Mark Murphy tweeted it yesterday. Chad Ford just tweeted it as well after DA's conference call today.
"Celtics had Josh Jackson & Jayson Tatum ranked in same tier as Fultz and Ball"
The Plan For the #1, er, #3 Overall Pick?
- Thread starter pdaj
- Start date
"Celtics had Josh Jackson & Jayson Tatum ranked in same tier as Fultz and Ball"
I'm not sure if silly is the word, but if you've got a 6'4" scorer versus a 6'8" one, explosiveness and creating separation may be more important to the small scorer than the big one. So I'm guessing its relative to who the player is and where he projects to play and the types of players that would be guarding him.
Got it. That's got some credibility unfortunately. I just cannot get on board with Tatum yet, so I'm hoping it's just misdirection, or they manage to move down again.
It is also relative, so if they were looking for a certain level of explosiveness and didn't see it they would reduce his grade somewhat, where Tatum may have met or exceeded lower expectations for explosiveness which made his overall grade higher given his other skills, profile etc.
Realistically I don't think that's a huge concern. Embiid has missed basically three straight years. Here is an article on 538 about the poor outcomes for big men with his foot injury. How many big men miss three years and come back to play regularly?
Surprised that the #1 protection on the 2019 picks doesn't lapse if the LAL pick fails to convey due to being #1.
Not many but Zydrunas Ilgauskas is an example of someone who beat the odds. He played 29 games in his age 23-25 seasons and then played in 62, 81, 81, 78, 78, 78, 73, 65, 64, 72 games after that.
Possibly get one of the protected Miami picks from Phoenix. No one on their roster that works for the Celtics.So what can you extract out of PHO to move back one spot? And then once that happens, what can you extract out of SAC to move back another?
Hopefully we don't hear this quote over and over the next decade. Why not have a second workout if that is the case? This team's been scouting these guys for how long? Surprised they put that much stock in one workout, especially if they end up drafting the guy that's refused to work out for them.
That's the part that doesn't make sense to me. They've seen him live a million times. It's not a private workout but they should still have a pretty good understanding of how explosive he is.
Which would seem to cover both Ball and Jackson. And Tatum, I believe, hadn't even worked out for them before today, so the trade would have had to be baked before they had the chance to see him in that context as well. Would seem to imply going with someone who had already worked out for the team, or moving the pick?
I'm surprised you are putting so much stock in a quote from one dude who is speculating as to why they aren't enamored with Fultz.
This is part of why I think they're taking Isaac if they keep the pick. They allegedly dinged Fultz cause of the workout. Isaac worked out with the Celtics previously, unlike Jackson, Ball, or Tatum. They're leaving their options open by working out Tatum, but it seems very strange to trade the pick cause of a bad workout, planning to take a guy who you haven't seen yet.
That said, as wade bogs chicken dinner posted, Isaac would be at odds with public reporting, so I'm probably wrong.
I mean I'm sure they had him ranked below another player or two beforehand. The workout probably just confirmed their views. Does the fact that Stevens is in on this make people feel better?
Agreed. I am confident we have zero idea what they were thinking, and likely never will. Certainly, during 'lying season' pre-draft there is almost no accurate information dribbling out of Celtics HQ (nor should there be). Some reports we see will just be making things up, others will be taking 'spin' from the team, and still more will be overextrapoliting from some tiny nugget they heard from someone who themselves may or may not really know anything.
After initial disagreement, I'm fine with passing on Fultz as long as Tatum/Jackson/Isaac is the pick. If it's Isaac, I hope they extra additional value. End of the day, I am very confident in a top 3 coach and GM not whiffing on a top 5 pick.
This thread has more activity than any Red Sox thread in many years. The Sale trade is only 16 pages. Crazy.
They attended a workout of his at another location previously, then worked him out in Boston recently.
It could just be that Ainge knows that sports reporters are far too credulous and that some GMs may be inclined to believe what they read.
The NBA has done a great job creating compelling, multi-year storylines, of which this is a fascinating part. Kudos to them wrt the product as a whole.
If anyone cares, apparently Fultz struggled with his shooting during the 76ers workout.
http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/boston-celtics-markelle-fultz-struggles-during-court-workout-76ers
http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/boston-celtics-markelle-fultz-struggles-during-court-workout-76ers
Cs saw Tatum workout in LA. http://www.celticslife.com/2017/06/celtics-still-seeking-workouts-from.html
Sure but if the C's don't get the LA pick next year that means PHI is possibly adding yet another #1 pick to their roster. If they then end up with the SAC #1 the following year, yikes. Really surprised Ainge agreed to a trade with such a potential low floor. Should have at least had protection from PHI rolling aces and ending up with 4 straight #1s and Boston netting a 3 and potential non-lottery pick two years out.
