Surprising Ainge didn't take either Chalmers or Jordan with the 30th pick...

[ssspence]

I remain surprised me that Danny didn't take either a 1 or a 5 with the Giddens pick, considering the guaranteed money invloved. Jordan's game needs a lot of work but the potential is clearly there (20 boards last night). Chalmers has played well and could be a more tradable asset. Just odd to take a nondescript wing with a shaky background from a weak conference when two guys at more valuable positions were out there...

yes, jordan is raw. yes, chalmers is limited. but anyone else have any thoughts here?

[crownsy]

I remain surprised me that Danny didn't take either a 1 or a 5 with the Giddens pick, considering the guaranteed money invloved. Jordan's game needs a lot of work but the potential is clearly there (20 boards last night). Chalmers has played well and could be a more tradable asset. Just odd to take a nondescript wing with a shaky background from a weak conference when two guys at more valuable positions were out there...

yes, jordan is raw. yes, chalmers is limited. but anyone else have any thoughts here?

I wanted chalmers on draft night at 30 when he was still around, but they trust in pruitt and sam at the backup PG spot i guess.

What they apperntly don't trust is the Sg situation what with two athletic 2/3's combo forwards drafted.

[footey]

I remain surprised me that Danny didn't take either a 1 or a 5 with the Giddens pick, considering the guaranteed money invloved. Jordan's game needs a lot of work but the potential is clearly there (20 boards last night). Chalmers has played well and could be a more tradable asset. Just odd to take a nondescript wing with a shaky background from a weak conference when two guys at more valuable positions were out there...

yes, jordan is raw. yes, chalmers is limited. but anyone else have any thoughts here?

I don't think Chalmers or Jordan would have gotten any burn beyond garbage minutes on this team to date.  I think the jury is still out on Giddens and Walker. Given DA's track record for selected quality late in the first round, and in the 2nd round, we have to give him more time to assess whether his picks were good or not.  He is not infallable (he underestimated the value of Brandon Roy, probably his biggest mistake to date), but his winners far outweigh his losers.

[ssspence]

I remain surprised me that Danny didn't take either a 1 or a 5 with the Giddens pick, considering the guaranteed money invloved. Jordan's game needs a lot of work but the potential is clearly there (20 boards last night). Chalmers has played well and could be a more tradable asset. Just odd to take a nondescript wing with a shaky background from a weak conference when two guys at more valuable positions were out there...

yes, jordan is raw. yes, chalmers is limited. but anyone else have any thoughts here?

I don't think Chalmers or Jordan would have gotten any burn beyond garbage minutes on this team to date.  I think the jury is still out on Giddens and Walker. Given DA's track record for selected quality late in the first round, and in the 2nd round, we have to give him more time to assess whether his picks were good or not.  He is not infallable (he underestimated the value of Brandon Roy, probably his biggest mistake to date), but his winners far outweigh his losers.

i don't think ainge regrets the roy trade at all. no roy trade, no theo ratliff, no kg.

and i agree 1) the jury is still out on giddens, and 2) neither guy would be getting any burn on the team. i'm looking at them as assets, which we have few of. let's face it -- reasonably athletic slashing 2s are easy to come by, and aren't worth much. not saying giddens isn't going to be a good player, but clearly no one wants him in trade. chalmers and jordan would certainly be more attractive to a team looking to make a deal.

[yall hate]

I wanted Jordan on draft night.  He was one of the 'higher ranked' players still available, and he has a pretty high ceiling.

But that being said, it isnt crazy to think that on this team, Jordan might not have sniffed PT for at least two years and while it hasnt worked out thus far with Giddens, it was possible that he could come in and play this year. 

Everytime there is an athletic big man it is exciting, but so many of them fail that I dont fault Ainge for not taking Jordan.  And it is till early, Giddens may yet become the best of those guys.

[BballTim]

  I think Ainge thought that the player from #30 wouldn't be a big contributor this year and very few bigs drafted that late turn into useful players at all.

[cordobes]

Heh, lots of people wanted Chris Douglas-Roberts, to who I was frontally opposed; where are you now??

Chalmers I'd have liked and was rooting for him, but it's not like we missed a very big thing. Jordan I didn't like and while he's showing some nice tools, it's still to early to be sure he can make a NBA career.

In hindsight, the better pick with the 30th would have been Luc Richard Mbah a Moute. I knew it!

[jdpapa3]

It's not like Ainge doesn't scout these guys. I feel as if scouting college kids may be his favorite part of being a gm and something he takes great pride in. This team was close to losing TA to OKC and we lost Posey. He knew we needed some wings.

The thing is that Doc likes to bring his rookies along slowly, with barely any room for failure or to lose confidence. Jordan does look good, but I'd be willing to give this a little more time.

[Bankshot]

I was very surprised he passed on Chalmers.  He's already better than Pruitt.

[ssspence]

I was very surprised he passed on Chalmers.  He's already better than Pruitt.

while i agree chalmers would have been a nice pick, i was more suprised he passed on jordan. it's a given that a late 1st rounder on a championship team will see limited time. why not take a raw but very talented, very big guy who could be legit? what's giddens gonna be? dahntey jones? tony allen?  maybe better? even if he is still seems wasteful...

