Indiana moving toward rebuild, open to trade talks on LeVert, Sabonis, Turner

[Kiorrik]

Nesmith or Romeo, three #1s, two pick swaps for Sabonis?

.... the moment you realize missing on picks makes a big difference. Could have taken 4-5 guys over Nosmith who would've improved our chances at a trade like this.

Even when you win the NBA lottery, you're still playing a game of chance.

....a homer Csblog argument for over a very long time because we've struggled outside the Top 3 in the draft.,

Yeah right. Total homer argument. It is well known that the Celtics are terrible at picking, and really, everyone else is hitting jackpot after jackpot consistently because drafting beyond pick 10 is super easy and a totally 100% sure deal.

By the way, did some research, came across this article;

https://medium.com/swlh/a-statistical-analysis-of-the-nba-draft-767999aaaf6c

Where we're bottom 10 in drafting high impact players.

Doesn't really elaborate on what we're talking about though (post top 10 drafting) but point for your hyperbolic point of view.

Wonder if there's some stats somewhere on how often each draft position pans out to be a good player.

[todd_days_41]

Nesmith or Romeo, three #1s, two pick swaps for Sabonis?

.... the moment you realize missing on picks makes a big difference. Could have taken 4-5 guys over Nosmith who would've improved our chances at a trade like this.

Even when you win the NBA lottery, you're still playing a game of chance.

....a homer Csblog argument for over a very long time because we've struggled outside the Top 3 in the draft.,

Yeah right. Total homer argument. It is well known that the Celtics are terrible at picking, and really, everyone else is hitting jackpot after jackpot consistently because drafting beyond pick 10 is super easy and a totally 100% sure deal.

Ah, the standard defense. It's like a warm blanket on this blog.

[Kiorrik]

Nesmith or Romeo, three #1s, two pick swaps for Sabonis?

.... the moment you realize missing on picks makes a big difference. Could have taken 4-5 guys over Nosmith who would've improved our chances at a trade like this.

Even when you win the NBA lottery, you're still playing a game of chance.

....a homer Csblog argument for over a very long time because we've struggled outside the Top 3 in the draft.,

Yeah right. Total homer argument. It is well known that the Celtics are terrible at picking, and really, everyone else is hitting jackpot after jackpot consistently because drafting beyond pick 10 is super easy and a totally 100% sure deal.

Ah, the standard defense. It's like a warm blanket on this blog.

You're literally bringing nothing to the discussion except "uh u stupid".

At least I went out my way to find data and gave you credit.

Maybe try being a bit less of a negative force.

[celticsclay]

I know this a never ending argument. But how does getting Tatum instead of fultz and getting brown Instead of bender, josh Jackson and others that were all legitimate spots for that pick not outweighs 6 drafts of someone in the spot of neismith?

[Kiorrik]

I know this a never ending argument. But how does getting Tatum instead of fultz and getting brown Instead of bender, josh Jackson and others that were all legitimate spots for that pick not outweighs 6 drafts of someone in the spot of neismith?

I thought of bringing that up, but I didn't wanna go there. Mostly because I think "fluking" into a couple good picks isn't a statistic you can base an argument on. Instead, I wanted to focus on the actual data over a longer period of time.

Which is why I gave him credit with that article. Appears we're not great at drafting (if all you look at is win shares per player)

In other words; 2 data points does not make a statistic.

Also, I'm genuinely curious about how the Celtics rate in drafting proficiency, and how they compare to the league as a whole.

You'd have to take a LOT into account though. There's different ways to measure player value, there's unpredictable factors (injuries), there's trades, there's "what's left" vs "what does the team need", etc.

[Sophomore]

There are definitely articles trying to assess Cs drafts. Here’s one that’s getting a little old now - from 2017 - which includes a proposed value for each slot and ainge’s record. (Good news is most of us could probably extend the analysis for the past few years…)

http://www.celticshub.com/2017/06/21/grading-ainge-drafts/

There are other charts that try to value draft slots based on WAR of players chosen in the slot or odds that the player becomes a star, solid player, role player, bust. There are fancier schemes. Below are a few. My own view is (1) Ainge hit on the most consequential choices he had to make. You cannot blow it when you pick top 3 and he didn’t. *Many others have*. (2) He’s mostly been average picking in the middle to end of the draft. A mix of busts and role players and a few solid hits. (3) he didn’t have a great run of above average performance in the middle/late first round, or a grand slam run late in the draft - the type of pick that can really turn a team around - a Tony Parker or a Jokic. Those guys are rare - and I reserve the right to change my vote when Time Lord plays his third all-star game and Nesmith breaks Ray Allen’s career three-point mark. 

