Your top priority off-season (with a constraint)

[bogg]

I think that's hard to say for certain, but not really critical. The point is: they'd both be major upgrades over our current situation. And if the Cs were gonna take a wing, they should have taken Bey.

Bey?  Bey isn't good though.

Do you mean Bane?

What's wrong with Saddiq Bey?

Poor shooting percentages, below average defense, doesn't do anything else of note aside from inefficient scoring. 

Look, maybe you get the kid on a team that isn't the Pistons and he looks better.  Still... I'm not sweating over not picking Bey when we had the chance.

Is he an actual NBA player?

I'd have rather taken Maxey or Anthony, but even Bey would have been a better pick.

I don't know, man. 

When people are fretting over the Nesmith pick and bringing up mediocre players as alternatives we "should have drafted instead", it doesn't make me think we missed.  Just makes me think that was a weak draft in that 14-20 range in terms of win-now options. 

I admittedly don't like playing the hindsight draft game in the first place, but if I'm going to play it, I at least want to think mournfully about cases like the Olynyk/Giannis pick.  That one is fun to regret, at least.  But Cole Anthony?  Tyrese Maxey?  Saddiq Bey?  None of these guys interest me any, sorry.  Have they shown more than Nesmith?  Sure.  They still aren't particularly good.

The real mistake made in connection to that draft was holding onto all three picks at the prior trade deadline. Cash out on a pair of those picks for veteran help and you aren't playing a four-man roster in the ECF against Miami.

[todd_days_41]

I think that's hard to say for certain, but not really critical. The point is: they'd both be major upgrades over our current situation. And if the Cs were gonna take a wing, they should have taken Bey.

Bey?  Bey isn't good though.

Do you mean Bane?

What's wrong with Saddiq Bey?

Poor shooting percentages, below average defense, doesn't do anything else of note aside from inefficient scoring. 

Look, maybe you get the kid on a team that isn't the Pistons and he looks better.  Still... I'm not sweating over not picking Bey when we had the chance.

Is he an actual NBA player?

I'd have rather taken Maxey or Anthony, but even Bey would have been a better pick.

I don't know, man. 

When people are fretting over the Nesmith pick and bringing up mediocre players as alternatives we "should have drafted instead", it doesn't make me think we missed.  Just makes me think that was a weak draft in that 14-20 range in terms of win-now options. 

I admittedly don't like playing the hindsight draft game in the first place, but if I'm going to play it, I at least want to think mournfully about cases like the Olynyk/Giannis pick.  That one is fun to regret, at least.  But Cole Anthony?  Tyrese Maxey?  Saddiq Bey?  None of these guys interest me any, sorry.  Have they shown more than Nesmith?  Sure.  They still aren't particularly good.

See, I take the opposite approach, in a way. I've harped plenty on the Giannis miss. It's the gold standard in draft **** ups.

But I prefer to operate in the more systematic misses year over year, particularly recently, because it's harder to defend.

If you don't like Bey, that's fine. He's clearly an NBA player, where Nosmith is highly at risk in this category.

However, missing on Anthony (next player taken) and Maxey -- particularly considering this team's lack of PG talent -- is , frankly, ridiculous. A giant whiff by the Celtics any way you slice it.

Regardless, the Cs missed on a bunch of good NBA players to take a guy who can't get on the floor.

[Atzar]

Is he an actual NBA player?

I'd have rather taken Maxey or Anthony, but even Bey would have been a better pick.

I don't know, man. 

When people are fretting over the Nesmith pick and bringing up mediocre players as alternatives we "should have drafted instead", it doesn't make me think we missed.  Just makes me think that was a weak draft in that 14-20 range in terms of win-now options. 

I admittedly don't like playing the hindsight draft game in the first place, but if I'm going to play it, I at least want to think mournfully about cases like the Olynyk/Giannis pick.  That one is fun to regret, at least.  But Cole Anthony?  Tyrese Maxey?  Saddiq Bey?  None of these guys interest me any, sorry.  Have they shown more than Nesmith?  Sure.  They still aren't particularly good.

See, I take the opposite approach, in a way. I've harped plenty on the Giannis miss. It's the gold standard in draft **** ups.

