If Bane, Herro, Haliburton were Celtics

[pokeKingCurtis]

Forget the near misses like Herro and TH…. how much better would this team be without about 10 glaring actual misses in the past couple years?

Which are?

Giannis Antentokounmpo.

That's not in the past couple years

[KG Living Legend]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

[pokeKingCurtis]

The way I see it is Ainge had his system of running things. That system got us Tatum over Fultz, got us Timelord...and Kyrie and Hayward.

But if we could go back and hit on a ridiculous amount of picks...that team might rival some of the top teams in the league? Shooting and ballhandling is what we've been needing - maybe still a bit thin at the center spots and possibly sort of tier 2. Feels like league-wide there's been some attrition this year, with the Bucks dropping a couple recently, but I don't follow closely to other teams.

[Roy H.]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

It's hard to say.  Is Ime still our coach?  Have Herro / Haliburton / Bane developed similarly in Boston?  Have we still made the same draft picks otherwise, or did trades have to be made to move up?

Timelord / Horford
Tatum / Williams
Brown / Richardson
Smart / Bane
Haliburton /  Herro / Pritchard

If the team played up to its potential, we'd be significantly better.  I'll predict 29 wins so far (29-16), making us 6 wins better so far.  That would put us on a 53 win pace.

In our theoretical standings, we'd be 0.5 games up on real life Miami for the 2nd seed, and virtually tied with Chicago for first in the East (we'd have a very slightly better winning percentage).

[perks-a-beast]

I’m not going to dwell on Herro or Haliburton not being Celtics considering Boston would have had to trade up to get those guys. The cost to do so at the time - to get players who hadn’t proved anything yet - was probably too steep. Also, I can’t think of one instance on my lifetime of the Celtics trading up in the draft so I don’t even view it as a possibility. Seriously, can someone let me know the last time the team traded up in the draft? Funny because there always seems to be rumors circulating around them doing so but nothing ever comes to be.

Also, it’s hard to be mad about the Langford pick. We just got screwed by getting the 14th pick, which in that draft was a huge drop off point in terms of talent. Why not swing for the fences and take a guy who was projected a couple months earlier to go in the top 5. Also, there aren’t really any stand out players taken after Romeo. The 14-25 range in the draft was probably the weakest in recent memory.

I’m still reasonably livid over the Nesmith pick since we missed out on Cole Anthony, Tyrese Maxey, Saddiq Bey, and others. That one will sting for some time, especially in a couple years when Nesmith is playing for the Shanghai Sharks, and Maxey and Anthony are making all star teams.

[Moranis]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

I did and said not much better.

[Roy H.]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

I did and said not much better.

Why do you think so?

Herro and Bane are playing large roles on good teams, and Haliburton is providing passing, shooting and good efficiency.  The stats wouldn't be the same, but I think that all three would play well.

The only major issue I see is turning the offense over to Haliburton.  His individual numbers are good, but Sacramento's offense is struggling as a whole (22nd overall, I think).  They're actually slightly behind the Celts in that regard.

[Who]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

Let me make two assumptions that I do not believe would be true (1) that they develop as well here as they have done elsewhere (2) that we have a quality head coach.

In this case, I would consider this team a title contender.

C: Rob Williams, Horford
F: Tatum
F: Jaylen, Josh Richardson
G: Haliburton, Herro
G: Bane

They'd need to trade Smart. Clear out the backcourt minutes for the other three guys who are all legit shooters. Their shooting is key to Boston's postseason hopes. Need some filler at forward but yeah that team is a title contender.

Herro is a notch below All-Star level. Haliburton is probably a top 50 guy and Bane isn't far off that level himself. Those 3 guys would make a massive difference in terms of the level of individual talent on the team.

They would also make a massive difference in terms of chemistry because of their individual and combined shooting ability which would turn Boston from one of the worst shooting teams in the league into one of the best.

I mean, look at that backcourt - that shooting is exceptional. Look at Jaylen and Tatum as forwards rather than wings and the massive shooting advantage we have there versus other teams in the league. 1-4 we are one of the finest shooting teams in the league. It is phenomenal.

That is why they are a title contender.

[Moranis]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

I did and said not much better.

Why do you think so?

Herro and Bane are playing large roles on good teams, and Haliburton is providing passing, shooting and good efficiency.  The stats wouldn't be the same, but I think that all three would play well.

The only major issue I see is turning the offense over to Haliburton.  His individual numbers are good, but Sacramento's offense is struggling as a whole (22nd overall, I think).  They're actually slightly behind the Celts in that regard.

Because they would be bench players with a limited role and I don't think that moves the needle very much.  I mean how many minutes are available when Tatum, Brown, and Smart are still on the team.  Perhaps Richardson as well.  Schroder would be unlikely, but he is probably more valuable than Haliburton to the actual wins and losses this year (not going forward, but the question is not going forward).  The Kings are worse with Haliburton on the floor then they are when he is on the bench, as an example.  Herro plays basically no defense and there is evidence the Heat are better without him as well (he has a negative on/off differential and they are 4-1 in the games he has outright missed and that has pretty much been that way since he entered the league).  I think Bane is an upgrade on say Richardson, but with the way Richardson has shot the ball this year, I'm not sure how much of an upgrade Bane actually is, especially when Richardson is a better and more versatile defender.  Now maybe Bane actually takes minutes from Smart, but that is again a big loss on defense and frankly shooting is not necessarily what the team actually needs.  I just don't think adding 3 bench guys to the team will actually do much for the wins and losses.  The starting lineup is much more of the issue.  Boston needs an actual and legit PG and PF and none of those guys upgrade those positions.

[todd_days_41]

Forget the near misses like Herro and TH…. how much better would this team be without about 10 glaring actual misses in the past couple years?