https://www.theringer.com/2021/7/28/22597310/nba-draft-expectations

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

https://towardsdatascience.com/measuring-success-in-the-nba-draft-a7f67cfb7718

[Kiorrik]

There are definitely articles trying to assess Cs drafts. Here’s one that’s getting a little old now - from 2017 - which includes a proposed value for each slot and ainge’s record. (Good news is most of us could probably extend the analysis for the past few years…)

http://www.celticshub.com/2017/06/21/grading-ainge-drafts/

There are other charts that try to value draft slots based on WAR of players chosen in the slot or odds that the player becomes a star, solid player, role player, bust. There are fancier schemes. Below are a few. My own view is (1) Ainge hit on the most consequential choices he had to make. You cannot blow it when you pick top 3 and he didn’t. *Many others have*. (2) He’s mostly been average picking in the middle to end of the draft. A mix of busts and role players and a few solid hits. (3) he didn’t have a great run of above average performance in the middle/late first round, or a grand slam run late in the draft - the type of pick that can really turn a team around - a Tony Parker or a Jokic. Those guys are rare - and I reserve the right to change my vote if Time Lord ascends to the all-star game. 

https://www.theringer.com/2021/7/28/22597310/nba-draft-expectations

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

https://towardsdatascience.com/measuring-success-in-the-nba-draft-a7f67cfb7718

So my initial theory was that picking in that range is super difficult. That the value vs perceived value there fluctuates HEAVILY.

That's the kinda stats I was looking for; what are the odds of striking gold?

Looks like it's kinda true. It really is a crapshoot.

.edit: TP btw for contributing ♥ love learning new stuff.

_{.edit2: Looks like the Celtics/Danny are rated pretty highly when we look at the statistics.}

[todd_days_41]

Nesmith or Romeo, three #1s, two pick swaps for Sabonis?

.... the moment you realize missing on picks makes a big difference. Could have taken 4-5 guys over Nosmith who would've improved our chances at a trade like this.

Even when you win the NBA lottery, you're still playing a game of chance.

....a homer Csblog argument for over a very long time because we've struggled outside the Top 3 in the draft.,

Yeah right. Total homer argument. It is well known that the Celtics are terrible at picking, and really, everyone else is hitting jackpot after jackpot consistently because drafting beyond pick 10 is super easy and a totally 100% sure deal.

Ah, the standard defense. It's like a warm blanket on this blog.

You're literally bringing nothing to the discussion except "uh u stupid".

At least I went out my way to find data and gave you credit.

Maybe try being a bit less of a negative force.

Oh come on. If the Cs had made a better pick than Nesmith, they'd be in a better position to trade for Sabonis -- simple as that. Blaming the draft like its a roulette game is homerism.

Being objective is not a "negative force."

Note how I use the quotes properly. I dunno what Uh U Stupid is about but it didn't come from me.

 

[michigan adam]

Sabonis! In a New York minute.

He's young 25, 6-10, a solid scorer, doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective, high IQ, an exceptional passer. a possible small ball Center or full-time PF, with JT sliding to Small Forward.

yeah, that would be nice.

I'dlove to do a big al and smart for sabonis and levert based trade.  I'd throw in a 1st or 2 to make this happen. i really like the options this would make.

[celticsclay]

A lot of people keep bringing up trading horford. I just don’t see us doing that.

[pokeKingCurtis]

Nesmith or Romeo, three #1s, two pick swaps for Sabonis?

.... the moment you realize missing on picks makes a big difference. Could have taken 4-5 guys over Nosmith who would've improved our chances at a trade like this.

Even when you win the NBA lottery, you're still playing a game of chance.

....a homer Csblog argument for over a very long time because we've struggled outside the Top 3 in the draft.,

Yeah right. Total homer argument. It is well known that the Celtics are terrible at picking, and really, everyone else is hitting jackpot after jackpot consistently because drafting beyond pick 10 is super easy and a totally 100% sure deal.

By the way, did some research, came across this article;

https://medium.com/swlh/a-statistical-analysis-of-the-nba-draft-767999aaaf6c

Where we're bottom 10 in drafting high impact players.

Doesn't really elaborate on what we're talking about though (post top 10 drafting) but point for your hyperbolic point of view.