But I prefer to operate in the more systematic misses year over year, particularly recently, because it's harder to defend.

If you don't like Bey, that's fine. He's clearly an NBA player, where Nosmith is highly at risk in this category.

However, missing on Anthony (next player taken) and Maxey -- particularly considering this team's lack of PG talent -- is , frankly, ridiculous. A giant whiff by the Celtics any way you slice it.

Regardless, the Cs missed on a bunch of good NBA players to take a guy who can't get on the floor.

Alright, I'm shelving the Maxey discussion because talking about our overall draft performance is much more interesting.  (though one parting shot I want to mention:  keep in mind that we passed up Maxey in a year when we still thought Kemba was part of our future.  Our PG position is screwed because Kemba fell off a cliff, not because we didn't draft Maxey or Anthony). 

I still don't view Giannis as a f***-up, per se.  We picked at a point in the draft where teams should realistically hope for a solid roleplayer.  We got one - in fact, I'm pretty sure Olynyk exceeded the expected win shares of a player taken at his spot in the draft (though unfortunately, the most useful article on the subject from a quick google search is from 2014:  https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-is-winning-the-nba-draft-lottery-really-worth/).  But Giannis was the coin flip that lands on its edge.  Nobody, Bucks included, saw him turning into arguably the best player in the NBA. 

This is why I think the hindsight exercises are pointless.  We got what we came for, but nobody mentions the fact that Olynyk was actually successful as far as 13th picks go.  That pick is viewed as a failure, rather than the mild success it was, simply because everybody fixates on Giannis.  If we were wrong, then 29 GMs should walk the plank for their transgressions that day.

Not sure I even agree that our overall draft performance is poor.  The Jays were hits.  Rob is a hit.  Grant looks likely to meet or exceed his expected WS and Pritchard, lack of opportunity this season aside, is in the same boat.  Rozier was fine.  Romeo and Nesmith have underperformed.  Yabusele and Zizic were flops.  James Young was a flop.  How far back am I going here?  Our lack of success in the second round is notable, with Ojeleye being the only recent pick who was even slightly useful.  Overall?  Doesn't look at all indefensible to me, according to expected value.

But if we're playing the "that draft was a failure because we picked X when Y was available" game, then I suspect that you'll want to fire every single GM in the league by the end of that exercise. 

[gouki88]

Till the day the Sixers trade Simmons, my top priority would always be to create a big 3 of Tatum-Brown-Simmons.

Generally speaking, I reckon we desperately need better ball movement. We could have a use for a pass-first player. He doesn't have to be a star. He doesn't have to be a PG either. For instance, I'd love us to go after Joe Ingles or Kyle Anderson.

This is one of the few plans that the J's may actually work together. Simmons has the weight to actually call for the ball and receive it, and stop the J's from sometimes shooting the team in the foot. Our switch happy coach would be in heaven.

End of the Rob Williams era.

Gotta move on from a non-shooting / garbage man center to a floor spacing center (like Myles Turner). Or small ball with Simmons at center.

It would be pretty cool to see Simmons at center, the Jays at forward and two guards who handle it and shoot. Whether that be as a starting unit or a death lineup ala GSW with Draymond. That lineup would be so tough to matchup with.

I also love the defensive capacity of M.Turner & B.Simmons with the Jays as the 3rd and 4th best defenders in the lineup. That is an amazingly talented defensive unit. They should have excellent offensive chemistry as well as everyone is in their comfort zone and allowed play to their strengths.

Agreed with the bolded part. I was thinking something like this.

PG: Pritchard
SG: Brown
SF: Ingles
PF: Tatum
C: Simmons

No need to start two Guards alongside a Point Center. Simmons would be the primary ball handler in the open court and a secondary ball handler in the half court. At the same time, most guards are undersized in a switch-heavy defensive scheme. Adding a third wing would allow us to take better advantage of Simmons' defensive versatility.

Pritchard is a lethal shooter with deep range. He'd be a perfect fit next to Simmons on the offensive side of the ball.

Ingles is a terrific shooter and a willing passer. Again, perfect fit next to Simmons. Apparently, his D isn't what it used to be, which is why the Jazz are open to moving him.

