Draft less then a week away and more questions then anything (my MOCK)

[danglertx]

#16 Cetlics, Lyles: this is a fall compared to where most mocks have him going but it could be for the best in the long term. Lyles skill set are a great fit for BS style/system and may be a better . I also think Looney and Portis get long looks here if the Cs can't trade up. The fact that Lyles is still on the board may actually help the Cs in a trade up situation. 


#28 Celtics, D Johnson:[/b] In an ideal situation I think DA would want to package this pick and #33 to move up to try to grab a wing player assuming they dont land one at #16. RHJ and J Anderson would be the logical targets. If not as a late first Johnson is a worth while gamble. Johnson may never be a starting center in the league but its not hard to see him as a 15-20 mpg valuable backup. He would likely spend the season the in D-Leauge but down the road his size in the paint and post scoring coud be a welcome addition to the Cs bench.



2nd Round

#33 Celtics, Andrew Harrison: so I unintentional have the Cs using UK as their farm system in this draft but the picks seems like a good fit. Two years ago scouts would have thought it was crazy to think Harrison would be available in the second round. At one time he was viewed as a lottery lock. His game never flourished on the the super talented UK roster but the tools are their. With his size he should make for a great utility player capable of playing PG, SG and against smaller SFs. The fact that he has a nack for getting into the paint should really help in the NBA. He seems like a better long term fit as the 4th guard over the diminutive Pressey.

I pray we take Portis at 16 if he is still there but a statistical analysis by FiveThirtyEight has D. Johnson as the sixth best prospect in the draft, so getting him at 28 would be a steal.   Not a fan of Harrison at all in the second round but the same site has him one spot behind Portis at 22. 

[tazzmaniac]

#16 Cetlics, Lyles: this is a fall compared to where most mocks have him going but it could be for the best in the long term. Lyles skill set are a great fit for BS style/system and may be a better . I also think Looney and Portis get long looks here if the Cs can't trade up. The fact that Lyles is still on the board may actually help the Cs in a trade up situation. 


#28 Celtics, D Johnson:[/b] In an ideal situation I think DA would want to package this pick and #33 to move up to try to grab a wing player assuming they dont land one at #16. RHJ and J Anderson would be the logical targets. If not as a late first Johnson is a worth while gamble. Johnson may never be a starting center in the league but its not hard to see him as a 15-20 mpg valuable backup. He would likely spend the season the in D-Leauge but down the road his size in the paint and post scoring coud be a welcome addition to the Cs bench.



2nd Round

#33 Celtics, Andrew Harrison: so I unintentional have the Cs using UK as their farm system in this draft but the picks seems like a good fit. Two years ago scouts would have thought it was crazy to think Harrison would be available in the second round. At one time he was viewed as a lottery lock. His game never flourished on the the super talented UK roster but the tools are their. With his size he should make for a great utility player capable of playing PG, SG and against smaller SFs. The fact that he has a nack for getting into the paint should really help in the NBA. He seems like a better long term fit as the 4th guard over the diminutive Pressey.

I pray we take Portis at 16 if he is still there but a statistical analysis by FiveThirtyEight has D. Johnson as the sixth best prospect in the draft, so getting him at 28 would be a steal.   Not a fan of Harrison at all in the second round but the same site has him one spot behind Portis at 22.

If there is a statistical analysis showing Dakari Johnson as the 6th best prospect in the draft whoever did it should be barred from evaluating basketball for the rest of their lives.  I wouldn't use our #33 pick on Johnson. 

[tarheelsxxiii]

It's interesting. I looked into the site and it seems reputable, but their predictors are qualitatively pretty weak. Their regression model includes age, height and weight, college statistics, and his top 100 ranking (per Ford). They claim their model is novel (and better) because they include some regressor that takes into account the opportunity they will get to play, if I'm not mistaken. They're vague, and perhaps I'm misunderstanding their approach, but they don't indicate at all how they did it.

Beyond that, for a statistics website (not specific to bball), one would expect to see variance accounted for using their model. There isn't reported, which gives no indication whatsoever of how accurately they can predict NBA success. It's a good idea, no doubt, but we don't appear to be anywhere near this, yet. Not sure if we will be, given so many other variables that we either wouldn't be able to collect data one or quantify (e.g., personality traits, bball IQ).