Chances are slim but not improbable.
Definition of "Improbable": not likely to be true or to happen
The 76ers have a 3.33% chance of having the worst record in the NBA just on the basis of there being 30 teams.
If they do hit on that 3.33% chance, they then have a 25% chance of getting the #1 pick (said a different way, a 75% chance of NOT getting the pick).
I think that is the very definition of "improbable" actually.
I agree with your overall point, but you can't do math like that.
It's like saying there's a 50/50 chance--they either get it or they don't.
Slim but not impossible is probably what Thor meant. The 76ers chances of having the worst record is less relevant than the Lakers chances, since that's the pick we're talking about. Those odds are probably more like 15% because the Lakers just aren't good. And having the worst record is not the only path to winning the lottery. Overall the chances of the Lakers-> Phila pick being number one are probably in the 5% range, +/-1%. I'd run that risk if I were Danny.
The odds of Philly getting the next two top picks is probably something like .75 percent.* That is highly improbable.
I think it's more likely the Lakers fall out of the top 5 than get the one seed, which would slightly increase the odds the Celtics don't make a pick. Maybe something like 2-3%.
All that notwithstanding, I'm not sure why Danny gave in. I find it hard to believe Philly wouldn't have blinked.
*I ran odds assuming fifth worst record each of the next two seasons for Lakers/Kings.
I think it's more likely the Lakers fall out of the top 5 than get the one seed, which would slightly increase the odds the Celtics don't make a pick. Maybe something like 2-3%.
All that notwithstanding, I'm not sure why Danny gave in. I find it hard to believe Philly wouldn't have blinked.
*I ran odds assuming fifth worst record each of the next two seasons for Lakers/Kings.
The math that matters are the odds of LA either picking 1 or 6+ next year and SAC picking #1 the following year.
I'm going to assume PHI is at the back end of the lottery if in it at all in 2yrs.
If we assume LA has a 20% chance of being 1 or 6+ next year and SAC has a 10% shot at 1st overall in 2019 that leaves BOS with a 2% chance of ending up with the #3 and PHI pick. At minimum Danny should have had extra protection if they end up with a non-lotto pick in 2019. Something like an extra first in 2020 or simply no protection on SAC pick would have made sense.
I'm going to assume PHI is at the back end of the lottery if in it at all in 2yrs.
If we assume LA has a 20% chance of being 1 or 6+ next year and SAC has a 10% shot at 1st overall in 2019 that leaves BOS with a 2% chance of ending up with the #3 and PHI pick. At minimum Danny should have had extra protection if they end up with a non-lotto pick in 2019. Something like an extra first in 2020 or simply no protection on SAC pick would have made sense.
I ran some numbers this morning, and if Danny thought the Lakers would finish someplace between 1st and 5th worst, the aggregate odds of getting the pick (2-5) is 71%. If they finish between 1st and 6th, it's 61%, and 1st to 7th was 54%. Obviously if you "know" where they finish you've got the exact odds, but I'm guessing the Celtics performed a win expectancy exercise and figured they'd come out in a certain range (assuming no marquis free agents or trades). Finishing 1-7 (probable) and coming out with a +50% chance at the pick seems like a decent risk.
Of course the George situation complicates this quite a bit. George goes to the Lakers and those percentages drop precipitously. The Pacers have no choice but to trade him and if the Lakers are smart they will make sure he gets dealt to them. I just don't think the Lakers can risk George getting traded to a contender as this seriously risks their chance of signing him long-term. Because unless LeBron is joining him in LA, I just don't see PG leaving a top-seeded playoff team to join a lottery team.
With the Cs having added incentive to make sure LA stays a bad team in 2017 it really looks like PG will either end up with LA or Boston, depending on who offers more.
LAL could assume George, a man of his word, will be theirs in '18. And having no '18 pick, and indifferent to where they finish, may not bid for George to keep those assets for the pursuit of other players. Perhaps the Celts should offer a lowball package (2nd round pick + Crowder ?) to the Pacers to just keep George out of LA for a year to protect their option on the '18 LA pick.
Even if George does go to LAL, and let's say that Randle/Clarkson/future pick go back to IND, how good are the Lakers going to be? They still kinda suck, even with George. Sure, they won't have the worst record in the league, but they are still a bottom 10 team for sure.