Too bad it's probably an unrealistic scenario. I highly doubt the Sixers want to deal with us.

Would you do it if it got the Sixers Dame

Yes. I like the Celtics more than I dislike the Sixers. In fact, I'd do literally any deal as long as we ended up with Tatum-Brown-Simmons. I'd be willing to overpay in terms of picks cause I'd expect us to be legit contenders for years to come.

As much as I loathe Simmons, a Pritchard-Brown-Ingles-Tatum-Simmons team would be lots of fun (with competent coaching)

If they were teammates, Ingles could even persuade Simmons to play for Australia. Perhaps you wouldn't hate him that much anymore.

Never thought about that angle...

[gouki88]

I think that's hard to say for certain, but not really critical. The point is: they'd both be major upgrades over our current situation. And if the Cs were gonna take a wing, they should have taken Bey.

Bey?  Bey isn't good though.

Do you mean Bane?

What's wrong with Saddiq Bey?

Poor shooting percentages, below average defense, doesn't do anything else of note aside from inefficient scoring. 

Look, maybe you get the kid on a team that isn't the Pistons and he looks better.  Still... I'm not sweating over not picking Bey when we had the chance.

Is he an actual NBA player?

I'd have rather taken Maxey or Anthony, but even Bey would have been a better pick.

I don't know, man. 

When people are fretting over the Nesmith pick and bringing up mediocre players as alternatives we "should have drafted instead", it doesn't make me think we missed.  Just makes me think that was a weak draft in that 14-20 range in terms of win-now options. 

I admittedly don't like playing the hindsight draft game in the first place, but if I'm going to play it, I at least want to think mournfully about cases like the Olynyk/Giannis pick.  That one is fun to regret, at least.  But Cole Anthony?  Tyrese Maxey?  Saddiq Bey?  None of these guys interest me any, sorry.  Have they shown more than Nesmith?  Sure.  They still aren't particularly good.

Maxey is starting for a very good team, averaging nearly 17 PPG, shooting above 40% from 3, and dishing 4.5 assists and only 1.2 turnovers.  That's pretty darn good for a second year point guard. In fact, couldn't we really use a guy like that right now?

Udoka would bench him anyway

[Vermont Green]

I think we are fine at PG.  Smart and Schroder are fine.  There are better PGs around but I just don't see this as a weakness.  If we had a good PF though, that would be improving upon Al Horford and Grant Williams.  Our biggest need is a PF or more broadly, a skilled big.  We start Horford and RWill and then our first "big" off the bench is GWill.  That is where our biggest need is.

Offensive Efficiency - 17th
Assists per possession - 20th
Turnovers per possession - 18th

I think PG is a pretty big need


Look at the top 10 teams in offensive efficiency

Utah - Conley / Mitchell
Atlanta - Trae Young
Miami - Lowry / Butler
Phoenix - CP3
Brooklyn - Harden
Chicago - Lonzo
Charlotte - LaMelo
Milwaukee - Giannis / Holiday
Philly - Maxey / Curry
Memphis - Morant


The only odd team out here is Philly. Maxey /Curry is not a great playmaking combo. But I think that's an exception that makes the rule -- Philly has Embiid drawing attention inside.  Embiid is averaging about the same number of assists as each of the guards.


Upgrading the shooting around Tatum and Brown would help, too, no doubt.  But I think the Celts' current backcourt just isn't good enough.

Schroder holds the ball too long, kind does his own thing more than operate within the offense, and is not actually a very accurate passer.  Smart is a decent passer, but his inability to consistently shoot makes it hard for him to really break a defense down.  Not to mention that he's not really speedy enough to beat most guys off the dribble.  If he's penetrating, he's usually finishing with a floater or trying to draw contact.

The Celtics have a 52.4% eFG with Smart on the court and 48.9% when he is off.  Points per 100 possessions the team is 8.5 points better with Smart than without.  Defensively, he adds another 2.1 points for a total net of 10.6 points per 100 possessions.

I an not trying to say there are not better PGs out there than Marcus Smart, I just don't think a different or even better PG is going to have the impact many seem to think.  I feel the bigger impact would be from bringing in a skilled big.  There is no way to prove it either way.