Which are?

Giannis Antentokounmpo.

That's not in the past couple years

Here's what I posted in a similar thread a week or two ago (small edits to simplify):

Let’s just focus on the draft and related transactions for the last 3 years. The Cs have build a list of young and end of roster players as follows:

Langford
Nesmith
Grant Williams
Pritchard
Fernando
Brodric Thomas
Sam Hauser
Javonte Green (needlessly traded)
Edwards (signed highest guaranteed deal for 2nd rounder at time – cut)
Fall (FA signing -- cut)
Waters (drafted -- cut)
Parker (FA signing -- cut)
Rights to Yam Mader
Rights to Beragin

Without lifting a finger, the Cs could have:

Brandon Clarke (who LOTS on this board wanted instead of Langford)
Thybuille (instead of trading the pick…. OR any one of Little, Poole, Keldon Johnson, Jerome, Bazley, or Claxton… would be better than even Langford to begin with, and certainly better than Edwards)
Grant Williams
Cody Martin (or Horton-Tucker, Paschall, Roby, or Mann – all useful players picked after Edwards)
Jalen McDaniels (picked immediately after Waters)
Cole Anthony (or Saddiq Bey, who is really good, or Maxey, who is really good, and a few others…. Instead of Nosmith)
Pritchard
Desmond Bane (dumped his pick for nothing)
Javonte Green (needlessly dumped last year in favor of lousy draft picks we’re embarrassed to trade too quickly)
Max Strus (moved off of a two way deal in favor of Fall and Waters, then cut)
Garrison Matthews (cut in favor of Parker and / or Fernando)
Paul Reed (picked after Mader)
Brandon Boston (or Aaron Wiggins -- picked after Beragin)

Did I miss any? So basically, they got Williams right, and on Pritchard, jury’s still out. The rest? That my friends is the worst long-tail roster management in the NBA over the past 3 years. WHOA is that bad.

Of course not every one of these players would still be on the roster -- too many screw ups listed above to fit 'em all. But those that wouldn't be prolly could have been traded or included in trades for improved assets we'd now have.

[todd_days_41]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

I did and said not much better.

The three players wouldn't have made much of a difference on a team with no legit starting PG (Haliburton) and lousy shooting / bench shooting (Bane, Herro) during a season where rosters are thin due to COVID? C'mon.

[CFAN38]

I would love a Celtics insiders recap of the 2020 draft. I have so many questions about their strategy/rankings of that class.

Was an offer ever made to the Kings for #12/Haliburton?

I assume the #30 pick was a pre determined deal with the Grizz?

The Nesmith pick felt at the time like a break from DAs typical BPA blue chip drafting in the lottery. I would love to know if prioritizing shooting pushed him up in the Cs rankings especially over Maxey or Cole Anthony who I thought fit better with DAs typical lottery picks. ( lottery DA typically targeted elite high school recruits, ESPN gave Nesmith a grade of an 85 as a recruit, Maxey a 95, and Anthony a 96). At the time I figured the Cs would draft Anthony or Maxey, trade #26, and take Tillman (as a poor mans AL) at #30.

[Moranis]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

I did and said not much better.

The three players wouldn't have made much of a difference on a team with no legit starting PG (Haliburton) and lousy shooting / bench shooting (Bane, Herro) during a season where rosters are thin due to COVID? C'mon.

Absolutely.  They wouldn't make much difference.  Bench players almost never make much of a difference and Schroder is clearly better than Haliburton right now.  It isn't close.  Schroder is a significantly better player, who isn't on the team if Haliburton is thereby making Boston worse in that regard.  Obviously at some point Haliburton will almost certainly eclipse Schroder, but that year is not this year and probably not next either.

[Vermont Green]

I get that it is kind of fun to think about what could have been regarding drafts but these discussions are always only about the missed good picks.  For every good pick that you don't make, there are probably several worse picks you could have made.

The most glaring example is taking Tatum over Fultz.  Drafting is a crap shoot.  Every team has made picks that don't turn out.  There is always a Jimmy Butler or a Giannis multiple teams pass on and become stars.

It is funny that two of the three being discussed here were not even available to the Celtics when they picked (Herro, Haliburton), correct?  And Bane is practically a second rounder where we picked Pritchard instead (I know we could have picked both but that was not really practical due to the roster).

I just don't understand why people torture themselves with all this draft second guessing.  On our roster right now we have Tatum, Brown, Smart, RWilliams (four starters) plus GWill, Pritchard, Langford, and Nesmith, all as draft picks (am I missing anyone?).  That is actually pretty good.

[todd_days_41]

 Sheesh. Nobody actually answered the question.  Are we 5 wins better with these three players? 10 wins better? 15?

I did and said not much better.

The three players wouldn't have made much of a difference on a team with no legit starting PG (Haliburton) and lousy shooting / bench shooting (Bane, Herro) during a season where rosters are thin due to COVID? C'mon.

Absolutely.  They wouldn't make much difference.  Bench players almost never make much of a difference and Schroder is clearly better than Haliburton right now.  It isn't close.  Schroder is a significantly better player, who isn't on the team if Haliburton is thereby making Boston worse in that regard.  Obviously at some point Haliburton will almost certainly eclipse Schroder, but that year is not this year and probably not next either.

Dead wrong. Haliburton is a better shooter, passer and defender than Schroder by a pretty wide margin in each case. He's a better player, and a better player for this team without a doubt.

And the question probably isn't whether TH is better than Denis, but rather Smart.

But again.... I can't even worry about whether the Cs did enough to try to trade up for Haliburton (who rumors had it the Kings were ecstatic fell to them) or Herro (Riley NEVER would have traded Ainge that pick) when there are enough missed opportunities with picks and players the Cs actually had to fill a warehouse.