Why Not Douglas Roberts? Why Not Chalmers?

[cdif911]

It's a little perplexing because Danny made such an issue this past year about only adding "character guys" to the roster, but I'm willing to give JR Rider...I mean Giddens a chance. Danny does make mistakes on draft day though (Gerald, Marcus, trading the Brandon Roy pick), so who knows. I'd be more peeved if I was a Hornets fan and they just lost Arthur, so Geaorge Shinn could pocket a million dollars.

More times than not Danny has done the right thing. I'll give you Marcus, but Gerald was a guy you had to pick, he fell into our laps - had we traded up to get him, it woulda been a mistake - plus remember he helped get us KG. Roy same thing, plus we actually traded Foye, not Roy, then the Twolves and Blazers traded the 2 (though I've heard arguments if Portland wasn't involed, Minnesota would have taken Foye outright) - regardless with the Roy/Foye deal we got Theo's contract and Bassy, who we dealt for KG, plus we got the pg we wanted by buying a pick from the Suns...

[Jon]

I know very little about these Giddens and Walker, but the thing I like about both of them from what I've read is that they both seem to have basketball skills and they both seem to value defense.  In other words, this doesn't seem to be a case of Kedrick Brown where the plan was to teach a super athlete how to play basketball.  I think Danny's gotten burned that route before with guys like Banks and Green, so hopefully he's learned. 

In terms of Douglas Roberts and Chalmers, it seems to me that Ainge thought these guys might make decent bench players, but what's the point of getting decent bench players in the draft?  We already have some decent bench players we want to re-sign and we can always get more via free agency. 

What we can't get so easily on the open market is stars, and both Giddens and Walker seem to have the upside to be stars (albeit a small chance).  And that's the sort of gamble Danny needs to take if we're going to successfully segue from the Big Three era to whatever comes after. 

[cordobes]

cordobes said:

I like CDR, but he's being overrated here. He benefited immensely from the system Calipari runs in Memphis, with all that penetration and kick out (Brokeback Mountain, as Phil said). Perimeter defenders in the NBA are much more quick recovering than those that CDR faced in college, so it won't be so easy for him to step past them or take open shots. I think this question has merits: would he be such a good slasher without a pg that didn't demand so much help defense in the lane like Rose did? Also, he'll have to read screens and post up in the NBA and I don't know if he's good doing that. I mean, can he create his own shot in another type of offense? I don't know... and neither does he, I guess. Anyway, if we draft him, I'll watch his games again to form a more solid opinion, as I was more interested in Rose the first time.

My educated guess: CDR is not as good as he looks. If I was giving him a workout, I'd like to see how well does he screen, posts, reads screens, how really good is his first step, etc. If he didn't workout well, I can easily understand why he fell.

Chalmers...because they like Pruitt.

I've never seen JR Giddens play and I don't like to form opinions by reading public reports. I know he was conference co-Player of the Year with Cummard and I know Cummard is a good basketball player.

He's got 3 years of great production by every metric available (almost every advanced stat dude loves him), whereas Gidden has 4 years of bad production by the same metrics.

Epic fail.

Link?

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/J.R.-Giddens-74/stats/
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Chris-Douglas-Roberts-506/stats/

Yeps, but in spite of that, lots of statistic driven teams, including Boston, passed on him. I'm a statistics guy myself, but there are things that stats can't tell: was he productive because of the system and teammates or is he really good?

Calipari's system is very uncommon in the NBA. Which NBA team wants a winger who have trouble reading screens? Who doesn't run off pindowns? Who doesn't have a great courtvision? Who relies heavily in slashing but doesn't have a good enough first step?

[paintitgreen]

Not that he's the best authority or most popular guy in Boston, but Chris Wallace just said a few minutes ago on EEI that Memphis also had Giddens ahead of CDR and Chalmers on their board, in part because at at least one group workout, Giddens just outplayed CDR. He didn't completely say so, but I got the feeling that it wasn't close between them. I think Danny took Giddens over CDR not because he has more potential but just because he's better, period.