In terms of your overall efficiency numbers, many of those teams have at least one really skilled big.  None of our bigs are "efficient".  Horford, Rob, and Grant all hurt our efficiency.  Plus Tatum is having a down season for shooting.  There are certainly PGs out there that could come in and have a higher individual efficiency than Smart but I don't see it as making the team better.  I don't see that as the problem or the weakness.  I understand I am in the minority.

[sgrogan]

I think we are fine at PG.  Smart and Schroder are fine.  There are better PGs around but I just don't see this as a weakness.  If we had a good PF though, that would be improving upon Al Horford and Grant Williams.  Our biggest need is a PF or more broadly, a skilled big.  We start Horford and RWill and then our first "big" off the bench is GWill.  That is where our biggest need is.

Offensive Efficiency - 17th
Assists per possession - 20th
Turnovers per possession - 18th

I think PG is a pretty big need


Look at the top 10 teams in offensive efficiency

Utah - Conley / Mitchell
Atlanta - Trae Young
Miami - Lowry / Butler
Phoenix - CP3
Brooklyn - Harden
Chicago - Lonzo
Charlotte - LaMelo
Milwaukee - Giannis / Holiday
Philly - Maxey / Curry
Memphis - Morant


The only odd team out here is Philly. Maxey /Curry is not a great playmaking combo. But I think that's an exception that makes the rule -- Philly has Embiid drawing attention inside.  Embiid is averaging about the same number of assists as each of the guards.


Upgrading the shooting around Tatum and Brown would help, too, no doubt.  But I think the Celts' current backcourt just isn't good enough.

Schroder holds the ball too long, kind does his own thing more than operate within the offense, and is not actually a very accurate passer.  Smart is a decent passer, but his inability to consistently shoot makes it hard for him to really break a defense down.  Not to mention that he's not really speedy enough to beat most guys off the dribble.  If he's penetrating, he's usually finishing with a floater or trying to draw contact.

The Celtics have a 52.4% eFG with Smart on the court and 48.9% when he is off.  Points per 100 possessions the team is 8.5 points better with Smart than without.  Defensively, he adds another 2.1 points for a total net of 10.6 points per 100 possessions.

I an not trying to say there are not better PGs out there than Marcus Smart, I just don't think a different or even better PG is going to have the impact many seem to think.  I feel the bigger impact would be from bringing in a skilled big.  There is no way to prove it either way.

In terms of your overall efficiency numbers, many of those teams have at least one really skilled big.  None of our bigs are "efficient".  Horford, Rob, and Grant all hurt our efficiency.  Plus Tatum is having a down season for shooting.  There are certainly PGs out there that could come in and have a higher individual efficiency than Smart but I don't see it as making the team better.  I don't see that as the problem or the weakness.  I understand I am in the minority.

I think I get your point, but RWIII is very "efficient", he's limited, and maybe less skilled than what you propose.

[RodyTur10]

I believe Smart, Brown, Tatum and Timelord are fine as starters (Smart doesn't necessarily have to start in my book, but I don't find it a problem). With those four you NEED an extra offball offensive thread. That can be an elite movement shooter or someone who has a complete offensive package. That's not Horford. I would try Richardson and if that doesn't work, I'd try Nesmith. And if both these options fail then I would certainly go on the market.

[PhoSita]

None of our bigs are "efficient".  Horford, Rob, and Grant all hurt our efficiency. 

Given that Grant is shooting the lights out from deep (also finishing 85% near the basket LOL) and Rob finishes over 70% of his attempts I'm not sure what type of efficiency you're talking about here.

Even Al is money from inside 16 feet (75% near the basket and his midrange efficiency is pretty excellent).  Not to mention that Al is still a very skilled passer and defender.

I certainly agree that playing Horford and Rob together is detrimental to the offense, but that's because double bigs is very hard to make work on offense in the modern NBA.

[Moranis]

Is he an actual NBA player?

I'd have rather taken Maxey or Anthony, but even Bey would have been a better pick.

I don't know, man. 

When people are fretting over the Nesmith pick and bringing up mediocre players as alternatives we "should have drafted instead", it doesn't make me think we missed.  Just makes me think that was a weak draft in that 14-20 range in terms of win-now options. 