There is some precedence for this (i.e., McHale agreeing to KG to Boston). Larry's on his way out, but probably still wields a bit on influence in Indiana.
We want the Lakers to be a #2-5 team, if they're a bottom 6 team, the Celts lose the '18 LA pick. It might be worth it to give the Pacers a reason to trade him to the Celts just to keep that option alive. And George may decide that he likes Boston and re-ups.(small %) If he sucks, or a club house cancer thats the risk, but you're not offering a lot and its just for one year.
Kevin Pelton on the ESPN Lockdown podcast today said he did an analysis and the average difference in value between the #1 and #3 is about the #13 pick, so he thinks Ainge did well (even accounting for the delayed gratification).
I can understand Philly not wanting to give up the #3 and a #1 for a #1 psychologically (not to mention that they would want the asset of the best player in the draft to bolster their lineup). I sure wish the second year (Kings pick) didn't have the same protection though. It would address the point Thor was trying to make about the 76ers getting the #1 pick 4 years in a row. Maybe Ainge could have offered their own #1 as a kicker in 2019 if the Kings pick turned out to be #1.
As for the #3 this year I think it will come down to Jackson/Tatum. Ainge probably sees 4 equivalently rated players in the Fultz/Ball/Tatum/Jackson quartet. Neither Ball nor Fultz are known to have an explosive first step and rely more on skill/craftiness for separation. Not sure if that becomes an added risk in trying to evaluate how that translates to the pro game. Tatum seems to have a higher floor and more polished game right now. Jackson however seems to have that explosion and a higher ceiling than Tatum (or Jaylen Brown according to someone i heard on a podcast - Kevin OConnor maybe?).
As for those advocating a trade of #3 for 5 and 10 - unless Ainge can encourage one of the two picks to be stashed overseas, their guaranteed salaries would be an additional impediment when it comes time to clear salaries to try to make room for a max FA deal for Hayward/Griffin.
I can understand Philly not wanting to give up the #3 and a #1 for a #1 psychologically (not to mention that they would want the asset of the best player in the draft to bolster their lineup). I sure wish the second year (Kings pick) didn't have the same protection though. It would address the point Thor was trying to make about the 76ers getting the #1 pick 4 years in a row. Maybe Ainge could have offered their own #1 as a kicker in 2019 if the Kings pick turned out to be #1.
As for the #3 this year I think it will come down to Jackson/Tatum. Ainge probably sees 4 equivalently rated players in the Fultz/Ball/Tatum/Jackson quartet. Neither Ball nor Fultz are known to have an explosive first step and rely more on skill/craftiness for separation. Not sure if that becomes an added risk in trying to evaluate how that translates to the pro game. Tatum seems to have a higher floor and more polished game right now. Jackson however seems to have that explosion and a higher ceiling than Tatum (or Jaylen Brown according to someone i heard on a podcast - Kevin OConnor maybe?).
As for those advocating a trade of #3 for 5 and 10 - unless Ainge can encourage one of the two picks to be stashed overseas, their guaranteed salaries would be an additional impediment when it comes time to clear salaries to try to make room for a max FA deal for Hayward/Griffin.
Sorry for asking a question most people here probably know the answer to, but if the additional pick BOS is getting is bumped to the 2019 SAC pick and that ends up being #1, does the pick just disappear and BOS gets nothing besides this year's #3? I know that is low-percentage, but I don't see that answer spelled out anywhere, sorry.
The Celtics would get the SAC/PHI 2019 pick that isn't #1. The 2019 pick otherwise is the better of SAC/PHI.
Ha I had a similar thought experiment with Jackson having that rumored promise and refusing to work out for the Celtics thinking maybe Philly made the promise and just wanted to guarantee LA didn't sneak in. Then LA panics and takes Ball while we end up with "the guy we would have taken #1" with Fultz. Then I saw that Danny Ainge isn't Kevin Costner so this isn't going to happen.
I'm mostly In Danny We Trust so I've gradually talked myself into this trade and the rational part of me says we likely end up with much more value with the trade. I'm just disappointed that the #1 seemed like the ultimate goal from the Brooklyn trade and we finally had one and I had fallen in love with Fultz over the last couple of weeks. What's done is done and now I get to root against the Lakers with some stakes beyond the usual "I hate the Lakers"
I know it's SAS and all that but he's reporting that PHI turned down Butler for #3. http://thebiglead.com/2017/06/19/philadelphia-76ers-turned-down-jimmy-butler-for-3-so-whats-keeping-the-celtics-from-grabbing-him/