[bucknersrevenge]

Not that he's the best authority or most popular guy in Boston, but Chris Wallace just said a few minutes ago on EEI that Memphis also had Giddens ahead of CDR and Chalmers on their board, in part because at at least one group workout, Giddens just outplayed CDR. He didn't completely say so, but I got the feeling that it wasn't close between them. I think Danny took Giddens over CDR not because he has more potential but just because he's better, period.

was just gonna post this myself. glad someone else caught it. the impression i got as well that giddens was better every single time they matched up. i heard CDR wasnt much of a workout guy in general. hes more of a game performer than a workout performer. but giddens apparently destroyed CDR in workouts and giddens projects so much so as an excellent defender with those long arms and i imagine he caught dannys eye much the same way rondo did who also had the defense-rebounding thing going for him.

[cmoney]

cordobes said:

I like CDR, but he's being overrated here. He benefited immensely from the system Calipari runs in Memphis, with all that penetration and kick out (Brokeback Mountain, as Phil said). Perimeter defenders in the NBA are much more quick recovering than those that CDR faced in college, so it won't be so easy for him to step past them or take open shots. I think this question has merits: would he be such a good slasher without a pg that didn't demand so much help defense in the lane like Rose did? Also, he'll have to read screens and post up in the NBA and I don't know if he's good doing that. I mean, can he create his own shot in another type of offense? I don't know... and neither does he, I guess. Anyway, if we draft him, I'll watch his games again to form a more solid opinion, as I was more interested in Rose the first time.

My educated guess: CDR is not as good as he looks. If I was giving him a workout, I'd like to see how well does he screen, posts, reads screens, how really good is his first step, etc. If he didn't workout well, I can easily understand why he fell.

Chalmers...because they like Pruitt.

I've never seen JR Giddens play and I don't like to form opinions by reading public reports. I know he was conference co-Player of the Year with Cummard and I know Cummard is a good basketball player.

He's got 3 years of great production by every metric available (almost every advanced stat dude loves him), whereas Gidden has 4 years of bad production by the same metrics.

Epic fail.

Link?

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/J.R.-Giddens-74/stats/
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Chris-Douglas-Roberts-506/stats/

Yeps, but in spite of that, lots of statistic driven teams, including Boston, passed on him. I'm a statistics guy myself, but there are things that stats can't tell: was he productive because of the system and teammates or is he really good?

Calipari's system is very uncommon in the NBA. Which NBA team wants a winger who have trouble reading screens? Who doesn't run off pindowns? Who doesn't have a great courtvision? Who relies heavily in slashing but doesn't have a good enough first step?

What's funny about this is the Celtics offense IS dribble drive motion oriented.  It's a little bit toned down, and it tends to break down if Rondo is out or we're just in one of our offensive funks, but by and large it's our offensive philosophy.  http://coachingbetterbball.blogspot.com/2008/02/celtics-dribble-drive-motion-offense.html

As for the notion that Giddens > CDR because of workouts.. man I hate that.  Workouts are way less meaningful than college production.

But I am warming up to Giddens.. hearing good things from lots of sources, Danny's late round draft record.. could just be something we're all missing. But I still think he won't shoot worth a [dang].  Hopefully he can still get to the rim.

[Brickowski]

Well, Giddens has a reputation as a knucklehead.  If talent and athleticism alone were enough, Greg Minor, Gerald Green and Kedrick Brown would still be in the league.  In fact, Giddens game reminds me quite a bit of Greg Minor.

If Giddens gets his head together and learns to shoot free throws, he could be a valuable addition.  He has the talent to become a solid starter when Ray Allen rides into the sunset.  If not, he'll be playing for Dynamo Moscow or Armani Jeans after his 3-year rookie guarantee expires.

I also think Chalmers has the ability to be a starting pf in the NBA.  Very heady player. As for CDR, well, he can score, but you would probably have to hide him in a zone.  Giddens appears to be a much better one-on-one defender.