I admittedly don't like playing the hindsight draft game in the first place, but if I'm going to play it, I at least want to think mournfully about cases like the Olynyk/Giannis pick.  That one is fun to regret, at least.  But Cole Anthony?  Tyrese Maxey?  Saddiq Bey?  None of these guys interest me any, sorry.  Have they shown more than Nesmith?  Sure.  They still aren't particularly good.

See, I take the opposite approach, in a way. I've harped plenty on the Giannis miss. It's the gold standard in draft **** ups.

But I prefer to operate in the more systematic misses year over year, particularly recently, because it's harder to defend.

If you don't like Bey, that's fine. He's clearly an NBA player, where Nosmith is highly at risk in this category.

However, missing on Anthony (next player taken) and Maxey -- particularly considering this team's lack of PG talent -- is , frankly, ridiculous. A giant whiff by the Celtics any way you slice it.

Regardless, the Cs missed on a bunch of good NBA players to take a guy who can't get on the floor.

Alright, I'm shelving the Maxey discussion because talking about our overall draft performance is much more interesting.  (though one parting shot I want to mention:  keep in mind that we passed up Maxey in a year when we still thought Kemba was part of our future.  Our PG position is screwed because Kemba fell off a cliff, not because we didn't draft Maxey or Anthony). 

I still don't view Giannis as a f***-up, per se.  We picked at a point in the draft where teams should realistically hope for a solid roleplayer.  We got one - in fact, I'm pretty sure Olynyk exceeded the expected win shares of a player taken at his spot in the draft (though unfortunately, the most useful article on the subject from a quick google search is from 2014:  https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-is-winning-the-nba-draft-lottery-really-worth/).  But Giannis was the coin flip that lands on its edge.  Nobody, Bucks included, saw him turning into arguably the best player in the NBA. 

This is why I think the hindsight exercises are pointless.  We got what we came for, but nobody mentions the fact that Olynyk was actually successful as far as 13th picks go.  That pick is viewed as a failure, rather than the mild success it was, simply because everybody fixates on Giannis.  If we were wrong, then 29 GMs should walk the plank for their transgressions that day.

Not sure I even agree that our overall draft performance is poor.  The Jays were hits.  Rob is a hit.  Grant looks likely to meet or exceed his expected WS and Pritchard, lack of opportunity this season aside, is in the same boat.  Rozier was fine.  Romeo and Nesmith have underperformed.  Yabusele and Zizic were flops.  James Young was a flop.  How far back am I going here?  Our lack of success in the second round is notable, with Ojeleye being the only recent pick who was even slightly useful.  Overall?  Doesn't look at all indefensible to me, according to expected value.

But if we're playing the "that draft was a failure because we picked X when Y was available" game, then I suspect that you'll want to fire every single GM in the league by the end of that exercise.

and in a redraft he'd probably come in in the 8-12 range.  Maybe even as high as 6 as I think really only Giannis, Gobert, McCollum, Covington (who wasn't even drafted), and Oladipo (because of his peak) would clearly go before him.  I'd personally put Adams in the clearly ahead of him group.  After that though it is a matter of preference with guys like Otto Porter, Jr., KCP, Hardaway Jr., Dieng, Cody Zeller (injuries hurt him badly), Plumlee, and Schroder.  Bullock has really come on lately, but I'd still take KO over him.  So in a redraft he almost certainly goes before 13, which makes him a good pick even within that draft, which I think is the best way to do the analysis. 

But that is a strange draft as the 3 best players went 15, 27, and 10 (and the 4th best wasn't even drafted). 

[Vermont Green]

None of our bigs are "efficient".  Horford, Rob, and Grant all hurt our efficiency. 

Given that Grant is shooting the lights out from deep (also finishing 85% near the basket LOL) and Rob finishes over 70% of his attempts I'm not sure what type of efficiency you're talking about here.

Even Al is money from inside 16 feet (75% near the basket and his midrange efficiency is pretty excellent).  Not to mention that Al is still a very skilled passer and defender.

I certainly agree that playing Horford and Rob together is detrimental to the offense, but that's because double bigs is very hard to make work on offense in the modern NBA.