Wonder if there's some stats somewhere on how often each draft position pans out to be a good player.

I'm no Celtic historian and I'm reading/typing from my phone but doesn't this include drafts before ainge joined, in the crappy years after Bird

[Birdman]

I trade whoever not named Tatum for Sabonis

[Kiorrik]

Nesmith or Romeo, three #1s, two pick swaps for Sabonis?

.... the moment you realize missing on picks makes a big difference. Could have taken 4-5 guys over Nosmith who would've improved our chances at a trade like this.

Even when you win the NBA lottery, you're still playing a game of chance.

....a homer Csblog argument for over a very long time because we've struggled outside the Top 3 in the draft.,

Yeah right. Total homer argument. It is well known that the Celtics are terrible at picking, and really, everyone else is hitting jackpot after jackpot consistently because drafting beyond pick 10 is super easy and a totally 100% sure deal.

Ah, the standard defense. It's like a warm blanket on this blog.

You're literally bringing nothing to the discussion except "uh u stupid".

At least I went out my way to find data and gave you credit.

Maybe try being a bit less of a negative force.

Oh come on. If the Cs had made a better pick than Nesmith, they'd be in a better position to trade for Sabonis -- simple as that. Blaming the draft like its a roulette game is homerism.

Being objective is not a "negative force."

Note how I use the quotes properly. I dunno what Uh U Stupid is about but it didn't come from me.

Maybe don't start your argumenting by saying someone's being a homer.

Also, statistics backed me up.

Also, saying "yeah but if we drafted someone better than Nesmith we'd get better return" is a bit ... I don't know how to say this. It's kinda like saying "if I had $10 I'd have more than if I had $5." Like, yeah, okay. My whole point was that finding the $10 is purely chance.

Stats backed me up on it so call me a homer all you want, I'm right.

The warm blanket thing was also the most useless thing to say in a discussion ever. What did that add to the discussion huh? Did you expect everyone to go "oh yeah, good point, we now suddenly agree with you"?

No, you were just trying to rile someone up a lil.

That's what I mean by being a negative force.

[todd_days_41]

Nesmith or Romeo, three #1s, two pick swaps for Sabonis?

.... the moment you realize missing on picks makes a big difference. Could have taken 4-5 guys over Nosmith who would've improved our chances at a trade like this.

Even when you win the NBA lottery, you're still playing a game of chance.

....a homer Csblog argument for over a very long time because we've struggled outside the Top 3 in the draft.,

Yeah right. Total homer argument. It is well known that the Celtics are terrible at picking, and really, everyone else is hitting jackpot after jackpot consistently because drafting beyond pick 10 is super easy and a totally 100% sure deal.

Ah, the standard defense. It's like a warm blanket on this blog.

You're literally bringing nothing to the discussion except "uh u stupid".

At least I went out my way to find data and gave you credit.

Maybe try being a bit less of a negative force.

Oh come on. If the Cs had made a better pick than Nesmith, they'd be in a better position to trade for Sabonis -- simple as that. Blaming the draft like its a roulette game is homerism.

Being objective is not a "negative force."

Note how I use the quotes properly. I dunno what Uh U Stupid is about but it didn't come from me.

Maybe don't start your argumenting by saying someone's being a homer.

Also, statistics backed me up.

Also, saying "yeah but if we drafted someone better than Nesmith we'd get better return" is a bit ... I don't know how to say this. It's kinda like saying "if I had $10 I'd have more than if I had $5." Like, yeah, okay. My whole point was that finding the $10 is purely chance.

Stats backed me up on it so call me a homer all you want, I'm right.

The warm blanket thing was also the most useless thing to say in a discussion ever. What did that add to the discussion huh? Did you expect everyone to go "oh yeah, good point, we now suddenly agree with you"?

No, you were just trying to rile someone up a lil.

That's what I mean by being a negative force.

Man, someone has their blood up. You just rip me broadly for objecting to the Cs recent draft record as the luck of the draw. Seriously?

And what stats are you referring to? I don’t see any. Do stats back up drafting Nesmith over Anthony, Maxey, Bey, Quickley, Bane or others? Nope.

[Csfan1984]

Id be okay with

Smart, TL, Langford and Juancho
for
Brogdon and Turner.

Feel Brogdon and Turner fit better than TL and Smart. Pacers don't lose out in talent much. They add Langford and cut salary in a year with the deal. I wouldn't add a 1st but 2nds are fine if needed.