[Who]

If the C's were drafting solely for a guy who can play a role for 10 minutes supplying defense, hustle and solid all round play than I can see why Giddens was taken.

If they did draft for that I'd be very disappointed. Chris-Douglas Roberts can be a very solid player in this league. I believe he's much more likely to have the better NBA career and could have lasted beyond these championship runs. I like think he's very likely to be at least the fourth scoring option on a good team down the road and he has some potential to become a borderline star because of his scoring ability. Like I said on draft night I can see CDR starting for New Jersey next season.

[Brickowski]

CDR isn't going to start for anyone.  He may get some minutes if the Nets don't resign Bostjan Nachbar, but that's about it.

Speaking of Nachbar, I wonder what he would cost in free agency.  He can't defend worth a lick, but he certainly can shoot the ball. And unlike CDR Nachbar has legitimate NBA 3-point range.

[timepiece33]

He's got 3 years of great production by every metric available (almost every advanced stat dude loves him), whereas Gidden has 4 years of bad production by the same metrics.

Epic fail.

Giddens had a higher PER and EFF in his senior year as well as stronger defensive statistics AND is a considerably better rebounder. 

I like CDR. Have since I saw him play with the Family in Detroit, but this seems like an interesting risk that Danny is taking.

Do you go with the guy at #30 who for all intensive purposes has lottery type skills and appears to be turning things around?  A kid who if not for his problems, would have likely been the best player on the Kansas team?

OR

Do you go with the safe player whose possibilities as a bench contributor might be higher in year 1?   

[Vermont Green]

I think the biggest problem with CDR is that "Douglas-Roberts" will look ridiculous on the back of a jersey, it is just too many letters.

Seriously though, I have decided that I am not going to sweat about or nit pick the draft.  I don't think it is going to matter much if any if we have CDR or JRG at the  end of the bench next year.  JRG seems like a good chance to take.  I love the rebounding numbers and reputation for defense.  It is clear what Danny thinks he is getting and I think it is a good plan.  CDR clearly has a nice stroke so don't a lot of good college players who never do much in the NBA.

I don't know any more about Walker than I do about JRG but he seems like more of the project.  He will play a little if he can defend and learn the systems.  He is worth a try even if it takes some time to get his knee healthy and strong.  We are in no hurry.  He can keep JRG company at the end of the bench and talk about the new diamond stud ear rings they are going to buy.

And then there is Erden.  Danny thinks he would be a first round pick next year.  That may be a stretch but what the heck.  The Celtics have always had at least one big goofy slow injury-prone white guy on the team so he fills a need.

[BballTim]

Well, Giddens has a reputation as a knucklehead.  If talent and athleticism alone were enough, Greg Minor, Gerald Green and Kedrick Brown would still be in the league.  In fact, Giddens game reminds me quite a bit of Greg Minor.

  Didn't Greg Minor have to retire because of a hip injury?

[BballTim]

As for the notion that Giddens > CDR because of workouts.. man I hate that.  Workouts are way less meaningful than college production.

  Not for nothing, but we drafted Rondo after he outplayed some guards that were thought of more highly than him in workouts for the Celts.

[P2]

Giddens' defense is much better and he is also more athletic than Douglas-Roberts. This pick was a no-brainer.

[Brickowski]

Well, Giddens has a reputation as a knucklehead.  If talent and athleticism alone were enough, Greg Minor, Gerald Green and Kedrick Brown would still be in the league.  In fact, Giddens game reminds me quite a bit of Greg Minor.

  Didn't Greg Minor have to retire because of a hip injury?

Yes, a fractured hip.  He was also involved in multiple paternity suits and wife-beating allegations, so maybe his hip gave out from sexual overuse.

But he could play.  I was at a game where he dropped 31 pts., most of them in the first half.  Then he was benched for 2-3 games.  I believe that was the year they were tanking to get Duncan.