It is not about their individual statistical efficiency, it is that we lose some much skill and ability.  Yes, RWill can do the alley oop dunk.  Yes, Grant can hit a 3 if wide open and in the corner (not sure you want to count on that in a pressure playoff game) and yes, Al can make a shot or two here and there.

The room for improvement in our bigs is so great though.  I would be fine with Horford and RWill as our Centers (never on the court together) and GWill as our 4th big/2nd PF, but we need a starting level PF with some skill, some punch to balance out our team and allow the team overall to be harder to defend, more dynamic.

An upgrade at PG would improve things some also but I see that as far less of a need, far less of a weakness.

[SHAQATTACK]

Get a quality Point guard … delete as many current guards as necessary without prejudice.

[Smartacus]

Get a quality Point guard … delete as many current guards as necessary without prejudice.

 

The trades and buyouts will continue until morale improves.

[Jvalin]

None of our bigs are "efficient".  Horford, Rob, and Grant all hurt our efficiency. 

Given that Grant is shooting the lights out from deep (also finishing 85% near the basket LOL) and Rob finishes over 70% of his attempts I'm not sure what type of efficiency you're talking about here.

Even Al is money from inside 16 feet (75% near the basket and his midrange efficiency is pretty excellent).  Not to mention that Al is still a very skilled passer and defender.

I certainly agree that playing Horford and Rob together is detrimental to the offense, but that's because double bigs is very hard to make work on offense in the modern NBA.

It is not about their individual statistical efficiency, it is that we lose some much skill and ability.  Yes, RWill can do the alley oop dunk.  Yes, Grant can hit a 3 if wide open and in the corner (not sure you want to count on that in a pressure playoff game) and yes, Al can make a shot or two here and there.

The room for improvement in our bigs is so great though.  I would be fine with Horford and RWill as our Centers (never on the court together) and GWill as our 4th big/2nd PF, but we need a starting level PF with some skill, some punch to balance out our team and allow the team overall to be harder to defend, more dynamic.

An upgrade at PG would improve things some also but I see that as far less of a need, far less of a weakness.

Agreed on Smart. That said, I'd want us to go after a swing, not a PF. Preferably a Point Forward in the mold of Ingles/SloMo. Imo, Tatum is at his best when playing at PF. Traditional PFs aren't mobile enough to stay in front of him on the perimeter. This is a massive advantage in our favour, especially since Tatum can put the ball on the floor and create his own shot.

[pokeKingCurtis]

None of our bigs are "efficient".  Horford, Rob, and Grant all hurt our efficiency. 

Given that Grant is shooting the lights out from deep (also finishing 85% near the basket LOL) and Rob finishes over 70% of his attempts I'm not sure what type of efficiency you're talking about here.

Even Al is money from inside 16 feet (75% near the basket and his midrange efficiency is pretty excellent).  Not to mention that Al is still a very skilled passer and defender.

I certainly agree that playing Horford and Rob together is detrimental to the offense, but that's because double bigs is very hard to make work on offense in the modern NBA.

It is not about their individual statistical efficiency, it is that we lose some much skill and ability.  Yes, RWill can do the alley oop dunk.  Yes, Grant can hit a 3 if wide open and in the corner (not sure you want to count on that in a pressure playoff game) and yes, Al can make a shot or two here and there.

The room for improvement in our bigs is so great though.  I would be fine with Horford and RWill as our Centers (never on the court together) and GWill as our 4th big/2nd PF, but we need a starting level PF with some skill, some punch to balance out our team and allow the team overall to be harder to defend, more dynamic.

An upgrade at PG would improve things some also but I see that as far less of a need, far less of a weakness.

Agreed on Smart. That said, I'd want us to go after a swing, not a PF. Preferably a Point Forward in the mold of Ingles/SloMo. Imo, Tatum is at his best when playing at PF. Traditional PFs aren't mobile enough to stay in front of him on the perimeter. This is a massive advantage in our favour, especially since Tatum can put the ball on the floor and create his own shot.

Tatum also has a size advantage now at the 3. Dude is massive.

Both are fine. A skilled (s)wing who can pass it, or just a small forward-type like Jerami Grant. We're just so slow, plodding and unskilled at the 4 right now.