[SHAQATTACK]

I think ...possibly HOW DA does in the draft sets the tone for bringing in a decent FA.

I think DA will go all out to move up.....


Not a clue if he ll be successful .....

Draft night might be exciting

[SHAQATTACK]

Winslow

Is the

Prize

[tarheelsxxiii]

Winslow

Is the

Prize

I've thought this since the tournament ended and still do. Think he will be out of our reach though, unfortunately.

[86MaxwellSmart]

the Pathetic thing about this draft....OKC has a better pick than us...Ridiculous, their roster has about 6-7 guys who are better than anyone we have already.

[danglertx]

It's interesting. I looked into the site and it seems reputable, but their predictors are qualitatively pretty weak. Their regression model includes age, height and weight, college statistics, and his top 100 ranking (per Ford). They claim their model is novel (and better) because they include some regressor that takes into account the opportunity they will get to play, if I'm not mistaken. They're vague, and perhaps I'm misunderstanding their approach, but they don't indicate at all how they did it.

Beyond that, for a statistics website (not specific to bball), one would expect to see variance accounted for using their model. There isn't reported, which gives no indication whatsoever of how accurately they can predict NBA success. It's a good idea, no doubt, but we don't appear to be anywhere near this, yet. Not sure if we will be, given so many other variables that we either wouldn't be able to collect data one or quantify (e.g., personality traits, bball IQ).

They seemed quite thorough.  They evaluated the teams, the teams offense and defensive numbers against each opponent as well as stats and physical data for each player.  They gave a history of players with that makeup and the % chance of them being stars/starters/role players/ and busts. 

I watch a lot of basketball, played in high school, and generally love it but my opinion can't be worth as much as people who did all of this statistical analysis.  I'm sure others on this site feel like they know more however.

Here is the link; http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/projecting-the-top-50-players-in-the-2015-nba-draft-class/

The chart is an image so I don't know how or if it is possible to post it.  But anyway, it shows you statistically how foolish it is to trade established players for anything but the top couple players.

[ThaPreacher]

Winslow

Is the

Prize

I saw Winslow up close in Indy.  I believe that is Danny's Crackerjax.  Winslow!


Justice!!

[tarheelsxxiii]

It's interesting. I looked into the site and it seems reputable, but their predictors are qualitatively pretty weak. Their regression model includes age, height and weight, college statistics, and his top 100 ranking (per Ford). They claim their model is novel (and better) because they include some regressor that takes into account the opportunity they will get to play, if I'm not mistaken. They're vague, and perhaps I'm misunderstanding their approach, but they don't indicate at all how they did it.

Beyond that, for a statistics website (not specific to bball), one would expect to see variance accounted for using their model. There isn't reported, which gives no indication whatsoever of how accurately they can predict NBA success. It's a good idea, no doubt, but we don't appear to be anywhere near this, yet. Not sure if we will be, given so many other variables that we either wouldn't be able to collect data one or quantify (e.g., personality traits, bball IQ).

They seemed quite thorough.  They evaluated the teams, the teams offense and defensive numbers against each opponent as well as stats and physical data for each player.  They gave a history of players with that makeup and the % chance of them being stars/starters/role players/ and busts. 

I watch a lot of basketball, played in high school, and generally love it but my opinion can't be worth as much as people who did all of this statistical analysis.  I'm sure others on this site feel like they know more however.

Here is the link; http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/projecting-the-top-50-players-in-the-2015-nba-draft-class/

The chart is an image so I don't know how or if it is possible to post it.  But anyway, it shows you statistically how foolish it is to trade established players for anything but the top couple players.

I agree that they were thorough - as thorough as they could've been. And I forgot to mention their evaluation of teams, that's helpful and important, thanks.

I believe in their stats far more than I would my own intuition, but I do think there are too many non-quantifiable variables out there for the model to ever be more than a modest predictor, at best. I trust it to an extent, though... changed my opinion about player options quite a bit.