-celtics-acquire-first-round-draft-pick
Well, I'd have preferred Fultz...and I think there is another shoe to drop. But for now at least I'll enjoy adding another team to "cheer" for in the tankathon.
I do think I would rather Danny had the right to decide on the 2018 pick if it wasn't #1 (i.e. he could decide this time next year whether he wanted the pick or to gamble on 2019). The swap rights in 2019 are useful in a worst case scenario for the Sixers but there should be little chance they get used.
I do think I would rather Danny had the right to decide on the 2018 pick if it wasn't #1 (i.e. he could decide this time next year whether he wanted the pick or to gamble on 2019). The swap rights in 2019 are useful in a worst case scenario for the Sixers but there should be little chance they get used.
Link from the Celtics:
http://www.nba.com/celtics/news/pressrelease/press-061917-celtics-acquire-first-round-draft-pick?sf90219853=1
If it's 2-5 in 2018, they get it. They get the better of Kings/Philly in 2019 unless it's #1 overall. Really don't like the #1 overall protections added for these picks.
http://www.nba.com/celtics/news/pressrelease/press-061917-celtics-acquire-first-round-draft-pick?sf90219853=1
If it's 2-5 in 2018, they get it. They get the better of Kings/Philly in 2019 unless it's #1 overall. Really don't like the #1 overall protections added for these picks.
Adam HimmelsbachVerified account @AdamHimmelsbach 5m5 minutes ago
Here are the protections on '19: Celtics will receive more favorable of Kings/76ers pick, unless it's No. 1 overall, then they get other one
if either of the 2019 picks end up being the 1st overall pick, Boston will get the other pick. Yuck.