 

[crownsy]

I was very surprised he passed on Chalmers.  He's already better than Pruitt.

while i agree chalmers would have been a nice pick, i was more suprised he passed on jordan. it's a given that a late 1st rounder on a championship team will see limited time. why not take a raw but very talented, very big guy who could be legit? what's giddens gonna be? dahntey jones? tony allen?  maybe better? even if he is still seems wasteful...

 

You can do the same, if not more lengthy list (and im sure someone will, im at work so i cant)Of raw talented bigs taken late in the first that "just needed time" who are washing cars at the moment. I think "talented big guys" are more of a risk than gaurds. Gaurds seem to hang around forever and be parts of trades at the very least. It seems teams are way less willing to take a flyer on a late round big guy than a guard, but thats just my impression.

Its a crap shoot.

[footey]

I remain surprised me that Danny didn't take either a 1 or a 5 with the Giddens pick, considering the guaranteed money invloved. Jordan's game needs a lot of work but the potential is clearly there (20 boards last night). Chalmers has played well and could be a more tradable asset. Just odd to take a nondescript wing with a shaky background from a weak conference when two guys at more valuable positions were out there...

yes, jordan is raw. yes, chalmers is limited. but anyone else have any thoughts here?

I don't think Chalmers or Jordan would have gotten any burn beyond garbage minutes on this team to date.  I think the jury is still out on Giddens and Walker. Given DA's track record for selected quality late in the first round, and in the 2nd round, we have to give him more time to assess whether his picks were good or not.  He is not infallable (he underestimated the value of Brandon Roy, probably his biggest mistake to date), but his winners far outweigh his losers.

i don't think ainge regrets the roy trade at all. no roy trade, no theo ratliff, no kg.

and i agree 1) the jury is still out on giddens, and 2) neither guy would be getting any burn on the team. i'm looking at them as assets, which we have few of. let's face it -- reasonably athletic slashing 2s are easy to come by, and aren't worth much. not saying giddens isn't going to be a good player, but clearly no one wants him in trade. chalmers and jordan would certainly be more attractive to a team looking to make a deal.

While it is true we got Theo the Rat in that trade, I am not certain that we would not have gotten KG anyway by throwing in Raef's salary in the deal. Yes, his salary was for another season, but it is not like the T Wolves were trying to free cap space right away to sign a big FA. You may be right. But I don't think Danny was thinking of getting KG when he made the Sebastian Telfair trade. He probably thought that Telfair was going to be a better PG than Rondo or Roy, which is the major reason he made the trade. I remember watching a DA interview when the Celtics were visiting Portland during Roy's rookie season. Ainge called Roy a "nice" player, but did not think he had all star potential.  He underestimated him. So did a few other teams that selected inferior players ahead of him, such as Minn (Randy Foye) and Charlotte (Adam Morrissey) and Chicago (Tyrus Thomas) and Toronto (Bargnani) and ATL (Shelden Williams--ugh). Only Aldridge at this point is obviously worthy of being selected ahead of Roy, and that is probably a toss-up, depending on positional need.

[ScoobyDoo]

I wanted us to take a flyer on a very athletic 7 footer in Jordan. I thought perhps in 2-3 years, the Perkins/Jordan combo might be effective. I figured we didn't have much to risk, whoever we picked probably wouldn't be seeing any time in the next 1-2 years anyway..perfect to let the big man develope.

But I'm not so sure the book is written on Giddens yet either. This kid has a boat load of physical talent. Once he settles down and gets into to gear in the NBA game he might we might understand why Ainge passed on Jordan ( a big with potential_ for Giddens > maybe he targeted Giddens to take over for Ray in 2-3 year's time?

I can udnerstand why he passed on Chalmers though. Perhpas he feels the better compliment to back up Rondo is a taller point who can match up better with bigger points when necessary, which Gabe certainly do...especially defensively.
  

[Cman]

I remain surprised me that Danny didn't take either a 1 or a 5 with the Giddens pick, considering the guaranteed money invloved. Jordan's game needs a lot of work but the potential is clearly there (20 boards last night). Chalmers has played well and could be a more tradable asset. Just odd to take a nondescript wing with a shaky background from a weak conference when two guys at more valuable positions were out there...

yes, jordan is raw. yes, chalmers is limited. but anyone else have any thoughts here?

I don't think Chalmers or Jordan would have gotten any burn beyond garbage minutes on this team to date.  I think the jury is still out on Giddens and Walker. Given DA's track record for selected quality late in the first round, and in the 2nd round, we have to give him more time to assess whether his picks were good or not.  He is not infallable (he underestimated the value of Brandon Roy, probably his biggest mistake to date), but his winners far outweigh his losers.

Yes.  A year ago we all thought the Pruitt and BBD picks were silly - in my case, in particular the Pruitt pick seemed a waste of a good draft pick - but those picks are looking better by the week...

[bdm860]

Come on now, you're not seeing the big picture.  If we draft Jordan, we don't sign O'Bryant and we don't get banner 18!  

As Crownsy said, you can come up with a lengthy lists of Bigs who were taken late and never panned out, and O'Bryant is the perfect example of that (except he wasn't taken late).  I can think of a lot more good wings drafted in late, then I can bigs.  Off the top of my head the only big I can think of (in the more recent NBA at least) to have been drafted late or not at all is Brad Miller (not counting Boozer and Ben Wallace as legit bigs since they are only 6'9").